DoD_RIF_2014_QA_Amendment_0010__July_21.pdf

HQ0034-12-BAA-RIF-0001

Amendment 0010

HQ0034-14-BAA-RIF-0001

The purpose of Amendment 0010 to the DoD FY2014 Rapid Innovation Fund (RIF) Broad Agency Announcement, HQ0034-14-BAA-RIF-0001 is to provide answers to submitted questions:

The following answers are provided to the first round of submitted questions. The final cut-off date for questions is Wednesday, July 09, 2014.

General

Q1) With reference to the HQ0034-14-BAA-RIF-0001 solicitation, section 3.0 details eligible sources and does not restrict offerors to be small businesses, while section 1.9.4 states that "This BAA is primarily for the validation and transition of technologies developed by small businesses, including those resulting from the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and DoD reimbursed Independent Research and Development

(IR&D)".

Am I correct in assuming that if an offeror does not fit the definition of a small business, it will not be disqualified on this basis?

A1) Yes. Although preference is given to small business, other than small businesses may compete in the DoD Rapid Innovation Fund (RIF) Program. Under the DoD RIF FY2014 Broad Agency Announcement, Solicitation HQ0034-14-BAA-RIF-0001, please see Sections 6.4 Selection Preferences and 6.5 Selection for additional information.

Q2) Does “prior DoD-funded SBIR or STTR projects” and work “funded by the DoD” include Phase I SBIR work which is under contract, but not completed, at the time the RIF white paper is submitted (but which will be completed, at least for a base period, by the time a RIF project would start)?

A2) Yes

Q3) Since the last day you will accept questions on topics is July 9, when will you publish online the specific questions/answers for PACOM-14-BAA-RIF-0001?

A3) Yes. All written questions submitted to questions@dodrif.com by July 9, will be posted as an amendment to the BAA on July 18, 2014.

Q4) According to the BAA, DoD laboratories are ineligible to submit proposals. However, it also states that: "these organizations may team with responsible sources from academia and industry that are submitting proposals under this BAA".

Could you please clarify if this means that a DoD lab can receive RIF funds as a subcontractor / teaming partner to a small business? The goal would be to have them mailto:questions@dodrif.com validate the system and provide feedback for a successful transition, and the question is whether or not RIF funds can cover the lab's expenses in doing so.

A4) DoD Labs are not eligible to receive awards under this BAA. However, they may team with responsible sources from academia and industry that are submitting white papers under this BAA.

Q5) Is there was a limit to the number of white papers we can submit in response to the RIF topics?

A5) There is no limit to the number of different requirements or different innovative solutions you can submit. However, please do not submit the same white paper to the same requirement multiple times.

Q6) In Air Force BAA Annex it mentions that they expect to receive $40M and to award ~15 contracts. I don't see a similar statement for the Army, wanted to understand if you could provide some clarity.

A6) The Congress added $175M to the DoD Rapid Innovation Fund (RIF) program element overseen by OSD's Office of Small Business Programs. We currently plan to allocate $40M each to support Army, Navy and Air Force funding for high priority RIF proposals received against their BAA requirements. $55M is set-aside for support of the Defense Agencies.

Q7) Could you clarify if large businesses can participate in these studies or if they're limited to small business?

A7) Although award preference is given to small business, other than small businesses may compete in the DoD Rapid Innovation Fund (RIF) Program. Under the DoD RIF FY2014 Broad Agency Announcement, Solicitation HQ0034-14-BAA-RIF-0001, please see Sections 6.4 Selection Preferences and 6.5 Selection for additional information.

Q8) Just for clarification, in the case of a contract, can we share or sub some % of the funding to a partner DoD laboratory?

A8) DoD Labs may team with responsible sources from academia and industry that are submitting white papers under this BAA. Please see Section 3.4 and 6.4 of the BAA.

Q9) The FY14 RIF BAA FINAL Amendment 0006 calls out for a 3 page white paper / volume 2 but the “FY2014_RIF_Defense-wide_Annex_Requirements__FINAL- Amendment_0006” page 44 called out for a 25 page technical approach. Is the 3 page white paper the initial white paper proposal and the 25 page technical approach a full proposal upon invitation? Please clarify the page limit for the initial white paper submission due on 8 August 2014.

A9) Correct. The White Paper is 3 pages. The full proposal, should your company be asked to submit one, has a 25 page limit on the Technical Approach.

Q10) Is there a page limitation for the US Army portion of this Defense Wide BAA?

A10) The White Paper limit is 3 pages which does not include the cover page and Quad chart.

Please see Section 4.0 "White Paper Package Preparation and Submission Instructions".

Department of the Army RIF Annex

Requirement Number: COE3 Title: Socio-cultural Course of Action Assessment and Exploration

Q11) The topic mentions that mission plans may contain "physical environment and terrain" information. Can you give an example on how this data might be used within a socio-cultural context?

A11) Army doctrine describes the following interdependent operational variables: political, military, economic, social, information, infrastructure, physical environment, and time (i.e., PMESII-PT). Three comparatively simple examples of interdependencies amongst these variables include: (1) understanding which roads have historically served as barriers between groups; (2) who controls access to infrastructure and how social and cultural context is impacted by that access; (3) social conflict emerging from resource deprivation.

Q12) Is there an existing tool for developing COAs that this socio-cultural assessment capability should eventually extend or should the proposed capability include mechanisms to develop baseline COAs?

A12) For this topic, no existing COA development tool is identified for extension or re-use.

However, extension or re-use of existing capabilities could significantly increase likelihood of successful development and transition; this could include alignment with programs from PM CONSIM, PM MC or others. JC3IEDM is a data model that may be appropriate for incorporation in a capability developed under this topic.

Requirement Number: COE4 Title: M&S for Robotics (Army)

Q13) Could you define plug and play as it relates to simulation federations, or to existing

GOTS, or to specific protocols or languages? Is there a particular federation that this simulation would need to interact with?

A13) It should conform to high-level architecture (HLA) standards.

Q14) Is this a classified system?

A14) No, Unclassified.

Q15) Will there be a requirement for analytical use for sensors with validated data and validated results in the simulation?

A15) No.

Q16) How many terminals will use the simulation at once? Is there a requirement for mass multiplayer capability?

A16) One terminal at a time.

Q17) Are there particular GOTS, open source, or commercial robotics M&S products that your office has used or would especially like to build on, further develop, or re-use?

A17) No, but we are currently using the Virtual Autonomous Navigation Environment

(VANE), which is a GOTS code.

Q18) The general overall use case seems to be "virtual evaluation" or test. Is that correct? The evaluation is of "autonomy and perception algorithms", so would it be correct to assume that the algorithms will be the primary output of the simulation?

A18) Virtual evaluation of algorithms is the goal. The algorithms should be tested with the simulation environment

Q19) There is interest in evaluation of all levels of robotics from individual component level to systems to system of systems (cooperating robots). Is this correct?

A19) Yes.

Q20) The emphasis seems to be real-time oriented. Is this correct?

A20) Yes.

Q21) HITL is mentioned. Is there a particular hardware lab configuration or location that you have in mind?

A21) No.

Q22) Is part of the idea to use virtual "scenes" to stimulate robotic perception algorithms (in lieu of real world (i.e. optical) stimulation?

A22) Yes, that is the main idea of the project.

Requirement Number: PEOAMMO04 Title: IED Defeat Sensors

Q23) What the specific desirements for the SWAP-C of an approach?

A23) The desired solution is intended to be used on manned and unmanned medium and large size vehicles. Power is 24 volts DC. Size and weight depend on the vehicle on which it is mounted, but not larger than the current Husky Mounted Detection System.

Q24) What is the CONOPS of how the devices will be used (attached to a vehicle, deployed at culverts)?

A24) The devices will be vehicle mounted (manned and unmanned) with the intent to clear a route with two-way vehicle traffic at an average rate of up to 45 kilometers per hour.

Subsequent spot checking/characterization of previously determined locations are permitted at slower speeds.

Q25) Minimum lifetime?

A25) The sensors should operate for at least 10 years without degradation.

Q26) Minimum detection range?

A26) Range is dependent on speed; the operator must be able to stop the vehicle prior to reaching the detected location.

Requirement Number: PEOAVN02 Title: Accelerometer and Wiring Test and Operational Verification Kit

Q27) With regard to the system, the title contains the word “Portable” yet the description uses

“in situ”. Is it a requirement that all the components of this nondestructive testing system be portable from wiring harness to wiring harness, or is it acceptable that a sensor array (corrosion and vibration/acceleration sensors) be permanently placed inside a wiring harness, continually monitoring conditions in situ, with maintenance technicians periodically downloading sensor data of wiring harness condition to be used for assessment of remaining harness useful life?

A27) System shall be portable and capable of testing in the place components on the aircraft focusing on wiring. Adding sensors to existing wiring harnesses is not preferred and adding download tasks for the maintainer is undesirable.

Q28) Could you give more detailed information concerning the requirement “installation and operability of vibration sensors” found in the first sentence of the Description section, since the rest of the Description section does not put a context to—or even mention— “acceleration” or “vibration”? Does this refer to testing accelerometers/vibration sensors that are already on the aircraft? Or that such sensors should be an integral part of the testing system to aid in the detection of defects in a wiring harness?

A28) The system should be capable of testing the currently installed accelerometers, as well as other sensors, for wiring integrity. Additional benefits would be gained by detecting sensor health beyond wiring integrity but not required.

Q29) Does the testing system have to provide the location of the defect within the wiring, or is it sufficient to detect when the harness should be replaced?

A29) The system should provide a defect location within +/- 12”. If the wire failure has been detected but signal integrity is not yet impacted then a remaining useful life assessment would be of use.

Q30) In terms of the aircraft, is there a preferred platform, e.g. C-130 Hercules, UH-60

Blackhawk, etc.?

A30) Army Aviation focused: H-60, H-47 and H-64.

Q31) What are the funding limits for this topic? This will help us in selecting the project scope and proposed team.

A31) Unknown. Scope of device would be limited to ground support equipment (1-2 devices per unit).

Requirement Number: PEOC3T01 Title: Improved Electronic Protection for Lower and Mid-Tier Tactical Networks

Q32) Can a company submit multiple White Papers for this requirement? (i.e. one on SRW, one on WNW, etc.)?

A32) Company may propose multiple solutions but have to identify a requirement that they are proposing to.

Q33) Must a White Paper address both parts 1 and 2?

A33) White paper does amplify proposal, but would recommend adhering to proposal format as described in RIF posting.

Q34) For part 2, can you give some examples of "quantifying threats to network performance?"

would examples be: "comm link degraded by 10 dB", "jammer with power X and bandwidth Y detected," or, "Denial of Service attack underway for 10 seconds?"

A34) The intent is to maintain operations in presence of hostile jammer.

Requirement Number: PEOC3T09 Title: Expeditionary Command Posts

Q35) What security features are currently implemented on the Command Posts that there is a desirement to improve?

A35) We are looking to reduce SWAP into multiple security domain.

Q36) Are the communications wireless or wired, and what standards are used for communications (e.g. Wifi)?

A36) Currently the Command Post are wired and goal is to transition to wireless infrastructure.

Q37) Commercial Suite B cryptography is mentioned, is it ok to suggest other algorithms that are equally as secure they may be more appropriate for low SWaP environments?

A37) Alternative algorithms are acceptable as long as they are NSA certified.

Requirement Number: PEOC3T14 Title: Tactical Authentication Schemes

Q38) What is the desired platform in which the cryptographic scheme is intended to run on

(e.g. smart phone, custom embedded solution, laptop, etc.)?

A38) The desired platforms are laptops, servers, smartphones and some custom hardware.

Q39) Is it desired that the devices in the network authenticate back to a central device (e.g.

central server) or operate in an ad hoc manner?

A39) The devices will not always have network access back to a central device; therefore there is an authentication requirement in a disconnected environment.

Requirement Number: PEOIEWS01 Title: RF Interference Mitigation in a Blue Force EW Environment

Q40) With respect to Requirement Number PEOIEWS01, 'RF Interference Mitigation in a Blue

Force EW Environment' the paragraph simply requests "technologies that increase the ability of communications to operate in close physical proximity to... EW systems", but does not indicate the type of technology. Are you seeking a hardware solution, a software solution, or some combination?

A40) The topic is written intentionally broad to be inclusive. RF Interference Mitigation (RIM) solutions for current the Army program of records (POR) comms and EW systems are being sought. They can be for hardware, software or some combinations.

Requirement Number: PEOIEWS08 Title: SIGINT Manpack Communications Tethering (Army)

Q41) What is the minimum acceptable wireless communication range and data rate for this application?

A41) No firm Spec, but goal is: 1KM and 1 MBPS.

Q42) What RF band and channel bandwidth can we assume is available to support the wireless connection?

A42) Proposed solution must work in both CONUS and OCONUS locations without interference. Proposed solutions must address RF Bands used.

Q43) Is the intention for the tether to carry only raw RF samples, or processed intelligence information, or both?

A43) Both

Requirement Number: PEOIEWS10 Title: Tactical SIGINT Inter-vehicle Communications (Army)

Q44) What is the minimum acceptable wireless communication range and data rate for this application?

A44) No firm Spec, but goal is: 50KM and 50 MBPS.

Requirement Number: PEOIEWS13 Title: Soldier Force Protection – Modeling (Army)

Q45) We are interested in providing a response submittal for ARMY Requirement

PEOIEWS13 (Soldier Force Protection - Modeling). Could you please provide additional information regarding the range of threats and systems to be considered?

A45) The Army is interested in modeling items that can be used as RF IED threats against

Army ground forces.

Requirement Number: PEOSOLD02 Title: Helmet-Mounted Sensor Ring to Enhance a Soldier’s Sound Localization Capability into In-the-Ear (ITE) and Over-The-Ear (OTE) Hearing Protection/Hearing Enhancement Devices (HPDs/HEDs)

Q46) The RIF BAA indicates a "Proof of Concept" Phase and then a subsequent follow on.

For the purposes of responding, does the government wish to see bidders propose to RIF projects in phases (Phase 1, 2, etc.)?

A46) Yes. A response containing a "Phase 1 - Proof of Concept" and a "Phase 2 - Follow-On

Effort" would be expected.

Q47) What types of impulse noise is desired for detection as well as what types of noises are desired for rejection? (E.G. We understand gunfire detection, but what about detection of mortars, rejection of slamming doors)

A47) Detection should be based on a 40 dB or more rise in sound pressure level occurring within a 0.5 second period, where the peak level equals or exceed 140 dB. Impulse noise can be considered either a discrete event (e.g. artillery fire, rifle fire) or multiple events (e.g., riveting, machine gun firing).

Q48) Is the intention of the topic for the development of a stand-alone system or is the desire to integrate the technology with a pre-existing system?

A48) The “Proof of Concept” can be considered as a stand-alone system. The subsequent

“follow-on” should consider integration with a pre-existing system.

Q49) In regards to the hearing protection that was mentioned in the topic, is it the government's desire to have a system that cancels, or removes overly loud noises?

A49) The emphasis in PEOSOLD02 is to be on Hearing Enhancement, not Hearing Protection.

Requirement Number: PEOSOLD07 Title: Color Night Vision

Q50) Investigation revealed that DOD have color night vision binocular prototypes from previous project: SOCOM02-001 Multi-Spectral Low-Light Imaging, to be specific from CANVS Corporation.

http://www.canvs.com/support.htm <http://www.canvs.com/support.htm>

This retrofitting solution can provide color capability with minor SWaP impact and seems already meet your requirement.

Do you have any comments on this prototype or Why DOD is still looking for a solution?

A50) As stated in the requirement, "Solutions should provide the color capability without negatively impacting the lowest light level performance of the device and without increasing system size and weight." We are looking for new, innovative ways to achieve color capability. The CANVS product does not meet the requirements of our SWaP. The CANVS system is much larger than current NVG's.

Q51) What's your interested wavelength range for color night vision? Will VIS-NIR (400-

1000nm) solution meets the requirement?

A51) The applicable wavelength would be the VIS-NIR spectrum (400-1000nm).

http://www.canvs.com/support.htm http://www.canvs.com/support.htm

Q52) Do you require true color capability? Is false color capability (enough to enhance situation awareness) at lowest light level acceptable?

A52) The application is for 'true color' night vision capability (discrimination of Red, Green, Blue, etc. objects and sources). Any implementation of 'False color' is not acceptable.

Requirement Number: PEOSOLD14 Title: Intra Soldier Wireless (ISW) - Compressed Video over Ultra-Wide Bandwidth (UWB)

Q53) Has the Army specified a UWB radio for this requirement?

A53) The Army has not specified a UWB radio. The Army desires to have interoperability across commercially available UWB radios.

Q54) If a UWB radio solution has not already been specified, will proposed solutions be expected to include a UWB radio?

A54) Yes, proposed solutions are expected to include a UWB radio. The Army desires to have interoperability across commercially available UWB radios.

Requirement Number: PEOSOLD20 Title: Intra Soldier Wireless (ISW) - Wireless Off-Body Video Streaming

Q55) Is the off-body radio integrated with the on-body network?

A55) Currently, both the Soldier’s off-body radio and EUD are physically connected. The

Army desires to have a UWB wireless connection between the Soldier’s off-body radio and the Soldier’s EUD.

Q56) Is it acceptable for the solution to send live video feeds, but still require a physical connection?

A56) Yes, this is an acceptable threshold capability. However, the Army desires to have a

UWB wireless connection between the Soldier’s off-body radio and the Soldier’s EUD.

Q57) Is there a preferred bandwidth cap for a single video stream on the off-body radio network?

A57) The Army desires to have selectable bandwidth capability to accommodate limitations of the Soldier’s off-body radio network, while continuing to ensure desired quality of service levels.

Requirement Number: PEOSOLD21 Title: Intra Soldier Wireless (ISW) - Wireless Off-Body Data Streaming

Q58) Are solutions expected to use the standard smartphone data networks (e.g. 3G, 4G LTE) for streaming video, or other available network connections?

A58) The Army desires to use low power UWB, military tactical radios and tactical variants of commercial cellular communications for off-body data streaming.

Q59) Is there a preferred network for streaming video?

A59) Low power UWB is preferred over military tactical radios; which is preferred over commercial cellular communications.

Q60) Is there a minimum preferred frame rate?

A60) A minimum preferred frame rate has not been established at this time.

Q61) Is there a minimum preferred resolution?

A61) A minimum preferred frame resolution has not been established at this time.

Q62) Is there a bandwidth limit?

A62) No off-body radio bandwidth limit has been established at this time.

Department of the Navy RIF Annex

MCSC

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-MCSC-06 Title: A helmet system with quick reaction blast protection and/or weight reducing ballistic protection enhancements

Q63) Is there a standard helmet we should use as a baseline to compare with?

A63) All helmets baselines are against the ACH 7 pad helmet. The other helmets in application are the USMC LWH helmet and the ECH helmet. The intent would be to apply solution to ECH Helmet first.

Q64) Is there a weight target for the improved helmet?

A64) The weight target for any of the helmet is no more than a 2 oz. increase in overall weight increase.

Q65) Will blast loads be provided or should we use loads from some of our related work?

A65) Blast loads are 3-5 lbs. at 8 feet ANAL.

SPAWAR

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-SPAWAR-04 Title: Information Security and Information Assurance (ISA)

Q66) What are the different types of devices in which data must be protected for data at rest and data in motion (e.g. smart phones, laptops, custom devices, etc.)?

A66) The different types of devices should be restricted to all non-mobile devices with an

Ethernet connection.

Q67) What type of communication links are used (e.g. Wifi, wired Ethernet)?

A67) Wired Ethernet are the types of communication links that are to be focused on.

Q68) What type of data must be protected (e.g. large files such as images and video or shorter messages)?

A68) Assume all types of data are to be protected.

Q69) Are the devices that are that must protect the data at rest servers (with large databases) or other types of devices with less storage capacity (e.g. smart phones, embedded devices)?

A69) Assume that the data-at-rest applies to servers and non-mobile clients.

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-SPAWAR-05 Title: SPAWAR: Data Integration and Decision Support (DDS)

Q70) Will A2AD environment capabilities include as requirement real time external data integration, i.e AirForce (GSTF)/ Navy (Assured Access) - LCS integration?

A70) From a C2/ISR perspective external data integration is required to support intra-ship data integration in an A2AD environment in non-real time. Here, non-real time external data integration with shipboard data is in the realm of milliseconds to seconds from external to internal data integration to operator display.

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-SPAWAR-07 Title: SPAWAR: Non-Kinetic Fires (NKF)

Q71) Does the Navy have a delivery platform selected for potential overwhelming RF attack?

A71) Within SPAWAR, the Shipboard Signal Exploitation Equipment (SSEE) program and the

Cryptologic Carry-On Program (CCOP) provide a wide range of RF exploitation capabilities including attack.

Q72) Does the Navy have a desired effective range and desired area of effect/hold down for RF attack?

A72) Performance attributes for these systems are classified.

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-SPAWAR-08 Title: SPAWAR: Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT)

Q73) In the Sub-Surface area - Will it be possible to get Ships Navigation data in real-time?

Example methods: Ethernet feed, USB feed, RS232 feed, or even analog feed, or acquire video of a screen that's displaying the data.

A73) Yes. GPNTS supports RS232/422 and Ethernet (100BaseFX, 1000BaseSX, and

10/100/1000BaseT) along with control display of real time data.

Q74) In the Sub-Surface area - Is processing utilizing ship's computers available, or is a separate computing platform required?

A74) Reserve processing capabilities are available. Further discussion will be required during implementation of proposed technology.

Q75) In the Sub-Surface area - Can one propose to insert new hardware (relatively small) into the existing submarine periscope masts? Or does everything have to be software only?

A75) There is available rack space in GPNTS to host additional hardware. Proposed designs should utilize no more than 5 discontiguous standard 1U rack height with no more than 19" of depth.

Q76) What do you mean by “hardening”? Does this refer to radiation hardening. If not, what does it refer to? If it does refer to radiation hardening, what are the levels?

A76) We are looking to "harden" the capabilities of the current PNT systems (NAVSSI and

GPNTS) via techniques such as multi-sensor fusion to increase PNT data reliability;

improved GPS anti-jam performance via advanced signal processing and/or anti-jam antennas; use of alternate sources of reliable PNT data (e.g., diurnal star tracker);

interference rejection (both intentional and unintentional); and anti-spoofing measures.

Radiation hardening of PNT systems is not currently being sought; but, could be desirable.

Q77) What did you have in mind when stating “modernizing?

A77) Modernization pertains primarily to NAVSSI systems such as WSN-7.

Q78) As it pertains to miniaturized PNT solutions, what is the target SWaP-C?

A78) For ruggedized platform antenna with anti-jam capabilities should have a target SWaP of <25 in^3 and <1 lb; cost target of well under $10k is desired in large quantities (~10,000+). Balance of PNT system SWaP-C will require further discussion; GPNTS is the baseline program of record.

Q79) As it pertains to miniaturized PNT solutions, does this pertain to a GPS receiver, GPS receiver + IMU, or other PNT solutions?

A79) All of the above.

Q80) As it pertains to “scalable” PNT solutions, what did you have in mind?

A80) We are looking for a modular system that will allow the use of many PNT sensors and fusion engines that can scale from large ground based terminals to small UAVs (e.g., BAMS and UCLASS).

BUMED

Requirement Number: FY14-DoN-RIF-BUMED-01 Title: Energy Efficient Patient Warming in support of Naval Expeditionary Health Services

Q81) Does contained "self-sufficiency" include the need for a battery or equivalent?

A81) It is presumed that some form of energy conversion will be required to produce heat for patient warming. The source is left open to stimulate innovative solutions. The preference is, in order of desired system: (1) self-contained, (2) small, external, highly mobile source (e.g., battery or other replaceable or rechargeable source), and 3) derived from/provided by another power system (e.g., generator, airframe, vehicle).

Q82) Are there other means of "low power" available in "forward units" that a warming device may be able to access?

A82) Battery, vehicle (ground & air), generator.

Additional Notes:

Battery Run Times:

o At High Temperature, 2 hours (T), 4 hours (O) o At Low Temperature, 3 hours (T), 4 hours (O)

Battery Charge Time: 2 hours (T), 1 hour (O) Electrical:

o 110 – 120 VAC 60 Hz o 220 – 240 VAC 50 Hz

Must be useable on Marine Corps aircraft: CH-46, CH-53, MV-22.

Q83) What is the medical desired outcome of warming the warfighter? Is it comfort warming, therapeutic warming or something else?

A83) Patients of interest are primarily combat casualties and are subject to hypothermia. The patient warming device is to provide a stable body temperature in patients who would otherwise be subject to deterioration of condition due to thermoregulation issues and due to the operational environments (ambient temperature) during operations or evacuation.

Additional Notes:

Operational Temperature Range: -30°C to +40°C (T=O), at RH of 95%, @ 10,000’ ASL

Storage Temperature Range: -30°C to +70°C (T=O), at RH of 95%

System should be waterproof

System must provide for optional heating units for use on extremities or localized heating.

Q84) Do caregivers need access to the patient while the warming device is operating?

A84) Yes. Patients of interest are primarily combat casualties. Caregiver access to the extremities and to the torso, as might be necessary for medical intervention is required.

Additional Note:

Material that comes into contact with the patient must either be disposable or able to be disinfected/sterilized.

Department of the Air Force RIF Annex

Air Force General

Q85) If responding to an Air Force FOUO topic, how should proposed solutions be addressed and delivered?

A85) Classify the white paper as FOUO and electronically submit the white paper as per the

BAA instructions. The website is certified for FOUO information.

Q86) Do responses to requirements (topic areas) that are FOUO need to be marked as FOUO?

A86) Yes.

Q87) Does a response that is FOUO need to be submitted in a different manner than through the online RIF portal as described in the BAA?

A87) Responses marked Unclassified FOUO should be submitted through the online RIF submission portal in the same way as described in the BAA. All RIF responses need to be Unclassified. Though Classified White Papers responses are not permitted, a DoD contracting and technical office may work with an offeror to submit a Classified full proposal if the full proposal is invited.

1) AIR FORCE TEST CENTER

Requirement Number: 1.c.

Title: Energy-Efficient On-Site Waste Remediation (Edwards Air Force Base)

Q88) What are the desired deliverables during the 24 month contract?

A88) Focus is on developing and demonstrating a system that can accommodate general municipal waste, yard waste, has a sorting system, energy storage and recycling capability. The system can be a mix of technologies that can economically reduce the cost of recycling, waste disposal, and can and can handle other similar waste stream disposal and energy conversion efforts. Other considerations include an assessment for reducing transportation costs for disposal and recycling, reducing the cost of energy production, and determining if converting waste to a commodity provides a long-term (e.g., 10-year) economic payoff.

Q89) When will the project begin? Is there any flexibility in the starting time?

A89) Refer to the BAA for more specific milestones. There is some flexibility in the contract start time. This current effort is concerned with the phase 1 White Paper due in August 2014. The timeline for inviting a full proposal is second quarter 2015, but actual timelines may vary depending on how long it takes the DoD to review and evaluate all white paper proposals. Actual start time of any contract award stemming from a full proposal submission will be negotiated by the Service or Defense Agency contracting office. See the RIF weblink at http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/RIF.html for 2014-2015 source selection milestones.

Q90) We are confused by Section 4.3.2 (3) Schedule: ".Technologies should transition to a military system or program within 24 months of contract award and deploy or be fielded within 36 months of contract award." Please elaborate. Would the 36 month contract begin after completion of the 24 month contract, so that the combination would be 60 months?

A90) Section 4.3.2(3) Schedule has been clarified. See Amendment 0006 to the DoD RIF

BAA The period of performance for the RIF contract is 24 months from date of contract award. The technology proposed should be available to transition and be of use at the end of this two-year period. In some cases, additional work may be required by the government sponsoring office with the RIF contractor to implement a fielding plan. This additional 12-months beyond the RIF period of performance, or 36 months total from date of contract award to full fielding, is a planning timeframe to baseline expectations between the government and offeror for full fielding of a RIF capability. It should not require 60 months to transition and field a successful technology proposed for RIF.

Q91) Is the focus in requirement 1.c on forward operating bases only or is the Air Force also interested in capability for stateside military installations?

http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/RIF.html%20for%202014-2015 http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/RIF.html%20for%202014-2015

A91) The Air Force is interested in technologies to process solid waste in a more economical and sustainable manner. The scalability and robustness of proposed systems are important considerations so whether at forward area bases or at stateside military bases the main point is the adequate on-site processing of the waste.

4) AIR FORCE SUSTAINMENT CENTER

Requirement Number: 4.f.

Title: Low Temperature Curing Powder Coating

Q92) Would another polymer coating other than a powder coating be acceptable providing they are:

1. Free of VOCs and HAPs, and

2. Provide the desired corrosion inhibiting properties, and

3. Meet similar requirements of a powder coating?

A92) This project seeks to compare leading corrosion inhibiting powder coating COTS products. Other than powder coatings will not be considered.

6) PEO BATTLE MANAGEMENT

Requirement Number: 6.b.

Title: Actionable Weather Information Production and Dissemination

Q93) Is there an existing DoD "cloud architecture" technology already in place that is being referenced? If so, can you provide additional information and/or references?

A93) No. We would consider any cloud architecture that is available for government use.

However, some may be more or less applicable for weather product generation.

Q94) Does the reference to emerging technologies such as "Intelligent Data Services (IDS)" refer to a specific program (if so, please describe), or is it a general term?

A94) The term Intelligent Data Services refers to a specific web services implementation using

Open Geospatial Consortium OGC Web Coverage Service 2.0 standards and Numerical Weather Prediction ensemble data. The service enables users to help determine mission impacting weather conditions by submitting geographic locations and weather conditions which might impact their respective operations (e.g. tell me the possibility of experiencing winds greater than 25 knots for Chicago O’Hare airport for the next 36 hours). IDS would be considered one type of web service in the broader category of mission impact services.

Q95) Does the reference "content distribution services (CDS)" refer to a specific program or concept (if so, please describe), or is it a general term?

A95) Content distribution services refer to the concept of re-hosting services providing a capability across a CDN (content delivery network). While static content is easily distributed across a CDN, the dynamic and perishable nature of weather data makes the use of CDNs more challenging. An example of a CDS is DISA’s Global Content Delivery Service (GCDS).

Q96) Are you seeking, not only the capability (software and system-level capability), but the

TOC or troop-level display hardware as well?

A96) No, just the capability to produce and deliver weather data out to our consumers.

8) PEO FIGHTER/BOMBER

Requirement Number: 8.f.

Title: Improved coatings to eliminate canopy water pooling

Q97) Is concave local geometry the basis for the canopy water pooling?

A97) There is no concave geometry on the transparency.

Requirement Number: 8.i.

Title: Test and demonstrate airborne internet network

Q98) How many assets are you looking to have in this demonstration (i.e. aircraft, vehicles, dismounted users)? Where would this demonstration occur? Contractor’s discretion/location? Are you looking to integrate a specific military radio? If so, which?

A98) There is not a specific number of assets for this demonstration, but recommend enough articles be proposed to address technical scalability and capability at a not to exceed contract project award limit of $3 million.. The contractor can propose a demonstration location. There is not a specific military radio targeted for integration.

Requirement Number: 8.k.

Title: Structural Maintenance Data Analytics

Q99) Can you elaborate what kind of data the system is supposed to work with? Does all the data come off-line from inspections and repairs, or there can be some on-line data from deployed sensor systems?

A99) The overall goal is to aggregate the maintenance and repair data across the fleet or for a particular aircraft to improve structural repair processes and support risk based inductions by providing accurate data under on a common framework. The data in question is typically repair damage and dispositions, supporting analyses, structural inspection data, test and teardown data, failure assessments, and other data used to support structural engineers and ASIP analysts. It is unclear what is meant by “off-line” vs. “on-line”, but the data is collected during inspections and repairs, or is available as a result of previous efforts, a teardown report, for example. We are not dealing with data from deployed sensor systems or data related to in-situ structural health monitoring.

Q100) What is the maximum expected size of the whole data the system is supposed to work with?

A100) The maximum expected size of the whole data is undetermined. However, it is expected to be quite significant. As an example for one of the types of data, structural teardown findings, a recent fatigue test and teardown resulted in ~ 38,000 inspections with ~ 650 findings.

Q101) How are the currently existing data stored?

A101) The data is currently stored in many fashions, which includes multiple online and offline databases, spreadsheets, and embedded in documents, some of which are currently being scrubbed to extract the data and associated metadata.

Q102) It is stated that the technology "tool must be capable of merging inspection and repair data with design and analysis models." Can you please elaborate about the "design and analysis models?" Does this infer that some models should come from us, and some models may come later, subject to same interface, from any source? Are the "design model[s]" supposed to come as already existing models of the involved structures? If so, are they supposed to be represented in 3D environment, with the analysis of merged data?

A102) The design and analysis models are primarily 3D definition of the airframe structure.

Damage and repair data can be mapped on this 3D definition to facilitate expedited repairs and analysis as well as a framework for seeing the “big picture” for the fleet, subset of the fleet, or a particular aircraft. Design and analysis models may also include analysis and FEMs that substantiate repairs and inspections. All of the models described already exist, are in development, or may be developed in the future; however, the contractor is not expected to develop these models, just a framework to display the models with merged data.

Q103) Could you please clarify the statement discussing the "3D environment to analyze this merged data." What, in very general terms, would you like to see represented in 3D?

A103) In general, the goal is to have a 3-D representation of the aircraft structure with the data mapped at its associated location. The goal would be to pull up a 3-D representation of the structure, maneuver to the location of interest, and pertinent data relative to that area will show up as data points with associated metadata. The engineer/analysts can quickly and visually have all the pertinent data to their particular situation in front of them to make the appropriate engineering decisions.

Q104) If we are successful and funded, what kind of data would be provided to adjust our core methods and implement the deliverables? Will it be limited examples of data, large samples of data, or really large training samples of data?

A104) All of the sources of data would be provided. Limited examples would be provided to build/adjust the environment, but large data sets will likely be provided to test the capacity of the system.

9) PEO ISR & SOF

Requirement Number: 9.b.

Title: Portable Link 16

Q105) Is there a target size or weight for the portable radio?

A105) The Thales 148 or Harris 152 radios would be good examples of the size and weight that would meet our User's definition of portable.

Q106) Are there any considerations we should be taking for powering the radio, such as using a battery that is interchangeable with another system that is currently carried to reduce the number of spares?

A106) The rechargeable 5.8V Li ion battery used in the Harris PCR-152A radio would be a preferred "interchangeable" battery source. The specs for the rechargeable Lithium Ion battery are 10.8VDC (nominal) with 5.8 Amp/Hours.

Requirement Number: 9.f.

Title: Increased Flight Endurance for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (SUAS)

Q107) Is there an official specification for the battery covered by 9.f., Increased Flight

Endurance for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (SUAS)? For example is this battery covered by MIL-PRF-32383 and is there a corresponding “slash sheet” for this specific battery?

If not I request the following information:

1) What is the required cycle life, number of cycles before the battery is considered at the end of life?

2) What is the operating and storage temperature ranges?

3) What is the physical size of the existing battery?

4) What is the shelf-life or shelf-discharge requirements?

A107) Current Air Force SUAS use batteries of different physical sizes and capacities.

Therefore, there is not an official specification for the battery. If a new or optimized battery were included in the proposed SUAS power system, the primary consideration would be how that battery contributes toward enabling the stated goal of 10-hr flight endurance.

Regarding operational and storage environment, the system should be capable of operations in maritime, desert, arctic, urban, mountainous, and jungle environments, in temperatures from -35° to 130° Fahrenheit, 100% humidity.

The evaluation of a proposed power system that includes a battery could consider the metrics identified in the vendor’s question, i.e., cycle life, physical size, and shelf life, even though specific requirements are not specified.

Requirement Number: 9.h.

Title: Anti-Icing for UAS

Q108) Would you consider a polymer coating as an alternative to other anti-icing methods for moderate icing environments?

A108) AFRL SBIR research efforts have looked at a numerous passive coatings (hydrophobic coatings) for Anti-Ice/De-Icing application. The coatings only reduce ice adhesion force and the ice still accretes on the treated surface with the coating; icing tunnel test results show that supercooled water droplets striking chilled leading of the wing airfoil (coating treated surface) freeze on impact and cause ice to build-up. The ice does not shed off from the leading edge with reduced adhesion force, since the aero dynamics forces prevents shedding.

Q109) What is the specific target platform for which solutions should proposed?

A109) Medium Altitude UAS - MQ-9 Predator Reaper

Q110) What is the available power budget; maximum and nominal, for any give solution?

A110) The nominal power budget available is approximately 600 W and the maximum power budget is 800 W. The contractor should try to design their ice protection system to meet 600 W power requirements, if possible.

Q111) What is the weight budget for any given solution set on each target platform?

A111) The target weight for the integrated ice protection system is approximately 88 lbs.

Q112) When the Air Force uses the term "retrofittable" what does this term specifically mean?

A112) Ice protection solution can be integrated into the delivered/fielded MQ-9's.

Q113) Given the limited budget available, what manner of demonstration will be required in order to prove the solution's Technology Readiness Level (TRL)?

A113) There are two options (A or B) available to demonstrate the Technology Readiness Level

(TRL):

Option A: Ground Test - Icing Tunnel Test on a representative production test article

Option B: MQ-9 flight test demonstration in natural icing conditions

**The available budget will determine which option can be executed for the TRL demonstration.

Q114) The system is a wing, tail, or other airframe components such as engine inlet, etc. Will it be sufficient to place these components in a realistic test environment instead of installing the solution on an operational airframe and flying it in various icing conditions in order to prove the solution's TRL 8?

A114) The goal is to integrate and test the ice protection system on an operation platform, but the budget limitation may prevent this type of activity. So, the only remaining option is to test the ice protection system in an icing tunnel. The ice protection system hardware and software should be close to production representative configuration; operational icing environmental conditions shall be simulated to verify icing protection system performance and effectiveness.

13) PEO STRATEGIC SYSTEMS

Requirement Number: 13.a.

Title: EMP Barrier Material

Q115) Would a candidate material of ultra-high-strength aluminum be considered responsive to the requirement, or must it be a composite?

A115) It does not have to be a composite material--ultra-high-strength aluminum will be appropriate. As long as it is light weight and it responds as an appropriate barrier material to EMP.

Requirement Number: 14.a.

Title: Denied Area Technologies

Q116) What are the SWaP-C constraints and targets?

A116) SWAP performance is dependent on the integration requirements of a teaming partner.

Miniaturizing technology is always of interest. Most strategic level systems are much more accurate but more expensive than their tactical counterpart. Getting strategic level performance for the cost and size of their tactical counterpart is the objective of many of our technology development efforts. If your IMUs are very cost effective, another teaming possibility would be with existing production programs as a cost reduction effort or an obsolescence form-fit-function replacement.

Q117) As it pertains to high performance anti-jam, what performance did you have in mind?

What is the allowable SWaP-C?

Q118) IMUs are very effective navigation aids but high performance IMUs are large and expensive. Any limitations of the SWaP-C of the IMU?

A117) & A118) For anti-jam performance, the Air Force is looking at a mandated upgrade to M-code in the next three years. Upgrading the anti-jam capability in conjunction with this would be a cost effective way to insert the technology. An upgrade to an existing form factor without an increase in size or weight would reduce integration cost and possibly prevent or reduce requirements to recertify systems.

Q119) What order of magnitude timing accuracy is desired?

A119) There are no formal requirements, but warfighter expectations are based on what they currently have. At the system level they would want/expect to have GPS-like performance.

If you have a subsystem component, finding a system level sponsor who believes it can contribute to that level of performance in their system is critical. A lesser performance may be acceptable if affordability is a significant factor, which again would be a sponsor judgment.

Q120) Between which data sources is the timing accuracy desired?

A120) Warfighter expectations are typically made at the operational level, i.e. miss distance/CEP. A margin analysis for the end system would be required to determine the specific system specifications. I personally don't have insight into the state of the art, but most strategic level system performance is much better (and more expensive) than tactical level system performance. Another typical goal is to reduce the size and cost of strategic level performance so it is affordable and will fit into tactical systems.

Q121) On what hardware platform should the timing solution run on (e.g. FPGA, single board computer, etc.)?

A121) This is dependent on the identification of an end use item. The government typically doesn't act as the system level integrator. If a program office has a known obsolescence issue, they may seek a form-fit-function replacement. Most successful subsystem/component offerors have partnered with prime contractors with specific end items in mind, which will dictate the form factor, as well as the require specifications.

OSD / Defense Agency RIF Annex

CBD-14-BAA-RIF-0002

Title: Permanent Anti-Fog Coatings for Protective Masks

Q122) Can you cite the “Recent research and development in nanomaterial coatings” which “has shown the potential to address [mask fogging] issues” that is mentioned in the requirement?

A122) Multiple organizations have been pursuing anti-fog capability for lenses. The various approaches are proprietary to the developers. An internet search for anti-fog coatings will identify a multitude of potential products which provide varying degrees of anti-fog capabilities.

Q123) What are the materials used in the lenses to be coated? Are they polyurethanes?

A123) The lenses are polyurethane based. The outserts are polycarbonate based.

Q124) Can you recommend a mask/lens manufacturer that would be good to work with for this

(Avon, Gentex, Scott, or other)?

A124) The Joint Science & Technology Office for Chemical and Biological Defense is unable to recommend a specific manufacturer.