Consolidated SEI RFI Questions_1Mar2021.pdf

Question Answer May we request and extension on the response date by 2 weeks as a result of COVID restrictions and minimal manning that our company is currently facing as a result? We intend on submitting a response as a Prime with Subs for this effort.

The suspense has been extended to 5 March.

Is there an initial expected funding amount and is there option annual cost (estimate) associated? This kind of information is necessary for calculating a realistic bid that encompasses the entire scope of the RFI. In addition, it would dictate offer letters, and determine overall cost for operations (shapes overall bid).

$6‐7M per year

For the facilities, what will be considered GFE? A small classified‐capable lab on WPAFB and facilities at the TISC in Florida.

What type of contract should be expected as a result of this RFI, and subsequent RFP? Flat Fee, FFP, etc? The majority of the effort is anticipated to be on cost‐type CLINs.

Is this RFI intended for preferred for small businesses?

Small Business determination wont be made until after concluding market research, with approval of acquisition authorities.

Are there any restrictions to small business teaming agreements to support this RFI? No Is there a minimum or maximum number of employees expected to execute this contract? No

What level of testing is desired and/or required (DT/OT)?

SWAK testing includes the full range of testing, as applicable (CQT, DT.OT, AFSIT, JITC, Cyber security testing, etc).

DT is conducted at the integrated system level, as most hardware items are non‐developmental.

Are there any other companies or organizations that will be sharing property space or responsible for any other portion of the RFI? No, single award for the full scope of the SE&I contract.

Is there a list of required and/or desired qualifications for MPSE’s that the vendor needs to respect when staffing or is that a responsibility of the vendor to determine/filter?

We anticipate the vendor will seek qualified individuals to meet contract requirements including trainers. If there are any constraints or specific qualifications required, those will be clearly outline in the Performance Work Statement in the draft and final RFP.

Please provide the number of systems anticipated to be fielded/year. 3500 systems

Please provide the list of CONUS and OCONUS units that will be supported by this program.

The complete list will be provided in the draft and final RFP; it includes one PACAF and 2 USAFE locations as well as over 20 CONUS sites.

Plesae estimat the number of disparate subcomponents required to be integrated with SWAK. RFI diagram depicts current certified kit items.

Please provide the number of new subcomponents (never been integrated) vs. number of existing components that have been integrated. Future number unknown, typically 3‐4 new or udpated peripherals/accessories/cables per year.

5. Please defined the required level of maintenance required for each system – annual? As needed/depot service, other?

SE&I contractor won’t maintain all items, and FOC quantities will be procurred off other contracts. SE&I sustainment focus will be on the software, not hardware.

Please detail the number of trainings required by training type – NET, refresher, etc – per year. This will be dependent on the SWAK major and minor release cycle, and which SW mission are impacted.

Can the government estimate the number of demonstrations/exercise support required to be supported per year? Normal non‐pandemic year: approximately 4‐6 per year.

What are the Cybersecurity testing and certification standards currently employed that must be employed?

Cybersecurity testing will be comprised of coordination with a designated AF Cyber Testing Squadron to conduct a system assessment in accordance with the Risk Management Framework (RMF) security controls. In addition, coordination with software development organizations will also be required to ensure implementation of Security Development‐Operations (SecDevOps) commercial best practices.

Reference “Conducting studies/analyses of future capabilities of the kit”, are the analyses technical only or inclusive of total cost of ownership? How often are these analyses expected?

Generally technical and cost information is needed. we expect 1‐2 per year maximum.

For “Future versions of SWAK support” – what is the development lifecycle for components integrated into SWAK? How often is a new component released?

SWAK IPT answer: Major releases approximately one per year, minor releases approximately 3 per year, Varies based on items to be integrated.

What systems does the government use and/provide for configuration management, helpdesk, inventory management, property management, etc? Or is the contractor responsible to determine which systems?

Due to the current SWAK contract being limited to software development, the government does not have single systems for overall configuration management of SWAK. A Key goal of SE&I is to have a Prime contractor with scope to assist the government in managing the entire SWAK solutions, versus jsut the software.

What equipment will the prime integrator be expected to procure vs. Product/equipment which the MACC holders procure?

The SE&I Prime will generally be required to procure evaluation and integration assets only (similar to LRIP). Full production quantities will come from numerous contracts including the SW MAC.

Will the prime integrator work out of the lab provided at the SW program office Operating Location in Ft. Walton Beach, FL? Will all testing facilities and equipment be USG provided or will the prime contractor be required to provide an integration lab on contractor site?

SWAK IPT answer: The government anticipates needing 1‐2 FTE support to the Burlburt TISC operating location.

The government lab on WPAFB Area B will remain available to support SE&I development and integration work.

Can the govenrment provide a complete list of OEM manufacturers in the current SWAK? This will be provided in the Draft and Final RFPs.

Will the government consider alternative but compliant components as part of the future capabilities requirement? Yes Will the SE&I contractor provide product recommendations based on future needs or will all fielded systems by pre‐established by the government?

Recommendations are desired to ensure the government is aware of all options. Some components will be required due to interoperability requirements with SOCOM or other commands.

Can the government provide potential locations for FSR support? Locations will be in the Draft and Final RFP.

Will the government provide to total number of units per system under current lifecycle management inventory?

There are approximately 3500 SWAK customers, but configurations vary across career fields. As mentioned above, since the SE&I contract will only be used to procure initial assets for integration and test, most hardware sustainment will be acquired through MAC or other contracts. The SE&I Prime will need to keep track of configuration and share that information with the ICP Prime.

Ref 6. c. Will the government provide an estimated Scope of effort, number of operators, systems, etc., so that contractors can provide a rought cost estimate/ROM for the 5 year period of performance required?

3500 systems/operators. Three primary configurations (ST, GA and TACP)

Reference: SSS/RFI FA8629‐21‐R‐5005, Para 5g: Will the government provide any/all of the documentation identified in this paragraph with the solicitation (e.g., use of a Bidders Library)? Which of the documents will be approved/issued to the winning contractor as GFI upon award?

Documents required to bid on any eventual request for proposal will be part of a bidder’s library. Other technical documents that exist will be made available after award. Paragraph 5g also levies a requirement to create/maintain technical documentation.

Since this effort appears to contain Engineering (NAICS 541330) and Research & Development (NAICS 541715) work, recommend the Government consider use of the OASIS GWAC (Pool 3 for NAICS 541330 and Pool 4 for NAICS 541715) for FOPR solicitation.

The government will look at available contracts to determine possible contracting strategies.

General. Will the prime MAC awardees and the ICP awardee be prohibited from offering on the SW SE&I requirement due to potential or actual conflict of interest concerns? If not, please explain. ICP has no conflict of interest.

Will all the existing software development companies be prohibited from offering on the SW SE&I requirement due to potential or actual conflict of interest concerns? If not please explain. No General. When will the Government be providing a draft solicitation or at least a Draft SOW with CDRLs? To make an informed suggestion on the contract CLIN structure and Level of Effort, this information is needed.

Release of an updated draft RFP is anticipated in FY21.

General. Will the Government be hosting another industry day for the SE&I contract? This is not anticipated prior to draft RFP release

Who will be developing the "potential next‐generation power and data management solutions"?

There are a number of S&T projects working towards new solutions; no decision has been made to transition any specific solutions.

Could the Government provide a detailed explanation or drawing of the cyber boundary of SWAK?

Yes, as part of the final RFP. The diagram in the RFI depicted the components in the existing SWAk cyber boundary.

Government states integrator continues development of various versions of SWAK. Has the requirements for each version been established or will the integrator be allowed to participate in the requirements validation and development phases in order to clearly determine what is in the realm of the doable on cost and schedule per market analysis?

The customers prioritize desired changes to the kit, and the SE&I vendor then assesses the prioritized list and provides the government and estimate to determine what can realistically be accomplished within the next release schedule.

Will the Government levy any proximity requirements for the contractor at any/all of the supported locations to include WPAFB and SW‐ TISC locations?

The Government anticipates the need to have 1‐2 FTE at the TISC (Hurlburt area). WPAFB: TBD

The Enabling Capabilities mission is a bit vague regarding what responsibilities the SE&I contractor would have. Does the Government envision a Technology Assessment and Roadmap engineering activity that might survey the product space for the "art‐of the‐possible" technologies applicable to the SWAK?

Most of the capabilities under “Enabling Capabilities” are not part of the body‐worn kit, such as ground mobility, Aerial Insertion, and Technical recovery Kits. One exception is Visual augmentation, where we are working to integrated Heads‐up displays and Night Vision Goggles with the kit (Augmented reality). As applicable, the SE&I Prime will be advised when a technology is near transition and is prioritized for integration.

Configuration Control (CC) is listed as a required effort of the SE&I contractor. Would the Government explain the extent to which CC applies? For example, since the SE&I Contractor is largely limited to integrating SWAK H/W and S/W from other companies and the Government, the level of control available to the SE&I Contractor is limited.

The goal is for the SE&I Prime to assist the government in establishing and maintaining documented configuration of SWAK to include all Hardware, software and firmware, regardless of source. Our current contract structure only has a software developer role, not a total kit Prime.

The Government states, "The SE&I prime integrator will be required to enter into non‐disclosure agreements (NDAs) and Associate Contractor Agreements to accomplish software development, component integration, and testing ". Figure 1 indicates the SE&I Contractor will be responsible for "S/W & H/W Integration " and "Software Development ". These appear to be in conflict. Can the Government confirm that the SE&I Contractor will perform these services or will the ACAs be used to accomplish these services (as is described in 5.b)?

The resulting scope to the SE&I Contractor is substantially different as is the placement of the technical risk as ACAs generally introduce ambiguity when problems arise in determining responsibility and cost to resolve.

The SE&I Prime will work with numerous hardware and software suppliers to develop and integrate future versions of SWAK.

Can the Government clarify the specific software by name that is/was "developed under the current software contract " where the Government retains unlimited rights? Will the software be furnished to the SE&I Contractor for sustainment or will it be retained by the Government, or current contractor, and only accessible by the SE&I Contractor via an ACA or other instrument? Sec. 5.d implies the SE&I Contractor will in fact be responsible to "both sustain and upgrade " current versions of SWAK software.

SWAK Team answer please – was it the same list as I the RFI?

This requirement appears to restrict the SE&I obligation to only the Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK) family of software. Is it correct to assume (for proposal purposes) that the iOS and MS Windows version of the TAK software are out of scope for the SE&I Contractor? The intent was not to restrict the scope, but currently our requirements for all three primary special warfare customers (Special Tactics, Guardian Angel, TACP) is to develop ATAK‐based Kits.

Can the Government identify the "commodity suppliers" and the "innovation contractors" who support SW S&T office?

There are many S&T performers supporting SW requirements, and the companies vary every year based on what awards are made through SBIR contracts and other S&T programs (RIF, ATD, JCTD, ectc). The Prime will be advised of relevant technologies if and when they achieve technical maturity and prioritization for transition.

Commodity suppliers: The baseline configuration of the kit including names and models of equipment will be provided in the draft and final RFP.

Can the Government clarify whether verbal responses are applicable to para (c) or para (d)?

The government understands some contractors may not want to commit to cost estimates or teaming arrangements in writing, or may prefer to discuss these topics by phone instead of in the RFI response. This is acceptable.