Accessibility Information

Users of assistive technologies such as screen readers should use the following link to activate Accessibility Mode before continuing: Learn more and Activate accessibility mode.

High Velocity Penetrating Weapon

Solicitation Number: BAA-RWK-12-0002
Agency: Department of the Air Force
Office: Air Force Materiel Command
Location: AFRL/RWK - Eglin
  • Print
:
BAA-RWK-12-0002
:
Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
:
Added: Sep 08, 2011 5:49 pm

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)
BAA-RWK-12-0002


FULL TEXT ANNOUNCEMENT


NAICS: 541712 (Size Standard: 500 Employees)


FEDERAL AGENCY NAME: Air Force Research Laboratory
Munitions Directorate
101 W. Eglin Blvd.
Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810


BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT TITLE: High Velocity Penetrating Weapon

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE: Initial Announcement

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: BAA-RWK-12-0002

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA) NUMBER(S): 12.800 AIR FORCE DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES PROGRAM

PROPOSAL DUE DATE AND TIME: This BAA will remain open through 30 Sep 2014, or until amended or superseded. It may be reissued and/or amended periodically, as needed. This BAA is set up in two parts: (1) Basic Open BAA, in which white papers may be submitted at any time during the open period. For these white papers, it is recommended that prior to submission, each submitter should consult with the technical POC to discuss the topic of interest; and (2) Call BAA, in which proposal call announcements may be issued by the Government in FedBizOps under BAA-RWK-12-0002. The two parts of this BAA are explained in greater detail in separate sections below. Submit white papers to afrl.rwk.baaworkflow@eglin.af.mil in accordance with the instructions in Section V below.


BASIC OPEN BAA:
OTHER THAN WHITE PAPERS, NO PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED AGAINST THIS BASIC OPEN BAA. A letter requesting a proposal (RFP) will be issued by the Contracting Officer (CO) when needed after a technical review of a white paper. Due dates and times will be specified in each letter requesting a proposal issued by the CO in accordance with the instructions for proposals in response to white papers and calls provided in this document. There will be no other announcement issued for this requirement. Offerors should monitor the Federal Business Opportunities website at http://www.fbo.gov in the event this announcement is amended.

CALL BAA:
Periodically over the period of this BAA, proposal call announcements (CALLS) may be issued in FedBizOps under BAA-RWK-12-0002 to request proposals for specific topics areas. Proposals in response to the CALLS will be accepted as specified in the individual CALLS. Offerors should monitor the Federal Business Opportunities website at http://www.fbo.gov in the event this announcement is amended or CALLS are issued.


I. BACKGROUND - HIGH VELOCITY PENETRATING WEAPON
Over the last several years, many potential adversaries have invested significantly in the construction of hard, deeply buried facilities, and these facilities often possess clear military value. The trend in their construction has been to increase complexity in depth and hardness, thereby making it more difficult to locate and destroy the facilities. Today's hard and deeply buried target (HDBT) set is rapidly expanding and becoming more difficult to defeat. Combined with new construction efforts by adversarial nations, there is a reduction in effectiveness against the broad target set with today's mix of weapons.

The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) response to this challenge is the High Velocity Penetrating Weapon (HVPW) Flagship Capability Concept (FCC). This FCC will reduce the risk in several key areas for the hard target munitions acquisition. The FCC is designed to reduce technical risk for the eventual demonstration of air-delivered weapons with increased kinetic energy derived from boosting the velocity of the warhead before impact to better penetrate into the target as illustrated below.

HVPW FCC will not integrate all sub-components into a "full-up round", but mature key technologies that are critical to defeat current and future HDBTs. The risk reduction activities are in the areas of fuze survivability, payload survivability, warhead case survivability, ordnance integration, warhead lethality, anti-jam GPS, navigation & algorithms, terminal seeker, angle-of-attack sensing, integrated SIL-HWIL testbed, IM requirements for propulsion, thermal testing over tactical temperature range for propulsion, modeling and simulation, and system integration.

HVPW's point design for research purposes is a solid rocket boosted 2000-pound (B2K) class weapon with the penetration of a 5000-pound gravity dropped bomb designed for internal carriage in an F-35 payload bay. It would also allow increased load-out for other bomber/fighter platforms.


II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This is a Broad Agency Announcement of the Air Force Research Laboratory, Munitions Directorate (AFRL/RW), under the provisions of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) paragraph 6.102(d)(2), which provides for competitive selection of research proposals. Proposals submitted in response to this BAA that are selected for award are considered to be the results of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of PL 98-369, the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984.


The scope of this capability concept involves the successful sled-track demonstration of the ordnance package. The envisioned scope of this effort also involves preliminary development of the GN&C technologies necessary for accurate target impact. The scope may also include preliminary tactical rocket development as funding may permit. The two requirements are the following:

1. Internal carriage on the F-35
2. Penetration of a 5,000 lb weapon

For purposes of this announcement, AFRL/RW intends to contract with private industry, non-profit organizations, and educational institutions for research in High Velocity Penetrating Weapon technologies. Research includes scientific study and experimentation directed at the following: ordnance design and test; guidance, navigation, and control design and test; propulsion design and test; and conceptual design and systems integration. Efforts proposed under this BAA should be designed to demonstrate well defined and substantive research results, should not be overly ambitious or open-ended, and should not be a paper study that inherently requires a substantial testing effort.


Under some circumstances, we expect that narrowly focused proposals for advanced research may be required during the time of this open announcement. Under those circumstances, proposal call announcements (CALLS) may be issued in FedBizOps under BAA-RWK-12-0002 to request proposals for specific topic areas. These subsequent CALLS will contain specific objectives and descriptions of the specific topic area to be addressed, anticipated period of performance, information peculiar to the specific topic area, and the expected dollar range for proposals received under the CALL. Proposals in response to the CALL BAA (as explained below) will be acceptable as specified in the actual CALL.

PROSPECTIVE RESEARCH AREAS

RESEARCH AREA- High Velocity Penetrating Weapon Flagship Capability Concept (RW)


The High Velocity Penetrating Weapon (HVPW) Flagship Capability Concept (FCC) is designed to reduce technical risk in several key areas for the eventual demonstration of an air-delivered weapon that will take advantage of the kinetic energy derived from higher impact velocities to better penetrate into Hard and Deeply Buried Targets (HDBT). The objective is to develop subsystem and component technologies to a maturity level sufficient for transition to a potential technology demonstration acquisition program beginning in FY14. Depending on the specific technology area, this development will entail component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory and/or relevant environment. Development and test of a single, point-design, integrated, flight test vehicle is not part of the HVPW FCC.


The HVPW FCC is organized around a coordinated set of technology development programs grouped in four key research areas. The following narratives are intended to provide an abbreviated description of the prospective research areas. These descriptions furnish specific examples of areas of interest and the Directorate focal points.

RESEARCH AREA 1 - ORDNANCE DESIGN AND TEST


The objective in this area is to develop ordnance technologies able to survive and function under high speed impact conditions expected for engaging HDBT. The mass of the penetrator, its angle of impact, the toughness of its case, the types of media encasing the target, and the depth of those media are only some of the variables that must be considered for a successful hard, deeply buried target penetrator. Sub-areas to be explored include fuze survivability, explosive payload survivability, warhead case survivability, warhead lethality and ordnance package integration. Of particular interest is a new explosive fill.


RESEARCH AREA 2 - GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION & CONTROL DESIGN AND TEST


The objective in this area is to develop guidance methodologies needed to provide maximum penetration effectiveness and minimum target miss distance. The guidance associated with the penetrators must be robust enough to overcome GPS degraded environments and orient warhead impact to stringent angle-of-attack and angle-of-obliquity requirements. The sub-areas of technical research that will be developed are anti-jam GPS, angle-of-attack sensing, guidance law and autopilot and RF seeker/guidance techniques that could support the HVPW accuracy requirements in GPS denied environments. Of particular interest with the use of an RF seeker are the use of multilateration and offset tracking guidance concepts. The engagement of feature-less fixed targets must provide information for guidance alignment of the weapon before and during boost, provide off bore-sight tracking of features and derive guidance estimates for closed-loop offset guidance. We anticipate that some level of data collection will be required in order to support development and analysis of a detailed RF seeker based concept.


RESEARCH AREA 3 - PROPULSION DESIGN AND TEST


The objective in this area is to evaluate and develop propulsion technologies to enable increased terminal speed of the penetrator. Conceptual propulsion system designs will be developed and analyzed to identify issues, gain knowledge of technology impacts and technology interactions, and understand the impact of more advanced technology across multiple subsystems. Advanced zero card propellants/binders will be evaluated for air launch environments. Evaluations will include mechanical and ballistic property assessments over the tactical temperature range along with accelerated aging assessments and insensitive munition (IM) response assessments.


RESEARCH AREA 4 - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND SYSTEMS INTEGRATION


The objective in this area is to develop system level concepts of a next-generation, air-launched weapon needed to attack hardened targets. This effort will not develop point designs but will explore the technology & performance trade space for design robustness. The focus will be on exploring system integration issues and design interactions between subcomponent technologies to enable improved terminal accuracy and overall weapon effectiveness. Also included in this area are technology issues associated with host platform integration, weapon system logistics, maintainability and system safety.


Technical POCs:
Dr. Mike Valentino
AFRL/RWAV
(850) 883-2561
Fax: (850) 883-2538
michael.valentino@eglin.af.mil


Mr. Ron Taylor
AFRL/RWA
(850) 883-2699
Fax: (850) 883-2538
ron.taylor2@eglin.af.mil


III. AWARD INFORMATION


A. Anticipated Funding:

Note that there is no inherent funding associated with the Basic Open BAA. All funding is subject to change due to Government discretion and availability. All potential offerors should be aware that due to unanticipated budget fluctuations, funding in any or all areas may change with little or no notice.
Each CALL will have funding profiles specific to that effort. However, similarly, all offerors should be aware that due to unanticipated budget fluctuations, funding in any or all areas may change with little or no notice.

B. Anticipated Type of Awards: A contract or assistance instrument could be awarded as a result of this BAA as appropriate. We expect most awards with universities and non-profit organizations to be grants.

C. Evaluation and Award (Applicable to Both Basic Open BAA and Call BAA): Proposals are intended to be evaluated, and awards made without discussions, unless discussions are determined to be necessary. However, the Government may obtain clarifications to determine proposal acceptability. Discussions may be held with prospective awardees prior to award if needed. In the event the Government is unable to conclude negotiations with the apparent successful offeror(s), it reserves the right to conduct negotiations with another acceptable offeror. Offerors are cautioned that only Contracting Officers are legally authorized to obligate funds and commit the Government.


IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Offeror/Applicants:
All potential applicants are eligible. Foreign or foreign-owned offerors are advised that their participation is subject to foreign disclosure review procedures. Foreign or foreign-owned offerors should immediately contact the contracting office focal point identified in Section VIII for information if they contemplate responding. The subject line of all correspondence must reference the BAA number, title, and associated research area.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching: Cost sharing is not a requirement.


V. BASIC OPEN BAA SECTION

A. WHITE PAPER/ SUBMISSION INFORMATION: THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ONLY SOLICITATION, and WE ARE SOLICITING WHITE PAPERS ONLY. DO NOT SUBMIT A FORMAL PROPOSAL AT THIS TIME.
White papers in response to the BASIC OPEN BAA will be accepted at any time this BAA remains open.

1. Application Package: Those offerors whose white papers are found to be consistent with the intent of this BAA may later be invited to submit a technical and cost proposal. Offerors whose white papers are not selected may contact the technical POC for feedback on their submission; however formal debriefings will not be provided.

2. Content and Form of Submission of White Papers: Offerors are required to submit either 1 electronic copy or 2 paper copies of a white paper, not exceeding 8 pages double spaced with a font no smaller than 12 pitch, summarizing their proposed approach/solution. In addition, respondents are requested to provide their Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number, their Dun & Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, a fax number, an e-mail address, and reference BAA-RWK-12-0002 with their submission.

Submit white papers to afrl.rwk.baaworkflow@eglin.af.mil. Any pages over the stated 8 page maximum will not be evaluated. The purpose of the white paper is to preclude unwarranted effort on the part of an offeror whose proposed work is not of interest to the Government. The format for the white paper is as follows:

Section A: Title, White Paper in response to Research Area Number (identify #), Period of Performance, Estimated Cost, Name/Address of Company, Technical and Contracting Points of Contact (phone, fax and email) (this section is NOT included in the page count)

Section B: Task Objective

Section C: Technical Summary and Proposed Deliverables

Section D: Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) Cost

Multiple white papers within the purview of this announcement may be submitted by an offeror. If an offeror wishes to restrict access to his/her white paper, it must be marked with the restrictive language stated in FAR 52.215-1(e).

3. Funding Restrictions: The cost of preparing white papers/subsequent proposals in response to this announcement is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract or any other contract, but may be an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect cost specified in FAR 31.205-18. Incurring pre-award costs for ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENTS ONLY are regulated by the DoD Grant and Agreements Regulations (DODGARS).

4. Other Submission Requirements: If the offeror chooses to submit white papers in hard copy, they must be submitted directly to the contract specialist at the address at Section VII, paragraph B. Documents should reference BAA-RWK-12-0002, a technical topic, and the name listed as a Technical POC for that Research Area. In lieu of 2 hard copies, electronic submissions may be sent to the Contracting Office at afrl.rwk.baaworkflow@eglin.af.mil.

B. WHITE PAPER/ PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION:

1. White Paper Evaluation Criteria:
The following three factors, listed in descending order of importance, will be used to determine whether full proposals will be invited based on the white paper submitted.
Evaluation Criteria:

a. Factor 1: An integrated assessment of the proposed technical approach to include scientific and/or technical merits, and the potential contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill High Velocity Penetrating Weapon research areas. Potential value to the government (technical promise) will be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility), transitionability, and functional capability for the warfighter.

b. Factor 2: The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, and combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposed objectives presented in the white paper.


c. Factor 3: ROM commensurate with technical approach.

2. Proposal Evaluation Criteria: If white paper is selected for further consideration, the following 4 Factors, listed in descending order of importance (cost/price, although ranked 4th, is a substantial factor), will be used to determine if a contract is to be awarded:
Evaluation Criteria:


a. Factor 1: An integrated assessment of the proposed technical approach to include scientific and/or technical merits, and the potential contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill High Velocity Penetrating Weapon research areas. Potential value to the government (technical promise) will be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility), transitionability, and functional capability for the warfighter.


b. Factor 2: The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, and combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposed project objectives presented in the formal proposal.


c. Factor 3: The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed principal investigator, team leader, and other key personnel who are critical to achieving the proposed objectives.


d. Factor 4: The reasonableness and realism of proposed costs and fees if any, the proposed cost share by the offeror if any, and the availability of funds (i.e., considering budgets and funding).


Proposal Risk Assessment: Proposal risk for technical, cost, and schedule will be assessed for formal proposals, should they be requested, as part of the evaluation of the above evaluation criteria. Proposal risk relates to the identification and assessment of the risks associated with an offeror's proposed approach as it relates to accomplishing the proposed effort. Tradeoffs of the assessed risk will be weighed against the potential scientific benefit. Proposal risk for schedule relates to an assessment of the risks associated with the offeror's proposed number of hours, labor categories, materials, or other cost elements as it relates to meeting the proposed period of performance. Risk may be assessed as High, Moderate, or Low.

High: Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Moderate: Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

Low: Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

3. Review and Selection Process: The evaluation described above will generally result in proposals being placed in one of the three categories below:

Category I: Proposal is well conceived, scientifically and technically sound, pertinent to the program goals and objectives, and offered by a responsible contractor with the competent scientific and technical staff and supporting resources needed to ensure satisfactory program results. Proposals in Category I are recommended for acceptance (subject to availability of funds) and normally are displaced only by other Category I proposals.

Category II: Proposal is scientifically or technically sound, requiring further development and is recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I.

Category III: Proposal is not technically sound or does not meet agency needs.

No further evaluation criteria will be used. Individual white papers/proposals will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria without regard to other white papers and proposals submitted under this BAA. White papers and proposals submitted will be evaluated as they are received.

It is the policy of AFRL/RW to treat all white papers and proposals as privileged information, and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation. Those selected as a result of initial review will be subject to an extensive evaluation by highly qualified Government scientists. The offeror must appropriately indicate any limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the white paper or proposal. Should portions of a proposal be incorporated into a resulting contract, that portion may be subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act unless exempt from release.

C. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:

1. Award Notices (White Papers): Offerors of those white papers found to be consistent with the intent of this Basic Open BAA may be invited to submit a technical and cost proposal. Notification by email or letter will be sent by the Contracting Office. Such invitation does not assure that the submitting offeror will be awarded a contract. Offerors of those white papers not selected for further consideration will be notified in the same manner. Prospective offerors are advised that only Contracting Officers are legally authorized to commit the Government.

Offerors may request status of their white paper no earlier than 45 days after submission.

2. Award Notices (full proposals): Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award after evaluation of the proposal. The notification is not to be construed to mean the award of a contract is assured, as availability of funds and successful negotiations are prerequisites to any award.


VI. CALLS BAA SECTION

Periodically, proposal call announcements (CALLS) may be issued in FedBizOps under BAA-RWK-12-0002 to request proposals for High Velocity Penetrating Weapon topic areas. This is a one-step process and NO WHITE PAPER will be requested, PROPOSALS ONLY. These subsequent CALLS will contain specific objectives and descriptions of the specific topic area to be addressed, anticipated period of performance, information peculiar to the specific topic area, and the expected dollar range for proposals received under the CALL. Proposals in response to the CALL BAA will be accepted as specified in the actual CALL.

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Content and Form of Submission of Proposals:
Proposal format, due dates and times will be specified in each CALL. Proposals received after the due date and time specified in the CALL shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 15.215-1(c)(3). There will be no other announcement issued for this requirement. Offerors MUST monitor FedBizOps https://www.fbo.gov in the event this announcement is amended or CALLS are issued. Offerors must monitor these systems to ensure they receive the maximum proposal preparation time for subsequent amendments as this is the official notification vehicle to request proposals.

2. Communications: Prospective offerors may contact the technical points of contact (listed below) to verify interest in the effort to be proposed PRIOR to committing any resources to the preparation of any proposals in response to a CALL under this announcement. Discussions shall not include content or rating information of other offeror's proposals or White Papers. Discussions with the points of contact shall not constitute a commitment by the Government to subsequently fund or award any proposed effort. Questions outside the scope of the technical focal point, such as contract terms or conditions, or projected award schedule, should be referred to the Contracting Officer. Only Contracting Officers are legally authorized to commit the Government.

3. Estimated Program Cost: Each CALL will contain funding profiles specific to that effort. All potential offerors should be aware that due to unanticipated budget fluctuations, funding in any or all areas may change with little or no notice.

4. Funding Restrictions: The cost of preparing proposals in response to this announcement is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract or any other contract, but may be an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect cost specified in FAR 31.205-18. Incurring pre-award costs for ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENTS ONLY are regulated by the DoD Grant and Agreements Regulations (DODGARS).

B. PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION:


1. Proposal Evaluation Criteria: The following 4 Factors, listed in descending order of importance (cost/price, although ranked 4th, is a substantial factor), will be used to determine if a contract is to be awarded:


Evaluation Criteria:


a. Factor 1: An integrated assessment of the proposed technical approach to include scientific and/or technical merits, and the potential contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill High Velocity Penetrating Weapon research areas. Potential value to the government (technical promise) will be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility), transitionability, and functional capability for the warfighter.


b. Factor 2: The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, and combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposed project objectives presented in the formal proposal.


c. Factor 3: The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed principal investigator, team leader, and other key personnel who are critical to achieving the proposed objectives.


d. Factor 4: The reasonableness and realism of proposed costs and fees if any, the proposed cost share by the offeror if any, and the availability of funds (i.e., considering budgets and funding)


2. Proposal Risk Assessment: Proposal risk for technical, cost, and schedule will be assessed for formal proposals, as part of the evaluation of the above evaluation criteria. Proposal risk relates to the identification and assessment of the risks associated with an offeror's proposed approach as it relates to accomplishing the proposed effort. Tradeoffs of the assessed risk will be weighed against the potential scientific benefit. Proposal risk for schedule relates to an assessment of the risks associated with the offeror's proposed number of hours, labor categories, materials, or other cost elements as it relates to meeting the proposed period of performance. Risk may be assessed as High, Moderate, or Low.

High: Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Moderate: Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

Low: Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

3. Review and Selection Process: The evaluation described above will generally result in proposals being placed in one of the three categories below:

Category I: Proposal is well conceived, scientifically and technically sound, pertinent to the program goals and objectives, and offered by a responsible contractor with the competent scientific and technical staff and supporting resources needed to ensure satisfactory program results. Proposals in Category I are recommended for acceptance (subject to availability of funds) and normally are displaced only by other Category I proposals.

Category II: Proposal is scientifically or technically sound, requiring further development and is recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I.

Category III: Proposal is not technically sound or does not meet agency needs.

No further evaluation criteria will be used. Individual proposals will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria without regard to other proposals submitted under this BAA.

It is the policy of AFRL/RW to treat all proposals as privileged information, and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of evaluation. Those selected as a result of initial review will be subject to an extensive evaluation by highly qualified Government scientists. The offeror must appropriately indicate any limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal. Should portions of a proposal be incorporated into a resulting contract, that portion may be subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act unless exempt from release.
4. AWARD NOTICES:

Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award after evaluation of the proposal. The notification is not to be construed to mean the award of a contract is assured, as availability of funds and successful negotiations are prerequisites to any award.

VII. TERMS APPLICABLE TO ALL BAA AWARDS:

A. Administrative and National Policy Requirements:

Depending on the work to be performed, the offeror may require a classified facility clearance and safeguarding capability; therefore, personnel identified for assignment to a classified effort must be cleared for access to information at the equivalent level of security at the time of award. In addition, the offeror may be required to have, or have access to, a certified and Government-approved facility to support work under this BAA. Data subject to export control constraints may be involved and only firms holding certification under the US/Canada Joint Certification Program (JCP) (www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp) are allowed access to such data.

B. Reporting: Contractors should expect any contract or assistance instrument resulting from this BAA would contain the requirement to provide various types of periodic and final technical reports, and possibly cost and other reports.

C. Data Rights Assertions: It is anticipated that all data delivered under any resulting award will be delivered with unlimited rights; however different rights may be negotiated as appropriate. The contractor shall identify data rights assertions, licenses, patents, etc. that apply to any proprietary materials, technical data, products, software, or processes to be used by the prime or subcontractor(s) in the performance of this program; and shall address acquisition of data rights or licenses, or expected recoupment of development costs for those proprietary items that will be integral to a resulting contract. Any data delivered or anticipated to be delivered with less than unlimited rights must be reported in a separate, appropriately marked appendix to the final report of any awarded contract resulting from this BAA.

D. Occupational Safety and health (OSHA) and Voluntary Protection Program (VPP): Eglin AFB is in the process of pursuing recognition under the OSHA VPP. If required as a part of a resulting contract from this BAA, AFFARS Clause 5352.223-9001 mandates that adequate health and safety requirements be identified in the contract.

Contractors can gain more information regarding the OSHA VPP Program at http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/vpp/index.html.


VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS

A. Questions of a technical nature shall be directed to the technical point of contact listed in Section II.

B.
Questions of a contractual/business nature shall be directed to the contract specialist:

Primary:
Michael Rivera
101 W. Eglin Blvd Ste. 337
Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810
Phone:  (850) 883-2679
Email:  michael.rivera@eglin.af.mil
Fax:  (850) 882-9599

Alternate:
Judie Jacobson
101 W. Eglin Blvd Ste. 337
Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810
Phone: (850) 883-2157
Email: judie.jacobson@eglin.af.mil
(850) 882-9599

Note: Any correspondence should reference the BAA title, number, and research area in the Subject Line.

C. In accordance with AFFARS 5301.9102, an ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from offerors, potential offerors, and others for this acquisition announcement. Before consulting with an ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, and/or recommendations to the contracting officer for resolution. AFFARS Clause 5352.201-9101 Ombudsman (Aug 2005) will be incorporated into all contracts awarded under this BAA. The Ombudsman is as follows: Barbara Gehrs, Director of Contracting (AFRL/PK), (937) 904-4407, barbara.gehrs@wpafb.mil.

IX. OTHER INFORMATION PERTINENT TO AWARD OF CONTRACTS AND/OR ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENTS

A. Support Contractors: Only Government employees will evaluate the white papers/proposals for selection. The AFRL Munitions Directorate has contracted for various business and staff support services, some of which require contractors to obtain administrative access to proprietary information submitted by other contractors. Administrative access is defined as "handling or having physical control over information for the sole purpose of accomplishing the administrative functions specified in the administrative support contract, which do not require the review, reading, or comprehension of the content of the information on the part of non-technical professionals assigned to accomplish the specified administrative tasks." These contractors have signed general non-disclosure agreements and organizational conflict of interest statements. The required administrative access will be granted to non-technical professionals. Examples of the administrative tasks performed include:

1. Assembling and organizing information for R&D case files;

2. Accessing library files for use by government personnel; and

3. Handling and administration of proposals, contracts, contract funding and queries.

Any objection to administrative access must be in writing to the Contracting Officer and shall include a detailed statement of the basis for the objection.

B. Communication: Dialogue between prospective offerors and Government representatives is encouraged until submission of proposals. Discussions with any of the points of contact shall not constitute a commitment by the Government to subsequently fund or award any proposed effort. Only Contracting Officers are legally authorized to commit the Government.

C. Debriefings (Proposals Only): When requested, a debriefing will be provided. The debriefing process will follow the time guidelines set out in 10 USC 2305(b)(5), but the debriefing content may vary to be consistent with the procedures that govern BAAs (FAR 35.016).

D. Wide Area Work Flow Notice: Any contract award resulting from this announcement will contain the clause at DFARS 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports, which requires electronic submission of all payment requests. The clause cites three possible electronic formats through which to submit electronic payment requests. Effective 01 October 2006, the Department of Defense adopted Wide Area Work Flow-Receipt and Acceptance (WAWF-RA), as the electronic format for submission of electronic payment requests. Any contract resulting from this announcement will establish a requirement to use WAWF-RA for invoicing and receipt/acceptance, and provide coding instructions applicable to this contract. Contractors are encouraged to take advantage of available training (both web-based and through your cognizant DCMA office), and to register in the WAWF-RA system. Information regarding WAWF-RA, including the web-based training and registration, can be found at https://wawf.eb.mil/ . Note: WAWF-RA requirement does not apply to Universities that are audited by an agency other than DCAA.

E. Item Identification and Valuation: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at DFARS 252.211-7003, Item Identification and Valuation, (Aug 2008) which requires unique item identification and valuation of any deliverable item for which the government's unit acquisition cost is $5,000 or more; subassemblies, components, and parts embedded within an item valued at $5,000 or more; or items for which the government's unit acquisition cost is less than $5,000 when determined necessary by the requiring activity for serially managed, mission essential, or controlled inventory. Also included are any DoD serially managed subassembly, component, or part embedded within a delivered item and the parent item that contains the embedded subassembly, component, or part. Per DFARS 211.274-3 policy for valuation, it is DoD policy that contractors shall be required to identify the government's unit acquisition cost for all items delivered, even if none of the criteria for placing a unique item identification mark applies. Therefore, your proposal must clearly break out the unit acquisition cost for any deliverable items. Per DFARS 211.274-3 policy for valuation, "the government's unit acquisition cost is the contractor's estimated fully burdened unit cost at time of delivery to the government for cost type or undefinitized line, subline, or exhibit line items" (per DoD, "fully burdened unit costs" to the government would include all direct, indirect, G&A costs, and an appropriate portion of fee). If you have questions regarding the unique item identification requirements, please contact the contracting point of contact listed above. For more information, see the following website: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/sitemap.html .

F. Forward Pricing Rate Agreements: If formal proposals are requested, offerors who have Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs) should submit them with their proposals.

G. Pre-Award Clearance: Pursuant to FAR 22.805, a pre-award clearance must be obtained from the U.S. Department Of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Office Of Federal Contract Compliance Program's (OFCCP) prior to award of a contract (or subcontract) of $10,000,000 or more unless the contractor is listed in OFCCP's National Preaward Registry http://www.dol-esa.gov/preaward . This registry indicates that the contractor has been found to be "in compliance" within the past 2 years with The Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations that the OFCCP is mandated to enforce. The registry is updated nightly and facilities reviewed more than 2 years ago are removed and new ones are added. Award may be delayed if you are not currently listed in the registry and the contracting officer must request a preaward clearance from the OFCCP.

H. Excessive Pass-Through Charges: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at DFARS 252.215-7004, Excessive Pass-Through Charges, (May 2008) which requires the contractor to identify in its proposal the percentage of effort to be performed by the prime contractor and the percentage expected to be performed by each subcontractor. If the contractor intends to subcontract more than 70% of the total cost of work under the contract or task order, then it shall identify the amount of the contractor's indirect costs and profit applicable to the subcontract work, and a description of the value added by the contractor. If any subcontractor intends to subcontract to a lower tier subcontractor more than 70% of the total cost of its work, then it shall identify the amount of the subcontractor's indirect costs and profit applicable to the lower tier subcontract work, and a description of the value added by the subcontractor.

I. Associate Contractor Agreements: Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs) are agreements between contractors working on government contract projects that specify requirements for them to share information, data, technical knowledge, expertise, or resources. The contracting officer may require ACAs when contractors working on separate government contracts must cooperate, share resources or otherwise jointly participate in working on contracts or projects. Prime contractor to subcontractor relationships do not constitute ACAs. For each award, the contracting officer will identify associate contractors with whom agreements are required.

J. Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation: As prescribed in FAR 19.308, FAR Clause 52.219-28, Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation (Apr 2009), is incorporated by reference in this solicitation. This clause will be contained in any contracts resulting from this solicitation. This clause requires a contractor to rerepresent its size status when certain conditions apply. The clause provides detail on when the rerepresentation must be complete and what the contractor must do when a rerepresentation is required.

K. Enabling Clause: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain a special clause entitled "Enabling Clause between Prime Contractors and Service Contractors", when a prime contractor must agree to cooperate with a support contractor during the performance of this contract.

L. FAR: Provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation may be accessed electronically at this address: http://farsite.hill.af.mil

M. CCR Registration: Pursuant to FAR 9.104-1, a responsibility determination will be made for all prospective offerors considered for award under this BAA. This determination will also include a review of the Excluded Parties List System to verify award eligibility. Unless exempted by 2 CFR 25.110 all offerors must:
(1) Be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) prior to submitting an application or proposal;
(2) Maintain an active CCR registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application or proposal under consideration by an agency; and
(3) Provide its DUNS number in each application or proposal it submits to the agency.

N. Executive Compensation and First-Tier Sub-contract/Sub-recipient Awards: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at FAR 52.204-10 - Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards. Any grant or agreement award resulting from this announcement may contain the award term set forth in 2 CFR, Appendix A to Part 25.

O. A Sample Evaluation Template is Provided Below.




                                                                  SAMPLE
                   TECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR COMPETITIVE ACQUISITIONS
                                      (Used for White Paper ONLY for this BAA)


BAA No:
White Paper No: Type of Instrument Proposed:


Name of Offeror: White Paper Title:
Name of Evaluator:
Date of Evaluation: Office Symbol:
Phone No:

EVALUATION CRITERIA (AS DETAILED IN THE SYNOPSIS)

1. An integrated assessment of the proposed technical approach to include scientific and/or technical merits, and the potential contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill High Velocity Penetrating Weapon research areas Potential value to the government (technical promise) will be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility), transitionability, and functional capability for the warfighter.


Meets the criteria (Address key aspects of the white paper which demonstrate why the white paper meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address key aspects of the white paper which demonstrate why the white paper does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses


2. The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, and combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposed objectives presented in the white paper.


Meets the criteria (Address key aspects of the white paper which demonstrate why the white paper meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address key aspects of the white paper which demonstrate why the white paper does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses


3. ROM commensurate with technical approach.


Meets the criteria (Address how white paper demonstrates it meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address how white paper demonstrates it does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses



SAMPLE


TECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR COMPETITIVE ACQUISITIONS
(Used for Formal Proposal ONLY for this BAA)


BAA No:
Proposal Control No: Type of Instrument Proposed:
Category Ranking:
Name of Offeror: Proposal Title:
Name of Evaluator:
Date of Evaluation: Office Symbol:
Phone No:

EVALUATION CRITERIA (AS DETAILED IN THE SYNOPSIS)

1. An integrated assessment of the proposed technical approach to include scientific and/or technical merits, and the potential contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill High Velocity Penetrating Weapon research areas. Potential value to the government (technical promise) will be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility), transitionability, and functional capability for the warfighter.

Exceeds the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal exceeds the criteria.)


Meets the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses


Assessed Risk: High _____ Moderate _____ Low _____


High: Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.


Moderate: Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.


Low: Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.



2. The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, and combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposed project objectives presented in the formal proposal.



Exceeds the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal exceeds the criteria.)


Meets the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses



Assessed Risk: High _____ Moderate _____ Low _____


High: No significant related experience. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.


Moderate: Some related experience, but no experience directly associated with this technology. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.


Low: Significant relevant experience directly associated with this technology.



3. The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed principal investigator, team leader, and other key personnel who are critical to achieving the proposed objectives.



Exceeds the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal exceeds the criteria.)


Meets the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal meets the criteria.)


Does not meet the criteria (Address key aspects of the proposal which demonstrate why the proposal does not meet the criteria.)


Strengths


Weaknesses


Assessed Risk: High _____ Moderate _____ Low _____


High: No significant qualifications, capabilities, and experience of key personnel. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.


Moderate: Breadth of qualifications, capabilities, and experience of key personnel is lacking in technologies. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.


Low: Key personnel possess qualifications and experience required and exhibit critical capabilities to perform this effort.


4. The reasonableness and realism of proposed costs and fees if any, the proposed cost share by the offeror if any, and the availability of funds (i.e., considering budgets and funding).
(Check all that apply)

The offeror's proposed: (1) quantity and mix of labor hours, (2) material,  (3) subcontracting, (4) travel, and (5) any other direct costs, are appropriate and realistic for their proposed technical approach and in meeting the proposed period of performance with the following exceptions, if any:


Assessed Risk: High _____ Moderate _____ Low _____


High: Cost proposed, labor mix and number of hours does not reflect that the Contractor has a clear understanding of the effort required to achieve technical objectives. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.


Moderate: Indicators exists that additional labor categories or hours may be required to complete the technical effort.


Low: Cost proposed, labor mix and number of hours reflect that the Contractor has a clear understanding of the effort required to achieve technical objectives.


 

:
101 West Eglin Blvd
Suite 337
Eglin AFB, Florida 32542-6810
:
Michael A Rivera,
Contract Specialist
Phone: 850-883-2681
Fax: 850-882-9599
:
Judie A Jacobson,
Contract Specialist
Phone: 850-883-2157
Fax: 850-882-9599