AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-3.30.26.pdf

PDF 218 KB Posted

Attached to
Request for Whitepapers: AEDC Velocity Alliance - A Multi-Billion Dollar OTA Consortium Opportunity
Solicitation number
FA9101-26-9-Velocity_Alliance
Issued by

About this file

This is a Questions and Answers document regarding the AEDC Velocity Alliance Request for Whitepaper (RFWP), issued by the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) at Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee.

The document addresses three primary inquiries from prospective alliance members. First, it clarifies that the Government will manage the AEDC Velocity Alliance OTA Consortium internally rather than contracting with an external company to run it. Second, it explains that asphalt paving projects may be competed within the alliance by leveraging the existing "General Construction" category. Third, and most significantly, the document provides detailed guidance on partnership requirements mandated by 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(A) or (B) for Other Transaction authority. Alliance membership requires each prospective member to demonstrate an established relationship with a partner meeting one of three statutory definitions: a Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC), a Small Business, or a Nonprofit Research Institution. The memorandum clarifies that universities typically qualify as nonprofit research institutions and advises prospective members to identify a university or national laboratory partner by name and CAGE code while confirming 501(c)(3) or equivalent nonprofit status. For whitepaper submissions, respondents should select one university partner to feature in their response, provide the entity's name and CAGE code with statutory justification, describe the existing relationship and unique capabilities, and explicitly link those capabilities to their technical project proposal, demonstrating how the partner could participate to a "significant extent" in future similar projects.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles - 15 Oct 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 6- 15 Oct 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-8.31.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 5- 26 Aug 26.pdf PDF
Atch 1 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives - 26 Aug 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-7.17.26.pdf PDF
Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles - 17 Jul 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 4 - 17 Jul 26.pdf PDF
Atch 3 - CMMC-Information..pdf PDF
Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles - 15 Jul 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 3 - 15 Jul 26.pdf PDF
Atch 5 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-7.15.26.pdf PDF
Atch 1 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives - 21 Apr 26..pdf PDF
Atch 4 - CMMC-FAQsv6.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-6.24.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-6.23.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-6.14.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-5.26.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-5.22.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 2 - 15 May 26.pdf PDF
Atch 5 - UTSI Map.pdf PDF
Summary of Changes-AEDC Velocity Alliance-RWP-Amend 2.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-5.12.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-5.1.26-2.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-5.1.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.30.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.28.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.27.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.24.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.23.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 1 - 21 Apr 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.21.26.pdf PDF
Atch 1 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives - 21 Apr 26.pdf PDF
Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles - 21 Apr 26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.17.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-4.15.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-3.31.26-2.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance Consortium_Q_A-3.31.26.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper.pdf PDF
Atch 4 - CMMC-FAQsv4.pdf PDF
Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles - 5 Mar 26.pdf PDF
Atch 1 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives-5 Mar 26.pdf PDF
Atch 3 - CMMC-Information.pdf PDF
AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper.pdf PDF
Show all 44

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE OHIO

One AFMC…Powering the World’s Greatest Air Force

MEMORANDUM FOR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

FROM: AFMC/AFTC/PZIA (Arnold) 100 Kindel Drive Arnold AFB, TN 37389-1332

SUBJECT: AEDC Velocity Alliance – Request for Whitepaper: Question & Answers

1. Would you all have any interest in a company to run the AEDC Velocity Alliance OTA

Consortium?

a. The Government will manage the consortium internally.

2. I didn't see that asphalt paving was included in this project. My question is will there be any paving included.

a. A standalone paving project could be competed within the AEDC Velocity

Alliance by leveraging the existing "General Construction" category.

3. I am writing to clarify the partnership requirements for the RFWP. Specifically, does the

Alliance Membership require us to identify a Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) or a small business as a partner? Over the last five years, our projects for the Air Force and DOE have involved partnerships with five universities and two national laboratories.

a. The answer is yes, the Alliance Membership requires you to identify a partner that meets a specific statutory definition, and your university partners are highly likely to satisfy this requirement.

Here is a more detailed explanation to guide your whitepaper submission:

1. The "Why" Behind the Requirement

As detailed in "Part 4: Innovation and Partnership Capability" of the RFWP, the purpose of this requirement is to satisfy the legal conditions for using this type of

Other Transaction authority (specifically 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(A) or (B)). This means that to join the Alliance, each prospective member must demonstrate an established relationship with a partner that falls into one of the following categories:

• A Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC)

• A Small Business

• A Nonprofit Research Institution

2. How Your University and National Laboratory Partners Fit

This is where your specific experience is highly relevant.

• University Partners (Excellent Candidates): Your extensive partnerships with universities are a perfect fit. Universities typically qualify as "nonprofit research institutions" under the statute. Your whitepaper should identify one of your university partners by name and CAGE code and, as noted in the RFWP (Note 2), be prepared to confirm their

501(c)(3) or equivalent nonprofit status. By doing this, you would be demonstrating your capability to satisfy condition (A) of the requirement.

• National Laboratories (Potential Candidates): Partnerships with National

Laboratories are also highly valued. Depending on the specific lab and its managing entity, it could potentially qualify as a nonprofit research institution. However, the most direct and clearly defined path, based on the notes in the RFWP, is to leverage your strong relationships with your university partners.

3. Your Path Forward

For your whitepaper submission, your strongest approach is to:

1. Select one of your university partners to feature in your "Part 4" response.

2. Provide the university's or laboratory’s name and CAGE code and provide justification on how the university or laboratory meets 10 U.S.C. §

4022(d)(1)(A) or (B)

3. Describe your existing relationship and their unique capabilities.

b. Crucially, link their capabilities directly to the technical project you described in your "Part 2" response, explaining how they could participate to a "significant extent" in a similar future project.

GREGGORY C. JONES

Agreements Officer, USAF

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .