ACC C-sUAS as a Service Sources Sought.pdf

Air Combat Command (ACC) Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft System (C-sUAS)

Sources Sought

FA4890-261013

1) Background

The Department of the Air Force faces an expanding and asymmetric threat environment from Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) which pose immediate risks to installations, personnel, operational readiness, and critical national defense assets.

Therefore, HQ ACC/AMIC is conducting market research to assess industry interest, technical capability, and commercial availability to deliver a comprehensive Contractor-Owned, Contractor-Operated (COCO) C-sUAS as a Service capability. The intent of this service model is to:

a) Provide organic, resilient, sustainable, and agile Point Defense capabilities across DAF installations.

b) Implement a flexible, scalable architecture allowing installations to scale operational capacity up or down based on dynamic threat levels.

c) Leverage mature, commercially available or rapidly adaptable systems rather than initiating high-risk developmental programs.

2) Scope

The Government envisions an initial prototype deployment at two (2) designated Continental United States (CONUS) Air Force installations, with option mechanisms to scale across additional ACC installations upon proven performance.

3) Core Functions and Operational Requirements

The anticipated contractor will provide a complete, integrated, turn-key service solution covering materiel, personnel, training, sustainment, and ongoing modernization:

a) COCO Operational Model: The contractor supplies, operates, maintains, modernizes, secures, and ultimately disposes of/removes all system components.

b) Detection, Tracking, and Identification:

i) Targets: Groups 1–2 sUAS (threshold); scalable to Group 3 and other low-altitude airborne threats (objective).

ii) Detection Range: 3 miles (threshold) to 5 miles (objective) measured radially outward from the defended perimeter/Base Defense Zone (BDZ).

iii) Classification/ID: Near-real-time identification and discrimination between authorized/friendly and unauthorized airborne objects.

c) Engagement and Neutralization:

i) Engagement must occur before threats cross the installation/defended perimeter.

ii) Incorporation of Government-approved kinetic and/or non-kinetic (e.g., RF jamming, cyber takeover, directed energy) effectors.

iii) Adherence to 10 U.S.C. § 130i authorities, local Rules of Force, and Installation Commander Use of Force protocols.

d) Subsystem Architecture:

i) BMC2 Engine Group: Integrated sensor fusion generating a Single Integrated Air Picture (SIAP), remote effector monitoring and control, standalone or commercial internet-capable.

ii) Sensor Group: Organic multi-spectral suite (active/passive radar, EO/IR cameras, RF direction finding/monitoring)

e) Communications Group: Organic, jam-resistant, resilient communications alleviating external network reliance.

f) System Support Group: Self-sufficiency capability for up to 96 hours (generators, fuel, transit cases, spares).

4) Command and Control (C2) & Interoperability

a) Seamless bidirectional integration with Base Defense Operations Centers (BDOC), Wing Operations Centers (WOC), Air Traffic Control (ATC), and Joint C2 frameworks.

b) Interagency coordination capabilities with the FAA, DHS, and federal/state/local law enforcement for CONUS operations.

5) Resilience and Security

a) Cyber survivability compliant with DAF Risk Management Framework (RMF), Anti- Tamper (AT), and relevant Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) benchmarks.

b) Electronic Warfare (EW) resilience to operate through degraded or contested electromagnetic environments.

c) Performance Standards:

i) Neutralization Rate: 95% (threshold) / 98% (objective) of positively identified unauthorized threats within the BDZ.

ii) System Availability: 95% (threshold) / 98% (objective) operational uptime.

iii) Response Time: Rapid engagement cycle matching incoming target velocity prior to perimeter breach.

6) The Government is specifically seeking feedback on the feasibility, risks, and recommended practices associated with this requirement. Responders are requested to address the following areas:

a) Section A: Corporate Overview & Experience

i) Provide company name, CAGE code, UEI number, business size status under relevant NAICS codes (Large Business, Small Business, SDB, WOSB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone), and primary point of contact.

ii) Detail your company’s direct past experience (within the last 5 years) providing counter-UAS or defense-as-a-service solutions in military, government, or high-risk civilian airspaces.

b) Section B: Technical Feasibility & System Capabilities

i) Detection & Tracking Envelope:

(1) Is a 3-mile (threshold) to 5-mile (objective) detection and tracking range technically achievable against low-Radar Cross Section, low-flying Group 1 and 2 commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) and custom sUAS?

(2) What sensor combinations (e.g., 3D AESA radar, RF detection, acoustic, long-range EO/IR) do you employ to achieve these ranges in cluttered CONUS ground environments?

ii) Neutralization Thresholds:

(1) Is a 95%–98% neutralization rate feasible in an operational, non-test environment? What environmental, regulatory, or operational constraints could prevent attaining this standard?

(2) What kinetic and non-kinetic effectors are currently at Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 8 or 9 that can safely be deployed on CONUS air bases without risking collateral damage to aircraft, personnel, or surrounding civil infrastructure?

iii) Sensor Fusion & Autonomy:

(1) Describe your system’s capability to ingest multi-source data and utilize Machine Learning / Artificial Intelligence (ML/AI) for track classification, target handoff, and false-alarm suppression.

c) Section C: COCO Operations, Personnel, and Legal/Regulatory Authorities

i) 10 U.S.C. § 130i & Use of Force:

(1) What is your corporate posture and experience regarding contractor personnel operating effectors under Title 10 U.S.C. § 130i?

(2) Do you operate under a "contractor detects/tracks, military authorizes/fires" model ("human-on-the-loop"), or can your personnel execute approved kinetic/non-kinetic fires under delegated authority? What legal, liability, or indemnification challenges do you foresee?

ii) Airspace & FAA Deconfliction:

(1) How does your solution address RF spectrum authorization (NTIA/FCC approvals) and FAA integration to ensure zero degradation to civilian and military air traffic?

iii) Crewing & Operations:

(1) Can your firm support flexible surge requirements at CONUS locations?

(2) What clearances (Secret / Top Secret / SCI) do your operational crews currently maintain, and what is your average timeline to recruit, vet, and qualify crews to military standards?

d) Section D: Integration, Cybersecurity, and Architecture

i) Network Integration & Accreditation:

(1) What is your experience integrating commercial BMC2 platforms with military C2 (e.g., BDOC, WOC, Medusa, FAAD-C2, ATAK)?

(2) Does your BMC2 software have active RMF reciprocity or an existing ATO on NIPR/SIPR with another DoD Component? What is your estimated timeline to achieve a DAF ATO?

ii) Self-Sufficiency:

(1) Can your complete system maintain fully independent operations (power, secure comms, critical spares) for 96 hours without drawing installation utilities?

e) Section E: Acquisition Strategy & Commercial Business Model

i) Pricing Structure:

(1) For a "C-sUAS as a Service" model, what contract structure best aligns with industry?

ii) Technology Refresh & Continuous Modernization:

(1) As drone threats evolve rapidly, how do you structure continuous hardware and software modernization within a multi-year service contract without frequent contract modifications?

iii) Schedule to Prototype:

(1) From contract award, what is the realistic mobilization timeline to stand up fully certified, operational COCO C-sUAS services at two initial prototype bases?

7) Interested vendors should submit a Capability Statement and Feedback Package conforming to the following criteria:

i) Page Limitation: Responses must not exceed twenty (20) pages in total (Times New Roman, 11-point font, 1-inch margins). Title page, executive summary, and table of contents are excluded from the page count.

ii) Format: Electronic submission in Adobe PDF format.

iii) Marking of Proprietary Information: Responders must clearly mark any proprietary, sensitive, or competition-sensitive information. The Government will handle all properly marked submissions with strict confidentiality in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

iv) Delivery: Submissions to be delivered via email to the designated personnel listed below:

(1) Contracting Officer: Timothy Overby [timothy.overby.1@us.af.mil]

(2) Contract Specialist: Jennifer Judkins [jennifer.judkins@us.af.mil]

Subject Line: Sources Sought Response: C-sUAS as a Service - [Company Name]

Due Date: No later than 23:59L 31 Oct 2026.

8) The Government reserves the right to hold one-on-one virtual or in-person clarification sessions with select respondents based on the capability statements provided. Such sessions will be used exclusively for market research and requirement refinement purposes.