Enclosure 2 - Responses to Industry Questions for the Final RFP.pdf

Amendment 5 – Enclosure 2 80JSC020R0018

Simulation and Advanced Software Services (SASS)

Reponses to Industry Questions to Final Request for Proposal (FRFP)

Question # Area Page In the RFP

Question/Comment Response

1 Section L.10 (c) 85 In the SASS Final RFP, section L.10(c) on page 85 states that:

"Offerors are advised that, as stated in the beta.sam.gov Learning Center, file sizes over 100MB may experience system difficulties. All the proposal files may be compressed (zipped) into one file titled “80JSC020R0018_VENDORNAME.zip” or uploaded individually. The electronic proposal shall contain all information required by the solicitation to be determined responsive. Files shall not have password protection, encryption, or any access or viewing restrictions."

Each major subcontractor has their own proprietary cost data spreadsheet and narrative.

Will a major subcontractor be able to independently submit their confidential cost data to support the prime's submitted proposal? If not, how can a prime contractor submit these confidential cost data without password protection on the subcontractor's files?

Section L.10 of the RFP has been revised with Amendment 3 with new instructions to Offerors on proposal submission via CD-ROM. Offerors’ prime and major subcontractor team members may submit their own proprietary cost data directly to the government separately. The Offeror team is responsible for ensuring their single proposal and all associated data is delivered by the time and date noted in the solicitation to include all amendments.

2 Section L,

17.5.1 (b)

96 In the SASS Final RFP, section L.17.5.1(b) on page 96 states that:

For those individuals proposed as Program Manager, Advanced Software Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead listed in Clause 1852.235-71, Key Personnel and Facilities, the Offeror shall provide their résumé details as prescribed in Attachment L-04, Key Personnel Résumé. Provide information about organizations and companies for which Program Manager, Advanced Software Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead have previously performed work relevant to the SASS SOW from the past three years, in order for the Government to obtain appraisals of past performance via the Key Personnel Resume in Attachment L-04. References with Government contracts are preferred, but not required. Key Personnel with no past performance experience shall so state.

Are Key Personnel Resumes included in the Past Performance page count?

No. While Key Personnel resumes are not included in the Past Performance page count, each resume is limited to 2 pages. “PP Attachments” are defined as L-2 Past Performance Questionnaire, L-3 Past Performance Consent Letter, L-4 Key Personnel Resume, and L-5 Past Performance Matrix. These attachments are not part of the Past Performance page limit. Table L-2, OVERVIEW OF PROPOSAL VOLUMES, PAGE

LIMITATIONS, COPIES, AND FORMAT was updated in Amendment 5 of the RFP to reflect this change.

3 Section L 17.5.1.(b)

96 If Key Personnel Resumes are part of the Past Performance page count, we request an additional 5 pages to the total Past Performance page count.

Refer to Question & Answer 2 concerning Key Personnel Resumes and impact to Past Performance page count. It is the judgment of the SASS PDT that 30 pages is sufficient for the Past Performance section.

Question # Area Page in the

RFP

Question/Comment Response

4 Section L 17.5.1.

96 Referencing RFP Section L.17.5.1:

paragraph (a) states:

Offerors shall demonstrate past experience in all areas of the statement of work by submitting past performance information on no more than three contracts for offerors and each proposed major/minor subcontractor, teaming arrangement and joint venture partner that best demonstrates their ability to perform the SASS work.

Where as paragraph (i) states:

In addition to the information above, Offerors, any major/minor subcontractors, as defined above, the proposed Program Manager, Advanced Software Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead, and any other organizational entity (parent or affiliated company, division(s), business units, or segments of your company, which is considered to provide meaningful involvement in contract performance, shall each submit the Past Performance Questionnaire, Attachment L-4, to all of the point of contact references required in paragraph (d) above. This shall be done for at least three contracts completed within the last three years containing some or all of the functions defined in the SOW, if such experience exists.

Should the phase “at least three contracts” in (i) be changed to be consistent with the phrase “no more than three contracts” in (a)?

The sentence in RFP Section L 17.5.1(i), “This shall be done for at least three contracts completed within the last three years containing some or all of the functions defined in the SOW, if such experience exists,” has been removed. Offerors shall submit the Past Performance Questionnaire, Attachment L-2, to all of the points of contact and technical references.

The RFP has been updated via Amendment 5 to reflect this change.

5 Section L 17.5.1

96 Referencing RFP Section L.17.5.1, paragraph (i), the Past Performance Questionnaire is called out as Attachment L-4. It is labelled Attachment L-2 in the RFP.

The Past Performance Questionnaire should be Attachment L-2.

Section L.17.5.1 (i) has been revised via Amendment 5 to correct the attachment number for the Past Performance Questionnaire.

6 Section L, Table 2

In Table L-2, OVERVIEW OF PROPOSAL VOLUMES, PAGE LIMITATIONS, COPIES, AND FORMAT, PP Attachments are specified as not subject to page limitations, but are not explicitly defined. We are working under the assumption that “ATTACHMENT L-4 KEY PERSONNEL RESUME” (with letters of commitment), as well as “ATTACHMENT L-3 PAST PERFORMANCE CONSENT LETTER” are part of the PP Attachments, and therefore not subject to page limitations. Can you confirm this assumption?

Refer to Question & Answer 2.

7 Many potential Past Performance references will be out for extended periods between now and the Proposal due date. Are the PP Questionnaires due to the CO on the proposal due date? If so, can this be extended?

Amendment 4 to the RFP extended the due date for proposals to January 31, 2020.

Question # Area Page In the

Question/Comment Response

8 Entire RFP Many sections and attachments throughout require offerors to edit or fill in information and the RFP submission requirements do not allow for PDF. Can the government please provide MS Word versions of the RFP and attachments where appropriate?

The RFP has been provided in MS Word with Amendment 5.

9 L.10, L.17.2(a);

Preproposal Conference slide 45

85 Per the Pre-Proposal Conference, we understand it is the government’s intent to release an Amendment to change the submission instructions. However, as of the date of these questions, the Amendment has not been released formally changing the submission to CD-ROMs. Therefore, we are submitting this clarification/question. There are currently no instructions in beta.SAM.gov or the Learning Center that provide guidance on how Offerors are to submit proposals in the system. The Learning Center implies the capability, but there are no specific instructions on how or where we are to submit proposals. Please clarify how we should submit SASS proposals in the system where it does not provide for the functionality or instructions.

Refer to Question & Answer 1.

10 L.17.2;

Table L-2

The past performance page count limitations do not appear to be enough to cover all the items required to submit in the section and does not list all the required items. Missing from the list is -Key personnel resumes and evidence of commitment – recommend not included in page count, but limited to 2 pages for the resume and 1 page for evidence of commitment as indicated Attachment L-4 -Consent letters, recommend removing from page count -Affiliate Company narrative – add a 1-page limitation and do not include in the overall page limitation.

Refer to Question & Answer 2 & 3 regarding Past Performance attachments and page count limits.

The evidence of commitment could be a formal letter or a signed statement within the resume. A formal commitment letter is not included in the resume page limitation.

11 L.17.2;

Table L-2

90 Due to the apparent number of expected past performance citations and key personnel references, we recommend that the government allow up to 5 page per reference and not limit the overall page count to 30.

Refer to Question & Answer 2 & 3.

12 L.17.2;

Table L-2

90 The table indicates that “PP Attachments” are not included in the page count. Please clarify which of the specific items required in section L.17.5.1 are considered PP Attachments.

Refer to Question & Answer 2.

Question # Area Page in the

Question/Comment Response

13 L.17.2;

Table L-2

90 The asterisk for Volume V indicates that all the J Attachments must be submitted in Volume V. Does this mean that we are to include the information in more than one volume? For example, J-6 is required in Volume I as the DRD-01 Contract Management Plan. Do we also include it in Volume V? This question also applies J-3 mapping, J-7, J- 12, and J-14.

The Contract Management Plan (DRD-01) and the Phase-In Plan (DRD-11) should be included in Volume I – Technical Acceptability.

The Organizational Conflict of Interest Plan (DRD-07) should be included in Volume IV – Responsibility Considerations.

Per Section L. 17.6(b)(5), the data provided in the Fringe Benefits Analysis of Compensation Plan (FBAC) template will serve as the Total Compensation Plan. This information shall be submitted in Volume III

– Cost/Price.

Once these plans are approved by the government, they will be incorporated into their respective J- Attachments.

The Standard Labor Categories provided in Attachment J-03 are intended to broadly group proposed labor into manageable number of categories. Any mapping to the SLCs provided shall be submitted in Volume III in the TRST tab of the Excel Pricing Model Workbook – Attachment L-6.

All Section J- Attachments must be included in Model Contract (Volume V) to include place holders for Attachments J-6 through Attachment J-15.

Question/Comment Response

14 L.17.2.1(b)(2

92 The RFP states that proposals shall be prepared and submitted in MS Office 2016 applications. How should offerors submit information where the source document is PDF such as SF-33, OSHA 300 and 300A logs, insurance certificates, consent letters, Model Contract information, and other pages where signatures are required?

Per Table L-2, Offerors are instructed to submit their Environmental and Safety Data, Insurance Information in their native format.

The SF-33 shall be submitted in its native format.

The Model contract shall be submitted in MS Word, with the exclusion of the SF-33 which shall be submitted in its native form. Table L-2 has been revised to clarify the submittal format for the SF-33 with Amendment 5.

Table L-2, has been revised to identify Past Performance Attachments with Amendment 5 and clarity that PP Attachments, to include the consent letter, shall be submitted in their native form.

15 L.17.5.1(b);

L.17.5.1.(d);

Attachment

L-4

96-97, Attachment

L-4 Page 147

Section L.17.5.1 (b) indicates that Key Personnel Past Performance is verified via the Key Personnel Resume Attachment L-4. However, L.17.5.1 (d) indicates offerors are to include all the contract related information for items (a) and (b). Please clarify that Offeror do not need to provide all the contract information listed in (d) for each contract reference in the Key Personnel’s resume.

Offerors do not need to provide contract information for contracts referenced in the Key Personnel resume that are not relevant to the SASS SOW, per L.17.5.1(b).

Offerors only need to provide contract information for contracts referenced in the Key Personnel resume that are relevant to the SASS SOW, per L.17.5.1 (b).

16 L.17.5.1(d) 96-97 RFP states, “…referenced contract in (a) and (b) above.” The current requirement appears to require that Offerors provide contract information for key personnel references including Contract number, Cage Code, NAICS, DUNS, number of FTE, etc.

•Is it the governments intent that all the information listed in item (d) apply to key personnel references or just for items in (a) and (c)? If not, what information is required for key personnel?

•Should the reference be (a) and (c), not (b)

Section L.17.5.1 (d) applies as stated in the RFP. The items listed in L.17.5.1 (d) are also applicable to the contract references associated with Key Personnel.

Question/Comment Response

17 Section H, clause

1852.235-71 Key

Personnel and Facilities

(MAR

1989);

L.17.5.1(d);

DRD-01

25 Clause 1852.235-71 and Section L.17.5.1 (d) use the key personnel titles of Advanced Software Technical Lead and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead. However, DRD- 01 references the key personnel as Advance Software Lead and Simulation and Graphics Lead. Please clarify which key position titles are preferred.

The Advanced Software Technical Lead and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead are the correct key position titles. DRD-01 of the RFP has been corrected via Amendment 5 to reflect this change.

18 L.17.5.1(d) 96-97 The RFP includes consent letters as a bullet within this paragraph number. Does the government want a separate consent letter for each referenced contract or just one consent letter from each subcontractor, teaming partner, proposed Program Manager, Advanced SW Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead?

Only one consent letter from each subcontractor, teaming partner, proposed Program Manager, Advanced SW Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead is required. Section L.17.5.1(d) of the RFP has been revised via Amendment 5 to clarify this requirement.

19 L.17.5.1(d);

L.17.5.1(e)

96-97 Can the government clarify why key personnel are being treated as past performance references with the expectation that we are to provide the same level of contract information for each position/reference the key person held including submitting PPQs?

This is highly unusual as key personnel do not normally have specific information being requested, nor do they typically get evaluated separately from the rest of contract with regard to past performance

The Government has determined that the past performance information for key personnel is important for this procurement.

20 L.17.5.1(d);

L.17.5.1(e);

L.17.5.1(h)

96-97 Is it permissible to group contract information, contract narrative, and summary supporting metrics responses together for each relevant contract to avoid repeating contract information?

It is permissible for the offeror to organize the Past Performance volume as they wish. The Past Performance volume needs to address the information requested in L.17.5 Past Performance (Volume II)

21 L.17.5.1(f);

L.17.2.1(b)(2

97,92 L.17.5.1 (f) indicates that the Past Performance Matrix goes in the volume. However, per section L.17.2.1 (b) (2), “…the Microsoft Excel spreadsheets shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format, not in a scanned Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF file. Are offerors expected to insert the past performance matrix in the volume as a table, as well as provide it electronically?

The Past Performance Matrix Attachment L-5 should be submitted in its native format. The Past Performance Matrix is a past performance attachment, and per the answer to question 2, is not part of the past performance page limit.

22 L.17.5.1(i) 98 Please confirm that Offerors are to request past performance questionnaires for each contact listed in item d, including key personnel?

As stated in the RFP, offerors are to request past performance questionnaires for each point of contact reference listed in L.17.5.1 (d), including references for key personnel specified.

23 L.17.5.1(h) 97-98 The RFP states, “(h) Offerors shall provide past performance narrative along with a summary of supporting metrics data (if available) on the following items on the contracts listed in section (d)” Section (d) requires information for both reference contracts and key personnel references. Information required in section (h) is not likely available for key personnel references.

Section L.17.5.1 (h) should refer to contracts listed in L.17.5.1(a). The RFP has been revised via Amendment 5 to reflect this change.

Question/Comment Response

24 L.17.8, table Section J

110 RFP states that Offerors are to submit the required documents.

•Please confirm that we are to submit all the DRDs in Volume V •If Attachments are required in other volumes, are we to also include the information in Volume V. For example, Attachment J-6, Contract Management Plan is required in Volume I, do we include in Volume V also.

•(c) Please provide an exact list of the J Attachments that we are to submit in Volume V.

Refer to Question & Answer 13.

25 L.17.8, table Section K

110 Is it permissible to submit only the fill-in pages or does the government want the entire section with the fill-in pages completed?

Per Table L-2, ** All Offerors are required to submit the entire Model Contract inclusive of every Section A- J also to include all requested fill-ins. Offerors shall also submit Section K, Representations and Certifications, with all fill-ins completed.

26 Attachment L-3

146 The sample reflects that a company official must sign the consent letter; however, the consent is also used for key personnel consent. Please confirm that for the purposes of consent of key personnel, the individual does not have to provide a company name, just an address.

Attachment L-3 is provided as a sample. The Offeror should tailor as needed for key personnel.

27 Attachment L-4

147 Items 6c and 6f appear to be the same information. Are both required? Item 6f has been removed from Attachment L-4. The RFP has been revised via Amendment 5 to reflect this change.

28 Attachment L-4

147 Item 9 indicates we are required to provide evidence of commitment for the Key Personnel. What are permissible items as evidence of commitment? Is this excluded from page count?

Refer to Question & Answer 10.

29 Attachment

L-6; EPM,

OHT Tab

149,EPM

Workbook Attachment

L-6

Instructions state that a separate template for each the proposed overhead and service center rate(s). Does the government want the separate template(s) to be added below the current Overhead Template or should a separate tab be created identifying the separate overhead or service center?

The Offeror may add the separate template(s) below the current Overhead Template or create a separate tab identifying the separate overhead or service center as long as each template is properly labeled/identified.

30 Section L:

Table L-4 and Table L-

Table L-4 page

95,Table L-6

Table L-4 identifies a total of 74.75 WYEs and Table L-6 identifies 109,740 hours per Contract Year equating to 59 WYEs. Is it the government’s intentions for the Total Technical Staffing WYEs Table L-4 to be different than pricing table L-6 WYEs?

It is the government’s intentions for the Total Technical Staffing WYEs Table L-4 to be different than pricing table L-6 WYEs.

Question # Area Page In the RFP

Question/Comment Response

31 Attachment J-14 Total

Compensation Plan

67 Are the Prime and Subcontractors Attachment J-14 Total Compensation Plan to be included with Volume V Model Contract? If not, which volume should Attachment J-14 be included in?

Section L. 17.6(b) 5, Fringe Benefits and Leave Programs, instructs the Offerors to utilize the Fringe Benefits Analysis of Compensation Plan (FBAC) template to provide the data in Volume III that will satisfy the Total Compensation Plan (TCP) requirement of the RFP. The data/information provided in the FBAC template will be incorporated into the contract as the TCP in Attachment J-14 for the successful Offeror.

32 L.17.5.1 (b);

Attachment L-4.

96, 147 Section L.17.5.1 (b) states, “Provide information about organizations and companies for which Program Manager, Advanced Software Technical Lead, and Simulation and Graphics Technical Lead have previously performed work relevant to the SASS SOW from the past three years, in order for the government to obtain appraisals of past performance via the Key Personnel Resume in Attachment L-04. References with government contracts are preferred, but not required. Key Personnel with no past performance experience shall so state” and Attachment L-4 states “6. Previous positions (within five years of proposal submission date)”. Please clarify that the government is requesting key personnel information on organizations and companies where they performed SASS related work for the last 5 years as is stated in Attachment L-4, and that the 3 years identified in section L.17.5.1(b) with regard to work relevant to SASS should be 5 years?

L.17.5.1 (b) is stated correctly. Attachment L-4 has been revised via Amendment 5 the RFP to “Previous positions (within three years of proposal submission date)”

33 Preproposal Conference slide, 29; Section K – Representations, Certifications and Other

Statements of Offerors or

Respondents, 52.204-8

69 Slide 29 states, “NAICS Code 541511 Custom Computer Programming Services and Small Business Size Standard, Annual revenues of $27.5 million or less” and 52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications (Oct 2018) (a) (2) “The small business size standard is $27.50 Million.” This number does not meet the SBA NAICS code update effective August 19, 2019 of $30 million. This NAICS code size standard is $30 million.

The NAICS code in the RFP has been amended to reflect the updated SBA Business size standard of $30 Million Average Annual Receipts.

34 Section F – Deliveries or Performance;

Attachment J-4

14 Can the government clarify in “Place of Performance” in Section F – Deliveries or Performance how much office space will be provided on-site? Will the government clarify if all staff will be located on site? If all staff will not be located on site, will the government clarify how many seats will be located on site?

There are approximately 60 WYE supporting the current requirements under the existing two contracts.

Approximately 40 WYE are located onsite at JSC.

Per Attachment J-4, Installation- Accountable Government Property; 40 computer workstations will be provided for the SASS requirements for contractor use.

35 Can you kindly state who the incumbent Vendor on this deal was? There are two current contracts that work is currently being performed. The two separate contracts are;

Software Robotics, and Space Systems Services (SRS3) and Robotics, Vehicle, & Graphics Simulation Services (RVGSS). The current incumbent for the SRS3 contract is Tietronix, the current incumbent for RVGSS is

METECS.