Attachment 2 - Detailed Proposal Instructions (DRAFT).pdf

HQ085020R0001 Attachment 2

Detailed Proposal Instructions

The offeror shall propose to develop and deliver Tranche 0 space vehicles (SVs) via three volumes. Specific volume contents and associated page limits are detailed below.

• Volume I – Schedule and Solution shall contain a detailed description of the offeror’s proposed technical solution to Space Development Agency’s (SDA) requirements and their schedule to deliver SVs on orbit.

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

Plan.

• Volume III – Experience and Past Performance shall contain résumés for key personnel to be assigned to this effort and up to five (5) recent (within the last five (5) years), relevant examples of on-time, on-cost/price delivery of complex systems, subsystems, or components.

The font in normal text for all volumes shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 12 pt., while text in figures shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 pt. All margins (top, bottom, left, and right) shall be no smaller than one inch. Regardless of paper or electronic submission, all 11

X 17 inch pages shall be counted as two pages. Note: Nonconforming proposals may be rejected without review.

The Government is purchasing the following:

A constellation of up to twenty (20) SVs to be awarded to two (2) or more vendors. It is important to highlight that a major selection criterion for this Request for Proposal (RFP) is the demonstrated ability to procure or manufacture commoditized busses at low cost and high reliability while achieving economies of scale as demonstrated in the commercial sector. The number of SV providers will be decided upon as a result of the merit and maturity of the responses that are received. The Government is recommending an orbit altitude of 1000 km and an inclination range between 80-100 degrees. The offeror may propose different orbits but must understand it is the Government’s intent that all vehicles from all vendors will operate at the same altitude and inclination.

Table 1 -- The nominal Tranche 0 constellation allows for continuous network, as well as periodic access to demonstrate the tactical links

Parameter Group A Group B

Number of Planes 2

SVs per Plane 7 3

Altitude 1000 km

Inclination 80-100 degrees

Node Separation 31.643 degrees

Mean Anomaly

Separation

51.429 deg 36 deg

Interplane Phasing 25.714 deg 18 deg

OISLs per SV 4 2 In-Plane

Mission Payload(s) IBS Link 16

IBS

TT&C Downlink Ka Ka

Navigation GPS GPS

Each orbital plane will consist of a set of Group A SVs and a set of Group B SVs, as shown in

Table 1. Each set of SVs in each plane must be interoperable with all other SVs regardless of vendor. Ideally, all SVs in the initial tranche will be launched on a single launch vehicle. The

Group A SVs include four Optical Intersatellite Links (OISLs) to support in- and cross-plane crosslinks, as well as crosslinks to compatible SVs outside the Transport Layer. These links also enable communication with Optical Ground Terminals, as specified in Section 4.4 of the

Statement of Work (SOW).

All SVs (Group A and Group B) must have the capability to demonstrate features of the

Integrated Broadcast System (IBS). This includes the ability to relay “bulk” IBS traffic, the ability to generate an IBS message set, and the ability to demodulate an IBS message for a specific geographic area. Group B satellites must also have the capability to demonstrate communication and data transfer via the Link-16 network. This includes the ability to receive

Link-16 messages from the ground, to forward Link-16 messages from another SV, and to transmit a Link- 16 message from the SV to the ground (including maritime and airborne). All

SVs (Group A and Group B) must have an on-board battle management processor (BMC3) for potential experimentation with on-orbit processing (Link-16, IBS, networking), increased automation (constellation management), and network management.

While the technology maturity of OISLs has improved, the SDA understands the risk associated with the reliance on OISLs on these SVs. As such, the SDA is requesting that proposals include -and offerors prepare costing options for - radio frequency (RF) crosslinks in addition to the

OISLs. The RF crosslinks should operate in the same arrangement as the OISLs defined above.

The decision to include or delete the RF crosslinks from final SV configuration will be made at the Critical Design Review (CDR).

Volume I – Solution and Schedule (NTE 35 Pages)

1. Executive Summary

The offeror shall present their proposed solution concept for the Space Transport Layer Tranche

0 including their team construct and expected contributions by each team member. Offerors shall clearly state whether they are bidding Group A SVs, Group B SVs, or both. The Executive

Summary should include an OV-1 or equivalent high-level overview of the proposed space segment. The graphics shall depict the number and type of satellites proposed, their specific payloads, means by which they communicate with each other and the ground, and means by which they provide data to the warfighter. Integrated into this graphical representation shall be the offeror’s milestone-driven integrated master schedule for capability delivery, culminating in on orbit performance per SDA’s schedule requirements.

2. Space Vehicle Overview

The offeror shall present an overview of the SV, including but not limited to: a block diagram, delta-v budget, high-level mass budget, power budget with power modes, and vehicle configuration showing all major components. This section should also include an overview of the

SV Concept of Operations (CONOPS). A detailed Master Equipment List with mass, power, and

Technical Readiness Level (TRL) or other flight heritage shall be included as an appendix and will not count against the page limit.

3. Transport Tranche 0 Payload Architecture and Design

The offeror shall present their Transport Tranche 0 payload architecture and design. For each payload element below, the offeror shall include, but not be limited to, a discussion of payload hardware, software, control, data transfer capability and/or limitations, and power requirements.

Commercial data sheets and/or previously delivered detailed designs submitted to other customers as part of system or subsystem delivery may be attached as appendices to this section and will not count against the page limit. This section shall detail:

A. SV Communication: Detailed description of optical and/or RF subsystems proposed to enable satellite-to-satellite optical communication (and V-band communication as risk mitigation against OISL development); satellite-to-ground optical communication;

satellite-to-ground Ka-band communication; and, satellite-to-ground/air/maritime L-band

(Link-16) communication. In each case, identify the number of terminals, frequency of operation, bandwidth, anticipated power requirements, anticipated data rate, bit error rate, and any other parameters considered key by the offeror.

B. Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS): Detailed description of data packaging and interface requirements to enable receipt and transmission of IBS information. Include a list of systems and customers for which this has previously been accomplished or state that the offeror does not have specific previous experience in this area.

C. Link-16 (Only included by those offerors choosing to bid Group B SVs): Detailed description of data packaging and interface requirements to enable receipt and transmission of Link-16 information to aircraft, missile defense, maritime and/or ground assets. Include a list of systems and customers for which this has previously been accomplished or state that the offeror does not have specific previous experience in this area. In particular, the offeror should identify specific user equipment to which Link-16 information has been successfully transmitted (if accomplished previously).

D. Battle Management Command, Control and Communication (BMC3): Describe the

BMC3 module and its relationship to the vehicle bus command and control system. Detail the offeror’s proposed philosophy and approach to verifying uploads of other vendor massless payloads (with software integration testing being performed at the SDA Hardware-

In-The-Loop laboratory) within the BMC3 module from both a satellite and ground perspective. Describe the Tranche 0 level of autonomy envisioned for the module and the anticipated path to full autonomy, with an associated autonomy definition based on the offeror’s particular design. Finally, the offeror should describe their approach to develop and demonstrate payload updates both on the ground and on orbit.

E. Networking: Describe the networking capabilities enabled by the offeror’s Tranche 0 offering. Identify improvements and enhancements to tactical exercises and warfighter capabilities anticipated by the offeror’s solution and list additional capabilities envisioned upon establishment of the full Tranche 1 constellation based on the offeror’s specific SV designs. The offeror should illustrate how the networking function is separable from the rest of the SV.

F. SV Interoperability and Associated Data Rights: The offeror should discuss how interoperability between vendor-agnostic SVs is enhanced and enabled by their offering, to include how their implementation of data rights accelerated past interoperability verification efforts. This section should detail other programs for which the vendor has enabled interoperability, how they tested – or would test – this requirement, and the additional capability for the customer shown by this process. The offeror should discuss situations in which they have led or at least participated in the development and acceptance of industry standards. Simply stating that the offeror will work with the SDA to ensure interoperability will not be sufficient for this section; the offeror must detail instances in which they instantiated interoperability in their and other vendor systems, subsystems or components.

4. Baseline SV Bus Design

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

SV busses. Should the offeror elect a non-commoditized bus alternative, they shall present their process for commoditizing the alternative bus. Commercial data sheets and/or previously delivered detailed designs submitted to other customers as part of system or subsystem delivery may be attached as appendices to this section and will not count against the page limit. This section shall detail:

A. Bus Design and Heritage: Detailed description of the SV bus size, weight and power available. Include in this description a discussion of the bus heritage: where and how many have flown; what is the design life and what has been the experienced flight life;

types and frequency of experienced anomalies and their solution; and the number and types of customers that have purchased the bus. If the proposed bus has not flown, provide the heritage from an existing bus (if applicable) and the changes made to reach the proposed bus along with rationale for each of the changes.

B. SV Subsystems: For each of the major subsystems (electrical and power; attitude control; telemetry, tracking and control; etc.) provide a detailed description of the subsystem as well as system heritage (similar to that for Bus Design and Heritage above). Include in the Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C) discussion the approach for obtaining the required spectrum allocation. Describe the proposed implementation of security concerns, such as red-black isolation, encryption, and command authentication. Discuss specialty engineering (radiation, electromagnetic interference, contamination control, etc.) issues and approaches as appropriate. Discuss the overall fault management approach, including the safe mode implementation.

C. Launch Interface Requirements: The SDA intends to provide launch services to the offeror through the U.S. Space Force. Describe how the SV integrates into the launch vehicle. On what vehicle(s) can the proposed solution be launched? Does the proposed design limit the Government’s launch options? Are there any atypical interface requirements? Are any particular launch services (such as a T-0 dry nitrogen purge) or additional accesses required to support launch vehicle integration? If the proposed bus has not flown on an EELV-class launch vehicle, provide the heritage from an existing bus (if applicable) and the changes expected to enable launch of the proposed bus.

5. Ground System(s) and Operations

The offeror shall present their approach to supporting ground system(s) and operations development. Define what functions the ground system and mission operations are assumed to provide. Describe the suggested approach for verification that the ground system at the Blossom

Point Test Facility (BPTF) is fully compatible with the proposed SV. List the documentation and training anticipated to be provided to BPTF personnel. Describe the systems and approach for maintaining inventory accountability and control per Section 3.7.3 of the SOW.

6. Test, Demonstration and Verification

The offeror shall present their hardware and software, ground and orbit-based test and demonstration approach(es). This section should address all aspects of test and demonstration to include modeling, simulation, emulation, ground and space-based testing. Offerors should address verification at the component, subsystem, system, vehicle and constellation levels. All requirements verification up to and through environmental should be discussed. Describe test approaches, methodologies, performance, verification, documentation and staffing. This section should include sample test artifacts from previous programs, identification of test platforms and hardware maintained by the offeror, and any test activities which must be accomplished outside of the offeror’s direct control. For those cases, the offeror should identify their approach for test conduct and the experience level of the organization the offeror plans to use to conduct the test.

Of particular interest to the SDA is the offeror’s approach to conduct tests and demonstrations in concert with the BPTF prior to launch and during early orbit operations and checkout, as well as exercise of the SVs in conjunction with warfighter exercises once on orbit. Also of particular interest to the SDA is the offeror’s approach to providing EFDU hardware and software or equivalent to the SDA Hardware in the Loop (HWIL) to be hosted at the Naval Research

Laboratory (NRL) for integration and testing prior to and after launch coupled with their approach to supporting integration and test of such hardware and/or software. Finally, offerors should examine the OV-1 included in the Executive Summary and present their approach(es) for bi-directional compatibility testing associated with each communication or data link shown on that diagram both prior to and after launch. Offerors should consider submission of this section as a standalone System Verification Plan suitable for use during program conduct and management by both the offeror and the Government.

7. Program Management, Systems Engineering, and Mission Assurance

The offeror shall discuss their approach, processes and tools for executing the program. Describe the proposed team that each organization brings to the effort. Discuss the management team and approach. Include a list of the primary risks on the project, the planned mitigations, and the approach for managing risks throughout the life cycle.

The offeror shall present the milestone-driven integrated master schedule designed to meet the

Government’s notional schedule provided in SOW Section 7.1. The offeror should identify program milestones to include entry criteria, key accomplishments and exit criteria for each milestone. If the milestones proposed correspond to progress payments anticipated by the offeror, this volume should so state and link (electronically if possible) to the appropriate section in Volume II – Price and Rationale so that the justification for the progress payment appears in

Volume I and the payment amount, terms, conditions and Government acceptance criteria for payment appears in Volume II. At least two of the pages should be a separable, standalone detailed Gantt chart (or similar) clearly presenting the offeror’s milestone-driven integrated master schedule to include dependencies, assumed Government or subcontractor hardware, software or information deliveries, tests, demonstrations, reviews, and/or any other key activities in the offeror’s proposed program.

Describe the system engineering approach and processes to be applied to this project. Also, describe the mission assurance approach and offeror’s quality systems, and include a discussion of relevant standards and certifications.

Volume II – Price and Rationale (No Page Limit)

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

Reasonableness (see Attachment 3).

1. Executive Summary and Pricing Rationale

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

(FFP) submission. The SDA needs to understand what the offeror has assumed in building their final price so that any discussions deemed of value can be conducted. Discuss any constraints on the Government such as time to review contractual documentation, constraints on mission partners such as time to receive needed data or information, etc. Where appropriate, the offeror should discuss their use of learning in driving down subsequent SV costs and where such learning has led to cost savings on previous programs.

2. Detailed Price Proposal

The SDA requests the following pricing information for non-recurring engineering (NRE) efforts associated with SV design, development, test and demonstration in addition to total and per unit prices proposed by the offeror for each SV type (Group A or Group B) per the following table:

Group A Group B

NRE NRE

Price: SVs 1-7 Price: SVs 1-3

Unit Price: SV 8-n Unit Price: SV 4-m

Total Price: All SVs

A. Supporting Pricing Data:

1) The proposer should include supporting pricing information in sufficient detail to substantiate the summary estimates and should include a description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting documentation.

2) The awardee is responsible for compiling and providing all subcontractor proposals for the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

3) Subcontractor proposals should include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements

(ITWA) or similar arrangements.

4) All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the awardee’s proposal and that cannot be provided with the proposed awardee’s proposal, shall be provided to the Government either by the awardee or by the subcontractor organization by e-mail (address TBD) when the proposal is submitted.

5) Within the effort, those portions partitioned for milestone payments should be identified clearly with rationale for their selection, amount and percentage of total price proposed for that payment and the total amount of payment and total percentage of total price accumulated by the offeror based on successful achievement of the milestone and receipt of milestone payment. The offeror should begin with the list provided by the SDA for milestones and milestone payments. Should the offeror propose an alternative set of milestones and payments, provide detailed rationale for departure from the list provided by the Government.

6) Each copy must be clearly labeled with the SDA RFP number, proposer organization, and proposal title (short title recommended)

B. Price Breakdown Information and Format

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

a) Price of major tasks by fiscal year by WBS element (Level 3 or below)

b) A summary of projected funding requirements by month to enable fiscal and milestone payment planning mailto:osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.hq085020s0001@mail.mil

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

Year, Performer Fiscal Year and Calendar Year to enable fiscal and milestone payment planning

d) An itemization of major subcontractors

e) Price and percentage of price by the prime and major subcontractors

f) Price by major risk/activity

g) Materials

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

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

Property/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.)

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

a) Project Management, System Engineering, and Mission Assurance

b) Payload(s) o OISL o IBS o Link 16 o BMC3 o Networking

c) SV (broken down by subsystem)

d) Assembly, Integration, and Test

e) Ground Support

f) Mission Operations Support

C. Subcontractor Proposals

The awardee is responsible for compiling and providing all subcontractor proposals for the PCO.

Subcontractor proposals should include ITWAs or similar arrangements. All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the prime and which cannot be provided with the proposed prime contractor’s proposal, shall be provided to the Government either by the prime contractor or by the subcontractor organization by e-mail (address TBD) when the proposal is submitted. The subject line of the e-mail shall contain the lead organization’s proposal title, lead organization name, lead organization proposal submission date, and subcontractor name.

D. Technical Data and Computer Software Rights Assertions

The offeror shall clearly delineate all limitations on data/hardware/computer software rights. It is

SDA’s assumption that no hardware, technical data or computer software will be provided with less than Government Purpose Rights (see DFARS 252.227-7013, 7014, 7015) and that the vast majority of information generated will be provided with Unlimited Rights to the Government.

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

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)

E. Small Business Utilization Plan

Offerors shall submit a Small Business Utilization Plan detailing their anticipated small business inclusion for this procurement to include selection, integration and evaluation processes. While the SDA will not mandate specific percentage goals by individual small business type, Offerors must meet the minimum quantitative requirement (MQR) of small business participation which is five percent of the total proposed contract value (to include options). Offerors shall detail planned small business contribution by type (Woman-Owned, Disadvantaged, Veteran-Owned, Service

Disabled, etc.) and by type of work expected to be performed (administrative, engineering, assembly, test and evaluation, modeling and simulation, etc.). The SDA expects that significant engineering and technical elements of this procurement shall be contributed by other than traditional large aerospace and defense contractors, including but not limited to new and emerging small, commercial bus, and/or payload providers. Their specific, technical inclusion and participation will contribute significantly to the offeror’s overall proposal. Simply including a standard corporate Small Business Plan without specific tailoring to SDA’s Transport Tranche

0 requirements will be considered unacceptable.

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

1. Executive Summary

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

2. Recent, Relevant Current and Past Performance

For up to five separate efforts, the offeror should clearly demonstrate their ability to satisfy the totality of SDA’s Transport Tranche 0 requirements. For each citation, the offeror should identify:

a) Customer (Name, phone, email, affiliation)

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

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

d) Bid cost/price, currently invoiced cost/price, Estimate at Completion

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

Offerors are highly encouraged to use key graphics to convey important elements of their current and past performance. OV-1 level graphics depicting numbers and locations of SVs, Gantt charts showing key program milestones planned and achieved, Earned Value charts (if applicable) showing estimates and current status, etc. are all substantially more valuable to the Government for relevance evaluation purposes than detailed written explanations. These artifacts should be taken directly from the efforts cited and be suitable for use by the SDA in conjunction with interviews which may be conducted with the customers named in each citation.

3. Personnel Résumés

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

a) Summary statement highlighting experience and expertise

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

c) Planned role within the Transport Tranche 0 program

d) Education (Academic and military if applicable)

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

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

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

h) Anticipated percentage to be assigned to this program

i) Signed statement agreeing to support the SDA Transport Tranche 0 program if awarded

Proposed staff members not currently employed by the offeror should be included as appropriate.

In those cases, the offeror shall include signed contingent offer letters. These letters should be signed by both the offeror and the proposed staff member and should state the willingness of the proposed staff member to join the offeror in support of the SDA Transport Tranche 0 program if awarded.

4. Personnel / Performance Matrix

Offerors should compare and contrast their submitted current and past performance as well as personnel résumés against the SDA Transport Tranche 0 requirements to validate corporate and individual experience and expertise thereby giving the SDA confidence in the offeror’s probability of success. Format for this comparison is entirely up to the offeror but this section of the proposal should stand alone for evaluation.

(End of Proposal)

Associate Contractor Agreement

The same of similar clause will be included in all awards made against SDA RFP

#HQ085020R0001.

“It is recognized that the success of the SDA transport architecture depends in part upon the open exchange of information between the various Associate Contractors involved in the Transport

Layer Tranche 0 effort. This clause is intended to ensure appropriate coordination and integration of work by the Associate Contractors to achieve complete compatibility and to prevent unnecessary duplication of effort. By executing this contract, the Contractor assumes the responsibilities of an Associate Contractor. For the purpose of this clause, the term Contractor includes subsidiaries, affiliates, and organizations under the control of the contractor (e.g., subcontractors).

Work under this contract may involve access to proprietary or confidential data from an

Associate Contractor. To the extent that such data is received by the Contractor from any

Associate Contractor for the performance of this contract, the Contractor hereby agrees that any proprietary information received shall remain the property of the Associate Contractor and shall be used solely for the purpose of the SDA Transport Layer Tranche 0 effort. Information which is received from another contractor in writing or electronically and which is clearly identified as proprietary or confidential shall be protected in accordance with this provision. The obligation to retain such information in confidence will be satisfied if the Contractor receiving such information utilizes the same controls as it employs to avoid disclosure, publication, or dissemination of its own proprietary information. The receiving Contractor agrees to hold such information in confidence as provided herein so long as such information is of a proprietary/confidential or Limited Rights nature.

The Contractor hereby agrees to closely cooperate as an Associate Contractor with the other

Associate Contractors on this effort. This involves as a minimum:

• Maintenance of a close liaison and working relationship

• Maintenance of a free and open information network with all Government-identified

Associate Contractors

• Delineation of detailed interface responsibilities

• Entering into a written agreement with the other Associate Contractors setting forth the substance and procedures relating to the foregoing, and promptly providing the

Procuring Contracting Officer with a copy of same

• Receipt of proprietary information from the Associate Contractors and transmittal of

Contractor proprietary information to the Associate Contractors subject to any applicable proprietary information exchange agreements between Associate Contractors when, in either case, those actions are necessary for the performance of either

In the event that the Contractor and the Associate Contractors are unable to agree upon any such interface matter of substance, or if the technical data identified is not provided as scheduled, the

Contractor shall promptly notify the SDA Program Manager and Contracting Officer. The

Government will determine the appropriate corrective action and will issue guidance to the affected Contractor.

The Contractor agrees to insert in all subcontracts hereunder which require access to proprietary information belonging to the Associate Contractors, a provision which shall conform substantially to the language of this clause, including this paragraph.”