QA Log W912CH26B0007.docx

Last Updated: 17 June 2026 9:13 am EST W912CH-26-B-0007 - Q & A Log

Question: As we look at sourcing all the components for this kit we are wondering if there is a consolidated spread sheet with items/parts and numbers that would simplify the referencing for procurement.

Answer: Please reference “TDPL COVER SHEET (EH4L0188EH)” located within Attachment 0001 TDP 0631A0000. This PDF lists the product drawings and associated lists tied to this procurement.

Please also note that per A.1. (c) of the IFB: “BIDDERS MUST RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THE TDPL COVER SHEET WITH THEIR BID SUBMISSION OR THE BID SUBMISSION MAY BE REJECTED.”

Question: (Drawing Number: 0631D2001) The plastic hex key holder in question does not exist anymore. All the hex keys are produced, but with the sizes and part numbers called out, there is not a set that is an exact match. Do you have a suggested part number, or can this be excluded from the BOM?

Answer: The part in question - 0631D2001 - was intended to be made especially for this set to contain all the hex keys that are necessary for the kit. Recommend exploring locating a vendor to create the mold. At this time, there are no changes to the required hex keys and no change to the requirement to have them grouped together for ease of use, identification and inventory.

Question: We are interested in working on W912CH-26-B-0007. Please allow us access to the drawings so may proceed to possibly quote.

Answer: Please reference Attachment 0001 TDP 0631A0000 for the drawings available under this solicitation.

Question: We are a little confused on which PN the government is looking to purchase. On doc 0631D0000 it lists different dash numbers which denote the various parts to be purchased for the kit itself. We need to know which dash number the government intends on purchasing.

Answer: The dash numbers included for the specific items on drawing 0631D0000 coordinate with the items on the actual drawings that are available to be included in the kit. We have had many parts have to be removed due to lack of availability, this is notated on the lower level drawings with "removed" in the source information. The same number is used on set drawings that require entire sets be from the same supplier. If a source is listed on the drawing and not on the assembly drawing it's because it can't be provided without mixing the set.

Question: Upon review of the drawings, there are a few tools that have been discontinued and superseded by the manufacturer. These are all direct subs. Are these acceptable?

Answer: Confirm the “New” part numbers are replacements for the part numbers in the old column.

Question: The solicitation states that offerors require a NIST Medium or High Assessment review by government personnel for adherence to NIST SP 800-171A and the contractor’s System Security Plan. _ is completing its NIST SP 800-171 System Security Plan, Basic Assessment score, and POA&M for entry in SPRS under CAGE _.

Please advise whether the Government will initiate the required Medium or High Assessment for this solicitation, whether an existing SPRS Medium/High assessment is required prior to award, or whether offerors may request assessment coordination through DCMA DIBCAC.

We are prepared to provide our SSP, Basic Assessment summary, POA&M, CUI boundary description, and supporting evidence package upon request through the appropriate secure channel.

Answer: The SPRS file on record may be used in the evaluation of the Offeror’s performance. For ensuring an appropriate SPRS file, we recommend contacting your assigned DCMA office (based on your region), as they are more aware of the processes and requirements for SPRS.

Question: Drawing 0631D2002, SOCKET RAIL, 1/4" DRIVE SET (and related drawings). Section C.4(4) of the IFB requires that when a tool is removed from its retention feature, a layer of color-contrasting foam is exposed to indicate the tool is missing. Where individual sockets are retained in dedicated, color-contrasting foam cutouts that satisfy this requirement, are socket rails still required, or may individual sockets be foamed separately without rails? Individually foamed sockets provide positive retention and immediate visual indication of a missing tool, consistent with the intent of QAP 0631E0002.

Answer: TBD Question: Drawing 0631D2009, TOOL POUCH, PUNCH SET. If individual punches are retained in dedicated, color-contrasting foam positions within the case in accordance with Section C.4(4) and the packaging requirements of Section D.1(k), is the tool pouch still required?

Answer: TBD Question: The following drawings identify Snap-on as the only approved source:

- 0712E0003 — RATCHETING SCREWDRIVER, 2 BLADES

- 0714E0012 — WRENCH, ADJUSTABLE, 8"

- 0714E0014 — WRENCH, ADJUSTABLE, 1-1/2" x 12"

- 0718F0000 — PLIERS, LOCKING, LONG NOSE, 6.5"

- 0718F0001 — PLIERS, LOCKING, CURVED JAW, 10"

- 0719K0000 — HANDLE, FILE, ADJUSTABLE

- 0721B0000 — HAMMER, HAND, BALL PEEN, 16 OZ

Will the Government accept alternate items of equal form, fit, and function that meet the salient characteristics of the cited drawings? If so, what supporting documentation should accompany the bid (e.g., manufacturer, part number, CAGE code, and a characteristics comparison)?

Answer: TBD Question: Where a specified part has been discontinued by the manufacturer and a direct successor or equivalent item is offered, how should bidders identify the substitution, given that Section B does not include a CLIN-level or component-level bill of materials fill-in? Specifically, please confirm whether:

(a) the Government will issue an IFB amendment authorizing identified successor part numbers prior to bid opening;

(b) bidders should include a substitution cross-reference matrix with their bid (original part number, offered part number, manufacturer, and CAGE code); or

(c) the Government intends for such changes to be addressed post-award through the Request for Variance (RFV) / Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) process in accordance with Section C.2 and SAE EIA-649-1.

Answer: TBD Question: If we are using the approved source tool box and tools, is the PVTR and FAT required? Traditionally, PVTs are only matching the provided tools to the DFP and confirming they match. With the PVT on this solicitation, it calls for additional testing that is like a First Article.

Answer: The solicitation was intentionally structured for the PVT and the resulting PVTR to be similar in scope to how a First Article Test is typically conducted. This ensures a comprehensive validation of the products. Please note that both PVT and destructive testing are mandatory requirements of this contract and cannot be waived, even when using the approved source toolbox and tools. The tests are to be conducted as outlined in sections E.2, E.3, E.4, and E.5 of the solicitation.