QUESTIONS__ANSWERS.pdf

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS FOR BAA-2019-DOS-AVC-001

1. Topic #10 & 11 Question: Can the BAA fund an experiment that would include a 25 ton shot, at least 10 1 ton shots, and 2500 active source seismograph that would cost over

$1M US?

ANS: Topics #10 and 11 focus on monitoring at regional distances. The goal of an active-source experiment is to calibrate a broad area, utilizing all regional seismic phases with high signal-to-noise ratios at 400 kilometers or so. These topics focus on the use of broadband seismometers. So long as the experiment design has merit, with the potential to achieve the monitoring goal, and the budget justification is detailed enough, the Department would consider proposals with a higher budget.

2. Topic #4 Question: Are you interested in a proposed solution that integrates a UAV with a sensor (i.e., real-time data collection and transmission) or integrates a UAV with a chemical collector (i.e., with analysis/results after retrieval by a land-based laboratory)?

Or either/both?

ANS: This topic aims to develop readily deployable, unmanned aerial platforms for use by CWC inspectors, capable of survey, detection, and sampling of chemically contaminated sites, using proven off-the-shelf technology. To serve the intended purpose, the UAV must sense its environment and either: 1) autonomously decide on what and how to sample, or 2) transmit information to someone who then remotely decides and directs the UAV on sample-taking. It is anticipated that the

UAV would have detection equipment for screening purposes, rather than for conducting actual analyses. For clarity, in either case, the UAV would take samples, and transport them to a location where they could be safely retrieved.

3. Is the sponsor interested in proposals that meet the goal of topic five (tools for investigation of chlorine as a chemical weapon) without involving biomarkers? Would other signatures preserved in plants be considered?

ANS: This topic seeks to identify unique biomarkers of vegetation exposure to chlorine. If successful, the selected project would enable investigators to confirm that chlorine had been used as a chemical weapon. Proposals that seek to identify unique “markers” in vegetation of exposure to chlorine (other than “biomarkers”) will also be considered.

4. Several BAA topics pertain to seismic R&D and nuclear explosion monitoring. Is the sponsor interested in proposals that pertain to other R&D areas relevant to nuclear explosion monitoring, such as atmospheric monitoring of radionuclides?

ANS: DOS/AVC’s nuclear verification mission includes verification of nuclear detonations in any environments, not just underground. However, proposals are invited this time to respond to the specific topics #9-#12 for underground nuclear explosions as posted in this BAA. Additional an BAA or RFP could be issued, if needed.

5. Just want to confirm that the submission vehicle for this proposal is an email? Page 4 of the BAA states:

ANS: YES, this is correct.

Proposals shall be submitted to (see also Section IV of this announcement):

V Fund Proposal Mailbox: Email: AVC-BAA@state.gov

6. Is more detailed information available on the anticipated timeline for proposal review and award notification?

ANS: NO

7. Is there a quad chart template available?

ANS: See template below for the format.

8. Is there a page limitation for the Cost Proposal portion of the proposal documentation?

mailto:AVC-BAA@state.gov

ANS: No. But all the key elements of a reasonable cost proposal should be included.

9. Section I.8 indicates that provisions and potential contract clauses would be included as an attachment to the BAA, however an attachment was not included. Please provide any available potential provisions and clauses for review.

ANS: Individual contracts will be tailored to include clauses regarding the deliverables as appropriate. For example, some may be required to submit quarterly progress/status reports, or semiannually. Some will have a DD-254. It all depends on the specific proposal, and thus there is no real good reason to include a package of universal clauses in the BAA.

10. Propose to determine teleseismic mb for 6 NK tests with station and paths effects inverted together with average magnitudes. Is it relevant topic to propose?

ANS: Please refer to pages 14 and 23 of the BAA for the Relevant Topic.

11. Proposals are to be sent to an E-mail address by 2PM on April 30th, 2019. Is it correct?

ANS: Yes this is correct.

12. The "$150,000, or higher" makes the expected upper end of costs unclear. Is it possible to be more precise about "higher"?

ANS: Please refer to Section II, the fourth (4) paragraph of page #5.

13. In prior years, the page limits were much smaller, more like 6 pages per proposal. The new page limit of 20 pages for Elements 1-4 is much larger. Are significantly longer proposals now expected? Or is the larger range just meant to remove a constraint?

ANS: Please refer to the BAA Section IV, pages 5-10

14. What is the maximum performance time allowed for a proposal?

ANS: The performance period should always be tied to the actual period required to carry out the work, demonstrating specific and visible impact. If certain tasks (such as seismic field deployment) require longer performance period, bidders should so propose and budget them accordingly.

15. If 24 or 36-month proposals are allowed, is the period of performance of concern regarding proposal evaluation and award?

ANS: The performance period by itself is not a factor in evaluation. NO preference for shorter projects over longer projects (or vice versa). However, the V Fund is meant to support projects that would promptly address AVC’s mission gaps and show immediate impacts on arms control verification. The performance period should always be tied to the period required to carry out the work, demonstrating specific and visible impact.

16. If a DD Form 254 Security Classification Specification, which would support the preparation of a Secret response to this BAA?

ANS: For the submission of proposals, there is no need for any DD-254, since there is no contract between the USG and any vendor yet. The proposal should refer to the specific Classification Guide.

Agencies and vendors can submit classified materials on SIPRNet or JWICS to

State Department, so long as the documents are properly marked. No DD-254 is required in any of such communications.

17. The reference (Technical Report TGAL-94-02) cited in Topic 9 as posted on DTIC web is a bit blurry. Any better version available?

ANS: DTIC (Defense Technical Information Center) has just updated that report with a clearer copy, at https://discover.dtic.mil/results/?q=ada284079 or https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284079.pdf

See also https://www.academia.edu/38687784/.

18. On "Topic 7 (CBW19-4). Sequencing techniques for investigation and attribution of biological weapons use. Research Sought: In particular, in support of the Bureau’s mission, AVC is interested in efforts to : (a) develop a method to detect the introduction of synthetic genetic sequences into a bacterium (project completed); and (b) evaluate the use of DNA sequencing for identification of deliberate modifications in a bacterial genome, including addition or deletion of naturally-occurring genetic sequences (project underway).”

In the Research Sought section above, it refers to a) (project completed) and b) (project underway).

What does those terms refer to?

ANS: Those are examples of what the Department has either funded or is currently funding under “Sequencing techniques for investigation and attribution of biological weapons use.” The Department is still seeking sequencing techniques for microorganisms and viruses.

https://discover.dtic.mil/results/?q=ada284079 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284079.pdf https://www.academia.edu/38687784/