TCS PSS_CfS _Vendor Questions and Government Responses_29Oct26.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 34 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Tactical Communication Systems - Procurement, Services & Sustainment (TCS-PSS) Call for Solutions
- Solicitation number
- CSO-ARMY-TCS-PSS-2027
About this file
This file is a Q&A document containing 86 non-proprietary vendor questions and government responses regarding the Tactical Communication Systems - Procurement, Services & Sustainment (TCS-PSS) Call for Solutions (CSO-ARMY-TCS-PSS-2027).
The CSO seeks innovative tactical communications solutions through single-award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts and/or Other Transactions (OTs) to support Next Generation Command and Control (NGC2). The Army is pursuing a flexible, multi-phased acquisition approach accepting submissions from integrators, original equipment manufacturers, and commercial solution providers—both large and small businesses, traditional and non-traditional defense contractors. Solutions must address either NSA High Assurance certification or Sensitive but Unclassified - Encrypted (SBU-E) qualification, with mandatory post-quantum cryptography (PQC) compliance roadmaps targeting NIST validation by 31 December 2030 and FIPS 140-3 Level 3 achievement by 31 December 2031. Offerors may propose complete end-to-end solutions or component/niche offerings (software, sustainment, integration services, installation kits) without penalty. White Papers are limited to 15 pages (12-point Times New Roman) or 15 slides, due 3 December 2026, with Phase 1 evaluations expected circa February 2027. Successful Phase 1 submissions remain valid for 24 months and may be considered for award without resubmission during on-ramps. The Government will establish processes for providing representative interfaces, test assets, and technical data to Phase 2/Phase 3 invitees. Teaming and subcontracting are permitted; however, standalone software/test-support offerings must be submitted through a tactical communications equipment provider. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) analysis and mitigation plans are required per Section 9 of the CFS. No dedicated small business set-asides are included under this DFARS 212.70 commercial solutions opening, though small businesses are encouraged to participate independently or as teammates. Cost and Schedule ROM submissions should assume a notional 5,000 radios per year per radio type for planning purposes only and do not constitute a commitment or guarantee.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| TCS PSS_CfS QandA _Round 2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| TCS-PSS CSO_10192026_final.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Non-propreitary
| Question # | Vendor Question | Government Response |
| 1 | Will the Government permit teaming and subcontracting arrangements under the resulting agreements, and must a proposed subcontractor independently meet the Amendment 1 access requirements (current DoW contract, DD 2345, JCP number and NDA)? | |
| Yes, teaming and subcontracting arrangements are permitted. The prime contractor is responsible for vetting, authorizing, and managing its subcontractors’ and teaming partners’ access to CUI in accordance with its internal security processes and all applicable contractual and CUI safeguarding requirements. A DoW contract # is not required. | ||
| 2 | Will the Government make the Interested Vendor List viewable, so small businesses can identify teaming partners? | No. The Government will not publish or make the Interested Vendor List or submissions from the Microsoft Forms "Intent to Submit" portal publicly viewable. Information submitted through the portal is maintained strictly as internal Government acquisition planning data. Companies interested in identifying teaming or subcontracting partners must establish industry relationships independently. |
| 3 | Will the Government publish a non-CUI summary of the post-quantum cryptography plan requirement? The summary would say whether the requirement applies to SBU-E products, High Assurance products or both, and whether "NIST validation" means CAVP algorithm validation, CMVP FIPS 140-3 module validation, or both. | Yes, the vendor plan for both HA and, or, SBU-E products must address providing a machine-readable Cryptographic Bill of Materials, roadmap for algorithm standardization to FIPS 203/204/205, FIPS 140-3 validation & timeline for CMVP, and PQC viability through Aquisition, Testing, and Licensing Authorization for Security (ATLAS) submission, and crypro-agility & architecture for dynamic updates to algorithms and protocols. Yes, this applies to both HA and SBU-E products and both NIST algorithm validation and FIPS 140-3 module validation. |
| 4 | Whether a standalone software/test-support offering covering this bounded scope may be submitted directly, or should be offered through a tactical communications equipment provider. | A standalone software or test-support offering should be submitted through a tactical communications equipment provider. |
| 5 | Which hardware, cryptographic certification and production-related submission requirements apply to a software/test-support-only offering. | |
| Hardware, cryptographic certification, and production-related submission requirements applicable to this effort should be addressed through a tactical communications equipment provider. | ||
| 6 | The authorized path for obtaining representative interfaces, test assets and applicable technical data needed to establish a credible integration and validation approach. | The Government will establish a process for requesting representative interfaces, test assets, and applicable technical data needed to support integration and validation activities. Additional details regarding the request process will be provided at the appropriate time. |
| 7 | There are many small businesses across the space that can support different needs under this call. Are you looking for companies that are integrators, or commercial product companies (OEM's) to directly contract with for this effort? | The Government is seeking innovative solutions to meet the Army’s communications needs and welcomes submissions from both large and small businesses, including traditional and non-traditional defense contractors. The Government is interested in capabilities from integrators, original equipment manufacturers, and other qualified commercial solution providers. |
| 8 | Are you able to extend the questions due date by a week? We do not need the response date extended, just the questions due date of October 26th. Please advise? | Please see Amendent #2 posted on Sam.gov. Questions are due by 11/04/2026, White Paper submissions are due by 12/03/2026 |
| 9 | Section 3 invites component solutions. Will the Government consider, for the Verified Products List, a soldier-worn mesh and position location node that relays CoT to the EUD and the fielded TCS radio but does not itself provide SBU-E encryption (attribute 1) or a software-defined radio (attribute 5)? Or is SBU-E certifiability a threshold for any listing? |
| SBU-E certification is a threshold requirement for any product considered for inclusion on the Verified Products List. Products that do not meet this requirement will not be eligible for listing. | ||
| 10 | Section 6.1.1.C.8 suggests a notional 5,000 radios per year for production ROMs. May an offeror of a component that is not a radio price its ROM at its own unit and production quantities, and does a kit price satisfy the cold-start unit pricing request? | Yes. Offerors proposing subsystem components or accessories rather than an end-item radio transceiver may price its ROM based on its own discrete unit of issue, but it must explicitly tie its assumptions to supporting the notional 5,000 radios/year. If their manufacturing realities necessitate different minimum run quantities, they must state both the 5,000-radio equivalent and their commercial lot size |
Kit Pricing: Yes, provided the kit is the primary unit of delivery. A kit price satisfies the "cold-start unit pricing" requirement only if the kit represents the deliverable SKU and the ROM clearly demonstrates the cost impact of initial line spin-up, first-article testing, and low-rate production tooling before reaching steady-state rates.
| 11 | Section 1 Q. The CFS refers to recurring updates to the Army CSO. What cadence does the Government expect for future calls or on-ramps, and may an offeror not selected in this round resubmit in a later round? | The Government may issue future calls or on-ramps to the TCS-PSS CSO subject to mission requirements, available funding, and Government discretion. An offeror that is not selected under the current call may submit a new or revised in response to a subsequent call or on-ramp, provided it meets the eligibility requirements and follows the instructions in that future announcement. Additionally, Phase 1 White Papers remain valid for a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date of submission. During this 24-month validity window, the Government reserves the right to initiate an award based on these submissions without requiring the submission of a new Phase 1 White Paper. |
| 12 | Section 2 Q. Which fielded radio families and kits does the Government expect the enterprise solution to sustain as legacy systems? Will an inventory or density list be provided to Phase 2 or Phase 3 invitees? | "HMS" Mounted and dismounted (Leader, Manpack, CNR, MANET & SCAR) Radios are fielded throughout the Army and will contine to be used for the foreseeable future. |
| 13 | Section 2 Q. For training and Field Service Representative support, can the Government share expected fielding locations, CONUS and OCONUS deployment expectations and the approximate number of units to be fielded per year? | The Army G‑3/5/7 determines the official fielding plan and priorities, and execution will require flexibility to support unplanned, accelerated, and surge requirements as they arise. |
| 14 | Section 2 Q. Is there a designated organic depot for hardware and software sustainment transition, and what depot transition timeline does the Government expect? | The need for a depot transition and the associated timeline will depend on the specific solution selected and its sustainment requirements. The Government will address depot support considerations, including any designated organic depot requirements, as appropriate during subsequent phases of the effort. |
| 15 | Section 2 Q. Will the TCS Enterprise solution replace, augment or interface with existing CECOM and organic Army depot sustainment for currently fielded tactical radios? | Augment/Interface - TCS Enterprise solution will provide support for new/innovative products along while established CECOM/depot efforts continue. Current sustainment contracts are not expected to be terminated; rather, the TCS Enterprise solution is planned to serve as the follow-on mechanism as legacy contracts reach completion and new capabilities are integrated across the enterprise. |
| 16 | Section 2 Q. When the radio software baseline is owned by a commercial OEM, how does the Government expect post-production software support, configuration management and obsolescence planning to be divided between the OEM and the enterprise integrator? | The Government is looking for innovative solutions to meet the Army's communications needs. Offerors are encouraged to propose their recommended operational model and division of responsibilities for post-production software support (PPSS), configuration management (CM), and obsolescence management/planning. Submissions should clearly demonstrate how the proposed approach ensures seamless integration, timely software maintenance, robust configuration control, and proactive mitigation of component obsolescence throughout the system lifecycle. |
| 17 | Section 2 Q. Can a sustainment-only or software-only offeror qualify without producing hardware? | The Government is looking for innovative solutions to meet the Army's communications needs. Offerors are not required to produce hardware or propose an end-to-end solution covering all scope areas to qualify. Offerors are not required to provide a single solution that satisfies all listed attributes. Companies are explicitly encouraged to propose component, modular, subsystem, or niche solutions addressing a subset of attributes where their commercial products or services offer capability. |
| 18 | Section 3 Q. Which ground vehicle platforms are in scope for vehicle mount installation kits (for example JLTV, AMPV, Stryker, HMMWV), and which aviation platforms, if any? | All ground vehicle and aviation platforms should be considered within scope for vehicle-mount installation kits. Specific platform requirements will be determined based on the proposed solution and applicable operational needs. |
| 19 | Section 3 Q. Will platform drawings, vehicle interface control documents and vehicle power budget data be made available to Phase 2 or Phase 3 invitees for installation kit design? | Where applicable, the Government will provide generic space, power, and interface requirements to Phase 2 or Phase 3 invitees to support installation-kit design. Availability of more detailed platform-specific technical data will be determined based on the proposed solution and applicable requirements. |
| 20 | Section 3 Q. Are any Section 3 attributes threshold requirements for Verified Products List placement, or are all attributes desired? Is there a priority order among them? | Threshold SBU-E attributes include Section 3: 3.2, 3.3, 3.37; and Section 6: 6.1.1.C.7.e and 6.1.1.C.7.f. |
| 21 | Section 3 Q. Does SBU-E refer to a specific NSA certification path? For solutions that are not high assurance, which standard is acceptable for SBU-E (for example FIPS 140-3, NIAP Protection Profiles or CSfC)? | No, SBU-E certification is not a specific NSA certification. The standard acceptable for SBU-E validation is FIPS 140-3 level 2, with plan to achieve level 3 by 31DEC31. |
| 22 | Section 3 Q. Is a CSfC layered commercial encryption architecture an acceptable approach for SBU-E data in transit and data at rest at the kit or system level? | No, the architecture must also be crypto-agile for dynamic updates to algorithms and protocols. |
| 23 | Section 3 Q. For the three production-representative devices for radiated emissions characterization: at which phase are they due, are they provided at offeror expense, will they be returned, and does the requirement apply to integrated kits or only to radios? | Three production-representative radios for radiated-emissions characterization are required during Phase 3 and must be provided at the offeror’s expense. The devices will not be returned, and this requirement applies only to radios, not integrated kits. |
| 24 | Section 3 Q. Which approved Government End User Devices should solutions interface with? Will the Government provide a current list and interface specifications? | Solutions should interface with the currently identified Nett Warrior End User Device environment, including Android Tactical Assault Kit, Lattice Mesh Edge, and Instant Connect Enterprise software. The Government will provide additional interface information, as appropriate, during subsequent phases of the effort. |
| 25 | Section 3 Q. Please clarify attribute 30, "access to a local wireless network (5G)." Should the solution connect to a tactical 5G network, host one, or connect to commercial 5G? | The solution should connect to a private tactical 5G network and commercial 5G networks. |
| 26 | Section 3 Q. Will the Government provide the interface specification for the Army Small Tactical Universal Battery (STUB) to offerors? | Yes. MIL-PRF-32383/7A is DISTRO A and available here: https://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=284838 |
| 27 | Section 4 Q. The CFS states the Army may award multiple single-award IDIQs and/or multiple single-award OTs. How will the Government decide which instrument a selected solution receives, and may an offeror state a preference in its white paper? | The Government retains sole discretion to determine the most appropriate contracting or agreement vehicle based on operational needs, vendor specific solution, business model, and capabilities. Offerors may state a preferred award instrument and identify their business status (e.g., traditional vs. non-traditional defense contractor) in their Phase 1 White Paper. However, the final determination of the award mechanism rests exclusively with the Government and the cognizant Contracting/Agreements Officer. |
| 28 | Section 4 Q. Does the Government intend to award separate instruments for enterprise integration, kitting and sustainment services, apart from instruments for radio end items? Or will each award be tied to a specific radio product? | The TCS Enterprise solution is envisioned as a flexible suite of multiple single-award IDIQ (SA IDIQ) contracts and/or multiple single-award Other Transactions (OTs). This structure is intentionally designed to provide the Government maximum flexibility to procure solutions based on operational mission needs while fostering innovation across diverse industry segments. Awards are not tied to specific radio products, but are made based on the offeror’s proposed commercial solutions and overall portfolio of capabilities. |
| 29 | Section 4 Q. The CFS describes a ""TCS Enterprise supply and services solution."" Does the Government envision one or more enterprise integrators that procure, integrate and sustain products from multiple OEMs under a single instrument? | No, the intent is not for this procurement to be a single instrument. Teaming arrangements or prime/subcontractor partnerships or direct OEM solutions are permitted. The Government envisioned multiple SA-IDIQ to meet supply and services needs under this effort. However, The Government is looking for innovative solutions to meet the Army's communications needs. |
| 30 | Does the Army anticipate requirements for embedded software cybersecurity, vulnerability mitigation, or runtime protection within the scope of this CSO? | Yes, the Army anticipates requirements for embedded software cybersecurity for secure boot and cryptographically signed software packages; vulnerability mitigation following assessment of new ones; and runtime protection for cryptographic attestation and audit logs. |
| 31 | Are there specific technical areas or work packages where software-security capabilities are being sought, particularly for existing tactical communications equipment? | Yes, software-security capabilities are being sought for achieving Post-quantum compliance and FIPS 140-3 level 3 validation for existing tactical communications equipment. |
| 32 | Can a specialized software-security vendor submit a narrowly scoped solution independently, or would participation through a system integrator or prime contractor be more appropriate? | The Government is seeking innovative solutions to meet the Army’s communications and security needs and welcomes submissions from qualified specialized software-security vendors. Offerors may propose solutions independently or through a system integrator or prime contractor, as appropriate to their proposed approach. |
| 33 | Is there an anticipated acquisition or funding path for independently proposed cybersecurity capabilities, or is the intent primarily to identify technologies for potential future consideration? | The intent is to identify technologies enabling secure tactical communications for potential future consideration. |
| 34 | Can the Government share the anticipated number of awards or funding range for the first ordering year, so offerors can size production and sustainment ROMs? | No. The Government cannot anticipate or project the number of awards or funding range at this stage, as Phase 1 White Papers have not yet been received or evaluated. To assist in the development of ROM unit pricing and production lead times, respondents may assume a notional annual delivery requirement of 5,000 radios. As noted in the CfS, this assumption is strictly for estimation and lead-time planning purposes and does not constitute a commitment or minimum guarantee by the Government. |
| 35 | Is there an anticipated total ceiling for each IDIQ? | Yes. Each IDIQ contract awarded under this Call for Solutions will be subject to an individual maximum ordering limitation over the full period of performance (inclusive of all option periods). The total contract maximum ordering ceiling, individual order limitations, and minimum guarantee thresholds will be formalized and incorporated directly into each individual contract upon award. |
| 36 | Are small business or other set-aside considerations planned for the single-award IDIQs? | This Call for Solutions is conducted under the authority of DFARS Subpart 212.70 (Defense Commercial Solutions Opening), which qualifies as a competitive procedure pursuant to 10 U.S.C. Chapter 221 and FAR 6.102. Participation is open to all qualified industry partners, including traditional and non-traditional defense contractors, large businesses, and small businesses. While there are no dedicated set-asides, small businesses are strongly encouraged to submit solutions, either as standalone offerors (addressing full or niche capabilities) or in teaming arrangements/subcontracts. |
| 37 | May a company submit its own white paper as an offeror and also be named as a teammate or subcontractor on other offerors' white papers? | Yes; an entity may submit as a prime offeror while participating as a team member or subcontractor on other submissions, provided that an OCI analysis and mitigation plan are completed IAW Section 9, competitive pricing and proprietary data remain strictly firewalled between competing primes, and all required data rights assertions are submitted IAW DFARS 252.227-7992 in both the offeror's own white paper and in any other submission where it is a teamate or subcontractor. |
| 38 | May a single company submit more than one white paper, each addressing a different subset of the Section 2 scope or Section 3 attributes? | No, please provide a single whitepaper for your portfolio of products. Additionally, please refer to section 6.1.1-Phase 1 - White Paper Content. Per the instructions, White Papers shall not exceed 15 written pages using 12-point Times New Roman font or, alternatively, may take the form of briefing slides not exceeding 15 slides. The Government will not consider inserted textboxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information as part of the White Paper and will not consider such information in its evaluation. White Papers are intended to be clear and concise. |
| 39 | The white paper must describe the integration approach with the Army's NGC2 architecture. Will the Government provide NGC2 architecture or interface reference documents to offerors? | The NGC2 architecture continues to evolve within the full stack approach of applications, data, infrastructure, and transport layers as directed by its Characteristics of Need dated 8 JUL 2025. For purposes of this CSO, the focus is on the transport layer. |
| 40 | If an offeror asserts no restrictions under DFARS 252.227-7992(d), should it submit the table stating ""None""? Is a separate signed assertion required from each teammate? | Yes, the offeror should submit the table stating "None." The offeror submits the Data Rights Assertion Table with its offer and signs it. The table must include any assertions from the offeror's subcontractors or suppliers, but they do not need to sign a spearate assertion. |
| 41 | May white papers reference or quote content from this CUI Call for Solutions, and if so, what CUI marking should offerors apply? | Yes, offerors may reference content from the CfS, provided the submission remains Unclassifed and is properly marked. Offerors are solely responsible for identifying, determining, and applying the appropriate Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and proprietary markings to their submissions |
| 42 | Will the Government hold an Industry Day? | An in-person Industry Day is currently being planned for 1–3 December 2026 at APG, which will focus on new SBU-E radio cybersecurity requirements on Day 1 followed by industry Q&A sessions on Days 2–3. Official event details, agendas, and registration instructions are published on SAM.gov (Notice ID: SBU-E-ARMY-INDUSTRY-DAY) |
| 43 | Is the notional 5,000 radios per year per radio type or for the whole enterprise? What split does the Government expect among mounted, dismounted and fly-away configurations? | The notional 5,000 radios per year would be per radio type. It is only to be considered for purposes of estimating and establishing production lead times. |
| 44 | The CFS defines Mounted and Dismounted Kits. Will the Government provide a definition for a fly-away (special purpose) kit, or should offerors propose one? | Fly-away is a man-portable configuration for rapid deployment via commercial aircraft overhead and from a vehicle into a static command post to use tactical communications equipment for command and control. |
| 45 | May offerors propose kit compositions that differ from the Mounted and Dismounted Kit definitions, provided the differences are clearly identified and the solution still meets the operational intent? | The Government is looking for innovative solutions to meet the Army's communications needs. |
| 46 | For the CNSA 2.0 post-quantum plan, does the 1 January 2027 date refer to plan submission, demonstrated compliance or a compliance roadmap start date? | After 31 December 2026, the Goverment cannot procure any National Security System hardware that is not capable of utilizing post-quantum algorithms. |
The vendor plan for both HA and, or, SBU-E products must address providing a machine-readable Cryptographic Bill of Materials, roadmap for algorithm standardization to FIPS 203/204/205, FIPS 140-3 validation & timeline for CMVP, and PQC viability through Aquisition, Testing, and Licensing Authorization for Security (ATLAS) submission, and crypro-agility & architecture for dynamic updates to algorithms and protocols. This applies to both HA and SBU-E products and both NIST algorithm validation and FIPS 140-3 module validation.
| 47 | Is there a required supply chain risk management framework (for example NIST SP 800-161) for the SCRM plan? | Yes, the systems will be part of an NSS and there must be SCRM Framework included. More details may be provided at later phases of the contracting process. |
| 48 | For high-assurance solutions, what level of detail does the Government expect in the NSA SERD v2.0 certification plan and timeline at the white paper stage? | At the white paper stage, offerors should provide sufficient detail to describe how the proposed product architecture, physical design, code, electrical schematics, and anti-tamper mechanisms will meet applicable requirements for memory-safe language and red/black separation. The certification plan and timeline should also address the proposed approach for fail-safe design and analysis, as well as covert-channel analysis, to verify compliance. |
| 49 | For subset or niche solutions, may offerors mark attachments 7a through 7i as not applicable without penalty when an item does not apply to the proposed solution? | For all solutions, if the attachments identified in subparagraphs (a) through (i) are not applicable to a proposed solution, they do not have to be submitted. |
| 50 | For offerings that combine OEM radios with kit, integration and sustainment elements, may the ROM show separate pricing lines for the OEM radio and for the integrator's elements? | Yes. The Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) Cost and Schedule shall include the estimated development, production, and sustainment costs. As well as the proposed schedule for testing, certification, and production delivery affiliated with the proposed solution(s). |
| 51 | Please define ""cold-start"" production unit pricing and the assumptions the Government wants behind it (for example restart after a production gap of a set length). | A cold start refers to bringing a production line from a fully powered‑down, non‑initialized state back into operation, where no prior operational state, calibration state, or configuration is preserved. |
| 52 | When a solution includes partner OEM products, may the offeror present those products and their certifications as part of its portfolio? Is a partner letter of commitment required at Phase 1? | Offerors may present partner OEM products and associated certifications as part of their proposed portfolio. A partner letter of commitment is not required during Phase 1. |
| 53 | If a white paper proposes radios from more than one OEM across different kit configurations, how should the portfolio alignment narrative and Schedule/ROM be organized for evaluation? | |
| The TCS Enterprise solution is envisioned as a flexible suite of multiple single-award IDIQ (SA IDIQ) contracts and/or multiple single-award Other Transactions (OTs). This structure is intentionally designed to provide the Government maximum flexibility to procure solutions based on operational mission needs while fostering innovation across diverse industry segments. Awards are not tied to specific radio products, but are made based on the offeror’s proposed commercial solutions and overall portfolio of capabilities. | ||
| 54 | Does the 12-point Times New Roman requirement apply to text inside tables, figures and captions, or only to body text? | The 12-point Times New Roman requirement applies to body text. For text within tables, figures, and captions, the Government requests that respondents use a font size no smaller than 8 point. |
| 55 | Is there a maximum email size for submissions? If the PDF exceeds it, may it be sent in multiple emails or through DoD SAFE? | Government email servers typically have an inbound file size limitation (generally 20MB to 30MB per message, depending on network configuration and security filtering). If an offeror's White Paper submission package exceeds standard email size limitations, they may submit their White Paper documentation via the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (DoD SAFE) (https://safe.apps.mil/). |
| 56 | Will responses to industry questions be posted on SAM.gov for all interested parties, or sent only to companies that submit questions or an Intent to Submit? | All non-CUI questions and official Government responses will be publicly posted to the SAM.gov announcement for open access by all prospective offerors. Any questions or responses that involve Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) or technical data will be controlled. |
| 57 | During the 24-month validity period, may an offeror update an accepted white paper to add new products, partners or technology refreshes without a new Phase 1 submission? | No. An accepted Phase 1 White Paper cannot be unilaterally modified or expanded out-of-cycle to incorporate new products, new partners, or significant technology changes. Offerors seeking to add new products, distinct product variants, or new teaming partners must submit a new or revised Phase 1 White Paper in response to a subsequent call or on-ramp, subject to the instructions and criteria of that future announcement. |
| 58 | For subset solutions such as installation kits, integration or sustainment services, how will Schedule/ROM be evaluated? May offerors provide per-kit and labor-rate pricing in place of radio unit pricing? | For subset solutions, the Schedule/ROM will be evaluated based on its relevance to and completeness for the proposed solution. Offerors may provide per-kit and labor-rate pricing, as applicable. |
| 59 | For solutions placed in the Acceptable for Testing pathway, what quantity and duration of bailed assets does the Government expect, and are test-related costs borne by the offeror or the Government? | Solutions will be placed bailment to the Government for up to 1 year and any testing will take place in a Goverment lab or Government sponsored field event. The offeror will own the cost. |
| 60 | For privately held companies, is a revenue range or a top-line summary acceptable for the Viability factor? | For privately held companies, a high-level top-line summary, a reasonable revenue range, or an overview of fundraising to date is acceptable to satisfy this requirement. |
| 61 | Will the Government give feedback to offerors whose white papers are Not Selected for Further Consideration? | Offerors will be notified if their White Paper is "Not Selected for Further Consideration," but written feedback is not mandatory, Because this solicitation is conducted as a CSO under DFARS Subpart 212.70, Phase 1 White Paper evaluations represent a multi-phased preliminary screening gate rather than a final contract award or exclusion from a competitive range. Formal statutory post-award debriefings in accordance with DFARS 215.506 (and enhanced debriefing procedures under DFARS 215.506-70) apply only to final contract award decisions resulting from detailed proposals (Phase 3), not to preliminary Phase 1 White Paper determinations. |
| 62 | When does the Government expect to notify offerors of Phase 1 selection decisions, and for Phase 2 pitches, what location, format and notice period should invitees plan for? | Phase 1 evaluations are not expected to conclude until after the winter holiday period; because the final volume of White Paper submissions will not be known until the closing date, the Government cannot provide a definitive evaluation schedule. Offerors may plan for Phase 1 selection notifications and potential Phase 2 activities in approximately February 2027, subject to change based on submission volume and review timelines. Phase 2 pitches may be conducted virtually or in person, may be bypassed for selected offerors, and invitations will provide reasonable advance notice; the Government may limit the number of offerors invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3. |
| 63 | What is the expected timing of Phase 1 selection notices and of the Phase 2 and Phase 3 windows? | See response #63 |
| 64 | If an NDA is not fully executed by the due date, may the offeror submit with proof of request and provide the signed copy later? | If an NDA has been initiated in good faith but is not fully executed by the submission deadline, the offeror may submit evidence of the pending request (e.g., copy of initial correspondence and status) with its White Paper submission, and provide the countersigned agreement to the Contracting Officer and Specialist immediately upon execution. |
| 65 | Should the OCI analysis cover every teammate named in the white paper, including product OEMs that act only as suppliers? |
| Yes, in accordance with Section 9 of the Call for Solutions, the Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) analysis must address the Offeror and any of the Offeror's proposed teammates,subcontractors, and consultants named in the white paper. | ||
| 66 | Format you want this submitted in, if I can have a conversation with any of the parties on this topic. I want to make sure my white paper is proper for this. | Please refer to sections 5 and section 6.1.1 for white paper content instructions. |
| 67 | We are attempting to see what evaluation criteria will be needed or required. | Phase 1 White Paper submissions will be evaluated in accordance with Section 7.1 ('Phase 1 – White Paper Basis of Evaluation') and Section 7.2 ('Phase 1 – White Paper Selection Process') as specified in the Call for Solutions. |
| 68 | What is the on-ramp process for introducing and integrating new technologies over the course of the IDIQ timeframe as referenced in Section 1? | The on-ramp process for new technologies is still evolving. Currently there will be an invitaiton for the solution, then the solution will be evaluated against the latest security requirments. If those requriements are met, the techology may be invited to test at a Government sponsored test event. From there the process will evolve based on evaulation of all of the above. |
| 69 | Does item 26 in Section 3 (Product Characteristics) only apply to new product lines? | No. The government would anticipate receiving 3 or more devices for testing and evlaution. |
| 70 | Can you clarify item 4 in Section 5 (Call Instructions and Notes)? Is the Cost ROM strictly for unit costs (5,000 qty), or is the Government considering investing in production and development to accelerate future technologies? | At this time, there is not the intent of the Government to investing in production and development to accelerate future technologies |
| 71 | Are all items listed under Section 6.1.1, subsection C. 7. (listed as a) through i)), to be characterized as “compliance documents and certifications” as referenced in the C.7. parenthetical and thus exempt from the page limitation? | Yes. In accordance with Section 6.1.1, Paragraph C.7, all compliance documents and certifications identified in subparagraphs (a) through (i) may be submitted as attachments and are exempt from the 15-page (or 15-slide) limitation. |
| 72 | For future High Assurance SERD 2.0 products that could be phased in (Section 6.1.1 - subsection C.7.h)), will the Army provide NSA sponsorship support, and what is the process? | Following the product securing Acquisition, Testing, and Licensing Authorization for Security (ATLAS) for post-quantum by the Department of War, yes, the Army will provide NSA sponsorship. |
| 73 | What specific features are of interest for this solicitation? | The Government encourages vendors to submit innovative solutions that support the intent and requirements described in the Call for Solutions. Offerors should clearly describe the features and capabilities of their proposed solutions and how they address the Army’s communications needs. |
| 74 | Is the Army interested in a Tactical Radio Solution with both Comms and ALT-PNT capabilities. | The Government encourages vendors to submit innovative solutions that support the intent and requirements described in the Call for Solutions. Offerors should clearly describe the features and capabilities of their proposed solutions and how they address the Army’s communications needs. |
| 75 | What are the specific requirements for the White Paper? | Specific requirements for Phase 1 White Paper submissions are detailed in Section 5 ('Call Instructions and Notes') and Section 6 ('Solution Submission Requirements'), specifically Paragraph 6.1.1 ('Phase 1 – White Paper Content') of the Call for Solutions. |
| 76 | What is the development timeline for this solicitation? | See response #63 |
| 77 | May a provider of a subsystem that performs no cryptographic function (for example RF digitization or digital beamforming hardware), and is not itself NSA High Assurance certified or SBU-E qualified, submit its own white paper, or should it take part only as a subcontractor within the submission of a prime whose end item holds that certification? | A provider of a subsystem that does not perform a cryptographic function and is not independently NSA High Assurance certified or SBU-E qualified should participate as a subcontractor under a prime contractor. The prime contractor’s proposed end item must hold the applicable certification. |
| 78 | Does the Post-Quantum Cryptography plan and NIST validation requirement apply to hardware that performs no cryptographic function? | |
| After 31 December 2026, the Goverment cannot procure any National Security System hardware that is not capable of utilizing post-quantum algorithms. |
The vendor plan for both HA and, or, SBU-E products must address providing a machine-readable Cryptographic Bill of Materials, roadmap for algorithm standardization to FIPS 203/204/205, FIPS 140-3 validation & timeline for CMVP, and PQC viability through Aquisition, Testing, and Licensing Authorization for Security (ATLAS) submission, and crypro-agility & architecture for dynamic updates to algorithms and protocols. This applies to both HA and SBU-E products and both NIST algorithm validation and FIPS 140-3 module validation.
| 79 | Does the Government recommend industry provide a single whitepaper response for multiple products in the portfolio or multiple (15-page) whitepapers for each product? | Please provide a single whitepaper for your portfolio of multiple products. Additionally, please refer to section 6.1.1-Phase 1 - White Paper Content. Per the instructions, White Papers shall not exceed 15 written pages using 12-point Times New Roman font or, alternatively, may take the form of briefing slides not exceeding 15 slides. The Government will not consider inserted textboxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information as part of the White Paper and will not consider such information in its evaluation. White Papers are intended to be clear and concise. |
| 80 | PQC Scope - Section 3:** Will the Government consider solutions focused specifically on PQC readiness assessments, cryptographic inventory, Cryptographic Bill of Materials (CBOM) development, and migration planning, or must these capabilities be integrated into a complete tactical communications hardware or software solution? | Post-quantum cryptography readiness assessments, cryptographic inventory, Cryptographic Bill of Materials development, and migration planning capabilities must be incorporated into a complete tactical communications hardware and software solution. |
| 81 | Teaming - Sections 4 and 6:** May a cybersecurity business submit a white paper jointly with an established tactical communications manufacturer or defense systems integrator? If so, should the submission identify one lead contractor and describe the proposed partners' responsibilities? | Yes. A cybersecurity business may support a tactical communications manufacturer’s or defense systems integrator’s plan to achieve post-quantum cryptography compliance through a teaming or subcontracting arrangement. |
| 82 | PQC Validation - Section 3:** Does the December 31, 2030 NIST validation objective apply to individual cryptographic modules, complete tactical communications products, or both? What interim milestones or evidence would the Government expect? | Both, evidence expected include Acquisition, Testing, and Licensing Authorization for Security (ATLAS); machine-readable Cryptographic Bill of Materials; FIPS 140-3 level 3 validation for both High Assurance and SBU-E products, and NSA certification for High Assurance products. |
| 83 | Security Requirements -Sections 3 and 6:** Are there specific facility clearance, personnel clearance, CMMC, or export-control requirements for vendors providing only unclassified PQC assessment and advisory services? | Facility and personnel clearances would be required only if the resulting contract includes classified work or requires access to classified information. For work limited to unclassified information and CUI, facility and personnel clearances are not required; applicable CMMC and export-control requirements will be addressed in the relevant solicitation or resulting agreement. |
| 84 | Evaluation - Section 7:** Will the Government evaluate specialized cybersecurity and cryptographic modernization capabilities independently, or only as components of an end-to-end tactical communications solution? | Specialized cybersecurity and cryptographic modernization capabilities will be evaluated only as components of an end-to-end tactical communications solution. |
| 85 | Can font sizes smaller than 12pt be used for tables and graphics? | The 12-point Times New Roman requirement applies to body text. For text within tables, figures, and captions, the Government requests that respondents use a font size no smaller than 8 point. |
| 86 | With verbage of NSA resiliency "High Assurance" involved, are there any specific documentations we can reference on requirements, pertaining to certifications where applicable? | Yes, the specific requirements, standards, and compliance frameworks for High Assurance and cryptographic resiliency are referenced throughout the CfS. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .