00. ARTS Q and A.pdf

Aerospace Research, Technology, and Simulations (ARTS) Questions and Answers RFP ‐ 80ARC024R0002

Question/ Comment #

Document Name and/or Attachment Number

Section Page # Paragraph Title (e.g.

clause/provision

Question‐Please note that questions such "Can you clarify section B, clause XX, paragraph XX, etc. will not be answered. All questions shall specifically state what is it that you don’t understand about a specific area.

Response

Example Request for Proposal (example)

M (example) M‐1 to M‐9 (example)

Mission Suitability (example)

EXAMPLE: The PWS makes mention of "Aerocraft Methods", however Section M has no mention of it. How will NASA evaluate an offerors plans, strategies, and/or approaches to carrying out this requirement?

1 DRFP L L‐13 Volume I ‐ General Proposal

Information

The DFRP sets forth a definition of a Major Subcontractor, but should be more explicit as to a Major Subcontractor’s proposal and subcontract particulars.

Are first tier subcontracts to Major Subcontractors required to be the same type (CPFF or FFP) by Line Item as the prime contract?

No, the definitions of what constitutes a major subcontract remain as stated in the in the RFP.

No, the Government does not determine or dictate the contract type of an Offerors subcontractors. This is the decision of the Offeror.

2 DRFP Does the Offeror have discretion to propose other than CPFF or FFP subcontracts for either Major Subcontractors or non‐Major Subcontractors?

Yes.

3 DRFP L L‐29 L 3 Proposal Preparation ‐

Specific Instructions for Columns II‐IV

C ‐ Cost/Price (Volume IV) Instructions ‐

Major Subcontractor Information

The DFRP indicates that a Major Subcontractor is to submit Past Performance information and a fully supported cost proposal, but a non‐ Major Subcontractor is to submit only its input to the Offerors cost matrix.

This seems to conflict with FAR 52.215‐12 which requires Subcontractor Cost or Pricing Data for all subcontract proposals over $2M.

The Government does not see a conflict. FAR 52.215‐12 references FAR 15.403‐ 4(a)(1), “The contracting officer shall obtain certified cost or pricing data only if the contracting officer concludes that none of the exceptions in 15.403‐1(b) applies.[…]”.

The Contracting Officer has determined that there is a high probability of adequate price competition for the acquisition. As such, FAR 15.403‐1(b)(1) provides an exception to certified cost or pricing data.

Certified cost and pricing data will be required in the event that adequate price competition is not achieved.

No revision to referenced instructions is required.

4 DRFP L L‐29 L 3 Proposal Preparation ‐

Specific Instructions for Columns II‐IV

C ‐ Cost/Price (Volume IV) Instructions ‐

Major Subcontractor Information

Are all subcontractors required to submit a fully supported cost proposal if the total proposed is over $2M?

Section L.3.C of the RFP provides a definition of major subcontractors, for proposal purposes. Section L.3.C also outlines the information required to be provided if a subcontractor meets or exceeds the threshold.

5 DRFP The DRFP indicates that work under IDIQ line items will be performed under task orders. Will the Offeror be required to compete each such task order between subcontract sources under FAR 52 244‐5 Competition in Subcontracting, or may task orders be awarded to team member subcontractors, whether Major or non‐Major, without further competition?

The contractor awarded this effort shall manage in accordance with FAR 52.244‐ 5 Competition in Subcontracting which requires competition to the maximum practicable extent.

6 DRFP The DFRP does not specifically differentiate contract clause flow‐down requirements for Major Subcontractors and non‐Major Subcontractors.

Suggest that a matrix be added to specify flow‐down requirements, especially if the requirements differ between Major Subcontractors and non‐ Major Subcontractors.

The individual requirements to flow down contract clauses can be found within each clause.

It is the Prime contractor's responsibility to flow‐down the appropriate clauses to a subcontractor. The Prime Contractor retains responsibility for the outcomes of their subcontractors.

7 DRFP L & M L‐26

M‐8

Past Performance

For ARTS Past Performance contract relevancy, there is a difference in the Section L (page L‐26) and Section M (Page M‐8) values stated for the Prime Offeror’s relevant total contract value and the Major Subcontractor’s relevant total contract value. As an example, within Section M the Prime Offeror’s relevant total contract value is equal or greater than $10,000,000 and the Major Subcontractor’s relevant total contract value must be equal or greater than $1,500,000. To increase qualifying Small Business competition under the 541330 NAICS, will the Government use the values currently stated in the Draft RFP Section M? Please harmonize Section L (Page L‐26) and Section M (Page M‐8).

Yes, for Past Performance only; the major subcontractor threshold is changed in the RFP from $20,000,000 to $10,000,000 or more for requirements over the five‐ year performance period of this contract and from $4,000,000 to $1,500,000 or more in any one year of this contract.

The definition of major subcontractor remains unchanged elsewhere in the RFP for the purposes of Cost/Price.

8 DRFP L L‐26 Past Performance

ARTS is a total Small Business Set Aside under the 541330 NAICS, with a Small Business size standard of $25.5M. To provide for increased competition amongst qualifying Small Businesses, will the Government update the RFP language to require up to three (3) recent past performance contract references for the Prime Offeror and up to three (3) recent past performance contract references for each proposed Major Subcontractor?

The current Draft RFP requires a total of three (3) past performance contract references per Prime offeror and each proposed Major Subcontractor.

As a related item, will the Government remove the language that states:

“The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three references for the Prime Offeror and each of its proposed Major subcontractors.”? Please see Section L (Page L‐

26) and Section M (Page M‐9).

No, the Government will not change the language requiring “Three (3) recent past performance contract references (including government and/or industry contracts), each with a total contract value equal to or greater than $10,000,000 shall be submitted for the Prime Offeror.”

Additionally, no change will be made to the following language: “The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three references for the Prime Offeror and each of its proposed Major subcontractors.”

In accordance with RFP Section L.3.B “"...if a Prime Offeror, or its Major Subcontractor(s), does not have the required number of past performance references, as determined herein, the missing references will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three references for the Prime Offeror and each of its proposed Major subcontractors.”

9 DRFP L L‐4 1852.215‐81

PROPOSAL PAGE

LIMITATIONS

Within Section L (Page L‐4), the 1852.215‐81 Proposal Page Limitations table states that the Past Performance Narrative has a 10‐page limit. Please confirm that this is 10 pages for the Prime Offeror and 10 pages for each proposed Major Subcontractor.

The language in NFS 1852.215‐81 Proposal Page Limitations has been revised to clarify the page limitations for the Past Performance Narrative.

10 DRFP L L‐25

L‐26

Past Performance

QUESTION SECTION L ‐ INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO

OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS states that “Three (3) recent past performance contract references (including government and/or industry contracts), each with a total contract value equal to or greater than $20,000,000 shall be submitted for the Prime Offeror.” In the interest of competition and EO 13985, can this be reduced to two (2) past performance references equal to or greater than $10,000,000?

This change would also make it consistent with Section M, which states “For a Prime Offeror’s individual past performance contract reference to be considered at least minimally “relevant”, it must have a total contract value equal to or greater than $10,000,000.”

No, the Government will not change the language requiring “Three (3) recent past performance contract references (including government and/or industry contracts)..."

Yes, the major subcontractor threshold is changed in the RFP from $20,000,000 to $10,000,000 or more for requirements over the five‐year performance period of this contract and from $4,000,000 to $1,500,000 or more in any one year of this contract.

In accordance with RFP Section L.3.B “"...if a Prime Offeror, or its Major Subcontractor(s), does not have the required number of past performance references, as determined herein, the missing references will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three references for the Prime Offeror and each of its proposed Major subcontractors.”

The definition of major subcontractor remains unchanged elsewhere in the RFP for the purposes of Cost/Price.

11 Industry Day n/a n/a n/a The Industry Day slides indicated that the IDIQ Maximum Ordering Quantity/Value is $75 million. Does the value of the contract depend on funding received from other sources or is the funding stable from Ames?

The contract supports multiple organizations including both governmental and commercial entities. Therefore, the contract is funded by ARC and these other entities. The total contract value will depend on NASA requirements.