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

A -- R&D BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT DUE 031999 POC Carole Mattice, Contract Specialist (703) 697-6259 and/or Joyce Rose, Supr. Contract Specialist, (703) 695-2564 BAA SUBJECT: NGP Research Element 6.A Fire Suppressant Dynamics in the Fire Compartment BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT -- The Executive Director, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), is soliciting proposals under NGP Research Element 6.A Fire Suppressant Dynamics in the Fire Compartment. [NOTE: In addition to this BAA, proposals will be also be solicited within the Government by the SERDP Executive Director.] 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 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/Platform and Materials Technology (ODDR&E/PMT). The NGP goal is to develop and demonstrate, by 2005, 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 "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. A. BAA OBJECTIVE: To develop understanding of the interaction between the suppressant flow, the fire field, and the concentration needed for extinguishment, with an emphasis on cluttered environments indicative of weapons system compartments in whichflame extinguishment must occur in intervals from tenths of a second to 10 seconds. B. EXPECTED PAYOFF: This project will provide the technology base needed to develop physical injection systems that are relevant to conventional fluid suppressants and to advanced fire suppression methods, such as flashing injection, mist generation, and gas-generator product injection. The results will also serve as the basis for engineering design tools (either in the form of data correlations or simple mathematical models) to optimize nozzle placement, guidance for how to test alternative suppression technologies at full scale, and how to rank their relative performance. C. BACKGROUND: Because of the high efficiency of halon 1301 and the absence of alternatives, little has been done to optimize delivery system engineering. Furthermore, flow fields dramatically affect fires and their suppression. This is further complicated if the fire's combustion products are re-entrained into the flames, and a directional flow can prematurely sweep the agent from the fire vicinity, leading to a need for more suppressant and inviting re-ignition of residual hot fuel. Experiments have shown that (a) significantly enhanced agent dispersion can result from improvements in the suppressant delivery system and (b) obstacles can impede the distribution of different suppressants to differing extents. These considerations are especially important for less effective agents and for those fire types that must be suppressed in fractions of a second. D. ESTIMATED COST AND DURATION OF PROPOSED WORK: The government estimate of the cost and time to meet the requirements of this Element is $3,000,000 over three years, with an estimated first year cost of $800,000. It is expected that 2-4 projects might be supported within the estimated resources. Proposers should not consider these estimates to be either minima or maxima; they are provided only as estimates around which reasonable proposals may be developed. It also should be understood 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 reasonable total 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 of this Research Element. 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 encouraged to submit concise, but descriptive, proposals. Proposals for FY 2000 contract awards will be accepted until 3:00 PM EST on 19 March 1999. The proposal, including the original signed copy, six additional copies, and one copy on a 3 " diskette (DOS-formatted, with text in a convertible word processor), all referencing BAA 6a 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 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 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 3:00 p.m. January 19, 1999, 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 12, 1999, 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; (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 of the budget to accomplishing the work proposed under this BAA. Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by a Peer Review Panel chaired by the NGP TPM. Dr. Richard G. Gann, the NGP Technical Program Manager (TPM) and Chairman of the NGP Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC), will Chair the Peer Review Panel selected by the TPM. The Panel will be composed of three or more evaluators. Each proposal will be evaluated and ranked by at least three Panel members. The NGP TPM/TCC will review the Panel results and consider acceptable proposals that best meet the programmatic needs of the NGP, as advertised in the BAA. The NGP TPM/TCC will recommend to the SERDP Executive Director, through the Halon Alternatives R&D Steering Group (HASG) and the SERDP Pollution Prevention Thrust Area Working Group (PP/TTAWG), a subset of the acceptable proposals for award which will construct a balanced program, meeting the needs of the NGP. 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, based on the projects' technical merit and funding, make appropriate selection recommendations to the SERDP Council. The TPM will make a concise 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 FY 2000 SERDP new-start projects prior to 1 October 1999. The Defense Supply Service-Washington (DSS-W) Contracts Office, the contracting agency for the NGP, will make contract awards within a reasonable period of time. A Military Department or NIST official will be designated a Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) for each contract, as recommended by the NGP TPM. It is the policy of the SERDP Program Office and the DSS-W 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 your 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. 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. Points of contact at the Defense Supply Service Washington: Carole Mattice, Contract Specialist (703) 697-6259 and/or Joyce Rose, Supervisory Contract Specialist, (703) 695-2564. Detail concerning additional requirements and amplifying information for preparation of Part II Cost Data can be found at NGP's Web Site; the address is http://www.dtic.mil/ngp/solicitation/html 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 Regulation (FAR) Part 31 and Defense FAR Supplement Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures. Educational Institutions: OMB Circulars A-21 and A-88. Nonprofit Organizations: OMB Circulars A-122, and A-133. 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 basis for the direct labor hours or percentage of effort, e.g., historical hours or estimates, as well as rates and 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. b. Fringe Benefits and Indirect Cost Rates, c. Major Equipment: 1) It is DoD's policy that commercial and nonprofit contractors provide the equipment needed to support proposed research. Where specific additional equipment is approved, approved costs shall be "non-fee-bearing." 2) An itemized list with cost of permanent equipment is required. Permanent equipment is an article of nonexpendable tangible property having a useful life of more than 2 years and an acquisition cost of $500 or more per unit. The basis must be disclosed, such as a Vendor Quote or Historical Cost. : 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, listed separately. f) Existing equipment to be modified to meet specific research requirements, including modification costs. Do not include as special test equipment those items of equipment that, if purchased by the contractor with contractor funds, would be capitalized for Federal income tax purposes. d. Materials and Supplies. e. Subcontracts. f. Travel Costs: List and detail all proposed travel. Project Principal Investigators will be required to attend the NGP Annual Research Meeting in the Washington, D.C. Metro Area, to present their research findings. The meeting duration is 3 days in the June/July time-frame. Travel to scientific meetings requires identification and purpose. F Posted 12/28/98 (W-SN283577). (0362)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0008 19981230\A-0008.SOL)