AEDC Velocity Alliance - Request for Whitepaper-Amend 2 - 15 May 26.pdf

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

15 May 26

MEMORANDUM FOR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

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

SUBJECT: Request for Whitepapers for Membership in the AEDC Velocity Alliance – Amend 2

1.0 Introduction and Purpose

The Department of the Air Force, through the Air Force Test Center (AFTC) and Arnold Engineering

Development Complex (AEDC), announces the establishment of the AEDC Velocity Alliance. This strategic consortium-based initiative is established under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 4022, "Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects."

The primary purpose of the AEDC Velocity Alliance is to create a streamlined and agile industrial partnership to accelerate the sustainment, restoration, and modernization of critical test infrastructure.

This effort is essential to support the development and validation of next-generation national defense systems. Upon establishment of the consortium, any project deemed necessary by the Government under this initiative will be competed exclusively among Alliance members.

This Request for Whitepapers represents an opportunity for vendors with relevant expertise to demonstrate their capabilities and be considered for inclusion in this foundational enterprise.

Performance locations for projects awarded through the Alliance may include, but are not limited to, the following Air Force Test Center sites:

• Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee

• 704th TG, Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico

• Tunnel 9, Silver Spring, Maryland

• National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC), Moffett Field, California

Additionally, the Government reserves the right to permit other installations and organizations across the broader Air Force Test Center (AFTC) enterprise to leverage the AEDC Velocity Alliance

Consortium. These entities may utilize this vehicle to execute infrastructure, sustainment, and modernization projects, provided the work aligns with the general scope and categories defined within these Program Objectives.

2.0 Problem Statement: The Need for an Agile Industrial Partnership

The Strategic Imperative

In response to new and evolving national security challenges, the United States is undertaking a generational modernization of its defense capabilities. National strategic imperatives now require the rapid development and fielding of highly advanced, integrated systems designed to ensure a decisive advantage against any potential peer adversary. This new defense architecture relies on a network of next-generation technologies operating at unprecedented speeds and levels of integration. The success of this national objective is critically dependent on the ability to test and validate these new systems effectively and rapidly.

The Evolving Technical Challenge

The advanced systems at the heart of this modernization effort—including those that travel at extreme speeds, operate at new altitudes, and rely on interconnected sensor and data networks—place demands on our national test infrastructure that far exceed its original design parameters. The flight simulation ground test facilities at the Arnold Engineering Development Complex (AEDC) are an indispensable national asset and are central to this endeavor. However, to accurately replicate the challenging operational environments required to mature these new technologies, a significant and accelerated campaign of infrastructure upgrades is required.

The Infrastructure & Execution Gap

The current infrastructure at AEDC, while a cornerstone of past success, must be recapitalized and modernized to meet this new mission. The sheer volume, complexity, and diversity of the required work—spanning high-pressure industrial systems, medium and high-voltage electrical grids, specialized fire suppression, and complex control systems—presents a significant execution challenge.

Traditional, project-by-project contracting methods are insufficient to deliver the required upgrades at the speed and scale necessary to support the nation's defense goals.

To bridge this gap, a new, more agile approach is needed to execute a broad portfolio of sustainment, restoration, and modernization projects. In recognition of this critical need, the Department of the Air

Force anticipates investing multi-billion dollars in test infrastructure at AEDC through Fiscal Year

2032.

The Solution: A Dedicated Enterprise Consortium

To effectively steward this substantial investment and meet the urgent timelines, AEDC is establishing an Enterprise Consortium. This model will create a pre-qualified, agile, and enduring partnership between the government and a select group of industrial vendors. The consortium will provide a streamlined and rapid contracting vehicle, enabling AEDC to quickly solicit and award individual

Project-Level agreements for the diverse technical projects required to prepare its facilities for the next generation of test and evaluation. This partnership is fundamental to ensuring the United States can develop, test, and field the critical defense capabilities needed to secure the future.

3.0 Onboarding and Selection Process

The Government will follow a multi-step process to evaluate and onboard members into the AEDC

Velocity Alliance. Vendors must successfully complete each step to be eligible for the next. The process is as follows:

• Step 1: Whitepaper Submission: Interested vendors shall submit a whitepaper in accordance with the instructions herein. Submission of a whitepaper constitutes the vendor's agreement to the terms in the "Statement of Understanding."

• Step 2: Government Evaluation: The Government will evaluate all submissions based on the

Pass/Fail criteria detailed in the "Whitepaper Evaluation Criteria" section of this document.

• Step 3: Invitation to Site Visit: Vendors who successfully pass the evaluation will receive an invitation to attend the mandatory site visit.

• Step 4: Mandatory Site Visit Attendance: The selected vendor must attend the mandatory

Industry Day to complete the onboarding evaluation. This event will take place on June 17, 2026, from 0800 to 1600 CST. The Industry Day will be hosted at the UTSI Auditorium, located at 411 B H Goethert Pkwy, Tullahoma, TN 37388. Vendors should refer to the attached site map (Atch 5 - UTSI Map) for specific parking and entrance instructions.

• Step 5: Execution of Membership Agreement: Upon successful completion of the site visit, the Government will provide the vendor with the official AEDC Velocity Alliance Membership

Agreement. This agreement must be fully executed by an authorized representative of the vendor.

Final membership in the AEDC Velocity Alliance is contingent upon the successful completion of all five steps. Only vendors who have a fully executed Membership Agreement on file with the

Government will be considered official members and be eligible to compete for projects.

4.0 Instructions for Vendors Whitepaper Response

Part 1: Mandatory Certification Requirements

To be considered for membership in the AEDC Velocity Alliance, vendors must meet the following mandatory certification requirements. Failure to meet these requirements will render a whitepaper submission non-responsive.

• Criteria 1: Joint Certification Program (JCP): Vendors must hold a current certification under the

Joint Certification Program (JCP). The Government will validate this certification.

• Criteria 2: Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC): Vendors must meet one of the following two conditions:

• (A) CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification: Provide proof of a current CMMC Level 2

Certification Assessment conducted by an authorized Third-Party Assessment

Organization (C3PAO). (Note: A CMMC Level 2 Self-Assessment does not satisfy this specific condition). The Government will validate this status.

• (B) Alternative Compliance Path: If a vendor does not yet possess a full CMMC Level

2 C3PAO Certification, they must meet both of the following requirements:

1. NIST SP 800-171 Assessment: The vendor must have a current NIST SP 800-171

DoD Assessment posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) with an assessment date no older than three (3) years. The Government will validate this posting.

2. CMMC Roadmap: The vendor must provide a detailed compliance roadmap as part of their whitepaper submission. To be deemed sufficient, this roadmap must explicitly detail the vendor's plan and timeline to achieve full CMMC Level 2

C3PAO Certification by the November 2026 deadline, and must specifically address:

• The timeline for closing out any open Plans of Action and Milestones

(POA&Ms) to achieve full implementation of the 110 controls, acknowledging the strict 180-day limitation on POA&Ms under the new

CMMC rule.

• The vendor's planned timeline and evidence of engagement with a C3PAO to conduct the final certification assessment prior to the November 2026 deadline.

Part 2: Technical Competency:

The response to this section must begin with your company's full legal name and CAGE code.

From the list below, you may answer one, some, or all of the questions. For each question you choose to answer, please provide a detailed response based on a representative project your company has completed within the last five (5) years that demonstrates your firm's technical expertise and qualifications for that specific project type. Your response should clearly define your firm's role and scope of work on the project, whether as a prime contractor or a subcontractor.

Technical Evaluation Questions by SOO Project Type

1. General Construction

• Describe a commercial or institutional building project to which your firm made a significant contribution. Detail your specific scope of work, your process for ensuring the quality of that work, and how your team coordinated with other trades and project leadership to ensure compliance with all plans and specifications.

2. Industrial Construction

• Provide a case study of an industrial facility project where your firm was responsible for a key scope of work (e.g., structural steel, specialized foundations, or utility system installation).

Explain the technical requirements of your scope and how your team executed the work and integrated it with other ongoing project activities.

3. Low Pressure Process Systems (≤ 150 PSIG)

• Detail a project where your firm was responsible for the design, fabrication, or installation of a low-pressure process piping system. Specify the fluid/gas media, materials of construction, and the industry standards (e.g., ASME B31.3) applied to your scope of work. Describe your testing and turnover process for your completed system.

4. High Pressure Process Systems (> 150 PSIG)

• Describe a project where your firm executed work on a high-pressure piping system. Your response must include the operating pressure, temperature, and media relevant to your scope.

Detail the specific codes (e.g., ASME B31.3) that governed your work and the quality assurance protocols you followed for critical tasks like welding and component selection.

5. Hazardous Process Systems

• Provide a case study for a project where your firm’s scope involved a system handling flammable, toxic, or otherwise hazardous media (per OSHA definitions). Explain the specific safety design features, controls, or procedures you were responsible for implementing to mitigate risks.

6. Process Ducting (> 24" Diameter)

• Detail a project where your firm was responsible for the fabrication, installation, or modification of large-diameter process ducting. Describe your scope of work, the materials used, and how your team addressed challenges such as structural support, thermal expansion, or vibration.

7. High Voltage Electrical (> 6.9kV)

• Describe your firm’s role in a high-voltage project, detailing the equipment you installed or serviced. Explain the specific safety procedures you followed for performing work in a high-voltage environment, including your process for coordinating and executing switching and lockout procedures.

8. Medium Voltage Electrical (600V - 6.9kV)

• Provide a case study for a medium-voltage electrical project your firm worked on. If your scope included it, detail the protective relaying scheme and coordination study. Otherwise, describe the specific installation, testing, and commissioning activities your team performed on the medium-voltage equipment.

9. Low Voltage Electrical (< 600V)

• Describe your role in a complex low-voltage power and controls project. Explain your scope of work, whether it involved installing motor control centers (MCCs), building power distribution, or integrating control systems, and how your work interfaced with the facility's overall electrical system.

10. Fire Suppression

• Detail a project where your firm was responsible for the design, installation, or testing of a specialized fire suppression system (e.g., deluge, foam, clean agent). Explain how the hazard was analyzed for your scope and why the specific suppression components were selected, referencing applicable NFPA codes.

11. Equipment Repair

• Provide a case study on an overhaul or repair of major rotating industrial equipment (e.g., motor, pump, compressor) performed by your firm. Describe your process for disassembly, inspection, root cause failure analysis, and reassembly to meet or exceed original specifications.

12. Mechanical Engineering Services

• Describe a project where your firm provided mechanical engineering services to design a component or solve a complex problem within a larger mechanical system. Detail the specific problem you were tasked to solve and the analysis, design, and validation process you used to deliver your solution.

13. Electrical Engineering Services

• Detail a project where your firm was contracted to provide electrical engineering services to solve a specific power quality, controls, or arc flash mitigation problem. Explain the nature of the problem, your analysis methodology, and the engineered solution you delivered to the prime contractor or owner.

14. ID&C Engineering Services

• Describe a project where your firm provided engineering services for an Instrumentation, Data, and Control (ID&C) system. Detail your specific scope, such as programming a PLC, designing a control panel, or commissioning a set of instruments, and explain how it contributed to the overall system's success.

15. Utilities

• Provide a case study for a project where your firm performed work on a site-wide utility distribution system (e.g., water, steam, or gas). Explain your specific scope of work and how you managed tasks like trenching, pipe laying, or system tie-ins while coordinating with other site operations.

Part 3: Intellectual Property Rights Acknowledgement

Vendors shall include an explicit statement in their whitepaper submission acknowledging their understanding and acceptance of the Government's intellectual property (IP) framework, which allocates rights based on the source of development funding. The required statement is as follows:

Vendor Name acknowledges and accepts the Intellectual Property Rights framework established in the AEDC

Velocity Alliance Base Articles. Specifically, Vendor Name understands that the allocation of rights (Unlimited, Government Purpose, or Limited/Restricted) for technical data and computer software delivered under any future Project-Level Agreement will be determined based on whether the development was funded exclusively by the Government, with mixed funding, or exclusively at private expense.

Vendor Name further acknowledges that to claim any rights other than Unlimited Rights, it must explicitly identify, negotiate, and properly mark those assertions on a case-by-case basis at the individual project level."

NOTE: The final determination of IP rights at the project level will be governed by the detailed framework outlined in the AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Article: Intellectual Property Rights.

Part 4: Innovation and Partnership Capability

The information requested in this section is a mandatory prerequisite for establishing a base consortium agreement with a prospective member. It serves as the upfront justification for the Government to utilize the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(A) or (B) for the establishment of the consortium business model itself.

Vendors are advised that this upfront demonstration of capability is a separate and distinct requirement from the mandatory compliance check that will be performed on every individual project-level proposal submitted under the Alliance.

Submission Requirement:

To satisfy this requirement, the vendor shall provide supporting documentation that identifies at least one

(1) partner company by name and CAGE code that enables compliance with either (A) or (B) below. The vendor must directly link this partner’s capabilities to the technical expertise demonstrated in their Part 2 technical response. The submission must provide:

a. A description of the partner's unique capabilities, their status as an NDC or small business, and the nature of the vendor's existing relationship with them.

b. A detailed rationale explaining how this specific partner could participate to a "significant extent"

(as defined in NOTE 3 below) on a future project that is similar in scope to the project described in your Part 2 response. This should illustrate how the partner's contribution would enhance the technical solution and how this partnership structure would satisfy one of the following conditions:

• (A) There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent in the prototype project.

• (B) All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small businesses (including small businesses participating in a program described under section 9 of the

Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638)) or nontraditional defense contractors.

NOTE 1: Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) = An entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by DoD for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards (CAS) prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations implementing such section (see 10 U.S.C. §3014). The phrase “the solicitation of sources” refers to the initial agreement solicitation only. A nontraditional defense contractor is considered a nontraditional defense contractor for the duration of the prototype project/agreement’s period of performance, or for any in-scope work modified under the same agreement.

NOTE 2: Non-profit research institution is validated by reviewing the vendor’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status, which is required by the Internal Revenue Service.

NOTE 3: “Significant extent” and “significant participants” may be defined by the vendor providing rationale to one or more of the following variables:

a. Has a significant role / level of involvement in the development, production, or delivery of a product or service.

b. Has a significant impact on the design, development, or production of the product or service.

c. Has a significant level of material interest in the success of the product or service.

d. Has significant level of company's financial interest in the success of the product or service.

e. Has significant level of control over the development, production, or delivery of a product or service.

f. Other significant rationale provided by the vendor.

NOTE 4: Failure to provide a sufficient response to this section that demonstrates the vendor's capability to partner with NDCs and/or small businesses may result in the whitepaper being deemed non-responsive and eliminated from consideration for membership in the Alliance.

5.0 Whitepaper Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate each whitepaper submission in a four-part process. A submission must receive a "Pass" on all four parts to be considered for membership in the Alliance. A "Fail" rating on any part will result in the entire whitepaper submission being deemed non-responsive and ineligible for further consideration.

Part 1: Mandatory Certification Requirements Evaluation (Pass/Fail)

This initial evaluation serves as a mandatory compliance gate. A submission will only be considered for further evaluation if it receives a "Pass" on BOTH of the following requirements.

• Criterion 1: JCP Certification:

• Pass: The vendor's JCP certification is successfully validated as current and active.

• Fail: The vendor's certification cannot be validated or is not in good standing.

• The Government will validate this certification via the Defense Logistics Agency

(DLA) at: https://www.public.dacs.dla.mil/jcp.

• Criterion 2: Cybersecurity Compliance Requirement:

• Pass: The vendor's submission successfully meets the requirements of either pathway (A) or (B) below:

• (Pathway A): The vendor's CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification is successfully validated by the Government.

• (Pathway B): The Government successfully validates the vendor's NIST SP 800-

171 Assessment in SPRS (with a date no older than three years) AND the vendor's submission includes a detailed compliance roadmap that credibly outlines the closure of open POA&Ms and scheduling of a C3PAO assessment prior to the

November 2026 deadline.

• Fail: The vendor's submission fails to meet the requirements of either Pathway A or

Pathway B, or the provided roadmap under Pathway B lacks sufficient detail regarding

POA&M closure and C3PAO engagement to demonstrate a credible path to a C3PAO certification by the deadline.

• The Government will validate this certification status via the Supplier

Performance Risk System (SPRS) at: https://sprs.csd.disa.mil

Part 2: Technical Competency (Pass/Fail)

For submissions that pass Part 1, the Government will evaluate the answered technical questions to determine the vendor's overall eligibility for membership in the Alliance. This evaluation serves as a technical competency gate.

To be accepted into the AEDC Velocity Alliance, a vendor must receive a "Pass" rating on at least one technical question response. While vendors may answer multiple questions to demonstrate the breadth of their capabilities, successfully passing a single question is sufficient to meet this requirement.

A response to any selected question will receive a "Pass" if it meets ALL of the following criteria:

• Project Timeliness: The project described was completed within the last five (5) years.

• Relevance: The project example is clearly relevant to the specific SOO Project Type addressed by the question.

• Clarity of Role: The response explicitly defines the vendor's role and details the specific scope of work their firm was responsible for executing.

• Technical Sufficiency: The response provides sufficient technical detail to demonstrate experience and competency. This includes citing applicable industry codes/standards, https://www.public.dacs.dla.mil/jcp https://sprs.csd.disa.mil/ describing processes or methodologies, and explaining how technical challenges were addressed.

• Completeness: The response addresses all parts of the question asked.

A vendor's submission will receive a "Fail" for this Part 2 evaluation if it exhibits ANY of the following deficiencies:

• The vendor fails to receive a "Pass" rating on at least one answered technical question.

Part 3: Intellectual Property Rights Acknowledgement Evaluation (Pass/Fail)

This evaluation serves as a mandatory compliance gate to ensure all prospective members accept the consortium's IP framework prior to entry.

• Pass: The vendor's whitepaper submission includes the exact, verbatim acknowledgement statement regarding the Intellectual Property Rights framework, exactly as written and required in

Section 4.0, Part 3.

• Fail: The vendor's submission fails to include the required acknowledgement statement, omits the statement entirely, or alters the language of the required statement in any way.

Part 4: Innovation and Partnership Capability Evaluation (Pass/Fail)

This evaluation serves as a mandatory compliance gate to ensure the vendor has the capability to satisfy the statutory requirements for the use of an Other Transaction Agreement.

• Pass: A submission will receive a "Pass" rating if it meets ALL of the following criteria:

1. Completeness: The submission identifies at least one partner company by name and CAGE code and provides all information requested in Section 4.0, Part 4 (a) and (b).

2. Partner Eligibility: The identified partner is verifiable by the Government as either a Non-

Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) or a small business.

3. Logical Connection: The submission provides a clear and logical connection between the partner's capabilities and the technical expertise demonstrated in the vendor's Part 2 response.

4. Sufficient Rationale: The submission provides a detailed and sufficient rationale that explains how the partner could participate to a "significant extent" on a future project, consistent with the definitions provided in Note 3 of Section 4.0.

5. Statutory Justification: The rationale clearly articulates how the proposed partnership structure would satisfy the requirements of either 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(A) or (B).

• Fail: A submission will receive a "Fail" rating if it exhibits ANY of the following deficiencies:

1. Fails to identify a partner company with a verifiable CAGE code.

2. Fails to provide a description of the partner's capabilities, status, or the existing relationship.

3. Fails to provide a rationale for significant participation that is linked to the Part 2 technical response.

4. The provided rationale for "significant extent" is superficial, inadequate, or does not align with the definitions provided.

5. The submission is otherwise incomplete or non-responsive to the requirements of Section

4.0, Part 4.

Vendors who successfully pass Parts 1 - 4 of this evaluation will be invited to join the AEDC Velocity

Alliance and will be eligible to compete for all future projects solicited within the consortium pending the requirements given in 6.0 Statement of Understanding.

6.0 Statement of Understanding

By submitting a whitepaper in response to this Request for Whitepapers, each vendor formally acknowledges and agrees to the following conditions for participation in the AEDC Velocity Alliance selection process:

1. Foundational Framework: The vendor acknowledges that the attached documents, "Atch 1 -

AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives" (the SOO) and "Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity

Alliance Base Articles" (the Base Articles), serve as the foundational framework for the

Alliance. By submitting a response, the vendor agrees to the following understanding of this framework:

(a) Statement of Objectives (SOO): The SOO establishes the general technical scope for the consortium. The vendor understands that this is a living document which may be updated at any time by the Government to add, delete, or modify objectives if determined to be in the Government's best interest.

(b) Base Articles: The Base Articles establish the base governing articles for the Alliance.

The vendor understands that this is also a living document which may be updated at any time by the Government if determined to be in its best interest.

(c) Project-Level Tailoring: While the Base Articles provide the foundational framework, the vendor understands that specific articles may be further negotiated at the individual project level to suit the unique requirements of a particular effort.

(d) Notification of Updates: The vendor understands that any official updates or modifications made by the Government to the SOO or the Base Articles will be posted to the original Request for Whitepaper notice on SAM.gov. It is the vendor's responsibility to monitor this notice for any such changes.

2. Mandatory Site Visit: The vendor understands and agrees that should they be successfully evaluated for Step 1 through Step 3, attendance at the mandatory Industry Day is strictly required. This site visit will occur on June 17, 2026, between 0800 and 1600 CST at the UTSI

Auditorium in Tullahoma, TN. By submitting a whitepaper, the vendor acknowledges this requirement and agrees to arrange for appropriate personnel to be present. Detailed logistical information, including parking and facility access, is provided in Atch 5 - UTSI Map.

3. Ongoing Cybersecurity Compliance: The vendor understands and agrees that membership in the AEDC Velocity Alliance is conditional upon maintaining a compliant cybersecurity posture.

(a) CMMC Level 2 Deadline: If a vendor is accepted into the Alliance via the alternative compliance path (NIST SP 800-171 assessment and a roadmap), the vendor agrees that they must achieve and provide proof of full CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification by the

November 2026 deadline. Failure to meet this deadline will result in the vendor's Membership

Agreement becoming inactive, and they will no longer be eligible to compete for new project awards until certification is achieved.

(b) Project-Level Impact and Assumption of Risk: The vendor understands and explicitly agrees that if they are performing on a Project-Level Agreement awarded prior to November

2026 and have not yet achieved full CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification, the Government reserves the right to issue a stop-work order on any project activities requiring the handling of information that necessitates such certification. The vendor further agrees that any and all costs, schedule impacts, or delays resulting from such a CMMC-related stop-work order are the vendor's sole responsibility and will not form the basis of a request for equitable adjustment or claim against the Government. The Government may keep the stop-work order in effect until the vendor's CMMC Level 2 C3PAO Certification is successfully validated.

Submission of a whitepaper will be considered the vendor's explicit agreement to these terms.

7.0 Submission Schedule and Key Information

Whitepaper Submission

All whitepaper responses must be submitted electronically in a single, searchable PDF format. The total submission must not exceed the ten (10) page limit as specified in this document.

Submissions must be emailed to the following address:

- Greggory C. Jones, Agreements Officer: greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil

- Brooke Z. Vandeman, Agreements Officer: brooke.vandeman@us.af.mil

- Haden D. Welch, Air Force Project Manager: haden.welch@us.af.mil

- Michelle R. Young, Air Force Project Manager: michelle.young.11@us.af.mil

The subject line of the submission email must follow this exact format:

"RFWP Response: AEDC Velocity Alliance - [Vendor Name]"

Responses received after the specified due dates for each onboarding opportunity will be considered late and may not be evaluated for that opportunity.

Questions and Inquiries

All questions regarding this Request for Whitepapers must be submitted in writing via email. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted. To ensure fair consideration, all questions and the Government's official responses may be made publicly available to all interested parties without attribution to the source of the inquiry.

Please submit all questions to the following addresses:

- Greggory C. Jones, Agreements Officer: greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil mailto:greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil mailto:brooke.vandeman@us.af.mil mailto:haden.welch@us.af.mil mailto:michelle.young.11@us.af.mil mailto:greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil

- Brooke Z. Vandeman, Agreements Officer: brooke.vandeman@us.af.mil

- Haden D. Welch, Air Force Project Manager: haden.welch@us.af.mil

- Michelle R. Young, Air Force Project Manager: michelle.young.11@us.af.mil

The subject line for all inquiry emails must follow this exact format:

"RFWP Question: AEDC Velocity Alliance - [Vendor Name]"

Questions Due Date: 1 May 2026, COB

The Government is not obligated to respond to questions received after the specified submission deadlines.

Onboarding Schedule

The Government intends to onboard members to the AEDC Velocity Alliance in multiple phases. The schedule for the initial opportunities is as follows:

Onboarding Phase Whitepaper Responses Due By: Mandatory Site Visit Window:

Opportunity 1 1 June 2026 17 June 2026 (0800 - 1600 CST)

Opportunity 2 1 September 2026 1 September 2026 – 30 September 2026

Opportunity 3 To Be Determined (TBD) To Be Determined (TBD)

The anticipated live date for the Alliance to become active is 1 July 2026.

Notice Duration

This Request for Whitepapers notice will remain active until 30 September 2032. The Government reserves the right to extend this period if determined to be in its best interest.

Governing Document Modifications

Vendors are advised that all governing documents associated with the AEDC Velocity Alliance are considered "living documents" and are subject to change.

• The Statement of Objectives (SOO) may be updated at any time to add, delete, or modify objectives as determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

• Any associated articles of the consortium may also be updated at any time if determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

mailto:brooke.vandeman@us.af.mil mailto:haden.welch@us.af.mil mailto:michelle.young.11@us.af.mil

Responsibility for Costs

Vendors are advised that this Request for Whitepapers is an unfunded solicitation for qualification to join the AEDC Velocity Alliance. The Government is not responsible for and will not reimburse any costs incurred by a vendor in relation to this opportunity.

This includes, but is not limited to:

• All costs associated with the preparation, submission, and any subsequent clarification of a whitepaper response.

• All costs associated with attending the mandatory site visit at Arnold Air Force Base, TN, including travel, lodging, and personnel time.

• All costs associated with the preparation and submission of proposals in response to future

Project Opportunity Announcements (POAs).

A vendor's participation in any stage of this process is entirely at their own risk and expense. The

Government's financial obligation only begins upon the award of a specific, funded Project-Level

Agreement to a member of the Alliance.

Process Flow Diagram

Step 1: Whitepaper Submission

• Vendor submits whitepaper by the deadline.

Step 2: Government Evaluation

• Government performs Pass/Fail evaluation based on mandatory certifications and technical merit.

Step 3: Invitation & Site Visit

• Successful vendors are invited to and must attend the mandatory site visit at Arnold AFB.

Step 4: Membership Agreement

• Following the site visit, vendor receives and executes the official Membership Agreement.

Step 5: Alliance Membership Granted

• With a fully executed agreement, the vendor becomes an official member, eligible to compete for all projects.

Attachments:

Atch 1 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Program Objectives - 21 Apr 26

Atch 2 - AEDC Velocity Alliance Base Articles – 21 Apr 26

Atch 3 - CMMC-Information

Atch 4 - CMMC-FAQsv4

Atch 5 - UTSI Map

GREGGORY C. JONES

Agreements Officer, USAF