Attachment 30 FWS-I Q and A Tracker 5 FEB 2021.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 43 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W91CRB-21-R-0012
About this file
This is a solicitation for the Family of Weapon Sights - Individual (FWS-I) Full Rate Production contract. The Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground is soliciting proposals to produce the FWS-I, associated spare parts, and provide maintenance and technical support. The FWS-I is an uncooled, lightweight infrared imaging device used for surveillance and target acquisition on individual weapons during various conditions. When paired with an Intra-Soldier Wireless device, the FWS-I also provides a wireless Rapid Target Acquisition capability. Proposals are due in Q1 2021, with awards planned for Q4 2021. The contract will have one follow-on award and up to two additional awards via the Prototype Development and Risk Reduction process. Adherence to schedules, integration, qualification, and intellectual property rights are emphasized.
View the file
Other files
Show all 46
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A
| Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 | Question & Answers |
| This will be posted to beta.SAM.gov |
| No. | RFP Document | Section / Paragraph # | RFP Wording | Question /Comment for Government | Government Response |
| Note: MS Word's automatic paragraph numbering and our Contract Writing Sytems caused an issue with Section L&Ms paragraph numbering. For Amendment 3, Section L&M have ben manually re-numbered. Please be cognizant of this when reviewing the Questions & Answers as well as the orginal solicitation. Appologies for the inconvenience. | |||||
| 1 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I | Section C- Descriptions and Specifications : STATEMENT OF WORK 4 JAN 2021. Paragraph 5 | Page 21 of the solicitation includes the following language: “Recipients shall NOT: Redistribute the documentation outside their company/organization that includes other subsidiaries within the corporate structure.” | Excelitas is confirming that the Redistribution / Export of that the FWS-I RFP Solicitation and Exhibit A document posted on SAM.gov yesterday can be exported to Qioptiq Limited (Excelitas wholly owned UK subsidiary) A valid TAA was put in place to allow the export of these documents. I have included the TAA as written as well as the DSP-5 related to TA-1020-20. | There is no objection |
| 2 | Exhibit A FWS-I CDRLs of solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 | Section FWS-I CDRLs, 22 June 2020, page 1, Paragraph 5 | Page 1 of the solicitation includes the following language: “Recipients shall NOT: Redistribute the documentation outside their company/organization that includes other subsidiaries within the corporate structure.” | Excelitas is confirming that the Redistribution / Export of that the FWS-I RFP Solicitation and Exhibit A document posted on SAM.gov yesterday can be exported to Qioptiq Limited (Excelitas wholly owned UK subsidiary) A valid TAA was put in place to allow the export of these documents. I have included the TAA as written as well as the DSP-5 related to TA-1020-20. | See answer to #1 |
| 3 | Performance Spec | 3.3.1.1.1.1, 3.3.1.1.1.2 | 3.3.1.1.1.1 The FWS-I ... while in spatially aligned RTA mode (3.3.2.1.1), shall have an 80 percent or greater probability of recognizing a personnel-sized target (standing) out to a range of 300 meters (T), and 480 meters (O) meters during night engagements in atmospheric conditions which provide seven kilometer visibility along an unobstructed line of sight (3.6.22). |
| 3.3.1.1.1.2 FWS-I while in spatially aligned RTA mode (3.3.2.1.1) shall have a 90 percent or greater probability of recognizing a personnel-sized target (standing) out to a range of 50 meters (T), and 150 meters (O) in dirty battlefield conditions (3.6.20) and adverse weather (3.6.19). | Spatially aligned RTA mode operates using wireless video that may be warped/scaled by RTA processing which is viewed by the user on an ISW ICD-compliant headset as opposed to the FWS-I display. Will the Government please provide definition of the modeling parameters for the ISW ICD-compliant headset identified as "CFI" on the Display and Human Vision page of the Performance Modeling Requirements and any display optic MTF as well as electronics MTF associated with receiving the wireless video and warping/scaling in accordance with PS 3.3.2.1.1? | Industry should model the RTA mode performance using the same display values used when modeling the FWS-I in clip-on mode. These two requirement paragraphs shall remain as is. | ||
| 4 | Performance Spec | 3.3.1.1.1.2, 3.6.20 | 3.3.1.1.1.2 FWS-I shall have a 90 percent or greater probability of recognizing a personnel-sized target (standing) out to a range of 300 meters (T), and 480 meters (O) meters in dirty battlefield conditions (3.6.20) and adverse weather (3.6.19). |
3.6.20 Dirty battlefield conditions include obscurant smoke from fog oil (α=0.03, CL=2), white phosphorous (α=0.38, CL=1.9), and hexachloro-ethane-zinc oxide (α =0.02, CL=20), and shall be modeled using the worst case condition, white phosphorous. The atmospheric transmission associated with dirty battlefield conditions are not explicitly defined. Can the Army please confirm that the modeling for dirty battlefield conditions are to add the specified smoke parameters to the atmosphere specified for clear-air conditions (MODTRAN atmospheric transmission data for US Standard Atmosphere 1976 for a five kilometer visibility day (Urban)? Yes, that is the correct method for modeling dirty battlefield conditions.
| 5 | SOW | 3.5.1 | The contractor is required to submit their standard warranty. The FWS-I systems warranty will be for a minimum of two years or fielding, whichever comes first. | Will the Government please define what is meant by fielding and how fielding will be communicated to the contractor? | FWS-I systems accepted by the Government on Delivery Orders are stored at Rock Island Arsenal (RIA) and then fielded, or issued to an operation unit. FWS-I system acceptance and fielding dates are tracked by Serial Number. The Government will report systems fielded by serial number to the vendor during IPT meetings. |
| 6 | Solicitation | Section C, SOW Para 3.5.1, Section L Para 1.1.2.2.2, Section M Para 3.2.3.1.2. | Section C SOW states "The contractor will verify warranty status and ship a spec-compliant replacement system no later than 10 business days upon receipt of the failed unit. |
Section L States "Offeror shall discuss its approach and methodology to providing a replacement system no later than 48 hours upon receipt of the failed unit."
and Section M states "The SSEB will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed warranty and the adequacy of its approach and methodology to providing a replacement system no later than 48 hours upon receipt of a warranty failure." The Government updated the warranty response time requirement in the final SOW but did not update Sections L & M. Will the Government please confirm that the requirement for replacing a unit that fails during the warranty period is 10 business days as specified in the updated SOW? The warranty turn around time in the SOW (10 business days) is correct. Section L and M will be revised to state 10 business days, not 48 hours.
| 7 | Solicitation | Section L Para 1.1.2.4.1 | The instructions for Volume 4 state "Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) information shall be submitted for the contracts referenced (if available);" | CPARS can be lengthy often running to many pages, will the Government please confirm that CPARS may be included in an appendix to Volume 4 (still within the volume) and that CPARS are excluded from page count? | CPARS data, Cure Notices, and Show-cause Notices will not count toward the Volume 4 page limit. This will be noted in Section L. |
| 8 | Solicitation | Section L Para 1.1.2.4.1 | The instructions for Volume 4 state "Offeror shall also provide a copy of any cure notices or show-cause notices received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action taken)." | Cure notices or show-cause notices can be lengthy running to multiple pages, will the Government please confirm that CPARS may be included in an appendix to Volume 4 (still within the volume) and that cure or show cause notices are excluded from page count? | See Government response to question #7. |
| 9 | Solicitation | Section B, SOW, Exhibit A | Section B CLIN 0022 IPS & HSI references CDRL E010. SOW 3.4.9 is "Deleted". SOW 3.4.9 in the Draft RFP was Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (E010). Exhibit A, CDRL, has a red note on E010 that says "unassigned". | Will the Government please confirm that CDRL E010 is no longer required? | CDRL E010 is not required, and has been removed from all CLIN descriptions. |
| 10 | Performance Spec | 3.3.4.2.1 | Once the FWS-I has been zeroed to the host weapon, the paired ISW ICD component shall provide for an RTA reticle that aligns the RTA aimpoint to the FWS-I reticle aim point to within half an FWS-I IFOV. The reticle within the FWS-I video stream shall then be turned off as to not cause confusion of reticle symbology when presented in the ISW ICD headset display. | The first sentence in this paragraph establishes a requirement that is not implemented within the FWS-I and, as such, should be changed to informational. Will the Government please change the first sentence to read "Once the FWS-I has been zeroed to the host weapon, the paired ISW ICD component provides for an RTA reticle that aligns the RTA aimpoint to the FWS-I reticle aim point to within half an FWS-I IFOV."? | No. Any vendor that receives award will be provided with a GFE ISW emulator device in order to test any and all wireless requirements such as the IFOV shift. |
| 11 | Performance Spec | 3.3.4.2.2 | Manual Alignment. The user shall have the ability to manually align the RTA capability at any time using one hand only. This manual alignment shall not be required within 15 minutes of the last automatic alignment/registration between the FWS-I and ISW ICD headset images. Manual alignment of the RTA capability shall take no more than 70 milliseconds to complete. | ||
| This paragraph imposes requirements which the FWS-I cannot control as they are implemented by the user and the ISW ICD-compliant headset. Will the Government please delete this paragraph, or change it to establish the FWS-I contribution to the requirement? | No. Alignment is done via button press on FWS-I not the ICD-headset. FWS-I ISW ICD additionally calls out allowable drift tolerance on IMU data. The FWS-I design must meet the 70ms requirement when paired with the GFE ISW emulator. | ||||
| 12 | Performance Spec | 3.3.4.3 | RTA Boresight Shift. Defined as the ability to retain an angular relationship between the optical line of sight represented by the RTA reticle and the FWS-I reticle that meets the FWS-I Weapon Boresight Retention requirement (3.3.3.8.1). The RTA reticle shall retain boresight with the FWS-I mounted to any of the weapons specified in Table 3.3.4.3-1 and over all environmental conditions, weapons fire shock (in accordance with the shock cycle limits for boresight retention contained in Table 3.3.8.16.1-1), temperature, temperature shock, vibration, shock, feed tray closure shock, mount/dismount cycles, input voltage drift, power on/off cycles, change Field of View cycles, or any compounded combination of these conditions, within the limits specified in the Tables. | This paragraph imposes requirements which the FWS-I cannot control as they are primarily implemented in the ISW ICD-compliant headset. Will the Government please delete this paragraph, or change it to establish the FWS-I contribution to the requirement? | No. Any vendor that receives award will be provided with a GFE ISW emulator device in order to test any and all wireless requirements such as the boresight shift requirements. |
| 13 | Performance Spec | Table 4.6-1 | Table 4.6-1 includes a row for paragraph 3.3.4.4 Controls with no verification requirements. Paragraph 3.3.4.4 includes three shall statements | Please clarify the verification requirements for paragraph 3.3.4.4? | The listing for paragraph 3.3.4.4 in table 4.6-1 has been changed to reflect shalls in the requirement. |
| 14 | SOW | 3.5.8 | No special tools or TMDE shall be required to repair the FWS-I at the field-level. For any system that has not attained MR, use of Modular ARMY TMDE for Maintainer-level maintenance. | The second sentence is incomplete. Please clarify this sentence? | The solicitation will be modified to read: "Any system that has not attained materiel release shall use the Modular ARMY TMDE for Maintainer-level maintenance." |
| 15 | SOW | 3.5.10, 3.5.11, 3.5.14 | 3.5.10: ... The SSP will consist of the following: a) Revised GFI Technical Manuals ... |
3.5.11: … For any system that has not completed MR, the contractor shall plan and support Field-Level and Maintainer-Level LDs for the FWS-I prior to Government OT using an LD Plan, Government personnel representative of the target audience trained by the contractor, and contractor-provided training material and revised GFI technical manuals
| 3.5.14: … For any system that has not attained MR, the contractor shall develop a 23&P... | LD plans and SSP specify "revised GFI technical manuals". 3.5.14 requires development of a 23&P manual but does not mention revising a GFI manual. The approach for developing the 23&P manual using as a baseline the AN/PAS-35 23&P manual simplifies training and operation in support of sustainment level maintenance. This benefit is similar to that gained at the field level by providing the -10 manual for common operation and support of the FWS-I across variants. Will the Government please confirm that development of the 23&P relies on revising the existing AN/PAS-35 23&P manual and provide the manual to support developing the proposal? | No, it is the vendor's responsibility to develop a 23&P Manual that describes the maintenance work packages for their design. The Government will not provide a baseline 23&P Manual as GFI. | |||
| 16 | Performance Spec | 3.3.7.1.1 | "operational check consisting of all pre- and post-tests indicated by a “*” in table 4.6-1" | The PS added a definition for "operational check" (3.6.15) which is repeated within paragraphs 3.3.7.1.1 and 3.3.8. Paragraph 3.3.7.1.1 requires, after every sixth thermal cycle, an "operational check consisting of all pre- and post-tests indicated by a “*” in table 4.6-1 ...". |
It is not clear if this operational check is to include the requirements stated in 3.6.15 in addition to the specified pre- and post-tests, or if it is only the specified pre- and post-tests.
| If the former, will the Government please change the language to "After every six cycles, the FWS-I shall be subjected to an operational check (3.6.15) and all pre- and post-tests indicated by a “*” in table 4.6-1 ...".? If the latter, then will the Government please change the language to "After every six cycles, the FWS-I shall be subjected to post-thermal cycle tests consisting of ..."? | Paragraph 3.3.7.1.1 will be revised to remove the term "operational check". It will state "After every six cycles, the FWS-I shall be subjected to post-thermal cycle tests consisting of all pre- and post-tests indicated by a “*” in table 4.6-1." | |||||
| 17 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Note 8) Weight by test and Interface with HMA by demonstration. | The note does not appear to apply to the table. Will the Government please confirm that the note is not applicable? | The Government confirms this note is not applicable. The note will be replaced with "Deleted". | |
| 18 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Note 12) Humidity and Explosive Atmosphere shall be tested after Functional Shock. | (1) This note is not affixed to the Explosive Atmosphere line item. Will the Government please affix the note to requirement 3.3.8.11 or remove this portion of the note (2) Order of humidity test is already defined by the note? | The note shall be affixed. The specification will be revised such that rows 3.3.8.11 of Table 4.6-1 refers to note 12. | |
| 19 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Note 13) Group C Semi-annual testing shall be conducted by the vendor. | Requirement 3.3.8.16.2 is listed as five systems and Govt Test. Is note 13 indicating that this is a Govt Test for PQT/FAT and a vendor test for Group C semiannual test? | Note 13 will be revised to "The vendor is required to test during PQT/FAT as well as semi-annually during Group C. In addition, this requirement is also validated during Government testing." | |
| 20 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Note 17) For Reliability, a Government approved ENVG simulator that replicates the optical interface between the RTA and ENVG, provides realistic ENVG imagery and can accept and display FWS-I RTA imagery on an actual ENVG display may be used | Will the Government please change the wording to: "...replicates the wireless interface between the FWS-I and ENVG…"? | Note 17 will be changed to "For Reliability, a Government approved ISW emulator that replicates the wireless interface between the FWS-I and ENVG may be used." | |
| 21 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Note 23) Quantity can be increased, up to 10 systems, as test infrastructure grows. | This note does not appear to apply to the table. Will the Government please remove this note? | The Government agrees that Note 23 does not apply. Note 23 will be revised to state "Not used". | |
| 22 | Performance Spec | 4.6 | Chemical compatibility (3.3.8.21) sample-size call-out in table 4.6-1 is 2 systems | Will the Government please add a note that allows this to be 2 sets of material coupons or full systems? | Material coupons are acceptable. | |
| 23 | SOW | 4.4 | FMS Training Materials. The contractor shall provide updated/tailored training materials for each FMS training event. The contractor shall deliver to the Government all training materials in accordance with CDRLG003. Approved Training material shall be provided for each operator/crew level and maintainer level training event in sufficient quantities to support all students. | CDRL G003 (CLIN 0039) has no deliverable schedule. See "Block 16" is referenced in the CDLR for 10. Frequency, 11. As of Date, 12. Date of First Submission and 13. Date of Subsequent Submission. Block 16, Remarks, has no text defining parameters for Blocks 10 - 13. What are the parameters for Blocks 10 - 13? | FMS CLINS are included to provide scope and ceiling. No schedule has been determined at this time. |
Block 16 of CDRL G003 will be revised accordingly.
| 24 | CDRL | E005 & E006 | |
| (CLIN 0025 & 0026) | CDRL E005 states: |
The contractor shall prepare and submit Operator/Crew Training Materials prior to:
• 50% Training Review • 80% Training Review • 100% Training Review 50%, 80% and 100% Training Reviews shall be IMS tasks.
CDRL E006 states:
The contractor shall prepare and submit Maintainer Level Training Materials prior to: • 50% Training Review • 80% Training Review • 100% Training Review
| 50%, 80% and 100% Training Reviews shall be IMS tasks. | In section 3.4.9. "Government and Contractor Testing" of the SOW there is a reference to Table I "Anticipated FWS-I Event Schedule" which only list 50% and 100% training review events. Is the 80% Training Review going to be a CDRL deliverable? If so, when is the Estimated Date after Contract award / Location and what is the impact to the number of systems required? | Table I is not a complete schedule. It is provided to give vendors a means to identify interdependencies between select milestones. The 80% training review is a CDRL deliverable as stated in E005 and E006. There is no impact to the number of systems required. Systems may be re-used at the 80% training review. The IMS in the vendors proposal should include the projected dates for all training reviews. A note will be added to table one explaining that it is not an exhaustive list of required events. | ||||
| 25 | CLIN | 3.3.1.2. | Subcontractor and Vendor Management. The contractor shall establish and maintain a subcontract management program. The contractor shall facilitate Government and subcontractor discussions/ activities as required by the Government. The contractor shall submit Small Business Utilization Report six months after contract award and every six months thereafter in accordance with CDRL B005. | CDRL B005 is not listed in Section B of the Solicitation. Should CDRL B005 be listed under CLIN 0015 of Section B? | Yes. The Government will amend Item Number 0015 to include B005. | |
| 26 | CLIN | Section B | The CLIN descriptions in Section B for CLIN 0003 is FWS-I Systems PY1, CLIN 0005 FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2, CLIN 0007 FWS-I FRP Systems Py-3, CLIN 0009 FWS-I Systems PY-4, and CLIN 0011 FWS-I FRP Systems PY-5. | CLIN 0003 does not contain the word "LRIP" in the description. Is the contractor to assume the CLIN 0003 is considered LRIP? CLIN 0009 does not contain the word "FRP" in the description, is the Contractor to assume that CLIN 0009 is FRP? | It is of no concequence or impact to the vendor whether the systems are designated as LRIP or FRP. Therefore, LRIP and FRP will be removed from all CLIN descriptions. | |
| 27 | Solicitation | Sect L, paras 1.1.1.1.1 and 1.1.2.2.1 | Supporting documentation will not be considered in the page limits and its applicability is denoted in the paragraphs below. Supporting documentation shall be submitted as annexes to the applicable Volume. | |||
| Offerors shall use the SOW, the FWS-I Performance Specification and all other applicable portions of the RFP as the basis for preparing their proposals. Offerors shall ensure all requirements in these documents are addressed; failure to do so may result in an Offeror’s removal from the competitive range | Will the Government allow Cross Reference Matrices demonstrating that all Performance Specification and SOW requirements have been addressed as supporting documentation and therefore not in the page limits for the applicable Volume? | Yes. Annex H should be a cross-reference between the SOW and WBS. Offerors may also cross-reference to their performance specs in this annex. | ||||
| 28 | Solicitation, beta.sam | Due Date | Original Date Offers Due: Feb 10, 2021 12:00 pm EST | The number of documents included in the RFP increased significantly from 4 in the draft to more than 32 in the final. Many of the additional documents include information that may have significant effects on FWS-I design, testing, qualification, and support. Additionally, a number of our questions may affect our approach. We will need sufficient time for the Government to answer questions and to act upon the answers to those questions. |
The 30-day turn is the normal period given for most RFP responses. However, the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic makes the proposal response anything but normal. We are all working remotely, unable to gather in a common location to work solutions, there is none of the continuous discussion and sharing that normally takes place in a proposal room, and managing the large number of documents required for the proposal response across the dozens of personnel involved requires both significant extra effort and time.
| Will the Government please grant a two week extension to allow contractors to overcome these hardships and deliver a quality proposal to the Government's benefit? | The proposal due date has been changed to 25 Feb 2021 as posted on betaSAM.gov | |||||
| 29 | Solicitation | Sect M 3.2.2 | Sub-factor 1 – Small Business Participation Plan (A/U) | The wording in Section M does not match that of Section L, will the Government please update Section M to Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) IAW Section L? | Section M has been revised with SBPCD. |
| 30 | Solicitation | Sect M 3.2.3.4.1 | Sub-factor 1 – Small Business Participation Plan (A/U) | The wording in Section M does not match that of Section L, will the Government please update Section M to Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) IAW Section L? | The answer is provided with question #29. | |
| 31 | Solicitation | Sect B CLIN 0030 (CDRL E011), SOW 3.5.12 | It's unclear as to what is supposed to be priced in CLIN 0030 (CDRL E011). 3.5.12 is for conduct of I&KPT not development of training, which is what CDRL E011 states. The training is being developed under E005 and E006. E011 should not say to develop training material. E011 really shouldn't be a CDRL because there is no "true data" deliverable for it. There should be a separate CLIN for the effort to conduct the I&KPT. | |||
| Will the Government please clarify what is to be priced in CLIN 0030? | CLIN 0030 should include the cost to execute the training to include, travel, labor, and printed copies of the materials. CDRL E011 will be revised to remove duplicate deliverables. | |||||
| 32 | Solicitation | Sect L 1.1.2.2.1 | Identify in the below chart the SBCs by company name, business category(ies), description of products or services, specific PWS reference number, NAICS code to be provided by each SBC and the nature of the commitment with the SBC (i.e., letter of commitment, joint ventures, mentor protégé agreements, others). | There is no PWS with this solicitation, will the Government please clarify what reference numbers we should use for Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD)? | PWS is removed, and in it's place states, Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph" | |
| 33 | Solicitation | Section B, CLIN 0003 | CLIN 0003 |
FWS-I Systems PY-1
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-1 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0005
FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-2 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0007
FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-3 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
| PSC CD: 1240 | The title for the Supplies/Services of this CLIN reads: “FWS-I Systems PY-1”. The title for CLIN 0005 reads: “FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2”. The title for CLIN 0007 reads: “FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3”. Will the Government please update the title of CLIN 0003 to read “FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-1”? | The answer is provided with question #26. | ||
| 34 | Solicitation | Section B, CLIN 0003 | CLIN 0003 |
FWS-I Systems PY-1
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-1 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0005
FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-2 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0007
FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-3 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
| PSC CD: 1240 | The title for the Supplies/Services of this CLIN reads: “FWS-I Systems PY-1”. The title for CLIN 0005 reads: “FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2”. The title for CLIN 0007 reads: “FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3”. Will the Government please clarify that only LRIP levels will be procured for PY-1 and PY-2? | The answer is provided with question #26. | ||
| 35 | Solicitation | Section B, CLIN 0003 | CLIN 0003 |
FWS-I Systems PY-1
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-1 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0005
FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-2 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
PSC CD: 1240
CLIN 0007
FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3
FFP
Family of Weapon Sights, Individual (FWS-I), Systems PY-3 in-accordance-with the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated herein.
FOB: Destination
| PSC CD: 1240 | The title for the Supplies/Services of this CLIN reads: “FWS-I Systems PY-1”. The title for CLIN 0005 reads: “FWS-I LRIP Systems PY-2”. The title for CLIN 0007 reads: “FWS-I FRP Systems PY-3”. | |||||
| Will the Government please clarify which is the first LRIP CLIN? | The answer is provided with question #26. | |||||
| 36 | SOW | Appendix A | SOW Appendix A states: “A Common TMDE station shall be provided by the Government which includes a base hardware and software interface (NVLabCap-based) to support all measurements required to sustain the FWS-I.” | Will the Government please clarify: (1) which of the items listed in Tables 1 and 2 of Attachment 15 “Attachment 15 draft M_TMDE Technical Manual (1).docx” are to be provided in addition to Item 1 listed in Section G of the solicitation, (2) what date (months after award) this GFE will be provided, and (3) whether this GFE remains with the contractor throughout the life of the contract | The modular TMDE station will not be provided to the vendor as GFE. The modular TMDE stations will be installed for maintenance of FWS-I in the field. Design data and drawings of the modular TMDE stations will be provided to the vendors as GFI; vendors will indicate when this data is required in the post-award conference. The Government will ensure access to a modular TMDE station as required by IPT determination for events such as training reviews. | |
| 37 | RFP Section I - and the TEP Worksheet | Section I - 52.216-19 Order Limitations and the TEP Worksheet | (a) Minimum order. When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than 104 units, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract. |
(b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor -
(1) Any order for a single item in excess of 86,557 units;
(2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of 86,557 units; or
(3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within 180 days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in paragraph (b) (1) or (2) of this section.
(c) If this is a requirements contract (i.e., includes the Requirements clause at subsection 52.216-21 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), the Government is not required to order a part of any one requirement from the Contractor if that requirement exceeds the maximum-order limitations in paragraph (b) of this section.
| (d) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the Contractor shall honor any order exceeding the maximum order limitations in paragraph (b), unless that order (or orders) is returned to the ordering office within 5 days after issuance, with written notice stating the Contractor's intent not to ship the item (or items) called for and the reasons. Upon receiving this notice, the Government may acquire the supplies or services from another source. | In the Step Ladder Pricing worksheet in the TEP the offeror can fill out the maximum quantity per year. CLINS 003, 005, 007, 009, and 011 all pull from a single cell (C45) which the contractor can fill in. CLIN 002 which shows up twice is not a calculated cell as inferred but does have the number 20 in it. According to Section I Order Quantity, the maximum is 86,557. Coes the Government desire us to divide 86,557 by five years and use the number 17,311 as the max per year or can the contractor put whatever maximum quantity they desire in C45? Can the Government please clarify thier intended maximum order quantity per year? | The contractor can put any maximum quantity they feel they can reaslistically deliver in a year in C45. Prior to award, the Government will modify 52.216-19(b)(1) to match the proposed value in this cell. Refer to Section M for evaluation of maximum production capacity. | ||
| 38 | RFP Section M and Specification | RFP Section M 2.2.3.1.1.2 Target Recognition and Specification Paragraph 3.3.1.1.1.1 and .2 Target Recognition | Section M offers a strength ≥70 percent at ≥ 1,250 meters at night AND ≥90 percent at ≥ 500 meters in obscured conditions |
HOWEVER
| The Specification has ≥70 percent at ≥ 1,200 meters at night AND ≥90 percent at ≥ 480 meters in obscured conditions as the Objective requirements | Can the Government modify either the specification or Section so they match or was this intentional? | The Government will revise Section M so that the definition of strength for target recognition mathces the specification objective. | ||||
| 39 | RFP Section L | Section L, 1.1.2.1 Volume 1 and Section L, 1.1.2.3 Volume 3 – | Section L, 1.1.2.1 Volume 1 – Offer states that Standard Form 33 and Section B are to be included in Volume 1. Section L, 1.1.2.3 Volume 3 – Cost/Price states that Standard Form 33 and Section B are to be included in Volume 3. | Does the Government want duplicate copies of the Standard Form 33 and Section B to be included in both Volumes 1 and 3? Please confirm. | Yes, include in both Volumes 1 and 3 | |
| 40 | TEP Worksheet | CLIN 0013 for FMS Systems | CLIN 0013 for FMS Systems | CLIN 0013 is a Plug Number of $5,000,000 from the Government. However on the Stepladder pricing sheet the Government has asked for individual pricing for CLIN 0013. Is it correct to assume that we should ignore CLIN 0013 on the Stepladder pricing Tab? | The Government desires step-ladder pricing for CLIN 0013 in order to assist in planning FMS cases. The pricing for CLIN 0013 will not be used in calculating the total evaluated price. The Government will increase the CLIN 0013 ceiling to $20M in the TEP. | |
| 41 | Sect L | 1.1.2.2.1 Subfactor 1-FWS-I Performance | "Offeror's proposed approach to meeting or exceeding all Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) thresholds and any other objective requirements identified in the FWS-I PS, and shall cross- reference to the Offeror's proposed FWS-I PS (see 2.1.2.2.1.1 below). " and then under Element 1 - "The Offeror's changes shall be explained in the narrative (see 2.1.2.2.1 above)" | Is it correct to assume there is a typographical mistake and the first Reference Should be (1.1.2.2.1.Element 1) and the second reference back should be 1.1.2.2.1? | This is a correct assumption/interpretation, and the solicitation will be amended to remedy the error. | |
| 42 | SOW and Specification | SOW Paragraph 3.5.4 and Specification Paragraph 3.5.1.5 | SOW 3.5.4. IPS Requirements. The contractor shall plan, manage, and execute an IPS program that assures the FWS-I achieves an operational availability of ≥ 81% (threshold), 90% (objective). | |||
| Specifcation 3.5.1.5 The FWS-I shall support an operational availability of no less than 90% measured over the 8-day wartime usage period | Is it correct to assume the Statement of Work is the more complete requirement and there is an 81% Threshold and a 90% Objective for Availability? | The Government will remove the specific operational availability requirement from the SOW. | ||||
| 43 | Sect L | Sect L 1.1.2.2.4 - Subfactor 4 Program Management - Production Manufacturing Plan (PMP) | The plan shall include discussion of initial monthly production rate, normal monthly production rate (based on one shift, operating eight hours a day, and five days a week), minimum monthly economical rate, and maximum sustainable monthly production capacity, maximum surge production capacity, and maximum duration of surge | Can the Government clarify what they mean by Minimum Monthly Economical rate? Since the TEP worksheet requires stepladder pricing down to a Qty of 1, we are contractually committed to any quantity the Government wants to order offered in the Stepladder price ranges. Is the Minimum Economical intended for the offeror to discuss the minimum quantity to keep the factory running smoothly? | The intent of "minimium monthly economical rate" is minimum sustaining rate. The Government requires pricing for smaller quanities in the event that foreign militaries or other services desire to add small order quantities against a CLIN after the Army has placed a sustaining order on that CLIN. In accordance with clause 52.216-19, the vendor is not obligated to accept an order of 1 system. | |
| 44 | SOW, Appendix L Perf Spec | 3.2.3 | FWS-I Interoperability. The contractor shall be responsible for ensuring the FWS-I devices procured under this contract are compliant with the ISW ICD, the buttonology located in the TM 11-588-343-10, and the keep-out zones referenced in Appendix L of the Performance Specification. | Section 3.2.3 in the SOW refers to keep-out zones referenced in Appendix L of the Performance Specification however there is no Appendix L in the Specification. Can the Government provide Appendix L? | Keep out zones have been moved into the body of the specification and are now called out in sections 3.3.3.10 and section 3.3.3.11. | |
| 45 | Solicitation, CDRL Exhibit A | Section L, Sec B CLINs, CDRL Exhibit A | Section L specifies that CDRLS written on CLIN 0015 are amortized over CLINs 0003-0012, however, per the CDRL exhibit A, the due dates would fall within execution of CLIN 0001. Can the Government please clarify? | Following qualification, and once in steady state production, the CLIN 0015 CDRL's will have normalized values that will be amoritized in production price. The Government agrees that the CDRLs associated with CLIN 0015 have delivery requirements which occur during Qualification and Production. Therefore, the paragraph will be revised to clearify that the costs of CLIN 0015 are amortized over CLINs 0001-0013. |
| 46 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 Attachment 01 - Performance Specification / Attachment 16 NVThemIP Modeling Guidance | Attachment 01 Sections 3.3.1.1.1.1 and 3.3.1.1.1.2 | The performance specification identifies three modes with standards, Stand Alone, Clip-on, and RTA. The modeling instruction given in Attachment 16 provides only for the Stand Alone mode. Does the Government need/require modeling data for Clip-on and RTA modes to fully evaluate the proposal? If so, will the Government please provide modeling instructions for the other two modes. | Modeling inputs for clip-on and stand-alone modes are identical with the exception that electronic zoom must be set to one in clip-on mode. Industry should model the RTA mode performance using the same display values used when modeling the FWS-I in clip-on mode. | |
| 47 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 Attachment 001 - Performance Specification | 3.3.2.1.1 and Table 4.6-1 | PS Section 3.3.2.1.1 is "deleted" and does not identify a Threshold. Table 4.6-1 identifies this item as having a Threshold. | Please advise if PS Section 3.3.2.1.1 is a Threshold item, and if so what is the Threshold value? | 3.3.2.1.1 should be a header paragraph titled "spacially aligned". Because it is a header paragraph there is no testable requirement. The solicitation will be revised accordingly. |
| 48 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 Attachment 001 - Performance Specification | 3.3.2.1.1 and Table 4.6-1 | PS Section 3.3.2.1.1 is "deleted". PS 3.3.2.1.1.2 is not deleted and remains a sub section of the deleted Section 3.3.2.1.1 | Please clarify is PS Section 3.3.2.1.1.2 remains current and if so, what pertinent information from deleted PS Section 3.3.2.1.1 applies? | See Government response to question #47. |
| 49 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 Attachment 001 - Performance Specification | 3.3.2.1.2 and Table 4.6-1 | PS Section 3.3.2.1.2 does not identify a Threshold. Table 4.6-1 identifies this item as having a Threshold. | Please advise if PS Section 3.3.2.1.2 is a Threshold item, and if so what is the Threshold value? | The Threshold in this case is not a value, but the ability to perform the action/meet the outlined requirement. The government will provide GFE emulators as part of any award for the contractor to test these requirements. Solicitation will be revised to remove threshold from Table 4.6-1. |
| 50 | Attachment 001 - Performance Specification | 3.3.2.1.3 and Table 4.6-1 | PS Section 3.3.2.1.3 does not identify a Threshold. Table 4.6-1 identifies this item as having a Threshold. | Please advise if PS Section 3.3.2.1.3 is a Threshold item, and if so what is the Threshold value? | See Government response to question #49. |
| 51 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 | Section L 1.1.2.2.2 paragraph 4 AND Section M 3.2.3.1.2 paragraph 4 | L 1.1.2.2.2: The Offeror shall include narrative describing the warranty offered for FWS-I systems and its approach, during the warranty period, to repair or replace, at no cost to the Government, any FWS-I system, and related spare parts that fails under normal operations, while in storage, or during transportation. The Offeror shall discuss its approach and methodology to providing a replacement system no later than 48 hours upon receipt of the failed unit. // M 3.2.3.1.2: The SSEB will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed warranty and the adequacy of its approach and methodology to providing a replacement system no later than 48 hours upon receipt of a warranty failure. | What signal/message from PEO triggers/starts the 48 hr clock for replacing the failed FWS-S system(s)? | The warranty clock is started when the failed unit arrives at the vendor's facility. Please note that there is a typo in Sections L and M that conflicts with the SOW. The required warranty turn-around time is 10 business days, not 48 hours. The solicitation will be revised accordlingly. |
| 52 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 | Section L, 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.3 item 1 | (1.1.2.1) Offerors shall include the following: Standard Form 33, "Solicitation, Offer and Award..." (1.1.2.3) Offerors shall submit the following for this Volume:1) Each Offeror shall submit a signed SF Form 33 | The RFP asks for the SF33 to be submitted in both volumes 1 and 3. Will the Government please clarify the requirement? | Please submit in both Volume 1 and 3. |
| 53 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 | Section L. 1.1.2.3 | 1) Each Offeror shall submit ...a completed and totaled Section B, and a completed Attachment #23 "Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Matrix" as part of its cost/price proposal | The RFP requests a completed and totaled Section B and a complete Attachment #23. The first tab in Attachment #23 contains a summary of Section B. Does completing the tab in Attachment #23 satisfy the requirement for submitting "a completed and totaled Section B" or does the Government expect a section B formatted similar to the RFP? | Neither. The RFP states, "Each Offeror shall submit a signed SF Form 33, a completed and totaled Section B, and a completed Attachment #23 "Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Matrix" as part of its cost/price proposal…" |
| 54 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 / Exhibit A | Section L 3.2.3.2 and CDRL B005 | Please confirm that CDRL B005 should be included in CLIN 15 as a NSP Integrated Program Management CDRL as is indicated in the CDRL description in Exhibit A. | Yes. The Government will ammend Item Number 0015 to include B005. | |
| 55 | Solicitation W91CRB21R0012 Exhibit A FWS-I CDRLs | CLIN 0022, CDRL E010 | CLIN 0022 calls for the submission of CDRL E010, but CDRL E010 has been removed from the list of CDRLs. Please clarify. | CDRL E010 has been eliminated and will be removed from CLIN 0022. | |
| 56 | Solicitation & Attachment+01+FWS-I+Performance+Specification+FRP-PRF-FWSI+09+Nov+2020 | Solication Section M, paragraph 2.2.3.1.1.2, Performance specification paragraphs 3.3.1.1.1.1 and 3.3.1.1.1.2 | The FWS-I shall have a 70 percent or greater probability of recognizing a person-sized target (standing) out to a minimum range of 960 meters during night engagements in atmospheric conditions which provide seven-kilometer visibility along an unobstructed line of sight. The FWS-I shall have a 90 percent or greater probability of recognizing a person sized target (standing) out to a minimum range of 300 meters in dirty battlefield and adverse weather conditions. The Offeror's proposed target recognition performance (2.1.2.2.1.1.2) is Annex C of Volume 2. Proposed Target Recognition performance that the SSEB can substantiate based on the Offeror’s proposal will result in a "Strength" IAW Table 7 - Target Recognition Discriminators. | Section 2.2.3.1.1.2 of the Solicitation describes the FWS-I Target Recognition for evaluation as a technical discriminator. The 2.2.3.1.1.2. paragraph calls out “a person-sized target (standing)” as one of the modeling criteria. This conflicts with the wording in Attachment 01 Performance Specification paragraphs 3.3.1.1.1.1 and 3.3.1.1.1.2 which call out “a personnel-sized target (upright moving man)” as one of the modeling criteria. Can the Government please clarify whether the person sized target for modeling is moving or standing for the analysis? There is no setting in the NVThermIP 2009 program to distinguish between moving or standing targets and there is no reference to standing or moving targets in Attachment 16. Can the Government please clarify how the modeling is intended to account for standing versus moving targets? | FWS-I Target Recognition will be modeled using an upright moving man target. References to "standing" will be corrected. |
| 57 | Attachment+10+FWS-I+SCG+25+APRIL+2018 | 4 | All users of this guide should also be familiar with "Long Wave Infrared Sensing Scanned Advanced Focal Plane and System Technology Security Classification Guide," 8 September 2006, and, "Infrared Focal Plane Technology Development for Uncooled Sensor Security Classification Guide," 19 April 2002. | The two referenced documents in paragrpah 4 of the FWS-I Security Classification Guide are not included with the solicitiation package - can the Government please provide these two additional security classification guides | Those two specific SCGs are now obsolete. The current Focal Plane Array SCG is "Security Classification Guide for Infrared Focal Plane Technology Development for Uncooled Sensors", |
Dated 13Jan2020. Vendors should direct requests for this document to Dieter Lohrman (rolf-dieter.j.lohrman.civ@mail.mil), and Cc the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist.
| 58 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | Section L/1.1.2.5 / 4. | Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR): The Prime Offerors (OTSB and small businesses) shall | |
| propose quantitative participation in terms of value of the total acquisition (total contract value). | Please confirm that the MQR should be calculated at the Full Rate Production Systems - Evaluated Order Quantities for years 21' to 25' on Step Ladder Pricing Worksheet tab of Attachment 23 FWS-I TEP. | Correct. | ||
| 59 | Attachment 23 FWS-I TEP | CLIN Summary by Year tab | PY1 2021 |
CLIN 0003 FWS-I Systems PY-1
| CLIN0004 FWS-I Spare/Repair Parts PY-1 | CLIN 0003 and 0004 are both in PY-1 in parallel to Qualification. They are not listed as LRIP or Qualification Systems. They predecess CLINs 0005 and 0006. Is this CLIN for the procurement of existing FWS-I or is it meant to front load procurement of systems that will be qualified under the program? | CLINs 0003 and 0004 are for procurement of FWS-I systems that have met all Qualification requirements. These CLINs provide flexibility in the event a vendor qualifies during PY-1. | ||
| 60 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.211-11 | Where: |
EXAMPLE (values are arbitrary): CLIN awarded for 150 systems at a unit cost of $10,000/system to be delivered over a three (3) month period at 50 system/month. Can the Government please clarify the following:
The table in the example appears to have multiple errors. Can the Government please address and publish a corrected version?
| "Actual Delivery Schedule" would be a better title for row #3, and the total for row #3 should be 150, not 350. The Government will correct these 2 errors in the next solicitation revision. | |||
| 61 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.211-11 | Where: |
EXAMPLE (values are arbitrary): CLIN awarded for 150 systems at a unit cost of $10,000/system to be delivered over a three (3) month period at 50 system/month. Can the Government please clarify the following:
The calculation for Delayed System Months does not appear to allow for the recovery of Delayed System Months by increasing the delivered quantity in future months. Can the Government please confirm this opportunity?
| Increasing future month deliveries recovers to the original cumulative schedule (this happens in May in the example.) This means that the Army has the quantity it expected to have in May, but that does not make up for the fact that the Army did not have the quantity it expected to have in Jan, Feb, Mar, or Apr. The purpose of this clause is to address the damages to the Army during these months. If a vendor suspects that it will not meet the contract delivery schedule, the vendor can reduce the cost to itself and damage to the Army by negotiating consideration for a new delivery schedule with the Government. | |||
| 62 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.211-11 | Where: |
EXAMPLE (values are arbitrary): CLIN awarded for 150 systems at a unit cost of $10,000/system to be delivered over a three (3) month period at 50 system/month. Can the Government please clarify the following:
Including such a provision in this procurement would obviously require the contractor to process significant excess material to cover the event of delayed deliveries. Can the Government confirm their obligation to assume this liability in the event of termination for any reason?
| Including the liquidated damages clause does not impact the Government's liability in the case of termination. The Government's specific liability would depend on the reason for termination and terms negotiated at the time of termination. If the contract is terminated for convenience, the Government would be liable for all material and labor costs incurred by the vendor in good faith. | |||
| 63 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.211-11 | Where: |
EXAMPLE (values are arbitrary): CLIN awarded for 150 systems at a unit cost of $10,000/system to be
| delivered over a three (3) month period at 50 system/month. | The utilization of liquidated damages in high volume, continual reliability tested products puts undue burden on both the Government and the contractor to operate within the total constraints of the program. Liquidated damages have not typically been utilized in these type of systems’ contract vehicles for this reason. The month to month delivery of products is tightly constrained to very rigorous quality requirements which ensure the fielding viability of the systems. These quality constraints which drive timelines via specified testing prior to shipment in combination with issue resolution through root cause corrective action determination and validation run counter to the Liquidated Damages schedule methodology. There are more typical financial consideration models that provide the Government and contractors the ability compensate for contractor deficiencies while also ensuring quality issue rectification is done in a manner that meets the overarching quality requirements. Leaving this clause in may limit the competitive field of the program. Will the Government remove the liquidated damages clause and move to another method of managing contractor schedule deficiencies? | The Liquidated Damages clause will not be removed as it is beneficial for both the Government and contractor to quickly assess the cost impact for deliveries that the contractor was not able to deliver within the set schedule. | ||||
| 64 | Solicitation W91CRB-21-R-0012 FWS-I.pdf | 2.1 | FWS-Mechanical Envelope Drawing | We do not see this as an attachment. Can the USG provide this document or point to the location in another already released document? | Envelope information has been moved to the body of the specification : 3.3.3.11 Proscribed area concerning Next Generation Squad Weapons – Fire control (NGSW-FC). |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .