Attachment 2 - CFS_Sizing Technology Pilot_QandA 101626.pdf

Question No. Question Government Answer

1 Which pilot sites or accession pipelines should the total estimated out-the-door pilot price assume?

The Government has not prescribed specific pilot sites for the Phase 1 Solution Brief. As stated in Section 6.1.1(c), offerors should propose a solution that solves the capability gap/problem across both centralized on-site and remote accessions and may base their estimated price on their own clearly stated assumptions.

2 How many Soldiers and Cadets should the pilot price assume will be measured across all pilot sites?

The Government has not prescribed specific quantities or participant volumes for the Phase 1 Solution Brief. Offerors should propose a pilot scope, including the number of participants, that they believe is sufficient to validate the capabilities of their proposed solution. All assumptions must be clearly identified.

3 What pilot period of performance should the out-the-door price assume?

Per Section 6.1.1(c)(vii), offerors shall provide a proposed project schedule. The Government has not mandated a specific period of performance for the pilot demonstration. Offerors should propose a timeline based on their technical approach and state any assumptions.

4 Should the pilot price include capture hardware delivered to and retained by the Government at the end of the pilot?

No. The pilot is an acquisition of commercial demonstration services.

The price should assume the offeror provides all necessary hardware for pilot execution and retains ownership of it upon completion.

5 Will the pilot capture measurements from actual Soldiers and Cadets, or only test data, within the isolated test network?

The specific details regarding pilot participants and data types will be defined in subsequent phases with selected offerors. For the Phase 1 Solution Brief, offerors should state their assumptions regarding the personnel to be measured.

6 Will the Government furnish the isolated test network environment in which the pilot is executed?

Details on the pilot environment will be provided in subsequent phases. Per Section 3, offerors should note that "Pilot execution will be conducted in an isolated, test/dummy network environment" and propose a solution that can operate accordingly.

Section 3 names Vantage feeding SEAM, while Section 6.1.1 names Army Vantage / ISM. Which system must the pilot export measurement and size records into directly?

The correct system is Soldier Equipping and Asset Management (SEAM), as stated in Section 3. The reference to "ISM" in Section

6.1.1 is a clerical error and has been updated. Solutions must be capable of integrating with Army Vantage to subsequently feed the SEAM system.

8 Will the Government furnish the Vantage interface specification and a test endpoint for use during the pilot?

Detailed Government technical specifications for Army enterprise systems will be provided only to selected offerors invited to participate in subsequent phases.

Does vendor-generated technical or derived data include the offeror's measurement-to-size mapping algorithms, or only data derived from Soldier and Cadet scans?

Per Section 3, the Government will retain exclusive ownership of "all Soldier and Cadet sizing data as well as any vendor-generated technical or derived data." The Government is not seeking ownership of an offeror's proprietary background IP. The final delineation of data rights will be subject to negotiation should an offeror be selected for a pilot award.

Section 8 describes an NDA with SMX Technologies and LMI as an opportunity, then states companies shall provide signed NDAs. Is a signed NDA required for a compliant submission?

No, a signed NDA with the non-Government advisors is not mandatory for a compliant submission. Per Section 8, offerors have the opportunity to enter into such an agreement for their own purposes. If an offeror elects to do so, a copy of the executed NDA must be included with their submission.

Will the Government provide, for the pilot, the current tariff or size tabulations and any fit guidance for the uniform and footwear items in scope, so offerors can build the measurement-to-size mapping against the Army's official sizes? Which items are in scope for the pilot (for example, OCP coat and trousers, AGSU, and combat boots)?

Information regarding specific uniform items and Government-furnished sizing data will be provided to selected offerors in subsequent phases. For the Phase 1 Solution Brief, offerors should describe their methodology for ingesting and utilizing such data and state any assumptions made regarding uniform types.

What is the Government's preferred interface for delivering Soldier-level measurement and size records into Vantage during the pilot (for example, a scheduled dataset upload, a secure file transfer, or an API), and is there an existing data schema or Soldier identifier that records should conform to?

See answer to Question #8.

Can the Government share the anticipated pilot locations (MEPS, IET reception, West Point, ROTC host institutions) and the expected number of Soldiers or Cadets per day at on-site locations, so offerors can size the number of capture stations?

See answers to Question #1 and Question #2.

For the remote self-assessment mode, will Cadets and

Soldiers use personally owned smartphones, Government-furnished devices, or both during the pilot?

The specific device model (e.g., personally owned vs. GFE vs. vendor-provided) for any potential pilot demonstration will be determined in subsequent phases. For the Phase 1 Solution Brief, offerors should describe their recommended approach and identify how it meets the requirements of Section 3.

Will the Government provide or designate trained measurers to take reference measurements during the pilot for accuracy validation, or should offerors include this in their pilot price?

The specific methodologies and resources for validating the accuracy of the proposed solution will be defined in subsequent phases with selected offerors. Offerors should describe their own recommended methodology for validating system accuracy in their Solution Brief and state any assumptions.

16 Should offerors propose the isolated test network and hosting for the pilot, or will the Government furnish the environment? See answer to Question #6.

Can the Government share the approximate number of

Soldiers and Cadets to be measured, the number of sites, and the expected pilot duration?

See answers to Question #1, #2, and #3.

Which uniform items and footwear are in scope for size recommendation (e.g., AGSU, OCP/IHWCU, APFU, Army combat boot)? Will the Government provide the current size charts or size tables for the pilot?

See answer to Question #11.

Is a smartphone- or tablet-based capture solution acceptable, or does the Government prefer a fixed booth or scanner at accession points?

Per Section 3 Hardware Agility & Openness, the Government is not prescribing a specific hardware form-factor. Offerors should propose the solution they deem best suited to meet the requirements for both On-Site High-Throughput and Remote Self-Assessment operational modes.

What hosting and authorization requirements are expected for the pilot (e.g., DoD Cloud SRG impact level, on-premises or offline operation, handling of PII and images)?

Per Section 3 Security & Compliance, pilot execution will occur in an "isolated, test/dummy network environment." The CFS also requires solutions to demonstrate a viable pathway to a full-scale enterprise deployment at Impact Level 5 (IL5). Offerors should describe their proposed pilot environment and cybersecurity approach in their Solution Brief.

21 What is the anticipated pilot scale (number of sites and Soldiers) and duration? See answers to Question #1, #2, and #3.

Will the Government provide a reference measurement method (e.g., trained measurers using ANSUR II definitions) for accuracy validation, or should offerors propose one?

See answer to Question #15.

Section 2 of the HQDA-G-4_26_01 call for solutions says that, “…the Army is seeking a commercial solution…” does this imply that the product shall be ready to pilot on day one of the award or will the Government consider an existing product that needs to be modified with funding from the Government via this call to meet all of the required solution attributes in section 3 and can be piloted with 6 months of award?

As stated in Section 6.1.1(c)(viii), offerors should identify whether their proposed solution includes an existing commercial technology or requires adaptation. The Government will evaluate the feasibility and achievability of the offeror's proposed schedule and maturity path. A solution does not need to be ready to pilot on day one, but the proposed timeline will be considered as part of the evaluation.

Section 3 required attributes of the HQDA-G-4_26_01 call for solutions says that, “Must produce accurate measurements across the complete spectrum of body types, statures, and physical compositions represented in the Army accession and training population.” Are there resolution and accuracy metrics such as resolution of X millimeters and +/- Y millimeters or the resolution and accuracy is only needed to bin the Soldier-level measurements into a predetermined uniform size such as small, medium, and large?

The Government has not prescribed specific technical metrics for measurement resolution or accuracy. The core requirement, as stated in Section 3, is that the solution must "produce accurate measurements" sufficient to determine the correct standard Army uniform and footwear size. Offerors should describe their system's accuracy and how it achieves this outcome.

Section 3 desired attributes of the HQDA-G-4_26_01 call for solutions states that, “Demonstrated prior experience deploying body scanning or measurement technology at organizational scale (e.g., commercial workwear, uniform systems, or other comparable large-scale programs) with proven quantifiable accuracy rates and user-adoption results.”

Would experience deploying scanning and measurement technology at organizational scale for other applications but not directly for bodies be considered favorable prior experience?

The Government will evaluate all submitted information. Offerors should clearly articulate how any cited experience is relevant to meeting the requirements of this Call for Solutions.

Section 3 desired attributes of the HQDA-G-4_26_01 call for solutions states that, “…or the mapping of additional tactical uniform and/or equipment types over time.” Is the Government open to solutions that are higher resolution and accuracy to size custom fit equipment than current commercial solutions that may depend on template-based body models for sizing?

The focus of this Call for Solutions is on translating measurements into recommended standard Army uniform and footwear sizes, as stated in Section 3. While the Government is interested in innovative and scalable solutions, the primary objective is to address the current capability gap related to standard-issue items.

Section 5 of the HQDA-G-4_26_01 call for solutions states that,” The Government anticipates awarding up to approximately three (3) small pilot contracts to validate operational fit and accuracy prior to any potential follow-on enterprise contract award.” Can the Government provide a range or upper limit to the total funding for all awards or anticipated amount per award?

No. The Government has not established a funding limit for the Phase 3 pilot awards. Offerors should propose a total estimated out-the-door price that corresponds to their proposed Pilot Execution Plan.

Has the Government defined accuracy, correct-fit, and processing-time targets for the pilot, or should we propose those targets and a validation method in our Solution Brief?

See answer to Question #15 and #24. The specific objective metrics for any potential pilot will be defined in subsequent phases. For the

Phase 1 Solution Brief, offerors should propose their system's capabilities and their recommended approach to validating performance.

Section 3 refers to Army Vantage and SEAM, while Section 6.1.1(c)(v) refers to Vantage and ISM. Which systems must the solution connect to during the pilot?

See answer to Question #7.

What geographic restrictions apply to the storage and processing of data during the isolated pilot, including any cloud-hosted components?

Any proposed solution must comply with all applicable DoD and Army regulations regarding data sovereignty and the geographic storage and processing of data, particularly as it relates to achieving an Impact Level 5 (IL5) authorization for the enterprise solution.

What cloud services, if any, may be used within the isolated pilot environment? What security authorizations are required before pilot testing, and which authorization activities will the

Government support?

See answer to Question #20. The specific security requirements and allowable environments for any potential pilot will be determined in subsequent phases with selected offerors.

What information or demonstrations should we provide to show that our solution can support different capture devices and future commercially available hardware?

Offerors should address the Hardware Agility & Openness requirement from Section 3 in their solution brief, describing their system's architecture, use of open standards, and their strategy for supporting new COTS devices over time.

To ensure our IP statement addresses the requirement correctly, please clarify the distinction between “vendor-generated technical or derived data” under Section 3 and background IP and commercial licence terms under Section

6.1.1(e).

See answer to Question #9.

What marking and submission procedures should we follow to protect proprietary architecture diagrams, data flows, and other technical information provided for evaluation, including information shared with non-Government advisers?

Offerors are responsible for appropriately marking any proprietary information included in their submission in accordance with standard industry practice. The Government will protect all submitted information to the extent permitted by law.

There was a mid-September solicitation (https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/ba93080c30c3430a 93a2c3f7bde7038f/view) from ACC for 3D Scanners for Boot Fitting. Should it be expected that our proposed solution will utilize those scanners?

This Call for Solutions is a separate, independent effort. There is no requirement or expectation that proposed solutions will utilize hardware from any other Government solicitation.

What quantitative performance thresholds and validation methodology will the Government use to evaluate measurement accuracy and recommended uniform and footwear sizing during the pilot? Will separate acceptance criteria be established for body measurements, foot measurements, and final size recommendations?

See answer to Question #15 and #24.

Will the Government accept body scanning solutions that require Soldiers and Cadets to wear form-fitting clothing, such as undergarments, to achieve the required measurement accuracy, or must the solution be capable of accurately capturing measurements in standard-issue clothing?

Offerors should propose the solution they deem most effective for achieving accurate measurements while considering the operational realities of the intended environments. The proposed process, including any clothing requirements, will be evaluated as part of the overall solution's feasibility and usability.

Does the Government have a targeted cloud hosting environment for this solution (cArmy, G-4 cloud environment, etc)?

See answer to Question #20 and #30. For the enterprise solution, any cloud environment must be capable of meeting DoD SRG Impact Level 5. The Government does not have a pre-selected hosting environment for this pilot.

39 Will the height of the person to be measured be an available parameter for our solution as required input?

Per the Comprehensive Scanning and Environmental Resilience attribute in Section 3, the proposed solution must use "automated, digital, non-contact methods that eliminate manual measurements."

The Government's objective is a fully automated process. Therefore, solutions should be capable of determining all necessary body parameters, including height, without requiring manual data entry as part of the measurement process.

Does the requirement for sam.gov registration / CAGE code only apply to prime Offerors/vendors? We seek confirmation that prime Offerors/vendors with sam.gov registration can partner with small companies that do not have a sam.gov /

CAGE code.

Per FAR 52.204-7, the prime offeror who will receive any potential contract award must have an active registration in the System for

Award Management (SAM) prior to submitting an offer or proposal.

The Government does not have a privity of contract with subcontractors. The responsibility for ensuring subcontractor compliance with any applicable regulations rests with the prime contractor.

41 Given AUSA activities this week, will the Army consider an extension of Phase 1 submission due date to Friday 10/23?

Yes. In response to industry feedback, the Government is extending the due date for Solution Briefs. The submission deadline is hereby extended from 20 October 2026 at 10:00 AM ET to 23 October 2026 at 10:00 AM ET.

CFS Q&As