Questions_Responses_Round1.pdf

Questions Round 1 Date 4/4/2019

RFP NO. SPRWA1-18-R-0033

RFP TITLE

Should packaging / shipping costs per AFMC_158 be separate or included with the unit price.

Pricing for packaging/shipping is a determination to be made by each individual vendor. Please note that all applicable unit prices be made on the attached Pricing Matrix.

First Article per * AFMC Form 260 – Para 7 “Long Lead Time Items” is selected differently for each item. Do we need to treat these differently? a. Item

5895015439384EW, set to “Required”

b. Item 5895013933618EW, set to “NOT Required”

c. Item 5985015608710EW, set to “NOT Required”

Should be listed as "Not Required" for each NSN. These are new designs that could be subject to long lead items based on the new designs. We cannot state if long lead items will be required.

Please confirm that GSI is required for final inspection only.

Please see Schedule B for inspection/acceptance criteria for all CLINs pertaining to this solicitation.

Radio Frequency Switches

Question # Questions Government Response

Paragraph 6.3 in the assembly SCDs indicates that the customer may allow qualification by similarity. This makes good sense for certain tests. Will this be allowed? We plan to request this on the following tests, so comments would be appreciated: a. Acceleration – Based upon successful completion of random vibration testing with equivalent acceleration level exposure.

b. Solderability – Based upon all leads being pretinned with a soldering iron with in-process verification of solderability.

c. Resistance to Soldering Heat – Based upon all leads being pretinned with a soldering iron with in-process verification of hermeticity through screening and qual.

d. Moisture Resistance – Based upon being a hermetically sealed unit with non-moisture sensitive external material and finishes

e. Fungus – Based upon use non-nutrient materials

f. Temp/Altitude – Based upon hermetic design and temperature performance being performed separately.

No, do not assume this is allowed, bid as though all testing will be required and no forms of approval will be allowed by similarity.

The quality pre-award survey notes that a previous sources being used. If a vendor has not had a survey prior, is this a negative in the bid selection? Will a survey be required?

No for both questions.

For items requiring customer (government) approval.

What will be the process for obtaining?

Depends on what is being approved. Test reports will be approved by responsible engineering authority by reviewing the documentation. First articles (and ultimately the vendor) will be approved by lab testing assets and reviewing associated reports that are provided after qualification.

Para 1.2 – The quoted part numbers use dash numbers that identify the approved vendors. Will we get our own company identifier. E.g., 312237-402 refers to REMEC’s design of the configuration 02 module. Yes, new designs have new part numbers and new NSNs

1. Para 3.1 – General - We plan to use the latest revisions and versions of referenced specifications. This includes the following: a. MIL-E-5400

=> MIL-HDBK-5400

b. MIL-STD-454 => MIL-HDBK-454 Yes, that is acceptable.

Para 3.3.1 – Configuration for -402 product is not listed in

Table V so we can identify which outline applies (1.e., Figure 1, Figure 1A, or Figure 1B).

It is likely that all of them are acceptable.

However, after award, the Government can likely provide an old asset as a second means of determining dimensions.

Para 3.3.2.3 – Water Vapor Content. If we have no bare die, can we omit this requirement? If not, are we allowed to use a desiccant of some type?

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral)

Para 3.3.11 – ESD Control – Do we need to submit an ESD sensitivity analysis to prove we are Class 3? If not Class 3, para 3.16 allows Loral/Government approval.

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral)

Para 3.4 – Reliability – Do we need to submit a reliability analysis to prove we meet the max failure rate? Can we opt to use vendor data when available rather than just MIL-

HDBK-217?

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral)

Para 3.7.1.1 – Microcircuits – Given the active device market, we will be using non-JAN devices with module-level ESS testing. No radiation latch-up test would be performed. This is consistent with our understanding of how prior procurements were run. Will this be acceptable.

Assets will be subject to all forms of testing, qualification, and reliability requirements. If these requirements are met, the internal design is irrelevant.

Para 3.7.1.2 – Semiconductor Devices. If we would like to use beam-lead diodes, will Government approval be provided?

Assets will be subject to all forms of testing, qualification, and reliability requirements. If these requirements are met, the internal design is irrelevant.

Para 3.7.2 – Passive Parts. We will primarily not be using ER rated devices. Can we use these with module-level ESS testing and consider them equivalent? It is our understanding that prior procurements were run this way.

Assets will be subject to all forms of testing, qualification, and reliability requirements. If these requirements are met, the internal design is irrelevant.

Para 3.7.3 – Part Derating – Whose approval can we get to use an alternative derating analysis spec? SCD allows customer approval (Government) to change method. Government is the approval authority.

Para 3.7.4 – Thin-Film Processing – We will need approval as thin film processes will be used.

Assets will be subject to all forms of testing, qualification, and reliability requirements. If these requirements are met, the internal design is irrelevant.

Para 3.7.7.1/.2 – Nonstandard Parts – If we use non-standard parts, a formal submission to the customer is required. Will Government approval be available? Government is the approval authority.

Para 3.8.1 – Electromagnetic radiation Control Plan – Do we need to submit a control plan for approval?

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral). For subject acquisition there is no CDRL associated for this plan however vendors that typically do this type of work should have one in place.

Para 3.9 – Marking – We plan to use a label for marking.

How do we obtain permission as required per spec?

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral)

Para 3.9.1 – Top Assembly Marking – The actual part number with dash number must be confirmed since they are designated to SCD-approved vendors. True.

Para 3.11.3 – SCD Deviations & Waivers – In general, how do we request and document approvals?

Requirements as defined by the specification shall be followed. Waivers to these requirements should not be assumed or implied. Any waivers or deviations will be approved by the responsible engineering authority (USAF, not Loral)

Para 3.14 – Physical Configuration Audit – Will this be required?

No, but the final configuration needs to be made upon providing the Government with the first article designs. Upon production, production assets and first articles should be of the same configuration. Changing the configuration could result in requalification requirements.

Para 3.15 – ESD Sensitivity – If module is not Class 3, how do we obtain permission. Will Government approval be available? Government is the approval authority.

Para 3.17 – Design Reviews – Will the Government require design reviews?

No, under this contract the contractor shall only be required to provide first articles with documentation showing necessary testing, as defined by the specification, has been performed adequately.

Para 4.4.2 – Screening Tests – Requires the use of strip charts to record temperature cycling. How do we get permission to use electronically recorded data?

Government is the approval authority.

Electronically recorded data is acceptable.

Sheet1