ROME RFP QA Set 2.pdf

# Reference Page Question/Comment Government Response

72 RFP, Section I Page 46

We believe there is a type in the NAICS below:

I.52 52.219-28 POST-AWARD SMALL

BUSINESS PROGRAM REPRESENTATION

(SEPT. 2021) (1)

The contractor represents that it □ is, □ is not a small business concern under NAICS Code 261210 assigned to the contract number _____.

We believe this should be NAICS 561210.

Question: Can the government confirm the NAICS is 261210 or can the government provide the correct NAICS code?

The NAICS Code for the ROME requirement is 561210.

The RFP states: (d) The apparently successful offeror agrees to submit, for each item as required prior to award, a Material Safety Data Sheet, meeting the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200(g) and the latest version of Federal Standard No. 313, for all hazardous material identified in paragraph (b) of this clause. Data shall be submitted in accordance with Federal Standard No. 313, whether or not the apparently successful offeror is the actual manufacturer of these items. Failure to submit the Material Safety Data Sheet prior to award may result in the apparently successful offeror being considered nonresponsible and ineligible for award.

Question: It is unclear exactly when this information is required. Does NASA intend to notify the apparently successful offeror and request the Material Safety Data Sheet after Source Selection? If so, how much time will the apparently successful offeror have to prepare the MSDS? We recommend this be changed to “prior to contract start” and not be part of the evaluation criteria. Also, did the government intend to say “nonresponsive” instead of “nonresponsible”?

This information can be submitted after award from the successful offeror during the phase-in period

73 RFP, Section I, Page 49

ROME Request for Proposal (RFP) Questions and Answers (Q&A) 80GSFC22R0011 Set 2

74 RFP, Section L.21

The RFP states: (h) Existing Government property may be reviewed at the following locations, dates, and times: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt; Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops, VA.

Question: The Government did not state the dates and time the GFP may be reviewed if the intent is allow an in-person review and/or site visit. Can the government please provide the dates and times for review?

Due to the center being under COVID code orange there will not be an opportunity to view Government property during the proposal period.

Government property is listed in Attachment C, C1 and C2.

75 RFP, Section L.30(a)

The RFP states: 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 $6M that your company has had within the last 5 years of the RFP release date.

Question: Will the Government accept CPARS evaluations in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires for Past Performance evaluation? If so, will the CPARS submitted be excluded from the page count limitations for the Past Performance Volume?

The Government will not allow CPARS evaluations in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires.

76 N/A

We respectfully request an extension to the due date of proposals for this procurement. The combination of FOMS III and FaCETS III has created a complex set of requirements and multiple Representative Task Order submissions and separate Basis of Estimates, etc. We believe that it is in the Government’s best interest to provide adequate time for all offerors to prepare high quality proposals and create a level playing field, which will give the Government the lowest risk and best value offers. By giving additional time for all offerors to prepare their submissions, it will reduce the chance for errors or omissions and allow a fairer competition.

Question: Can the Government please provide an extension to the current due date of September 2, 2022, at 2PM EST.

This question is still under review.

77 RFP, Page 132, Section L.30, Paragraph (a)

In Section L.30, paragraph (a) Information from the Offeror, the Government requests offerors to “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 $6M that your company has had within the last 5 years of the RFP release date”.

For some offerors, presenting all recent and relevant contracts could entail providing narrative responses for more than 20 contracts in the last 5 years. This would not allow for adequate space to effectively provide relevant information on each contract. This would hinder the Government in conducting a fair evaluation as there would not be sufficient detail to determine relevance to the magnitude of effort and scope of work provided.

Question: Will the Government please limit the number of contracts provided to a maximum of five (5) contracts per offeror?

It is up to each offeror to determine the most relevant (similar efforts) contracts to provide for the Past Performance evaluation.