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

B -- SPECIAL STUDIES/ BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT DUE 022699 POC Carole Mattice,(703)697-6259 or Joyce Rose,Supr.Contracting Specialist,(703)695-2564 BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT The Deputy Director, Operational Test & Evaluation/Live Fire Test & Evaluation (DOT&E/LFT&E) is soliciting proposals to identify and test highly effective, passive, ullage fire and explosion suppression systems. BACKGROUND: If an ignition source is introduced to a fuel tank partially filled with fuel under steady state conditions, combustion will occur and a flame front will propagate away from the source. The space inside a fuel tank where fuel vapors are located above the liquid fuel is defined as the ullage space. Penetration by missile fragments and detonation of high explosive ballistic rounds into tanks containing fuel mists and vapors (ullage) will cause explosive flame fronts (explosions) to be generated. The pressures generated by these flame fronts will, when impacting fuel tank structure, cause significant structural deformation and failure, leading to cascading fires or fuel starvation of engines. The velocity, at which the flame front travels depends upon the amount and rate of energy released. A relatively large and rapid energy release by the combustion process causes a supersonic wave or flame front with a rapid rise and large increase in the pressure. This phenomenon is referred to as a detonation. A relatively small and slow energy release causes a subsonic flame front with a slow rise and low increase in the pressure. This phenomenon is called a deflagration. Jet fuels typically deflagrate with overpressures normally less than 200 psi. When the combustion overpressure is sufficiently large to damage or destroy portions of the structure, the combustion process is referred to as an explosion. For many years, protection of a weapon system against fire has usually meant engine firewalls, engine compartment venting, and fire detection and possibly extinguishing in the engine compartments and crew stations. These protection measures were primarily installed to combat safety type fires that occur in engine compartments. However, studies of the combat ballistic data over the past 25 years have revealed that fires and explosions can occur in other areas, such as fuel tank ullage and the void spaces around the tanks, and that these fires are a major contributor to aircraft loss. Consequently, a mature technology for the suppression of fires and explosions has been developed over the past 15 years. In World War II, the Russians pumped engine exhaust gas into the fuel tanks of their long range bombers; and the Marine's F-4U used fuel tank inerting in the wing tanks of their early models. There are many suppression techniques currently available depending upon the location of the flammable vapor. Probably the most widely used technique is the installation of either flexible or rigid lightweight safety foam in spaces where flammable mixtures could occur. For example, flexible, reticulated (porous) polyurethane foam can easily be installed in ullage spaces. As the fuel is drawn from a tank, some of it adheres to the foam. When ignition occurs in the ullage space, the wetted foam significantly reduces the combustion overpressure by rapidly absorbing and transferring heat away from the ignition point. The foam is also a locally rich zone, and the small pores interfere with the mixing action that is characteristic of a flame front. Foams typically displace 3% of the fuel by volume, and approximately 2% will adhere to the foam skeleton. Inert gases can also be used to inert the ullage spaces of a fuel tank. Inerting systems prevent the initiation of combustion by reducing the oxygen concentration of the gaseous mixture to below the combustion limit; making the fuel-air mixture too rich to support combustion. The disadvantage to these systems is that they are big and bulky. Small volume, lightweight, active fire and explosion suppression systems have also been developed for fuel tank ullage. This type of system operates by detecting an ignition source and then rapidly dispersing a chemical fire-suppressing agent. Since the sensors are line of sight type detectors, complex voids and multicell tanks require multiple detector/sensors and possibly multiple dispensers. This complexity can lead to inadvertent discharge or even a false indication of a fire. These active type of fire suppression systems are ineffective if the peak combustion overpressures are reached before the chemical agent is dispensed. Furthermore, the logistics support for the bottled systems are high. Toxicity and corrosive properties of the gaseous and the dry chemical suppression agents are also detrimental. BAA OBJECTIVE: To identify through testing and evaluate the most promising techniques of passively preventing or suppressing ullage fires and explosions. The LFT&E Office wishes to sponsor testing of passive systems which will help mitigate the problems of the fire and explosion potential onboard aircraft (military and civilian) as well as other platforms which could suffer from these effects (land combat systems, ships etc.). Passive systems do not require any interaction by aircraft/ground vehiclecrew members. They do not require electrical or other power from the host vehicle. PRODUCTS: The outcome of work under this project will be a report that will document promising techniques of ullage fire/explosion suppression and the degree of effectiveness versus various ballistic threats and capable of integration within military weapons fuel systems. BACKGROUND: This office funds Joint Live Fire (JLF) Test Programs which, as one of its missions, assess the survivability of platforms to a variety of potential threats (including those which could cause ullage fire and explosion). Over the past year, this office has found several companies who claim to have developed a capability to reduce the probability of fire and/or explosion in fuel tanks. Though similar products have shown promise in the past for reducing the potential for explosive fires, they were incompatible with aircraft systems because they displaced too much fuel, were too heavy, were susceptible to corrosion and/or chaffed coatings on fuel tank walls. These types of issues need to be resolved before being integrated with any combat vehicle. The LFT&E office desires to test the capabilities of new passive systems in a way in which would be fair and equitable across all manufacturers as well as to be sufficiently representative from the standpoint of test realism. Hence, the LFT&E office has structured a program under the aegis of the JLF program and budget to accomplish these objectives without undue delay and cost. Our intent is to cover the cost of the test execution with manufacturers providing materials to make them available for destructive testing at no cost or liability to the government other than access to the test data involving their materials. No funds will be available nor additional time allowed for system development. SUBMISSIONS: Offerors are encouraged to submit concise, but descriptive, proposals. Proposals for these concepts will be accepted until 4:00 PM EST on Feb. 26, 1999. The proposal, including the original signed copy, five additional copies, and one copy on a 3 1/2" diskette (DOS-formatted, MS Word 6.0 or lower) all referencing BAA 99-01 must be submitted to: Deputy Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, Live fire Test and Evaluation (DD,OT&E/LFT), 1700 Defense Pentagon, Room 1C730, Washington, DC, 20301-1700. All technical questions concerning this BAA should be addressed to Mr. Timothy A. Wise (twise@dote.osd.mil). E-mailed proposals are acceptable and encouraged (provide backup hard copy postmarked no later than 26 Feb 99). Proposals will be selected through a technical/scientific decision process with technical considerations being most important. The primary basis for selecting proposals shall be technical (i.e., importance to passively reducing the vulnerability of fuel tanks due to ullage fires and explosions). 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 tested. No evaluation will be made without a proposal to perform the specific effort within an estimated cost and time framework. Offerors, if selected, must be willing to cooperate and exchange information with the Department of Defense. This BAA is for soliciting information test hardware only, no contracts will be awarded in conjunction with this BAA. PROPOSAL CONTENT: Proposals shall provide a technical proposal and management approach. The proposal shall he prepared on 8.5 x 11 inch paper, with one and one-half line or double line spacing, 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 evaluation criteria listed below. In addition, the proposal shall include (a) a cover page including BAA number; proposal title, submitting organization, office code and address, principal investigator's name, mailing address, telephone number, electronic mail address and facsimile machine number, administrative/contracting representative's mailing address telephone number, electronic mail address and facsimile machine number, (b) a one-page summary identifying any technical ideas to be pursued and their expected impact on the state-of-the-art of passive ullage fire protection, (c) a description of technique, detailing how the system passively reduces or eliminates ullage fires and explosions, and how it can be implemented within military fuel tank, (d) a description of expected results, products, and transferable technology expected from the project, (e) a schedule for system test availability, (f) a statement of the technical rationale that substantiates the schedule and justifies the overall technical approach of the proposal, (g) a summary, not-to-exceed one-page, of any proprietary claims to results, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype, (h) a section describing relevant capabilities, accomplishments, and work in these or closely related areas along with the qualifications of proposed subcontractors. The total proposal must be no longer than 15 pages (not including the cover page, appendices curriculum vitae). Foldouts shall he 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 will not be reviewed. Proposals in excess of 15 pages may not be reviewed. Proposals of fewer than the maximum number of pages will not be penalized. An abstract is not a requirement for submission or selection of a proposal. Any offeror whose abstract is found to be consistent with the intent of this BAA will be invited by March 31, 1999, to provide a 25 minute briefing (followed by five minutes of questions and answers). Such an invitation does not assure subsequent approval of concept. Regardless of the recommendation, the decision to submit or not submit a proposal is the responsibility of the offeror. EVALUATION/AWARD PROCESS: Evaluation of the abstracts, proposals and brief will be performed using the following criteria, listed in descending order of relative importance: (1) technical quality and compatibility with military fuel tanks of the proposed product/technique, (2) relevance to the ullage protection 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 anticipated cost of the technique. Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by a Scientific/Peer Review Panel. The Panel will be composed of experts in the field of ullage protection (aviation and ground vehicles). The Panel will recommend to the Chairman a subset of the acceptable proposals for award, which will meet the passive ullage protection goals. The Chairman would then review the recommended proposals. His mission will be to review all recommended proposals and make appropriate recommendations to the DOD Contracts office. The approved offerors will make a concise (30 minute) presentation of the proposals to the Scientific/Peer Review Panel, usually in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Principal investigators of the recommended projects may attend, as coordinated with the Chairman, who will provide specific guidance for this presentation, including date, time, and location. Contract award selections will be recommended by the Chairman, who will submit these recommendations to the DOD Contracts office. The Defense Supply Service-Washington (DSSW) Contracts Office, the contracting agency for this effort, will make contract awards within a reasonable period of time. The DSS-W Contract Office point of contact is Ms. Carole Mattice, Contract Specialist telephone (703) 697-6259 or Ms. Joyce Rose, Supervisory Contracting Specialist, (703) 695-2564. A Defense Department member will be designated a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) for each contract, as recommended by the Chairman. It is the policy of DOT&E and 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. Posted 01/15/99 (W-SN288451). (0015)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0014 19990120\B-0004.SOL)