MODIFICATION
A -- Broad Agency Announcement for Exploratory Research for Nuclear Detection Technology
- Notice Date
- 6/3/2009
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Washington, District of Columbia, 20528, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20528
- Solicitation Number
- HSHQDC-09-R-00037
- Response Due
- 6/5/2009 12:00:00 PM
- Archive Date
- 6/16/2009
- Point of Contact
- Rhonda M Trent , Phone: 202-254-7032, Tracy C Miller, Phone: 202-254-7027
- E-Mail Address
-
rhonda.trent@dhs.gov, tracy.c.miller@dhs.gov
(rhonda.trent@dhs.gov, tracy.c.miller@dhs.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Final Exploratory Research Questions & Answers 1.If a proposed concept has applicability to more than one sub-topic, is it permissible to indicate this in the proposal and will it be considered in the evaluation of the proposal? ANS: The proposal will be evaluated in one and only one sub-topic assignment. It is recommended that the offeror select that sub-topic most suited for their proposed solution. The Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) may place the proposal in a different sub-topic area at their discretion prior to evaluation. Encouraged White Papers may have recommendations as to which sub-topic the proposal is most relevant. 2. Since the "General Research" and "Applied Development Leading to Proof-of-Concept Demonstration" approaches have very different phase structures, do the two approaches have the same requirements for the SOW, costing, etc. in the proposal? If not, what are the separate requirements for each approach in terms of the detail required for phases after Phase I? ANS: For BAA solicitations, the SOW and costing details are provided by the Offeror in their proposal. It is up to the Offeror to select the best phased structure that minimizes R&D risk for the government. The tasking details for the initial phase must be provided in sufficient detail to supply a clear understanding the Offerors technical approach. The follow-on phases, if funded, will be clarified in greater detail at the end of the previous phase. Follow the ER BAA for additional directions. Topic Area 4.1: 1.May one assume that when a proposal only addresses certain parts of the topic, the government will make suitable data samples, simulated or real, available as GFI? ANS: If government furnished material, information or facilities are required to carry out a proposed R&D effort, these should be clearly stated in the proposal. Topic Area 3.2: 1.Is there a requirement to inspect in addition to the body, the empennage, wings, engines and tail? ANS: For this ER BAA, the technology concept should be applicable to the entire aircraft, but for the ER Proof-of-Concept (PoC) demonstration, it will be limited to several facsimile sections (with realistic layers of appropriate material) to be selected in Phase I. 2.Would there be cargo loaded in the aircraft that requires inspection? Note that specifications of the interrogating system would strongly depend on this. ANS: For general aviation, baggage and cargo will be removed and processed separately by customs; or will be processed in advance of loading, at the port of departure. 3.We understand that the final system would inspect from a Cessna to an A380? Do you intend vendors to demonstrate a system that will cover this range? Otherwise, could you please provide guidelines about the airplane size that would be used to demonstrate system? Note that the project cost will depend on this. ANS: For the proposal, Proof-of-Concept (PoC) demonstration will likely be applied to mid-sized airplane facsimiles that will be selected in Phase I. 4.Obviously the size of the exclusion should be as small as possible. However, what is the largest acceptable exclusion-zone size? ANS: For the ER BAA PoC, this is left to the Offeror to decide. 5.Has DNDO selected a site where to perform the POC demonstration? Or does DNDO want the vendors to come up with the site? If the former, how long would the system be at the demonstration site? ANS: For the ER BAA PoC, this is left to the Offeror to decide. Topic Area 3.1: 1. Human Portable Systems, and to help better guide the exploratory research and development, please provide anticipated requirements and goals for the following performance and system specifications: •size of inspection volume, •number of sides accessible (1 or more), •environmental conditions, •distance to target from inspection system, •minimum target mass, •distribution of targets in inspection volume, •amount/type of target shielding, •inspection time, •system setup/teardown time, •battery life (if desired) and •dose limitations. ANS: The requirements and goals of the technology concept and the PoC demonstration system should be defined by the Offeror in the proposal. Items that provide the greatest Transformation Impact (Criterion I) should be emphasized.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DHS/OCPO/DHS-OCPO/HSHQDC-09-R-00037/listing.html)
- Place of Performance
- Address: Various Locations, United States
- Record
- SN01835253-W 20090605/090603235818-263097ee720ce0970be7ab0f0284d451 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |