Attachment 2 - T1 OandI Proposal Instructions.pdf

HQ085022R0002 Attachment 2

National Defense Space Architecture

Tranche 1 Operations and Integration

Proposal Instructions

18 January 2022

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release: distribution unlimited.

Table of Contents Introduction

Submission Instructions

Proposal Format Instructions

Use of Non-Government Advisors

Definitions

Volume I: Executive Summary

Volume II: Program Governance

Program Management

First 100 Days

Subcontractor and Supply Chain Management

Mission Systems Engineering and Integration

Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment Management

Organizational Conflict of Interest

Personnel Résumés

Technical Data and Computer Software Rights Assertions

Volume III: Schedule and Schedule Agility

Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

Schedule Agility

Schedule Agility Scenario

Volume IV: Technical Solution

System Architecture

System Operations Concept (OPSCON)

Facilities Development

SUPERNOVA Development

Development, Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment Tool Suite

Integration and Test

Ground Entry Points (GEP) Acquisition

Radio Frequency (RF) (Ka-Band and S-Band) Antennas

Optical Ground Terminal (OGT)

Cloud vs Stand-alone Trade Analysis

Link 16 Mission Day-In-The-Life

Commercial Data Sheets

Volume V: Past Performance and Experience

Volume VI: Small Business Participation

Volume VII: Cost/Price and Rationale

Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure

Fixed Price Milestone Payments

Cost/Price Narrative

Proposal Pricing Detail

Cost Build Up

Travel, Equipment, Material, and Other Direct Costs

Teammate Proposals

Pricing Data by Contract Line Item Number (CLIN)

Professional Employees Compensation Plan

Introduction

The Offeror shall propose to design, develop and deliver the Tranche 1 (T1) Operations and Integration (O&I) via seven (7) volumes. Specific volumes with associated page limits are detailed below.

Volume I: Executive Summary page count limit is 3 pages.

Volume II: Program Governance page count limit is 10 pages.

Volume III: Schedule and Schedule Agility page count limit is 10 pages of content and unlimited for the IMS file.

Volume IV: Technical Solution page count limit is 30 pages.

Volume V: Past Performance and Experience page count limit is 12 pages.

Volume VI: Small Business Participation page count limit is unlimited.

Volume VII: Cost/Price and Rationale page count limit is unlimited.

Proposals must be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail to support a thorough and effective evaluation. Offerors are CAUTIONED not to simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements. Proposals MUST provide convincing rationale supported by factual, verifiable information that fully demonstrates that the Offeror understands the requirements outlined in the SOW for this acquisition. Proposals must clearly describe how the Offeror intends to fully satisfy these requirements. The Offeror should assume the Government has no prior knowledge of its capabilities and experience and will base its evaluation solely upon the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal except for Past Performance and Small Business.

The Offeror shall provide tailored T1 O&I processes and procedures including stakeholders, teammates, subcontractors, and associate contractors for all inputs.

Submission Instructions

The Space Development Agency (SDA) requests that Offerors submit only electronic proposals.

All Volumes along with any appendices and/or attachments shall be submitted only in .pdf format, except in cases where another format is explicitly required, and must be submitted independently by file as SDA will not accept .zip files. Offerors shall submit their responses via Department of Defense (DoD) Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE): https://safe.apps.mil. Offerors shall submit one (1) original copy of each Volume and appendices and/or attachments to be used for any and all printing (i.e. official copy retention requirements) NO LATER THAN 1200 EDT 24 February 2022, and Volume VII with associated appendices and/or attachments NO LATER THAN 1200 EDT 3 March 2022. Each Volume shall be submitted as a separate .pdf file. Offerors shall submit each copy of their proposal via a separate DoD SAFE submission and all files should be included in a single DoD SAFE submission. Each file submitted must be clearly labeled with the SDA Request for Proposal (RFP) number, prime contractor organization name, prime contractor proposal title (short title recommended), and Volume number and appendix or attachment number (as appropriate). The size limit for each SAFE file transmission is 8192 MB. Proposals submitted shall be appropriately marked in accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.48 – Controlled Unclassified Information, dated March 6, 2020, if CUI is present, or appropriate security classification guide if classified information is present.

For submission of Volumes I – VI, offerors shall request a SAFE Drop-off Request, via an email to osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.hq085022r0002@mail.mil, NO LATER THAN 1200 EDT 17 February 2022. The Offeror shall request a SAFE Drop-off Request regardless of whether or not they have access to DoD SAFE already. The subject line shall be: O and I RFP Submission SAFE Request (m of n) and the Offeror’s organization name, where m is the request number and n is the total number of requests that will be made by the Offeror. If the Offeror’s submission will exceed the DoD size limit, then they shall make the required number of requests to complete their submission. Within the body email, the Offeror shall clearly state the email address to which the Drop-off Request will be sent. The Offeror is free to request read receipts for each Drop-off Request email sent. The Offeror will receive an email with their SAFE Drop-Off Request NLT 1200 EDT 23 February 2022. Note that this email will not come from the email address listed above.

For submission of Volume VII, offerors shall request a SAFE Drop-off Request, via an email to osd.pentagon.ousd-r-e.mbx.hq085022r0002@mail.mil, NO LATER THAN 1200 EDT 24 February 2022. The Offeror shall request a SAFE Drop-off Request regardless of whether or not they have access to DoD SAFE already. The subject line shall be: O and I RFP Submission SAFE Request (m of n) and the Offeror’s organization name, where m is the request number and n is the total number of requests that will be made by the Offeror. If the Offeror’s submission will exceed the DoD size limit, then they shall make the required number of requests to complete their submission. Within the body email, the Offeror shall clearly state the email address to which the Drop-off Request will be sent. The Offeror is free to request read receipts for each Drop-off Request email sent. The Offeror will receive an email with their SAFE Drop-Off Request NLT 1200 EDT 2 March 2022. Note that this email will not come from the email address listed above.

Within the DoD SAFE submission form, the Offeror shall check both the “Encrypt every file” check box and the “Send me an email when each recipient picks up the files” check box. The password shall be sent under separate email to the email address above with the subject line: O and I RFP Submission SAFE Request (m of n) Password and the Offeror’s organization name. The “Short note to the Recipients” field shall clearly identify the Offeror’s organization name, the proposal name, and the number of the submission.

SDA expects Volumes I - VII to be CUI. Should a classified Volume V be required, the Offeror must contact SDA via the email address above for submission instructions. Offerors may also submit a classified addendum to an otherwise CUI Volume V submission. Offerors desiring to submit classified Past Performance attachments must ensure the information is appropriately classified and marked in accordance with the appropriate security classification guidance.

Proposals received after 1200 EDT 24 February 2022 (Volumes I-VI) and 1200 EDT 3 March 2022 (Volume VII) will be considered late and not evaluated. If any part of the submission is late, all parts of the proposal will be removed from consideration. Offerors whose proposals which are considered late will be so informed by the primary contracting officer (PCO) and their proposals will be deleted without any files being opened or read.

Proposal Format Instructions

The font in normal text for all volumes shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 12 pt., while text in tables and figures shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 pt. A table shall consist of at least two columns in every row. Tables that are deemed as attempts to circumvent these text formatting restrictions will be removed from the proposal and not evaluated. All margins (top, bottom, left, and right) shall be no smaller than one (1) inch. No less than single line spacing shall be used for all text in paragraphs, bulleted lists, and tables. All .pdf pages, in all volumes, formatted larger than 8.5 inches X 11 inches shall be counted as two (2) pages. Line numbers shall be applied to all text sections in all volumes and shall be set within the left margin of the page so as not to reduce the usable size of the page. Title pages and tables of contents, tables of figures and/or tables will not count against the page counts of the respective volumes and will not be evaluated for content. Note: Nonconforming proposals may be rejected without review.

Use of Non-Government Advisors

The Offeror is advised that technical and price data submitted to the Government in response to this solicitation may be released to non-Government advisors that have signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) for review and analysis. Any objection to release shall be provided in writing to the Contracting Officer (CO) within ten (10) days of the RFP issuance and shall include a detailed statement of the basis for the objection. The detailed statement shall identify the specific portions of the proposal which the Offeror objects to disclosure to non-Government advisors.

Definitions

Within this Attachment, the following definitions are used:

Prime: The O&I Offeror.

Major Teammate: A member of the Prime's development team with a different

Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code from the prime Offeror, that either accounts for no less than ten (10) percent of the proposed cost and/or the develops one of the following subsystems or functional area:

o SUPERNOVA o Networking and Data Routing o Encryption o RF GEP Integration & Deployment o Optical Ground Terminal (OGT) o Interoperability Testing o Complex Systems Integration o Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment

Additional definitions are provided in Attachment 3 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document.

Volume I: Executive Summary

Volume I shall not exceed three (3) pages. Any pages in excess of this limit, other than those noted below as specifically excluded from the overall page limit, will be removed from the Offeror’s proposal and not evaluated.

The Executive Summary shall contain an overview of the governance and program management approaches, the technical solution, and the Offeror’s past performance.

The Offeror shall identify their program team, including contributions of each major teammate, and shall provide a summary of the past performance of themselves and each major teammate. The Offeror shall include an organization chart depicting their key personnel and major teammates.

The Offeror shall include a schedule of key program milestones.

The Offeror shall include an overview of their system architecture including an Operational Viewpoint (OV)-1 level diagram of the architecture.

Volume II: Program Governance

Volume II shall not exceed ten (10) pages. Any pages in excess of this limit, other than those noted below as specifically excluded from the overall page limit, will be removed from the Offeror’s proposal and not evaluated.

Program Management

The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of the Offeror’s proposed program management processes, procedures, methods, and tools for executing the program on schedule and within the price proposed. The Offeror shall describe how they use these processes, procedures, methods, and tools to manage the life cycle of large, complex systems.

The Offeror shall discuss their program, personnel with experience across the T1 mission areas, organization chart, cost, and risk management approach and their processes and tools for executing the program on schedule and within the price proposed. The Offeror shall discuss collaboration with Government, SV contractors, and other associate contractors. The Offeror shall include a consolidated list of the primary technical, schedule, and cost risks on the project, the planned mitigations, and the approach for managing risks throughout the system life cycle through the period of performance.

The Offeror shall describe its processes for staffing the program with qualified personnel, communicating plans and status to the customer, identifying and managing critical vendors and subcontractors, and controlling costs within a cost plus price environment. The Offeror shall document planned communication with the Government, detailing the purpose, entrance criteria, key accomplishments anticipated, exit criteria, and documentation methodologies for each meeting, review, or key management milestone within the program.

The Offeror shall plan the program using the milestones identified in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document. If the Offeror believes that an alternate review structure (e.g., combining certain reviews) meets the needs of the Government for insight into the design and understanding of challenges and risks at appropriate stages of the development, the Contractor is free to propose it. For each review combined, omitted, or added, the Contractor shall clearly delineate during what remaining review(s) the information traditionally provided shall be discussed.

First 100 Days

The Offeror’s proposal shall specifically identify key activities they intend to perform in the first 100 days to ensure the greatest possible chance of program success. The Offeror shall describe the importance of their selected activities, their approach for execution, and the direct impacts those activities will have in successful initiation and execution of their program scope of work. These activities shall be included in their program plan and shall include the following:

Addressing technical and schedule risks with proactive burn down plans Staffing, by name and by labor category, against critical work packages Subcontracting actions to be executed with whom, by when, and priority rationale Identification of long lead procurement items and their supply chain procurement schedules Travel, including personnel, destination, and purpose Program tailored security processes Integrated architecture and operational concepts definition Establishment of interface working groups and applicable teaming arrangements Any other specific activities the Offeror deems necessary upon initiation to assure program success

This section should be at least 2 pages of the total page limit, and additional details for this topic must be linked in the IMS.

Subcontractor and Supply Chain Management

The Offeror shall address their subcontractor and supply chain management methodologies. The Offeror should describe how they will minimize the impact of fluctuations in supply chain availability and subcontractor deliveries on program execution. The Offeror shall describe long-lead items and impacts on the proposed integrated master schedule. The Offeror shall explain their approach to ensuring supply chain integrity for all hardware, firmware, and software delivered and/or integrated by the Contractor.

The Offeror shall describe, to the extent applicable, foreign participation as subcontractors, hardware/software/firmware supplies, foreign person participation, etc.

Mission Systems Engineering and Integration

The Offeror shall detail their Mission Systems Engineering and Integration processes and methods that will be used to execute the O&I program and how the stakeholders, teammates and subcontractors are integrated into these processes and methods. The Offeror shall clearly identify their approach to mission systems engineering and detail the use of any processes and tools that will be used. The Government expects that the Offeror will utilize Systems Engineering best practices for this and the Government is particularly interested in how these best practices will be applied and tailored to ensure T1 accomplishes the warfighter support and networking missions for which it is being deployed. As part of this, the Offeror shall provide an initial Document Tree for the O&I program and describe their mission-focused process for designing and conducting Trade Studies and Analyses upon Government request. Finally, the Offeror should clearly discuss their processes, methods and tools to maintain mission accomplishment during all aspects of systems integration and test.

Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment Management

The Offeror shall discuss their program, personnel, cost and risk management approaches, process and tools, specifically focused on operations, maintenance, and sustainment. The Offeror shall describe the operations structure, including their expected staffing profiles for teams within the associated facilities and across appropriate functional areas and system phases. The Offeror shall describe their approach to training and maintaining qualified personnel throughout the project period. The Offeror shall describe the organization of their operations team staffing (crew mix and skill sets) to include roles and responsibilities for the different positions, distribution across locations and shifts, and control across classification boundaries. The Offeror shall describe their quarterly sustainment delivery and integration approach. The Offeror shall discuss a sparing philosophy for the program. The Offeror shall describe their personnel, DevSecOps techniques, tools, and approaches for sustaining the GS in accordance with the requirements in Attachment 1

– Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document.

Organizational Conflict of Interest

There is potential organizational conflict of interest (see FAR Subpart 9.5, Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest) due to the nature of separate solicitations and contracts for an integrated Tranche 1 system of systems. Reference PotentialOCI.xlsx within the Bidder’s Library for initial OCI impact assessments. At this time the Government is chiefly concerned about future potential OCI issues between the prime contractor for the T1 Operations & Integration contract and the prime contractor for any T1 space vehicle development contract, such as those for T1 Transport Layer (T1TL). As a part of the proposal, the Offeror shall provide the contracting officer with complete information of previous, potentially impending, or ongoing work that is in any way associated with the contemplated acquisition.

If award is made to the Offeror, the resulting contract may include an organizational conflict of interest limitation applicable to the related Government work, at either a prime contract level, at any subcontract tier, or both. During evaluation of proposals, the Government may also, after discussions with the Offeror and consideration of ways to avoid the conflict of interest, insert a special provision addressing eligibility for future contract awards within the existing tranche.

The organizational conflict of interest clause included in this solicitation may be modified or deleted during negotiations.

The Agency reserves the right to waive an OCI that is in the best interests of the government.

If the Offeror believes that an OCI exists or may exist upon award, then the Offeror shall include an OCI mitigation plan as an appendix to this volume. The OCI mitigation plan will not be counted in the Volume II page limit.

Personnel Résumés

Personnel résumés shall not exceed one (1) page each. The personnel résumés shall be included as attachments to this volume and will not be included in the Volume II page limit.

The Offeror shall identify the key personnel planned to be assigned to this program from the Offeror and major teammates and subcontractors as appropriate. Résumés should be in bullet format and include:

Summary statement highlighting experience and expertise Current role with the Offeror or teammate to include current assignments and programs Planned role within the T1 O&I program

Evidence of applicable mission experience or understanding Education (academic and military, if applicable) Military, Government, or Commercial space-related experience (if any) Anticipated percentage of time to be assigned to this program over what phase/duration Signed statement agreeing to support the SDA T1 O&I program if awarded

Proposed staff members not currently employed by the Offeror may 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 T1 O&I program if awarded.

Résumés shall be included for the key personnel filling the following functions:

Program Manager Project Engineer Chief Engineer Chief Software Engineer Chief Network Engineer GEP Acquisition and Integration Lead Interoperability/Integration and Test Lead

ISSM

Operations Lead Maintenance Lead Engineer

A maximum of 5 additional résumés for key personnel may be included, to include major teammates if applicable.

Technical Data and Computer Software Rights Assertions

The Offeror shall clearly delineate all limitations on data, hardware, and computer software rights for technical data, hardware, or computer software provided by the Offeror and all its teammates, using the format shown in Table 1. It is the Government’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. The Offeror shall clearly identify those elements to be provided with less than Unlimited Rights and identify the rationale for their assertion(s) using the format shown in Table 1. Any item related to the performance of this effort and not contained in Table 1 shall be delivered upon request to the Government, with no less than Government Purpose Rights.

Table 1: Technical and Data Rights Assertion Template

Company Asserting Data Rights

Hardware/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

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

Table 1 shall be included as an attachment to Volume II and will not be counted in the page count. Any associated narrative will be counted in the page limit.

Volume III: Schedule and Schedule Agility

Volume III shall not exceed ten (10) pages. Any pages in excess of this limit, other than those noted below as specifically excluded from the overall page limit, will be removed from the Offeror’s proposal and not evaluated.

Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

The Offeror shall present a milestone-driven IMS designed to meet the Government’s notional milestones provided in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document.

The Offeror should identify major reviews and program milestones separated between baseline and options, including T1TL, T1 Tracking, and T1DES with entrance criteria, key accomplishments, and exit criteria for each milestone, including Giver-Receiver milestones, significant reviews, and integration and test activities. At least two of the pages should be a separable, standalone detailed Gantt chart (or similar illustration) clearly presenting the Offeror’s milestone-driven integrated master schedule. This chart should include external dependencies, integration specific tasks, assumed Government or subcontractor hardware, software, or information deliveries and/or approvals, interoperability tests, demonstrations, reviews, milestones, and/or any other key activities in the Offeror’s proposed program.

The Offeror shall clearly delineate the primary and secondary critical path within their schedule, from contract award through operations and sustainment, and any additional critical paths deemed appropriate to justify their ability to deliver the proposed Operation Centers, SUPERNOVA, and Ground Entry Points on time and on cost. The Offeror should discuss the critical path analysis used to determine the primary and secondary critical paths. The Offeror should discuss their approach to managing progress against the baseline schedule.

The Offeror shall also identify the top schedule risks in executing the O&I effort, and outline their mitigation approaches to ensure on time delivery. The Offeror shall include their plans to minimize the risk associated with working with multiple contractors to ensure the Ground Segment is ready prior to the Ground Readiness Review (GRR). The Offeror shall include a schedule risk assessment and margin evaluation.

The Offeror shall deliver their complete IMS in Microsoft Project native format as well as .pdf format in conjunction with this volume. The complete IMS shall include schedule details down to at least Level 3 of the contract work breakdown structure (CWBS). The delivered IMS files (Microsoft Project and .pdf format) will not count against the Volume III page limit, however, the Gantt chart is included in the page limit.

Schedule Agility

The Offeror shall describe their approach to managing dynamic schedules with varying levels of task order definitization for T1 NDSA design, development, integration, and operations, including but not limited to lines of effort from the Offeror, T1TL contractors, BMC3 contractor, Host installations, T1 Tracking contractor(s), and the T1DES contractor(s). The Offeror shall present their approach to identifying and addressing evolving schedule risks as T1 contract activities progress and describe how their approach to addressing schedule risks maximizes the probability of delivering the T1 NDSA on schedule.

Schedule Agility Scenario

As an example of the Offeror’s overall approach to schedule agility in practice, the Offeror shall include a response to the following scenario: the Offeror is informed by the Government at T1 System PDR that the Southern Tier Operations Center at Redstone Arsenal will only accommodate two total vendor NOVA systems (at any classification level). The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of all possible Course of Actions (COA) for changes to the technical baseline as a result, benefits to maintaining schedule to achieve on-time GRR for each COA, and the impacts to overall mission performance and/or operations for each COA. The Offeror shall provide a recommended COA and rationale or basis of recommendation for the selected COA. The Offeror should demonstrate how its tools and processes were used to assess these COAs. Please note that this scenario is hypothetical, constructed for the purposes of this proposal to understand how the Offeror will use its team, tools, and techniques to maintain schedule and on-time system delivery in a complex, dynamic environment.

Volume IV: Technical Solution

Volume IV shall not exceed thirty (30) pages. Any pages in excess of this limit, other than those noted below as specifically excluded from the overall page limit, will be removed from the Offeror’s proposal and not evaluated.

System Architecture

The Offeror shall present the system architecture subsystem including system, and subsystem functional flow block diagrams for operating the NDSA Ground Operations Centers in compliance with the requirements as presented in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document. The Offeror shall identify required interfaces and interface mechanisms, both internal to SDA and to external customers, the Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment (OMS) Tool Suite, and internal and external services. The Offeror shall define what functions the ground segment and mission operations are assumed to provide. The Offeror shall provide a description of the cybersecurity services solutions of the SUPERNOVA ground system.

System Operations Concept (OPSCON)

The Offeror shall describe the personnel, techniques, procedures, and heritage (substantiated by past performance) that will be used for conducting the operations and maintenance of the Operation Centers and GEPs. The Offeror shall include a two (2) page detailed architecture diagram for the entire T1 system and a three (3) page day-in-the-life (DITL) narrative during the “Walk” mission phase. The diagram shall clearly delineate the major system components and their functions. The diagram should indicate and specify any interfaces between any of the system components and/or personnel. The diagram should indicate key system requirements and how they are allocated to system components. The diagram should indicate which of these system components are assumed as Government-Furnished Equipment, Commercial-Off-The-Shelf products acquired by the Offeror, Offeror in-house tools or products adapted for use in T1, or new development items. For any of the non-GFE, the diagram should indicate the level of data rights asserted. For any Offeror in-house tools or new development items, the Offeror should indicate if it is provided or developed by the Offeror or by a teammate and, if so, which teammate. The accompanying narrative shall describe an operational DITL during the “Walk” mission phase, from the receipt of a service request from a tactical user to confirmed satisfaction of the service request. The narrative shall describe all tasks or activities required to successfully execute, which system components or personnel are performing those tasks or activities, and description of the interactions between them. The narrative shall indicate any assumed Government approvals required throughout the process.

Facilities Development

The Offeror shall define the facilities that will be used to support operations, the design, and configuration of the OCs to allow for 24/7 autonomous operations. The Offeror shall include their architecture diagrams and physical layout of the two operation centers: operations floor, equipment (hardware and software), and the network connections required. The Offeror shall provide their analysis of existing electrical, UPS, generator, HVAC, and associated infrastructure capacity to meet their design. The Offeror should clearly provide detailed recommendations for utilities modification to meet mission requirements in the event existing capability is not sufficient. The Offeror shall clearly identify the ability of their facilities to support operations at the multiple classification levels. Of particular interest to SDA is the Offeror’s approach to establish and maintain new security accreditations for the Southern Tier OC. The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of how they will obtain and maintain proper physical and logical security protocols to ensure only authorized personnel have access to the facility, system hardware and software components. The Offeror should describe the systems and approach for access control and inventory control.

SUPERNOVA Development

The Offeror shall describe their technical approach for developing and delivering their SUPERNOVA system that meets all applicable requirements in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document. The Offeror shall include their SUPERNOVA system architecture and design diagrams to include a functional block diagram showing the products and services being used within their solution. The Offeror shall provide a software design including Computer Software Configuration Item (CSCI) allocation, interface definitions and interconnections, maturity of existing solutions and new/reuse percentages of the chosen software solutions. The Offeror shall describe their approach for implementing applications and services compatible with Enterprise Ground Services (EGS) products and services into their SUPERNOVA solution. The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of how their proposed SUPERNOVA implementation and development processes are flexible and extensible to support additional planning and scheduling systems in the future. The Offeror shall present their considerations for their data storage implementation (on-site, cloud-based or hybrid solution).

Development, Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment Tool Suite

The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of their Development, Operations, Maintenance and Sustainment tools including the following:

Tool maturity in similar environments Native interface capabilities Native user interfaces and automation capabilities Native scalability Native interoperability within an Enterprise system Licensing requirements

The Offeror shall describe in detail what operations and enterprise management tools will be used, and how they will be used, to perform Network Management of the NEBULA network during the Walk Phase. In the description of which tools will be used, the Offeror shall provide the name of the tools, a description of the tools’ functions, identify the source of the tools (COTS procurement, existing Offeror or Offeror teammate tool, Offeror or Offeror teammate tool to be developed during the program, or assumed GFE), experience using these tools for recent and relevant applications, and the process by which the Offeror selected these tools and any alternative tools considered. In the description of how the tools will be used, the Offeror shall describe in detail how it will implement NEBULA protocols and policies, be used to monitor and manage network traffic and congestion, which features are automated, which interfaces are machine-to-machine and which are human-to-machine, and what information is required in an external user request for Transport T1 services to enable and effectively manage the network using these tools.

The Offeror should clearly identify any mission constraints or limitations of the proposed Operations and Maintenance tools. The Offeror shall describe the enterprise system Common Operational Picture (COP) approach. The Offeror shall describe their use of Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software, tools, and licensing.

Integration and Test

The Offeror should describe their complete hardware, software test and integration approaches, methodologies, platform performance requirements, verification coverage, documentation, and staffing. The Offeror shall present their approach/method for implementing DevSecOps, providing an environment to allow for continuous development, integration, testing, and deployment of capabilities. The Offeror should discuss their methods, software suite, and tools for integrating / interfacing with SV NOVAs, BMC3, and the GEPs. The Offeror shall provide a test and integration design including CSCI allocation, interface definitions and interconnections, maturity of existing solutions and new/reuse percentages of the chosen software solutions. The Offeror should define the verification and interoperability tests and tools that they plan to perform and use and the benefit that those tests and tools will bring to SDA. Of particular interest to SDA is the Offeror’s approach to conducting tests and demonstrations in concert with the SV contractors prior to launch and during early orbit operations and checkout. Throughout the discussion of their test activities, Offerors should clearly identify manual, automated, live, virtual, and constructive tests and demonstrations, if applicable, and any elements expected to be provided by the Government to facilitate completion of their verification program.

Ground Entry Points (GEP) Acquisition

The Offeror shall describe their technical approach for GEP acquisition and delivering solutions that meet all GEP requirements in Attachment 1 – Statement of Work and Technical Requirements Document. For each GEP below, the Offeror shall include, but not be limited to: a discussion of hardware, software, control, data transfer capability and/or limitations, environmental and power requirements. The Offeror shall address any needed test and certification requirements and plans and must include schedule and risk assessments for subject completion. Reference the GEP Design Assumptions within the Bidder’s Library, SDA-TM-006_GEPDesignAssumptions.pptx. The Offeror shall provide link budget analyses to substantiate the compliance of their proposed GEP solutions with applicable system requirements. Link budget analyses will not be subject to the page limit for this volume.

Radio Frequency (RF) (Ka-Band and S-Band) Antennas

The Offeror shall provide their technical approach for procuring, installing, testing, and delivering ten radio frequency (RF) (eight (8) Ka-Band and two (2) S-Band) antennas into operations, at multiple locations. The Offeror shall identify the number of terminals, frequency of operation, bandwidth, anticipated power requirements, anticipated data rate, bit error rate, and any other parameters key to mission performance. The Offeror should identify the antenna configurations, field of regard, and deployment mechanisms for each of the antenna systems. The Offeror shall include a description of the space to ground communications solution to accomplish checkout and testing of the antennas. The Offeror should provide an estimate of the duty cycle required of each ground antenna to support the T1 Space Segment. The Offeror shall describe their approach for designing, procuring, testing, and delivering RF Ground Support Equipment for compatibility testing with SV contractors to meet the timeline set forth in SKCT_CTR_1. The Offeror shall describe the events and dependencies in their critical path to meet the technical objectives set forth in GEP_CTR_1 to support on-orbit test and operations. The Offeror shall describe their approach to establish and execute a maintenance and sustainment plan for the RF GEPs.

Optical Ground Terminal (OGT)

The Offeror shall provide their technical approach for designing, procuring, installing, testing, and delivering one OGT to Kirtland AFB, NM. The Offeror may reference the OGT documentation provided in the Bidder’s Library. The Offeror should identify the anticipated environmental, power requirements, data rate, bit error rate, and any other parameters considered key by the Offeror. The Offeror shall identify the compliance of their current system with the SDA OCT Standard v3.0, detail any non-compliant components of their design, and describe the path to full compliance for those components. The Offeror shall describe their approach to establish and execute a maintenance and sustainment plan for the OGTs.

Cloud vs Stand-alone Trade Analysis

The Offeror shall provide the Government with their trade-analyses for a cloud-based or hybrid system vs a stand-alone system, listing key advantages and disadvantages for their proposed system configuration including cost, schedule, and technical factors (Cloud/Hybrid vs Stand-alone). This analysis should describe the considerations and conclusions for the proposed design and meeting the stated requirements. While the Government is not dictating a cloud-based vs stand-alone approach, it is requiring this trade-analyses in order to gain the necessary insight into the Offeror’s approach and rationale for their proposed design. The Offeror shall provide a data synchronization overview between OCs, impacts of process distribution on latency and critical mission operations, and schedule and cost impacts associated with the design over the PoP. This analysis is limited to three (3) pages and shall be included as an attachment to this volume and will not be counted in the Volume IV page limit. Any pages beyond the 3-page attachment limit will be removed from the volume and will not be evaluated.

Link 16 Mission Day-In-The-Life

The Offeror shall provide the Government a description of servicing a notional 100 nm radius (200 nm diameter) Link-16 coverage area around the center of Riyadh Saudi Arabia using the following coordinates: 24.7 N, 46,7 E. The time period for servicing will be a continuous eight (8) hour mission from 22:00 Zulu 22 Nov 2024 to 06:00 Zulu 23 Nov 2024. All three T1 Transport Layer constellations (128 SVs) can be utilized for this coverage area and the Offeror shall assume that each SV has a body mounted antenna, and all antennas are identical. The Offeror shall also assume that an OPTASKLINK message has been provided which includes the Network Data Loads and crypto approved by the CENTCOM JICO.

The Offeror shall demonstrate the day-in-the-life exemplar in theatre, enabled by the NEBULA concept. The Offeror’s should describe their proposed approach to achieve and maintain persistent regional Link 16 access with no less than a 10-degree elevation angle coverage. Considering that each Link-16 receiver has different antenna characteristics (assume 200 nautical mile diameter coverage at Nadir) and thus could be negatively impacted by angles of reception, more than one SV coverage is encouraged. The Offeror’s day in the life exemplar must address how a singular SV or multiple SVs will be used to service this specific area. The Offeror must present a product which identifies which SVs were used during this period, and length of coverage for the eight-hour period. This would include an explanation of how JREAP-C is used between specific SVs to allow passing of and how the proposed approach will accomplish key mission objectives associated with Link 16. As mentioned, the Offeror shall assume that an OPTASKLINK message is received but the Offeror must explain how the OPTASKLINK is handled by the NEBULA, NOVA and SUPERNOVA. Offerors should specifically address data interchange with external organizations.

The use of activity diagrams is encouraged. This analysis is limited to five (5) pages and shall be included as an attachment to this volume and will not be counted in the Volume IV page limit.

Any pages beyond the 5-page attachment limit will be removed from the volume and will not be evaluated.

Commercial Data Sheets

The Offeror may submit commercial data sheets as a list of up to ten (10) hyperlinks to publicly available downloadable .pdf data sheets on the Offeror’s website or their subcontractor’s websites.

Each downloadable .pdf file shall be no more than two (2) pages, resulting in a cumulative maximum of twenty (20) pages of commercial data sheets. Links will be accessed in the order provided in the proposal and only the first twenty (20) pages will be evaluated. Any pages beyond the twenty (20) page limit will be discarded.

Volume V: Past Performance and Experience

Volume V shall not exceed twelve (12) pages inclusive of all unclassified or classified pages.

Any pages in excess of this limit, other than those noted below as specifically excluded from the overall page limit, will be removed from the Offeror’s proposal and not evaluated.

The Offeror should introduce the current and past performance citations, clearly stating why they have chosen the efforts and how they best prove their ability to perform the proposed workscope.

They should include experience in complex systems integration, developing an OC, experience in relevant satellite constellation monitoring, control, and mission planning, and experience working with multiple SV providers. Each citation should provide specific, measurable validation of the Offeror’s rationale and document successful current and past performance directly relevant to the current solicitation. The Government expects direct correlation between the current and past performance citations and the résumés submitted in Volume II – Program Governance.

The Offeror shall include information on recent/current programs that are similar in magnitude, scope, and complexity to this program. These submissions should clearly demonstrate the ability of the Offeror and its teammates to satisfy the totality of the T1 O&I requirements. The minimum set of major teammates is defined in the introduction to this Attachment. All submissions shall have a period of performance within three (3) years from the proposal due date.

For each submitted citation, the Offeror shall identify:

Customer (Name, phone, email, affiliation) Scope and relevance to the T1 O&I requirements Place of performance, period of performance, contract/agreement type Bid cost/price, currently invoiced cost/price, Final price/Estimate at Completion Specific rationale for effort selection and detailed justification of relevance

The Offeror is highly encouraged to use key graphics to convey important elements of their current and past performance. High level graphical descriptions of the operational concept (e.g., Department of Defense Architecture Framework’s (DoDAF’s) OV-1) depicting numbers and locations of OCs, 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 Government in conjunction with interviews which may be conducted with the customers named in each citation. Project citations shall not exceed four (4) pages each and should stand alone by project.

Separately from the above examples, each Offeror shall submit past performance information to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of FAR Subpart 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan including the extent to which applicable goals and other small business performance objectives/requirements were met for the contracts submitted to demonstrate compliance. For past performance efforts where minimum quantitative requirements and/or goals were not met, explanation of efforts to resolve the issue(s) must be provided. In sum, the response to this paragraph shall not exceed two (2) pages in addition to the 12 pages allocated to this section.

Current and Past Performance citations shall only include work that has been completed or is ongoing. If a citation indicates expected capability, such as a program that has yet to be launched, only the work completed to date will be evaluated.

Offerors are hereby notified that SDA intends to survey Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) and to conduct interviews with customers identified in Volume V. Information obtained via either of these methods will be included in Offeror evaluations per the criteria in Attachment 3 – Evaluation Factors for Award of this RFP.

Volume VI: Small Business Participation

There is no page limit for Volume VI. Content in Volume VI will only be evaluated in support of the Small Business Utilization Factor and will not be evaluated for other technical content.

The Offeror shall submit a Small Business Utilization Plan (SBUP) and/or Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SPCD) (see Attachment 4 – SBPCD and FAR 52.219-9 Alt II) detailing their anticipated small business inclusion for this procurement to include selection, integration and evaluation processes. While SDA will not mandate specific percentage goals by individual small business type, the Offeror must meet the Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) of small business participation which is five (5) percent of the total proposed contract value (to include options). The Offeror 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 Government expects that significant engineering and technical elements of this procurement will be contributed by other than traditional large aerospace and defense contractors, including but not limited to new and emerging small business.

Volume VII: Cost/Price and Rationale

There is no page limit for Volume VII. This volume consists of relevant information describing the Offeror's proposed cost/price for meeting solicitation requirements.

The Offeror's proposal shall contain sufficient factual information to establish the realism, reasonableness, and completeness of the proposed cost, see Attachment 3 – Evaluation Factors for Award. The Offeror shall detail their assumptions, basis of estimates, and rationale supporting their proposed cost and pricing. This information will be used to evaluate the risks associated with the proposed technical solution, schedule, and price.

Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure

The Government anticipates awarding the Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) as shown in Table

2. All CLINs shall be included for a compliant proposal.

Table 2: CLIN Definitions

CLIN Description Details Contract Type

CLIN Start/Stop

Development and Integration (primary

CLIN)

Design, development, integration and delivery of two (2) integrated operations centers with development, test and integration capabilities and external interface connectivity supporting T1 Transport Layer capability.

CPAF

Qty: 1 Unit: Lot Base Fee:

0% Award Fee: 12%

26 May 2022 (ATP) / GRR + 6 months (31 Jan 25)

Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment (base period)

All Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment activities for the NDSA GS. Supporting all NDSA capability layers.

(OCSUST_CTR_1)

FFP

Qty: 11 Unit:

Quarterly

30 Dec 23 / 30 Sep 2026

3-5

Maintenance, and Sustainment Options (CLIN for each of up to 3 option years)

All Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment activities for the GS for the years 3-5. Supporting all NDSA capability layers.

(OCSUST_CTR_1)

FFP

1…