BAA-RQKPD-2015-0001-Call2.pdf

As of April 2015

1-Step Broad Agency Announcement

Overview Information

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

NAICS Code: 541712 (Aircraft Exception)

Federal Agency Name: Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate, Aerospace Vehicles Division (AFRL/RQV)

Broad Agency Announcement Title: Tools for Assessing the Durability and

Damage Tolerance of Fastened Composite Joints

Broad Agency Announcement Type: This is the second Call for BAA-RQKPD-

2015-0001

Broad Agency Announcement Number: BAA-RQKPD-2015-0001 – Call #2

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 12.800 AIR

FORCE DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES PROGRAM

Proposal Due Date and Time: March 4, 2016 – 04:00 P.M. Eastern time

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

Solicitation Request: Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate, Aerospace Vehicles Division (AFRL/RQV), Wright Research Site is soliciting technical and cost proposals on the research effort described below.

Proposals should be addressed to the Contracting Point of Contact (POC) stated in

Section VII of the Full Text Announcement. This is an unrestricted solicitation.

Small businesses are encouraged to propose on all or any part of this solicitation.

The NAICS Code for this acquisition is 541712 (Aircraft Exception) and the small business size standard is 1,500 employees. Proposals submitted shall be in accordance with this announcement. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any BAA amendments that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date.

System for Award Management (SAM) Registration: FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management (SAM) (JUL 2013), and DFARS 252.204-7004, Alternate A, System for Award Management (SAM) (Feb 2014) are included by reference. SAM is the primary Government repository for prospective federal awardee information and the centralized Government system for certain contracting, grants, and other assistance related processes. It replaces CCR/FedReg, On-line Representations and Certifications (ORCA) and the Excluded Parties Lists System (EPLS). By submission of an offer, the offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee shall be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance, and through final payment of any contract, basic agreement, basic ordering agreement, or blanket purchasing agreement resulting from this solicitation. Contractors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the

SAM accessed through https://www.acquisition.gov or by calling 866-606-8220.

Type of Contract/Instrument: The Air Force reserves the right to award the instrument best suited to the nature of research proposed. Accordingly, the Government may award any appropriate contract type under the FAR or Other Transaction (OT) for Prototype, grant, cooperative agreement, or OT for Research.

The Air Force may also consider award of an appropriate technology transfer mechanism if applicable. It is anticipated that awards under this BAA will generally be Cost-Plus Fixed Fee. Cost reimbursement contracts require successful offerors to have an accounting system considered adequate for tracking costs applicable to the contract.

Estimated Program Cost: $1,500,000.00 to be incrementally funded over FY16 and FY17.

Anticipated Number of Awards: The Air Force anticipates awarding one (1) award for this announcement.

Brief Program Summary: This research effort will develop methods and models to assess the remaining service life and residual strength of mechanical joints connecting advanced composite structural components to other advanced composite structural components and/or to metal structural components. An example of such a joint, in service, could be an advanced composite wing skin bolted to an advanced composite wing rib and an aluminum wing spar, but there are many other possible combinations. The envisioned research effort intends to develop two general types of models for two different, but related applications.

The first application would be for estimating expected residual strength of joints due to the known or assumed service history of the actual, or a fleet nominal aircraft. Such a model would allow structural integrity managers to predict fatigue damage to joints based on the aircraft service history and predict the remaining life of the airframe based on planned future usage. The model outputs should be sufficiently accurate to identify potential structural hot spots for more detailed inspection at safe inspection intervals. The second application would be for detailed analysis of the damage tolerance of structural features containing mechanically fastened advanced composite members, such as would be found in built-up aircraft structure. This model should accurately predict the progression of damage within the joint sufficiently well to establish margins of safety or determine when residual strength has dropped below design requirements. The ability to predict the initiation of damage to cyclic loading is also highly desired. Performance of the models developed will be validated through testing.

Communication Between Prospective Offerors and Government

Representatives: Dialogue between prospective offerors and Government representatives is encouraged; however, prospective offerors shall have discussions with the AF point of contacts no later than 12 FEB 2016, 3:00 P.M. local time.

Communication will be limited to the time frame specified.

The Government has reference information for the offerors to use but cannot be posted in the BAA due to OPSEC concerns. In order to get the reference material the offeror must contact the Program Engineer (Richard

Holzwarth).

Discussions with any of the points of contact shall not constitute a commitment by the Government to subsequently fund or award any proposed effort. Only Contracting Officers are legally authorized to commit the Government.

Address technical questions to: Richard Holzwarth, Bldg. 65, 2790 D. St., WPAFB, OH 45433, (937) 656-8825, Richard.Holzwarth.1@us.af.mil

Address contracting questions to: Ryan Huffman, Bldg. 45, 2130 Eighth St., WPAFB, OH 45433-7541, (937) 713-9927, Ryan.Huffman@us.af.mil mailto:Richard.Holzwarth.1@us.af.mil mailto:Ryan.Huffman@us.af.mil

Full Text Announcement

I. Program Description: Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate, Structures Advanced Technology Branch is soliciting technical and cost proposals on the following research effort:

1. Statement of Objective/Needs:

Background:

The advanced composite structures currently in use in USAF aircraft are, for the most part, built-up through mechanical assembly of fabricated parts. Many of these fabricated parts are also mechanically attached to metallic structures. It is therefore critical that USAF is able to assess the structural integrity of these composite-to-composite and composite-to-metal (hybrid) joints in order to assure continuing airworthiness of individual airframes and aircraft fleets. The ability to predict the residual strength and new margins of safety, and/or the probability of failure of joints as a function of the number of flight hours and/or load cycles is critical for assessing the potential to extend the structural life of advanced composite and advanced composite and metal hybrid airframe structures.

Air Force structural integrity managers lack tools for rapidly assessing remaining life and residual strength of mechanical joints containing composite structural members. A key to conducting such assessments is to have knowledge of prior loading history (actual usage data or an informed approximation of usage) and an accurate projection of the future load spectrum. The ability to perform such an assessment will identify life limited structure that requires disposition in terms of additional inspection requirements and planned obsolescence (repair, modify or replace) to meet required service life goals and supports economic service life projections for force management decisions to either conduct a structural life extension program or retire an aircraft. The basic challenge for developing these analysis capabilities is to accurately predict failure of mechanically fastened composite structures subjected to cyclic loads in service. Such tools are necessary to formally predict the strength, durability, and damage tolerance of composite joints, at the detail level, to assure continuing airworthiness.

Tools such as those described above would be equally useful for performing analysis and trade studies required in the design of composite structure for new aircraft. Use of such tools would allow future designers to more effectively design and develop structure to meet severe mission requirements with high confidence, without incurring the weight and cost penalties associated with more conservative but less accurate design methods. A recent AFRL program has demonstrated the feasibility of predicting degradation and wear in mechanically fastened composite structure as a function of applied cyclic load. The program was focused on modelling aspects of fastened joint structural integrity and the growth of fastener diameter as a function the load history. To generalize such a method, other factors, such as but not limited to load conditions, material properties, structural response and environmental conditions should be considered. AFRL intends to determine the feasibility of providing tools capable of predicting residual strength and remaining life of composite joints, determine the current technology readiness of these tools, and validate the tools selected for application.

Recent technology development programs undertaken by AFRL and other US Government agencies have demonstrated that progressive damage failure analysis methods are maturing sufficiently well to model the initiation and growth of some forms of composite failure as a function of cyclic loading. Much of this work has been focused on the modelling of damage initiation and growth near on open hole.

AFRL intends to determine if similar methods can be applied to predict initiation and progression of damage in the vicinity of filled holes, particularly damage due to cyclic application of loads to mechanically fastened assemblies.

The envisioned research effort intends to develop two general types of models, for two different, but related, applications.

The first model is expected to be used as a general purpose model, for use in estimating expected residual strength of joints due to the known or assumed service history. This model is to be used by fleet structural integrity managers to predict fatigue damage to joints as a general effect within the fleet. Such a model could be used to accurately estimate the residual strength and remaining service life of composite joints in the airframe, and thereby assess the feasibility of a life extension, if one is contemplated, to meet future airframe usage requirements. It should be capable of identifying locations in the airframe where fatigue damage is beginning to significantly reduce remaining life, creating possible trouble spots known as “hot spots.” As such, it could be used to cue inspection efforts and plan for possible repairs. It is assumed, but not required, that such models will utilize a parametric approach. It is further assumed, but not required, that such models will be functions of parameters that are related to not just the airframe material properties, but to features of the specific joint, past use of the airframe, and expected future use of the airframe. Such models should be capable of dealing with the widespread variation in data (scatter factor) usually encountered in the development of composite structural properties and performance. The parameters that drive these models should rely on data readily available to cognizant specialists and not require extensive new testing or development to obtain.

The second model would be used for detailed analysis of the damage tolerance of structural features consisting in part or entirely of mechanically fastened advanced composite members, such as would be found in built-up aircraft structure. This model should use methods to accurately degrade structural performance and model failure sufficiently well to establish margins of safety or determine when residual strength has dropped below design requirements.

This is a complex technical effort. The intent is to develop tools that can be used for general and detailed assessment of continuing airworthiness of existing aircraft structure, with all of the risks and consequences relative to such assessments.

Detailed understanding of the design and structural integrity requirements of airframe joints containing composite structural elements is required to successfully execute this program. Detailed understanding of the scope of effort to verify those requirements have been met is required to successfully execute this program. But there are significant technical capability gaps preventing both general assessments and detailed analysis tools from being used by the structural integrity community.

Innovative approaches using emerging tools are expected to be the path towards closing these capability gaps, and such innovation is not confined to the mainstream aerospace manufacturing community. Identifying innovative approaches having the potential of achieving these objectives while reducing the risk of applying these new approaches to existing structure may require teaming, which is highly encouraged.

Objective 1 – Develop Predictive Models for Estimating Fastened Assembly Durability.

The contractor shall develop a set of predictive models for assessing the residual strength and remaining life of mechanically fastened joints containing advanced composite members. The contractor shall assess the factors related to prior service loads and assumed future loads likely to degrade the residual strength and remaining service life of common mechanically fastened joints between composite members and/or between composite and metallic members in aerospace structures.

The contractor shall identify parameters related to these factors, and develop parametric models to estimate the remaining service life of airframe mechanical joints due to the influence of these factors. It is particularly important to develop models capable of capturing the effects of a fatigue spectrum change at any time within the airframe life to include load excursions beyond design limit load. The contractor may include other factors related to loss of residual strength as deemed appropriate.

Use of an iterative and progressive approach for identifying and maturing such parametric models is encouraged. Such an approach shall be coordinated to an iterative and progressive assessment and validation effort.

When selecting parameters, or other factors to be used to assess the effect of service history or future service intent on structural integrity of the joints, the contractor shall be guided by the intended application of this model. AFRL envisions these methods being used to evaluate the expected condition of composite joints of aircraft in service, to identify the need for more detailed examination of specific joints or structural regions, to consider the effects of operational changes on joints considered sensitive to spectrum changes, and provide insight into other matters related to joint durability related issues. AFRL recognizes that specific material properties and/or new damage growth rate curves or some other parametric data may need to be developed for the predictive tools to be sufficiently accurate for the intended purpose. Nevertheless, AFRL would like to minimize reliance on the need to generate such empirical data in order to perform airframe condition assessments, and likewise within this research program. The contractor should, as much as practical, rely on the use of prior design properties and common data readily available to Air Force structural integrity experts as parameters in these models.

In the development of these parametric models, the contractor shall also be guided, in part, by the data requirements of the models being developed and demonstrated to achieve Objective 2. Mechanical properties, response values, or other parameters shown to be critical for accurate modeling of damage initiation and propagation should at least be considered for application in the prediction of residual strength and life, but the decision to implement all these factors within predictive tools is also subject to the guidance provided above. The development of parametric models in pursuit of objective 1 should be informed by insight gained in the effort to achieve Objective 2, but it is not necessary to incorporate all the analysis needs of the selected progressive damage models in the durability prediction models.

Objective 2 – Identification and development of progressive damage analysis methods for determining fastened assembly damage tolerance.

The contractor shall perform progressive damage analysis to determine the damage tolerance of mechanically fastened composite joints typical of complex aircraft structure. The analysis should predict the initiation of damage due to spectrum loading in the joint of interest. The analysis should predict the growth of damage from initiation to failure, in the joint of interest. The contractor shall select and apply the set of analysis tools most appropriate to conduct the detailed analysis of multiple joint assemblies’ representative of aerospace structure subjected to spectrum loads. The contractor shall use and develop this set of tools to perform analyses to predict initiation and growth of damage and eventual structural failure due to application of cyclic-spectrum loads to the joint. The contractor shall develop damage initiation and growth models for assessing the damage tolerance of multiple joint configurations, ranging from simple assemblies to more complex assemblies, as is typically found in an aerospace building block development effort.

Use of an iterative and progressive approach for identifying and maturing such analytic models is encouraged. Such an approach shall be coordinated to an iterative and progressive assessment and validation effort.

Objective 3 – Assess model maturity and validate performance.

The contractor shall conduct physical specimen testing, as required, to assist in the development of the durability prediction methods (Objective 1) and damage tolerance models (Objective 2). The contractor shall provide the test plan to the Air Force for review and approval prior to commencing test activity. The contractor may provide the test plan in increments for incremental approval.

The contractor is advised that upon review of contractor test plans, AFRL may elect to perform some portion of the test effort. The contractor is encouraged to consult with AFRL while developing test plans to account for AFRL test facilities and capabilities while planning the Task 3 test effort.

The contractor is encouraged to select the test specimens, and develop the mechanical test plan to provide as much data relative to durability prediction and damage tolerance modeling from test specimens common to both applications as is practical. “Common” in this usage is intended to mean used for both applications and is not intended to require the use of recognized and documented test specimens, such as an ASTM standard. AFRL recognizes that to accomplish this goal, it may be necessary to implement non-standard test specimens. The contractor is also advised that it is more important that the durability and damage tolerance methods be well validated than the test specimens be common.

It is not necessary for the contractor to address Objectives 1, 2, and 3 sequentially.

The technical efforts required to accomplish these objectives are viewed by AFRL as separate, but linked, activities. The contractor is free to plan and schedule their technical effort in the most efficient manner relative to their specific proposed technical solutions.

OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC)

Operations Security (OPSEC) must be an integral part of our daily activities. As we maintain security on our future technologies that are vital to national interest, we must recognize and prepare for the threat poised against our technology.

Department of Defense policies mandate a high degree of security throughout the acquisition process. However, heightened security awareness and threat-based countermeasures are particularly essential during the research and development phase when our technology is most vulnerable to espionage, sabotage, or exploitation. It is the obligation of each employee or person involved on this contract to be constantly aware of and strictly adhere to security requirements designed to protect sensitive unclassified and other information and resources produced by acquisition, research and development, and technological security efforts outlined in this SOO. The contractor shall ensure employees receive training and follow appropriate Operations Security (OPSEC) measures during the performance of the contract.

2. Deliverable Items:

a. Data Items (Contract Data Requirement List) CDRL’s (Attachment 1):

- A001 - Scientific and Technical Reports – Final Report

- A002 - Funds and Man-Hour Expenditure Report

- A003 – Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR)

- A004 – Status Report

- A005 – Scientific and Technical Reports – Interim Report

- A006 – Presentation Material

b. Software: N/A

c. Hardware: N/A

d. Other: N/A

3. Schedule:

a. Overall effort: 15 month effort (12 months technical and 3 months for final report.)

b. Data Items: Specified on individual CDRL(s) (Attachment 1).

c. Software: N/A

d. Hardware: N/A

4. Other Requirements:

a. Program security classification: Unclassified

b. OPSEC: The Contractor shall train personnel in, and follow appropriate Operations Security (OPSEC) measures during the performance of this contract.

c. Export Control: Information involved in this research effort will be subject to Export Control (International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR)

22 CFR 120-131, or Export Administration Regulations (EAR) 15 CFR 710- 774). If effort is subject to export control then a Certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, will be required to be submitted with proposal.

d. Export-Controlled Items: As prescribed by DFARS 225-7901-4, DFARS

252.225-7048, “Export-Controlled Item (JUN 2013)” is contained in this solicitation (as shown below). This clause shall be contained in ALL solicitations and resulting contracts.

EXPORT CONTROLLED ITEMS (JUNE 2013)

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

Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR Parts 120-130). The term includes:

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

120.

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

EAR, 15 CFR 772.1.

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

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

(d) Nothing in the terms of this contract adds, changes, supersedes, or waives any of the requirements of applicable

Federal laws, Executive orders, and regulations, including but not limited to—

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

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

(3) The International Emergency Economic Powers Act

(50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq.);

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

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

(6) Executive Order 13222, as extended.

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

(End of clause)

5. Other Information:

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

b. Base Support/ Network Access: N/A

c. Multiple awards subject to Fair Opportunity are not anticipated.

d. Data Rights Desired:

(1) Technical Data: Unlimited Rights

(2) Non-Commercial Software (NCS): Unlimited Rights

(3) NCS Documentation: Unlimited Rights

(4) Commercial Computer Software Rights: Customary License

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

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

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

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

Offerors are reminded that the Identification and Assertion of Restrictions on the Government’s Use, Release, or Disclosure of Technical Data or Computer Software (the assertions list), required under DFARS 252.227-

7013 and DFARS 252.227-7014, is included in Section K (Attachment 2) and due at time of proposals. Assertions must be completed with specificity with regard to each item, component, or process listed.

Nonconforming assertions lists will be rejected.

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

As used in this subparagraph, the terms Unlimited Rights, Government Purpose Rights, Specifically Negotiated License Rights, and Limited Rights in technical data are as defined in DFARS 252.227-7013. The terms

Unlimited Rights, Government Purpose Rights, Specifically Negotiated License Rights, and Restricted Rights in noncommercial computer software and noncommercial software documentation are as defined in DFARS 252.227-7014. The term Commercial Computer Software is as defined in DFARS 252.227-7014.

II. Award Information

1. Anticipated Award Date: 13 June 2016

2. Anticipated funding for the program: FY 16 - $1,200,000 and FY 17 - $300,000

This funding profile is an estimate only and not a contractual obligation for funding. All funding is subject to change due to Government discretion and availability. Potential offerors should be aware that due to unanticipated budget fluctuations funding in any or all areas may change with little or no notice.

3. Number of awards anticipated: One (1).

III. Eligibility Information

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

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

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

4. Government Agencies: If a Government agency is interested in performing work, contact the Program Office identified in the BAA. If those discussions result in a mutual interest to pursue your agency's participation, the effort will be pursued independent of this announcement.

5. Other:

a. Foreign participation: Foreign participation at the prime level is not allowed; however, the prime contractor and participating subcontractor may employ foreign nationals. Access to the information by the foreign national will be limited to information found in the public domain.

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

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

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

IV. Proposal and Submission Information

1. Overview: Proposals submitted shall be in accordance with this announcement. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award some, all, or none of the proposals received without negotiation/discussion;

however, the Government reserves the right to negotiate with those offeror(s) whose proposal is selected for funding.

Offerors should be alert for any BAA Call#2 amendments that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date.

For additional information, a copy of the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)

Guide for Industry is located at http://www.wpafb.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-150518-026.pdf

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

a. General Instructions:

i. Offerors should apply the restrictive notice prescribed in the provision of FAR 52.215-1(e) Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition. Offerors should consider proposal instructions contained in the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Guide for Industry, which can be accessed on line at http://www.wpafb.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-150518-026.pdf

ii. This guide is specifically designed to assist the offeror in understanding the BAA proposal process.

iii. Technical/management and cost volumes should be submitted in separate volumes, and must be valid for 180 days.

iv. Proposals must reference the announcement number BAA-RQKPD- 2015-0001 – Call #2.

v. Offerors must submit one-original and 5 hard copies of their proposals via mail to the Contracting POC, identified in Section VII.

vi. Offerors must include 6 CDs in Microsoft WORD Format containing all electronic versions of required submittals (Technical/Management

Proposal/SOW/Cost/Business Proposal). All electronic versions must match the hard copies.

a) Technical/Management proposals, Statements of Work and

Subcontracting Plan (if Applicable in accordance with FAR 19.7) must be provided in Microsoft WORD.

b) The cost file(s) spreadsheets must include the formulas for calculating cost element bases (i.e., G&A, O/H, etc.)

c) The CDs should be labeled with the company name and proposal title.

vii. Offerors are advised that only contracting officers are legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise commit the government.

viii. The cost of preparing proposals in response to this BAA is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting or any other contract; however, it may be an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect cost as specified in FAR 31.205-18.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-150518-026.pdf

ix. No classified technical proposals or cost volumes are expected.

Offerors are encouraged to keep all elements of the proposal package unclassified. In the rare case where an offeror has a need to submit a classified appendix, please contact the technical POC listed in Section

VII for delivery instructions.

b. Technical/Management Proposal:

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

a) The Technical/Management Proposal shall be limited to 20 pages, prepared and submitted in Microsoft Word format.

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

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

d) Pages shall be double-spaced (must use standard double-space function in Microsoft Word), double sided (each side counts as one page), 8.5 by 11 inches, with at least one-inch margins on both sides, top and bottom.

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

f) Pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being Page

1, and the last page being no greater than Page 20. The page limitation covers all information including indices, photographs, foldouts (counted as 1 page for each 8.5 by 11 portion) tables, charts, appendices, attachments, resumes, etc.

g) The proposal page limit does not include the offeror’s proposed

Statement of Work (SOW); however, the same formatting rules apply to the SOW, which is limited to ten pages (10).

h) Please note: the Government will check the proposal and SOW for conformance to the stated requirements. Any pages in excess of the stated page limitation after the format check will not be considered.

ii. The Technical/Management proposal(s) shall include a discussion of the nature and scope of the research and the technical approach.

Additional information on prior work in this area, descriptions of available equipment, use of base support (if desired), data and facilities and resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal. (This/These) volume(s) shall/ include a SOW(s) detailing the technical tasks proposed to be accomplished under the proposed effort and suitable for contract incorporation. Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW. Refer to the BAA Guide for Industry referenced above to assist in SOW preparation. If

Government Furnished Property is requested you are required to submit the following information with your offer—

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

b) The dates during which the property will be available for use

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

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

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

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

c. Cost/Business Proposal:

i. Separate the proposal into a business section and cost section.

Adequate price competition is anticipated.

a) The business section should contain all business aspects to the proposed contract, such as type of contractual instrument, any exceptions to terms and conditions of the announcement model contract (Attachment 3), any information not technically related, etc. Provide rationale for exceptions.

b) Identify any technical data that will be delivered with less than unlimited rights.

c) Cost/Business proposals have no page limitations; however, offerors are requested to keep cost proposals to 100 pages as a goal.

d) The Cost proposal shall be furnished with supporting schedules and shall contain a person hour breakdown per task. Refer to the BAA Guide for Industry for detailed proposal instructions.

ii. Subcontracting plans, for efforts anticipated to exceed $700,000, shall be submitted along with the technical and cost proposals. Reference

FAR 19.704, DFARS 219.704, and AFFARS 5319.704(a)(1) for subcontracting plan requirements. Small business concerns are http://www.afrl.af.mil/contract/default.htm http://www.afrl.af.mil/contract/default.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_237.htm#P814_129251 exempt from this requirement. If an IDIQ contract arrangement is anticipated, the basis for the subcontracting plan should reflect the entire ceiling amount.

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

Reference Section VIII for a Checklist of the requirements.

4. Proposal Due Date and Time: March 4, 2016 – 4:00 P.M. Eastern time NOTE: Proposal receipt after the due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3).

NOTE: Intent to Propose: Offerors that anticipate submitting a proposal are requested to submit an e-mail to Ryan Huffman at ryan.huffman@us.af.mil containing the name of the contractor, the POC, and the contractor’s intent to submit a proposal. This “Intent to Propose” is requested by 17 February 2016, 4:00 P.M. Eastern Time.

5. Intergovernmental Review: None

6. Funding Restrictions: None

7. Other Submission Requirements: Proposals must be submitted to:

Ryan Huffman, AFRL/RQKPD; Bldg 45, 2130 8th St., Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

45433-7541.

V. Proposal Review Information

1. Evaluation Criteria: The selection of one or more sources for award will be based on an evaluation of each offeror’s proposal (both technical and cost/price aspects) to determine the overall merit of the proposal in response to the announcement, as well as on Agency need and funding availability.

The technical aspect, which is ranked as the first order of priority, shall be evaluated based on the following criteria that are of descending order of importance:

a. Technical:

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

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

iv. Soundness of the offeror’s technical approach.

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

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

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

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

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

2. Review and Selection Process

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

i. Category I: Demonstrates technical merit. Is important to agency programs. The offeror presents relevant experience and access to adequate resources. Risk is acceptable. The cost/price is reasonable and realistic. Proposals in Category I are recommended for acceptance (subject to availability of funds) and normally are displaced only by other Category I proposals.

ii. Category II: Demonstrates technical merit; is important to agency programs; and presents relevant experience and access to adequate resources; but requires further development. Risk is acceptable. The cost/price is reasonable and realistic. Category II proposals are recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I.

iii. Category III: Does not demonstrate technical merit; does not meet agency needs; does not present adequate experience or resources; the risk level is unacceptable; or the cost/price is not reasonable or realistic.

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

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices: Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award, by letter or e-mail, on or about 15 Apr 2016. The notification is not to be construed to mean the award of a contract is assured, as availability of funds and successful negotiations are prerequisites to any award.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: See Section I.

3. Reporting: Please refer back to paragraph I.2.a.,CDRLs (Attachment 1).

VII. Agency Contacts

1. Address technical questions to: Richard Holzwarth, Bldg. 65, 2790 D. St., WPAFB, OH 45433, (937) 656-8825, Richard.Holzwarth.1@us.af.mil

2. Address contracting questions to: Ryan Huffman, Bldg. 45, 2130 Eighth

St., WPAFB, OH 45433, (937) 713-9927, Ryan.Huffman@us.af.mil or to Jennifer Kleiv, Bldg. 45, 2130 Eighth St., WPAFB, OH 45433, (937) 713- 9975, Jennifer.Kleiv.1@us.af.mil

VIII. Other Information

1. Acquisition of Commercial Items: Based upon market research, the

Government is not using the policies contained in Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, in its solicitation for the described supplies or services.

However, interested persons may identify to the contracting officer their interest and capability to satisfy the Government’s requirement with a commercial item within 15 days of this notice.

2. Support contractors: Only Government employees will evaluate proposals for selection. Offerors are advised that employees of commercial firms under contract to the Government may be used to administratively process proposals, monitor contract performance, or perform other administrative duties requiring access to other contractors' proprietary information. These mailto:Richard.Holzwarth.1@us.af.mil mailto:Ryan.Huffman@us.af.mil mailto:Jennifer.Kleiv.1@us.af.mil support contracts include nondisclosure agreements prohibiting their contractor employees from disclosing any information submitted by other contractors or using such information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished.

3. Debriefings: If a debriefing is requested in accordance with the time guidelines set out in FAR 15.505 and 15.506, a debriefing will be provided, but the debriefing content may vary to be consistent with the procedures that govern BAAs (FAR 35.016).

4. Wide Area Work Flow: NOTICE: Any contract award resulting from this solicitation will contain the clause at DFARS 252.232-7003, Electronic

Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports (JUN 2012) which requires electronic submission of all payment requests. Any contract resulting from this solicitation will establish a requirement to use WAWF-RA for invoicing and receipt/acceptance, and provide coding instructions applicable to this contract via the clause at DFARS 252.232-7006, Wide Area

Workflow Payment Instructions (MAY 2013). Contractors are encouraged to take advantage of available training (both web-based and through your local

DCMA office), and to register in the WAWF-RA system. Information regarding WAWF-RA, including the web-based training and registration, can be found at https://wawf.eb.mil. Note: This WAWF-RA requirement does not apply to Universities that are audited by an agency other than DCAA.

5. Item Unique Identification and Valuation. Any contract award resulting from this solicitation may contain the clause at DFARS 252.211-7003, Item

Unique Identification and Valuation, (DEC 2013) which requires unique item identification and valuation of any deliverable item for which the Government’s unit acquisition cost is $5,000 or more; subassemblies, components, and parts embedded within an item valued at $5,000 or more;

or items for which the Government’s unit acquisition cost is less than $5,000 when determined necessary by the requiring activity for serially managed, mission essential, or controlled inventory. Also included are any DoD serially managed subassembly, component, or part embedded within a delivered item and the parent item that contains the embedded subassembly, component, or part. Per DFARS 211.274-3 Policy for Valuation, it is DoD policy that contractors shall be required to identify the Government’s unit acquisition cost for all deliverable end items for which Item Unique Identification applies. Therefore, your proposal must clearly break out the unit acquisition cost for any deliverable items. See DFARS 211.274-3, Policy for Valuation, for policy. (Per DoD, “fully burdened unit costs” to the

Government would include all direct, indirect, G&A costs, and an appropriate portion of fee). If you have questions regarding the Unique Item Identification requirements, please contact the Contracting Point of Contact listed above. For more information, see the following website:

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/index.html. The contract will also include DFARS 252.211-7007, Reporting of Government-Furnished Property

(AUG 2012).

https://wawf.eb.mil/ http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/index.html

6. Forward Pricing Rate Agreements: Offerors who have forward pricing rate agreements (FPRA’s) and forward pricing rate recommendations (FPRR’s) should submit them with their proposal.

7. Pre-Award Clearance: Pursuant to FAR 22.805, a preaward clearance…