FINAL.SOLICIATION..pdf

HSHQDC-14-R-B0006 BAA14-101

Radiation Awareness and Interdiction Network

(RAIN)

Advanced Technology Demonstration

Broad Agency Announcement No.

BAA14-101

for the

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

(DNDO)

Transformational and Applied Research Directorate

(TAR)

Table of Contents 1 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Global Nuclear Detection Architecture

1.3 Strategic Approach

1.4 Scope and Funding

2 Research Opportunity Description

2.1 Program Goals

2.2 Performance Requirements

2.3 Environmental and Source Specifications

2.4 General Requirements

3 Management Approach

3.1 Program Milestone Structure

3.2 Deliverables and Review Cycles

4 Procurement Overview

4.1 Eligible Offerors

4.2 Review and Evaluation Process

4.3 Award Instruments

4.4 Award Schedule

4.5 Period of Performance

5 Proposal Preparation and Content

5.1 Full Proposal Preparation: Format and Content

6 Award Administrative Information

6.1 Administrative Requirements

6.2 Information for Proposal Respondents

6.3 Other Information

7 Evaluation and Evaluation Criteria

7.1 Criterion I: Transformational Impact

7.2 Criterion II: Technical Approach

7.3 Criterion III: Capability and Experience

7.4 Criterion IV: Management Approach

7.5 Criterion V: Cost/Price Realism and Reasonableness

7.6 Evaluation Panel and Process

8 Instructions to Offerors

8.1 Submission of Full Proposals

8.2 Questions

8.3 Proprietary Protection

8.4 Objections

8.5 Central Contractor Registration:

8.6 Representations and Certifications

8.7 Safety Act

8.8 Security Classification/ Classified Full Proposals

9 Attachments

9.1 Full Proposal Cover Sheet

9.2 Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Descriptions

9.3 Quad Chart Template

Appendix A: General Venue Descriptions A-1 Introduction A-2 Highway A-3 On-ramp A-4 System Generalizability A-5 Highway Level of Service (LOS) Descriptions

Appendix B: Information about Threat and Nuisance Sources B-1 Introduction B-2 Threat Sources B-3 Nuisance Sources

Appendix C: Software Options for Radionuclide Identification C-1 Introduction C-2 Options

C-3 RNAK

C-4 Disclaimer

1 INTRODUCTION

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016. This announcement is seeking proposals for a new capability for high-confidence, high-precision detection, identification and localization of vehicle-borne radiological or nuclear threats in free-flowing traffic.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), will not issue paper copies of this announcement. DNDO reserves the right to select for award and fund all, some, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation. No funding for direct reimbursement of proposal development costs will be allowed. Technical and cost proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will not be returned.

However, depending on the markings on the proposal, DNDO will adhere to FAR policy on handling source selection information and proprietary proposals. It is the policy of DNDO to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose their contents only for the purposes of evaluation.

Multiple awards are anticipated to be issued through this BAA and will be based on an assessment of the overall best value to the Government. Awards will be made based upon the proposal evaluation, funds availability, and other programmatic considerations. The award schedule table for this BAA is as follows:

DATE EVENT

11 FEB 2014

TUESDAY

Request for Information (RFI) Posted

24 FEB 2014

MONDAY

RFI Response Submission Deadline, 4:00 PM ET

28 MAR 2014

THURSDAY Pre-solicitation Posted

31 MAR 2014

FRIDAY Solicitation Posted

11 APR 2014

FRIDAY

Questions Submission Deadline for Full Proposals, 12:00 PM (noon) ET

18 APR 2014

THURSDAY

DNDO: Responses Posted to Questions for Full Proposals

15 MAY 2014

TUESDAY

Full Proposal Submission Deadline, 4:00 PM ET

AUG 2014 Anticipated Award Date

Background The Department of Homeland Security has been tasked to ensure that the United States remains safe from the illicit importation, development, or procurement of a nuclear or radiological device. In recognition of the catastrophic risk posed by the use of a nuclear weapon within the United States, DHS has integrated all nuclear detection research, development, testing, evaluation, acquisition, and operational support into a single office: the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. DNDO develops the global nuclear detection architecture; conducts research and development; and acquires and supports the deployment of domestic nuclear detection and forensics systems.

The Transformational and Applied Research (TAR) Directorate was established within DNDO to conduct, support, coordinate, and encourage an aggressive transformational program of research and development (R&D) that will dramatically improve national capabilities to detect and report attempts to import or transport a nuclear device, Special Nuclear Material (SNM), or radiological materials outside of regulatory control. Priority is placed on R&D that has the greatest potential for addressing needs or weaknesses in the global nuclear detection architecture (GNDA). TAR will undertake those efforts that dramatically improve performance and reduce technical, performance, and/or cost risks in achieving DNDO mission objectives.

DNDO coordinates and consults with other Government agencies (intra-DHS, Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DoD), etc.) to reduce duplication of effort, leverage related R&D efforts, and encourage collaboration across the R&D community.

Global Nuclear Detection Architecture The Global Nuclear Detection Architecture (GNDA) is a worldwide network of sensors, telecommunications, and personnel, with the supporting information exchanges, programs, and protocols that serve to detect, analyze, and report on nuclear and radiological materials that are out of regulatory control. The term “out of regulatory control” refers to materials that are being imported, possessed, stored, transported, developed, or used without authorization by the appropriate regulatory authority, either inadvertently or deliberately.

Furthermore, the GNDA:

• is global in that it includes both U.S. systems and those of other countries, as well as the sharing of information among those systems;

• targets illicit trafficking and unauthorized use of nuclear and radiological material to help protect against both nuclear and radiological terrorism;

• detects by way of passive and active detection equipment as well as by non-technical means, such as ongoing law-enforcement information or observations, public and other government departments and agencies’ observations, or reporting of suspicious behavior;

and

• represents the architecture or structure which reflects the fully coordinated approach to detect, analyze, and promptly report nuclear and radiological threats.

DNDO has identified a number of significant, long-term technical challenges in the deployment and operation of an effective architecture. Many of these challenges cannot be easily overcome with existing or near-term technology developments. They include:

• Cost effective equipment with sufficient technical performance to ensure widespread deployment;

• Enhanced wide area search and screening capabilities in a variety of scenarios to include urban and highly cluttered environments;

• Capabilities that can be deployed along challenging GNDA pathways, to include scanning of general aviation and small maritime vessels, and searching for nuclear threats along our borders, between ports of entry; and finally,

• The ability to detect nuclear threats, even when they are heavily shielded.

Technological solutions to these challenges and many others will require sustained, long-term support to develop the fundamental scientific and technological foundation required to make such detection capabilities effective and affordable. Major advances in capabilities that support the GNDA can be achieved through focused research in areas ranging from the sensor materials, front-end-electronics, advanced algorithms, modeling, sensor fusion and other research supporting development of passive, active, and ancillary detection systems. Advances in one or more of these areas in-turn can provide new and improved capabilities for screening, scanning or searching for nuclear and radiological materials of concern, improved identification of these materials and reduced or simplified operations for end-users. The many challenges in developing the GNDA illustrate the need for a well-supported transformational and applied research program to fully explore the limits and potential of physics, engineering, mathematics and computation to counter the radiological and nuclear threat.

Strategic Approach The DNDO approach to transformational and applied research is intended to stimulate the R&D community in academia, private industry, non-profit organizations, federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs), university affiliated research centers (UARCs) and other federally-funded government activities. To this end, the overall TAR research and development program is organized into four primary initiatives: Advanced Technology Demonstrations, Exploratory Research, an Academic Research Initiative, and Small Business Innovation Research. A description of each of these follows:

• Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs) are the final stage of development and evaluation of proven technology in the DNDO Transformational Research program. The purpose of an ATD is to develop a mature prototype capable of providing reliable performance measurements in a challenging and realistic, albeit simulated, operational environment, replicating the concept of operations and employment relevant to the technologies intended use. These data will be analyzed to formulate recommendations on technology maturity, support a cost-benefit analysis of the technology and aid in determining next-steps in development to include potential commercial system development and acquisition. The ATD may encompass a demonstration of the technology in an actual operational environment under controlled conditions to further refine concepts of operations and understand technology performance.

The present BAA covers only the RAIN ATD. However, the following initiatives may be announced as separate solicitation announcements. The following is for informational purposes only. Full proposals for Exploratory Research, the Academic Research Initiative and Small Business Innovation Research must await the issuance of their respective solicitation announcements.

• Exploratory Research (ER) – is intended to transform the basic building blocks of nuclear detection technology and supporting fields. Innovative concepts that successfully complete the exploratory R&D phases are typically brought to a Proof-of-Concept (PoC) demonstration – a minimal, but functional, realization of the technology for testing and demonstration, typically in a laboratory environment.

• The Academic Research Initiative (ARI) is intended to support a research community in nuclear detection and related sciences within academia that will conduct fundamental and basic research in nuclear detection and related fields. The ARI is also intended to address the human capital crisis in scientists and engineers who can support the next generation of researchers in these fields. These research grants cover a wide breadth of research activities, emphasize collaborative and interdisciplinary approaches to research, and encourage robust student engagement at both the graduate and undergraduate levels.

Successful ARI research endeavors may support exploratory research efforts and small business research projects.

• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program supports technological innovation that can lead to rapid prototyping and commercialization of concepts by small businesses, to include socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns.

Scope and Funding DNDO anticipates making multiple awards under this BAA. DNDO reserves the right to fund all, parts, or none of the full proposals received and will fund awards by phases as options under selected efforts. Total funding for this BAA in FY14 is anticipated to be $3.0M with additional funding potentially available in later years. The actual number and size of awards under this BAA will be at the discretion of DNDO, based on the criteria listed in Section 7, and the availability of funds.

2 RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

DNDO is seeking proposals under this BAA for the performance of research, development, design, characterization and demonstration of a node of a Radiation Awareness and Interdiction Network (RAIN) system. A RAIN system would be composed of many potential nodes that would be deployed around a region, and provide actionable information on whether radiological or nuclear threat materials are entering or departing that region. A conceptual view of the RAIN system and nodes is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1: RAIN system and node concept. The RAIN system would provide actionable information to an operations center on nuclear or radiological threat materials that enter or depart a monitored region via car, truck or other conveyance. Many RAIN nodes would constitute a RAIN system.

DNDO is seeking innovative research and development of a node in the RAIN system, resulting in the integration of radiation detectors, ancillary sensors, image capture systems, and automated analysis and data communications capabilities to detect, localize and provide actionable information on a specific conveyance carrying radiological or nuclear threat materials. The ATD will demonstrate the ability to:

• Detect radioactive sources in vehicles as they approach (or depart) a region

• Discriminate between benign sources, such as medical patients and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM), and threat sources which could be used in a radiological dispersal device or nuclear weapon

• Identify the vehicle carrying the source or a small set of suspect vehicles containing the source carrier

• Transmit timely and actionable information, to include but not limited to vehicle license plate, to a law enforcement operations center to support alarm adjudication and threat interdiction prior to the threat reaching the protected region

To be practical in a comprehensive and sustainable system deployment, the RAIN concept must also:

• Have minimal impact on the flow of traffic and commerce

• Have a system architecture emphasizing flexibility, agility, simplicity and robustness for wide-ranging road, traffic and environmental conditions

• Have a reasonable cost to procure, deploy, and operate (including alarm adjudication)

• Take into consideration the safeguarding of Protected Personal Information The RAIN ATD seeks to demonstrate individual nodes that would be suitable for the formation of an overall large area, layered detection network. Note that the node is only responsible for monitoring a single location and reporting information to a designated operations center. Other factors, such as architecture design and inter-node communications will not be addressed through this BAA.

The wide range of road types and traffic conditions in a typical urban environment requires technical approaches based on flexible/agile and modular designs, which are easily adapted to the unique characteristics and constraints of a given roadway location. For instance, the available mounting positions for individual sensor modules will depend upon the existing site infrastructure. Because cost is a major impediment to achieving large area coverage, solutions should utilize economical hardware and software components with commercial-over-the-shelf (COTS), government-over-the-shelf (GOTS) or near-COTS/GOTS maturity. The ATD will focus research and development on integration of these components and implementation of advanced algorithms for threat detection and localization.

Program Goals Following the phased approach outlined in Section 3.1, this BAA will culminate in the fabrication and subsequent Technology Demonstration and Characterization (TD&C) of a RAIN performance test unit (PTU), representing a single node of the RAIN system, with an anticipated technology readiness level1 (TRL) of 7. The PTU will consist of the sensors, signal processing, analysis software, communications, and other components of the node that are required to

1 See Section 9.2 monitor a designated section of roadway. PTU performance will be systematically assessed by DNDO, in conjunction with the contractor, in a controlled environment to produce scalable performance data to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the technology and aid in determining the next-steps in development, including transition to commercialization and acquisition. The final phase of the ATD is intended to consist of an operational characterization and demonstration in a major urban area.

This BAA is directed towards two classes of roadways whose features are representative of those generally found along the approaches to (or from) a monitored region: highways and on-ramps.

These are described in more detail in Section 2.3 and Appendix A. Submissions should specify which roadway class is addressed by the proposed solution or describe how the proposed solution is capable of addressing both classes. The performance requirements and their thresholds and objectives for the two roadway classes, related traffic conditions, and other technical stipulations and constraints are described in the following sections.

Performance Requirements The key performance requirements of the RAIN ATD are separated according to the two roadway classes.

The Offeror must show that the proposed technical approach meets or exceeds the performance thresholds (Table 1) under the specified source and traffic threshold conditions (

Table 3). The threshold value represents the minimum acceptable performance level of the PTU.

The objective values are the desired performance of the PTU, and represent the performance requirements that a to-be-fielded capability should be able to achieve. The Offeror should seek to achieve as many of the objective requirements as possible in their proposed designs.

The required threat detection and classification probabilities (P1 and P2) must be demonstrated for a range of shielded threat sources. Also, the required false positive rate (P3) must be demonstrated in the context of a population of non-threat nuisance sources, including medical isotopes and naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). Threat and nuisance sources and shielding configurations are described in Appendix B. When a threat source is detected, the PTU is required to identify which vehicle on the roadway is carrying the source. In some configurations and traffic conditions, correct and unambiguous identification of the source carrying vehicle will be a challenge. When this occurs, the PTU will report a limited set of suspect vehicles (P4) likely to contain the actual source carrier (P5).

Table 1: RAIN performance requirements for the highway and on-ramp roadway classes

Highway On-ramp

Requirement Threshold Objective Threshold Objective

[P1] Probability of detecting minimum threat source strength*

0.95 0.99

Requirement Threshold Objective Threshold Objective

[P2] Probability of correctly classifying threat nuclide detected at the minimum threat source strength

0.9 0.95

[P3] Probability of false positive: allowable error rate for identification of a threat nuclide when none is present (either due to false alarms from background or from NORM and medical sources**)

<1/25,000 encountered vehicles

<1/1,000,000 encountered vehicles

<1/25,000 encountered vehicles

<1/1,000,000 encountered vehicles

[P4] Suspect vehicle set size: maximum number of vehicles allowed in suspect set

1 vehicle ≥ 90% of time;

2-5 vehicles ≤ 10% of time

1 vehicle ≥ 95% of time;

2-3 vehicles ≤ 5% of time

1 vehicle ≥ 95% of time;

2-3 vehicles ≤ 5% of time

1 vehicle ≥ 95% of time;

2 vehicles ≤ 5% of time

[P5] Probability that suspect set contains threat vehicle

0.95 0.99

[P6] Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) Accuracy

0.999 Image Capture + 0.99 Overall Plate Accuracy

*Minimum threat source intensities are defined by T1 in

Table 3

**Typical nuisance source populations are described in Appendix B

Table 2: RAIN PTU cost requirements

Requirement Threshold Objective Threshold Objective

[C1] Maximum PTU cost (assume production of 20 units)

$350k / lane $200k / lane $270k / lane $120k / lane

[C2] Annual maintenance cost $65k $36k $50k $20k

Environmental and Source Specifications The PTU performance requirements must be achievable while encountering real world traffic conditions and for relevant threat signatures, which are bounded by Table 3. Proposals should describe the expected performance of the PTU for the most difficult set of conditions encompassed by the threshold requirements. However, proposals should also indicate which objectives are attainable with the proposed PTU design and Offerors should understand that the TD&C intends to assess the PTU performance across a full range of conditions.

Table 3: Specifications of the RAIN source set and traffic conditions

Specification Threshold Objective Threshold Objective

Threat Source Specifications

[T1] Minimum source strength: the minimum detectable emission at surface of source object* (gammas/second)

6.0×106 3.0×106

(2.0×107 for 90Sr/90Y)

6.0×106 3.0×106

(2.0×107 for 90Sr/90Y)

[T2] Height of source above roadway**

0.5-1.5 m 0.5-2.5 m 0.5-1.5 m 0.5-2.5 m

[T3] Location of source within lane** within ± 1.0 m of center

No constraints within ± 1.0 m of center

No constraints

[T4] Maximum degree source asymmetry (min. to max. ratio of angular flux)

0.8 0.2 0.8 0.2

[T5] Threat nuclides of interest

137Cs, 192Ir, 60Co, 75Se, reactor grade Pu, and weapons grade Pu

Threshold nuclides plus 90Sr/90Y, 169Yb, 226Ra, HEU, DU, and (α,n) source such as Am/Be

137Cs, 192Ir, 60Co, 75Se, reactor grade Pu, and weapons grade Pu

Threshold nuclides plus 90Sr/90Y, 169Yb, 226Ra, HEU, DU, and (α,n) source such as Am/Be

Environment Specifications

[E1] Maximum vehicle speed (mph) 50 70 40 50

[E2] Maximum no.

lanes (std. width) 3 5 1 2

[E3] Maximum vehicle density (vehicles/mile/lane)

42 110 64 160

Specification Threshold Objective Threshold Objective

[E4] Weather conditions

Clear Clear/Rain/Snow/Fog Clear Clear/Rain/Snow/Fog

[E5] Time of day Day and Night (24 hours)

*“Source object” would include shielding. A range of source activity and shielding combinations with this emission rate are provided in Appendix B.

**Performance estimates should be based on the offsets that represent the most challenging case for the proposed detector placements.

Specific demonstration and characterization locations will be chosen in the latter phases of the ATD. These locations may impose a particular set of constraints on how the PTU is setup and configured. However, there are some common guidelines that the proposed technical approaches and designs should adhere to. For instance, while taking advantage of available structures such as light poles and overhead gantries is encouraged, significant re-engineering of the roadway environment is prohibited. For example, imbedding system components in a roadway is not permitted. Systems must maintain minimal clearance on the side and above the road and must not interfere with other sensor equipment, such as E-ZPass® readers and speed cameras. More details about the potential roadway environments are provided in Appendix A of the BAA.

General Requirements In addition to the requirements described in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, there are several general requirements relating to the functional aspects of the PTU that must be satisfied as a condition for participating in the TD&C.

• Unattended operation for a sustained period (12 hours) without human intervention while maintaining system stability (energy calibration, etc.)

• Ability to switch between generator and shore power (not to exceed 400 Watts per monitored lane)

Refer to Appendix A for additional suitability factors. Those requirements related to data collection and processing are described in the following subsections.

2.1.1 Data Aggregation

The characterization methodology of the ATD program requires full and open access to the data generated by the PTU. This entails the storage and retrieval of data at multiple levels within the system architecture and encompassing raw sensor data and processed outputs. These will support the timely validation of data quality and the subsequent analyses of system and subsystem behavior. Data storage must be logical, transparent, and contain sufficient metadata for an analyst to quickly retrieve desired information, such as archived radiation spectra and ancillary sensor data streams, on demand. All data generated by the system must be accessible externally by remote commands through wired and wireless network interfaces. These interfaces may also serve to issue control messages, such as start and stop commands, to the data acquisition controller. Specifications for the network layers will be determined at a later phase in the ATD.

Additionally, the PTU is required to produce and communicate alarm messages containing actionable information to aid in the interdiction of suspect vehicles. Alarm messages must be generated and available within a few seconds of the vehicle passing a RAIN node. Alarm messages shall include spectra in the ANSI N42.42 format and the following types of additional information:

• Dose rate of the detected source

• Alarm significance, location, and time

• Radioisotope identification and confidence, (with associated spectral data)

• Identification of suspect vehicle(s) (license plate number at a minimum; photographic or video evidence is also beneficial)

Along with the alarm messages, the PTU will generate system health and diagnostic messages on a periodic basis or when queried remotely. These messages will inform the operations center of the functional state of the radiation detectors and ancillary sensors. Additional data aggregation requirements may be specified by DNDO following contract award. Similarly, a list of preferred ALPR vendors will be provided at that time.

2.1.2 Software Replay and Signal Injection

An integral part of the RAIN ATD research and development process will be the development and utilization of software tools for simulating the data processing routines that are executed during the operation of the PTU. The basic function of the replay code is to ingest previously generated sensor data and produce a new set of output files from the algorithms with the purpose of exploring a much larger parameter space than would be possible with only direct experimentation. This is achieved by executing the replay under modified conditions; either by adjusting the algorithms themselves or through manipulation of the input sensor data. Example features include the ability to alter ancillary sensor data (.e.g. vehicle tracking information) or the ability to inject a threat source signature into radiation sensor readings. Signal injection requires accurate detector response modeling, at each time step, given the position and emission characteristics of the source. Replay codes are expected to operate in a batch processing mode at speeds faster than real-time acquisition. Although the contractor is expected to be the sole developer and main user of the replay software, the replay scenarios will be designed according to guidance and input from the government’s Technical Support Team (TST). More details about this process will be provided following the award of contracts.

3 MANAGEMENT APPROACH

Program Milestone Structure The Program will be structured using the sequential development phases discussed below.

• Phase I (5 months): Conduct the necessary research and development (experiments, modeling, analysis, and trade studies) and design to validate a PTU device design choice, culminating in a Preliminary Design Review (PDR).

• Phase II (7 months): Following a successful PDR, conduct the necessary engineering and development to present a Critical Design Review (CDR) and report.

Coordinate with DNDO to draft a Vendor Development Test (VDT) Plan.

• Phase III (12 months): Following a successful CDR, proceed to final development, fabrication, and assembly of the PTU. Execute the VDT Plan in accordance with DNDO guidance, culminating in a CRR.

• Phase IVa (6 months): Following a successful CRR, support TD&C of the PTU device by DNDO in a realistic albeit simulated environment. Assist DNDO in preliminary data analyses.

• Phase IVb (5 months): Based on initial findings from Phase IVa, perform defined upgrades to the PTU as approved by DNDO to support characterization in an operationally relevant environment, culminating in an Operational CRR (OCRR) for Phase V.

• Phase V (6 months): Following a successful OCRR for Phase V, support operational characterization and evaluation of the same or revised PTU in an operationally relevant environment.

Offerors may propose starting in a later phase than Phase I, or with different Phase durations.

However, such revisions to the above milestone structure must be strongly supported and justified. Further, Offerors must plan for a CRR milestone (at the end of Phase III) no more than 26 months from program start.

Offerors shall plan for sufficient subsystem, system, and performance testing in Phase III to demonstrate the technology readiness to justify proceeding to the TD&C. This testing will be clearly defined and described in a vendor development test (VDT) plan which will be developed in coordination with DNDO. This document will include all methods of test, measures of effectiveness and performance, as well as data output elements and software replay functionality necessary to convince the government team that the Offeror is prepared and the system is capable of participating in the TD&C. More details regarding the structure and content of this document will be provided following contract award. DNDO reserves the right to augment any vendor testing with additional tests before proceeding to TD&C.

Details of the actual TD&C phase (phase IV) will be developed by DNDO in consultation with the selected contractors and agencies in advance of characterization. The goal of these activities will be to fully characterize the PTU system and algorithms to understand the merits and limitations of the technical approach chosen and the subsequent RAIN node produced for the program. For planning purposes, phase IVa shall have a six (6)-month duration and should assume two (2) months of direct support to the DNDO data collection activities and four (4) months for preliminary analyses. Vendors will have an opportunity to make improvements to their PTU at the beginning of Phase IVb based on initial findings from the TD&C and with approval from DNDO. Phase IVb would include two to three months of these revisions (particularly to software and algorithms), and (3) months final data collection and analysis. Note that Phase IV may likely require relocating the PTU from the vendor development site to a characterization site of the government’s choosing.

Phase V shall have a six (6)-month duration and should assume three (3) months of direct support to the operational characterization activity and three (3) months of minimal support. At the beginning of this phase, the PTU will be relocated from the government characterization site to the operational environment which, for planning purposes, is assumed to be a major metropolis near the East Coast.

Details will be finalized in conjunction with the readiness review prior to each characterization event. The Offeror shall task and include the cost of their technical support for Phase IV and V.

This will include shipment of the PTU to the government characterization site and operational evaluation site, maintenance of the PTU throughout characterization and evaluation, and any other costs relevant to preparing the system for characterization and evaluation.

Deliverables and Review Cycles The number and types of reviews and deliverables will be specified in the award document, but is anticipated to include the items described in this section. The reports shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the award document and mutually agreed on before award. A Final Report that summarizes the project and tasks will be required at the conclusion of the performance period for the award. All reports, briefings, and other documents described below shall be electronically submitted to both the DNDO Program Manager (PM) and the DHS Contracting Officer.

The following items are anticipated deliverables for each selected effort:

3.1.1 Project Plan, Milestones and Schedule

The project plan includes a task and event-driven plan that documents the significant activities and accomplishments necessary to complete each phase of the project, with greatest detail provided for the initial phase of the effort. The plan should include major milestones for each phase that can be used to assess research progress, and potentially as go/no-go criteria for latter phases of the effort. The plan also includes a detailed spend plan for all tasks necessary to complete the work. The project plan, milestones and schedule should be delivered by the kickoff event for the effort following contract award.

3.1.2 Quad Chart and/or Summaries

Quad charts are one page documents that provide a very concise summary of the overall effort and are generally updated annually or when significant changes occur within an effort. The quad chart should include a picture, graphic or artist’s conception of the effort in the top left, a summary of technical approach and risks in the bottom left, a summary of relevance and goals on the top right, and a summary of schedule, budget and team in the bottom right. A template is provided in Section 9.3. The project summaries are one or two page narratives that are usually used to communicate the nature, scope and impact of a research effort to persons or audiences internal or external to DNDO. A specific template will be provided for any required project summary. The summary should not contain proprietary information.

3.1.3 Monthly Progress Report (MR)

Brief narrative reports shall be submitted within two weeks after the last day of each month.

These reports will include:

• A summary of the previous month’s activity,

• Progress achieved against planned goals and milestones,

• A summary of technical challenges and risks, and risk mitigation strategies (as necessary)

• Details of research planned for the next month,

• An account of all funds expended by task to date,

• A summary of contract schedule status relative to baseline project plan and schedule, and

• Any additional information required by the DNDO Program Manager.

Monthly reports should generally follow a standardized template format that will be provided by

DNDO.

3.1.4 Performance Reviews

Performance Reviews (PRs) will be held every three to six months or as needed depending on the project risk and duration. A kickoff meeting will take the place of the initial PR, and shall be held within six (6) weeks after contract or grant award. The PR briefing is due one week prior to the PR, for which a suggested presentation outline will be provided by DNDO. A PR briefing will be comprehensive in nature and must include, where appropriate:

• Review of the prior quarter’s (or period since the last review’s) activity,

• Review of the overall technical progress,

• A summary of technical challenges and risks, and risk mitigation strategies,

• A comprehensive account of all funds expended by task to date,

• Explicit plans and planned accomplishments for the next quarter

• A summary of contract schedule status relative to baseline project plan, milestones and schedule, to include any requirements adjust the program plan, and

• Any additional information required by the DNDO Program Manager.

Meeting minutes shall be generated within one week after the PR. The PR does not replace the monthly progress report, unless agreed upon in advance with the DNDO Program Manager.

3.1.5 End of Phase Performance Evaluation & Report

Each phase concludes with submission of an end of phase report, and will also include a performance evaluation for each phase indicated in Section 3.1. Performance evaluations may take the place of performance reviews depending on the overall schedule for the effort.

Performance evaluations include a briefing and possibly a technical demonstration to DNDO and stakeholders. This generally includes:

• Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Briefing

• Critical Design Review (CDR) Briefing

• Characterization Readiness Review (CRR) Briefing/Demo Briefing material is due one week prior to the evaluation. The performance evaluation will be the basis for determining whether the next option phase of the contract will be exercised. The end of phase report does not replace the monthly technical report. The evaluation must include, where appropriate:

• Technical progress achieved against goals,

• A summary of technical challenges and risks, and risk mitigation strategies,

• A comprehensive account of all funds by program, project, and tasks expended during the phase along with a comparison of these figures with projections from the start of the contract,

• Demonstration that all key tasks for the phase have been completed, and that all planned milestones for the phase have been achieved,

• If follow on work is proposed, updates as required to the project plan and schedule, statement of work (SOW) and cost breakdown for the next phase,

• Lessons learned and their impact on future R&D, and

• Any additional information required by the DNDO Program Manager.

The end of phase report and meeting minutes are due two weeks after the evaluation or end of phase, whichever is soonest, and it should address issues raised during the evaluation. Early in Phase III, DNDO will provide comprehensive guidance regarding expectations about the information to be presented at the CRR and other factors constituting proof of readiness. The end of phase report for Phase III will include a detailed summary of the results from the VDT, which serves as the principle input to the CRR. Following the CRR, the PTU will be transferred to a test location in anticipation of the start of the TD&C. Final copies of the replay software will be provided at the end of Phase III, though DNDO may request the release of earlier versions at prior times.

3.1.6 Final Report

A final report shall be due at the end of the final phase of the effort. The final report will be a cumulative, stand-alone document that describes the work of the entire program and projects.

The final report shall also include “lessons learned” from the effort, recommendations for future research in this area, and a comprehensive accounting of all funds expended. A final report will be due within 60 days of the end of the final phase's period of performance.

3.1.7 Other Deliverables

In addition to the various reports and plans discussed above, a range of other deliverables will be expected related specifically to the PTU and will be included in the final award instruments.

These will include the hardware and software developed for the PTU, software replay tools, detector response models and calibration measurements, and other deliverables necessary to support technology demonstration and characteristics and operational evaluation.

4 PROCUREMENT OVERVIEW

Eligible Offerors Private industry is invited to submit proposals to this BAA, and is encouraged to team/subcontract with other companies, organizations, academia and institutions to include FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities, as appropriate, to best utilize their individual strengths.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Minority Institutions (MI), Small and Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), women-owned businesses, and HUB-zone enterprises are encouraged to submit proposals, and to join others as team members/subcontractors in submitting proposals. However, no portion of the BAA will be set-aside for these special entities pursuant to FAR Part 19.502-2.

FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities may not propose directly as prime contractors to this BAA. However, they may collaborate with eligible Offerors by providing explicitly identified supporting capabilities and may be a subcontractor. It is the responsibility of the providing laboratory (not DNDO) to identify which supporting capabilities are available. DNDO will neither encourage nor discourage eligible Offerors from utilizing FFRDCs, UARCs and other Federally-funded Government activities. This is at the sole discretion of eligible Offerors. All members of the proposed team may participate in proposal preparation and fully participate in the execution of the program. UARCs must include as part of a full proposal a statement of permission to participate from the Center's Federal sponsoring activity.

Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Regulations, Export Laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

Note: Pursuant to FAR 25.701, except as authorized by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) in the Department of the Treasury, no contracts shall be awarded as a result of this BAA if any proclamation, Executive Order, or statute administered by OFAC, or OFAC’s implementing regulations at 31 CFR Chapter V, would prohibit such a transaction. Except as authorized by OFAC, most transactions involving Cuba, Iran, and Sudan are prohibited, as are most imports from North Korea into the United States or its outlying areas. More information about these restrictions, as well as updates, is available in OFAC’s regulations at 31 CFR Chapter V and/or on OFAC’s website at http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac.

Note: FAR 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases, is applicable to this solicitation and will be included in any resulting contract.

Note: HSAR 3052.209-70 Prohibition on Contracts with Corporate Expatriates (JUN 2006) applies to this solicitation and will be included in any resulting contract.

Organizational Conflict of Interest:

(a) Disclosure. The Offeror must represent, as part of its proposal and to the best of its knowledge that: (1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract; or (2) It has included information in its full proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included the mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision.

(b) Determination. The Contracting Officer may determine that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest, or may provide one or more Offerors with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage based on the information provided or based on knowledge of the Contracting Officer.

If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may (1) disqualify the Offeror, or (2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the Offeror and include the appropriate provisions to mitigate or avoid such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the Offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated, or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the Offeror may be found ineligible for award.

(d) Mitigation/Waiver. If an Offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes it can be mitigated, neutralized, or avoided, the Offeror may submit a mitigation plan to the Contracting Officer for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan.

(e) Other Relevant Information. In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from the Offeror. The Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the Offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the Offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict.

(f) Corporation Change. The successful Offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision.

(g) Flow-down. The contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in each first tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold.

Review and Evaluation Process It is the policy of DHS/DNDO to ensure an impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all full proposals and to select the source (or combination of sources) whose offer is most advantageous to the Government. Evaluation criteria are stated in Section 7 and include the potential for transformational impact, technical approach, team capability and experience, management approach, and cost/price realism and reasonableness. See Section 7 for evaluation criteria and full proposal evaluation details.

Award Instruments The Government anticipates multiple awards resulting from this BAA. Although multiple awards are anticipated, they are not guaranteed. The awards which are made will typically be issued as FAR based cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. Contracts and Other Transactions will be administered by the cognizant DNDO program office.

Contracts will typically be awarded as a base contract with options. The base contract will be for the first phase with a separate option for each remaining phase, to be exercised at the Government’s discretion. The required phase structure is described in Section 3.1, Program Milestone Structure.

Award Schedule The Office of Procurement Operations anticipates multiple awards during summer 2014. This schedule is subject to change if circumstances warrant. The complete award schedule for this BAA is outlined in the table in Section 1.

Period of Performance DNDO anticipates awarding contracts with a base period and up to five option periods, as delineated in Section 3.1. No individual phase shall exceed 12 months and the maximum total period of performance is 41 months.

5 PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND CONTENT

Full Proposal Preparation: Format and Content Full proposals shall remain valid from the date of submission for four (4) months.

Full proposals consist of three (3) separate documents for submission described in detail below:

1) Volume I: Technical and Management Proposal (Not to exceed 40 pages);

2) Volume II: Supplemental Data (Not to exceed 45 pages);

3) Volume III: Cost Proposal (no page limit).

Volume I is the primary document to be evaluated by the technical reviewers, with Volumes II and III providing supporting information. The supplemental material in Volumes II and III are to be used at the discretion of the technical reviewers, and may not be reviewed. Volume III will serve as the formal costing submission for future contracting discussions should the full proposal be recommended for award.

All proposal submissions will be protected from unauthorized disclosure in accordance with FAR 15.207, applicable law, and DHS regulations. Offerors are expected to appropriately mark each page of their submission that contains proprietary information.

5.1.1 Format and Size Limitations

The three-volumes consist of three separate files. Volumes I and II will only be accepted in Portable Document Format (PDF). Volume III will only be accepted in Microsoft Excel format (.xls and .xlsx files are acceptable). The maximum file size for each volume is 10 MB. Memory sizes of graphic images should be minimized before insertion into any of the files and should support clear display and document printing. Non-conforming full proposals may be rejected without review.

Volume I, the Core Technical and Management Proposal, shall not exceed forty (40) pages of standard size (8.5” by 11”) in 12 pt. fonts or larger for text and 9-point fonts or larger for pictures, figures, tables and charts. Full proposals for which Volume I exceeds the 40 page limit will have any pages above the 40 page limit removed and those pages will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Volume II, the Supplemental Data Proposal, may not exceed forty five (45) pages of standard size (8.5” by 11”) in 12 pt fonts or larger. This volume is optional and may or may not be reviewed at the discretion of the reviewer.

Volume III, the Cost/Price Proposal, has no page limit and must show the costs/price for the entire effort.

5.1.2 Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Volume I shall provide the primary technical and management description of the full proposal.

Volume I should include the following sections listed below. The section headings below are mandatory, the page limits for each section are suggestions, and only the overall limit of 40 pages will be considered during compliance checks. Pages after the 40 page limit will be removed during the compliance check and will not be reviewed or evaluated. Volume I should be in the following order:

1. Cover Sheets

2. Official Transmittal Letter

3. Table of Contents

4. Executive Summary

5. Quad Chart

6. Transformational Impact

7. Technical Approach, Trades and Implementation

8. Capability and Experience

9. Management Approach

10. Cost Summary

11. Project Schedule and Milestones

12. Deliverables

13. Statement of Work

14. Team Description/Resume(s)

15. Assertion of Data Rights

5.1.2.1 Cover Pages (2 pages)

Information required for the cover sheets is included in Section 9.1.

5.1.2.2 Official Transmittal Letter (1 page)

An official transmittal letter…