LTAMDS_PPON_QUESTIONS_SET_4.docx

LTAMDS PROTOTYPE PROJECT OPPORTUNITY NOTICE (PPON)

W15QKN-19-Z-0501

Industry’s Questions & Comments Set 4

1. QUESTION:

Is it the Government’s intent that Total Evaluated Price (TEP) includes the amount of the contractor’s cost share or excludes the amount of the contractor’s cost share?

ANSWER: . The TEP is the total of all line item numbers proposed by the offeror. Cost share only comes into the picture if there are no non-traditional defense contractors. Then to be eligible to receive an OTA award: At least one-third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by parties other than the Federal Government

2. QUESTION:

Is it the Government’s intent that the Total Project Cost (TPC) includes the amount of the contractor’s cost share or excludes the amount of the contractor’s cost share?

ANSWER: Total Evaluated Price (TEP) is the same as Total Project Cost. See response above for question 1.

3. QUESTION:

Is it the Government’s intent that the TEP is equal to the TPC? If yes, how is the amount of the contractor’s cost share considered?

ANSWER: See response above for questions 1 & 2.

4. QUESTION:

Is it the Government’s intent that the best value determination be made based on the TPC (inclusive of the offeror’s cost share to be paid by the offeror) or the TEP (exclusive of any cost share to be paid by the offeror) (assuming all other evaluation factors are equal among the offerors)?

ANSWER: Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the best value to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation results. The Evaluation Criteria listed in section 4 of the PPON will be used in the selection of one OTA award.

5. QUESTION:

Will cost share (to be paid by the offeror) be considered by the Government in determining best value or only for determining qualification for an OTA award?

ANSWER: Cost share only comes into the picture if there are no non-traditional defense contractors. Then to be eligible to receive an OTA award: At least one-third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by parties other than the Federal Government.

6. QUESTION:

Is it the Government’s intent that a higher TEP with higher cost sharing be considered of higher value to the Government than a lower OTA FFP award amount (assuming all other evaluation factors are equal among the offerors)?

ANSWER: Cost share only comes into the picture if there are no non-traditional defense contractors. Then to be eligible to receive an OTA award: At least one-third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by parties other than the Federal Government.

7. QUESTION:

Will the best value evaluation of price be based on the TEP, the TPC (which is inclusive of the amount of the offeror’s cost share) or the OTA FFP award amount?

ANSWER: Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the best value to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation results. The Evaluation Criteria listed in section 4 of the PPON will be used in the selection of one OTA award.

8. QUESTION:

Is the lowest TEP, or lowest OTA FFP award amount, or a higher TPC with higher cost sharing considered best value to the Government (assuming all other evaluation factors are equal among the offerors)?

ANSWER: Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the best value to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation results. The Evaluation Criteria listed in section 4 of the PPON will be used in the selection of one OTA award.

9. QUESTION:

Are royalty/license fees excluded from the TEP and evaluated for “affordability” even if such are necessary for delivery and/or beneficial use of the six (6) PRUs and therefore essentially a cost of performing the LTAMDS OTA award? If excluded from the price evaluation, then how are such royalty/license fees considered in the best value determination? If such royalty/license fees are evaluated for “affordability” only, what are the factors to be considered to determine them “affordable”?

ANSWER: As stated in the PPON, 3.10, Factor 5, Special License Agreement (SLA), the price/costs of the SLA will not be included in the TEP calculation in Factor 4, but will be evaluated in Factor 5 evaluation. The SLA will be evaluated based on affordability, minimum quantity to be procured, period of time, and/or other conditions required for the granting of at least the LTAMDS Purpose Rights, as dined in paragraph 1.4 Attachment 12 Special License Agreement that allow the Government to (1) organically perform or to complete field level or depot maintenance; (2) compete spare parts procurement; (3) secure additional sources for the LTAMDS system and equipment; and (4) use submitted technical data or computer software and background patent rights for any other Government programs.

10. QUESTION:

Please confirm that all Offerors that participated in the Sense-Off received the same information in the report files released on 24-June-2019. This would include and is limited to:

1. CD#1 (Unclassified): Contained EPP and ABITT Assessment

a. LTAMDS ABITT Summary

b. LTAMDS EPP Demo Summary

2. CD#2 (Unclassified): Contained Weather and Live Testing Truth

a. Folder for each Mission, and each day for weather

3. CD#3 (SECRET/NOFORN): Contained the Digital Sim Assessment

a. LTAMDS Digital Simulation Assessment Vendor Report

ANSWER: Yes; all participants received the same information.

11. QUESTION:

Please confirm that information and assessments associated with Live Mission and Target Injection scenarios were not included for any Offeror.

ANSWER: Confirmed.

12. QUESTION:

Please confirm that the information and data the Offerors collected during the Sense-Off and will subsequently perform their own assessments on is considered “Sense-Off” data per paragraph 3.4(k) of the LTAMDS PPON Solicitation W15QKN-19-Z-0501.

ANSWER: Confirmed.

13. QUESTION:

Can the Government please describe the process it will use to allow vendors to discuss discrepancies and inconsistencies that may be found in the Government’s Digital Simulation assessment provided in CD#3 of the Sense-Off data released to LM on 24 June 2019?

Response: The Government does not believe there is any discrepancies or inconsistencies in the Government’s Digital Simulation assessment.