NOC II Final RFP QandA Set 2.pdf

Final Request for Proposal (RFP) Questions and Answers: Set 2

Solicitation Number: 80JSC023R0007

Procurement Title: Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) Operations Contract II (NOC II)

# Category Section Page Number Type Question/Comment Answer

2 Unnecessary or inefficient requirements

J-23 p. J-23-1 Request for additional information

There are multiple references throughout the RFP to the DD 254 requirements. However, this document was not provided in Section J.

The Request for Proposal

(RFP) has been amended to include DD Form 254

Department of Defense

Contract Security

Classification Specification.

3 Unnecessary or inefficient requirements

L.19 L-16 Clarity Table L-2 contains a row entry titled "DD254 Top Secret Clearance" with a MS Word submission format. It is not clear what this requirement is for as there are no further instructions later in Section L.

Additionally, the DD254 is typically a Government-provided document, yet it is not present in Attachment J-

23. Please clarify the submission requirements.

In accordance with provision L.16 SECURITY

REQUIREMENTS AND

INSTRUCTIONS TO

OFFERORS, at the time of proposal Offerors shall provide their CAGE code for verification of current security clearance status.

Table L-2 within Provision

L.19, Proposal

Arrangement, Page

Limitations, Copies, and

Due Dates, has been amended to indicate that the submission requirement is the

Offeror’s CAGE Code for verification of current Top

Secret Facility Clearance

Level (TS FCL).

See question 2 for DD254.

4 J-16 J-16-2 Clarity Should the J-16 Wage Determination be Even Numbered rather than Odd Numbered?

The applicable Wage

Determination (WD) for this contract is Odd

Numbered, WD 2015-

5233. The Department of

Labor has confirmed this is the applicable WD for this contract as they are in the process of phasing out the

Even-Numbered WD.

5 Other Section J-16 Attachment J-16 Wage Determination

Request for additional information

WD 2015-5233 does not appear to be applicable to the NOC2 contract.

Is it the Government’s intent to use WD-2015-5234? Please advise.

See question 4.

6 Other Volume V - Model Contract - Section J

J-2 and RFP "pdf" attachments

Clarity Do RFP attachments provided separately, J-12, J-16, J-19 and J-20 need to be incorporated into the Volume 5 behind their respective Section J coversheets?

Yes, the RFP attachments provided separately are required to be incorporated behind their respective Section J coversheets within the Offeror’s Volume V Model Contract submission.

7 Other Volume V - Model Contract - Section J

J-2 Plans required with Proposal

Clarity Do the various Section J plans provided in other volumes also need to be incorporated behind their respective Section J coversheets?

Yes, the various Section J plans provided in other volumes also need to be incorporated behind their respective Section J coversheets within the Offeror’s Volume V Model Contract submission.

8 Other Volume V - Model Contract - Section J

J-2 and J-23 Clarity Does the DD254 provided in the Volume 1 also need to be incorporated behind Section J-23 cover sheet?

Yes, the DD254 is required to be incorporated behind Section J-23 cover sheet within the Offeror’s Volume V Model Contract submission.

9 Section L Proposal Instructions

DRD-NOCII-

J-10-25 Clarity Section 5 refers to "critical areas."

Will the Government confirm that the critical areas are cost and schedule estimating? Or is there some other critical area being referenced here?

The “critical areas” referenced in DRD-NOCII-

10, Change Control Process and Plan element [section]

5 are cost and schedule estimating. No other area is being referenced in this element.

10 Section L Proposal Instructions

DRD-NOCII-

J-10-38 Clarity The RFP instructs Offerors to reference OSHA CSP 03-01-005 and use “Appendix C, ‘Format for Annual Submissions’, as mandated by the cognizant OSHA regional office.”

However, Appendix C of OSHA CSP 03-01-005 is actually "Interview Questions." Reference OSHA’s website at:

https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/ files/enforcement/directives/CSP_03 -01-005.pdf

The RFP has been amended to indicate that Offerors should use Appendix A “Format for Annual Self-Evaluations” of

OSHA CSP 03-01-005.

Appendix A of that document, however, deals with the format and appears to be the correct reference:

“Format for Annual VPP Participant Self - Evaluation Submissions.”

Would the government please confirm the specific appendix or other reference which contains the format it believes is “mandated by the cognizant OSHA regional office” and should be used by Offerors?

11 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21.1 MA2

and DRD-

NOCII-34;

L.22(b)

J-10-127, L-21, and L-29

Clarity Volume I requires that the Program Manager resume be submitted with the proposal, as referenced in the Staffing and Critical Skills Plan (DRD- NOCII-34). However, Volume II also requires the same resume and information be provided IAW L.22 requirements. Is the Government requesting the same document be submitted in both Volumes, or is one Volume preferred over the other?

Please clarify.

Yes, the Government is requesting that the Program Manager resume be submitted as both part of the DRD-NOCII-34, Staffing and Critical Skills Plan (in Volume I) and as part of Past Performance (Volume 2).

12 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.22(d) L-30 Clarity The Past Performance data includes a request for a Duns number, which is no longer being used to uniquely identify federal contractor entities (the Unique Entity ID, UEID is being used instead). Will the Government please confirm that offerors are to

Offerors shall provide their Unique Entity ID (UEID) rather than DUNS number for Past Performance. The RFP has been amended to request UEID rather than DUNS number.

use their UEID instead of DUNS to satisfy this requirement?

13 Other Attachment

J-21 SLC

Description

J-21.3 Clarity Standard Labor Category 4, Supervisor I, does not include any education requirements. Is this a typo, or should offerors assume a minimum education requirement of high diploma/GED?

The absence of education requirements for Standard Labor Category (SLC) 4, Supervisor I, is a typo. The RFP has been amended to indicate that the education requirements for this SLC are “Typically requires a bachelor’s degree in area of specialty.”

14 Other CX12-

UWI0036,

CX12

Change Request (CR) Process

Request for additional information

The provided reference link does not appear to be functioning. Will NASA please send/post the master Change Request flowchart file?

\\Jsc-mod-nbl2\nbl_cr\_CR_Master\CR_Flowch art.pdf

The CR Flowchart referenced in CX12- UWI0036, CX12 Change Request (CR) Process, will be added to the Technical Library.

15 Other Section J-6 J-6-3 (page 154 of Final RFP .pdf)

Clarity SOW element 1.15 for CX/EVA, Robotics and Crew Operations Division Flight Readiness Review is missing from the WBS-SOW Mapping table in J-6. Our understanding maps SOW 1.15 to WBS 1.3.

The RFP has been amended to include the mapping of SOW Section 1.15, CX/EVA, Robotics and Crew Operations Division Flight Readiness Review, to WBS 1.3 NBL Line Management.

16 Other Section J-6 J-6-3 (page 154 of Final RFP .pdf)

Clarity New SOW element 2.7 Technical Integration Assistance is missing from the WBS-SOW Mapping table

The RFP has been amended to include the mapping of SOW Section

2.7 Technical Integration

in J-6. Our understanding maps SOW 2.7 to WBS 3.2.

Assistance, to WBS 3.2 Event Support.

17 Other Section J-6 J-6-3 (page 154 of Final RFP .pdf)

Clarity SOW element 2.6 Public Affairs Support is missing from the WBS- SOW Mapping table in J-6. Our understanding maps SOW 2.6 to

WBS 3.2.

The RFP has been amended to include the mapping of SOW Section

2.6 Public Affairs Support, to WBS 3.2 Event Support.

18 Other Section J-6 J-6-3 (page 154 of Final RFP .pdf)

Clarity SOW element 2.4 External Customers is not mapped to WBS 6.0 for External Customer Support in the WBS-SOW Mapping table J-6.

Currently, 2.5 Support Services is the only element mapped to WBS 6.0.

The RFP has been amended to include the mapping of SOW Section

2.4 External Customers, to

WBS 6.0 Support Services.

19 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21-2.a.(2) L-22 Other Responding to Final RFP requirements within the 65 pages and with 12 point graphics font is proving very challenging. Will the government consider excluding the Efficiencies and Innovative Techniques (DRD-NOCII-03) section from the 65 page limit? The requirement to provide SOW language in Volume I may greatly restrict what techniques Offerors can propose for this section.

In order to allow sufficient space for Statement of Work (SOW) language associated with DRD- NOCII-03, Efficiencies and Innovative Techniques, the RFP has been amended such that the 65 page limit for Mission Suitability does not apply to SOW language associated with Efficiencies and Innovative Techniques.

20 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.22.(j) L-32 Clarity Will the government consider limiting the Environmental Data and Safety and Health Data requirement to major subcontractors, with

The Government agrees to limit Environmental Data and Safety and Health Data requirement to major subcontractors, as defined proposed operations at JSC, rather than all “subcontractors”?

in provision L.22 (e). The RFP has been amended accordingly.

21 Other Clarity What payment terms will apply to firm-fixed-price orders issued under the NOC II contract? Is it the Government’s intent to provide contract financing payments such as performance-based payments under firm-fixed-price orders?

It is the Government's intent to offer contract financing payments in the form of performance-based payments under firm-fixed-price (FFP) orders, on an order-by-order basis, when requested by the NOC II Contractor and determined to be appropriate by the Contracting Officer for the specific FFP order. Upon review of the Request for Proposal (RFP), the Government identified the inadvertent omission of FAR clause 52.232-32, "Performance-Based Payments," and has amended the RFP to incorporate this clause as Clause I.23. The Government intends to include the solicitation provision at FAR 52.232- 28, Invitation to Propose

Performance-Based Payments, in Requests for Task Order Plans to be issued during the ordering period of NOC II, applicable to IDIQ FFP orders.