BAA Amendment 12 Final.pdf

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

HDTRA1-20-S-0002

AMENDMENT 12

BAA Amendment 12

As the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Strategic Trends Division’s (SI-STT) focus and priorities have evolved for this Broad Area Announcement (BAA), we made the following changes to the BAA and Attachments that reflect the current areas of interest. Please see the referenced sections and ensure these changes are appropriately reflected in your white paper and proposal submissions.

SI-STT will hold a virtual Research Topic Information Session (RTIS) for interested participants on October 19, 2021 from 8:00 AM to 11:15 AM EST. To register for the RTIS, please email:

dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-adm@mail.mil. In the registration email (Subject: STRI RTIS Registration), please include the participant’s full name, title, organization, and email address. On or before October 15, 2021, SI-STT will send a link for the virtual session on the Zoom4Gov platform.

Questions should also be directed to the above email address.

I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

1. Statement of Objective/Need: (BAA page 2) has been modified as follows:

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) enables the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), the U.S. Government (USG), and International Partners to counter and deter Weapons of Mass Destruction and emerging threats. The Strategic Integration Directorate, Strategic Trends and Effects Department, Strategic Trends Division’s (SI- STT) primary responsibility is to generate operationally-relevant, timely, credible, actionable insights and recommendations into emerging threats within DTRA’s mission space in order to enable and guide warfighter understanding of the range of military operations in an era of Great Power Competition.

SI-STT’s activities will focus on characterizing the 2027 to 2032 battlespace in mission-relevant areas in order to inform future DTRA and DoD operations, activities, and investments, particularly in areas most relevant to DTRA’s mission space. This timeframe was specifically chosen to allow DTRA, DoD, and the CWMD community an appropriate amount of time to mitigate the anticipated threats. Given the complexity of the challenges/topic areas and the need to consider and incorporate a range of viewpoints and analyses, SI-STT needs to partner with the expert community to achieve success. This requires sponsoring analytic research efforts through the Strategic Trends Research Initiative (STRI). It seeks analytic research products that not only provide insight into the future battlespace in mission-relevant areas, but identify operationally-relevant recommendations for how (in priority order) DTRA, DoD, and more broadly the USG can address the identified challenges, threats, and issues, including in cooperation with partners and allies.

While it’s recognized that analytic research can take many forms, DTRA SI-STT prioritizes the development of analytic research papers resulting from studies, strategic dialogues, and tabletop exercises (TTXs). DTRA SI-STT is not seeking databases, datasets, software development, models, simulations, hardware, technologies, or any research product that requires a purchase of a data subscription or tool. While literature reviews can be incorporated into studies, dialogues, or TTXs, DTRA SI-STT does not prioritize research efforts that focus solely on mining existing data, or summarizing insights from the extant literature base.

While it’s understood that some research may lead to the identification of policy options, SI-STT does not prioritize research that is primarily focused on the policy realm. DTRA 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.

It is important that we understand the extent of the trend or the emergence of a technology AND the implications to the warfighter. This is important for our use in prioritizing threats and understanding how we might take the insights and recommendations for further development/exploration. Simply stating that something exists or will exist is only marginally helpful – we need to understand how and when this will occur and what will result from its implementation/emergence.

SI-STT has identified the following three (3) thrust areas for FY2022.

Thrust Area1: Research Studies to Characterize the 2027 to 2032 Battlespace

SI-STT is seeking studies that:

• Provide insight into competitor’s/adversaries’ emerging strategic capabilities.

Consider potential implications for the United States’ ability to maintain operational advantage and a favorable balance of power in key strategic regions.

Priority will be given to studies covering China and Russia. Priority will be given to studies that address WMD or CBRN-relevant topics, especially the intersection with other warfighting domains (e.g. cyber and/or space), and identify steps that the United States, in cooperation with allies and partners, can take to prevent or mitigate their effects.

• Examine concepts and approaches relevant to “integrated deterrence.” Priority will be given to studies that highlight the 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.

• Explore adversarial strategy, operational constructs, vulnerabilities, and implications related to “limited” CBRN use (i.e. small, localized strikes or releases) to achieve non-strategic objectives (e.g. degrade, deny, coerce). Specific priority given to those studies addressing asymmetric advantages and disadvantages of such an approach.

• Explore issues relevant to adapting to nuclear environments. This includes, but is not limited to studies that examine:

o Circumstances that incentivize adversary non-strategic nuclear use, including conditions that could trigger adoption of a nonstrategic nuclear warfighting capability among countries that do not yet possess it.

o Operational adaptations across warfighting functions to mitigate or overcome the effects of nuclear weapons.

o Past nuclear operations doctrine to determine what remains applicable to future conflicts, especially those that may involve priority threat actors.

o Adaptations to the nuclear environment that are efficient (i.e. account for both nuclear and other emerging threats, or minimize disruption to preferred operational methods)

• Provide insight into how competitors/adversaries might exploit advances in chemical and biological technologies (including enabling technologies or dissemination/employment options) to intensify surprise and/or alter warfighting and escalation dynamics in key strategic regions through chemical and biological warfare shaping operations. Priority will be given to studies covering China and Russia.

• Examine how competitors/adversaries are exploiting weaknesses in current U.S.

partnerships, alliances, or international agreements and identify steps to mitigate the effects of these actions. Priority will be given to studies that focuses primarily on the security/military-related aspects of these relationships. Priority will be given to studies covering China and Russia.

• Provide insight into the WMD or CBRN-related threats and challenges the United

States needs to be prepared to address relevant to North Korean and Iranian activities and the steps it could undertake to prevent or mitigate the effects of these activities on regional and global stability.

• Provide insight into 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. Priority will be given for studies on emerging threats, including emerging disruptive technology (EDT) or enabling technology, which would significantly change how the U.S. might approach defense prioritization and implementation or technology advances that will drive strategic innovation. Priority will be given to studies that address WMD or CBRN-related topics, including intersection between threat domains (e.g. CBRN + cyber and/or space).

• Explore future approaches to international treaties and agreements related to WMD and CBRN topics including arms control, risk reduction, and/or CBRN defense.

Specific priority given to studies addressing mitigation of the erosion of norms, strengthening of international laws regarding WMD development, proliferation, and use, or the potential/ future roles and responsibilities of international organizations chaperoning regulatory efforts (i.e. IAEA, OPCW, etc.).

• Examine challenges, threats, and issues related to floating nuclear power plants

(FNPP) and small, modular reactors (SMRs) in the Indo-Pacific region (particularly Southeast Asia) and impacts on regional stability and security.

Priority will be given to studies that address dual-use considerations and/or identify threat reduction-related activities the United States could undertake with allies and partners.

• Examine the challenges, threats, and issues related to biotechnology and synthetic biology. Priority will be given to studies that address military/defense applications, vulnerabilities caused by their future development, and convergence with other disciplines (i.e. chemical + bio, bio + cyber, etc.) or studies addressing broad biotechnology competition and manipulation by China and the implications for further WMD development.

• Examination of the challenges, threats, and issues related to climate change set to impact chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear infrastructure, development, employment, or mitigation efforts.

• Examine the trajectory of Chinese and Russian hypersonic missile development and implications for strategy and operational usage.

• Examine convergence of artificial intelligence and machine learning with CBRN threats – methods, strategy, and mitigation.

• Examine the 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 identify ways to mitigate the effects of these differences to achieve mutual security objectives. Priority will be given to studies that address, either wholly or partially, WMD or CBRN-related topics.

• Examine the 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 identify ways to mitigate the effects of these differences to achieve mutual security objectives.

Priority will be given to studies that address, either wholly or partially, WMD or CBRN-related topics.

• Examine stability in a world with multiple regional hegemons that seek uncontested influence in their near abroad. These studies could address the following questions (list is not exhaustive and is meant to be for illustrative purposes only):

o What are the implications of multiple regional hegemons for the United States?

o Can this be achieved absent conflict, and by what methods? Is the subsequent situation more or less likely to lead to great power war?

o Can the United States preserve or re-establish extended deterrence under such conditions, assuming such a future includes a reversal or failure of current U.S. policy?

• Examine what the post-COVID world looks like in terms of biological threats.

These studies could address the following questions (list is not exhaustive and is meant to be for illustrative purposes only):

o How, if at all, does focused attention by all governments on improving their biological defense capabilities provide opportunities to divert resources to biological warfare programs?

o Given the prominence of zoonotic diseases in recent major outbreaks, to what extent do issues such as animal trafficking or habitat loss become global issues, and issues that require DoD attention?

o How is bio-surveillance adequate or inadequate to address future challenges?

o How might emerging technologies impact this future?

• Provide insight into the impacts and implications of a reduced U.S. presence in the Middle East (including Afghanistan and Iraq) on WMD and CBRN-related proliferation potentials in the region.

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

SI-STT is seeking bilateral and multilateral Track 1.5 and Track 2 strategic dialogues that provide a venue and engagement framework for structured, but informal discussions among subject matter experts, held under the “Chatham House Rule,” 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.

SI-STT is primarily interested in dialogues that involve allies and partners in the Indo- Pacific and address security challenges related to a rising China. At this time, it prioritizes dialogues that:

(1) involve two or more allies and partners with shared security objectives and/or threat considerations;

(2) bilateral dialogues with countries that do not have a current Track 1 dialogue (formal diplomacy engagements) with the United States, but have been identified as a priority country in USG strategic documents; and

(3) bilateral dialogues with allies that focus specifically on WMD and emerging threat-related topics that are not sufficiently addressed in other USG engagements.

The dialogues shall 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 potential activities that might be undertaken in support of shared security objectives. As with other STRI-sponsored projects, each dialogue should seek to have a list of insights and recommendations at the conclusion for DTRA, DoD, and the CWMD community to work against.

While the discussions should be strategic in nature and be aligned to DoD/USG priorities, the meetings shall include at least one segment focused on topics that fall within DTRA’s purview, including (but not limited to) deterrence; strategic stability;

nuclear, biological, and chemical security; WMD acquisition, proliferation, and use;

WMD risk reduction and arms control; identification and response to intentional or accidental CBRN release; proliferation of dual-use technologies; and emerging technologies and capabilities that can be used to achieve or maintain operational advantage. As WMD development generally tracks with development of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, missile, and enabling technologies (i.e. science, technology, engineering disciplines), addressing areas that promote a desire/willingness to proceed to WMD development or would increase access and/or proliferation of WMD are especially important.

DTRA SI-STT is especially interested in those dialogues that have the potential to build from year to year, advancing the discussion and understanding on important strategic issues. White papers should describe potential topics for consideration and explain why they’re important.

*Track 1.5 and Track 2 dialogues are 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). Track 2 dialogues involve non-governmental expert representatives, to include former government officials. Current government officials do not participate unless they are providing a keynote address or are observing, which may be appropriate depending on the specific dialogue. Track 1.5 dialogues involve a mix of government officials - who participate in an unofficial capacity - and non-governmental experts.

Dialogue leads are expected, for both Track 1.5 and Track 2 strategic dialogues, to identify salient research questions and conduct preliminary research (as required) in order to inform the development of the dialogue’s agenda in coordination with DTRA and other stakeholders. Dialogue leads are expected to develop, vet, and coordinate with DTRA the invitation list for all meetings connected to the dialogue. Careful selection of participants is needed to ensure we address and answer critical questions.

Leads should promote balance in participation along political, gender, age, technical/policy, and affiliation lines when possible to avoid bias. The dialogue lead is responsible for keeping the sessions on track with the agreed agenda, introduce new concepts, to challenge assumptions of the audience, and pose hard questions that we need answers for, all while building rapport between nations (tall order, we know!).

The resulting insights and recommendations serve as the basis for analytic reports that are provided to DTRA SI-STT at the end of the period of performance.

Thrust Area 3: WMD-Relevant Tabletop Exercises

SI-STT is seeking table-top exercises (TTXs) that provide an experiential learning opportunity 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; and anticipate opportunities for DTRA to support.

Each exercise should draw important insights and implications for the United States’ ability to maintain its operational military advantage over its competitors and other priority threat actors. They should involve participation from DTRA and the larger DoD, as well as other experts as appropriate.

TTXs serve a vital role in exploration of difficult challenges and positively impact workforce development/understanding. Each TTX needs to be a stand-alone effort to 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.

At this time, SI-STT is primarily interested in TTXs 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 TTXs that consider chemical and biological threats or explore integrated deterrence concepts.

TTXs that are intended to serve as an input to a larger research study output should be proposed under Thrust Area 1.

II. AWARD INFORMATION: This section has been changed as follows. Please refer to BAA Amendment 8 for all other relevant information.

2. Anticipated Number of Awards:

The period of performance (PoP) for Thrust Area 1 (studies) shall not exceed nine (9) months. DTRA will not consider contract option periods, however, those who have current awarded contracts to perform studies are invited to submit white papers for follow-on studies research. NOTE: Follow-on white papers can’t be submitted until DTRA has received (at least) the draft technical report for the current study.

In order to ensure year by year advancement of Thrust Area 2 (dialogues) and Thrust Area 3 (TTXs), as well as to maximize efficiencies, DTRA will consider up to two contract option periods for dialogue and TTX projects. However, each iteration of the dialogue or TTX should not exceed twelve months.

4. Anticipated Award Period:

b. The next review period will begin on November 9, 2021. For priority FY2022 funding consideration, please submit:

Thrust Area 1 by November 16, 2021

Thrust Area 2 by November 9, 2021

Thrust Area 3 by November 23, 2021

IV. PHASE 1 – WHITE PAPER SUBMISSION INFORMATION: This section has been changed as follows. Please refer to BAA Amendment 8 for all other relevant information.

Offerors shall submit the complete White Paper package to the corresponding Thrust Area email address for review/evaluation. No submission shall exceed 5 MB of storage space and should be no more than 10 pages. Include all requested technical and cost information in one file. Do not attach multiple files. DTRA SI-STT will not consider submissions that are uploaded into any submission sites such as Grants.Gov. All submissions must be emailed.

In addition to the information outlined in Amendment 8, the technical concept shall also include information about the proposed research team members’ capabilities and experience to conduct the proposed research. Do not simply outline the organization’s experience.

DTRA SI-STT will not consider capability statements. Each white paper should outline a specific proposed research project in a reasonable level of detail. While DTRA SI-STT will consider white papers that outline alternative approaches to conduct a specific research project, it will not consider white papers that outline a list of potential projects an organization could undertake in response to the BAA. DTRA SI-STT will also not consider white papers that offer a proposed analytic approach to address a TBD research topic (e.g. a research topic identified post-award).

VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS: This section has been modified as follows.

The specific contact point for each Thrust Area is listed below. Submit the white papers and proposals to the corresponding Thrust Area email address. DO NOT submit the same white paper or proposal to multiple Thrust Areas.

All questions regarding administrative content shall be submitted in writing by email to Admin. Correspondence & Questions (dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-adm@mail.mil).

DTRA will not release employee personal contact information.

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

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

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

ATTACHMENT 1 – PROPOSAL FORMAT AND PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

This section has been modified as follows. Refer to Amendment 8 for all other relevant information.

The proposal submission shall not exceed 10 MB. It shall include no more than five (5) separate attachments. The attachments are as follows:

1. Technical Proposal

2. Cost Narrative

3. Cost Sheet (Use provided MS Excel template)

4. Statement of Research Work (Use the provided template and retain in MS Word format. DO NOT attach this document to the technical proposal.)

5. Supplemental Information mailto:dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta2@mail.mil mailto:dtra.belvoir.si.mbx.hdtra1-stri-ta3@mail.mil

ATTACHMENT 2 – COST SHEET INSTRUCTIONS:

This section has been modified as follows. Refer to the cost instructions that will be sent with the invite to submit a proposal.

Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

Successful completion of STRI research does not require the use of government-furnished information technology (IT) equipment such as telephones, computers, printers, or videoconferencing platforms. STRI research also does not require the purchase of the same.

DTRA SI-STT will not mandate the use of specific types of IT equipment. Proposed ODCs may include costs related to conferencing calls, conference/meeting support services, and printing and copying services, but may not relate to the purchase of IT equipment. Do not list the names of specific IT equipment that you will be using, to include videoconferencing platforms. Ensure these services are not replicated in the general and administrative (G&A) costs.

ATTACHMENT 4 – Statement of Research Work (SoRW)

This document shall be included in all proposal submissions, and not appended to the technical proposal. Do not modify the text unless indicated. Do not replace the word “contractor” with the name of your organization or any specific title/position. Please submit in MS Word format as a separate attachment. DTRA SI-STT will use this document as a basis for the SoRW that is included in the contract should the research effort proceed to award.

Statement of Research Work

Title

Date:

1. Background: Briefly describe, in one or two short paragraphs, what the research gap, challenge, or issue is; why it needs to be addressed (from a research and US Government perspective); and highlight any alignment to current US strategy, policy, or activities.

2. Project Type: [Dialogue, Study or Tabletop Exercise]

3. Scope and Objective: To address the [gap/challenge/issue] highlighted in Section 1.0, the contractor will [insert a succinct statement that outlines the primary research question and objective that will be addressed. Identify any sub-objectives in sub-bullets (3.1…), but do not include more than two. Delete sub-bullets if not needed.

3.1. Begin with Verb

3.2. Begin with Verb

4. Task Requirements: The contractor will perform the following tasks to fulfill the [dialogue, study, or TTX] objective[s] outlined in Section 3.0:

4.1. Conduct kickoff meeting with DTRA SI-STT.

4.1.1 The contractor and DTRA Contracting Officer’s Representative (hereafter DTRA

COR/PM) will determine the time and place of the kickoff meeting with SI-STT, which may be conducted remotely due to COVID-19-related restrictions.

4.1.2 In accordance with the Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRL), the contractor will submit briefing slides to the DTRA COR/PM no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.

4.2 Conduct a midpoint in-progress review (IPR) meeting with DTRA SI-STT.

4.2.1 The contractor and the DTRA COR/PM will coordinate the appropriate time and place for the IPR at the kickoff meeting and subsequent email communication. It may be conducted remotely due to COVID-19-related restrictions.

4.2.2 In accordance with the CDRLs, the contractor will submit briefing slides to the DTRA COR/PM no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.

4.3 Insert tasks to accomplish the research project in sequential order. Continue with numbering, 4.3, 4.4, etc. – each must begin with a verb. Please be sure the tasks reference any required workshops, interviews, conferences, or other meetings. While meeting-related tasks should be sufficiently detailed, you do not need to provide detail on how you will plan them or what type of IT equipment you will use, if any. You do not need to include tasks related to the preparation of the deliverables. Those are covered in 4.4.

4.4 Based on the [dialogue meeting outputs, study results, etc.], prepare and provide final deliverables in accordance with the CDRLs.

4.5 Dissemination of Research Outputs. This task will involve disseminating the research output (to include reports and briefings) to key stakeholders, including in coordination with DTRA SI-STT as appropriate.

5. Period of Performance: X months from date of award.

6. Deliverables: The contractor shall provide deliverables to the DTRA COR/PM according to the CDRLs.

7. Additional Information:

7.1. Travel: Describe any required travel outside of the local D.C., Maryland, and Virginia

(DMV) area. Outline any contingency plans as relevant for COVID-19.

7.2. Security: The research effort will be conducted entirely at the unclassified level and all reports, including the final report, will also be unclassified. [Modify as required.]

7.3. Publication/Release of Information: The contractor will consult the DTRA COR/PM prior to publishing findings resulting from the research in any academic journals, media outlets, or online forums, including websites. Publication opportunities (to include speaking engagements) will be discussed at the kickoff and IPR meetings, and the DTRA COR/PM will notify the contractor of any required release processes. Upon publication in any journal or other outlet, the researcher shall provide a copy to the DTRA COR/PM for tracking purposes.

7.3.1. Outline any publication plans as currently known.

7.4. The technical proposal and final negotiated terms are incorporated as part of this SoRW.