Inactive

1. Background: The MDA is responsible for developing an integrated Missile Defense System (MDS), integrating land, sea, air, and space-based assets to defend the United States, deployed forces, and fr... 1. Background: The MDA is responsible for developing an integrated Missile Defense System (MDS), integrating land, sea, air, and space-based assets to defend the United States, deployed forces, and friends and allies from missile attacks. As the integrating element, Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC) is at the core of the MDS. As a subsystem of C2BMC, the C2BMC Planner provides the Combatant Commander with a MDS capability to collaboratively plan, coordinate, assess, optimize, and integrate High-Demand / Low-Density missile defense resources to defend the United States, our deployed forces, our allies and friends against all ranges of missiles in all phases of flight. The C2BMC Planner capability performs pre-mission analysis to determine optimized asset pairings for efficient and effective Missile Defense. The C2BMC Planner initializes Operational C2BMC Suites with validated Defense Design Data and supports Force Level planning processes 2. Description: The C2BMC Planner is responsible for delivering reliable, continuous support to the Warfighter, including new innovative capabilities. The current C2BMC Planner is an advanced planning capability, which enables Warfighters to utilize MDS assets across the globe to counter various threat scenarios. The MDA seeks to modernize how we design, develop, deliver, operate, and sustain our systems. The Agency seeks to move to a modern software development environment such as cloud-native, to improve and accelerate secure movement of developed software to operational fielding. The C2BMC Planner Program is interested in concepts and approaches to rapidly develop, test, integrate, and validate new capabilities into a modular, extensible system securely and reliably in a responsive manner. Additionally, there is a requirement to sustain and maintain capabilities while minimizing risk to cyber vulnerabilities and costs. C2BMC Planner Requirements Overview The C2BMC Planner functionality is increasingly dependent on reliable understanding of existing missile defense assets and resources as well as potential future changes. Knowledge of both allied and adversary capability together forms a foundational data-driven basis for battle plans which influence battle management and engagement outcome. Frequently evolving threat data requires an adaptive approach to MDS planning as well as an ability to adapt to regular advancements in missile defense assets. A C2BMC planner needs to stay relevant to these advancements and look ahead to plan for future advancements as well as provide flexibility to dynamically modify and validate defense designs while operating in a joint collaborative environment. The C2BMC Planner of the future must be postured for advanced and emerging threats, documented Application Programing Interface for extensibility to new weapons and sensors, left through right of launch integration, a multi-level security posture, dynamic near-real-time collaborative planning capability (both machine-to-machine and human to machine), acquisition & engagement statistics, and quick access to third party models & simulation capabilities. C2BMC Planner will provide the Warfighter the ability to quickly evaluate alternative defense laydowns and conduct Course of Action (COA) Analysis. C2BMC Planner collaborates Defense Design Data vertically down to tactical level planners and horizontally across Combatant Commands. The Planner performs rapid feasibility & integrated defense design assessments at a Strategic Level. These analyses provide the user with measures of effectiveness, which characterize system performance. Some examples of typical analyses are: Defended Area Analysis Operating Area Analysis Multi-threat Scenario Analysis Sensor Resource Management Sensor Search Tailoring and Optimization The C2BMC Planner capabilities include: 1) Exporting a C2BMC suite initialization file in accordance with the Interface Control Document. 2) Defense design creation, editing, import, export, analysis, and optimization. 3) Integration with the C2BMC suite; provide an intuitive interface and workflow that minimizes training and expertise. 4) Translating Combatant Commander Guidance into an actionable missile defense plan, coordinated both vertically to the tactical systems and horizontally between the Combatant Commands in support of the Joint Operation Planning Process. 5) Creating a Strategic Level Plan that can be analyzed, collaborated and coordinated between the MDS elements to create a joint Defense Design. 6) Orchestrating a complex simulation of multiple globally distributed MDS blue-force weapon systems, threat systems and launch areas. 7) Analyzing Defended and Operating Areas to determine measures of effectiveness such as Probability of Engagement Success to validate weapon system placements within the greater MDS context and provide quantitative evidence of feasibility of defensive objectives. 8) Optimizing mission-specific sensor search volumes when defined search plans are not available. 9) Evaluating alternative defense laydowns and conduct COA Analysis. 10) Producing reports from analysis to communicate results such as visualizations, engagement timelines, preferred engagement sequence groups and other measures of effectiveness to decision makers. 11) Displaying defensive analysis results such as visualizations, engagement timelines, preferred engagement sequence groups and other measures of effectiveness in a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for users and operators. 12) Providing an intuitive user interface and experience that walks user through the necessary steps to create, edit, analyze, and collaborate defense designs using workflows and error checking. 13) Generating sensor-tasking(s) to support C2BMC Sensor Resource Manager. Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment: The overarching requirement is to efficiently and effectively operate, maintain, and sustain the deployed C2BMC Planner while minimizing total ownership costs. The focus is to increase supportability and reduce hardware and software lifecycle costs of current and future variants in a technology environment that faces rapid turnover and requires increasing cyber resilience. Operations and maintenance support must be maintained for C2BMC Planner locations. An agile development process increases the cadence of operational deployments and allows maintenance changes to be prioritized in-line with development of upcoming releases. Agile institutes a software “pipeline” of continuous integration test and continuous development. In this way, the development process addresses changes early and often, shortening time to fielding and reducing impact to concurrent development. Cybersecurity and ATO processes shall be integrated into this pipeline to ensure efficiency and prevent unforeseen roadblocks. 3. Responses: Responses to this RFI will inform the Government’s determination as to whether sources capable of satisfying the Agency’s requirements exist; specifically the requirement to design, develop, test, and field new C2BMC Planner capabilities to support MDA commitments to the Warfighter as well as to maintain/sustain the current and future fielded capabilities. The MDA is interested in responses outlining new and creative ideas for the development and integration of state of the art technology to advance C2BMC Planner while maintaining the operational integrity of the deployed system with minimal risk at all times. New technologies should include an assessment of the current Technology Readiness Level/Algorithm Readiness Level, as required as a part of the C2BMC MDS program element (MDA/BC). As a guide, reference the BC Algorithm Readiness Process (see section 9). This RFI is issued solely for market research MDA will not be liable for any cost incurred for any information submitted.– it does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. This RFI does not commit the MDA to establish a contract for any supply or service whatsoever. Further, the MDA is not seeking proposals nor will it accept proposals. The information provided may be used in developing an Acquisition Strategy, Statements of Work, Statements of Objectives, or Performance Work Statements. Participation in future Agency transactions and procurement opportunities is not contingent upon responding to this RFI. It is the responsibility of the potential respondents to monitor this site for additional information pertaining to this requirement. Responses must follow the following guidelines: All responses are limited to no more than twenty 8.5 inch X 11 inch pages using Times New Roman 12 pt font, with one inch margins on top, bottom and sides (11 inch X 17 inch foldouts shall be counted as two pages). The cover page, table of contents, and acronym page will not be counted against the twenty page count. In addition, addendums may be added to meet the MDA's request for additional cost detail - top level Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) of the technical work described in submission to include, but limited to, all anticipated non-recurring engineering costs (two pages), answer the MDA's question regarding MDA furnished technical data, computer software, computer software documentation, programmatic or operational information (one page) (see d. below), and recommendations for future contract construct (two pages) (see e. below). These addendums will not count against the twenty page RFI response limitation. Responses must provide the following information: a. The cover page should contain: Respondent’s profile to include company name and address, number of employees, annual revenue history, office locations, DUNs number, cage code, NAICS code, current business status (large or small), small business category (if applicable), applicable socioeconomic status, primary and one alternate point of contact, and telephone and email addresses. b. Respondents should submit a C2BMC Planner Capability explaining why it is a responsible source (See FAR Part 9). Capability statements must include a schedule and a plan that demonstrates the respondent’s ability to deliver capabilities by the Increment 10 fielding timeframe of December 2027. For planning purposes, this effort begins in 1QFY2023. c. Description of the respondent's approach to transition work from the current C2BMC Planner capability to ensure successful delivery of future capabilities and increments. d. Specifically what government furnished technical data, computer software, computer software documentation, programmatic or operational information is necessary to perform the requirement? e. A recommended contract construct for this effort. This includes, but is not limited to, contract type and incentive and fee structures. Include the rationale for each recommendation. f. A prime small business contractor planning teaming arrangements to meet the support requirements above should include past experience in managing subcontractors on similar requirements. g. Small businesses teaming arrangements, if any, to meet the support requirements listed above should include the portions of work that the prime small business intends to perform and the portions that subcontractors or teaming partners will perform. Responses should include business size and business socio-economic category of all subcontractors or teaming partners identified to perform work associated with the NAICS for this RFI. 4. Marking: Proprietary information is neither sought nor desired by the MDA. If proprietary information is submitted, it must clearly be marked "proprietary" on every sheet containing such information and the proprietary information must be segregated to the maximum extent practicable from other portions of the response (e.g., paragraph markings, image markings, or use an attachment or exhibit). Respondents are responsible for adequately marking proprietary information contained in their response. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and its amendments have resulted in an increasing number of requests for copies of industry documents submitted to federal agencies. If a respondent’s submissions contain information that it believes should be withheld from such requestors under FOIA on the grounds that they contain “trade secrets and commercial or financial information” [5 USC§552(b)(4)], the respondent should mark its submissions in the following manner: The following notice should be placed on the title page: “Some parts of this document, as identified on individual pages, are considered by the respondent to be privileged or confidential trade secrets or commercial or financial information not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Material considered privileged or confidential on such grounds is contained on page(s) [enter page number(s)].” Each individual item considered privileged or confidential under FOIA should be marked with the following notice: “The data or information is considered by the submitter to be confidential or privileged, and is not subject to mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.” 5. Response Submissions: Packages shall be submitted electronically to the Contracting Officer in Microsoft Word Format or Portable Document Format at sharon.hall@mda.mil. All responses to this announcement must be received by close-of-business 22 November 2021. Submitted information will not be returned to the interested party. The MDA may not acknowledge receipt of responses to this RFI. If a receipt is desired, potential sources should submit statements electronically and select "read receipt request" from electronic mail options. Communications with the MDA with regard to this RFI will be permitted only electronically to the Contracting Officer during the RFI response period, ending 22 November 2021. It is anticipated that all information submitted will be unclassified. If it is necessary to submit classified information, please contact the Contracting Officer for submittal instructions. 6. Response Review: The MDA intends to use Government personnel and third party, non-government (i.e., contractor) support personnel as subject matter experts in the review of responses received, including the review of any marked or unmarked proprietary information provided. Appropriate nondisclosure agreements will be executed between the third party, non-government support personnel and the MDA. As a general policy, contractors, which provide advisory and assistance services to the Agency, particularly in the engineering, acquisition support, and quality functional areas, cannot develop or support the development of the Agency’s procurement efforts. This separation of contractual responsibilities is critical to ensuring the Agency obtains independent and objective advice. Submission of a response under this RFI constitutes a grant of authority by the respondent to the MDA to allow access to Federal personnel and these third party individuals to any content of the submission that may constitute material within the ambit of the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1905. Respondents will not be notified of the results of any review of this RFI; however, the Contracting Officer may request clarification of submissions. 7. Compensation: Participation in this effort is voluntary with no cost or obligation to be incurred by the MDA. All costs associated with responding to this RFI will be solely at the respondent’s expense. No funds have been authorized, appropriated, or received for this contemplated effort. 8. Security Clearance: The highest level of personnel and facility security classifications for this effort will be Top Secret. 9. List of Documents Available Upon Request: Government Furnished Information is restricted for use for this RFI only. Dissemination of information is limited and intended to assist a respondent in providing a response to this request. Respondents are required to follow regional Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) guidelines for the disposition of Government Furnished Information. All requests must be submitted to the Contracting Officer, Sharon Hall at sharon.hall@mda.mil. Ballistic Missile Defense System Security Classification Guide (SCG), Change dated May 26, 2017 2. Missile Defense Agency Assurance Provisions (MAP) MDA-QS-001-MAP-Rev C Dated October 2019 3. BC Algorithm Readiness Process, dated 25 October 2017 4. MDA Phased Implementation Plan (PIP) 5. C2BMC Top Level Architecture 6. AEGIS BMD SCG, 9 NOV 2017, to include Admin Changes, 24 May 2021 7. BMD Radars SCG, Change 1, 25 APR 17, to include Admin Changes, 24 May 2021 8. GMD SCG Change 4, 26 AUG 2019, to include admin update, 24 May 2021 9. HBTSS SCG, Change 1, 18 FEB 2021, to include Admin Changes, 24 May 2021 10. Spacebased Kill Assessment (SKA) SCG, Change 2, 17 FEB 2021 11. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) SCG, 18 OCT 2010, with Admin Changes, 29 DEC 2014 All technical data, computer software, computer software documentation, and programmatic and operational information provided by the MDA in an "as is" condition without any warranty as to its accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. The respondent shall use this technical data at its own risk. The MDA assumes no responsibility for such data/documentation nor will the MDA have any liability should such data/documentation prove to be inaccurate, incomplete, or otherwise defective. Contracting Office Address: Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 United States Place of Performance: Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 United States Primary Point of Contact: Sharon Hall Contracting Officer, C2BMC sharon.hall@mda.mil 256-450-0709 Opportunity History MDA21BCRFI01