RETURN BIDS TO: Title-Sujet RETOURNER LES SOUMISSIONS À: Polar Communications and Weather (PCW) Project / Projet de Responses to this Request For Information Télécommunications et de météorologie en orbite polaire shall be sent to the Contracting Authority Solicitation No. - No de l’invitation Date referenced herein / Les réponses à la W6369‐04DC01/A présente Demande d’Information doivent Client Reference No. - No de référence du client être envoyées à l’autorité contractante W6369‐04DC01 mentionnée dans la présente o GETS Reference No. - N de référence de SEAG PW‐13‐00535594 o File No. – N de dossier Amendment No. – Modification 007 AMENDMENT – MODIFICATION Solicitation Closes – L’invitation prend fin Time Zone REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Fuseau horaire DEMANDE D’INFORMATION Eastern Standard at – à 2:00 PM Time EST – on – le 2014-01-31 Heure normal de l’est
The referenced document is hereby revised; unless otherwise indicated, all other terms and conditions of the Solicitation remain the F.O.B. – F.A.B same. Plant-Usine : Destination: Other-Autre: x Ce document est par la présente révisé; sauf indication contraire, les modalités de l’invitation demeurent les mêmes. Address Enquiries to: - Adresser toutes questions à: Buyer Id – Id de l’acheteur Labbé, Sandra Telephone No. - N° de téléphone FAX No. - No de FAX (819) 956‐1345 (819) 997‐2229 Destination of Goods, Services and Construction: Destinations des biens, services et construction :
Specified Herein Précisé aux présentes Comments - Commentaires
Instructions : See Herein Vendor/Firm Name and Address Raison sociale et adresse du Instructions : voir aux présentes fournisseur/de l'entrepreneur
Delivery Offered - Livraison proposée Delivery Required - Livraison exigée
See Herein – voir aux présentes Vendor/Firm Name and Address Raison sociale et adresse du fournisseur/de l'entrepreneur
Issuing Office - Bureau de distribution Science Procurement Directorate/Direction de Telephone No. - N° de telephone l'acquisition Facsimile No. - N° de télécopieur de travaux scientifiques 11C1, Phase III Name and title of person authorized to sign on behalf of Vendor/Firm Place du Portage (type or print) 11 Laurier St. / 11, rue Laurier Nom et titre de la personne autorisée à signer au nom du fournisseur/de Gatineau, Québec K1A 0S5 l'entrepreneur (taper ou écrire en caractères d'imprimerie)
Signature Date
Part 1 ‐ Page 1 of ‐ de 1
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) for
POLAR COMMUNICATIONS AND WEATHER (PCW) Project
Amendment 007
The following companies attended the Industry Day of November 25, 2013.
ABB Inc.
Adga
AeroScribe Consulting
Atmospheric and Environmental Research Inc.
Avanti Communications Ltd
Boeing Company
Carr Astronautics Corp
C-Core
Ciel Satellite Group
ComDev Ltd
Communications & Power Industries Satcom Division
Dauria Aeropace
EADS Canada
Exelis
General Dynamic Canada
Harris Corporation Government Communications Systems
Info-Electronics H P Systems Inc.
Intelsat
Lansdowne Technologies Inc.
Lockheed Martin Canada
Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co
Magellan Aerospace
MDA
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 2
Mott MacDonald Canada
Neptec Design Group
Network Innovations
NGC Aerospace
Norstrat Consulting Inc.
Omnispace
Orbit Communication Systems Inc.
Raytheon Canada Ltd
S.A Bain Consulting Int’l Inc.
SED Systems, a division of Calian Ltd
SES
SSL
Telesat Canada
Thales Alenia
The Hammers Company Inc.
Trevor Hebert
Ultra Electronics TCS Inc
University of Calgary
Valcom Consulting Group Inc.
ViaSat
VT iDirect
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 3
The following questions were received during the Industry Day and the follow-on One-on- One meetings. In accordance with paragraph 5.3, the questions and the corresponding answers are provided to all Respondents having requested the RFI package through the Government Buy and Sell Website without revealing the sources of the enquiries.
Industry Day - Questions and Answers
Where’s the Coast Guard requirement? The Coast Guard (CG) requirement is embedded in the civilian requirements with Other Government Departments. The civilian requirement is based on a study from the CSA (Phase A PCW Study). During CSA’s Phase A PCW Study, CG, Aboriginal Affairs and Transport Canada, etc, were surveyed and all OGD usage requirements were grouped under the civilian requirement.
How long are you looking at for closure of the project? The PCW capability lifetime is currently planned from 2021 to 2035, with Initial Operational Capability (IOC) being 2021. If approved, the project will close approximately three months after anticipated Final Operational Capability (FOC) is declared. However, it is hard to predict when FOC will be since we are still very early in the project and the criteria for both IOC and FOC have not yet been determined.
US was supposed to put up one payload, is that still true? What other countries are supposed to be joining and providing money? We are in informal discussion with the allies and will continue to explore all options to meet the GoC capability requirements for PCW. Until formal discussions are finalized we are not in a position to provide further information with regard to possible allied contributions.
What are the rules of engagement for one-on-ones? We will publish only information which has been agreed to by the industry partner. Information that is being disclosed in a one-on-one will be treated as company confidential, as this is the individual industry partner’s time. The general questions and answers will be posted on “buyandsell” website so that all of industry can better understand the requirement and the way forward.
What does the Canadian delegation call a closing date as referred to on the posted RFI? This RFI is the first step of industry engagement. All the information that we receive between now and January 2014 will be used to better understand our viable options to meet the business requirements, as stated in the BR, and develop a business case to support the
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 4
preferred option(s). That being said, this is an open environment and we will accept any extra information after the fact, and we will continue having a dialogue with you.
Start date November 2016? Program or final operational capability? November 2016 is the estimated date for the start of project implementation, should the project be approved by the GoC. Please keep in mind that a number of factors may effect this date and it should be understood by industry that this is in no way a firm commitment to start the implementation of the project by this date.
Earth electromagnetic belt radiation? Don’t satellites generally try and avoid it? If industry can propose a solution that avoids or mitigates the risk of going through the electromagnetic belt we would be interested in seeing that information as part of your RFI response.
Is the Canadian Government going to be getting the frequency licenses? Yes, the government will be managing the frequency licenses required for the military UHF payloads. For all other frequency licenses, the GoC is seeking for Industry to propose the most efficient way to secure those licenses.
Is there intent to maximize Canadian Contribution? For the GoC contribution to the project, should it be approved, we intend to maximize the benefits for Canadian industry.
Regards to cost estimates, can we stick to a 15 year estimate? This is the estimate that seemed to make the most sense for a weather and communication combined requirement. Any information that industry can provide with regards to cost and capability versus mission lifetime would be of interest to us in reviewing our options and developing our business case.
One-on-One meetings - Questions and Answers
If some allies were interested in the PCW mission, does DND have to keep the project at the confidential level? If there is a requirement to keep part of the mission classified, the PCW project will adapt to National and Allied requirements. For example, if the PCW mission is used for NORAD missions, the level of security associated with the bi-national agreement will have to be respected.
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 5
Will there be a release of the updated MRD from CSA The CSA Phase A Mission Requirements Document (MRD) is a reference document. However it is no longer current and the new Business-Level Requirement (BR) document is now the latest PCW Whole of Government (GoC) official document. Updated documents will be provided once the business plan has been determined and approved. However, a company’s solution(s) should not be limited to the BR in their abilities to provide innovative suggestions. The BR is the threshold requirement that the GoC is aiming to deliver.
Are you looking for one company to do everything? Canada is open to any suggestion that makes sense. We are still in the information gathering stage, and will choose the option(s) that is the best for Canada and our Allies. We have no perceived way of doing it.
Regarding the geolocation requirement, is the capability requirement done using one or two satellites? The geolocation requirement can be met in any feasible way that industry would like to propose. If there are different options available, Canada is looking for the best way.
What is the concept of transmission of weather and space weather to the ground? Canada is looking to industry to provide alternatives with respect to the transmission of weather and space weather information from the satellite to the ground. The BR does not suggest a solution.
Will the required crypto devices be provided to the contractor? Should Cryptographic equipment be required it will be provided as GFI.
X and Ka was not given for aircraft, was this an oversight? Canada’s aircraft fleets are being upgraded to support WGS at X and/or Ka band. As information becomes available, it will be provided.
MET 3.05 Asked for information south of 45 latitude, how far south are we asking? With regards to best effort how much should we try? Coverage of the circumpolar regions at latitudes below 45 N is on a best effort basis which means that this added capacity should not impact significantly on mission costs.
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 6
Met 643 Re-processing requirement. In the introduction real time reprocessing, the information in the requirement seems to be saying something different. Satellite acquisition and processing time? MET-643 simply states that the Meteorological Processing Capability (MPC) shall be able to process Level 1a, 1b, or 1c products 'on demand' using Level 0 or Level 1 archived data. The processing latency times apply to the operational data stream only.
Will there be more information being released to industry? If so and when? Canada will publish a Feedback Summary of the RFI responses received. Meanwhile, should the Industry require more information, Canada will endeavor to provide it upon request. Depending on the selected procurement strategy, Canada could publish a draft RFP and/or a draft RFQ. In any case, the documents will be published on Buy and Sell. No specific timeline has been determined yet.
Regarding the calibration, there will have to be science expertise to do troubleshooting. Will that be an EC issue or an Industry issue? The Meteorological Processing Capability (MPC) includes responsibility to support data and product calibration up to Level 1c. Industry shall propose plans to meet the calibration requirements. Environment Canada will monitor calibration performance in coordination with industry, but responsibility to troubleshoot issues is with Industry. Acceptance criteria will be jointly defined by Environment Canada and Industry.
From the meteorological prospective, which way are you going for trades/patents? Specifically for algorithm development, orbit related aspects, level 2 aspects. Algorithm Theoretical Basis Documents (ATBDs) for level 2 products will be publicly available. Environment Canada will not patent software and algorithms for meteorological products.
Are there any PPPs that you consider to be good models for a potential PCW implementation, and what aspects of the PPPs were most interesting to you? At this time, Canada has not determined which business model will be used. Canada will analyze all solutions proposed in response to the RFI and determine which solution provides best value to Canada.
Do you have a target for direct and indirect IRBs? This is too premature to specify any target for direct and indirect IRBs. This will be addressed when the procurement strategy is determined. Industry Canada is the prime for IRBs.
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 7
What vignettes considered by Canada or the interested allies involve networks connecting Arctic and non-Arctic communications? Based on Industry proposed solutions, the GoC will be looking into the possible network connectivity gaps and suggest to Industry (perhaps during a second round of RFI), a more precise and detailed ground infrastructure to meet in their design.
Have you considered using threshold and objective requirements, and how might that help you address your approach to sizing to the peak situation? The BR already provides Essential and Desirable requirements, where a solution that meets all Essential and Desirable requirements all together would represent the GoC “peak” answer for the PCW project.
Can you supply additional time-phased budget targets, including Government management and sustainment costs? As mentioned during the Industry Day, this is not an approved project and therefore no budget has been determined yet.
For business model data that we might supply, what are your most critical needs, and what parameters are most important? This is a Whole of Government Initiative and therefore all parameters identified are important. Canada will analyze all solutions proposed by the Industry before making a decision.
How severable is this requirement into multiple acquisitions? Canada will analyze all solutions proposed by the Industry before making a decision.
What considerations drive ground station locations? Do you have any probable sites in mind? For this round of RFI, the GoC is seeking the best ground infrastructure solution that would meet the PCW mission and Industry capacity. In addition, Industry can assume that GoC land could be used for possible installation of future satellite ground infrastructure. A cost analysis of any new development would be appreciated however. There is no particular intent to deploy portable ground sites, as per the BR. However mobile user terminals have to be considered as per the CONOPS vignettes.
RFI PCW – Amendment 007 8