Draft C-sUAS RFI_16OCT2025.pdf

Request for Information U.S. Air Force Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft

Systems

Table of Contents

1. Introduction/Purpose

2. Background and Objectives

2.1. Mission Overview

2.2. Capability Description

3. Support Needed ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4. Contractor IDIQ PWS Feedback

5. IDIQ Gating Criteria

6. Draft Task Order-1 Scope

7. Basic Information

8. Submission of Information

9. Points of Contact

10. Disclaimer

1. Introduction/Purpose AFLCMC/ESSK office is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) to improve understanding of market landscape to identify qualified vendors capable of providing Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) integration, development, training, and sustainment services.

Additionally, this RFI seeks to enhance our understanding of the likelihood of vendors meeting contract gating criteria, establish vendors potential to propose to an initial task order based on the scope provided below, and support the analysis of an IDIQ as a possible contract strategy to meet USAF requirements.

All interested and qualified businesses (i.e., Small Business, Other than Small Business) are encouraged to respond to this notice in accordance with the instructions addressed herein.

2. Background and Objectives

2.1. Mission Overview

The C-sUAS mission for the USAF is the defense of critical assets from threats which includes but is not limited to personnel, bases, flight lines, storage areas, and in transit equipment. Due to the widespread use of UAS technologies both for recreational and military use, the AF is tasked with protecting these critical assets from a diverse range of threats.

These threats are classified as groups 1-3 UAS that vary drastically in capability (range of characteristics can be found below).

Characteristics for Group 1-3:

- Size: <1,320 lbs

- Speed: <250 knots

- Operating altitude: < Flight Line 180 or < 3500 ft AGL

These threats range further in capability from commercial or hobbyist to military UAS. This poses a diverse and ever evolving threat. The operators of these UAS and their intent can also range quite drastically. They could be a commercial hobbyist who have interest in the DoD and their activities or a nefarious actor(s) who wish to cause harm to personnel, gather intelligence about, or destroy military assets.

Overall, the AF is tasked with protecting a diverse range of assets from a wide and ever evolving threat.

2.2. Capability Description

Please review Air Force Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) Integration, Development, Training, and Sustainment Services Request for Information (RFI 72025) for additional information.

3. Basic Information

1. Please provide the minimum information in section 1 below in your response. If you did not respond to the previous C-sUAS RFI, please fill out section 2-7.

1.1. Name and Address

1.2. Point of Contact for company (Name, Title, Email, and Phone Number)

1.3. Identify your business size – Other than small, small, small disadvantaged, 8(a)-certified small disadvantaged, HUBZone small, woman-owned small, very small, veteran-owned small, service-disabled veteran-owned small.

1.4. Applicable GSA Schedule Contract No.

1.5. Other contract vehicles the USAF may consider for this requirement for which you are an awardee (e.g., Government Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs), GSA Schedules, DHS Strategic Sourcing Contract).

1.6. Recommended North American Industry Classification Code (NAIC) best suited for the requirements within this RFI.

1.7. Provide a summary description of your company’s experience with C-sUAS as it relates to the information in this RFI. Limit response to 1 page.

Note: Failure to provide information for questions 1.4 and 1.5 will not negatively impact your eligibility for an award.

2. Contractor Proficiencies (Limit below responses to 2 pages for this section)

2.1. Please provide a brief overview of your company's understanding of USAF C-sUAS requirements as presented in this RFI.

2.2. Describe briefly the capability and experience in providing programmatic and technical management/support of a similar program including, but not limited to cost control strategies, and quality processes.

2.3. Describe resources and technical proficiency as it relates to the scope of effort to include the labor mix available and expertise.

2.4. Describe capability and experience of providing training program development services.

3. Technical

3.1. Have you worked with refining, integrating, and sustaining government owned software?

3.2. Have you developed a software-centric system which follows a Modular Open System

Architecture (MOSA)? Please list out software or program names.

3.3. Have you worked Agile processes? Please put preferred methodology.

3.4. Have you ever maintained a DevSecOPs pipeline?

3.5. Have you ever worked in a Government owned cloud (e.g., CloudOne)?

3.6. Have you ever continued developing a software from some third party?

3.7. What types of machine learning models have you worked with?

3.8. What were these models built for (e.g., Image Recognition, Natural Language AI, etc.)?

3.9. What types of digital engineering tools have you used?

3.10. Have you implemented a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) design? Attach example or provide POC.

3.11. Have you ever built a full Technical Data Package?

3.12. Have you worked a JF-12 Process?

3.13. Have you worked an RFA process?

3.14. Have you worked an EA process?

3.15. Have you worked with a government test organization?

3.16. Describe experience working with MBSE tools, creating/maintaining a DSOP, and experience being the main integrator for a Government C2 software. Limit response to 2 pages and provide any necessary diagrams, or drawings as an attachment.

Commented [AF1]: Are we asking to limit responses to 2 pages for this entire section or per question? I am assuming for the entire section but just want it to be clear.

Commented [SD2R1]: Updated to for this section

3.17. How would your organization execute taking over the Government owned software pipeline and what resources and documentation would you envision being supplied?

3.18. How does your organization envision keeping up with the sUAS threat? In what mission space have you had previous experience or examples?

4. Cyber

4.1. Have you ever maintained compliance for systems, networks, and applications to approved cybersecurity standards?

4.2. Have you ever assessed security controls, conducted audits, continuous monitoring and proposed/implemented measures to address vulnerabilities or non-compliance issues?

4.3. Have you ever conducted vulnerability scanning of the information systems using approved

DoD industry tools?

4.4. Have you ever conducted compliance scans of the information systems per the NIST-800-

53 security technical implementation requirements using approved DoD industry tools?

4.5. Have you ever performed vulnerability scans on the static code deliverables?

4.6. Have you ever implemented the concept of least privilege to ensure that systems operate securely and efficiently without sacrificing capabilities?

4.7. Have you ever developed an Identity and Access Management system?

4.8. Have you worked with PKI authentication and implementation.

4.9. Have you ever worked with 802.1x implementation on layer 2 and layer 3 network devices?

4.10. Describe your experience and knowledge of verifying system compliance with cybersecurity requirements. This should include a high-level Cybersecurity plan to ensure supported systems are up to date and in compliance with Authority to Operate (ATO) requirements. Please limit response to 2 pages.

5. Logistics

5.1. Have you worked with managing Government approved ILS databases for inventory control?

5.2. Have you worked with Government Depot Source of Repair (DSOR)?

5.3. Have you worked with multiple warehouses located both CONUS and OCONUS?

5.4. Have you worked with OEM Supply chain management?

5.5. Have you worked developing related training programs for personnel, civilian or military?

5.6. Have you worked with incorporating related OEM training, scheduling or implementing?

5.7. Have you worked developing a tiered system of training, 3 levels or higher (Maintainer, Operator, Administrator?

5.8. Have you dealt with handling, storage, and disposal of HAZMAT?

5.9. Have you worked handling USAF PHS&T standards to include up to classified storage and transportation?

5.10. Have you worked handling large scale inventories (10,000+ items)?

5.11. Do you have experience with handling lost, damaged, or destroyed equipment?

5.12. Have you worked with maintaining Reliability, Availability and Maintainability Data?

5.13. Do you have experience with DRMO capabilities?

5.14. Please describe experience working with a DSOR, supply chain management, PHS&T, and

RAM data. Limit response to 2 pages.

5.15. Have you shipped equipment to foreign countries for installation?

5.16. Have you ever made a Technical Order (TO)?

5.17. Have you ever made a TO based off a COTS/GOTS manual?

5.18. Have you performed a site survey to include spectrum interference, line of sight, and infrastructure assessment?

5.19. How would your organization envisioning working side by side with a government sustainment depot? Please provide any examples or previous history.

6. Contacts

6.1. List out other Government agencies you have worked with on a similar scope effort along with a Point of Contact for each.

6.2. This project requires working with other manufacturers and companies. Please list out other manufacturers and companies that you have worked with on a similar scope effort.

7. Other and General Statement(s).

7.1. Please use remaining pages to describe additional thoughts, approaches, or other information that you deem relevant to this RFI submission in addition to what risks an organization responding to this requirement foresees in partnering with the government.

4. Contractor IDIQ Performance Work Statement Feedback

Please provide any relevant feedback for the IDIQ PWS (attachment A) on if your company needs additional clarification on the scope required.

5. Contract Gating Criteria Please provide if your company can meet the following gating criteria. Please provide any relevant feedback as desired on the criteria below (ex. too easy/strict, ambiguous, or not relevant). Please provide any artifacts to support your company meeting the gating criteria as able.

• Candidate #1: Prime on a DoD contract in last 3 years

• Candidate #2: Contract to maintain, update and field a Government owned or fielded software product in the last 5 years as a prime or a sub conducting at least 25% of the software work

• Candidate #3: Contract requiring work to support acquiring a DoD issued Authority To Operate in the last 5 years as a prime or a sub conducting at least 25% of the cybersecurity work

• Candidate #4: Contract requiring working with classified data in the last 3 years as a prime or a sub

• Candidate #5: Contract requiring sustainment of systems fielded to at least 10 DoD sites, with at least 2 sites OCONUS, within the last 5 years as a prime or a sub conducting at least 25% of the work

• Candidate #6: On contract for as a prime or sub sustaining, developing, or supporting C-sUAS or C2 related equipment in the DoD within the last 3 years

6. Draft Task Order-1 Scope Please provide feedback if your company can meet the scope required and would propose to the draft task order objectives (attachment B) if it was released at the same time as the IDIQ. The CDRL documentation is still in draft and will be provided at a future date.

Specific questions requested to be answered:

1. What technical data would be requested to support proposing to the draft TO?

2. What risks does a vendor incur entering this scope of effort? How can the government mitigate that risk?

3. What is a desired transition-in/out timeline?

a. Warehouse

b. FSR support

c. Software team stand-up

d. Any other efforts requiring a transition timeline?

4. What issues/risks do you anticipate supporting the draft list of systems?

a. Will teaming with OEMs be an issue?

b. Will working with a government depot be an issue?

5. Please provide any other relevant feedback.

8. Submission of Information The information requested in support of the Request for Information must be submitted in writing.

The submitted document shall not exceed twenty (20) pages, in addition to a one (1) page cover letter, for a total submission not to exceed twenty-one (21) pages. If answering section 3.2 through

3.7 the total page limit is raised to twenty-seven (27) to include the cover letter.

Your submission should be organized in accordance with the instructions in this document to permit a thorough and accurate review and evaluation by the USAF. Responses to this RFI must be submitted to the USAF via electronic mail no later than Nov 21, 2025 at 10:00AM, EST to the following:

AFLCMC/HBUK Proposals at aflcmc.hbuk.proposals@us.af.mil

Mr. Robert Gill at Robert.Gill.12@us.af.mil

Ms. Kristen Rienzo at kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil

Ms. Ciabha Kelleher at ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil

Maj Sergio Dominguez at sergio.dominguez.1@us.af.mil

9. Points of Contact All comments, inquiries and responses should be directed to the following individuals:

Ms. Kristen Rienzo Contract Specialist kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil

Ms. Ciabha Kelleher Contract Specialist ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil

Mr. Robert Gill Procuring Contracting Officer robert.gill.12@us.af.mil mailto:aflcmc.hbuk.proposals@us.af.mil mailto:Robert.Gill.12@us.af.mil mailto:kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil mailto:ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil mailto:sergio.dominguez.1@us.af.mil mailto:kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil mailto:ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil mailto:robert.gill.12@us.af.mil

Maj Sergio Dominguez C-sUAS IPT Lead Sergio.dominguez.1@us.af.mil

10. Disclaimer

THIS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IS SOLELY FOR INFORMATIONAL AND

PLANNING PURPOSES AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SOLICITATION. In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract, nor do they affect a potential offeror's ability to respond to any future synopsis/solicitation, which may or may not follow or restrict the Government's eventual acquisition approach. The Government will not provide reimbursement for any information that may be submitted in response to this notice, and no basis for a claim against the Government shall arise from a response to this notice or Government use of any information provided. Respondents are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.

mailto:Sergio.dominguez.1@us.af.mil