CRS(I)_Pre-Proposal_Conf_Brief_6_Jun_17_-_FBO.pdf

Common Robotic System (Individual)

Pre-Proposal Conference

UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

Welcome to the CRS(I) Pre-Proposal Conference

Bryan McVeigh

Pre-Proposal Conference

Administration Pam Srebernak

Contract Specialist

Pre-Proposal Conference Guidance

• Purpose:

– To provide potential Offerors with Common Robotic Systems (CRS(I)) program related information

– To improve the potential Offeror’s understanding of the CRS(I) Request for Proposals (RFP)

• Pre‐Proposal Conference is for informational purposes only

• Nothing stated here changes or amends the terms, conditions, or requirements of the RFP.

Pre-Proposal Conference Agenda

• 0900 Administration, and Opening Remarks

• 0910 Acquisition Program Background

• 0920 Contracting

• 1000 Small Business

• 1010 Systems Engineering/CBRN/SW/IOP

• 1030 Break

• 1045 Systems Engineering/CBRN/SW/IOP cont.

• 1115 Cybersecurity

• 1125 Safety

• 1135 Environmental

• 1145 Test & Evaluation/Quality

• 1200 Lunch

• 1400 Logistics/Provisioning

• 1415 TM Publications

• 1425 Packaging

• 1435 Training

• 1445 Break/Displays

• 1530 Q & A Session

• 1630 Closing Remarks

Pre-Proposal Conference Administration

• Restroom Facilities

• Emergency Exits

• Breaks (2) & Lunch (Estimated 1200‐1400)

• Potential Lunch Locations:

– Mulligan’s Restaurant

Located on Base 29857 S. Perimeter Rd., Bldg. 570 Harrison Township, MI 48045

– Mama Vicki’s Coney Island 24989 William P. Rosso Hwy.

Macomb, MI 48042

– The Pantry Restaurant 44945 Morley Dr.

Clinton Township, MI 48036

Pre-Proposal Conference Administration

• No Sidebar Conversations

•No recording devices are allowed

• FBO Website

– https://www.fbo.gov/notices/caaeb20fedef8e97182c5a73038fde94

– Request For Proposal (RFP) posted 17 May 17

– All questions as answered will be posted to FBO along with the Pre‐

Proposal Conference Brief

• Mailbox: usarmy.detroit.acc.mbx.wrn‐crsi@mail.mil

Question and Answer (Q&A) Session

• Pre‐Proposal Conference Q & A

– No verbal questions will be allowed

– Government may answer Q&A’s today (Questions submitted prior to Pre‐Proposal Conference and on the Index Cards passed out at Registration Check‐In and submitted prior to the lunch break)

– All Q&A will be posted to the CRS(I) FBO site and will serve as the official responses

Displays

• Display will be available during breaks and from 1445‐1530

• Intent of the display is to provide an understanding of the required integration aspects of the CRS(I) program

• Displays include:

– Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear (CBRN) Sensors

– Handheld‐Ground Control Station (H‐GCS)

– Multi‐robot Operator Control Unit (MOCU) Software

– MTRS MK II Mod 3

– Raven

– Puma

– Maintenance Support Device (MSD)

Opening Remarks

Louis Anulare Product Manager

CRS(I) Acquisition Program Background

Jim Muldoon Program Officer

Key Stakeholders

Infantry/Engineer School/Chemical School/Ordnance School – Develops the requirements doctrine which identifies needed Soldier capabilities.

PdM UGV ‐ Transforms congressional funding into usable assets for the Soldier through the Army’s acquisition process. Manages the system through its entire life cycle.

TRADOC – Training and Doctrine Command develops, reviews and approves Army training packages.

CASCOM – Combined Arms Support Command reviews and approves the logistics support package to ensure it is suitable to provide maintenance support to the equipment.

AEC – Army Evaluation Center evaluates the contractor and Government test results to ensure the systems perform as the mission requires.

Organizational Overview

Army Contracting Command ‐Warren

• Contract Support

ILSC – Integrated Logistics Support Center

• Maintenance / Logistics

• Publications

• Packaging

• New Equipment Training

• Fielding

TACOM Safety Engineering Office

Tank Automotive Research Development Engineering Center

• Engineering

• Environmental

• Quality

Product Director Test Measurement Diagnostic Equipment

• Special Tools & Test Equipment

Support Organizations

Support Organizations contain Subject Matter Experts (SME) and provide review and concurrence oversight of contractual deliverable elements in support of Full Material Release (FMR).

UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

Multi‐robot Operator Control Unit Software

• Software support

Full Material Release Process

Requirements Identified

Requirements Identified

Contract Awarded Contract Awarded

LORA / MA

TM’s

FAT Report

NET

Review / Approval

Required Documents

PEO Concurrence / TACOM CG Approval

Answer Three Question:

1. Is the system safe?

2. Is the system suitable?

3. Is the system sustainable?

FMR Approval is required prior to fielding to the Soldier. Once achieved, fielding can begin.

Support Organizations

UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

FMR

Package

Development

CRS(I) Program Overview

• CRS(I) is a man-packable (< 25lbs), miniature, highly mobile, unmanned robotic system with advanced sensors and mission modules for dismounted forces. Designed so that operators can quickly reconfigure for various missions by adding/removing modules and/or payloads.

• Provides a standoff capability to interrogate, detect, confirm and neutralize presence across War-fighting functions

• Capability to identify and disposition of explosive hazards

• Army’s small sized common platform allowing use of various payloads in support of current and future missions

CPD: Approved, 5 JAN 2016 RFP Release: 17 MAY 2017 Pre-Proposal Conference: 6 JUN 2017

• Contract Award: 2QFY18

• Target Cost AUMC: $121K; APUC $150K

• AAO: 3,258

• Users: Infantry, Engineer, CBRN and

EOD

CRS(I) Integrated Master Plan (IMP)

CRS(I) FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25

QTRS 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Major Events

Contracting

Systems Engineering

Deliveries

Test & Evaluation

Logistics Events

PDR

SRR

LRIP

CDR

MS C/TC/LP

PCA

SVR/FCA

Base/EMD1 Award

TRR

OTRR

LUT

OER

IOC

CTR

PPQT

LRIP AwardEMD2 Award

Draft Test Report

Run‐Off

Post CDR Assessment

Final Test Report

NET

SSR

CFA

Run‐Off TRR

EUA

FRP Award

SOWM1 SOWM2

PQT

TM VERLOG Demo

TM VAL I&KPT #2

I&KPT #1

PTM 1

PTM 2

FRC

PC2

PC1

2 Run‐Off Assets

15 LRIP PQT / LUT Assets 3 LRIP LOG Assets2 LOG/2 SW/1 FAC

PRR

FRPFMR/TC STD

Timing of events in the IMP (Attachment 0005) are projections only. The contract delivery schedule (Section F) takes precedence in the event of a conflict.

15 PPQT/ EUA Assets

FUE

Distribution Statement A – Approved for Public Release; distribution unlimited 16

• CRS(I) team will present their areas of expertise highlighting:

– System requirements

– Cost drivers

– Proposal development

• Display intended to highlight required integration efforts and provide context for proposal development

Pre-Proposal Conference Plan

CRS(I) Contracting

Jennifer Jusela Contracting Officer

Solicitation (RFP)

• RFP: W56HZV‐17‐R‐0065

• Posted to FedBizOps on 17 May 2017

• Closes on 3 Jul 2017

• Check FBO regularly for any updates, question & answers, or amendments to the RFP

– https://www.fbo.gov/notices/caaeb20fedef8e97182c5a73038fde94

RFP POCs

Army Contracting Command – Warren (ACC‐WRN)

• CRS(I) email: usarmy.detroit.acc.mbx.wrn‐crsi@mail.mil

• Required for all RFP related offeror inquiries

• Jennifer Jusela is the CRS(I) Contracting Officer

Description of Contract Action

• Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts:

– EMD1 – Up to 2 vendors awarded, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Affordability Cap

$17.2 M

– EMD2 – Down select to 1 vendor for EMD2, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Affordability Cap $24 M

• Award Firm Fixed Price contract:

– LRIP – 1 vendor, 2 ordering years

– FRP – 1 vendor, 3 ordering years

– CRS(I) is a non‐commercial item

• Competitive Negotiated Acquisition Source Selection

– Contractor requested to provide Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing data

• EMD1 requires manufacture and delivery of two prototype CRS(I) systems.

– Constitutes the guaranteed minimum quantity required to satisfy the

Government's obligation under the Multiple Award IDIQ CRS(I) contract in accordance with FAR 16.501‐2(b)(3).

• Two Critical Design Review (CDR) configured CRS(I) System test assets shall be provided to the Aberdeen Test Center for the Run‐Off Test Readiness Review (TRR).

• The Government will evaluate non‐cost and price factors for the down‐select outlined in Section H.

• The successful contractor will be awarded a Task Order for EMD2.

– As authorized by FAR 16.103 (c), the IDIQ of the contractor selected for

EMD2 will be converted to a single award IDIQ eligible for award of TOs for LRIP and FRP.

Unique CLINs (not inclusive)

CLIN Description Est. Qty

1001 EMD1

• CRS(I) Run‐Off Test Assets 2

• Shipment of Test Assets to ATC 2

• Engineering & Manufacturing Development 1

• All Other 1

CLIN 1001 subject to a $17.2M affordability cap proposed prices greater than cap will be considered unaffordable

2001 EMD2

• CRS(I) PPQT/EUA Test Assets 15

• EMD SW (SPAWAR) Assets 1

• EMD M/S (TARDEC) Assets 1

• EMD LOG Assets 2

• EMD Facility Asset 1

• Refurbishment of all EMD1 & EMD2 Test Assets 22

• Shipment of Test Assets to ATC 22

• PPQT/EUA (FSR) Test Support 1

• Engineering & Manufacturing Development 1

• All Other 1 23

CLIN Description Evaluated Qty 3001 LRIP MBP Year 1 110 3002 LRIP STD Payload Year 1 110 3003 LRIP EOD Payload Year 1 110 3004 LRIP CBRN Payload Year 1 110 3005 LRIP OCU Year 1 110 3006 LRIP Shipping Containers Year 1 110 3007 LRIP Secondary Display Year 1 110

3100 OCU Configuration Kit 50 3101 Special Tool Kit (STK) 20 3102 Initial Service Package (ISP) 20 3103 PQT (FSR) Test Support 1 3104 LRIP Storage & Maintenance 160,000 days/unit 3105 TM Verification Support 1 3106 IOP Conformance Test Support 1 3109 LUT (FSR) Support 1 24

CLIN Description Evaluated Qty 4001 LRIP MBP Year 2 215 4002 LRIP STD Payload Year 2 215 4003 LRIP EOD Payload Year 2 215 4004 LRIP CBRN Payload Year 2 215 4005 LRIP OCU Year 2 215 4006 LRIP Shipping Containers Year 2 215 4007 LRIP Secondary Display Year 2 215

5001 FRP MBP Year 1 1084 5002 FRP STD Payload Year 1 1084 5003 FRP EOD Payload Year 1 1084 5004 FRP CBRN Payload Year 1 1084 5005 FRP OCU Year 1 1084 5006 FRP Shipping Containers Year 1 1084 5007 FRP Secondary Display Year 1 1084

CLIN Description Evaluated Qty 5100 FRP OCU Configuration Kit 50 5101 FRP Special Tool Kits (STK) 30 5102 FRP Initial Service Package (ISP) 30 5103 FRP Authorized Stockage List (ASL) 150 5104 FRP Storage & Maintenance 100,000 days/unit 6001 FRP MBP Year 2 1084 6002 FRP STD Payload Year 2 1084 6003 FRP EOD Payload Year 2 1084 6004 FRP CBRN Payload Year 2 1084 6005 FRP OCU Year 2 1084 6006 FRP Shipping Containers Year 2 1084 6007 FRP Secondary Display Year 2 1084

CLIN Description Evaluated Qty 7001 FRP MBP Year 3 1090 7002 FRP STD Payload Year 3 1090 7003 FRP EOD Payload Year 3 1090 7004 FRP CBRN Payload Year 3 1090 7005 FRP OCU Year 3 1090 7006 FRP Shipping Containers Year 3 1090 7007 FRP Secondary Display Year 3 1090

8001 CDRLs‐ Not Separately Priced (Exhibit A Data Items contain quantities and delivery schedule information on each CDRL)

8002 Invention Report (Required by DFARS Clause 252.227‐7039)

Proposed Prices for TDP

Description Est. Qty

OCU TDP 1

OCU Software TDP 1 Mobile Base Platform TDP 1 Mobile Base Platform Software TDP 1 Standard Payload TDP 1

EOD TDP 1

CBRN TDP 1

Test Articles:

Delivery Schedule for Production Articles also included in Section F of the RFP

Delivery Schedule (Section F) Highlights

Item # Description Quantity Months after Delivery Order Award

1001 EMD1 Assets 2 (EST) 12 after EMD1 Award

2001 EMD2 Assets 20 (EST) 5 after EMD2 Award

3001‐3007 LRIP Assets 18 (EST) 5 after LRIP Award

Description of Services

• Services (not an inclusive list)

– Care and Storage of CRS(I) Systems

– Instructor & Key Personnel Training

– Support Government Logistics Demonstration

– Support Government Technical Manual Verification

Source Selection

• A best value tradeoff source selection will be used to select the proposal representing the best value to the Government

• Best value process:

– Permits tradeoffs among price and non‐price factors

– Allows award to other than the lowest priced proposal

– Allows award to other than the highest technically rated proposal

• The Government may choose not to award a contract where it concludes that no proposal exists with a reasonable probability of achieving program requirements complying with contract terms and conditions, or if no submissions are deemed to satisfy the requirement at an acceptable level of risk or at an affordable price.

Section L – Instructions to Offerors

Section L Instructions

• Offerors must submit information required in RFP Section L

• It’s the offerors responsibility to:

– Submit a well written proposal with adequately detailed information

– Clearly demonstrate an understanding of the requirement

• The Government won’t:

– Assume the offeror possesses any capability not specified in its proposal

– Search for information to cure problems it finds in proposals

• Offerors must submit proposals:

– IAW the methods of submission identified in Section L of the RFP

– Prior to due date and time specified on Page 1, Block 9 of RFP

• Offerors are limited to one proposal

• Offers must be submitted for all the RFP requirements

• Proposal Content:

– Six separate volumes

• Volume I / Performance Factor

• Volume II / System Integration Maturity Factor

• Volume III / Price Factor

• Volume IV / Past Performance Factor

• Volume V / Small Business Participation Factor

• Volume VI / Proposal Terms & Conditions

Volume I – Performance Factor

Performance Factor

Subfactors:

• Mobility

– Operate in Standing Water

– Operate in Tunnel/Sewer

– Travel Distance when Carrying an Object of 5 lb Weight and 5 inch

Diameter

– Climb Stairs

• Manipulator Arm

– Manipulator Arm Traverse

– Manipulator Arm Extension, Above Ground Surface

• Weight

– How the offeror’s configuration will meet the proposed level of performance from Attachment 0064 for weight.

– How the offeror’s configuration will meet the threshold stated in the

Performance Specification for Shipping Containers Lifting Provisions

Volume II – System Integration Maturity Factor

System Integration Maturity Factor:

• Complete Attachment 0062 (two page self‐assessment of proposed System

Integration Maturity in relation to characteristics/levels described in Attachment 0062).

• Provide substantiating data (not part of the 2‐page limit) to support the self‐ assessment

• Completed Attachment 0063 (Matrix of Substantiating Data) to support System Integration Maturity (not included in the two page self‐assessment above)

Section L.4.2.1(b): …“The resulting technical information, documentation, test data and rationale shall be complete, specific, and relevant to the specific characteristics of the offeror's self‐assessment assertions. If the substantiating data originated from a design other than the proposed design solution, the offeror shall discuss the extent of the variance and the impact such variance has on the credibility of the substantiating data.”…

Volume III – Cost / Price Factor

Cost / Price Factor:

• Provide substantiating information supporting reasonableness of the proposed firm fixed price (in U.S. Dollars) Contract Line Item Number (CLINs) and reasonableness and realism of the proposed costs and fees for the Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLINs in Cost/Price Worksheet, Attachment 0069

• Provide spreadsheets in RFP‐specified Microsoft formats (include all formulas, functions, equations, etc.)

• Provide prices in Attachment 0069 (don’t provide prices in Section

B) IAW L.4.3.1

Volume IV – Past Performance Factor

Past Performance Factor:

• Provide information for up to three recent/relevant contracts

– Contract is defined in L.4.4.1 in terms of Delivery/Task Orders or work directives under base contracts

– Recent contract performance is within three years of RFP issuance

– Relevant contract is comparable to scope, effort, complexity of

L.4.4.2

• Provide Attachment 0065 – Past Performance Relevance Matrix

• Provide Attachment 0066 – Past Performance Questionnaire

– Offeror sends to appropriate PCO/COR

– Offeror requests that PCO/COR fills out and submit electronically to

CRS(I) mailbox (usarmy.detroit.acc.mbx.wrn‐crsi@mail.mil)

Volume V – Small Business Participation Factor

Small Business Participation:

• Complete Attachment 0067 SBP Workbook using the SBP Workbook Instructions in Attachment 0068

• If the offeror is other than a U.S. Small Business concern, a Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be submitted in accordance with FAR Clause 52.219‐9 ALT II ‐ Small Business Subcontracting Plan as part of the proposal submission. Note that such a plan is not required of offerors that are small businesses.

• Provide certification for any subcontractor not registered in System Award Management (SAM) – Attachment 0072

Volume VI – Proposal Terms and Conditions

Proposal Terms and Conditions:

• Provide authorized signature on RFP cover page

• Complete all RFP provision fill‐ins

• Provide statement acknowledging agreement with RFP terms & conditions IAW L.4.6.3

• Provide copy of offeror’s current Facility Clearance (FCL) for any applicable offeror facility IAW L.4.6.8

– Attachment 0071 is classified and requires FCL to obtain

– FCL is required in order to be determined responsible

Evaluation Process

Evaluation Process:

• Proposals will be subject to evaluation by a Government Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Proposals will be evaluated IAW Section M:

– Based on response to information called for in Section L

– Against RFP requirements and evaluation criteria

– To determine evaluations conclusions (ratings) under each Factor

Section M Criteria Relative Order of Importance

Performance System

Integration Maturity

>= Price Past

Performance

Small Business

Participation

Legend = Approximately Equal > Slightly More Important >> More Important >>> Significantly More Important

IAW FAR 15.304(e), the non‐price factors are significantly more important than price when combined

Mobility

Manipulator Arm Performance

Weight

Pe rf or m an ce S ub fa ct or s

UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

Section M.4 (B): Government test data that supports the ability of the offered design configuration to meet requirements, up to the objective (where applicable) performance levels, represents the most credible form of substantiating information.

Performance Factor Sub-Factors

Performance Factor/Sub Factor Evaluation:

Sub Factors 1 and 2:

• Evaluated to assess the risk associated with the offered configuration meeting the threshold performance levels

• No extra credit in the form of a proportional strength will be given for exceeding the threshold performance levels, except to the extent that performance beyond the threshold level reduces the risk of achieving the threshold performance level

For Sub Factor 3:

• Evaluated to assess the risk associated with the offered configuration meeting the proposed performance levels

• Extra evaluation credit in the form of a strength, proportional to the amount of performance above threshold, may be given for proposed performance above the threshold performance level up to the objective

• Extra credit in the form of a proportional strength will not be given for exceeding the objective performance level

• Proposed level of performance incorporated into contract

System Integration Maturity Factor

System Integration Maturity Factor Evaluation:

• Assess the risk that, based on the extent and credibility of the System Integration Maturity data, the offeror will timely deliver assets that will successfully pass FAT.

– Self‐assessment of proposed level of System Integration Maturity in Attachment 0062

– Substantiating data supporting offeror’s asserted extent of maturity in Attachment 0063

Cost / Price Factor

Cost / Price Factor Evaluation:

• The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine the Total Evaluated Price.

• The Total Evaluated Price (M.4.3.2), rather than the total proposed price, shall be used in the trade‐off evaluation to determine best value.

• The Total Evaluated Price will include an assessment of the reasonableness of the Fixed Price CLINs, and an assessment of the reasonableness and realism of the Cost Reimbursement CLINs.

Past Performance Factor

Past Performance Factor Evaluation:

• The Government will assess the expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on recent and relevant contract performance.

• This assessment will result in the application of a Confidence Rating which will be based upon the extent to which recent prior past performance is relevant to the requirements listed in Attachment 0066.

Small Business Participation (SBP) Factor

Small Business Participation Evaluation:

• The SSEB will assess the risk that the offeror achieves the SBP’s Factor goals for small business identified in the RFP

– Based on the extent of SBP proposed

– Based on the credibility of the data, provided by the offeror, measured against the SBP Factor goals

– Where SBP is assessed as creditably being equal to or higher than RFP goals, the SSEB may assign a strength to the SBP Factor

– Where SBP is assessed as not creditably being equal to the RFP goals, the SSEB may assign a weakness to the SBP Factor

Source Selection Team

• A Government SSEB will evaluate all proposals

– The SSEB is comprised of technically qualified Government personnel

– The SSEB will conduct its evaluation IAW evaluation criteria in the RFP

– The SSEB will give careful, full and impartial consideration to all proposals

– The SSEB will conduct discussions (through the PCO) with offerors

Communications (Exchanges prior to competitive range establishment)

• Exchanges prior to establishing the competitive range are referred to as “Communications”

• Conducted via Evaluation Notices‐Communications (EN‐Cs) between PCO and offeror

• Limited to offerors:

– Whose past performance is determining factor preventing them from being placed in competitive range

– Whose exclusion from competitive range is uncertain

Communications (Exchanges prior to competitive range establishment)

• Limited communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals:

– Allows reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or

– Facilitate the Government’s evaluation process

• Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range

– Purpose to address issues that must be explored to determine whether a proposal should be placed in the competitive range

– Address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns

– Information relating to relevant past performance; and

– Address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to comment.

• Communications shall not be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or cost elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the proposal.

Competitive Range

• PCO will establish a competitive range comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals

– Based on SSEB ratings of each proposal against the evaluation criteria

– Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a debriefing

Discussions (Exchanges after competitive range establishment)

• Also referred to as “Negotiations”

• Conducted via Evaluation Notices‐Discussions (EN‐Ds) between PCO and offeror

• Are undertaken with intent of allowing offeror to revise its proposal

• May include bargaining

• Must be conducted by PCO with each offeror in competitive range

Source Selection Decision (Award)

• Following the trade‐off process the Source Selection Authority will identify the proposal(s) which represents the best value to the Government by:

– Weighing non‐price factors against total evaluated price

– Considering evaluation factors relative order of importance

– Considering relative strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal

Determination of Responsibility

• A contract can only be awarded with an offeror that the PCO has determined responsible

• To qualify for award, offerors must be able to demonstrate they meet standards found in FAR 9.104

• Demonstrate that the prospective offeror has a Facility Clearance

• The PCO may request DCMA perform a pre‐award survey to assess the offeror’s financial and management capabilities to meet RFP requirements

Contracting Summary

• The receipt of proposal is the deadline is 3 Jul 2017 at 3:00 pm

• Submittal and marking instructions for proposals are IAW L.2.2.3

• Make sure you submit all parts required by the RFP

• Check FBO regularly for any updates, question and answers, or amendments to the RFP

CRS(I) Small Business

Mike Bradley Small Business Office

Small Business

“The essence of the American economic system of private enterprise is free competition.

Only through full and free competition can free markets, free entry into business, and opportunities for the expression and growth of personal initiative and individual judgment be assured. The preservation and expansion of such competition is basic not only to the economic well‐being but to the security of this Nation. Such security and well‐being cannot be realized unless the actual and potential capacity of small business is encouraged and developed. It is the declared policy of the Congress that the Government should aid, counsel, assist, and protect, insofar as is possible, the interests of small‐business concerns in order to preserve free competitive enterprise, to insure that a fair proportion of the total purchases and contracts or subcontracts for property and services for the Government (including but not limited to contracts or subcontracts for maintenance, repair, and construction) be placed with small business enterprises, to insure that a fair proportion of the total sales of Government property be made to such enterprises, and to maintain and strengthen the overall economy of the Nation.”

Small Business Act

What is a Small Business? (13 CFR Part 121)

• Organized for profit.

• Place of business located in the United States, and

– Operates primarily within the United States OR

– Makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through

• payment of taxes

• use of American products, material, or labor

• Does not exceed the small business size standard for the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code:

– Assigned to the procurement ‐ for Prime contracts

– Assigned to the subcontracted work ‐ for Subcontracts

– Affiliation must be considered

• 7 general principles, 9 exceptions, 7 specific bases of affiliation

• See 13 CFR Part 121.103 and the guidance that SBA provides: http://www.sba.gov.

• Small Business Administration (SBA) develops the standards based on Revenue or Number of Employees. Table of Size Standards: http://www.sba.gov.size.

• A firm can be:

– Small for one solicitation and large for another.

– Small for a prime contract and large for a subcontract or vice versa.

• CRS(I) NAICS Information:

NAICS Code Description Size Standard 334511 Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

1,250 Employees

Small Business Categories and Certifications SB Small Business (self‐certify).

SDB Small Disadvantaged Business (self‐certify).

8(a) SB 8(a) Small Business (SBA must certify).

WOSB Woman‐Owned Small Business (self‐certify).

HubZone SB Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (SBA must certify).

VOSB Veteran‐Owned Small Business (self‐certify).

SDVOSB Service‐Disabled Veteran‐Owned Small Business (self‐certify).

• See 13 CFR Parts 121‐127, FAR 2.101, FAR Part 19, DFARS Part 219, AFARS Part 5119, and the guidance that SBA provides at http://www.sba.gov for definitions and qualifications a business must meet to be able to be represented as any of these small business categories, including the self‐certification categories.

• There are other similar categories established by state and local government and industry communities, but they are not the same as the categories recognized in Federal Government programs.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan

• Applies to Other Than Small Business (OTSB) Offerors only.

• Proposed Subcontracting Goals to be expressed as % of Total Subcontract Amount.

• FAR Clause 52.219‐9, ALT II includes instructions on content.

Small Business Participation Factor (Section L & M)

• Applies to ALL Offerors.

• Proposed Participation Goals to be expressed as % of Total Contract Amount.

• Automated workbook and extensive instructions were provided in the RFP.

CRS(I) Objectives / Goals:

SB SDB WOSB HZSB VOSB SDVOSB

13.6% 2.0% 2.0% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2%

Attachments Related to SBP Factor

RFP Attachment Number

Attachment Name

0067 Small Business Participation – Workbook

0068 Small Business Participation – Workbook Instructions

0072 SBP – Certification‐Subcontractor Certification of Small Business Size and Socioeconomic Status for Proposed Subcontractors Not Registered in System for Award Management (SAM)

Attachments related to Small Business Participation FACTOR (Section L & M)

Types of Subcontracting Plans & Reports

• Types of Subcontracting Plans

– Individual Plan

– Master Plan

– Commercial Plan

– Comprehensive Plan

Small Business Subcontracting Plans

• Individual Plan

– Preferred for non‐commercial items

– Incorporated into only one Federal contract

– Covers the entire contract period including options and orders

– Goals are broken out in accordance with FAR 19.704 OR as specified by the PCO in the RFP

– Plan is approved by the PCO

– Corresponding Report Types submitted in eSRS are Individual (ISR) and

Summary (SSR)

• ISR submitted semi‐annually (Due: 30 Apr & 30 Oct)

• SSR submitted annually (Due: 30 Oct)

• Master Plan

– Preferred for non‐commercial items

– Incorporated into one or more Federal contracts awarded to the entity

(whole corporation, company, or subdivision)

– Effective for 3 years after approval OR for the life of the contract

– Master Plans do NOT contain goals / only includes the mandatory elements listed in the clause

• Incorporated into Individual Plans for each contract which are negotiated for each contract individually

• Master Plan + Goals for each contract are treated like individual plans in terms of any modifications to goals and for reporting requirements

– ACO approves Master Plan (mandatory elements, not goals)

– Corresponding Report Types submitted in eSRS are Individual (ISR) and

Summary (SSR)

• ISR submitted semi‐annually (Due: 30 Apr & 30 Oct)

• SSR submitted annually (Due: 30 Oct)

• Commercial Plan

– Preferred for commercial items

– Incorporated into all contracts awarded to the entity and in effect for the time period covered by the Plan (Whole Corporation, Company, or Subdivision)

– Effective for 1 Contractor FY

– Goals are entire production of commercial items for both Gov’t and non‐Gov’t contracts (not broken out for individual contracts)

– Once one PCO approves the plan, other PCOs may use the same plan provided it covers the entity to which the award is being made.

– Corresponding Report Type submitted in eSRS is Summary (SSR)

• SSR submitted annually (Due: 30 Oct)

• Comprehensive Plan

– Preferred for non‐commercial items

– Contractors must be active participants in the DoD

Comprehensive Subcontract Plan Test Program

• Currently only 10 companies are participants

– Incorporated into all DoD contracts awarded to the entity and in effect for the time period covered by the Plan (Whole Corporation, Company, or Subdivision)

– Effective for 1 Government FY

– Goals are for all DoD contracts rolled together (not broken out for individual contracts)

– Plan approved by DCMA

– Corresponding Report Type submitted in eSRS is Summary (SSR)

• SSR submitted semi‐annually (Due: 30 Apr & 30 Oct)

Locate Small Businesses

• List of Available Subcontractors ‐ TACOM LCMC Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP):

https://www.tacom.army.mil/sbo/primecontractor.html.

• System for Award Management (SAM) ‐ official representations and certifications:

https://www.sam.gov.

• SBA’s Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS):

http://web.sba.gov/pro‐net/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm.

• National Network of Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTACs):

http://www.aptac‐us.org.

• Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) Website for SB award recipients, SB events: https://www.fbo.gov.

• Attend conferences with a specific socioeconomic focus.

Help for Small Businesses

• Add your firm to:

• List of Prospective CRS(I) Inc. I Contractors on the CRS(I) Inc. I page on FBO

• List of Available Subcontractors – TACOM LCMC OSBP – see instructions at:

https://www.tacom.army.mil/sbo/primecontractor.html.

• Register (required for prime contracting, helpful for first tier subcontracting) in:

• System for Award Management (SAM) ‐ official representations and certifications:

https://www.sam.gov.

• SBA’s Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) Database:

http://web.sba.gov/pro‐net/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm.

• Visit your Procurement Technical Assistance Center (PTAC):

http://www.aptac‐us.org.

• Office of Small Business Programs will be posting more information on Doing Business at:

https://www.tacom.army.mil/sbo/index.html.

BREAK

CRS(I) Systems Engineering

Corinna Womack Systems Engineer

• Performance Specification

• Highlight of the Requirements

• Highlight of Changes due to Requests for Information

• Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government

Furnished Property (GFP)

• CBRN Sensors

• Software

• Interoperability Profile (IOP)

Requirements Highlights

• Defines the performance of the system

– The expression “Threshold” is a minimum acceptable value of an attribute that the Government considers achievable within the available cost, schedule, and technology at low‐to‐moderate risk. This document notes a threshold as a (T).

– The expression “Objective” is the desired operational goal achievable at a higher risk in cost, schedule and technology. Performance above the objective does not justify the additional expense. This document denotes an objective as an (O).

– When the document does not note a (T) or (O), then the requirement is a threshold and (T=O), or Threshold is equal to the Objective.

– Requirements may not be traded

– The goal is to meet all Threshold requirements

Performance Specification (P-Spec) Attachment 0001 of RFP

• Weight

• Payloads

• Mobility

• Manipulator Arm

• Operator Control Unit (OCU)

• Camera

• Audio

• Power

• Environment

• Communication

• Human System Integration (HSI)

Highlight of the Requirements

• Updated Verification method for 2.5 lb hand controller in the P‐Spec

– Analysis of weight of hand controller with a built‐in display using

Engineering calculation from hand controller components.

• Updated size of MOLLE Pack from “Assault Pack” to “MOLLE Ruck Sack System” as described in the P‐Spec

– “MOLLE Ruck Sack System” provided as GFE at Contract Award

• 32 lb weight requirement

– Configuration is able to pick up a 5 lb object using only the OCU as the visual method for manipulating the arm movement.

Highlight of Changes due to Requests for Information

Weight

* Figure 1 from Attachment 1 ‐ Performance Specification

• Standard Payload

– Standard Payload (manipulator arm) is required to mount the ENG/EOD (Explosive Ordinance Disposal) and CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiation, and Nuclear) payloads

• Engineer = EOD Payload

• CBRN Payload

• Payloads shall be operational within 5 minutes (T) after CRS(I) components have been removed from MOLLE Ruck Sack System.

Payloads

• Traverse Terrain

– Includes mud, snow, grass, sand, water

– Includes travel across slopes and grades

• Control Motion / Speed

– Control and adjust speed

• Overcome Obstacles

– Stairs, rubble

Mobility

UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

Mobility includes movement of platform WITH and WITHOUT manipulator arm

• Part of the Standard Payload

• 24” reach from the base of the manipulator arm

• Traverse 360 degrees on all sides of Mobility Base Platform

(MBP)

• Lift and carry a 5 lb and 5 inch object

Manipulator Arm

• Visibility of Display in Day, Low and Night conditions

• Operable in MOPP IV gear

• Interface to Helmet Mounted Display (HMD)

• Interface to Speaker and Microphone

• Interface to Secondary Display

– Secondary Display is part of the EOD/ENG payload and CBRN payload to support missions

Operator Control Unit (OCU)

• Provides the ability to see from a standoff

• Requirements to allow operator to see various items and to control camera operations and locations

• “Recognize” a person at day, low and night conditions at required distances

– Mobility Base Platform

– Standard Payload

Cameras

• The ability to listen and broadcast

• Both OCU and MBP must receive and broadcast sound

• Broadcast at volume intensities: 60db at 1m

• Detect sound at a minimum level: 50db from 1m

P‐Spec: 3.5.2.1 Communicate with Environment

Audio

• Batteries must be in current Army Supply Systems IAW Performance Specification

• Batteries shall be charged using the Universal Battery Charger (UBC) and Accessories (PM‐SWAR‐SP‐UBC‐ 061614).

• 3 hours operation of OCU and MBP without recharge

Power

• Operating Environment (temperatures, sand, dust, rain, sun, etc.)

• Vibration and shock

• Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) environments

• Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3)

• For any materials not inherently chemically agent resistant treated (CARC) and requiring a paint coat, the surface shall be treated with CARC paint.

Environment

• Cryptography: NIST Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 140‐2 Level 2

• IOP Compliance: Interoperable with GFE

– UxS (current & future)

– UAS Group 1: Digital Data Link (DDL)

• Communications Range (P‐Spec 3.5.3.3)

– Tethered Communications

– Wireless Communications

• Line Of Sight

• Non‐Line of Sight

• Maintain wireless communications throughout 360 degrees rotation in horizontal plane

• System must stop if communications are lost

– After 10 Sec, MBU retrace path at least 3m

– Prior to mission, user could access controller menu options enable/disable the retrace dependent on terrain/environment of mission

Communication

Joint Communications Architecture for Unmanned Systems (JCAUS)

Architecture that supports the development a family of UxS communications systems by enforcing interfaces between Modules:

• Spectrum efficiency and agility

• Technology insertion flexibility

• Encourage competitive business environment

• Reduce stakeholders programmatic / cost risk

• Establish industry framework for UxS communication systems

Objectives

CDRL A022: Frequency Allocation Data (DD1494)

• Soldier sizes, Mission Oriented Protective Posture (MOPP) IV, other CBRN Personnel Protective Equipment

• Visual readability of OCU display

Human System Integration (HSI)

Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) Government Furnished Property (GFP)

Attachment 0028 of RFP

• Maintenance Support Device (MSD)

• JDMS ICBMT

• TOGA/H‐GCS Controller

• TOGA/H‐GCS Software Development Guide

• CRS(I) IOP Instantiation

• CRS(I) MOCU 4

• JCAUS Architecture

• CBRN Sensors

– TIC Vapor Detector

– Gas Monitor

– Radiac Dosimeter

– JCAD, M4A1

• Unmanned Aerial Systems

– RQ‐20B Raven

– RQ‐11B Puma

• MTRS Surrogate (MTRS MK II Mod 3)

• MTRS IOP Instantiation

• Modular Lightweight Load‐Carrying Equipment (MOLLE)

Ruck Sack System (NSN: 8465‐01‐523‐6276)

CRS(I) CBRN Sensors

Robert Nevels

CBRN Sensors

• The CRS(I) shall integrate/carry various CBRN sensors, as described in the SOW and P‐Spec.

• The CBRN Sensors are organic to the unit and will not be part of the CRS(I) system.

• CBRN Sensors shall be provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Government Furnished Property (GFP) at contract award for integration and CBRN Integration Kit development.

Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) M4A1

• Description: Real time detection of nerve, blister, and blood agent vapors base on IMS technologies

• Capabilities:

– Agent/Operating Temperature

• GA: ‐50 to 49°C

• GB: ‐32 to 49°C

• GD: ‐32 to 49°C

• GF: ‐30 to 49°C

• HD: 14 to 49°C

• L: ‐18 to 49°C

• HN3: ‐3 to 49°C

• Manufacturer: GOTS system produced by Smiths Detection, Edgewood, MD

• NSN: 6665‐01‐586‐8286

MultiRAE Pro and MultiRAE

• Description: TIC Vapor, LEL/O2, and VOC capabilities using photo‐ionization detector (PID) and electrochemical sensors.

• Capabilities:

– Operating temperature range: ‐20°C to +50°C; 0 to 95%

RH

– TIC Vapor capability for:

• HCN, SO2, Cl2, H2S, and NH3

– LEL capability for:

• Acetylene, 1,3 butadiene, Butane, Carbon disulphide, Carbon monoxide, Diborane, Dimethylamine, Ethylene, Ethylene oxide, Hydrogen, Hydrogen cyanide, Hydrogen sulfide, Isobutylene, Methane, Phosphine, Propane, Propene

– Capable of being deconned for radiological threats

• Manufacturer: COTS system produced by RAE Systems, San Jose, CA

• Part Numbers: MCB3‐0RC178E‐DS1 and MCB3‐A3C136E‐DS1

92UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution A, Approved for Public Release

Radiac Dosimeter GY (RGU-100 High Sensitivity Military Pocket Radiac)

• Description: Personal radiation dosimeter measuring gamma/neutron dose and dose‐ rate. The Navy configuration includes the AN/UDR‐15, all other Services include the

AN/UDR‐14

• Capabilities:

– Dosimeter capability of 1‐999cGy

– Rate meter capability of 0.1‐999cGy

– Operating temperature range:

• ‐46°C to +49°C; 0 to 95% RH

• Manufacturer: COTS system produced by Canberra in Oakridge, TN

• Part Number RGU‐100‐GO

CRS(I) Pre-Proposal Conference

Software

CRS(I) Software Engineering

• Meet the P‐SPEC

• Interoperability Profile (IOP) Compliant

• Cyber Compliant

• Provide for Embedded Training

• Open System Architecture

• OCU Common Operating Environment

• Solution runs on Handheld‐Ground Control Station (H‐GCS)

• Control CRS(I), MTRS‐S, RQ‐20B Raven, RQ‐11B Puma

• Provide for Software Updates, Configuration Management and File Transfer via the Maintenance Support Device (MSD)

GFE Technical Data Documentation

• TOGA Partial TDP (Attachment 0026)

– Updated TOGA data will be provided at Contract Award

• IDDs, CES, GCS Specification

• MOCU4 Capabilities & Reference, Interface Control

Document, Software Developer Guide (Attachment 0057)

– Updated MOCU data drop at Contract Award

• Video/Image Transfer

• Message/Help/Health Status Logging

• Maintenance/CBM Logging Data

• Improved Surrogate Platform Control

• Initial Embedded Training for End Users

• MOCU4 Baseline

• MTRS Inc 2 P‐Spec (Attachment 0059),

• MTRS Inc 2 Instantiation (Attachment 0060)

Software Related Major Deliverables (CDRLs)

• Software Development Plan (CDRL A068)

• Open System Management Plan (CDRL A081)

• Software Requirements Specifications (CDRL A086)

• Interface Design Descriptions (CDRL A087)

• Software Design Description (CDRL A088)

• Software Test Reports (CDRL A010)

• Software Test Plans (CDRL A089)

• Software Test Description (CDRL A090)

• Software Version Description (CDRL A028)

Interoperability Profile

(IOP)

Robotic Autonomous System-Government

(RAS-G) IOP

• CRS(I) requires implementation of the CRS(I) Instantiation of IOP, which is based on IOP V2.

• CRS(I) Instantiation and IOP V2 are included as Attachments 0018 and 0034 to the RFP

RAS-G IOPs Basic Overview

• Robotic and Autonomous Systems

– Ground (RAS-G) Interoperability Profiles (IOPs)

• Defines software messaging & hardware interfaces between major subsystems of unmanned ground systems

Software messages primarily based on SAE AS-4 – Joint Architecture for Unmanned Systems (JAUS)

• IOP Conformance Testing

– Contractor to provide onsite software engineering technical support for IOP conformance testing

– Contractor shall address/update the system to resolve all conformance issues

– Conformance Validation Tool (CVT) is available to the contractors in support of IOP

– CRS(I) radio solution must comply with JCAUS ICD per CRS(I) P‐Spec

IOP Compliance

CRS(I) Cybersecurity

Tracy Terry Cyber Engineer

• Protects electronic data throughout the lifecycle

– Contractor network

– Development environment

– Operation

– Maintenance

– Decommission

• Risk Management Framework (RMF)

– Formal process of evaluation and risk acceptance to operate an information system (IS)

• Cybersecurity Authorization Package

– CDRL A024 supplies the information needed to describe Cybersecurity

• Cybersecurity Vulnerability Identification/Adversarial Cybersecurity Developmental Test (CVI/ACDT)

– Security assessment event focused on confirming vulnerabilities

• Policy Reference

– Not exclusive, additional references will apply

Cybersecurity

DoD Risk Management Framework (RMF) 6 step process

CRS(I) Initial Categorization (C‐I‐A): L‐M‐M (pending final determination)

Cybersecurity Authorization Artifact Package (CDRL A024)

• RMF Security Plan

– System Architecture

• Architecture Diagram

• Data Flow Diagram

• Hardware/Software List

• Ports, Protocols, and Services List

– Policies and Procedures

• Backup and Restoration Procedures

• Account management procedures

• Roles based access permission description

• Product approvals (as required)

– Evidence of technical configuration

• Army Best Business Practices (BBP)

• DISA Security Guides (STIG and SRG)

• Other artifacts as needed to meet RMF requirements

• Known system vulnerabilities and mitigation strategies

• Critical Functionality Analysis

Cooperative Vulnerability Penetration Assessment (CVPA)

• Characterize the cybersecurity status in an operational context

• Conducted by a vulnerability assessment team through:

– Document reviews

– Physical inspection

– Personnel interviews

– Automated scanning

– Password tests

– Exploitation tools

Policies and Regulation

• DoD Cybersecurity program http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/ins1.html

– DoDI 5200.44 ‐ Protection of Mission Critical Functions to Achieve Trusted Systems and

Networks

– DoDI 8500.01 Cybersecurity

– DoDI 8510.01 ‐ RMF for DoD IT

– DoDI 8582.01 ‐ Security of Unclassified DoD Information on Non‐DoD Information Systems

• CNSS requirements (amplify NIST documents) https://www.cnss.gov/CNSS/issuances/Instructions.cfm

– CNSSI 1253 ‐ Security Categorization And Control Selection For National Security Systems

– CNSSI 1253f Attachment 1‐6 – Overlays by information type

• Cybersecurity control description and assessment http://www.nist.gov/publication‐portal.cfm

– NIST SP 800‐53 rev4 Security and Privacy Controls for Federal IS and Organizations

– NIST SP 800‐53A rev4 Guide for Assessing the Security Controls in Federal Information

Systems

• Army‐specific requirement for Cyber and INFOSEC https://www.apd.army.mil/Search/ePubsSearch/ePubsSearchForm.aspx?x=AR

– AR 25‐2 ‐ Information Assurance

– AR 380‐5 ‐ Army Information Security Program

Program Protection

• Program Security and Protection

– AR 70‐77 Program Protection

• Critical Functional Analysis

– Decomposition and identification of critical Hardware/Software components that would lead to mission failure

• Supply Chain Risk Management

– Identifying susceptibilities and threats in the supply chain of critical components

• Anti‐Tamper Plan

– Contractor will develop Anti‐Tamper Plan to protect Critical Program

Information (CPI) if identified

– DoDI 5200.39 defines CPI as “U.S. capability elements that contribute to the warfighters’ technical advantage, which if compromised undermines U.S. military preeminence”

CRS(I) Safety

Jack Giannosa System Safety Engineer

SYSTEM SAFETY in ARMY ACQUISITION

The Defense Acquisition System is designed to provide:

• Safe, Suitable and Supportable systems to the warfighter

• ….In the shortest practical time

• ….To satisfy requirements with measurable improvements to mission capability and support

• ….At a fair and reasonable price

System Safety Defined

Safety Verification Process

SEP / EDP

Test Directive SAR/HTSDTP

TEST CONDUCT / TIR

ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

HUC

TEST REPORT / SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS

SAFETY RELEASE SAFETY CONFIRMATION

SYSTEM EVALUATION REPORT

MATERIEL RELEASEUSER EVENT

SEP

SYSTEM ENGINEERING PLAN

EDP

EVENT DESIGN PLAN

DTP

DETAILED TEST PLAN

HUC

HUMAN USE COMMITTEE

SAR

SAFETY ASSESSMENT

REPORT

HTS

HAZARD TRACKING SYSTEM

TIR

TEST INCIDENT REPORT

Army Test and Evaluation Command

Safety Documentation Summary

SYSTEM SAFETY PROGRAM PLAN (SSPP)

• Provides a basis of understanding between the contractor and Program Manager (PM) on how the safety hazard management effort will be integrated into the System Engineering (SE) process.

• Documents system safety methodology for the identification, classification, and mitigation of safety hazards as part of the overall SE process.

• Details the tasks and activities that are required to implement a systematic approach of hazard analysis, risk assessment, and risk management.

• Reference: MIL‐STD 882E TASK 102

• Authority: Data Item Description: DI‐SAFT 81626

• Contract Reference: C.13.2

SAFETY ASSESSMENT REPORT (SAR)

• A comprehensive description, evaluation and operation of the system and status of potential safety or health hazards.

• It’s the considered judgment of the developing agency of any hazards or associated risks prior to Government Development Testing

• Identified hazards are assessed IAW MIL‐STD 882E Severity, Probability and Risk Assessment Code matrices

• Required as supporting documentation to for Materiel Release’s

• To be provided 60 days prior to the start of Development/Operational

Testing:

– Facilitates test center SOP preparation

– Provides focus to safety testing

• Reference: MIL‐STD 882E TASK 301

• Authority: Data Item Description: DI‐SAFT 80102B

• Contract Reference: C.13.3, C.13.3.1

HAZARD TRACKING SYSTEM (HTS)

• Hazard identification considers entire system life‐cycle and impacts to:

– Personnel

– Environment

– Infrastructure

– Defense systems

– The public

• Hazard status documented utilizing a closed‐loop Hazard Tracking System

(HTS)

• Identified hazards from SAR fed into HTS (Table ‐ column/row format)

• Reference: MIL‐STD 882E TASK 101 and Task 106

• Authority: Data Item Description: DI‐MISC‐80508B

• Contract Reference : C.13.3.5, C.13.4, C.13.6, C.13.11

Lessons Learned

• Preliminary & Critical Design Review are key events

• Designing out potential hazards is preferred materiel solution

• Warnings/labels last resort for mitigation/control of hazards

• Point‐of‐Use Warning labels ‐ Affix to equipment in addition to TM warnings ‐ Constant Reminder

CRS(I) Environmental

Shruti Jha Environmental Engineer

Hazardous Materials

• Hazardous Materials are defined by FED‐STD‐313D

• Prohibited materials included in the Performance Specification

• Requirements apply to all components, parts, and materials provided under this contract including parts from subcontractors or suppliers

Hazardous Materials Restrictions

• Prohibited Materials

– Asbestos

– Beryllium

– Class I and Class II Ozone Depleting Substances

– Hexavalent Chromium

• AKA Chromate, chromic acid, zinc dichromate, yellow sealer, wash primer, chrome conversion coating, etc.

– Cadmium

– Mercury

– Lead

– Radioactive Materials

– Group 1 Agents Classified as “carcinogenic to humans” by IARC

Exceptions to Prohibited Materials

•…