Questions and Answers for 80TECH22R0001.pdf

#` Section # or Reference Comment/Suggestion Response

1 I.144 (c)

Text indicates that "The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 8 years, 8 months." We believe that should read 8 years, 9 months based on the inclusion of a 90-day phase-in, one year base period, seven (7) one year option periods, and six-month option to extend. Revised to read 8 years, 9 months.

2 I. C.

Text indicates that "...the IDIQ maximum ordering value of this contract is $1000,000,000.00." We believe that is a typo and should read $100,000,000.00 in accordance with RFP Section B.11. Typo corrected.

3 Form 1 Proposed Effort tab

The Option to Extend (six months) would typically be equal to 1/2 of Option 7 (12 months), but here the Government-specified level of effort is equal to 1/6 which would only support two months of performance. Question: Can the Government please clarify? Formula corrected to /2.

4 L-21

Section (d) "The Offeror shall require all service Subcontractors provide ... items

(a) through (c) for cost reimbursement or non-compettitive Fixed Price Subcontracts ... "

Question: Does the Government require a Total Compensation Plan from Non- Significant Subcontractors who exceed the CCPD threshold in FAR 15.403-4?

Yes. A Total Compensation Plan is required from any subcontractor (significant or non-significant) that exceeds the CCPD threshold at

FAR 15.403-4

Cover Letter Pg. 2, Para 3 and Attachment J-P List of Contracts

Transitoning to eMITS

The cover letter page 2, para. 3 states "The anticipated contract award date is December 16, 2022, with phase-in commencing on January 3, 2023 and a contract effective date of April 4, 2023." However, Attachment J-P List of Contracts Transitioning to eMITS states multiple contracts with a tentative starte date in eMITS of 3/1/23. Question: Will the Government update the attachment to reflect the statement in the cover letter with regard to the contract effective date of April 4, 2023? 3/1/23 start dates have been revised to 4/4/23.

6 B.2 MA-2 Phase-in Plan

The complexity and scope of activities required during the 90-day phase-in 10 pages may not be sufficient to incorporate all the required elements in the required schedule. Question: Will the government consider increasing the Phase-in Plan to 15 pages or excluding schedule from page count? The Phase-In Plan page count has been increased to 15 pages.

7 MA-02 Item 1

Item 1 states "Provide a plan for ensuring a smooth phase-in consistent with maintaining efficient continuity of services for the 60-day period prior to contract start." Question: Will the government update to reflect the 90 day as stated in the RFP and page 19 of the DRD under Scope?

MA-02 Item 1 has been updated to reflect 90 days.

I.53 and

L.30 - B.4

FAR Clause 52.222-43 referenced in I.53 requires offerors to warrant that their pricing does not include increases for which the clause provides adjustment. Question: Could the Government please confirm that FAR 52.222- 43 only applies to the fixed price portion of the contract and that escalation should be applied to the cost-plus portion?

As prescribed at FAR 22.1006(c)(1), this applies to fixed-price, time-and-materials, and labor-hour only.

Enterprise Multimedia and Integrated Technical Services (eMITS) Request for Proposal

17 11. Distribution

The DRD states, "Initial Submission: After contract award," but that language is followed with, "Submission Frequency: Initial submission with the proposal shall include the following sections:". Question: Can the Government please confirm that the Contract Management Plan (DRD MA-01) is due to the Government only after contract award, and update the DRD instructions accordingly?

The language in the DRD referencing initial submission with the proposal has been removed. In accordance with Section J, the initial submission is due 30 days after the effective date of the contract.

18 L.32.h.2

The RFP states, "Offerors shall include in their proposal the written consent of their proposed significant subcontractors to allow the Government to discuss the subcontractors' past performance evaluation with the Offeror." Question:

Can the Government please confirm submission of the significant subcontractors consent is excluded from page count? The written consent will be excluded from the page count.

19 L.21.a

The RFP states, "The total compensation plan [TCP] shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each of these categories of labor." Question: Considering the various geographic locations that will require the submission of salary ranges and supporting data for each labor categories within each geographic location, along with the 10 page limit for the TCP, will the Government please increase the page count to 15 pages or exclude all salary ranges and supporting data from the TCP page count?

The Total Compensation Plan page count has been increased to 15 pages.

20 N/A

The only populated tab in this file is labeled “eMITS Labor Categories – DRFP” Question: Can the Government please confirm this is the labor categories list for the final RFP or will you supply an updated version? DRFP has been revised to RFP.

21 N/A

Question: Can the Government confirm that the Offeror should include applicable burdens on top of the Gov’t Plug Numbers for ODCs, Materials, and Travel provided in the Cost Forms, Form 1 Proposed Effort tab?

Contractors should apply indirect rates to Government provided figures for ODCs, Materials, and Travel if applicable and in a manner which aligns with their established estimating policy/procedure.

22 N/A

Is there an incumbent on this contract? If so, please provide the incumbent name, current contract number, duration, historical level of effort and value of the contract?

This is a new enterprise contract that incorporates work from multiple contracts.

23 B.12(c )

Various sections of the RFP describe the intent to award IDIQ Task Orders during execution of the contract. In section B.12 (c ), the government explains that when the Government issues a request for task plan to the contractor, the contract shall prepare its estimate of the labor hours, labor categories, indirect costs, and other direct costs required to perform the task order requirements.

The offeror interprets the labor categories and levels within the categories given in Enclosure 1 that go beyond the list of government directed non-management hours in the Exhibit 2 Cost Forms as being those available for IDIQ work. However, the offeror does not see any direction on where to submit fully burdened rates for these additional labor categories, nor how they may be evaluated. Does the government intend for the offeror to provide fully burdened rates for these additional labor categories in order to evaluate IDIQ suitability, and if so where should the offeror list those burdened rates?

The government does not intend the offeror to provide any rates for IDIQ suitability. The offeror should only submit rates as required from the cost model.

24 Form 1

There does not appear to be a description for Property Administrator in Enclosure 1, even though this labor category is given within the government directed non-management labor categories and hours. Would the government please provide an updated Enclosure 1 with this labor category description?

Exhibit 2 will be revised, Property Administrator will be revised to Property Specialist II.

25 L.31 (1) (c ), Form 2

a. The directions in L.31 (1)( c) describe that offers should include the proposed profit rate for FFP task orders but the Cost Exhibit Form 2 excel sheet only appears to include an input space for profit/fee on CPAF task orders.

Should the offeror update this form to include the additional profit rate for FFP task orders?

The direction in section L.31(2)(c), Form 2, have been revised. The offer is not required to provide information related to FFP labor rates.

FFP labor rates will be proposed at the annual work plan/package level and negotiated with the Government at that time.

Government Furnished Property List

The document only lists GFP for Headquarters, MSFC and KSC. In order for the contractor to accurately estimate the effort involved in transitioning the GFP associated with the initial contracts phasing in during the first 90 days, an accurate list of equipment at each Center and its location is required. Please provide accurate lists of GFP for each Center that will transition to eMITS during the Phase In period.

GFP will not transition on to the contract during the phase in period. However, the GFP transitioning will be determined during the annual work package development process. The list provided in the RFP package represents data available at the time of RFP release.

Installation Accountable Government Property List

The document only lists IAGP for MSRC (MSFC?). In order for the contractor to accurately estimate the effort involved in transitioning the IAGP associated with the initial contracts phasing in during the first 90 days, an accurate list of equipment at each Center and its location is required. Please provide accurate lists of IAGP for each Center that will transition to eMITS during the Phase In period.

IAGP will not transition on to the contract during the phase in period. However, the IAGP transitioning will be determined during the annual work package development process. The list provided in the RFP package represents data available at the time of RFP release. MSRC is a typo and should be MSFC.

Initial Submission/Submission

Frequency/Maintenance (Note)

"Initial Submission: After contract award Submission Frequency: Initial submission with the proposal shall include the following sections ...

Note: Upon Contract Award, the Contractor’s Contract Management Plan becomes a part of the contract."

The DRD provides conflicting initial submission instructions regarding the Contract Management Plan (CMP). In addition, Section L provides no instructions for including the CMP with the proposal and Section M provides no evaluation criteria for the CMP. Please confirm that the CMP is due after contract award and modify DRD MA-01 accordingly. If the Government desires the CMP with the proposal, we respectfully request the CMP be excluded from any page count restrictions and a two week extension to the proposal due date to give all Offerors the opportunity to prepare the voluminous CMP response. See response to question 17.

29 Attach J-P

The Proposal calls for a Phase in of 90 days starting Jan 3, 2023 through April 4, 2023. There are 4 contracts in Attachment J-P that show a tentative start date in eMITS of 3/1/2023. Does the customer anticipate that these 4 contracts will start on eMITS during the Phase In Period (3/1/2023) or will the tentative start dates be changed to 4/4/2023. See response to question 5.

30 List of Contracts

Attachment J-P (List of Contracts Transitioning to eMITS) does not list the SRACES contract, however a document by the name of "Historical_Document_SRACES__PERFORMANCE_WORK_STATEMENT.pdf" is included as a Final RFP document. Please confirm if SRACES will be transitioned into eMITS. Also, please clarify the Government's purpose for including the PWS/SOW for five contracts with the Final RFP when Attachment J-P identifies thirteen contracts transitioning into eMITS.

Some of the scope of the SRACES contract is anticipated to transition to the eMITS contract when the SRACES contract is complete. The list of contracts is not considered all inclusive. The requirements documents were only included for some of the listed contracts as these were considered to be the most representative of the type of work on eMITS.

31 L.32

RFP states: "The Offeror shall include a list of those to whom the questionnaires were sent, including name of individual, phone number, organization, and contract number. Offerors shall include in their proposal the written consent of their proposed significant subcontractor to allow the Government to discuss the subcontractor' past performance evaluation with the Offeror." Please consider excluding the written consent of proposed significant subcontractors from the page count restrictions as is typically done in NASA RFPs. See response to question 18.

32 L.32

RFP states: "Offerors shall present a summary of relevant past performance information in matrix form as described by the Section L.32, Table 1, Sample PWS Past Performance Matrix, below in order to match past performance information with the sections of the PWS identified in paragraph (e)(1) of this provision." Please consider excluding the PWS Past Performance Matrix from the page count restrictions as is typically done in NASA RFPs.

The PWS Past Performance Matrix will be excluded from the page count.

L.27(b)(1) Page limitations L.32(e)(1) Past Performance

The Past Peformance page limitation is 20 pages.

The final RFP added two additional elements to be covered in the past performance citations.

f) Creation of IT services catalog and delivery of IT services to a variety of disparate (i.e., geographical, business units, scientific technical, and mission focus) customers.

g) Project Management of complex IT solutions requiring management of subcontracts and vendor solutions.

Also up to 3 citations for the offeror, and 2 for each significant sub are allowed.

This can add up to a total of as many as 9 past performances.

We respectfully request the Government allow 30 pages for the Past Performance volume so that offerors have adequate pages to answer these new requirements that were not present in the draft RFP. The page count will not be increased. The consent letters and matrix will be excluded from the page count.

L.27(b)(1) Page limitations

A.1 TA-1 SCENARIO 1

L.30.2 (B)(1)(g) Subfactor B – Management Approach (MA)

The Mission Suitability Volume is limited to 60 pages.

The final RFP requires an additional element to be covered in Scenario 1: Item 7 requires coverage of “ how will the cost control measures (from 5. and 6.

above) be impacted by collective bargaining agreements?”

The final RFP also requires an additonal element to be provided in the Management plan under B(1)(g: “The Offeror shall describe their integration approach to establish and maintain effective, collaborative communications with the management team and point of contacts of the other Agency Contracts, described in the PWS Section 1.2, including the plan to establish working relationships with the associate contractor’s operational teams”

We respectfully request the Government allow 70 pages for the Mission Suitability volume so that offerors have adequate pages answer these new requirements that were not present in the draft RFP. The mission suitability volume page count has been increased to 70 pages.

35 ------------

“We understand that a portion of the KSC workforce on KIAC which is transitioning to eMITS are covered by two Unions: the IBEW and the IATSE Unions. However the Final RFP contains only CBAs for the IATSE. Would the Government please provide the IBEW CBA(s) as soon as possible to enable offerors to properly price the labor categories associated with the Union.”

Attachment J-Q has been updated to include the IBEW CBA.

36 L.28(a) SF33

L.28(a) requires Joint Venture proposals to reference FAR 4.102 for signature requirements. FAR 4.102(d) requires:

Joint venturers. A contract with joint venturers may involve any combination of individuals, partnerships, or corporations. The contract shall be signed by each participant in the joint venture in the manner prescribed in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section for each type of participant. When a corporation is participating, the contracting officer shall verify that the corporation is authorized to participate in the joint venture.

The SF33 signature block cannot accommodate multiple signatures as required by FAR 4.102(d). Will the Government accept an attachment page to the SF33 allowing a joint venture the space to accommodate the necessary signatures?

The SF33 signature block must include the associated signatures (written or electronic).

37 All

With the addition of 30 days to the Phase in and one additional contract (HITTS), would the government consider adding 3 to 5 pages to the Phase In Plan page count? See response to question 6.

L.32 (j) Can the Agency please provide clarification and confirmation of the intended scope of the contracts, data and explanatory information that offerors are required to submit in response to the additions of L.32(j) Safety, Health and Environmental Past Performance in the Final RFP by responding to the following question: Are the requirements for submission of Safety, Health and Environmental Past Performance limited to data and explanations for Joint Venture Offerors/Partners and significant subcontractors or is the Agency requiring the submission of this data and explanations for “ALL subcontractors”?

Yes, requirements for submission of Safety, Health, and Environmental Past Performance are limited to data and explanations for Joint Venture Offerors/Partners and significant subcontractors.

L.32 (j) Can the Agency please provide clarification and confirmation of the intended scope of the contracts, data and explanatory information that offerors are required to submit in response to the additions of L.32(j) Safety, Health and Environmental Past Performance in the Final RFP by responding to the following question: Are the requirements for submission of Safety, Health and Environmental Past Performance limited to such data and explanations pertaining to the relevant contracts as specified in L.32 (a) –(i), or is the Agency requiring the submission of this data and explanations for ALL “work” and “contracts” performed in the past 5 calendar years? Submission is limited to the relevant contracts as specified in L.32

(a) –(i).

Section L 30.2 B.2;

MA-02

Phase-in Plan requires that "The Offeror shall provide a detailed phase-in plan that will ensure continuity and a smooth transition with the incumbent Contractors during the 90-day phase-in period. The phase-in plan shall clearly demonstrate an ability to assume full contract responsibility on the effective date of the contract and shall contain the information required in DRD MA-02, Contract Phase-In Plan."

DRD MA-02, item #1 states: "Provide a plan for ensuring a smooth phase-in consistent with maintaining efficient continuity of services for the 60-day period prior to contract start. The plan shall describe how you will maintain continuous and efficient operations.”

Question: There is a discrepency between DRD MA-02 and Section L.30.2, MA-2 Phase-in Plan regarding the number of days for Phase-in.There is no other reference to a 60-day phase-in period within the RFP documents. Does the Government intend to change DRD MA-02, item #1to read "90-day period prior to contract start"? If not, please clarify the difference between 90-day phase-in period and 60 day period as defined in the phase-in plan.

See response to question 7.

L.25(b)(2) For the solicitation statement, “Additionally, the contractor will have privileged access (administrative access) to various NASA systems which contain nonpublic Government sensitive information as well as other companies’ proprietary and business confidential information”, please provide a list of the NASA systems and a description of the types of nonpublic Government sensitive information and other companies’ proprietary and business confidential information that would be accessed. This information is required to make assessment of the nonpublic sensitive and proprietary/confidential information and assess the extent to which it might create an OCI with current or future contracts.

As documented throughout the PWS, the offeror may have privileged access through both system administration and elevated rights for content management. A systems inventory list was provided in Attachment J-H. This list is not all inclusive but gives

Offerors a sense of the types of systems to be administrated. Lists of NASA systems maybe be further defined at the work package level. Types of nonpublic Government sensitive information the contractor may have access to include, but are not limited to ITAR, PII etc. Types of other companies' proprietary and business confidental information that the contractor may have access to include, but are not limited to, pricing, performance metrics, processes, and work products from contractors for which ACAs are in place.

Tabs 5a-5d Under an unpopulated JV, each company will have an indirect rate build-up.

Can the contractors add the buildup as addendums for Tabs 5a-5d?

The offeror may add tabs as necessary to support the indirect rates proposed. Form 5 instructions have been revised to provide clarification.

…"The Offeror is to add tabs as necessary to support the indirect rate stucture proposed. For all indirect tabs added by the Offeror, the offeror shall also adjust the Form 5, Summary of Indirects to reflect the additional information provided."

SRACES is provided with a historical PWS document but is not included in the list of contracts transitioning per Attachment J-P List of Contracts Transitioning.

Please confirm whether work from this contract is transitioning to eMITS.

See response to question 30.

MA-03 The DRD scope calls this document the Cybersecurity Support Plan and the DRD Title is Information Security Mangement Plan. Please confirm these are one in the same.

The DRD Title has been updated to reflect Information Security Management Plan in both places.

3.1.7;

3.11.4;

L.28.7

PWS 3.1.7 on page 5 states the Contractor shall, "Maintain the ability to obtain security clearances, up to the Top - Secret level." However, The DD Form 254, PWS 3.11.4 on page 11 states "The work to be performed under this contract is up to the Secret level." Additionally, RFP L.28.7 on page 148 states, "Offerors shall possess a Secret level facility security clearance by the due date for receipt of proposals and this clearance shall be maintained throughout the life of the contract." Please confirm the security level for work on this contract is Secret. PWS 3.1.7 has been revised to state, "Possess a Secret level facility security clearance."

L.30.2 B.4 MA-4 Total Compensation Plan

Please clarify the requirement for nonsignificant subcontractors to submit a total compensation plan. It appears you have the submission tied to the certified C&P threshold. Given certified data may not be required due to competition, does the Government still require a TCP from all subcontractors with a work share that exceeds that threshold? See response to question 4.

In reviewing the Center transition schedule- Attachment J-P List of Contracts Transitioning to eMITS and the associated Exhibit 2 Cost Forms, there are Centers that show hours to be costed prior to their transition year. As an example SSC transitions in contract year 2 (Option 1) but there are 3 LCATS that show hours in the Base Year of the contract. There are similar situations with other Centers. Will the government clarify?

To clarify, contracts (or pieces of contracts) are transitioning to eMITS. Existing contracts may span multiple Centers. Transitions of content will be by contract.

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

Form 4a Within Exhibit 2 Cost Forms, there is a Center identified as GSC. Should that be

GRC?

Form 4a has been revised to reflect the center accronyms as defined in section F.5 of the RFP. Form Revised.

Form 4a Is there any additional detail for the single LCAT assigned to MSFC and if so will the government provide it to bidders? The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

Form 4a The Exhibit 2 Cost File shows 46,848 hrs for MSFC with only a "Multimedia Specialist 3" LCAT. Are there no other LCATS or hours associated with other IT specific PWS elements of 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 or other elements in 7.0 for MSFC and if so will the government provide?

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

Since SRACES historical PWS document is provided with the RFP, is there associated equipment with the SRACES contract that should be included in the GFP list and if so, would the government provide?

The GFP transitioning will be determined during the annual work package development process. The list provided in the RFP package represents data available at the time of RFP release.

Can the government please let us know what Applicable Labor Categories on this Contract apply to the CBA Categories on the KIAC contract? We can not crosswalk them back as the names do not match directly.

CBA labor categories will be identified during the annual work plan and work package development process.

DRD No.: MA-01

"11. Initial Submission: After contract award. Submission frequency: Initial submission with the proposal…"

Please clarify exactly when DRD No.: MA-01 is due to the Government. See response to question 17.

DRD No.: MA-01

“The plan shall identify the contractor employee who will serve as the Contract Integration Manager responsible for leading and managing the integration of services."

DRD No. MA-01 includes the position of "Contract Integration Manager."

However, Enlosure 1, Labor Categories, does not mention this position. Please clarify.

The contractor should designate a labor category(s) that is a part of their program management team to serve in the role of Contract

Integration Manager. This should be interpreted as a role and not a labor category.

L.32

"Offerors shall include in their proposal the written consent of their proposed significant subcontractor to allow the Government to discuss the subcontractor' past performance evaluation with the Offeror."

Please confirm that this letter is excluded from the core page count for Volume IV, Past Performance. See response to question 18.

56 Tab 4 a No hours were given for NASA centers other than GSFC, HQ, and LARC. Is this an omission or accurate?

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

L.32, (j)

Given the expanded requirements for Past Performance (versus the DRAFT RFP), requirement for developing pricing considering support at multiple work locations, as well as the overall complexity of the FINAL RFP, we respectfully request that the Government extend the due date for proposals until Friday, July 15, 2022. This will enable Industry to provide fully complete and compliant proposals, which will be in the best interest of NASA for this important eMITS consolidation contract. We believe this extesnion is very reasonable. The proposal due date is extended to July 11, 2022.

58 Tab 4

Based upon the RFP / Section L.31, we understand that the Government is asking for proposing a single rate for each labor category, irrespective of work location. Please clarify this.

Offerors should propose a single rate for each labor category, irrespective of work location.

L.27 (b)

Is Total Compensation Plan Required for all subcontractors or Significant Subcontractors only? Since This plan contains company proprietary / confidential information, can the subcontractors send it directly to the Government? Please advise.

See response to question 4. Subcontractors can submit the TCP directly to the Government.

60 L.32(h)

The RFP States that the "Offeror shall complete the Offeror fill-in sections of the Questionnaire and forward the Questionnaire to the contracting and technical representatives. We believe the Government is expecting one Questionnaire from a single representative for each contract. We assume the Representative can be any of the following - Contracting Officer (CO), Contracting Office Represenative (COR), or a Technical Manager. Please clarify this.

The questionnaire may be sent to any number of Government representatives that can provide feedback on the Offeror's performance on each contract.

61 PWS 7.2.1

Attachment J-H is listed in the SOW as systems to manage in PWS 7.2.1 Question: Will the Government update the GPM to provide labor hours to maintain systems listed in Attachment J-H aligning with PWS 7.2.1?

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

Form 4 - Labor Rate Build Up & Form

3 Schedule of Rates Prime tab

Question: Can the Government confirm that the Offeror does not have to use the same weighting to calculate the proposed composite rate for each year? If so, can the Offeror add columns in Form 3 Schedule of Rates Prime to include the specific weightings for each year?”

The offeror is allowed to adjust the model to account for changes in weighting for the outyears, as long as the changes align with the Offerors technical approach. All changes to the Government cost model weighting should be indicated by a highlight. If proposing a weighting that changes during the period of performance, the varying weighting is to be addressed in the cost and technical narrative, explaining and providing the basis of the change. Exhibit 2 applicable instructions will be updated in the excel file and the

RFP to reflect the additional instruction.

63 Legacy PAWS The third paragraph under Legacy PAWS states per 4.1.2.1? Question: Can the Government please clarify is this a PWS section? Reference to 4.1.2.1 has been removed.

64 Two-way Radio

System states there is 2500 mobile, portable and fixed mounted KSC radio. In Attachement J-I Government furnished property it does not show any radios.

Question: Are all radios government provided or contractor furnished? What section of the PWS does radio coverage fall under?

The referenced radios are government furnished. Section 7.2 includes the engineering, installation, and maintenance. Radio coverage is included in Section 7.8. GFP and/or contractor furnished property will be further defined at the work package level.

65 Two-way Radio List mobile radios are installed in vehicles locasted at KSC. Question: What section of the PWS covers installation of radios? Section 7.2 includes the engineering, installation, and maintenance.

66 OTV

The second paragraph covers Pan and Tilt cameras. Attachment J-I Government furnished property it does not show any pan and tilt cameras. Question: Are all pan and tilt government provided or contractor furnished? What section of the PWS covers pan and tilt camrea coverage?

The referenced pan and tilt cameras are government furnished.

Section 7.2 includes the engineering, installation, and maintenance.

Section 7.8 of the PWS covers pan and tilt camera coverage. GFP and/or contractor furnished property will be further defined at the work package level.

67 Section H.23 Question: Will the Government be providing any GFE vehicles at any NASA center to support the eMITS contract?

It is unclear how the referenced Section of the RFP (H.23, page 75) is relevant to GFE vehicles. Whether or not GFE vehicles will be provided will be determined during the annual work package development process.

68 Form 4, 4a

Typically, CBA-directed fringe benefits and policies drive differing fringe and overhead indirect rates compared to non-CBA fringe benefits and policies.

Based on the Exhibit 2 Form 4a, there are a number of labor categories with expected workforces in locations both with and without CBA requirements. In the same way that the government allows the offeror on Form 4 to list multiple rows for each labor category, if the FBR is a composite of multiple team members, will the government allow the offeror (or its significant subcontractors) to provide multiple rows for a single labor category if an FBR for a single labor category is a composite of both union and non-union workforces with differing indirect rates?

CBA labor categories will be identified during the annual work plan and work package development process.

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

69 I.85, Form 4a

The RFP paragraph I.85 on pg 92 lists 52.229-10 State of New Mexico Gross Receipts and Compensating Tax (Apr 2003) as an applicable clause on the contract. Form 4a lists a set of hours that are located on site at JSC but lists no hours at White Sands Test Facility. Would the government please clarify if any of the hours listed as JSC are expected to be at WSTF?

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

70 Form 4

The instructions for Exhibit 2 Cost Form 4, section iii states that the offeror should identify the allocation base for each proposed indirect cost. Where on this sheet should the offeror make this identification?

Exhibit 2 Cost Forms, Form 4 instructions have been revised.

71 Form 1

The Enclosure 1 lists five levels of the labor category Graphic Design Specialist, and the Exhibit 2 Form 1 lists the labor category Graphic Design Specialist without an identified level.

The same issue exists for other labor categories such as Multimedia Producer/Senior Multimedia Producer and Project Coordinator. What are the intended level for Graphic Design Specialist, Multimedia Producer/Senior Multimedia Producer and Project Coordinator labor categories in Form 1?

Form 1 has been updated to designate levels.

72 Forms 3, 3a, 3b, 4

The offeror interprets Exhibit 2 Form 4 implicitly allowing for a varying composite weight percentages for each company/labor category pair across contract years by having separate sets of rows (and the column existing) in each of the contract years. However, Form 3 (for the prime) and 3a/3b (for subcontractors) seem to contradict this allowance by seeming to have one composite weight percentage apply to all years. Considering that numerous contracts phase in to eMITS after contract start and will consistently change the balance of workshares, is it the government’s intention that offerors may vary the percentages across the years, and if so may the contractor adjust Form 3 (and 3a/3b) to reflect these variations?

The labor categories and hours provided in the Cost Forms are for evaluation purposes only and are not indicative of the requirements for performance. Labor categories and hours will be determined during the annual work plan/package development.

73 Tab 4a

There are two NASA centers named as APPS and GSC. Should GSC be GRC or Glenn Research Center. Please define APPS. Where is it located? Is it a NASA Center? See response to question number 9.

74 Tab 4a

The Hours in Column K for extesnion period appear to be for 2 months. Based upon the Table in RFP Section L.31 / Pages 158 and 159, Extension period is 6 months. Please clarify if the hours in Column K are accurate or will be revised to reflect 6 months. See response to question number 3.

75 Tab 4a

The Labor Category is indicated as "Property Administrator" in Exhibit 2 / Tab 4a and Tab 4 . Enclosure 1 / Row 95 gives Job Description for Property Specialist. Are they both same? If so, what level for Property Specialist should we use out of the three levels I, II, III. See response to question number 71.

76 RFP Secion L.31 and Attachment J-P

RFP Page 158 states Phase-in Period of 90 days for a duration till April 3, 2023.

Attachment J-P shows some centers (JSC, KSC) with a tentative starts date of 03/01/2023. This means these centers may have to be transitioned in less than 60 days. Please clarify this. Attachment J-P has been updated to include the correct dates for transitions.

77 RFP Secion L.31 and DRD MA-02

RFP Page 158 states Phase-in Period of 90 days for a duration till April 3, 2023.

DRD MA-02 / Page 20 states: 1. Provide a plan for ensuring a smooth phase-in consistent with maintaining efficient continuity of services for the 60-day period prior to contract start. Please confirm it is 90-days transition period.

DRD-MA-02 has been updated to reflect 90 days.

RFP Section L.31 (d), Exhibit 2 / Tab 4, and WD for Washington DC Area

Can the Government identify the Service Contract Act (SCA) Wage Determination (WD) Labor Categories and if possible provide mapping to WD Occupation Code. This way, all bidders will use same WD Labor Categories.

SCA labor categories will be identified during the annual work plan and work package development process. However, Section I.149 of the RFP lists the anticipated SCA covered labor category details.

RFP Section L.31 (d), Exhibit 4a, and

CBA for KSC Can the Government identify the positions that are in the CBA.

CBA labor categories will be identified during the annual work plan and work package development process.

80 Tabs 4a, Tab 4, and Tab 5

For the purposes of this proposal, all exempt direct charged labor shall be priced assuming a location of onsite. Onsite is defined as all NASA facilities. We request the Government to name the on-site location for pricing since in Tab 4, since we are required to provide single rate. This way all bidders will use same site for pricing direct labor.

Labor hours by category and center are provided in the NASA provided Cost Forms under Form 4a, Labor hours by Center.

81 All Tabs

Will the Govt. use Burdened Labor Rates in Tab 2 for pricing IDIQ Rates for future task orders after contract award. It will be helpful to know this since the contract spans all NASA centers.

FFP IDIQ labor rates will be proposed at the annual work plan/package level and negotiated by the Government at that time.

82 RFP

The solicitation includes reference to 8(a) joint ventures and states that SBA approval prior to contract award is required. First, this is a small business set-aside, so please clarify the section for 8(a) joint ventures. Second, SBA only approves 8(a) joint ventures for 8(a) sole source awards. 13 C.F.R. 124.513(e).

At minimum, will the agency please remove the requirement for approval, as this is impossible to comply with. The language in L.28(d)(4) has been removed.

83 RFP

The solicitation states that "if applicable, the Offeror (i.e., Joint Venture Partners) shall demonstrate a history of successfully performing Joint

Ventures." Can the agency please clarify whether it is requiring an offeror bidding as part of a joint venture to have experience performing as part of a joint venture? If so, will the agency please remove this requirement as it is unduly restrictive.

As stated in the RFP L.32(b) the offeror is required to demonstrate a history of successfully performing Joint Ventures. If the offer is a newly formed business (including Joint Venture) please provide the required information outlined in this section.