Q&A_5_23_Dec.pdf

MTRS Inc II Q&A #5

QUESTION GOVERNMENT

RESPONSE

At the SOWM (20 Business days after contract award) the contractor is required to present an analysis of the "approved maintenance and fielding strategies” implying these strategies exist pre-award. What are the "approved maintenance and fielding strategies" (i.e, sources and levels of repair, required or prohibited use of existing (e.g.

MTRS Inc I) maintenance infrastructure, fielding densities, etc)?

Maintenance and fielding strategies are described in DA PAM 700-127. At the SOWM, the contractor is required to present its Logistics Product Data Plan, as defined in CDRL A052, for development and management of all logistics products as well as the IPS schedule. CDRL A052 shall be submitted IAW instructions in Block 16 of CDRL A052 and is expected to mature as analysis is conducted during contract execution.

For GFP subsystems (CBRN Payloads), are bidders to conduct analysis and develop support elements (if any) beyond their removal/replacement at the 20 level?

No. The contractor shall ensure that the integration does not impact the reliability of the sensor, but is not responsible for any support of the GFP.

Please clarify form of "NMWR summary" to be developed and delivered. CDRL A062 DID describes LPD per the Attribute Selection Worksheet but SOW also references Attachment 27 which describes a MI-STD-40052-2 Technical Manual. Is requirement to deliver the defined LSA attributes, a technical manual or both, and if a TM is required is it to be subject to the in process reviews, validation and verification?

The requirements for the NMWR data summary are described in C.11.2.8.1.

Attachment 0027 contains NMWR general requirements and is provided as a reference to assist the contractor in performing the analysis required to develop the CDRL. The actual NMWR development will not be performed under this effort.

The SOW requires the IMI to contain capabilities and limitations data and of the all of the IMI data to available for on-line review. The SCG indicates that such information may range from FOUO to SECRET. Please clarify the Government’s intent and definition of the associated cybersecurity and access control requirements to support this.

The Government does not anticipate that the IMI development will require the development of any FOUO or SECRET data.

We are unable to locate Attachment 0005, RDS Space Claim Interface Control Document, within any of the items posted to FBO for the MTRS II solicitation. Can you provide this document?

Attachment 0005 was unintentionally left out of the RFP and will be added in an upcoming amendment as a restricted document.

There is confusion regarding the I&KPT requirement: Paragraph C.14.4 and the standing IMS indicate two I&KPT classes are required, one in the 2nd quarter of OY 3 and the other in the 4th quarter of OY3, however, CLINS 2009, 3008, and 4008 required pricing for three classes to be held in OY 2, OY 3, and OY4. Please clarify the number of classes, and correct timeframe. Also please address the CLIN requirement for pricing single unit training vice the two sessions indicated elsewhere.

The Government anticipates ordering two I&KPT classes to be conducted in Ordering Year 3. CLINs for I&KPT classes in Ordering Years 2 and 4 are included to provide the program flexibility if the schedule shifts to the left or the right during execution. The Government anticipates the amount of support required to be the same whether the I&KPT classes are conducted in Ordering Year 2, 3, or 4.

However, proposed costs should be allocated at the offeror's discretion. The costs for the I&KPT classes will be evaluated in accordance with Attachment 0014. In Attachment 0014, the estimated quantity is 2.

The STRAP indicates in paragraph 5.0 that the material developer will provide I&KKPT to all individuals who may require it however, the RFP indicates that there will only be two classes providing train the trainer instruction for up to 16 instructors and 16 alternative personnel. Does paragraph 5.0 intend to pass the instructional requirement to the Army vice the MD, or does the developer need to plan for additional, undefined, training?

There will only be two I&KPT events, as indicated in the RFP. The Government does not anticipate any additional training events.

Paragraph 15.2.4 indicates the use of the ALMS for management of IMI courseware however, the STRAP requires the developer to provide an appropriate LMS system, which is correct?

Paragraph C.15.2.4 of the RFP is correct. C.14.2 will be updated to clarify that the RFP takes precedence over Attachment 0064 in the event of a conflict.

Paragraph 5.0 of the STRAP indicates that the material developer will “maintain and update” training materials throughout the system’s life cycle. This requirement is not supported in the RFP. Should this requirement be addressed and if so, where?

The Government is developing the operator training material and will maintain that material for its life cycle.

The contractor-developed FLMNET described in C.14 will be delivered to the Government and the Government will maintain that training after acceptance for its life cycle.

1: Based on the information provided in the RFP paragraphs C.14.3 and C.14.4, I&KPT classes will required up to 8 operational units and supporting hardware/modules for training. A: Given the IMS, can these initial units be drawn from the LRIP production cycle, or should they be produced in addition to the units listed under the CLIN 2002 LRIP? B: Will these units be leave behinds for use with future training, or returned to inventory? C: If the units will be retained by the Army for future training, should the cost of these units be included under training material cost?

The Government will ensure that adequate quantities will be ordered in time to support the I&KPT events.

These systems will come from the LRIP quantities and will be returned to inventory to be fielded at a later date.

Should the I&KPT training require the use of existing modules, such as FIDO, will the government provide these as part of a GFE training support package? If so will they provie the 8 modules of each needed for I&KPT?

The Government will provide all GFE required to support the I&KPT events.

The IMS indicates a requirement for 2 I&KPT training classes, These classes are currently scheduled for the 2nd and 4th quarter of OY3.

CDRLS 2009, 3008, and 4008 cover I&KPT however only 3008 lists a quantity, and it only covers 1 class, please kinldy resolve and clarify the I&KPT requirement and insure the quantity as stated in the CDRL aligns with the IMS requirement.

The Government anticipates ordering two I&KPT classes to be conducted in Ordering Year 3. CLINs for I&KPT classes in Ordering Years 2 and 4 are included to provide the program flexibility if the schedule shifts to the left or the right during execution. The Government anticipates the amount of support required to be the same whether the I&KPT classes are conducted in Ordering Year 2, 3, or 4.

However, proposed costs should be allocated at the offeror's discretion. The costs for the I&KPT classes will be evaluated in accordance with Attachment 0014. In Attachment 0014, the estimated quantity is 2. The RFP will be updated to clarify the CLIN quantities in an amendment.

Following the intial IMI IPR, can the quarterly IMI IPR’s as listed in C.4.1.5.3, be held in conjunction with the quarterly Training IPR listed in C.4.1.4.2?

The Government is open to combining meetings during execution, provided all requirements of the RFP can be completed in a timely manner.

Is the RDS system to be used with the basic MTRS Inc II robtoic platforms or with that AND with a full sensor suite?

The RDS will only carry the base MTRS Inc II.

What is the maximum weight of all CBRN sensor payloads needed to be installed at one time for one mission?

Answered in question #78.

Are all CBRN sensors being provided GFE with mounting and interface kits and if so are they complaint with IOP2 and Common CBRN Sensor Interface (CCSI)? If not who is responsible to provide the interface kits and to develop compliance with IOP2 and CCSI?

Sample CBRN sensors will be provided as GFE. No mounting or interface kits will be provided as GFE. Section C.3.2 describes the payload intergration kits that the vendor is required to provide.

Instructor and Key Personnel Training, as currently stated, there is no delivery quantity associated with these CLIN’s. Is this correct? If not, should the mentioned CLINs be removed?

The estimated CLIN quantity is 2 classes. The RFP will be updated to clarify the CLIN quantities in an amendment.

Instructor and Key Personnel Training. This CLIN shows a delivery quantity of 1 however, the IMS shows the training will be conducted twice during OY 3 in the 2nd and 4th quarters. Is the CLIN correct, should it reflect a quantity of 2, or should we price both training sessions as a single order?

The Government anticipates ordering two I&KPT classes to be conducted in Ordering Year 3. CLINs for I&KPT classes in Ordering Years 2 and 4 are included to provide the program flexibility if the schedule shifts to the left or the right during execution. The Government anticipates the amount of support required to be the same whether the I&KPT classes are conducted in Ordering Year 2, 3, or 4.

However, proposed costs should be allocated at the offeror's discretion. The costs for the I&KPT classes will be evaluated in accordance with Attachment 0014. In Attachment 0014, the estimated quantity is 2.

CDRL 072 references First Article Test (FAT) system delivery as a marker for the delivery of the training POI. The IMS does not use the terminology “system delivery” however it does show a FAT Delivery in 1st QTR, OY2. Is this the reference point referred to in CLIN 072?

Yes.

CDRL 085 references the IMI FCA however there does not seem to be a provision for the IMI FCA on the IMS. Is this an oversite or does the contractor need to set the IMI FCA as part of the IMI IMS?

Yes, the contractor will set the IMI FCA as part of the IMI IMS.

The reference link to determine the most current version of IE requires a log-on. Is this available or can the Gov. provide the most current version number of IE?

The Government will sponsor the contractor to grant access to this website after contract award. The current Internet Explorer version is Internet Explorer 11.0 v1.0.8.

There is a reference to additional GFI data on the adapter box and CBRN sensors. We would like to request this information with the understanding that it is not expected to meet the performance requirement for MTRS Inc. II.

The Government intends to provide this data after contract award, if desired by the awardee. Attachment 0003 will be updated to clarify that these documents will be available after contract award.

204 We would like to request the physical connection and verification tool data per the data in 6.1.3

This information can be requested from the contact listed in section 6.1.3 of Attachment 0003.

205 Will the Government please provide the estimated start date for this program?

The program will begin upon contract award, which is projected for July 2017.

The Attachment 0030 Payload integration Maturity self-assessment, Levels 2-4, requires offeror to assess the ability to integrate only 3 of the 5 required CBRN sensors. Can the government clarify why only three sensors require self-assessment, when the performance spec (3.5.7.1.1.4) requires five sensors be integrated?

The Government is not evaluating every contract requirement during source selection. The offeror is required to submit the information detailed in Section L of the RFP with its proposal.

The performance specification requires “use 3 out of the 4 arm mounted CBRN sensors at one time, in addition to the MBU mounted sensor and tether communications system.” Can the government clarify that any 3 of the 4 (JCAD, MultiRAE, RMX, and Fido XT) need operate simultaneously?

Correct. Any 3 of the 4 need to operate simultaneouly, as selected by the operator.

Can the government provide clarification on how the MILES system is to integrate with the MTRS Inc II system? Based on our understanding its just external mounting of the sensors and not full integration

Correct. This requirement informs the vendors that the MILES system will be used on the robot.

These are test articles delivered after the initial lot used for government testing IAW the SOW Section E are delivered, supported by the contractor. What assumptions should the contractor make regarding if these other units will undergo testing and what kind of test support is required by the contractor? If support is required by contractor, which sections in Section E apply?

Answered in Question #31.

Attachment 0014 shows the Order Years for production units CLIN 3002AA taking place in Order Period 3. However in Attachment 0002 describing the Integrated Master Plan, full rate production is stated to start in the second quarter of Order Year 4. These statements conflict.

Clarification is requested.

A CLIN for production units is included in Ordering Year 3 to provide the program flexibility to allow for orders if Full Rate Production Approval occurs before Ordering Year 4 begins.

Attachment 0014 states the LRIP units CLIN 2002AA and 3001AA take place in Order Periods 2 and 3 respectively. However Attachment 0002 states that LRIP starts in Order Year 3 and runs through mid Order Year 4. These statements conflict. Clarification is requested.

A CLIN for LRIP units is included in Ordering Year 2 to provide the program flexibility to allow for orders if approval to proceed to Low Rate Initial Production occurs sooner than anticipated.

212 Does the cover of the Executive Summary volume count toward the five-page page count? Yes.

213 What Volume does the integrated master plan and schedule go in?

These are not required with the proposal in response to the RFP.

Past performance template has 4 columns (Relevance considerations a & b (columns C & D), and two blank columns (columns E &F)). Can we enter data in columns E and F, and will any data in these columns be evaluated?

No.

Paragraph 1 of sections L.4.1.1, L.4.1.2, and L.4.1.3 indicates that the substantiating data does NOT count toward the 15 page limit. Can the Government confirm what the totality of available pages for an offeror to respond to each subfactor is? For example is the “substantiating information” that is to be provided included in the 15 page limit?

Or is the 15 page limit solely for the written narrative to describe how the substantiating information provided demonstrates the offered configuration will meet the level of performance proposed? Is the 15 page limit inclusive of the substantiating information and the narrative?

The 15 page limit applies to the narrative. There is no page limit for substantiating information.

Can the Government confirm that CLIN1001AA, 1001AB, 1002AA, 1002AB, 1003AA, 2001AA, 2002AA, 2002AB, 2003AA, AND 2003AB are also Firm Fixed Price? If not, how shall these CLINS be proposed?

All CLINS are firm fixed price.

Shall an Offeror be expected to provide in detail -for example direct labor, labor categories, overhead/indirect, and profit for non-major subcontracts and material as described in L.4.3.2.4 ? Or is the narrative requested in L.4.3.2.4 all that is required, or both?

Detailed labor breakout pricing is not required for non-major subcontractors.

The narrative in L.4.3.2.4 is all that is required.

Shall an Offeror be expected to provide in detail -for example direct labor, labor categories, overhead/indirect, and profit for major subcontracts as described in L.4.3.2.10? Or is the requested narrative requested in L.4.3.2.10 all that is required, or both? How do the detailed costing requirements defer from minor to major subcontracts? Should the term “material” be inserted in L.4.3.2.10 verses just “major subcontractor”?

Answered in Question #48.

Are Prime Contractor(s) required to include the same level of costing detail required by it in section L, from its minor subcontractors and material?

The same level of detail required by Prime Contractors does not apply to minor subcontractors or material.

Are Prime Contractor(s) required to include the same level of costing detail required by it in section L, from its major subcontractors?

No, the proposal requirements for major subcontractors are detailed in L.4.3.2.10.

RFP states that FAR 52.219-9 small business subcontracting plans are not required from small business offerors. Yet L.4.5.1 does require small business participation plans from all offerors, which contain much of the same information...Will the Government consider exempting all small business offerors from all small business participation and subcontracting subcontracting requirements?

All offerors, in accordance with RFP Section L.4.5.1 and based on DFARS 215.304(c)(i), must submit a Small Business Participation Volume, as detailed at L.4.5, for evaluation.

Q&A #5