OPF-L RFP Amendment 001_Attachment J.7_Offeror QA_Gov't Responses.pdf

No. Document Section Paragraph Question Govt. Response 1 Solicitation M6785423R1037 RFP L DFARS 252.215-7013-

Supplies and Services Provided by Nontraditional

Defense Contractors

Per DFARS 252.215-7013, supplies and services provided by a nontraditional defense contractor, as defined in DFARS 202.101 , may be treated as commercial products or commercial services.

Please confirm that based on this DFARS, if an offerer qualifies as a non-traditional defense contractor, that exception can be taken to any relevant FAR Part 15 requirements?

DFARS Clause 252.215-7013 states “………. The decision to apply commercial product or commercial service procedures to the procurement of supplies and services from a nontraditional defense contractor does not require a commercial product or commercial service determination and does not mean the supplies or services are commercial.” Accordingly, the clause only obviates any for the Government to perform a commercial item determination. It does not consititue an automatic exception to or waiver of the FAR Part 15 requirements that are laid out in the solicitation.

2 Solicitation M6785423R1037 RFP L-5.1 Last paragraph The Government's participation objectives for this acquisition are marked TBD. Will the Government provide the percentages?

The RFP due date will be updated in Amendment 001.

3 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.2.5 end of paragraph The text "Meetings, Formal Reviews, Conferences and Audits" is bold, should this be Section 3.3?

This is corrected in Amendment 001.

4 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.6.6 - 3.6.7 2nd sentence Section 3.6.7 Support of Government Safety Certification is listed in the Table of Contents but the content is found embedded in Section 3.6.6, will the Government separate the content to create Section 3.6.7?

This is corrected in Amendment 001.

5 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.11.1 For FSR, please clarify the number of locations and which CLIN should we use for billing purposes?

The Government does not require onsite dedicated FSR support in the SOW. The Government does require offsite FSR / on-call support throughout the life of the contract and is applicable to all CLINS. Per SOW paragraph 3.9.6, onsite FSR support is required during OT. The Offeror is requried to provide onsite support per SOW paragraph 3.17.

6 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.17.4 Please confirm that NET training will be at government facilities.

Yes - confirmed.

7 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.17 Will the government provide AUR for training purposes? (would this be included in the GCS statement?)

If the Offeror's training plan identifies a Live Fire training element, then the Government will provide the LM. The Government will take into considersation, during their best value assessment, the number of rounds the Offerors requires for training.

8 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.17 Is there a live fire requirement for training? The Offeror shall propose their best value solution to meet the SOW requirements for 3.17.

M67854-23-R-1037 – Organic Precision Fires – Light (OPF-L) Request for Proposal Questions from Industry

Instructions: The Interested Offerors shall submit Questions in the template below in Excel format only. If the Interested Offerors does not submit using this Excel format, then they may not be addressed. One question per row. Add rows as necessary. The Interested Offerors shall accurately reference the correct document, section, and paragraph. The Interested Offerors shall update the file name to include their Interested Offerors name. The Government's responses to any Interested Offeror Q&A Submission will be publicly posted. The Government will not edit or change the questions received before posting. All Interested Offerors shall ensure no proprietary or sensitive information is included in the body of their question. If any additional information is needed for context, it shall be clearly separated from the specific question asked.

9 Attachment J.1_SOW 3.11.2 first paragraph Government defines categories of repairs (SOW section 3.11.2) but on attachment J.10 Pricing Workbook CLINs 0010, 0011, 0012, 1010, 1011, and 1012 the pricing fields are blacked out. Furthermore within the RFP in section L, specifically section L-6.5, there is no reference to CLINs 0010, 0011, 0012, 1010, 1011, and 1012. Are CLINs 0010, 0011, 0012, 1010, 1011, and 1012 to be priced or for informational purposes only?

CLINs 0010, 0011, 0012, 1010, 1011, and 1012 refer to the GCS. The RFP Section B, Section L-6.5, and Attachement J.10 will be updated in Amendment 001.

10 Respectfully requests a four (4) week extension for submission - requested new date of proposal submittal: November 8th, 2023.

The RFP due date will be updated in Amendment 001.

11 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L, L-4.2 Volume II – Past Performance (Evaluated in Section M-4.3, Factor 2: Past Performance)

4 "...Offerors shall complete Parts I-III of the Past Performance Assessment and email the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the associated contract." Where Offerors cite a major subcontract, does the Government accept a Past Performance Assessment Questionnaire completed by the Prime Contractor of the cited procurement or does it require a Past Performance Assessment Questionnaire completed by both the Government and Prime Contractor? Please confirm.

Amendment 001 of the RFP updates Section L-4.2 to clarify Past Performance submissions. Also, Attachment J.8 - Past Performance Questionnaire is updated in Amendment 001 to add clarity that Prime Contractors would be the "assessor" for Major Subcontractor submissions.

Any PP submissions already provided in response to the OPF-L RFP are available for re-submission given the updates to the Past Performance Section and J.8 - PP Questionnaire.

12 OPF-L RFP_Attachment J.1_SOW Section 3.12.2 GFP 1 In the Q&A released, the Government stated that no GFE/GFP would be provided at this time. SOW Section 3.12.2 GFP references Attachment J.5 that was not included with the soliciation. If the Government still does not intend to provide GFE/GFP, will the Government please update the SOW to remove the requirement and remove the CDRLs CDRL D003: Receipt of Government Materiel Report and CDRL D005: Quality Deficiency Report as these CDRLs would not be applicable?

An Attachment J.5 - GFP placeholder document is added to the solicitation in RFP Amendment 001. This attachment is needed in the event GFP is added to the effort at a later time. Contractor performance for GFP requirement compliance stated in the RFP only become appliable post-award, at the DO level, in the event GFP is provided.

13 OPF-L RFP_Attachment J.1_SOW Section 3.12.1 GPM 2 In the Q&A released, the Government stated that no GFE/GFP would be provided at this time. SOW Section 3.12.1 GPM references monthly status reporting for GFE/GFM. If the Government still does not intend to provide GFE/GFP, will the Government please update the SOW to remove the requirement and remove the CDRL D004:

Government Property (GP) Inventory Report as this CDRL would not be applicable?

An Attachment J.5 - GFP placeholder document is added to the solicitation in RFP Amendment 001. This attachment is needed in the event GFP is added to the effort at a later time. Contractor performance for GFP requirement compliance stated in the RFP only become appliable post-award, at the DO level, in the event GFP is provided.

14 RFP M M-4.5 Factor 4 Concern: We understand the Government’s desire to establish unit pricing in advance of a firm requirement, provide flexibility to execute quickly under a wide range of scenarios, and maximize cost savings due to economies of scale/learning curve theory. We also understand the Government’s need to protect against unbalanced pricing in the evaluation.

The current described methodology for evaluating the stepladder pricing on page 88 does not allow for accurate comparison of prices between offerors and conduct a proper price reasonableness evaluation.

We have provided an analysis spreadsheet to demonstrate this in the attached.

Question: Will the Government modify the methodology for stepladder pricing evaluation?

Recommend that the Government provide a minimum and maximum quantity for each CLIN, and generate a TEP using a random step-ladder quantity.

The Government is not comparing one Offeror's proposal to another. The Government will evaluate each proposal's price indivudually. The Government will utilize the method desribed in Section M-4.5.

15 RFP L L-11.0 Question: Any additional time contractors can receive will be helpful to best lay out our proposed offer as thoroughly and thoughfully as possible. Will the government consider providing a 2-week extension on the propsoal due date?

The RFP due date will be updated in Amendment 001.

17 RFP I Page 44 and 48 Concern: 52.232-16 Progress Payment clause is listed two times, both the Deviation and Alt. III. Please clarify if 80% or 90% progress payments will be allowable under this contract.

The base FAR 52.232-16 replaces the 52.232-16 (CD) in Amendment 001 of the RFP. As this is a full and open competition, Alt lll does apply to the solicitation for Large Businesses and DFARS 252.232-7004 (CD) also applies to the solicitation for Small Businesses.

Therefore, the inclusion of all 3 clauses is appropriate and applicable to the solicitation.

18 RFP Section L and M L-5.1 and M-4.4.1 Concern: Please clarify the Government’s SB Participation Plan Objectives, as it is unclear what will be considered acceptable or unacceptable in evaluation.

The RFP due date will be updated in Amendment 001.

19 RFP Section M M-4.3 Factor 2 Question: Regarding Past Performance Assessment, if a major subcontractor has a recent and relevant contract with a foreign government entity, is the foreign government contracting entity a valid POC to complete the PP questionnaire?

Amendment 001 of the RFP clarifies that in the case of an Offeror's "Major Subcontractor" submissions, the Prime Contractor is considered the "assessor", as it is the Prime Contractor who has privity of contract with the Subcontractor (the Offeror) and can comment on performance.

Attachment J.8 - Past Performance Questionnaire is updated in Amendment 001 to clarify the applicability of a Prime Contractor as the "assessor".

20 RFP Section B CLINs Question: Can the customer identify a central location to ship the production CLINs as to better allow competitors to estimate shipping costs?

No. Delivery schedules and locations will be established at the Delivery Order level.

21 RFP Section L Table L1, Volume I Question: Given that the WBS structure is required for the Technical Volume and will most likely consume multiple pages, can the WBS be exempted from the Tech Volume page limit?

Yes. The RFP will be updated in Amendment 001 to exclude the WBS from page count.

22 Section J Exhibit A Exhibit A CDRLs Question: Will the Government provide DIDs for contractors to review prior to submitting our proposals?

If you know the DID number, you can use the ASSIST Quick Search. Simply enter the 5-digit DID number (do not use revision letters) in the search filed labeled [Document Number:] and click on the [Submit] button.

https://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsSearch.aspx

23 SOW 3.6 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 Question: Can the government provide more direction around the ESOHWG requirement? When will this working group first meet, how often and what location(s)?

The Offeror shall plan to support virtual ESOHWG meetings on a monthly basis. The initial meeting will be established at the Post-Award Conference (PAC). Remote attendance fo ESOHWG is acceptable.

24 SOW 3.11 3.11.1 and 3.11.2 Question: Please clarify the locations that FSR support will be needed at for ILS and CLS.

The Government does not require onsite dedicated FSR support in the SOW. The Government does require offsite FSR / on-call support throughout the life of the contract and is applicable to all CLINS. Per SOW paragraph 3.9.6, onsite FSR support is required during OT. The Offeror is requried to provide onsite support per SOW paragraph 3.17.

25 SOW 3.11 3.11.2.2 Question: Please clarify the the assumed number of support locations globablly for sustainment activity, as well as if additional training courses will be expected to be conducted on-site globally as well.

Paragraph 3.11.2.2 refers to the Offerors ability to support CLS at their location. The Government's training requirements are identified in SOW paragraphs 3.9 and 3.17.

26 Attachment J.10 Pricing Worknook Rows 33, 34, 36,37,39,and 40 CLS Minor, Moderate, Major Repairs CLINs X010, X011, X012

These rows are formatted in a way that the contractor is assuming a flat 20%, 40% 65% mathematical application to the Base Unit Price. Please confirm thatthis is the Government's intent and not a bottoms-up estimate.

Yes, confirmed. Amendment 001 of the RFP updates Attachment J.10 - Pricing Workbook and Offerors are to use a flat 20%, 40%, and 65% rate application to the Base Unit Price.

27 Attachment J.10 Pricing Worknook Rows 44 and 46 ECP and Data Delivery CLINs X014, X015

Please confirm that no pricing is requested for CLIN X014 and X015

No pricing is requested for Base and Option CLINs 0014 and 1014 - ECPs, and 0015 and 1015 - Data Deliverables.

ECPs CLINs 0014 and 1014, will be negotiated and priced at DO level.

Data Deliverales CLINs 0015 and 1015, are Not Separately Priced (NSP).

DFARS 252.204-7002 in the RFP defines what NSP means and how Offerors shall handle pricing of NSP items.

28 Attachment J.10 Pricing Worknook Rows 7 AUR CLINs and others X003, X004, X005, X006, X007

Based on the J.10 template (currently populated as qty 1-#, qty #-#, qty #+), the contractor is assuming that price ranges are requested, for example, qty 1-5;

qty 6-10; qty 10+ etc. Please confirm if that is correct.

If the above is correct, and a range is requested, please advise on how to calculate a total per CLIN on a range. For instance on a range of qty 6-10, should the total be considering the 6 or 10 (or in-between)?

Yes, confirmed. See RFP Section L-6.5 for step-ladder pricing instructions.

The Government requires on unit price for all items within a given range.

29 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L-6.5 The Offer Sections B It is the contractor's understanding that the pricing offer should only contain pricing details per form J.10 (unit price and total price per CLIN and year) and NO pricing backup will be provided (such as quotes, cost/price analyses/labor bottom-up estimates/subcontractor proposals, etc.). Please confirm that this understanding is correct.

Correct - no pricing back up is needed.

30 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L-6.5 The Offer Sections B The RFP states "Offerors shall include their overall proposed price at the end of the Schedule of Supplies/Services section." Where is the Schedule of Supplies/Services Section and should the overall proposed price be at the proposed quantity ranges?

Amendment 001 of the RFP provides a space for Offerors to include their overall proposed price in Section B.

31 Attachment J.1 SOW 3.1 Production Paragraph 1 The first sentence refers the reader to "Attachment J.3, Figure 4", however we cannot find Figure 4 in Attachment J.3. Please provide clarification

There is no Figure 4 in Attachment J.3. The SOW will be updated in Amendment 001.

32 Attachment J.1 SOW 3.5 Configuration Management Paragraph 3.5.5 Will an ECP for Class I and Class II changes be required for baseline items?”

SOW paragraph 3.5.1 states "The Contractor’s proposed system shall be the product baseline. Any change to this proposed baseline shall be documented by an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP)."

33 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L-1.0 General Instructions Paragraph 1 Contractor notes that Section L allows offeros to submit up to two proposals. Is it the Government's intent to have bidders submit their initial proposal (proposal-1), then following Government review, provide an opportunity for bidders to submit an FPR (proposal-2)? If not, please clarify.

The (2) proposals authorized in Section L refers to the allowance for Offerors to submit separate proposals for up to (2) separate solutions.

34 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 I-Contract Clauses 252.217-7001 Surge Option (Dec 2018)

Section I states, "The Government has the option to --

(1) Increase the quantity of supplies or services called for under this contract by no more than 50% percent of the maximum rate requested in the contract…" Contractor notes that the maximum rate requested in the contract is currently defined in Section B as "Undefined+".

Can the Government please clarify surge quantities that bidders should expect? If not, please clarify this requirement.

The surge clause applies at the delivery order level and is applicable to the Offerors plan to achieve the production and delivery requirements as identified in SOW paragraph 3.1.

35 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L-3.0 Proposal Preparation Instructions Table L1: Proposal Submission Requirements;

Technical Proposal

Please confirm that the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) does not count against the Technical Proposal 50-page limit.

Yes. The RFP will be updated in Amendment 001 to exclude the WBS from page count.

36 OPF-L RFP_M67854-23-R-1037 L-3.0 Proposal Preparation Instructions Table L1: Proposal Submission Requirements and Table L2: Items Not

Counted Against The Page Limit

Cross Reference Matrix, Attachment J.6 appears in Table L1 in Row Two of items that count against the Technical Proposal 50-page limit and also appears in Table L2, Items That Do Not Count Against The Page Limit. Please confirm that the Cross Reference Matrix does not count against the Technical Proposal 50-page limit.

The Cross Refernce Matrix does not count towards page count.

37 OPF-L RFP and Attachment J.6, SOW & PSPEC Cross- Reference Matrix

RFP: 3.0 Requirement RFP: 3.2.5 Program Manager and PSPEC Cross-Reference

Matrix Line 12

Was it the Government's intent for "Meetings, Formal Reviews, Conferences and Audits" to be paragraph 3.3?

This is corrected in Amendment 001.

38 OPF-L RFP and Attachment J.6, SOW & PSPEC Cross- Reference Matrix

RFP: 3.0 Requirement RFP: 3.6.6 Material Safety Data Sheets and PSPEC Cross-

Reference Matrix Line 41

Was it the Government's intent for "Support of Government Safety Certification" and all the text following it including the CDRLs to be paragraph 3.6.7?

This is corrected in Amendment 001.

39 Attachment J.6, SOW & PSPEC Cross-Reference Matrix

N/A N/A Does the Government have a preferred file format (Excel or PDF) for the completed matrix?

Excel format.

40 Attachment J.10 - Pricing Worksheet Section L L-6.5 Question: Attachment J.10 calls out pricing for Minor, Moderate and Major Repairs but there are no instructions within Section L, "The Offer" , as what the government would require for pricing. Additionally, Attachment J.10 has no fields to enter data for those CLINs, 0012-0014 and 1010-1012. Is the government requesting pricing for Quantity 1 of each repair type and per every year? If so, will the government provide a revised Attachment J.10

The RFP and Attachment J.10 will be updated in Amendment 001.

41 RFP Section M M.4 Question: Are the Subfactors for Technical Performance: System Design and Performance Compliance, Workmanship and Statement of Work

(SOW)

Compliance and Manufacturing Capability equally important in the evaluation?

The Government has no Technical Subfactors.

42 RFP Section L L-4.2 Section 1a Question: Regarding Past Performance; if the contractor has a relavent contract that is broken up into one delivery order (DO) for engineering activity, and one DO for manufacturing scope (among various other DOs), can the contractor use the combination of multiple DOs under the same contract for one of the three past performance examples?

Offerors may provide government and non-government past performance (PP) submissions IAW Sections L&M of the Formal RFP. Task Orders/POs, etc on related efforts are acceptable as separate PP entries.

Offerors with three or more prior Government contracts shall provide three Government contracts as PP submissions. Those Offerors with fewer than three Government contracts shall provide all Government contract as PP submissions (non-government contracts may still be submitted in addition to the Government contract to reach the maximum limit of up to three submissions). The maximum total PP submission remains limited to no more than 3. Offerors shall use the Formal RFP Section J Attachment 8 - Past Performance Questionnaire, for PP submissions.

43 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.20 1 Under what approaches & distances should the indicator be visible. E.g. 360° view on a plane for approaching on foot; half- or full spherical for approaching unit from above or below.

For objective Pspec requirement 3.2.20 the indicator should be visiable from the ground with the user in a standing position near the system without touching the system.

44 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.20 1 Should indicators be visible through visually-impairing mediums like smoke or water.

There is no requirement for Pspec 3.2.20 to be visible through impairing mediums.

45 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.4.3 1 After mission abort, is there a max amount of time the unit should be recoverable.

There is no maximum amount of time requirement for the LM flight after

3.4.3 abort is initiated. Recovery after mission abort is recoverable by the Marine for reuse.

46 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.4.3 1 Related to question No. 3 above, if there is a max recoverability time what should happen if that time is exceeded.

Recoverability is not time based but mission based. After abort the objective requirement in 3.4.3 is for the system to be recoverable to be reused.

47 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.13/14 1 Should the battery pack have a way of indicating to the user how much capacity/runtime is available.

Offerors should propose their systems capabilities. Requirement 3.2.13 and 3.2.14 does not require the vendor to provide a state of charge indicator.

48 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.1.1 1 What types of ground surface may be launched from (ex - snow)

The Offeror shall provide all ground surfaces that their system can launch from for the Government to evaluate. Systems shall be verified using the available ground surfaces at the test center at the time of test.

Environmental condition for the system is provided in the PSpec. Launch environments will be within these environmental conditions.

49 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.31 1 Which platform criteria in NAVSEA S9310 Table 1 will be applicable to the air vehicle battery.

Platforms for the OPF-L that are relevent to its S9310 certification include Navy facilities, ships, and aircraft.

50 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.35 1 Confirm that BIT results can be reported over the remote hand controller or GCS

The Offeror shall provided the capability of their systems for the Government to assess.

51 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.4.3 1 Is there a maximum time allowed for recovery and relaunch?

There is no maximum time requirement between recovery and relaunch in Pspec 3.4.3

52 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.4.3 1 Is there a maximum number of re-use operations required?

The Government will assess the Offerors proposed recovery capabilities for usefulness to the Marine Corps.

53 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.5.5 1 Is there a specified solar loading ion the storage location?

Pspec 3.5.5 is a maximum storage temperature requirement. This maximum storage temperature incorporates increase in temperatures due to solar loading during storage.

54 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.5.11 1 Are there specific requested corrosive elements that should be tested against?

Pspec 3.5.11 provides the corrosion requirement for the OPF-L system and its test procedure is provided in TOP 1-1-65 in 4.8.11.

55 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.2.30 1 Confirm that functional safety certification for flight controls, such as DO-178C, is not required

The Safety requirements for this program are provided in the Pspec and the SOW. DO-187C is currently not a listed requirement for this system.

Software safety is a requirement for the program.

56 3.2.6 How is probability of hit defined exactly? What are the metrics that define a hit? Target size? Distance deviation from center? Any sample size requirements?

Probability of hit requirement is provided in 3.2.6. Further details for probability of hit will be provided in the detail test plans after contract award. The vendor should provide their systems capability for probability of hit with an Anti-material warhead.

57 3.3.10 Do multiple LMs need to be controlled from the same UI at the exact same time, or is it acceptable to control them from multiple instances of the same UI, where each instance is dedicated to controlling a single asset, but all instances display the locations and routes of each asset currently airborne in the AOR?

The latter proposal would involve some rapid switching back and forth between control modes, but allow only one asset to be controlled at a time to reduce chance of user confusion.

The Threshold requirement is for one LM to be controlled by one GCS.

The Offeror shall propose their systems capability to meet the objective requirement of controlling more than one LM for the Government to evaluate.

58 What is the desired behavior of the system if link is lost with the C2 node AFTER a terminal engagement has been started and approved? This is expected to happen as the vehicle drops low at range, or into urban canyon terrain. Should the vehicle proceed on its planned engagement, autonomously maintaining course to the target it is tracking?

The Offeror shall provided the capability of their systems for the Government to assess. Different vendor solutions will provide different capabilities with regards to this question.

59 3.3.16 & 3.3.17 What is the ditch procedure, necessitated by the pre-planned ditch location? Is ditching destructive? Does it involve intentionally crash landing or explosively self-destructing? Or is it the same as landing at a pre-defined and dynamically changeable location? What conditions should trigger a ditch?

A Ditch location is a location that the operator can select for the LM to crash/land if its ditch parameters are met. The Offeror shall propose how ditch has function for their system for the government to evaluate.

60 3.3.13 Clarify meaning of time remaining to abort. Does this mean the time until we must return the system home (or knowingly prolong the mission with insufficient battery life to return home), or is it related to aborting a terminal engagement and estimating the time remaining until the system reaches the point of no return, where is will become unrecoverable?

The objective requirement of 3.3.13 applies to the time after an attack has been initiated. The Offeror should provide how their system will provide the operator the time remaining to abort the attack once an attack has been initiated.

61 J.2 OPF-L RFP 3.5.21 1 Is there a list or test spec used to define which chemicals are applicable to this requirement?

No list of test specs for specific chemicals are being provided at this time.

The vendors should provided what chemicals and fluids their system is resistant to or susceptible to for the government to evaluate.

62 3.8.2 1 Is there a standard definition of a mission that defines valid countable mission time to count towards mean time before failure? (ie does a vehicle powered on but not flying count as mission time, or is this just counted as flight time)

The sample mission profile that will be used to assess requirement 3.8.2 is provided in section 1 of the Pspec.

63 3.2 (All) Do all performance specifications listed under section

3.2 need to be met under all environmental corner cases? (For example does maximum flight range need to be met at the minimum temperature condition, or is there some amount of acceptable performance degradation with corner case environmental conditions)

The Offeror shall propose how its systems will meet system requirements provided in the Pspec, to include section 3.2, in the operating environmental condition for the system listed in the Pspec. Certain testing environments are provided in section 4 for certain Pspec requirements and should be used for those requirements.

64 3.6.2 Can the government please provide a description of EMS attacks with bounding criteria?

The Offeror should provide information on its system's ability to recover from EMS attacks for the Government to evaluate. No specific EMS attack will be provided at this time.