XM919 IAM RFP Questions from Industry Final 30-OCT-2023 Amendment 0003.pdf

XM919 Individual Assault Muni on (IAM) Solicita on W15QKN-23-R-0089 Ques ons from Industry

Document/Sec on/Paragrap h

Page # Ques on Response

1 A achment 0001, Para 8.(a) and (b)

8 MIL-STD 1171A is referenced in the Sec on J A achment

0001 Quality Clauses but SOW C.3.1 and SOW C.5.3.13 reference MIL-STD 1171B.

Which is correct?

MIL-STD 1171B is the correct reference.

2 A achment 0001, para 6.(f) 3 Sec on J A achment 0001 Quality Clause 6.(f) states the PCO may order an addi onal first ar cle sample whenever there is a lapse in produc on for a period in excess of ninety (90) days. Our typical

USG contracts allow up to 360 days lapse in produc on.

Can this requirement be updated to 360 days in order to avoid Contractors and sub-er suppliers pricing the poten al of 2-3 addi onal FATs per year? Since this requirement flows down to every part in the BOM, the poten al for lapse in produc on a er 90 days is high.

Requirement updated to three hundred and sixty (360) days.

3 N/A 106 Will the Government consider including FAR

52.216-4 (Economic Price Adjustment-Labor and

Material) in the solicita on?

The Government did not iden fy any items/components that warranted inclusion of the EPA clause in the solicita on.

However, if a contractor has ra onale suppor ng the poten al for incorpora ng the EPA clause, a contractor may provide that ra onale in their proposal for Government review and considera on.

4 SOW C.5.3.8 83 SOW C.5.3.8 states “The Contractor shall perform the LAT requirements under this contract IAW Paragraph 7, LAT, in the Quality Clauses, incorporated as A achment 0001 in Sec on J.”

A achment 0001 Paragraph 7 is MEASUREMENT SYSTEM

EVALUATION (MSE). What is the correct reference?

Please see revised Sec on J Amended Quality Clauses.

5 Sec on L, A.2.c.vi 167 Sec on L – Instruc ons, Condi ons, and No ces to

Offerors, Volume VI (Solicita ons, Offer and Award Documents and

Cer fica ons/Representa on

s) requires the Offeror to complete Sec on J Contract Data Requirements List

(DD1423) "with blocks 17 & 18 completed" as part of the proposal submi al. Blocks 17 and 18 require pricing each

CDRL separately.

Sec on B – Supplies or

Services and Prices/Costs CLIN 6001 (Data Items) and CLIN 6002 (Contract Data

Requirement List – CDRLs), are iden fied as Not

Separately Priced. Which is correct?

Not Separately Priced (NSP) is correct. DD1423 Blocks 17 &

18 shall be marked "NSP" upon proposal submission.

6 Sec on F, (a) 108-109 A delivery schedule is only included for OP1. Will the USG require deliveries in

OP2-5 to be made within a certain lead me? If so, what delivery window should be assumed for OP2-5? (xx months minimum and yy months maximum).

The details of Delivery Orders beyond DO1 are unknown at this me.

7 SOW C.5.3.6 86 SOW 5.3.6 states the Government reserves the right to require PCA "for the XM919 IAM, XM922 SCT, and

Tracer Ammuni on Cartridge". There is no CLIN

Please see revised SOW Sec on C 5.3.6.

for Tracer Ammuni on PCA.

Which is correct?

8 SOW C.5.3.7 87 SOW Paragraph C.5.3.7 requires 15 days’ no ce for a

CONUS FAT and 75 days’ no ce of an OCONUS FAT. In Sec on I, I-119 (52.209-3) is invoked which requires 60 calendar days’ no ce before a CONUS FAT and 75 calendar days’ no ce for an OCONUS

FAT. Which is correct?

Please see revised SOW Sec on C 5.3.7.

9 SOW C.5.0 83 SOW C.5.0 requires Government approval of PVT prior to ini a ng build of FAT hardware. Sec on F requires PVT hardware 9 months a er delivery order award and FAT hardware 15 months a er delivery order award. How long should the Offeror assume, the Government will take for PVT of the XM919 IAM, XM922 Subcal Trainer and SCT Trainer Cartridge, respec vely? This informa on is required to develop an IMS in accordance with Sec on F and Sec on M evalua on criteria.

The planning meline for PVT is 6 months in dura on.

10 SOW C.5.0 83 SOW C.5.0 states that in the event of PVT failures "The

Contractor shall be responsible for providing the updated PVT hardware and tes ng at no addi onal cost to the Government to confirm the corrected design meets the Performance Specifica on." In order to bound the risk to the Contractor, what is the quan ty of PVT hardware required for the XM919 IAM, XM922 Subcal Trainer and

Each applicable Performance Specifica on outlines tes ng in

Table II. Quan es for DVT /PVT are iden fied in Table III.

DVT and PVT are synonymous.

SCT Trainer Cartridge, respec vely?

11 SOW C.5.1.1(6)(c) 84 The Ancillary Parts list in the SOW states the Sub-Caliber

Tracer Cartridge ammuni on "rounds are ballis cally matched to the XM919 IAM".

The XM922 P-spec paragraph

6.11.14 states "The XM922 is not required to ballis cally match the XM919…". Which is correct?

Please see revised SOW Sec on C5.1.1(6)(c).

12 SOW C.5.1.1(6)(m) 84 For the Arena Fragmenta on Configura on, Energe c Projec le (Type 2), is the

Government providing the means to simultaneously and remotely detonate both the Forward and Rear Warheads or is the Contractor responsible for this?

Projec les should be modified for sta c firing using a detonator (e.g. RP-80 exploding bridge wire (EBW)) for simultaneously func on of the BIC and MC. The Safety Arming Ini a on (SAI) units should be removed from the

BIC and MC and replaced with an aluminum surrogate drilled for detonator rou ng. All modifica ons need to minimize any influence on the normal progression of detona on and fragment forma on and trajectory. The

BIC and MC are intended to be detonated simultaneously for the purpose safe separa on analysis. If RISI compa ble detonators are not suitable, the contractor needs to supply the detonators. For the MC performance arena fragmenta on tes ng only the MC must be modified in same manner as safety arena tes ng using the same detonator type and iden cal surrogate method for rou ng the detonator.

13 SOW C.5.5.1, C.5.5.4 and C.5.5.5

89-90 Do the requirements of SoW Paragraphs C.5.5.1, C.5.5.4 and C.5.5.5 apply to OCONUS subcontractors and suppliers, or do they only apply to CONUS subcontractors and suppliers?

SoW Paragraphs C.5.5.1, C.5.5.4 and C.5.5.5 apply to CONUS subcontractors and suppliers.

However, contractors shall make a good faith effort to ensure that their OCONUS subcontractors and suppliers are in compliance with applicable regula ons related to Environmental Compliance/

Pollu on Preven on/ and Hazardous Waste.

14 SOW C.5.7.10 91-92 Is the "specialized test equipment required by the

Government" already included in the Ancillary Parts list, or is the Contractor required to provide test equipment above and beyond the Ancillary Parts list?

The Price Matrix for the Ancillary Parts is open to allow the contractor flexibility to add addi onal specialized test equipment only if needed

15 SOW C.5.7.14 92 SOW Paragraph C.5.7.14 cites DI-SAFT-80931C but says “(paragraph 3 does not apply).” We aren’t sure what is being referred to as

“paragraph 3”. Sec on 3 of DI SAFT 80931C is the en re technical content of the Data Item. Could you clarify what was meant?

Please see revised SOW Sec on C.5.7.14. "(paragraph 3 does not apply)" statement removed.

16 SOW C.5.10.1, C.5.10.4 and C.5.10.5

95-96 Do the requirements of SOW Paragraphs C.5.10.1, C.5.10.4 and C.5.10.5 apply to OCONUS subcontractors and suppliers, or do they only apply to CONUS subcontractors and suppliers?

C.5.10.1 applies to any prime contractor submi ng a proposal/receiving award.

Aside from addressing the prime contractor's SOP/Plan related to safeguarding cri cal informa on, if cri cal informa on must be shared with a subcontractor or supplier, the SOP/Plan shall address this regardless of whether the subcontractor or supplier is OCONUS/CONUS.

C.5.10.4.1 applies to anyone requiring access to Army installa ons/facili es/controlle d access areas.

C.5.10.4.2 applies to CONUS-based prime contractor employees and associated subcontractor/supplier employees traveling to

OCONUS.

C.5.10.5 applies to CONUS-based prime contractor employees and associated subcontractor/supplier employees, if performing or traveling outside the United States under this contract.

17 Performance Specifica ons N/A The three performance specifica ons each contain paragraph 3.1 for Design Verifica on Tes ng (DVT).

However, DVT is not included in Sec on B or Sec on C. Is the Contractor required to

PVT is the same as DVT. We are using PVT to prove the design.

conduct DVT? Is DVT the same as PVT?

18 MIL PRF XM919 24 MIL-PRF-0032749 Table II indicates that Acous c Energy is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well. Which is correct?

Table IV and V are correct.

Table II error will be corrected.

19 MIL PRF XM919 24 MIL-PRF-0032749 Table II indicates that Toxic Fumes is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well. Which is correct?

Table IV and V are correct.

Table II error will be corrected.

20 MIL PRF XM919 26 MIL-PRF-0032749 Table II indicates that Loose Cargo Repe ve Shock tes ng is conducted only during a DVT.

Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well.

Which is correct?

Table IV and V are correct.

Table II error will be corrected.

21 MIL PRF XM919 13 MIL-PRF-0032749 paragraph 3.6.9-d. states the a achment rails "shall not be collinear." Is this correct?

The statement is an error. The rail should be collinear.

Specifica on will be corrected.

22 MIL PRF XM919 5 MIL-PRF-0032749 Table 1 and Table VII list 15 Cri cal

Characteris cs. Table VI lists 16, with C010 from Table 1 and VII being split into C010 and C011 in Table VI. Which is correct?

There are 16 total cri cal characteris cs. Table VI is the correct list. Tables I and VII will be corrected to reflect this.

23 SOW C.5.3.6 86 In SoW Paragraph C.5.3.6 the Government “reserves the right” to require a PCA on the Tracer Ammuni on Cartridge, but there is no corresponding

CLIN for PCA of the Tracer

A PCA will NOT be required for Tracer Ammuni on. SOW

Paragraph C5.3.6 corrected.

Ammuni on. Which is correct?

24 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

9 Paragraphs 3.7.3.1, 3.7.3.2, and 3.7.3.3 all refer to XM919 performance, not the performance of the sub-caliber tracer ammuni on for the XM922. Should these be rewri en or deleted?

Paragraphs 3.7.3.1, 3.7.3.2, and 3.7.3.3 all should refer to

XM922AMM performance.

XM919 is listed in error. The document will be corrected.

25 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

5 Minor error: 3.5.1 was renamed from Uninten onal Detona on to Uninten onal Func on, but not changed in Table II, Table III, or Table IV.

3.5.1 requirement is an error.

Will be revised.

26 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

9 Minor error: 3.7.2 was rewri en as a second ESD requirement (3.7.1.2). Table II has it listed as EM environments and Paragraph

4.7.2 s ll defines an EM test that no longer exists in Sec on 3.

3.7.1 and 3.7.2 are now PESD and HESD requirements respec vely and verified per

4.7.1 and 4.7.2.

Tables II and Table III will be corrected to reflect the change.

27 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

11 Subcal Ammuni on Spec Table II indicates that

Acous c Energy is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and

Conformance tes ng as well.

Which is correct?

Tables IV and V are in error Acous c Energy will only be verified during PVT/DVT.

Tables IV and V will be corrected to remove this verifica on.

28 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

11 Subcal Ammuni on Spec Table II indicates that Toxic

Fumes is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well. Which is correct?

Tables IV and V are in error Toxic Fumes will only be verified during PVT/DVT.

Tables IV and V will be corrected to remove this verifica on.

29 MIL-PRF-0032750(AR) for

XM922AMM

11 Subcal Ammuni on Spec Table II indicates that Loose

Cargo Repe ve Shock tes ng is conducted only

Tables IV and V are in error Loose Cargo Repe ve Shock will only be verified during PVT/DVT. Tables IV will be during a DVT. Table IV lists it as being required in FAT as well. Which is correct?

corrected to remove this verifica on.

30 MIL-PRF-0032751(AR) for

XM922

11 Subcal Trainer Spec Table II indicates that Acous c Energy is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well. Which is correct?

Table II is correct. Table IV and V will be corrected to remove this tes ng.

31 MIL-PRF-0032751(AR) for

XM922

11 Subcal Trainer Spec Table II indicates that Toxic Fumes is verified by analysis and test only during Design Verifica on. Tables IV and V both list it as being required in FAT and Conformance tes ng as well. Which is correct?

Table II is correct. Table IV and V will be corrected to remove this tes ng.

32 MIL-PRF-0032751(AR) for

XM922

11 Subcal Trainer Spec Table II indicates that Loose Cargo Repe ve Shock tes ng is conducted only during a DVT.

Tables IV lists it as being required in FAT as well. Which is correct?

Table II is correct. Table IV will be corrected to remove this tes ng.

33 SOW C.5.0 83 The solicita on states the Government will approve or disapprove of the XM919 IAM/XM922 SCT/Tracer

Ammuni on Cartridge PVT hardware mee ng

Performance Specifica on requirements but does not define the tests to be conducted, nor does it define how many units of each deliverable will be involved.

As a result it is impossible to define the risk associated with this requirement. Please clarify what tests will be conducted and how many

Each applicable Performance Specifica on outlines tes ng in

Table II. Quan es for DVT /PVT are iden fied in Table III.

DVT and PVT are synonymous.

weapons will be involved in each test.

34 SOW C.5.3.8 87 The solicita on states LAT plans "shall be submi ed for all Contractor and subcontractor LATs for the

XM919 IAM, XM922 SCT,

Tracer Ammuni on Cartridge, and major subassemblies for these items". It further states "The Contractor shall conduct

LAT for the following items:

the fuze, warhead, propellant, igniter, launch tube, and complete end item system per the approved plans, and specifica ons."

Are "major subassemblies" being defined by the subsequent list?

No. The list provided was an example only. Individual vendor designs define their unique major subassemblies.

35 SOW C.5.3.8 87 The solicita on states "The Contractor shall conduct the system level LAT IAW the procedures contained in the test plan(s) previously approved by the

Government." Are LAT plans and reports required to be submi ed and approved for major subassemblies and/or the specified components on a lot-by-lot basis, or only the complete systems? If required, should the prices be included in the LAT CLINs for the XM919 IAM tac cal muni on?

LAT plans for subassemblies and complete systems must be submi ed to the USG for approval. Once approved the plan can be executed as needed to produce each lot contracted. If LAT procedures or processes change for the subassembly or complete system, a revised plan must be submi ed for approval by the

Government.

36 A achment_0004_-

_XM919_IAM_P-

Spec_Compliance_Matrix.xls x

Number

Minor Error: 3.7.9.9 Fungus is no longer a requirement in the XM919 IAM performance specifica on. Should this compliance row be deleted or marked as N/A?

Item 3.7.9.9 in the Compliance Matrix for fungus tes ng is not required and should be listed as N/A. Revised.

37 Exhibit A CDRL A004

CDRL A004 (Manufacturing Plan) says “Date of first submission shall be 30 days a er contract award."

However, Sec ons L and M state the Government will evaluate the Offerors detailed Manufacturing Plan. Is the

Manufacturing Plan an addi onal CDRL that is required to be submi ed with the proposal.

Sec ons L and M specify requirements for submission and evalua ons of proposals.

A er award of the XM919 IAM contract, the contractor will be required to deliver the CDRLs specified in the solicita on.

38 N/A 106 Will the Government consider including FAR

52.232-16 (Progress Payments) in the solicita on?

Yes, FAR 52.232-16 added for considera on.

39 N/A N/A Will unit prices be released as public informa on? And if we object, shall we include a statement in our response to that effect?

Disclosure of Unit Price Informa on is discussed in

Sec on A of the RFP.

40 Section B, CLIN 1006 9 Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 1006 states:

“LAT XM919 IAM (YEAR 1)

SERVICE REQUESTED: LAT

XM919 IAM (YEAR 1)

For Lot sizes 1 through 3200:

Lot Acceptance Testing (LAT) and LAT Test Report of the XM919 IAM (YEAR 1) shall be in accordance with the Statement of Work

(SOW) and the requirements throughout the contract.”

For Lot sizes greater than 3200, can we perform a different, compliant LAT per our established, quality and test processes?

To reduce program risk, the USG will accept a maximum quantity of 3200 rounds per

Lot.

41 Section B, CLIN 1007 10 CLIN 1007 states:

“LAT XM922 SUBCAL

TRAINER (YEAR 1)

SERVICE REQUESTED: LAT

XM922 SUBCAL TRAINER (Y1)

For Lot size 1 through 100 a

Lot Acceptance Test will be conducted.”

Lot sizes greater than 100 may be performed with

Government approval of a CTR LAT Plan.

For Lot sizes greater than 100 for LAT, can we perform a different, compliant LAT per our established, quality and test processes?

42 SOW C.5.3.8 87 The RFP states:

“The Contractor shall perform the LAT requirements under this contract IAW Paragraph 7, LAT, in the Quality Clauses, incorporated as Attachment 0001 in Section J.”

In Attachment 0001, Paragraph 7 is Measurement

System Evaluation (MSE);

however, the LAT requirement is not included in this paragraph.

See Section C.5.3.8 Lot Acceptance Test (LAT).

Amended Section J Quality Clauses.

43 SOW C 5.2.2 / CDRL 001 85-86 Both Section C, C.5.2.2.

provides guidance on Class I and II Engineering Change

Proposals (ECP).

Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) 0001 ECP Block 12

/ 16 provide guidance on Class III ECPs:

“Class III ECPs will be provided on an informational only basis only for administrative changes. If the government determines that the class III ECP is not administrative in nature, the contractor shall be notified within ten (10) days. If this occurs the Government reserves the right to reject the ECP and request that it be submitted as a class I or Class II ECP. If this does not occur, no notice shall be sent.”

Class III is not a recognized engineering change class. The government only requires

"Class III ECP" is an incorrect designation and should be

“Class I". Corrected in a revised CDRL.

notification of Class I and II ECPs.

44 SOW C.6.i & j 84 Bullets I and J are duplicates:

“ i) Inert Projectile/Live Fuze

(Rear Warhead) Projectile that contains no energetics in the warheads or Forward Warhead Fuze, but contains the live Rear Warhead Fuze.

(from the XM919 IAM)

j) Inert Fuze/Live Fuze (Rear

Warhead) Projectile that contains no energetics in the warheads or Forward Warhead Fuze, but contains the live Rear Warhead Fuze.

(from the XM919 IAM)”

Section C.5.1.1, Para 6, items i) and j) revised to address concern.

45 SOW C.6 d) 84 The text reads “XM919 IAM Target Practice munition”

The Training (TP) weapon is built in same process as the live weapon.

Shall a LAT CLIN be added based on this guidance?

No LAT CLIN is required. The TPT round is a test round for purposes of soldier fired accuracy testing during the User Excursion and will be consumed in testing.

46 SOW C.6 r). 84 The RFP reads: “XM919 Virtual Trainer Shell Inert

Launch Tube with the exact dimensions as the XM919

IAM complete.”

Is it Ok to use an FHT solution with brackets attached with screws?

This solution requires an inner fixture tube to fasten the screws. Inner diameter

71,8 mm. Possible additional protrusion from screws. The benefit is that Spare Parts are available for FHT system.

Yes, a FHT can be a possible solution for the Virtual Trainer. Providing the internal volume is maximized to the fullest extent possible to adequately secure outer components and the SVT engine can fit in the reduced space. The minimum space requirement for SVT is 60mm.

47 Section L, 2.C.I.1 & 1.e 159 Does the completed Attachment 0004 count toward the 50-page limit for Volume I Technical or is it excluded from page count along with the other excluded documents listed in

Section L, 1, e?

Section L states:

“The Offer shall complete Attachment 0004 - XM919

IAM Performance Specification Compliance Matrix with proposal data reference location annotated in Column I.”

Please refer to revised Section L.1.e.

48 Section L, 1.d. 158 Is the minimum font size for text 10 point or 12 point?

Section L, 1, d states:

“Each paragraph should be single spaced and shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required.

Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be produced in landscape mode.”

While Section L, 2, e related to documents excluded from page count, such as the WBS, IMS, etc. states:

Pages should not exceed 8- 1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; foldout may be used, with each fold counted as one additional page. The font used shall not be less than 10 point.

Minimum font size varies depending on if it is the response, chart illustration, or pages/data that do not count towards page limitation.

Please refer to Section L.

49 Section L, 1.e. & 2.a. 158-159 Are 11 inches in width by 17 inches in length allowable, which is inferred by the instructions related to “each fold counted as one additional page” guidance in

Section L?

RFP states:

“Pages should not exceed 8- 1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; foldout may be used, with each fold counted as one additional page.”

“All proposal volumes shall be marked with the appropriate Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) markings. MS Word

(doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Please refer to revised Section L.1.e.

Margins Top, Bottom, Left, Right 1

Gutter 0 From Edge Header, Footer

0.5 Page Size, Width 8.5 Page Size, Height 11”

50 Section L, Volume III Past Performance

162 The following restrictive language mandates use of

Microsoft (MS) Excel format while preparing Volume III

Past Performance narrative.

RFP states” “Submission of the identified contracts shall be in Excel format to include contractually scheduled delivery dates, actual delivery dates, quantities and how many days over/under (i.e., early/late deliveries).

Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to North

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code (332993) required by the RFP. that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to North American Industry Classification System

(NAICS) code (332993) required by the RFP.”

Please see revised language in Section L.

51 Section L, Volume III Past Performance, e.6.

162 RFP states: "(1) Section 1 Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format… (e) Government contract administration activities Pre- Award Monitors name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers."

Section 1 (b), (c), and (d) require ACO/PCO and COR contact information. Item (e) Pre-Award Monitor contact information of the Government contract administration activity is most cases not disclosed to contractors.

No. The Government is not removing this requirement. If the Contractor does not have this information, they should advise the Government.

52 Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List

A012 A012 Test Report, Lot Acceptance Test (LAT) includes a clerical error. It states FAT and it should be

LAT.

CDRL A012 amended to read Lot Acceptance Test (LAT)

53 Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List

A015, A016

A015, A016 Certification/Data Report

(Material) respectively read:

“BLOCK 12: The Contractor shall submit Energetic /Material Certifications Report 30 days prior to

FAT/LAT.”

“BLOCK 12: The Contractor shall submit Energetic /Material Certifications Report 30 days prior to

FAT/LAT.”

The Contractor's suggested revision is unclear, however the language in the CDRLs is accurate.

54 Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List

A017 A017 Critical Characteristics Control Plan (CCCP) reads:

“Block 12 & 13: Submission for Government approval due NLT thirty (60) days prior to

FAT.”

There is a clerical error. Is

“Block 12 & 13: Submission for Government approval due

NLT sixty (60) days prior to FAT.” A017 revised with the corrected suspense - due NLT 60 days prior to FAT.

A017 due NLT 30 or 60 days prior to FAT?

55 Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List

A029 A029 Hazardous Waste Report CDRL states:

“Block: 12 & 13: Submission for Government review and approval is due NLT ninety

(180) days after contract award and annually following first submission.”

There is a clerical error. Is the review and approval date due

90 days or 180 days after contract award?

“Block: 12 & 13: Submission for Government review and approval is due NLT ninety (90) days after contract award and annually following first submission.”

A029 revised with the corrected suspense - due NLT

90 days prior to FAT.

56 Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List

A036 Correct CDRL A0029 A0036? CDRL A036 amended to read:

"The Contractor shall describe the reliability and maintainability program used to develop and ensure the specified reliability of the

XM919 IAM."

57 Attachment 0008 - Price Matrix FFP Labor Tab

How are engineering services intended to be ordered? Will they be requested via a purchase order with hours identified for pricing?

The Government intends to issue Task Orders with a Statement of Work for

Engineering Services. The Offeror would then propose to the SOW using the Labor Rates proposed under the applicable

Engineering Services CLIN.

Please refer to Sections L and

M for line items relating to Engineering Services.

58 Attachment 0008 - Price Matrix Spare Parts CLINs

Tabs

On the Spare Parts CLINs Tab of Attachment 0008, not all spare parts apply to our pricing. Additionally, there are spare parts missing from the Tab.

1) Can spare parts be deleted and added to the Spare Parts

CLINs Tab of Attachment 0008?

2) Can extra columns be added to distinguish which of the spare parts apply for the Sub Caliber Trainer and/or

Field Handling Trainer.

(Several of the spare part apply to both systems.)?

1) Spare parts can be deleted and added to the Spare Parts

CLINs Tab.

2) Extra columns can be added to distinguish which of the spare parts apply for the Sub Caliber Trainer and/or Field

Handling Trainer.

59 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

4.2 p. 28, Table 2, p.

19 Table 4,

p. 29

In 3.4.6.2, it is unclear if the Bunker is test optional or not?

It is included in Table 2 for

FAT, but the test is also required during the

Government PVT according to 4.4.6.2.

Bunker testing is not optional for PVT, it is required.

60 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table 4, p. 29 /

Table 5, p.

In the verification matrix in Table 2, should the verification class Box “B” and Box “C” be checked referenced in 3.5.10.4?

P-Spec Table II, boxes B and C will be updated.

61 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table 4, p. 29 /

Table 5, p.

Toxic fumes referenced in

3.5.9 and acoustic energy referenced in 3.5.8 are not part of FAT or LAT, according to the Verification Matrix, Table 2.

Table II is in error and boxes B and C should be annotated with and (X). Both the toxic fumes and acoustic energy are validated during FAT/LAT

(Table 4 and 5). Table II, boxes B and C will be updated.

62 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table 4, p. 29 /

Table 5, p.

31 / Para 6.18, p.

52-53

Loose cargo repetitive shock referenced in 3.7.5.2.3 is not part of FAT or LAT, according to Verification Matrix, Table

2. The temperature requirements do not correspond to the flowchart in 6.18.

Table II is in error and boxes B and C should be annotated with and (X). In addition, for 3.7.6.6

Thermal shock box C should be checked.

63 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

Table 2,

p. 19 /

Table 4,

p. 29 /

Para 6.18,

p. 52-53

Tactical drop/impact referenced in 3.7.5.4 is not part of FAT, according to the Verification Matrix, Table 2, nor does this requirement correspond to the flowchart in.6.18.

Additionally, the Tactical drop/impact requirement in

3.7.5.4 is verified at design verification and not part of

FAT.

Table II (Box B) was missing an X and has been adjusted for

Tactical drop (FAT) in the updated interim P-Spec. The

Flowchart in section 6.18 does include Tactical drop so no change was made for the flowchart with tactical drop.

64 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919 IAM Interim Performance

Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table

4, p. 29

The Logistic drop 3.7.5.5 requirement is verified at design verification and is not part of FAT

Yes, 3.7.5.5 Logistic Drop requirement is not part of FAT.

Will be removed from Table IV

(FAT).

65 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919

IAM Interim Performance Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table

5, p. 31

Accuracy and note 1/2, 3.4.5 LAT: Is minimum 30 samples still applicable or should it be determined by lot size according to ISO 2859 and be equally divided for hot, ambient, and cold temperature?

Accuracy in note 1/2 p. 31 - It is determined by lot size AND the minimum of 30 total rounds (10 for each temp).

Contractor submits plan to show the different amount of firing depending on lot sizes.

The Government cannot enforce/request the use of

AQL (ISO 2859) in specification, per MIL-STD-

961.

66 Attachment 0005 - CUI - XM919

IAM Interim Performance Specification

Table 2, p.

19 / Table

4, p. 29

Please verify the total number of weapons samples included in FAT based on:

30 samples, accuracy, 8 samples, humidity/immersion/salt fog, 2 samples Armor 2 samples Building = 42 samples FAT 2 samples Bunker if required

= 44 samples FAT

42 weapons total per Table IV.

Flowchart in 6.18 is an example (Not prescriptive).

Ambient Testing should be 12 systems. Note in flowchart states: All target shots performed at any temperature conditioning at the request of the USG. Per note 2, demonstrate successful function for each mode (armor and delay/instant). Contractor may propose surrogate targets to demonstrate each mode.

Bunker firing option.

67 RFP / Attachment 0008 - Price Matrix

Section B / Price

Matrix

In Section B, CLINS 1009, 1010, 1011, and 1012 for

Ordering Period 1 Production do not have any quantities associated with them.

However, the following quantities are provided in

Attachment 0008:

Refer to Section F, Required Delivery Schedule.

68 N/A N/A If there is a delay in receiving export authorization from the

Government to share the XM919 IAM P-Specs with foreign partners, will the

Government grant a further extension for proposal submission?

Under Amendment 0002 to the XM919 IAM solicitation, the deadline for proposal submission has been extended to 14 December 2023.

69 N/A N/A Who do we contact if you are furloughed?

TBD

AMENDMENT 0003 dated 07 November 2023

70 SOW C.5.3.10 Page 9 Can a bidder propose alterna ve test methods to the requirements in SOW Requirement C.5.3.10 so long as they ensure structural integrity verifica on?

Yes, alterna ve burst test methods are acceptable provided the methodology is presented to and approved by the Government. Test methods must address the overarching requirements to provide an acceptable level of traceability to 100% of the launch tubes produced, as well as a sta s cally relevant sample for burst tes ng conducted on a sample of the launch tube(s) lot.