Government Responses 12 Sept 2012.pdf

Government Responses to Industry Questions 9/13/2012

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

3.1.2.1 The SI2 RCU shall record and

display emplaced component locations to within 10 m Circular Error Probability (CEP).

Since the RCU cannot verify the accuracy of GPS location data better than to a Figure of Merit level 1 which indicates an estimated position error of <25 meters, how can the RCU be expected record and display locations to within 10 m

CEP?

The requirement as stated is achievable with Military GPS.

Precise Positioning Service (PPS).

The PPS is a highly accurate positioning, velocity, and timing service that is available only to users authorized by the US DoD.

The PPS provides the greatest degree of GPS accuracy. Access to the PPS is controlled through the use of cryptography.

Technical reference: DAGR TM 11- 5820-1172-13

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

3.13.2 The packaged SI2 RCU shall meet

the DEW requirements in Table 1A of MIL-STD-464A such that its system operational performance requirements are met.

Is this requirement necessary? This is a new requirement on the Spider system and only targeted to the SI2 RCU. The SI2 RCU will replace the SI1 RCU in the RCS Shipping Container. This requirement requires the contractor to determine if the current protection provided by the RCS Shipping Container is adequate and if not to augment the protection or develop another shipper container that would provide the protection. This has the potential to add significant scope into the SI2 program. The SI1 system has the following requirement in 290-100056 Rev D PUPs.pdf:

The System Obstacle shall survive Directed Energy (DE) Threats as defined in the System Threat Assessment Report

(STAR).

The STAR has not been provided to contractors, hence it cannot be determined if the SI2 requirement is the same as the SI1 requirement. If it were the same there is a high likelihood that the scope to achieve this requirement would be minimal.

This requirement has been deleted from the PRD.

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

3.13 and

3.17 Section 3.13 and 3.17 of the SI2 PRD discusses requirements for the packaged RCU. Will the SI1 package for the RCU be provided GFE? Can we assume that the SI1 packaged RCU meets all the relevant requirements in Section 3.13 and 3.17?

While no new requirements on the SI1 packaging are being imposed, environmental testing of the SI2 RCU within and outside the packaging may be required.

The SI1 packaged RCU meets the relevant requirements in the PUPS.

The Government will provide response to GFE question at a later date.

3.6 and 3.12.3

Sections 3.6 and 3.12.3 of the SI2 PRD discusses requirements for cables. Can we assume that the SI1 cables for the RCU will be provided GFE and that the SI1 cables meet the relevant requirements in Sections 3.6 and 3.12.3?

The SI1 cables meets the requirements in the PUPS.

Depending on the hardware chosen for the SI2 RCU, the existing SI1 cabling may not be compatible with the S2 hardware.

The Government will provide response to GFE question at a later date.

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

3.6 Section 3.6 of the SI2 PRD states that: “All SI2 RCU direct current electrical bonding between enclosures to system structures shall have resistance of 10 milliohms or less.”

Since the RCU is a hand held device and is not bonded to any system structure, this requirement does not seem to apply. Similar question applies to the statement: “The SI2 RCU shall prohibit fault current through any composite structure to preclude ignition of the composite structure as specified in MIL-STD-464”. Please clarify if these requirements are applicable to the SI2 RCU.

The bonding requirements have been deleted from the PRD.

3.11.2 Section 3.11.2 of the PRD states: “Environmental tests shall be conducted after the unit has gone through their reuse sequence to ensure SI2 safeties are not compromised.” What type of environmental test needs to be conducted? Are these tests conducted in the field? Does the word “safeties” refer to environmental safety? What does the “reuse sequence” refers to?

This requirement has been deleted from the PRD.

3.13.3.3 Section 3.13.3.3 of the SI2 PRD provides requirements associated with different environmental conditions. This section discusses that the SI2 performance requirements shall not be degraded in typical environmental conditions.

This requirement is on the SI2 system, not just the SI2 RCU.

Can we assume that this means that the SI2 RCU must be at least as good (in terms of performance) as the SI1 RCU?

Can we assume that the SI1 RCU achieves all the environmental requirements in 3.13.3.3? Is there a more quantitative definition of “degraded performance”?

Section 3.13.3.3 "Environmental Conditions Table" and all references to degradation have been removed from the current

PRD.

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

3.13.3.3 Section 3.13.3.3 of the SI2 PRD provides requirements associated with solar loading. Is there a specific time interval associated with the solar loading or is the loading assumed to be continuous?

The solar loading requirement has been deleted from the PRD.

The KPPs provided in the industry day data package do not appeared to be referenced in the PRD or SOW for SI2.

Please confirm that the KPPs provided with Industry day data package are applicable to the RCU procurement for

SI2?

The applicable CDD requirements that were briefed during Industry Day are included in the PRD and

SOW.

3.13 Section 3.13 of the PRD has a requirement to operate at -25F which is the same temperature requirement for storage. The storage requirement is not a problem. But the operating temperature requirement appears to be difficult to meet (most ruggedized COTS RCUs will guarantee operation no lower than -22F). Please consider revising the min operating temperature requirement.

The Government will provide a response at a later date.

Para. Requirement Question Government Response

SOW

3.6.7

The contractor shall develop a process to identify and eliminate latent defects through performance of ESS / Highly Accelerated Stress Testing (HAST) / Highly Accelerated Lifecycle Testing (HALT) on designated circuit card assemblies (CCAs) and sub-assemblies.

Modeling and simulation efforts may be used in conjunction with testing.

The contractor shall submit the ESS Procedures and Implantation Plan (DI-ENVR-81014) for review, approval, and evaluation to the government.

Does this requirement apply to COTS products? This requirement has been deleted from the SOW.

SOW

3.7 3.8

3.9.2 3.12

3.7 Pollution Prevention

Program/Plan,

3.8 Materials Degradation, Corrosion

Prevention and Control

3.9.2 Technical Data Package

3.12 Integrated Logistics Support

(ILS)

These sections appear to levy requirements at the system level. We assume that these requirements apply only to SI2 RCU. Please confirm.

These requirements apply to anything new that is developed under the SI2 contract.

Para. Requirement Question Government Response 7 The contractor shall prepare Interface

Control Documentation (ICD) for interfaces between Spider components, component subsystems, and external systems (DI-CMAN- 81248A, tailored).

Section 3.9.3 of the SOW discusses system and subsystem interfaces. We assume that the SI2 RCU contractor will only need to document interfaces that are different than SI1 (e.g., maps and JBC-P). Please confirm.

The SI2 RCU contractor is required to document all interfaces to the

SI2 RCU.

SOW is clarified as follows:

The contractor shall prepare Interface Control Documentation (ICD) for all interfaces to the SI2 control station (DI-CMAN- 81248A, tailored).

3.17.2 Section 3.17.2 of the PRD refers to: “All wood packaging materials (i.e. pallets and over-packs) shall be treated…” Wood packaging does not appear to be applicable to the SI2 RCU. Please clarify. If applicable, would the wood packaging materials be GFE?

There may be a need to load several packaged RCU kits onto a single pallet for transportation. If a wooden pallet is used, it should adhere to the specifications indicated.

There is no plan to provide wood packaging material as GFE.

Are Fault Tree analysis and Safety Assessment Report (SAR) available for Spider 1?

Yes. These documents will be provided to the SI2 contractor after award.

Contractor