DARPA HR001120S0017 NOMARS Question and Answer.pdf

DARPA NOMARS Final Q&A Reference: HR0011120S0017

Questions and Answers Final Comprehensive Version

02/26/2020 Question 1: Will there be any underwater radiated noise requirements imposed?

Answer 1: No.

Question 2: What is the anticipated contract award value for Phase 1?

Answer 2: Per the BAA, the anticipated total budget for Track A Phase 1 awards is $31M including options, and $10M for Track B awards.

Question 3: Is it envisioned that the vessel could be deployed from a sea-based host platform as well as a land-based facility?

Answer 3: DARPA is not specifying a method of deployment. However, use of a sea-based host platform does not count toward fulfilling the performance metrics specified in the BAA.

Question 4: Will the Government further define ‘survivable in Sea State 7’ (e.g. maintain best heading and speed)?

Answer 4: The NOMARS vessel is intended to be operational (capable of accomplishing its mission) after Sea State 7 conditions subside to Sea State 5.

Question 5: Can an organization propose as a sub on multiple teams?

Answer 5: Yes.

Question 6: Is an organization prohibited from being a Track A and a Track B sub?

Answer 6: No.

Question 7: What are the reasons nuclear propulsion or power is not considered for this application?

Answer 7: This technology imposes significant programmatic risk, which would be counterproductive to the goals of the program.

Question 8: You mention on slide 18 that Track A performers should demonstrate that they would be able to successfully construct NOMARS. Does this mean that teams should include a shipyard for Phase 1A and/or 1B?

Answer 8: Proposers are encouraged to assemble well-rounded teams to holistically assess all aspects of ship design during Phase 1. Ship construction, manufacturability, and shore-based maintainability are considered part of the trade space and therefore, such expertise is relevant for a complete team. However, teaming with a shipyard is not required as the sole means for conducting that assessment.

Question 9: What’s the frequency of the sprint speed performance objective, i.e. 2 hours per day / week?

Answer 9: There is no defined frequency for sprinting, because DARPA is interested in understanding how sprint periods may be traded with cruise and loiter, and the resultant impact on endurance and refueling frequency. However, frequent sprint periods are more tactically advantageous.

Question 10: Should GPS enabled navigation be assumed?

Answer 10: Yes.

Question 11: Will a classification guide be provided, especially related to survivability and signatures?

Answer 11: No. The NOMARS program intends to develop an ‘X-ship’ demonstrator, not an operational vessel.

Question 12: From a strike mission perspective, will more information be provided on what’s required to appropriately design in weapons/launchers that can be certified?

Answer 12: The BAA defines parameters for a surrogate NOMARS mission payload. For the purpose of the NOMARS program, this ‘X-ship’ will not employ or integrate weapons or launchers.

Question 13: Can you delineate an Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) vs. semi-submersible?

Answer 13: A semi-submersible is defined as ship that breaks the surface, and is not intended to operate at depth or operate in an air-independent mode.

Question 14: Can information from NSWC efforts (NOMARS seedling) be provided to potential proposers (e.g. reports, concepts, AoA, cast data, etc.)?

Answer 14: No.

Question 15: Are requirements for autonomous navigation hardware included in payload size, weight, and power (SWaP)?

Answer 15: No, these are not specified for Phase 1, but are anticipated to be included in the Phase 2 BAA update. Track A teams should consider nominal SWaP as part of the payload in the trade space analysis based upon their knowledge of ship design requirements.

Question 16: Depot based maintenance is on the table. How often do you envision this taking place?

Answer 16: After 12 months of at-sea operation.

Question 17: Do we need to propose a full team for Phase I Track A or can we wait for the updated BAA opportunity?

Answer 17: Track A proposers should demonstrate their ability to complete Phase 1.

Question 18: Is a maintenance facility concept part of trade study / preliminary design expectation?

Answer 18: Yes.

Question 19: Can Track A proposals include technologies that may otherwise be proposed under Track B?

Answer 19: Yes.

Question 20: Will Phase 2 result in full system prototype?

Answer 20: It is anticipated that Phase 2 will result in a demonstrator.

Question 21: Can a company propose tech in Track B and same tech as part of Track A team?

Answer 21: Yes. However, the same scope of work will not be awarded twice.

Question 22: Would you consider NOT asking for a ROM for Phase 2A and 2B? This will result in a better Phase 1A & 1B proposal as the same team will have to develop the basis for that ROM which is challenging given it is speculative and heavily based on Phase 1A & 1B results.

Answer 22: Yes. The request for a Phase 2 ROM has been removed. Instead, we are requesting a ROM be provided as part of the Conceptual Design Review (CoDR) deliverable.

Question 23: We are inquiring as to whether or not Track A proposals have to have a Track B component in order to be eligible for award. It is unclear as the Overview on Page 3 states "NOMARS is a two-phased program, but this BAA seeks full proposals for Phase 1 (comprised of two tracks) only" and the Proposal Format that begins on page 25 separates Track A and Track B.

Answer 23: Proposers may submit for either Track A, Track B, or both tracks. However, proposers will not be awarded as a prime for both Track A and Track B. Successful Track A proposers will perform comprehensive assessment of the NOMARS trade space, to include critical enable technologies and subsystems. Track B is DARPA's method of directly collaborating with entities who either do not have the ability to execute Track A, or did not propose as part of a Track A team.

Question 24: The BAA requires Track B abstracts be submitted by Feb 14; however, it is silent on Track A abstracts. Will abstracts be required for Track A proposals? If a team wishes to offer a Track A proposal, must they also offer a Track B proposal?

Answer 24: Abstracts are not required for Track A proposals. Track A proposals must address the objectives as outlined for Track A teams in the BAA. Teams are not required to submit a proposal for both tracks.

Question 25: Will the Government consider extending the proposal deadline (Track A or B)?

Answer 25: No.

Question 26: Does the sponsor expect that the work produced under Track A of the NOMARS program (Seaframe Design and Integration) will be subject to ITAR restrictions?

Answer 26: The Department of Defense does not have authority over ITAR restrictions. Proposers are expected to comply with the applicable regulations.

Question 27: Please identify the highest level of information distribution limitation Track A performers should plan for in the execution of the NOMARS contract (i.e. Distribution Statement A, D, etc.)?

Answer 27: It is anticipated that most program products will be delivered under Distribution Statement D.

Question 28: Please clarify the specific unit for tonnage (i.e. Long Ton, Metric Ton, etc.) for the target X-ship displacement, and clarify if the displacement target is for light ship or fully loaded displacement.

Answer 28: DARPA is not specifying a target tonnage, as this parameter will be highly subject to design trades.

Question 29: Should Track A performers plan to attend a one-day combined Quarterly TIM with Track B Performers, or five distinct Quarterly TIMs?

Answer 29: Track A teams may assume that each round of TIMs will occur within the span of a single day, at a single location.

Question 30: The Cost Proposal Template states that “Certified cost or pricing data may be required for subcontractor proposals over $2,000,000.” It also states “A fully disclosed cost proposal as detailed as the prime Offeror’s cost proposal including support documentation will be required to be submitted by all proposed subcontractors and for all interorganizational transfers.” Is the threshold for the subcontractor requirement to provide a fully disclosed cost proposal as detailed as the prime Offeror’s cost proposal concurrent with the $2,000,000 threshold for Certified Cost and pricing data, therefore subcontractors below $2,000,000 do not have to provide detailed data?

Answer 30: All proposed subcontractors must provide detailed data. The $2,000,000 threshold pertains to whether proposers (prime or subcontractor) must submit a certificate of current cost or pricing data at the conclusion of contract negotiations.

Question 31: Please clarify the level of discretion that will be afforded Track A performers as to which Track B solutions are selected for incorporation into a Phase 2 Design for down select.

Question 31: This decision is entirely at the discretion of Track A teams.

Question 32: Does the requirement to identify a path to existing USN logistics for refueling imply that the NOMARS fuel must be Diesel Fuel Marine (F76) or Jet Fuel (JP5); if not what fuel limitations should be anticipated?

Answer 32: The use of F76 or JP5 is not a requirement. DARPA is not providing specific bounds on fuel selection, but encourages teams to consider impacts of the NOMARS logistic footprint when conducting trade studies.

Question 33: Understanding that sprint frequency is subject to trade space exploration, does DARPA expect a minimum number of sprint excursions to form the basis of a minimum performance objective? If so, what is the minimum number of excursions?

Answer 33: DARPA is not specifying a minimum number of excursions, this is part of the trade space analysis.

Question 34: Should diesel engines be selected within a concept design, will DARPA levy an emissions compliance requirement for EPA Tier 3, EPA Tier 4 or IMO II?

Question 34: DARPA is not levying a compliance requirement for EPA Tier 3, EPA Tier 4, or IMO II.

Question 35: For the seaframe design, are there any restrictions to utilizing only a single type of propulsion system?

Answer 35: No.

Question 36: What is the expected endurance level for the vehicle at Sea State 7?

Answer 36: DARPA is not specifying endurance during Sea State 7.

Question 37: While we recognize that the seaframe should be designed not to require human intervention during the proposed 12-month cycle, are we allowed to make design provisions that would enable, in theory, other specialized unmanned systems to provide maintenance and repair services in operation (for example, in an emergency scenario where human intervention is not possible)?

Answer 37: Yes.

Question 38: What are the expected requirements, if any, for the vehicle to “evade detection by opposing force maritime surveillance sensors, and if detected, impose challenges for weapon system targeting” as described in the BAA? (e.g. expected RADAR signature range, etc.)

Answer 38: DARPA is not specifying these requirements, however increased system efficacy in this regard is a positive (e.g. a lower radar signature is better than a higher radar signature).

Question 39: Can you provide us with any additional information regarding the proposed theatre of operation for the vehicle?

Answer 39: No.

Question 40: What is the total service expected life cycle expected to be for NOMARS?

Answer 40: Designed service life is subject to system trades. DARPA is not providing an estimate.

Question 41: Will you consider hydrogen to run a fuel cell as an acceptable fuel for NOMARS?

Answer 41: DARPA is not categorically dismissing hydrogen as a fuel for NOMARS, nor any other fuel, with the exception of nuclear.

Question 42: As the BAA states specifically in various requirements that the requirement applies to any proposed team member and since the BAA requires information for team members, will DARPA explain what the difference between a team member and subawardee? It is our understanding that a team member is typically only a proposed subawardee with which the proposer has entered into a teaming agreement or teaming arrangement with, or intends to do so. As such, not all subawardees or consultants are team members.

Answer 42: The term “team member” as used in the BAA is not intended to denote specific teaming agreements/arrangements. Instead, the term is used to describe the proposed team to complete the work, which includes prime offeror personnel, subawardees, and consultants.

Question 43: Will DARPA confirm whether or not that the requirements stated in Section III.B. (page 23), IV.B.3.c.B.a. (page 36), and IV.B.4.c. (page 37-38) apply to proposers who are proposing non-procurement contracts, primarily OTs? For example, the requirements make reference to FAR 9.5, but OTs are not necessarily subject to the FAR/DFARS.

Answer 43: The organizational conflict of interest (OCI) requirements stated in Section III.B (page 23) apply irrespective of award instrument. The certified cost or pricing data requirement stated in Section IV.B.3.c.B (page 36) only applies to FAR-based procurement contracts. While the DFARS provisions/clauses identified in Section IV.B.4.c (page 37-38) do not apply to other transactions, any negotiated other transaction likely will include terms/conditions to address the concepts from those DFARS provisions/clauses.

Question 44: As the language at the BAA reference [Section IV.B.4.c (page 37-38] states, “The following provisions and clause apply to all solicitations and contracts,” the proposer assumes the requirements, including the DFARS clauses at the BAA reference apply to all contractual instruments, including OTs, except for work that is considered fundamental research. Will DARPA confirm?

Answer 44: While the referenced provisions and clause apply only to FAR-based procurement contracts, any negotiated other transaction likely wll include terms/conditions to address the concepts from those DFARS provisions/clauses, so proposers should anticipate any fundamental research exemptions to apply to both FAR-based procurement contracts and other transactions.

Question 45: BAA referenced language:

“Pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. § 637(d)) and FAR 19.702(a)(1), each proposer who submits a contract proposal and includes subcontractors might be required to submit a subcontracting plan with their proposal. The plan format is outlined in FAR 19.704.”

The proposer assumes the intent of the term “contract proposal” in the BAA referenced language is to mean “procurement contract proposal” as opposed to an OT proposal, and therefore Small Business Subcontracting Plan requirements do not apply to proposals for OTs. Will DARPA confirm?

Answer 45: That is correct. The term “contract proposal” only applies to FAR-based procurement contracts, and not other transactions.

Question 46: Our organization does not use MS Project. Transferring data from our existing software package to MS Project does not work reliably not does it transfer all information. MS Project does not integrate with our other company software and EVMS system. May we provide PDF versions of the schedule and a native file?

Answer 46: Yes.

Question 47: WBS structure for unmanned vehicles is called out in MIL-STD-881D Appendix H. Is this suitable for the NOMARS program?

Answer 47: DARPA will not specify a WBS.

Question 48: Could you please clarify "Program Security Requirements," “CUI Mitigation Plan,” and “Description of Security Management architecture” as there aren't any related DoD/DARPA acquisition instructions/manuals, especially regarding data dissemination plans, disaster recovery plans, and CUI mitigation plans.

Answer 48: At a summary level, DARPA seeks to understand whether proposers have an approach to appropriately protecting program information at the appropriate security levels, and considering these facets from the start. For further information, consult DoDM 5200.01, Volume 4, “DoD Information Security Program: Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)” and http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

Question 49: Is there a sea state requirement for at-sea refueling of the vessels?

Answer 49: DARPA is not specifying a sea state requirement for at-sea refueling of the vessels.

Question 50: Does the notional payload have survivability and operability requirements (e.g. IPX moisture rating, motions & accelerations, climate, etc)? Can the Government provide guidance about the http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa payload’s ability to survive the environment and what measures, if any, proposers should take to protect the payload from the environment?

Answer 50: Assume that the payload poses no restrictions for the purpose of this proposal, but the impact of limiting this assumption should be part of the trade space evaluations that occur in Phase 1.

Question 51: Do Track A proposers need to have an intended Track B partner for post-award collaboration? Will DARPA assign Track A & B awardees exclusively to one another, or will performers from each track exchange information with multiple performers from the other track? In that case, what protections will be in place for prevention of cross-contamination of competition-sensitive material and intellectual property. non-disclosure, IP, competition sensitive material/concepts.

Answer 51: Track A teams will not be aware of the Track B teams until all contracts are awarded. As stated in the BAA, the purpose of the TIMs are for all the Track B teams to provide Track A teams with insight into their innovative approaches and technical development to facilitate potential teaming later in the program (Phase 2). NDAs are anticipated.

Question 52: Can the Government define the volume reservation for the payload in terms of its dimensions (length, width, height, CG)? Is the payload volume reservation to be taken on the exterior deck, or below deck?

Answer 52: Phase 1 proposals should focus on trade space analysis of ship designs, and thus the final SWaP of the payload should not be central to the proposal process. However, for informational purposes, notional dimensions are 23 ft. by 12 ft. by 9 ft.

Question 53: It has been emphasized that lead proposers on Track A are discouraged from participating in Track B. Does this viewpoint extend to a Track A proposer’s fully owned subsidiary company?

Answer 53: No.

Question 54: Attachment 1 - Cost Proposal Template states that “Gray cells indicate references or formulas that should not be changed.” If an offeror’s approved accounting system calculates indirect costs on a per hour basis, opposed to a percentage of costs as assumed in the worksheet, many formulas will not work properly. Can the offeror change the formulas to properly calculate indirect costs in-line with its approved accounting system?

Answer 54: Yes. Please annotate the spreadsheet noting these changes as appropriate.