NNK17600289R-RFP-_Questions_and_Answers_1.18.2017.docx

LASSO QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES NNK17600289R-RFP

INTRODUCTION

Government responses to Industry questions on the LASSO RFP are below. The Government grouped similar questions or topics and provided a single response when appropriate. All industry questions received as of January 17, 2017 have been captured and responded to in this posting.

GENERAL

General I know that the work being performed under the Labs ESC is being incorporated into LASSO. I am looking to try and confirm if other portions of the ESC are being incorporated into the Test and Operations Support Contract (TOSC) with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. and whether there will be a separate RFP for A&E requirements. Is it possible to confirm if this accurate?

response:

RFP NNK17600289R identifies the LASSO contract requirements being competed.

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

RFP Reference: Section B, Table B.3 and Table B.7 Topic: Inconsistent data Question: Table B.3, “Non-Proposed” Costs (page 8) does not match the detailed Table B.7, “Non-Proposed” Costs (page 12). Please clarify.

B.7 NON-PROPOSED COSTS

In the Final RFP the total non-proposed costs per year for the specific cost elements (included in the table under B.7 NON-PROPOSED COSTS) does not equate to the Contract Values listed for non-proposed cost in the Section B.3 CONTRACT VALUE, Estimated Cost Table. Is it intended that table B.7 include all non-proposed costs to correlate with B.3?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section B.7 to be consistent with Section B.3.

B.7 NON-PROPOSED COSTS

It is our interpretation that the non-proposed cost table in this paragraph are for proposal purposes and based upon Base Hours effort. Expansion to support authorized flex hours are subject to negotiation. Is this true?

rESPONSE:

Offerors should refer to Section B.7, Non-Proposed Costs. Adjustments will be based on actual costs.

FAR Clauses 52.216-7 and 52.216-8 Please clarify where the incorporation of cost reimbursable/fixed fee invoicing clauses, 52.216-7, 52.216-8 is referenced. The only reference we see is as an asterisk to Table B.3: “*Non Fee Bearing. These estimates are Government provided in Clause B.7, Non-Proposed Costs and actual cost for these estimates will be reimbursed in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment.” However, this reference only seems to apply to non fee bearing costs.

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section I to include clauses 52.216-7, 52.216-8.

03-NNK17600289R-Section B -M Under B.6 special cost requirements, the government states that each cost reimbursement subcontract requires a completed provisional billing rates table. As this is proprietary data, most subcontractors will not share this information with the prime. Will the government consider removing this requirement? If not, will the Government accept sealed package submissions of this data?

B.6 SPECIAL COST REQUIREMENTS

Subcontractor's provisional billing rates are considered proprietary information, in some cases, and will only be shared with the Government. Per table B.6.1 of the Model Contract, a table including this information is required for each cost reimbursable subcontract. If a subcontractor considers this information proprietary, can the table be submitted in their sealed package to the Government?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Table B.6-1 to be completed only by the Prime.

SECTION F – DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

F.2 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

Section F.2 states that period of performance for Base Period is October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2019. Can the Government please clarify if Phase-In is considered to be part of the Base Period or is it in addition to the 5-year period of performance provided in Section F.2?

rESPONSE:

Phase-in will be in addition to the 5-year period of performance.

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.17 Unique Contract Requirements and Approaches Attachment J-11.

The model contract includes H.17 Unique Contract Requirements and Approaches but the Attachment J-11 has (To Be Determined). Will the government provide a format for the Offeror to address our approach for H.17 in the proposal? Is Attachment J-11 required as part of the proposal response? If required, what section of the proposal should this information (H.17 and Attachment J-11) be included in, is it excluded from page count and where will it be evaluated?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises H.17, Section L.14 and Section L.19(k) to provide instructions for unique implementation approaches to meet contract requirements and revises submittal requirements.

Attachment J-11 Unique Contract Requirements and Approaches In the final RFP this Attachment (J-11) is identified as Unique Contract Requirements and Approaches and designated as "To Be Determined" on the placeholder cover page. It is discussed in H.17 of the final RFP. Will the Government please clarify that this attachment should be delivered with the proposal and indicate whether this document is an attachment to the Model Contract or should be provided with another volume?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises H.17 and Section L.19(k) to provide instructions for unique implementation approaches to meet contract requirements and revises submittal requirements.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

GENERAL

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

"Will the government please verify which J Attachments need to be provided as part of the proposal? For the Attachments that need to be included, will the government please clarify where the information is required in the proposal?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises the proposal submittal requirements for J Attachments in Section L.19(j)ii and removes To Be Proposed from J Attachment title pages.

L.2 52.215-1 – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.2.a.c.2 refers to the "first page of the proposal". In addition, L.2.e.1 refers to the "title page". Is the first page of the proposal intended to be the title page for Volume I? If not, will the government please clarify what's intended to be the first page of the proposal?

rESPONSE:

Section L.2 52.215-1 is required by the Federal Acquisition Regulations and anticipates that Offerors will comply with all of the proposal submission instructions contained within Section L of the RFP. The first page of the proposal may be considered the “title page” for purposes of Section L.2(e)(1).

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

RFP Section L.2.c.1 refers to c.1.i and c.1.ii, but these sections don’t exist. Did the government intend to refer to Sections c.2.i and c.2.ii?

rESPONSE:

No, the FAR Clause is correct.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.2.e.2 requires the disclosure of data on each page that the Offeror wishes to restrict. Does this include government provided forms (Attachments, cost forms, etc.)? If so, is it acceptable to modify the government provided forms in order to be compliant with the RFP requirements in Section L?

rESPONSE:

Yes, it is acceptable for Offerors to include the proprietary data restriction legend.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

RFP Reference: Section L.14, Table L.14-1 and Section L.19 Topic: Small Business Plan Question: Table L.14-1 has listed the Small Business Plan requirement in Volume IV, Other Plans and Data. However, Section L.19 does not have a Small Business Plan requirement.

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.19 to include the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

RFP Reference: Section L.14(b) & (c) Topic: Font size for illustrations and/or graphics Question: The answer to DRFP question #25 stated the font size for illustrations and/or graphics was 12 pt as specified for proposal text. However, Section L.14 (c) in the Final RFP states, “If illustrations are submitted, they must be legible…” Can specific 12pt font for proposal text and no smaller than 10pt font for graphics and/or illustrations to provide some flexibility in graphics and illustration presentation while still maintaining legibility.

L.14 Font Size Does the font of icons contained within graphics have to meet the 12 point font rule?

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

The RFP states “(b) A page is defined as one side of a sheet, 8 1/2" x 11", with at least one inch margins on all sides, using not smaller than 12 point type for all proposal text. The text should be printed on both sides of the sheet. Each side of the sheet, tab, or divider, containing proposal material will be counted as a page.

(c) If illustrations are submitted, they must be legible and no larger than 11” x 17” Does this mean text or photos with text inside graphics must measure no smaller than 12 pt.?

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

In section L.14 C it states that “if illustrations are submitted, they must be legible” In section K it states that "we are allowed to use proprietary fonts". This is interpreted as we can use smaller than 12 point font in our graphics or illustrations. Will the government allow smaller than 12 point font inside our graphics as long as they are legible as stated in the RFP. If accepted, this will greatly increase the amount of information we can include on each page.

rESPONSE:

The requirements in Section L.14(b) for 12 point type for all proposal text will remain as stated.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Since header and footer text is not considered to be evaluated proposal text, will the government please confirm that the 12 point font limitation DOES NOT apply the text included in headers and footers (i.e., name of solicitation, company name/logo, solicitation number, proposal due date, page numbers and proprietary data restriction statements, etc.)

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.14(i) to clarify that the header and footer will not be evaluated and are excluded from the 12 point type requirement.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

The 2nd sentence in Section L.14, Proposal Page Limitation states: In addition, for each copy of each proposal volume the Offeror shall identify with the following legend the copy number for each volume (legend: Volume__, Copy __ of __). Is it the Government’s intent that the referenced legend be included on just the cover and title page of each volume and not in the header or footer of every page of each volume?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises L.14(i) to clarify volume and copy marking requirements.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Will the government please confirm that any font style or mix of font styles can be used as proposal text in narrative, tables, graphics and illustrations as long as they meet the 12 point font limitation?

rESPONSE:

The RFP only specifies 12 point type.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Will the government please confirm that tabs with the title only on each tab is not considered proposal text and therefore excludes tabs from proposal page count?

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.14(h) to clarify.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

"Section L.14(m) requires electronic copies on CD-ROM to be in Adobe PDF format; however, sections L.14(n) and (o) ask for Cost narrative and key personnel resumes and letters to be in MS Word or PDF, and BOE and mapping rationale to be in MS Word or Excel.

L.14(n)(2) does not state a format for Cost templates.

Please clarify, what format is required for each proposal Volume and Section of the electronic (CD-ROM) submission?"

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

The government has asked that each volume be contained in a 3-Ring binder. However, in addition to the original for Volume II, the RFP L.14 table requires 7 copies of the Cost Narrative and 0 copies of the Cost Templates. Since these are combined in a 3-Ring binder for Volume II, how does the government anticipate the Offeror to provide the conflicting number of hardcopies of this volume? How many hardcopies of each section need to be included in the hardcopy of Volume II?

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

"Per L.14 (n)(2) the Cost Template shall be submitted in electronic format only. However, Table L.14-1 indicates that Offeror must submit 1 Original volume to include the Cost Templates.

Due to the conflicting instructions, are the Cost Templates to be included in the Original 3-Ring binder for Volume II - Cost or not?"

RFP Reference: Section L, Table L.14-1 and Paragraph L.14(1) Topic: Inconsistent requirement Question: Table L.14-1 specifies that 1 original hardcopy of the Cost Templates shall be submitted. However, the second paragraph in L.14(l) states that the Cost Templates shall only be submitted electronically. Please clarify.

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Table L.14-1 and Sections L.14(m) and L.14(n) to clarify formats and hard copy requirements.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

L-07 Key Personnel Resume form "Table L.14-1, section L19(d), and Attachment L-07 refer to Key Personnel Letters of Intent; however, section L.14(o)(2) refers to Letters of Commitment.

Are the Letters of Intent and the Letters of Commitment intended to be the same? Will the government please clarify?"

rESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises L.14(o)(2) to clarify.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Will the government please provide clarification on Table L.14-1 regarding Volume IV Other Plans and Data regarding how the varied number of hard copies should be identified and delivered. (i.e., 7 copies for Total Compensation, Key Personnel Resume, Small Business Plan, Key Personnel Letters of Intent, Contract Phase-in Plan, Scenario Responses and OCI Mitigation Plan; versus 5 copies of Basis of Estimates, 10 copies of Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms, and 2 copies Model Contract all contained in this 1 volume.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Table L.14-1 Volume IV Other Plans and Data reflects 10 hard copies of Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms, however, the maximum number of copies in Volume IV does not exceed 7 (Total Comp Plan, Key Personnel Resumes, Small Business Plan, Key Personnel Letters of Intent, Contract Phase-in Plan, Scenario Responses, and the OCI Mitigation Plan). Is it the Government's intent to supply 3 additional copies of Volume IV with just the Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms in it, or are the extra 3 copies of the Key Terms intended to be included in Volumes I, II and III with its own page limit of 10 pages in addition to the page limits in those volumes?

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

"Per L.14.g and L.14.h, the government has asked that each volume be contained in a 3-Ring binder. However, per the RFP L.14 table, Volume IV - Other Plans and Data asks for 1 original and 5 copies of the Basis of Estimate, 10 copies of Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms, 2 copies of the Model Contract and 7 copies of each of the other sections in this volume.

Since these are combined in a 3-Ring binder for Volume IV, how does the government anticipate the Offeror to provide the conflicting number of copies of this volume? Specifically, what sections, attachments and other information needs to be provided in the original, as well as each copy, of the proposal for Volume IV?"

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Table L.14-1 to clarify number of copies required.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

References L.14, L.16, L.17, L.18, L.19:

Please confirm that in light of the page count limitations, Volumes I and IV are allowed to cross reference material across volumes and that material does not have to be replicated in multiple volumes in order to be considered in the evaluation.

Referencing Between Volume I and Volume IV Due to the limited page count in both the Volume I Mission Suitability, and for all Plans and each of the Scenarios in Volume IV will the government please confirm that cross referencing between volumes is acceptable to avoid repeated/redundant information among the volumes?

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

"L.19 Volume IV Plans and Other Data Instructions states, “The Offeror shall include the following items in this volume in reference to L.16 Volume I – Mission Suitability Proposal Instructions.”

Specific requirements, including instructions, for the required Plans listed in L.19 are included in various volumes/sections throughout the RFP. Is any information for the Volume IV sections required to be referenced in Volume I? If so, what is the mapping for each section in Volume IV to the required reference in Volume I?"

RESPONSE:

Referencing is acceptable in accordance with L.16 and L.19 instructions.

L.14 NFS 1852.215-81 PROPOSAL PAGE LIMITATION (APR 2015)

Section L-14, paragraph (b), page 72 states that text should be printed on both sides of the sheet. Does this apply to Excel files? Does this requirement apply to Attachment L-02 - Basic Cost template, Attachment L-11 - Phase-In Template, Attachment L-12 Rates and Factors template and Attachment L-14 Labor Distribution and Mapping Template?

rESPONSE:

Yes, where hard copies of Excel files are requested, they should be printed on both sides of the sheet. RFP Amendment 01 provides clarification in Section L.14(b) on hard copies to be printed for proposal submittal.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.16. has specific requirements on pages 76 of 117 and 77 of 117 that aren't called out anywhere else in the RFP. Where should this information be included in the proposal? Is it acceptable to provide this information in an Executive Summary? If so, will this be evaluated as part of Volume I?

RESPONSE:

RFP Section L.16 provides general instructions applicable to the mission suitability proposal volume. It is expected that the Offeror will follow these general instructions when preparing its proposal to respond to the specific proposal preparation instructions for the mission suitability subfactors, which are contained in L.16.1 for Management, L.16.2 for Technical and L.16.3 for Small Business Utilization.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

"L.16.1 Management (7) Total Compensation Plan states that a Total Compensation Plan (TCP) is required for the prime and each major subcontract, with a major subcontractor defined in L.17 Cost Instructions as any subcontract with a total proposed value (total of Base plus all Option years plus Phase-In) of $20 million or greater. L.16.1 Management (7) further states that Offeror shall also ensure that the Total Compensation Plan meets the requirements of FAR 52.222-46 and NFS 1852.231-71.

NFS 1852.231.71 (d) states:

Offeror shall require all service subcontractors (1) with proposed cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type subcontracts having a total potential value in excess of $500,000 and (2) the cumulative value of all their service subcontracts under the proposed prime contract in excess of 10 percent of the prime contract’s total potential value, provide as part of their proposals the information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision.

Provision (a) of NFS 1852.231.71 requires submittal of a TCP from the subcontractor.

Can the government please clarify if a TCP from a subcontractor is required if the conditions of NFS 1852.231.71 are met, even though the subcontractor does not meet the LASSO RFP criteria as a major subcontractor?

RESPONSE:

Offeror shall refer to Section L.6 and Section L.17 for the determination of the Total Compensation Plan submittal.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Reference L.16.2 (1) ii: Please confirm that Attachments L-14 and L-10 are excluded from the page count and also confirm that the material in Attachments L-14 and L-10 does not have to be replicated within the page count of the Mission Suitability volume.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Table L.14-1 and Sections L.16.1(4)ii and L.16.2(1)ii that Attachments L-14 and L-10 are part of the Volume IV, BOE and Mapping Rationale, which does not have page count limits. Please reference Section L.19(b). There is no requirement to replicate data in these attachments in Volume I.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

L16.3 states: ” ii. The Contracting Officer’s assessment of appropriate subcontracting goals for this acquisition, expressed as a percent of total contract value (total of base period and all option years), is as follows:”. Does “Base” apply to base period or base LOE hours? Are the percentages shown based upon the Base hours or base plus flex hours? Must we meet the percentages shown for the base LOE hours plus our TBP (To Be Proposed) hours or do we have the flexibility of meeting the percentages with the future flex execution.

L.16.3 SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

We will achieve the small business goals primarily through assigning flex fours to the appropriate category of small business. Since flex is such a large portion of the contract we will exceed the allocation requirements. Since flex is undefined, must we pre-identify the businesses we will use?

Response:

‘Flex’ hours are not a part of the contract value until exercised. RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.16.3(1)ii to clarify total contract value. Offeror shall reference RFP Section I, 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Alt II, for Small Business Utilization.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

In L.16.3(1).ii it states, "ii. The Contracting Officer’s assessment of appropriate subcontracting goals for this acquisition, expressed as a percent of total contract value (total of base period and all option years)".

Please confirm that the goals are to be expressed as a percent of total contract value versus total subcontracted value. "

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section I to include clause 1852.219-75 to clarify the percentage totals. Refer to FAR 52.219-9(d)(1) for further clarification.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

In L.16.3(1).i it states,"i. The Offeror, unless excepted as provided above, shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Alternate II, which is incorporated in RFP Section I."

Section I does not include the Alternate II version of the clause. Does the Alternate II version of this clause apply to the contract and will Section I be updated accordingly? The Alternate II version of the clause is also referenced in paragraph's v and vi of this section. "

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 updates Section I to clarify that Alternate II (NOV 2016) applies.

L.16 VOLUME I – MISSION SUITABILITY PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

"In L.16.3(1).v it states, ""v. If it is anticipated that the proposed small business goals will not be met by the submission of the first Individual Subcontracting Report (ISR) for this effort as required by FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation), Alternate II, the Offeror should discuss its approach and include a timeline for meeting proposed goals and the rationale for it. In addition, the offeror may phase goals if it anticipates other than straight-line annual usage of subcontractors."" Section I does not include a Deviation version of the clause. Does the Deviation version of this clause apply to the contract and, if so, will a copy of the Deviation clause be provided and Section I be updated accordingly? "

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.16.3(1)v to remove the word “deviation.”

L.17 VOLUME II- COST PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

L.17 VOLUME II- COST PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Section L.17 defines a Major Subcontractor as "any subcontract with a total proposed value (total of Base plus all Option years plus Phase-In) of $20 million or greater". Does "Base" in this context refer to Base years or Base hours (as opposed to Flex)? Please clarify--– is the $20,000,000 value assessed against just the base hours or the base plus flex hours?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.17 to clarify the definition of Major Subcontractor(s).

L.17 VOLUME II- COST PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

L-11 Phase-In Template The cost instructions for Phase-in [page 96] state Attachment L-11 “shall include all costs to be incurred prior to full assumption of the PWS” and “shall reflect the cost associated with staffing build-up to full assumption of contract responsibility.” Since full assumption of the PWS associated with the engineering, science and research laboratory requirements does not occur until 150-days after contract start, can the Government please clarify if costs associated with the transition of the engineering, science and research laboratory requirements are also to be included in Attachment L-11?

response:

The Offeror should refer to Section L.16.1(1)vii for instructions regarding costs associated with transition of engineering, science and research laboratory requirements.

L.18 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

L.18 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

RFP section L.18(a) states, "(a) Provide a table depicting a list of no more than ten (10) relevant and recent contracts for the Offeror and no more than five (5) for each major subcontractor. Recent is defined as performance within the last five years from the due date of proposals on contracts that are being performed or completed." Are the three (3) contracts requested in section L.18(b) required to be from that table of ten (10) contracts? Or can the three (3) contract citations in L.18(b) be different contracts than reference in the ten (10) contracts from L.18(a)?

L.18 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

In RFP section L.18(a) the requested table of 10 (ten) contracts shall include only those that are within the past five (5) years, from the due date of the proposal for those contracts. Does the same 5 (five) year recency requirement apply to the three (3) contract citations requested in section L.18(b) as well? Or is there no recency requirement for the three (3) contracts required for L.18(b)?

L.18 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Section L.18(b) states (3) The Offeror shall request a Past Performance Questionnaire (reference Attachment L-03) for each of the contracts identified by the Offeror and each major subcontractor in this section (b).

Can the government clarify if this applies only to the three (3) contracts, which the offeror deems most similar in size, content, and complexity to requirements of this RFP and NOT to the contracts in the list of no more than ten (10) relevant and recent contracts valued over $10 Million dollars for the Offeror and no more than five (5) for each major subcontractor?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.18(b) to clarify that the requested three (3) contracts come from the list in Section L.18(a).

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

"Section L.18 (e) states, “The Offeror shall provide the following information on safety performance for the last three (3) years:

(1) A statement summarizing any OSHA citations of the Offeror’s operations.

(2) Copies of OSHA Form 300A, Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, for comparable contracts for 2013, 2014, and 2015.

(3) Safety performance experience, including worker compensation claims and Experience Modification Rates for 2013, 2014, and 2015.

The Offeror shall provide a statement and explanation of citations for environmental violations that were received as a result of the company’s performance during the last three (3) years. This should include violations that any customer received as a result of the Offeror’s performance. Note: The OSHA forms are excluded from the Volume III, Past Performance, page limit.”

Will the government please exclude all safety performance information from the Volume III, Past Performance page limitations?

RESPONSE:

No, the page limitation requirements referenced in RFP Section L.14(a) will remain as stated.

L.19 VOLUME IV- PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS

L.19 VOLUME IV- PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS

Reference L.19 (b) ii: Please confirm that the Mapping Rationale Narrative is to address only the Base hours since no information is provided to allocate Flex hours to PWS elements.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Attachment L-04 to clarify that mapping rationale narrative is only to address the Government-provided ‘Base’ LOE hours.

L.19 VOLUME IV- PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS

BOE and Mapping Rationale L-04 Minimum PWS Level to Propose The breakout of the Base hours for PWS provided in Attachment L-02 - LASSO Basic Cost template is at the 2nd level of the PWS. Attachment L-04 - PWS Level to propose requests breakout of the BOE at the 3rd level of the PWS which contradicts information provided in Attachment L-02. To be consistent with Attachment L-02, please confirm that the offeror is required to provide breakout of the Base LOE hours at the 2nd level of the PWS in Attachment L-04 - PWS Level to Propose.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Attachment L-04 for clarification on the different levels for Offerors to propose BOEs, Mapping Rationale and Costs for both Offeror-proposed and Government-provided ‘Base’ LOE hours.

L.19 VOLUME IV- PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS

Attachment L-10 Labor Classifications & Qualification Crosswalks Section L.19, paragraph iii, page 103 states that the offeror shall provide crosswalk of the Offeror's labor classifications with required years of experience and position description. Since years of experience and position descriptions have already been provide by the Government in Attachment L-05 - Labor Classification Description, is this information still required for completion of Attachment L-10.

RESPONSE:

Yes, the Offeror is required to complete Attachment L-10. Please reference RFP Section L.19(b)iii.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

"Section L.16.1(3) states, “The Offeror shall complete Attachment L-07, LASSO Key Personnel Resume Form for each key person.” In addition, Section L.19(c) requires, “Key Personnel Resumes: Two (2) page maximum per resume, reference Attachment L-07, Key Personnel Resume Form” in Volume IV of the proposal.

Evaluation Factor for Award, Section M.3.1(3) says Key Personnel will be evaluated at part of Volume I, Mission Suitability, Management.

Because proposal instructions are included in Volume I and the evaluation criteria for Key Personnel are also tied to Volume I, it appears that the Offeror should respond with some Key Personnel information in Volume I in order to be compliant.

Please clarify, is any information required in the Volume I, Key Personnel Section in order to meet the requirement for L.16.1(3) and M.3.1(3)? Or is all information related to Key Personnel included in Volume IV, per Attachment L-7, Key Personnel Resume Form and Signed Letters of Intent? Please clarify, what Key Personnel information is required in the Volume I, Management Section of the proposal versus the Volume IV, Key Personnel Resumes and Signed Letters of Intent?

RESPONSE:

Yes, Offerors shall address the RFP requirements of Section L.16.1(3) in Volume I, Mission Suitability under the Management section, with the exception of the résumés and signed letters of intent.

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L16.1(3) to clarify the requirement to complete Attachment L-07 and submit in Volume IV, Plans and Other Data.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

" L.19.(h) states, “Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms” Are the 10 pages allocated in Volume IV, Section "Key Terms, Abbreviations and Acronyms" intended to provide information for all proposal volumes (I, II, III and IV)? Would the government allow bidders to place Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms in each Volume and exclude from page count?"

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises L.19(i) to clarify that “Key Terms, Abbreviations and Acronyms” covers information for all proposal volumes and is to be submitted in Volume IV.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

Per L.14, Volume IV requires "Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms". Attachment J-05 is "Glossary and List of Acronyms". Are these intended to be the same list? Per L.19 VOLUME IV - PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS, "The purpose of this volume is to provide the Offeror’s required plans and other data to the Government. Each item listed below should be separately tabbed, clearly indicating the content." If these two lists/items are the same, is the requirement that it will be included in Volume IV twice; once under a separate tab and once as Attachment J-05 in the Model Contract?

RESPONSE:

No, "Key Terms, Abbreviations, and Acronyms" in Volume IV is for the Offeror’s proposal and the Attachment J-05, Glossary and List of Acronyms is already completed for the LASSO RFP and resultant contract.

Specifically, per L.19 VOLUME IV - PLANS AND OTHER DATA INSTRUCTIONS, ""The purpose of this volume is to provide the Offeror’s required plans and other data to the Government. Each item listed below should be separately tabbed, clearly indicating the content."" Per the table in L.14, it appears that the Small Business Plan, Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan and the Key Terms, Abbreviations and Acronyms require their own separate tab in Volume IV. In addition, Volume IV, Model Contract requires fill-ins, including Attachment J-01 - Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Attachment J-05 Glossary (Glossary and List of Acronyms) and J-07 Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan. Does the government intend that this information be duplicated in both locations of Volume IV?"

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.19(j)ii to clarify J Attachments are excluded from the Model Contract.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

J-02 Small Business Subcontracting Plan It appears that the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is intended to be included in Volume IV of the proposal. However, the instructions are not clear about whether it should be in the Model Contract only or if a section should be included for Attachment J-2. Please clarify, where do we include Attachment J-2 and/or the Small Business Subcontracting Plan? Where will this be evaluated?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.19(j)ii to clarify J Attachments are excluded from the Model Contract. The proposed Small Business Subcontracting Plan is to be provided in Volume IV per Section L.16.3 and will be incorporated as Attachment J-02, Small Business Subcontracting Plan in the resultant contract. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.16.3.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The Table in L.14 have the sections for Volume IV in one order and L.19 has the sections for Volume IV in another order. Please clarify, what order do we organize the Volume IV sections in the proposal?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Table L.14-1 to match Section L.19.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

Volume IV has sections that are considered in the page limitations, but also has sections that are not considered in the page limitations (i.e. BOEs & Mapping Rationale, Model Contract). Will that government please clarify that the pages do not have to be consecutively numbered in Volume IV?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.14(i) to clarify the instructions for the page numbering requirements.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

"Section L - Instructions, Conditions, And Notices To Offerors provides instructions for the required Total Compensation Plan in multiple places, including Section L.4(a), Section L.6(a), Section L.16.1(7) and Section L.19(a).

Section M.3 Volume 1 – Mission Suitability Factor, M.3.1 Management, (7) Total Compensation Plan. Detailed instructions are provided in Section L.16.1(7), but it also appears that the Total Compensation Plan detail should be provided in proposal Volume IV. Does any information actually need to be included in the Volume I, Management Section for the Total Compensation Plan? If so, what information should be provided in proposal Volume I, Management versus proposal Volume IV, Total Compensation Plan? "

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.16.1(7) and Section L.19(a) for the Total Compensation Plan including associated rationale to be submitted in Volume IV.

L.20 – LIST OF ATTACHMENTS SECTION L

ATTACHMENT L-01 LEVEL OF EFFORT (LOE) HOURS

L-01 Level of Effort (LOE) hours The LOE for the FLEX hours only shows labor categories and not PWS. Will NASA provide PWS for these labor categories?

RESPONSE:

No, the Government will not provide the PWS for ‘Flex’ LOE hours.

L-01 Level of Effort (LOE) hours PWS 2.6 Facility Management There is a discrepancy between labor categories provided in Attachment L-01 - Total LOE and Attachment L-02 Basic Cost Template for PWS 2.6 - Facility Management. Attachment L-01 has Laboratory Support Assistant listed as labor category for PWS 2.6 and Attachment L-02 has Aerospace Technician listed as labor category for PWS 2.6. Request the Government to clarify which is the correct labor category to use for PWS 2.6

RESPONSE:

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

RFP Reference: Attachment L-01, Tab “Base-by PWS” Topic: Inconsistent labor category Question: Under PWS 3.2, the comment section indicates that the Laboratory Support Assistant includes the CBA Calibration Support Coordinator. Neither of the two CBAs include a Calibration Support Coordinator labor category. Please clarify.

RESPONSE:

Attachment L-01, “Comment” column correctly indicates that the Laboratory Support Assistant includes the duties typically performed by the CBA Calibration Support Coordinator, which is included in the IBEW CBA.

L-01 Level of Effort (LOE) hours

Since the majority of Aerospace Technician hours in the Base are in labs covered by CBA, can the offeror assume that a similar proportion of Aerospace Technician hours in Flex are also covered by CBA?

response:

It is up to the Offeror to determine how to develop its proposal to meet the RFP requirements.

ATTACHMENT L-02 BASIC COST TEMPLATE

L-02 Basic Cost Template The PWS references in the cost template (Cost BY PWS, WYE by PWS, Non-Labor Costs by PWS tabs) are different from the PWS descriptions included in Attachment- L-04 and Attachment J-01. Specifically, PWS 1.8 is listed as Logistics in the cost template and Property Management in Attachment L-04 and Attachment J-01. Please confirm which one is correct.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 provides instructions for Offerors to correct Attachment L-02 to change the title for PWS 1.8 to Property Management.

Attachment L-02 Tab: Subcontractor by PWS The spreadsheet template provided contains proprietary data that a subcontractor will not provide to the prime offeror. We recognize that the Government is allowing a Subcontractor (Major or otherwise) to provide sealed packages containing their proprietary cost build-ups. However, where in the spreadsheet should the prime offeror include the fully burdened rates from the subcontractors? Do we populate Columns N, AB, AP, BD and BR with the fully burdened rates for a Subcontractor (Major or otherwise)?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 provides revised instructions for Attachment L-02 associated with major and minor subcontractors’ submissions.

L-02 Basic Cost Template Flex LOE Hours and Cost Tab of Attachment L-02 request offerors to provide rates without fee. Will the offeror be able to apply its fee to labor rates for flex labor hours during execution?

rESPONSE:

Yes, the Offeror will be able to apply fee to labor rates for ‘Flex’ labor hours during execution.

ATTACHMENT L-04 PWS LEVEL TO PROPOSE

L-04 Minimum PWS Level to Propose

4.0 PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES

Attachment L-04 of the draft RFP, had a requirement for minimum level for BOE and cost for PWS 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7. In the FRFP, PWS 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 are deleted from the BOE and cost columns. Was this intentional? If so, does this mean that the PWS elements 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 do not need to be priced and BOE's are not required?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Attachment L-04 to clarify BOE and Mapping rationale submission requirements.

L-04 Minimum PWS Level to Propose The L-04 PWS Level to Propose document identifies that Mapping Rationale is required for PWS 2.7 and 3.1. The L-01 Level of Effort Hours document assigns 0 hours to PWS elements 2.7 and 3.1. Is a mapping rationale template/file expected to be provided for PWS elements 2.7 and 3.1?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Attachment L-04 to clarify BOE and Mapping rationale submission requirements.

ATTACHMENT L-08

RFP Reference: Section L, Attachment L-08, “Contractor-Owned Property Available for Purchase” Topic: Missing file Question: Attachment L-08 is missing from the final NNK17600289R_LASSO_RFP file.

RFP Reference: Section L, Attachment L-08, “Contractor-Owned Property Available for Purchase” Topic: “Non-Proposed” Costs Question: Are the costs associated with Attachment L-08 included in the Government’s “Non-Proposed” Costs plug numbers (Table B.3)? If the answer is no, what property in the Attachment L-08 list is required to be purchased (be it from the incumbent contractor or another party) as an indirect cost for the performance of the LASSO contract?

L-08 Contractor-Owned Property Available for Purchase (Under Review) Does the government intend to provide a template for Attachment L-08?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises L.20 to remove reference to Attachment L-08 Contractor-Owned Property Available for Purchase.

ATTACHMENT L-10 LABOR CLASSIFICATIONS AND QUALIFICATION CROSSWALK

RFP Reference: Section J, Attachment J-09 and Section L, Attachment L-10 Topic: Data submission Question: Please confirm that the Government is requesting the same data submission for the Attachment J-09 “Labor Classifications and Qualification Crosswalks” as in the Attachment L-10 “Labor Classifications and Qualification Crosswalk”.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.19(j)ii to clarify J Attachments for the Model Contract.

ATTACHMENT L-14 LABOR DISTRIBUTION AND MAPPINIG TEMPLATE

L-14 Labor Distribution and Mapping Template Please confirm that information that is required to be provided in Attachment L-14 is for Base LOE only and is not required for Flex LOE.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises Section L.19(b)iv to clarify instructions for Attachment L-14 that only ‘Base’ LOE hours are to be provided.

Attachment L-14 Labor Distribution and Mapping Template – Tabs: Base 1 (GFY 18); Base 2 (GFY 19); Option 1 (GFY 20); Option 2 (GFY 21); Option 3 (GFY 22) Per the instructions, Column F is to be used for allocation of Government LOE labor hours per PWS and Column G is to be used for allocation of Offeror Proposed Labor Hours. It appears that Column H is to capture either the Government LOE Labor Hours or the Offeror Proposed Labor Hours depending on which column is empty. However, the calculation in Column H is providing a result of "0" if Column F has numbers in them. If Column G is populated, the corresponding number shows up on Column H. Is there an error in the spreadsheet tabs?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 deletes Column H from Attachment L-14.

Attachment L-14 Labor Distribution and Mapping Template – Tabs: Base 1 (GFY 18); Base 2 (GFY 19); Option 1 (GFY 20); Option 2 (GFY 21); Option 3 (GFY 22) Cell H2 requires the offeror to provide the "Offeror's Proposed Prod. Hrs./Yr.". Given that this contract is a mixture of represented (2 CBAs) and non-represented personnel, providing a singular number for "Offeror's Proposed Prod. Hrs./Yr." may lead to a faulty analysis of the Offeror's proposed WYE's. Please confirm that the Attachment L-14 is purely for evaluation purposes for the allocation of work and does not affect the evaluated pricing

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 deletes Column H (Offeror Proposed WYE) from Attachment L-14. Please refer to L.17, Section 3, for the purpose of Attachment L-14.

Attachment L-14 Labor Distribution and Mapping Template – Tabs: Base 1 (GFY 18); Base 2 (GFY 19); Option 1 (GFY 20); Option 2 (GFY 21); Option 3 (GFY 22) It appears that the formulas in Cell K4 through K22 are not properly pulling the Gov. LOE Labor Hours from Column F. At present, the formula appears to pull from Column G. Please confirm that the formula needs to be corrected.

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises instructions for Attachment L-14. However, the formulas in Cells K4 through K22 are correctly tallying values from Column G.

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 EVALUATION AND SOURCE SELECTION – GENERAL

The Small Business Plan moved to Volume IV when the Final RFP was released. In Section M.3.3 Small Business Utilization (page 114) discusses how the Small Business Plan will be evaluated in terms of the Offeror's proposed subcontracting goals. Where will the Small Business Plan will be evaluated?

RESPONSE:

Offerors shall refer to Section M.3.3 for Small Business Utilization subfactor evaluation criteria.

M.4 VOLUME II - COST FACTOR

The first sentence states, "The cost factor will not be weighted or scored." However, further down it states, "For purposes of source selection, the total proposed cost and evaluated cost will be considered. The total evaluated cost consists of the Phase-In (firm-fixed-price) and the probable costs and proposed fee for the ‘Base’ and ‘Flex’ LOE hours across the base period and option years 1, 2 and 3 (including non-proposed cost)." Will the government please clarify the evaluation criteria for the Cost Factor Volume II? Will the total evaluated cost of the phase-in and the probable cost and proposed cost be considered and evaluated?

RESPONSE:

Offerors shall refer to Section M.4 for Cost factor evaluation criteria and Section M.1(c) for relative order of importance of evaluation factors.

Evaluation of New Ideas – Since the LOE labor is to be consistent over the duration of the bid, how will the government factor in or evaluate innovations of bidders that could save labor? Will the government address more detail about how they will evaluate innovations or new ideas?

RESPONSE:

Offerors shall refer to Sections M.3.1 and M.3.2 for evaluation criteria associated with innovations and approaches.

ATTACHMENT J-01, PERFORMANCE STATEMENT OF WORK

GENERAL PWS QUESTIONS

PWS 1.0

PWS 1.0

H.3 NFS 1852.225-70 EXPORT LICENSES (FEB 2000) – ALTERNATE I

As KSC expands its services as a multiple customer launch site and as commercial operators expand operations at KSC, CCAFS, and Spaceport Florida, it is probable that US entities will request services from LASSO in support of non-US customers. These services may include such things as NDE, sample chemical analysis, etc. supporting spacecraft to be launched. It may also include engineering laboratory services for research to be launched or assessed (such as ISS payloads). Is the contractor to assume that all work submitted to it by NASA through the provisions of this contract are ITAR exempt or must the contractor have in place a process to identify end item user and ITAR applicability? If the contractor is so responsible then this is additional cost and evaluation time. Is the effort for this included in the base and flex hour allocations?

RESPONSE:

No, the Offeror shall not assume all work submitted to it by NASA through the provisions of this contract are ITAR exempt. The Offeror shall propose in accordance with PWS 1.8.4, Export Control requirements.

PWS 2.0

Attachment J-01

PWS 2.2

Based on description under Item C of Section 2.2 (PVS), is it correct that no Technician hours are required for BASE PWS 2.2 LOE Hrs?

RESPONSE:

RFP Amendment 01 revises PWS 2.1 to clarify that technician labor for maintenance of PVS is covered.

PWS 2.0 LABORATORY MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT

The PWS states that “For the NASA-managed laboratories, the Contractor shall provide support to the Government and perform equipment maintenance activities per technical direction.” Must the contractor’s maintenance management plan include these items and management system provide maintenance notifications and tracking for such items or will NASA perform this maintenance management?

RESPONSE:

Yes, Offerors shall refer to PWS 2.

PWS 2.3 Laboratory Safety and Health The PWS contains requirements that the contractor serve as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) and “provide expert consultation in biosafety policies and procedures as well as biological materials assessments”. Are these activities included in the LOE hours or are they TBP?

RESPONSE:

The Offeror shall refer to PWS 2.3(i) for requirements and Attachment L-01 for associated LOE hours. With regard to TBP LOE hours, Offeror shall refer L.16.1(4) for Program Management (PWS 1) and Laboratory or Technical Management (PWS 2).

PWS 2.3 Laboratory Safety and Health Are the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) and the expert for consultation in biosafety policies part of the initial transition or the Engineering Labs transition.

RESPONSE:

The requirements for these positions and the laboratories are defined in PWS 2.3, PWS Appendix 03 and Attachment L-05. The Government-provided LOE hours are given in Attachment L-01.

PWS 2.0 Laboratory Maintenance and Support

It is extremely difficult for the contractor in a multi-customer, multi-NASA manager situation where different facilities have different policies and procedures. Cross utilization of personnel between facilities and managers is difficult because they may have different work rules depending upon whose lab they are within. There are many requirements within the PWS regarding Safety and Health, Quality Management, Environmental Management, Hazard Management, Quality Assurance, Training, Access, etc.