BAA Amendment 5_N0002417IWS5A01_Announcement_Posting.pdf

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

SUBMARINE AND SURFACE COMBAT SYSTEM SENSOR AND

SIGNAL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGIES

General Information:

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Number: N00024-17-IWS5A-01

***Posted Date: 16 March 2023

Amendment 5 revises Sections 1.2, 1.3, 3.2, 3.4 and 8.0 (changes reflected in bold excluding paragraph headers):

1.0 Purpose

1.1 The Naval Sea Systems Command, Advanced Development Office for Undersea Systems within the Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems (PEO IWS), is intending to solicit proposals through the use of a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) (see FAR 35.016) for research interests in advanced undersea technologies in the areas of submarine and surface ship sensors and signal processing as elaborated in Section 1.2 below.

1.2 The Navy’s primary objective for this BAA will be the acquisition of applied research for the advanced development of capabilities in the below stated areas. Innovative concepts, methods or approaches are solicited rather than focusing on a specific system or hardware/software solution.

These concepts, methods or approaches will be tested in a prototype system to ensure compatibility with existing solutions/systems before being rapidly transitioned to Fleet introduction via appropriate acquisition programs.

The Navy will continue to accept White Papers on submarine and surface ship sensors and signal processing topics; Computing Technologies and Sensors, Active Sonar Signal Processing (bi-static sonar, parametric sonar, parasitic sonar), Electronic Warfare (detection, localization, and recognition), Torpedo Defense (active and passive), and Automation (target motion analysis, path determination, contact correlation), which were previously posted:

Computing Technologies - Application of sophisticated computing technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Deep Learning or Machine Learning and Predictive Analytics, to address:

o Detection of man-made signals o Cyber Security, to include recognition of cyber attacks o Decision Support o Detection and classification of ships from visual images

Sensors:

o Development and fabrication of towed array telemetry components utilizing Government standard interface definitions defined in the Open Architecture Telemetry (OAT) framework.

o Development, design and fabrication of prototypes of advanced imaging and Electronic Warfare (EW) sensors to meet current and future submarine mission requirements as detailed in classified descriptions provided on request

Additionally, the Navy is seeking White Papers in the following Undersea Warfare topic areas:

Theater ASW Prediction, Assessment, and Situational Awareness Active Sonar Signal Processing (bi-static sonar, parametric sonar, parasitic sonar) Electronic Warfare (detection, localization, and recognition) Torpedo Defense (active and passive) Automation (target motion analysis, path determination, contact correlation) Imaging

The Navy is not seeking white papers in the following Undersea Warfare topic area:

Training

Note: Technologies developed for a particular application may be reused in a different effort (e.g., submarine signal processing capability reused for surface combatant ships).

1.3 The Navy will not be conducting an Industry Day but will provide technical information, upon request, during the open period of this BAA in order to elaborate on the areas of research interest in Section 1.2.

If you would like to receive a hard copy power point brief(s) on a topic, complete the Broad Agency Announcement Material Request Form, Attachment 1 and the Terms of Use Agreement, Attachment 2, and return the form to the following emails: margaret.c.stout2.civ@us.navy.mil, vincenzo.l.bianco.civ@us.navy.mil, and shannon.l.vineyard.civ@us.navy.mil no later than 17 April 2023.

For receipt of classified brief(s), be sure to include a company address that is able to receive, and store the classified material that will be mailed out. If your company is not cleared to receive, by mail, and store classified material, you will be unable to receive the classified hard copy power point briefings. Each company location will receive only ONE (1) copy of the brief(s).

2.0 Proposal Selection Process and Contract Information

2.1 A two-phased (Phase I and Phase II) selection process will be utilized under this BAA. This approach will save the Navy and offerors considerable expense by not requiring development of full proposals unless necessary and desired by the Navy.

2.2 Phase I of the selection process consists of an invitation to submit White Papers describing technical approach, experience of key personnel, past performance and a cost estimate in any of the technology improvement areas listed in Section 1.2 above. White Papers are initially sought to preclude unwarranted effort on the part of the offeror in also preparing full technical and cost proposals without an initial assessment of the technical and operational feasibility of the concept by the Navy. Offerors submitting White Papers may be invited to submit a full cost proposal and technical proposal (if requested) on all or part of their White Paper submission. However, any such invitation is in no way an obligation on the part of the Government to award a contract.

Decisions regarding the invitation to submit a full proposal will be based on the Navy’s evaluation under Section 7.0 below. Furthermore, White Papers may be summarily rejected for any of the following four (4) reasons: 1.) White Paper is not germane to research interests identified in Section 1.2 above; 2.) White Paper was tried in the past or is in an existing capability; 3.) White Paper has high schedule and/or cost risk or is unaffordable; or 4.) White Paper is insufficiently mature for advanced sensor or signal processing development which requires a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of at least 3.

2.3 Phase II of the selection process will consist of a request from the Government to the offeror(s) for full cost proposal and technical proposal (if requested) for a maximum of a five (5) year period of performance to support the Navy in the technology improvement areas listed in Section 1.2 above. This effort will include maturing the technology leading to laboratory and at-sea testing, and participating in technical/program reviews. An offeror can be considered for contract award only upon preparation and submittal of a fully compliant Phase II proposal based on the Government’s Request for Proposal (RFP). The Government may choose to include coverage for extending a selected capability for reuse in other applications (e.g. submarine technologies may be extended for reuse on surface applications).

2.4 It is anticipated that Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF), Level of Effort contract(s) will be awarded under Phase II of this selection process. It is also anticipated that Technical Instructions (TIs) will be issued to guide specific efforts as required. Travel, Material, and Other Direct Costs will be cost only. Contract periods of performance will include a base year with up to four (4), one

(1) year options for a total performance period of up to five (5) years. Since NAVSEA and its affiliated PEOs have funded related technology development under numerous programs, submittals that build on current or previous Department of Defense (DoD) work are encouraged.

However, if offerors are enhancing work performed under other DoD projects, they must clearly identify the point of departure, what existing work will be brought forward, and what new work will be performed under this BAA. Industry, academia, Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses, educational institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Minority Institutions are all encouraged to participate.

3.0 General Source Selection Information (See FAR 2.101 and 3.104)

3.1 Any contract(s) awarded based on responses to this BAA are considered to be the result of full and open competition (see FAR 6.102(d)(2)(i)) and are in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law (PL) 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984.”

3.2 The planned schedule for this BAA is as follows: This BAA will be open for thirty six (36) months from the original date of posting (27 June 2017) to Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) for Phase I, during which time White Papers shall be submitted. To be considered for the fifth round of White Paper technical evaluations, White Papers for the applicable topic areas shall be submitted to NAVSEA PEO IWS 5.0 no later 17 April 2023. Phase I White Papers, submitted in response to this BAA, shall be mailed to Meg Stout at the following address: Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command, ATTN: Code PEO IWS5A (Meg Stout), 1333 Isaac Hull Avenue, SE, Stop 2040, Washington Navy Yard, D.C. 20376-2040.

(Note: E-mail submittals of White Papers will not be accepted).

3.3 The Navy intends to complete review of White Papers for the applicable topic areas and will provide notification to industry based on that review. White Papers will be reviewed for technical importance to PEO IWS 5.0 areas of interest outlined in Section 1.2 and funding availability. All White Papers selected by the Navy for Phase II will be invited to submit a full cost proposal and technical proposal (if requested) based on an RFP issued by the Navy to that offeror.

3.4 Offerors are advised that only the Contracting Officer is legally authorized to bind the Government. All contractual and technical questions regarding this BAA must be directed to the Contracting Officer: Shannon Vineyard at 202-781-0429 or email:

shannon.l.vineyard.civ@us.navy.mil and Contract Specialist: Vincenzo Bianco at 202-781- 3317 or email: vincenzo.l.bianco.civ@us.navy.mil. Questions should be submitted as soon as possible and will be answered as expeditiously as possible by the Government.

4.0 White Paper and Full Proposal Preparation Costs

Offerors are hereby advised that the Government will not pay for any White Paper or full proposal preparation costs resulting from this BAA. The cost of preparing White Papers and full proposals is NOT an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract that may be awarded as a result of this BAA, or any other contract with the Government.

5.0 Data Rights & Proprietary Data

5.1 The Government desires a minimum of Government Purpose Rights in technical data (FAR 52.227-14) delivered under any contract resulting from the two phased selection process described herein. If the offeror is enhancing work performed under other DoD project, they must clearly identify the point of departure, what existing work will be brought forward, and what new work will be performed under this BAA. This explanation must include specific identification of data rights asserted for existing work that will be brought forward and data rights other than Government Purpose Rights which would be asserted on work to be performed under this BAA and rationale for such assertion.

5.2 The Government (along with selected scientific and engineering expert personnel as well as support contractor personnel as stated in Section 7.2 below) will treat White Papers the same as bid and proposal information (see DFARS 252.227-7016). White Papers or full proposals containing data that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the

Government except for evaluation purposes shall include the following statement on the cover page:

“This document includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purposes other than evaluation. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of, or in connection with, the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, and disclose this data to the extent provided in the resulting award document. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets marked "Proprietary" or that contain the legend prescribed by FAR 52.215-1.”

6.0 Submission Information

6.1 The Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the White Papers or full proposals received in response to this BAA. Offerors must be able to certify that they have an appropriate facility clearance and safeguarding capability to meet the security requirements of work proposed, and key personnel must be vetted by their respective Facility Security Officer (FSO) as holding an appropriate security clearance and access. The security clearance level required for these efforts is at the SECRET level.

6.2 White Papers (Phase I): White Papers MAY BE CLASSIFIED up to the SECRET level and no more than fifteen (15) pages, excluding resumes and draft Statements of Work. Submit White Papers in accordance with DoDM 5200.01-V1 through V4. Utilize the following Security Classification Guides (SCG) for proper classification of the information contained within the White Paper: SCG ID# 05-003.01 Acoustic Warfare, Submarine, Confidential and SCG ID# 05-

128.2 High Frequency Active and Passive Submarine Sonar, Unclassified. No supplemental information should be submitted such as supporting videos; but screenshots or photos may be submitted provided it is within the page limit. A separate White Paper shall be submitted for each individual research interest proposed; no grouping of White Papers. White Papers shall include the following information as a one-file submittal:

1. Cover page, including company name and address, proposal title, area of technology improvement being addressed, technical and administrative points-of-contact, along with email address, telephone and facsimile numbers. (Note: provide one e-mail address to use for any Government notification letters);

2. Executive Overview of the proposed technology improvement area as well as a summary of any innovative claims, experience of the key personnel and company past performance in this area;

3. Technical Description, which should be sufficiently accurate and complete to assist the Government to write a Statement of Work, and consist of discussions of the technology improvement(s) being proposed and the ingenuity associated with the concept, method or approach. Provide a summary of the deliverables including data associated with the proposed technology improvement(s). If any portion of the proposed effort is predicated upon the use of

Government-owned resources of any type, the contractor shall clearly identify: the resources required, the date the resource is required, the duration of the requirement, the source from which the resource may be acquired, if known, and the impact on the effort if the resource is not provided. This section should specifically address any intellectual property claims associated with the outcome of this effort. Specifically, the offeror shall justify the use of proprietary, vendor-unique, or closed components including but not limited to hardware, software and interfaces in current or future designs. Providing rights other than Unlimited or Government Purpose Rights to the Government may result in not receiving an invitation to submit a full cost proposal and technical proposal (if requested);

4. Resumes of key personnel that include relevant experience in the technology area proposed (excluded from page limit). (Note: It is preferred that the file name be formatted as:

CompanyName_FirstNameLastName_Resume.pdf);

5. Discussion of past performance detailing at minimum three (3), and maximum five (5), recent (within the last five (5) years) accomplishments and work which are in any way relevant to the effort required by this BAA. This should include previous cost and schedule performance, contract numbers, and appropriate points of contact with their phone and/or e-mail address;

6. A high level schedule for the proposed effort;

7. Draft Statements of Work (SOW) including deliverables and key milestones, by fiscal year, to accomplish the effort proposed in the White Paper (excluded from page limit);

8. Cost Estimate in $K on a fiscal year basis (October 20XX– September 20XX+1) for up to five (5) years;

9. Indicate if an existing contract can be utilized for this effort, and provide the contract number and point-of-contact information; and

10. Pages are to be 8.5 x 11 inch, single-sided. Minimum font is 10 point. For each White Paper submission, to PEO IWS5A, Meg Stout, (see Section 3.4 above) include three (3) electronic copies via a CD enclosed within a protective covering. Electronic submittals (CD), should be clearly readable as a ‘pdf’ version (an additional Word (.doc) document is unnecessary), and avoid sending an electronic copy of a scanned version. It is important to ensure the CD itself is marked with the company name, BAA N00024-17-IWS5A-01, date, White Paper title, and area of technology improvement, and proper classification marking (Unclassified or Classified). It is preferred that the entire file name be:

CompanyName_Title_WhitePaper.pdf.

6.3 Full Cost Proposal and Technical Proposals (if requested) (Phase II): If solicited by the Contracting Officer, offerors shall submit their cost proposal (three (3) paper copies and three (3) electronic copies) and technical proposal (if requested) (three (3) paper copies and three (3) electronic copies) in accordance with and by the time and date requested in the RFP.

7.0 Evaluation

7.1 The selection of White Papers submitted in response to this BAA will be based on a scientific and peer review process. The major purpose of the evaluation will be to determine the merit of the technical approach of each White Paper. The selection of White Papers to continue through to Phase II of this process will be based on the potential benefits to the Government weighed against the cost estimates provided in the White Papers, in view of the availability of funds.

7.2 If White Papers are not summarily rejected for the reasons cited in Section 2.2 above, then evaluation will be based on the following criteria in descending order of importance:

1. Technical Merit/Approach and Key Personnel Experience;

2. Past Performance; and

3. Cost estimates for budgetary feasibility.

Note: Each White Paper will be evaluated against the above criteria, using the adjectival ratings below, and not against each other since White Papers are not submitted in accordance with a common work statement. Any White Paper not receiving a technical merit/approach and Key Personnel experience evaluation rating of acceptable or superior will not be evaluated for past performance or cost for budgetary feasibility.

Adjective Rating for Technical Merit/Approach and Key Personnel Experience:

Superior: White Paper is characterized by all of the following:

• Exceptional or innovative technical features, and key personnel possess strong relevant technical knowledge, experience and/or capabilities, which will highly likely lead to significantly improved advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology; and

• Is consistent with Navy priorities and/or needs and may exceed them; and

• Deliverables and schedule are reasonable for the proposed technology project;

• Contains one or more Major Strengths and no Major Weaknesses, and

• Minor Weaknesses, if any, are few and will have minimal impact on the proposed technical development effort or successful program performance, and are more than offset by strengths; and

• Risks, if any, can be mitigated with little or no Government oversight.

Acceptable: White Paper is characterized by all of the following:

• Technical merit and/or approach is adequate but may lack significant innovative technical features; and key personnel possess adequate technical knowledge, experience and/or capabilities, which can reasonably lead to improved advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology capability; and

• Meets minimal Navy priorities and/or needs; and

• Deliverables and schedule are reasonable for the proposed technology project;

• Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting; and

• Risks, if any, can be mitigated with moderately close Government oversight

Unacceptable: White Paper is characterized by one or more of the following:

• Technical merit and/or approach is inadequate and demonstrates a lack of understanding of needs and/or advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology; and/or key personnel do not possess adequate technical knowledge, experience and/or capabilities to improved advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology capability; or

• Fails to meet minimal Navy priorities and/or needs; or

• Deliverables and schedule are not reasonable for the proposed technology project; or

• Contains at least one Major Weakness, and weaknesses are generally not offset by strengths; or

• Risks are high and may not be mitigated even with a high level of close Government oversight

Technical Assessment Definitions:

• Major Strength. A positive aspect of the White Paper that contains one or more of the following:

• Exceptional or innovative feature(s) which is/are highly beneficial to advanced undersea sensors or signal processing technology; or

• A high probability that advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology development time or hardware/software Total Ownership Costs, if implemented, can be reduced; or

• Exceeds at least a single Government need; or

• Significantly increases the probability of successful advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology performance.

Minor Strength. A positive aspect that modestly enhances the merit of the White Paper/proposal or modestly increases the probability of successful advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology performance.

Major Weakness. A flaw of the White Paper that contains one or more of the following:

• Demonstrates a lack of understanding or is irrelevant to the advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology; or

• Fails to meet a minimum Government need; or

• Likely to cause advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology development time to be exceeded or increase hardware/software Total Ownership Costs with no improvement to capability; or

• Fails to mitigate risk to a manageable level thereby jeopardizing advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology execution; or

• Likely to require significant Government oversight to meet minimal needs; or

• Significantly increases the probability of unsuccessful advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology performance.

Minor Weakness. A negative aspect that detracts from the White Paper, or modestly increases the probability of unsuccessful advanced undersea sensor or signal processing technology performance.

2. Past Performance Relevancy is defined as follows:

Relevant is characterized by Past Performance effort in recent contracts involved in similar scope and magnitude of research and development on advanced undersea sensors or signal processing development efforts; and similar complexity, dollar value, contract type, period of performance, or degree of involvement with Government laboratories, academia or other industry partners.

Not Relevant is characterized by Past Performance effort that involved little or no similarity to scope and magnitude of research and development on advanced undersea sensors or signal processing development efforts; and little or no similarity to complexity, dollar value, contract type, period of performance, or degree of involvement with Government laboratories, academia or other industry partners.

Note: A recent contract is within five (5) years or less

3. The Government intends to use Government personnel for the evaluation of White Papers and proposals from activities other than the Naval Sea Systems Command or Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems. The Government personnel will likely be from the Office of Naval Research (ONR), the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) Division, Newport, and Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC). The Government also reserves the right to use contractor support personnel to assist in providing technical advisory support regarding any White Papers and full cost proposals and technical proposals (if requested) ensuing from this BAA. The Government has identified support contractor personnel from KMS Solutions who will assist in providing technical advisory support during the evaluation process. In addition, the Government reserves the right to use selected scientific and engineering expert personnel from CGI Federal, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL), Advanced Research Laboratory at the University of Texas (ARL/UT), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory (MIT/LL), and Pennsylvania State University Applied Research Laboratory (PSU/ARL). The technical experts will assist in providing technical expertise in the evaluation of any White Paper and full cost proposal and technical proposal (if requested) ensuing from this BAA. The evaluators and support personnel will be bound by Non-Disclosure Agreements to protect proprietary and source-selection information. Additionally, the support organizations described above are prohibited from submitting White Papers in response to this

BAA.

Should the offer or have any objections to personnel from these organizations participating in the evaluation of White Papers and proposals, written notification shall be provided to the Contracting Officer within ten (10) business days prior to your submission of White Paper(s). If there is an objection, the specific reason(s) for the objection(s) shall be stated in the written notification, and the specific non-government laboratory or support contractor of concern shall be identified.

7.3 One (1) or more awards may be made under this BAA to the same offeror based on the evaluation criteria above and the availability of funds.

7.4 White Papers may be selected to proceed to tasking under existing contracts, if active and with related scope, thereby eliminating the need for Phase II proposals.

8.0 Points of Contact

Contracting Officer: Shannon Vineyard at 202-781-0429 or email:

shannon.l.vineyard.civ@us.navy.mil; and Contract Specialist: Vincenzo Bianco at 202-781- 3317 or email: vincenzo.l.bianco.civ@us.navy.mil.