SPEAD Call 005 - BAA FA8650-17-S-6001 - QandA 2.docx

BAA FA8650-17-S-6001 Call 0005 SPEAD Questions and Answers (2) Q: Section IV.1.a (page 7) of BAA Call 005 states that the Technical/Management Proposal shall address “Estimated vehicle cost (procurement and life cycle) of production-ready system (will not be procured under this IDIQ)”. Does this mean “Shipset Cost” for items that are subsystems or payloads? Also, please advise on the level of ROM detail desired. For example, does the government want a breakout of NRE and single Shipset price? Other?

A: Estimated vehicle cost should include the production costs for each flyable vehicle without payloads or mission systems for proposed technical solution. Non-recurring engineering costs should be reflected separately from vehicle costs and recurring costs. Proposals should reflect the assumptions for the vehicle costs to include amortization schedules as applicable. The USG recommends ROMs reflect enough detail to support follow-on USG planning as the major system level (examples: engine, avionics, vehicle, assembly, test and checkout, etc), additional detail will be provided in subsequent calls.

Q: Will development and delivery of mission platform capabilities such as mission computing include delivery of only prototypes in scope of the ID/IQ contract, or will it also include possible LRIP, short of full production?

A: This is the first step in an accelerated prototyping and experimentation schedule. Follow-on solicitations in the form of Fair Opportunity Proposal Requests (FOPRs) are expected to be issued on an aggressive timeline following this basic award. The USG anticipates the first FOPR to be for procurement of vehicles for experimentation. Additional vehicles may be procured via additional delivery orders or future contracting actions.

Q: Cost/Business Proposal: Is a cover page desired for the cost proposal and, if it is, is the cover page considered part of the one page limit as it is in the Technical /Management Proposal?

A: The cover page is not desired for the Cost/Business Proposal Q: Without specific requirements, there can be no specificity in data assertions. Are data rights assertions expected to be supplied at the time of FOPR submission?

A: Data Rights are anticipated to be submitted for each Delivery Order as defined in the Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR).

Q: During Industry Day, will separate meetings (attend only by the government and supporting contractor team) be held for each awardee to present their material?

A: An Industry Day is not being held for this effort. Separate Kick-Off Meetings will be held for each awardee of the Basic ID/IQ.

Q: The technical/management approach section in Call 005 (page 7) calls for "schedule to accomplish scope of work". The SOW lists many areas that may be the subject of subsequent FOPRs, but scope and timing of those orders is not specified. Is the "scope of work" only the kick-off meeting, or are bidders expected to produce a notional schedule for the entire program as broadly described in the SOW?

A: Proposals should contain enough information to assess projected lead times for deliverables in the core maturation areas for the proposed technical solution.

Q: The Technical / Management Approach asks for input on, "major technical risk and mitigation" but the SOW describes a broad scope of work that will be addressed in more detail in multiple future orders. In the limited space allowed, is there a preference by AFLCMC/WA for bidders to focus on risks around a particular core maturation area, mission set, or the development areas de-scribed under the "1. Program Security" section starting on page 5?

A: Ability to support/mitigate all core maturation areas should be addressed in the risk assessment.

Q: The Data Rights Desired section of Call 005 states that the assertions list included in Section K is due at time of proposals and completed with specificity. Request clarification of desired assertions that should be included with this submission, since without knowing defined scope of the future FOPRs, bidders are not able to evaluate specific data items for delivery. Should data assertions provided with this proposal only apply to information provided in the first order proposal?

A: Section K is not related to Data Rights. Section K is related to Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors or Respondents.

Q: When will the model contract be made available?

A: The USG anticipates releasing a model contract by close of business 5 June.

Q: Please confirm whether a small business subcontracting plan is required as part of the Cost/Business Proposal for the SPEAD Kick-Off Meeting.

A: IAW FAR 19.702(a)(1), a subcontracting plan is required when the contract is expected to exceed $700,000 and subcontracting possibilities exist. The Kick-Off Meeting has a not to exceed of $4,000.

Q: If a small business subcontracting plan is required as part of the Cost/Business Proposal for the SPEAD Kick-Off Meeting, is it the Government’s expectation that goals will be developed based on the $400M IDIQ ceiling value, not at task order levels?

A: A small business subcontracting plan is not required or the Kick-Off Meeting. However, IAW 19.705-1(b)(1), “Except where a contractor has a commercial plan, the contracting officer shall require a subcontracting plan for each indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract.” Therefore, offerors must provide a subcontracting plan for the Basic ID/IQ ceiling value.

Q: In accordance with FAR 19.704, small business subcontracting goals are based on total subcontract value. Could the Government please advise how an offeror should propose a small business subcontracting plan without knowledge of specific delivery order work scope?

A: In accordance with FAR 19.705-1(b)(1) a subcontracting plan is required for an ID/IQ contract. Contractor’s should use company guidelines/policies when developing their goals. It is anticipated that each Delivery Order will be valued over $700,000, so an individual subcontracting plan will be required.

Q: Does the Government recommend minimum goals for small business concerns (SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, SDVOSB) in support of the SPEAD requirement?

A: The government recommends the Small Business Program’s FY20 Goal for the Department of Defense, which is available here: https://business.defense.gov/About/Goals-and-Performance/.

Q: What is the Government’s preferred Open Architecture?

A: The USG will be using open architecture developed by the Skyborg SDA and is in development. Proposals can identify experience with existing open standards such as OMS, FACE and others.

Q: Is there a provision for recovering costs associated with program management functions under the IDIQ?

A: No money will be obligated to the ID/IQ. Program management functions should be charged to individual orders, as necessary, in compliance with FAR Part 31.

Q: Will contract type vary amongst the FOPRs?

A: Contract type may vary by individual order and will be identified in each FOPR.

Q: Will awardees under future FOPRs work as subs to the SDA or directly for the government?

A: Awardee will not be subcontractors to the SDA as the result of an award. However, in accordance with the Call 005, awardees “may be required to enter into Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs) for any portion of the contract requiring joint participation in the accomplishment of the Government's requirement in accordance with (IAW) AFFARS IG 5317.9000.”

Q: Call 005 Section III para 4 states simply, “Foreign participation is not authorized”. However, FA8650-17-S-6001 clarifies on page 19 that primes and subs may employee foreign nationals, subject to limitations on data sharing. Does the expanded language in the STAT BAA take precedence over the statement in Call 005? Or is no foreign participation in reference to just attendees at the Industry Day?

A: Government is still working this question. Please check back.

Q: Is it the government’s intent that the only CDRL on this task order is presentation material (A007)?

A: DO 1, Kick-Off Meeting does not have any deliverables.

Q: Is it the government’s intent to have the proposer’s propose as a single industry entity or should the proposer provide a multi-disciplinary team of industry entities?

A: The proposer should reflect their approach to accomplishing the work scope described in the call. There is no restriction on teaming.

Q: May the proposer supply an appendix above the secret collateral level? If so, is this within the technical page allotment?

A: Submittal of information above the secret collateral level is not requested for this delivery order. A proposer may request submittal of information via the instructions in the Call, however, this information will count against the technical page allotment.

Q: Is it the government’s intent that the technical proposal shall address items listed in Sections 1, 2, and 3 (of pages 2, 3 and 4) of the Basic IDIQ Statement of Work within the ten page limit or is the proposer to only summarize relevant UAS development experience?

A: The Call requests the following as information as part of the Technical/Management Approach for the SPEAD ID/IQ: The Contractor shall describe its capability to perform all aspects of the potential work. That may include a description of its research and development history and competencies, design and analytical capabilities, operational analysis, manufacturing and experimental testing capabilities, flight test capabilities, systems integration capabilities, software practices, and air vehicle production.

Q: Is it the government’s intent that the proposal should not address the software or hardware aspects being developed under the Skyborg SDA? I.E., should the proposers only address the experimentation and prototyping of the Skyborg Hosts?

A: Refer to the above answer. The proposer is also expected to address the ability to integrate open and autonomous mission systems and produce prototypes of autonomous platforms to meet Operational mission sets.

Q: Does the government have an approved MIL-STD-881 WBS for the Skyborg program? If not, which appendix of the revision D standard should be used for the technical and cost volume?

A: The USG does not have a separate dedicated MIL-STD-881D approved WBS. Appendix A – Aircraft Systems includes unmanned aircraft items relevant to this effort. Also refer to Appendix K for Common Elements. Proposers may recommend to include other WBS elements as appropriate.

Q: In regards to Pricing, the proposal requests a single Excel file with unlocked formulas. Historically, a compliant proposal requires a cost volume detailing out the cost rate structure. Is it the government’s expectation that the Excel file will be accompanied with a cost volume detailing rate structure as an appendix? Also, is a template of the excel file going to be provided by the government?

A: The government is not requesting a cost volume detailing out the cost rate structure for the Kick-Off Meeting with a not to exceed of $4,000.

Q: Based on existing LCAAP’s and Skyborg contracts, is it the government’s intent that all content be generated and handled by US citizens only?

A: The USG does not allow foreign participation on the program.

Q: Should contractors who can have a meaningful contribution to Skyborg Prototyping, Experimentation & Autonomy Development (SPEAD), but unable to fulfill the entire scope of the Statement of Work, respond to this call in order to gain entry to the competitive pool for subsequent Delivery Orders?

A: Successful proposers should describe their capability to perform all aspects of the potential work. Partial responses are not expected for awards.

Q: Can you describe the anticipated schedule and phases of SPEAD and the broader Skyborg program?

A: The Skyborg program continues to rapidly evolve. This ID/IQ is anticipated to have several Delivery Orders on accelerated schedules. Each DO will have relevant schedule information issued as appropriate. The SPEAD SOW presents as much information as possible as this program continues to rapidly mature.

Q: Will there be a virtual industry day or additional Q&A period?

A: No, the program does not anticipate a virtual industry day or additional Q&A periods for this initial Delivery Order Call. Individual DOs will have their own schedules and proposal process.

Q: Does the requested subcontracting plan count against the 10 page technical/management volume page count? Or can it be submitted as an appendix without page count impact?

A: The subcontracting plan does not count against the 10 page technical/management volume page count.

Q: Will our submission be considered a Phase 3 SBIR contract if we are fortunate enough to be awarded a contract?

A: WA is utilizing this solicitation to award IDIQs to a pool of vendors. It is WA’s intent for the IDIQ contracts to include the same terms and conditions for all companies regardless of business size or previous work performed.

Q: In compliance with Section 6 (Data Rights Desired), we will submit SBIR data rights assertions as required by the FAR. Will asserting SBIR data rights in our submission be detrimental in the evaluation?

A: Data Rights will not be addressed in the IDIQ, rather on each Delivery Order.

Q: In section IV (Proposal and Submission Information) it states the following: "The model contract for the Basic ID/IQ includes the SOW, CDRLs, ID/IQ ordering instructions, and the DD 254. The Government intends to award uniform contracts to all awardees. Any material exceptions to the terms and conditions may make the contractor ineligible for contract award." Does assertion of SBIR data rights constitute a "material exception to the terms and conditions"?

A: SBIR Data Right are not considered a material exception.

Q: there is some confusion over the Attachments to the 10 page Technical Volume. These would typically not be part of the page count for the submittal. For this BAA response, are Attachments excluded from the 10 page count or included? It is unclear from the BAA contents.

A: Attachments are part of the page count.