Assured SATCOM Services In Single Theater (ASSIST)

Assured SATCOM Services In Single Theater (ASSIST) Industry Days Contracting Office Address Defense Information Systems Agency, Procurement and Logistics, DITCO-Scott, 2300 East Drive Bldg 3600, Scott AFB, IL, 62225-5406 Description On 28 and 29 June 2011, The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) will host an Assured SATCOM Service In Single Theatre (ASSIST) Capabilities Focused Industry Days in Fort Meade, Maryland. Event details will be transmitted to registered and confirmed participants NLT 6 June 2011. Purpose This unclassified conference is to enable Department of Defense (DOD) representatives to obtain information from industry experts on Commercial Satellite Communications (COMSATCOM) Service as well as to better understand how industry might best meet the Governments needs. Background COMSATCOM is an essential communications component for in-theater operations. The USCENTCOM theater of operations incurs the greatest amount of COMSATCOM usage, using Ku-band service on more than 20 different commercial communications satellites, mostly through the use of base period leases (typically single-year) with additional option year leases. Leases range from small fractions of a Transponded Equivalent (TPE) to multiple TPEs with an aggregate sustained demand of over 5 GHz of service and more than 1,200 terminal links/accesses. With the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 President's Budget Request, the DoD is preparing for an FY12-FY14 investment to acquire long-term satellite communications services in the Ka- and Ku-bands, preferably on a single satellite, to meet COCOM theater demand, directing as many future users and migrating as many existing users as possible from Ku to Ka-band. The investment includes both the space segment and associated terminals. Initially, the DoD goal is to reduce costs for COMSATCOM capability in the CENTCOM theater of operations. In the future, DoD requires the flexibility of moving these services to other theaters of operation as needed. A core set of objectives were identified and released on FedBizOpps on 15 March, 2011, as the Assured SATCOM Service In Single Theatre (ASSIST) RFI. INTERESTED PARTICIPANTS SHOULD HAVE REGISTERED NO LATER THAN 3:00 PM CST, FRIDAY, 27 MAY, 2011 AS INSTRUCTED ON 18 MAY, 2011. *****REGISTERED PARTICIPANTS WHO ARE PROVIDED CONFIRMATION OF ATTENDANCE BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MUST PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS NLT 17 JUNE 2011.****** ASSIST INDUSTRY DAY RFI QUESTIONS Technical: T.101. What are the typical Ka-band satellite transponder sizes as compared to Ku-band satellites where they are typically sized at 36, 54, 72, or 112/150 MHz? What are the Ka-band transponder technical specification guidelines that result in achieving target throughput (i.e., TX saturated EIRP, satellite G/T, PDF) and how do these parameters compare with the corresponding parameters for a typical Ku band transponder? T.102. What is Industry's target bandwidth occupation ratio (bits/Hz) for forecasted Ka-band services and associated terminal classes? Is it SCPC-specific or IP-network topology specific? If IP-network based, does it differ on inbound vs. outbound routes? Also, what is the expected oversubscription ratio? T.103. How is the physical transponder bandwidth determination (i.e., width of transponder in MHz) related to with the number of transponders on the spacecraft? This question should be addressed separately for a Ka-only satellite vice Ka-Ku hybrid? Is there a particular ratio between the numbers of Ka vs. Ku transponders on the spacecraft that is optimal? T.104. What is the trade-off (in terms of the number of transponders on the spacecraft, the flexibility and/or limitation for their configuration/cross-connectivity) in case of a hybrid Ka/Ku satellite vs. Ka only satellite and whether a hybrid Ka/Ku would have an impact in the overall transponder sizing (by how wide in MHz each of Ka and Ku transponders should be - do they all have to be of the same size in case of a hybrid satellite or not)? T.105. What is Industry's relationship between transponded Ka-band bandwidth and transponded satellite EIRP used in your engineering design process? If so, what is it? What is the corresponding impact on beam shapes? What is the size of the grid on the ground (km x km) that can be covered by one Ka-band beam? T.106. What precautions are being considered in the design/configuration of the transponders, frequency, polarization and traffic routing plans to avoid interference in the event of beam overlap within the same coverage area? Due to lack of spatial isolation in case of a beam overlap, is the polarization isolation the only means to avoid the interference? How does this issue affect the transponder planning in terms of sterilizing transponder utilization over the overlapped area to avoid interference and does this issue limit the spacecraft transponder cross-connectivity over that area? T.107. Regarding a Hybrid (Ka/Ku) Scenario, it is assumed the Ku portion would be represented by wide band Ku coverage. While Ka Band transponders may be circularly polarized, the conventional Ku-band transponders are linearly polarized. In that regard the antenna equipped with dual feed/dual pole capability that is sitting in the area where both Ka- and Ku- coverages overlap, can impact/be impacted with the "other" frequency band traffic with only 3 dB attenuation vs. the power level at which that antenna operates in its nominal band. How will this lack of spatial isolation over the area of coverage, as well as an almost entire lack of polarization isolation affect the transponder cross-connectivity configuration/traffic planning, connectivity sterilization? T.108. Is it reasonable to assume that all terminals can be made Ka-capable by the intended 2014 service activation date? Regarding terminal requirements, are there recommendations on minimum/nominal requirements with regards to configurability and capability in order to ensure a flexible system capable of supporting the largest number of users over time (i.e. as band use shifts)? For reach back from / forward link to theater, what is the recommended minimum/nominal number of links and hubs supporting these links? Funding and Contracting: F101. To help the government conduct effective trade studies and affordability analysis, what are the parametric relationships between the ROM price for each major cost element and the ASSIST requirements, such as bandwidth capacity, lease duration, and band? For example, satellite cost = aX+b, where X is the satellite bandwidth in MHz. If these relationships only hold for a specific range (e.g., 1 GHz < X < 8 GHz), please note. F102. Leasing: the government is investigating lease structures, such as capital leases and lease purchases that support a turnkey service consistent with ASSIST's up front heavy funding profile. The Government is interested in industry's experiences and insights for use of leases, including: a. What type of lease should DISA consider and why? Is there an example where this type of lease was used for another government service, and if so, are you aware of any lessons learned? b. What terms and attributes are key to maximize competition and minimize total costs? c. What are the risks to the government? To industry? d. If the life of the satellite lasts longer than the duration of the lease contract, what type of lease would best support a follow up contract? What terms in the initial contract would best support competition, minimized costs, maximum performance, and minimum disruption for the follow up contract? F103. What is covered by on-orbit insurance? What are typical costs? Who purchases (e.g., satellite operator)? How long are manufacturer's liable for satellite system performance and what level of compensation is associated with what events? F104. To the extent that the government post-pays for goods and services, at what rate would industry inflate costs to account for the cost of money? F105. What are the costs, regarding both financial and loss of satellite life for a satellite move? Is there a parametric relationship to characterize the expected cost per degree move and loss of satellite life per degree move? What is the expected speed of satellite movement for these costs and loss estimates? F106. How do satellite operators typically manage risks for launch and satellite failures? What terms are most common and what are the cost implications? How does this vary depending on the stage of a satellite's lifecycle? Response Instructions In order to make efficient use of ASSIST Industry Days one-on-one sessions; responses provided to the above questions will be discussed with the respondent/business individually during ASSIST Industry Days one-on-one session. One-on-one sessions must have been requested during registration as noted on FBO post 18 May 2011 and must be confirmed with the Government prior to ASSIST Industry Days event. DISA requests responses be submitted via e-mail to: Noah Vasquez, Contracting Officer at noah.vasquez@disa.mil AND Christopher Enriquez, Contract Specialist at christopher.enriquez@disa.mil Responses shall be transmitted no later than 3:00 PM Central Standard Time (CST) on Friday, 17 June 2011. Responses should be single-spaced, Times New Roman, 12 point font with one inch margins. Information transmitted in response to the RFI will not be returned. ASSIST INDUSTRY DAYS RULES OF ENGAGEMENT (ROE) -The Government intends to use this forum to better refine its requirements, not to elicit trade secrets. -All information will be treated confidentially and discreetly. The contractor is encouraged to be honest and forthcoming. -Contractor personnel shall be limited to a total of three (3) attendees per participating company. -No sales pitches allowed from industry; no give-aways, failure to comply will result in removal of participant/business from the event proceedings. -No electronics, cameras, cell phones, tape recorders, or other reproduction devices are allowed. -No hard copies of any Government documents will be provided to contractors. -The Government will not accept any materials that were not actually part of the contractor's briefing. Don't bring marketing brochures. -The contractor shall introduce its team and explain their roles. -Total time allotted for the contractor's One-on-One briefing session is one hour. -Under no circumstances will the contractors allotted time be extended. -Restrict comments/questions to the topics listed in this forum. Questions about the prospective RFPs will not be answered. -Contractor personnel will be required to sign in and sign out during the visit and must stay within the confines of the Industry Days meeting areas designated at all times. -(Contractor representatives should leave after the initial briefing, returning for their briefing and departing afterwards. Those waiting for their briefing to begin should stay in a centralized area designated by the government). -Contractor personnel must be identified in advance, and only advance substitutions (24-hour in advance notice) will be permitted. -Contractor identified key personnel shall make the actual presentation. -The Government reserves the right to inspect all material, briefcases, etc., entering or leaving the facility. NOTE: Failure to comply with the aforementioned REO guidance will result in removal of participant/business from event proceedings. Proprietary information and trade secrets, if any, must be clearly marked. All information received that is marked Proprietary will be handled accordingly. Please be advised that all submissions become Government property and will not be returned. DISA intends to have contractor support personnel assist during the ASSIST Industry Days as well as in review and assimilation of RFI responses. All Government and contractor personnel reviewing RFI responses will have signed non-disclosure agreements and understand their responsibility for proper use and protection from unauthorized disclosure of proprietary information as described 41 USC 423. The Government shall not be held liable for any damages incurred if proprietary information is not properly identified. This announcement does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. Responders are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative cost incurred in response to this announcement.