Final_Questions_and_Answers__2.pdf

Questions and Answers #2 for OMES II RFP

Question Answer

Question #1:

L.10 (b) Proposal Content and Page Limitations

(page 98): Would the Government consider excluding Acronyms from the page limitations?

Question #1 Answer:

The list of acronyms is part of the 100 page limitation and will not be increased.

Question #2:

L.10 (a) (5) Proposal Format and Organization

(page 98): “Each volume of the proposal shall specify the relevant evaluation criteria being addressed, if appropriate.” Would the

Government consider inclusion of an RFP

Compliance matrices for each of the applicable volumes and excluding them from page count for ease of their evaluation?

Question #2 Answer:

There was not a requirement for a SOW compliance matrix; however, it will be added to

GSFC Clause 52.215-201 (b) (1) and excluded from the page count.

Question #3:

L.10 (b) Proposal Content and Page

Limitations--

L.15(b) PRIOR CUSTOMER EVALUATIONS

(PAST PERFORMANCE

QUESTIONNAIRES) (page 100, 130):

“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.” Would the

Government consider excluding subcontractor consent letters from the overall 25 pages for

Past Performance?

Question #3 Answer:

This requirement is part of the 25 page limit and will not be excluded.

Question #4: The Government Pricing Model

(GPM) provided in Enclosure CC shows four labor categories (ELEC ENG STAFF, QA ENG

SR, SW PROGRAMMER II, SW

PROGRAMMER III) with differences in hours between CY1 and CY2. The resulting different totals are: 998,935 in CY1 and 998,693 in CY2.

There are no differences in hours between CY2, CY3, CY4, or CY5. Are the differences between CY1 and the other CYs intentional?

Question #4 Answer:

Yes; the differences in direct labor hours are intentional. However, Enclosure CC will be revised to delete “calendar year” and replace with

“contract year”. Also, the years called out “2017, 2018,….” Will be removed from the enclosure in an RFP amendment to be issued.

Question #5:L.10 (a) (5) Proposal Format and

Organization (page 98): “The Offeror shall provide written documentation that describes the contents of each CD-ROM and of each file.” The RFP does not specify the location of where to provide the written documentation of the CD-ROM contents information. We assume we can include this information in the Cover

Letter, please confirm that is an acceptable approach

Question #5 Answer:

Yes, this is an acceptable approach.

Question #6:

L.14(a). The RFP states non-significant subcontractors should complete Exhibits 2C and 2D (if applicable), however the last paragraph in this same section says “each

Offeror, including proposed subcontractors, shall submit the other than certified cost or pricing data described in Section (b) below”. Can the Government confirm that other than certified cost or pricing data is only required of the Offeror and any proposed significant subcontractors and that Non-

Significant subcontractors need only complete

Exhibit 2C and 2D, if applicable?

Question #6 Answer:

The paragraph will be re-worded as follows:

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 significant subcontractors and non-significant subcontractors, shall submit the required Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing

Data (exhibits and supporting narrative). These data requirements differ by prime offeror, significant subcontractor, and non-significant subcontractor, as indicated in Section (b) below.

Question #7:

L.14(b)(14) states that Exhibit 10A and 10B be provided by all service subcontractors (as defined in paragraph (d) of NFS provision

1852.231-71). However, exhibit 10A and 10B only have an option to check if it is for the

Prime or Significant Subcontractor. Please clarify if exhibits 10A and 10B need to be submitted by non-significant subcontractors as defined by NFS 1852.231-71.

Question #7 Answer:

Yes, non-significant subcontractors need to submit

Exhibits 10A and 10B. Exhibits 10A and 10B will be revised by deleting the word “Significant” from the checkbox area that says “[ ] Significant

Subcontractor” in an upcoming RFP amendment.

Question #8:

L.3. 52.222-56 CERTIFICATION

REGARDING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

COMPLIANCE PLAN (MAR 2015). This provision requires contractors to have a contract-level compliance plan in place if:

(1) it is possible that at least $500K of the value of the contract will be performed outside the

United States, and (2) the acquisition is not entirely for commercially available off-the-shelf items.

Please advise if a compliance plan is required with proposal submission or at the point after award that we propose to reach the FAR value threshold?

Question #8 Answer:

FAR 52.222-56 states that “(b) The apparent successful Offeror shall submit, prior to award, a certification….”. Only The apparent successful Offeror will be required to submit a certification not all offerors

Question #9:

L.14 (b)(3) GPM-Specified ODCs (page 119):

The instructions on page 119 provide two types of plug values that need to be burdened by the offeror in Exhibit 1B, Misc. - Purchases and

Travel. Would the Government provide a further breakdown of the Misc. Purchases into classifications such as Materials/Equipment, Software, and/or Other ODCs, in order to allow offerors to fully demonstrate their accounting practices as they pertain to indirect burdens on

ODC items, as an offeror’s disclosed practices may treat different types of ODCs differently depending on the type of ODC.

Question #9 Answer:

The ODCs have been broken down further in the RFP amendment as follows:

Other Direct

Costs by

Element

CY 1 CY 2 CY 3 CY 4 CY 5

Material $ 1,939,955 $ 2,004,318 $ 2,062,443 $ 2,122,254 $ 2,183,799

Misc. ODCs $ 569,131 $ 588,013 $ 605,065 $ 622,612 $ 640,668

Travel $ 423,848 $ 436,564 $ 449,224 $ 462,251 $ 475,657

Total ODCs $ 2,932,934 $ 3,028,895 $ 3,116,732 $ 3,207,117 $ 3,300,124

Question #10:

L.14(3)(b), Cost Volume Proposal Format, and

Enclosure CC, Government Pricing Model

(GPM) - Specified Non-Management Direct labor Categories. (page 117 and Enc. CC, 4).

Section L.14 (3)(b) states "Enclosure CC, GPM-

Specified Non-Management Direct Labor

Categories, Direct Labor Hours and Position

Descriptions, contains the individual GPM-

Specified Non-Management Direct Labor

Categories, their respective Direct Labor Hours by each site location (Onsite, Offsite, and

Manufacturing Site) and Contract Year…”

However, Enclosure CC itself indicates that the hours are being provided by CY but on the bottom of page 4 of Enclosure CC, CY is defined as “CY=Calendar Year”. Attachment B defines CY as “CY=Contract Year”. Would the

Government please clarify what the definition of “CY” should be? Since the Exhibits and most all other references to CY seem to be by

Contract Year, should CY in Enclosure CC also be by Contract Year?

Question #10 Answer:

Enclosure CC will be revised to reflect CY as Contract Year through an amendment to the

RFP.

Question #11:

L.15 (a) Past Performance Volume, Information from the Offeror. (page 217) L.15 (a) states

"Recent customer evaluations of past performance including Award Fee Evaluation results, Fee Determination Official letters, Annual Performance Evaluation Forms, etc.".

Is it acceptable for Significant Subcontractors to deliver their CPAR/Award Fee Briefings via sealed envelope, similar to Cost information?

CPARS/Award Fee presentations are considered extremely sensitive because they could influence future competitions. As such, Significant Subcontractors are highly reluctant to share that information with other companies.

Question #11 Answer:

Yes; significant subcontractors may submit any proprietary information in a sealed envelope as part of the proposal response. However, it must be within past performance page limitations. Award fee briefings/presentations are not requested. Final award fee evaluations are requested.

Question #12:

L.15 (b) Past Performance Volume, Prior

Customer Evaluations (Past Performance

Questionnaires). (page 128) L.15 (b) states

“The questionnaire respondent shall be a representative from the technical customer and responsible Contracting Officer with direct knowledge of your firm’s performance.”. Is

GSFC’s expectation that two questionnaires will be returned – one from the technical customer and one from the Contracting Officer; OR a single questionnaire on which the technical customer and Contracting Officer collaborate?

Question #12 Answer:

NASA would prefer to receive a combined past performance questionnaire completed together by both the CO and COR; however, if not possible, it can be submitted separately.

Question #13:

Enclosure CC, Government Pricing Model

(GPM) - Specified Non-Management Direct

Labor Categories, Direct Labor Hours, and

Position Descriptions. (Encl. CC, 9) MS or BS

+ 4 years exp. Please confirm the "MS or BS +

4 years exp" notation means the minimum experience (years) is required with an MS, or alternatively, 4 more years above the minimum experience (years) is required with a BS.

Question #13 Answer:

NASA is stating they should have a MS degree or a BS degree plus 4 years of experience.

Question #14:

Enclosure CC, Government Pricing Model

(GPM) - Specified Non-Management Direct

Labor Categories, Direct Labor Hours, and

Position Descriptions. (Enc. CC, 10). We understand there are a number of personnel without college degrees working on the OMES contract today in labor categories that require a degree. To allow these incumbent personnel to continue to work on OMES II (if selected), does the Government have a defined experience equivalency for the BS degree? If so, please provide the equivalency.

Question #14 Answer:

Our Enclosure CC defines all of the OMES II education and experience levels for each position. The current OMES contract education requirements may or may not be the same as in OMES II. Please ensure the OMES II Enclosure CC is used for your proposal response.

Question #15:

L.10(a)(1) General Proposal Instructions do not specifically identify the hard copy submission requirements for Non-Significant

Subcontractors. It would be administratively burdensome for small business subcontractors to produce the multiple copies required and for an Offeror with a large team the resulting hard copy proposal would be quite large and render it very difficult for Government review when considering the data required and number of copies resulting in thousands of pages. Request confirmation it is acceptable for Non-

Significant Subcontractors to provide a single hard copy and electronic proposal which may be provided in a separate binder for submission.

Question #15 Answer:

Non-Significant Subcontractors shall complete and submit Exhibit 2C and, if applicable, Exhibit 2D, which should be included with the Prime Offeror’s Cost Volume proposal. However, Non-Significant Subcontractors may submit Exhibits 2C and 2D, 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.

The RFP amendment has revised this instruction to include, potentially, Exhibits 10a and 10b.

These exhibits are a material part of the Cost Volume, and are to be submitted in the formats/quantities specified in the RFP. They can be included in the Prime Offeror’s cost volume or submitted separately by the non-significant subcontractor. They need not be bound, but rather can be submitted in a sealed envelope that is properly marked for identification purposes.

Question #16:

Enclosure DD, Contract Historical Data Direct

Labor Incumbent Rates. (Enc. DD). No

Average Seniority or Date and amount of last escalation" is provided for the labor categories.

The 2011 OMES solicitation Attachment I, Contract Historical Data, requests information intended to "ensure a comprehensive and fair evaluation of competitive proposals and increase the probability that realistic pricing is provided in future proposals submitted.

Minimizing the potential risk for unrealistic or unsubstantiated pricing materially reduces the risk that cost could become an inappropriate discriminator among competing offerors". This information includes "Average Seniority for this category" and "Date and amount of last rate escalation", availability of both of which would indeed increase the probability for realistic pricing and avoiding an in appropriate discriminator. Will the Government release this additional Contract Historical Data to help ensure a fair evaluation of proposals?

Question #16 Answer:

All of the incumbent direct labor rates that were able to be released have been included in

Enclosure DD.

Question #17:

Section L of the RFP, L14 (b) (3) – page 117 of 139 in the RFP - states that: “Enclosure

CC, GPM-Specified Non-Management Direct

Labor Categories, Direct Labor Hours and

Position Descriptions, contains the individual

GPM-Specified Non-Management Direct

Labor Categories, their respective Direct

Labor Hours by each site location (Onsite, Offsite, and Manufacturing Site) and Contract

Year…”

• However, Enclosure CC itself indicates that the hours are being provided by CY but on the bottom of page 4 of Enclosure CC, CY is defined as “CY=Calendar Year”.

• Attachment B defines CY as “CY=Contract

Year”

Can the Gov’t please clarify what the definition of “CY” should be? Since the

Exhibits and most all other references to CY seem to be by Contract Year, should CY in

Enclosure CC also be by Contract Year?

Question #17 Answer:

Enclosure CC will be revised to reflect CY as

Contract Year through an amendment to the

RFP.