CAMS IV Draft RFP QAs.pdf

PDF 18 KB Posted

Attached to
Calibration and Metrology Services (CAMS) IV
Solicitation number
80JSC021R0051
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
CAMS IV final SSS.pdf PDF
80JSC021R0051 - Amendment 4.pdf PDF
80JSC021R0051 T and Cs - Amendment 4.docx DOCX document
CAMS IV Final RFP Amendment 3 QAs.pdf PDF
80JSC021R0051 - Amendment 3 SF30.pdf PDF
80JSC021R0051 - Amendment 2 SF30.pdf PDF
80JSC021R0051 - Amendment 1 SF30.pdf PDF
Attachment_L3.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
CAMS IV Final RFP Amendment 2 QAs.pdf PDF
CAMS IV Preproposal Bulletin.pdf PDF
CAMS IV Final RFP Cover Letter.pdf PDF
Attachment J-5.pdf PDF
Attachment L-5.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment J-4.pdf PDF
Attachment J-6.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment J-1.pdf PDF
Attachment L-3.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
CAMS IV Draft RFP Changes to Final RFP.pdf PDF
Attachment J-3.xls XLS spreadsheet
80JSC021R0051.pdf PDF
Show all 20

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Calibration and Metrology Standards (CAMS) IV

Draft RFP Questions and Answers

1)

Reference: Section B, Contract Value (Firm-Fixed Price) “Total Contract Value” Table

Question: The Table includes the offeror’s price for Phase in and the Contract Baseline (Year 1).

Are the Option periods (Years 2-5) from the EPM to be included in the “Total Contract Value”?

Does the government intend for “Contract Baseline” to include the Options Periods (Years 2-5)?

Answer: No, the Government does not intend for the Contract Core* to include the Option Periods in the “Total Contract Value” Table. The referenced table’s purpose is to reflect the current contract value. The Contract Core is the current value for the SOW Core work. The clause has been updated in the final RFP to state that the table will be updated when options are exercised.

* The term is now updated from Contract Baseline to Contract Core

2)

Reference: Contract Value (Firm-Fixed Price) “Total Contract Value” Table, EPM

Question: Is the “Contract Baseline” value in the table intended to include the price of vehicles as described and required in attachment J-12?

Answer: Yes, the Contract Core* includes the price to complete all of the Core requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW).

* The term is now updated from Contract Baseline to Contract Core

3)

Reference: Section L, L.1.6, Price Factor Volume III, Summary Table for Price Proposal Instructions

Question: The requirements for technical details about the offeror’s phase in are given in many sections of the draft RFP including the Technical instructions and DRDs. However, there is no requirement regarding pricing details for phase in except at the top level in Section B. Should the offeror provide pricing details for phase-in within its cost volume or the electronic pricing model?

Answer: We have added a Phase-in Template (PIT) to Attachment L-3 in the final RFP for the offeror to provide pricing details for phase-in.

4)

Reference: L.1.5 (a), (d) Past Performance Factor Volume II; “Offerors shall demonstrate past experience in all areas of the statement of work by submitting information on up to five past contracts.”

Question: We assume that this maximum of five past performance citations includes subcontractors based on language further in the section. Is this a correct assumption?

Answer: Yes that is correct, offerors shall submit no more than the number of contracts provided in L.1.5 (a), (d) Past Performance Factor Volume II from their team (prime and subs).

5)

Reference: Attachment L-3, PPST; Prime Price Summary Template, Rows 31-34

Question: Are the cost of vehicles as described in Attachment J-12 intended to be included in the PPST as NLR Cost?

Answer: The cost of vehicles should be included per the offeror’s unique approach to pricing. The final RFP will include instructions for identifying charges.

6)

Reference: Attachment L-3, FBR

Question: Instructions in the FBR tab reference the OHT and GAT templates for Overhead and G&A. These templates are not included and would not typically be used in the buildup of FFP rates. Would the government clarify the intention of the pricing template instructions?

Answer: The references for OHT and GAT have been removed from the final RFP.

7)

Question: SOW paragraph 6.0 (Logistics), states if equipment has to be shipped it will be done at customer expense. What about laboratory standards or shipping MAP standards? Can the NASA address or clarify who pays for this external shipping?

Answer: NASA directly pays for any external shipping costs associated with repair of MSCL lab standards and related lab equipment.

8)

Question: SOW paragraph 8.1 (Calibration), states “be traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.” Is it acceptable to also have traceability derived outside NIST (e.g.

Naval Observatory for Time/Frequency)?

Answer: No, it must be traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

9)

Question: Within documents provided, the document titled NPR_8570.1 actually contains NPR 8570.1B. The SOW reference is JWI 8570.1, Energy Conservation. Are these references the same document/requirements?

Answer: These are two different documents. Check final RFP for relevant documents.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .