1 / 37

Other Transaction Authority

Other Transaction Authority. Michael Halloran Comptroller AFRL/RIF. 28 Mar 2019. AFRL OTA Scope:

ho
Download Presentation

Other Transaction Authority

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Other Transaction Authority Michael Halloran Comptroller AFRL/RIF 28 Mar 2019

  2. AFRL OTA Scope: “The scope of this Other Transaction for Prototype Agreement (OTP) is for the development, test, measurement, demonstration, integration, and delivery of prototypes for the Air Force related to Command, Control, Communications, and Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) information sharing information systems.” Our Purpose: Meet needs in the C4ISR community through rapid, agile acquisition of technologies from traditional and non-traditional sources

  3. Agenda • OTA Overview • Consortium Model • Execution Statistics • Way Ahead

  4. OTA Overview – History and Types OTA History • 1958: Nasa granted first authority to use OTs • 1989: DARPA granted OTs for Research • 1994: DARPA granted OTs for Prototype Projects • 1995 – 2014: Authority granted to 11 other Agencies • 2016: OTs permanently codified in 10 USC 2371b • 2017: Public Law 115-91 §864 expanded authority for Other Transactions for Prototype Projects (10 USC 2371b) OTA Types • Other Transactions for Prototype Projects (10 USC 2371b) • Provide a direct benefit to the DoD • Considered Acquisition Instruments • Other Transactions for Research (10 USC 2371) • Provide stimulation or support of research • Technology Investment Agreements (TIAs) • Procurement for Experimental Purposes (10 USC 2373) • Experimentation and test purposes • FAR applies when purchases are made in quantity

  5. OTA Overview – What is an Other Transaction? • What is an Other Transaction: • A legally binding agreement other than a Procurement Contract, Grant, or Cooperative Agreement • OTA Authority is delegated from SAF/AQ to the MAJCOMs and then to the individual organization • OT Benefits • Flexible Terms and Conditions that can be Tailored • Reduce Impediments for Nontraditional Contractors • Access to New and Emerging Technology • Defined by what it is NOT: • Not a Procurement Contract • Generally not subject to Federal Laws and Regulations • Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) does not apply. • FAR Supplements do not apply i.e. DFARs, AFFARs • Not a Grant, or Cooperative Agreement • DoD Grants and Agreements Regulations (DoDGARS) does not apply.

  6. OTP Overview: Applicable Laws and Regulations • What DOES apply: • Fiscal Law • Agency Fiscal Regulations Apply – Consult Legal and Comptroller • Anti-Deficiency Act (ADA) • Property Law • Procurement Integrity Act • Award to a Legal Entity: • Single Company, Joint Venture, Partnership, Consortium, or a Prime Contractor with Subcontract relationships • Price Reasonableness • Exhaust all other means before requesting cost information • What DOES NOT apply? • Truth In Negotiations Act (TINA) • Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) • Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) • Bayh-Dole Act • Contract Disputes Act (CDA) • GAO Protests • Agency-Level Protests and U.S. Court of Federal Claims are applicable Use of OT authority does not eliminate the applicability of all Laws and Regulations.Consult legal counsel whenever an OT is used!

  7. OTP Overview: Two Common Models Direct OTA • Direct Award • Custom Terms • Direct Payment • May Require and/or Consume More USG Resources to Administer/Manage • Possible increased lead times • Solicitation (i.e. BAA or program specific) Consortium Model • Projects Awarded to Consortium Manager • Custom Terms & Flow-Downs • Payment to Consortium • Consortium Acts as Mentor • Publicizes Projects to Consortia • Administrative Fee

  8. PlugTests • What is a PlugTest? • An event where multiple industry partners “Plug” their COTS or Prototype Solutions into the applicable environment or system to demonstrate their initial prototypes to the Government. Benefits • End User gets direct hands-on assessment of the Prototype • Government only pays for further development of prototypes. • Nontraditional Contractors can clearly demonstrate their capabilities • Live Demos or Virtual via remote access to the test environment • Reduces cycle times for development of new capabilities • Comparatively low-cost for innovative prototype solutions

  9. Request for Whitepapers and/or Proposals Request for Whitepapers • Tracks the Broad Area Announcement (BAA) Process. • More Traditional approach to the acquisition. • Rapid response time from Consortium Members (10-14 days). • Government can provide feedback on whitepapers to improve the quality of the proposals in the Request for Proposal stage of the process. Request for Proposal • Tracks similar to an Order under an ID/IQ type contract. • Program Office requires an even more rapid turnaround. • Industry understands the technology well enough to skip whitepapers.

  10. Agenda • OTA Overview • Consortium Model • Execution Statistics • Way Ahead

  11. OTP Consortium Model OTP *Member Capabilities: • 117 – Smart Building & Automation Systems • 314 – C2/C3/C4i Technology Development & Prototyping Integration • 180 – Surveillance & Warning • 209 – Critical Infrastructure & Key Resources Protection Tech • 348 – Systems Integration • 255 – Information Assurance • 285 – Cyber Defense • 270 – Situational Awareness • 197 – Communications • 227 – Data Mining • 350 – Sensors + Robotics • 278 – Integration of Comms • & Data Systems *Includes overlapping capabilities of members with multiple areas of expertise. Current as of 27 NOV 2018

  12. OTP Consortium Model Three Solicitation Approaches: • Notification of PlugTest • Request for Whitepapers (RFWP) • Request for Proposals (RFP) • AFRL works with the Program Office to determine the best acquisition strategy for each individual prototype project • Prototype projects are solicited competitively withall members of the SOSSEC consortium eligible for a project award RFP → Award = One-step Process RFWP → RFP → Award = Two-step ProcessPlugTest →RFP →Award = Two-step Process Goal: To employ the most agile approach, effectively delivering unique, innovative, scalable prototyping solutions for the warfighter.

  13. OTP Consortium Model • Prototype Projects are Awarded to SOSSEC • Firm Fixed Price Prototype Projects • Milestone payments track technical progress • OT is Amended to add the Project, Milestones, and Funding • SOSSEC then enters into a Project Level Agreements with the Consortium Member (Project-Level Performer) • Not a Prime-Subcontractor Relationship • Project Level Performer is responsible for technical work however, SOSSEC responsible for delivery • Government has direct insight into the technical performance • SOSSEC acts a Mentor to the Performer and Intermediary for the Government

  14. OTP Consortium Model Customer Program Office AFRL SOSSEC Customer Program Office AFRL Customer Program Office SOSSEC • Issues Project Level Agreement to the Consortium Member • Ensures Timely Reporting • Handles Invoicing • Quality Control • Determines Project is in Scope • Develops RFP • Sends RFP to SOSSEC • Evaluates Proposals • Recommends an Awardee • Issues RFP to Consortium • Conducts Q&A Sessions • Performers respond with Proposals • Identify and Define Requirement(s) • Reviews Evaluation • Documents Award Decision • Amends OTA to add Project and Funding • Engage with Technical Performance • Verify Deliverables • Adopt or Transition Prototype 7-14 Days 7-14 Days 14 Days 14 Days 7 Days • Average Lead Time on RFPs is 60 - 70 Days • Projects have been awarded in 30 days Consortium Nontraditional Contractors Traditional Contractors Academia

  15. Breadth of Customers • External Organizations: • Army Edgewood Chemical & Biological Center • Army Engineer Research and Development Center • Army PdM Tactical Cyber Network Operations • DHS Cyber Division • Navy SPAWAR • Navy PEO C4I PMW 150 • STRATCOM/J8 “Without your heroic efforts last year, as well as your continual excellence throughout this year, the R-EGI effort would likely not even be started yet and DAFIF Plus would still be a navigation engineer's dream of the future, not even close to becoming reality.” - Jorge F. Gonzalez, SES, Director, AFLCMC/EN-EZ “…able to generate a lot of contractor interest (21 contractors during RFI process with maxed out phone lines during the document walkthroughs)...all on a platform that has been vendor locked for decades…” - Matthew Kelly, AFLCMC/HBSG “Your [OTP] was the only vehicle that provided the flexibility and scope allowing us to explore this emerging technology and prototyping is the perfect approach for [the Artificial Intelligence Options Analysis Tool (AIT)] effort. Our hats are off to AFRL for providing this invaluable resource and for your tireless support!!!” - James Hubert, AF-A9 “The [OTP] enabled access to vendors that would have had no way (or at least no easy way) to contract with.” - Brad Tyndall, AF-A9 Blue font indicates repeat customers • AFRL Organizations: • AFRL/RI(RIE/RIG/RIS) • AFRL/RY • AFRL/RC • AFRL/RD • AF Organizations: • AFLCMC/EN-EZ • AFLCMC/HN(HNA/HNJ/HNC) • AFLCMC/HB(HBA/HBC/HBS/HBD) • AFLCMC/WNE • AFNWC/NCI • AF/A9 • AFLOA/JAS • ACC A2/A2O • ACC A6/A6T

  16. Agenda • OTA Overview • Consortium Model • Execution Statistics • Way Ahead

  17. Execution Statistics: Non-Traditional Involvement *All traditional awards included significant participation from non-traditional defense contractors

  18. Completed Projects • Total Awards: 26 • Total Projects: 23 • Total Value: $65,156,985.00 • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 0 • Total Projects: 13 • Total Value: $101,391,000.00 Execution Statistics: Projects • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 19 • Total Projects: 16 • Total Value: $11,419,141.00

  19. Completed Projects • Total Awards: 26 • Total Projects: 23 • Total Value: $65,156,985.00 • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 0 • Total Projects: 13 • Total Value: $101,391,000.00 Execution Statistics: Upcoming Projects • F-16 Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite Prototype • Estimated $25.8M prototype project from AFLCMC/WWM • Anticipated 14 month effort • Sole Source Follow-on Production Contract if successful • The United States Air Force (USAF) F-16 Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite Program will design, develop, and test prototypes of an EW Suite system, to include a Digital Radar Warning Receiver (DRWR), with detection, identification and jamming capability for F-16 Blocks 30/32/40/42/50/52, C&D model aircraft. • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 19 • Total Projects: 16 • Total Value: $11,419,141.00 Acquisition Strategy RFWP → RFP → 2 Awards → [Go/No-go Gate → 1 Award]

  20. Completed Projects • Total Awards: 26 • Total Projects: 23 • Total Value: $65,156,985.00 • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 0 • Total Projects: 13 • Total Value: $101,391,000.00 Execution Statistics: Upcoming Projects • Size and Power Reduction of a Standardization Agreement (STANAG) 7221 Network Interface Solution Suitable for Integration into the EGI-M/Miniature Airborne GPS Receivers (MAGR) Military Code Upgrade Program Prototype • Estimated $23.4M prototype project from AFLCMC/WWB • Anticipated 20 month effort • Objective to deliver a prototype NATO STANAG 7221-compliant network interface solution with a reduced form-factor (size, weight and power (SWaP) to enhance viability for airborne integration. The anticipated prototype solution will be production ready and can be designed, integrated, tested and qualified in military avionics. • Completed Projects • Total Awards: 19 • Total Projects: 16 • Total Value: $11,419,141.00 Acquisition Strategy RFP → 1 Award

  21. Execution Statistics: Projections

  22. How We’re Effective: Success Stories • Advanced Capability Microsatellite Prototype (COMPLETE) • $50k Government prototype project from AFRL/RV • 5 month effort • Awarded to Orbital Sidekick, no previous defense work • Requirements to award: 65 days (RFP) • Results: • Sensor deployed to the International Space Station • $4.7M venture capitalist investment with additional $15M potential • Government access to commercial technology Minor government investment enabled major commercial success and provided a unique new ISR asset

  23. How We’re Effective: Success Stories • Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) (COMPLETE) • $1.4M Government prototype project from AFLCMC/XCZ • 7 month effort • Requirements to award: 9 months (RFI to PlugTestto RFP) • Results: • COTS iPad secured for use by aircrews • Ensured continued use of 18,000 fielded EFBs Mature COTS product secured for operational use

  24. How We’re Effective: Success Stories • Resilient Embedded GPS/INS (R-EGI) (ONGOING) • $7.5M across 4 projects from AFLCMC/EZAC & AFRL/RY • Aggregate 2 year technical completion to incrementally develop capabilities • Results: • Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) open standard implemented • Leveraged by several other OT projects under OSAI • Impacting many systems across the DoD Implementing an open standard for rapid EGI/INS evolution to mitigate current and future threats

  25. How We’re Effective: Success Stories • Digital Aeronautical Flight Information Files (DAFIF) Plus (ONGOING) • $8.8M Government prototype project from AFLCMC/EZAC • 24 month effort • Requirements to award: 63 days (RFP) • Results: • Reworked process for navigational data • Mirroring commercial navigational data process • 50% increase in navigation database coverage More, better navigational data on aircraft in less time with fewer errors

  26. Agenda • OTA Overview • Consortium Model • Execution Statistics • Way Ahead

  27. Way Ahead • Compete new Consortium-based Other Transaction Agreement for Prototype Projects • $500M Ceiling; 3 Year Project Award Period, 5 Year Completion • Scope: • Develop prototypes related to Command, Control, Communications, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance • Authority: 10 USC 2371b • AFRL OT Website • Greater transparency & accountability • Increased accessibility to AF community

  28. Trailblazing New Initiatives • Engagement with OT community • Frequent industry briefings (2-3/month) • Government to government information sessions (weekly) • Transparency in our model • Open sharing of our process & forms • Proactive communication with customers about timeline, funding, and process • New OTPs adopting our model and/or processes • AFLCMC/LPA, FA8626-17-9-1000, Propulsion Consortium Initiative (PCI) • AFLCMC/XZM, FA8604-19-9-4050, AFLCMC Consortium Initiative (ACI) • NGA EIO, HM0476-17-9-0001, National Geospatial Agency (NGA) (SCE) • ARMY CERDEC, W909MY-18-9-0001, Sensors, Communications and Electronics • ARMY PEO-EIS/PdM DCO, W52P1J-18-9-5023, Cyberspace Operations Broad Responsive Agreements (COBRA) • DISA PLD, **TBD**

  29. Points of Contact AF OTP Agreements Officer’s Technical Representative (AOTR) Mark A. Southcott AFRL/RIEBA (315) 330-4590mark.southcott.1@us.af.mil AF OTP Agreements Officer (AO) Kyle W. Braunlich AFRL/RIKE (315) 330-4755kyle.braunlich@us.af.mil System of Systems Security (SOSSEC) Consortium John Nunziato 603-458-5529 www.sossecconsortium.com info@sossecconsortium.com AF OTP Agreement Specialist Adam J. HoogheemAFRL/RIKE (315) 330-4707adam.hoogheem@us.af.mil

  30. Questions?

  31. Backup Slides

  32. Execution Statistics: Active Projects

  33. Execution Statistics: Active Projects

  34. Execution Statistics: Completed Projects

  35. Execution Statistics: Completed Projects

  36. Execution Statistics: Upcoming Projects

  37. How We’re Effective: Success Stories Commercial Satellite Data Pilot Prototype Project (CSD) The $7.96M prototyping initiative aims to determine the validity of using commercially available Space-Based Environmental Monitoring (SBEM) satellite data to meet and/or further develop any of the SBEM gaps and evaluate their use in warfighter models and applications in lieu of, or in addition to, Government capabilities.

More Related