Request for Solutions: Family of Maintenance Trainers (FMT) – Product Line (PL) Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 Tank Hands On Trainers (HOTs) 17 April 2020 1. Purpose and Authority This Request for Solutions (RFS) is issued to identify and select capable vendors with the ability to develop an FMT PL CC compliant Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The Army desires to extend the Family of Maintenance Trainers (FMT) Product Line (PL) to incorporate the legacy Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 Hands On Trainer (HOT) into the existing FMT PL portfolio by developing an OT prototype using the FMT-Common Core (CC). The purpose of this prototype project is to develop a design solution for the Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT that is compliant with the FMT-PL architecture and CC baseline and will still provide the required hardware and software interface methodology to facilitate training. The awardee will be provided with the previously developed FMT CC baseline products. The awardee will be provided with a legacy M1A2 SEP V2 HOT as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). The OTA effort includes an analysis of requirements which will detail the vendor’s approach to determine the feasibility and ease of reuse of the Army’s legacy maintenance trainers (Abrams M1A1 SA, M1A1 ED, and M1A2 SEP V2) components on the FMT CC compliant Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The awardee will demonstrate the CC compliance utilizing the GFE HOT. Then the vendor will provide the design and documentation required to convert the FMT PL CC compliant HOTs to Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT prototype project is unclassified but will require the utilization of technical data/information. The RFS scope is limited to the design development of the FMT M1A2 SEP V3 HOT prototype unit. There is the potential for production follow-on efforts which will field the FMT PL CC compliant M1A2 SEP V3 HOTs as described in Section 8 of this RFS. The HOT will be incorporated into and extend the existing FMT PL and will therefore, utilize and build upon the FMT-CC Diagnostic Page 1 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
Transcript
Request for Solutions:Family of Maintenance Trainers (FMT) – Product Line (PL)Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 Tank Hands On Trainers (HOTs)
17 April 2020
1. Purpose and Authority
This Request for Solutions (RFS) is issued to identify and select capable vendors with the ability to develop an FMT PL CC compliant Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The Army desires to extend the Family of Maintenance Trainers (FMT) Product Line (PL) to incorporate the legacy Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 Hands On Trainer (HOT) into the existing FMT PL portfolio by developing an OT prototype using the FMT-Common Core (CC). The purpose of this prototype project is to develop a design solution for the Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT that is compliant with the FMT-PL architecture and CC baseline and will still provide the required hardware and software interface methodology to facilitate training. The awardee will be provided with the previously developed FMT CC baseline products. The awardee will be provided with a legacy M1A2 SEP V2 HOT as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). The OTA effort includes an analysis of requirements which will detail the vendor’s approach to determine the feasibility and ease of reuse of the Army’s legacy maintenance trainers (Abrams M1A1 SA, M1A1 ED, and M1A2 SEP V2) components on the FMT CC compliant Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The awardee will demonstrate the CC compliance utilizing the GFE HOT. Then the vendor will provide the design and documentation required to convert the FMT PL CC compliant HOTs to Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT. The FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT prototype project is unclassified but will require the utilization of technical data/information. The RFS scope is limited to the design development of the FMT M1A2 SEP V3 HOT prototype unit. There is the potential for production follow-on efforts which will field the FMT PL CC compliant M1A2 SEP V3 HOTs as described in Section 8 of this RFS. The HOT will be incorporated into and extend the existing FMT PL and will therefore, utilize and build upon the FMT-CC Diagnostic and Troubleshooting Trainer (DTT) PL architecture including the FMT-CC Training Management System (TMS), Instructor/Operator Station (IOS), Network Attached Storage (NAS), and FMT-CC User Interfaces (UI). The FMT PL (HOTs, Parts Task Trainers (PTTs), and DTTs) include shared components such as the TMS and IOS. Any information regarding PTTs and DTTs variants of maintenance training systems is provided for FMT PL shared components, compliance, and reference only. The Government will evaluate the solutions with the intent of awarding an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) in accordance with 10 U.S. Code § 2371b.
The FMT-CC PL standardizes the Army’s vehicle maintenance trainers with a common core architecture, software baseline, and common equipment. The FMT-CC DTT PL effort established the CC architecture and baseline which will be used on all FMT PL trainers (DTTs, HOTs, and PTTs). FMT-CC PL includes, but is not limited to the Stryker, Abrams, AMPV, and JLTV maintenance trainers.
2.1.1. Legacy Maintenance TrainersLegacy maintenance trainers are comprised of three (3) distinct classes of devices: the DTTs, the PTTs, and HOTs. These systems provide Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) skill level development for system operation, fault diagnosis, troubleshooting, adjustments, component removal/replacement, and other servicing and repair tasks for the respective vehicles. Each of these variants targets specific training goals but share common training elements. The DTTs are computer based system simulations: no actual physical vehicle hardware is employed. Navigation and interaction with the DTTs is handled via keyboard, mouse, and touchscreen inputs.
There are a few existing legacy PTTs which are not instrumented, for example: The Bradley A2 PTT and the Abrams PTT. The newer PTT and HOT trainers integrate virtual training with physical hardware. In the case of the PTT, a specific subsystem, such as the brakes or engine, is targeted, and realistic components of that system are instrumented to be an active part of the emulation. The HOT expands upon the PTT concept. The hardware in a HOT is part of a more completely integrated environment that may contain more than one subsystem. The HOT is instrumented in the same manner as the PTT, with the hardware interacting with the virtual software simulation. In all classes, the legacy trainers are comprised of an IO) and one or more Student Workstations (SWS). In addition, a TMS provides record storage and classroom management utilities. The IOS, SWSs, and TMS are connected by an Ethernet or wireless network and high-speed switches. In the case of the PTTs and HOTs, the SWSs are connected by hardware linkage to additional Input/Outputs (I/O) used to instrument the physical representations of the specific device trainers.
The IOS controls the simulation state and the behavior of the simulation. The SWSs run the actual models that provide the virtual trainer capabilities. The PTT and HOT IOS has a similar software package as the DTT but the lessons are focused on interaction with actual vehicle components or components that approximate the real vehicle with high fidelity.
2.1.1.1. SoftwareReal-Time software includes the software models that simulate the vehicle systems and the executive software which controls the iteration rate of the simulation and schedules the models to run at the appropriate frequencies. The IOS software provides control of the simulation including freeze, lockstep, lesson plan control, and communication control. The TMS software provides support for classroom management functions, student record archiving, and lesson plan maintenance. The Display and Control software is the interface between the student’s or instructor’s actions at a display and the effect it has on the simulation.
In addition to the simulation software, a Software Support Environment (SSE) provides the resources for performing post deployment software support activities, including
Page 2 of 26
464748495051
52
5354555657585960
6162636465666768697071727374
75767778798081
8283848586878889
9091
identifying, documenting, and correcting system software faults, implementing system software upgrades, managing databases, and providing configuration management.
2.1.2. Common Software BaselineHistorically, although the current trainers have common classifications of software within a variant (i.e., within vehicle types for both DTTs and PTTs), there is no commonality between platforms (e.g. Abrams, Stryker). Each variant’s software architecture and source code is unique and stove-piped. The Army is in the process of establishing a FMT-CC software baseline to replace the current stove-piped software architecture with a common product line architecture which completely supports the entire FMT PL. The FMT-CC PL includes a set of plug-and-play applications that are applicable across the FMT product portfolio of legacy and future combat/tactical vehicle training systems without a loss of current functionality. The FMT CC DTT design documentation is not complete but is expected to be mature at the time of M1A2 SEP V3 HOTs agreement award. There is currently a FMT-CC effort for the DTTs. This effort will utilize the CC baseline and ensure maintenance lessons are incorporated into the M1A2 SEP V3 HOTs as part of the PL.
While the initiation of the FMT-CC PL was started with the DTT development, in support of the DoD objective to rapidly acquire quality products in an evolutionary approach, further improvements to the CC PL are desired (including new technology insertion) and should be proposed for the M1A2 SEP V3 HOT.
The FMT-CC, vehicle specific software, assets, digital information, and documentation will reside on the Live Training Transformation (LT2) portal. The LT2 portal is an Army repository for data and standards for the live training community created under the Consolidated Product Line Management (CPM) Next contract. Information uploaded by the vendor onto the LT2 portal may be available to other contractors/vendors on a need to know basis to perform work for the Army. The vendor shall provide a plan that documents a path to conformance to the LT2 Product Line Operations and Configuration Management (CM) Guide and existing FMT-CC documentation. The LT2 portal and guides are located at www.lt2portal.mil. A Common Access Card (CAC) is required to access this portal. For potential vendors without CACs, the LT2 Product Line Operations and CM Guide is being provided as Government Furnished Information (GFI). All software code developed with this effort and with the FMT-CC DTT resides in the Independent Development Environment (IDE) portion of the LT2 portal. Access to the IDE requires a secret clearance. If a vendor does not have secret clearance to access the portal, alternate methods can be made by the Government. However, the vendor must include its need for alternate methods of access within the solution.
3. General information
3.1. Training and Readiness Accelerator (TReX)Vendors interested in responding to this RFS must be members of TReX or teamed with a TReX member. Information about membership can be found at the following webpage: https://nstxl.org/membership/. This project will be managed by the U.S. Army Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI), Project Manager Soldier Training (PM ST), Product Manager Virtual Training Systems
Page 3 of 26
9293
94
9596979899100101102103104105106107
108109110111
112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127
128129130
131132133134135
(PdM VTS). All Government participants and advisors in the evaluation process will be required to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs).
3.2. Allowable Costs and Teaming
An individual vendor may not submit more than one comprehensive response to this RFS as a Prime. A vendor may participate as a sub-vendor to multiple responses. The cost of preparing and submitting a response is not considered an allowable direct charge to any Government contract or agreement. Non-compliance with the submission instructions provided herein may preclude the vendor from being considered for award.
3.3. Non-Government AdvisorsThis is to advise you that non-Government advisors will assist in the evaluation. The use of non-Government advisors will be strictly controlled. Non-Government advisors will be required to sign a NDA prior to working this effort. Agreements Officer will review NDAs for conflict prior to allowing access to source selection information.
All non-Government advisors will only have access to the information corresponding to their area(s) of expertise. Advisors will not have access to the Price Volume of the response. The companies identified herein have agreed not to engage in the manufacture or production of hardware/services/R&D that is related to this effort, and to refrain from disclosing proprietary information to unauthorized personnel.
The following companies will have non-Government personnel advising:
ECS Federal, LLC2750 Prosperity Ave Suite 600Fairfax, VA, 22031-4312CAGE Code: 1T1E5
OST, INC.2101 L St NW Suite 800Washington, DC, 20037-1657CAGE Code: 1NCB1
4. GFI/GFEThe Government will make available vehicle operation and maintenance documentation for use during solution preparation to the extent available. The Government will provide a legacy Abrams M1A2 SEP V2 HOT as GFE. The GFI will contain the Distribution C or D. The TReX member/team will require processing and approval prior to being authorized to receive any project exhibits to include GFE/GFI such as technical documentation, software, data packages, etc. All exhibits will be considered “As Is” upon being transferred.
In order to obtain the GFE/GFI artifacts, the vendor shall submit a request in writing to [email protected], with “FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT” used in the subject line along with the required information as outlined in the Security Process for Vetting Vendors, Attachment 16, and the Vendor GFI Tech Data Distribution
Page 4 of 26
136137138139140141142143144145146147
148149150151
152153154155156
157158159160161162163164165166167
168
169170171172173174175176177178179180
Agreement, Attachment 13 . The Distribution Agreement will provide further guidance regarding the handling of GFI after OTA award. The Government will provide additional GFI for the effort no later than 15 days after award of agreement. The GFI will include vehicle drawings, technical manuals and supplements, operator user manuals, if available. GFE for Technical Objective #3 will be provided after successful completion of a mutually agreed upon milestone or at the times agreed upon by the Government.
4.1. Government Property
The awarded vendor shall meet the following requirements upon receipt of GFE. The awarded vendor shall have the ability to store and secure an M1A2 SEP V2 HOT which will be provided as GFE for the prototype project. The M1A2 SEP V2 HOT will be provided to the selected Vendor to use as needed in the development of the prototype. The Vendor shall have a system of internal controls to manage (control, use, preserve, protect, repair, and maintain) Government property in its possession. The Vendor shall create and maintain records of all Government property accountable to the agreement. The Vendor shall investigate and report to the Government all incidents of property loss as soon as the facts become known. The Government shall have access to the Vendor’s premises and all Government property, at reasonable times, for the purposes of reviewing, inspecting and evaluating the Vendor’s property management plan(s), systems, procedures, records, and supporting documentation that pertains to Government property. The Vendor shall include the requirements of this paragraph in all sub agreements under which Government property is acquired or furnished for sub vendor performance. The Government shall retain title to all GFE/P. The Vendor shall promptly disclose and report Government property in its possession that is excess to agreement performance. The Vendor assumes the risk of, and shall be responsible for, any loss of Government property upon its delivery to the Vendor as GFE. However, the Vendor is not responsible for reasonable wear and tear to Government property or for Government property properly consumed in performing this agreement. The GFE will be provided as is.
4.2. Applicability of Technical Supplements and FMT CC Design DocumentsThe characteristics of this prototype system and the Government concept for its development are included in the technical supplements and FMT CC design documentation. Vendors are encouraged to tailor the technical supplement in its individual solutions and should articulate any suggested additions or major discrepancies between the technical supplements and the proposed technical solution. The technical supplement and FMT CC design documents are:
Technical Supplement for the FMT Abrams FMT HOT Prototype, PRF-PT-741 FMT-CC Interface Control Document, PGM-FMT-0032 FMT-CC System Subsystem Specification (SSS), PGM-FMT-0029 FMT-CC Software Design Description (SDD), PGM-FMT-0011 FMT-CC Interface Design Description (ICD), PGM-FMT-0012
If tailored, vendors are to submit the technical supplements with tracked changes to reflect the solution and approach proposed.
5. Solution ResponsesSolution submissions should clearly address planned documentation deliverables (including format and content) and any planned demonstrations, design reviews, and management reviews. A proposed Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) shall be provided in a Microsoft Project format. Responses shall be submitted in an editable/executable (not scanned) Word/Adobe PDF format and limited to no more than 15* standard size (8 ½” X 11”) pages for the total volume count (see table below), using standard 12-point Arial font. Charts or figures are not bound by the 12-point font requirement but shall be clearly legible. Page size of 11”X17” are allowed for charts or figures only and each page will be counted towards the 15* page limit (see Table 1). If the solution exceeds the page limitation, the Government may choose not to read any information exceeding the 15* page limit and the information may not be included in the evaluation the solution.
Volume Section Format**Counted towards
page limit Page Limit
Yes No
General
Cover Page
Word/PDF
X
5
Nontraditional Status X
FOCI Status X
OCI & Mitigation Plan X
Data Rights X
Security Requirements X
Company Information X
Technical
Cover Page Word/PDF X
10
Sub-Vendor List Word/PDF X
Solution Paper Word/PDF X
Schedule (IMS) MS Project X
Personnel, Manpower, Resource Allocation Excel X
Labor & Pricing
Cover Page Word/PDF X
Labor Hours & Pricing Excel X
BOE Word/PDF X
Table 1- Page Limits
*The Cover Pages, OCI & Mitigation Plan, Data Rights Assertion, IMS, BOE, Excel format Labor & Pricing Breakdown, and technical supplements with tracked changes are not included in the 15 page total.
**ALL PDF’s will be editable (not locked).
Page 6 of 26
227
228229230231232233234235236237238239240
241
242243
244
245
Any additional information the vendor deems pertinent may be incorporated into the solution but the total submission shall not exceed the 15 page limitation identified in Table 1 above. 5.1. RFS Solution Responses
Interested parties shall provide a RFS solution response. The RFS solution response shall contain separate General, Technical, and Price Volumes. No pricing detail shall be provided in any volume other than the Price Volume. As appropriate, vendors shall mark their submissions with proprietary, confidential, etc. The volumes shall consist of:
General Volume Contents List o Cover Pageo Nontraditional Statuso Definition of Nontraditional Defense Contractor (NDC)o Foreign Owned, Controlled or Influenced (FOCI) statuso Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) and Mitigation Planso Company Information
Technical Volume Contents List o Cover Pageo Sub-Vendor Listo Solutions Submissiono Schedule which include proposed Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) for
the entire HOT Prototype efforto Personnel, Manpower, Resource Allocation and Involvemento Data Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software (as described in
Section 5.1.2.7.2 of this RFS)
Labor & Pricing Volume Contents List o Cover Pageo Labor and Pricing o Basis of Estimate (BOE)o Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)
5.1.1. General Volume
If the vendor fails to meet the minimum requirements, the solution may be denied further evaluation at the Governments discretion.
5.1.1.1. Cover Page
The cover page shall include the title, vendor’s name, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code (if available), Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Business Size, address, primary point of contact (phone number & email), and status of
Page 7 of 26
246247248249250251252253254255
256
257258259260261262
263
264265266267268269270271
272
273274275276
277278
279280281282283284285286287288
U.S. ownership. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code for this effort is 541512, Computer System Design Services. 5.1.1.2. Nontraditional Status
The Vendor shall provide its nontraditional business status or its ability to meet the eligibility requirements of 10 U.S.C. §2371b. The Vendor shall check one of the following boxes – with appropriate justification, if needed.
□ There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participation to a significant extent in the project.
□ All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors.
□ At least one third of the total cost of the project is to be provided by sources other than the Federal Government.
If the Vendor is not a nontraditional defense contractor (NDC) and the first two check boxes are not checked, additional information is needed to support the eligibility requirements of 10 U.S.C. §2371b. Vendor shall provide the name, CAGE code, and DUNS number information for the NDC. Additionally, the Vendor shall provide what portion of the work the NDC is performing and an explanation of how the prototype would not succeed based on the portion of work performed by the NDC.
Definition Nontraditional – an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the Department of Defense (DoD) for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to 41 U.S.C §1502 and the regulations implementing such section.
5.1.1.3. Foreign Owned, Controlled or Influenced (FOCI) Status In accordance with RFS Attachment 16, Security Process for Vetting Vendors, the General Volume must include certification that the vendor (and subcontractor(s)) are not Foreign Owned or under USA FOCI status (and are not in merger or purchasing discussions for a Foreign company or USA FOCI Company). Should a prospective vendor be unable to so certify, they will be ineligible for award unless the mitigating circumstances in Attachment 16 Security Process for Vetting Vendors are met. In such a case, these mitigating circumstances shall be detailed in an appendix to the General Volume.
Security Vetting: All vendors who want to compete, bid or team with others for this effort must be willing to comply with the PEO STRI Security Process for Vetting. All vendors (Prime and Subs) must be vetted for eligibility, suitability, national status e.g. FOCI prior to the receipt of any award instrument.
5.1.1.4. Organizational Conflicts of Interest and Mitigation Plan
Vendors will submit an OCI Mitigation Plan via an appendix to its General Volume. In the event there are no real or perceived OCI, simply state so and annotate what actions would be taken in the event that one is realized. The OCI mitigation plan is not part of the solution page count.
5.1.1.5. Company Information
Within this section, the Vendor may include relevant or other miscellaneous information the company wishes to express to the Government (e.g. previous work, partnerships, awards, company structure, etc.).
5.1.2. Technical Volume
5.1.2.1. Cover Page
The cover page shall include the title, vendor’s name, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code (if available), Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Business Size, address, primary point of contact (phone number & email), and status of U.S. ownership.
5.1.2.2. Sub-Vendor List
Vendor shall provide a list of all sub-vendors involved and their role within the performance of your submission as an appendix to Technical Volume. The list shall include FOCI status and OCI.
5.1.2.3. Solution Submission
The Vendor’s proposed technical solution shall describe its approach to providing the solution based on the technical objectives identified in Section 5.1.2.7 (including all subparagraphs), with the system characteristics described in the Technical Supplement for the Technical Supplement for the M1A2 SEP V3 FMT HOT Prototype PRF-PT-741, Attachment 5. Vendors are encouraged to tailor the technical supplement in individual solutions and should articulate any suggested additions or major discrepancies between the technical supplements and the proposed technical solution. If tailored, vendors are to submit the technical supplements with tracked changes to reflect the solution and approach proposed. The solution shall describe how the vendor plans to provide all of the major capabilities as well as:
1. A design approach that demonstrates a thorough understanding of desired product line system architecture, prototype objectives, and modular approach to key subsystems.
2. One or more design solution(s) that can support training at the point of need. The vendors are encourage to include how its design could meet future requirements (e.g. transportability, vehicle platform upgrades).
3. Description of the team composition and sub-vendor involvement.
4. Facilities, capabilities, and management of developing a maintenance trainer.
The above capabilities are not listed in any specific order of priority and are provided to help focus vendor responses. In addition to describing the approach to delivering these capabilities, the technical solution shall also include full discussions of: a) Anticipated development risks. b) Proposed timeline tied to milestone activities for the 8 month period of performance. 5.1.2.4. Schedule
This section should include an anticipated delivery schedule: The Vendor is to include the anticipated delivery dates with their solution that includes all FMT Abrams CC PL compliant HOTs, completion dates the V3 design requirements and for key design reviews, test events, Integrated Product Team collaboration activities, cybersecurity completion events, and other tasks and deliverables as described herein.
5.1.2.4.1. Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)
An IMS is to be created using Microsoft Project. The IMS should be resource loaded with each task including a predecessor (if applicable), and correlate to the Basis of Estimates (BOE). The IMS may be attached as an appendix file. The IMS is not included in the total page count and page count is unlimited. 5.1.2.5. Personnel, Manpower, Resource Allocation and Involvement
5.1.2.5.1. Key Personnel (KP) List
The Vendor is to provide a list of key program personnel by labor category, title, and experience. KP consist of Lead Hardware Engineers, Lead Technical Engineers, Lead Software Engineers, and Program Managers. Vendors will specify KP experience with tracked vehicle engine maintenance trainers for the prime and all sub-vendors. Describe experience with design of trainers equipped with, fire suppression systems, diesel engines, and Controller Area Network architecture used in a training environment similar to the planned M1A2 SEP V3 HOTs. Experience should be within the last three years.
5.1.2.5.2. Manpower Allocation
Reasonableness of the Manpower Allocation (labor categories and hours by month) and schedule in relation to the IMS for the entire effort. Reasonableness includes the
appropriate distribution of labor categories and hours associated with each milestone. The manpower allocation document will be in Excel format.
5.1.2.6. Data Rights
Government desired rights are described in Section 5.1.2.8 of this RFS. For data rights other than unlimited or government purpose rights, the Vendor shall assert each instance with justification within the Data Rights Assertions tables in Attachment 17.
5.1.2.7. M1A2 SEP V3 HOT FMT PL Compliant Prototype
The prototype developed under this OTA should satisfy the requirements and provide the capabilities identified in the Technical Supplement and FMT-CC design documentation.
The Government will require a complete demonstration of the functionality and utility of the FMT PL compliant prototype unit at the Vendor’s facility, unless specifically noted as GFE, the solution shall provide all equipment (for example: network cables, computers, monitors, etc.). The solution shall also include any wireless equipment including switches and any equipment/systems required to demonstrate the prototype unit will seamlessly integrate with the FMT PL CC common equipment without a degradation in performance. The Government preference is to use fabricated equipment in place of tactical equipment, where possible. The Vendor shall provide a draft Notional GFE list with its solution. The Vendor will update the GFE list after award. The Government will provide GFE for the prototype demonstration unit with a minimum of 90 days’ notice prior to need.
The prototype shall include all applicable safety and cybersecurity Risk Management Framework (RMF) controls sufficiently documented to enable the Government to obtain a Safety Release, Health Hazard Approval, and an Authority to Operate (ATO) for fielding.
The FMT PL HOT prototype approach includes a single phase, with multiple technical objectives, as well as potential follow-on production activities outlined in Section 8: “Follow-on Production Activities.” The varying completion criteria established for each technical objective may be considered a Decision Point (DP) for entry into subsequent technical objectives and/or follow-on OT production efforts. The technical objectives for each phase will be separately priced. The Government may, at its discretion, use a DP to stop the effort and/or terminate the project and agreement, if the vendor is unable to successfully perform.
To ensure FMT PL concurrency with fielded FMT PL products as well as concurrent FMT PL efforts, Associate Vendor/Contractor Agreements (AV/CAs) will be required for all FMT PL vendors.
The prototype design shall utilize the FMT PL CC software baseline and architecture for the common equipment (i.e. SWS, TMS, and IOS). The prototype design shall utilize the FMT PL CC equipment and the FMT DTT PL existing common equipment, when
possible. The common equipment may be located in a different location within the same building or in other buildings. The HOTs must have connectivity to the common equipment within the same building. The storage and operational location may differ between locations. The design shall reflect that Government facility space and facility power will be provided by the Government. Any available facility space documentation will be provided after award in accordance with Section 4. An initial site visit/survey to Fort Benning, Georgia will be required during the prototype development to ensure the building requirements are met for installation and operation of the trainers. The site visit/survey will be properly documented within a Training Facilities Report (TFR). Any modifications required to the facility space, including power and duct work, will be required to be identified in a TFR. Any reference, in this RFS or supporting documentation, to network capabilities refers only to the networking between or within the prototype training devices (for example: DTT to DTT, PTT to DTT, PTT to PTT, PTT to HOT, etc.); the FMT PL prototype training devices DO NOT and WILL NOT connect to the facility network or the internet. The Internet Protocol (IP) addressing for the HOTs will conform to the IP addressing plan in the FMT-CC RMF.
5.1.2.7.1. Prototype Phase
This prototype phase consists of three (3) Technical Objectives (TO): 1) Research & Analysis and Proposed Solution, 2) Development & Verification, and 3) Demonstration & Validation and a Final Technical Objectives Assessment. The TOs explain the high-level scope and deliverables required prior to proceeding to the subsequent TO. Within 2 weeks of award the Vendor will submit a draft IMS. The Vendor’s IMS will include the date of expected completion for each TO. The Government review and Configuration Control Board (CCB) and/or Core Asset Working Group (CAWG) approval of the proposed architecture will be required prior to proceeding to the next Technical Objective.
The Government has the right to deny or approve entry into the next TO. The Government reserves the right to reject any deliverables. At the Government’s discretion, the Vendor may be required to revise and resubmit deliverables. If the Government determines that the Vendor has not successfully met the TOs and/or has not produced the required (approved) technical documentation, the Government may terminate the prototype effort at any DP.
The phase is considered complete upon the successful demonstration of the collective TOs and the approval of all deliverables. However; the Government, at its discretion, may choose to proceed into subsequent TOs or production prior to approval of TO objectives and/or deliverables. The potential production follow-on DP will not occur prior to TO #3 completion.
Estimated Timeline:
The Government anticipates that the total period of performance for this effort, which consists of one phase, will not to exceed 8 months. The Vendor will present a timeline for approval within the delivered IMS prior to the Kickoff meeting.
5.1.2.7.1.1. Technical Objective 1, Research & Analysis and Proposed Solution1. Analyze the latest DTT Common Core software and hardware architecture, FMT
PL guidelines and standards/specifications, GFI, and the FMT Abrams Technical Supplement to develop a generic architecture and design approach for HOTs that can be adopted into the FMT PL. This objective requires the research and analysis for the effort needed to bring the existing GFE Abrams M1A2 SEP V2 HOTs into the CC (to include any CC hardware and software updates due to changes in the vehicle platform, as required).
2. Includes the Vendor’s FMT Abrams V3 design requirement analysis into the FMT-CC PL. The FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT system solution system architecture that will include:
a. Satisfy the functional and performance requirements of the FMT-CC and Technical Supplements.
b. Leverage FMT-CC software components and existing legacy equipment. Maximum use of fabricated components versus tactical equipment is preferred.
c. Minimize life cycle costs to establish and sustain the FMT PL.
d. Support the integration of new training technologies.
e. Be compatible with the LT2 constructs and guidelines described in Section 2.1.2 of this RFS.
The Government review and Configuration Control Board (CCB) and/or Core Asset Working Group (CAWG) will be required to approve the proposed architecture prior to proceeding to Technical Objective #2.
3. Completion of the FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT design requirements analysis which includes reusing existing hardware (i.e. GFE legacy HOT). The design requirements should include the list of required GFE and Bill of Material required to meet M1A2 SEP V3 HOT objectives.
The prototype FMT CC PL HOT will determine the methodology and demonstrate the functional training requirements of the trainer. The requirement analysis shall determine the additional level of effort and GFE required for converting the CC compliant prototype to M1A2 SEP V3 HOT system.
FMT- CC design document updates (if applicable) Initial
Alternative HOT Design Concepts with Pros and Cons of each alternative and Bill of Material (including GFE)
Initial
Requirement Analysis Document Initial
5.1.2.7.1.1.2 Decision Point for Technical Objective #1
The Government will hold a DP meeting to determine whether the Government will proceed into TO #2 or terminate the agreement. 5.1.2.7.1.2. Technical Objective #2, Development & Documentation: Includes the FMT-CC compliant lesson integration from the legacy trainers and demonstration of the FMT Abrams CC PL HOT prototype using the FMT common components (for example: TMS, IOS). Based on the approved HOT CC architecture, FMT-CC TS, Abrams HOT Performance Specification, and the Abrams technical documentation, develop:
1. Troubleshooting paths for all the lessons on the current V3 legacy trainer to be implemented. The troubleshooting paths will be developed with input and agreement from the Government provided Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).
2. A list of all required GFE, including dates required.
3. Technical manual work package identification and method to introduce faults for the lessons to be implemented on the HOT.
FMT- CC design document updates (if applicable) 2nd Submission
Training Facilities Report (TFR) Initial
5.1.2.7.1.2.2 Decision Point for Technical Objective #2
The Government will hold a DP meeting determine whether the Government will proceed into TO #3 or terminate the agreement.
5.1.2.7.1.3. Technical Objective #3 Demonstration & Validation: Based on the architecture and specification developed in Technical Objectives 1 and 2, design the FMT CC PL compliant HOT prototype. The approach should maximize reusability and modularity to the maximum extent possible. For example, the design should include common/reusable components that could be used for any M1A2 SEP V3 variant with minimum internal reconfiguration required. The prototype shall include all applicable safety and RMF controls implemented to enable the Government to obtain both a Safety Release and an ATO.
5.1.2.7.1.3.2 Decision Point for Technical Objective #3
The Government will hold a DP meeting to determine whether the Government will terminate the agreement, proceed into the final technical objective, or the prototype was successfully completed and will proceed into production.
5.1.2.7.1.4. TO #4 Final Technical Objectives Criteria: The final Technical Objective criteria includes the successful system demonstration and In-Plant Acceptance Test at the Vendor’s location of the FMT PL CC prototype HOT including the FMT-CC IOS, TMS, and NAS. The demonstration will demonstrate ability to use the legacy hardware in a CC compliant HOT. To ensure scheduling needs are met, the integration and demonstration will be coordinated with the Government.
5.1.2.7.1.4.1 Final Technical Objectives Deliverable Outcomes:
Document Submission
M1A2 SEP V3 HOT System Architecture Description (SAD) Final
M1A2 SEP V3 HOT System Specification (SS) Final
M1A2 SEP V3 HOT System/Subsystem Design Description
Final
Requirements Traceability Verification Matrix (RTVM) Final
HOT Prototype Technical Data Package (TDP) (Design documents, source code, drawings, NET package, Item Unique Identifier (IUID), etc.)
Final
Verification/Validation Documentation
(Test Procedures, Test Reports)Final
Cybersecurity/RMF Documentation and Reports Final
System Safety Assessment Report (SAR) Final
Health Hazard Analysis Report (HHAR) Final
Training Facilities Report (TFR) Final
Software Description Final
Software Product Specification Final
Configuration Audit Report Final
Logistics Product Data – (OUM & SMM) Final
Page 16 of 26
602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617
Software Product Package Final
Product Baseline Index Final
5.1.2.7.1.4.2 Final Technical Objectives Decision Point
The Government will hold a DP meeting determine whether the Government will proceed into production. 5.1.2.8. Government Desired Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software
For the purposes of this RFS and final award document, the Government will use the data rights and computer software related terms defined in Attachment 19, Data Rights and Computer Software License Terms and Definitions.
Vendors shall complete the Data Rights Assertions tables in Attachment 17, including any assertions of its subvendors or suppliers must be submitted as an attachment to its solution response. The tables must be completed in the format set forth in the attachment, dated and signed by an official authorized to contractually obligate the Vendor. If additional space is necessary, additional pages may be included. There is no page limit for the Data Rights Assertions Tables and they do not count against the proposed technical solution page limitation. If the proposed solution under this transaction contains data rights other than unlimited or government purpose rights, the Vendor shall assert each instance with justification within the Data Rights Assertions tables in Attachment 17.
The Government requires a minimum of Government Purpose Rights (GPR) to all development and deliverables of technical data and computer software developed exclusively with Government funded under the transaction agreement, for a five-year period. At the end of the five year period, unlimited rights shall transfer to the Government. This includes but is not limited to the following:
(a) Studies, analyses, test data, or similar data produced for this agreement, when the study, analysis, test, or similar work was specified as an element of performance;
(b) Form, fit, and function data;
(c) Data necessary for installation, operation, maintenance, or training purposes (other than detailed manufacturing or process data);
(d) Corrections or changes to technical data furnished to the Vendor by the Government;
(e) Data otherwise publicly available or have been released or disclosed by the Vendor or Vendor partners without restrictions on further use, release or disclosure, other than a release or disclosure resulting from the sale, transfer, or other assignment of interest in the technical data to another party or the sale or transfer of some or all of a business entity or its assets to another party; Commercial Computer Software.
The Vendor shall describe the intellectual property rights being provided to the Government in terms of technical data, both in software and hardware, clearly outlining the appropriate assertion of rights within technical data, computer software and software documentation that will be delivered with your solution(s), and any rights restrictions. If the proposed solution includes commercial software, copies of any applicable End User License Agreements (EULAs) must be submitted with the response. It is the Government’s intent to plan for the maintenance and modification of the system(s) using Government personnel and third party vendors. The EULA submissions have no page limit and do not count against the proposed technical solution page limitation. If additional pages are needed, data rights assertions may be submitted as an appendix, which has no page limit and does not count against the proposed technical solution page limitation. The Vendor shall make every effort to analyze feasible non-proprietary solutions and incorporate them when applicable to the effort. This includes, but is not limited to, software rights, data, source code, drawings, manuals, warranties, and integration efforts. The Vendor shall clearly state all assumptions made during development of responses.
5.1.2.9. Operations Security
For Operations Security (OPSEC) requirements, see the Attachment 15; OPSEC requirements document.
5.1.2.9.1.1. Cybersecurity
The prototype shall meet all applicable RMF (cybersecurity requirements) required for the Government to obtain an ATO.
5.1.3. Labor & Pricing Volume
5.1.3.1. Cover Page
The cover page shall include the title, vendor’s name, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code (if available), Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Business Size, address, primary point of contact (phone number & email), and status of U.S. ownership. 5.1.3.2. Labor Hours & Pricing
Vendors shall submit a firm, fixed-price amount for its solution, further divided into severable milestones. The Government is not dictating a specific price mechanism. However, proposed payments should be linked to clearly definable, detailed milestones for the prototype. It should be clear, with sufficient detail, what is being delivered at each milestone. The Vendor’s pricing milestones may vary from the defined decision points, depending on the proposed solution. Labor Hours and labor category by TO should be included in the pricing breakdown. Pricing submission shall be submitted in Excel format with all Excel formula’s and pricing information used during calculation. Milestones should be established and priced in a manner that prohibits milestone efforts from being
worked concurrently. Each milestone price should reflect the anticipated value the Government will receive toward accomplishment of the OTA goals and objectives at the time the milestone is completed. The Labor Hours & Pricing has no page number limitation.
5.1.3.3. Basis of Estimates (BOE)
Vendors shall include a basis of estimates which covers manpower allocation for the entire scope of this prototype development effort, validates the labor hours & pricing breakdown and is correlated to the vendors proposed IMS. The BOE shall include a detailed Bill of Materials (BOM).
5.1.3.4. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)
Vendors shall provide a ROM pricing for potential the FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT follow-on production activities as described in Section 8. The ROM pricing shall state all assumptions and methodology used to obtain the ROM. The ROM quantities shall be 1-50 permanently stationed units. The vendor shall include their estimated timeline for production of quantities of 1-23 and storage fees associated with GFE (Abrams M1A2 SEP V2 HOT). Please note: the Follow-On ROM will assist in future planning efforts for the potential follow-on efforts. The Follow-On ROM is not part of the evaluation.
5.2. RFS Response Instruction: There will be an open period for the submittal of questions relating to the RFS. All questions related to this RFS should be submitted in writing to [email protected], with “FMT Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 HOT” used in the subject line. All questions must be submitted with company name and POC information. The Government will remove the company name and POC information before the questions are posted to industry. The Government will make every attempt to answer all submitted questions as soon as possible, but no later than 1:00 PM EDT, two weeks after release of final RFS. Questions shall not include proprietary data.
Note: the Government reserves the right to post submitted questions and answers to facilitate vendor solution responses.
The Government may also establish a WebEx session, as appropriate, to communicate with industry. If the Government decides to utilize WebEx, a date, time and title of the event will be posted no later than two (2) weeks before solutions are due.
Written solutions shall be submitted no later than 1:00 PM EDT on TBD in Final RFS, via the “Submit a Solution” button on the NSTXL website. Any submissions received after the deadline may be rejected as late and not considered.6. Evaluation and Selection Process
6.1. Evaluation
The evaluation will consist of evaluation of the written solution response. If further information is required after the completion of the evaluations of the written solution
responses, the Government may request presentations and/or demonstrations or enter into communications with vendors.
The Government will evaluate the degree to which the submission provides a thorough, flexible, and sound approach to fulfill the requirements.
In performing the initial review of the Technical Volume, the Government evaluators will only review the enclosures and other proposal information if the response describes a technical approach that the Government evaluators find sufficiently viable and effective based on the Focus Areas described below.
If the other supporting documents are reviewed, the Government evaluators will consider the extent to which the supporting documents are consistent with the remaining technical response. If the supporting documents are not consistent, the overall evaluation of the vendor’s solution may be negatively affected.
The Government recognizes the need for flexibility in its evaluation process. The following represents the Government’s planned approach to evaluating submissions in response to this RFS. If necessary, the Government reserves the right to modify its evaluation approach.
Written solution responses will be evaluated with consideration given to the Vendor’s ability to provide a clear description of the proposed solution, the overall technical merit of the response and the total project risk with consideration aimed at the Technical and Labor & Pricing Volumes, with respect to the Focus Areas referenced below and the ability to fulfill the requirements in the Technical Supplement and FMT-CC design documents identified in the Technical Attachments 1-5. The Government evaluators will consider the written solution response when selecting the preferred approach to achieving the Government’s objectives.
After the evaluation of written solution responses, it is anticipated that the Government will begin Statement of Work (SOW) collaboration with the selected vendor.
The Technical and Labor & Pricing Volumes of the Written Solution Response will be evaluated based upon the following focus areas.
Focus Areas: In evaluating the viability and overall effectiveness, the Government evaluators will consider the following focus areas, in no specific order of importance.
Focus Area Focus Area Description
1 Technical Merit
2 Demonstrated Experience
3 Solution Feasibility of Implementation
4 Solution Price
6.1.1.1. Focus Area 1 – Technical Merit
The technical merit of the vendor’s technical solution and design approach for all phases and objectives as described in Sections 5.1.2.7
Page 20 of 26
756757
758759
760761762763
764765766767
768769770771
772773774775776777778779
780781
782783
784785
787788789790791792
6.1.1.2. Focus Area 2 – Demonstrated Experience
Clearly communicate how past experience in creating maintenance trainers, such as, HOTs will demonstrate the ability to satisfy the technical capability requirements of this effort. Communicate experience in development, production, and fielding of HOT maintenance trainers’ product line. Communicate experience with development of trainers including turret equipped vehicles and Controller Area Network (CAN) architecture. Communicate experience with establishing product lines and Army wheeled/tracked vehicle maintenance. Experience should be within the last three years. 6.1.1.3. Focus Area 3 – Solution and Feasibility of Implementation
Clear, concise, and well-developed solution with streamlined approach of being implemented into the FMT PL, ease of adapting the final design solution to reuse (for example: the instructor controls could be reused) in order to expand the product line and fielded within schedule.
6.1.1.4. Focus Area 4 – Solution Price
Clear pricing & cost data which accurately reflects level of effort derived from proposed prototype development, and IMS. Rational price breakdown for each major milestone activity. Detailed man-hours by month for each labor category, and detailed bill of material.
6.2. Selection Process
The Government anticipates awarding one OT prototype project, through TReX, to the vendor that proposes a solution that best satisfies the Government’s objectives.
The Government is planning a one day face to face or virtual site visit to Ft. Benning, GA to provide information to vendors during the solution preparation process and observe Abrams HOT currently fielded. The face to face or virtual site visit to Ft. Benning, GA will be held on To be identified in Final RFS.
The Government will review each Vendor’s submittal against the focus areas and make award to the Vendor whose solution is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government in terms of price, schedule, technical risks, and data rights assertions considered.
Assessment of risk is subjective. If the risk is obvious or the schedule seems overly aggressive, the Government will consider that in the total risk assessment. Vendors are responsible for identifying risks within their submissions, as well as providing specific mitigation solutions. If sufficient validation of the proposed information is not provided, the Government may reject the submission. Unsupported assertions will be discounted by the evaluators.
In making the final decision it may become necessary to compare the proposals of each vendor against the other, but the Government anticipates that its decision is more likely to be made based on each Vendor’s submittal as evaluated against the criteria
described above and a determination of which proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government.
7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
7.1. Statement of Work
The proposed solution will be used to collaboratively negotiate a Statement of Work (SOW) after selection for award. The SOW will be incorporated into the OTA agreement as part of the award.
7.2. Export Controls Research findings and technology developments arising from the efforts may constitute a significant enhancement to the national defense and to the economic vitality of the United States. As such, in the conduct of all work related to this effort, the recipient will comply strictly with the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (22 C.F.R. §§ 120-130), the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) and the Department of Commerce Export Regulation (15 C.F.R. §§ 730-774). 7.3. Interaction and/or Disclosure The Vendor should comply with foreign disclosure processes IAW US Army Regulation (AR) 380‐10, Foreign Disclosure and Contacts with Foreign Representatives; Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 5230.11, Disclosure of Classified Military Information to Foreign Governments and International Organizations; and DoDD 5230.20, Visits and Assignments of Foreign Nationals. All submissions shall be unclassified. Submissions containing data that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes shall include the following sentences on the cover page:“This submission includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government, except to non-Government personnel for evaluation purposes, and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose other than to evaluate this submission. If, however, an agreement is awarded to this Company as a result of -- or in connection with – the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent agreed upon by both parties in the resulting agreement. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]”
Each restricted data sheet should be marked as follows: “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this submission.”
8. FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES
It is anticipated that potential follow-on production OTAs or contracts may be awarded which use the FMT-CC PL HOT architecture and software/hardware, developed under this prototyping effort. Potential follow-on production OTAs or contracts may be either
sole source, based on the prototype being issued using competitive procedures for the selection of parties for participation in the transaction and successful completion of the prototype project within the scope of this document, or successfully competed as outlined in the agreement SOW or alternate requirement document. Follow-on production activities could include system and software updates to address obsolescence, concurrency with the weapons platform, evolving training requirements, and technology insertion.
Anticipated follow-on activities may include, but are not limited to the following:
1. Production of lessons for the M1A2 SEP V3 HOT which are compliant with the approved FMT-CC architecture and the vehicle specific training requirements.
2. Perform software and hardware updates to existing M1A2 SEP V3 HOT as required.
3. Production of one to twenty three (1-23) production HOTS for the M1A2 SEP V3 which are compliant with the approved FMT-CC architecture and the vehicle specific training requirements. The follow-on production HOTs may be installed at Fort Benning, GA, Fort Lee, VA and Gowen Field, ID.
4. For the potential production HOTs, Government facility space and facility power will be provided by the Government. Any modifications required to the facility space, including power and duct work, will be required to be identified in a TFR. Any reference, in this RFS or supporting documentation, to network capabilities refers only to the networking between or within the prototype training devices (for example: DTT to DTT, PTT to DTT, PTT to PTT, PTT to HOT, etc.); the FMT PL prototype training devices DO NOT and WILL NOT connect to the facility network or the internet. The Internet Protocol (IP) addressing for the production HOTs will conform to the IP addressing plan in the FMT-CC Risk Management Framework (RMF)
Follow-on Products: Follow-on products will include software design description, source code, interface capability and interface design documents (ICD/IDD), production level technical data package, and system specifications, interim vendor support (ICS), and new equipment training (NET).
The Government will provide GFE for the potential follow-on production effort with a minimum of 90 days’ notice, prior to need.
Estimated Timeline: FY22-FY23
The estimated value of all potential follow-on production activities is $32M.
9. ATTACHMENTS
The characteristics of this prototype project and the Government concept for its development are included in the attached technical supplement and FMT-CC design documentation (Attachments 1-5).
Page 23 of 26
890891892893894895896
897
898899900
901902
903904905906
907908909910911912913914915916
917
918919920921
922923
924
925
926927928929930
Attachment #1 - FMT-CC Software Design Description (SDD), PGM-FMT-0011Attachment #2 - FMT-CC Interface Design Description (IDD), PGM-FMT-0012,Attachment #3 - FMT-CC System Subsystem Specification (SSS), PGM-FMT-0029 Attachment #4 - FMT-CC Interface Control Document (ICD), PGM-FMT-0032 Attachment #5 - Technical Supplement for the M1A2 SEP V3 FMT HOT Prototype PRF-
PT-741Attachment #6 - M1A2 SEP V2 Interactive Electronic Manual (IETM)Attachment #7 - M1A2 SEP V2 HOT DrawingsAttachment #8 - M1A2 SEP V2 HOT OUMAttachment #9 - M1A2 SEP V2 HOT SMMAttachment #10 - LT2 Product Line Configuration Management Guide, 25 Feb 2019Attachment #11 - LT2 Operations Guide, 8 October 2019Attachment #12 - Abrams SEP V3 LRU ChangesAttachment #13 - Vendor GFI Tech Data Distribution Agreement, 4 April 2020Attachment #14 - DoDM 5100.76, April 17, 2012, Physical Security of Sensitive
Conventional Arms, Ammunition, and Explosives, Enclosure 9Attachment #15 - OPSEC Requirements, 23 May 2019Attachment #16 - Security Process for Vetting VendorsAttachment #17 - Data Rights Assertions TablesAttachment #18 - Data Rights License Terms DefinitionsAttachment #19 - Data Rights and Computer Software License Terms and Definitions and EULA Attachment #20 – DTT FMT Ph 3 BOMAttachment #21 – CCTT Reuse Drawings
Attachments 1-12, 20, and 21 are considered GFI and will be provided in accordance with Section 4 of this document.
