SOLICITATION NOTICE
J -- Microclimatic Conditioning System
- Notice Date
- 6/4/2008
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, U. S. Army Materiel Command, JM&L LCMC Acquisition Center, Picatinny, US Army ARDEC, AMSTA-AR-PC, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 07806-5000
- ZIP Code
- 07806-5000
- Solicitation Number
- W15QKN-08-R-0340
- Response Due
- 6/16/2008
- Archive Date
- 7/16/2008
- Point of Contact
- Michael Grant, Contract Specialist, (973)724-6742
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Q1. PWS Para. 3.3.1 Period of Performance (and other places), Statesthat The contractor shall complete all Phase II tasks no later than 9 monthsafter completion of Phase I Tasks. We request that the Government considerlinking completion of Phase II to the option exercise date in case there is atime lag between the completion of Phase I and the exercise of the Phase IIoption. A1. The 9 month completion period for Phase II tasks will begin when and ifthe Government exercises the option for Phase II. Q2. Regarding Solicitation page 32 (Schedule of GFP), for Phase II, should thecontractor assume that we will use the same GFP same units that were modifiedfor Phase I? A2. Yes Q3. PWS Para 5.1 PRS / QASP, The third row, third column of the Table statesthat the Contractor shall provide three (3) test prototype valves. What arethe test prototype valves? A3. This should be changed to state Contractor shall provide three (3) testprototype MCS packs. Q4. Test Plan / Requirements document, Table page 7, Indicates that the LifeCycle (operation longevity) verification requirement is a test requirement. Alater reference states that the Reliability verification requirement shall bea demonstration. No reliability test / demonstration requirements areprovided. Is a reliability test / demonstration or analysis intended? A 1000hour reliability test at 40 hours per week would take 25 weeks (six months).This could not likely be accomplished within the program time frames. A4. A4. The 1000 hours MTBF are defined in para. 3.7.4 and 4.7.5 of spec.DTL12553830. This is the Paladin MCS, and Paladin M109A6 Vehicle systemrequirements. Formal testing of this requirement is not required. Therequirement may be met via detailed RAM analysis. Whether RAM analysis orformal testing is performed, the contractor's approach for satisfying thisrequirement shall be included in the contractor's test plan which is part ofthe RFP. Q5. Test Plan / Requirements document, Para 5.2.2 Envelope Dimensions, Statesthat the component envelope dimensions shall meet the dimensions noted onthe applicable engineering component drawings of XXXXX. What is the actualintended reference? A5. "Test Plan / Requirements document, Para 5.2.2 Envelope Dimensions,States that the component envelope dimensions shall meet the dimensionsnoted on the applicable engineering component drawings of DTL spec.DTL12553830, defined in paragraphs 3.7.2.2 and 4.7.3.2. Q6. Test Plan / Requirements document, Para 6.5.4 Current Draw, Referencesa test described in XXX. What is the actual intended reference? A6. See DTL12553830 para. 3.6.2.4, 3.7.8.1 and 4.9.4 Q7. PWS Para. 3.2.3 System Design Report, References paragraph 3.4. Paragraph 3.4 of the PWS does not exist. A7. PWS Para. 3.2.3 System Design Report, References paragraph 3.4. it shouldreference paragraph 3.1.2.
- Web Link
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=2f76cf4b36884d3bfaaf9bd7b4ae6446&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Record
- SN01586516-W 20080606/080604215440-2f76cf4b36884d3bfaaf9bd7b4ae6446 (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 |