QA_POGS_Amendment0002.pdf

Questions & Answers

Solicitation W81K04-25-Q-1969

Portable Oxygen Generation System (POGS)

Prepared by the Government Response Team

Date: July 2026

Solicitation W81K04-25-Q-1969 | Q&A

Executive Overview

This document compiles the official Government responses to industry inquiries regarding Solicitation

W81K04-25-Q-1969 for the Portable Oxygen Generation System (POGS).

RPP Section

Q1: Inquiry

Cylinder Filling Capability (APP-8) is mentioned in the RPP but not at all in the SOW. Is this part of the objectives? Can you please elaborate on the requirements for this capability? Are you expecting this to be a separate device and project?

Government Response: The Cylinder Filling Capability (APP-8) is a desired optional capability and has been assigned a separate pricing line item (CLIN 0005). The Government is open to approaches where this is either an integrated feature of the main POGS unit or a secondary/standalone device, provided it meets the performance objectives. Offerors should clearly define their proposed physical configuration and interface in their proposals.

Q2: Inquiry

Section 5.2, items 1 and 2: does it make sense to list repair parts at this point in time for a project that may not go through to production?

Government Response: Initial provisioning and repair parts lists are necessary to evaluate the system’s maintainability and lifecycle logistics early in the prototype phase. However, the

Government acknowledges the design will mature over the period of performance. Offerors may propose an alternative, phased delivery schedule for these deliverables in their proposal for

Government consideration.

Q3: Inquiry

Section 6.1, items D-004, D-006, D-010: We believe this timing is too soon and suggest that it be pushed back within the 120 – 180 day development project when the system design is more mature.

Government Response: Offerors are permitted to propose an alternative delivery schedule for D-

004 (Repair Parts List) and D-010 (Special Tools List) to better align with the design maturity timeline. For D-006 (TAA certificate), please refer to the RPP which requires this with the proposal/at award.

Q4: Inquiry

Please provide the Cost and Weight of the 2 components individually for the current POGS-33-HV. Is the 350 weight goal to include the refilling cylinder system?

Government Response: For informational purposes only, the approximate total weight of the legacy

POGS-33-HV components is 790 lbs, with each separate component weighing up to 275 lbs.

Historical procurement costs will not be disclosed. Regarding the weight threshold, the 350 lb weight goal does include the optional cylinder refilling system if configured in one system.

Q5: Inquiry

Section 3.5: Does the follow-on production quantity of 304 units include the refilling unit?

Government Response: Yes, the 304 follow-on units include the refilling unit requirement.

Q6: Inquiry

Section 7.4, Past Performance. Will you accept commercial customers for past performance?

Government Response: Yes. The Government will accept past performance references from commercial customers, provided the agreements or sales are relevant to portable oxygen generation systems of similar scope and complexity.

SOW Section

Q1: Inquiry

Section 4.2 does not have any requirements for the cylinder refill option. Please clarify what is expected in the POGS as a single device and what is a secondary device.

Government Response: Please see the response to RPP Q1. The physical configuration (single integrated device vs. secondary device) is left to the Offeror to propose, provided the system meets the performance metrics defined in the RPP for APP-8.

Q2: Inquiry

Section 4.5 items D-004, D-006, D-010: This timing isn’t possible since the product will not have been fully designed. These documents will be much more refined at a later date when the system design is more mature. Can you modify these deliverables?

Government Response: Please see the response to RPP Q3. The Government will consider proposed alternative schedules for these specific deliverables based on design maturity milestones.

Other / General Questions

Q1: Inquiry

How much funding had been budgeted for this effort for each award by the government?

Government Response: The Government is not disclosing the specific funding amounts budgeted per award at this time. As stated in Section 9.2, adequate funding is available for this effort.

Q2: Inquiry

Would you consider extending the due date of proposals at least 2 to 3 weeks after the Amendment with Questions and Answers is posted on SAM.GOV?

Government Response: The Government does not intend to extend the proposal due date at this time.

Q3: Inquiry

Is the government willing to assist with expediting the FDA clearance process?

Government Response: Yes, while the Offeror remains primary and ultimately responsible for securing FDA clearance, the Government is willing to support these efforts. Depending on the prototype’s progression, this assistance may include reviewing pre-submission packets, or providing letters of military necessity/support to help expedite the clearance process.

Q4: Inquiry

Would the government accept proposals that extend delivering the prototypes beyond the 180 days?

Government Response: The RPP currently specifies a delivery timeline of 120-180 days after award.

Offerors proposing a timeline beyond 180 days will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis but may incur a higher schedule risk rating.

Q5: Inquiry

If there are 2 awardees and both meet the specifications, how will the government down select which product moves on to the production phase?

Government Response: If multiple prototypes successfully meet the specifications, the Government will conduct a down-select evaluation. Criteria for this follow-on production decision will include, but are not limited to, final prototype performance testing, reliability, total lifecycle cost, user feedback, and manufacturing readiness.