Medium range radar systems and in-service support

Table of contents

• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1 Project requirement
• 2. Request for information phase
• 3. Request for proposal phase
  • 3.1 Activity monitored
  • 3.2 Fairness Monitor observations
  • 3.3 Bid submissions
  • 3.4 Proposal evaluation
    • 3.4.1 Technical proposal evaluation
    • 3.4.2 Live fire evaluation
    • 3.4.3 Price proposal
• 4. Attestation of assurance
• 5. Methodology
• 6. Reference documents

1. Introduction

PPI Consulting Limited (PPI) was engaged by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) as the Fairness Monitor (FM) contractor to observe the procurement process related to the Department of National Defence’s (DND) procurement of Medium Range Radar (MRR) systems and associated logistics support.

By means of Solicitation # W8476-133817/E, dated February 27, 2014 and issued on March 4, 2014, PWGSC, on behalf of DND, issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to select a contractor to provide MRR Systems and In-Service Support. The original closing date of May 30, 2014 was subsequently revised to September 16, 2014.

We hereby submit our Final Report, covering the activities of the FM commencing with the Request for Information (RFI) and vendor consultation process, Request for Proposals (RFP) and subsequent proposal evaluation including Live Fire Evaluation (LFE).

PPI is an independent third party with respect to this activity. We reviewed all of the information provided and observed all relevant activities.

1.1 Project requirement

DND has a requirement for the acquisition and the provision of In-Service Support (ISS) of Medium Range Radar (MRR) systems. The primary function of the MRR system will be to detect hostile projectiles, such as rockets, mortars and artillery to determine their impact location and locate their origin. The MRR system will also track hostile and friendly aerial vehicles, including fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), cruise missiles and anti-radar missiles so that land forces can take appropriate action.

The requirement is for eight (8) Military-off-the-Shelf (MOTS) MRR systems and associated logistics support, with the option to purchase two (2) additional MRR systems within twelve (12) months of contract award. The requirement also includes ISS and the option to extend the ISS period. The requirement will result in the issuance of two (2) contracts to only one (1) successful Bidder: the MRR Acquisition Contract and the MRR ISS Contract. This procurement is subject to the Controlled Goods Program.

2. Request for information phase

A draft RFP for bidder feedback was posted on the Governments Electronic Bidding system (GETS) on July 8, 2013. Prospective bidders were invited to attend an Industry Day to discuss the draft RFP on August 1 and 2, 2013. Following the initial feedback from prospective bidders and from the first Industry Day, an invitation to a second Industry Day was posted on the open bidding system for one-on-one, commercially confidential discussions on August 28, 29 and 30, 2013. Responses from prospective bidders was such that these meetings were all held on August 29, 2013.

The FM attended all meetings with industry and participated in subsequent team meetings. The information gathered from this RFI phase was considered when finalizing the approach and solicitation documents.

3. Request for proposal phase

3.1 Activity monitored

During the RFP phase i.e. February 27, 2014 to September 16, 2014, the FM attended the Industry Day held on March 17, 2014.

During the RFP phase the following documents were provided to the FM for review:

• Review of vendor questions arising from Industry Day;
• Draft solicitation documents: The FM was provided access to multiple iterations of the draft documents for review and provided fairness observations via the Contracting Authority to the client. All fairness observations were addressed to the FM’s satisfaction;
• The final solicitation document RFP # W8476-133817/E, dated February 27, 2014 was provided to the FM for review including the Evaluation Plan. All fairness observations were addressed to the FM’s satisfaction;
• Proponent Clarification Questions and Answers during bid open period. During the bid open period, the FM was provided with vendor clarification questions and the draft responses for review. Questions were compiled as they were received and responses drafted on an ongoing basis. All fairness observations were addressed to the FM’s satisfaction. The clarification process resulted in 27 Amendments providing responses to bidder clarification questions along with amendments to the RFP as applicable.;
• Evaluation spreadsheet.

The documents and activities completed in this phase complied with the fairness principles below:

• The RFP was posted on Buyandsell.gc.ca, the Government of Canada’s open bidding system, and the information was therefore available to all potential bidders at the same time;
• Proponents were provided equal opportunity to ask clarification questions.

3.2 Fairness Monitor observations

The FM reviewed and provided fairness observations with respect to solicitation documents during the RFP development and finalization phase of the initiative up to the posting of the RFP on Buyandsell.gc.ca. The FM was present at the Industry Day held on March 17, 2014 and reviewed questions from vendors resulting from that information session.  Any observations made by the FM were addressed by the client project team and by the Contracting Authority. Both the client project team and the Contracting Authority were responsive in providing clarification when requested by the FM.

During the clarification process, questions from vendors were logged, and a draft response created by the client project team or the Contracting Authority as applicable. The FM was included in the review of the responses. Both the client project team and the Contracting Authority were responsive in providing clarification to any observations made by the FM.

3.3 Bid submissions

PWGSC received three (3) proposals by the closing date and time on September 16, 2014.

3.4 Proposal evaluation

3.4.1 Technical proposal evaluation

The FM attended the Evaluator Briefing and distribution of evaluation documents. The evaluation team was briefed on all issues related to conducting the evaluation in accordance with the stipulated selection process, including roles and responsibilities, confidentiality, document control, evaluator conduct, independent assessment, consensus process, schedule, and an explanation of clarification versus bid repair.

The following process was undertaken to evaluate the written proposal:

• Each evaluator conducted their own independent review and scoring of the proposal in their evaluator workbook;
• Once the independent reviews were completed, the evaluators participated in consensus meetings to agree on the score to be assigned to each rated requirement. The scores and the rationale for the scores were recorded in the master record;
• Evaluators recorded and initialled any changes agreed to during consensus in their individual workbooks;
• The FM confirmed with each member of the evaluation team that they were in agreement with the consensus scores;
• All evaluators confirmed their agreement;
• The evaluation team signed the consensus record.

The FM witnessed the written proposal consensus sessions and confirms that the process was conducted appropriately in accordance with the process established in the RFP and in a fair, open and transparent manner.

3.4.2 Live fire evaluation

Live Fire Evaluations (LFEs) were scheduled with each of the three bidders during the period December 2014 to March 2015. The PWGSC contracting officer accompanied the evaluation team and coordinated each of the live fire demonstrations for Canada with the bidder.

Bidders had submitted technical data related to their proposed solutions within their bid submission which the evaluation team had scored in accordance with the process identified in the RFP. Subsequent to each demonstration, bidders provided the contracting authority with the actual data records achieved by their solution during the LFE.

The following process was undertaken to evaluate the Live Fire demonstrations:

• The evaluation team met in consensus to review the actual data record from the LFE and the original written proposal scores;
• In accordance with part 4 of the RFP, Basis of Selection, section 2.2 Adjustment of Technical Score, minor adjustments were agreed to reflect any variance between the written proposal and the data captured during the LFE;
• The Live Fire Evaluation consensus spreadsheet was adjusted to reflect the results of the LFE;
• All evaluators confirmed their agreement;
• The evaluation team signed the consensus record.

The FM witnessed the LFE consensus sessions and confirms that the process was conducted appropriately in accordance with the process established in the RFP and in a fair, open and transparent manner.

3.4.3 Price proposal

The Contracting Authority completed the price verification, assigned scores and reviewed with the FM.

The Price Proposal was complete and complied with the requirements of the RFP. In addition, the other financial requirements of the RFP, Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITBs), Value Proposition (VP) requirements and financial capability requirements were met.

The documentation from Industry Canada confirming compliance with the ITBs, the points awarded to the VP requirements in the RFP and the PWGSC financial analysis confirming compliance were reviewed with the FM. All requirements were met and the FM had no fairness concerns.

4. Attestation of assurance

The FM hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the procurement of MRR Systems and In-Service Support for the Department of National Defence.

It is our professional opinion that the RFI and RFP processes, including the evaluation of the proposals received in response to the DND procurement of MRR Systems and In-Service Support, that we observed, were carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.

5. Methodology

PPI Consulting Limited was engaged as a Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe the procurement process for DND’s procurement of Medium Range Radar Systems and In-Service Support and to attest to the fairness, openness and transparency of this monitored activity.

In accordance with the terms of our engagement, we familiarized ourselves with the relevant documents, observed the pre-bid solicitation activities including the RFI and vendor consultation processes, the bid solicitation activities including the consensus scoring of the live fire demonstration, the written proposal and the price proposal, identifying fairness-related matters to the contracting and technical authorities and ensuring that responses and actions were reasonable and appropriate.

6. Reference documents

Table summary

The following table includes a list of documents referred to in the report such as the Request for Proposal (RFP), amendments, clarification letters, debriefing letters, etc. Each row is numbered, followed by the document title, then a document identifier such as a date or document number.

#	Reference Documents	Document date/number
1	RFP Ref. ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU000	February 27, 2014
2	Amendment 1 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU001	March 10, 2014
3	Amendment 2 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU002	March 10, 2014
4	Amendment 3 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU003	March 13, 2014
5	Amendment 4 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU004	April 7, 2014
6	Amendment 5 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU005	April 30, 2014
7	Amendment 6 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU006	May 27, 2014
8	Amendment 7 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU007	May 28, 2014
9	Amendment 8 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU008	May 30, 2014
10	Amendment 9 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU009	June 2, 2014
11	Amendment 10 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU010	June 4, 2014
12	Amendment 11 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU011	June 5, 2014
13	Amendment 12 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU012	June 11, 2014
14	Amendment 13 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU013	June 27, 2014
15	Amendment 14 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU014	July 24, 2014
16	Amendment 15 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU015	July 25, 2014
17	Amendment 16 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU016	July 28, 2014
18	Amendment 17 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU017	August 4, 2014
19	Amendment 18 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU018	August 6, 2014
20	Amendment 19 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU019	August 18, 2014
21	Amendment 20 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU020	August 19, 2014
22	Amendment 21 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU021	August 28, 2014
23	Amendment 22 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU022	August 28, 2014
24	Amendment 23 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU023	September 2, 2014
25	Amendment 24 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU024	September 2, 2014
26	Amendment 25 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU025	September 8, 2014
27	Amendment 26 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU026	September 9, 2014
28	Amendment 27 ABES.PROD.PW__QD.B023.E24350.EBSU027	September 10, 2014

Addendum to the final report
September 15, 2015

Addendum to fairness monitor final report dated April 28, 2015, for the acquisition of medium range radar systems and in-service support

This Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Final Report covers the period following the conclusion of the evaluation phase.

Contract award, communications and debriefing

The contract was awarded on June 25, 2015. Along with the notification of award, information was provided to each proponent on July 27, 2015 explaining the results of the evaluation of their proposal. Debriefings were held with the two unsuccessful bidders on September 9 and 10, 2015.

It is our professional opinion that the Medium Range Radar Systems and In-Service Support procurement we observed was carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.