Attachment_0022_ESPS_Solicitation_Q A.pdf

W911QY-17-R-0003

Attachment 0022

Questions & Answers

Question 1: The performance specification Mil-PRF-32521B in sections 3.4.1 and 4.6.1 references NSRDEC drawing 5-10-2023. There were no drawings included with the solicitation and associated files. This number also does not match any of the pre-solicitation drawings. Where can I find a copy of this drawing and any final versions of drawings for this solicitation?

Answer 1: The performance specification Mil-PRF-32521 has been updated to MIL-PRF-32521A. The updated performance specification can be downloaded from FBO. The drawings referenced in the performance specification have been added to section J.2 List of Technical Attachments in the solicitation and uploaded to FBO.

Question 2: Item number 1 refers to 50 test units and item number 2 refers to production units. Does this unit equate to the drawing of a module? Does this mean each unit includes 3 panels, 4 support struts, 4 universal support strut handles, 4 anchor brackets and 8 tent pegs?

Answer 2: If the panel module being proposed in the offeror’s submission is comprised of some number of layered panels, then each “unit” includes however many panels that it takes to create one fully functional module plus the struts and auxiliary equipment required to support that unit.

Question 3: The universal strut handle is an expensive method of attaching the strut to the panels. Is it acceptable to propose a less complicated and less expensive strut assembly combination that will accomplish the same task to reduce system cost?

Answer 3: No, the proposal should consist only of armor module designs. If, at some point in the future, the PM decides to modify the design of the universal strut handle, that modification would be performed via ECP.

Question 4: D.3.2.1 seems to indicate IUID markings are required for all components of the system. Are IUID tags needed for all of the parts including each individual panel unit, strut assembly, universal strut handle, tent peg and anchor bracket?

Answer 4: Please see clause at 252.211-7003, Item Unique Identification and Valuation As prescribed in 211.274- 6(a)(1).

Question 5: There are several questions regarding the water absorption testing. The Performance Specification Sheet (PSS) section 4.8.3 states that due to the size of checking the whole panel that the ASTM D570 has been modified.

For conditioning: The ASTM method D570 calls out for conditioning the material. (1 hour @ 221 -230 F) The PSS did not state that the specimens to be conditioned or not. Does the specimen’s need to be conditioned prior to testing?

Answer 5: The item does not need to be conditioned prior to water absorption testing.

Question 6: Water: the D570 calls out for distilled water. In section 3.6.3 of the Performance Specification Sheet (PSS) it states “fresh water”. Is it distilled water or fresh water (tap, water source??)?

Answer 6: Fresh water is acceptable, the water does not need to be distilled.

Question 7: Temperature: D570 calls out for maintaining a water temperature 73.4 +/- 1.8F. The Performance Specification Sheet (PSS) does not state a temperature. Does the water need to be maintained at a certain temperature?

Answer 7: Room temperature water is acceptable. Extremely precise temperature control is not required.

Questions 8: Long Term immersion: D570 calls out for checking after a week and then every two weeks after until weight gain is less than 1%. The Performance Specification Sheet (PSS) in section 3.6.3 made reference to 3 days.

So is the Long Term for 3 days and only checked after the 3 days or does the immersion test need to continue for weeks?

Answer 8: I am not seeing the reference to 3 days. Long term immersion should be conducted in accordance with ASTM D570 paragraph 7.4.

Question 9: For the immersion test, can the same specimen be checked for the 24 hour and then the long term?

Answer 9: Yes, the same specimen can be used for both tests. In fact, the long-term immersion procedures calls for a weighing after 24-hoursand then immediate reimmersion in the water; so both tests can be accomplished with one specimen as long as the reimmersion is immediate and the specimen is not given an extended amount of time for drying.

Question 10: What are the number of specimens needed for water absorption testing? D570 calls out for 3; the Performance Specification Sheet (PSS) did not give a number. Is it one panel?

Answer 10: One panel is adequate.

Question 11: Hot and Cold Testing are referenced in (sections 3.6.4; 3.6.5; & 4.8.4; 4.8.5): Can the same panel be used for the Cold storage test that was used for the Hot storage test or does a new panel need to be used for each test?

Answer 11: Each test, Hot and Cold, should use different specimens.

Question 12: Thickness measurements state “5 taken at random locations”. Are these measurements just the edge of the panel or randomly taken throughout the panel. (This is also not clear in section 3.4.1/4.6.1 under Dimensions the only reference is “Thickness shall not vary over the total area by more than 0.05 inches”.) So we are looking for clarity regarding where the measurements are taken. Do we do destructive test and cut the panel to check center or find an instrument that can check all locations on a given panel?

Answer 12: It is recommended that the measurements be taken randomly throughout the panel, not just on the edges.

Ideally, an instrument to take the measurement throughout the panel would be used, like a long reach caliper.

Question 13: Now that we have seen the prints we have a question on print 5-10-2022. Some of the drawing pieces on page one of the print do not correspond with the numbers they are given on page 2. The design also appears to contain parts that serve no function. The toggle handle is machined with a 2 ½” slot, but the threaded rod is welded to a ½” stainless pivot pin at the front of the slot that cannot slide. There is a ½” – 6 coil thread square nut that is placed into the slot in the toggle handle, but it is not attached to anything. It appears it would just be in there sliding around. There is a ¼” X 7/8” slotted pin inserted in a hole in the end of the toggle handle that also doesn’t seem to have a purpose except to keep the square nut from falling out of the end of the handle. Was this part originally designed to have the threaded rod be retractable and the design never updated to reflect a change to a fixed position threaded rod? The mismatched numbers for some of the parts on page one versus page two makes it look like changes were made for this part and not completely updated. Is there a purpose to these parts that my engineer is missing?

Answer 13: It does appear that there is a discrepancy between the numbering scheme on page 1 and 2... The 2 ½” slot is not in place so the threaded rod can slide, but so the threaded square nut can slide. It can be difficult to visualize, but this ability to slide the square nut allows the ESPS to more easily be built into corners. The pin is indeed in place to prevent the square nut from falling out of the handle.

Question 14: In section 9.1.4 section c the instructions read “Documents shall be stamped FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY AND SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE”. Does this mean that verbiage should be stamped on every page in all 5 volumes of the proposal or just on the front page of each binder?

Answer 14: “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY AND SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE” should be included on all pages of the proposal.

Question 15: In the proposal content section 10.1 section 2 part b it mentions “Section E: Complete ‘Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement’”. The higher-level quality requirement is listed on page 28 under section D – Packaging and Marking. Does this matter or do we just insert our ISO certification paperwork in section II b of the administrative volume?

Answer 15: Offerors are required to submit "Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement" IAW L.10.1 Volume I:

Administrative. The higher-level quality requirement listed on page 28 under section D – Packaging and Marking was moved to Section E in solicitation amendment 0002.

Question 16: Print 5-10-2021 under note 3. Finish requires the part to be powder coated IAW Mil-prf-21712A. I cannot find that specification. Does it mean Mil-prf-32348 or Mil-prf-24712A which are powder coating specifications? If the specification listed is correct, where can we get a copy of it?

Answer 16: The part is required to be powder coated IAW MIL-PRF-24712B.

Question 17: On drawing 5-10-2022 there is no length measurement for the toggle handle. The longest measurement shown is from the end to the slotted pin at 3.125 inches. What is the full length of the toggle handle?

Answer 17: The toggle handle itself is 4.44 inches long. The total length of the handle + threaded rod fixture is 9.85 inches.

Question 18: On drawing 5-10-2022 the pivot pin is noted as ½” hardened steel on page one and as ½” 304 stainless steel on page 2. Which material should the pin be made from?

Answer 18: It does appear that there is a discrepancy between the numbering scheme on page 1 and 2. The pin material should be 304 stainless steel.

Question 19: Can an extension be granted on the question timeframe and proposal submission timeframe due to the change in required hardware that was released on October 19th?

Answer 19: An extension to the question timeframe and submission timeframe will not be granted due to the solicitation amendment that was released on 19 October 2016.

Question 20: The solicitation calls for a great deal of documentation for a system that will consist of 6 or 7 parts.

None of the parts can be repaired. Are manuals for MTA, LORA, MAC, PPL, EDFP, Operator and Field Maintenance Manual, Manual Validation Plan and Report, NMWR, NMWR Validation Plan and Report, NMWR PPL and NMWR EDFP necessary for this system?

Answer 20: The government does require all the logistics manuals for this requirement. As stated in the solicitation each logistics requirement should be priced in accordance with instructions in the solicitation.