LOCAAS

FROM: AFRL/MNK

101 West Eglin Blvd, Ste 337

Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810

SUBJ: Synopsis MNK PRDA 98-0004

TO: U.S. Department of Commerce

Commerce Business Daily

P.O. Box 5999

Chicago, IL 60630

1. P!!

2. 0831!!

3. 98!!

4. GPO391030!!

5. 32542-6810!!

6. A!!

7. Air Force Research Laboratory/Munitions Directorate Contracting Division, AFRL/MNK, 101 W. Eglin Blvd, Ste 337, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810.!!

8. A—Powered Low Cost Autonomous Attack System (P-LOCAAS)!!

9. PRDA No. MNK-98-0004

10. 100198!!

11. Contact Mr John Hawk, Contracts Manager, (850) 882-4294, ext 3414!!

12. N/A!!

13. N/A!!

14. N/A!!

15. N/A!!

16. N/A!!

17. B--REQUIREMENTS:
18. (1) Technical Description: The Air Force Research Laboratory, Munitions Directorate (AFRL/MN) is conducting up to a 45 month Powered Low Cost Autonomous Attack System (P-LOCAAS) program which intends to demonstrate a technology suite representative of an affordable, miniature, powered munition capable (in the sense of military utility) of autonomous broad area search and detection, identification, and destruction of the entire spectrum of ground mobile targets in relevant types of target, weather, and terrain conditions, using a LADAR based seeker. This program will demonstrate the feasibility and military utility of the LOCAAS technology for the Lethal Suppression of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD), Theater Missile Defense (TMD) Attack Operations, and Interdiction mission areas.

 

19. TECHNOLOGY GOALS: The following objectives have been established for this technology demonstration program:
20. (a) demonstrate P-LOCAAS affordability with design to unit production cost (DTUPC), parts and touch labor, goal of $33K/munition (FY98$, 12,000 unit buy), substantiated by detailed analysis supported to the maximum extent possible by cost experience, vendor quotes, etc. The Offeror shall discuss in detail any performance/cost trades necessary to reach the stated cost goal. Additional information is contained in the supplemental information (SI) annex, Section II-A;
22. (b) demonstrate a LADAR seeker with sufficient autonomous targeting capabilities to accurately distinguish between target and non-targets in a variety of weather, terrain, and target conditions and scenarios. Develop, with government approval, the non-baseline test conditions as outlined in the SI annex, Section I-B. A classified annex will specify baseline seeker/Autonomous Target Acquisition (ATA) performance and Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) exit criteria for the seeker/ATA system;
24. (c) demonstrate onboard inertial navigation system/global positioning system (INS/GPS) guidance capable of providing navigation data of sufficient quality for ingress, execution of programmable search patterns, and LADAR image coordinate transformation within an allocated error budget. The error budget to be developed by the contractor consistent with the developed Anti-materiel Submunition Warhead Technology (ASWT) multi-mode warhead, system design, and concept definition. Refer to SI Annex, Section II-C;
25. (d) demonstrate, through design and warhead static tests, compatibility with a proven shoot-to-kill multi-mode warhead capable of destroying the attacked targets. Required performance for all modes of warhead operation and targets to be engaged will be specified in a classified annex (SI Annex, Section II-D and Section III, Classified Appendix);
26. (e) demonstrate guidance integrated fuzing, with an overall targeting error budget, consistent with the previously developed ASWT multi-mode warhead, system design, and concept definition, as further documented in the SI annex, Section II-E;
27. (f) demonstrate a powered vehicle providing a weapon range and ingress velocity consistent with the system design and concept definition;
28. (g) demonstrate, via guided flight test and analysis, an average search area coverage rate and, via analysis, total searched area consistent with the system design and concept definition, as documented in the SI annex, Section II-G;
29. (h) demonstrate, through design, a compact high lift-to-drag ratio airframe compatible with both internal and external dispense concepts employed from Air Force, Army, and Navy platforms, including Tactical Munitions Dispenser (TMD) family, the Army and Navy Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS/NTACMS), advanced dispenser systems compatible with the F-22 internal weapons bay, and the Army Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS). The proposed munition should be consistent with realistic data communication and power management concepts associated with these dispense systems;
30. (i) demonstrate, via captive flight test results and analysis, an overall mission success probability threshold specified in the SI annex, Section III, Classified Appendix as Noted in Section II-H of the Annex, for several mission scenarios;

1. development of a tactical design consistent with DTUPC cost goals, as approved by the Government (and further elaborated on in the SI annex), substantiated by detailed analysis supported to the maximum extent possible by cost experience, vendor quotes, etc. and an overall tactical design, and CFT seeker, incorporating pre-planned improvement features for expected technology improvements, e.g. processors and IMU’s;
2. demonstration of ATD seeker/ATA exit criteria, as defined in the classified annex, against several target sets, under realistic weather conditions, various terrain features consistent with conceptual weapon employment, target obscuration, target articulation, and target employed counter-measures. The determination of the tested scenarios will be specified per the SI annex (see Sections I-B & C and Section III, Classified Appendix;

(F) demonstration of Concept of Operations through Distributed Interactive Simulation / Higher Language Architecture (DIS/HLA) simulation. The DIS/HLA simulation environment will complement the tactical design simulation capability by providing a system level simulation (multiple munition, 6 degree-of-freedom models) capable of interacting with exercise simulations. The Contractor will develop and continue to modify and enhance this simulation throughout Phases II-IV, See SI Annex, Section I-D and Section II-M;

(G) accomplishment of concept definition and system design, and supporting cost and performance trades, consistent with the Government provided ASWT warhead lethality and effectiveness assessment. See SI Annex, Section II-N;

(H) delivery of non-proprietary data sufficient for procurement program start.

2. PROGRAM OUTLINE: The P-LOCAAS program will be executed in four phases. The first phase will commence in late 1998 with the potential selection of up to two (2) competing Contractors to perform concept definition, risk reduction, and provide designs suitable for the entire P-LOCAAS program. However, based upon the quality of the proposals received, capabilities of the proposing Contractors, demonstration of maturity of the leveraged technologies associated with each proposal, and available funding, the Government may make only one award. If two Contractors are selected to compete during Phase I of the program, then a downselect decision will be made at the conclusion of Phase I for continued performance into Phase II. The Government expects to fund each agreement awarded in Phase I with a maximum of $1 million. Regardless of the downselect decision, the Government’s maximum liability shall not exceed $1 million under each Phase I agreement. Phases II – IV will be individually priced as options. During the downselection process, Contractors will be given the opportunity to make adjustments in the prices established at the time of the Phase I award for Phases II-IV. Phases II-IV will last a combined total of up to 33 months.

Phase I (Risk Reduction) is anticipated to be a 1-year effort, in which up to two prime Contractors will perform tailored risk mitigation. Phase I will require P-LOCAAS designs compatible with TMD (four per dispenser) and F-22 internal carriage and dispense and with modifications required to show how the Contractor proposes to achieve compatibility with MLRS, ATACMS and NTACMS dispense systems. System design and the concept definition (with accompanying documentation), consistent with the evaluation criteria and program requirements and goals are to be accomplished during Phase I. The P-LOCAAS program is an Advanced Technology Development (ATD), and as such, the system development, performance testing and analysis must emphasize mission level performance, i.e. the contribution of the candidate system component to overall system effectiveness on realistic, mission-like scenarios. This goal requires careful definition of representative scenarios for use in designing tests and analyses for assessing performance in all program phases. Such scenario definitions are an essential product of the concept definition activities required in Phase I. Further elaboration on this point is contained in the SI annex. The contractor shall designate a focal point that will be the single point of contact for all matters relating to Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) for the duration of this effort. Any tactical vehicle components that appear to significantly and adversely impact operational support of the P-LOCAAS technology, related to its intended military use, shall be identified during the program. These components shall be tracked and corrective action taken when appropriate to preclude operational support problems should P-LOCAAS proceed into EMD and Production. The Contractor shall consider the munition’s requirements for operational as well as sustaining/recurring engineering support and discuss their concept of LOCAAS cradle-to-grave inventory management. The contractor shall incorporate pre-planned improvement attributes into the system design, to include the processor package. The system design should make use of the most appropriate processors based on the concept definition. The Government will provide range targets and range time for a single four-week test sequence, in approximately Aug 99, subject to negotiation between the Government and potential competing Contractors. Estimate CFT costs according to an Eglin AFB based test. One-half of all data acquired during the CFT may be sequestered by the Government for later use. The Government will make final decisions concerning the disposition of acquired, non-proprietary data. Final Phase I report will be due no later than 15 Dec 99.

4. Phase II (Support Equipment Fabrication and Test) is an anticipated 2-3 year effort that will consist of the four major tasks listed below as well as the decision to extend the contract into Phase III.

(1) Tactically Performing and Sized Seeker Fabrication & Qualification: Fabricate a form-factored, tactical performance seeker, modified for extended use as a captive flight test instrument, i.e. necessary equipment conditioners and equipment layout conducive to easy maintenance and upgrade (especially the processors), for captive flight test and accomplish captive flight tests necessary to demonstrate the ATD exit criteria, as specified in the classified annex. All tactical modes of operation must be implemented consistent with the overall concept definition and system design identified during Phase I of the program. The Seeker shall be capable/qualified for operation in the full range of expected flight test regimes. Seeker captive flight test pod must be fully instrumented for Differential GPS ground truthing, and environmentally protected for operation in captive flight test environments consistent with Eglin AFB, Camp Grayling Army Airfield, and Nellis AFB.

5. (2) Government Kinetic Kill Vehicle Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulator (KHILS) Test Support Fabrication & Installation Support: Fabricate tactical seeker model to support design/checkout of P-LOCAAS seeker and guidance system. The Contractor will be expected to provide an on-going level of support during the life of the contract to install and maintain his hardware. It is a requirement to successfully simulate each guided flight test using a validated KHILS seeker model before the actual guided flight test is attempted. Contractor expected to provide monthly support throughout phases II-IV both for equipment installation and checkout and for tactical system simulation analysis.

(3) Tactically Sized and Performing Seeker Tower and Captive Flight Tests (CFTs): A contractor proposed number of tower and CFTs shall be conducted to demonstrate the seeker performance under a full range of tactical scenarios. Performance with respect to countermeasures, weather, target articulation, target obscuration, and various terrain types will be evaluated. All seeker tower and captive flight tests will be conducted in a manner consistent with the overall concept definition and system design. Specific mission scenarios and corresponding performance criteria shall be established during the Phase I concept definition task and the seeker/ATA performance will be judged against these criteria. The mix of tower and captive flight tests shall be balanced to meet the controlled conditions desired for parts of the tests (especially the countermeasures and articulation testing) and the enhanced mission scenario realism attainable in captive flight. The mix shall also be selected with consideration to test expediency and program costs. The aircraft used to captive carry the seeker pod shall be chosen and provided by the Contractor, with Government approval. The Contractor shall conduct, document, and deliver to the Government relevant test results, plans, and analyses (including safety related analyses) required to obtain Government flight test approval. In addition, the Contractor shall support Government flight test analyses. Seeker captive flight testing may be accomplished at several CONUS Government facilities, including Eglin AFB. Seeker captive flight testing shall be accomplished with Government oversight to include running any off-line ATA software systems, analyzing real-time ATA results, and deriving the accompanying scores. One-half of all data acquired during the various seeker tests may be sequestered by the Government for later use. The Government will make final decisions concerning the disposition of acquired, non-proprietary data. The tower and CFT testing is required to demonstrate the seeker ATD exit criteria. The Contractor shall support the Government ATA analysis and scoring process as outlined in the SI annex, Section I-C.2 and Section II, Para. O.

(4) Tactical Munition System Integration and Evaluation: Conceptually develop a fire system capable of effecting complete functional interface between the multi-mode warhead and the other components of the tactical munition; conceptually develop, to include error bounds and budgets, the warhead interface ( e.g. functional, power, event timeline, aiming alignment, etc) with the rest of the technology suite; and assess the integrated effectiveness of the ASWT warhead. Also included in the warhead integration is the design and assessment of the aero-fairing over the warhead face. This overall assessment shall support design trade-offs such as airframe design and seeker accuracy vs. warhead performance, and to evaluate the resulting P-LOCAAS design.

 

Phase III (Guided Test Vehicle Fabrication) is anticipated to be a 2-3 year effort to be run in parallel with Phase II and will consist of the three major tasks listed below.. The decision to exercise the option for Phase III will be made as early as practical in Phase II.

(1) Guided Test Vehicle (GTV) Design and Fabrication: Design and fabricate a sufficient number of powered, guided flight test vehicles in order to achieve three guided flight tests. The GTV configuration shall be consistent with the overall tactical munition concept definition and system design, and shall address tactical design issues such as: complete functional and physical interface between the multi-mode warhead, safe-and-arm fuzing, and munition guidance and control system; interface between the submunition, dispenser, and carriage vehicle, to include physical and functional interfaces and transition from stowed to powered flight; interface between the engine (and accessories) and the rest of the submunition. The design shall maximize use of off-the-shelf and proven components. For purposes of test expediency and program cost savings, a Contractor may propose the use of non-tactical components, not to include the Ladar seeker, for the flight test articles. The Contractor must document a clear and achievable design transition from the test expedient design to a realizable tactical configuration. The maximum length of the flight test vehicles shall be 36 inches with no change from the tactical design cross-section. The relaxation of the overall length requirement, derived from the munition dispenser requirements, allows the use of test expedient items in the construction of the GTVs, consistent with the overall tactical munition concept definition and system design. The GTVs will be designed to accommodate and activate a warhead consistent with the overall tactical munition concept definition and system design, but will not be fitted with one. The space in the GTVs associated with the warhead may be used for test specific hardware. The GTVs shall include a flight termination function or device (as required by safety for flight test), a telemetry device, and GFE scoring camera system aligned with the warhead. The Government will approve the tactical design and changes necessary for GTV fabrication, prior to GTV fabrication. Changes to the final design will require Government approval.

7. (2) GTV Munition Qualification: Qualification must include all test specific equipment such as telemetry (TM) and flight termination systems (FTS). Analysis shall be provided to show that the munition will survive the entire expected range of flight test environments, consistent with the overall tactical munition concept definition and system design.
9. (3) Static Warhead Demonstration: The Contractor shall demonstrate, through actual live warhead tests, compatibility between an accurate physical munition mass model (to include the aero-fairing over the warhead face) and actual warhead interface components, consistent with the system design and concept definition, and the proposed munition warhead; and through design, complete functional compatibility between the warhead, safe and arm, and the rest of the tactical munition system. An analysis of the warhead chosen for the tactical munition must be accomplished, if necessary, to show warhead effectiveness consistent with the system design and concept produced by the AFRL/MN ASWT program. The Government will GFE two residual ASWT warheads to the Contractor for the demonstration.

1. Detailed design drawings in Government approved Contractor format, suitable for GTV fabrication, re-procurement level data is not required. These drawings are for Government, and support contractor, use only. ILS related information, effectiveness analyses, trade studies, DTUPC documentation, etc., are expected as part of the overall system concept documentation.
2. Form-factored tactically performing seeker (with necessary modifications for extended use in a test environment and upgrade potential), with an environmentally protective pod, with all tactical modes of operation implemented, consistent with the overall concept definition and system design.
3. Sufficient number of powered guided test vehicles to accomplish three GTV flights, with capabilities consistent with the overall concept definition and system design. Allowable tolerance for test expedient modifications include: an overall length of up to 36 inches and TM, warhead camera, and FTS, carried in the area designed for the warhead. These vehicles are for use in the drop tests.
4. All source and executable code software and documentation associated with this program will be made available to the Government at no additional cost. The Government does not seek ownership, only in-house access by Government and Government support contractor analysis and evaluation teams. In accordance with this requirement, all Contractor proprietary code, among other data, should be appropriately marked. And will be appropriately protected. This includes, but is not limited to: validated 6-DOF GNC computer simulation models and KHILS compatible simulation computer code, ATA algorithms and associated code, effectiveness models and simulations, mission planning and flyout simulations (incorporating high-fidelity models of P-LOCAAS submunitions, terrain, targets, and their interaction), and engineering models and simulations.
5. Test data, plans, and analyses necessary to obtain seeker captive flight test and GTV flight test approval.
6. Test results and post-test analyses in, a Government approved, Contractor format for all program tests.
7. Lethality analyses, mission effectiveness analyses, concept definitions, and system design and interface documents in Government approved, Contractor format.
8. Non-proprietary, overall system design and concept definition documents for use in the future by Government offices to provide competing Contractors baseline system concept information.
9. Hardware-in-the-loop seeker, avionics, IMU, and other key guidance and navigation hardware for closed-loop simulation in the KHILS facility. Hardware upgrades as required to ensure functional equivalence of HIL and flight systems. Interface for real-time hardware communication with facility simulation computers. Interface control and support documentation.

C--ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

1. Anticipated Period of Performance: Up to 45 months.
2. Expected award date: 15 December 1998.
3. Funding Estimate: The Government expects to fund each agreement in Phase I at a level up to $1 million. It is anticipated that $17 million would be made available to fund Phases II-IV. This is an estimate only, not a promise of funding availability.
4. Type of Agreement: The use of the innovative type of Agreement known as an "845" or "other transactions for prototypes" will be used. This is used to reduce the traditional administrative burden and oversight required to support a "standard" Government contract. This type of Agreement allows a great deal more flexibility and has far fewer regulatory requirements than a typical Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) contract. Phase I is offered as a Firm Fixed Price risk reduction effort with a maximum liability to the Government, regardless of the downselect decision, of $1 million. Phases II-IV are considered to be negotiable. However, in addition to the Government funding, Contractor cost sharing is encouraged. Many Contractors receive Government-reimbursed funds for independent research and development (IR&D). The use of "other transactions for prototype projects" for this effort will allow the use of IR&D funds on the Contractor’s share of costs (see FAR 31-205.18(e)).
5. Government Furnished Property (GFP): It is the Offeror’s responsibility to identify any equipment to be used whether Contractor-owned and furnished or Government-owned and furnished. The Government will assist in providing Government-owned property as appropriate and if available. Depending on the GFP requested, Offerors may require authorization/permission to use certain components due to proprietary classifications.
6. Base Support: The Government will provide access to appropriate flight test facilities and equipment, as required to accomplish this program, with sufficient notification from the Contractor.
7. Notice to Foreign-Owned Firms: Foreign-owned firms are asked to immediately notify the Air Force technical point of contact cited below upon deciding to respond to this announcement. Foreign Contractors or subcontractors should be aware that restrictions may apply which could preclude their participation in this acquisition.

D--PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

1. General: Offerors should apply the restrictive notice prescribed in the provision at FAR 52.215-12, Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, to trade secrets or privileged commercial and financial information contained in their proposals. Offerors must submit approved DD Form 2345, Export-Controlled DOD Technical Data Agreement, with their proposal. Offerors should state whether they are a large business, small business, small disadvantaged business, nonprofit, educational, or historically black college or minority institution. Offerors should consider instructions contained in the "Proprietary Information" and "When and How to Submit" sections of the AFMC Pamphlet 64-101, "Unsolicited Proposal Guide," copies of which are available by writing to: AFDTC/BC, 205 West D Avenue, Ste 449, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6863 or telephone (850) 882-2843. AFMC Form 190, Policy Agreements, does not apply to Program Research and Development Announcements. Other information and instructions for working with Program Research and Development Announcements may be obtained by visiting the world wide web site: www.wrs.afrl.af.mil/contract/prdag.htm. Preparation guidance may be obtained from Chapter 3 of the PRDA guide. Additional proposal questions should be directed to one of the points of contact listed elsewhere herein. A technical and cost proposal submitted in separate volumes is required and must reference the above PRDA number. Volume 1 should provide the technical proposal, and Volume 2 should address the price/cost portions of the proposal. Volume 1, Technical/Management, shall be limited to a total of 100 pages, including charts, figures, tables, etc. but not to include normal front matter such as: title page, table of contents, list of figures, etc. Pages in excess of the specified 100 pages will be removed and returned to the Offeror before the evaluation starts. An additional 10 pages will be available for any and all classified SECRET material which pertains to the proposal. Contractor technical proposals shall identify candidate components for the P-LOCAAS submuntion and associated dimensions of each component. Also included in the description of these components shall be a brief notification of the level of development and acceptance testing each component has been through, keeping in mind that proven off-the-shelf components are desired to minimize risk and schedule delays to the demonstration program. Volume 2, Cost; certified cost and pricing data is not required - the cost portion of the proposal, has no limitation, however, Offerors are requested to keep cost proposals to 50 pages. A page is defined to be one side of an 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper with information on it. Minimum print size is 10 point type, or 12 pitch. The left, top, and bottom margins shall be one inch, while the right margin shall be three-quarters of an inch. Proposals shall be submitted in an original, 10 paper copies, and an electronic version in Microsoft Word. All responsible sources may submit a proposal which shall be considered against the criteria set forth herein. Copies of the proposals may be forwarded, to other interested Government agencies for funding consideration. Offerors are hereby notified that Government support Contractors may be part of any Government evaluation team. Authorization for limited reproduction and dissemination within Government Agencies and National Laboratories is required. Contractor shall provide the Government the access to the Contractor’s RAMS database. Offerors are advised that only the Contracting Officer is legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise obligate the Government. The classified SECRET addendum will be handled according to approved methods.
2. Cost Proposal: The Offerors shall provide a cost/price breakdown for the Basic (phase I) and each option for (Phases II-IV) which shall include a labor-hour, labor-category breakdown by task and a cost element spreadsheet, labor, overhead, travel, G&A, etc.). Offeror investment shall be identified for each Phase. The cost proposal shall be cross-referenced to the Technical proposal. Estimated costs for tests and historical data for similar efforts are requested for program office budgetary estimation and value estimation. An area of consideration in Phase I will be the extent to which the amount of effort proposed correlates to the proposed cost in such a way to ensure the Government is receiving adequate value, and the degree of cost sharing proposed by the Contractor. Certified cost or pricing data is not required. Section 845 agreements do not require Government cost accounting standards or Government cost audits. Commercial accounting (GAAP) practices are acceptable.
3. Technical Proposal: The Government does not intend to provide a Statement of Work. Offerors shall incorporate a Statement of Work into the proposal. Technical proposals shall be traceable, by reference, to the effort proposed under the SOW. The paragraph labeling format shall correspond to that of the technical proposal The SOW shall be in a format acceptable for incorporation into any subsequent agreement and limited to no more than 10 pages in length. The SOW is not counted against the page limitations established for the technical proposal. The technical proposal shall include as a minimum:

1. list of recent (within five years) and relevant contracts, with a government point of contact,
2. P-LOCAAS program related risk self-assessment and mitigation plan,
3. detailed technical approach,
4. proposed component description,
5. proposed P-LOCAAS system design and concept definition,
6. proposed program schedule, to include spending schedule,
7. proposed non-proprietary documentation suitable for public release as a baseline system concept.

1. Statement of Work: The SOW shall have a separate page count of no more that 13 pages, with paragraphs cross referenced to the technical proposal.

1. risk to successfully complete the ATD;
2. capability to generate a tactical design and concept definition with a clear path showing how the design will meet the DTUPC objectives and how that design incorporates life cycle cost considerations such as reliability, producibility, etc.;
3. capability to meet baseline seeker/ATA performance criteria established by the government (and contained in the classified annex) with a tactically representative seeker (consistent with the size and performance of a tactical design and concept definition) and scored under a Government run process. Any ATA results included as part of a contractor’s proposal must be accompanied with the source code, executable code, and any other necessary data related to the algorithms which generated the results in order to allow Government verification. ATA results submitted without Government verification will be given due consideration
4. capability to meet baseline ATD seeker/ATA exit criteria (contained in the classified annex);
5. capability to design and fabricate GTVs, consistent with the proposed tactical design and concept definition;
6. capability to meet performance/cost/schedule objectives during Phase I;
7. capability to meet Phase II-IV performance/cost/schedule objectives;
8. capability to fly tactically sized CTV;
9. capability to execute modeling and simulation efforts, sufficient to meet program objectives, which includes access and use by Government personnel;
10. capability to determine component level error budgets and analysis showing CEP performance consistent with classified annex performance;
11. capability to execute lethality and effectiveness assessments to support design, cost, and performance trades for the tactical design;
12. identification of reasonable non-proprietary system concept and or design data, suitable for public release;
13. capability to adequately manage organic and vendor component deliveries per required schedule, cost, and performance.
14. management and administrative capabilities including technical program management resources necessary to comply with program objectives and the proposed teaming arrangement
15. the reasonableness and realism of the proposed cost for the instant agreement – this shall be a secondary consideration to the above evaluation factors

1. Contractor performance during Phase I, including the timeliness and quality of the deliverables;
2. Mitigation of risk areas;
3. Degree to which Phase II-IV leverages and builds on Phase I development.

LORNA TEDDER

Contracting Officer

Munitions Contracting Division