U.S. AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY

MUNITIONS DIRECTORATE


BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

2006

TACTICAL NETWORK SYSTEMS 




Published in the Federal Business Opportunities on 18 January 2006,
MNK-BAA-06-0004.

Air Force Research Laboratory Munitions Directorate Contracting Division,
AFRL/MNK, 101 West Eglin Boulevard, Suite 337, Eglin AFB, FL  32542-6810

Direct inquiries to the Technical focal points listed in each research
area; or to Ms. Brenda M. Soler, Contracting Officer, (850) 883-2680,
e-mail:  brenda.soler@eglin.af.mil.



TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Abstract

Part I Research Interests

A.	Introduction

B.	Mission

C.	Prospective Research Areas

Part II Proposal Preparation

Part III Proposal Evaluation

Individual Proposal Evaluation Template
 
ABSTRACT:

The Munitions Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory, Eglin AFB,
FL is interested in receiving research proposals in the areas of:

- WIRELESS NETWORKS and GATEWAYS

- GROUND MOBILE GATEWAYS

- REMOTE SENSING

Proposals should describe scientific study and experimentation to increase
knowledge and understanding in these areas.

This Broad Area Announcement consists of three parts (ATTACHMENT 1):

	PART I ? Research Interests
	PART II ? Proposal Preparation
	PART III ? Proposal Evaluation

ATTACHMENT 2 of this Broad Agency Agreement consists of the Individual
Proposal Evaluation Template.

The cost of preparing proposals in response to this announcement is not
considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract or any
other contract.  It is, however, an allowable expense to the normal bid
and proposal indirect cost specified in FAR 31.205-18.	Companies
responding to this announcement are cautioned that only a Contracting
Officer may obligate the Government to any agreement involving expenditure
of Government funds.

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) constitutes a solicitation for
proposals under the provisions of PL 98-369, the Competition in
Contracting Act of 1984.  The BAA describes research requirements and
methods of preparing and submitting proposals.
	







 


AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY MUNITIONS DIRECTORATE

TACTICAL NETWORK SYSTEMS BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)
MNK-BAA-06-0004



PART I - RESEARCH INTERESTS

A.  INTRODUCTION

This is a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) of the Air Force Research
Laboratory Munitions Directorate (AFRL/MN) under the provisions of
paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which
provides for the competitive selection of research proposals.  Proposals
submitted in response to the BAA that are selected for award are
considered to be the results of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of PL 98-369, the Competition in
Contracting Act of 1984.  Tactical Network Systems proposals may also be
submitted for the acquisition of test assets.  In the event these
submissions are selected for award, they could be awarded under the
authority of 10 U.S.C. 2373, Acquisition for Experimental Test Purposes. 
 

For purposes of this announcement, AFRL/MN intends to contract with
educational institutions, non-profit organizations, and private industry
for research in Tactical Network Systems.  Research is defined to be
scientific study and experimentation directed at developing technologies,
components, and quick reactive capabilities (QRC) for tactical level C4ISR
systems.  This work includes, but is not limited to, battle group
interoperability; tactical C4ISR network analysis, design, development,
and assessment; sensor and datalink design, development, and assessment;
and implementation, training, and CONOPS design and development of
tactical C4ISR systems.  Potential areas of interest include QRC component
design, development, miniaturization, hardening and assessment; tactical
network and control design and integration; remote sensor design,
development, and assessment.  It is an enhancement to related exploratory
and advanced development programs. 

The program should be designed to demonstrate well defined and substantive
research results, should not be overly ambitious or open-ended, and should
not be a paper study that inherently requires a substantial testing
effort; however, there is the possibility of experimental testing to
support battle lab experiments proposed under this BAA.  Under some
circumstances, we expect that narrowly focused white papers or proposals
for advanced research may be required during the time of this open
announcement.  Under those circumstances, a specific or special BAA
amendment may be issued describing the requirement in greater detail,
defining funding available, elaborating on white paper or proposal
submission due date and format, and possibly providing more specific
evaluation criteria.  

Persons/firms contemplating submission of a proposal to AFRL/MN should not
only carefully examine this BAA, but are also strongly encouraged to
contact the appropriate AFRL/MN technical Point of Contact (POC)
identified in this publication to ascertain the extent of interest which
AFRL/MN may have in a specific research project. Proposals may be
submitted at any time during the period the BAA is open.  However, prior
to submitting a proposal, offerors are encouraged to submit a two-to-three
page white paper on their proposed research topic to the key AFRL/MN
technical POC(s) who have been contacted for each area of interest.  The
purpose of the white paper is to preclude unwarranted effort on the part
of an offeror whose proposed work is not of current interest under this
BAA.  Those offerors submitting white papers found to be consistent with
the intent of this BAA may subsequently be invited to submit a proposal. 
The proposal shall be in accordance with the instructions in Part II. 
Such invitation however does not assure that a contract or assistance
instrument (grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction) will be
awarded.  Proposals submitted may be evaluated as they are received or
held for consolidated evaluation.  There will be no further correspondence
between the Government and Offerors if their white papers are not selected
for award.  However, Offerors may call the AFRL/MN technical POC directly
for selection status. 

Notice to Foreign-Owned Firms:	Such firms are asked to immediately notify
the Air Force technical point of contact cited below upon deciding to
respond to this announcement.  Foreign offerors should be aware that
restrictions may apply which could preclude their participation. 

This BAA may be amended as needed to provide specific further defined
information regarding a research area.	In that case, either white papers
or technical and cost proposals in accordance with Part II may be
requested, and more specific instructions may be provided.

A contract or assistance instrument could be awarded as a result of this
BAA, as appropriate.  We expect most awards with universities and
non-profit organizations to be grants.	In addition to being posted on
http://www.fedbizopps.gov, all Federal grant opportunities under this BAA
are posted at http://www.grants.gov.  For the purpose of this BAA, the
size standard is 1000 employees (NAICS 541710).  

Note that there is no inherent funding associated with this BAA. 

This BAA will remain open for one year or until superseded.  It will be
reissued periodically and may be amended at any time.  Proposals submitted
in response to this BAA will be accepted through 31 January 2007. 

The descriptions of the technical areas are organized by scientific
discipline, and the reader may note some overlap between sections.  To
contact an AFRL/MN POC by mail, include branch or division symbol and POC
name in the following format: 

AFRL / (Branch or Division Symbol)
Attn:  (Point of Contact)
101 W. Eglin Blvd. 
Eglin AFB, FL 32542-6810

If you have general questions about the proposal preparation guidance,
please contact MiMi Martin, AFRL/MNK, at 850-883-2675,
mimi.martin@eglin.af.mil or Brenda Soler, AFRL/MNK, at 850-883-2680,
brenda.soler@eglin.af.mil.   




B. MISSION

AFRL/MN has been tasked under the Battlefield Air Operations (BAO) Kit
program for the rapid improvement of warfighting capability.  The
improvements are for the benefit of warfighters including, but not limited
to, the Combat Air Controllers and Tactical Air Control Party (TAC-P)
personnel.  This is a matter of our highest priority.  The Battlefield
Airman (BA) concept was initiated to transform the Combat Controllers,
TAC-P, Para-rescue, and Tactical Weather troops into a single fighting
force using common equipment, tactics, and training procedures.  It has
recently been adapted as a transformation process across the AF.

Recently the BA concept was expanded to include the AF Security Forces
(SF).  Transformation of the SF personnel into combat coded troops will
eventually reduce critical manpower issues and costs associated with the
Air Expeditionary Force (AEF) concept.	It will involve common equipment,
interfaces, and training procedures throughout the Air Force.  




C. PROSPECTIVE RESEARCH AREAS

The following narratives are intended to provide an abbreviated
description of the prospective research areas mentioned in the ABSTRACT. 
These descriptions are not meant to be exhaustive, but rather to challenge
the reader to create and submit truly creative proposals that have the
potential to dramatically shift existing paradigms.  Further, these topics
are not intended as an all-inclusive list.  These descriptions furnish
specific examples of areas of interest and Directorate focal points
associated with these technology areas.  However, any submitted white
paper or proposal must be grounded in achievable technology goals.


WIRELESS NETWORKS

The goal of this work is to perform wireless network research in the areas
of: self-forming, self-healing wireless networks for tactical level C4ISR,
threat intercept, and threat intercept/interdiction applications. 
Hardware and software solutions should support inter and intra-team
communications for tactical missions.  Networks should include, but are
not limited to, communicating voice, text, video, whiteboard, and
personnel location and status among team members and the C2 elements for
targeting and situational awareness.  The objective is to design, develop
and integrate commercial and military components and systems to form
wireless networks that are highly mobile and which take tactical data and
information and link them to C4ISR architectures for all types of
targeting.  These networks move sensor, positional, and other tactical
data from the soldier in the field to multiple levels of command and
control.  Time critical targeting information generated by the soldier in
the field needs to be integrated into the global grid for a common
operating picture and joint operations.  Network development also needs to
provide for an inter-team, situational awareness capability that allows
personnel to communicate information at all levels (voice, text, video,
etc.).	This effort is focused on Special Operations Forces (SOF) troops,
but also includes Security Forces, Battlefield Airman, and many other
government related applications.  Other areas of interest include: low
frequency/high bandwidth communications, data and information fusion
techniques, data compression techniques, data storage and retrieval
techniques, concept of operations analysis, mission planning, and training
procedures.  This may require combinations of centralized data fusion with
decentralized communication networks.

Jerry Provenza				Mark OHair
AFRL/MNAV			or		AFRL/MNAV
850-883-2532				850-883-2531
jerry.provenza@eglin.af.mil		Mark.ohair@eglin.af.mil 	  
	     

GROUND MOBILE GATEWAYS

The goal of this work is to perform communication reachback research in
the areas of:  tactical communications among forwardly deployed, remotely
accessible, or rapidly deployed personnel and various levels of command
and control and tactical forces.  The objective is to develop mobile
reachback systems for SOF, Security Forces, and Battlefield Airman troops
that bridge communications between tactical operations at a variety of
local, base, and joint level command and control.  These networks will use
a variety of existing networks (satellites, airborne, ground radios, all
forms of data links, cell phones, paging systems, etc) and develop the
necessary hardware and software to build mobile reachback systems.  The
architecture of this communication gateway is expected to be open and
flexible across a very broad spectrum of frequencies and operational
situations.  This may require the passing and fusing of real-time
targeting data and situational awareness information.

CMSgt Donald Clabaugh			Mark OHair
AFRL/MNGN					AFRL/MNAV
850-883-1653				850-883-2531
donald.clabaugh@eglin.af.mil		mark.ohair@eglin.af.mil


REMOTE SENSING

The goal of this work is to perform remote sensing research in the areas
of: robotic control and systems, small/lightweight tactical cameras and
sensors, integration of sensor information into dedicated and distributed
network systems, operational placement of remote sensors, data storage and
retrieval, switching, reporting, and unmanned systems for tactical level
C4ISR.	The development of these applications also includes the
integration of small unmanned systems to deploy remote sensors and collect
tactical level information.  The objective is to bring a systems level
approach to development of remote sensing and not just to the sensors
themselves.  In the case of small or micro-systems, size, weight,
endurance, etc. are all trade-off variables that must be approached via a
systems integration perspective.  This effort is particularly interested
in developing the remote sensors along with their methods of deployment,
sustainment, and data extraction.  The primary customers are SOF, Security
Forces, and Battlefield Airman, but there are many government related
organizations that could benefit from these systems.  This effort may
require individual component level (hardware or software) development as
well as entire network level planning, development, and integration for
remote sensing.

Jack Cocchiarella				Mark OHair
AFRL/MNAV			or		AFRL/MNAV
850-883-2708				850-883-2531
claude.cocchiarella@eglin.af.mil		Mark.ohair@eglin.af.mil  



PART II 

PROPOSAL PREPARATION GUIDANCE

General:  If you prefer, or at the AFRL/MN Technical POC?s request, you
may submit a proposal vice the white paper.  However, before submitting a
research proposal, you may wish to further explore proposal opportunities
by contacting the AFRL/MN Technical POC to verify that you have a topic
that is of current interest to the Air Force.  In conversations with any
Government official, be aware that only warranted contracting and grants
officers are authorized to commit the Government.  A proposal may also be
solicited by a warranted United States Air Force Contracting Officer or
Grants Officer upon selection of a white paper topic of interest, or
solicited as a part of a special amendment to this BAA that identifies a
specific technology development requirement. 

A.  Each proposal submitted should consist of two volumes. Volume 1 should
provide the technical proposal and Volume 2 should address the price/cost
portions of the proposal.  Volume 1 should be limited to a total of 20
pages, including resumes, charts, figures, tables, etc.  Pages in excess
of the specified 20 pages may be removed and returned to the offeror
before evaluation starts.  A page is defined to be one side of an 8.5 x
11-inch piece of paper with information on it.	Minimum print size is
10-point type, Times New Roman or Arial.  All proposals must be submitted
in hard copy or by electronic media (floppy disk or CD-ROM in Word or
Portable Document File (pdf) format) directly to the office listed in the
applicable BAA.  Be sure to mark your proposal with the specific BAA
number to ensure that it receives proper consideration.    Proposals
submitted on disk are to be submitted in Microsoft Word 2003 or later
format.  It is preferred that the pricing portion of the cost proposal on
disk be provided in Excel.  Note: The preferred format for all proposals
is via electronic means.  The Government intends to work proposals and
awards through electronic means.  To do business with the Air Force
Research Laboratory Munitions Directorate (AFRL/MN), you must have
software packages that are compatible with Microsoft Office 2003.

B.  The technical portion of the proposal, Volume 1, should contain the
following: 
1.  A title, date, and abstract that includes a concise Statement of Work
and basic approaches to be utilized. The Statement of Work should indicate
the effort intended for each period of research. 
2.  A reasonably complete discussion stating the background and objectives
of the proposed work, the approaches to be considered, and the resources
to be employed.  Include also the nature and extent of the anticipated
results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to the
accomplishment of the agency's mission. 
3.  The names, brief biographical information, and a list of recent
publications of the offeror's key personnel who will be involved in the
research.  Documentation of previous work or experience of the proposer in
the field is especially important. 
4.  The type of support, if any, the offeror requests of the Munitions
Directorate, e.g. facilities, equipment, and materials. 
5.  The names of federal, state, local agencies or other parties receiving
the proposals and/or funding the proposed effort or efforts of a similar
nature.  If none, so state. 
6.  The identity of facilities, specialized equipment, or other real
property to be used for the work, if appropriate for an understanding of
the technical work to be conducted. 
7.	Identify all on-going Government contracts and related past
contracts or assistance instruments.  Provide a technical point of contact
and telephone number for each contract cited. 

C.  The cost portion of the proposal, Volume 2, should contain the
following: 
1.  Proposal Pricing Cover Sheet for total proposal. 
2.  Summary by cost element and profit for each contract line and sub-line
item and for the total proposal. 
3.  Labor summary for total proposal by categories, rates, and hours. 
Include an explanation of how labor rates are computed, including base
rates and escalation.  Show the level of effort, if applicable. For
proposals from universities, the times and amounts to be charged should be
identified by academic year and summer effort. 
4.  Identification of indirect rates by fiscal year, an explanation of how
they were established, and the base to which they apply. 
5.  Bill of materials detailing items by type, quantity, and unit price,
total amount, and source of estimate.  Provide vendor quotes. 
6.  Summary of all travel by destination, purpose, number of people and
days, air fare, per diem, car rental, etc. 
7.  Consultants by name, rate, and number of days or hours.  Furnish copy
of consulting agreement, and identify prior agreements under which the
consultant received the proposed rate. 
8.  Other direct costs by type, amount, cost per unit and purpose. 
Specifically identify any costs for printing, publication, and computers. 

9.  Subcontractor proposals and price/cost analysis of the proposals
performed by the offeror.  If subcontractor was not competed, include
justification. 
10.  Forecast of monthly dollar commitments for the proposed contract
period. 
11.  Type of contract or assistance instrument proposed. (We expect most
awards to universities and non-profit organizations to be grants.) 
12.  State whether you, and your subcontractors, are a large business,
small business, small disadvantaged business (SDB), woman-owned small
business, HUBZONE small business, Veteran-owned business, Service Disabled
Veteran-owned business, nonprofit, educational, or historically black
college or university. 
13.	Identify and provide any evidence of approved accounting system.
Other terms and conditions, if any. 

D.  Grants, cooperative agreements, and other transactions are encouraged.
 Information regarding these can be found in the AFMC Homepage - site:
http://www.afmc-pub.wpafb.af.mil/HQ-AFMC/PK/pkt/assistance.htm.  The cost
proposals for grants should follow items C.1 through C.13, above, as
applicable for assistance instruments.	Award of an assistance instrument
to an educational institution or nonprofit organization, in lieu of a
contract, will be considered.	 

E.  On occasion, oral technical presentations may be deemed appropriate. 
In such cases, specific guidelines will be provided as needed for the
presentations.	

F.  Options are discouraged unless specifically requested, and unpriced
options will not be considered for award. 

G.  The cost of preparing proposals in response to this announcement is
not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting contract, or
any other contract. It is, however, an allowable expense to the normal bid
and proposal indirect cost specified in FAR 31.205-18. 

H.  Proposals should be sent directly to the MN Technical POC.	Documents
should reference MNK-BAA-06-0004, a technical topic, and the name listed
as a technical POC for that area.  This announcement is open and effective
until superseded.    
 


PART III

PROPOSAL EVALUATION 

A.  Proposals submitted in response to this BAA will be evaluated as
received using the factors given below.  The factors are listed in
descending order of importance.  No further evaluation criteria will be
used in selecting the proposals unless specifically stated in a BAA
amendment.

1.  An integrated assessment of the proposed approach to include
scientific and/or technical merits and associated risks, the potential
contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill BAO (BA and SF) mission
requirements.  Potential value to the government (technical promise) will
be assessed, based on innovation (originality and feasibility) and
desirability from the warfighter. 
2.  The offeror's capabilities, related experience (to include past and
present performance), facilities, techniques, or unique combinations of
these that are integral factors for achieving the proposal objectives. 
3.  The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed
principal investigator, team leader, and other key personnel who are
critical to achieving the proposal objectives. 
4.  The reasonableness and realism of proposed costs and fees, if any, the
proposed cost share by the offeror, if any, and the availability of funds.

5.  The extent to which the proposal supports government field testing
when applicable.

B.  Upon receipt of a proposal, the AFRL/MN technical staff will perform
an initial review of its scientific merit and potential contribution to
the Air Force mission and also determine if funds are expected to be
available for the effort.  Proposals not considered having sufficient
scientific merit or relevance to Air Force needs, or those in areas for
which funds are not expected to be available, may be declined without
further review. 

C.  It is the policy of AFRL/MN to treat all proposals as privileged
information, and to disclose the contents only for the purposes of
evaluation.  Proposals not declined as a result of initial review will be
subject to an extensive evaluation by highly qualified Government
scientists. The offeror must indicate on the appropriate form/page any
limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the
proposal.  Should portions of the proposal be incorporated into a
resulting contract, that portion may be subject to release under the
Freedom of Information Act unless exempt from release.

D. Each proposal will be evaluated based on the merit and relevance of the
specific research proposed as it relates to the overall AFRL/MN program,
rather than against other proposals for research in the same general area,
unless specifically addressed in a BAA Amendment. 
 

ATTACHMENT 2

INDIVIDUAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION TEMPLATE


Research Area Title :						

Evaluation Factors (descending order of importance): 

1.   (50%) An integrated assessment of the proposed approach to include 
scientific and/or technical merits, and associated risks, the potential
contributions of the effort to meet/fulfill BAO (BA and SF) mission
requirements. Assess potential value to the government (technical promise)
based on innovation (originality and feasibility) and desirability from
warfighter

Proposal Risk Assessment*:  High __  Moderate __ Low __

Strengths:





Weaknesses: 





Technical Issues/Clarifications:






* Proposal Risk
High:  Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increase cost,
or degradation of performance.	Risk may be unacceptable even with special
contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. 

Moderate:  Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase
cost, or degradation of performance.  Special contractor emphasis and
close		    Government monitoring will probably be able to
overcome difficulties. 

Low:  Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase cost,
or degradation of performance.	Normal contractor effort and normal
Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.
 
 

2.  (15%) The offeror?s capabilities, related experience (to include past
and present performance), facilities, techniques, or unique combinations
of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposal objectives.

Proposal Risk Assessment*:  High __  Moderate __ Low __

Strengths:







Weaknesses: 







Technical Issues/Clarifications:













* Proposal Risk
High:  No significant related experience, including past and present
performance. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor
emphasis and close Government monitoring. 

Moderate:  Some related experience, but no past or present experience
directly associated with this technology.  Special contractor emphasis and
close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome
difficulties. 

Low:  Significant relevant experience directly associated with this
technology. 



3.  (15%) The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed
principal investigator, team leader, and other key personnel who are
critical to achieving the proposed objectives.
	
Proposal Risk Assessment*:  High __  Moderate __ Low __

Strengths:









Weaknesses: 









Technical Issues/Clarifications:




 



* Proposal Risk
High:  No significant qualifications, capabilities, and experience of key
personnel. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis
and close Government monitoring. 

Moderate:  Breadth of qualifications, capabilities, and experience of key
personnel is lacking in key technologies.  Special contractor emphasis and
close Government monitoring could overcome difficulties. 

Low:  Key personnel possess qualifications and experience required, and
exhibit critical capabilities to perform this effort. 

 

4.  (15%) The reasonableness and realism of proposed costs and fees, if
any, the proposed cost share by the offeror, if any, and the availability
of funds.

Proposal Risk Assessment:  High __  Moderate __ Low __

Strengths:







Weaknesses: 







Technical Issues/Clarifications:













* Proposal Risk
High:  Cost proposed, labor mix and number of hours does not reflect that
the Contractor has a clear understanding of the effort required to achieve
technical objectives.  Risk may be unacceptable even with special
contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. 

Moderate:  Indicators exist that additional labor categories or hours may
be required to complete the technical effort. 

Low:  Cost proposed, labor mix and number of hours reflect that the
Contractor has a clear understanding of the effort required to achieve
technical objectives. 
 


5.  (5%) The extent to which the proposal supports government field
testing when applicable .
	
Proposal Risk Assessment*:  High __  Moderate __ Low __

Strengths:






Weaknesses: 







Technical Issues/Clarifications:














* Proposal Risk
High:  No significant related experience in providing support to
government field testing. Risk may be unacceptable even with special
contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. 

Moderate:  Some related experience in providing support to government
field testing.	Special contractor emphasis and close Government
monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties. 

Low:  Significant relevant experience in providing support to government
field testing.