CIDAS_QA_20121116.pdf

Solicitation W911QY-13-R-0001 CIDAS

Government Responses to Industry Questions Received as of: 1 Nov 2012

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This document serves as a running tally of questions received from industry regarding subject solicitation, and the Government responses.

Questions must be received no later than the deadline indicated in the solicitation.

Answers will be provided with questions, on a non-attribution basis to all interested parties via Federal Business Opportunities (www.fbo.gov). This document will be routinely updated as questions are received and addressed up to the final date of acceptance of offeror questions. Questions will be listed in the order received and processed, with newer questions and responses added to the end of previous ones. This is a living document, and will be updated as of the posting date in the header to include all questions addressed as of the posting date. After the due date of proposals, the solicitation will be amended to incorporate any changes resulting from industry questions, and this document will be added to the list of solicitation attachments.

Questions received after the closing date for questions may not receive responses and will not be grounds for extending the proposal submission date. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to address questions received after the sixth (6) calendar day prior to solicitation closing with those offers deemed responsive and/or in the competitive range.

Responses highlighted in yellow indicate a change from the previously posted response.

Q1: How does the CIDAS Product Manager and/or the JPM-Protection advise offeror transmission of performance/data pertaining to NTAs given the Security Classification Guide for Non-Traditional Agent Defense issued on 8 February, 2010?

A1: If the Offeror would like for classified performance data to be considered as part of the response to the RFP, the Offeror should provide the Point of Contract for the Government agency who conducted the testing and developed the relevant data and reports. The CIDAS PMO will coordinate directly with that Government agency to ensure classified data is available or released in accordance with the program’s Security Classification Guide and DoD Directives.

Q2: What is the proposed term/duration of this effort?

A2: This effort is deliverable based. The contractor will be expected to deliver product and data as specified in the solicitation.

Q3: Are the quantities of “Indicants” requested in CLINS 0002 through 0005 contingent upon the volumes/prices listed in the Price Proposal Form? For example, if a vendor quotes for a given amount of indicant for each CLIN, can the Government request larger quantities based upon the quoted price?

A3: No. The Government requests specific quantities expressed in gallons in the price proposal. Since the Government is accommodating Offerors who may be proposing products that require a different Unit of Measure, such as powders, the CLINs for the awardee(s) will reflect the quantities and units necessary to achieve the desired amounts in gallons.

Q4: Would the Government want to see a price schedule for larger quantities of the indicant to give an idea of the potential cost scenarios at large quantities?

A4: The Government has not requested price schedules information for larger quantities as this information is not being used for evaluation purposes.

Q5: The Price sheet explicitly states a request for 1-gallon packaging of consumables. Is the Government willing to receive 2-gallon form factors? Offerors responding may not have a commercially-available form factor in a 1-gallon size. This is important because repackaging materials into a 1-gallon form factor requires the provider to utilize new packaging, and materials testing and shelf-life studies in new packaging form factors must be performed each time a new form factor is implemented. The Offeror proposes that this section be revised to read “Offeror configuration proposed” to enable the Offeror to provide the nearest reasonable form factor.

A5: The Government is willing to receive pre-existing, standard packaging for proposed products as long as the number of units delivered and individual quantities meet the requirements of the solicitation. To clarify, the quantities and packaging must accommodate the number of 1-gallon aliquot samples identified in the price proposal to be drawn over time without compromising the overall integrity and/or quality of the entire batch. Thus, it is acceptable for the Offeror to provide 10 units of 2 gallons each (for example) in order for the test team to be able to pull 1 gallon at a time to support the Government’s test strategy.

Q6: Does the Government have a more defined specification for the power requirements of the man-portable applicator? The 1-hour operating requirement is also highly dependent upon how the spray is applied. More specifically, are pneumatically-powered or battery powered applicators preferred? May an offeror propose to provide both a pneumatically-powered system and a battery-powered system?

A6: Offerors may propose any power source that best addresses the requirements of the solicitation. Note that the Performance Specification is draft at this time.

Q7: In the performance specification (section 3.1.1.5) for a spray capable of detecting spores, what is the basis for the requirement to detect 100 CFU / m2

A7: This requirement ties to infectious dose levels as established by USAMRIID.

Q8: In the PSPEC (3.1.3) the coverage area specification seems arbitrary. Shouldn’t coverage requirement be in some liquid volume per unit area in square meters, since that is the metric for agent coverage/decontamination requirements? This number will be highly dependent upon the surface type that is being covered, i.e. the required amount won’t be the same for all surfaces given that some surfaces are lighter than others, more porous than others, etc.

A8: As coverage area is highly dependent upon multiple variables (i.e. surface porosity, environment, vendor technology, etc.) the requirement is listed in overall surface area not in liquid volume per unit. The Government expects the Offeror to provide a clear description of the coverage area as relevant to the proposed system in response to subfactor System Design and Concept of Use.

Q9: In the PSPEC (3.7.13), what is meant by “visual signature” of equipment? Does this refer to the heat/IR signature?

A9: The “visual signature” refers to the equipment on which CIDAS is applied being vulnerable, or susceptible to easier detection or targeting in a hostile environment. Using CIDAS on equipment should not increase the vulnerability of the equipment through residual effects such as added heat/IR signature or permanently altering the color of equipment, which could negatively affect the purpose of the camouflage.

Q10: PSPEC (3.10.8) states that the applicator should have a 10-year service life. Does the government anticipate an annual service/support contract for the equipment?

A10: The government will consider an annual service/support contract as part of the Sustainment Business Case Analysis, which will be conducted during the EMD Phase.

Q11: Is a Cost Plus Fixed fee arrangement anticipated for any research and development efforts performed?

A11: There is no R&D element to this solicitation at this time.

Q12. Winds – Is there a cross wind spec for effective application at a maximum wind speed?

A12. We are not aware of any such specification but would expect the application to be dependent on the technology. Wind will not be generated for outdoor testing but will be whatever the weather conditions are in the area in which testing is conducted. Laboratory testing will be completed in hoods or during swatch testing with minimal air flow across samples (e.g. .3 lpm for swatch).

Q13. Indicator – is visible detection to be completed only with unaided eye, or can an electronic detector be used?

A13. The PSPEC has no requirements preventing use of additional equipment as part of the proposed system. The vendor may propose any system that meets the PSPEC requirements.

Q14. Price – What are the objective Price Points? For Applicator/Indicator/ Consumables

A14. The Government will not disclose objective price points. The Government has allowed maximum flexibility in the pricing of these products. Products should be priced bearing in mind tradeoffs between the importance of technical performance, reuse, and cost effectiveness.

Q15. Acq Strategy – How is DFoS and its first program CIDAS aligned to other advanced development programs like IBD? And DR-SKO?

A15. CIDAS is not part of IBD or DR-SKO but the Program Office will coordinate with these other programs to ensure cognizance of schedules and efforts..

Q16. Funding and Tech Maturity – Is the extended program schedule due to lack of funding and support in current POM? Or due to concerns with the TRL?

A16. The schedule is aligned with further refinement of User requirements (which may leverage results from Competitive Prototyping events), meeting necessary acquisition activities and milestones, and corresponding funding.

Q17. Is the army only considering physical removal as the method of decon?

A17. This is not applicable to the CIDAS.

Q18. What decon agent is to be used?

A18. CIDAS must be compatible with legacy decontaminants as listed in the PSPEC.

Q19. Does a contractor have to bid to offer indicators applicable for all nerve and blister agents?

A19. The indicator shall meet the minimum indication levels as defined in the PSPEC.

TD phase testing will focus on GD, HD, and VX.

Q20. What is the EMD, LRP and FRP estimates for the number of applicators and amount of indicator material?

A20. This information is not available at this time. Services will provide their Initial and Full Operational Capability requirements following receipt of Competitive Prototyping test results and estimated unit costs.

Q21. Is a TD phase required to compete for EMD phase contract?

A21. No

Q22. With continuing resolution at a new start, is RFP release dependent on FY13 budget?

A22. The RFP release is not dependant on the FY13 budget, but the contract award is.

As noted in Section A of the RFP, award is subject to the availability of funds.

Q23. Is the TRL Level of 6 needed to be awarded TD phase contract or is that required by end of TD Phase?

A23. Technology must achieve TRL 6 by the end of the TD phase.

Q24. Does indicator have to meet all KPP 3.1.1.1 Chemical (e.g. HD, VX, and GD) or can indicator meet only 1 or 2 of the chemical KPPs? e.g. HD and/or VX and/or GD?

A24. If the proposed solution(s) can only partially meet the PSPECs, the Offeror should clearly identify which parameters can and cannot be met. If a proposed solution is rated high during evaluation, it may be selected despite not meeting all requirements.

However, technical ratings will be a function of the strength of the proposed solution's ability to meet the performance requirements (indication/compatibility/other factors) and the number of Chemical KPPs that can be indicated. In other words, all other technical factors being equal, the proposed solution that is effective for all three (HD, VX, and GD) will be rated higher than a proposed solution that can meet two, and that will be rated higher than a proposed solution that can meet only one.

Q25. It was mentioned two awards are anticipated. Are more than two awards for TD phase possible?

A25. The contract is structured for multiple awards. The Government anticipates two contract awards. Based on technical merit and available funding, we may award more than two contracts.

Q26. Requirements has KPPs for:

a. 3.1.1.1 Chemical

b. 3.1.1.2 NTAs

c. 3.1.1.3 Radioactivity

d. 3.1.1.4 TIC

e. 3.1.1.5 Biological

How does that equate to the Indicator and applicator? e.g. does one indicator need to meet all KPPs? All Chemicals? Etc.

A26. 3.1.1.3, 3.1.1.4, and 3.1.1.5 are desired requirements only. Although 3.1.1.1 and

3.1.1.2 are minimum (threshold) requirements, a single indicator is not required to meet both of these requirements. The applicator shall be capable of applying all proposed indicators.