Attachment 2 - Questions for Industry.pdf

RHPED RFI ATTACHMENT 2: QUESTIONS FOR INDUSTRY

Attachment 2 – RHPED Questions for Industry

Important Dates

Event Date Submission Requirements Response to RFI 12 January 2024 See Section SAM.gov posting for details

TSA is requesting the following questions be addressed in the RFI response:

Question 1. Please provide a response that addresses the questions a-e below:

a) Describe how the solution provides specificity of an alarmed item’s contents to provide the Transportation Security Officer (TSO) with information that can inform a decision on whether an item should be allowed or denied into the sterile area. To what level of fidelity does this technology provide and answer for what a bulk mass contains? How will this technology provide a high probability of threat detection with a low false alarm rate? Describe the nature of the detection algorithm to include potential use of machine learning.

b) Indicate design specifications such as estimated size and weight, and the full hardware and software technology required;

c) Summarize the proposed solution’s current state maturity, and an assessment of the concept’s Technology Readiness Level (TRL);

d) Provide an estimate of time and cost required to design, develop, and implement a system ready for technology and field operations assessments;

and

e) Summarize how the technical approach to develop and implement proposed solutions delivers the functionalities, capabilities, and objectives outlined in the RFI.

Question 2. What is concept of operations for the system? What are the operating limitations of the proposed solution? What is the level of skill required from an operator to use the solution? What is the level of manipulation needed to resolve material alarms? Please describe if any information from primary screening is needed, for example, whether the screener needs to manually enter the information or whether a cable or network connection is required. Are there safety concerns for the operator when using the equipment either from system components or when interrogating a bulk explosive mass?

Question 3. What is the process to identify the challenge points for the proposed solution?

What types of threat materials that may have challenging signatures? What types of Opaque Sealed Objects (OSOs) impenetrable to the technology?

Question 4. Describe the operational capabilities, feasibility, and trade-offs for various capabilities to include cost, performance, maintenance, etc. For example, to get to 95% of threats and containments (theoretically), the system would be affordable and fast, but to resolve the last 5% you would need a significantly greater investment in cost or time. Are there containments or threat materials/material types that may remain a challenge for the solution given these trade-offs?

Question 5. What is the estimated life cycle cost of the system to include unit cost, consumables, maintenance, i.e., how much does it cost to operate the system per year? Are parts within the system modular? Do key components within the system degrade over time and if so, what is the shelf life? Are there supply chain risks associated with any parts? Will the solution comply with the Buy America Act or Trade Agreements? How will respondents annually verify solutions continue to meet certification after deployment? Will these systems have callback support? What is the anticipated support time?

Question 6. What is the respondent’s capability for full commercialization of solution? Are there challenges to producing units or hardware to meet deployment needs? Is the proposed system/architecture currently in use? Does the solution rely on subcontract support?

Question 7. What are the defined subsystems, standards and Application Program Interface (API) that enable interoperability between components (either hardware or software algorithms) or other systems in the proposed screening system of systems? What are the proprietary components that are planned and what is the rationale for their use? Please include discussion of the systems utilization of Open Architecture principles and TSA solutions such as DICOS and/or OPSL.

Outline deviations and proposed approaches to align with TSA interoperability requirements.

Question 8. Describe the interoperability (for example, data sharing between the secondary screening and primary screening) approach of the proposed system/architecture with other checkpoint systems. How will the technical approach maintain or increase throughput? What concept of operations and operational resourcing requirements for the proposed system/architecture support effective resolution of alarms during screening at the desired throughput rate, accommodating both directed search and managing passenger flow?

Question 9. How could Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) or non-COTS be used for hardware components? What security standards are observed with COTS hardware used in the proposed system? What quality control procedures are in place for either COTS or non-COTS hardware and software?

Question 10. How is the system able to meet the requirements for government cybersecurity, security certifications and ATO? How does the system use ATO or is it Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) certified? What are step(s) needed to obtain certification? Please discuss the approach to supply chain risk management, organizational cybersecurity posture, DevSecOps pipeline, and cybersecurity assessments or methodologies applied throughout development.

Question 11. What are some safety risks associated with meeting the objectives? How could these risks be mitigated or overcome?

Question 12. What is your recommendation for an alternative NAICS code? What is the rationale for the proposed NAICS?

Question 13. Are you interested in a Prime contract? Teaming (to include Joint Venture)?

Subcontractor opportunities?

Questions/Feedback

Please provide feedback on the content, clarity, or completeness. Are any of the objectives or responsibilities unclear? If so, please identify and provide clarifying information that may assist in improving the requirements definition.