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.

MINIATURE WEAPON DEMONSTRATION

Solicitation Number: BAA-RWK-09-0005
Agency: Department of the Air Force
Office: Air Force Materiel Command
Location: AFRL/RWK - Eglin
  • Print

Note:

There have been modifications to this notice. You are currently viewing the original synopsis. To view the most recent modification/amendment, click here
:
BAA-RWK-09-0005
:
Presolicitation
:
Added: May 01, 2009 1:44 pm

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)
RWK-BAA-09-0005

 


 


NAICS CODE: 541712


FEDERAL AGENCY NAME: AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, MUNITIONS DIRECTORATE, CONTRACTING DIVISION (AFRL/RWK), EGLIN AFB, FL


BAA TITLE: MINIATURE WEAPON DEMONSTRATION


BAA TYPE: INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT


BAA NUMBER: BAA-RWK-09-0005


WHITE PAPER DUE DATE AND TIME: White papers are due by 2:00 PM Central Daylight Time (CDT) on 1 Jun 2009. Deliver to: AFRL/RWK, Attn: Ms. Donna Moran and/or Ms. MiMi Martin, 101 West Eglin Blvd, Suite 337, Eglin AFB FL 32542-6810. If white papers are hand delivered to RWK, offerors must use the crosswalk entrance into Bldg 13 and call Donna Moran or MiMi Martin to accept the package. White Papers received after this due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c) (3). See Section IV for additional information. It should be noted that this installation observes strict security procedures to enter the facility. These security procedures are NOT considered an interruption of normal Government processes, and proposals received after the above stated date and time as a result of security delays will be considered "late". Furthermore, note that if offerors utilize commercial carriers in the delivery of White Papers, the couriers may not honor time-of-day delivery guarantees on military installations. Early White Paper submission is encouraged.



I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:


The Air Force Research Laboratory Munitions Directorate, Contracting Division (AFRL/RWK) is soliciting White Papers for the Flight Vehicle Integration Branch (AFRL/RWAV) on the following research effort: Miniature Weapon Demonstration (MWD) program. It is anticipated that one of the White Papers may be selected for further consideration, and its originators may subsequently be requested to submit formal written technical and cost proposals, with the intent of negotiating one contract for the MWD program. However, the Government reserves the right to award one, multiple, or no contracts pursuant to this BAA.


(1) Introduction: MWD serves as a risk reduction program for development of airframe, miniature ordnance package and guidance, navigation and control (GNC)/seeker technologies needed for an air-launched, precision miniature munition capability. Such a precision miniature munition would provide a mobile target kill capability against a broad set of targets in a suburban environment. The challenge is to design a robust suite of technologies that will integrate into an affordable solution.


 


(2) Program Objective:


General Program Objective: The overall program objective is to identify, assess, develop and demonstrate an affordable precision miniature weapon concept. The primary technology area to be developed and demonstrated should include miniature ordnance package (warhead, fuze and safe & arm), miniature weapon guidance/seeker technologies and agile airframe technologies.

Specific Program Objective: Specific program objectives are given in Annex 1 "Specific Program Objectives". (Reference Section/Paragraph I(12)(e) below to obtain this annex.)


(3) Technical Requirements: The MWD technical requirements are given in Annex 2 "Technical Requirements". (Reference Section/Paragraph I(12)(e) below to obtain this annex.)


(4) Program Tasking: The program is anticipated to include the following two Task Orders:


Task Order 0001 Concept Development & Preliminary Testing: The effort commences with the issuance of Task Order (TO) 0001. Refer to Section/Paragraph V(2) for selection details. See Section/Paragraph II(4) for anticipated Period of Performance. Under TO 0001, the contractor shall:


• Identify and develop a miniature weapon system concept based on the Program Objective and Technical Requirements, Goals & Assumptions.
• Perform preliminary engineering design trades and system level effectiveness analyses to demonstrate the merit of the concept.
• Conduct a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessment of the key supporting technologies to enable the miniature weapon system concept.
• Develop a Draft Master Test Plan(s) for the remainder of the program. The plan should include priced/prioritized recommendations to mature each of the key technologies (as approved by the Government).
• Develop a Draft System Safety Program Plan for the remainder of the program. The plan should document the developer's system safety engineering approach (to include hazard analysis techniques) and identify key safety review milestones.
• Risk reduction component level testing and analysis to demonstrate the feasibility.
• Deliverables: Technical Data, Draft Master Test Plan, Draft System Safety Program Plan, Final/Interim Report



Task Order 0002 Concept Refinement, Component Testing & Initial Flight Test Vehicle Design: It is anticipated that TO 0002 will be awarded following the review of the deliverables from TO 0001. Refer to Section/Paragraph V(3) for selection details. See Section/Paragraph II(4) for anticipated Period of Performance. If TO 0002 is awarded, the contractor shall:


• Refine the miniature weapon system concept
• Finalize Master Test Plan(s) for the program.
• Demonstrate the merit of the concept through a combination of detailed analyses, digital simulation and/or component level tests IAW the Government approved, Master Test Plan.
• Develop a flight test vehicle (FTV) design
• Maintain technical requirements documentation and ensure requirements traceability from tactical design to test articles, including tracking and reporting key differences between test articles and the precision miniature weapon concept
• Develop a flight test vehicle Fabrication and Integration Plan
• Finalize System Safety Program Plan for the program.
• Fabricate sufficient test assets IAW the Fabrication and Integration Plan
• Conduct flight/ground testing IAW the Master Test Plan
• Update the miniature weapon system concept and conduct final system level effectiveness analyses.
• Deliverables: Master Test Plan, System Safety Program Plan, Technical Data, Test Reports, Final Report, Flight Test Vehicle(s) and/or residual test assets, if any.


(5) Test Support: The contractor shall be responsible for all test plans necessary for the maturation and demonstration of the hardware and software products to be tested. Contractor-generated test plans, as approved by the Government, will become schedule milestones and will identify test methodologies required to meet each major program milestone. For tests being conducted at Government facilities, the contractor shall be responsible for providing technical support, analysis, data and test planning support to the identified responsible Government test organization. The contractor shall provide test support to include, but not limited to, the following: support of test planning meetings; test setup advice; test article build up; checkout; installation of hardware; instrumentation package support required documentation for testing; identification of risk and suggestion of improvements; record test setup; data collection for evaluation of results; support required for test accident/mishap investigations; post-test analysis and test result documentation.


(6) Safety Reviews: The contractor shall support all Government safety reviews, including, but not limited to, analysis, documentation and manpower.


(7) Risk: During all phases of the MWD program, the contractor shall identify and track all risks relating to the technical, safety, financial, and schedule aspects of the program. The contractor is responsible for utilizing a risk evaluation process, determining all major program risks, assigning values to those risks, developing mitigations for those risks, and periodically re-evaluating those risks after the mitigations are applied. The contractor shall make risk evaluation a component of all major technical reviews, and risk items/progress shall be discussed in monthly status reports.


(8) Management: The contractor shall be responsible for meeting all requirements of this contract, including but not limited to: cost, technical, safety, schedule, security and subcontractor management. The contractor shall communicate the technical and programmatic status through Data Requirements submissions discussed in Section/paragraph I(9) and scheduled meetings discussed in Section/paragraph I(10). In addition to formal design reviews, informal program status interchanges (such as weekly teleconferences) are encouraged.


(9) Data Requirements: The following data submittals are expected to be required for each contract awarded:


a. Monthly Status Reports (Status Report: DI-MGMT-80368/T)


b. Contract Work Breakdown Structure (DI-MGMT-81334C)


c. Monthly Performance and Cost Report (DI-FNCL-80912)


d. Quarterly Contract Funds Status Report (DI-MGMT-81468)


e. Program Review Material (Presentation Material: DI-ADMN-81373/T)


f. Design Drawings (Developmental Design Drawings and Associated Lists: DI-SESS-81002D)


g. Test Plans (Test Plan: DI-NDTI-80566)


h. Test Data (Test/Inspection Report: DI-NDTI-80809B)


i. System Engineering Management Plan (DI-MGMT-81024)


j. Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Report (DI-ILSS-81163A)


k. Safety Assessment Report (DI-SAFT-80102B)


l. System Safety Hazard Analysis Report (DI-SAFT-80101B)


m. Explosive Hazard Classification Data (DI-SAFT-81299B)


n. Final Technical Report (Scientific and Technical Reports (Final Report): DI-MISC-80711A/T)


o. The contractor may propose additional elements or submittal of combined elements or Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) as appropriate for the proposed program.


(10) Meetings and Reviews: The Government anticipates the following program meetings and reviews: Kickoff within a month of contract start date at contractor's facilities; Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM) quarterly and/or at times coinciding with key program milestones or decision points that alternate between the contractor's facilities and Eglin AFB, FL; and a Final Program review at completion of the program at Eglin AFB, FL. The contractor may propose to conduct or participate in other meetings with subcontractors, Government agencies, or third parties, as deemed necessary.


(11) Other Requirements:
a. Program Security Requirements: Portions of this program will be classified at the Secret level and a DD Form 254 will apply to the awarded contract. Thus, offerors must verify their Cognizant Security Office information is current with Defense Security Service (DSS) at www.dss.mil .
b. Emissions Security (EMSEC) requirements will apply. Generation of classified material is authorized only on equipment approved for classified processing by Air Force EMSEC authorities. Based upon the proposed technical approach, the Government will provide a Security Classification Guide at contract award or during the performance of the contract, whenever the requirements of the guide, as it pertains to the contract performance, can be determined.
c. Certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, is required to be submitted to the Program Manager and the Contract Specialist in order to receive the Annex. (See paragraph I(12)(e) below.)
d. International Traffic in Arms Regulations and Public Law 98-94 (export control) will apply to this effort.
e. It is anticipated that all data delivered under any resulting award will be delivered with unlimited rights; however, other 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 the MWD design. The contractor shall specifically address data rights/proprietary issues at each meeting discussed in Section/Paragraph I(10). The contractor shall specifically address inventions/patents identified in the performance of the program at each meeting discussed in Section/Paragraph I(10).
f. Subcontracting Plans: Subcontracting plans will be required in accordance with FAR 19.702 Small Business Programs


(12) Other Information:
a. Government Furnished Property (GFP): The Government may provide GFP, based on availability, if requested. Therefore, the offeror shall include a detailed list of Government resources, with their associated approximate value (if known), required to execute a contract in a timely and cost effective manner
b. Base Support/Network Access: It is not anticipated, but offeror should identify any they believe is necessary in their White Paper and any subsequent proposals.
c. Notice to Foreign-Owned Firms: Foreign or foreign-owned offerors are advised that their participation is subject to foreign disclosure review procedures. A determination has been made for this solicitation, that all foreign participation at the prime contractor and subcontractor levels will be prohibited, with the exception of those firms with an appropriate Special Security Agreement (SSA) in place with the U.S. Government. Foreign or foreign-owned offerors should immediately contact the contracting office focal point identified in Section VII for information if they contemplate responding. All correspondence must reference the title and BAA number.
d. Hazardous Materials: The contractor must identify any hazardous materials to be used in performance of this effort in the White Paper and any subsequently requested Formal Proposal.
e. Request for Annexes: To receive Annex 1 and Annex 2, the offeror must be certified to receive military critical technical data under the US/Canada Joint Certification Program (JCP) (www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp). To request these annexes, forward a written request for release of export-controlled data related to the MWD program to Capt Jason Lee or Ms. Virginia Swindell via mail or fax (see Section VII - Agency Contacts, paragraph (2)). The written request shall include:
i. Certified copy of a DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement
ii. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code
iii. Approved address to receive classified mail
iv. Cognizant Defense Security Service office name/address
v. Facility Security Officer: name, phone, email, fax
vi. Name, phone, email, and fax of the person to receive the annexes


The request should be provided early enough to allow the Government up to 14 calendar days to provide the document. No supplemental documentation will be provided unless requested in strict accordance with these instructions.


II. AWARD INFORMATION:


(1) Type of Contract: The Government anticipates negotiating one Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract for this effort. Task Order 0001 will be issued along with the contract awarded and Task Order 0002 (if awarded) after review of the deliverables for Task Order 0001. It is currently expected that the MWD program will consist primarily of Task Orders 0001 and 0002. The Government expects to fund up to approximately $7M on contract for Task Orders 0001 and 0002 (See Section/Paragraph II(5)). However, an IDIQ contract will allow for additional in-scope tasks to be awarded later if additional funding becomes available. Accordingly, it is anticipated the IDIQ contract will bear a ceiling maximum of $17M.


(2) Anticipated Number of Awards: The Government anticipates negotiating one Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract for the MWD Program. However, the Government reserves the right to award one, multiple, or no contracts pursuant to this BAA.


(3) Anticipated Award Date: The Government expects to receive White Papers within 30 days of publication of this BAA, to request proposals within 2 weeks thereafter, to receive proposals within 30 days thereafter, and to negotiate and award one or more contracts within 8-9 weeks thereafter (Sep 2009).


(4) Anticipated Period of Performance: The IDIQ MWD program contract ordering period will be 5 years. The current MWD program is anticipated to take 34 months as shown in the graphic below.


• Task Order 0001 is expected to be 9 months (6 months for the technical effort (final review), 1 month for first submission of final report, 2 months for report revision & task order closeout).
• Task Order 0002 is anticipated to be 27 months (24 months for the technical effort (final review), 1 month for first submission of final report, 2 months for report revision & task order closeout).


 


(5) Anticipated Funding: Anticipated funding for the total program (Task Orders 0001
and 0002) is approximately $7M. 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. One award is anticipated for Task Order 0001 and Task Order 0002. Task Order 0001 is estimated to be $0.50M, and Task Order 0002 is estimated to be $6.50M. Thus, a maximum total of $7.00M is anticipated to be awarded on any one contract consisting of Task Orders 0001 & 0002. Also, the maximum totals assume the inclusion of all test costs. If Government-conducted testing and/or Government facility/range use are proposed, the contractor should make a ROM estimate of the costs associated for such testing and factor it into the maximum total cost. If additional funding becomes available during the contract ordering period, additional task orders may be issued up to the contract ceiling of $17M.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION:


(1) 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. A determination has been made for this solicitation, that all foreign participation at the prime contractor and subcontractor levels will be prohibited, with the exception of those firms with an appropriate Special Security Agreement (SSA) in place with the U.S. Government. Foreign or foreign-owned offerors should immediately contact the contracting office focal point identified in Section VII for information if they contemplate responding. All correspondence must reference the title and BAA number.


(2) Cost Sharing or Matching: Cost sharing is not a requirement.


IV. PROPOSAL/APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:


(1) Application Package: THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ONLY SOLICITATION. WE ARE SOLICITING WHITE PAPERS ONLY. DO NOT SUBMIT A FORMAL PROPOSAL AT THIS TIME. (See Sections V and VI of this announcement for further details.)


(2) General: Offerors should be alert to any amendments that may be published. The Government reserves the right to amend due dates or other data as necessary, and to make awards without discussions.


White Papers within the purview of this announcement may be submitted by each offeror. While not required as part of this solicitation, there may be opportunity for collaboration with AFRL/RW researchers to assist in the development and demonstration of technologies under the Miniature Weapon Demonstration program. Specific technology areas for potential collaboration include: flight vehicle - airframe aerodynamic design, fabrication, and flight testing; ordnance - miniature warhead design, energetic material formulation, structural energetics, and warhead testing; advanced guidance - closed loop guidance, navigation, and control, hardware in the loop, flight experimentation, and cooperative control/engagement. Offerors may prepare a second white paper with an alternative approach that incorporates collaboration with the AFRL/RW in one or more of the technologies areas.


All offerors should apply the restrictive notice prescribed in the provision at FAR 52.215-1 (e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, to trade secrets or privileged commercial and financial information contained in their white papers (and formal proposals , if requested IAW VI(1)). Any classified material must be provided in a separate Annex and must be properly marked and handled as such. Any classified material should be provided directly to the Program Manager, Capt Jason Lee, (see Section/Paragraph VII(2)) rather than to AFRL/RWK. For formal proposals, submit separate Technical and Cost Volumes, and mark them as valid for 180 days. Volume 1 should provide the Technical proposal, and should be unclassified, if possible. Volume 2, Cost Proposal, must be unclassified, and should address the price, cost details, and a risk assessment of the proposal.


(3) Content and Form of Submission for White Papers: Offerors are required to submit one-original and six paper copies, and one (1) electronic copy (on a CD or DVD) of a White Paper summarizing their proposed approach/solution. The White Paper shall be limited to 20 pages, prepared and submitted in Word format. Font shall be standard 10-point business font Arial. Character spacing must be "normal," not condensed in any manner. Pages shall be single-spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches, with at least one-inch margins on all sides. All text, including text in tables, must adhere to all font size and line spacing requirements listed herein. Font and line spacing requirements do not have to be followed for illustrations, flowcharts, drawings, and diagrams. These exceptions shall not be used to circumvent formatting requirements and page count limitations by including lengthy narratives in such items. The page limitation covers all information except the cover page. Any pages in excess of the stated page limitation will be removed (after page 20) and will not be considered. Email submissions will not be accepted. 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. Format the White Paper as follows:


Section A: Cover Page. BAA Reference number "BAA-RWK-09-0005", Title of Paper, Period of Performance, Estimated Cost, Name/Address of Company, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number, Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Technical and Contracting Points of Contact (phones, fax and emails) (this section is NOT included in the page count).
Section B: White Paper Details. White Papers should address all areas indicated by the Evaluation Criteria (see Section V(1)), including how the contractor intends to achieve the objectives of Section I for Tasks 0001 and 0002 (see II(4)) based on the anticipated funding shown in Section II(5) . Both corporate and individual experience should be addressed (See evaluation criteria in Section V(1)). A rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimate, broken down by Task Order, should be provided. Also, the white paper shall include a top level discussion of tests planned for Task 0002, which identifies contractor- and Government-conducted testing, as well as the facilities at which the testing is to occur. The contractor should make a ROM estimate of the costs associated with testing (to include both contractor costs and expected Government costs). Additionally, the White Papers shall include any partners, subcontractors, etc., to be utilized, discuss risk (technical, schedule and cost) assessment, technology maturity levels and maturity plans required to meet requirements, and identify the modeling and simulation (M&S) software that will be used in system design and effectiveness assessments.
(4) Content and Form of Submission for Full Proposals: The Government reserves the right to request one, multiple or no proposals as a result of the white paper evaluations. In the event that the White Paper results in an invitation to submit a formal proposal, the paragraphs below indentify proposal format and content. Offerors must submit one-original and six paper copies, and one (1) electronic copy (on a CD or DVD) of both the Technical and Cost proposals.


a. Volume 1- Technical Proposal:
(i) Page Limitation: The Proposal shall be limited to 75 pages, prepared and submitted in Word format. Font shall be standard 10-point business font Arial or Times New Roman. Character spacing must be "normal," not condensed in any manner. Pages shall be single-spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches, with at least one-inch margins on all sides. All text, including text in tables, must adhere to all font size and line spacing requirements listed herein. Font and line spacing requirements do not have to be followed for illustrations, flowcharts, drawings, and diagrams. These exceptions shall not be used to circumvent formatting requirements and page count limitations by including lengthy narratives in such items. The page limitation covers all information except the cover page. Any pages in excess of the stated page limitation will be removed (after page 75) and will not be considered.


(ii) The Technical Proposal shall include, as a minimum, a Statement of Work (SOW) for the basic IDIQ contract, suitable for incorporation into the basic contract; and a contract schedule. Additionally, a SOW suitable for incorporation should be provided for Task Order 0001 and Task Order 002. Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW. Volume 1 should fully address the approach in accomplishing the Program objectives/requirements of Section I, Program Description, above. The contractor must also provide a summary of relevant past and present capabilities and experience. Both corporate and individual experience should be addressed (See evaluation criteria in Section V). The offeror must provide sufficient technical discussion and technical detail to establish the soundness of the proposed approach; provide an adequate basis for assessing program technical cost and schedule risk; and form a sound basis for the cost proposed in Volume 2. The technical proposal shall also include an overall test plan, with a supporting test matrix and discussion, which identifies all contractor- and Government-conducted testing, as well as the facilities at which the testing is to occur. The contractor must demonstrate knowledge of the systems engineering process and make realistic assumptions of how the proposed technology enhances performance at the weapon system level; identify any perceived risks, and risk mitigation actions to be taken.


b. Volume 2 - Cost Proposal:
Cost proposals have no page limitations; however, offerors are requested to keep cost proposals under 100 pages as a goal. See FAR Table 15.2 for specific information for adequate cost proposal requirements. Cost proposal spreadsheets must be submitted in Microsoft Excel format. The Volume 2 formal cost proposal for Task Order 0001 and Task Order 0002 must include and segregate the contract costs by year, and also provide a total summary. The contract costs shall include, as a minimum, a labor category and man-hour breakdown, by task, including applicable labor rates, a cost element summary including labor, travel, other direct costs, consolidated bill of material, overheads, G&A, fee, etc., and reflecting all rates for the contract and data, and an expenditure schedule for the entire program. The offeror shall include estimates for the cost/value of any Government Furnished Property (GFP), and all costs expected to be incurred by the Government associated with providing the equipment, facilities and support necessary to meet the contractor's testing requirements. Any costs associated with data or data rights shall be separately identified in the cost proposal. Cost and Pricing/Certified data shall be required in accordance with FAR 15.


(c) Cover Page: Both the Technical and Cost proposal must have a cover page with the following information: BAA Reference number "BAA-RWK-09-0005", Title of Paper, Period of Performance, Estimated Cost, Name/Address of Company, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number, Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Technical and Contracting Points of Contact (phones, fax and emails). The Cover page is NOT included in the page count.


(5) Submission Dates and Times: White papers are due by 2:00 PM Central Time on 1 Jun 2009. White Papers received after this due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c) (3). Both White Papers and Proposals must be submitted to AFRL/RWK Contracting Office to the parties shown in Section VII - Agency Contacts, paragraph (1).


(6) Funding Restrictions: The cost of preparing White Papers/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.


(7) Contractual Authority: Offerors are advised that only the Contracting Officer is legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise obligate the Government. The Government reserves the right to award one, multiple, or no contracts, based on the proposals received and the requirements of the Government.



V. PROPOSAL/APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION:


(1) White Paper Evaluation Criteria: White Papers will be evaluated as to their projected success in achieving the objectives/requirements outlined in Section I, of this BAA, utilizing the Factors and Sub-factors below. Additionally, a risk assessment (See Section V(3)) will be made of the offers, and selections will be made based on the Best Value to the Government. Awards may be made without discussions. Factors are listed in descending order of importance. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. Although Cost is less important than Technical, it is still considered a significant factor.
(1.1) Factor (1) Scientific/Technical Merit - Sub-factors (a) through (d) are of equal importance.
(a) Soundness of offeror's proposed technical approach
(b) Extent to which the offeror demonstrates that the defined requirements can be accomplished with the proposed technology
(c) Scope, traceability and feasibility of proposed analysis and test plans
(d) Scope of technologies to be investigated


(1.2) Factor (2) Capabilities and Experience - Subfactors (a) through (c) in Factor (2) are of equal importance.
(a) Personnel/Management: Experience and capabilities of key personnel (both technical and management); experience and capabilities to manage technical risks, control cost and schedule.
(b) Facilities, equipment and techniques necessary to accomplish the project.
(c) Subcontract Management: Experience and capabilities to manage subcontractor performance, cost and schedule; nature and extent of reliance on subcontractor.

Experience and capabilities may include unique combinations of the subfactors above, which are integral factors for achieving proposal objectives. Experience may be best indicated by work performed on programs of similar scope and complexity within the last 5 years. Experience should be relevant to the tasks identified in this BAA, to include; design, development, integration and flight testing of air launched munition systems. The government team may request supplemental historical information if required to confirm/verify experience and capabilities.


(1.3) Factor (3) Cost - Reasonableness and realism of proposed ROM costs. Cost realism includes evaluating if the proposed cost is realistic for the work to be performed, reflects a clear understanding of the requirements, and is consistent with the unique methods of performance and material described in the offeror's white paper. The total cost to be evaluated will include the cost of performing the contract, the cost of testing, and any applicable offsets for GFP or acquisition of data rights.


Proposal Evaluation Criteria: Proposals will be evaluated as to their projected success in achieving the objectives/requirements outlined in Section I, of this BAA, utilizing the Factors and Sub-factors below. Additionally, a risk assessment (See Section V(3)) will be made of the offers, and selections will be made based on the Best Value to the Government. Awards may be made without discussions. Factors are listed in descending order of importance. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. Although Cost is less important than Technical, it is still considered a significant factor.
(2.1) Factor (1) Scientific/Technical Merit - Sub-factors (a) through (d) are of equal importance.
(a) Soundness of offeror's proposed technical approach
(b) Extent to which the offeror demonstrates that the defined requirements can be accomplished with the proposed technology
(c) Scope, traceability and feasibility of proposed analysis and test plans
(d) Scope of technologies to be investigated


(2.2) Factor (2) Capabilities and Experience - Subfactors (a) through (c) in Factor (2) are of equal importance.
(a) Personnel/Management: Experience and capabilities of key personnel (both technical and management); experience and capabilities to manage technical risks, control cost and schedule.
(b) Facilities, equipment and techniques necessary to accomplish the project.
(c) Subcontract Management: Experience and capabilities to manage subcontractor performance, cost and schedule; nature and extent of reliance on subcontractor.

Experience and capabilities may include unique combinations of the subfactors above, which are integral factors for achieving proposal objectives. Experience may be best indicated by work performed on programs of similar scope and complexity within the last 5 years. Experience should be relevant to the tasks identified in this BAA, to include; design, development, integration and flight testing of air launched munition systems. The government team may request supplemental historical information if required to confirm/verify experience and capabilities.


(2.3) Factor (3) Cost - Reasonableness and realism of proposed costs. Cost realism includes evaluating if the proposed cost is realistic for the work to be performed, reflects a clear understanding of the requirements, and is consistent with the unique methods of performance and material described in the offeror's technical proposal. The total cost to be evaluated will include the cost of performing the contract, the cost of testing, and any applicable offsets for GFP or acquisition of data rights.


(3) White Paper/Proposal Risk Assessment: White Paper/Proposal risk will be assessed at each Factor level as part of the evaluation of the above evaluation criteria. White Paper/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 payoff. The following definitions will be used during the risk assessment:
(3.1) 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.
(3.2) 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.
(3.3) 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.


(4) No further evaluation criteria will be used. Individual white paper/proposal evaluations will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria without regard to other white papers and proposals submitted under this BAA.


(5) Review and Selection Process: Should formal proposals be requested based on the evaluation of White Papers, those technical and cost proposals will be evaluated at the same time, using the same criteria stated above, and categorized as follows:


(i) 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.


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


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

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:
(1) Selection Notices for White Papers: Those White Papers evaluated in accordance with Sections V(1) and V(3) and determined to be of Best Value to the Government may be invited to submit a technical and cost proposal. Notification by email or letter will be sent by the contracting or technical POC. Such invitation does not assure that the submitting organization will be awarded a contract. Those White Papers not recommended to submit a proposal 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(s) no earlier than 45 days after submission.


(2) Award Notices for Proposals: Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award, by letter or e-mail. 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. The Government reserves the right to award one, multiple, or no contracts pursuant to this BAA.


(3) Administrative and National Policy Requirements: The offeror will require a Secret facility clearance and safeguarding capability; therefore, personnel identified for assignment to a classified effort must be cleared for access to Secret information 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.


VII. AGENCY CONTACTS: Any correspondence must reference the BAA title and number.


(1) Contracting and Cost Information: Address all concerns to both individuals: Ms. Donna Moran, Contract Specialist, (850) 883-2676, donna.moran@eglin.af.mil and Ms. MiMi Martin, Contracting Officer, (850) 883-2675, mimi.martin@eglin.af.mil. Address and fax for both: AFRL/RWK, 101 West Eglin Blvd, Suite 337, Eglin AFB FL 32542-6810; and fax (850) 882-9599.


(2) Programmatic/Technical Issues and Information: Program Manager, Capt Jason Lee, phone (850) 883-1888; Fax: (850) 883-2538; e-mail jason.lee@eglin.af.mil and Deputy Program Manager, Virginia Swindell, phone (850) 883-2697; Fax: (850) 883-2538; email virginia.swindell@eglin.af.mil. Address: AFRL/RWAV, 101 West Eglin Blvd, Suite 332, Eglin AFB FL 32542-6810.


(3) In accordance with AFFARS 5315.90, 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 listed above 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:


Ms Karen Sue Hunter; phone: 937-904-9700; email: Karen.Hunter@WPAFB.AF.MIL; FAX: 937-255-5036.


VIII. OTHER INFORMATION:


(1) Communication: Dialogue between prospective offerors and Government representatives is encouraged until White Paper due date. 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.
(2) Debriefings: 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).
(3) 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, 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.
(4) Item Identification and Valuation: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at DFARS 252.211-7003, Item Identification and Valuation, (Apr 2005) 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/uid/ .
(5) Forward Pricing Rate Agreements: Offerors who have forward pricing rate agreements (FPRA's) should submit them with their proposal.
(6) Pre-Award Clearance: Pursuant to Far 22.805, a preaward clearance is expected to pertain to this BAA.
(7) Excessive Pass-Through Charges: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at DFARS 252.215-7004, Excessive Pass-Through Charges, (Apr 2007) 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 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.
(8) On-Line Representations and Certifications: Potential offerors are notified that, effective 01 Jan 2005, to be eligible for an award, they must submit annual Electronic Representations and Certifications, otherwise known as On-line Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) via the Business Partner Network (BPN) at http://www.bpn.gov/orca . These FAR level representations and certifications are required in addition to the representations and certifications specific to this acquisition. Before submitting the Electronic Representations and Certifications, contractors must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) Database. On-line registration instructions can be accessed from the DISA CCR home page at http://www.ccr.gov


(9) Associate Contractor Agreements: Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs) are not expected to pertain to this BAA.
(10) Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation: As prescribed in FAR 19.308, FAR Clause 52.219-28, "Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation (JUN 2007)," 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.
(11) Enabling Clause: Any contract award resulting from this announcement may contain the clause at AFMCFARS 5352.215-9008, Enabling Clause Between Prime Contractors and Service Contractors, (Jul 1997), substantially as written, in Section I when a prime contractor must agree to cooperate with a support contractor during the performance of this contract.
(12) Provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation may be accessed electronically at this address: http://farsite.hill.af.mil


 


 


 


:
101 West Eglin Blvd
Suite 337
Eglin AFB, Florida 32542-6810
:
Donna A Moran
Phone: (850)883-2676
Fax: (850)882-9599
:
MiMi Martin,
Contracting Officer
Phone: 850-883-2675
Fax: (850)882-9599