Consolidated Automated Support System (CASS) Fourth Generation Electro-Optics (EO4) Subsystem

1. THIS IS NOT A NOTICE OF SOLICITATION ISSUANCE BUT RATHER, A FOLLOW-UP NOTIFICATION PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO INDUSTRY REGARDING A PREVIOUSLY RELEASED NEXT GENERATION CONSOLIDATED AUTOMATED SUPPORT SYSTEM (CASS) ELECTRO-OPTIC (EO) REQUEST FOR INFORMATION.

2. On 15 November 2017, the Naval Air Systems Command Aviation Support Equipment Program Office (PMA260) issued Presolicitation Notice N68335-17-R-0204 seeking recommendations from industry sources regarding development and production of a Consolidated Automated Support System(CASS) Family of Testers (FoT) next-generation electro-optic subsystem. This would become the US Navy's fourth-generation electro-optic subsystem, and therefore is hereafter referred to as the EO4 subsystem. Industry comments were received in response to the N68335-17-R-0204 request for information, some of which included questions about the draft EO4 Performance Specification, which is an export-controlled document. Government responses to industry comments regarding the EO4 Performance Specification are available and must be requested via email by contacting Mr. Stephen Winkler at stephen.winkler@navy.mil. The email should include the company's point-of-contact name, phone number, and mailing address for the recipient of the disks. If your company has not already provided a Form DD-2345 (authorization to take receipt of export-controlled information), then an approved DD-2345 should be submitted with the email request.

THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SOLICITATION AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A COMMITMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONSES IN ANY FORM ARE NOT OFFERS AND THE GOVERNMENT IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO AWARD A CONTRACT AS A RESULT OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT. NO FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO PAY FOR PREPARATION OF RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT. ANY INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS TO THIS TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION IS STRICTLY VOLUNTARY.

.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. THERE IS NO SOLICITATION PACKAGE AVAILABLE.

The Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Lakehurst, NJ seeks to obtain recommendations from potential industry sources for development and production of a Consolidated Automated Support System (CASS) Family of Testers (FoT) Fourth Generation Electro-Optics (EO4) subsystem. An EO4 informational brief was presented to industry on 14 September 2017 at the Schaumburg Renaissance Convention Center Hotel in Schaumburg, IL. The informational presentation and associated documentation is available via FedBizOps solicitation number N68335-17-R-0402.

The objective of the EO4 program is to produce a modernized open architecture Electro-Optic Support System (EOSS) solution to be hosted by the CASS FoT to support current and emerging avionics testing requirements with improved sustainability and increased affordability while resolving the obsolescence issues of the currently fielded Third-Generation Electro-Optical (EO3) subsystem. The Government requests that industry provide information regarding enablers of 1) improved affordability [primarily during operational/sustainment phase], and 2) optimized reliability, availability, maintainability & supportability (RAMS). Enablers may include functional system architectures to include open systems hardware and/or software architectures, use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS), modularity, methods to minimize or eliminate calibration and alignment requirements, data rights, etc.

This RFI also serves to notify industry partners that a draft EO4 Performance Specification is available for industry review and comment. The draft Performance Specification is Export Controlled. As such, access to the Performance Specification will require submission of an approved DD-2345 (Military Critical Technology Data Agreement) to the Primary Point of Contact listed below.

Information and recommendations provided by industry may be utilized in creating a future solicitation package.
 
Specific questions are provided as follows. Please number your responses to correlate with the question numbering as provided below.

1. Sustainment Cost Reduction - What does industry envision as the best approach to reducing EO subsystem supportability and sustainment costs, including that of maintenance and calibration?
2. Guaranteed Support Agreements - What is a realistic duration that the Government should expect for guaranteed product support agreements from offerors/subcontractors/vendors? Since an EO subsystem may not contain a significant portion of COTS electronics, how beneficial are such agreements in the peculiar world of EO support equipment?
3. Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase Duration - What level of risk would industry associate with the Government's plan to conduct a 36-month duration EMD phase? What EMD phase duration would industry recommend? Provide best-case and worst-case estimates for anticipated EMD phase duration. Are there specific long-lead items that may drive the duration of the EMD phase, and what would be the lead time requirement estimates for those items?
4. Logistics - The tentative Government strategy entails transitioning directly from EMD phase to Full Rate Production (FRP) phase without a Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) phase. What barriers does industry foresee with regard to completing all logistics elements (technical drawings, technical manuals, training curriculum, provisioning, etc.) by the end of the EMD phase? Does industry have any recommendations to maximize efficiency in completing the logistics requirements during EMD to support transitioning directly to FRP?
5. Government Furnished Property (GFP) - Identify any known or recommended GFP, Government Furnished Supplies (GFS), Government Furnished Information (GFI) and Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for executing an EO4 EMD contract.
6. Reuse items - If known, provide recommendations of potential reuse items/hardware/software from the existing Navy EO3 subsystem for potential inclusion into an EO4 subsystem and provide estimated cost avoidance associated with each reuse item. The Government would consider these items as potential "should-cost" initiatives in order to achieve cost avoidance during development, production, or sustainment phases of the program. For instance, would industry partners recommend that the Government reuse the existing EO carts vice procure a new solution, reuse the existing collimator vice a replacement, reuse the existing "blue box" console chassis vice a new chassis, etc?
7. EOSS Computer Processing Requirements - Does industry foresee any issues with migrating to a diskless node architecture that uses an Internet Small Computer Systems Interface (iSCSI) to access its boot device over a Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) network for EO computer processing? Is industry aware of any existing Test Program Set (TPS) or EO system implications regarding migration to such a solution?
8. EO4 Spec Requirement - What EO4 specification requirements need to be added, deleted or modified, including those recommendations to support emerging requirements? Please document the rationale for each recommended addition, deletion or modification.
9. TPS Compatibility - What are the main concerns with regard to achieving/maintaining compatibility with existing Test Program Sets that utilize the legacy EO3 subsystem?
10. Data Rights - The Government seeks a full technical data package and maximum data rights in this procurement. Please identify any known licensing requirements, data rights limitations and/or restrictions. Are there any data rights considerations of which the Government might be interested?
11. Self-Test - What value does industry see in performance verification of the full optical path at the collimator aperture as a self-test function? Would such capability be worth the investment cost? Please explain.
12. Calibration - What is industry's recommended approach for an EO4 solution that provides for a simple, affordable and tenable calibration process?
13. Collimator Geometric Distortion Calibration -Is it common throughout industry that EO collimators require periodic geometric distortion calibration? If so, provide periodicity. Are there peculiar design considerations that may either mandate or relieve the collimator geometric calibration requirement?
14. Miscellaneous - Are there any other suggestions or recommendations that industry would like to convey to the Government team for consideration in the evolving the EO4 solicitation?
The Government will not share any information received with any other party outside the Government with the exception of those Government Contractor Support Services (CSS) personnel exclusively supporting the EO4 program and bound by Non-Disclosure Agreements on file with the Government. Feedback will not be provided to any offerors. The Government PCO, at his/her sole discretion, may or may not incorporate suggestions into the final RFP package.

REQUEST SUBMITTAL OF WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE RFI QUESTIONS AND TO THE DRAFT EO4 SPECIFICATION NO LATER THAN 22 JANUARY 2018.

Primary Point of Contact: Technical information (unclassified only) will be made available to potential respondents of the RFI upon request to Shanna Cermak. Unclassified information available upon request includes the draft EO4 Specification. As stated above, due to the EO4 Specification being an export controlled document, it is not posted herein and is only available via written request. Any request for technical information or questions about this RFI should be in writing and sent either by email to shanna.cermak@navy.mil or via letter to the following address: Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Contracts Code 2.5.2.1.3, Attn: Shanna Cermak, Highway 547, Building 562-3, Lakehurst, NJ 08733-5083.

Important Information: Unless otherwise stated herein, no additional information is available and no formal RFPs or other solicitations regarding this announcement are available at this time. Any such requests will be disregarded. There is no commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation, to make an award or awards, or to be responsible for any monies expended by any interested parties before award of a contract for the effort mentioned above. Information provided herein is subject to change and in no way binds the Government to solicit for or award a contract. If a solicitation is released it will be synopsized in FedBizOpps at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. It is the potential offeror's responsibility to monitor this site for the release of any information.

This RFI is issued for the purpose of gathering industry recommendations and determining market interest and does not constitute a formal solicitation or request for proposal. No contract will be awarded from this announcement.

.

Added: Nov 15, 2017 10:33 am THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. THERE IS NO SOLICITATION PACKAGE AVAILABLE.

The Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Lakehurst, NJ seeks to obtain recommendations from potential industry sources for development and production of a Consolidated Automated Support System (CASS) Family of Testers (FoT) Fourth Generation Electro-Optics (EO4) subsystem. An EO4 informational brief was presented to industry on 14 September 2017 at the Schaumburg Renaissance Convention Center Hotel in Schaumburg, IL. The informational presentation and associated documentation is available via FedBizOps solicitation number N68335-17-R-0402.

The objective of the EO4 program is to produce a modernized open architecture Electro-Optic Support System (EOSS) solution to be hosted by the CASS FoT to support current and emerging avionics testing requirements with improved sustainability and increased affordability while resolving the obsolescence issues of the currently fielded Third-Generation Electro-Optical (EO3) subsystem. The Government requests that industry provide information regarding enablers of 1) improved affordability [primarily during operational/sustainment phase], and 2) optimized reliability, availability, maintainability & supportability (RAMS). Enablers may include functional system architectures to include open systems hardware and/or software architectures, use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS), modularity, methods to minimize or eliminate calibration and alignment requirements, data rights, etc.

This RFI also serves to notify industry partners that a draft EO4 Performance Specification is available for industry review and comment. The draft Performance Specification is Export Controlled. As such, access to the Performance Specification will require submission of an approved DD-2345 (Military Critical Technology Data Agreement) to the Primary Point of Contact listed below.

Information and recommendations provided by industry may be utilized in creating a future solicitation package.
 
Specific questions are provided as follows. Please number your responses to correlate with the question numbering as provided below.

1. Sustainment Cost Reduction - What does industry envision as the best approach to reducing EO subsystem supportability and sustainment costs, including that of maintenance and calibration?
2. Guaranteed Support Agreements - What is a realistic duration that the Government should expect for guaranteed product support agreements from offerors/subcontractors/vendors? Since an EO subsystem may not contain a significant portion of COTS electronics, how beneficial are such agreements in the peculiar world of EO support equipment?
3. Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase Duration - What level of risk would industry associate with the Government's plan to conduct a 36-month duration EMD phase? What EMD phase duration would industry recommend? Provide best-case and worst-case estimates for anticipated EMD phase duration. Are there specific long-lead items that may drive the duration of the EMD phase, and what would be the lead time requirement estimates for those items?
4. Logistics - The tentative Government strategy entails transitioning directly from EMD phase to Full Rate Production (FRP) phase without a Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) phase. What barriers does industry foresee with regard to completing all logistics elements (technical drawings, technical manuals, training curriculum, provisioning, etc.) by the end of the EMD phase? Does industry have any recommendations to maximize efficiency in completing the logistics requirements during EMD to support transitioning directly to FRP?
5. Government Furnished Property (GFP) - Identify any known or recommended GFP, Government Furnished Supplies (GFS), Government Furnished Information (GFI) and Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for executing an EO4 EMD contract.
6. Reuse items - If known, provide recommendations of potential reuse items/hardware/software from the existing Navy EO3 subsystem for potential inclusion into an EO4 subsystem and provide estimated cost avoidance associated with each reuse item. The Government would consider these items as potential "should-cost" initiatives in order to achieve cost avoidance during development, production, or sustainment phases of the program. For instance, would industry partners recommend that the Government reuse the existing EO carts vice procure a new solution, reuse the existing collimator vice a replacement, reuse the existing "blue box" console chassis vice a new chassis, etc?
7. EOSS Computer Processing Requirements - Does industry foresee any issues with migrating to a diskless node architecture that uses an Internet Small Computer Systems Interface (iSCSI) to access its boot device over a Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) network for EO computer processing? Is industry aware of any existing Test Program Set (TPS) or EO system implications regarding migration to such a solution?
8. EO4 Spec Requirement - What EO4 specification requirements need to be added, deleted or modified, including those recommendations to support emerging requirements? Please document the rationale for each recommended addition, deletion or modification.
9. TPS Compatibility - What are the main concerns with regard to achieving/maintaining compatibility with existing Test Program Sets that utilize the legacy EO3 subsystem?
10. Data Rights - The Government seeks a full technical data package and maximum data rights in this procurement. Please identify any known licensing requirements, data rights limitations and/or restrictions. Are there any data rights considerations of which the Government might be interested?
11. Self-Test - What value does industry see in performance verification of the full optical path at the collimator aperture as a self-test function? Would such capability be worth the investment cost? Please explain.
12. Calibration - What is industry's recommended approach for an EO4 solution that provides for a simple, affordable and tenable calibration process?
13. Collimator Geometric Distortion Calibration -Is it common throughout industry that EO collimators require periodic geometric distortion calibration? If so, provide periodicity. Are there peculiar design considerations that may either mandate or relieve the collimator geometric calibration requirement?
14. Miscellaneous - Are there any other suggestions or recommendations that industry would like to convey to the Government team for consideration in the evolving the EO4 solicitation?
The Government will not share any information received with any other party outside the Government with the exception of those Government Contractor Support Services (CSS) personnel exclusively supporting the EO4 program and bound by Non-Disclosure Agreements on file with the Government. Feedback will not be provided to any offerors. The Government PCO, at his/her sole discretion, may or may not incorporate suggestions into the final RFP package.

REQUEST SUBMITTAL OF WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE RFI QUESTIONS AND TO THE DRAFT EO4 SPECIFICATION NO LATER THAN 22 JANUARY 2018.

Primary Point of Contact: Technical information (unclassified only) will be made available to potential respondents of the RFI upon request to Shanna Cermak. Unclassified information available upon request includes the draft EO4 Specification. As stated above, due to the EO4 Specification being an export controlled document, it is not posted herein and is only available via written request. Any request for technical information or questions about this RFI should be in writing and sent either by email to shanna.cermak@navy.mil or via letter to the following address: Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Contracts Code 2.5.2.1.3, Attn: Shanna Cermak, Highway 547, Building 562-3, Lakehurst, NJ 08733-5083.

Important Information: Unless otherwise stated herein, no additional information is available and no formal RFPs or other solicitations regarding this announcement are available at this time. Any such requests will be disregarded. There is no commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation, to make an award or awards, or to be responsible for any monies expended by any interested parties before award of a contract for the effort mentioned above. Information provided herein is subject to change and in no way binds the Government to solicit for or award a contract. If a solicitation is released it will be synopsized in FedBizOpps at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. It is the potential offeror's responsibility to monitor this site for the release of any information.

This RFI is issued for the purpose of gathering industry recommendations and determining market interest and does not constitute a formal solicitation or request for proposal. No contract will be awarded from this announcement.