DOW-UAP-D110: AAWSAP Statement of Objectives - The Program's Founding Scope: 12 Technical Areas and a Threat Horizon to 2050 (July 2008)

Source file: DOW-UAP-D110_AAWSAP-Statement-of-Objectives-July-18-2008.pdf Originating agency: Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Acquisition Support Division (DWO-3) Document type: Statement of Objectives (SOO) for a planned contract, headed "Statement of Objectives for the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program" Date: 18 July 2008 Classification: No classification marking appears on the four released pages; publicly released in 2026 Page count: 4 VIRIN: 260918-D-D0360-1099 PURSUE Release: 6

Summary

This four-page Statement of Objectives, dated 18 July 2008, is the earliest document in the AAWSAP series and the one that defines what the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program was supposed to do. It was written by the Acquisition Support Division (DWO-3) of the Defense Intelligence Agency to tell prospective bidders what the government wanted, before any contractor had been chosen. Its heading still carries a "PAN: #" field that was never filled in.

The objective is stated in a single sentence: to understand the physics and engineering of advanced aerospace weapon system applications "as they apply to the foreign threat out to the far term, i.e., from now through the year 2050." The document then lists the twelve technical areas the contractor would study, sets requirements for the research team and its security clearances, and lays down a schedule of deliverables ending in an integrated threat assessment.

Everything that follows in this category flows from these pages. The September 2008 contract award (DOW-UAP-D111) prices the twelve areas as "Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12", a direct reference to paragraph 3(a) of this document; the 2009-2010 modifications (DOW-UAP-D112 to D116) adjust its schedule and funding; and the Defense Intelligence Reference Documents (DIRDs), DOW-UAP-D117 to D153, are the program's technical papers. According to the official description, the series comprised 38 DIRDs, 37 of which are in this release.

Research Article

What the document is

A Statement of Objectives is a short acquisition document that states the outcome the government wants and leaves the method to the bidders. This one says so explicitly: "The proposal shall describe a technical approach which discusses how the breakthrough technologies and applications listed below would be studied and include proposed key personnel that have experience in those areas" (page 1). It is organised in fifteen numbered paragraphs, from Background (paragraph 1) to Defined Terms (paragraph 15), and runs to just under four pages.

The background paragraph places the program inside the DIA's acquisition-support mission. DWO-3, it says, is responsible for providing guidance and oversight to the Department of Defense acquisition process and for coordinating, producing and maintaining "projections of the future threat environment in which U.S. air, naval, ground, space, missile defense and information systems operate." The rationale follows immediately: to assess the foreign threat to U.S. weapon systems accurately, "a complete as possible understanding of potential breakthrough technology applications employed in future aerospace weapon systems must be obtained" (page 1). The frame throughout is threat forecasting for the acquisition community, not the investigation of any particular event.

The objective: breakthroughs, not extrapolations, out to 2050

Paragraph 2 sets the time horizon and the kind of technology in view. The program is to cover the "far term, i.e., from now through the year 2050", some 42 years from the date of the document, consistent with the official description of a horizon of "more than 40 years". The second half of the paragraph is the most distinctive instruction in the file: "Primary focus is on breakthrough technologies and applications that create discontinuities in currently evolving technology trends. The focus is not on extrapolations of current aerospace technology." The word "not" is underlined in the original (page 1).

In plain terms, the DIA was not asking for a forecast of a better jet engine or a stealthier fighter. It was asking which physically new capabilities could appear, and how a foreign adversary might use them. That instruction helps explain why the program's later technical papers range into subjects such as warp drive, traversable wormholes and quantum-vacuum energy alongside entirely conventional materials science.

The twelve technical areas

Paragraph 3(a) is the heart of the document: "The contractor shall complete advanced aerospace weapon system technical studies in the following areas" (page 1). The list, exactly as worded:

1. lift
2. propulsion
3. control
4. power generation
5. spatial/temporal translation
6. materials
7. configuration, structure
8. signature reduction (optical, infrared, radiofrequency, acoustic)
9. human interface
10. human effects
11. armament (RF and DEW)
12. other peripheral areas in support of (1-11)

The document does not define these headings. Most are standard aerospace engineering categories: how a vehicle stays aloft (lift), moves (propulsion), is steered (control) and powered (power generation), what it is made of (materials) and how it is shaped and built (configuration, structure). Signature reduction concerns how detectable a vehicle is in the four bands the document names: visible light, infrared, radio frequency (radar) and sound. Human interface and human effects concern, respectively, how crews interact with a vehicle and how a vehicle or its technology affects the human body. "RF and DEW" in the armament line are the usual abbreviations for radio-frequency and directed-energy weapons.

The one heading with no conventional engineering meaning is item 5, "spatial/temporal translation". The document does not explain it. Read against the objective in paragraph 2, it points to concepts of moving through space and time by means other than ordinary flight; several of the program's later papers, for example those on warp drive and on traversable wormholes (DOW-UAP-D138 and D139), sit most naturally under it. Item 12 is a catch-all that lets the contractor study anything supporting the other eleven.

The numbering matters for reading the rest of the record: the contract (DOW-UAP-D111) and its modifications price the work as "Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12" and "Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12", each with a quantity of 12, one per area.

The contractor the DIA was looking for

Paragraphs 3(b) to 3(d) describe the team. The DIA expected "numerous experts with extensive experience (minimum of 10 years) in breakthrough aerospace research and development". Management had to include "a lead integrator to oversee the work of the various analytical teams, and to integrate their findings into final coherent products", and "At least one member of each analytical team must have a PhD, although that member can be on several teams" (page 2).

The intended readership was set high: finished reports and presentations had to be "in a format suitable for dissemination at the highest levels of the federal government", and each report needed an executive summary "utilizing clearly understandable (non-technical) language" (page 2).

The most restrictive requirement is 3(d). Beyond three references, offerors were to show examples from the previous seven years of having performed, as a prime contractor, "the analysis, design, construction, and flight testing of high performance aircraft and/or satellites", and the document adds: "Success in this program is dependent upon this capability and experience" (page 2). This asked for an organisation that builds and flies hardware, not only an analysis house.

Paragraph 5 sets the security frame. The requirements "may be based on materials classified at or below Top Secret with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/ SCI)"; the contractor must comply with the DD-254 (the security classification specification attached to classified contracts) before starting any classified work; every individual must be "identified, cleared, and approved through DIA/DAC-3" before access; and the contractor must provide a facility with a Top Secret facility clearance granted by the Defense Security Service (DSS), although "Cleared facilities are not required at contract inception". At the start, only "At least two personnel cleared at the Secret level" were required (page 2).

The remaining administrative paragraphs are routine but concrete: the government would lend the computers and printers needed to handle classified material (paragraph 6); data requests go through the Government Project Lead (GPL), and classified data must be returned "not more than 30 days after contract conclusion" (paragraph 7); property bought with government funds becomes government property and must be returned within 60 days of the end of the contract (paragraph 8); equipment leases must be justified against purchase (paragraph 9); and travel is reimbursed at Federal Travel Regulation rates against receipts (paragraph 10) (page 3).

Deliverables and contract structure

Paragraph 11 fixes the deliverables (pages 3-4):

• Status Reports: "monthly reports outlining accomplishments, milestones, and work in progress."
• Project Management Plan: for each technical area, at the 60-day point, an overview paper identifying the scope of the final report, a Plan of Action and Milestones, and the composition of the analytical team.
• Research Reports: for each technical area, "a comprehensive report and briefing forecasting potential advancements and their impact", due to the GPL "by the end of the tenth month", with an executive version.
• Integrated Threat Assessment: a final report and briefing that "assesses the foreign threat from advanced aerospace platforms incorporating the technologies discussed in the individual research reports", due at the end of the period of performance, with an executive version.
• Resumes of all key personnel, which the government may review before accepting individuals for assignment.

Paragraph 12 anticipates a five-year contract: "a base year of 12 months from date of award plus four (4) 12 month option years." Paragraph 13 makes it firm fixed price (FFP), meaning the government pays the agreed price for the deliverables rather than reimbursing actual costs. The contract documents released alongside this one show how far the plan was carried out: the award (D111) prices a base year and a single option year, and the last modification in the release (P00005, in D116) extends performance only to 21 December 2010.

What the document does not say, and what is redacted

The Statement of Objectives never mentions UFOs, UAP or unidentified phenomena. It names no contractor, no foreign country and no specific adversary system. It contains no budget or dollar figure, and it gives no reason for the choice of the twelve areas. It cites no earlier study, report or event.

The redactions are confined to paragraph 14, "Key Government Personnel" (page 4). The name of the Contracting Officer is withheld under "(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)", that is, the statute that protects the identities of DIA personnel and the FOIA privacy exemption. The person designated as "The COR and Government Project Leader" is replaced by the label "AAP Person 1". The same label appears as the Contracting Officer's Representative on the contract award (D111), as point of contact on the 2009-2010 modifications, and as "AAWSA Program Manager" in the administrative notes of the DIRDs. The defined terms in paragraph 15 show the weight of that role: "The COR handles all aspects dealing with the interpretation and deliverables of the contract" (page 4).

Three small textual points: the "PAN: #" field in the heading was never filled in; paragraph 12 contains a drafting slip ("shall is anticipated"), consistent with a working acquisition draft rather than a polished publication; and the document uses two names for the same role, "Government Project Lead" in paragraph 7 and "Government Project Leader" in paragraph 14.

Significance

This is the document that defines AAWSAP. Every contract line item, every modification and, in effect, every DIRD in the series can be read against its paragraph 3(a). In the DIA's own words, it establishes three points central to understanding the program: that its official purpose was forecasting foreign aerospace threats to 2050; that it was explicitly aimed at trend-breaking breakthroughs rather than incremental technology; and that its scope was framed in engineering categories, from lift to armament, rather than in terms of unidentified phenomena, which the text never mentions.

It also shows how the program was meant to run as a contract: a firm-fixed-price effort with monthly reports, work plans within 60 days, research reports by the tenth month and a closing integrated threat assessment, overseen by a single government official, AAP Person 1, who combined the roles of COR and Government Project Leader. Readers of the individual DIRDs can use the list of twelve areas to see which part of the original scope each paper was serving.

Key People

Locations

Key Concepts

Notable Quotes

"The objective of this program is to understand the physics and engineering of these applications as they apply to the foreign threat out to the far term, i.e., from now through the year 2050." -- page 1

"Primary focus is on breakthrough technologies and applications that create discontinuities in currently evolving technology trends. The focus is not on extrapolations of current aerospace technology." -- page 1

"In order to accurately assess the foreign threat to U.S. weapon systems, a complete as possible understanding of potential breakthrough technology applications employed in future aerospace weapon systems must be obtained." -- page 1

"At least one member of each analytical team must have a PhD, although that member can be on several teams." -- page 2

"Finished reports and presentations, while highly analytical and technical, must be in a format suitable for dissemination at the highest levels of the federal government." -- page 2

"In addition, offerors should provide examples, conducted within the past 7 years, of having performed, as a prime contractor, the analysis, design, construction, and flight testing of high performance aircraft and/or satellites. Success in this program is dependent upon this capability and experience." -- page 2

"For each technical area, a comprehensive report and briefing forecasting potential advancements and their impact is to be submitted to the GPL by the end of the tenth month." -- page 3

"A final report and briefing that assesses the foreign threat from advanced aerospace platforms incorporating the technologies discussed in the individual research reports will be provided to the GPL at the end of the period of performance." -- pages 3-4