I don't think the Beis are lawful. They put their principles - which they attributed as GTVA's principles - ahead of the legal authority of their superior officers in the GTVA. Lawful people tend to put legal authority ahead of their own opinions, adopting the authority's principles as their own. As they both are fairly opinionated, it doesn't seem right to call them neutral either, but chaotic good doesn't seem to fit either. I would say Sam Bei might be closer to lawful, but still in Neutral Good territory, while Admiral Bei would be somewhere between Lawful Neutral and Neutral Good.
Simms can seem Chaotic Good, but there are some nuances of Chaotic Neutral there as well.
Steele isn't really Chaotic. He plans, and plans, and his contingencies have contingencies. Planning is not a strong suite for Chaotic alignments, I think. Steele's characterization puts him more in the True Neutral, Lawful Neutral, or possibly Neutral Evil alignment. He certainly has no qualms about using people as means to an end - but whether his motivation are his own goals (neutral evil) such as promotion of his career, obeying orders from superior officers to his best ability (lawful neutral) or just doing the best job he can in the position he is at, without much personal feelings about it to motivate him (true neutral), it's anyone's guess... alternate character interpretations are fun either way. Personally, I'm leaning toward neutral evil or lawful neutral.
Shivans and Vishnans can both seem evil from Humanity's perspective (with best available information). They both seem willing to disregard any other species' opinion and well-being to fulfill their own, unknown (so far) goals.
Neither of them are lawful, but I'd say Shivans are more willing to blindly obey their own rule set, while Vishnans might make exceptions to their rules. I'd swap their alignments to Lawful Evil for Shivans, and Neutral Evil for Vishnans; although you might want to consider Lawful Neutral/True Neutral and Lawful Good/Neutral Good for them as well - depending on what perspective you have on their actions and motivations.
Remember that character alignments are always supposed to be in effect from the character's own perspective. It would be possible to have a story with a lawful good character doing horrible things that they thought were good and just, while it could seem evil to everyone else. The main difference between lawful good and evil is that LG character sees the legal authority as something that everyone need to adhere to above everything else, and if the legal authority would require them, say, executing someone, they would do it if it was the law (or they believed it was required by the law). LE characters see rules as something to exploit to advance their own goals; for example manipulating people into doing something because otherwise they would break the law.
Question here is... are Shivans or Vishnans more interested with advancing their own goals and plans with their actions at the expense of everything and everyone else (which would make them evil), or do they have other motives? Do they self-actualize or do they feel like they have responsibilities or duties to perform?
