Responses_to_Questions.pdf

Questions and Answers:

1. Submission Deadline: We kindly request that the electronic submission be made prior to the designated due date of 13 August, 2019 {3pm EST); however, that the requested

Hard copy volumes (if indeed necessary) be received by NASA 3 to 5 business days following.

Response: All hard copy and electronic copies are due on the same day, August 13, 2019, at 3 pm ET.

General Documents:

1. In reference to WFIRST-SYS-PLAN-0051 contamination control, can NASA kindly provide this document as referenced in the Statement of Work?

Response: This document has been posted to fbo.gov.

2. In reference to WFIRST - SM A-REQ-0032, the MAR as referenced in the SOW Section

1.4.1, the provided MAR of WFIRST-RQMT-05819 MAR was included on the Fed

Biz Op document list; however, not WFIRST-SMA-REQ-0032. Can NASA clarify that WFIRST-RQMT-05819 is in fact the correct MAR document for the referenced solicitation.

Response: During the RFP review, the MAR, WFIRST-RQMT-05819, was transferred into our new CM system (TDMS) and approved as WFIRST-SMA-REQ-

0032, Revision B. The document includes the same content as the MAR posted but with a new document and revision number.

3. In reference to WFIRST-IC-SPEC-0057 noted in Section 5 of the SOW, can NASA kindly provide this document?

Response: WFIRST-IC-SPEC-0057 should be listed as WFIRST-IC-SPEC-0046.

4. WFIRST-IC-SPEC-0069, Thermal Cycling Specification as noted in the specification document and in SOW, figure 1. of Section 1.4.3, can NASA kindly provide this document?

5. Fitting Drawings: We received 2250578 for one (1) fitting configuration, are the other fitting drawings available?

Response: There are other fitting drawings available. However, we supplied this to get an idea of the cost. This is one of the most complicated fittings and again was provided so they could understand the complexity of the titanium fittings.

6. CAD Models: We kindly request an updated CAD {3D model) of the IC Structure.

Response: There is no other information available at this time.

7. In reference to NASA STD 5005 - We kindly request the most recent released revision.

8. In reference to NASA NRP 6000.1- We kindly request the most recent released revision.

9. In reference to 540-PG-8700.2.1 - We kindly request the most recent released revision.

10. In reference to 540-PG-8719.1.1 - We kindly request the most recent released revision.

11. Are the documents referenced in Attachment G, IT security, available for review by us?

Response: A revised Attachment G has been posted to fbo.gov, which provides for links to the referenced documents.

12. The RFP.pdf (80GSFC19R0036) document references SOW paragraphs that do not seem to exist (The SOW does not go beyond 6.2 and the RFP document addresses SOW section 9.7)

Response: The SOW references in Clause B.1 have been revised to capture the correct SOW references including delivery schedule revisions.

Statement of Work (Attachment, WFIRST-IC-SOW-001) and Delivery Schedule

1. The SOW identifies the kick-off meeting at both 15 days ACA, and at 25 days

ACA, can NASA please clarify.

Response: In table 1 it calls out the Kickoff to be 15 days but we made a change to 25 days since the presentation draft is due 10 days before which leaves no time to put a package together so it should be 25 days.

2. The final assembly delivery is denoted as 12 months ACA per Attachment C

(DILS), and 13 month ACA per RFP.pdf document (80GSFC19R0036) Section B.1 and the SOW notes Jan 2021 delivery date. Can NASA kindly confirm the program need date (months ACA)?

Response: This should be 12 months not 13 months. Further, items in Clause B.1 of the

RFP have been revised to reflect the dates in the DILS.

3. We kindly request confirmation the deliverable articles to be FOB Destination or

Origin.

Response: The deliveries are FOB Destination.

Specification:

1. Specification Section 2.5.6 - denotes Plexi-glass trial samples. Are the quantities and a drawing of the expected samples available for consideration?

Response: There are no quantities on the plexiglass trials since this is only to prove the process works so it may be several or as little as one.

2. Specification Section 2.5.11 - is the terminology correct at the end of the sentence? The word 'but' appears to be in place of 'by'.

Response: The word “but” should be “by”.

3. Specification Section 2.6.3 - Can NASA kindly confirm that the subscale articles receive a mechanical load test that is to be defined later?

Response: Yes; in Section 2.6.3, these loads will be provided later.

4. Specification Table 5 shows a 'dimensional' test only for the test assemblies. The term 'proof testing' is shown in Section 3.2.27 of the DILS document. Therefore, we kindly request clarification if the proof testing is something more than dimensional. Also, specification Section 2.6.3 implies thermal cycling, but is not shown in Table 5.

Response: Table 5 shows dimensional but the sections above have testing required. The intent of WFIRST is to have the 3 test articles dimensionally inspected and tested at loads that will be provided later.

5. Please clarify the intention of Specification Section 2.6.4 for additional plug test articles, or how to baseline an approach for the Section 2.6.5 clip testing since a drawing is not going to be available until ACA.

Response: The plug testing should be 18 pieces of the drawing 2250602. This is bonding and ready to be tested if needed.

6. Specification Section 2.11.3 - We kindly request that NASA provide the desired quantities of spare components. (DILS HW-5 refers to the SPEC document.)

Response: For clip testing just specify your assumptions and cost them with any details you can provide.

DILS:

1. Are the quantities of the Spare Gusset Material (HW-6) and the quantities of the

Repair Panels (HW-7) defined anywhere, or is it expected that we develop a plan for spares as mentioned in SE-9? Reference note 6 under Specification above.

Response: WFIRST would like the sparing assumptions written down and costed. It could be a minimum of one panel for each configuration but the assumptions should be identified to understand the cost.