RFP_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Expendable Launch Vehicle Integrated Support 3 (ELVIS 3)

RFP NNK16570512R Questions and Answers

No. Document Section Page # Question Answer

1 Attachment J-01 PWS 6.2.2; 6.2.3 36 Please confirm that the title of 6.2.3 is Engineering Launch Team Services and that the SMA task wording currently in the 6.2.3 title should be the last bullet of section 6.2.2. Engineering Support

Services.

The RFP has been amended to correct the last bullet in Section 6.2.2, Engineering Support Services, and the title of Section 6.2.3, Engineering

Launch Team Services.

2 Attachment L-01-1 “Total WYE by Sub

LC”; “Total Hours by

Sub LC” and

“Subcontractor by

WBS” Worksheets

N/A In the "Total WYE by Sub LC" worksheet, column C, “Offeror LC” and in the "Total Hours by Sub LC" worksheet, column C, “Offeror LC”, the “Offeror LC” is populated by referencing each row in the

“Subcontractor by WBS” worksheet for the “Subcontractor Labor Category". This results in duplicate labor category rows in both the “Total WYE by Sub LC” and “Total Hours by Sub LC in the

"Offeror LC", column C.

The WYE in the “Total WYE by Sub LC” worksheet and the Hours in the “Total Hours by Sub LC” worksheet are both populated using a "sumif" formula. Where there are duplicate labor category rows in the “Offeror LC”, column C, in each worksheet, the WYE and Hours are being counted more than once.

May the offeror update the "Offeror LC", column C, in the "Total WYE by Sub LC" and "Total Hours by

Sub LC" worksheets to list each labor category as opposed to having the labor category being linked to the "Subcontractor by WBS" worksheet?

No. The RFP has been amended to correct formulas in the "Total WYE by

Sub LC" and "Total Hours by Sub LC" worksheets.

3 Attachment L-01-1 “Labor Hours by

WBS” and

“Subcontractor by

WBS” Worksheets

N/A In the "Labor Hours by WBS" worksheet, the WBS description for WBS 9.8 is

"9.8 IT Support to None Agency Consolidated End-User Services (ACES) Products".

The subcontractor hours are populated using the WBS from the "Subcontractor by WBS" worksheet. The description in the "Subcontractor by WBS worksheet is:

"9.8 IT Support to Non Agency Consolidated End-User Services (ACES) Products".

Therefore, the hours from the "Subcontractor by WBS" worksheet are not being populated into the "Labor Hours by WBS" worksheet.01

May the offeror update the WBS in the "Labor Hours by WBS" worksheet to:

"9.8 IT Support to Non Agency Consolidated End-User Services (ACES) Products".

No. The RFP has been amended to correct the title of PWS Section 9.8, IT

Support to Non Agency Consolidated End-User Services (ACES) Products, in the "Labor Hours by WBS" worksheet.

4 Attachment L-01-2 Labor-Fringe Rate

Form" Worksheet

N/A Row 7 , columns G through S list the contract periods. Since the data in this column is the offeror's fiscal year data may the offeror change the lables in row 7 to the offeror's fiscal year rather than the contract period?

Yes. The offeror may change the labels in row 7 to the offeror's fiscal year.

5 Attachment L-01-2 Rates & Factors

Summary" Worksheet

N/A Cells E18-E24 require the offeror to blend their fiscal year rates to produce GFY17 rates. May the offeror insert cells into this spreadsheet to account for an offeror FY prior to Phase In so that they can appropriately create a blend for GFY17 (10/1/16-9/30/17)?

Yes. The offeror may insert cells into the worksheet. Refer to solicitation provision L.19, paragraph (a)(1) regarding Cost Templates.

6 Attachment L-01-3 "ODC" Worksheet N/A Cell B2 states "Detail list of ODCs being proposed for Phase-In; costs should be transferred to the appropriate cell in PWS 1.0". Should the offereror transfer the costs to the worksheet "Phase In Cost

Summary" rather than to "PWS 1.0"?

Yes. The offeror should transfer the cost to the "Phase In Cost Summary" worksheet. Offerors may replace "PWS 1.0" with "Phase In Cost Summary" in cell B2 of the "ODC worksheet.

7 Attachment L-05 "ELVIS III Staffing

Plan" Worksheet

N/A The column headers in cells B6 and E6 are "Name of Subcontractor" and "Subcontractor Labor

Category" respectively. May the offeror replace the word Subcontractor with Contractor so that the columns are titled "Name of Contractor" and "Contractor Labor Category"?

No. The RFP has been amended to correct titles in cells B6 and E6.

8 Attachment L-05 "ELVIS III Staffing

Plan" Worksheet

N/A The pull down menu in column D is missing PWS "7.9 Facility Management and Support Services at

CCAFS", may the offeror add PWS "7.9 Facility Management and Support Services at CCAFS" to the data validation list in column XEW?

No. The RFP has been amended to add PWS Section 7.9, Facility

Management and Support Services at CCAFS, to column D.

Expendable Launch Vehicle Integrated Support 3 (ELVIS 3)

RFP NNK16570512R Questions and Answers

9 Sections A-M L.17; L.18.3 89; 97 Section L currently requires both the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (L.18.3(a)) and the

Commitment to the Small Business Program (L.18.3(b)) to be submitted as part of Volume I, Mission

Suitability. Given the Plan will require several pages to address all FAR 52.219-9, Alternate II requirements, and that we must also include a separate completed Table L.18.3-1 for the base contract and each option year, we request that the Plan be made part of Volume IV, Other Plans and

Data, and that only the Commitment to the Small Business Program required by L.18.3(b) be included in Volume I, Mission Suitability.

In the alternative, we request an additional five (5) pages be added to the page count for the Mission

Suitability volume to accommodate both the full Plan and the discussion of our Small Business

Program commitment.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan will not be made part of Volume IV, Other Plans and Data. The page limit for Volume I, Mission Suitability, will not be increased.

10 Sections A-M L.18.1 (b)(2)(iii) 93 With regard to the Discipline/Sub-Discipline table requested as part of the Staffing plan:

PWS 10.1 appears to list analytical disciplines (with no subdisciplines)

PWS 10.2 appears to list 2 engineering disciplines (with several subdisciplines each).

PWS 10.3 lists potential disciplines, "The Contractor shall provide and maintain expertise in the following areas: flight controls engineering, electrical engineering, avionics engineering, RF and telemetry engineering, pneumatics engineering, mechanical engineering, structures engineering, propulsion engineering and administrative support." but it appears these are covered by the disciplines, subdisciplines in PWS 10.1 and 10.2 with the exception of the administrative support discipline.

In order to ensure compliance with the intended requirement, we request the following clarifications:

1) For analytical disciplines in PWS 10.1, is it the Government's intent to exclude subdisciplines from these disciplines?

2) For engineering disciplines in PWS 10.2, does the Government request additional engineering disciplines beyond the "Electrical and Avionics Engineering" and "Mechanical, Fluids and Propulsion

Engineering" listed?

3) For the additional potential disciplines listed in PWS 10.3, should the administrative support discipline be included in the discipline/sub-discipline table?

Since disciplines and sub-disciplines information is spread across these three PWS areas, if possible, we request a clear delineation of the disciplines and sub-disciplines the Government wishes to be considered for the Staffing plan table.

PWS Sections 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 have been amended to correctly label analytical sub-diciplines, and clarify or delinieate systems engineering disciplines and their respective sub-disciplines. The Discipline/Sub-

Discipline Table shall include all disciplines and sub-disciplines proposed by the offeror, including the administrative support sub-discipline for Section

10.3.