PM-FSS-ULCANS-RFI Questions & Answers Last Updated 4/26/2017 PRE- SOLICITATION

Transcription

1 PRE- SOLICITATION PM-FSS-ULCANS-RFI Question 1: Are you looking for camo with multiple types of performance or just once that will perform best to a certain sensor? Answer 1: The ULCANS Increment I camouflage will incorporate multispectral sensor performance and will be optimized for sensor threats across the full electromagnetic spectrum. Question 2: Does the vendor have to test the camo against the technologies they (adversaries) have or against what you will provide? Answer 2: Vendors should plan to test camouflage against cutting edge US tactical and lab grade sensors, with the understanding that these domestic sensors represent a greater technology challenge, and may eventually be incorporated into adversary tactical sensors in the future. Question 3: Can we get more information on KPP's and CDD's changes? Answer 3: The ULCANS program will have a single KPP focused on sensor performance. That KPP is incorporated verbatim into the draft Performance Specification. Two KSAs will focus on Climate and Interoperability to inform where the system must operate, and what equipment it must operate with. Two APAs were also added which focus on total system weight and setup time. Question 4: Which areas of DOD will use this new program as a platform? Answer 4: This is an Army program, but the USMC has also expressed significant interest in utilizing this technology. Question 5: Please provide more information on centrally procured AAO and how many option years we anticipate? Answer 5: This will be a ten year contract with R&D as well as production. The centrally procured AAO is still in flux, but our research has identified a minimum sustaining rate of 300 system per month as the absolute minimum required to keep the industrial base. A production rate of 600 systems per month would sustain the industry while also allowing for some surge capability. Nominal production would be higher than those quantities. Question 6: What do you think are the toughest problems in executing this program? Answer 6: We have intensive laboratory and field testing planned, with a very aggressive test schedule. We re also dealing with a number of unknowns for FY17 Congressional funding. Question 7: Are you going to release the RFP even if it's subject to funding availability? Answer 7: Currently we re operating under the guidance that the RFP will be released even if funding is still pending. PEO CS&CSS may change that guidance as we get closer to the RFP release date. The contract will not be awarded until funding is available. Question 8: What are the ceilings going to be on the contract as far as dollar amount and quantities? Answer 8: The contract ceiling will be $480M. No quantity ceiling is currently specified. Question 9: Are the desired colors going to be provided or are the vendors free to innovate within certain criteria? Answer 9: Vendors will be expected to innovate within certain base criteria in terms of colors utilized and camouflage pattern used. Question 10: Do you anticipate if the proposals will include production price options? Answer 10: The proposals will be evaluated on production price options. Question 11: Can you amend the RFP? Answer 11: Yes, if action or developments warrant amendment. Question 12: Will we have yardsticks for sensor threats? Answer 12: Proposals should address sensor threats across the entire electromagnetic spectrum Question 13: When will answers be posted?

2 Answer 13: Within 30 days PM-FSS-ULCANS-RFI Question 14: Question Set 1 for Performance/Design Specification/Industry Day Question 14a: Reference Section Identification: Will bidders on the ULCANS Increment I program be permitted to submit both a 2D and a 3D solution to any/all variants? Answer 14a: Vendors should submit single the best possible solution for each variant type. Both 2D and 3D solutions will be considered. Question 14b: Reference Section Identification: Are there no longer acquisition requirements or operational requirements for single-sided ULCANS variants? Answer 14b: The current program guidance focused on reversible camouflage solutions for all variant types Question 14c: Reference Section Identification: Is the current ULCANS considered Dark Woodland? Answer 14c1: The current ULCANS could compete as a dark woodland variant. New patterns, colors, and concepts will also be considered. Answer 14c2: If not, will industry be required to develop two new Woodland variants? Industry will be required to present two woodland patterns on a reversible net one side light, the other dark. Question 14d: Reference Section Identification: When will the Government further define light and dark relative to visual color and patterning? Answer 14d: General descriptions of colors and patterns are provided to allow for maximum competition and innovation on the part of interested vendors. Further definition will not be provided. Question 14 e: Reference Section Identification: Will the Government provide industry any guidance or Should-Cost information for Reversible Variants? Answer 14 e: Should-Cost pricing will not be provided for the solicitation. Question 14f: Reference Section System Components: Is there a requirement for ULCANS Increment I systems to be backwards compatible with legacy ULCANS operationally or with regards to Class IX spares and repair parts? Answer 14f: ULCANS Increment I is not required to be backwards compatible with legacy systems Question 15g: Reference Section Screen System: Technologies and capabilities exist that render the traditional hardcopy Technical Manual (TM) a sub-optimum solution for the soldier. These new capabilities are also more cost-effective than traditional hard copy TMs. Is the Government prohibiting the use of App-like tools to deliver technical manual and user information? Wil the Government consider: Threshold (Hardcopy TM); Objective (App)? Answer 15g: A hardcopy TM will still be required, however the government is considering provisions to incorporate an electronic Quick Reference Guide in app or similar format. Question 15h: Reference Screen System, Screen System Requirements, and 5.2 Screen System: If hard copy TMs are required: Question 15h1: Will the TM be supplied as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)? Answer 15h1: TMs should be priced as a separate line item on the contract Question 15h2: If the TMs are not going to be furnished as GFE, will the contractor be responsible for developing the TMs? Answer 15h2: If TMs are not government developed, contractors will be responsible for TM development Question 16: Reference Section Support System:

3 Question 16a: Will the Government provide additional explanation and a specific definition of the term bi-stable reeled fiberglass composite poles? Answer 16a: Bi-stable reeled fiberglass composite refers to a support pole solution that is fiberglass based, but flexible and able to maintain consistent, stable shape in both rigid pole (unrolled) form and stored (rolled) form. Question 16b: Is industry permitted to use other vendors besides Rolatube Expeditionary Systems to attain support systems? Answer 16b: Industry is encouraged to consider any and all solutions, from any vendor, that can meet the proposed technology requirements and performance considerations described in the Performance Specification Question 16c: Has the required support system been tested with all Reversible ULCANS variants in all specified climactic conditions? Answer 16c: The proposed support system technology has been tested with reversible camouflage nets from temperatures ranging from -40F to +100F. Additional testing is currently underway with ATEC to further demonstrate this capability. Question 16d: Rolatube is a United Kingdom company with no U.S. production capability/facility. How will the Government ensure that a Berry Compliant support system is available from Rolatube within the acquisition timelines required by this program? Answer 16d: Rollatube, as one potential supplier of the support system, has a manufacturing plan in place that demonstrates on-shore US production capability in line with the government s acquisition timeline for the program. Initial determination has been made that the support system s intended use is for pole support, and is not subject to the textile definition of the Berry Amendment. Question 17: Reference Sections Support System and Support system Requirements Handles: The Government specification is referring to a specific manufacturer s support system. Question 17a: Will the Government provide the Rolatube support system as GFE? Answer 17a: The government is not currently considering providing the support system as GFE Question 17b: If not, how will the Government ensure that all competitors receive identical pricing from Rola Tube? Answer 17b: The support system technology has been described in the performance specification, but no specific vendor has been identified. Rollatube is one of many options that may have the potential to the government s requirements. Question 18: Reference Sections Radar Cross Section and Screen Material Properties: Is the Government considering a Monetized Best Value approach for proposal evaluation in order to give credit during proposal evaluation and subsequently during R&D phase testing for exceeding the desired minimums and threshold values stated in the Performance Spec? Answer 18: A monetized best value approach is not currently being considered. Question 19: The Draft Spec does not address First Article Testing (FAT) requirements. Will a FAT be included in the ULCANS Increment I RFP? Answer 19: ULCANS Increment I will consist of a Competitive Prototyping phase, followed by a Production Prove-out Test (PPT), and then a Production Qualification Test (PQT). The PQT will encompass the elements of FAT, but will also include more robust testing requirements. This approach better aligns the program to ATEC recommendations. Question 20: The Government has indicated interest in a camouflage net that is radar scattering in lower wavelengths and radar absorbent in higher wavelengths. Does the Government envision maturing this capability

4 during the initial RDTE phase of ULCANS Increment I or will the Government consider making this the objective with the current capability being the threshold in this capability area? Answer 20: A variable performance radar scattering net would be considered favorably, but the government has not seen any proof of concept of this technology in market research, and has no basis for assuming production success of a variable radar product at this time. Question 21: We understand The Government s desire to procure support system poles that are constructed of a reeled fiberglass composite which can transform from a rolled to a tubular format and back. However, after much research it appears that this technology is heavily protected by patents. Are alternative support system pole technologies acceptable? Answer 21: In the market research phase, the government tested and considered five unique support system technologies from multiple different vendors. The only support system that did not completely and catastrophically fail in early user testing was a bi-stable reeled composite. Additional testing is currently underway with ATEC to further prove this technology. Metal poles and rigid fiberglass poles are not currently being considered due to their significant failures. Question 22: We understand The Government s desire to procure support system poles that are constructed of a reeled fiberglass composite which can transform from a rolled to a tubular format and back. There appears to only be a single source of such technology, which is heavily patent protected but not currently manufactured in the United States. Does the Government intend on lifting requirements for the Buy American Act and / or Berry Amendment for the kit? Answer 22: The source referenced in this question has a manufacturing plan which outlines US sourcing and production in line with the program s acquisition timeline. Initial determination has been made that the support system end use is that of a pole, and therefore not subject to the textile provisions of the Berry Amendment. a. Industry is aware of only one, non-us manufacturer capable of meeting the requirements as defined in section of the MILPRF, Will the government provide a list of all Government qualified vendors for industry to work with prior to release of the final RFP? The government will provide the technical specification required for the support system. Industry may present any product by any vendor that meets the performance considerations required. Question 23: We understand The Government s desire to procure support system poles that are constructed of a reeled fiberglass composite which can transform from a rolled to a tubular format and back. However, Given that the patent protected technology is not currently produced in the United States there are some concerns with Industry s ability to identify / quantify risks associated with performance, the ability to stand up production in the US for the said technology, as well as the ability to handle potential spikes in demand. Industry feels that Government Directed Support System may cause 2nd and 3rd order effects that impact technical performance of the Prime Contractors technical solution. Furthermore, if it is found that modifications need to be made to the reeled fiberglass composite during the developmental phase, Industry would likely have to subcontract the development / product improvement work back to the technology owner. Given the Government is directing industry to utilize a technology provided by a single source, the potential for pricing advantages may exist between the single provider of the reeled fiberglass composite manufacturer and Prime Contractors. The inability of the Government to control the material cost on this Government directed technology has created much concern for industry. As such Industry would like to propose the following questions and comments for consideration: a. Would the Government consider Modification of Requirements and Evaluation Criteria to accept different support system pole technologies and not penalize the offeror for using other than bistable reeled fiberglass? Answer 23: As discussed above, the Government has conducted a comprehensive survey of support systems used and recommended by the global industry leaders in camouflage, as well as other nations currently using camouflage. All non-bi-stable fiberglass support systems have catastrophically failed during early user assessments with US Soldiers. No metal or rigid fiberglass solutions will be considered. Proposals must meet specified pack volume as stated in the performance specification to comply with user requirements. Question 24: If the Government intends on sourcing the patented reeled fiberglass composite pole technology, would the Government consider providing the support system kits as Government Furnished Equipment? This

5 approach would remove cost risk, technical performance risk, and production risk from the Prime contractor allowing the Prime to offer the Government a lower cost. If the Government is not amenable to such an approach, can the Government provide the rationale behind the decision? Answer 24: The Government is currently not considering providing the support system as GFE. Doing so would require the build and maintenance of two separate contracts, as well as the management of multiple concurrent deliverables for the same end item. In the interest of streamlining the acquisition of the camouflage end item, as well as the schedule constraints of the program, multiple contracts for components of the a single end item are not being considered. To address the technical risk concerns, the Government is conducting formal, independent test and evaluation of the support system technology in an effort to reduce the risk burden on industry. Question 25: If the Government intends on sourcing the patented reeled fiberglass composite pole technology, would the Government consider removing the support system from the evaluation criteria? With this approach, The Government may also want to consider removing the price associated with support system kit and any engineering, development, etc would need to be removed from the total evaluated price in order to create a level playing field. If the Government is not amenable to such an approach, can the Government provide the rationale behind the decision? Answer 25: This will be taken under advisement, but could present substantial price risk to the Government if adopted. Question 26: We understand The Government s desire to procure support system poles that are constructed of a reeled fiberglass composite which can transform from a rolled to a tubular format and back. This appears to be a fairly descriptive requirement for a design that is relatively unknown with little documentation as to its maturity. It is our experience that new designs must demonstrate its Technology Readiness Level (TRL) maturity through extensive government or industry test and verification. We are not aware of any government test and evaluation experience with this technology. Inasmuch as the government bestows full systems reliability responsibility on ULCANS contractor, it is necessary for us to properly assess this design's maturity, and we ask will the Government provide any and all evaluation data related to its evaluation of this new pole design approach? Answer 26: The Government has conducted test and evaluation of this technology for more than a year, and had proven its effectiveness in both extreme hot and extreme cold environments, as well as its durability with field use by Soldiers. A formal, independent test and evaluation is currently being conducted, and the results will be shared with industry as appropriate. Question 27: In the RFI, the government refers to MIL-STD-1472G regarding the maximum weight allowable for a two-person lift, and states that no component of the system shall exceed the established weight limitation. This limitation is 74 lbs (33.6 kg). The total screen system weight as well as the total screen system weight specified in Table III of exceed this limitation. The sum of the screen weights themselves in Table IV exceed this limitation. Can the Government please clarify this apparent weight violation as indicated in the performance specification? Answer 27: As stated, no single component can exceed the 74lbs stated in MIL STD 1472G. The total screen is composed of a single hexagon piece and a single diamond piece. The weight of each of these pieces must be less than 74lbs. Additionally, the total system (screens plus supports) must be packed into no more than two cases. The total weight of both cases, and thus the total system weight, must not exceed 148lbs. Question 28: Will the Government Require a PDM to be submitted for evaluation as part of the Technical evaluation of the proposal? Answer 28: The Government will require a PDM as part of the submission for technical evaluation. These shall consist of one (1) full size hexagon screen for each variant type, in a reversible format. Additionally, two (2) 4x4 (now 4 x 8 ) samples will be required for each variant type in order to conduct transmission testing and textile testing. Finally, a 1x1 solid color sample shall be provided for each color of each variant, printed on the representative substrate material of each variant.

6 Question 29: Program Procurement Strategy. While the ULCANS Industry Day on 23 February will offer the opportunity to inspect the current ULCANS products and provide a presentation on the recent RFI, the specifics of the government s procurement strategy remains unclear. We would ask that clarification be provided related to the government s plan for developing, evaluating and procuring the next generation of ULCANS. Answer 29: The Government intends to release Sections L and M in advance, as well as releasing a full draft RFP prior to solicitation. Question 30: What is the ULCANS program performance framework in terms of: Question 30a: R&D contract award. Answer 30a: Award will be based upon Technical Performance, Past Performance, Admin, Delivery Schedule, and Production Pricing Question 30b: Length of R&D contract effort. Answer 30 b: A competitive prototyping phase will commence immediately following contract award. This period will extend approximately 9mo, and will serve as an opportunity for vendors to work with the government to further refine all variants of camouflage to fully meet the performance specification. Following this period, Developmental Test of the Woodland variant will begin, lasting approximately 1yr. This will be followed by Developmental Test of Arctic (1yr), and Desert/Urban (1yr). The total R&D period will last for 4 years, but production of the variants that have completed R&D will commence upon the maturation of each variant and subsequent production decision reviews. Question 30c: Number of contracts awarded. Answer 30c: Up to three contracts will be awarded for the competitive prototyping phase. Following competitive prototyping, a single vendor will be selected to continue through Developmental Test and Production. Question 31: Procurement contract profile, in terms of number of base year and option years. Basis of Issue plan, total Authorized Acquisition Objective (AAO), Answer 31: A single contract will be advertised that includes R&D as a base, with Production options. No separate production contract will be pursued. This contract will span 10 years. The first two years will be exclusively R&D and the last 5 years will be exclusively Production. Years 3 and 4 will be a period on the program where mature variants (woodland) will be procured with a production option, while immature variants (arctic, desert) are still in R&D. BOIP and AAO remain in flux. Question 32: Will the Research and Development (R&D) phase be separate and distinct from the subsequent Procurement phase? Answer 32: As R&D will be conducted in a waterfall schedule format by variant, Production of mature variants will overlap with R&D of new variants. Question 33: How many contracts can be awarded for the R&D phase? Answer 33: Up to three contracts will be awarded. Question 34: Will the government have successive down selects during the R&D phase and prior to the Procurement phase, if in fact more than one contract is awarded for the R&D phase? Answer 34: A second downselect will occur at the end of the competitive prototyping phase. Question 35: Will the down select for the Procurement Phase be solely predicated on the results of the Woodland type camouflage performance evaluation? Answer 35: All downselects will be conducted based upon the performance of ALL camouflage variants. Question 36: Will prototype deliverables be required for delivery across a number of events during the R&D phase? Answer 36: Prototype deliverables will be required at the start and end of competitive prototyping, as well as the start of each developmental test phase of each variant. Question 37: Will ULCANS procurement pricing be required as part of the R&D solicitation?

7 Answer 37: Yes, full production pricing will be required upon proposal submission. Again, a single solicitation will cover both R&D as well as procurement. Question 38: Will procurement delivery ramp up schedules, sustaining rate schedules and surge requirements be made available prior to the issue of the R&D phase solicitation? Answer 38: These requirements will be listed as part of the solicitation, and will be very similar to those listed in the RFI. Question 39: Will procurement orders be negotiated as part of the R&D contract activity? Answer 39: Procurement pricing will be performed as part of the contract proposal. Production orders will be handled in subsequent phases of the same contract. Question 40: At the industry day you demonstrated a new design shape disrupter. a. Is that part commercially available? If so, can you provide a vendor contact information? b. Are drawings available for this part? Answer 40: The shape disrupter demonstrated at Industry Day was a prototype done by RollaTube. We would suggest reaching out to them directly for drawings and additional information. Question 41: RolaTube - I have made contact with UK based RolaTube and they plan to do their production in the UK. We assume that the support poles will be covered by the Berry Amendment. If not, is it possible that the RolaTube product(s) be covered by a waiver? Answer 41: There will not be any Berry Amendment waivers or Domestic Non-Availability Determinations for the ULCANS Increment I program. If the prime contractor enters a partnership with Rolatube they would be required to ensure they are in compliance with the Buy American Act. Initial determination on the RollaTube product was that it was not a textile or subject to the Berry Amendment because its end use was as a pole system. Question 42: I am being asked for additional drawings above the 5 pages on the attached. Please advise where I may find these. Answer 42: Additional drawings will not be released at this time. The drawings beyond the five referenced here refer to the specific build-to-print details of the legacy camouflage system. PM FSS desires new product innovation for ULCANS Increment I and not a build-to-print of previous iterations of camouflage, therefore the drawing package for ULCANS Increment I will be limited to those drawings already identified. Question 43: As we have begun working to design and fabricate our PDMs for submission, our internal discussions have led us to request clarification on the 4ft x 4ft and 1ft2 specimens that are to accompany the hex nets. For the 4ft x 4ft specimens, the verbal request given on Industry Day stated that they should be finished samples does this mean they should be of the print pattern or solid color, and in the instance of the 3D design, should they be incised and quilted? The configuration depends on your intentions - is the objective to use them as test samples in the field, or to measure Apparent Color and Spectral (and Open Space Transmission)? The procedure to measure Apparent Color and Spectral (and OST) as outlined in Rev. G of the specification, called for the 4ft2 specimens to be of each solid color, and incised and quilted. Answer 43: The 4 x 4 (now 4 x 8 ) samples would be printed with (a portion of the) camouflage pattern, and incised/quilted as applicable. The PDMs will be used for the laboratory radar, thermal transmission, open space testing, along with the physical and durability testing on the material. The 1ft^2 samples will be used for spectral characterization of the colors and print methods. The government will be measuring the laboratory color and NIR and SWIR performance on those samples with a spectrophotometer against the performance specification. The 1ft^2 samples should not be incised or quilted so we can get accurate measurements with the benchtop spectrophotometer.