SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Broad Agency Announcement (B AA) Precision Approach Landing System Technologies
- Notice Date
- 11/7/2006
- Notice Type
- Solicitation Notice
- NAICS
- 541710
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Navy, Naval Air Systems Command, NAVAIR HQ, Building 2272 47123 Buse Road Unit IPT, Patuxent River, MD, 20670, UNITED STATES
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- N00019-07-R-0016
- Response Due
- 12/8/2006
- Archive Date
- 12/31/2006
- Description
- This Broad Agency Announcement is for Basic and Applied Research in accordance with FAR 35.016. This BAA is listed at http://www.navair.navy.mil/doing_business/open_solicitations/ and also the Joint Precision and Approach Landing System (JPALS) website at https://home.navair.navy.mil/pma213/jpals_industry/login.asp. Responses to this BAA should be submitted in accordance with the guidelines set forth herein and will be accepted at the Contracting Office for a period of one (1) month from the date of this announcement. No formal solicitation will be issued; this BAA is the solicitation. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Government JPALS Team is releasing this Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as an unclassified solicitation to seek proposals for research support in developing concept and architectural solutions for precision approach and landing system technologies. 2.0 BACKGROUND The Government JPALS Team is conducting research to develop, acquire, integrate, test, and field a GPS-based aircraft precision approach and landing capability by 2014. The JPALS Program is preparing to enter System Development and Demonstration (SDD) for Increment 1 JPALS in early Calendar Year 2008. Increment 1 SDD will provide ground systems and a prototype aircraft system to support a two-hundred (200) ft Decision Height (DH) and one-half (1/2) nautical mile (nm) visibility precision approach and relative navigation capabilities in support of Sea-based operations. Increment 1 also includes growth requirements for ground and aircraft systems to support two hundred (200) ft DH and one-half (1/2) statute mile (sm) visibility in support of fixed-base and tactical landing operations. The purpose of the BAA is to achieve additional risk reduction efforts by gaining additional insight and feedback on JPALS capability requirements, potential solution concepts and architectures, and program cost drivers. Additionally, the information obtained through this BAA may be used to investigate growth paths for fixed land-based and mobile land-based JPALS variants, and future JPALS incremental capabilities as described in the Capabilities Description Document (CDD), and to provide industry support of the OSD Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) process. 3.0 AREAS OF INTEREST 3.1 Sea-Based Trade Studies. Explore the available trade space to determine a range of cost versus attainable operational effectiveness. Each trade study topic below includes areas to be addressed. Contractors are encouraged to include additional areas affecting cost and system effectiveness in their analysis. Results should be accompanied by supporting technical and business case analyses. When modeling and simulation is used to support analysis, a concise description of the model, how it works and how it was validated, should be included. Both development costs and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) should be considered in the analyses. a. Sensors: Consider possible sensor or suite of sensors required to accomplish the functions, e.g., relative navigation, surveillance, and precision approach. In examining the sensor options and performance requirements, at a minimum, consider the operating environment, air-vehicle constraints, weather, and day/night operations. This analysis shall also assess the trades involved in optimizing current air-vehicle equipage with additional sensor requirements. b. Aircraft Platforms: Consider current military aircraft avionics equipage and planned upgrades for suitability to meet JPALS subsystem level requirements. In examining aircraft, consider numbers of Type/Model/Series (TMS) and levels of system commonality. Additionally, consider achievable performance of new avionics systems installations as compared to use of existing avionics systems. 3.2 Sea-Based System Requirements Reconciliation. Conduct system requirements review and analysis to verify that your technical baseline meets the System Requirements Document (SRD) requirements and that the requirements are complete and consistent with the program CDD. 3.3 Sea-Based System Architecture. Provide a description of a notional Modular Open System Approach (MOSA) architecture (Hardware/Software). The approach shall provide a logical and cost effective progression to capabilities that are identified in the SRD and CDD, including future JPALS capability increments. It shall leverage the commercial sector computing hardware technology investments for technology refresh and growth to future requirements beyond those identified in the SRD for Increment 1 and identified in the CDD as future increments. The description shall provide a modular, open system approach which has a sound basis for system development, sustainment and maintenance, capability enhancement, and future capability growth. The approach shall demonstrate a functionally partitioned construct that permits functional integration and test at the functional interface. The architecture shall integrate non-proprietary, proprietary, military, and commercial applications whose selection within the system concept is substantiated by a business case analysis and shall establish key interfaces for hardware and software components that utilize widely-accepted open standards where possible. Where open standards do not exist, establish non-proprietary logical and physical interface specifications to support the key interfaces. Pertinent architecture attributes such as net centricity for support of Net Centric Operations and Warfare, interoperability with network enabled and disadvantaged users, multilevel security, data latency, C2, and safety of flight should be considered. For each approach, thoroughly explore the architectural design to determine feasibility. Contractors are encouraged to include additional areas affecting cost and architectural effectiveness in their analysis. Results should be accompanied by a supporting technical baseline, including high level operational and system architectural views, and business case analyses. 3.4 Sea-Based Technical Baseline. Allocate mission critical system functions, e.g., precision approach to major subsystem(s) and identify required subsystem performance parameters to support the capability. Identify candidate physical system components compliant with the allocated performance specifications. Use technical and business case analyses from Section 3.1 to support design selections. Treat major software functions, e.g., navigation solution, as individual components, assign to a software configuration item and estimate size and complexity. Characterize and document the technical maturity of physical components (hardware and software) and support the OSD TRA process. 3.5 Reliability and Maintainability. In order to update the Government R&M model, provide reliability block diagrams and simulations including: the block diagram; dependencies; assumptions; failure rates and distributions; repair rate and distributions; related cost estimates; BIT methodology; and application used in the concept. 3.6 Sea-Based Program Management 3.6.1 Program Plan. Prepare a program plan to develop, integrate and test the technical baseline described by task in Section 3.4. The plan should address resource requirements, including labor, and time for each phase of the hardware and software design and development, integration and test. The program schedule should specify planned engineering development activities for each major subsystem, with a roll up to the top level program milestones. 3.6.2 Systems Engineering Management Strategy. Develop a systems engineering management strategy that outlines the overall method for performing the systems engineering process for the JPALS system. 3.6.3 System Certification Plan. Develop a proposed system certification plan for a Sea-Based landing system. 3.6.4 Test and Evaluation Strategy. Develop a TES to describe proposed test strategy and test phases (including M&S, ground, and flight testing) for the integrated system. 3.6.5 Software Design and Development Strategy. Prepare a software development strategy that provides a plan to derive requirements, develop a software design, perform software coding and unit test, perform software integration, and support system testing through all test phases of the program. The plan should address resource requirements (to include labor phasing and development environment), software development schedules, software tracking metrics (both technical metrics and earned value metrics), configuration management, and software corrective action. The software development plan should take into consideration emerging DoD information assurance and anti-tamper requirements. 3.6.6 Risk Assessments. Develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP) and perform a risk assessment associated with realizing the technical baseline. The risk assessment should address technology risks (e.g., risks associated with new science, exploring unknown physical phenomena and advancing the state of the art) as well as development risks (e.g., system integration, manufacturing, and software development based on well understood science). Develop a risk assessment for cost, schedule, and technical performance aspects of the program. Risk assessments pertaining to staffing, external dependencies, programmatic, supportability and maintainability should also be included. Develop risk mitigation plans for any moderate or high likelihood/consequence risks. 3.7 Land-Based Growth. Provide a description of the proposed JPALS architecture that will be developed to meet Sea-Based Increment 1 ground and aircraft system requirements. Explain your approach for expanding or modifying the proposed architecture to meet growth requirements to support future Land-Based incremental capabilities. With reference to the CDD capabilities for each future increment, describe how the resulting architecture(s) would support Land-Based requirements including availability under jamming, civil interoperability, and mobile system deployability. Discuss the use of MOSA and the ability to use common software and hardware. Describe how the resulting architecture(s) will enable certification to be achieved for the Land-Based ground and airborne subsystems, and identify any technical issues which could have an adverse impact on certification. 3.8 Land-Based Category II/III Requirements and System Architectures. The JPALS program has developed Guidance Quality (GQ) requirements for Land-based Cat I operations that were modeled on the civil (LAAS/GBAS) Cat I requirements. The civil Cat I requirements were largely derived from Instrument Landing System (ILS) performance, but some recent proposals in the civil community have suggested that an extension of this ILS paradigm may not be the optimum method for determining Cat II/III requirements. Assess the relevance of different GQ concepts to a Land-Based JPALS Cat II/III capability and access the ability of Land-Based architecture(s) to support Cat II/III. 4.0 CONTRACT INFORMATION Contracts will be Firm Fixed Price using traditional FAR/DFARS/NAVAIR clauses. It is anticipated that contracts issued under this BAA will be restricted to businesses that have the in-house breadth of experience and expertise to explore in detail the specific areas of interest for which the offerors are proposing. Offerors may propose a teaming arrangement, in which the offeror will be responsible for the overall content of deliverables as proposed in the statement of work. Due to the nature of the requirements, it is anticipated that there will be a series of Government/contractor technical interchange meetings throughout the period of performance. There is no commitment by the Government to be responsible for any monies expended by the offeror prior to award of a contract. Offerors are cautioned that only a Contracting Officer is legally authorized to commit the Government. The Government is not required to award any contracts. NOTE: Typically, research findings result in the need for additional services/supplies that are not possible to anticipate or project. Contract modifications may be executed to satisfy these requirements thereby providing for flexibility in technology assessment (with technology transition the ultimate goal). In the event that this is required, it shall be considered to be within the scope of this BAA and the resulting contract, and therefore will have met the requirements of the FAR/DFARS and the Competition in Contracting Act. 4.1 Number of Awards. It is the Government's intention to award two contracts under this BAA; however, the number of contracts may vary based on technical merit and utility to the Government. The Government will consider each proposal independently and weigh each against the defined evaluation criteria. The Government may elect to pursue only a portion of the proposed statement of work should that portion best address the desired subject matter. 4.1.1 Expected Award Dates and Available Funding. It is the Government's intention to award contracts NLT January 2007. The Government expects to allot $4.0-$5.0M for each award, however, awards amounts may vary. 4.1.2 Period of Performance. The expected period of performance for awards under this BAA is not to exceed nine calendar months. 4.1.3 Deliverables. Offerors shall identify within their proposals the specific deliverables to include content and delivery dates. Delivery dates of proposed CDRLS will vary from task to task, but the Government's interest is for two sets of deliverables, one in mid-May to support the TRA event and another at the end of the contract. 4.1.4 Security Classification. The DD-254 is on the JPALS website for review and is for solicitation bidding purposes only. It is not valid for the actual contract. Upon award of any contracts, new DD-254's will be issued. 5.0 FULL PROPOSAL AND SUBMISSION Offerors shall submit one (1) original and three (3) copies of their proposals to NAVAIR Contracts, Attn: Ms. Lynda Frattone, Department Of The Navy, NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, AIR 2.2.1.3, 47123 Buse Road, Suite 453, Patuxent River, MD 20670-1127. Advanced copies can be emailed, Attn: Ms. Lynda Frattone at lynda.frattone@navy.mil. The cost of preparation and response to this BAA is not considered an allowable direct charge to the resulting contract or any other contract. 5.1 Proposals. In presenting material, offerors are advised that quality of information is significantly more important than quantity. Offerors are requested to confine their submissions to essential matters providing sufficient information to define their offers and establish an adequate basis for the Government's evaluation. Offerors may propose multiple approaches for a given area of interest. 5.1.1 Program Management (PM) Section. The PM proposal section is intended to present the offeror?s relevant research experience. In the PM proposal section, identify primary location where work will be accomplished, define organizational structure for the team supporting and performing the tasks, and identify any subcontracted tasks and activities. Identify methodologies, tools, and databases used for program planning and project tracking that allow complete program visibility and insight to risk, cost, schedule and technical performance. For both prime and subcontractor teams identify personnel performing primary task management and supporting technical specialists. Include areas of expertise, relevant work experience on similar efforts and planned contributions to this effort. Describe past performance where similar research activities were successfully completed. Data rights should appear in this section as described in Section 5.1.6 below. 5.1.2 Technical Section. The technical proposal should include a Statement of Work (SOW) that clearly states the offeror's understanding of the area of interest, the objectives, the tasks to be accomplished and the program milestones. At a minimum, each task description should clearly state the problem, define the approach or approaches for solving the problem(s), state any assumptions with justifying data, and pose pertinent questions and issues to be addressed. Identify analytical tools to be used in the effort. 5.1.3 Priced Section. The priced proposal section shall contain cost information in sufficient detail to enable the Government to evaluate the offeror's financial submission for price reasonableness and assess technical understanding. Fully priced proposals shall include a detailed breakdown of proposed prices and shall remain valid for a period of 120 days. The proposal should contain a separate price for each task (Areas of Interest) in the offeror's proposal. 5.1.4. Certification and Representative Information. Current Registration in the DoD's Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database shall be a prerequisite for receiving an award resulting from this BAA. For more information, please contact the CCR Assistance Center at 1-888-227-2423; or http://www.ccr.gov. Offerors shall complete the on-line Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) before submission of a proposal. The information pertaining to ORCA can be found at http://www.bpn.gov/orca. 5.1.5 Subcontracting Plan. Offerors are advised to submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.7 with proposals. 5.1.6 Data Rights Information. Offerors shall review technical data rights clauses found in DFARS 252.227. Provide the information required by DFARS 252.227-7017 as part of the Program Management section. 6.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION Proposals will be evaluated as they are received. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with FAR PART 35.007 and Subpart 15. The offeror's proposal will be the sole basis of the award. 6.1 Evaluation Criteria. The Government will evaluate proposals responsive to any and/or all areas of interest discussed herein. Proposals will not be weighted against each other. Each offeror's proposal shall be evaluated against the criteria listed below. The criteria are listed in order of value to the Government. 6.1.1 Understanding the JPALS Requirements and Architectures. Does the Offeror's proposal demonstrate an understanding of the pertinent issues of a GPS-Based Landing System Family/System of Systems environment, and does the offeror have the experience and knowledge base to give confidence in meaningful results? 6.1.2 Technical Innovation. Does the Offeror's proposal hold the promise of introducing an innovative yet attainable solution to the Precision Approach and Landing mission? 6.1.3 Technical Merit. Does the Offeror's proposal describe a sound, reasonable and effective technical approach and are valid and appropriate analytical tools brought to bear on the issues? 6.1.4 Price. Does the Offeror's proposal clearly show reasonable, complete and realistic prices based on the tasks identified in the SOW? A proposal's price reasonableness will be evaluated based on priced tasks, supporting data, planned resources and task schedule. 6.1.5 Socio-economic Merits. The socio-economic merits of each proposal will be evaluated based on the commitment to provide meaningful subcontracting opportunities with small business, small disadvantaged business, woman-owned small business concerns, and HBCU/MIS. 7.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION (Available on JPALS Website) a. JPALS System Description Document b. JPALS System Requirements Document (Draft) c. JPALS Capabilities Description Document (Draft) d. JPALS Program Schedule e. TRA Definitions and Guidance f. MOSA Acquisition Program Managers Guide (available at www.acq.osd.mil/osjtf) 8.0 NON- GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION Offerors are hereby notified that non-Government participants of Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) firms may serve as technical advisors on the program. Such FFRDC firms are expressly prohibited from competing on the subject effort and from proposal rating, ranking, or recommending the selection of a source. By submission of its offer, the offeror gives the Government permission to release the offeror's proprietary information to employee of the following organization: MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA. 9.0 INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION Direct International participation is not anticipated due to level of classification of these requirements (SECRET NOFORN). 10.0 POINTS OF CONTACT The technical point of contact is Gary Cote, PMA213/AIR 4.1.1 (301) 995-6183, e-mail: gary.cote@navy.mil, while Ms. Lynda Frattone (301) 757-5936, email: lynda.frattone@navy.mil is the point of contact for all contractual matters. Offerors may contact these individuals at any time for clarification of technical/contractual issues and cost proposal format.
- Record
- SN01177604-W 20061109/061107221029 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |