MODIFICATION
B -- AEROSPACE ACQUISITON EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS USING PARAMETRIC MODELING TECHNIQUE
- Notice Date
- 12/21/2007
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 541618
— Other Management Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 210.M, Greenbelt, MD 20771
- ZIP Code
- 20771
- Solicitation Number
- NNG08226016Q
- Response Due
- 12/28/2007
- Archive Date
- 12/21/2008
- Point of Contact
- Yolanda A. Williams, Contract Specialist, Phone 301-286-0689, Fax 301-286-9159, Email Yolanda.A.Williams@nasa.gov
- E-Mail Address
-
Yolanda A. Williams
(Yolanda.A.Williams@nasa.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- THIS NOTICE CONSTITUTES AMENDMENT NO. 002 TO THE COMBINED SYNOPSIS/RFQ FOR AEROSPACE ACQUISITON EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS USING PARAMETRIC MODELING TECHNIQUE. Companies shall acknowledge all amendment(s) in their quote. This notice serves as the official amendment to subject synopsis/RFQ and a written amendment will not be issued. The purpose of this amendment is to address the following offeror's questions: 1. RFQ / RFIs - I understand that the subject effort has been an ongoing activity for the past number of years. At one time Northrop Grumman (NG) was providing such services (through the CEPPAD sole source procurement in 9/2005) from its Huntsville, Alabama site. Now I see that Cost, Inc. is also an incumbent. Qa) Are both NG and Cost, Inc. staff still currently supporting the subject effort? Ans.a) Cost Inc. is the current incumbent. Qb) Are there any other contractors /consultants supporting this effort now? Ans.b) No. Qc) Is this RFQ intended to augment the Cost modeling support to a desired/planned staffing level? Ans.c) No. Q2) Is this RFQ intended to recompete the incumbent staff provided by Cost, Inc.? Or, does it cover a wider scope? Ans.2) No. The purpose of this RFQ is as stated in the attached SOW. Q3) RFQ - What is the state of the current parametric cost modeling efforts at OSSMA/RAO? Is the RAO using both a legacy system (NG?) and a new COTS based system (Cost, Inc.?) at the same time? How long a legacy system, if any maintained, be used for this effort? Ans.3) RAO is using the current legacy system with minor modifications. Q4) What is the current cost modeling system environment? What COTS and tools are being used to support the cost modeling effort now? Will the Government furnished them all to the contractor, either on-site or off-site, to support the subject effort? Ans.4) Individual desk and/or laptop (PC and/or MAC). COTS GB Stat statistical application suite or equivalent and Microsoft application software, i.e., Access, Excel, and SQL. There is no Government furnished equipment. Q5) SOW Scope - The period of the contract notes the subject effort to last for 3 years. The On-line RFQ notes a Delivery Date of 1/31/2010 (2 years from January 2008). should they both match to say a 3 year contract period? Ans.5) The correct Period of Performance End date is 1/31/2011. Q6) SOW #2 - This requirement provides a summary of the NASA's total Workload environment in terms of missions, spacecrafts and instruments, etc What percentage would reflect an average annual workload for the cost modeling requirements (collect, analyze, validate, etc.)? Ans.6) The SOW provides the necessary information of the workload required for this effort. Q7) SOW 7.3.1 - Would NDAs excited between the contractor/incumbent and the third party data suppliers disqualify the incumbent contractor from pursuing other work at other NASA GSFC Codes? at Other NASA Centers? If so, What would be the extent of the disqualification period? Does OSSMA/RAO requires an Conflict of Interest Plan to help mitigate the NDA restrictions on the contractor? Ans.7) NASA has not included a Limitation of Future Contracting Clause in this Order. Should organizational contracting issues arise during performance, they will be handled in accordance with FAR Part 9.5. Q8) SOW 7.3 - Does the contractor need to provide a secured facility to protect third part cost data? Or, the implementing of confidentiality procedures will be acceptable to safeguard and protect the third party cost data? Ans.8) No. NASA has no secret clearance for this Order. Please refer to the NASA FAR 1852.237-73, RELEASE OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION Clause (JUNE 2005), included in the original solicitation. The due date for receipt of offers is not extended. Companies shall provide the information stated in the synopsis/RFQ posted on the NASA Acquisition Internet Service (NAIS) on December 7, 2007. Documents related to this procurement are available over the Internet. These documents reside on a World Wide Web (WWW) server which may be accessed using a WWW browser application. The Internet site, or URL, for the NASA/GSFC Business Opportunities home page is http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eps/bizops.cgi?gr=D&pin=51 NOTE: THIS NOTICE WAS NOT POSTED TO FEDBIZOPPS ON THE DATE INDICATED IN THE NOTICE ITSELF (21-DEC-2007); HOWEVER, IT DID APPEAR IN THE FEDBIZOPPS FTP FEED ON THIS DATE. PLEASE CONTACT fbo.support@gsa.gov REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
- Web Link
-
Click here for the latest information about this notice
(http://www.fbo.gov/spg/NASA/GSFC/OPDC20220/NNG08226016Q/listing.html)
- Record
- SN01475751-F 20071223/071221232811 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |