FY18_ER_BAA_Solicitation.pdf

70RDND18R00000001 ER BAA FY18

Exploratory Research in

Preventing Nuclear and Radiological Terrorism

Broad Agency Announcement No.

70RDND18R00000001

for

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

(DNDO)

Transformational and Applied Research Directorate

(TAR)

Table of Contents 1 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Grand Challenges & Technology Portfolios

1.3 Strategic Approach

1.4 Scope and Funding

2 Exploratory Research Topics

2.1 RTA-01: Mobile Active Interrogation Using Neutrons (MAIN)

2.2 RTA-02: Radiation Isotope Identification Device (RIID) Based on Thallium Bromide

2.3 RTA-03: Nuclear Detection through Centralized Data Analytics

3 Management Approach

3.1 Program Milestone Structure

3.2 Deliverables and Review Cycles

4 Procurement Overview

4.1 Eligible Offerors

4.2 Review and Evaluation Process

4.3 Award Instruments

4.4 Award Schedule

4.5 Period of Performance

5 White Paper & Proposal Preparation and Content

5.1 White Paper Preparation: Format and Content

5.2 Proposal Preparation: Format and Content

6 Evaluation Criteria

6.1 Criterion I: Transformational Impact

6.2 Criterion II: Technical Approach

6.3 Criterion III: Capability and Experience

6.4 Criterion IV: Management Approach

6.5 Criterion V: Cost/Price Realism and Reasonableness

7 Instructions to Offerors

7.1 Submission of White Papers and Proposals

7.2 Questions

7.3 Central Contractor Registration:

7.4 Representations and Certifications

7.5 Safety Act

7.6 Security/Classified White Papers/Proposals

8 Attachments

8.1 White Paper/Proposal Cover Sheet

8.2 Non-Disclosure Agreement

8.3 Quad Chart Template

1 INTRODUCTION

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Office of Procurement Operations (OPO) is soliciting proposals for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) under this Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for Exploratory Research (ER) that directly supports the DNDO mission. This BAA solicits first white papers and then proposals in the area of Preventing Nuclear and Radiological Terrorism that may lead to a dramatic improvement in national capabilities in nuclear/radiological threat detection and interdiction and in nuclear forensics capabilities.

For this BAA, the Government encourages proposals from the following types of organizations which could serve as the prime contractor: private industry, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations. Prohibited from serving as prime contractors, but encouraged to participate as sub-contractors for this BAA are National Laboratories, Federal Government Laboratories, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), Federal Government Activities, Federal Agencies, and Government-Sponsored University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs).

This BAA is issued in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016, which provides for the competitive selectionof basic and applied research and/or development not related to a specific system or hardware. Proposals submitted in response to this BAA that are selected for award are considered to be the result of full and open competition and in compliance with the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), 10 U.S.C. § 2304(a)(1); 41 U.S.C. § 3301(a)(1).

The award schedule for this BAA is as follows:

DATE EVENT

15 AUGUST 2017

TUESDAY

Pre-solicitation Notice Posted

17 NOVEMBER 2017

FRIDAY

BAA Solicitation Posted and Open for White Paper Submission

29 NOVEMBER 2017

WEDNESDAY

Question Submission Deadline for White Papers, 12:00 PM (Noon) ET

1 DECEMBER 2017

FRIDAY

DNDO: Responses Posted to Questions for White Papers

19 JANUARY 2018

FRIDAY White Paper Submission Deadline, 4:00 PM ET

12 FEBRUARY 2018

MONDAY

DNDO: Responses for White Papers Provided to Offerors and Open for Proposal Submission

1.1 Background

DHShas been tasked to ensure that the United States remains safe from the illicit importation, development, or procurement of a nuclear or radiological device. In recognition of the catastrophic risk posed by the use of a nuclear weapon within the United States, DHS has integrated all nuclear detection research, development, testing, evaluation, acquisition, and operational support into a single office known as DNDO. DNDO is charged with the mission to prevent nuclear terrorism by continuously improving capabilities to deter, detect, respond to, and attribute attacks, in coordination with domestic and international partners. This mission requires the research and development (R&D) of new technologies which lead to new and improved operational capabilities.

To address this need, the Transformational and Applied Research Directorate (TAR) was established during the foundation of DNDO in 2005, to develop breakthrough technologies that will have a dramatic impact on the capabilities to prevent nuclear and radiological terrorism though an aggressive and expedited R&D program. This R&D focuses on technology to detect threat Special Nuclear Material (SNM) or radiological material out of regulatory control and technology to attribute this material back to its sources though nuclear forensics. The R&D identifies, explores, develops, and demonstrates scientific and technological approaches that address gaps determined from analysis of the global nuclear detection architecture and end user needs; dramatically improves the performance of domestic radiological and nuclear (RN) detection and forensics systems and enabling technologies; or significantly reduces the operational burden for domestic stakeholders such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), United States Coast Guard (USCG), Transportation and Security Administration (TSA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and state and local law enforcement.

Within TAR, research which transitions from basic to applied research is managed by the Exploratory Research (ER) Program. The ER Program specifically focuses on innovative, high risk, early-stage applied research that is expected to have transformational impact, and when conducted with a clear and well supported technical approach that will provide new capabilities to help counter the threat of nuclear terrorism. Research under this Program is expected to culminate in a Proof-of-Concept (PoC) demonstration, that will then serve to support transitioning to an advanced technology demonstration program or supporting direct commercialization of the technology.

2 MARCH 2018

FRIDAY

Question Submission Deadline for Proposals, 12:00 PM (Noon) ET

6 MARCH 2018

TUESDAY

DNDO: Responses for Proposal Questions Provided to Offerors

20 APRIL 2018

FRIDAY

Proposal Submission Deadline, 12:00 PM (Noon) ET

BY SEPTEMBER

Anticipated Award Date

DNDO coordinates and consults with other Government agencies (intra-DHS, Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DoD), etc.) to reduce duplication of effort, leverage related R&D efforts, and encourage collaboration across the R&D community.

1.2 Grand Challenges & Technology Portfolios

DNDO conducts a recurring analyses regarding current state of nuclear detection and forensics for preventing nuclear terrorism. Historically, this has been informed through development of a framework for detecting (through technical and non-technical means), analyzing, and reporting on nuclear and other radioactive materials that are out of regulatory control. The term “out of regulatory control” refers to materials that are being imported, possessed, stored, transported, developed, or used without authorization by the appropriate regulatory authority, either inadvertently or deliberately. Results from the joint interagency annual review of the National Strategic Five-Year Plan for Improving the Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Capabilities of the United States have highlighted a number of long-term technical grand challenges that provide a focus for research activities conducted under the ER Program. Through this process, several important grand challenges were identified to help guide research and development. These grand challenges include:

o Cost effective equipment with sufficient performance to ensure wide spread deployment (Cost Effective) o Detection of SNM, i.e. uranium or plutonium, especially when shielded (Shielding) o Enhanced wide area search capabilities in a variety of scenarios, to include urban and highly cluttered environments (Search) o Monitoring along challenging pathways in the architecture (Pathways) o Forensics determination of the origin and history of interdicted materials

(Forensics)

The collection of R&D projects conducted under the ER Program can be categorized into five unique technology portfolios. These include the following with their linkages to the Grand Challenges indicated above:

• Materials Research and Supporting Technologies (Materials): The Materials portfolio has the technical objective of discovering new high performance and/or low cost gamma-ray and neutron sensing materials, significantly improving existing materials or lowering their costs, improving or developing new signal readout methods for these materials, and incorporating these materials into prototypes for test and evaluation. Advances in this project impact most if not all of the other portfolios and Grand Challenges. This Project focuses on the core detection materials used in most radiation detectors: scintillators and semiconductors. The project addresses improvements in types of materials ranging from those appropriate for handhelds, backpacks, and personal radiation detectors with very good energy resolution capable of superior isotope and threat identification, to those used in large portal monitors (14”x68”x3”), which would benefit from better isotope capabilities and discrimination between threat and non-threat. This Project also addresses stability issues in portal plastics, both in terms of understanding the root cause of the issues as well as finding low cost and robust solutions. Links to the Cost Effective Grand Challenge.

• Radiation Detection Technology (Radiation): The Radiation portfolio emphasizes investigating novel approaches to greatly improve the ability to detect, identify, and locate threat materials based on their intrinsic radiological signatures. Research emphasis has been on improved gamma-ray detection approaches, particularly imaging, enabled by new electronics, sensor fusion, and advanced algorithms. Recent efforts are focused on development of technologies to make low operational burden R/N sensors available for a wide variety of law enforcement vehicles. Links to the Search Grand Challenge.

• Shielded Special Nuclear Material (Shielding): The Shielding portfolio addresses the critical challenge of being able to detect SNM and other threats even when heavily shielded or masked. ER projects under this Sub-Project are focused on development of component technologies to include next generation x-ray and neutron radiation sources for Homeland Security applications, algorithms enabling improved imaging for radiography, and detector materials that can be integrated into large scale systems for screening cargo and conveyances for shielded threats. Also investigates alternative approaches to shielded threat detection that do not rely on the use of ionizing radiation.

Links to the Shielding Grand Challenge.

• Advanced Analytics (Analytics): The Analytics portfolio has two thrust areas:

Algorithms are developed to improve the means and abilities to detect, locate, and identify threat materials. Modeling and simulation tools are developed to aid in the analyses of R/N detection capabilities as they are, and as they could be, which could be used in identification of capability gaps, risk analysis for system threat reviews, or cost-benefit analysis within DNDO’s solutions development process. Links to Cost Effective, Search, and Pathways Grand Challenges.

• Nuclear Forensics (Forensics): The Forensics portfolio directly coordinates with DNDO’s NTNFC mission to execute research and development to discover new forensics signatures of R/N material and to also develop the tools enabling comprehensive and timely analytical results. R&D conducted under this sub-project looks to collect signature data to increase our ability to answer questions about the history of interdicted material, develop models to provide predictive associations of that data, and to exploit the validated signatures to answer specific material origin questions.

Technological solutions to these Grand Challenges and other needs required to effectively support the DNDO mission will require sustained, long-term support to develop the fundamental scientific and technological foundation necessary to make such detection capabilities effective and affordable. The topics in this Solicitation are tied to this objective, and aligned with these Grand Challenges. Major advances in capabilities that support the DNDO mission to prevent nuclear terrorism through nuclear detection and forensics can be achieved through focused research in areas ranging from the sensor materials, front-end-electronics, advanced algorithms, modeling, sensor fusion and other research supporting development of passive, active, and ancillary detection systems. Advances in one or more of these areas in-turn can provide new and improved capabilities for screening, scanning or searching for nuclear and radiological materials of concern, improved identification of these materials and reduced or simplified operations for end-users. The many challenges in developing breakthrough technologies to prevent nuclear terrorism illustrate the need for a well-supported transformational and applied research program to fully explore the limits and potential of physics, engineering, mathematics and computation to counter the radiological and nuclear threat.

1.3 Strategic Approach

The DNDO approach to transformational and applied research is intended to stimulate the R&D community in academia, private industry, non-profit organizations, FFRDCs), UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities. As part of this endeavor, TAR executes the ER Program, which is intended to support innovative, high risk, early-stage applied research for nuclear detection technology and supporting fields. Specifically, research is pursued that addresses strategic issues in the current state of nuclear detection and forensics for preventing nuclear terrorism, as well as tactical issues raised by DHS components and state and local jurisdictions in conducting preventative R/N detection operations. Research may focus on a specific DNDO mission need, investigate the improvement of existing capabilities, or support improvement in nuclear technical forensics capabilities. Innovative concepts that successfully complete the exploratory R&D phases are typically brought to a PoC demonstration – a minimal, but functional, realization of the technology for testing and demonstration, typically in a laboratory environment. DNDO anticipates releasing future Exploratory Research BAAs on an annual schedule.

1.4 Scope and Funding

DNDO anticipates making multiple awards under this BAA. DNDO reserves the right to fund all, parts, or none of the proposals received and will fund awards by phases as options under this BAA. Total funding for this BAA in FY18 is anticipated to be $2M with additional funding potentially available in later years. The actual number and size of awards under this BAA will be at the discretion of DNDO, based on a review of submitted proposals against the criteria listed in Section 6 of this BAA, and the availability of funds.

2 EXPLORATORY RESEARCH TOPICS

DNDO is interested in technologies or methodologies that can dramatically improve the national capability to detect and report attempts to import or transport a nuclear device, SNM, or radiological material outside of regulatory control. For this BAA, the technologies and methodologies are divided into three RTAs as follows:

• RTA-01: Mobile Active Interrogation Using Neutrons

• RTA-02: Radiation Isotope Identification Device Based on Thallium Bromide

• RTA-03: Nuclear Detection through Centralized Data Analytics Each RTA description below contains a summary of the research area of interest with examples of intended research and overall performance objectives, as appropriate. Offerors must propose to a specific RTA. It is anticipated that the topics will change in future exploratory research BAAs, which are scheduled to be released on a yearly basis. Offerors must emphasize the extent to which their proposal provides transformational capability in support of the DNDO mission and compare to current solutions, as applicable. White papers and proposals that are non-responsive to a specific RTA will be not encouraged for proposal submission and not selected for award, respectively.

DNDO prefers comprehensive programs that may include elements of scientific theory, modeling, simulation, experimental investigations, algorithm development, and other elements of applied research and development. All exploratory research efforts should lead to a formal PoC demonstration. Note that the intended scope of exploratory research excludes large scale, integrated systems development efforts that are the focus of advanced technology demonstrations and other developmental programs and projects.

Proposals should followed the phased technical approach specified in the below topic areas. A program can enter into a phase later than feasibility if the proposal can show that feasibility has already been demonstrated. Supporting documentation, data, simulations, analytic calculations, and references need to be provided to support the proposed approach. For this BAA, DNDO is only considering offerings addressing solutions for areas described in the following RTAs.

2.1 RTA-01: Mobile Active Interrogation Using Neutrons (MAIN) This topic is looking to develop a mobile active interrogation system that can quickly detect SNM, as well as other types of contraband, such as explosives and drugs. By the end of the project, the system will be built such that it can undergo a proof of concept (POC) demonstration on a mobile platform. During system demonstration, the objects envisioned to be scanned by the MAIN system range from small packages (backpack size) to sea cargo containers. DNDO will work with program partners to better define the types of contraband for awardees. This topic includes two possible paths to a mobile system: 1) Passenger vehicle (i.e., SUV, passenger van);

and 2) Robotic. Those using a robotic platform will utilize commercial equipment for the robot, though some minor modifications are acceptable to fit the MAIN system. System components for either platform should be modular to allow portability. In general, the system should utilize single-sided detection. However, when modules are disassembled, dual-sided detection could be utilized.

System performance targets/goals

Metric Target Goal

SNM detection < 8 kilograms < 4 kilograms

Explosives detection < 10 kilograms < 5 kilograms

Drugs detection < 10 kilograms < 5 kilograms

Distance for detection 1 meter 3 meters

Time to detection < 10 seconds < 2 seconds

Probability of Detection > 95% > 99%

Probability of False Alarm < 5% < 1%

Dose to driver (vehicle) Rad worker Non-rad worker

System unit targets/goals

Metric Target Goal

System Unit Cost < $1,000,000

System size and weight Suitable for the conveyance method (vehicle or robot)

Module size and weight Suitable for one person to carry while minimizing number of modules

Power requirements Battery required if away from power source (i.e., moving modules)

Neutron source characteristics are vital to the overall system. Those having high output (i.e., 109 neutrons per second via the DD-based reaction) allow for faster scan times. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Intense and Compact Neutron Sources (ICONS) project is developing neutron sources that can meet these needs. DT-based sources can be acceptable, though DD has some preferred advantages. A list of key neutron source requirements is listed below:

• High yield ( > 109 DD)

• Deuteron beam diameter ~ 1 cm o Minimizes active cooling required for target

• Compact and lightweight (<20 lbs)

• Fast rise (<1 µs) / fall time (<10 µs)

• No dark current ( < 10-5 after fall time)

• Snout design of target area (~ 1”) to minimize moderator size

• Ability to support high dose and low dose modes

Competitive proposals will have detailed descriptions of all main components (neutron source, detectors, shielding, detection methods, algorithms, dose to operator and environment/target, and infrastructure [robotic/vehicle based]). Proposals should include the size and weight of the system (excluding the vehicle or robot) and components. Research should not be proposed on individual components, but work on engineering of components to fit the system and detection algorithms is acceptable.

The envisioned schedule for this program is as follows, though adjustments can be proposed with justification.

• Phase I (6-9 months): Conduct necessary research and development focused on addressing all critical scientific and technical issues and risks, leading to a conceptual design and concluding in a Feasibility Evaluation Review (FER) and report. Phase I efforts will generally be no longer than 6 – 9 months. However, any duration longer than 9 months would require full justification. Generally, funding for Phase I efforts is around $300k. However, funding greater than $300k can be acceptable, if justified;

• Phase II (9 months): Following a successful FER, conduct the necessary research and development (experiments, modeling, analysis, and trade studies) to design the proposed system culminating in a Critical Design Review (CDR) and report. A draft Concept of Operation (CONOPS) for testing should also be developed in Phase II in collaboration with DNDO;

• Phase III (9 months): Following a successful CDR, proceed to procure, integrate, and conduct vendor development testing. Based on Phase II feedback and vendor development testing, work with DNDO to develop the final CONOPS for testing. Work with DNDO to develop a Test Readiness Review (TRR), report, and Test Plan for Phase

IV;

• Phase IV (6 months): Following a successful TRR, execute the test plan and generate a comprehensive final report for the entire effort. DNDO will likely utilize non-vendor sites for all MAIN vendors. MAIN vendors will have to provide technical support during this time to ensure the test plan can be executed with minimal downtime.

2.2 RTA-02: Radiation Isotope Identification Device (RIID) Based on Thallium Bromide

DNDO seeks to develop a handheld, room-temperature, prototype Radiation Isotope Identification Detector (RIID) using newly developed thallium bromide (TlBr) semiconductor materials. The aim is to provide the next generation of technologies for gamma detection and identification with RIIDs, via an Accelerated Development Approach. This next generation is expected to provide cost/benefit tradeoffs superior to the current COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) RIIDs with regards to detection efficiencies, energy resolution, cost, volume, weight, power, gain stabilization, robustness in the field, and (optional) directionality. By the end of this project, a device will be built that will go through a PoC prototype demonstration and testing.

Effort would include demonstration of the TlBr technology, instrumentation of the crystal(s), identification of reliable source of crystals of sufficient quality, integration of core hardware components, and signal processing. The effort shall also include algorithm development and integration, system engineering associated with the power requirements, battery life, volume, weight, and interfacing to controls (GUI). Additionally, handling of long-term stability issues with TlBr (i.e., polarization) has to be addressed, as well as consideration of temperature stability and/or control (e.g., gain stabilization). In order to encourage wide-spread deployment, costs of the crystal semiconductor material has to be shown to be < 50$/cm3 for performance capabilities of better than 1% energy resolution and energy range of 25-3000 keV.

Prototype instrument must meet the following requirements:

Parameter Threshold Objective

Physical Dimensions < 33 cm x 23 cm x 15 cm

Fit within a rectangular solid defined by 10.5 cm in length, 7.5 cm in width, and 3.5 cm in depth

Weight (grams) 1,500 1,100

Power (Battery Life) 8 hr at 25°C 24 hr

FOM* (cm2/%) @ 662 keV 1.2 1.5

System shall detect gamma radiation †

0.66 µR/hr of Co-57 @ 1ft/s &

7.53 µR/hr of Ba-33 @ 1ft/s

0.16 µR/hr of Co-57 @ 2 ft/s & 1.88 µR/hr of Ba-

133 @ 2 ft/s

Energy Resolution 2% @ 662 keV Better than 1% @ 662 keV

Energy Range 25 keV-3 MeV 10 keV – 3 MeV

Device will provide the direction of the radiation source (Optional)

Direction within ± 45 degrees of the radiation source

Direction within a few degrees of the radiation source

Nominal operating conditions Room temperature -20°C to 50°C

Replay Tool (Reference 1) Yes Yes

* Performance would be gauged against a FOM defined, for gammas, as FOM=A*ε/R, where A is the largest 2-dimensional area projection of TlBr crystals facing a radiation source, ε is the photopeak efficiency defined as number of counts in the photopeak relative to the incident number of gamma rays incident on the area A, and R is the energy resolution. (Note this FOM is the same as that used in the SIGMA program [Reference 2].) The FOM shall be calculated for two different energy resolutions: 662 keV and 1.17 MeV.

†For a source which has a real strength (not what is necessarily measured with Offeror’s detector) of 0.66 uR/hr Co57 at some distance x, then Offeror’s detector needs to detect and identify that source were that source to approach from a long distance away at the given speed and come, at closest approach, within x distance and then continue on to a long distance away.

Competitive proposals shall have detailed descriptions of all the main components (hardware, signal processing methods, software, algorithms) required to meet the requirements set forth above, as well as Replay Tool, internal and external testing, scheduling, and teaming. Proposals shall address all of the “Parameters” listed in the Requirements Table above. Research should not emphasize exploratory work on individual components, but instead should emphasize integration and engineering of components to fit the system. Detection algorithm research is acceptable.

Approach to isotope identification algorithms must be presented and specified whether these would be vendor supplied or government furnished equipment (GFE). Consideration should be given to designs, which can be later expanded to provide for larger area detectors. It should be noted that there may be follow-on efforts to incorporate semiconductor thermal neutron detectors into the prototypes, but this present effort is focused on gamma detection only. Environmental testing outside of the specifications above is not a requirement.

This Program would be executed with the option for design/construction iterations along the development path as early prototypes are built and tested and lessons learned are fed back into improved designs. The envisioned schedule is below, although adjustments can be proposed with justification. Projects that were previously funded by the Government or other funding sources may enter at an advanced phase provided that justification is included in the proposal.

Phase / Milestone

Duration (months) Description

PHASE I - SYSTEM DESIGN

I.a

• Detailed conceptual design.

• Performance modeling and comparison to COTS.

• Address all critical scientific and technical issues and risks.

• Conclude FER and report.

I.b 3

• Conduct the necessary R&D (experiments, modeling, analysis, trade studies, etc.) to validate final PoC prototype design choice.

• Conclude in Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and report.

I.c 3

• Demonstrate FOM and detection limits are met.

• Conduct necessary engineering and development to present a

CDR and report.

PHASE II - ITERATION ONE

II.a 6 • Develop, fabricate, and assemble prototype device.

References:

Reference 1: Replay Tool: “DNDO Replay Tool Requirements Specification”, APL Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory AOS Report No. AOS-16-0082; Version 2.0; January 2016.

Reference 2: https://www.darpa.mil/program/sigma

2.3 RTA-03: Nuclear Detection through Centralized Data Analytics With the increase of networking capabilities, it is becoming more common to send data from sensors in the field to a centralized location where the data can be combined with other sources of information, to enhance situational awareness and the capability to detect threats. Conversely, it is more common to send information processed at a centralized location back to the fielded sensor, to improve its performance under the current threat conditions. These fielded sensors could be fixed or mobile, and may or may not be controlled by a human operator.

DNDO is looking to build its capability in centralized data analytics to augment capabilities to detect and prevent the illicit entry, transport, assembly, or potential use of nuclear and

• Demonstrate stable spectrum (no gain shift, or correct for gain shift; no off-set change, or correct for same; no degradation).

II.b 3

• Integrate isotope identification algorithm and demonstrate desired system functionality by detecting and identifying a set of radionuclides in the requirements.

• The initial Replay Tool (Reference 1) should be developed.

II.c 3 • Conclude with TRR and report.

• Submit Test plan for POC demonstration for DNDO approval.

II.d 3 • Vendor Testing & Evaluation and report.

PHASE III - ITERATION TWO

III.a 3 • Redesign as needed to address issues found during testing.

III.b 6

• Construction of revised unit.

• Based on feedback and vendor testing, work with DNDO to develop final CONOPS for testing.

III.c 3 • Vendor Testing & Evaluation and report

PHASE IV - PROOF OF CONCEPT (POC) DEMONSTRATION

IV.a 3 • Finalize Replay Tool and deliver to DNDO

IV.b 3 • POC to include testing against other commercial RIIDs in various different CONOPS

Total 42 https://www.darpa.mil/program/sigma radiological threats against the United States. The goal is interconnected sensors coupled with intelligence and information, to support targeting and detection of threat materials in any number of potential trafficking or smuggling routes. By creating, sharing, and fusing data, the goal is to ensure operators have optimal information to efficiently interdict nuclear and other radioactive materials. Areas of improvement could include nuisance alarm (medical and other legitimate sources) rejection, different inspection protocol for high risk items, predictive analytics to anticipate adversary movements and proactively deploy limited resources, and strategies for moving detection as far “left” as possible (e.g., away from our shores). Approaches that focus on information and data unique to DHS are of particular interest.

Research and development proposals are requested to perform multivariate data analysis, combining information of different types and sources to search for rare events. DNDO’s specific interest is in detection of nuclear and radiological threats, combining physical sensor data (e.g., radiation detectors, video, license plate readers, radiography images) with non-physical information (e.g., cargo manifest, import data, financial information). For the purposes of this BAA, however, proposals that would demonstrate the analysis of any sort of physical and non-physical information (of 4-7 independent streams), are welcomed. Key are analytic techniques that are robust even when labelled data are sparse, for which traditional machine learning techniques may be impaired. The proposal shall state how the information will be combined and how resulting analyses will lead to actionable information and improved overall network performance. The proposal will also indicate what government furnished data may be required to support the research activity, and the offeror’s ability to access and manage said data.

The proposal should be for no longer than a term of three years. After an initial feasibility phase, a spiral development approach is anticipated with approximately six months for each spiral.

This Topic is purposely meant to be very open. Hence, it is highly recommended that a white paper be submitted prior to a full proposal submission.

3 MANAGEMENT APPROACH

3.1 Program Milestone Structure

When responding to the topic descriptions, all offerors should follow the research and development approaches noted in the topic description. If the offeror chooses to propose a management plan that does not follow the phased approaches described herein, the offeror must provide a justification for its own approach, including a discussion of the benefits to the Government with its approach.

Regardless of the approach chosen, all proposals must be submitted with a detailed master plan and schedule, describing the phases of execution to successfully achieve research objectives, and must provide cost information for each phase corresponding to the proposed research structure.

Selection for award constitutes commitment of funding for the initial phase, while funding for the subsequent phases will depend on the performance of the preceding phase and availability of funds.

3.2 Deliverables and Review Cycles

The number and types of reviews and deliverables will be specified in the award document, but it is anticipated to include the reports and reviews described in this Section. The reports shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the award document and mutually agreed on before award. A Final Report that summarizes the project and tasks will be required at the conclusion of the performance period for the award. All reports, briefings, and other documents described below shall be electronically submitted to both the DNDO Program Manager (PM) and either the DHS Contracting Officer or Grants Officer, as appropriate.

The following reports are anticipated in managing funded efforts:

3.2.1 Project Plan, Milestones and Schedule

The project plan includes a task and event-driven plan that documents the significant activities and accomplishments necessary to complete each phase of the project, with greatest detail provided for the initial phase of the effort. The plan should include major milestones for each phase that can be used to assess research progress, and potentially as go/no-go criteria for latter phases of the effort. The plan also includes a detailed spend plan for all tasks necessary to complete the work. The project plan, milestones and schedule should be delivered during the kick-off activities following contract award and should be updated as necessary for each phase of the effort.

3.2.2 Quad Chart and Project White Papers or Summaries

Quad charts are one page documents that provide a very concise summary of the overall effort and are generally updated annually or when significant changes occur within an effort. The quad chart should include a picture, graphic or artist’s conception of the effort in the top left, a summary of technical approach and risks in the bottom left, a summary of relevance and goals on the top right, and a summary of schedule, budget and team in the bottom right. A template is provided in Attachment 8.2. The project summaries are one or two page narratives that are usually used to communicate the nature, scope and impact of a research effort to persons or audiences internal or external to DNDO. Specific templates will be provided for any required white paper or project summary.

3.2.3 Monthly Progress Report (MR)

Brief narrative reports shall be submitted within two weeks after the last day of each month.

These reports will include:

• Program Overview

• A summary of the previous month’s activity,

• Progress achieved against planned goals and milestones,

• Technical program details by major task,

• A summary of technical challenges and risks, and risk mitigation strategies (as necessary)

• An account of all funds expended by task to date,

• Details of research planned for the next month by task,

• Contract schedule status with respect to baseline Gantt chart,

• Description of any publications, presentations or intellectual property stemming from the effort,

• Any changes or organization or personnel involved with effort, and

• Any additional information required by the DNDO PM.

Monthly reports generally should follow a standardized template format that will be provided by

DNDO.

3.2.4 Performance Reviews

Performance Reviews (PRs) will be held every three to six months, or as needed depending on the project risk and duration. A kickoff meeting will take the place of the initial PR, and shall be held within the first three (3) months after contract or grant award. The PR briefing is due one week prior to the PR, for which a suggested presentation outline will be provided by DNDO. A PR briefing will be comprehensive in nature and must include, where appropriate:

Executive summary (30 min)

• Conceptual Overview

• Capabilities; Performance targets; Goals

• Development Approach (technical tasks, teams, schedule)

• Key Challenges / Issues to Address

• Risks; Mitigation

• Accomplishments & Highlights

• Milestones: list all and progress towards each

• Remaining Issues

• Schedule: Gantt chart with milestones & deliverables indicated

• Cost (planned, actual, commitments)

• Effort for next quarter / phase / year as appropriate slides

Detailed technical and programmatic discussion for last quarter (as long as required)

• Accomplishments: Plan vs Actual, per Task activities

• Milestones: progress for each deliverables

• Schedule: Gantt chart by major task with list of milestones & list of deliverables included

• Cost: Expenditure burn over period of performance – monthly plan, actuals, commitments (to date) in graphical form

• Assessment of Feasibility / Proof of Concept

• Proposed Follow-On Effort

• Key Objectives

• Technical issues: risks and mitigation strategy

• Plans to complete Phase

• Technical Plans for next Quarter / to complete Phase, as appropriate

• Cost & Schedule

• Any additional information required by the DNDO PM.

Meeting minutes shall be generated within one week after the PR. The PR does not replace the monthly progress report, unless agreed upon in advance with the DNDO PM.

3.2.5 End of Phase Performance Evaluation & Report

Each phase concludes with submission of an End of Phase Report, and may also include a performance evaluation. If a performance evaluation is required, the briefing material is due one week prior to the evaluation. The performance evaluation will be the basis for determining continued funding for the follow-on phase. The End of Phase Report does not replace the monthly technical report. The evaluation must include, where appropriate:

• Technical progress achieved against phase goals,

• A summary of technical challenges and risks, and risk mitigation strategies,

• A comprehensive account of all funds by program, project, and tasks expended during the phase along with a comparison of these figures with projections from the start of the contract,

• If follow on work is proposed, updates as required to the project plan, milestones and schedule, statement of work (SOW) and cost breakdown for the next phase,

• Lessons learned and their impact on future R&D, and

• Any additional information required by the DNDO PM.

The End of Phase Report and meeting minutes are due two weeks after the evaluation or end of phase, whichever is soonest, and it should address issues raised during the evaluation.

3.2.6 Final Performance Evaluation & Report

Each project concludes with submission of a Final Report due at the end of the final phase of the effort. The final report will be a cumulative, stand-alone document that describes the work of the entire program and project. The final report shall also include “lessons learned” from the effort, recommendations for future research in this area, and a comprehensive accounting of all funds expended. Prior to submission of this final performance report, a final performance evaluation may also occur. If a performance evaluation is required, the briefing material is due one week prior to the evaluation. A final report will be due no later than the end of the final phase’s period of performance.

4 PROCUREMENT OVERVIEW

4.1 Eligible Offerors

Private industry, non-profit organizations, and academic institutions are invited to submit proposals to this BAA, and may team/subcontract with other companies, organizations, and institutions to include FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities, as appropriate, to best utilize their individual strengths.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Minority Institutions (MI), Small and Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), women-owned businesses, and Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUB-zone) enterprises are encouraged to submit proposals, and to join others as team members/subcontractors in submitting proposals. However, no portion of the BAA will be set-aside for these special entities pursuant to FAR 19.502-2.

FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities may not propose directly as prime contractors to this BAA. However, they may collaborate with eligible offerors by providing explicitly identified supporting capabilities. It is the responsibility of the providing laboratory (not DNDO) to identify which supporting capabilities are available. DNDO will neither encourage nor discourage eligible offerors from utilizing FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities. This is at the sole discretion of eligible offerors. All members of the proposed team may participate in proposal preparation and fully participate in the execution of the program. UARCs must include as part of a proposal a statement of permission to participate from the Center's Federal sponsoring activity.

Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Regulations, Export Laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

Note: Pursuant to FAR 25.701, except as authorized by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) in the Department of the Treasury, no contracts shall be awarded as a result of this BAA if any proclamation, Executive Order, or statute administered by OFAC, or OFAC’s implementing regulations at 31 CFR Chapter V, would prohibit such a transaction. Except as authorized by OFAC, most transactions involving Cuba, Iran, and Sudan are prohibited, as are most imports from North Korea into the United States or its outlying areas. More information about these restrictions, as well as updates, is available in OFAC’s regulations at 31 CFR Chapter V and/or on OFAC’s website at http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac.

Note: FAR 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases, is applicable to this BAA and will be included in any resulting contract.

Organizational Conflict of Interest issues will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, as outlined below. Offerors who have existing contract(s) to provide scientific, engineering, technical and/or administrative support directly to DHS DNDO will receive particular scrutiny.

http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac

Organizational Conflict of Interest:

(a) Disclosure. The Offeror must represent, as part of its proposal and to the best of its knowledge that: (1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this Contract; or (2) It has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included the mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision.

(b) Determination. The Contracting Officer may determine that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest, or may provide one or more offerors with the potential to obtain an unfair competitive advantage based on the information provided or based on knowledge of the Contracting Officer.

(c) If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may (1) disqualify the offeror, or (2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the offeror and include the appropriate provisions to mitigate or avoid such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated, or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the Offeror may be found ineligible for award.

(d) Mitigation/Waiver. If an offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes the conflict can be mitigated, neutralized, or avoided, the offeror may submit a mitigation plan to the Contracting Officer for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan.

(e) Other Relevant Information. In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from the offeror. The Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict.

(f) Corporation Change. The successful offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision.

(g) Flow-down. The successful offeror shall insert the substance of this clause in each first-tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold.

4.2 Review and Evaluation Process

It is the policy of DHS/DNDO to ensure an impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all proposals, and to select the source (or combination of sources), whose offer is most advantageous to the Government. Evaluation criteria are stated in Section 6 of the BAA, and include the potential for transformational impact, technical approach, team capability and experience, management approach, and cost/price realism and reasonableness. See Section 6 of the BAA for evaluation criteria and proposal evaluation details.

A review panel drawn from Government and non-Government experts, including system engineering and technical assistant (SETA) support contractors, who have signed appropriate non-disclosure agreements, will support DNDO in performing technical evaluations of the white papers and proposals. National Laboratory personnel on detail to DNDO will be considered Government personnel, for purposes of the technical evaluation of proposals, and will participate in the evaluation subject to conflict of interest considerations.

The Contracting Officer will notify all unsuccessful offerors in writing, at the time of award.

Post-award debriefs may be conducted and specifics regarding debriefs will be included in the notice of award letters and letters to unsuccessful ,fferors.

4.3 Award Instruments

The Government anticipates multiple awards resulting from this BAA. Although multiple awards are anticipated, the Government does not guarantee that will be the result of this BAA.

The awards which are made will typically be issued as FAR-based cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts.

Contracts and Other Transactions will be administered by the cognizant DNDO program office.

Academic institutions may request awards as a Cooperative Agreement. Proposals requesting Cooperative Agreement (CA) awards will be forwarded, evaluated and awarded by the Office of Procurement Operations, Grants and Financial Assistance Division. All applicable CA terms and conditions will apply to such awards.

Contracts will typically be awarded as a base contract with options. The base contract will be for the first phase with a separate option for each remaining phase, to be exercised at the Government’s discretion. The required phase structure is described in the respective Research Topic Area.

4.4 Award Schedule

The Office of Procurement Operations anticipates multiple awards to be made during Summer 2018. This Schedule is subject to change if circumstances warrant. The complete award schedule is outlined in the table found under Section 1 of this BAA.

4.5 Period of Performance

DNDO anticipates awarding contracts or CAs with a base period and option periods depending on the phase structure provided in the respective Research Topic Area. If the offeror chooses to not follow the phased approaches described herein, the offeror must provide a justification for its own approach, including a discussion of the benefits to the Government with its approach. The maximum total period of performance is five years.

5 WHITE PAPER & PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND

CONTENT

DNDO will not reimburse offerors for any white paper or proposal preparation costs.

5.1 White Paper Preparation: Format and Content

Offerors are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED, but not required, to submit a white paper in advance of a proposal (see Section 7.1.1 for instructions regarding the submission of white papers). White papers should capture the essence of a complete proposal and are designed to permit offerors an opportunity to obtain feedback from DNDO on their project without having to go to the expense and effort of writing a proposal. A white paper shall consist of a maximum of four (4) pages, including all pictures, figures, tables, and charts in legible size. The Quad Chart described below is included in the four page limit. The cover sheet will not be included in the four page limit.

A white paper is a single electronic file in PDF format, viewable by Microsoft Windows-7 compatible machines. The individual white paper file size must be no more than 5 MB.