Q# Solicitation/ Attachment Subject

Page #, Paragraph Reference Question / Comment Response/Document Edits

1 Pricing Does the Government have a preferred format for BOEs within the Price Narrative? While the Government is flexible in terms of the format of the submission, Offerors are cautioned that as a part of the Realism evaluation, the Government will compare the quantities entered in Atch 4.7, along with any BOEs to the technical proposal to ensure the Offeror has demonstrated an understanding of the work to be performed.

2 Pricing Atch 4.7 Attachment 4.7 does not appear to have a dedicated place for fee/profit. Does the Government have a preference of how this is broken out or built into the inputs?

The Government has amended Atch 4.7 to include an additional column within tab 'Labor Categories' for Offerors to include their profit/fee.

3 Pricing What level of detail is required from subcontractors for the cost proposal? In lieu of certified pricing data being required, does the Government want them to submit unsanitized cost proposals at the same time as the prime contractors?

The Government requests Offerors notate instances where the labor category would be performed by a subcontractor.

Further, the unit price displayed should include the subcontractor's fully burdened labor rates plus any additive rate on behalf of the prime so that the total unit price reflects the combined price. Atch 4 Section L has been amended to reflect this instruction.

4 Are there expected end dates for the System Requirements Review as well as the various PDRs and PDR Reporting that we should use for proposal purposes?

Kick-off Meeting ~10 Days ARO SRR ~30 Days ARO PDR ~6 Months after SRR CDR ~9 months after PDR

5 Site Visit Cover Letter I'm assuming that you intend that to be three persons per team. We may have representatives from four of five companies on our team interested in attending. But I think your intent is that only three persons from our Corvid Team can go on the site visit. Is that interpretation correct?

We are utilizing buses from Base Transportation to take everyone through WSMR and to the site. Space is limited, therefore we are limiting companies to 6 persons per team.

6 Site Visit Cover Letter I read paragraph 7 as there is not a limit on the number of attendees for the Holloman portion of the trip. Is this correct? If it is correct, do you have any info on what will be discussed during the Holloman portion? The reason that I'm asking is that if we have 4 or 5 team members who would like to attend, but only 3 can go to WSMR, it would be good to know if it's worth their time, or if we should just limit ourselves to 3 for the entire trip.

Yes, we are using a bus to transport folks to and from the site. The bus has limited seating. The point of the trip to the test site is to show vendors where the system will be located in reference to other buildings, show them the current condition of the buildings we intend to reutilize, and get a good understanding of the distance between main base and the test site. The technical details will be discussed during the presentations.

Site Visit Is the agenda for Feb 26 set well enough to know when you expect to finish? We are working on arranging travel. If it's a full day, we'll arrange accommodations for that night and fly home on Friday, but if the plan is for only a half day, we may be able to fly home that evening. Either way is great, just wanted to ask before we lock anything in.

Industry Day will now conclude 25 February.

Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.2 Subfactor 1.1:

Technical Approach

CDRL Item A006 is titled as "Life Cycle Support Plan". Solicitation-FA910126RB005- Pg 7 states CDRL Item A006 as "Integrated Logistics Support Plan". Can the government clarify the scope of Item A006 of the CDRL?

CDRL A006 follows DI ILSS 80095; within the Data Item Section 10.2.1 states, "identify and define lifecycle ILS requirements and tasks in adequate detail to assure that each system/equipment being installed in an operational environment can be supported" Maturity of the ILSP correlates to the maturity of the design milestone.

Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.2 Subfactor 1.1:

Technical Approach

CDRL Item A008 is titled as "Configuration Plan". Solicitation-FA910126RB005- Pg 7 states CDRL Item A008 as "Quality Management System Report" Can the government clarify the scope for Item A008 of the CDRL?

CDRL A008 follows DI SESS 80858D; within the Data Item Section 3 states, "The Supplier’s CM plan shall identify the Supplier’s processes and procedures for:

a. Configuration management and planning over the lifecycle of a product.

b. Configuration identification throughout the product lifecycle.

c. Configuration change management involves controlling and documenting the product and its product configuration information to the product’s end of life." Maturity of the Configuration Plan correlates to the maturity of the design milestone.

Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.2 Subfactor 1.1:

Technical Approach

Please clarify if the CSOW covers tasks for CDR or PDR. Atch 8 implies that the CSOW covers CDR, while Atch 4 implies it covers PDR, and Atch 5 implies PDR.

The CSOW for PDR is required as part of the current RFP.

The CDR CSOW is required during PDR events.

11 Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.3. Subfactor 1.2:

Management Approach

Please clarify if the Management Plan addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

Yes, the Management Plan scope is for PDR, this document is updated with each milestone

Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.3. Subfactor 1.2:

Management Approach

Please clarify if the SBPCD addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

SBPCD should address entire project.

Survivability Test Stand (STS) - Solicitation Questions

Atch 4 - Section L L-3.2.4. Subfactor 1.3:

Integration Approach

Please clarify if the Integration Approach addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

Integration scope should address plans/concepts for the entire project

14 Atch 4 - Section L L-3.3.2 Price Information

Please confirm that the estimated start date for the initial order is 15 June 2026. The Gov't is planning to award in June and begin the initial DO as soon as possible

15 Atch 4.7 - STS Initial Order Pricing Sheet tab: Labor Categories

Please clarify the meaning and expected information from contractors of column I, titled FY Applicable.

Because of the addition of a column in the 'Labor Categories' tab of the updated Atch 4.7, this question is assumed to be referring to Column J. This column, entitled 'FY Applicable', reflects that labor pricing will likely be different for each FY as the effort matures. For example, the hourly pricing for the PM in Government FY27 may be different than Government FY28.

Offerors should input the cooresponding FY of each labor category's rate and use multiple lines to separate the different FY specific rates for the same labor category for as long as that labor category will be used. Per the Atch 4.7 'Instructions' tab, Offerors may add as many rows as necessary to reflect a complete 'Labor Categories' tab.

Please refer to attachment 4.7 from Amendment 0001.

Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.1.2 Measure of

Merit: Contractor Statement of Work (CSOW)

Please clarify if the CSOW covers tasks for CDR or PDR. Atch 8 implies that the CSOW covers CDR, while Atch 4 implies it covers PDR, and Atch 5 implies PDR. (similar to Question #3)

The initial Delivery Order covers PDR, as part of completing the PDR a CSOW will be required for CDR.

17 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.2 Subfactor 1.2:

Management Approach

Please clarify if the Management Plan addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion. (similar to Question #4)

Yes, the Management Plan scope is for PDR, this document is updated with each milestone

18 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.2.1 Measure of

Merit: Resource Management

Please clarify if the Resource Plan addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

Resource plan should address the entire project

Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.2.2 Measure of Merit: Small Business

Please clarify if the Small Business Plan addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

SBPCD should address entire project.

20 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.3 Subfactor 1.3:

Integration Approach

Please clarify if the Integration Approach addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion. (similar to Question #6)

Integration scope should address plans/concepts for the entire project

21 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.3.1 Measure of

Merit: Technical Comprehension in Business

Please clarify if the business model addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

Business model should address the entire project

22 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.1.1.3.2 Measure of Merit: Integration Plan

Please clarify if the Integration Plan addresses only scope for PDR or should it address all project scope through project completion.

Integration scope should address plans/concepts for the entire project

23 Atch 5 - Section M M-2.2.3.2.1 Past

Performance Relevancy Criteria

Please clarify if $500K minimum limit applies to major subcontractors. For purposes of relevancy, a magnitude of $500K total contract scope applies to all references submitted for past performance.

24 Atch 8 - Delivery Order 1 SOO 2.1 Work to be Performed

Please clarify if the CSOW covers tasks for CDR or PDR. Atch 8 implies that the CSOW covers CDR, while Atch 4 implies it covers PDR, and Atch 5 implies PDR. (similar to Question #3)

As part of completing the PDR a CSOW is required for the

CDR

Atch 8 - Delivery Order 1 SOO 2.3 Data Deliverables

Please clarify if CDRL A013 CDRL is due as part of DO1. Exhibit A shows that A013 is due as part of DO1; Attachment 8 indicates that it is not due as part of DO1.

Yes, CDRL A013 is due as part of DO 0001. Amendment 0002 includes a revised Attachment 8. The level of detail is commensurate with the milestone of the project.

26 Exhibit A - STS CDRLS A013

Please clarify if CDRL A013 CDRL is due as part of DO1. Exhibit A shows that A013 is due as part of DO1; Attachment 8 indicates that it is not due as part of DO1.

Yes, CDRL A013 is due as part of DO 0001. Amendment 0002 includes a revised Attachment 8. The level of detail is commensurate with the milestone of the project.

27 Solicitation-FA910126RB005- Note

In the Notes section of the solicitation, offerors are instructed to complete Blocks 12, 17, 23, 24, and 30 of the SF 1449. However, Section L (page 8) states that offerors are required to complete only Blocks 17 and 30. Can the Government please clarify which blocks offerors are required to complete?

Only Blocks 17 and 30 should be completed. Since STS is an IDIQ with a ceiling, pricing will be included at the DO level.

Industry Day Are the questions and answers from this discussion going to be published? Yes, the general questions and answers will be published.

However, any information unique to a specific company's business or approach will be redacted.

Industry Day Can the IEEE standard, which is being used as a guideline for major milestones like PDR and CDR, be tailored?

Yes, it can be tailored for work beyond the initail delivery order. The key is to adhere to the AEDC systems engineering processes and maintain the formality of the review process, ensuring cost, technical, and schedule baselines are addressed. The specifics of tailoring can be negotiated.

Industry Day Is the CSoW (Contractor Statement of Work) synonymous with a WBS (Work Breakdown Structure)?

No. The CSoW list reflects the contract, while the WBS is a program management tool that breaks down the project into smaller components. However, the structure of the CSoW list can be used to easily create the WBS.

31 Industry Day Can we get a copy of the environmental impact? We will give it to the awarded contractor, but a draft is publicly available.

https://home.army.mil/wsmr/6317/7092/9630/Draft_Supple mental_Environmental_Assessment_National_Radar_Cross _Section_Test_Facility_Survivability_Test_Stand_Construc tion_and_Operation.pdf

32 Industry Day What is the process for unique engine attachment fixtures for new and legacy engines? The system should be designed to be adaptable for interface to multiple engines. Engine specific adapters will be provided by the test customers.

34 Industry Day Are you (the government) providing the radar system? No, the government is not providing the radar.

Industry Day Can we get more details on the J&A. J&A will be posted with Amendment 0002.

Industry Day Can Saber handle any of the Acoustics, IR or Engine data? Saber is just for the Radar data, but data will need to be time synchronized across signature measurements

Industry Day Does the proposed design need to be tank-based? Is there a need to run multiple different types of fuels?

The RFP lists a tank concept and companies should propose according to the RFP. As part of the design space (post award) additional concepts may be suggested to achieve a value engineering approach.

Industry Day Does the test article (engine) need to be imaged at variable heights up to 15 feet, or will it be at a fixed height?

It's likely that testing for a specific engine would be at a fixed height, depending on the engine's dimensions, to avoid ground bounce interference. However, to get 3D imagery, some elevation aperture is necessary. Follow the KPPs and KSAs provided with the RFP.

39 Industry Day Can existing drawings for other buildings be provided to reduce design costs? Yes, those can be provided after award.

Industry Day Are buildings going to be separated by caveats/different programs? The buildings were setup to be SAPF locations (mission control meeting rooms in second building), but were not accredited. Any new construction would need to meet current accreditation standards.

Industry Day Are there other access points for bringing in engines etc. Yes there are other gates that have smoother roads.

Industry Day Please clarify the purposes of the Software listed on the J&A. SABER is only for the RF measurements and must be in a compatible file format from the antennas into the software.

REAPR is used for Command and Control and would need to control the turntable and antenna heights. ISAR software/harware is a module being added to the NRTF's current system and used to collect RF measurements.

43 Industry Day Is there a desired diameter of the turntable? No, there is not required foot-print, as long as it meets the KPPs and KSAs

44 Industry Day Is the PDR for the Initial Operating Capability (IOC) or the Full Operating Capability

(FOC)?

The PDR is for the entire project, through to FOC.

45 Industry Day For the initial test, do we need to design a stand that can accommodate the full range of engines, from a small J-85 to a large F135?

The focus is on current and future engines.

46 Industry Day What will be the first engine tested? For the proposal, using the current USAF operational inventory as a guideline is recommended.

Industry Day Does the contractor need to provide a data acquisition system for the engine? Engine OEMs will likely provide their engine specific data acquisition. For proposal purposes, please address what is specified in the TCRD and needed for PDR.

48 Industry Day Should trade studies be proposed? They can be; however, the first DO is through PDR. Any additional work would be on a different delivery order.

50 There are three different evaluation criteria listed between the FA9101-26-R-B005 SF 1449 and Section M. Request clarification.

1. SF 1449, page 56 of 56 in the file "Solicitation-FA910126RB005-.pdf", FAR 52.212- 2(a) paragraph 2 lists the order of precedence for the three factors as 1. Price, 2. Technical,

3. Past Performance.

Interpretation: Price > Technical > Past Performance

2. SF 1449, page 56 of 56 in the file "Solicitation-FA910126RB005-.pdf", FAR 52.212- 2(a) paragraph 3 states that "Technical and past performance, when combined, are more important than price.

Interpretation: (Technical + Past Performance) > Price. (Implied interpretation: Technical = Past Performance)

3. Section M-1.1 states "Technically acceptable competing Offerors’ past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price." and "All technically acceptable offers will be considered technically equal. The tradeoff will occur only between the past performance factor and the price factor among those offerors who have been determined to be technically acceptable."

Interpretation: Technically Acceptable? Yes -> Past Performance >> Price (but then there is a potential tradeoff that might put price above past performance?)

Note that Section M-2.2.4.5 states that "If the lowest priced (complete, reasonable, realistic, not unbalanced), technically acceptable Offeror, receives a Substantial Confidence PCA, then that Offeror will constitute the best value to the Government."

While this is consistent with the first sentence in Section M-1.1, there is no mention of tradeoffs from the second sentence quoted from Section M-1.1.

Paragraph 2 of SF 1449 FAR 52.212-2(a) seems to be in direct conflict with the other two

The verbiage in SF 1449 has been amended to reflect the verbiage in Section M.

51 Will additional buildings be MILCON, or is the contractor responsible for designing and building them?

There will be no MILCON for this effort

52 Will there be any new construction? Yes, there can be new construction as well as modifications to the existing buildings

53 Have there been target features operated on pilons before that interfaced with the REAPER software?

Test article features have typically been operated separately.

54 When will the awarded contractor be expected to start? Award is planned to mid to late June. The kick-off is planned for within one week of contract award, at the RAMS site. SRR is expected to be within the first 30 days.

55 Will slides be posted to SAM.gov? Yes, the Industry Day slides have been posted to SAM.gov

56 Can any infrastructure be constructed above grade on the range? There shall be no hardware above the ~3% grade on the range so as not to impact radar measurements.

57 Is there a location where the fuel farm would need to be located? There is no strict requirement on the fuel farm location.

Fuel piping cannot go above ground on the range, or in areas where it would interfere with RCS measurements.

58 Will there be paving required on the range? The requirement for paving will be decided during the design process. For the purposes of the proposal, the design should adhere to the KPPs and KSAs.

59 What is the impact to the mission for construction? The ReDI range is not a high use area, so the impact of construction is expected to be low.

60 Are there keep-out zones and details on available power? There is existing power, copper and fiber, as well as nearby transformers. Keep-out zones and available power levels will be provided to the awarded contractor.

61 Can heavy equipment be driven onto the range? Yes, heavy equipment has been driven on the range.

Specifications on the rated loading will be provided to the selected contractor.

62 Will there need to be any SCIF spaces built? Yes, modified portions of the existing facilites need to go through the accreditation process.

63 Is there a fiber path from the range to the existing buildings that will be re-used for this project?

Yes

64 Are the surrounding mountains expected to impact Acoustic measurements? Yes, the nearby mountains are expected to have an effect on acoustic measurements at low frequencies. These can be addressed either via post-processing, or physical design.

65 Can drawings be provided for the existing buildings on the range that will be re-used for

STS?

Yes, drawings will be provided to the awarded contractor

Table 1