Attach 2 - Tracking Layer T0 WFOV Proposal Instructions (Draft).pdf

Solicitation HQ085020R0003

Section L

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE 1

SDA TRACKING LAYER TRANCHE 0 (T0) 2

WIDE FIELD OF VIEW (WFOV) PROGRAM 3

Draft Dated May 11, 2020 4

The Offeror shall propose to develop and deliver Tracking T0 WFOV space vehicles (SVs) via 5 three volumes. Specific volume contents and associated page limits are detailed below. 6

Volume I – Schedule and Solution shall contain a detailed description of the Offeror’s 7 proposed technical solution to Space Development Agency’s (SDA’s) requirements and 8 their schedule to deliver SVs for integration into a launch vehicle, deployment on orbit, 9 and ready for on-orbit and flight testing. 10

Volume II – Price and Rationale shall contain the Offeror’s Firm Fixed Price and 11 associated detail. This volume shall also include the Offeror’s Small Business Utilization 12

Plan and/or Small Business Participation Commitment Document. 13

Volume III – Experience and Past Performance shall contain résumés for key 14 personnel to be assigned to this effort and up to five (5) recent (within the last five (5) 15 years), relevant examples of on-time, on-cost/price delivery of complex systems, 16 subsystems, or components. Offerors may also include up to three (3) past performance 17 examples for each team member, subcontractor, partner, intra-company provider and/or 18 vendor the Offeror considers significant in the accomplishment of the requirements 19 contained in Attachment 1 – SOW. Offerors are free to define “significant” but shall 20 clearly describe their rationale for such a designation within their proposal. 21

SDA requests Offerors submit all unclassified content electronically. Proposals received after 22

1200 ET will be considered late and will not be evaluated. Offerors whose proposals are 23 considered late will be so informed by the contracting officer and their proposals deleted without 24 any files being opened or read. Classified Appendices, Attachments and/or Volumes may be 25 submitted if required. Classified submittals may be delivered electronically or via hard copy. 26

Electronic submission instructions: 27

All Volumes along with any Appendices or Attachments should be submitted only in .pdf format 28 and must be submitted independently by file as SDA will not accept .zip files. Files are limited 29 to twenty (20) megabytes (MB) each. All electronic submissions must be received NO LATER 30

THAN 1200 ET. Offerors should submit one (1) copy of each unclassified Volume and 31

Appendices and/or Attachments to be used for any and all printing or official copy retention. 32

Offerors are free to request read receipts for each email sent. 33

1. Unclassified Information may be emailed to osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-34

0003@mail.mil. Files larger than 20 MB should be sent via DoD Secure Access File 35 mailto:osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-0003@mail.mil

Exchange (SAFE). Offerors submitting via DoD SAFE must send an email to the 36 address above notifying SDA of this submission method NO LATER THAN 1200 ET on 37

(date TBD). 38

2. Confidential and Secret information may be emailed to (TBD). Offerors submitting 39

Confidential and/or Secret information must send an unclassified email to 40 osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-0003@mail.mil notifying SDA of this submission 41 method NO LATER THAN 1200 ET on (date TBD). 42

3. Top Secret Information may be emailed to (TBD). Offerors submitting Top Secret 43 information must send an unclassified email to osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-44

0003@mail.mil notifying SDA of this submission method NO LATER THAN 1200 ET 45 on (date TBD). 46

Hard copy submission instructions: 47

Hard copy submissions shall only be used by Offerors who are submitting classified information 48 and who do not have access to the electronic submission methods mentioned above. Hard copy 49 classified submissions shall be delivered with inner envelope sealed and addressed to SDA, 50

ATTN: Dr. Derek Tournear, with reference to the Request for Proposal (RFP) number, and 51 conspicuously marked with the appropriate classification level. The outer envelope shall be 52 sealed with NO RFP identification or classification and only addressed to R&E SECURITY, 53

ATTN: Mr. Mark P. Koch. If delivering hard copy submissions, then Offerors should submit 54 one (1) copy of each Volume and Appendices and/or Attachments to be used for any and all 55 printing or official copy retention requirements and one (1) additional copy of each Volume and 56

Appendices and/or Attachments. Offerors submitting hard copy classified information must send 57 an unclassified email to osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-0003@mail.mil notifying SDA of 58 this submission method NO LATER THAN 1200 ET in order to coordinate receipt of the 59 submission. Hard copy submissions must be received NO LATER THAN 1200 ET on (date 60

TBD). 61

1. Confidential and Secret information may be hand-carried or mailed, in accordance with 62

DoD 5220.22-M, to 3015 Defense Pentagon, Room 5B1066, Washington, DC 20301. 63

Hand-carried delivery shall have arrival time of delivery coordinated by contacting R&E 64

Security at 703-695-3717. 65

2. Top Secret Information must be hand-carried to Room 5B1066 with arrival time 66 coordinated, as stated above. Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) must be 67 marked, managed and transmitted in accordance with DoDM 5105.21, Volumes 1-3. 68

The font in normal text for all volumes shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 12 pt., while 69 text in figures and tables shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 pt. All margins (top, 70 bottom, left, and right) shall be no smaller than one inch. All pdf pages formatted larger than 8.5 71 mailto:osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-0003@mail.mil mailto:osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-rfp-20-0003@mail.mil inches X 11 inches shall be counted as two pages. Note: Nonconforming proposals will be 72 rejected without review. 73

The Government is purchasing the following: 74

A constellation of up to eight (8) (TBR) SVs to be awarded to at least two (2) vendors; the ratio 75 between vendors, or the decision to have only one vendor will be determined during source 76 selection. It is important to highlight that a major evaluation factor for this RFP is the 77 demonstrated ability to procure or manufacture commoditized buses1 at low cost and high 78 reliability while achieving economies of scale as demonstrated in the commercial sector. The 79 number of SVs and SV providers will be decided upon as a result of the merit, maturity and cost 80 of the responses that are received. The Government is selecting an orbit altitude of 1000 km and 81 an inclination range between 80-100 degrees. The Offeror may propose different orbits but must 82 understand it is the Government’s intent that all vehicles from all vendors will operate at the 83 same altitude and inclination. 84

Each SV shall have the capability to interoperate with SDA Transport Layer SVs via an Optical 85

Intersatellite Link (OISL). While the technology maturity of OISLs has improved, the SDA 86 understands the risk associated with the reliance on OISLs for the Transport Tranche 0 SVs. As 87 such, the SDA is requesting that proposals include, and Offerors prepare costing options for, 88 radio frequency (RF) crosslinks in addition to the OISLs. The RF crosslinks should operate in 89 the same arrangement as the OISLs. The decision to include or delete the RF crosslinks from the 90 final SV configuration will be made by SDA no later than the Critical Design Review (CDR). 91

For proposal pricing purposes only, Offerors should assume down select to OISLs at CDR. 92

1 A commodity space vehicle utilizes an existing bus design that can be easily manufactured and reused across multiple space vehicles and for multiple missions. A commoditized bus has been designed for manufacture and is suitable for, or currently being produced by, an assembly line like process at economies of scale.

Volume I – Solution and Schedule (NTE 30 Pages) 94

1. Executive Summary 95

The Offeror shall present their proposed solution concept for the T0 WFOV program including 96 their team construct and expected contributions by each team member. The Executive Summary 97 should include an OV-1 or equivalent high-level overview of the proposed space and ground 98 segments. The graphics shall depict the type of satellites proposed, means by which they sense 99 key tactical data, means by which they communicate with each other and the ground, and means 100 by which they provide key tactical data to the warfighter or operational interface. Integrated into 101 this graphical representation shall be a high-level roll-up of the Offeror’s milestone-driven 102

Integrated Master Schedule for capability delivery, culminating in on orbit performance per 103

SDA’s schedule requirements. 104

2. Space Vehicle Overview 105

The Offeror shall present an overview of the SV, including but not limited to: a block diagram, 106 delta-v budget, high-level mass budget, power budget with power modes, and vehicle 107 configuration showing all major components. This section should also include an overview of 108 the SV Concept of Operations (CONOPS). A Master Equipment List with mass, power, and 109

Technical Readiness Level, Manufacturing Readiness Level, or other flight heritage shall be 110 included as an appendix and will not count against the page limit. 111

3. T0 WFOV Payload Architecture and Design 112

The Offeror shall present their T0 WFOV payload architecture and design. For each payload 113 element below, the Offeror shall include, but not be limited to, a discussion of payload hardware, 114 software, control, data storage and data transfer capability and/or limitations, and power 115 requirements. Commercial data sheets submitted to other customers as part of system or 116 subsystem delivery may be attached as Appendices to this section and will not count against the 117 page limit. This section shall detail: 118

A. WFOV Sensor: Detailed description of the Offeror’s proposed sensor system, 119 subsystems and components to include manufacturability, flight heritage, space 120 environment susceptibility, and power requirements. Describe the payload assembly, 121 test, and calibration approach. Include a discussion of key technical dependencies 122 between the primary payload and other SV subsystems, ground elements, and/or 123 communication systems which could adversely affect overall mission performance. 124

B. SV Communication: Detailed description of optical and/or RF subsystems proposed to 125 enable satellite-to-satellite and/or satellite-to-ground communication. In each case, 126 identify frequencies, orbital constraints, data formats, and any other parameters 127 considered key by the Offeror. Of particular interest is a discussion of the Offeror’s 128 approach to integrate WFOV data into the overall tracking architecture to include 129 interface and interoperability with the Missile Defense Agency Medium Field of View 130 program, BMDS, other mission partner assets, and SDA Transport Layer assets. Critical 131 to this analysis are any assumptions made by the Offeror regarding data required from 132 external sources for their T0 WFOV mission approach and data collected by the Offeror 133 to be provided externally. 134

C. Mission Data Processing: Detailed description of the Offeror’s proposed Mission Data 135

Processing systems. This should include processes that will start on the ground and 136 migrate to on-board the space vehicle as testing progresses. Define the functions that will 137 be executed on-board the space vehicle and the physical location of the processing 138 algorithms. Define the functions that will be executed on the ground. Identify any 139 distributed processing that will occur, and the data flows and diagrams required to 140 support that processing. Include in the discussion the reasons each processing step is 141 moved on-board and its anticipated impacts on the communications network. Include in 142 the discussion any dependencies on Government provided portions of the ground system 143 and identify the required interfaces. Include on-board storage requirements and 144 limitations as well as anticipated uses. 145

4. Baseline SV Bus Design 146

The Offeror shall present their SV design based on the manufacture or purchase of commoditized 147

SV buses per the definition included in Attachment 1 - SOW. Should the Offeror elect a non-148 commoditized bus alternative, they shall present their process for commoditizing the alternative 149 bus. Commercial data sheets submitted to other customers as part of system or subsystem 150 delivery may be attached as appendices to this section and will not count against the page limit. 151

This section shall detail: 152

A. Bus Design and Heritage: Detailed description of the SV bus size, weight and power 153 available. Include in this description a discussion of the bus heritage: where and how 154 many have flown; the design life and what has been the experienced flight life; types and 155 frequency of experienced anomalies and their solutions; and the number and types of 156 customers that have purchased the bus. If the proposed bus has not flown, provide the 157 heritage from an existing bus (if applicable) and the changes made to reach the proposed 158 bus along with rationale for each of the changes. 159

B. SV Subsystems: For each of the major subsystems (electrical and power; attitude 160 control; telemetry, tracking and control; etc.) provide a detailed description of the 161 subsystem as well as system heritage (similar to that for Bus Design and Heritage above). 162

Describe the proposed implementation of security concerns, such as red-black isolation, 163 encryption, and command authentication. Discuss engineering (radiation, 164 electromagnetic interference, contamination control, etc.) issues and approaches as 165 appropriate. Discuss the overall fault management approach, including the safe mode 166 implementation. 167

C. Launch Interface Requirements: SDA intends to provide launch services to the Offeror 168 as a government furnished service through the U.S. Space Force, with which the Offeror 169 will work for design interface, satellite mating, final interface testing, launch readiness 170 rehearsals, etc. Describe how the SV integrates into any recommended launch vehicle. 171

On what vehicle(s) can the proposed solution be launched? Does the proposed design 172 limit the Government’s launch options? Are there any atypical interface requirements? 173

Are any particular launch services (such as a T-0 dry nitrogen purge) or additional 174 accesses required to support launch vehicle integration? If the proposed bus has not 175 flown on an EELV-class launch vehicle, provide the heritage from an existing bus (if 176 applicable) and changes expected to enable launch of the proposed bus. 177

5. Ground Systems and Operations 178

The Government shall provide an operations center facility, ground entry points and a 179 communications network. Within those Government Furnished Equipment constraints the 180

Offeror shall present their approach to ground systems and operations. Define what functions 181 the ground system and mission operations are assumed to provide. Describe the suggested 182 approach for verification that the ground system at a Government-provided location (TBD) is 183 fully compatible with the proposed SV. Describe the systems and approach for maintaining 184 inventory accountability and control. 185

6. Test, Demonstration and Verification 186

The Offeror shall present their hardware and software, ground and orbit-based test and 187 demonstration approach(es). This section should address all aspects of test and demonstration to 188 include modeling, simulation, emulation, ground and space-based testing. Offerors should 189 address verification at the component, subsystem, system, vehicle and constellation levels. All 190 requirements verification up to and through environmental testing should be discussed. Describe 191 test approaches, methodologies, performance, verification, documentation and staffing. This 192 section should include sample test artifacts from previous programs, identification of test 193 platforms and hardware maintained by the Offeror, and any test activities which must be 194 accomplished outside of the Offeror’s direct control. For those cases, the Offeror should identify 195 their approach for test conduct and the experience level of the organization the Offeror plans to 196 use to conduct the test. Of particular interest to the SDA is the Offeror’s approach to conduct 197 tests and demonstrations in concert with the Government-provided operations center prior to 198 launch and during early orbit operations and checkout, as well as exercise of the SVs in 199 conjunction with warfighter exercises once on orbit. Finally, Offerors should examine the OV-1 200 included in the Executive Summary and present their approach(es) for bi-directional 201 compatibility testing associated with each communication or data link shown on that diagram 202 both prior to and after launch. The Government will provide a hardware-in-the-loop (HITL) 203 testbed capability to verify physical and network layer interoperability between the multiple 204

WFOV program contractors. Offerors shall describe their approach for providing specified 205 hardware, or recommended alternatives to achieve functional equivalent, for interoperability 206 verification testing at the Government-furnished HITL. 207

7. Program Management, Systems Engineering and Mission Assurance 208

The Offeror shall describe the program management and systems engineering approach and 209 processes to be applied to the T0 WFOV program. The Offeror shall thoroughly discuss the 210 approach to plan for, ensure, and validate integration and interoperability with the SDA 211

Transport Layer Tranche 0 space vehicles, the OPIR enterprise architecture, and the Missile 212

Defense System. The Offeror shall also describe the mission assurance approach and Offeror’s 213 quality systems, and include a discussion of relevant standards and certifications and what 214 sustaining engineering processes, tools and approach will be applied to this system as part of the 215

Offeror’s approach. The Offeror shall describe the proposed team that each organization brings 216 to the effort, discuss the management team and approach, and include a list of the primary risks 217 on the project, the planned mitigations, and the approach for managing risks throughout the life 218 cycle. The Offeror shall describe their approach to mission assurance and what processes the 219

Offeror intends to use to ensure the quality of the delivered product. 220

The Offeror shall present the milestone-driven Integrated Master Schedule designed to meet the 221

Government’s objective to have SVs delivered for launch integration thirty (30) days before 222 launch. The Offeror should identify program milestones to include entry criteria, key 223 accomplishments and exit criteria for each milestone. If the milestones proposed correspond to 224 progress payments anticipated by the Offeror, this volume should so state and link (electronically 225 if possible) to the appropriate section in Volume II – Price and Rationale so that the justification 226 for the progress payment appears in Volume I and the payment amount, terms, conditions and 227

Government acceptance criteria for payment appears in Volume II. At least two of the pages 228 should be a separable, standalone detailed Gantt chart (or similar) clearly presenting the 229

Offeror’s milestone-driven Integrated Master Schedule to include dependencies, assumed 230

Government or Subcontractor hardware, software or information deliveries, tests, 231 demonstrations, reviews, and/or any other key activities in the Offeror’s proposed program. 232

8. Specialty Engineering 233

The Offeror shall discuss their approach to the specialty engineering disciplines and how they 234 will be involved in the design of the space and ground segments. These disciplines include, but 235 are not limited to, those listed in the SOW such as: cryptologic systems, spectrum management, 236 security operations, cybersecurity and software protection. 237

Describe the process on how specialty engineering requirements will be matured through the 238 design process, e.g., through the systems engineering design process, through working or focus 239 groups, or through the delivery of implementation or management plans. Describe the decision 240 to adopt company corporate processes or the generation and/or tailoring of new processes. 241

Describe the process maturity level of the specialty engineering disciplines and include any 242 lessons learned and/or process pedigree associations between the T0 WFOV program and 243 previous programs. 244

Volume II – Price and Rationale (No Page Limit) 246

The Government requests the following information to assist in its determination of Price 247

Reasonableness (see Evaluation Factors for Award, Section M). 248

1. Executive Summary and Pricing Rationale 249

The Offeror shall detail their pricing assumptions and rationale that guided their firm fixed price 250

(FFP) submission. SDA needs to understand what the Offeror has assumed in building their final 251 price so that any discussions deemed of value can be conducted. Discuss any constraints on the 252

Government such as time to review and/or approve contractual documentation, constraints on 253 mission partners such as time to receive needed data or information, etc. Where appropriate, the 254

Offeror should discuss their use of learning in driving down subsequent SV costs when 255 producing more than a single copy and where such learning has led to cost savings on previous 256 programs. 257

2. Detailed Price Proposal 258

The SDA requests the following pricing information for Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) 259 efforts associated with design, development, test and demonstration of SV 1 in addition to unit 260 prices of SVs 2-8 per the following table: 261

Firm Fixed Price

NRE:

SV 1

Unit Price:

SV 2

SV 3

SV 4

SV 5

SV 6

SV 7

SV 8

Total Price

NRE + SVs 1-8

A. Supporting Pricing Data: 263

1) Provide the total price and elements of price broken down by milestone, including at 264 a minimum: 265

a) Price of major tasks by fiscal year by Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) element 266

(Level 3 or below) 267

b) A summary of projected funding requirements by month to enable fiscal and 268 milestone payment planning 269

c) A summary of projected funding requirements by quarter for Government Fiscal 270

Year, Contractor Fiscal Year and Calendar Year to enable fiscal and milestone 271 payment planning 272

d) An itemization of major Subcontractors 273

e) Price and percentage of price by the prime and major Subcontractors 274

f) Price by major risk/activity 275

g) Materials 276

h) Other Direct Costs (ODCs) (e.g., travel, equipment, etc.) 277

i) Identification of pricing assumptions of which may require incorporation into the 278 resulting award instrument (e.g., use of Government Furnished Property, access to 279

Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.) 280

2) The WBS should include but not be limited to the following elements: 282

a) Project Management 283

b) Mission and System Engineering 284

c) Payloads, including a separate element for the backup V-band system through 285

CDR 286

d) SV (broken down by subsystem) 287

e) Assembly, Integration, and Test 288

f) Ground Segment 289

g) Mission Operations 290

3) Milestones - For this effort, those portions partitioned for milestone payments should 292 be identified clearly with rationale for their selection, dollar amount per milestone 293 payment, and percentage of total contract price proposed for that milestone payment. 294

The Offeror should begin with the list provided by the Government for milestones 295 and milestone payments. Should the Offeror propose an alternative set of milestones 296 and payments, provide detailed rationale for departure from the list provided by the 297

Government 298

This information will be used by the government to evaluate the reasonableness of and risks 299 associated with the proposed technical solution, schedule, and cost. 300

B. Subcontractor Proposals 301

The Awardee is responsible for compiling and providing all Subcontractor proposals for the 302

Government. There is no limit to the overall percentage of work assigned to Subcontractors 303 by the Prime Contractor. Subcontractor proposals should include ITWAs or similar 304 arrangements. All proprietary Subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same 305 level of detail as that required of the prime which cannot be provided with the proposed 306 prime contractor’s proposal shall be provided to the Government either by the prime 307 contractor or by the Subcontractor organization by e-mail (osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.sda-308 rfp-20-0003@mail.mil ) when the proposal is submitted. The subject line of the e-mail shall 309 contain the lead organization’s proposal title, lead organization name, lead organization 310 proposal submission date, and Subcontractor name. Each file submitted must be clearly 311 labeled with the SDA RFP number, proposer organization, proposal title (short title 312 recommended), Volume number and Appendix or Attachment number (as appropriate). 313

C. Technical Data and Computer Software Rights Assertions 314

The Offeror shall clearly delineate all limitations on data/hardware/computer software rights. 315

It is SDA’s assumption that no hardware, technical data or computer software will be 316 provided with less than Government Purpose Rights (see DFARS 252.227-7013, 7014, 317

7015) and that the vast majority of information generated will be provided with 318

Unlimited Rights to the Government. Should the Offeror disagree they must clearly 319 identify those elements to be provided with less than Unlimited Rights and identify the 320 rationale for their assertion(s) using the following format. 321

Technical Data

Computer

Software To be

Furnished with

Restrictions

Summary of

Intended Use in the Conduct of the

Effort

Basis for Assertion Asserted Rights

Category

Name of Person

Asserting

Restrictions

(LIST) (NARRATIVE) (LIST) (LIST) (LIST)

D. Small Business Utilization Plan / Small Business Participation Commitment 324

Document 325

Offerors shall submit a Small Business Utilization Plan and/or Small Business Participation 326

Commitment Document detailing their anticipated small business inclusion for this 327 procurement to include selection, integration and evaluation processes. While the SDA will 328 not mandate specific percentage goals by individual small business type, Offerors must meet 329 the minimum quantitative requirement of small business participation which is five percent (5) of the 330 total proposed contract value (to include options). Offerors shall detail planned small business 331 contribution by type (Woman-Owned, Disadvantaged, Veteran-Owned, Service Disabled, 332 etc.) and by type of work expected to be performed (administrative, engineering, assembly, 333 test and evaluation, modeling and simulation, etc.). The SDA expects that significant 334 engineering and technical elements of this procurement shall be contributed by other than 335 traditional large aerospace and defense contractors, including but not limited to new and 336 emerging small, commercial bus, and/or payload providers. Their specific, technical 337 inclusion and participation will contribute significantly to the Offeror’s overall proposal. 338

Simply including a standard corporate Small Business Plan without specific tailoring to T0 339

WFOV requirements will be considered a significant weakness in the Offeror’s approach. 340

Volume III – Experience and Past Performance (No page limit) 342

1. Executive Summary 343

The Offeror should introduce the current and past performance citations and résumés of key 344 personnel that are included in this volume. The Offeror should clearly state why they have 345 chosen both the efforts and the staff they believe best proves their ability to design, develop and 346 deliver the SVs and key mission sensors requested by the SDA. Each citation and each résumé 347 should provide specific, measurable validation of the Offeror’s rationale and document 348 successful current and past performance directly relevant to the current solicitation. The SDA 349 expects direct correlation between the current and past performance citations and the résumés 350 submitted. Significant disconnects between the efforts cited and the personnel identified could 351 be grounds for elimination from further consideration for award. 352

2. Recent, Relevant Current and Past Performance 353

For no less than two (2) and up to five (5) separate efforts by the prime and at least one (1) and 354 up to three (3) separate efforts for each major subcontractor, the Offeror should clearly 355 demonstrate their ability to satisfy the totality of SDA’s T0 WFOV requirements. Offerors are 356 free to define “major” based on their proposed solution but should provide rationale for such 357 designation. For each example, the Offeror should identify: 358

a) Customer (Name, domestic or foreign, phone, email, affiliation) 359

b) Scope to include number of SVs/payloads/systems/subsystems/components to be 360 delivered 361

c) Place of performance, period of performance (must be within last five (5) years), 362 contract/agreement type 363

d) Bid cost/price, currently invoiced cost/price, Estimate at Completion with rationale for 364 any variance greater than ten (10) percent of original bid cost/price 365

e) Specific rationale for effort selection and detailed justification of relevance 366

Offerors are highly encouraged to use key graphics to convey important elements of their current 367 and past performance. OV-1 level graphics depicting numbers and locations of SVs, Gantt 368 charts showing key program milestones planned and achieved, Earned Value charts (if 369 applicable) showing estimates and current status, etc., are all substantially more valuable to the 370

Government for relevance evaluation purposes than detailed written explanations. These 371 artifacts should be taken directly from the efforts cited and be suitable for use by the SDA in 372 conjunction with interviews which may be conducted with the customers named in each citation. 373

3. Personnel Résumés (Not to Exceed Two (2) Pages Each) 374

The Offeror should identify the key personnel planned to be assigned to this program. Résumés 375 should be in bullet format and include: 376

a) Summary statement highlighting experience and expertise 377

b) Current role with the Offeror to include current assignments/programs 378

c) Planned role within the T0 WFOV program 379

d) Education (Academic and military if applicable) 380

e) Military or Government space-related experience (if any) 381

f) Commercial sector space-related experience (if any) 382

g) Traditional aerospace/defense contractor space-related experience (if any) 383

h) Anticipated percentage to be assigned to this program 384

i) Signed statement agreeing to support the SDA T0 WFOV program if awarded 385

Proposed staff members not currently employed by the Offeror may be included as appropriate. 386

In those cases, the Offeror shall include signed contingent offer letters. These letters shall be 387 signed by both the Offeror and the proposed staff member and should state the willingness of the 388 proposed staff member to join the Offeror in support of the T0 WFOV program if awarded. 389

4. Personnel / Performance Matrix 390

Offerors should compare and contrast their submitted current and past performance as well as 391 personnel résumés against the SDA T0 WFOV requirements to validate corporate and individual 392 experience and expertise thereby giving the SDA confidence in the Offeror’s probability of 393 success. Format for this comparison is entirely up to the Offeror but this section of the proposal 394 should stand alone for evaluation. 395