EOLTS_Q A_V.2.docx

SOLICITATION W56HZV-16-R-0164

Questions;

1: Can the gov’t offer a minimum 4-week bid extension now since questions were disallowed at Site Visit?

RESPONSE: Solicitation will be extended to 02 NOV 2016. They could be extended longer depending on the timeliness of the markings on the drawings.

2: Can the pictures promised during Site Visit be posted as well as the Geotechnical report?

RESPONSE: Awaiting approval from security on releasing the pictures.

3: REF: Item 0001AA, narrative b002. Due to the complexity of architectural requirements and review for foundation installation we request that the design plan be allowed 120 Days after Contract Award for delivery.

RESPONSE: The design plan submittal will not be extended to 120 days after contract award. The 60 day requirement is the normal timeframe for similar projects that have been performed at Red River Army Depot.

4: REF: Item 0002AA, narrative b002. We do not believe that any Vendor can deliver 130 days after design and request an extension to minimum 260 days for completion of installation.

RESPONSE: 130 days delivery after the plan and drawings are submitted will be the starting POP. If during the installation phase inclement weather slows down the installation, the POP will be extended.

5: Reference Purchase Description, Section 2.1 General Requirements. We believe that this description must be modified as it is not possible that any Vendor other than Mustang Dynamometer (dba Ganzhorn Investments) can bid this project and this is not a Sole Source justified solicitation. Many companies can manufacture Chassis Dynamometers that have the ability to test, on the same machine, a vehicle Anti-lock Brake System. The fact that Mustang Dynamometer provided a single, custom machine to one company (Force Protection, prior to their sale to General Dynamics) does not make this a machine that only Mustang can provide. For example, Power Test has provided dozens of EOL ABS and hundreds of heavy-duty multi-axle Chassis Dynamometer test stands to heavy-duty truck and military customers for more than 40-years. Combining the functions into one machine is not anything that requires significant engineering design, nor does it justify a sole-source.

RESPONSE: The description will not be modified. This is NOT a sole source action, its Brand Name or Equal. Offerors do not have to propose the Mustang system, they can propose an equivalent system. It’s up to the offeror to prove that the system they are proposing meets or exceeds the performance standards of the Brand Name product.

6: Reference Item 2.1.1 states that the ‘standard’ mustang machine can be modified with discussions after award, further proving this should not be a sole source to a specific vendor.

RESPONSE: This is not sole source. Offerors can submit an equivalent system. Any system that is deemed equivalent will be given the same opportunities.

7: Reference Item 2.2.9: To meet “The system must perform the same test and have the same functional capabilities as EOLTS vehicle OEM General Dynamics currently has in place at its facility for testing the Cougar, Cheetah and Buffalo MRAP vehicles”, these exact functions must be listed by the Government in an appendix or amendment.

RESPONSE:

I. Road Test II. Post Road test visual inspection III. Power Pack Temperature Check IV. Stall Test V. Downshift inhibitor test VI. Exhaust Brake Test VII. Vehicle acceleration test IX. FPVI Speed test X. ECM fault code check XI. Visual Inspection XII. Speed Sensor Validation XIII. Valve Activation Sequence XIV. Drag and Brake Test XV. Vehicle Warm Up XVI. Front Heat Reading Test XVII. Rear Heat Reading Test XVIII. Parasitic Drag Test XIX. Exhaust Brake Test XX. Percent Grade Test XXI Full Acceleration to Governed Speed Test XXII. Maximum Power Lug Down Test XXIII. Down Shift Test XXIV. Off Road Test XXV. Front AC Reading XXVI. Rear AC Reading.

8: Reference 2.2.9, A-J: Please confirm this list of information is to be delivered after contract during the planning and design phase and is not required for bid. It is standard information that shall be distinguished during the system/facility design but the information would require undue burden on any bidder to have to supply that detail prior to award of contract.

RESPONSE: It is required with the proposal. It should already be completed if this is a standard product model that is being proposed.

9: Reference 2.3.1, “Each system shall have its own control room”. Can the two test stands in the existing building share a control room? What is required STC rating of the control rooms?

RESPONSE: Yes, the two test stands in the existing building can share a control room.

10: Reference 2.3.5: Calibration hardware for torque is listed but not a method for measuring torque. Is it expected that the individual wheel dynamometers listed in 2.3.7 shall measure real-time shaft torque using an inline torque transducer? Please describe acceptable torque measurement techniques and accuracy of measurement required for both the chassis roll loads and ABS testing forces.

RESPONSE: Method of torque measurement is based on the equipment offered design. Since this is a standard design, the offeror should provide what they have. The accuracy measurement should be .25% +/- of rated output.

11: Reference 2.3.7: “In conjunction with the control system, dynos must be able to simulate vehicle weight and road loads for each variation of vehicle listed in section 2.3.3 including simulating a five (5) percent grade. Peak absorption per roller at max speed of 100 mph should be at least seven hundred horsepower.” The peak power does not describe continuous power required. What is the maximum continuous tractive effort and max continuous power required as a load per axle? The peak absorption for Air-Cooled Eddy brakes on Mustang’s referenced machine can handle the 700HP max power for only several seconds. Regarding requested 5% grade Road Load: Please confirm if slope simulation requires both down-hill and up-hill vehicle forces?

RESPONSE: Peak HP is specified in the solicitation. The test system continuous force/power must be able to simulate vehicle road load, including a 5% uphill grade for each variation of vehicle listed in the solicitation.

12: Reference 2.3.8: “Brake testing capability for the roll tester shall be identical to that used by General Dynamics for testing of the MRAP vehicles following production”. To be identical to an existing method the method must be defined. We have manufactured ABS testers to many SAE, NHTSB, APTA and other heavy duty ABS standards. What standard is this defining and please amend RFP to have this standard definition attached. Also what maximum speed required for the ABS motoring for testing wheel drag?

RESPONSE: The solicitation will not be amended. This is part of the legacy vehicle contract the Government has with General Dynamics and they were/are not required to define the testing to the Government. It’s up to each offeor to make business decisions to meet the requirements needs.

13: 2.3.9: Controls: Since a COTS PLC is defined as preferred for control, is the purpose to make sure the control system does not include any custom electrical board-level components for control that are not COTS hardware? Please amend RFQ to state purpose of having preferred PLC manufacturer.

RESPONSE: The solicitation will not be amended. Reference the Better Buying Power Initiative, this is an instance of open architecture and cross system integration.

14: 2.5.2: ID Plate to include National Stock Number. Is the government going to issue an NSN number for the machine after award? Will the machine be required to meet NSN guidelines?

RESPONSE: NSN can have the offerors model/part number.

15: Reference 2.9: During site visit it was explained that the entire concrete floor around the test stand pits (or mounting area if test stands are above ground) was the responsibility of the contractor yet there is no description of floor footprint, thickness, or finish. Please provide such specifications.

RESPONSE: This will be up to the offeror to determine. The only concrete pad required, is to support the equipment. The offeror who is awarded a contract, their equipment will dictate what type of foundation is required. The only specifications that the Government has on the current concrete in this area will be attached to the drawings when they are released.

16: Reference 2.9.4: “Utilities by contractor”: We require to know exactly what the specifications of electrical power including voltage(s) phase(s) & kVA will be allotted in the Government-furnished electrical room for each EOLTS. It was stated that the electrical power is in contract and will be installed by RRAD prior to delivery of the EOLTS. This will define the maximum current each EOLTS can draw, which will affect the capabilities. Please define exact electrical power specifications that is being installed.

RESPONSE: Each EOLTS will have a 480 volt, 3 phase, 186 kva, 225 amp main service to hook up to, via a switchboard.

17: Reference Brand Name or Equal 2.2.0. “Brand Name or Equal. The Mustang EOL Testing System (part number: MAE-MRAP-EOL-4000) is considered the Brand Name for this system. Offerors may offer the Brand Name or equivalent system from other manufactures determined to be equal to the specific system. Equal items shall meet the salient characteristics (listed below) of the Brand Name items to be acceptable for award.” A system matching the salient characteristics, if amended to include answers to the subject questions are possible without being the referenced one Mustang machine that bears that part number, with the below addition.

RESPONSE: If true, it falls under the “Or Equal” and it’s the responsibility of the offeror to specify that an alternate is equal.

18: Reference Salient Characteristics: 2) System is upgradable so it can test 8x8 wheeled vehicles (1.2). Where will 4th axle be expected to be installed and to what maximum centerline axle spread from the closest EOLTS axle will the pit need to accommodate? This would also be different than the MAE-MRAP-EOL-4000 design.

RESPONSE: The fourth axel must be integrated and meet all of the requirements of the testing system.

19: Reference Salient Characteristics: 12) Controls must be Allen Bradley (2.3.9). Allen Bradley PLC was a preferred but not mandatory. Please confirm PLC control but not brand name to eliminate additional sole-sourcing.

RESPONSE: Allen Bradley is not specific to any equipment manufacturer. It’s a world wide used PLC control. Red River Army Depot has numerous Allen Bradley PLC controllers and have the trouble shooting capability to work on Allen Bradley PLC controllers.