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

A -- ENHANCED PAYLOADS FIELDING SUPPORT SOL DNA001-95-R-0044 POC Carol Dickerson, Negotiator, (703) 325-1193, Scott G. Morton, Contracting Officer, (703) 325-1200. This solicitation was synopsized in the CBD on 052295. 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 NOT include a supplemental package. In case it may later be found necessary for the Contracting Officer to issue an amendment, offerors must provide written address information now to the contract negotiator, Carol Dickerson at FAX (703) 325-9291. Note: if your company provided address information in response to the synopsis or to previous synopsis/solicitation for DNA001-95-R-0036, 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.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.134, I.144, I.147, i.153, I.154*, I.155, I.156, I.157, I.159, I.163*, I.166*, I.167, J.1, and L.14. The applicable clauses and provisions are those in effect through FAC 90-22 and DAC 91-6. Evaluation factors at Section M are: 1. Experience: This effort will involve extensive efforts planning and executing experiments designed to demonstrate the functional kill effectiveness of advanced unconventional warhead technologies against WMD targets. Since the experimenter will be responsible for designing both equipment response and environmental model validation experiments it is particularly important that key personnel assigned to this effort have extensive experience designing and executing such model validation efforts and also possess an intimate familiarity and test experience with energetic materials environments and phenomenology, to include fire effects and dynamics. He should demonstrate experience and capability to perform pre-test predictions, and post-test analyses, and demonstrate a capacity for developing original response models based on generated experimental data. (a) Specific experience developing damage assessment methodologies and response models for target component equipment or systems. (b) Specific experience designing, fabricating, and executing special laboratory scale experiments of the type required to obtain data for target equipment damage response. c) Specific experience developing response diagnostics and executing experimental plans involving energetic materials, fire effects, or contaminant material equipment response, preferably all three, in support of model development efforts. (d) Specific experience modeling energetic material and fire effects to include pre-test predictions and post-test analyses. (e) Specific experience designing and supporting large scale field demonstration tests as a complement to a laboratory scale test and analysis program. 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 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 generic communications center, such as might be located in a hardened, buried bunker complex, to a contaminant environment. Provide a discussion of an appropriate experimental setup, to include a diagnostic suite, to elucidate the potential damage response. Include in the discussion identification of problems that can arise, the potential for obtaining misleading data, and their resolution. The offeror may choose any specific contaminant to discuss or simply consider a model substance with some generic properties. The offeror should also decide what kind of generic equipment to include in such a test. b) Does the offeror's discussion of the damage assessment and response modeling convey a sense that he is thoroughly familiar with the phenomenolgy, is adequately prepared to handle potential pitfalls, and understands the interplay of small scale and large scale testing activities? 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 assess a thorough grasp of the relevant underlying physical processes? 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? Does he convey the sense that his plan is laid out on a rational scientific basis which will extract the required data in an efficient manner? (b) 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) Identification of risk and mitigation plan. Cost will not be a weighted factor and contract award will be based on Best Value analysis. Deliverables will include the following: 1) Monthly Progress Reports, 3 copies (1 DNA/AM, 2 Project Manager (PM) due 45 days after contract award (DAC)), 2) Monthly Cost performance reports, 2 copies (1 DNA/AM, 1 PM), due 45 DAC, 3) Draft Final Report, 6 copies (DNA/TITL) due forty-five (45) months after contract award (MAC), 4) Final Report, 1 copy ( DNA/TITL) due forty-eight (48) MAC), and, 5) Counterproliferation Project Status Report, 3 copies, (1 DNA/AM, 1 PM, 1 DNA/SPCP). A cost plus fixed fee contract is contemplated. Period of performance is estimated to be forty-eight (48) months including the final report. For assistance in proposal preparation, the government estimate of the technical effort is eleven (11) man years with a project start work date of 30 Sep 95. Technical and Cost proposals are due at DNA/AM2, Attn: Carol Dickerson, no later than 1600 hours local time, on 071095. Three copies and one original of the technical and cost proposals must be provided. The technical proposal is limited to 50 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. This contract will require access to restricted data, In performing the contract, the contractor will receive and generate classified documents. The DD 254, Contract Security Classification 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 explores 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 and contaminant warhead technology developments. 2.1 Objective. The objective of this effort is to provide experiment and analysis support to the Enhanced Payload Program. Support activities shall include: experiment planning and analysis, execution of laboratory and scaled experiments, and field test support. Phenomenology of interest include the effects of special incendiaries and other energetic material ignitions in buried hardened targets, the response of target components and facilities equipment to thermal and contaminant material environments, dispersion and propagation of thermal and contaminant effects through extended structures and tunnels. 2.2 Applicable Documentation. None. 3.0 Requirements (Tasks). Task 3.1 Experiment Design. Experimental activities are presently anticipated as follows: a) Target Component/Equipment Response Tests. These tests will involve the characterize response of equipment response to either contaminant or thermal source environments. Contaminant sources are either ''stand alone'' or the products of energetic reactions. For purposes of estimating requirements for this RFP, contractors should consider that the equipment of interest shall fall into three generic classes, to include, communications/data processing equipment (including computers and electronic switching systems), biological or chemical warfare agent production and storage equipment (including asociated tankage, pumps, motors, electromechanical switches, etc. as well the chemical or biological agent material themselves), and facility critical systems such as air handling or power distribution systems. b) Environment and Propagation Tests. These experiments determine contaminant environment production development and propagation, or may be used to validate models of gas and/or fire propagation in geometries of interest following an incendiary event. Task 3.1.1 Data Base Review and Planning. a) As part of the experiment planning process the contractor shall review the relevant data base for information on contaminant and thermal damage or lethality thresholds for equipment identified in Task 3.1a and plan an experimental matrix designed to remedy data base gaps. The equipment suites of interest shall be developed in conjunction with, and in consultation with, the DNA Technical Manager. The contractor shall interact with other Enhanced Payloads Program analysts developing information or analyses related to equipment response. As part of the planning process the contractor shall suggest an appropriate test matrix, to include numbers of tests at different intensity levels, to map out the lethality space for the generic classes of equipment described in Task 3.1. b) In conjunction with efforts by other Enhanced Payloads Program performers, the contractor shall also propose laboratory scale experiments to validate environment model development efforts. For purposes of this effort the offeror should consider that four such experiments will be planned during this contractual effort. Task 3.1.2 Design. The contractor shall develop specific experiment designs to acquire the required equipment response information by executing the test plans as developed under Task 3.1. Since DNA recognizes that the entire target component equipment response matrix may not be executed due to level-of-effort contraints, the contractor shall propose a financially feasible sub-matrix and limit the specific experimental designs to this sub-matrix. These designs shall include both laboratory experiments and equipment response add-ons to larger scale field test validation and demonstration activities. The design of an appropriate diagnostic suite shall also be a critical element of this effort. Task 3.2 Experiment Execution. Task 3.2.1 Laboratory Scale Experiments. The contractor shall be responsible for the execution of all aspects of the planned and approved equipment lethality response experiment test matrix, as defined in Task 3.1. Task 3.2.2 Field Test Support. In coordination with the DNA Technical Manager, the contractor shall execute the field test designs specified in Task 3.1. The contractor shall provide specialized diagnostics as required by the DNA Technical Manager to the DNA Field Command field testing integrator and perform other test support tasks as required. For the purposes of this RFP the offeror should consider that four such field events shall be executed over the life of this contract. The contractor shall also support and attend all POMs and Test Readiness Reviews as scheduled by Field Command DNA. Task 3.3 Experiment Analysis. a) Damage Assessment. Since equipment response is a key element of this effort, the contractor shall be responsible for selecting or developing an appropriate damage assessment methodology and applying this methodology to an analysis of equipment damage response in Enhanced Payload environments. The data developed on equipment response shall be used to develop predictive damage models for equipment in Enhanced Payload generated environments. b) Experiment Analysis. The contractor shall perform pre-test environment predictions and post-test analysis for all experiments executed during the course of this contractual effort. 4.0 Milestones. 1) Initial lethality test matrix developed - 4Q FY 95. 2) Equipment lethality test series I - 3Q FY96. 3) Equipment lethality test series II - 3Q FY97. 4) Equipment lethality test series III - 4Q FY98. 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. Reference Synopsis No. 95-59 (0158)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0001 19950608\A-0001.SOL)