Questions and Answers for Request for Proposal 80TECH23R0002 Amendment 02.pdf

Area in Question Page # Question Government's Response

L.31.C.4 MA-4

Total

Compensation Plan

NSF 1852.231-71 states: (d) The offeror shall require all service subcontractors provide, as part of their proposal, the information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision for cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type subcontracts having a total potential value expected to exceed the threshold for requiring certified cost or pricing data as set forth in FAR 15.403-4.

Within the clause, the ‘information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision is the salary and benefit information which makes up the TCP.

However, the answer to the question included states that TCPs are required for ‘any and all subcontractors that employ professional employees’. As written, all labor subcontractors on every team proposed will need to submit TCPs to the Government, regardless of whether the subcontractor is supporting with one employee or several hundred under the NCAPS program and regardless of whether the subcontractor is supporting under a cost plus subcontractor or a competitive fixed price type subcontract, such as T&M. NCAPS teams are in many cases large including twenty or more subcontractors per prime proposal, greatly increasing the amount of material to be submitted and evaluated, as well as placing a burden on many small businesses across the various prime teams. Historically, NASA has set a threshold for TCPs, often aligned with ‘significant subcontractors’ or at a minimum, allowed compliance with the NSF 1852.231-71 requirement which would require TCPs for those proposed under cost plus subcontracts or those proposed under T&M or FP contracts (when those T&M / FP subcontracts were not competed).

Will NASA please consider establishing a threshold for individual TCPs from subcontractors or alternately accept the parameters of NSF 1852.237-71?

Offeror shall submit total compensations plans in accordance with FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

L.31.D 175 D.1 Small Business Subcontracting Plan This was a formatting error and the title was inadvertently missing.

The RFP has been updated to title D.1 Small Business Subcontracting plan in section L.31.D.

RFP, L.32 (b) 183

Prior Customer Evaluations (Past Performance Questionnaires, states, “The questionnaire respondent shall be a representative from the technical customer and responsible Contracting Officer with direct knowledge of your firm’s performance.” Would NASA confirm that Offerors should return a single questionnaire completed by a single customer with direct knowledge of their performance for each referenced contract.

The questionnaire respondent shall be a representative from the technical customer and responsible Contracting Officer with direct knowledge of your firm's performance. The respondent shall provide one copy of the questionnaire from the technical customer and responsible Contracting Officer with direct knowledge of your firm's performance or two questionnaires (one each) from the technical customer and responsible Contracting Officer with direct knowledge of your firm's performance

L.31, D.2b; L.29 b.1

178; 155

In the final RFP, NASA had removed the instruction contained in the Sept 2022 DRFP for Offeror’s to “provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments”. Table in L.29 b.1, page 155, in the final RFP lists ‘enforceable/non-enforceable commitments’ as outside page count. Given the removal of the instruction for Offerors to provide documentation of enforceable/non-enforceable commitments, please confirm that NASA does not require Offeror’s to submit documentation of enforceable/non-enforceable commitments?

If NASA requires documentation, please confirm that Letters of Commitment are sufficient.

In accordance with the section M.4.D.2: NASA also will evaluate the extent of commitment to use the subcontractor(s) (enforceable vs.

non-enforceable commitments).

L.21; L.31.C, C.4 142; 175

The instructions for Total Compensation Plan provided in Section C.4 MA-4 appear to be for the Prime Offeror (for example, paragraph C.4.c refers to “Offeror’s commitment to managing differing compensation plans across prime and subcontractors”). Please confirm that the offerors’ subcontractors should follow the requirements outlined in Section L.21 11852.231-71 DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION REASONABLENESS (APR 2015) for submission of subcontractor TCPs.

Offeror shall submit total compensations plans in accordance with FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

NCAPS RFP 80TECH23R0002

Area in Question Page # Question Government's Response

L.30.10 160

"The RFP states ""Safety, Health, and Environmental (SHE) Plan: The Offeror shall submit the information required by NFS 1852.223-73, Safety and Health Plan, and DRD SA- 001, Safety, Health, and Environmental Plan. Offerors are directed to NPR 8715.3, Appendix E instructions regarding the contents of Safety and Health Plan. NPR 8715.3 can be accessed at the following website: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t=NPR&c=8715&s=3C Per the link provided, NPR 8715.3 Appendix E is “RESERVED” and unavailable. Will the Government please provide Appendix E or confirm that the DRD SA-001 has all the instruction needed. We request that the RFP is amended with this information. "

The RFP has been updated. The Offeror shall submit the information required by NFS 1852.223-73, Safety and Health Plan, and DRD SA- 001, Safety, Health, and Environmental Plan.

ATT L -

Application

Support Levels

In "Attachment L - Application Support Levels" there is a reference to "interfaces to applications maintained by external parties" for calculating the complexity of an applications. There is not a clear definition of would be considered an "interfaces to applications maintained by external parties". There are platforms or applications that could be partially maintained by third parties but NCAPS would maintain their unique configuration. Can the Government clarify if applications where NCAPS would not be responsible for the base application code but would configure and maintain their unique configurations would be considered an "applications maintained by external parties" or NCAPS maintained applications?

Attachment G - Acronyms, Terms and Definitions has been updated.

ATT G Language. Applications maintained by external parties – Applications where an external party maintains the code and configuration of the application. Applications where a third party maintains the code and NCAPS manages the configuration of the application is not considered “Applications maintained by external parties”

NCAPS RFP 80TECH23R0002