The following questions and answers include all Price Model questions
received through December 8, 1997. All other questions submitted after
December 3, 1997, will be answered on December 16, 1997.

EXHIBIT 4 CENTER IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

Comment ID: 324

1\) Will an implementation plan be provided for Langley Research Center
(LaRC)?

***RESPONSE:*** ***The implementation plan for LaRC will be provided as
soon as it is available.***

EXHIBIT 2 ODIN PRICE MODEL INSTRUCTIONS

Comment ID: 325

2\) I believe you have left out the Year 2000 from the Pricing
instructions on page 2. On that page ARC is the example and the years
are listed:

ARC99

ARC01

ARC02 \...

leaving out ARC00.

Please confirm this is correct or provide instructions to correct it.

***RESPONSE: This was an omission. Updated Pricing Instructions will be
provided with the revised price model by close of business December 17,
1997.***

A.3.11.3 ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY OF PRICING EXHIBITS

Comment ID: 326

3\) Any attempt to open Center specific spreadsheets causes an alert
about a link to an external file named C:\\ODIN\\XXXC MIN MAX.XLS (where
XXX represents the specific NASA Center). No such file(s) are available
for download on the NASA Web Site. Will these files be made available
soon?

***RESPONSE***: ***This error will be corrected, and the corrected Price
Model will be provided by close of business December 17, 1997.***

4\) Quantity entries in the Center specific spreadsheets are expressed
as decimal numbers. Why are they not integers?

***RESPONSE:*** ***When we converted from formulas to values, the system
generated the decimal numbers. However, the values in the cells are
integers. This difference will have no affect on your proposal.***

EXHIBIT 1 ODIN PRICE MODEL

Comment ID: 327

5\) There are a number of formula and logic errors in the Exhibit 1
spreadsheets.

Some examples...

In ARC.XLS reference the portion of the spreadsheet indicated below.

\| A \| B \| C \| D \| . . . \| L \|

490 \| Infrastructure \| \| \| \| \| \|

\| Upgrade \| \| \| \| \| \|

The formulas in B490 through L490 are:

=(150000000/11)\*1-ClassDB!

The formulas should be =(150000000/11)\*(1-ClassDB!) With parentheses
around the second expression.

In MFSC.XLS, the same problem with the parentheses in the formula
exists.

***RESPONSE: This mistake will corrected in the revised Price Model.***

6\) In addition to this error exists in many/all of the sheets, there
are additional errors in this area.

RESPONSE: Please note there are error division messages throughout the
price model. These occur because the value is established by the offeror
in the Class DB and CSCC Tabs. Currently, the value is zero.

7\) In addition, the MSFC.XLS spreadsheet references the JSC spreadsheet
in the formulas in B490 through L490, which does not appear to be
correct.

***RESPONSE: This will be corrected in revised Price Model.***

8\) In JSC.XLS, the same problem with the parentheses in the formula
exists.

***RESPONSE: See previous response.***

9\) Also, the formula references sheet \"JSCClassDB\" in error. This
reference should be to \"ClassDB.\"

***RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price Model.***

10\) For many/all of the sheets in Exhibit 1 the value in ClassDB! is
blank/zero, but in the event the Government wishes to use this
parameter, the formulas should be corrected.

*RESPONSE: The value of ClassDB! is equal to the values inputted by each
offeror in the Class DB! table.*

Comment ID: 330

11\) Is the ODIN price model the series of Excel spreadsheets for each
center?

RESPONSE: Yes.

Comment ID: 328

12\) The Cost/Price requirements are excessive and cost prohibitive.

Much of the data requested, without bounds, is unavailable from a cost
history standpoint. The pricing data will have to be generated bottoms
up via engineering estimates. This leads to validation concerns as well
as a general concern for inflated costs to cover may of the unbounded
risks. This is also concern for being a very capable technical, service
delivery company which will be noncompetitive in the eyes of NASA

I assume that there is some cost history in existance today that exists
for incumbent contractors. The data exists at a gross level.

There are alternatives pricing options available in a \"model site\"
scenario or banded scenario that would offer the same value and
objectives to NASA. If in fact the variables and information will change
at the site level, the yard stick, NTE pricing gained from a \"model\"
site could be refined or rebid at a center level bid.

I believe Industry would be receptive to offering suggestions for
alternate pricing models or scenarios that truly fit a diverse
commercial model.

The number of variables and options within the service levels cause many
concerns. The main concern is: The unbounded (contractually) options
allow the user community to pick and choose their service level
requirements which also allows the basis for costing to be picked apart
and disbanded, therfore exposing the contractor to prolonged cost risk
and service delivery risk.

There is no evidence of convergence of service level requirements or
computing resources.

Could we suggest price model alternatives at this juncture. Thanks.

RESPONSE: Other than formatting changes as discussed below, alternate
Price Models will not be solicited at this time.

Comment ID: 362

13\) General - The pricing instructions specify that the \"vendor shall
provide in a separate electronic file the \'intelligence\' behind the
unique number structure \...\" used in the Vendor Product Identification
Number column. Please specify what type of electronic file NASA prefers.

***RESPONSE: Microsoft Word.***

14\) General - Please specify the type of electronic file NASA prefers
for pricing notes.

***RESPONSE: Microsoft Word.***

15\) Center Specific Workbooks - Will it be possible to copy the CSCC
spreadsheet from one set of workbooks to another and maintain the
integrity of the VLOOKUP? Does NASA envision this file as Center
specific? If not, is it necessary to have multiple copies of this
worksheet?

***RESPONSE: It is possible to copy the CSCC spreadsheet from one set of
workbooks to another and maintain the integrity of the VLOOKUP; however,
when copying from one NASA Center spreadsheet to another, the Center id
carries forward in the formulas. To replace with the correct Center id,
you would execute the edit, find and replace to cite the correct Center
id in the formulas. Please note: before copying a spreadsheet, the
product class codes used in the CSCC must be specified in the Class DB
with a discount. In addition, the CSCC file is Center specific because
it is being evaluated in the summary tab for each Center.***

16\) Center Specific Workbooks - The CSCC included with the GSFC
workbooks is not the same as that in the ARC workbook.

RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price Model.

17\) Center Specific Workbooks (FYxx) - Row 403 titled \"Johnson Space
Center Fax Service Type\" (noted in ARC and DFRC workbooks, as
examples) - Is this a typo? The same title appears in Rows 422, 437,
456, 472, 489.

***RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price*** M***odel.***

18\) Center Specific Workbooks (FYxx) - No formulas are recorded for PC
standard seat

calculation of total cost although the SUM worksheet links back to these
cells for its calculation of grand totals. (For example, cells E3-E6.)

RESPONSE: The Base Seat Total amount cells, in the spreadsheets, now
contain a formula that reflects all standard seat items. This total has
been carried forward to the Summary tab.

19\) Center Specific Workbooks (FYxx) - Additionally, it appears that
every entry which is designated as \"Standard\" does not have a formula
for calculating a total and carrying that total forward to the Summary
spreadsheet.

RESPONSE: See previous response.

20\) Center Specific Workbooks (Total Summary) - The GSFC workbook
refers to the ARC workbook to calculate the CSCC totals in Rows 486-487.
Is this correct?

RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price Model.

21\) Vendor1 Workbook (Discounts Spreadsheet) - There is a note with a
single asterisk (\*), \"This surcharge is based on a 1% increase above
the existing 1% priority service level\". To what does this refer?

***RESPONSE: This note has been deleted.***

22\) Vendor1 Workbook (Total Summary Spreadsheet) - Row 42 has a
\'#VALUE\' error. The formula is attempting to add values from the
Center-specific spreadsheets, but the cell references point to cells
containing the word \'TOTAL\'. (See also rows 83, 126, 190 through row
483.) When will these errors be corrected?

RESPONSE: This formula will be deleted in the revised Price Model.

The next four questions will be answered in next week's responses.

23\) Vendor1 Workbook (Total Summary Spreadsheet) - Rows 486-488 and 494
contain

reference errors. Will these be corrected?

24\) Vendor1 Workbook (Total Summary Spreadsheet) - The November 28
release of the pricing model included 2 new centers, GWAC and GWAC-H,
but these two centers are not included in the totals. Please explain.

25\) Vendor1 Workbook (ARC Spreadsheet) - Row 43 of this spreadsheet,
upon which TOTAL Sum Row 42 depends, contains the word \"TOTAL\".

26\) Vendor1 Workbook JSC/GSFC Spreadsheets) - Rows 485-488 contain
reference errors.

Comment ID: 363

These questions were duplicate of Comment ID: 362

Comment ID: 364

27\) If NASA reissues the pricing model, will you format only the
spreadsheet cells that contain entries (rather than formatting all of
the spreadsheet columns)? This will greatly reduce the size of the
spreadsheet files. For example, we were able to reduce the size of the
ARC.XLS file from 13,958,656 bytes to 2,187,776 bytes. If the model is
not reissued, will NASA allow bidders to eliminate unused cells by
formatting cells rather than columns?

***RESPONSE: NASA will be reissuing the price model, but the formatting
will remain. However, if an offeror wants to eliminate unused cells by
formatting cells rather than columns, that is okay as long as all of the
required information is submitted with the proposal.***

Comment ID: 366

28\) Must ODIN bidders submit the existing pricing spreadsheets in color
without any formatting modifications? The size of the spreadsheets can
be significantly reduced by removing color, reducing the font size,
formatting only cells with entries, and printing only used pages. This
greatly reduces storage requirements and program load times and reduces
the amount of paper (and print/copy time) required for hardcopies.

***RESPONSE: Offerors may submit their proposals with format
modifications as long as all of the required information is submitted
with the proposals. Please note: NASA is going to post a message to the
website asking for additional feedback in this area.***

Comment ID: 365

28\) It is not clear from the Exhibit 1 spreadsheets where the
Government intends that offerors enter the unit prices for a standard
seat.

***RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price*** M***odel.***

29\) It is \[not\] clear where prices for optional items are entered and
how they are multiplied by the associated quantities, totaled, etc.

***RESPONSE: This will be corrected in the revised Price*** M***odel.***