TAB_5_-_Sauron's_Eye_RFWP_26APR2019.docx.pdf

SAURONS EYE

REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPER (RFWP)

FA8629-19-9-5012

1.0 Summary

This Request for White Paper (RFWP) is issued to request Industry response in support of the acquisition of a Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures (LAIRCM) camera utilization optical device prototype, or “SAURONS EYE.”

The United States Air Force (USAF) (“The Government”) is seeking a technology solution to provide increased situational awareness (SA) onboard the Special Operations and Personnel Recovery

(SOF/PR) HC-130J aircraft utilizing pre-existing LAIRCM sensors. The solution will provide crew members the ability to view and scan the exterior of the aircraft through virtual reality (VR) optical devices. The current LAIRCM system has five sensors installed on the aircraft which are capable of providing infrared (IR) video display in overlapping 360° views around the aircraft; however, it lacks the ability to “stitch” them together. Air-to-air threat engagements normally result in a stern convert, high and aft of the aircraft where, currently, scanning is impossible; the HC-130J aircraft configuration, as it stands today, physically limits crew scanning capabilities to the paratroop door windows and the front windows of the aircraft. To meet current mission requirements, additional SA devices are required to provide HC-130J crew members significantly enhanced capabilities to scan for factor threats around the aircraft as well as to assist with personnel recovery.

Adding this capability is critical to improving visual scanning and aircraft survivability in air-to-air and surface-to-air threat environments. Identifying Air Defense Artillery (ADA) engagements even against threats not using tracers would be possible utilizing the IR spectrum. Surface-to-air missiles and maneuverable-portable air defense systems (SAM/MANPADS) engagements from beyond unassisted visual range, and/or from aft of the aircraft could be identified and reacted to, increasing aircraft survivability. Additionally, this system would reduce crew workload by allowing both visual and electronic scanning to be accomplished simultaneously, thereby reducing the number of aircrew visual scanners required to be posted in windows.

1.1 Other Transaction Agreement (OTA). The Government will utilize OTA procedures for this solicitation with the intention of negotiating and awarding one (1) Other Transaction for

Prototype (OTP) Agreement, in accordance with 10 U.S. Code § 2371b.

1.2 Eligibility. Respondents to this request must be a small business concern under the criteria and size standards in Title 13, Code of Federal Regulations, part 121 (13 CFR 121), or meet the definition of a Non-traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) in order to be eligible to submit a whitepaper. An NDC, as defined in section 2302(9) of title 10, U.S.C, is an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense (DoD) that is subject to full coverage under the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations implementing such section.

1.3 Program Objective. The objective of SAURONS EYE is to provide enhanced SA to the

SOF/PR HC-130J crew members utilizing pre-existing LAIRCM sensor data. Adding this capability is critical to improving visual scanning and aircraft survivability in air-to-air and surface-to-air threat environments as well as to assist in critical personnel recovery missions.

The solution is required to be a “roll-on, roll-off” configuration (i.e. easily removed once the aircraft takes off and lands) with limited Group A (e.g. enclosures and brackets for installation) development.

1.3.1 Technical Requirements

Proposed solutions shall, at a minimum:

a. Utilize existing HC-130J LAIRCM sensor data;

b. Utilize Virtual and/or Augmented Reality;

c. Minimize Group A install;

d. Have a Roll-on/Roll-off configuration for prototype demonstration;

e. Be man-portable by no more than two airmen and shall be capable of being setup within one hour; see MIL-STD-1472G, Human Engineering, Sections

5.8.6.3.1(b) and 5.8.6.3.7(b) for weight limits for two lifters/carryiers.

1.3.2 Testing Requirements

a. Provide engineering support through Developmental Testing (DT) as required;

b. Provide engineering re-work as applicable after initial ground test +2 flights over a two week period at Davis-Monthan ANG/AFRC Test Center (AATC).

1.3.3 Delivery Requirements

a. Deliver a prototype ready to test within 60 days after receipt of agreement.

1.3.4 Other

a. Provide a copy of an approved DD Form 2345, Military Critical Technical

Data Agreement; access to “For Official Use Only” (FOUO) will be required during performance;

b. Information and engineering support to the Government will be required upon prototype delivery to complete a Cybersecurity Impact Evaluation

Recommendation (CIER), and, if the Government determines one is needed after CIER, an Interim Authority to Test (IATT);

c. There will be no foreign participation during performance, or during any potential follow-on effort.

2.0 Evaluation – General

2.1 The Government intends to down-select from the submittals received in response to this request based on the following two-step process:

STEP ONE - Respondents submit a white paper for initial evaluation. Technical subject matter experts (SMEs) will evaluate submissions based on merit and relevance as it relates to the evaluation criteria detailed below in Section 4.0, as well as whether the available funding allocations are sufficient to support the estimated cost.

2.1.1 The Government reserves the right to request oral presentations from one or more respondents to further clarify and discuss information provided in the submitted whitepapers.

STEP TWO - The Government will contact the provider of the most highly rated, and affordable solution to request a proposal, and will outline the steps to proceed to negotiations for the procurement of the prototype. The Government will provide all other respondents with a notice that they have not been selected to proceed to the proposal phase.

2.2 The Government intends to award one (1) OTP agreement upon the completion of the two step evaluation process.

2.2.1 However, the Government reserves the right to not issue an OTP.

2.2.2 The Government also reserves the right to award multiple OTPs. If multiple

OTPs are awarded, the Government reserves the right to down-select for a potential production follow-on contract.

2.3 Formal debriefings are not anticipated for this solicitation.

3.0 General Instructions

3.1 The Respondent's white paper must include all data and information requested by this RFWP and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this RFWP may result in an unfavorable evaluation.

3.2 The white paper shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The white paper should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the respondent intends to meet the requirements. Respondents shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities, personnel, and experience, and that it will base its evaluation solely on the information presented in the submitted white paper.

3.3 White Paper Preparation Requirements

3.3.1 Cover Page. The Cover Page of the response shall include: Company name, team partners (if applicable), Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code, address, primary point of contact including phone number and email address.

3.3.2 Technical Solution. Respondents shall:

3.3.2.1 Detail precisely how each of the requirements identified in Sections 1.3.1 through 1.3.4 will be met through their solution.

3.3.2.2 Provide a notional milestone schedule, inclusive of initial delivery and testing. Identify what requirement(s) is/are currently not achievable or pose a lead time of longer than 60 calendar days; provide a proposed plan and schedule for meeting those requirement(s).

3.3.2.3 Identify key risks anticipated during the solution development (and future implementation) along with corresponding mitigation strategies.

3.3.2.4 Identify any assumptions that influence the response.

3.3.3 Intellectual Property. Respondents shall:

3.3.3.1 Identify the short (~1-3 years) and long (5+ years) business plans with respect to the prototype, inclusive of production and follow-on support as well as future development of the technology, and how it relates to the ability of the Government to establish organic software and hardware maintenance support and repair capability (i.e. minimum Government

Purpose Rights as well as Unlimited Rights for form, fit and function data and operation, maintenance, installation and training (OMIT) other than detailed manufacturing or process data). Government purpose rights: the Government may use, modify, release, reproduce, perform, display or disclose the data pertaining to such items, components, or processes within the Government without restriction, and release or disclose the data outside the Government for Government purposes.

Unlimited rights: the Government may use, modify, reproduce, perform, display, release or disclose technical data in whole or in part, in any manner, and for any purpose whatsoever, and to have or authorize others to do so.

3.3.3.2 Identify the technical data that will be provided to the Government with the solution. Identify the, type, scope and term of asserted intellectual property rights for all data, to include firmware, software, drawings, etc.

Provide the rationale for the assertions. Also, clearly list any required third-party software/hardware that the technical solution may require.

3.3.4 Business Status. Respondents shall provide their small and/or non-traditional business status, or describe the ability to meet the eligibility requirements of 10

U.S.C. Code 2302(9).

3.3.5 Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM). Respondents shall provide an itemized

ROM outlining the not-to-exceed (NTE) total of estimated costs pertaining to the acquisition of one (1) prototype inclusive of the costs associated with support during prototype testing. Respondents shall hold the estimated price for not less than 30 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of white papers. The

ROM shall be provided as an Appendix to the white paper in a separate electronic file, and shall not exceed one (1) page.

3.3.6 Additional Concepts. Respondents may make the Government aware of additional concepts that expand beyond the instant RFWP but directly correlate to the long-term vision of SAURONS EYE by submitting a supplemental document that does not exceed five (5) pages. This information shall be submitted as an entirely separate document from the RFWP response and shall not cross-reference the RFWP response.

3.4 Page Limitations. Responses shall be submitted in Microsoft Word format, no smaller than

10 point font size, and limited to:

a. Technical Solution: Shall not exceed five (5) pages. Cover pages, Tables of Contents, DD Form 2345, acronym lists, glossaries or drawings that illustrate or describe capabilities required by the RFWP, are not included in the page count.

b. ROM: An appendix that shall not exceed (1) page.

c. Additional Concepts: A separate document that shall not exceed five (5) pages.

4.0 White Paper Assessment

4.1 The Government will perform a comprehensive assessment of white paper responses, with consideration given to the demonstrated expertise and overall technical merit of the solution as it relates to the identified need, in addition to the feasibility of, sustainability of, and risk related to, the solution's implementation. The proposed data rights assertions and estimated cost/price will also be considered.

4.2 The evaluators will apply an adjectival rating to the following factors:

a. Factor #1 - Contribution to the Requirement: The degree to which the technical approach is relevant to the proposed requirement. Ratings: Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant, Not Relevant.

b. Factor #2 - Technical Approach and Qualifications: The degree to which the technical approach is feasible, achievable, complete and supported by a technical team that has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed tasks. This includes evaluation of the probability for transition of this effort into an acquisition program, a military system or other military capability. Ratings: Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable.

c. Factor #3 - Intellectual Property: The degree to which the proposed data rights align with the Government's intent to establish organic software and hardware support maintenance. Ratings: Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable

d. Factor #4 - Schedule: The degree to which the proposed schedule is achievable within

60 days after OTP award. Ratings: Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable.

4.3 Lastly, the evaluators will assess whether the proposed cost or price is realistic for the proposed technical approach, and whether sufficient funding is available.

4.4 The Government will request a proposal from the respondent whose solution is determined to be the most highly rated, and affordable.

5.0 Markings

5.1 All submissions shall be unclassified. Responses 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 paragraph on the cover page: "This white paper 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 issued 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."

5.2 Each restricted data sheet shall be marked as follows: "Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this white paper."

6.0 Submission

Submit responses to the below-listed Agreements Officer via email no later than 5:00 PM Eastern time 20 May 2019. Confirmation of receipt will be provided to the respondent.

7.0 Follow-on Activities

The Government intends to award a follow-on sole source production contract to outfit the HC-130J fleet upon the successful completion of the OTP. However, the completion of a successful prototype does not guarantee the award of a follow-on production contract.

8.0 Additional Information

8.1 Bid and Proposal Cost. The cost of preparing and submitting white papers is not considered an allowable direct charge to any subsequent agreement.

8.2 Export Controls. Research findings and technology developments arising from the resulting

White Paper 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).

8.3 Non-Government Advisors. Non-Government support contracts may act as advisors to the

Government during the white paper evaluations, and will have signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) on file. The company names will be provided to respondents upon request. The Government understands that information provided in response to this solicitation is presented in confidence and may contain trade secret or commercial or financial information, and it agrees to protect such information from unauthorized disclosure to the maximum extent permitted or required by law, to include:

a. 18 USC 1905 (Trade Secrets Act);

b. 18 USC 1831 et seq. (Economic Espionage Act);

c. 5 USC 552(b)(4) (Freedom of Information Act);

d. Executive Order 12600 (Pre-disclosure Notification Procedures for Confidential

Commercial Information); and

e. Any other statute, regulation, or requirement applicable to Government employees.

8.3.1 The Government will treat all submissions as source selection information, and will disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. Restrictive notices notwithstanding, during the evaluation process, submissions may be handled by support contractors for administrative purposes and to assist with technical evaluation. Under no circumstances will nonGovernment advisors have access to pricing data.

8.4 Submissions will not be returned.

8.5 Be advised, only an Agreements Officer has the authority to enter into a binding agreement on behalf of the Government. He or she will sign the agreement, and only an Agreements

Officer has the authority to change the terms of the agreement.

8.6 Any resultant OTA-prototype will include a requirement for the contractor to be registered to use, and to submit all invoices in, the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) application:

https://wawf.eb.mil/ for electronic payment processing.

https://wawf.eb.mil/

9.0 Points of Contact

The Agreements Officer, Amber A. Taylor, is the primary point of contact for this agreement; and

Capt Michael Black is the point of contact for technical aspects of the requirement. Responses shall be sent to the Agreements Officer. Written requests for clarification shall be sent to both individuals:

Primary; Agreements Officer

Name: Amber A. Taylor

Email: amber.taylor.9@us.af.mil

Technical

Name: Michael J. Black, Capt, USAF

Email: michael.black.31@us.af.mil