26Nov2019_Consolidated_Industry_Day_Comments.pdf

Topic Comment/Question Government Response Past Performance Recommended that the Government include USG Space Launch missions for AF Strategic Systems in Table 6 Past Performance Relevancy Rating. This would be consistent with launch activity categories specified in AFSPCI 13-610.

Government will evaluate AFSPCI 13-610. Suggest using the language from Phase 2. Could contractor's performing ballistic missile work perform the SE&I- 2 contract? ASK ECL LEADERSHIP: 1) Do we want to give potential bidders past performance credit for ballistics expertise?

Past Performance How did you come up with 40% subcontractor past performance? The government will correct the RFP documentation to reflect the correct number for subcontractor past performance, which is 20%.

Past Performance We recommend the Government add a new category of Highly Relevant to Section M - Evaluation Criteria, Table 6 Past Performance Relevancy between Relevant and Very Relevant. This distinction can be used to define the full range of Past Performance as a Prime/Subcontractor and clarify the scope, magnitude, and complexity relating to National Security Space Launch (NSSL).

The Government does not intend to deviate from the DoD Source Selection procedures with regards to the general categories of relevancy.

Past Performance If a subcontractor was doing more than 40% of the work, do they have to submit past performance? If 40% is in error, please let us know the correct number as soon as possible.

The government will correct the RFP documentation to reflect the correct number for subcontractor past performance, which is 20%. Subcontractors who are proposed to perform 20% or more of the proposed effort must submit past performance.

Past Performance What type of past performance would you look for from the small businesses?

Section M, paragraph 2.4.2.2 Relevance describes the past performance relevance the government desires, regardless of business size.

L-4 Past Performance Attachment L-4, Past Performance Information states: "(NOTE: If the company or division performing this effort is different than the offeror or the relevance of this effort to the instant acquisition is impacted by any company/corporate organizational change, note those changes.

Refer to the 'Organizational Structure Change History' you provided as part of your Past Performance Volume)." Attachment 12, Section 5, Volume III - Past Performance does not reference a requirement for an Organizational Structure Change History. Please advise.

The Government is currently evaluating consistent communication across all documents and its attachments.

Incentive Plan Have you considered Quarterly or Semi – Annual evaluations?

Contractor preference is quarterly.

The Government has determined that annual evaluations accurately meet its intent.

Incentive Plan Would you consider adjusting the 100 percent retention rates for Key Personnel taking into account BLS labor statistics for the industry and region? 100% is tough no matter what the metric is

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel:

1. Disability or death

2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Plan 1. KTR: Clarification on 100% Key Personnel.

a. KTR: There are a lot of Key Personnel on this contract. Did you mean critical personnel? Standard of zero incentive fee earned if the 100% metric is not met is very tough. We suggest maybe staggering based on turn over or allowing a replacement within 2 weeks exception.

2. KTR: Define Retention. Does it take into account voluntary attrition or is retention across the board.

3. KTR: When are we evaluated on staff levels?

1. The Government's Performance Incentive plan is correct: 100% Key Personnel. 1a.

The Government's intention is to have key personnel at or below 10% of the total positions.

The Government will not stagger the Key Personnel, but has included exclusions that will not affect the retention rate. 2. Retention is defined in within the Performance Incentive Plan. 3. At the end of the evaluation period, all attrition that occurred within the evaluation period will be evaluated

Incentive Plan We recommend that higher Incentive Fee be in place. 10% rather than 7% while also retaining the current fixed fee

The Government has determined that 7% is appropriate for this type of contract.

Incentive Plan Are your retention percentages based on anything like BLS? That's very high for key personnel. It is almost an unachievable goal. Can we replace with a deputy and not get penalized?

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 90% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel:

1. Disability or death 2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Plan 1. The Incentive Fee allocation creates a lot risk on the KTR, specifically Data Spills and Retention

The Government wants to place a heavy emphasis on the importance of limiting and eliminating data spills and breaches. However, there is now a tiered approach to the grading scale.

Incentive Plan KTR: We are concerned that the risk is too high for us to bid on. We think you should focus on performance. The penalty should scale with the program impact. Please take an outcome approach. Attrition as is unreasonable. Give us more positive incentives. The current incentive forces us to lock people into positions.

The Government has included a tiered scale to the data spill area and has included updated language to both the key and non-key areas.

Incentive Plan The current language doesn’t define who accepts the innovation. It also does not define acceptance. What is considered an innovation? Do creative ways of keeping retention rates high count as an innovation?

The Government defines innovation as any efforts which significantly improves a process, methodology, or staffing mechanism that results in reduction to cost or schedule or enhances performance.

Incentive Plan The Incentive Plan defines timely replacement as no longer than 2 weeks after vacancy. If a position is filled within the 2 week timely period, is this position counted as filled or turned over in the retention calculation?

If Key Personnel: if filled within two weeks, it will be considered turnover. If Non-Key Personnel, this would not be considered turnover.

Incentive Plan Can fee associated with Innovation be evaluated on other than a pass/fail basis? The Government is not evaluating innovation on a pass/fail basis; it is a tiered approach.

Incentive Plan What kind of partner is the USG looking for? Capt Cunningham advised that the USG is looking for the contractor to provide innovation.

The Government is looking for a contractor who can provide successful SE&I support.

Innovation and efficiency are key to attaining success in an evolving launch environment.

Incentive Plan If the innovation provides some sort of risk will this negatively impact the company? All approaches will be considered with the associated risk and resulting benefits in mind.

Incentive Plan Data Protection and Security Breeches (Para 7.1 A/B).

We believe the methods used to incentivize contactors are unfair and unrealistic in terms of expected performance in the categories listed in the Objective Performance Incentive Plan.

We recommend the government revisit the incentive plan and determine a graded scale to this criteria that defines different levels of impact to mission execution of the data spill or security breech.

The Government has included a tiered scale for data spills and security breeches.

Incentive Plan The retention rates for Key Personnel listed in the Objective Performance Incentive Plan are very unrealistic based on real world industry levels in Los Angeles and all supported locations.

We recommend the government use an incentive strategy that is focused on incentivizing contractor performance based on elements that are under our control, such as timely recruiting and replacement, rather than retention.

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel:

1. Disability or death 2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Plan We believe that this requirement is not relevant to SE&I support. We recommend the government remove this criteria in its entirety from the Objective Performance Incentive Plan.

The Government wants to place a heavy emphasis on the importance of limiting and eliminating data spills and breaches. However, there is now a tiered approach to the grading scale.

Incentive Plan Will the Government consider modifying the Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) to provide staggered levels for the key personnel retention area to more formally consider timely and non-timely replacement (e.g., 0% - turnover not replaced within 2 weeks, 50% if replaced within 2 weeks, 100% for no KP turnover)?

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel:

1. Disability or death

2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Plan "Staffing levels for purpose of incentive calculations will be based on contractor proposed staffing matrix." This assumes that the contact, as awarded, will exactly match the officer's proposal. In the event the Government adjusts scope or labor mix as part of the award, will the Government establish a new baseline for incentive measurement?

If a new baseline is required to be established, there will be a negotiated agreement for any change to the proposed staffing matrix.

Incentive Plan Staffing levels for purpose of incentive calculations will be based on contractor proposed staffing matrix. As this is potentially a 10 year contract, will the Government allow the Contractor to establish a new baseline incentive fee purposes as authorized scope is adjusted?

If a new baseline is required to be established, there will be a negotiated agreement for any change to the proposed staffing matrix.

Incentive Plan This plan allows only 2 weeks to replace staff after vacancy. To obtain fully qualified personnel, the advertise/interview/offer/hire process if highly likely to exceed the 2 week allowance. Will the Government consider revising this requirement to allow for at least 30 days to replace staff?

The Government intends to incentive above and beyond the normal turn over and turn around rates. The Government has changed the requirement for non-key personnel retention to 95% to account for some attrition.

Incentive Plan Based on the current Incentive Plan, 100% Key personnel retention is required to earn 1.5% of the overall 7% pool. Less than 100% retention results in a 0% award. According to the plan:

"The retention calculation for Non-Key Personnel does not consider timely replacements as turnover. Timely replacement is defined as a period no longer than 2 weeks after vacancy."

Will the Government consider revising the requirement to also include timely replacement for Key Personnel with fully qualified replacements as meeting the criteria for the 1.5% award?

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel:

1. Disability or death

2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Plan Customers will be surveyed to identify innovative methods, products or outcomes. Suggest establishing a similar conduit or mechanism for the contractor to identify potential innovations for consideration by the government.

The Government does not intend to establish a process for the contractor. The contractor will have the opportunity to identify potential innovations for consideration by the Government customers who will be surveyed at the end of every period of performance.

Incentive Plan 1. Would the Government consider evaluating the incentive quarterly or semi-annually versus annually? 2. If the answer to #1 is no, would the Government consider prorating the evaluations that are pass fail such as the Key personnel retention?

1: The Government will evaluate once a year, at the end of each option. 2: The entire period of performance will be evaluated and not portions of it.

Incentive Plan While every effort will be made to limit turnover of personnel, some level of attrition is unavoidable.

Will the customer consider aligning retention rates to industry and regional trends as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics? Also, the PWS Performance Thresholds and Incentive Plan for management of key personnel are contradictory. Recommend changing the evaluation criteria in the incentive plan to reflect the PWS performance thresholds as follows:

7.2 Base Year Staffing Stability

The performance incentive for this section shall be earned by maintaining qualified staff to meet contractual requirements, providing communicative and capable management to oversee activities in a competent and professional manner and directing subcontractors and consultants to meet or exceed contractual requirements. The maximum performance incentive that can be earned in this section is 4% out of the 7% reserved.

1) Given ongoing missions, it is imperative the contractor staff is available to fulfill requirements quickly after contract award. The contractor shall meet the following criteria to be eligible to earn the performance incentive in the "FOC Performance" area. FOC is defined as day 31 from ATP.

Note: staffing level will be calculated as a percentage of the positions in the contractor proposed staffing matrix (Attachment 8, Staffing Plan to the contract).

The Government intends to incentivize performance that is above and beyond the average or industry standard. The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in IFP. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel: 1. Disability or death

2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Fee Plan PWS Performance Thresholds and Incentive Plan for management of key personnel are contradictory. Recommend changing the evaluation criteria in the incentive plan to reflect the PWS performance thresholds as follows:

7.4.2 Option Year Staffing Stability

The performance incentive for this section shall be earned by maintaining qualified staff to meet contractual requirements, providing communicative and capable management to oversee activities in a competent and professional manner and directing subcontractors and consultants to meet or exceed contractual requirements. The maximum performance incentive that can be earned in this section is 4% out of the 7% reserved.

All personnel shall have qualifications and experience equivalent to that in contractor’s proposed staffing matrix (Attachment 8, Staffing Plan to the contract) in order to be considered for the performance incentive unless COR and PCO have in writing exempted/relaxed the requirement for certain positions. The retention calculation for Personnel does not consider timely replacements as turnover. Timely replacement is defined as a period no longer than 30 days after vacancy. The PCO will be the final decision authority for considering exigent circumstances on a case-by-case basis. Exigent circumstances do not include turnover due to other employment opportunities. However, turnover due to employee development will be exempted from the calculation with PCO written concurrence.

The Government will keep the 100% language for key personnel, and reduce to 95% for non key personnel in the Performance Incentive Plan. However, for key personnel, there will be language that will exclude the following from calculation of retention rate for Key personnel: 1. Disability or death

2. Planned employee development and rotations that are informed to the government at least 60 calendar days in advance, and equivalent replacement provided within no more than 5 business days.

Incentive Fee Plan Please provide the government’s definition for innovation. Will the government provide an objective determination for the evaluation of innovation? CMMI Maturity Level 5 defines innovation as a multi-stage process whereby an organization transforms ideas into new or significantly improved products, processes, services (including staffing), or business models that have a measurable positive impact over a period of time and enable the organization to remain relevant and successful.

Distinction between new ideas (innovation) and significantly improved ideas (improvements) should be made. Award Fee type contracts are better suited for evaluating innovation as determination of fee is based solely on the subjective determination of performance. Recommend the PCO validate offerors innovation plan in order to receive a performance incentive award for innovation.

Definition of Innovation: The Government defines innovation as any effort which significantly improves a process, methodology, or staffing mechanism that results in reduction to cost, schedule, or enhances performance.

The Government will not have an award fee on this contract and will not review or validate innovation plans.

Incentive Fee Plan Innovation Incentive. The Government has clearly emphasized the importance of innovation and continuous contractor performance. Will the Government consider including the requirement for an Innovation Plan as an additional standalone evaluate factor? An example of the Section L Subfactor: The offeror would submit an Innovation Plan (in contractor format) and would discuss the contractor’s approach to establishing continuous improvements, value stream(s), process areas to be managed and monitored, and an overall process improvement methodology. The offeror would also identify unique methods and tools (i.e. software and hardware) and how these tools will be used in execution of this contract. An example of the Section M Evaluation requirements: The Government would evaluate the offeror’s identification and approach to implementing the innovation processes required and improvement thereof. In addition, the Government would evaluate the offeror’s current level and use of methods and tools (both software and hardware) and how these tools will be applied to improve and sustain contract efficiency with an emphasis on overall SE&I performance and mission assurance.

The Government will not be evaluating an Innovation Plan as part of this solicitation.

Incentive Plan Can the contractor submit innovations for consideration in addition to the Government survey? Also, the number per period of 5 innovations seems unrealistic depending on the definition of "innovation" (see comment #20). We suggest three levels: >2 significant innovations or >3 improvements = 1.5% of incentive,1 significant innovation or 2 improvements = 0.75% of incentive, 1 improvement = 0.25% of incentive, 0 significant innovation or 0 improvements = 0% of incentive.

The Government will update the Incentive Plan to include a requesting contractor submission that will be included in the government survey for validation by the Government customers.

Based on the Government's definition of innovation, 5 innovations in a period of performance is achievable and the government will not be implementing the suggested levels.

Incentive Plan Will the government evaluate innovations that relate to staffing stability (i.e. Incentive Plan Section 7.2) in addition to customer satisfaction (i.e.

Incentive Plan Section 7.3)?

Yes, The Government will evaluate innovations relating to staffing stability as long as they meet the Government's definition of innovation.

Incentive Plan

Requiring that "no launch service provider proprietary data is released in violation of any non-disclosure agreements" is vague. Recommend reference the overarching NDA incorporated into this contract.

The Government will change the statement to read as follows: "The Contractor shall ensure that no controlled technical information or Contractor attributional/proprietary information (e.g. Launch Service Contractors’ information) is compromised in violation of DFARS 252.204-7008, 252.204-7009, 252.204-7012 or the SE&I-2 Contractor Nondisclosure Agreements or Associate Contractor Agreements. Compromising controlled technical information or Contractor attributional/proprietary information can potentially cause litigations and expose the US Government to liabilities."

Incentive Plan This section states “Zero spillage of any NSSL data," which could be for spillage that resulted in no harm to the Government. Recommend revising to "Zero spillage of any NSSL data resulting in harm to the Government"

The Government intends to have a tiered approach to data breach area of the incentive plan.

Incentive Plan Recommend revising to "100% Key Personnel Staffed - …" The Government believes the requirement as stated meets the Government's intent.

Incentive Plan Recommend revising retention percentages as follows: A) At least 90% retention – 1.50% of the performance incentive pool; B) At least 87% retention – 1.25% of the performance incentive pool; C) At least 85% retention – 0.75% of the performance incentive pool; D) Less than 80% retention – 0% of the performance incentive pool. All incentive fee is achievable regardless of the retention rate if performance or mission is not impacted.

The Government will reduce the performance requirement for non-key personnel to 95%.

Incentive Plan This section states “The PCO will have unilateral authority to determine if a mission partner’s complaint is valid.” Recommend allowing the Contractor to respond to complaints and given the opportunity to address the issue.

It is standard practice that the contractor would work with their respective Government counter parts to address issues before they become documented as a formal complaint.

Incentive Plan Insert the following bolded text: "This plan establishes SMC/ECL’s performance incentives for the Systems Engineering & Integration-2 (SE&I-2) contractor (hereafter referred to as "the Contractor" or "SE&I 2 Contractor."

Accepted. The Government will update the recommended language in the incentive plan.

Incentive Plan Recommend revising the language to read: "The criteria for each option year may change by bilateral agreement and the Government may provide the revised Incentive Plan prior to each option exercise.

SMC/ECL has the unilateral authority to change the incentive criteria prior to the exercise and award of an option period. The decision to revise the incentive criteria shall not be subject to the Disputes Clause or the Contract Disputes Act."

Reject

Incentive Plan This provision incentivizes weak intrusion detection and forensic capabilities. Highly recommend removing or rethinking 7.1 to incentivize the right behavior.

The Government is incentivizing the contractor to eliminate data breaches and data spillages. The contractor is still held to the requirements of DFAR 252.204-7009 and 252.204-7012 to report and safeguard information.

Incentive Plan This provision will have a chilling effect on information sharing and it discourages employees from reporting accidental data spillages. Highly recommend removing or rethinking 7.1 to incentivize the right behavior.

The Government intends to have a tiered approach to data breach area of the incentive plan.

The contractor is still held to the requirements of DFAR 252.204-7009 and 252.204-7012 to report and safeguard information.

Incentive Plan This provision increases legal risk to the USG more than it reduces risk from data breaches. Highly recommend removing or rethinking 7.1 to incentivize the right behavior.

The Government intends to have a tiered approach to data breach area of the incentive plan.

The contractor is still held to the requirements of DFAR 252.204-7009 and 252.204-7012 to report and safeguard information.

Incentive Plan Recommend removing the innovation incentive and reassigning the weighting to "validated formal complaints" and "staffing stability."

Reject

Incentive Plan Recommend removing Article 10. Reject

PWS Requiring that "no launch service provider proprietary data is released in violation of any non-disclosure agreements" is vague. Recommend reference the overarching NDA incorporated into this contract.

The Government will change the statement to read as follows: "The Contractor shall ensure that no controlled technical information or Contractor attributional/proprietary information (e.g. Launch Service Contractors’ information) is compromised in violation of DFARS 252.204-7008, 252.204-7009, 252.204-7012 or the SE&I-2 Contractor Nondisclosure Agreements or Associate Contractor Agreements. Compromising controlled technical information or Contractor attributional/proprietary information can potentially cause litigations and expose the US Government to liabilities."

PWS/Staffing Matrix PWS and Staffing Matrix numbering are inconsistent The Government is in the process of adjudicating the inconsistencies.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Can you update Labor Categories so that they can include NSSL or similar Launch Vehicle Program?

The Government is in the process of adjudicating the inconsistencies. Language from ITO will be incorporated into Labor categories

PWS/Staffing Matrix Do you have high level objectives? The objective of SE&I-2 contract is to provide Launch Enterprise with Systems Engineering, Integration, Launch Systems support engineering, Mission Integration, security systems and other SE&I functions to support NSSL, LSP integration, certification support and fleet surveillance support

Staffing Matrix Can we provide blind resumes? Please comply with the dRFP and generate a staffing matrix. No request for resumes, blind or otherwise, is included in the RFP.

Staffing Matrix How can you be sure you're getting the people they propose? The Government is not contracting for individuals, but for a delivery of services based upon experience, education, and credentials. Please comply with the dRFP and generate a staffing matrix. No request for resumes, blind or otherwise, is included in the RFP.

PWS/Staffing Matrix When will the awardee be checked for staff matrix compliance? Per the Incentive Fee Plan, Full Operational Capability is required on day 31.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Has the Government considered a management plan? In accordance with Section L, paragraph 4.1.2, a ten page staffing plan will be required for the transition and execution. The Government will not incorporate a management plan onto the contract.

PWS/Staffing Matrix On page 18 of the PWS, what does data management governance refer to? Can you provide the policy?

This is not a major IT maintenance contract. The KTR will only be required to maintain data on the server. This RFP will not cover updating our systems. Data management refers to management of government MA data, LSP data, and other program related data in government data management systems, or contractor owned data management system.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Can you describe the specifications of the Data Repository that will require maintenance?

This is not a major IT maintenance contract. The KTR will only be required to maintain data on the server. This RFP will not cover updating Government data management systems.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Can we get more information on the livelink system? Livelink system is a data management system used by the Government to manage data.

This is not a major IT maintenance contract. The Contractor will only be required to maintain data on the server. This RFP will not cover updating Government data management systems.

PWS/Staffing Matrix In regards to page 38, what are the 45 OG bases? We already have a database, this is not a data base management system development or maintenance contract. We only require the KTR to maintain data on the server using either contractor owned or Government owned data management system.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are there other databases in use? If so, which ones? There are several databases used by our Launch Service Providers which are not owned or operated by the Government. This is not a major IT maintenance contract. The KTR will only be required to maintain data on the server. This RFP will not cover updating Government data management systems.

PWS/Staffing Matrix In regards to pages 160 & 161 (IDE), what are the technical requirements the servers and storage including Operating System and File system.

Refer to above response. this is not a data base development or maintenance contract. We don’t provide those specs. The Contractor has to be able to develop and maintain that IDE. Those file systems should be compatible what the Government uses. Microsoft Windows 10, Microsoft 365 Office Suite, Adobe Acrobat. The Contractor will have the option to choose their own hardware to support our board requirements.

PWS/Staffing Matrix What qualifies as a National Security Space Launch (NSSL) Payload?

Please clarify

See the definition of payload in the PWS glossary of terms on page 95. Clarify with

DAG.

Staffing Matrix It appears that there are 25-38 Key Personnel on this effort. Please reevaluate whether a person is key or not. It has an adverse effect on our pricing. If you are referring to minimum qualifications than please replace Key with minimum qualifications. We would like to provide resumes, letters of commitment, and letters of contingency.

The Government is reviewing the number of key personnel to be approximately 10% of the total positions.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Will there be resource sharing throughout all 3 LAAFB, CCAF, and VAFB locations? They want to make sure they are not under hiring/ over hiring for the task at hand.

The Government is open to any innovative staffing or work solutions that the offeror would like to propose.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are there positions that are unusually difficult to recruit or hire? Hiring and maintaining the workforce in any aspect is the company's management decisions. The Government cannot comment on this question.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are there positions that are unusually difficult to retain? Hiring and maintaining the workforce in any aspect is the company's management decisions. The Government cannot comment on this question.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are there hiring/retention concerns anywhere on the contract? Hiring and maintaining the workforce in any aspect is the company's management decisions. The Government cannot comment on this question.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are the launches generally spread out over a specific timeframe? Due to the technical complexities of launch, forecasting launch timeframes change greatly and cannot be generalized to a specific timeframe.

PWS/Staffing Matrix What would the organization consider launch experience? Appendix E questions on labor categories

Labor Categories have been updated to provide the relevant launch experience definitions.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Are their off-site locations at Los Angeles AFB? Refer to PWS Section 5.3.2 of the PWS for office location details.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Where would the home base be for the contract manager? LA AFB PWS/Staffing Matrix What are the security requirements? In accordance with PWS paragraph 5.7.1, a minimum of Tier 3 is needed for those accessing controlled unclassified information PWS/Staffing Matrix The Draft RFP does not contain a consistent definition of NSSL.

We recommend that the government clarify the definition of NSSL in the PWS Section 1.1 and make clear references to this definition in section L and M so that any evaluation of NSSL experience/capabilities is clear an unambiguous.

A suggested clarification could be, "Effective March 2019, “Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) is referred to as National Security Space Launch (NSSL). For the ECL SE&I-2, NSSL includes missions that launches NSS "DoD" and "IC" satellite payloads into orbit, including certification of new entrant launch service providers.

Effective March 2019, “Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) is referred to as National Security Space Launch (NSSL). For the ECL SE&I-2, NSSL launces are defined as those missions which launch NSS class payloads into orbit.

PWS/Staffing Matrix PWS 3.1.1 discusses the use of SE tools to support ECL SE&I-2. We do not understand the disconnect between the PWS references to MBSE and Draft RFP references for innovation (Objective Performance Incentive Plan) and the need to use existing standard govt /COTS tools.

If the government intent is to ensure full access and control of all data/information, we recommend the following.

• Request SE&I to use Government approved software tools and standard COTS software to the maximum extent possible

• Reduce overhead and approval processes for new SE&I tools if tools can be proven to integrate into the Government environment

• Mandate unlimited rights for non-commercial computer software, computer software documentation, and technical data.

• Provide a list of current tools and tool purpose employed in ECL today

• Require all data and information to be exportable into normal government applications - (i.e. MS Office applications)

• Consider adding SE training of new tools (how to access, run, interpret results etc.) into the PWS

Agree, the PWS will be updated to reflect changes to the tools used by the contractor to align with the Government's vision of innovation.

PWS/Staffing Matrix The Govt Staffing Estimate (L-3) contains numerous inconsistencies in PWS mapping, locations, security requirements etc…

We recommend the government remove all inconsistencies from the Govt Staffing Estimate (L-3). Additionally, we would recommend the government review the security clearance required for all positions and locations for consistency.

The Government will ensure all inconsistencies have been adjudicated. The Government will also re-evaluate the security clearance designations for all positions.

PWS/Staffing Matrix The personnel profile is provided in FY. Can you confirm its FY (vs CY, or year(s) from contract award).

It is PoP beginning date as our performance is for 1 base year and 9 option years which may cross FY and CY. The Government has updated the Government Estimated Staffing Matrix for consistency.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Is there a phasing approach within each FY (i.e. by Quarter) for meeting the staffing level or is the plan to be fully staffed to the proposed numbers by the start of the FY?

There is no phasing approach. The contract period of performance for each option may cross FY and CY based on the award date. The Offeror shall plan based on their proposed staffing matrix and option execution mechanism.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Please provide a labor category for Subject Matter Specialist II - Risk Management

The Government will update the RFP to provide the labor category for Subject Matter Specialist II - Risk Management.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Please provide a labor category for "Project/Integration Manager II - Launch Site Engineering" (seems like a mix of Project Manager and Project/Integration LCATs)

The Government will update the RFP to provide the labor category for Project/Integration Manager II - Launch Site Engineering.

PWS/Staffing Matrix There is no LCAT provided for ECL SE&I-2 Program Manager? Please provide a LCAT for the ECL SE&I-2 Program Manager.

The Labor Categories include Program Manager Level I and Level II and the RFP provides the flexibility for an offeror to propose labor categories outside those already designated.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Staffing: Some positions are indicated with partial FTE. Was that intentional?

Yes.

That is the Government estimated FTE, unless this position is identified as Key or minimum staffing, the offeror has trade space to propose alternate plan.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Government Labor Categories: Most Level II positions indicate 2 years experience required. Others indicate 5 years, which is usually attributed to a Level III. Are these correct, or did the Gov't intend to standardize the years required for each category level?

The Government will revisit the Labor Categories to ensure consistency.

PWS/Staffing Matrix LEM (ECLM) is showing staffing of 1.0 within the CCAFS 45th SW O&M funds. Should this be included under the CCAFS 45th SW Procurement Fund?

This will be updated to reflect Procurement Funds.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Staffing matrix: The reference to Column J, in Column L, should be Column K, correct?

Yes. Column K requires the offeror to clarify if the proposed position will be available to start transition on day 1 of ATP. If the position is available on day 1 the column L will be a blank cell, if the position is not available to transition on day 1 of ATP, then the offeror will propose the day after ATP when the position will be filled and be available to transition and subsequently perform on the contract (this number will be between 2-30, as on day 31 all the positions are expected to be filled and ready to perform on the contract).

PWS/Staffing Matrix Labor Categories: some "advanced" positions require zero years of experience, is that correct?

The Government will revisit the Labor Categories to ensure consistency.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Recommend including the offerors organization chart as an appendix to the staffing (management) approach (as opposed to the Executive Summary) such that it may be evaluated.

The government will award based on evaluation of qualifications and experience that will lead to successful performance and not on personnel associated with the qualifications and experience. The Government allows offerors to include a 20 page staffing approach which could include this information.

PWS/Staffing Matrix Clarification: If offerors do not bid the minimum and Key Personnel with the minimum defined Labor Category Qualifications, does that make the offeror's bid unawardable?

If a position is identified as Key, the offeror will not be evaluated further if the proposal has lower number of positions or does not meet at the minimum the qualifications and experience as required by the labor category. For non-key positions, the offeror has trade space to propose alternate plan.

PWS Requires all key personnel to be staffed on Day 1 after ATP. The period between Award and ATP is at the discretion of the Government. Can an estimate of the number of days between Award and ATP please be provided?

At this time, the government does not have accurate estimation of the number of days between award and ATP.

PWS 5.5.1.1 specifies the requirement for a Program Manager. Neither Attachment L-3 nor the PWS list this as a labor category. Please add this category to Attachment L-3 and the labor category list within the

PWS.

The Labor Categories include Program Manager Level I and Level II and the RFP provides the flexibility for an offeror to propose labor categories outside those already designated.

PWS Is it the Government's intent for the contractor to employ an on site, on-contract Facility Security Officer (FSO)? Or may the offeror use a Headquarters FSO to fulfill this function?

The offeror may use a Headquarters FSO.

PWS Emergency or Special Event Services - states that if a base closure exists (e.g., due to inclement weather) the contractor's personnel are to report to the contractor's off-site location(s) and perform contract duties. If USG facilities are provided for VAFB and CCAFS, do we need to consider having office space for those facilities as well? Similarly, does the offeror need to make contingency plans to move staff offsite in the event a higher priority need for on site administrative space is required?

Offeror's are allowed to propose facilities in their proposal, it is not the PWS requirement to have contractor facility in VAFB and CCAFB

PWS The PWS states support will be required for "Other Potential New Entrant(s)." Will launch system certification and verification only be performed on U.S. launch vehicles, or could non-U.S. vehicles be included?

At this time, the government does not anticipate non-U.S. vehicles.

PWS Could launch system certification and verification be performed on air launched vehicles?

Potentially yes, however at this time there are no certified air launched vehicles in the NSSL portfolio

PWS Will assessment of launch infrastructure be limited to the three sites listed in the PWS, or will assessments be required of other launch sites such as Wallops island, Boca Chica Village, or Spaceport America?

For the purposes of the solicitation, the Government is only considered the three launch sites listed in the PWS.

PWS How many people at each location require training or maintenance of training. What is the split between security training and technical or certification training?

Government staffing matrix estimate is based on current requirements. However, Launch Enterprise and U.S. launch market are evolving.

PWS Will the contractor be fully responsible for implementing the MBSE conversion effort, or will they be in an advisory/reporting role with the Government?

Implementation of MBSE will be a collaborative effort between the SE&I II contractor, the government, and FFRDCs. The SE&I II contractor is expected to take the lion's share of the effort.

PWS What is the timeline for implementing the MBSE conversion effort, and will work volume indicators be available to bidders?

MBSE is not yet implemented in the Launch Enterprise but anticipate its implementation during the contract performance.

PWS Debris recovery efforts require near real time call-up of a Ready Team.

This will require current passports, immunizations, immediate visas, transportation, lodging, and often basic life support (food, sanitary arrangements) and communications/networking setups. Will all items (except passports) be provided by the Government?

As this is a cost reimbursable contract, all costs that are determined to be reasonable can be invoiced to the government.

PWS Will Export Compliance, Public Release Document, TAA, FSO and FOIA support be required on site at VAFB and CCAFS, or can they be supported remotely from the LAAFB office?

The Government believes these services can be supported remotely from LA AFB.

PWS For Facility Engineering, Configuration Management, and Engineering Analysis tasks, what software systems will be available to the contractor? Will they be legacy from the previous contractor, or will the new contractor be expected to update/refresh the software to current versions?

Any software/tools that has been developed by the previous contractor at government cost will be owned by the government and transferred to incoming contractor. However, the contractor is expected to plan for owning all necessary software/tools to perform the requirements on this contract.

PWS In addition to supporting USG in reviewing Technical Assistance Agreements, will the contractor be expected to obtain TAA with customers?

The contractor will not be required to obtain TAA with customers.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Row 14 references PWS section 3.3.1.12. This section does not exist in the draft PWS. Will the government provide the correct PWS mapping for this item?

The Government Staffing Estimate has been updated accordingly.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Rows 26 - 28 reference PWS section 3.3.3.1.3. This section does not exist in the draft PWS. Will the government provide the correct PWS mapping for these items?

The Government Staffing Estimate has been updated accordingly.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Rows 2 - 5 reference PWS sections 3.4.1.7 - 3.4.1.9. These sections do not exist in the draft PWS. Will the government provide the correct PWS mapping for these items?

The Government Staffing Estimate has been updated accordingly.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Certain positions identified as key show multiple FTE in the staffing estimate. For example, tab "LAAFB Procurement Funds", row 56 shows 3 to 5 FTE in FY20, 4 FTE in FY21, etc. Will the Government clarify if all of the personnel in a row identified as key are considered key, or is a subset of the total number considered key? If a subset, what number of personnel should offerors use as key in each of these cases?

Certain positions do require multiple key positions. The government is currently evaluating the government estimate for accuracy and consistency.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Certain positions identified as key do not have a matching Minimum Staffing Level. For example, on tab "VAFB 30th SW Procurement Funds" row 6, the Key Personnel column shows Yes but the Minimum Staffing Level column shows No. Will the government clarify the Minimum Staffing Level of "No" in these cases, considering there are key personnel identified in column F?

The government is currently evaluating the government estimate for accuracy and consistency.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Some rows in the government staffing estimate provide labor estimates at a top level section and then provides estimates for certain subsections under the top level section. Can the government confirm the estimate at the top level covers subsections that do not have separate estimates. For example, on the tab LAAFB Procurement Funds, rows 34 - 36 provide staffing for PWS section 3.3.2, rows 41 - 43 provide staffing for section 3.3.2.4, row 10 provides staffing for section 3.3.2.6, and rows 12 - 13 provides staffing for section 3.3.2.7. Does the estimate for section 3.3.2 apply to the remaining subsections of 3.3.2 that do not have separate estimates (3.3.2.1 - 3.3.2.3, 3.3.2.5, and 3.3.2.8 - 3.3.2.12)?

All of the estimates are separate. The top level estimates do not include estimates for the sub-sections. The government has provided as granular mapping as possible. The government is currently evaluating the government estimate for accuracy and consistency.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Rows 4 - 7 provide a labor estimate for PWS sections 3.3.13.1 and row 8 provides an estimate for 3.3.13.3, but the staffing file does not provide an estimate for the other subsections of 3.3.13 (3.3.13.2, 3.3.13.4 - 3.3.13.10). Will the government clarify the estimates for these subsections?

The discrepancy will be corrected in the Government Staffing Estimate.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category The Government staffing estimate file does not provide estimates for PWS sections 3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.3, 3.5.1.4, 3.5.1.10, 3.5.2.1b through 3.5.2.1l, 3.5.2.2a, and 3.5.2.1b - 3.5.2.1l. Will the customer clarify the estimates for these sections?

The government is verifying and updating the accuracy of PWS to staffing matrix mapping.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category The following labor categories in the Staffing Estimate file do not have corresponding descriptions in the Labor Category Description file or the PWS Appendix E:

>Tab "LAAFB Procurement Funds" - Subject Matter Specialist II - Risk Management >Tab "CCAFS 45th SW O&M Funds" - Project Integration Manager II - Launch Site Engineering Will the government provide the descriptions associated with these labor categories?

The government is currently evaluating the government estimate and labor categories for accuracy and consistency.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Some labor categories in the Staffing Estimate file do not have an exact match Labor Category Description file or the PWS Appendix E. Will the government confirm the mappings shown below are correct?

(Staffing Estimate file LCATs are on the left, Labor Category Description file LCATs are on the right:

>Chief Engineer IV -vs- Chief Engineer >Network Administrator I -vs- Network Administrator >Systems Engineer - Launch Site II -vs- Systems Engineer II - Launch Site >Systems Engineer - Launch Site III -vs- Systems Engineer III - Launch Site >Systems Engineer - Launch Site IV -vs- Systems Engineer IV - Launch Site >Systems Engineer - Remote Launch Control Center III -vs- Systems Engineer III - Remote Launch Control Center >Systems Engineer II - Tech Partnerships -vs- Systems Engineer II - Tech Partnerships / Implementation & Transition >Systems Engineer III (Ground) -vs- Systems Engineer III - Ground Systems >Systems Engineer III (Prop/Structures/Avionics) -vs- Systems Engineer III - Propulsion/Stage Prop/ Structures/Avionics >Training Specialist - Range III -vs- Training Specialist III - Range

The government is currently evaluating the government estimate and labor categories for accuracy and consistency.

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category Systems Engineering Manager III is misspelled (Engineer vs Engineer) Accepted

Labor Category Description Some of the Labor Category descriptions in the Labor Category Description file reference SMC/LE while the descriptions in the PWS Appendix E reference SMC/ECL. Recommend the Government standardize the updated office symbol throughout the RFP and related attachments.

Accepted

PWS/Staffing/Labor Category…