Loren Data's SAM Daily™

fbodaily.com
Home Today's SAM Search Archives Numbered Notes CBD Archives Subscribe
FBO DAILY - FEDBIZOPPS ISSUE OF MARCH 31, 2017 FBO #5607
SOURCES SOUGHT

59 -- Sources Sought: Recapitalization of Enhanced Polar System (EPS) Satellite Communications System - EPS Recapitalization Attachments A & B

Notice Date
3/29/2017
 
Notice Type
Sources Sought
 
NAICS
334220 — Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
 
Contracting Office
Department of the Air Force, Air Force Space Command, SMC - Space and Missile Systems Center, 483 North Aviation Blvd, El Segundo, California, 90245-2808
 
ZIP Code
90245-2808
 
Solicitation Number
17-111
 
Point of Contact
Kimberly Dandridge, Phone: 3106533515, Judy Hudson, Phone: (310) 653-9286
 
E-Mail Address
kimberly.dandridgedrennon@us.af.mil, judy.hudson@us.af.mil
(kimberly.dandridgedrennon@us.af.mil, judy.hudson@us.af.mil)
 
Small Business Set-Aside
N/A
 
Description
Appendix B - EPS Recapitalization Data Library Access Appendix A - EPS Recapitalization Questionaire The Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Military Satellite Communications Systems (MILSATCOM) Directorate (SMC/MC), Los Angeles Air Force Base, California hereby issues a Sources Sought. I. Purpose: The US Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Military Satellite Communications (MILSATCOM) Systems Directorate, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California is seeking sources for recapitalization of the Enhanced Polar System (EPS), which provides secure Extremely High Frequency (EHF) eXtended Data Rate (XDR) communications in the North Polar Region. SMC plans to purchase two additional EPS EHF XDR payloads to prevent a MILSATCOM mission gap in the Polar region. SMC is pursuing a near-term hosted payload option to be launched in Calendar Year (CY) 2022 to satisfy EPS mission requirements. The purpose of this Sources Sought request is to determine if sources exist which possess both the capability and experience to effectively perform the contemplated effort: 1. Near term MILSATCOM need. Sources capable of producing two EPS EHF XDR payloads capable of integrating with the existing ground and terminal systems no later than CY21 to support a hosted-payload dual launch in CY22. The vendor will be responsible for testing to validate interfaces, preparation for launch, and on-orbit check-out. 2. Industry responses to this Sources Sought should explain their capabilities and how they would build and deliver two Three-Apogee (TAP) Highly Elliptical Orbit qualified payloads and integrate with the existing EPS ground architecture. 3. For purposes of this Sources Sought, assume contract award no earlier than 1 Feb 2018. 4. The Government plans to assess responses based upon evidence of a high-confidence path to meet the performance and schedule requirements described with minimal duplication of nonrecurring-engineering costs to the Government. II. Background: Global protected SATCOM will be provided in the near-term by two complementary space systems. The Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) system currently provides protected SATCOM services for both tactical and strategic users in mid-latitude regions (65°S to 65°N). The EPS will soon provide protected SATCOM for a small number of tactical users in the North Polar Region (65°N to 90°N). Both AEHF and EPS provide protected SATCOM employing XDR payloads utilizing the EHF band. EPS payloads are currently hosted on another organization's space vehicle. EPS-1 is currently on orbit and EPS-2 will be available for testing in late CY17. The EPS ground segments includes a payload control and mission planning element located at Schriever AFB and a Northern Tier SATCOM Gateway located at Clear AFS, which provides DoD Information Network (DoDIN) connectivity via the Camp Roberts Teleport. EPS availability is projected to degrade starting in the mid-2020s, so an interim solution is required to bridge the gap between EPS and a long-term solution that is currently in the early planning phases. An additional challenge is that the current hosting arrangement is no longer available to the Air Force for the EPS recapitalization effort. As a result, SMC reviewed several options examining performance, mission needs, schedules, and costs to avoid a mission gap. Based on these guidelines, SMC identified a ride share opportunity that launches in CY22 as a viable option. This option is attractive because it has the potential to significantly reduce the overall program cost to the US Government. This option, which potentially involves US allies, would also help promote US policy with international space partnerships. However, this option requires the US to deliver two EPS payloads by CY21 to meet schedule requirements. To meet this strict timetable, it is the Government's assessment that the effort will need to start in early CY18. III. Sources Sought EPS Recapitalization SMC plans to purchase two additional EPS EHF XDR payloads to prevent a MILSATCOM mission gap in the Polar region. The current manufacturer of the EPS Payloads is Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, Redondo Beach, CA. As such, the Government is assessing the market to ascertain if any other sources possess the capability to manufacture highly specialized equipment and deliver two EPS payloads within the timeframes described in this announcement. Since the requirements associated with previously competed and awarded contract remain unchanged, the Government will assess the extent of potential duplication of cost and if these cost could be recovered through competition. Potential sources must demonstrate a mature, proven capability to produce two EPS EHF XDR payloads with minimal non-recurring engineering (duplication of costs), production capabilities, and the capability to satisfy this near term polar EHF SATCOM requirement. To mitigate program costs and minimize redundancy, the Contractor will be expected to leverage as much as possible from the existing EPS system to include the ground segment. All manufacturing, integration, and test must be able to support a dual launch capability in CY22. A. Capability Needs The payloads must include the following minimum capabilities: 1. Two protected EHF SATCOM payloads with XDR waveform capability ready for delivery NLT CY21. 2. Continuous coverage from 65°N to 90°N latitude (North Polar Region) utilizing two payloads in a TAP orbit (assume 63.4 degrees inclination, 0.55 eccentricity, and 32,175 km semi-major axis). 3. High Technical Readiness Level (TRL) components, i.e., ideally TRL-9 at contract award. 4. Compatible with all EPS-capable XDR terminals, e.g., Navy Multiband Terminal and EPS T&C-T. 5. Sufficient maturity to support system-level Preliminary Design Review (PDR) no later than one year after authority to proceed. 6. Interface and integrate with the EPS ground segments (i.e., Gateway and CAPS) with minimal impacts to ground systems. B. Response Objectives Your responses should detail your company's ability to produce two flight-qualified EHF XDR payloads with a high-confidence path given firm schedule constraints. Your responses should address (at a minimum) the following: 1. Describe EHF XDR payload design, including performance and supporting requirements/needs (e.g., payload size, weight, and power). 2. Discuss the approach for manufacturing, integration and test of a payload which is able to meet the draft technical requirements. 3. Identify the solution's TRL and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL), design maturity, and qualification approach/levels. 4. Describe corporate and teaming experience to produce, integrate and test an EHF XDR payload. 5. Describe corporate and teaming experience with host platforms providers, systems engineering to accommodate host platform requirements, and successfully delivering payloads to the host platform for integration within schedule constraints. 6. Discuss the approach for testing the payloads to validate external interfaces. 7. Provide a budgetary estimate (separate cost between non-recurring and recurring) with error bounds. The budgetary estimate should be a time-phased obligation profile in 2017 base-year costs spread by Government Fiscal Year (FY). 8. Discuss any cost drivers, cost tradeoffs, schedule considerations, and assumptions. 9. Identify the Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) items needed. 10. Include a target schedule including the major milestones with the following assumptions: a. Contract Authority to Proceed (ATP) to Initial Launch Capability (ILC) with a low risk profile. For purposes of this Sources Sought assume an ATP of 1 Feb 2018, payload delivery NLT CY21, and ILC NLT CY22 b. Include any dependencies on key GFE items as part of the schedule c. Include non-recurring engineering, long-lead parts requirements, subsystem production, integration and test activities d. Provide other milestones such as payload delivery and integration dates, and the estimated critical path to initial launch capability 11. Discuss the cost, schedule and technical risk associated with producing two EHF XDR payloads for the specified need date, including interfaces with the existing EPS ground segment. Include potential risk reduction approaches and/or efforts to address those risks. 12. Respondents may include additional information not explicitly requested that helps clarify their capabilities. IV. Response Format Instructions Adherence to the following guidance is requested: A. Page size should be 8.5 x 11; font type should be Times New Roman and text font size should be no smaller than 11 pt; font size within graphics and tables should be no smaller than 8 pt. Margins shall be one-inch on all sides. B. Submit an electronic copy in either a searchable PDF format or Microsoft Word format. V. Response Classification All responses should be provided at an unclassified level. If a respondent chooses to provide proprietary information, the respondents should indicate which paragraphs are proprietary if they wish for the responses to be handled as such. It is the Respondent's responsibility to clearly mark and define to the Government what is considered proprietary data. VI. Small Business Considerations The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this project is 334220 - Satellite Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Applicable Classification Code is "59- Electrical and Electronic Components". The small business size standard is 1250 employees. Small Business companies with the capability to perform this requirement are encouraged to participate. If you are interested only in subcontracting opportunities, indicate this fact clearly in your submission. VII. Response Content All interested respondents who believe they have the capability to provide a solution that meets this SMC/MC Sources Sought need shall submit an Executive Summary (two page limitation) of your capability and solution and a detailed Statement of Capability (SOC) that also includes responses to the Government desired capabilities and response objectives (15 page limitation). All responses should be on company letterhead. Ensure the following information is included in your SOC: 1. Company name 2. Your company's ownership and other relevant information 3. Personnel/Business size classification (Small/Large Business, HUB, veteran, etc.) 4. Mailing address 5. Point of Contact (POC) and telephone numbers 6. Experience: specific work previously performed or work performed which is relevant to this effort. Corporate expertise should focus on Satellite SATCOM development/integration/test to the greatest extent possible. This information should include: a. Company history with SATCOM programs (if applicable) b. Your company's relevant products and services c. Effort to be subcontracted and the subcontractor's capabilities d. Any work performed by small businesses e. In addition to the SOC, respondents are required to fill out the Appendix A, Market Research Questionnaire (3 page limitation). 7. Detailed responses to the Sources Sought Response Objectives identified in Section III. B. VIII. Response Due Date 1600 Pacific Standard Time, April 12, 2017. IX. Submission Instructions Submit an electronic copy in either searchable PDF format or Microsoft Word format to the Primary Contact, Kimberly Dandridge, Contracting Officer, kimberly.dandridgedrennon@us.af.mil including a cc copy to Judy Hudson, Contract Specialist, judy.hudson@us.af.mil, by the Response Due Date. Hard copy responses will not be accepted. X. Points of Contact Primary: Kimberly Dandridge Contracting Officer kimberly.dandridgedrennon@us.af.mil Phone: (310) 653-9687 Secondary: Judy Hudson Contract Specialist judy.hudson@us.af.mil Phone: (310) 653-9286 All communication associated with this RFI shall be submitted to the points of contacts listed in this section. XI. Disclaimer and Notes This Sources Sought is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a solicitation (Request for Proposal or Request for Quotations) or a promise to issue a solicitation in the future. This Sources Sought announcement does not obligate the US Air Force to procure any supply or service. The US Air Force is not seeking proposals at this time. Respondents are advised that the US Air Force will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this Sources Sought. The Government will not assume liability for costs incurred by any attendee for travel expenses or marketing efforts. All costs associated with responding to this Sources Sought will be solely at the responding party's expense. All information received in response to this Sources Sought that is marked PROPRIETARY will be handled accordingly. The US Air Force shall not be liable for or suffer any consequential damages for any proprietary information not properly identified. Proprietary information will be safeguarded in accordance with the applicable US Air Force regulations. Note: the Government mandates review of this Sources Sought response from its Federal Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), University Affiliated Research Center (UARC), Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I), Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA), and Advisory and Assistance (A&AS), including but not limited to the following contractors: Aerospace, MITRE, MIT/Lincoln Labs, JHU/APL, Linquest, SAIC, Tecolote, MCR, SAVI LLC, Odyssey, Figueroa and Associates, and Parsons. Each of these contractors have signed non-disclosure agreements with the Government per their respective contracts. For further information regarding these agreements, contact the Contracting Officer identified in section X. The Government will use industry responses to document market research. The Government reserves the right to contact the submitting parties, on an as required basis, for further clarification on material provided. The information provided may be used to develop a Request for Proposal (RFP).
 
Web Link
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USAF/AFSC/SMCSMSC/17-111/listing.html)
 
Place of Performance
Address: TBD, United States
 
Record
SN04451037-W 20170331/170329234503-122d3716174165118a27a2e497ce0efd (fbodaily.com)
 
Source
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |
ECGrid: EDI VAN Interconnect ECGridOS: EDI Web Services Interconnect API Government Data Publications CBDDisk Subscribers
 Privacy Policy  Jenny in Wanderland!  © 1994-2024, Loren Data Corp.