ESES_III_RFP_Q&A_Set_1.pdf

Electrical Systems Engineering Services (ESES III)

RFP NNG17591526R

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q1: Section L .18(b) states PPQs are due no later than the closing date of the solicitation. The

PPQ (Exhibit 12) and the Cover Letter indicate that the PPQs are due two weeks prior (12/7/17).

Please clarify when PPQs are due.

A1: Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted no later than the solicitation due date.

However, offerors are encouraged to submit it two weeks prior to solicitation due date.

Q2: Section L.18(b) lists the CO as the recipient for PPQs. The PPQ (Exhibit 12) lists Alpana

Jenne, Code 210.M. Please clarify to whom the PPQs should be sent

A2: PPQs shall be sent to the Contracting Officer (CO), Claudia Canales.

Q3: Would the government provide a POC and appropriate email address on the classified network for electronic submission of PPQs containing classified information? If so, please provide instructions for how to submit to the classified POC.

A3: Classified PPQs shall be hand delivered and directly coordinated with Ronald Johnson, ronald.l.johnson-1@nasa.gov.

NOTE: Offerors that have hand delivered classified PPQs to Ronald Johnson shall notify the Contracting Officer via email.

Q4: Ref L.14. The instructions indicate a JV Offeror "facility clearance must be granted in the name of the joint venture and the joint venture CAGE code shall be provided” "by the due date for receipt of proposals.” However, the DRFP indicated that the facility clearance would be required prior to award, not proposal submission. Further, GAO has ruled that small-business JV agreements need not be finalized until time of the award in concurrence with the SBA’s position. Changing this requirement 43 days ahead of the proposal due date is an undue burden on any newly formed JV, which—based on the DRFP language and GAO ruling—anticipated finalizing agreements prior to contract award. Would the Government revise the requirement to “time of award” instead of proposal due date?

A4: The facility clearance documentation must be submitted by the due date for receipt of proposals.

Q5: Section L.12 (h) indicates the OCI Plan is part of the Offer Volume, and L.16 does not reference an OCI Plan in the Mission Suitability Volume instructions. However, the Proposal

Components table in Section L.13 shows the OCI Plan in Volume II. Would the Government clarify in which volume the OCI Plan should be submitted?

mailto:ronald.l.johnson-1@nasa.gov

A5: As stated in L.12(g), the OCI Plan is not required with the initial proposal. However, the

Government may request this information at any time during the proposal evaluation. The components table in L.13 will be revised in Amendment 3.

Q6: In Enclosure BB, the assumptions for RTO #2 state, “The MIS will be operated at a temperature range of -10°C to 55°C at a required stability of +/- 2°C...” However, the period over which the stability requirement applies (e.g., an orbit) is not specified. Would the

Government clarify the time period over which the thermal stability requirement applies?

A6: The time period is over the life of the mission. Amendment 3 will be issued to state such.

Q7: The attachment only contains Exhibit 1A (Government Pricing Model).

Will the government provide Exhibits 1B (Prime Offeror Loadings on GPM-Specified Other

Direct Costs) and 1C (Summary of Government Pricing Model (GPM))?

A7: Attachments 1B and 1C were inadvertently omitted and will be added under Amendment 3.

Q8: The SOW requires “Manufacturing and Assembly Services,” as well as “storage and inventory management for EEE Parts at the contractor facility equivalent to 2000 square feet.”

Would the Government add labor categories needed to implement manufacturing, assembly, and parts management elements of the SOW to the Manufacturing Site table in Enclosure CC?

A8: The Manufacturing Engineer III labor category hours under the Manufacturing GPM have been moved to the Offsite GPM. See question and answer #11 for revised Offsite total hours.

Revised GPM document will be provided under Amendment 3.

Q9: In Enclosure CC, there are two labor categories where the data in the columns titled “Min.

Exp. (Yrs.)” and “Min. Edu. Level” does not match the data written in the column titled

“Position Description”. Will the government update Enclosure CC so that the data for all three columns corresponds?

For example:

Configuration Management Specialist IV - AS degree or just 2 years of college education?

Electrical/Electronic Designer III - Technical Trade School or AS/AA?

A9: Both labor categories will now reflect AA/AS degree on the revised Enclosure CC to be provided under Amendment 3.

Q10: For many of the labor categories in Enclosure DD there are no Position Descriptions corresponding in Enclosure CC (GPM Specified Non-Management Direct Labor Categories, Direct Labor Hours, and Position Descriptions) of ESES III or in the RFP for ESES II. Will the

Government provide Position Descriptions for all labor categories in Enclosure DD which are not in Enclosure CC already?

A10: All incumbent labor categories in Enclosure DD have corresponding PDs in Enclosure CC, which were provided in Amendment 2. Note: Labor categories shown in parentheses on

Enclosure DD map to titles in Enclosure CC.

Q11: Can you please confirm the correct total for onsite and offsite hours? Enclosure CC shows

444,617 onsite and 222,378 offsite per year, but the columns calculated add up to 444,615 onsite and 222,379 offsite per year.

A11: Onsite Hour total is 444,617 and Offsite Hour total is 223,752 per the revised Enclosure

CC to be provided under Amendment 3. The Offsite Hour total of 223,752 is inclusive of the

Manufacturing Engineer Labor category hours being added to offsite hours as explained in question and answer #8.

Q12: Cost exhibits submitted are to contain all formulas. The cost exhibits are provided in .pdf format with instructions to convert to Microsoft Office Excel. However, the converted files do not include formulas, which would have to be manually recreated. Would the Government consider providing all cost exhibits in Microsoft Office Excel format?

A12: It is the offeror’s responsibility to provide formulas for the Excel spreadsheets.

Q13: The contract title page for the QAP states 'To be Proposed,' however Section J lists the

QAP as 'To Be Submitted.' Please clarify.

A13: The QAP is “To Be Submitted”.

Q14: The cover letter indicates that the Government Furnished Property (GFP) is for the offsite use at the contractor’s facility. Is this correct? Or is the GFP for combined onsite and offsite use? The GFP value in the RFP Attachment D is $210,228,500.37. Please also clarify if this figure includes work in progress as well as equipment to be stored at contractor's facility. If so, please describe the location of the equipment.

A14: The GFP is a combination of onsite and offsite property which does not include work in progress and is housed both at GSFC and at GSFC project designated facilities. Amendment 3 will provide more details on the location of the property.

Q15: RTO2 - The Task Description states "The contractor is responsible for performing tasks related to the acceptance of the MIS, electrical integration to the ACME spacecraft, and any changes to the electrical systems and communications requirements." Please clarify whether or not the integration of the MIS to the spacecraft is to be performed during the Period of

Performance of this task?

A15: The actual integration of the MIS to the spacecraft will happen after the period of performance. Amendment 3 will address this point.

Q16: RTO2 - What is the scheduled delivery date of the MIS?

A16: After March 1, 2019. Amendment 3 will address this point.

Q17: RTO2 - At what state of development is MIS and what reviews has it completed?

A17: MIS is built to flight specifications and is ready for Pre-Ship Review. Amendment 3 will address this point.

Q18: RTO2 - Is the Integration and Test Outline deliverable an outline only, not a plan?

A18: For this RTO it is only an outline. Amendment 3 will address this point.

Q19: Exhibit 3 asks for direct labor costs then applies indirect costs to them. The GPM does not currently have an Exhibit to calculate direct labor costs. Should the Offeror submit a separate support tab to calculate this?

A19: Offerors do not need to submit a separate support tab to validate this summary exhibit.

However, offerors will need to do some calculations to reformat the GPM Exhibit 1 data into the

Exhibit 3 format.

Q20: Can the security clearance requirement be revised to allow for dormant clearances to be reactivated?

A20: L.14(c ) (2)(8) is being revised to read as follows in Amendment 3:

(8) Contract Security Classification

In accordance with Attachment K, Contract Security Classification Specification (DD 254), Offerors shall possess a Secret (or higher) level facility security clearance, or demonstrate a recently dormant Secret (or higher) level facility clearance, by the due date for receipt of proposals and this clearance shall be maintained throughout the life of the contract. Offerors shall provide their CAGE code for verification of current security clearance status. If an Offeror does not have an active Secret (or higher) level facility security clearance in place by the due date for receipt of proposals, they shall demonstrate that their prior Secret (or higher) level facility clearance was active within one year prior to the proposal due date and has since been in a dormant status (for less than one year), based on the administrative termination process from the Defense Security Service. For proposals submitted as joint ventures, the facility clearance must be granted in the name of the joint venture and the joint venture CAGE code shall be provided.

Q21: Can the Government provide additional information regarding the 2,000 sq ft storage space (e.g. what is stored, what are the environmental control requirements, the security requirements, access requirements, etc.)?

A21: This storage space is for the inventory of procured EEE Parts which will require

Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) protected area.

Q22: The far left column on the Position Description chart does not contain a number 24 or 26.

Do these numbers indicate how many labor category families there are? If so, are there labor categories missing for numbers 24 and 26 and will the Government provide the labor category data?

A22: Enclosure CC (under the Positions Descriptions) has been renumbered to correct the missing #24 and #26. Amendment 3 will address this point.