MAST_Q A_.pdf

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. PA # 14248

MAST BAA Questions and Answers

Q: Is there a requirement for physics based models to be integrated into existing AFRL analysis software?

A: No there is not a requirement to integrate into existing AFRL analysis software

Q: Can information be provided on how the modules interface with existing AFRL analysis software?

A: Integration with existing AFRL analysis software is not a requirement of this program. Some documentation is available in the install of existing AFRL analysis software, but there is no open or

DTIC information available. In general, existing AFRL analysis software is not an open software platform.

Q: Is the significant added cost for the AFI 33‐210 approach desirable for new physics based algorithm models and software that has only been demonstrated to a TRL 4?

A: Requirement to comply with AFI33‐210 certification and accreditation is being removed, although the code will need to be developed in a STIG compliant environment. There will be additional cost to this effort to doing this approach but code needs be meet STIG compliance at a minimum to access

SATURN (RDT&E enclave). In being good stewards of taxpayers’ money, we cannot pay for development that could only be utilized by the awarded company. This will also help in the long‐term supportability of the code. However, as with the SEMP, this effort should be at an appropriate level for this type/level of effort.

Q: What are AFRL’s specific expectations for a contractor to meet I‐1.3.2 (original) and be compliant with I‐1.3.3 (original)?

A: Amendment 1 to the BAA updates requirements to section I‐1.3. Software developed needs to work on a recent DoD standard desktop configuration client or DoD server core configuration ideally without the user needing any elevated rights, but install can use elevated rights. The development and testing of the system on a STIG compliant system should enable I‐1.3.2 and new I‐1.3.4 (old I‐

1.3.3).

Q: Does AFRL plan to provide tailoring of the AFI requirement?

A: Local IT shop hopes to develop a design or coding guide but there is no timeline for such a development.

Q: Will AFRL more clearly state the desired level of certification and accreditation required to allow for more accurate pricing? If yes, include the clarification details.

A: A C&A is not needed for this program. The BAA language has been updated by Amendment 1.

Although in the future (beyond this effort) it is desired to have as few changes as possible to the software if C&A needs to be completed, significant documentation would need to be done by government and/or contractor.

Q: Can contact information for AFRL contracts with sensor companies be provided, so an understanding of the state of the art in sensor technology.

A: We do not have a list of sensor companies. The supplemental package includes a list some of the SBIR contracts that AFRL Edwards has worked with in the recent past; of which some were about sensors.

This list is not necessarily a list of what is the current state of art in sensors. The supplemental package as well as items in the bibliography in the BAA also includes work on some sensor and their implementations in solid rocket motor aging and surveillance.

Q: Would AFRL consider removing the interim report (CDRL A006 on page 18 of 30) requirement at the end of the technical effort only since the final report, CDRL B001, follow so close?

A: No, each interim report is built upon the previous interim report and directly leads to the final report.

Q: Would it be acceptable to substitute the “Contractor’s Progress, Status & Management Report” and remove the interim report requirement?

A: No.

Q: Will AFRL evaluate and clarify which CLIN’s are CPFF versus FFP?

A: Only CLIN 0005 is FFP. Amendment 1 to Model Contract corrects CLINs 0001 through 0004 CLIN types to Cost Plus Fixed Fee.

Q: Model Contract page 2 of 20 Item 0002 refers to “Exhibit B” but the cover page in front of the B

CDRL’s is labeled “Exhibit‐A”. Should it be labeled “Exhibit B”?

A: Amendment 1 to the Model Contract corrects the cover page on Exhibit B.

Q: Model Contract page 20 of 20 refers to Attachment 3 as “DFARS 252.227‐7013 RIGHTS IN TECHNICAL

DATA – NONCOMMERCIAL ITEMS” and Attachment 4 as “ANSI‐BASED FORMAT GUIDELINES”.

However, the actual attachments appear to be mislabeled and Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 respectively. Which is correct?

A: Cover pages were corrected in Amendment 1 to the Model Contract.