REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS (RWP)

RWP Number N00421-21-9-0001

RWP Title: PMA-201 Advanced Aerial Refueling Store Performance Improvements

White Papers Due Date/Time July 20, 2020 / 4 PM EDT Submit White Papers To RWP@cmgcorp.org

N00421-21-9-0001

Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft DivisionOther Transaction Agreement

Statement of Need (SON)

Title of Requirement: PMA-201 Advanced Aerial Refueling Store Performance Improvements

Project Number: N00421-21-9-0001

Estimated Prototype Price: $1,500,000

Estimated Delivery Date of Prototype: Jan 2022

Project Security Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Minimum Acceptable Data Rights: Unlimited

References:1) NAVAIR 03-10JA-34.1 – Technical Manual, Depot, Organization, and Intermediate

Maintenance with Illustrated Parts Break Down, Work Packages 3 and 8. 1 May 2017.2) A/A42R-1 Air Refueling Store Assembly Part Number 31-301-48310-7 Interface Control

Document, 4 DEC 20183) DRAFT /A42R-1 Air Refueling Store Assembly Part Number 31-301-48310-DCU

Interface Control Document, 23376694) NAVAIR 03-10JA-34.2 – Technical Manual, Depot, Organization, and Intermediate

Maintenance with Illustrated Parts Break Down, Work Packages 16 and 18. 1 May 2017.

Problem Statement: The Aerial Refueling (AR) program is developing a next generation Aerial Refueling Store (ARS) called the Advanced Aerial Refueling Store (AARS). At this time, the AR program is intending to field the AARS as a kit upgrade approach to the current ARS. As part of this kit upgrade, the AR program is looking to develop performance improvements to the current ARS that can be incorporated into the AARS to increase reliability, safety, and efficiency of the aerial refueling store, while decreasing the weight and/or part count.

Desired Objective (product, system, tool, capability, process, analysis or model):

The objective of this effort is to produce a hydraulic system design and prototype kit that can be installed and flight tested as part of a larger prototype Advanced Aerial Refueling Store in the Mid FY22 timeframe.

The contractor will be expected to design/develop, produce and test a hydraulic system upgrade that can be installed as a kit into the ARS. It is expected that this process will involve design reviews, component testing, and system testing both on the ground and in the air. PMA-201 will provide an ARS as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) as a tool for the selected contractor to use in designing and developing the hydraulic upgrade kit. The final prototype kit will be installed by the Government (using contractor provided procedures) on a Ready For Issue (RFI)

N00421-21-9-0001

ARS and ground tested, in a joint contractor/Government test, in the ARS lab at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD. The kit will then be flight tested as part of the Government’s AARS program. Flight testing costs will be paid by the Government, but the contractor will be expected to provide on-site engineering support. References 1 and 2 provide a complete overview of the ARS, including its operational principles, performance characteristics, and a parts breakdown. Reference 3 provides an overview of the new control system that is being developed as part of the AARS program mentioned above. This document might be useful when integrating feedback sensors from the new hydraulic system to the new Digital Controller Upgrade.

Minimum capability requirements of the Prototype:This Request for White Papers is looking for refinements and design improvements for the ARS’ hydraulic system that will improve the overall operational capabilities of the store. The current hydraulic system is described in Reference 1. The overall goal of this effort is to improve the performance via reduced weight, reduced part count, and higher efficiency components rooted in 21st century technology. The below paragraphs highlight the main areas of focus for these improvements. Submissions can address all or some of these as kit approaches to the current ARS. NAVAIR may elect to award to one single vendor or multiple vendors, as deemed appropriate.

Focus Areas:1) Reduced Part Count – There are a number of components in today’s store that are quite

complex, whose removal could help simplify the store complexity. For example, some components for consideration would be the venturi and shutoff valve, and the hydraulic flow control and priority valve, Reference 4. While removal may be considered, the key functions that they provide must not be lost. This effort is not looking to replace the basic functionality of the hose reel response system/servo valve positioner, as it would require a complete hose reel response requalification, which is beyond the scope of the effort. While some performance verification will be required with this effort, the need for complete requalification of hose reel response performance will negatively affect the evaluation of the submitted white paper.

2) Improved Efficiency – Redesign of the routing of the hydraulic components can be considered to decrease line losses. Advances in hydraulic systems may allow for new motors and pumps that can decrease weight and deliver improved performance. For comparison purposes, the current system requires the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) to produce about 52 HorsePower (HP). System improvements should target a 25-50% reduction in required HP.

3) Additional Electrical Power Generation – If significant efficiencies in hydraulic performance can be gained, that may be traded for internal generation of electrical power via the RAT, or other means, to power some of the new AARS systems aimed at unmanned aerial refueling.

4) Improved Functionality – For example, incorporate the ability to selectively use the internal fuel pump for fuel transfer back to the tanker, or the ability to start the RAT up at a lower operating airspeed.

N00421-21-9-0001

5) Health Diagnostics - With the change to Government owned software, health and diagnostic capability can easily be adapted to new “smarter” components in these areas. Consideration should be given to sensors/feedback (system pressures/component status) to the ARS controller to help in real time diagnostic/continuous Built In Test (BIT) capability of the hydraulic system, both in flight and on the ground. See Reference 3 for draft AARS Interface Control Document.

In addition to the prototype, deliverables will include a complete Technical Data/Drawing Package (TDP), performance assessment report, and all test data. Component and integrated ground and flight testing will be conducted. This data will be used to develop a performance assessment of the system, to include a relative assessment against baseline ARS performance. The contractor will be expected to support all Government sponsored test events.

Additional Desired Capabilities:

N/A

Evaluation Factors for White Papers (WP):

The Government will conduct an evaluation of all eligible WPs submitted in response to this request for WPs based on an integrated assessment of the following:

The degree to which the solution meets the requirements of the SON. Evaluation of the potential impacts of the data rights assertions. Evaluation of significant nontraditional or one-third (1/3) cost share. Evaluation of proposed ROM price against Government funding profile. Evaluation of requalification risk –complete requalification of hose reel response

performance should be avoided.

White paper responses shall be limited to 10 pages.

*******Only Government personnel will evaluate the White Papers.*********

Production: Successful completion of the initial prototype may result in award of follow-on production under provisions of Other Transaction Authority 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f).

N00421-21-9-0001

WHITE PAPER INSTRUCTIONS

Overview

An RWP is issued by CMG to solicit White Papers from consortium members that detail their proposed technology solutions to address the challenges outlined in the corresponding Government Statement of Need (SON).

CMG members can submit White Papers individually, or collaborate via a team. CMG will work with each interested member to ensure that government expectations are met and statutory compliance is maintained. Draft White Papers must be submitted to CMG by the member deadline specified in this RWP for review for completeness and compliance. Upon completion of that review, the White Papers will be forwarded to the Government by CMG.

CMG members solely are responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RWP. White Papers shall conform to the White Paper Template and adhere to the formatting instructions.

Non-traditional Defense Contractor Participation or Cost-Share Commitment

Each Prototype Project awarded under an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) must meet at least one of the following conditions:

1. There is at least one Non-traditional Defense Contractor (NDC), small business or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent in the Prototype Project, or

2. At least one-third of the total cost of the Prototype Project is to be paid out of funds provided by parties to the transaction other than the Federal Government.

What is an NDC?

An NDC is an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least one year preceding the issuance of a prototype project solicitation, any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the FAR-based Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”). Full CAS coverage is required typically for contracts greater than $50 million. Firm-fixed price contracts and contracts with small businesses are exempt from all CAS requirements regardless of dollar value.

N00421-21-9-0001

How Does an Entity Determine if it is an NDC?

A review of an entity’s DoD cost-plus contracts and subcontracts on which it has performed during the previous year will aid in determining NDC status. If none of the contracts or subcontracts was subject to full CAS coverage, then the entity is an NDC. OTA awards do not impact NDC status, as CAS does not apply to OTAs.

Are Small Businesses Automatically Considered NDCs?

Yes. Since contracts and subcontracts with small businesses are exempt from all CAS requirements, small businesses are deemed NDCs under OT Authority. An entity is considered a small business based upon its applicable North American Industry Classification System (“NAICS”) designation (as described at 13 C.F.R. §121.201) for the specific nature of the work being proposed.

Are Nonprofit Research Institutions Considered NDCs?

The 2018 NDAA made Nonprofit Research Institutions essentially the same as NDCs with respect to OT Authority.

Can a Subsidiary or a Division of a Corporation Qualify as an NDC?

Yes. Provided the definition of an NDC is met, the entity can be at the prime level, team members, sub-awardees, lower-tier vendors or intra-company business units, including a subsidiary or division of a Traditional Defense Contractor.

Regarding NDC Participation, What does “Significant” Mean?

Significant participation is determined on a project basis and is based on the importance of the NDC contribution to the overall execution or outcome of the proposed project. OT Authority statute does not prescribe a monetary threshold or percentage value to justify significance. Examples of “significant” participation are:

Supplying a new key technology or product, or unique capability;

Causing a material and quantifiable reduction in the project cost or schedule;

Causing a measurable increase in the performance of the prototype;

N00421-21-9-0001

Accomplishing a significant amount of the effort;

Value-added analysis not based on percentage of project work or value.

How does a Traditional Defense Contractor Satisfy the Cost-sharing Requirement?

If the member responding to an RWP is a Traditional Defense Contractor and there is no significant participation by an NDC in the project, the Traditional Defense Contractor is required to expend resources on the project amounting to one-third of the project cost. Cost-sharing does not involve funds paid directly to the Government. There are two types of cost-sharing:

Cash—outlays of funds to perform under the project for labor, materials, new equipment or subcontractor effort; sources can include new IR&D funds, profit or fee from another contract, and overhead or capital equipment expense pool;

In-Kind—reasonable value of equipment, materials or other property used in performance under the project.

White Paper Format

The White Paper (WP) template is provided as an attachment to this RWP. The following formatting requirements apply:

Times New Roman 10 (or larger), single-spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches

Smaller type may be used in figures and tables, but must be clearly legible

Margins on all sides (top, bottom, left and right) should be at least 1 inch

Refer to the SON for the requirement specific page limit. The page limit excludes the White Paper Cover Sheet and Affirmation of Business Status Certification(s)

WPs shall include a cover sheet, not counted toward the page limit, that includes:

o Prototype Project Title

o Primary point of contact, secondary point of contact, and FSO, if applicable, including name, address, phone, and e-mail contact

N00421-21-9-0001

information

o Total Solution Rough-Order-of-Magnitude price

Shaded text in the White Paper Template indicates areas for entry of information by the member. Shading should be removed before submittal of the White Paper.

DO NOT SUBMIT ANY CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Technical Requirements

Each WP shall contain the following information:

Background and Benefits of Proposed Solution

Technical Approach, including clearly defined prototype solution

Schedule and Deliverables

Participants, including description of contributions and significance of each

N00421-21-9-0001

Data Rights Assertions: Identify any intellectual property, patents and inventions involved in the proposed solution and associated restrictions on Government use of that intellectual property, patents, and inventions. The following information shall be presented for all assertions:

o Technical data, computer software or patent to be furnished with restriction

o Basis for assertion

o Asserted rights category

o Name of entity asserting restrictions

If no restrictions are applied, insert “None” in each column.

Data Rights Withholding: Identify any technical data or software involved in the proposed solution that shall NOT be delivered for Government use. The following information shall be presented:

o Technical data and computer software being withheld

o Name of entity owning the technical data and computer software

If no restrictions are applied, state No Withholding.

Cost Section Requirements

The Government will be considering affordability in making its source selection decision; therefore, the White Paper shall contain cost information as requested in the table in Section 6.0 of the White Paper Template.

Evaluation Criteria

The Government will conduct an evaluation of all eligible WPs submitted in response to this RWP based on criteria identified within the SON.

Basis for SelectionIt is the Government’s intention to select, negotiate and fund Prototype Projects from the submitted WP(s). The WP selection will be conducted in accordance with the Government’s procedures and the evaluation criteria identified herein. The Government will make a determination whether to:

Select the WP(s), or some portion of the WP(s), and/or

N00421-21-9-0001

Retain the WP(s) in a library for potential future requirements in accordance with the terms of the OTA.

The WP selection decision will be provided to CMG, and the Government will issue a Request for Proposal(s) to CMG for the selected WP(s).

Affirmation of Business Status Certification

Each participant proposed in the WP shall complete the Business Status Certification which is provided as an attachment to this RWP.

These certifications shall be included as an attachment to the WP and will not count toward the page limit.

Export Control

Research findings and technology developments arising from the resulting RWP may constitute a significant enhancement to the national defense and to the economic vitality of the United States. As such, in the conduct of all work under the subsequent PPA(s), the recipient will comply strictly with the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (22 CFR 120-130), the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) and the Department of Commerce Export Regulation (15 CFR 730-774).

Points of ContactQuestions regarding White Paper procedures should be directed to the CMG Contract Management Office, 540-937-6300 or via email to RWP@cmgcorp.org.

N00421-21-9-0001

WHITE PAPER TEMPLATE

RWP Number Insert RWP Number from Request for White Papers (RWP) cover page

Proposed Project Title Insert Title from RWP cover page

Submittal Date To be completed by ConsortiumSubmitted By Insert Consortium Member nameFacility CAGE Code Insert Facility CAGE Code

Consortium Member Point of Contact (POC)**Note: POCs shall be from the prime member’s corporation, please do not insert contact information for subcontractor participants.

POC NamePOC AddressPOC PhonePOC Email

Primary Secondary FSO

Total Project ROM Price

$ Insert Total Proposed Project Price Including 3.8% Consortium Fee

Proposed Project Resource Share

$ Insert Amount of Resource Share (if applicable)

Net Government Cost

$ Insert total ROM price less Proposed Resource Share

Signed (electronic signature is acceptable)

Amounts should be presented in whole dollars only

N00421-21-9-0001

X

SECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND AND BENEFITS OF PROPOSED SOLUTION

Describe the proposed solution, including how the Government’s requirements shown in the Statement of Need are being addressed. Provide a brief description of the “new” capability that will result.

SECTION 2.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH

Describe the design and detailed technical approach for achieving the proposed prototype solution. Clearly describe the proposed prototype and ensure that it is included as a deliverable in Section 3.0.

SECTION 2.1 PROJECT TASKS

Describe the specific tasks required for project execution. If a phased/element approach is indicated in the Government Statement of Need, the tasks shall be detailed by phase/element.

SECTION 2.2 RISKS

Describe the technical maturity of the proposed solution and its readiness to meet the Government’s requirements. Describe any technical, cost and schedule risks associated with achieving the proposed solution. Discuss the plan to avoid complete requalification of hose reel response performance.

SECTION 2.3 FACILITY/PERSONNEL CLEARANCE

The current personnel and facility(ies) level of [Consortium Member name]’s is [Insert classification level].

SECTION 3.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES

N00421-21-9-0001

Milestone Deliverable Estimated Delivery(Months after Award)

Insert list of milestones

Insert list of deliverables associated with each milestone (at a minimum, the proposed prototype and a final report must be included as deliverables)

Insert estimated lead time in terms of months after award for each milestone/deliverable.

The total proposed project duration is [Insert proposed period of performance in months] months from project award.

SECTION 4.0 PARTICIPANTS

N00421-21-9-0001

Participants (including Consortium Member)

Business Status(check one)

Participant Contribution andSignificance to Overall Project

Insert Consortium Member

Traditional Non-traditional Nonprofit

Research Institution

Insert detailed, quantifiable description which addresses the following:

A.)What specific tasks will this Participant be accomplishing for this project?

B.)Why are these Participant's tasks significant to this project?*

C.)How is this Participant uniquely qualified to provide these tasks for this project?

Insert separate row(s) for each additional participant. Delete row(s) as applicable if Consortium Member is the only participant.

Traditional Non-traditional Nonprofit

Research Institution

Insert detailed, quantifiable description which addresses the following:

A.)What specific tasks will this Participant be accomplishing for this project?

B.)Why are these Participant's tasks significant to this project?*

C.)How is this Participant uniquely qualified to provide these tasks for this project?

*Significance is defined as supplying a new key technology or product, accomplishing a significant amount of the effort, causing a material reduction in the cost or scheduling or causing an increase in the performance. Any vendor proposing labor costs must be listed as a participant.

SECTION 5.0 DATA RIGHTS

Data Rights Assertions: All intellectual property, patents and inventions involved in the proposed solution and the associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property, patents and inventions are presented in the table below. If no assertions are being made, state as such.

N00421-21-9-0001

Data Rights Withholding: Identify any technical data or software involved in the proposed solution that shall NOT be delivered for Government use are presented in the table below. If none, state No Withholdings.

Technical Data/ Computer

Software/ Patent to be Furnished with Restrictions

or Withheld

Basis for Assertion or Withholding

Asserted Rights Category

Name of Entity Asserting

Restrictions or Withholding

Identify the technical data/software/patent to be furnished with restriction or withheld (insert “None” if no restrictions apply)

Indicate whether development was exclusively or partially at private expense. If development was not at private expense, enter the specific reason for asserting that the Government’s right should be restricted

Insert asserted rights category (e.g., limited rights (data), restricted rights (software), government purpose rights, SBIR data rights or specifically negotiated license)

Insert corporation or individual

*If COTS licenses will be required, please list them here.

SECTION 6.0 ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE (ROM) COST

Cost Share (if applicable) is proposed as follows:

Cash into Project: [Describe and quantify the proposed cash contribution(s) being made for use on the project, or insert N/A].

In-Kind Contributions: [Describe and quantify the proposed in-kind contribution(s) being made for use on the project, or insert N/A].

N00421-21-9-0001

Cost Element Total Description/Comments

Prime Contractor Labor $ Insert generic position titles, estimated rates and labor hours

Subcontractor/Consultant Labor

$ Insert generic position titles, estimated rates and labor hours. If more than one Subcontractor is listed, provide cost break-out by Subcontractor.

Material/Equipment $ Insert list of proposed material/equipment

Other Direct Costs (ODC)

$ Describe proposed ODC (outside services, conference fees, software licenses, other fees/royalties, etc.)

Travel $ Describe estimated travel (e.g., travel to customer site(s) for meetings, etc.)

Proposed Project Total $ Sum of cost elementsConsortium Fee $ Cost-share amount (if

applicable)Total Project ROM Price $ Amount after cost share

is deductedProposed Project Resource Share

$ 3.8% Applied to Total Price per OTA terms

Net Government Cost $ To be confirmed by CMG

N00421-21-9-0001

Affirmation of Business Status CertificationEach participant shall complete a separate certification. These certifications will not count toward the page limit. Participant Name      Proposed NAICS Code      Industry Size Standard (Small/Large)      DUNS No.      CAGE Code      Active SAM Registration Yes No Expiration Date:     Address 1      Address 2      City/State/Zip      POC Name/Title      POC Phone/Email      

Check one of the following boxes:

Non-traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) — A Non-traditional Defense Contractor is an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the issuance of this Request for White Papers by the Department of Defense, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to Section 1502 of Title 41 of the U.S. Code and the regulations implementing such section.

All small businesses are considered NDCs. A small business is a business concern as defined under Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). To be considered a small business for the purposes of this RWP, a concern must qualify as a small business under the size standard for the proposed North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code, as described at 13 C.F.R. 121.201.

Nonprofit Research Institution — means a nonprofit institution, as defined in 15 U.S.C. §3703, and includes federally funded research and development centers, as identified by the National Scientific Foundation in accordance with the Government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation issued in accordance with 41 U.S.C. §1303(a)(1) (or any successor regulation thereto).

Traditional Defense Contractor — A traditional defense contractor is an entity that does not meet the definition of a Non-traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) or a Nonprofit Research Institution.

This is to certify that the above is accurate, complete and current as of insert date for insert RWP number.

N00421-21-9-0001

Signature (electronic signature is acceptable)

X

Date Signed      

N00421-21-9-0001