BAA-12-09-PKM.doc

1-Step Broad Agency Announcement

Overview Information To access hyperlinks from this electronic solicitation – Hit CTRL and click on the link.

Federal Agency Name: Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, Nonmetallic Materials Division, AFRL/RXBC Broad Agency Announcement Title: Integrated Computational Methods for Composite Materials (ICM2) Broad Agency Announcement Type: This is the Initial Announcement.

Broad Agency Announcement Number: BAA-12-09-PKM Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 12.800_AF Proposal Due Date and Time: 22 May 12, 2:00p.m. EDT

NOTE: Proposal receipt after the due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3). It should be noted that this installation observes strict security procedures to enter the facility. These security procedures are NOT considered an interruption of normal Government processes, and proposals received after the above stated date and time as a result of security delays will be considered “late.” Furthermore, note that if offerors utilize commercial carriers in the delivery of proposals, they may not honor time-of-day delivery guarantees on military installations. Early proposal submission is encouraged.

Solicitation Request: Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, Nonmetallic Materials Division, RXBC, Wright Research Site is soliciting technical and cost proposals on the research effort described below. Proposals should be addressed to the Contracting Point of Contact (POC) stated in Section VII of the Full Text Announcement. This is an unrestricted solicitation. Small businesses are encouraged to propose on all or any part of this solicitation. The NAICS Code for this acquisition is 541712, and the small business size standard is 500 employees. Proposals submitted shall be in accordance with this announcement. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any BAA amendments that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date.

CCR Registration: Unless exempted by 2 CFR 25.110 all offerors must (1) Be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) prior to submitting an application (for an assistance award) or proposal;(2) Maintain an active CCR registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application or proposal under consideration by an agency; and (3) Provide its DUNS number in each application or proposal it submits to the agency. On-line registration instructions can be accessed from the DISA CCR home page at http://www.ccr.gov.

On-line Representations and Certifications: Potential offerors are notified that effective 01 Jan 2005 to be eligible for an award; they must submit annual Electronic Representations and Certifications, otherwise known as On-line Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) via the Business Partner Network (BPN) at http://www.bpn.gov/orca. These FAR and DFARS level representations and certifications are required in addition to the representations and certifications specific to this acquisition. Before submitting the Electronic Representations and Certifications, contractors must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) Database.

Type of Contract/Instrument: It is anticipated that a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract will be awarded as a result of this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to award other contract types as well.

Estimated Program Cost: $8,487,000.00.

Anticipated Number of Awards: The Air Force anticipates awarding one award; however, the Air Force reserves the right to make no awards as a result of this BAA.

Brief Program Summary: The goal of this Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) composite material Foundational Engineering Problem (FEP) program is to demonstrate an ICME digital framework that links material processing, property, structure relationships for material design to account for processibility, manufacturability, system performance and sustainability. A foundational engineering problem consists of an advanced engineering component, a materials system, and a manufacturing process that must be rapidly optimized within a more complex engineering system. The demonstration will be accomplished for high temperature polymer matrix composite (PMC) for specific engineering cases as defined by the contractor.

Address technical questions to: Dr. Kevin Kendig, AFRL/RXBC, 2941 Hobson Way, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, (937) 255-9060 Kevin.kendig@wpafb.af.mil Address contracting questions to: Scott Savory, Contracting Officer, AFRL/PKMN, 2310 8th Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, (937) 255-5369, Scott.Savory@wpafb.af.mil; and/or Gary Victor, Contract Negotiator, AFRL/PKMN, 2310 8th Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, (937) 255-0808, Gary.Victor@wpafb.af.mil.

Full Text Announcement

I. Program Description: Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, AFRL/RX, is soliciting technical and cost proposals on the following research effort:

1. Statement of Objective/Needs:

a. Vision: The ICME digital framework developed within this effort will be in the hands of the contractors funded under this effort and also made available to others in the US industrial base. It is envisioned that the composite manufacturing engineers will ultimately be able to provide accurate models of the distribution of residual stresses as a function of application-specific geometry processing. The commercially available and supported simulation tools – a combination of tools developed within this effort and existing tools (public domain analysis tools, commercial of the shelf tools, industry tools, university analysis tools, etc.) – will provide this information to the designers in a useful format enabling a shift from conservative material selection based on legacy data and already qualified materials. The impact is substantial. Unlike metals, in which it only takes 2 to 5 years for OEM qualification of a new alloy, composite material qualification and certification requires the use of a building block approach to mitigate manufacturing scale-up risk. The objective of the building block approach is two-fold. Firstly, the approach provides the manufacturer and designer some assurances that the material properties and allowables measured at the coupon level are representative of the properties of the materials in the full scale structure. Secondly, the scale-up approach provides the means to refine, verify and finally validate their predictive design and analysis tools for the full scale structure. It takes 10 to 20 years for qualification of a new composite material system often making it late to need for the application for which it was designed. The use of an ICMSE approach with strategic experimentation to facilitate material qualification and structural certification is one further step towards the vision of modeling from “atoms to aircraft.” Currently, HTPMCs are put into structures using a relatively low fidelity building block design process involving sequential activities (application requirements, target properties, supplier offerings, trade studies, fabrication studies, materials allowable development, full-scale fabrication & test). From the strength perspective, there are advanced stress analysis models of the desired structure, but the strength prediction is based on a multiplicative superposition of worst case scenarios and empirically generated data-bases. This process is overly conservative and inadequate for areas where the structure is complex. Processing of high temp PMCs is accompanied by simulation, but simulation at a relatively low fidelity, often resulting in unexplained failures in the manufacturing process. These failures may be catastrophic or minor, but inadequate linking with strength prediction tools results in a higher scrap rate than is likely necessary. A successful integrated approach to responsive virtual design of HTPMCs will reduce cost, time and risk for the insertion of these materials into Air Force systems. Application of an integrated simulation digital framework from manufacturing to final part will allow a reduction in the building block approach cost and time by reducing the number of required test articles while increasing the understanding of behavior. Simulation will allow the designer to optimize more easily for a specific need and be responsive to new requirements and new materials. Measurement of success will be in the form of comparisons between conventional methods and the ICM2 method of cost/time savings and reduction in re-worked parts.

b. Statement of Objectives The goal of this Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) composite material Foundational Engineering Problem (FEP) program is to demonstrate an ICME digital framework that links material processing, property, structure relationships for material design to account for processibility, manufacturability, system performance and sustainability. A foundational engineering problem consists of an advanced engineering component, a materials system, and a manufacturing process that must be rapidly optimized within a more complex engineering system. The demonstration will be accomplished for high temperature polymer matrix composite (PMC) for specific engineering cases as defined by the contractor.

· Build and demonstrate an ICME-based method (material and structural article) that links processing and manufacturing (resin cure models, modeling of in-situ fiber geometries, processing models, residual stress and tool-part interaction models) and design considerations (damage and strength prediction) as well as links to material databases. The proposer’s assessment of the state of the art (SOTA) in this area with respect to ICME should be established, and the advances that this program will make should be clearly articulated. The proposal should result in the development of new standards and protocols to build infrastructure in industry for modeling, experimental method development, and validation and verification to advance the SOTA. The proposal must provide an approach that is viable for overcoming all relevant implementation barriers.

· Address a pervasive issue in the AF and/or OEM community. It should provide models/methodologies that will support other components, other manufacturing communities, OEMs, other services and have non-military application.

· Utilize existing models and experimental methods where possible as well as models and experimental methods that become available through the course of the program from the AF or from the engineering community. At a minimum, the fundamental mechanisms that form the foundation of the computational tool(s) should be well established, at least at a laboratory scale.

· Focus on model integration, verification and validation (including appropriate experimentation) as well as maturation of existing models, not the development of new models. The proposal should digitally encompass component design, processing, structure, properties and include verification & validation (via experimentation and mechanical testing) of the overall ICME process. The proposal should include a minimum of one per year, key feature articles to demonstrate program progress in implementation of ICME process and to validate model integration. Key feature articles are articles that incorporate critical design features of one or more target components identified by the contractor. The key feature articles must adequately demonstrate program progress through the use of more complex articles as the program progresses. Demonstrate the ICME digital framework development and model integration progress and demonstrate its potential benefit [Rough order of Magnitude (ROM) potential cost savings and Return on Investment (ROI) calculated by the contractor] to USAF systems through the periodic design, manufacturing and testing of key feature articles with increasing complexity through the program. The proposal should articulate the primary goal of developing the software integration framework, linking tools, model and databases and verify and validate using key feature articles. The program plan should be sufficiently focused such that the primary goal can be accomplished with the proposed cost and schedule.

· Identify and document outstanding pervasive ICME needs.

· Develop methodologies for dealing with pervasive ICME issues such as data collection and management, model integration, and verification and validation in such a way that the entire structural composite materials stakeholder community will benefit.

· Identify and fill, key pervasive technical/infrastructure gaps (i.e. missing models or M&P representations, networking or code mismatches, inadequate data structures, simulation frameworks or security controls) facing the development of an ICME method for high temperature polymer matrix composites.

· Engagement of M&P, Structures, and Design communities is a must. The proposal should tie in an adequately broad industrial collaborator base including OEM materials and design groups from both the airframe and engine communities. Demonstrate design authority participation and a logical plan to assess the design and manufacturing integration concepts and resolve the associated issues consistent with “standard work practice.” Design authority participation means that one or more employees of the contractor who are responsible for their design process will be involved in the proposed effort. The involvement should be defined in the proposal. The standard work practice refers to the contractor’s existing design process and associated requirements for utilization of the integration concepts within that process. It is desired that the proposed approach have approval from the proposing contractor’s local design/certification authority.

· Use existing mature material system(s) Technology Readiness Level (TRL) ≥ 5 and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) ≥ 5 with established databases. The proposal should utilize a material, fiber form and targeted application that is of interest to the AF and meet the following criteria:

· Structural high temperature polymer composite system (bismaleimide and/or polyimide)

· Designer quality information developed via traditional approaches is available for the chosen material.

· The material system does not utilize methylene dianiline (MDA) in resin preparation.

· The chosen material system is amenable for addressing, in a generic way, the critical technical issues identified in the proposal.

· The development of new or extension/maturation of existing materials' models must be tractable in the time frame of the program.

· Participate in AFRL led integrated product team (IPT.) Participation includes monthly telecons and annual face-to-face meetings in Dayton, OH. Discussions will typically focus on progress by IPT members and any issues or concerns that arise during the course of the work.

· While it is recognized that certain details will be protected as critical or proprietary information, the general ICME approach employed and results of the demonstration(s) should be amenable to open presentation through public forums such as technical conferences, conference proceedings, and journal articles. Public releasable versus proprietary issues for the software architecture framework must be addressed in sufficient detail to ensure the program meets its goals of supporting culture change for all stakeholders in the composite materials community. Programmatic progress should be disseminated through participation and presentation at a conference (conference selection based on AF program manager approval) at least once per year. The proposal should contain provisions for a data management plan describing how data and data rights are going to be handled in developing industry standards.

· The contractor should anticipate a decision gate to be scheduled at approximately 27 months into the program. Program progress and health will be assessed at this gate, and the government will decide whether the program should continue.

· Associated Contractor Agreement (ACA): Due to the nature of the work, contractors will be expected to actively engage with, cooperate, share resources, and jointly participate during period of performance to successfully accomplish research objectives. Refer to AFFARS 5317.9500 and IG 5317.9500 for regulatory guidance.

2. Deliverable Items:

a. Data Items: Refer to the attached DD Form 1423-1, Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), dated 08 March 2012 (data documentation includes CDRL, Report Documentation Page (SF 298), All Purpose Checklist, and Air Force Format Guidelines referenced in ANSI NISO Standard Z39.18).

b. Software: Source code and executable for any developed software to be delivered annually, and shall be submitted in CD-ROM format.

c. Hardware: None.

d. Other: None

3. Schedule:

a. Overall effort: 55 months total, consisting of 52 months for completion of the technical effort and 3 months for submission and review of the final report.

b. Data Items: Reference CDRL, dated 08 March 2012

c. Software: Deliver annually

4. Other Requirements:

a. Program security classification: Unclassified.

b. Export Control: Information involved in this research effort is subject to Export Control (International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR) 22 CFR 120-131, or Export Administration Regulations (EAR) 15 CFR 710-774). If effort is subject to export control then a Certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, will be required to be submitted with the proposal.

c. Export-Controlled Items: As prescribed by DFARS 204.7303, DFARS 252.204-7008, “Export-Controlled Item (APR 2010)” is contained in this solicitation (as shown below). This clause shall be contained in ALL solicitations and resulting contracts.

EXPORT-CONTROLLED ITEMS (APR 2010)

(a) Definition. “Export-controlled items,” as used in this clause, means items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 CFR Parts 730-774) or the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR Parts 120-130). The term includes:

(1) “Defense items,” defined in the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2778(j)(4)(A), as defense articles, defense services, and related technical data, and further defined in the ITAR, 22 CFR Part 120.

(2) “Items,” defined in the EAR as “commodities”, “software”, and “technology,” terms that are also defined in the EAR, 15 CFR 772.1.

(b) The Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding export-controlled items, including, but not limited to, the requirement for contractors to register with the Department of State in accordance with the ITAR. The Contractor shall consult with the Department of State regarding any questions relating to compliance with the ITAR and shall consult with the Department of Commerce regarding any questions relating to compliance with the EAR.

(c) The Contractor's responsibility to comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding export-controlled items exists independent of, and is not established or limited by, the information provided by this clause.

(d) Nothing in the terms of this contract adds, changes, supersedes, or waives any of the requirements of applicable Federal laws, Executive orders, and regulations, including but not limited to—

(1) The Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. App.2401, et seq.);

(2) The Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751, et seq.);

(3) The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq.);

(4) The Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730-774);

(5) The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Parts 120-130); and

(6) Executive Order 13222, as extended;

(e) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (e), in all subcontracts.

d. Operations Security Requirements: Contractor shall participate in the organization’s Operations Security (OPSEC) program, following appropriate OPSEC measures during the performance of this contract. OPSEC requirements are required in an effort to reduce program vulnerability from successful adversary collection and exploitation of critical information.

The prime contractor will ensure that all subcontracts conform to the OPSEC and marking requirements as required by the prime contractor.

(End of clause)

5. Other Information:

a. Government Furnished Property (GFP) availability: GFP is not anticipated to be made available under any resulting contract.

b. Base Support/ Network Access: Not applicable. Base support/network access is not anticipated to be made available under any resulting contract.

c. Data Rights Desired:

(1) Technical Data: Unlimited to the modeling tools and data that are generated and utilized within the ICME architecture

(2) Non-Commercial Software (NCS): Unlimited to the ICME architecture software that is developed under the contract

(3) NCS Documentation: Unlimited Rights

(4) Commercial Computer Software Rights: Customary License

The Air Force Research Laboratory is engaged in the discovery, development, and integration of warfighting technologies for our air, space, and cyberspace forces. As such, rights in technical data and NCS developed or delivered under this contract are of significant concern to the government. The Government will therefore carefully consider any restrictions on the use of technical data, NCS, and NCS documentation which could result in transition difficulty or less-than full and open competition for subsequent development of this technology.

In exchange for paying for development of the data, the Government expects technical data, NCS, and NCS documentation developed entirely at Government expense to be delivered with Unlimited Rights.

Technical data, NCS, and NCS documentation developed with mixed funding are expected to be delivered with at least Government Purpose Rights. Offers that propose delivery of technical data, NCS, or NCS documentation subject to Government Purpose Rights should fully explain what technical data, NCS, or NCS documentation developed with costs charged to indirect cost pools and/or costs not allocated to a Government contract will be incorporated, how the incorporation will benefit the program, and address whether those portions or processes are segregable. The Government expects that delivery of technical data, NCS, and NCS documentation subject to Government Purpose Rights will fully meet program needs.

Offers that propose delivery of technical data, NCS, or NCS documentation subject to Limited Rights, Restricted Rights, or Specifically Negotiated License Rights will be considered. Proposals should fully explain what technical data, NCS, or NCS documentation developed with costs charged to indirect cost pools and/or costs not allocated to a government contract will be incorporated and how the incorporation will benefit the program.

Offerors are reminded that the Identification and Assertion of Restrictions on the Government’s Use, Release, or Disclosure of Technical Data or Computer Software (the assertions list), required under DFARS 252.227-7013 and DFARS 252.227-7014, is included in Section K and due at time of proposals. Assertions must be completed with specificity with regard to each item, component, or process listed. Nonconforming assertions lists will be rejected.

Note that DFARS 252.227-7014(d) describes requirements for incorporation of third party computer software (commercial and nonconmmercial). Any commercial software to be incorporated into a deliverable must be clearly identified in the proposal. Because many commercial software licenses are not transferrable or may not be acceptable to the Government, commercial software licenses proposed for delivery to the Government must be approved by the contracting officer prior to award.

As used in this subparagraph, the terms Unlimited Rights, Government Purpose Rights, Specifically Negotiated License Rights, and Limited Rights in technical data are as defined in DFARS 252.227-7013. The terms Unlimited Rights, Government Purpose Rights, Specifically Negotiated License Rights, and Restricted Rights in noncommercial computer software and noncommercial software documentation are as defined in DFARS 252.227-7014. The term Commercial Computer Software is as defined in DFARS 252.227-7014.

e. ICM2 Industry Day: A one-day ICM2 Industry Day is scheduled at Tec^Edge Innovation and Collaboration Center, 5000 Springfield Street, Dayton, Ohio, 45431 (phone: (937) 424-8661), on Thursday, April 12, 2012, starting at 9:00AM EDT for interested offerors. This information session will be conducted and overseen by Air Force personnel, and will be made available for all interested offerors. Information accessed at the ICM2 Industry Day will be limited strictly to the public domain, which is the type of data available in open literature. Time slots will be available during the course of the Industry Day event for offerors to meet privately with the government team. All information, feedback, and questions aired during the course of the event will be documented by the Air Force, and will be posted to the FBO via amendments subsequent to this solicitation. Direct questions related to the arrangements, directions, and scheduling of this event to: Dr. Kevin Kendig, Program Manager, Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, AFRL/RXBC, 2941 Hobson Way, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, (937) 255-9060, Kevin.kendig@wpafb.af.mil.

II. Award Information

1. Anticipated Award Date: 24 August 2012

2. Anticipated funding for the program (not per contract): FY12/$90,000; FY13 /$1,898,000; FY14 /$2,029,000; FY15 /$2,059,000; FY16 /$2,088,000; FY17 /$323,000 (total funding of $8,487,000) (type of funds: 3600 (Research & Development; 6.2) This funding profile is an estimate only and will not be a contractual obligation for funding as all funding is subject to change due to Government discretion and availability

3. Number of awards anticipated: One III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Offeror: This is an unrestricted solicitation. Small businesses are encouraged to propose on all or any part of this solicitation.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Cost Sharing is not required.

3. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers: The following guidance is provided for Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) contemplating submitting a proposal, as either a prime or subcontractor, against this BAA. FAR 35.017-1(c)(4) prohibits an FFRDC from competing with any non-FFRDC concern in response to a Federal agency request for proposal for other than the operation of an FFRDC (with exceptions stated in DFARS 235.017-1(c)(4)). There is no regulation prohibiting an FFRDC from responding to a solicitation. However, the FFRDC’s sponsoring agency must first make a determination that the effort being proposed falls within the purpose, mission, general scope of effort, or special competency of the FFRDC, and that determination must be included in the FFRDC’s proposal. In addition, the non-sponsoring agency (in this case AFRL) must make a determination that the work proposed would not place the FFRDC in direct competition with domestic private industry. Only after these determinations are made would a determination be made concerning the FFRDC’s eligibility to receive an award.

4. Other:

a. Foreign participation: No

b. This acquisition involves data subject to export control laws and regulations. Only contractors who are registered and certified with the Defense Logistics Services Center (DLSC) and have a legitimate business purpose may participate in this solicitation. Contact the Defense Logistics Services Center, 74 Washington Avenue N., Battle Creek, Michigan 40917-3084 (1-800-352-3572) for further information on the certification process. You must submit a copy of your approved DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, with your proposal.

c. There are no limits to the number of proposals an offeror may submit.

d. You may be ineligible for award if all requirements of this solicitation are not met on the proposal due date as identified above.

IV. Proposal and Submission Information

1. Overview: Proposals submitted shall be in accordance with this announcement. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any BAA amendments that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date. There is no additional information to be provided.

2. Content and Form of Proposal Submission: The paragraphs below identify proposal format and content. Proposals should be addressed via mail to the Contracting Point of Contact (POC) identified in Section VII.

a. General Instructions: Offerors should apply the restrictive notice prescribed in the provision of FAR 52.215-1(e) Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition. Offerors should consider proposal instructions contained in the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Guide for Industry, which can be accessed on line at http://www.wpafb.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=9218. This guide is specifically designed to assist the offeror in understanding the BAA proposal process. Technical/management and cost volumes should be submitted in separate volumes, and must be valid for 180 days. Proposals must reference the announcement number BAA-12-09-PKM. Offerors must submit one-original and 5 hard copies of their proposals via mail to the Contracting POC, identified in Section VII. Offerors are advised that only contracting officers are legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise commit the government. The cost of preparing proposals in response to this BAA is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting or any other contract; however, it may be an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect cost as specified in FAR 31.205-18.

a. Technical/Management Proposal:

i. Page Limitations: The following describes the page limitations on the proposal submittal:

(a) Proposal shall be limited to 25 pages, prepared and submitted in Word format.

(b) Font shall be standard 10-point business font Arial.

(c) Character spacing must be “normal,” not condensed in any manner.

(d) Pages shall be double-spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches, with at least one-inch margins on both sides, top and bottom. Lines between text lines must also be 10-point.

(e) All text, including text in tables and charts, must adhere to all font size and line spacing requirements listed herein. Font and line spacing requirements do not have to be followed for illustrations, flowcharts, drawings, and diagrams. These exceptions shall not be used to circumvent formatting requirements and page count limitations by including lengthy narratives in such items.

(f) Pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being Page 1, and the last page being Page 25. The page limitation covers all information including indices, photographs, foldouts (counted as 1 page for each 8.5 by 11 portion) tables, charts, appendices, attachments, resumes, etc.

(g) The proposal page limit does not include the offeror’s proposed Statement of Work (SOW); however, the same formatting rules apply to the SOW, which is limited to 10 pages.

(h) A CD with the WORD version of your Technical/Management Proposal and the SOW must be submitted with the hard copies of the proposal, and must match the hard copy.

(i) Due to continuing attempts by numerous offerors to obtain an unfair advantage by failing to conform to the formatting rules above, the Government will check the proposal and SOW for conformance to the stated requirements. Any pages in excess of the stated page limitation after the format check will not be considered. In addition if the proposal or SOW does not conform to the above requirements, a notification will be sent to the offeror’s company management to advise of the nonconformance.

ii. The proposal shall include a discussion of the nature and scope of the research and the technical approach. Additional information on prior work in this area, descriptions of available equipment, data and facilities and resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal. This volume shall include a SOW detailing the technical tasks proposed to be accomplished under the proposed effort and suitable for contract incorporation. Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW. Refer to the BAA Guide for Industry referenced above to assist in SOW preparation. If Government Furnished Property is requested you are required to submit the following information with your offer—

(a) A list or description of all Government property that the offeror or its subcontractors propose to use on a rent-free basis. The list shall identify the accountable contract under which the property is held and the authorization for its use (from the contracting officer having cognizance of the property);

(b) The dates during which the property will be available for use (including the first, last, and all intervening months) and, for any property that will be used concurrently in performing two or more contracts, the amounts of the respective uses in sufficient detail to support prorating the rent;

(c) The amount of rent that would otherwise be charged in accordance with FAR 52.245-9, Use and Charges; and

(d) The voluntary consensus standard or industry leading practices and standards to be used in the management of Government property, or existing property management plans, methods, practices, or procedures for accounting for property.

iii. Any questions concerning the technical proposal or SOW preparation shall be referred to the Technical POC cited in the Overview Information.

b. Cost/Business Proposal:

i. Separate the proposal into a business section and cost section. Adequate price competition is anticipated. The business section should contain all business aspects to the proposed contract, such as type of contractual instrument, any exceptions to terms and conditions of the announcement model contract, any information not technically related, etc. Provide rationale for exceptions. Cost proposals have no page limitations; however, offerors are requested to keep cost proposals to 100 pages as a goal. The proposal shall be furnished with supporting schedules and shall contain a person hour breakdown per task. Refer to the BAA Guide for Industry for detailed proposal instructions.

ii. A Subcontracting Plan is required for large businesses and educational institutions for efforts anticipated to exceed $650,000.00, and shall be submitted in conjunction with the technical and cost proposals. Reference FAR 19.704, DFARS 219.704, and AFFARS 5319.704(a)(1) for subcontracting plan requirements. Small business concerns are exempt from this requirement.

d. Proposal Content Summary: You may be ineligible for award if all requirements of this solicitation are not met on the proposal due date. Reference Section VIII for a Checklist of the requirements.

2. Proposal Due Date and Time: 22 May 2012, 2:00PM, EDT. NOTE: The provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3) shall govern proposal receipt after the due date and time.

3. Intergovernmental Review: None.

4. Funding Restrictions: None.

5. Other Submission Requirements: Proposals must be submitted to: Gary Victor, Det 1 AFRL/PKMN, Bldg 167, 2310 8th St., Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7801. Note: Submission of proposals via email is NOT authorized.

6. Intent to Propose: Offerors that anticipate submitting a proposal are requested to submit an e-mail to Gary Victor (via Gary.Victor@wpafb.af.mil) containing the name of the contractor, the POC, and the contractor’s intent to submit a proposal. This “Intent to Propose” is requested by 30 April 2012, 3:00 p.m. EDT.

V. Proposal Review Information

1. Evaluation Criteria: The selection of one or more sources for award will be based on an evaluation of each offeror’s proposal (both technical and cost/price aspects) to determine the overall merit of the proposal in response to the announcement, as well as on Agency need and funding availability. The technical aspect, which is ranked as the first order of priority, shall be evaluated based on the following criteria that are of Descending order of importance:

a. Technical:

i. Unique and innovative approach proposed to accomplish the technical objectives. New and creative solutions and/or advances in knowledge, understanding, technology, and the state of the art.

ii. The offeror’s understanding of the scope of the technical effort.

iii. Soundness of the offeror’s technical approach.

ii. The potential for AFRL to transition the research and development deliverables to future Government needs. Any proposed restriction on technical data or computer software will be considered.

iii. Availability of qualified technical personnel and their experience with the applicable technologies.

vi. Availability, from any source, of necessary research, test, laboratory, or shop facilities.

b. Cost/Price: Cost/Price includes the reasonableness and realism of the proposed cost and fee and consideration of proposed budgets and funding profiles. Cost/Price is a substantial factor, but ranked as the second order of priority. (If an offeror proposes the use of GFP other than any GFP identified in this BAA, and that proposed GFP provides the offeror an unfair competitive advantage, then FAR 45.202 requires rental equivalent be applied to the Cost Factor for evaluation purposes only).

c. Proposal Risk Assessment: Proposal risk for technical, cost, and schedule will be assessed as part of the evaluation of the above evaluation criteria. Proposal risk relates to the identification and assessment of the risks associated with an offeror's proposed approach as it relates to accomplishing the proposed effort. Tradeoffs of the assessed risk will be weighed against the potential payoff.

2. Review and Selection Process

a. Categories: The technical and cost proposals will be evaluated at the same time and categorized as follows:

i. Category I: Proposal is well conceived, scientifically and technically sound, pertinent to the program goals and objectives, and offered by a responsible contractor with the competent scientific and technical staff and supporting resources needed to ensure satisfactory program results. Proposals in Category I are determined to be acceptable, but will be recommended for award based on availability of funds. They are normally displaced only by other Category I proposals.

ii. Category II: Proposal is scientifically or technically sound, but requires further development, and may be recommended for award, but at a lower priority than Category I.

iii. Category III: Proposal is not technically sound or does not meet agency needs.

b. No other evaluation criteria will be used. The Air Force reserves the right to select for award any, all, part or none of each proposal received.

VI. Award Administration Information

a) Award Notices: Offerors responding to this solicitation will be notified in writing whether their proposal is recommended for award, by approximately 25 June 2012. The notification is not to be construed to mean the award of a contract is assured, as availability of funds and successful negotiations are prerequisites to any award.

b) Administrative Requirements: See Section I.

c) Reporting: The applicable data deliverables include a final technical report, technical status and progress reports, standard programmatic and financial reports, and presentation materials from reviews and conferences (refer to CDRL, dated 08 March 2012).

VII. Agency Contacts

1. Address technical questions to: Dr. Kevin Kendig, Program Manager, Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, AFRL/RXBC, 2941 Hobson Way, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, (937) 255-9060, Kevin.Kendig@wpafb.af.mil

2. Address contracting questions to: Gary Victor, Contract Negotiator, Air Force Research Laboratory, Research and Development Contracting Office, DET 1 AFRL/PKMN, address: 2310 8th Street, Building 167 (Area B), Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7801, phone number: (937) 255-0808, e-mail address: Gary.Victor@wpafb.af.mil VIII. Other Information

1. Acquisition of Commercial Items: Based upon market research, the Government is not using the policies contained in FAR Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, in its solicitation for the described supplies or services. However, interested persons may identify to the contracting officer their interest and capability to satisfy the Government’s requirement with a commercial item within 15 days of this notice.

2. Support contractors: Offerors are advised that employees of commercial firms under contract to the Government may be used to administratively process proposals, monitor contract performance, or perform other administrative duties requiring access to other contractors' proprietary information. These support contracts include nondisclosure agreements prohibiting their contractor employees from disclosing any information submitted by other contractors or using such information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished.

3. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF):

NOTICE: Any contract award resulting from this solicitation will contain the clause at DFARS 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports (Mar 2008), which requires electronic submission of all payment requests. The clause cites three possible electronic formats through which to submit electronic payment requests. Pursuant to that clause, the Department of Defense is adopting Wide Area Work Flow-Receipt and Acceptance (WAWF-RA). Any contract resulting from this solicitation will establish a requirement to use WAWF-RA for invoicing and receipt/acceptance, and provide coding instructions applicable to this contract. Contractors are encouraged to take advantage of available training (both web-based and through your local DCMA office), and to register in the WAWF-RA system. Information regarding WAWF-RA, including the web-based training and registration, can be found at https://wawf.eb.mil. Note: This WAWF-RA requirement also applies to Universities.

4. Item Identification and Valuation. Any contract award resulting from this solicitation may contain the clause at DFARS 252.211-7003, Item Identification and Valuation, (Aug 2008) which requires unique item identification and valuation of any deliverable item for which the Government’s unit acquisition cost is $5,000 or more; subassemblies, components, and parts embedded within an item valued at $5,000 or more; or items for which the Government’s unit acquisition cost is less than $5,000 when determined necessary by the requiring activity for serially managed, mission essential, or controlled inventory. Also included are any DoD serially managed subassembly, component, or part embedded within a delivered item and the parent item that contains the embedded subassembly, component, or part. Per DFARS 211.274-3 Policy for Valuation, it is DoD policy that contractors shall be required to identify the Government’s unit acquisition cost for all items delivered, even if none of the criteria for placing a unique item identification mark applies. Therefore, your proposal must clearly break out the unit acquisition cost for any deliverable items. Per DFARS 211.274-3 Policy for Valuation, “The Government’s unit acquisition cost is the Contractor’s estimated fully burdened unit cost at time of delivery to the Government for cost type or undefinitized line, subline, or exhibit line items” (Per DoD, “fully burdened unit costs” to the Government would include all direct, indirect, G&A costs, and an appropriate portion of fee). If you have questions regarding the Unique Item Identification requirements, please contact the Contracting Point of Contact listed above. For more information, see the following website: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/index.html.

5. Limitations on Pass-Through Charges. As prescribed in FAR 52.408(n)(1) & 52.408(n)(2), provisions 52.215-22, “Limitations on Pass Through Charges – Identification of Subcontract Effort (Oct 2009),” and 52.215-23, “Limitations on Pass-Through Charges (Oct 2009),” are contained in this solicitation (as shown below). Any contract valued greater than the threshold for cost or pricing data threshold, except fixed price contracts awarded on the basis of adequate price competition, resulting from this solicitation, shall contain the Clause at FAR 52.215-23 (or Alt I).

52.215-22 – Limitations on Pass-Through Charges—Identification of Subcontract Effort (Oct 2009)

(a) Definitions. “Added value, excessive pass-through charge, subcontract, and subcontractor,” as used in this provision, are defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled “Limitations on Pass-Through Charges” (FAR 52.215-23).

(b) General. The offeror’s proposal shall exclude excessive pass-through charges.

(c) Performance of work by the Contractor of a subcontractor.

(1) The offeror shall identify in its proposal the total cost of the work to be performed by the offeror, and the total cost of the work to be performed by each subcontractor, under the contract, task order, or delivery order.

(2) If the offeror intends to subcontract more than 70 percent of the total cost of work to be performed under the contract, task order, or delivery order, the offeror shall identify in its proposal—

(i) The amount of the offeror’s indirect costs and profit/fee applicable to the work to be performed by the subcontractor(s); and

(ii) A description of the added value provided by the offeror as related to the work to be performed by the subcontractor(s).

(3) If any subcontractor proposed under the contract, task order, or delivery order intends to subcontract to a lower-tier subcontractor more than 70 percent of the total cost of work to be performed under its subcontract, the offeror shall identify in its proposal—

(i) The amount of the subcontractor’s indirect costs and profit/fee applicable to the work to be performed by the lower-tier subcontractor(s); and

(ii) A description of the added value provided by the subcontractor as related to the work to be performed by the lower-tier subcontractor(s).

(End of Provision) 52.215-23 – Limitations on Pass-Through Charges (Oct 2009)

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--

“Added value” means that the Contractor performs subcontract management functions that the Contracting Officer determines are a benefit to the Government (e.g., processing orders of parts or services, maintaining inventory, reducing delivery lead times, managing multiple sources for contract requirements, coordinating deliveries, performing quality assurance functions).

“Excessive pass-through charge,” with respect to a Contractor or subcontractor that adds no or negligible value to a contract or subcontract, means a charge to the Government by the Contractor or subcontractor that is for indirect costs or profit/fee on work performed by a subcontractor (other than charges for the costs of managing subcontracts and any applicable indirect costs and associated profit/fee based on such costs).

“No or negligible value” means the Contractor or subcontractor cannot demonstrate to the Contracting Officer that its effort added value to the contract or subcontract in accomplishing the work performed under the contract (including task or delivery orders).

“Subcontract” means any contract, as defined in FAR 2.101, entered into by a subcontractor to furnish supplies or services for performance of the contract or a subcontract. It includes but is not limited to purchase orders, and changes and modifications to purchase orders.

“Subcontractor,” as defined in FAR 44.101, means any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or services to or for a prime Contractor or another subcontractor.

(b) General. The Government will not pay excessive pass-through charges. The Contracting Officer shall determine if excessive pass-through charges exist.

(c) Reporting. Required reporting of performance of work by the Contractor or a subcontractor. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing if—

(1) The Contractor changes the amount of subcontract effort after award such that it exceeds 70 percent of the total cost of work to be performed under the contract, task order, or delivery order. The notification shall identify the revised cost of the subcontract effort and shall include verification that the Contractor will provide added value; or

(2) Any subcontractor changes the amount of lower-tier subcontractor effort after award such that it exceeds 70 percent of the total cost of the work to be performed under its subcontract. The notification shall identify the revised cost of the subcontract effort and shall include verification that the subcontractor will provide added value as related to the work to be performed by the lower-tier subcontractor(s).

(d) Recovery of excessive pass-through charges. If the Contracting Officer determines that excessive pass-through charges exist;

(1) For other than fixed-price contracts, the excessive pass-through charges are unallowable in accordance with the provisions in FAR subpart 31.2; and

(2) For applicable DoD fixed-price contracts, as identified in 15.408(n)(2)(i)(B), the Government shall be entitled to a price reduction for the amount of excessive pass-through charges included in the contract price.

(e) Access to records.

(1) The Contracting Officer, or authorized representative, shall have the right to examine and audit all the Contractor's records (as defined at FAR 52.215-2(a)) necessary to determine whether the Contractor proposed, billed, or claimed excessive pass-through charges.

(2) For those subcontracts to which paragraph (f) of this clause applies, the Contracting Officer, or…