Logistics_Contract_Final_RFP_NNJ16589301R_-_Official_Responses_to_Questions_-_Group_1.pdf

Final RFP NNJ16589301R

Official Responses to Questions Logistics Contract

Final Request for Proposal NNJ16589301R

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

SECTION C:

1. Referencing PWS 5.1.3 Tag Out, how will the contractor acquire bicycles if organizations have not addressed the �tag out� within 30 days? Should these acquisitions be considered ODC, or will the contractor be expected to order new bicycles through a government procurement system?

Response: “Acquire” in this section means removing derelict bikes from around the Center and refurbishing into the Logistics free range bicycle program. This is not a procurement action.

2. Reference PWS 5.1.3, will the government provide an estimate or historical data of the number of bicycles tagged out that organizations have not addressed within 30 days?

Response: Reference J-10 Logistics Operations Contract Historical Workload Data.

3. Reference PWS 5.2 Bicycle Inventory, Database, and Cycling Mailbox, is the Bicycle

Database a government owned system? What system is used to operate the Bicycle Database? What system is used to operate the Cycling mailbox?

Response: The Bicycle Database is an Excel database. Cycling mailbox is operated using Outlook.

4. There are some SOW requirements that are labor driven but provide no work load history. For instance, 3.4: Connect/Disconnect, 3.6 upholstery cleaning. Can the Government please provide the estimated number of actions for SOW 3.4,3.6.

Response: The Government does not track all workload actions to this level;

therefore, we cannot provide any further details.

5. Section C, 11.1 Export Control Services; Paragraph 11.1 references JAII 2190 – Export Services Team (EST) Operations Manual.

QUESTION: No link was provided for this document and we have been unable to locate

it. Can NASA JSC please provide JAII 2190.

Response: The JAII 2190 is posted in the Technical Library.

SECTION H:

6. Reference: CFR 121.404. This CFR states “For the purposes of contracts (including Multiple Award Contracts) with durations of more than five years (including options), a contracting officer must request that a business concern recertify its small business size status no more than 120 days prior to the end of the fifth year of the contract, and no more than 120 days prior to exercising any option thereafter.” The RFP Section H.7 states, “Within 90 days after the beginning of CYs 4, 5, and 6, the Contractor shall recertify as a small business and provide electronic documentation to the Contracting Officer.”

Question: We respectfully request that the RFP be amended as follows, to reflect the requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations: “Within 90 days after the beginning of CYs 5, 6, and 7, the Contractor shall recertify as a small business and provide electronic documentation to the Contracting Officer.”

Response: Your input has been noted.

7. Reference: RFP Clause H.7 Section 3. This section states “If the Contractor fails to re-certify as a small business under NACIS code 493110 – General Warehousing and Storage, size standard $27.5 million, they will be ineligible to earn any additional terms, and re-competition procedures will commence.” We would like to direct NASA to CFR 121.404(3) - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/121.404. It is understood that this contract is a total small business set-aside, however, this regulation does not prohibit a contractor who recertifies as “other than small” from receiving additional option years nor does it require NASA to recompete the contract early. This RFP requirement is in excess of the CFR and could create additional challenges for industry and NASA.

Question: We respectfully recommend the Government reassess the benefits of this requirement in comparison to the significant effort associated with completing a source selection of this magnitude.

SECTION J:

8. The final DRD AR-1-1 changed the content requirement iii to require �A Basis of Estimate narrative at the individual WBS level with sufficient supporting information and detail to allow for a technical analysis.� A Basis of Estimate is normally included in the Cost/Price Volume which is normally not page counted. A detailed Basis of estimate at the lowest WBS level will consume a fair amount of the available 75 pages.

Please clarify if there is a distinction between this requirement and a traditional Basis of Estimate.

Response: Please provide sufficient supporting information for the Government to analyze your proposal.

9. Attachment J-10; Export Compliance, Exported Item: 13,500; Foreign National

Badge/Access, Request: 6,300.

QUESTION: IT Security, Request: 2,400; Please provide an estimate of the number of expedited requests for each classification of export requests.

Response: The Government does not track Export Control actions to this level;

10. AR-1-1 requires "A Basis of Estimate narrative at the individual WBS level with sufficient supporting information and detail to allow for a technical analysis." Please confirm that the BOE narratives are required only for the Core areas of the contract and the provided Task Orders. Offerors do not have enough information to provide BOEs for the areas of SOW 11.0 that are not included in the Task Orders.

Response: Confirmed.

SECTION L:

11. Duplicate Questions:

a. XXX, Inc. (a subsidiary of XXX, LLC) will be submitting a proposal for the JSC Logistics contract. In the RFP shown in FedBizOpps, we are not able to access the Excel version of Attachment L-8, Logistics EPM. As this file is crucial to being able to start our pricing volume, would the government please provide this file as soon as possible?

b. Section L, Paragraph L.17.6(d), Attachment L-8 Logistics EPM was only provided as a pdf. Will the government please provide an Excel version of the

EPM.

c. Will the Government provide an excel version of Attachment L-8, Logistics

EPM?

d. Attachment L-8 Logistics EPM.pdf. Can the government provide the Excel source file that was used to produce this PDF attachment? There are numerous minor changes which are easier to incorporate if the original Excel file is made available.

Response: Please see Amendment 000001 to the RFP.

12. Section L, Paragraph L.17.5(d), Attachment L-6 PP Questionnaire was only provided as a pdf. Will the government please provide a Word version of the PP Questionnaire.

Response: No, a Word version will not be provided as the PDF can be manipulated for the appropriate fill-ins.

13. Duplicate Questions:

a. Section L, Paragraph L.17.6(c), Attachment L-5 PP Matrix was only provided as a pdf. Will the government please provide a Word or Excel version of the PP Matrix.

b. Attachment L-5 PP Matrix is formatted as a PDF. Can the Government provide an excel version and confirm that the attachment is excluded from the 75 page limit across volumes I and II?

Response: Please see Amendment 000001 to the RFP. Attachment L-5 PP Matrix is excluded from the 75 page limit.

14. Section L, Paragraph L.17.6(b)5, Attachment L-7 SLCs was only provided as a pdf. Will the government please provide a Word or Excel version of the SLCs.

Response: Please see Amendment 000001 to the RFP.

15. Reference L.17.6.b.5. This reference states, “Offerors are allowed to include additional SLCs for work that does not easily map into the SLCs provided in the cost proposal.”

Question: May we also add additional rows to Table L-5: SLC/WYE Mapping?

Response: Yes.

16. Reference: Attachment L-8 Excel Pricing Model

Question: We request that NASA provide historical information or a GRE for the annual overtime hours incurred by each SLC in support of these requirements.

17. Is Attachment L-6 PP Questionnaire due back to the Government by the POCs with the same date and time as the proposal overall?

Response: Yes. The Proposal and all associated deliverables are due no later than the date and time specified in L.17.2, Proposal Arrangement, Page Limitations, Copies, and Due Dates.

18. Duplicate Questions:

a. Attachment L-8 and Tables L-7 & L-10 list different positions than what appear on page 49 of the CBA. Will the Government provide a cross-reference between the Attachment L-8 Positions and the CBA positions? Will the Government confirm if there are currently positions under the contract that are exempt from the CBA?

b. The following job titles appear on tables L-7 and L-10 but do not appear mapped on the SLC Status spreadsheet provided in the technical library. Can you please confirm the SLC status of the following? Logistics Analyst III, Storekeeper II and III, Traffic/Rate Analyst II and III, Export Manager, Sr.

Aircraft Loadmaster, Export Control/Access Analyst I, II, and III, Export Control Principle Analyst, and Senior Export Control Principle Analyst.

Response: Please see ‘Collective Bargaining Agreement and Related Documents’ link for the ‘SLC_CBA Mapping’ document located in the Technical Library. Please see ‘SLC Status’ document located in the Technical Library.

19. Reference L.12 NFS 1852.245-81 List of Available Government Property (JAN 2011).

This clause states that … (emphasis added)

“(a) The Government will make the following Government property available for use in performance of the contract resulting from this solicitation, on a no-charge-for-use basis in accordance with FAR 52.245–1, Government Property, included in this solicitation. The Offeror shall notify the Government, as part of its proposal, of its intention to use or not use the property.

(b) The Government will make the following Government property available for use in performance of the contract resulting from this solicitation, on a no-charge-for-use basis in accordance with FAR 52.245–2, Government Property Installation Operation Services, as included in this solicitation. The Offeror shall notify the Government of its intention to use or not use the property.”

Question. Where in our proposal should we include these notifications?

Response: Section L.12 is “Reserved” in the Final RFP.

20. Reference L.17.8. The instruction for Section J is “Offerors shall submit the required initial documents as identified.”

Question: Can NASA please clarify what is meant by “the required initial documents as identified?”

Response: Each DRD provides specific instructions for submission requirements.

21. Reference: RFP Section L.17.6(a) – “For the purposes of this solicitation, a “major subcontractor” is any team member with an estimated annual contract value that equals or exceeds $3,000,000 over the period of performance for this contract…”.

Question: The RFP only requires the sample task orders to be priced for a 12-month period of performance. As a result, the task orders overall price is a small portion of the overall 8 year proposal price. Based upon this and the definition of a Major Subcontract, Subcontractors who are primarily supporting the sample task orders may not meet the threshold for a Major Subcontractor. We request that NASA modify the definition of a Major Subcontractor so that subcontractors who compose a significant portion of the sample task orders may be considered a Major Subcontractor. We believe this change is in the best interest of NASA. Subcontractors who provide significant support to these task orders will have major impacts on the overall success of the program.

22. Duplicate Questions:

a. Section L states, "Sections of the proposal which are page limited shall be prepared and submitted using non-compressed Arial font with single-spaced 12 point text with a one-inch margin on all sides in accordance with Microsoft Word default settings. Character spacing shall be �Normal� per Microsoft Word settings. Text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point text size."

Is it correct to assume that the font in tables and charts may be other than arial?

b. Is it possible to allow smaller pitch for images (.jpg, .gif, etc.) and tables? The 12 pitch for tables and images with pages with one inch margins actually use more space. Additionally, most images that can be inserted into the proposal have text with pitch smaller than 12.

Response: All fonts shall be non-compressed Arial 12 point text size.

23. The following two job positions appear on the SLC status spreadsheet provided in the technical library but not on tables L-7 or L-10. Can you please confirm if the positions should be included in the Government�s estimated staffing in tables L-7 and L-10? IT Professional, Logistics Analyst I.

Response: It was not the Government’s intent to include these positions in the estimated staffing tables, L-7 and L-10.

24. What level of the WBS should we go down to for reporting/BOE purposes?

Response: The EPM worksheets are built for completion to the Government’s expected level of detail.

25. Attachment L-2, Export Control Services - Sample Task Order; Page 6; Reference Text:

The Annual Workload Estimate for Export Compliance, Exported Items is 13,500;

however, to properly size and cost the export control requirements, we need a further breakout.

For the 13,500 items, would the Government please break out and post the number or percentage in each of the following four Export Categories:

Simple and Routine, Moderately-Complex, Complex, and Highly-Complex?

26. Attachment L-2, Export Control Services - Sample Task Order; Page 6; Reference Text:

The Annual Workload Estimate for Foreign National Badging/Access Requests is provided, however to properly size and cost the effort, we need further breakout.

For the 6300 Requests, would the Government please provide the number of requests that require HQ review in addition to Center Review?

27. The Volume V fill-ins are all in pdf. Does the Government want us to convert the PDFs to MS Word before populating the fill-ins? If so, how does the Government want the signatures handled in the SF 33?

Response: Yes, please convert the PDFs to Microsoft Word. The Government prefers digital signatures; however, script signatures are acceptable.

28. OSHA logs that are to be inserted into Volume II, are PDF only type documents. Would that pdf format be acceptable?

Response: Yes, PDF format is acceptable.

29. Are export controls tasks currently being done by contractor staff or the incumbent?

Response: Export Control is currently performed by General Dynamics Information Technology.

30. Reference: L.17.5 (a,b,c), Page L-16

Discussion: It appears sub-parts a, b, and c pertain to the Past Performance contracts limited to the Prime and Major Subcontractor. However, beginning with the third sentence following the Consent Letter attachment icon it seems to reference the information to be provided in Attachment L-5 which includes prime, major subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner are responsible for and the specific resources.

Question: Please clarify that within sub-part c there are two separate directives, the first part regarding the restricted past performance of the Prime and Major Subcontractors and a second set of directives for the Attachment L-5 that is inclusive of all team members (prime, major subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner).

Response: No, there are not two separate directives. Attachment L-5, Past Performance Matrix.xlsx shall be completed for prime contractor, major subcontractors, teaming partners, joint ventures, parent company, affiliates, or any division within your company.

31. Reference: Section L.17.5 (c) Section M.2.2

Discussion: Section L:

“Submit the above information on contracts that you consider relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. The submission shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance. This submission shall clearly detail what portions of the Statement of Work, the prime, major subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner are responsible for and the specific resources (workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) to be employed and relied upon to perform the proposed effort.

Section M: “Contracts that exhibit all specific trades/type of work required under the solicitation statement of work will be considered more relevant than contracts limited to specific trades only.”

Section M: “The past performance of a major subcontractor or each joint venture partner will be compared to the work proposed to be performed by that subcontractor/joint venture partner, and weighted accordingly in assigning the overall past performance adjectival rating to the Offeror.”

Questions: Please clarify if each past performance contract will be evaluated based on its coverage of the JSC logistics SOW requirements, or will the government take into consideration whether or not the prime, major subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner will be performing specific SOW tasks relevant to their past performance reference?

Response: Past Performance will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.2.2.

32. Duplicate Questions:

a. Reference: L.17.5 (f), Pg. L-18, “Offerors shall provide the following performance data with explanatory remarks on relevant contracts performed in the last three years. Offerors shall identify the applicable NAICS Code for each relevant contract and shall include points of contact for each contract. If a joint venture or prime-subcontractor relationship is proposed, the same information shall be provided for each company proposed. Explanatory statements shall be included as appropriate. For all relevant work performed during the past three years from the date of the Logistics Contract original solicitation, Offerors shall provide the following: Environmental Data, Safety and Health Data.”

Discussion: The first part of the directive asks for information regarding the relevant contracts and the later part of the directive references “for each company proposed….”

Question: Since the first part of the directive asks for information regarding the relevant contracts and the later part of the directive specifies “for each company proposed”, will the Government please clarify if the Environmental and Safety and Health Data is to be provided for each relevant contract or at the company level or both?

b. Reference: L.17.5 (f), Pg. L-18, Environmental Data

Discussion: Contract Level or Company Level

Question: Please clarify if the environmental data to be provided is at the Contract Level or Company Level.

c. Reference: L.17.5 (f), Pg. L-18, Safety and Health Data

Discussion: Contract Level or Company Level

Question: Please clarify that the Safety and Health Data to be provided is at the Company level.

Response: Yes, if a joint venture or prime-subcontractor relationship is proposed, the same information shall be provided for each company.

33. Reference: Attachment L-3 Driver Services; Attachment L-7 SLCs

Discussion: The IDIQ driver description listed in Attachment L-3 does not match the Driver I or Driver II qualifications in Attachment L-7.

Question: Would the government consider adding a Driver Courier (WD 31043) labor category and the associated description?

Response: The Government has released the Final RFP and does not intend to amend the SLCs. The Offeror may include any additional SLCs relevant to their proposal.

34. Are Offerors able to modify L-8 submission, to include positions identified within the approved CBA? Currently, GRE SLC�s are included in L-8.

Response: In accordance with Attachment L-7, SLCs, the Offeror may propose additional Labor Categories that cannot be logically mapped into any of the Standard Labor Categories. If so, provide a job description and qualifying education and/or experience for all additional labor categories.

35. How many loadmaster service missions/work requests are received/processed each year?

Response: Please refer to the Sample Task Order for an average number of missions per year.

36. How many cargo transport missions are accompanied by the loadmaster to the delivery location per year? When the loadmaster accompanies the cargo to its destination, how many other contractor crew members are required to accompany him?

Response: All transport missions are accompanied by a minimum of one loadmaster.

37. Section L, Paragraph L.3(b); Text in diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs shall be no smaller than 12 point text font. Diagrams, charts, tables, artwork and photographs shall not be used to circumvent the text size limitations of the proposal.

QUESTION: Given that the text for graphics, charts, etc. is the same as the text font, would the Government please consider allowing the contractor to use a smaller font for diagrams, charts, tables, artwork, and photographs. For example, a 10 point text font for charts, tables and graphics (Arial) as opposed to 12 point.

Response: All fonts shall be non-compressed Arial 12 point text size.

38. Table L-3, L.17.4C and Note 3(b); The Total Compensation Plan (included in Vol. I) is limited to 15 pages for the Prime…

QUESTION: Given the amount of data required, will the government consider expanding the page limitation of the TCP to 20 pages?

Response: The Government has finalized the TCP limit at 15 pages.

39. Table L-3 Note 2; Note 2 states that the PP Attachments and PP Information

Spreadsheet (in Excel Format) are excluded from the 75 page limitation.

QUESTION: Is the PP Information Spreadsheet referenced in Note 2 the same as Attachment L-5 PP Matrix?

Response: No, they are different documents.

40. Attachment L-2, Export Control Services Sample Task Order, Paragraph 6.0 Training

Development, and Section C 1.22.1f; Export Control Services Sample TO Training Development ; Section C, Paragraph 1.22.1f states that the Export Manager or designee shall participate in the NASA Headquarters Annual NASA Export Control Program Review, the ICAM Face-2-Face Meeting, and export control summits. Attachment L-2, Export Control Services Sample TO Paragraph 6.0 states that the contractor shall assess Center training needs and develop appropriate curriculum and certification programs as necessary…requirements may include… NASA Headquarters Annual NASA Export Control Program Review, the ICAM Face-2-Face Meeting, and export control summits.

QUESTION: Please clarify if this is a requirement to: A) develop and provide training at these events, or B) attend these events to receive training, or C) both.

Response: The contractor shall both attend and develop training in support of Export Control.

41. Attachment L-2, Export Control Services – Sample Task Order; AES filings.

QUESTION: Will the contractor be responsible for making AES filings or will a NASA employee?

Response: There is no reference to AES filings in Export Control Services Task Order.

42. Section L, Table L-7-Attachment J10; USG Estimate of WYE’s.

QUESTION: Please confirm that the USG WYE estimate in Section L, Table L-7 is based on the historical workload data provided in Attachment J10

Response: Section L, Table L-7 is based on workload requirements for this procurement. Attachment J-10 is a three-year average historical workload.

43. Section L.3(h); Electronic copies of the proposal shall be prepared and submitted in Microsoft Office applications (Word and Excel). Further, the Microsoft Excel spreadsheets shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format, not in a scanned Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF file. Microsoft Word documents shall be submitted in Microsoft Word format, not in an Adobe PDF file. At a minimum, each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as a separate electronic file. The Offeror shall not embed sound or video files into the proposal files. Minimize the use of scanned images and keep embedded graphics as simple as possible. The government is requested that contractors submit only Word or Excel documents. By submitting our proposals in MS Word with section/page breaks, headers/footers, we run the risk of formatting issues when the government either opens or prints the proposal. Also, Volume V Model Contract will require the contractor to embed scanned images of the entire solicitation document, which will create a very large file.

QUESTION: Will the government please reconsider allowing the contractors to submit their proposals in PDF format, with the exception of the EPM, or allow the contractors to submit PDF documents in addition to the Word documents.

Response: Please follow guidance provided in Section L regarding format requirements of Proposal submissions. The Government does not intend to change these requirements.

44. Questions Lacking Specificity:

a. Are there shipping and receiving warehouses located at all three buildings?

b. Are there issue points located at all three buildings?

c. Are there inventory requirements for all three buildings?

d. How many work stations are located in each of the three buildings for the AOR?

Response: The question is lacking sufficient information in order to provide an answer.

SECTION M:

45. Reference: M.2.2 Past Performance (Volume II), Pg. M-5, Para 2, Relevance, “If the contract is deemed recent, the Government will then determine the degree of relevance - i.e., level of pertinence - of the contract based on size, content, and complexity. The term “content” considers the contract’s scope of services in comparison to the requirements of this solicitation.”

Discussion: Definition of Complexity

Question: The Government defined “Content”; will the Government please define what is considered when evaluating “complexity”?

Response: The term “complexity” considers items such as contract type, experience with special terms and conditions, experience performing a contract where the employees were represented by a union, experience managing multiple facilities in different locations, and other unique contract requirements in comparison to the performance requirements outlined in the solicitation.

TECHNICAL LIBRARY:

46. Reference Technical Library. On the Average Composite Direct Labor Rate spreadsheet posted in the technical library, the following SLCs are missing:

Traffic/Rate Analyst II Traffic/Rate Analyst III Warehouse Specialist III Export Control Principle Analyst Export Control/Access Analyst I Export Control/Access Analyst II Export Control/Access Analyst III Senior Export Control Principle Analyst Export Manager

Response: The above SLC’s are new to this procurement.

47. Technical Library. We are noting several apparent discrepancies.

On the SLC Status document posted in the technical library, the labor category "IT Professional" is listed. This SLC is not included in RFP attachment L-6 with the list of SLCs.

On the SLC-CBA mapping document posted in the technical library, the SLC “Helper” is listed. This SLC is not included in RFP attachment L-6 with the list of SLCs.

Response: SLC’s in Final RFP are referenced in Attachment L-7. Please utilize Attachment L-7 in the Final RFP.

48. Desk Instruction JB-39 mentions the "Driver Services Office." However, this term is not reflected in the SOW or in RTO 3. Is the contractor required to manage the Driver Services Office, or simply to provide Drivers? Whose responsibility is it to create the Driver Services Schedule?

Response: The successful Offeror is responsible for providing drivers as well as creating and managing the Driver Services schedule. The successful Offeror will update JB-39 as required upon award.

49. FAR 22.1008-2 requires the CO to separately list in the solicitation the service employee classifications 1.) subject to the CBA and 2.) Not subject to the CBA. The current technical library documents comingle the two which make it difficult for a non-incumbent to accurately price direct labor and fringe costs. Please provide more transparency into this information and segregate union and non-union WYEs.

Response: Please see ‘SLC Status’ document located in the Technical Library.