N66604-15-R-0022_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

See Page 2

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 6

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-May-2015

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 N66604-15-R-0022

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Apr-2015

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 is extended, X 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 2 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

08-May-2015

CODE

NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER

CHESTER M. SWISZCZ, CODE 0222

CONTRACTS DEPARTMENT

1176 HOWELL STREET, BLDG. 1258

NEWPORT RI 02841

N66604 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N66604-15-R-0022

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

GENERAL INFORMATION

THE CLOSING DATE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS REMAINS UNCHANGED AT 18 MAY

2015.

The purpose of this amendment is as follows:

1) Respond to vendor questions.

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Q1. There is no design review as part of the proposal. Has the penetrator been successfully built and qualified before with these prints? If so, do any ECP's exist or were there lessons learned recorded?

A1. Contract is for a build to print item with NO design review required. An EDM is currently in production for Environment Qualification Testing. No Engineering Change Proposals or Lessons Learned have been provided to the Government from the vendor.

Q2. Has the indicated Kemlon component (part number 16-B-10537) gone through qualification testing?

A2. Kemlon part number 16-B-10537 does NOT appear in this drawing package. Item no. 4 on

NAVSEA Drawing 53711-8212314 (2Y403-16-B-10737) is currently used in EHPs on US

Submarines.

Q3. Is there performance data regarding mating cycles and quantified RF results for the

Kemlon coax?

A3. The Kemlon Coax Contact meets the specified requirements in an existing installed EHP configuration. The CEHP EDM will be used to validate the CEHP requirement.

Q4. If the Penetrator has not been qualified is there an option to use our own equivalent design for the RF assembly in lieu of the Kemlon component?

A4. SUBSAFE drawings are non-deviational.

Q5. Are there test reports from the original design work? If so, can we have copies of the results?

A5. A SUBSAFE Design Review (SSDR) was completed for this EHP. The information in the SSDR is not required for fabrication of the EHP.

Q6. Reference: Page 15 (f) - Is this the mechanism if the Contractor identifies drawing errors or design deficiencies?

A6. Section (f) under HQ C-2-0012 Configuration Management (NAVSEA)(APR 2004) defines the criteria for Equitable Adjustment for Change Documentation Preparations. An ECP (Section (c)) would be the appropriate mechanism.

Q7. In the Solicitation, page 3: Item Number and Supplies- Can we assume the part numbers are 53711-8212306, 53711-8212307, and 53711-8212331?

A7. The SOW, Section 2: Scope, states the deliverable as 53711-8212306.

Q8. Since the Drawing 8212314 calls out a Kemlon component, is Kemlon obligated to offer the same price to all vendors?

A8. Kemlon has given the Government their assurance they will sell to any vendor who requests. The

Government does NOT have control over pricing of the components listed on the drawings.

Q9. Can you provide the configuration for the GFM Dip Loop/Test Cable?

A9. Drawing 53711-8212331 defines the requirements for the CEHP and the electrical performance which the connectors must meet independent of any test cable.

Q10. Section 6 calls out GFM/CFM procedures. What GFM will be provided?

A10. The only GFM which is provided are the drawings which were provided as part of the RFP.

Section 6.a.(1) is part of E22R and is N/A for this contract.

Q11. Drawing 5613015

a. Is color code in MIL-PRF-46010 black or natural?

b. What is the orientation of the marking?

A11a. Either color would be acceptable.

A11b. MIC marking should be oriented so that the required .125” high characters fit and are visible.

Q12. Drawing 5613016- Recommend changing .750+/- 0.005 thickness dimension to MIL-

24231 fractional standard of ¾ +/- 1/64 due to expansion and contraction of material due to temperature. What is the allowable edge break?

A12. Dimensions and tolerances on the drawing are for fabrication and are not intended to account for thermal effects. This item is currently used in other EHPs with no reported issues. Material is

Rubber therefore edge break NOT required.

Q13. Drawing 5613017- What is the allowable edge break?

A13. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q14. Drawing 5613018- What is the allowable edge break?

A14. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q15. Drawing 5613022 -What is the allowable edge break?

A15. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q16. Drawing 5613023- What is the allowable edge break?

A16. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q17. Drawing 5613024- What is the allowable edge break?

A17. Per note 1 of drawing 5613024 , the allowable edge break is .015 maximum.

Q18. Drawing 5613029- What is the type and class for the anodizing specification MIL-A-

8625?

A18. Either Class or type may be used as long as the requirements with MIL-A-8625 are met.

Q19. Drawing 82121305 - Has it been confirmed that connectors and cable bundles fit through the hull insert?

A19. A study was completed as part of a design review and confirmed that connectors and cable bundles fit through the hull insert.

Q20. Drawing 82121306- Note 7 requires the nut to be torqued to 200 ±10ft. lbs. Typically it is torqued to 100 ft. lbs. Has the torque value been verified?

A20. Torque specified by SUBMEPP.

Q21. Drawing 82121308 - Schott glass has been limiting raw material supply to manufacturers. Can the drawing/contract be revised to add "or equivalent" after S8061?

A21. SUBSAFE drawings are non-deviational. If the glass listed is not available then a suitable alternative would need to be approved by the Government.

Q22. Drawing 82121309-

a. What is the allowable contact tip geometry?

b. What is the allowable edge break?

A22a. Full Radius

A22b. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q23. Drawing 82121310-

a. Should the slot callout be indicated as evenly spaced?

b. What is the allowable edge break?

A23a. Slots are to be evenly spaced

A23b. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q24. Drawing 82121311- What is the allowable edge break?

A24. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q25. Drawing 82121319 - What is the allowable edge break?

A25. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q26. Drawing 82121316 - With reference to industry standard ferrules; tolerance is .00002, not .000002. Should the drawing tolerance be corrected?

A26. Concur, the drawing tolerance is .00002. The reference dimension will be updated at the next revision.

Q27. Drawing 82121323- What is the allowable edge break?

A27. NO edge break specified per drawing.

Q28. Drawing 8212314- Header Assembly note 5 states ASTM-B-488 for Gold Plating. Is

MIL-DTL-45204 acceptable as an alternative?

A28. No, MIL-DTL-45204 is not acceptable as an alternative. Pins are to be plated in accordance with ASTM-B-488.

Q29. Drawing 8212331- Drawing 8212331 has an error which has been carried over from

PPD 802-6337554. Note 1.1.4 requires the C63200 to have a Yield of 50,000 psi. That is correct for material up to 3.0 dia. Gland Nut, 5613022 requires the stock to be over 3.0 inches in diameter [3.03 REF]. In accordance with ASTM B150/150M, Table 2, page 4, C63200- For material over 3 to 5 inclusive the Yield will be 45,000psi. Will the drawing be corrected?

A29. Do not concur, the yield strength value is 50,000 psi. The ASTM B150 value is a minimum.

Q30. Drawing 8212331-Reference 1.3.2.1 and Table 3.

a. The indicated Fiber Optic loss is more stringent than the PPD specification for similar Hull Penetrators where the maximum loss is 1.8dB max. This loss includes MQJs and mate repeatability. Has this value been achieved with the previously built units?

b. Should there be a return loss requirement in Table 3?

A30a. Value to be verified in the EDM.

A30b. Return loss not specified on the drawing.

Q31. Drawing 82121332- The indicated undercut dimension is greater than the outside diameter of the part. Reference Sheet 1 zone 6-D and Sheet 2 detail 2-7E. Will this drawing be revised to correct?

A31. The 3.880 dimension in zone 1-6D is in error and unnecessary. It will be removed in the next revision of the drawing.

Q32. Will the Dynamic Test/Balance Procedure be waived because it is not applicable for the

Penetrator?

A32. Agree that this test is not applicable and is not required for the CEHP.

Q33. Are the "said" requirements of HQ C-2-0027(b) the same as 8212331 Quality

Conformance Testing?

A33. Pre-Production = Vendor Qualification, Production = Quality Conformance.

Q34. Will pre-production units require MIC Markings?

A34. Yes, all delivered units, including the pre-production units, will require MIC markings.

(End of Summary of Changes)