N0017422R0070U0001_FINAL.docx

N0017422R0070

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES (REVISED)

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment is to (1) answer questions received in response to the solicitation issuance, (2) revise Section L and (3) extend the solicitation closing date as follow:

1. Questions submitted in response to the solicitation issuance, as well as answers to those questions, are as follows:

Question 1: For this opportunity, Note 2 States: Steel Castin, investment, Corrosion-resistant (17-4 PH) in accordance with SAE AMS 5355, H1000. Can this part be made from 17-4 PH Solid Bar/Tubing rather than from a casting?

Answer 1: It is acceptable to machine from solid bar stock of 17-4 SS, Heat treated to H1000.

Question 2: On drawing PN 525-174-0132, Nozzle, Note 11. states that dimensional limits and surface texture apply to finished part including painting. While MIL-H-18911, Paragraph 3.1.2 states that " The dimensions and tolerances of all rocket components to painted shall apply prior to the application of paint coatings. What takes precedence?

Answer 2: The painted surface is on the exterior of the nozzle ONLY, and so this surface condition or dimensional difference due to coats of paint doesn’t matter. The interior of the nozzle and mating and thread surfaces are unpainted.

Question 3: PN 525-174-0132 Nozzle. AMS2700 is called out in Note 9 for controlling passivation. It lists Type 2 but not a class. Can the USG clarify?

Answer 3: There is method 1 which is “passivation with Nitric Acid” and method 2 is with Citric Acid. Offerors are instruced to use type 1 with Nitric Acid.

Question 4: We have engaged a dozen+ casting houses and have received multiple no-quotes for making this part from an investment casting. One of which was a vendor with hands-on experience with this part. They no-quoted due to the historically high yield loss and other nuances associated with the design. Has the USG successfully procured this item in volume using the casting option?

Answer 4: The Government has cast via Investment casting. The Government drafted a more stringent Weapon spec that governs the casting process more tightly to ensure there are fewer rejects. It is perfectly acceptable to machine these nozzles from round stock though so you can quote that if you wish.

Question 5: In section C SOW, 3.2.3 Dimensional: States Contractor is responsible for submitting a 'Final Dimensional Inspection Report' with every lot. Is this report intended to be comprised of a sample or 100% dimensions on 100% of the lot?

Answer 5: No, not 100%. A full dimensional should be done for 10 first articles made, but for lot production, only one sample from each lot of heat treat batch should be done.

Question 6: In Section C SOW Paragraph 3.2.2 Tensile Test Samples: This states that the tensile test samples will be sent to the USG for testing. However, The requirements also indicates that tensile testing be provided by the contractor COA (Certificate of Analysis). To Clarify, will the contractor be required to provide tensile testing data? If so, to what specification? We recommend ASTME8 if yes.

Answer 6: In Note 4 of the drawing, a tensile test sample is to be taken from the rough machined part (or Cast part) after heat treatment in the approximate area and size shown in the drawing. The Contractor will be required to perform these tests. ASTM E8 for Tensile test specimen spec is acceptable for the nozzles.

Question 7: There was some missing information for this Solicitation that I was not able to find. Considering these documents were missing, I would like to request the documents along with an extension for proposals. Please advise if an extension for 7/11/2022 (this will allow outside companies to finalize our Past Performance information that is needed for our submission). The follow information was not able to be located and will need to be provided if possible: Past Performance Matrix Document was not posted to the Solicitation on SAM.gov, Past Performance Questionnaires were not posted to the Solicitation on SAM.gov. Please provide these documents and advise if the extension can be granted.

Answer 7: The Government has granted an extension with the solicitation closing date of 7/11/2022. The Past Performance Matrix and Questionnaire is now posted on SAM.gov.

1. SECTION L – Instructions to Offerors is revsied to add:

Offeror shall submit one (1) Past Performance Questionnaire provided as an attachment in Section J to each of its customer POCs identified in the Recent and Relevant Past Performance References if there is not a CPARs record. In order to expedite the assessment process, the Offeror may complete the “Contract Information” portion of the Past Performance Questionnaire for the convenience of the customer POC. The Offeror shall not, however, complete any other section of the Past Performance Questionnaire. The questionnaire shall be provided to the customer POC with instructions to complete and submit it directly to the Contracting Officer (jamie.l.brown1.civ@us.navy.mil) on or before the proposal due date. Electronic submission via e-mail by the customer is required. The Contracting Officer will confirm receipt of questionnaires received.

1. SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 24-Jun-2022 03:00 PM to 11-Jul-2022 03:00 PM.

1. All other items remain unchanged.

1. Direct any questions to Bridget Taylor at bridget.m.taylor.civ@us.navy.mil.

(End of Summary of Changes) image1.wmf