MAST_DRAFT_CALL_2_PA15048_February_2015.pdf

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

FOR THE AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY

ROCKET PROPULSION DIVISION

AEROSPACE SYSTEMS DIRECTORATE

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

February 2015

Issuing Office: Air Force Test Center, Directorate of Contracting

Edwards AFB, CA Distribution A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

Public Affairs Clearance Number 15048

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

MAST DRAFT Call 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT CALL 2

I. CALL 2 DESCRIPTION

I-1. Aging and Surveillance (A&S) Technology Development:

I-2. Deliverable Items:

I-3. Schedule:

I-4. Other Information:

II. AWARD INFORMATION:

II-1. Anticipated Funding:

II-2. Type of Contracts/Instruments:

II-3. Discussions:

II-4. Anticipated Award Date:

III. PROPOSAL APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:

III-1. Content and Form of Submission for Proposals:

IV. PROPOSAL CONTENT SUMMARY:

IV-1. Ineligibility:

IV-2. Submission Dates and Times:

IV-3. Incorrect Submittal:

IV-4. Funding Restrictions:

V. PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION:

V-1. Evaluation Criteria:

V-2. Review and Selection Process:

VI. PROPOSAL CONTENT CHECKLIST:

20 Feb 2015

NAICS CODE: 541712

FEDERAL AGENCY NAME: Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate (AFRL/RQ-West)

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT TITLE: Motor Aging and Surveillance Technology (MAST) Development and Demonstration

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE: This is a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) with multiple calls

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA) NUMBER: BAA-RQR-2014-0002

BRIEF SUMMARY OF MAST BAA: This BAA describes the development of the Motor Aging and Surveillance Technology (MAST) Development and Demonstration that are of interest to the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). The Government anticipates making one initial call with additional calls in the future. The Government anticipates awarding independent Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) for technical efforts with a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) final report for most efforts awarded under this BAA It is anticipated that the second call will occur in FY15, a third call should occur in FY16, and a fourth call may occur in FY17. Calls 1 and 2 are anticipated to utilize closed one-step process where Calls 3 and 4 are anticipated to utilize closed two-step process. The closed one-step and two-step processes will be described in section IV of the BAA.

BAA ORDERING PERIOD: 60 months after initial release

PROPOSALS DUE DATE AND TIME: Proposals due date and time will be specified in each call. Proposals received after the due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c) (3). Specific information will be located in each call. It should be noted that this Edwards Air Force Base 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 because of security delays will be considered “late”. Furthermore, if offerors utilize commercial carriers to deliver proposals, they may not honor time-of-day delivery guarantees on military installations.

DRAFT CALL 2

I. CALL 2 DESCRIPTION

I-1. Aging and Surveillance (A&S) Technology Development:

I-1.1. Technology Development Objective: This effort focuses on demonstrating and validating RP21 A&S 2017 goal attainment in an approximately five (5) year program. This RP21 goal specifically applies to large-scale solid rocket motors (SRM) used for ballistic missile systems.

I-1.2. RP21 current Government baseline and goals for A&S are defined in a supplemental package for this BAA. See BAA III-5 about how to request a supplemental package.

I-1.3. Problem Statement: The demonstration of the RP21 A&S goal would ideally be done through a program with a complete fleet of full scale motors used in strategic assets, aged and monitored individually in an operationally representative manner over their entire service life (40+ years). The government does not have the funds or time for a study of such scope. The challenge of this program is to demonstrate the RP21 A&S goal in a much shorter timescale (5 years), with cheaper, less numerous, but still representational, motors with full interrogation in sample environments.

I-1.4. Technology and Methodology Description: AFRL is interested in A&S studies that systematically collect aging data on solid rocket motor (SRM) assets in support of the MAST Technology Development Objective (I-1.1). The program would focus on a statistically significant number of non-proprietary SRMs with motor features and propellants representative of those found in strategic motors in order to deliver the best value to the government. Aging in multiple environment types is highly desired; different storage conditions should be developed to support goal validation and expand understanding of the underlying predictive uncertainty. The program may include hardware development and/or computer modeling, but these items must be done in direct support of data collection and methodology application in support of demonstration and validation of RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment;

standalone development that does not focus on this validation through experimental data would not be considered appropriate for this call. Emphasis in this program should be placed in three main parts: 1) methodology definition and review by government-led IPT over the initial stage of the program, 2) data collection over extended time with continuous risk evaluation, and 3) continued analysis in support of demonstration and validation of RP21 A&S 2017 goal attainment and in support of application of this technology to operational systems.

I-1.5. Technology Demonstration Requirements: Proposed programs must meet all of the following requirements and the proposal shall contain a description of HOW each requirement will be accomplished. The Call 2 requirements are as follows:

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

I-1.5.1. Program shall define RP21 2017 contractor A&S technology baseline including individual technology/area uncertainties and how they aggregate into the overall customer A&S baseline uncertainty.

I-1.5.2. Program shall define RP21 2017 contractor A&S technology suite that will demonstrate and validate the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment.

I-1.5.3. Program shall define a scientific methodology to validate RP21 2017 A&S baseline and RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment.

I-1.5.4. The proposal methodology shall also be applied to the demonstration and validation of the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment.

I-1.5.5. The program’s methodologies and technologies shall rigorously verify the customer A&S baseline.

I-1.5.6. The program’s methodology shall utilize a statistically significant number of non-proprietary SRMs with motor features and propellants representative of those found in strategic motors and include multiple defined, operationally relevant environments in direct support of A&S goal demonstration.

I-1.5.7. Risk management processes shall be used at all stages of the methodology to maintain focus on proper RP21 2017 A&S goal demonstration.

I-1.5.8. Technologies shall clearly demonstrate and increase understanding of the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment.

I-1.5.9. Community forums such as JANNAF meetings and broad integrated product teams shall be used to disseminate program progress and results.

I-1.5.10. All methodologies, technologies, risk analyses and results shall be reported throughout the program in Distribution C sources.

I-1.5.11. The program’s structure and approach shall be focused on achieving a significant advancement in the demonstration and validation of the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment at the end of the program.

I-1.6. Proposal Requirements: All proposals for this effort must define and describe a contractor A&S baseline, methodologies to validate customer A&S baseline and goal attainment, and all of the work necessary to carry out those methodologies.

The document cannot simply propose to establish this baseline and/or methodologies; the proposal must define these items in sufficient detail with justified relevancy to give the Government evaluation team insight into all processes and technologies. These proposal requirements shall be defined in individual sections of the proposal (see III-1.4 of this BAA Call):

I-1.6.1. The proposal must describe how a comprehensive program will establish a contractor A&S baseline and demonstrate RP21 2017 goal attainment. The proposal shall define and justify the quantified predictive uncertainty that the program is designed to obtain at the end of the program.

I-1.6.2. The proposal must describe a detailed contractor A&S baseline by defining the individual technologies that make up this baseline and their anticipated uncertainties and by defining an aggregate uncertainty with the method used to calculate that uncertainty.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

I-1.6.3. The proposal must describe, in detail, the methodology to be used to validate contractor A&S baseline and specify the appropriateness of that methodology in regards to assessment of the aging study.

I-1.6.4. The proposal must describe the technologies proposed to demonstrate RP21 2017 goal attainment. The proposal must describe the detailed individual technologies that will be utilized to demonstrate RP21 goal attainment and their anticipated uncertainties and must define an aggregate uncertainty with the method used to calculate that uncertainty.

I-1.6.5. The proposal must describe a complete program plan including a specified methodology to demonstrate RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment and detailing all of the work, cost, schedule, and resources needed to carry out that methodology.

I-1.6.6. The proposal must describe the program management organization and why that proposed organization is required to accomplish a successful program.

I-1.6.7. The proposal must describe a detailed risk management and systems engineering process and specify how that process will be applied to the entire program.

I-1.7. Program Structure: The overall program shall be structured with major milestones to support initial program layout, routine assessments and long-term surveillance of representational assets.

I-1.7.1. The methodology to experimentally verify contractor A&S baseline and RP21 A&S goal attainment shall be documented, reviewed and accepted by the Government-lead A&S IPT, and published on DTIC within six months of award. This methodology report is defined as CDRL A007.

I-1.7.2. The program shall define routine surveillance of representational motors in CDRL A007 and then carry out those inspections for the life of the contract.

I-1.7.3. The program shall have a semiannual assessment of the customer A&S baseline’s service life estimate and its uncertainty. Assessment periods should be scheduled to allow timely reporting to the Government IPT.

I-1.7.4. The program shall have a semiannual assessment of the RP21 goal attainment demonstration motors’ service life estimate and their uncertainty.

This assessment shall include an analysis of the degree that the demonstration has addressed the RP21 goal to that point and an analysis of the project’s potential to demonstrate RP21 goal attainment over the course of the project. Assessment periods should be scheduled to allow timely reporting to the Government IPT.

I-1.8. Technology Verification and Validation: This effort requires both validation of the RP21 goal described above and verification that the program technology scientifically and accurately represents the measured or modeled qualities. Every aspect of a proposed plan shall address both verification and validation (V&V) of techniques and products of the program. For clarification, definitions of verification and validation used for this effort are described below:

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

I-1.8.1. Verification is the process of determining that a computational model accurately represents the underlying mathematical model and its solution from the perspective of the intended uses of M&S. "Did you build the system correctly?" Verification provides evidence that the system or system element performs its intended functions and meets all performance requirements listed in the system performance specification and functional and allocated baselines.

I-1.8.2. Validation is the process of determining the degree to which a prediction is an accurate representation of the real world from the perspective of the intended use of the prediction. "Is it the right solution to the problem?" Validation provides objective evidence that the capability provided by the system complies with stakeholder performance requirements, achieving its use in its intended operational environment.

I-1.8.2.1. BAA reference section VII items #2 and #4 discuss relevant aspects of experiment validation.

I-2. Deliverable Items:

Any contract awards resulting from this Call shall be required to deliver appropriate data items; and possibly software and hardware.

I-2.1. Data Requirements:

I-2.1.1. ALL program technical and financial progress shall be reported. The Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) list is provided in Table 1. The items below or similar items shall be incorporated into each proposed effort as applicable.

Relevant CDRL items shall then be incorporated into each effort. The Data Item Descriptions (DID) are given as references only. All reports are to be divided into sections with appropriate markings for distinguishing proprietary versus non-proprietary information.

I-2.1.2. Offerors are encouraged to propose an alternate CDRL list adding or deleting any of the items shown below for Government consideration and approval. If an alternate CDRL is proposed, the offeror must demonstrate the benefits of using the alternate. These alternatives must be stipulated and explained in Appendix C6 of the proposal. Contractor’s format and report consolidation are highly encouraged and may be acceptable upon request. Alternate or additional data items that would streamline or enhance the effectiveness of the effort are solicited. Proposals must show a list of CDRL items included in the price of the proposal. Electronic submission of data items shall be required on individual efforts. The model contract will contain Exhibits A and B for complete requirements.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

Table 1: Sample Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) CDRL Authority Description Frequency A001 DI-ADMN-81373/T Presentation Material As Required A002 DI-MGMT-81468/T Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR) Quarterly A003 DI-FNCL-80331A/T Funds and Man-Hour Report (FMHR) Quarterly A004 DI-MGMT-80227/T Contractor’s Progress, Status & Management Report Quarterly

A005 DI-SESS-81785/T Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) Once & Revisions

A006 DI-MISC-80711A/T Scientific and Technical Reports, Subtitle Interim Report As required *(1) A007 DI-NDTI-80566A Test Plan (A&S Methodology) Once A008 DI-ADMN-81373/T JANNAF Papers and Presentations As necessary

B001 DI-MISC-80711A/T Scientific and Technical Reports, Subtitle Final Report Once & Revision

B002 DI-IPSC-81443A/T Software User Manual Once, if necessary

B003 DI-SESS-81002E/T Developmental Design Drawings/Models and Associated Lists

Once, if necessary

*Notes

(1) CDRL A006 will be submitted annually and at the end of the technical effort.

I-2.1.3. Interim and Final Report: Interim Reports will be submitted annually, due every 12 months to the day from the beginning of the technical effort, and submitted on the day of the end of the technical effort. The last interim report (submitted at the end of the technical effort) will be reviewed by the Government, but subsequent submission of a camera-ready version will not be required. The final report firm fixed price effort will commence at the end of the technical effort and will be used to generate an acceptable Final report.

I-2.1.4. Residual Hardware: Residual hardware deliveries may be required; AFRL is particularly interested in continuing any aging studies of energetic material at government facilities after the end of proposed programs. Residual hardware would be identified for individual efforts and delivered to AFRL/RQRM upon the completion of the technical effort. Delivery due thirty days after end of technical effort of each contract if there is residual hardware developed.

I-2.1.5. All proposals must ensure of proper disposal of energetic material, including accounting for cost of disposal if proposed.

I-2.1.6. Software: All contracts that stipulate computer code as a deliverable shall deliver the source and compiled code thirty days after end of technical effort.

I-3. Schedule:

The anticipated period of performance for contracts resulting from this call is sixty (60) months technical effort, plus 90 days for the Final Scientific and Technical Reporting Cycle.

I-4. Other Information:

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

I-4.1. Joint Army Navy NASA Air Force (JANNAF): Offerors shall plan for participation in the JANNAF conferences, subcommittee meetings, and periodic workshops in order to present current results. This participation will serve as a mechanism to report current progress to the community. The presentations and papers will be submitted as part of CDRL TBD.

I-4.2. Government Furnished Property or Information (GFP or GFI): It is possible that GFP or GFI may be involved or used in this effort; however, if it is required, it must be identified in the proposal for each effort in Appendix C5 (III-1.4.10.15). If proposing GFP or GFI identify the source and location of the item or information;

who owns it (include point of contact with phone number); the value of the property;

approval from the property owner and how, when, and for how long it will be made available under the proposed effort. Address commonality with other programs. If contributions from other efforts are proposed, identify the specific efforts, the planned start and end dates, and the applicability to the current call and RP21.

I-4.3. Contractor Acquired Property: None anticipated.

I-4.4. Base support: None anticipated.

II. AWARD INFORMATION:

II-1. Anticipated Funding:

II-1.1. This funding profile is an estimate only and will not be a contractual obligation for funding. All funding is subject to change due to Government discretion and availability. All potential offerors should be aware that due to unanticipated budget fluctuations, funding in all areas may change with no notice.

II-1.2. Funding Profile: The anticipated funding profile for this call is provided in Table 2.

The values provided are for all efforts and not per award.

II-1.3. Funding Per Effort: It is anticipated that all efforts resulting from this call will be between XXX and YYY. Efforts that are less than or greater than this range should provide significant additional justification.

Table 2: Anticipated Total Call 2 Funding Profile (all values in $1000s) A&S Topic Title FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 Total

1 Call 2Tech Developments TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

II-2. Type of Contracts/Instruments:

The Government anticipates awarding Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) type contract(s) from proposals resulting from this call. If another type of contract is desired, please contact Contracting POC before submittal of proposal.

II-3. Discussions:

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award, part, some, all, or none of the proposals received without negotiations/discussions; however, the Government

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

reserves the right to negotiate with offeror(s) whose proposal(s) is(are) potentially eligible for funding.

II-4. Anticipated Award Date:

The first contract is anticipated to be awarded on TBD.

III. PROPOSAL APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:

III-1. Content and Form of Submission for Proposals:

Offerors must submit one-original with five additional hard copies, and two electronic (CD) copies of their proposal to the contracting office. The Government will check the proposal for conformation to the stated requirements and deviation from stated requirements will be dealt with in the manner stated in each of the following sections.

III-1.1. Proposal Contents: All proposals will consist of a single volume with sections, appendices and tables described below.

III-1.2. Required Format: Proposals are to be on 8.5 inch x 11 inch pages with one (1) inch margins on all sides. Headers, footers, and page number can be in the margins, but the margins must contain no technical information. A template will be utilized to see if text extends into the margins, and if it does the specific text will be blacked out and not evaluated, and the remaining text will be read as is.

III-1.2.1. The text will be 11-point Arial single space with 10pt spacing between paragraphs, with no text or line compression, for all text body, figures, tables or attachments, unless otherwise directly specified in the proposal structure below or BAA templates. If another font, font size, or paragraph spacing is utilized, a conversion factor will be determined and amount over the limit will be removed. For example if the page limit is 8 pages and 9pt Calibri font is utilized for all 8 pages, when expanded the 8 pages would be 11 7/19 pages long so 3 7/19 pages or 29.7% would be removed. The remaining document would then be evaluated as is.

III-1.2.2. Pages shall be numbered continuously throughout the proposal. The cover page and table of context are not numbered pages. The body of the proposal shall start with page #1 and include sections III-1.4.3 to, and including, III-

1.4.9. Page number on the bottom of each page shall include “Page X of Y” to stipulate the current page (X) and the total number of pages in the body (Y).

Appendices shall be numbers by the section, a dash, and then the page, as in A1-1 for the first page of appendix A1.

III-1.2.3. Sections shall be numbered (i.e. Section 1, Section 2, etc.), with individual sections starting on a new page. Subsections may be numbered within each section based on the offeror’ s organization, but subsections shall not start on their own individual page.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.2.4. SOW, WBS, schedule items, and basis of estimates (BOE) shall use a consistent and complementary numbering system throughout the proposal.

For example, SOW task 1.1 shall be related in task and scope to WBS 1.1, schedule task 1.1, and BOE item 1.1. If method is not followed proposal will be returned unevaluated.

III-1.2.5. Any figure and table must be discussed in the text; otherwise, it will not be evaluated. Figures and tables must have titles and must be numbered.

III-1.2.6. If any item is illegible (due to font size or print blur) at 100% magnification to the evaluation team, it will not be considered.

III-1.2.7. The hardcopy of each proposal shall be mechanically bound to itself either with staples, straps, or in a ring binder so that the proposal stays physically connected through handling. Paperclips are not sufficient.

III-1.2.8. Optical disks with the Microsoft Word version of the proposal shall be submitted with the hard copies of the proposal and exactly match the hard copy; if they do not match the proposal will be returned unevaluated.

III-1.2.9. Appendices shall follow these format requirements and are subject to the same controls as stated above, unless stated.

III-1.2.10. All cost spreadsheets provided must be in Microsoft Excel 2003 Format or later. Within the workbook, all spreadsheets, cells and formulas must be visible with no hidden fields.

III-1.3. Number of proposals: One proposal can be submitted for this call per prime offeror;

if more than that is provided the extras will be removed at random. For other calls of this BAA, the number of proposals will be determined at the release of the individual call. Submissions for this call do not affect or influence submissions for other calls on this BAA.

III-1.4. Proposal Structure: The proposal shall be comprised of a single volume with sections and appendices formatted per III-1.2 and the limitations below.

III-1.4.1. A cover sheet shall be included at the front of the proposal with the following information:

III-1.4.1.1. Title of proposal

III-1.4.1.2. Full company name and address

III-1.4.1.3. BAA number submitting proposal against

III-1.4.1.4. Call number proposing to

III-1.4.1.5. Point of contact, name, title, phone, fax number, and email

III-1.4.1.6. CAGE code

III-1.4.1.7. DUNS number

III-1.4.1.8. Type of contract proposed (e.g. CPFF, FFP)

III-1.4.1.9. Name, address, and phone number of administration (DCMA) office

III-1.4.1.10. Name, address, and phone number of audit (DCAA) office

III-1.4.1.11. Validity period in accordance with BAA section III-2

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.1.12. Appropriate markings (ITAR, destruction, competition sensitive)

III-1.4.2. Table of Context [unlimited] sections, appendices, tables, and figures

III-1.4.3. Section 1: Proposal Overview [Maximum Page Limit 4 pages] This section provides an introduction to all pieces of the proposed program and how these pieces interconnect. Overview of program plan and methodologies to establish the customer A&S baseline and to verify program goals are discussed. The program structure is outlined and explain in reference to the SOW (appendix A1), V&V plan (appendix A3), the program schedule (appendix B2), and the CDRL list (Table 1). The specific ability of the proposed program to demonstrate the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment is explained, and a quantified predictive uncertainty at the end of the program is proposed. This section explains the integration of methodologies, technologies, risk management, scheduled surveillance, analyses, and community involvement in the program and why this program is specifically designed to provide the most rigorous validation AND best insight to A&S concerns.

III-1.4.4. Section 2: Contractor baseline definition and baseline technologies [Maximum Page Limit 12 pages] The technologies that make up the customer A&S baseline are defined and scientifically justified. All uncertainties and sources of error in the technologies are discussed in sufficient detail to justify their role in the program as the best application to define this baseline. This justification will include a comparative discussion of related technologies and their uncertainties. An aggregate uncertainty is defined and the method used to determine this aggregate uncertainty is supported.

III-1.4.5. Section 3: Methodology to validate RP21 A&S baseline and goals [Maximum Page Limit 10 pages] The methodology to be used to experimentally validate the RP21 A&S baseline and RP21 A&S 2017 goals are explained, irrespective of the proposed technologies and baseline technologies. Methodologies are to be discussed in terms of scientific veracity and statistical strength.

Experimental parameters such as different environments, sampling rates or techniques, sensor types, chemical analyses, configurations, etc. are explained with sufficient detail to justify relevance and uncertainty. All sources of error are to be described and quantified. If computational resources are to be used as part of the program, the development and applicability of these techniques to the experimental validation are to be explained. In this section, the proposal must outline the program’s intention to rigorously verify and document the methodology in a DTIC report six months after start of the program.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.6. Section 4: Technologies to demonstrate goal and their estimated uncertainties [Maximum Page Limit 10 pages] The technologies proposed to demonstrate goal attainment are discussed. Technologies are explained in sufficient detail to understand the underlying physics of the technology and its role in the A&S program. All uncertainties and sources of error in the technologies are discussed in sufficient detail to scientifically support their rationale and to justify their role in the program as the best application to validate goal attainment. This justification will include a comparative discussion of related technologies and their uncertainties. Technology development activities within the program must be rationalized in terms of impact to the RP21 goal attainment.

III-1.4.7. Section 5: Program Plan [Maximum Page Limit 10 pages] The overarching processes and procedures to be executed are discussed. Each step of the program plan is explained in terms of its role in validating the demonstration of the RP21 2017 A&S goal attainment. Methodologies and technologies discussed in previous sections are connected to each step of the program.

Sources of error and contribution from uncertainties (from methodologies and technologies) are discussed relative to the objective of a validated A&S goal demonstration. Baseline definition and configuration management of A&S experiments are discussed in detail. The program plan shall include a description of the SRM to be used in the A&S study and a rationale for the SRM size, configuration, number, arrangement, etc. in regards to 1) goal attainment, 2) interpretation of that goal attainment finding to other assets and operational programs, and 3) best value to the government. Program aspects meant to protect experiment integrity over the course of the long A&S studies are discussed with risk analysis and mitigation strategies. Resource management and control are defined, particularly in consideration of extended A&S studies; details of required resources may be referenced from appendices, but the resource requirements must be sufficiently explained to support a comprehensive program.

III-1.4.8. Section 6: Program management organization [Maximum Page Limit 5 pages] This section describes the organizational structure of the research team and how the program will manage personnel over the extended A&S studies. The proposal will explain why the proposed personnel structure and proposed personnel are the best possible resources for the objective of A&S goal attainment. The roles of key personnel are defined and the responsibilities for specific program areas are assigned to specific personnel. Sufficient detail will be provided to identify specific tasks in the SOW to specific roles/responsibilities in the organizational structure. Subcontractor and consultant roles are discussed in detail with particular regard to their justification on the project and their importance to the objective of A&S goal attainment. External interfacing of the research team with both the subcontractor/consultants and with the government must be clearly defined.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.9. Section 7: Risk Management and systems engineer method [Maximum Page Limit 3 pages] The proposal will define how the program will apply risk and systems engineering processes throughout the research effort. An overview of major risks and how did these risk drive the program plan are discussed.

The research team’s risk management approach is explained in conjecture with examples from the defined risk analyses in Appendix A4.

III-1.4.10. Proposal Appendices

III-1.4.10.1. Appendix A1: Statement of Work (SOW): [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The SOW shall contain a summary description of the technical methodology as well as detailed task descriptions. Offerors are cautioned to include only the information that is essential to a clear, logical, binding, and reasonable SOW. This document will be made part of any resulting contract. Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW. The SOW section structure below is based on the SOW description in the BAA Guide for Industry in Part III of the BAA; offerors should refer to that document for more information. All subsections of the SOW are to be numbered in outline form according to the number of the main section (i.e. 1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1.1, 1.2.1.2, etc.)

1.0 BACKGROUND

The background information should identify the requirement in very general terms; describe why the project is being pursued, and how it relates to other projects. Summarize any statutory authority or regulations affecting the overall requirement.

2.0 SCOPE

This section should provide a brief statement of what the offeror expects to accomplish under the contract — the breadth and limitations of the contract effort. It should not include specific work tasks or a description of deliverable products since this will be included in the “Tasks” section.

3.0 OBJECTIVES

This section should provide a concise overview of the contract effort goals and objectives; and how the results or end products will be used.

4.0 TASKS/TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

This section defines the tasks that the contractor must complete during contract performance and would have a task description for each step of the WBS. The description of task requirements will depend on the approach that is selected to describe the required effort. The tasks shall be defined by “shall” statements that are contractually binding rather than “will” or “may” statements.

5.0 DELIVERABLES

This section should clearly state all deliverables including CDRLs and material.

6.0 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The period of performance shall be clearly stated using in units of months after contract award. Milestones shall be stated as a number of months after contract award. These milestones must include the end of technical period of performance and end of contract period of performance.

III-1.4.10.2. Appendix A2: Compliance matrix: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The specific proposal section and specific proposal page is listed for each requirement to cite where the proposal defines compliance with the BAA Call 2 requirements (see I-1.5) and CDRL requirements (see I-2.1.2)

Table 3: Appendix A2: Compliance Matrix

Requirement # Proposal Section Proposal Page # I-1.5.1 I-1.5.2 I-1.5.3 I-1.5.4 I-1.5.5 I-1.5.6 I-1.5.7 I-1.5.8 I-1.5.9 A001 A002 A003 A004 A005 A006 A007 A008 B001 B002 B003

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.10.3. Appendix A3: Verification and Validations Plan (V&V): [Five (5) pages]

The structure of the offeror’s V&V plan is described in regards to specific tasks. Reference to company procedures may be used as long as the intent or application of those procedures is clear to the government reviewers. A systematic approach shall be stressed. A method of documenting and tracing these validations shall also be described.

III-1.4.10.4. Appendix A4: Risks and Mitigations: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The risks are defined using the following template. Major technical, management, schedule, and cost risks are listed based on the offeror’s evaluation. This appendix can only contain the risk chart defined in Table 4 with cells formatted to wrap the text. The risk chart is designed to record an assessment of the initial risk and then an assessment of the risk AFTER applying a single mitigation approach. Multiple mitigation approaches shall be defined until the offeror reaches a risk factor that it is willing to accept for the program. The following details are included in the risk chart:

III-1.4.10.4.1. Risk ID: A unique number, starting at #1, for each initial risk.

III-1.4.10.4.2. Stage: A risk is defined as “Initial” or “I” on the risk chart or “Mitigated” or “M” on the risk chart. For risks marked as “I”, the mitigation approach is left blank. Each risk must have one “I” entry but can have multiple mitigation entries.

III-1.4.10.4.3. Risk Statement: The risk is defined in this section as a clear statement of the cause and effect of the risk.

III-1.4.10.4.4. Mitigation Approach: Definition of the tasks or steps taken to reduce the risk. For initial risk assessment, this position is left blank.

III-1.4.10.4.5. Likelihood: A number between 1 and 5 (inclusive) that defines the likelihood of the risk occurring based on Table

5. For initial risks, this likelihood is evaluated without any mitigation; for mitigation assessment, this likelihood is evaluated considering the application of the defined mitigation approach for this row.

III-1.4.10.4.6. Likelihood Rationale: A justification or basis for this likelihood is cited.

III-1.4.10.4.7. Consequence: A number between 1 and 5 (inclusive) that defines the consequence of the risk occurring based on Table 6. For initial risks, this consequence is evaluated without any mitigation; for mitigation assessment, this consequence is evaluated considering the application of the defined mitigation approach for this row.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.10.4.8. Risk factor: The risk factor is determined using the likelihood number and the consequence number in Table

7. Risk factors below 12 are considered low and assumed to not need to be mitigation. Risk factors above 19 are considered high risk and must be mitigated to a lower risk factor. Risk factors between 12 and 19 (inclusive) can be accepted or further mitigated.

Table 4: Appendix A3: Risks and Mitigations

Risk ID Stage Risk Statement Mitigation Approach

Likeli hood

Likelihood Rationale

Conseq uence

Consequence Rationale

Risk factor

Table 5: Risk Likelihood Table

Level Likelihood PROBABILITY of Occurrence

5 Near Certainty ~ 90%

4 Highly Likely ~ 70%

3 Likely ~ 50%

2 Low Likelihood ~ 30%

1 Not Likely ~ 10%

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

Table 6: Risk Consequence Table

Level Tech Performance Cost Schedule

5 Severe gradation in technical performance; cannot meet KPP or key technical/supportability threshold; will jeopardize program success.

> 10% total program budget

Cannot meet key program milestones

4 Significant degradation in technical performance or major shortfall in supportability; may jeopardize program success.

Budget threatens a SOW task, < 10% total budget

Program critical path affected

3 Moderate reduction in technical performance or supportability with limited impact on program objectives

Significant budget increase or unit production cost increase, < 5% total budget

Minor schedule slip;

able to meet key milestones with

2 Minor reduction in technical performance or supportability;

can be tolerated with little or no impact on program

Budget shifts within program

Able to meet key dates

1 Minimal or no consequence to technical performance

Minimal or no impact Minimal or no impact

Table 7: Risk Factors Table

Li ke lih oo d 1 1 3 5 8 12

2 2 7 11 14 17

3 4 10 15 19 21

4 6 13 18 22 24

5 9 16 20 23 25

1 2 3 4 5

Consequence

III-1.4.10.5. Appendix A5: References: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] – References only listed in a standard bibliographic format

III-1.4.10.6. Appendix B1: Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS Dictionary:

[no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] WBS shall be done down to level three with level 1.0 being program to demonstrate RP21 goal achievement and level 2.0 being the final report.

Table 7: Appendix B1: Work Breakdown Structure Table

WBS Number WBS Title 1.1 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.3.1 1.1.3.2 1.1.4 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.2.1 1.2.2.2 1.2.2.3 1.2.3 1.3 1.4 1.5

2.1 Final Report

2.1.1 Draft Final Report

2.1.2 Camera-ready Final Report

III-1.4.10.7. Appendix B2: Program Schedule: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] This section is limited to a single schedule chart of unrestrained size (i.e. this chart may cover a number of pages).

Ensure that the words and dates can be read on the chart.

III-1.4.10.8. Appendix B3: Resumes of key personnel: [Maximum Page Limit 1 page per person]

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.10.9. Appendix B4: Company’s Physical capability Table: [Maximum Page Limit 4 pages] This section specifically details the offeror’s physical capabilities to accomplish the program plan proposed.

III-1.4.10.10. Appendix B5: Related Past Performance: [Maximum Page Limit 1 page per program, maximum 8 programs]

III-1.4.10.11. Appendix C1: Proposal Cost Summary: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The offeror shall provide a cost summary in a modular fashion by severable tasks. All proposed tasks shall be included. The Government reserves the right to fund none, some, parts of, or all of the proposed tasks. Present the modular cost summary in the format below. The tasks and costs in the template are hypothetical, non-predictive, and for the purpose of example only.

Table 8: Appendix C1: Modular Cost Summary Table WBS Number Task Title Cost

1.1.1 $250,000.00

1.1.1.1 $100,000.00

1.1.1.2 $50,000.00

1.1.1.3 $90,000.00

1.1.1.4 $10,000.00

1.1.2 $250,000.00

1.1.2.1 etc.

1.1.3 etc.

1.1.3.1 etc.

III-1.4.10.12. Appendix C2: Cost Summary by Government Fiscal Year: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The offeror shall provide a cost summary broken out with subtotals for each government fiscal year (GFY) and ending with the total cost for that task. The government fiscal year is any cost occurred between October 1st and September 30th. GFY 2016 starts on October 1st, 2015. The tasks and costs in the template are hypothetical, non-predictive, and for the purpose of example only.

Table 9: Appendix C2: Cost Summary by GFY

WBS Number Task Title GFY 2016 GFY 2017 GFY 2018 etc. Total

1.1.1 $72,393 $47,885 etc. etc. $250,000

1.1.1.1 $35,600 $22,650 etc. etc. $100,000

1.1.1.2 $14,500 $8,560 etc. etc. $50,000

1.1.1.3 $21,050 $12,489 etc. etc. $90,000

1.1.1.4 $1,243 $4,186 etc. etc. $10,000

1.1.2 $84,250 $45,352 etc. etc. $250,000

1.1.2.1 etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

1.1.3 etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

1.1.3.1 etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

III-1.4.10.13. Appendix C3: Cost Summary by cost element: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] offeror shall provide a cost summary for proposed effort/priced CLIN by major cost elements including labor categories by Government Fiscal Year (GFY) [Oct 1 to Sept 30] using the format shown below.

Ensure the totals for any cost elements, which require further breakdown as specified below, agree with the totals reflected in other cost summaries in the proposal. Ensure the types and quantities of all direct charged cost elements (labor, travel, computer, etc.) are consistent with the data provided in the proposal. For cost realism purposes, identify in electronic spreadsheet labor rates by category and GFY as well as all other direct and indirect rates (such as overhead) by GFY. Offerors shall submit all cost spreadsheets in Microsoft Excel 2003 Format or later.

Within the workbook, all spreadsheets, cells and formulas must be visible with no hidden fields. Any cost information submitted must be consistent with the offeror’s approved estimating system and must duplicate the logic and mathematical formulae reflected in the paper copy of the proposal.

Table 10: Appendix C3: Sample Cost Summary Format COST ELEMENT GFY 14 GFY 15 etc. TOTAL Direct Labor Hours & Dollars Engineering Hours Engineering Dollars etc.

Subtotal Direct Labor Hours Subtotal Direct Labor Dollars Overhead Material Subcontracts Other Direct Costs Subtotal G&A Estimated Cost Facility Capital Cost of Money Fee Total

III-1.4.10.14. Appendix C4: Data Rights and exceptions (if any): [Maximum Page Limit one (1) page]

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.10.15. Appendix C5: Government Furnished Equipment or Data: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Description of any GFE required for the proposed program, including written confirmation from the government representative responsible for that material that the hardware/data is available. Each specific item (hardware or data) must be justified to relevancy, suitability and importance to the specific role.

III-1.4.10.16. Appendix C6: Contract exceptions [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Exceptions to the sample Model Contract Terms and Conditions

III-1.4.10.17. Appendix C7: Resource Allocations: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The offeror shall submit a summary table of person loading by WBS level three subdivided by labor type broken out by each month of the proposed program. Do not reflect dollar amounts in this schedule. All hours shown in this submittal must agree with those reflected in the cost summary. The tasks and costs in the template are hypothetical, non-predictive, and for the purpose of example only.

Table 11: Appendix C7: Resource Allocation

WBS/MAJOR TASK Nov 2016 Dec 2016 Jan 2016 etc. TOTAL WBS 1.1.1 (Title) Engineering A – Prime 60 hours 40 hours 30 hours 0 hrs 450 hours Engineering B - 20 hours 20 hours 10 hours 0 hrs 200 hours Program Manager 8 hours 8 hours 8 hours 0 hrs 64 hours etc.

WBS 1.1.2 (Title) Engineering B 150 hours 250 hours 10 hrs 410 hours etc.

WBS 1.2.1 (Title) etc.

Subtotal Engineering A 100 hours 100 hours 100 hrs 300 hours Subtotal Engineering B 200 hours 300 hours 10 hrs 510 hours Total Engineering 300 hours 400 hours 110 hrs 810 hours Total Program Manager

ETC.

Total Direct Labor Hours 300 hours 800 hours 110 hrs 1210 hours

III-1.4.10.18. Appendix C8: Labor Mix Schedule by Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic and in format defined by this BAA Call] The offeror shall submit a summary table of person loading by WBS/Major Task and by labor category or skill mix in the format shown below. These hourly requirements are to include (but separately identify) interdivisional transfer(s) hours. Do not reflect dollar amounts in this schedule. All hours shown in this submittal must agree with those reflected in the cost summary. The tasks and costs in the template are hypothetical, non-predictive, and for the purpose of example only.

Table 12: Appendix C8: Labor Mix Schedule by WBS

WBS/MAJOR TASK GFY 15 GFY 16 etc. TOTAL WBS 1.0 (Title) Engineering A – Prime 50 hours 100 hours 0 hrs 150 hours Engineering A - Interdivisional transfer 50 hours 0 hours 100 hrs 150 hours Engineering B - 50 hours 50 hours 0 hrs 100 hours etc.

WBS 1.1 (Title) Engineering B 150 hours 250 hours 10 hrs 410 hours etc.

WBS 1.2 (Title) etc.

Subtotal Engineering A 100 hours 100 hours 100 hrs 300 hours Subtotal Engineering B 200 hours 300 hours 10 hrs 510 hours Total Engineering 300 hours 400 hours 110 hrs 810 hours

ETC.

Total Direct Labor Hours 300 hours 800 hours 110 hrs 1210 hours

III-1.4.10.19. Appendix C9: Subcontractor plan [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] In accordance with FAR 19.702, a subcontracting plan shall be submitted along with the cost proposals [reference FAR 19.704, DFARS 219.704, and AFFARS 5319.704(a)(1) for subcontracting plan requirements]. Small businesses are exempt from this requirement.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.10.20. Appendix C10: Basis of Estimates for Manpower [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Offerors shall submit a BOE supporting the proposed manpower hours by WBS/Major Task, Subtask (level 3). The BOE shall convey a clear understanding of how the labor was estimated for each task in the SOW. The BOE for labor shall include sufficient detail to identify: what work is being performed, why the offeror believes the proposed person-loading is sufficient, and that the labor mix is appropriate for each task of the SOW. Where it is applicable, historical data for similar tasks shall be identified; if a government contract the Government contract number shall be used, along with any judgment factors that were applied. The applicability of the historical data shall be explained, and all factors shall be defined and justified. Do not reflect dollar amounts in the BOE.

III-1.4.10.21. Appendix C11: Basis of Estimates for Material [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Offerors shall submit a BOE supporting costs of the proposed materials organized by WBS/Major Task, Subtask (level 3). The BOE shall convey a clear understanding of how the materials were estimated for each task in the SOW. The BOE for materials shall include foundation for the types, quantities, and costs of items used. Where it is applicable, historical data for similar tasks shall be identified; if a government contract the Government contract number shall be used, along with any judgment factors that were applied. The applicability of the historical data shall be explained, and all factors shall be defined and justified.

III-1.4.10.22. Appendix C12: Basis of Estimates for Other Direct Costs [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Offerors shall submit a BOE supporting the proposed hours in subcontracts, costs for travel and other direct costs by WBS/Major Task, Subtask (level 3).

The BOE for subcontracts shall include sufficient detail to identify: what work is being performed, why the offeror believes the proposed person-loading is sufficient, and that the labor mix is appropriate for each task of the SOW for each subcontractor. Where it is applicable historical data for similar tasks shall be identified; if a government contract the Government contract number shall be used, along with any judgment factors that were applied. The applicability of the historical data shall be explained, and all factors shall be defined and justified. Travel shall be broken out in all cost types, with a basis of estimate for each type. The number of travelers, purpose related to WBS, location and duration of each trip shall be clearly defined.

III-1.4.10.23. Appendix C13: Abbreviations and Acronyms: [no maximum page limit but material must be on appendix topic] Identify any and all abbreviations and acronyms that are used in the proposal. Items shall be listed in descending alphabetical order and include the full terminology that the abbreviation or acronym stands for. Please limit the use of abbreviations and acronyms to ones in common scientific/engineering use.

BAA-RQR-2014-0002

III-1.4.11. Guidelines for Submission of Other than Cost or Pricing Data: The Contracting Officer has anticipated that Adequate Price Competition does not exist.

Offerors are requested to submit in its proposal information described in FAR 15.403-5, Instructions for Submission of Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data…