Attch_1_Call_1_BAA_SOO_-_MaDMANS_dated_2019.08.19.pdf

BAA – FA8650‐19‐S‐5004

Attachment 1

2019.08.19

CALL- 001 “HEMP SHIELDING FOR MATERIALS

DEVELOPMENT AND MATURATION FOR

APPLICATIONS IN NUCLEAR SYSTEMS

(MADMANS)”

Broad Agency Announcement, Call 001: This is a call to BAA FA8650-19-S- 5004 and the Call is entitled “Hemp Shielding for Materials Development and Maturation for Applications in Nuclear Systems (MaDMANS).” This is a one-step Call. Please refer to BAA FA8650-19-S-5004 for additional information. Items delineated in this document are specific to this Call.

Proposal Due Date and Time: Proposal(s) are due no later than 30 Sept 2019,

3.00 p.m. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH local time, by postal mail or hand delivery only to: Michelle M. Arostegui, Contract Negotiator, AFRL/RXKMC, 2130 Eighth Street, Bldg. 45, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7541.

Award Notices: Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award on or about 17 Oct 2019. 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.

Anticipated Number of Awards: The Air Force anticipates awarding multiple awards for this announcement. However, the Air Force reserves the right to award zero, one, or more contracts for all, some or none of the solicited effort based on the offeror’s ability to perform desired work and funding fluctuations.

This Call for proposals is being issued with Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) FA8650-19-S-5004. Offerors must refer to FA8650-19-S-5004, which must be read in conjunction with this Call for Proposals.

Address technical questions to the Technical POC: For CALL- 001, the Technical POC is Ms. Brittany Campbell, AFRL/RXCC, 2941 Hobson Way, Wright- Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7750, brittany.campbell.4@us.af.mil, (937) 255-8205 or alternatively Mr. Eric Becker, eric.becker@us.af.mil, (937) 255-9818.

Address contracting questions to the Contracting POC: For CALL – 001, the Contracting POC is Michelle M. Arostegui, AFRL/RQKMC, Bldg 45, 2130 8th St., Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7541, michelle.arostegui@us.af.mil, (937) 713-

9889, or alternatively Mary Ann Sharits, AFRL/RXKMC, 2130 8th Street, WPAFB, OH 45433, mary.sharits@us.af.mil, 937-713-9898.

Statement of Objectives:

1.0 Program Goal:

1.1 The goal of this program is to execute and maintain a strong, sustainability-driven Research Development Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) Program for the Air Force (AF).

1.2 All program efforts shall be performed through the use of individual contracts. Associated CDRL Data Items will be identified for each contract.

2.0 SCOPE: The US Air Force needs to be able to respond to any threat at the

CONUS or OCONUS level as needed. Support infrastructure must be able to operate before, during, and after any sort of attack on the surrounding area.

Such demands sets up a need for facilities with strong structural foundations that have radiation and electromagnetic (EM) protections. One of the main areas of shielding for these facilities is against shock wave propagation and electromagnetic pulse (EMP), specifically high altitude EMP (HEMP). The goal of this work is to provide an “all in one” solution with HEMP hardened facilities.

All materials should have the ability to be scalable and suitable for mass production. All models should be readily integratable into an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) industrial design system. This solicitation seeks to help provide the M&P, manufacturing readiness and life modeling knowledge base that is necessary for system designers to make informed decisions.

3.0 TECHNICAL : The Air Force Research Laboratory, Materials & Manufacturing Directorate, AFRL/RX, is soliciting technical and cost proposals to produce low cost, light weight HEMP resistant facility construction materials, retrofit HEMP materials, and enhanced capability panel systems. Testing of HEMP construction materials to MIL-STD 188-125 and/or MIL-STD 2169 would occur in FY21 to FY23, with a full facility demo by the end of FY24. While a design of experiments is normally desired, it is viewed as desirable, but not required in this case. The Customer is looking for results within 2 years, so that would be beyond the scope of this effort.

Manufacturing readiness is primarily focused on improving the understanding and control of processes associated with the construction of support infrastructure. Depending on the construction method selected, the overall performance of these materials and components is highly sensitive to variations inherent in the construction steps required for manufacture

The application of an integrated computational materials engineering (ICME) framework with processing data and material properties to predict material behavior or lifing is desired to enhance materials optimization and performance prediction during design. Demonstration of this ICME framework is highly recommended.

4.0 Statement of Objective/Needs:

i. HEMP Shielding Concretes for Facilities

a. Concrete composites for HEMP shielding of fixed support facilities have expressed and written MIL STDs that they must adhere to. MIL-STD 188- 125-1/2 lays out the shielding levels in dB that must be achieved across the EM spectrum from both the electric plane wave and the magnetic wave.

Figure 1 below shows the Reference 1 frequency spectrum and shielding effectiveness levels that must be achieved along with the 20 dB margin desired. Reference 1 also discusses testing of penetrations that are found in a shielded enclosure and how to maintain continuity through waveguide below cutoffs (wbc), conductive sealants, shielded doors and windows, and other piping or conduit. This testing and sealing of penetrations must be adhered to in order to maintain conformance with 188-125. Any concrete material developed in this program must be poured or built into a demo facility, using the same techniques as actual production, and be tested to MIL-STD 188-125-1/2 to margin specifications. The material alone can be tested in a representative 2 foot by 2 foot panel to determine shielding effectiveness but in order to meet final certification a demo facility with proper techniques must be evaluated as well given that seals, penetrations, and points of entry are specifically called out in the standard. Currently demos could be tested at Pax River, WSMR, SARA, or Little Mountain for certification while other smaller facilities can be used to test samples for initial verification of shielding.

Figure 1: MIL-STD 188-125-1 shielding effectiveness versus frequency for an E3 HEMP event. The margin is an additional 20 dB above the specified SE line. (From Reference 1. Department of Defense Interface Standard, High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) Protection for

Ground-Based C4i Facilities Performing Critical, Time-Urgent Missions, MIL-STD-188-125-1/2.)

b. In addition to MIL-STD 188-125 systems should also be able to pass MIL- STD 2169C. This standard specifies the HEMP threat levels likely to be seen.

Testing against this waveform helps to ensure that electronics sealed within a shielded structure will survive in an “operate through” or “store through” event. The actual waveform is classified as it is based upon intel threat assessments but focuses on the rise-time, frequency, and pulse duration as would be seen by the system. Since these support facilities have communication and electronic systems inside, meeting 2169 ensures that not only will the electronics “store through” as detailed in 188-125 but also operate through.

c. Structural requirements would be determined by Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center (IMSC) for facility installations. The final weight requirements, rigidity, flexibility, tensile and compression strengths would all be set based upon facility design and location. Data from the nuclear power industry on concrete systems can help with radiation shielding possibilities and environmental impacts from adding various particulates into concrete composite mixtures. Things like moisture retention, corrosion, erosion, air entrainment, and void placement are all important for concrete aging and viability. The nuclear power industry has relied on concrete mixtures certified for nuclear applications for decades and can provide initial criteria for concrete development. Aging and environmental studies would need to be performed on developed materials depending upon the final location of facilities; some are in hot and humid locations while others would be cold and dry. The difference of these locations can create different testing requirements and age viability.

d. Requirements for manufacturing viability will be considered, such as pros/cons with the processing method (direct pour vs. concrete construction blocks stacking/assembly). Each processing method requires different construction and manufacturing techniques. Choice of technique could depend on the mechanical strength needs and the facility location. Emphasis will be placed on ensuring that the concrete formulations can be produced in small and large batches, is reproducible, and that it works with one or both of these standard construction techniques to ensure that materials are commercially viable.

ii. Retrofit HEMP and Enhanced Capability Systems

a. HEMP shielding requirements will fall under the same MIL STD 188-125 as above following procedures and shielding effectiveness seen above in Figure

1. The only change in requirement is to follow section 2 rather than 1 for “mobile” facilities rather than “fixed” facilities. The same MIL-STD 2169C waveform will determine the “operate through” capability of the panels.

b. Overall these requirements mirror TEMPEST and EMSEC requirements already established, but the exact lines for EM shielding and vibration/sound proofing will be distinguished by the users.

iii. All solutions should have the ability to be scalable and suitable for mass production. Improved understanding of the relationship between process variability and product performance is a necessity. Tasks that would be identified as manufacturing readiness would meet the following objectives:

a. Development of an industry-trusted knowledge base defining the relationship between manufacturing process variability and component performance and cost for structural support facilities.

b. Identification of processing parameters that have the greatest level of influence on variability in the character of the manufactured material and its properties.

c. Identification and prioritization of innovative real-time closed loop process instrumentation & control strategies that can reduce process variability, lower manufacturing cost, and shorten processing cycle times.

d. Creation of material process models to inform manufacturing.

e. Identification of further studies for improved fundamental understanding of critical processing parameters to include more complete modeling efforts.

f. Any other development that would increase production, reduce cost, or decrease lead time.

5.0 Technology Maturation Approach:

i. HEMP Shielding Concretes for Facilities: Improvements will be formulated and tested to meet MIL-STD 188-125. The concrete material alone can be tested in a 2 ft. by 2 ft. section to determine shielding effectiveness, but in order to meet final certification a demo facility (nominal 6 ft. by 6 ft. by 6 ft.) must be evaluated. Any concrete material developed in this program must be poured or built into a demo facility, using the same techniques as actual production, and be tested to MIL-STD 188-125 and MIL-STD 2169C. Emphasis should be placed on ensuring that the concrete formulations can be reproduced in small and large batches, verifying variability (or the lack of it), and that it is compatible with standard construction techniques to ensure that materials are commercially viable. Particular government data rights will be determined on a case by case basis for each contract.

ii. Retrofit HEMP and Enhanced Capability Panel Systems: Improvements will be formulated and tested to meet MIL-STD 188-125. The main concept is to integrate previously designed HEMP/EM protection materials with commercially available panel designs for internal applications so structural/mechanical viability is already met. The only additional requirement is the viability of integration of the protection materials into the previous panel construction and fabrication. As in 4.i., a demo facility will be tested to the same MIL-STDs and data rights established by contract.

6.0 Demonstration Approach: MaDMANS is a program designed to meet the support infrastructure needs for the Air Force. Assuring our systems meet, or exceed, the requirements of MIL-STD 188-125-1/2 and MIL-STD 2169C is paramount. Facility attenuation of an electromagnetic pulse and electronic survival against an electromagnetic pulse are both governed by the MIL-STDs mentioned above. Testing to these standards, using representatively sized components (nominal 2 ft. by 2 ft. concrete or panel specimens) is the first step to meeting the requirements. Eventually, a demo facility (nominal 6 ft. by 6 ft.

by 6 ft.) with full enclosure doors and cutouts, built with proper techniques, will be required to be tested to MIL-STD 188-125-1/2 in order to meet final certification.

All modeling tools must be readily integratable into the industrial design system of the OEMs. The application of an ICME framework is required to enhance materials optimization and performance prediction during design. The models may be empirical, analytical, numerical, or a combination, but should, to the degree possible, reflect the underlying physics and chemistry of the system.

The model or modeling architecture should be flexible enough to incorporate new materials and processes in the future. Any processing models should enable the prediction of physical and mechanical properties of produced structural materials. The feasibility of any model should be demonstrated, validated, and verified for at least one relevant material system and process.

Acquired data and resulting material models should be adequate to form a M&P knowledge base to reduce risks. A Data Management Plan shall be included as part of the proposal.

Since the evaluation criteria includes the ability of AFRL/RX to transition the technology to a government application, it is essential that offerors identify in their proposal any pre-existing technical data and/or commercial/non-commercial software that they will deliver to the Government with less than unlimited rights.

Proposals must provide technical and funding details for the work proposed. If the offeror includes manufacturing readiness tasks as a part of a proposal or as the whole proposal, the individual tasks must be identified as manufacturing readiness specific tasks.

A schedule with significant milestones shall be included that will allow the progression of the proposed technology to TRL of 5/6 to be tracked. The timeline should include technical milestones as well as a funding breakout by task and time through the duration of the proposed effort. The rationale for the proposed technology shall be clearly stated in the context of its intended application.

7.0 System Safety:

a) The successful offeror shall comply with all federal, state, and local safety and environmental regulations.

b) This Program requires that the offeror perform a safety assessment per the safety policies of the organization and applicable regulations and laws. The successful cognizant safety authority at the offeror shall accept safety risk for any experimental efforts performed in the offeror's facility according to the offeror's specific safety policies. The offeror shall notify the AFRL TPOC that the safety assessment has been completed according to organizational policies and applicable regulations.

8.0 Environmental Protection. Throughout the period of performance for this effort, the Contractor shall:

a) Assess the environmental consequences of R&D testing. If the testing of any technology has adverse environmental effects, the Contractor shall develop suggestions for making the testing environmentally acceptable and indicate what impact the suggestions will have on the testing; and

b) Document the findings.

9.0 OPSEC:

Contractor will be required to participate in all activities associated with the disciplines of the organization’s Industrial Security, Information Security, Personnel Security, Operations Security (OPSEC), and Antiterrorism, following appropriate measures as required to reduce program vulnerability from successful adversary collection, exploitation of critical information, and violations of export control requirements. The Contractor will seek guidance provided by AFRL/RX Security as needed. Any potential critical program information (CPI) generated as part of this effort will be reviewed to determine the need for a program protection plan.

10.0 Deliverable Items:

a. The deliverable items for this Call include the following data items:

A001 – Final Report A002 – Funds & Man Hour Expenditure Report A003 – Scientific & Technical Reports A004 – Contract Funds Status Report A005 – Status Report A006 – Presentation Material A007 – Material and Processing Digital Data Package (MPDDP)

b. Hardware: All hardware deliverables should be clearly stated in the offeror’s proposal.

11.0 Schedule/Funding:

a. a. Overall Effort: The period of performance for the technical effort will be twenty-four (24) months plus an additional three (3) months for preparation, review, revision, and submittal of the approved final technical report.

b. Funding: Funding for Call 001 is $2,205,000. Awards are anticipated to range from $400,000 to $1,000,000. 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.