Final ASSESS DRFP Q and A Government Sheet.pdf

Question

Document Name and/or Attachment Number Page # Section Paragraph Title

(e.g. clause/provision #) Question-Please note that questions such "Can you clarify section B, clause XX, paragraph XX, etc. will not be answered. All questions shall specifically state what is it that you don’t understand about a specific area.

Government Answer

1 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

2 Cover Letter Contract Award Date The Cover Letter states that the anticipated contract award date is October 3, 2024 (this is almost 16.5 months after the anticipated due date for proposals). The Cost instructions in Section L.5.(c).III on page 131, include a table of escalation percentages that assume that contract years 1-5 will span 2023 to 2027, corresponding to a contract start date in 2023.

Understanding the correct timeline is critical to properly price the ASSESS effort, thus, can you please clarify if the anticipated contract award date should be October 3, 2023 instead of 2024?

The table has been updated in Section L.5.(c).III on page 131 to reflect the escalation rates required with the Contract Award Estimated Date.

2 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

100 L.2 1852.215-81 Proposal Page Limitations

Given that the DRFP requests 3 past performance citations (references) for the prime contractor, the allocation of 10 pages for all 3 citations is too limiting for the offeror to comprehensively describe the past performance, specifically in relation to the more than 25 individually identified ASSESS PWS elements. The same is true for the significant subcontractor(s). We request the government to modify the requirement to 30 pages in total shared between the prime contractor and significant subcontractor(s).

The table on page 100 has been updated to reflect up to 30 pages each for past performance.

3 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

123/145 L.5/M.4 Past Performance (Volume

III)

Given this is a small business procurement, the offeror requests the government to modify the language from requiring three (3) recent past performance contract references to requiring "up to three (3) recent past performance contract references" and delete the language "Offerors shall provide the required number of past performance references if it has three or more references that meet the criteria stated above. However, if an Offeror does not have the required number of past performance references, as determined herein, the missing references will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and will be given a neural adjectival rating.

The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three references". This modification would maximize qualified small business competition and allow offerors to comprehensively address past performance in the limited pages allocated.

The RFP has been revised to state, "The overall level of confidence rating may be negatively impacted for an Offeror who submits less than three contract references for the prime and/or less than three contract references for each major subcontractor. "

4 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

106 L.3 Proposal Submission Instructions

Since the prime will be submitting the Mission Suitability Volume and the Past Performance Volume, is there any scenario where a subcontractor would submit files named "Prime Offeror name - Subcontractor name - solicitation number - MS Volume.docx" or "Prime Offeror name - Subcontractor name - solicitation number - PP Volume.pdf"?

These examples are provided to show how to label files for submission and are not specific to this solicitation. These examples are not stating a requirement for this solicitation. If the subcontractors elect to submit, this is a format for submission

5 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

99/100 L.2 1852.215-81 Proposal Page Limitations

Given that each volume would be submitted as a single document and given that PDF formats are more reliable in their display across multiple computer platforms compared to Word, the offeror requests the government to also accept PDF formats for all submission documents (other than for Excel spreadsheets for the Cost/Price templates).

The RFP has been updated to allow PDF format where Word formatting was allowable in 1852.215-81.

6 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

135 L.5/M.4 Exhibit 11, Phase-in The DRFP says "For proposal purposes only, assume start date of the Phase-In Period to be September 23, 2024" while the Cover Letter (page) states that the Phase-In shall start on the effective date of the contract and the anticipated contract award date is October 3, 2024.

Please clarify the anticipated dates for: i) contract award, ii) contract effective date, and iii) start of Phase-In

The Start of the Phase in Period will align with commencement of contract award. For planning purposes, the estimated award date is October 3, 2024. September 23, 2024 reference has been deleted from the RFP.

7 PWS

DRFP+J.1.(a).1 Performance Work Statement

3 2.1 Core Requirements The Performance Work Statement (PWS) released with the Sources Sought had the following four work elements under Division and Branch Operations Support (2.1.1.2):

•2.1.1.2.1 Division and Branch Management Support •2.1.1.2.2 Technical Documentation Support •2.1.1.2.3 TPS Materials Laboratory Management and Safety Support •2.1.1.2.4 Aerothermal Analysis Software Maintenance

Most or all of the work elements in section 2.1.1.2.1 Division and Branch Management support above seem to be captured within the DRFP PWS document in the Contract Management Requirements (section 2.1.1). However the three remaining work elements (sections 2.1.1.2.2, 2.1.1.2.3, and 2.1.1.2.4) seem to be removed from the DRFP PWS.

(a) Is the government removing the above three items from the Core Requirements of ASSESS and implicitly including them in the IDIQ work elements OR is the government removing these three work elements from the ASSESS scope?

(b) Is the IDIQ ceiling limit ($84.9M on page 4 of DRFP) consistent with the above modification?

(c) Are the labor categories defined in the DRFP consistent with the above modification?

2.1.1.2.4 Aerothermal Analysis Software

Maintenance is now under 2.2.1.

2.1.1.2.3 TPS Materials Laboratory

Management and Safety Support is now under

2.2.2.5. 2.1.1.2.2 Technical Documentation Support is implied under 2.2. IDIQ Requirements. The IDIQ maximum ordering value and the plug labor categories in the DRFP are commensurate with the scope of work that may be performed under the ASSESS PWS.

8 Excel Pricing Workbook DRFP+J.1.(b).1+Cost+Price+Template+Work book+rev1

Exhibit 3 Cell A12 & A21

Minor Subcontractor from Exhibit 15

Cells A12 and A21 refer to Exhibit 15, but Exhibit 15 is undefined. The last Exhibit shown in DRFP Cost/Price Template is Exhibit 12. Please clarify.

This error has been updated on the Excel Pricing Workbook DRFP+J.1.(b).1 Cost Price Workbook. The references in Exhibit 3 have been updated from Exhibit 15 to accurately reflect Exhibit 12

9 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

101 L.2 Item (a) Item (a) appears to be truncated from the clauses full text. In particular, it is missing the reference to FAR 52.222-46, “Evaluation of Compensation of Professional Employees”. Is FAR 52.222-46 applicable to this acquisition?

FAR 52.222-46 has not been included, 1852.231-71 DETERMINATION OF

COMPENSATION REASONABLENESS

(APR 2015) has been included in this RFP.

10 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

125 L.5 Past Performance (Volume

III)

The DRFP says that "Offeror shall complete the PWS Requirements/Relevancy Matrix and included in the Past Performance Volume III. The templates and instructions are found as Section J.1.(b).7". Should the spreadsheet be a separate document submitted in addition to the Past Performance Volume III or should the spreadsheet be imported into the Past Performance Volume III? If the latter is intended, does the 10 page limit include this spreadsheet as well?

The spreadsheet should be in part of Volume III. The page limitation does not include the Requirements/Relevancy Matrix Excel Worksheet. Additional narrative has been provided to clarify that the page limitation does not include the Requirements/Relevancy Matrix Excel Worksheet.

11 DD254 Form Attachment 5 DD 254 contract security classification specification

3 Inspections block 15 What aspects of the work are outside the responsibility of DSS? As stated: "Elements of this contract are outside of the inspection responsibility of the Defense Security Service (DSS).

DSS maintains cognizance over non-NASA Center performance and the NASA Protective Services Office assumes security cognizance for all activities conducted on a NASA Center."

The DD254 states, "DSS maintains cognizance over non-NASA Center performance and the NASA Protective Services Office assumes security cognizance for all activities conducted on a NASA Center." Varying place of performance will be identified at the task order level.

12 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 and

DRD

DRFP J.1.(a).3 Data Requirements Descriptions (DRD)

Multiple

J.1

DRDs 5, 7, 8, 9, 13, 20, 22, and 29

J.1(a)

DRDs 5, 7, 8, 9, 13, 20, 22, and 29

The table in Section J.1(a) contains some, but not all of the plans cited in the DRD document.

While some of the plans are due after the contract award date or the contract effective date, several plans (DEIA, OCI, Phase-In, and Compensation) are listed as being due with the proposal. For clarity and to ensure compliance with the RFP instructions, we recommend that all required plans be included in the table in Section J.1(a), identifying when they are due, and indicating any page count restrictions (for example, the table under Clause 1852.215-81 suggests the OCI plan is not page limited while the Phase-In Plan and Compensation Plan must be included within the 60-pages allocated for Management Approach. Further, the DEIA Plan is not included in the table under Clause 1852.215-81 so offerors do not know in which volume that plan should go and whether or not it is subject to page restrictions.

The Volume II Page Count Table under Section L 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATIONS has been updated.

a. To clarify that the page count is included for 75 Pages (a)-(f). b. To DEIA plan has been updated to initial submission of "30 days after award"

13 DRFP

DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022

100-101 L.2 Clause 1852.215-81 Proposal Page Limitations

The DRFP does not clarify that the stated font size requirements apply only to either (1) Word or PDF documents or (2) page limited documents. Our experience with other NASA RFPs has been that they expressly exclude excel exhibits from the font size limitations or include a statement such as "The excel exhibits provided are formatted using 9-12 point type Times New Roman font." We recommend that NASA clarify the font size requirement for excel exhibits.

The RFP has been updated to clarify that the excel exhibits provided are formatted using 9- 12 point font and are excluded from font size limitations.

14 SAM.gov DRFP Posting N/A N/A SAM.gov DRFP Posting You indicated that we should use sam.gov to sign up as an interested vendor. The ASSESS page in sam.gov does not have an Interested Parties link at present. Can you fix this?

This has been updated in SAM.

15 DRFP+J.1.(a).1 Performance Work Statement 2 1 3 The AEMMS SOW mentioned the Aeromechanics Division and the Aeroflightdynamics Directorate (Army) as a customer. The ASSESS SOW does not. Is the Army Aeromechanics Branch at ARC a customer for ASSESS?

NASA utilizes Interagency Agreements for their programmatic assignment of technical requirements. ASSESS does not limit further programmatic assignments utilizing these agreements for use of the contract. This is a hybrid contract with an IDIQ component, and specific tasks deemed necessary for programs will be required at the task order level.

16 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 100 L.2 1852.215‐81 Proposal Page Limitations

The DRFP states, "Foldouts count as an equivalent number of 8 1/2" x 11" pages." Please confirm that this means that 11"x17"-sized pages count as 2 pages in page count determination.

Yes

17 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 100‐101 L.2 Clause 1852.215‐81 Proposal Page Limitations

The DRFP instructions indicate Offerors must use Times New Roman font, and further indicate that "For this RFP, Times New Roman font is defined as Times New Roman font only and does not include any variation of Times New Roman font." We assume this requirement is to ensure that Offerors not use condensed or narrow versions of the font. To aid in readability, however, Offerors often use Bold or Italics variations of the font for section titles or to indicate when text represents a "quotation." Please clarify if use of Bold and Italics forms of the Times New Roman font are permitted to aid in readability.

The statement, "The use of Bold and Italics Times New Roman font is acceptable." has been included to the PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATIONS section of Section L.2.

18 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 101 L.2 1852.231‐71 Determination of Compensation Reasonableness

The DRFP states, "This plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to union agreements, the Service Contract Act, and those exempt from both of the above." Our understanding is that there are no personnel subject to union agreements.

Please confirm.

There are no existing CBAs on the existing contracts currently to provide. As applicable to the Contractor's proposed solution, the contractor shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to union agreements, the Service Contract Act, and those exempt from both of the above.

19 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 105 L.3(a)(5) Proposal Structure and Due Dates

The DRFP states, "Offerors shall structure their proposals as set forth in L.4 – Proposal Preparation - Required Proposal Content and L.5 – Proposal Preparation-Specific Instructions for Volumes II-IV. Proposal content (other than Tables of Contents) excluded from the page limit (as identified under NFS provision 1852.215-81), title pages, list of figures, list of tables, acronym list and glossaries shall be placed at the end of each volume." Please consider allowing the title page of each volume to be placed at the beginning of the volume (along with the lists excluded from the page count). This makes it easier for Offerors to paginate sequentially, which enables the evaluators to validate compliance with page allocations.

RFP has been changed: title pages have been moved outside of the requirement to be placed at the end of the volume.

20 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 105 L.3(a)(6) Proposal Structure and Due Dates

The DRFP states, "The Offeror shall not lock, or password protect any file. PDF documents must be submitted in Text Searchable Adobe Acrobat PDFs. All elements of the file must be searchable for text." Are graphics required to be searchable? Many graphics cannot be searched, such as screenshots.

Clarifying language has been included in the RFP stating that "contents of graphics are excluded from search criteria."

21 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 112 ‐ 115 L.5(a) Mission Suitability (Volume

II)

Would the Government consider requiring offerors to address key elements of items (3) Phase- In Plan, (5) Compensation Plan, and (6) Representations of Limited Rights Data and Restricted Computer Software within the page counted portion of the Mission Suitability Volume, but allowing offerors to include the full plans (3 and 5) and representations (6) in an appendix that is excluded from the page count? We believe that the Government will benefit from receiving fully detailed plans and representations for these factors while still being able to address their salient points under the page limited response.

The page count for VOLUME II – Mission Suitability Sections (a) - (f) have been updated in the table under 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATIONS (APR 2015) from 60 pages, to 75 pages.

22 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 123 L.5(b)2 Past Performance (Volume

III)

The DRFP states, "For each proposed major subcontractor, also list the Cage Code and/or DUNS Number." Should "DUNS Number" be "Unique Entity ID," which is the number posted in sam.gov?

This has been corrected

23 DRFP+ASSESS+December+15+2022 All All All Given that answers to some questions/comments may result in changes to page limitations and any such change has a major impact in Offerors' responses to the solicitation, would the Government provide information on such changes prior to release of the final RFP?

The Consolidated Q&A will be provided with the posting of the RFP.

24 DRFP_J.1.(b).6+Past+Performance+Questionn aire+rev1

All N/A Past Performance Questionnaire

Under the Contractor's Performance section of the PPQ, items 7 through 12 only cover a subset of the IDIQ requirements/technical disciplines. Is it the Government's intent to only request past performance information on a subset of the PWS elements while an offeror's Past Performance response must address all PWS elements? We respectfully recommend that the Government include in the PPQs a request to provide details on the offeror's performance across all elements of the PWS.

Updates have been made to the PPQs to account for 4 elements of the PWS.

25 DRFP none none none What other contracts, if any, are Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs) necessary for the prime contractor to obtain in the performance of ASSESS?

There are no ACA's required to be obtained for the ASSESS Contract.

26 PWS 23 PWS 3.0 Security Requirements PWS Section 3.0 Security Requirements require the contractor to possess a Secret FCL within 120 days after contract award. To fully evaluate the risk to the Government of noncompliance by the Prime contractor, consider requiring Offerors to describe a viable plan for obtaining the Secret FCL within the timeframe or provide proof of possession of the FCL at proposal submission.

The process to acquire a FCL is well defined.

No changes will be made to the RFP regarding the FCL.

27 DRFP 100 L.2 Provisions Incorporated by FCurrently, the Past Performance Volume will be limited to 10 pages for the Prime Offeror and 10 pages for each major subcontractor. Additional space is necessary to thoroughly describe relevant past performance for the advanced requirements of ASSESS. Please consider increasing the page limit for the Past Performance Volume. Thirty pages each for Prime Offeror and major subcontractor, or up to 10 pages per contract reference, would be a reasonable amount of space.

This has been updated in question 2.