Prototype Opportunity Notice Amendment 1.pdf

Prototype Opportunity Notice (PON)

For

Ocular Warning Lamp (OWL)

Issued by:

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

In Support of:

Project Manager Soldier Weapons – Crew Served Weapons Picatinny, NJ 07806-5000

PON Issue Date: November 07, 2018 Proposal Due Date: December 03, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

1.1 Purpose and Authority

1.2 Background

1.3 Acquisition Approach

1.4 Definitions

1.5 Eligibility

1.6 Evaluators

SECTION 2 – PON STATEMENT OF WORK:

2.1 Technical Attributes

2.2 Technical Events & Deliverables

2.3 Planned Testing Schedule

2.4 Place of Performance

SECTION 3 – PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND INSTRUCTION:

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Proposal Preparation

3.2.1 Proposal Section 1 – Contractor Information

3.2.2 Proposal Section 2 – Factor 1 – Required Attributes

3.2.3 Proposal Section 3 – Factor 2 – Target Attributes

3.2.4 Proposal Section 4 – Factor 3 – Price

3.2.5 Proposal Section 5 – Factor 4 – Schedule

3.2.6 Proposal Section 6 – Data Rights Assertion

3.2.7 Proposal Section 7 – Significant Non-Traditional Participation or Cost Share

SECTION 4 – BASIS OF EVALUATION:

4.1 Evaluation Factors

4.2 Order of Importance

4.3 Rating Definitions

4.4 Factor 1 – Required Attributes Evaluation

4.5 Factor 2 – Target Attributes Evaluation

4.6 Factor 3 – Price Evaluation

4.7 Factor 4 – Schedule Evaluation

SECTION 5 – FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION AWARD:

SECTION 6 – OTHER INFORMATION:

SECTION 7 – CONTACT INFORMATION:

SECTION 8 – ATTACHMENTS:

SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

1.1 Purpose and Authority 0F

The purpose of this Prototype Opportunity Notice (PON) is to award up to two Prototype Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs) under Section 815 OTA authority, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b, with the goal of delivering an Ocular Warning Lamp (OWL) capable of being integrated into a Remote Weapon System (RWS) that provides non-lethal capabilities to deny, move, and suppress targets within checkpoints or security zones while operators remain protected within the respective platforms.

1.2 Background

The Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) M153 Escalation of Force (EOF) kit is an integration of a green laser ocular disrupter and an OWL on a RWS that provides non-lethal capabilities. These capabilities will enable our forces to respond with other actions in which lethal measures are not appropriate. The integration of non-lethal capabilities will provide capabilities to deny, move, and suppress targets within checkpoints or security zones.

The CROWS EOF kit will address requirements for Operational Need Statements (ONS) 17- 2208, ONS 17-22105, ONS 17-22106, ONS 17-22109, Product Manager Army Watercraft Systems (PdM AWS), and the Department of Energy (DOE). The CROWS EOF will provide crew served weapon operators with the ability to engage targets while remaining within the respective platforms (i.e. vehicles, vessels, etc.). This enables protective cover from incoming fire, blast protection and other protection such as vehicle rollovers. The green laser ocular disrupter is not part of this prototype development and will be procured separately.

The Government has conducted a study on the integration of EOF effectors onto CROWS in 2016-2017. ACC-NJ on behalf of U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) awarded DoD Ordnance Technology Consortium (DOTC) 13-01- INIT-111 to CLogic Defense for a Light Emitted Diode (LED) lamp to support the EOF CROWS integration study. The study demonstrated the feasibility of integrating a lamp onto a

CROWS.

Additionally, the Government has reviewed multiple industry white papers through Request for Information (RFI) W15QKN-16-X-02N9 posted December 3, 2015 and W15QKN-18-X-02O6 posted June 8, 2018. The RFIs indicated that multiple non-traditional Offerors are capable of meeting the Government requirements. The Government also conducted an Industry survey through trade show and internet research. The collective analysis shows that Industry has potential solutions/concepts that can address the aforementioned operational needs in the near term.

While militarized lamps exist in the commercial market place, currently there are no known lamps that can integrate with the CROWS fire control and user interface. Prototyping

1 For additional information please refer to the Department of Defense (DOD), Other Transactions Guide, Version 1.2.0, dated January 2017 development efforts are needed to update the commercialized lamps’ software and firmware to create an OWL that is able to be integrated onto the CROWS. This PON seeks to explore those potential industry solutions/concepts that can be matured to address the OWL requirements.

1.3 Acquisition Approach

The structure of this program is a multi-phased approach:

Phase I – OTA Award(s): Offerors will be required to submit a 20 page OWL proposal with the following sections: Contractor Information, Required Attributes, Target Attributes, Pricing, Schedule, and Non-Traditional Certification. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated by the Government against the evaluation factors to determine which proposal(s) are of greatest benefit to the Government. The Government intends to evaluate and award, based on the evaluation results, up to two stand-alone Prototype OTA(s) procuring three Prototype OWLs and spare parts per OT award, due within 45 days after award. The period of performance for Phase I – OTA Award(s) is 80 calendar days.

Phase II – Follow on Production Award: The Government will verify the delivered OWLs meet all the technical attributes through Government analysis, demonstration, examination, and/or testing. At the conclusion of the Government’s verification, Offerors may be asked to provide updated proposals. Updated proposals are expected to include Schedule, Pricing for Production systems and Spares, Production Capability, and Warranty. Based on the prototype OWL’s technical attributes and updated proposals, the Government may decide to make a best value decision for a follow-on production OTA or Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) based contract award to one offeror for a known quantity of 100 to a potential of 5,000 OWLs.

1.4 Definitions

“Agreements Officer” is the United States Army Contracting Command – New Jersey Contracting Activity warranted Officer with authority to enter into, administer, change or terminate other transactions agreements.

“Agreements Specialist (AS)” is the United States Army Contracting Command – New Jersey Contracting Activity specialist and designee of the AO for executing modifications, administrative matters, and financial aspects of the Agreement.

“Cost Share” includes any costs a reasonable person would incur to carry out (necessary to) Statements of Work not directly paid for by the Government.

“Fixed Amount” means an OTA under which an awardee agrees to complete a prototype project for an agreed upon total price and where payments are not based on amounts generated from the awardee’s financial or cost records.

“Innovative” means any new technology, process, material, or method, including research and development; or any new application of an existing technology, process, material, 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. 2371b 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 Section 2371b "other transaction". OTAs are acquisition instruments that generally, are not subject to the federal laws and regulations governing procurement (FAR based) contracts. As such, they are not required to comply with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), its supplements (i.e. DFARS) or laws that are limited in applicability to procurement contracts.

“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).

1.5 Eligibility

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2371b paragraph d, 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, nontraditional defense contractors, or nonprofit research institutions.

(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 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.

1.6 Evaluators

ACC-NJ, with the assistance of subject matter experts (Government and Government Contractors), will review and evaluate proposals submitted in response to this PON.

SECTION 2 – PON STATEMENT OF WORK:

This Statement of Work (SOW) will define the work required to design, develop, fabricate, test, and deliver a prototype OWL. All Verification Methods shall be performed by the Contractor.

Testing Verification Method shall be performed on three Owls to verify the OWL’s technical attributes. Examination and Demonstration Verification Methods shall be performed on an OWL to verify the OWL’s technical attributes. A final Statement of Work will be negotiated with each awardee. The following table describes the OWL’s technical attributes and verification methods. Military Standards can be found on ASSIST Quick Search located at https://quicksearch.dla.mil/.

0B2.1 Technical Attributes Number Technical Attributes Attribute

Type* Verification Method**

2.1.1 Physical

2.1.1.1 Dimensions: The entirety of the OWL, excluding cable if applicable, should fit in the volume specified in Attachment 1 – OWL Allowable Volume without interference. Target

Analysis using computer aided drafting software

2.1.1.2 Weight: The OWL weight (with interface cables and without cover) should not exceed 10 pounds. Target Examination

2.1.1.3 Mounting: The OWL shall be capable of attaching securely within the specified volume of space, via tapped holes, threaded studs, MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rail, and/or other attaching mechanisms.

Required Examination

2.1.1.4 Color: The OWL and all components should be non-reflective black. Target Examination

2.1.1.5 Cover/Enclosure: The OWL shall be provided with a protective cover/enclosure. Required Demonstration

2.1.2 Electrical

2.1.2.1 Power: The OWL shall operate at 28 volts direct current and drawing a maximum of 2 amp. Required Test

2.1.2.2 OWL Connection: The OWL shall have one of the following connections:

Required Examination

2.1.2.2.1 Receptacle Connection: The OWL shall have a D38999 type connector which contains communications and power.

2.1.2.2.2 Cable Connection: The cable shall have an Amphenol 2M series, MIL-DTL-38999 series equivalent straight plug connector, 2M801-008-26NF13-37PA, with the following pin out:

Pin 1: 28 volt power Pin 2: 28 volt ground Pin 31: RS422 ground https://quicksearch.dla.mil/

Pin 36: RS422 receive negative (RX -) Pin 32: RS422 receive positive (RX +) Pin 37: RS422 transmit negative (TX -) Pin 33: RS422 transmit positive (TX +)

2.1.2.3 Electromagnetic Interference (EMI): The OWL should operate safely and should not be susceptible to failure or disruption of operation, when exposed to external or internal intentional or un-intentional emissions when tested to the requirements in MIL-STD-461F Table V (Requirement matrix) for “Ground, Army” to the following levels:

2.1.2.3.1 CE102: Conducted emissions, power leads, 10 kHz to 10 MHz. Target Test

2.1.2.3.2 RE102: Radiated emissions, electric field, “10 kHz to 18 GHz”, in accordance with

MIL-STD-461F 5.17.1.a. Ground 2 MHz to 18 GHz* and FIGURE RE102-4 limit for ground applications.

Target Test

2.1.2.3.3 RS103: Radiated susceptibility, electric field, “2 MHz to 40 GHz”, in accordance with MIL-STD-461F, TABLE VII limits for Army Ground applications. Target Test

2.1.3 Communication

2.1.3.1 The OWL shall communicate remotely using RS-422 in accordance with

Attachment 2 – ASEC-180136 Interface Design Description (IDD)1F

2. Required Demonstration

2.1.4 Performance

2.1.4.1 Adjustable Intensity: The OWL shall have an adjustable intensity measured from 0 to 100 percent of the output with increments no greater than 10 percent. Required Demonstration

2.1.4.2 Modes: The OWL shall have the following modes:

2.1.4.2.1 The OWL shall produce a continuous light beam. Required Demonstration

2.1.4.2.2 The OWL shall produce a pulsing light at 10 Hz +/- 5 Hz. Required Demonstration

2.1.4.2.3 The OWL shall produce an infrared beam with a wavelength of 835 nanometers +/-

15 nanometers. Required Demonstration

2.1.4.3 Visible Light Range: The OWL should produce a white light of 0.25 lux at a range of 3000 meters measured in accordance with ANSI/PLATO FL 1 2016 Standard2F

3 at 28 volts direct current 2 amp.

Target Test

2.1.4.4 Infrared Light Range: The OWL should produce an infrared light of 0.25 lux at a range of at least 800 meters measured in accordance with ANSI/PLATO FL 1 2016 Standard at 28 volts direct current 2 amp.

Target Test

2.1.4.5 Cone: The OWL shall have a beam angle greater than 1 degree.

Required Test

2.1.5 Marking / Packaging

2.1.5.1 The OWL shall be marked with part number and serial number. Required Examination

2.1.6 Reliability / Maintainability

2 Attachment 2 has data with limited distribution and in order for vendors to receive a copy of Attachment 2, vendors are required to complete and submit to Government the fully executed versions of Attachments 4 – 6.

3 Reference ANSI/PLATO FL 1 2016 Standard at https://www.plato-usa.org/ansiplato-fl-1-2016-standard

2.1.6.1 Built-In Test: The OWL shall have built-in-test (BIT). The BIT shall be capable of monitoring the functional state of the OWL, report firmware version, and prevent damage to the OWL through overheating.

Required Demonstration

2.1.6.2 Reliability: The OWL should have a Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) of at least 2500 hours regardless of mode or operation. Target Analysis

2.1.7 Environmental

2.1.7.1 The OWL has the following environmental requirements while powered-on:

2.1.7.1.1 Temperature: The OWL should perform as specified during and after exposure throughout the temperature range from -50 degrees Fahrenheit to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. After two hours un-powered at these temperatures, the OWL should start-up and produce the specified Visible Light Range in 2.1.4.3 within 30 seconds.

Target Test

2.1.7.1.2 Vibration: The OWL should perform as specified during and after exposure to the vibration requirements at the mounting interface in all axes as specified in MIL- STD-810G Change 1, Method 514.7, Procedure 1 for Category 4, Common Carrier, Figure 514.7C-2 with a duration of 500 minutes per axis.

Target Test

2.1.7.1.3 Shock: The OWL should perform as specified during and after exposure to three terminal peak sawtooth shock impulses, applied in each direction of the three mutually perpendicular axes for a total of 18 shock (in accordance with MIL-STD- 810G Change 1, Method 516.7, Figure 516.7-10) with a peak amplitude of 20 g (standard gravity) with an 11 milliseconds duration in all axes.

Target Test

2.1.7.1.4 Altitude (Barometric Pressure, Reduced): The OWL should perform as specified and show no evidence of damage, during and after exposure to a pressure equivalent to an altitude of 15,000 feet (4,572 meters). (Exposure shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-810G Change 1, Method 500.6, Procedure II).

Target Analysis

2.1.7.1.5 Fluid Contamination: The OWL should show no evidence of physical or performance degradation from exposure to noxious/hazardous substances typically encountered in the operational environment (i.e., those found in Table 504.2-I of MIL-STD-810G Change 1).

Target Analysis

2.1.7.2 The OWL has the following environmental requirements while powered-off:

2.1.7.2.1 Air Transportation: The OWL should perform as specified herein following exposure to a pressure equivalent to an altitude of 50,000 feet (15,240 meters) with exposure duration of at least 24 hours (in accordance with MIL-STD-810G Change 1, Test Method 500.6 Procedure I).

Target Analysis

2.1.7.2.2 Immersion: The OWL should perform as specified and show no evidence of water infiltration after submersion in water to a depth of one inch (measured between the water surface and the top of the equipment) for up to 30 minute duration. A five minute drip-dry period is permissible prior to performance within the specified limits (in accordance with MIL-STD-810G Change 1, Method 512.6, Procedure I).

Target Test

2.1.7.2.3 Corrosion Resistance: The OWL should be produced with corrosion resistant materials, protective coatings, and geometries to prevent deterioration in corrosive rich environments such as salt fog.

Target Analysis

*Attribute Type Definitions:

Required Attribute. A mandatory characteristic of the system. The failure to meet a required attribute may cause dismissal of a proposed system.

Target Attribute. A characteristic that the system should possess. It is desired that the system meet or exceed the characteristic.

**Verification Method Definitions:

Analysis. Analysis is the use of recognized analytic techniques (including computer models) to interpret or explain the behavior/performance of the system element. Analysis of test data or review and analysis of design data should be used as appropriate to verify requirements.

Demonstration. Demonstration is the performance of operations at the system or system element level where visual observations are the primary means of verification.

Demonstration is used when quantitative assurance is not required for the verification of the requirements.

Examination. Visual inspection of equipment and evaluation of drawings and other pertinent design data and processes should be used to verify conformance with characteristics such as physical, material, part and product marking and workmanship.

Test. Test is an activity designed to provide data on functional features and equipment operation under fully controlled and traceable conditions. The data are subsequently used to evaluate quantitative characteristics.

2.2 Technical Events & Deliverables

The following table details the required deliverables under this prototype effort. The Contractor shall provide unlimited rights as defined in DFARS 252.227-7013(b)(1) Rights in Technical Data-Noncommercial Items (Feb 2014) and unlimited rights as defined in DFARS 252.227- 7014(b)(1) Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software and Noncommercial Computer Software Documentation (Feb 2014). If any content includes copyrighted material, the Contractor shall furnish full copyright release for that data. Unless otherwise noted, all reports and/or documents shall be delivered in a Portable Document Format (PDF) or other Government approved format and delivered to the Agreement Officer (AO), Travis James at travis.t.james2.civ@mail.mil and the Agreement Specialist (AS), Tariq Miakhel at tariq.m.miakhel.civ@mail.mil. All days are considered calendar days.

Number Deliverable Description Due Date Reference

2.2.1 Kick-Off / Start of

Work Event The Contractor shall present a technical review of the proposed design, ensuring the OWL can proceed into test and meet stated technical attributes within performance and schedule risk.

Contractor format is acceptable. DI-ADMN-81373 may be used as a presentation guide. A presentation read-ahead is due 3 days before the Kick-Off / Start of Work event. Government shall be notified of any design changes after the Kick-Off / Start of Work event.

Within 14 Days after award

DI-ADMN-81373

2.2.2 Draft Interface

Control Documents (Mechanical, Electrical, and Software Interface Control)

The Contractor shall provide, in a draft-state, system engineering interface documentation of the OWL using DI- IPSC-81434A as a guide. The mechanical interface control document (ICD) shall include a description of the mounting interface. The electrical ICD shall include steady state and peak current, voltage, and connector pin-outs. The software ICD shall include a description of the message input/outputs and communication protocol.

Within 14 Days after award

DI-IPSC-81434A

mailto:travis.t.james2.civ@mail.mil mailto:tariq.m.miakhel.civ@mail.mil

Number Deliverable Description Due Date Reference

2.2.3 3D Models of

Critical Design Review prototype

The Contractor shall provide 3D models of the Critical Design Review in Government approved format.

Within 14 Days after award

DI-SESS-81001E

2.2.4 Draft Safety

Assessment Report

The Contractor shall conduct a safety assessment of the OWL.

The Safety Assessment Report (SAR), in a draft-state, shall be submitted using DI-SAFT-80102C as a guide. A SAR is required with the delivery of any configuration or component to the Government for testing or demonstration. The SAR shall contain results from the Contractor’s safety assessments, hazard analyses, and testing.

30 Days after award

DI-SAFT-80102C

2.2.5 Three Design

Verification Unit Prototype OWLs

Issued to the Contractor as Government Furnished Property for Contractor verification.

45 days after award

2.2.6 Spares The Spares shall at least include a cover. 80 days after

2.2.7 System Verification

Review Technical Report

The Contractor shall present a technical review, assessing if the OWL has met its technical attributes. Contractor format is acceptable. DI-ADMN-81373 may be used as a presentation guide. A presentation read-ahead is due 7 days before the CDR. Government approval is required to proceed.

80 days after award

DI-ADMN-81373

2.2.8 Design Verification

Test Report

The Contractor shall provide a report describing the results of the OWL technical attribute verification testing using DI- NDTI-80809B as a guide.

80 days after award

DI-NDTI-80809B

2.2.9 Final Interface

Control Documents (Mechanical, Electrical, and Software Interface Control)

The Contractor shall provide system engineering interface documentation of the OWL using DI-IPSC-81434A as a guide.

The mechanical ICD shall include a description of the mounting interface. The electrical ICD shall include steady state and peak current, voltage, and connector pin-outs. The software ICD shall include a description of the message input/outputs and communication protocol.

80 days after award

DI-IPSC-81434A

2.2.10 3D Models of System Verification Review prototype

The Contractor shall provide 3D models of the System Verification Review in Government approved format.

80 days after award

DI-SESS-81001E

2.2.11 Final Safety

Assessment Report

The Contractor shall conduct a safety assessment of the OWL.

The Safety Assessment Report (SAR) shall be submitted using DI-SAFT-80102C as a guide. A SAR is required with the delivery of any configuration or component to the Government for testing or demonstration. The SAR shall contain results from the Contractor’s safety assessments, hazard analyses, and testing.

80 days after award

DI-SAFT-80102C

2.2.12 Technical Manual New equipment technical manuals (TMs) to support the OWL shall be developed in accordance with DI-TMSS-80527C.

These TMs will be utilized during training and maintenance for Government testing.

80 days after

DI-TMSS-80527C

Number Deliverable Description Due Date Reference

2.2.13 Accident/Incident

Report The Contractor shall notify the AO immediately following any major accident/incident (including fire) resulting in any one or more of the following: causing one or more fatalities, or one or more disabling injuries; damage of Government property exceeding $10,000; the effect on program planning or production schedules; degrading the safety of equipment under OTA, such that personal injury or property damage may be involved; identify a potential hazard requiring corrective action.

The Contractor shall prepare an Accident/Incident Report for each incident.

As Required

2.2.14 One New Prototype

OWL (OPTION)

Issued to the Contractor as Government Furnished Property for Contractor verification.

As Required

2.3 Planned Testing Schedule

The Contractor will perform all testing outlined in the SOW Section 2.1 Technical Attributes.

The Government will verify the delivered OWLs meets all the technical attributes through Government analysis, demonstration, examination, and/or testing.

2.4 Place of Performance

The primary place of performance shall be at the Contractor’s facility unless otherwise designated. The prototype OWLs shall be delivered to:

Attn: Christopher Sankovich Phone: (973) 724-8767 Email: Christopher.m.sankovich.civ@mail.mil W4MK Armament RDEC BLDG 91 4TH Ave Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 DoDAAC: W15BW9

SECTION 3 – PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND INSTRUCTION:

3.1 Introduction

The purpose of the Proposal is to identify innovative solutions for the Department of Defense and preclude efforts on the part of the Offeror whose proposed work is not of interest to the Government. Accordingly, Offerors are encouraged to submit their Proposal following the instructions detailed below.

Proposals received after the date specified will NOT BE ACCEPTED. In general, Offerors will be notified approximately three weeks after the PON has closed whether their solution is of interest to the Government. The Government and each selected Offeror will then negotiate the terms and conditions of the OTA prior to award.

mailto:Christopher.m.sankovich.civ@mail.mil

A notional timeline to OTA award is below:

FY19

Milestones Oct Nov Dec Issue Solicitation Close Solicitation PON Proposal Evaluation Notification and Negotiation Finalize OTA Award

1) The costs of preparing and submitting the Proposal are not considered an allowable direct charge to any contract or agreement.

2) Advertising brochures are not desired.

3) Multiple proposals may be submitted by the same organization; however, each proposal must be separate and distinct from one another.

4) The Proposal(s) shall be valid for a period of 90 days.

5) Technical data and/or computer software data with military application may require appropriate approval, authorization, or license for lawful exportation.

6) All Proposals shall be unclassified and will be protected as competitive source selection information. This does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in the proposal if it is obtained and allowed from another source.

7) Questions regarding the objectives or preparation of the Proposal shall be addressed to Tariq

M. Miakhel, Agreements Specialist, Army Contracting Command – New Jersey, Email:

tariq.m.miakhel.civ@mail.mil.

8) Required proposal information shall be submitted to Tariq Miakhel, Agreements Specialist at tariq.m.miakel.civ@mail.mil and Travis James, Agreements Officer at travis.t.james2.civ@mail.mil, on or before 02:00 PM EST December 03, 2018.

3.2 Proposal Preparation

Offerors shall provide information by addressing each Factor in the format and sequence identified in the PON. The Offerors must provide information in sufficient detail to allow the Government to make a best value assessment of the Offeror’s proposal. The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal. Offerors shall not assume information submitted in one area of the evaluation will be considered in other areas of the evaluation. However, the Government reserves the right to mailto:tariq.m.miakhel.civ@mail.mil mailto:tariq.m.miakel.civ@mail.mil utilize information submitted in one area of the evaluation in other areas of the evaluation at its sole discretion.

The Proposal written section shall not exceed 20 pages using 12-point Times New Roman font, 1 inch margins on 8.5 inch by 11 inch page size. Unless requested by the Government, hyperlinks, appendixes, and/or other attachments are not allowed. Only Section 2 (Factor 1 – Required Attributes), Section 3 (Factor 2 – Target Attributes), Section 4 (Factor 3 – Pricing) and Section 5 (Factor 4 – Schedule) have a combined page limit of 20 pages. All other sections do not have a page limit. A conceptual 3D model of the proposed lamp must be included with the response delivered as a Standard of the Exchange of Product (STEP) model. The conceptual 3D model will not count against the 20 page limit.

Section 1 – Contractor Information (no page limit) Section 2 – Factor 1 – Required Attributes (counts towards combined 20 page limit) Section 3 – Factor 2 – Target Attributes (counts towards combined 20 page limit) Section 4 – Factor 3 – Pricing (counts towards combined 20 page limit) Section 5 – Factor 4 – Schedule (counts towards combined 20 page limit) Section 6 – Data Rights Assertions (no page limit) Section 7 – Significant Non-Traditional Participation Or Cost Share (no page limit)

3.2.1 Proposal Section 1 – Contractor Information

(This section does not have a page count limit.)

Company Name, CAGE Code, Date, Point of Contact Information (Name, Title, E-Mail Address, Phone, and Address), and any key participants, subcontractors or team members.

Include an abstract which provides a concise description of the proposal. Include a statement that the proposal is valid for 90 days.

3.2.2 Proposal Section 2 – Factor 1 – Required Attributes

(This section counts towards the combined 20 page limit.)

Offerors shall propose required attributes that are achievable considering the OTA’s timeline and funding availability. The proposed required attributes will be incorporated as Threshold Performance Requirements in the resulting OTA. The Offeror shall provide substantiating data and/or plans on how they will achieve the proposed required attributes. Substantiating data may be in the form of U.S. Government test data, third party test data, Offeror test data, manufacturers specification sheets, validated modeling and simulation data, analytical support, design documentation, photos, illustrations, model/drawing extracts, and/or other rationale.

3.2.3 Proposal Section 3 – Factor 2 – Target Attributes

(This section counts towards the combined 20 page limit.)

Offerors shall propose target attributes that are achievable considering the OTA’s timeline and funding availability. The proposed target attributes will be incorporated as Threshold Performance Requirements in the resulting OTA. The Offeror shall provide substantiating data and/or plans on how they will achieve the proposed target attributes. Substantiating data may be in the form of U.S. Government test data, third party test data, Offeror test data, manufacturers specification sheets, validated modeling and simulation data, analytical support, design documentation, photos, illustrations, model/drawing extracts, and/or other rationale.

3.2.4 Proposal Section 4 – Factor 3 – Price

(This section counts towards the combined 20 page limit.)

The Offeror shall complete and provide the table below. All pricing shall be fixed amounts. For each Line Item, the Quantity will be multiplied by the Unit Price to arrive at the Total Price. The Total Price for all Line Item will be summed for a Total Evaluated Price. Offerors may propose milestone payments under Line Item 0001 – Prototype Effort.

Line Item Description Unit of Issue Quantity Unit Price Total Price 0001 Prototype Effort Lot 1 $ $ 0002 OWL Each 3 $ $ 0003 Spare OWL Cover Each 1 $ $ 0004 Option: OWL Each 3 $ $

Total Evaluated Price $

Price Inconsistencies. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between the proposed performance and price, should be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistencies, if unexplained, raise a fundamental issue of the Offeror’s understanding of the nature and scope of work required and their financial ability to perform the contract, and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal.

Unbalanced Pricing: The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, one or more line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques without an Offeror’s documentation (including calculations and supporting rationale) explaining the apparent unbalanced pricing.

The Agreement Officer may reject a proposal where the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Government Furnished Property (GFP): No GFP shall be used in the Offeror’s proposal to eliminate any unfair competitive advantages. During negotiations, the Government may allow the use of GFP if the use results in a cost savings to the Government.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL ACCESS TO INFORMATION

In projects that provide for payments in a total amount in excess of $5,000,000, the agreement must include a clause that provides for the Comptroller General the ability to examine the records of any party to the agreement or any entity that participates in the performance of the agreement.

3.2.5 Proposal Section 5 – Factor 4 – Schedule

(This section counts towards the combined 20 page limit.)

The Offeror shall propose a detailed timeline of how they plan on meeting the proposed prototype OWL delivery date.

3.2.6 Proposal Section 6 – Data Rights Assertion

(This section does not have a page count limit.)

The Proposal will identify any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property (including any patents or patent applications) in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7013(e) Identification and Delivery of Data to be Furnished with Restrictions on Use, Release or Disclosure, DFARS 252.227-7014(e) Identification and delivery of computer software and computer software documentation to be furnished with restrictions on use, release, or disclosure, and/or DFARS 252.227-7017 (Jan.

2011) Identification and assertion of use, release, or disclosure restrictions.

The Government may request the Offeror provide additional information/detail provided in the Proposal to clarify data rights assertions. Include documentation proving your ownership of or possession of appropriate licensing rights to all patented inventions (or inventions for which a patent application has been filed) that will be utilized under your proposal for a system demonstrator. If a patent application has been filed for an invention that your proposal utilizes, and the application has not yet been made publicly available, you may provide only the patent application serial number, inventor name(s), assignee names (if any), filing date, filing date of any related provisional application, and title, together with either: (1) a representation that you own the invention, or (2) proof of possession of appropriate licensing rights in the invention.

The Proposal will provide a good faith representation that you either own or possess appropriate licensing rights to all other intellectual property that will be utilized under your proposal.

3.2.7 Proposal Section 7 – Significant Non-Traditional Participation or Cost Share (This section does not have a page count limit.)

To be considered for award, the Offeror shall meet at least one of the following conditions:

Conditions Yes No

1. At least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution is participating to a significant extent in this prototype project.

2. All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small business, nontraditional defense contractors, or nonprofit research institutions.

3. At least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by parties to the transaction other than the Federal Government.

3.2.7.1 If you answered “Yes” to condition 1, then the Offerors’ proposal shall provide a description of how the significant participant meets the requirements for a non-traditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution, how they will be participating to a significant extent, and the percentage and dollar amount of the significant participation.

The Offerors’ proposal shall certify the following:

“[Significant Participant Company Name] 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.”

3.2.7.2 If you answered “Yes” to condition 2, then the Offerors’ proposal shall provide a description of how all significant participants are small business, how the significant participants meet the requirements for a non-traditional defense contractor, or how the significant participants meet the requirements for a nonprofit research institution.

The Offerors’ proposal shall certify the following:

“[Significant Participant Company Name] 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.”

3.2.7.3 If you answered “Yes” to condition 3, then the Offerors’ proposal shall state the amount that is being proposed and the cost sharing cash contribution as discussed below. If the offer contains multiple team members, this information shall be provided for each individual team member providing cost share.

Cost sharing includes any costs a reasonable person would incur to carry out (necessary to) Statements of Work not directly paid for by the Government. Cash contributions mean: Outlays of funds to perform the Technology Objective. Cash includes labor, materials, new equipment, and relevant subcontractor efforts. Sources include new Internal Research & Development (IR&D) funds, profit or fee from another contract, overhead or capital equipment expense pool.

New IR&D funds offered to be spent on the Statement of Work and subject to the direction of the project’s management may be utilized as cost share. All cash sharing availability must be clearly and convincingly demonstrated by the member. The Offeror will be required to provide financial reporting with appropriate visibility into expenditures of Government funds vs. private funds. Parallel research that might be related to the project, but will not be part of the Statement of Work or subject to the direction of the project’s management will not be considered for cost sharing. All costs, fees, profits, G&A, bid and proposal costs, or intellectual property value incurred prior to the project award will not be accepted.

Unacceptable cost share sources include the following:

a) Sunk costs or costs incurred before the start of the proposed project

b) Foregone fees or profits

c) Foregone G&A or cost of money applied to a base of IR&D

d) Bid and proposal costs

e) Value claimed for intellectual property or prior research

f) Parallel research or investment, i.e., research or other investments that might be related to the proposed project but which will not be part of the Statement of Work. Typically these activities will be undertaken regardless of whether the proposed project is awarded.

g) Off-Budget Resources, i.e., resources that will not be risked by the Offeror in performance of the proposed project, will not be considered when evaluating cost share.

3.2.7.4 Cost Share Requirements: Cost share is not a mandatory requirement. However, if a proposal does not contain at least one nontraditional defense contractor participating to a significant extent, then it is anticipated the proposal will contain at least one third of the total Project cost as cost share. Beyond that, cost sharing is encouraged if possible as it leads to stronger Government-contractor technology leveraging.

SECTION 4 – BASIS OF EVALUATION:

ACC-NJ, with the assistance of subject matter experts, will review and evaluate proposals submitted in response to the PON to ensure the Offeror is meeting all Government requirements.

Offeror Proposal(s) will be evaluated in a careful, full and impartial manner pursuant to the stated criteria of the PON. Awards will be made to the Offeror(s) that best meet the Government requirements based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation results. Upon review of a Proposal(s) the Government may invite an Offeror prior to award of OTA to provide additional clarifying information. The Government reserves the right to conduct a Pre-Award Survey or similar, in order to determine Contractor responsibility.

The below Evaluation Criteria will be used in the selection of up to two Prototype OTA awards.

The basis for award of OTAs resulting from this PON will be the result of the evaluation of the Factors specified below.

4.1 Evaluation Factors

Factor 1 – Required Attributes Factor 2 – Technical Attributes Factor 3 – Price Factor 4 – Schedule

4.2 Order of Importance

Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2, which is more important than Factor 3 and 4. Factor 3 and 4 are of equal importance. A proposed system that fails to meet any requirements in Factor 1 may not be considered for award.

The combination of all factors, other than Price, are more important than Price. However, price may become a more significant factor when ratings of acceptable proposals are closely grouped.

Offerors will be cautioned, however, that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced Offeror or the Offeror with the highest rating.

4.3 Rating Definitions

The evaluators will use the following terms in support of the ratings for Factor 1 – Required Attributes and Factor 2 – Technical Attributes.

Factor 3 – Price does not receive a rating.

The evaluators will use the following terms in support of the ratings for Factor 4 – Schedule.

Rating Definition

Blue Outstanding

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Rating Definition Blue

Outstanding Proposal indicates a high likelihood for a 30 day or less delivery schedule.

Purple Good

Proposal indicates a reasonable likelihood for a 30 day or less delivery schedule or a high likelihood for a 31-45 day delivery schedule.

Green Acceptable

Proposal indicates a reasonable likelihood for a 31-45 day delivery schedule

Yellow Marginal

Proposal indicates a flaw in the likelihood of delivery within the proposed days or a 46 day or more delivery schedule.

4.4 Factor 1 – Required Attributes Evaluation

A required attribute is a mandatory characteristic of the OWL. The failure to meet a required attribute may cause dismissal of a proposed OWL. Offeror’s required attributes that provide additional military utility may be given more favorable consideration. Based on the Offeror’s experience and resources, the Government will evaluate if a proposal meets or is able to achieve the required attributes listed below and the risk of doing so. Experience is defined as the history of past deliverables to customers and knowledge / mastery of the technology. Resources is defined as the in-house / sub-contractor production capabilities, on-hand stock of components, and ability to acquire long lead items.

All required attributes are of equal importance. The individual required attributes will not receive a rating, but collectively form the basis of the factor rating.

Required Attributes

4.4.1 Mounting: The OWL shall be capable of attaching securely within the specified volume of space, via tapped holes, threaded studs, MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rail, and/or other attaching mechanisms.

4.4.2 Cover/Enclosure: The OWL shall be provided with a protective cover/enclosure.

4.4.3 Power: The OWL shall operate at 28 volts direct current and drawing a maximum of 2 amp.

4.4.4 Receptacle Connection: The OWL shall have a D38999 type connector which contains communications and power.

OR

Cable Connection: The cable shall have an Amphenol 2M series, MIL-DTL-38999 series equivalent straight plug connector, 2M801-008-26NF13-37PA, with the following pin out:

Pin 1: 28 volt power Pin 2: 28 volt ground Pin 31: RS422 ground Pin 36: RS422 receive negative (RX -) Pin 32: RS422 receive positive (RX +) Pin 37: RS422 transmit negative (TX -)

Pin 33: RS422 transmit positive (TX +)

4.4.5 The OWL shall communicate remotely using RS-422 in accordance with

Attachment 2 – ASEC-180136 Generic Bright Light Interface Design Description

(IDD)2.

4.4.6 Adjustable Intensity: The OWL shall have an adjustable intensity measured from 0 to 100 percent of the output with increments no greater than 10 percent.

4.4.7 The OWL shall produce a continuous light beam.

4.4.8 The OWL shall produce a pulsing light at 10 Hz +/- 5 Hz.

4.4.9 The OWL shall produce an infrared beam with a wavelength of 835 nanometers +/-

15 nanometers.

4.4.10 Cone: The OWL shall have a beam angle greater than 1 degree.

4.4.11 The OWL shall be marked with part number and serial number.

4.4.12 Built-In Test: The OWL shall have built-in-test (BIT). The BIT shall be capable of monitoring the functional state of the OWL, report firmware version, and prevent damage to the OWL through overheating.

4.5 Factor 2 – Target Attributes Evaluation

A target attribute is a characteristic that the OWL should possess. Offerors may propose other than target attributes. Offeror’s target attributes that provide additional military utility may be given more favorable consideration. Based on the Offeror’s experience and resources, the Government will evaluate if a proposal meets or is able to achieve the target attributes listed below and the risk of doing so. Experience is defined as the history of past deliverables to customers and knowledge / mastery of the technology. Resources is defined as the in-house / sub-contractor production capabilities, on-hand stock of components, and ability to acquire long lead items.

All target attributes are of equal importance. The individual target attributes will not receive a rating, but collectively form the basis of the factor rating.

Target Attributes

4.5.1 Dimensions: The entirety of the OWL, excluding cable if applicable, should fit in the volume specified in Attachment 1 – OWL Allowable Volume without interference.

4.5.2 Weight: The OWL weight (with interface cables and without cover) should not exceed 10 pounds.

4.5.3 Color: The OWL and all components should be non-reflective black.

4.5.4 Electromagnetic Interference (EMI): The OWL should operate safely and should not be susceptible to failure or disruption of operation, when exposed to external or internal intentional or un-intentional emissions when tested to the requirements in MIL-STD-461F Table V (Requirement matrix) for “Ground, Army” to the following levels:

4.5.4.1 CE102: Conducted emissions, power leads, 10 kHz to 10 MHz.

4.5.4.2 RE102: Radiated emissions, electric field, “10 kHz to 18 GHz”, in accordance with MIL-STD-461F 5.17.1.a. Ground 2 MHz to 18 GHz* and FIGURE RE102-4 limit for ground applications.

4.5.4.3 RS103: Radiated susceptibility, electric field, “2 MHz to 40 GHz”, in accordance with MIL-STD-461F, TABLE VII limits for Army Ground applications.

4.5.5 Visible Light Range: The OWL should produce a white light of 0.25 lux at a range of 3000 meters measured in accordance with ANSI/PLATO FL 1 2016 Standard at 28 volts direct current 2 amp.

4.5.6 Infrared Light Range:…