JTT Follow-On_Questions for Industry_29Oct2024_FINAL.docx

CUI

KESSEL RUN (C3C)

JOINT TARGETING TOOLBOX (JTT)

JTT Follow-On Responses to Questions from Industry

Prepared by

AFLCMC/C3C

Version Date: 29 October 2024

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies and their contractors Information Systems Vulnerability Information 29 Oct 2024. Other requests for this document shall be referred to AFLCMC/C3C (DoD Controlling Office), 11 Barksdale Street, Building 1614, Hanscom AFB MA 01731-1700.

HANDLING AND DESTRUCTION NOTICE: Comply with distribution statement and destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Controlled By: AFLCMC/C3CW CUI Category: Controlled Technical Information Dissemination: FEDCON POC: Lauren Cheslofska; lauren.cheslofska@us.af.mil Questions from Industry in response to JTT Follow-On Request for Information (RFI) from 15 Aug to 12 Sep 2024 in black font. The Government’s answers in red.

1. Is RFI looking forward to getting Joint Targeting Toolbox (JTT) 6.x deployed and operational, and then sustaining it?

A: Yes. The RFI is asking industry how potential respondents might fulfill requirements to deploy/field, sustain, and provide new capability for JTT 6.x.

2. Are you looking for additional resources to get it integrated with Workflow Application for Recording Production and Targeting History (WARPATH) or to finish the development using the real Machine-assisted Analytic Rapid-repository System (MARS) Application Programming Interface (API)’s (not the MARS façade)?

A: The integration objectives of this effort include but are not limited to integration of JTT 6.x with MARS modern APIs and WARPATH APIs.

3. Does the Government want to replace BAE Systems (the incumbent) for JTT sustainment or is this to help with a potential sole-source justification?

A: The Government’s intention for this effort is to potentially compete this Follow-On acquisition.

4. Is the Government wanting to make a contract change before the end of the last option year on the existing contract (Jun 2027)?

A: This RFI is only seeking information about a Follow-On acquisition separate from the existing JTT 5.x (JTT-CP – Capabilities Package) contract and following the JTT 6.0 (JTT-R – Re-Architecture) Period of Performance (PoP).

5. Is FA873022C0044 considered the incumbent? Or is there a different contract that this is a follow-on for?

A: Yes, FA873022C0044 is considered the incumbent. This is a Follow-On specifically for the JTT 6.0 (JTT-R) portion of the contract.

6. FA873022C0044 expires in 2027 based on Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS). Are there plans to get a follow-on RFI earlier than this?

A: The Follow-On is for the JTT 6.0 (JTT-R) portion of contract FA873022C0044 which ends in 2025. The Follow-On is anticipated to be awarded by the end of 2025.

7. Will the Contractor need to utilize or adhere to any specific requirements management process?

A: Since JTT uses the Software Acquisition Pathway framework per DoDI 5000.02, the vendor would have to utilize/adhere to a requirements management process using an agile software methodology

8. Will the Government provide space for contractor support and development?

A: No. The contractor will be expected to perform at its own facility. See the DRAFT Performance Work Statement (PWS) section on Place of Performance and Facility Clearance requirements.

9. What is the expected transition period from the incumbent to a new contractor?

Could you provide further details on the government’s preferred transition strategy for JTT 6.x, especially concerning the overlap between the incumbent contractor and the new contractor? Is a phased approach favored over a hard cutoff?

What is the government’s preferred and expected transition strategy? Do they intend to have an overlap between the incumbent and the new vendor? Or a hard cutoff?

What are the anticipated timeline for the transition from the incumbent contractor to the new contractor, and what support will be available during this transition period? Understanding this will help us plan for a smooth handover and continuity of operations.

A: The government intends to have a minimum of 30 days of overlap between a new vendor and the incumbent with a hard cutoff at the end of the incumbent's Period of Performance (PoP), 19 Dec. 2025. The awardee will work with the incumbent during this time to transition the code to the awardee's development environment. The Government will support the awardee with coordination and assistance in filing paperwork to enable appropriate accesses to National Geospatial Intelligence Agency Common Operations Release Environment (NGA CORE), SIPRNet, and JWICS environments, as needed.

10. Given the tight timelines from award to exercises that include JTT 6.0 (within 6 months of award), what is the expectation of support from a new contractor for these exercises?

A: The awardee must be able to scale to support pre-fielding requirements of two (2) theater-level exercises within the first six (6) months of contract award. This includes preparing the inherited JTT 6.0 software deployed to NGA CORE JWICS and SIPRNet environments (deployments include Authentication and Authorization, Software, and Database instances on NGA CORE Dev-Int, STAGING, and Production environments for both SIPRNet and JWICS); and providing 1-2 weeks of JTT 6.x series training by deploying a Mobile Training Team ahead of each exercise. The Contractor must also be ready to support each exercise with 1-2 weeks of engineering presence for live technical support during the exercise with two engineers per exercise.

11. Will there be an opportunity to discuss these deeper matters in-person within a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) setting.

A: There is no need to hold conversations about requirements at anything higher than a Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) level, since all requirements are at the CUI level.

12. What is JTT’s multi-cloud strategy?

A: JTT does not currently have plans for a multi-cloud strategy.

13. How do edge devices (i.e. hybrid cloud service provider hardware) fit into JTT’s service offering a/o Concept of Operations (CONOP)? What impact level is needed?

A: This is irrelevant to the current JTT effort.

14. What specific cross-domain solutions are currently in use or preferred for the JTT 6.x deployment across various security domains and networks? Understanding this will ensure compatibility and streamline integration efforts.

How does JTT currently use NSA ‘Raise the Bar’ (RTB) cross domain solutions? Describe how they are used currently, and which flows are needed (i.e. UàS, SàTS, TSàS, TSàU etc).

A: CDS is irrelevant to JTT as we don't maintain Data. This is handled by MIDB/MARS.

15. How does JTT plan to use NSA RTB cross domain solutions provided by cloud service providers? When does JTT plan to begin using cloud-based cross domain solutions?

A: This is not applicable to the current JTT effort.

16. How is artificial intelligence used today at JTT? When will artificial intelligence be needed at JTT?

A: Artificial Intelligence is not used in JTT today, and the current effort does not plan to incorporate AI.

17. What percentage of JTT’s current offerings are GOTS/COTS hosted on cloud service providers’ infrastructure?

A: This is irrelevant to the current JTT effort.

18. What geospatial modeling tools does JTT need hosted by cloud service providers?

A: Currently, JTT is using NGA CORE and maps supported on that platform.

19. Which networks will JTT use to access the AF C2 Simulation Centers and worldwide? What impact level are these networks?

A: This is not applicable to the current JTT effort.

20. How are DISA-accredited, DAF365-hosted low-code Software as a Service (SaaS) tools used today by JTT? If not in use today, how does JTT see integrating such SaaS into the DevSecOps process?

A: JTT does not use these tools and does not plan to integrate them at this time.

21. How does JTT procure cloud services today? Which contract vehicle(s) does JTT use to purchase cloud services?

A: JTT is mandated to use NGA CORE.

22. In April 2021, the Government released a signed Justification & Approval (J&A) for Other Than Full and Open Competition indicating that the JTT incumbent, BAE, was the only qualified vendor with the capability to support JTT without significant transition impacts and program risk. The J&A highlighted technical debt, the use of outdated technologies, and an expected difficulty in knowledge transition. It is requested that clarification on resolution of these issues, to include any details that can be released regarding progress in achieving the “Modernized JTT” mentioned in the J&A. Such information could help inform industry and offer the Government improved competition for a follow-on JTT contract.

A: The Government intends to select an appropriate acquisition strategy to burn down risks. All options are open to the Government at this time.

23. Are there any specific legacy systems or external applications that JTT 6.x must integrate with, beyond those already mentioned, and what is the anticipated level of complexity for these integrations?

A: There are several applications that use data originated from JTT directly (full integration) and indirectly:

· Full integration: WARPATH, Kessel Run All-Domain Operations Suite (KRADOS), MARS, Joint Fires Network (JFN)

· Through JTT web services: Theater Battle Management Core Systems (TBMCS), Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (T-LAM), Global Command and Control System – Joint (GCCS-J) 6.1, Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS)

24. What are the key security and compliance benchmarks the government expects for JTT 6.x, particularly concerning cross-domain solutions and Denied, Disrupted, Intermittent, and Limited Impact (DDIL) environments? How does the government prioritize these in relation to other program objectives?

A: JTT 6.x will follow the Risk Management Framework process in accordance with National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidance and applicable Intelligence Community Directives. JTT 6.x will also require a software assurance/evaluation certification approving the use of JTT on AF Intelligence Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) systems.

25. How does the government plan to incorporate user feedback into the ongoing development and deployment cycles of JTT 6.x? Will there be regular opportunities for user-driven adjustments?

A: The new JTT 6.0 UI/UX design draws from ongoing user feedback interviews, which the government expects to continue for the follow-on effort (see DRAFT PWS section on User-Centered Design). The awardee for the JTT Follow-On will inherit the current backlog, which includes user-driven deficiency reports and enhancement requests and will be expected to work with the government to prioritize future work and groom the backlog. The government will work with the awardee and the sponsor to establish a repo for collecting new requirements and prioritizing them.

26. Regarding the goal of enterprise scalability across multiple security domains, what challenges has the government identified, and how does it plan to address them? Are there preferred tools or platforms for managing this scalability?

A: The JTT Follow-On awardee will be expected to be able to work in SIPRNet and JWICS environments from its own facility where it will execute performance for this effort. The user base also includes JTT instances in unique deployment environments, such as Combined Enterprise Regional Information Exchange System-Korea (CENTRIXS-K), Five-Eye (FVEY), STONEGHOST, and Foreign Militaty Sales (FMS) cases, among others. The awardee will be expected to scale to provide software installation support and ongoing technical and engineering support to instances in these types of environments, as directed by the government.

Currently, JTT faces the challenge of a broken Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) pipeline from UNCLASS Impact Level (IL) IL-5 up to IL-6 and IL-7, requiring UNCLASS IL-5 development to be happening on the incumbent's development environment with deployment occurring on NGA CORE IL-6 and IL-7. This challenge with NGA CORE not currently possessing an IL-5-accredited domain requires that the awardee will need an IL-5 equivalent development environment in which to inherit the existing source code and then manage the risks of pushing to NGA CORE without automation until NGA CORE provisions an IL-5 development environment.

27. What is the expected ratio of in-person versus remote training sessions, and how does the government foresee managing the logistics of training and fielding support across CONUS and OCONUS locations?

Can the Government provide more details on the expected frequency and duration of remote-based and in-person training sessions at both CONUS and OCONUS locations?

A: The anticipated training requirement is to staff a total of three (3) personnel to provide up to 24 training sessions per year at the Contractor's facility, at user locations (CONUS and OCONUS), or virtually. This includes one (1) trainer, based out of the Contractor’s facility, to provide general user and JTT system administration training. The anticipated requirement also includes two (2) mobile trainers to provide site-specific training at user sites. The Government anticipates 12 annual trips for the Mobile Training Team: six (6) CONUS and six (6) OCONUS.

28. Can you clarify the expectations around the helpdesk support, especially regarding the frequency and type of on-site support required at OCONUS locations? What metrics will be used to assess the effectiveness of this support?

A: The JTT Follow-On holds a 24/7/365 Help Desk staffing requirement with availability on NIPRNet, SIPRNet, and JWICS to support a diverse and global user base across time zones and security domains.

29. What emerging user needs or potential future requirements does the government anticipate for JTT 6.x? How flexible does the government expect the contractor to be in responding to these evolving needs?

A: Some potential future capabilities in the Follow-On include Space Targeting, Multi-domain Targeting (including weaponeering to diverse solutions with various effects), and Dynamic Targeting solutions. This list is only a sample and not exhaustive. The government will work with the sponsor to identify and prioritize emerging requirements as they arise and then work with the awardee to implement development plans using agile methodologies.

30. How does the government plan to structure incentives within the contract to ensure the continuous delivery of high-quality, mission-critical software? Are there particular performance metrics that will be tied to these incentives?

What key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics will the Government use to evaluate the success of the JTT 6.x deployment and ongoing support? Knowing these will help us align our performance management processes.

A: Information Sought: The Government is specifically requesting feedback for the JTT Follow-On solicitation, including but is not limited to: additional requirement clarification; additional bidders library content; recommended changes to the PWS, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure, Instructions to Offerors, Evaluation Factors, or Incentives.

31. Could the Government clarify the scope and extent of support required for denied, degraded, intermittent, or limited (DDIL) environments? This will help us tailor our solutions to meet these operational challenges.

A: Some JTT users will be in an offline/disconnected environment, so they need to run with a local copy of the MIDB.

32. Can the Government provide more information on the existing DevSecOps platform and any specific tools or technologies currently in use or preferred? This will assist us in ensuring seamless onboarding and integration.

Which government-furnished DevSecOps platform does the Government intend on using for this effort?

A: Expected to have DevSecOps on NGA CORE, unless otherwise directed. NGA CORE is currently not accredited for IL-5. Consequently, JTT faces the challenge of a broken CI/CD pipeline from UNCLASS IL-5 up to IL-6 and IL-7, requiring UNCLASS IL-5 development to be happening on the incumbent's development environment with deployment occurring on NGA CORE IL-6 and IL-7. This challenge requires that the awardee will need an IL-5-equivalent development environment in which to inherit the existing source code. The awardee will need to manage the risks of pushing to NGA CORE without automation until NGA CORE provisions an IL-5 development environment. JTT requires IL-5 because it is a National Security System (NSS) and is regulated by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).

33. Are there any specific risks or challenges the Government has identified in the current JTT 5.x system that should be addressed in the JTT 6.x modernization effort?

A: Specific known risks surround the cutover from JTT 5.x to JTT 6.x. JTT 5.x relies on connection to a unique database (Joint Targeting Database - JTDB) that will be deprecated when MIDB cuts over to MARS via GMI. If JTT 6.x does not include a technical solution to cutover needed JTDB data into GMI, there will be data loss for JTT 6.x and other targeting enterprise applications calling GMI exclusively with no replication from JTDB into the backend database. There is a further risk that dual operations between JTT 5.x and JTT 6.x running concurrently will result in data-duplication and the need for data deconfliction because of dual replication.

CUI

image1.jpeg