dRFP_Official_Responses_to_Questions.pdf

Draft RFP NNJ16589301R

Official Responses to Questions Logistics Contract

Draft Request for Proposal NNJ16589301R

Note: The questions that are listed in this document were reproduced exactly as they were submitted.

1. RFP Section: 2016 Industry Day. Question: It was stated at industry day that Shuttle closeout activities are expected to be completed by the end of the current contract.

Please confirm whether this is true, and if not, how much continued Shuttle closeout activity the next contract should expect.

Response: All Shuttle closeout activities are expected to be complete by the end of the current Logistics Operations Contract.

2. RFP Section C 1.12 Quality Plan, p. C-10. This section states that the “Contractor shall develop and implement a Government-approved Quality Plan that is compliant with ASQ/ANSI/ISO 9001:2015. The initial plan shall be prepared in accordance with DRD AR-1-8, Quality Plan.” DRD AR-1-8, however, asks contractors to address each element of ANSI-ISO/ASQ Q9001-2008 and to provide a list of current procedures that support the ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2008 elements. Can the Government clarify which version of the ANSI/ISO/ASQ standard the Quality Plan should address?

Response: The DRD AR-1-8, Quality Plan requirement will be removed from the Final RFP. In addition, RFP Section C 1.12 Quality Control, will be updated for the Final RFP as well. The Contractor shall perform all work onsite in accordance with the JSC Quality Management System as defined in JPR 1280.2, Quality Manual.

3. RFP Section J-11 Government Provided Facilities, p. J-11 1. Will interested parties have another opportunity to tour the JSC facilities associated with this contract before release of the Final RFP? If yes, what is the process for scheduling the tours?

Response: All site tours were conducted in conjunction with Industry Day on June 15, 2016. No additional site tours are anticipated.

4. RFP Section L.11(h), p. L-9. Section L.11(h) states: "Existing Government property may be reviewed at the following locations, dates, and times: As requested." Will interested parties have an opportunity to review the existing Government property before release of the Final RFP? If yes, what is the process for scheduling the reviews?

Response: Section L.11 will be removed from the Final RFP. All property will be Installation Accountable Government Property (IAGP) and the successful Offeror will be custodians and users of NASA IAGP property. No reviews will be scheduled.

5. RFP Section L.17.4.C Labor Relations Plan, p. L-17. Would NASA have any objections to potential offerors meeting with representatives of Teamsters Local Union No. 988 before proposals are due?

Response: No, NASA does not have any objections to potential offerors meeting with representatives of the Teamster Local Union No. 988. Point of contact information was provided in the Pre-Proposal Conference slides, which are posted to the Logistics acquisition website at: https://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/log/.

6. Sections H.3, L.17.8, pages H-2, L-33, Section H.3 requires 3 Key Personnel, however Section L does not provide instructions regarding resumes, etc., only refers to completion of fill-ins for model contract. Are Key Personnel required? If so, where are resumes and commitment letters to be placed in proposal?

Response: Yes, Section H.3 “Key Personnel and Facilities” requires Key Personnel to be identified; however, resumes are not required.

7. Sections F.4, L.17.6(c)1, pages F-3, L-24, Contract Close Out is to be priced into the core part of the contract. Are all of the close-out activities assumed to be performed during the LOC period of performance? If yes, where? Is this the same as Phase-Out, referenced in Section F.4.

Response: The incumbent contractor is responsible for closeout activities of the incumbent contract. Phase-Out activities are synonymous with closeout activities.

8. Please confirm that H.11 Administrative Leave pertains to the leave granted to civil servants before major holidays. This leave ranges from 2-4 hours on the eve of the holiday to full day. If so, please confirm that the contractor is able to bill these hours under "Administrative Leave".

If this is the case, this is a great move to reducing disparity between civil servants and contractors allowing them both to take the same time off.

Response: Per H.11(a), Administrative Leave may be granted to Government employees for a number of reasons, including special circumstances, which could, but does not always include time around major holidays. Per H.11(b), the cost of salaries and wages related to the granting of any Administrative Leave are reimbursable under the contract in accordance with the contractor’s established accounting policy.

9. Since this procurement is PPT, we request and recommend that you separate the page limits for Volume I and II. This removes a dilemma of an offeror having to decided between pages in Technical (which is pass/fail) and pages in Past Performance (which has the highest rating). It is important that NASA provides these separate limits so that all proposal volumes are submitted with similar page allocations so that they can be equally evaluated.

Response: The Offerors are free to divide the page limit for Volume I and Volume II between Technical and Past Performance as long as the overall page limit for Volumes I and II does not exceed 75 pages.

10. The 3rd paragraph in L.17.4.A Management Approach (including Table L-4) seems to duplicate or is similar to item v. of the CMP (DRD AR-1-1) that is also required with the proposal. Recommend incorporating the Section L requirement and Table L-4 into the CMP to eliminate any duplication of responses.

Response: Reference DRD AR-1-1, Frequency, Initial: Only Sections i through iv are required with the initial proposal. Section v is not required until 60 days after contract start, per DRD AR-1-1, Frequency, Final.

11. For Section L.17.4.A: what is meant by identify their understanding of the existing instructions and their correlation to the SOW? Is this just a mapping of all 122 Desk Instructions to their corresponding SOWs or is there also an expectation of a narrative discussion? If narrative discussion is expected, it will be difficult to provide a meaningful discussion of all 122 Desk Instructions under the current page count.

Response: The Offeror shall map each Desk Instruction in Table L-4 to the applicable Statement Of Work (SOW) Part/Section (example is provided within Table) to identify their understanding of the existing desk instructions and their correlation to the SOW.

12. For Section v. of CMP: This appears to be a mapping of all 122 Desk Instructions to the SOW sections (along with an analysis of the desk instructions for new, modify, keep). Table L-4 appears to be a subset of this mapping.

Response: Table L-4 is a subset of Section v. of the CMP.

13. Since SOW 11.0 has significantly different elements, please provide the WYEs by second level SOW (i.e. 11.1 Export Control, 11.2 Loadmaster, 11.3 Hurricane/Severe Weather Plan Support).

We assume that Table L.10 and able L.11 to now reconcile because Table L.10 includes historical support in SOW 11.0 that is not included in the two sample task orders.

Please confirm.

Response: Offerors are required to develop their own resource estimates that support their unique management and technical approaches and shall provide supporting rationale in narrative form.

14. We request that Attachment J-10 Logistics Operations Contract Historical Workload

Data be released in the Technical Library as soon as you have the data pulled together prior to the RFP release. This will allow offerors to proactively work on their responses which are reliant on those parameters prior to the RFP release.

Estimates or partial releases of this information will still be beneficial.

Response: Estimated workload data is provided in the Technical Library.

15. Table L.7 provides the GRE for core labor. That section states that offerors are required to develop our own estimates based on our unique management and technical approaches and shall provide supporting rationale in narrative form. However, it is unclear where this rationale and corresponding Basis of Estimate buildups should be presented. Should it be included with Table L-5 in the management approach?

Response: Supporting rationale and corresponding Basis of Estimate buildups shall be included in Volume III – Cost/Price Proposal Factor.

16. Regarding the above mentioned solicitation, will the prime contractor be required to have a DD254 (per section J-13) or will the Government sponsor the awarded contractor the facility clearance?

J-13 DD Form 254 Contract Security Classification Specification

Response: Once the contract is awarded, NASA will complete the DD254 and forward to the awarded contractor’s security official.

17. For Section L.17.5, please clarify that you are asking for up to five past performance reference for the prime contractor and for each of the major subcontractors. For example, a team with a prime and one major subcontractor could submit up to 10 references (within the page count).

Response: Correct

18. Table L.7 Core Work WYE count includes the Project Manager. However, we do not see a specific SLC for the two other key positions (Business Manager, Safety/Environmental Rep). Do these need to be added to the list or are they included in one of the other more generic SLCS such as Manager or Supervisor?

Response: The Business Manager key personnel will be changed to a Business Specialist (I or II) and the Safety, Quality and Environmental (SQ&E) Rep to the Standard Labor Categories proposed by the Offeror. SQ&E Representative can be a dual-role responsibility and mapped to any position defined in the Standard Labor Categories (SLCs). Section H.3, Key Personnel and Facilities will be updated in the Final RFP.

19. Will this webinar be re-posted/re-played at a later date?

Response: The Virtual Pre-proposal Conference presentation is posted on both the FedBizOps (FBO) and the Logistics website. The audio conference was not recorded.

20. How will we know the incumbent labor rates?

Response: The average composite direct labor rates of the incumbent are posted in the Technical Library.

21. Will JSC provide incumbent staff labor rates?

Response: Please refer to Response #20.

22. Who is the incumbent?

Response: L&M Technologies.

23. What is the face value of the current fiscal year?

Response: This question, as written, is unclear and cannot be answered.

24. Is there any change in the current scope of work?

Response: Please refer to the SOW for the current Logistics Operations Contract (LOC), located in the Technical Library.

25. Would you be able to provide to all the interested vendors the seniority list of the current employees?

Response: The seniority profile of the incumbent employees is located in the Technical Library.

26. Since we are planning to keep the current employees if awarded, would you be able to provide us with the current employees resume?

Response: NASA is not privy to current contractor employee resumes.

27. General: Given the size and complexity of this RFP we request at minimum 30 days be provided for the proposal. It would be desirable to have more time (+45 days) to prepare the proposal, and this additional proposal preparation time would result in improved proposals.

Response: Your input has been noted.

28. Reference B.1: clause B.1 states support may be required for external customers to include: other NASA Centers, Government Agencies, and commercial organizations. -

- Will this support to external customers be procured under the IDIQ portion of the contract?

Response: Depending on the requirement, support may be covered within the core contract or Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

29. Reference Section C SOW, Sections 1.13: SOW section 1.13 indicates that contractor shall use NASA furnished computers, IT Systems, and applications. However, Section

1.13.4 appears to be conflicting as it requires the contractor to be responsible for mitigating any IT system failures. We recommend the Government clarify the contractor s responsibilities related to maintenance/management of Government furnished IT and related systems.

Response: Section 1.13.4 will be updated in the Final RFP to indicate contractor provided IT systems.

30. Reference Section C SOW, Section 1.19: SOW section 1.19 requires the contractor to furnish and maintain vehicles. Can the Government provide historical information related to this requirement to support contractor estimating?

Response: Information is located in the Technical Library, “Vehicle Usage.”

31. General: Some of the requirements included in this RFP are significant barriers for small businesses, both from a proposal preparation and performance perspective. We recommend the Government re-assess the RFP requirements to make it more accessible for small businesses.

Response: The requirements included in this RFP have been contemplated for a Small Business Set-aside, and are either required by regulation, policy, or for adequate contract performance.

32. Reference H.4 and H.5: Section H Clauses H.4 and H.5 only permit equitable adjustments when they exceed $100K (Core) or $50K (IDIQ). We believe these clauses create the opportunity for scope creep and recommend they be removed or the thresholds reduced. Additionally, given that cost control is tied to the award term s being exercised, we believe these clauses create an unintended risk for the contractor.

33. Reference H.7: Will the Government explain the reason(s) for changing the award term plan from the current contract?

Response: The award term plan was changed to reduce the administrative burden to the Government and the contractor.

34. Reference H.7 Section 1 - Adjectival Rating: The adjectival ratings required to earn award terms appear to be above ordinary requirements. The award term plan requires a very good rating in CY1 and a rating of excellent after CY1. We recommend that these requirements be reduced to be more realistic. This RFP requirement creates a risk for contractors, and will result in higher priced proposals as contractors accommodate for the increased risk. Additionally, it is unlikely the Government will want to re-compete this contract immediately without providing the contractor an ability to address performance issues.

35. Reference H.7 Section 2 Cost Control Requirement: Clause H.7 states that the contractor must meet or underrun their cost estimates in order to earn future terms.

This is a very strict requirement and we recommend this requirement be removed or adjusted to give the Government more flexibility in the evaluation. This RFP requirement creates a risk for contractors, and will result in higher priced cost proposals as contractors accommodate for the increased risk. If the Government s desire is to completely avoid overruns, the Government may want to consider making this a fixed price requirement and having the award term decision based solely on adjectival rating.

36. Reference H.7 Section 3 Recertification: Clause H.7 requires that the contractor to recertify as a small business in order to be eligible to receive future award terms (starting in CY4). Given the size standard of $27.5M, if the contractor earns $12M in revenues per year through this contract in CYs 1-3 years, then in order to remain a small business the most they could earn through the entirety of their remaining business is $15.5M per year ($12M+$15.5M=$27.5). This creates a risk for the Government of having to recompete this contract early (and possibly with a high performing contractor). It also limits the small business contractor s incentive to try and grow their business which defeats the goal of a small business set-aside. We recommend the requirement to recertify as a small business be removed from the RFP.

Response: 13 CFR 121.104, How does SBA Calculate Annual Receipts, states that the way SBA will calculate a Small Business Size Standards based on revenue is by “Annual receipts of a concern that has been in business for three or more completed fiscal years means the total receipts of the concern over its most recently completed three fiscal years divided by three.” The Government anticipates keeping this requirement as part of the Final RFP.

37. Reference Section K.12 and K.13: Section K of the RFP includes the following two provisions related to Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) -- 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification and 52.230-7 Proposal Disclosure Cost Accounting Practice Change. As this is a total small-business set-aside, CAS is not applicable to the resultant contract. We recommend these provisions be removed from the RFP to avoid confusion.

Response: Provisions 52.230-1 and 52.230-7 will be removed in the Final RFP.

38. General: Do any personnel under the current contract receive a hazard pay premium?

Response: None of the personnel under the current contract receive a hazard pay premium.

39. Reference G.3 Hazardous Materials List & I.9 52.223-3: Is there a hazardous materials list available from the current contract or can the Government provide information necessary to complete this fill-in clause?

Response: A list of hazardous materials used for contract performance is posted to

40. Reference Section I 52.211-15 & Section L 52.211-14 - DPAS Rated Order: Can the Government please identify the requirements under this solicitation which are associated with it being considered a rated order? Additionally, can the Government identify if this is a DO or DX rated order?

Response: The entirety of this contract is susceptible of being priority rated. Any part of the SOW can be co-opted by Presidential authority for national defense, emergency preparedness, or energy program use. This will be a DO rated order.

41. Reference Section I 52.222-2: This clause has been filled-in with $0. Can the Government please clarify if overtime is or is not permitted under the contract? This fill-in appears to conflict with the Section L requirements to provide overtime rates.

Response: Overtime is permitted in accordance with 52.222-2(a)(1) through (a)(4).

Section I, Clause 52.222-2 fill-in will be revised with “TBD” in the Final RFP.

42. Reference Section L: The cost and pricing requirements included in this solicitation are very complex and significantly above the norm of what is required to determine the cost realism. Given the guidance included in FAR 15.403, and the fact that adequate price competition is anticipated, we recommend that NASA consider reducing these requirements. This will help to streamline the proposal and evaluation process.

Response: The Government is not requesting certified cost or pricing data in accordance to FAR 15.403. The Government is requesting other than certified cost or pricing data in accordance to FAR 15.403-3. The Government requests these cost and pricing requirements to determine if the cost and price elements of each Offeror are fair and reasonable.

43. Reference Section L.17.4(B): RFP section L.17.4(B) is related to the requirements for technical proposal. It includes the following sentence, in executing the IDIQ TO requirements, complete a price proposal, and include in Volume I Technical Acceptability. Does NASA want a TO price proposal as a part of Volume I or is this an error? Typically, cost/price information is not permitted in the technical volume.

Response: The complete price proposal shall be in Volume III Cost/Price Proposal.

The Final RFP will be updated to reflect this clarification.

44. Reference Section L.17.6(b)(2) Direct Labor Rate Escalation: The solicitation requires the offeror to provide the company s direct labor escalation history for the past three years. The escalation our company provides to employees is different for each contract, and it is not practicable to calculate an average escalation for our entire company. This requirement is unusual and we recommend it be removed. Typically, contractors are required to justify the proposed escalation and that is adequate for the Government s determination of reasonableness and realism.

Response: The Government requests that the Offeror provide the company’s direct labor escalation history for the past three years as stated in Section L.17.6(b)(2) Direct Labor Rate Escalation of the RFP.

45. Reference Section I, Section L.17.6(b)(2), and Labor Related Q&A Document Question #2 FAR 52.222-43: In accordance with FAR 22.1006(c)(1), this clause does not apply to cost-type contracts (it applies to fixed price, T&M, and labor hour type contracts).

We recommend the RFP be updated to address this.

Response: The Final RFP will be update to remove FAR 52.222-43 and any references to this clause.

46. Section L Table L.9: Besides the plug number included in L.9, are other non-labor costs anticipated for the core work?

Response: Yes. The Final RFP will be updated to provide a GRE for the other non-labor costs.

47. Section L Tables L.10 and L.11: The GRE totals for Table L.10 and L.11 do not match.

Table L.10 states 14.0 WYEs. Table L.9 states 10.0 WYEs.

Response: Tables L-9 and L-10 will match at 14 WYE’s in the Final RFP. Sample TO 3 will be added to Table L-10.

48. Section L.17.7: Section L.17.7 only addresses 8(a) Joint Ventures. If a small business joint venture (which is not an 8(a) joint venture) is proposed, is any documentation related to the joint venture agreement required to be submitted with the proposal?

Response: The SBA requires certification of all 8(a) Joint Ventures competing for Government contracts. Non-8(a) Joint Ventures do not have the same requirements.

49. Section L EPM Pricing Instructions: It is typical for unpopulated joint ventures to have an additional indirect cost pool associated with the administrative cost of managing the joint venture. Should offerors adjust the EPM in order to represent the proposed cost structure?

Response: Yes, offerors should adjust the EPM to represent their proposed cost structure.

50. Sample Task Order 1: TO#1 states that the Contractor may be required to provide OCONUS loadmaster services. In the event OCONUS support is needed, is defense base act insurance required?

Response: Defense base act insurance is not required.

51. Sample Task Order 1 & 2: TO#1 and TO#2 have requirements for financial tracking and reporting which is different from the Core financial reporting requirements. To reduce costs, we recommend that costs be tracked uniformly across the contract.

Response: All costs, whether Core or IDIQ, are required to be reported in accordance with the requirements contained in DRD MO-1-1, NF533 Cost and Data Reporting. Additionally, task orders require individual proposals and approvals before execution.

52. Contract Historical Data: We recommend NASA provide the following historical information. This information is critical for estimating purposes and will be the basis for proposed wages and fringe benefits costs.

a. A mapping of WYEs by SLC and wage determination labor category

b. A mapping identifying which non-exempt personnel are union vs. non-union.

c. A mapping showing the seniority of the non-exempt personnel who are union and non-exempt personnel who are non-union

Response:

Question (a): The Technical Library will be updated to map each non-exempt labor category to either the Collective Bargaining Agreement or Wage Determination category.

Question (b): The Technical Library will be updated to identify which personnel are union and non-union.

Question (c): A seniority breakdown of the entire workforce is included in the incumbent rate table located in the Technical Library.

53. Contract Historical Data: We recommend NASA provide more information related historical non-labor costs. For example, under other NASA solicitations industry has been provided with historical annual unburdened non-labor costs.

Response: The Final RFP will be updated to reflect historical non-labor costs.

54. Section L.3 (h) Proposal Page Limitations

The instructions specify that Microsoft Word documents shall be submitted in Microsoft Word format, not in an Adobe PDF file. Will the Government consider allowing the use of Adobe PDF file format for submission of Volumes I, II, IV, and V? Adobe makes combining various sections of the proposal volumes originally created in Word into one cohesive document that is much easier to upload electronically.

Response: No. Please follow the guidelines provided in Section L, Table L-3, Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations, and Format.

55. Is it a correct assumption that Bldg. 419 contains office space that can used by the contractor team? If so how many offices will be provided?

Response: Yes. Office Space will be made available in Building 419 as well as other buildings identified in Section J, Attachment J-11. The Government will provide the appropriate amount of office space to support the successful Offeror proposed needs.

56. Will the Government gives us an approximate estimate of the number of vehicles required by weight/size?

Response: Current vehicle usage is provided in the Technical Library.

57. May we lease the vehicles from GSA?

Response: Yes.

58. Please clarify the DRD submission. The virtual conference indicated the following DRDs were required with the proposal:

AR-1-1 Logistics Contract Management Plan AR-1-2 Logistics Contract Phase-In Plan AR-1-7 Safety and Health Plan AR-1-9 Labor Relations Plan TE-1-1 Total Compensation Plan

The draft solicitation indicates that in addition to the DRDs listed above the following are also to be included:

AR-1-5 Government Property Management Plan

AR-1-8 Quality Plan

If these DRDs are to be included in the initial submission in which volume are they to be included?

Response: The requirement for AR-1-8 has been removed from the final RFP. AR- 1-5 is not due with the proposal.

59. Will the Government please provide a list of SLCs that are required to have a security clearance?

Response: This information is provided in the SLCs.

60. Will this contract include SCA and wage determination employees?

Response: Yes. Non-exempt and non-union employees will be identified in Attachment L-6 in the Standard Labor Categories in the Final RFP.

61. Is PPE included in the NLR?

Response: Yes, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) should be included in the Material Non-Labor Resources (NLR).

62. Reference: Table L-3: Proposal Volumes, Page Limitations, and Format

a. Question: Shall each document required in section 1 (Management Approach, Sample Task Order IDIQ, Labor Relations Plan, Phase-In Plan, Safety and Health Plan) be provided as a separate file, or shall all of the documents be combined into a single Volume 1 MS Word file?

Response: At a minimum, each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as a separate electronic file; however, Offerors may be required to submit sections of the volumes in multiple uploads due to bandwidth limitations.

63. Will the Government provide estimation on the number of inventory items by category (store stock, program stock, IAOP, critical spares, R&U, Temp Storage)?

Response: Item counts subject to a physical inventory during Phase-In period is posted to the Technical Library, “Physical Inventory Items.”

64. Reference Section C, Page C-40, Para 11.1.4 Sub Para a has requirement for action completion of 3 days. Sub Para b has requirement for action completion of 5 work days

a. Question: Sub para a: Should time requirement should be 3 work days also, as this requirement will not be met in event of three day weekend, without incursion of overtime costs?

Response: TO has been corrected to 3 work days.

65. Reference L.3: Will the submitted word and excel proposals files be accompanied by a password protected file version in the event of an inadvertent changes to the original un-protected proposal files?

Response: The Government will ensure all files are appropriately protected when received.

66. DRD AR-1-8 states in the paragraph titled Scope that the Quality Plan shall be submitted with the Contractor’s proposal. However, Section L does not include this requirement nor consider a Quality Plan in the page count limitations. Please clarify.

Response: Requirement for AR-1-8 has been removed.

67. Reference: L.17.4: L.17.4 instructs that several plans be submitted as part of Volume I.

These include the Logistic Contract Management, Total Compensation, Labor Relations, Phase-In, and Safety and Health Plans. All of these plans are to be in accordance with the related DRD. Is the Government intent that each of these plans be standalone documents formatted to meet DRD submission criteria?

Response: Yes, unless otherwise stated in the RFP.

68. Reference: L.3(f) and L.17.4: L.17.4 instructs that the Total Compensation Plan be included in the Management Approach in addition to the Management Plan. Although limited to 20 pages, its page count is not included in the 75-page limitation for Volumes I and II. L.3(f) provides page numbering instructions but does not provide for non-counted pages within counted pages. Please clarify how the Government would like the Total Compensation Plan to be numbered. The same question exists for the Organization Chart.

Response: Because the page count for the Total Compensation Plan (TCP) is separate from the 75-page limit for the Technical Acceptability volume, the Final RFP will be updated to state that the TCP will be provided at the end of the volume.

All pages in the TCP shall be numbered sequentially with Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, etc.) for contents subject to page limitations. Any title pages, table of contents, cross-reference matrices, glossaries, acronym lists, etc. shall be numbered with lower case Roman numerals (i, ii, iii, etc.) in order to provide ease of reference for the Government.

69. Reference: SOW 1.4: What functionalities are contained in SAP provided for LOC.

For example, does it include modules for Work Orders, Procurement, Inventory, Property Management, Human Resources, and Financial?

Response: The functionalities for SAP are for the execution of the Statement of Work (SOW) only.

70. Reference: LC Desk Instructions Listing: The listing of Desk Instructions omits JB3-29 through JB3-39. Is this intentional?

Response: The listing has been updated and added to the Technical Library.

71. Reference: DRD AR-1-7: The Frequency of Submission indicates that the initial submission shall include 2.7.1 however this section is not highlighted as with other required sections. Please clarify.

Response: 2.7.1 is due with the initial submission.

72. Reference: DRD AR-1-7, paragraph 2.3c references JSC 17773 for “Preparing Hazard Analyses for JSC Ground Operation. The provided https link implies there is a Revision D of JSC 17773. However, the link does not work for us. The latest revision available through internet search is JSC 1773C dated December 2001. Please advise what version of JSC 17773 is applicable and, if Revision D is the applicable document, provide a working link.

Response: Revision D is the correct version. This document will be added to the

73. Reference: SOW 5.0 Bicycle Program: What is the number of bicycles in the Bicycle Program?

Response: The number of bicycles is a fluid number; as of today, there are 265.

74. Reference: Regarding MSDS/SDS, JPR 1700K states that manufacturers must replace their current MSDS with SDS by 30 May 2015. An SDS appears to be the only acceptable data sheet for product delivered after 30 May 2015 date unless there are products to be managed by LOC which were procured prior to this date. Are MSDS still applicable for products to be provided by LOC logistics services?

Response: Yes, MSDS’s procured prior to May 30, 2015 will be provided to the Logistics Contractor.

75. Reference: CBA/ Virtual Pre-Proposal Conference: What is the actual number for the Teamsters Local Union? The Letter Agreement between the NASA Logistics Team and the Teamsters Local Union (CBA) identifies the number as 988. The Virtual Pre- Proposal Conference Power Point slide number 15 identifies the number as 968.

Request clarification.

Response: At the time the CBA was negotiated, the local union number was 968.

Since this time, this local union has merged with the Local Union 988. Any future CBAs will be negotiated with the Teamsters Local Union 988.

76. Reference: SOW 11.1: The JSC JWI 2190.1 reference link is broken and is not included in the current Technical Library provided. Please provide.

Response: JWI 2190.1 is in the Technical Library.

77. Reference: DRD AR1-7, para 3.11: There is an error with the link to the reference document in the DRD AR1-7, para. 3.11. Please provide.

Response: JSC’s Hazard Abatement Process, referenced in 3.11 has been added to

78. Reference: JPR 1700.1K: Attachment 3.8A Appendix F, is omitted from JPR 1700.1K.

Please provide.

Response: Please refer to Page F-27 of Appendix F.

79. Reference: SOW 1.14: SOW 1.14 specifies the computer applications that the LOC “shall” use to conduct the various LOC activities. There is not an umbrella application that links the various computer application components or provides an overall LOC work management system. Is the LOC allowed to propose a work management/work control system? Is the LOC allowed to expand the use of the available computer applications, SAP or Maximo, to provide this functionality?

Response: Efficiencies may be submitted with proposals.

80. Reference: RFP: Could the Government please provide an updated Government Property/Equipment list and Historic Workload data from the current Logistics contract?

Response: This information will be provided in the Final RFP in Section J.

81. L.3 Proposal Page Limitations, L.9 Proposal Marking and Delivery; L-2 to 3, L-6 to 7;

The Draft RFP is silent on 11 X 17 fold out pages in the proposal, which are normally allowed and are useful for large tables and diagrams.

Would the Government please confirm that 11 X 17 foldouts are allowable in the proposal, in both the page limited and non-page limited portions?

Response: 11 x 17-inch paper may be used for large tables, charts, graphs, plans, figures, diagrams and schematics, not for pages of text. These pages shall be counted as two pages against the page limited and non-page limited portions. Section L.3, Proposal Page Limitations, Paragraph c will be updated in the Final RFP.

82. Reference: Section: L 17.5, Page: L-18, Paragraph: b, Question: The instructions to offerors concerning past performance indicate that current and relevance will be evaluated to determine the validity of past performance. As part of relevance, will the value of contracts be considered?

Response: Relevance is considered on the components of size, content, and complexity.

As a small business primarily interacting with commercial clients, much of our business is carried out on a purchase order basis, with client activity consisting of multiple purchase orders. Can these purchase orders be combined into a single client reference in order to approach the monetary scope of the Johnson Space Center Logistics Contract?

Response: The Contractor holds the discretion on the past performance data that is submitted. All submissions will be evaluated for recency, relevance, and performance.

83. Reference: FAPIIS database, will an offeror be considered with no previous Government contract history.

Response: A submission of no past performance history will receive an adjectival rating of “Neutral”.

84. Reference: Financial Resources, what metric is applied to determine adequate financial resources? (Lines of Credit, Cash Reserves, Liquidity)

Response: The Government will consider a multitude of factors, to include items such as Lines of Credit, Cash Reserves, and Liquidity, to determine adequate financial resources.

85. Reference: If not allowed to interface with incumbent, how may an offeror negotiate with Unionized labor, slides state via the Union representative, and will we be provided current wage details from said representative?

Response: Offerors will not negotiate with the union. The successful offeror will negotiate with the union once a contract is awarded. The Technical library includes composite labor wage details on the incumbent employees, as well as the CBA.

Wage information for individual employees is proprietary and will not be provided to Offerors.

86. Reference: Safety/Health – What Medical services are to be provided?

Response: Please refer to Section G.8 Installation-Accountable Government Property, Paragraph c for a list of property and services provided.

87. Reference: Safety/Health –Will annual review template be provided for review.

Response: In regards to the Safety and Health Plan directions for annual review and revisions to the Plan can be found in DRD AR-1-7, Safety and Health Plan “Revisions to the Plan.”

88. Reference: Hazardous Materials – As an offeror, our HAZMAT personnel are trained every 2 years with IATA/IMO/DOT CFR 49 training to facilitate handling/documentation/packing/exporting Hazardous materials are the commercial training programs in line with NASA Directives?

Response: The Contract must meet the requirements identified in Section C, 1.22.1,b. There are commercially available training programs in line with NASA Directives.

89. Table L.10 and Table L.11 IDIQ (WYEs)

Please confirm the differences in these tables are correct and in addition to those identified on Table L.7, page L-24.

Response: Tables L-9 and L-10 will match at 14 WYE’s in the Final RFP. Sample TO 3 will be added to Table L-10.

90. Reference: Page C-14, C-15, C-16

Please identify training and/or certifications that are provided by the government, i.e., Loadmaster, Forklift, x-ray screening, environment, etc.

Response: Any Contractor required training that is not provided by the Government would be considered an allowable charge to the contract. . The Government does not provide training/certifications referenced in the following Sections:

Section C 1.22.1 b, c, and f Section C 1.22.4 b

91. Reference: Section M.21 C., Page M-4

Please provide a description or definition of reasonableness, feasibility and completeness as it relates to the technical understanding in the Labor Relations Plan

Response: DRD AR-1-9 describes the content required for the Labor Relations Plan.

A complete Plan addresses each item in the DRD. In that DRD, there are 5 areas that must be discussed by the Offeror in regard to Offeror’s approach to working with organized labor. Please reference section M.2.1.C for NASA evaluation procedures. The Government has the discretion to determine what is reasonable, feasible, and complete as those elements relate to the Government’s requirements.

92. Reference: Page L-16

Please provide a correlation between the SLC's listed in table L-5 and the job categories listed in the CBA.

Response: It is the Offeror’s responsibility to map the SLC’s in Table L-5 with the CBA and provide their best estimate of Human Resources required to perform the Statement of Work (SOW); however; a mapping of the Logistics Operations Contract No. NNJ08JA01C SLC’s to the current CBA labor categories is provided in the Technical Library.

93. Reference: Table L-4, Page L-15

There is a discrepancy between JB-83 and the title "Office Space Design". In the Desk Instructions, "Office Space Design" correlates with JB-82, and JB-83 correlates with "Furniture Supply Clerk". Please clarify.

Response: The correct reference for “Office Space Design” is JB-82. Table L-4 will be updated in the Final RFP.

94. Reference: Section L.17.4 B, Page L-17

The instructions on detailing our technical approach for the sample TO's in the draft RFP states "Discuss needed functions, if any, from the Core Section of the contract to demonstrate the Offeror's approach in executing the IDIQ TO requirements, " Can we interpret the words "needed functions" as Statement of Work elements?

Response: Yes. However, the Final RFP will be updated to change the word “functions” to “resources.”

95. Reference: Table L-3, Page L-14

We believe it is the intent that the PP introductory material be one page. Note 2 "Past Performance (PP) Introductory Material (included in Vol. II) - One page limit." ends in a period. We believe this is the first element included in a list of other elements that are outside of page count and this should not be a sentence ending in a period but a comma.

Please clarify if items are missing. Is the one page Past Performance (PP) Introductory Material part of the 75 page limit for Volume I and II?

Response: No, the one page PP Introductory Material is excluded from the 75 page limit. Table L-3 will be updated in the Final RFP and will clarify the requirements.

96. Reference: Section L.17.2 (b), Page L-13

The draft RFP states "Proposal sections excluded from the page limit shall be placed at the end of each volume." Does the customer desire that the table of contents placed at the end of each volume instead of the traditional location in front?

Response: The page limited volume’s table of contents shall be placed at the beginning of each volume and shall be excluded from the page count. The sections excluded from the page limitations shall be placed at the end of each volume and will have its own table of contents.

97. Reference: L.17.6.c.2, Second paragraph (page L-26)

Second paragraph states that offerors are required to develop their own resource estimates that support their unique management and technical approaches and shall provide supporting rationale in narrative form. Please confirm the BOE narrative referenced would be the narrative description provided in AR 1-1 and no additional BOE narrative is required as part of the price volume.

Response: The BOE narrative shall be provided in Volume I, Technical Acceptability DRD AR 1-1. The Final RFP will be updated to reflect this clarification.

98. Reference: L.17.6.c.1, Second paragraph (page L-24)

Second paragraph states that offerors are required to develop their own resource estimates that support their unique management and technical approaches and shall provide supporting rationale in narrative form. Please confirm the BOE narrative referenced would be the narrative description provided in AR 1-1 and no additional BOE narrative is required as part of the price volume.

Response: The BOE narrative shall be provided in Volume I, Technical Acceptability DRD AR 1-1. The Final RFP will be updated to reflect this

99. Reference: Attachment L-7 Logistics EPM, TRST-Core Instructions Tab

The TRST-Core Instructions tab states that offerors are required to fill in their assumed staffing level prior to implementation of any efficiencies that result from the application of the Offeror’s technical and management approach. The offeror shall provide rationale, detailed narrative, and validation of their resources basis in AR-1-1 Logistics Contract Management Plan.

These instructions refer to BOE narratives to be included in DRD AR-1-1 Logistics CMP that includes narratives on WYE Resources Basis, Proposed WYEs with Efficiencies, NLR Resources Basis, Proposed NLR Resources with Efficiencies, and Delta from Resources Basis.

These instructions state all CMP BOE paragraphs are to be referenced in the TRST-Core Tab; however, there is no reference to BOE narrative requirements in DRD AR-1-1 except for Section iii related to proposing efficiencies. Please confirm the BOE narrative should be included in AR 1-1 per pricing model instructions and provide updated AR-1-1 instructions to include BOE specific requirements.

Response: The BOE narrative shall be provided in Volume I, Technical Acceptability DRD AR 1-1. AR-1-1 will be updated in the Final RFP to reflect this

100. Reference: L.17.5.a (page L-18)

It states that major subcontractors (defined at annual value greater than $3M) shall provide information on up to five past contracts. However, if a team provides contract references on minor subcontractors, will they also be accepted in the past performance evaluation?

Response: No. The Offeror shall submit past performance information only on subcontracts with an estimated annual value greater than $3M as identified in Section L.15 Volume II – Past Performance Factor, Paragraph a.

101. Reference: L.17.4.A, 3rd paragraph (page L-15) and DRD AR-1-1 Logistics Contract Management Plan, Section v.:

These requirements state to identify existing desk instructions and apply them to the applicable part of the SOW. Is there an expectation of a narrative response to this request or is NASA just looking for a table mapping of the 120+ desk instructions to the SOW areas?

Response: A narrative discussion is not required with the submission of the proposal. This is a mapping to the 5 desk instructions identified in Table L-4.

102. Reference: L.17.4.A (page L-15)

The third paragraph states to identify the understanding of the existing desk instructions and their correlation to the SOW. This appears to be a duplicate requirement that is also in DRD AR-1-1 Logistics Contract Management Plan, Section v which also states to identify existing desk instructions and apply them to the applicable Part of the SOW.

Suggest combining these two requirements into one to reduce response duplications in the proposal.

Response: L.17.4.A Table L-4, is a subset of the requirements identified within DRD AR-1-1 Section v. A complete mapping of all desk instructions is due 60 days after contract start in accordance with AR-1-1 Frequency instructions.

103. Reference: L.17.2, Table L-3, Note 2 (page L-14)

It is noted in the table that the Safety and Health Plan is not limited in page count.

However, it is part of Volume I which is part of a 75 page limit. Please confirm the Safety and Health plan is not included in the 75 page limit, and if so, list it in Note 2.

Response: The Safety and Health Plan is not included in the 75 page limit. Note 2 will be updated in the Final RFP.

104. Reference: L.17.2, Table L-3, Note 1 (page L-14)

Volume I and Volume II have an overall 75 page limit. We respectfully recommend that NASA provide individual page limits for Volume I and Volume II instead of an overall 75 page limit. The reason for this request is that Volume I is graded “pass/fail” and Volume II receives the heaviest weighting of the proposal. Separate page limits will remove the guesswork of how much page allocation offerors should give to each volume and ensures NASA receives the same proposal approach from each offeror.

Response: The Offerors are free to divide the page limit for Volume I and Volume II between Technical and Past Performance as long as the overall page limit does not exceed 75 pages.

105. Reference: H.11 Administrative Leave (page H-8)

(a) When the NASA installation grants administrative leave to its Government employees (e.g., as a result of inclement weather, potentially hazardous conditions, or other special circumstances), the following personnel should also be dismissed upon notification of a center closure provided by the Contracting Officer. Does this clause’s “special circumstances” include the cases where the President or Center Director grants early leave before a Federal holiday which has ranged from 2 hours to half a day to a full day off? If so, please confirm that contract personnel are also expected to take this time off and the time can be billable and recorded as “Administrative Leave”. If this clause applies, please provide historical administrative leave that has been given at JSC in the past years to help offerors more accurately calculate productive hours.

Response: The Contractor should grant and bill employee leave in accordance with company policy.

106. Reference: Section C, C.1.0 Contract Admin

1.0 Contract Administration (page 8) states that the Contractor shall provide all resources to perform Logistics Operation services for the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Ellington Field (EF), and the Sonny Carter Training Facility (SCTF) in Houston, Texas.

Will the Contractor be using the NASA Aircraft Management Information System

(NAMIS)?

Response: No. Support of aircraft operations is not part of the SOW.

Will the Contractor be maintaining the Program Stock at EF?

Response: No. Support of aircraft operations in not part of the SOW.

What is the Contractor’s scope for EF and SCTF?

Response: The scope for EF and SCTF is for Logistics Operations as defined in the

SOW.

107. Reference: Section C, C.1.13.1

The Government will provide the Contractor with 81 computer seats. Please describe what items constitute a computer seat? E.g. CPU, laptop, mouse, number of monitors, docking station, key board, power adapters etc.

Please confirm that the 81 computer seats include the Export Control functions?

Response: A computer seat may be comprised of the following:

a) Desktop computer to include a keyboard, mouse, and one monitor

b) Laptop computer to include a keyboard, mouse, power cord, one monitor, and one docking station

The computers seats will include the Export Control functions.

108. Reference: Section C, 1.13.3

The Contractor shall use existing NASA IT systems in the performance of this contract, unless otherwise approved by the COR. Will the Government authorize the Contractor to use its own computers for Contractor business and provide access to the NASA network to operate its computers?

Response: The Government may approve the use of corporate owned computers with sufficient business justification in accordance with G.8 Installation- Accountable Government Property (c)(3)(ii).

109. Reference: Section C, 1.13.4

The Contractor shall designate primary and alternate points of contact that shall be responsible for mitigating any IT system failures that may occur in the performance of this contract. Please clarify the Contractor’s role in mitigating any IT system failures.

Response: The Contractor shall be responsible for mitigating any failures to contractor provided IT systems. Section C, 1.13.4 will be updated in the Final RFP.

110. Reference: Section C, 1.13.5

The Contractor CSM will attend and participate in IT security meetings. Please provide the estimated number of IT security meetings yearly?

Response: NASA’s IT security manager plans for a monthly meeting.

111. Reference: Section C, 1.14

1.