OMES III Draft RFP QA (Batch 1) 3-23-22.pdf

OMES III Draft RFP Batch 1 Q&A Posting (Batch 1)

# Document Reference Question/Recommendation Government Response

1 L 25(g)(1)A-D

As part of the OCI Assessment, "A The Offeror shall include a list of all of its and its proposed subcontractor’s NASA contracts and subcontracts in its submission" and "B For non-NASA contracts, the

Offeror shall list any of its and its proposed subcontractor’s contracts or subcontracts that may give rise to an OCI" Will the Government please clarify if this data is required as part of the OCI Plan submission due 2/11 or whether it is to be submitted with the Offer

Volume

Yes, this data was required as part of the OCI plan submission due February 11, 2022 and it is required to be submitted in the Offeror Volume in accordance with the Final

RFP Clause GSFC 52 209-301 NOTICE OF POTENTIAL

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (MAR

2020) Offerors were encouraged to provide mitigation strategies addressing potential OCI identified in L 25, Notice of Potential Organizational Conflicts of Interest of the Draft

RFP Offerors will not be considered “ineligible” from competition if mitigation strategies are not provided at this point, prior to the proposal submission

L 22(c) DETERMINATION OF

COMPENSATION

REASONABLENESS, page 94

The requirement refers to an "applicable wage determination"

Question: Will the government add a wage determination to the solicitation/contract?

This clause was applicable per the prescription However, we do not anticipate a wage determination being applicable

L 22(d) DETERMINATION OF

COMPENSATION

REASONABLENESS, page 94

Total Compensation Plan: This provision requires "all service subcontractors provide, as part of their proposal, the information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision for cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type subcontracts having a total potential value expected to exceed the threshold for requiring certified cost or pricing data as set forth in FAR 15 403-4" The threshold in FAR 15 403-4 is $2 million which could be deemed an unreasonable and unnecessary burden on small business

Question: Will the Government consider an alternative GPM threshold for the requirement for service subcontractors to submit a

TCP such as the threshold for a Significant Subcontractor in Section

L 32(a): "any proposed subcontractor that is estimated to meet/exceed an average annual cost/fee of $20M"?

This is a FAR regulatory requirement, thus the Government is not going to consider increasing the $2M threshold

B 3 SUPPLIES AND/OR SERVICES TO BE

PROVIDED, Page 10 Question: Will the Government be adding the Safety and Health Plan as an Item in the table?

No, the Safety and Health Plan shall be submitted as part of the Offerors' proposal in accordance with L 30 (d), Subfactor

B - Management Approach, B 13 - Safety and Health Plan

5 L 30 (d) Subfactor A A 2

1) L 30 (d) Subfactor A A 2 states that the response to the RTOs must demonstrate “potential technical problems, risks, and critical issues”

Question: Will the government confirm they intend for offerors to submit the listing of “technical” problems, risks, and critical issues or does the government want to see "non-technical" risks and critical issues?

Yes, as per L 30 (d) Subfactor A 2 (RTOs), the Government confirms that the Offeror shall submit the listing of

"technical" problems, risks, and critical issues

Past Performance, L 27, Table of Page Limitations, Page 102 of 147 and L 32a Page 135 of 147, and L 32b, Page 136 of

To ensure sufficient detail from Offerors on their contract references, will the Government consider moving the requirements for

"Company OSHA Recordable Injuries and Illnesses for the past 3 years" and the "Past Performance Questionnaire List" outside of the

20 page limit, excluding them from page count?

No, the requirements for "Company OSHA Recordable

Injuries and Illnesses for the past 3 years" and the "Past

Performance Questionnaire List" will remain unchanged

However, the Final RFP will reflect a page increase from 20 to 25 pages

OMES III Draft RFP QBatch 1 Q&A Posting (Batch 1)

Past Performance, L 32a, Information from the

Offerors, Page 133 of 147

Prime Offerors may have extensive list of contracts that meet the requirement of "Prime Offerors shall furnish the information requested below for all of your most recent contracts (completed and ongoing) for similar efforts with a minimum average annual cost/fee incurred of $40M that your company has had within the last 5 years of the RFP release date "

To ensure Prime Offerors are able to provide all required materials for Past Performance, will the Government increase the page limitations for Prime Offerors from 20 to 25 pages? Yes, the Government will increase the page limitation requirement from 20 to 25 pages

8 L 27(b)(1)

Please confirm that the entire Small Business Utilization Subfactor

(Subfactor C, Part A, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Exhibit

12, Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals, and Part B, Commitment to the Small Business Program) is excluded from page count

Yes, Subfactor C - Small Business Utilization (SBU) is excluded from page count

9 L 27 (b)

The Draft RFP table on page 103 show the Deviations / Exceptions are excluded from page count However, Section L 28 (b) Page 105 includes the instructions for Volume I Offer Volume and seems to indicate under Summary of Exceptions that “This list must include all exception(s), deviation(s) and/or conditional assumptions taken”

Can the government please clarify where offerors are to include

Deviations and Exceptions?

Cost Volume, Item (d) Deviations/Exceptions will be deleted in the Final RFP Deviations and Exceptions shall be included in the Offer Volume in accordance with L 28 GSFC 52 215-

203 OFFER VOLUME (JUL 2020) (b)

10 L 27(b)(1) Would the Government please confirm that for all Volumes, the following are excluded from the page count: Cover Page, Indices, RFP Compliance Matrix, Title Page, Tabs, Table of Contents, and

List of Acronyms?

In accordance with L 27 GSFC 52 215-201 (ALT I)

PROPOSAL PREPARATION—GENERAL

INSTRUCTIONS (ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL

DELIVERY) (MAR 2020) (b)(1) table the following are excluded from all volumes: Cover Page, Indices, Table of

Contents, and List of Acronyms

11 L 30, B 2

Will the Government confirm our response to this entire B 2 requirement only applies to significant subcontractors?

Yes, Per L 30 GSFC 52 215-210 MISSION SUITABILITY

VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS (SEP 2020), B 2 requirement only applies to significant subcontractors

12 L 33 Besides the list in L 33, the DRFP does not reference Enclosure AA

– Government Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Will the

Government reference elsewhere in the RFP (e g , B 11, Page 114) the applicability of Enclosure AA?

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) was referenced in error M 3 GSFC 52 215-311 MISSION

SUITABILITY VOLUME EVALUATION (SEP 2020),

B 11 will be updated to remove the Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan (QASP) in the Final RFP

13 L 33 The Draft RFP lists Enclosure DD which was not included with the files post to SAM gov Will the Government please provide this documents as soon as possible, before the release of the Final RFP?

Yes, the Government will post Enclosure DD before the release of the Final RFP

14 M 3, B 1 Will the Government please distinguish between

"comprehensiveness" and "completeness" as evaluation criteria?

M 3 GSFC 52 215-311 MISSION SUITABILITY

VOLUME EVALUATION (SEP 2020), B1 will be updated to delete "completeness" as an evaluation criterion in the

Final RFP

Exhibit 2B

(L 31) The Draft RFP makes reference to Exhibit 2 There appears to be two (2) Exhibits 2Bs (one on page 2, the other on page 3), which one(s) is appropriate or should be used for this procurement?

Exh 2B Prime & SS Offsite M&A is appropriate if proposing

Offsite rates only Exh 2B Prime & SS On&Offsite M&A is appropriate if proposing a combination of Onsite and Offsite rates

OMES III Draft RFP QBatch 1 Q&A Posting (Batch 1)

OMES III Draft Request for Proposals Exhibits 1A -

1C All IDIQ w GPM and Exhibits 2 - 12 All IDIQ by CY All

Will the Government please confirm that the cost Exhibits should only contain fonts in Arial 9 - 12 point? The Draft RFP Cost Exhibits are provided in PDF format with instructions to convert to Excel It appears when the instructions are followed the resulting Excel file contains minor formatting issues that are not consistent with the

Draft RFP instructions For example, Draft RFP section L 27 (b) (2) indicates the Excel exhibits are formatted using 9 - 12 point Arial font However, when the PDF is converted to Excel the resulting excel file has multiple font types, to include Arial and Times New

Roman, and multiple font sizes outside of the 9 - 12 point range identified in the Draft RFP

The Government confirms that the cost Exhibits should only contain fonts in Arial 9-12 point

OMES III Draft Request for Proposals Enclosure

CC - Gov Pricing Model All

The Labor Categories listed in the Hours By Site Location section are abbreviations of the titles in the GPM-Specified Non-

Management Labor Position Descriptions

Please confirm that we can use either of these versions of the labor category name, since Draft RFP instructions state (L 31 B 4, Page

128) that the offeror must use this information

Yes, using the abbreviations or the full labor category name is appropriate

18 L 22, L 30 B 10 and L 31(b)(14)

Please confirm that Exhibits 10A and 10B also satisfy the TCP requirement for non-significant subcontractors in RFP section L 30

Subfactor B (B 10) which again references FAR 52 222-46 and NFS

1852 231-71 The DRFP indicates in Section L 31(b)(14) that

Exhibits 10A and 10B satisfy the TCP requirement at FAR 52 222-

46 for the Non-Significant subcontractors Please confirm that

Exhibits 10A and 10B also satisfy the TCP requirement for non-significant subcontractors under NFS 1852 231-71(d), found in

DRFP Section L 22(d), which requires a TCP from all service subcontractors for cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type subcontracts having a total potential value expected to exceed the threshold for requiring certified cost or pricing data as set forth in FAR 15 403-4?

Yes, Exhibits 10A and 10B satisfy the TCP requirement for non-significant subcontractors referenced in FAR 52 222-46 and NFS 1852 231-71

19 Page 134

Will the government confirm that "Offerors" in the second paragraph on Page 134 is inclusive of Significant Subcontractors for the purposes of that requirement? The Draft RFP states: "If applicable, Offerors may provide the experience or past performance of a parent or affiliated or predecessor company to an Offeror (including Joint

Venture prime partner companies and/or a parent or affiliated company that is being otherwise proposed as a subcontractor on this effort) where the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate or predecessor will affect the performance of the Offeror The Offeror shall demonstrate that the resources of the parent or affiliate or predecessor company (its workforce, management, facilities or other resources) shall be provided or relied upon for contract performance such that the parent or affiliate or predecessor will have meaningful involvement in contract performance "

The Government confirms that "Offerors" in Clause L 32

GSFC 52 215-230 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME

(MAR 2020) second paragraph on page 134 on the Draft

RFP is inclusive of Significant Subcontractors