70RWMD22R0000008 Attachment 1 OBAA Topic Solicitation No. 12 - Multi-Sensor Multi-Data Analysis 26 May 2022.pdf

1 | P a g e

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) COUNTERING WEAPONS OF MASS

DESTRUCTION OPEN BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (CWMD OBAA)

TOPIC SOLICITATION NO. 12: 70RWMD22R00000008

1. Topic Solicitation Number: Topic Solicitation No. 12: 70RWMD22R00000008

2. SAM.gov Solicitation Number: 70RWMD22R00000008 for Topic Solicitation No. 12 and

SAM.gov Solicitation Number: 70RDND19R00000003 for the OBAA

3. Topic Solicitation No. 12: 70RWMD22R00000008 Event Dates/Time (Local Eastern Time)

• Notification to Submit Pitch Papers – May 26, 2022

• Potential Offeror Question Submission Deadline – June 2, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Eastern

Standard Time

• Pitch Paper Submission Deadline – July 7, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time

• Pitch Paper Notifications – July 25, 2022

• Proposal Due Date – August 8, 2022, 5:00 p.m Eastern Standard Time

• Notification of Selection/Non-selection of Proposals – August 23, 2022

• Award date (estimated) – 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2023

There will be no exceptions to the time and date on which responses are due, unless determined otherwise by the Government. Proposals received after the designated closing date/time may not be considered. See Sections 5.2.1 and 5.3.1 of the OBAA.

Note: This Topic Solicitation will be conducted in accordance with the Two Phased Evaluation Process as described under Section 1.6 of the OBAA. This Topic Solicitation is being issued in accordance with the notice and solicitation requirements set forth in FAR Part 5 for the FAR Part 35 Research and Development solicitation. The OBAA Solicitation 70RDND19R00000003 was posted on Federal Business Opportunities (FBO.gov) on April 17, 2019. Effective November 12, 2019, FBO.gov is retired, and the OBAA Solicitation 70RDND19R00000003 can now be found on https://sam.gov

This evaluation process will consist of the solicitation, receipt, and evaluation of the pitch papers and proposals. Under this evaluation, Phase 1 of the evaluation process will consist of the solicitation, receipt, and evaluation of the pitch papers from potential performers. Entries in the various sections of the pitch papers should be concise and conform to the specified formatting and word count limitations as indicated in this Topic Solicitation. Repetition of presentation materials should be avoided or minimized as much as possible. No formal transmittal letter is required for Phase 1 responses. Once the pitch paper peer/scientific review process has been completed, potential offerors will be notified in writing, typically via email, whether the potential offeror is “encouraged” or “not encouraged” to submit a full proposal. Potential Offerors are strongly encouraged to take advantage of the pitch paper process, but they are not required to submit a pitch paper in advance of a proposal.

A down-selection process will then be conducted by Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

https://sam.gov/

2 | P a g e

Offerors who submitted Phase 1 pitch papers and were encouraged to submit proposals, will be given the opportunity to participate in Phase 2. As stated in Section 5.2.2 of the OBAA, pitch papers are designed to permit Offerors an opportunity to obtain feedback from CWMD on their project without having to go to the expense and effort of writing a proposal. Therefore, if the Government does not encourage a proposal based on an Offeror’s pitch paper submission, the Offeror may still participate in Phase 2. Phase 2 will consist of the solicitation, receipt, and evaluation of a proposal limited to 16 pages, excluding the cover sheet, Volume II and Volume III. Once the proposal peer/scientific review process has been completed, offerors will be notified in writing, typically via email, that their proposal has either been selected, selected but not funded, or not selected for the award. Potential offerors are strongly encouraged to take advantage of the pitch paper process, but they are not required to submit a pitch paper in advance of a proposal. Pitch Papers and proposals received after the designated closing date/time may not be considered. See Sections 5.2.1 and 5.3.1 of the OBAA.

Offerors not selected for the award may request feedback regarding the peer/scientific review findings of the submitted proposal. A written request to the Contracting Officer must be received within 3 calendar days of notification of non-selection

4. Topic Solicitation Research and Development Focus Areas

CWMD.01 – Data Analytics: Improvements over existing data analytics capabilities or creation of new data analytics capabilities for point, local, regional, national and/or worldwide targeting and interdiction of potential CWMD threats or indicators of potential CWMD threats.

5. Research Opportunity Description

Topic Title: Multi-Sensor, Multi-Data Analysis

Objective: Develop toolkit for fusing data from multiple radiation detectors to achieve enhanced threat detection, reduced false alarm, and operationally focused reporting.

Technology Readiness Level at Beginning: TRL 3 Technology Readiness Level at Conclusion: TRL 5 (Note: TRL definitions can be found in Attachment B of the OBAA.)

Background

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is committed to using cutting-edge technologies and scientific talent in its mission to make America safer. In December 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established the Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) Office by consolidating the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) and a majority of the Office of Health Affairs (OHA). The mission of CWMD is to counter attempts by terrorists or other threat actors to carry out an attack against the United States or its interests using a weapon of mass destruction. The DHS CWMD Research and Development (R&D) appropriation provides resources necessary to identify, explore, and demonstrate new technologies and capabilities that will help enable the DHS and stakeholders to prevent, protect

3 | P a g e against, respond to, and mitigate chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats and incidents.

Priority needs of DHS’s operational components drive CWMD's R&D investments. CWMD looks for the following types of solutions within the chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear mission space:

• Over the horizon, future innovations that will transform the way homeland security operators accomplish their missions.

• Near-term capabilities that will solve current operational challenges and meet the Department's R&D needs.

• New applications of technologies to respond to emerging threats to the homeland.

Among the capabilities that enhance the nation’s defensive posture against nuclear, chemical, radiological, and biological threats and incidents, CWMD manages the Mobile Detection Deployment Program. This program enhances radiological and nuclear detection and interdiction capabilities by deploying equipment and technical support personnel during mission partner counter-terrorism operations, and events of national significance. Mobile Detection Deployment Units (MDDU) may be deployed in support of national special security events, significant state and local special events, multiagency training and exercise activities, and to augment steady-state operations focused on criminal smuggling pathways. MDDUs are a national radiological and nuclear (R/N) detection “surge” asset designed to augment and supplement existing stakeholders’ R/N detection and reporting capabilities. MDDU equipment includes mobile detection systems, portable backpacks, handheld radio-isotope identification devices, and personal radiation detection devices, as well as chemical and biological air monitoring equipment.

As the threat of terrorism evolves, DHS intends to assess a wide spectrum of potential technologies that can enhance its capabilities. Through this solicitation, CWMD seeks to develop enhanced algorithms for networked sensor fusion, threat detection and reporting of principally radiological operational information and secondarily chemical and biological information. The focus will be on MDDU equipment, data types, and operations workflows, but development will produce a set of tools generally applicable to networked sensors in the DHS chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear detection enterprise.

Description

The research topic involves developing a toolkit that will in total provide the following features:

(1) Algorithm for fusion of R/N (or CBRN) sensor data from multiple sensor types and data types. For example, data from a medium resolution, vehicle-mounted radiation detection system reporting gamma spectra each second fused with a singular alarm from a radio-isotope identification device. Once-per-second gamma-ray spectra will be a significant component of the data.

(2) Incorporation of contextual information, which may include sensor position, imagery, video, lidar point cloud of surroundings, weather, operator notes, roadway or facility maps, traffic patterns, historical data, and other information.

(3) End-of-day or after-action reports, editable by an operator, that highlight the fusion of information to provide operational insights.

4 | P a g e

(4) Real time enriched data stream that feed into other operational systems such as common operating pictures.

Currently, operator tools show locations of alarms, condensed data from always-on detectors, and additional contextual information in limited cases. However, simple co-display of sensor data is different than analytical integration of multiple data sources, which is left to an analyst (a human) currently. There is a shortcoming in the automated analysis of data streams and how derived information is efficiently displayed to an analyst, an operations center, or strategic planners at a national level. DHS CWMD will support R&D through this solicitation to enhance the fusion of data streams and enhance the operator experience.

In fusing sensor streams and incorporating contextual information, an important driver is the increase in overall sensitivity while maintaining low false alarms. A goal of the development is to show that an automated, comprehensive analysis over multiple, heterogenous sensors reveals more than the sum of sensor parts individually. Fusion Enhancement Factor will be defined as the increase in sensitivity of a fused system of sensor data relative to the sensors operating in sum but independently.

Performance Threshold: Achieve Fusion Enhancement Factor of 15%.

Performance Objective: Achieve Fusion Enhancement Factor of 30%.

The nominal false alarm rate should be adjustable but target 1 alarm per 24 hours per detector.

While no specific isotope identification algorithm is prescribed, partnerships with national laboratories is encouraged to leverage the Government’s prior and ongoing investment in this area.

To support the R&D effort, DHS will provide a combination non-operational data and operational data. An important aspect is that the data fusion must work with operationally realistic data, which could include GPS dropouts or poor location information, data dropouts, shifting calibrations, operational activities such as equipment checks using small radioactive sources, moving radiation sources, saturated detectors, etc.

Operational data will be available on a DHS-managed Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud. In proposals submitted against this topic area, Offerors should describe the initial set of resources needed for development. This includes AWS computer nodes and any AWS specific tools or software licenses required. Data sets in the development environment will be on the order of a few GB and may be Thrift formatted messages, JSON files, N42.42, and raster images.

DHS CWMD operational data is Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU). Only companies based in the United States of America should respond to this solicitation, and key personnel must be US Citizens. To access the operational detector data, project participants need to pass DHS suitability background screening. They will need to meet training related to the use of IT systems. They may need to obtain a Personal Identity Verification card from a DHS badging office before they can access the DHS-managed cloud. While not all project participants may require direct access to operational data, the expectation is that two to five project participants

5 | P a g e will need background screening, badging, and relevant training. Alternatively, if the Offeror has a secure development environment that has been previously certified to receive, store, and process SBU information, CWMD may transmit SBU datasets once the system has been further vetted by CWMD. All project participants who directly access operational data or view derived products must sign a Sensitive But Unclassified Information Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), as a condition of access to such information.

Phase Structure

The research will occur in a phased schedule with incremental steps towards a final algorithm and toolkit demonstration. Alternative structuring, for example agile development cycles, are negotiable with justification, but DHS requires gate reviews to ensure progress is matching expectations.

Phase I (6 months, not to exceed $350,000) – Review Data Sets, Tailor Approach, Preliminary Design Review Within this phase, the Offeror will:

• Submit personnel for DHS background screening, acquire DHS badges (PIV cards), and obtain access to DHS Workplace As A Service;

• Optionally, work with the CWMD Chief Information Security Officer to demonstrate the ability to securely transmit, store, and process SBU data on the Offeror’s development system;

• Gain familiarity with the data provided and the mechanisms for interacting with the data;

• Access the DHS-managed Amazon Web Server development environment to become familiar with operational data;

• Suggest additional data sources that are generally available and will augment the analysis;

• Tailor the approach for processing individual radiological sensor streams;

• Tailor the approaches for fusing radiological data streams;

• Tailor the approaches for integrating contextual information;

• Estimate the Fusion Enhancement Factor using provided sensor data and contextual data;

• Provide a mockup product for relaying fused data to operators as an after-action report;

• Describe the functionality of the real-time analysis and the products that would be delivered as an enriched output data stream;

• Propose a software framework that will result in a documented, maintainable, and secure code base;

• Conclude the phase with a preliminary design review (PDR).

Deliverables to include:

• Kick-off briefing;

• Monthly progress reports;

• PDR presentation and end of phase summary report;

• Notes from meetings with CWMD.

Phase II (9 months, not to exceed $700,000) – Development Leading to a Critical Design Review

6 | P a g e

Following a successful PDR, the Offeror will:

• Implement the algorithm framework to demonstrate the data fusion components working in concert;

• Preliminarily determine the Fusion Enhancement Factor using provided sensor data and contextual data;

• Develop automated procedures for resolving operationally realistic situations such as data dropouts, equipment checks with small radioactive sources, etc.;

• Implement end-of-day and after-action reporting toolkit with basic operator-user editing and output functionality;

• Implement a continuous processing pipeline that accepts near real-time inputs from sensors and outputs an enriched data stream based on data fusion;

• Demonstrate software framework that will result in a documented, sustainable, and secure code base;

• Conclude the phase with a critical design review (CDR).

• Monthly progress reports;

• Interim software bill of materials;

• CDR presentation and end of phase summary report;

• Notes from meetings with CWMD.

Phase III (6 months, not to exceed $450,000) – Develop the Final Product Leading to a Characterization Readiness Review Following a successful CDR, the Offeror will:

• Finalize the algorithm framework to demonstrate the data fusion components working in concert;

• Finalize determination of the Fusion Enhancement Factor using provided sensor data and contextual data;

• Finalize end-of-day and after-action reporting toolkit, to include printable reports (such as pdf or docx file types), interactive reports (through web browser for example), and output suitable for Global Information System (shapefiles, etc.);

• Provide tool for operator user editing of reports so that they contain the best of automated analysis and operator analysis;

• Finalize the continuous analysis pipeline for enrichment of near real-time data;

• Finalize software package to include source code, compile instructions, documentation, and finalized Software Bill of Materials;

• Conclude the phase with a Test Readiness Review leading into any further DHS testing.

While this is a R&D demonstration effort, the final software package will be an important project artifact. Following the contract, DHS may seek to implement the software as part of a larger networked sensor framework. If there are components of the software that are not generally available and are restricted in Government use rights, then the vendor should provide both the proprietary component and a full-rights functional alternative with documented interface. The performance benefit of the proprietary alternative should be clearly explained to justify incorporation of restrictive software.

7 | P a g e

• Monthly progress reports;

• Source code, documentation, and other resources necessary for DHS to use the toolkit beyond the end of the R&D program;

• Final Software Bill of Materials and other cyber hygiene artifacts in accordance with

Executive Order 14028;

• TRR presentation and comprehensive end of project report.

6. Deliverables: Minimum deliverables required under this Topic Solicitation are disclosed in Section 8.8 and 8.9 of the OBAA, to include monthly reports, performance reviews, end of phase performance evaluation & report for each phase, and final performance evaluation & report. Performers should define additional program-specific deliverables as appropriate for the proposed approach.

7. Number of Selections: CWMD expects to make up to four awards under this OBAA Topic

Solicitation.

8. Anticipated Ceiling: Although subject to appropriations and funds availability, it is anticipated that approximately $1,400,000.00 of (FY) 2022 funds will be available across resultant awards for this OBAA Topic Solicitation for funding the first phase of the effort (up to $6,000,000.00 in total value, across all periods, for all awards). For planning purposes, the overall ceiling should not exceed $1,500,000.00 over a 21-month period of performance for each award. The Government will reserve the right to incrementally fund any resultant contract line-item numbers awarded from this OBAA Topic Solicitation as provided by the FAR 52.232-22, “Limitation of Funds.”

9. Anticipated Award Type: Award type is anticipated to be in the form of FAR-based, Cost

Plus Fixed Fee contracts and/or interagency agreements.

10. Anticipated Award Dates: The 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2023 is when the Government anticipates making a resultant award(s) for this Topic Solicitation. However, the award date may vary based on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

11. Pitch Papers: Pitch papers are being requested for this Topic Solicitation. Potential offerors are strongly encouraged to take advantage of the pitch paper process, but they are not required to submit a pitch paper in advance of a proposal. Pitch paper submission instructions and formatting guidance can be found in Sections 11.1 and 11.2 of this document.

11.1 Pitch Paper Submission Instructions

Pitch papers must be submitted on or before the deadline listed in Section 3 of this Topic Solicitation (no later than 30 calendar days from the Topic Solicitation posting), in electronic format and emailed to inbox – CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov. Pitch paper submissions consist of one attachment in the email submission. Specific guidance is provided below regarding the email and pitch paper file name format.

mailto:CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov

8 | P a g e

In the email subject line, please use “CWMD OBAA Pitch Paper Submission for <organization>, Topic Solicitation No. 70RWMD(FY)R000000##”

Each pitch paper file name should include the following: “CWMDOBAA-PP-0#- XXXX,” where “0#” = number of pitch paper submission, and “XXXX” = four letter character shortcut for organization name.

Example: Company A, Inc.’s submission for one pitch paper comprised of one file in the attached email:

Subject: CWMD OBAA Pitch Paper Submission for Company A, Inc.

The email submission should at least include the following information:

• Organization: Company A, Inc.

• Submitted by: <first last name>, <title>, <email of submitter>

• Topic Solicitation No.: 70RWMD(FY)R000000##

• Attached file for submission:

1) Pitch paper: CWMDOBAA-PP-01-COMA.pdf

• Request for receipt confirmation? (YES or NO)

Hard copy, facsimile, or hand delivered pitch papers will not be accepted.

Pitch papers should be submitted well in advance of the deadline for submission, to ensure completion of the electronic submission process by the date and time of the deadline, as stated in this Topic Solicitation. Any pitch paper submissions received by the Government after the deadline for submission will not be accepted. It is highly encouraged that offerors do not wait until the last minute to submit their pitch paper(s). Receipt of pitch papers will be handled in accordance with FAR 15.208 and FAR 52.215-1.

11.2 Format and Content of Pitch Paper

Pitch papers should capture the essence of a complete proposal and are designed to permit potential offerors an opportunity to obtain feedback from CWMD on their proposed project without having to go to the expense and effort of writing a full proposal. Such exchanges are to improve the understanding of Government requirements and industry capabilities, thereby allowing the potential offerors to judge if they can satisfy the Government’s requirements and to enhance the Government’s ability to obtain quality supplies and services, at reasonable prices, and increase efficiency in proposal preparation, proposal evaluation, and contract award. A pitch paper shall consist of a maximum of two pages, including all pictures, figures, tables, and charts in legible size. The quad chart described below is included in the two-page limit. The cover sheet and fully executed non-disclosure agreement (NDA) mentioned in Section 14 will not be included in the two-page limit.

A pitch paper is a single electronic file in PDF format, viewable by Microsoft Windows-10 compatible machines. The individual pitch paper file size must be no more than 20 MB.

Pitch papers shall not exceed two pages (standard size: 8.5” by 11”) using 1” margins and

9 | P a g e

12- point fonts or larger for text and 9-point fonts or larger for pictures, figures, tables and charts. The pitch paper should contain the following information in this order:

• Cover Sheet (see Attachment 2 for format, not included in two-page limit).

• Quad Chart (see Attachment 3 for format, included in two-page limit).

• One-page summary (included in two-page limit) capturing information not included in the quad chart or coversheet abstract to include:

o Technical Approach and Critical Path: Describe the main research goals, and main tasks and methodologies to be employed to achieve these goals.

Point out the critical research path to the proposed investigation, to include what will specifically be accomplished during the initial phase(s) of the effort to achieve research objectives.

o Team Capability and Experience: List and describe the extent of your team’s experience and current capabilities to successfully execute the proposed research project.

o Management Approach: Provide a summary description of the management structure and approach for the effort.

o Cost: Provide a Rough Order of Magnitude cost to accomplish the technical approach.

If the pitch paper is found to be responsive to the topic, CWMD will schedule a brief (no more than 20 minutes) scientific engagement discussion with the offeror. The primary purpose of the scientific engagement discussion is for the Government to learn more about the proposed prototype, the potential offeror, and its capabilities. The Government will not be obligated by these discussions, and nothing discussed will authorize the potential offeror to work, start work, or bill for work. During these scientific discussion engagement sessions, CWMD:

• Will ask clarifying questions about the information provided in the pitch paper. This includes questions to obtain a better understanding of the advantages and issues associated with a technical approach.

• Will not attempt to replace the potential offeror’s original ideas with their own.

• Will not provide information concerning the objectives/criteria of the topic to one potential offeror without providing the information to all potential offerors.

• May note that a particular proposed feature or capability is not required by the

Government to meet topic objectives or criteria and will provide that information regarding such functions or capabilities to all potential offerors.

• Will not share ideas of technical solutions that were provided by another potential source.

After this review, CWMD will notify potential offerors, either encouraging or not encouraging submission of a proposal. It is anticipated that responses will be provided no later than 10 days after the pitch paper deadline. If a proposal submission is not encouraged, the general basis for the opinion to not encourage further participation will be provided. If a proposal submission is encouraged, comments and questions regarding the pitch paper submission will be provided, which may include comments regarding the potential offeror’s apparent capability and experience and management approach.

10 | P a g e

Pitch papers will be reviewed against four criteria in order of importance: Strategic Impact, Technical Approach, Capability and Experience, and Management Approach. A description of these criteria can be found in Section 13 of this document.

12. Proposal Format and Submission Process:

CWMD will not reimburse offerors for any proposal preparation costs. Proposals shall remain valid from the date of submission for at least six (6) months.

Offerors shall submit proposals no later than the deadline set forth in the Topic Solicitation and the notification letters encouraging proposal submission. Offerors shall submit proposals in electronic format and email their proposals to inbox – CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov. An offeror may choose to alter their ideas, concepts, technical approaches, etc. or expand on their original ideas reflected in the offeror’s pitch paper (if submitted) at any time after the submission of the offeror’s pitch paper and prior to the offeror’s submission of their proposal. Exchanges between the Government and a potential offeror regarding the potential offeror’s pitch paper are not binding.

Proposals consist of three separate documents described in detail below:

• Volume I: Technical and Management proposal (Not to exceed 16 pages). The cover sheet

(Attachment 4) and fully executed NDA (if submitting a proposal only and not a pitch paper followed by a proposal) will not be included in the 16-page limit.

• Volume II: Supplemental Data (Not to exceed 30 pages).

• Volume III: Cost proposal (No page limit).

• If an offeror submits a fully executed NDA, as mentioned in Section 14, with a pitch paper and chooses to submit a proposal, they do not need to submit an additional fully executed NDA with the proposal. If an offeror submits a proposal only, then they must submit a fully executed NDA with the proposal.

Volume I is the primary document to be evaluated by the technical reviewers, with Volumes II and III providing supporting information. Note that Volume I should be a standalone document describing, consistent with the sections below, the material aspects of the proposed effort. The supplemental material in Volumes II and III are intended to support Volume I’s statements and ensure compliance with non-technical aspects of the solicitation. All volumes will be evaluated by the Contracting Officer to ensure compliance with the requirements of the OBAA and this Topic Solicitation. For instance, Volume III will serve as the formal cost submission for future contracting discussions should the proposal be recommended for the award from a technical aspect.

Specific guidance is provided below regarding the email and proposal file name format.

Offerors shall submit proposals in electronic format and email their proposals to the inbox – CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov. In the email subject line, please use “CWMD OBAA Proposal

11 | P a g e

Submission for <organization>, Topic Solicitation No. 12: 70RWMD22R00000008”.

Each proposal file name should include the following: “CWMDOBAA-VOL#-FP-0#-XXXX,” where “VOL#” = volume number, “0#” = number of proposal submission, and “XXXX” = four letter character shortcut for organization name.

Example: Company A, Inc.’s submission for one proposal comprised of the three separate files in the attached email:

Subject: CWMD OBAA proposal Submission for Company A:

• Volume I file name: CWMDOBAA-VOL1-FP-01-COMA (.pdf file)

• Volume II file name: CWMDOBAA-VOL2-FP-01-COMA (.pdf file)

• Volume III file name: CWMDOBAA-VOL3-FP-01-COMA (.xls or .xlsx file)

The email for the proposal submission should at least include the following information:

• Organization: Company A, Inc.

• Submitted by: <first last name>, <project title>, <email of submitter>

• Topic Solicitation No: Topic Solicitation No. 12: 70RWMD22R00000008

• Attached Files for Submissions:

1. Volume I – CWMDOBAA-VOL1-FP-01-COMA.pdf

2. Volume II – CWMDOBAA-VOL2-FP-01-COMA.pdf

3. Volume III – CWMDOBAA-VOL3-FP-01-COMA.xls (or .xlsx)

• Request for receipt confirmation? (YES or NO)

Hard copy, facsimile, or hand delivered proposals are not accepted.

Offerors shall submit their proposals well in advance of the proposal submission deadline, in order to ensure completion of the electronic submission process no later than the date and time of the deadline, as set forth in the particular Topic Solicitation. Any proposal submissions received by the Government after the submission deadline will not be accepted unless receipt of the proposal would not unduly delay the acquisition and it was the only proposal received. It is highly encouraged that offerors do not wait until the last minute to submit their proposal(s).

The three volumes consist of three separate electronic files, which may need to be delivered to the Government in separate emails but may be transmitted in a single email if size limitations permit. Volumes I and II will only be accepted in PDF format. Volume III will only be accepted in Microsoft Excel format (only .xls and .xlsx files are acceptable). The maximum file size for each volume is 20 MB. Memory sizes of graphic images should be minimized before insertion into any of the files and should support clear display and document printing. Non-conforming proposals may be rejected without review and the Offeror will be removed from consideration for award.

12 | P a g e

Volume I: Technical and Management Proposal (16 pages)

Volume I shall provide the primary technical and management description of the proposal.

Volume I is the primary document to be evaluated by the technical reviewers, with Volumes II and III used as supplementary material. Volume I shall not exceed sixteen (16) pages of standard size (8.5” by 11”) using 1” margins in 12-point fonts or larger for text and 9-point fonts or larger for pictures, figures, tables and charts for all Topic Solicitations. Volume I shall include the sections described below. The section headings below are mandatory, the page limits for each section are suggestions, and only the overall limit of 16 pages will be considered during compliance checks. Proposals for which Volume I exceeds the 16 page limit will have any pages above the 16 page limit removed and those pages will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Quad Chart (1 page) The general quad chart can be found in Attachment 3. The proposal quad chart content does not have to be the same as the pitch paper quad chart, but it should be in a similar format.

Strategic Impact (1.5 pages) Describe how the intended research will provide strategic impact to the CWMD mission to counter attempts by terrorists or other threat actors to carry out an attack against the United States or its interests using a weapon of mass destruction.

• What CWMD need(s) is/are being addressed and discuss the impact on that need(s) if the project were successful?

• What is the expected performance of the technology or system with respect to the research Topic Solicitation objectives and/or current-state-of-art? What are the quantitative performance improvements expected?

• How will this performance dramatically reduce the technical, performance, or cost risks in achieving CWMD mission objectives?

• What are the envisioned transition activities for the resulting technology, to include identification of CWMD end user?

Technical Approach (4 pages) This narrative section should describe in detail what is intended to be accomplished and the premise or theory justifying the approach taken. It should describe the fundamental principle, premise, or theory that the work will explore, the scientific approach being pursued to explore this premise, and how the results or data from the effort will be analyzed and/or evaluated. This section should also provide some detail as to why this approach was taken, and an estimate of the risk in achieving research goals. In developing the technical approach, the following should be considered:

• Is there a clear understanding of the research objectives and driving goals?

• Are the research objectives/goals clearly supported by appropriate performance modeling, analysis, or existing literature, and are quantitative performance metrics defined, as appropriate?

• What technological choices were made and why, including trade studies which were made and alternate technologies/approaches which were considered?

• What is the likelihood the research goals are achievable as proposed in pursuit of the stated research objectives?

13 | P a g e

Technical Implementation (4.5 pages) This section should provide a detailed outline of the plans and rationale for technical implementation including a summary of proposed tasks (work breakdown structure) for each phase of the effort. The discussion of Phase I tasks is expected to be more comprehensive than those of the follow-on phases. The narrative should answer the following questions:

• What key research or development tasks are needed to execute the effort?

• Is the technical plan clear, detailed, and complete to fully explain how research objectives will be met?

• Have likely risks in the proposed technical approach been identified and is there a risk mitigation strategy?

• What is the critical path and Milestones (MSs) for the effort? Have methods been proposed for assessing technical progress?

Capability and Experience (1.5 pages) This section should provide an overview of the offeror’s experience with fusing data from multiple radiation detectors to achieve enhanced threat detection, reduced false alarm, and/or operationally focused reporting. This section should address the following:

• Team’s understanding of past scientific and technical accomplishments and the current state-of-the art knowledge or technology.

• Prior experience and performance of the team (to include history of subcontractor performance, if applicable) in related efforts demonstrating an ability to perform innovative research and deliver results/products within proposed budgets/schedules.

• Completeness of proposed team to complete all required tasks.

Management Approach (2 pages) This section should provide an overview of the proposed management approach, tools, and management processes to be used to execute the project. This section must provide:

• Delineation of schedule, phasing and MSs via integrated master plan and schedule (including all hardware deliverables and reviews). The schedule shall be presented in a Gantt chart.

• Delineation of roles, responsibilities and coordination among all team members and organizations, to include description of how subcontractors (if applicable) will be managed.

• If necessary, a brief summary of required information, facilities, equipment, materials and data which must be provided by the Government to support the proposed work.

• If necessary, a security plan that describes the rationale for what aspects of the work need to be protected, at what level, and proposed strategy for doing so.

Cost/Price (1.5 pages) This section should provide an overview of the total cost of the proposed work. This section must provide:

• The type of award vehicle proposed.

• A narrative description of the cost and cost-estimation approach.

• Cost allocation over all phases.

• A listing of costs per task for Phase I, itemized as shown in the table below.

14 | P a g e

Task Labor ($k) Materials and

Supplies ($k)

Capital Equipment ($k)

Travel ($k)

Subcontracts ($k)

Total ($K)

N

Total

• A listing of costs per phase, over the entire project, itemized as shown in the table below.

Phase Labor ($k) Materials and

Suppli es($k)

Capital Equipment ($k)

Travel ($k)

Subcontracts ($k)

Total ($k)

I

V

Total

*Note: For each subcontractor and consultant cost, the prime offeror must submit a detailed breakdown by labor, materials, equipment, travel and other costs.

Volume II - Supplemental Data Proposal (30 pages)

Volume II, the Supplemental Data proposal, will be used to ensure the proposal guidelines have been met. Volume II may not exceed 30 pages of standard size (8.5” by 11”) using 1” margins in 12-point fonts or larger. The section is mandatory (Statement of Work (SOW)); the other sections (Technical Approach, Management Approach, Small Business Considerations, Employee Eligibility Verification, and Assertion of Data Rights) are optional.

Statement of Work Provide a detailed SOW, by task, for all phases of the proposed work using the template provided (Attachment 5 for FAR-based, Cost Reimbursement-type contracts; Attachment 6 for interagency agreements under the Economy Act; or Attachment 7 for interagency agreements with Department of Energy National Labs). Tasks and sub-tasks up to three levels are recommended for efforts of high complexity. Quantitative performance or time MSs must be defined. Describe all deliverables proposed under this effort, including data, software, and reports, material, or systems consistent with objectives of the work involved.

Technical Approach Provide additional or supplemental technical information and data not included in Volume I.

Management Approach Provide additional or supplemental information describing how the overall effort will be managed.

Small Business Considerations Proposals that exceed $750,000, except for those submitted by small business concerns, must include

15 | P a g e a Small Business Subcontracting Plan, in accordance with FAR Subpart 19.7 and FAR 52.219-9.

The plan is included in the 30-page limit. Although the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required to be included in the proposal for FAR compliance, the plan is not an evaluated factor.

Proposals that do not include a required plan will receive no further consideration.

Regardless of the proposed dollar value, all offerors shall indicate their business size status and list all subcontractors and their business size statuses. All offerors are encouraged to offer subcontracting opportunities to small businesses to the maximum extent practicable.

Employment Eligibility Verification Include a statement specifying compliance with FAR Clause 52.222-54.

Assertion of Data Rights Include a summary of any assertions to any technical data or computer software (as each term is defined in FAR 52.227-14(a)) that will be developed or delivered under any resultant award. This includes any assertions to pre-existing results, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype. Any rights asserted in other parts of the proposal that would impact the rights in this section must be cross-referenced. If less than unlimited rights (as defined in FAR 52.227-14(a)) in any data delivered under the resultant award are asserted, the offeror must explain how these rights in the technical data or computer software will affect their ability to deliver research data, subsystems, and toolkits for integration as set forth below. Additionally, the offeror must explain how the program goals are achievable considering these proprietary and/or restrictive limitations in the technical data or computer software. If there are no claims of proprietary rights in pre-existing data, this section shall consist of a statement to that effect.

Proposals submitted in response to any topic issued against this OBAA shall identify all technical data or computer software that the offeror asserts will be furnished to the Government with restrictions on access, use, modification, reproduction, release, performance, display, or disclosure. Offeror’s pre-award identification of such claims shall be submitted using the following table as an attachment to their offer and shall contain the following information:

Assertions Table

For each deliverable listed in the below table, please identify any assertion of restriction on the Government’s use, release, or disclosure of technical data or computer software.

Deliverable

Technical Data or Computer Software to be Furnished With Restrictions*

Basis for

Assertion**

Asserted Rights

Category***

Name of Person Asserting

Restrictions****

*For technical data (other than computer software documentation) pertaining to items, components, or processes developed at private expense, identify both the deliverable technical data and each such item, component, or process. For computer software or computer

16 | P a g e software documentation identify the software or documentation.

**Generally, development at private expense, either exclusively or partially, is the only basis for asserting restrictions. For technical data, other than computer software documentation, development refers to development of the item, component, or process to which the data pertain. The Government’s rights in computer software documentation generally may not be restricted. For computer software, development refers to the software. Indicate whether development was accomplished exclusively or partially at a private expense. If development was not accomplished at a private expense, or for computer software documentation, enter the specific basis for asserting restrictions.

***Enter asserted rights category (e.g., Government purpose license rights from a prior contract, limited, restricted, or Government purpose rights under this or a prior contract, or specially negotiated licenses).

****Corporation, individual, or other person, as appropriate, or enter “none” when all data or software will be submitted without restrictions.

Completed by:

Signature Date Printed Name and Title

(1) Statement of Assertion. Include the following statement: “The Offeror asserts for itself, or the persons identified below, that the Government’s rights to access, use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose only the following technical data or computer software should be restricted.”

(2) Identification of the technical data or computer software to be furnished with restrictions. For technical data (other than computer software documentation) pertaining to items, components, or processes developed at a private expense, identify both the deliverable technical data and each such item, component, or process as specifically as possible (e.g., by referencing specific sections of the proposal or specific technology or components). For computer software or computer software documentation, identify the software or documentation by specific name or module or item number.

(3) Detailed description of the asserted restrictions. For each of the technical data or computer software identified above in paragraph (2), identify the following information:

(i) Asserted rights. Identify the asserted rights for the technical data or computer software (Please see FAR 52.227-14 and FAR 52.227-15).

(ii) Copies of negotiated, commercial, and other non-standard licenses. The offeror shall attach to their proposal copies of all proposed negotiated license(s), offeror’s standard commercial license(s), and any other asserted restrictions other than Government purpose rights; limited rights; restricted rights; rights under prior Government contracts, including

17 | P a g e

SBIR data rights for which the protection period has not expired; or Government’s minimum rights.

(iii) Specific basis for assertion. Identify the specific basis for the assertion. For example:

• Development at a private expense, either exclusively or partially. For technical data, development refers to development of the item, component, or process to which the data pertains. For computer software, development refers to the development of the software. Indicate whether development was accomplished exclusively or partially at private expense.

• Rights under a prior Government contract, including SBIR data rights for which the protection period has not expired.

• Standard commercial license customarily provided to the public.

• Negotiated license rights.

(iv) Entity asserting restrictions. Identify the corporation, partnership, individual, or other person, as appropriate, asserting the restrictions.

(4) Previously delivered technical data or computer software. The offeror shall identify the technical data or computer software that are identical or substantially similar to technical data or computer software that the offeror has produced for, delivered to, or is obligated to deliver to the Government under any contract or subcontract. The offeror does not need to identify commercial technical data or computer software delivered subject to a standard commercial license.

(5) Estimated Cost of Development. The estimated cost of development for that technical data or computer software to be delivered with less than unlimited rights.

(6) Supplemental information. When requested by the CO, the offeror shall provide sufficient information to enable the CO to evaluate the offeror’s assertions. Sufficient information must include, but is not limited to, the following:

• The contract number under which the data or software were produced.

• The contract number under which, and the name and address of the organization to whom, the data or software were most recently delivered or will be delivered.

• Identification of the expiration date for any limitations on the Government’s rights to access, use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose the data or software, when applicable.

Note: The Bayh-Dole Act shall apply for any patentable materials, technologies, or knowledge developed on a contract resulting from this Topic Solicitation. The Government reserves nonexclusive, perpetual, royalty-free licensure of any materials developed under a contract resulting from this Topic Solicitation.

(7) Ineligibility for award. An offeror’s failure to submit or complete the identifications and assertions required by this provision with their offer may render the offer ineligible for award.

18 | P a g e

Note: This section entitled “Assertion of Data Rights” must be severable, i.e., it must start on a new page. It is anticipated that the proposed Assertion of Data Rights will be incorporated as an attachment to the resultant award instrument. Proposals must include a severable self-standing Assertion of Data Rights section without any proprietary restrictions, which can be used to make the contract or agreement award.

Volume III - Cost Proposal

The cost proposal shall consist of a cover page and a detailed cost by task/sub-task using the same task numbers used in the SOW. Options must be separately priced. The purpose of this volume is to provide detailed backup information for the summary costs provided in Volume I. There should be a clear correlation between the information in these two volumes, including, but not limited to, total amounts proposed. Volume III has no page limitations.

The cost of preparing proposals in response to this OBAA is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract or any other award.

Per FAR 16.301-3 Cost Reimbursement Contracts Limitations: The Contractor must have an approved accounting system to be eligible for a Cost Reimbursement Contract award.

Those who have not been audited by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) for a cost-type contract will be required to undergo an audit prior to a cost-type contract award. The DCAA website at: http://www.dcaa.mil/index.html has been prepared by DCAA to assist contractors in understanding applicable requirements and to help ease the contract audit process.

Cover Page

The phrase “Cost proposal” should appear on the cover page in addition to the following information:

1) OBAA number

2) Topic solicitation number

3) R&D Focus Area (See Section 4 herein)

4) Proposal ID for Volume I

5) Title of proposal

6) Type of classifications

7) Identity of prime offeror and complete list of subcontractors, if applicable

8) Technical point of contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address)

9) Administrative/business point of contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address)

10) Duration of effort (separately identify the basic effort and any options)

11) Unique Entity ID (UEI) – formerly DUNS

12) TIN/EIC

13) Banking Information:

a) Bank Name

b) Bank Routing Number (ABA) http://www.dcaa.mil/index.html

19 | P a g e

c) Swift (BIC - Bank Identifier Code; Applicable for foreign vendor payments to non-U.S. banks)

d) Bank Account Number

e) IBAN (Applicable for foreign vendor payments to non-U.S.