Att4_TMIT_RFP_QandA_Matrix_15_Mar_2024_Gov Response.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 42 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Trackless Mobile Infantry Targets
- Solicitation number
- M6785424R8000
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This is a solicitation for knowledge-based training services to support the United States Marine Corps with trackless mobile infantry targets. The contractor will provide semiautonomous human-type targets capable of moving safely within established boundaries on live-fire ranges and training areas to present realistic moving threats to shooters. The services include operating the targets, maintaining equipment, developing training scenarios, conducting after-action reviews, and program management at multiple locations. The period of performance is five years for this single-award IDIQ contract, with task orders issued noncompetitively to the awardee. Proposals are due by April 2024 and should address staffing plans, past performance, pricing, and technical approaches for meeting the requirements defined in the performance work statement and its appendices.
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ALL Questions
| Attachment 04 - Question and Answer Matrix M67854-24-R-8000 | ||||||
| Question # | Document Name (e.g., PWS, CDRL, etc.) | Page / Section / Paragraph | Relevant Text | Question | Government Answers | Column1 |
| 1 | Base Contract Performance Work Statement (PWS) For Trackless Mobile Infantry Targets (TMIT) | Page 1-2 / Section 1 / Paragraph 4 (Scope) | Supporting Marine Corps training with TMITs capable of moving on a training range within established geographic boundaries to ensure safety, and to present shooters with realistic, moving threats on live-fire ranges and training areas used by the Marine Corps; | Does this include the development and delivery of TIMITs? | No. This requirement is for services only; however the services require the vendor to provide TMIT targets that meet the system characteristics defined in Appendix A of the PWS. | If the answer is no, you're not modifying anything, so shouldn't publish the question or answer, which itself acts to modify the solicitation. |
| 2 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Conformed Copy.pdf | Page 118 of 136, Section L.1. Overview: This solicitation is restricted to small business concerns only under the NAICS Code 611519. | NAICS 611519 - Other technical and trade schools, has a SB size standard of $21M. | Would the government consider a change in the NAICS from 611519 - $21M to NAICS 541330 - Exception 3? | No. | |
| --TMIT is focused on training as a service but the technology required for the TMIT effort is a large portion of the overall effort and that technology is limited to a very small number of vendors. As such, a small company able to meet the SB size standard of $21M for NAICS 611519 would incur additional risk to prime a contract with the size and scope requirements contained within the TMIT solicitation. | ||||||
| --A different NAICS code - 541330 (Engineering Services), Exception 3 (Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture), which has a SB size standard of up to $47M, is a more appropriate NAICS. | ||||||
| --NAICS 541330 allows for greater competition on an acquisition that includes both services and technology. | ||||||
| 3 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Conformed Copy.pdf | Page 55 of 136 | CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE | Will the government consider inclusion of FAR 52.245-1 Government Property and 52.249-6 Termination for Convenience? | No, See Amendment 02, Section I addition of 52.249-4. | |
| 4 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Conformed Copy.pdf | Page 120 of 136 | Section L.3.A. Proposal Submission Instructions | Will the Government please confirm: a. For the required paper copies: Do dividers count against your page count? b. Is a Table of Contents (TOC) required for each section or for the overall volume submission? c. Does the TOC count against the page count? d. For the required paper copies: Are they required to be bound separately? | See Amendment 02, Sections L.3.A. | |
| 5 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Conformed Copy.pdf | Page 121 of 136, L.3.B., paragraph 4 | The offeror shall provide three (5) paper copies of the Technical Proposal , Volume 1 and the Past Performance Volume II and one (1) copy of the Price Volume III and the Contract Information Volume IV, see Table below. | Will the Governmnet please clarify: a. the number of paper copies required for the Volume I and II. Is is three (3) paper copies or is it five (5) paper copies? Also, please verify the number of paper copies required for the Volume III and IV. Is the stated requirement of one (1) paper copy correct? | See Amendment 02, Sections L.3.B. | |
| 6 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Conformed Copy.pdf | Page134 of 136, Section M.2 Past Performance, Para A. 2). Relevance, Final two (2) sentences. | Only past performance of the prime, performed as the prime, will be considered. However, the Government will consider the past performance of certain small business offerors that have been members of joint ventures or have been first-tier subcontractors pursuant to 13 C.F.R. § 125.11. | As written, the language is very restrictive, especially if the Prime only has past performance with equipment and not with services. Will the government consider revising the paragraph to allow greater inclusion of past performance from a sub-contractor (especially if the sub-contractor is a services based vendor). Possible language for consideration of the paragraph: "The Offeror may identify contracts or efforts for its proposed subcontractors among the five (5) past performance references provided in its quotation. If past performance references are provided for a subcontractor, the offeror’s quotation should clearly state the aspects of the work in the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform. It is the contractor’s responsibility to adequately explain the relevance of a reference provided for a subcontractor’s past performance to the effort that the subcontractor is proposed to perform under the solicitation." | See Amendment 02, Sections L.3.B.2 and M.2.A.2. | |
| 7 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 2 of 59, Item 1.4, Lines 85-87. | Para. 1.4. Scope. Supporting live-fire and non-live fire training events with TMITs so that military personnel can evaluate the skills of individuals, leaders, teams, and units, and sustain operational readiness. | Will the Governmnet confirm if the vendor responsible for providing the required PPE on ranges or will the government provide sufficient levels of PPE? | The vendor will not be required to provide PPE to any shooters. | Here you're clarifying, so it's okay to publish, but it's not ncessary. Offerors can read, and if the solicitation doesn't have a requirement for offerors to provide PPE then the logical answer is that there is no such requirement. |
| 8 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf & Attachment 3 TMIT Price Proposal Workbook_1.17.24 | Page 2 of 59, Figure 1 and | Figure 1: Places of Performance and Qte X Trailers by location. | Will the government clarify the exact or minimum and maximum number of trailers required by location? PWS Figure 1 lists 1-3 TMIT trailers per location but Attachment 3 requires pricing up to 7 TMIT trailers per location. | The minimum and maximum number of trailers required by location are listed in Attachment 3 TMIT Price Proposal Workbook which must be fully populated by the offeror. | |
| Attachment 4, tab Unit Pricing | ||||||
| Consistent with Section L and M of the amended solicitation, the Government is evaluating the offerors ability to meet the specific requirements in support of 13 trailers at the following locations: (3) CPEN, (3) CLEJ, (3) 29PLMS, (2) MCBH, (1) MCBB, and (1) MCBQ. | ||||||
| 9 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 18 of 59, Item 3.1.7, Lines 637-641 | Para 3.1.7: Locations and Hours of Work: However, it is possible that the Government’s scheduling requirements may require support in a continuous 24-hour period (including weekends and holidays). In those instances, the contractor shall support the complete exercise, and it shall be incumbent upon the contractor to manage employee schedules (i.e., to ensure complete coverage) accordingly. | Will the government provide the number of 24/7 support days/events that have occurred during the last 12 months on the current contract? | During the most recent 12 months of performance, there were approximately 22 events requiring support of ~24 hours in duration on the current USMC TMIT contract. The breakdown is as follows: | Edited |
| 29 PLMS - 3 | ||||||
| CLNC - 9 | ||||||
| CPEN - 7 | ||||||
| MCBH - 3 | ||||||
| QUAN - 0 | ||||||
| OKI - 0 The preceding information is historical reference only. The Government may require less or more during any 12 months of performance. | ||||||
| 10 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 22 of 59, Item 3.1.8.5.1, Lines 771-781 | Paragraph 3.1.8.5.1. Foreign Travel: The contractor’s personnel may be required to undertake foreign travel as part of a task order issued under this contract. The DoD Foreign Clearance Manual, located at https://www.fcg.pentagon.mil/fcg.cfm, prescribes overseas travel requirements for contractor personnel. The DoD Foreign Clearance Manual, which includes country, theater, and special area clearance requirements, applies to all contractor travel to/from Outside Contiguous United States (OCONUS) locations. Furthermore, contractor personnel traveling to OCONUS locations shall complete all prescribed training outlined in the then-current edition of the DoD Foreign Clearance Manual. | Will the government please confirm if they anticipate a DSP-05 licensing requirement for the contractor (Application/License for Permanent Export of Unclassified Defense Articles and Relate Unclassified Technical Data)? If so, what countries would this DSP-05 need to cover? | A DSP-05 licensing requirement does not apply to the TMIT KBTS RFP, because the DSP-05 license covers the permanent export of unclassified items that will not be returning to the United States. | |
| 11 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 23 of 59, Item 3.1.9.1., paragraph 2 | Para 3.1.9.1: Facilities: When a task order identifies facilities to be provided for the contractor’s use… | Will the government identify the facilities to be provided by location now that the task order location has been removed in Amendment 0001? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS para 3.1.9.1. | |
| 12 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 23 of 59, Item 3.1.9.1., paragraph 2 | Para. 3.1.9.1 Facilities. When a task order identifies facilities to be provided for the contractor’s use, the Government may provide heating, ventilation and cooling, lights, electricity, and running water commensurate with the workspace environment of the military installation aboard which the work is performed. | Will the Government please confirm the power source available to the contractor at each location? Is it a 220V 50A (service is required to power each trailer of TMIT at each location). Can this be provided and if not can it be installed at the government's expense so each location has the same charging capability? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS para 3.1.9.1. | Answer once. If there is an aspect of this question not included in the one above, merge, but don't publish the same question and answer more than once. |
| 13 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 25 of 59, Item 3.1.10.1 | Paragraph 3.1.10.1 Contract Management Plan: Unless otherwise specified, the contractor shall deliver a management plan to the Government for each task order issued under this contract. | Will the Governmnet please provide the delivery deadline for the Contract Management Plans? The requirement is not specified in Appendix C. | See Block 12 of CDRL B005. | If the answer is already in the solicitation or an attachment, don't publish the question. Offerors can read, and if they can't we don't want them. |
| 14 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 25 of 59, Item 3.1.10.3 | Para 3.1.10.3: Training Systems Utilization Report (TSUR): Unless otherwise specified, the contractor shall deliver to the Government a TSUR that provides information regarding the training system utilization rate and throughput data for training events and exercises for each task order issued under this contract. | Will the government provide a TSUR template or is the contractor expected to develop one? | Yes, the template will be provided at the post award conference. Template headings for the report will be added to CDRL F001 in Amendment 02. | |
| 15 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 25 of 59, Item 3.1.10.3. | Para 3.1.10.3. Training Systems Utilization Report (TSUR) Unless otherwise specified, the contractor shall deliver to the Government a TSUR that provides information regarding the training system utilization rate and throughput data for training events and exercises for each task order issued under this contract. | Will the Governmnet please confirm: Is this report per trailer or per unit? What is the unit of measurement....miles or hours? Is the usage based on the duration of systems on the range of physically being employed by the units? Is throughput unit based or total individuals trained? Does this also include ammo utilization? | A report is required per trailer, unit of measurement is in hours. Duration of systems on the range. The unit trained is tracked, but the measurement is total individuals trained. Yes, ammo utilization is included. | This response should be recorded within the PWS as amended required performance. It's not specifically delivery instruction, but more performance. |
| Template headings for the report will be added to CDRL F001 in Amendment 02. | ||||||
| 16 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 25 of 59, Item 3.1.10.3. | Para. 3.1.10.3. TSUR Unless otherwise specified, the contractor shall deliver to the Government a TSUR that provides information regarding the training system utilization rate and throughput data for training events and exercises for each task order issued under this contract. | Will the Government please confirm if one trailer be required to support multiple events or ranges? If so, up to how many events would one trailer need to support simultaneously? This impacts supporting items for employment of systems. | One trailer will not be required to support more than one event simultaneously. | Is the answer complete. Please consider all possible scenarios, as an answer could limit how we require future performance. This response should be incorporated within the actual requirement within the PWS/Solicitation, not just as an answer here to this question. |
| 17 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 35 of 59, Item 3.1.13., Line 1185-1186 | Para. 3.1.13. Risk Management Framework (RMF) Support. "It is the contractor’s responsibility to obtain services from the Marine Corps certified SCV." | Will the government please confirm if they are covering the costs of the SCV? | No. The Government will not cover the costs of the SCV. | This isn't a clarification, you're just stating what the solicitation already states. |
| 18 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 37 of 59, Item 3.1.19., Line 1263-1264 | Para. 3.1.19. Performance in Japan. It is the contractor’s responsibility to comply with all applicable laws and regulations relating to its contractual performance in Japan. | Will the Governmnet please confirm: If equipment will transit between USMC installations at all times? If systems need to move between bases, off base, will a Japanese trailer variant and vehicle be required? Will this unit support NTA or Fuji? | The awardee will transit the TMITs and associated equipment between bases (Hansen, Schwab, etc) on Okinawa. It is incumbuent upon the offeror to provide on island transportation for their equipment and personnel. Currently there has been no training at NTA or Camp Fuji. | Edited |
| 19 | 24R8000 Amendment 01_Attachment 1 TMIT PWS_Rev1_Clean.pdf | Page 37 of 59, 3.1.19., Lines 1263-166 | Para 3.1.19. Performance in Japan. It is the contractor’s responsibility to comply with all applicable laws and regulations relating to its contractual performance in Japan. In order to operate in the country of Japan and associated provinces, equipment must comply with the Radio equipment conformity certification technical standards under the Radio Act of Japan. Equipment must possess a Technical Conformity Mark and provide DD1494/JF12/Host Nation documents for approved operation per the Radio Act of Japan. | Will the government submit frequency information and data for approval or it the a responsibility of the Prime? | The Government will submit for frequency approval based on the information provided in CDRL A001 deliverable. | Amend the requirement with this information, if this answer isn't already spelled out in the PWS. |
| 20 | RFP | L.3.B.2 | The offeror shall submit a minimum of three, and maximum of five, recent and relevant efforts it performed as the prime, preferably with the DoD or another federal agency, and preferably performing services of the same nature as the services required by this solicitation. | Can the L.3.B.2 section include the same wording as Section M regarding 13 C.F.R. § 125.11? | See Response to Question 6. | If already answered, don't publish duplicative questions. |
| “Only past performance of the prime, performed as the prime, will be considered. However, the Government will consider the past performance of certain small business offerors that have been members of joint ventures or have been first-tier subcontractors pursuant to 13 C.F.R. § 125.11.” | ||||||
| 21 | RFP | L.3.B.1.d | The offeror is required to perform successfully all of the requirements delineated in the solicitation and any appendices. However, for evaluation purposes only, the offeror’s Material Technical Approach shall only addresses those requirements specified for evaluation. | How should the offeror convey compliance with appendix A items that are not explicitly evaluation criteria? | The contractor's timely submission of its signed proposal and any solicitation amendments without taking any exceptions, deviations or requests for waiver from any term in the RFP constitutes its agreement to be bound by the terms of the TMIT KBTS RFP. | If an offeror doesn't already understand this, we probably don't want them as an offeror, so I recommend not publishing the question and answer. |
| 22 | Attachment 3 TMIT Price Proposal Workbook_1.17.24 | CLINs: 110X, 210X, 310X, 410X, 150X | (Additional 32 Hours) | Is the 32 hours of additional support all training hours or is it the same ratio of range training to overall training time as the 64 hour CLINs (in which case the 32 hours would include not more than 15 hours of non range activities)? | The 32 hours of additional support is all training hours. | If this answer isn't already obvious, add this asnwer within the base requirement, not just as an answer here. |
| 23 | RFP | L.3.B | ABC-Vol3-Sec1.xls | Will the government clarify that the file extension for Price Vol. Sect 1 is pdf and not xls? | See Amendment 02, Section L.3.B Table 1. | |
| 24 | Attachment 5 TMIT Organizational Experience Information Sheet-0.1 | N/A | N/A | . | See Amendment 02, Section J. Attachment 5 has been removed. | |
| 25 | Attachment 6 TMIT Past Performance Questionnaire-0.1 | N/A | N/A | Could the government outline the instructions for this attachment? | See Amendment 02, Section J. Attachment 6 has been removed. |
| Should we create an additional copy of this attachment for each effort? | ||||||
| 26 | Attachment 6 TMIT Past Performance Questionnaire-0.1 | Page 1 | Required Response Date: No later than 2:00 PM local time Orlando, FL, on April 01, 2024 | Is the past performance questionnaire due on the 1st or 8th of April? | See response to Question 25. | Combine with question 25 and publish the Q & response once. |
| 27 | RFP | L.3.B.1.d.1 | Contract Phase-In Plan. The offeror’s phase-in plan shall demonstrate an ability to perform all phase-in requirements and meet all performance schedules, by location, in accordance with the PWS | Will the government confirm that the phase-in plan should reflect the number of trailers outlined in Figure 1 (13 trailers) with a PoP start date of 20 March 2025? | The quantities from Figure 1 have been removed. See Amendment 02, Attachment 1, PWS paragraph 3.1.10.6.1. of the amended solicitation, the Government is evaluating the offerors ability to meet the specific requirements in support of 13 trailers at the following locations: (3) CPEN, (3) CLEJ, (3) 29PLMS, (2) MCBH, (1) MCBB, and (1) MCBQ. | |
| 28 | Attachment 2 TMIT Staffing Plan Worksheet-0.1 | Sheet 1 | Hour Columns | Should the monthly hours in the staffing plan be actual hours per month or the annual hours / 12? Would this impact monthly invoicing? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 2 TMIT Staffing Plan Worksheet-0.2.xlsx | |
| 29 | RFP | L.3.B.1.a | The offeror shall complete a staffing plan that describes their approach to personnel staffing to meet the requirements of the PWS | Will the government confirm that the staffing plan should reflect the number of trailers outlined in Figure 1 (13 trailers) with a PoP start date of 20 March 2025? | The quantities from Figure 1 have been removed. See Amendment 02, Section L.3.B.1.a | Combine with question 27 and publish the Q & response once. |
| 30 | RFP | L.3.B | The offeror shall provide three (5) paper copies of the Technical Proposal | Will the government confirm if this is supposed to be 3 or 5 paper copies? | See response to question 5. | Merge/Combine with Q 5 |
| 31 | RFP | L.3.B | All Attachments will be counted against page limitations when applicable. | Are Attachments 5 & 6 counted against the past performance sect 1 Vol II page limit? | See response to questions 24 & 25. | Merge/Combine with Qs 24 & 25 |
| 32 | RFP | 52.204-30 FEDERAL ACQUISITION SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY ACT ORDERS--PROHIBITION (DEC 2023) ALTERNATE I (DEC 2023) | Yes [ ] No [ ] DoD FASCSA | Will the government confirm if this section was left blank intentionally? | See Amendment 02, Section I, clause 52.204-30 has been removed. | |
| 33 | RFP | L.3 | N/A | Will the government accept a video submission with proposals? If so, what are the submission instructions? | No. | Unless you answered yes, you aren't adding new info and the asker had their answer before uttering the question. |
| 34 | PWS | 1.4 | Figure 1 - Places of Performance | Are the quantities of trailers (per location) indicative of the government’s TO intentions? | See Amendment 02, Section L.3.B.1.a and Attachment 1, PWS paragraph 1.4 and 3.1.10.6.1. The quantities from Figure 1 have been removed. . | Merge with Q27 |
| 35 | PWS | 1.4 | One TMIT trailer shall be comprised of at least 8 TMITs | Is there scope for trailers of more than 8 TMITs? Advise addition of trailers containing 10 TMITs in the pricing workbook to allow flexibility for requirement changes, noting the operational forces’ current usage of trailers containing 10- TMITs. | The contractor will be required to meet the 90% Ao requirement throughout the Task Order period of performance. Contractors shall not deviate from the minimum quantities identified in the pricing workbook. Therefore, the contractor must only include 8 TMITS per trailer for pricing purposes. However, a contractor at its sole discretion can utilize more than 8 TMITS per trailer to meet the 90% Ao requirement. | |
| 36 | PWS | 3.1.11 | If the product of the 90% Ao and the KBTS solution TMIT(s) at each location is less than a whole number, then the number of KBTS solution TMIT(s) required to meet the 90% Ao will be the next whole number. | Will the government please provide an example of this calculation? | The intent of the Government is to round up to the next whole number of TMITs. Example: If the calculation shows 17.2 TMITs required, we would round up to 18 as the number of TMITs needed. | |
| 37 | PWS | 3.1.14 | The contractor shall notify the Government of any proposed changes to the TMIT Target system hardware or software, including upgrades, modifications, alterations, or adjustments, which must receive written approval from the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR). | Would the government consider replacing: | No. | No new information. |
| … | “The contractor shall notify the Government of any proposed changes to the TMIT Target system hardware or software, including upgrades, modifications, alterations, or adjustments, which must receive written approval from the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR).” | |||||
| To initiate a proposed change, the Contractor shall submit a written request to the COR, outlining the nature and scope of the proposed modification, its rationale, and potential impacts on the system. The COR will review the proposal and provide a written response, either granting or denying approval within 10 business days. | ||||||
| with: | ||||||
| “The contractor shall notify the Government of the effect of any proposed changes to the TMIT Target system hardware or software, including upgrades, modifications, alterations, or adjustments, which degrade the TMIT Target system’s ability to meet the performance metrics/parameters described in the PWS. Such changes must receive written approval from the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR).” |
The ability to make rapid changes enhances the contractor’s ability to support the Marine Corps: by adapting quickly to lessons learned and to changes in the Marine Corps’ needs. A 10-business-day delay in urgent software updates would degrade this ability (as well as presenting an additional manpower cost in communicating changes to the government).
Furthermore: all changes are relative to a configuration baseline. The government has not requested a configuration baseline to describe the state of the contractor’s hardware/software at the beginning of the contract, it has only set out the performance metrics (per the PWS requirements).
| In order to communicate changes, the contractor would first have to describe the baseline state of the hardware/software. Both the baseline design and changes to the design represent valuable proprietary IP, disclosure of which would be problematic. | ||||||
| 38 | PWS | 3.2.2 | A comprehensive AAR capability that facilitates multi-sensory feedback for overall learning | Will the government clarify what “multi-sensory feedback” means? | Multi-sensory feedback includes audio, visual, oral, and written feedback. To meet the requirement in Section 3.2.2, the AAR must facilitate multi-sensory feedback. See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS Section 3.2.2. | |
| Is an AAR capability that presents information visually sufficient or insufficient? | ||||||
| 39 | PWS | 3.2.2.2 | Operator’s Control Station and require basic data, including the total number of shots, number of shots on each target, severity of impact | Does "shots" refer to impacts on targets? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS para 3.2.2.2. | |
| … | ||||||
| After a training scenario is complete, Operator's Control System shall display severity of impact, time of impact, number of shots on each target, and TMIT location at time of impact for all shots on all TMITs. | ||||||
| 40 | PWS | 1.a | 1.a - TMIT shall navigate no closer than 1m around unmapped obstacles taller than 24" without human intervention. Threshold (T) | Would the government consider removing the 1m safety buffer around unmapped obstacles? I.e.: “TMIT shall not collide with obstacles (whether mapped or unmapped) taller than 24"/16” without human intervention.” | No. | No new information. |
| Drawing a distinction between mapped and unmapped obstacles is difficult because the definition of an “unmapped obstacle” is unclear. There is a spectrum of possible changes to range environments after maps are made. Some examples: |
| - A barricade is added in the middle of an open field: this is a clear example of an unmapped obstacle. |
| - A box is moved 1 foot. Is it a mapped obstacle in a new location, or is it now an unmapped obstacle? |
| - A box is removed and a different box is placed in the exact same location. Is it an unmapped obstacle? (How would the TMIT know?) |
| - If a doorway has a door on it and the door is in a different position, is that an unmapped obstacle? Noting that if so: a TMIT cannot pass through the door while obeying the 1m-clearance rule. |
| - Foliage grows on the range. The distinction between old (mapped) foliage and new (unmapped) foliage is very fine. |
| - Other TMITs are presumably unmapped obstacles. Keeping a clearance of 1m from other TMITs would degrade the ability for multiple TMITs to work together in tight spaces (e.g. passing one-another in trench systems). |
Furthermore, the required geolocation accuracy of 1.0m Circular Error Probability (O) (15.b) is insufficient to detect small changes in positions of obstacles (the example above of a box moving).
| If the TMIT is unable to reliably distinguish between mapped and unmapped obstacles, one way to guarantee compliance with this requirement is to maintain 1m clearance from all obstacles. This would result in a loss of capability for the Marine Corps: e.g. it degrades the ability of TMITs to navigate through gaps (as described in requirements 17.h - 17.j). | ||||||
| 41 | PWS | 1.d, 1.e | TMIT shall avoid collision with stationary humans by at least 1m without human intervention. | Would the government consider removing the 1m tolerance? I.e.: “TMIT shall avoid collision with stationary/moving humans without human intervention.” | No. | ditto |
| Appendix A | TMIT shall avoid collision with moving humans by at least 1m without human intervention. | |||||
| 1) There are many situations where moving close to humans is safe and desirable, if the obstacle-avoidance is sufficiently robust. Example 1: it may be desirable for a TMIT to navigate at a slow speed between two people standing 2m apart, in order to move down-range. Example 2: it’s safe for a TMIT to move away from a person standing less than 1m behind it. |
| 2) In order to keep a 1m safety buffer from humans but not from other objects, TMITs need to be able to identify them. Reliably differentiating humans from other objects is a challenging task -- especially humans who may be wearing camouflage (specifically designed to avoid detection) at night. If TMITs cannot reliably differentiate humans from other objects, one solution which fulfils this requirement is to simply keep 1m spacing from all obstacles -- however this would result in a loss of capability for the Marine Corps as described in the previous question. | ||||||
| 42 | PWS | 2.g | The TMIT shall turn off battlefield visual cues when the safety stop is activated from the Operator's Control System. | What are “battlefield visual cues”? Does it refer to simulated muzzle flash (9.a)? | Yes, battlefield visual cues refers to the requirement in PWS Appendix A Section 9 a. and any other visual signatures that are included in TMITs. | |
| Appendix A | ||||||
| 43 | PWS | 2.n, 2.o | TMIT shall navigate to waypoints with an accuracy of at least 3.0 meters (CEP) when at least 4 GPS satellites are visible to the TMIT. | Modern satellite positioning systems typically use multiple satellite constellations -- should the word “GPS” be replaced with “GNSS”? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS Appendix A. | |
| Appendix A | TMIT shall navigate to waypoints with an accuracy of at least 5.0 meters (CEP) when fewer than 4 GPS satellites are visible to the TMIT. | |||||
| 44 | PWS | 2.s | TMIT shall move the target into the concealed position and stop all movement, sound, and visual effects if it moves within 5.0 meters of the enclosed operational area boundary. | Would the government consider modifying the requirement to state: “TMIT shall stop all autonomous movement if it moves within 5.0 meters of the enclosed operational area boundary.”? | No. | No new information. |
| Appendix A | ||||||
| Requirement 2.r states that TMITs are not allowed to move outside the enclosed operational area boundary. Therefore, reasons why the TMIT might find itself outside the boundary: | ||||||
| Due to a positioning error (ie the TMIT is not where it thinks it is). But in this case it doesn’t know to take the remedial actions described in this requirement 2.s. |
Due to a change in the enclosed operational area boundary. The resulting target movement to the concealed position would represent a safety issue: an apparently innocuous action like changing the operational area boundary could cause a TMIT to suddenly/unexpectedly move its target, surprising nearby people who may have their hands near the mechanism.
| It is much safer for the FSR controlling the robot to command the target to drop if they see that it is somehow outside the operational area, as they have the ability to ascertain location accuracy through the control system. They will have a much better awareness of circumstances that the robot cannot detect, like personnel with hands near the mechanism. This is of concern with robots that may be staged behind the firing line and waiting for commands to go down range, as this will be outside the operational area. | |||||
| 45 | PWS | 2.t, 2.u | TMIT shall be able to communicate with the Operator’s Control System without line of sight within a radius of 1000m from the Operator’s Control System. | Are 2.t and 2.u meant to be Threshold and Objective respectively? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS Appendix A. |
| Appendix A | TMIT shall be able to communicate with the Operator’s Control System without line of sight within a radius of 2000m from the Operator’s Control System. | ||||
| 46 | PWS | 17.h,17.i, 17.j | 17.h TMIT shall navigate through gaps twice the width of TMIT. (O) | Would the government consider replacing 17h-17j with two requirements: | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS Appendix A. |
| Appendix A | 17.i TMIT shall autonomously navigate through doorways at least 36" wide. (T) | TMIT shall autonomously navigate through gaps at least 70” wide (T) [being 2x the Threshold maximum TMIT width] | |||
| 17.j TMIT shall autonomously navigate through doorways at least 30” wide. (O) | |||||
| TMIT shall autonomously navigate through gaps at least 56” wide (O) [being 2x the Objective maximum TMIT width] |
17.h is written in terms of the width of the TMIT. Requirements 18b & 18a set objective and threshold TMIT-widths of 28” and 35” respectively. For those widths, 17.h describes gaps 56”-70” wide. 17.h is an Objective, which appears to be easier to achieve than 17.i which is a Threshold requirement.
| Furthermore: |
| The Threshold width described in 18.a is only 1” less than the Threshold gap described in 17.i |
The Objective width described in 18.b is only 2” less than the Objective gap described in 17.j
| We would suggest that it is unrealistic for a TMIT to reliably traverse gaps autonomously with only 0.5”-1” on either side. | ||||||
| 47 | PWS | Page 1, Line 52-57, 1.1 | General | What is the governments expectation for the execution of task order #1 and subsequent Task Orders if this is a SA IDIQ with a 5 year period of performance? Will subsequent TO's be issued and bid competitively? | This is a Single Award IDIQ. Therefore, any subsequently issued Task Orders will be issued to the contract awardee noncompetitively. | No new information. |
| 48 | PWS | Page 2, Para 1.4 | Scope - Places of Performance Lines 89-91 | Does the Governement anticipate Guam as being a future place of performance for TMITS? If so, how many systems/trailers will be required in Guam? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS paragraph 1.4. Guam is not a TMIT place of performance. | |
| 49 | PWS | Page 2/1.4/Figure 1 | Trailer Qtys | Trailer quantities in Figure 1 do match the quantities in Attachment 3 - which is correct? | See Amendment 02, Section L.3.B.1.a and Amendment 02, Attachment 1, PWS paragraph 3.1.10.6.1. The quantities in Figure 1 have been removed. | |
| 50 | PWS | Page 7, 3.1.2.3 | Contracting Officer's Reprentative Line 234 | Where will the Contracting Officer's Representative be located? What is the governments expectation that the Offerers PMO be closely located to COR? | The COR will be located in Orlando, FL. There is no requirement or expectation that the offerors PMO is closely located to the COR. | |
| 51 | PWS | Page 8/3.14/280-282 | Except as otherwise provided, the contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and quality control necessary to perform the requirements of this contract and any task orders issued under this contract. | Is the facility power for the trailers considered included in the "Except as otherwise provided,"? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1: PWS para 3.1.9.1. | |
| 52 | PWS | Page 15/3.1.5.6 | CDRL B001: DI-MGMT-81928 NOT 1 Contractor’s Progress and Status Report | Assuming NOT 1 is a typo? | NOT 1 connotates that Data Item Description DI-MGMT-81928 was validated by the DID Approval Authority on a specified date. This DID was developed in 2013 and has been validated once (2018) | |
| Page 20/3.1.8 | ||||||
| Page 25/3.1.10.2 | ||||||
| 53 | PWS | Page 17/3.1.6.2 | CDRL B002: DI-MGMT-82188 NOT 1 (Accident Incident Report) | Assuming NOT 1 is a typo? Also, CDRL calls it an "Accident Mishap Report" Can the government please confirm? | See Amendment 02: Section J: Exhibit B, CDRL B002. NOT 1 connotates that Data Item Description DI-MGMT-82188 was validated by the DID Approval Authority on a specified date. This DID was developed in 2018 and has been validated once (2023). The correct language is "Accident Incident Report". | Merge questions 54, 55 & 61 and answer once. |
| 54 | PWS | Page 21/3.1.8.3 | Car Rental | Will the government approve truck rentals when required to move TMITs from site to site as described in section 1.4? | The Government will only approve transportation costs under this contract for transporting the TMIT system to the big island of Hawaii in support of training exercises in accordance with, Attachment 1: PWS para 3.1.17. | Add something to the fact that car rental is otherwise a cost of duing buisness, priced into the overall contract |
| 55 | PWS | Page 21/3.1.8.3 | Car Rental | What is the governments expectation that the offerer provide vehicles to transport trailers and equipment to each training site? | See response to Question 54. | |
| 56 | PWS | Page 24, 3.1.19 | Program Management, 830 | What is the governments anticipation that the site leads be colocated with the site government representative at each site? | The site leads are not required to be co-located with the site Government representative at each site. | |
| 57 | PWS | Page 24, 3.1.19 | Program Management, 830 | At each site who is the POC or at what level is the POC that the government anticipates the contractor to collaborate with for range scheduling and scenario training development? For example will the offerer be responsible for coordinating with USMC at the Unit Level, Bn Level, Division, Group Levels and Range Control or will there be a single POC that supports all of the above at each site? | For range scheduling and coordination, most interaction will occur between the unit(s) and the the installation System Support Officer (SSOs), Training Liaison Officers (TLOs), and personnel within the Training Support Centers (TSCs). | Merge and combine questions 59 & 60 |
| 58 | PWS | Page 24, 3.1.19 | Program Management, 830 | At each site who is the site government representative POC that the government anticipates the contractor to collaborate with who has authority for concept of employment and resource allocation? | Government POCs that the contractor would collaborate with include installation System Support Officer (SSOs), Training Liaison Officers (TLOs), Range and Training Area Management (RTAM) personnel and personnel within the Training Support Centers (TSCs). | |
| 59 | PWS | Page 26/3.1.10.4-5 | CDRL B006: DI-MGMT-81651 NOT 3 Contract Invoicing and Payment Report | Assuming NOT 3 is a typo? | NOT 3 connotates that Data Item Description DI-MGMT-81651 was validated by the DID Approval Authority on a specified date. This DID was developed in 2005 and has been validated 3 times (2013,2017,2023) | |
| 60 | PWS | Page 24, 3.1.19 | Program Management, 830 | Who are the Other Government Stakeholders? | Other Government Stakeholders include installation System Support Officer (SSOs), Training Liaison Officers (TLOs), Range and Training Area Management (RTAM) personnel and personnel within the Training Support Centers (TSCs) | |
| 61 | PWS | Page 26, 3.1.10.6.1 | Phase - In, line 905 | How long is the Phase - in period? | See Amendment 02, Attachment 1. The length of the Phase-In period is based on each offerors technical approach consistent with PWS paragraph 3.1.10.6.1. | |
| 62 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | Will the offerer be participating as SME support and instructing during the live-fire training evolutions? | The contractor shall provide TMIT system Subject Matter Expert (SME) support (not instruction) during scenario design and development. The TMIT system SME shall provide feedback during After Action Reviews (AARs). The TMIT system SME is strictly prohibited from directing Marines during the conduct of fire unless they observe an unsafe situation. | Incorporate response to clarify PWS |
| 63 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | What is the level of marksmanship proficiency of the USMC participants? i.e. will participants be novice, intermediate, or experts? | TMIT usage to date involves Marines with marksmanship proficiency at all levels. | |
| 64 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | What is the governments expectation for the offerer to manage and conduct the training evolutions? | Contractors are expected to assist in scenario design and development and help Marines translate their specific Training and Readiness (T&R) tasks into a scenario in which those T&R tasks can be trained and evaluated. | |
| 65 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | Will the government expect the developed training scenarios to support or incorporate current organic training systems such as the USMC ISMT? | No, the TMIT KBTS does not need to incorporate outside training systems such as the ISMT. | |
| 66 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | Will the government expect the the training scenarios to implement the TMIT systems during Tables 1-6 of annual rifle qualifications? | TMIT training is not required during Annual Rifle Qualification. | |
| 67 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | Will the government expect the the training scenarios to be in compliance with current Training & Readiness standards? | Yes. | |
| 68 | PWS | Page 38, line 1298, 3.2 specific requirements | To conduct effective training, the contractor shall provide subject matter expertise in designing and developing live-fire training scenarios using TMITs that meet the characteristics described herein. | Will the government be looking for training that supports or enhances current training standards or is the government looking for a new training approach? | The Government is seeking training that meet or exceed current training standards. | |
| 69 | PWS | Page 42 Para 3 | Ballistics Protection | Does the government expect the armor to survive a sustained high rate of fire from squad automatic weapons such as the M249 SAW, SIG Sauer MG 338, M240 or similar weapon systems, if so what is the average length of training evolution? | Training evolutions are typically 12-14 hours, with the robots being engaged for 8-10 hours. | Merge questions and answers to Qs 71 - 73 & answer once. |
| 70 | PWS | Page 42 Para 3 | Ballistics Protection | Does the government expect the armor to survive a sustained high rate of fire from squad automatic weapons such as the M249 SAW, SIG Sauer MG 338, M240 or similar weapon systems, if so what is the estimated number of shooters that generally participate a each training evolution? | The Government anticipates the average number guns to be between 2 and 6. | |
| 71 | PWS | Page 42 Para 3 | Ballistics Protection | Does the government expect the armor to survive a sustained high rate of fire from squad automatic weapons such as the M249 SAW, SIG Sauer MG 338, M240 or similar weapon systems, if so what is the estimated quantity of ammunition expended during one training evolution? | The Government anticipates the average number of rounds to be between 15,000 and 100,000 rounds can be shot at 8 targets per day and that the armor will survive these training evolutions. | |
| 72 | PWS | Page 42 Para 3 | Ballistics Protection | What is the overall primary objective in the employment of the TMIT systems during training? | The primary purpose is to improve combat marksmanship training. | |
| 73 | PWS | Page 42 Para 3 | Ballistics Protection | What is the primary objective in the employment of the TMIT systems during Precision/Designated marksmanship training; Grazing and supporting fires; or engagement of moving targets at various speeds and distances to increase marksmanship effectiveness? | The primary purpose is to improve combat marksmanship training. | merge with question above |
| 74 | PWS | Page 49, Appendix B | APPENDIX B. CONTRACTS TO BE PERFORMED IN JAPAN | Is the Defense Basing Act Insurance required for work performed in Non US Territories? | Yes, Defense Base Act Insurance is required for all contractor employees working oversees in Non-US Territories. See Amendment 02, Section I. | |
| 75 | PWS Appendix A | Page 42, Section 3.a. # 1-4 | Ballistic Protection | Appendix A, Section 3.a. 1-4 and 6-11 indicates several ammunition types. Can the government clarify if these ammunition types are classified as Threshold (T) or Objective (O)? | See Amendment 02, Section J Attachment 1: PWS Appendix A. | |
| a. The TMIT shall provide hardened protection to the non-target portion of the TMIT capable of withstanding impacts from the following ammunitions and associated minimum distances without system failure: | ||||||
| 76 | PWS Appendix A | Page 42, Section 3.a. #6-11 | Ballistic Protection | What are the specific projectile types or designations (e.g. M193, M855, FMJ/Pb/HC, etc.), as well as velocities at the given distances for the ammunition types indicated in Appendix A? | The Government is not prescribing any specific projectiles. If there are limitations on the contractor's TMIT, this should be identified. | |
| a. The TMIT shall provide hardened protection to the non-target portion of the TMIT capable of withstanding impacts from the following ammunitions and associated minimum distances without system failure: | ||||||
| 77 | PWS Appendix A | Page 42, Section 3.a. #6-11 | Ballistic Protection | What is the governments anticipated minimum service life of the ballistic protection package before the system protection replacement? | The Government expects the contractor to meet the 90% (Operational Availability) Ao requirement. | This is spelled out in the solicitation |
| a. The TMIT shall provide hardened protection to the non-target portion of the TMIT capable of withstanding impacts from the following ammunitions and associated minimum distances without system failure: | ||||||
| 78 | PWS Appendix A | page 42, Section 2, line T | TMIT shall be able to communicate with the Operator’s Control System without line of sight within a radius of 1000m from the Operator’s Control System. | Will the government accept that the TMIT system be operated from locally stored data on HTT while out of direct sight line? | The Government expectation is that the TMIT system is fully responsive to user input while out of direct line of sight to meet safety requirements. | If not already spelled out in basic requirements, add to requirement. |
| 79 | RFP | Page 102, (xx) | 52.225-2, Buy American Certificate. | What is the governments requirement to procure TMIT solutions in compliance with Buy America Act 52.225-2 and Made in USA 16 CFR Part 323 in accordance with legistlative policy? | The Government is not procuring any TMIT targets. The Government is procuring Knowledge Based Training Services (KBTS) in which the targets are ancillary to the services. | |
| 80 | RFP | Page 123, Para 1.d.1 Contract Phase-In-Plan | Phase - In, line 905 | What is the governments anticipated or acceptable Phase - In Period length? | See reponse to question 61. | |
| 81 | RFP | Page 134 / M.2 / 2) | Relevenace | Are prime contract past performance examples evaluated more or less relevant than tier 1 subcontract in demonstrating an offeror's ability to manage larger IDIQ and task orders similar in size, scope and complexity to the TMITS SATOC IDIQ contract? | See response to Question 6. | |
| 82 | RFP | Page 134 Para M.2.A.2 | However, the Government will consider the past performance of certain small business offerors that have been members of joint ventures or have been first-tier subcontractors pursuant to 13 C.F.R. § 125.11. | Please confirm the offeror is able to submit past performance from a contract where the offeror performed as a first tier subcontractor? | See response to Question 6. | |
| 83 | RFP | Page 134 Para M.2.A.2 | Only past performance of the prime, performed as the prime, will be considered. However, the Government will consider the past performance of certain small business offerors that have been members of joint ventures or have been first-tier subcontractors pursuant to 13 C.F.R. § 125.11. 3) | Is the government using the term “offerer” and “prime” interchangeably when stating that only Past performance of the Prime will be considered? | See response to Question 6. | |
| 84 | RFP | Page 123 Para L.3.B.2 | The offeror shall submit a minimum of three, and maximum of five, recent and relevant efforts it performed as the prime… | Is subcontractor/team member past performance acceptable as part of the 5 past performance efforts submitted? | See response to Question 6. | |
| 85 | RFP | Page 120 Para L.3.B. | The offeror shall provide three (5) paper copies of the Technical Proposal, Volume I and the Past Performance Volume II and one (1) copy of the Price Volume III and the Contract Information Volume IV | Please confirm the number of copies the Government is requesting of the Technical and Past Performance Volumes. | See response to Question 5. | |
| 86 | RFP | Page 120 Para L.3.B. | The offeror shall provide three (5) paper copies of the Technical Proposal, Volume I and the Past Performance Volume II and one (1) copy of the Price Volume III and the Contract Information Volume IV | Please provide any additional details on the hard copy requirements. Does the government wish to see the copies in hard cover binders, stapled or another production method? | See Amendment 02, Section L.3.B. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .