MAST_Call_3_Industry_Day_Questions_and_Answers_for_FBO_5_Jun_17.pdf

Questions and Answers (Q&A) from the MAST Call 3 Industry Day held on 31 May 2017

Q – When will the final MAST Call 3 solicitation be posted?

A – The government anticipates to release the final official solicitation mid to late June, dependent on the feedback of industry and making any necessary changes to the existing Call.

Q – If a company is submitting a white paper on more than one Subtopic, the 15-day delivery date for submission is not realistic. Is the government willing to extend this date?

A – AFRL has received a lot of feedback on this issue during Industry Day. The 15-day due date is being discussed. Please provide feedback on your opinion of an appropriate time to prepare and submit a white paper for submission. A final timeline will be published in the official MAST Call 3 document. AFRL will consider common working days (no weekend of holidays) but cannot commit to counting only company-specific working days.

Q – If multiple proposals are requested from a single company can the proposal due dates be staggered?

A – No, the same due date must be applied to all white papers for all companies; AFTC cannot make exceptions as that may be seen as giving an unfair advantage. A company may submit white papers on or before the final due date.

Q – (a) If a company submits more than one white paper, how will proposals be requested? (b)

Can a company submit ONE PROPOSAL to cover multiple Subtopics, or will they be required to submit separate proposals per Subtopic?

A – (a) Proposals will be requested for each white paper that is selected for invitation. Each Subtopic proposal shall be submitted separately. The government reserves the right to combine multiple proposals into one award through negotiations. In order to do this, proposals should be prepared with proper WBS structures required to this efficiently.

Through negotiations, redundant or duplicative costs or tasks can be combined prior to award. NOTE – The only exception to combining awards will be for Subtopic 5, which is a SB Set-Aside and one separate award will be made for this Subtopic. (b) No. The government will not evaluate combined proposals for all Subtopics if they are submitted in response to the invitation for proposals.

Q – How long will it take the government to review the white papers once received?

A – It will take a number of weeks, depending on availability of reviewers and workloads, etc.

Anticipate a minimum of 4-6 weeks. The administrative process to approve invitations may add a few more weeks.

Q – On Industry Day Slide 8, Size Standard on NAICS of 541712 is listed as 1,000 employees.

What does this mean?

A – For this NAICS, the size standard to determine the size of the business means you cannot be considered a SB unless you have less than 1,000 employees. This applies to Subtopic 5 for the Small Business set-aside.

Q – For subtopic 5 (Small Business (SB) Set-Aside), can the SB have a subcontractor that is

‘other than SB”?

A – Yes, a Prime SB may have a subcontractor that is other than SB. FAR requirements (per

FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting) require the Prime SB to provide at LEAST 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel. The Contracting Officer suggests review of 13 CFR 121 and 13 CFR 125 for compliance details.

Q – It is not clear in the MAST Call 3 solicitation what AFRL expects in terms of a dollar amount for a SB? The project range of $500k to $1.2M is mentioned but is that applicable to all subtopics equally?

A – Yes, that range is applicable to all subtopics. The dollar values are not specific to business size. The range the government provided was considered reasonable for the subtopics listed and within our available funding profile. The offeror should provide justification in the white paper if the proposed amount is lower or greater than what is stated in the call.

Q – Is a SB restricted in white papers they can submit on other Subtopics? Can a small business provide white papers on other topics, or only the SB Set-Aside?

A – Any size business may submit white papers on subtopic 1, 3, 4, and 6; these subtopics are full and open and a company, no matter what the size, can submit one white paper per subtopic, for these subtopics. Subtopic 5 is the only topic specifically set aside for SBs.

Q – Can a SB team with large businesses in subtopic 5 or in any other subtopic? If a SB does, is there a percentage required for the SB prime contractor?

A – Yes, small businesses may team with large businesses as a subcontractor on any subtopic.

This has been a successful arrangement on recent contracts at AFRL. FAR requirements per FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, require the Prime SB to provide at LEAST 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel. The Contracting Officer suggests review of 13 CFR 121 and 13 CFR 125 for compliance details.

Q – As far as starting and ending dates, for Subtopic 5, are there any restrictions on starting and ending dates?

A – No restrictions on any duration of the program. The government anticipates that technology development projects of this nature should take less than 36 months to complete. The period of performance is specific to what was submitted as part of the offeror’s program and what is negotiated at the time of award. They are not dependent on any other Subtopic or the successful completion of any other awards.

Q – Industry Day slide 18, list of Subtopics, Subtopic 5, has “(chemical, embedded)” after the subtopic name? What does this mean? Is it similar to Subtopic 2, study of any embedded sensors?

A – This wording in parentheses was an example of a sensor, not restricted to that specific type of sensor. Subtopic 5 is a hardware development focus. The words “chemical” and “embedded” were only mentioned to illustrate the possible scope of types of sensors.

Q- In reading the DRAFT Call 3 document, it reads “up to 36 months” period of performance for an individual project. Does this mean any contract awarded under this Call will be less than three years? The Funding profile shows four (4) Fiscal Years.

A – The technology development should be completed within a certain number of years; the government anticipates that projects of this nature should take less than 36 months. Based on the timing of the award, those 36 months may stretch out across four fiscal years.

Also, the government hopes to re-release MAST Call 3 solicitation in 2018 or 2019. This statement is not to say that technology development projects cannot be longer than 36 months; exceptions to the government’s anticipated schedule are possible but need to be justified in the white paper and/or full proposal.

Q – If a company submits a white paper and is not invited to submit a proposal for that subtopic, can the company submit one anyway?

A – No. Proposals will only be evaluated and considered for award if they are requested. For additional information, unsolicited proposals must follow the guidelines in FAR 15.603;

and cannot be for a known agency requirement that can be acquired by competitive methods or address a previously published agency requirement.

Q – Will full costing data be required with white papers?

A – No. Currently, a cost estimate is required with the white paper for planning purposes. The cost estimate is limited to the single page in the white paper and does not require additional justification.

Q – If a company has ongoing technical work with AFRL, can that company discuss the technical work done on that effort with the AFRL team during the time of restricted communication under MAST Call 3 solicitation?

A – A contractor can discuss existing contracts, such as Call 1, at any time with AFRL.

Limitations on communications during the MAST Call 3 acquisition do not apply to existing or past contracts. The period of restricted communication applies to the technologies under MAST Call 3 subtopics. If an offeror has specific questions on what can be discussed, contact the Contracting POC.

Q – The MAST Call 3 solicitation requires maturation of technology to a minimum of TRL 4?

Does AFRL want something it can use at the end?

A – Yes, AFRL requires a project to exit with a minimum of a TRL 4. At the end of MAST Call

3, the government is looking for something the AFRL can demonstrate (i.e. operate as an exhibition of function) but not necessarily apply to a weapon system at this stage.

Q – Where are the RP21 goals defined? I cannot find a section III-5 as mentioned in Call 3 I-1.2.

A – “Section III-5” refers to “MAST BAA section III-5”, the original BAA that was first posted to FBO.gov in 2014. The original BAA contains the guidelines and requirements for this project that are not specific to a subtopic or call. The instructions for requesting a supplemental package are found in the original BAA which is still posted on the FBO.gov website.

Q – Are you going to make available the documents from previous efforts?

A – Yes. That will be included in the supplemental packages. Instructions for requesting supplemental packages will be included in the Call 3 solicitation.

Q – There was reference to different reports available on A&S. Will these be made available?

A – Yes. Reports and technical papers relating to this topic will be provided in the supplemental package. Specific reports can always be requested from AFRL outside of the acquisition process.

Q – Does AFRL intend to ask for more proposals than it intends to fund?

A – AFRL does not plan on requesting proposals for white papers that it does not intend to award or that the government views could not be awarded. There is no guarantee that all proposals requested will be negotiated for award. A full proposal may not be funded based on the results of the review process, but AFRL does not intend to ask for full proposals on ideas it could not or would not fund based on the evaluation of the white paper.

Q – Given the BAA and Calls allow for awarding all, part or none of proposals, do you intend on requesting proposals on a ‘piece’ of a white paper?

A – No. If white papers are selected for invitation to propose; a full proposal will be requested.

The government does maintain the right to award all, part or none of the full proposal.

Q – How has testing on STIG computers compliance been conducted on past contracts?

A – Software requirements include five requirements: MAST Call 3 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 1.4.4, and

1.4.5. The government provides the toolkit to verify 1.4.2. If it passes the toolkit, the government process is such that the software is considered to meet the other requirements. Contractors on MAST Call 1 have not reported any undue hardship from the STIG requirements.

Q – Are there any restrictions on programming language that can be used?

A – AFRL does not have restrictions on the programming language per se, but it must be able to be verified as secure through the AFRL software toolkit.

Q – Can AFRL add clarification on the required detail for the plan identified in MAST Call 3 1-

1.3.17?

A – AFRL is looking for information from the offeror on how the proposed technology would be validated. The project team needs to illustrate that a validation plan has been thought about and/or considered. AFRL does not require the full plan for validation of use of the technology in the system; that would be left up to later demonstration projects.

Q – For MAST Call 3 1.7.2 do proposals need to define all sources of error in current SOTA or proposed processes, or both?

A – The sources of error should be included for the specific technology the proposal is developing.

Q – Can AFRL include the number and locations of IPTs for budgeting purposes as well as the number of JANNAF sessions planned?

A – MAST IPT meetings are held once per quarter, alternating between a physical meeting at

AFRL, Edwards AFB, CA and a telephonic meeting (call-in). A proposal can, for budgetary reasons, plan for a Feb 2018 award resulting in a teleconference meeting in April 2018, a physical meeting in July 2018 at Edwards AFB, and alternating meetings each three months after that. The total number of MAST IPT meetings would depend on the length of the proposed program. Major JANNAF meetings occur about every 18 months for each subcommittee, so a program of 12 months to 30 months could plan for one JANNAF meeting. Longer programs may want to propose two JANNAF meetings.

Shorter programs can propose two JANNAF meetings as well if defended by the program plan. A proposal should use an arbitrary host city for costing purposes since the location of the JANNAF meetings are not known this far in advance.

Q - For MAST Call 3, 1.9.3, is it safe to assume that accelerated aging of sensors is allowed or required?

A – Yes. A project can propose that type of technology. Offerors must account for errors associated with accelerated aging when discussing possible sources of error.

Q - For MAST Call 3, 1.9.7 can AFRL provide any guidelines on the allowable increase in consumption of logistics resources? Or, can you identify the types of logistics resources that AFRL is most sensitive to?

A – AFRL cannot provide details or guidelines of a specific weapon system; these types of details are controlled by the program office for that weapon system and not divulged to AFRL for a variety of reasons (this type of technology development may be too immature to have logistical details defined). AFRL is interested in ensuring that the impact of logistical resources are addressed by the proposing team, not that AFRL has guidelines to meet. Each offeror shall address minimal increases in consumption and what the impact is on a possible weapon system. MAST Call 3, 1.9.7 refers specifically to power as the resource.

Q – Can AFRL clarify if a SOW and detailed WBS are required for the white paper?

A – No SOW or WBS is required with white paper.