2024 10 01 SF30 Amendment P00002.docx
DOCX document 238 KB Posted
- Attached to
- NEXT GENERATION SCALABLE DATA ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS, AND INFORMATICS SUPPORT FOR OPEN SCIENCE (NEXT GEN) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80MSFC24R0005
About this file
This document is a contract amendment (SF30 Amendment P00002) that provides responses to industry questions and comments related to a Request for Proposal (RFP) amendment for the MSFC Next Gen solicitation. The primary purpose of this amendment is to respond to RFP questions and comments on Amendment P00001. Attachment A provides the responses, and Attachment L-1 (Excel Pricing Model) has been updated. The amendment notes that failure to acknowledge receipt may result in an unacceptable proposal. The period for questions and comments on the solicitation has closed, and the government is no longer accepting additional inquiries. All other terms and conditions of RFP 80MSFC24R0005 remain unchanged.
The related federal contract opportunity is for the "Next Generation Scalable Data Engineering, Operations, and Informatics Support for Open Science (Next Gen)" solicitation, which is a hybrid research and development and services requirement to provide resources for the Interagency Implementation and Advanced Concepts Team (IMPACT) to maintain leadership in science informatics, machine learning, science data systems, and scientific data storage, archiving, and management. The solicitation is being issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Marshall Space Flight Center.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 10 01 L-1 Excel Pricing Model Amendment 2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 2024 09 20 L-1 Excel Pricing Model Amendment 1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 2024 09 20 Next Gen Final RFP - Amendment 1.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2024 09 05 Next Gen Final RFP.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2024 09 05 L-1 Excel Pricing Model.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Next Gen Consolidation DF.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ATTACHMENT A – RESPONSE TO INDUSTRY RFP AMENDMENT P00001 QUESTIONS
14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (CONTINUED):
(a) The primary purpose of this amendment is to respond to RFP questions and comments in relation to the MSFC Next Gen solicitation Amendment P00001.
(b) Attachment A, Responses to Industry RFP Amendment P00001 Questions, provides responses to questions and comments provided by industry. Additionally, Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing Model, is updated and replaced in its entirety (updates are noted in Attachment A).
(c) Failure by the offeror to acknowledge receipt of this amendment on the Standard Form (SF) 30, Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, or transmittal letter by the due date for receipt of proposals may result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable and therefore ineligible for award.
(d) In relation to Section L, Provision MSFC 52.205-90, Designated Point of Contact, paragraph (b), the period for questions or comments relative to this acquisition has closed (i.e., questions and comments relative to this acquisition were previously due no later than 5:00 p.m., Central Time, September 25, 2024). At this time, the Government is no longer accepting additional questions or comments in relation to the solicitation, as released on October 1, 2024.
(e) All other terms and conditions of RFP 80MSFC24R0005 remain unchanged.
| Question # |
| Section/Page # |
| Additional Reference Section |
| Question |
| NASA's Response |
| 1 |
| RFP Section L Volume III |
| Section L Volume III Past Performance Instructions Section II (3), page L-25 |
| In regard to the sensitivity and confidential nature of the M&A data being requested in Volume III, Section II(3), will the Government allow the M&A information of the Prime’s subcontractors to be submitted as part of the subcontractor’s sealed package? |
| Yes, if subcontractors consider the merger and acquisition information to be confidential, they may electronically submit this information separately along with their Excel Pricing Model and Total Compensation Plan in accordance with Section L provision “Electronic Submission of Proposals – Proposal Marking and Delivery Through NASA’s EFSS Box.” Subcontractors shall ensure each submission is clearly identified in accordance with the naming convention established in this provision to ensure appropriate identification of the entity and type(s) of submission. |
| 2 |
| RFP Section L Volume IV |
Section L Volume IV Contract Instructions (c) Section I (1), page L-26
| Regarding the sensitivity and confidential nature of the M&A data, and the Prime’s inability to have insight into such actions of their subcontractors, will the Government allow the Prime’s subcontractors to submit this data directly to the Government with a redacted notification to the Prime upon submission? Or, will the Government consider addressing this request during a pre-award competitive range Evaluation Notice to validate award eligibility? |
| See response to Question #1 above. |
While proposed subcontractors are not required to submit a Volume IV – Contract Volume, if after the prime offeror’s submission of the proposal the subcontractor is involved in a merger or acquisition, the offeror is required by the terms of the provision to provide notice to the Government and describe any impacts to the offeror’s proposal as described in the provision. Any supplemental information considered to be sensitive and confidential may be provided by the subcontractor directly to the Government in accordance with Section L provision “MSFC 52.205-90, Designated Point of Contact.” Offerors shall not utilize this notification to alter or revise any aspect of their proposal.
| Are foreign companies eligible to submit proposals on this RFP? |
| While a foreign company could submit a proposal, there are numerous requirements that must be met to be eligible for award. The Small Business Administration (SBA) establishes size standards corresponding to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, which apply to all offerors for a specific procurement, regardless of whether the offerors are foreign entities. SBA's regulations define “business concern” as an entity that is “organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States, and which operates primarily within the United States, or which makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor” (13 CFR 121.105). Such entities that meet the definition of “business concern” may be considered small for FAR part 19 procurements if they meet the size standard for the NAICS code assigned to a specific procurement. |
Additionally, any entity desiring to submit a response to the Next Gen solicitation must, per the SBA: (1) Be a for-profit business of any legal structure; (2) Be independently owned and operated; (3) Not be nationally dominant in its field; and (4) Be physically located and operate in the U.S. or its territories.
Potential offerors are also reminded that they are required to meet all solicitation and contract terms and conditions and have a current SAM.gov registration. Potential offerors should also review the solicitation for mandatory experience requirements and past performance relevancy standards for size, content, and complexity before deciding to submit a proposal in response to the solicitation.
| 4 |
| RFP Section L Excel Pricing Model (EPM) |
| On Tab B Labor Build-up in Cells N3, W3, E21 and N2, the file calls for the input of the escalation factor. The RFP provides the presumed escalation factors for each calendar year, but the formula in these identified cells do not seem to calculate the labor rate correctly when the percentage is entered. |
| Can bidders change the government’s formula in these cells to ensure the correction calculation is achieved? |
| The EPM is revised to correct the calculation error related to escalation. Offerors should also be aware that they should adjust the escalation rate to account for the overlap in calendar year versus the contract fiscal year. For example: The base year one expected period of performance is October 1, 2025-September 30, 2026. The offeror should weight the escalation based on the 25% / 75% split between calendar years. Offerors are allowed to adjust the split based on their unique corporate practices such as when compensation increases are or will be implemented. |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .