NNG17611358R_DRFP_Q2-58.pdf

Page | 1

Question # RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

2 L.11, (a) (5) “The format for each proposal volume shall parallel, to the greatest extent possible, the format of the evaluation factors and sub factors contained in Section L of this solicitation".

Will the Government please provide clarification that the proposal volume shall follow Section L?

Conflicting direction for proposal format - the Evaluation Factors are provided in Section M.

Yes. The instructions in Section L provide the format for proposal volume submission. As necessary, the WBS should be utilized when addressing SOW requirements within that framework.

3 L.14, (b) "The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) contained in Attachment A, Statement of Work of this solicitation shall be used to structure the Mission Suitability Volume for each of the Subfactors. This solicitation .... However, the Mission Suitability Volume and the Cost Volume must follow the provided WBS.”

Will the Government please provide clarification that the proposal volume shall follow Section L with the WBS providing secondary formatting?

Conflicting direction for proposal format

Section L provides the general proposal format, the WBS reflects the detailed organization/structure of the requirements

4 SOW 6.1 "Major remote campaigns to locations other than PFRR shall also be supported as defined in the Core Mission Model"

Will the Government please remove the reference to the Core Mission Model?

There is no Core Mission Model The Government will change the text to "as defined by the task order"

5 M.2 (a) SF A Government evaluation of SF A Will the Government please provide Evaluation criteria for Technical Challenges?

There is no Evaluation criteria for Technical Challenges Section L ( c) SF A para 2

The Government will add evaluation criteria for technical challenges and solutions, including all areas and information as specified in Provision L.14, Subfactor A.

Page | 2

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

6 L.14, (c) SF A para

"In accordance with RTO requirements and with the Task Ordering Procedure clause in Section H of this solicitation each task plan shall..."

Will the Government please provide the Task Ordering Procedure?

There is no Task Ordering Procedure in Section H

The Task Ordering Procedures are in clause B.7 and clause I.142.

The Government will change the text to "In accordance with RTO requirements and with the Task Ordering Procedure clauses in Section B and Section I of this solicitation each task plan shall..."

7 L.16, (a) PP "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 $10M that your company has had within the last 7 years of the RFP release date. "

Will the government please clarify that the recency requirement is the standard 5 years established in past and other procurements?

In past and current other procurements the recency requirement for Past Performance has been established at 5 years.

No. As stated in L.16(a), contracts held by the company within the previous 7 years of the RFP release date will be considered recent.

8 L.14(c) Subfactor A, paragraph 6

"The proposed approach shall also include a discussion of the personnel categories proposed under the contract and how the labor skill and mix will be employed to accomplish the work in an effective and efficient manner."

Will the Government please provide clarification of the requirement regarding the scope of discussion to be provided?

Should the discussion of "personnel categories proposed" be limited to proposed "new or innovative methods, techniques or technologies"or include the full contract/SOW?

As currently worded the requirement may be construed as including a discussion of all of the work to be accomplished under the SOW (contract) rather than the subject of para 6 which is "new or innovative methods, techniques or technologies"

The Government will change the text to "Regarding the new or innovative methods, techniques or technologies, the proposed approach shall also include a discussion of the personnel categories…."

Page | 3

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

9 Section L.14, (c), Subfactor A , para 1 and 4

"The technical approach shall address the following critical elements of the Statement of Work (SOW) in enough detail to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror understands the requirements and the inherent problems associated with the objectives of this procurement: SOW Section 3.2, Mission Preparation Products and Reviews;"

Will the government please clarify SOW 3.2 should be addressed in Sub Factor B?

SOW Section 3 is Program Management but the requirements are called out under Sub Factor A Technical Approach

Subfactor A explicitly requires the offeror to address SOW Section 3.2, whereas Subfactor B instructs the Offeror to provide an overall Program Management Plan.

10 Section L. 16, (a), para 2

Significant subcontractor is defined as any proposed subcontractor that is estimated to meet/exceed an average annual cost/fee of $6M

Will the government please consider lowering the average annual cost/fee to qualify as a significant sub-contractor to $2M as they have in prior solicitations?

The increase to $6M per year from the original ROCII procurement of $2M precludes the use of some subcontractors past performance that would provide the Government the ability to compare the proposed subcontractor(s) stated experience to execute the work to that proposed by the prime contractor”.

The Government considered this request, but will maintain the original $6M threshold

Page | 4

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

11 L.15.(b).(2) and Attachment C and M.3

N/A Attachment C, "Direct Labor Rates, Indirect Rates, and Fee/Profit Matrices" are to be included at "not to exceed" bid rates. Additionally, Offerors will be permitted to propose lower costs than those included in Attachment C for task orders.

Section M defines the cost evaluation factor as one of "cost realism" and "probable cost" based on the Offeror's Attachment C and probable RTO costs?

As the entire contract is defined as IDIQ with NTE, and potentially lower costs for task orders, and the Offeror's proposed RTO costs, there appears to be a conflict on how "probable cost" will be defined.

Will "probable cost" be based on the proposed RTO costs (defined as NTE) or will it be determined by a reduction of the proposed RTO costs?

Clarification The NTE reference cited pertains only to the rates incorporated into the contract, which are utilized for the purpose of estimating the cost of task orders when awarded; there is no NTE associated with or placed upon the reimbursement of costs. Therefore, the NTE rates that would be incorporated in Attachment C do not impact the probable cost assessment.

Page | 5

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

12 L.15.(a) N/A The DRFP states, "The Government does not intend to issue a separate task order for overall contract program management…Program management costs must be included in the RTO cost estimates…".

As the Program management costs are to be defined by the RTO and not through a separate task order, how does the Government intend for Offeror's to be able to respond to task order requests, oversee maintenance and sustainment as well as engineering and technology development?

Issue a separate task order for Program Management which allows task order management as well as day-to-day management of the program (maintenance, sustainment, engineering development, and technology development).

The Government will not revise the existing language. One option to capture Program Management is to derive a Cost Estimating Relationship (CER) for Program Management [see Attachment C, Section 2, Prime Cost Estimating Relationships (For all Task Orders)]

13 L.14.(c).(7) and Exhibit 15

N/A Subcontracting goals are to be, "expressed in both IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value and Planned Subcontracting Value for an IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value of $100M and a planned subcontract value of $50M".

However, in Exhibit 15 the IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value is shown as $200M and Total Planned subcontracts is shown as $TBP. Can the Government clarify the Small Business Subcontracting Plan requirements?

Provide clarification of Small Business Plan requirements.

The full text reads, "Example of Subcontracting Goals as expressed in both the IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value and Planned Subcontract Value for an IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value of $100M and planned subcontract value of $50M." As such, the $100M and $50M figures are part of an example. The planned subcontracting value will vary by Offeror. The Offeror shall follow the instructions in Provision L.14, Subfactor C and propose their own goals relative to the total IDIQ value.

Page | 6

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

14 L.15.(b).(1) and Attachment C

N/A DRFP requires that all proposed direct and indirect rates are to be substantiated by the previous three years of contractor's actuals. Additionally, Section L states that "Failure to provide this justification may result in cost realism adjustments to your proposal due to the application of rates the Government deems more reasonable and supportable (e.g., historical rates as charged under existing contracts or as supplied by cognizant audit and administrative agencies)".

Attachment C defines all proposed direct and indirect rates as not to exceed. How does the Government intend to allow the Offeror to propose NTE rates when the Offeror is required to not only propose and support rates based on actuals but more importantly, potentially be plussed-up by the Government for proposing other than supportable rates?

Remove "not to exceed" requirements and the contractor's ability to propose lower costs at task order levels from the RFP. Evaluate cost realism and probable cost based on proposed RTO costs only, with the proposed costs supported by Offeror.

The NTE reference cited pertains only to the task estimating process during contract administration; there is no NTE associated with or placed upon the reimbursement of labor costs or indirect rates.

Therefore, the probable cost of the proposal may be higher or lower than the RTO costs proposed.

Page | 7

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

15 Enclosure 3, 4 & 5, RTO's 1, 2 & 3

N/A Does NASA have a preferred template for Task Implementation Plans, or are they to be contractor proposed formatting?

A template would provide consistent responses from all offerors.

The Offeror shall follow the Task Ordering Procedure clauses in sections B and I and also the RTO requirements in formulating a response.

No, there is no preferred template. The RTO 3 description specifies the required items to include in the RTO 3 TIP.

16 Enclosure 5 N/A The RTO 3 lists re-fueling activities and arresting gear, however the statement of work does not mention any requirements associated with those activities. Will the Government please clarify the ROC II contractor support requirements associated with these activities?

Provide clarification regarding offeror responsibilities regarding these activities in the RTO.

The Offeror will not have to meet refueling and arresting gear requirements; NASA uses other contract mechanisms to provide these services.

17 Section L and multiple attachments

N/A Is the Contract Effective Date considered: The day the award is announced/the contractor is notified they are the successful bidder; the 1st day beginning the 60-day phase-in period; or, the 1st day of full contract performance after the phase-in has been completed?

If it is the last option, consider calling it: The first day of full contract performance following completion of the 60 days Phase-in period.

Clause F.3 defines the "contract effective date of April 1, 2018" which is intended to be the day after the completion of the phase-in period. The effective date may change based on the duration of this source selection

18 Attachments G, J & L

N/A Does “within” a given number of days of the contract effective date mean that number of days prior to or after the contract effective date?

Use the words "after" or "prior to".

The Government will clarify "after", "prior to", or "following"

Page | 8

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed

Solution Answer

19 Attachment P N/A Attachment P Contractor Proposed Enhancements indicates that this document is TBD however Section L .14(a) paragraph 2 indicates that this document is to be proposed (TBP) and included in the Contract Volume of the offeror’s proposal. Is this document TBD or TBP?

Change the Attachment P placeholder sheet to "TBP", if the intent is for the attachment to be included with the proposal.

The Government will change Attachment P to "TBP"

20 Section L(c) paragraph 7, Enclosure 3, 4 and 5

N/A Section L requirements list specific items to be covered when addressing each representative task order, however each RTO includes very different requirements that, in some cases, duplicates some (but not all) of these requirements. In other instances, the RTOs do not address the Section L requirements in them at all. In addition, Enclosure 4, RTO 2 provides clear page limitations to address requirements whereas RTOs 1 and 3 have no page limitations.

(1) Will the Government consider removing RTO 2's page limitations to accommodate the ability to address all requirements defined in Section L as well as the requirements outlined in the Enclosure?

(2) Also, will the Government consider removing all 3 RTO responses from the proposal page limitations?

(1) Remove page limitations in RTO 2.

(2) Exclude all RTOs from proposal page count.

1. The Government will remove the page limitations in RTO 2

2. The Government will not exclude the RTOs from the Subfactor A page count of 75 pages

Page | 9

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

21 Draft RFP Attachment A Item 3.3.1

N/A The Instrumentation List does not show a fixed radar at PFF, however the NASA WFF Range Overview shows what appears to be a fixed radar. Is there a fixed radar at PFF or are all radars required for support deployed to the site as mobile units?

Clarification Depending on mission needs, the Range can choose to leave mobile systems in PFRR as "fixed" but the systems are still mobile.

22 Draft RFP Enclosure 3, RTO1

N/A If a fixed radar is located at PFF how many additional radars are required to support the event?

Clarification The Government expects the offeror to determine the number of radars depending on mission requirements.

23 Draft RFP Enclosure 3, RTO1

N/A Are any NASA personnel permanently attached to the PFF and is there only a need to augment an existing staff for the instrumentation required?

Clarification PFRR has no permanent personnel assigned with ROC II functions.

24 Draft RFP Enclosure 3, RTO1

N/A What is the track duration for each of the sounding rockets?

Clarification Typically from launch to loss of signal but it depends on the mission requirements.

25 L.12 GSFC

52.215-203

OFFER VOLUME

(MAR 2017)

(a) STANDARD

FORM (SF) 33,

OFFEROR FILL INS

AND SECTION K

N/A The following Section J attachments are to be proposed by the contractor:

PMP, Safety and Health Plan, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, RMP, Contractor Proposed Enhancements, Key Personnel Qualifications. Are these proposed plans to be submitted only in the Mission Suitability Volume, or should they also be included in the Offer Volume?

Submit only in the Mission Suitability Volume

The Offer Volume shall address all areas explicitly required in Provision L.12. If an attachment is not explicitly addressed in Provision L.12, the offeror shall not include this attachment

Page | 10

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

26 L.15 GSFC

52.215-222 COST

VOLUME

INSTRUCTIONS.

(SEPT 2016)

(a) Instructions Page 100:

N/A The Cost Volume exhibits provided in the RFP are in Portable Document Format (PDF). Prior to completing the Cost Volume exhibits, Offerors shall convert the .PDF file to Microsoft Office Excel either using Adobe Acrobat DC or manually recreate each individual exhibit.

The gov't intends to provide the referenced exhibits in PDF and require the contractor to convert them to Excel. Can the Gov't instead provide the exhibits in Excel so conversion isn't necessary?

Gov't to provide referenced exhibits in Excel version.

Due to Center policy, the Government will only release these documents in .pdf format

27 L.15 GSFC

52.215-222 COST

VOLUME

INSTRUCTIONS.

(SEPT 2016)

(b) Cost Volume Proposal Format

(1) DIRECT AND

INDIRECT RATE

SUBSTANTIATION

N/A RFP instructions indicate that this is applicable to Prime Offeror, Significant Subcontractors, and Non- Significant Subcontractors.

Recommend that this requirement apply only to Prime Offeror, Significant Subcontractors

Section (b) of the cost instructions covers a variety of requirements, and only those specifically citing applicability to non-significant subs are to be addressed by those subs. Refer to last sentence in Section (a) of cost instructions, which states:

"These data requirements differ by Prime Offeror, Significant Subcontractors, and Non- Significant Subcontractors, as indicated in Section (b) below."

Page | 11

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

28 L.16 GSFC

52.215-230 PAST

PERFORMANCE

VOLUME. (JUN

2014) (a)

INFORMATION

FROM THE

OFFEROR

N/A The Offeror shall provide the information requested below for any significant subcontractor(s) for those similar efforts within the last 7 years of the RFP release date with a minimum average annual cost/fee incurred of at least 25% of the estimated average annual dollar value of the proposed significant subcontract.

The cited section requires that the estimated average annual dollar value of the proposed significant subcontract is known in sufficient time for the subs to identify 7 years of past performance contracts that have 25% of that value. It's not unusual for proposed subcontract values to change very late in the proposal stage, too late to effectively revise the past performance volume as necessary.

Recommend removing the 25% requirement and allow the subcontractor to submit relevant PP contracts over the last 7 years, regardless of their value.

The Government considered this request, but will maintain the original 25% requirement

29 Enc. #5 N/A RTO #2 requires the development of a Task Implementation Plan (TIP). The TIP is not referenced in the SOW. Would the government provide a copy of the TIP template in the eLibrary?

The Offeror shall follow the Task Ordering Procedure clauses in sections B and I and also the RTO requirements in formulating a response.

Page | 12

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

30 Solicitation Sections B-M, N/A Would the government consider allowing the Prime Offeror or subcontractor at least one (1) past performance citation below the minimum defined threshold, if similar scope and complexity related to the proposed effort can be demonstrated.

The Government will not provide exceptions to thresholds as defined in the RFP

31 L.14, P. 92 N/A In section L14(a) p. 92 the government references Attachment P to be included as part of the model contract in the Contract Volume. Is the Contract Volume the same as Volume I – Offer Volume?

The Government will change "Contract Volume" to "Offer Volume"

32 L.14, P. 92 N/A The government references “…Task Ordering Procedure clause in Section H…”. Should this be Task Ordering Procedure clause in Section I.142 (pg 62)?

The Task Ordering Procedures are in clause B.7 and clause I.142.

The Government will change the text to "In accordance with RTO requirements and with the Task Ordering Procedure clauses in Section B and Section I of this solicitation each task plan shall..."

33 L.15(a); P 99 N/A To establish significant subcontrators, the government states “…meet or exceed 20% of the total RTO estimated value”.

Should this be combined value of all RTO’s or by the value of each individual RTO?

The Government will change the text to "meet or exceed 20% of the total sum of all RTO estimated values."

Page | 13

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

34 L.14 (b) P. 95 N/A Will the government please clarify if they are seeking identification of named Key Personnel?

Is it the government’s intention that the Key Personnel staff the 4 most important positions?

The term Key Personnel, as used in L.14, refers to the position and not the individual.

35 L.16(b) N/A Will the government please consider excluding the significant subcontract written consent letter to discuss subcontractor past performance from page count?

The Government will exclude the significant subcontract written consent letters from the past performance page count

36 Attachment A, SOW

Sustainment Engineering vs.

Sustaining Engineering what is the difference between the two terms? The SOW uses Sustainment Engineering 5 times and Sustaining Engineering 16 times.

Standardize on one term or define each term.

The term Sustainment Engineering and Sustaining Engineering mean the same thing. For consistency, the Government will convert all terms to "Sustaining Engineering"

37 Enclosure 5, RTO 3, p. 7

RTO 3, Optical support The first paragraph of the PAX river mission (daily operations) description in the RTO mission set discusses the need for optical instrumentation. But this appears inconsistent with detailed bulleted asset lists in the second and third paragraph.

What is the government's optical instrumentation requirement for this RTO?

Make first paragraph consistent with detailed asset list.

The Government will add "Optical Tracking Systems" to the bulleted lists in RTO 3

Page | 14

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

38 SOW 3.1.2, p. 10 Monthly Status Report requirements

In order to properly estimate cost in preparation of report, can the government please clarify and or define “NASA/GSFC Problem/Issue/Risk RYG definitions and presentation process defined by the Chief of the Range”?

Provide current Monthly Status reports in bidders library or provide additional clarity/example of definitions in RFP requirements

Yes. The Government will provide the RYG chart from

MSR.

39 SOW 15.4.1 Payload Processing What is the intent of the requirement to “manage spacecraft fueling facilities and configuration” per reference?

Does it mean that contractor shall operate, maintain and sustain pursuant to your document level definitions in

SOW 5.1?

Either 1) define “manage” specifically or 2) reword this paragraph to be in accordance with definitions of technical activities in prior sections of the RFP—similar to succeeding paragraph on cleaning services and equipment.

The Government will replace the word "manage" with "operate, maintain, and sustain"

40 SOW 15.3.1 Vehicle Processing Activities and Systems

What is the scope of the reference to “Wallops Range Systems” as used in this paragraph requiring documentation?

Clarify the scope of the reference to ensure documentation efforts are properly allocated. For example, to focus on those systems involved vehicle processing, potentially use the language of Section L.14.c, subfactor A instruction, paragraph 5 “Range Ground Operations systems”.

The Government will replace "Wallops Range Systems" with "Range Ground Operations Systems".

Page | 15

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

41 SOW 12.0, p. 54 All contract maintenance functions and Sustainment Engineering Plans

By starting referenced paragraph with the phrase “As with all contract maintenance functions… ”, is it the government's intention to clarify and enhance all other SOW paragraphs having to do with depot level maintenance?

Recommend government provide broader provisions for Depot Level Maintenance, related maintenance actions, and/or Sustaining Engineering Plans in prior, more general SOW sections if that is intent.

Regardless, recommend removal of phrase, “As with all contract maintenance functions,” from detail SOW

12.0. Removal would clarify

expectations of contractor maintenance obligations specifically for mobile power and hydro-mechanic system services if they are different from other services

The Government will delete "As with all contract maintenance functions"

42 Attachment A, SOW 1.0, 4.1, 5.1

Activity definitions Why are general definitions in SOW 1.0 for operations, maintenance etc.. repeated apparently verbatim in SOW 4.1 and 5.1. If a SOW section such as

6.0 does NOT contain this set of definitions are bidders supposed to infer that the SOW 1.0 definitions do not apply?

Remove redundant definitions to improve communication of a single document level set of definitions.

As stated in Section 1.0, the definitions apply to the entire document.

Page | 16

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

43 RTO 3 Arresting gear and aircraft fueling services are required for the daily Pax River operations support.

Is the ROC II contractor required to provide the services to operate, maintain and sustain the arresting gear and aircraft refueling services for this RTO despite they are not discussed in the SOW? If not, is the intent of the requirement to have the contractor engage those services supported by other WFF contract vehicles?

Rewrite sentence to clarify responsibilities of the contractor

Yes, the intent of the requirement is to have the contractor engage those services supported by other WFF contract vehicles.

44 SOW 4 (page 23), RTO 2, Solicitation L.14

The SOW discusses the Government-provided Operations Tracking System (OTS) and potential work to implement and integrate OTS in to ROMS.

Can the Government provide a purpose, description of the functions, interfaces and outputs/reports, deliverables of the OTS since it is a contained in a critical section per Section L.14?

Clarify the purpose, functionality and interfaces for OTS.

The Government will correct OTS from "Operations Tracking System" to "Operations Tasking System." A decsription and information on OTS is on the RMMO website.

45 Bidder’s Library Landing Page and WFF Range Overview document (Page 5)

SSA and SEB chair members are not defined at the landing page of the Bidder’s Library but are defined in the referenced document.

Are the names provided in the presentation package for the SSA and SEB Chair correctly identified?

Clarify the positions referenced above in the final solicitation.

The WFF Range Operations Overview document correctly identifies the Source Selection Authority and Source Evaluation Board Chair

46 SOW Paragraph

4. Page 23

Integrated Range Services Management

The second paragraph on page 23 indicates the contractor will work with the Government to integrate OTS in ROMS. Can the government please provide clarification of the task whether OTS/ROMS integration is a task in process or starting the integration as a completely new tasking?

Government provide current state of the OTS/ROMS integration activity and documentation of progress as well as the architecture and user documentation for OTS and ROMS so accurate task development may be developed by the offerors.

The task is not in process. Per wording in the SOW, offerors may "consider" integration of the OTS/ROMS

Page | 17

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

47 SOW Paragraph 6.1, Page 34

Mobile Telemetry Operations The 7th paragraph indicates that remote campaigns to locations other than PFRR shall also be supported as defined in the Core Mission Model. Can the government please provide clarification on the need for the Core Mission Model as referenced?

Government provide Core Mission Model in the Bidder's Library or remove reference.

The Government will change the text to "as defined by the task order"

48 Section L.11(5), Proposal preparation Section L.11(5) indicates proposal volume shall parallel to the greatest extent possible the format of the evaluation factors and subfactors contained in Section L of this solicitation.

First, seems to conflict with L.14(b) and (c) which indicates per WBS contained in Attachment A, SOW. Should the proposal volume be aligned to Evaluation Factors L.11(5) or WBS L.14(b) and (c)?

Provide clarification on what to align proposal volumes to the evaluation factors or WBS.

The instructions in section L provide the format for proposal volume submission. As necessary, the WBS should be utilized when addressing SOW requirements within that framework.

49 Section L.11(5), Proposal Preparation Does Section L.11(5) have a typographical error, evaluation factors are in Section M, section L does not contain evaluation factors. Should the reference in L.11(5) be Section M as a reference, not Section L? Please clarify.

Provide clarification if reference in L.11(5) needs to change or if it should be removed all together.

No, there is no typographical error. The instructions in section L provide the format for proposal volume submission.

Page | 18

# RFP Section RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

50 Section L.15 “Cost Volume Instructions” (p 99)

Pricing Exhibit There is a discrepancy on percentage of significant subcontractor between pricing template Exhibit 2 and draft RFP, page 99. Pricing Exhibit 2 bottom note says, “*Significant Subcontractor (>=25% of a RTO estimate)”; DRFP page 99, says “meet or exceed 20% of the total RTO estimated value.”

The Government will correct Pricing Exhibit 2 to match Provision L.15

51 Cost Volume (b) Cost Exhibits, Proposal Format, Section 5, page 104 “Prime Offeror RTO Elements of Cost Summary by

WBS.

Exhibit 2A – Direct Labor Hours, Direct Labor Rates and Direct Labor Costs Detail

Is the requirement for Exhibit 2a to create multiple unique tables according to each 3rd level WBS number listing the associated labor category names? For example, in this case, the offeror would create a separate table for each WBS number: 3,1, 3.2, 3.3, etc., and list each proposed labor category name assigned to that WBS element. Or, is the requirement for Exhibit 2a to be one table listing all proposed labor category names under each 3rd level WBS number as separate line items within one table. In this scenario, the offeror would create one table listing each labor category name along with its associated 3rd level number.

The offeror suggests that the second approach using one table is more efficient, and provides the same level information as the multiple table approach.

The instruction for Exhibit 2a requires a separate worksheet ("table") for each 3rd Level WBS area applicable to the RTO effort. Consolidating multiple WBS areas into a single worksheet is not acceptable.

Page | 19

# RFP Section

RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

52 Section L Subfactor B- Management Approach (p 94) and Cost Proposal instruction for Exhibit 11- 11A.(p105)

Indirect Ceiling applicability to FP Task Orders

In paragraph 3, the government states the 60-day Fixed Price Phase in will be accomplished through the issuance of a separate Firm Fixed Price contract. And Cost proposal instructions: “Offerors shall propose the total firm-fixed-price associated with the 60-day phase-in period, which will be performed under a separate, firm-fixed-price order.” This is the only reference in the Draft RFP which applies FP requirements. Would the government consider removing the applicability of indirect ceiling requirement from the all Task Orders and make it applicable to the cost Reimbursable TOs only?

There is no "indirect ceiling requirement" as cited in the question. The Attachment C rates are "not to exceed" rates for purposes of proposing on both fixed price and cost-reimbursable tasks. The only "ceiling" associated with payments to the contractor are those established by the total fixed price of a FFP task. Cost-reimbursable tasks are not governed by any contractual rate ceilings in performance.

53 Section L.11 (b) Attachment P submission The Section L proposal submission requirements has various attachments to be provided in Volumes II and III.

There are no submission instructions for Attachment P – Contractor Proposed Enhancements. Is this attachment to be provided in Volume I?

The instructions for Attachment P are in Provision L.14(a)

Page | 20

# RFP Section

RFP

Requirement/Statement/Topic Question

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

54 Section B1 and B2 Section Band Section I implies that the government anticipates that there will be both CPFF and FFP task orders on the contract.

Can the government identify what type of work will apply to the FFP Task Orders. Can the government identify what percentage of Task Orders will be FFP?

If it is the government intent to only have the phase-in as FP;

remove FP clauses and language from RFP and procure as stated in under a separate contract.

The Government will use Firm Fixed Price task orders on clearly defined requirements such as the purchase of spare parts. The Government cannot estimate the percentage of Firm Fixed Price task orders, but the percentage will likely be small.

55 Section J Attachment J

To be Proposed (TBP) The government notes that the Quality Assurance Plan is due within 60 days of the Contract Effective Date, but also asks for the plan to be proposed. Can the government please clarify delivery requirement, at proposal submittal or during phase-in?

The Quality Assurance Plan will be due within 60 days after the Contract Effective Date.

Regarding Clause J.1, Attachment J, the "TBP" will be changed to a "TBD"

56 H.18 Key Personnel and Facilities

Facility Requirements What work, storage, or other requirements are there for a contractor-provided facility?

Please clarify key contractor facility requirements?

There are no key contractor facility requirements

57 Section M Price Evaluation

Phase-in costs. Will phase-in costs be evaluated in the total evaluated price?

Do not include phase-in costs, favors the incumbent because they will do a zero phase-in.

The Government will include phase-in costs as part of the cost evaluation

58 L.9 Item C Transportation cost for all equipment.

L.9 cites GFP and installed equipment at WFF, and says the contractor is responsible for all transportation costs for movement of equipment. Are we responsible for transportation of non-GFP government installed equipment? G.13 states govt will move all large equipment, supplies, etc.

Please provide Clarification or remove

The Offeror is responsible for moving Government Furnished Property (Attachment D) and Installation Accountable Government Property (Attachment R). Clause G.13 (c)

(11) refers to items not in Attachmend D or R (e.g. desks)