Attachment 5 Industry Day Brief ABAD.ppt

UNCLASSIFIED

Please note that this Webex service allows audio and other information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be discoverable in a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, you may exit the session.

Industry Day Instructions / Information

USAFE - AFAFRICA

Industry Days:

AIR BASE AIR DEFENSE (ABAD) CONTRACT

OVERALL BRIEFING CLASSIFICATION:

UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO

This slide deck is Source Selection Sensitive when filled-in.

Agenda

Purpose

Allow Industry to gain a better understanding of the ABAD requirement

Provide the opportunity for Industry to give constructive feedback on the Government’s Acquisition Plan and documentation

Enable Industry to propose alternative courses of action for the Government

If you have registered and not received a timeslot for a one-on-one, you can e-mail Capt Alex Cordell, before the end of today’s briefing.

(alex.cordell.1@us.af.mil) Industry Day Schedule

INDUSTRY DAY RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

Contracting Officer: Capt Alex Cordell Legal Representative: Mr. Trent Fox

Rules of Engagement

Ethics Issues

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST (OCI)

Legal Representative: Mr. Trent Fox

OCI Discussion

Definition of OCI FAR 2.101 - Definitions

“Organizational conflict of interest” means that because of other activities or relationships with other persons:

a person is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government, or the person’s objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage

Governing FAR Provision FAR 9.504 - Contracting Officer Responsibilities

Contracting officers shall analyze planned acquisitions in order to Identify and evaluate potential OCIs as early as possible Avoid, neutralize, or mitigate potential conflicts before contract award

Types of OCIs Biased Ground Rules

Systems Engineering and Technical Direction

(FAR 9.505-1)

Preparation of Statement of Work; Requirements

(FAR 9.505-2)

Impaired Objectivity

Providing Evaluation Services (FAR 9.505-3) Unequal Access to Information

Access to Proprietary Information (FAR 9.505-4)

Identification of OCI

A8I MISSION BRIEF

ABAD

BRIEFING CLASSIFICATION:

UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO

Lt Col Jason “Gozer” Mountain USAFE-AFAFRICA A8I 19 May 2020

Air domain threats have evolved significantly since the end of the Cold War, with platforms that challenge current defense systems with their size, altitude, speed and agility

The current peacetime airspace is complex, with dense air traffic, and many sources of natural and manmade interference that make detection, identification and mitigation of air threats a challenge

A layered, integrated, and fused air defense architecture is a solution that considers the threat engagement timeline through a series of surveillance, track, identification, and response options Introduction

Context

Air Threats to Military Bases (Not all inclusive)

Air Defense Architectures by Mission and Scale

Peacetime Air Security Challenges Determining Identity and Intent Diverse and Evolving Airborne Community Increasingly Complex Background Environment Busy Airspace Wind Turbine Interference Weather Clutter Birds Gyrocopter Air Taxi Small Fixed-wing UAS Quadcopter

Air Defense System Considerations Engagement Identification Detection and Tracking

FAA / NORAD radar data Correlation with flight plan Strategic intelligence Surveillance Zone Flight Restricted Zone Terminal Zone Fighter Interceptors All channel voice warning Warning Zone

Layered Regional Air Defense Architecture Example: Washington DC Post 9/11 Attack Point defense The layered defense architecture in Washington DC provides threat conditioning, evidence accrual, and warning

FAA radars 3D track radars Optical track Visual ID Regional Surveillance Zones nmi

Unknown aircraft originating From outside restricted zone

Nominal Design Threat

Regional Air Defense Design Elements Example: Washington DC Post-9/11 Attack Response Missile System

Surveillance and Fire Control Radar

Identification Camera

Counter-UAS Architecture for Fixed Sites Addressing the Current Threat

Low Cost Detection and Tracking of Multiple Threats

Automated Identification and Decision Support

Low Collateral Hard Kill

Electronic Attack (when permissible)

C-UAS layered defense architecture requires high-confidence ID and interoperability to other air defense systems Other Attributes

Surveillance Layer Response Layer

Cognitive Computer on Watch for Air Defense Tools for Command and Control Current workload for air defense operators, and short engagement timelines demand increased automation Data Information Knowledge Action

Text and Social Media Weather

HUMINT

Cyber Maritime Ground Space Air Ingest, Extraction & Enrichment

Knowledge Store Autonomous Analytics

Tasking Query / Provenance Feedback/ Learning Human/Machine Interface Human Machine Teaming

<html>

A C D E B

Response Engage Intercept Evacuate

Air Base Air Defense at Ramstein AB Current and Planned Prototyping Activities Advanced ID Radar Initial demo system deployed (camera, local ADSB) ) Demo for Secretary of the Air Force (Hon Barrett) Integration laboratory established in AFHQ building (RADSIL) World-wide cooperative air picture from Lexington air defense facility Multi Source Correlator Tracker (MSCT) install RAB air traffic control radar (DASR) connected to RADSIL Hydra C-sUAS install and integration Ninja, MADS-K install RF detection system (CRFS) Initial Army ALPS install and integration Link-16 radio, CAOC Uedem, Torrjon ABMS demonstration Anduril Lattice C2, tower system Automated decision support Improved camera network (Infinity & Silent Sentry) AF AI Accelerator video analytics ALPS fusion Ramstein AB

ASR-11

Sentinel radar integration NASAMS Fire Distribution Center (FDC) Advanced ID radar Man-machine interface Situation Awareness Threat Identification Engagement Goals

RADSIL = Ramstein Air Base Air Defense System Integration Lab Camera Demo System

Dec 2019

Feb 2020

Apr 2020

Jun 2020

Aug 2020

Oct 2021

Dec 2021

Feb 2021

Apr 2021

Jun 2021

Aug 2022

Oct 2021

Air domain threats have evolved significantly since the end of the Cold War, with platforms that challenge current defense systems with their size, altitude, speed and agility

The current peacetime airspace is complex, with dense air traffic, and many sources of natural and manmade interference that make detection, identification and mitigation of air threats a challenge

A layered, integrated, and fused air defense architecture is a solution that considers the threat engagement timeline through a series of surveillance, track, identification, and response options Summary

ABAD CONTRACT INFORMATION

Contracting Officer: Capt Alex Cordell Contract Specialist: Mr. Ian Orton

The information contained in this briefing is pre-decisional.

BLUF

Anticipated Award Schedule

This is an example schedule for competitive acquisitions. Adjust to meet your needs.

Planned CLIN Structure

Source Selection Procedures

Technical Technical Approach (e.g. scenario) (tradeoff with price) Past Experience (acceptable/unacceptable) O&M Task Order (acceptable/unacceptable) Cost Total Evaluated Price combining: (CPFF First Task Order proposal) + (Fixed Price labor rates multiplied by government estimated hours) Proposed Fixed Price labor rates will also be incorporated into IDIQ for use on future Fixed Price task orders

Trade-off: Technical Approach is significantly more important than cost Past Performance will not be evaluated!

Government will be using both A&AS and FFRDC Contractors for the Technical Evaluations. Winning vendor will also work closely with these organizations as they help develop and manage ABAD.

Evaluation Process

The Government is open to suggestions for how to limit the number of oral proposals beyond what Step 2 offers.

Basis for Award: Tradeoff with Technical

1st Step The Government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the Technical Subfactors 2 & 3 (Past Experience and the O&M Task Order) on an acceptable or unacceptable basis.

2nd Step The Government technical evaluation team shall conduct and evaluate oral proposals for Technical Subfactor 1 (Technical Approach) only for proposals that were evaluated as acceptable in Subfactors 2 & 3.

This is not on the basis of setting a competitive range, but on the basis that any part of a proposal being deemed ‘unacceptable’ makes it ineligible for award.

The Government source selection team shall select the offeror based on the above criteria, with the Technical Approach being significantly more important than price.

Source Selection Procedures Goal: match to the complexity (or simplicity) of your acquisition Full Trade-off, other trade-off processes, Lowest Price-Technically acceptable (LPTA) Describe the source selection approach Identify specific evaluation criteria with proposed weighting

Questions