Addendum 1 - UNDP`s Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian

United Nations Development Programme
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
‫ ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻣﺳﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺷﻌﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺳﻁﻳﻧﻲ‬/‫ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻻﻣﻡ ﺍﻟﻣﺗﺣﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻧﻣﺎﺋﻲ‬
ITB-2013-286
Addendum No. 1 to the Solicitation Documents
29 October 2013
ITB:
Procurement and Supply of an Armoured Toyota Land Cruiser
Issue Date:
22 October 2013
Original Close Date:
5 November 2013
In addition to the original duly signed hard copy of the technical proposal, bidder is requested
to submit a soft copy on CD or USB. In case of discrepancy between the signed original copy and
the CD/USB, the original signed copy shall prevail
Some prospective Bidders have required in writing clarifications of the Solicitation Documents. Follow
are UNDP responses to the said queries that have been received:
QUESTION No. 1:
Preferred agency being Beschussampt Mellrichstadt because it is the original
publisher of the “B” system of armouring standards?
REPLY No. 1:
Certification must be produced, from a recognized government testing
agency, in the name of the armouring manufacturer, confirming that all
armour plating and glazing used in the up-armour production of these specific
vehicles, as required and supplied under this specific ITB, fully comply with the
European Committee for Standardization (CEN) VRG standards to Vehicle
Resistant BRV 1999 VR6 or VPAM BRV 2009 (VR7) – DIN EN 1063, 1522 and
1523VRG
QUESTION No. 2:
15 kg Gerosit – with this you are referring to 15 kg equivalent to TNT aimed at
the “B” pillar; but at what distance, 2 metres; 3 metres or 4 metres?
REPLY No. 2:
2 meters distance.
QUESTION No. 3:
If the vehicles are to perform outside of Europe is there a reason why the UN
does not choose a base unit that suits the region for example Gulf or Tropical
spec?
REPLY No. 3:
Yes, there is a reason. We insist on EU standards.
QUESTION No. 4:
Toyota Land Cruiser Hardtop Model 200 (EU version)? The Hardtop only refers
to the 70’s series.
REPLY No. 4:
Thank you; this was an unintentional oversight.
Page 1 of 6
Revised 2012
United Nations Development Programme
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
‫ ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻣﺳﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺷﻌﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺳﻁﻳﻧﻲ‬/‫ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻻﻣﻡ ﺍﻟﻣﺗﺣﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻧﻣﺎﺋﻲ‬
ITB-2013-286
QUESTION No. 5:
Child security locks on the rear doors are required? If a child lock is activated
(and in many instances this sometimes means the simply pushing down of a
small latch in the locking system) it means the rear passengers can not exit the
vehicle under any circumstances either manually, electronically! They are
trapped! There are requests whereby it is specifically mentioned that child
locks should be deactivated.
REPLY No. 5:
Child locks remains; the vehicle specifications are made according to specific
threat, but thank you for double checking.
QUESTION No. 6:
Is there a reason why only Hutchinson or the company in the UK Runflat
International are specifically named? Do you have a special relationship with
them and regard their products better than Rodgard for example?
REPLY No. 6:
No, we don’t have special relationship with any company; but we do insist on
this specific product.
P.S. Rodgard is a division of Hutchinson.
QUESTION No. 7:
“Referring to point 35) of the specification requirements, we note that the
vehicle kerb weight “cannot exceed 3,500kg as it must be imported in Israel.”
… Please could you clarify this requirement, as it is unlikely that a VR7
armoured vehicle can be supplied with a kerb weight of 3,500kg. Is there a
chance this figure could be raised?
The kerb weight cannot be raised and it has to remain 3500kg because Israeli
relevant authorities do not register a vehicle that is heavier then 3,5 ton.
REPLY No. 7:
QUESTION No. 8:
Section 3a: Schedule of Requirements and Technical Specifications , you
mention that “The supplier shall provide valid certification, in the name of the
armouring manufacturer”. Should the requirement to show valid certification
be exclusively in the name of the armouring manufacturer as a must?
REPLY No. 8:
The certificate must show the name of the armouring manufacturer.
QUESTION No. 9:
Would it be acceptable to provide report of results … or still you require the
certificate itself and not just report of results of the blast?
REPLY No. 9:
Valid certificates are a must, but ballistic and other reports as per the published
ITB are preferred in addition.
QUESTION No. 10:
It is mentioned everywhere in the requirements Vehicle Resistant “Level 7 (VR7)
VPAM BRV 2009 (VR7) – DIN EN 1063, 1522 and 1523VRG” while we have
noticed in (Section 3.a.3. Schedule of Certificates Required) item No 2 in the
table (CEN) VRG standards to Vehicle Resistant Level 6 (VR6) in accordance with
BRV 1999 – DIN EN 1063, 1522 and 1523VRG ) ….. We believe there is some
confusion because (VR6) is lower than (VR7) which is required and mention
everywhere else this section …. Can you please clarify?
Page 2 of 6
Revised 2012
United Nations Development Programme
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
‫ ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻣﺳﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺷﻌﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺳﻁﻳﻧﻲ‬/‫ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻻﻣﻡ ﺍﻟﻣﺗﺣﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻧﻣﺎﺋﻲ‬
ITB-2013-286
REPLY No. 10:
The vehicle must be armoured up to VR6 level according to BRV 1999
standards or VR7 level according to BRV 2009 standards.
The solicitation document is hereby amended to change the standards to read
“the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) VRG standards to
Vehicle Resistant BRV 1999 VR6 or VPAM BRV 2009 (VR7) – DIN EN
1063, 1522 and 1523VRG”.
QUESTION No. 11:
Is it possible to consider an extension of closing date for at least of one week
please?
We cannot extend the deadline.
REPLY No. 11:
QUESTION No. 12:
Your requirement is for a level VR7 vehicle that was tested and certified in
accordance with BRV 2009. You listed a number of calibres including AK 47
(7.62 x 39) and AK 74 (5.45 x 39). Neither of the two calibres are used for the
BRV 1999 and/or the BRV 2009 certification as they are regarded as inferior to
the US and the NATO calibre. Can you confirm that you will accept the
certificate even if the two Kalashnikov calibres are not included?
REPLY No. 12:
This is correct; the car tested for this level does not need to include these two
calibres.
QUESTION No. 13:
Can we assume that you want the entire certification report to be submitted
together with the bid?
REPLY No. 13:
As above, more is better.
QUESTION No. 14:
You are asking for a side blast protection against 15 kg Geosit III, but you do not
stipulate the distance and the height at which the charge is to be detonated.
The NATO norm STANAG 4569 specifies for the 15 kg to be detonated at a
distance of two meters to the side of the B-column and for the charge to be
elevated by 100 cm. This norm also demands for a Side Impact Dummy
(EUROSid) to be positioned on the driver seat and for the dummy to be
connected to a blast recording system. If any of the dummy values are above a
certain level, the test is deemed to be unsuccessful even if a vehicle does not
show signs of fragmentation or signification deformation after the test. Many
manufacturers use an inferior and unrealistic standard where the charge is
detonated at four meters to the side of the vehicle (actual explosive force of 5
kg TNT detonated at two meters). This inferior standard does not require for a
dummy to be used for the test but only a pressure sensor. This unrealistic
method of testing has resulted in manufacturers making exaggerating claims
such as “the passengers would have survived with no injuries”, even though it
is not proven that this is the case as no dummy was used. Please let us know at
what distance you require the 15 kg to be detonated and if you make the use
of a dummy mandatory.
As above. We expect to have the official blast certificates for standards
REPLY No. 14:
Page 3 of 6
Revised 2012
United Nations Development Programme
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
‫ ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻣﺳﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺷﻌﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺳﻁﻳﻧﻲ‬/‫ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻻﻣﻡ ﺍﻟﻣﺗﺣﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻧﻣﺎﺋﻲ‬
ITB-2013-286
described in the tender. Generally we tend not to rely on “manufacturers
exaggerated claims”.
QUESTION No. 15:
Will you accept a vehicle that has failed the side blast test and that had to be
represented for a second test?
REPLY No. 15:
No.
QUESTION No. 16:
Will you accept a vehicle that was tested with explosives months or even years
after the ballistic testing was carried out?
REPLY No. 16:
The question is not clear.
QUESTION No. 17:
Will you contact the testing authority for verification of manufacturer
statements?
REPLY No. 17:
We may if deemed necessary.
QUESTION No. 18:
You have requested for welding certificates to be submitted together with the
bid, but how can you be sure that the certified welders really work for the
bidder?
REPLY No. 18:
UNDP has its own internal process.
QUESTION No. 19:
You are demanding cooperation and full access from the bidder in the event of
your technical expert wanting to inspect the vehicle in production. Does this
mean that you will only inspect the bidders product after contract award?
REPLY No. 19:
The inspection process is very well described in the tender. We cannot be
realistically expected to carry out physical inspection of every bidder.
QUESTION No. 20:
Will the inspector compare the tested vehicle with the vehicle that is
manufactured for you in order to ensure that the weak areas where
penetration occurred have really been eradicated.
Inspection process will be carried out according to the ITB.
REPLY No. 20:
QUESTION No. 21:
REPLY No. 21:
Will you terminate a contract if it turns out that the manufacturer is not
building the vehicle in accordance with the instructions of the testing
authority?
We will terminate the contract if there is a breach of contract. This will be done
according to instructions to bidders and the pursuant General Terms and
Conditions.
QUESTION No. 22:
You have stipulated for the base vehicle to be a “EU version”. Does this mean
you require a vehicle that meets the current European emission standard?
REPLY No. 22:
We require the vehicle to meet the EU standards.
Page 4 of 6
Revised 2012
United Nations Development Programme
Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
‫ ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻣﺳﺎﻋﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺷﻌﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺳﻁﻳﻧﻲ‬/‫ﺑﺭﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻻﻣﻡ ﺍﻟﻣﺗﺣﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻧﻣﺎﺋﻲ‬
ITB-2013-286
QUESTION No. 23:
You demand for larger brake discs to be fitted, but at the same time you do not
allow alloy rims to be installed. These two requirements do not go hand-inhand as there is no steel rim that will accommodate a larger disc. Can we
assume that the larger disc is more important than the steel rim?
REPLY No. 23:
The disc, as described in the tender is more important, though the best
solution would be to have the steel rim that matches.
QUESTION No. 24:
Seating and belting an XXL passenger with body armour might result in the
original safety belt being too short. Will you accept a safety belt that is modified
by the manufacturer or do you prefer a “click-on” extension similar to those
used on aircraft?
REPLY No. 24:
Both are acceptable as long as they function properly.
QUESTION No. 25:
Toyota offers a base vehicle with front and rear independent air conditioners.
This includes the European model. Upgrading the air conditioning system is
therefore not really necessary. If we can prove to you that the existing dual air
conditioner can easily cool the vehicle down to the Toyota standard when
exposed to continuous heat above 40° Celsius, will you accept for the AC
system to remain unmodified?
REPLY No. 25:
That depends on how the armourer intends to prove this.
QUESTION No. 26:
While you expect the AC system of the vehicle to be able to deal with
temperatures above 40° Celsius you make no reference to the temperature
range the glass is supposed to meet. Cheap glass will expand when exposed to
heat and automatically lose its ballistic integrity. Many of the glass
manufacturers cannot prove that their glass will still meet the ballistic
requirements when it is continuously exposed to temperatures of plus 49°
degrees or minus 30° Celsius. Can you please tell us what you expect from the
glass in conjunction with § 27 where you state: “Any bidders requiring UNDP to
indemnify the supplier and/or the armouring manufacturer against faulty
workmanship or against penetrations will be automatically disqualified.
Bidders will be required to guarantee the quality of the workmanship and the
compliance with the international armouring standards as described above.”?
REPLY No. 26:
We don’t understand what “cheap glass” is supposed to mean. All transparent
areas should meet the standards described in the tender.
QUESTION No. 27:
REPLY No. 27:
Will you supply the VHF radio for installation?
No. The VHF shall be Motorolla GM 360.
Page 5 of 6
Revised 2012