NNK17600289R_Questions_and_Responses_2_1.26.2017.docx

LASSO QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES #2 NNK17600289R

As of January 26, 2017

INTRODUCTION

Government responses to Industry questions on the LASSO RFP Amendment 01 are below. The Government grouped similar questions or topics and provided a single response when appropriate. All industry questions received between January 18 and January 26, 2017 have been captured and responded to in this posting.

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

J-08 LOE Labor Rates Section B.4 (a), states that this is a Level of Effort contract with base and flex SOW, and on page 41, J-01 states that Attachment J-8 will be the LOE Labor Rates. Will the Government please clarify the role of Attachment J-08 in that this is stated to be a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, with Provisional Billing Rates in B.6.(a.) and with B.6.(b) addressing changes in Fringe rates.

response:

After Contract Award, Attachment J-08 will be used to price the ‘Flex’ hours in accordance with B.4(d) and H.16(b).

SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE - SECTION I

Clause 52.222-43, FLSA and SCA - Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option) is mentioned in Section L.17 but is not included in Section I. Will the Government incorporate this clause into the solicitation?

response:

RFP Amendment 02 revises Section I to include Clause 52.222-43.

I.1 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE – SECTION I

Since this contract is subject to the Service contract act, will the Government incorporate clause 52.222-41 - Service Contract Labor Standards into the solicitation?

response:

RFP Amendment 02 revises Section I to include Clause 52.222-41.

SECTION L.17 – VOLUME II, COST PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Attachment L-02 "The instructions in Attachment L-02 indicate that the Government recognizes that offerors could have more than one fringe rate due to the type of labor and the associated benefits, and directs offerors to make use of ‘other rate pool’ and ‘other rate labor’ tabs, but the PWS tabs in the Government model only allow bidders to insert one rate in row 39 on each tab for each contract year for ‘labor burdens (e.g. fringe)’. Furthermore offerors are told to complete a Labor-Fringe Rate Form with total benefits by contract year. (a) Assuming the offeror is bidding one or more existing fringe pools which include numerous other programs in the base, are offerors required to take existing proportions of pools and bases and apply them to the applicable direct labor for each specific contract year? (b) How exactly does the Government expect offerors to address fringe in the model assuming that the fringe rate will be different for different types of labor? How should multiple fringe rates be expressed on the PWS tabs of Attachment L-02?

response:

(a) Offerors are expected to propose consistent with its Cost Accounting Disclosure Statement or Cost Accounting System, as applicable.

(b) The Offeror may include multiple fringe rates in Attachment L-12 either by duplicating the Labor-Fringe Rate Form or using the Other Rate Pool and Other Rate Base tabs provided.

If the Offeror includes multiple rates in L-12 fringe rate, the Offeror must also manually input the resulting total dollar value into Attachment L-02 under the “Other Labor Burden Rate Cost and Adjustments” cell for each PWS tab and each year within the PWS tab. In other words, the sum of the fringe dollars for the additional fringe rates shall be shown in row 40, “Other Labor Burden Rate Costs and Adjustments” in Attachment L-02, Basic Cost Template for each year. This sum must be subtracted from row 39 to assure the subtotal value in row 38 is correct.

For example, Fringe Rate one (Labor Burdens (e.g. fringe)) dollars will be shown in row 39, Fringe rate two (Other Labor Burden Rate Cost and Adjustments) dollars will be shown in row 40 and the total fringe dollars are shown in row 38.

Attachment L-02 The instructions in Attachment L-02 direct offerors to propose different productive manyears based on labor type and applicable labor agreement, yet the PWS tabs in Attachment L-02 calculate work-year equivalents (WYE) based on the exempt manyear. The PWS tabs do not allow offerors to apply more than one manyear. As a result any WYE calculation that the model makes will not be consistent with a BOE which is based on multiple manyears. Please clarify how the Government expect offerors to deal with this issue and reconcile FTEs based on this limitation.

response:

In the Attachment L-02, Productive Hours tab the Offeror shall duplicate rows 3-36 into rows 40-73. Offerors shall input Exempt productive hours and narratives in rows 3-36. The Offeror shall change the title in row 40 from “Exempt Employees” to “CBA or Non-exempt Employees” and input the productive hours and narratives in rows 40-73.

The Government acknowledges that the WYE calculations in the PWS tabs will not be accurate if the productive hours are different between exempt and CBA/Non-exempt positions; however, this has no impact on proposed pricing.

Attachment L-02 In the Attachment L-02 Instructions tab under “Labor Classification” where offeror is told to "select the overtime rate/multiplier (Offeror shall enter 1 for exempt employees which indicates no OT or 1.5 for Non-Exempt positions which indicates OT at 1.5 times the base rate)”, however there is no where in the Government excel sheet to input such information. How should offerors respond to this instruction?

response:

RFP Amendment 02 revises Cell B4 of the Instructions tab in Attachment L-02, Basic Cost Template to delete the following sentence:

“The Offeror shall select the overtime rate/multiplier (Offeror shall enter 1 for exempt employees which indicates no OT or 1.5 for Non-Exempt positions which indicates OT at 1.5 times the base rate).”

In Attachment L-02, within the Labor Classification tab, if proposing overtime, the Offeror shall add a Labor classification (for example, “Crane Operator OT”) which will allow the Offeror to provide a rate that reflects OT in Column D of the Direct Labor Rate Base Year 1 tab.

Attachment L-02 Attachment L-02 for PWS 2.6 asks that we price an Aerospace Technician. Attachment L-01 for PWS 2.6 asks that we price an Laboratory Support Assistant which is consistent with Attachment L-14. Which would the government like us to price?

Response:

RFP Amendment 01 provided instructions for Offerors to correct Attachment L-02. The correct labor category for PWS 2.6 – Facility Management is Laboratory Support Assistant.

Attachment L-12 Attachment L-12 Rates and Factors Template requires offerors to break out overhead cost and bases as if they were direct costs only intended for this program. Furthermore there are 3 separate tabs required for overhead in the template and it is difficult to understand how the 3 tabs are supposed to work together. For example, are offerors supposed to breakout ‘overhead labor’ by LCAT even though the indirect pool is a composite of numerous non-LASSO existing programs? The Overhead Labor tab looks like it’s designed for direct labor. Keep in mind overhead consists of many costs other than just labor.

response:

No, Offerors are not requested to breakout ‘overhead labor’ by labor classification in Attachment L-12. In accordance with RFP L.17 Section 5, Rates and Factors Template (Attachment L-12) instructions, Offerors are to include expenses in the “Overhead Rate Pool” tab, overhead labor in the “Overheard Labor” tab, and basis of application for the overhead rate in the “Overhead Base” tab.

L.17, VOL II-Cost Proposal Instructions, Section 4-Other Information, #4 This states that the "Offeror shall provide this information when submitting their past performance volume." Is it the Government’s intent that Offeror is to provide this information in the Cost Volume and the Past Performance Volume? Please provide clarification.

Response:

RFP Amendment 02 revises Section L.17, Volume II-Cost Proposal Instructions, Section 4-Other Information, to delete paragraph (f)(4).

L.17 If there is a difference between base and flex labor rates, where should an offeror provide their detailed explanation?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 02 revises Section L.17 - Section 2, to clarify that Offerors shall explain all pricing and estimating techniques including direct labor rates and indirect rates in Volume II as part of its Cost Narrative for both ‘Base’ and ‘Flex’ LOE labor rates.

SECTION L.18 – VOLUME III, PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Reference Amendment 01 revision to Section L.18 regarding major subcontractor.

"The Offeror shall submit the past performance information below for the Offeror and for each major Subcontractor [defined as any subcontract with a total proposed cost for the five-year period of performance (Base period plus all Option years) of $20 million or greater, excluding proposed cost associated with ‘Flex’ LOE hours."

We request that the Government reconsider the decision to clarify the definition of Major Subcontractor at such a late stage of the proposal process. This "clarification" was provided to industry with roughly less than 22 days to submission (not taking into account the time required to produce and deliver the volumes).

In our review of the RFP considering the base hours and Flex LOE Hours, a major subcontractor was defined as any subcontract with a total proposed cost for the five-year period of performance (Base period plus all Option years) of $20 million or greater. It is our determination that removing the Flex LOE hours as a basis of defining a major subcontractor could create an unbalanced work share between the prime contractor share versus its subcontractors. We calculate that the Flex LOE hours would make up close to 50% of the evaluated price implying that a Major Subcontractor could have close to 30% of the workshare using the base hours only. This seems to be a higher than the usual value for Major Subcontractors comparing similar solicitation ceiling values released by NASA.

If the Government determines that the Base Hours are to be only used to define a Major Subcontractor, we respectfully request that the definition for Major Subcontractor be changed to $10M since half of the value of the total evaluated contract price was in the Flex hours.

response:

The RFP will remain as revised by Amendment 01. ‘Flex’ hours under the resulting contract may or may not be ordered. The number of ‘Flex’ hours exercised after contract award, if any, are subject to identification of requirements and are at the Government’s discretion (reference Clauses B.4 and H.16). Additionally, Section L.17 clearly states that total cost and fee associated with ‘Flex’ hours is for proposal evaluation purposes only:

“The LOE hours provided in Attachment L-01 cover both ‘Base’ hours for contract award and ‘Flex’ hours for proposal evaluation purposes only.

The ‘Flex’ hours are to be used to determine the ‘Flex’ hour labor cost used for proposal evaluation and fee determination purposes. The ‘Flex’ hours required during contract execution may vary.

The ‘Flex’ LOE hour rates based on the Offeror’s proposed labor classifications will be incorporated into the resulting contract under Attachment J-08.”

The evaluation of the Offeror’s Past Performance proposal will be conducted in accordance with the RFP Section M.5.

The Government will not comment on your assumptions or calculations.

SECTION L.11 – KSC 52.214-90 DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSALS

Proposal Due Date Will the Government consider extending the proposal due date?

Response:

The Government has reasonably considered this request for extension and RFP Amendment 02 revises Section L.11 to extend the proposal due date.