Solicitation Questions and Answers Updated 2 May 2025.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 28 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Maritime Automated Ingestion for Scene - Aware Identification and Localization (MAINSAIL)
- Solicitation number
- FA2377-25-R-B003
About this file
This document is a Solicitation Questions and Answers spreadsheet for the MAINSAIL (Maritime Automated Ingestion for Scene-Aware Identification and Localization) solicitation issued by the Air Force Research Laboratory. The contract, valued at $6.8M, seeks to develop autonomous capabilities for maritime target tracking using spaceborne sensing assets, with a period of performance from 16 September 2025 through 15 September 2028. Key clarifications include electronic-only proposal submission, a 30-page technical proposal limit (excluding resumes), and expectations for classified work to be performed primarily at contractor facilities with an estimated 30% classified and 70% unclassified components.
The solicitation (FA2377-25-R-B003) focuses on developing algorithms for automated target recognition, using contextual data to enhance target identification and prediction. Proposers should build solutions within the fiscal year funding profile, with DoD High Performance Computing resources available at unclassified, Secret, and Top Secret levels. AFRL will provide synthetic and measured imagery to support the research. Contractors are expected to have existing TS-level secure facilities, and proposals should include software license agreements and security disclosures. The government anticipates occasional CONUS travel to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and does not expect OCONUS travel.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Contractual Q&A
| Questions | CO Response |
| The MAINSAIL Solicitation states that "Proposals must be submitted electronically" (p. 3). However, section 8.7 (Proposal Content Checklist) states "Offerors other than small businesses are to include a subcontracting plan in Microsoft Word Readable Format on a CD ROM as well as a hard copy." Please clarify whether hard copies and/or CD ROMs will be required or if all documents can be submitted electronically. | All documents should be submitted electronically. |
| The MAINSAIL Solicitation 5.2.b Technical/Management Proposal states, "Pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being Page 1, and the last page being no greater than Page 30." Please confirm whether the 30 page limit is inclusive of all content, to include any appendices. Please also confirm whether text in tables should be single- or double-spaced. | 30 page limit does not include appendices. Text in tables should be single spaced |
| Model Contract contains FAR 52.219-4 Notice of Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns. This clause states that offerors who are not HUBZone will have 10% added to the offerors price. As the cover page does not designate this effort as a set-aside, we request removal of this clause. | As this is not a set-aside, this clause is not required. |
| In Amendment 1, Section 1.0 Overview Information changed the Estimated Program Cost from $9.8M to $6.8M however the Section 3.2 Anticipated Funding table did not change. Can we get some clarification? | Section 3.2 Anticipated Funding should show: |
| On 9 April, an amended MAINSAIL solicitation was posted that changed the funding reflected on page 3 from $9.8M to $6.8M. However, the funding table in para 3.2 on page 10 still shows a total of $9.8M. Which number is correct? | The budget for the MAINSAIL solicitation is $6.8M. The funding table in para 3.2 on page 10 of the Solicitation Amendment 1 has been updated |
| Regarding available funding, does the industry solution need to match the funding available in each fiscal year, or can we build our solution and milestones as though the entire amount is available for the whole period of performance? In particular, we’re looking at that $0.600M in FY25 and whether there is an expectation that the money must be executed in the approximately 2 weeks remaining of FY25 after award? | This is just a funding profile that shows the fiscal year and types of funding we're expecting to get. Build your milestones under the assumption that we won't get more funding than is listed for the appropriate fiscal year you're working in and the fiscal years prior. For example, you shouldn't do work in FY25/FY 26 that would generate billable costs over the $3.2M we have budgeted for FY25 and FY26. FAR 52.232-22 Limitation of Funds will still apply and the Government is not obligated to reimburse the Contractor for costs incurred in excess of the total amount allotted by the Government. The $.600M in FY25 will be obligated onto the contract at award but will not need to be executed in the 2 remaining weeks of FY25. |
| Does AFRL have a preferred cost template? | AFRL does not have a preferred cost template. |
| The solicitation went to $9.8M to $6.8M, but deliverables for the program didn’t change. Why is that? | The initial amount on the solicitation was in error due to miscommunications from the AFRL team. We are interested in seeing your proposals relative to the amount of funding available and will evaluate based on the possibilities achievable with this amount of funding. We apologize for the confusion. |
| Are the resumes included in the Technical / Management 30 page limitation? | Resumes are not included in the 30 page limit. |
| Is Attachment 9 “Research and related Senior and Key Person Profile Worksheet” sufficient for resumes? If not, please advise re: expected content. | Attachment 9 "Research and Related Senior and Key Person Profile Worksheet" are sufficient for resumes. |
| The solicitation suggests an end date of Sep. 2028. Do you expect that date to include the time to write the final report (nominally 33 months of technical effort and 3 months of report writing), or is Sep. 2028 the end of the technical period, followed by final report (36 months of technical effort, 3 months of reporting)? | We anticipate that final reporting will be complete in Sep. 2028. This is consistent with the lower funding available in FY28 relative to the rest of the program. |
| The solicitation says, "...resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal." | SEE BELOW |
| 1) Please confirm that resumes are required to be submitted with the Technical/Management proposal. | Full resumes are optional. A brief summary (~1-2 paragraphs) listing the experience of key personnel is satisfactory in lieu of resumes. Proposers will need to fill out the Key Personnel worksheet, Attachment 09 |
| 2) If resumes are required, please confirm that they are not part of the 30-page limit. | Correct, resumes are not part of the 30-page limit. Please also fill out Attachment 09. |
| 3) If resumes are required, then it is recommended that they be submitted for contractor-identified Key Positions, only. | Resumes/descriptions of experience are only necessary for key positions |
| 4) If resumes are required, does AFRL have a recommended format? | There is no preferred format |
| 5) If resumes are required, should they include names? | Names are acceptable. |
| The solicitation states, "from award through September 2028" For pricing purposes, should offerors assume a Period of Performance commencing 16SEP2025 through 15SEP2028? | Yes. Please assume a 33 month technical period followed by a 3 month reporting period |
| Will the customer define the anticipated CONUS and OCONUS locations? | We do not anticipate any OCONUS travel. Occasional CONUS travel to WPAFB, OH may be warranted. The government team anticipates doing much of the necessary travel for regular meetings, as required. |
| Subparagraph (c) states the travel CLIN is intended to pay for travel; however, no travel CLIN is identified in the Model Contract. | This in intended to be a CPFF contract, so there will be one R&D CLIN, and travel cost will be subsumed into the CLIN. |
| The model contract identifies CLIN 0002 for Software with no value. Are offerors to assume Software procured to support MAINSAIL will be in addition to the $6.8M. | This in intended to be a CPFF contract, so there will be one R&D CLIN, and software licenses will be subsumed into the CLIN. CLIN 0002 details the requirement to deliver any developed software to the government. |
| The offeror recommends the customer consider providing not-to- exceed plug numbers for software, hardware, travel, etc., to ensure offerors do not use these costs to under-estimate their proposed price. This will allow the government to evaluate the offerors proposed resources based on its understanding of the technical requirements. | There is no breakout for how much can be proposed for each cost element. There is only a total ceiling limit of $6.8M that can be broken out in any way contractors would like. |
| 1) Is there a font and spacing requirement for the Cost/Business proposal and contracts cover letter? | Please use the same formatting as listed in the technical/management proposal, section 5.2b(1), page 12 of the solicitation |
| 2) The offeror recommends tables to be in 8pt Times New Roman for the Cost/Business proposal. | ^ See above |
| Will contractors need a completed DD Form 2345 in its proposal response or by performance start date? Please clarify. | DD2345 should be completed by the time of proposal response. Please see section 4.4.1(2) of the solicitation. |
| Are bidding Senior/Key personnel and "Covered Individuals" optional for Contractors? | All proposers are required to fill out attachment 09, "Research and related senior and key person profile worksheet" |
| Can the Government please provide Attachment 8 Security Risk review Appendix 2,3 and 4 documents? | Appendix 2 is attachment 07 in the solicitation, appendix 3 is attachment 09 in the solicitation, and appendix 4 is attachment 10 in the solicitation |
| Can Contractors submit security plan as applicable to address questions in Attachment 07 Security Program Questionnaire or is the Government seeking statement responses with no supporting plan documentation? | Proposers may submit existing security plans as long as they address the questions in Attachment 07 |
| Can contractors submit a security volume with no page limitation and formatting requirements as part of its proposal response? | Yes |
| Can contractor provide proposed edits to Attachment 03 Solicitation DD254? | Yes |
| Is the Gov't requesting Contractors to establish and maintain procedures and processes addressing foreign talent programs by performance start date? | Contractors should follow their current established processes to safeguard controlled unclassified information and classified information from foreign access |
| Is the research support disclosure only required if a Contractor is bidding covered individuals and to be provided with proposal response? | A research support disclosure is required for all proposals |
| Can contractor interpret N/A that the Gov't will not require contractor to develop data as part of its work requirements or the Gov't will not fund? | AFRL does not expect contractors to develop or collect new data as part of this effort. Sourcing data from existing data repositories, such as the Training Data Storefront, may be of interest to proposers, and information about data sourced from such sources would be delivered. |
| 1) Is the Government requesting contractors to include license agreements in its proposal response or just to identify? |
2) If only identification is required, what level of detail is the Government seeking to identify the software license?
3) Is Contractor required to provide the documentation to correlate or map any commercial computer software with its proposal or is this documentation to be provided upon request during execution of contract? 1) Please identify any software license agreements you have.
2) Acknowledgement of existing software agreements and the parties involved (especially foreign countries, companies, or individuals) is sufficient
3) Documentation should be provided upon request during the contract
| Is the Government seeking an acknowledgement or statement from Contractor confirming it has practices and standards in the management of Government property to fulfill Section 5.2 Proposal and Submission Instructions (d) (iv) voluntary consensus? | Proposers must acknowledge and confirm that it has practices and standards in the management of government property. |
| Will the Government allow resumes to be submitted as an attachment, not counted within the 30-page count? | Correct, resumes are not part of the 30-page limit. Please also fill out Attachment 09. |
| Do you prefer the SOW to be attached as a standalone file from the Technical/Management volume, or should both components be combined into the same file? | We would appreciate it if the SOW would be sent as a standalone file and also combined into the Technical/Management volume |
| Is the preaward clearance described in Paragraph 8.5 of the solicitation required since the Estimated Program Cost is $6.8M? | This should not apply. |
| Please confirm that the government expects MAINSAIL proposals to adhere to the table of contents/checklist structure outlined in the BAA Guide for Industry on page 21 | Correct. Adhere to the contents/checklist structure on Page 21 of the Guide for industry. |
https://www.afrl.af.mil/Portals/90/Documents/HQ/BAA%20Ind%20Guide%202020.pdf?ver=7AivkWvoUoptKgypgCuIvw%3D%3D https://www.afrl.af.mil/Portals/90/Documents/HQ/BAA%20Ind%20Guide%202020.pdf?ver=7AivkWvoUoptKgypgCuIvw%3D%3D Technical Q&A
| Questions | PE Response |
| The MAINSAIL Solicitation Section 5.2.a.7 states the following: "No classified technical proposals or cost volumes are expected. Offerors are encouraged to keep all elements of the proposal package unclassified. In the rare case where an offeror has a need to submit a classified appendix, please contact the technical POC for delivery instructions." ARS would like to provide a classified appendix; please advise on the procedure and specifications for submitting that document. | Classified appendices are appreciated. Please submit classified appendices on SIPR to benjamin.p.lewis7.civ@mail.smil.mil or on JWICS at benjamin.lewis@af.ic.gov. A low-side email tipper to Ben Lewis at benjamin.lewis.13@us.af.mil is also appreciated. |
| With the 30% reduction in planned program funding, is there any scaling back to the objectives of MAINSAIL, or possible prioritization adjustment? | The original funding numbers were a miscommunication between the PI and contracting team. We are interested in seeing solutions that respond to the SOO within the available funding profile. |
| Does AFRL RY require the work be performed at: a government SCIF onsite, a contractor SCIR offsite, a non-SCIF contractor facility (i.e., code low/push high), or a combination of any of the above? In the event that multiple options are acceptable does RY have a preference that you can share? | MAINSAIL would prefer work to be performed at a contractor SCIF offsite. A very limited on-site presence may be acceptable, but space at AFRL is limited. |
| In section 2.9.2, it states that the place of performance is WPAFB, OH 45433. Must work occur on base, or can it occur in a contractor facility? | Classified workspace at AFRL is limited. We would prefer classified work to occur at contractor facilities, but may be able to accommodate a very limited on-site presence. Performers not located in the Dayton, OH area are not required to accomplish work in the Dayton/WPAFB area. Work need not occur on base if performers have sufficient classified facilities |
| What is the anticipated ratio of work that must be performed in a SCIF vs that may be conducted in an unclassified environment? | Due to the sensors and technologies involved, there will likely be a large classified component to this program. A very rough estimate would be 30% classified work, 70% unclassified work, but that may vary widely depending on proposed tasks. AFRL of course supports a hybrid paradigm of developing as much work as possible on unclassified systems and transitioning to classified systems. |
| Would AFRL consider sponsoring a TS FCL upgrade post-award, or must performers already have a TS-accredited facility? | Unfortunately, upgrading a secure facility is a programmatic schedule risk. Given the types of data necessary for the MAINSAIL program, it is advantageous to have an already-accredited SCIF. |
| For offsite (remote) safeguarding of classified materials, is a Secret-level facility sufficient, or would a TS-level accredited facility be required? | TS-level facilities are likely required, since some of the data and products for MAINSAIL will be at the TS level. |
| Is AFRL planning on making any high side cloud development/compute resources available for MAINSAIL? | AFRL will facilitate access to DoD High Performance Computing resources at both unclassified and classified Secret and TS levels. Any other cloud compute resources performers desired to use will need to be included as part of the proposal cost. |
| To facilitate proposal document marking and ensure compliance, please provide the CUI Category and Appropriate Distribution Statement for the ADAM MAA MAINSAIL SOO | CUI Category is "Critical Technology". Distribution Statement is Distribution C |
| What unclassified technical data with military or space applications will Contractors have access to? | AFRL is still developing resources with training networks and solving the MAINSAIL problem. We will provide synthetic and measured imagery to the performer as we acquire it. |
| Will AFRL provide the winning team with a development environment (compute resources) on the high side (cloud resources or RLE or DoD HPC or other) or does each team need to figure out how to do that internally in each SCIF? | AFRL will provide winning teams with access to DoD HPC at TS, Secret, and unclassified levels. Any cost for other compute resources should be included as part of the proposal. |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .