ePS_RFP_Attach_03_Capability_Requirements_Document_20170214.pdf

For Official Use Only

CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT (CRD)

FOR

ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT SYSTEM (ePS)

Pre-ACAT IAM

Validation Authority: OPNAV N41

Approval Authority: DASN AP & PDASN FM&C

Milestone Decision Authority: USD AT&L

Designation: Independent

Prepared for RFP Decision Acquisition Entry

UNCLASSIFIED

Version 1.0

Date: 5 November 2015

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

UNCLASSIFIED

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only iv

A. REVISION HISTORY

VERSION DATE CHANGE PURPOSE

RESPONSIBLE

INDIVIDUAL

1.0 5 November

Baseline V1.0

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only v

B. TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. VII

1 CAPABILITY DISCUSSION

2 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES (AOA) SUMMARY

3 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS SUMMARY

4 THREAT SUMMARY

5 PROGRAM SUMMARY

6 REQUIRED SYSTEM CAPABILITIES

7 FAMILY OF SYSTEMS AND SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS SYNCHRONIZATION

8 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND NATIONAL SECURTY SYSTEM (IT AND NSS) SUPPORTABILITY

9 INTELLIGENCE SUPPORTABILITY

10 E3 AND SPECTRUM SUPPORTABILITY

11 ASSETS REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE INITIAL OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY (IOC)

12 IOC/FOC DEFINITIONS

13 OTHER DOTMLPF CONSIDERATIONS

14 OTHER SYSTEM ATTRIBUTES

15 PROGRAM AFFORDABILITY

APPENDIX A. INTEGRATED ARCHITECTURE VIEWS AND PRODUCTS

APPENDIX B. REFERENCES

APPENDIX C. ACRONYM LIST

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only vi

C. LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. PROCURE-TO-PAY PROCESS

FIGURE 2. EPS HIGH-LEVEL OPERATIONAL CONCEPT GRAPHIC - OPERATIONAL VIEWPOINT (OV-1)

FIGURE 3. DISTRIBUTION OF EPS BUYERS BY LOCATION AND POPULATION

FIGURE 4. EPS PROJECT TIMELINE (PV2)

FIGURE 5. LEGACY SYSTEM MIGRATION (NOTIONAL)

FIGURE 6. FUNCTIONAL AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES

FIGURE 7. CONCEPTUAL “TO BE” DICE

FIGURE 8. ENTERPRISE SERVICES AND SYSTEMS INTEGRATION (SV-1)

FIGURE 9. GSA SAM PHASED DEVELOPMENT

FIGURE 10. DON FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM INTERFACES (PLANNED)

D. LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE MEASURES (SV-7)

TABLE 2. CROSSWALK OF CWS FUNCTIONS TO ENTERPRISE SERVICES

TABLE 3. QOS REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

TABLE 4. OTHER SYSTEM ATTRIBUTES

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document establishes the Department of the Navy (DON) operational requirement for an Electronic Procurement System (ePS) capability. It includes System Performance Measures, with thresholds and objectives, defining key system parameters that must be met in order for the ePS to meet its operational goals.

It also defines the criteria to achieve Initial and Full Operational Capability (IOC and FOC).

In October 2011 and September 2014, Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) declared the sunset of its mandated Standard Procurement System (SPS), set a timeline to cease its operations, and further, directed each Service Component to plan and budget for future contracting capabilities. Rather than specifying a specific solution that may not be usable in all environments, DON has mandated common output formats, data sources, and internal controls that any contract writing system (CWS) must meet. Because the ePS program will be DON-specific, and there are no joint requirements, it continues to be a non-Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) interest program and is not subject to JROC oversight.

The need for the ePS is driven by DON’s intent to solve the immediate problem posed by sunsetting the SPS as well as the DON’s larger need for a true “end-to-end” contracting system in keeping with the resiliency of modern provisioning of IT services, moving away from rigid, legacy systems.

The DON’s vision for the ePS is driven by three basic principles. The first principle is a renewed commitment to a future Program based on the DON’s CWS requirements. The second principle is adherence to business principles codified in Federal and DON Information Technology (IT) acquisition processes. The final driving principle is capitalization on IT trends and a push to exploit them when practical.

The ePS Program will provide the DON with standardized, seamless, end-to-end contract management (i.e.

sourcing) of services, supplies, and construction. The ePS will also support mission-related assistance through the use of assistance agreements such as grants. The ePS will deliver the following functional/technical capabilities:

Provide robust functional capabilities to support the end-to-end Procure-to-Pay (P2P) process Capture data at the source (i.e., no redundant data entry via touch labor) Leverage a data-centric and standard-compliant design for data storage and exchanges Enforce business process controls and system controls to support a clean audit opinion Inform decision making through available, accurate, timely, and visible reporting Comply with DON-specific architecture and environmental constraints (e.g., Navy/Marine Corps

Internet (NMCI)/ Next Generation Enterprise Network (NGEN)) Deliver a flexible solution that allows changes to be made promptly and cost-effectively Support 100% of the DON contracting actions in a fully auditable and traceable environment Provide a secure computing environment that implements critical security controls and capabilities

The ePS provides the potential for the Navy and Marine Corps to develop a true end-to-end electronic procurement system capable of processing contract requirements from inception to closeout in a fully electronic and data-centric fashion. The ePS will serve as system of record for the full electronic contract file. The system will have the flexibility to interface with other electronic systems as needed to meet the needs of all stakeholders, and as defined in statutes, regulations, and approved business practices. Data captured through system automation and distributed through interface transactions are critical elements in supporting the DON’s Financial Improvement Program (FIP) and in enabling DON’s vision of clean financial statements.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only viii

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 1

1 CAPABILITY DISCUSSION

The Department of the Navy (DON) requires an ePS capability to provide a fully electronic and data-centric contracting system for the DON procurement community.

In October of 2011, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD AT&L) set the initial goal that no new contracts, agreements, or orders be awarded through SPS after September 30, 2015, and that all use of SPS cease by September 30, 2017.

In September of 2014, USD (AT&L) issued a revised memo that updated the Department of Defense (DoD) goal to sunset SPS such that no new contracts, agreements, or orders be awarded through SPS after September 30, 2018. It is expected that the use of SPS for contracts issued prior to September 30, 2018 will continue until September 30, 2020. The memo further directed each Component to plan and budget for future contracting capabilities.

The Investment Review Board (IRB) approved the ePS Problem Statement in February 2015. This Capability Requirements Document (CRD) is the first acquisition entry milestone capabilities document for the Program.

1.1 Problem Statement

Due to current events, the DON now requires a comprehensive electronic contract writing capability, able to meet DON contract writing requirements, which include: effective deal initiation, management, termination, close out, and auditability across the full spectrum of Navy and Marine Corps contracting environments.

This capability is required because in October 2011 OSD declared the FY17 sunset of its mandated SPS. SPS had been the DON's primary contract writing system and contracting data exchanger. While initially used for simplified acquisitions during the 90's, when Navy ERP rolled out, SPS found itself the only authorized system for ERP interface regarding contracts. Thus, today the majority of DON contracts and modifications are SPS issued (over 75%). However, as SPS was never intended for complex major contracts it started crashing under load during processing of major deals. Also, in 2013 Congress passed an NDAA directing DoD write all contracts electronically by 2018. Therefore, either due to sunset or to technical failure, when SPS goes, DON will not have what is now a legally required electronic contract writing capability across the Enterprise, and as such, a new ePS program is needed in order that projected capability shortfalls are satisfactorily filled. The ePS's scope is defined as covering contracting functional requirements end-to-end, meaning it includes derivative ancillary requirements such as incorporation of modern and secure technical architecture, alignment of contracting business processes and data, compliance with DoD and Federal initiatives, including audit readiness, and the supply of business intelligence so better business deals can be written. The result of a successful ePS implementation will be a contracting process workforce well informed and completely empowered to writing accurate and timely contracts in support of the warfighter, including management of the data flows into and out of the deal making space.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 2

1.2 Program Capabilities

The ePS will provide an electronic contracting system for the Department of the Navy’s procurement community. The system will support the P2P process in alignment with the DoD Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA) per the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO). The standard P2P process encompasses all business functions necessary to obtain goods and services and is illustrated within Figure 1.

While the end-to-end P2P process will be supported by multiple solutions within the DON, The ePS will primarily support the contracting activities (blue) while maintaining data visibility into the logistics and financial functions (red).

Figure 1. Procure-to-Pay Process

The Operational Viewpoint (OV-1) graphic, Figure 2, depicts how the ePS aligns with the BEA business domains.

Requirements are generated by end users and are managed and coordinated by the DON business domains.

The DON contracting domain will use the ePS to satisfy sourcing requirements and to share information with industry, federal and other government entities, financial assistance recipients, international partners, and Non- Government Organizations (NGOs). Through those sources, the DON Acquisition domain will be able to deliver supplies, services, construction, and grants and other assistance agreements that meet the sourcing capabilities the end users need to successfully execute the full range of military operations.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 3

Figure 2. ePS High-Level Operational Concept Graphic - Operational Viewpoint (OV-1)

1.3 Capability Gaps

The development of multiple applications used by Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) commands, small-scale relational databases, spreadsheets, and other various tools utilized across the DON contracting domain are a testament to the fact that capability gaps are an ongoing issue with legacy DON contract writing systems. The ePS will provide capabilities intended to close the gaps identified below.

System Agility to Adapt to Policy Changes 1.3.1

The current contract writing system (CWS) environment lacks the flexibility and adaptability to rapidly incorporate policy changes, such as Congressional mandates, updates published to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), Navy Marine Corps Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NMCARS), or other governing regulation or policy.

The ePS must be capable of being rapidly configured in order to respond to changes in procurement policy driven by emerging or contingency needs of the DON. The system will ensure correctness and completeness of data across the acquisition lifecycle (e.g., Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN) structures) for the entire DON procurement community, enabling enterprise-wide consistency with evolving policy and mandates.

Interaction Across Functional Domains 1.3.2

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 4

Data is not effectively exchanged across the multiple systems in the Business and Financial community, resulting in a lack of authoritative information across the P2P process. The DON requires a system that will certify funding data and obligation data, exchange requirements between contracting activity and requiring activity, enable legal review, coordinate with Small Business offices, and engage with vendors.

The ePS will provide an integrated system to allow effective exchange of authoritative information across the procurement environment. It will provide the enterprise with the capability to generate, send, and receive certified funding data and generate obligation data.

Oversight/Management Capability 1.3.3

There is a lack of visibility of procurement data to support efficient contract administration, contract management, data reporting, and data analysis.

The ePS will provide integrated procurement management, contract file records management, data reporting and analytical capability.

Auditability 1.3.4

The DON’s business systems must support the Department's ability to produce auditable financial statements in accordance with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA), resulting in clean audit opinions. The DON's audit readiness posture is hampered because controls and data standards are not consistently implemented across multiple legacy procurement systems.

The ePS will provide a single enterprise contract writing and management system that is compliant with FFMIA and integrate with existing Financial Management Information Systems/General Ledger Systems. The ePS will provide consistently-applied business process controls, system controls, and business rules in order to foster auditability.

Complex Contracting 1.3.5

Due to shortcomings of legacy CWSs, some contracting officers (KOs) have resorted to the use of small-scale relational databases, spreadsheets, and other various tools to accommodate contracting actions with multiple concurrent contract modifications and complex contract line item structures. This has especially been a problem for complex shipbuilding, conversion and repair contracting, and international military base construction contracting.

The ePS will provide integrated capability and flexibility to meet the needs of complex contracting.

1.4 Capability Redundancies

The ePS will provide a single integrated procurement system that will retire multiple disparate systems and capabilities (see Figure 5) that overlap in functionality across the DON.

Multiple Contracting Writing Systems 1.4.1

Multiple CWSs in the DON are used to create procurement instruments. This results in different user interfaces, processes, standards, and internal business rules.

The ePS will provide a single CWS to the DON procurement community.

Redundant Data Entry 1.4.2

Multiple systems increase risk by allowing data entry redundancy across the spectrum of contracting support systems. In addition to placing an unnecessary burden on the contracting professionals who use these systems, redundant data entry is a primary contributor to data integrity errors.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 5

The ePS will provide a single data entry system, removing duplicate data validation and redundancy.

Redundant Databases 1.4.3

The problem of duplicative databases for SPS has largely been addressed through the consolidation of databases at each of the HCAs, but there remain some contracting offices that have yet to consolidate into this environment. Even with the establishment of the consolidated databases, there remain detrimental redundancies by having four distinct database frameworks – SPS, SEAPORT, Integrated Technical Item Management and Procurement (ITIMP), and PRISM.

The ePS will provide a single repository for contract data which allows for data analytics and eliminates redundant data sources.

1.5 Statutory Direction

Federal statute requires the DoD to write, distribute and manage contract actions using electronic systems.

Section 862 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 directed the Department to:

1. Establish uniform data standards, internal control requirements, independent verification and validation requirements, and business process rules for processing procurement requests, contracts, receipts, and invoices;

2. Establish and maintain one or more approved electronic CWSs that conform with the standards, requirements, and rules established pursuant to paragraph (1); and

3. Require the use of electronic CWSs approved in accordance with paragraph (2) for all contracts entered into by the DoD.

As stated in the report to Congress on implementation of Section 862, dated 31 July 2013, DoD has established and published the required standards and business rules.

1.6 Joint Capabilities

Rather than specifying a joint-service solution that may not be usable in all environments, the DoD has mandated common output formats, data sources, and internal controls that any contract writing system must meet. Because the ePS program will be DON-specific, and there are no joint requirements, it continues to be a non-JROC interest program and is not subject to JROC oversight.

2 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES (AOA) SUMMARY

The ePS Analysis of Alternative (AoA) approved by the Resources and Requirements Review Board (R3B) in May 2014 recommends investment in a Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) solution to address both the near-term replacement of SPS with a true end-to-end procurement system within a modern and secure technical architecture. This approach is defined within the AoA as Alternative 2 – Prime. The ePS AoA further recommends collaboration with the Navy Office of Financial Operations (FMO) to standardize data exchanges, ensure end-to-end data alignment, and reduce offline processes between financial and contract-writing components. Additionally, this preferred alternative considers supplementation of the COTS solution with Business Process Management (BPM) tool sets to close capability gaps between DON requirements and the eventual COTS vendor's 'out of the box' capability.

The following is a list of actions recommended by the AoA to provide optimal capability using a commercial acquisition approach.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 6

2.1 Recommendation #1: Competitively Procure a COTS “Contract Writing System ”

Initial market research indicates a mature market for COTS contract writing systems. The mandated use of SPS has caused these products to develop primarily on the Federal side over the last decade; however, there appears to be significant overlap between the commercial marketplace and the ePS Requirement Set.

Once a specific product is chosen, the AoA recommends:

• Conduct solution-specific Business Process Reengineering (BPR) to optimize and align current business processes

• Perform solution-specific gap analysis for each current contract writing system to identify gaps and redundancies within the current environment, procuring or leveraging Business process modeling (BPM) tools to address gaps

• Continue to monitor the commercial marketplace to support informed decisions and mitigate risks when addressing functional and technical gaps

• Identify transition (sunset) strategies for redundant capability

2.2 Recommendation #2: Partner with Navy FMO on the DON Enterprise Exchange

The DON Financial Exchange aims to improve data-exchanges and end-to-end data alignment through incorporation of reliable data into the contracting process without the need for touch labor. Full DON provision of this capability to include contract-writing components will yield efficiencies of scale and related cost saving through reduction of point-to-point interfaces. Multiple point-to-point interfaces are difficult to manage and do not align with emerging Defense Procurement Acquisition Policy (DPAP) data standards. To provide maximum efficiency the AoA recommends this component be mandated for all internal DON business data exchanges.

2.3 Recommendation #3: Collaborate with DoD on Provided Capabilities

During the procurement process DoD data sources are leveraged to collect data, inform decision making, generate procurement instruments, and satisfy reporting requirements. As a result, the satisfaction of the ePS requirements and, ultimately, DON strategic goals and objectives, has become dependent on the accuracy and reliability of these provided capabilities. Therefore, the DON should continue to collaborate with DoD leadership and ensure DON ePS requirements are met by DoD level capabilities. The AoA has identified the DoD Clause Logic Service (CLS) as the most critical of these capabilities

In addition the AoA suggests the DoD consider providing access to its level of historical information (i.e., provide a tri-service level collection of SPS data) via a web-service, hereafter referred to as the “Strategic Sourcing Assistance Information Service” (SSAIS). Such a platform would provide research results required for successful strategic sourcing initiatives to take place in the DON.

3 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS SUMMARY

The primary function of the ePS is to provide end-to-end procurement capability to the estimated 5,500 contracting personnel (i.e., “Buyers”) within the DON HCAs. These activities span 445 locations around the globe (see Figure 3). However, the processes of creating (writing), managing, and executing contracts within the DON is not limited to those with the authority to obligate funds on behalf of the Government. This process is also supported by approximately 10,000 users (i.e., “Non-Buyers”) spanning complementary functional areas (e.g., Legal, Small Business Review, Requiring Activities, and Finance). The total number of Buyers and Non- Buyers combined is approximately 15,500. Together, these groups are responsible for the successful execution of the DON’s contracting mission. In addition it is anticipated that there will be over 10,000 users of the vendor

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 7 portal which will serve as the gateway for vendors and other interested parties to view public postings and respond to the DON’s business opportunities. Data migration from existing CWSs will provide the capability to access data from sources external to the ePS. Using interfaces, Procurement Data Standard (PDS) .XML, or bulk Extract Transform and Load (ETL) loading with on-going synchronization of master or referential data will enable the HCA’s to produce, administer, and close-out open contracting actions after migrating to ePS.

The ePS users and administrators using tools, job aids and training may be able to transfer open contract actions, if available, from existing CWS systems into ePS. Developing procedures to support potential user based transfer, administration, integration and close-out of migrated contract actions will become a secondary requirement for migration of existing CWS data and the responsibility of the HCA to develop the procedures and quality assurance of the data migrated.

The ePS data migration will focus on the capability to search, access, retrieve data and continue contracting actions on open contract instruments after migration to the ePS to support contract analysis, reporting and other business requirements. Managing and maintaining data in accordance with requirements and all applicable Department of Navy, Department of Defense, and Federal laws, regulations and policies will be coordinated and documented through the data migration process.

Figure 3. Distribution of ePS Buyers by Location and Population

The ePS will enable the DON contract administrators, and procurement officials to perform electronic commerce (EC) with the Government’s trading partners to process purchase orders, invoices, and a variety of other business documents. During the execution of end-to-end contracting processes, the ePS will be interoperable with purchase request (PR) generation tools, DON financial systems, DoD authoritative sources (i.e., systems mandated by policy), and DoD ancillary tools (i.e., complementary capabilities). The improved electronic and data-centric DON procurement capability, with shared cross-functional data and current technology, will benefit global peace-time, crisis and combat support responsiveness.

Once the ePS is ready for use, it will be accessed via an authorized (NMCI/NGEN-compliant) Internet browser from a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) enabled machine on any approved Navy network. The ePS ‘s objective is

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 8 to have a “zero client footprint” which means it will not need to be certified to run on an NMCI/NGEN client machine, require additional user client software not included in the Navy Enterprise Standard Application, nor will any non-standard web plugins be required. The ePS users will be granted access to the ePS for purchasing services and products required by the DON’s Fleet, System Commands (SYSCOMs), and sailors. The ePS will validate credentials in compliance with cybersecurity controls and limit system functions in accordance with a role-based security model. All users will be trained in system and data access procedures and receive annual training in ethics policies.

To promote usability, the system will provide Government personnel the ability to perform routine system administration tasks such as adding new users, changing passwords, updating clauses, adding forms, etc. For data management, the ePS will provide a data manager the ability to recover data, identify and fix corrupted tables, monitor data log files, user identification and monitoring, and adjust data configuration to optimize. The systems administrator will be responsible for archiving and deleting backup files. All files and software necessary for file server reconstruction and processing will be rotated to the on-site archival vault on a regular basis.

3.1 Organizational Environment

The functional proponent for The ePS is Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy Acquisition and Procurement (DASN AP) and Assistant Secretary of the Navy Financial Management and Comptroller ASN (FM&C) but the system will be used across all commands within the DON, to include commands such as Commander, Navy Installations Command (CNIC) that do not have procurement authority but do generate PRs. Other primary organizational stakeholders include, but are not limited to, ASN (FM&C) FMO, Program Executive Office – Enterprise Information Systems (PEO-EIS), Office of Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAVN41), United States Marine Corps Programs and Resources Department (USMC P&R), Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence (DASN C4I), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS), and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). The primary user organizations are the ten (10) HCA commands and the US Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED) detailed below:

INSTALLATIONS AND LOGISTICS, HEADQUARTERS, U.S. MARINE CORPS (HQMC, I&L) 3.1.1

HQMC, I&L is responsible for the award and administration of contracts for supplies and services to support installation and logistics requirements of the Marine Corps Operating Forces and supporting establishments.

MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND (MARCORSYSCOM) 3.1.2

MARCORSYSCOM is responsible for awarding and administering contracts for assigned Marine Corps programs, assigned IT systems programs or components, and relevant professional, research and engineering services, except for naval aviation programs.

MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND (MSC) 3.1.3

MSC is responsible for awarding and administering contracts for services of ocean-going ships, craft, floating dry docks, and other repair facilities for purposes such as oceanographic research and survey, underwater research, cable laying, and range instrumentation; and contracts for the maintenance, conversion, and modernization of assigned vessels. MSC’s unique contracting responsibilities include contracts for services of ferries and tugs, but exclude contracts for (i) pilot services and (ii) ferries and tugs used for husbanding services, including water taxi contracts awarded outside continental United States (OCONUS) under husbanding services contracts. MSC transportation responsibilities are identified in the Defense Transportation Regulation.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 9

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND (NAVAIR) 3.1.4

NAVAIR is responsible for awarding and administering contracts for naval aviation programs and efforts supported by the Naval Air Warfare Centers, to include relevant logistics, training and professional, research, and engineering services. In addition, NAVAIRSYSCOM unique contracting responsibilities include designing, developing, procuring, and supporting naval aviation systems used by the Navy and Marine Corps.

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND (NAVFAC) 3.1.5

NAVFAC is responsible for awarding and administering contracts for all architect-engineer, construction, utilities, energy, facilities support, and assigned weapon and IT system programs or components associated with Navy expeditionary forces.

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (NAVSEA) 3.1.6

NAVSEA is responsible for awarding and administering contracts for ships and submarines, assigned weapon systems and platforms, and relevant professional, research and engineering services. NAVSEASYSCOM unique contracting responsibilities include awarding and administering contracts for construction, maintenance and modernization of ships and submarines, nuclear propulsion, water craft, submersibles, equipage for towing, diving and salvage, and University Affiliated Research Centers.

NAVAL SUPPLY SYSTEMS COMMAND (NAVSUP) 3.1.7

NAVSUP is responsible for awarding and administering contracts in support of assigned logistics support functions. NAVSUPSYSCOM’s unique contracting responsibilities include procuring supplies and services for all non-contracting Navy activities, offices or commands for which no other HCA is delegated authority (e.g. US Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery).

OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH (ONR) 3.1.8

ONR is responsible for awarding and administering contracts and other instruments for assigned DON Science and Technology (S&T) research. ONR’s unique contracting responsibilities include the award and administration of contracts to the Navy’s Federally Funded Research Development Center (FFRDC) and Post-Award activities for DoD awards to universities/non-profits.

SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS COMMAND (SPAWAR) 3.1.9

SPAWAR is responsible for awarding and administering contracts in the information dominance domain, including assigned programs in the areas of research and development, systems engineering and development, and other relevant professional services associated with production, installation and sustainment for Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems (C4ISR);

Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) and Joint Tactical Networking Center (JNTC), Space Systems; Enterprise Information Systems (EIS); and Navy Chief Information Officer (CIO) supported information technology initiatives.

STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS (SSP) 3.1.10

SSP is responsible for awarding and administering contracts in support of the development, production, and life-cycle support of the TRIDENT Strategic Weapon System, and other assigned programs under the cognizance of the Director, SSP (DIRSSP).

BUREAU OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY (BUMED) 3.1.11

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 10

BUMED is responsible for providing, coordinating, and executing health care services acquisition and contracting activities. BUMED’s unique contracting responsibilities include coordinating the supply of medical and dental materiel management and logistic support to the Operating Forces and shore activities and procuring and maintaining life cycle management of Expeditionary Medical Facilities. Although BUMED is not an HCA it is a Budget Submitting Office (BSO) with some delegated contracting responsibility.

3.2 Contracting Scenarios

The Navy currently relies on the DoD-provided SPS for a significant portion of the current Contracting Writing Capability executed by the Heads of Contracting Activities. The Navy is developing the replacement capability in accordance with the DoD Defense Business System (DBS) guidance, DoD Policy, statutes and industry best practices. Business Process Re-engineering activities were conducted to define the current and proposed solution states. The following notional Use Cases and their derivative scenarios were developed in an effort to demonstrate the derived functional capabilities and requirements for the future ePS.

Six (6) Use Cases were selected and are projected to demonstrate the capability to create a confidence baseline.

The Use Cases were developed in conjunction with the To-Be work flow process diagrams from the BPR Findings Document Dated 28 September 2012 and the Functional Requirements Matrix. The six scenarios that were developed will be utilized to evaluate and facilitate product selection for the future ePS as well as to identify the capabilities and capability gaps (unique Navy needs) of the proposed solution vs. the “to-be” workflow of the Procurement System.

Each Use Case defines the preconditions for the scenarios under each use case, a crosswalk between each scenario with detailed steps for achieving functional goals, and then each step is tied to the appropriate functional requirements. The Use Case descriptions below detail the Use Cases and associated tasks/scenarios to be performed for each. The planned use cases are described as follows:

USE CASE #1: SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION 3.2.1

The System Administration Use Case is designed for use with any business system deployed for contract writing and procurement activity. It further focuses on those who must provide basic administrative capability to authorized users in order to setup, maintain, and assist end-users to accomplish their various business goals.

Additionally, it exercises the processes required to initialize and modify basic system components such as users, workgroups, libraries, and business rules which will be the basis for all further system activity.

USE CASE #2: MAJOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS 3.2.2

The Major Weapon Systems Use Case is designed for use with the procurement of Major Weapons Systems featuring scenarios covering a large number of CLINs, multiple types of contracting, and a variety of financial and procurement operations. The Use Case models the procurement process through a Business Process Remodeling effort mapping the to-be architecture of the ePS and maps the flow of actions from receipt of requirements through contract award and closeout.

USE CASE #3: CONSTRUCTION 3.2.3

The Construction Use Case is designed for use with the procurement of construction related services to include architectural design and engineering using the Construction Specification Institute (CSI) Master Format, covering solicitation, vendor engagement, solicitation posting, option CLINs, source selection automation and several other areas in regards to construction procurement as single or multiple awards.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 11

USE CASE #4: COST-TYPE PROCUREMENT 3.2.4

The Cost-Type Procurement Use Case is designed to focus on enhanced cost-type procurements to demonstrate multiple pricing and incentive structures to allow flexibility for the contracting officer.

USE CASE #5: CONTRACT OVERSIGHT & MANAGEMENT 3.2.5

The Contract Oversight & Management Use Case is designed for use for contracts that focus on contract oversight and compliance as well as a contract officer’s management of the contracts. Further focus is on workflow and document routing, records management and archiving, milestone reporting, Procurement Management Reviews, compliance data, and ad hoc queries and dashboard capabilities.

USE CASE #6: COMPLEX CONTRACTING – CONCURRENT MODIFICATION 3.2.6

The Complex Contracting – Concurrent Modification Use Case is designed for the unique contracting requirements required by complex procurements in the Navy. The focus is on large contracts (e.g. shipbuilding) that include many years of Purchase Requests and countless modifications many which occur concurrently and incongruently with the usual contracting sequence. Further focus is on the workflow for PR Generation, PR Data, PR Association, Modification Generation and Properties, and finally Concurrent Modifications.

USE CASE #7: BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 3.2.7

The Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Use Case is designed to focus on solicitations that encourage contract proposals using creative and innovative approaches in research areas identified by the government.

A BAA may be used as a solicitation mechanism for basic and applied research directed toward advancing the state-of-the-art or increasing knowledge or understanding or advanced development not related to developing a specific system or procuring hardware.

BAAs are general in nature, identifying areas of research interest, and are used when meaningful proposals with varying technical or scientific approaches can be reasonably anticipated.

A BAA follows a similar process as a request for proposals (RFP), with a few exceptions. Instead of a statement of work, the government provides research and technical objectives in the BAA solicitation that describe the research areas the government is interested in. The offeror, not the government, develops and defines a statement of work, including work requirements and performance specifications.

4 THREAT SUMMARY

Cybersecurity controls are implemented to manage the risk to information systems (IS), specifically by applying security controls to counter threats to the IS and reducing system vulnerabilities. Information Operations (IO) poses the most likely and most serious threat to the program. The most serious threat is the “Trusted Insider,” where a person with legitimate access to the system acts either intentionally or unintentionally on behalf of an adversary. The ePS system will apply its own security controls and will be available from the NIPRNet using NMCI resources and inherited network protective mechanisms. Connection to the NMCI network includes connectivity to the Department of Defense Information Network (DoDIN). This connectivity creates a large attack surface that must be understood and protected.

Understanding the threat to our attack surface requires knowledge of the threat. Threats to most DBS and applications on the NIPRNet includes persistent malware attacks, criminal actors seeking financial gain, state sponsored actors attempting to steal information and understand military plans and capabilities, as well as other

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 12 common threats widely affecting the Internet and non-DoD systems. The ePS must implement security controls and capabilities to counter these threats and other emerging threats. In April 2015 the ePS Program submitted an official Threat Assessment Worksheet to the SPAWAR Technical Intelligence Liaison Office (STILO) to ensure we would have a thorough and accurate threat assessment document. The STILO performed an initial review of the worksheet and provided interim guidance which indicates that the ePS Program is likely to be issued a formal Threat Letter to include specific reference to adhere to threat guidance from a current Defense Intelligence Agency Capstone Threat Assessment Report on Information Operations (Cyber). Other guidance from Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) and DIA may be included as we approach the Milestone-B deadline in FY-

17. Timing of the issuance of this Threat Letter will ensure a current product in advance of Milestone-B.

The ePS will incorporate defensive information protection capabilities that protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability of information, as well as multi-factor authentication mechanisms, single sign-on capability and non-repudiation of the information exchanged and used. Significant protection will result from the implementation of the DoD Public Key Infrastructure capability, using a DoD Common Access Card as the physical token for system authentication.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 13

5 PROGRAM SUMMARY

The notional ePS Milestone plan (PV-2), depicted in Figure 4, captures the acquisition approach for the ePS Program. It is designed to be a streamlined approach with multiple builds/releases planned.

User requirements are allocated to each build as approved by the Requirements Governance Board. A Build Technical Review (BTR) will allocate requirements to functions and review the preliminary design with a systems integrator. Configuration and integration work aligns the COTS solution to meet requirements allocated to that release or build. After BTR, a Field Technical Review (FTR) is conducted to complete the design and ensure readiness to begin testing. Integrated Testing will combine developmental and operational assessment, coordinated with OPTEVFOR. Upon completion of Integrated Testing, a Limited Deployment Decision (LDD) will authorize the first deployment of the ePS to the initial user commands. Initial Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E) will follow.

Following Limited Deployment (LD), successive Releases will improve functionality to support enterprise wide procurement requirements to close functionality gaps, such as automatic order writing. Finally, the Full Deployment Decision (FDD) will authorize deployment to the remaining commands with the full functionality of the ePS. A centralized infrastructure will ensure that all commands will use the most current release of the ePS as it becomes available.

Figure 4. ePS Project Timeline (PV2)

5.1 LEGACY SYSTEM MIGRATION

The ePS will be a new DON system that will ultimately subsume the legacy DON Contract Writing and Requirement Management systems identified in the notional Figure 5, Legacy System Migration (notional). In a notional phased deployment sequence, legacy systems will gradually be replaced as each HCA implements the ePS, with final expected legacy system rationalization occurring after Full Deployment of the ePS. The ePS must

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 14 be deployed to support shutdown of the SPS instances and ensure Navy contracts continuity in accordance with the USD (AT&L) guidance.

Figure 5. Legacy System Migration (notional)

6 REQUIRED SYSTEM CAPABILITIES

The Department of the Navy requires the capability to award and manage contracts that support combat operations, military operations other than war, and associated missions with supplies, services, construction, grants, and other assistance agreements. Figure 6 depicts the functional, technical, and management requirements that comprise the capabilities of the ePS. The required system capabilities described in this section will be further decomposed in an ePS System Requirements Specification (SRS) which will define the detailed system level requirements. In FY13, the requirement baseline was reviewed by the Functional Sponsor (and AoA Study Director), renamed as the ePS Requirement Set, and used as a means of determining quality for each Alternative within the ePS AoA and included in Appendix C of the AoA. This AoA requirement set was used as the starting point to derive the SRS detailed system level requirements. Some are verbatim from the AoA requirements set and some will be further decomposed in the SRS. Additionally, other sources of requirements

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 15 will be included in the SRS detailed system level requirements, including, but not limited to FISCAM IT controls and DPAP and OUSDI internal controls.

These detailed requirements are summarized in the following overarching capabilities, to support the Procure-to-Pay Operational Process areas:

Purchase Request Development Procurement Strategy Execution Procurement Management Data Reporting and Analytical capability

The required Integrated Architecture products are described in Appendix A.

Figure 6. Functional and Technical Capabilities

6.1 PURCHASE REQUEST DEVELOPMENT CAPABILITIES

The ePS must be capable of supporting the development of requirements documents that comprise the PR package such that the data within those documents is available for subsequent actions. The PR consists of line item supplies or services descriptions and, when applicable, the appropriate line of accounting (taking into consideration the fiscal legalities associated with that line of accounting). The ePS must be capable of routing that data to the contracting community to support automated interactions between organizations.

The PR development capabilities of the ePS fall in the central area of Figure 6 where all of the major operational organizations first come together to develop an acquisition plan. As such, ensuring the efficient, accurate, and timely collection and exchange of data is a critical capability.

One of the most fundamental requirements of this capability includes the interaction between the requiring activity, the financial management community, and the contracting community in developing the PR. The ePS must be capable of supporting the development of requirements documents such that the data within those

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 16 documents is available for subsequent actions. Examples of these documents include Request for Information (RFIs), Small Business Administration (SBA) Coordination, and Justification and Approval (J&As).

6.2 PROCUREMENT STRATEGY EXECUTION CAPABILITIES

The ePS must be able to execute solicitation instruments such as: Requests for Quotes (RFQs), Invitation for Bids (IFBs), Requests for Proposals (RFPs), BAAs, and amendments to all of the aforementioned instruments. As part of this process, announcements, synopses, and other postings are made to the public regarding the Government’s intention. Vendors are engaged in the acquisition process through the submission of proposals, bids, questions & answers, and other communications. The vendor portal will serve as the gateway for vendors (over 10,000 accounts) and other interested parties to view public postings and respond to the DON’s business opportunities. The vendor portal capability will support activities performed by vendors and award applicants/recipients as part of their business relationship with the DON. These will include passive operations such as receiving notifications of potential business opportunities or receiving a final copy of an award instrument, as well as active operations to submit proposals, conduct negotiations, and/or report on the status of their contract performance. Ultimately the acquisition plan is executed and an award instrument (including FAR-based contracts, orders, modifications, Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) calls, Department of Defense Grants and Agreements Regulations (DoDGARs) based agreements, grants, and other transactions and modifications to the aforementioned instruments) is executed. The ePS must be capable of providing direct support to all of these functions.

The system output may be a form, template, or other document, but since the overall operational effectiveness of an enterprise P2P system-of-systems relies so heavily on the correctness of data developed and captured during this phase, the form itself must be considered secondary to the data. With this emphasis in mind, data validation edits accomplished in a proactive manner will be a critical component of the system functional architecture and business processes. Consequently, the ePS must be capable of balancing the requirements for presentation versus transmission and integrity of contracting data.

The ePS must provide milestone tracking (e.g. pre-award) and status of the ongoing contracting operations, as well as the ultimate distribution of the contract/agreement data.

6.3 PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES

Once the award instrument is executed, continued support of the contracting functions necessary for the successful accomplishment of the original requirement begins. The ePS must be capable of supporting these contract administration functions in a way that minimizes duplicative data entry, is flexible enough to handle a broad spectrum of situations, and ensures the terms and conditions of the contract are met. The ability to accomplish this in an effective manner is highly reliant upon the correctness of the data generated in the previous operations. It is in this phase that re-work becomes necessary due to incorrect or incomplete information. Although the intent is to prevent this as much as possible, the ePS must be capable of facilitating re-work type functions alongside other administrative functions.

The ePS must be capable of tracking ongoing modifications and/or orders against basic contracts that are within the scope of the basic contract. Additionally, during this phase the ePS must support activities that may not be directly attributable to a single contract action. Such contracting operations include de-briefings, managing and responding to protests, supporting ongoing performance meetings, etc.

Once performance on a contract/agreement is complete, the ePS must be capable of supporting the performance reporting requirements, documenting that the requirements have been fulfilled, and ultimately the process of closing out the contract.

VERSION 1.0, 5 November 2015 For Official Use Only 17

6.4 DATA REPORTING AND ANALYTICAL CAPABILITIES

The ePS must have the capability to report on the status of existing and previous contracting operations and provide the ability to restrict access to information, in accordance with stated policies, to individuals with the…