Defense Supply Service-Washington, Rm 1D245, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310- 5200

A -- BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT/EVALUATION OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE CHEMICAL SUPPRESSANTS DUE 041197 POC Contact Ms. Sally Williams, Contract Specialist (703) 693-5017, Contracting Officer, Joyce Rose (703) 695-2564 BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT -- The Executive Director, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) is soliciting proposals to identify and test highly effective chemical suppressants as new and more effective fire suppression technologies. [NOTE: In addition to this BAA, proposals will be also be solicited with the government.] BACK- GROUND: Halon 1301, used for fire extinguishment and explosion suppression applications in fielded weapon systems and mission-critical facilities, has been banned from national production due to its high ozone- depleting potential. Alternatives developed by industry to date have sizable weight and volume penalties, and their application to fielded current weapons systems could require expending large amounts of funding and time. Consequently, the DoD has embarked on an aggressive new R&D program -- the Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology Program (NGP) -- under the technical direction and oversight of the Office of the Director, Defense Research and Engineering/Advanced Technology (ODDR&E/AT). The NGP goal is to develop and demonstrate, by 2004, retrofitable, economically feasible, environmentally-friendly and user- safe processes, techniques, and fluids that meet the operational requirements currently satisfied by halon 1301 systems in aircraft, ships, land combat vehicles, and critical mission support facilities. The results will be specifically applicable to fielded weapons systems, and will provide dual-use fire suppression technologies for preserving both life and operational assets. Successful candidates must perform satisfactorily in tests for a wide variety of properties, including those reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). An initial survey of fires for which the DoD currently uses halon 1301 shows an extremely broad range of fire conditions and several distinct hazards to be avoided. The Military Departments and other participating government agencies will conduct research projects within the NGP, and proposals accepted from industry or academia for NGP research projects will be incorporated into these programs. Additional information on the NGP, including preliminary information about the types of fires to be suppressed, may be found on the Internet Web site http://www.dtic.mil/ddre/, under Science and Technology Programs, at document titled The Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology: Strategy for a National Program, dated July 1996. The NGP Technical Point of Contact is Dr. Richard G. Gann, Technical Program Manager (TPM), NGP, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), e-mail (preferred): rggann@nist.gov, phone: (301) 975-6866; fax: (301) 975-4052. BAA OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the full range of chemically active suppressants that are as, or more, effective than halon 1301 (CF3Br), and sufficiently low in toxicity and environmental impact. To meet this objective, the principal investigator (PI) must develop a list of candidates with high flame suppression efficiency and appropriately low toxicity. The chemicals should be applicable to the types of fires identified in Appendix A of the NGP Strategy Document. New chemicals must be synthesized as necessary. The PI should perform extinguishment and flame structure experiments on strained diffusion flames to verify or adapt fire suppression principles; perform post-flame analyses to identify potential by-products; and run screening tests from Elements 3.a and 3.b [Contact the NGP Technical Point of Contact] for suppression effectiveness, toxic potency, environmental impact, and residue to estimate acceptability. PRODUCTS: The outcome of work under this project will be (a) a list of promising chemically-active compounds with pertinent information on their physical and chemical properties, suppression efficiency, toxicity, storage stability, and breakdown products (including their properties and toxicities); and (b) full documentation of the procedures used and the results. Depending on the success of the NGP in identifying new chemicals and this effort in evaluating them, a successive project within this Element may be advertised to continue this work. BACKGROUND: Exploratory studies have shown that several families of compounds (e.g., organometallics and phosphonitrilics) are at least as efficient as halon 1301 as flame inhibitors and have zero zone depletion potential (ODP). Although some are too toxic, others are potentially non-toxic and may have desirable chemical and physical properties. SERDP Program Office Resources: The government estimate of the cost and time to meet the requirements of this Project is $1.0M over three years, with an estimated first year cost of $300,000. Proposers should not consider these estimates to be either minimums or maximums; they are provided only as estimates around which reasonable proposals may be developed. It should be understood, also, that the government reserves the right to fund more than one proposal either to meet this requirement fully or to pursue more than one innovative approach; the reasonabletotal cost of which might be more or less than the government estimate. The government will consider proposals which offer technical or cost advantages but only meet partial technical requirements in this BAA. Estimated additional funding (cost sharing) from performing organizations: colleges/universities and small business firms-10% of total request: all others-33% of total request. SUBMISSIONS: Offerers are encourages to submit concise, but descriptive, proposals. Proposals for FY 1998 contract awards will be accepted until 4:00 PM EST on April 11, 1997. The Proposal, including the original signed copy, five additional copies, and one copy on a 3 1/2" diskette (DOS-formatted, MSWord 6.0 or lower, or WordPerfect) all referencing BAA ##-## and must be submitted to: Brenda J. Batch, Administrative Officer, SERDP Program Office, 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 303, Arlington, VA 22203, TEL (703) 696-2123; FAX: (703) 696-2114. All technical questions concerning this BAA should be addressed to Dr. Richard G. Gann. PROPOSALS SENT BY FAX OR E-MAIL WILL BE REJECTED. Proposals will be selected through a technical/scientific/business decision process with technical and scientific considerations being most important. The primary basis for selecting proposals shall be technical, importance to the NGP and funds availability. Individual proposal evaluations will also consider the acceptability or non-acceptability without regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement; however, due to budgetary constraints, all acceptable proposals may not be funded. No award will be made without a proposal to perform the specific effort within an estimated cost and time framework. Offerers, if selected, must be willing to cooperate and exchange information in an integrated program with other contractors chosen by the TPM. PROPOSAL CONTENT: Proposals shall be prepared in two sections, Part I and Part II, and able to be separated for review purposes. Part I shall provide the technical proposal and management approach, and Part II shall address costs. Proposals shall be prepared on 8.5 x 11 inch paper, with one and one-half line spacing or double spaced, in no less than 11-point size, any font. All margins (top, bottom, left, and right) shall not be less than 1". The proposal shall address and be relevant to the listed evalation criteria listed herein. In addition, Part I of the proposal shall include: (a) a cover page including BAA number; proposal title; SERDP Log Number; developed by SERDP; submitting organization, office code, and address; Contractor DUNS Number and CAGE Code; Principal Investigator's name, mailing address, telephone number, electronic mail address, and facsimile machine number; Administrative/Contracting Representative mailing address, telephone number, electronic mail address, and facsimile machine number; total estimated cost and duration; (b) a one-page summary of any technical ideas to be pursued and their expected impact on the state of the art and the NGP; (c) a statement of work detailing the scope of the proposed work and specific utilization of subcontractors; (d) a description of results, products, and transferable technology expected from the project; (e) a list of the milestones and schedule; (f) a statement of the technical rationale that substantiates the schedule and justifies the overall technical approach of the proposal; (g) a not-to-exceed-one-page summary of any proprietary claims to results, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype (if there are not proprietary claims this section shall consist of a statement to that effect); (h) a section describing relevant capabilities, accomplishments, and work in these or closely related areas along with the qualifications of proposed subcontractors; (i) a management plan describing the overall approach to management of this effort, including brief discussions of total organizations, use of personnel, project/function/subcontra ctor relationships, government research and facility interface, and planning, scheduling and control practices. Part I must be no longer than 15 pages (not including the cover page, appendices or curriculum vitae). Foldouts shall be counted as a single page. The contents of the appendices shall be limited to figures that directly support items discussed in the text of the proposal. If items are included in the appendices which are not covered in the basic proposal, the proposal may not be reviewed. Proposals with Part I in excess of 15 pages may not be reviewed. Proposals of fewer than the maximum number of pages will not be penalized. PART II of the proposal is not page limited, but should be very concise and address the elements listed below and in Appendix A to this BAA. A one-page summary will be included. Tabs, table of contents, introduction/executive summary are neither required nor desired. Costs shall be supported by detailed breakdowns of labor hours by labor category and tasks/subtasks, materials, travel, computer and other direct and indirect costs. An explanation of any estimating factors, including their derivation and application shall be provided. Details of any cost sharing to be undertaken by the Offerer should also be included in the cost section. [See APPENDIX A of this BAA for additional requirements and amplifying information concerning preparation of Part II cost data.] ABSTRACT: Offerers, either individual or teamed, are strongly encouraged to submit a two-page abstract of their proposed work to preclude unwarranted effort (a) on the part of an Offerer in preparing a full proposal and (b) on the part of the government, in reviewing one. Page one shall be a title page clearly labeled PROPOSAL ABSTRACT and including this BAA number, proposal title, plus Offerers administrative and technical points of contact along with mailing addresses, telephone and facsimile numbers, e-mail addresses, and the signature of an authorized officer. The second page should include a summary of the technical ideas proposed and their anticipated deliverables, and total cost. The abstract shall be on 8.5 x 11 inch paper, with one and one-half line spacing or double spaced, in at least 11-point type, any font. All margins (top, bottom, left, and right) shall not be less than 1". The original and one copy of each abstract shall be received no later than February 21, 1997, by: Brenda J. Batch, Administrative Officer, SERDP Program Office, 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 303, Arlington, Virginia 22203, TEL: 703-696-2123; FAX: 703-696- 2114. A copy of the abstract should also be sent -- preferably by e-mail -- to the Technical Point of Contact, Dr. Richard G. Gann, by the same date. An abstract is not a requirement for submission or selection of a proposal. Any Offerer whose abstract is found to be consistent with the intent of this BAA will be invited by February 28, 1997, to submit a full technical and cost proposal. Such an invitation does not assure subsequent contract award. Regardless of the recommendation, the decision to submit or not submit a proposal is the responsibility of the Offerer. EVALUATION/AWARD PROCESS: Evaluation of the abstracts and proposals will be performed using the following criteria, listed in descending order of relative importance: (1) technical quality and originality of the proposed research; (2) relevance to the NGP goal and impact on the goal if successful; and (3) The Offerers capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, or unique combinations thereof, which are integral factors for achieving the proposed objectives; and (4) the appropriateness and cost realism of the budget for accomplishing the work proposed under this BAA. Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by a Selection/Peer Review Panel chaired by the NGP TPM. The primary basis for selecting proposals for acceptance shall be technical importance to the NGP and funds availability. The Panel is composed of members of the NGP Technical Coordinating Committee, the SERDP Pollution Prevention Technical Thrust Area Working Group (PP/TTAWG), and/or other selected reviewers as needed by the Chairman. The Panel and the PP/TTAWG will recommend to the SERDP Executive Director, through the Halon Alternatives R&D Steering Group (HASG), a subset of the acceptable proposals for award which will construct a balanced program meeting the NGP needs. These recommended proposals will then be reviewed by the SERDP Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). The mission of the SAB is to review all proposed SERDP funded projects and make appropriate recommendations to the SERDP Council on technical merit and funding. The TPM will make a concise (30 minute) presentation of the proposals to the SAB, usually in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. Principal investigators of the recommended projects may attend, as coordinated with the TPM, who will provide specific guidance for this presentation, including date, time, and location. Contract award selections will be recommended by the SERDP Executive Director to the SERDP Council, which will approve the proposal within a reasonable period of time after receipt in an effort to incorporate the work in to the NGP. The Defense Supply Service -- Washington (DSSW) Contracts Office, the contracting agency for the NGP, will make contract awards within a reasonable period of time. The DSS-W point of contact is Ms. Sally Williams, telephone (703) 693-5017. A Military Department of NIST official will be designated a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) for each contract, as recommended by the NGP TPM. It is the policy of the SERDP Program Office and the DSSW Contracts Office to treat all proposals as competitive and proprietary information and to disclose the contents only for the purpose of evaluation. The Government may use selected support contractor personnel as special resources to assist in administering the evaluation of the proposals. These persons are restricted by their contracts from disclosing the proposal information or using it for other than performing their assigned administrative task. Contractor personnel are required to sign non-disclosure statements. By submission of your proposal, you agree that your proposal information may be disclosed to these selected contractors for the limited purpose stated above. Any information submitted with you proposal that you do not consent to limited release to these contractors must be clearly marked and submitted segregated from other proposal material. This announcement constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement as contemplated in FAR 6.102(d)(2). There will be no formal request for proposals or other solicitations outside the Government regarding this announcement. The Government reserves the right to select for award all, some, or none of the proposals received in response to this announcement. The provisions of DFARS subpart 227.71, Rights in Technical Data, will apply to any award issued under this BAA. All responsible sources may submit a proposal which shall be considered. Historical Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and Minority Institutions (MI) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of this BAA will be set aside for HBCU and MI participation due to the impracticality of reserving discrete or severable areas of NGP technology for exclusive competition among these entities. APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND AMPLIFYING INFORMATION CONCERNING PREPARATION OF PART II COST DATA. 1. Cost Estimate: An estimate of the total research project cost, with a break down of direct and indirect funds by category and year, must accompany each formal proposal (PART II). Multiple-year proposals are encouraged to cover the total estimated duration of the project, as appropriate. Incremental funds will be provided by SERDP to successful proposers for effort performed during each Federal fiscal year, given that sufficient funds are provided to SERDP and the defense requirements indicate that the research is a continuing priority. Costs proposed must confirm with the following regulations and principles: Commercial firms: Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 31 and Defense FAR Supplement Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures. Educational Institutions: OMB Circular A-21, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions, OMB Circular A-88, Indirect Cost Rates, Audit an Audit Follow-up at Educational Institutions. Nonprofit Organizations: OMB Circular A-122, Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations, OMB Circular A-133, Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Organizations. The cost of preparing proposals in response to this BAA is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resultant contract, grant or cooperative agreement. It is, however, an allowable expense to the bid and proposal indirect cost specified in FAR 31.205-18, and OMB Circulars A-21 and A-122. The budget estimate must include the following data. a. Direct Labor Costs: Show the current and projected salary amounts in terms of man-hours, man-months or annual salary to be charged by the PI(s), research associates and assistants, and the total amount per year to be paid to each from the project. State the number of man-hours used to calculate a man-month or man-year. For proposals from universities, the time and amounts to be charged should be identified by academic year and summer effort. The proposal must identify the following: 1) The basis for the direct labor hours or percentage of effort, e.g., historical hours or estimates. 2) The basis for the direct labor rates or salaries. Labor costs should be predicated upon actual labor rates or salaries. These estimates may be adjusted upward for forecast salary or wage cost-of-living increases that will occur during the contract period. Such COLAs should not exceed 4%, exclusive of merit increases. The proposal should separately identify the ratio applied to base salary/wage for cost-of-living adjustments and merit increases. Each must be fully explained. b. Fringe Benefits and Indirect Cost Rates (overhead, general and administrative and other): The most recent rates, dates of negotiation, the base(s) and periods to which the rates apply must be disclosed and a statement included to identify whether the proposed rates are provisional or fixed. A copy of the negotiation memorandum should be provided. If negotiated forecast rates do not exist, sufficient detail must be provided to enable a determination that the costs included in the forecast rate are allocable according to applicable FAR/DFARS or OMB Circular provisions (see above). Disclosure should be sufficient to (0024)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0008 19970129\A-0008.SOL)