DRAFT_FINAL_2016_Key_Verification_Assets_Fund_BAA_Text__3_May_2016.docx

BAA-2016-DOS-AVC-VTRDN

United States Department of State Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2016

KEY VERIFICATION ASSETS FUND PROGRAM

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

FOR THE KEY VERIFICATION ASSETS FUND PROGRAM

FULL TEXT ANNOUNCEMENT

ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE: Broad Agency Announcement - annual update. Any updates or possible cancellation will be issued as an amendment to the BAA. This annual review and subsequent amendments to the BAA shall meet the requirement of FAR 35.016 to update the BAA notice no less frequently than annually.

SECURITY: All submissions shall remain at the UNCLASSIFIED level.

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Requiring Agency: United States Department of State

2. Broad Agency Announcement Title: Key Verification Assets Fund Program

3. Broad Agency Announcement Number: BAA-2016-DOS-AVC-VTRDN

4. Response Date: This announcement will remain open until 2400 hours Eastern Time on the closing date, 1 year from public posting. Proposals received after the closing date will not be reviewed or evaluated, please see the submission deadlines in Section V Paragraph 4.

5. Background:

The Department of State (DOS), Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance (AVC) through the Key Verification Assets Fund or V Fund Program seeks ambitious, innovative research proposals to address requirements outlined in its annual UNCLASSIFIED Innovative Science and Technology Verification Needs Document. AVC invites researchers and project managers to submit white papers for sustaining, researching, developing, or acquiring technologies or programs relating to the verification of chemical, biological and nuclear agreements and commitments as well as measures that enhance United States (U.S.) security related to missiles, space, strategic stability and deterrence. The V Fund Program supports and preserves critical verification assets and promotes the development of new technologies, improves and expands analytical tools, models, data and metrics applicable in the science and policy decision-making process. The fund requests annual project proposals ranging from the basic science level to the operation of a fully developed capability. The V Fund program is open to all interested and qualified sources, to include participation by and potentially with both “traditional and non-traditional” members (e.g. large businesses, small businesses, independent consultants, academic institutions, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, government agencies, non-governmental organizations, consortium participants, others). These qualified sources may assist the Department of State in finding innovative technological approaches to current and future arms control, and nonproliferation policy implementation challenges through exchanges between the science and technology communities.

The V Fund has been particularly effective when used as seed money to survey the technical opportunities and challenges associated with new verification regimes under consideration by the arms control policy community. While the available resources are modest, the V Fund has successfully funded projects that address nuclear explosion detection; investigating and developing technology gaps of nuclear life cycle research; chemical and biological weapons detection and attribution. In addition to the investigation of new technologies relating to security tags and seals; sensors on mobile platforms; space related arms control gaps, verification of conventional arms control technology, and exploring the promise and peril of digital era tools such as social media to explore the utility of societal verification and using such new media for training arms control professionals.

6. Communications:

Prospective offerors may contact the programmatic points of contact (listed below) to verify interest in the effort to be proposed PRIOR to committing any resources to the preparation of any white papers in response to the BAA. Discussions shall not include content or rating information of other offeror’s proposals or White Papers. Discussions with any of the points of contact shall not constitute a commitment by the Government to subsequently fund or award any proposed effort. Questions outside the scope of the technical focal point, such as contract terms and conditions, or projected award schedule, should be referred to the contracting officer (CO). Only COs are legally authorized to obligate the Government.

7. Points of Contact:

Any questions regarding this announcement must be provided to the points of contact below. All questions shall be submitted in writing by e-mail.

Questions of a contractual/business nature shall be directed to:

Contracting Officer: Fabiola Bellevue 1735 North Lynn Street Arlington, VA 22209 Phone: 703-875-6945 Email: BellevueF@state.gov

Questions of a programmatic nature shall be directed to:

V Fund Program Mailbox: Email: VFBAA-Inquiries@state.gov

8. Contract Instruments/Awards:

Multiple awards are anticipated. Awards under this BAA will be made to offerors on the basis of the evaluation criteria contained in Section VI, paragraph 1. Awards will be subject to the availability of funds. The State Department anticipates that Awards because of this BAA will be in the form of negotiated contracts, purchase orders or Interagency Acquisition Agreement through existing contract vehicles from the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, or any agency, entity, or other component of the intelligence community.

II. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

The Arms Control, Verification and Compliance Bureau selects its research efforts through the V Fund Program Broad Agency Announcement process (BAA). The V Fund will select a number of proposals for fiscal year FY2016 funding. The number will depend on resources available and on the quantity/quality of proposals responsive to this BAA. Offerors are invited to propose research and technologies that address topics based on priority research and development needs identified for each Focus Area within the annually approved UNCLASSIFIED Innovative Science and Technology Verification Needs Document. Compelling proposals addressing other needs related to the Focus Areas will be considered, but generally speaking, proposals that address the listed priority needs will have an advantage in scoring for the “Importance/Potential to the AVC Bureau’s Mission” evaluation criterion. The AVC Bureau’s technology interests are structured across a range of focus areas, encompassing physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics as well as multidisciplinary arms control topics such as support for the present generation of treaties agreements and initiatives; and exploratory research for future options in arms control and transparency.

This section sets out the research requirements descriptions and overall technical objectives. The intent of this BAA is to identify innovative scientific technologies and approaches in the basic science, near and long-term solutions, which enhance the capabilities of the United States Government to address current and future verification and compliance gaps and challenges. The current gaps are identified in the Support of the Present Generation of Agreements and Commitments and the future challenges are addressed under the Exploratory Research for Future Options in Arms Control and Transparency heading. The level of detail and order of appearance for a given treaty focus area requirement are not intended to signify its relative priority.

Support for the Present Generation of Agreements and Commitment

1. Missiles and Nuclear Arms Reduction: The New START Treaty has a verification regime in which National Technical Means (NTM) play a significant role. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty also remains in force. Although the on-site inspection regime for the INF Treaty has expired, Section 403 of the Arms Control and Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2577) still requires yearly compliance analysis and reporting, which relies heavily on NTM sources. Verifying compliance with the central commitments of the New START and INF Treaties, as well as potential future agreements that could extend to reductions in, and elimination of, non-strategic nuclear weapons and non-deployed nuclear weapons, requires the extensive collection of detailed monitoring information. Such data also supports informed U.S. participation in Treaty implementation commissions (such as the New START Treaty’s Bilateral Consultative Commission (BCC) and the INF Treaty’s Special Verification Commission (SVC)). The research areas of interest are to:

· Develop tools or processes needed to monitor the presence and/or number of nuclear warheads and distinguish them from non-nuclear warheads.

· Develop assessment tools to determine the accuracy of information provided by states under an arms control agreement or commitment (telemetry, data exchanges, database declarations, etc.).

2. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: In April 2009, the President outlined his nuclear security strategy in Prague and indicated that the Administration would work to strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). These initiatives will require improved capabilities to detect and characterize activities associated with the nuclear fuel cycle and covert nuclear weapons development. The research areas of interest are to:

· Identify tools and methods to detect nuclear weaponization activities.

· Identify tools and methods to characterize covert production of uranium isotopes.

3. Nuclear Test Ban Treaties, Agreements, and Moratoria: Global explosion monitoring technology is mature, but countering foreign denial and deception capabilities aimed at impairing collection remains an ongoing challenge. New approaches are necessary in the detection of explosions with much lower yields (well within the explosive power of conventional explosions); to counter the use of evasive techniques (e.g., seismic decoupling); and to distinguish between very low-yield nuclear events and conventional explosions. Research needs to be performed to enhance understanding of the underlying physical phenomena, to develop new collection instruments and data exploitation techniques, and to develop ways to exploit new signatures associated with nuclear testing. The State Department’s Berkner Panel Report of 1959[footnoteRef:1] still provides good guidance concerning the key research areas for improving the detection of underground nuclear explosions using seismic and acoustic sensing (source phenomena, wave propagation, better detection, and better data processing techniques; specific subtopics have of course changed over the last half century). The research areas of interest are to: [1: Fifty years ago, this Berkner Panel report led to the creation of the ARPA-funded World-Wide Standardized Seismograph Network (WWSSN), which among other things led to the great scientific finding of confirmation of plate tectonics, using year-long recordings of analog seismic data. Today’s IMS or USAEDS can do that with just a month’s worth of digital data. But there is no doubt that there is still a need to do research on better, smaller, more rugged seismic and acoustic sensors.

· Conduct critical examination of the assumptions and methodologies necessary to determine the yield of an underground test by performing seismic measurements at standoff distances.

· Investigate new or enhanced monitoring methodologies and capabilities for underground nuclear explosive tests that:[footnoteRef:2] [2: For example, Ar37 detection may have these characteristics and has received some recent attention as a candidate nuclear test monitoring capability. It is produced when energetic neutrons irradiate calcium, the fifth most abundant element in the earth’s crust (after oxygen, silicon, iron, and aluminum).

· Distinguish nuclear from chemical explosions, and detect both fission and fusion processes.

· Are not unduly contaminated by activities related to the nuclear fuel cycle (reactor operations, reprocessing, etc.).

· Allow for discrimination of emissions from other nuclear activities such as the production of isotopes for medical or industrial uses.

· Allow detection of signatures that are long-lived and propagate well through soil and air.

· Explore the feasibility of “information barriers” to allow the collection and analysis of gamma-ray spectra associated with radionuclides without making the full spectral data available to inspectors (in the context of CTBT On-Site Inspections (OSI)).[footnoteRef:3] [3: The CTBT provides that detection and characterization of radionuclides during OSI can be limited to only radionuclides relevant to the OSI. An agreed list of radionuclides considered "relevant" has been arrived at in the CTBT Preparatory Commission. Accurate and useful determination of the presence and abundance of these relevant radionuclides generally requires acquisition of full gamma-ray spectra containing information about radionuclides present that are not on the "relevant" list. Research is needed to explore the feasibility of "information barriers" either by development of reliable and sufficient analysis techniques that can work with only partial spectra or the development of software/hardware solutions to allow the collection and analysis of complete spectra without making the full spectral data (or information about non-"relevant" radionuclides) available to inspectors.]

4. Biological Weapons Convention: The current policy initiatives are derived primarily from the National Strategy for Countering Biological Threats (Strategy), the National Research and Development Strategy for Microbial Forensics, and the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. The Strategy, in particular, tasks the U.S. government to pursue capabilities in seven key areas to protect the homeland and its citizenry from natural or man-made biological threats. Within those seven areas are specific calls for technological developments or improvements, notably: building knowledge about the global disease burden and technological capabilities; improving intelligence on deliberate biological threats; facilitating data sharing and knowledge discovery; ensuring robust capabilities for law enforcement and security; ensuring robust capabilities to disrupt or interdict illicit activity; and, enhancing microbial forensics and attribution. The research areas of interest are to:

· Develop tools and techniques for sample collection in a hazardous environment from a fixed or remote location.

· Improve or enhance understanding on how to detect the diversion of advanced biotechnology to weapons development without placing undue burdens on the biotech industry as it develops advances to benefit mankind. The research should include:

· How do we promote transparency initiatives for biodefense research activities?

· What are the most relevant types of data for the confidence-building measures (CBM)?

· What information do BWC States Parties need to best assure one another that treaty obligations are being met?

5. Chemical Weapons Convention: The current policy initiatives and priorities are derived primarily from National Security Directives and implementation directives for the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (CWC). The CWC eliminates an entire category of Weapons of Mass Destruction through its prohibitions and application of strict verification measures. Through its non-proliferation mandate and verification regime, the CWC seeks to ensure that toxic chemicals and precursors are only used for peaceful purposes. It is critical to maintain the ability to verify compliance with this Treaty even as advances in the chemical industry and science and technology complicate verification efforts. The research areas of interest are to:

· Develop tools and techniques to support sampling and analysis of chemical agents, their precursors, and their respective degradation products in a variety of matrices and environments, to include bio-medical analytical methods for these chemicals, adducts formed upon exposure to plants and animals, and their metabolites in blood and urine.

· Investigate and develop innovative analytical tools and sampling methodologies, which address the convergence of biological and chemical production. Considerations should be given to how these tools can be applied in verification of facilities declared under Schedule 1, 2 or 3 regimes, or under the regime for discrete organic chemicals and/or under alleged use or challenge inspection scenarios.

· The research should address toxic biologically mediated products as well as chemical synthesis of toxic biological molecules.

6. Open Skies Treaties: There is a need for new sensors – digital video, infrared (IR), and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) – that meet the criteria outlined in the Treaty on Open Skies and its subsequent Decisions, ensuring aerial observation of all the territories of the parties to the Treaty. There is also a need to inspect and assess foreign Open Skies assets in order to verify compliance with the terms of the Treaty and to understand and mitigate any associated risks to U. S. national security. The research areas of interest are to:

· Identify methodologies and equipment that better utilize the full range of technologies permitted under the Open Skies Treaty. In addition to adhering to the Treaty’s technical specifications, the technologies need to be affordable and accessible to all Treaty parties, and provide a significant value added relative to the data already available from other sources.

· Improve methodologies and technologies used to inspect foreign Open Skies equipment and verify that sensors deployed by foreign nations fully comply with limits in the Treaty.

· Develop a full understanding of how modern foreign Open Skies capabilities impact U.S. national security equities and how to mitigate risk to those equities.

7. Space: The National Space Policy (NSP) released in June 2010 states that the United States will consider space-related arms control concepts and proposals that are equitable, effectively verifiable, and which enhance the national security of the U.S. and its allies. The Administration is pursuing transparency and confidence building measures (TCBMs) to encourage responsible actions in, and the peaceful use of, space. Monitoring the implementation of and adherence to, TCBMs such as a multilateral code of conduct becomes critical to promoting responsible behavior in outer space. As we consider initiatives to further define “rules of the road” for stability and security in outer space, and to strengthen norms of responsible behavior in outer space, we need to improve our capabilities for space-based space situational awareness (SSA) to complement and enhance ground-based SSA capabilities. The research areas of interest are to:

· Develop new space situational awareness technologies to assist the United States in tracking commercial and university small satellites (smallsats) and other difficult-to-track objects from launch until long after they have ceased operating. The best technical solutions should be lightweight and non-powered (such as reflectors) to make them easily identified and tracked for the purposes of enhancing safety of flight for other satellites.

· Investigate and develop data mining technologies (e.g., predictive analytics) that could examine the data streams from multiple U.S. government, commercial and international satellites and associated infrastructure to detect unusual patterns of events that could indicate purposeful interference with space systems, and support attribution of the source of such illicit activity.

· Seek simple satellite-based instruments that require little weight or power and could provide some level of autonomous on-orbit collision warning (or in some cases, interface with other satellites using similar instruments).

· Develop tools to detect and prevent the deliberate misuse of the maritime domain to commit hostile, harmful, or unlawful acts. The use of space for Maritime Domain Awareness could provide an unprecedented level of transparency regarding such activities. We seek methods to achieve persistent global surveillance of the maritime domain by:

· Improving our utilization of current space assets.

· Exploiting fully the next generation of small satellites (particularly those with Earth observation and signals collection capabilities).

· Deploying new analytical tools to fully exploit the data from these sources.

Exploratory Research for Future Options in Arms Control and Transparency

8. Future Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty: In April 2009, the President outlined our goal of a world without nuclear weapons, while noting that the “road to zero” would be a long one. The negotiations of future treaties to further reduce nuclear weapons may move away from the traditional focus on bilateral strategic delivery systems and towards limits on the nuclear warheads[footnoteRef:4] themselves among multiple Treaty partners at lower numbers. Verification of such treaties that directly addresses nuclear warheads at lower numbers with multiple Treaty partners will require new approaches that balance the need to protect sensitive information with the inherent difficulty of remotely detecting nuclear devices. We need to develop the best possible technologies to mitigate the difficulties associated with striking this balance. [4: Following the signing of the New START Treaty in April 2010, President Obama has repeatedly made clear his readiness to discuss further reductions in all types of nuclear weapons with the Russian Federation, including non-strategic and non-deployed nuclear weapons. ]

Strategic weapons controls and reductions have traditionally been addressed by bilateral U.S.-Russian treaties covering delivery systems (such as the INF and START Treaties), while the nuclear industry has been addressed by the multilateral Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The proposed Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty would more broadly address key nuclear materials. Future nuclear reduction regimes involving multiple treaty partners at significantly lower numbers will likely have to merge functionalities that have historically been separately through these treaties, for example by addressing the full lifecycle of nuclear warheads and their components. Conceptual designs for such cross-cutting control regimes need to be developed. To do so, expert community will need to identify chokepoints and possible new signatures that may be useful to a new generation of arms control or transparency regimes. The research areas of interest are to:

· Design technologies that identify aspects of the nuclear enterprise, particularly those involving the warhead life-cycle, that would require control and/or transparency regime that is substantive, verifiable, and improves U.S. National Security.

· Improve the detection of fissile materials, particularly when they are shielded, at a standoff distance, and/or do not spontaneously emit neutrons.

· Develop technologies to protect sensitive information and manage access while verifying compliance with a nuclear warhead control or dismantlement regime.

Strategic Stability and Deterrence: Strategic stability calculations may also change in the future if we move from bilateral models to a more multipolar world. Such calculations will require an examination of the components of strategic stability, the trade-offs in the calculations, and the dynamics between regional and global strategic choices. The research topics of interest are to:

· Examine the components of strategic stability, from deterrence, assurance, reassurance, and arms control perspectives and their impact of emerging technologies on strategic capabilities and verification technology.

· Examine the trade-offs among global adversaries and their effects on global strategic concerns. Examples include South Asia border countries; Northeast Asia border countries; and the Middle East.

9. Embracing Public Technical Needs: Public Technical Means includes data, interactions, and analysis in the public domain.[footnoteRef:5] The proliferation of powerful networked sensors[footnoteRef:6] will generate data of a granularity and variety that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. This data could be aggregated to develop new emergent information. Social media permits the spontaneous formation of virtual communities that may act as “verification flash mobs” to collect and analyze data and information. Such developments will likely be game changers in many areas, but while arms control will probably not be the leading adopter,[footnoteRef:7] the emerging interaction between people and technology could help empower a new generation of transparency measures and arms control verification provisions. We need to understand the underlying phenomena to assess possible paths forward. The research areas of interest are to:

[5: The term Public Technical Means is taken from Stubbs and Drell. It represents the modern evolution of “societal verification,” a concept first articulated by Melman and Bohn in the 1950s and based on the idea that the public supported nuclear disarmament and would actively participate in arms control out of a sense of civic duty.

] [6: For example, “smart phones” carried by highly empowered “citizen sensors,” dedicated sensors embedded throughout smart cities to manage municipal assets, and the internet of things.

] [7: Given the complex ethical and legal questions involved, communities addressing topics such as climate change, precision medicine and disaster relief will likely take the lead in employing information obtained from citizen sensors and social media, but the arms control community needs to be fully aware of the emerging norms in this area to lay the groundwork for the creative use of such public technical means in the context of future arms control and transparency initiatives. Active research will be needed to develop an understanding of the full range of issues to be addressed and resolved before such tools are deployed. ]

· Characterize the clutter in public data for the purposes of discrimination, calibration, and validation as applied to nuclear weapons treaty regimes.

· Detect deception and falsification in open source data when applied to the nuclear weapons treaty regimes.

Please note that regardless of the technical area, the ultimate success of a proposal is based on the evaluation criteria listed in Section VI below.

III. AWARD INFORMATION

The amount and period of performance of each selected proposal may vary depending on the research area and the technical approach pursued by the selected offeror. The period of performance is typically twelve (12) months from the effective date of award by the Contracting Officer.

The Department of State plans to make multiple awards under this BAA, which represents the best value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria contained in Section VI, Paragraph 1 Evaluation Criteria and the Evaluation Review and Selection Process Section VI, paragraph 2 of BAA-2016-DOS-AVC-VTRDN. The DOS is seeking institutions and participants for this program that are capable of supporting the goals and desired outcomes as described in this BAA. Offerors have the opportunity to be creative in the selection of the technical and management processes and approaches to address the research areas of interest described by the information addressed in Section II, paragraph 1 that outlines the 2016 requirements description. The research Needs are generated from the annually updated UNCLASSIFIED Innovative Science and Technology Verification Needs Document.

The Department of State anticipates approximately $1.770 million will be available to make V Fund approved awards. This information is only an estimate and does not obligate the Government in any way. Estimated funding amounts may increase or decrease at any time based on current and future appropriations and can affect the actual funding approved compared to the cost identified in the proposals.

There is no set limit on the award levels for each proposal: however, approved cost proposals are generally anticipated to fall between $500 and $150,000.

IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

This BAA is open to all interested and qualified sources, to include participation by and potentially with both “traditional and non-traditional” members (e.g. large businesses, small businesses, independent consultants, academic institutions, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers; government agencies, non-governmental organizations, consortium participants, others).

V. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Application and Submission Process: White papers that do not meet format requirements may be rejected without further review or evaluation. An individual at a qualified institution wishing to apply for an award must submit a White Paper and Quad chart as described in Paragraph 2 below. The submission shall follow the procedures and formats described under the proposal preparation guidance found in Section V Paragraph 2 “Form of Proposals” and Section V Paragraph 3 “Form and Content of White Papers.”

Offerors must identify on each page information considered proprietary by marking their submissions with the restrictive language contained in FAR 52.215-1(e), Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition.

In addition, respondents are requested to provide their Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number, a fax number, and an e-mail address. Individual white paper evaluations will be based on acceptability or unacceptability without regard to other information submitted under this BAA.

No further notice will be provided to offerors submitting offers responsive to this BAA. All submissions shall remain at the unclassified level.

2. Form of Proposals White Paper/Quad Chart:

This announcement constitutes the only solicitation. Do not submit a formal proposal at this time. The purpose of the White Paper and Quad chart (referred to as white paper throughout) is to preclude unwarranted effort on the part of an offeror whose proposed work is not of interest to the Government. A rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimate is needed in the white paper, although not at the level of detail as required in response to a request for proposal (RFP) issued by the Contracting Officer (CO) at a later stage of the process. The ROM cost estimate should be consistent with any dollar value or ranges specified in the announcement, as well as the level of work being proposed. White papers must sufficiently detail the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the AVC’s Bureau mission.

White papers will be accepted ONLY during the period identified in Section V, paragraph 4 in accordance with the specified timeline. Technical reviews/selection points may be conducted based on the needs of AVC at any time.

Other than white papers, no proposals should be submitted. A letter requesting a proposal (RFP) will be issued by the Contracting Officer (CO) as determined by a peer or scientific review of a white paper. Due dates and times will be specified in each letter requesting a proposal issued by the CO.

White papers found to be consistent with the requirements of the BAA may be invited to submit a formal technical and cost proposal. An invitation to submit a proposal does not assure that the offeror will be awarded a subsequent contract. If requested to submit a formal proposal the offeror will be requested to do so in accordance with the RFP. There will be no other announcement issued for this requirement. Offerors MUST monitor Federal Business Opportunities website at http://www.fbo.gov in the event this announcement is amended.

3. Form and Content of White Papers White papers submitted under this BAA are expected to be unclassified. Titles given to the White Papers should be descriptive of the work they cover and not be merely a copy of the title of this solicitation. White papers that do not meet format requirements may be rejected without further review or evaluation. Offerors must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) in order to be eligible for contract award.

White Papers Format – All Pages:

· Paper size – 8.5 X 11 inch paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. The page limitation for abstracts includes all figures, tables, and charts.

· Margins – 1 inch

· Spacing – single spaced

· Maximum number of pages permitted: 6 pages (excluding cover page and Quad chart)

White Paper Content:

White paper shall be submitted by e-mail ONLY to AVC-BAA@state.gov and contain the following information:

· BAA Number “BAA-2016-DOS-AVC-VTRDN”

· Proposal Title: Name of the project.

· Proposal Summary: Use the attached Quad chart format. This is separate from the project description below.

· Project Description: 3 single spaced pages is the maximum length of the project description.

a) General Information: Make the white paper a standalone document. Do not make reference to websites and other sources that you expect assessors to visit or to read to understand your proposal. No classified information should be submitted with the white paper.

b) Key Proposal Points: Your proposal should fully cover the following:

i. The idea – identifies and describes a highly innovative technology idea and the scientific principles that underpin the idea and/or the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternative approaches.

ii. The benefit – clearly identifies and describes what you think are the valuable benefits to the Department of State. Explain how your proposal will build and improve science and technologies capabilities identified in the V FUND FY16 Research Needs, Section II.

iii. The impact – explains your vision of how the technology will be game changing; pushes the boundaries of science and technology; integrates with current systems; or will be used for future development.

iv. The approach – provide a clear description of each concept or idea and how it translates into identifiable deliverables. Describe your credible expertise and experience in the areas of science and technology necessary to complete the work proposed.

v. The deliverables – demonstrate credible measures of performance; the progress made in the project execution as addressed in the approach; the data and end results. Each deliverable shall be clearly identified.

· Bibliography: Does not count towards page limit.

a) A brief bibliography of relevant technical papers and research notes (published and unpublished) which document the technical ideas upon which the white paper proposal is based.

· Project Duration: 12 months or less.

· Project Projection: $500.00 - $150,000.00: Proposals must provide a rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimate. The ROM cost estimate should be consistent with any dollar value or ranges specified in the announcement, as well as the level of work being proposed. White papers should avoid disclosing proprietary information or data not critical to the idea being presented. The V fund program provides modest funds for science and technology projects that have applicability towards arms control verification and transparency technologies.

· Principal Investigator(s): List all principal investigators and organizations and the role of each investigator in the project.

· Partner, Collaborator and End User: List all partners and collaborators along with their respective organizations and potential end users. It should be clear which individual(s) are conducting what phase or portions of the research AND/OR are funding aspects of the proposal. Any information relating to the transition to an end user(s) should be identified.

· Administrative and Financial Contact: Provide the name, address, phone/fax, and e-mail address of the points of contact.

Quad Chart Format: A Quad chart conveys the essence of the proposed solution for a single requirement. When preparing a submission, the offeror shall ensure that the specific criteria of the Need are addressed, the solution is clear, and can be accomplished with the proposed technology, cost, and schedule. The Quad Chart includes a document header and four quadrants. Please see the V Fund 2016 Quad Chart attachment on the solicitation page.

a) Header Information: Must include the BAA Announcement number, the Document Identifier, and the Proposal Title. The date and company name should be included along with the appropriate document markings.

b) Top Left Quadrant - Graphical Description: Can be a photograph, schematic or artist conception of the proposed solution or prototype. Include labels or brief descriptive test as needed for clarification.

c) Top Right Quadrant - Treaty Focus Area/Research and Development Need Objective: Identify the specific treaty focus area that the proposal is addressing as specified by the BAA Fiscal Year 2016 Innovative Science and Technology Verification Needs.

d) Bottom Left Quadrant

i. Technical Approach and Phases: Describes the proposed technical approach, the technology involved, how it will be used to solve the problem, actions done to date, and any related ongoing efforts. Briefly describe the tasks to be performed for each phase, a bullet list is acceptable.

ii. Deliverables: Deliverables shall include, by phase, a list of all prototype hardware and software along with the required data as described in the White Paper.

iii. Cost and Schedule: A Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) and Schedule shall be proposed by phase and include the cost, period of performance (POP) and a total cost and POP that combines all phases shall also be included.

iv. Proposers/Partners: Identify all lead organization(s) and other significant teaming partners. Details must include names, e-mails and telephone numbers.

v. Principal Investigators: If different from Proposers and Partners, the details must include names, e-mails and telephone numbers.

e) Bottom Right Quadrant

i. Operational and Performance Capabilities Summary: Describe any basic, new, or enhanced capabilities the system will provide to meet the Treaty Focus Area and explain how the project address and answers the specific Need. List all key aspects of performance, capability, operational use, relevant software or hardware specifications, and planned interface and/or compatibility.

ii. Corporate Contact Information: Provide the submitter’s company name, point of contact, phone and fax numbers, and email address.

4. Timeline for Proposal Submission and Selection:

This announcement will remain open until 2400 Eastern Time on the closing date. White papers and proposals will be accepted throughout the open period of BAA-2016-DOS-AVC-VTRDN. This announcement will remain open until cancelled or replaced by a successor BAA, whichever occurs first.

White papers evaluation occurs ONCE annually.

VI. EVALUATION INFORMATION

1. Evaluation Criteria: Award decision will be based on a competitive selection of white papers resulting from a peer and scientific review process and shall be evaluated based on the following criteria that are listed in “DESCENDING” order of importance.

a. Importance/Potential to the AVC Bureau’s Mission: The potential contributions of the proposed effort are relevant to AVC Bureau’s mission to address policy and technical challenges of verifying compliance with arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements. Specifically, the identification of and advocacy for technological and analytical solutions to a broad range of verification and compliance issues for both current and future arms control challenges.

b. Overall Scientific and Technical Merits: The proposed technical approach is feasible, achievable, complete and supported by a proposed technical team that has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed tasks. Task descriptions and associated technical elements provided are complete and in logical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined. The proposal identifies major technical risks and planned mitigation efforts are clearly defined and feasible.

c. Fund Availability/Affordability: The proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach offered and demonstrates the proposer’s practical understanding of the effort.

2. Evaluation Review and Selection Process:

a. The AVC Bureau will conduct a scientific and technical review of each white paper proposal submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in this BAA. Proposals will not be evaluated against each other since they are not submitted in accordance with a common work statement. The AVC Bureau’s intent is to review proposals in accordance with the timeline for White Paper Open Period submission dates, Section V, paragraph 4.

b. Award(s) will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be most advantageous to the Government, all factors considered, including the potential contributions of the proposed work to the overall V Fund Program and the availability of funding for the effort.

c. It is the policy of the AVC Bureau to ensure impartial, equitable, comprehensive proposal evaluations and to select the source whose offers best meets the Government’s technical, policy and programmatic goals. In order to provide the desired evaluation, qualified Government personnel will conduct reviews and convene panels of experts in the appropriate areas.

d. Technical and cost proposals submitted under this BAA will be protected from unauthorized disclosure in accordance with FAR 3.104-4 and 15.207 OR FAR 37.203(d). NOTE: Ask AQM Restrictive notices notwithstanding, one or more support contractors may be utilized as subject-matter-expert technical consultants. However, proposal selection and award decisions are solely the responsibility of Government personnel. Each support contractor having access to Technical and Cost Proposal submitted in response to this BAA will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreements and organizational conflicts of interest statement prior to receipt of any proposal submissions.

VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

1. Selection Notices: As soon as the evaluation of all the proposals are complete, the proposer will be notified by the Contracting Officer that (1) the proposal has been selected for funding pending contract negotiations, purchase orders or completion of the Interagency Agreement(s), or (2) the proposal has not been selected. The official notifications will be sent via e-mail to the Technical and Administrative points of contacts identified in the white paper.

2. Administrative Requirements

a) Meeting and Travel Requirements: Performers should anticipate regular Principal Investigator(s) meetings and periodic site visits at the Program Manager’s discretion.

b) Post Contract Evaluation: Principal Investigator(s) maybe requested to participate in a project evaluation at a later date upon completion of the effort.

c) Export Control – All procurement contracts, other transaction and other awards as deemed appropriate, resultant from this solicitation may be subject to International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and Arms Export Control Act.

3. Reporting: The number of reports will be specified in the award document. The reports shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the procedures contained in the award document and mutually agreed before award. Reports and briefing material will also be required as appropriate to document progress in accomplishing program metrics. A final report that summarizes the project tasks will be required at the conclusion of the performance period for the award, notwithstanding the fact that the research may be continued under a follow-on vehicle.

VIII. OTHER INFORMATION

FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION: This acquisition is unrestricted. This BAA is issued under the provisions of Federal Acquisition Regulation paragraph 6.102(d) (2) that provides for the competitive selection of research proposals. Proposals submitted in response to approved whitepapers issued pursuant to this BAA that are selected for award are considered to be the results of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of PL 98-369, the Competition In Contracting Act of 1984.

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Organizational Conflict of Interest may apply to this action but cannot be determined prior to issuance of this announcement. This issue and the need for applicable clauses will be resolved prior to the award of any instrument resulting from an offeror’s proposal.

ASSOCIATE CONTRACTOR AGREEMENTS: Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs) are agreements between contractors working on government contract projects that specify requirements for them to share information, data, technical knowledge, expertise, or resources. The contracting officer may require ACAs when contractors working on separate government contracts must cooperate, share resources or otherwise jointly participate in working on contracts or projects. Prime contractor to subcontractor relationships do not constitute ACAs. For each award, the contracting officer will identify associate contractors with whom agreements are required.

NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL: All proprietary material should be clearly marked and will be held in strict confidence. The program office has contracted for various non-governments scientific, engineering, technical and administrative staff support services, some of which require contractors to obtain access to proprietary information submitted by other contractors. All non-government contractor support personnel have signed and are bound by the appropriate non-disclosure agreements and organizational conflict of interest statements.

FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS (FFRDCS): FFRDCs may submit proposals in response to this announcement. FFRDCs or contractors that propose using FFRDCs shall provide rationale in their proposal that the research is within the purpose, mission, general scope of effort or special competency of the FFRDC and that research to be performed would not place the FFRDC in direct competition with the private sector. The Government does not intend that FFRDCs use privileged information or access to facilities to compete with the private sector.

NAICS CODE: The applicable NAICS code for this announcement is 541710 – Research and Development in the physical, engineering, and Life Sciences, with a size standard of 500.

image1.png