Comment_Resolution_Matrix_RFP_Questions_-_FINAL.xlsx

Section L

b) Will the Government accept elements of the Corroborating Documentation that have and are marked as International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)?

Basic SOW

References: Section 2.0 of Basic SOW (see excerpt labeled Figure A below);

Section 1.0 of Attachment 3 (Task Order 0001), definition of 4 phases (see excerpt labeled Figure B below);

Section 2.0 Scope, “At this time, the Government anticipates the contractor’s support for this Task Order shall consist of program coordination and systems engineering support up to and including CDR in Phase A”;

Attachment 3 (Task Order 0001), Section 4.2.2, “The contractor shall attend and participate in programmatic, technical, and safety reviews (i.e., SRR, PDR, CDR, etc.) through CDR of the mission development. Typical activities include: 1) researching, preparing and presenting formal briefings at program reviews; 2) reviewing briefings and related documents and 3) providing recommendations to the Government.”

Attachment 5 (Task Order 0003), Section 1.0, (see excerpt labeled Figure C below);

Section 1.0 (see excerpt labeled Figure D below);

Section 2.0 Scope (excerpt labeled Figure E below);

Also see excerpt from RISE Industry Days: Topic University (18 Aug 2017) University Nanosat Program (labeled Figure F below), as well as multiple specific activities within the Basic SOW and Task Order requirements referring to activities pre- and post- milestones relative to the phase definitions. a) Please clarify the definitions of the phases and the milestones for entrance and exit criteria of phases as these appear to be different in the examples provided below and across the Basic SOW and Task Order Requirements.

b) Please clarify if the AI&T phase ends with a ship readiness review or at Launch of payload; or at some other criteria.

c) Please clarify if different definitions of phases are to be applied for RISE specific missions versus the University Nanosat program.

d) Please clarify the transition from Mission Design Phase to Implementation Phase (e.g. are effort to culminate in PDR to be in Mission Design (phase A) or Implementation (phase B)?

e) Are the phase definitions different for the University Nanosat Program versus specific AFRL RISE Missions?

a) The definitions of the phases and milestones and entrance and exit criteria vary by requirements/risk class/experiment/task order/etc. The Basic SOW includes Figure 1 as a visual aid to assist the offerors in understanding the notional experimental lifecycle process for RVE. Figure 1 should not drive the work performed at the task order level. For example, Task Order 0003 furnished additional detail on how the SSP program transitions through programmatic execution of R&D experiments for SSP. This includes the five phases of rigorous systems engineering processes specified in TO 0003 (Section 1.0).

b) The phases and milestones and entrance and exit criteria vary by requirements/risk class/experiment/task order/etc. The Basic SOW narrative in Section 2.0 and Figure 1 provide a overarching view of programmatic execution for RVE. How an experiment transitions from Phase C to Phase D will be further detailed at the Task Order level and may vary by experiment. Task Order 0001 and 0003 include additional information for each phase in Section 1.0 of the TO SOWs.

c) Yes, the UNP program has different processes than the SSP program. The variance is described in Section 1.0 of the Small Satellite Portfolio Statement of Work.

d) The Basic SOW narrative in Section 2.0 and figure 1 provide a overarching view of programmatic execution for RVE. How an experiment transitions from Phase A to Phase B will be further detailed at the Task Order level and may vary by experiment. Task Order 0001 and 0003 include additional information for each phase in Section 1.0 of the TO SOWs.

e) Yes, the UNP program has different processes and phase definitions than AFRL/RVE experiments. The variance is described in Section 1.0 of the Small Satellite Portfolio Statement of Work.

TO 0001

TO 0002

CDRLs

Task Order 0002 PNT 8.0 Deliverables Can the government clarify the following Task Order 0002 CDRLS?

A003 Scientific and Technical Report at End of Contract -- Does the government expect similar reports after major Task Order activities as needed throughout the contract period?

A013 Computer Software Products to be delivered as needed. Are these only the products developed under the TO activities?

Would the government consider the use of COTS products if they can be shown to be useful and cost-effective? How should the contractor propose pricing for these?

Would the government consider CLINS for some of these that we might propose at the start of the contract? CDRL A003 is only required to be delivered once at the end of the Task Order period of performance. Any other reports submitted will be under CDRLs A002 Status Reports and A022 Scientific and Technical Reports Summary.

CDRL A013 Computer Software Products are only the products developed for the task order.

ODCs and Materials for TO 0001 and TO 0002 are baselined and should not be included in the offeror's cost model. For TO 0003, Materials shall be priced IAW Section L 5.4.4 Schedule of Materials and Table 5.4.5. For TO 0003, the offeror may propose products they determine appropriate for their proposed approach.

The Government intends to use the CLIN structure identified in the solicitation.

Attachment 4, Task Order 0002 Section 8.0, p. 11 Given the number of V&V campaigns to be conducted for TO 0002, please consider A004 Test/Inspection Report as one of the TO 0002 deliverables. A022 Scientific and Technical Reports Summary will be sufficient to report test results.

Pricing

(1) Please indicate if Offerors should prepare a separate template for CLIN 0003 (Travel), CLIN 0004 (ODCs), and CLIN 0005 (Material).

(2) Should the CLIN 0003, CLIN 0004, and CLIN 0005 templates simply reflect the Government baselined amounts plus the Materials amount developed by each Offeror for TO 0003?

b) Will the columns in cost summary by cost element represent each separately priced CLIN and Offerors Fiscal Year (OFY) combination?

c) Will there be multiple total CLIN columns on the cost summary by cost element schedule to sum each separately priced CLIN for all Offerors Fiscal Years?

d) Please confirm that with the removal of the “Travel, Materials, and ODC’s” from the Table 5.4.1 Cost summary by cost elements, that the Offeror is NOT required to include price in the Cost summary by cost elements.

a. The offeror should generate a separate cost element summary for each task order.

b. The cost element summary is a sample only. c. The costs should be broken down by CLIN (if necessary) by OFY. There will only be one priced CLIN broken down by OFY.

d. The baselined amounts for Travel, Materials and ODCs should not be included in the cost element summary.