0_SF30_Q_A_Changes_Log_80JSC020R0034_FC_FRFP_Amend4.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

PAGE OF PAGES

3. EFFECTIVE DATE 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

FACILITY CODECODE

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and Zip Code)

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE

SIGNED

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE

SIGNED

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15A NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

is not

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by orletter provided electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO.

IN ITEM 10A.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) is extended, copies to issuing office.

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

1 749

P00004

NASA

Johnson Space Center 2101 NASA Parkway Houston TX 77058-3696

X

80JSC020R0034

08/03/2020

X X

See Continuation Sheet If Applicable

Lara N. Procknow appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

CHECK ONE

(X)

See Continuation Sheet If Applicable electronic communication, orlettereach

See Block 16B.

(A)

ITEM NO.

(F)

AMOUNT

(B)

SUPPLIES/SERVICES

(C)

QUANTITY

(D)

UNIT

(E)

UNIT PRICE

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

Page of

80JSC020R0034P00004

2 749

The purpose of Amendment 4 is to:

1. Release the Facilities Contract Final Request for Proposal (FRFP) 80JSC020R0034 Questions and Answers.

2. Replace the following sections and attachments in their entirety (See attached Change Log):

• Section A – Table of Contents

• Section I – Contract Clauses;

• Section K – Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors or Respondents; and

• Attachment L-2, Electronic Pricing Model (EPM) Workbook

3. Provide a PDF of the Model Contract for Final RFP Amendment 4.

Facilities Contract

Lara N. Procknow, BJ/Contracting Officer Email: lara.n.procknow@nasa.gov Work: 281-483-0155

0001 Phase-In

0002 Incremental Funding

Number References Questioner's Statement Question or Recommendation Government Response 1 2_Section_B_Tabl es_80JSC020R003

4_FC_FRFP;

Section L.18

Within the DRFP Q&A Response to question 61, the Government states that "The Section B Tables are submitted as a separate file."; however submittal instructions for the Separates Section B document are not provided within the Final RFP within Sections L.18 Cost / Price or within Table L-2 Overview of Proposal Volumes.

Question: Will the Government confirm that Section B will be a separate submission requirement from the EPM and the Cost/ Price Narrative Support provided?

Yes, Section B is separate from the EPM and Cost/Price Narrative.

2 Excel File 2_Section_B_Tabl es_80JSC020R003

4_FC_FRFP; PDF

RFP Section B;

Section L 21

Section B Tables

The Government has provided two sets of Section B Tables 1) as an Excel attachment to the Final RFP and 2) as a two PDF Tables within the Final RFP Consolidated file, both sets of tables have varying differences.

Question: Will the Government clarify which one, or if both files, are required for the completion of the Model Contract Volume V Submission?

Both file tables are required for the completion of the Model Contract Volume V Submission.

3 FRFP

80JSC020R0034,

Section C Statement of Work 6.14.3.1.1 page 175 in the PDF, page 6-27 in the SOW

In Section C SOW 6.14.3.1.1 (Coefficient Factor coverage), states:

"*Coefficient Factors in CLIN 6.14.3.1.2 shall include the following price elements, which shall not be separately priced in submitted proposals: ... . "

Question 1: Will the Government provide the historical average data for the cost elements listed in this section (other than indirect rates) that are required for Coefficient Factors and not permissible to be separately priced on subsequent IDIQ proposals?

Question 2: Will the Government reconsider the requirement for all the items listed in this section to be priced in the Coefficient Factors and not permissible to be separately priced on subsequent proposals?

The Government does not have the historic average cost data for the elements listed in this section that are not to be separately itemized in the individual cost estimates. These items are considered to be common and necessary to get the work done.

These items were added to the coefficients' value for ease of Cost Estimate Review, and shall not be separately itemized within the individual cost estimates.

4 SF30_Q_A_80JSC0

20R0034_FC_FRFP

_Amendment_2, #53, 54, 55 and

The Government's response to questions 53 and 54 appeared very clear - we are able to submit the BOE, required in Section L- 19.2(a)(2), in either Vol II or Vol III. However, the Government's response to questions 55 and 77 seem to contradict the response to 53 and 54.

1) Does the Government interpret the requirements at L.18(a)(3) through L.18(a)(6) to establish a requirement for the same BOE information within Vol II as is required within Vol III by Section L.19.2(a)(2)?

2) Regarding the Government's response to question #77, Please clarify the Governments response "Support for the proposed resources shall be included in the Technical Narrative (Volume III) of the proposal." Did you intend to state the information should be in Volume II OR Volume III to be consistent with #53 and 54?

1) The requirements of L.18(a)(3) through L.18(a)(6) and L.19.2(a)(2) have significant overlap.

2) The Bases of Estimate does not have to be reiterated, but only referenced in the Cost/Price Volume. The Government's answer to Question 77 was inadvertently and unnecessarily restrictive.

5 DRFP Q&A #74,

Section L.19(a)(2), FRFP Q&A 53-55 and 77.

After preparing our "concise" BOE as directed in response to DRFP Q&A #74, we are concerned that the limited amount of information we are providing justifies our staffing. Our typical BOE contains 1) extensive information taken from all solicitation documents (i.e.;. Annex 3 WO information and SOW workload date), 2) basis "standard", 3) hours and extended hours, 4) FTEs,

5) labor categories, 6) assumptions, 7) schedules, 8) data validation, 9) OBS#, as well as other annex-specific data. While the Government's response to questions 53 and 54 allow us to place our detailed BOE in Vol II, there is risk that the Government may determine that we placed content from a "page restricted" volume into an unrestricted volume.

To completely "level the playing field" we strongly recommend the Government make the BOE, as required in Section L.19(a)(2), a separate document to be submitted in excel or word. Furthermore, we recommend this document be excluded from the Vol III 100 page limit.

Recommendation is duly noted. However, no changes shall be made.

6 SF30 Changes Log and Sections L and M

The SF30 Changes Log and Sections L and M state that the Mission Suitability Volume page count is now being reduced to 90 pages after removal of the TCP.

The expectation from the Q&A responses to Questions 35 and 38 was that the 100 pages would not be reduced to allow a responsive approach to the Mission Suitability Volume. The answer to question 35 stated that “The Government will not remove the tables from the page count. However, the Government will increase the TCP page count to 12 pages. It should also be noted that the TCP will be excluded from the overall mission suitability page count”, and the answer to question 38 stated that “The Government will increase the TCP page count to 12 pages.

Per the RFP Section L, Table L-2: Overview of Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations, and Format, the TCP will be excluded from the total page limit in Mission Suitability.”

Will the Government please reconsider and leave the Mission Suitability factor at 100 pages? Our proposal had been completed using the above references and will require a significant revision to remain compliant.

No, the Government will not reconsider increasing the Mission Suitability Factor total page count from 90 pages to 100 pages.

7 SF30_Q_A_80JSC0

20R0034_FC_FPR

P_Amendment_2

The Government makes numerous references to a forthcoming Amendment 003 inclusive of revised RFP Sections, specifically Section L, and a revised EPM. As Prime, Major, and Minor Subcontractors all are required to provide varying levels of detail within the prescribed RFP EPM formats Industry will require time to review and assess the impact of revisions to volumous "Detailed" EPM instructions. As changes in the EPM with respect to "Escalation", "Conversion Factors", and "Overtime" will be revised to the Individual category level it suggests that adjustments to the structure of the LPT, OPT, TOPT-IDIQ-CPFF, MST-FBR-CPFF, TOPT-IDIQ-FFP, SCE, IRAP tabs of the model (7 of 20+ tabs) within the EPM.

Question: When will the Government provide Amendment 003 with Section L and EPM updates? Please note the Facilities Contract 80JSC020R0034 Final RFP Amendment 3 was published on Friday, September 11, 2020, via https://beta.sam.gov/.

Additionally, please see the below link from the Facilities Contract website (https://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/fac/):

• Request for Proposal and Related Documents link at https://beta.sam.gov/opp/6808f1320ae74764bc0091828ecf4cc8/view

Facilities Contract 80JSC020R0034 Final Request for Proposal (RFP) Questions and Answers

8 Amendment 2 Question 53

The Answer to question 53 states "Yes. The Bases of Estimate may be placed in Volume II or Volume III at the Offeror's discretion (but they must all be in the same volume) and referenced from the other Volume."

Question: Given that question 65 states that bidders cannot add a worksheet to the EPM to accomodate a BOE, we assume it is up to the bidder where we provide the BOE in Volume II as long as it is not in the EPM?

If incorporated into Volume II, the Bases of Estimate would be part of the Pricing Methodology in L.18(c).

9 FRFP

80JSC020R0034,

Section C Statement of Work 6.14.3.1.1 page 175 in the PDF, page 6-27 in the SOW;

5_Attachment_L-

2_EPM_80JSC020

R0034_FC_FRFP

TOPT-IDIQ-CPFF

and TOPT-IDIQ- FFP tabs

In Section C SOW 6.14.3.1.1 (Coefficient Factor coverage), states:

"*Coefficient Factors in CLIN 6.14.3.1.2 shall include the following price elements, which shall not be separately priced in submitted proposals:

a. Project management and supervision

b. Quality control

c. Administrative and clerical support, office management, and office equipment/supplies".

Question: With the mandatory SLC hours for Program Manager, Manager, and Supervisor personnel in a, b and c above also included in the L- 2 EPM TOPT-IDIQ-CPFF and TOPT-IDIQ-FFP tabs, these hours are duplicated with no compliant way in the current RFP instructions to remove either set of labor costs. Will the instructions be revised to permit offerors to reduce the mandatory SLC hours in the EPM by those included in the Coefficients (or another method to eliminate the duplicated costs)?

The amount of required IDIQ work is a prediction of the average amount of work JSC may receive; however, IDIQ funded work is not guaranteed. It is understood that there may be some overlap of Core and IDIQ duties. In order to evaluate all proposal coefficients equally, all Offerors are required to use the designated hours and raw material and equipment costs.

Offerors Shall Not reduce the mandatory SLC Core hours in the EPM by those included in the IDIQ. The revised FFP tab in the EPM will be revised to zero out the IDIQ hours for Program Manager, Managers and Supervisors.

10 6_Attach_L-

2_EPM_80JSC020

R0034_FC_FRFP_

Amend3

IRAP and FBACP tabs

Regarding 6_Attach_L-2_EPM_80JSC020R0034_FC_FRFP_Amend3:

the IRAP and FBACP tabs state the following:

IRAP: THIS TEMPLATE TO BE PREPARED BY THE PRIME OFFEROR

AND ALL SERVICE SUBCONTRACTORS

A separate IRAP is required for Contract Year 1 only from the Prime Offeror, and all Major Subcontractor(s) as defined in NFS 1852.231-71(d). However, the template is also required of minor subcontractors if their total contract value is $2,000,000 or more AND the minor subcontractor total contract value also represents 10% or more of the total contract value to the prime contractor.

FBACP: INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FBAC TEMPLATES

This template is required of the prime Offeror, and each major subcontractor. However, the template is also required of minor subcontractors if their total contract value is $2,000,000 or more

These IRAP and FBACP requirements differ from Q&A 40 below. Therefore, will the Government please clarify the requirements for the IRAP and FBACP?

The instructions in the IRAP and the FBACP templates have been amended to clarify any ambiguities. Briefly, the amended instructions included in the templates indicate that ALL subcontractors, (whether classified as major or minor), who falls within the criteria set forth in JPI 1852.231-71 (d), shall submit the IRAP template and the 3 required FBACP templates. In addition, ALL subcontractors who are required to submit these templates are also required to submit a Total Compensation Plan.

11 Attach_L-

2_EPM_80JSC020

R0034_FC_FRFP_

Amend3, OHT and GAT tabs, #8 instructions

For some Offerors, the amount of information being requested to support our Existing Business Base and Forecasted Business Base would be significant and is also highly sensitive data. Our preference would be to provide proof of the latest FPRP which includes the support detail to justify the proposed forward pricing rates submitted to DCMA/DCAA.

Will the Government consider allowing an Offeror to lump together the contracts forming no less than 80% of the “Existing Business Base” dollars if the Offeror has submitted an updated Forward Pricing Rate Proposal (FPRP) and can provide a copy of the FPRP with its proposal?

The Government will not consider changing the instructions for the OHT and GAT templates. The instructions remain the same. An FPRP submitted to DCAA and/or DCMA provides no insight to NASA about the development, or the reasonableness, of the indirect rates. If an FPRA or an FPRR is obtained prior to the Offeror’s proposal submission, then the Government will accept the FPRR or FPRA without any other explanation. The detailed information required is necessary for NASA to evaluate the proposed rates.

Unlike DCAA, NASA will not review the contractor’s books and records to determine the reasonableness of the proposed rates. Additionally, it is the Government’s responsibility to safeguard all contractors’ proprietary data, and as such procedures are in place to safeguard all contractors’ data.

12 SF30_Q_A_80JSC0

20R0034_FC_FPR

P_Amendment_2

The Government makes numerous references to a forthcoming Amendment 003 inclusive of revised RFP Sections, specifically Section L, and a revised EPM. As Prime, Major, and Minor Subcontractors all are required to provide varying levels of detail within the prescribed RFP EPM formats Industry will require time to review and assess the impact of revisions to volumous "Detailed" EPM instructions. As changes in the EPM with respect to "Escalation", "Conversion Factors", and "Overtime" will be revised to the Individual category level it suggests that adjustments to the structure of the LPT, OPT, TOPT-IDIQ-CPFF, MST-FBR-CPFF, TOPT-IDIQ-FFP, SCE, IRAP tabs of the model (7 of 20+ tabs) within the EPM.

Question: Will the Government provide an Extension with Amendment 003 with Section L and EPM updates to allow industry adequate time to assess and distribute updated EPM formats to Major and Minor Subcontractors?

Yes, Amendment 3 extended the proposal due date from September 16, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. Central Time to September 23, 2020, at 1:00 p.m.

Central Time.

13 SF30_Q_A_80JSC0

20R0034_FC_FPR

P_Amendment_2;

RFP Section L

Questions 81

The Government states that a revision list will be added to the Technical Library.

Question: Will the Government clarify if an Extension will be provided with Amendment 003 to allow industry adequate time to review and process updated data and their impact?

Yes, Amendment 3 extended the proposal due date from September 16, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. Central Time to September 23, 2020, at 1:00 p.m.

Central Time.

14 Technical Library The Technical Library Revisions list a file in Annex 1 named PAE DRD AN-1-5 2017 (Newest CBA’s).zip.

Question: We cannot locate the file when opening the zip file. Can NASA please provice the file? The Technical Library Revisions list will be corrected to remove the CBA attachment reference.

15 Page 2

Technical Library Revisions.pptx

The Technical Library Revisions list a file in Annex 1 named PAE DRD AN-1-5 2017 (Newest CBA’s).zip.

This file does not appear to be in the Annex 1 subfolder, or any other subfolder in the Technical Library. The Technical Library Revisions' list will be corrected to remove the CBA attachment reference.

Changes from Final RFP 80JSC020R0034 to Amendment 4 - Final RFP 80JSC020R0034

Note: This Document Change Log includes notable changes made to Amendment 4 of the Final Request for Proposal (RFP) since the release of the Final RFP. Although every effort was made to include minor changes, there may be some edits that are not recorded in the log. Therefore, all potential Offerors are advised to carefully read the entire RFP.

SECTION A:

• Updated clause dates

SECTION B:

• No changes

SECTION C:

• No changes

SECTION D:

• No changes

SECTION E:

• No changes

SECTION F:

• No changes

SECTION G:

• No changes

SECTION H:

• No changes

SECTION I:

• Updated clause date from AUG 2019 to AUG 2020 for 52.204-25 PROHIBITION ON

CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR

EQUIPMENT

SECTION J:

• No changes

SECTION J ATTACHMENTS:

• No changes

SECTION K:

• Updated clause date from AUG 2019 to AUG 2020 for 52.204-24 REPRESENTATION REGARDING

CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT

Changes from Final RFP 80JSC020R0034 to Amendment 4 - Final RFP 80JSC020R0034

SECTION L:

• No changes

SECTION L ATTACHMENTS:

• Attachment L-2, Electronic Pricing Model (EPM):

o Clarified instructions in the Incumbency Retention and Pay Template (IRAP) and the

Fringe Benefits Analysis of Compensation Plan (FBACP) templates of the EPM due to Potential Offeror questions

SECTION M:

• No changes