JandA-CyberVAN Redacted.pdf

All of the integration and interface work has been performed under the AR&EP contract. To allow a lapse in support without allowing the PEO and Peraton to complete their code transfer would cause unacceptable delays and perhaps even completely dismantle the technical, administrative, and legal work that has been performed and is still underway.

While complementary, it is important to note that there is no significant overlap between ARL’s AR&EP requirements and that of other contracts. For example, is used by C5ISR as both an R&D tool and delivery mechanism for other development not related to the AR&EP contract. personnel also keep ARL researchers informed of other contracts, so the FCDD-RLA-ND Computer Scientist and COR have a firm grasp on how the testbed is being leveraged throughout the Government. is the product of over 10 years of R&D and has become a vital tool not only for ARL, but also for its partners.

Government researchers were actively involved during the development of the testbed under the AR&EP contract, through which it obtained insights into the time and resources needed to take on tasks related to testbed development, maintenance, and other associated services. Based on the Government’s 10-year oversight of requirements, it is estimated that the Government would experience an 18-to-24 month lapse in service (an unacceptable delay) while another vendor attempted to scale the learning curve required to be proficient with the testbed as well as acquire the specialized workforce to provide research and experimentation support. Specific effects of this unacceptable delay are described below.

The ramp-up period, a time during which new developers familiarize themselves with a product/system and build proficiency to the point of being able to handle tasks without support, is often several months in the best of cases. The maturity and complexity of are compounding factors. In addition to s technical intricacies, a new developer would also have to develop a fundamental understanding of DoD cyber research and use cases. This is all with no guarantee of success.

Programmatically, the delay would have a snowballing effect on research and projects that depend on While varying in terms of research impact, a lapse in services would cause significant schedule disruptions across all current projects and experiments, curtailing cyber R&D efforts within ARL and its mission partners. Lengthy delays like the estimated ramp-up period would result in, at a minimum, the delayed completion of ongoing projects and experiments and their respective deliverables, and possibly even result in cancellation. In addition, several planned projects and experiments are contingent upon future testbed improvements. As a result, some planned projects and experiments may be indefinitely postponed until these capabilities are made available to the Government, by which time the research may no longer be relevant or the programmatic risk too great to continue due to missing or unfinished prerequisite research and experimentation. This will ultimately result in a significant reduction in the probability of achieving windows of superiority via cyberspace, putting future soldiers at risk due to lack of necessary cyberspace capabilities.

Failing to award to would have the following impact to mission requirements:

Impact: Internal and collaborative experiment and research support utilizing would cease, causing unacceptable delays for planned research and demonstration deliverables.

Explanation: is currently responsible for maintaining and correcting faults when issues arise. As noted above, another contractor would not be able to seamlessly support Until the contractor attains proficiency, the Government will become increasingly subject to research disruptions over time. During the proficiency ramp-up, another contractor would also take more time to rectify issues and, depending on the severity, may not even be able to do so.

Impact: Planned testbed functionality enhancements would be cancelled, causing unacceptable delays for planned research and demonstration deliverables.

Explanation: Given the pace of innovation in the cyber domain, should the Government be required to use the current version of without any enhancements or updates going forward while a new contractor attains proficiency, it would quickly fall behind the State-of-the-Art. The snowballing effect described above would be mirrored here, further compounding the reduction in the probability of achieving windows of superiority via cyberspace.

The following are specific examples of anticipated continued and future developments that have stemmed from ARL researcher feedback, intramural and extramural collaborations, and observation of changes in adversarial capabilities which would be in jeopardy:

1) Hosting in Cloud-based Computing Environments

2) Red Team (attacker) models, scenarios, and tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs)

3) Adversarial Machine Learning (AML) model validation and verification

4) Data set generation and simulated waveform implementation not publicly available (e.g., radio & cellular comms)

5) Information Environment

6) Human and Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) capability additions and enhancements

Impact: Any extramural research or effort hinging on the use of would suffer unacceptable delays while the new contractor becomes proficient in the testbed. This would damage ARL’s reputation with external partners, possibly preventing future research relationships.

Explanation: Partners like Soldier Center, the Army Cyber Institute, Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), and others currently rely on experimentation and research support for ongoing research programs. A break in continuity would disrupt said programs and research, as well as degrade ARL’s relationship with each partner.

Based on the aforementioned, Peraton is the sole vendor capable of meeting the Government’s minimum requirements for research and development in the testbed.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The contracting office published a combined Request for Information (RFI) and sources sought synopsis to SAM.gov on 12 June 2024 under Synopsis Notice number W911QX-24-R-0015 as required by FAR 5.201, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 205.205-71, and DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 206.302-1(d) in an effort to gain competition. This synopsis, notifying the public that any capability statement, proposal, or quotation will be considered, closed on 05 July 2024, and one (1) response was received. However, this vendor did not provide a capability statement, and the Government was unable to adequately assess their capability. A second combined RFI and sources sought synopsis was posted on 18 October 2024 and closed on 08 November 2024. No responses were received against the synopsis.

a. Effective competition: Neither limited nor full and open competition is expected for this specific action based on the extensive market research conducted. Market Research did not identify a source in the marketplace that satisfies the Government requirements.

b. Subcontracting competition: The contractor will be required to provide a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.702(a). This will promote competition and ensure that small business concerns will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with its efficient performance. All the required clauses for subcontracting, such as FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.244-5, Competition in Subcontracting will be included in the solicitation and contract to enable competition through subcontracting opportunities.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The Government will continue to survey the marketplace to increase competition by attending conferences and exhibitions and conducting searches on the internet. The Government will further continue to interact with other Government researchers through open discussions with industry experts.

By utilizing an IDIQ-type contract, the Government has flexibility to create or stop additional task orders at discretion. Should an alternative source become available, the Government has the capacity to change requirements with a different source under a new contract. The use of an IDIQ-type contract provides for quick responses and streamlined procurement methods which allows greater access to increase competition if necessary.

8. Market Research: Market research and evaluation for this effort was conducted between June 2022 and February 2024 by the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC). The TPOC’s efforts included contacting knowledgeable SMEs within ARL itself, reviewing the market research findings from previous or similar contracts as well as from industry, and searching the internet and GSA companies for those with cyber range testbeds. The market research suggests that no other vendor other than and no other testbed other than can meet the requirements of this effort.

The SMEs that were consulted include an Electronics Technician (Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) for the AR&EP contract), Branch Chief for the Network Security Branch, and the Network Security Branch Division Chief. All the aforementioned SMEs were heavily involved in the CRA, have extensive knowledge of capabilities, and have kept abreast of developments in the space. The SMEs are aware of no other solutions that provide the same experimentation and validation capabilities as the testbed.

To obtain competition, the following websites were used to search for potential sources:

UNICOR, AbilityOne, Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software and Solutions (CHESS), One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS), and General Services Administration (GSA). These included discussions held with knowledgeable individuals that are SMEs within Government and industry to review other similar testbeds in various catalogs and other generally available product literature published by other manufacturers, distributors, and dealers available on-line. Despite these actions, the Government was unable to identify any other sources with the required capabilities to enable the utilization of competition for this effort.

AN RFI was posted to SAM.gov on 12 June 2024 for 23 days and only one (1) vendor, responded to the posting stating they were interested in the requirement and that they would send over a capability statement before the closing date. However, the vendor did not provide a capability statement, so the Government was unable to assess their capabilities. A second synopsis was posted on 18 October 2024 and closed on 08 November 2024. No responses were received against the synopsis.

9. Interested Sources:

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History

i. Contract: W911NF-14-D-0006

ii. Contractor: TT Government Solutions dBa Applied Communications Sciences/

Peraton Labs, Inc.

iii. Award Date: 26 September 2014