MTIC Draft Request For Proposal Questions And Answers.pdf

Solicitation Number 80JSC025R7002 Procurement Title Mission Technical Integration Contract (MTIC)

Question Number Category Section Page Number Type Question/Comment Response

1 Section L Proposal Instructions

Attachment L-10 L-66 Request for additional information

The MS Excel file for Attachment L-10, Work Load Indicators, was not provided with the original release of the Draft RFP on 13 Dec 2024. When does the Government anticipate providing this file to offerors?

Attachment L-10, Work Load Indicators was added to the Attachment Section on the governmentwide point of entry via modification 11 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC. The Government has provided updated Work Load Indicators (WLIs) with the Final Request For Proposal. Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36 4086b37c38c357adcdbf/view

2 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.19A MA1 L-17 Clarity The instructions in Section L regarding the specific sections to address in the Contract Management Plan, DRD MTIC- PM-01, conflict with the DRD instructions regarding which sections should be addressed with the proposal submittal (e.g., Sections E, I, L, and O are in conflict). Additionally, Section L directs offerors to address Section O in the DRD, but this section does not exist. Please clarify the requirements regarding which sections of the DRD are to be submitted with the proposal.

The Government will be requesting sections A-D, F-H, and L-N. All references in the Final Request For Proposal will be updated accordingly.

3 other other What specific deliverables are you expecting from this pre-solicitation?

Per the Draft RFP Cover Letter "Potential offerors are encouraged to comment on all aspects of the draft solicitation, including the requirements, schedules, proposal instructions, and evaluation approaches, any perceived safety, occupational health, security (including information technology security), environmental, export control, and/or other programmatic risk issues associated with performance of the work.

Potential offerors are also encouraged to comment on any unique terms and conditions, Section L Instructions, and the Section M Evaluation Criteria."

4 other other Is there an opportunity to schedule a meeting or a brief one-on-one discussion to better understand the scope of the MTIC opportunity and potential small business participation strategies?

One-on-ones with Industry occurred in June 2024. There are no planned additional opportunities for one-on-one discussions for MTIC scope conversations.

5 other other Are there additional steps or recommendations you would suggest for small businesses to engage effectively with this opportunity?

Interested parties should continue to monitor the MTIC website and sam.gov for additional information. There is also the JSC Office of Small Business Programs available for additional guidance specific to small businesses who can be reached at jsc-smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov mailto:smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov mailto:smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov

6 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.17 (b) L-11 Other Request the page limit for the Mission Suitability Volume be increased from 30 pages to 45 pages. Given the amount of content requested from offerors within the page limits, offerors are only able to address their proposed approaches at a very high overview level without providing any detail or opportunity to explain innovative proposed approaches for MTIC.

The Government has considered the recommendation and will be updating the Final Request For Proposal to thirty-seven (37) pages as the page limit for the Mission Suitability Volume.

7 Other J-13 J-13-1 Other The cover sheet for Attachment J- 13 in the DRFP PDF is titled incorrectly as the Safety and Health Plan.

The cover sheet for Attachment J-13, Government Furnished Software, IT Systems, and Models, Contractor Hosted Apps and Sustained Apps, and Licenses will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal.

8 Section L Proposal Instructions

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Clarity The text in Section L states "(1) Offerors are permitted to discretely estimate additional NLRs required to support their unique approach."

This sentence implies that offeror-proposed NLR estimates are supplemental to a pre-established estimate provided by the Government. Does the Government plan to provide NLR plug numbers to be used in pricing with the aforementioned reference supplementing this plug number or are offerors required to provide bottoms-up estimates for the entire scope of work?

No plug number will be provided.

The Government has provided historical Non-Labor Resource data via modification 13 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC.

Offerors should propose their estimated Non-Labor Resources.

Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36 4086b37c38c357adcdbf/view

9 Section L Proposal

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Clarity The Government Furnished hardware in Attachment J-13, Table 4 appears to be separate from the IAGP and GFP provided in Attachment J-12. Will the Government please confirm that the costs identified in both of these attachments must be accounted for in non-labor pricing estimates?

Offerors are not required to provide a Non-Labor Resource value for the items in Attachment J- 13, Government Furnished Software, IT Systems, and Models, Contractor Hosted Apps and Sustained Apps, and Licenses or J- 12, List of Installation Accountable Government Property and Government Furnished Property.

Proposal pricing should not include costs associated with the government-furnished items in these attachments. Attachment J-13 lists the Government resources available to the awarded contractor for use in fulfilling the Statement of Work requirements during the course of contract performance.

10 Section L Proposal Instructions

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Request for additional information

Many of the entries in Attachment J-13, Table 4 do not include sufficient information to determine the annual estimated cost. For example, in rows 9 and 10 of the spreadsheet, the expiration date is provided but the duration of the agreement is not specified. These two entries total >$4.1M and represent more than half of the cost associated with the Table 4 entries.

When the duration is note specified in the Product Description field, please provide either a start date or duration for all entries so offerors can properly assess HW & SW License sustainment requirements.

Offerors are not required to provide a Non-Labor Resource value for the items in Attachment J- 13, Government Furnished Software, IT Systems, and Models, Contractor Hosted Apps and Sustained Apps. Attachment J-13 lists the Government resources available to the awarded contractor for use in fulfilling the Statement of Work requirements during the course of contract performance.

Proposal pricing should not include costs associated with the government-furnished items in these attachments.

11 Section L Proposal

Attachment L-10 (All Workbooks)

Clarity There are many workload indicators that have magnitudes or schedules identified as “ongoing,” “as-needed,” “continuous,” or are similarly undefined. We interpret these requirements as unknown at this time. To enable offerors to price these unknown requirements in a fair and consistent manner, will the Government be providing any further indicators for these elements?

Work Load Indicators (WLIs) updates will be provided with the Final Request For Proposal where available. WLIs can be utilized in combination with historical Work Year Equivalent (WYE) and the Statement of Work (SOW) to assist the offerors in their estimating of the current requirements.

12 Section L Proposal Instructions

Attachment L-10 (All Workbooks)

Clarity These workload indicators all appear to be for a single year.

However, we recognize that program needs will be changing over time (e.g., ISS retirement activities). Will the Government be providing any guidance or guidelines on how offerors should address changes in labor or non-labor over time? Recommend requiring all offerors to create a basis of estimate for the first year and assume only escalation for proposal purposes to ensure a fair competition.

The Government has provided Work Load Indicators (WLIs) as a reference document to support the Basis of Estimate (BOE) process for the baseline work on this contract. This data is provided to assist offerors in the proposal process. While it captures a moment in time, the Government feels this is a proper representation of current performance requirements. The Government will also be providing historical Work Year Equivalent (WYE) data by program. The Government does not have any information on future changes in the workload at this time and the offeror should not anticipate increases or decreases in future requirements.

13 Other SSP-50291 Russian FRIO (from

Technical Library)

Clarity Section 3.1 includes American manning support staff, but it is unclear which personnel, if any, are employed under HSFTIC and therefore required under MTIC.

Will the Government please provide current staffing levels and skill mix for support provided to Russia, particularly any support driven by agreements with ROSCOSMOS? Or are these agreements subject to change based on MTIC offeror estimates of support needs?

The HSFTIC contract does not include any of the American manning staff described in SSP 50291. SSP 50291 outlines the staffing in Mission Control Moscow and includes personnel that are civil servants or employees of other contracts. MTIC will not be providing any of the staff outlined in Section 3.1. Historical Work Year Equivalent (WYE) Data relating to Russia IT Support will be provided in Modification 15 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC. Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36 4086b37c38c357adcdbf/view

14 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.20(j) L-23 Clarity L.20(j) requires Environmental Data, Safety and Health Data, and letter from the insurance carrier, "For all work performed on these contracts during the last five years." Would the Government confirm whether these items are required for each of the 3 referenced contracts being provided in Volume II?

Yes, the government is only requesting Environmental Data, Safety and Health Data, and letter from the insurance carrier for the contracts the offeror submits in past performance.

15 Section L Proposal Instructions

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Clarity The cost fields for several items in Attachment J-13, Table 4 are blank. Will the Government be providing additional data to price these items, or are they to be considered $0 for proposal purposes?

Refer to Question & Answer 9.

16 Section L Proposal

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Clarity Should offerors include any content from Attachment J-12 in non-labor cost estimates, or are these items treated as Government purchases that should be excluded from cost/price estimates?

SOW 2.4 states that “IT resources and systems covered by this SOW are listed in Contract Attachment J- 12, List of Installation Accountable Government Property and Government Furnished Property.”

In SOW 2.4.4, it states that the contractor is responsible for maintenance, ordering replacement parts, sparing, EOL, etc. for IT systems in Attachment J-12.

However, SOW 2.2.6.1 implies that J-12 is the list of ISS property that the MTIC contractor inventories and maintains records for (Tables 1 through 10 all indicate ISS). SOW 3.2.1 similarly describes the contractor as the property custodian of Gateway property. Of particular concern are high value items (e.g., there are 7 items in Table 11 that add up to $14M, for which offerors have no additional insight).

Offerors are not required to provide a Non-Labor Resource value for the items in J-12, List of Installation Accountable Government Property and Government Furnished Property.

Any purchases made in support of these requirements are done so through the Government Information Technology Procurement independent of this contract. The contractor identifies any purchases required by the Government to support these requirements.

17 Section L Proposal

L-21 (d) Non-Labor Resources

L-33 Clarity Should J-13 Table 4 content be considered in the development of non-labor cost estimates for MTIC pricing purposes, or will it be handled as part of the annual operating planning exercise to establish priorities in alignment with annual budget? The table provides historical expenses but does not offer insight into how historical expenses should be used to predict future needs.

Refer to Question & Answer 9.

18 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21(c)(2)(viii)

L.21(d)(Direct Labor

Page L-29

Page L-32

Clarity Will the government confirm that under FAR 52.222-43, Offerors are not required to preemptively escalate SCA wage determination labor rates in their proposals, as any adjustments for updated Wage Determinations during contract performance will be handled as equitable adjustments to the contract?

The DRFP inadvertently included FAR 52.222-43. The Final Request For Proposal will be updated accordingly to remove references to FAR 52.222-

43. Refer to FAR 22.1006(c)(1) for reason to remove. This clause is not applicable to MTIC. The clause is to be used in fixed-price, time-and-materials, or labor-hour service contracts. Offerors are required to escalate the SCA rates in their proposals.

Cost)(7. Escalation Factors)

19 Section L Proposal L.21(d)(Direct Labor Page L-32

Proposed Prime Labor Rates worksheet

Clarity The requirement in Section L.21 allows Offerors to "adjust the Excel formula to be consistent with their accounting and disclosure practices" when populating the labor escalation in the Attachment L-6A "Proposed Prime Labor Rates" tab. Will the government confirm that Offerors may adjust the formula to exclude preemptive escalation of Wage Determination (WD) wages, as these rates are subject to equitable adjustments under FAR Clause 52.222-43 during contract performance? This approach would ensure compliance with FAR 52.222-43 and align with the Offeror's accounting practices.

No, offerors should not adjust the formula to remove preemptive escalation of Wade Determination (WD) wages. Refer to Question & Answer 18.

Instructions Cost)(7. Escalation

L-6A MTIC Cost

Price Template.xlsx

20 Section L Proposal L.21(d)(Direct Labor Page L-32 Clarity Given that uncompensated overtime is not allowable for employees covered under the Service Contract Act (SCA) and Wage Determination (WD) provisions, will the government require Offerors to disclose any assumed uncompensated overtime hours by labor category in the Labor Cost Details worksheet of Attachment L-6A, similar to overtime and double-time hours?

Refer to FAR 52.237-10 Identification of Uncompensated Overtime.

Uncompensated overtime is not allowed on SCA covered labor. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) or the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA), both require payment for overtime hours worked beyond 40 per week.

RFP Section L.21(d)(8), states if uncompensated overtime is proposed, it must be included in the estimated cost, with explanation on the cost narrative.

If required, uncompensated

Instructions Cost)(8.

Uncompensated

Overtime) overtime is to be proposed in accordance with the Offerors estimating and accounting practices and FAR 52.237-10, Identification of Uncompensated Overtime, to include the adjusted hourly rate in the estimated cost and the realized productive labor hour factor.

21 Section L Proposal

L.21(d)(Direct Labor Cost)(2. Work Year

Equivalent)

Page L-30 Request for additional information

The Cost Price Template has a single productive hour factor to be applied to both exempt and WD labor category hours in the Labor Cost Details worksheet. Would the government consider explicitly disallowing uncompensated overtime from being included in a productive hour factor calculation?

Alternatively, If uncompensated overtime is incorporated into an Offeror’s Work Year Equivalent (WYE) / productive hour factor, will the government require Offerors to demonstrate how WD staff are excluded from the calculation to ensure compliance with labor laws?

Offerors may adjust the Labor Cost Details Tab, if required to align with a unique approach which may require multiple productive labor hour factors.

Attachment L-6A, Instructions, will be updated to allow offerors to include additional productive labor hour factors. "Offeror is able to add rows and adjust the excel formula to be consistent with their accounting and disclosure practices."

The current instructions note uncompensated overtime is not encouraged. Offerors are required to propose in accordance with their internal estimating and accounting system practices. As a result, additional guidance is not available from the Government.

RFP Section L.21(d)(8), currently requires uncompensated overtime, if proposed, to be included in the estimated cost, with explanation on the cost narrative.

In accordance with FAR 52.237- 10 (d), proposals that include unrealistically low labor rates, or that do not otherwise demonstrate cost realism, will be considered in a risk assessment.

22 Section L Proposal

L.21(d)(Direct Labor Cost)(2. Work Year

Equivalent)

Page L-30

Labor Cost Details worksheet

Indirect Rates and Factors worksheet

Clarity Would the government allow offerors to update the Labor Cost Details and Indirect Rates and Factors worksheets to include separate productive hour factors for exempt and non-exempt labor categories, if properly documented in the Cost Narrative to demonstrate compliance with all provisions and regulations?

Yes, Attachment L-6A, Instructions, will be updated to include "Offeror is able to add rows and adjust the excel formula to be consistent with their accounting and disclosure practices."

23 Section L Proposal

L.21(d)(9. Overtime Premiums)

Page L-32

Labor Cost Details worksheet

Clarity Will the government confirm that Offerors proposing staffing levels based on full-time equivalents (FTEs) sufficient to meet the requirements without estimating overtime or double-time hours in the Labor Cost Details worksheet of Attachment L-6A sufficiently address FAR Clause 52.222-2, Payment of Overtime Premiums, paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) by providing this narrative explanation in the Basis of Estimate (BOE) and by stating that any overtime incurred during performance will comply with the clause and require government approval?

Offerors are to propose direct labor hours required to support their unique approach. If overtime hours are determined by the Offeror to be required, the Government provided Cost Prime Template is prepopulated with areas to reflect the applicable overtime premiums.

24 Section L Proposal

L.21(d)(Non-Labor Resources)(1)

Page L-33

Nonlabor Resources worksheet

Clarity The language in Section L.21 (d) Non-Labor Resources (NLRs) on page L-33 suggests that the requirement applies specifically to unique, additional NLRs tied to the proposed approach, rather than all general NLRs for baseline contract performance. Leading us to believe that the requirement focuses on costs uniquely driven by how we intend to fulfill the work, such as proprietary tools, systems, or methodologies not inherent to the baseline contract. However, it would exclude resources the government expects to provide or those intrinsic to standard execution.

"Offerors are permitted to discretely estimate additional NLRs required to support their unique approach" and "provide basis of estimate information for the non-labor resource proposed, by SOW."

Please clarify or confirm this understanding that the government intends for the NLR requirement in Attachment L-6A and the associated BOE to include only additional NLRs and not general materials, equipment, or travel

The Government has provided historical Non-Labor Resource data via modification 13 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC.

However, the Government has not provided an estimated figure for use in the Cost Price Template to capture anticipated costs for general materials, equipment, or travel. Offerors are to discretely estimate and propose all NLRs required to support their unique approach.

Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36

25 Section L Proposal L.21(d)(Direct Labor Page L-32 worksheet

Request for additional information

To ensure equitable cost/price comparisons among Offerors for labor cost elements, will the government consider providing standard escalation factors for proposed labor rates, based on historical contract data or reputable economic indices, such as those from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) or Global Insight?

Alternatively, would the government require the consistent use of the provided rates for labor to ensure consistency and prevent the use of unrealistic rates that could impact cost realism or price comparisons?

No, the Government will not provide a standard escalation factor.

Offerors are to propose escalation in accordance with their internal estimating and accounting procedure. RFP Section L.21(d)(7) provides Offerors insight into the level of detail required to support the escalation rate(s) proposed, enabling appropriate evaluation by the Government.

26 Section L Proposal L.21(d)(Direct Labor Page L-32

Nonlabor Resources worksheet

Request for additional information

To ensure equitable cost/price comparisons among Offerors for non-labor cost elements, such as materials, travel, and other direct costs, will the government consider providing and mandating the use of standard escalation factors based on historical contract data?

No, the Government will not provide a standard escalation factor.

Offerors are to propose escalation in accordance with their internal estimating and accounting procedure. A standard escalation factor will not be provided by the Government. RFP Section L.21(d)(7) provides Offerors insight into the level of detail required to support the escalation rate(s) proposed, enabling appropriate evaluations by the Government.

27 Section L Proposal

L.21(d)(Non-Labor Resources)(1)

Page L-33

Nonlabor Resources worksheet

Request for additional information

Given that non-labor costs, such as Other Direct Costs (ODCs), are directly tied to the government’s requirements and historical trends known primarily by the incumbent contractors, will the government provide ODC plug values for proposal purposes? This would ensure consistency across Offerors, prevent discrepancies from varying estimation methods, and create a level playing field for all Offerors.

The Government has provided historical Other Direct Costs (ODCs) via modification 13 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC. No plug number will be provided by the Government. Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36

28 Section L Proposal L.21(d)(Direct Labor Page L-32 worksheet

Request for additional information

Will the government provide historical incumbent unburdened base labor rates for each labor category? This data would ensure proposed rates adequately reflect the skill level and compensation of the incumbent workforce, preventing estimates based on external surveys that may undervalue the expertise required.

Providing this information would reduce risks to recruiting and retention, promote realistic cost estimates, and support equitable competition among Offerors.

Yes, the Government has provided historical Work Year Equivalent (WYE), Unburdened Labor Rate, and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) Data via modification 13 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC. Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36 4086b37c38c357adcdbf/view

29 Section L Proposal

L.21 (d) (Direct Labor Cost) (4.

Estimated Labor

Rates)(i)

Page L-30 Request for additional information

Will the government provide historical incumbent rates (HIRs) for MTIC labor categories, similar to the data provided for JSC’s recent solicitations (e.g., NOC-II and COSMOS)? Access to these rates would enable Offerors to propose realistic and competitive rates that reflect current market conditions and the incumbent workforce's skill level, while also reducing the risk of workforce retention challenges.

Yes, the Government has provided historical Work Year Equivalent (WYE), Unburdened Labor Rate, and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) Data via modification 13 to the Notice ID 80JSC024MTIC. Link:

https://sam.gov/opp/a9e18dba5f36 4086b37c38c357adcdbf/view

30 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21 Request for additional information

Will the government provide a demographic breakdown of incumbent Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) by years of experience and labor category (e.g., exempt and non-exempt), similar to the data provided in Table L.19-2 of the COSMOS solicitation?

Demographic data helps create an accurate estimate the largest driver of fringe costs—employee leave.

Refer to Question & Answer 29.

31 Other Request for additional information

How many IT System Security and Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) Plans exist today? Will the existing plans be transitioned to MTIC contractor?

There are currently three IT security plans (ISS Production Facility (IPF), Mission Evaluation Room (MER), Russia Services Group (RSvG)) owned by NASA.

The MTIC Awardee will be taking on the roles of Information System Security Officer (ISSO) primary and ISSO Alternate as described in the plans.

32 Section L Proposal

L.18.2 L.-14 Other Given limited page count, will the government consider allowing 10-point Arial family font for graphics and tables only?

No, formatting shall be in accordance with L. 18 Proposal Formatting Instructions.

33 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.19 L-16 Clarity Paragraph (f) requires proof and compliance with the Security requirements in Section L.15. L.15 is shown as "Reserved" on page L-

8. Please confirm that the reference should be to Section L.14. In addition, please clarify if the entry in Table L-2 on page L-11 labeled "DD254 Secret Facility Clearance (Attachment J-17)" is referring to the proof and compliance with the

DD254.

Yes, L.14, Security Requirements and Instructions to Offerors, is the correct reference. The Final Request For Proposal will be updated accordingly. The entry in Table L-2 is referring to the proof and compliance with the DD254.

34 Other B.6 B-2 Clarity Table B-3, Fully Burdened Rate per Hour Table, does not include Other 1, Other 2, and Other 3 labor categories that are included in L-5 Technical Resources Template.

Please clarify if Offerors can include additional labor categories in Table B-3.

Yes, Offerors can include additional labor categories. Table B-3, Fully Burdened Rate Per Hour Table and Attachment L- 6A, MTIC Cost Price Template have been updated in the Final Request For Proposal to include these categories.

35 Section L Proposal

L.19B L-19 Request for additional information

Paragraph L.19B(a) states: "The offerors are required to demonstrate their understanding of the requirements, risks, and the specific labor resources needed to successfully perform the requirements of this Contract."

Please confirm that offerors need to address "specific labor resources" for only the Export Control, CoFR, and IT SOW sections identified on pages L-20 and L-21 within the page counted portion of the Mission Suitability Volume and the remaining SOW sections are addressed in Attachment L-5 Technical Resources Template and the Basis of Estimates included in the Cost Volume.

Yes, offerors should only address the identified Statement of Work sections in Mission Suitability.

The remainder shall be addressed in Attachment L-5, Technical Resources Template. L.19B, Technical Approach, Mission Suitability (Sub-Factor B) will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal to request Systems Engineering and Integration, Mission Planning & Integration, Operations, and Information Technology.

36 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21, Attachment L- 6B

L-33, Instructions Tab

Clarity Page L-33 indicates the major subcontractor threshold as greater than $30M over the total proposed period. Elsewhere in the RFP the major subcontractor threshold is identified as $50M over the total proposed period (pages L-17, L- 22, L-25, L-37, and M-12). Please confirm that the major subcontractor threshold is $50M.

Yes, the major subcontractor threshold is $50M over the total proposed period. The Final Request For Proposal will be updated accordingly.

37 Section L Proposal

L.24 L-44 Request for additional information

Paragraph (b) states: "The Government had identified specific actual or potential conflicts related to the contract in paragraph (c) below." Paragraph (c) states: "The nature of the potential OCI(s) are:". Please provide the additional information specifying the potential OCIs.

L.24 Notice Of Potential Organizational Conflicts Of Interest (OCT 2021) provision will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal to specify potential Organization Conflict of Interests included in the solicitation.

38 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.21 L-28 Clarity Paragraph (b)(13) states: "The Offerors shall develop their proposed cost/price based on the statement of work outlined in Attachment L-10 Work Load Indicators." Please confirm that rows in Attachment L-10 that have no Approximate Magnitudes provided should not be included in each Offerors proposed cost/price for the baseline effort including options.

No, WLIs will be updated to include “Do not cost. Scope Only” for Statement of Work content areas that do not have performance requirements. All other requirements should include estimates from the offerors based on WLIs, historical Work Year Equivalent Data, and the Statement of Work. Work Load Indicators (WLIs) updates will be provided with the Final Request For Proposal where available.

39 Section L Proposal Instructions and

Section F Deliveries of Performance.

F.4, L.21 F-3, L-28 Clarity Section F.4 states multiple places of performance for the contract

(NASA JSC, KSC, MSFC,

Moscow, and others) but Section L.21(b)(12) states "For estimating purposes, Offerors are to assume the place of performance is NASA, Johnson Space Center." Please confirm that all places of performance should be used for estimating purposes."

For work to be performed at JSC, KSC, and MSFC, Offerors are to assume JSC as the place of performance for estimating purposes. However, to support the unique work performed in Mission Control Moscow, Offerors are permitted to develop direct and indirect costs associated to support the outside the contiguous United States (OCONUS). The Government Cost Price Template is prepopulated with ‘Other’ labor categories which may be populated with OCONUS categories and resulting rate data. Current instructions allow Offerors to add additional indirect rate build up tabs, if required. The Request For

Proposal will be updated to reflect this change.

40 Section L Proposal

L.18.2 L.-14 Other Will the government confirm that information (i.e. logo, etc.) in the headers/footers can be outside of the 1" margins and text can be in a smaller font.

Per L. 18 (a)(2) Proposal Formatting Instructions, Margins may contain headers and footers but shall not contain any proposal content to be evaluated. Font size will not be evaluated within the margins.

41 Section L Proposal Instructions

Attachment L-5 Instructions Tab Clarity Paragraph B) states: "WBS Level I- III are provided to capture the mapping and distribution of labor resources across SOW requirements." The CY matrices include columns for SOW Level I and SOW Level II, but there are no references to WBS Level I-III. We believe the government should remove reference to "WBS Level I- III" to eliminate any confusion.

The Final Request For Proposal will be updated to only refer to Statement Of Work Levels I and II.

42 Section L Proposal Instructions

Attachment L-2 PP Questionnaires

L-48 Clarity Will the government confirm that the January 23rd date listed for submittal of the past performance questionnaires is a placeholder date and not the date questionnaires are due back.

All dates within the Draft Request For Proposal are placeholder dates.

The Final Request For Proposal will define actual due dates.

43 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.18.2 L.-14 Other Will the government confirm that the font restriction doesn't apply to screenshots or examples of dashboards, etc.

Per L. 18 Proposal Formatting Instructions, Text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12-point text size for page limited sections.

44 Other Attachment J-1 J-1-67 Other There is no requirement to provide the schedule for Phase-In with submittal of the contract, which is critical to a successful Phase-In.

We recommend adding Section B (Attachment J-1, Contract Phase-In Plan MTIC-PM-08) to what is due at the initial Submittal with proposal. For page count purposes, recommend adding as an attachment outside of the page count with its own two page limit.

All sections pertaining to the phase-in plan in the Final Request For Proposal will be updated to include a schedule submittal with the proposal submittal for Attachment J-1, Contract Phase-In Plan MTIC- PM-08. Page limit will be updated to thirty-seven

(37) pages as the page limit for the Mission Suitability Volume.

45 Other B.6 B-4 Clarity Section B.6 states the rates in Table B-3 are to be utilized in the subsequent negotiation of contract change orders and IDIQ task orders in accordance with I.15, Task Ordering Procedure (NFS 1852.216-80) and Contract Modifications (FAR Clause 52.243 2 Alt II). The change clause cited for Contract Modifications entitles the contractor to submit a proposal for an equitable adjustment for a Cost Reimbursement contract. This FAR clause does not restrict the contractor from proposing reasonable and current cost and pricing for the new work. The B.6 clause appears to restrict the contractor from proposing reasonable future current cost for a contract modification and limits the pricing to a set of rates that were developed for a defined and known statement of work in Section C of the DRFP, not new work. Recommend Section B.6 be revised to state Table B-3 rates only apply to IDIQ task orders.

B.6, Fully Burdened Rate Table clause will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal to only apply to pricing of IDIQ Task Orders.

46 Section L Proposal

L.21.(d)(4)(iv) L-31 Clarity There are several references in the DRFP, L.21(b)(4)(5) on pages L- 26 and 27 and L.21(d)(Subcontractors) on page L- 33, which state both Major and Minor subcontractors can submit their proprietary information directly to the Government.

However, in this section, the proposal language states, "No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime offeror. This information will be required in Attachment L-6A, MTIC Cost Price Template".

Please clarify or explain if these cited sections are in conflict with each other or further explain NASA's intent in this section.

The cited sections do not conflict with one another. Refer to L.21 (d)(4)(iv) for unburdened base labor rate(s), and the combination of all applicable indirect costs thru profit/fee in offerors fully integrated attachment L-6A tab, SubK Cost Detail. If applicable, the proprietary documents (major L-6A or minor L-6B) sent directly to the Government will contain major and minor subcontractors detailed data to supporting subcontractors indirect rates and Fully Burdened Labor Rate.

47 Other J13 table 3b and L- 10-2 2.4.2

L-10-2: TAB SOW

2.4 - IT; section

2.4.2 line 20

Clarity The SOW calls out VMDB as sustaining but J13 calls out to host only; Which should it be?

Attachment J-13, Government Furnished Software, IT Systems, and Models, Contractor Hosted Apps and Sustained Apps, and Licenses will be updated to reflect sustaining in the Final Request For Proposal.

48 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.19A MA1.

Management

Approach

L-17 Other Section L.19A MA1 instructions say to provide DRD-PM-01 sections A-I, M, N and O, but Section M4A MA1 states that sections A-D, F-H, and L-N will be evaluated. Further, DRD MTIC- PM-01 states that sections A-D, F- H, and L-N are due with the proposal. Please confirm that sections A-D, F-H, and L-N of DRD-PM-01 sections are required.

See Question & Answer 2.

49 Section L Proposal

Table L-2 Page Limitations

L-12 Clarity Page Limitations for Past Performance show 1 page for "Introductory Materials" and 20 pages for "Past Performance Narrative, General Information, and Org Chart". The instructions in L.20 do not refer to Introductory Materials or General Information, so it is unclear what portions of the L.20 requirements the page limitations apply to.

Table L-2, Page Limitations will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal to clarify that the 1 page Introductory Material is not included in the 20 page Past Performance Narrative limit. The Introductory Materials will be evaluated a part of the Past Performance Evaluation.

50 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.20(a) Past Performance information

L-21 L.20 (a) requests "information on up to three past contracts that best demonstrates their ability to perform the MTIC work." It is unclear if this is the total per team, or per team member. In addition, the matrix in L-3 illustrate 3 citations for each entity, including prime, major/minor subcontractors, key personnel, and affiliates. Can you clarify on up to how many citations we are to submit?

L.20 (a) requests up to three past contracts total per team.

Attachment L-3, Past Performance Relevancy Matrix represents the ability to submit these past performance contracts under any of the identified entities. Example would include one contract from the Prime, one from a major subcontractor, and one from a minor subcontractor.

51 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.20(f) and Attachment L-3 Past

Performance Relevancy Matrix

L-23 Clarity The instructions in L.20(e) request information from the prime and major subcontractors, but the examples in L-3 include minor subcontractors. The instructions in L.20(f) discuss conflicts between the narrative and the matrix.

Should we include both major and minor subcontractors in L-3, or should it be major subcontractors only, as in the narrative?

Attachment L-3, Past Performance Relevancy Matrix should be consistent with the proposal data provide in the narrative. The offeror may submit data from any team partner. Per L.20 (e). team partners are included in this data and a minor subcontractor can be a team partner.

52 Section L Proposal

L.21 b. (8) L-27 Clarity L.21 b. (8) references the FAR 16.301-3 Limitations clause. This information is requested in L.22 1)

b. Should this information appear in both Volume IV Responsibility Considerations and in Volume III Cost and Price Factor, or is it sufficient to include it in Volume IV and include a reference in Volume III?

Accounting systems information can be provided in Volume IV, Responsibility Considerations, and then referenced in Volume III, Cost And Price Factor. The Final Request For Proposal will be updated in L.21 b. (8) to reflect the reference being permitted.

53 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.19B TA1 (2)

Export Control

L-20 Clarity The instructions state to include SOW 2.1.12, SOW Section 2.1.12, International Space Station Program (ISSP) Export Control and Foreign National Access Management. This should be 2.1.11.

Yes, Section L.19B TA1 will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal to reflect this change.

54 Section M Evaluation Criteria

Section M.7 (b) 1 e.

Government

Property Management Plan

M-12 Clarity Section M.7 (b) 1 e. Responsibility Considerations states that the Government Property Management Plan (DRD MTIC PM-05) will be evaluated, but Section L does not require it as part of Volume IV.

Should this be included in Volume IV, or should it be provided at award?

The Final Request For Proposal will be updated. The Government Property Management Plan (DRD MTIC PM-05) should be provided as part of the Responsibility Determination requested at Competitive Range, if held, or at Award Notification, if no Competitive Range is held.

The evaluation will be in accordance with the Final Request For Proposal.

55 Section L Proposal

L.18(a)(2) Font limitations

L-14 Other The RFP states that Text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12-point text. It is common practice to allow text in such sections to be slightly reduced to aid in readability. Will the Government allow such text to be submitted no smaller than 10-pt font? Note, NextSTEP-2 BAA Appendix R-1: Lunar Logistics and Mobility Studies NNH16ZCQ001K-Appendix R-1 allowed 10 point font for graphics and tables.

No, formatting shall be in accordance with L. 18 Proposal Formatting Instructions.

56 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.18(a)(2) Font limitations

L-14 Other As a serif font, Times New Roman is particularly ill-suited to graphics and tables. Can the government confirm that sans-serif, or other fonts can be used in graphics and text besides Times New Roman as long as they are a standard font and are the same point size and not compressed?

Refer Question & Answer 46.

57 Other L-10-X SOW work load files Clarity In the L-10-X workload indicator files many of the cells are marked "N/A" or are left blank. Some of the blank areas appear to be roll-ups, but others do not. Are we to understand that blank cells, or cells marked N/A are either roll-ups with no unique requirements, or are requirements that are not planned for MTIC, and should reflect zero labor hours against them?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

58 Other L-10-X SOW work load files Request for additional information

The Approximate Magnitude column sometimes includes the term "products" with a quantity, such as "10 products"; however, no quantifiable data regarding the size, scope or complexity of the "products" is indicated. What quantitative data should offerors use as basis for estimating undefined work load support activities?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

59 Other L-10-X SOW work load files Request for additional information

The letter "X" frequently appears in the Approximate Magnitude column, often with a schedule value of "continuous" indicated.

What do "X" and "continuous" signify in terms of magnitude - is continuous 1 FTE 24 / 7? What quantitative data should offerors use as basis for estimating undefined work load support activities?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

60 Other L-10-X SOW work load files Request for additional information

Throughout the workload files, the "Approximate Magnitudes" column sometimes includes the term "Sustaining", "Throughout the Year", "Dedicated", but no quantifiable data to assess the level of effort or number of dedicated personnel required. What quantitative data should offerors use as basis for estimating undefined work load support activities?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

61 Other L-10-X SOW work load files Request for additional information

Throughout the work load files, the "Typical Schedule" field sometimes includes the terms "As needed", "on-going, as-needed", "continuous", etc. but no quantifiable "Approximate Magnitude" is included to assess the level of effort required. For example, should offerors interpret "continuous" as requiring 1 (or more) FTEs on a 24/7 basis? How should offers determine how often and how many products or support services required for "As needed" requests? What quantitative data should offerors use as basis for estimating undefined work load support activities?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

62 Other L-10-4 SOW 4.3 work load files

Request for additional information

Several entries under SOW 4.3 include a combination of "N/A" for work load or products, "As needed" under approximate magnitude and "Continues" as typical schedule. All three selection for the same SOW element seems in contradiction.

Could the Government clarify the work load data with quantifiable data?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

63 Other L-10-4 SOW 4.5 work load files

Request for additional information

Several entries under SOW 4.5 measure magnitude in numbers of "EP" . Could the Government clarify the meaning of "EP"?

L.10, Work Load Indicators have been updated to remove Equivalent Person (EP) entries.

64 Other L-10-5 SOW 5.2 work load files

Request for additional information

SOW 5.2.3 references RFP Attachment J-7 but no work load to the number of meetings supported.

Could the Government provided quantifiable work load data for

SOW 5.2?

Attachment J-7, Meeting Services will be updated to incorporate additional meeting data in the Final Request For Proposal.

65 Section L Proposal Instructions

L-20 Past Performance & L-23 Volume V, Model

Contract

L.43 Other L20 and the table in L23 reference Section H.5 “NFS 1852.235-71 Key Personnel and Facilities”.

This appears to be an error and should reference Section H.4

The Final Request For Proposal will be updated to reflect the correct clause number H.4, NFS 1852.235-71, Key Personnel and Facilities.

66 Section L Proposal Instructions

L-23 Volume V, Model Contract

L.43 Other The table in L23 references Section H.14 “Identification and Representation of Limited Rights Data and Restrictive Computer Software (Pre-Award) It appears that this reference should be to Section H.10.

The Final Request For Proposal will be updated to reflect the correct clause number H.10, Identification and Representation of Limited Rights Data and Restrictive Computer Software (Pre-Award).

67 Section L Proposal

L.19A, MA3 Total Compensation Plan

L.18 & 19 Request for additional information

Incumbent capture and the ability to attract new staff is a key element to this proposal as highlighted by the RFP. To help facilitate this bidders need to understand the current staff and direct labor rates for the incumbent workforce.

Without this information, only the incumbent is able to provide a response that meets the requirements of the RFP. Per the RFP we are required to address any TCP differences and their impacts, but NASA has not provided any information to assess this nor any insight into the current or historical average direct labor rates. Further, the TCP requests that we compare our proposed workforce and compensation against that of the current labor force and salary structure and, if lower, to address how we will ensure retention, specifically to address incumbent retention and a comparison to incumbent rates explaining how we will attract and retain the incumbent staff. Without any information on the current rates and numbers of employees, we cannot make any kind of comparison and cannot ensure that our TCP is sufficient to attract and retain incumbent personnel. We request that NASA address this by providing a Government Resource Estimate (GRE0 broken down by SOW (including Program) and Labor Categories as well as the average direct labor of the incumbent workforce. This approach is common, and in fact was provided for the HSFTIC competition and was very effective.

Refer to Question & Answer 29.

68 Section L Proposal

Attachment L-5 In the Excel Spreadsheet

Request for additional information

In Attachment L-5 we are asked to provide the Incumbent Retention % without knowing the WYE’s of the incumbent workforce. Only the incumbent can provide this information as it is not publicly available. We are requesting that NASA provide a GRE across the SOW and Labor Categories by Program to facilitate this effort.

Refer to Question and Answer 29.

The Government will be providing historical Work Year Equivalent Data by Statement of Work

(SOW).

69 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.17 Table L-2:

Overview of

Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations and

Due Dates

L-13 Other Government Property Management Plan (DRD MTIC PM-05) is requested twice in the table.

The Final Request For Proposal will be updated to reflect one request.

70 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.19B TECHNICAL

APPROACH,

MISSION

SUITABILITY

(SUB-FACTOR B)

L-20 Clarity Section L requires a response to SOW Section 4.5.3, Orion Program Certification of Flight Readiness, however in Section C, that SOW element is in Section 4.5.5.

Section L.19B TA1 will be updated in the Final Request For Proposal.

71 Other Workload Indicators L-10-6.xlsx

SOW 6.2 Clarity Could the Government clarify the statements "This highlighted section is mostly S&MA support and can go under the S&MA placeholder in the SOW. Up to yell." under SOW 6.2.3. Should offerors update the SOW as indicated?

The identified statements were not intended to be in the Workload Indicators document. The statements will be deleted in the Final Request For Proposal.

72 Other Workload Indicators L-10-10.xlsx

SOW 10.2 Request for additional information

The Approximate Magnitude column appears to include a percentage allocation of various bulleted actives across SOW 10.1;

however, no quantifiable basis to apply the percentage to is provided. Will the Government provide work load data for this area?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

73 Other Workload Indicators L-10-7.xlsx

SOW 7.x Request for additional information

All of the workload Indicator cells in this workbook are blank. Will the Government provide work load data for this area?

Refer to Question & Answer 38.

74 Section L Proposal Instructions

L.6

PREPROPOSAL/PR

E-BID

CONFERENCE

L-4 Clarity We are required to submit final RFP questions 5 working days prior to the pre-proposal conference. Due to the intervening weekend, that puts the question due date at 1/24, but the plan is to release the final RFP on 1/23. This does not provide sufficient time to evaluate the final RFP and develop questions. Will the government allow questions after this date?

The subject dates will be updated to represent sufficient time for offerors to submit questions. Questions are due seven calendar days after Request For Proposal release.

75 Section M Evaluation Criteria

M.4, (d) M-3 Clarity Section M.2 states that Subfactors are evaluated in accordance with NFS 1815.305(a)(3)(A).

According to acquisition.gov, there is no section 1815.305(a)(3)(A).

Section 1815.305-70 (a)(3) does not have an (A) part, only a (b).

Can the government direct us to the clause referenced in M.3

NFS 1815.305 and NFS 1815.305- 70 are different references.

1815.305 does include the identified part.

Link:

https://www.acquisition.g ov/nfs/part- 1815%E2%80%94contrac ting-negotiation#Section_1815 _305_70_T48_604181421

76 Section L Proposal Instructions

Attachment L-6A MTIC Cost Price

Template

Tab: "SOW Requirements

Structure"

Other In the price template, the 3rd tab "SOW Requirements Structure"…