Attachment 1 OBAA TS No. 13 Multi Mode Ceramics 70RWMD22R00000010.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. 13: 70RWMD22R00000010

1. Topic Solicitation Number: Topic Solicitation No. 13: 70RWMD22R00000010

2. SAM.gov Solicitation Number: 70RWMD22R00000010 for Topic Solicitation No. 13 and SAM.gov Solicitation Number: 70RDND19R00000003 for the OBAA

3. Topic Solicitation No. 13: 70RWMD22R00000010 Event Dates/Time (Local Eastern Time)

• Notification to Submit Pitch Papers: September 8, 2022

• Potential Offeror Question Submission Deadline: September 15, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time

• Pitch Paper Submission Deadline: October 11, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time

• Pitch Paper Notifications: November 14, 2022

• Proposal Due Date: December 05, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time

• Notification of Selection/Non-selection of Proposals: December 27, 2022

• PRs to OPO: January 04, 2022

• Award date (estimated) March 06, 2022 – 60 days from receipt of PR packages

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 Section 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 5 for the 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 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.

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.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. Topic Information

Topic Title: Multi-Mode Ceramic-Based Scintillation Detector Discovery and Development

Objective: Identify and/or discover ceramic-based detector materials which have multi-mode (gamma and neutron sensitive) capabilities. Characterize, demonstrate, scale-up, test and ultimately transition to commercialization.

Technology Readiness Level at Beginning: TRL 2 Technology Readiness Level at Conclusion: TRL 4 (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 against, respond to, and mitigate nuclear, chemical, radiological, and biological threats and

3 | P a g e 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.

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

Several advances in recent years have transformed the world of detector materials and their capabilities. Two advances are particularly noteworthy, one of which is dual- or tri-mode single-crystal scintillator materials which can simultaneously detect not only gamma rays but thermal neutrons and, for certain materials, fast neutrons as well. These “multi-mode” materials offer numerous advantages such as reducing the need for two or three separate dedicated detectors, thus reducing the size, weight, and power (SWAP) requirements for a detector instrument and the associated operational and sustainment burden and costs. In particular, these multi-mode materials that were developed had respectable sensitivity (efficiency) and specificity (energy resolution).

The other noteworthy advance is the achievement of transparent ceramic-based scintillator gamma detection materials with good spectroscopic capabilities. These ceramics offer unique mechanical, environmental, and radiological material properties while providing high performance at low cost.

Some of the advantageous properties of ceramics compared to non-ceramic solutions are mechanical robustness, radiation hardness, chemical inertness, non-hazardous/toxic nature, environmental robustness, non-hygroscopicity, ease of fabrication, flexibility in manufacturing form factor, and low cost. Each of these two major advances took much time, effort and cost to achieve.

Description

This topic seeks to combine the two recent advances in detection materials discussed above into one material – namely, a ceramic scintillator with multi-mode capability for integration into radiation detectors.

The material would need to exhibit the potential for good sensitivity (efficiency) and specificity (energy resolution) as well as exhibit many of the unique properties of ceramics. The process of identification/discover could initially include a materials survey if necessary. Once the best material options are identified, the aim is to demonstrate their performance in small scale samples (on the order of centimeters), develop to the point of demonstrating a moderate-sized (on the order of a few inches), multi-mode ceramic, which can then be further developed, optimized, scaled up in size (on the order of many inches), tested, and made commercially available.

4 | P a g e

Specific research areas of interest that the proposal should focus on include understanding the state of the art regarding multi-mode detectors and transparent scintillating ceramics. Focus should consider important performance characteristics such as sensitivity (efficiency) and isotope identification specificity (energy resolution). Performance should be gauged against COTS, recently developed new materials, and other materials presently under development, which are not multi-mode, and which are not ceramics. Additionally, the other attributes of ceramics mentioned above should be characterized and documented.

Outputs from this effort would include identification of a number of potential materials with their performance properties documented including other properties of interest such as mechanical, chemical, environmental, as well as the projected ultimate estimated cost of manufacturing/fabricating such materials. Once the best material options are identified, and with the approval of CWMD, the next output would be the fabrication of samples of these materials large enough to perform better analysis of their expected performance. If initial results are encouraging, then the next step would be to start further scale-up in size to commercially relevant sizes. Finally, a desired output is transition to industry for commercialization.

Areas of research that are not of interest for this topic include materials whose performance is significantly worse than the separate benchmark examples of state-of-the-art multi-mode crystals and ceramics. Present day multi-mode materials include, for example, CLYC and CLLBC, with energy resolutions (at 662 keV) from 3-5%. Present day ceramics include, for example, GYGAG and GAGG (or GGAG) with energy resolutions on the order of 4-5%.

Of interest is a collaborative team (e.g., involving academia, national labs, industry, as appropriate) that can help identify best materials and scale-up and test the down-selected best options for material choice. It is of particular interest to include and/or identify an industrial partner by which the developed material can ultimately be commercialized, and have this industrial partner involved from early in the effort.

Phase Structure

A notional phase structure is provided below, which can be modified and/or abbreviated or compressed as appropriate in the Offeror’s proposal based on technology maturity available from the Offeror. As an example, Offeror may enter at a later phase if their technical readiness warrants such.

For All Phases: Proposals should specify for each phase well-defined and described tasks, milestones, and deliverables. Deliverables are to include monthly reports, end of phase reports, and briefing materials from nominally quarterly technical project reviews as well as special reviews.

• Phase I – Feasibility Evaluation (Duration = 9 months):

Conduct necessary research and development focused on addressing as much as possible all critical scientific and technical issues and risks, leading to conceptual designs, and

5 | P a g e concluding in a Feasibility Evaluation Review (FER) and report. The total cost of Phase I should not exceed $500,000.00.

Outputs from this effort should include identification of a number of potential materials based on their performance properties and characteristics. Identification of candidate materials can be a product of a combination of trade studies, literature surveys, theoretical calculations and modeling predictions, known past experimental developments, or initial experimental tests performed within the effort itself on new material samples.

Phase I should include candidate (by compound formula) table along with a description of all of the following performance properties and characteristics:

o Efficiency (sensitivity) o Specificity (energy resolution): Threshold: 6%; Objective: 3% (at 662 keV) o Density o Effective atomic number Zeff o Bandgap o Radiation hardness o Environmental robustness o Mechanical hardness o Non-hygroscopicity o Chemical inertness o Toxicity/Non-hazardousness o Ease of manufacture o Flexibility in manufacturing of different geometric form factors o Cost of raw materials o Cost of manufacturing/fabricating o Availability of raw materials o Cost/volume of final samples o Self-radioactivity level of material

Deliverables:

o Along with deliverables applicable for all phases, deliverables are to additionally include a kickoff meeting with associated briefing materials provided in advance and minutes provided post-kickoff.

o Report on candidate list, describing all the characteristics of each.

• Phase II – Preliminary Design (Duration = 12 months):

Following a successful FER, conduct the necessary research and development (experiments, modeling, analysis) to validate the best PoC material choices, culminating in a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and report. The total cost of Phase II should not exceed $750,000.00.

Once the best material options are identified from Phase I, and with the approval of CWMD, the next output would be the fabrication of samples of these materials large enough (on the order of cm or more) to perform better (experimental) analysis of their expected performance and properties.

Table in Phase I should be updated appropriately based on new data and results.

Deliverables:

o Fabrication of samples of best candidates (on the order of cm or more).

6 | P a g e o Report on all updated performance properties and characteristics enumerated in Phase I description.

• Phase III – Preliminary Design (Duration = 12 months):

Following a successful PDR, conduct the necessary engineering and development to present a Critical Design Review (CDR) and report. The total cost of Phase III should not exceed $750,000.00.

If initial results are encouraging, conduct scale-up in size to commercially relevant sizes (on the order of inches or more).

Deliverables:

o Fabrication of samples of best candidates (on the order of inches or more).

o Report on all updated performance properties and characteristics enumerated in Phase

I description.

• Phase IV – Test Readiness (Duration = 12 months):

Following a successful CDR, proceed to develop, fabricate, and assemble a prototype component, culminating in a Test Readiness Review (TRR) and report. Submit testing a demonstration (T&D) plan for the Proof-of-Concept (PoC) demonstration for CWMD approval. The total cost of Phase IV should not exceed $900,000.00.

Deliverables:

o Test Readiness Review (TRR) and report o T&D Plan for PoC demonstration.

• Phase V – Proof-of-Concept Demonstration (Duration = 12 months):

With participation of CWMD, execute the T&D plan and generate a comprehensive report to date for the effort. Following a successful execution of the T&D Plan for the PoC demonstration, proceed to develop a plan for transitioning the technology to industry for commercialization. It is understood that this may require a continued interaction between technology developers and commercial industrial manufacturers due to differences in manufacturing facilities capabilities. The total cost of Phase V should not exceed $900,000.00.

Deliverables:

o Report on execution of T&D Plan.

o Plan for transitioning technology to industry for commercialization.

o Along with deliverables applicable for all phases, deliverables are to additionally include a comprehensive final report in addition to the end of phase report.

6. Deliverables: Minimum deliverables required under this Topic Solicitation are disclosed in

Section 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.

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

7 | P a g e

8. Anticipated Ceiling: Although subject to appropriations and funds availability, it is anticipated that approximately $1,000,000.00 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 funds will be available across resultant awards for this OBAA Topic Solicitation for funding the first phase of the effort (up to $3,800,000.00 in total contract value, across all periods, for all contracts).

For planning purposes, the overall ceiling should not exceed $3,800,000.00 over a 57-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

Reimbursement-type contracts (Cost Plus Fixed Fee type).

10. Anticipated Award Dates: The 2nd 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.

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 will 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) mailto:CWMDOBAA@hq.dhs.gov

8 | P a g e

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 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 capturing information not included in the quad chart or cover sheet 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

9 | P a g e 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.

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).

10 | P a g e

• 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. 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 Submission for <organization>, Topic Solicitation No. 13: 70RWMD22R00000010”.

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 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. 13: 70RWMD22R00000010

• 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.

11 | P a g e

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.

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?

12 | P a g e

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?

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 relative to ceramic-based and/or multi-mode (gamma and neutron sensitive) radiological/nuclear detector materials fabrication, development, and testing. 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

13 | P a g e

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.

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 ($k) Materials and Supplies ($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). 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.

14 | P a g e

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 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.

15 | P a g e

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 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.

16 | P a g e

(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 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.

17 | P a g e

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.

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.

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 4.1 of the OBAA)

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) UEI

12) TIN/EIC

http://www.dcaa.mil/index.html

18 | P a g e

13) Banking Information:

a) Bank Name

b) Bank Routing Number (ABA)

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. 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 that the representations and certifications in the System for Award Management Application (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1#1 have been completed and shall provide the Certification Validity period.

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 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 its respective hourly rates (unburdened).