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

A -- BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT NEXT GENERATION FIRE SUPPRESSION TECHNOLOGY DUE 020698 POC Sally Williams, Contract Specialist (703) 693-5017; Joyce Rose, Contracting Officer 695-2562 WEB: Defense Supply Service-Washington, http://www/hqda.army.mil/dssw. E-MAIL: Defense Supply Servi ce -- Washington, willism@hqda.army.mil. Broad Agency Announcement -- The Executive Director, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) is soliciting proposals under NGP Research Element 4.d (BAA #99-01) to identify and test new concepts for new and more effective fire suppression technologies, and proposals under NGP Research Element 5.e (BAA #99-02) for enhanced powder panel fire suppression technologies. Background: 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 weapon 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 ofthe 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 weapon 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 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. DSS-W Point of Contact is Ms. Sally Williams (703) 693-5017. Both BAA's may also be accessed on the DSS-W homepage: The address is: http://www.hqda/mil/dssw BAA OBJECTIVE, RESEARCH ELEMENT 4D: To introduce new and innovative approaches to fire suppression in current weapon systems at the onset of the NGP. The NGP will provideup to 1-year support for worthy proposals (to include proof-of-concept demonstration) and continue support for those with promise. PAYOFF: The expected outcome of work under this Element will be new classes of high efficiency fire extinguishing agents and technologies and new concepts having application to current weapon systems and that will broaden the range of fire suppression approaches considered under the NGP. BACKGROUND: There are additional and diverse new ideas that merit screening. Subject to the boundaries set as a result of findings under Appendix A of the NGP Strategy Document, the best of these should be examined to see if further research is needed to develop their full potential for the Program. ESTIMATED COST AND DURATION OF PROPOSED WORK. The government estimate of the cost and time to meet the requirement of this BAA is $500,000 for one year. It is expected that the funding will be allocated to about 5 projects. BAA OBJECTIVE, RESEARCH ELEMENT 5E: To advance protection against penetratingshells in those weapons systems where halon 1301 is currently used in conjunction with powder panels. PAYOFF: The expected outcome of work under this Element will be enhanced versions of current powder panel technologies. BACKGROUND. Powder panels provide passive, lightweight, effective fire protection against ballistic impact, releasing powder into the fire zone to inert the space before the adjoining fuel spills into the space and is ignited by incendiaries. Preliminary results with simple powders have been impressive. Cleanup remains a concern. Powder panels add weight based upon the surface area of the fuel wall/fire zone interface, as opposed to the volume of the fire zone, so the relative benefit of the panels are dependent upon the configuration of the particular bay. Testing of conventional panels showed promise for final implementation, but they are in essence the same design that has existed for decades. ESTIMATED COST AND DURATION OF PROPOSED WORK. The government estimate of the cost and time to meet the requirements of this Element is $600,000 over three years, with an estimated first year cost of $200,000. During the first year, the proposer should identify the types of enhancements and demonstrate both their effectiveness (proof-of-concept) and their feasibility for retrofit on current weapons systems. Estimated 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 encouraged to submit concise, but descriptive, proposals. Proposals for FY 1999 contract awards will be accepted until 4:00 PM EST on 20 March 1998. The proposal, including the original signed copy, five additional copies, and one copy on a 3 " diskette (DOS-formatted, with text in a convertible word processor), all referencing BAA ##-## and must be submitted to: 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. 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. Individual proposal evaluations will be based on the evaluation criteria 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 consist of two separate parts. Part I shall provide the technical proposal and management approach, and Part II shall address costs. The proposals shall be prepared on 8.5 x 11 inch paper, with one and one-half line spacing or double spaced, in at least 10-point type. Part I of the proposal should, as a minimum, describe the proposed concept thoroughly. This should include naming the proposed chemical(s) or technology, indicating why there is reason to believe it will be effective, and showing the types of fires for which its use is suggested. In addition, the document should describe the experiments proposed to obtain the proof of concept and the criteria for success, and the performance schedule. In particular, Part I of the proposal shall include: (a) a cover page including BAA number, proposal title, technical and administrative points of contact including mailing addresses, telephone numbers, electronic mail addresses, and facsimile machine numbers; (b) a one-page summary identifying 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 no 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/subcontractor relationships, government research and facility interface, and planning, scheduling and control practices. Part I must be no longer than 10 pages in length, including up to one appendix for figures. Foldouts shall be counted as a single page. The contents of the appendix shall be limited to figures that directly support items discussed in the text of the proposal. If items are included in the appendix which are not covered in the basic proposal, the proposal may not be reviewed. Proposals with Part I in excess of 10 pages may not be reviewed. Proposals of fewer than the maximum number of pages will not be penalized. Part II of the proposal shall be no longer than 10 pages and shall include a one page summary. 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 Offerer s 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 10-point type. The original and one copy of each abstract shall be received no later than February 6, 1998, by: the SERDP Program Office, 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 303, Arlington, Virginia 22203, TEL: 703-696-2117; 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 20, 1998, 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. Any Offeror at their election can submit a proposal regardless of whether they are invited to submit a proposal. 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; (3) the Offeror's 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 Scientific/Peer Review Panel. The primary basis for selecting proposals for acceptance shall be technical importance to the NGP and funds availability. The Government shall use selected support contractor personnel (Gamboa International Corporation, 3920 Oak Street, Fairfax, VA 22030) 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 tasks. Contractor personnel are required to sign non-disclosure statements. By submission of your proposal, you agree that your proposal information may be disclosed to the abovementioned contractor for the limited purpose state above. Any information submitted with your proposal that you do not consent to limited release to the above referenced contractor must be clearly marked and submitted segrated 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. 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. 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 conform 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: 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 permit a full understanding of the content of the rate(s) and how it was established. As a minimum, submission should identify: 1) all individual cost elements included in the forecast rate(s); 2) the basis used to prorate indirect expenses to cost pools, if any; 3) how the rate(s) was calculated; and 4) the distribution basis of the developed rate(s). c. Major Equipment: 1) It is the policy of the Department of Defense that all commercial and nonprofit contractors provide the equipment needed to support proposed research. In those rare cases where specific additional equipment is approved for commercial and nonprofit organizations, such approved cost elements shall be "non-fee-bearing." 2) An itemized list of permanent equipment is required, showing the cost for each item. Permanent equipment is any article of nonexpendable tangible property having a useful life of more than two years and an acquisition cost of $500 or more per unit. The basis for the cost of each item of permanent equipment included in the budget must be disclosed, such as: a) Vendor Quote: show name of vendor and number of quotes received and justification if intended award is to other than lowest bidder. b) Historical Cost: identify vendor, date of purchase and whether or not cost represented lowest bid; include reason(s) for not soliciting current quotes. c) Estimate: included rationale for estimate and reason for not soliciting current quotes. d) Special test equipment to be fabricated by the contractor for specific research purposes and its cost. e) Standard equipment to be acquired and modified to meet specific requirements, including acquisition and modification costs, listedseparately. f) E (0365)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0007 19980105\A-0007.SOL)