70RWMD23R00000014 Amendment 0001 with Attachments.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a)By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE

DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Attachment 1 Topic Solicitation #16 RFP Amendment#

70RWMD23R000000140001

1 | P a g e

ATTACHMENT 1: TOPIC SOLICITATION

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) COUNTERING

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (CWMD) OPEN BROADAGENCY

ANNOUNCEMENT (OBAA)

TOPIC SOLICITATION NO. 16

RFP NO. : 70RWMD23R00000014

1. Topic Solicitation Number: Topic Solicitation No. 16

2. SAM.gov Solicitation Number: Topic Solicitation Request for Proposal (RFP) No. :

70RWMD23R00000014 and OBAA Solicitation No. : 70RDND19R00000003

3. Topic Solicitation No. Event Dates/Time (Local Eastern Time)

• Topic Solicitation Posted – August 29 2023

• Potential Offeror Question Submission Deadline – September 11, 2023, by 5:00

PM Eastern Time

• Proposal Due Date – November 1, 2023, by 5:00 PM Eastern Time

• Notification of Selection/Non-Selection of Proposals (estimated) – 1st Quarter FY 24

• Award date (estimated) – 2nd Quarter FY24

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 and time will not be considered. For more information, please see section 5.3.1 of the OBAA.

Note: This Topic Solicitation will be conducted in accordance with the Single 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 5 for this FAR 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 proposals only, limited to 13 pages, excluding the cover sheet, Volume II, Volume III, or NDAs. Once the peer/scientific review process has been completed, an Offeror will be notified in writing, typically via e-mail, that its proposal has been selected, selected but not funded, or not selected for award.

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

https://sam.gov/

2 | P a g e

4. Topic Solicitation Research & Development Focus Areas:

CWMD.04 – Chokepoint Optimization: Technologies to improve the ability to scan conveyances for threats and other anomalous activities at chokepoints (ports-of-entry, rail scanning) through development of new capabilities to optimize chokepoint operations or to improve performance of currently deployed sensors for scanning conveyances at chokepoints.

CWMD.05 – Nuclear Sensing: Technologies to provide cross-cutting improvements to nuclear threat detection through dramatically improved performance or reduced costs when compared to Commercial off the Shelf.

5. Research Opportunity Description Topic Title: Neutron Generator for Security Applications

Objective: Develop neutron generators to efficiently perform high-quality scans of a variety of cargo items in an inspection environment.

Minimum Technology Readiness Level at Beginning: TRL 2 Minimum Technology Readiness Level at Conclusion: TRL 5-6 (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 2018, the Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Act authorized the creation of the DHS Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office (CWMD). The mission of CWMD is to lead DHS efforts and coordinate with domestic and international partners to safeguard the United States against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) and health security threats. The DHS CWMD Research and Development (R&D) appropriation provides resources necessary to identify, explore, demonstrate new technologies and capabilities, and refine existing technologies and capabilities that will help enable the DHS and stakeholders to prevent, protect against, respond to, and mitigate nuclear, chemical, radiological, and biological 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:

• Near-term capabilities that will solve current operational challenges and meet the

Department's R&D needs.

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

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

As the threat of terrorism evolves, DHS intends to assess a wide spectrum of potential technologies that can enhance its capabilities.

3 | P a g e

Description Active interrogation of cargo with neutrons has been demonstrated for detecting multiple threats of interest under the Mobile Active Interrogation using Neutrons program. This neutron interrogation method is complementary to X-ray scanning of cargo and is particularly well suited for detecting nuclear threats concealed in thick shielding. However, currently available neutron generators do not have the properties required to quickly and efficiently scan cargo in an inspection environment. These available neutron generators do not have the necessary reliability and robustness for field applications, and the ECR ion sources in use are limited in their ability to produce a short fall-time pulse. A neutron generator to be used in the cargo screening environment must overcome the challenges of increasing yield and pulse quality for improved threat detection, while being sufficiently ruggedized and operating in a compact form-factor.

Metric Target Goal Average yield when operating at 100% duty factor, although pulsed operation mode is required

>1010 n/s >1011 n/s

Fast pulse rise time and fall time <1µs / <10µs

Low dark current <10-6 of peak output after fall time

Compact form factor < 1 m3 with all components

Snout design of target area 1” diameter

Operation in field environments -30°C to 50°C, varying humidity

Long lifetime 1000 operating hours between major downtime

Low Cost < $100,000 unit cost

It is expected that the neutron generator produced during this development is capable of performing in an environment relevant to end-user operations. This could include screening cargo ranging from small packages to sea cargo containers. Threat of interest to be used during testing include special nuclear material (SNM), explosives, and drugs. The generator should have low maintenance requirements, and should require minimal input from an expert operator. It should be able to accurately determine neutron output in real time, and correct for any deviations from set values.

Phase Structure This will be a phased development activity, with schedule determined by the type of the proposed development. All phases are event driven but will at minimum have one progress update with the government to ensure timely progression of each phase.

Additional progress updates will be at the discretion of the government to ensure performer is successfully progressing towards the projected schedule plan provided by the performer.

Novel Source Design

4 | P a g e

Phases I – IV is not to exceed 40 concurrent months. Offerors are to propose Phase periods/durations that best meets their proposed approach.

For the purposes of contract line organization, the government structured CLIN phases with general periods follows:

Phase I (Base Period): 10-month Phase II (Option Period 1): 12-month Phase III (Option Period 2): 12-month Phase IV (Option Period 3): 6-month Phase

Note: Offerors are not constrained to these periods/durations for their phases unless their proposed approach aligns to them.

• Phase I, Feasibility Evaluation Review: Perform initial research and development on technical requirements, issues, and risks. Produce conceptual design for neutron generator, initial plans for prototype development, and estimates of final operating specifications. Estimated Funding for the Phase I efforts should not exceed $500k.

Deliverables:

• Feasibility Evaluation Review (FER) and report.

• Phase II, Preliminary Design Review: Design and testing of prototype components in a laboratory environment. Initial results should support the proposed design direction towards the full system, and further refine the results of the FER. Final technical performance parameters should also be estimated based on predicted system limitations.

Estimated Funding for the Phase II efforts should not exceed $1M.

• Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and report.

• Component-level results to support the initial system design.

• Phase III, Critical Design Review: Conduct the necessary research and development to design the proposed generator, culminating in a Critical Design Review (CDR) and report. Component production and testing should begin, leading towards integration of the generator. A draft plan for characterizing the generator’s performance should also be developed in collaboration with CWMD. Estimated Funding for the Phase III efforts should not exceed $1.5M.

• CDR and report.

• Components developed to support the plan laid out in the CDR.

• Initial characterization plan draft for a relevant environment, developed with CWMD and end users.

• Phase IV, Proof of Concept Demonstration: Support characterization of the generator in an operationally-relevant environment. Optimize performance to field conditions by fixing emerging technical difficulties, and report on final characterization results.

5 | P a g e

Estimated Funding for the Phase IV efforts should not exceed $500k.

• Final generator optimized to operational conditions, supporting user and design documentation, and all supporting equipment and operating software.

• Characterization report with evaluated performance and descriptions of emerging technical difficulties.

ECR Source Improvements

Phases I – III is not to exceed 28 concurrent months. Offerors are to propose Phase periods/durations that best meets their proposed approach.

For the purposes of contract line organization, the government structured CLIN phases with general periods follows:

Phase I (Base Period): 10-month Phase II (Option Period 1): 12-month Phase III (Option Period 2): 6-month Phase

Note: Offerors are not constrained to these periods/durations for their phases unless their proposed approach aligns to them.

• Phase I, Preliminary Design Review: Proposed full system design and testing of prototype components in a laboratory environment. Initial component results should support the proposed design direction towards the full system. Final technical performance parameters should be estimated based on predicted system limitations. Estimated Funding for the Phase I efforts should not exceed $800k.

• Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and report.

• Component-level results to support the initial system design.

• Phase II, Critical Design Review: Conduct the necessary research and development to design the proposed generator, culminating in a Critical Design Review (CDR) and report. Component production and testing should begin, leading towards integration of the generator. A draft plan for characterizing the generator’s performance should also be developed in collaboration with CWMD. Estimated Funding for the Phase II efforts should not exceed $1.5M.

• CDR and report.

• Components developed to support the plan laid out in the CDR.

• Initial characterization plan draft for a relevant environment, developed with

CWMD and end users.

• Phase III, Proof of Concept Demonstration: Support characterization of the generator in an operationally-relevant environment. Optimize performance to field conditions by

6 | P a g e fixing emerging technical difficulties, and report on final characterization results.

Estimated Funding for the Phase III efforts should not exceed $500k.

• Final generator optimized to operational conditions, supporting user and design documentation, and all supporting equipment and operating software.

• Characterization report with evaluated performance and descriptions of emerging technical difficulties.

6. Deliverables: Minimum deliverables required under this Topic Solicitation are disclosed in Sections 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. These may include but are not limited to prototypes, algorithms, or software packages, and will be negotiated upon selection. The government requests unlimited government rights for all software and algorithms developed under this topic.

7. Number of Selections: CWMD expects to make up to two (2) awards, in total, resulting from this topic solicitation. It is anticipated that up to two (2) awards will be made in FY24 using FY24 funding.

8. Anticipated Ceiling: Although subject to appropriations and funds availability, it is anticipated that no more than $3.5M in funding will be available for an individual resultant award for this OBAA topic solicitation over a 40-month period of performance for novel source development. For ECR source improvements, it is anticipated that no more than $2.8M in funding will be available for an individual resultant award for this OBAA topic solicitation over a 28-month period of performance

Note: 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: The Government intends to award Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts and/or Interagency Agreements under this topic solicitation.

10. Anticipated Award Dates: The 2nd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2024 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. Proposal Format and Submission Process: CWMD will not reimburse Offerors for any proposal preparation costs. Offerors must submit proposals no later than the deadline set forth in the Topic Solicitation. Proposals shall remain valid from the date of submission for at least six (6) months.

Proposals consist of three separate documents described in detail below:

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

(OBAA Attachment D) will not be included in the 16 page limit);

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

7 | P a g e

• Volume III: Cost Proposal (no page limit).

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 stand-alone document, describing, consistent with section 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. For instance, Volume III will serve as the formal cost submission for future contracting discussions should the proposal be recommended for 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 Submission for <organization>, Topic Solicitation No. 16/RFP: 70RWMD23R00000014”

Each proposal file name will 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 a minimum include the following information:

• Organization: Company A, Inc.

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

• Topic Solicitation Information: Topic Solicitation No.: 16 RFP 70RWMD23R00000014

• Attached Files for Submissions:

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

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

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

• Request for receipt confirmation? (YES or NO)

Hard copy, facsimile, or hand delivered proposals are not permitted or 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 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).

mailto:CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov

8 | P a g e

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 searchable 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.

Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal 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 thirteen (13) 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 exceed the 16 page limit will have any pages above the 16 page limit removed and those pages will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Cover Sheet (see OBAA Attachment D for format, not included in page limit)

Quad Chart (1 page) The Quad Chart format can be found in Attachment E of the OBAA.

Strategic Impact (1 page) 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 (3 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. The narrative should include what proposed change(s) will be assessed and how those changes are proposed to meet the specified objectives (i.e., cost, performance). In addition, this section should

9 | P a g e clearly detail how the proposed effort will advance the ability to do biosurveillance and biodetection. Lastly, this section should provide some detail as to why this particular 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?

• Will proposed changes/improvements meet specified objectives and how?

Technical Implementation (3 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 so as 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 for the effort? Have methods been proposed for assessing technical progress?

Capability and Experience (2 pages) This section should provide an overview of the team composition and experience and must include short biographies of all key personnel. 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 the proposed team. That is, are key personnel and partners identified who have the required range of competencies to execute this effort?

• 1-2 paragraph biographies for each key team member to include education, relevant experience, and proposed roles; and

• Ongoing related efforts of each team member, with source and level of funding. Explain, as appropriate, how ongoing, or relatively recent efforts relate to the proposed work.

Management Approach (1.5 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:

10 | P a g e

• Delineation of schedule, phasing and milestones 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 subcontractors (if applicable) will be managed;

• Approach for project management including management experience of the team and use of appropriate management tools, as applicable

• 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 among team members summed over all phases.

• An itemized description of any individual material and supplies or capital equipment item that exceeds $10K.

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

Task

Labor ($k)

Materials and Supplies ($k)

Capital Equipment

Trave l ($k)

Subcontracts

Total ($k)

I N Total

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

Phase

Labor

Materials and Supplies ($k)

Capital Equipment

Trave l ($k)

Subcontracts

Total ($k)

I V Total

11 | P a g e

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

Résumés Provide a résumé for each key personnel listed in Volume I. A list of relevant publications (if any) must also be included. Each résumé shall be no more than two (2) pages.

Statement of Work Provide a detailed statement of work (SOW), by task, for all phases of the proposed work using the template provided (Attachment 2). Tasks and sub-tasks up to three levels are recommended for efforts of high complexity. Quantitative performance or time milestones 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.

This section should include a detailed proposed test plan for Phase II Proof of Concept testing and any proposed testing of prototypes to be completed in Phase III and IV.

This section should also include detailed explanation (and any supporting data) detailing how the Biodetection system will meet all objectives to include but not limited to;

detection/identification ability in urban environments (indoor/outdoor), costs for instruments and any consumables to include both individual and bulk pricing, and maintenance.

Supporting Test Data:

Provide any supporting test data that show performance both in the laboratory and in operational environments, of any COTS devices that will be used or incorporated into the system design plan.

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 a Small Business Subcontracting Plan, in accordance with FAR Subpart 19.7 and FAR 52.219-9. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is included in the 30 page limit. Although the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required to be included in the proposal, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not an evaluated factor. Proposals that do not include a required Plan will receive no further consideration.

12 | P a g e

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 its 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 in light of 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 Assertions Table as an attachment to its 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 software documentation identify the software or documentation.

**Generally, development at private expense, either exclusively or partially, is the only

13 | P a g e 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 private expense. If development was not accomplished at 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 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. Offeror shall attach to its offer for each listed item 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 SBIR data rights for which the protection period has not expired; or government’s minimum rights.

14 | P a g e

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

• Development at 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 need not 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 Contracting Officer, the Offeror shall provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer 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; and

• 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.

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 its offer may render the offer ineligible for award.

Please 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-

15 | P a g e 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 in the Statement of Work. 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.

When a government accounting review of the prospective contractor’s accounting system hasn’t been completed within the past four years, or there’s no other information is available, a pre-award survey of the prospective contractor’s accounting system may be needed. 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 words “Cost proposal” should appear on the cover page in addition to the following information:

1) OBAA number;

2) Topic Solicitation number;

3) Research & Development Focus Area (See Section 2.1);

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 Identifier (UEI);

12) TIN/EIC;

13) Banking Information:

a) Bank Name

b) Bank Routing Number (ABA)

c) Swift (BIC - Bank Identifier Code; Applicable for Foreign Vendor Payments to non-

US Banks)

d) Bank Account Number

e) IBAN (Applicable for Foreign Vendor Payments to Non-US Banks)

f) Account Type (Checking/Savings)

14) In accordance with FAR 4.1201, prospective Offerors for contracts and for OTAs involving prototypes (Section 845), shall state the representations and certifications in the System for Award Management Application (SAM) at http://www.dcaa.mil/index.html

16 | P a g e https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1#1 have been completed and shall provide the Certification Validity period; and

15) The signature and title of an authorized representative of the entity submitting the proposal. If multiple organizations are participating, one signature from the principal/leading organization is acceptable.

Cost proposal Detailed Bases of Estimates (BOEs) are required for all tasks/sub-tasks in the SOW. The Offeror should provide a total estimated price for major demonstrations and other activities associated with the program, including cost sharing, if any. The Offeror should state whether any Independent Research and Development (IR&D) program is or will be dedicated to this effort, or if IR&D is being pursued to benefit related programs as well. Any cost sharing estimates should include the type of cost share, i.e., cash or in-kind. If in-kind is proposed, the Offeror should provide a discussion of how the cost share was valued. For the Government to determine the reasonableness, realism, and completeness of the cost proposal, the Offeror shall submit Microsoft Excel spreadsheet(s) with a detailed cost breakdown of all proposed costs by cost categories, including quotes, receipts, historical pricing, payroll records, catalogue pricing, etc. to include the following sets of data:

• Labor: Labor cost is defined as the number of direct labor hours multiplied by their respective hourly rates (unburdened). Labor cost shall be segmented by task for the initial phase. Provide a breakdown of labor hours and rates for each task/sub-task by category of personnel.

• Direct Materials: Total direct material that will be acquired and/or consumed during the project. Summary information shall be supplied for all material items. Provide detailed information only for all material items (e.g., how the estimated expense was derived) to include copies of price lists or quotes or price estimates for proposed materials. Material costs shall be assigned to specific work tasks.

• Subcontracts: Describe the work in detail to be subcontracted, the source, the estimated cost, and the basis for this estimate. Subcontract labor and material shall be accounted for per the two paragraphs above. A summary chart showing each major subcontractor labor and material effort by work phase is required. For each subcontractor, provide the basis for selection, a narrative explaining why the price is reasonable and any adjustments the prime may have made to the subcontractor’s price.

• Travel: Total proposed travel expenditures relating to the period of performance. Limit this information to the number of trips, location, duration, number of travelers, and purpose of each trip. Travel should include travel to Washington, DC for performance reviews. Travel costs must be itemized for each segment listed above, and then totaled.

Note: Travel shall be proposed to as a separate contract line item number (CLIN).

Additionally, Offerors shall not apply fee to travel, as it is an unallowable cost.

• Indirect Costs: Include current negotiated indirect rate agreements, letters, and the names of cognizant audit agencies. If no such agreements exist, provide a detailed listing and explanation of indirect costs and/or rates. DCAA or other audit organization’s audited statements are required to support indirect cost rates. The proposal must list the https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1%231

17 | P a g e name, telephone number and email address of the Offeror’s DCAA contact person/office.

• Other Direct Costs: Any direct costs not included above. List the item, the estimated costs, and the basis for the estimate with supporting documentation.

• Fee: Any proposed fee/profit and appropriate justification.

The Price/Cost proposal should be consistent with your proposed SOW. Activities such as demonstrations required to reduce the various technical risks should be identified in the SOW and reflected in the Price/Cost proposal. The Offeror should provide a total estimated price/cost for the major Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) activities associated with the program.

Note: The Prime and Sub-contractors using exchange rates must include the exchange rate used and shall provide the origin/source of the exchange rate in the proposal submission.

12. Proposal Evaluation Criteria:

The evaluation of proposals will be accomplished through an independent technical review using the following criteria, which are listed in descending order of relative importance.

Criterion I: Strategic Impact The following items will be considered and evaluated:

• How the proposed concept/methodology/approach/effort, if successfully executed and realized, is likely to provide a solution to address CWMD needs in achieving the mission objective 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, as intended by the relevant topic area

• How likely the proposed concept/methodology/approach/effort, if successfully executed and realized, is to provide an opportunity to transition the envisioned technology to a CWMD operational end user;

• Likelihood of providing risk or threat reduction, dramatically improving performance, reducing costs and/or increasing effectiveness resulting in a significant impact in achieving CWMD mission objectives relative to current state-of-the-art. This will include how the proposed concept/methodology/approach addresses the goals and objectives of the research topic area; and

• Whether this effort is being duplicated or is redundant under funding from either CWMD or another government activity, and the risk and/or reward, if successful, does not warrant multiple efforts in the same area.

Criterion II: Technical Approach

• Understanding of the research objectives and driving goals, to include appropriate performance modeling and analysis, and development of quantitative performance metrics and technical milestones for the project, as appropriate;

18 | P a g e

• Clarity, completeness, feasibility, and achievability of the proposed technical plan (and supporting statement of work), with task descriptions and associated technical elements in a logical sequence with all proposed deliverables; Proposed trade studies, performance modeling, analyses and experiments required during the initial phase of the effort; Proposed methods for assessing technical progress to include milestones and go/no-go criteria; and Adequacy of initial identification of key technical risks and their associated mitigation strategies;

• Likelihood the research is achievable as proposed, in pursuit of the stated research objectives;

and

• Clearly addresses how the proposed redesign differs from current COTS device design.

Criterion III: Capability and Experience

• Completeness of the proposed team to perform the required research, to include identification of key team members and their qualifications/competencies;

• Prior experience and performance of the team (to include history of subcontractor performance, if applicable) in related efforts demonstrating an ability to 1) perform innovative research, 2) deliver results within proposed budgets and on schedule, and 3) successfully transition or commercially develop subsequent products; and

• Team’s understanding of past scientific and technical accomplishments, and the current state-of-the-art of knowledge or technology. Similar efforts completed/ongoing by the Offeror in this area are fully described including identification of other Government sponsors.

Criterion IV: Management Approach The following items will be considered and evaluated:

• Delineation of schedule, phasing and milestones that is consistent with the proposed technical approach and the SOW. The proposed schedule identifies and mitigates any potential schedule risk;

• Delineation of roles, responsibilities and coordination among all team…