FA8650-19-S-6003-Q&As-3.pdf

FA8650-19-S-6003

AIRMAN DECISION MAKING AND INTERFACE RESEARCH (ADMIRE) PROGRAM

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

30 January 2019

Below are the Questions and Answers related to FA8650-19-S-6003. This Q&A document is dated 30 January 2019.

16. QUESTION: The answer to Question 5 of the Q&A's released on Jan 15 says that technical proposal attachments are NOT included in the 15-page limit. This directly contradicts the instructions in paragraph b) 6. on pages 13 and 15 of the BAA, which say "The page limitation covers all information including indices, photographs, foldouts...,tables, charts, appendices, attachments, resumes, etc.” Will the Government publish a revised BAA to change paragraph b) 6. on pages 13 and 15?

ANSWER: Pages 13 and 15 of the BAA will be updated to read as follows: “Pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being Page 1, and the last page being no greater than Page

15. The page limitation covers all information including indices, photographs, foldouts (counted as 1 page for each 8.5 by 11 portion) tables, charts, appendices, and resumes. Attachments are not included in the 15 page limitation. However, the offeror shall not use attachments as a means for including Technical or Task Order Proposal information that would exceed the prescribed 15 page limit. Attachments should only be used for the purposes described on page 14, para c) and page 15, para c).”

17. QUESTION: Task Order 4 - Battlespace Visualization Research (BVR): Please provide more detailed information about the "Government-owned light measurement device that contains a radioactive calibration device" listed in 5.0 Additional Requirements, Radioactive Materials. What is the name of the device? Is it a COTS device? What kind of radioactive material is in the calibration device?

ANSWER: RHCV has three devices containing small amounts of radioactive material. All devices are COTS manufactured by Photo-Research Inc.

PHOTO-RESEARCH, INC.

MODEL: 1980A-OP-PL

Carbon 14 SOURCE

MODEL: AAC40108

SN: 646

AMOUNT: 50 HC

PHOTO-RESEARCH, INC.

MODEL: 1980A-OP-PL

Carbon 14 SOURCE

MODEL: AAC40108

SN: 747

AMOUNT: 50 HC

PHOTO-RESEARCH, INC.

MODEL: PR-1530 AR

Carbon 14 SOURCE

MODEL: RCT # 41-08

SN: 1432

AMOUNT: 50 UC

18. QUESTION: The Estimated Funding Profiles for TOs 3, 4 and 5 appear not to account for the three (3) additional months for delivery of the Final Technical Report referenced in the Period of Performance. Please clarify.

ANSWER: Each of the Task Orders specifies an overall technical period of performance plus 3 months for final reporting. The budget profile specifies the amount of funding that the government expects each fiscal year for performance of the task order. Funding is not expected to be completely spent/earned in only that FY. It is acceptable for funding in one fiscal year to extend into another fiscal year for execution. The overall task order funding/budget is expected to cover the entire period of performance (technical plus reporting) and the offeror’s cost proposal and spend plan should be for the number of months specified in each Task Order.

19. QUESTION: In the Estimated Funding Profile referenced in each TO SOO, do the FY1 –

FY5 column headings equate to Contractor Fiscal Years (therefore varying by Contractor) or to Government Fiscal Years? If Government Fiscal Years, please confirm that proposed expenditures could vary by FY (if each task order’s total funding amount is not exceeded) as otherwise FY1 funding expended from 18 July through 30 September 2019 would match or approximate funding in each subsequent 12-month FY.

ANSWER: The funding profile in each task order corresponds to government fiscal years.

Expenditures and spend plans can and will vary by FY based on the contractors approach to achieving the objectives outlined in the individual task orders.

Archived Questions dated 15 January 2019:

1. QUESTION: I'd like to get in contact with technical POCs on this effort to determine whether or not our interests align. We would appreciate whatever technical contact information you can forward.

ANSWER: The Technical POC for this effort is Mr. Joe Nalepka, 711 HPW/RHCI. He can be reached at 937-713-7008 or joseph.nalepka@us.af.mil.

2. QUESTION: Please provide additional clarification regarding the page counts at both the

IDIQ and Task Order level.

ANSWER: Offerors can propose against one, some or all five of the stated Technical Areas.

EACH Technical Area Technical/Management Proposal shall be limited to 15 pages (see paragraph IV.2.c.i.b.1 of the BAA). The collective all Technical Area Technical/Management mailto:joseph.nalepka@us.af.mil

Proposals can be viewed at as your overall IDIQ Proposal. This means an offeror could have up to 75 pages total in Technical Area Technical/Management Proposals (15 pages X 5 Technical Areas). Each Technical Area Proposal should contain a separate Statement of Work (SOW), which is limited to 10 pages (see paragraph IV.2.c.i.b.7 of the BAA). For each Technical Area proposal submitted, a corresponding Task Order proposal must be submitted. Task Order proposals are limited to 15 pages for the Technical/Management volume and 10 pages for the SOW (see paragraphs IV.2.d.i.b.1 and IV.2.d.i.b.7 of the BAA). If an offeror were to propose against all 5 Technical Areas your proposal should not exceed 250 pages (not including Task Order Cost/Business Proposals, which have no page limitation) as follows:

3. QUESTION: My Company’s interest is in product development, and the opportunity to bring forth technology to address the Government’s research objectives. Is there room for product outcome within this solicitation, or is the priority on the basic science supporting the underlying mechanisms.

ANSWER: In accordance with FAR 35.016, BAA’s may be used by agencies to fulfill their requirements for scientific study and experimentation directed toward advancing the state-of-the-art or increasing knowledge or understanding rather than focusing on a specific system or hardware solution. Please see page 2 of the BAA, which sates: the goal of this effort is to provide basic, applied and advanced research, development and demonstration for the mission of the 711HPW/RHC. The research type (basic, applied, advanced) and associated requirements are defined through task orders issued by the government in order to meet research needs. The development and maturation of technology solutions will be determined by those task orders.

The outcomes/products of this research, based on those task order requirements, may be hardware, software, data, designs or analyses.

4. QUESTION: BAA, page 11, para 2. A. 11. - Please clarify how the proposal volume should be bound (i.e., should the proposals and CSOWs be included in one binder, provided in separate binders by research area, or provided in separate binders by research area/IDIQ, TO?)

Technical Area Proposal TA SOW

Task Order Proposal TO SOW Total

Battlespace Acoustics 15 10 15 10 50 Supervisory Control and Cognition 15 10 15 10 50 Aerospace Physiology 15 10 15 10 50 Battlespace Visualization 15 10 15 10 50 Applied Neuroscience 15 10 15 10 50

TOTAL 75 50 75 50 250

Pages allotted

ANSWER: Technical/Management proposal information shall be organized in separate binders by Technical Area. The Offeror can determine the best method for organizing the information within each binder.

5. QUESTION: BAA, page 14, para c) and page 15, para c) – can you provide concurrence this is the governments intent for the proposal attachments to be included in the page count?

ANSWER: Attachments are not included in the 15 page limitation. However, the offeror shall not use attachments as a means for including additional Technical or Task Order Proposal information that would exceed the prescribed 15 page limit. Attachments should only be used for the purposes described on page 14, para c) and page 15, para c).

6. QUESTION: Attachment 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 – Paragraph number 6.6 is included twice. Does the Government intend to correct the paragraph numbering?

ANSWER: Yes.

7. QUESTION: It appears there was not a reference to a Business Volume requirement at the

IDIQ level. Can you provide concurrence that a Business Volume is not required at the IDIQ level.

ANSWER: A Business Volume at the IDIQ level is not required.

8. QUESTION: No Cost Volume appears to be requested for the Technical Areas. How will the overall IDIQ value be determined?

ANSWER: All IDIQs awarded under this BAA will share a common ceiling, anticipated at $135,000,000. Each IDIQ award will be valued at $135,000,000 and include language to indicate the ceiling is shared among multiple contracts. The total amount of the awards (Task Orders) issued under all IDIQs will not exceed $135,000,000.

9. QUESTION: The restrictive notice required in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e) is considered a legend. Can you confirm whether the double spacing and the Arial 10-point business font requirement applies to the restrictive notices for the cover page and each restricted data sheet?

ANSWER: No, this requirement does not apply to restrictive notices.

Archived Questions dated 23 January 2019.

10. QUESTION: To be rated selectable, does a TO proposal need to address all technical requirements for the TO or is a subset allowable?

ANSWER: The offeror needs to address all technical requirements specified for the TO. Based on the offeror’s submission against the requirements, and the government’s evaluation of that submission, the government may elect to award all, part or none of a proposal, as noted in paragraph V(2)(a) of the BAA.

11. QUESTION: Does an offeror have to be able to meet the full security requirements listed in the DD 254 in order to propose?

ANSWER: Please refer to paragraph I(5)(b) of the BAA: “Program Security Classification: Up to Top Secret/SCI as determined by individual task orders. Offerors must verify their Cognizant Security Office information is current with Defense Security Service (DSS) at www.dss.mil. The DD Form 254 is provided as Attachment 13 and provides the highest security requirements for this program. Only proposals that meet this criteria or have the ability to obtain these security requirements will be considered for contract award.”

12. QUESTION: Will you welcome proposals from Academia?

ANSWER: Yes. Please refer to page 1 of the BAA, “The Air Force reserves the right to award the instrument best suited to the nature of research proposed. Accordingly, the Government may award any appropriate contract type under the FAR or Other Transaction (OT) for Prototype, grant, cooperative agreement, or OT for Research. The Air Force may also consider award of an appropriate technology transfer mechanism if applicable. It is anticipated that awards under this BAA will be Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts with Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or Cost Reimbursement task orders. Cost reimbursement contracts require successful offerors to have an accounting system considered adequate for tracking costs applicable to the contract.”

13. QUESTION: Are DoD lab facilities eligible to propose under this BAA?

ANSWER: Any federal entities should reach out to the Contracting or Technical POCs listed in the BAA. We are unable to issue contracts to other federal agencies under this effort, but would be open to discussing other potential opportunities.

14. QUESTION: Can an offeror propose a collaborative agreement or effort with AFRL?

ANSWER: Yes. Please refer to page 1 of the BAA, “The Air Force reserves the right to award the instrument best suited to the nature of research proposed. Accordingly, the Government may award any appropriate contract type under the FAR or Other Transaction (OT) for Prototype, grant, cooperative agreement, or OT for Research. The Air Force may also consider award of an appropriate technology transfer mechanism if applicable. It is anticipated that awards under this BAA will be Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts with Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or Cost Reimbursement task orders. Cost reimbursement contracts require successful offerors to have an accounting system considered adequate for tracking costs applicable to the contract.”

15. QUESTION: Can two offerors who both have Selectable Technical Area 1 Proposals and

Selectable Task Order in Technical Area 1 Proposals be selected for a Task Order 1 award?

ANSWER: The Government anticipates that the initial Task Order awards will each be awarded to a single company. However, BAA paragraph V(2)(a) states the following: “The Government reserves the right to award some, all, or none of proposals. When the Government elects to award only a part of a proposal, the selected part may be categorized as Selectable, though the proposal as a whole may not merit such a categorization.” In the case of the Government selecting only part of a proposal, another offeror with Selectable Technical Area and Task Order proposals could receive an award. The government also reserves the right to have multiple awards of the same Task Order if there are multiple Selectable Task Order proposals and sufficient funding exists for multiple awards.