Defense Nuclear Agency, 6801 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, VA 22310- 3398

A -- ENHANCED PAYLOADS FIELDING SUPPORT SOL DNA001-95-R-0036 DUE 053095 POC Carol Dickerson, Negotiator, (703) 325-1193, Scott Morton, Contracting Officer, (703) 325-1200. 17. This solicitation was synopsized in the CBD on 040795. Contract award will be made in accordance with DFARS Subpart 235.70, Research and Development Streamlined Contracting Procedures. A FORMAL WRITTEN REQUEST For PROPOSAL (RFP) WILL NOT BE ISSUED. This solicitation does include a supplemental package which will be sent to offerors who provide written address information to the contract negotiator, Carol Dickerson, FAX (703) 325-9291. Note: if your company has provided address information in response to the synopsis, a second submission is NOT necessary. All of the mandatory terms, clauses, and provisions in DFARS 235.7006, Research and Development Streamlined Contracting Format, and the following optional items are incorporated by reference (* Denotes clauses to be incorporated at time of award as appropriate): B.3, B.6, C.2, e.1, F.1, G.1, G.2, I.42, I.43, I.44*, I.45*, I.46, I.48, I.50*, i.51*, I.52, I.53, I.63*, I.65*, I.68, I.70, I.73, I.74, I.75*, i.76*, I.77, I.78, I.82*, I.83*, I.84*, I.85, I.87, I.88, I.94, i.97*, I.98*, I.100, I.104, I.107, I.108, I.127, I.129, I.132, i.133, I.144, I.147, I.153, I.154*, I.155, I..156, I.157, I.159, i.163*, I.166*, I.167, J.1, L.14. The applicable clauses and provisions are those in effect through FAC 90-21 and DAC 91-6. Evaluation factors are: 1. Experience. This effort will involve extensive efforts planning and executing complex field experiments designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of advanced unconventional warhead technologies against complex, extended, structural targets. Since the experimenter may be responsible for all aspects of test bed planning and integration, it is particularly important that key personnel assigned to this effort have extensive experience actually fielding full-scale explosive field tests or fire tests, and preferably both. As the prime experimenter for some tests, he should demonstrate experience and capability to perform pre-test predictions and post-test analyses and also demonstrate an intimate familiarity and technical grasp of energetic material phenomenology as well as future effects and dynamics. a. Specific experience developing instrumentation plans and fielding energetic materials and/or fire effects tests, preferably both, in full-scale complex structures. b. Specific experience modeling fire effects and fire dynamics in complex structures to include pre-test predictions and post-test analyses. c. Specific experience modeling energetic material effects on target structures to include pre-test predictions and post-test analyses. d. Specific computational experience supporting large-scale field testing for weapons effects experiments. 2. Responsiveness of Proposal. Did the offeror respond adequately to all elements of the statement of work? Does he demonstrate the requisite familiarity with the appropriate diagnostic suites? Does he provide a sense of understanding the integration role? Does he give evidence and confidence that he can adequately plan for the required testing activities? a. Homework problem: Assume that DNA wishes to study the response of a structure to the initiation of a high temperature incendiary device. Details of the incendiary source and structure are provided in the attachment (will be provided in the supplemental package). Provide a discussion of an appropriate diagnostic suite, to include identification of problems that can arise during their deployment, the potential for obtaining misleading data, and their resolution. b. Does the offeror's discussion of the test integration and interface activity convey a sense that he is adequately prepared to handle potential pitfalls and is familiar with the requirements of such a role? Has he demonstrated a familiarity based upon experience fulfilling an analogous role? c. Adequate response to all elements of the statement of work. 3. Soundness of Approach: Does the offeror's discussion of the technical background and his proposed approach give confidence that he will develop a plan flexible enough to respond to technical surprises, insights, or late-term course corrections as they arise in the course of this effort? Does he convey a sense that he possesses a thorough graphs of the relevant underlying processes and phenomenology? Does he convey a sense that he understands where the program must get to and how he expects to get there? Specific rating factors include: a. Does his discussion of the technical problems and test plan development give evidence of a well conceived plan based upon a clear understanding of the relevant phenomenologies and give confidence that the test plan will focus on measuring the right physical parameters? b. Does his discussion of the interplay bewteen the calculation, modeling, and test design give confidence that the test bed will be laid out on a rational scientific basis which will extract all the required data in a efficient manner? Does his discussion adequately describe the pre- and post-test interfaces with other prime experimenters whose experiments may be fielded by the offeror under this contractual effort? c. Does his program plan seem flexible enough to incorporate and respond to inevitable surprises, complications, and short term panics? 4. Management Plan: Does the offeror's personnel resources, in terms of quality, quantity, and experience seem adequate to the task? Does he present an adequate management plan which highlights potential risks and mitigation procedures? a. Availability and qualification of key personnel. b. Identificatin of risk and mitigation plan. Cost will not be a weighted factor and contract award will be based on Best Value analysis. The deliverable data items include monthly progress reports, monthly cost performance reports, draft final report (Month 45), final report (Month 48), and monthly Counterproliferation Program Status Report (due end of each Month). A cost plus fixed fee contract is contemplated. Period of performance is estimated to be forty-eight (48) months including the final report. Technical and Cost proposals are due at DNA/AM2, Attn: Carol Dickerson, no later than 1600 hours local time, on 053195. Three copies and one original of the technical and cost proposals must be provided. The technical proposal is limited to 100 pages, the cost proposal to 50 pages. Multiple awards are not contemplated. The Contracting Officer is Scott G. Morton, 6801 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, VA 22310, (703) 325-1193. All contractor personnel will require DoD security clearance of SECRET-RD. This contract will require access to restricted data (RD). In performing the contract, the contractor will receive and generate classified documents. The Contract Security Classificatin Specification will be included in the contract. The Statement of Work (SOW) is as follows: 1.0 Background. Conventional high explosive filled weapons are relatively ineffective at destroying large, hardened, underground structures such as deeply buried command and control facilities or nuclear, chemical, and biological storage and manufacturing facilities. The increasing world wide tendency of potential adversaries to ''dig in'' has thus placed our ability to neutralize critical hostile warfighting capabilities at considerable, and increasing, risk. The Enhanced Payloads Program activity at DNA is exploring applications of innovative, non-nuclear technologies to support defeat of such hardened hostile assets. DNA is investigating a variety of concepts and alternative technologies for enhanced range-to-effect potential. The tasks embodied in this statement of work are an integral component of this effort. 2.0 Scope. The scope of the Enhanced Payload Program encompasses both lethal and non-lethal (soft-kill) warhead technology concepts. This effort will primarily support thermal warhead technology developments and agent neutralization effectiveness assessment. 2.1 Objective. The objective of this effort is to provide support for Enhanced Payload Program field testing activities. Support activities shall include: experiment planning, supporting Field Command DNA in fielding of Enhanced Payloads tests at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR)test facilities, fielding advanced test diagnostics as required, and acting as the prime experimenter for tests executed outside of WSMR. Phenomenology of interest include the effects of special incendiaries and other energetic material ignitions in buried hardened targets, the dispersion and propagation of thermal and contaminant effects through extended structures and tunnels, and the response of stored biological agents to enhanced payload technology induced environments. 2.2 Applicable Documentation. None. 3.0 Requirements (Tasks). The government anticipates that testing activities shall take place at government furnished facilities and will involve full scale tests at both cut and cover buried structure facilities and at tunnel facilities. A typical test will involve approximately sixty channels of active data records. For tests at WSMR, the contractor shall typically field about fifteen channels of advanced diagnostics while Field Command DNA will have overall test integration responsibility to include instrumenting the other forty five channels, testbed cable layout, installation, and recording. The government requires support for approximately ten tests over the next three years, including six at WSMR and four at other locations. Task 3.1. Experiment Design and Test Bed Layout. Testing activities are anticipated as follows: a) Thermal Incendiary Tests. These involve the emplacement or delivery (e.g. via GFE Davis Gun) of thermal energy sources in test structure or tunnel facilities and characterization of the response. b) Contaminant Tests. These involve the emplacement or delivery of contaminant sources in test structure or tunnel facilities and characterization of the response. Response characterization shall include at a minimum: dispersal range as a function of time, contaminant density versus time, and possibly some simple lethality response tests. c) Agent Neutralization Tests. These involve coordination with, and provision of fielding support as required, to the Agent Neutralization Experimenter and Field Command DNA. A typical support scenario involves emplacement of agent simulant storage modules and embedded instrumentation provided by the Agent Neutralization Experimenter for incendiary environment test exposure, and subsequent retrieval and return of the test items to the Agent Neutralization Experimenter. Task 3.1.1 Design. The contractor develop experiment designs and testbed layout for Enhanced Payload Program phenomenology and proof-of-principle field tests. The contractor shall interact with other Enhanced Payloads Program analysts and performers (to include,as appropriate, with DNA Field Command for tests to be executed at White Sands facilities) to develop appropriate experiment designs and fielding plans. The contractor shall serve as the principal experimenter for tests outside of White Sands, and may also be called upon to field experiments designed by other Enhanced Payloads program elements. Task 3.1.2. Instrumentation. As part of the test bed layout planning activities, the contractor shall plan and deploy an appropriate diagnostics suite to support test objectives. The cable channels and data recorders will be provided GFE while the transducers shall be provided by the contractor. Measurements shall typically involve temperature, pressure, characterization of any particulate flow, and photography, but may also involve more sophisticated techniques. Task 3.2 Fielding. The contractor shall field Enhanced Payload Program experiments at government provided test facilities, according to plans approved by the DNA CTM. Fielding activities shall include, at least, the following: Task 3.2.1 Field Installation. For tests not executed at White Sands, the contractor, as prime experimenter, shall be responsible for the planning, installation, and checkout of all components of the testbed, to include instrumentation and test items. In the event that DNA Field Command will be supporting test execution at DNA operated facilities, the contractor shall coordinate any required testbed support efforts through Field Command DNA. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to ensure that the installation properly conforms to the DNA approved test plan. Task 3.2.2 Test Readiness Review. When acting as prime experimentor, the contractor shall schedule a test readiness review prior to each test where preparation, final plans, and progress for the test are reviewed and DNA approval is obtained to proceed. These should be planned in temporal proximity to the planned test date, but should allow sufficient time for any issues or changes arising out of the review process to be implemented without impacting test schedules. At White Sands tests he shall fully participate in the regular test planning meetings scheduled by Field Command DNA. Task 3.2.3 Data Recording and Retrieval. The contractor shall coordinate with Field Command DNA to ensure the proper recording and retrieving the data from contractor designed transaducers during the field tests. At DNA operated test facilities, the recording and retrieval function will be executed by Field Command. At non-DNA sites, where other government components are unavailable to perform this function, the fielding contractor will execute this function himself utilizing GFE data recorders. Task 3.3 Analysis. The contractor shall be responsible for the initial quick look data reduction from contractor designed instrumentation and presentation in engineering units. When acting as the principal experimenter, he shall be responsible for the subsequent data analysis, interpretation, and comparison of theory to experiment. In the event that the contractor shall field a test designed by another enhanced payload program experimenter, he shall provide that experimenter with the retrieved data reduced to engineering units. Task 3.4 Coordination. The contractor shall be responsible for all facets of test coordination. As the representative of the DNA CTM, he shall serve as the primary interface between DNA Headquarters personnel, Field Command Personnel, and other experimenters or test bed users. He shall develop recommendations for resolving any problems or disputes which may develop, or resolve them directly if they involve contractor personnel. 4.0 Milestones. 1. Initial HTI thermal lethality test - 4Q FY 95. 2. Tunnel facility thermal warhead test - 2Q FY96. 3. Tunnel smoke/particulate facility infiltration test - 3Q FY96. 4. Bunker thermal warhead test series - 3Q FY96. 5. Full scale thermal warhead tunnel test- 2Q FY97. 6. Large scale functional lethality test demo - 2Q FY98. 5.0 Products. (END SOW) For information, contact Carol Dickerson at (703)325-1193. Information on new DNA solicitations can be obtained by calling the DNA Hotline at (703) 325-1173. (0116)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0001 19950427\A-0001.SOL)