80JSC020R0031 RFP Question and Answers.pdf

80JSC020R0031

Question and Answers

Question Answer

1 Is there an anticipated GFY or CFY funding profile available or should the contractor assume all funding will be available as needed?

The government will not provide a Government Fiscal Year (GFY) or

Contract Fiscal Year (CFY) funding profile for the Orion Main Engine

Request for Proposal (RFP). Per Section H clause 1852.232-77

LIMITATION OF FUNDS (a) “It is anticipated that from time to time additional funds will be allocated to the contract as required by the payment schedule in Section H clause OME CERTIFICATION &

ENGINE PRODUCTION PAYMENTS, MILESTONE EVENTS,

AND COMPLETION CRITERIA or as required by the payment schedules defined in special task orders until the total price of all

CLINs is allotted.”

2 On page H-9 of the RFP, footnote 9, it is stated that prior to and including Production Milestone 2, the milestone will not exceed 70 percent of the price. In the event that an engine goes into storage, would

NASA consider allowing an invoice for 100% of the engine price minus the remaining delivery reviews and shipping? When the CLIN 0004 storage task order is placed, an additional milestone that allows for this invoice could be included as well as modifications to the final post-ship HAR milestone values. In this way, the Contractor is not cash-negative for an undetermined period after completing the hardware and storing it for NASA’s risk mitigation

The RFP Section H clause, OME CERTIFICATION & ENGINE

PRODUCTION PAYMENTS, MILESTONE EVENTS, AND

COMPLETION CRITERIA has been updated which includes the following changes:

1) Deletion of the Milestone 4, Post Flight Assessment Review

-The Post-Flight Assessment Review will now be executed under CLIN 0003, Special Tasks and Studies

2) Adjustment to the “not to exceed” percentage amounts for Milestone

2, Pre-Ship Hardware Acceptance Review for the following tables:

-Table II.A.1-2A, -2B, and -2B2: Superscript 9 from 70% to

90%

-Table II.A.1-3A and 3B: Superscript 14 from 75% to 90%

3) Adjustment to the “must equal at least” percentage amount for

Milestone 3, Post-Ship Hardware Acceptance Review for the following tables:

-Table II.A.1-2A, -3A, -2B, -2B2, and -3B

Superscript 10 from 20% to 10%

As a result of this change the following superscript notes have been updated:

9After successful completion of OME certification, the total of production milestone payments prior to and including the

Production Milestone 2, Pre-Ship Hardware Acceptance

Review, for each production engine shall not exceed 90% of the total price of each engine.

10Production Milestone 3, Post-Ship Hardware Acceptance

Review, milestone payments for each engine must equal at least

10% of the total price of each engine.

11Reserved

14For future lot buys, the total of production milestone payments prior to and including the Production Milestone 2, Pre-Ship Hardware Acceptance Review, for each production engine shall not exceed 90% of the total price of each engine.

The following attachments have been replaced in their entirety as a result of this change:

Attachment L-6A- OME EPM Templates-Baseline

Attachment L-6B- OME EPM Templates-Accelerated

3 Given the COVID-19 pandemic and the uncertainty surrounding personnel availability and remote work environments that the contractor sites, supplier sites, prime customers, NASA test facilities, etc, may experience, it is possible that GTAs, Past

Performance responses, and other critical proposal submittal items may be impacted. Has any thought been given to this or consideration for an extended proposal submittal timeline?

In the event that issues arise impacting the timely proposal submission due to COVID-19, please email the Contracting Officer at ashley.h.chaves@nasa.gov or jsc-ome@mail.nasa.gov. However, the

RFP has been updated to allow for a full 90 days of proposal preparation.

Section L provision L.17.2 PROPOSAL ARRANGEMENT, PAGE

LIMITATIONS, COPIES, AND DUE DATES has been updated to read:

“The entire proposal is due no later than June 17, 2020 at 1:30 p.m.

Central Time. Proposal Volume II, Past Performance Information is requested early by May 28, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. Central Time but not officially due until the proposal submittal date.”

“Email invitations with LFT links expire in 168 hours. Therefore, all

Offerors that plan to submit Volume II, Past Performance early must submit their request for an LFT invitation to submit the Past

Performance Information to the aforementioned emails, no later than

1:30 p.m. Central on May 21, 2020. The Government anticipates responding with an invitation to use LFT on May 22, 2020.

All Offerors must submit their request for an LFT invitation for the final proposal to the aforementioned emails, no later than 1:30 p.m.

Central on June 10, 2020. The Government anticipates responding with an invitation to use LFT on June 12, 2020.”

The last paragraph of Provision L.17.3 PROPOSAL MARKING AND

DELIVERY THROUGH LARGE FILE TRANSFER (LFT) has been updated to read:

mailto:ashley.h.chaves@nasa.gov mailto:jsc-ome@mail.nasa.gov

“The Government is not responsible for any failure attributable to the transmission or receipt of documents submitted using electronic means, including the missing of any established deadlines. Please note that uploading documents via LFT and the transmission of the files from the Offeror to the Government may not be instantaneous. Offerors are cautioned to allow for sufficient time to ensure timely proposal delivery before the submission deadline of June 17, 2020 at 1:30 p.m.

Central. To ensure successful delivery, Offerors should submit proposals at least 24 hours prior to the time specified in the solicitation.”

4 What is the most likely timing in the certification/production activity will the decision to store engines be made? How much advanced notice for storage will there be?

NASA will notify the contractor on the decision to store the engines no later than 30 calendar days prior to Milestone 2, Pre-Ship Hardware

Acceptance Review.

The RFP Section B clause CLIN 0004 OME STORAGE has been updated to read “No later than 30 calendar days prior to Milestone 2, Pre-Ship Hardware Acceptance Review, NASA will notify the contractor if storage is required.”

5 If we have responded to RFI and draft RFP, do we need to add ourselves to the interested parties list on beta.sam.gov?

Yes, please add your company to the Interested Vendors List on

Beta.Sam.Gov for 80JSC020R0031. Due to the move from Federal

Business Opportunities to Beta.Sam.Gov, there is now the ability to add your company to the publicly-available Interested Vendors List.

In order to add yourself to the Interested Vendors list for the RFP

80JSC020R0031, please follow the instructions on the below link:

https://gsafsd.servicenowservices.com/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d4226633dbf44850304c327c7c961907 https://gsafsd.servicenowservices.com/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d4226633dbf44850304c327c7c961907 https://gsafsd.servicenowservices.com/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d4226633dbf44850304c327c7c961907

6 Is the proposer still responsible for attaining costs of the government for a GTA?

Yes, the offeror is responsible for obtaining the costs for the

Government Task Agreements (GTA).

The RFP states in Section H clause USE OF GOVERNMENT

PROPERTY, FACILITIES, ASSETS, OR SERVICES that “The

Contractor shall obtain and maintain any necessary contracts or agreements between the Contractor and any Government Agency authorizing the use of Government property, facilities, assets or services in performance of this contract (except as may be expressly stated in this contract as furnished by the Government).”

In addition, Attachment L-8, Government Task Agreement Instructions states that “The Offeror’s GTAs shall be submitted as attachments to the Offeror’s proposal. GTAs shall have an agreed-upon price provided to the Contractor by the Performing Organization. The price of all GTAs will be added to the Offeror’s firm fixed price for purposes of calculating a Total Evaluated Price for proposal evaluation purposes.”

7 The RFP identifies four components of the OME that require a Contractor to identify the major subcontractors supplying those components. If the

Contractor is making the component, but sending it out for outside processing, are outside processors considered major subcontractors?

If the offeror as a prime, is responsible for one or more of the critical parts listed as a major subcontractor effort, the offeror shall complete the Major Subcontractor templates for each critical part. If the contractor is making the component and sending it for outside processing, the outside processor would not be considered a major subcontractor.

The RFP Section L.17.7 Price Factor – Volume III, (b) Specific

Guidelines, has been updated to read “If a contractor (Prime or major subcontractor) is responsible for one or more of the critical parts listed above, the contractor shall complete the major subcontractor templates for each critical part.”

8 Offeror is requesting clarification as to the level of detail in the BOE requirements, when considering that this is a competitive, FFP procurement.

The offeror is required to provide the level of detail in the BOE in accordance with Provision L.17.7 Price Factor- Volume III (a) which states

“To ensure that the Government is able to perform a fair assessment and determine the reasonableness of proposed price, each Offeror is required to submit a Price Proposal that is suitable for evaluation.”

In addition, provision M.4 Price Factor (Volume III) states that “To ensure that the final agreed-to prices are fair and reasonable the

Government will perform these analyses in accordance with FAR

15.305 - Proposal Evaluation, FAR 15.404 - Proposal Analysis, and

NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) 1815.305 - Proposal Evaluation.”

9 How is contract value and funding affected if a government facility overruns its GTA through no fault of the Contractor?

If the Government facility overruns the GTA at no fault of the contractor, the Government will cover the cost of the overrun.

Attachment L-8, Government Task Agreement Instructions, states “The parties will be held responsible for any changes or addition of GTA’s by negotiating a corresponding supplemental agreement recognizing the equitable adjustment to the price, pursuant to FAR 52.243-1 –

Changes.”

10 What are the assumptions to be utilized for CLIN

0003 and CLIN 0004?

The pricing instructions assumptions for CLIN 0003 Special Tasks and

Studies and CLIN 0004 Storage are outlined in Provision L.17.7

PRICE FACTOR- VOLUME III, (c)(5) Pricing for IDIQ RFP

Specified Resources (SR) - CLIN 0003: Special Tasks and Studies and

(c)(6) Pricing for Delivery Order- CLIN 0004: Storage.

11 CLIN 0004 specifies a time period to estimate for storage, but does not estimate the quantity of engines to be stored. Please clarify the quantity to be assumed.

The RFP pricing instructions in L.17.7 PRICE FACTOR- VOLUME

III (c)(6) Pricing for Delivery Order- CLIN 0004: Storage, have been updated to read

“Offerors are to assume the storage need is for a minimum of three (3) engines.”

12 Contractor requests NASA’s schedule for when it thinks award selection shall be made. There are a number of deliverables due at ATP, and the

Contractor will need time to prepare them.

Contract selection is anticipated to be made by October 2020 and contract award by November 2020.

13 What is the latest beta.sam.gov website to follow for the RFP?

All Offerors shall follow 80JSC020R0031 in Beta.Sam.gov for the latest information.

14 Is there any line of sight that these engines will be used by other than Orion?

At this time, NASA has not determined if the OME will be used for others outside of the Orion Program.

15 Are there any concerns with International Partners? All Foreign Offers will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 25.5

Evaluating Foreign Offers- Supply Contracts.

16 What are the limitations with International

Partnerships?

The limitation on International Partnerships are outlined in FAR Part

25 Foreign Acquisitions and in the following clauses in the RFP:

52.204-23 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING FOR HARDWARE,

SOFTWARE, AND SERVICES DEVELOPED OR PROVIDED BY

KASPERSKY LAB AND OTHER COVERED ENTITIES

52.204-25 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE

SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT

52.225-5 TRADE AGREEMENTS

52.225-6 TRADE AGREEMENTS CERTIFICATE

52.225-13 RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOREIGN PURCHASES

(JUN 2008)

52.225-20, PROHIBITION ON CONDUCTING RESTRICTED

BUSINESS OPERATIONS IN SUDAN—CERTIFICATION.

52.225-25, PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES

ENGAGING IN CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OR TRANSACTIONS

RELATING TO IRAN—REPRESENTATION AND

CERTIFICATIONS

1852.225-71 RESTRICTION ON FUNDING ACTIVITY WITH

CHINA (FEB 2012)(DEVIATION)

1852.225-72 RESTRICTION ON FUNDING ACTIVITY WITH

CHINA – REPRESENTATION (FEB 2012)(DEVIATION)

In addition, Offerors shall comply with export laws, as well as any provisos levied on them in accordance with the applicable Technical

Assistance Agreements (TAAs) or Manufacturing License Agreements

(MLAs).

17 How do the use of Government Task Agreement’s get evaluated in the proposal versus using other government facilities?

The GTA’s will be evaluated in accordance with M.4 Price Factor.

The Offerors use or approach of the GTA’s is not evaluated.

18 Is there a preference for use of WSTF over other facilities?

There is not a preference for use of White Sands Test Facility.

19 Will the price of the GTA be included in the final price?

The price of the GTA will be included in the total evaluated price for proposal evaluation purposes.

Attachment L-8, Government Task Agreements, states “The price of all

GTAs will be added to the Offeror’s firm fixed price for purposes of calculating a Total Evaluated Price for proposal evaluation purposes.”

20 As work is being executed, can the scope be adjusted for the utilization of GTAs?

Attachment L-8, Government Task Agreement Instructions states “any

GTA may be amended or revised during performance as agreed to by the NASA and the Contractor. During contract performance, the

Parties may also agree to execute additional GTAs if they mutually determine such agreements are necessary to respond to new or changed circumstances that arise during performance. After award, the contractor will be responsible for the price of such subsequent GTAs.

The parties will be held responsible for any changes or addition of

GTA’s by negotiating a corresponding supplemental agreement recognizing the equitable adjustment to the price, pursuant to FAR

52.243-1 – Changes.”

21 On which initial ARTEMIS mission OME is supposed to fly? Is OME#1 allocated to the same mission for the baseline as well as for the accelerated schedule?

Section C states “This Performance Work Statement (PWS) and all exhibits and documents attached or referenced herein define the NASA requirements for the Contractor to provide the Orion Main Engine

(OME) that will replace the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

(MPCV) Orbital Maneuvering System-Engine (OMS-E) that has been repurposed to support the Orion spacecraft on Artemis I through

Artemis V.” Therefore, the first Artemis mission the Orion Main

Engine will fly on is Artemis VI. The OME #1 will be allocated to

Artemis VI under the baseline schedule. It has not been determined which Artemis mission OME #1 will be allocated to under the accelerated schedule.

22 Is NASA open to offers proposing a schedule beyond the baseline schedule and/or accelerated schedule in the RFP or will that be considered non-responsive?

In order to be awarded the OME contract, Offerors must be determined responsible per FAR 9.104-1(b) “Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental business commitments;”. An offeror that proposes a schedule that does not meet the required baseline or accelerated delivery schedule will be considered non-responsive.

23 Is NASA open to offers proposing a cost+ contract instead of FFP for CLIN 0001 or will that be considered non-responsive?

The RFP in Section L contains FAR 52.204-22 which states “The

Offeror may submit one or more additional proposals with alternative line items, provided that alternative line items are consistent with subpart 4.10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. However, acceptance of an alternative proposal is a unilateral decision made solely at the discretion of the Government. Offers that do not comply with the line items specified in this solicitation may be determined to be nonresponsive or unacceptable.”

24 The procurement policy for this activity is in accordance with FAR 25. Does the absence of

52.225-2, Buy American Certificate, lead to the conclusion that a European offeror could be awarded as OME prime contractor?

Both foreign and domestic offerors are eligible for award, subject to the terms contained in the OME RFP and all applicable laws and regulations.

The RFP contains in Section I, FAR 52.225-5 Trade Agreements which states “(b) Delivery of end products. The Contracting Officer has determined that the WTO GPA and FTAs apply to this acquisition.

Unless otherwise specified, these trade agreements apply to all items in the Schedule. The Contractor shall deliver under this contract only

U.S.-made or designated country end products except to the extent that, in its offer, it specified delivery of other end products in the provision entitled ‘Trade Agreements Certificate.’ ”

25 Would NASA consider in the price evaluation a potential funding support by a foreign space agency of the foreign part of CLIN 0001 procurement and how this will be taken into account?

NASA is not considering in the price evaluation potential funding support by a foreign space agency. NASA will only be evaluating the pricing information requested in Section L.17.Price Factor- Volume III in accordance with Section M.4 Price Factor (Volume III).

https://www.acquisition.gov/content/subpart-410-uniform-use-line-items#iSubpart_4_10

26 We do not see a specific evaluation factor in the RFP for offering an OME that can be used on other NASA programs than Orion - will NASA selection process consider this as an advantage in its OME proposal evaluation?

The RFP does not have evaluation factors specifically concerning the use of the OME on other NASA Programs. The evaluation factors outlined in Section M, Evaluations Factors For Award includes use for the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program and other NASA Exploration

Programs.

27 What are the contractual and financial consequences in case of not meeting the schedule delivery milestones during execution of CLIN 0001 and CLIN

0002?

If the contractor fails to meet the scheduled delivery milestones, the

Contracting Officer will assess the scenario and use remedies per the terms and conditions of the contract, which may include using a Show

Cause notice or a Request for Equitable Adjustment to ensure adequate consideration is given for any contractor-caused delays. Because the milestones are performance based payments, the financial consequences of not meeting the milestones would mean the contractor is not paid for the milestone until the deliverable is completed. In the event that the contractor fails to deliver or makes substantial progress on the milestones, the government reserves the right to a termination for default.

28 Would NASA supply propellants for testing to

European facilities? If so, will this include all efforts for shipping and related activities?

NASA will supply propellants for testing to the testing facility which includes the propellant and transportation to any testing location.

29 To which destination shall the first CLIN 0002 hardware (Lot Buy 1, OME 1-4) be delivered:

Bremen or Huntsville?

The RFP does not state where the first lot buy should be delivered.

Provision L.17.7 Paragraph C (2)(f) states “The Offerors shall assume half of the deliveries are shipped to Bremen, Germany and half of the deliveries are shipped to Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama as detailed in Section F clause SHIPPING

INSTRUCTIONS.”

30 General question, CLIN 0003. If a Contractor does not have fully developed rates for all 11 years of this

IDIQ, would NASA consider a price reopening clause at set periods to allow for rate adjustments once fully developed rates are released in the

Contractor’s business systems?

The contractor shall propose contract rates for all years for CLIN 0003 in accordance with the pricing instructions outlined in Provision L.17.7

PRICE FACTOR- VOLUME III Paragraph (c)(5) Pricing for IDIQ

RFP Specified Resources (SR)- CLIN 0003: Special Tasks and Studies.

NASA will not consider a price reopening clause.

31 General question: At what level will NASA be segregating funds and expect segregated invoices: at the task order level or at the CLIN level? For example, if there are two open task orders on CLIN

0003, would those require separate invoices or could one invoice for both task orders be issued?

The contract will be funded at the task order level and therefore, invoices shall be submitted at the task order level. Section G clause

1852.232-80 SUBMISSION OF VOUCHERS/INVOICES FOR

PAYMENT (APR 2018)(c)(2) states “invoices submitted under fixed-price contracts shall include the items delineated in FAR 32.905(b) supported by relevant back-up documentation.” FAR 32.905(b)(iii) referenced in NFS 1852.232-80 states that “Contract number or other authorization for supplies delivered or services performed (including order number and line item number)” 32 Page 43, Use of Government Property, Facilities, Assets, or Services, paragraph (d): Please clarify paragraph (d). It states both that the Contractor will be responsible for the cost of a GTA, and it also states that Parties will effect new GTAs and corresponding price adjustments pursuant to the changes clause. It is unclear whether the cost of new

GTAs is expected to be contained within the currently stated NTE or is expected to alter the currently stated NTE. It seems like the answer to that question would depend on the nature of the change:

whether NASA flowed new scope or whether the

Contractor wanted to complete additional work at the government facility with no change to NASA’s IDIQ or task order. Please clarify how paragraph (d) affects price.

The price of any new GTA will be part of the stated Not-To-Exceed value. Any changes to an awarded task order will be made in accordance with the FAR 52.243-1 – Changes.

33 Page 52, 52.222-46 EVALUATION OF

COMPENSATION FOR PROFESSIONAL

EMPLOYEES (FEB 1993) is flowed. (It is also present on page I-3 of the RFP.) This clause requires, as part of the proposal, a compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits for the professional employees who will work under the contract. There is no definition of page count or in which volume this plan is to be provided. Please clarify the submission requirements of this plan.

The Government inadvertently kept this clause in the RFP. This clause has been removed from the RFP.

34 Page 52, 52.223-3 Hazardous Material Identification and Material Safety Data is flowed. This requires an

OFI. Shall this be inserted in the full text clauses in the back?

The RFP has been updated to include the Full Text Version of FAR

52.223-3, 52.223-3 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION

AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA (JAN 1997) (ALT 1) (JUL 1995)

to allow for the offeror fill in.

Accessibility Report

Filename:

80JSC020R0031 RFP Question and Answers.pdf

Report created by:

Organization:

[Enter personal and organization information through the Preferences > Identity dialog.]

Summary

The checker found no problems in this document.

Needs manual check: 2

Passed manually: 0

Failed manually: 0

Skipped: 5

Passed: 25

Failed: 0

Detailed Report

Document

Rule Name Status Description

Accessibility permission flag Passed Accessibility permission flag must be set

Image-only PDF Passed Document is not image-only PDF

Tagged PDF Passed Document is tagged PDF

Logical Reading Order Needs manual check Document structure provides a logical reading order

Primary language Passed Text language is specified

Title Passed Document title is showing in title bar

Bookmarks Passed Bookmarks are present in large documents

Color contrast Needs manual check Document has appropriate color contrast

Page Content

Rule Name Status Description

Tagged content Passed All page content is tagged

Tagged annotations Passed All annotations are tagged

Tab order Passed Tab order is consistent with structure order

Character encoding Passed Reliable character encoding is provided

Tagged multimedia Passed All multimedia objects are tagged

Screen flicker Passed Page will not cause screen flicker

Scripts Passed No inaccessible scripts

Timed responses Passed Page does not require timed responses

Navigation links Passed Navigation links are not repetitive

Forms

Rule Name Status Description

Tagged form fields Passed All form fields are tagged

Field descriptions Passed All form fields have description

Alternate Text

Rule Name Status Description

Figures alternate text Passed Figures require alternate text

Nested alternate text Passed Alternate text that will never be read

Associated with content Passed Alternate text must be associated with some content

Hides annotation Passed Alternate text should not hide annotation

Other elements alternate text Skipped Other elements that require alternate text

Tables

Rule Name Status Description

Rows Skipped TR must be a child of Table, THead, TBody, or TFoot

TH and TD Skipped TH and TD must be children of TR

Headers Passed Tables should have headers

Regularity Passed Tables must contain the same number of columns in each row and rows in each column

Summary Skipped Tables must have a summary

Lists

Rule Name Status Description

List items Passed LI must be a child of L

Lbl and LBody Passed Lbl and LBody must be children of LI

Headings

Rule Name Status Description

Appropriate nesting Skipped Appropriate nesting

Back to Top