COSMOS - DRFP Q and A Part II.pdf

Contract for Organizing Spaceflight Mission Operations and Systems

(COSMOS)

DRFP Q&A Part 2 – October 17, 2024

Category Sec�on Page Number Ques�on Number

Type Ques�on/Comment Response

Other 2.14.3 C-18 22 Under 2.14.3 Government Property, the DRFP states

"The Contractor shall designate a property manager in accordance with the Government Property Management Plan (PMP) (DRD-COSMOS-0008) for

COSMOS Government property administra�on and management." DRD- COSMOS-0008 also calls out the submission of the property manager's qualifica�ons and experience. The list of labor category categories at page J-

12.2 does not include a property manager labor category, and one is not listed as key personnel under H.4 NFS 1852.235-71 Key Personnel and Facili�es.

Would the government provide clarity on how bidders should price the property manager posi�on?

Offerors are being requested to propose and price the resources it requires to perform property management consistent with its proposed approach(es).

For this reason, the Government will not prescribe a specific approach to pricing that effort

Other 2.2 Contract Communica�ons

C-10 23 SOW 2.2 states "Contract deliverables and communica�ons between NASA and the Contractor shall be via the Government provided FOD Contract Management System

(FCMS)." Will the government provide in the

Bidder's Library nonincumbents insight into FCMS requirements, date input requirements for deliverables, and other program management areas that the contractor will support via the system?

The FCMS tool will be made available to the

COSMOS awardee. The FCMS requirements and sustainment are not part of the COSMOS SOW. For frequency of deliverables Offerors should refer to Atachment J-16: Data

Requirements List

(DRL).

Other 3.1.1.5 Equipment Replacement/Obsole scence

C-23 24 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide a copy of the latest equipment replacement 7 year plan.

See Atachments J-8 List of Government

Furnished Property and J-9 List of Installa�on-

Accountable Government Property for the current list of equipment. The Government will provide a dra� of exis�ng hardware and so�ware with associated end of service informa�on to the Technical Library. .

Other 3.1.1.5 Equipment Replacement/Obsole scence

C-23 25 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government iden�fy any equipment replacements that have been deferred over the last 7 years. If any were deferred, which ones, why were they deferred, and how long were they deferred or are they s�ll being deferred?

See ques�on 24.

Other 3.2.2.4 C.36 26 The DRFP states, "The Contractor shall provide a MTC operator, co-located with AST-R at the Gagarin

Cosmonaut Training Center (GCTC) in Star City, Russia, to operate the AST-R, maintain the local DST hand controller and serve as the local point of contact to GCTC, the Russian Space Corpora�on –

Energia (RSC-E) and the Moscow Technical Liaison

Office (MTLO) representa�ves." This posi�on has not been filled in some �me. Is it expected to be filled immediately upon contract award? Are there any limita�ons as to staffing the posi�on with a subcontractor?

The COSMOS awardee will be responsible of mee�ng all COSMOS SOW requirements upon contract start.

The Government does not have limita�on on the staffing approach for this posi�on.

However, if any limita�on arises during contract performance the Government will no�fy the COSMOS contractor.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

Atach L-5a and L.21.a.5

Tabs 3-5 27 Would the government consider revising the

Atachment L-5a such that teammates are not being asked to essen�ally disclose proprietary cost informa�on to the prime Offeror? As writen, both minor and major subcontractors are asked to disclose what % of their rate is composed of the SLC Historical Incumbent rates (provided in Table L.19-

1) in tab 5, IRAP. If the

Offeror's solu�on requires them to bid 100% incumbent reten�on, then the subcontractors will be disclosing to the prime proprietary informa�on about their wrap rate. This puts subcontractors in the posi�on of having to choose between disclosing informa�on that could put them at a compe��ve disadvantage to the prime in future bids or withdrawing from proposing on this contract. Forcing subcontractors to make this choice could limit compe��on on this bid. This applies especially to the

Per L.21 Cost and Price Factor - Volume III, if needed, each Minor or Major Subcontractor may submit their files directly to the Government if the

Major or Minor Subcontractor informa�on is deemed proprietary and not shared with the Prime.

small businesses, who would be most disadvantaged given they typically do not have more than one business sector.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

Atachment L-1 Key Personnel Resume

Template

L-55 28 Clarity Atachment L-1 Key Personnel Resume Template notes a 2-page limit of the

Proposed Program Manager resume that must be included as part of Volume II Past Performance. Would the Government clarify that these 2 pages are excluded from the Past Performance Descrip�on page limit of 15 pages?

See ques�on 78.

Other Atachment L5-a 3 29 Other Sec�on L.21 (c) Indirect Rates page L-43 of the dra� RFP states that offerors shall incorporate work site percentages into the Offeror's es�ma�ng approach (2% Contractor Site, 98% Government Site).

If an offeror has different Overhead rates for Contractor site and

Government site work, should the offeror insert addi�onal rows and duplicate the SLCs so there is one

Composite Straight-�me FBR for Contractor site work and

Yes, the offeror should break out the SLCs to differen�ate between

Contractor Site and Government Site, if applicable.

one for Government site work?

Other Atachment L5-a 5 30 Gramma�cal Will the Government please update cell F220 to "Business

Specialist I Composite"

Yes, this will be updated as part of the

Final RFP.

Other Atachment L5-a 5 31 Other The formula in cells G281, G282, H281, H282, J281, J282 references the data associated with the Administra�ve III SLC rather than the intended SLC (Administra�ve Specialist II for row 281 and Administra�ve Specialist I for row 282). Will the Government please update the formulas to reference the correct cells?

Yes, this will be updated as part of the

Final RFP.

Other Atachment L-5a 5 IRAP tab 32 Clarity If minor subs select data source other than Historical

Incumbent Rate, are they required to submit a narra�ve or provide a basis / source data within their submital?

Yes, if a minor subcontractor selects a data source other than the Historical Incumbent Rate they are required to submit a narra�ve or provide a basis/source data.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

Atachment L-5a 8 Incumbency Assump�ons tab

33 Clarity The RFP states that for Minor Subcontractors are to submit

L-5b Minor Subcontractor Template and 5 IRAP.

Tab 8 Incumbency Assump�ons has a

Atachment L-5b and RFP Language will be updated to include the Incumbency

Assump�on Tab for Minor Subcontractors requirement for Minor Subcontractors to submit that tab as well, but does not include that in the RFP. Do minor sub also have to submit 8 Incumbency

Assump�ons tab?

to complete as part of the Final RFP.

Other Atachment L-5a COSMOS Cost Price

Template

Tab 4 Minor SubK

Template

34 Clarity The offeror is required to indicate a Fee Rate Included in the FBR for each subcontractor by proposed labor category.

How is the offeror to accommodate the RFP requirement to propose award fee and fixed fees by each year when the cost price template is not constructed to allow different fees for each year and fee type?

Offerors can add addi�onal rows in Tab 4

Minor SubK Template to reflect the different fees for each year by

SLCs.

Other Atachment L5-b 1 35 Other Will the Government please replace the text "Year 8" in cell U6 with "6-Month OTE"

Yes, this will be updated as part of the

Final RFP.

Other Atachment L5-b 1 36 Other Will the Government please correct the date in cell U8 to "3/31/2035" to match the dra� RFP sec�on L.21

Yes, this will be updated as part of the

Final RFP.

Other Atachment L5-b 1 37 Other Will the Government please correct the end date in cell

BI11 so the 6-Month OTE PoP reflects "10/1/2034 -

3/31/2035"

Yes, this will be updated as part of the

Final RFP.

Other Atachment L-9 Cer�fica�on and

Cri�cal Skills Reference

L-78 to L-80 38 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Regarding Atachment L-9 (cer�fica�ons and cri�cal skills): Will the Government please confirm that L-9 includes all known cer�fica�ons and cri�cal skills required to perform the technical aspects of the

COSMOS scope, at least for proposal purposes, and that any adjustments can be handled collabora�vely during phase-in?

L-9 Cer�fica�on and Cri�cal Skills Reference, includes the minimum unique cer�fica�ons

VMF, MCCS, and MSSC.

DRD-COSMOS-0017

requires Offerors to self-iden�fy all cri�cal skills required to execute the contract both FOD unique and non-FOD unique.

Other Atachment L-9

Cer�fica�on and Cri�cal Skills

Reference

L-78 to L-80 39 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Concerning Sec�ons 1, 2, and 3 of Atachment L-9: Can offerors assume that the cer�fica�ons list in Sec�on 3 covers all the requirements for ac�vity iden�fied in Sec�ons 1 and 2 (since all three sec�ons pertain to

SVMF needs)?

See ques�on 38.

Other Atachment L-9 Cer�fica�on and

Cri�cal Skills Reference

L-78 to L-80 40 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Regarding Sec�on 3 of Atachment L-9: a) Sec�on 3 iden�fies "Cer�fica�on Type" in the first table but also "Cer�fied Posi�on" and "Posi�on" as different numbers of personnel. Can offerors assume that the

"Cer�fied Posi�on" table is a sufficient descrip�on of cer�fica�ons required, or will the Government provide addi�onal insight into which specific cer�fica�ons they need? b) Similarly, can offerors assume that the

"Posi�on" table is sufficient and that the 16 personnel listed are all cer�fied for simply "Mission Systems

Support Center," or will the Government provide addi�onal insight into the cer�fica�ons required by these posi�ons?

The tables are sufficient for purposes of proposal submission, no addi�onal informa�on required to be shared with Offerors

Other Atachment L-9 Cer�fica�on and

Cri�cal Skills Reference

L-80 41 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Concerning Sec�on 5 of Atachment L-9: Can the Government clarify the relevance of Sec�on 5 as it relates to cer�fica�ons and cri�cal skills? This appears to be a requirement that would be more appropriately placed in the SOW.

Sec�on 5 will be removed as part of the Final RFP, but the SOW and DRD references stated (Sec�on C3.1.5 and details in DRD- COSMOS-0012) are s�ll present and levied.

Other B.2(a) B-1 42 Clarity Due to the highly complex nature of the transi�on tasks that need to take place, globally, for this effort and limited defini�on of required “phase-in” tasks/standards, would the Government consider a cost-plus fixed fee construct for the “Phase-In” work?

This will enable the ability for the awardee to react and perform the most effec�vely with inputs from the kickoff mee�ngs/discussions with NASA at �me of award. In other words, requirements/necessi�es that may have not been fully iden�fied or contemplated at

�me of proposal, can be implemented without a change proposal, as the Cost-type construct will afford the requirement/cost flexibility to immediately execute those mission-needs. This affords flexibility to NASA in iden�fica�on of transi�on-in needs, incen�vizes rapid responsiveness of the awardee and fosters open communica�on between

The Government has determined this will remain fixed-price.

par�es - ensuring the most seamless and produc�ve transi�on possible.

Unnecessary or inefficient requirements

Sec�on C 2.6 C-12 43 Clarity As referenced Sec�on 2.6 Security, please elaborate on the differences between Mission Systems Security Plan, the facility security plans, and the Contractor

Security Plan.

For example, in J-18, there are 25+ facili�es listed.

Which of these security plans apply to which of these facili�es.

The SOW defines the security plans required during the execution of the COSMOS requirements. The Mission

System Security Plans refers to any security plan outlined by JSC 35209 Mission Systems Division (MSD) System Security

Management Plan (SSMP), NPR 2810.1 Security of

Information and Information Systems, and the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-130, Managing Information as a Strategic Resource. The MSD SSMP also requires security plans for each of the facilities which supported as part of the

COSMOS

SOW. "Contractor Security

Plans" is used to cumulatively refer to all the security plans developed and maintain by the Contractor per the

SOW

Other Dra� RFP

80JSC024R0003

N/A 44 Other Given the substan�al number of ques�ons and clarifica�ons needed for the Dra� RFP, we respec�ully request that the Government consider either issuing another dra� RFP a�er addressing the submited queries, or if that's not feasible, providing a reasonable period of �me between the release of ques�on responses and the issuance of the final RFP. This addi�onal step would allow offerors sufficient �me to review the updated informa�on, adjust their strategies accordingly, and develop comprehensive, compliant proposals that align with the Government's requirements and expecta�ons. Could the Government please advise on the feasibility of either op�on and their preferred approach to ensure offerors have adequate prepara�on

�me?

The an�cipated release date of the COSMOS Request For Proposal 80JSC024R0003 is on or about October 25, 2024, with an an�cipated proposal due date for the en�re proposal of on or about December 9, 2024.

Security (including informa�on technology security)

DRD-0030-Contractor Security

Management Plan

J-17.102 45 Clarity Will the government confirm that DRD-0030 applies to government loca�ons only?

DRD-COSMOS-0030

applies only to government facili�es and loca�ons. DRD-

COSMOS-0031 applies to Government and Contractor facili�es.

Security (including informa�on technology security)

DRD-0030-Contractor Security

Management Plan

Page 3, paragraph 6, of DRFP dated Sep 12, 46 Clarity DRFP states, "A Top Secret//Sensi�ve

Compartmented Informa�on (SCI) facili�es clearance is required at proposal submission for this acquisi�on in accordance with the DD Form 254, Contract Security Classifica�on Specifica�on."

Will a dra� DD 254 be provided lis�ng the gov'ts actual places of performance and all security/classifica�on guidance as required?

The Government will provide a complete and signed DD Form 254 no later than the Final RFP.

Other DRD-COSMOS-0001 11.i

J-17.2 47 Clarity Are Offeror's required to provide a mapping of their proposed WBS to SOW requirements at Ini�al

Submission with the proposal or submit the mapping at

Contract Start

Per DRD-COSMOS-0001 instruc�ons on page J- 17.2: WBS tree only is due with proposal.

Remainder of DRD is due at start of Phase-In.

Other DRD-COSMOS-0018 Page 286 of

48 Request for addi�onal informa�on

DRD says the FY Tech Plan is due annually. We understand FOD is moving to a con�nual planning model. Can the Government provide more informa�on on this model and indicate how this impacts the submission

Frequency of DRD-COSMOS- 0018?

FOD has always had a model of con�nual replanning based on opera�onal needs, Federal policy changes, programma�c priority changes, etc. DRD- COSMOS-0018 provides a baseline snapshot for strategic planning purposes. Intermediate planning processes are to be defined by the Offeror in various other

DRDs.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

DRD-COSMOS-0032,

Sec�on 10

J.17.110 49 Clarity The language in DRD Sec�on 10 states “work performed by the Offeror that may give rise to an actual or poten�al conflict”. Will the government please confirm that the NASA list requiring informa�on from items 1 thru 3 of DRD Sec�on 10 should be provided for only those contracts that “the Offeror has iden�fied as giving a rise to an actual or poten�al conflict”?

Confirmed. Offerors shall provide items 1-3 for each prime contract and subcontract listed that may give rise to an actual or poten�al conflict.

Other DRD-COSMOS-0044 Configura�on

Management Plan, Contents: v

J-17.130 50 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide details on the document management tree in the Government provided system.

The Documenta�on Tree is provided by the Offeror, therefore the Government cannot provide details.

Other DRD-COSMOS-0044 Configura�on

Management Plan, Interrela�onship

J-17.129 51 Clarity It appears that the list is missing the following interrelated DRDs:

DRD-COSMOS-0002

Management Plan

DRD-COSMOS-0004 Contract Configura�on Management

Plan DRD-COSMOS-0005 Phase-In

Plan

DRD-COSMOS-0008

Government Property Management Plan (PMP)

DRD-COSMOS-0033 Records Management Plan

DRD-COSMOS-0041 COSMOS

So�ware List

DRD-COSMOS-0043 Change Control Process and Plan

DRD-COSMOS-0057 So�ware Standards and Development

Plan Request the Government confirm this list and update the DRD as appropriate.

The Government has not yet determined any changes to DRD- COSMOS-0044 are required, it con�nues to consider this comment and will include changes, if any, in the final RFP.

Other DRD-COSMOS-0044 Configura�on

Management Plan, Scope and referenced

SOW 2.7

Documenta�on Management

J-17.129 52 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide details on the current change management, issue tracking, and electronic documenta�on library? Is this one system thatperforms all three func�ons or are they separate systems/libraries?

There is no single system which performs the three func�ons listed. The Final RFP will be updated to reflect appropriately.

Other General Tools 53 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Our understanding is that in many cases (Ex; property, Service Now, etc.) the Government expects the contractor to interface or use Government supplied tools in the execu�on of the contract. Request the

Government provide in the bidders library, or in the RFP the complete list of tools that meet this criteria.

Please refer to SOW sec�ons for the tool examples and Atachment J-10 List of

COSMOS So�ware

Other H.4 NFS 1852.235-71 Key Personnel and

Facili�es (MAR 1989)

101 of 520 54 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Can the Government please clarify what "other key posi�ons" entail in regards to key personnel? That is, will these "other key posi�ons" be iden�fied by the Government at �me of final RFP? Or is this op�onal key personnel recommended/proposed by the Offeror(s)?

"Other key posi�ons" in H.4 is an opportunity for the Offeror to propose any addi�onal Key Personnel beyond those already iden�fied.

Other J J.2 55 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The DRFP references Atachment J-10. Would the Government please provide

Atachment J-10.

The Government provided the

Atachment J-10 COSMOS So�ware list with the publica�on of set 1 of the responses to dra� RFP ques�ons.

Other J J-10.1 56 Request for addi�onal informa�on

When will Atachment J-10 be made available?

See ques�on 55.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

J.17 DRD-COSMOS-

0008 Government

Property Management Plan

(PMP)

J-17.17 57 Clarity The DRD Ini�al Submission states, "Submit Government Property Management Plan at Request for Proposal and within 10 days of Contrac�ng Officer’s request" What does it mean to submit the Property Management Plan at “Request for Proposal”?

Please clarify.

The Contrac�ng Officer will request a

Government Property Management Plan

(DRD-COSMOS-0008)

from all offerors in the compe��ve range or only from the Apparent Successful Offeror or from offerors deemed as necessary to support an efficient responsibility decision.

Other J-10 Page 196 of

58 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The Government provided hardware lists (atachments J-8 and J-9) with the Dra� RFP. Can the Government also provide the COSMOS So�ware List (J-10) with license expira�on dates so we can incorporate this informa�on in our Scenario b response?

See ques�on 55. The Government will provide a dra� of exis�ng hardware and so�ware with associated end of service informa�on to the Technical Library.

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-25 400-402 59 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Does NASA an�cipate the extension of the following agreement to ensure coverage for COSMOS Period of Performance given the extension of the ISS program? The following Agreement expires in 2028:

“Intergovernmental Agreement Among the Government of Canada, Governments of Member States of the European Space Agency, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federa�on, and the Government of the

United States of America concerning Coopera�on on the Civil Interna�onal Space

Sta�on (IGA) for the Interna�onal Space Sta�on

(ISS)” (ref:

htps://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/12 927-Mul�lateral-Space-

Space-Sta�on- 1.29.1998.pdf).

The Government cannot comment on the status of this agreement.

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-25 400-402 60 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Will any COSMOS contractors be expected to have a long-term presence at the Germany or Japan loca�ons, similar to Russia, or is the expecta�on that contractor

Other than Russia, the Government does not expect the contractor to have any long term presence at loca�ons outside of JSC.

personnel will travel to those loca�ons on a short-term basis?

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-25 400-402 61 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Will NASA please provide addi�onal informa�on about the expecta�ons for short term travel, such as the volume and dura�on of trips to Russia, Germany and

Japan?

See ques�on 60.

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-25 400-402 62 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Does NASA an�cipate any addi�onal OCONUS loca�ons for temporary travel or long-term deployment/permanent assignment in performance of this mission?

See ques�on 60.

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-25 400-402 63 Request for addi�onal informa�on

For Export/ITAR prepara�on and adherence, the awardee will need all Export/ITAR control numbers to ensure compliance and seek licenses from the Department of

State. Does NASA an�cipate providing this informa�on at

�me of award?

This informa�on will be provided during the phase-in period.

Unique terms and condi�ons

J-3, Item 3.0 185 of 520 64 It states "When the Contractor is performing in an excellent manner, the Government may choose to exercise the op�on in Sec�on H.13, Op�on to Transi�on from Award-Fee to Fixed- Fee. Should the op�on be exercised, the Government will u�lize the Fixed Fee

Provisions under sec�on 3.0 of the Fee Distribu�on Plan."

May NASA please clarify how

"excellent manner" is defined? Is this award fee scores of Very Good and above?

It is at the discre�on of the Government based on overall performance to choose whether to exercise the op�on.

Please refer to NFS

1816.405-275 Award fee evalua�on ra�ng.

Other J-8 and J-9 Page 196 of

65 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Can the Government please confirm that all equipment listed in J-8 and J-9 is in use

(or reserved as spares)? Or is some of the listed equipment unused and ready to be repurposed or disposed of?

The Government can confirm that all of the hardware in J-8 and J-9 is either in use, planned as spares, or ready to be repurposed/disposed

of. All of it will be the responsibility of

COSMOS.

Sec�on K

ANNUAL

REPRESENTATI

ONS AND

CERTIFICATION

S (MAY 2024)

K-2 (a) 405 66 Clarity Can NASA please verify if the small business size standard of 1,000 for NAICS 541715 is correct for this solicita�on?

The small business standard will be updated as part of the Final RFP with excep�on 3 asservices requiring thorough knowledge of complete spacecra� will be provided. Therefore, the Small Business Size Standard is 1,300 employees.

Schedule L.11 PERIOD

COVERED BY

PROCUREMENT

L-8 67 Clarity The Dra� RFP requirement from the government notes a

“91-day Phase-in period” occurring from “July 1, 2025 -

September 30, 2025” in mul�ple places. However, these dates appear to include 92 days, not 91.

Should the reference to the Phase-in dura�on be updated to 92-days?

The phase in period is from July 1 2025 to September 30 2025.

We will update documenta�on throughout to correctly reflect this is 92 days.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.13 (a) L-9 68 Clarity "The offeror shall submit its proposal via NASA’s

Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a

FedRAMP Moderate cer�fied pla�orm. Electronic submissions shall not contain hidden formulas, tables, be locked, be password protected, or contain links to data not included in the electronic copy." Request the Government clarify whether tables will be allowed per DRFP L.18(a)(2)

Tables are allowed specifically where requested in various por�ons of the proposal. Where table submission applies there shall be no hidden formulas, no locked tables, no password protected tables, or links that are not contained within proposal submission.

"Text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12-point text size. Diagrams, charts, tables, artwork and photographs shall not be used to circumvent the text size limita�ons of the proposal. " Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.13 ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION OF

PROPOSALS –

PROPOSAL MARKING

AND DELIVERY

THROUGH NASA’S

EFSS BOX (OCT 2023)

L-9 69 Clarity There appears to be a discrepancy in the provided hyperlink for "COSMOS Proposal File Submission," as it currently directs to JSC Safety and Health

Requirements. Could the Government please provide the intended submission method or correct link for offerors to submit their proposal files?

The link will be updated as part of the COSMOS

Final RFP.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.13 ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION OF

PROPOSALS –

PROPOSAL MARKING

AND DELIVERY

THROUGH NASA’S

EFSS BOX (OCT 2023)

L-9 70 Clarity The DRFP Cover Leter notes that Past Performance is due early (November 13, 2024).

However, Sec�on L.13 does not provide any specific instruc�ons for this submital. Should offerors assume that Volume II Past

Performance will be submited via EFSS Box, and therefore we need to provide

The following update will be made to Sec�on L.17 as part of the Final

RFP, “The en�re proposal is due by

December 9, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Central Time.

Proposal Volume II, Past Performance is requested 2 weeks early, but not officially our intent to submit that volume 48 hours prior to the

November 13 deadline?

due un�l the proposal submital date.” Yes, Offerors should submit a no�fica�on 48 hours prior to the intended submission of Past performance and/or the en�re contract. All proposal submissions are through EFSS box.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.13(a)ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION OF

PROPOSALS

L-9 71 Clarify "All electronic submissions should be searchable and should not contain scanned documents, except those documents that must be provided in their na�ve format (e.g., signature pages, prior award fee leters for past performance, DCAA/DCMA approval leters, as applicable)." As the Model Contract contains signatures, would the Government please confirm that offerors are permited to submit the model contract in its na�ve PDF format?

Yes, Offerors are required to submit the model contract in its na�ve PDF format.

Instruc�ons

L.13, C 432 72 Other For delivery, it seems the site given to offerors for

"COSMOS Proposal File Submission" was actually linked to:

htps://www.nasa.gov/johns on/jsc-safety-health-requirements/. Can NASA please provide a corrected link so that offeror's may work access issues in advance of the proposal due date?

See ques�on 69.

Security (including informa�on technology security)

L.14 L-11 73 Clarity Please clarify if the FCL requirement is for a Top

Secret Facility Clearance with TS Storage which is the highest level of FCL approved by DCSA.

No, exact verbiage to be corrected in Final

RFP. For proposal submission Offeror will need to show proof of

Top Secret Facility Clearance Level.

Anything higher than Top Secret on the personnel side (TS // SCI) the Offeror needs to have personnel eligible to be sponsored by NASA for TS //SCI

Security (including informa�on technology security)

L.14; J-6 DD Form 254, Department of

Defense DoD Contract Security

Classifica�on Specifica�on

L-11 74 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The "J-6 DD Form 254, Department of Defense DoD

Contract Security Classifica�on Specifica�on" provided with the Dra� RFP is currently blank. Will the

Government provide a version with Sec�ons 1, 10, 11, 13, and 14 completed so that Offerors are aware of all

Security Requirements in advance of the release of the final RFP?

The Government will provide a complete and signed DD Form 254 in PDF format as part of the Final RFP

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.17(b) L-14 75 Other DD254 Top Secret/Sensi�ve Compartmented Informa�on Clearance format submission requirement is MS Word.

Would the Government please provide DD254 in MS Word or change the submission requirement to PDF. When Offerors are asked to convert pdf files to MS Word for submission there may be anamolies due to the conversion process.

See ques�on 74.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.18 L-20 76 Other To provide NASA with responsive detail and clarity, while s�ll ensuring a succinct, compliant response, Would the Government change the font size for graphics and tables to 10-

The Government will not change these forma�ng requirements.

point, and specify the font type as Arial Narrow?

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.19.1, 2. TCP L-25, L-26 77 Clarity Sec�on L.19.1, 2. TCP, paragraph (b), states "Sources used for the proposed direct labor rates shall be supported with the following informa�on to allow a complete understanding of, and establish traceability to, the proposed labor rates" and then describes salary survey requirements.

If offeror is proposing the provided incumbent rates as the source of direct labor, are suppor�ng salary surveys s�ll required?

Yes, suppor�ng salary surveys are s�ll required.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.20 (b) Program Manager

L-33 78 Clarity Paragraph (b) discusses Program Manager Resume and submital, but does not state if it is excluded from page limits.

Would you please confirm that the Program Manager resume is not included in the 15 page limit for Volume II?

Atachment L-1 Key Personnel Resume

Template states that the Program Manager resume is limited to two pages. These two pages are not part of the 15 page limit for

Volume II. Table L-1 on page L-17 will be updated on the final RFP to show Program

Manager Resume page limit.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.20, Paragraph e 456 79 Clarity The requirement states, "For the purposes of this solicita�on, a “major subcontractor” is a subcontractor (e.g., a subcontractor or inter-divisional organiza�on) with an es�mated total contract value that equals or exceeds $100,000,000 over the period of performance for this contract as defined in Sec�on L.11, JSC 52.215-126

PERIOD COVERED BY

PROCUREMENT (AUG 2018)."

Can the Government confirm that the $100,000,000 over the period of performance is over the 9.5 years of the total contract?

The Government confirms a major subcontractor has an es�mated contract value of $100,000,000 or more over the 9.5 year period of performance.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.20, Paragraph f 456 80 Clarity Can you clarify if the Prime and all teammates/subcontractors are required to complete as many relevant programs in the Past Performance Matrix or are the only contracts to be iden�fied in the Matrix are those being submited as "up to 5" references

Correct. Prime and all teammates/subcontrac tors are required to complete for contracts submited as references under L.20 (d).

iden�fied under L.20, paragraph d?

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.20.j L-35 81 Clarity L.20.j requires Environmental Data, Safety and Health Data, and leter from the insurance carrier "For all work performed on these contracts performed in the last five years". Would the

Government confirm whether these items are required for each of the 5 referenced contracts being provided in Volume II?

In accordance with L.20 (j), Offerors shall submit the informa�on requested under

Environmental Data 1 and Safety and Health Data 1, 2, and 3, for all work performed on these contracts during the past five years.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.21 L-37 82 Other This sec�on requires "Minor" Subcontractors to provide requested informa�on as detailed on atachment L-5b and the IRAP tab included in atachment L-5a, cost/price templates. Can the government please consider adding the IRAP tab to the L-

5b cost/price template for the "Minor" Subcontractors or allow the Offerors to modify the L-5b cost/price template to add the L-5a

IRAP tab?

Atachment L-5b will be updated for the final

RFP to also include the IRAP tab for Minor Subcontractors to complete.

Instruc�ons

L.21 (c) L-46 83 Clarity The RFP states "For all Subcontracts, both Minor and Major, the Offeror shall include the following in their cost narra�ve and template:

1.Subcontractor’s Name

2. An�cipated Subcontract

Type

3. A list of all proposed labor categories

4. Subcontractor’s total burdened labor rate"

For Minor Subcontractors that already provide this informa�on in tab 4 Minor SubK Template, does this also need to be duplicated and added in the "Subcontract Costs" sec�on of the Cost

Narra�ve as well?

If the informa�on is provided in Tab 4 Minor SubK Template, it does not need to be duplicated in the Cost

Narra�ve.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.21 (c) Escala�on Factors

L-41-42 84 Clarity The dra� RFP requests that offerors provide calcula�ons and ra�onale on how escala�on factors were developed for both labor and non-labor elements. Will the Government please confirm that no ra�onale is needed for non-labor elements since offerors are required to u�lize the Government’s specified Non-Labor

Resources (NLRs) provided in

No escala�on ra�onale is needed for non-labor resources. The RFP language will be updated accordingly.

Atachment L-5a and Table L.5b? Two of the four Govt specified Non-Labor resources (Sustaining

Material and Dev/Mod Material) include a 5% YoY escala�on

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.21 Cost and Price Factor - Volume III

L-41 85 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The Government provides a defin�on of how to calculate a WYE in Sec�on L.21.c.

However, this calcula�on assumes that the hired workforce will have a different produc�ve labor year based on their employer's broad experience on other contracts and at other loca�ons, rather than based on the historical average of sick �me and �me off experienced by the current, local workforce.

To protect the total compensa�on of the incumbent workforce, consider providing a required produc�ve labor year defini�on (in hours) for all offerors based on history rather than forecast for unique offerors.

The Government will not provide a required amount of hours needed to comprise one Work Year Equivalent (WYE).

Offerors shall iden�fy the produc�ve work hour and WYE assump�ons u�lized in pricing their Cost/Price

Proposals.

Instruc�ons

L.21 Cost and Price Factor - Volume III

L-41 - L-42 86 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The solicita�on offers a wide degree of flexibility with regard to proposed escala�on rates, to include 3 years of historical escala�on or incen�ves to mo�vate performance of a staff with zero or nega�ve escala�on.

We believe this presents a significant risk to COSMOS personnel, since (1) historical escala�on may not reflect future escala�on, (2) non-incumbent historical escala�on may not reflect local condi�ons, and (3) broad incen�ves are difficult to quan�fy. In addi�on, the

BLS has indicated that wages and salaries in the Houston area have increased 5.2% as of June 2024, a significant increase from previous escala�on.

To ensure proposed pricing is realis�c, protect the wages of

COSMOS personnel, and to protect the ability of your contractor to con�nue to atract strong talent for the FOD mission, we recommend the Government provide a

The Government will not provide a minimum escala�on rate.

minimum escala�on rate for proposal purposes.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L.21(b).1-L.21(b).3.ii L-39 87 Clarity For Volume III Cost/Price, please confirm the

Government requires only one Introductory Page, one Table of Contents , and one

Index/Overview appropriately referenced. It appears that in the Sec�ons referenced, there may be some duplica�on in the instruc�ons.

For the Cost and Price Volume only one introductory page, table of contents, and index are required.

Sec�on L.21b)1.i.

through viii. describe the informa�on required on the introductory page of the cost/price proposal.

Sec�on L.21b)2. details the requirement for a table of contents and

Sec�on L.21b)3. details the requirements for a Cost/Price Volume to be considered responsive for evalua�on.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L-20 Page 442 of

88 Other In order to show our graphics in more detail, we request that the font requirement for text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs be reduced to

10-point Arial Narrow.

The Government will not modify this requirement.

Other L-54 Atachment L-6 Past Performance Relevancy Matrix

L-34 89 Clarity Atachment L-6 shows 1.3 for Subcontracts. The SOW

(Sec�on C) does not have Sec�on 1.3.

Would you please correct

Atachment L-6 to not reflect Sec�on 1.3 or will a Sec�on

1.3 be included in the final

SOW?

Sec�on 1.3 in Atachment L-6 will be removed as part of the COSMOS Final Request for Proposal.

Other L-54 Atachment L-6 Past Performance Relevancy Matrix

L-34 90 Clarity Atachment L-6 states 2.9 Environmental and Health

Management. The SOW (Sec�on C ) 2.9 is

Environmental and Energy Conserva�on.

Would you please clarify which is correct?

Sec�on 2.9 in Atachment L-6 of the COSMOS Final Request for Proposal will be updated to

Environmental and Energy Conserva�on.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L-5a Tab - IDIQ Summary

91 Row 125 calculates the Fee Dollars for the overall contract by year. From columns C-E, the formula uses the NTE Award Fee (AF) Rate from row 123, which is in alignment with the contract being CPAF for the ini�al 3 years. However, columns F-L s�ll use the AF Rate from row 123 despite the contract switching to be CPFF in those years. Row 124 is labeled as the NTE Fixed Fee (FF) Rate, but it is not

This will be corrected in the final RFP; however, please note per L.21 Cost and Price Factor - Volume III, offerors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of formulas and figures contained in the cost price template.

used in any downstream calcula�ons. Would the government please clarify that row 124 is intended for fee calcula�on from year 4 un�l end of contract and correct atachment L-5a to reflect this?

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template

466 92 Clarity Can the Government confirm that the hours prescribed in Table L.5 (a) are considered produc�ve hours?

The hours shown in Table L.5a are resource or produc�ve work hours es�mates for each year to be used for proposal prepara�on and are not a guarantee of future work.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template

Tab 5 IRAP 93 Clarity Does the Government expect work year equivalents (WYE) for each SLC from Prime and

Subs to equate to the prescribed hours for each SLC as there are SLCs with 1 hour? That is, in Table L.5

(a), does the IRAP from the prime and subs need to add up to the prescribed hours?

Produc�ve work hours are defined as the total available hours for produc�ve work in a year, excluding over�me, less paid �me off. This figure may differ between companies based on the amount of paid

�me off given. A WYE is defined as the proposed produc�ve hours needed to comprise one average full-�me employee.

This may be one employee or several part-�me employees.

Offerors shall iden�fy the produc�ve work hour and WYE assump�ons u�lized in pricing their Cost/Price

Proposals.

The WYEs on the IRAP tab for the Prime and

Major or Minor Subcontractors should relate to the equivalent produc�ve work hours

(from Table L.5a.)

assigned by the Prime.

The WYEs (when converted to the equivalent produc�ve work hours of the respec�ve company) from the IRAP tabs of the Prime and Subcontractors should add up to the prescribed hours in

Table L.5a for each SLC.

For SLCs with 1 hour, the equivalent WYE should be noted on the IRAP tab of either the

Prime or Subcontractors if the SLC is associated with the Prime or Subcontractor. For example, a WYE of

1,792 hours, as applied to 1 hour would be approximately 0.0006 WYEs when taken to the 4th decimal place.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost

Price Template Tab 7 TCP

Rate Build-up 94 Clarity Per instruc�on, the TCP Rate

Buildup is required for Prime and Major Subcontractor.

Would the Government allow an edit Company Name field to clarify Prime Offeror and

Major Subcontractor?

The Offeror and Major Subcontractors shall each complete their own Atachment L-5a to this solicita�on, COSMOS Cost/Price Template.

Per L.21 Cost and Price

Factor - Volume III, a Major Subcontractor may submit their files directly to the Government if Major

Subcontractor informa�on is deemed proprietary and not shared with the Prime.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template &

Sec�on J-12 Standard Labor Categories

Tab 3 Rate Development

FBR

and

J-12.2

96 Clarity J-12 states "The Contractor is allowed to include addi�onal labor categories that do not easily map into the SLCs below under the "other" SLC.

However, Tab 3, Rate Development FBR of Cost

Price Template - Instruc�on To Offerors, 2nd Paragraph, 3rd sentence states "Offerors may NOT iden�fy addi�onal

SLCs". Would the Government please clarify if contractor may propose addi�onal SLC.

Will remove reference to offerors proposing

SLCs as part of the Final

RFP.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template &

Sec�on J-12 Standard Labor Categories

Tab 3 Rate Development

FBR

and

J-12.2

97 Clarity If addi�onal SLCs are allowed, how shall Offerors integrate those new SLCs into their proposal? For example, should hours be iden�fied for any new SLCs added or should offerors just provide an hourly rate?

See ques�on 96.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template

Tab 2 IDIQ Summary

98 Clarity For bidders with different burden rates on Non Labor Resources (NLRs) based on types of NLR, would the Government allow amending or adding addi�onal rows to clarify the specific burden applied to each type of NLR?

Yes, the offeror should modify the rows on the IDIQ Summary Tab to apply appropriate burdens to the stated categories of non-labor resources.

Other L-5a COSMOS Cost Price Template

Tab 6a Indirect Rate OHT and Tab 6b Indirect Rate GAT

99 Clarity Would the Government please define "Significant

Change?"

With regard to the significance of the elements of cost in pool and/or base amounts driving change to the indirect rates versus historical indirect data and/or significant changes in the indirect rates from one year to another, the determina�on of what cons�tutes a significant change is le� to the Offeror's or Major

Subcontractor's discre�on.

Sec�on M Evalua�on

Criteria

M.4.3.1 SBU. Small Business

Subcontrac�ng and M.6 Cost and Price Factor (Volume III)

M. 6 and M.11

100 Clarity The Contents of DRD- COSMOS-0009 require "the percentage of contract" for each Small Business subcontractor. However, we were unable to find evalua�on criteria in M.4.3.1 SBU1 or M.6 Cost and Price Factor that clarifies either 1) how these percentages are to be proven or 2) how these percentages are validated as part of the cost realism analysis. Are offerors required to provide signed Teaming Agreements as part of the Small Business Plan?

Offerors shall refer to Sec�on L.19.1, L.19.2, and L.19.3 for instruc�ons and M.4.3, M.4.3.1, and M.4.3.2 for evalua�on factors in regards to Small

Business. In accordance with L.19 Mission

Suitability - Volume 1,

(e) , "Offerors shall ensure the informa�on submited in this volume is consistent with informa�on submited in other

And will the percentages in these agreements be used as part of the cost realism analysis to ensure consistency of these independent proposal elements?

volumes, as applicable."

Other N/A N/A 101 Other Reques�ng use of both the NASA and FOD logos for the purposes of this proposal submission.

Offerors shall not use NASA and FOD logos for proposal submission.

Other Sec�on C, 2.14.2 Sec�on 508 Compliance

C-18 102 Clarity Do all current applica�ons and systems meet 508 requirements or will the COSMOS contractor need to perform updates to exis�ng applica�ons?

New projects must be compliant, exis�ng projects may be required to meet compliance when being modified.

Other Sec�on C, 2.7 Documenta�on Management

C-14 103 Clarity Request the government be more specific on the

"Government provided electronic documenta�on library?" Is this the currently myMSOC applica�on/site or something else?

This is referring to the FOD Contract

Management System (FCMS). Please refer to

SOW Sec�on 2.2 Contract

Communica�ons Other Sec�on C, 3.1

Common Mission Systems Support

C-19 104 Clarity In addi�on to the project documenta�on being compliant with the So�ware management Plan (SMP), should it also be assumed that all products associated with that so�ware project are compliant (e.g., source code, etc.)?

New projects must be compliant, exis�ng projects may be required to meet compliance when being modified.

Other Sec�on C, 3.1.1.5 Equipment

Replacement/Obsole scence

C-23 105 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide a copy of the current

Tech Plan.

We will provide a redacted summary of the Technical Plan in the Technical Library as part of the COSMOS

Final Request for Proposal.

Other Sec�on C, 3.1.5 Performance

Standards

C-29 106 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide the current metrics for all delivered so�ware to beter understand the maturity and quality of the code baseline that will be transi�oned.

See J-10 COSMOS So�ware List.

Other Sec�on C, 3.1.5 Performance

Standards

C-29 107 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide a list of Government provided tools used to support development, scheduling, building, or release of custom so�ware.

See Atachment J-10 List of COSMOS

So�ware

Other Sec�on C, 3.2

UNIQUE MISSION

SYSTEMS SUPPORT

C-32 108 Request for addi�onal informa�on

Request the Government provide informa�on and status on current in-flight projects or Task Orders that will modify the base capabili�es of the Mission Systems.

A redacted version of the MSOC Fiscal Year 2025 Task/Delivery

Orders will be provided in the Technical Library as part of the COSMOS

Final Request for Proposal.

Unique terms and condi�ons

Sec�on I LISTING OF

CLAUSES

INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE

I-6 109 Clarity Request the Government clarify its intent in the wording (a) The use of over�me is authorized under this contract if the over�me premium does not exceed

This means that any over�me will have to be requested and approved by the

Contrac�ng Officer per FAR 52.222-2(b), if it zero or the rates iden�fied in Atachment J-20, Labor Rate

Tables exceeds zero or the rates iden�fied in

Atachment J-20, Labor Rate Tables.

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

Sec�on L.17(b); L- 19.1.2

L-24; L-47 110 Clarity Request the Government allow subcontractors that need to submit TCPs containing proprietary data to submit them directly to the Government (analogous to the Subcontractor cost instruc�ons on page L-47).

Yes, please refer to L.13

ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION OF

PROPOSALS –

PROPOSAL MARKING

AND DELIVERY

THROUGH NASA’S EFSS

BOX (OCT 2023).

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

Small Business U�liza�on (SBU)

L-30 111 Clarity Sec�on L.19.3 states that, "The instruc�ons regarding

Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns (SDB) par�cipa�on apply to all

Offerors." However, there do not appear to be any instruc�ons specific to SDB concerns. Is this referring to the subcontrac�ng goal of 5% for SDB, as iden�fied within sec�on SBU.1? Or is the Government intending for Small Business offerors to also meet SDB subcontrac�ng requirements? Or what is the Government's intent here?

Please clarify.

SBU.1(b) will include the following as part of the Final RFP, "* Although 15 U.S.C.

637(d) requires subcontrac�ng plans to contain informa�on about SDB concerns, case law prevents the

Government from giving evalua�on credit to business types based on race or ethnicity unless those businesses are in under-represented industries.

The Sec�on M evalua�on for SDB par�cipa�on ensures that the Government only evaluates par�cipa�on of SDBs in industries that are designated by the

Department of Commerce as underrepresented. For purposes of the Small

Business Subcontrac�ng Plan, the proposed subcontrac�ng goal for SDBs will be evaluated based upon the SDB’s status as a small business."

Other Standard Labor Categories, Quality

Assurance Specialist

J-12.5 112 Request for addi�onal informa�on

The labor category does not list the educa�on level.

Please provide to enable bidders to beter es�mate the rate for this labor category.

A�er a review of the Standard Labor categories only the Technician I posi�on did not list the educa�on level.

Therefore, the Final RFP will include the following, " Typically has a high school degree or its equivalent and normally possesses 0 to 4 years of experience in the field or in a related area.".

Instruc�ons

L.25.2 (b) - Volume I Mission Suitability

TCP, L.25.2 (b)

L-24 & L-25 113 Clarity Table L.19-1 provides Incumbent Rate Data for the

SLCs.

The following statement appears in the DRFP above Table L.19-1:

"The average direct labor rates, as provided by the

Government, are based on data provided by the incumbent Contractor as of January 2024 for its workforce (includes subcontractors) and reflects the incumbent’s mapping of its labor classifica�ons to the respec�ve Government standard labor classifica�ons.

Some rates were derived from the Economic Research

Ins�tute (ERI)."

Which standard labor categories are based on ERI rates?

The labor rates for the following SLCs were derived from ERI:

Quality Assurance Specialist, Safety Manager, Safety

Engineer, and So�ware Quality Assurance

Engineer

Sec�on L Proposal

Instruc�ons

L-5a - Volume III Atachment L-5a

COSMOS Cost Price Template

Tab 2 IDIQ Summary

114 Clarity Cells F125 - L125 contain an incorrect formula for the Fee Dollars. The current formula does not calculate the fee dollars for the fixed fee star�ng in contract year 4 and con�nuing through the rest of the period of performance.

Are the bidders to correct

This will be corrected in the final RFP; however, please note per L.21 Cost and Price Factor - Volume III, offerors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of formulas and figures contained in the cost price template.

this formula, or will this be corrected in the Final RFP template?

Sec�on L Proposal

Instr…