Kronos_FoS_CSO_2.0.pdf

Kronos Program

Family of Systems (FoS)

Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO)

Dated 01 July 2026

Record of Revisions

Revision Description Date Initial Release 1.0 Establishment of CSO 1.0 and Opens 1st Call 12 Nov 2025 Amendment Admin Changes 02 Dec 2025 Initial Release 2.0 Establishment of CSO 2.0 01 July 2026

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

2. PURPOSE

3. CSO APPROACH

4. GENERAL INFORMATION

5. SUBMISSION INFORMATION

6. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

ATTACHMENT 1: PHASE 1 – Initial Submission

ATTACHMENT 2: PHASE 2 – TECHNICAL AND PRICE PROPOSAL

ATTACHMENT 3: REVIEW, EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

ATTACHMENT 4: AREAS OF INTEREST (AOI)

Focus Area Statements (FAS)

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1

1.1 Space Systems Command (SSC), through its Kronos Program of Record, is issuing a 3 Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) in accordance with Revised Defense Federal 4 Acquisition Regulation Supplement (R-DFARS) 212.70, Defense Commercial Solutions 5 Opening, 10 U.S.C. §4022 - “Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain 6 prototype projects,” and 10 U.S.C. §4023 - “Procurement for Experimental Purposes.” 7 Under the Kronos Family of Systems (FoS) CSO, the Government may award proposals 8 received in response to a general solicitation to acquire innovative products, technologies, 9 or services based on a review of solutions by scientific, technological, or other subject 10 matter expert peers within the program management office (PMO). “Innovative”, for CSO 11 purposes and in accordance with (IAW) 10 U.S.C. § 3458 and R-DFARS 212.70, means 12 any new technology, process, or method, including research and development (R&D), or 13 any new application of an existing technology, process or method, that is new as of the 14 date of the submission of a proposal . The Government may award FAR-based or Other 15 Transaction Agreement (OTA) awards as a result of this CSO. All awards under this CSO 16 will be treated as commercial. 17

1.2 The Government is interested in a broad range of solutions spanning from foundational 19 cloud computing services to mission-specific software applications and software 20 development services to include, but are not limited to: 21

Advanced cloud-native services 23 Scalable and secure platform solutions 24 Agile software development methodologies and tooling 25 Mission-driven C2 applications 26 Data integration, management, and visualization capabilities 27 Artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and decision-support tools 28 Cybersecurity and zero-trust architectures 29

This CSO seeks to identify and leverage cutting-edge innovations that can enhance the 31 scalability, flexibility, interoperability, and resiliency of the Kronos program in alignment 32 with the evolving operational needs of the US Space Force (USSF) Command and Control 33 (C2) mission. 34

2. PURPOSE 36

2.1 This CSO is a competitive solicitation under R-DFARS 212.70. It is focused on identifying 38 and acquiring innovative technologies and services to support the mission of the PMO. 39 The Government seeks commercial innovative solutions (prototypes only) that could 40 fulfill requirements, close capability gaps, and provide potential technological 41 advancements. The Government’s Areas of Interests (AOIs) are outlined in Attachment 42

4. 43

3. CSO APPROACH 45

3.1 The Government encourages proposals that span a wide spectrum of possible technical 47 and business solutions in response to the specific AOIs. Each AOI will identify the interest 48 for an individual program requirement or a broadly defined interest area covering a range 49 of program requirements. The Government anticipates releasing a staggered set of Calls 50 for each AOI, notionally in accordance with the corresponding announcement. Offerors 51 may submit solutions in response to any open Call; however, the Government will only 52 review submissions received during the submission period identified in the applicable 53 Call. When issuing a Call under this CSO, the Government may provide none, one or more 54 focus areas within the scope of a specific AOI to address emerging mission needs. The 55 Government will evaluate solutions submitted in response to a Call based on the AOI and 56 any focus areas identified in that Call. The Government may retain submissions for future 57 consideration under subsequent Calls, subject to the terms of this CSO. Unless otherwise 58 specified, all submissions received in response to a Call will be governed by the terms and 59 conditions of this CSO. 60

3.2 The Government may utilize Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a tool to assist in the review 61 and evaluation of proposals. AI will be used to support human evaluators in assessing 62 proposals against the evaluation criteria established in the CSO documentation. 63

3.3 The Government anticipates making award(s) primarily using OTA authority. Where 65 appropriate, the Government may also award FAR-based contracts. If FAR-based 66 contracts are used, fixed-price type contracts are anticipated; incentives may be considered 67 when supported by risk analysis. 68

3.4 Upon favorable review and evaluation, the Government may choose to award an OTA for 70

Prototype phase as deemed appropriate for the transaction. The Agreements Officer will 71 negotiate directly with the Offeror on the terms and conditions of the OTA, including 72 payments, and will execute the OTA on behalf of the Government. 73

3.5 Upon completion of the prototype phase and fulfilling the defined criteria, the 75

Government reserves the right to transition to a follow-on production phase without 76 further competition as authorized under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(f). The decision to proceed with 77 a follow-on production award will depend on the results of the prototype and the 78 availability of funding. A follow-on production award is not guaranteed. 79

3.6 Awards resulting from this CSO will be made based on the process described in 81

Attachment 3. The Government reserves the right to fund all, some, one, or none of the 82 Phase 2 proposals submitted. The Government may elect to fund only part of a submitted 83 proposal and may incrementally fund any or all awards under this CSO. All awards are 84 subject to the availability of funds. 85

3.7 All coordination and communication between Offerors and the Government will be 87 conducted as specified in Section 4. 88

4. GENERAL INFORMATION 90

4.1 POINT OF CONTACT: 92

4.1.1 CSO & AOI General Questions – General CSO Questions may be sent via email to 94 the CSO Technical Team at SSC.BMZ.SYD85@spaceforce.mil . Due to the large amount 95 of expected interest in this CSO, and to maintain a written record of questions, this is the 96 only email address that will be used for general question communication. 97 The following shall be utilized in the email subject line: (AOI X) Kronos CSO General 99 Question(s). 100

4.2 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION: All Phase 1 and 2 submissions shall be unclassified. 102 For Phase 2 submissions, offerors should possess all required personnel security 104 clearances, facility clearances, and other infrastructure requirements necessary to perform 105 any proposed classified work in accordance with the draft Contract Security Classification 106 Specification (DD Form 254) without reliance on Government resources. 107 As a wide variety of responses, as well as potential awards of diverse scope and associated 109 classified classification levels under this CSO are possible, the Government will provide 110 award specific security details for individual award actions as required. A draft DD Form 111 254 will be provided with a Phase 2 request for proposal, as necessary. 112

5. SUBMISSION INFORMATION 114

5.1 SUBMISSION OVERVIEW: This CSO establishes a rolling competitive solicitation 116 framework for SSC. The Government may amend this document to set up Call(s). A Call 117 sets the acceptance window to submit solutions against specific AOI(s) and, if applicable, 118 the AOI’s focus area. The Government may update, delete, or add AOIs by amending this 119 CSO document. 120 The Government will not reimburse companies for the costs associated with 121 submissions for any phase. 122 Submissions for all phases shall be sent electronically. Hardcopies for any phase will 123 not be accepted. 124 Offerors shall mark each page of the Phase 1, Phase 1B and Phase 2 submissions that 125 contain proprietary information. 126

5.2 TWO PHASED SUBMISSION PROCESS: This CSO will be conducted in two phases. Phase 128 1 is structured to provide the Government with an initial Call for Solutions while Phase 2 captures 129 proposal submission. The Government reserves the right to select none of the submissions. 130

5.2.1 Phase 1 Submissions: Phase 1A submissions will be sent to the CSO email org box 132 by the date and time specified in the Call. If invited for Phase 1B, those submissions will 133 be scheduled by the Government and may be conducted either by email or by a video 134 teleconference meeting. Any documentation from Phase 1B shall be sent to the 135 Government through DoD SAFE. 136

5.2.2 Phase 2 – Technical and Price Proposal: Phase 2 submissions will be submitted to the 138 PCO/AO in accordance with the submission procedures outlined in the request for proposal. Phase 139 2 proposals will only be accepted from Offerors who, upon review of Phase 1 submission, have 140 received a request from the PCO/AO to submit a full proposal (Technical and Price). Proposals 141 shall not be submitted to the general questions email address. 142

6. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 144

6.1 DATA RIGHTS: It is the Government’s intention to acquire only Technical Data, 146 Computer Software, and Computer Software Documentation data rights necessary to 147 satisfy agency needs. For FAR-based contracts, the Government will follow R-DFARS 148 252.227-7989. For OTAs, the Government will negotiate data/IP rights consistent with 149 OTA authority. 150

6.2 FOREIGN PARTICIPATION: Foreign participation may be considered subject to export 152 control restrictions (ITAR/EAR), national security considerations, and disclosure of any 153 foreign ownership, control, or influence (FOCI). The research and test data produced 154 under a resultant contract or agreement may contain Military Critical Technology List 155 (MCTL) information whose export is restricted by Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S. 156 Sec 2751, et seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (Title 50, 157 U.S.C., App. 2401, et seq.). Request certification and registration from the Defense 158 Logistics Services Center (DLSC), Federal Center, 74 North Washington, Battle Creek, 159 MI 49016-3412 as soon as possible. 160

6.3 NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS: In order to review submissions resultant from any 162 phase, PROPRIETARY information may be given to Federally Funded Research and 163 Development Centers (FFRDC), Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA), 164 Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I), and/or Advisory and Assistance Services 165 (A&AS) contractors working for the Government. The non-Government advisors will 166 have signed a non-disclosure agreement with the Government prior to reviewing 167 submissions. 168

6.4 PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, ETHICAL 170

CONSIDERATIONS, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: All offerors shall fill out the 171 attached Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan Checklist and include 172 a plan as applicable. 173

6.5 OFFEROR FEEDBACK: For FAR-based contracts, the Government may provide 175 debriefings in accordance with RFO 52.212-1(e). It will not include a comparison of 176 submissions against a common Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of 177 Work (SOW) as the CSO provides no common PWS or SOW that interested parties must 178 respond to and instead represents opportunity for submission of a variety of innovative 179 commercial items, technologies, and/or services that represent meaningful submissions of 180 diverse scope and price. For OTAs, the Government may provide summary feedback after 181 each phase at the Government’s discretion consistent with OTA authority. 182

6.6 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP) AVAILABILITY: GFP is not 184 anticipated to be made available under any resulting contract or agreement, but a 185 determination regarding GFP will be made for each award. In accordance with RFO 186

45.201(b), the contractor is responsible for all costs related to making the property 187 available for use, such as payment of all transportation, installation, or rehabilitation costs. 188

6.7 NETWORK ACCESS AND CLASSIFIED INFRASTRUCTURE: Support will be 190 determined for each award for testing, validation, and deployment and demonstration 191 purposes. 192

ATTACHMENT 1: PHASE 1 – Initial Submission 193

PHASE 1: OVERVIEW BRIEFING 195

The function of Phase 1 is to receive initial solutions for the respective AOIs from potential offerors. 197 Each Offeror shall submit their plans to provide an innovative solution addressing the specific AOI 198 described in Attachment 4. The following Quad Chart must be included as the first content slide in 199 the Phase 1 overview briefing submission. Quad Charts shall not exceed 1-page in landscape view 200 and must follow the formatting guidelines on the slide template below. Any slides in addition to the 201 1-page Quad Chart will not be reviewed. All fonts must be Times New Roman ≥12pt. File size must 202 not be greater than 10MB. Submissions shall be provided in PDF or PPT format. 203

PHASE 1A – WHITE PAPER FORMAT 205

1. The White Paper narrative expands on the overview briefing and must be 8.5 x 11 inches with 207 one-inch margins, no longer than five pages, single-spaced, with text in Times New Roman, 208 and no smaller than 12-point font. Each Offeror shall describe their plans to provide an 209 innovative solution to the individual AOI. 210

2. The White Paper shall contain a cover sheet containing the following information. The cover 212 sheet will not count against the page limitation. 213

(a) CSO number, AOI number, and AOI name 215

(b) Project Title 216

(c) Full company name and address 217

(d) CAGE code 218

(e) Unique Entity ID number 219

(f) Business Size Classification (large, small, or other) and respective NAICS 220

(g) Current Facilities Clearance Level 221

3. White Papers must be submitted electronically as a PDF not exceeding a file size of 10 MB. 223

Pages exceeding the page limitation will not be read or reviewed. 224

4. The White Paper should provide sufficient information on the technical approach being 226 submitted to allow for review by a technical expert. Expand as deemed necessary on the 227 following sections of the overview briefing: Objective; Description of the Effort; Benefits of 228 the Proposed Approach; Technical Challenges; Solution Approach; Explanation of how the 229 solution is innovative (see below); Eligibility for OTA per statute; State of Solution; Major 230 Milestones by Government fiscal year and month. Offeror must also disclose any foreign 231 ownership, control, or influence (FOCI). Do not include corporate or personnel qualification, 232 past experience or any supplemental information not requested. 233

5. Innovation: The White Paper must contain an opening statement that answers the following 235 questions on how the solution is innovative: 236

a. How is the proposed solution innovative? Describe the original thinking, new 238 application of existing technology, or novel concepts, approaches, methods or 239 capabilities that differentiate the solution from other alternatives. 240

b. Has this proposed solution been submitted to any part of the Government before and if 241 so when? 242

c. Is the proposed solution currently available to the Government through a procurement 243 mechanism? (e.g. Grant, Contract, Agreement) If so, what are those current Government 244 mechanisms and what are their associated agencies? 245

PHASE 1B – PITCH SESSION AND FORMAT* 247

1. Offerors may be invited to a Pitch Session to expand upon the proposed 249 concept/technology/solution. The Pitch Session is intended to have a free exchange of 250 information and questions between the Government and the Offeror about the proposed solution. 251 The format of the Pitch Session may be through a virtual teleconferencing (VTC) meeting or 252 through email requesting the Offeror to send a demonstration video. The Offeror will be allowed 253 up to 30 minutes to display a demonstration video of the proposed solution. The Government will 254 provide additional time if needed for follow-up questions. The Government will define the 255 technical parameters of the demonstration video when the Government sends the invitation for 256 Phase 1B to the Offeror. 257

2. During the Pitch Session, Offerors shall address Government’s preliminary/after-demonstration 259 questions and provide additional detail regarding the proposed solution. The Government’s 260 questions may clarify or expand on Phase 1A’s submission to include broader topics necessary 261 for the Government to evaluate Government interest and technical validity (feasibility, 262 integration, and risk). All Government’s questions, comments, or interactions during Phase 1B 263 are non-binding, exploratory, and provided solely to support the Government’s evaluation. No 264 statements, questions, or feedback shall be construed as direction, commitment, or an obligation 265 to solicit, award, negotiate, or otherwise proceed with the Offeror. 266

*Note: The Government reserves the right to forgo a Phase 1B pitch session and go directly to 268 Phase 2. 269

ATTACHMENT 2: PHASE 2 – TECHNICAL AND PRICE PROPOSAL 270

The Phase 2 proposal submission shall conform to the following: 272

1. Cover Sheet: The following information shall be contained in a cover sheet submitted with the 274 proposal: 275

(a) CSO number, AOI number, and AOI name 276

(b) Full company name and address 277

(c) CAGE code 278

(d) Unique Entity ID number 279

(e) Business Size Classification (large, small, or other) and NAICS 280

(f) Offeror’s socioeconomic status 281

(g) Point of contact, name, title, phone number, and email address 282

(h) Current Facility Clearance Level 283

2. Technical Approach: The following describes the technical approach requirements: 285

(a) The Technical Approach shall describe the background and objectives of the proposed work, 287 the approach, deliverables, the resources needed to execute, and additional details of data 288 rights assertions. Include the nature and extent of the capability and how it addresses the AOI, 289 the innovative aspect of the solution, the intended results, and address possible integration or 290 testing needs. Include ancillary and operational considerations such as certifications, 291 algorithms, and any engineering/software development methodologies to be used. Provide a 292 graphic display of major program milestones. Measurable milestones should capture key 293 activity points and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to the start of the 294 effort. Submissions may refer to previously submitted information from Phase 1. 295

(b) Government Support Required: Identify the type of support, if any, the Offeror requests of the 297

Government in general, such as facilities, equipment, data, and information or materials. 298

(c) The Government reserves the right to ask for additional technical information in the Phase 2 300 request for proposal. 301

(d) Due to the varying AOIs and potential solutions, Technical Proposal page limitations and 303 formatting will be identified in Phase 2 request for proposal. 304

3. Statement of Work (SOW): The following describes the SOW requirements: 306

(a) The SOW must be a separate and distinct document suitable for incorporation into a contract 308 or agreement. The SOW shall conform with the Department of Defense Handbook for 309 Preparation of a SOW, MIL-HDBK-245E. It must be a separate and distinct document 310 suitable for incorporation into a contract or agreement. Pages should be numbered and 311 provide line numbers. The initial page should have a date (document date) shown under the 312 title. Proprietary information should not be included in the SOW. 313

(b) The proposed SOW must accurately describe the work to be performed. The SOW must 314 also contain a summary description of the technical methodology as well as the task 315 descriptions, but not in so much detail as to make the SOW inflexible. The SOW should 316 include the following sections: 317

1. OBJECTIVE: This section is intended to give a brief overview of the project and 319 should describe why the work is being pursued and what the Offeror intends to 320 accomplish. 321

2. SCOPE: This section includes a statement of what the SOW covers. This should 323 describe the AOI to be investigated, goals, and for the effort. Provide a graphic 324 display of major program milestones. 325

3. BACKGROUND: The Offeror must identify appropriate documents that are 327 applicable to the effort to be performed. This section includes any information, 328 explanations, or constraints that are necessary to understand the project tasks and 329 requirements. This section should describe the effort’s relationship to previous and 330 ongoing efforts, if applicable. 331

4. TASKS AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: This section contains the detailed 333 description of tasks that are necessary to perform the proposed work. These tasks 334 will represent the work to be performed in any potential contract or agreement 335 award, and, thus, shall be considered contractually binding. This section should be 336 developed in an orderly progression and presented in sufficient detail to establish 337 the feasibility of accomplishing the overall program goals. The Government reserves 338 the right to modify and negotiate the language in the SOW prior to any potential 339 contract or agreement award. 340

4.1. Task descriptions must be definite, realistic, and clearly stated. Use the phrase 342

“the contractor shall” whenever the work that is a mandatory obligation. Use 343 “should” or “may” whenever it is necessary to express work that is aspiration 344 or not compulsory. 345

4.2. Do not use acronyms or abbreviations without first defining them. Place 347 abbreviations and acronyms in parentheses following the first usage of the 348 spelled-out phrase. 349

(c) Due to the varying AOIs and potential solutions, SOW page limitations will be identified 351 in the Phase 2 request for proposal. 352

4. Price Volume: The following describes the Price submission requirements: 354

(a) The Price submission must include pricing information sufficiently detailed for meaningful 356 evaluation of the proposal. The Price Proposal does not have a page limit restriction. For 357 FAR-based contracts, since all proposals ae considered commercial items, technologies, or 358 services, the requirements of the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Act are not applicable. 359 However, if the Contracting Officer determines additional information is necessary to 360 support a determination of a fair and reasonable price, other than certified cost and pricing 361 data may be requested. For OTAs, Agreement Officer must ensure the Government pays a 362 price that is reasonable relative to scope, risk, and market conditions. Data rights are 363 negotiated separately and not evaluated as price. 364

(b) The responsibility for providing adequate supporting data and attachments lies solely with 366 the Offeror. Further, the Offeror also bears the burden of proof in establishing 367 reasonableness of proposed prices; therefore, it is in the Offeror’s best interest to submit a 368 fully supportable and well-prepared price proposal. 369

(c) The Offeror shall prepare the Price submission to include an electronic version of the 371 pricing model in a Microsoft (MS) Excel editable format. The electronic pricing model 372 shall include active formulas demonstrating the mathematical calculation of the proposed 373 price. 374

(d) The Offeror shall propose milestone phases, key deliverables, due dates, exit/acceptance 376 criteria and payment amounts within their submitted milestone schedule. The Offeror shall 377 include all key deliverables and sub-deliverables as identified in the Attachment 4 MPS 378 template. Milestone payments may vary by month based on completion of priced tasks 379 and/or deliverables. The Government will accept no more than one invoice per month. 380 Offerors shall structure milestones to align with a monthly invoicing cadence while 381 ensuring appropriate performance assurance. 382

5. Additional Proposal Submission Content: 384

(a) Small Business Subcontracting Plan: If FAR-based contract is indicated by the Government 386 and the offeror is other than small business, offerors shall submit either an individual 387 subcontracting plan and/or master subcontracting plan (if available) in accordance with RFO 388 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation Date) and R-DFARS 252.219-7997 389 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program) (Deviation 2026-O0037) with their Phase 390 2 proposal. The Offeror's small business subcontracting plan shall include, but is not limited 391 to, details regarding the commitment/targets for each category of small business, veteran-392 owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, small, disadvantaged 393 business, HUBZone, and women-owned small business concerns. The plan shall describe for 394 each category the total value subcontracted expressed in dollars and percentage of total 395 subcontracted value if an individual subcontracting plan. The plan shall also state the extent 396 and nature of work to be performed by small business concerns, the method used to develop 397 goals, the method used to locate potential suppliers, if the goals include indirect costs (if so, 398 describe the cost allocation method) and describe the efforts the Offeror will make to assure 399 small businesses have an equitable opportunity to compete for subcontracts. The plan shall 400 also provide the name and duties of the contractor's subcontracting plan administrator. 401

If the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not initially acceptable, the Contracting Officer 403 may request additional information regarding the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. 404

(b) Organizational Conflict of Interest: Regardless of whether FAR-based contract or OTA, the 406 Offeror shall perform an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) analysis and submit the 407 results of that analysis as part of the Offeror’s Phase 2 proposal. Specifically, the Offeror shall 408 analyze the planned acquisition for actual or potential OCI situations associated with the 409 Offeror or any of the Offeror’s proposed teammates or subcontractor’s performance under any 410 contract or agreement the Offeror or the Offeror’s teammates or subcontractors has been or 411 may be awarded by any federal agency or other entity. The Offeror shall describe in detail the 412 methodology used to identify actual or potential OCI issues. If the Offeror identifies any actual 413 or potential OCIs with respect to the performance of the Offeror or the Offeror’s subcontractors 414 or teammates, the contractor shall provide an OCI Mitigation Plan to be incorporated as an 415 attachment to any resulting contract or agreement. Any proposed avoidance or mitigation 416 techniques shall be consistent with RFO 9.5. 417

(c) Responsibility: For FAR-based awards, the Offeror shall provide information that presents a 419 brief verifiable self-assessment in the areas of responsibility as described in RFO 9.104 420 (Deviation Date) as supplemented by R-DFARS. Elements of responsibility to address include 421 but are not limited to, management of government property, capability, resources, competency, 422 capacity, credit, integrity, perseverance, tenacity, and limitations on subcontracting. For OTA 423 awards, the Offeror shall provide similar information to aid the Government in the assessment 424 of responsibility. 425 For FAR-based awards, the inability to perform in compliance with the limitations of 427 subcontracting clause RFO 52.219-14 (Deviation Date) is a matter of responsibility for small 428 businesses. The Contracting Officer will follow the Small Business Administration Certificate 429 of Competency procedure at RFO 19.204 when a small business concern would otherwise be 430 selected for award but is considered not responsible. 431 For OTA awards, it is the offeror's responsibility to affirmatively demonstrate in its proposal 433 that the proposed transaction is compliant with the statutory requirements. The proposal must 434 clearly identify and provide supporting rationale for one of the following eligibility 435 pathways: 436

Pathway 1: Significant Participation by NTDC or Small Business 438 If the offeror asserts that it meets the requirement through the significant participation of a 440 Nontraditional Defense Contractor (NTDC) or a small business, the proposal must: 441 Identify the Participant(s): Clearly name the specific NTDC(s) or small business(es) 443

(whether the prime or a subcontractor). 444 State the Status: For each entity identified, state its status (e.g., NTDC, Small Business, 445

Veteran-Owned Small Business, etc.). For NTDC status, the proposal must affirm that the 446 entity has not performed any contract subject to full Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) 447 coverage for at least one year prior to RPP’s issuance. 448

Justify "Significant" Participation: Provide a detailed narrative explaining why the 449 participation is significant. The justification should focus on the importance of the 450 contribution, such as: 451 o Supplying a key technology, component, or capability; 452 o Causing a material reduction in cost or schedule or an increase in performance; or 453 o Providing a novel application of existing technology. 454

Pathway 2: Minimum One-Third Cost Contribution 456

If the offeror is a traditional defense contractor proposing to meet the requirement through 458 cost-sharing, the proposal must: 459 Explicitly State the Commitment: Clearly state that the offeror will provide a cost 460 contribution of at least one-third (33.33%) of the total prototype project cost. 461 Detail the Cost Share: Provide a breakdown of the total project cost, identifying the 462

Government's share and the offeror's share. The offeror’s contribution may be in cash or 463 in-kind (e.g., labor, materials, facilities), but if in-kind, it must be auditable and directly 464 relevant to the project. 465

Failure to clearly address and substantiate one of these pathways in the proposal may 466 render the submission ineligible for award of an OTA. 467

(d) Space Contractor Responsibility Watchlist (CRWL): In accordance with Section 1601 of the 469

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2025 (P.L. 118-159) and DAFGM2025-470 63-01, the PCO/AO may not award a contract to a contractor included on the CRWL without 471 making a determination of responsibility and obtaining the approval of the SAF/SQ. A 472 contractor that has been notified that it has been added to the CRWL may respond to this CSO 473 but must submit documentation describing how it has addressed the conditions that resulted in 474 its inclusion on the CRWL and why those conditions will not impact performance on a contract 475 resulting from this CSO. Proposed subcontractors must notify the prime Offeror if they receive 476 notification from the SAE that they have been added to the CRWL. In order to be considered 477 for a subcontract, a proposed subcontractor that has been added to the CRWL must submit 478 documentation describing how it has addressed the conditions that resulted in its inclusion on 479 the CRWL and why those conditions will not impact its performance on a subcontract to a 480 contract resulting from this CSO. The proposed subcontractor may submit CRWL-related 481 documentation through the prime Offeror or directly to the Contracting Officer as long as the 482 information is received prior to the proposal due date. 483

Note: CRWL does not apply to operation and maintenance contracts, professional services 485 contracts for Government support (e.g., FFRDC, A&AS). 486

(e) Rights in Technical Data, Computer Software, and Computer Software Documentation: For 488

OTA awards, data rights are subject to negotiation. 489

(f) If the Gov cannot award OTA and must award a FAR-based, then an Offeror may provide with 491 its submissions assertions to restrict, use, release, or disclosure of data and/or computer 492 software and computer software documentation that will be provided in the course of contract 493 or agreement performance. For FAR-based awards, rules governing these assertions are 494 prescribed in R-DFARS clauses 252.227-7989 and 252.227-7990 may be accessed at 495 https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/classdev/DFARS_RFO/Part-227/2026-496 O0036_TAB_A_Deviation_Memo_Part_227.pdf. For OTA awards, data rights are subject to 497 negotiation. 498

If the proposed solution relies upon patented technology or pending patent applications, the 500 Offeror shall identify such patents and provide documentation demonstrating ownership or 501 appropriate licensing rights sufficient to perform the prototyping effort. 502

ATTACHMENT 3: REVIEW, EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS 503

Proposals are not evaluated against each other, as they are not submitted in response to a common 505 PWS or SOW. 506 The Government will review and evaluate submissions in multiple phases, as described below. 508 Progression from one phase to another, and ultimately to award, is at the sole discretion of the 509 Government, subject to review and evaluation results and availability of funds. Solutions will be 510 evaluated on the basis of the merit of the proposed concept in addressing the Areas of Interest and 511 not against other vendor’s solutions submitted in response to the same Area of Interest. 512

1. Phase 1A – Quad Chart and White Paper Submission: 514

a. Purpose: The Government will identify Phase 1 submissions that demonstrate 516 sufficient Government interest and technical merit based on the AOI’s description 517 and, if applicable, its focus area (see Attachment 4) to justify further consideration. 518

b. Review: Phase 1A submissions will be reviewed against the factors below: 520

i. Government Interest – Contribution to mission need and alignment of the 521 proposed solution with the AOI description and, if applicable, its focus area. 522 Should the Government be interested in the submission, it will then be 523 reviewed for technical merit. 524

ii. Technical Validity - Technical validity and reasonableness, alignment with 525 the AOI description. 526

iii. Eligibility for OTA - Per line 421-453, offeror will state whether pathway 1, 527 pathway 2, or none applies to its proposed solution. The answer does not 528 disqualify offeror from award. 529

iv. Innovation Compliance – Provide a clear and substantiating justification 530 demonstrating that the proposed solution meets the definition of innovative 531 per line 11 of this CSO document. as stated in Offeror’s White Paper. 532

c. Outcome: Based on the review, offerors may be: 534

i. Invited to Phase 1B (by Government Request); 535

ii. Invited to submit to Phase 2; or 536

iii. Notified that the submission will not be pursued. 537

2. Phase 1B – Pitch Session (by Government Request): 539

a. Purpose: The Government may invite offeror(s) to provide a demonstration video 541 and to address Government’s question(s) regarding their submission. The 542 Government highly encourages the offeror to address the areas of but not limited to, 543 demonstration of technical challenges, business viability and integration potential not 544 already addressed in the white paper. 545

b. Review: Phase 1B pitch sessions will be reviewed against the factors below: 547

i. Government Interest – Contribution to mission need and alignment of the 548 proposed solution with the AOI description and, if applicable, its focus area. 549

ii. Technical Validity: Technical validity and reasonableness, alignment with 550 the AOI description, demonstration of an understanding of the integration 551 environment. 552

c. Outcome: Based on the pitch session review, offerors may be: 554

i. Invited to submit a Phase 2; or 555

ii. Notified that the submission will not be pursued. 556

3. Phase 2 – Proposal - Technical Price Information: 558

a. Purpose: The Government will assess the technical, business, integration potential 559 and cost aspects of the proposal in detail. The specific evaluation criteria for Phase 2 560 will be provided in the request for prototype proposal (RPP) and may include, but is 561 not limited to, the following evaluation factors: 562

b. The Government will ensure vendors meet the following un-rated criteria before 563 being evaluated: 564

i. Government Interest – Contribution to mission need and alignment with the 565 AOI description and, if applicable, its focus area. The Government will 566 choose the proposal(s) that best aligns with the mission priorities and has the 567 greatest potential impact in meeting the needs identified in the AOI 568

ii. Security and Accreditation Posture – Compliance with applicable 569 cybersecurity requirements, or demonstration of a credible path to 570 compliance. Evaluation will consider cybersecurity maturity, risk 571 management practices, data protection measures, and the ability to support 572 secure operational integration 573

iii. Vendor viability - Demonstrated ability to meet current and projected 574 program demands. The Government will choose the proposal with the best 575 capacity, proven track record, and scalable solution that aligns with the 576 Government’s current and projected needs. 577

iv. OCI Mitigation plan, if applicable – Completed OCI checklist and 578 mitigation plan, if applicable. 579

c. Evaluation: After meeting the un-rated criteria, Phase 2 proposals will be evaluated 580 against the factors below: 581

i. Technical Merit - Technical executability, alignment with the AOI 582 description and, if applicable, its focus area, compliance with modern 583 software practices, and standards compliance. The Government will choose 584 the proposal(s) that demonstrate technical feasibility, innovation, and 585 alignment with engineering best practices will be favored, as these factors 586 contribute to the long-term viability of the project. 587

ii. Integration Feasibility - Ability to integrate into existing mission operations. 588 The Government will choose the proposal that presents a low-risk, high-589 impact integration plan and minimizes disruption to existing systems and 590 operations will be prioritized. 591

iii. Price – The Government will choose the proposal that demonstrate a 592 reasonable, affordable price that is justified and aligned with the scope and 593 technical merit. Pricing will not be evaluated on a lowest-price basis but must 594 demonstrate value commensurate with scope. Vendors must also provide any 595 proposed investment by the vendor or on behalf of the vendor for the proposed 596 prototype solution including investment source and background information. 597

d. Evaluation Method: Scientific, technological, or other subject-matter expert peer 598 review will be performed. 599

e. Proposals will not be evaluated against each other, as they are not submitted in 600 response to a common PWS or SOW. 601

b. Outcome: The Government may: 602

i. Select proposals for negotiation leading to award 603

ii. Fund all, some, part of, or none of the proposals 604

f. Other Award Considerations 605

To be eligible for FAR-based awards under R-DFARS 212.70, offerors must: 607

Be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at www.sam.gov; 609 Be determined responsible under RFO 9.104; 610 Have updated required representations and certifications (RFO 52.204-7) 611 Comply with R-DFARS 204-76 (assessment posted in Supplier Performance Risk 612

System (SPRS), if applicable) 613 Submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan if a large business (per RFO 614

52.219-9). 615

To be eligible for OTA awards under 10 U.S.C. § 4021 & §4022 and §4023, offerors 617 must: 618

Be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at www.sam.gov 620 Demonstrate capability, resources and integrity to perform; 621 Be in good standing (not debarred/suspended, and not on the SSC Contractor 622

Responsibility Watchlist); 623 Comply with program-specific security and cybersecurity requirements, as 624 applicable; 625 Disclose potential organizational conflict of interest. The Government may 626 require a mitigation approach before award; 627

ATTACHMENT 4: AREAS OF INTEREST (AOI) 629

The Kronos PMO is interested in innovative products, technologies, and services related to the AOIs 631 listed below. The level of detail provided for each AOI or the order in which each AOI appears is 632 not intended to convey any information regarding relative priority. 633 Focus Area Statements (FAS) 635

To facilitate industry planning and engagement, the Government may publish a Focus Area 637 Statement (FAS) within the scope of an AOI when issuing a Call. The FAS will 638 provide additional context regarding mission needs, desired outcomes, and areas of technical interest 639 to assist industry in preparing submissions. 640 AOI 01: Operational Command and Control 642 The Kronos PMO is seeking innovative solutions that enable end-to-end Operational C2 644 functionality, including planning, preparation, execution, and assessment, within a unified, 645 interoperable framework at the operational echelon. The intended users of these capabilities are at 646 the Echelon 2 and 3 level, notionally, the National Space Defense Center (NSDC), Combined Space 647 Operation Center (CSpOC), and Space Force Components. Key capabilities include developing and 648 prioritizing commanders’ intent; supporting both deliberate and dynamic target development and 649 effects-based operations; conducting capability and feasibility analysis; facilitating commander’s 650 decision-making and force assignment; monitoring real-time mission execution with adaptability to 651 changing conditions; performing combat assessment; and providing comprehensive shared 652 situational awareness across joint, and allied partners. The Operational C2 innovative solution must 653 be scalable, modular, and extensible to support evolving mission needs and emerging technologies. 654 Cloud-native design, DevSecOps practices, Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) 655 integration, advanced data management, and zero trust cybersecurity principles are highly desired. 656 Submissions should demonstrate how the proposed solution delivers a cohesive, resilient, and 657 adaptable Operational C2 capability aligned with U.S. Space Force operational priorities and enables 658 agile, data-driven decision-making across the Kronos Enterprise. 659

AOI 02: Battle Management 660 The Kronos PMO is seeking an integrated Space Attack Planning Toolkit to enable advanced effects-662 based planning and coordination across the Kronos Enterprise. The desired solution will support the 663 ability to match space resources to effects-based requirements by synthesizing commander’s 664 guidance, effects, and operational priorities with real-time resource status, including tactical units 665 and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) assets. The solution should expedite C2 666 planning and enhance coordination between operational and tactical levels. Key capabilities include 667 integration of tactical C2 assessment tools to enable rapid course of action development, feasibility 668 modeling, probability of success analysis, and collateral impact assessment. The solution should 669 support tactical C2 planning by providing real-time status, warnings, and orders to tactical units, 670 while capturing and managing Concept of Operations (CONOPs) and Concept of Employment 671 (CONEMPs) to ensure coherent command relationships and execution pathways. Additionally, the 672 toolkit must enable tactical C2 monitoring and visualization of ongoing effects, support dynamic 673 guidance updates, and facilitate responsive coordination with tactical units within established rules 674 of engagement. The solution must be modular, scalable, and designed for seamless integration with 675 the broader Kronos C2 architecture, with an emphasis on agility, real-time data integration, and 676 operational relevance. 677

AOI 03: Space Intelligence Integration 678 The Kronos PMO is seeking an integrated Intelligence solution to enhance decision advantage for 680 joint and coalition forces across the Kronos Enterprise. The desired solution must unify three core 681 intelligence capabilities: battlespace characterization, collection operations, and targeting. 682 Battlespace characterization should enable continuous understanding and prediction of adversary 683 capabilities, tactics, dispositions, centers of gravity, and courses of action, with dynamic assessments 684 that inform targeting and operational decision-making. Collection operations must support the 685 tasking and synchronization of ISR assets and exploitation resources to acquire actionable data on 686 the operational environment, adversary activity, and infrastructure, closing intelligence gaps and 687 enhancing situational awareness. The targeting component must provide a continuous, analytic 688 process to select, prioritize, and engage targets in alignment with commander objectives, integrating 689 intelligence at every stage of the targeting cycle. The solution must facilitate seamless coordination 690 across functional disciplines and between operational and tactical levels. Scalability, modularity, and 691 interoperability with the broader Kronos C2 architecture are essential, with emphasis on real-time 692 data integration, dynamic visualization, and AI/ML-driven analytic capabilities. Submissions should 693 clearly demonstrate how the solution enhances intelligence-driven operations and supports timely, 694 informed, and effective decision-making across the joint force. 695

AOI 04: Mission Support Services 696 The Kronos PMO is seeking innovative prototype solutions that provide infrastructure support 698 services, mission operations support, tools, analytics, and automated test capabilities, cybersecurity 699 engineering, and secure software enablement across the Kronos Family of Systems and the PMO. 700 This Area of Interest is focused on the services, engineering approaches, automation, operational 701 processes, and technical capabilities required to deploy, operate, secure, monitor, scale, and sustain 702 mission infrastructure in support of Kronos objectives. This AOI is not intended to procure 703 underlying infrastructure as the primary deliverable. 704 Proposed solutions may address site reliability engineering; platform and infrastructure operations; 706 cybersecurity engineering and cyber operations; secure software delivery and deployment 707 orchestration; Infrastructure-as-Code and configuration management; cloud, hybrid-cloud, and edge 708 integration; containerized workload orchestration; observability, monitoring, alerting, incident 709 response, automated recovery, and resiliency; continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, 710 compliance automation, and support for operational accreditation; zero-trust implementation; and 711 mission application hosting and integration across distributed environments, classification levels, 712 and security domains. 713 Solutions should improve operational agility, reduce deployment and recovery timelines, enhance 715 resiliency, strengthen cybersecurity posture, and support mission continuity under degraded, 716 intermittent, limited bandwidth, or contested conditions. The Government is particularly interested 717 in approaches using automation, DevSecOps, zero-trust principles, Infrastructure-as-Code, policy-718 as-code, continuous monitoring, and autonomous orchestration. 719 Submissions should describe the operational problem, proposed support model, required 721 infrastructure dependencies, integration feasibility, expected mission impacts, scalability, and 722 approach for demonstrating and refining the prototype in mission-relevant environments. 723