Commander, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, Acquisition Center, Research Development and Engineering Center, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5000

A -- COMPACT KINETIC ENERGY MISSILE (CKEM) -- ADDENDUM SOL DAAH01-00-R-RB01 DUE 012700 POC Mr. Kyle Samples, (256) 876-5326, Contract Specialist; Ms. Patsy Garrison (256) 842-7406, Contracting Officer TITLE: A -- COMPACT KINETIC ENERGY MISSILE (CKEM)SOL DAAH01-00-R-RB01 (Reference CBD 20 Dec 99). This is an addendum to that notice. POC: Contract Specialist, Mr. Kyle Samples, (256) 876-5326, e-mail: sample-kk@redstone.army.mil, Contracting Officer, Ms. Patsy Garrison, (256) 842-7406, e-mail: garrison-pc@redstone.army.mil, AMSAM-AC-RD-BC. Technical POC: Mr. George Snyder, AMSAM-RD-PS/Propulsion & Structures Directorate, (256) 876-3483 email: George.Snyder@redstone.army.mil/. Addendum to BAA DAAH01-00-R-RB01: 1.Contracts anticipated to be awarded on a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee basis or Cost Sharing, if proposed. 2. The BAA is recognized as a competitive procedure and proposals shall be evaluated in accordance with the specified evaluation criteria, but since they are not submitted in accordance with a common work statement, cost reasonableness is evaluated, based on the merits of the individual proposal. Therefore, certified cost and pricing data is required, and in accordance with the BAA, may be submitted 15 days from the date proposals are due. However, a summary of costs must be provided with initial proposal submission, including the options. The subcontracting plan may be delayed for 15 days also. 3. The government does not intend to issue a model contract for Phase 1, Segment 1. After an award decision is made, the government intends to negotiate applicable terms and conditions (e.g., Contract Sections E, H, I, and J) with the selected contractor, based upon the individual statement of work. 4. Regarding the 75 page limitation for Volume 1, Fold-outs are intended to provide the system contractors opportunity to better clarify and illustrate their concepts for CKEM through charts and graphs. Fold-outs are not intended to increase page count, and as such, fold-outs are counted as two pages. 5. The DD254 is in process and will be tailored to the individual contract. The Security Classification Guide will be faxed upon request. 6. The Segment II effort is intended to mature enabling technologies identified by the system contractors in their CKEM concept. The enabling technologies will be funded within the fiscal constraints of the program and as such it is anticipated that some of the technologies identified by the system contractors will not be funded. The Segment II effort is not intended to be a manufacturing demonstration whereby the government provides the output to the system contractors. Therefore, the government will not provide the components/subsystems to the system contractors for integration and testing. 7. For planning purposes, a chart showing a Program Plan for Phase 1 Segment 2 is available upon request. 8. A Reading Room is not available. Individual questions should be e-mailed for response by subject matter experts. 9. A list of potential bidders is available upon request. 10. Following is a more detailed description of the evaluation criteria: Proposals will be evaluated by the Government with respect to the following evaluation criteria:(1) Technical Soundness and Operational Merit of Proposed Concept (A) Adequacy of the System Design Process -- Offeror's comprehension of the overall effort as evidenced by the adequacy and feasibility of the proposed design to meet the requirements. Offeror's proposal should define a representative concept and accompanying design specifying: overall system architecture; guidance scheme, hardware components (propulsion, guidance components, sensors and sensor interfaces, and lethal mechanism), energy management methodology, software methodology and tools, etc. to be used or developed; packaging and configuration; weight, size, and expected performance and operating characteristics. The proposal should provide definitions and descriptions of the critical issues associated with CKEM, the proposed approach to tradeoffs, evaluation methodology, and system development. (B)Requirements Definition -- Offeror's proposal should sufficiently answer the following questions: Are program requirements understood? Is the process for translating operational requirements into technical requirements sound? Is a mechanism defined to clarify any resulting issues? Are key technical issues defined and addressed? (C)Adequacy of the Analysis/Risk -- Offeror's proposal should sufficiently answer the following questions: Can the predicted performance be achieved? Are sensors, guidance/control, aerodynamics response, timelines, and error budgets properly analyzed and integrated? Is there substantiating test results/physical data presented? (D) Operational/Logistic Impact -- Offeror's proposal should sufficiently answer the following questions: What are the operational or logistics implications? Is the system easy to use? (E) Performance Limitations -- Offeror's proposal should answer the following questions: What are the limits or bounds to the proposed performance? Do they significantly degrade mission performance? Can they be used as the basis for countermeasures? Do practical countermeasures invalidate the system? (2) Realism of Schedule and Soundness of Management Plan (to include risk mitigation efforts) as demonstrated by Quantifiable Milestones (A) Schedule/Milestone -- Offeror's proposal should provide a statement of work, schedule, list of deliverables and costs for all options of the proposed program. The proposal should specify tasks that will be used to benchmark overall performance of the components, subsystems and system. Additionally, the proposal should answer the following questions: Are meaningful and demonstrable tests and milestones with quantifiable results defined? Is the schedule realistic and appropriate? What is the demonstrated track record of achievement? (B) Management Performance -- Offeror's proposal should answer the following questions: Are the proper personnel and experience available? Did the offeror identify facilities, equipment and information needed to support the effort (offeror's, team members, and government furnished)? Does the proposal define and demonstrate effective management and cost control? (3) Proposed Cost and Cost Reasonableness. Cost will be evaluated on the basis of reasonableness of the proposal and how realistic the cost numbers are that are presented. 11. The due date for proposals remains 27 Jan 2000 at 11:00 A.M. (Central Standard Time). Posted 01/10/00 (W-SN414615). (0010)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0008 20000112\A-0008.SOL)