16--CALL W911W6-15-R-0012 issued under Master Broad Agency Announceent W911W6-15-R-0004

1.0 Purpose & Background Call No. W911W6-15-R-0012 solicits proposals for the Ultra-Reliable Designs-Phase I (URD-PHI) program. URD-PHI is the first phase of the Ultra Reliable Designs (URD) effort which aims to develop reliability criteria for design tools, methodologies, and materials to optimize designs for reliability and sustainment of future aircraft designs. Ultra-reliability has been defined as an order of magnitude improvement in reliability over the current standard. By improving Rm, Army Aviation can achieve higher availability Ao and Am while reducing life cycle costs associated with O&S and reduce the downtime due to maintenance (Mean Down Time). This strategy will keep Future Vertical Lift (FVL) and future aircraft consistent with the Army's vision of maintaining a leaner and more responsive future force. The URD program is broken down into three phases: Phase I: Assessment of reliability/develop reliability criteria Phase II: Develop design tools, methodologies, and materials Phase III: Develop and demonstrate models/simulations and components/sub-systems to verify and validate the tools, methodologies, and materials Note: Phase II and Phase III may be combined. In order to decrease the sustainment burden and align S&T sustainment efforts with the future defense strategy, Army Aviation is currently pursuing a Zero Maintenance (ZM) concept for future aircraft (FVL and Beyond). It should be noted that FVL is not intended to be a Zero Maintenance Aircraft (ZMA), but for it to benefit from the efforts taken to advance toward a ZMA. The goal of ZM is to establish a maintenance free operating period (MFOP) during which an aircraft will perform its mission for a specified number of flight hours without requiring scheduled maintenance. The ZM goals tie directly to the key performance parameters (KPP) and key system attributes (KSA) the DOD has established regarding sustainment: Availability (KPP) o Operational Availability (A o) (local parameter) = Uptime / (Uptime + Downtime) o Materiel Availability (Am) (global parameter) = Number of End Items Operational / Total Number of End Items Materiel Reliability (Rm) = Total Flight Hours / Total Number of Failures (KSA) Mean Down Time, in the context of Zero-Maintenance, is defined as the total time it takes to perform all maintenance necessary to transition from the end of one MFOP to the start of the next MFOP (KSA) Operations and Sustainment (O&S) Costs (KSA) Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) = Total Elapsed Time for Corrective Maintenance/Total Number of Corrective Actions during a Given Period (ZM Metric) Table 1 contains the current metrics associated with ZM, as developed in the ZM workshop. The DOD has identified Rm as one of the key drivers of Ao and Am. Considerable work has already been done in developing tools, methodologies, and materials to increase the reliability of specific components and sub-systems. However, more work is needed to increase the Rm at the aircraft level to achieve an ultra-reliable design. Table 1 Proposed Zero-Maintenance Metrics Metric Threshold Objective Rm TBD TBD MFOP 480 Flt Hr 720 Flt Hr Ao 90% 95% Am TBD TBD Mean Down Time 4.5 Days (216 MMH) 3.0 Days (144 MMH) Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) (Unscheduled)* 3.0 MMH 1.5 MMH *Unscheduled maintenance is defined as maintenance that occurs due to failures that are not related to Materiel Reliability and require corrective action prior to the end of the MFOP (e.g. battle damage, extreme environmental conditions, soldier/crew caused, etc.). 2.0 Scope of Research Effort The Aviation Development Directorate-Aviation Applied Technology Directorate (ADD-AATD) is soliciting technical and cost proposals to explore the area of Ultra Reliable Designs. The objective of the Ultra Reliable Designs-Phase I effort is to assess the materiel reliability of aircraft in the Army fleet and future reliability drivers for future aircraft. The assessment will address the aspects of aircraft design that prevent achieving an order of magnitude improvement in materiel reliability for future aircraft. This shall be examined in the context of overall aircraft materiel reliability, with the understanding that this is comprised of the collective sub-system, component, software and interface reliabilities among others. The Government is seeking efforts in the exploration of Ultra Reliable Designs. Offerors may submit multiple proposals. Each proposal shall describe an effort to address all of the objectives defined below. Offerors are strongly encouraged to take advantage of currently available methodologies, tools, materials, and existing aircraft data sources wherever possible. Offerors should consider current and possible future qualification requirements when addressing the assessment objectives in their proposal. 3.0 Performance Objectives and Constraints Considerable work has already been done developing reliable designs for aircraft. The objective of this research effort is assessing the materiel reliability of aircraft in the Army fleet and future reliability drivers for future aircraft designs. While offeror's should examine the current Army fleet this efforts primary application will be for future vertical lift and achieving the Zero Maintenance concept. The assessment shall recommend reliability criteria and highlight technology gaps for further development. The assessment shall address the following objectives: Identify most and least effective design-for-reliability practices and technologies Identify significant drivers of materiel reliability as it relates to future aircraft Identify and analyze current and future technology transition points applicable to FVL reliability Recommend technology investments needed to achieve ultra-reliability including estimated scopes and timelines Recommend realistic and affordable reliability design criteria for future aircraft Identify development or acquisition policies, processes, and applicable changes needed for ultra-reliability The research objective of this call includes addressing the materiel reliability of the aircraft which is a composite of all the system, subsystem and component reliabilities. Without detailed knowledge of the system, subsystem and component reliability data, a single entity cannot effectively address the composite system reliability. The Government, therefore, anticipates and encourages teaming by interested sources to effectively address the research objectives of the call, subject to disclosure of such arrangements in the proposal and avoidance/mitigation of organizational conflict of interests and/or arrangements with anti-trust implications. 4.0 Call Specific Instructions This call will use the Proposal Submission Process as described in 5.2 of the Broad Agency Announcement, as further supplemented below: 4.1 Due Date for Proposals As stated in the FedBizOpps Announcement 4.2 Proposal Instructions Specific instructions pertaining to the content and structure of provided proposals are provided in the BAA, W911W6-15-R-0004, paragraph 5.2.2 and 5.2.3. Technical proposals are limited to 35 pages total for this Call. In addition to the content required by BAA W911W6-15-R-0004, in the cost volume (paragraph 5.2.3), the offeror shall provide the following: Technical Volume: The offeror shall provide justification of the selection of the solution proposed, benefits of the proposed solution relative to the Ultra Reliable Designs objective and the specific technology area, and a plan to develop, mature, and transition the technology. Cost Volume: If a foreign entity is participating as part of a prime's team, the cost volume shall clearly identify such participant and the Offeror's planned compliance with U.S. export controls, including any required export licensing. If a TIA is proposed the total cost of the proposed effort (including any cost share) must be provided in the same detail/format as those costs which are to be funded by the Government. A fiscal year funding profile shall be included in the cost proposal. The offeror shall provide the applicable CAGE and DUNS number for offeror's company and all proposed subcontractors. 4.3 Period and Place of Performance Offerors should clearly depict their proposed schedule. Anticipated Period of Performance: Not to exceed 18 Months Total (15 technical and 3 for Final Report). 4.5 Funding The award of selected proposal(s) will be subject to availability of funds. The Government anticipates multiple awards under this call, however, reserves the right to award only one or none, based upon the technical merit and affordability of received technical proposals. Anticipated Government funding is approximately $750,000 in total 6.2 funds per award. Government fiscal year distribution is as follows: FY15: $250,000 and FY16 $500,000. A fiscal year funding profile shall be included in the cost proposal. 4.6 Required Government Facilities, Property and Data It is the Offeror's responsibility to identify, coordinate and furnish supporting documentation in the proposal for use of any Government furnished facilities, equipment, or property. Government furnished data will not be provided. Offerors must have access to or be capable of generating the data required to develop and validate the algorithms or systems proposed as applicable. 4.7 Security Performance will require access to and/or generation of technical data the export of which is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C., Sec. 2751 e t. seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, Title 50, U.S.C. App. 2401 et. seq. Prior to award, the successful offeror will be required to provide an Export-Controlled DoD Data Agreement certification number issued in accordance with DoD Directive 5230.25. This certification may be requested from the Defense Logistics Services Center, ATTN: DLSC-FBA Federal Center, Battle Creek, MI 49017-3084, Telephone 1-800-352-3572. Pre-award access to or submission of a classified proposal is not authorized. This Announcement is limited to U.S. firms as Prime Contractors. 4.8 Data Rights The Government desires quote mark Unlimited Rights quote mark , but at a minimum requires quote mark Government Purpose Rights quote mark as defined by DFARS Part 227, to all technical data, deliverables, and computer software developed under this program, and no limitations on the use of delivered and/or residual hardware. It is the Offeror's responsibility to clearly define the proposed data rights for technical data, computer software and each deliverable. Ambiguities will be negatively evaluated against the Offeror. 5.0 Required Reporting and Deliverables The award under this announcement will require a kickoff meeting following award. The award will require delivery of the following data items or deliverables: (1) Program Management Plan, (2) Bi-Monthly Progress, Cost and Performance Reports, (3) Final Report, and (4) Final Briefing Charts. All awards will include a requirement to present the results of the work in a final briefing at Ft. Eustis, Virginia upon completion of all technical effort. 6.0 Evaluation Criteria The evaluation criteria outlined in BAA W911W6-15-R-0004, paragraph 6.1 will be used. 7.0 Other Information In addition to the information provided in BAA, W911W6-15-R-0004, paragraph 7.4 the following applies. If proposing a procurement contract, offerors shall incorporate the subcontracting plan as part of the offeror's proposal submission. DFARS 226.370-8 discusses subcontracting incentive and goals with the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions. DFARS 219.708(b)(1)(A) and (B), discusses the appropriate use of DFARS Clauses 252.219-7003 and 252.219-7004 in solicitations and contract related to small, small disadvantaged and women-owned small business subcontracting plans. Offerors are cautioned that in solicitations where subcontracting opportunities exist, the Government will not execute a contract unless the Contracting Officer determines that the negotiated plan provides the maximum practicable opportunity for SBs, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, and Veteran-owned Small Business concerns or HBCUs/MIs to participate in the performance of the contract. Offerors should note that DFARS 219.705-4 provides for a goal of 5% for SDB concerns and HBCUs/MIs. Additional Proposal Instructions: Proposal preparation costs are not authorized. Proposals shall be valid for a period of six months from the closing date of this call. Technical and cost proposals shall be provided in original plus 3 paper copies and one electronic copy (CD ROM disk format). The cost proposal shall be provided in Excel format for cost verification puposes. Electronic submission of proposals is not authorized under this Call. Proposals shall be submitted to AATD, Attn: CCAM-RDT, Laurie Pierce, Bld. 401 Lee Blvd., Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577. Questions may be submitted in writing via email to Laurie Pierce, laurie.a.pierce2.civ@mail.mil. All questions must be submitted within 14 days prior to the call closing date to ensure a response. This is particularly important with regard to proposal submission questions. All questions and responses received will be posted to FedBizzOpps as an amendment to the call. Proposals received after the date and time specified for closing will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition. This call is issued subject to the availability of funds. Proposals shall be received not later than 24 August 2015; 1400 local (Fort Eustis) time.