Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF MAY 31, 2002 FBO #0180
MODIFICATION

A -- 2nd Set Questions and Answers to DTRA01-PRDA-02-AL01 PRDA Announcement for DTRA Technology Applications

Notice Date

5/29/2002
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

Contracting Office

Defense Threat Reduction Agency , DTRA Annex, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, MSC 6201, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201
 

ZIP Code

22060-6201
 

Solicitation Number

DTRA01-PRDA-02-AL01
 

Response Due

6/10/2002
 

Archive Date

7/10/2002
 

Point of Contact

janet thodos, 703-767-7894
 

E-Mail Address

Email your questions to Defense Threat Reduction Agency
(janet.thodos@dtra.mil)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Description

NA 33. Question: Could you provide a clarification of the term point and standoff with regard to chemical detection devices as found in Sections 2.4 and 2.5. Answer: Point detectors collect samples from a single physical location (e.g. dry filter unit). T he target substance must be transported to the detector. Standoff detection involves sampling across a large geographic area from a single location (e.g. LIDAR). Samples can be analyzed at a distance without transport to the detector. 34. Question: Regarding Topic Area 2: A). The solicitation seeks prototype software. Our evaluation of similar issues has indicated that such problems are best addressed through a combination of Commercial off the shelf (COTS), near-COTS, and new softw are. Can you provide us with an estimate of this mix as sought in the PRDA?Answer: No mix is sought by DTRA. Use of developmental software is anticipated to fill gaps in current state of the art. B) Question: The text description of the need is extrem ely brief. In order to price a solution, further details are needed such as a description of the business processes, the software requirements, details of the operating environments, a description of the desired prototype system. Can you provide further technical details? Answer: Systems shall be compatible with existing emergency response systems within US cities. C) Question: Who is the intended customer(end user)? Answer: Not specified. DTRA is the end user initially. D) Question: What is the numbe r of awards expected for this area and the size of each or the total? Answer: 5 to 10 awards and contracts between $5M-10M or less each are anticipated for the period of performance (up to a 2 year base period and a one year option period) E). Question: W hat is the source of the funding for this area, i.e 6.1, 6.2, etc? Answer: 6.3 funding 35. Question: Regarding Topic 1, Would building a neutron imaging system (degree resolution)that will use 3He as the detector of interest or does it not fulfill the technical requirements of the PRDA? Answer: The question is, what does this new system offer that standard He3 does not. We are not interested in more ruggedized He3 detectors. As stated in the PRDA, we are interested in better efficiency, neutron direction, neutron energy, and new materials for detection. If this system offers a benefit in any of these areas, then DTRA may be interested. 36. Question: Regarding Topic Area 2: Would the development of antimicrobial compounds against bio-terrorism organisms be appropriate and/or considered in this solicitation of proposals? Answer: No 37. Question: Regarding Topic Area 1, Radionuclide Detectors A). In talking with a number of groups working on the development of CdZnTe gamma ray detectors and have published several papers that address the performance of CZT material and would like t o propose a modeling only response to address additional issues that will determine the ultimate performance of CZT-based detectors. This work would benefit the whole community working on CZT based detectors. Will such a modeling only proposal be conside red as responsive? Answer: Same as Question 10. 38. Question: Under Topic 2, is the hope that proposals will integrate efforts in a number of sub-topics (Software Development and Environmental Monitoring) or can a proposal emphasizing one sub-topic be successful? Answer: Single subtopic proposals have the same level of competitiveness as integrated, multiple sub-topic proposals. 39. Question: I have the PRDA 1 and PRDA 2 documents, is there any other information about this proposal?Answer: No, however, keep checking fedbizopps for any changes in the solicitation and questions and answers. 40. Question: Does DTRA have a specific form for the cover page or do we just need to have the information listed in the announcement? Answer: Only the information listed in the announcement is needed. 41. Question: In regard to Topic 2, we are co ns idering an imaging FT-IR system, using a completely new concept to eliminate the background response, with a consequent improvement in sensitivity of 2, or more, orders of magnitude as well as a marked reduction in the false alarm rate. As it is currently conceived, the system will detect very low concentrations of chemical warfare agents, explosives and other threats with output to a CRT, in combination with an alarm system. The approach is ideal for border crossings, where vehicles could be rapidly scanne d using stand-off instrumentation. The specific question is centered on the phrase in canisters, shipping containers and hold baggage. While our system will be very sensitive to traces of chemicals on the outsides of these items and vehicles, it will have no capability of determining the contents. Normally this approach is the basis for explosive detectors in airports. It is very difficult to fill a container of any sort without traces of the material being detectable on the outside surfaces. This is especi ally true for low vapor pressure materials such as nerve agents and explosives. Answer: In assuming that the question is Is detection on the surface of a container the same as detection within a container, the answer is technically no. However, surface c ontamination may be an indication of material within a container. This could be used as a trigger for further characterization. 42. Question: Under Topic area 2, it states that $10M in awards are anticipated for the base period with 5-10 awards. Does this mean that there will be $10M worth of awards as a total or that DTRA is expecting 5-10 awards of $10M each. Answer: Proposal s may be $5-$10M or under each. There is $50M total anticipated for all awards under this topic area. 43. Question: We understand that each Topic area requires a separate proposal, but in addressing a Topic Area such as 2, will you accept proposals for a single section such as 2.1, or are you expecting a single proposal addressing all subparagraphs 2.1 t hrough 2.5? Answer: Yes, a proposal for a single section will be accepted. 44. Question: By methods should be validated, do you mean validation should have already occurred and be documented or can validation of the proposed technical methods occur during the contract period of performance? Answer: Analysis of chemical and biological samples independently is satisfactory. 45. Question: For Topic Area 1, Radionuclide Detectors, Section 1.1, Improved Gamma Ray Spectroscopy Systems; Is there a preferred range of gamma ray energies that the proposed system should be optimized for? Answer: The intent is to detect and identify highly enriched uranium and weapon grade plutonium. There are many different views on how to do this. That is part of the challenge of the detector design. Too detailed of input may limit the innovation. There are two goals: 1. A system similar to HPGe wi thout the logistics of liquid nitrogen; 2. A system similiar to NaI, but with a signifantly better resolution (2-3%) at 661 KeV. 46. Question: Is the Program looking for very advanced, innovative, high/risk-high pay-off technologies or for those technologies which have relatively established basic understanding and are quickly transferable into a portable Chemical and Biological Ag ent Detection system? Answer: Yes 47. Question: Is sample preparation, both for clinical and environmental samples and its integration with the array based detection system responsive and/or essential to the topic? Answer: Responsive but not essential. 48. Question: Are you looking for a portable, field system for both chemical and biological agent detection, or addressing one type of agent (chemical or biological) is satisfactory?Answer: Analysis of chemical and biological samples independently is sa tisfactory. 49. Question: Are there any defined/desirable specifications for a potential device (how many agents, detection time, portability, weight, power requirements, etc )?Answer: System design specifications have not been specified. 50. Question: If one proposes a highly innovative concept for rapid detection of biological agents, with no supporting experimental data, would it be still a competitive proposal? Answer: No 51. Question: To what extent will neutrons from the source background be moderated before reaching the detector? Answer: In general this is unknown. We are dealing with the neutron emission from Pu-240. There will be some moderation and attenuation as neutrons pass through the weapon and container. There is no intent to add extra moderation to the storage container, but an entity attempting to hide a nuclear weapon may chose to use shielding and moderators to avoid detection. This offers too many pos sibilities. Our desire is to interrogate an unknown container that is suspect of having nuclear materials inside. 52. Question: Is partnership between institutions, e.g., with National Labs acceptable and/or encouraged? Answer: Partnering/teaming is encouraged. However, DOE or DOD labs are prohibited from proposing as either a prime or a subcontractor on this soli citation. 53. Question: Are there any specific agents of particular interest to the program, e.g. CDC's A list of biological agents? Answer: Actual list is classified but CDC list A is suitable for this solicitation. 54. Question: Does DTRA have preferred vendors? Answer: No 55. Question: I wasn't able to locate anything about the proposal format. What is the proposal format?Answer: The format for the technical and cost proposal are listed in the DTRA PRDA solicitation and modification 01 listed on the fedbizopps website. 56. Question: Under Topic Area 2, Section 2.5, you state: Validation of devices is desired. Is this a desire for the proposal or will be part of the contracted activities? What level of validation is required? Who does this kind of validation?Answer:Va lidation standards vary. The intent is to use vendor developed protocols for validation. DTRA reserves the right to submit devices to independent third parties for validation. Cost incurred shall be the responsibility of DTRA. 57. Question: Under Section 2.5, what is low cost?Answer: Less than $250K per device. 58. Question: a. Are you looking for a combined chemical and biological agent detector?Answer: It is not necessary to be a combined sensor. b. Question: Can we submit a sensor capable of only detecting chemical agents? Answer: Yes 59. Question: Are there specific target chemical agents you are hoping to detect and what would those agents be?Answer: No 60. Question: Do you have specific applications you would like to see these systems be used for? What are the priority features you would like these systems to exhibit?Answer: Continuous operation, low O&M costs. 61. Question: Do you have a preference for certain technologies for detection? Answer: See answer to # 5. 62. Question: Can government agencies such as USARIEM or USACEHR team with us in responding to the PRDA? Before we form a team, the question is: Can a government team be a part of the team and receive program dollars (i.e. deriving direct funding from th ese activities?). Answer: No, Government agencies cannot receive direct funding, just as FFRDCs cannot. 63. Question: Under technical proposal format requirements, it is stated that the technical proposal shall not exceed 45 single spaced pages. Does this mean that each technical proposal covering one sub-topic, such as sub task 2.1 Software Development,i s limited to 45 pages or that the entire proposal covering sub-topics 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 should be limited to 45 pages? Answer: It means that the entire proposal covering all subtopics proposed is limited to 45 pages. 64. Question: In regard to curriculum Vitae of the solicitation, Is all biographical information, including for the PI, in Annex A? Or is the CV for the PI in the main proposal, and counts against the 45 page limit with only supporting personnel included in the Annex? Answer: The curriculum vitae does count against the 45 page limit. 65. Question: Regarding Topic Area 2, Is there any interest in enhancing commercial off the shelf display-based technologies (e.g. PDAs, cell-phones, and other portable devices) to meet NBC environmental conditions? Answer: Only if the devices can provide performance equivalent to current lab-based or rapid field assays. 66. Question: Where will the detectors be used: Indoors or Outdoors? Answer: Outdoors primarily 67. Question: What is the form of the radioactive materials? Answer: Primarily Plutonium and uranium metal used in nuclear weapons, but could be oxides of plutonium and Uranium. Additional area would look at radiological dispersal devices. This could take many forms. 68. Question: What quantities or radioactivity must be detected (MDA)? Answer: Amounts above 0.5 kg. 69. Question: What time frame is required for the measurements? Answer: In some cases, the time could be as much as 5-10 minutes, but in counter terrorism applications, the count time could be under 1 minute. 70. Question: Should radioactivity analysis be performed on-line or off-line? Answer: There will be the need to perform the analysis immediately on sight. In some cases, the date will not be allowed to be saved to protect weapon design information. T here is a small need to be able to transmit data so a more detailed analysis by a trained physist can be performed. 71. Question: In regard to improved neutron detectors, What is the purpose of the neutron measurements? Answer: Primarily to confirm the presence of Plutonium 240. It may also be used to determine quantity of plutonium or locate a source. 72. Question: What is more important, total sensitivity or directional dependence? Answer: Sensitivity is of primary importance. 73. With respect to section 2.3 Development and Validation of Advanced Diagnostics. The questions follow.1) The solicition specifically calls out technologies invoving micro-arrays. Can you give a better definition of an micro-array in terms of expecteds ize (both cell size and number of array cells) Answer: Array size and density is dependent on the number of agents analyzed, the analytical approach, number of targets needed to resolve near-neighbors and the redundance of spots. In general, an array in t he hundreds to thousands of cell should be anticipated. 2) The solicitation mentions a desire for the use of PCR assays. Is this exclusive? Would other technologies that do not involve PCR be appropriate? Answer: Any technique that provides comparable s ensitivity, selectivity, speed and level of detection is acceptable NOTICE: Offerors are advised that Dyncorp and ITT will be involved in the peer review process (proposal evaluation) for this solicitation. Anyone having access to the offeror's proposal will be required to sign conflict of interest/non-disclosure statements.
 

Place of Performance

Address: Defense Threat Reduction Agency DTRA Annex, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, MSC 6201 Fort Belvoir VA

Zip Code: 22060-6201

Country: US
 

Record

SN00084858-W 20020531/020529213356 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |