R&D Contracting Directorate, Bldg 7, 2530 C Street, WPAFB, OH 45433-7607

A -- COMPOSITE REPAIR AIRCRAFT STRUCTURES PROGRAM SOL PRDA 97-04-FIK DUE 051297 POC Ms. Genet Stewart, Contract Negotiator, (937) 255-5901, Mr. Lawrence W. Kopa, Contracting Officer, (937) 255-5901 INTRODUCTION: Wright Laboratory (WL/FIKA) is interested in receiving proposals (technical and cost) on the research effort described below. Proposals in response to this PRDA shall be submitted and received by 12 MAY1997, 1500 hours Eastern Standard Time, addressed to Wright Laboratory, Directorate of R&D Contracting, Building 7, Area B, Attn: Genet R Stewart, WL/FIKA, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7607. This is an unrestricted solicitation. Small businesses are encouraged to propose on all or any part of this solicitation. Proposals submitted shall be in accordance with this announcement. Proposal receipt after the cutoff date and time specified herein shall be treated in accordance with restrictions of FAR 52.215-10; a copy of this provision may be obtained from the contracting point of contact cited in this announcement. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any PRDA amendments that may permit subsequent submission of proposal dates. Offerors should request a copy of the WL Guide entitled, "PRDA and BAA Guide for Industry". This guide was specifically designed to assist offerors in understanding the PRDA/BAA proposal process. Copies may be requested from the contract point of contact, WL/FIKA, Genet Stewart, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7607, telephone (937) 255-5901. The guide is also available on the internet, address, www.wl.wpafb.af.mil/contract. B-REQUIREMENTS: (1) INTRODUCTION: With the present limitations in government funding, fewer aircraft will be procured in the future and the emphasis will be on techniques to extend the economic life of current aircraft. Techniques are being developed to enhance the lifetime potential of many of the aging aircraft in the Air Force fleet. One such technique is the use of bonded composite patches to repair fatigue or other damage on metallic aircraft structure or use bonded composite repairs to prevent future fatigue damage. This basic technique has been investigated for many special applications and shown to be very effective. The overall purpose of this program will be to develop guidelines to help determine where this technology may be applied to aging aircraft, to develop techniques to aid in appropriate implementation of repairs and to transition this technology to aging aircraft operators and maintainers. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION: The objective of this program is to develop, verify, and apply analytical techniques that include predicting the effects of existing fatigue or other damage and predict the effectiveness of the application of bonded composite repairs to increase aircraft structural safety and durability. The contractor shall identify aircraft structural components, both primary and secondary, that are subject to fatigue, corrosion, or other damage and are potential sites for the application of composite repair technology. The Contractor shall establish guidelines on which types of patch materials, patch designs, structure and damage can benefit from application of this technology and which combinations of patch design, patch material, damage, and structure are not suitable for application of this technology. The contractor shall survey work that has been completed in this area and document it as a lessons learned document. The contractor shall assess, combine, integrate, develop, apply, and verify analytical and modeling techniques for predicting the effects of fatigue damage, design/verification of representative bonded repairs covering a variety of simple and complex aircraft structural configurations (e.g. fighter wings, transport wings, pressurized fuselage skins, door cutouts, empennage structures, etc.), and conduct experimental verification of the long-term durability of bonded repairs. Existing analysis techniques available to Air Logistics Centers and industry for evaluation shall include, but not be limited to, the Air Force Crack Growth Code (AFGROW) developed by the Flight Dynamics Directorate of Wright Laboratory and Calculation of Repairs code (CalcuRep) developed by the Air Force Academy. The contractor shall place emphasis on code(s) which may be executed on portable computers at the Air Logistic Center level. The contractor shall establish the strengths and limitations of the code(s) which can be executed on a portable computer and document cases where detailed analysis on a workstation or mainframe computer is required. The contractor shall work with the Air Logistics Centers to establish which code(s) they can execute and which code(s) will need support from contracted support organizations. The contractor shall apply the analysis techniques to primary and secondary structural components to predict inspection intervals, establish required nondestructive inspection (NDI) levels, remaining structural life and residual strength. Where appropriate, the contractor shall develop improvements to the accuracy and establish links between existing models to enhance their utility and user interface. Before completion of the effort, the contractor shall review the existing Air Forceguidance on required usage of the Ada language and formulate a plan to bring any code(s) into compliance under follow-on efforts. The contractor shall base all material and processing issues for the fabrication and inspection of bonded composite repairs on the Composite Repair of Metallic Structures (CRMS) guide developed under a Wright Laboratory, Material Directorate's Contract. The contractor shall identify any deficiencies in material, processing, or NDI which could limit the usefulness of this technology and could be funded in parallel or follow-on efforts to increase the application of this technology. The contractor shall conduct an appropriate range of coupon, subelement, element, and subcomponent tests to verify and validate the modeling approaches and repair techniques that have been selected and/or developed and to correlate the effect of the composite repairs on structural integrity and airframe life. The contractor shall analytically and experimentally determine the effects of manufacturing or damage related partial disbonds on the effectiveness of the bonded repairs. Coupon and subelement testing shall be conducted under realistic environmental conditions (e.g. hot/wet preconditioning, hot/cold cycling, salt fog exposure) to provide a comprehensive assessment of structural performance, long term durability and the effectiveness of composite repairs on damaged structural components to increase life/integrity. Large-scale components shall be required and tested to verify and validate leading concepts. The contractor shall survey government sources, other manufacturers and his internal supplies to identify potential large-scale components for test. Large-scale components and the concepts to be tested shall be selected after consultation with the Air Logistics Centers, airframe manufacturers, and Wright Laboratory. The contractor shall evaluate government and industry locations for conducting large-scale structural tests and recommend the best location based on cost, capability, experience, and availability. Funding for conducting these tests will be separate from this contract. The contractor shall support this testing, acquire large-scale test components, install patches, install instrumentation, act as an observer/advisor during critical portions of the testing, and document the results under funds from this contract. Final results of this program will be documented in a format similar to the Composite Repair of Metallic Structures (CRMS) guide. This document should be capable of being used along with the CRMS guide in the design of repairs and capable of periodic updating as technology advances are made. Any developments resulting from this contract activity that have dual-use benefits should be clearly identified in the final report. The contractor shall assess the supportability of the technology developed throughout this effort by developing and conducting a formal supportability program commensurate with the level of effort of this R&D program. The program shall establish objectives, design goals, thresholds, and constraints through comparison with existing systems and analyses of supportability, cost, and readiness drivers (to include but not be limited to software/manual updates, consolidation/compatibility of software, field maintainability, materials handling, process criticality); optimize the support system to achieve the best balance between cost, schedule, performance, and supportability; to assure that specified requirements are achieved and deficiencies corrected; and be integrated with the engineering process during all phases of the program. Supportability reviews shall be held in conjunction with all program reviews. The contractor shall also consider the following supportability items found within MIL-PRF-49506: maintenance planning; repair analysis; support and test equipment; manpower, personnel, and training; facilities; and package, handling, storage, and transportation. The contractor shall pursue a continual and aggressive technology transfer effort throughout the program given the nature of the technology to be developed and the strong potential for commercial applications. (2) Deliverable Items: The following deliverable data items shall be proposed: (a) Status Report, DI-MGMT-80368/T, monthly; (b) Funds and Man-Hour Expenditure Report, DI-FNCL-80331/T, monthly; (c) Project Planning Chart, DI-MGMT-80507A/T, monthly; (d) Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR), DI-FNCL-81468/T, quarterly ; (e) Presentation Material, DI-ADMN 81373/T, as required; (f) Contractor Billing Voucher, DI-MISC-80711/T, monthly; (g) Scientific and Technical Reports, DI-MISC-80711/T, (Draft and Reproducible, Interim and Final); (h) Test Plan, DI-NDTI-80566/T, coupon, subelement, element, subcomponent and full-scale testing; (i) Engineering Drawings, DI-DRPR-80651/T; (j) Innovations Report, DI-MISC-80406/T; (k) Computer Software Product End Items, DI-MCCR-80700. Contractor format is encouraged in all deliverables. A kick-off meeting will be held at the contractor's facility within 60 days after contract start. Thecontractor will further be required to conduct program reviews quarterly alternating between Wright Patterson AFB and the contractor's facility. In place of one quarterly review, the contractor shall be required to conduct a yearly workshop for both potential users of this technology and manufacturers of aircraft structure. The contractor shall make codes or design documentation freely available at these workshops. (3) Security Requirements: The work performed under this contract shall be unclassified. C-ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: (1) Anticipated Period of Performance: The total length of the technical effort is estimated to be 48 months, but the contractor may propose an alternate schedule to demonstrate the technology. The contractor shall also provide for an additional 4 months for processing and completion of the final report. The proposed program schedule could be different from what is anticipated by the government (2) Expected Award Date: Fourth Quarter FY97. (3) Government Estimate: The government anticipates a funding breakout for the contract by fiscal year as follows: FY97-$ 54K, FY98-$1620K, FY99-$1537K, FY00-$2230K, and FY01-$1493K for a total of $ 6934K. In addition to the direct funding for the contract the government anticipates a separate funding breakout from the contracted effort to support the large-scale testing as follows: FY99 -- $300K, FY00 -- $324K and FY01 -- $649K. The Government funding profile is an estimate only and is not a promise for funding as all funding is subject to change due to Government discretion and availability. (4) Based on the strong potential for commercial applications, the Air Force will consider the full range of Cost Contract types, to include Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), Cost Reimbursement (CR) (no fee), Cost Sharing (CS), along with grants and other forms of assistance instruments such as cooperative agreements and other transactions. Offerors are encouraged to propose a contract type which is considered to be most appropriate for the technology proposed to be developed. If a cooperative agreement is awarded, no CDRL requirements will apply but provisions to make the same type of data available to the government and industry on a similar schedule should be proposed. Any grants awarded will be Cost (no fee). (5) Government Furnished Property: No government property is anticipated for this contractual program. (6) Base Support: Base support for testing will be provided by WL/FIBT if major structural testing is performed at WPAFB. (7) Size Status: For the purpose of this acquisition, the size standard is 500 employees (SIC 8731). (8) Notice to Foreign-Owned Firms: Such firms are asked to immediately notify the Air Force contract point of contact upon deciding to respond to this announcement. Foreign contractors should be aware that restrictions may apply which could preclude their participation in this acquisition. D-PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS: (1) General Instructions: Offerors should apply the restrictive notice prescribed in the provision at FAR 52.215-12, Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, to trade secrets or privileged commercial and financial information contained in their proposals. Proposal questions should be directed to one of the points of contact listed elsewhere herein. Offerors should consider instructions contained in the WL PRDA and BAA Guide for Industry referenced in Section A of this announcement. Technical and cost proposals, submitted in separate volumes, are required and must be valid for 180 days. Proposals must reference the above PRDA number. Proposals shall be submitted in an original and ten copies. All responsible sources may submit a proposal which shall be considered against the criteria set forth herein. Offerors are advised that only contracting officers are legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise commit the government. (2) Cost Proposal: Adequate price competition is anticipated. Therefore, to permit a cost realism analysis, the submission of a SF 1448 is required in lieu of a SF 1411, together with supporting schedules and breakdown by fiscal year, and shall contain a person-hour breakdown per task. Copies of the above-referenced forms may be obtained from the contracting office cited. The costs should be broken down by task to facilitate partial award of a separate task if appropriate. Proposed cost and fee will be evaluated to ensure reasonableness, realisim and completeness for the effort proposed. (3) Technical Proposal: The technical proposal shall include a discussion of the nature and scope of the research and the technical approach. Additional information on prior work in this area, including a discussion on the state of the art and your particular past experience in predicting/demonstrating the effectiveness of bonded composite repairs on damaged structure, descriptions of available equipment, data and facilities, and resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal and are not included in the page limit. The technical proposal shall include a Statement of Work (SOW) detailing the technical tasks proposed to be accomplished under the proposed effort and suitable for contract incorporation. Offerors shall refer to the WL Guide referenced in Section A to assist in SOW preparation. Any questions concerning the technical proposal or SOW preparation shall be referred to the Technical Point of Contact cited in this announcement. (4) Page Limitations: The technical proposal shall be limited to 75 pages (12 pitch or larger type), double spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches. The page limitation includes all information, i.e. indices, photographs, foldouts, appendices, attachments, etc. Pages in excess of these limitations will not be considered by the Government. Cost proposals have no limitations; however, offerors are requested to keep cost proposals to 20 pages as a goal. (5) Preparation Cost: This announcement does not commit the Government to pay for any response preparation cost. The cost of preparing proposals in response to this PRDA is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting or any other contract. However, it may be an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect cost as specified in FAR 31.205-18. E-BASIS FOR AWARD: The selection of one or more sources for award will be based on an evaluation of an offeror's response (both technical and cost aspects) to determine the overall merit of the proposal in response to this announcement. The technical aspect, which is ranked as the first order of priority, shall be evaluated based on the following criteria which are of equal importance: (a) new and creative solutions; (b) the offeror's understanding of the scope of the technical effort; (c) the soundness of the offeror's technical approach which will include: (1) the offeror's past experience with structural fatigue, structural damage assessment, bonded composite repair design and transition of repair technology; (2) the viability of technology transition with emphasis on the performance of the technology; and (3) the organization, clarity, and thoroughness of the proposed SOW; (d) Cost, which includes consideration of proposed budgets, funding profiles and procedures to insure yearly expenditures are at least 60 percent of allocated budgets, is ranked as the second order of priority. Cost and/or price will be a substantial factor for award. No other evaluation criteria will be used. The technical and cost information will be evaluated at the same time. The Air Force reserves the right to select for award of a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement any, all, part or none of the proposals received. Award of a grant to universities or nonprofit institutions or a cooperative agreement, in lieu of a contract, will be considered and will be subject to the mutual agreement of the parties; F-POINTS OF CONTACT: (1) Technical Point of Contact: Project Engineer, Forrest Sandow, WL/FIBA, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH 45433-7542, (937) 255-5664. (2) Contracting Point of Contact: Questions related to the contract /cost issues should be directed to the Contract point of contact listed in part A. (3) An Ombudsman has been appointed to hear concerns from offerors and potential offerors during the proposal development phase of this acquisition. The purpose of the Ombudsman is not to diminish the authority of the Contracting Officer, but to communicate contractor concerns, issues, disagreements and recommendations to the appropriate government personnel. All potential offerors should use established channels to voice concerns before resorting to use of the Ombudsman. When requested, the Ombudsman does not participate in the evaluation of proposals or in the selection decision. Interested parties should direct all routine communication concerning this acquisition to the Contract point of contact listed in part A. The Ombudsman should only be contacted with issues or problems that have been previously brought to the attention of the contracting officer and could not be satisfactory resolved at that level. These serious concerns only may be directed to the Ombudsman, Mr. Michael S. Coalson, ASC/SY1, Bldg 52, 2475 K St, Suite 1, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7642, E-Mail coalsoms@sy.wpafb.af.mil, phone (937) 255-9279 ext. 232. (0086)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0007 19970331\A-0007.SOL)