DRAFT

STATEMENT OF WORK - DEVELOPMENT OF A COALITION BATTLE MANAGEMENT COMMAND & CONTROL (CBMC2) – Joint Close Air Support (JCAS) - ROADMAP ENVIRONMENT AND INITIAL VERSION

1Introduction.

1.1This Statement of Work (SOW) outlines activities to be undertaken for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OUSD AT&L), Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration (OASD NII), Joint Staff (JS) and Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) under the direction and management of OUSD Joint Force Integration (JFI). Work will be in support of producing a Coalition Battle Management Command & Control (CBMC2) – Joint Close Air Support (JCAS) environment and initial roadmap that embrace both United States (US) and non-US communities. The products from this work stream are to be releasable to close coalition partners; JS will be the release authority.

2general requirement

2.1Background. DoD (JS, NII, JFCOM and AT&L) is funding together with nominated coalition partners (United Kingdom (UK), Australia (AU), Canada (CA) and Sweden (SE) a crosscutting analysis of JCAS Command and Control (C2) capability within a coalition context. It is accepted that the US shall be the lead nation in most future coalition environments, and that coalition partners shall play key supporting roles. Understanding baseline JCAS C2 interoperability issues and their implications will add value to the current war fighter, and will highlight ‘current/future’ capability gaps and excesses. US only JCAS capability, limitations and potential solutions have been identified by JFCOM using the Joint Battle Management Command & Control (JBMC2) Process. Utilizing the successfully proven Coalition Capability Development Framework (CCDF), conceived by AT&L/UK Integration Authority (IA) this activity seeks the creation of a common contextual backdrop to which US and Coalition JCAS capability can be coherently mapped to identify common capabilities, limitations and solutions.

2.2Aim. The aim is to identify the key JCAS BMC2 capability interoperability issues impacting the current and ‘known future’ coalition operating environment (initially US/UK/AUS/CA/SE)and address these capabilities early in the acquisition process in order to influence US and coalition partners’ procurement activities.

2.3Objectives. The objectives are to:

  • Highlight current capability and limitation shortfalls.
  • Overlay national capability migration plans to identify future capability gaps and excesses.
  • Identify a range of coalition-wide options that may be analysed to deliver enhanced levels of shared effectiveness.
  • Recommend courses of action to each of the 5 nations to optimise their conjoint JCAS BM C2 capability in the deployed environment.
  • Scope
  • The task shall be conducted for 6 Months with a 3 Month Option out to 1 year. Follow-on CBMC2 efforts will be dependent upon milestone achievement in year 1.
  • The task shall apply the principles developed for and as agreed upon by JFCOM for application of the JBMC2 Roadmap and the AT&L produced CCDF.
  • Learning from experience principles shall apply and the task shall be optimised to exploit current thinking.
  • Lessons identified shall be re-invested to inform future iterations of the US JBMC2 Roadmap, CCDF and relevant coalition roadmaps.
  • Initial task boundaries shall be limited to US/UK/AUS/CA/SE JCAS.
  • SCOPE OF WORK

a)Develop a CBMC2 JCAS Data Capture Environment[1] based upon the Coalition Capability Development Framework (CCDF), emerging Joint Capability Area (JCA) activity with the JS, and in harmony with JFCOM’s JBMC2 JCAS mission thread.

b)Develop a US baseline based on the CBMC2 JCAS data environment.

c)Provide support to AU/CA/SE/UK on capturing their National baselines in harmony with the US JCAS baseline.

d)Validate the baseline at Bold Quest

e)Produce an initial draft version of the CBMC2 JCAS Roadmap utilizing the US and Coalition Partners (AU/CA/SE/UK) baselines to address a limited set of identified capability gaps and identifycross coalition Solutions.

2.5.1The CBMC2JCAS environment, shall include, but is not limited to:

  1. Scenario Generation. Two scenarios, define?
  2. Capability Taxonomy. A proposed shared capability taxonomy, ontology and lexicon. The taxonomy shall identify linkages to each nation’s individual capability taxonomies[2].
  3. National and coalition task boundaries (within the framework of previously established levels).
  4. JCAS Joint Mission Thread (JMT).Orientation to the JBMC2 JMTand selection of a vignette of activity for each agreed scenario to expose the CBMC2 issues witha plan to align with JMT as it develops. Alignment could range from incorporation to the JMT as an integrated element of activity or development of plans to proceed as a separate work stream with known linkages to the JMT
  5. Coalition Order of Battles (ORBATs) to support the scenario.
  6. Baseline capability with high-level systems information and current integration issues, where identifiable.
  7. Identified Migration plans, both in capability and known system terms, out to 2020 (and beyond if known).
  8. In developing the initial JCAS CBMC2 Roadmap, the contractor shall perform:
  1. Capability, Integration and Interoperability Assessments. Conduct more detailed analysis of the identified capabilities. Focus analysis on the derivation of lower level systems information to inform integration and interoperability analysis. Develop interoperability assessment matrices in accordance with JBMC2 Coalition Chapter Draft 1 Dated 28 October 2005.
  2. Gap and Excess Analysis. Conduct Capabilities Gap and excess analysis of pre-acquired baseline and future capabilities information. Where required, support these analyses with architectural analysis (within the DODAF framework) and detailed IO analysis (within iSMART). Gaps and excesses shall be highlighted in both the shared coalition and national environments, and assessments made of gap and excess implications.
  3. Opportunity and Threat Identification. Conduct post gap and excess analysis for each nation and for the coalition environment opportunities to enhance capability, and to determine and expose threats to those enhancements. Opportunities and threats shall be considered against all DOTMLPF. Particular focus shall fall on ‘shared’ opportunities and threats. Opportunities shall be considered both in the light of shared coalition contexts and known national activities.
  4. Alternative Development. Alternatives shall be presented in 2 forms:
  • Alternatives for shared coalition enhancements to the bounded C2 environment.
  • Alternatives for national activities that in turn may raise the level of C2 in the shared coalition bounded environment.
  1. Alternative Generation. Candidate roadmaps for each respective nation shall be raised and overlaid with each other to demonstrate the potential growth in ‘shared’ capability.

2.6PlACE OF PERFORMANCE

2.6.1The task is to be conducted from the contractor’s premises.

2.7gOVERNMENT fURNISHED iNFORMATION

2.7.1The Government will:

a)Supply the Contractor with the latest version of the JBMC2 Roadmap including the Multi National Coalition Chapter

b)Supply the Contractor with the latest version of the JCA activity

c)Supply the Contractor with the latest version of the US JCAS mission thread activity

d)Supply the Contractor with the non US baseline information collected from the AU/CA/SE/UK as made available to the US

e)Liaise between the Contractor and other Government agents to facilitate access to any reasonable information required to enhance the product.

3Deliverables

3.1CBMC2 JCASData Environment, CDRL XXX1. The contractor shall:

a)Deliver a DRAFT version of the CBMC2 data environment for approval no later than 20 days from contract award, which will include.

  • Common context scenarios and vignettes of activity.
  • Common capability taxonomy, ontology and lexicon for the agreed vignettes.
  • Resolution of coalition context boundaries and ORBATs/ORBAT contributions for analysis.

b)Deliver a FINAL version of the CBMC2 environment no later than 14 days from receipt of government

4.2CBMC2 US Baseline Environment, CDRL XXX2 The contractor shall:

a) Deliver a DRAFT version of the CBMC2 JCAS US baseline for approval no later than 2 Monthsfrom issue of the CBMC2 JCAS environment, which will include.

  • Baseline US capability and systems information identifying current (visible) strengths and weaknesses.
  • Establishment of US national (relevant) C2 migration plans.
  • Establishment of alignment with the JBMC2 C2 JMT.

b)Deliver a updated version of the US CBMC2 baseline no later than 14 days from receipt of government comments and validation at Bold Quest.

4.3Support and attend Bold Quest 07 for the purpose of validating US and coalition Baselines, identifying capability gaps and potential cross coalition solutions.

4.3 DRAFT CBMC2 JCAS Roadmap, CDRL XXX3. The contractor shall deliver a DRAFT version of the CBMC2 JCAS Roadmap no later than 2 months from issue of CBMC2 JCASUS baseline, which shall include:

  1. An initial Candidate populated interoperability matrices.
  2. An initial high-level Systems level integration and interoperability assessments supporting gap and excess analysis.
  3. A report detailing the targeted gaps and excesses, together with assessments of their impact.
  4. A coordinated capture of targeted opportunities and threats to the development of both national and coalition BMC2.
  5. A coordinated capture of targeted options for the development of both national and coalition BMC2.
  6. National roadmaps within the context of the task
  7. A review of overlaid national roadmaps and an assessment of the implications for future BMC2.

4.4 CBMC2 – JCAS Report, CDRL XXX4. Prior to completion of this task the contractor shall provide an overall report, detailing the key issues exposed and providing evidence for any recommended follow-on tasking.

4.5CCDF Review, CDRL XXX5. Prior to completion of this task the contractor shall provide a review of the CCDF and the proposal of any perceived necessary alterations to the process.

1

DRAFT

[1]Environment is defined as that necessary to enable the capture of coherent information about all defense lines of development across the multi-nations

[2] Given the potential scale of this task the taxonomy shall be bound to the mission thread environment, as agreed between the stakeholders.