03 Section L_A0002_20090601.doc

SECTION L: REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

GPS Advanced Control Segment (OCX)

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

SECTION L

for

FA8807-09-R-0003

29 April 2009

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 General Instructions 2.0 Proposal Submission and Electronic Format 3.0 Program Overview 4.0 Volume I - Executive Summary 5.0 Volume II –Mission Capability 5.1 General Instructions 5.2 Instructions for the Mission Capability Volume 5.2.1 Subfactor 1: Program Management 5.2.2 Subfactor 2: Software & Architecture 5.2.3 Subfactor 3: Systems Engineering, Integration, and Test (SEI&T) 5.2.4 Attachment MC1 to Volume II: Integrated Master Schedule 5.2.5 Attachment MC2 to Volume II: Software Development Plan and Associated Processes 5.2.6 Attachment MC3 to Volume II: Software Architecture Description 5.2.7 Attachment MC4 to Volume II: SS-CS-800 5.2.8 Attachment MC5 to Volume II: Analyses of Offeror Changes to Compliance Documents 5.2.9 Attachment MC6 to Volume II: Resumes of Key Personnel 5.2.10 Attachment MC7 to Volume II: Government Property, Base Support, Rent Free Non Interference (RFNI) Use and Information Needs 5.2.11 Attachment MC8 to Volume II: System Engineering Management Plan ….………31 5.2.12 Attachment MC9 to Volume II: Integrated Support Plan 5.2.13 Attachment MC10 to Volume II: Program Improvement Action Plan 5.2.14 Attachment MC11 to Volume II: DIACAP Implementation Plan 5.2.15 Attachment MC12 to Volume II: Capability Insertion Program Plan 5.2.16 Attachment MC13 to Volume II: Technology Readiness Assessment 5.2.17 Attachment MC14 to Volume II: PPIP 5.2.18 Attachment MC15 to Volume II: Operational Concept Description 5.2.19 Attachment MC16 to Volume II: MCEM Demonstration Narrative

5.2.20 Attachment MC17 to Volume II: Test Plan

5.2.21 Attachment MC18 to Volume II: Transition Plan

5.2.22 Attachment MC19 to Volume II: PSICA

6.0 Volume III Factor 2 - Cost/Price Risk 7.0 Volume IV – Factor 3 - Past Performance 8.0 Volume V Factor 4 - Cost/Price ...……...………………………………………… 9.0 Volume VI - Contract Documentation………………………………………...………60 9.1 Model Contract/Representations and Certifications 9.2 Section B, Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices 9.3 Section E, Inspection and Acceptance 9.4 Section G, Contract Administration Data 9.5 Section H, Special Contract Requirements 9.6 Section I, Contract Clauses 9.7 Section J, List of Documents, Exhibits & Attachments………………………………62 9.8 Section K, Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors 9.9 Attachments to the Model Contract 9.9.1 Exhibit A to Volume VI: Contract Data Requirements List 9.9.2 Attachment 1 to Volume VI: Statement of Work 9.9.3 Attachment 2 to Volume VI: Comp & Ref Document List & Tailoring 9.9.4 Attachment 3 to Volume VI: Contract Work Breakdown Structure 9.9.5 Attachment 4 to Volume VI: Integrated Master Plan 9.9.6 Attachment 5 to Volume VI: Award Fee Plan 9.9.7 Attachment 6 to Volume VI: DD Form 254(Contract Security Classification 9.9.8 Attachment 7 to Volume VI: Government Property (GP) and Base Support List (BSL) 9.9.9 Attachment 8 to Volume VI: Rights in Data (Including Technical Data, Computer Software, & Computer Software Documentation) 9.9.10 Attachment 9 to Volume VI: Small Business Subcontracting Plan 9.9.11 Attachment 10 to Volume VI: Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan 9.9.12 Attachment 11 to Volume VI: Special Studies 9.9.13 Attachment 12 to Volume VI: Hazardous Materials List 9.9.14 Attachment 13 to Volume VI: System Modifications 9.9.15 Attachment 14 to Volume VI: Capability Insertion Program……………………….75

9.9.16 Attachment 15 to Volume VI: Performance & Schedule Incentive Plan...….……...75 9.10 Appendices to Volume VI 9.10.1 Appendix A to Volume VI: Rationale for Proposed FOIA Redactions 9.10.2 Appendix B to Volume VI: Additional Supporting Information

9.10.3 Appendix C to Volume VI: Approved Master Subcontracting Plan or Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan (If Applicable)………………………………...79

1.0 General Instructions

a. The Offeror’s proposal shall include all data and information requested in Section L and shall be submitted in accordance with these instructions. In developing the proposal, the Offeror shall comply with all the requirements contained in the RFP. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the RFP may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. The Government intends to award without discussions so Offerors are expected to submit the highest quality proposals in the initial submittal.

b. The Offeror’s proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. The Offeror shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s facilities and experience, and will make its evaluation based solely on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal. Should discussions be required, Offerors shall provide a place, near San Pedro, CA, to hold face-to-face meetings between the Government and the Offeror. The Offeror will videotape each meeting and provide copies of the video daily to the Government.

c. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and shall not be submitted.

d. The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of RFP. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of Volume VI of the Offeror’s proposal that the offer is valid for 270 calendar days.

e. In accordance with FAR 4.8, Government Contract Files, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

f. The PCO will promptly notify the Offeror of any decision to exclude it from the competitive range, whereupon the Offeror may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. The PCO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. An Offeror desiring a debriefing must make its request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

g. Acronyms used in Sections L and M of this RFP are defined in Section L, Annex A: Acronyms.

1.1 Points of Contact

The PCO, Ms. Sara E. Lawlyes, is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns to the PCO at (310) 653-3451 (prior to proposal receipt), (310) 653-8509 (after proposal receipt), or Sara.Lawlyes@losangeles.af.mil. On all email correspondence, courtesy copy the lead Contract Specialist, Ms. Yvette L. Wilson at Yvette.Wilson@losangeles.af.mil.

1.2 Discrepancies, Errors, and Omissions

If an Offeror believes the requirements in these instructions lack clarity or contain an error, omission, discrepancy, or are unsound, the Offeror shall immediately contact the PCO in writing with supporting rationale. Government responses will be placed in the OCX Bidder’s Library and posted to the Internet for access by all Offerors. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

1.3 Considerations of Alternate Proposals

Alternate proposals will not be considered.

1.4 Bidders’ Library

A Bidders’ Library has been established containing documents to assist in preparation of the proposal. Access to the library can be granted after the user registers at the website which is located at https://gps.losangeles.af.mil/gpslibrary/login.asp. The point of contact for issues with access to the Bidders’ Library is Capt Moses Uribarri at (310) 653-3944 or Moses.Uribarri@losangeles.af.mil.

2.0 Proposal Submission and Electronic Format

2.1 Proposal Delivery

a. The Offeror’s proposal, including both electronic and paper copies, must be received not later than 20 June 2009 except the response in Appendix A of Volume VI, Rationale for Proposed FOIA Redactions, described in L-9.10.1. The Offeror shall submit Appendix A of Volume VI no later than seven calendar days later. Proposals received after cutoff date and time (1630 hours Pacific Daylight Saving Time) will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition. Early delivery of proposals shall be coordinated with the PCO. The delivery address for proposals is: GPSW/PK (Attn: Ms. Sara E. Lawlyes), 2400 S. Pacific Ave. Bldg 410, San Pedro CA 90731. Personal delivery of proposals shall be coordinated 24 hours in advance of the due date/time with the PCO to ensure timely submission. Offerors shall also deliver a copy of the proposal to their cognizant ACO in either hard copy or soft copy in accordance with the ACO’s preference.

b. Classified information is required in the response to this solicitation. Electronic copies shall be provided on a separate CD conforming to the requirements of the DD Form 254 provided as Attachment 6 to this solicitation. Transmission of hard and electronic copies of classified information, to the Collateral Secret level, shall be accomplished in accordance with DoD 5220.22-M, NISPOM. Collateral Secret information shall be submitted between 0900 and 1400 hours Pacific Daylight Saving Time, on the day proposals are due. Deliver to GPSW, Bldg 271 basement, Los Angeles AFB, El Segundo, CA 90245. The inner envelope shall be marked “To attention of PCO Ms. Sara Lawlyes.” Contact the GPS Program Security Office 24 hours prior to delivery, via secure communications at (310) 653-4331, 653-4190 or 653-4337, to coordinate transmission of all SAP and SCI.

c. Where classified information is required in the response, it shall be provided as a classified annex to the proposal. Each entry in the classified annex shall reference the proposal volume, page number, and paragraph number to which it applies. Similarly, a reference shall be placed in the unclassified volume where the classified insert applies, giving the page and paragraph numbers within the addendum where it can be found. Each page in a classified annex shall count against the page count for the volume to which it applies. See paragraph 2.5 for binding instructions.

2.2 Submission of Electronic Proposals

a. Two soft copies of the proposal shall be delivered on CD-ROMs. The CDs shall be labeled with the Offeror’s name, the submission date and the volume number(s) and title(s) contained therein. If more than one CD is required, use the minimum number required. All CDs shall be placed in plastic sleeves in one binder separate from the other proposal volumes.

b. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be in a format readable by Adobe Acrobat 9.0 (with “Select” and “Copy” enabled to allow for text and graphics transfer), Microsoft (MS) Word 2003, MS Excel 2003, Crystal Ball 5.0, @Risk 4.1.4, ACEIT 7.1, SEER-SEM 7.3 with PPMC (PPMC is optional), MS-Project 2003 Pro, MS-Power Point 2003, DOORS ver. 8, and Internet Explorer 7.0. It is critical that all Excel spreadsheets and ACEIT models be supplied in “active” format with all formula and data sources included and fully functional so that the Government may use them during the cost and price evaluation. Each electronic file shall be clearly marked to show the proposal volume number, solicitation number, and Offeror’s name. Hypertext links shall be used to facilitate navigation within the document. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including exhibits, annexes, and attachments, if any. Each volume shall be in a different CD-ROM directory. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program (e.g., WINZIP) must be included. The proposal shall include the native file (e.g., .DOC) and .PDF versions of all textual material.

c. In the event of a conflict between the hardcopy and softcopy, the softcopy will take precedence over the hardcopy. In the event of a conflict between the native file and .PDF versions, the native file version will take precedence over the .PDF version.

2.3 Proposal Content

a. The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in Table 1, Proposal Organization, set forth below. A complete proposal will consist of five separate volumes (Volume III is reserved), all of which shall be within the required page limits specified in Table 1. The format of the proposed volumes shall correlate directly with the instructions in Section L. The proposal must provide a direct correlation to the specific questions and requirements given in each instruction.

b. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and (for paper copies) will be returned to the Offeror as soon as practical. Page limitations do not apply to title pages, tables of contents, list of figures, list of abbreviations, glossaries, or indexes. A cross-reference matrix shall not be counted in the page limits. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Number all pages.

c. The Offeror shall use a common paragraph numbering system among the tasking statements in the SOW, CWBS, IMP and IMS that is consistent with the GSOW and WBS.

d. The PCO, at the request of any Offeror, will allow early “uploading” of sample proposal information on the AF servers used for source selection. This information will be checked for compatibility with the source selection facilities servers, workstations and software. All information in this “test run” will be erased when the test is completed.

Table 1 - Proposal Organization

2.4 Page Size and Format

a. Page size (for text sections of the proposal) shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 10-point Verdana font or 12-point Times New Roman font. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. For further information on electronic proposals, please see paragraph 2.2 above.

b. Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans. These displays shall be clear, legible and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as two pages for each side used. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics, but not for pages of text. All segments of the document that are primarily text shall use single-line spacing and no smaller than 10-point Verdana font or 12-point Times New Roman font. Text inside graphics, matrices, spreadsheets, focus boxes, and tables shall use single-line spacing and shall be no less than 8-point Verdana font or 10-point Times New Roman font. Otherwise, text may be used sparingly to describe the depicted pictures or graphics and shall use single-line spacing and be no smaller than 8-point Verdana font or 10-point Times New Roman font.

2.5 Binding, Labeling, Tables of Contents, and Acronym List

a. Each hardcopy of the proposal must be separately bound in a D-3-ring loose-leaf binder, which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. Do not overload binders and do not use staples. Each binder shall have a cover, spine, and title page clearly marked with the Offeror name, volume number, binder identifier, copy number, and solicitation identification. All classified document binders shall have applicable security designators and be colored according to the applicable security guide and conforming to the DD Form 254 provided in Attachment 6 of this solicitation. Unclassified binders can be any color other than red and shall contain applicable security designators. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition, and 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

b. More than one MC attachment may be combined in sequential order in a single binder. However, Offerors are encouraged to use separate binders for individual Volume II MC Attachments when such binding will facilitate Government review (e.g., Attachment MC1). Offerors must identify the MC Attachment numbers contained in the binder in addition to the information required in paragraph 2.5a above.

c. Each volume shall include a table of contents and acronym list that will not count against the page count identified in Table 1, Proposal Organization.

2.6 Cross Referencing

To the greatest extent possible, Volume II shall cross reference to applicable MC attachments or Volume VI attachments. The electronic copy of Volume II shall contain hyperlinks to all such cross-references. All other information required for proposal evaluation that is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. The Offeror shall use a common paragraph numbering and outline system for the volumes and attachments of the proposal.

2.7 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

2.8 Mission Capability Attachments

a. Section L refers to Attachments MC1 through MC19, which will be used as reference material to assist in the evaluation of Mission Capability Subfactors and must support the Offeror’s proposed approach. Throughout the Mission Capability instructions and criteria, parenthetical references are used to depict MC Attachments the Government anticipates the Offeror will use to substantiate its proposal. However, the Offeror may refer to additional MC attachment(s) to substantiate its responses. Attachment MC16 may be used to substantiate any subfactor response, provided supporting material is identified. The instructions for several MC Attachments require the Offeror to provide the content of a specific item as described in Exhibit A, CDRL of Volume VI. Although an Offeror who has previously submitted documents to the GPSW that address the requirements of an MC Attachment is encouraged to submit relevant material from that same document with revisions indicated by change bars, use of previously submitted documentation is not required. Except as otherwise indicated in the RFP, an Offeror’s format is acceptable.

b. Use of second tier references in any MC Attachment is not acceptable. For example, statements such as the following are unacceptable: “Specific processes at our subcontractor will be in accordance with Subcontractor Process Plan XYX” or “This process will be done using our corporate process XYZ”. Instead, the Offeror must extract the applicable process information from those documents and include it in the MC Attachments. This information shall also be included in IMP narratives when appropriate.

c. Attachment 2, Compliance and Reference Documents List and Tailoring of Volume VI identifies certain CDRL data items that will become compliance documents upon Government approval. The Offeror will provide several of these data items as MC Attachments in its proposal. If the Government deems one or more of the following MC Attachments approvable during source selection, it will approve them and add them as a compliance document in the Offeror’s proposed Attachment 2:

MC2 (SDP),

MC4 (SS-CS-800),

MC8 (SEMP),

MC14 (PPIP),

and MC18 (Transition Plan).

3.0 Program Overview

The Government has a need for a GPS Advanced Control Segment (OCX) with a flexible architecture that can rapidly adapt to the changing needs of today’s user. Given the current dynamic military operational environment, our warfighters need more capability than today’s GPS Control Segment can provide.

In particular, OCX must meet today’s information assurance requirements to ensure protection of GPS data critical to determining warfighter position, velocity, and time; monitor and control new M-code encrypted GPS signal to ensure the battlefield advantage of American warfighters and civil signals (L1C, L2C, and L5); and connect GPS data to the Global Information Grid so that users around the globe have immediate access to GPS data and constellation status.

OCX is urgently needed not only to enable new user capabilities, but to provide command and control of the GPS IIIA SV scheduled to launch in May 2014. As a result, the Government seeks an offering that has high confidence in meeting the schedule identified in Section F of this RFP, and delivers capability on time for launch of the first GPS IIIA SV.

OCX also supports civil users who are employing GPS in innovative ways for transportation, surveying, financial transactions, and many other activities. As a result, the Government also seeks a proposal that meets PSICA requirements in Blocks 1.0 and 2.0 that will be able to meet Effectivity 40 requirements in the SS-CS-800 if required to do so, and provides a cost-effective sustainment approach including effective trainers and simulators.

Finally, the Government seeks a Program Management; Software and Architecture; and System Engineering, Integration and Test approach that provides a flexible architecture for adding new capabilities, solid requirements management process to address new requirements without impacting delivery schedules, and confidence to operators and maintainers that the proposed approach will not adversely impact the system before, during, and after Transition to Operations.

4.0 Volume I - Executive Summary

The purpose of the Executive Summary Volume is to provide a complete overview of the Offeror’s proposal. Volume is not evaluated or scored. Any summary material presented in Volume shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal. Do not include cost information in this Volume other than the total proposed cost. A letter of transmittal or executive cover letter shall be included in Volume. This cover letter shall not be counted against the page limitations of the Volume. Letter shall not exceed two pages in length. Executive Summary Volume shall include the following sections:

4.1 Offeror’s Proposed Team

The Offeror shall briefly identify the Offeror’s team including the prime, subcontractors, and IDT locations. The Offeror shall identify the parent Cost Center for the project (i.e., the business center where project costs are collected and reported).

4.2 The OCX Mission and Vision

The Offeror shall describe the proposed implementation plan for the OCX program. The Offeror shall provide a concise narrative summary of the entire proposal, including significant risks, highlights of key or unique features, and total proposed cost. The Offeror shall highlight plans to develop OCX capabilities that meet the tasks in the GSOW and the requirements of the Government-supplied SS-CS-800. Discuss any capabilities from Effectivities beyond 17 that the Offeror’s architecture allows to be added to the OCX with minimum cost for rework of previously delivered elements of the system.

4.3 Organization and Management

The Offeror shall describe its organization, management, roles, and responsibilities. The Offeror shall indicate agreements that have been executed (e.g., subcontracts, interdivisional efforts) to allow work to begin at contract award. The Offeror shall provide an organization chart that shows prime, subcontractors, and IDT and includes personnel key to the success of the OCX program. The Offeror shall provide another organization chart that depicts how the Offeror’s program fits within the company, clearly identifies the entire chain of command from the Offeror’s Chief Executive Officer to the Program Manager, and includes key names, titles, division names and locations. The Offeror shall discuss the Offeror’s proposed relationship with the GPSW. The Offeror shall summarize the controls and processes to be used to manage cost, schedule, risk, and technical compliance.

4.4 Program Risk

The Offeror shall describe its top ten program risks and discuss the mitigation strategies for each risk.

4.5 Volume IA - Master Table of Contents and Cross Reference Matrix

The Offeror shall provide a master table of contents for the entire proposal and shall clearly and concisely describe the physical structure of the proposal to include the presentation structure, the interrelationships between volumes and sections or subsections of the overall proposal, and where material may be found for each major element of the evaluation as defined in Section L of this RFP. In addition, the Offeror shall provide a tutorial to explain the process of navigating through the proposal, and any limitations on use of hyperlinks. The format of this discussion is at the discretion of the Offeror. In addition, the Offeror shall provide a cross-reference matrix for the entire proposal containing, at a minimum, the items shown in Table 2, Cross Reference Matrix. The Offeror shall provide Volume IA in a separate binder from Volume I.

Table 2 - Cross Reference Matrix (Sample)

5.0 Volume II – Mission Capability

In this volume, the Offeror shall describe its proposed approach for meeting the solicitation requirements addressed by each Mission Capability subfactor, as well as the risks to schedule, cost, or performance associated with this approach. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's proposed approach against the Mission Capability and risk criteria in Section M. The Offeror's Mission Capability volume must be consistent with its Cost/Price volume and the associated Cost/Price risk.

5.1 General Instructions

a. The Mission Capability Volume shall be specific and complete. By submitting a proposal, the Offeror is representing that the proposed system will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. Using the instructions outlined below, provide the actual methodology that would be used to address the criteria of these subfactors. The Mission Capability Volume shall be organized according to the outline for Volume II in Section L-2.3, Table 1.

b. The Government cannot assess as a “strength” any aspect of an Offeror’s proposal associated with any Mission Capability subfactor that does not satisfy all elements of the definition of “Strength” in Section M-5.1.1.a.(1). In justifying a proposed strength, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to identify a specific requirement, describe how that requirement is being “exceeded” in objective, quantifiable or qualifiable terms, describe why exceeding the requirement is beneficial to the Government and either explain the extent to which the requirement (i) will be included in the contract or (ii) is inherent in the Offeror’s process. In order to demonstrate that a significant aspect of the Offeror’s proposal is “inherent in the Offeror’s process,” when discussing that process in its proposal the Offeror shall identify the process using appropriate bibliographical references (e.g., “XYZ Company Corporate Process No. 02-245 Rev A, dated 5 January 2002”). It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that any aspect of its proposal that it believes to be a “Strength” satisfies all elements listed in Section M-5.1.1.a.(1).

c. Wherever applicable, the Offeror shall describe how the activities and results of the Phase A contracts, including the MCEM effort, are applied to satisfy the GPS OCX requirements of this solicitation and reduce risk to the Phase B program.

5.2 Instructions for the Mission Capability Volume

The indicated information, at a minimum, shall be provided for the following subfactors set forth below. Throughout this volume, provide references to Volume VI (e.g., Offeror-proposed SS-CS-800, SOW, IMP, CWBS, CDRL) that reflect the proposed work with cross references to the IMS to show the accompanying schedule.

5.2.1 Subfactor 1: Program Management

5.2.1.1 Organization and Staffing (MC1, MC6)

a. The Offeror shall describe the participating companies proposed to execute OCX. Include all prime and subcontractors and Interdivisional Transfers (IDTs) whose total cost is greater than $50 million for the period of performance of this contract or who is the single source in the industry for the product or component to be delivered, or whose performance falls on the critical path as reflected in the Offeror’s IMS. Describe the relationships, roles and responsibilities of the participants.

b. The Offeror shall provide a program-specific IPT-based organizational chart that starts at the level of the Offeror’s Chief Executive Officer and clearly identifies the entire chain of command down to the IPT lead level, specifying each party’s name, title, and division name and location. The Offeror shall describe where all of its team members fit in the organization and identify the interdependencies, key relationships, and communication channels, and any key relationships with associate contractors. In addition, the Offeror shall describe its management approach for OCX (including the authority, accountability and responsibility of the Offeror’s Program Manager to execute that program) identify the decision-making flow within the team, and identify the Cost Center for the project (e.g., the business center where project costs are collected and reported). The Offeror shall describe the Government’s role in the Offeror’s IPT structure.

c. The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of the key technical and management personnel proposed in H009 including responsibilities, accountabilities, and authorities. The Offeror shall provide resumes of key personnel in Attachment MC6 that reflects experience needed to successfully execute the program. The Offeror shall provide a staffing plan that identifies the personnel levels (prime, subcontractors, and IDTs) needed to support OCX throughout development, transition, and sustainment of Blocks 1.0 and 2.0, including a rationale for that proposed staffing plan. The staffing plan must be consistent with the proposed bases of estimates and staffing profile included in Volume V and must provide sufficient resources to execute the proposed program. The Offeror shall describe how it will ramp-up staffing to perform the proposed program on the schedule proposed in the IMS. The Offeror shall identify all development facilities required to execute this program and describe how their use supports program requirements.

5.2.1.2 Management Approach (MC1, MC5, MC7)

a. The Offeror shall describe an overall management approach for OCX program execution.

b. The Offeror shall describe how the Offeror’s proposed SOW, IMP, CWBS, and IMS support the OCX delivery schedule. The Offeror shall explain how and when products from subcontractors, other prime contractor divisions, associate contractors (including GPS IIIA and AEP/LADO associate contractors), the Government (e.g., property deliveries and approvals), and suppliers will be required to support on-time delivery.

c. The Offeror shall describe the tools and processes proposed to manage performance, cost, and schedule. The Offeror shall discuss the frequency of use, intended utility, heritage, and benefit of each tool, specifically addressing the relationship between the IMS, EVMS, and other proposed tools.

d. The Offeror shall describe the technical and administrative management of prime, subcontractors, and IDTs. The Offeror shall identify special management controls proposed for critical path or higher risk subcontractor or interdivisional efforts. The Offeror shall describe how management controls allow the Offeror to maintain oversight and provide insight to the Government.

e. The Offeror shall describe its communications and collaboration strategy that illustrates how information will be shared with its subcontractors and vendors, other divisions of the prime contractor, associate contractors, and the Government.

f. The Offeror shall describe the management and technical boards (e.g., ERB, CCB, ROMB, SRB) it proposes to use to manage the technical and program baseline. Describe the roles and responsibilities of each participant in these boards, including the prime contractor and subcontractors or other divisions of the prime contractor whose total cost is greater than $50 million for the period of performance of this contract or who is the single source in the industry for the product or component to be delivered, or whose performance falls on the critical path as reflected in the Offeror’s IMS, and the Government.

g. The Offeror shall describe how its proposed Volume VI, Attachment 8 will meet the Government’s minimum needs as described in Section L-9.9.9 and will result in an executable OCX program. In addition, the Offeror shall describe the analysis it conducted (including all assumptions made) to determine that the quantity of proposed seats associated with the licenses the Offeror will deliver to the Government listed in its completed Attachment 8, Table 2, Column 4, will be sufficient for the Government to successfully execute the OCX program, and is consistent with the Offeror’s proposed architecture. The quantities proposed shall include all persons (e.g., Government personnel, support services contractors, prime hardware/software development, and production manufacturers) described in Attachment 8.c.(2)(ii) for that license.

h. The Offeror shall describe its dependencies on the GP and BSL proposed in Volume VI, Attachment 7 and RFNI and Government-Provided Information proposed in Attachment MC7, to successfully execute its proposal. The Offeror shall identify the Government effort that is required to execute its program. The requested items and support shall appear in the Offeror’s IMS and be consistent with the SOW and IMP.

5.2.1.3 Small Business Participation

The Offeror shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in Volume VI, Attachment 9 in accordance with the instructions in Section L-9.9.10.

5.2.1.4 Program Management Risk (MC1, MC5, MC7, MC8)

a. The Offeror shall provide an assessment of its top ten program management risks to delivery of OCX Blocks 1.0 and 2.0 in accordance with Section F, including its ability to execute its proposed approach to CLINs 0100, 0200, 0300, 0350, 0600, and 0710 consistent with the funding profile for FY09-FY11 provided in Table 3, below. The Offeror shall designate one of the ten risks as risk of “Government asset and information availability” to meet the proposed IMS.

b. The Offeror shall provide a risk mitigation and “burn down” plan that is reflected in the IMP and IMS. The Offeror shall provide an analysis of prime, subcontractor, IDT, and Government responsibilities required effort to mitigate each risk.

c. The Offeror shall indicate the metrics to be collected and used to track progress towards burning down each risk.

Table 3 Projected OCX Funding

(Total Cost to the Government including All Fees, Profit, and Incentives)

5.2.2 Subfactor 2: Software & Architecture

This Subfactor evaluates the overall architecture and design of the OCX. While OCX is primarily a software intensive system, the Government must understand the entire segment design to perform its evaluation, and ensure that the contractor meets requirements within available funding and schedule.

5.2.2.1 OCX Segment Architecture & Design

a. The Offeror shall describe its segment architecture including hardware, software, quantities, locations, external and internal interfaces.

b. The Offeror shall describe its baseline design that implements the OCX segment architecture.

c. The Offeror shall describe its planned content for Block 1.0 and Block 2.0 and map to Effectivities in the redlined SS-CS-800.

5.2.2.2 Software Products (MC2, MC3)

a. The Offeror shall describe quantitatively and qualitatively all new software products and any products (including MCEM) it plans to reuse in Block 1.0, Block 2.0, or in Blocks 1.0 and 2.0 and how such products contribute to the OCX system in terms of development effort, integration effort, architectural flexibility, supportability, and maturity of technical solution. The Offeror shall describe how both new and reused software products incorporated into OCX will meet the standards of SMC-S-012 “Software Development Standard for Space Systems”.

b. For any reused software product the Offeror describes in response to Section L-5.2.2.2.a. above, the Offeror shall provide the following information: (1) name, (2)version, (3) vendor, (4) function and application of reused software product, (5) rationale for selection, (6) alternatives, (7) product customer base description, (8) supportability approach, and (9) heritage of the reused products in terms of defects per KSLOC over the product’s operational history. Utilizing the definitions in the Offeror’s IMP narrative, “Software Development Definition and Treatment of New vs. Reuse”, the Offeror shall describe the anticipated degree of modifications required for each reuse product.

5.2.2.3 Human Systems Integration (MC2, MC3, MC8, MC9, MC15)

a. The Offeror shall describe its approach (e.g., user involvement, prototyping) for integrating HSI process and products into the OCX design, including hardware, software, logistics, training, facilities and operational procedures, as described in the SDP, SAD, SEMP, ISP, and Operational Concept Description.

b. The Offeror shall describe its methodology for utilizing HSI-related products and activities to support automation and to optimize staffing profiles (number of personnel and skill level of personnel) for OCX operations and maintenance.

5.2.2.4 Software Architecture (MC3, MC16, MC17)

The Offeror shall describe how its:

a. Proposed software architecture satisfies SS-CS-800 requirements for modularity, flexibility, scalability, and expandability, and data rights proposed in Volume VI, Attachment 8 meet the Government’s minimum needs as described in this RFP. Justify the selection of proprietary software over non-proprietary software.

b. Proposed software architecture supports integration of new, reused, NDI, GOTS/COTS software, or any combination thereof, into OCX.

c. Proposed software architecture facilitates the addition of new requirements (i.e., Effectivities 17-40).

d. Proposed evolutionary approach would respond to a “software technical refresh” modification. Provide an example of the effort required to refresh a significant software element of the delivered OCX Block 2.0 that occurs two years after Block 2.0 becomes operational. Describe how the design, manufacture, and fielding of the modification improves reliability, maintainability, availability, and operability.

5.2.2.5 Processes (MC1, MC2, MC10)

a. The Offeror shall describe its overall software engineering approach in the SDP in MC2. The Offeror shall describe how the processes proposed in MC2 will be effectively implemented throughout the program’s lifecycle for the following CMMI® Process Areas: Requirements Management, Verification, and Project Monitoring and Control. The Offeror shall describe how software reuse is incorporated throughout the software development life-cycle.

b. The Offeror shall provide a PIAP that describes action plans resulting from SCAMPI appraisal results and any other Organizational or Program appraisals. The Offeror shall include the action plans in the IMP, IMS, and SOW. The Offeror shall describe any PIAP risks and mitigation plans for completing these action plans.

5.2.2.6 Software Risk (MC1, MC8, MC16)

a. The Offeror shall provide an assessment of its top ten software risks to OCX Blocks 1.0 and 2.0. The Offeror shall include risks in areas such as requirements definition, software reuse, software development and test environments, schedule adherence, integration, testing, transition to operations, and transition to maintenance with supporting rationale.

b. The Offeror shall provide a risk mitigation and “burn down” plan that is reflected in the IMP and IMS. The Offeror shall provide an analysis of prime, subcontractor, IDT, and Government responsibilities required effort to mitigate each risk.

c. The Offeror shall indicate the metrics to be collected and used to track progress towards burning down each risk.

5.2.2.7 Net-Centricity (MC2, MC3)

The Offeror shall describe its processes, architecture strategy, and technical design solutions that it will employ to:

a. Conform to the DoD Net-Centric data strategy, as defined by DoDD 8320.02, Data Sharing in a Net-Centric Department of Defense, dated 23 April 2007, and its planned use of DoD enterprise metadata for semantic interoperability.

b. Separate application functionality from infrastructure in compliance with the net-centric scalability and extensibility requirements of SS-CS-800.

c. Prepare for the OCX Net-Ready KPP certification processes and criteria for infrastructure development, in accordance with the Interoperability and Supportability Assessor’s Checklist, with rationale, in the Bidder’s Library, and support future compliance with the OCX Net-Centricity requirements in Effectivity 30 with rationale for any compliance areas that cannot be met.

5.2.3 Subfactor 3: Systems Engineering, Integration, and Test

5.2.3.1 Systems Engineering Approach (MC8, MC17)

The Offeror shall describe how its approach for conducting systems engineering is consistent with the GPS Enterprise TEMP, and is in compliance with the GPSW SEP and SMC-S-001.

5.2.3.2 Integrated Logistics Support (MC1, MC9)

a. The Offeror shall describe its approach for conducting the supportability analyses required to satisfy OCX RMA requirements.

b. The Offeror shall describe its approach for assisting the Government and collaborating with OCX stakeholders in the development of a PBL sustainment strategy. The Offeror shall identify its OCX sustainment cost drivers and its process to address these cost drivers to continuously reduce life-cycle costs. The Offeror shall also describe how its approach adheres to the development system assurance processes (e.g., according to the standards in the SDP) and provides technical advisors to support transition and sustainment of the OCX system during Interim Contractor Support of each OCX Block.

c. The Offeror shall propose a Public Private Partnership strategy with organic candidate depots.

d. The Offeror shall propose an approach to transitioning all logistics elements within the OCX system from development to sustainment for Blocks 1.0 and 2.0 consistent with Section F and the Offeror’s proposed IMS. The Offeror shall also discuss the extent to which the data rights it proposes in Attachment 8 of Volume VI meet the Government’s minimum needs described in this RFP during such transitions from development to sustainment.

e. The Offeror shall describe its approach to support Level I and II Software Maintenance within a sustainment environment. Clearly describe the differences between Level I and Level II Software Maintenance. Include in the discussion how the approaches adhere to the same system assurance processes as in development (e.g., according to the standards of the SDP), and maintain a high state of OCX operational readiness. Provide a work plan for Level I and Level II Software Maintenance that assumes the Government exercises all the hours in H032 for year 1 and the contractor performs the work described in SOW paragraphs identified in the descriptive data for CLINs 2501 and 2601. Include (1) a description of the work to be performed, (2) maintenance crew size, (3) number of shifts and shift duration, (4) crew skill level, (5) estimated material usage, (6) sparing process, (7) concept of support to all OCX sites, and (8) types of expected travel and material.

f. The Offeror shall describe its approach to support Level I and II Hardware Maintenance within a sustainment environment as directed by the Government. Clearly describe the differences between Level I and Level II Hardware Maintenance. Include in the discussion how the approaches adhere to the same system assurance processes as in development (e.g., according to the standards of the SDP), and maintain a high state of OCX operational readiness. Provide a work plan for Level I and Level II Hardware Maintenance that assumes the Government exercises all the hours in H033 for year 1 and the contractor performs the work described in SOW paragraphs identified in the descriptive data for CLINs 2701 and 2801. Include (1) a description of the work to be performed, (2) maintenance crew size, (3) number of shifts and shift duration, (4) crew skill level, (5) estimated material usage, (6) sparing process, (7) concept of support to all OCX sites, and (8) types of expected travel and material.

g. The Offeror shall describe its approach to providing technical order support and maintenance.

h. The Offeror shall describe its approach to providing Interim Contractor Support. Provide a work plan that assumes the Government exercises all the hours in H030 for CLIN 2000 and the contractor performs the work described in SOW paragraphs identified in the descriptive data for CLIN 2000. Include (1) a description of the work to be performed, (2) maintenance crew size, (3) number of shifts and shift duration, (4) crew skill level, (5) estimated material usage, (6) sparing process, (7) concept of support to all OCX sites, and (8) types of expected travel and material.

5.2.3.3 Transition to Operations (MC1, MC18)

a. The Offeror shall describe in detail its proposed Control Segment transition plan for transitioning current operations to OCX Block 1.0 and from OCX Block 1.0 to OCX Block 2.0 to achieve RTO as defined in the SOW for each transition event, including, but not limited to, (1) processes (e.g., action item identification and resolution, test and transition schedule, problem report identification and resolution, working groups and integrated product teams), (2) transition of facilities, (3) equipment, (4) remote sites, (5) security, (6) information assurance, (7) communications, (8) CRYPTO, (9) resource planning/scheduling, (10) training systems, (11) data rights (as proposed in Volume VI, Attachment 8), (12) simulation certification, (13) technical order validation/verification, (14) operations and maintenance suitability, (15) operations and maintenance readiness (e.g., maintenance training, spares), (16) transition tools, (17) strategies, and (18) contingencies. The Offeror’s plan shall be consistent with its proposed IMS, IMP, and SOW.

b. The Offeror shall describe in its proposed plan the approach for not impacting GPS operations and the end users while transitioning from AEP/LADO to OCX Block 1.0 and from OCX Block 1.0 to OCX Block 2.0. Discuss the capability to fall back to the previous increment at any time after start of transition.

c. The Offeror shall describe its approach to providing Transition Support. Provide a work plan that assumes the Government exercises all the hours in H031 for CLIN 2300 and the contractor performs…