BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001.pdf

BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001

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

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2019

KEY VERIFICATION ASSETS FUND

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

I. GENERAL INFORMATION 2

II. AWARD INFORMATION 5

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION 5

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION 5

V. EVALUATION INFORMATION 11

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION 12

VII. OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION 13

VIII. LIST OF BAATOPICS (S&T THRUSTS, FOCUS AREAS, AND NEEDS) 14

Topic 1. Verification and Attribution of Use of Directed Energy Weapons Topic 2. Arms Control Treaty Item of Inspection Automated Tracking and Reporting Topic 3. Miniature Autonomous Odor-guided Flight Vehicles for Chemical Verification Topic 4. Unmanned Aerial Platforms for Data Collection in Investigation of Chemical

Weapons Use at Sites Inaccessible to Inspectors Topic 5. Bio-markers in Vegetation as a Tool for Investigation of Use of Chlorine as a

Chemical Weapon Topic 6. Enabling Attribution of Chemical Weapons Use Topic 7. Sequencing Techniques for Investigation and Attribution of Biological Weapons Use Topic 8. Firewalls to Impede the Development of Nuclear Weapons Topic 9. Systematic Seismic Magnitude Study of Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions Topic 10. Seismic Calibration Research/Experiment(s) in Eurasia Topic 11. Synergy of Active-Source Experiment and Passive Seismic Deployment Topic 12. Yield Estimation Research on Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

FOR THE KEY VERIFICATION ASSETS FUND

FULL TEXT ANNOUNCEMENT

ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE: Broad Agency Announcement (BAA).

- This publication constitutes an BAA as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35.016 and FAR 6.102(d)(2). This BAA is a competitive announcement of Proposals focusing on research and development of technologies to meet the mission of the Arms Control, Verification and Compliance Bureau (AVC) of the U.S. Department of State (DOS).

Any updates or possible cancellation will be issued as an amendment to the BAA.

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Requiring Agency: United States Department of State (DOS).

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

3. Announcement Number: BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001

4. Response Date: This announcement will remain open until 2400 hours Eastern Time on the closing date as posted. Proposals received after the closing date will not be reviewed or evaluated, please see the submission deadlines in Section IV Paragraph 3.

5. Background:

DOS/AVC’s Statutory Authorities for this solicitation:

• Section 1111 of Public Law 106-113 regarding the Key Verification Assets Fund.

• Other Laws regulating AVC’s mission areas are

- 22 USC§2652C (Public Law 106-113), Section 1112;

- 22 USC § 2577 (Arms Control and Disarmament Act), Section 306:

Verification and Compliance;

- 22 USC § 2593a (Arms Control and Disarmament Act), Section 403: Annual Report) to Congress on Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments.

Pursuant to the relevant laws cited above, the Department of State’s (DOS), Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, through the Key Verification Assets Fund, or V Fund, seeks ambitious, innovative research proposals to address its priority science and technology requirements for monitoring and verification. The V Fund is administered to help sustain, research, develop, or acquire technologies or programs relating to the verification of arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements and commitments.

The V Fund may be used to support and preserve critical verification assets/capabilities as well as to promote the development of new technologies to support monitoring and verification. It may also be used to improve and expand analytical tools, models, data and metrics applicable to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) related policies. The Fund requests annual project proposals ranging from the basic science level (low Technology Readiness Level (TRL) in DoD terminology) to the operation of a fully developed capability (i.e., high TRL). This BAA may accept proposals that focus on experimental work that creates a roadmap for a future, larger scale research program.

The V Fund is open to all interested and qualified sources, to include participation by and potentially collaboration with a wide variety of entities (e.g. large businesses, small businesses, independent consultants, academic institutions, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs), government agencies, non-governmental organizations, consortium participants, national labs, etc.).

These qualified sources may assist the Department of State in finding innovative technological approaches to address current and future arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament policy development and implementation challenges through exchanges with various science and technology communities.

6. General Communications:

The AVC Bureau has functional offices covering different arms control, nonproliferation-related, and disarmament treaty and policy areas (such as CBW, nuclear, strategic, etc.).

Each office has technical experts who are active in their respective professional fields.

Prospective offerors may maintain routine professional discussions with these government experts and their own R&D community.

7. Contacts for BAA-related Communications:

Any questions regarding this BAA announcement must be provided to the points of contact below, by E-mail. Only Contracting Officers (CO’s) at the Department are legally authorized to obligate the awards.

Contracting Officer:

Name: Pete W. Jones Address: 2009 Dyess Ave, Bldg. #F

Charleston, SC 29415 Phone: 843-308-4250 202-486-2684 Email: JonesPW@state.gov

Contracting Specialist:

Name: Jewel Carter Address: 1735 North Lynn Street Arlington, VA 22209 Phone: (703) 875 5704 Email: CarterJA@state.gov

For general programmatic questions, which must be submitted by email, responses will be posted at the V Fund BAA Federal Business Opportunity (FedBizOpps) webpage as an amendment to the original announcement. For inquiries that are company proprietary, responses will be sent directly to the institution, and will not be posted online. All questions shall be submitted by the date stipulated in Section V, paragraph 4.

Programmatic Questions shall be directed to:

AQM Mailbox: Email: CarterJA@state.gov Jonespw@state.gov

Proposals shall be submitted to (see also Section IV of this announcement):

V Fund Proposal Mailbox: Email: AVC-BAA@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 V, Paragraph 1. The actual number of awards will be subject to the availability of funds as well as the quality and relevance of the proposals,. The AVC Bureau reserves the right to fund all, some, or none of the proposals received.

The State Department anticipates Awards to be in the form of negotiated agreements, purchase orders, or Interagency Acquisition Agreements (IAAs).

Provisions and potential contract clauses for negotiated purchase orders for commercial entities are included as an attachment to this document. Potential provisions and contract clauses are also provided for non-governmental organizations, consortium participants, national labs, academic institutions, and UARCS. Terms and conditions for Interagency Agreements with other Federal Government Agencies will be negotiated at the time of the IAA award.

9. Security: Generally, submissions shall remain at the UNCLASSIFIED level.

o Offerors may submit classified proposals up to the Secret level. See Section IV, Paragraph 1 for further instructions.

II. 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 period of performance shall be stated in the award documents.

The Department of State plans to make multiple awards under this BAA in accordance with the evaluation criteria contained in Section V, Paragraph 1 “Evaluation Criteria” and Paragraph 2 “Review and Selection Process” of this BAA. 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 under Topics in Section VIII.

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 individual proposal: however, approved cost proposals are generally anticipated to fall between $2,000 and $150,000, or higher. The requested cost estimate shall be accompanied with a thorough budget justification and detailed spending plans and projected milestones/pace.

III. 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; University Affiliated Research Centers (UARC);

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC); government agencies; non-governmental organizations; consortium participants; and others).

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Application and Submission Process: Proposals 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 Quad chart and a full proposal as described in Paragraph 2.2.4 below. The submission shall follow the procedures and formats described under the proposal preparation guidance found in Paragraph 2 “Format and Content of Proposals.”

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, DUNS Number, a fax number, and an e-mail address. In addition, please ensure registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) which can be found at www.sam.gov. Individual proposal 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, with a supplementary classified submission, as appropriate.

Classified submissions: Offerors shall submit an unclassified proposal as a placeholder to the mailbox specified in the Request for Proposals, and send the classified version to jihrs@state.sgov.gov on SIPR or rjih@state.ic.gov on JWICS. Proposals maybe classified up to the Secret level.

2. Format and Content of Proposals

Proposals submitted under this BAA are generally expected to be unclassified. Titles given to the Proposal should be descriptive of the work they cover and not be merely a copy of the title of this solicitation. Proposals that do not meet format requirements may be rejected without further review or evaluation. Non-Government Offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) in order to be eligible for a contract award.

2.1 Proposal Typographic Style:

Paper size – 8.5-inch X 11-inch paper with font 12 point, Times New Roman.

Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. The page limitation for proposal text includes all figures, tables, and charts combined.

Margins – 1 inch each side

Spacing – single spaced

Maximum number of pages permitted: See instructions in Paragraphs 2.2.1 and

2.2.2 below.

2.2 Proposal Content:

2.2.1 Proposal Cover: (One page at most.)

Element 1: A statement clearly defines Topic number, for example:

“This proposal is in response to BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001, Topic ___” http://www.sam.gov/

Element 2: Title of proposal should be descriptive, for example:

Advanced Location, Discrimination, and Yield Estimation Algorithms to Enhance Monitoring of the Korean Peninsula

Element 3:

Lead Organization: (name) Lead Principal Investigator: (name, address, phone, E-mail address) Team Organizations (if applicable): (name, address, phone, E-mail address)

Element 4: Executive Summary

2.2.2 Technical Proposal Text: (at most 30 pages; with 20 pages for Elements 1-4) Element 1: Program description

1.1 Introduction and Motivation

1.2 Proposed Approach

1.3 Illustrative/Demonstrative Examples (or Previous Successes in Different

Regions or Corroboration with Other Techniques)

1.4 Relevance to DOS/AVC mission, Overall Merit, Achievability/Risk Assessment, Uniqueness, Benefits of Teaming Arrangement (if applicable).

Element 2: References A brief bibliography of relevant technical papers and research reports/notes (published and unpublished) which document the technical ideas upon which the proposal is based.

Element 3: Contractor’s Statement of Work Element 4: Deliverables

Quarterly progress and technical reports (annual and final) will describe the methods, analyses, and results of applications to datasets.

For example, in the seismic arena, we shall deliver the following reports, data, results, and software. Base software will be in the form used for research. Additional efforts to design, implement, deliver, and integrate advanced user interfaces to function in user environments are optional tasks. Since we propose a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract, each of these items are priced as separate CLINs.

Quarterly R&D progress reports (e.g., 4 if 1-yr effort; 8 if 2-yr effort) Annual technical reports (1) Annual Technology Interchange Meeting (TIM) - briefings to COR at

DOS/AVC

Annual and final delivery of CSS3.0 waveform data and GT locations of blast clusters (as an example for seismic projects aiming at improving detection) Parametric data, template events, and software A final technical report (1) Software interfaces, documentation, and training, if funded as additional CLINs Element 5. Milestone Chart (Schedule)

Tentative Schedule for Performing Proposed Tasks (a 2-yr example for illustrative purpose)

Task Month (after award of contract) 0 6 12 18 24

Task 1. (Brief description of task)

Task 2. (Brief description of task)

Task 3. (Brief description of task)

Element 6. Facilities and Equipment Description Element 7. Description of Relevant Prior Work

For each relevant prior work, list the following elements:

Principal Investigator:

Project Title:

Contract No:

Sponsoring Agency:

Government PoC (COR):

Period of Performance: Start month/year – End month /year

Plus a brief (50 words at most) summary for each relevant prior work.

Element 8. Management Plan Element 9. Resumes of Key Individuals

2.2.3 Cost Proposal

Project Cost Estimate: Proposals must provide a 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. The ROM should be split between an estimate for travel costs (if any) and the direct costs of the research being proposed. The V fund program provides modest funds for science and technology projects that have applicability towards the verification of arms control, disarmament and nonproliferation agreements and commitments. The requested cost estimate shall be accompanied with a thorough budget justification, detailed spending plan, and projected milestones/pace.

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

2.2.4 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 Science and Technology Verification Focus/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 2018 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: Include a photograph, schematic, or artist conception of the proposed solution or prototype. Include labels or brief descriptive text as needed for clarification.

c) Top Right Quadrant Science and Technology Verification Focus/Need Objective:

Identify the specific focus need that the proposal is addressing as specified by the BAA Topics in Section VIII.

d) Bottom Left Quadrant

i. Technical Approach and Phases: Describes the proposed scientific and 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 proposal.

iii. Cost and Schedule: A ROM and Schedule shall be proposed by phase, which includes the cost, period of performance (POP), and a total cost and POP that combines all phases. The ROM should be split between an estimate for travel costs (if any) and the direct costs of the research being proposed.

iv. Proposers/Partners: Identify 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 Science and Technology Verification Focus/Need. Explain how the project addresses 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.

3. Timeline for Proposal Submission and Selection:

This announcement will remain open until 2400 Eastern Time on the closing date. Proposals will be accepted throughout the open period of BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001.

PROPOSAL ACTIVITIES DATE

BAA Questions Due NLT April10, 2018

Proposal Submission Open Period Due April 30, 2019, 1400 hour

V. EVALUATION INFORMATION

1. Evaluation Criteria: Award decision will be based on a competitive selection of proposals 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. 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. The P.I. should demonstrate a thorough understanding of the scientific problem, e.g., through an unbiased and balanced quotation of previous work on the same or similar problem.

Proposals attempting to – or claiming to be able to - invent a silver bullet overnight in a vacuum generally will not succeed.

b. Impact/Importance/Potential to the AVC Bureau’s Mission: The potential contributions of the proposed effort must be relevant to the AVC Bureau’s mission to address the policy and technical challenges of verification and compliance with arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament treaties, agreements, and commitments.

This would include identifying and providing technological and analytical solutions that address specific verification and compliance challenges related to both current and future arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements/concerns.

Proposals with the potential to have an impact on the Bureau’s annual Report on Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments are most welcome.

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.

d. Past performance: To the extent possible, the P.I.’s past record in delivering products as required under previous government-funded awards will be included in the consideration. P.I.s are encouraged to document his/her past record briefly in the vitae.

2. Additional Information about the Review and Selection Process:

a. The AVC Bureau will conduct a scientific and technical review of each proposal submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in this BAA. The AVC Bureau’s intent is to review proposals in accordance with the timeline for the Proposal Open Period submission dates, Section IV, Paragraph 3.

b. Award(s) will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be the 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, and comprehensive proposal evaluations and to select the source whose offer 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).

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

1. Selection Notices: As soon as the evaluation of all the proposals is 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 proposal.

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 transactions, and other awards as deemed appropriate, resulting from this solicitation may be subject to International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and the Arms Export Control Act.

d) Logos and Names Usage – V-Fund Awardees agree that DOS has permission to use organization names and logos in certain materials, such as slide presentations, to highlight the wide array of interest in the V-Fund BAA.

3. Reporting: The number of reports (and other deliverables) 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 to before the award is granted.

Reports and briefing material will also be required as appropriate to document progress in accomplishing program metrics. Detailed, periodic status/progress reports are required in order for incremental invoices to be certified and processed. A final technical 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. The program office will work with the PI to archive and post the final technical report in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 1151-1157, and Public Law 102-245, SEC. 108.

VII. OTHER INFORMATION

FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION: This acquisition is unrestricted and is issued under the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation paragraph 6.102(d) (2) and FAR 35.016 that provides for the competitive selection of research proposals. Proposals submitted in response to approved proposals issued pursuant to this BAA that are selected for award are considered to be the result 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-government 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.

VIII List of Topics

Topic 1. Verification and Attribution of Use of Directed Energy Weapons Topic 2. Arms Control Treaty Item of Inspection Automated Tracking and Reporting Topic 3. Miniature Autonomous Odor-guided Flight Vehicles for Chemical Verification Topic 4. Unmanned Aerial Platforms for Data Collection in Investigation of Chemical Weapons Use at Sites Inaccessible to Inspectors Topic 5. Bio-markers in Vegetation as a Tool for Investigation of Use of Chlorine as a Chemical Weapon Topic 6. Enabling Attribution of Chemical Weapons Use Topic 7. Sequencing Techniques for Investigation and Attribution of Biological Weapons Use Topic 8. Firewalls to Impede the Development of Nuclear Weapons Topic 9. Systematic Seismic Magnitude Study of Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions Topic 10. Seismic Calibration Research/Experiment(s) in Eurasia Topic 11. Synergy of Active-Source Experiment and Passive Seismic Deployment Topic 12. Yield Estimation Research on Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions

Topic 01 (MT19-2, DEW). Verification of Use and Attribution of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW).

Background: The science behind Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) is experiencing a renaissance with both laser and high-power microwave weapons expected to be produced on a large scale and fielded by several foreign countries. Rapid developments of DEWs poses increasingly significant verification challenges. These weapons have the potential for disrupting U. S. verification assets. Laser and high energy microwave weapons are no longer the weapons of Star Wars science fiction. In fact, several systems are currently deployed by a number of countries and have the potential to threaten our national security. Satellite systems are particularly vulnerable to these weapon systems.

Research Sought: We seek research that aims to develop novel technology to enable identification, geolocation, and attribution of DEWs to a country of origin and a manufacturer. Innovative approaches to measure unique properties of these weapons could lead to identification of the source, geolocation, and attribution.

As an example, the ability to “fingerprint” a manufacturer and a country of origin using laser weapons could lead to identification and verification of the enemy trying to take out the operation of a vital U.

S. space platform system.

Topic 2 (MC19-1, SSD). Arms Control Treaty Item of Inspections Automated Tracking and Reporting

Background: The Department of State is seeking to explore options that could enhance the current method of inspecting, monitoring, and reporting the location and movements of Treaty accountable items that could be used in future arms control treaties. Accountable items are referred to as “Items of Inspection” (IOI). During current and expected future arms control treaties, each treaty partner must ascribe a unique identifier (UID) to each Item of Inspection. The current method is strongly dependent upon manual methods. Currently, during inspections, the UID for each inspected item must be physically observed and manually recorded. Further, whenever any IOI changes location, the new location is manually recorded, and that information is manually provided to the Treaty partner in a pre-determined format and within a Treaty mandated time limit.

Research Sought: The intent of this BAA is to seek solutions that will record UID’s during inspections without requiring manual intervention, automatically provide IOI location, and transmit it to a database in the Treaty prescribed format. Furthermore, when an IOI is transported to a new location, this system should automatically detect that movement, record the item and its new location in a atabase, and at the same time automatically generate a report in the Treaty prescribed format and send the report to other Treaty partners. This BAA seeks to: (1) explore current technological approaches to make the automated approach described here practically achievable; (2) develop a concept of operations for achieving a fully automated approach;, and (3) conduct a subscale demonstration. The New START Treaty can serve as a good model for this effort since the Treaty has well defined IOI accountability rules and, as a result, could serve as a practical test case for evaluating the efficacy of potential approaches. Commercially available approaches are preferred. Radio

Frequency Identification (RFID) technology, unobtrusive ID tags, portable readers, wireless portal monitoring of IOI entry/exit into storage facilities, mobile satellite data transfer to servers that automatically fold just-read data into a Treaty defined format are all building blocks upon which the automated Tracking and Reporting System could be built. Other potential approaches to examine might be micro-dot technology,” Smart" crystals, or any approach the bidder wishes to propose to address the intent of this BAA. It is critical that the proposed architecture is spoof-proof and would provide only Treaty mandated data.

Topic 3 (BN19-1, CBW). Miniature Autonomous Odor-Guided Flight Vehicles for Chemical

Verification

Background: The ability to have unobtrusive chemical sensing of closed environments is highly valuable for some applications of on-site monitoring of facilities and processes. One such intriguing option is the use of bio-inspired or bio-mimetic robotics.

Research Sought: We are seeking solutions that focus on the development of novel technologies that would solve an exceedingly challenging task: localize a chemical source in a complex environment using off-the-shelf micro-air vehicle systems. While a small, bio-hybrid robotic system has been developed, we hope to refine this system to develop it as a reliable platform for odor localization.

Thus, we foresee a need to integrate additional technological features including visual obstacle avoidance and navigational odometry. We are especially interested in successful operations in GPS-denied environments that will depend on optic flow, odor sensing, and obstacle avoidance systems.

We foresee a new generation of bio-hybrid robotic systems that incorporate the advantages of bio-sensing (genetic control, extreme sensitivity, high efficiency, ultra-low mass) with state-of-the- art technologies such as wireless devices, programmable autonomous flight, and low weight materials.

Topic 4 (CBW19-1). Unmanned aerial platforms for data collection in investigation of chemical weapons use at sites inaccessible to inspectors

Background: In investigation of alleged chemical weapons use, analysis of samples from the purported attack site provide critical evidence. However, practice has shown that timely access of inspectors to the attack site is not often possible. In such cases, critical samples may go uncollected, or may be collected by others, which creates chain-of-custody issues.

Unmanned aerial platforms that move rapidly into a remote area, obtain data via sensors, and transmit the data to an operator located at a distance are currently available off-the-shelf. Likewise, off-the-shelf chemical detectors using ion mobility spectrometry, as well as sampling components used in gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, are now light enough to be secured as a payload in off-the-shelf aerial platforms. Proof of concept tests have demonstrated use of unmanned systems for sampling from remote lakes, from whale plumes, and from vegetation.

Research Sought: What is lacking is a reliable, cost-effective union of these technological areas to produce viable verification tools.

Topic 5 (CBW19-2). Bio-markers in vegetation as a tool for investigation of use of chlorine as a chemical weapon

Background: In the past, the use of chemical weapons has been evident from the unique symptoms of victims (e.g., pinpointing of pupils and lowered cholinesterase enzyme levels from nerve agents;

severe burns from mustard agents), as well as from chemical analyses of plasma or blood samples from victims. The recent use of chlorine in violation of international law, including the Chemical

Weapons Convention, however, has been very difficult to identify through chemical analyses, since unique bio-markers have not yet been identified. Apart from the obvious visual evidence that high doses of chlorine can severely damage plants, little is known about possible unique bio-markers in plants for chlorine exposure.

Research Sought: This project seeks to identify unique bio-markers of vegetation exposure to chlorine.

Topic 6 (CBW19-3). Enabling Attribution of Chemical Weapons Use

Background: Following recent numerous confirmed use of chemical weapons, the international community has been struggling in its pursuit of attribution for these attacks. Even in the case of Syria where attribution mechanisms have been established, the results have not been as extensive or as technically-founded as one would hope. Furthermore, a solid, science-based approach to chemical weapons forensics needs to be established in order to assist in eventual legal proceedings against the responsible parties.

Research Sought: Proof-of-concept innovative technical approach to enable attribution in cases of chemical weapons use, including the use of toxic industrial chemicals as weapons. Two potential areas of pursuit are geolocation based on stable isotope ratios, and the identification of unique markers associated with a given synthetic pathway.

Research on stable isotope ratios could be of particular value for geolocating toxins.

Characteristic impurities could identify specific synthetic pathways used in the production of chemical weapons and also have the potential of identifying the source of the precursors used in the process.

Other innovative approaches will also be considered.

Topic 7 (CBW19-4). Sequencing techniques for investigation and attribution of biological weapons use

Background: The capability for biological attack investigations under the framework of the UN

Secretary General’s Mechanism (UNSGM) has not been developed adequately and no operational capability currently exists. The United States and several other countries are assisting the UN Office of Disarmament Affairs, which is responsible for the UNSGM, to develop an international capability for the investigation of alleged biological weapons attacks. A key part of this effort is the Swiss-led development of a network of laboratories with demonstrated capability to analyze samples to help determine whether the outbreak is natural or deliberately-caused and, if deliberate, the source of the pathogen. But this requires the development of a methodology for reliable sample analysis and the conduct of exercises to test the actual capabilities of laboratories. Additionally, Germany is sponsoring a series of laboratory exercises to apply classical microbial forensic techniques, but only limited information relevant to attribution is provided.

Microbial forensics is intended to help answer key questions…what kind of biological agent was used, where and when it was made and how it was prepared. Technical investments ultimately center on the ability to properly attribute the origin of pathogens behind those threats (i.e. determine and verify the origin, sponsorship, source, delivery and responsible party). This can be scientifically challenging but necessary in order to meet the standards for admissibility of scientific evidence put forth in Daubert Standard.

Since the Amerithrax case in the early 2000’s, the United States government has been actively involved in developing investigation tools. Work has been sponsored by the FBI, IARPA and the

Department of State V-Fund to develop more versatile and informative microbial forensic procedures built on scientific advances in molecular biology.

Research Sought: In particular, in support of the Bureau’s mission, AVC is interested in efforts to : (a) develop a method to detect the introduction of synthetic genetic sequences into a bacterium (project completed); and (b) evaluate the use of DNA sequencing for identification of deliberate modifications in a bacterial genome, including addition or deletion of naturally-occurring genetic sequences (project underway).

Topic 8 (MT19-3). Technology-based Firewalls to Impede the Development of Nuclear Weapons

While Enabling Peaceful Use of Nuclear Power.

Background: Production of weapon-usable material is a key proliferation concern for peaceful use of nuclear power. This project aims to develop practical technologies to impede production of weapons grade uranium and plutonium without adversely affecting legitimate civilian nuclear power applications. This could be accomplished by doping with small amounts of materials that do not impact physical properties or operating characteristics of nuclear fuel when used in accordance with stated peaceful purpose.

A number of feasibility studies have been reported included isotopic denaturing of plutonium based on doping minor-actinide in uranium oxide to produce a proliferation resistant fuel, based on transmutation of 237Np and 241Am to 238Pu in light water reactors. Also Uranium enrichment by gas phase centrifuge of uranium hexafluoride could be limited to lower enrichment levels by addition of small amounts of molybdenum hexafluoride.

Research Sought: DOS/AVC seeks proposals that will provide an additional layer of inherent safeguards to ensure treaty compliance where traditional safeguards or treaty verification capabilities require bolstering. Proposed technologies should consider materials that may be added to starting materials in the fuel cycle and/or nuclear fuel to challenge the isolation of weapons grade fissile materials. Proposals must reflect successful, practical, and cost effective methods that enable peaceful use of nuclear technology and inhibit the pursuit of nuclear-weapons programs.

Topic 9 (RJ19-1, N). Systematic Seismic Study of Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions

Background: Following a series of intensive studies on Soviet tests, the USAF funded in 1992-1994 an external study to re-measure and re-analyze almost all US and Soviet underground nuclear explosions in a systematic manner (Baumstark and Wagner, 19941; Jih and Baumstark, 19942). That study called for re-measurement and re-analysis of mb(Pa), mb(Pb), mb(Pmax), Ms, mb(Pn), and mb(Lg) of nearly

600 events. To this date, that USAF-funded study has been the most complete and most authoritative study, aside from a parallel series of studies recently carried out by the British NDC at AWE/Blacknest

(e.g., Peacock et al., 2015, 2017). However, both studies did not analyze the 2006-2017 DPRK events.

(Additional references available upon request.)

Research Sought: The Department of State is interested in efforts that provide carefully measured phase amplitude picks and period, of seismic phases on waveforms recorded at both teleseismic and regional distances, from aforementioned unstudied test sites (i.e., China, India, Pakistan, and North

Korea). For teleseismic analysis, the proposal should adopt the General Linear Model (GLM) formulated in Jih and Baumstark (1994) and earlier references to decompose the station magnitude into network-averaged event magnitude term, receiver effect term, and the test-site-to-station path effect term. mb(Pa), mb(Pb), and mb(Pmax) can be lumped into one single linear inversion, as the station correction and test-site-specific path correction would be the same for these phases of the same event. Regional seismic waves have been attracting more attention in recent decades, as the seismic community has learned more about the potential of regional phase in discrimination and as the tool sets for associated regional study are maturing. This solicitation will consider both teleseismic and regional studies. Regional study of the nuclear tests of interest will inevitably require data access beyond the IRIS/GSN or CTBT/IMS data. It is the bidder’s responsibility to secure a cooperative agreement with countries/institutions that host seismic data needed in the study. Should the host country have a reason to impose restrictions on further dissemination of the raw data, such a request will be considered, and to the extent justifiable, respected.

1 Baumstark, Richard, and Robert Wagner (1994). Measurements and Statistics of Underground Nuclear Explosions, TGAL-94-01.

2 Jih, RongSong, and Richard Baumstark (1994). Maximum-Likelihood Network Magnitude Estimates of Low-Yield Underground Nuclear Explosions, TGAL-94-03, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284079.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284079.pdf

Topic 10 (RJ19-2, N). Seismic Calibration Experiment(s) in Eurasia

Background: All declared full-scale nuclear tests over the past thirty years were conducted underground, and seismology has been the most effective and relevant means for monitoring such tests (NRC, 2012). To better constraint the source parameters, seismic waveform parameters (or spectrum) are first measured at individual stations, and then stacked across a network for computing the mean. This general procedure is applicable to practically every seismic phase, including mb(Pa), mb(Pb), mb(Pmax), Ms, mb(Pn), mb(Pg), mb(Lg), and more. To compute mb(Lg), Nuttli’s time-domain, two-step formula (Nuttli, 1986, 1987, 1988; Patton, 1988) has been re-arranged by Jih to get a simpler, equivalent, and more intuitive formula (Jih, 1992, 1993, 1995): mb(Lg) [Nuttli] ≡ 4.0272 –

Bias + log A (Δ) + log (Δ) / 3 + log [ sin (Δ /111.1)] / 2 + γ (Δ – 10km) / ln (10) where γ ≡ π / ( Q * U *

T ), Q (f) = Q0 * f η , A (Δ) = 0-to-peak Lg amplitude in microns [μm] at epicentral distance of Δ km, and the “Bias” term is 0 for eastern US, western US, and Eastern Kazakhstan; but it is 0.39 for Iran, per

Nuttli (1980, 1986,…). Thus an event in eastern United States or Eastern Kazakhstan with 1-second Lg amplitude of 110 μm at 10km hypothetical epicentral distance would correspond to a mb(Lg) of

4.0272 – 0 + 2.0414 + 0.3333 – 1.4019 + 0.000 = 5.000.

Verification-Relevant Seismic Questions: Nuttlie’s formula – particularly his bias term - and the six

DPRK-declared tests in the 21st century raise several relevant verification questions:

What are the corresponding Lg-excitation biases for other regions – particularly East Asia, such as Punggye?

What are the region-specific magnitude scales for Pn, Pg, P coda, Lg, and Lg coda for East Asia

– particularly for Punggye?

Why is mb-Ms behavior so different for Punggye events? Would mb(Lg) be a “better” alternate (i.e., more transportable, or more stable) source measure rather than mb and Ms?

To compute mb(Lg) for NK events, what is the path Q0 for the seismic stations in the region?

Research Sought: DOS is interested in efforts that provide carefully validated seismic excitation at the source region as well as path Q for seismic stations within regional distances from spots of interest

(such as Punggye). Toward that end, proposals that provide a realistic design of an active-source experiment in the region inside or adjacent to areas of interest are welcome. The size of the experiment must be reasonably large enough to trigger good regional phases (Pn, Pg, Sn, and Lg) with clear S/N ratios out to 400 kilometers and beyond. Experiments below 25 tons are to be discouraged, as previous experiments of small size conducted in 1998-2009 by academia did not trigger adequate regional phases. Experiments combined with passive seismic deployment (such as the NECESSArray or SINOPROBE project) would provide valuable data. Bidder should secure a cooperative agreement with countries or institutions that can host the active-source experiment(s).

Topic 11 (RJ19-3, N). Synergy of Active-Source Experiment and Passive Seismic Deployment

Background: The academic community and oil industry deploy dense networks or arrays of seismometers to study the Earth structure, to analyze the seismic data recorded in the passive mode

(See NECESSArray and SINOPROBE reports). Usually large seismic sources – either natural events (like earthquakes) or man-made events (like explosions) – occur far away from seismic stations and are utilized to determine the structure underneath the stations. A more direct and more effective method for characterizing the region where the seismometers are deployed is to add a controlled active-source experiment on top of the seismic deployment, so that the source and receivers (i.e., the seismic stations) are in the generally same geophysical /geological province, and the whole lateral structure of the Earth can be characterized.

Such active-source experiments offer valuable Ground-Truth data, so that the regional magnitude scales of mb(Pn), mb(Pg), and mb(Lg) can be defined on a region-by-region basis, and in the “absolute” sense. For instance, in order to compute mb(Lg), with the Nuttli-Jih formula, mb(Lg) [Nuttli] ≡ 4.0272 – Bias + log A (Δ) + log (Δ) / 3 + log [ sin (Δ /111.1)] / 2 + γ (Δ – 10km) / ln

(10) where γ ≡ π / ( Q * U * T ), Q (f) = Q0 * f η , A (Δ) = 0-to-peak Lg amplitude in microns [μm] at epicentral distance of Δ km.

Note the “bias” term and the source-receiver Q (i.e., the 1/ γ) values must be determined.

Research Sought: The Department of State is interested in proposals that add an active-source experiment to an already-approved/funded seismic deployment, as well as proposals that add a seismic deployment to existing, known opportunities of upcoming large-size active-source experiments. The goal is to seek the maximum benefit of synergy at a minimum cost. Experiments in areas of interest would be given higher preference. Proposals in areas of high interest for large-scale passive seismic deployment alone can also be considered, in the event an active-source experiment is not realistic at present time. The size of the proposed experiment must be reasonably large enough to trigger good regional phases (Pn, Pg, Sn, and Lg) with clear S/N ratios out to 400 kilometers and beyond. Experiments below 30 tons are generally to be discouraged. The team carrying out a large-scale, already-funded deployment must already have the official permission from the host country, and hence it is reasonable to expect that it would be easier for the same team to obtain permission to add the task of carrying out an active-source experiment.

Topic 12 (RJ19-4, N). Yield Estimation Research on Recent Underground Nuclear Explosions

Background: The DPRK conducted six declared nuclear tests in 2006-2017 at the Punngye-ri test site.

These events were well recorded by global seismic networks and have been promptly reported by various seismic organizations (including CTBTO,…