SAS_RFP_Questions_6-30-16.pdf

Click links Q A Q A Q A Q A

General Questions 3 3 Attachment A 1 1 Exhibit 1 0 0 Enclosure 1 3 3 Section A 0 0 Attachment B 2 2 Exhibit 2 0 0 Enclosure 2 1 1 Section B 0 0 Attachment C 0 0 Exhibit 3 0 0 Enclosure 3 4 4 Section C 0 0 Attachment D 0 0 Exhibit 4 0 0 Enclosure 4 1 1 Section D 0 0 Attachment E 1 1 Exhibit 5 0 0 Enclosure 5 0 0 Section E 0 0 Attachment F 0 0 Exhibit 6 0 0 Enclosure 6 0 0 Section F 1 1 Attachment G 0 0 Exhibit 7 0 0 Section G 0 0 Attachment H 0 0 Exhibit 8 0 0 Section H 0 0 Attachment I 0 0 Exhibit 9 0 0 Section I 0 0 Attachment J 0 0 Exhibit 10 0 0 Section J 0 0 Attachment K 0 0 Exhibit 11 0 0 Section K 0 0 Attachment L 0 0 Exhibit 12 0 0 Section L 30 30 Attachment M 2 2 Exhibit 13 0 0 Section M 0 0

Total Questions 49

SOLICITATION NNG16544506R - SAS RFP QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS ANSWERS

Does NASA have tools with which we can perform version control on documents and corrective/Preventive action tracking? If so, please specify the tools.

Yes, the NASA IV&V Program utilizes LiveLink by OpenText as our enterprise content management system. LiveLink provides version control tracking. NASA has also implemented a Corrective/Preventive action tracking workflow in LiveLink.

Offerors Cover Letter, Para. 4 Page 1 - NASA Locations- The "Offeror Cover Letter" provides NASA Center locations and approximate individuals (headcount) per location. Can the Government clarify by location, the number of individuals that reside at each location?

Kennedy has 12 spaces at that location. Marshall has 4 spaces. GSFC currently has 4 spaces available.

Offerors Cover Letter, Para. 5 Page 2 - NASA Locations- The "Offeror Cover Letter" states that the "incumbent contractor currently provides this space…". Can the Government provide the number of ISS support personnel that reside at this location?

There are currently 19 WYE's residing at the vendor's Houston office. There are 10 WYE's supporting ISS.

Overview General Questions

F.2 Page F-13 GSFC 52.217-92 Effective Ordering Period (Jan 2014) -Effective Ordering Period states the contract shall be for a period of five (5) years. Can offerors remove CY 6 (Contract Year 6) from Attachment B, Exhibit 6, Exhibit 7, and Exhibit 9?

In accordance with FAR 52.216-22 Indefinite Quantitity, Paragraph (d) task orders may extend beyond the 5 year period of performance, therefore the labor rates for CY6 are necessary.

Section F

Questions Answers

L.22 (a) (3) Page L-103 All pages of Volumes I, II, III, and IV shall be numbered and identified with the Offeror’s name, RFP number and date. Please clarify if these requirements apply to the Subfactor A (Technical Approach/Capability) slides within Volume II? These requirements would severely limit space available on the slides.

Yes, this requirement is applicable to subfactor A.

L.22 (b)(1)(d), Page L-104 Cover Page, Table of Contents, Indices, List of Acronyms, Dividers/Tabs, Total Compensation Plan, Phase-in Plan, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Exhibit 12 excluded. Please clarify that dividers and tabs are not included in the oral presentation page count.

Dividers and Tabs are not necessary for the oral presentation.

L.22 (b)(1)(d), Page L-104 Cover Page, Table of Contents, Indices, List of Acronyms, Dividers/Tabs, Total Compensation Plan, Phase-in Plan, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Exhibit 12 excluded. We also request that the Government please exclude the following pages from the orals presentation page count: (1) a slide that introduces the presenters; and (2) a TOC slide for the presentation.

A slide that introduces the presenters is not required. The TOC is already excluded.

L.22 (b)(2) Page L-106 Diagrams, tables, artwork, and photographs may be reduced and, if necessary, run in landscape format or folded to eliminate oversize pages. Can Offerors create diagrams, tables, artwork, photographs, and graphics for Subfactor A in 12 point font and reduce them for inclusion in the PowerPoint presentation?

No. In order to ensure the text is legible, the text in diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point. Diagrams, tables, artwork, and photographs shall not be used to circumvent the text size limitations of the presentation charts.

L.22 (b)(2) Page L-106 The presentation charts shall be provided on standard 8-1/2" x 11" paper in landscape orientation, one chart per page. No chart text shall be smaller than 16 point. Charts shall be numbered sequentially. Text in Diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point. Will the Government allow Offerors to submit graphics using 10-point font in the orals presentation?

No. In order to ensure the text is legible, the text in diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point. Diagrams, tables, artwork, and photographs shall not be used to circumvent the text size limitations of the presentation charts.

L.22 (b)(2) Page L-106 The presentation charts shall be provided on standard 8-1/2" x 11" paper in landscape orientation, one chart per page. No chart text shall be smaller than 16 point. Charts shall be numbered sequentially. Text in Diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point. Will the Government allow Offerors to use 10-point font for footers in the orals presentation?

No chart text shall be smaller than 16 point. Charts shall be numbered sequentially.

Text in Diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point. Diagrams, tables, artwork, and photographs shall not be used to circumvent the text size limitations of the presentation charts.

Section L

L.24(a) Page L-111 The time and location of the Oral Technical Proposal Presentation will be scheduled within 15 days after receipt of the written portion of the Offeror’s proposal. Can the Government be more specific about the window for the orals date notification? How much time will Offerors have between the date of notification and presentation?

Oral proposals will be scheduled within 15 calendar days after receipt of proposals. At a minimum 7-10 days will be provided for the Offerors to make necessary travel arrangements.

L.26 ( c) Page L-118 Subfactor B - Management Approach Please confirm that the response to the requirement below is intended to be a part of the Total Compensation Plan and not part of the 35 page limit of the management volume:

"The Offeror shall identify its minimum critical positions required to meet the requirements of the SOW. Additionally, the rationale for identifying these positions as critical shall be provided, as well as a description of each position. The descriptions shall include a list of the qualifications associated with each position. The description shall also include the position title, to whom the person reports, summary of duties and responsibilities, any specific requirements/licensing, and minimum education and minimum experience required for the position."

The Offeror's identification of the minimum critical positions is NOT part of the Total Compensation Plan. The Offeror's response is subject to the 35 page limitation set for the written documentation.

L.22 (a) (5) Page L-104 and SOW Section L of the RFP requires a matrix that provides "the slide number(s) that corresponds to the SOW requirements," however the SOW requirement numbering schema (e.g., [CM-1], [CM-2], etc.) was removed from the final solicitation. Would the Government please replace the SOW numbering for ease of evaluation and ease of reference within the required matrix?

Unfortunately we can not accommodate your request.

L.22 (b) (1) Page L-121 Please confirm that Subfactor C - Small Business Utilization (SBU) - Commitment to SB Program is included in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and not part of the 35-page limit for the Management Approach?

The Commitment to the SB Program is NOT to be included in the SB Subcontracting Plan. The Commitment to the Small Business Program is subject to the 35 page limit for the Written Documentation

L.26 (c) Page L-114 Subfactor A - Technical Approach/Capability. Per RFP Section L instructions for Scenario 1: describe “techniques”, “common practices”, “demonstrate an understanding of … key technical requirements.”. Per RFP Enclosure 1 for Scenario 1 Section 2.1.3: “… identify the required analysis tasks.”. Per the SOW on IV&V planning, planning requires “… identifying methods from the IV&V Catalog of Methods …”. We believe release of the Catalog of Methods to bidders is required to prepare IV&V plans that are compliant with the SOW and RFP instructions when responding to Scenario 1. Will the government please provide a description of each method in the catalog to bidders?

A full description of each method is now be posted to the procurement library.

L.26 (c) Page L-119 Subfactor C - Small Business Utilization Within the solicitation it requires the submission of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan by large business offerors within Attachment H. Further referenced within the Mission Suitability Volume under Subfactor C – Small Business Utilization, it details instructions to submit within section (a) the Small Business Subcontracting Plan compliant with FAR 19.704 and within section (b) reference the offeror’s Commitment to the Small Business Program.

Is it NASA’s intent that large business offerors shall submit 2 Small Business Subcontracting Plans? One within Attachment H, and another one as an appendix to the Mission Suitability Volume, excluded from the 35-page limitation?

No. Only one Small Busines Subcontracting Plan is required. Once assessed, and a contract is awarded, the proposed Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into the contract as Attachment H. Paragraph (b) The Commitment to Small Business Program under Subfactor C is subject to the 35 page limitation for the Written Documentation.

L.28 (a) Page L-135 Past Performance Volume. RFP states "Prime Offerors shall furnish the information requested below for ALL of your most recent contracts (completed and ongoing) for similar efforts with a minimum average annual cost/fee incurred of $8M that your company had within the last 5 years of the RFP release date" (emphasis added)

Would the Government consider limiting the number of references required to UP TO five in order to allow Offeror's to comply with the 25-page limit?

No. All relevant efforts should be included. The page limitation changed from 25 pages to 30 pages. See RFP amendment 1

L. 26(c) Page L-116 Subfactor B Management Approach, Paragraph 3. Please confirm that the last sentence of this paragraph: "The offeror shall discuss its plan for addressing any problems that arise as a result of the proposed organization structure or poor and/or poor performance of subcontracted portions of the contract" is intended for significant subcontractors only.

This should address ALL subcontractors.

L.27 (a) Page L-123 Paragraph 6, Cost Proposal instructions indicate “Duty charges, if any shall be included in the cost, regardless of whether or not duty free certificates are obtained”. Question: Please clarify if the reference to duty charges is in reference to task order pricing after IDIQ award, or for inclusion in the Phase-In cost proposal? The Offeror shall include duty charges, if any during performance of the contract.

L.27 (b)(1) Pages L-125 – L-126, Cost Volume Proposal Format, Direct and Indirect Rate Substantiation. Enclosure 4 provides historical labor rates for the incumbent work force that is assumed to be the median salary for the staff in that labor category.

On Page L-125, it advises the offer must propose these rate if they plan on utilizing the incumbent workforce. On page L-126, it advises that Attachment B are “not to exceed” bid rates. Furthermore, as instructed in Exhibits 2A and 2C, the offer is to provide a blending of contractor labor categories and rates to form a composite rate equal to the Attachment B rates which are then “not to exceed” rates for each labor category as well. The blended rate is derived based on median salary for each labor category and the offeror’s understanding the appropriate mix of labor. However, since all of these rates are based on median salaries and an assumption as to the appropriate blending, this means that the winning company would not be able to hire those incumbents whose salary rate is higher than the median salary rate provided. This has the potential to impact approximately half the incumbent staff. Will the Government consider removing the words "Not to Exceed" and replacing it with "Median" on page L-126 and Attachment B?

The "not to exceed" language cannot be removed. Attachment B is used for the pricing of task orders; hence, task orders must be estimated/proposed using the not to exceed rates. The Government will pay all of the allowable, allocable and reasonable costs for performance of the contract.

L.27 (b)(1) Pages L-125 – L-126, Cost Volume Proposal Format, Direct and Indirect Rate Substantiation. Can the Government clarify if non-significant subs are required to submit the data required in Section (B1)?

The “Direct and Indirect Rate Substantiation” language pertains to offerors/subcontractors that are required to submit such rates in accordance with the detailed instructions in Section (b). In this case, the detailed instructions require only fully burdened rates to be supplied by the non-significant subcontractors; as such, direct and indirect rate substantiation is not required by non-significant subcontractors.

L.27 (b)(12), Page L-134 Is the FFP Phase-In task order, which is to be priced and submitted with the Offeror’s proposal, be awardable concurrently with the IDIQ award? If awarded a contract, a separate firm-fixed-price contract will be awarded.

L.27, GSFC 52.215-233 Page L-122 Cost Volume Instructions (Mar 2016) Please confirm in the cost volume instructions, all references to “offeror” refer to the prime offeror only.

Not necessarily. Offerors shall follow the instructions throughout the cost volume instructions.

L.27, GSFC 52.215-233 Page L-122 Cost Volume Instructions (Mar 2016) Please confirm that non-significant subcontractors are not required to submit a cost volume. If this assumption is incorrect, in addition to Exhibit 2C and 2D (if applicable), what specific additional information and exhibits (e.g., direct and indirect rate substantiation, Exhibits 4-11B, etc.) is the government seeking non-significant subcontractors to complete and submit?

The following change will be made in L.27(a): Non-Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibit 2C and, if applicable, Exhibits 2D, 10A, and 10B, which should be included with the Prime Offeror’s Cost Volume proposal. However, Non- Significant Subcontractors may submit Exhibits 2C, 2D, 10A, and 10B, if deemed proprietary cost data, under separate cover directly to the Government no later than the date and time specified in the instructions for receipt of proposals for this RFP.

L.22, Page L-106 Presentation Charts Would the government consider using 14 Point Font for Chart Text and 10 Point Font for the Diagrams, schedules, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs?

No.

L.27 (b)(3) Page L-129 Government Pricing Model (GPM) “The Grand Total Government Pricing Model value is a summation of the Subtotal GPM-Specified Non- Management Direct Labor Costs (Onsite and Offsite); the Subtotal Offeror Labor-oriented Management and Administrative Costs; and Subtotal Non-Labor Recurring ODCs and Cost Estimating Relationship Costs in Exhibit 1A.” Can offerors remove the “GPM-Specified Non-Management MFG SITE Direct Labor Costs” row from Exhibit 1B which is not included in the RFP instructions on Page L-129 and is not a section included in Exhibit 1A?

Yes.

L.27 (a) Page L-123 In regards to Exhibit 3 Government Pricing Model - Will the government consider revising the RFP instructions and Exhibit Titles for the following Exhibits? RFP page L-123 (a) Instructions states that proposed Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 4 through 12.

Exhibit 3 Government Pricing Model: According to the RFP page L-123, this is an exhibit to be filled out by the Prime Offeror only. However, the title in Exhibit 3 (Row

3) is consistent with the titles on 2A, 2B, and 4 through 12 providing the option for [ ] Prime Offeror OR [ ] Significant Subcontractor. Will the government replace the title with “PRIME OFFEROR” consistent with Exhibits 1A and 1B which are to be filled out by the prime offeror only?

Exhibit 3 is to be completed by Prime Offeror's only. The option for significant subcontractor can be ignored.

L.27 Page L-123 (a) in regards to Exhibit 4 Source of Personnel Chart - Will the government consider revising the RFP instructions and Exhibit Titles for the following Exhibits? RFP page L-123 (a) Instructions states that proposed Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 4 through 12.

Exhibit 4 Source of Personnel Chart: Will the government remove Exhibit 4 for significant subcontractors in the RFP page L-123 (as well as revise Exhibit title with “PRIME OFFEROR”)? Page L-131 of the RFP (8) Contract Source of Personnel states this exhibit shall be provided by the offeror. Using the Labor Category Code SU=Subcontractor, the prime offeror’s version of this exhibit will be inclusive of any and all subcontractors.

A separate submission of Exhibit 4 is to be submitted by each significant subcontractor.

L.27 Page L-123 (a) in regards to Exhibit 8 Phase-In Plan Price - Will the government consider revising the RFP instructions and Exhibit Titles for the following Exhibits?

RFP page L-123 (a) Instructions states that proposed Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 4 through 12.

Exhibit 8 Phase-In Plan: Will the government remove Exhibit 8 for significant subcontractors in the RFP page L-123 (as well as revise Exhibit title with “PRIME OFFEROR”)? Page L-134 of the RFP (12) Phase-In Plan states this exhibit shall be provided by the offeror. In a firm-fixed-price environment, all subcontractors are proposed under the Prime Offeror’s proposed rates.

Exhibit 8 is to be completed by Prime Offeror's only. The option for significant subcontractor can be ignored.

L.27 Page L-123 (a) in regards to Exhibit 12 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals - Will the government consider revising the RFP instructions and Exhibit Titles for the following Exhibits? RFP page L-123 (a) Instructions states that proposed Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 4 through 12.

Exhibit 12 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals: Will the government remove Exhibit 12 for significant subcontractors in the RFP page L-123 (as well as revise Exhibit title with “PRIME OFFEROR”)? Page L-134 of the RFP (16) Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals states this exhibit shall be provided by the offeror.

Exhibit 12 is to be completed by Prime Offeror's only. The option for significant subcontractor can be ignored.

L.27 Page L-124 (a) in regards to Exhibit 10A and 10B Fringe Benefits (Total Compensation Plan) - Will the government consider revising the RFP instructions and Exhibit Titles for the following Exhibits? RFP page L-124 (a) Instructions states that proposed Non-Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibits 2C and, if applicable, Exhibit 2D.

Exhibit 10A and 10B Fringe Benefits (Total Compensation Plan): According to the RFP page L-124, Non-Significant Subcontractors are not to submit Exhibits 10A and 10B. However, the RFP on pages L-118 and L-134 state, “the Offeror and all service subcontractors (as defined in paragraph (d) of NFS provision 1852.231-71) shall provide a detailed list of their fringe benefits and company estimated cost per hour, along with an itemization of the benefits that require employee contributions and the amount of that contribution as a percentage of the total cost of the benefit” as part of Exhibits 10A and 10B. Is this applicable to Significant Subcontractors only?

The following change will be made in L.27(a): Non-Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibit 2C and, if applicable, Exhibits 2D, 10A, and 10B, which should be included with the Prime Offeror’s Cost Volume proposal. However, Non- Significant Subcontractors may submit Exhibits 2C, 2D, 10A, and 10B, if deemed proprietary cost data, under separate cover directly to the Government no later than the date and time specified in the instructions for receipt of proposals for this RFP.

L.27 (a) Page L-124 "In order to establish the reasonableness and realism of the proposed costs, and the extent to which costs reflect performance addressed in the Mission Suitability Volume proposal, each Offeror, including proposed subcontractors, shall submit the other than certified cost or pricing data described in Section (b) below." Is the data described in Section (b) below, specifically (1) Direct and Indirect Substantiation, applicable to subcontractors defined as Significant Subcontractors? If indirect cost rates, including cost breakdowns, are required of non-significant subcontractors, the RFP does not specify the format or require those Exhibits applicable to such requirements (i.e. Exhibits 5 Summary of Indirect Rates and Exhibit 6 Overhead Expense Pool).

The “Direct and Indirect Rate Substantiation” language pertains to offerors/subcontractors that are required to submit such rates in accordance with the detailed instructions in Section (b). In this case, the detailed instructions require only fully burdened rates to be supplied by the non-significant subcontractors; as such, direct and indirect rate substantiation is not required by non-significant subcontractors.

L.27 (b)(8), Page L-131 Is the Government asking offerors to convert the GPM provided total hours for each Labor Category (provided in Enclosure 3) to the number of personnel proposed?

Yes.

L.28(a) Page 137 The last bullet asks for de-scope information. We respectfully request the data required for contracts that were “de-scoped” be modified to a disclosure of information that will provide NASA the data that is relevant to the services or provides NASA information that will assist with their evaluation. We believe that to ask a large business to disclose any contracts that were de-scoped could be overly cumbersome based on the large volume of contracts that would have to be analyzed and assessed for this information and in many cases it is very likely that LB contractors don’t track this type of information. Therefore we request that the requirement to provide de-scope information be either removed or limited to NASA contracts.

The past peformace instructions only requires the Offerors to include contracts that were "descoped" by the customer because of performance or cost problems.

SOW DEL-4 requirement was removed in drafts subsequent to the October 2015 draft SOW and it is not included in the final solicitation. Please confirm that the Contract Management Plan is now longer a part of the SOW.

"[DEL-4] The Contractor shall deliver a Contract Management Plan (CMP) annually that describes the overall strategy for meeting the requirements of the contract for government review and approval. A draft CMP will be delivered twenty (20) business days prior to the beginning of the Government Fiscal Year (GFY) to allow for Official Review. A final CMP is due ten (10) business days after the beginning of the GFY.

Copies of the CMP shall be delivered to the CO, COR, ACOR, IV&V Office Lead and SMA Office Lead. The report shall be in a format approved by the CO and COR and shall be delivered electronically."

The Contract Management Plan is no longer a part of the SOW.

Attachment A

Page 1 1. PRIME DIRECT LABOR RATE MATRIX (For All Task Orders):The **Labor Categories that Offerors are to provide direct labor rates for, in accordance with the Position Qualifications in Section 6, according to the instructions will be used as not-to-exceed rates for pricing all task orders contemplated or issued. Should the **Labor Categories in this section of Attachment B be the same as the GPM Specified Non-Management Direct Labor Categories identified in Enclosure 3?

The Offeror's and Significant Subcontractor's individual direct labor categories/rates and indirect rates used in Exhibit 2A must match those rates proposed in Attachment B.

The labor categories must be the same as the labor categories used to make the non-management direct labor category conversion.

Please clarify why there are 6 contract years of performance for rate pricing in Attachment B and 5 contract years of direct labor hours in Enclosure 3?

In accordance with FAR 52.216-22 Indefinite Quantitity, Paragraph (d) task orders may extend beyond the 5 year period of performance, therefore the labor rates for CY6 are necessary.

Attachment B

Will the Government provide ACES workstations for IV&V personnel in Houston for use at the contractor site? ACES workstations may be provided dependant upon the network connectivity of the

Offeror's proposed location.

Attachment E

Security Guidance states: The contractor must have sufficient cleared employees assigned duties under this contract to be able to complete all classified work assignments up to and including Top Secret/Sensitive Compartment Information.

(TS/SCI). How many staff do you anticipate require TS/SCI clearance – at contract start and at the peak level during the period of performance?

It is anticipated that the work will require an estimated 10 TS/SCI cleared personnel at contract award. During performance of the contract approximately 22 TS/SCI cleared personnel may be needed for peak times.

Are the TS/SCI cleared staff to be concentrated at one of the IV&V-associated NASA sites, or may they be distributed at any of the sites?

It is anticipated that classified work will be performed at the IV&V Facility in Fairmont, WV; however, there may be in instances where a business need justifies preforming the work at another NASA center or off-site location. For SSO projects there will be situations where classified work must be performed off-site at customer locations.

Attachment M

1.1, 1.3 Pages 3-7 Scenario 1 describes the ARM mission and ARM systems. It is unclear whether the scope of the scenario includes manned systems or manned mission phases. The following suggests that manned systems or manned mission phases are included: (1) This Scenario indicates in Section 1.1 that it is “… unique in that it covers two distinct NASA mission Directorates: Science and Human Exploration.”.

(2) Section 1.3 indicates that ARM mission Objectives include “Use assets already under development (SLS and Orion) as a first step to using these new capabilities even deeper in space.”. (3) The Mission Overview in Section 1.3 indicates the DRO is reachable by SLS/Orion with two crew members in a 22 to 25 day mission. (4) The figure on Page 5 shows a docking of the Orion vehicle with the ARV. (5) Asteroid Capture Operations Experience on the top of Page 5 includes “Rendezvous and docking”. The following suggests the manned mission phases are excluded from the ARM IV&V Scope: (1) Only the ARV is described. (2) The mission timeline at the top of Page 4 ends with ARV transfer to DRO. (3) no description of ARV to Orion docking systems or operation is provided, (4) The figure at the top of page 4 does not show a launch of Orion and docking with the ARV.

1) Does this scope of Scenario 1 include any aspect of the ARCM mission and ARCM systems (e.g., SLS, Orion, EVA equipment, ground control, etc.)? If yes, will the government provide ARCM information as was provided for the ARV to include a mission description, system descriptions, a mission timeline, and a development timeline?

2) Does the ARM IV&V scope end when the ARV is parked in DRO or does it continue through the duration of the manned mission phase, e.g., ARV systems and software that may be operating when the Orion vehicle arrives?

ARM scenario has been revised to address questions received. See amendment 1

1.1, 1.3 Page 3-7 In addition to the ARV, the ARM mission will include use of a launch vehicle. In Scenario 1, It is unclear whether the launch phase and launch vehicle are in the scope of the Scenario. The ARM mission timeline at the top of Page 4 includes the launch vehicle and launch phase. Page 7 of Scenario 1 describes numerous launch systems. However, no details of the launch systems are provided nor a selection of a particular launch system for the scenario.

1) Is the launch vehicle within the scope of Scenario 1? If yes, which vehicle, and will the government provide information for the launch vehicle as was provided for the ARV to include system descriptions and a development timeline?

2) Is the launch mission phase in the scope of Scenario 1? If not, when does the scope of scenario 1 begin? i.e., post separation ARV power-up?

ARM scenario has been revised to address questions received. See amendment 1

Enclosure 1

1.2, 1.3 Page 3 According to Scenario 1 Section 1.2, the SRR has just occurred and the mission development timeline is 5 years. The Mission overview In Section 1.3 indicates a launch capability in 2017 or 2018. What is the amount of time between the SRR in this scenario and the completion of the mission development and launch?

ARM scenario has been revised to address questions received. See amendment 1

2.3 Page 5 Currently only FMEA is limited to critical elements. Should Hazard Analysis also be limited to Critical Elements?

The scenario has been changed to reflect that the Hazard Analysis be limited to critical elements. See amendment 1

Enclosure 2

GPM Since the historical labor rates in Enclosure 4 reflect the incumbent prime contractors labor rates only, please confirm that only the prime offeror is required to use the historical labor rates for incumbent staff.

Any company prime or subcontractor who is intending on hiring incumbent staff for performance of the contract is required to utilize the historical labor rates.

2 Labor category position titles differ between Enclosures 3 and 4. Please clarify with a mapping.

GPM Labor Category - Historical Data Project Lead - Project Lead II Systems Engineer 1 - Systems Engineer Jr Systems Engineer 2 - Systems Engineer Mid Systems Engineer 3 - Systems Engineer Sr Systems Engineer SME - Systems Engineer SME Computer Analyst 1 - Information Assurance Engineer Jr Computer Analyst 2 - Information Assurance Engineer Mid Computer Analyst 3 - Information Assurance Engineer Sr Computer Analyst SME - Information Assurance Engineer SME Software Developer 1 - Software Engineer Jr Software Developer 2 - Software Engineer Mid Software Developer 3 - Software Engineer Sr Software Developer SME - Software Engineer SME

Is there any equivalency exchange of experience for education to qualify for a labor category? The Government will not be providing any equivalency exchange of experience for education to qualify for a labor category.

Historical Data has been provided in Enclosure 4 for an Information Assurance Eng Sr and Information Assurance Eng SME but no hours or LCAT description have been provided in Enclosure 3. Did the Government intend to leave out the LCATS for Information Assurance Eng Sr and Information Assurance Eng SME? Does the Government prefer Offerors to use alternative categories for use in SOW 3.9? Will the Government provide these LCAT description and hours for them so we may provide rates?

See Enclosure 3, Question 2

Enclosure 3

Page 2 Historical Labor Data The Systems Engineer Mid - Offsite has a weighted unburdened Hourly Average Rate higher than the more senior labor category, Systems Engineer Sr - Offsite. If this is an error, can the government provide a corrected Historical Labor Data table?

The Systems Engineer Mid is higher due to the geographical location of the employees assigned to the labor category.

Enclosure 4