ASTRO_1st_RFI_Questions_and_Answers_Final.docx

Initial RFI Questions About ASTRO:

Overarching Questions:

1. What is the difference between ASTRO and ATLAS?

Answer: ATLAS was a Government-wide IDIQ contract concept to support all requirements for all Government agencies revolving around manned, unmanned, and optionally manned platforms. ASTRO is DOD-sponsored IDIQ focused on meeting client requirements from combatant commands. ASTRO is likely to only allow ordering from FEDSIM.

2. If ASTRO remains a FEDSIM only vehicle, we believe that the need to support "lower dollar" requirements will be missed. How does FEDSIM intend to support this significant need?

Answer: The FEDSIM requirements from the Department of Defense thus far have indicated primarily a need for large businesses, with subcontracting with a variety of large, small, and unique firms. However, the initial RFI results indicate a significant amount of capability from small business. We will continue our market research and further analyze that market research in order to allow GSA Management to determine the appropriate course of action for the ASTRO vehicle.

Questions Related to Small Business:

3. Will there be a Small business component to this effort?

Answer: There is always some small business component to any federal contract effort. Currently, the effort is being designed to satisfy the requirements. Many of FEDSIM’s clients do have large and complex requirements. However, market research efforts are designed to create a picture of the entire landscape of requirements so that GSA can obtain a better understanding of the marketplace. The process starts with information obtained through market research. As such, the market research efforts will identify the best acquisition strategy to satisfy client requirements.

4. Will there be small and large business pools?

Answer: TBD. All organizations are encouraged to participate in calls for data during this process through RFI responses, surveys, client use cases, etc.

5. Would the Government consider setting aside this requirement for 8(a) program or HUBZone?

Answer: If the market research indicates that and 8(a) set-aside or a HUBZone would be an appropriate course of action, then yes. If market research indicates that it would not be an appropriate course of action, then no.

6. Is the government primarily looking for industry partners that have engaged in $50 Million plus contracts? If so, why is this solicitation being released under the 8(a) STARS II program, which is predominantly comprised of small businesses with much less revenue?

Answer: This procurement is not being solicited under STARS II and is not at all associated with or related to the STARS II program or any other existing contract vehicle.

7. We are a SDVOSB that has been tracking ATLAS which we understand is now ASTRO, will interested small businesses still be able to respond to the RFP even if they were unable to respond to the ASTRO base RFI or one of the individual NAICS code releases?

Answer: Yes, small businesses will still be able to respond to the ASTRO RFP when it is released. However, to clarify, ASTRO is not ATLAS, and there are very important differences between the two. See the response to Question 1. Additionally, it was not mandatory to respond to the ASTRO RFI. FEDSIM is just beginning the market research process and trying to understand the marketplace and Industrial base; RFI responses will help FEDSIM further its understanding of both.

Questions Related to Scope:

8. Will there be a Cyber or Data Analytics component to this effort?

Answer: Yes. those solutions are anticipated to be within the scope of ASTRO. Further RFI releases will provide more elaboration on scope and other factors attributed to this effort.

9. Does the Gov't anticipate Ship Repair for manned and unmanned surface combatant to be executed during this 10 year ordering period, to include structural, hydraulic, machinery, electrical, and propulsion? And if so, what geographical locations is the Gov't looking to support?

Answer: Yes, all aspects of ship repair is anticipated to be performed worldwide. Further RFI releases will provide additional details on scope and locations.

10. Will ASTRO solicit for manned fixed-wing and/or rotary-wing airlift solutions, in accordance with NAICS Codes 481212 and 481211?

Answer: Yes, those solutions are anticipated to be within the scope of ASTRO.

11. Would capabilities related to supporting the systems that integrate with manned/unmanned platforms via subject matter expertise in the areas of command and control, mobilization and readiness be considered in scope for this requirement?

Answer: Yes, subject matter expertise of command and control, mobilization, and readiness in support of systems that integrate with manned/unmanned platforms are anticipated to be in scope. Further RFI releases will provide additional details on scope.

Questions Related to Teaming:

12. Has the government considered allowing contractors to enter a CTA or newly formed JV?

Answer: In accordance with regulation and law, the government must consider contractor teaming agreements and joint ventures. However, it is up to the individual agencies to determine how those situations are to be considered. FEDSIM places greater value on proven performance which shall be reflected in any resulting solicitation.

13. Can our experience include the experience of a teammate?

Answer: For market research purposes, the experience cannot include that of a teammate. It is important to understand each individual company’s experience and skill sets in order to make the best decision in determining the industrial base and designing any resulting contract solution.

Questions Relating to Prime/Sub Experience:

14. We are a business with only subcontracting experience, as such, what will be past performance requirements for this effort for both prime and subcontractors?

Answer: Being a prime contractor requires more skill sets than being a subcontractor. Furthermore, being able to assemble a team to meet a specific requirement at the task order level and being able to capture work are valuable assets that prime contractors must have in order to be successful. Accordingly, FEDSIM’s first interest is in the past performance of prime contractors. However, if market research suggests that there are an insufficient number of qualified prime contractors in a given field, subcontractor work may come into consideration. If subcontractor work is considered for past performance, FEDSIM would need input from Industry as to how to validate what was actually accomplished by the subcontractor and objectively determine how well it was actually done. Although the government has mechanisms to evaluate these things on prime contractors, it currently is unable to do the same for subcontractors, which makes it difficult to recognize and validate subcontractor experience.

15. Would the Government consider allowing major subcontracting opportunities for past performance; many large industry partners have provided required services in a subcontracting role.

Answer: FEDSIM does not anticipate allowing major subcontracting opportunities for past performance; however, the results of market research will help to determine the best approach.

Questions Relating to Structure:

16. Will there be sub-pools for NAICS codes other than 541330 with their own targeted number of awardees?

Answer: FEDSIM anticipates that there will be multiple pools with differing NAICS. The final list of pools and corresponding NAICS codes is yet to be determined.

Miscellaneous Questions:

17. Will a Facility Clearance be required for this effort?

Answer: Although it is likely that additional points would be given for having a facility clearance, it is unlikely that it will be made a mandatory requirement.

18. Will the Prime contractor be required to have a certain level of experience in specific technical fields or will general Systems Engineering be sufficient?

Answer: It is currently too early in the process to determine the required levels of experience in technical fields. Subsequent RFIs will provide opportunities for companies to offer input on scope, structure, and evaluation factors. Please continue to look for additional communications and RFIs in order to help shape this effort.

19. Would the government consider awarding a contract to an organization who has relationships with a contracted supply chain management organization that can provide forward and reverse logistics operations in support of ISR asset Echelon III maintenance and repair operations?

Answer: Yes, the government may consider an award in that situation if that organization scores high enough in the evaluation schema.

20. Would the government be more concerned, less concerned, or not concerned about the location of the contractor as it relates to the quick and timely repair and redeployment of ISR assets? (i.e. Proximity to DLA Maintenance Depots) Answer: At the master IDIQ contract level, FEDSIM is not concerned about the geographic location of a contractor unless that reveals itself to be a relevant consideration in market research. However, task orders placed under the contract may specify that contractor location is somewhat important or very important.

21. What is the estimated date of a draft solicitation for review?

Answer: FEDSIM plans to begin releasing draft sections of the solicitation in June and continuing through the next six months or until FEDSIM feels comfortable that the solicitation will result in the best mix of contractors to satisfy requirements. Keep informed by monitoring FedBizOps.gov as well as GSA FEDSIM website, and the ASTRO Interact site located here; GSA FEDSIM ASTRO Program Interact Site

22. What is the difference between this contract vehicle and the DTIC IAC MAC?

Answer: ASTRO is in no way affiliated with the DTIC IAC MAC. The DTIC IAC MAC is for “all RDT&E services and other R&D-related analytical services.” ASTRO will include R&D-related services and development for platforms, but will also include operational activities and maintenance activities that would not be allowable under the DTIC IAC MAC.

23. What will be the safety and environmental requirements?

Answer: It is far too early in the process to identify the safety and environmental requirements. Further, it is anticipated that these types of specific requirements would be identified at the task order level rather than at the master contract level.

24. Can the Government clarify the definition of “hardware as a service”? Our company has provided the professional services in all the functional components within the market research, but not “as a service” as we interpret the Government’s requirement.

Answer: Hardware as a service addresses any and all requirements involving contractor-owned and contractor-operated platforms, robotics, and/or systems for land, air, sea, or space.

25. Will this multiple award IDIQ validate, complement or enhance small business opportunities for companies that have been successfully supporting Seaport-e / Seaport NxG?

Answer: This IDIQ has no relation to Seaport.

26. It is unclear from this data request if the Government is seeking original equipment manufacturers of these types of systems, Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) support for these systems, or Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) for these systems or a combination. Which is it?

Answer: Potentially all of the above. While it is not anticipated for ASTRO to allow for commodity only orders, GSAis interested in hearing from OEMs about capability to provide associated services as well. GSA is looking for ALL companies that may perform services that would be in scope of ASTRO.

27. Technical Direction Letter (TDL)-based task orders have been very successful recently and have grabbed the attention of the COCOMs and Intelligence Communities due to speed, agility, and effective vendor-agnostic execution. Will the ASTRO support usage of TDLs?

Answer: Yes, ATRO may support usage of TDLs if they are utilized under the proper contract type.

28. Will ASTRO support T&M, Cost Plus, and Fixed price type contracts?

Answer: Yes, ASTRO will support all contract types authorized by regulation and law.

29. Will ASTRO offer an option for Sole Source TOs?

Answer: Yes, ASTRO will offer an option for sole-source task orders.

30. Is GSA intending for a self-scoring assessment RFP, similar to OASIS, or a more traditional proposal response?

Answer: The acquisition team is intending to utilize a highest technically rated source selection methodology similar to the one the acquisition team invented for OASIS.

31. Is there a complete listing of all the NAICS codes that will be covered under ASTRO in a single document that has been released or is releasable?

Answer: The complete list of NAICS codes will eventually be shared further along in the market research process. NAICS codes assigned will be dependent on the final scope and the overall structure of the contracts.

32. Are all 25 NAICS code going to be released as a single RFP?

Answer: The initial thought and proposed approach would be to release everything as a single RFP. Depending on the final structure and client base of the contracts, some awards or pools may be phased in over time. Industry will have an opportunity to provide feedback on this in the future.

33. Our Key Management Personnel has the necessary background and experiences to support this effort, will the government allow Prime contractors to utilize their Key Personnel’s background as the company's Past Performance?

Answer: No, Key Personnel background may not be used as the company’s Past Performance.

34. Some applicable contracts or even clients cannot be disclosed due to non-publicity clauses. How can secured solutions be provided?

Answer: Typically, submissions to the Government for federal procurement purposes are not considered publicity as that information is protected. Classified projects may be considered if the contracting entity is willing to share summary details with GSA in a classified setting.