N00421-11-R-0045.doc

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

POINTS OF CONTACT

CONTRACT SPECIALIST:

CANDICE BYRD

TELEPHONE NUMBER:

301-737-2756

EMAIL ADDRESS:

CANDICE.BYRD@NAVY.MIL

CONTRACTING OFFICER:

MELINDA K. STANN

TELEPHONE NUMBER:

301-737-2982

EMAIL ADDRESS:

MELINDA.STANN@NAVY.MIL

CONTRACTING OFFICER REPRESENTATIVE:

TO BE DETERMINED AT CONTRACT AWARD

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

TABLE B-2 FFP LABOR CLINS

Firm Fixed Price labor CLINs are based on the hours demonstrated below in accordance with table B-2 below:

Table B-2

Labor Category

TABLE B-3 CPFF PRICE TABLE

While the contractor will be paid actual costs, the contractor will be held accountable for controlling costs based on the rates proposed for the basic contract. Therefore, the contractor shall utilize the fully burdened (inclusive of fee) labor rated outlined below for each period of performance in the development and pricing of each task order. Cost control will be monitored in accordance with the performance measures outlined in the QASP.

Program Manager*

Senior Warfare Analyst*

Warfare Analyst

Junior Warfare Analyst

Senior Operations Analyst*

Operations Analyst

Junior Operations Analyst

Senior Engineer*

Engineer

Junior Engineer

Senior Computer Scientist*

Computer Scientist

Junior Computer Scientist

Senior Logistics Analyst*

Logistics Analyst

Senior Tactical Systems Analyst*

Tactical Systems Analyst*

Junior Logistics Analyst

Cost Analyst

Senior Systems Administrator*

Systems Administrator

Program Analyst

Technical Writer

Administrative Assistant

Total

TABLE B-4 FFP PRICE TABLE

The following fully burdened (including profit) labor category rates shall be utilized when pricing firm fixed price task orders.

Program Manager*

Senior Warfare Analyst*

Warfare Analyst

Junior Warfare Analyst

Senior Operations Analyst*

Operations Analyst

Junior Operations Analyst

Senior Engineer*

Engineer

Junior Engineer

Senior Computer Scientist*

Computer Scientist

Junior Computer Scientist

Senior Logistics Analyst*

Logistics Analyst

Senior Tactical Systems Analyst*

Tactical Systems Analyst*

Junior Logistics Analyst

Cost Analyst

Senior Systems Administrator*

Systems Administrator

Program Analyst

Technical Writer

Administrative Assistant

Total

Labor - Base Year

CPFF

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. Direct and indirect rates and fees proposed at the basic contract level shall be the rates utilized to develop the task order pricing. (NTE)

FOB: Destination

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: 1300200335

MAX COST

FIXED FEE

TOTAL MAX COST + FEE

Labor - Base Year

FFP

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. The fully burdened labor rates proposed at the contract level will be the labor rates utilized to develop task order pricing. The FFP value for this CLIN is a NTE ceilng. Each task order will define a FFP for the specific effort under the order.

MAX

NET AMT

Travel & Material- Base Year

COST

Travel & Material in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services. (NTE)

MAX COST

NMCI - Base Year

NMCI in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering & Technical Services. (NTE)

MAX COST

Technical Data- Base Year

Technical Data in accordance with CDRLs in support of Warefare Analysis Engineering & Technical Services. NOT SEPARATELY PRICED.

MAX COST

CPFF

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. Direct and indirect rates and fees proposed at the basic contract level shall be the rates utilized to develop the task order pricing. (NTE)

FFP

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. The fully burdened labor rates proposed at the contract level will be the labor rates utilized to develop task order pricing. The FFP value for this CLIN is a NTE ceilng. Each task order will define a FFP for the specific effort under the order.

MAX

COST

Travel & Material in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services. (NTE)

MAX COST

COST

MAX COST

COST

Technical Data in accordance with the CDRLs in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services. NOT SEPARATELY PRICED.

MAX COST

CPFF

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. Direct and indirect rates and fees proposed at the basic contract level shall be the rates utilized to develop the task order pricing. (NTE)

FFP

Labor for Warfare Analysis, Engineering, & Technical Services in accordance with the Performance Based Work Statement. The fully burdened labor rates proposed at the contract level will be the labor rates utilized to develop task order pricing. The FFP value for this CLIN is a NTE ceilng. Each task order will define a FFP for the specific effort under the order.

MAX

COST

Travel & Material in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering & Technical Services. (NTE)

MAX COST

COST

MAX COST

COST

Technical Data in accordance with the CDRLS in support of Warfare Analysis, Engineering & Technical Services. NOT SEPARATELY PRICED.

MAX COST

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

5252.211-9503

LEVEL OF EFFORT (COST REIMBURSEMENT) (NAVAIR)(OCT 2005)

(a) The level of effort estimated to be ordered during the term of this contract is 445,386 man-hours* of direct labor including authorized subcontract labor, if any. The contractor shall not, under any circumstances, exceed one hundred (100%) percent of the total level of effort specified in this basic contract. The estimated composition of the total man-hours of direct labor by classification is as follows:

*Note: The hours outlined herein apply to the Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLINs as designated below:

* denotes Key Personnel labor categories

(b) FAR Clause 52.232-20, "Limitation of Cost" applies to fully funded orders and FAR Clause 52.232-22, "Limitation of Funds" applies to incrementally funded orders. Nothing in this clause amends the rights or responsibilities of the parties hereto under either of those two clauses. In addition, the notifications required by this clause are separate and distinct from any specified in either FAR Clause 52.232-20 or FAR Clause 52.232-22.

(c) In the event that less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established level of effort of the basic contract is actually expended by the completion date of the contract (or if said Level of Effort has been previously revised upward, or the fee bearing portion of the additional hours by which the Level of Effort was last increased), the Government shall have the option of:

(1) Requiring the Contractor to continue performance, subject to the provisions of the FAR Clause 52.232-20 or 52.232-22, as applicable, until the effort expended equals 100% of the established Level of Effort; or

(2) Effecting a reduction in the fixed fee by the percentage by which the total expended man-hours is less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established Level of Effort (or the fee bearing portion of the last upward revision).

(d) Completion Form Task Orders.

(1) A level of effort shall be established for each completion form task order. This estimated level of effort is established for the purpose of determining the amount of fixed fee payable on the task order and tracking the ceiling amount of the contract, it is not to be construed as a performance requirement. In the event the task(s) cannot be completed within the estimated cost, the Government will require more effort without increase in fee, if the Government elects to continue, provided the Government increases the estimated cost.

(2) Within thirty days after completion of the work under each completion form task order, the Contractor shall submit the following information directly, in writing, to the ordering officer, with copies to the COR and the Defense Contract Audit Agency office to which vouchers are submitted:

(i) The Contractor's estimate of the total allowable cost incurred under the task order; and

(ii) In the case of a cost under run, the amount by which the estimated cost of the task order may be reduced to recover excess funds.

(e) Term Form Task Orders.

(1) The Contractor shall notify the Procuring Contracting Officer immediately in writing whenever it has reason to believe that:

(i) The level of effort the Contractor expects to incur under any term form order in the next 60 days, when added to the level of effort previously expended in the performance of that order, will exceed seventy-five (75%) percent of the level of effort established for that order; or

(ii) The level of effort required to perform a particular term form order will be greater than the level of effort established for that order.

As part of the notification, the Contractor shall provide the Contracting Officer a revised estimate of the level of effort required to perform the order. As part of the notification, the Contractor also shall submit any proposal for adjustment to the estimated cost and fixed fee that it deems would be equitable if the Government were to increase the level of effort as proposed by the Contractor. In performing term form task orders, the Contractor may use any combination of hours of the labor categories listed in the task order.

(2) In performing term form task orders, the contractor may use any combination of hours of the labor categories listed in the task order.

(3) Within thirty days after completion of the work under each term form task order, the Contractor shall submit the following information directly, in writing, to the ordering officer, with copies to the COR and the Defense Contract Audit Agency office to which vouchers are submitted:

(i) The total number of man-hours of direct labor, including subcontract labor, expended and a breakdown of this total showing the number of man-hours expended in each direct labor classification listed in the task order schedule, including the identification of the key employees utilized;

(ii) The Contractor's estimate of the total allowable cost incurred under the task order; and

(iii) In the case of a cost under run, the amount by which the estimated cost of the task order may be reduced to recover excess funds.

(4) In the event that less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established level of effort of a term order (or if said level of effort has been previously revised upward, of the fee bearing portion of the additional hours by which the level of effort was last increased) is actually expended by the completion date of the contract, the Government shall have the option of:

(i) Requiring the Contractor to continue performance, subject to the provisions of the "Limitation of Cost" or the "Limitation of Funds" clause, as applicable, until the effort expended equals one hundred (100%) percent of the established Level of Effort (or of the fee-bearing portion of the last upward revision); or

(ii) Effecting a reduction in the fixed fee by the percentage by which the total expended man-hours is less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established Level of Effort (or the fee bearing portion of the last upward revision).

(5) In the event that the expended level of effort of a term order exceeds the established level of effort by ten (10%) percent or less, but does not exceed the estimated cost of the order; the contractor shall be entitled to cost reimbursement for actual hours expended, not to exceed the ceiling cost. The contractor shall not be paid fixed fee, however, on level of effort in excess of one hundred (100%) percent without complying with subsection (e)(1) above. This understanding does not supersede or change subsection (e)(1) above, whereby the contractor and Government may agree on a change to the task order level of effort with an equitable adjustment for both cost and fee.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

STATEMENT OF WORK

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

WARFARE ANALYSIS, ENGINEERING & TECHNICAL SERVICES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

CLINs 0001, 0002, 0003, 0004 and 0005 and Option CLINs 0101, 0102, 0103, 0104, 0105, 0201, 0202, 0203, 0204, and 0205-

The services shall be performed in accordance with the statement of work as outlined below:

Warfighting challenges of today have created demands on our naval forces that exceed in quantity and differ in kind from anything experienced in our nation’s history. New warfighting concerns and threats to our national security require reshaping our naval force structure to secure the warfighting capabilities and capacity that are needed to address the threats of the future. An increased focus on Low Contingency Operations (LCOs), formerly known as the global war on terrorism, requires an increase in forward deployed forces – capable of providing a scalable and rapid response – and a significant change in our nation’s naval force structure and the way we train and deploy troops to meet emerging threats.

Requiring assessments of the naval systems, concepts, force structure and the role of naval forces in supporting joint warfighting capability requirements are key to the development of investment strategies to obtain the Navy’s vision for future operations. Naval leadership relies on analytic and capability assessments provided by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) to help guide naval programming and investment decisions that are designed to achieve the warfighting capabilities envisioned for future operations. The naval analytic agenda and integration of analytic efforts are managed by OPNAV N81, coordinated with OPNAV Resource and Warfare Sponsors and Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command (CFFC), and supported analytically by the Systems Commands (SYSCOMs).

The Naval Air (NAVAIR) SYSCOM Warfare Analysis and Integration Department (AIR-4.10) serves as NAVAIR’s competency and authoritative source for naval aviation warfare analysis, providing Modeling, Simulation and Analysis (MS&A) support to NAVAIR program offices, OPNAV, and the fleet for analytically defendable acquisition decisions and acquisition program execution. Within the acquisition program, warfare analysis is used to ensure engineering level performance and design are in fact meeting campaign, mission, and engagement level warfighting capability requirements. Using campaign, mission and engagement level models as a foundation, AIR-4.10 assesses weapon systems in the context of Major Combat Operations (MCOs) to support capabilities based acquisition. Central to AIR-4.10’s Modeling and Simulation (M&S) capability is the Naval Aviation Enterprise Warfare Analysis Environment (NAE WAE) that provides state-of-the-art M&S laboratories in which analyses are performed to simulate naval warfare at the engineering, engagement, mission, and campaign levels. Properly integrating naval aviation systems in an appropriate M&S architecture is essential for analysts to identify the optimal systems, systems of systems, operational concepts, tactics, and capabilities required to deal with current and emerging threats to the United States abroad and at home. The NAE WAE provides decision makers with a much-needed, low cost analysis environment to efficiently plan for optimum structuring, acquisition, and operation of naval aviation forces within the new capabilities-based paradigm.

AIR-4.10 tasking for warfare analysis stems from many demands such as:

(1) Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Analytic Agendas

(2) The Joint Capabilities Integrated Development System (JCIDS) process

(3) Quadrennial Defense Review assessments

(4) Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) guidance

(5) Sea Power 21 assessments

(6) Office of Naval Research (ONR) assessments

(7) Navy Warfare Development Command (NWDC) CONOPS

(8) OPNAV requirements development

(9) Defense transformation initiatives

(10) On-going analysis of acquisition systems

(11) Fleet support for fielded systems

Each of these areas of analysis may involve operations at the campaign, mission, engagement or system level across a myriad of missions/warfare areas.

1.2 SCOPE

A broad spectrum of support for naval and joint warfighting capability assessments and M&S is required to support and enhance government and military warfighting analytic efforts that are conducted in support of AIR-4.10, Program Executive Offices (PEOs), the Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE), and OPNAV. The scope of this Performance Work Statement (PWS) is multi-faceted and includes warfare analysis, M&S, software development, and analytic program support. Additionally, analytic efforts may be assessed relative to joint capability requirements to provide time-phased capabilities within Joint Capability Areas (JCAs).

MS&A support provided under this PWS will be performed at the campaign, mission and / or engagement level to identify warfighting gaps, determine the effectiveness of various alternatives in meeting those gaps, and ensure engineering level performance and designs meet warfighting capabilities requirements – all of which will provide the analytic underpinning for capability based acquisition decisions. Conceptual, developmental, and existing subsystems, systems, System of Systems (SoS), and Family-of-Systems (FoS), with associated Concepts of Operations (CONOPS) and tactics, will be assessed within operational and tactical situations to derive optimal naval warfighting capability requirements. Naval mission areas that will be examined include the following:

Air Warfare

(AW)

Amphibious Warfare

(AMW)

Anti Submarine Warfare

(ASW)

Command, Control and Communication

(CCC)

Construction

(CON)

Expeditionary Warfare

(EXW)

Fleet Support Operations

(FSO)

Force Health Protection

(FHP)

Information Operations

(IO)

Intelligence Operations

(INT)

Irregular Warfare

(IW)

Logistics

(LOG)

Mine Warfare

(MIW)

Mission of State

(MOS)

Mobility

(MOB)

Non-Combat Operations

(NCO)

Naval Special Warfare

(NSW)

Strike Warfare

(STW)

Surface Warfare

(SUW)

Strategic Sealift

(STS)

The scope of this PWS includes the Naval Capability Pillars (Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing, Sea Shaping, and FORCEnet), all aspects of the CNO Analytic Agenda, and all newly defined Naval Strategies, Capability Pillars, warfare areas, or mission areas.

Development and application of M&S and analysis techniques will be used to assess, engineering designs and approaches, concepts and alternatives, weapons and their characteristics, and platforms and their performance for blue (friendly), red (threat), white (neutral), and green (coalition) systems. Support for AIR-4.10 M&S includes all associated technical support services required to operate the NAE WAE, ensure M&S is applied with engineering discipline with improved traceability of data through the modeling hierarchy, and ensure continuous improvement in the development and application of M&S in support of analysis. Related tasking will include support for M&S Validation and Verification (V&V); configuration management; user / administrator training; execution and administration of policies and procedures that govern the administration of the laboratories; and development and maintenance of an MS&A data repository.

Per FAR 7.503(a), this contract shall not be used for the performance of Inherently Governmental Functions (IGF). Guidelines for IGF can be found in the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Federal Procurement Policy Letter 11-01, Performance of Inherently Governmental and Critical Functions, at the following link: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-12/html/2011-23165.htm.

1.3 DATA HANDLING

This contract provides for the Contractor to provide technical evaluation and/or advisory and assistance services in support of modeling and simulation and analytically based warfare analyses. The Contractor will have access to system performance, naval force structure, program / business sensitive, and pre-decisional material / data, which shall not be disclosed to any entity, government or otherwise, outside of AIR-4.10 unless specifically indicated in task orders or authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall not use for purposes other than performance under this contract; nor shall the Contractor release, reproduce, distribute, or publish any data or analysis that is provided as Government Furnished Information (GFI) or produced in the performance of this contract; nor shall the Contractor authorize others to do so, without written permission of the Contracting Officer. Further, the Contractor shall, within 15 days after the effective date of this contract, obtain and provide to the COR signed Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) with each subcontractor and consultant (provided as Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) A00K for Company) and shall obtain and provide to the COR signed individual NDAs with all contractor, subcontractor, and consulting personnel that performs work under this contract (provided as CDRL A00L for Individuals). Additionally, the Contractor agrees to place in each subcontract affected by these provisions the necessary language to bind the subcontractor by these terms and conditions.

2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

2.1 MILITARY SPECIFICATIONS & STANDARDS

Applicable military specifications and standards that are listed in the Department of Defense Index of Specifications and Standards (DODISS) and current on the date of contract award, plus applicable industry standards or any other program documents may be specified within the individual task orders that will be issued for performing specific tasks under this Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract.

2.2 INFORMATION ASSURANCE PROGRAM

NAVAIR’s Information Assurance (IA) Program is a unified approach to protect unclassified, sensitive or classified information, and is established to consolidate and focus efforts in securing that information, including its associated systems and resources. IA is required operationally throughout the DON. DON CIO (Chief Information Officer) is responsible for IT within the Navy, as mandated by the Clinger-Cohen Act, and is the lead for departmental compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002.

All IA shall be in compliance with the following listed instructions to include those referenced within the below listing:

SECNAV M-5239.1 DoN Information Assurance Program; Information Assurance Manual

National Industrial Security Operating Manual (NISPOM)

CJCSI 6211.02 (series) --Defense Information System Network (DISN): Policy Responsibilities and Processes of 31 July 2003

CJCSI 6212.01E (series) --Interoperability and Supportability of Information Technology and National Security Systems

DoDD 8100.1--Global Information Grid (GIG) Overarching Policy

DoDD 8500.1E--Information Assurance

DoDI 8500.2--Information Assurance Implémentation

DODI 8510.01 DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP), November 28, 2007

CNO N614/HQMC C4--Navy-Marine Corps Unclassified Trusted Network Protection (UTN-Protect) Policy, Version 1.0, 31 October 2002”

DoDD 8570.01 Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management, August 15, 2004, Certified Current as of April 23, 2007

Department of the Navy Chief Information Officer (DON CIO) Memorandum 01-09, Information Assurance Policy for Platform Technology, January 30, 2009

National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Policy (NSTISSP) No. 11, National Policy Governing the Acquisition of Information Assurance (IA) and IA-Enabled Information Technology (IT) Products

SECNAVINST 5230.15, Information Management/Information Technology Policy for Fielding of Commercial Off the Shelf Software, April 10, 2009

For more information on determining the applicability of these documents to the specific requirements of your program, contact your local information assurance point of contact for assistance. An IA POC is available via the NAVAIR portal at https://air74.navair.navy.mil.

All IT procured on behalf of NAVAIR shall meet all DOD/DON and NAVAIR IA polices. Failure to follow these policies will result in denied access to NMCI, One Net, ISNS and other DON, DOD and Joint Networks. These IA policies are standard across the Dept and ensure IA compatibility and interoperability.

IT systems and/or networks operated by Contractors subsequent to a NAVAIR contracts, regardless of the level of data processed shall be operated and in accordance the NISPOM.

Contractor-owned equipment shall be permitted connections to NAVAIR/DoD networks in order to carry out the performance of this contract. All Contractor-owned hardware and/or software shall meet DODI 8500.2 IA Controls and is subject to validation scanning and must be approved by the NAVAIR site IA Manager prior to connection. The following specific criteria shall be met before being connected to any DoD or NAVAIR network in support of this contract. Requirements include:

Network Vulnerability Scanning. NAVAIR Deputy CIO for Information Assurance maintains authorized auditing tools and shall provide for firewall/port scans, device discovery scan, vulnerability assessment, and other requirements as required to ensure secure interoperability with DOD Contracts. The Contractor shall be responsible for the remediation of any equipment that fails these audits prior to connecting the system to the networks; Results of approvals shall be documented via Memorandum of Agreement with the Facility Security officer and the Defense Security Service Representative for that Contractor;

Extent of Validation Scanning. To prevent scanning of “corporate” assets, all such networks, equipment and connections shall be physically segregated from any Government/Contractor “corporate” networks that are not in direct support of DoD contracts;

Circuit Provisioning. Any circuit or connection between NAVAIR and/or DoD site and the Contractor site shall be provisioned via the Defense information Security Agency and comply with CJCSI 6212.11B;

Servicing Systems from a Remote Contractor Site. Remote Access Service connections that allow off-station operation and/or administration of contractor owned systems, located at any NAVAIR facility or site, shall not be permitted, with the exception of those systems connecting to the Command via the Outreach Services identified in Section 7, Enterprise Architecture;

Memorandum of Agreement and Inter-Connection Agreements. An Information Assurance Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Contractor owning the equipment and AIR-7.2.6 shall be developed and signed before the equipment can be connected to NAVAIR networks. Failure to comply with the signed MOA shall be grounds for disconnection from the network.

3.0 REQUIREMENTS

The requirements under this PWS cover a broad spectrum of support to naval and joint warfighting capability assessments and M&S. The Contractor shall support government and military subject matter expertise to provide integrated, capabilities-based warfighting assessments that will ultimately provide the analytic underpinning to support the acquisition of naval aviation systems and OPNAV and OSD investment decisions.

3.1 Warfare Analysis and Assessments. The Contractor shall perform warfighting assessments and effectiveness analyses of operational nodes, systems, subsystems, SoS, and FoS in the operational context, including campaign, mission, engagement and force structure analysis at various levels of fidelity in support of the pre-acquisition, acquisition and sustainment of naval aviation systems and to determine the right naval warfighting capability and capacity required to address threats of the future. The Contractor shall perform the following efforts as delineated in task orders in the area of Warfare Analysis and Assessments:

3.1.1 Perform warfare analysis within the context of the Global Information Grid (GIG) showing results and outcomes as a function of GIG operation.

3.1.2 Support in the development of, or develop, excursions to existing Major Combat Operations (MCOs)/Conventional Campaigns (CCs) and Steady State Security Posture (SSSP) to serve as the analytic framework specific to naval aviation warfighting assessments.

3.1.3 Perform end-to-end kill chain assessments of systems, SoS and FoS in the context of OPSITs and TACSITs to assist in the determination of current and Program of Record (POR) system effectiveness against defined threats to identify naval warfighting gaps and the capability and capacity required to address current and emergent threats.

3.1.4 Perform analyses of operational architectures in accordance with the DoD Architectural Framework (DODAF); develop products as defined in the DODAF in any or all of the architectural areas, including Operational Views, System Views and Technical Views.

3.1.5 Develop mission level metrics applying appropriate M&S tools to assess various options. Develop Measures of Outcome (MOOs), Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), and Measures of Performance (MOPs) for evaluating the relative merits of warfare systems. Metrics shall be reflective of effectiveness, performance, and overall military worth.

3.1.6 Support “battle, warfare, and geopolitical experiments” and war-games.

3.2 Advanced Concept Development / Design. The Contractor shall perform research, development, and assessments related to the development and design of advanced air vehicle concepts and operations.

3.2.1 Perform research related to advanced concept development and evaluation including development of descriptive data required for MS&A.

3.2.2 Provide support for the development and MS&A of new and advanced transformational concepts and variations to existing or planned concepts.

3.2.3 Perform assessments of options for the transition of technology to support investment strategies and identify methods for transition of technology options into future architectures for Naval, Joint, and Allied forces.

3.2.4 Provide support for the development of new operational concepts to optimize use of new systems, technologies, or capabilities.

3.2.5 Provide support for air vehicle conceptual design development, assessments, comparisons, performance analysis, and simulations; develop air vehicle conceptual design drawings and Computer Aided Design (CAD) data.

3.2.6 Provide support for weapon system conceptual design development, assessments, comparisons, performance analysis, and simulations.

3.3 Acquisition Analysis and Support. The Contractor shall provide analytic support for the pre-acquisition, acquisition, and sustainment of Navy, Joint, and allied systems acquisition process.

3.3.1 Provide support for Joint Capabilities Integration & Development System (JCIDS) analysis and documentation. Participate in functional area analyses, functional needs analyses, functional solutions analyses, and post independent analyses. Functional analysis should be directly traceable to activities used in the models.

3.3.2 Provide support in establishing disciplined engineering processes and standards to ensure analyses are traceable to customer requirements.

3.3.3 Identify Doctrine, Organization, Training, Material, Leadership, Personnel and Facilities (DOTMLPF) implications resulting from the development and fielding of new warfighting capabilities.

3.3.4 Design and implement configuration management and quality assurance processes and procedures to support M&S based analysis including management support for the accreditation of models, application, data and scenarios.

3.3.5 Recommend standards for processes and employment of M&S in capabilities-based acquisition programs.

3.3.6 Support in concept development, definition, and documentation of manpower assessment requirements to achieve manpower reduction goals within the JCIDS process in coordination with NAVAIR’s Human Systems Department (AIR-4.6).

3.3.7 Perform acquisition related assessments and prepare documentation for the pre-acquisition, acquisition and sustainment of Navy, joint and allied systems to include:

1) Trade-off analysis

2) Make-buy analysis

3) Risk assessments

4) Mission Area Assessments (MAA)

5) Analysis of Material Alternatives (AMA)

6) Decision Analysis Support (DAS)

3.3.8 Perform Pre-Analyses of Alternatives (AoAs), Evaluation of Alternatives (EoAs) and AoAs to evaluate and compare the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of potential weapon system alternatives in meeting defined naval requirements and support the development of Capabilities Development Documents (CDDs). Conduct effectiveness analysis that will model the performance of each alternative and determine the quantity required to execute associated missions. Combine these results with the related cost data into a complete AoA.

3.3.9 Provide analytic support for the support of acquisition documentation to include but not limited to:

1) Acquisition Plan (AP)

2) Acquisition Program Baselines (APB)

3) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration(ACTD)

4) Analysis of Alternatives (AOA)

5) Capability Development Documents (CDD)

6) Capstone Requirements Documents (CRD)

7) Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence Support Plans (C4ISP)

8) Decision Analysis Support (DAS)

9) Evolutionary Acquisition (EA)

10) Information Support Plans (ISP)

11) Modeling & Simulation Support Plan (MSSP)

12) Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Cost Rationale Report (RAM-C)

13) System Threat Assessment Reports (STARs)

14) Technology Development Strategy (TDS)

15) Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP)

3.3.10 Perform warfare analyses and assessments in terms of cost, effectiveness and capability to determine the ability of systems and architectures to meet current and emerging warfighting requirements.

3.3.11 Perform force analyses to determine the Navy’s capability to meet peacetime deployment requirements and respond to transition-to war and contingency operations.

3.3.12 Support in the development of Operational Situations (OPSIT) and Tactical Situations (TACSITs) within the scope of the defense planning scenarios which will allow performance of appropriate analyses under the desired operational conditions. OPSIT and TACSIT development shall include review of threat and friendly force lay-downs, CONOPS, tactical missions and timelines for use in analysis.

3.3.13 Perform readiness analysis of current and future systems to include readiness impacts of advanced technologies and ensure successful integration of aircraft operations, maintenance and support requirements aboard new ships / ship classes and in-service ships for both legacy and future aviation weapon systems.

3.3.14 Perform vulnerability and survivability assessments of weapon systems, including determination of the contributions of various technologies to overall platform and SoS survivability, in close coordination with the Survivability and Vulnerability Assessment Branch under NAVAIR’s Systems Engineering Department (AIR-4.1).

3.3.15 Develop, review and support the development of threat data sets for use in MS&A and related areas under the guidance of the NAVAIR Scientific and Technical Intelligence Liaison Officer (STILO) and AIR 4.10.

3.3.16 Provide source selection support in the areas of planning, process definition and improvement, research, analysis of prior related acquisitions, documentation, training, and support of source selection activities. No item in this Performance Based Statement of Work (PBSOW) shall be used to procure any services that are IG or personal services. See Section C, paragraph 1.2 for further information regarding IGF.

3.3.17 Perform cost analysis and develop cost estimates for projects and phases of projects in close coordination with AIR-4.2, including; development, Test and Evaluation (T&E), operations and maintenance, travel, materials and training in current FY dollars and other-year dollars as specified and all relevant estimating techniques, information, and data required to develop or interpret cost estimates provided with one-time and recurring costs identified.

3.3.18 Perform Life Cycle Cost Estimation (LCCE) analysis based on inventory requirements for weapon systems in close coordination with the NAVAIR Cost Department (AIR-4.2). Define cost ground rules and assumptions and determine cost issues. Develop methodologies for Research and Development (R&D), investment, and Operating and Support (O&S) costs

3.3.19 Support cost-performance trade studies, Earned Value Management (EVM) efforts, and development of independent cost estimates as specified by AIR 4.2.

3.3.20 Attend and provide analytic support to system engineering reviews, technical interchange meetings, and acquisition program reviews.

3.4 Modeling & Simulation. The Contractor shall apply a standardized, rigorous, structured methodology to create, verify, and validate physical, mathematical, or otherwise logical representations of systems, entities, phenomenon, or processes. This functional area involves the use of models and simulations, including emulators, prototypes, and simulators, either statically or over time, to develop data as a basis for supporting managerial, technical, strategic, or tactical decisions. Models and simulations must be traceable to requirements. The Contractor shall perform the following efforts as delineated in task orders in the area of M&S:

3.4.1 Apply, with demonstrated proficiency, the following models and simulations for operational analysis to include but not limited to:

1) Extended Air Defense Simulation (EADSIM),

2) Naval Simulation System (NSS)

3) BRAWLER

4) THUNDER and STORM

5) Network Warfare Analysis (NETWARS)

6) OPNET Modeler

7) Enhanced Surface-to-Air Missile Simulation (ESAMS)

8) General Campaign Analysis Model (GCAM)

9) Integrated Theater Engagement Model (ITEM)

10) C4ISR Space & Mobile Operations Simulator (COSMOS)

11) Joint Services Endgame Model (JSEM)

12) Fast Shot-line Generator (FASTGEN)

13) Computation of Vulnerability and Repair Time (COVART)

14) SPECTRUM

15) Managed Attrition End Game (MAEG)

16) SHAZAM

17) Active System Performance Estimate Computer Tool (ASPECT)

18) Joint Integrated Mission Model (JIMM)

19) SUPPRESSOR

20) Enhanced Surface to Air Missile Simulations (ESAMS)

21) Satellite Tool Kit (STK)

22) PC-Interactive Multisensor Analysis Training (PC-IMAT)

23) RADGUNS

24) QUALNET

3.4.2 Develop and use integrated M&S environments to assess engineering designs and approaches, concepts and alternatives, weapons and their characteristics, and platforms and their performance for Blue (friendly), Red (threat), White (neutral), and Green (coalition) systems.

3.4.3 Support engagement, mission, and campaign level M&S efforts including development of new “discovery” type M&S efforts.

3.4.4 Develop M&S tools that support Joint and Navy resource allocation decisions including development of models and simulations for non-traditional warfare, Manpower Personnel Training & Education (MPT&E), and emerging Naval and Joint mission/warfare areas.

3.4.5 Support the evolution of integrated M&S environments, digital system models and architectures to support programs over their life cycle, program design decisions, CONOPS development, requirements assessments and demonstrations, integration of systems, sensitivity analyses, spiral design development, and system test in cooperation with the NAVAIR T&E Department (AIR 5.0).

3.4.6 Provide support for M&S Validation, Verification & Accreditation (VV&A) activities including tasks associated with plan development, documentation review, and acceptance testing.

3.4.7 Perform V&V of M&S to ensure consistent and credible M&S results, informed decision-making, compliance with DoN Policy, and the cultivation of reusable M&S.

3.4.8 Perform V&V activities and develop templates to improve the traceability of data through the modeling hierarchy. Traceability must extend to validated requirements, or DODAF products, and shall be coordinated with the Type Commanders (TYCOMs) (operational) and System Commands (SYSCOMs) (technical) as required.

3.4.9 Support Naval MS&A initiatives such as the N81 World Class Models Program.

3.4.10 Develop, test, install and support MS&A and related training in support of the numbered fleet commands or other operational units (i.e., Course-Of-Action tools and Tactical Decision Aids).

3.4.11 Apply, with demonstrated proficiency, operations research analysis tools to be used in addition to or conjunction with M&S warfare tools, such as MATLAB, SAS and JMP.

3.4.12 Provide analytic expertise in operations research areas to be used in addition to or conjunction with M&S warfare tools, such as Design of Experiments, Response Surface Methodology and regression Analysis.

3.5 NAE Warfare Analysis Environment (NAE WAE). The Contractor shall provide support for the NAE WAE infrastructure including hardware and software determination, installation, testing, configuration management, laboratory management, development and implementation of back-up and disaster recovery procedures, and development of hardware and software requirements for laboratory upgrades or establishment of new laboratory facilities.

3.5.1 Perform installation and test of M&S hardware, software, and related support systems.

3.5.2 Set up, organize, and archive populated models and simulations with recent scenarios and databases.

3.5.3 Perform all web-based efforts using current DoD computer security networks, protocols, firewalls, and network protection schemes; ensure familiarity with the Public Key Infrastructure policies and utilize as required and appropriate.

3.5.4 Support NAE WAE users as a central point to receive support on usage of M&S resources and to identify, manage, report, and solve issues.

3.5.5 Provide QA management support in accordance with the approved NAE WAE QA Plan.

3.5.6 Provide configuration management and version control over all NAE WAE components and data in accordance with the approved CM and Data Management Plans.

3.5.7 Operate and maintain an efficient data management system with flexible user privileges to allow selective access to data, metadata, and information; ensure data items are single valued and that the data management system does not contain duplicate entries for the same item or items.

3.5.8 Conduct monthly reviews with users, developers and managers to determine improvements and modifications needed to reduce costs and to improve the quality and utility of the NAE WAE.

3.5.9 Develop M&S hardware and software operation and installation manuals and provide training to administrators and users on use of M&S systems and operating policies and procedures.

3.5.10 Prepare all DoD and Navy security and Information Technology (IT) documentation required to operate the NAE WAE, including documentation required to maintain connectivity to the SIPRNET, Secret Defense Research Engineering Network (SDREN), and other secure facilities (i.e., System Security Authorization Agreement, NAVAIR IT Approval Form, etc.). No item in this Performance Based Statement of Work (PBSOW) shall be used to procure any services that are inherently governmental services or personal services.

3.5.11 Perform updates to planning, policy, and procedure documentation as changes occur including the NAE WAE maintenance plan, QA plan, CM plan, and data management plan.

3.5.12 Update the NAE WAE roadmap to identify the post-implementation evolution of the NAE WAE with associated costs that includes a plan for leveraging M&S technological advances, staffing requirements, and facility expansion and upgrades.

3.6 Software Development. The Contractor shall perform software development efforts to update, enhance, or develop M&S applications or tools and shall perform the following development elements according to more detailed requirements provided with each individual task order. M&S applications can include and are not limited to high fidelity engineering, engagement, mission, and campaign level models as well as database web application development.

3.6.1 Develop Software Architecture.

3.6.2 Develop application or tool.

3.6.3 Develop detailed documentation of the development process, code architecture, code structure, and user’s manuals.

3.6.4 Utilize an established and recognized industry standard for Configuration and Risk Management.

3.6.5 Testing: Test the application or tool at a unit level as well as provide for user community testing during development and acceptance testing.

3.6.6 Provide support for VV&A of software and data. This includes tasks associated with plan development, documentation review, and acceptance testing.

3.6.7 Provide services and support for deployment of the application or tool.

3.6.8 Develop and implement a source code transition plan that provides a process to transition the completed source code to AIR – 4.10 which includes documentation for source code updating and recompiling.

3.6.9 Provide software development and maintenance support throughout the life cycle of the application or tool.

3.7 Data. The Contractor shall provide support and perform efforts relating to data used for DoN and DoD warfare analyses.

3.7.1 Research and prepare materials that can be used to disseminate, understand, update, and project threat data information such as the Strategic Planning Guidance (SPG), including the identification of threat, friendly, and neutral actors, systems, system characteristics, strategies, and tactics.

3.7.2 Develop and support development of data sets representing United States, friendly, allied, coalition, neutral systems to be used in campaign, mission, engagement, and engineering level MS&A.

3.7.3 Implement procedures to extract data from data sources and statistically process data as required.

3.7.4 Develop and modify translators to construct input sets for models and simulations as required.

3.7.5 Provide general research and data collection support including data analysis, mining and archiving to support projects associated with warfare analysis.

3.7.6 Collect data from authoritative data sources and identify authoritative data sources for modeling efforts; assist in accrediting data from authoritative data sources.

3.7.7 Propose specific metadata associated with classes of data.

3.7.8 Ensure all analytic products and data are hosted in the AIR-4.10 analysis repository including updates as iterations occur.

3.7.9 Support development, test, implementation, and maintenance of websites, content management, and MS&A applications using computer security networks, protocols, firewalls and other computer and information, and network protection schemes currently in use by the DOD to include the planning, design, development, coding, population, testing and implementation of databases; create and distribute reports to support periodic management reviews.

3.7.10 Perform data assessments identifying, describing and recommending the types of data, data elements, data formats, and data structures for databases.

3.7.11 Develop database "filters" to allow users to sort through bodies of results, filter out what is not wanted, and allow quick access to the information and data sought

3.7.12 Perform and support V&V of data and databases.

3.8 Programmatic Analysis Support. The Contractor shall perform the following efforts as delineated in task orders in the area of Programmatic Analytic Support:

3.8.1 Provide analytic support to NAVAIR PEOs and Program Offices (PMAs) in determining the contribution of their platforms to future naval and joint warfighting capability requirements.

3.8.2 Provide analytic expertise to support leadership meetings, Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs),…