OUSD (R&E) CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Trusted AI and Autonomy; Advanced Computing and Software; Integrated Sensing and Cyber; Integrated Network Systems-of-Systems The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws. OBJECTIVE: Deliver new technologies, software, and or systems sufficiently mature to be tested in a Battle Management / Command and Control (BM/C2) environment to assess the improvement in performance obtained over current Battle Management / Command and Control systems. DESCRIPTION: This Direct to Phase II topic will examine the LEFT OF LAUNCH THROUGH POST ENGAGEMENT ASSESSMENT segments of the battlespace. Proposed concepts will build upon and incorporate prior foundational knowledge and technologies for the MID-COURSE & TERMINAL segments of the missile defense problem set. Solutions will consider any available pre-launch Indications and Warnings (I&W), Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), Imagery Intelligence (IMINT), and other information sources, for the purpose of identifying and delivering new technologies, software, and or systems sufficiently mature to be tested in a Battle Management / Command and Control (BM/C2) environment. Testing of deliverables will be conducted in a laboratory environment to measure and evaluate the improvement in performance obtained over current BM/C2 systems. Testing will include Post Intercept Assessment (PIA) evaluations of intercepted target complex objects in addition to assessing the implementation and effectiveness of Left Through Right Integration (LTRI) technologies and LTRI Concepts of Operation (CONOPS). Successful offerors may be required to obtain a Facility Clearance Level (FCL), have classified storage capability, and the ability to produce, process, store, and securely transmit and receive classified information. MDA is interested in next generation Battle Management and Command and Control (BM/C2) technologies and techniques that expand the battlespace further left of launch through post-engagement assessment using any available I&W, SIGINT, IMINT or sensing measurement and track data to build probability likelihood maps for missile launches based on available (or unavailable) feature sets. The proposals submitted should support the missile defense mission and have the ability to support the larger Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) mission. Key attributes are distributed, survivable, intelligent BM/C2. Specific technologies include (but are not limited to): a. Cloud enabled, edge deployable, scalable, distributed BM/C2 architecture technologies b. Advanced, multi-domain data processing including machine-to-machine processing c. BM/C2 digital assistants that partner with humans to execution missions including autonomy/semi-autonomy and Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) technologies d. AI decision aids that highlight the enemy kill-chain and identifies Courses of Action (COAs) to affect critical steps in the process PHASE I: Phase I-like proposals will not be evaluated and will be rejected as nonresponsive. For this topic, the Government expects the small business would have accomplished the following in a Phase I-like effort via some other means, e.g., independent research and development (IRAD) or other source, a concept for a workable prototype or design to address, at a minimum, the basic capabilities of the stated objective above. Proposal must show, as appropriate, a demonstrated technical feasibility or nascent capability. The documentation provided must substantiate the proposer's development of a preliminary understanding of the technology to be applied in their Phase II proposal in meeting topic objectives. Documentation should comprise all relevant information including, but not limited to, technical reports, test data, prototype designs/models, and performance goals/results. Feasibility = maturity and what have you already done/validated. Proposers interested in participating in Direct to Phase II must include in their responses to this topic Phase I feasibility documentation that substantiates the scientific and technical merit and Phase I feasibility described in Phase I above has been met. (i.e., the small business must have performed a proof of concept like Phase I component and/or other validation in a relevant environment, and/or at a much higher TRL level (5 or higher) and describe the potential commercialization applications. The documentation provided must validate that the proposer has completed development of technology in previous work or research completed.) IRAD work, previous Phase I/Phase II work: Documentation should include the most relevant information including, but not limited to: technical reports, test data, prototype designs/models, and/or performance goals/results. Work submitted within the feasibility documentation must have been substantially performed by the proposer and/or the principal investigator (PI). PHASE II: Deliver new technologies, software, and/or systems sufficiently mature to be tested in a Battle Management / Command and Control (BM/C2) laboratory environment to assess the improvement in performance obtained over current Battle Management / Command and Control systems. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The Phase III activity would be to transition the laboratory environment tested technologies to an operational BM/C2 environment to further assess the improvement in operational performance as well as the compatibility with currently deployed BM/C2 systems. REFERENCES: 1. Battle Management/Command and Control, and Communications (BM/C3), Environmental Assessment https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA213942 2. Battle Management: DOD and Air Force Continue to Define Joint Command and Control Efforts https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105495 3. Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC) https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/c2bmc KEYWORDS: Battle Management; Command and Control; Kinetic and Non-Kinetic; Directed Energy; Artificial Intelligence
