MTIC Request For Proposal Questions and Answers.pdf

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

Category Question Number Section Page Number Type Question/Comment Response

Section L Proposal Instructions

1 Attachment J-5 Page J-5-4 Clarity Can NASA confirm whether the "Secretary" labor category in Attachment J-5 should be classified as Non-Exempt under the Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS)?

Currently, the J-5 solicitation defines "Secretary" only as requiring secretarial training and demonstrated secretarial skills, without any additional education requirements. Given this, the position appears to align more closely with the WD OCC Codes 01311, 01312, or 01313 (Secretary I, II, or III) under the SCLS, rather than being classified as an Exempt position.

Can NASA clarify whether this designation will be revised, or whether offerors should assume the Exempt classification as stated in Attachment J-5?

Based on Contracting Officer Determination, the Secretary labor category should be classified as Non- Exempt under the Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS). The Request For Proposal will be updated.

Section L Proposal Instructions

2 Attachment J-5 Page J-5-4 Clarity Can NASA clarify why the "Clerk" labor category in Attachment J-5 is classified as Exempt, despite its alignment with Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS)?

The Section L incumbent rate for the Clerk position is $21 per hour, indicating that this role is historically structured as an hourly (Non-Exempt) position. Additionally, the J-5 description provides no educational or experience requirements, suggesting that this position aligns more closely with WD OCC Codes 01111, 01112, or 01113 (General Clerk I, II, or III) under the SCLS.

Should offerors assume this classification is final, or will NASA reclassify this role as Non-Exempt to align with FLSA and SCLS requirements?

Based on Contracting Officer Determination, the Clerk labor category should be classified as Non- Exempt under the Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS). The Request For Proposal will be updated.

Instructions

3 1) B.6 Fully Burdened Rate

Table;

2) L-6A MTIC

Cost Price Template.xlsx;

3) L-7 MTIC

TCP Rate Build- Up Form.xlsx

1) Page B-4;

2) IDIQ

Proposed FBLR sheet;

3) TCP-

Contract Year

X sheets

Clarity Can NASA clarify the rationale for listing "Analyst I - Overtime" and "Support Specialist - Overtime" as separate line items in the IDIQ rate tables (Section B.6) and the TCP Excel template (Attachment L-7), while other non-exempt labor categories (e.g., Clerk, Secretary) are not similarly identified?

Since Attachment 5 provides a mechanism for reporting overtime rates for all labor categories, it is unclear why only these two positions are singled out. Additionally, because overtime is a rate modifier rather than a distinct labor category, it does not seem appropriate for inclusion in the TCP template at all.

Would NASA consider either (1) removing these overtime-specific line items altogether or (2) allowing offerors to include all non-exempt categories under a consistent structure to ensure full compliance with FLSA overtime provisions in the IDIQ Tables and removing it from the TCP?

The Request For Proposal will be updated to remove labor classifications "Analyst I - Overtime" and "Support Specialist - Overtime".

Section L Proposal Instructions

4 Attachment J-5 Page J-5-4 Clarity Can NASA clarify whether an "Administrative Assistant" labor category is missing from Attachment J-5? The attachment includes a caveat on page J-5-5 that lists skills mapped to SLCs (e.g., Secretarial, Clerical, Cataloger, Courier, Customer Service Clerk, Supply Clerk) under "Administration Assistant", yet there is no corresponding "Administrative Assistant" labor category in J-5. Could the government please clarify if these roles are not applicable?

The identified Administrative Assistant labor category on page J-5-5 is an example of how to map skills into Standard Labor Categories (SLC). The Administrative Assistant labor category is not applicable to this Request For Proposal (RFP). The RFP will be updated to reflect an example for Analyst I instead.

5 Section L, Table L.19-1

Page L-17 Clarity Can NASA clarify the absence of incumbent rates for the Secretary and Consultant positions in Table L.19-1: SLC Incumbent Rate Data? While the Program Manager is explicitly listed as "Not Available," and we assume the Deputy Program Manager would be treated similarly, the Secretary and Consultant positions are omitted entirely.

Should offerors assume there is no historical rate data for these positions?

Offerors should assume there is no historical data available for the Secretary and Consultant positions.

Deputy Program Manager historical rate data is treated similarly to the Program Manager position.

Section L Proposal Instructions

6 Table L-2 Page L-13 Other Would the Government please allow offerors to submit the Model Contract in its native PDF format to preserve the integrity of the document?

Per L.18 Proposal Formatting Instructions, Offerors must submit the Model Contract in the designated Microsoft Word format.

Section L Proposal Instructions

7 L.19(f) Page L-16 Other Would the Government please permit the supporting documentation for the Facility Clearance Level (FCL) be excluded from page count?

Per Table L-2: Overview of Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations and Due Dates, DD 254 Secret Facility Clearance (Attachment J-17) is not page limited. The Government has considered the supporting documentation being excluded from page count and determined it will remain page limited.

Other 8 Attachment J-8 J-8-2 Other The Conference Facility specifications in Attachment J-8 require parking for 75% of meeting room capacity and the meeting room capacity requirement for this facility exceeds 600 people. The available parking ratio at a typical commercial office building in the local area is 4 spaces per 1000 rentable square feet. In other words, offerors would need to rent the entire building for one of the typical 4-8 story facilities (>100,00 sq. ft.) in the local area to accommodate this amount of parking.

Given that rentable space of this size is not available in the current market and would also significantly exceed what is required for conference room occupancy density, we request you revisit the parking requirement, the simultaneous percent occupancy requirement, and/or the distance requirement from JSC in order for offerors to provide an acceptable solution that meets your expectations. As currently written, your requirements lend themselves to the refurbishment of an old mall, large retail store, theater complex, or place of worship in order to meet the parking requirement.

None of these options are available within your specified radius from JSC and we also suspect these options are not in alignment with your expectations for the Conference Facility.

The Government will update the Request For Proposal to require parking for 50% of meeting room capacity for the Conference facility specifications.

9 MA3 TCP L.17 Other TCPs contain proprietary cost information, therefore we recommend the government allow subcontractor TCP(s) be submitted directly to the government.

The Government will allow subcontractors to submit their Total Compensation Plan directly to the Government. The Request for Proposal will be updated to clarify.

Section L Proposal Instructions

10 L.14 Security Requirements

L.7 - L.8 Clarity Can the government confirm what proof they are requiring for the FCL. Currently the information downloaded from DISS is considered CUI. If the download is required, is CUI allowed to be submitted through the EFSS system?

A Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code is required for the Government to verify the current security clearance status per L.14 Security Requirements and Instructions to Offerors, "provide their CAGE code for verification of current security clearance status." The requested CAGE code is not Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI).

Section L Proposal Instructions

11 L.4 NFS

1852.245-80 Government

Property Management Information

L.5 NFS

1852.245-81 List of Available Government

Property

L-2 - L.4 Clarity The Government Property Management Plan is not due until FPR. L.4 & L.5 both contain several "shall" statements that could require responses. Recommend the government provide clarification that L.4 & L.5 are not due until FPR.

The Government Property Management Plan is not due until Final Proposal Revisions (FPR).

Clause L.4 NFS 1852.245-80 Government Property Management Information (JAN 2011) and L.5 NFS 1852.245-81 List Of Available Government Property (JAN 2011) are not due until FPR.

Other 12 L-10 WLI "3.0 Gateway Work Load Indicators Matrix (FRFP)"

Tab: SOW 3.6

- MSN

PLNING &

INTEG line 9

Clarity Should the Approximate Magnitude be 12 hours instead of 120 hours? Recommend the government update the WLI accordingly.

No, in accordance with L.10, Work Load Indicators, the Work Load Indicator is 120 hours for the identified requirement.

Section L Proposal Instructions

13 L.20 Past Performance

L-22 Clarity Will the government confirm that past performance consent letters are only required by major subcontractors.

No, per L.20 Volume II, Past Performance Information (d), past performance consent letter are required for each subcontractor, teaming partner, proposed Program Manager and/or joint venture partner.

Section L Proposal Instructions

14 L.21 Volume III, Cost and Price

Factor (d) (4) (iii) and MA3. Total Compensation Plan (TCP) (a)

(1)

L-31 and L-18 Clarity The Cost and Price instructions in the paragraph noted above require the Offeror to provide third-party survey related source data only “if the Offeror’s proposed direct labor rates are based on information obtained from a third-party salary survey”.

Will the Government confirm that if the Offeror’s proposed direct labor rates are not based on information obtained from a third-party salary survey the Offeror only needs to provide the information requested in paragraph (ii) and (iii) in section (a) (1) of the TCP instructions as the information requested in paragraphs (i), (iv), and (v) specifically relate to salary surveys.

No, the instructions related to supporting data of two separate FACTORS shall not be blended together when specifically requested in two separate RFP sections. As outlined in the RFP, the L.21 volume III, Cost and Price Factor contains separate instructions and will be separately evaluated from the L.19A Volume 1, Mission Suitability factor, MA3.

Schedule 15 Cover Letter, Section A

5 Other Since several requirements for Mission Suitability were changed significantly from the DRFP and since the actual nature of the changes was not known until RFP release, the 30-day proposal period is insufficient.

We request the time be extended to a 45-day proposal period as was done for HSFTIC.

The Government will consider adding additional time for the proposal period. If a decision is made to change the proposal due date an amendment to the Request for Proposal will be issued. Offerors shall continue to monitor sam.gov for any changes to the response period.

Other 16 Work Load Indicators - Set 8

Work Load Indicators - Set

Clarity The 3rd column (December Actuals Fiscal Year 2025) sums to a total WYE significantly less than the other period data provided. Is the 3rd column of data low due to holidays or plant shut downs? Would the Government provide WYE data for indirect WYE for each of the periods so non-incumbent offers can adjust baseline staffing estimates using accurate, consistent and realistic data?

Based on historical actuals, December trends to be the lowest month for Work Year Equivalent (WYE) actuals primarily due to holidays. The Government has already provided WYE data by Statement of Work Section and Program via the Technical Library at the notice 80JSC024MTIC. The Government does not intend to provide any additional data.

Other 17 Work Load Indicators - Set 8

Work Load Indicators - Set

Clarity Is the heading “December Actuals Fiscal Year 2025” represent calendar month Dec 2024?

Yes, the December Actuals Fiscal Year 2025 represents calendar month December 2024.

Other 18 Work Load Indicators - Set 8

Work Load Indicators - Set

Clarity Library Set 8 data was released in January;

however, columns 4 and 5 state the data are actuals for Jan FY 2025 and Feb FY 2025.

Could the Government clarify if the January and February 2025 data are forecasted WYE for Jan 2025 and Feb 2025?

Yes, the columns for January 2025 and February 2025 represent forecasts for the identified months.

Other 19 Work Load Indicators - Set 8

Work Load Indicators - Set

Clarity Library Set 8 provided two WYE amounts related to ISS. Is the amount identified for Russian support in addition to or a component of the amount provided for the ISS program?

The historical data provided identifies the Russian support separately to better assist offerors in their estimating. The historical Work Year Equivalents (WYE) data provided are in addition to the number provided for the International Space Station Program.

Other 20 Work Load Indicators - Set 8

Work Load Indicators - Set

Clarity Given the conflicting and disparate GRE data for which only the incumbent could decipher realism, would not a single and definitive Government provided GRE baseline by SLC and by program be a more efficient, effective and “apples to apples” approach to evaluating price, while evaluation of understanding more effectively demonstrated with BOEs detailing offeror's allocation of unique approaches, skill mix and the definitive GRE WYE across the SOW 2nd level?

The Government has already provided Work Year Equivalent data by Statement of Work Section and Program via the Technical Library.

Additionally, Work Load Indicators have been provided to assist the offerors in estimating the requirements. The Government does not intend to provide any additional data.

21 L.18 (b) (5) L-15 Other Recommend that the cross-reference matrix be required for only Mission Suitability and not all volumes.

The Government has considered requiring the cross-reference matrix for only the Mission Suitability Volume and has determined the cross-reference matrix is a requirement for all Volumes.

Section L Proposal Instructions

22 L.20 Past Performance

L-22 Clarity Will the government confirm that past performance consent letters are required for all subcontractors (major/minor/teaming) and the proposed program manager.

Yes, see question and answer 13.

Section L Proposal Instructions

23 L.17 Table 1 and L.19B

L-11, L-21 Other With the addition of the SE&I and Mission Planning & Integration SOW areas we are request fully asking the government to consider increasing the page count for the mission suitability volume to 55 pages in order to provide a more comprehensive solution.

The Government has already increased the Mission Suitability page limitation from thirty (30) to thirty-seven (37) pages. The Government does not intend to increase it further.

Other 24 Attachment J-5 Standard Labor

Categories

RFP page J-5-1 Request for additional information

For the SLCs where the RFP only provides the Education/Experience requirement, can the Government clarify, or provide, the job descriptions so Offerors can provide the correct skill discipline(s)?

No, the Government does not intend to provide any additional Standard Labor Categories (SLCs) job descriptions or guidelines. However, the Government will be updating the Request For Proposal to allow a substitution of years of experience for graduate level degrees.

Section L Proposal Instructions

25 MA3. Total Compensation

Plan (TCP)

RFP page L-17 Request for additional information

Comparing Table L.19-1 and L-6A Cost Price Template, it appears the only SLCs not identified in L.19-1 are the Deputy Program Manager, Secretary, and Consultant. Is incumbent rate data available for these positions and if so will the Government provide?

See Question and Answer 5.

Section L Proposal Instructions

26 L.21 (d) (4) (i) RFP page L-30 Clarity As pertains to Attachment L-6A Cost Price Template, the RFP instructions state that "If needed, the Offeror is able to add rows and adjust the excel formula to be consistent with their accounting and disclosure practices." Is the Offeror able to add columns as well?

Yes, the Offeror is able to add rows, columns, and adjust the excel formula in this excel workbook to be consistent with their accounting and disclosure practices. However, the Offeror shall not change the excel table organization or design within each spreadsheet tab. The Final Request For Proposal will be updated to clarify.

27 L.31 (d) (4) (iv) RFP page L-31 RFP page L-33

Clarity Instruction on page L-31 (4) (iv) states "For its proposal preparation, the Prime offeror shall collect unburdened base labor rate(s), and the combination of all applicable indirects thru profit/fee, for all team members (i.e., major(s) and minor(s) SubK) for all applicable labor classifications. As such, the Prime offeror shall coordinate and require the submission of the Government's requested data, from each Team member. No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime offeror." However, on page L-33, directions state "if there are proprietary or confidential information restriction from prime contractor, then the major and/or minor subcontractors shall submit the file directly to the government in accordance with L.16 ELECTRONIC

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS –

PROPOSAL MARKING AND DELIVERY

THROUGH NASA’S EFSS BOX." As these two statements seem to be contradictory, will the Government please confirm that subcontractors are not required to reveal their proprietary information to a Prime offeror?

The Request for Proposal was updated in Amendment 1 to remove the statement “No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime offeror.” on page L-31.

Not Applicable 28 Not Applicable Not Applicable Other Does NASA offer a small business navigator or matchmaking resources to help businesses like mine identify suitable opportunities and/or connect with prime contractors?

The NASA Johnson Space Center Office of Small Business Programs is available for Industry Assistance.

They can be reached at jsc-smallbusiness@mail.nasa.gov or 281- 483-4512. Offerors may review the interested parties list posted on the notice 80JSC024MTIC for possible partnering opportunities.

Not Applicable 29 Not Applicable Not Applicable Other How does NASA define small business? To be a small business, vendors must adhere to industry size standards established by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).

When small firms register as a government contractor in the System for Award Management (SAM), they also self-certify their business as small.

Not Applicable 30 Not Applicable Not Applicable Other Can I contact the incumbent to discuss sub-contracting work?

Prospective Offerors are reminded not to contact incumbent personnel (either directly or through electronic means) during duty hours or at their place of employment, as such contacts are disruptive to the performance of the current contract. Contacting company management for possible teaming arrangements is not determined by the government.

Section L Proposal Instructions

31 L-6A MTIC Cost Price Template;

Section L-21 Volume III, Cost and Price Factor

L-30 Other Section L.21, Paragraph (d) (4) (iv) states, “For Proposal Preparation, the Prime offeror shall collect unburdened rate(s) and the combination of all applicable indirects thru profit/fee, for all team members (i.e., major(s) and minor(s) SubK) for all applicable labor classifications…No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime Offeror….” The unburdened rates along with the buildup of the indirects thru profit/fee is considered proprietary information. FAR 3.104-4 and FAR 9.505-4 emphasize the importance of protecting contractor and subcontractor proprietary information to avoid unfair competitive advantage. FAR 15 permits direct submission of unsanitized pricing to the Government in sealed bids for

The Request for Proposal has been updated in Amendment 1 to remove the statement “No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime offeror.”

There will be no changes to the Attachment L-6A, tab SubK Cost Details. However, L.21, Paragraph (b)(3) will be updated to address data required for Offeror fully integrated Attachment L-6A, tab SubK Cost Details if the subcontractor information is deemed proprietary and not shared with the Prime.

subcontractors in competitive proposals.

FAR 15.207(b) prohibits the disclosure of contractor proposal information, including pricing data to unauthorized parties, and FOIA exemption 4 protects confidential commercial or financial information from public disclosure, to include proposal submissions and cost/pricing information.

FAR 15.404-3 allows Subcontractors to submit cost/pricing data directly to the Government for any competitive proposals that have hit the CCPD threshold. Rate builds generally qualify as trade secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) as contractors invest significant resources in creating and maintaining their rate structures, making them eligible for trade secret protection. We respectfully request clarification how the statement, “No Team Member shall claim this data to be proprietary to the Prime offeror” under Section L-21 Volume III, Cost and Price Factor, Subsection (d)(4)(iv), is reconciled with these protections and the language in L.21 Volume III, Cost and Price Factor, Subsection (b)(5) (pg. L-26) and Subsection

(d) Cost/Price – Narrative and Specific Cost Instructions, Subcontractors (1), which allows for each Minor Subcontractor to submit files directly to the Government if the information is deemed proprietary and not shared with the Prime. We also request that in the Pricing Template provided for the Prime submittal that all references to subcontractor Direct Labor rates and fringe build up is removed.

Not Applicable 32 Preproposal Conference

Charts

Slide 44 Other Slide 44 of this morning’s MTIC proposal presentation appears to contain an error in stating that populated joint ventures would not be permitted for award pursuant to 13 CFR 121.103(h). Pursuant to that regulation, populated joint ventures are permitted if the parties to the joint venture are “similarly situated” and pursuing a small business set-aside contract.

Yes, per 13 CFR 121.103(h)(1)(i) which states “If a joint venture exists as a formal separate legal entity, it cannot be populated with individuals intended to perform contracts awarded to the joint venture for any contract or agreement which is set aside or reserved for small business, unless all parties to the joint venture are similarly situated as that term is defined in part 125 of this chapter (i.e., the joint venture may have its own separate employees to perform administrative functions, including one or more Facility Security Officer(s), but may not have its own separate employees to perform contracts awarded to the joint venture).” This would be an exception to populated joint ventures pursuing a small business set-aside contract.