Enclosure 1_ SOW for Contested Logistics.pdf

STATEMENT OF

WORK

FOR

Enhanced Contested Logistics Software

January 29, 2025 Version 2

Prepared by:

Army Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office

ATTN: SAAL-RCCTO-CTO

Building 6010

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005

WARNING - This document contains technical data and / or technology whose export or disclosure to Non-U.S. Persons, wherever located, is restricted by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 C.F.R. Section 120-130) or the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 C.F.R. Section 730-774). This document CANNOT be exported (e.g., provided to a supplier outside of the United States) or disclosed to a Non- U.S. Person, wherever located, until a final jurisdiction and classification determination has been completed and approved by the cognizant U.S.

Army official, and any required U.S. Government approvals have been obtained. Violations are subject to severe criminal penalties.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Scope……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

1.1 Background………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

1.2 Potential Places of

Performance…………………………………………………………………………………………..4

1.3 Period of Performance…………………………………………………………………………………………….4

2 Applicable Documents……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..4

2.1 Army Regulations…………………………………………………………………………………………….…..4

2.2 Government Furnished Information (GFI)……………………………………………………………………….5

2.3 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)………………………………………………………………………………....5-7

2.4 Hardware/Software Deliverables…………………………………………………………………………………7

2.5 Media and File Format……………………………………………………………………………………………7 3 Tasks and Requirements……………………………………………………………………………………...………….7

3.1 Tasks……………………...………………………………………………………………………………………7

3.2 Requirements……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8

3.3 Project Management……………………………………………………………………………………………...9

3.4 Application of Knowledge Graphs, LLMs, and Other Deep Learning ML Models………………………...9

3.5 Product Development……………………………………………………………………………………………10

3.6 Human Machine Interface Formations (HMIF) Logistical Requirements………………………………………10

3.7 Project Management………………………………………………………………………….………………… 11 4 Travel……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13 5 Data Rights…………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………13 6 Government Furnished Property…………………………………………………………………..………………....…13 7 Security and Classification……………………………………………………………………………………………..13 8 Anti-terrorism (AT) and Operations Security (OPSEC)……………………………………………………………13-15

ATTACHMENT 1: QASP Template (Pages 16-20)

1.0 Scope

This Statement of Work (SOW) describes a summary of the project/effort to develop for the U.S. Army a Contested Logistics (CL) framework that provides a software for enhanced intelligence and visualization of in-transit assets to include maintenance and predictive maintenance requirements.

Contractor prototype solutions will utilize Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) technology to analyze different data types to help plan and optimize future logistics scenarios in contested environments. By using real-time data analysis and prediction capabilities, the suite shall identify and plan for potential enemy threats to logistics and supply lines at the operational and tactical levels. The benefits of this approach include improved inventory management at forward-deployed locations, faster decision-making, reduced complexity, enhanced in-transit asset visibility and more robust recommendations for enhancing overall operations.

CL software shall be designed to optimize logistics in contested environments by leveraging advanced AI and ML capabilities to provide dynamic decision support with accompanying visualizations. CL software shall integrate real-time data analysis and prediction, using large language model(s) (LLM), knowledge graph(s), or other Deep Learning ML models to enhance decision-making and operational efficiency by warfighters. The primary objective of this CL requirement is to provide the U.S. Army with a robust tool for the visualization and intelligence planning of in-transit assets, including fuel and other Army and Department of Defense (DOD) materiel in order to address Army Modernization priorities (See Army Modernization Strategy: Investing in the Future (U.S. Government Printing Office, 2021).), to include Multidomain Operations (MDO). Army leadership has concluded that there are gaps in the joint force’s ability to provide reliable, agile, responsive and survivable sustainment, causing senior leaders to ask how the Army is going to sustain itself and the joint force from fort to port to foxhole. It is imperative that the Army has a robust sustainment enterprise that can provide support over great distances in austere environments, both inter- and intra-theater, to prevail in conflict and ensure readiness in high-tempo MDO.

Developed capability will recommend Courses of Action (COAs) to warfighters and decision makers.

This SOW outlines the tasks, services, and work planned to achieve the CL project objectives. The tasks involve the application of LLM(s), other Deep Learning ML models, and knowledge graphs to contractor-identified and government-provided datasets to address the identified gaps in CL operations. The primary goal is to enhance the U.S. Army’s ability to sustain high operational tempo and maintain superior readiness of combat systems in logistical and supply chains, from source to the warfighter.

1.1 Background

The U.S. Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO) has identified a need for CL solutions. The requirement for CL refers to the challenges and complexities involved in managing and executing logistics operations in contested or hostile environments, such as war zones, areas affected by natural disasters, or regions with limited infrastructure and security concerns. In CL, the primary goal is to maintain dynamic planning capability in order to provide a reliable, visible, and secure flow of all classes of supplies and services to include maximum operational readiness while under adverse conditions that may include:

• Enemy threats: The risk of enemy forces attempting to disrupt or destroy logistics operations through attacks, ambushes, or other hostile effects.

• Degraded infrastructure: Damage to transportation networks, such as roads, bridges, airports, and seaports, can significantly impair logistics capabilities.

• Limited resources: Contested environments often have scarce resources, including fuel, water, and other essential supplies, making allocation decisions and subsequent resupply operations challenging.

• Environmental challenges: Extreme weather conditions, rough terrain, and other environmental factors can complicate logistics operations and hinder mobility.

• Lack of security: Contested areas may lack a stable security environment, increasing the risk of theft, sabotage, or other criminal activities targeting logistics assets.

CL operations require careful planning, coordination, and execution to overcome these challenges.

Strategies will include software aided intelligence and visualization as well as the use of armored or hardened vehicles, alternative transportation methods (such as air, maritime, or autonomous operations), dispersed supply chains/logistics networks, and enhanced security measures. Additionally, CL often relies on specialized personnel and equipment designed for operating in hostile environments. Effective CL operations are crucial for maintaining operational readiness and sustaining military or humanitarian efforts in challenging regions, as it ensures the timely delivery of essential supplies and resources needed to support operations or provide aid.

The Contractor’s CL software solution shall address the gaps and needs as outlined in this SOW.

1.2 Potential Places of Performance:

Fort Shafter, Hawaii Huntsville, Alabama Wiesbaden, Germany Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland Other travel locations and places of performance as required or directed

1.3 Period of Performance:

The period of performance (PoP) for this effort is twenty (20) months from date of contract award.

2.0 Applicable Documents:

The following documents are applicable to the extent cited. All revisions will be the latest available revision as of the agreement date.

2.1 Joint and Army Regulations

AR 25-2 Army Cybersecurity (4 APR 2019)

AR 530-1 Operations Security (FOUO) (26 SEP 2014)

AR 190-13

MIL-HDBK-831

The Army Physical Security Program (27 JUN 2019)

Preparation of Test Reports

MIL-HDBK-245D

Field Manual (FM) and JP 4-0 Joint Concept of Contested Logistics (JCCL)

Handbook for Preparation of DOD Statements of Work

Sustainment Operations

2.2 Government Furnished Information (GFI)/ Government Furnished Equipment (GFE):

The Government may furnish or make available to the Contractor any data, documentation and/or material deemed necessary to accomplish requirements of a resultant contract. The Government will provide the Contractor with GFI/GFE and access to Government network connectivity as necessary to accomplish requirements as defined herein, including Common Access Cards. Upon the project's kick off, contractor and the sponsor will start the process of identifying applicable data sources. To the extent possible, the sponsor shall make the raw data available to the Contractor. The Government shall provide the following:

• OPSEC information & Security Classification Form DD254

2.3 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) Deliverables:

All Data Item requirements referenced throughout this SOW are reflected in Table 1 below. Timely submission of deliverables is essential to successfully completing this requirement. All deliverables shall be prepared and submitted according to format, content, and schedule described in the SOW and the accompanying CDRLs (DD Form 1423). All delivery dates are based on calendar days (30 days = one (1) month). Specific acceptance criteria are provided in the applicable CDRLs. If a deliverable is unacceptable, the Contractor shall make the necessary corrections and redeliver to the Government.

Table 1 Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)

DID Number CDRL Number Title Delivery Date

DI-MGMT-81605 CDRL A001 Kick Off Meeting including a systems requirement review and IMS (SOW Para 3.7.2)

15 Days after award

IEEE 15288.2 CDRL A002 Preliminary Design Review (PDR) (SOW Para 3.7.6)

2 months after award

IEEE 15288.2 CDRL A003 Critical Design Review (CDR) (SOW Para 3.7.6)

4 months after award

DI-SESS-81248B CDRL A004 Interface Control Document (ICD) (SOW Para 3.5.1)

Draft at PDR Final at CDR

DI-SAFT-80102C CDRL A005 Safety Assessment Report (SAR)

(SOW Para 3.7.9)

Draft at CDR Final SAR at 14 months

MIL-STD-31000 CDRL A006 Technical Data Package (s) (TDPs) for device(s) and Source Code utilizing CL software framework.

(SOW Para 3.7.10)

2 weeks prior to PDR/CDR events

DI-ADMN-81250B CDRL A007 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM) and Interim Design & Program Reviews. Documented with Post Meeting Minutes. (SOW Para 3.2.8, 3.6.2, 3.6.3, 3.6.4, 3.6.5, 3.6.6, 3.7.3, 3.7.4, and 3.7.6)

As Required by the AOR or Project Lead

DI-MGMT-80937 CDRL A008 Test/Demo Plans – For Any Laboratory Demonstrations/Field Tests/Demos (SOW Para 3.2.9, 3.4.3, , and 3.6.5)

3 weeks prior to Laboratory or Field Demo (@ month 15)

MIL-HDBK-831 CDRL A009 Demonstration/Test Reports, including actual lab/field demonstrations (SOW Para 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.5, 3.2.6, 3.4.3, and 3.6.5)

1 month after Laboratory Demo and 1 month after the Field Demo

DI-MGMT-80368A CDRL A010 Monthly Status Report Including Financial Performance (SOW Para 3.7.7)

Due on 5th day after the end of the preceding month

MIL-PRF-63029J CDRL A011 Technical, User, & Training Manuals.

Contractor to deliver all technical, user, operational, training manuals and instructions for delivered hardware and software for proper system operations & maintenance.

(SOW Para 3.7.1)

20 months after award

DI-IPSC-81429 CDRL A012 Software Transition- The Software Transition Plan (STrP) shall identify the hardware, software, and other resources needed for life cycle support of deliverable software and describe the Contractor’s plans for

20 months after award transitioning deliverable items to the support agency. This DID requires the Contractor to develop and record plans for transitioning deliverable items to the support activity. (SOW Para 3.2.8)

DI-MISC-80711A CDRL A013 Final Closeout Review (FCR) Report/Meeting, including technical design, hardware deliverables, technical evaluations, operational evaluations, imbedded software, and all project conclusions / findings.

Summarize all in a final report & meeting. (SOW Para 3.7.8)

20 months after award

2.4 Hardware and Software Deliverables –

As part of this contract, the Contractor shall package and deliver the following items in support of this effort:

The Contractor shall provide software that meets the objectives outlined and agreed to in the PDR and the SOW. The software will be provided in the Microsoft 365 Government Community Cloud High (GCCH) Azure Cloud Environment. The Contractor will provide the software in a package that can be deployed and operated in combat and forwardly deployed military environments with supported hardware capabilities. The Contractor shall provide product specifications and any documentation that comes with the product software and operation manuals to enable users to utilize the software effectively. The Contractor will provide product reach-back support for a period of six months post contract to support product evaluation.

2.5 Media and File Format

Microsoft (MS) Office suite applications (MS Word, MS Excel, MS PowerPoint, and MS Project) are the preferred file formats for data furnished under this agreement unless specified otherwise. For unclassified data uploaded to the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) website, MS Internet Explorer 7.0 (or later version) is the preferred browser. Other formats for the transmittal of agreement documentation and methods for electronically signing a Material Inspection and Receiving Report (DD Form 250) shall be set forth in the agreement.

3.0 Tasks and Requirements:

3.1 Application of CL Software to Address CL Requirements:

The Contractor shall leverage its AI/ML technology and use operational field data to test and demonstrate its CL software suite. The synthetic data set(s) of the Contractor’s choosing may be utilized by the Contractor in CL software suite development but must be presented to the Government for approval as part of the test plan required by CDRL A008 prior to testing or executing the demonstration. This demonstration using operational field data will focus on the data sources identified in 3.1.2 below. By using real-time data analysis and prediction capabilities, the suite must demonstrate its ability to identify and plan for potential enemy threats to logistics and supply networks. The prototype will provide a common operating picture (COP) and prove out the benefits of this approach to include improved inventory management at forward-deployed locations, faster decision-making, reduced complexity, and more robust recommendations for enhancing overall operations. The prototype deliverable will show how the software suite will configure the capabilities along with the unique data sets and needs of the U.S.

Army to create the force multiplier needed to enable decision dominance during future conflict.

3.1.1 The Contractor shall demonstrate the value of the CL software in CL and related sub-elements of logistical activities to include maintenance (including predictive maintenance), supply chain management, asset tracking, lead-time planning, modes of transportation, and communications of logical information and data. The prototype must show how the application of AI technologies will be used to assist warfighters in decision making for all aspects of logistics and asset visibility/domain awareness. The prototype demonstration shall be shown in real-time, and a detailed report of the prototype shall be generated after the demonstration IAW CDRL A009.

3.1.2 Operational Data Integration and Testing. Contractor may use synthetic data in CL software suite development and initial demonstrations. To support CDRL A008 and CDRL A009, contractor shall in consultations with the government identify and utilize operational field data to test the CL software's ability to manage logistics for Classes III (Fuel), V (Ammunition), and IX (Repair Parts). The operational field data sets shall be representative of operational scenarios and must be approved by the Government prior to testing and test results reported IAW CDRL A009. The Contractor shall demonstrate its utility for Class III (CLIII), Class V (CLV), and Class IX (CLIX) materiel using different data types to analyze, plan, and optimize future logistics scenarios in contested environments.

3.2 Application of Computational Knowledge Graphs and Large Language Models, and Incorporation of Logistics Data - Technical Approach: The Contractor shall apply knowledge graphs, large language models (LLMs), and other Deep Learning ML models to either government-provided operational field data or Contractor-defined data sets in order to address the i gaps in CL operations. This task is focused on strengthening the U.S. Army’s capacity to maintain a high operational tempo, ensure peak operational readiness, and extend its operational reach. The overall technical approach shall be structured around the following key tasks:

3.2.1: System Integration and Customization. Integrate CL software with Army logistics and command systems (e.g., EBS, Global Command and Control System – Army (GCCS-A), Command Post Computing Environment (CPCE)).

3.2.2: AI Model Optimization. Optimize AI algorithms for military logistics scenarios.

3.2.3: Real-Time Demonstration of Capabilities. Demonstrate the real-time capabilities of the CL software in providing a Common Operating Picture (COP) and optimizing inventory management, decision making, and logistics planning in contested environments IAW CDRL A009. The COP shall integrate with existing Army COP systems; RCCTO does not desire a stand-alone COP.

3.2.4: Addressing Army Capability Gaps. Demonstrate how CL software addresses known Army logistics capability gaps, including:

3.2.4.1 Improvement of Fuel Distribution Logistics: Provide visibility into operational and tactical distribution needs, optimizing Class III bulk distribution using government-provided data and recommending optimal use of ground and other distribution assets (e.g. air, rail).

3.2.4.2 Enhancing Mobility and Readiness: Ensure timely delivery of Class III and Class V supplies to Brigade Combat Teams and Command Posts, optimizing supply chain management.

3.2.4.4 Maintaining Combat Platform Readiness: Leverage predictive maintenance and real-time monitoring to enhance the readiness of combat platforms, with recommendations for optimizing Class IX distribution.

3.2.5: Scenario-Based Testing and Validation: Conduct field tests to validate the CL software’s performance in simulated contested environments IAW CDRL A009.

3.2.6: Risk Management and Mitigation: As part of testing and demonstration, identify and mitigate potential risks associated with AI deployment in CL IAW CDRL A009.

3.2.7 Application of Knowledge Graphs, Large Language Models (LLMs), or other Deep Learning ML Models: Enhance the CL software’s data analysis and decision-making capabilities by integrating knowledge graphs, LLMs, and/or other Deep Learning ML models into the system. Use AI-Agent driven and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG)-enhanced LLMs to process and analyze vast amounts of logistics data, predicting potential supply chain disruptions and optimizing resource allocation. Integrate disparate data sources into a knowledge graph, mapping relationships between data points to provide a holistic view of the logistics landscape.

3.2.8 Systems Requirements Review, Documentation, and Transition Planning Identify and document the specific U.S. Army requirements for the CL software solution, ensuring alignment with operational needs and constraints IAW CDRL A007. Additionally, Contractor shall identify Army requirements for the CL software solution and document those requirements as part of the Software Transition Plan (CDRL A012).

3.2.9 Test Plan Development and Execution Develop and execute a comprehensive test plan, including both lab testing and field demonstrations to validate the capabilities of the CL software IAW CDRL A008.

3.3 Addressing Army Capability Gaps:

3.3.1 Improve fuel distribution logistics by providing visibility into operational and tactical distribution needs, ensuring units are adequately supplied before the Line of Departure (LD). CL software will optimize the CLIII Bulk distribution using either government-provided or contractor-defined data to account for ground-delivery capacity shortfalls and recommend best use of ground assets combined with other distribution (air, rail, other) techniques.

3.3.2 Enhance the mobility and operational readiness of Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) and Command Posts by optimizing supply chain management and ensuring timely delivery of CLIII and CLV supplies to the Division Support Areas.

3.3.3 Maintain the readiness of combat platforms with advanced data systems by leveraging predictive maintenance and real-time monitoring capabilities that will allow for recommendation of CLIX Distribution.

3.4 Application of Knowledge Graphs, LLMs, and Other Deep Learning ML Models to Government- Provided Data Sets

Capabilities include:

3.4.1 Enhancing Data Analysis: Using LLMs or other Deep Learning ML models, the CL software shall analyze vast amounts of logistics data to provide actionable insights. This includes predicting potential supply chain disruptions, optimizing resource allocation, and identifying critical dependencies in the logistics network.

3.4.2 Knowledge Graph Integration: The knowledge graph will integrate disparate data sources, providing a holistic view of the logistics landscape. It will map relationships between different data points, such as supply routes, inventory levels, and transportation assets, enabling more informed decision-making.

3.4.3 Contractor shall provide a test plan (CDRL A008) before any laboratory testing, demonstrations, and actual field testing/demonstrations and a test report (CDRL A009) after them.

3.5 Product Development

3.5.1 Initial Product Development: The Contractor shall advance a prototype of its CL software based on the approved Preliminary Design Review (PDR). This phase of product development will leverage some of the data sets provided by the community of interest (COI) (potentially the 21st Theater Sustainment Command in Kaiserslautern, Germany and the 8th Theater Sustainment Command in the Pacific) in Requirements Gathering and Analysis. The data will likely be manually entered and potentially inaccurate. The Contractor shall use the real/raw logistics data from multiple sources and relational databases that use structured query language (SQL), or similar data management tools, and continue to use sufficient operational field and synthetic data to show efficacy of the predictive capabilities for CLIII, CLV, and CLIX materiel. The Contractor shall develop techniques for automatically identifying trustworthy data and removing. The Contractor shall explore the impact of data on readiness at various echelons starting at Corps, then Division, down to Platoon. The Contractor shall report at PDR and CDR the impact(s) at different phases of the fight beyond Joint Operations Phase 1 (deter) and into Phases 2 (seize the initiative) and 3 (dominate). An Interface Control Document (ICD) that defines interfaces between systems and components shall be presented as a draft at the PDR and as a final at CDR IAW CDRL A004.

3.5.2 Based on operational field data and vendor-provided synthetic data, Contractor shall build, train, validate, and document the ML models for:

3.5.2.1 Predicting consumption of Fuel and lubricants

3.5.2.2 Predicting consumption of Ammunition

3.5.2.3 Predicting parts / platforms consumptions

3.5.2.4 Predicting platforms maintenance requirements, to include frequency, timing of said maintenance

3.5.3 Refined Product Development: The Contractor shall refine the design based on feedback from the PDR, lessons learned, and findings from the test and demonstrations performed, and feedback from Critical Design Review (CDR). The Contractor shall replace all synthetic data with real historical data from warfighter exercises (i.e., National Training Center (NTC)) and real-world sources like Global Command Support System (GCSS), Total Ammunition Management Information System (TAMIS), Bulk Petroleum Contingency Report (REPOL), other operational field data sources, etc. to demonstrate efficacy of the CL software in realistic scenarios. The Contractor shall leverage a breadth of data provided by the Community of Interest (COI) to accurately demonstrate the readiness suite.

3.6 Human Machine Interface Formations (HMIF) Logistical Requirements

3.6.1 HMIF represents a coordained investment in the development of robotic combat formations. However, little is known of the logistical needs of these HMIF formations, which represents both a knowledge and cost gap. These gaps relate to determining the logistical tail of these robotic platforms and sensors, specifically in CLIII and V, maintenance requirements, with a focus on predictive maintenance, and the logistical lifecycle costs of the HMIF equipment, hardware, and software. The Contractor shall analyze and develop recommendations for using the CL software tool in supporting the logistical and operational needs of HMIF.

This includes addressing the unique challenges posed by the logistical requirements of robotic platforms and sensors, particularly in the areas of Class III (fuel and lubricants), Class V (ammunition), and Class IX (maintenance), predictive maintenance, and lifecycle process.

3.6.2 The Contractor shall perform the analysis and develop recommendations (tools, processes, options, costs, benefits and risk) for the use of its CL software prototype suite on all aspects of the HMIF operational prototypes, hardware, platforms, sensors, and systems. Contractor shall evaluate HMIF prototypes to identify logistical tail requirements, focusing on the consumption of CLIII, CLV supplies, and CLIX maintenance needs. The predictive maintenance capabilities of the CL software suite must be clearly demonstrated. The Contractor shall coordinate with HMIF stakeholders and program managers to determine the logistical requirements of the robotic HMIF prototypes with a determination on how the CL software will be used to support the HMIF capabilities. The Contractor shall identify the data required to leverage its CL software on either a holistic HMIF construct or on an individual platform and sensors basis. The deliverable will be a detailed report, IAW CDRL A007, on its findings and analysis on the logistical needs for HMIF that will illustrate how the CL software prototype will integrate and operate in contested combat environments. Contractor shall clearly demonstrate the use and utility of CL software for HMIF Platforms and Payloads. Contractor shall identify the data sets required and define the tests needed to demonstrate CL software capabilities in support of HMIF logistical requirements, including predictive maintenance.

Contractor shall conduct such tests and demonstrations of CL software and shall deliver the reports of the results in accordance with the guidelines of MIL-HDBK-831 and CDRL A007.

3.6.3 CL software shall demonstrate its optimization for the CLV and CLIII Bulk distribution using government-provided data from HMIF platforms and/or payloads to account for ground-delivery capacity shortfalls and recommend best use of ground assets combined with other distribution (air, rail, other) techniques. Interfacing with HMIF datasets and supporting headquarters, CL software prototype will dynamically recommend re-tasking of assets and predict re-supply timelines for logisticians to support continuous operations. Demonstrations and reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007.

3.6.4 CL software shall be customized for HMIF adaption and optimization of HMIF operational environments, integrating the specific data sets related to robotic platforms, sensors, and associated logistical requirements. Reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007.

3.6.5 Conduct scenario-based testing for HMIF logistics and conduct field tests and simulations to validate the effectiveness of CL software in managing HMIF logistics, focusing on predictive maintenance, supply chain resilience, and operational readiness in contested environments. Reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007; test plans and test reports shall be delivered IAW CDRLs A008 and A009.

3.6.6 Coordinate and engage with HMIF stakeholders, including program managers and end-users, to refine CL software integration with HMIF platforms and payloads to ensure alignment with operational requirements. Reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007.

3.7 Project Management

3.7.1 Planned services and activities for each task and deliverable shall include the following:

• Stakeholder Engagement: Regular meetings with Army stakeholders to gather requirements and feedback.

• System Design and Development: Iterative design and development of the CL software, incorporating feedback from reviews and testing phases.

• Testing and Validation: Comprehensive testing of the CL software in simulated and real-world environments to ensure it meets performance requirements.

• Deployment and Training: Deployment of the CL software to designated locations (see Para.

1.3 above), accompanied by documented user training sessions and manuals to ensure effective adoption and utilization. (CDRL A011).

• Project Management and Reporting: Ongoing project management activities, including status reporting, risk management, and issue resolution, to ensure timely delivery of project milestones.

3.7.2 The Contractor shall coordinate with the Government Agreements Officer Representative (AOR) to conduct a Formal Kickoff meeting in accordance with (CDRL A001). During the kickoff meeting, the Contractor shall present a detailed project plan, review the integrated master schedule (including analysis of critical path activities), review capability requirements, and present an assessment of project risks and opportunities.

3.7.3 Gather and analyze requirements from key stakeholders. This shall include an environmental scan working across the community of interest to identify the data available and how it can be leveraged for predictive analysis. For the purposes of the operational prototype the focus will be on CLIII and CLV.

However, the solution should monitor the CLIX data opportunities as they become available. Document functional and technical requirements. Reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007.

3.7.4 Initial Product Development and Report. Advance and/or modify a CL software prototype based on the approved PDR. This phase of product development will leverage some of the operational field data sets provided by the community of interest in 3.5.1, potentially the 8th and 21st Theater Sustainment Commands (TSC), to compare and contrast requirements in these two different theaters of operation. The data will likely be insufficient and incomplete. Use the elements of operational field data and generate sufficient source data including synthetic data to show efficacy of the predictive capabilities for CLIII and CLV. Develop techniques for automatically identifying trustworthy data and removing hand-jammed dirty data. Explore the impact of the data on readiness at various echelons starting at Corps, then Division, down to Platoon. Note where available the impact at different phases of the fight beyond Phase 1 and into Phases 2 and 3. Reports under this section shall be IAW CDRL A007.

3.7.5 Refined Product Development and Report. Refine the design based on feedback from the PDR, lessons learned from the 3.5.1 Initial Development, and feedback from the CDR. Replace any synthetic data with real historical data from warfighter exercises and Combat Training Centers and real-world sources like GCSS, TAAMIS, REPOL, other operational field data sources etc., to demonstrate efficacy of the readiness suite.

3.7.6 The Contractor shall coordinate with the Government AOR, and stakeholders identified by the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) for project reviews, Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs), and other technical exchanges as required. (CDRLs A002, A003 & A007)

3.7.7 The Contractor shall provide the Government AOR monthly technical and financial reports (CDRL A010).

3.7.8 The Contractor shall coordinate with the Government AOR to conduct a Final Closeout review meeting (with report) upon completion of all requirements delineated in this SOW (CDRL A013).

3.7.9 The Contractor shall coordinate with the Government AOR to draft and submit a Safety Assessment Report (SAR) (CDRL A005).

3.7.10 The Contractor shall provide the Government with the Technical Data Package (TDP) and Source Code for the delivered CL software (CDRL A006).

4.0 Travel

The Contractor will travel with five (5) employees per trip to attend four (4) Design Review events to demonstrate the capabilities of the developed solution. One (1) kick off meeting with 3 employees at APG, MD with Government stakeholders. Government AOR will approve travel in advance (Government email approval is adequate).

5.0 Data Rights

All products, data, and software developed by the Contractor in support of its proposal for this SOW shall be delivered with unlimited rights (UR) to the Government as delineated in the clause at FAR 52.227-23 – Rights to Proposal Data (Technical). Additionally, Government data right requirements under this contract are regulated by FAR clause 52.227-14, Rights in Data-General, Alternative III. The Contractor shall comply with FAR clause 52.227-15, Representation of Limited Rights and Restricted Computer Software, and complete the requirements of paragraph (b) of that clause and submit with its proposal. Rights in technical data for commercial items shall be provided in accordance with the DFARS clause 252.227- 7015, Technical Data – Commercial Items, and rights in technical data for noncommercial items shall be provided in accordance with DFARS clause 252.227-7013, Technical Data-Noncommercial Items. The Government also retains the right to validate any restrictive markings under DFARS clause 252.227-7037, Validation of Restrictive Markings on Technical Data and asserts its rights under DFARS clause 252.227- 7030, Technical Data-Withholding of Payment. Furthermore, FAR clause 52.227-16, Additional Data Requirements, gives the Government the right to obtain any data during contract performance or within three (3) years after final delivery under this contract.

6.0 Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information (GFE/GFP/GFI)

The Contractor may require GFE, GFP, or GFI for this requirement. Requirements for the Government are limited to network and dataset access by the Contractor. (See Paragraph 2.2 above.)

7.0 Security and Classification

All hardware developed as part of this effort is anticipated to be unclassified or controlled unclassified information (CUI) and raw data taken during the test events and final demonstration will also be unclassified or CUI.

The Government shall provide the following:

• OPSEC information & Security Classification Form DD254

8.0 Anti-terrorism (AT) and Operations Security (OPSEC) [Standard Language]

8.1 AT Level I Training. All contractor employees, including subcontractor employees, requiring access to Army installations, facilities, and controlled-access areas shall complete AT Level I awareness training within 30 calendar days after the contract start date or effective date of incorporation of this requirement into the contract, whichever is applicable. The Contractor shall submit certificates of completion for each affected contractor employee and subcontractor employee, to the COR or to the contracting officer, if a COR is not assigned, within 15 calendar days after completion of training by all employees and subcontractor personnel. AT Level I awareness training is available at the following website:

http://jko.jten.mil

8.2 Access and general protection/security policy and procedures. Contractor and all associated sub-contractors’ employees shall provide all information required for background checks to meet installation access requirements to be accomplished by installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. Contractor workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements (FAR clause 52.204-9, Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel) as directed by DoD, Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) and/or local policy. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any individual facility or installation change, the Government may require changes in contractor security matters or processes.

8.2.1 Before CAC issuance, the Contractor employee requires, at a minimum, a favorably adjudicated National Agency Check with Inquiries (NACI) or an equivalent or higher investigation in accordance with Army Directive 2014-05. The Contractor employee will be issued a CAC only if duties involve one of the following: (1) Both physical access to a DoD facility and access, via logon, to DoD networks on-site or remotely; (2) Remote access, via logon, to a DoD network using DoD-approved remote access procedures;

or (3) Physical access to multiple DoD facilities or multiple non-DoD federally controlled facilities on behalf of the DoD on a recurring basis for a period of 6 months or more. At the discretion of the sponsoring activity, an initial CAC may be issued based on a favorable review of the FBI fingerprint check and a successfully scheduled National Agency Check with Inquiries (NACI) at the Office of Personnel Management.

8.2.2 Contractor and all associated sub-contractors employees shall comply with adjudication standards and procedures using the National Crime Information Center Interstate Identification Index (NCIC-III) and Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) (Army Directive 2014-05/AR 190-13), applicable installation, facility and area commander installation/facility access and local security policies and procedures (provided by government representative), or, at OCONUS locations, in accordance with status of forces agreements and other theater regulations.

8.3 iWATCH Training. The Contractor and all associated sub-contractors shall brief all employees on the local iWATCH program (training standards provided by the requiring activity ATO). This local developed training will be used to inform employees of the types of behavior to watch for and instruct employees to report suspicious activity to the COR. This training shall be completed within 60 calendar http://jko.jten.mil/ days of contract award and within 30 calendar days of new employees commencing performance with the results reported to the COR NLT 75 calendar days after contract award.

8.4 All contractor employees with access to a government info system must be registered in the ATCTS (Army Training Certification Tracking System) at commencement of services and must successfully complete the DOD Information Assurance Awareness prior to access to the IS and then annually thereafter

8.5 The Contractor shall develop an OPSEC Standing Operating Procedure (SOP)/Plan within 90 calendar days of contract award, to be reviewed and approved by the responsible Government OPSEC officer. This plan will include a process to identify critical information, where it is located, who is responsible for it, how to protect it and why it needs to be protected. The Contractor shall implement OPSEC measures as ordered by the commander. In addition, the contractor shall have an identified certified Level II OPSEC coordinator per AR 530-1.

8.6 Per AR 530-1 Operations Security, the Contractor employees must complete Level I OPSEC Awareness training. New employees must be trained within 30 calendar days of their reporting for duty and annually thereafter.

8.7 All contractor employees and associated sub-contractor employees must complete the DoD IA awareness training before issuance of network access and annually thereafter. All contractor employees working IA/IT functions must comply with DoD and Army training requirements in DoDD 8570.01, DoD 8570.01-M and AR 25-2 within six months of appointment to IA/IT functions.

8.8 Per DoD 8570.01-M, DFARS 252.239.7001 and AR 25-2, the Contractor employees supporting IA/IT functions shall be appropriately certified upon contract award. The baseline certification as stipulated in DoD 8570.01-M must be completed upon contract award.

8.9 All hardware developed as part of this effort is anticipated to be controlled unclassified information (CUI) and raw data taken during the test events and final demonstration will also be CUI.

8.10 Threat Awareness Reporting Program. For all contractors with security clearances. Per AR 381-12 Threat Awareness and Reporting Program (TARP), contractor employees must receive annual TARP training by a Counter-Intelligence (CI) agent or other trainer as specified in 2-4b.

8.11 Contractors must adhere to Controlled Unclassified information requirements IAW DFARS:

252.204.7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, https://www.acquisition.gov/dfars/252.204-7012-safeguarding-covered-defense-information-and-cyber-incident-reporting. And DoDI 5200.48, “Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI),” section 5.3 – Requirements for DoD Contractors.

https://www.acquisition.gov/dfars/252.204-7012-safeguarding-covered-defense-information-and-cyber-incident-reporting https://www.acquisition.gov/dfars/252.204-7012-safeguarding-covered-defense-information-and-cyber-incident-reporting

Attachment 1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

For

Project Name: Contested Logistics Enhanced Software Contractor:

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose. The role of the Government in quality assurance is to ensure contract standards are achieved. The purpose of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to identify the methods and procedures the Government will use to evaluate contractor actions while performing the requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW) and the proposal. It is designed to provide an effective surveillance method by monitoring contractor performance against the requirements in the

SOW.

1.1.1. The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services the Contractor is required to perform for providing services, prototypes, hardware, software, research & development, and data item deliverables.

1.1.2. The QASP has been developed by the Rapid Capabilities & Critical Technologies Office

(RCCTO). It is designed to provide direction to personnel performing contract surveillance activities. Personnel surveying the contract terms and conditions, and SOW requirements will periodically review the QASP throughout the life of the contract.

2.0. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

2.1. Agreement Officer’s Representative. The Agreement Officer’s Representative (AOR) is responsible for quality assurance guidance and to ensure that contract quality requirements, provisions, standards, and thresholds are defined, practical, enforceable, necessary, and verifiable.

2.1.1. The AOR evaluates and documents contractor performance in accordance with the QASP and

SOW.

2.1.2. The AOR notifies the Contracting Officer of any significant performance deficiencies using a Contractor Discrepancy Report with supporting documentation.

2.1.3. The AOR maintains surveillance documentation.

2.1.4. The AOR recommends improvements to the QASP and SOW throughout the life of the contract.

2.2. Contracting Officer/Agreement’s Officer. The Contracting Officer/Agreement’s Officer is responsible for safeguarding the interests of the United States Government in contractual relationships.

Only the Contracting Officer is authorized to bind the Government and then, only to the extent of the authority delegated to them through the issuance of a warrant.

2.2.1. The Agreement’s Officer delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance in accordance with the terms of the contract.

2.2.2. The Agreement’s Officer informs the Contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all quality assurance personnel assigned to the contract.

3.0. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

3.1. Scope of Work. The scope of this contract/agreement is for the Contractor to develop for the Army a Contested Logistics (CL) capability that provides software and tools for intelligence and visualization of in-transit assets to include maintenance and predictive maintenance requirements. Contractor prototype solution will utilize AI/ML technology to analyze different data types to help plan and optimize future logistics scenarios in contested environments. This CL technology will focus on the most relevant data sources for the Army’s mission.

4.0. QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

4.1. Quality Control Program. The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract.

5.0 SURVEILLANCE. The AOR will perform monthly surveillance based on the quality and effectiveness of the Contractor’s data deliverables as well as the services provided.

5.1 Unacceptable Performance. If the number of complaints/defects exceeds the performance threshold for any objective, the AOR will determine the possible cause of this unacceptable performance. Government-caused complaints/defects will not be counted against the Contractor. The same applies to any other requirement of the contract when Government-caused complaints/defects are the cause of unacceptable contractor performance. If the Contractor’s performance is judged unacceptable for any requirement by the AOR, the AOR will inform the contracting officer for resolution. Significant performance deficiencies must be submitted to the Contracting Officer using a Contractor Discrepancy Report and include supporting documentation.

6.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.

6.1 Monthly Progress Reports

6.2 Project Reviews and Technical Exchanges

6.3 Contract Data Requirements List Submittals

6.4 Final Closeout Review Meeting

7.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

7.1 Overview. This PRS summary identifies the services required by the SOW over which the Government will exercise surveillance.

7.2 Performance Evaluation. Performance of a service will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance threshold. Revising and resubmitting the documentation at no cost to the Government is the preferred method for correcting unacceptable performance. The Contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future.

7.3 Performance Objectives, Standards, Thresholds, and Surveillance Methods. The services required by the Contractor are summarized into performance objectives along with the minimum standards that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement. These thresholds are critical to mission success.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Task or Deliverable

Performance Indicator

Performance Threshold

Surveillance Method

PRS # 1.

Monthly Status Reports

(SOW Para.

3.7.7, CDRL

A010)

Status Reports are thorough, accurate, complete and accepted in accordance with the Data Item Description (DID) and the Government schedule.

95% accuracy and completeness with first draft.

100% accuracy with one correction/rewrite.

100% inspection of deliverables

PRS # 2 Project Reviews and Technical Exchanges (TIMs)

(SOW Para.

3.7.6, CDRL

A007)

Reviews and Exchanges are conducted timely and relevant and required information is shared and charts, data, reports are accurate, complete and accepted by the AOR/Project Lead (PL).

95% accuracy and completeness

100% accuracy and completeness with one correction/rewrite.

100%

Task or

Deliverable

Performance Indicator

Performance Threshold

Surveillance Method

PRS # 3

Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs)/DIDs (Table 1-DIDs)

All CDRLs/DIDs are thorough, accurate, complete and accepted in accordance with the DID, CDRL guidance and delivered according to the required dates in the contract/agreement.

95% accuracy and completeness with first draft.

100% accuracy with one correction/rewrite.

100% Timely. First draft submitted according to the award schedule.

Rewrites submitted according to the

AOR/PL

timeline/schedule.

100%

PRS # 4 Final Closeout Review Meeting Report

(SOW Para

3.7.8, CDRL

A013)

Final Report contains required information and are accurate, complete and accepted in accordance with the DID and the Government schedule

95% accuracy and completeness

100% accuracy and completeness r one correction/rewrite.

100%

7.4 In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance Rating

Criteria

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the…