QandA.docx

Questions and Answers

AFSOC-OTA-26-001

1. Am i correct to assume that this line in the solicitation:

"Any other capability or service required to enable the rapid development, demonstration, or deployment of solutions that enhance AFSOC mission readiness"

Allows a company to respond with our SensorOS capability (end-to-end solution for LAAD) ISO of AFSOC mission requirements/capability gaps versus services/support focused?

To clarify, this Prototype OTA is not intended to solicit or select a specific “end-to-end” solution (to include SensorOS or any other company’s proprietary platform) as the objective of the effort. The language you referenced is written broadly to allow flexibility in the types of support, capabilities, and services that may be needed to enable rapid development, demonstration, or deployment of solutions aligned to validated AFSOC mission needs and capability gaps.

In other words, the purpose of this OTA is to provide AFSOC a rapid innovation pathway (concept-to-demo-to-fielding), rather than to procure a predetermined system. If a future prototype effort identifies a requirement where your offering is relevant, the awardee may absolutely choose to work with your company as part of execution, but that would be driven by AFSOC mission requirements as they are defined during the effort, not by the solicitation being an open call for complete standalone solutions.

2. While the solicitation mentions "Design, fabrication, integration, and operational employment... [and] additive and subtractive manufacturing," It appears to be heavily services oriented. Can you tell me if the intent to be able to leverage Advanced Manufacturing and Additive Manufacturing from organizations that are not GOCO?

Yes — the intent is to be able to leverage advanced manufacturing (additive and subtractive), design, fabrication, integration, and related technical capabilities from industry, and that includes organizations that are not GOCO. That said, advanced manufacturing is only one segment of the overall contract requirements and intent. This vehicle is structured as an innovation pathway and is generally services/support oriented to enable rapid development, demonstration, and deployment against validated AFSOC needs. The specific mix of “services vs. manufacturing” will ultimately be driven by the task orders (i.e., what AFSOC is trying to prototype/solve on a given effort).

3. The solicitation mentions "Place of Performance: Work will be performed primarily off-site of Hurlburt Field, Florida, at the contractor's facilities or designated range spaces. In some cases, work may be conducted at government sites or during field events. Contractor facility should be within 3 miles of Hurlburt field and the designated range spaces within 55 miles of Hurlburt Field." While our company plans to have factories throughout the U.S., we are currently only located in Torrance, CA. Will this be an issue or do you foresee our inability to respond to parts requests?

The 3-mile (facility) and 55-mile (range) requirements are tied to operational requirements and the need for rapid iteration with AFSOC teams, aircraft, and field events. These are requirements at the time of proposal submission. AFSOC has current needs and must be able to leverage those spaces immediately.

4. Related to the following solicitation statement, “Offerors shall demonstrate, at the time of proposal submission, their ability to support classified efforts, including current or planned facility clearance (FCL) status, personnel clearance eligibility, and processes for safeguarding classified information. Specific security requirements will be defined on a per-task-order basis.” While this appears to be written broadly enough to indicate that we may be eligible with our FCL in the works, could you confirm/deny if that is the case?

The language is intentionally broad because security requirements will vary by task order. In general, having an FCL “in the works” may be acceptable for tasks that are unclassified or that can be structured to allow performance while clearances are being finalized. However, for any task order requiring classified performance, the awardee will need to meet the specific security requirements established for that task (facility, personnel clearance eligibility, safeguarding processes, etc.). Your approach should clearly articulate your current status, timeline, and how you would support classified work when required.

5. Prototype OTA in-kind contribution / resourcing As a reminder, Prototype OTAs commonly require meaningful participation beyond government funding (often described as cost share or in-kind contribution). This can include internally funded labor/engineering, use of company facilities and equipment, materials, test support, and other non-cash contributions that demonstrate the performer has “skin in the game” and can execute rapidly. Where applicable, that approach should be clearly described in your submission and is typically managed/validated at the task-order level.

6. Does the space have to be owned by the Prime, or is it okay if the Prime does not own the space and teams with someone whose space fits the requirement?

No, it does not need to be owned by the Prime, however the Prime must have full control of the facility.