Ref_3,_A-Team_MSDI_Description_of_Research_Effort_Final.pdf

Attachment 1: A-Team Mission Systems Development and Integration

W911W6-19-R-0006

Aviation Development Directorate - Eustis

401 Lee Boulevard

Fort Eustis, Virginia 23604

Mission Systems Development & Integration for

Advanced Teaming Demonstration Program

ATTACHMENT 1

Description of Research Effort

February 28, 2019

Contents

1.0 Program Information

Purpose

Program Objective

Background

2.0 Research Opportunity Description

Technical Approach

Concepts of Operations

Mission Systems Development and Integration

Subsystems Technology Development and Integration

Technology Demonstrations

3.0 Award Information

Award Dates

Funding

Type of Contract/Instrument

Number of Awards

Period of Performance

Deliverables

4.0 Eligibility Information

Foreign Entities

5.0 Proposal and Submission Instructions

Submission

Proposal Content

Volume 1: Technical Proposal

6.0 Evaluation Information

Technical Evaluation Criteria

Cost / Price Criteria

7.0 Instructions to Offerors

References

Supplemental Information Package

Government Furnished Information, Equipment, Property, or Facilities ... 19

Technical Data and Computer Software Rights

Security Classification

Export Control Considerations

Contractor Support

APPENDIX A Program Schedule Outline

1.0 Program Information

Purpose

This Special Notice (“Call”), W911W6-19-R-0006, is issued under the Aviation Development Directorate – Eustis (ADD-E) Master Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911W6-19-R-0012 in support of the objectives of the Advanced Teaming Demonstration Program (“A-Team”). This Call solicits proposals for the Mission Systems Development and Integration line of effort. Successful Offerors will take on the role of Mission Systems Integration (MSI) Leads for the program. A detailed description of the technical requirements is provided in the Supplemental Information Package (SIP) (Section 7.2).

Program Objective The objective of the A-Team program is to develop and demonstrate advanced teaming of manned and unmanned aviation assets to execute tactical missions with minimal human intervention, while operating as part of a combined arms team in a complex operating environment. An equally important objective of the program is to develop and integrate technologies for advanced teaming using an open systems approach. The program will demonstrate the technologies developed and matured in a Mission Systems Integrated Technology Demonstration (MSITD) at the end of the program.

Background A-Team is an S&T program funded from the Army’s Research, Development, Test, and Engineering (RDT&E) appropriation, Budget Activities 6.2, Applied Research, and 6.3, Advanced Technology Development. The program is planned for execution from FY19 through FY23. The technologies developed are important to satisfy operational capability requirements of the Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA), Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA), and the Advanced Unmanned Aircraft System (AUAS), enhance the capabilities of the current fleet and enable operational concepts envisioned by the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Cross Functional Team (CFT) and the wider military community.

It is anticipated that the program will begin with technologies at varying Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) and mature many of them to TRL 6 or 7 with potential to transition into advanced component development and prototypes.

The goals of A-Team encompass a breadth of systems, subsystems, and component technologies ranging from manned and unmanned aircraft systems and mission equipment packages to a large number of software enabled capabilities and end items all integrated to enable advanced teaming operational capabilities. By necessity, the program relies on integrating off-the-shelf technologies where applicable and leveraging developmental products from other associated S&T efforts and non-traditional commercial sources where feasible. The program maintains cognizance of relevant efforts across the Department of Defense (e.g., U.S. Army’s Combat Capability Development Command (CCDC), Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), U.S. Air Force, and the U.S. Navy in the area of autonomy and collaborative teaming) and would benefit by leveraging and adapting their products in this program. A-Team will leverage Army Aviation S&T efforts that are nearing completion, including: the Mission Systems Architecture Demonstration (MSAD) effort under the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration (JMR TD) program and the

Synergistic Unmanned Manned Intelligent Teaming (SUMIT) program. A-Team will also be closely coordinated with concurrent and planned Army Aviation S&T efforts, including:

Integrated Mission Equipment for Vertical Lift Systems (IME), Air-Launched Effects (ALE), Survivability Against Integrated and Networked Threats (SAINT), and Holistic Situational Awareness and Decision Making (HSA-DM). These relationships, instrumental for A-Team to meet its goals, are described further in the SIP.

2.0 Research Opportunity Description

A-Team is tasked with developing an advanced teaming capability integrated into a mission system that adheres to an open systems architecture applicable to several Army Aviation mission sets. An overarching theme of the execution approach is to advance A- Team technologies in capability increments using an agile development process with regular demonstrations of increasingly advanced and more capable technologies.

Technical Approach The program’s technology development and demonstration approach comprises three major interconnected lines of effort executed in parallel:

1. Mission Systems Development and Integration, the topic of this Call as outlined in Section 2.3 and described in the SIP accompanying this Call,

2. Subsystems Technology Development and Integration, the topic of the parallel Call (W911W6-19-R-0008) outlined in Section 2.4, and,

3. Technology Demonstrations, outlined in Section 2.5 and described in Appendix D Outline of Demonstration Approach included in the SIP accompanying this Call.

The inclusion of the Subsystems Technology Development and Integration and the Technology Demonstrations is intended to provide potential offerors an understanding of the Government’s overall approach to A-Team development effort. The Government may elect to issue additional BAA Calls in support of the A-Team program for aircraft platform providers and off-the-shelf payload products at a later date based on the outcomes of the current Calls. The Government’s overall approach to executing this program is summarized in the following documents included as appendices to this Call.

Appendix A, Program Schedule Outline, provides an overview of the key knowledge points, decision points, program milestones and activities by the Government, the MSI Leads and Subsystems Technology providers (STs). Appendix A is included at the end of this document.

Appendix B, Outline of Integrated Program Plan, provides information about the Government’s role in the program, the planned organizational structure and its resources, the integrated master schedule, and the A-Team program’s relationships with other programs and external stakeholders. These plans will be described in the Government’s Integrated Program Plan, an initial release of which will be provided to contractors at award. Appendix B is included in the SIP.

Appendix C provides the A-Team concept of operations and additional operational task details for use by Offerors in developing their proposal. The content in

Appendix C will be expanded to include more detail before start of execution by contractors. Appendix C is included in the SIP.

Appendix D, Outline of Demonstration Approach, describes the program’s demonstration approach and its relationship to the concept of operations in more detail. It describes the plan for capability increments in each of the annual Partial Capability Demonstrations (PCDs). It provides assets, resources, and their performance characteristics, as well as Key Performance Measures, to use as basis for contractors’ execution approach. The outline in Appendix D will be expanded into the Government’s Test and Demonstration Plan (T&DP). An initial release will be provided at award. Appendix D is included in the SIP.

Appendix E, FORCE Lab, summarizes the Government’s simulation environment, describes its current capabilities, and outlines plans for its upgrades to meet A- Team’s requirements. Offerors may use this information to decide and propose their effort for Government simulation tests and demonstrations. Appendix E is included in the SIP.

Appendix F provides government furnished information from the MSAD effort.

Appendix F is included in the SIP.

Concepts of Operations The concept of operations (CONOPS) for A-Team includes several Army Aviation mission sets and is used to guide the program’s technology development effort. The CONOPS developed for A-Team form the basis for defining the functional capabilities necessary to enable advanced teaming operations. The CONOPS are illustrated in a series of operational concept graphics (OV-1s) and are provided in Appendix C in the SIP. Also included for use by all A-Team contractors are additional details in the Task Reference Matrix with operational task and operational capability decompositions for each view.

Mission Systems Development and Integration The primary focus of the Mission Systems Development & Integration line of effort is to develop and demonstrate the foundational mechanisms for integrating advanced teaming capabilities in a transitionable, sustainable and affordable manner.

The Mission Systems Development & Integration line of effort will be performed in two Phases. Phase I will be performed by all Offerors selected as MSI Leads. During an initial set of tasks in Phase I, the MSI Lead must collaborate with other MSI Leads to develop consensus architecture products applicable to A-Team CONOPS. The MSI Leads then continue with tasks to be performed individually by each to refine these products. These architecture products form the basis for the A-Team mission system architecture to be designed individually by those MSI Leads the Government selects for continuation into Phase II.

MSI Leads are required to use model-based system engineering processes based on a modular open systems approach aligned with the JMR Common Architecture Strategy (JCAS). MSI Leads must use the artifacts developed by MSAD as the basis from which to build their A-Team mission systems architecture. MSI Leads are required to document their A-Team technical execution approach in accordance with Government guidance through deliverables, to include the Open Systems Management Plan, Systems Engineering Management Plan, and the Integration and Test Plan. MSI Leads are required to participate in the Government-led change management process.

Phase II consists of tasks to design the demonstration Mission Systems Suite (MSS) and lead the coordination, planning, and conduct of the FY23 TRL 6 Mission Systems Integrated Technology Demonstration (MSITD). The Government will finalize the selection of subsystems technologies, platforms, and payloads for integration by the MSI Leads in the early stages of Phase II in time for the start of system design, integration, and test activities. MSI Leads have primary responsibility to coordinate with the Government team as well as A-Team contractors in the role of STs and, potentially, additional A-Team contractors for aircraft platforms and payloads pending follow-on BAA Calls.

MSI Leads will have to coordinate with STs to provide integration guidance, integrate their subsystems, and conduct in-house integration checks and functional tests before the MSITD. MSI Leads are responsible for configuration management of their MSS. The STs will have primary responsibility to modify their product to meet the MSI Lead’s interface and function requirements. STs are not required to use the same processes, standards, and tools that MSI Leads are required to use. Therefore, MSI Leads should be prepared to coordinate with STs to identify suitable delivery methods to provide requirements information to STs.

MSI Leads will also lead the safety qualification and airworthiness task in support of the MSITD. This includes coordinating with aircraft platform providers to define the air vehicle to mission system interface. The platform provider can be assumed to be responsible for delivering substantiation information to the MSI Lead for all A-kit modifications of their aircraft. In the case of the integration of an ST’s product (as part of the MSS) with impact on an air vehicle’s safety of flight, the MSI Lead will ensure that the necessary safety requirements are addressed in their MSS and coordinate with the ST for necessary technical analysis and documentation support.

During the preparation and conduct of the MSITD, MSI Leads have primary responsibility for the MSS specification, which consists of platforms, payloads, and subsystems furnished by A-Team contractors. The MSS specification may also include payloads and subsystems delivered to the MSI Lead for integration (e.g., products from the ALE or SAINT programs). MSI Leads are not responsible for managing other external systems (e.g., ground systems) that are not integrated into the MSS specification but may be included in the MSITD to demonstrate interoperability.

The Government anticipates that any decisions on selecting external subsystems from other S&T efforts for integration as part of the MSI Leads’ MSS will be made in consultation with the MSI Leads. The Government’s decisions will be contingent on successful initial integration and test of the MSI Leads’ MSS and the availability of suitable products from these other S&T efforts. For any such external subsystem integrated into the MSS, the MSI Lead will have to provide interface requirements, conduct system integration and test, and include it as part of their safety and airworthiness approvals tasks.

The Government will actively collaborate with MSI Leads during preparation for, and to facilitate the conduct of, demonstrations.

Offerors for the MSI Lead role have the opportunity to propose tasks using an agile software development approach with development cycles of build, integration and test to advance capability in multiple increments. Offerors are encouraged to propose the use of in-house modeling and simulation facilities to evaluate capability growth with each increment. The Government seeks approaches that use a meaningful combination of modeling, analysis, simulation and flight activities to methodically advance through system build, integration and test, to include subsystem-specific hardware-in-the-loop and system-level technical performance evaluation.

MSI Leads will have opportunities to conduct simulation demonstrations in the Government’s simulation facilities as well as participate in PCDs. The Government’s program schedule outline in Appendix A shows MSI Lead participation in both events scheduled after the integration and in-house testing of selected subsystem technologies in their MSS. MSI Leads will have to identify interface requirements, provide integration guidance, and coordinate preparations with the providers of subsystem technologies before these demonstrations.

The detailed description of the technical requirements of the Call, its tasks and necessary supporting information is provided in the SIP. Offerors are required to submit proposals for the full set of Phase I and II tasks.

Subsystems Technology Development and Integration The Subsystems Technology Development and Integration line of effort, seeks to develop, mature, and integrate subsystem technologies to enable and demonstrate advanced teaming capabilities. The primary focus of this line of effort is on developing and maturing software products that enable specific subsystem capabilities required by the A-Team

CONOPS.

The Subsystems Technology Development & Integration line of effort is organized in four different “subtopics.” Each subtopic is intended to represent a domain of mission capability described in terms of its functional capabilities. The four subtopics are briefly defined below. Detailed descriptions of their functional capabilities are included in the SIP for reference by Offerors to this Call.

I. Human Machine Interface Management: This applies to subsystem technologies for human-to-autonomous systems interaction and supervision. It includes functional capabilities for user data input and output management; user interface content preparation and management; presentation management for HMI devices;

and user state monitoring to enable supervision of autonomous operations.

II. Operations Management: This applies to subsystem technologies for autonomous mission management of teamed operations. It includes functional capabilities for mission planning, execution, monitoring, re-planning, and oversight. It also includes capabilities specific to mission task management for the various mission sets in the A-Team CONOPS.

III. Platform Resource Capability Management: This applies to subsystem technologies for managing the resources on an aircraft to include capabilities for autonomous flight. It includes capabilities specific to resources such as sensors, communications devices, and effectors onboard an aircraft.

IV. Situational Awareness (SA) Management: This applies to subsystem technologies for management of SA information in the team. It includes the processing and preparation of data onboard individual aircraft in the team as well as the distribution and sharing of information within the team. It includes capabilities for sensor data fusion, storage, registration, automated object detection and classification, automated target recognition, identification, and geolocation. It involves capabilities for updates and maintenance of shared SA databases, abstraction of knowledge from data, and report generation for use within and external to the team.

The Government asks for separate proposals for each subtopic in the Call for Subsystems Technology Development and Integration (W911W6-R-19-0008). Technology solutions that satisfy a group of related functional capabilities in each subtopic are being sought as “subsystems” made of modular, separable components.

The Government plans for the use of agile software development approaches to deliver multiple capability increments over the contractor’s period of performance. The Government has planned its demonstration approach to show increasing capabilities in each annual PCD (Appendix D) and asks STs to follow a Capability Increments Plan for their subsystem development effort. STs may test and demonstrate their capability increments using in-house simulation facilities or Government-owned simulation facilities.

MSI Leads will provide interface definition and systems integration information to STs over the course of their effort, beginning with consensus functional and data descriptions. STs will be tasked with reviewing the MSI Leads’ interface definitions. The Government’s program schedule outline currently plans for at least two such knowledge points (labeled KP 1 and KP 2 in Appendix A) that will occur during effort under this Call. STs will be responsible for review and feedback based on the data requirements for their subsystem products to help MSI Leads refine their mission system architecture and interfaces. This collaboration is an opportunity for STs to influence the interface requirements of the A- Team mission system architecture solutions and improve the integration readiness of their subsystem solution.

The Government will select subsystem technologies for integration into one or more of the Government’s PCDs and/or the MSITD. Selection depends on the subsystem’s specific capabilities and its progress on key performance measures. If selected for integration into the MSITD, STs will have primary responsibility to modify their product to satisfy the interface requirements provided by the MSI Leads. In the case of innovative subsystem solutions that show promise but are not mature or ready for integration into the PCDs or

MSITD, the Government may opt to continue their maturation for future technology insertion opportunities.

Technology Demonstrations The Technology Demonstrations line of effort involves simulation demonstrations in the Government’s simulation facilities and Government-hosted flight events for PCDs and the MSITD. The purpose of this line of effort is to integrate and demonstrate technology solutions in multiple capability increments as they mature and assess their advances as they progress towards end-state capability objectives. The Government’s plans for technology demonstrations is outlined in Appendix D. The Program Schedule Outline at Appendix A also provides milestones and events in this line of effort.

A description of the Government’s existing simulation facilities and plans for its upgrades are provided in Appendix E in the SIP. Simulations are planned with partial capabilities of subsystem technologies initially, and later in the program, for the integrated capabilities (subset of final MSS) from MSI Leads. STs can test their products and supplement their in-house facilities as needed using the Government’s simulation facilities. The Government will provide necessary interface definitions and integration guidance for its simulation environment. The emphasis in the A-Team program is on the use of simulation facilities for the use of partial capability tests and demonstrations over short durations rather than human-in-the-loop evaluations or experiments that require longer periods. This is primarily to ensure that facilities are available for access by multiple contractors to test their systems. Human-in-the-loop evaluations may be considered for the MSI Leads’ integrated capabilities if the Government sees benefit to the stakeholder community.

Flight demonstrations are planned with partial capabilities of subsystem technologies initially, and later in the program, with integrated capabilities from MSI Leads.

Demonstrations will be hosted and run by the Government. The Government will select subsystem solutions for flight demonstrations based on their specific capabilities and progress on key performance measures. Demonstrations may involve products from more than one ST. Subsystems may have to be connected in a federated manner to prove out capabilities in the early stages of the program until the MSI Leads have finalized interface definitions for the MSS. When the MSI Lead participates in PCDs, the MSI Lead is responsible for subsystems integration as part of their integrated capability.

Activities for the MSITD begin upon the completion of the MSI Lead’s system integration and test of their MSS specification for the subsystem technologies, payloads, and platforms selected by the Government. The Government will coordinate closely with MSI Leads for incorporation of other external ground systems into the MSITD. The Government will also facilitate the availability of range support and necessary ground test equipment. Flight events are likely to use Government-owned aircraft. Contractor-furnished aircraft may be included pending a Government decision on future Calls.

Technology demonstrations may be in support of, or may lead to, technology transition into programs of record.

3.0 Award Information

Award Dates Awards for the MSI Lead role are anticipated in August 2019.

Funding Estimated budget for effort under this Call is in the table below. The allocation to each Phase is only a rough order of magnitude estimate. Please refer to cost proposal instructions for estimating level of effort for collaborative tasks in Phase I.

Total Funding

$34M

Phase I $11M

Phase II $23M

The Government requests fully priced proposals that include the entirety of Phase I and Phase II tasks of this Call. Costs associated with updating Phase II proposals are not considered allowable direct costs.

Awards will be subject to availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to make partial awards of one, part of one, or none, based upon the technical merit and affordability of received technical proposals.

Type of Contract/Instrument The Government will consider a variety of instruments, including cost-reimbursable procurement contracts for awards and cooperative agreements such as Technology Investment Agreements (TIA). The ADD Master BAA provides a description of available instrument types. Offerors shall clearly state their desired funding instrument in the cost proposal. The evaluation of proposals will consider the rights in technical data offered and its impact to the Government’s business and technical objectives. The type of instrument preferred by the offeror will influence the Government’s evaluation inasmuch as its impact on the Government’s ability to utilize the offeror’s products without undue restrictions to rights in their technical data.

A draft TIA format is included as an attachment to this Call.

Number of Awards The Government anticipates making four Phase I awards. The Government anticipates selecting two Phase I awardees to continue into the Phase II effort.

Period of Performance The period of performance for awards on this Call is planned through the end of 2023. It assumes MSITD in September 2023 and provides time for completion of post-demonstration reviews, deliverables, and outbriefs.

Total Aug 2019 – Dec 2023

Phase I Aug 2019 – Nov 2020

Phase II Oct 2020 – Dec 2023

Deliverables The list of deliverables anticipated is provided below. Offerors may propose a mix of deliverables that best fits their approach.

Item No.

Document ID Description Paragraph Reference in Tech Reqts Doc

Desired Technical data and computer software rights

Notes

001 DI-MGMT-81644B Operational Activities Decomposition

3.1.1.1 Unlimited

002 DI-MGMT-81644B

DI-MISC-80508B

JCA FRA

Data description and Recommended Changes to JCA FRA

3.1.1.2 3.1.1.3

Unlimited Distribute to STs for review / revision

003 DI-AVCS-80700A JCA DSDM extension 3.1.1.4 3.2.1.2 3.2.2.2

Unlimited

Updates at each task

004 DI-MISC-80508B Recommendations for Software technical standards Recommendations for Hardware technical standards

3.1.1.5 3.1.1.6

Unlimited

005 DI-MISC-80508B Safety guidance recommendations Security guidance recommendations

3.1.1.7 3.1.1.8

Unlimited

006 DI-MGMT-81644B

DI-MISC-80508B

Conceptual AIF 3.1.2.1 Unlimited/

GPR

007 DI-MGMT-81644B

DI-MISC-80508B

Objective Architecture 3.1.2.3 3.1.2.4 3.2.1.1 3.2.1.3 3.2.1.4

Unlimited/

GPR

Includes draft and final - Functional, SW, HW

008 DI-MGMT-81644B

DI-MISC-80508B

CONEMPs 3.1.2.5 Unlimited

009 DI-SESS-82044 Subsystems Integration Guide (SIG)

3.2.1.5 3.2.2.5 3.2.3.4 3.2.6.7

Unlimited/

GPR

Review / revise;

Update

010 DI-MISC-80508B Functional Completeness review and recommendations

3.2.1.6 Unlimited/

011 DI-MGMT-81644B

DI-MISC-80508B

System Architecture 3.2.2.1 3.2.2.3 3.2.2.4

Unlimited/

GPR

Includes Functional, SW, HW

012 DI-SESS-80776A

DI-MISC-80508B

DI-SESS-81248B

DI-IPSC-81432A

Technical Data Package for demo MSS and IDD, SDD, ICD BOM

3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2 3.2.3.4 3.2.5.3

Unlimited /

GPR

at Design;

at final

MSITD

013 DI-NDTI-80809B

DI-IPSC-81440A

DI-MISC-80508B

Integration and Test Report

3.2.4.1 3.2.4.2 3.2.4.3 3.2.4.4 3.2.5.1 3.2.5.4 3.2.5.5

Unlimited /

GPR

Frequency of updates depends on Offeror’s execution approach

014 DI-SESS-81766

DI-SESS-81768

Airworthiness Substantiation / Safety Qualification Specification

3.2.3.3 3.2.5.2 3.2.5.4

Unlimited /

GPR

For PCD and

MSITD

015 DI-MGMT-82099 OSMP 3.2.6.1 Unlimited

016 DI-SESS-81785A

DI-MGMT-81650

SEMP

Integrated Master Schedule

3.2.6.2 Unlimited

017 DI-SESS-82044

DI-NDTI-80566A

Integration and Test Plan

(ITP)

3.2.6.3 Unlimited

018 DI-IPSC-81441A

DI-IPSC-80590B

DI-AVCS-80700A

DI-MGMT-81453B

Computer Software End Items SW End item documentation Data Accession List

3.2.5.1 3.2.5.2

3.2.6.10

Unlimited/

GPR/

Limited

019 DI-MISC-81321A

DI-ILSS-80872

Installation Instructions Operating Instructions

3.2.5.1 3.2.5.2

3.2.6.10

Unlimited/

020 DI-FCNL-80331A

DI-MGMT-80227

Cost Status Report Monthly Progress Report

3.2.6.8

021 DI-ADMN-81373 Presentation Material 3.2.6.8 Unlimited/

022 DI-MISC-80711A Report: Final Report 3.2.6.11

Unlimited

4.0 Eligibility Information

Foreign Entities Participation is limited to U.S. Firms as Prime Contractors; however, foreign-owned entities can participate as subcontractors/recipients to U.S. prime contractors/recipient. The U.S.

prime entity retains responsibility for compliance with U.S. export controls. Countries included in the U.S. State Department List of Countries that support Terrorism are excluded from participation. Interested entities must address export compliance of any foreign sub-contractors/recipients in its cost volume.

5.0 Proposal and Submission Instructions

This Call uses a single step, full proposal submission process. Offerors are advised to follow the proposal submission instructions as described in the ADD Master BAA Solicitation Number: W911W6-19-R-0012, Section 5.2 Proposal Submission Process.

This Call supplements them with additional instructions as provided below.

Submission Proposals are due not later than 29 April 2019; 1530 eastern time. Proposals received after the specified closing date and time will not be evaluated.

Proposals shall be valid for a period of at least six months from government receipt.

Copies - A proposal shall consist of one Technical Proposal volume and one Cost Proposal volume. Submissions shall be in Microsoft Office format or Adobe Acrobat portable document format (“.pdf”).

Submission Instructions: Unclassified responses should be submitted electronically via the Safe Access and File Exchange website (https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/). Submissions must be directed to Mr. Thomas Helms at Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil, and Ms. Hope McClain at hope.a.mcclain.civ@mail.mil.

Questions may be submitted in writing via email to Mr. Thomas Helms at Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil, and Ms. Hope McClain at hope.a.mcclain.civ@mail.mil. All questions must be submitted no later than 14 days prior to the call closing date to ensure a timely Government response. All substantive questions and responses received that can be answered without revealing sensitive information will be posted to FedBizOpps as an amendment to the Call.

Proposal Content Proposals shall be prepared in accordance with the instructions in Section 5.2.3 of the Master BAA. They are supplemented as follows for this Call:

Volume 1: Technical Proposal Number of pages shall not exceed 50. Page count is defined in accordance with the Master BAA.

Detailed Technical Approach Of importance to the requirements of this Call are the Offeror’s approach to developing a framework for mission system integration that enables autonomous teamed aviation operations for all the mission sets in A-Team’s CONOPS. The Offeror should provide the rationale for their selected approach.

SORE and SOW Of importance to the requirements of this Call are the Offeror’s use of systems engineering, model-based development, open systems management, technical performance measures, modeling & simulation, and flight tests in defining tasks to achieve technical objectives. The Offeror should describe the standards, tools, processes, and facilities to be used in support of proposed tasks.

Management Plan Offerors should propose their plan for collaborating with other MSI leads during collaborative tasks in Phase I. Offerors should describe their plan for communication and coordination with A-Team contractors and the Government. Offerors should describe their https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/ mailto:Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil mailto:hope.a.mcclain.civ@mail.mil mailto:Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil mailto:hope.a.mcclain.civ@mail.mil plan for configuration management, risk management, safety qualification and airworthiness approvals, and their program organization with lines of communication with collaborating A-Team participants.

Facilities Offerors should describe their integration and test facilities, to include any proposed facilities for modeling and simulation and/or flight test tasks.

Key Personnel In addition to providing resumes for key personnel, discuss the plan to access subject matter expertise in the various relevant technical areas. Offerors should also present their plan to maintain continuity of work if a key person departs.

Assertion of Technical Data and Computer Software Rights In the summary of assertions of any restrictions on Government use of technical data or software, include any non-standard or less than widely used software tools and technical data required for use in the proposed effort. Explain how the restrictions will affect the Government’s ability to use the technical data that will result from effort. See Section 7.4 below for more information.

Volume 2: Price/Cost Proposal For estimating costs for the collaborative tasks in Phase I, see Instructions to Offerors in Section 7.0.

Include Cover Page, Part 1, Part 2, in accordance with the Master BAA.

6.0 Evaluation Information

The evaluation criteria outlined in the Master BAA are supplemented with additional sub-criteria as follows. All other evaluation information in the Master BAA apply unchanged to this Call. Proposals will be evaluated on their own merit without regard to others submitted under this Call.

Technical Evaluation Criteria The technical evaluation criteria listed in the Master BAA apply to proposal evaluations in this Call. Master BAA technical evaluation Criteria I and II are supplemented with sub-criteria specific to the requirements of this Call. The sub-criteria for each are of equal priority. There are no changes to Criterion III.

For completeness, all the evaluation criteria to be used are provided below.

Criterion I: The extent to which the proposed effort satisfies the Army research need by use of innovative, efficient, affordable, and suitable solutions to the stated technical objective. The following sub-criteria apply (of equal priority):

1. The adequacy and completeness of the technical approach to identifying all the functional capabilities and data required to enable all the mission sets in the concept of operations. The adequacy and completeness of the technical approach to defining interface requirements and identifying suitable technical standards.

2. The suitability of the proposed concept for an autonomy integration framework to generate appropriate autonomous behaviors by the team for all the mission sets in the concept of operations.

3. The merit of the technical approach to distributing functions across assets in the team and assessing the functional continuity and completeness of the resulting mission system suite.

4. The extent to which the technical approach to identifying key interfaces and variation points preserves modular designs and satisfies the Government’s objectives to procure separable, portable, flexible, and extensible subsystems from different sources.

5. The merit of the technical approach to considering the impact of safety and security concerns in the design of the mission system architecture for autonomous teamed aviation operations.

6. The adequacy and completeness of the technical approach for subsystems integration testing, mission system suite performance assessment, and assessment of readiness for MSITD.

Criterion II: The merit of the proposed approach (including reasonableness of the proposed tasks and schedule) to accomplish the scientific and technical objectives to include offered technical data and computer software rights.

1. The extent to which the proposed approach provides a well-defined system engineering process sufficient for requirements definition and management;

architecture design and implementation; system design, subsystems integration and interface management; system performance and flight safety assessments; and execution of the MSITD.

2. The extent to which the proposed approach considers risk management, identifies risks, and proposes mitigation approaches for the development of the mission systems suite.

3. The suitability of the proposed approach to managing collaboration and information exchange with multiple subsystems providers, platform providers, and the Government team. The extent to which it maintains and allows for up-to-date information flow between relevant parties.

4. The impact of restrictions in technical data and software rights on the Government’s objectives to obtain separable, portable, flexible, and extensible mission system solutions for autonomous teamed aviation operations. The impact of restrictions in technical data and software rights on the MSI Lead’s ability to manage collaboration and share information with other MSI Leads, subsystems providers, platform providers, and the Government team.

Criterion III: The capability of the Offeror to accomplish the proposed effort, which includes suitability and availability of personnel, facilities, and any necessary data, as well as past performance.

The Government will assign each proposal an overall risk rating based upon an integrated assessment of the risk to successful performance.

Cost / Price Criteria Cost will be analyzed in accordance with the Master BAA.

Technical Evaluation Criteria are in descending order of importance. Technical Evaluation Criteria are more important than Cost/Price Criteria.

All other definitions and terms in Section 6, Evaluation Information, of the Master BAA remain unchanged.

7.0 Instructions to Offerors

Offerors are advised to review the technical requirements of the Subsystems Technology Development & Integration Call (W911W6-19-R-0008) before proposal preparation. For reference, the technical description of the Subsystems Technology Development & Integration Call is included in the SIP accompanying this Call. Offerors are advised to also review the appendices included in the SIP before proposal preparation. Instructions specific to individual tasks are included in their technical descriptions provided in the SIP.

Government-furnished Information (GFI) for use in proposal development is also furnished in the SIP. Other GFI will be provided after award in accordance with program schedule.

Instructions to receive the SIP are provided in Section 7.2 below.

Offerors must submit fully priced proposals that include Phase I and Phase II. For the collaborative tasks in Phase I, Offerors selected as MSI Leads will be required to participate as equal members of a collaborative group and share equally in the effort involved. The Government recommends Offerors use the following estimates:

Collaborative tasks over a duration of 8 months

Each Offeror provides the equivalent of 3 full-time equivalents in resources

Resources are a mix of Systems Engineers, Data Modelers, and Subject Matter Experts in the individual technical disciplines to include experts in military aviation operations.

For preparing their Phase II proposals, Offerors must use the MSITD-B and MSITD-R operational scenarios provided in Appendix D, Outline of Demonstration Approach.

Appendix D also provides information on team composition and platform capabilities to use as a basis in developing the technical proposal. Offerors may propose an agile development approach to the system design and system integration and test tasks in Phase II.

Towards the end of Phase I tasks, the Government will make a decision on selecting two MSI Leads to continue into Phase II. The Government’s decision for Phase II selection will be based on the results of Phase I tasks performed individually by each MSI Lead as well as the Phase II proposals. The Government will offer an opportunity for MSI Leads to update their proposals, both technical and cost, for the remaining Phase II work before the selection decision is made. The decision criteria will use the proposal evaluation criteria and applicable sub-criteria identified below:

Applicable Criterion I sub-criteria -

The suitability of the autonomy integration framework to generate appropriate autonomous behaviors by the team for all the mission sets in the concept of operations

The extent to which the key interfaces and variation points identified preserves modular designs and satisfies the Government’s objectives to procure separable, portable, flexible, and extensible subsystems from different sources

The adequacy and completeness of the technical approach for subsystems integration testing, mission system suite performance assessment, and assessment of readiness for MSITD

All other Criteria will be used unchanged.

The Government reserves the right to update decision criteria after awards against this Call and re-publish them to all Phase I contractors. This allows the Government to adjust to learning during execution of initial tasks in this line of effort.

Offerors that submit proposals for this Call may also submit proposals for the Subsystems Technology Development and Integration Call (W911W6-19-R-0008). Proposals under each Call will be evaluated independently. The Government reserves the right to require that subsystem technology products by an Offeror not be integrated by the same Offeror in their role as MSI Lead.

Cyber Security requirements: By submission of this offer, the Offeror represents that it will implement the security measures consistent with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171 “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations” (see http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-171) that are in effect at the time the solicitation is issued.

If the Offeror proposes to vary from any of the security requirements specified by NIST SP 800-171 that are in effect the Offeror shall include in the proposal, a written explanation of:

a. Why a particular security requirement is not applicable; or

b. How an alternative but equally effective, security measure is used to compensate for the inability to satisfy a particular requirement and achieve equivalent protection.

Offeror requests to vary from NIST SP 800-171 may require adjudication by an authorized representative of the DoD CIO in writing prior to award. Any accepted variance from NIST SP 800-171 shall be incorporated into the resulting award.

References

a. ADD Master Broad Agency Announcement W911W6-19-R-0012

b. Advanced Teaming Demonstration Program pre-solicitation notice W911W6-R-18-

00AT

c. A-Team Subsystems Technology Development & Integration Call W911W6-19-R-

Additional references are included with documentation in the SIP.

Supplemental Information Package The SIP includes the following technical content.

i. 03 A-Team MSI Call Technical Requirements

ii. 03 A-Team ST Call Technical Requirements

iii. APPENDIX B, Outline of Integrated Program Plan

iv. APPENDIX C, A-Team CONOPS views (OV-1’s) and Task Reference Matrix

v. APPENDIX D, Outline of Demonstration Approach

vi. APPENDIX E, FORCE Lab

vii. APPENDIX F, MSAD GFI

Due to the limited distribution authorized on the necessary documents, the SIP will be provided to Offerors upon request in writing by email. Send your requests to Mr. Tom Helms, Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil. Requests must be accompanied by a verifiable Joint Certification number or a copy of the Offeror's current and approved DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement. Contact the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Joint Certification Program at http://www.dla.mil/HQ/InformationOperations/Offers/Products/LogisticsApplications/JCP.aspx for more information. Please review the instructions online and use the form available at the web link to expedite your request.

Government Furnished Information, Equipment, Property, or Facilities Additional GFI and GFE to be provided after award include the following.

i. Integrated Program Plan

ii. Test & Demonstration Plan

iii. Open Architecture Management Plan

iv. Model Management Plan

v. JCA DSDM

vi. A-Team CONOPS views (OV-1’s and OV-2’s).

vii. FORCE System Integration Guide and Interface Design Description

Additional Government furnished data, information, equipment or facilities will be identified in future over the course of the program.

Technical Data and Computer Software Rights The Government will review Offerors’ assertions of technical data and computer software rights during proposal evaluation. The Government aims to find a balance between preserving Offerors’ intellectual property rights and removing unreasonable barriers to the rapid and affordable fielding of products to deliver operational capabilities and reduce mailto:Thomas.m.helms6.civ@mail.mil http://www.dla.mil/HQ/InformationOperations/Offers/Products/LogisticsApplications/JCP.aspx overall lifecycle costs. Rights in technical data and computer software that are too restrictive result in closed systems that inhibit the Government’s ability to integrate innovative products from different industry sources.

The Government anticipates that deliverables under this Call will include a mix of content with Unlimited Rights and Government Purpose Rights (GPR), and may include content with Limited or Restricted Rights. Offerors must use the definitions in DFARS Part 227 in describing the rights that the Government will receive in technical data and computer software used, developed, generated, and/or modified as part of the effort.

The Government expects that the external interfaces of the lowest level functions of subsystems will be defined as key interfaces, and their interface descriptions and associated data files, if any, will carry Unlimited Rights. The Government requires at a minimum, GPR to all other technical data, software, tools, analysis, and deliverables developed under this Call, excepting technical data, software, tools, or deliverables related to components that are developed exclusively at private expense. However, technical data, software, and tools proposed with less than GPR shall not be coupled to required technical data, software, tools, analysis, and deliverables possessing GPR or greater technical data and computer software rights.

Security Classification All proposals and research effort under this Call are anticipated to be at an unclassified level.

Export Control Considerations Awards made under this Call require access to and generate unclassified military critical technical data, the export of which is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C., Sec. 2751 et. Seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (Title 50, U.S.C. App. 2401 et. Seq.). Only Offerors who are registered and certified with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Joint Certification Program may participate in responding to this Call. Offerors are required to provide an “Export-Controlled DoD Data Agreement” certification number issued in accordance with DoD Directive 5230.25. This certification may be requested from the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Joint Certification Program at http://www.dla.mil/HQ/InformationOperations/Offers/Products/LogisticsApplications/JCP.aspx.

Contractor Support The Government intends to use non-Government support contractors to assist with administrative and technical support during proposal evaluations. In accomplishing their duties relating to the review process, the below mentioned firms may require access to proprietary information contained in the proposals. Proprietary information in the proposals must be marked accordingly. To facilitate the non-disclosure agreement process, email requests for non-Government support contractor POC information to the Contracting Office points of contact listed in this announcement.

http://www.dla.mil/HQ/InformationOperations/Offers/Products/LogisticsApplications/JCP.aspx

U.S. Falcon 11817 Canon Blvd Newport News, Virginia 23606 Support Provided: Local Area Network Administration & Professional Engineering

JHNA, Inc.

11602 Lawter Lane Clifton, VA 20124-2259 Support Provided: Operational Analysis and Program Integration

CRL Technologies, Inc.

9426 Ferry Landing Court Alexandria, VA 22309 Support Provided: Mission System Architecture

PeopleTec, Inc.

4901 Corporate Dr NW Huntsville, AL 35805 Support Provided: Systems Engineering

Trideum Corp.

655 Discovery Drive, Suite 100 Huntsville, AL 35806 Support Provided: Systems Engineering, Human Interfaces

Intuitive Research and Technology Corporation 5030 Bradford Dr NW #205 Huntsville, AL 35805 Support Provided: SharePoint Administration

Each Offeror may elect to sign non-disclosure agreements with these non-Government support contractors so the Government can properly protect the proprietary information submitted. Pursuant to FAR Part 9.505-4, these firms must execute an agreement with each Offeror that states that they will (1) protect the Offeror’s information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than which it was furnished. To expedite the review process, should they elect to do so, each Offeror should contact the companies above to effect execution of such an agreement prior to submission of their response(s).

Each Offeror shall submit copies of the agreements with their response(s) or provide a definitive statement that the Offeror does not consent to the release of the information to the aforementioned.

APPENDIX A Program Schedule Outline

G ov t F is ca l Y ea r

Q ua rt er

Ke y

Pr og ra m

E ve nt s

M is si on

S ys te m s

D ev el op m en t a nd

In te gr at io n

Ke y

M

SI

+S T

In te gr at io n

Ev en ts

Su bs ys te m s

Te ch no lo gy

D ev el op m en t a nd

In te gr at io n

G ov er nm en t-

H os te d

Te ch

D em o Ev en ts

KP

1:

M

SI

/S T

In te rf ac e Ch ec k

D

RR

D em on st ra ti on R ea di ne ss

R ev ie w

KP

2:

S

IG

R ev ie w

C om pl et ed O bj Ar ch O bj ec ti ve

A rc hi te ct ur e

Ca ll

: S ub sy st em

P ay lo ad s Te ch no lo gi es

M

SI

TD

M is si on S ys te m s

In te gr at ed T ec h

D em o

Ca ll

: P la tf or m s

PC

D Pa rt ia l C ap ab il it y

D em on st ra ti on

SI

G

Sy st em s

In te gr at io n

G ui de

ST

Su bs ys te m s Te ch no lo gi es

Sy sA rc h

Sy st em s

Ar ch it ec tu re

B A

A In du st ry ay

ST

ST

+M

SI

ST PC

D

ST

+M

SI

PC

D

M is si on

Sy st em s

In te gr at ed T e ch m o

M

S A ct iv it ie s

M

SI

TD

S

T Se le ct io n

R q ts f A rc h es ig n

PD

R

KP

CD

R

D es ig n

K…