encl2c_JINTACCS-SME-pws-2024-05-29_(CUI).docx

CUI

CUI

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

Award

Contract Number:

Task Order Number:

Contractor Name

Tracking Number:

1. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

a. Primary COR. See DITCO Additional Text G1 - Points of Contact

b. Alternate COR. See DITCO Additional Text G1 - Points of Contact

c. Property Administrator See DITCO Additional Text G1 - Points of Contact

Organization:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

E-Mail Address:

2. Contract or Task Order Title. Joint Interoperability of Tactical Command, Control Systems (JINTACCS) Integration and Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Research & Development (R&D)

3. Background.

3.1. JINTACCS Task Background.

The JINTACCS products provide Net Centricity for information exchange syntax and format for interoperability on the battlefield for tactical messaging platforms/systems. These messaging platforms/systems implement command control functions vital to tactical operations and enable global command and control, intelligence dissemination, weapons employment, and situational awareness. These products are essential for interoperability among the systems used by the Services, the Combatant Commanders, and with/among our allies.

3.1.1. Focus.

This project executes the Tactical Data Link (TDL), Joint Military Symbology (JMS), and United States Message Text Format (USMTF) facets of the JINTACCS program assigned to the DISA by the Joint Staff. As an integral part of the responsibility as Executive Agent for JINTACCS, DISA must ensure the warfighter has seamless and secure access to tactical, strategic and resource information. The key areas of focus are:

3.1.1.1. Increased situational awareness at all levels resulting in more efficient battle management of scarce resources; increased combat effectiveness; effective coalition operations; elimination of redundant/ambiguous data reporting by combat units; and reduction of fratricide.

3.1.1.2. Expeditious intelligence dissemination by moving intelligence data across integrated warfighter systems as well as net-centric platforms rather than stovepipe networks. This provides improved information/image exchange within the battle space.

3.1.1.3. Efficiencies in defense systems development by accelerating movement to interoperable Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) systems; providing metadata and discovery tagging capabilities to extend data beyond C4I systems to the Global Information Grid (GIG); reducing training time and cost through supporting software re-use; consolidating operational procedures and documentation; standardizing C4I information constructs, parsing, decoding and distribution software; and consolidating TDLs by accelerating migration to the Joint Data Link family.

3.1.1.4. Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E) work including development and testing of extensible markup language (XML) implementations of JINTACCS elements, development of bit- and character-oriented automated tools for analysis and maintenance of those new implementations and for their transformation to the net-centric Defense Information Systems Network and/or Department of Defense Information Networks and MDA support in bit and character oriented, fixed and variable message formats providing real-time and near real-time tactical digital information flow among Missile Defense Systems segments. The XML Subgroup (XMLSG) is tasked to provide recommendations to the Joint Multi-Tactical Data Link Configuration Control Board (JMTCCB) and the Joint Multi-TDL Standards Working Group (JMSWG) on the establishment of TDL XML capabilities in a net-centric environment. It is also tasked to develop XML schema representations of the J-series family and legacy TDL message standards for approval by JMTCCB.

3.1.2. Task Components.

The JINTACCS task incorporates component programs that provide the warfighter with the messaging and data exchange specifications required for joint and combined interoperability and data availability on the battlefield. These products are necessary for joint Service and coalition air/land/maritime deployment, situational awareness, and battle space information exchange, whether on well-defined interfaces or shared spaces. The program components are:

3.1.2.1. Bit-oriented fixed format TDL, Variable Message Formats (VMF) and Integrated Broadcast Service Common Message Format (IBS CMF) products that allow real time or near real time tactical digital information exchange among air, ground, and maritime components for U. S., North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and other allies. Unless stated otherwise in this PWS, the term TDL shall include VMF, IBS CMF, Cursor on Target (CoT), Common Data Link (CDL), Common Integrated Air and Missile Defense XML Schema (CIXS), and Multi-Function Advance Data Link (MADL) as well as the traditional tactical data links (Links 11, 16, 22, etc.) and possibly other new standards.

3.1.2.2. USMTFs that are character oriented information products providing common, media independent messages used for Joint and Combined operations among U. S. forces, NATO, allies, and other friendly nations.

3.1.2.3. Coordination of information interoperability data exchange requirements and support to combined testing and deployment among non-NATO allies, primarily in the USINDOPACOM, USSOUTHCOM, USEUCOM, USAFRICOM, USNORTHCOM, USCENTCOM, and USSPACECOM Areas of Responsibility.

3.1.2.4. Work on development and maintenance of TDL XML products (including Link 16, VMF, IBS, and CIXS) that are tagged representations of shared data components. These products serve to extend GIG tactical vocabularies beyond point-to-point messaging platforms. XML representations support web-based, network centric products that will facilitate next generation messaging and symbology, and will be used for Joint and combined operations among U. S. forces, NATO, allies, and other friendly nations.

3.1.2.5. Enhancement of the capabilities of the JINTACCS program by including configuration management of MIL-STD-2525, Joint Military Symbology. This part of the overall task includes development and maintenance of the Joint Military Symbology XML schema and symbol identification code (SIDC) architecture. The SIDC will be developed as an integral but separate data concept product for use in both DOD and non-DOD symbology applications. These products provide the Government with the capability to manage data that comprises Joint Military Symbology and to maintain MIL-STD-2525 in an accurate and timely manner. This part of the task shall also include participation with, but not limited to, DISA, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, Joint Staff, and the NATO Joint Symbology Panel in the development, acquisition, and use of other symbology management tools and their associated databases, with open-source products as the preferred methodology.

3.1.3. JINTACCS Configuration Management.

The general approach to Configuration Management of Military Standards involves identification of requirements to modify a standard; precise identification of the affected areas of the standard; documentation of the additions, deletions, and modifications to be applied; achievement of consensus among the individuals and groups affected by the proposed change regarding how and when the change is to be applied; and establishing the change as approved, or in some cases disapproved. The vehicle that documents the needed changes and moves them through the process described above is known as an Interface Change Proposal (ICP). These ICPs are accumulated over a period of months or years, and are applied to the Military Standard at the agreed time, resulting in a new version of the standard. Depending upon the importance and ramifications of the needed change(s), some ICPs take effect immediately following approval. Because ICPs vary widely in size and importance, their production may cause the publication schedule of new editions of Military Standards to be advanced or delayed.

4. Objectives:

The objectives of this task order are to:

· Maintain, revise, and improve JINTACCS Configuration Management (CM) processes and procedures used to configuration manage United States (US) Military Standards and NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAG) pertaining to TDL, Allied TDL Publications (ATDLP), JMS, and IBS. Specifically covers section 6.3/Task 3.

· Support the coordinated development, maintenance, and international exportation of these products.

· Provide MDA funded support efforts necessary to provide joint interoperability for US, Allied, and Coalition missile defense operations. Covers section 6.5/Task 5.

5. Scope. (Provide a general description of the work required to accomplish your objectives.)

The Government may require surge support during the base or any option period, and surge modifications will be within the scope of the contract and provide increased support for the defined task areas of this PWS. Surge support over the life of the contract will not exceed 25% of the contractor’s total proposed cost/price for the base and all option periods, excluding any six-month extension of services pursuant to FAR 52.217-8.

· Performance Area 2 - Integrated Solutions Management

· Performance Area 7 - Information and Knowledge Management

6. Performance Requirements.

6.1. Task 1 – Task Order (TO) Management.

To track and oversee progress of their employees’ work, the PM needs clearance to attend any of the meetings where NATO and/or CUI/CMI (limited distribution) information is discussed, to include; pre-meetings, meetings, hot washes of JMSWG, (TDL and MTF) CCB, Bilat, Joint Symbology Panel / SSMC, and some of the TRPs/WGs like VMF, MDASG, and OPSG. (over 40 meeting per year, total)

6.1.1. Subtask 1 - Integration Management Control Planning. The contractor shall provide the technical and functional activities at the required level for integration of all tasks specified within this PWS and include productivity and management methods such as quality assurance, progress/status reporting and program reviews. The contractor shall provide the centralized administrative, clerical, documentation, and related functions.

6.1.2. Subtask 2 - TO Management. The contractor shall prepare a TO Management Plan, Deliverable Number 18-01 (Del # 18-01); see table of deliverables in Section 11, Delivery Schedule) describing the technical approach, organizational resources and management controls to be employed to meet the cost, performance, and schedule requirements throughout task order execution. The contractor shall provide a monthly Contractor's Progress, Status, and Management Report (CPSMR) (Del # 18-02) monitoring quality assurance, progress/status reporting, and program reviews applied to the TO (as appropriate to the specific nature of the PWS). The CPSMR shall also include cost data, including expenditures, obligations, and projections to the end of the period of performance of the task order. Cost data shall be prepared in the format prescribed by the COR. This data shall identify expenditures on all tasks down to the subtask level with separate subtotals. DISA EM6 representatives (e.g. the COR, the program manager, and other interested/needed parties) will meet with the contractor once a month to review the CPSMR, the Program Plan, and any other topic required for the execution of this work.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.2. Task 2 - Program Plan.

The Program Plan coordinates the development and maintenance of Symbology and TDL Military Standards, including the international export of these products, several of which have classified components.

6.2.1. Program Plan Performance Requirement.

The contractor shall develop a Program Plan (Del # 18-03) for coordination, development, and maintenance of Symbology and TDL Military Standards (MIL-STD) products, the international export of these products, ongoing MDA and other R&D, and XML support activities. The plan shall address each requirement in the PWS and shall be updated as changes are identified by the Government and agreed to by the COR and contractor. Portions of this task also address RDT&E activities. At a minimum, the plan shall include:

· A detailed update and publication schedule for all products, deliverables and databases specified in the PWS;

· Identification of potential problem areas and recommendations for resolving those problems;

· Recommendations for improvements in product development, configuration management, coordination, or automation activities;

· Recommendations for performance standards, performance/effectiveness measures, and proposed documentation method for each deliverable.

Note: The publication schedule will be the result of an initial coordination meeting between the contractor, Emerging Technology’s Branch Chiefs, and COR. In addition to production of this schedule, the purpose of the meeting will be to confirm the standards that are customarily published during the task, usually determined by the odd or even numbering of the calendar year during which the task occurs. All databases required by this PWS shall be created and maintained by the contractor for internal use only.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.3. Task 3 Transition-in: The contractor shall deliver a transition-in staffing plan (Del # 18-04) in contractor-determined format within two weeks of TO award. The transition-in period covers the first 60 calendar days after award.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4. Task 4: JINTACCS CM Support.

This task provides support for production of TDL standards and related publications. The contractor shall provide technical support and analysis for the JMTCCB, the JMSWG, the JMSWG IBS Implementation Subgroup (IMSG), the IBS Message Set Working Group (MSWG), the Operational Procedures Subgroup, the Variable Message Format Subgroup, the Symbology Standards Management Committee (SSMC), the USMTF CCB and TDL/Symbology standards production. The contractor shall execute administrative and technical configuration management activities as outlined in the approved Program Plan.

JINTACCS Configuration Management Support. Most standards and interface change proposals (ICP) are Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C. However a few of the standard appendices and their related ICPs are classified, and are distributed on SIPR. Several of the standards have STANAG equivalents also being maintained. A NATO “Read In” briefing is required.

6.4.1. Technical Analysis. Production of Change Proposals (CP) (Del # 18-05) which entails continuously processing and analyzing US and allied CP. CP priorities and delivery schedule will be established during meetings between the COR and the contractor and in accordance with (IAW) the approved Program Plan. These CPs may include US TDL ICPs, USMTF ICPs, NATO CP, NATO MTF CPs and Data Link Change Proposals (DLCP), Interoperability Standard Change Proposals (ISCP) from the Combatant Commanders, US Symbology Change Proposals (SCP), NATO Joint symbology Panel Symbology Change Proposals (NSCP), and certain ICP format conversion tasks. A CP Technical Evaluation (Del # 18-06) shall be completed for designated CPs, as established during meetings between the COR and the contractor and IAW the approved Program Plan. Contractor representatives shall attend US JMSWG, JMTCCB, USMTF CCB, IBS IMSG, IBS MSWG, and SSMC meetings hosted in the contractor’s facility (see para 6.5) to provide subject matter expertise associated with all CPs (ICPs/DLCPs/evaluations). The contractor shall write ICPs and run them through the appropriate approval process (JMTCCB, NATO Tactical Data Link Capability Team (TDL CaT), SSMC, etc.) as well as interact with Combatant Command (COCOM)/Services/Agencies (C/S/As) and NATO to lobby for incorporation of an ICP. The contractor shall provide development of TDL standards that support the IBS that includes use of TDL/MTF/symbology messages.

6.4.1

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.1.1. TDL CPs for the US JMTCCB. Subsequent to each allied meeting (e.g. NATO Tactical Datalink Capability Team (TDL CaT)) and subject to criteria agreed upon during meetings between the COR and the contractor and IAW the approved Program Plan, new allied CPs shall be converted to US ICPs, and revised allied CPs and Comment Sheets (e.g. DCSs) shall be converted to US ICP Evaluations as proposed updates to US ICPs. All shall include analytical comment and recommendations.

6.4.1.2. CPs for allied meetings.

6.4.1.2.1. Subsequent to each US JMTCCB, ICPs modified by JMTCCB action shall be updated IAW JMTCCB action and provided to COR. All ICPs requiring products for allied meeting shall be converted to allied format (e.g. DLCPs, DCSs) and shall be completed and provided to COR two weeks prior to allied meeting. The corresponding TDL CaT Guidance Package Part II (Del # 18-07) with the ICP updates and configuration management history shall be provided three weeks prior to the allied meeting. The corresponding TDL CaT Guidance Package with the ICP updates and configuration management history will be provided two weeks prior to the allied meeting.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.1.2.2. Each year, two UK-US TDL Bilateral Meetings require draft products for selected ICPs/DLCPs. As TDL Bilateral meeting schedules permit relative to US JMTCCB meetings, the contractor will produce draft ICP/DLCP products for submission to UK-US TDL Bilateral meetings, involving receiving and analyzing allied input as well as tracking, evaluating, consolidating, and developing topics and changes resulting from the meetings. Specific products will be as determined during Program Plan meetings. Contractor support for this meeting shall consist of a Primary and Secondary person. Primary contractor support is defined in paragraph 6.6.6. The Secondary person is constrained to the meeting only, and will provide administrative support to overseas bilateral meetings when not required to support MDA tasking. This support shall consist of coordination with the UK Secretary regarding administrative matters, consolidation of US submissions during the meeting for provision to the UK Secretary, note taking, action item tracking, and attendance at both the pre- and post-bilateral coordination meetings.

6.4.1.2.3. Each year three NATO TDL CaT Meetings normally require draft products for selected ICP/DLCPs. The contractor will produce DLCP products for submission to NATO TDL CaT Meetings. Specific products will be as determined during Program Plan Meetings. Contractor support for this meeting shall consist of a primary and a secondary person primary contractor support is defined in paragraph 6.6.6. The secondary person is constrained to the meeting only and will provide SME support to NATO TDL CaT meetings when not required to support MDA taskings. This support shall consist of coordination regarding administrative matters, consolidation of US submissions during the meeting for provision to the US Secretary, note taking, action item tracking, and attendance at both the pre- and post-bilateral coordination meetings.

6.4.1.2.4 The contractor shall review/comment on Government provided ICP/DLCP baseline lists to ensure completeness based on the JMTCCB voting.

6.4.1.3. SCP for SSMC meetings. The SSMC provides the management forum for symbology as prescribed by a 1993 tasking from the Military Communications Electronics Board (MCEB) to develop and maintain JMS for use by all of the DoD, allies, and friendly nations. In response to this tasking, a Department of Defense symbology standard, Military Standard 2525 (MIL-STD-2525), JMS, was developed for use in planning, executing and evaluating military operations in support of C4I functions and activities. Subsequent to each SSMC meeting, SCPs submitted to and processed by SSMC action shall be updated and provided as a deliverable (see para 6.4.1) to the SSMC Chairperson and COR.

6.4.1.4.

NSCP for NATO Joint Symbology Panel (JSP) meetings. The SSMC also provides subject matter expert (SME) analysis and recommendations to the NATO Joint Symbology Panel on technical and visualization requirements of NATO symbology change proposals (NSCP) for STANAG 2019/ APP-06 NATO Joint Military Symbology. Contractor shall work with the JSP chair and APP-06 custodian in preparing NSCPs and relevant meeting documents for review and analysis. The contractor shall also provide subsequent administrative assistance to ensure timely and accurate processing of SSMC and JSP meeting documents, action items and reports.. Post-meeting actions shall be updated and provided as a deliverable (see para 6.4.1) to the JSP and SSMC Chairpersons and the COR.

6.4.1.5 Management of Symbology GitHub/GitHub-like, and DGIWG Symbology Repositories.

The contractor shall work with the SSMC members to develop a Symbology GitHub Developer’s Repository and a Defense Geospatial Intelligence Working Group (DGIWG) symbol Repository. The contractor shall manage and maintain a symbology developer site on GitHub. The contractor shall also collaborate with NGA and other relevant organizations in developing a separate geospatial intelligence symbology repository structure in the DGIWG, the tagging of each symbol in the repository database for XML and/or appropriate open geospatial consortium (OGC) standards, associating symbols with other symbols and designing requirements for storing tactical graphics and all components within a symbol. Results shall be entered into the Record of Technical Discussions for each meeting at which this task is addressed. Both the GitHub developer site and the DGIWG symbol repository shall be available to any authorized viewer on unclassified and classified networks according to user community security requirements.

6.4.1.6 Symbol Identification Code (SIDC) Development and Management. The contractor shall work with DoD, federal, civilian, and relevant NATO and partner nation entities to develop and manage a symbol identification code data structure based on open-source concepts to support interoperability between DoD and other military, federal, civilian and international C2 systems (Del # 18-08) IAW DoD information superiority requirements. The data architecture shall be designed to enable development of open-source user-community modular SIDC sets for interoperable cross- and multi-domain situation awareness and information sharing. The SIDC Master List shall be a separate deliverable from the deliverable for MIL-STD-2525. (Del # 18-09)

6.4.1.7 Symbology development for emergency management, public safety and intelligence symbology.

IAW DODD 3025.18 Defense Support of Civil Authorities and JP-3.28, the Department’s order of priorities is to first protect the homeland and second, to protect our own human and material assets. Therefore, the contractor shall work with the SSMC to develop, maintain, and manage symbology for emergency management, public safety, and intelligence symbology for the military that is also compatible with civilian C2 systems in support of Department information sharing and interoperability goals. The contractor shall collaborate with military and civilian organizations in developing symbology sets and modular symbol identification (SIDC) formats that support command and control (C2) and common operational picture (COP) information sharing with other military, federal, civilian, and international C2 systems.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.1.8 USMTF Support

6.4.1.8.1 Prior to each USMTF CCB, contractor shall review C/S/A submitted ICPs. Review will ensure ICPs are formatted IAW USMTF Technical Procedures within one week of receipt. Contractor shall correct minor editorial errors, assign ICP number, notify C/SAs of new ICP and file to the USMTF DoD 365 SharePoint site.

6.4.1.8.2 Prior to each USMTF CCB, contractor shall then conduct a technical review of C/S/A submitted ICPs. The technical review shall ensure the ICP is compliant with the rules contained in MIL-STD-6040. Contractor shall then create a written review, IAW the USMTF Technical Procedures, addressing any issues discovered with reviewed ICP no later than two weeks prior to the next USMTF CCB. (Del # 18-10)

6.4.1.8.3 Prior to each USMTF CCB, the contractor shall conduct an editorial review of evaluations submitted by C/S/As against proposed ICPs. Contractor shall review evaluations for compliance with the USMTF Technical Procedures. Contractor shall make minor editorial corrections, distribute evaluation to the USMTF Community of Interest (COI) and file to the USMTF SharePoint site within one week of receiving the evaluation. In the event the contractor determines submitted evaluations to contain grievous errors, the contractor shall recommend returning the evaluation to originator for a rewrite. (Del # 18-11)

6.4.1.8.4 Prior to each USMTF CCB, the contractor shall create consolidated evaluations in accordance with the USMTF CCB Technical Procedures. The contractor shall distribute consolidated evaluations to the USMTF COI and file to the USMTF SharePoint page no later than two weeks prior to the USMTF CCB. The contractor shall provide responses to all technical evaluation comments.(Del # 18-12)

6.4.1.8.5 During the USMTF CCB the contractor shall attend in person. Contractor shall present consolidated evaluations. Contractor shall make real time updates to consolidated evaluations and capture agreed comments. Contractor shall present new NATO CPs and provide summary report of NATO CP status from the MTF CaT Formal Rules Syndicate. Contractor shall also provide technical advice and recommendations to DISA and the USMTF CCB.

6.4.1.8.6 After the USMTF CCB the contractor shall update the record of processing for each ICP to reflect the USMTF CCB status decided during the meeting. (Del # 18-13)

6.4.1.8.7 After the USMTF CCB the contractor shall file ICPs to the appropriate ‘Approved’, “Withdrawn” or “Disapproved” folders on SharePoint as determined by the USMTF CCB.

6.4.1.8.8 After the USMTF CCB, the contractor shall produce changes to ICPs as approved by the USMTF CCB in accordance with the USMTF CM Technical Procedures. Updated changes shall be posted to the USMTF SharePoint site no later than four weeks following the USMTF CCB. (Del # 18-14)

6.4.1.8.9 After the USMTF CCB the contractor shall update the USMTF Message catalog via the USMTF-WA or other computer applications as directed the government. The contractor shall make updates in accordance with ICPs approved at the previous ICP. Updates to the USMTF message catalog shall be 97% free of errors. (Del # 18-15) The contractor shall also use government provided software to generate XML schema for the updated messages. The XML schema shall be tested in accordance with Section 2.5.4.1.1 of the USMTF Technical Procedures. (Del # 18-16) All message catalog updates and schema files shall be complete 90 days following the USMTF CCB.

6.4.1.10 The contractor shall author ICPs as directed by the government to support DISA sponsored submissions.

6.4.1.11 The contractor shall provide in person support for Technical Review Panels and Working Groups as defined in the USMTF Terms of Reference.

6.4.1.12 The contractor shall provide in person support to NATO meetings as required. Expect up to three meetings per year. . The contractor shall serve as the United States subject matter expert to the Formal Review Syndicate (FRS). The contractor shall review, consolidate and provide US comments to NATO CPs presented during the FRS. CP comments shall be submitted in accordance with deadlines established by the NATO MTF support staff. The contractor shall keep the government apprised of CP deadlines and submissions.

6.4.1.13 Subsequent to each allied meeting (e.g. NATO Information Exchange Requirements Harmonization Working Group (IERHWG)) and subject to criteria agreed upon during meetings between the COR and the contractor IAW the approved Program Plan, new allied Information Exchange Requirements (IER)s shall be converted to US ICPs, and revised allied IERs and comments shall be converted to US ICP evaluation comments as proposed US updates to US ICPs (Del # 18-17). All shall include analytical comment and recommendations and be 95% free of errors.

6.4.1.14 Subsequent to each US USMTF CCB, all ICPs requiring products for allied meeting shall be converted to allied format (e.g. IERs) and shall be completed and provided to COR two weeks prior to allied meeting (Del # 18-18) and be 95% free of errrors.

For each USMTF CCB

For each USMTF CCB

18-13

For each CCB

18-14

For each CCB

18-15

For each CCB

18-16

For each CCB

For Each CCB

For each allied meeting

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.2. Production of the Product Baseline Update (Del # 18-19). Refer to the JMTCCB Terms of Reference (TOR), Appendix D, for a list of TDL products and related documents for which DISA/EM6 is custodian.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.2.1. The following NATO Baselines will be produced in an order and schedule to be determined at the initial Program Plan meeting each base/option year, kept in the Program Plan. Priority may be later adjusted in response to NATO requirements. Production shall include update of the respective DLCP or ICP-equivalent databases. These documents shall be updated and published using the appropriate revision identification every two years. This will include as a minimum one or more drafts as needed, and a final version. Documents include STANAG 5516 (Del # 18-20), STANAG 5511 (Del # 18-21), STANAG 5522 (Del # 18-22), and STANAG 5616 (Del # 18-23). With each STANAG, an ATDLP will be required. ATDLP 5.16 (Del # 18-24), ATDLP 5.11 (Del # 18-25), ATDLP 5.22 (Del # 18-26), ATDLP 6.16 (Del # 18-27).

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.2.2. The following US Baselines will be produced in an order and schedule to be determined at the initial Program Plan meeting each base/option year kept in the Program Plan. Priority may be later adjusted in response to Service/Agency requirements. Production shall include update of respective MIL-STD ICP databases. These documents shall be updated and published using the appropriate revision identification every two years. This will include as a minimum one or more drafts as needed, and a final version. Documents include MIL-STD-2525 (Del # 18-28), MIL-STD-3011 (produced under Task 5), MIL-STD-6016 (Del # 18-29), MIL-STD-6017 (Del # 18-30), MIL-STD-6018 (Del # 18-31), MIL-STD-6020 (Del # 18-32), MIL-STD-6040 (Del # 18-33), Data Extraction and Reduction Guide (DERG) (Del # 18-34), CJCSM 6120.01 (Del # 18-35), National Difference Document (Del # 18-36), MIL-STD-6090 (Del # 18-37), and MIL-STD-6022 (Del # 18-38).

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.3. The contractor shall provide Pending/Completed ICP Technical Evaluations (Del # 18-39) to provide coordination between CM efforts by the contractor and the Government. The deliverable shall be presented in a form suitable for posting on the appropriate portal.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.4. Periodically, but at least once in the two-month period following each JMTCCB, the contractor and COR representatives shall reconcile and exchange (in MSWord format) historical information regarding staffing status of each active ICP/DLCP. (Del # 18-40) One month following each JMTCCB and NATO TDL CaT, the contractor shall deliver an update to the Data Field Identifier (DFI) Data Use Identifier (DUI) Data Item (DI) tracking tool. (Del # 18-41) The DFI DUI DI Tracking Tool is a Microsoft Excel file that tracks proposed and agreed changes to any shared DFIs, DUIs, and DI values that are six bits or smaller.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.5 IAW the data at rest DoD Memorandum “Encryption of Sensitive Unclassified Data at Rest on Mobile Computing Devices and Removable Storage Media” dated July 3, 2007, all unclassified data delivered for this PWS shall be delivered via encrypted email or uploaded directly to INTELSHARE. Any deliverables made in CD-R or DVD-R format shall be FIPS 140-2 compliant.

6.4.6. Joint Range Extension Application Protocol (JREAP) MIL-STD-3011 CM The JREAP MIL-STD-3011 CM responds to JREAP issues identified by the MDASG, Combatant Command (COCOM)/Services/Agencies (C/S/As), the JMSWG and JMTCCB as well as issues, comments and proposals raised by the NATO TDL CaT. It prepares and staffs JREAP-related ICPs through the JMTCCB. The contractor shall provide appropriate technical expertise to support these efforts, and provide a Record of Technical Discussions (Del # 18-42).

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.6.1. Under this task the contractor shall continue to support updates to MIL-STD-3011x as well as issues, comments and proposals raised by the NATO TDL CaT, during the PWS base year on a schedule to be determined by agreement between the COR and the contractor and IAW the approved Program Plan. Completion of MIL-STD-3011x shall include update of the MIL-STD-3011x production databases. Delivery of subsequent updated final US Baselines, MIL-STD-3011x, shall occur each second year thereafter during future years. (Del # 18-43).

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.6.2. Under this task the contractor shall continue to support updates to STANAG 5518 (MIL-STD-3011x covering STANAG) in the option year for submission to the TDL CaT. This deliverable shall also recur on a two-year cycle (Del # 18-44). The content and format of the covering STANAG portion are to be as approved by the TDL CaT and as provided by the US Head of Delegation (HoD). The MIL-STD-3011 portion content is to be identical to MIL-STD-3011 (agreed releasable edition), with structure and administrative details modified to fit the covering STANAG. This STANAG will be produced using TDL standards production database Administrative details are to be established during regularly scheduled meetings between the COR and the contractor.

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.7 Development and CM of new standards. Labor for this section will be funded by CLINs x001 Operations & Maintenance), x005 (DISA R&D), and x006 (MDA R&D).

6.4.7.1 There will be five new standards being developed for production besides those already listed in 6.4.2.2 and elsewhere in this PWS. This will include MIL-STD-XXXX (Future CDL) (Del # 18-45), MIL-STD-XXXX (Future MADL) (Del # 18-46), and MIL-STD-XXXX (Future CIXS) (Del # 18-47). These will also require the standard production tasks, processing and incorporating the relevant ICPs. One or more drafts will be expected until the final version is delivered. These will be done as directed by the COR when the standards have enough information to begin development. STANAGs of some or all of these new standards will also be develop as directed above. STANAG for MIL-STD-6090 (CoT) (Del # 18-48), STANAG for MIL-STD-XXXX (Future CDL) (Del # 18-49), STANAG for MIL-STD-XXXX (Future MADL) (Del # 18-50), STANAG for MIL-STD-XXXX (Future CIXS) (Del # 18-51), MIL-STD-XXXX (Cyberspace Symbology) (Del # 18-52), MIL-STD-XXXX (Public Safety Symbology) (Del # 18-53), and Intelligence Symbology (Del #18-54).

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.7.2 Some or all of the new standards listed in 6.4.7.1 shall be migrated from an existing Technical Interface Design Plan Test Edition (TIDP-TE) format to the standard format for military standards, as defined in the most current version of MIL-STD-961. (Del # 18-55)

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.8 XML Schema Output of standards.

6.4.8.1 Upon request, or as scheduled in the Program Plan, the data for all Military Standards (MIL-STDs) shall be exported into corresponding XML schemas. (Del # 18-56)

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.4.8.2 Upon request, or as scheduled in the Program Plan, the data for all NATO Standards (STANAGs) shall be exported into corresponding XML schemas. (Del # 18-57)

*Standard Distribution: 1 copy of the transmittal letter without the deliverable to the Contracting Officer; 1 copy of the transmittal letter with the deliverable to the Primary COR and ACOR(s).

6.5. Task 5: Support for Joint and Combined Warfighter Interoperability Fora.

Specific meetings to be hosted by DISA at the contractor facility shall be listed in the approved Program Plan after agreement between the COR and the contractor. Note the geographical restriction stated in section 9, Place of Performance. For meetings to be hosted by the contractor (location identified throughout this document as "contractor’s facility") the contractor shall provide meeting facilities. The facility shall include a meeting room capable of seating 50 attendees for each USMTF CCB, JMTCCB, JMSWG, and SSMC meeting, and a room capable of seating 35 attendees for other fora sessions to be held at the contractor-provided facility. The contractor shall:

· Configure the USMTF CCB, JMTCCB, JMSWG, and SSMC CCB meeting rooms to seat 35 attendees at a conference table with 20 observers in theatre seating.

· Configure meeting rooms for other groups to seat 20 attendees at a conference table with 15 observers in theatre seating.

· Prepare the meeting room (arranging tables/chairs, placing name placards).

· Provide audio/visual equipment/support for two concurrent screens and projectors.

· Provide security measures IAW directives for safeguarding classified information.

· Provide Video Teleconference (VTC) / audio teleconference connection and both wired and wireless High Speed Internet connections to allow access to Government/contractor Virtual Private Networks for IntelShare/DoD Teams (or their replacements) for each USMTF CCB, JMTCCB, JMSWG, and SSMC meeting.

· Make sound recordings of unclassified meeting proceedings, provide, and maintain a recording archive of earlier meetings.

· Provide meeting electronic files.

· Provide access to a classified PC for processing restricted or classified documents during meetings at pre-arranged times coordinated with the meeting chairperson or COR. The contractor shall store and provide access to a classified laptop provided by DISA during the meetings.

· Electronically enter changes (in near real time) proposed and made to each document (such as an ICP) modified during meetings for display on a viewing surface of sufficient size to allow all attendees to view the changes as they are being made.

· Provide support for “Other Meetings” (para 6.4.1.7) not to exceed the support described for scheduled meetings shown in this section.

Meeting support, some of which are held at the Contractor facility occasionally include…