LTAMDS_PPON_QUESTIONS_SET_1.docx

LTAMDS PROTOTYPE PROJECT OPPORTUNITY NOTICE (PPON)

W15QKN-19-Z-0501

Industry’s Questions & Comments Set 1

1. QUESTION: Please clarify how the FFP requirement impacts a vendor’s ability to propose as a cost share as a means of satisfying Section 1.5 Eligibility (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)?

ANSWER: The FFP requirement doesn’t impact an offerors ability to propose one third cost share to meet the statutory requirement. In order to be eligible for an award, one of the conditions stated in the PPON in Section 1.5 Eligibility and Section 5-Conditions for Award must be met. If the Offeror chooses 1.5 Eligibility (C) and Section 5- Condition of Award (3) “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.” The Offerors proposal shall state the amount that is being proposed and whether the cost sharing is a cash contribution or in-kind contribution. If Offerors choose to 1/3 cost share and are selected for award, the Government would award an OTA for 2/3 of the TEP. The 1/3 funding shall be negotiated once the offeror is selected for award and may include costs allowable in Section 5 – Condition of Award (3). The 1/3 funding doesn’t get calculated on Enclosure D spread sheet. Enclosure D calculates the Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

2. QUESTION: Section 3.6 provides a listing of required capabilities in descending order of importance. Number 1) is prerequisite requirements, however nowhere in the Solicitation are these requirements defined. Please define the Prerequisite Requirements

ANSWER: PPON, TCM-Attachment 6, further defines Prerequisite Requirements. Attachment 6 has been sent out 5/21/2019

3. QUESTION: Enclosure D, Line Item Number Structure, identifies Line Items 1-7. Section 3.9 Factor 4 - Price Sentence 2 states "All line item numbers will be summed for a Total Evaluated Price (TEP)". However Section 4.5 Factor 4 - Price sentence 2 reads "The TEP will be determined by summing all line items numbers (Enclosure D, CLINs 1-2)". Please clarify if the TEP consists of all Line Items (1-7) or just Line Items 1-2.

ANSWER: The TEP consists of Line Items 1-2. Enclosure D, Line Item Number Structure, provided with the PPON is incorrect. There are only 2 Line Items. PPON, Enclosure D, Line Number Structure has been corrected and provided as an attachment to this document. Enclosure D will be updated in an amendment to the PPON.

4. QUESTION: The model OTA Article 8 addresses Computer Software and Data Rights, however it is unclear how rights for commercial items and Special License Agreement (SLA) are also incorporated in the OTA. Can the USG confirm how commercial license rights and the SLA will be incorporated in the OTA, for example will the SLA be a separate attachment to the

OTA?

ANSWER: The SLA will be a separate attachment to the OTA.

5. QUESTION: If cost share is included by the Offeror, please clarify whether the TEP will be assessed against the total cost to the Government, or the Total Cost including cost share by the Offeror.

ANSWER: The TEP will not be assessed against the cost share. All Offerors shall provide a completed Enclosure D, Line Item Number Structure in Excel 2013 Format.

All pricing shall be fixed amounts and all Line Item Numbers will be summed to a Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The cost share is not included in the TEP. The 1/3 cost share shall be negotiated once the offeror is selected for award and may include costs allowable in Section 5 – Condition of Award (3). The 1/3 cost share doesn’t get calculated on Enclosure D spread sheet.

6. QUESTION: Please clarify that Offerors may add columns as appropriate to include the prices to be offered (Total Cost, and if cost share is intended Government Price and Amount of cost share).

ANSWER: All Offerors shall provide a completed Enclosure D, Line Item Number Structure in Excel 2013 Format. All pricing shall be fixed amounts and all Line Item Numbers will be summed to a Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Offerors may proposed sub milestone to supplement the Milestone Payment Schedule located at Table 6 in the Statement of Work. For each identified Milestone Number, the sum of all proposed sub milestone (within that milestone) and the milestone itself may not exceed the percentage of award for that applicable Milestone. Additionally, proposed milestone payments must be linked directly to a meaningful deliverable. The 1/3 cost share doesn’t get calculated on Enclosure D spread sheet.

7. QUESTION: Past Performance requires the following “…The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the release of the RFP, to (insert Contracting Officer’s email address)…”. The detailed questionnaire states “… Please return the completed Questionnaire within 15 days after receipt…”

This requires Offerors’ to identify candidate programs, prepare and complete Part 1 of the questionnaire in 2 weeks. This results in the questionnaires to be submitted to the POCs on a holiday weekend, and then for the respective Government POCs to complete Part 2 on a very aggressive timeline. Request Government reconsider the timing for submission of the questionnaires to permit 3 weeks for the Offeror’s to identify, prepare and submit the completed Part 1 to the respective POCs, and for the POCs to respond in 3 weeks to the Contracting Officer. Request response to this question be expedited.

ANSWER: The Government has granted an extension, see below updated language.

Past Performance requires the following “…The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Agreements Officer within forty-five (45) calendar days of the release of the RFP, to Therese Grimm therese.m.grimm.civ@mail.mil and Jon Glassic jon.m.glassic.civ@mail.mil …” The Offeror shall also email to the Contracting Officer a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. …….The detailed questionnaire states “… Please return the completed Questionnaire within thirty (30) days after receipt…”

8. QUESTION: Final SOW Release added item g) Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP), however item g) was not provided as a PPON attachment. The TEMP is required to determine associated cost and schedule. Question: Please provide item g) TEMP and consider an expedited delivery.

ANSWER: The Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) is an applicable SOW document; however, is not available on a public database. Therefore, offerors meeting the requirements of PPON section 1.3.5 can request a copy of the TEMP for bidding purposes.

9. QUESTION: When shall we expect the receipt of Attachment 6, TCM Priorities? Attachment 6 was not included amongst the documents received via SAFE nor from the LTAMDS Product Office. According to Section 9, Attachment, of the Prototype Project Opportunity Notice (PPON), the TCM Priorities should have been included IAW with Paragraph 1.3.5.

ANSWER: The TCM Priorities, Attachment 6, was released to offerors meeting the PPON 1.3.5 requirements on on 5/21/2019.

10. QUESTION: We noticed that the LTAMDS P-Spec retrieved on May 16 from the LTAMDS Product Office is dated 29 November, 2018, version 0.22, which corresponds exactly to the copy we had received in January. Can you please confirm that version 0.22 dated 29 November 2018 is what we should have received?

ANSWER: The P-spec version released last week was the .22 dated 29 Nov 2018.

11. QUESTION: From the PPON document: (Page 13 Section 5 Past Performance Questionnaire). Who is the Contracting Officer and the associated email address?

"The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the release of the RFP, to (insert Contracting Officer’s email address)."

ANSWER: See Question 7.

12. QUESTION: Reference below statement on page 13, (5) Past Performance Questionnaire, Is this date the 12th of June at COB?

"The Offeror shall also e-mail to the Contracting Officer a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list within thirty (30) calendar days after release of the RFP." Is this date the 12th of June at COB?

ANSWER: See Question 7.

13. QUESTION: Reference, Attachment 9 - Past Performance Questionnaire, Part III-Return Information: "Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to the Contracting Officer identified in the cover letter." Is there an accompanying cover letter in the PPON document?

ANSWER: An accompanying cover letter will be included in Attachment 9 – see attached.

The following statement under Part III. RETURN INFORMATION will be updated to read as follows, “Please return the completed questionnaire via e-mail to the Agreements Officer identified in the cover letter.”

14. QUESTION: Reference Section 3.7, 3.3.2 (5) PPON, Missing e-mail address input.

ANSWER: Reference Question 11, e-mail address for Agreements Officer should be therese.m.grimm.civ@mail.mil

15. QUESTION: Reference Section 3.4 (f) PPON. Can the unclassified and classified proposal be hand-delivered to the addresses provided in Section 3.4 (f)?

ANSWER: Yes, the unclassified and classified proposal be hand-delivered to the addresses provided in Section 3.4 (f)?

16. QUESTION: Reference Section 3.5 (b) PPON. As stated in Section 3.5(b) Proposals shall consist of a Table of Contents, Executive Summary, Summary Section and narrative discussion for each Factor. The instruction implies an Executive Summary and a Summary section be included in volume 1 - 6. If this is the government's intent, please clarify the difference between Executive Summary and a Summary Section to avoid redundancy in a page limited volume.

ANSWER: It is only necessary to provide a Summary Section no need for Executive Summary. Section 3.5 (b) PPON. A PPON Amendment will be issued to delete all reference to the Executive Summary.

17. QUESTION: Reference the Statement of Work. Could you please provide a description of each LIN?

ANSWER:

18. QUESTION: Reference Article 2, Enclosure E, Model OTA. We have already established a common program WBS for submittal. We assume Enclosure E is a sample for illustration purposes only?

ANSWER: Enclosure E, Contractor Cost and Software Data Reporting Plan, is the DCARC approved CSDR plan for LTAMDS. The WBS is based on MIL-STD-881 requirements.

19. QUESTION: Reference PPON 1.3.2. The anticipated period of performance is stated as Sept 2019 through Sept 2020, for a period of 3 years (or 36 months), however this is 37 months. Should the PoP start Oct 2019?

ANSWER: PoP is estimated to begin in Sep 2019 and go for 36 months.

20. QUESTION: Reference Section 3.7 PPON. Section 3.7 Factor 2 - Past Performance has two subsections numbered 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. Should these subsections be renumbered as 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 to stay aligned with Section 3.7?

ANSWER: These subsections should be numbered 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 and will be updated in the PPON amendment.

21. QUESTION: Reference SOW paragraph 4.7.4. Is Section 4.7.4 really to be bid as LIN 5, or as LIN 1?

ANSWER: Section 4.7.4 should be LIN 1. Amendment will be issuing to update.

22. QUESTION: Reference PPON 4.5. Section 4.5 Factor 2 - states that price will be evaluated based on CLINs 1 & 2 in enclosure D, including sub milestones & milestone payments. CLINs 3-7 are expected to have price reasonableness, however, the scope for these CLINS are not defined within the SOW.

ANSWER: Line Item Number Structure, Enclosure D has be updated to reflect LINS 1-2.

23. QUESTION: Reference PPON, Is the Company's proposed milestone payment plan due upon proposal submission?

ANSWER: The contractor’s proposed milestone payment plan is due upon proposal submission.

24. QUESTION: Reference Statement of Work, Table 5. Please provide concurrence that the "Rights" column In Table 5, Deliverables, will be updated to match the Special License Agreement.

ANSWER: The "Rights" column In Table 5, Deliverables, will be updated to match the Special License Agreement.

25. QUESTION: Reference Statement of Work. The "Applicable Documents" section refers to a Test and Evaluation Master Plan. When will this document be provided?

ANSWER: The Government anticipates that the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) will be coming out this week.

26. QUESTION: Reference SOW 4.3.8.4.2. Some headings have conflicting LINs. Is this section to be bid as LIN 1 or LIN 2?

ANSWER: SOW 4.3.8.4.2 should be bid as LIN 2.

27. QUESTION: When will the Government provide feedback and performance data from the Sense-Off to each vendor (what date, and will all vendors receive this data on the same or different date)?

ANSWER: As stated in Section 3.8.1.2 of the PPON, Sense-off data, Digital Simulation data, and any associated reports will be provided to participants by the LTAMDS Sense-Off Analysis Team within 10 days after the final participant’s demonstration is complete.

28. QUESTION: Based on the different timing of the Sense-Off events, is the Government considering an approach to stagger the response dates of the UMR proposals given the early start by the first vendor?

ANSWER: As stated in the PPON, Proposal Due Date is 09 July 2019 for all vendors.

29. QUESTION: Additionally, will each participant have the opportunity to take their participant generated Sense-off data with them immediately following their scheduled demonstration time slot (i.e. the Sense-off data each participant generates and provides to the Government following each day of the Sense-off demonstration)?

ANSWER: Any generated vendor data may be taken each day by the vendor consistent with the applicable security guide(s).

30. QUESTION: Due to the requested required information combined with PPON instructions that “The Offeror may not assume that substantiating data submitted for any factor will be considered in the evaluation of other factors of the proposal.” it is recommended that the page limitations for Factor 1 Capability and Factor 3 Schedule be increased to 100 pages each. Please confirm that the page count can be increased to 100 pages for Factor 1 and Factor 3.

ANSWER: Substantiating data does not count towards the 50 page limit. Each volume is limited to 50 pages except where no page count is specified.

31. QUESTION: Paragraph 3.8.1.5 states: “Sense-Off data shall be provided in its entirety and annotated as such.” This implies Government intends for the Offeror to resubmit all the raw data submitted to the Government during the Sense Off, which is terabytes of data.

Please clarify whether this is intended to be documented results or the raw data. If raw data, please confirm this may be submitted on an encrypted hard drive.

ANSWER: Documented results supported with data.

32. QUESTION: Paragraph 3.8.1.2 states: "...Sense-off data, Digital Simulation data, and any associated reports will be provided to participants by the LTAMDS Sense-Off Analysis Team within 10 days after the final participant’s demonstration is complete…" Given an expected receive date of 24 June, combined with a proposal due date of 9 July, it would be beneficial to Offerors to receive the Government's digital simulation details in advance of the final report. This will permit Offerors to conduct their analysis in advance, and reduce the amount of time needed to assess the Government's and incorporate this assessment into the proposal. Please provide the digital simulation scenario details such as bearing with respect to PTL, Impact Order, and Impact Time Offset for the Mass Attack scenarios the Government intends to provide in the Digital Simulation data now, so that the Offerors may have an opportunity to assess performance with these scenarios prior the final Government Report.

ANSWER: The Government intends to provide results 10 days after final participant’s demonstration is complete

33. QUESTION: The referenced MIL Standards appears to have omitted the IETM S1000D. S1000D compliant manuals enable quick and efficient development consistent with a UMR program. Please confirm the list of applicable IETM standards includes S1000D.

ANSWER: Volume 6 seeks comments against the Model OTA.

Updated Documents:

Copy of Enclosure D - Line Item Number Structure.xlsx Sheet1

Line Item Number Structure Description Type

0001 6 Prototypes and all support (excluding DEF) Firm Fixed Price

0002 DEF Firm Fixed Price image1.emf

Past Performance Cover Letter Plus questions.docx

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND - NEW JERSEY BUILDING 9, PHIPPS ROAD

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NEW JERSEY 07806-5000

Xx Month 2019

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Army Contracting Command – New Jersey on behalf of The Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS) has issued a Prototype Project Opportunity Notice (PPON) which affords a potential Offeror the opportunity to build, test and deliver six LTAMDS Production Representative Units (PRUs) under 10 U.S. Code § 2371b, Other Transaction Authority (OTA) with the potential of a follow-on production contract for an additional quantity of up to 16 LTAMDS.

The U.S. Army is conducting a performance risk assessment in anticipation of a possible contract award. An Offeror interested in proposing on this work has identified you as a Point of Contact (POC) on a past or present contract which the Offeror deems relevant to this effort. We are, therefore, requesting your assistance in completing the attached Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire so that we may evaluate the Offeror in the area of past performance. The Questionnaire has been developed for ease of electronic completion. Please provide your comments regarding the overall assessment of the Offeror’s performance on the contract identified and any additional information that your organization deems relevant to our evaluation team. It is important that your information be as factual, accurate and complete as possible to preclude the need for follow-up by the evaluators.

Please complete and submit the Questionnaire within 30 days of receipt via e-mail to the undersigned Agreements Officer at; therese.m.grimm.civ@mail.mil 973-724-3942 and the Agreement Specialist Jon Glassic at jon.m.glassic.civ@mail.mil. If you have any questions relative to the enclosed Questionnaire, please contact me.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Sincerely, //signed//

Therese Grimm Agreements Officer

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FORM

Contractor: ____________________ Contract No.:____________________________

Subcontract No. (If applicable):_________________________________

POC: ________________________ Title: ________________________ (Name) (E.G. PCO/ACO/TM)

(Agency, Telephone No., E-mail Address & Fax Number)

Please provide your candid responses. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of federal contracts. Therefore, it is important that your information be as factual, accurate and complete as possible to preclude the need for follow-up by the evaluators. If you do not have knowledge of or experience with the company in question, please forward this Questionnaire to the person who does. Please return the completed Questionnaire within 30 days after receipt. Thank you.

PART I. (To be completed by the Offeror)

A. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

Contractor/Company Name/Division:

Address:

Program Identification/Title:

Contract Number:

Contract Type:

Prime Contractor Name (if different from the contractor name cited above):

Contract Award Date:

Forecasted or Actual Contract Completion Date:

Nature of the Contractual Effort or Items Purchased:

B. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR’S REPRESENTATIVE

Name:

Title:

Date:

Telephone Number:

FAX Number:

Address:

E-mail Address:

PART II. EVALUATION (To be completed by Point of Contact – Respondent)

A. Compliance of Products, Documents, and Related Deliverables to Specification Requirements and Standards of Good Workmanship.

· Exceeds Contractual Requirements (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

· Meets Contractual Requirements

· Failed to Meet Contractual Requirements (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

Comments:

B. Effectiveness of Project Management (to include use and control of subcontractors).

· Exceptional (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

· Satisfactory

· Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

C. Timeliness of Performance for Product Deliverables, including the Administrative Aspects of Performance.

· Exceeds Contractual Requirements (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

· Meets Contractual Requirements

· Failed to Meet Contractual Requirements (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

D. Effectiveness in Forecasting and Controlling Project Cost.

E. Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like Concern for its Customers’ Interest.

F. Overall Satisfaction.

F. Overall Satisfaction

· Extremely Satisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below)

G. General Comments. Provide any other relevant performance information.

H. Other Information Sources. Please provide the following information:

Are you aware of other relevant past efforts by this company?

If yes, please provide the name and telephone number of a point of contact:

I. Respondent Identification. Please provide the following information:

Organization:

Name:

Title:

Date:

Telephone Number

Address:

Fax Number:

E-mail Address:

PART III. RETURN INFORMATION

Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to the Agreements Officer identified in the cover letter.

Thank you for your assistance.

image1.png image2.emf