SSHINE Industry Day - All QAs Final 01 Aug 2024.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 61 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- Industry-2024-RVEP
About this file
This document is a Special Notice for the upcoming Space Systems and Hardware Integration for Novel Experiments (SSHINE) acquisition by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). SSHINE is anticipated to be a Small Business Set-Aside contract with a $499M ceiling and a 5-year base period with a 5-year option. The purpose of the Industry Day event on July 26, 2024 is to provide information on the requirements and facilitate collaboration and teaming. Draft requirement documents are provided, and feedback and questions on the requirements are requested by July 19, 2024. One-on-one meetings with the government are also available by request. The contract will provide systems engineering, modeling & simulation, ground system development, and other technical support for AFRL's space technology programs and flight experiments. The government intends to have the final RFP released in Q3 2024 with an award in Q4 2025.
View the file
Other files
Show all 24
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&As
| Question | Govt Response |
| Are we able to have people dial in to the one on one session (we will have two people there physically)? | Yes; Virtual Only - Details on Amended Industry Day Notice |
| Will you please verify the correct SMO code to submit a VAR through DISS for one of my employees who is attending the AFRL SSHINE Industry Conference on July 26, 2024. | AFRL-KV1MFSCC6 SMO code |
| I noticed that some of the attachments for the SSHINE Industry Day on SAM.gov were deleted, specifically the Visit Request (Attachment 3) and Kirtland Map (Attachment 4). Do we need to still fill out Attachment 3 per the SAM.gov instructions? Or do we just fill out Attachment 2 Industry Day Registration? |
Finally, we would like to request a one-on-one meeting with the government in conjunction with Industry Day, but the event is scheduled for a Friday (July 26, 2024). Do you plan to hold in-person one-on-ones at a later date? With interested companies like ours traveling to Albuquerque for Industry Day, usually time is blocked out in an industry day agenda for that, or at least the day after because of the interested attendees all being there (but that would be a Saturday in this case).
Also, can you clarify the number of company personnel allowed to attend? SAM.gov states “…no more than two (2) personnel per company will be allowed to attend the site visit”, but does that include only the tour in the afternoon or all events on July 26? Multiple original postings were deleted due to security markings and replaced after revising.
Attachment 2 & 3 are required to be filled out.
One-on-One sessions are Virtual Only; Details on Amended Industry Day Notice.
Company personnel are limited to two (2) individuals for all Industry Day events on 26 Jul 2024.
1. What MBSE is used today at AFRL/RV? Can the government provide examples or a published style guide that has the preferred schema? Can the government also provide what MBSE tools are currently in use at AFRL/RV? Are bidders responsible for pricing and procurement of MBSE tools?
2. Does the government intend to procure hardware through SSHINE (e.g., spacecraft buses or other hardware)? Will any procurement associated with a sample TO be provided as a “plug” number in the RFP?
3. Will all TOs in-work on RISE transition to SSHINE? For any that do transition will AFRL/RV provide the timeframes and point in the mission lifecycle for those TOs?
4. For the sample TOs to be bid on SSHINE, will AFRL/RV provide workload indicators (WLI) such that reasonable/realistic estimates can be generated by non-incumbents?
5. Will the government provide example SEMPs (Basic and each TO)? If not, will the AFRL/RV systems engineering process documentation be made available to bidders?
6. Will AFRL/RV make clear all the organizational responsibilities for government, the Aerospace Corporation, SSHINE contractor, and any other organizations involved in the mission (e.g., payload customers)? For example, does the Aerospace Corporation or a payload customer share responsibility for mission assurance/quality assurance?
7. Does a bidder require any current RISE directed subcontractor on their SSHINE team? Such that teaming agreements be in place and documented in the SSHINE proposal.
8. Does a bidder require any directed university on their SSHINE team? For example, a University Nanosatellite Program (UNP) participant.
9. Will AFRL/RV change their draft SOW that prescribes the key position/personnel requirements for SSHINE? Our recommendation is to let bidders propose their own key positions/personnel and provide rationale why those positions/personnel were bid.
10. Will AFRL/RV provide “plug” ODC and material costs that require procurement on SSHINE?
11. Will transition costs be included in the Total Evaluated Price? We suggest that transition costs not be included, as this gives a direct advantage to an incumbent bidder.
12. Currently the SSHINE Basic SOW numbering scheme is reused for Task Order (TO) SOWs (0001-0004), which causes confusion in the mapping between them. Will the government please use “Reserved” for TO SOW sections not used from the Basic SOW, such that they align with the Basic SOW numbering scheme? Or at least use a different numbering scheme for TOs than is used for the Basic SOW. For example, TO 0001 uses 4.1.10 for technology transfer planning, while the Basic SOW 4.1.10 is for procurement assistance (which is not used in TO 0001).
13. Will AFRL/RV provide a phase-out plan from the incumbent RISE contract? 1. MBSE is our approach to systems engineering. We have a style guide and satellite reference architecture that are based on the Object Oriented Systems Engineering Method (OOSEM). Those are provided to our current flight experiment prime contractors as well as other government organizations on request. The style guide and reference architecture are not published in the sense that they have not been reviewed and approved by AFRL/RVE leadership. The MBSE tools used are currently Cameo System Modeler 19 on our standalone enclave and MagicDraw 22 on our collaboration site. We expect bidders will be responsible for pricing and procurement of sufficient numbers of software licenses to support the scope of potential MBSE related efforts undertaken.
2. Procurement costs are not expected to vary significantly between offerors, and are unlikely to be an evaluation criteria in the proposal. We do anticiapte SSHINE to be leveraged to procure hardware (flight and non-flight items).
3. We expect work to transition off of RISE and onto SSHINE.
4. The government intends to provide workload indicators in the form of a matrix indicating the number of space technology programs RVE expects to concurrently work during the award period and the approximate scale of those programs.
5. No. Offerors should expect to be evaluated on their systems engineering processes.
6. Organizational roles and resonsibilities for specific flight experiments and programs will be made clear within the associated program task order.
7. No.
8. No.
9. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
10. ODC and material costs are not expected to vary significantly between offerors, and are unlikely to be evaluation criteria in the proposal.
11. Transition costs are anticpated not be included in the Total Evaluated Price.
12. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
13. Not anticpated at this time.
1. Current DD-254 states this effort is a follow-on contract. Is Research and Development Integrated Space Experiments (RISE) the follow-on contract this DD-254 is referring to? If so, do you anticipate any contractual clause changes for SSHINE not currently covered on RISE? If so, may you please share what those may be?
2. Can you please provide the current FTE level of support provided on the existing contract?
3. From the related RFI, the Government asked industry to provide a ROM cost estimate and FTEs to help best assess the contract ceiling. As a result of your industry research can you please provide what the intended ceiling may be for this effort if it changed from the original $499M originally considered?
4. For the RFI, the Gov’t as a result from industry questions provided a “flight experiment volume” profile for the five-year PoP. Is this still a viable planning model or has this changed since the RFI and will this be addressed during the Industry Day?
5. Given you previous RFI release and industry feedback, is there a NTE FTE level being initially considered for SSHINE?
6. If the period of performance being considered still 5 years?
7. Do you still anticipate releasing Sections L & M only with the final solicitation or will industry be able to see and comment on the drafts prior to the final RFP?
8. What is the final RFP date?
9. What is the intended award date?
10. What is the intended start date?
11. Will a document library be established for this solicitation to include information related to existing flight experiments/missions? 1. SSHINE requirements have evolved from RISE, though similiar, SSHINE will include some clauses consistent with the current RISE contract, however will include any additional clauses or required clauses as applicable.
2. No.
3. The current anticipated ceiling for SSHINE is $499M.
4. The government intends to provide workload indicators in the form of a matrix indicating the number of space technology programs RVE expects to concurrently work during the award period and the approximate scale of those programs.
5. Please adhere to the key personnel referenced in the Base SOW and TOs
6. The current anticipated ceiling for SSHINE is a 5-year base, 5-year option period.
7. A draft RFP is anticipated to be released with draft sections L&M.
8. Final RFP is anticipated for 3rd Qtr 2024.
9. Award is anticipated for 4th Qtr 2025.
10. Start date is anticipated for 4th Qtr 2025.
11. No.
| Can we also have a virtual call-in number for the 1v1 session? | Yes; Virtual Only - Details on Amended Industry Day Notice |
| Are you able to confirm if this is a follow-on and/or related to the Research and Development Integrated Space Experiments (RISE)? The requirements are similar (not the exact same obviously) which is why I am asking. | SSHINE is related to the RISE acquisition requirements, however SSHINE will encompass additional scope. |
| 1. SOW: For the classified work within the scope, which networks does the customer currently use (and potentially anticipate using throughout the contract duration)? This information will help companies currently developing Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility spaces to plan accordingly, if desired. |
2. SOW: Is AFRL planning to provide access to a Technical Library? If technical library materials are relevant to a response, we strongly recommend identifying which specific documents should be referenced or addressed. This prevents conflicts between source materials and reduces any potential incumbent advantage in knowing which documents are applicable to which situation.
3. SOW 1.1.5 Surge Capability: Given that AFRL is providing office space to the current contractor, will you please provide either the current square footage allotted or a projected square footage to be used for proposal and evaluation purposes, to include surge expectations? This information is crucial for effective planning and resource management to accommodate potential increases in project activity.
4. SOW 1.1.7.1: Is it correct that all TDY/travel expenses will be directly reimbursed and do not need to be included in a bidder’s proposal?
5. SOW 4.1.2.3 Government Reference Designs (GRD): What specific documentation (e.g., Interface Control Documents, Preliminary Interface Design Specifications, System/Subsystem Specifications, Technical Data Packages) is required for systems engineering activities related to space technology programs and individual flight experiments with respect to GRD for each Task Order?
6. SOW 4.4 Ground System Development: What is the current architecture of the "common" ground system? Is it cloud-based, unclassified, or classified? Each mission will have unique software builds, but is the aim to support multiple missions on one ground system or use multiple ground systems? It would be beneficial to understand the architecture, including whether it is a local or distributed cloud-based environment. Will a Government Reference Architecture be provided for assessment and development for current and future missions? What is the vision for this system? Is there collaboration with SpRCO and SSC/SZI?
7. RVEP SOW, TO 0001: The SOW Mission includes "upkeep, upgrade, maintenance, and facility management" support. However, the specific requirements for this effort are difficult to determine, and only appear in SOW 4.2.4 under assembly and integration support and the SOW 5.1 Key Personnel requirements. Can you clarify which aspects of facility support are included in the scope and to what degree the contractor is responsible for them? In particular, we recommend providing offerors with a detailed list of all equipment and facilities that your contractor would be responsible for. We also recommend including facility planning support requirements in the SOW (e.g., baseline plans, 5 year plan, asset management, asset procurement, cybersecurity, sustainment, etc.).
8. RVES SOW, TO 0003, 4.1.5: The section states that the "contractor will provide Systems Engineering, including mechanical, thermal, electrical, structural, and other specialized engineering to support mission development for space technology, spacecraft, and high-altitude balloon experiment designs." Data management and distribution are crucial for efficient experiment setup and analysis. Suggest adding Data Management/Trending to this list of specialized skill sets. Additionally, there is an opportunity to include autonomous/automated operations to enhance overall efficiency. 1. The government will provide any classified networks required for contract performance within government facilities.
2. Yes, contractors will have access to the technical library once they have been in processed.
3. RVE has not exercised surge support to date on prior contracts, but this is still a capability required of SSHINE. Activities where the government anticipates a possible need for surge capacity include, but are not limited to: launch integration and concurrent AI&T campaigns.
4. This is correct.
5. Specific documents will be identified in program task orders.
6. Ground System is currently both physical systems and cloud based (Ref 4.4.3.1 in DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW). Support is requested under the SSHINE effort for the government managed operations environment (Ref 4.4.2 in DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW). A gov-referenced architecture will be available to the successful offeror. Successful offerers will need to support programs across various classification levels. (Ref 4.4.4 in DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW).
7. A listing of GFE will accompany the RFP.
8. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
1. What awardable TOs will be proposed with the IDIQ contract bid and when will the Government release those instructions and evaluation criteria?
2. Do you anticipate including any further compliance and reference documents into Attachment N of the IDIQ SOW?
3. The DD254 does not include safeguarding of any classified materials at contractor facilities but the IDIQ SOW (section 7.2) identifies classified work that may be performed at the Contractor’s facility. Can you clarify this requirement and if contractor’s site is required and what level of security classification may be required?
4. Does the Government anticipate directing offerors to add subcontractors for the performance of the SSHINE requirements? If so, will the Government provide this information prior to proposals being due?
5. Can the Government identify the foreign nations that will need to have Technical Assistance Agreement (TAA) in place with the Department of State or if the Government would support exemption clauses of the ITAR?
6. RVEN Draft SOW: What Key Personnel are meant to be identified in Section 2.0? 1. It is anticipated TO 0001 - TO 0004 scope will be awarded with the Base award.
2. This is possible.
3. This is a draft DD 254. It will not have contractor requirements as we have not awarded the conract. Maximum level of classified processing at a contractor facility will be TS.
4. The government expects, on occaision, to require or encourage additional subcontractors on SSHINE specific to a certain space technology mission or payload.
5. No new TAAs are anticipated to be required by SSHINE beyond what currently exist at the Space Vehicles Directorate level. The government is not currently considering exemptions to ITAR.
6. The key personnel section will be completed as we finalize the TO SOW.
| I am hoping to connect with you to discuss the SSHINE acquisition and upcoming Industry Day. Do you have availability to meet? | No meetings on SSHINE acquisition requirements will be held - Please see one-on-one session details on Amended Industry Day Notice |
| My question is that one of our attendees has a CAC and has base access. Will they still need to complete the Kirkland AFB Visitor Form? | No visitor request needed if individual possesses a CAC |
| Are there particular constraints I need to be aware of or would I just submit the two request forms I see there? I do see two attachment 3 visitor request forms/pages in addition to the industry day registration form (attachment 2). Given it is an unclassified meeting, would I just focus on the attachment 3 pre-notification form for this visit in addition to attachment 2? Or do I need access to DISS? When looking at the pre-notification form would you be the sponsor or am I misreading it? | Attachments 2 &3 are required to be filled out. Additionally, Attachment 3 should be sent to the AFRL visitor center through DISS. If you cannot send it through DISS, you may fax your request to the visitor center using the information on the visit request form. YChristopher Garcia (SSHINE PM) will be the sponsor and will complete it. |
| Want to verify if a VAR in DISS was required for this Industry Day? | Yes, a VAR is required for Industry Day |
| Can you tell me the contact information that I need for the Sponsor Information section of the Short Term Visitor Pass Pre-Notification Form? | |
| Could you please confirm the number of attendees allowed from each company for the One-on-One sessions. | There is no cap on attendees for one-on-one sessions. |
| Would you be able to provide a phone number we can include as a Technical POC number? | Christopher R. Garcia, SSHINE PM, 505-203-7178 |
| I see that one on ones are currently scheduled for July 30. I will be unable to be onsite for the 30th. Is it possible to conduct the one on one meeting virtually? | One-on-One sessions are Virtual Only; Details on Amended Industry Day Notice. |
| The Systems Security Engineering Group (SS3G) is a Cybersecurity Services company that will be teaming for the SSHINE contract. Is there a way to have a cyber focused 1 on 1 and if yes will it be on the 26th ? | One-on-One sessions are Virtual Only held on 30 Jul 2024; Details on Amended Industry Day Notice. Each contractor team dictates how they would like to spend their alloted time during the session. |
| 1. What is the planned expansion from existing flight experiment loads? |
2. What are the current skillsets that are missing on-site in support of RVE?
3. What are the historical core funding and staffing levels for this scope of work?
4. What are the estimated surge levels and/or historical surges?
5. What are the external facilities/equipment required to support RVE that are not currently present on base?
6. Recommend the government provide draft Section L and M.
7. Transition of prototypes/experiments seems to be a constant theme in the draft SOWs. Recommend the government include specific technical evaluation criteria on transition planning as well as past performance supporting the rapid development, test, and transition of capabilities/solutions.
8. Strong space-focused technical leadership and support is at a premium, especially in Albuquerque. Recommend the government utilize a Highest Technically Rated Offering (HTRO), in accordance with FAR part 16, to have access to and to retain the best possible technical talent while still keeping costs competitive and reasonable. If the government does not leverage HTRO, what will be the strategy for evaluation criteria and weighting? 1. The expected increase in work volume over the award period is on the order of 50%.
2. At this point in time, all requirements are being fulfilled via on-site support contract for RVE. There are no specific skillsets currently missing.
3. Average FTE across all ongoing efforts, according to CY 2023 data is between 25-30 FTE per month. And we spent just under $10M in labor, materials, travel, and ODCs.
4. RVE has not exercised surge support to date on prior contracts, but this is still a capability required of SSHINE. Activities where the government anticipates a possible need for surge capacity include, but are not limited to: launch integration and concurrent AI&T campaigns.
5. RVE does not expect non-government facilities to be required for the execution of SSHINE.
6. A draft RFP is anticipated to be released with draft sections L&M.
7. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
8. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
1. Would the Government be willing accept, review, and provided feedback on an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) mitigation plan in advance of the solicitation to ensure it is adequate prior to submitting a proposal? (Ref: Attachment 6 - DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW.docx – Section 16.0 Organizational Conflict of Interest)
2. Should the Lead Software engineer have years systems engineering or software engineering experience? The current requirement states “systems engineering” experience. (Ref: Attachment 6 - DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW.docx - 5.3 Key Personnel)
3. Does AFRL/RVE intend to give developed technology to Space Systems Command (SCC) or other acquisition entities for a separate follow-on procurement? (Ref: Attachment 6 - DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW.docx - General Question - Technology Transfer)
4. Is the Government’s acquisition strategy to award a Single or Multiple Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract? (Ref: Attachment 6 - DRAFT_SSHINE_SOW.docx - General Question - Acquisition Strategy) 1. This suggestion is being considered by the government team.
2. This is an error in the document, software engineering is the correct inference.
3. Yes.
4. Contract structure is currently under consideration for SSHINE
1. The draft SOW and various Task Order SOWs discuss using MS&A for concept development. Is this going to be used to tease out and "compete" internal concepts for flight experiment candidates prior to selection, or more for paring down requirements and developing CONOPS once an experiment is already selected? Will this include evaluation of military utility, or primarily evaluating performance based on ranges of design or engineering parameters? (References 2.1, 4.1.2.2.)
2. The draft SOW and TO attachments reference MBSE being required throughout the lifecycle of the flight experiment (Sections 4.1.3 in all SOW docs). Are there any specific Style Guides that are expected to be used, modeling languages expected (if other than SysML), or specific MBSE tools expected to be used (e.g. Cameo, Enterprise Architect, Rhapsody)? No Style Guides are listed in Attachment N.
3. Is there a desire to be able to integrate AFSIM into MBSE efforts? (References 4.1.3)
4. Regarding "4.1.4.1 Development of modeling capabilities to simulate, emulate and evaluate technology options identified by RVE." What is meant by "emulate" here? Physically? Optically? Electromagnetically?
5. Regarding "4.3.3.2 Spacecraft on-orbit operations and experimentation and 4.3.3.3 Anomaly resolution and reporting," does RVE anticipate using the National Space Test and Training Complex--Orbital Range for conduct of any on-orbit experiments? If not, is RVE considering capabilities to provide dedicated monitoring of on-orbit experiments and analysis of the spacecraft's on-orbit behaviors (to include detection of anomalous behaviors)?
6. TO 3 is written to support the RVES Simulation and Tech Assessment branch. That branch has traditionally done a wide range of MS&A not necessarily associated with specific flight experiments but looking at the technology from RVS or RVB. That said, the MSE&A infrastructure for conducting tech assessments have generally been similar to that used to evaluated flight experiment concepts, requirements, designs, etc. Will this contract vehicle be limited to MS&A of flight experiments only? Will other MSE&A be handled via other contract vehicles? 1. Yes and both.
2. Section 4.1.3 states “The contractor will provide Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) when/where applicable/requested, including requirements definition, design, analysis, and verification/validation activities….” Note the terminology used, “when/where applicable/requested,” Section 4.1.3. does not state a requirement. AFRL/RVE does have a style guide and satellite reference architecture that we strongly recommend compliance with; however, there is no contractual language (at this time) that requires compliance to these documents. AFRL/RVE’s primary tool used for supporting adopting of the model based systems engineering approach is Cameo System Modeler/MagicDraw.
3. Yes
4. This section is aimed at digital models of system capabilites. However, RVE also produces prototypes, demonstatrations, and models that can also be accurately described as an emulator. Requirements for development and construction of a physcial emulator would be covered under 4.2 is the draft Basic SOW.
5. Both are possible.
6. SSHINE will address Modeling, Simulation, and Anaylsis for a variety of Space Technology programs.
Slido - Industry Day Q&As
| Question | Govt Response | Method |
| Can you please provide the number of contractors that curently support each branch? | No, the Government cannot provide at Distro A. | Slido |
| Will the list of attendees be post after BFI? | Yes, a list will be released after 26 Jul 24. | Slido |
| When do you anticipate draft RFP and final to be released? | Refer to anticipated milestone schedule in slide brief; will be posted on SAM.gov. | Slido |
| Is rfp anticipated to be DISTRO A , and do you anticipate being able to accommodate more restrictive response materials? | Yes. | Slido |
| You show 499M ceiling but current contract is only 1/3 of that from what we can tell. How confident are you in the growth of this contract? | Dollar value currently is anticipated to follow known scope increase. | Slido |
| Why does RVE use its own ground system when the USSF already has several for each type of mission? Wouldn’t using R2C2, FORGE, OCX, etc.? | RVE has a suite of existing ground capabilities that have been successfully used for first-of-a-kind S&T missions at low-cost and low-risk. RVE is a stakeholder to USSF research and development into emerging ground capabilities. AFRL's unique situation as a DoD S&T organization makes operating within existing and upcoming ground systems difficult due to the fact that our systems are by nature S&T. This means that we are not "big O", Operations flights. AFRL's approach for ground systems maintains S&T flexibilities while we track and communicate future needs unto the other Operational systems. Additionally AFRL continues to experiment with the ground system itself as an independent thrust from the traditional mission support role that ground usually provides. | Slido |
| Slide 41, will you provide the list of universities? | The Government can publish a historical list, but the Government is actively working to expand the number of universities we work with. | Slido |
| As a small business set aside is there an expectation that the prime will deliver 51% or is it 51% small business ( mix of small business?) | SSHINE is a total set aside due to the reasonable expectation offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns; and award will be made at fair market prices (FAR 19.502). Management of value added activites are a Prime function and offerors need to be aware of Limitation of Pass Through Charges. | Slido |
| We are interested in a one-on-one but did not request by the deadline. What is the process to sign-up? | All offerors are welcome to submit questions via Slido. If an offeror has missed the deadline for requesting a one-on-one, please coordinate with the CO and PM to check availability due to cancellations. | Slido |
| If a small business isn’t CAS compliant are they ineligible to submit a prime bid? | No. | Slido |
| Will support contractors be responsible for the reorganization to specific branches and programs as opposed to specific topics? | Please further explain. | Slido |
| Within the POP, how many projects do you expect will be over $10M? | At this time, anticipated at 10 projects based on information currently known. | Slido |
| Will the questions asked during one-on-one sessions be posted to SAM.gov? | Redacted versions of questions are anticipated to be posted. | Slido |
| Does RVE have any teaming approach concerns? I.e. to many subs to address TOs creating some kind of challenge with dynamic funding and talent retention. | The Government encourages teaming and anticipates management of subcontractors to be an evaluation criterion. | Slido |
| For TO 0004 (RVEX), is the USG interested in *open* architectures? Is a Government Reference Architecture (GRA) envisioned? | Yes, the Government is interested in open architectures. The necessity of a GRA is currently under consideration by the Government. | Slido |
| Can you please clarify if SSHINE contractors are also required to manage the AFRL lab facilities or only work in these spaces? | Scope will include facility management. | Slido |
| Can the govt please clarify if there will be an anticipated OCI between SSHINE contractor and the upcoming Mod, Sim, Analyses, and Apps opportunity? | The government is not clear what opportunity this is in reference to, please clarify. At this time, the Government does not anticipate an OCI for any RVES support efforts. | Slido |
| Industry is still testing s/c to heritage env levels and not contested space metrics. Does RVE want to lead industry in expansion of those stds/practices? | RVE intends to continue to expand the envelope of available technologies to meet the requirements of USSF. | Slido |
| Will programs covered under this effort potentially include nuclear technologies, such as radioisotope power systems or fission reactors? | Nuclear technologies are an active research area and could conceivably fall under the definition of space technology which could be under SSHINE. | Slido |
| With the current RISE available ceiling do you for see any of the current TOs being extended on RISE and not aligned to SSHINE? | SSHINE will be used as the on-site RVE contract; on-site work from RISE is planned to transition to SSHINE. | Slido |
| Please clarify if there will be an anticipated OCI between SSHINE and MARS contractor opportunities? | The Government does not anticipate at this time, however IAW FAR 9.5, OCIs will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Vendors are obligated to disclose if known. | Slido |
| How do you currently prioritize projects? Do you utilize an in house or contractor provided tool? | Currently the Government prioritizes projects. The Government does not currently have a tool to do this. | Slido |
| There are currently directed subs on RISE. Will the company and FTE associated with their scope provided? | At this time, the Government does not require any specific subcontractors on SSHINE. Reference Industry Day QAs 24 Jul 2024.xls on SAM.gov | Slido |
| Will TS clearance requirements be included in the solicitation so companies that don't currently have clearance get an opportunity to get clearance | Clearance requirements were included in Industry Day Notice attanchments, Industry Day briefing slides, and are anticipated to be included as attachments for the draft RFP and RFP. | Slido |
| What is the capacity of the AI&T facilities- how many programs per/ year? Today and what is anticipated in the future? | Refer to Slide 14 from Industry Day brief. The Government anticipates needing the capacity for ~3 large satellites and ~5 small satellites at a given time. | Slido |
| What OCI posture are you anticipating for this effort? | Please explain further. | Slido |
| After the first four (4) initial task orders are awarded, when do you anticipate the next one to be awarded? | Anticipate no later than two (2) years after award. | Slido |
| Why are only space services and SDA listed for missions under concept ideation? What about space superiority? | The Government is unable to answer this question at Distro A. | Slido |
| What is the expected overlap between RISE & SSHINE? | Please explain further. | Slido |
| How often do you expect to require surge support? What are the situations you expect needing to surge for? | Refer to posting on SAM.gov, Industry Day Notice, Attachment entitled "Industry Day QAs 24 Jul 2024", #19 -Subquestion #6. | Slido |
| Will historical CPARS be in bidder's library? | No. | Slido |
| For RAPID, does the government expect mid-level key personnel or will they augment key personnel? | Please clarify further. | Slido |
| Is the requirement for all personnel to be at Kirtland? | The Government expects the majority (but not all) of work to be completed at Kirtland AFB. | Slido |
| What do you anticipate as being the number of FTEs needed to support the entire effort?What % of support would you expect to be on-site, remote, and hybrid? | The response is dependent on branch and scope, but the majority of the effort is expected to be on-site due to the nature of the scope. It is expected a minimum of 30 FTE will be required to perform total scope of the base effort. The government will not dictate a minimum or maximum FTE and is more interested in performance and value in meeting requirements. | Slido |
| How many high altitude balloon projects are anticipated during the PoP? | At least two high altitude balloon flights are anticipated during the early portion of the POP. The government plans to be postured for one to two flights per year. The actual requirement will be based on the specific needs for a program or customer. | Slido |
| During presentation and tour, policy issues were mentioned as causing problems and delays for SSP. Please elaborate on what have been those issues. | AFRL's missions often are pursuing technology applications that were not originally envisioned within current policies. Many times we take a technology and apply it in a different regime (space) that would normally be either fielded on the ground or within the air layer. Since these applications are not directly in their initially designed and licensed implementation we encounter slowdowns and roadblocks. These policy hurdles are encountered mainly in frequency allocations and in information systems. Additionally, AFRL is pushing to shorten our mission development timelines. There are some timelines that are baked into Government policies that we encounter that are incompatible with the intent of moving faster. | Slido |
| Regarding the question referencing “the upcoming Mod, Sim, Analyses, and Apps opportunity?” what is that is alluding to? | The government is not clear what specific opportunity is being referred to in that question. | Slido |
| Is there going to be a SEPARATE opportunity specific to RVES? Will they continue to use vehicles like IAC MAC? | SSHINE will primarily support proposed and selected flight experiments with systems engineering and MS&A. | Slido |
| Would/can offerors be requested to identify/provide novel experimental payloads as part of any of these task orders due to unique access to those technologies? | The four base task orders do not contain scope for any specific experimental payloads. | Slido |
| Is SysMLv2 being considered in your SSHINE MBSE roadmap? | SysML V2 will be adopted when the tools are updated to support it and when it aligns with the timing of flight experiment systems engineering processes and when the workforce is ready for it, as determined by the RVES team | Slido |
| Can we get an extension on the Q&A deadline since we haven't received access to the Industry Day slides yet? | Industry Day Q&A Slido Session has been active until COB 30 Jul 24 (One-on-One scheduled session date), as briefed during the General Session of Industry Day. Initial industry Q&A period was open from the date of the notice on SAM.gov, 26 Jun 24, through 19 Jul 24. No extensions will be granted to submit further questions as the Government team is working to respond to the questions submitted by the above deadlines. | Slido |
| $10M projects - when pricing, do vendors include within task order order pricing or separately for those projects over $10M? | The Government recommends to comment on Section L&M when draft RFP is released if not clarified; Additionally, price for the scope that is presented and not contingencies. | Meet & Greet |
| How are vendors supposed to price FTEs, etc. without knowing Op tempo? | Op tempo matrix was released with RFI - The Government considering updating Op tempo matrix to release with draft RFP/final RFP (Not always to publish details at Distro A). | Meet & Greet |
| Will the Government still require a "Consent to Subcontract" when the Prime has an approved purchasing system? | If the contractor has an approved purchasing system, consent is required for subcontracts specifically identified by the contracting officer in the subcontracts clause of the contract. The contracting officer may require consent to subcontract if the contracting officer has determined that an individual consent action is required to protect the Government adequately because of the subcontract type, complexity, or value, or because the subcontract needs special surveillance. (FAR Subpart 44.2) The cognizant administrative contracting officer (ACO) is responsible for consent to subcontracts, except when the contracting officer retains the contract for administration or withholds the consent responsibility from delegation to the ACO. In such cases, the contract administration office should assist the contracting office in its evaluation as requested. | Meet & Greet |
| What is driving the compressed timeline? | The timeline is based on working backwards from the desired award date and planned government timelines. The desire to move quickly from industry day to Draft RFP to RFP is driven by leadership and meant to keep focus on moving forward in this acquisition. | Meet & Greet |
| Has the Government taken into account Holidays for draft RFP and final RFP? | Yes. | Meet & Greet |
| Can Industry have a list of all RV contracts? How is SSHINE CPFF? How did the Government arrive at CPFF? | Industry can research RV contract awards through public sites, such as SAM.gov and https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/. SSHINE is anticipated to be CPFF and best aligns with the needs of the Government based on FAR 16.306. | Meet & Greet |
| Bldg 595 Tour: Can you clarify the VPM mission? | VPM was a past 6U CubeSat mission out of AFRL/RVEN. VPM was a sister satellite to the larger AFRL Mission DSX and was designed to measure the signals transmitted from the DSX spacecraft as a means of verifying its performance on orbit. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: How did VPM push the Policy boundaries? | VPM was a demonstration in how Small Satellites can be utilized to augment or support larger missions. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: Where are we performing Balloon programs since 595 is SSP? | The Balloon program is managed under the RVEP Draft TO SOW. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: How many SSP launches per year? And development time for small satellite missions? | Over the past 4 years AFRL/RVEN has been launching approximately 1 mission per year. The cadence of missions is increasing so we expect for this tempo to continue as well as accelerate as the division (RVE) executes approximately 22 missions over the next 6 years. Naturally “launch chicken” will phase out the launches of the missions as much of the industry understands that launch dates change over the course of a program. AFRL/RVEN is pushing to execute missions from concept to launch ready within 24 months to be more aligned with the current state of industry. We intend to continue to press for more efficient and responsive capabilities so we are also investigating how we can shorten these execution timelines even further. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: Based on Industry Days slides there are 22 space missions. Are these expected to be supported over the SSHINE TOs? | Yes, these approximately 22 missions will be executed across all of the SSHINE TOs. Depending on the mission, the different branches will be charged with their execution and will fall under the associated TO. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: Do we have analysis to support the throughputs expected? | RVE has been working to manage the throughput of the missions that we are executing. We are managing this by accounting for the staggered phasing of the missions, our facility space availability as well as the execution methods employed. It is expected that through nature phasing as well as launch schedule shifts that the throughput will be supportable with the government and contractor teams being requested as well as through contractor surge capabilities. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: How does the Government determine the platform for mission? | As we work with mission partners, we identify what is needed to perform the mission as efficiently as possible. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: What is the workforce/percentage per mission? | Historically, the contractor support for the RVEN branch government team hovers around 9FTE for with more than 50% of those folks being on-site. This number scales according to mission. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: What are your thoughts on attack surface under cloud based mission operation? | The attack surface that cloud presents is being considered and is being addressed through the accreditation of the environments. | Tour |
| Bldg 595 Tour: What extension/expansion capabilities are under SSHINE? | The surge capability of the SSHINE effort is seen as an ability to expand the capabilities of AFRL for achieving missions. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: What is the pressure limit run in the TVAC Chamber? | 1-2 Torr | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Do you do propulsion testing or propulsion firing in a dirty chamber? | No, we do not test our propulsion systems in a dirty chamber. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Is facility management (specs and calibration) part of the SSHINE requirements? | The contractor will be responsible for operating and managing facility equipment. Facility maintenance will be managed by PRS and is outside the scope of SSHINE. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: What class of clean room does the 277 facility have? | They are rated to a 10,000 class but used to a 1,000 class. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Is maintenance of the building and equipment in the scope of SSHINE? | The maintenance of the building is outside the scope of SSHINE. Equipment management, calibration, and upkeep is within the scope of SSHINE. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Is the machine shop and facilities included in SSHINE? | Yes. The machine shop and the various technical facilities within the high bay of bldg. 277 are included as usable facilities that will be included in SSHINE. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Is material testing done in this facility? | We do not have a dedicated materials lab in the facility. | Tour |
| Bldg 277 Tour: Is the building capable of expanding for more missions in the future? | The high bay in building 277 as well as various other facilities at PRS, can support a future increase in throughput. | Tour |
One-On-One Qs
| Question | Answer |
| May we expect to see the increased SSHINE scope in the Draft RFP to further address the surge and facilities/labs management requirements? | Yes. |
| With the additional scope increase is the $499M ceiling still adequate? | Yes |
| You mentioned at the Industry Day that all existing projects on RISE would be transferred to SSHINE. What are the number of active projects and will you be able to provide the % level of the project that will be transferred at the time of contract award/start? | There are at least 3 flight programs in various stages and one likely research effort that will transition from RISE to SSHINE. The scope of this work will remain in the core task orders for each branch unless the future work is expected to exceed $10M. |
| What is the number of pages expected for the proposal? | TBD; Draft RFP anticipated to include this information. |
| When does the USG expect to have it's full acquisition strategy completed (i.e. you indicated in one of the questions asked that you are still considering a single vs multi-award IDIQ)? | EOM September |
| USG states they are interested in the ‘whole lifecycle’ for space systems. What scope is the USG expecting for spacecraft acquisition? There is very limited info included in the (RFI) SOW. Will acquisitions for spacecraft be ‘sole-sourced’ to the SSHINE contractor to design/acquire/AI&T/test/fly? | Cradle-to-grave scope as defined in the draft SOW. This will depend on specific missions, but we expect SSHINE to directly support all of these types of work for RVE. Specific missions may be competed outside of SSHINE. The SSHINE contractor is expected to work mainly on site as a part of the government team. |
| Can we have flexibility to on-ramp key niche partners , as needed, project specific? | Your selection of who you wish to partner with is up tor you as long as they meet the security requirements. |
| Can we leverage off-site team (non-core) personnel and team integration facilities, as needed? Especially for "surge support" and If so, how do you anticipate this will be handled...i.e. special approval from KO? Please clarify? | If the off-site personnel have been vetted through the contracting process and their facilities meet security requirements then yes. |
| What are your past performance citation requirements? Will you require past performance citations or PPQ's? | Past performance will be an evaluation factor. Specific requirements for how to cite past performance will be in sections L +M |
| Wrt past performance how many citations will be required of the prime vs the subcontractor teammates? | Past performance will be an evaluation factor. Specific requirements for how to cite past performance will be in sections L +M |
| You mentioned "surge" is a new requirement on SSHINE, is there consideration to add a "surge option" to each TO base core TO (TO-001 – 004)? | Each TO will have a surge requirement which falls in line with the base contract surge language. Surge capability has been a part of past contracts to enable AFRL to adapt to changing mission requirements in the most responsive way. |
| From a previous question asked the Gov't indicated average FTE across all ongoing efforts, according to CY 2023 data it is between 25-30 FTE per month. However, for SSHINE do you anticipate this to remain the same for core or increase 2X or 3X? | We see FTE as dependent on the response and strategy in scaling currently successful operations to meet demands for more or quicker deliveries. This may slightly increase historic FTEs, but it should not be 2x or 3x as scaling at low-risk and high value should drive efficiencies. |
| Also during the 1-on-1s, it was expressed to expect 15 - 19 more projects/missions during the course of the SSHINE PoP...are these to be used as general representations of increased work and at planned values of $10M per each new project/mission? Please clarify? | Not every mission will reach the estimated $10M threshhold for an independent TO. |
| Per additional industry day information provided, the Gov't indicated there is a new SSHINE vs RISE requirement for “upkeep, upgrade, maintenance and facility management”. However as expressed from previous industry question this requirement is only briefly referenced in the draft RVEP SOW, TO 0001 (SOW Sections 4.2.4 and 5.1). As such, would the Gov’t consider a SSHINE Facility Management TO-0005 that clearly delineates the Facility Management requirements on SSHINE (i.e. (all facilities/labs, facility management responsibilities, facility & equipment/management/maintenance/upgrades (ODCs)/certification/safety/compliance/scheduling, periodic maintenance logistics inspection (PMLI)? | The government does not anticipate a separate facilities management TO. Previous contracts have included this facility management role and SSHINE will contine to support facilities across AFRL. |
| What is the current facilities/lab average FTE per month for this work? Who is the incumbent contractor? | Please see answer on total FTE question. |
| In the RVES SOW it also states this task order supports upkeep, upgrade, maintenance, and facility management of RVE Mission Operations Centers (MOCs). May you please clarify on details related to this support (i.e. locations, numbers, depth of support required)? What is the current average FTE per month for this work? Who is the incumbent contractor? | This is new scope for RVE that will be addressed by SSHINE. |
| As part of the facilities/lab management, is SSHINE personnel required to also support Non-SSHINE customers/projects in these facilities/labs/MOCs…i.e. would this be 24/7/365 support or addressed on a case by case? | Mission requirements will include non-standard duty hours, and occaisional 24/7 support requirements, but this is not a continuous requirement. |
| What are the three current biggest challenges AFRL/RVE is experiencing today that the Gov't would clearly like addressed during SSHINE? | Please see RVE industry day charts |
| Are there any current management issues the Gov't would like addressed on SSHINE? | Please see RVE industry day charts and refer to Sections L + M in the Draft RFP when released |
| Reference PWS section 4.2.4.2 “Government integration facility management, including personnel training, facility security, and safety compliance” and section 4.2.4.6 “Maintenance and upgrade support for government integration facility capabilities.” Will further details on facility management requirements be provided? | The government team is considering ways to further specifiy facility managament requirements. |
| Reference PWS Section 4.3.5.1 “In the event surge requirements drive a change to the contract, the contractor will be notified through an RFP, contract/task order modification, or contracts letter, as appropriate.” How much notice will be given prior to a surge event? What would the timeline be to get resources in place? | The government would expect surge support to be provided within a relevant timeline given the required scope - in general thanks would be less than 90 days for most small to medium efforts and less than 180 days for a major effort. |
| Reference PWS Section 4.4 Ground System Development. Are there any SSHINE antenna support requirements? | It is anticipated that the SSHINE effort will be utilized in part to support the operation, maintenance and upgrades necessary for our AFRL antenna site. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .