|
COMMERCE BUSINESS DAILY ISSUE OF DECEMBER 30,1998 PSA#2252Defense Supply Service-Washington, 5200 Army Pentagon, Rm. 1D245,
Washington, DC 20310-5200 A -- R&D BAA DUE 031999 POC Carole Mattice, Contract Specialist
(703)697-6259 or Joyce Rose, Supr.Contract Specialist,(703)695-2564 BAA
SUBJECT: NGP Research Element 3.C-b Instrumentation for Fuel and Oxygen
Concentration Measurements During Suppression of Flames in Real-scale
Fire Test Facilities BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT -- The Executive
Director, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program
(SERDP), is soliciting proposals under NGP Research Element 3.C-b
Instrumentation for Fuel and Oxygen Concentration Measurements During
Suppression of Flames in Real-scale Fire Test Facilities. [NOTE: In
addition to this BAA, proposals will be also be solicited within the
Government by the SERDP Executive Director.] BACKGROUND: Halon 1301,
used for fire extinguishment and explosion suppression applications in
fielded weapon systems and mission-critical facilities, has been
banned from national production due to its high ozone-depleting
potential. Alternatives developed by industry to date have sizable
weight and volume penalties, and their application to fielded current
weapons systems could require expending large amounts of funding and
time. Consequently, the DoD has embarked on an aggressive new R&D
program -- the Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology Program
(NGP) -- under the technical direction and oversight of the Office of
the Director, Defense Research and Engineering/Platform and Materials
Technology (ODDR&E/PMT). The NGP goal is to develop and demonstrate, by
2005, retrofitable, economically feasible, environmentally-friendly and
user-safe processes, techniques, and fluids that meet the operational
requirements currently satisfied by halon 1301 systems in aircraft,
ships, land combat vehicles, and critical mission support facilities.
The results will be specifically applicable to fielded weapons systems,
and will provide dual-use fire suppression technologies for preserving
both life and operational assets. Successful candidates must perform
satisfactorily in tests for a wide variety of properties, including
those reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). An initial
survey of fires forwhich the DoD currently uses halon 1301 shows an
extremely broad range of fire conditions and several distinct hazards
to be avoided. The Military Departments and other participating
government agencies will conduct research projects within the NGP, and
proposals accepted from industry or academia for NGP research projects
will be incorporated into these programs. Additional information on the
NGP, including preliminary information about the types of fires to be
suppressed, may be found on the Internet Web site
http://www.dtic.mil/ddre/, under "Science and Technology Programs," at
document "The Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology: Strategy
for a National Program," dated July 1996. The NGP Technical Point of
Contact is Dr. Richard G. Gann, Technical Program Manager (TPM), NGP,
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), e-mail
(preferred): rggann@nist.gov, phone: (301) 975-6866; fax: (301)
975-4052. A. BAA OBJECTIVE: To develop, install and demonstrate a
multi-point measurement method for fuel vapor (heptane) and oxygen
concentration during fire suppression tests in the engine nacelle
simulator at the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson
AFB, and in the large-scale shipboard compartment facility at the U.S.
Naval Research Laboratory Chesapeake Beach Division. The time interval
for suppression is between 1 and 10 seconds. B. EXPECTED PAYOFF: The
enhanced instrumentation of these facilities will enable (a)
understanding of the extinguishment process during exploratory tests
under realistic conditions and (b) determination of the cause of
extinguishment during the evaluation of new fire suppression processes,
techniques and fluids. C. BACKGROUND: During experiments in real-scale
test fixtures, a variety of processes may contribute to the
extinguishment of flames (direct action of the suppressant, flame
blow-off, oxygen deprivation, etc.). The flames may also be stabilized
behind obstructions. Certain measurements are needed to enable
distinguishing the relative importance of these effects, whether
seeking to verify whether the new fire suppression technology is
operating as in bench-scale apparatus or whether demonstrating the
value of the technology. The proposer, in selecting an instrumentation
approach, should describe the accuracy and time/space resolution of
the method and put these capabilities in the context of the quality of
data needed to enable this understanding of the extinguishment
process. D. ESTIMATED COST AND DURATION OF PROPOSED WORK: The
government estimate of the cost and time to meet the requirements of
this SON is $500,000 over two years. Proposers should not consider
these estimates to be either minima or maxima; they are provided only
as estimates around which reasonable proposals may be developed. It
also should be understood that the government reserves the right to
fund more than one proposal either to meet this requirement fully or to
pursue more than one innovative approach; the reasonable total cost of
which might be more or less than the government estimate. The
government will consider proposals which offer technical or cost
advantages but only meet partial technical requirements of this
Research Element. Estimated additional funding (cost sharing) from
performing organizations: colleges/ universities and small business
firms -- 10% of total request; all others -- 33% of total request.
SUBMISSIONS: Offerers are encouraged to submit concise, but
descriptive, proposals. Proposals for FY 2000 contract awards will be
accepted until 3:00 PM EST on 19 March 1999. The proposal, including
the original signed copy, six additional copies, and one copy on a 3 "
diskette (DOS-formatted, with text in a convertible word processor),
all referencing BAA 3C-b and must be submitted to: Brenda J. Batch,
Administrative Officer, SERDP Program Office, 901 North Stuart Street,
Suite 303, Arlington, Virginia 22203, TEL: (703) 696-2123; FAX: (703)
696-2114. All technical questions concerning this BAA should be
addressed to Dr. Richard G. Gann. PROPOSALS SENT BY FAX OR E-MAIL WILL
BE REJECTED. Proposals will be selected through a
technical/scientific/business decision process with technical and
scientific considerations being most important. Individual proposal
evaluations will be based on acceptability or non-acceptability without
regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement; however,
due to budgetary constraints, all acceptable proposals may not be
funded. No award will be made without a proposal to perform the
specific effort within an estimated cost and time framework. Offerers,
if selected, must be willing to cooperate and exchange information in
an integrated program with other contractors chosen by the TPM.
PROPOSAL CONTENT: Proposals shall consist of two separate parts. Part
I shall provide the technical proposal and management approach, and
Part II shall address costs. The proposals shall be prepared on 8.5 x
11 inch paper, with one and one-half line spacing or double spaced, in
at least 10-point type. Part I of the proposal should, as a minimum,
describe the proposed concept thoroughly. This should include naming
the proposed chemical(s) or technology, indicating why there is reason
to believe it will be effective, and showing the types of fires for
which its use is suggested. In addition, the document should describe
the experiments proposed to obtain the proof of concept and the
criteria for success, and the performance schedule. In particular, Part
I of the proposal shall include: (a) a cover page including BAA number,
proposal title, technical and administrative points of contact
including mailing addresses, telephone numbers, electronic mail
addresses, and facsimile machine numbers; (b) a one-page summary
identifying any technical ideas to be pursued and their expected impact
on the state of the art and the NGP; (c) a statement of work, detailing
the scope of the proposed work and specific utilization of
subcontractors; (d) a description of results, products, and
transferable technology expected from the project; (e) a list of the
milestones and schedule; (f) a statement of the technical rationale
that substantiates the schedule and justifies the overall technical
approach of the proposal; (g) a (not-to-exceed) one-page summary of any
proprietary claims to results, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or
necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype (if
there are no proprietary claims this section shall consist of a
statement to that effect); (h) a section describing relevant
capabilities, accomplishments, and work in these or closely related
areas along with the qualifications of proposed subcontractors; (i) a
management plan describing the overall approach to management of this
effort, including brief discussions of total organizations, use of
personnel, project/function/subcontractor relationships, government
research and facility interface, and planning, scheduling and control
practices. Part I must be no longer than 10 pages in length, including
up to one appendix for figures. Foldouts shall be counted as a single
page. The contents of the appendix shall be limited to figures that
directly support items discussed in the text of the proposal. If items
are included in the appendix which are not covered in the basic
proposal, the proposal may not be reviewed. Proposals with Part I in
excess of 10 pages may not be reviewed. Proposals of fewer than the
maximum number of pages will not be penalized. Part II of the proposal
shall be no longer than 10 pages and shall include a one page summary.
Costs shall be supported by detailed breakdowns of labor hours by labor
category and tasks/subtasks, materials, travel, computer and other
direct and indirect costs. An explanation of any estimating factors,
including their derivation and application, shall be provided. Details
of any cost sharing to be undertaken by the Offerer should also be
included in the cost section. [See APPENDIX A of this BAA for
additional requirements and amplifying information concerning
preparation of Part II cost data.] ABSTRACT: Offerers, either
individual or teamed, are strongly encouraged to submit a two-page
abstract of their proposed work to preclude unwarranted effort (a) on
the part of an Offerer in preparing a full proposal and (b) on the part
of the Government, in reviewing one. Page one shall be a title page
clearly labeled "PROPOSAL ABSTRACT" and including this BAA number,
proposal title, plus Offerer's administrative and technical points of
contact along with mailing addresses, telephone and facsimile numbers,
e-mail addresses, and the signature of an authorized officer. The
second page should include a summary of the technical ideas proposed
and their anticipated deliverables, and total cost. The abstract shall
be on 8.5 x 11 inch paper, with one and one-half line spacing or
double spaced, in at least 10-point type. The original and one copy of
each abstract shall be received no later than 3:00 p.m. January 19,
1999, by the SERDP Program Office, 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 303,
Arlington, Virginia 22203, TEL: 703-696-2117; FAX: 703-696-2114. A
copy of the abstract should also be sent -- preferably by e-mail -- to
the Technical Point of Contact, Dr. Richard G. Gann, by the same date.
An abstract is not a requirement for submission or selection of a
proposal. Any Offerer whose abstract is found to be consistent with the
intent of this BAA will be invited by February 12, 1999, to submit a
full technical and cost proposal. Such an invitation does not assure
subsequent contract award. Regardless of the recommendation, the
decision to submit or not submit a proposal is the responsibility of
the Offerer. EVALUATION/AWARD PROCESS: Evaluation of the abstracts and
proposals will be performed using the following criteria, listed in
descending order of relative importance: (1) technical quality and
originality of the proposed research; (2) relevance to the NGP goal and
impact on the goal if successful; (3) the Offeror's capabilities,
related experience, facilities, techniques, or unique combinations
thereof, which are integral factors for achieving the proposed
objectives; and (4) the appropriateness of the budget to accomplishing
the work proposed under this BAA. Proposals will be evaluated and
ranked by a Peer Review Panel chaired by the NGP TPM. Dr. Richard G.
Gann, the NGP Technical Program Manager (TPM) and Chairman of the NGP
Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC), will Chair the Peer Review
Panel selected by the TPM. The Panel will be composed of three or more
evaluators. Each proposal will be evaluated and ranked by at least
three Panel members. The NGP TPM/TCC will review the Panel results and
consider acceptable proposals that best meet the programmatic needs of
the NGP, as advertised in the BAA. The NGP TPM/TCC will recommend to
the SERDP Executive Director, through the Halon Alternatives R&D
Steering Group (HASG) and the SERDP Pollution Prevention Thrust Area
Working Group (PP/TTAWG), a subset of the acceptable proposals for
award which will construct a balanced program, meeting the needs of the
NGP. These recommended proposals will then be reviewed by the SERDP
Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). The mission of the SAB is to review
all proposed SERDP-funded projects and, based on the projects'
technical merit and funding, make appropriate selection recommendations
to the SERDP Council. The TPM will make a concise presentation of the
proposals to the SAB, usually in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan
area. Principal investigators of the recommended projects may attend,
as coordinated with the TPM, who will provide specific guidance for
this presentation, including date, time, and location. Contract award
selections will be recommended by the SERDP Executive Director to the
SERDP Council, which will approve the FY 2000 SERDP new-start projects
prior to 1 October 1999. The Defense Supply Service-Washington (DSS-W)
Contracts Office, the contracting agency for the NGP, will make
contract awards within a reasonable period of time. A Military
Department or NIST official will be designated a Contracting Officer's
Representative (COR) for each contract, as recommended by the NGP TPM.
It is the policy of the SERDP Program Office and the DSS-W Contracts
Office to treat all proposals as competitive and proprietary
information and to disclose the contents only for the purpose of
evaluation. The Government may use selected support contractor
personnel as special resources to assist in administering the
evaluation of the proposals. These persons are restricted by their
contracts from disclosing the proposal information or using it for
other than performing their assigned administrative task. Contractor
personnel are required to sign non-disclosure statements. By submission
of your proposal, you agree that your proposal information may be
disclosed to these selected contractors for the limited purpose stated
above. Any information submitted with your proposal that you do not
consent to limited release to these contractors must be clearly marked
and submitted segregated from other proposal material. This
announcement constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement as contemplated in
FAR 6.102(d)(2). There will be no formal request for proposals or other
solicitations outside the Government regarding this announcement. The
Government reserves the right to select for award all, some, or none of
the proposals received in response to this announcement. All
responsible sources may submit a proposal which shall be considered.
Historical Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and Minority
Institutions (MI) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in
submitting proposals; however, no portion of this BAA will be set aside
for HBCU and MI participation due to the impracticality of reserving
discrete or severable areas of NGP technology for exclusive competition
among these entities. Points of contact at the Defense Supply Service
Washington: Carole Mattice, Contract Specialist (703) 697-6259 and/or
Joyce Rose, Supervisory Contract Specialist, (703) 695-2564. Detail
concerning additional requirements and amplifying information for
preparation of Part II Cost Data can be found at NGP's Web Site; the
address is http://www.dtic.mil/ngp/solicitation/html Cost Estimate: An
estimate of the total research project cost, with a break down of
direct and indirect funds by category and year, must accompany each
formal proposal (PART II). Multiple-year proposals are encouraged to
cover the total estimated duration of the project, as appropriate.
Incremental funds will be provided by SERDP to successful proposers for
effort performed during each Federal fiscal year, given that sufficient
funds are provided to SERDP and the defense requirements indicate that
the research is a continuing priority. Costs proposed must conform
with the following regulations and principles: Commercial firms:
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 31 and Defense FAR Supplement
Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures. Educational
Institutions: OMB Circulars A-21 and A-88. Nonprofit Organizations: OMB
Circulars A-122, and A-133. The budget estimate must include the
following: a. Direct Labor Costs: Show the current and projected salary
amounts in terms of man-hours, man-months or annual salary to be
charged by the PI(s), research associates and assistants, and the total
amount per year to be paid to each from the project. State the number
of man-hours used to calculate a man-month or man-year. For proposals
from universities, the time and amounts to be charged should be
identified by academic year and summer effort. The proposal must
identify the basis for the direct labor hours or percentage of effort,
e.g., historical hours or estimates, as well as rates and salaries.
Labor costs should be predicated upon actual labor rates or salaries.
These estimates may be adjusted upward for forecast salary or wage
cost-of-living increases that will occur during the contract period. b.
Fringe Benefits and Indirect Cost Rates, c. Major Equipment: 1) It is
DoD's policy that commercial and nonprofit contractors provide the
equipment needed to support proposed research. Where specific
additional equipment is approved, approved costs shall be
"non-fee-bearing." 2) An itemized list with cost of permanent equipment
is required. Permanent equipment is an article of nonexpendable
tangible property having a useful life of more than 2 years and an
acquisition cost of $500 or more per unit. The basis must be disclosed,
such as a Vendor Quote or Historical Cost. : d) Special test equipment
to be fabricated by the contractor for specific research purposes and
its cost. e) Standard equipment to be acquired and modified to meet
specific requirements, including acquisition and modification costs,
listed separately. f) Existing equipment to be modified to meet
specific research requirements, including modification costs. Do not
include as special test equipment those items of equipment that, if
purchased by the contractor with contractor funds, would be capitalized
for Federal income tax purposes. d. Materials and Supplies. e.
Subcontracts. f. Travel Costs: List and detail all proposed travel.
Project Principal Investigators will be required to attend the NGP
AnnualResearch Meeting in the Washington, D.C. Metro Area, to present
their research findings. The meeting duration is 3 days in the
June/July time-frame. Travel to scientific meetings requires
identification and purpose. For planning purposes, SERDP may require
PIs to attend up to four meetings each year. g. Publication and Report
Costs. h. Consultant Costs. i. Other Direct Costs, and j. Fixed Fee.
Posted 12/28/98 (W-SN283616). (0362) Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0010 19981230\A-0010.SOL)
A - Research and Development Index Page
|
|