Attachment_B_NGJ_LB_DET_SOO_20180112_Version_3.0.pdf

Distribution Statement D: Distribution authorized to DoD and U.S. DoD contractors only (Critical Technology) (12 June 2012). Other requests shall be referred to Program Executive Officer Tactical (PEO (T)), PMA-234, 47123 Buse Rd., RADM William A. Moffett Building, Patuxent River, MD 20670-1547

Statement of Objectives

Next Generation Jammer Low Band

(Increment 2)

Demonstration of Existing Technologies (DET)

Prepared by:

Program Executive Officer Tactical Aircraft (PEO-T)

EA-6B Airborne Electronic Attack Program Manager (PMA-234)

Version 3.0

12 January 2018

NGJ Low Band (Increment 2) DET SOO Version 3.0

Table of Contents

1.0 SCOPE

1.1 Background

1.2 Solicitation Purpose

1.3 Objectives

1.4 Requirements Summary

2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

3.0 REQUIREMENTS

3.1 General

3.2 Program Management

3.2.1 Cost and Schedule Reporting

Integrated Program Management .................................................................................. 5 3.2.1.1

3.2.1.1.1 Schedule Risk Assessments with Government

Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) ................................................................................. 5 3.2.1.2

Subcontract Cost/Schedule Management and Reporting .............................................. 7 3.2.1.3

Over Target Baseline (OTB)/Over Target Schedule (OTS)/Restructure ...................... 7 3.2.1.4

Contracting Officer’s Management Report ................................................................... 7 3.2.1.5

3.2.2 Programmatic and Technical Meetings

Formal Program Management Reviews (PMRs) & Technical Meetings ...................... 7 3.2.2.1

3.2.2.1.1 Post Award Conference (PAC)/Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) #1

3.2.2.1.2 PMRs/TIMs

3.2.2.1.3 Demonstration Readiness Reviews (DRRs)

Weekly Program Management Status Update Meetings ............................................. 10 3.2.2.2

3.2.3 Subcontractor and Supplier Management

3.2.4 Security

Security Classification Guides (SCGs) & Deliverables Marking ............................... 11 3.2.4.1

Classified Systems ....................................................................................................... 11 3.2.4.2

Data Spillages .............................................................................................................. 11 3.2.4.3

Operational Security Plan ............................................................................................ 12 3.2.4.4

3.2.5 Configuration and Data Management

3.2.6 Collaborative Data Environment (CDE)

3.3 Systems Engineering (SE)

3.3.1 Requirements Management

Requirements Management Process ............................................................................ 14 3.3.1.1

Requirements Verification ........................................................................................... 14 3.3.1.2

3.3.1.2.1 Verification Cross Reference Matrix (VCRM)

3.3.2 Other Contractor Data

Intellectual Property .................................................................................................... 15 3.3.2.1

3.3.3 Allocated and Product Baselines

Allocated Baseline ....................................................................................................... 15 3.3.3.1

Product Baseline ...................................................................................................... 1516 3.3.3.2

3.3.4 Demonstration Readiness Reviews (DRRs)

Demonstration Readiness Review – 1 (DRR-1) .......................................................... 16 3.3.4.1

Demonstration Readiness Review – 2 (DRR-2) ...................................................... 1617 3.3.4.2

3.3.4.2.1 Pod Concept

3.3.4.2.2 Technology Demonstration Unit (TDU)

Demonstration Readiness Review – 3 (DRR-3) ...................................................... 1718 3.3.4.3

3.3.5 Estimated Mass Properties Report (EMPR)

3.4 Technology Demonstration Unit (TDU)

3.4.1 TDU Introduction

Controller, Receiver, and Exciter (CRE) ..................................................................... 19 3.4.1.1

Antenna .................................................................................................................... 1920 3.4.1.2

Transmitter............................................................................................................... 1920 3.4.1.3

3.4.2 TDU Demonstration Methodologies

Measurements in a Representative Environment ........................................................ 20 3.4.2.1

Demonstration (Non-Measurement) ............................................................................ 21 3.4.2.2

Analysis / Modeling..................................................................................................... 21 3.4.2.3

Analysis / Modeling Verification ................................................................................ 21 3.4.2.4

3.4.3 Test Facilities

Tests at Contractor or Other Facilities ......................................................................... 21 3.4.3.1

Master Test Plan ...................................................................................................... 2122 3.4.3.2

Individual Contractor Test Plan ................................................................................... 22 3.4.3.3

Contractor FARM Test Plan ........................................................................................ 22 3.4.3.4

Government FARM Facility .................................................................................... 2223 3.4.3.5

3.4.4 Demonstration Parameters

Testing Utilizing the Antenna Subsystem ............................................................... 2526 3.4.4.1

3.4.4.1.1 Effective Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP)

3.4.4.1.1.1 Determination of EIRP through Analysis

3.4.4.1.1.2 Determination of EIRP through Modeling

3.4.4.1.1.3 EIRP Verification

3.4.4.1.2 Antenna Power Handling

3.4.4.1.3 Installed Antenna Performance

3.4.4.1.4 Antenna Impedance

3.4.4.1.5 Receive Antenna Patterns

3.4.4.1.6 Multiple Simultaneous Assignments Utilizing the Antennas and Apertures

3.4.4.1.6.1 Beamforming for Multiple Simultaneous Assignments

3.4.4.1.6.2 Aperture Dividing or Multiple Apertures for Multiple Simultaneous Assignments 2829

3.4.4.1.7 Transmit Power

Tests of the Transmitter Subsystem ......................................................................... 2930 3.4.4.2

3.4.4.2.1 Thermal Monitoring

3.4.4.2.2 Technique Commanding

3.4.4.2.3 Output Spectrum

3.4.4.2.3.1 Continuous Wave (CW)

3.4.4.2.3.2 Modulated Waveform

3.4.4.2.3.3 Signal Compression

3.4.4.2.3.4 Linearization Impacts on Timing

3.4.4.2.3.5 Pre-Distortion Impacts on Timing

3.4.4.2.3.6 Instantaneous Bandwidth

3.4.4.2.3.7 Frequency Drift

3.4.4.2.3.8 Phase Noise

3.4.4.2.4 Output Power

3.4.4.2.4.1 Exciter Output Power

3.4.4.2.4.2 1 dB Compression Point

3.4.4.2.4.3 Saturated Output Power

3.4.4.2.4.4 Load Pull

3.4.4.2.4.5 RF Output Power Reduction

3.4.4.2.5 Multiple Simultaneous Assignments Utilizing the Transmitter

3.4.4.2.5.1 Digitally Combined Simultaneous Assignments

3.4.4.2.5.2 RF Combined Simultaneous Assignments

3.4.4.2.6 Time Commutation Assignments

3.4.4.2.7 TDU RF Protection

3.4.4.2.7.1 HPA RF Protection

3.4.4.2.7.2 Receiver RF Protection

3.4.4.2.8 Blanking

3.4.4.2.9 Frequency Lockout

Receiver Parameters ................................................................................................ 3536 3.4.4.3

3.4.4.3.1 Spurious Free Dynamic Range

3.4.4.3.2 Instantaneous Bandwidth (IBW)

3.4.4.3.3 Noise Figure

3.4.4.3.4 Sensitivity

3.4.4.3.5 Selectivity

APPENDIX A - DATA DELIVERABLES

ACRONYM LIST

List of Tables

Table 1: Government Documents Table 2: DET Programmatic and Technical Meetings

Table 3: DET TDU Demonstration and Measurement Parameters and Verification Methods

List of Figures

Figure 1: TDU Notional Block Diagram Figure 2: EIRP Demonstration Method

NGJ Low Band DET SOO Version 3.0

1.0 SCOPE

1.1 Background

The Next Generation Jammer Low Band (NGJ-LB) program is a Department of Defense (DoD) program intended to replace the aging ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System (TJS) currently used on the EA-18G aircraft for Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA). The Navy’s desire is to develop a

Low Band TJS for implementation as soon as feasibly possible.

1.2 Solicitation Purpose

In particular this Statement of Objectives (SOO) will increase the Government's knowledge and understanding in regard to existing technologies supporting an airborne wideband low radio frequency (RF) band jamming application where significant size, weight, power and cooling

(SWaP-C) constraints exist, such as those limitations when considering applications on carrier-based tactical aircraft (e.g., EA-18G aircraft).

The Government is also interested in long term system viability approaches that encompass the use of open architectures. This includes the ability to easily upgrade subsystems in order to pace the evolving threat.

The information obtained through this SOO for the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) will be used to support the determination of the Milestone entry point of the NGJ-LB program into the

Department of Defense acquisition process (as defined by DoD Instruction 5000.2 and other statutorily authorized accelerated acquisition authorities).

1.3 Objectives

The goal of the BAA effort is to develop system level alternatives which provide optimal maritime AEA capabilities, while leveraging existing and projected contractor technologies.

The high-level objectives of this BAA:

1) Demonstrate low band transmitter group within the SWaP-C constraints and allocations of a pod concept that fits on Station 6 of the EA-18G.

2) Assess performance in such areas as Frequency Coverage, Effective Isotropic Radiated

Power (EIRP), spatial coverage, spectral purity, and polarization.

3) Obtain previously generated Contractor data related to transmitter group performance.

4) Assess potential to rapidly deploy an interim pod solution or Early Operational Capability

(EOC) prior to planned Initial Operational Capability (IOC) and assess the use of open architectures to support a potential block upgrade approach.

The Navy’s notional NGJ-LB system capabilities and performance goals are included in the Low

Band Goals Document and this SOO. The NGJ-LB Goals Document provides detailed draft goals to address capabilities compatible with current and future NGJ-LB needs. Meeting the goals defined in the Goals document is not a requirement of the contract, but rather a guidepost for the Contractor in performance of SOO tasking. It is also the criteria the Government will use to assess Contractor technology to determine where the program can enter the acquisition cycle.

1.4 Requirements Summary

To support the objective of demonstrating mature technologies in a representative environment, a joint Government/Contractor test period will be conducted with the prototype Technology

Demonstration Unit (TDU) installed on Station 6 of the F/A-18E (used as a surrogate for the EA-

18G) aircraft airframe at the Patuxent River Facility for Antenna and Radar cross section

Measurement (FARM). The test period will consist of a series of Government executed demonstrations including full EIRP measurements and antenna pattern measurements further defined in Section 3.0 of this SOO.

The Contractor shall make available a prototype TDU that is consistent with the outer mold line of a Contractor developed pod concept. The size, weight, and volume constraints from the Low

Band Goals Document are provided as a guide for the pod concept; however, ability to meet these constraints is not required. The prototype TDU will be installed on Station 6 of the F/A-

18E airframe. The contractor shall ensure the prototype TDU meets all FARM requirements necessary to be installed inverted on the F/A-18E airframe located outside at the Naval Air

Station (NAS) Patuxent River FARM In Accordance With (IAW) FARM-ICD-001. The contractor shall ensure that the TDU can withstand all local weather conditions. The

Government will provide power and chilled water that currently exists at the FARM. The

Contractor is responsible for any conversion hardware and software needed to support the power and cooling allocations for the TDU. The Contractor is responsible for providing controls and displays for the prototype TDU.

Technical information gathered through this effort includes:

Data from Contractor-funded technology maturation or development efforts for technologies that are incorporated in the pod distributed technical baselines

Data from Contractor-funded technology maturation or development efforts for technologies that are incorporated in the TDU

Pod concept allocated baseline

Prototype TDU design data that defines and substantiates pod concept allocations

Prototype TDU drawings and data required to support aircraft test configuration clearances

Pod concept outer mold line

Test facility requirements

Demonstration test data and report

2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

The Contractor shall utilize the documents cited and invoked in Section 3.0 of this SOO that are listed in the Applicable Documents section (Table 1). In the event of conflict between the text of this SOO and the references cited herein, the text of this SOO shall take precedence. Nothing in this SOO supersedes applicable laws and regulations unless the Government has provided a specific exemption.

Table 1: Government Documents

Document

Number Document Title Document Date

Central Security

Service Policy

Manual 3-16, Revision 2014

NSA/CSS Classification Guide 23 May 2014

DD Form 254 Contract Security Classification

Specification Dec 1999

DoD 5010.12M Procedures for the Acquisition and

Management of Technical Data

14 May 1993

DoD Manual

5200.1, Change

Notice 1

DoD Information Security Program, Marking of Classified Information, Volume

28 Mar 2013

DoD Manual

5220.22-M, Change Notice 2

National Industrial Security Program

Operating Manual (NISPOM)

18 May 2016

DoDI 5200.39, Change Notice 1

Critical Program Information Protection within the Department of Defense

28 Dec 2010

DoDI 5230.24 Distribution Statements on Technical

Documents

23 Aug 2013

SAWE

Recommended

Practice #9

Estimated Weight and Balance Report -

Mass Properties Data for Missiles

3 June 2000

NGJ LOW BAND (INCREMENT 2)

SYSTEM GOALS DOCUMENT v4.3 08 November 2017

AT - USAF Anti-Tamper Security Class

Guide (Change 2)

19 May 2014

OPNAVINST

5513.2C- SCG

ID #08-084.1

Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) Tactical

Jamming System (TJS) Security

Classification Guide

23 January 2015

OPNAVINST

5513.2C- SCG

ID #02-26.4

F/A-18 Hornet (All Series) and Electronic

Attack EA-18G Security Class Guide

20 October 2014

OPNAVINST

5513.2C- SCG

ID #02-303.1

Navy Airborne Electronic Attack Jammer

Technique Optimization (JATO) Security

Classification Guide

28 October 2013

OPNAVINST

5513.2C- SCG

ID ID# 02-306.1

ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System (TJS)

Security Classification Guide

15 June 2016

FARM-ICD-001 FARM-ICD-001 12 October 2017

NAVAIRINST

13034.1D

Flight Clearance Policy for Air Vehicles and Aircraft Systems

15 March 2010

NAVAIRINST

4355.19E

System Engineering Technical Review

Process

06 February 2015

NSDD No. 298 National Operations Security Program 22 January 1988

DoD Directive

5205.02

DoD Operations Security (OSPEC)

Program

6 March 2006

DoD 5205.02-M DoD Operations Security (OPSEC)

Program Manual

3 November 2008

OPNAVINST

3432.1A

Department of the Navy Operations

Security

4 August 2011

3.0 REQUIREMENTS

3.1 General

The Contractor shall conduct a series of Demonstration Readiness Reviews (DRRs) as part of the build-up to the demonstration of technical perfomanceperformance at the FARM. The Contractor shall develop an allocated baseline for its proposed pod concept. The Contractor shall make available its prototype TDU that is consistent with its pod concept allocations. The Government will measure the TDU’s performance relative to the goals in the Low Band Goals Document in accordance with (IAW) SOO Sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.4. The Contractor shall provide data from its technology maturation efforts for any technologies that are included in the pod concept allocated baseline to be developed for this effort. The Contractor shall provide the associated management to successfully complete the pod concept allocated baseline, the systems engineering efforts, and

TDU demonstrations.

3.2 Program Management

The Contractor shall facilitate communications between its management organization and the

Government.

3.2.1 Cost and Schedule Reporting

Integrated Program Management 3.2.1.1

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) 252.234-7002 apply. The

Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) (DI-MGMT-81861) shall be developed, maintained, updated/statused and reported on a monthly basis per CDRL (AM01) requirement.

The contractor shall establish, maintain, and use in the performance of this contract, an integrated management system that is in compliance with the Industry Guidelines for Earned

Value Management Systems (EVMS) EIA-748 as determined by the Defense Contract

Management Agency (DCMA).

3.2.1.1.1 Schedule Risk Assessments with Government

The AIR-4.2 Program Schedule Assessment and SRA Instructions shall be used when conducting the SRA.

Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) 3.2.1.2

The IBR Process may consist of these five events: 1) Joint Government/Prime Management

Systems Training, 2) Prime Management Systems Assessment 3) Subcontractor IBRs, 4)

Schedule Risk Assessment (SRA) and 5) Total Contract IBR. These events are described below.

1) Joint Management Systems (JMS) Training. Prior to the end of the first full accounting period, the contractor shall host and facilitate a joint Government/Prime training session on the contractor's system description and procedures governing the implementation and operation of its management control systems. This shall include an overview of: EVMS;

Baseline Establishment; Planning, Scheduling and Budgeting; Earned Value Methods;

Performance Measurement Analysis; Baseline Maintenance; Estimate At Completion (EAC)

Process; and Material and Supplier Management/Subcontract Processes, including Inter-

Divisional Processes.

2) Prime Management Systems Assessment. Prior to the end of the third full accounting period, the contractor shall demonstrate the development of its Performance Management Baseline

(PMB) in accordance with the contractor's approved management systems processes. The contractor shall ensure that the baseline includes the entire contract technical scope of work at the prime level and is consistent with contract schedule requirements, adequate management processes are being employed, and has adequate resources assigned. The contractor shall demonstrate to the Government that effective earned value methods are used to accurately status contract cost, schedule, and technical performance. The contractor shall make Management Systems AssesmentAssessment (MSA) documentation available for

Government review at least two weeks prior in electronic, searchable format. The documentation shall include, but is not limited to, Organizational Charts, Responsibility

Assignment Matrix, Control Account Plans (including Work Packages and Planning

Packages), Work Authorization Documents, Baseline Control Logs, Baseline Change

Requests, Program unique directives/procedures, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) to

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) cross-reference matrix, proposed subcontractors and definitization schedule, and Data (WBS/IMS) dictionary.

3) Subcontractor IBRs. IBRs shall be conducted on subcontractors that report EVM data. The subcontractor IBR shall be led by the Prime contractor with Government participation. All subcontractor IBRs shall be within 90 days of Subcontract Authority to Proceed. Often-times subcontracts are not awarded until after the Prime IBR is conducted. The Statement Of Work

(SOW) language may be written to reflect that fact but clearly state the expectation that the subcontractor IBR be conducted at an appropriate time after authority to proceed. Timing for this IBR may be tailored.

4) Schedule Risk Assessment. The contractor shall conduct a SRA which shall be facilitated by participants from the Government. The SRA shall be conducted in accordance with Section

3.2.1.1.1 and the IPMR DID and IPMR CDRL AM01. The SRA shall be completed prior to the end of the fifth full month accounting period. The requirement to complete the SRA prior to the end of the fifth full month accounting period is tailorable. It is acceptable to conduct the SRA several weeks prior to the Total Contract IBR.

5) Total Contract IBR. This IBR shall be conducted no later than 180 calendar days after contract award. The Government will assess the contractor’s baseline, including all awarded subcontracted effort, to be used for performance measurement to ensure complete coverage of the Statement of Work, logical scheduling of work activities, adequate resourcing, and identification of inherent risks. Detailed planning, to the greater of, “six months beyond the

IBR date” or “the next major milestone following the IBR” is required. IBR documentation/updated documentation shall be made available to the Government at least four weeks prior to the review. The documentation includes but is not limited to that listed in paragraph (2) above. The Government will verify during the IBR, and follow-on IBRs when warranted, that the contractor has established and maintains a reliable performance measurement baseline. The contractor will ensure that the baseline includes the entire contract technical scope of work consistent with contract schedule requirements, adequate management processes are being employed, and has adequate resources assigned. The contractor will assure the Government that effective earned value methods are used to accurately status contract cost, schedule, and technical performance.

Subcontract Cost/Schedule Management and Reporting 3.2.1.3

The contractor shall manage all subcontracts, including those that are Firm Fixed Price (FFP), to include the timely award of the subcontract, integration of the subcontractor’s plans into appropriate schedules with sufficient detail, and monitoring the subcontractor’s staffing plans, to include the execution of those staffing plans to the required levels with the required skills.

Cost and incentive type subcontracts at or exceeding $20M in then year dollars will have applied to them the requirements of DFARSs clauses 252.234.7001, andDFARS 252.234-7002, Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) (DI-MGMT-81861) per CDRL AM01.

DCMA will be considered the Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA) for determining EVMS compliance for Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).

Over Target Baseline (OTB)/Over Target Schedule (OTS)/Restructure 3.2.1.4

The contractor may conclude the baseline no longer represents a realistic plan in terms of budget/schedule execution. In the event the contractor determines an OTB/OTS/Restructuring action is necessary, the contractor shall obtain customer approval prior to implementing an

OTB/OTS/Restructuring action. The contractor shall refer to CDRLthe AM01IPMR DID to ensure compliance with EVM reporting prior to and after OTB/OTS execution. The request shall also include detailed implementation procedures as well as an implementation timeframe. The contractor will not implement the OTB/OTS/Restructuring prior to receiving written approval from the Contracting Officer. The implementation procedures and IBR(s) will be supported in the price of this contract.

Contracting Officer’s Management Report 3.2.1.5

In order to support invoice reviews conducted as part of proper surveillance, the Contractor shall report incurred cost and progress in accordance IAW CDRL AM04.

3.2.2 Programmatic and Technical Meetings

Formal Program Management Reviews (PMRs) & Technical Meetings 3.2.2.1

The Contractor shall attend all formal program reviews listed in Table 2 below. Whenever possible, meetings shall be combined to minimize Government and Contractor travel and documentation requirements. For each review listed in Table 2, the Contractor shall:

Coordinate an agenda for each review, developed through regular Integrated Product

Team (IPT) interaction. The Contractor shall include action item review (new action items and carry-over action items) as part of the agenda for each review. Draft meeting agendas shall be made available to the Government no later than 15 business days prior to the scheduled review date via the Collaborative Data Environment (CDE) as described in Section 3.2.6.

Prepare material for presentation at each review to cover the scope of the particular review as defined in paragraphs 3.2.2.1.1 through 3.2.2.2. The Contractor shall be prepared to discuss additional technical details of the material presented. Presentation materials shall be delivered IAW AM02.Draft briefing material shall be made available to the Government no later than 15 business days prior to the scheduled review date via the CDE. Final presentation materials shall be delivered to the Government IAW CDRL

AM02.

Deliver to the Government official meeting minutes IAW CDRL AM03. These meeting minutes shall include all significant questions, deviations, conclusions, and action items resulting from the meeting, including concurrent meetings (i.e. side meetings) held during the event. The Contractor shall record any recommendations not accepted with the reason for non-acceptance.

In order to support invoice reviews conducted as part of proper surveillance, the Contractor shall report incurred cost and progress in accordance with NAVAIR clause 5252.232.9529, “Incurred Cost and Progress Reporting for Services,” CDRL AM04, and contract Attachment

X.

Table 2 is a summary of the formal reviews required during DET.

Table 2: DET Programmatic and Technical Meetings

Review SOO Para

Reference

Frequency / Notional

Dates Location

Post Award Conference (PAC) /

Technical Interchange Meeting

(TIM) #1

Section

3.2.2.1.1

Date to be determined by the Procuring

Contracting Officer

(PCO)

Contractor

Facility

DRR-1

Section

3.3.4.1

2 months after contract award

Patuxent River, MD

Program Management Review

(PMR) / TIM

Section

3.2.2.1.2

3 Total:

1 – Mid-way between

DRR-1 and DRR-2

1 – Mid-way between

Patuxent River, MD

DRR-2 and DRR-3

1 – 1 month prior to end of the period of performance

DRR-2

3.3.4.2

Expected date will be approximately 8 months after contract award

DRR-3

3.3.4.3

Expected date will be approximately 11 months after contract award

3.2.2.1.1 Post Award Conference (PAC)/TechicalTechnical Interchange Meeting (TIM) #1

A PAC shall be hosted by the Contractor in conjunction with the first Technical Interchange

Meeting (TIM #1). It is expected that the PAC/TIM #1 will be three days with a half day dedicated to the PAC and two and a half days dedicated to technical interchange discussions.

The purpose the PAC is to ensure that both Government and Contractor personnel have a clear and mutual understanding of all contract requirements, and to identify and resolve potential problems. The Government PCO will establish the date of the conference, provide the conference agenda, act as the chairperson of the conference, and prepare and distribute a summary report of the conference. The PAC shall include, but is not limited to, the presentation and discussion of information and data relating to:

Introduction and contract overview

Discussion and clarification of the SOO requirements

CDRL delivery schedule

The purpose of TIM #1 is to ensure that both Government and Contractor personnel have a clear and mutual understanding of the technical aspects of the effort, and to identify and resolve potential problems. The agenda for TIM #1 will be established as described in Section 3.2.2.1 and will be used as a forum to discuss Government and Contractor team interaction and engagement (plan recurring informal meetings, identify preferred methods of communication, etc.), to review the Contractor’s execution plan, and to review and clarify the technical documents associated with the SOO requirements.

TIM #1 shall include, but is not limited to, the presentation and discussion of information and data relating to:

Presentation of a complete, accurate, and realistic IMS and detailed schedule with status

Identification of the critical paths within the IMS and detailed schedule

Integrated Product Team (IPT) structure, membership, and responsibilities

Action item reporting and status

Long lead time item identification and status

Contractor Data discussion per Section 3.3.2

Updated team contact list

3.2.2.1.2 PMRs/TIMs

The Contractor shall conduct PMRs/TIMs with agenda, briefing material, and meeting minute deliverable requirements as delineated in Section 3.2.2.1. It is expected that each PMR/TIM will be two days with a half day dedicated to the PMR and one and a half days dedicated to technical interchange discussions. At a minimum, the Contractor shall provide an update on the technical progress since the last meeting on such topics such as design development, component procurement, fabrication progress, completed or upcoming tests, modeling and simulation, analyses, schedule, technical challenges, and any proposed risks.

3.2.2.1.3 Demonstration Readiness Reviews (DRRs)

The Contractor shall conduct three DRRs with agenda, briefing material, and meeting minute deliverable requirements as delineated in Section 3.2.2.1. Further technical descriptions of these reviews can be found in Section 3.3.4.

Weekly Program Management Status Update Meetings 3.2.2.2

The Contractor shall conduct weekly program management status update meetings during weeks that do not include other major engineering or management reviews, as referenced in Table

2such as PMRs and TIMs. This review is intended to be a summary of key progress on technical performance achievements, issues and risks from the previous week.

The weekly reviews may be held via teleconferencing, video teleconferencing, or by web-enabled conferencing hosted by the Contractor.

3.2.3 Subcontractor and Supplier Management

The Contractor shall ensure that its subcontractors’ and suppliers' efforts are consistent with contract and program requirements, and that provisions are made for surveillance of subcontracted activities. The Contractor shall be responsible for disseminating, to all subcontractors and suppliers, all requirements and/or modifications necessary to meet the requirements of this SOO and the goals within the Low Band Goals Document.

3.2.4 Security

Security Classification Guides (SCGs) & Deliverables Marking 3.2.4.1

The Contractor shall comply with the Government provided SCG(s) IAW the DD Form 254 for proper classification of information generated, marking of information, and protection of information. The Contractor shall mark all deliverables IAW DoDI 5230.24 and DoD Manual

5200.1.

Classified Systems 3.2.4.2

For all classified information to be transmitted via electronic media, the Contractor shall use a cryptographic system authorized by the Director, National Security Agency (NSA) IAW Central

Security Service Policy Manual 3-16 and DoD 5220.22-M.

Data Spillages 3.2.4.3

A violation is any knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information. An unauthorized disclosure or release of classified or For Official Use Only (FOUO) information is the communication, physical transfer, inadvertent, unauthorized, or illegal conveyance of technical program information, in any manner, to an unauthorized recipient, or to any person(s) not previously authorized by PMA-234, or higher DoD authority. Methods of disclosure or release include oral, physical, and visual.

For all security violations and unauthorized disclosures or releases of classified or FOUO information, the Contractor shall notify the PMA-234 Program Security Manager (PSM) within

24 hours of identification/detection/notification of the incident regardless of how the Contractor became aware of the information.

The Contractor shall use the “Administrative Inquiry (AI) Process Job Aid”, located at the

Defense Security Service (DSS) Website: http://www.cdse.edu/documents/cdse/ai-job-aid-for-industry.pdf to submit preliminary, initial, and final reports as required by the National Industrial

Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM). For classified information, the Contractor shall comply with the timelines in the Job Aid. For FOUO, the Contractor shall submit the Preliminary and Initial Reports within 72 hours, and 30 days for the Final Report.

The Contractor shall report all cyber-security intrusions/incidents involving the compromise, exfiltration, or other loss of any FOUO data on the Contractor’s information system to the DoD-

Defense Industrial Base Collaborative Information Sharing Environment at:

https://dibnet.dod.mil/portal/intranet.http://www.dc3.mil/dcise/dciseAbout.php. Initial reports shall be made within 24 hours upon first identification/detection/notification of the intrusion/incident regardless of how the Contractor became aware of the information, or 72 hours for incidents still under investigation, for linkage to PMA-234 FOUO data. Initial report information should include the following information, as available:

a. Applicable dates, including date of compromise and date of discovery

b. Threat methodology, including all known “resources” used (e.g., IP addresses, domain names, software tools)

c. An account of what actions the threat(s) may have taken on the victim system/network

d. What information may have been compromised, exfiltrated or lost and its potential impact on Government programs

The Contractor shall provide copies of reports to the PMA-234 PSMrogram Security Manager at the same time they are submitted to other organizations. Reporting security violations to the

PMA-234 PSM does not replace the reporting requirements to other organizations.

Upon completion of the final report, the Contractor shall develop and implement a risk mitigation plan to correct identified security vulnerabilities/deficiencies within 30 days of final report and provide mitigation plan(s) and evidence of implementation to the PMA-234 PSM. The

Contractor shall notify PMA-234 PSM (in writing) for any specific security deficiency requiring corrective action that exceeds 30 days.

Operational Security Plan 3.2.4.4

The Contractor shall implement and maintain security procedures and controls to prevent unauthorized disclosure of program technical information, to include information marked For

Official Use Only (FOUO), Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), Critical Information

(CI), Critical Technology (CT), Critical Systems (CS), Critical Program Information (CPI), and

Personally Identifiable Information (PII). All work is to be performed IAW National Operations

Security Program (National Security Decision Directive 298), DoD Operations Security

(OPSEC) Program (DoDD 5205.02), DoD Operations Security (OPSEC) Program Manual

(DoD 5205.02-M), and Department of the Navy Operations Security (OPNAVINST 3432.1A).

The Contractor shall handle and protect all program technical information not previously authorized for public release IAW DoD Manual 5200.01, DoD Information Security Program

(Volume 4, Enclosure 3, Pages 11-18). The Contractor shall also protect PII IAW the requirements established in 5 U.S.C. § 552a, The Privacy Act of 1974.

Release of program technical information (not previously approved for public release) to foreign entities or US citizens working for a foreign owned, controlled, or influenced (FOCI) company is restricted by Title 22 U.S.C. 2778 The Arms Export Control Act (AECA), and 22 CFR 120-130, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and all applicable US Export Control laws and regulations.

All Contractor facilities shall provide an appropriate means of storage for controlled unclassified information and materials.

Any controlled unclassified information pertaining to this contract shall not be released for public dissemination, including posting to any social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter, unless it has been approved for public release by the appropriate U.S. government authority. All information dissemination to any individual(s) not party to this contract must be cleared by

PMA-234 in writing. Material may include, but is not limited to, technical papers, reports, presentations, news releases, videos (with scripts), photographs (with captions), viewgraph presentations (with scripts), web pages, etc. Any material (including FOUO material) presented at venues such as hotels and conference centers, where wait staff is not cleared, should be approved for public release.

The Contractor shall submit all technical information and materials, including note pages in all briefings and slide presentations, at least 10 working days prior to the date necessary for public release. The Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Public Affairs Office is responsible for the public release clearance process and authorized to make public release determinations. The

Contractor shall deliver an OPSEC Plan IAW CDRL AM05.

3.2.5 Configuration and Data Management

The Contractor shall implement and manage a data management (DM) process to manage the configuration control of required data developed or utilized by this effort. The Contractor may use the DoD 5010.12M for guidance.

The Contractor shall may obtain copies of the Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) cited in the DD

1423 CDRL form from the following web site: http://quicksearch.dla.mil/.

The Contractor shall develop and deliver a Data Accession List (DAL) IAW CDRL AM06.

For data deliverables that require approval by the Government, the Contractor shall incorporate comments according to the DD 1423 or provide a rationale in the re-submittal as to why the comments were not incorporated.

If the Contractor intends to provide data higher than collateral secret, then the Contractor shall coordinate with PMA-234.

3.2.6 Collaborative Data Environment (CDE)

To gain access to the unclassified PMA-234 TeamConnect CDE, the Contractor shall obtain

External Certification Authority (ECA) Medium Token Assurance certificates (Smart Card) per the DISA External Certification Authority Program for its assigned Data Manager(s). An alternative to the ECA Medium Token Assurance certificate would be an ECA Medium

Assurance certificate (soft cert), only if the ECA Medium Token Assurance certificate cannot be obtained.

The Contractor data manager(s) shall upload unclassified data, as specified in this contract to the

PMA-234 TeamConnect CDE CDRL drop box and provide an email notification to the

Government DM point of contact(s) when a data deliverable has been uploaded.

For data deliverables that contain source code, executable and mp4 files, software, databases, or files that exceed 150mb, the Contractor shall place on a CD-ROM or DVD and deliver by overnight means to the address(s) in Section F of the contract.

This electronic location and appropriate accesses shall be determined and granted prior to the

PAC.

http://quicksearch.dla.mil/

Classified data shall be delivered by CD-ROM or other classified means mutually agreed upon by the Government and the Contractor.

3.3 Systems Engineering (SE)

The Contractor shall perform SE and SE management activities necessary to execute the requirements of this contract IAW the Contractor’s internally-approved SE processes.

3.3.1 Requirements Management

Requirements Management Process 3.3.1.1

The Contractor shall implement requirements management IAW the Contractor’s internally-approved requirements management processes.

Requirements Verification 3.3.1.2

3.3.1.2.1 Verification Cross Reference Matrix (VCRM)

The Contractor shall be responsible for completing a VCRM for the Low Band Goals Document based on the demonstration parameters listed in Section 3.4.4 IAW CDRL AE01. The

Government does not expect all of the goals in the Low Band Goals Document to have an identified verification methodology in the VCRM. At a minimum, the Contractor shall include the verification methods required in Table 3Table 3 in the VCRM. The Contractor shall permit the Government to witness any tests conducted in the Contractor’s facilities or any tests conducted by the Contractor at other facilities in support of the requirements specified in this

SOO. The Contractor shall provide notice to the Government 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of any testing funded under this effort.

3.3.2 Other Contractor Data

The contractor shall deliver the data from any technology maturation efforts applicable to its pod concept & the TDU. The contractor shall provide data that include: identification of the item under test, the test conditions, the expected test results, and the actual test results. The Contractor shall deliver the data from any technology maturation efforts IAW CDRL AE02.

The contractor shall deliver a notional level three schedule that includes major engineering tasks or other milestones for a flight worthy pod using the technology demonstrated at the FARM for the DET effort IAW CDRL AE03. The effort identified in the schedule will not be executed on the DET contract. The purpose of the notional schedule is to allow the Government an opportunity to determine the approximate timeline required to develop a flight worthy pod.

If the Navy were to field a NGJ-LB pod (via separate contract) containing the Contractor’s TDU technology, the pod and associated subsystems will need to be airworthy. The EA-18G, in the

Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) configuration and with the NGJ-LB pod containing

TDU technology would obtain an airworthy determination IAW NAVAIRINST 13034.1D prior to a first flight scheduled milestone. Available technical artifacts used to support claims of airworthiness shall be included IAW CDRL AE02.

Contractor Data shall be an agenda item for TIM #1. The Contractor will present a detailed list of available data that will be included IAWin CDRL AE02, this list will include the format the

Contractor intends to deliver it in. The purpose of this discussion is to give the Government an understanding of available data, allow dialogue on other available data the Contractor may not have included on the list, as well as other available formats of the data.

Intellectual Property 3.3.2.1

As outlined in Sections 1.2 and 1.3, an open systems approach for the proposed pod concept is important for meeting NGJ-LB long term supportability and upgrade capability goals. Pod concept approaches that do not impose data rights restrictions on tools, processes, or systems that hinder an open systems approach, particularly for key sub-system hardware interfaces and architectures are strongly encouraged.. The contractor shall document IAW CDRL AE02 how it plans to use an open architecture approach to enable the Contractor’s proposed NGJ-LB pod concept to adapt to evolving requirements and threats; accelerate transition from science and technology into technology and deployment; facilitate systems reconfiguration and integration;

reduce the development cycle time and total life cycle cost; maintain continued access to cutting edge technologies and products from multiple suppliers; and mitigate the risks associated with:

(1) technology obsolescence, (2) restrictive proprietary or vendor-unique technology data rights, and (3) reliance on a single source of supply over the life of the system.

3.3.3 Allocated and Product Baselines

Allocated Baseline 3.3.3.1

In support of the prototype TDU demonstration, the Contractor shall produce an allocated baseline for its pod concept. These notional allocations provide context that will allow the

Government to ascertain if the TDU subsystems would be viable in a pod on the centerline of an

EA-18G (host platform). While not every goal in the Low Band will be verified, the Contractor shall allocate all of the functions identified for DRR-1. Other than controls and displays, the

Contractor shall not allocate functions to the host platform. The Contractor shall substantiate the design allocations through analyses, modeling and simulation, or prototyping. In the software and firmware allocations, the Contractor shall indicate where the process will be executed and estimate the lines of code. The Contractor shall provide the size, weight, and power required for each major system and the entire pod. The Contractor shall provide descriptions of the electrical, mechanical, and coolant interfaces between Hardware Configuration Items (HWCIs), and describe the function of each interface. The Contractor shall provide the allocated baseline as part of DRR-2 presentation material.

Product Baseline 3.3.3.2

The Contractor shall make available for testing a prototype TDU representative of the pod concept allocated baseline. The Contractor shall provide detailed design information for the TDU and existing components of the product baseline as tailored for the demonstration parameters listed in Table 3Table 3 and the VCRM. The Contractor shall provide the product baseline as part of DRR-2 presentation material. The Contractor shall identify and provide descriptions of all interfaces between the prototype TDU and any external equipment needed to conduct the demonstration at the FARM. The Contractor shall ensure that the power and cooling allocations for the prototype TDU are the same for the pod concept and the FARM demonstration. The

Contractor shall deliver the external TDU interface descriptions IAW CDRL AE04.

3.3.4 Demonstration Readiness Reviews (DRRs)

Demonstration Readiness Review – 1 (DRR-1) 3.3.4.1

The purpose of DRR-1 is to show that the requirements baseline and the functional baseline for the Contractor’s pod concept have been established and are sufficient to proceed towards DRR-2 and the planned technology demonstrations. Contractor processes consistent with establishing a

Requirements Baseline and a Functional Baseline are acceptable for conducting the DRR-1.

The Contractor shall include a discussion of “other contractor data”, as defined in Section 3.3.2, and the VCRM as part of DRR-1. The VCRM discussion will begin the process of ensuring that the Government understands which of the goals in the Low Band Goals Document will be assessed during this effort. The Contractor shall present evidence at DRR-1 that all goals in the

Low Band Goals Document will be addressed in the pod concept allocated baseline at DRR-2.

The Contractor shall present evidence that all goals in the Low Band Goals Document have been flowed down to functional system segments including the TDU. The Contractor shall present all test efforts, planned or completed, that are to be conducted as part of the build-up to the demonstration at the FARM. The Contractor shall provide initial information on interfaces needed to allow its prototype TDU to be radiated at full power at the FARM. The Contractor shall present an overarching plan showing how the planned tests, modeling and simulation, and analyses integrate in order to quantify the parameters in Table 3Table 3. The Contractor shall identify any government assets or facilities required for the test program.

The Contractor shall develop and present a functional block diagram for its pod concept that depicts the HWCIs and Computer Software Configuration Items (CSCIs) that will comprise the pod concept. For each HWCI and CSCI, the Contractor shall describe the key functional attributes and identify the traceability to the Low Band Goals Document.

Additional topics for discussion include, but are not limited to:

- Test Assets Required for Test

- Other contractor data to Date (See Section 3.3.2)

- Allocated Baseline (See Section 3.3.3.1)

Demonstration Readiness Review – 2 (DRR-2) 3.3.4.2

The purpose of DRR-2 is to show that the allocated baseline for the Contractor’s pod concept is complete and the product baseline for the prototype TDU is complete. Contractor processes consistent with establishing an Allocated Baseline for the Contractor’s pod concept and a

Product Baseline for the TDU are acceptable for conducting the DRR-2. Specific timing for

DRR-2 will be mutually agreed upon with the Government based on Contractor readiness.

3.3.4.2.1 Pod Concept

The Contractor shall present evidence at DRR-2 that functions described in DRR-1 have been flowed down to allocations in its pod concept. The Contractor shall present evidence at DRR-2 that its pod concept addresses all applicable SWaP-C constraints as derived from the Low Band

Goals Document, and that the constraints have been allocated to notional subsystems.

The Contractor shall present evidence at DRR-2 of an allocated baseline (see Section 3.3.3.1) for the pod concept addressing the goals of the Low Band Goals Document. At a minimum, the

Contractor shall justify all allocations through analyses and modeling. The Contractor shall justify the SWaP-C allocations through analysis, modeling, and similarity.

The Contractor shall deliver Three Dimensional (3-D) Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models of the full-scale pod concept outer mold line in all operating configurations IAW CDRL AE05.

3.3.4.2.2 Technology Demonstration Unit (TDU)

The Contractor shall include actual SWaP-C allocations for the prototype TDU at DRR-2. The

Contractor shall present evidence that a Product Baseline has been established for the prototype

TDU at DRR-2. The Contractor shall identify any test-unique design differences between the

TDU implementation and the same components in the pod concept allocations, and explain how the differences do not invalidate the allocations for the pod concept.

The Contractor shall present the updated VCRM. The Contractor shall present any results of completed test efforts conducted as part of the build-up to the demonstration at the FARM. The

Contractor shall present a TDU Interface Control Document (ICD) with updated information on interfaces needed to allow its prototype TDU to be radiated at full power at the FARM IAW

CDRL AE04.

The Contractor shall describe in the DRR-2 briefing materials, the TDU hardware and software, for all systems and subsystems, in detail consistent with a Product Baseline focused design. For example, producibility, testability, quality, and sustainability are not required. The level of detail presented should be sufficient to allow the Government to assess technical risk in areas where demonstrated performance did not meet the goals in the Low Band Goals Document.

The Contractor shall present any modeling…