Request for Whitepaper-Advanced NAV-WAR Open Air (ANOA) System-Amend 2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE OHIO

One AFMC…Powering the World’s Greatest Air Force

21 APR 26

MEMORANDUM FOR 334511 SEARCH, DETECTION, NAVIGATION, GUIDANCE,

AERONAUTICAL, AND NAUTICAL SYSTEM AND INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURING

FROM: AFMC/AFTC/PZIA (Arnold) 100 Kindel Drive Arnold AFB, TN 37389-1332

SUBJECT: Request for Whitepapers: Advanced NAV-WAR Open Air (ANOA) System – Amend 2

1.0 Introduction and Purpose

The purpose of this project is to acquire a high-powered, electronically steerable Global Positioning System

(GPS) jamming system to support critical Department of War testing and training initiatives. Current systems have limitations in their ability to replicate the contested electronic warfare environments necessary to adequately assess and prepare our forces for modern threats. The Advanced NAV-WAR Open Air

(ANOA) system will overcome these limitations by providing a robust, realistic, and adaptable platform for evaluating the performance of navigation-dependent systems in a GPS-contested scenario. This RWP is issued under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 4022 for the purpose of acquiring prototypes to address this need.

2.0 Project Scope and Key Objectives

The scope of this project is to design, develop, and produce a prototype ANOA system capable of supporting two primary use cases:

• GNSS Contested Weapon Drop: The system must be able to create a high-power jamming environment to rigorously test the performance of precision-guided munitions from the point of release to impact. This will enable the evaluation of weapon effectiveness in a realistic, electronically contested battlespace.

• Near-Peer Conflict GPS Contested Test and Training: The system shall be capable of supporting large-scale military exercises by emulating a complex and threat-realistic GPS-contested environment. This will provide an immersive training experience for a wide array of systems, including ground personnel, vehicles, and airborne assets, enhancing their readiness and operational capabilities.

The key objective is to deliver a deployable and interoperable system that can generate a steerable, high-power jamming signal to create the required test and training conditions.

3.0 Instructions for Vendor's Whitepaper Response

The vendor's whitepaper response shall be structured in the following four parts:

• Part 1: Technical Competency: The vendor shall provide a comprehensive narrative demonstrating their technical expertise, capabilities, and experience as they directly relate to the objectives and performance parameters outlined in Atch 1 - Advanced Nav-War Open Air

(ANOA)- Performance Parameters. This demonstration should include, but is not limited to, experience with high-power radio frequency (RF) systems, electronically steerable phased array antennas, advanced signal processing, and systems integration for rugged, deployable environments.

• Part 2: Intellectual Property (IP) Rights: The vendor shall provide a clear and unambiguous statement confirming they will grant the U.S. Government "unlimited rights" to all deliverables, including technical data and computer software, developed under the entirety of this prototype project.

• Part 3: 10 U.S.C. 4022(d) Appropriate Use of Authority: The vendor shall specify and provide supporting documentation justifying how their company plans to satisfy 10 U.S.C. 4022(d)(1)(A)-

(C) by elaborating on one of the specified options (Nontraditional participation, Small Business participation, or Cost-Sharing).

(A) There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent in the prototype project.

(B) All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small businesses (including small businesses participating in a program described under section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638)) or nontraditional defense contractors.

(C) At least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Government.

NOTE 1: Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) = An entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by DoD for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards (CAS) prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations implementing such section (see 10 U.S.C. §3014). The phrase “the solicitation of sources” refers to the initial agreement solicitation only. A nontraditional defense contractor is considered a nontraditional defense contractor for the duration of the prototype project/agreement’s period of performance, or for any in-scope work modified under the same agreement.

NOTE 2: Non-profit research institution is validated by reviewing the vendor’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status, which is required by the Internal Revenue Service.

NOTE 3: “Significant extent” and “significant participants” may be defined by the vendor providing rationale to one or more of the following variables:

a. Has a significant role / level of involvement in the development, production, or delivery of a product or service.

b. Has a significant impact on the design, development, or production of the product or service.

c. Has a significant level of material interest in the success of the product or service.

d. Has a significant level of company's financial interest in the success of the product or service.

e. Has a significant level of control over the development, production, or delivery of a product or service.

f. Other significant rationale provided by the vendor.

NOTE 4: Failure to provide supporting documentation may eliminate a company from being considered for an award.

• Part 4: Pricing: The vendor shall provide a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) for the Business Process

Prototype and the Proof of Concept Prototype.

• Part 5: Cybersecurity and CMMC Compliance: Due to the Distribution D nature of Atch 1, the vendor shall provide documentation demonstrating their ability to safeguard Controlled

Unclassified Information (CUI). The vendor must provide evidence of one of the following:

• CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification: If the vendor claims a current CMMC Level 2

C3PAO Certification, they shall state this in their response for Government validation of that status.

• Alternative Compliance Path (Roadmap): If the vendor relies on the alternative path, they shall provide a credible and realistic roadmap to achieve full CMMC Level 2 C3PAO

Certification by the 10 November 2026 deadline. This roadmap must include:

• Information to allow Government validation of the required NIST SP 800-171 assessment in SPRS (no older than three years).

• A feasible timeline to close out any open Plans of Action and Milestones

(POA&Ms), acknowledging the strict 180-day limitation.

• A realistic planned timeline and provided evidence of engagement with an authorized C3PAO to conduct the final certification assessment prior to the deadline.

4.0 Whitepaper Evaluation

The Government will perform a comparative analysis of the whitepaper submissions to determine which proposal provides the best value. The evaluation will be based on an integrated assessment of the vendor’s demonstrated potential to successfully perform the project. While the evaluation will be highly subjective and at the Government’s sole discretion, the award decision will be based on a trade-off between technical merit and price. The primary factors for evaluation will be the demonstrated Technical Competency, the vendor's agreement to provide Intellectual Property (IP) Rights, conformity with the 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d) requirement, the adequacy and credibility of the vendor's Cybersecurity and CMMC Compliance (including certification status or roadmap feasibility), and the total proposed price for the Business Process and Proof of Concept prototypes. The Government reserves the right to select for award one, all, or none of the whitepapers received in response to this RWP.

5.0 Successful Prototype Definition

A successful prototype is defined by the completion of the following milestones:

• Successful Business Process Prototype: A successful business process prototype is achieved upon the Government’s acceptance of a detailed Statement of Work (SOW) that is complete, actionable, clearly defines the vendor's plan to execute all phases of the project from start to finish, and is in-line and in accordance with Atch 1 - Advanced Nav-War Open Air (ANOA)- Performance

Parameters.

• Successful Proof of Concept Prototype: A successful proof of concept prototype is achieved upon the delivery and Government acceptance of one (1) functional ANOA system that is delivered in accordance with the vendor's approved SOW from the Business Process Prototype, meets the performance parameters defined in Atch 1, and follows the successful completion of all preceding design reviews (Conceptual, 60%, and 100%).

• Successful Operational Utility Prototype: A successful operational utility prototype is achieved when the delivered systems (7 additional units and 2 spares) demonstrate a high degree of contribution to mission success within the operational environment. Success is defined by the system's mission effectiveness, seamless integration with existing range infrastructure, logistical sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and adaptability, which ultimately contributes to the lethality and readiness of the Department of War.

6.0 Program Milestones

This project will be executed in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 4022 and will be structured to obtain three prototypes through the following milestones:

Milestone Title Description

1 Business

Process

Prototype

The vendor will deliver a detailed Statement of Work (SOW) that clearly defines the execution plan for the project from start to finish.

2 Proof of

Concept

Prototype

This milestone will consist of the following sub-milestones, culminating in a functional system: 2.1 Conceptual Design (10%) 2.2 60% Design Review 2.3 100%

Design Review 2.4 Delivery of one (1) functional ANOA system.

3 Operational

Utility Prototype

This milestone is comprised of options dependent on the successful completion of the Business Process Proof of Concept. It will consist of the delivery of seven (7) additional ANOA systems and two (2) spares.

7.0 Submission Details

Whitepapers must be submitted electronically to the Agreements Officer, Greggory C. Jones, at greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil. Submissions must be received no later than 29 May 2026, COB. The whitepaper submission shall not exceed 10 pages in length.

8.0 Attachment

Atch 1 - Advanced Nav-War Open Air (ANOA)- Performance Parameters.pdf

• This attachment contains Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and is marked Distribution

D. To obtain a copy of this attachment for whitepaper preparation, vendors must submit a written request to the Agreements Officer. The attachment will be released only after the Government has vetted the vendor to confirm they possess a current NIST SP 800-171 Assessment in SPRS or a current CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification.

Atch 2 - Advanced NAV-WAR Open Air (ANOA) System-Articles.pdf

GREGGORY C. JONES

Agreements Officer, USAF https://www.google.com/url?q=mailto%3Agreggory.jones.4%40us.af.mil