MODIFICATION
13 -- 105mm Canister Cartridge M1040
- Notice Date
- 4/28/2006
- Notice Type
- Modification
- Contracting Office
- US Army ARDEC, AMSTA-AR-PC, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 07806-5000
- ZIP Code
- 07806-5000
- Solicitation Number
- W15QKN-06-R-0625
- Response Due
- 5/26/2006
- Archive Date
- 6/25/2006
- Description
- 1. Question: Drawing 8828098, Chamber Gauge, is referenced, but not included in the M1040 TDP. Answer: Drawing 8828098 and associated drawings are available upon request. Interested parties meeting the NTIB must contact this office for a copy. 2. Question: Section 4.5.1 of DTL 13012536, there are several paragraphs regarding operations that occur at LAP regarding chamber gauge evaluations. Within this paragraph, it states that after 50 consecutive successful chamber gauge evaluations, the chamber gauge evaluation can switch to a single evaluation position rather than the 4 stated orientations. This conflicts with Drawing 13012520 that states that all cartridges must be evaluated in 4 positions in the chamber gauge. QAP 13012520 also reinforces Drawing 13012520. Which specification takes precedence in this case? Answer: DTL 13012536 takes precedence. The QAP and drawing will be updated in the future. The correct procedure is to switch to a single evaluation position after 50 consecutive successful evaluations of 4 positions. 3. Question: Section 4.6.7 in DTL 13012536 gives requirements for strength of design (SOD) testing including the number of rounds tested at each temperature. This conflicts with the requirements in Table II. What is the correct number of rounds needed at the extreme temperature for SOD testing? Answer: There is a typographical error in the DTL. It has been updated in the latest revision of the DTL, which is attached. The correct quantity is 10 rounds at ???46??C and 10 rounds at +63??C. 4. Question: Section 4.6.7, Paragraph C of DTL 13012536 states than an underline camera shall be located approximately 420 meters from the muzzle (under line of fire) to capture obturation. Please confirm 420 meters is the desired distance? Answer: The underline camera should be placed at 20 meters from the gun, not 420 meters. 5. Question: Section 4.6.11.1 of DTL 13012536, reference is made to cold testing at ???46??C in the first paragraph and -37??C in the final paragraph. Which temperature is correct? Answer: The correct temperature is -46??C. This has been updated in the latest revision of the DTL (attached). 6. Question: In QAP 13012520, Part C of the inspection requirements (for Cartridge Drawing 13012520) shows major 116 as cartridge weight. Is there a weight tolerance to meet? Answer: The current weight and tolerance are 23677.4g and standard deviation was 27.3g. A statistical measurement for outliers will be taken of 100 cartridges during the LRP production run. The TDP will be modified if necessary afterwards. 7. Question: On Drawing 93430111, Liner, reference is made to Drawing 9282888, Additive Composition. This drawing details the composition of the ablative paste that is applied to the linder and is not included I the current version of the TDP. Please provide Drawing 9282888 at the revision level that is needed for this TDP. Answer: Drawing 9282888 is available upon request. Interested parties meeting the NTIB must contact this office for a copy. 8. In QAP 13012522, the following clarifications are required: a. Question: Tungsten Ball, CD 103, Crush Strength: Crush Strength lists a test report as the Inspection Method. Drawing 13012528 requires 35,584 N but does not provide a sample size. What is the sample size? Answer: A total of 10 balls are to be tested per each lot. b. Question: Obturator, CD 203, Interior Chamfer: What is the Conformance Criteria and Inspection Method for the Interior Chamfers? Answer: This is a level II feature. Inspection method is not specified. c. Question: Base, CD, 202, Rod threads-type: What feature size is to be inspected (i.e. major, minor, pitch or all)? Answer: All features are to be inspected. d. Question: Body, CD, 104, Circular runout of OD: The OD of the part does not have a runout requirement. Can we assume this will not be a CD? Answer: The drawing will be adjusted to add the OD runout requirement. This feature will be a CD. e. Question: Cap, CD 201, Threads ??? type: What feature size is to be inspected (i.e. major, minor, pitch or all)? Answer: All features are to be inspected. f. Question: Rod, CD 201, Threads ??? type: What feature size is to be inspected (i.e. major, minor, pitch or all)? Answer: All features are to be inspected. g. Question: Projectile, CD 110, Projectile Weight: The weight is an advisory on the drawing, but the QAP in paragraph 502 contains a method for establishing a weight to ensure all parts are present. Is this statistical method the acceptance criteria? If so, is the mean +/-3 standard deviations? Answer: Correct, the weight measurement is the statistical acceptance criteria. The QAP will be adjusted to the PQT weight +/- 3 standard deviations. 9. Question: Order of precedence for the TDP drawing package provided with referenced RFP. The label of the disc reflects ???Distribution C: Limited to US Government Agencies and their Contractors???. Drawings contained within that package have other distribution statements. Does the statement on the individual drawings take precedence over the disc label? Answer: The label for the disc with the Distribution C takes precedence. 10. Question: Please clarify that the solicitation is for a loaded case only, correct? Answer: Yes, the case would be loaded. 11. Question: Paragraph 7.4.4 (page 20): contractor requests modifying the first sentence of this section from "The contractor shall provide the technical data maintenance for the M1040 Program on the Government furnished Technical Data Package (TDP)." to: "The contractor shall provide the technical data maintenance for the M1040 unique documentation on the Government furnished Technical Data Package (TDP)." There are various documents within the TDP maintained by other contractors and/or the Government, are common parts or packaging documents maintained by other agencies, or are being maintained by us under other contracts. As a result, maintenance for the entire TDP would be beyond the successful bidder's control. Therefore, we propose limiting the TDP maintenance to the drawings provided in the enclosed table. Answer: TDP Maintenance is required for the entire TDP, whether unique or common components. Your company should be well aware of the method of TDP maintenance and Configuration Management procedures. The PM-MAS CM Plan has been provided as guidance. 12. Question: Page 86, L.9 Submission of Proposals: General Instructions: The wording implies that we send 4 large binders with Volumes 1, 3, and 4 (with no Volume 2, Price) and 1 large binder with price (Volume 1, 2, 3, and 4). Reference page 87, Specific Instructions/Information the wording implies that we submit ???separate volumes??? If so, do we submit 4 sets of Volume 1, 3, and 4 (with no Volume 2, Price) and 1 set of Volumes 1, 2, 3, and 4? Answer: Follow L.9 and send 4 binders with volumes 1, 3, and 4 (with no Volume 2, Price) and 1 binder with price (Volume 1, 2, 3, and 4). 13. Question: On page 88 of the RFP, the page limitations indicate that Volume 1: Technical has a total page limit of 90 pages consisting of: a. Management/Quality Assurance/Production (60 page limit) plus b. Production (30 page limit) However, on Line 3 of Page 89, the RFP states: ???1. Technical ??? Volume 1: (60 page limit).??? To ensure consistency throughout the document, we request that Line 3 of page 89 be revised to reflect that the Technical ??? Volume 1 is limited to a total page limit of 90 pages. Answer: The total number pages for the Technical Volume to be submitted are 60 pages. 14 Question: Request the Government make available any ballistic test results form which any evaluation of performance to the requirements can be performed. Answer: Ballistic test results are available upon request. Interested parties meeting the NTIB must contact this office for a copy. 15. Question: In the TDP provided for subject RFP, Note 5 of Liner Drawing 9343011 refers to Federal Specification L-P-377C dated 23 March 1994. That Spec was cancelled without a replacement. We request the Government provide direction as to what requirement for polyester film will be incorporated. Answer: Offerors are to produce to the requirements called out in drawing 9343011 and Federal Specification L-P-377C Type I. A suitable replacement and/or revised drawing will be identified in the future. 16. Question: The following QAPs were not included with the Solicitation TDP. Please provide the following QAPs: - QAP 12982931 - QAP 12982932 - QAP 12982933 - QAP 12956135 - QAP 12525143 - QAP 12956320 Answer: The above QAPs are available upon request. Interested parties meeting the NTIB must contact this office for a copy. 17. Question: The following drawings were not included in with the Solicitation. Please provide them. - AC200000427-1, Stiffener - 13005480, Rivet, Identification Tag Rivet Answer: The above drawings are available upon request. Interested parties meeting the NTIB must contact this office for a copy. 18. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
- Web Link
-
US ARMY TACOM-Picatinny Procurement Network
(http://procnet.pica.army.mil/dbi/Download/GoGetSolicitation.cfm?SolNum=W15QKN-06-R-0625)
- Record
- SN01037431-W 20060430/060428220842 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |