Attachment 2 SPLASH LnM Addenda.pdf

Solicitation # FA2521-26-Q-0010 Sections L & M Addenda – Instruction to O erors, Evaluation Criteria, and Basis for Award

L. Instructions to Quoters This acquisition is being conducted under RFO FAR 12, as supplemented by RFO FAR 15, and using Acquisition Gateway, Periodic Table of Acquisition Innovations (PTAI) government-wide initiatives. Please carefully review the instructions, evaluation criteria, and basis for award below and submit any questions or concerns, in writing, to the Contracting O icer, adhering to the timelines and due dates outlined below.

L.01 Evaluation Approach The Government intends to award a single award in response to this RFQ using a Highest Technically Rated (HRT) with Reasonable Price (RP) approach. A notional schedule for this process is below.

Event Date RFQ Release 02 Sep 26 Questions Due 09 Sep 26 Quotes Due 18 Sep 26 Award Anticipated 25 Sep 26

L.02 Questions. Any questions regarding this RFQ must be submitted via email to the Contracting O icer (CO) at jose.plasencia.2@spaceforce.mil.

Questions shall be submitted no later than (NLT) 1200 EST on 09 September 26. Include the solicitation number in the subject line of the email.

L.03 RFQ Response Due Dates and Submission Quoters shall submit their quote via email to jose.plasencia.2@spaceforce.mil NLT 1500 EST on 18 Sep 26. The Government is not liable for any expenses incurred by firms in developing and submitting responses to this RFQ.

L.04 General Instructions Quoters are instructed to read the entire RFQ document, including all attachments, prior to submitting questions and/or preparing responses. Omission of any information from the quote submission requirements may result in rejection of your response.

a. Quoters are expected to follow the detailed preparation instructions fully. The

Government will only rely on the information provided by each firm submitting a quote to evaluate responses. It is therefore imperative that Quoters carefully follow each instruction set forth below and submit accordingly.

b. Responses that fail to provide information in the format requested may be found non-responsive and be rejected without further consideration if the Contracting O icer determines that it is in the best interest of the Government to do so, especially if the incompleteness or errant formatting of the response appears to be due from a lack of due diligence or competence of the Quoter.

c. The instructions provided have been specifically tailored to the evaluation criteria and procedures to be used for evaluation. They are designed to ensure the submission of information essential to the understanding and comprehensive validation and evaluation of responses. Clarity and completeness are of utmost importance. The relevance and conciseness of responses is also important. The Quoters are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of their quote submissions. Quote submissions shall be valid for 180 calendar days from the due date.

d. Definitions:

1. "Quoter" is defined as the prime contractor, its subcontractors, and consultants retained.

2. "National security space" is defined as space capabilities of the Department of War (DoW) or U.S. intelligence community (IC).

3. “Key Personnel” is defined as (1) personnel considered essential to the performance of the contract. (2) Personnel whose resume or CV are marked or otherwise identified by the contractor as “Key Personnel” before award. (3) Personnel otherwise identified in the contractor's quote submission as key individuals to be assigned for participation in the performance of the contract or any modifications thereto. (4) Personnel whose resumes or CV are submitted as a response to any contract change request or future modification. (5) Individuals who are designated as “Key Personnel” by agreement between the Government and the Contractor during negotiations. (6) If the Government determines personnel are "key" to successful completion of the contract, they may also be designated as "Key Personnel." See Section H.10 for more detail.

L.05 Instructions for "Written Quote" The following instructions are for the preparation and submission of the written quote responses. The purpose of this section is to establish the requirements for the format and content of the written quote package and accompanying supporting documents so that responses contain all essential information and can be evaluated properly. Non-conformance with these instructions can result in a quote being considered non-responsive and rejected by the CO.

Quoter’s written quote submission shall include/conform to the following:

a. Quoters shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their capabilities or experience in preparing a written quote. The Government shall make its award decision based solely on the information submitted as part of the quote.

b. Quotes shall be clear, concise, and include su icient detail for e ective evaluation, for substantiating the validity of stated claims therein, and to provide convincing rationale demonstrating how the Quoter intends to meet SPLASH requirements.

c. Page count is strictly limited to space needed to respond to these instructions. Quotes shall NOT include general marketing or promotional material not essential to responding to evaluation criteria, demonstrating capability, or describing approach specific to the SOW.

d. The use of tables, charts, graphs and figures is strongly encouraged to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules and plans, etc. “Swim lane diagrams” showing process steps or time along the horizontal axis and responsible individual or organization along the vertical axis are e icient and e ective means of demonstrating a Quoter’s understanding of the requirements and corresponding approach.

e. Text size shall be no smaller than 12-point font, using Arial or Times New Roman or equivalent machine-readable font, with 1-inch margins.

f. Company Information / Cover Page (1 page maximum): Company name, address, SAM.gov Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), and authorized Point of Contact (name, telephone number and email address).

Factor 1 – Technical. Technical submissions and supporting documents shall be submitted in a single document readable by Microsoft Word or searchable PDF. The OCI Disclosure and Analysis form and associated documents shall also be submitted in a separate single document readable by Microsoft Word or searchable PDF. Pay careful attention to page limits stated below.

g. Factor 1, Subfactor 1 - Technical Approach (10 pages maximum):

1. Describe the technical approach to executing each SOW requirements including spaceport assessment, launch vehicle familiarization methodology, national security launch requirements development and approach to training recommendations.

2. Describe the proposed study schedule from start to study completion. Identify each milestone in relative days from start and the resources required to complete each phase. Describe how progress will be measured and reported to ensure timely execution and successful completion.

3. Describe the information management approach and how case data and information will be captured, organized, stored, controlled, and shared for study team participants.

4. Describe how intermediate and final work products will be generated, reviewed, approved, and released across a geographically dispersed team. Describe what proprietary or controlled unclassified information is needed and how this information will be protected from inappropriate release.

5. Describe the analytical tools and techniques to be used to gather, assess, validate, and integrate the data and information required to achieve the objectives of this case, develop actionable recommendations, and submit a complete and timely final report.

h. Factor 1, Subfactor 2 - Technical Capability (10 pages maximum).

1. Describe the study team and their role(s) for this case, reporting relationships to the study manager (project manager), partner nation, and government sponsor, percentage of their time committed to this study, date of availability, and physical work location.

2. Describe the skills and work experience of each member of the study team and how these skills and experience align with case objectives. Provide a CV for each study team member (CVs shall be considered Supporting Documents, see below).

3. Describe experience performing similar studies over the past three years. Identify customer (agency name and contact information of technical sponsor), scope, duration, and a brief description of the overall outcome for any representative or highlighted prior studies.

i. Supporting Documents (Not part of the written proposal page count):

1. CVs for all study team members ("Key Personnel," reference definition in L.04d.3.). Ensure information is presented in reverse chronological order (most recent first) and includes all professional experience, education, formal training or certifications, and current security clearance level.

j. OCI Disclosure and Analysis (Not part of the written proposal page count): Submit completed form, a proposed mitigation plan (if determined necessary), and/or any additional supporting information (as needed). Shall be submitted in a single document readable by Microsoft Word or searchable PDF. Review and address the following prior to completing and submitting the form:

1. Based on the type of services (advisory and assistance) being solicited, the

Government is concerned this e ort could result in an actual or potential conflict of interest or could provide one or more Quoters with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage.

2. If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the CO may either disqualify the Quoter or determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the Quoter and include appropriate clauses to avoid, neutralize, mitigate, or waive such conflict in the award. After discussion with the Quoter, the CO may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the Quoter may be found ineligible for award.

3. Disclosure: By completing the form, the Quoter represents to the best of its knowledge that either (1) it is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract, or

(2) it has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and (3) has included a mitigation plan in accordance with the next paragraph:

4. Mitigation: If a Quoter with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes the conflict can be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the Quoter shall submit a mitigation plan to the Government for review.

Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall NOT occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan.

5. Other Relevant Information: In addition to the mitigation plan, the CO may require further relevant information from the Quoter. The CO will use all information submitted by the Quoter, and any other relevant information known to the Government to determine whether an award to the Quoter may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict.

Factor 2 – Pricing (Not part of the written proposal page count). It is anticipated that pricing and award of this acquisition will be based on adequate price competition, therefore best pricing on rates for labor categories proposed are strongly encouraged.

k. Submit a single document readable by Microsoft Word or searchable PDF for the following:

1. Fill in and submit the SF 1449 Solicitation/Contract/Order form, RFQ page 1.

2. Fill in and complete the bid schedule, Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs, RFQ pages 3-4. Fill in unit pricing and extended amounts.

3. Fill in and submit the applicable RFQ provisions and clauses as instructed therein.

l. Submit a single Microsoft Excel compatible spreadsheet with separate worksheets for each of the following:

1. Table 1 (Labor Categories): Provide a listing of ALL proposed labor categories with fully burdened hourly rates. This table will be incorporated into the contract award to establish the agreed-upon labor pricing for the duration of the contract.

2. Table 2 (CLIN Breakdown): Provide a breakdown of each CLIN extended amount per month and demonstrate traceability for each CLIN between monthly and extended amounts and any labor categories fully burdened hourly rates in Table 1.

Specifically, for CLINS 0001-0006, show: (1) the proposed labor categories under each CLIN; (2) the proposed number of labor hours per month and the corresponding number of FTEs for those categories; (3) the fully burdened hourly rates; and (4) how these elements roll up to the resulting CLIN monthly and extended prices. For CLIN 0007, break down the proposed number of CONUS and OCOUNS trips, to show transportation, lodging, and per diem amounts covered as part of the proposed travel budget.

m. Disclosure of the magnitude of funding for the project. To ensure Quoters develop solutions within funding constraints, the Government is disclosing a target price range in the solicitation to maximize project value in terms of quality, scope, and design within funding limitations. Price range disclosure supports industry participation by enabling contractors to assess project feasibility and prevents award delays by reducing inappropriate quotes. For this solicitation, the magnitude of funding is between $500,000.00 and $1,500,000.00. Quotes outside this range will not be considered for award.

n. Quoters are cautioned against submitting a quote that contains unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and result in the payment of unreasonably high prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable proposal, the price of one or more items is significantly over-or-understated, as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. Quotes that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the Contracting O icer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

After receipt of the written quotes, the Government will evaluate the submissions considering the technical evaluation factors, subfactors, and price using the criteria as stated in Section M (See section M.01 for Basis of Award).

(End Section L / FAR 52.212-1 addendum)

M.01 Basis for Award

a. It is the Government's intent to award a single purchase order contract using the procedures RFO FAR 12, as supplemented by RFO FAR 15, to the responsible Quoter whose quote, in conforming to the RFQ, is the highest technically rated quote that is also found to have a reasonable price without using trade-o s between price and technical.

b. The Government will evaluate each Quote submission in accordance with the evaluation criteria for each phase / evaluation factor identified below as stated in Sections M.02-03:

Factor 1 - Technical, Subfactor 1 "Technical Approach" Factor 1 - Technical, Subfactor 2 "Technical Capability" Factor 1 – Technical, Subfactor 2 "Supporting Documents" Factor 1 - Technical “OCI Disclosure & Analysis” Factor 2 - Pricing

c. The Government may reject any quote that is evaluated to be non-compliant with the solicitation requirements, unreasonably high or low in price, or reflects a failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the work to be performed. Should initial quotes not provide the Government with a satisfactory solution, the Government reserves the right to engage with quoting firms. The Government reserves the right to engage all, some, or none of the Quoters submitting quotations in response to this RFQ. Once the government determines that a firm is the highest technically rated quote (e.g. the apparent successful awardee), the government reserves the right to engage with only that firm to address any remaining issues, if necessary, and finalize an award to that vendor. These issues may include technical and price. If the parties cannot successfully address any remaining issues, as determined pertinent at the sole discretion of the government, the government reserves the right to engage the next best-suited (e.g. the next highest technically rated quote) based on the original evaluation analysis and address any remaining issues. Once the government has engaged the next best-suited firm, no further engagements with the previous firm will be entertained until after award has been made. This process will continue until an agreement can be successfully reached and purchase order is awarded.

d. The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the low-priced firm.

The technical evaluation factors (Factor 1 and its subfactors), when combined, are more important than price (Factor 2).

e. Each Quoter should recognize that its initial price and written quote submission may be used as the sole and final basis for award and should be quoted accordingly. Therefore, please provide your best pricing upfront.

M.02 Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Each technical factor and subfactor will be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation team in accordance with M.03 below using the following ratings:

Rating Description Outstanding Quote demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Quote indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Quote meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Quote has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

M.03 Evaluation Criteria and Approach for Factor 1

Quotes will be evaluated to determine the overall highest technically rated quote for the Government considering the technical evaluation factors and subfactors. This practice allows for an award to the highest technically rated vendor overall that is also found to have a reasonable price without using trade-o s between price and technical. Quoters will be rated according to the technical factors following a government technical evaluation. Price evaluation of only the highest rated quote proceeds next. In the case there are two or more quotes receiving an equally high rating, the lower priced quote will be evaluated first, followed by the next low (as needed), etc. If the quoter’s price is not determined to be a reasonable price (e.g. fair and reasonable), the quote is rejected and the next highest rated quote is evaluated until award can be made to the highest ranked or rated quote with a fair and reasonable price (see M.01c). Factor 1 will be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation team using the evaluation criteria listed below:

Factor 1 - Technical Subfactor 1 - Technical Approach

a. The Government will evaluate the O eror's proposed Technical Approach to determine the extent which the Quoter's approach demonstrates its knowledge, understanding, and ability to successfully execute SOW requirements. The evaluation will assess the degree to which the Quoter:

1. Demonstrates a technical approach that provides balanced, complete, and integrated treatment of all study requirements.

2. Demonstrates a detailed, time phased schedule reflecting an expeditious and deliberate approach to achieving study objectives with clearly defined entrance and exit criteria and resources for each study phase; and demonstrates objective measurements of progress.

3. Demonstrates an understanding of the types, formats, and sources of data and information required by this study and methods to capture, organize, store, and control the data while making it accessible to all participants.

4. Demonstrates the use of readily available information systems to generate, review, approve, and release work across a geographically dispersed team including the Government and partner nation; and recognizes relevant proprietary and controlled unclassified information applicable to this study and corresponding control approach.

5. Demonstrates possession and ability to apply appropriate analytical tools and techniques to this study.

Factor 1 - Technical Subfactor 2 - Technical Capability

b. The Government will evaluate the Quoter's Technical Capability and proposed subcontractor or consultant utilization (as applicable) to determine the extent to which the Quoter has demonstrated its knowledge, understanding, and ability to successfully execute SOW requirements. The evaluation will assess the degree to which the Quoter:

1. Demonstrates a clear and complete organization structure that provides e icient sharing of information, direction, and status across all program participants including the partner nation and government sponsor.

2. Demonstrates a team with direct, hands-on experience in spaceport operations and logistics, launch-pad integration, aerospace logistics, U.S. Space Force (USSF), National Security Space Launch (NSSL), and/or Rocket Systems Launch Program (RSLP) mission operations and mission assurance practices and launch from foreign locations.

3. Demonstrates successful experience performing spaceport capability assessments, launch facility integration, or international defense aerospace logistics of similar scope and complexity, with a specific focus on USSF mission assurance standards.

c. Supporting Documents. The Government will evaluate the CVs as part of Factor 1, Subfactor 2 “Technical Capability” to determine whether the quoter demonstrates the required skills and qualifications to meet the requirements of the SOW.

d. OCI Disclosure and Analysis. The Government will review Quoter’s submitted responses in accordance with FAR 9.5 and AFFARS 5352.209-9001 Organizational Conflict of Interest, and its Alternates, prior to an award decision, to determine if any conflicts relevant to this RFQ exist for the apparent awardee and whether the mitigation plan (if required) adequately neutralizes or mitigates any identified conflicts. A proposal from a Quoter deemed to have a conflict under FAR 9.5 may be considered non-conforming and susceptible to Government rejection of its complete submission.

Factor 3 – Pricing

e. The Government will evaluate the Quoter’s Factor 3 – Pricing submission, including the

SF1449 form, bid schedule, and applicable provisions and clauses to determine whether all RFQ requirements have been met.

f. The Government will evaluate pricing by adding all extended CLIN pricing to form Quoter's total evaluated price. Total evaluated price must fall within the disclosed magnitude of funding to be considered for award.

g. The Government will evaluate labor rates in Table 1 to determine whether the labor rates proposed are fair and reasonable.

h. The Government will evaluate Table 2 by comparing it with an Independent Government Estimate.

i. Prices, rates, and quoted amounts will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1 to determine if they are balanced, and fair and reasonable. Only a Reasonable Price (RP) quote will be eligible for award.

(End Section M / FAR 52.212-2 addendum)