Secure Enclave Chiplets_Call 01 Questions and Answers.docx

Responses to Questions Call 1 – Secure Enclave Chiplets - SAFAQC

In accordance with the instructions for the subject Call, the Government offers the following answers to questions deemed beneficial to the entire competitive pool.

White Papers will now be accepted until 27 July at 1700 ET

What is the overall budget for pilot projects under this call?

To ensure accurate estimates, the Government is not disclosing a specific budget at this time.

What is the max pilot project amount?

There is no defined maximum for the pilot projects.

What is the preferred Technology Readiness Level (TRL) range?

There is no target TRL range. Since Intel 18A and Intel 18AP are newer technology nodes, the Government understands responses may be on the lower end of the TRL scale.

Is the 12-month Period of Performance (PoP) a hard requirement?

No, the 12-month PoP is a target. Offerors may propose alternate PoPs, but the Government suggests using a step approach or separately priced options if a proposed PoP extends significantly beyond 12 months.

Is the goal of Phase 1 to tape-out the chip, or to have a design finished?

The end goal of this Call is to have a finalized design ready for tape-out, validated by Intel. If a vendor believes they can achieve greater maturity within their suggested PoP, they should state this in their White Paper.

Will Intel’s Process Design Kit (PDK) be provided in a timely manner?

Intel will provide their PDK. The Government highly recommends ensuring all documentation is in place between your organization and Intel now to allow for timely sharing of information such as the PDK, Intellectual Property (IP) availability list, etc.

Will the Government provide Electronic Design Automation (EDA) tools?

No EDA tools or IP will be provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFX) or otherwise.

Is the Government looking for Intel 18A or Intel 18AP solutions?

Either solution is acceptable, the Secure Enclave will be capable of producing both Intel 18A and Intel 18AP designs.

Are Foundry quotes needed?

For Step 1, the Government expects a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate for all subcontractor costs. This does not have to be a firm quote from any individual vendor but must outline a wedge for expected costs.

Is the Contract Statement of Work (cSOW) included in the page limit?

Yes, for Phase 1 White Papers, a cSOW / Statement of Objectives (SOO) response as well as a technical approach must be included and fit within the page limits listed in the instructions to offerors section of the call.

From OBJECTIVE 2: “The contractor shall deliver a detailed cost estimate and technical schedule required to advance the Pilot Project to physical fabrication and initial testing, including a detailed description of dependencies and timelines.” Is this estimate expected to be part of the Call response, or is this scope that is to be completed in execution for delivery at the end of the PoP?

The referenced paragraph is part of the scope the Government seeks to achieve during the performance of awards made under this Call. Step 1 (White Paper) requirements for Offerors to respond to this Call are outlined in Section III "Instructions to Offerors" "Step 1 Instructions."

Can Offerors submit Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) White Papers?

Yes, offerors may submit UNCLASSIFIED or CUI White Papers in response to this Call. CUI documents must be appropriately marked (to include portion marking). Offerors may submit CUI White Papers via a CUI approved email system to: SE_PI@us.af.mil. If offerors do not have access to CUI approved email, they may request a DoD Safe link no later than 1700 (ET) on 21 July 2026 by emailing SE_PI@us.af.mil with the subject line “DoD Safe Link.”

Is the “Award Vehicle” a new contract, under an existing Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) consortium, or is the Call looking for us to propose existing contract/OTA vehicles?

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) Call may result in the award of new Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)-based contracts or Other Transaction for Prototype Projects pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 4022. White Papers must identify and justify the Offeror's preferred award vehicle (FAR or OTA). However, Offerors are not required to identify existing contracts or OTAs.

May a single vendor submit more than one White Paper across single or multiple mission areas or domains?

Yes, vendors may submit more than one White Paper, provided the solutions they describe are sufficiently unique.

May multiple vendors collaborate on a single White Paper?

Yes, offerors are encouraged to collaborate on potential solutions.

We have multiple ideas for solutions; can you give us guidance on which specific functions and applications we should prioritize?

The Government is interested in reviewing a broad range of solutions across multiple mission areas, domains, and functions. Please prioritize those efforts you think are best aligned with the Call's Statement of Objectives and Evaluation Criteria.

What date should be assumed as the program start for pricing purposes?

Awards issued under this Call will be funded with FY2026 appropriated funds. The Government intends to award in September 2026 but reserves the right to adjust the program start date.

Should the White Paper be submitted in a single document or separate files for each section?

The vendor may submit in one document or multiple, so long as they adhere to the instructions to offerors listed in the call.

Can the Government define a rough transition to work plan?

The Government expects a generic narrative response on how the vendor plans to start execution, if awarded.

The definition of “state-of-the-art microelectronics (SOTA ME) chiplet” for the purpose of this BAA Call seems to be “a new chiplet using the Intel 18A technology node” which would be designed to tape-out ready as a Pilot Project under Objective 2 of this BAA’s SOO. Is that a correct understanding?

Yes, that is a correct understanding for this Call.

The “transition” aspect Objective 3 of the SOO tasks is about planning the transition of the new Pilot Project chiplet design, inducing developing the cost and schedule for packaging, fab, assembly, test of the chiplet, but not actually doing it. Is this correct?

Yes, that is a correct understanding.

Will the USG accept a Phased PoP?

Yes, the USG will accept a phased PoP.

Is a multi-chip package (MCP) expected as a physical deliverable?

The Government does not expect a physical MCP deliverable. However, a vendor's solution may include a physical deliverable of an MCP or chiplet if they believe it is achievable.

Is there a Government-defined template or content specification for the Bare Die Data Package?

There is no Government defined template.

Does SOO 2.2.10 preclude Offeror emulation, simulation, or modeling?

The vendor is expected to complete emulation, simulation, and/or modeling outside of the Secure Enclave. The requirement only applies to final assembly and sign-off artifacts.

Does the parent BAA's default 50/50 resource-sharing starting position for OT prototypes apply to this Call, or is cost share negotiable or waived?

The default resource sharing is expected for any traditional defense contractor who wishes to pursue an OT.

Does the Government prefer FAR or OT awards?

The Government does not have a preference.

Do figures, acronym lists, and references count toward the page limit?

Yes.

Does the 12pt Times New Roman minimum apply inside figures and tables?

Figures and block tables may be smaller than 12pt Times New Roman.

Will the Government accept offers with competition sensitive markings?

Yes, the Government will accept offers with competition sensitive markings.

Can the Government offer more guidance on the level of specificity in the Offeror's Initial Data Rights Disclosure?

In the initial response, the Government expects a summary of expected data rights focused on identifying those items which do not comply with the Government’s desired data rights outlined in the Call. Sentence or paragraph forms justifying assertions are acceptable. Additional details will be requested in Step 2, if needed.

Should offerors flag expected conflicts to sub-contractor’s terms, including those that are commercial?

Yes, to the best of your ability please flag all expected data rights assertions for both the Prime Contractor and any known subcontractors to the most detailed extent practical.