Sol_31310019R0017_Amd_0002.pdf

(x)

31310019R0017 x x

1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR

OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

NRCHQ

WASHINGTON DC 20555-0001

MAIL STOP TWFN-07B20M

ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT DIVISION

US NRC - HQ

05/07/20190002

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

05/07/2019

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of this amendment is to 1) address questions from the vendors 2) modify the deadline for questions to NLT May 31, 2019 by 4:00pm (EDT;

3)Extend the deadline for offers to NLT June

12th, 2019 by 4:30 PM (EDT).4) Incorporate NRC

Attachment 1: Subpart 2009.5 Organizational

Conflicts of Interest is incorporated

5)Incorporate NRC Past Performance Survey.

Period of Performance: 07/01/2019 to 06/30/2022

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

MONIQUE B. WILLIAMS

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243 Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

Solicitation No. 31310019R0017 – Amendment 1

Questions

1. What is the difference between solicitation numbers 31310019R0017 and 31310019R0027 because they appear to have the same title?

1) RESPONSE: 31310019R0027: Is Risk informed reviews of Instrumentation and controls System and Components: Integrating Risk Insights into the Digital I/C regulatory Framework

31310019R0017: Is Risk informed reviews of Instrumentation and controls System and Components: Quantifying Digital I/C System Reliability and treatment of uncertainty.

2. General. Please advise, if possible, on the lead NRC branch for this Solicitation, as it will help identify the prime focus for the review and deliverables.

RESPONSE: The prime focus for the review and deliverable information can be found in the Statement of Work and the deliverable schedule

3. Section B.3 (p. 4), and Section C.5 (p. 9): Please confirm that offerors may include additional personnel and classifications, such as Project Manager and Administrative Support.

RESPONSE: Per the language in Section B.3 and L.6, the information provided is for advisory purposes only and the contractor can recommend additional labor categories and level of effort based on your understanding of the requirement. If additional labor categories and LOE is incorporated, please provide supporting documentation and explanation in technical and cost proposal.

4. Section B.3, (p. 4). This section includes a table for providing fully burdened labor rates. The table heading is “Burdened Labor Rates (FY 19-24)*”

a. There is no footnote for the *. Please clarify.

RESPONSE: Per FAR 16.601(a) - Time-and-Materials a Burdened (fixed) Labor Rate includes: wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, and profit for each category of labor.

b. FY19 to FY24 is six fiscal years. However, the period of performance of this contract is only four year, with hours specified only for the first 3. Please clarify how NRC would like offerors to present rates, whether rates should be presented by contract year or by fiscal year, and whether NRC desires rates only for the fourth year (i.e. no hours).

RESPONSE: The estimated level of effort table is displayed below for 31310019R0017: “Risk Informed Reviews of Instrumentation and Control Systems and Components: Quantifying Digital I/C System Reliability and Treatment of Uncertainty” The period of performance is intended to be three years from the effective date of this contract FY19-FY21.

Year 2019 Year 2020 Year 2021 Labor Category Estimated

Hours Estimated

Hours Estimated

Hours

Total

Senior Key Staff 350 350 350 1,050 Mid-level Key Staff 350 350 350 1,050 Total 700 700 700 2,100

5. Section C.5 (p. 9): Can NRC identify the estimated level of effort by Task?

RESPONSE: It is up to the contractor to determine the level of effort per task based on your understanding of the statement of work. Please see Section B.3 and L.6.

6. Section L.8 (p. 75) states that “This procurement is unrestricted under NAICS Code 541330.” Please explain the meaning of “unrestricted” in this context and confirm that this is a small business set-aside.

RESPONSE: Section L.8 (p.75) first paragraph is revised accordingly:

“L.8 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL AND COST PROPOSALS –

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has a requirement for the services described in the attached Statement of Work (SOW). This procurement is total small business set aside under NAICS Code 541330”

7. Section L.8(a) (p. 75) requires submittal through FedConnect. However, this RFP number does not appear under FedConnect. Please clarify submittal instructions.

RESPONSE: Section L.8 (p.75) first paragraph (a) is revised accordingly:

To respond to this Request for Proposals (RFP), your organization will be required to provide a proposal which consists both of a written technical proposal, as well as a separate cost proposal. Your offer must be submitted electronically using Fedconnect: https://www.fedconnect.com OR via email: April.bucher@nrc.gov no later than 4:30 pm, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), on June 12, 2019. Proposals submitted via Fedconnect shall be submitted via the Response tab;

not submitted through the Message Center.

8. Section L.9 (p. 76) specifies the deadline for submission of questions as June 6, 2019. That is the same day proposals are due. Please clarify.

RESPONSE: Section L.9 (p. 77) Second paragraph is revised accordingly:

All questions shall be sent via fedconnect: https://www.fedconnect.net OR via email: April.bucher@nrc.gov no later than May 31, 2019, by 4:00 PM (EDT).

9. Section L.10 (p. 77): Please advise whether there is a page limit for the technical proposal. We note that reference is made to a page limit in other locations within the proposal instructions, but we could not find a specified page limit in the RFP.

RESPONSE: There is no page limit for the technical proposal.

10. Section L.10 (p. 78): The RFP states that offerors should identify proposed individuals “who may have or have the appearance of a conflict of interest via employment or financial interest in organizations regulated by the US NRC.”

a. Since many experts qualified to perform portions of this SOW have worked extensively for NRC licensees or applicants, would such individuals be eligible to perform work under this SOW?

b. The SOW involves work related to BWRs, PWRs, and SMR’s including advanced non-LWRs. If an individual works for an NRC-regulated entity on one type of technology, would they be eligible to support NRC on other technologies?

RESPONSE: Please see the statement below which responds to questions (a) and (b) As referenced in the NRC Attachment 1: Subpart 2009.5 Organizational Conflicts of Interest. Specifically it states the following:

(a) It is the policy of NRC to avoid, eliminate, or neutralize contractor organizational conflicts of interest. The NRC achieves this objective by requiring all prospective contractors to submit information describing relationships, if any, with organizations or persons (including those regulated by the NRC) which may give rise to actual or potential conflicts of interest in the event of contract award.

https://www.fedconnect.com/ mailto:April.bucher@nrc.gov https://www.fedconnect.net/ mailto:April.bucher@nrc.gov

(b) Contractor conflict of interest determinations cannot be made automatically or routinely. The application of sound judgment on virtually a case-by-case basis is necessary if the policy is to be applied to satisfy the overall public interest. It is not possible to prescribe in advance a specific method or set of criteria which would serve to identify and resolve all of the contractor conflict of interest situations that might arise.

This document gives specific directions, guidance and examples related to Organizational Conflict of Interest. It is up to the contractor to read this attachment and apply accordingly to the specific situations and make the determination. The offeror is responsible for identifying the information in the offerors proposal in accordance with NRC conflict of interest clause.

11. Section L.10, (p. 79), states: “Offerors shall provide a list of contracts completed within the past five (5) years of the release date of this request for proposals (RFP) that are relevant to this requirement.” Please clarify whether or not offerors may submit contracts that are currently ongoing – i.e. not yet completed.

RESPONSE: Yes. Offerors can submit relevant past performance for on-going work as long as it’s within the past five years. So, active contract are acceptable.

Section L.11, (p. 81). This section states: “Offerors shall also identify travel costs (if applicable).” Since Section B.3 includes a plug number for travel costs, we assume that no additional travel cost information is required in the cost proposal. Please confirm.

RESPONSE: Correct. In accordance with Section B.3, the government estimate for travel is not to exceed $8,000.00 for the three year period of performance.

12. Section L.11, (p. 82). This section states: “The cost proposal must include all costs related to performing the SOW, including the deliverables, labor hours, personnel costs, software, license, training materials, and maintenance, as appropriate.” However, there is no provision for cost-reimbursable Other Direct Costs (ODCs) included in Section B.3.

Please confirm that offerors may add a “Materials” line to the Section B.3 table.

RESPONSE: NRC anticipates travel as the cost reimbursement line item (materials). The NRC does not anticipate any additional other direct costs. However, if you think other materials are warranted you can include in your cost proposal for consideration.

13. Section M.2 EVALUATION FACTORS, Factor 2: CORPORATE EXPERIENCE, p. 82, states: “… The NRC also reserves the right to evaluate the corporate experience of Significant Subcontractors as part of this factor, if they are included in the offeror’s proposal.”

Please clarify that subcontractors’ corporate experience will be considered as part of the evaluation provided that the corporate experience meets the requirements of section L.10, Factor 2, Corporate Experience, Subcontractor Corporate Experience, p 83. That is, please confirm that consideration of subcontractor corporate experience is not discretionary.

RESPONSE: As stated in Section L.10, Factor 2, Subcontractor Corporate Experience If offerors are proposing subcontractors for a significant or critical portion of this effort, then offerors may include a list of corporate experience references for contracts completed within the past five (5) years by the subcontractor that are relevant to this requirement. The NRC defines “significant” as any effort for which a single subcontractor will be performing at least 25 percent of the overall required work. Therefore, if the offer proposes a subcontract to perform more than 25 percent of the work than their corporate experience will be considered.

14. Are there restrictions and/or terms associated with university partnerships with my small business for this scope of work? For example, may I propose a split in senior key staff between myself and experienced academic senior and mid-level key staff members whom have industry experience?

RESPONSE: As stated in Section L.10, Factor 2, Subcontractor Corporate Experience:

If offerors are proposing subcontractors for a significant or critical portion of this effort, then offerors may include a list of corporate experience references for contracts completed within the past five (5) years by the subcontractor that are relevant to this requirement. The NRC defines “significant” as any effort for which a single subcontractor will be performing at least 25 percent of the overall required work. Therefore, if the offer proposes a subcontract to perform more than 25 percent of the work than their corporate experience will be considered.

15. Is there a ceiling cost of this SOW?

RESPONSE: The NRC is not providing the total ceiling for the contract. However, for bidding purposes see Section B.3 for the proposed Level of Effort table.

End of Questions

This amendment also incorporates these additional changes:

1. Incorporate NRC Attachment 1: Subpart 2009.5 Organizational Conflicts of Interest is incorporated

2. Incorporate NRC Past Performance Survey.

Attachment 1

Subpart 2009.5 Organizational Conflicts of Interest

§2009.500 Scope of subpart.

In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 2210a., NRC acquisitions are processed in accordance with §2009.570, which takes precedence over FAR 9.5 with respect to organizational conflicts of interest. Where non-conflicting guidance appears in FAR 9.5, that guidance must be followed.

§2009.570 NRC organizational conflicts of interest.

§2009.570-1 Scope of policy.

(a) It is the policy of NRC to avoid, eliminate, or neutralize contractor organizational conflicts of interest. The NRC achieves this objective by requiring all prospective contractors to submit information describing relationships, if any, with organizations or persons (including those regulated by the NRC) which may give rise to actual or potential conflicts of interest in the event of contract award.

(b) Contractor conflict of interest determinations cannot be made automatically or routinely. The application of sound judgment on virtually a case-by-case basis is necessary if the policy is to be applied to satisfy the overall public interest. It is not possible to prescribe in advance a specific method or set of criteria which would serve to identify and resolve all of the contractor conflict of interest situations that might arise. However, examples are provided in these regulations to guide application of this policy guidance. The ultimate test is as follows: Might the contractor, if awarded the contract, be placed in a position where its judgment may be biased, or where it may have an unfair competitive advantage?

(c) The conflict of interest rule contained in this subpart applies to contractors and offerors only.

Individuals or firms who have other relationships with the NRC (e.g., parties to a licensing proceeding) are not covered by this regulation. This rule does not apply to the acquisition of consulting services through the personnel appointment process, NRC agreements with other Government agencies, international organizations, or state, local, or foreign Governments. Separate procedures for avoiding conflicts of interest will be employed in these agreements, asappropriate.

§2009.570-2 Definitions.

Affiliates means business concerns which are affiliates of each other when either directly or indirectly one concern or individual controls or has the power to control another, or when a third party controls or has the power to control both.

Contract means any contractual agreement or other arrangement with the NRC except as provided in §2009.570-1(c).

Contractor means any person, firm, unincorporated association, joint venture, co-sponsor, partnership, corporation, affiliates thereof, or their successors in interest, including their chief executives, directors, key personnel (identified in the contract), proposed consultants or subcontractors, which are a party to a contract with the NRC.

Evaluation activities means any effort involving the appraisal of a technology, process, product, or policy.

Offeror or prospective contractor means any person, firm, unincorporated association, joint venture, co-sponsor, partnership, corporation, or their affiliates or successors in interest, including their chief executives, directors, key personnel, proposed consultants, or subcontractors, submitting a bid or proposal, solicited or unsolicited, to the NRC to obtain a contract.

Attachment 2

TO: WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

SUBJECT: PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE SURVEY IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

NO. 31310019R0017, ENTITLED “RISK-INFORMED REVIEWS OF INSTRUMENTATION AND

CONTROL SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS: QUANTIFYING DIGITAL I&C SYSTEM RELIABILITY

AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is currently conducting proposal evaluations for a contract to provide the NRC with “Risk-Informed Reviews Of Instrumentation And Control Systems/Components: Quantifying Digital I&C System Reliability and Treatment of Uncertainty”.

Our primary source of information for this part of the evaluation will come from the past performance references that the offeror has provided us. The NRC evaluation panel must ensure that the offeror has both relevant and successful past performance in performing work of a comparable nature and complexity to the NRC’s requirement.

Accordingly, we ask that you complete the enclosed past performance survey and return it directly to April Bucher:

April.bucher@nrc.gov no later than June 6, 2019, 4:00 PM EST.

Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (301) 415-0144.

Sincerely, Digitally signed by April Bucher Date: 2019.05.30 09:22:18 -04'00'

April Bucher, Contracts Specialist Acquisition Management Division Office of Administration

Enclosure: Past Performance Questionnaire

April Bucher mailto:April.bucher@nrc.gov

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE COVER SHEET

Name of offeror questionnaire is being completed for:

Name of agency/company completing questionnaire:

Contract Number: NRC Solicitation No. 31310019R0017

Name, title of person completing questionnaire:

Address:

Telephone No.:

Email Address:

Length of time your organization has been involved with the offeror:

THE COMPLETED PAST PERFORMANCE COVER SHEET AND PAST PERFORMANCE

QUESTIONNAIRE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL.

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE RATING SHEET

RATING SCALE

Please use the following ratings to answer the questions. If you are unable to rate an item because it was not a requirement, never an issue, or you have no knowledge of the item in question, then you should mark “NA”.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Excellent - The offeror’s performance was consistently superior. The contractual performance was accomplished with only minor problems for which corrective action taken by the contractor was highly effective.

Good - The offeror’s performance was better than average, and you would willingly do business with the offeror again. The contractual performance was accomplished with minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Neutral - No record exists.

Average - The offeror’s performance was satisfactory and consideration would take part in awarding a contract to the offeror again. The contractual performance reflects a problem for which the contractor has not yet implemented corrective actions.

Poor - The offeror’s performance was entirely unsatisfactory and you would not do business with the offeror again under any circumstances. The contractual performance being assessed contains problems for which the contractor‘s corrective actions appear to be or were ineffective.

NOTE: For statements indicating “Poor”, please provide a brief explanation in the comments section of the survey.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

POOR AVERAGE NEUTRAL GOOD EXCELLENT

QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE:

(1) The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate reports.

(3) The Contractor utilized personnel that were appropriate to the effort performed.

COST CONTROL:

(1) The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.

(3) The Contractor demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.

(4) The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.

SCHEDULE:

(1) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

(2) The Contractor was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.

BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS:

(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.

(2) The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and/or Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) were apprised of technical, cost, and schedule issues.

(3) The Contractor presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.

(4) The Contractor promptly notified the COR, -5-

POOR AVERAGE NEUTRAL GOOD EXCELLENT

TPOC, and/or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.

(5) The Contractor cooperated with the Government in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical program issues.

(6) The Contractor made timely award to, and demonstrated effective management of, its subcontractors.

(7) The Contractor demonstrated an effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program.

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

(1) The products/services provided adequately met the needs of the program.

(2) The Contractor was able to perform with minimal or no direction from the COR or the

TPOC.

(3) I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS