PGS PPON OTA_FINAL 2-11-2025.docx

Prototype Project Opportunity Notice (PPON) for Precision Grenadier System (PGS) Technology Demonstration

Issued by:

U.S. Army Contracting Command – New Jersey Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

In Support of:

PM Soldier Lethality – Soldier Weapons Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

PPON Issue Date: 11 February 2025 White Paper (WP) Due Date: 13 March 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Purpose & Authority

The purpose of this Prototype Project Opportunity Notice (PPON) is to award multiple Fixed Price Prototype Project OTAs under Section 815 OTA authority, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 4022, with the goal of developing technologies associated with the current capability gap. The Prototype Project being matured is a System Element of the PGS System Concept. The Army would like to invite interested entities to respond to this PPON and showcase their innovative concepts to address this capability gap on a component level. The Army strives to continue to successfully engage with Industry by: (1) understanding the spectrum of “world-class” technologies being developed commercially that may benefit DoD in the Soldier Lethality space: (2) integrating the sector of non-traditional innovators into the DoD Science and Technology (S&T) ecosystem; and (3) to accelerate, mature, and transition technologies of interest to DoD in support of the Soldier.

1.2 Background

Results of the 2015 Soldier Capabilities Based Assessment (CBA) revalidated the 2008 Small Arms CBA capability gap identifying the need for a Counter Defilade Target Engagement (CDTE) capability to defeat precisely and quickly enemy combatants, their personal equipment, and thin-skinned targets in defilade positions, while limiting collateral damage.

The Precision Grenadier System (PGS) is the Program of Record (POR) for Project Manager Soldier Lethality (PM SL), which conducted its initial Industry Day in August 2024. This PPON is a risk reduction effort and is independent of the PGS POR. Offerors are not required to respond to this PPON in order to respond to the PGS POR. The response of the Offeror to this PPON is entirely unrelated to, and confers no advantage towards, the PGS POR.

1.3 System Concept

The Precision Grenadier System (PGS) is envisioned to be a Soldier portable, shoulder fired, semi-automatic, magazine fed, integrated armament system (weapon, ammunition, fire control) that enables rapid, precision engagements to destroy personnel targets in defilade and in the open with increased lethality and precision compared to legacy grenade launchers, while also not impacting Soldier mobility. The PGS is anticipated to be deployed as a Soldier’s primary weapon system, providing organic, close-quarters combat, counter-defilade, and counter-UAS capabilities through a family of ammunition to ranges in concert with the rest of the squad’s battlespace, and requiring minimal resupplies to support. This capability shall provide overmatch to comparable threat grenade launchers in near-peer formations in future operating environments to include urban, jungle, woodland, subterranean, and desert, in day, night, or obscured conditions.

The PGS enables users to detect and engage targets at a distance, gather relevant information for accurate targeting, and rapidly deploy selected munitions. The system features capabilities for precise targeting and adjustable settings for optimal effectiveness.

It is anticipated that the PGS shall create a more lethal force using a direct-fire round that travels above or past cover, precisely airbursts fragmenting warheads, and defeats the enemy without causing substantial collateral damage.

It is anticipated that the PGS shall create a more survivable force because they will not have to maneuver and expose themselves to gain an advantageous firing position to neutralize an enemy behind cover. The PGS gunner can stay behind cover, fire an airburst round, and defeat a covered/defilade target.

It is anticipated that the PGS shall reduce the dependency on other organizations for fire support. The Army is seeking to improve squad and platoon effectiveness against enemy in defilade by identifying solutions that are more precise, faster to employ, and cause less collateral damage than existing grenade launchers.

1.4 Acquisition Approach

The structure of this approach shall consist of a white paper submission, a collaboration with those selected, and the opportunity to submit a final Prototype Proposal based on Government feedback from the white paper and the collaboration meeting. Each offeror may only submit one proposal. A proposal may contain one or more System Element(s) to mature. If the Government is unable to come to terms with the initial selectee(s), the Government may reevaluate the white paper responses and make another selection. At the end of the proposal phase, the Government reserves the right to award multiple Firm Fixed Price OTAs up to $2M each based on available funding. Only one award per Offeror. The Government reserves the right to make no OTA awards.

1.4.1 White Paper

Offerors shall submit their white paper per paragraph 2.0 Request for White Papers. The Offeror’s white papers will be evaluated and selected, per paragraph 3.5, Evaluation Factors for the White Papers. The White Paper basis of selection decision will be formally communicated to Offeror(s). The Government will request a Collaboration for the selected White Paper(s).

1.4.2 Collaboration

Based on the selection from the white papers, offerors shall be prepared to brief to a panel of technical subject matter experts and stakeholders. The Agreement’s Officer will reach out to Offerors to schedule the Collaboration meeting. Offerors may be provided a list of Government questions and/or comments based on the Offeror’s white paper approximately three (3) business days prior to their Collaboration meeting. After collaborations, a request for final prototype proposal will be issued by the Government.

1.4.3 Request for Final White Paper Proposal

Approximately seven (7) business days after the collaboration, the Agreements Officer will send the offeror(s) a request for final prototype proposal. The offeror(s) will have an opportunity to submit a final prototype proposal. The AO’s request for final proposal will provide offeror(s) further instructions for the content of the final proposal submissions. After Government evaluation of the final proposal and any negotiations, an award decision will be made based upon the availability of funding. The Government reserves the right to not make an award. Determination and Findings documents that affirm each project complies with 10 USC 4022 shall be prepared and approved by the Government for each Project selected for award.

1.5 Definitions

“Agreements Officer” as defined by the Department of Defense (DoD) OTA Guide is an individual with authority to enter into, administer, or terminate other transactions for prototype projects. To be eligible to be an Agreements Officer, the individual must be a warranted DoD Contracting Officer with a comparable dollar value warrant.

“Cost Share” is defined as the resources expended by the award recipients over the life of the prototype project.

“Innovative” means any new technology, process, or method, including research and development; or any new application of an existing technology, process, or method.

“Key Participant” as defined by the DoD OTA Guide means a business unit that makes a significant contribution to the prototype project. Examples of what might be considered a significant contribution include supplying new key technology or products, accomplishing a significant amount of the effort, or in some other way causing a material reduction in the cost or schedule or increase in performance.

“Nontraditional Defense Contractor” as the term is defined in section 2302(9) of title 10, United States Code with respect to applicable authority, means an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the Department of Defense for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations implementing such section.

This includes all small business concerns under the criteria and size standards in Title 13, Code of Federal Regulations, part 121 (13 CFR 121).

"Other Transaction for Prototype Projects” refers to this type of OTA. This type of OTA is authorized by 10 U.S.C. § 4022 for prototype projects directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, components, or materials proposed to be acquired or developed by the DoD, or for the improvement of platforms, systems, components, or materials in use by the armed forces. This type of OTA is treated by DoD as an acquisition instrument, commonly referred to as an "other transaction" for a prototype project or a 4022 "other transaction".

“Small Business” as defined by the DoD OTA Guide means a small business concern as defined under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)

“System Concept” is defined as the anticipated form-factor, use case, capability, and desired characteristics of the Precision Grenadier System.

“System Element” is defined as a demonstrable critical technology to the PGS System Concept (para 1.3). The Offeror shall define a System Element(s) to mature in their proposal.

“Technology Demonstration” is defined as the Awardee demonstrating (via test, demonstration, analysis) successful maturation of their chosen System Element(s) as defined in the white paper.

“Technology Demonstration Report” is defined as a description of efforts undertaken, and how they envision the successfully matured System Element(s) in application to a System Concept with the capabilities described in section 1.3.

1.6 Eligibility

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4022, Offerors must meet at least one of the following conditions to be considered for an award:

a) There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent in the prototype project.

b) All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors.

c) At least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Government.

In addition, Offerors must have a Dunn and Bradstreet (DUNS) number and must register in the System for Award Management (SAM) to obtain a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. This system verifies identity and ensures that payment is sent to the right party. In general, to invoice and receive payment after award of an OTA, Offerors must register in the Invoice, Receipt, Acceptance, and Property Transfer (iRAPT) system formerly known as Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF). The Offeror must be considered a responsible party by the Agreements Officer and is not suspended or debarred from such agreement by the Federal Government, and is not prohibited by Presidential Executive Order, or law from receiving such award.

1.7 Evaluators

The Government Evaluation Team will include advisors and experts with experience in small arms weapons, ammunition, and fire control. During the performance of the agreements, the Agreements Officer and Agreement Specialist will administer the agreements. The performance of the agreements will be overseen by the Project Manager Soldier Lethality. Assistance may be requested from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) in conducting pre-award surveys on the potential Offerors to determine contractor responsibility.

1.8 Follow-On Production/Activities

At this time, the Government does not anticipate any follow-on production activity in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4022(f).

1.9 Non-Government Advisors (Contractors)

Non-Government Advisor(s) are anticipated to provide Subject Matter Expertise advice to the evaluation process.

The non-Government Advisor(s) will have a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in place with the Government, and are prohibited from responding to this RWP, either individually or as members of a team, and from participating in any way in the prototype project related to this RWP.

Contractor Advisors:

Inalab Consulting 3949 Pender Drive Fairfax, VA, 22030

SECTION 2 – Preferred Approach The white paper shall include supporting information on how the Offeror’s identified System Element(s) can be used to achieve the System Concept as outlined below.

2.1 Preferred Approach

The Offeror shall provide a technical approach - that defines the work required to mature and demonstrate their System Element(s) in support of the overall System Concept outlined above. The solution shall be provided in the white paper. A final SOW will be negotiated with each Offeror before award. The solution shall include:

a) System Element - Identify and describe the System Element(s) that the Offeror will mature via the prototype project OTA. The proposal shall include how the System Element(s) is important to the System Concept. Government will evaluate the System Element(s) to be matured and the Importance of the System Element(s) to the success of the System Concept.

b) Maturation Plan of System Element - Describe how the Offeror will mature the System Element(s) during the Period of Performance. The white paper submission shall include a rough order of magnitude for the cost of maturation. The proposal shall include the contractor’s SOW and a list of key organization(s). The Government will evaluate the ability of the Offeror to mature the System Element(s) within the Period of Performance. The Government will consider the following areas of the Offerors’ plan:

1. Technical Approach

2. Key Organization(s)

3. Rough order of magnitude estimates for maturation of System Element(s)

c) Technology Demonstration – Is defined as the Awardee demonstrating successful maturation of their chosen System Element(s) as defined in the white paper

d) Technology Demonstration Report – Is defined as a description of efforts undertaken, and how they envision the successfully matured System Element(s) in application to a System Concept with the capabilities described in section 1.3.

2.2 Schedule

The Offeror shall propose a schedule that reflects key events and applicable milestones which may include: (1) Kickoff meeting, (2) Technology Demonstration Readiness Review, (3) Technology Demonstration, and (4) Technology Demonstration Report. Due dates will be negotiated with each Awardee.

2.3 Period of Performance

The period of performance for this statement of work is up to twelve (12) months but the final schedule can be negotiated depending on Offeror’s System Element’s SOW.

2.4 Place of Performance

The primary place of performance shall be at the Awardee’s facility unless designated otherwise.

SECTION 3 – Request for White Papers

This PPON includes the following Request for White Papers (RWP). Offerors are responsible for all expenses associated with responding to an RWP.

3.1 Format

The following general formatting requirements apply:

· Times New Roman 10 (or larger) single-spaced, single-sided, 21.6 x 27.9 cm (8.5 by 11 inches)

· Smaller type may be used in figures and tables, but must be clearly legible

· Margins on all sides (top, bottom, left, and right) should be at least 2.5 cm (1 inch)

· Page limit is ten (10) pages, does not include cover, cost, data right assertions, and certification pages. If more than one System Element is proposed, the white paper must still stay within the ten (10) page limit.

· DO NOT SUBMIT ANY CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.

White Papers shall include a cover sheet (not counted toward the page limit) that includes:

· Prototype Project title

· Primary point of contact, including name, address, phone and e-mail contact information

· Total Solution Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost

· Date of submission

3.2 Technical Section Requirements

The technical section of the White Paper shall contain, as a minimum, the following:

· Background and Benefits of Proposed Prototype Project

· Technical Approach, including clearly defined prototype project

· Schedule with Deliverables

· Organization(s), including description of contributions and significance of each

· Data Rights Assertions: Identify any intellectual property, patents and inventions involved in the proposed solution and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property, patents and inventions. The following table shall be presented for all assertions:

3.3 Cost Section Requirements

The Government will be considering affordability in making its source selection decision; therefore, the White Paper shall be required to contain cost information suitable for such evaluation.

This section shall include the ROM cost and ROM narrative associated with meeting the technical requirements as described in the White Paper. This shall include at a minimum the estimated costs for Labor, Material/Equipment, Other Direct Costs and Sub-contracts. Include the following table, as applicable, in this Section.

The ROM Narrative shall include, at a minimum, details on the following cost categories for the ROM:

· Labor Rates. The ROM Narrative shall include the basis for which the estimated total labor hours were calculated. (i.e. Generic position titles and estimated rates and hours for those individuals.)

· Material/Equipment. Provide a list of the materials/equipment required to meet the technical approach as described in the White Paper and the estimated cost.

· Indirect Costs. Provide an estimate of the total indirect costs and provide data supporting how the estimate was calculated. This section should include a breakout of any estimated costs other than Labor and Material/Equipment. (i.e. Overhead, G&A, etc.)

3.4 Affirmation of Business Status Certification

Each participant shall complete the certification below. These certifications shall be included as an attachment to the White Paper and will not count toward the page limit.

Affirmation of Business Status Certification Business Entity

Proposed NAICS Code

Industry Size Standard (Small / Large)

DUNS No.

CAGE Code

Address 1

Address 2

City/State/Zip

POC Name/Title

POC phone/email

☐ Non-traditional Defense Contractor (NTDC) - A nontraditional defense contractor is an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the issuance of this Request for White Papers by the Department of Defense, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 of the U.S. Code and the regulations implementing such section. All small businesses are considered NTDCs. A small business is a business concern as defined under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). To be considered a small business for the purposes of this RWP, a concern must qualify as a small business under the size standard for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code, as described at 13 C.F.R. 121.201 and the proposed NAICS code above.

☐ Traditional Defense Contractor - A traditional defense contractor is an entity that does not meet the definition of a non-traditional defense contractor (NTDC).

This is to certify that the above is accurate, complete, and current as of ________________________ for (Insert Project Number).

Signature

Name

Title

Date

3.5 Evaluation Factors for White Papers

The Government will conduct an evaluation of all eligible White Paper(s) submitted in response to an RWP. A basis of selection will be made. In the event that the Government is unable to come to terms with the initial selectee under the final proposal process, the Government can reevaluate the white paper responses and make another selection.

3.5.1 Evaluation Criteria

The overall evaluation will be based on an integrated assessment of the below criteria.

· The degree to which the proposed prototype project meets the intent of the PPON.

· Evaluation of the potential impacts of the data rights assertions.

· Evaluation of significant nontraditional and/or small business participation, or one-third (1/3) cost share, if applicable.

· Evaluation of proposed ROM against government funding profile.

3.5.2 Basis for Selection

It is the Government's intention to negotiate, select and fund "best value" Prototype Project(s) from the submitted White Paper(s). The White Paper selection will be conducted in accordance with Government procedures and the evaluation criteria above. The Government will make a determination, after evaluation of the White Paper, whether to:

· Select the White Paper(s) for Collaboration

· Retain the White Paper(s) in a library for potential future requirements for eighteen (18) months

· Reject the White Paper(s) for further consideration The White Paper basis of selection decision will be formally communicated to the offerors. The Government will hold Collaboration meetings for the selected White papers and intends to issue a request for final prototype proposal to each offeror(s). The Government will perform an evaluation of the project proposal to ensure it meets the intent of the PPON and then proceed with award based on availability of funding.

SECTION 4 – OTHER INFORMATION

ACC-NJ policy is to treat all submissions as source selection information, and to disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. Restrictive notices notwithstanding, during the evaluation process, submissions may be handled by support contractors for administrative purposes and/or to assist with technical evaluation. All ACC-NJ and DoD support contractors performing this role are expressly prohibited from performing DoD-sponsored technical research and are bound by appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

This announcement is in reference to the Call for Participants – Product Manager Soldier Weapons Precision Grenadier System Industry Day, notice: W15QKN-24-X-10KK, published 26June2024 to SAM.gov (https://sam.gov/opp/5242f32d8d0040d48d8eb1ee0bc4104a/view).

SECTION 5 – CONTACT INFORMATION

U.S. Army Contracting Command - New Jersey Soldier Weapons Building 9 Phipps Road Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 Agreements Specialist – Corey W. Woodson, Email: corey.w.woodson.civ@mail.mil Agreements Officer – Katie Lyons, Email: katie.j.lyons.civ@army.mil Be advised, only an Agreements Officer has the authority to enter into a binding agreement on behalf of the Government. He or she will sign the agreement, and only an Agreements Officer has the authority to change the terms of the agreement.

SECTION 6 – ACRONYMS