20100623 Santitized - BAA SMC-032 Questions and Answers.docx

BAA Questions and Answers V7 I. Contracting Questions

1. Question: Please clarify how work on architectural solutions that satisfy multiple Mission Focus Areas be delineated in the SOW and cost proposals.

Answer: If work covers multiple Mission Focus Areas, include this work in one SOW/cost and link as appropriate.

2. Question: Please clarify anticipated and acceptable options structures that would facilitate additional or extend awards.

Answer: Proposal need not address special option structures to extend the PoP for this effort. That would be addressed after award if contract extensions are needed.

3. Question: What will be the contract type of the award? Ref: page 9, Vol 2 paragraph 1.1 Cover Sheet -- Appears to specify only a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) offer can be made. However, page 15, paragraph VIII.4 implies other forms (e.g., Cost Plus, FPLOE) of award are possible. If a proposer feels other than a FFP award is best, where and how should that be expressed in the BAA response?

Answer: The Air Force anticipates awarding a Fixed Price type of Contract(s) as stated in the BAA. An offeror may state a case for a different type of contract in the cover letter but should propose Fixed Price to be considered.

4. Question: Can the BAA study be performed at a contractor’s local facility, or is there a need to perform the study in the Los Angeles area so as to be close to the SMC customer?

Answer: The expectation is that the BAA studies will be performed at the contractor’s local facility. There is no expectation that the studies will be performed in the Los Angeles area. Furthermore, there is not expectation for Study-funded travel to Los Angeles. Meetings will be held at the contractor facility to conserve resources.

5. Question: The BAA states the Period of Performance is "anticipated" to be 6 months. Is there a reason for fuzzing that (is it tied to an expected AoA kick-off, is it a matter for some limited negotiation upon award, anything like that?)?

Answer: The period of performance is anticipated to be 6 months; however, the length will be set at award and will depend on funding, AoA schedule, and content of the funded studies.

6. Question: Will Procurement Integrity Act and its implementing FAR provisions be applicable to this procurement?

Answer: Yes.

7. Question: Can we submit a Certificate of Current Cost and Pricing Data after negotiations?

Answer: If a Certificate of Current Cost and Pricing Data is required in accordance with FAR 15.403 and no exemptions apply, it may be submitted prior to award as requested by the Contracting Officer.

8. Question: Ref: Page 5, lead paragraph Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest lines 3-6 -- This appears to be two sentences, with inadvertently deleted words following "has access to." Please clarify the requirement(s).

Answer: To be clarified later.

9. Question: Ref: page 5, lead Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest line 7 -- Please provide an electronic copy of the SMC OCI mitigation plan checklist.

Answer: The SMC OCI mitigation plan checklist has been added to the SMC-32 BAA FedBizOpps page.

10. Question: Ref: page 5, lead Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest -- If the Government ultimately acquires hardware, software and/or services to fulfill the needs outlined in this BAA, will a successful proposer have an immitigable Organizational Conflict of Interest by having performed on a contract under this BAA?

Answer: The current BAA scope of work as posted is not anticipated to create an OCI situation as these feasibility studies are not intended to be used to establish government operational requirements nor contract technical requirements. However, we can't preclude that other activities undertaken with DoD organizations in which prospective offerors may engage could create an OCI for future SMC efforts. It's up to each prospective offeror to understand OCI rules and take actions to mitigate potential conflicts.

11. Question: Can individual proposals be submitted for each Mission Focus Area?

Answer: One single proposal is expected from each respondent that separately calls out and prices the activities for each Mission Focus Area proposed.

12. Question: Ref: page 7, Technical Approach -- Is the 30-page limit for a technical response all inclusive or is it a separate limit for each of the four Mission Focus Areas a proposer wishes to address?

Answer: Each proposal has a 30-page limit for the technical approach, irrespective of the number of Mission Focus Areas proposed. A 30-page limit is based on an offerer responding to up to four mission focus areas with the content required in section "2.3 Technical Approach." If there is process material that cuts across all mission areas proposed, this may be placed in a separate section as long as it is clear how it is linked to each mission focus area. (See also the answer to question 1). Note that Section 2.3 is intended to present the offeror’s proposed technical approach, and not a detailed architecture and operational concept for a mission focus area.

13. Question: Ref: page 8, paragraph 2.5, Statement of Work (SOW) —Is the 5-page limit for a SOW all-inclusive or is it a separate limit for each of the four Mission Focus Areas a proposer wishes to address?

Answer: 5-page limit is for each of the four Mission Focus Areas a proposer wishes to address. Also see answer to #12.

14. Question: Ref: page 9, Vol 2, Cost Proposal -- Is there a page limit on the Cost Proposal or on any element thereof?

Answer: There is no page limit for a Cost Proposal.

15. Question: Appendix A, sections 1-4 and SOW/cost instructions state, "...Responder may address either global or theater requirements individually or in association with one another or in architectures for all or a part of Paragraph 1 above. It may likewise be integrated into an architecture addressing all or part of Paragraphs 2 or 3 above."

The BAA recognizes in several areas that solutions may be provided that address multiple mission areas A, B, C, and D. SOW and cost instructions clearly state that "Offeror shall provide a However, SOW segregated by each Mission Focus Area" and "Total program cost broken down by Mission Focus Area". Funding also states "Four mission focus areas bid as separable options" Can the Government provide clarification as to how work on architectural solutions that satisfy multiple mission areas can be delineated in the SOW and cost proposals? Is it acceptable to bid such effort with an additional, separate SOW or cost element?

Answer: See the answer to contracting questions 11, 12 and 14

16. Question: Regarding Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), is it SMC’s intent to preclude a firm from bidding on both the study phase and any resultant work from that phase? In other words, if and offeror submits a bid for the study, can we also bid on the work phase solicitation?

Answer: See answer to contracting question #10 II. Subcontracting Questions

1. Question: Page 10, Vol 2 paragraph 1.2, Detailed Cost Breakdown, item 3 — If a proposer plans to employ subcontractors for this work, will it be required to submit a separate Certificate of Current Cost and Pricing for each subcontractor as well?

Answer: The prime is required to obtain Certified Cost and Pricing Data as required from subcontractors unless an exception applies IAW FAR 15.403-1(b). A single Certificate of Current Cost and Pricing Data from the prime will be submitted to the Government.

2. Question: Page 13, para VI.2.C Subcontracting — Is there a page limit on the subcontracting plan?

Answer: No

3. Question: If a subcontracting plan is required, where should it be placed in the response?

Answer: As a separate attachment.

4. Question: Does the subcontracting plan count against any of the specified page limits in the BAA?

Answer: No.

5. Question: Can SMC please confirm that a small business offeror need not submit a subcontracting plan?

Answer: A confirmed small business need not submit a subcontracting plan.

III. Technical Questions

1. Question: What is the current satellite architecture baseline for the various Mission Focus Areas? Are they derived from current commercial or government systems?

Answer: The mission focus areas are derived from mission needs and thus are not intended to necessarily trace to a current satellite architecture baseline.

2. Question: The sentence in the first paragraph of the appendix that reads "Candidate architectures will be evaluated for geostationary satellite systems, specialized free flying satellites and for specialized MILSATCOM payloads hosted on commercial satellites" mean that the concepts and architectures offered are limited to geostationary orbits only?

Answer: Responses may cover any or all Mission Focus Areas. For every response, technical approach provided in the response will be evaluated using all of the criteria for Overall Technical Approach (Section V.1.A). As described, this was not intended to exclude non-geostationary orbits. Moreover, as described in Appendix A, respondents are invited to explore viable cost-effective modifications to commercial terminals for operation in a MILSATCOM environment which may enhance its proposed architectures.

3. Question: Please provide additional technical details regarding specific aspects of the Mission Focus Areas described in Appendix A. Details include size of theaters, notional terminal parameters such as EIRP and G/T, government operations, capacity shortfalls, etc. Moreover, please describe the content, detail and classification level of information to be made available during the execution of the proposed studies.

Answer: The descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas are not intended to be sufficient to execute the studies. Moving forward, the Gov't will work with awardees post award to further refine descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas including determination of the type of content, content detail and classification level of such information. When developing their response, potential respondents are encouraged to use their best understanding of the descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas provided in the BAA, including providing any additional assumptions they feel are necessary within the page limits described in the BAA.

4. Question: Can X type of system element be included in the response and will it be scored?”

Answer: The technical approach will be scored according to section V.1.A, i.e., appropriate architectures, types of systems and system elements with respect to addressing Mission Focus Areas. System elements will not be scored on their own, but in this context. Consequently, there is no intent to exclude or require particular system elements.

5. Question: Can the proposal's Technical Approach propose to a portion of what is described in Section 2.3 -- solely specific components -- or does the proposal have to address a full architecture solution?"

Answer: Responses may cover any or all Mission Focus Areas. For every response, the provided technical approach will be evaluated using all of the criteria for Overall Technical Approach (Section V.1.A). Here, parenthetical items correspond with portions of the description of the content and form of the Technical Approach (Section IV.2.3).

For example, a proposal lacking appropriate architectures, types of systems and system elements would rank low in the corresponding criterion, while a proposal including particularly strong COMSAT systems and technologies would rank high in the corresponding criterion. In each case, however, the final evaluation will be based upon all criteria.

Moreover, Capabilities and/or Related Experience (Section V.1.B) will be evaluated based upon the capabilities and experience of the entire team.

6. Question: Please clarify the term "long-track." (Ref: page 16, Glossary and Appendix A, page 2, paragraph 3) Answer: Long-Track AISR is intended to refer to airborne ISR platforms that will commonly operate out of theater, at high altitude and with missions covering long distances. The Global Hawk would be an example of a long-track AISR platform.

7. Question: Are the satellite capabilities in the GEM briefing intended to be requirements for the Mission Focus Areas?

Answer: No. The BAA contains all information required to submit a proposal.

8. Question: When addressing Mission Focus Area 1, Item C (Ubiquitous Ka-band), are responses limited to hosing payloads on commercial Ka-band spacecraft? Can it be hosted on any spacecraft as long as it can be accommodated?

Answer: For the context of the BAA Studies, a military Ka-band payload can be hosted on any commercial satellite that meets its accommodation requirements.

9. Question: Please clarify the term "NDI" and "NDI acquisition objectives" in Appendix A Answer: As an alternative to the term "NDI", our objective is more precisely to restrict satellite and other system elements to "commercial items" as defined in FAR 2.101 in support of a typical commercial timeframes (32-36 months) and with a typical commercial acquisition approaches (FFP).

This definition of commercial item in FAR 2.101 reads in part:

(1) Any item, other than real property, that is of a type customarily used by the general public or by non-governmental entities for purposes other than governmental purposes, and-- (i) Has been sold, leased, or licensed to the general public; or, (ii) Has been offered for sale, lease, or license to the general public;

(2) Any item that evolved from an item described in paragraph (1) of this definition through advances in technology or performance and that is not yet available in the commercial marketplace, but will be available in the commercial marketplace in time to satisfy the delivery requirements under a Government solicitation;

(3) Any item that would satisfy a criterion expressed in paragraphs (1) or (2) of this definition, but for -- (i) Modifications of a type customarily available in the commercial marketplace; or (ii) Minor modifications of a type not customarily available in the commercial marketplace made to meet Federal Government requirements. Minor modifications means modifications that do not significantly alter the nongovernmental function or essential physical characteristics of an item or component, or change the purpose of a process.

As a simple example, satellite or terminal "commercial items" considered for an architecture included in a BAA response would likely need to be modified to function at military frequencies. This is consistent with 3.ii in the definition above: "Minor modifications of a type not customarily available in the commercial marketplace made to meet Federal Government requirements."

The objectives of the BAA permits additional minor modifications to commercial items as long as they remain consistent with 3.i and 3.ii in the definition above and do not otherwise impugn upon the viability of delivering capability within a typical commercial timeframe (32-36 months) and with a typical commercial acquisition approach (FFP).

10. Question: The Gov’t offered a set of presentations at the MILSATCOM IDGA Conference. Can those presentations be made available? Are they requirements for this BAA?

Answer: Yes those presentations have been posted to FedBizOpps, as well. The presentations are not requirements but provided for information only; all BAA requirements are contained in the solicitation.

11. Question: In Appendix A, item 3, the BAA states that "Up to ten global AISR orbits must be supported notionally distributed equally across three areas of responsibility, with one dedicated to training over CONUS. For an active combat theater, one would operate in-theater and up to four long-track links would be provided to supporting aircraft outside the theater perimeter.

The first statement seems to indicate a constellation of four satellites/payloads each with three accesses, with the exception of the CONUS satellite, with a single access (for training). The second statement implies four accesses per theater instead of three. Can you please clarify the requirement?

Answer: For the purposes of this solicition, the offeror is free to develop reasonable assumptions to justify a technical approach. Specifics will be available after contract award when the work will be performed.

12. Question: In Appendix A, item 2, the BAA states that "Global deployment may number as high as 1000 terminals. Alternately, COTM coverage for an active individual theater may number as many as 250 terminals."

Can additional detail be provided to clarify the "global deployment"?

* What is the extent of global deployment?

* What is the geographical extent of an individual theater?

* How many theaters are there, and what might be their relative locations vs. available satellite orbital slots?

* Can the Government specify the area over which a group is deployed, and the number of those groups within the theater?

Answer: That detail will be available after contact award. Specific scenarios/laydowns are in work. For the purposes of this solicitation, the offeror may make reasonable assumptions.

13. Question: Appendix A provides some information regarding assumptions on terminal aperture size and data rates; however user terminal EIRP and G/T is not provided. Can the Government provide notional values for these parameters for AISR and CoTM users?

Answer: Reference answer to Technical Question # 3: The descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas are not intended to be sufficient to execute the studies. Moving forward, the Gov't will work with awardees post award to further refine descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas including determination of the type of content, content detail and classification level of such information. When developing their response, potential respondents are encouraged to use their best understanding of the descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas provided in the BAA, including providing any additional assumptions they feel are necessary within the page limits described in the BAA.

14. Question: Appendix A provides some information regarding assumptions on terminal aperture size and data rates; however user terminal EIRP and G/T is not provided. Can the Government provide notional values for these parameters for AISR and CoTM users?

Answer: Reference answer to Technical Question # 3: The descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas are not intended to be sufficient to execute the studies. Moving forward, the Gov't will work with awardees post award to further refine descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas including determination of the type of content, content detail and classification level of such information. When developing their response, potential respondents are encouraged to use their best understanding of the descriptions of the Mission Focus Areas provided in the BAA, including providing any additional assumptions they feel are necessary within the page limits described in the BAA.

15. Question: In Appendix A, Section 3, it is stated that, "Data rates of 137 mbps and 83 mbps are required. Terminal antennas are 24 inches in diameter."

This appears inconsistent with the current Global Hawk family of terminals which are greater than one meter in diameter. Please clarify this apparent antenna size discrepancy. Will the Government provide specific terminal antenna and EIRP assumptions for the 10 global wideband/high-altitude AISR users in mission area C & Appendix A section 3?

Answer: Yes, an aligned reference terminal model will be available after award.

16. Question: Appendix A, Page 2 states, "Proposed architectures must utilize existing ground terminals and governmental facilities in place to the maximum extent possible."

What information on user terminal and Government operations centers and teleport assets will be available during the execution of the proposed studies?

Answer: Sample information on wideband program of record terminals will be available following contract award. Teleport information will also be provided.

17. Question: Can launch systems for free flyers be included in the response? Will it be scored?

Answer: Launch systems aren’t part of this solicitation.

18. Question: IV. Submission Information states, ""This solicitation contains all information required to submit a proposal."

Is the additional information available on the fbo.gov SMC-32 site intended to clarify and augment BAA Appendix A "Study Objectives and Architectures of Interest"? For example, the file "2010_02_01_Commercial_GEM_Briefing,_cleared_for_public_release.pptx" contains more specific definitions of "AISRsat", "COCOMSat", and "COTMsat" with notional requirements for coverages and bandwidth provided in coverages. Should bidders refer to or include the Government reference "sat" architectures in their responses?

Answer: See answer to Technical Question #7.

19. Question: And are the reference "sat" capabilities tables in the PowerPoint briefing "2010_02_01_Commercial_GEM_Briefing,_cleared_for_public_release.pptx" intended to be requirements for the Mission Areas in the BAA (A, B, C, and D)? How are these reference satellite or hosted payload capabilities related to the mission areas?

Answer: See answer to Technical Question #7.

19. Question: Appendix A, Section 1 states, "A potential shortfall of Ka band capacity is indicated in the 2025 time frame. WGS Ka band and X band capacity must be sustained and Ka band capacity may need to be augmented."

Wideband capacity is described general notions of shortfalls of capacity and potential solutions. Will the Government provide specific capacity shortfalls for the frequency bands mentioned in notional geographical coverage regions, with associated user terminal and teleport assets, for purposes of more specific analysis of architectural alternatives? Please describe the content, detail, and classification level of such information available during the execution of the proposed studies.

Answer: That information may be available after award based on JROC validated ICD results which could be available in July. Please note that this study may result in commercial options to support the Government Material Solutions Analysis (MSA).

20. Question: Appendix A, Section 4 states, "Up to 65 orbits must be supported globally, with as many as 12 orbits in an individual active theater."

What is the geographical extent of the theater? Are the operational theaters identical to the tactical theaters described for COTM in section 2?

Answer: That information will be available after award. The underlying 0A-08 scenarios are being updated.

21. Question: Appendix A, Page 2 states, "Responders are invited to suggest modifications which could enhance AJ/LPI/LPD capabilities in a contested environment, without violating NDI acquisition objectives" Will the Government provide additional guidance on the contested environment mentioned - and at what classification level?

Answer: That information is currently being developed, and may be available after award. Generalized capabilities are of interest.

22. Question: Mission Focus Area 1, Item C: "Ubiquitous Ka Band" (pg. 17) describes hosted military Ka-band transponders on multiple commercial Ka-band spacecraft.

Is the hosted payload constrained to a commercial Ka-band spacecraft? Could it be hosted on any spacecraft, as long as it can be accommodated?

Answer: Any spacecraft. See response to technical question # 8.

23. Question: In the Study Description on Page 2, the BAA states that "Architecture solutions should result in on-orbit capability in the 2016 - 2025 timeframe, with an authority to proceed as early as Fiscal Year (FY) 12 to FY14. Earlier in this section "typical commercial timelines (32 to 36 months to launch)" is also stated. Given an FY12 start and a 36-month ATP to launch would imply an earliest IOC in 2015 rather than 2016. Is this true, or is there some additional time allocated (up to approximately one year) for other Government on-orbit activities prior to IOC?

Answer: This schedule estimate is at a generalized high level taking into consideration Government and Industry constraints.