Amendment 13 Questions and Answers.pdf

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

HDTRA1-20-S-0002

AMENDMENT 13

This Amendment provides a copy of the briefing slides presented at the DTRA Strategic Trends Division Industry Day/Research Topic Information Session on October 19, 2021.

This event corresponded with the publication of Amendment 12. It also includes a summary of the questions and answers posed prior to, during, and following, that event.

The information contained herein should be reviewed with the information included in Amendment 12.

STRI RTIS Briefing Slides:

STRI RTIS - Oct21 final.pdf

Questions & Answers:

White Paper Submissions

1) Are the submission dates listed in Amendment 12 for white papers or proposals? What are the email submission addresses?

ANSWER: The identified dates are for white paper submissions. For priority FY22 funding consideration, please submit Thrust Area 2 (Strategic Dialogues) white papers to dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta2@mail.mil. The due date is November 9, 2021. Thrust Area 1 (Studies) white papers should be submitted to dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta1@mail.mil. The due date is November 16, 2021. Thrust Area 3 (TTX) white papers should be submitted to dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta3@mail.mil. They are due November 23, 2021.

2) Can I submit a white paper/proposal to Thrust Area 1 and another white paper/proposal to Thrust Area 2?

ANSWER: There is no limit to the number of white papers a single individual or organization can submit. Accordingly, you can submit one paper to Thrust Area 1 and another to Thrust Area 2, etc. However, they must be different papers.

3) Can we submit an interrelated series of white papers/proposals that address a single topic, but are for different project types (e.g. a study, dialogue, tabletop exercise etc.)?

ANSWER: Yes, but each white paper/proposal must stand alone. The technical evaluation panel will review each separately according to the published evaluation criteria. Proceed with caution as there’s a risk that DTRA may elect to invite a proposal (and award) for one, but not the others, for example.

4) We have a proposed project that touches upon Thrust Area 1, but may apply to other thrusts. How should we submit?

ANSWER: Please select the thrust area that best aligns with the proposed project and submit to that thrust area. Consider the overall objective/intended output. If the output is a tabletop exercise (TTX), submit to Thrust Area 3. If the output is a dialogue, submit to Thrust Area 2. If the dialogue or TTX is a component of, or input to a study (which is the intended output), submit to Thrust Area 1.

5) We have a three-tiered project that begins with a study, but that study can be reinforced, and significantly improved, by a dialogue and a TTX. We plan to submit to Thrust 1 because the study could be stand-alone, but list in the white paper how the study can be improved with a dialogue and TTX. Is that the preferred way to address this?

ANSWER: Please submit to Thrust Area 1. Within the technical concept portion, discuss how you will use a dialogue and TTX as an input to the study. Be sure to explain the benefit of this multipronged approach and estimate the overall cost accordingly.

Should you be invited to submit a proposal, DTRA will weigh in on the technical approach and may ask for adjustments if needed.

6) Can you share an example of a successful white paper?

ANSWER: We do not share examples. Please follow the instructions in the BAA.

7) Amendment 12 says not attach multiple files in the email, but it also refers to 5 possible attachments. It also states to not attach the SOW to the technical proposal. Should I send fives files or one?

ANSWER: The instruction not to attach multiple files refers to the phase I (white paper) submission. The instruction that refers to multiple attachments refers to the phase II submission (proposal). Please send a single attachment in accordance with the white paper instructions. Should you be invited to submit a full proposal based on the white paper, DTRA will provide instructions on proposal submission. DTRA includes the proposal instructions in the amendment for reference.

Dialogues

8) Many of the examples of dialogues mentioned during the industry day don’t directly relate to weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For example, a Track 1.5 with India on Indian Ocean access. Can WMD be a secondary focus in the white paper or proposal?

ANSWER: WMD has to be a central component of any dialogue. So, if there are four key topics that will be explored in four dialogue panels, at least one (and better, two) topics should be WMD- related. The white paper should make clear the benefit of the dialogue for DTRA in the objective statement.

9) If DTRA is already funding another organization to execute a specific dialogue, can another organization submit a white paper for a dialogue that involves that same country, but perhaps with a narrower focus? Or are we better off avoiding that?

ANSWER: All organizations are invited to submit white papers regardless of whether DTRA SI-STT is currently funding a related or similar project. Each white paper is evaluated based on the published evaluation criteria. While past performance is considered as part of the evaluation process (including the quality of that performance), DTRA SI-STT does not guarantee further/future funding simply because a specific organization has a history of performing a certain project. Continued funding of specific dialogues is not guaranteed from year to year.

10) Is DTRA interested in dialogues focused on maritime security issues?

ANSWER: As this is a federal procurement activity, we are unauthorized to state whether a particular research idea will be well received prior to white paper submission.

DTRA will evaluate all properly submitted white papers from eligible organizations based on the criteria published in the BAA. As DTRA is a WMD-focused agency, we require WMD to be a central component to any dialogue we sponsor. Your white paper should explain how you will integrate those two topics and the associated benefit (for DTRA and DoD) of a dialogue that focuses on both sets of issues. Please review Amendment 12 for more details about the kinds of dialogues we are prioritizing.

Tabletop Exercises (TTX)

11) What does "experiential learning platform" mean in the context of TTXs?

ANSWER: DTRA views TTXs as a component of workforce development. DTRA SI- STT refers to them as experiential learning platforms because they provide the participants with hands-on experience working through a problem set/scenario. Please review Amendment 12 for more details.

12) Can we propose a scenario-based TTX?

ANSWER: Scenario-based TTXs are welcome. We expect each applicant to describe the proposed game structure and mechanics.

13) Can we propose a track 1.5 TTX (with participation from current government/military officials in their private capacity) or should it be track 2?

ANSWER: As noted in Amendment 12, TTXs proposed under Thrust 3 should "involve participation from DTRA and the larger DoD, as well as other experts as appropriate."

There is no need to reference or distinguish between Track 1.5 and Track 2 in TTX white papers. That's only required for Thrust Area 2 (Strategic Dialogue) white papers. Thrust Area 3 white papers should provide sufficient detail about the types of experts you plan to involve in the TTX if awarded. For example, you should describe the proposed level of seniority, the kinds of organizations the individuals will represent, the kinds of expertise they possess, etc. As a reminder, if the TTX is intended to be an input to a larger study (and is not the single intended outcome), it should be submitted to Thrust Area 1. If you are proposing a TTX that is a component of a dialogue, please submit the white paper to Thrust Area 2.

Contracting

14) How early can we get started on the project if awarded?

ANSWER: The technical evaluation panel will review all white paper submissions received by the priority review period deadlines specified in Amendment 12 starting on that date. We will not hold anything until later. We will try to turn decisions around as quickly as possible on white papers and (if invited) proposals. Contracts will not be awarded until Calendar Year 2022. As several factors influence award date, DTRA SI- STT is unable to specify a planned award date.

15) What does contract option mean? Does it mean that after three iterations of the same dialogue/TTX, we should think of other initiatives? Or does it mean we could propose a dialogue or TTX series (one iteration per year) for three years, in one white paper/proposal (meaning no need to submit white papers each year)?

ANSWER: Applicants are welcome to propose a series of up to three TTXs or dialogues that build on one another and explain how all three would be accomplished in a single white paper with corresponding cost summary. Each iteration of the dialogue or TTX should be accomplished in twelve months or less and the required deliverables are expected at the end of each period. Should the research project be awarded, DTRA would issue a single contract for the full proposed period of performance (up to 36 months) and you would not be required to submit a new white paper/proposal each year.

DTRA would make the decision whether to execute the option period based on the results of the project during the initial (base) period of performance (and, as applicable, the first option period). There is no guarantee that DTRA will elect to execute the option period(s).

16) Amendment 12 references a requirement for a cost sheet. However, the explanation makes it sound like it is not requested until the proposal. This differs from Amendment 8 where there is a proper template to be used. Can you please clarify if we no longer need to submit a cost sheet? If we do need a cost sheet, can you share what is needed and clarify where to find the proper cost sheet format?

ANSWER: Amendment 12 highlights changes or additions to previous amendments.

Your white paper needs to include all of the elements listed in section IV ("Phase 1 - White Paper Submission Information" of Amendment 8 (starting on page 6) and Amendment 12 (starting on page 9). This includes a cover page, technical concept, and a cost estimate. There is no required format for the cost estimate that is included in the white paper, but it should include the information that is identified in section IV of Amendment 8 under "cost estimate" (page 7). The cost sheet referenced in Amendment 8 and 12 (Attachment 1) refers to a spreadsheet that needs to be included in the cost proposal. DTRA will provide that template should your organization be invited to submit a proposal based on the white paper review/decision.

Foreign Organizations

17) What are the opportunities for non-U.S. organizations to submit white papers and proposals? Can a U.S.-based organization propose a foreign entity as a sub-contractor or consultant? For example, a European think tank?

ANSWER: At present, foreign organizations should partner with U.S. organizations with the U.S. organization serving as the prime contractor. The U.S.-based organization should submit the white paper and (if invited) proposal as the prime contractor. There is no prohibition to proposing a foreign entity such as a European think tank as a sub-contractor or consultant. However, they must be citizens of ally or partner nations.

Per Amendment 3, we also have citizenship requirements for Principal Investigators (PIs) and research team members (e.g. those who work in the prime contractor organization and provide direct support to the project). As referenced there, "Principal Investigators are limited to US personnel only. Research teams may include foreign nationals from allied nations. Please keep in mind that foreign nationals’ access may be restricted for Government meetings and briefings.”

18) I am a U.S. citizen based at a foreign university. I have colleagues at my university who are conducting research that we believe would be directly relevant to some of the priority areas identified in Amendment 12 and at the industry day. Is it possible for us to submit a white paper or proposal with me as the PI, but conduct the work primarily with colleagues based at my university? Or should we partner with a U.S. institution as the prime contractor?

ANSWER: At this time, we request that you partner with a U.S. institution as the prime contractor. It is acceptable for you to involve other colleagues from your university as research team members should they meet the requirements identified in Amendment 3 as referenced above.

Government Entities

19) Does DTRA fund government entities such as professional military educational (PME) institutions under this BAA? How does the submission process differ for faculty members at PME institutions? Should they submit to the same email addresses as identified in Amendment 12?

ANSWER: We fund non-governmental, quasi-governmental, and some governmental entities. Please consult the BAA for full eligibility requirements. PMEs should submit under the corresponding Government Call. However, the submission process is the same as identified in Amendment 12. Please specify you are applying under the Government Call. These submissions should also be sent to the email addresses specified in Amendment 12.

20) Do all organizations need to ensure WMD is a main focus of all proposed projects? For example, PMEs?

ANSWER: Yes, DTRA's WMD mission should be central to every submitted white paper, regardless of the organization type.

UNCLASSIFIED

Strategic Trends Research Initiative Research Topic Information Session

(“Industry Day”) for HDTRA1-20-S-0002 (Amendment 12)

Strategic Trends and Effects Department (SI-ST) October 19, 2021

UNCLASSIFIED – APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

Zoom for Government – Virtual Etiquette

General:

Camera/video use when speaking is optional, but preferred Keep chat box open for notifications and posing questions Participant microphones will be muted except during Q&A segments If you get disconnected, simply rejoin (no need to leave message in chat)

Asking Questions:

Speakers will answer questions at specific points in the presentation Use the “raise your hand” feature or post a question in the chat box If you are not actively asking a question, please mute your microphone Questions posted in the chat box will be answered in the chat box

Introductions

Sponsor: Strategic Integration Directorate, Strategic Trends and Effects Department (SI-ST) Mr. Robert Peters, Department Chief Mr. Donald Wenzlick, Strategic Trends Division Chief (SI-STT) Ms. Jennifer Perry, Strategic Trends Research Coordinator and PM/COR for Dialogues Mr. Michael Sims, Program Analyst and PM/COR for Studies and Tabletop Exercises Major Khoi Tran, Assistant PM (Detailed) Ms. Janice Atkinson, Acquisition Administration Support (Contractor) Mr. Glen Ogden, Acquisition Administration Support (Contractor)

Contracts: Acquisition, Contracts, and Logistics Directorate, Contracts Department, Mission Support Contracts Division (AL-ACB)

Ms. Linda Mulligan, Division Chief, Mission Support Contracts Ms. Rorri Waters, Contracting Officer Ms. Aninze Awanna, Contracting Officer Mr. Ohaji Yarborough, Contract Specialist (Contractor)

Agenda

This “industry day” serves as a mechanism to share information about DTRA Strategic Trends’ FY22 applied research requirements and specific topics of interest as outlined in HDTRA1-20-S-0002 BAA (Amendment 12). The submission process and related requirements will also be explained.

Welcome/Introductions DTRA Overview SI-STT Overview STRI/BAA Overview and Thrusts Discussion Review of BAA/Call Submission Process/Requirements General Q&A

DTRA OVERVIEW

Combat Support Agency

(CSA)

Defense Agency

(DA)

DTRA enables DoD, the USG, and international partners to counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and emerging threats. [2021 Strategy]

The mission of DTRA is to safeguard the United States and its allies from weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threats globally. [ DoDD5105.62. “DTRA Charter”]

CSAs “…fulfill combat support or combat service support functions for joint operating forces across the range of military operations, and in support of the Commanders of the Combatant Commands executing military operations.” [DoDD5100.01 Functions of DoD (2010)]

DTRA “...integrates assigned WMD activities and tasks across DoD…” [DoDD2060.02 DoD CWMD Policy (2017)]

Supports ASD(NCB): “…the principal advisor to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense and the USD(AT&L) on nuclear energy, nuclear weapons, and chemical and biological defense…Develop policies, provide advice, and make recommendations on nuclear weapons; chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) medical and non-medical defense; safety and security of chemical and biological agents; safety, surety, security, and safe destruction of the current chemical weapons stockpile; CWMD; nuclear, chemical, and biological (NCB) arms control activities; and related plans and programs.” [DoDD5134.08 (2013, Change2)]

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

M/V Cape Ray (2013-14) | Elimination of Syrian chemical weapons

Ebola Support (2014) | Tracking of spread, equipment, and therapeutics (ZMapp) for IA effort

Skripal Response (2018) | U.S. response to use of Fourth Generation Agent in Salisbury, England

COVID-19 Response (2020-) | Provided capability and training used in 46 countries

Syrian CW Use (2012-19) | Monitoring and expertise in support of DoD and IA efforts

DPRK VX Use (2018) | Tracked developments in Kim Chong-nam assassination

ISIS CW Use (2013-17) | Monitoring and expertise in support of DoD and IA efforts

DA

ILY

CR

IS

/C

ON

TI

NG

EN

CY

CWMD Planning & Analysis | Support to CCMDs, including CWMD Coordinating Authority, USSOCOM

CBRN R&D | Full scope research and development on WMD topics and emerging threats

BPC | Worldwide efforts to build allies and partners WMD response capability, understand threats, secure materials, and strengthen CWMD/nonproliferation regimes

Reachback | Expertise and modeling/simulation on WMD threats 24/7, used by all of DoD, IA

Deterrence | Continual effort to ensure U.S. is able to provide credible nuclear deterrent

Elimination & Inspection | Implementation of treaties and progress toward destruction goals

Fukushima Response (2011) | Direct support to Operation Tomodachi

Mission Highlights for DTRA

CT | The Cooperative Threat Reduction Directorate prevents the proliferation or use of weapons of mass destruction by working with partner nations to secure, eliminate, detect and interdict WMD-related systems and materials.

Proliferation Prevention, Biological Threat Reduction, WMD Elimination. CBRN Material Security

NE | The Nuclear Enterprise Directorate provides capabilities to the Department of Defense and interagency stakeholders, allies and partners to ensure the safety, security, reliability and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent force and the countering weapons of mass destruction mission.

Mission Assurance, Nuclear Surety, Nuclear Logistics, Contingency Operations, Nuclear Education

OB | The On-Site Inspection and Building Capacity Directorate enables the Department of Defense, the U.S. Government, and International Partners to counter and deter WMD by conducting Arms Control Treaty Verification and Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) Building Partner Capacity Activities.

Treaty Support, Interagency Liaison, Building Partner Capacity, Inspections

OI | The Operations and Integration Directorate provides operational, analytical, and security support for CCMD and DTRA missions, in collaboration with FVEY and interagency partners, to achieve strategic outcomes against NDS threats.

Operational Analysis, Operations, CCMD Support Desks, Security

RD | The Research and Development Directorate provides science, technology and capability development investments that maintain the U.S. military’s technological superiority in CWMD & emerging threats, mitigate the risks of technical surprise and respond to the warfighter’s urgent technical requirements.

Chem/Bio Defense Program, Nuclear Technologies, Counter WMD Technologies, Enabling Capabilities, 24/7 Reachback, Modeling & Simulation

SI | The Strategic Integration Directorate shapes DTRA’s response to the challenges and priorities set forth in the National Defense Strategy, focusing the Agency’s operations, activities and investments in a manner that maximizes their cumulative effect in support of our warfighting customers.

Strategy, Threat Forecasting, Comptroller, Planning & CCMD Plans Support, Opportunity Analysis, Threat Prioritization, Assessment

IT | Information Management & Technology Directorate

EI | Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Office

HR | Human Resources DirectorateAL | Acquisition, Contracts, & Logistics Directorate

ES | Environmental, Safety, and Occupational Health Office IG | Inspector General Office LA | Legislative Affairs Office

“M

SI

ON

” D

IR

EC

TO

RA

TE

S

Organizational Roles within DTRA

SI-STT OVERVIEW

Generate operationally relevant, timely, credible, actionable insights into emerging threats within DTRA’s mission space.

Enable and guide warfighter understanding of the range of military operations in an era of Great Power Competition.

Activities: Research, Trends Analysis, Events, Tabletop Exercises

[Strategic Trends Division, STT]

Department & Division Missions

The Strategic Trends and Effects Department (SI-ST or STED) identifies future challenges for DTRA regarding emerging threats, provides advice regarding mitigation approaches, and assesses the collective effects of DTRA’s operations, activities, and investments (OAIs) within the operating environment.

Two primary responsibilities:

Provide DTRA leadership with independent analysis and assessments of Agency capabilities (programs) to maximize strategic effects and mitigate risk.

Activities: Operational Research and Statistical Analysis, Program Evaluations

[Strategic Effects Division, STE]

Strategic Trends Division (SI-STT)

Aligned to National Defense Strategy (NDS) and Interim National Security Strategic Guidance

NDS (2018):

Maintaining favorable regional balances of power Defending allies from military aggression and bolstering partners against coercion Dissuading, preventing, or deterring state adversaries and non-state actors from acquiring, proliferating, or using WMD

Interim National Security Strategic Guidance (2021):

Reinvigorate and modernize our alliances and partnerships Address the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons Prevail in strategic competition with China or any other nation

Strategic Trends Division (SI-STT)

Competition below threshold of armed conflict (includes acute competition) Warfighting challenges related to WMD and emerging threats Five to 10 years beyond the current fiscal year of execution

(Approximate time horizon 2027-2032)

Capability/technology focus areas relevant to DTRA’s mission:

Advances in chemical and biological agents

Militarization of space

Advances in missile technology and hypersonic weapons

Advances in manufacturing

Advances in unmanned/ autonomous systems

Advances in non-traditional CBRN delivery systems

Advances in artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML)

Advances in Cyber/ digital technology

Application of directed energy weapons

Advances in nuclear technology

STRI AND BAA DISCUSSION

UNCLASSIFIED 14

Strategic Trends Research Initiative (aka “Story”)

Encompasses primarily UNCLASSIFIED studies, strategic dialogues, and tabletop exercises (classified work can be undertaken in some circumstances)

Provides clear and concise analytic products tailored to a primarily USG audience from midlevel to senior personnel with diverse expertise and a range of interests

Priority Order: DTRA. DoD, Interagency, and (as appropriate) Allies and Partners, Research Community

Prioritizes year after year build and cross-pollination of ideas across projects

Focus: Delivering operationally relevant, credible, timely, and actionable research for DTRA and the Warfighter community

Intent: Deliver insights and recommendations that can inform future operations, activities, and investments, especially in areas relevant to the DTRA mission

Alignment: National Defense Strategy, Interim National Security Strategic Guidance

We are not interested in…

Development of databases and datasets, software, models, simulations, hardware, and technologies

A purchase of a data subscription or tool Research efforts that focus solely on mining existing data, or summarizing insights from the extant literature base (literature reviews can be incorporated in broader analytic efforts)

Policy Recommendations:

While it’s understood that some research may lead to the identification of policy options, we do not prioritize research that is primarily focused on the policy realm

We will entertain limited policy recommendations insofar that DTRA has equities in that policy area (i.e. CBRN and WMD topics) and normally advocates for changes to policy/guidance through normal advisory activities

Deliverables

All projects funded under the BAA have the same core deliverables;

additions to this list should be identified as tasks Monthly technical and financial progress reports Briefings (kickoff meeting, midpoint IPR, and outbrief) Final financial report Final closeout report Final 12 to 15-page technical report (not including appendices/TOC/covers) with accompanying 1 to 3-page standalone executive summary (templates provided)

External Publications:

Are not acceptable substitutes for the final technical report Requirement to consult SI-STT prior to publishing findings resulting from the research in any academic journals, media outlets, or online forums, including websites DTRA will notify the researcher of any required public release processes

Award Type and Period of Performance (PoP)

Award Types:

Discussant: Aninze Awanna

Contracts MIPRs Interagency Orders Grants NO

Project Type PoP Requirement

Studies No more than nine months; no option periods

Strategic Dialogues Each iteration: No more than 12 months Option Periods: Two one year Tabletop Exercises

DTRA will consider option periods for dialogues and tabletop exercises to ensure year after year advancement and maximize efficiencies

Study performers are invited to submit white papers for follow-on research once DTRA has received the draft technical report for the current effort

Enduring Research Focus Areas (Unchanged)

Identify the utility of deeper, more meaningful relationships with existing allies, partners, and establish new relationships with non-traditional partners as a mechanism to compete against key strategic competitors

Understand the implications of emerging capabilities – with specific emphasis on those developed or used by key competitors and current and potential adversaries – on the United States’ ability to maintain operational advantage and project power in order to generate insights and develop recommendations that can inform future U.S. operations, activities, and investments

Identify emerging WMD threats of concern for the future battlespace, methodologies to assess and counter them, and consider implications for future U.S. operations, activities, and investments

Thrust Area Discussant: Don Wenzlick

Thrust Area 1:

Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace

Research Thrust Areas

Thrust Area 2:

Track 1.5 and Track 2 Strategic Dialogues with Allies, Partners, and

Non-Traditional Partners

Thrust Area 3:

WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

DTRA reduced the number of thrusts to make it easier for applicants to identify the thrust that aligns best to their proposed project

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (1 of 5)

Of particular interest:

Topic Priority Competitor’s/adversaries’ emerging strategic capabilities and implications for the United States’ ability to maintain operational advantage and a favorable balance of power in key strategic regions

Russia and China Address WMD/CBRN topics, especially the intersection with other warfighting domains Identify steps for United States to mitigate effects, including in cooperation with allies and partners

Concepts and approaches relevant to “integrated deterrence”

Highlight impacts for how the United States conceives and responds to WMD or CBRN-related threats and challenges in key strategic regions, including in cooperation with allies and partners

Adversarial strategy, operational constructs, vulnerabilities, and implications related to “limited” CBRN use to achieve non-strategic objectives

Address asymmetric advantages and disadvantages of such an approach to 2032 Battlespace (2 of 5)

Issues relevant to adapting to nuclear environments Circumstances that incentivize adversary non-strategic nuclear use Adaptations across warfighting domains to overcome or mitigate effects of nuclear weapons Applicability of past nuclear operations doctrine Efficient adaptations

How competitors/adversaries might exploit advances in CB technologies to intensify surprise and/or alter warfighting and escalation dynamics in key strategic regions through CB warfare shaping operations

Russia China

How competitors/adversaries are exploiting weaknesses in current U.S. partnerships, alliances, or international agreements and identify steps to mitigate the effects

Focus primarily on security and military aspects of relationships

Cover Russia and China to 2032 Battlespace (3 of 5)

WMD or CBRN-related threats and challenges the United States needs to be prepared to address relevant to North Korean and Iranian activities and steps to prevent or mitigate the effects on regional and global stability

Specific military-related threats or challenges that are not yet USG priorities (but should be) and identify ways to avoid, prevent, or mitigate the negative impacts, unilaterally and in cooperation with allies and partners

Focus on emerging threats that would significantly change how the United States might approach defense prioritization and implementation or technology advances that will drive strategic innovation

Address WMD or CBRN-related topics including intersection between threat domains

Future approaches to international treaties and agreements related to WMD and CBRN topics including arms control, risk reduction, and/or CBRN defense

Focus on mitigating norm erosion, strengthening international law, or future/potential roles of international organizations such as IAEA, OPCW etc.

to 2032 Battlespace (4 of 5)

Challenges, threats, and issues related to floating nuclear power plants and small, modular reactors in the Indo-Pacific region and impacts on regional stability and security

Address dual-use considerations Identify threat reduction activities the United

States could undertake with allies and partners Focus on Southeast Asia

Challenges, threats, and issues related to biotechnology and synthetic biology

Address military/defense applications, vulnerabilities, and convergence with other disciplines

Address biotech competition and manipulation by China and implications for WMD development

Challenges, threats, and issues related to climate change set to impact CBRN infrastructure, development, employment, or mitigation efforts

Trajectory of Chinese and Russian hypersonic missile development and implications for strategy and operational usage

Convergence of artificial intelligence and machine learning with CBRN threats – methods, strategy, and mitigation to 2032 Battlespace (5 of 5)

Potential impact of divergent threat perspectives between the United States and its partners in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific on potential cooperative activities in the security realm and ways to mitigate the effects of these differences to achieve mutual security objectives

Address WMD or CBRN-related topics

Potential impact of differences in military and technological capabilities between the United States and its partners in Southeast Asia/Western Pacific on potential cooperative activities in the security realm and ways to mitigate the effects of these differences to achieve mutual security objectives

Stability in a world with multiple regional hegemons that seek uncontested influence in their near abroad

What the post-COVID world looks like in terms of biological threats Focus on DoD-related issues

Impacts and implications of a reduced U.S. presence in the Middle East on WMD and CBRN-related proliferation potentials in the region

It is important that we understand the extent of the trend or the emergence of a technology AND the implications to the warfighter

Track 1.5 / 2 Definition: Unofficial, bilateral, or multilateral meetings that provide an opportunity for American experts to discuss important, and sometimes sensitive, strategic issues with their foreign counterparts in a private, open environment, outside of official diplomatic channels (Track 1)

Thrust Area 2: Track 1.5 and Track 2 Strategic Dialogues with Allies, Partners, and Non-Traditional Partners

Need:

Dialogues that provide a venue and engagement framework for structured, but informal discussions…that can help the United States develop deeper, more meaningful relationships with existing allies and partners and/or establish new relationships with non-traditional partners as a mechanism to address mutual security challenges

Track Environment Official Government Participation

Non-Government/ Expert Participation

1 Official Yes No

1.5 Unofficial Yes (in private capacities) Yes

2 Unofficial No Yes

UNCLASSIFIED 26

Primary interest: dialogues that involve allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific and address security challenges related to China, especially those that have potential to build from year to year

Priorities:

Multilateral dialogues that involve two or more allies and partners with shared security objectives and/or threat considerations Bilateral dialogues with countries that have been identified as strategic priorities but do not have Track 1 engagements with the United States Bilateral dialogues with allies that focus specifically on WMD and emerging threat-related topics that are not sufficiently addressed in other USG engagements

Dialogues should:

Primarily focus on identifying points of convergence and divergence in threat perspectives, obstacles and opportunities for further collaboration and cooperation in military-relevant areas, and activities that might be undertaken in support of shared security objectives

Generate list of insights and recommendations for DTRA, DoD, & CWMD community

Discussions should be strategic in nature and aligned to DoD/USG priorities White papers should identify potential topics and explain why they’re important Meetings need to include at least one segment focused on topics that fall within

DTRA’s purview

DTRA-relevant topics include:

Deterrence I Strategic stability I Nuclear, biological, and chemical security I WMD acquisition, proliferation, and use I WMD risk reduction and arms control I Identification and response to intentional or accidental CBRN release I Proliferation of dual-use technologies I Emerging technologies and capabilities that can be used to achieve or maintain operational advantage (especially WMD/CBRN-relevant ones)

Expectations Upon Award:

Develop agenda in coordination with DTRA Coordinate, develop, and vet a balanced invite list with DTRA Keep dialogue meetings on track to address agenda items, introduce new concepts, and challenge assumptions

Thrust Area 3: WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

Need:

Tabletop exercises that provide an experiential learning platform to strengthen the DTRA workforce’s ability to:

Understand the multi-faceted and complex challenges facing the Joint Force Recognize requirements that may be placed on a Combatant Command in a crisis or conflict situation Anticipate opportunities for DTRA to support

Each exercise should:

Draw important insights and implications for the United States’ ability to maintain its operational military advantages Involve participation from DTRA and the larger DoD in addition to other experts Be a standalone effort achieve a limited number of objectives that will help us to understand implications of future WMD or CBRN development or employment – and the U.S. responses to such an event

Thrust Area 3: WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

Primary interest: exercises that examine scenarios in the Indo-Pacific or European theaters and the intersection between WMD and other emerging threat domains, including (but not limited to) cyber and space

Priority will be given to exercises that:

Consider chemical or biological threats Explore integrated deterrence concepts

Note: TTXs that are intended to serve as an input to/portion of a larger research study output should be proposed under Thrust Area 1

Two Phase Submission Process

Phase I – White Paper submission

• Consists of a technical concept, cost summary, and information about the proposed research team’s capabilities to conduct the research

• Should not exceed 10 pages or 5 MB of storage space

• Send each submission in one file; do not send multiple files

• Send all submissions via email; submissions uploaded to submission sites (e.g.

Grants.Gov) will not be considered

Phase II – Proposal submission (upon written acceptance of white paper)

• No more than five attachments (10 MB limit): technical proposal, cost narrative, cost spreadsheet

(template provided), Statement of Research Work (SoRW), and supplemental information

• SoRW should not be attached to technical proposal and should be submitted in MS Word format using the template provided

• Be sure to review the specific instructions for reporting IT-related costs in Amendment 12

BAA notice and amendments provide full instruction regarding submission guidelines

Submission and Review Process Discussant: Aninze Awanna

White Paper Review Process

Review Process:

Technical Evaluation Panel: SI-ST personnel (Gov/Mil Only) Notification of Phase 1 decision occurs 30 days or less following submission deadline Feedback will be provided via email; requests for additional feedback

(including meetings/phone calls) will not be considered

Dates to Remember

This DTRA BAA is open-ended, but for priority FY22 funding consideration, please bear in mind the following review periods:

Project Type/Thrust Review Begins Studies (Thrust 1) Nov 16, 2021 Strategic Dialogues (Thrust 2) Nov 9, 2021 Tabletop Exercises (Thrust 3) Nov 23, 2021

Papers received after the beginning of each review period will be evaluated, but may not receive priority consideration

DTRA will not review any white papers ahead of the specified review period

Contact and Submission Emails

Thrust Area 1: Studies dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta1@mail.mil

Thrust Area 2: Dialogues dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta2@mail.mil

Thrust Area 3: Tabletop Exercises dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta3@mail.mil

Admin. Correspondence & Questions:

dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-adm@mail.mil

Q&A

Slide Number 1

Zoom for Government – Virtual Etiquette

Introductions

Agenda

DTRA Overview �

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)

Mission Highlights for DTRA

Organizational Roles within DTRA

SI-stt Overview �

Slide Number 10

Strategic Trends Division (SI-STT)

Strategic Trends Division (SI-STT)

STRI and BAA discussion �

Slide Number 14

We are not interested in…

Deliverables

Award Type and Period of Performance (PoP)

Enduring Research Focus Areas (Unchanged)

Research Thrust Areas

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (1 of 5)

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (2 of 5)

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (3 of 5)

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (4 of 5)

Thrust Area 1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace (5 of 5)

Thrust Area 2: Track 1.5 and Track 2 Strategic Dialogues with Allies, Partners, and Non-Traditional Partners

Thrust Area 2: Track 1.5 and Track 2 Strategic Dialogues with Allies, Partners, and Non-Traditional Partners

Thrust Area 2: Track 1.5 and Track 2 Strategic Dialogues with Allies, Partners, and Non-Traditional Partners

Thrust Area 3: WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

Thrust Area 3: WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

Two Phase Submission Process

White Paper Review Process

Dates to Remember

Contact and Submission Emails

Q&A�