RFQ 80NSSC22779076Q1 Questions and Answers.pdf

NSSC-F-0015

Memorandum Questions and Answers To: RECORD

Date: 11/09/2021

Re: 80NSSC22779076Q1

1. In the SAM.gov online synopsis, it states “Performance will be located at NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)”. Does this mean any study awarded is required to be on-site at GSFC or just that the managing center will be GSFC? The managing center is GSFC.

2. The procurement is listed as Commercial, however the FAR language included in the RFP is for procurements “Other than Commercial”. Are these the correct Ts and Cs for this procurement and, if so, do you request any contractual concerns be listed in a section to follow the Reps. and Certs.? This is a non-commercial requirement.

3. This procurement is listed as an RFP for a contract – yet it also states the procurement will be issued as a Purchase Order. Can you please clarify the intended contractual vehicle for this procurement? NASA will issue a NF 1449 (PO) (the start date will be listed in the PO).

4. If there is a page limit, are the pricing and contractual parts of the response expected to be outside that page count? No.

5. Will any deadline extension or updates to RFP documents be listed on SAM.gov prior to the current 11/10/2021 deadline? Not at this time. The RFQ has been extended until 11/17/2021 @ 4:00 p.m.

6. The RFQ states “Potential offerors should pay close attention to all solicitation instructions in AOS-I-ATS-RSP-2, AOS Inclined ATS RFP Statement of Work (SOW);

however, the following requirements list is summarized to assist in proposal development. Please note that this list is not exhaustive, and the solicitation terms and conditions and provisions in sections L and M take precedence:” Is the reference to AOS- I-ATS-RSP-2 referring to the document AOS-I-ATS-RFP-2? Yes it does. The RFQ text reference in Section 1 contains a typo. It should read, “…RFP…” not “…RSP…”. This is a reference to the SOW document.

7. There are evaluation criteria in section 5 of the RFQ. However, there is no section M.Is section 5 the evaluation criteria. Section L appears to be missing. Please provide proposal instructions.

The offeror's proposal shall describe how it plans to study each of the requirements in the Statement of Work and the applicable specifications.

The offeror's proposal shall describe in detail its overall management approach for the proposed activities. The proposal shall describe the organization and management methods that will be utilized in performing work under the contract and shall also describe plans for interfacing with and facilitating communication with the Government’s personnel.

The offeror’s proposal shall include a detailed description of the following:

1. Describe how the vendor is a Qualified Source for Flight Spacecraft Development: The proposal shall include relevant flight experience with spacecraft of the type required for AOS instruments that would make them a qualified source for flight spacecraft development.

2. Decribe the vendor’s existing spacecraft designs that have flight heritage and how they meet all instrument accommodation requirements, or would with further study and describe that study effort. Also, describe the current Technology Readiness or Engineering Development status for all spacecraft subsystems.

3. Describe any proposed innovative mission concepts that will reduce mission cost and/or improve performance in detail.

8. The RFQ states “While the RFP’s Price Volume exhibits are in PDF format, the Offeror’s Price Volume proposal shall include completed Price Volume exhibits in Microsoft Office Excel format with working cell formulas.” Offerors may disregard this text.

Offeror quotes may be provided in any format the offeror chooses, as long as the total Firm Fixed Price quote value is clear and includes all proposed effort in response to the RFQ requirements. Payment will be made upon completion of the effort; no milestone or interim payments will be made.

9. Are there page limitations or font rules that must be followed? No

10. The scope of work defined in the SOW appears to be challenging for the NTE $125K budget. Given this, will the government entertain proposals that address a subset of critical SOW items that industry determines is feasible for the allocated budget? Yes;

however, the offeror should enumerate what it deems as feasible within the cost allocation.

11. The RFQ requests a spacecraft ROM that includes detailed breakdown into lower level elements that are challenging to determine at even a low confidence at this very early stage in concept development/analysis. Generally, industry tools for a ROM at this stage of maturity consist of parametric modeling that rolls up to the spacecraft level with appropriate scale factors. Lower level estimates are at best inaccurate and at worst may lead the government to the wrong assumptions. Would the government accept a ROM at the spacecraft level for this RFQ?

We agree with many of the comments made and understand the situation. We would accept a ROM but would like to have sufficient information or a dialog to perform cost trade studies.

12. The proposal content requested in the SOW document (Section 2, RFP Deliverables and Trade Studies) closely resembles the information requested in the AtmOS ATS RFI (July 2021). The SOW document additionally provides a description of the Deliverables and Trade Studies (CDRLs). However, there is no clear distinction between the Proposal Deliverables and Study Deliverables. For Option 1, are the Proposal Deliverables described in SOW Section 2.1 (pg 6-7) only, with the CDRLs to be addressed later, in the Study, as Study Deliverables? Yes…Section 2 RFP Deliverables and Trade Studies should be Study Contract Deliverables and Trade Studies. Sorry for the confusion.

13. This solicitation is referred to as an RFQ, however the SOW document refers to an RFP.

Are these two terms interchangeable for the purpose of this solicitation, or they refer to two different aspects of the same solicitation? RFQ and RFP are interchangeable.