Attachment 1 SOO.pdf

Spectrum Reallocation

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

1. BACKGROUND

The mission of the Air Force Research Laboratory Sensors Directorate’s OneRY Range (AFRL/RY) is to test radio frequency systems and theories. The Range completes this mission by operating an indoor test chamber and outdoor range facilities that support a wide variety of scenarios for understanding the performance and capabilities of radar, communication, electronic warfare, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems. In furtherance of that mission, this Spectrum Reallocation effort is being conducted to understand the impact of changes in frequency authorizations to the Sensors Directorate’s operations.

The Spectrum Pipeline Act of 2015 will improve the feasibility of reallocation of the 1300-1350 MHz band to allow implementation of High Power/High Density wireless broadband (HP/HD WBB). Studies will facilitate improved access by HP/HD WBB beyond that achievable solely through the Joint-Agency Spectrum Pipeline Plan for the Spectrum Efficient National Surveillance Radar (SENSR) (the “Joint SENSR Spectrum Pipeline Plan” or “SENSR Plan”). Under the SENSR Plan, participating agencies are studying the development of a SENSR capability that could enable vacating certain long-range air surveillance systems from the 1300-1350 MHz band, making that spectrum available to a significant portion of the U.S. population for HP/HD WBB. The studies presented in this effort seek to achieve additional goals of long-term spectrum efficiency and spectrum access by fostering effective bi-directional sharing with DoD’s “non-SENSR” systems, those DoD systems remaining in the 1300-1350 MHz band after the long-range air surveillance vacate the band as well as DoD systems in the bands immediately above and below the 1300-1350 MHz band.

The DoD Non-SENSR Spectrum Pipeline Plan (“DoD Non-SENSR Plan” or “Non-SENSR Plan”) covers DoD activities and costs associated with the study and development of methods to achieve compatible or dynamic shared access of HP/HD WBB and DoD systems or operations not included in the Joint SENSR Program and therefore not covered by the SENSR Plan. Similar to the SENSR Plan, this Non-SENSR Plan consists of two phases. The DoD Non-SENSR Plan Phase 1 defines DoD non-SENSR spectrum requirements and the methods or tools that can potentially facilitate sharing. The DoD Non-SENSR Plan, Phase 2 will focus on refining the analysis and implementation outcomes through dialog with industry, evaluation of dynamic sharing techniques, and evaluation of system adjustments that might be applied to facilitate sharing. These efforts will ultimately lead to a recommended path forward to improve the accessibility of the 1300-1350 MHz for HP/HD WBB while ensuring DoD’s flexible access to the band to meet mission requirements.

Under the DoD Non-SENSR Plan, Phase 1, AFRL/RY contract FA8650-18-F-1641, Applied Research Associates (ARA) was tasked with assisting AFRL/RYM in gathering information related to a loss of DoD licensed spectrum in the 1300-1350 radio-navigation band currently operated by the US Department of Defense, and administered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

The assets and facilities examined included the Tillman Pit, the ACT-IV West Radome Tower, the South S-Band Tower, the East Radome Tower, Ingram Hill, Springfield ANG, as well as inquiries into the Relocatable Jammer Program, Spectral Bat, Split Aces, and Blue Max.

Results indicated that the ACT-IV radar installation and Ingram Hill Facilities are most impacted by the loss of 1300-1350 MHz spectrum. Mitigation of these impacts are necessary for the continued RDT&E mission to proceed at these locations.

2. SCOPE

The DoD Non-SENSR Phase 1 & 2 efforts will pursue several complementary activities that include the following:

1) A detailed Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) analyses and further development of dynamic sharing methodologies and tools

2) Analysis for consideration of Compression, Retuning, or Other System Adjustment Options

3) A study of SENSR Target Bands for long-range air surveillance systems confliction with DoD assets (More than one band may be utilized if a system of systems approach is adopted by SENSR. In developing their costs, some of the Military Departments have assumed that the primary target band will be 2700-3000 MHz.)

The outcomes from these applied research, development, test, and analysis efforts will be used to develop and assess decision options and make recommendations regarding how to best facilitate sharing. The resulting decisions taken would then be employed in the development of associated transition plans in support of an auction and sharing transition. The TRL level will not change on the RY equipment at the end of this effort.

It will provide the path forward for continued use in development of new or improved sensors and techniques.

Tools and assumptions to be used in modeling efforts are listed below:

Analysis tool RF Analyst Propagation model TIREM 5.2 Clutter model ITU-R. P2108, ITU-R.P452 * Terrain model DTED Level 1, 3sec, 90m

*As used in the NTIA MobileNOW study for 3450-3550 MHz band

O&M funded work may be added via an in scope modification to demonstrate the R&D in a real world environment and on an operational platform. Procurement funded work may be added via an in-scope modification to aid transition from lab to production unit/system(s).

3. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this effort is to analyze the anticipated changes to the current RF environment, and resulting effects on AFRL/RY systems created by the 1300-1350 MHz selloff. This will include the effects of FAA/NOAH long range surveillance radars vacating the 1300-1350 MHz band, and moving into adjacent frequency bands. This includes solutions based on research, analysis, and test results, as required, to correct deficiencies. Data gathered will provide information to develop a roadmap of developmental, and test efforts required for modification to HW, and SW that will assure continued operation of AFRL’s DT&E assets in the new spectral environment.

4. SPECIFIC TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES

4.1 Through collaboration with other stakeholders, mature the EMC baseline to identify areas of incompatibility with AFRL/RY DT&E systems and other RF systems in the 1300-1350 MHz band and adjacent frequency bands, to include, but not limited to, impacts incurred from moving FAA/NOA radars in Dayton, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis (ASR-9s) and the London ARSR-4 (Columbus, OH).

4.1.1 Calculate Frequency over Distance (F/D) separation for the AFRL systems to the

FAA/NOAA systems and apply analysis approach to each frequency assignment under consideration. Recommend potential exclusion areas that may be reduced or removed based on your analysis.

4.1.2 Perform the Δf=0 in-band analysis for each frequency assignment under consideration in accordance with the agreed upon method.

4.1.3 For the adjacent band case, the analysis will assume that emissions from HP/HD

WBB occur at the non-SENSR system at the permitted unwanted emission limits. The MILDEPS will perform adjacent band analysis using the unwanted emission levels of HP/HD WBB systems.

4.1.4 Consolidate analysis results developing aggregate contours of exclusion areas and overlay those areas on a map with coordinate values for the 1300-1350 MHz band. The results will support the baseline from which to study improvements to the access and efficiency of the band along with the interference of HP/HD WWB in the area.

4.2 Develop approaches and verify their effectiveness through lab/ground testing as required for dynamic sharing of the environment

4.2.1 Develop approaches and tests for dynamic sharing between AFRL and other sensors within frequency band

4.2.1.1 Identify Hardware/software obsolescence issues with incumbent systems

4.2.2 Provide recommendations and a test plan prior to testing that include but are not limited to:

4.2.2.1 Improved filtering

4.2.2.2 Improved interference tolerance via digital signal processing

4.2.2.3 Waveform improvements

4.2.2.4 Sector Blanking

4.2.2.5 Range/Azimuth cell based CFAR

4.2.3 Conduct lab and ground testing as required to verify the effectiveness of proposed solutions and provide verification/test results

4.2.4 Based on test results, provide a ROM cost and timeline of proposed retuning/modernization solutions and a cost benefit analysis (value of impacted license blocks vice cost of retuning/modernization)

4.3 Review Analysis and Modeling tools

4.3.1 Identify tools that can assess compression and relocation. Examples to include, but not limited to, RF Analyst (the tool recommended by AFSMO), cloud based computing, speed improvements, and supplemental data synthesis,

4.3.2 Recommend adjustments or new approaches. Examples to include, but not limited to, new algorithms, model improvements, and user features

5. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

5.1. Management objectives include maintaining clear government visibility into program schedule, performance, and risk while allowing the contractor maximum flexibility and innovation to manage the effort. This would include program schedule, cost, performance, risks, associate contractor agreements, subcontracts and data to meet contract objectives that satisfies all technical requirements.

5.2. Attend and Conduct Meetings. Host a post-award kickoff meeting within 30 days of contract award. Conduct program management reviews and technical interchange meetings. Develop agendas for all meetings jointly with the government.

5.3. Systems Engineering. Incorporate a disciplined systems engineering approach tailored to meet the Program and Contract Objectives to provide an integrated development program.

5.4. Training. Conduct training for the customers and users for any new hardware procedures implemented as part of the study or dynamic sharing tools that are developed as part of this contract.

5.5. Field Test and Data Collection. Test plan preparation for lab and ground testing to support technical and safety reviews, system safety and hazard identification.

6. DELIVERABLES/OUTPUTS

- For technical data and computer software documentation, see CDRL’s, attached as an Exhibit to this ARDIS ARA Call.

As part of the technical and management objectives, provided above, deliver software and materials, hardware prototypes, or equipment to demonstrate the research needed, as follows:

Prototype Software: Deliver any developed and/or any modified software, to include computer software or databases, during the course of the effort.

Materials: Procure and deliver materials to accomplish test objectives outlined in this SOO. Deliver all hardware prototypes or equipment to demonstrate the research needed.

7. OPSEC

General Operations Security (OPSEC) procedures, policies and awareness are required in an effort to reduce program vulnerability from successful adversary collection and exploitation of critical information. OPSEC will be applied throughout the life cycle of the contract. The

Critical Information List (CIL) will be provided upon request by AFRL/RYOY Information Protection Office. While working on the government installation, OPSEC guidance will be provided by the AFRL/RYOY Information Protection Office.

8. SAFETY OBJECTIVES

8.1. General office safety and associated training will be followed and administered.

8.2. The Contractor will enact safety policies and procedures which will mitigate any risk of injury/illness to employees and visiting government personnel.

8.3. The following requirements must be incorporated into the Statement of Work (SOW):

8.3.1. The Contractor must comply with all federal, state, and local safety and environmental regulations.

8.3.2. The Contractor will require an approved Safety Plan IAW AFI 91-202 AFRL Supplement 1 before any experiment may be conducted. The Contractor must comply with all Air Force safety and environmental regulations.

8.3.3. The Contractor must comply with system safety requirements contained in MIL- STD 882E, Section 4 “General Requirements” for any deliverable systems or hardware. The Contractor must identify safety-critical components of those systems or hardware, and software interfaces with those components. The Contractor must test and verify the safety-critical hardware and software for safety acceptance.