Questions and Answers (Set 6).pdf

Goddard Logistics Services Contract Request for Proposal

Questions and Answers – Set 6

December 19, 2023

Question

No. Document Page No. Reference Question Government Response

1 Exhibit 1 Cost Forms N/A

Form 6 GSFC AbilityOne

From 7

WFF Mail Mgmt.

(1) Will the Government please explain the intent behind Forms 6 and 7, along with an explanation of how Offerors are expected to fill this form out?

(2) Form 6 is the Prime Offerors cost for the AbilityOne directed Subcontractor costs. As the Prime Contractor, we will not incur any additional labor costs associated with this area. Are we to put the total AbilityOne cost in the ODC section or list the labor categories and rates as we do for other Subcontractors in the Forms 2 Hours Detail tabs?

(3) For Form 7, what is the intent behind the Prime Contractor segregating this mail room cost separately from Form 2D – 5.0 Hour Detail?

(1) In accordance with Section L, Cost Volume Instructions, Form 6 – AbilityOne (Page L-27);

Offerors shall coordinate with AbilityOne via primecontractor@abilityone.org to establish the proposed costs for all services identified in Performance Work Statement Section 5.0 (Mail Management) for the GSFC Greenbelt, MD facility.

In accordance with Section L, Cost Volume Instructions, Form 7 – Wallops Flight Facility Mail Management (Page L-28); Offerors are to summarize the proposed costs for all services identified in Performance Work Statement Section

5.0 (Mail Management) for the Wallops Flight Facility (Wallops Island, VA).

(2) Form 1 – Proposed Effort Detail, Row 42 (GSFC AbilityOne) is prepopulated to capture Form 6 (GSFC AbilityOne) totals.

(3) Form 1 – Proposed Effort Detail, Row 43 (WFF

Mail Mgmt.) is prepopulated to capture Form 7 (WFF Mail Mgmt.) totals allowing for the analysis of costs associated with the Wallops Flight Facility mail room.

Question No. Document Page

No. Reference Question Government Response

2 Exhibit 1 Cost Forms N/A

Form 4 Indirect Rates & Other

Rates

Exhibit 1 – Cost Forms – Forms 4 – Indirect and Other Rates all appear to have an incorrect formula in the proposed rate row calculations. They are described as accounting for a blending of calendar years to align to period of performance, however the final calculation results in a value that is 120% of the actual blending. The formula “=(F51*0.3)+(G51*0.9)” appears to be attempting to blend the rates for 3 months of one year and 9 of another. Suggest revising the formula as follows: =(F51*0.25)+(G51*0.75).

Offerors are to validate all Government populated formulas. An Amendment to the solicitation is not required.

3 Sections B-M

L-32

M-6

GSFC 52.215-230(a) Past Performance Volume

GSFC 52.215-330

Past Performance

Evaluation Factor (Services)

Please confirm our interpretation of this language to mean that a proposed Subcontractor must receive at least $10M in revenue annually on the contract resulting from this solicitation, in order for that Subcontractor's past performance citation to be evaluated as part of an Offeror’s proposal. If correct, this language effectively excludes non-joint venture Small Businesses or any non-incumbent from this full and open opportunity because:

The Subcontractor would be given the vast majority of direct labor on the resulting contract, which would not be viable from a business perspective for the Prime, and requiring this proportion of work to be subcontracted will result in a more costly bid to the Government as well as a significant cost disadvantage to any business needing a Subcontractor to meet Past Performance Volume requirements, as the proposing Prime will have the burden of adding indirect burdens on top of the Subcontractor’s indirect burdens.

The net effect of this requirement is thereby to preclude an Offeror from using a Subcontractor’s past performance, effectively preventing most Small Businesses from bidding. We request that the Government eliminate this requirement from the solicitation so that Small Businesses may compete fairly with larger entities.

The referenced Section L and M provisions define a Significant Subcontractor as any proposed Subcontractor that is estimated to meet/exceed an average annual cost/fee of at least $10M. This $10M threshold is to solely determine if a Subcontractor’s past performance will or will not be evaluated by the Government.

If a proposed Subcontractor does not meet the definition of a Significant Subcontractor, than the Government will not evaluate its past performance.

If a proposed Subcontractor does meet the definition of a Significant Subcontractor, the Government will evaluate its past performance.

Offerors are still able propose Subcontractors that do not meet the $10M threshold, but the Government merely will not evaluate their past performance.

There is no requirement within the referenced provisions that Offerors are required to subcontract, therefore no change is applicable.