14RGP55_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

This amendment is issued to provide answ ers and clarif ication to questions from potential offerors and to extend the date and time for receipt of proposals from 4:00pm local time on 12 DEC 2013 to 4:00pm local time on 23 JAN 2014. Please see additional pages for answ ers and clarifications.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 26-Nov-2013

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N00164-14-R-GP55

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Nov-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

26-Nov-2013

CODE

NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CRANE DIV

L.ARMES (812-854-4748)

BLDG 2035

300 HIGHWAY 361

CRANE IN 47522-5001

N00164 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N00164-14-R-GP55

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 12-Dec-2013 04:00 PM to 23-Jan-2014 04:00 PM.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0001

Question 1:

Our understanding was all photos requested to be taken by any of the visitors during the site visits last December and January would be posted with the other documents. Where are these located?

Government Response 1:

The following documents will be uploaded to www.fbo.gov:

Site_Visit--Photographs_of_First-Generation_D5_Railcar--5DEC2012.pdf o Photographs taken by interested vendors at 4-5 DEC 2012 Site Visit

Site_Visit--Photographs_of_First-Generation_D5_Railcar--17JAN2013.pdf o Photographs taken by interested vendors at 16-17 JAN 2013 Site Visit

Photographs_of_First-Generation_D5_Railcar--31JAN2013.pdf o Photographs taken and captioned by NSWC Crane subject matter expert

Site_Visit_Presentation--Second-Generation_D5_Railcar--20130116.pdf o Site Visit Presentation presented at 16-17 JAN 2013 Site Visit o Note that several changes were made to the Statement of Work and the System Requirements

Document between the Site Visits and solicitation release; hence, the Site Visit Presentation information may not represent the latest requirements.

Question 2:

To assist small companies, is there a provision for staged milestone payments during the design, analysis, first article build and first article testing; other than what has been defined in the “Solicitation, Offer and Award”?

Government Response 2:

No. The solicitation is structured to provide payment after the completion of each CLIN.

Question 3:

Does the Navy have a Program Management Organization to assist small companies with the volume of documentation we are not normally staffed to handle?

Government Response 3:

No, the Contractor is responsible for generating and delivering all required data. The NSWC Crane technical team assigned to N0016414RGP55 technical oversight will be available to answer questions regarding the interpretation of documentation requirements. The NSWC Crane technical team is also responsible for reviewing Contractor submitted data and for accepting the data or returning the data to the Contractor for updates until accepted.

Question 4:

When it gets to the design stage, are 3D models for Government Furnished Materials (including HVAC system) and Government Furnished Equipment provided to assist in confirming fit-up of components?

Government Response 4:

3D models of Government Furnished Equipment and Government Furnished Materials are not available and will not be provided. An interface control drawing of the HVAC LRU and Common Package components will be provided by the Government. An interface control drawing of the Refresh Tracking Module components will be provided by the Government. Drawings of the interior support equipment will be provided by the Government.

Question 5:

Other than the PDF’s, will CAD drawing files be available for 64XXXX Series First Generation D5 Rail Cars? If so, what file format?

Government Response 5:

No. Native CAD part, assembly, and drawing files for the First-Generation D5 Railcars (GARD 640000 Drawings) do not exist. The GARD 640000 Drawings in PDF format are the only existing design documents that exist; but note that these drawings were not maintained or kept up-to-date throughout the life of the existing fleet.

Question 6:

Per the System Requirements Document, WC00015032 REV A, Section 1.4.1 our understanding is, in addition to the analysis, demonstration and test verification, also, all the DR####E Examination (inspection) requirements are only required for first article verification and not for the production units. Production units conform to the approved Technical Data Package and acceptance testing. Is this the correct interpretation of the requirements?

Government Response 6:

The Contractor shall document satisfaction of all analysis, demonstration, test, and examination requirements defined in WC00015032 REV A on the first article unit only. Production units will be built to the approved Technical Data Package and inspected/tested in accordance with the approved Production Acceptance Test Procedures. The Government and the Contractor will come to an agreement on the examinations and tests to perform on production units, along with the associated documentation that will need to be developed, to ensure that a quality production unit is being delivered. Impact testing, environmental chamber testing, rain testing, and facility checks will not be performed on production units. Traceability to every DR####E examination requirement defined in WC00015032 REV A is not explicitly required for each production unit, but it is anticipated that many of the examination requirements would be incorporated into the Technical Data Package and the Production Acceptance Test Procedures. The following are three examples:

The Technical Data Package (CDRL A012) would identify critical dimensions, the Production Acceptance Test Procedures (CDRL A016) would outline how the critical dimensions would be inspected, and the Test/Inspection Report (CDRL A018) for each production unit would document the results of the dimensional inspection. Anticipated critical dimensions include, but are not limited to: floor flatness, guiderail location/spacing, bulkhead link interface locations/dimensions, and facility interface dimensions.

The Technical Data Package (CDRL A012) would specify 100% visual weld inspection and no less than 5% magnetic particle weld testing, the Production Acceptance Test Procedures (CDRL A016) would outline how the welds would be inspected/tested, and the Test/Inspection Report (CDRL A018) for each production unit would document the results of the weld inspections and tests.

The Technical Data Package (CDRL A012) would specify ballistic resistant materials and structural steel materials, the Production Acceptance Test Procedures (CDRL A016) would list all ballistic resistant parts and structural steel parts requiring certificates of conformance, and the

Certificates of Conformance (CDRL A019) for each production unit would document the conformance of ballistic resistant materials and structural steel materials.

Though strict traceability to each DR####E examination requirement is not explicitly required for each production unit, the Technical Data Package and Production Acceptance Test Procedures will specify several similar examinations performed by the Contractor to ensure that a quality product is delivered and is suitable for acceptance.

Question 7:

Per the System Requirements Document, WC00015032 REV A, can you provide possible sources for the testing requested in DR0990T?

Government Response 7:

The Government cannot recommend sources to perform air leakage testing services. Note that ISO 1496-2 Test No.

13 is comparable to typical air leakage tests performed on residential buildings. The following information clarifies the air leakage testing requirements. An air supply source is used to transfer ambient outside air into the lading space interior via an opening in the sealed lading space. The air supply source has an integral flow-measuring device to measure the air flow rate into the lading space. A suitable manometer is installed to measure the pressure differential between the outside ambient air and the lading space interior air. The air supply source is adjusted to increase the air flow rate into the lading space until the pressure differential is 250 Pa ± 10 Pa. The steady state air flow rate at the pressure differential of 250 Pa ± 10 Pa is the lading space air leakage rate.

Question 8:

Per the System Requirements Document, WC00015032 REV A, are the following items duplicates of the same requirements, in addition to each other, or could be done in combination to fulfill both during a single analysis or test?

DR0980A and DR3840A And DR0980AT and DR3840T And DR3810T1 and DR4680T1

DR3810T2 and DR4680T2

Government Response 8:

DR0980A is an analysis to justify why the lading space will be rain tight in the environment specified. DR3840A is an analysis to justify why the railcar as a whole can operate in the rain environment specified; for example, justify why the generator set and associated electrical equipment can operate in the specified rain environment.

DR0980T and DR3840T can be performed simultaneously. DR0980T is to verify that the lading space does not leak during the specified rain test. DR3840T is to verify that all railcar systems can operate during and after exposure to the specified rain test. Note: The Contractor is not responsible for the performance of the Government Furnished Equipment and Government Furnished Material during these tests, though they should be in an operational state during these tests.

DR3810T1 and DR4680T1 can be performed simultaneously. DR3810T1 is to verify that all railcar systems can operate in a -30°F environment; for example, this test will verify that the generator set can operate in a -30°F environment. DR4680T1 is a system level test to verify (1) that the railcar lading space is suitably insulated and sealed and (2) that the HVAC system can suitably maintain required air conditions. Note: The Contractor is not responsible for the performance of the Government Furnished Equipment and Government Furnished Material during these tests, though they should be in an operational state during these tests. Instrumentation is present during the test to characterize the test.

DR3810T2 and DR4680T2 can be performed simultaneously. DR3810T2 is to verify that all railcar systems can operate in a +120°F environment; for example, this test will verify that the generator set can operate in a +120°F environment. DR4680T2 is a system level test to verify (1) that the railcar lading space is suitably insulated and sealed and (2) that the HVAC system can suitably maintain required air conditions. Note: The Contractor is not responsible for the performance of the Government Furnished Equipment and Government Furnished Material during these tests, though they should be in an operational state during these tests. Instrumentation is present during the test to characterize the test.

Question 9:

Ref the System Requirements Document, WC00015032 REV A, DR3810T1 and DR4680T1 And DR3810T2 and DR4680T2

DR4670T

During the site visit, we got the understanding that as long as the same temperature differentials (ΔT) were maintained for the testing referenced above, the internal and external parameters could be changed, based on available equipment. Is this correct?

Government Response 9:

Deviating from required internal and external parameters for DR4670T, while maintaining the same temperature differential, was preliminarily discussed at the Site Visit. But upon further discussion with Strategic Systems Program representatives, the requirements, as currently defined, must be satisfied. The Contractor needs to satisfy the requirements of DR3810T1, DR3810T2, DR4680T1, DR4680T2, and DR4670T, as defined in WC00015032 REV A. Please note the following statement from page 80 of the solicitation N0016414RGP55: “Offerors are not encouraged to take exceptions to this solicitation; however, any exceptions taken to the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation shall be explained in detail and set forth in a cover letter as well as in this section of the Cost Proposal. Offerors are to detail the particular section, clause paragraph, and page to which they are taking exception and the reason for the exception.”

Question 10:

My recall from the site visit is the railcar would not be allowed to travel outside the continental US for testing. Per the “Solicitation, Offer and Award” document, page 68, are we correct in assuming, that by submitting DD Form 2139, the railcar could be tested at a facility in Canada?

Government Response 10:

NSWC Crane is currently working with Strategic Systems Program representatives to determine if any ITAR or START requirements are applicable that would prohibit the use of testing facilities outside of the continental United States. Another amendment to this solicitation will contain the technical response to this question.

Question 11:

Could you provide an example, or outline, to help a small company with the technical expertise, but small administrative capacity, to accurately complete all the bid offer requirements?

Government Response 11:

The provision CNIN-L-0002 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS contains the requirements for proposal submission.

Section L contains all of the instructions, conditions and notices to offerors.

Question 12:

Having reviewed the bid package in more detail, the scope of the material required at the bid stage is much more than anticipated. It will take time to prepare the Technical Proposal (maximum 100 pages) and for the execution of many representations and certifications to include with the Cost/Price Proposal. We are requesting a six week extension beyond the December 12, 2013 response date.

Government Response 12:

The required response date/time has changed from 12-DEC-2013 04:00 PM to 23-JAN-2014 04:00PM.

Question 13:

Section 3.2 Cargo Configurations

Example: Paragraph 3.2.1.3 “An analysis shall verify that the D5 Railcar accepts the static live air pallet loads from the FS motor, FS motor chock, SS motor, SS motor chock and air pallets as defined in Figure DR3670, for all values of the variable X, defined in Figure DR3670. The analysis report shall indicate that the live loads defined in Figure DR3670 were used in other D5 Railcar Analysis.”

X is defined in Figure DR3670 as Greater or equal to 127.0 inches. This defines a range of values.

The phrase: “for all values of the variable X” if read plainly indicates an infinite number of positions, as there is no limit to the divisions in a non-zero dimension that can exist. This would require an infinite number of load cases.

It seems that the goal of this specification (and other instances of similar specifications) is to indicate that the structure is to withstand these loads in a variety of practical positions along that length. In order to accomplish this goal, a finite number of positions can be defined by stating an increment in the variable X.

For example, instead of stating “for all values of the variable X” it could be stated “for values of X at Z inch increments.” Meaning if the range of X is 120 inches, and if Z was defined as 12” then there would be 10 locations defined for analysis. It is suggested that Z should be defined with regard to the footprint of the load being considered.

This same or a similar phrase is used in many places throughout the specification.”

Government Response 13:

The following are structural analysis verification requirements defined in WC00015032 REV A that indicate a defined pressure load with a defined area can be applied over a range of locations during operations: DR3670A, DR3710A, DR3750A, DR3790A, DR4420A, DR4430A, DR4440A, DR4450A, DR4460A, DR4470A, DR4480A, DR4490A, DR4500A, DR4510A, DR4530A, DR4540A, DR4550A, DR4560A, & DR4570A. The Government does not expect an infinite number of load cases to be analyzed for these requirements. The Government is cautious to pre-define incremental load application locations as a critical loading location may be located between the incremental locations depending on the design. The Government expects the Contractor to use engineering judgment to identify and justify the potential critical loading locations and to perform structural analyses at those identified locations.

Question 14:

Section 3.3.6 Wind

Example: Paragraph 3.3.6.1 “An analysis shall verify that the D5 Railcar functions properly when traveling no greater than 70 mph with each cargo configuration or when empty, in no greater than 45mph steady state winds directed in any direction.”

This seems to indicate speeds which may range from 0 to 70 mph without definition of increment, as well as wind speeds up to 45 mph also without increment. It would seem that a worst-case combination should be stated in order to avoid excessive (or infinite) numbers of load combinations.

In addition to the speed increment the direction of the wind is stated as “any” of which there are infinite possible directions. As an alternative, a finite number of specific load values (railcar speed, wind speed and wind direction) should be defined to represent the worst case.

Further, there is no indication of what track configuration is to be considered—whether curving or any other regime.

Does this specification assume the wind loads are applied with the car on tangent track?

Government Response 14:

The Government’s expectation for analysis verification requirements DR3860A and DR3870A is to identify features on the railcar that are vulnerable to damage due to wind effects while in transit. The Government does not expect an infinite number of load cases to be analyzed for these requirements. The Government expects the Contractor to use engineering judgment to identify the critical railcar speeds, the critical wind speeds, and the critical wind directions, and to justify why vulnerable features will withstand damage from the wind effects while in transit; hence, track geometry (straight, curve, longitudinal incline, transverse incline, etc.) will have negligible effect on the analysis.

These analyses will likely be qualitative analyses, but if uncertainty exists in qualitative conclusions, quantitative analyses may be appropriate. Computational fluid dynamic analyses are not expected. Analysis verification requirement DR3880A for hurricane winds requires a quantitative analysis to verify the railcar will not overturn while stationary in hurricane winds. Computational fluid dynamic analyses are also not expected for this analysis requirement.

Question 15:

After contacting the Union Pacific and rereading the Speed Test I have a question for clarification in the SRD.

Section 3.4.4.1 - The sub subsection (DR4690D) it requires the car travel at no less than 70 Mile Per Hour. I believe it was intended for the analysis to prove that the car can travel at that speed, but the demonstration would be conducted at speeds no greater than 70 MPH? Or will the railcar need to reach the speed of 70MPH. Please advise.

3.4.4 Maneuverability

3.4.4.1 Speed

[DR4690] The D5 Railcar shall be able to travel at sustained speeds of no greater than 70 miles per hour on the unrestricted interchange service when loaded with each cargo configuration or when empty.

[DR4690A] An analysis shall be performed to verify the D5 Railcar is able to travel at sustained speeds of no greater than 70 miles per hour on the unrestricted interchange service when loaded with each cargo configuration or when empty. The analysis report shall provide statements justifying why the D5 Railcar can travel 70 miles per hour on the unrestricted interchange service.

[DR4690D] A demonstration shall be performed to verify the D5 Railcar can travel on the unrestricted interchange service when loaded with an inert FS motor and inert SS motor at speeds of no less 70mph.

Government Response 15:

Requirement DR4690 indicates that under normal operations, the D5 Railcar will only operate at speeds ranging from 0mph to no greater than 70mph. Demonstration requirement DR4690D requires that the loaded railcar demonstrate the ability to travel at a speed of no less than 70mph; in practical terms, the demonstration requirement will have been satisfied when the loaded railcar attains a speed of 70.1mph. It is not the Government’s intent to have the Contractor largely exceed a speed of 70mph to show any extra capability. The goal of the demonstration is to show that the loaded railcar can operate at all speeds defined in DR4690, and in practical terms, the only way to do that is to ever so slightly exceed 70mph.

Question 16:

On page 75 of 86, Factor I – Past Performance – The paragraph states:

“The Past Performance Factor is comprised of four evaluation subfactors. A narrative response to each subfactor is required to be submitted for each past performance reference. Each narrative response to the four evaluation subfactors shall be cross referenced to the CNIN-K-0001 Contractor Performance Data Sheet. Past Performance data on a minimum of three and a maximum of five contracts for like or similar items, either completed or ongoing, under which performance has taken place within the last ten years shall be provided. References MUST include company names, points of contact, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses (if available).”

Page 85 of 86, CNIN-M-0003 PAST PERFORMANCE, first paragraph states:

“During the source selection process the Government will assess the offeror’s past performance in the evaluation for contract award. Accordingly, each offeror is required to submit a list of up to a minimum of three and maximum of five of its most recent contracts within the past three years, either completed or on-going, for the same/similar products or services…..”

Please advise whether the acceptable performance period for “most recent contracts is for the submission of past performance data” for ten years or past three years OR are these two different submission requirements, ”narratives” and “a list of most recent contracts”.

Government Response 16:

Past Performance data on a minimum of three and a maximum of five contracts for like or similar items, either completed or ongoing, under which performance has taken place within the last ten years shall be provided. CNIN- M-0003 has been revised to reflect the ten year timeframe.

Question 17:

Solicitation N00164-14-R-GP55, CNIN-L-0002 (Proposal Requirements, part (b), Page 75) refers to “CNIN-I-0001 in Section I” in reference to Warranty Terms and Conditions. I find 52.246-19 Warranty of Systems…, Section I, Page 45, but no other reference to CNIN-I-0001. Can you please either provide CNIN-I-0001 or clarify your intent?

Government Response 17:

Clause CNIN-I-0001 was not included in the solicitation. The warranty clause 52.246-19 was included instead.

CNIN-L-0002 has been updated to remove “(b)(3) 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy on CD-ROM* of the proposed Warranty terms and conditions. Reference Clause CNIN-I-0001 as contained in Section I.”

Question 18:

Section L, CNIN-L-0002 “Proposal Requirements” Part (c) on Page 75 states, “The Offeror shall provide a table which cross references their proposal page numbers and paragraphs to Section L, the Statement of Work, and the Technical Drawing Package.” To what Technical Drawing Package does this refer? Does it refer to the government-furnished drawings provided of the First-generation Rail car, or to the product of engineering efforts on the Second Generation D-5 Rail Car?

Government Response 18:

The term Technical Drawing Package refers to the drawings, specifications, and documents as delineated in Section J of the solicitation.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

CNIN-L-0002 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

(a) Proposal Structure. The Technical Proposal and the Cost/Price Proposal shall be submitted in separate hard copy volumes. Electronic copies may be submitted on one CD-ROM. The Technical Proposal shall not contain any cost/pricing information, except for salary information provided on resumes or past performance contract information.

The submitted written proposals shall be on 8½” x 11” paper with 1” top, bottom, and side margins. Font shall be no smaller than 10 point font. If printed on double sided paper, each side counts as one page toward applicable page limitations. Title pages shall include the following information:

Solicitation Number Name of Offeror Date of Submission

(b) The offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) 6 hard copies and 1 electronic copy on CD-ROM* of the Technical Proposal. The Technical Proposal shall encompass Factors I and II. Page limitation is 100 pages.

(2) 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy on CD-ROM* of the Cost/Price Proposal. The Cost/Price Proposal shall include a signed solicitation package with all representations and certifications executed and the cost/prices in Section B completed. No page limitation.

*CD-ROM must be clearly marked with the Offeror’s Name, content on the CD-ROM, Solicitation Number, and Date of Submission.

(c) The order of presentation in the Offeror’s submitted proposals shall correspond to the order of the factors discussed below. The Offeror shall provide a table which cross references their proposal page numbers and paragraphs to Section L, the Statement of Work, and the Technical Drawing Package. The content requirements described below address major topics of concern to the Government. Failure to respond to any of these topics shall be considered a “major omission.” The Offeror may expand beyond the specific information requested, but any additional information shall be within the page limitations. Any additional text provided must be relevant and demonstrate capabilities beneficial to the overall requirements described in this solicitation. Each volume submitted must be separate and contain sufficient information to permit a detailed evaluation. Previously submitted data, if any, shall not be used in the evaluation of the response to this solicitation.

(d) Technical Proposal. The Technical Proposal shall address Factors I and II. Each Technical Proposal shall enable Government evaluating personnel to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether or not the proposal will meet the requirements of the Government. To this end, each technical proposal shall be so specific, detailed and complete as to clearly and fully demonstrate that the prospective contractor has a thorough knowledge and understanding of the requirements and has valid and practical solutions for technical problems. Statements which paraphrase the specifications or attest that “standard procedures will be employed,” are inadequate to demonstrate how it is proposed to comply with the requirements of the specifications, and this clause.

A narrative response to each subfactor is required.

At a minimum, the proposals must clearly provide the following:

FACTOR I – PAST PERFORMANCE

The Past Performance Factor is comprised of four evaluation subfactors. A narrative response to each subfactor is required to be submitted for each past performance reference. Each narrative response to the four evaluation subfactors shall be cross referenced to the CNIN-K-0001 Contractor Performance Data Sheet. Past Performance data on a minimum of three and a maximum of five contracts for like or similar items, either completed or ongoing, under which performance has taken place within the last ten years shall be provided. References MUST include company names, points of contact, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses (if available).

SUBFACTORS

A. Manufacturing Past Performance

Standard 1: The offeror shall identify examples of railcars that were fabricated within the last 10 years in the proposed manufacturing facility, having the AAR S-2034 Car Builder Certification, or Conditional Certification, and the AAR M-1003 Quality Assurance Certification. Proof of certifications shall be provided with the proposal.

Standard 2: For each fabricated railcar example, the offeror shall describe similarities to the proposed conceptual design for the Second-Generation D5 Railcar, provide photographs and/or high-level drawings, provide proof and date of AAR and FRA acceptance, describe first article fabrication and production duration, describe any manufacturing challenges, and identify any formal operational or mechanical problem reports.

Standard 3: The offeror shall identify examples of other fabricated designs having similar characteristics to the proposed conceptual design for the Second-Generation D5 Railcar, such as ballistic resistant material, flatness over large areas, and manufacturing tolerances.

B. Design/Engineering Past Performance

Standard 1: The offeror shall identify examples of submitted designs of railcars submitted to the AAR Equipment Engineering Committee (EEC) within the last 10 years that received AAR EEC approval.

Standard 2: For each example of a submitted railcar design, the offeror shall provide details of the design and effort including:

a) Top-level description and photographs/drawings of the designed railcars. Include discussion of similarities to proposed conceptual design for Second-Generation D5 Railcar,

b) Describe the analyses that were performed on the railcar design and identify the analytical, modeling, and drafting tools employed,

c) Duration of time for design efforts, and the role played by the prime contractor/subcontractor/teammates in product design,

d) Describe the design package submitted to the AAR EEC and date of approval, and describe any additional analyses or tests that were required by the AAR EEC after the initial design package submittal,

e) Describe the configuration management system utilized to maintain control of configuration items,

f) Describe any difficulties in designing for manufacturability, and

g) Identify any formal operational or mechanical problems reported.

Standard 3: The offeror shall submit any examples of equipment that was designed within the last 10 years that utilized ballistic resistant materials, required stress and deflection analyses, required analyses of shock mitigation performance, required analyses of insulation performance, required analyses with factors of safety above typical Association of American Railroad (AAR) factors, (identify the factors of safety used).

C. Testing Past Performance

Standard 1: The offeror shall identify examples of testing efforts within the last 10 years that were performed on railcars, or other equipment, including:

a) Impact Testing,

b) Environmental Testing - High/Low Temperatures, High Humidity,

c) Rain Testing,

d) Air Leakage Testing,

e) Demonstrations on Unrestricted Interchange Service (i.e. 400 mile test),

f) Executing/Performing 70mph Speed Test,

g) Dimensional Inspection Over Large Areas,

h) AAR Standard Tests to Enter the Unrestricted Interchange Service, such as AAR MSRP required Brake

Test, Minimum Horizontal Radius Curvature Test, and Light Weight Test, and

i) AAR M-1001 Chapter 11 Service-Worthiness Tests

Standard 2: For each testing effort identified above, the offeror shall:

a) Describe the piece of equipment being tested,

b) Briefly describe instrumentation setups,

c) Describe coordination of significant testing resources, and

d) Describe interactions with any external organizations during testing.

Standard 3: The offeror shall provide examples of prior test planning and execution that were performed within the last 10 years. Include discussion of schedule variance from plan.

D. Program Management Past Performance

Standard 1: Offeror shall identify examples of projects that have been managed within the last 10 years in these specific areas:

a) New product development,

b) First Article Manufacture,

c) First Article Test, and

d) Production.

Standard 2: For each example of projects managed, the offeror shall describe the scope of the project, describe the contract type (firm fixed price or cost plus fee), describe project successes and lessons learned, and describe schedule variance between the baseline schedule and actual performance.

Standard 3: For each example of projects managed, the offeror shall describe the division of efforts between the prime and any subcontractors and/or teaming arrangements that were employed, the extent and/or history of the working relationships between the organizations, the scope of each organization's efforts, the methods of governing each organization's performance, and the effectiveness of the method.

FACTOR II – PROPOSED APPROACH

SUBFACTORS

A. Conceptual Approach

Standard 1: The offeror shall submit a conceptual design of the Second-Generation D5 Railcar and shall explain each of the following conceptual features: Superstructure Framing and Materials Approach, Lading Space Floor, Bulkhead Structure, Ballistic Resistant Materials, Ballistic Resistant Materials Method of Connection to Superstructure, Lading Space Rain and Air Tight Provisions, Lading Space Insulation, Lading Space A-End Door Provisions, Lading Space Side Door Provisions, Equipment Chamber Doors, Generator Set, Fuel Tank, Coupler / End-of-Car Cushioning Device Arrangements, and Truck Arrangements.

Standard 2: The offeror shall describe and justify the conceptual features that are commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) items.

Standard 3: The offeror shall justify why the conceptual design will likely be categorized as a conventional car that is not of an untried type, requiring minimal or no AAR M-1001 Chapter 11 Service-Worthiness Tests.

B. Program and Engineering Management Approach

Standard 1: The offeror shall provide a projected program schedule with milestones as suggested in the SOW, and shall allow for contingencies in case all AAR M-1001 Chapter 11 Service-Worthiness Tests are required for the new design.

Standard 2: The offeror shall identify the primary point of contact for Government interface.

Standard 3: The offeror shall identify which efforts will be performed in-house, and which efforts will be performed by a subcontractor/teammate. Subcontractors/teammates shall be identified and the planned location of efforts identified.

Standard 4: The offeror shall identify any subcontracting and/or teaming arrangements. For each subcontractor and teaming arrangement, the offeror shall describe the function of each organization, location of each organization, extent of responsibility of each organization, offeror's method of governing each organization's performance, and the prior working history between organizations.

Standard 5: The offeror shall submit resumes of key personnel and the percentage of each individual's time to be devoted to this effort. Resumes are required for: Engineering staff (including designers, managers, manufacturing, and test), drafting/CAD staff, "on-the-floor fabricators” (machinists, welders, etc.), surface finishers/preparers, all inspectors, management, and other personnel considered key by the offeror. Resumes should indicate education, experience, location of work performance, and whether personnel are prime or subcontractor personnel.

Standard 6: The offeror shall describe the engineering tools to be utilized (i.e. 3D modeling and drafting tools, Analytical tools for stress, deflection, dynamic, and thermal analysis). Indicate experience with systems and level of expertise.

Standard 7: The offeror shall describe the existing configuration management system, and method of configuration status accounting. Also discuss any variations that are planned for this new effort.

C. First Article Manufacturing Approach

Standard 1: The offeror shall explicitly identify the manufacturing facility that will be used to build the Second- Generation D5 Railcar First Article and Production Units, and shall submit proof of the following certifications for the manufacturing facility:

a) AAR S-2034: Car Builder Certification or Conditional Certification

b) AAR M-1003: Quality Assurance Certification

Standard 2: The offeror shall describe the manufacturing facility and capabilities that will be available for the Second-Generation D5 Railcar manufacturing efforts. Include location, rail access, GFE/GFM storage and segregation, and environmental control (if applicable). Identify any areas specifically designated for this effort.

Standard 3: The offeror shall describe the fabrication equipment and capabilities, including any specialized equipment. Provide the location if not permanently located on-site, and also describe the expertise associated with specialized equipment and material handling equipment.

Standard 4: The offeror shall identify the planned paint facility; describe the access, the surface preparation capability, any special paint application equipment, lighting, or environmental control.

Standard 5: Rail equipment at manufacturing equipment is described, including locomotives, railcar jacks, transfer table, railcar scale, brake testing equipment, on-site rail.

Standard 6: The offeror shall describe their existing quality processes used at the manufacturing facility, including:

inspections, nonconformance processes, calibration processes, training, and certification. Also describe how the quality system will be flowed to subcontractors and teammates.

Standard 7: The offeror shall describe the approach for dimensionally inspecting the following features: floor flatness, guiderail straightness and spacing, bulkhead link interface location.

Standard 8: The offeror shall describe the preliminary manufacturing methods for the First Article Second- Generation D5 Railcar, specifically: manufacture of the lading space floor within tolerance, attaining guiderail straightness and spacing, properly locating bulkhead link interfaces, and identify any known fixtures that will be utilized/developed to support fabrication.

Standard 9: Welding inspections are described. SRD requirements include 100% visual by Certified Weld Inspector (CWI), and 5% magnetic particle testing.

Standard 10: The offeror shall identify any anticipated special processes for the ballistic resistant material selected.

D. First Article Testing Approach

Standard 1: The offeror shall describe the approach for performing standard railcar tests including: AAR MSRP required Brake Test, Minimum Horizontal Radius Curvature Test, and Light Weight Test.

Standard 2: The offeror shall describe the approach for performing solar radiation and salt fog testing on paint samples. Identify any outside laboratory services that are planned to be used.

Standard 3: The offeror shall identify the proposed impact testing location and describe testing approach including the following details:

a) Identify the resources that will be available, such as:

i. Locomotives,

ii. Location and Size of Area available for Inert Motor staging equipment,

iii. Location for First-Generation D5 Railcar Delivery of Inert Motors,

iv. Rail Available for Buffer Cars and Impact Tests (including number of rail spurs),

v. Material Handling Equipment (forklifts, cranes, slings/rigging), and

vi. Buffer Cars.

b) Identify data acquisition system approach, if known.

Standard 4: The offeror shall describe the approach for the 400 mile test on the unrestricted interchange service, with inert first stage and second stage motors loaded.

Standard 5: The offeror shall describe the approach for performing and measuring the 70 mph speed test on the unrestricted interchange service, with inert first stage and second stage motors loaded.

Standard 6: The offeror shall identify the proposed environmental test chamber location and describe the environmental testing approach, such as:

a) Describe the environmental test chamber capabilities, such as:

i. Minimum and maximum temperature,

ii. Minimum and maximum relative humidity,

iii. Chamber size, and

iv. Railcar access.

b) Identify data acquisition system approach, such as:

i. Types, Quantities, and Locations of Temperatures Sensors and

ii. Data Acquisition System(s)

Standard 7: The offeror shall identify the proposed rain test facility location and capability, and the planned testing approach.

Standard 8: The offeror shall submit a mitigation plan if the AAR Equipment Engineering Committee requires the First Article Second-Generation D5 Railcar to undergo all AAR M-1001 Chapter 11 Service-Worthiness Tests.

E. Production Manufacturing and Testing Approach

Standard 1: The offeror shall identify the designated work area(s) for Production efforts of Second-Generation D5 Railcars.

Standard 2: The offeror shall identify the approach for completing a production order (example production line, one at a time, staggered starts (including delay time between staggered start), small batch, etc.).

Standard 3: The offeror shall identify provisions intended to retain or maintain manufacturing capability during first article testing.

Standard 4: The offeror shall identify any intended manufacturing differences between first article and production products.

Standard 5: The offeror shall describe how the requirement for welding inspections will be met during production, if different from First Article manufacturing.

Standard 6: The offeror shall describe the approach for dimensionally inspecting the following features on production railcars: floor flatness, guiderail straightness and spacing, and bulkhead link interface location.

Standard 7: The offeror shall describe the approach for performing standard railcar tests on production units including: AAR MSRP required Brake Test, Minimum Horizontal Radius Curvature Test, and Light Weight Test.

ANY EXCEPTION TO THE GOVERNMENT’S TECHNICAL REQUIRMENTS / SPECIFICATIONS MUST BE

INCLUDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND A COVER LETTER TO THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

FACTOR III – PRICE

(e) Cost/Price Proposal. The cost/price proposal is required to contain the solicitation package with the prices competed in Section B of the solicitation, all representation and certifications executed in Section K, including the clause CNIN-K-0001. The prices are to be provided as separate unit prices for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) listed.

(f) Exceptions. Offerors are not encouraged to take exceptions to this solicitation; however, any exceptions taken to the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation shall be explained in detail and set forth in a cover letter as well as in this section of the Cost Proposal. Offerors are to detail the particular section, clause paragraph, and page to which they are taking exception and the reason for the exception.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

CNIN-M-0003 PAST PERFORMANCE

During the source selection process, the Government will assess the offeror's past performance in the evaluation for contract award. Accordingly, each offeror is required to submit a list of up to a minimum of three and a maximum of five of its most recent contracts within the past ten years, either completed or on-going, for the same/similar products or services. It is preferred that these contracts be with U.S. government customers, but contracts with other commercial concerns are also acceptable. Offerors are authorized to provide information relative to any problems encountered on the identified contracts and any corrective actions taken by the offeror. If the offeror does not provide a corrective action the Government will assume that the problem encountered still exists. The Source Selection Authority (SSA)/Contracting Officer will evaluate the offeror's past performance based upon the information furnished by the offeror and/or other information obtained by the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer is not responsible for locating or securing any information not furnished with the offer. The SSA/Contracting Officer may, however, utilize all available information, including information not provided by the offeror, in the past performance evaluation. The Government reserves the right to review less than all information submitted, and to only analyze sufficient information to make a reasonable determination of each offeror’s past performance rating. If insufficient information regarding the offeror’s corporate history is available, the offeror is encouraged to submit for evaluation evidence of relevant past performance on the part of the offeror’s key/principal employees, as either a prime- or sub-contractor.

Past performance is assessed by the SSA/Contracting Officer and is assigned adjectival ratings in the evaluation.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation:

The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The criteria to establish what is recent and relevant shall be unique to each source selection and shall be stated in the solicitation. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming. Each offeror will be given an adjectival rating on past performance relevance: very relevant, relevant, somewhat relevant or not relevant.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts. The Past Performance information will be reviewed to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. Each offeror will be given an adjectival rating on past performance confidence: substantial confidence, satisfactory confidence, limited confidence, no confidence, unknown confidence. Offerors who do not have recent/relevant performance record available to the Contracting Officer will be rated Unknown Confidence (Neutral).

The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest priced offer as set forth elsewhere in the solicitation. In addition, the Government may accept other than the lowest priced offer if doing so would result in greater value to the Government in terms of technical performance, quality, reliability, life cycle cost, or lower overall program risk. As a part of the past performance evaluation, the Government will assess the offeror's previous compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 as applicable.

(End of Summary of Changes)