ROC_II_RFP_-_Questions_89_through_107.pdf

Question # RFP Section Requirement/Statement/Topic Question

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

89 Att A. SOW 3.5 N/A Will the government release the assigned facilities for AFOM areas of responsibilities?

Per the Statement of Work, the AFOM duties are described in GPR-8830.1B.

The physical locations will be addressed per task order.

90 SOW, Solicitation - General

CubeSat support for Operations What are the CubeSat support requirements for the ROC II contract?

Provide CubeSat support requirements for ROC II

CubeSat support will be specified per task order.

Typically, CubeSat support is performed during two shifts (16 hour minimum) with after-hour and weekend support as requested by the customer.

91 SOW 5.0

Will the government please identify the demarcation points identifying the responsibility of the contractors for all systems which have multiple contractor interface points?

The Statement of Work requirements form clear demarcation points for all systems with multiple contractor interface points.

The Offeror should review the Statement of Work to understand the contractor's obligations under the ROC II Contract.

92 L.16(b)

The Government noted that the Operations Tasking System, (OTS) description and information could be found on the RMMO website. We have visited this RMMO website, https://sites.wff.nasa.gov/code840/, and were unable to locate the OTS information. Can you please provide the correct link?

The Government will include the Operations Tasking System Development powerpoint presentation in the bidder's library

93 RFP Reference: RTO 1, page 1

The RTO calls for each Sounding Rocket (SR) to be launched sequentially separated by 30 seconds. Review of the 2015 Alaska Project Plan and the 2015 RRS Annual Report, discussed a four SR mission with each SR launched on 30 minute intervals. Can the Government clarify if the intent is to decrease the launch interval to 30 seconds in RTO 1?

Clarify launch interval of 30 seconds or 30 minutes in RTO 1.

30 seconds is correct as written in RTO 1

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

94 RFP Reference:

Alaska 2015 Project Plan (Bidder’s Library) Page 10 Topic: ROC Contractor Project Support Plan (PSP)

The “Alaska 2015 Project Plan” references a Project Support Plan that is to be developed and submitted by the ROC Contractor RSM. Can the Government please supply the 2015 Alaska PSP?

Provide the 2015 Alaska Campaign PSP in the Bidder’s Library.

The Government does not intend to require Project Support Plans under the ROC II Contract

95 L.11 PROPOSAL

PREPARATION –

GENERAL

INSTRUCTIONS

L.14 (a) General Instructions

L.14 (c) Sub Factor A Technical Approach - SOW -para 1, 3,4 and 5

L.14 ( c) Sub Factor A Technical Approach Para 7 - RTOs

Demonstrate understanding of the overall and specific requirements of the proposed contract.

• Convey the company's capabilities for transforming understanding into accomplishment.

• Present in detail, the plans and methods for so doing

The Mission Suitability Volume should be specific, detailed, and provide all the information requested by these instructions. The Mission Suitability Volume must demonstrate that the offeror understands the requirements and has the ability to meet the requirements.

SOW – “shall statements”

3.2 Mission Preparation Products and reviews -

4.0 Integrated Range Services Management - 43

5.0 Range Services - 33

15.0 Ground Operations - 37

Identify the technical approach, labor categories, projected hours, Government interface, the flow of activities from start to completion (including time line), and any other information required to determine the adequacy and reasonableness of the offeror’s plan. The plan must be specific, detailed, and complete to demonstrate a clear and full understanding of the objectives;

potential technical problems, risks, and critical issues; and possible problem mitigation/ resolution. Any assumptions made in preparing a response to these Representative Tasks orders must be clearly stated.

Will the Government please consider an increase in Mission Suitability to 100 pages

It is considered that the current limitation of 75 pages for the Mission Suitability volume precludes offerors the opportunity to fully demonstrate their understanding of the overall and specific requirements, how such understanding is converted into detailed and specific plans and methods to meet the requirements.

It is recognized that the majority of the Sub Factor B responses are exempted from the page count limitation but within Sub Factor A there are 132 "shall" statements in the SOW sections called out and RTO requirements are both complex and broad based.

Providing the Government with sufficient information to allow effective evaluation of our assumptions and justifications, identification and characterization of the multiple risks inherent in the execution of the unique WWF range operations and the completeness, reasonableness, effectiveness, and efficiency of our approach to the Technical Requirements is not achievable with the prescribed 75 pages.

The Government will retain the Mission Suitability page limit of 75 pages

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

96 Enclosure 5 RTO3 para 3

The Period of Performance of this Task is one year with this single year's support requirements defined in this RTO. It shall be assumed that the mission set below is repeated in each contract year for cost estimation purposes.

Will the Government please provide clarification of the requirement for pricing RTO3?

For the purposes of pricing RTO3 there is a conflict between pricing the "Period of Performance" for one year - July 15, 2019 through June 15, 2020 and pricing "the mission set repeated in each contract year".

The Government will amend RTO3 to remove the following sentence, "It shall be assumed that the mission set below is repeated in each contract year for cost estimation purposes."

97 Attachment C Direct Labor Rate, Indirect Labor Rates, and Fee Profit Matrices

Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 provide a Contract Year (CY) 6 column for rates and factors. Sec. F.3 of the RFP states that the ordering period of the contract is 5 years.

Please provide clarification on the number of Contract Years of Attachment C required to be proposed by the Offeror.

Revise Attachment C to remove reference to CY 6.

No change. Clause I.119 FAR

52.216-22 INDEFINITE

QUANTITY (OCT 1995)

states, "Contractor shall not be required to make deliveries under this contract after one year beyond the end of the contract's effective ordering period." Therefore, performance may occur in CY6 making CY6 rates necessary.

98 Attachment C Direct Labor Rate, Indirect Labor Rates, and Fee Profit Matrices

Attachment C directs Offerors that the rates and factors proposed are to be "not to exceed" rates. RFP Section L.15.b.2 also states that the rates and factors to be proposed in Attachment C are to be "not to exceed" rates. However, RFP Sections L.15.b.4/5/6/7/10 direct the Offeror to propose RTO rates and factors that match the Offeror's Attachment C.

Is the Government's direction that the RTOs are to be proposed in compliance with Attachment C and the Offeror's "not to exceed" rate? As the proposed RTOs are task orders under the IDIQ contract is not the Offeror permitted to bid less than Attachment C "not to exceed" rates and factors?

Remove requirement of Section L that rates and factors must match those proposed in Attachment C.

Allow Offeror's to propose RTOs at rates less than "not to exceed".

No change. The rates used to price the RTOs shall be the same as the rates in Attachment C

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

99 Attachment C Direct Labor Rate, Indirect Labor Rates, and Fee Profit Matrices

Attachment C directs Offerors that the rates and factors proposed are to be "not to exceed" rates. RFP Section L.15.b.2 also states that the rates and factors to be proposed in Attachment C are to be "not to exceed" rates. However, RFP Section L.15.b.12 requires Offeror to provide substantiation for any Overhead and G&A rate proposed. This support is to include the prior three years of actual expenses and projected expenses for the life of the contract as well as information regarding any forwards pricing rates.

How does the Offerors comply with the RFP instruction to fully support/propose rates based on actuals and to propose rates as "not to exceed"?

Remove requirement of Section L that rates and factors must match those proposed in Attachment C.

Allow Offeror's to propose RTOs at rates less than "not to exceed".

No change. The rates used to price the RTOs shall be the same as the rates in Attachment C

100 M.3 Cost Evaluation Factor Cost Evaluation Factor is to include a determination "cost realism" of proposed costs of the Representation Task Orders (RTOs). Will this analysis consider that the proposed RTOs will have been priced at "not to exceed" rates per instructions in Section L and Attachment C?

Remove requirement of Section L that rates and factors must match those proposed in Attachment C.

Allow Offeror's to propose RTOs are rates less than "not to exceed".

No change. The rates used to price the RTOs shall be the same as the rates in Attachment C

101 Enclosure 3 RTO 1 Enclosure states that Offeror's are to assume that POP starts in March of 2021.

What is the specific end date of RTO 1?

The Government will amend the RFP to reflect that RTO1 has a definitive period of performance from March 1, 2021 to March 15, 2022

102 Enclosure 5 RTO 3 Enclosure states that the Period of Performance (POP) is one year.

Additionally, the Enclosure states, "It shall be assumed that the mission set below is repeated in each contract year for cost estimation purposes."

Is the Offeror to propose the stated POP (one year) or all contract years?

The Government will amend RTO3 to remove the following sentence, "It shall be assumed that the mission set below is repeated in each contract year for cost estimation purposes."

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

103 Enclosure 5 RTO 3 Enclosure provides assumptions for travel and materials/ODC cost.

Are these costs to be included in the Cost Volume as the travel and materials/ODC?

Are these annual costs? Do they cover all travel, material, and ODC requirements?

If so, are these costs burdened or unburdened?

The Government will clarify that RTO3 travel and material/ODC costs are not recurring costs and should be straightlined over the RTO3 period of performance. The assumed travel and material/ODCs cover all travel and materials/ODCs expected and are unburdened.

104 Attachment C Direct Labor Rate, Indirect Labor Rates, and Fee Profit Matrices

Section 5 directs Offeror's to provide a schedule of "not to exceed" fully-loaded direct labor rates for subcontractors. RFP Section L.15.b.2 directs Offerors to provided fully-loaded direct labor rates for Significant Subcontractors.

Please clarify the requirements for Attachment C, Section 5.

The Prime Offeror shall include a fully-loaded direct labor rate matrices for each Significant Subcontractor in Section 5, as indicated in Section L.15.b.2.

105 B.7 Supplemental Task Ordering Procedures Supplemental Task Ordering Procedures states, "When the Government issues a request for a "task plan" to the Contractor in accordance with the Clause entitled "Task Ordering Procedure" of this contract, the Contractor shall prepare its estimate…..".Section L.15.b.1 states, "The Government does not intend to issue a separate task order for overall contract program management". Also, in L.15.b.6, the RFP states, "Program management shall be proposed by the contractor for each task order initiated under this contract".As the RFP does not allow for any program management costs outside of issued task orders, how does the Government anticipate the Contractor's to respond to the Task Ordering Procedure?

Create a separate TO to allow for program management for maintenance and sustainment of the contract as well as management of the Task Ordering Procedure.

Offerors are responsible for determining thier approaches to estimating and recovering program management costs. There are various ways to capture program management costs without a stand-alone task order (e.g., cost estimating relationships, etc...)

Issue/Rationale for Question/Proposed Solution Answer

106 Exhibits 1-16 Exhibits 8, 9, 10 & 2 Exhibits 8, 9, and 10 display costs for materials, travel, and ODC by Contract Year; however, Exhibit 2 requires input of these costs by month.

Is it the Government's intent that the Offeror provide a breakout of the Contract Year costs to monthly costs?

In Exhibits 8, 9 and 10, the travel and material/ODC costs should be presented in the year where they are incurred.

In Exhibit 2, the travel and material/ODC costs should be presented in the months where they are incurred.

107 RTO 3 Travel and Material Plug amount Is the Government estimated RTO 3 Travel plug amount $1000 and $100,000 material plug amount for each contract year?

The Government will clarify that RTO3 travel and material/ODC costs are not recurring costs and should be straightlined over the RTO3 period of performance. The assumed travel and material/ODCs cover all travel and materials/ODCs expected and are unburdened.