1131PL26RQ0015 A00002 - Questions and Responses.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

1131PL26RQ0015 A00002

1131PL

N/A

TYRONE W. JOHNSON, CONTRACTING OFFICER

The purpose of this Amendment 00002 is to Provide Responses (in BOLD) to Questions received under solicitation number:

1131PL26RQ0015. All Else Remain Unchanged.

1131PL

Office of Acquisition Management United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) 1101 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1100 Arlington, Virginia 22209

SAME AS BLOCK 6

2026-31001A

1131PL26RQ0015

1 9

See Block 31c.

03/02/2026

pg. 2

Solicitation Number: 1131PL26RQ0015 Amendment 0002 Title: Definitional Mission for Indo-Pacific Energy and Critical Minerals Infrastructure Opportunities

CONTINUTION OF SF30 BLOCK 14…

All questions must be emailed to the POC listed in the solicitation at contractproposals@ustda.gov and tjohnson@ustda.gov no later than 1:00 p.m., Arlington, VA Time Monday, March 9, 2026. Please reference the Solicitation Number and Project Title in the SUBJECT LINE of your email.

Questions AND Responses (BOLD):

1. Past Performance Questionnaire: Please confirm that if the Offeror performed as a subcontractor on a federal project, then in lieu of the CO’s signature, the completed Past Performance Questionnaire may be signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the prime contractor with oversight of the submitted project.

Response: Yes, this is an acceptable approach.

2. Labor Categories: Please advise if there is any guidance available regarding the labor categories for this solicitation.

Response: We defer to the offeror’s to determine the appropriate labor categories to fulfill the requirements of the solicitation.

3. CVs: Please confirm if only the CVs of key experts should be provided as part of the offer.

Response: Please provide CVs for all experts as it pertains to the core requirements of the solicitation.

4. Price Proposal: Please confirm if the format for the proposal price referred to in Section E should follow Attachment V or kindly advise if there is a specific template or preferred format for providing the breakdown in Microsoft Excel.

Response: Please follow Attachment V Required Budget Format

5. Budget Narrative: Please confirm if the format for the narrative to support the price proposal referred to in the instruction in Section E should follow Attachment VII or kindly advise if there is a separate format.

Response: Please follow Attachment VII Budget Narrative Requirements

pg. 3

6. Proposal Extension: Please advise if a possible extension of one week is possible for the proposal deadline.

Response: This solicitation will not be extended.

7. Proposal Submission: We understand that the two volumes are to be submitted as separate documents. Please confirm if all documents should be sent in a single email, or if submitting them in separate emails is also acceptable?

Response: Yes, proposals submitted in a single email are preferred but separate emails (Must be labeled Vol I or II in Title) will be acceptable. However, any proposal submitted to the Office of Acquisition Management (AQM) by email in whole, separately or partially (Examples…Volume I or II) after the designated closing date and time as posted in the solicitation 1131PL26RQ0015 will be recognized as late proposals and will be processed in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation guidance.

8. Section D.1.5 identifies six Project Profile areas: nuclear, geothermal, oil and gas, grid modernization, critical minerals, and seabed minerals. The RFP does not specify how many Project Reports should cover each technology area.

a. Response: USTDA is an on-demand facility, so the number of Project Reports for each technology area will be dependent on market demand and consultation with the COR.

Will USTDA provide any guidance on the expected distribution of projects across technology areas, or is this entirely at the contractor's and COR's discretion based on mission findings?

b. Response: This will be dependent on the contractor and COR’s discretion based on mission findings, as well as covered in the kick-off meeting.

9. Section D.1.6.4 states that 'substantive technical work may not be subcontracted to local entities.'

Can USTDA clarify whether non-U.S. nationals located in host countries may support the mission in roles such as stakeholder engagement, sector insight, market research, provided they are not performing substantive technical deliverables?

Please see USTDA Nationality Requirements Attachment IV of the solicitation

If host-country experts provide limited advisory input or facilitate meetings with stakeholders, may those services be included as Other Direct Costs (ODCs) or local support services rather than labor categories?

pg. 4

Response: Offeror’s will travel with the USTDA COR, or Regional Staff, and these services will not be required. USTDA will help to organize meetings with local market project stakeholders.

10. Section E requests submission of past performance information for up to three recent contracts or subcontracts.

Can past performance examples include contracts performed by a proposed subcontractor that will play a significant technical role in the proposed team?

Response: Yes, this is acceptable.

11. Section E.6 (3) state that “price is fair and reasonable in accordance with the OASIS contract.”

Please clarify that firms that do not hold OASIS contract are eligible to apply under this solicitation.

Response: This is a Typo: Should read: “Price is Fair and Reasonable in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR).

12. For travel to multiple countries in the Indo-Pacific region, should offerors assume one primary scoping mission per project opportunity?

Response: No, one trip total (see specified days in solicitation) to identify new project opportunities.

13. Can the contractor budget a lump sum cost under ODC for local nationals consulting labor for each country? This cost will be minimal for any minor local logistical support.

See Response Question #9: Offeror’s will travel with the USTDA COR, or Regional Staff, and these services will not be required. USTDA will help to organize meetings with local market project stakeholders.

14. Section E.6 states that non-price factors combined are significantly more important than price, and that the two Technical sub-factors are of equal importance to each other.

Please confirm: (a) are Technical Approach and Past Performance of equal importance to each other as non-price factors, or does Technical outweigh Past Performance? (b) If an offeror receives an 'Unknown/Neutral' past performance rating due to no relevant recent record, is this treated as a neutral finding — neither positive nor negative — consistent with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)?

pg. 5

Response: FAR 15.304 Evaluation Factors and Significant subfactors…Please Read last sentence of Section E.6 Evaluation Factors for Award: …The following non-price factors are of equal importance and will be used to evaluate all offers. All evaluation factors, other than cost/price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost/price. As technical merit of the proposals becomes more equal, cost/price may become a determining factor.

Please read Section E, Table 1 and Table 2 which gives a Definition of each Adjectival Rating.

15. The solicitation uses adjectival ratings (Outstanding through Unacceptable) for Technical factors and confidence ratings (Substantial through Unknown/Neutral) for Past Performance.

Will USTDA publish the specific evaluation criteria or rating descriptors that define what distinguishes an 'Outstanding' from a 'Good' technical proposal for each sub-factor? If not, can USTDA confirm that Section M/E.6 constitutes the complete evaluation criteria?

Please read Section E Instructions to Offerors, Table 1 and Table 2 which gives a Definition of each Adjectival Rating. Also, Read Section E.6. Evaluation Factors for Award

16. The solicitation states that 'as technical merit equalizes, price may become a determining factor.'

Can USTDA clarify the mechanism for this? Specifically, will USTDA conduct a “best value” tradeoff analysis between higher-technical/higher-price and lower-technical/lower-price offerors, or is this a tie-breaking provision only applicable when technical ratings are identical?

Price proposals found to be unrealistically low (an indication of “buy – in”) will be ineligible for award. The evaluated price will be used in the tradeoff analysis between price and non-price factors to determine best value. No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Price. Also, please read Section E.7.3. Best Value Award Determination

17. The solicitation incorporates FAR 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services).

Can USTDA confirm: (a) whether the option price must be included in Volume II of the initial proposal; (b) whether the option period would be priced at the same CLIN rates as the base period; and (c) the maximum duration of the option period?

pg. 6

Response: No

18. Would USTDA consider extending the proposal submission deadline by two weeks?

Response to Questions #6

19. Section D.1.5: Should bidders demonstrate that their key personnel have any particular foreign language skills, or experience working in any particular priority countries?

Response: Foreign language skills are not required. Each offeror’s bid will be evaluated based on the performance criteria noted in the solicitation. USTDA’s Indo-Pacific priority markets are India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.

20. . Section D.1.5: Does USTDA already have a pipeline of proposed projects/activities ready for the Contractor to begin reviewing as part of Initial Assessments?

Response: Yes, there are projects in the pipeline.

21. . Section D.1.5: Can USTDA provide their list or definition for "critical minerals"?

Response: Please refer to the U.S. Department of the Interior, through the U.S.

Geological Survey, final 2025 List of Critical Minerals.

22. Section D.1.5. Conventional thermal generation is mentioned in the narrative part of this section as types of projects being developed in Southeast Asia, South Asia, and the Pacific Islands, but it is not listed in particular in the table of categories of project types covered by this DM. Should this be considered an oversight?

Response: Conventional thermal generation projects will be considered as part of this DM.

23. Section E.5. Can a CPARS evaluation be used in place of the Past Performance

Questionnaire?

Response: Yes

24. . Section D.1.3 lists possible Definitional Mission deliverables. Under 7. Amendment

Reviews it states that there may be “up to 4 total”, but the pricing only asks for two (2).

Please clarify the number of Amendment Reviews that may be required.

Response: Two.

pg. 7

25. . Section D.1.6.3 notes that the contractor may find it useful to purchase the Gold Key or Business Facilitation Services offered at the U.S. Embassy or Consulate and/or contract with local entities for logistics and interpretation. Should offerors include these costs in the reimbursable travel line item or in the firm fixed price CLIN?

Response: Offeror’s will travel with the USTDA COR, or Regional Staff, and these services will not be required. USTDA will help to organize meetings with local market project stakeholders.

26. Section D.1.6.3 notes that the contractor may be requested to travel for a Scoping Mission. How many people does the Government expect the contractor to send on the Scoping Mission as the timeframe is limited to 10 days?

Response: Two staff.

26. Section E.6 (3) PRICE makes reference to OASIS. Is this intended?

Response: Typo: Please see response on Question #11.

27. On page 2 of the solicitation, the Schedule of Supplies/Services lists two Activity Amendment Reviews (Items No. 0004 and 0005). However, on page 17, the solicitation references "up to 4 total" Amendment Reviews. Could you please clarify the expected number of Amendment Reviews so that bidders may price this accordingly in the financial proposal?

Response: Two Amendment Reviews are included as part of this solicitation.

28. Please confirm if the USTDA accepts participation of non-US nationals in the proposal who are nationals of eligible host-country(s) in the Indo-Pacific Region (for up to 30% of the contract value).

Please see USTDA Nationality Requirements Attachment IV of the solicitation

29. In the event of a bidder comprised as a consortium, shall up to 3 PPS be submitted by each member-firm of the consortium, or up to 3 total for the consortium?

Response: Ideally one for each, but 3 total is the minimum requirement.

30. There are a few discrepancies between the SF 1449 CLIN schedule and the PWS.

Specifically, Activity Amendment Reviews are shown as CLINs 0004 and 0005 in the SF 1449 (at 1 item each), but as 2 items under CLIN 0004 in D.1.2. Moreover, D.1.3, suggests that up to 4 total AARs may be ordered. The SF 1449 has 7 CLINs, whereas

pg. 8 the PWS references 6. Could the Government please reconcile the CLIN structure and the number of Activity Amendment Reviews that are to be ordered?

Response: Two Amendment Reviews are included as part of this solicitation.

31. Please confirm that the deliverables under the FFP portion of the contract under SF 1449

0001-0006 and the cost reimbursement travel portion (0007) is correct and Section D.1.2 on pages 15-16 is incorrect and missing the second Activity Amendment Review.

Response: Payment schedule for SF 1449 is correct. Please review PWS under Section D.1.7.6. AMENDMENT REVIEW REPORTS for requirements.

32. The following links in the text do not work. Can USTDA provide updated links to the documents? Competed process flowchart. Sole-source process flowchart.

Response: Link in solicitation experiencing technical issues. Recommend link:

https://www.ustda.gov/ustda-document-center/

33. Can USTDA confirm that it is acceptable to submit both volumes in a single email as long as the attachments are clearly marked as separate volumes?

Response: Yes

34. Can the offeror submit an acronym list as part of the proposal that does not count against the 10-page limit?

Please read E.5. Instruction for Submission of Offer/Proposals. No material may be incorporated in the proposal by reference in order to circumvent the page limitation.

35. Would it be acceptable to submit a CPAR in lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire?

Due to government reductions in force, many CO/CORs are no longer available.

Response: Yes, this is acceptable.

36. Should the offeror include an estimate for the 1 scoping mission trip in the cost proposal?

If so, can USTDA provide a plug estimate or provide more details on which country (countries)?

Response: Yes, please include this in your cost proposal. USTDA’s priority markets are India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. The trip would only be able to cover 3-4 markets over a 2-week period.

https://www.ustda.gov/ustda-document-center/

pg. 9

37. Given the fixed price nature of the contract, can USTDA confirm the level of detail is limited to fully loaded labor rates, number of days and travel?

Response: Yes, these are the main components to budget for.

38. The solicitation mentions options. Can USTDA confirm that this scope includes a base and option period (s)? If so, can USTDA provide more information on the period of performance for each?

Response: The period of performance is 2 years, with an option to extend by 6 months if all contract components are not fulfilled within the 2 year period.

39. Can USTDA clarify whether this solicitation is being competed under an OASIS or OASIS+ vehicle, or whether the OASIS reference is simply a benchmark for price reasonableness evaluation?

Response: Any and All Reference to OASIS is a TYPO…This solicitation is not being competed under an OASIS or OASIS+ vehicle.

40. Do the 10 working days and 14 total travel days represent a fixed ceiling for the entire Scoping Mission regardless of the number of countries visited, or do they represent per-country estimates that would scale with the number of countries?

Response: 10 working days and 14 total travel days represent the fixed ceiling.

Likely 3-4 markets would be visited within this period.

41. Can USTDA clarify the correct ceiling quantity for Amendment Reviews?

Response: Two Amendment Reviews.

42. Given that USTDA has three live solicitations with substantially overlapping scope and with proposal due dates falling within a ten-day window, would USTDA consider extending the proposal date for two weeks to allow offerors to submit the most competitive and responsive proposals possible?

Response: This solicitation will not be extended.

ALL ELSE REMAIN UNCHANGED.