QAs dated 5 June 2024.pdf

FA8650-24-S-9760

Ephemeral Paragon (E-Gon)

Question and Answers (Q&As)

Q&As dated 5 June 2024

1. Question: The documents reference Multiple Sources for the classification, but we do not see what SCGs are used in the classified material received. What are the referenced SCGs?

Answer: AFRL RYW SCG and NRO FADE MIST SCG.

2. Question: We have not received the DD 254 or the SCG for the subject solicitation yet. Is there anything I need to do in order to get these items? If a classified White Paper is anticipated and we are unable to access the SCG, would it be possible to reach out directly for questions regarding classification of specific elements?

Answer:

Regarding the DD254: A Solicitation DD254 was posted as Attachment 4 to the E-Gon solicitation on SAM.gov. This document is intended to be a representative example of the security requirements anticipated for resulting contracts and is provided to aid in development of a responsive technical approach. Contract-specific DD254s will be generated at the individual contract award level, once final award selections have been made.

Regarding the SCG: An SCG is not anticipated to be provided to potential offerors as part of the solicitation process. If there is a question regarding classification of information derived from the AFRL-provided GFI/GFP materials, then potential offerors should follow the derivative classification of that GFI/GFP. If there is doubt in the classification of a specific element of your White Paper, then mark as SECRET and follow the procedures in paragraph 5.2.1. of the solicitation for submitting a classified addendum.

3. Question: Is the AFRL Spectrum Warfare SCG one of the applicable

SCGs?

Answer: Yes, see answer #1 above. This is the AFRL RYW SCG.

4. Question: What are the expected entrance/exit criteria & expected duration for Capstone Events and Field Tests?

Answer: These criteria will be established as the specific technologies under each Technical Area evolve. Please anticipate sending a small technical and programmatic team to the test events, and a larger team to the capstone demonstration. For cost estimating purposes, potential offerors should assume these types of events will last 5-15 days.

5. Question: What are the expected entrance/exit criteria of MVP, Option 1, and Option 2?

Answer: This program is based on agile development principles and not waterfall project management. As such, flexibility is key to maintaining efficiency during development.

Entrance criteria for the MVP are outlined in the classified SOOs. Exit criteria are: addressing performance issues and re-testing as required AND the exercise of the option for the objective product OR delivery of the MVP without the option being exercised.

Entrance criteria for Option 1 is the exercise of the option itself.

Contractors will then expand the capabilities of the MVP. Potential maturation/acceleration Option 1 objective algorithms are identified by AFRL in the CUI GFI and classified documents. There will be a subset of algorithms picked for the objective product based on the performance testing and government decision authority. Exit criteria will be the capstone test and delivery of the software with or without exemplar capabilities.

Entrance criteria for Option 2 will be: funds availability AND sufficient schedule remaining with objective algorithm performance already meeting or exceeding the performance capabilities anticipated at the capstone. Exit criteria for Option 2 will be implementation of any additional performance capabilities into the final delivery. Success of exemplar capability is not required for successful delivery of the E-Gon Technical Area of responsibility.

6. Question: Which TA/party of responsibility is expected to bear the majority of integration costs & coordination between the TAs for the final product delivery and Capstone events? Will the MVP require integration testing and demonstration across the 5 TAs or is it a demonstration for individual TAs only?

Answer: Given the iterative nature of this effort, AFRL will act as main coordinator between Technical Area contract holders during the early stages of the development process. Paragraph 3.1 of the CUI SOO advised potential offerors of the need to develop and implement Associate Contract Agreements (ACA) with the other Technical Area contract holders in order to facilitate the collaborative relationships that are envisioned for the execution of the overall E-Gon effort.

Attachment 7, Statement of Work (SOW) Supplemental Requirements, of the E-Gon solicitation has been updated via Amendment 3, dated 5 June 2024, to reflect the more specific ACA requirements that are anticipated to be included in resulting awards. The MVP will demonstrate real-time streaming I/O and interoperability of all 5 Technical Areas. Each Technical Area will also have to meet specific performance standards outlined in the classified SOOs. For estimating purposes, potential offerors should account for potential costs associated with ensuring interoperability of the applications.

A separate integrator will be brought online to coordinate and incur the majority of the integration and testing costs. The anticipated timeline for this is about 4-5 months into performance of the individual Technical Area development contracts. It is expected Technical Area performers will supply the engineering and programmatic expertise to the integrator before, during and after the test and capstone events.

7. Question: Will the MVP require hardware testing or software simulation testing only?

Answer: The MVP will be initially tested using the ARCEM software testing framework, and as each of the TAs mature, they will be transitioned to the ACEDE hardware for chamber or Hardware-In-The- Loop (HITL) testing.

8. Question: Will the MVP be expected to support Field Tests within the base period of performance?

Answer: No.

9. Question: We wanted to check if a ROM is required because based on the wording in Chapter 4 of the Industry Guide, a ROM is asked for but not required for step 1. The word “should” is used instead of “shall”.

Answer: Paragraph 5.2 of the E-Gon Solicitation refers potential offerors to Chapter 4 of the ReACT MAA Industry Guide. Chapter 4, Paragraph 5(c) states “White papers SHALL be formatted as follows” and breaks out Sections A-D, with Section D being the ROM. The use of “shall” in this context indicates these are mandatory elements of a

White Paper submission. Paragraph 5(e) states, “No detailed price or cost support information should be forwarded; only a time-phased bottom line ROM should be provided.” The use of “should” in this context is not intended to imply that the ROM itself is optional, but rather speak to the level of pricing substantiation to be provided with the ROM.

Q&As dated 23 May 2024

1. Question: We wanted to inquire about getting a sponsorship to get upgraded to TS so we could participate in the solicitation and hopefully the contract as well.

Answer: There is nothing that prohibits any company from submitting a White Paper under Step 1 of the E-Gon Solicitation. If a company can provide a current, approved DD 2345, it can receive the CUI Information Package. Not having the security clearances required for performance, at this point, does not automatically bar a company from potential consideration in Step 1. Please refer to FA2385-24-S- 9760 Amendment 2, dated 13 May 2024, for additional clarification regarding the security requirements of this program. All white paper submissions will be reviewed in accordance with the solicitation, ReACT MAA and the ReACT Industry Guide. The E-Gon program is not prepared to provide any financial support or take on any liability for companies wishing to pursue higher security clearance levels.

2. Question: Would it be possible to get a copy of the interested bidder’s list if one exists? Or a copy of the Industry Day attendees from E-GON vendor day held June 6-9, 2023?

Answer: A representative list of potential offerors, generated through various market research activities, is included on the last page of this document. This list is being provided as a means to facilitate potential teaming opportunities and is not reflective of a commitment to propose by any particular firm(s). This list will not be maintained on SAM.gov.

3. Question: Is the intent of this solicitation to provide a complete solution to a technical area or will partial solutions to a technical area be considered? If both are acceptable which is preferred?

Answer: As stated in Section 1.0 of the Solicitation: “The Air Force anticipates awarding up to 5 awards for this solicitation (One award per Technical Area). However, the Air Force reserves the right to award zero, one, or more contracts for all, some or none of the solicited effort based on the offeror’s ability to perform desired work and funding fluctuations.” Per paragraph 2.1 of the Solicitation, “Each performer will develop software that meets the technical requirements of each Technical Area.”

4. Question: Will solutions involving a combination of SOSA aligned firmware and Big Iron aligned software be considered?

Answer: Please reference the CUI SOO which states in Paragraph 1.0, “The software will be developed, accelerated, integrated, and tested with Big Iron, Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOA), and Open Mission Systems (OMS) compliant hardware." Potential Offerors will need to demonstrate their best approach to solving these technical challenges.

Further, SOO Paragraph 2.2.3 states, “Specifically, the contractor will adopt the latest government-directed Big Iron software framework to develop portable, flexible, and tunable software modules that can be used across all Big Iron compliant systems. Big Iron compliance will ensure reduced upgrade timelines, capability extensibility, and possibility to mimic EW System software within a controlled environment."

5. Question: What, if any, is the TRL requirements of the proposed solution at the time of white paper submission?

Answer: Reference paragraph 2.1 of the Solicitation which states, “Each Technical Area has a requirement to mature existing government-owned algorithms (or in specific cases, develop new algorithms) to a minimum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6.

Each performer will develop software that meets the technical requirements of each Technical Area.”

6. Question: What is the desired TRL after the base and two options?

Answer: Reference paragraph 2.1 of the Solicitation which states, “Each Technical Area has a requirement to mature existing government-owned algorithms (or in specific cases, develop new algorithms) to a minimum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6.

Each performer will develop software that meets the technical requirements of each Technical Area.”

Q&As dated 9 May 2024

1. Question: Could you clarify from 4.1.2 White Paper Limits – Are technical areas required to be captured in separate white papers or is it permissible to include multiple areas in a single paper?

Answer: AFRL expects potential offerors to submit ONE (1) White Paper for EACH Technical Area. An offeror may submit more then ONE (1) White Paper for a Technical Area if the offeror wishes to propose unique technical approaches for a single Technical Area. Since each White Paper must be tied to a single Technical Area, offerors should clearly identify the Technical Area on the White Paper.

AFRL would also like to reiterate the following important points:

1) Reference Solicitation Paragraph 2.2: Once an offeror has received the CUI Information Package containing the CUI Statement of Objectives (SOO) and detailed Technical Area Descriptions, offerors must then submit a SEPARATE REQUEST to indicate their desire to receive the Classified Appendix for a Technical Area. Classified information will only be provided for those Technical Areas specifically requested.

Please pay particular attention to the dates identified in Attachment 2, Classified Appendix Request Instructions.

Requests for Classified Appendices MUST be received by 17 May 2024. AFRL will distribute Classified Appendices to the vetted potential offerors via the appropriate means on 22 May 2024. AFRL will utilize identical shipping speeds for all offerors and anticipates no less than 2-day mail options; potential offerors can expect to receive information on or before 24 May 2024.

2) Reference Solicitation Paragraph 5.2.1: This paragraph states, “Of the 5 pages allowed, up to 3 pages may be segregated into a classified addendum. If the offeror chooses not to submit a classified addendum, they may use the additional 3 pages at the unclassified level. The total White Paper submission, including any classified addendum shall not exceed 5 pages. NOTE: Any information contained in the White Paper that relates to information derived from any Classified Appendix received must remain classified and should be included in the classified addendum.” While AFRL recognizes that a White Paper may not need a classified addendum to be considered fully responsive, potential offerors should, at a minimum, review the applicable Technical Area Classified Appendices for a full understanding of the MVP, Objective and Exemplar product goals.

E-Gon Potential Bidder’s List (alphabetical order)

Aalyria Tech Amazon AWS Anduril Arka Azimuth Corp BAE FAST Labs Ball Aerospace (BAE) Boeing Defense/Space Booz Allen Hamilton CFD Research Dbresearch DCS Corp Defense Unicorns Dorner Works Elbit Episys Science E Spectrum Strategies Expedition Technology Georgia Tech Research Institute HII Mission Technologies Infinity Labs Information System Laboratories Intrepid LLC KBR Wyle L3Harris SAS Leidos LinQuest Lockheed Martin ATL Lockheed Martin Aero Matrix Research Michigan Technological University Northrop Grumman Northrop Xetron Pacific-Defense Peerless Innovation Center Peraton Labs Raytheon RINCON Research Riverside Research SciTec, Inc Sierra Nev. Corp Southwest Research Institute SRC Inc SRI International Stotter Henke Systems & Technology Research (STR) Tangram Flex University of Dayton Research Institute Vertex Solutions