SOURCES SOUGHT
D -- RFI for Teleport Management and Control Segment
- Notice Date
- 2/28/2002
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- Contracting Office
- 4301 Pacific Highway Bldg OT4 Code 02, San Diego CA 92110-3127
- ZIP Code
- 92110-3127
- Solicitation Number
- SPAWAR Headquarters MKTSVY 155E2
- Response Due
- 3/25/2002
- Point of Contact
- Point of Contact - Gene J Moran, Contract Specialist, 858-537-0440
- E-Mail Address
-
Email your questions to Contract Specialist
(morang@spawar.navy.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) along with the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) is interested in gaining information regarding industry solutions to provide the Management and Control (M&C) Segment of the DOD Teleport. The DOD Teleport services will provide the deployed warfighter expanded satellite communications capability and DISN service access for worldwide operations. It is the expansion of the Standardized Tactical Entry Point (STEP) program begun in the early 1990s. The DOD Teleport will provide centralized integration capabilities, contingency capacity, and the necessary interfaces (satellite and terrestrial) to access the Defense Information Systems Network (DISN) in a seamless, interoperable and economical manner. Using technology insertion, the capabilities of the DOD Teleport system will be enhanced as the warfighter's information technology needs advance. The DOD Teleport will be constructed such that new technology can be easily inserted as the needs of the warfighters evolve. For Generation 1, the six Teleport sites are located in Northwest, VA; Fort Buckner, Okinawa; Wahiawa, HI; Lago di Patria, Italy; Ramstein, Germany; and Camp Roberts, CA. Follow on work may include Teleport sites in Bahrain and Landstuhl, Germany. The M&C segment description and requirements are contained in the draft Statement of Objectives (SOO) and its Attachment A are available at the link below. Specifically, this RFI seeks the following information: 1) Review of and comments on the draft SOO 2) Conceptual technical architecture alternatives Rely heavily on COTS products with minimum customization Technical feasibility alternatives assessments Approximate cost information (i.e., order of magnitude, ballpark estimates, etc.) for alternatives Schedule estimates to meet Gen 1 and future requirements Ideas and suggestions that provide alternative approaches to managing and controlling Teleport Sample Response Outline Following is a suggested outline and suggested page counts for a response to this RFI. This outline is intended to minimize the effort of the respondent and structure the responses for ease of analysis by the government. Nevertheless, respondents are free to develop their response as they see fit. Due to the speed of the RFI process, and the extent with which innovation is being requested and considered, the quality and depth of the responses to the RFI will be especially important. Responses that are excessively "boilerplate", lack technical depth, or reflect commonly-available product information (recitation of stock product offerings) are not recommended. In the event that a more thorough response is not possible, teaming/partnering may be advisable. Section 1 - Review and Comment on the Statement of Objectives (SOO) Industry is requested to review the Statement of Objectives and provide the Government with ideas and suggestions for improvements regarding: a) the technical clarity of the SOO; b) the definition of the objectives in the SOO; and c) the understanding of the phased approach desired by the Government for this effort. At a minimum, Government requests that responses for this Section be delivered using the SOO Microsoft Word file with the "Track Changes" feature enabled. Section 2 - Conceptual Alternatives Briefly describe your architecture concept for the M&C Segment of Teleport, including the reliability and availability characteristics of the alternatives. Discuss the capability for the architecture to expand to meet phased requirements and needs outside CONUS. (Suggest 3-5 pages with one diagram identifying the brand/type of equipment that would typically be deployed) Section 3 - Feasibility Assessment Briefly describe the feasibility and risks of your alternative and the design tradeoffs involved as matched against the Teleport objectives. Discuss how your approach would guard against inadvertent and hostile information warfare attacks. (Suggest 1-2 pages) Section 4 - Cost and Schedule Estimates Provide rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimates for your alternative for non-recurring and annual recurring costs such as industry provided maintenance. Also, discuss cost drivers, cost tradeoffs, and schedule considerations which industry believes would benefit the Government. (Suggest 2-3 pages) Section 5 - Corporate Expertise Briefly describe your company, your products and services, history, ownership, financial information, and other information you deem relevant. (no suggested page count) In particular, please describe any projects you have been involved in that are similar in concept to what is described in this RFI, including satellite or earth terminal communications operations, monitoring and control systems, management and operations approach, security requirements, security assurance processes, and any relevant lessons learned (suggest 1- page per project). Section 6 - Additional Materials Please provide any other materials, suggestions, and discussion you deem appropriate. DISCLAIMER This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a solicitation. Responses to the RFI will not be returned. In accordance with FAR 15.202(e), a response to this RFI does not constitute an offer and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI. Telephone inquiries or requests for information will not be honored. Questions or requests for information must be in writing and e-mailed to morang@spawar.navy.mil. ANY INDUSTRY SUBMISSIONS (AS WELL AS QUESTIONS) SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY INFORMATION CONSIDERED PROPIERTARY AS SPAWAR MAY DESIRE TO POST INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE SUBMISSIONS ON ITS PUBLIC WEBSITE. DO NOT SUBMIT PROPRIETARY INFORMATION!! When the Government has finalized its requirement for this procurement, SPAWAR intends to release an RFP incorporating industry's best ideas/practices. Although this is the Government's intent, the Government reserves the right not to release an RFP. CONTACT INFORMATION Following is the Point of Contact (POC) Mr. Gene Moran morang@spawar.navy.mil To make certain that your submission is included in our review of industry comments, please submit responses via e-mail, in Microsoft Office format, by 0600 Hours PST (6AM) on March 25th, 2002, to the POC at: morang@spawar.navy.mil.
- Web Link
-
Click on this link to access the SPAWAR E-Commerce Central Web Site
(https://e-commerce.spawar.navy.mil/command/02/acq/navhome.nsf/homepage?readform&db=navbusopor.nsf&whichdoc=5AE2984758E36CD688256B6E0073F97E&editflag=0)
- Place of Performance
- Address: N/A N/A, N/A N/A
- Zip Code: N/A
- Country: N/A
- Zip Code: N/A
- Record
- SN00034131-W 20020302/020301082827 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |