SEWP VI Batch 3 Published 11.07.24.pdf

sewp6_rfp_all_comments

Comment

Id

Original Comment Published Response

1669 Can contracts used as Mandatory Experience also be used as a Past Performance contract? There are no restrictions on contracts used for Mandatory Experience also being used as a Past Performance reference.

1674 How should Representations and Certifications be submitted? As part of Volume I? As specified in first paragraph of Section V, the Offeror shall complete only paragraph (b) of this provision if the Offeror has completed the annual representations and certification electronically in the System for Award

Management (SAM) accessed through https://www.sam.gov. If the Offeror has not completed the annual representations and certifications electronically, the Offeror shall complete only paragraphs (c) through (v) of this provision. The Representations Certification is a part of the Offer Volume.

1683 Large Business teammates for Small Business bidders, can a Large Business be a subcontractor to a Small

Business on Category B or Category C for the purposes of meeting Mandatory Relevant Project Experience submissions?

Yes.

1686 Please clarify where and if a Q&A spreadsheet can be uploaded here? There are no spreadsheet uploading capabilities, however, you can upload individual questions or comments following the instructions . Any comments regarding the RFP should be submitted electronically using the

SEWP VI RFP application found at https://sewp.nasa.gov/sewpvi/

1688 The instructions on page 95 of the RFP stated that the respective documents within the folder should be labeled as "GetItDone_Category#‐EXHIBIT #," etc. However, the next paragraph stated, "Each proposal volume shall be submitted in a single searchable Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) file. Should we have separate PDF documents in a Volume folder or incorporate all documents into a single Volume PDF document?

Please reference the proposal format and organization in Section A.3.6 (A).

1695 On page 109, "Offerors are advised that the matrix is a summary of the referenced contracts identified in paragraph (a)(12) above." This implies the response to item 12 applies to the contract references required in

A.3.7.2(a), but that section allows "no more than 3" similar contract references. Please confirm that for #12, offerors may use the same or different contract references than used to respond to #1‐11.

Yes, for item #12, offerors may use the same or different contract references than those used to respond to items #1‐11.

1700 Please confirm that the requirement for up to 3 contract references is per category ‐‐ so that an offeror proposing in Category A and Category B would provide up to 6 total references.

Yes, the requirement for up to 3 contract references is per category.

1711 A.4.3 paragraph 4 on page 116 says "Additional performance factors may include contract administration, occupational health, safety, security, subcontracting plan goals and small disadvantaged business participation targets, if applicable, and other contract requirements." These factors are not included in Exhibit 2. Please explain how the Government will evaluate these factors.

The Government may review and consider past performance information on other contracts that it is aware of or that are made available from other sources and inquiries with previous customers. These factors will be taken into consideration as part of the overall performance evaluation

1739 "An offeror can propose as the prime contractor one time per category and can propose one additional time as a member of a JV or CTA in that same category...More than one Offer, e.g. proposal, from a Corporate

Structure may be submitted if an Offeror is NOT sharing proposal evaluation elements and/or committing resources from other entities by way of a Meaningful Relationship..." Consistent with the Draft RFP Q&A responses (which included Question 1459), please confirm that A.3.5 does NOT preclude a prime contractor from acting as a traditional 1st tier subcontractor on one or more proposals within a category if they are not providing REP or Past Performances to another company's proposal. In other words, this statement in A.3.5 applies only to limitations on the number of PRIME proposals a company can participate in (as a CTA/JV or standalone prime), not on the number of SUBCONTRACTS they can participate in. This allows highly specialized subcontractors to add value to multiple proposals, which will increase price competition at the task order level by limiting exclusivity of niche capabilities while still providing for a diversity of small business prime contractors.

The statement in A.3.5 does not preclude a prime contractor from acting as a traditional 1st tier subcontractor on one or more proposals within a category if they are not providing REP or Past Performances to another company's proposal. This statement applies only to limitations on the number of PRIME proposals a company can participate in (as a CTA/JV or standalone prime), not on the number of SUBCONTRACTS they can participate in. This allows highly specialized subcontractors to add value to multiple proposals, which will increase price competition at the task order level by limiting exclusivity of niche capabilities while still providing for a diversity of small business prime contractors.

1741 A.3.6(B)(7) "In no event can an offeror compete as a prime and as part of more than one joint venture or teaming arrangement per category." Please confirm that this language does not limit companies' ability to participate as first‐tier subcontractors on traditional prime/sub teams (not JVs or CTAs). This allows highly specialized subcontractors to add value to multiple proposals, which will increase price competition at the task order level by limiting exclusivity of niche capabilities while still providing for a diversity of small business prime contractors.

The language in A.3.6(B)(7) does not limit companies' ability to participate as first‐tier subcontractors on traditional prime/sub teams (not JVs or CTAs). This allows highly specialized subcontractors to add value to multiple proposals, which will increase price competition at the task order level by limiting exclusivity of niche capabilities while still providing for a diversity of small business prime contractors.

1743 For Small Businesses who are proposing traditional prime/subcontractor teams (not CTAs or JVs) AND are not using any of their subcontractors to meet the requirements of Volume I or II (i.e., REPs or Past Performance):

please confirm that Meaningful Commitment Letters (MCL) are NOT required for each 1st tier subcontractor discussed in the Mission Suitability Volume.

For Small Businesses who are proposing traditional prime/subcontractor teams (not CTAs or JVs) and are not using any of their subcontractors to meet the requirements of Volume I or II (i.e., REPs or Past Performance), Meaningful Commitment Letters (MCL) are NOT required for each 1st tier subcontractor discussed in the

Mission Suitability Volume.

1746 A.3.6(B)(7) "Any proposal found to be a duplication or replica of another (company) or have a section that is a duplication or replica of another offeror (company), that is not part of a JV or CTA, will lead to all identified offerors being ineligible for award…" Many large government contracts have multiple companies working on the contract together as a team. For example, Company A and Company B are teamed to perform Contract

XYZ for the Department of Defense. If Company A submits a Prime Offer for NASA SEWP and uses Contract

XYZ for one of their REPs, and Company B also submits a Prime Offer for NASA SEWP and uses Contract XYZ for one of their REPs ‐‐ there will be some duplication of information (such as contract name, period of performance, similar descriptions of the project objectives). Please confirm that as long as the two companies only cite THEIR PORTION of Contract XYZ (i.e., their dollar value, the scope that their company performed, the results they were responsible for) and WRITES THE DESCRIPTION in their own words, this will not be found ineligible for award. The benefit to the government is that MANY small business prime offerors (particularly in

Category C) must relay on REPs or Past Performances where they were a subcontractor, and they cannot control whether their prime contractors also use that contract. By not making this limitation, NASA will not unnecessarily reduce its small business pool and competition for Category C.

Companies using the same contract for their REPs and PPQs will not be penalized as long as they only cite the portion of the contract that their specific company was involved in. They are also required to write these descriptions in their own words.

1749 "Each Offeror (inclusive of first‐tier subcontractors, if applicable) for each NAICS code represented in Section

A.1.33…must complete Exhibit 4 reflecting their size standards…" Please confirm that the crosswalk is only required for first‐tier subcontractors who are required to provide Meaningful Commitment Letters.

The NAICs code crosswalk is only required for first‐tier subcontractors who are required to provide

Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letters.

1750 "Each Offeror (inclusive of first‐tier subcontractors, if applicable) for each NAICS code represented in Section

A.1.33…must complete Exhibit 4 reflecting their size standards…" The NAICS crosswalk in SAM.gov simply says if a company is "small" in that NAICS with a "Yes" vs. "No." The SAM registration indicates if a company is certified as HUBZone, EDWOSB, etc. Please clarify that in filling out the crosswalk, we are to use the socioeconomic certifications indicated in our SAM registration (e.g., EDWOSB) to be accurate?

Yes, in filling out the crosswalk in Exhibit 4, offerors are to use the socioeconomic certifications indicated in the offeror's SAM.gov registration.

1758 Exhibit 2, Past Performance Questionnaire, contain questions in Section 6 that is directed at the offeror and not at the reference, for example to calculate annual value, to explain a cost overrun, and it asks on another item "If this was an award fee contract, what are the individual and/or average ratings of performance by your organization? Please attach any available award fee letters or database entries." Would you please clarify if the offeror or the reference should respond to these? The reference might not have this information available.

The offeror should respond to these questions as the reference might not have this information available.

1760 Past Performance Volume, (a) Information from Offeror states "The offeror shall provide the following information on all past/current contract references that meet the above criteria for the prime offeror" and requests 12 data points. Can the Government please confirm that these 12 data points are requesting data specific to the three (3) referenced contracts (i.e., Reference #1 (1‐12), Reference #2 (1‐12), Reference #3 (1‐

12)?

Yes, the Government confirms that the 12 data points requested in the Past Performance Volume, (a)

Information from Offeror, are specific to the three (3) referenced contracts (i.e., Reference #1 (1‐12), Reference #2 (1‐12), Reference #3 (1‐12))

1761 Past Performance Volume, (a) Information from Offeror #9 requires "recent customer evaluations of past performance including..." Will the Government please confirm that customer‐written performance feedback issued in recent CPARS is acceptable "other written performance feedback"?

Yes, customer‐written performance feedback issued in recent CPARS is acceptable as "other written performance feedback" for the requirement in Past Performance Volume, (a) Information from Offeror #9

1763 We have done work as a subcontractor for a Prime contract holder of SEWP V. On exhibit 1, the relevant experience project table has project value. Is this the project value specifically of us as the sub contractor or the total project value of the prime contract holder? Thank You.

The project value on Exhibit 1 should reflect the total value of the offeror's contract, task order, etc.

1764 Past Performance Volume, (a) Information from Offeror states "The offeror shall provide the following information on all past/current contract references that meet the above criteria for the prime offeror" and requests 12 data points. Within these data points, #9, #10 and #11 are excluded from page limits. Can the

Government please reorder the list of items to keep page‐limited items together (#1‐8 and #12) and to keep excluded from page limit items together (#9, #10, and #11)? Alternatively, could the Government indicate that the items excluded from page count can be included as attachments?

The Government confirms that within the 12 data points requested in the Past Performance Volume, (a)

Information from Offeror, items #9, #10, and #11 are excluded from page limits. To keep page‐limited items together (#1‐8 and #12) and to keep excluded from page limit items together (#9, #10, and #11), the

Government can reorder the list of items accordingly. Alternatively, the Government could indicate that the items excluded from the page count can be included as attachments.

1766 General Question: There are multiple references to the Goddard Space Flight Center (GFSC) Supplement clauses. Where are these located and how are they different than the NASA FAR Supplement?

The Goddard Space Flight Center (GFSC) Supplement clauses are provided in the contract in full text.

1772 Page 103‐104 of the RFP states "For Small Businesses (including prime small business offerors and first tier

Subcontractor, if applicable): A total of three (3) different REPs from different mandatory experience technical areas shall be submitted. Each Project must have had a minimum of $5M in total value size of a single order or contract and must be described using the Exhibit 1 REP template." indicating "REPs from different mandatory experience technical areas" then the RFP states "For HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, WOSB, EDWOSB, 8a offerors

(inclusive of first‐ tier subcontractors, if applicable): A total of 2 different REPs for each of the mandatory experience technical areas shall be submitted." indicating "REPs for each of the mandatory experience technical areas" This contradicts the requirement for Small Business. Please verify that this should also read

"REPS from different mandatory experience technical areas".

The Government confirms that the HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, WOSB, EDWOSB, 8a offerors (inclusive of first‐ tier subcontractors, if applicable) are required to submit 2 different REPs from different mandatory experience technical areas.

1773 A.3.3 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION indicates "All Electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than 120MB" on Pg 92 #(d), and "Electronic files of Volumes I, II, and III, shall be in separate folders in 1 zip file, virus free, and no larger than 120MB per file" on Pg 94 #(3). Please clarify if the 120MB file limit is applied to the zip archive as a whole or applied to each of the electronic files individually.

The 120 MB size limit applies to the single submitted zip file containing all the submission files.

1781 A.3.7.1 states: "Provide information addressing all the elements under FAR 9.104 to demonstrate responsibility (address the elements under this section that are not addressed in another proposal volume)."

Since the requirements of this FAR are very broad, from financial resources to management approach, can the government please break down exactly what evidence is required for this section?

No, the Government will not be providing a breakdown.

1790 A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME, (a) INFORMATION FROM THE OFFEROR, page 106 states "The offeror shall provide the following information on all past/current contract references that meet the above criteria for the prime offeror:" and then identifies 12 separate requirements. The way this is written, it appears that the intention is for all 12 of these requirements to apply specifically and only to the "minimum of one (1) but no more than three (3)" contract references that are presented as past performance references for the proposal. However, while requirements 1 ‐ 8 are clearly able to be drawn from a specific contract reference, requirement #'s 9 ‐ 12 seem as though they could be aimed at a bidders overall performance. Can the

Government please clarify whether these 12 requirements are applicable to ONLY the reference contracts that are selected by the bidder, or whether some of them would apply to the bidders overall business?

Data points 1‐8 are specific to the contract reference while data points 9‐12 can be for the bidder's overall performance.

1815 "The offeror must provide past performance submissions as it relates to the NAICS code being used for competition."

What does the code being used for competition mean? Is there only one code, or will any code in Exibit 4 count as the competition code?

The NAICS code being used for competition refers to the NAICS code under the category the offeror is submitting a proposal for.

1822 Should the offeror complete the Reps & Certs and include in their proposal? If so, which volume should this be included in and are the pages excluded?

Yes, the Representations and Certifications should be included in the proposal as part of Volume I, page limitations are excluded.

1828 Are separate sets of volumes (Volume I‐Offer Volume, Volume II‐Past Performance Volume, and Volume III‐

Mission Suitability Volume) required for each individual Technical Area within a Category? For instance, if a company is proposing two Content Representative Areas from Category C, for example, C.2. Information and

Data Analytics Services (IDAs) and C.3. Application Services/Software Development, are two sets of Volumes I, II, and III required?

Offerors wishing to propose on more than one category must submit a complete and separate proposal for each category they want to propose on.

1842 For the Volume I submission, is it acceptable for Offerors to use Tabs to identify RFP documents the Offerors are completing, such as the SF1449, Certifications and Representations, Exhibit 3a (PDF), and Exhibit 5, in the

Volume Table of Contents with each Tab containing the numbered page, Offeror name, RFP number, and date in lieu of modifying each page within the SF1449, Certifications and Representations, Exhibit 3a (PDF), and

Exhibit 5 with this same information?

Yes, it is acceptable for Offerors to use Tabs to identify RFP documents the Offerors are completing.

1849 Can an SBA‐approved Mentor‐Protege SDVOSB (comprised of a SDVOSB Protégé and a Large Business

Mentor) submit a bid as a Small Business under Category B?

Yes, an SBA approved Mentor‐Protégé SDVOSB (comprised of a SDVOSB Protégé and a Large Business

Mentor) can submit a proposal as a Small Business under category B.

1850 Can manufacturer Authorization letters (LOAs) be in the names of the individual partners in a JV rather than the JV itself?

No, the 4 designated provider (manufacturer) LOAs must be the name of the JV.

1854 Can an Offeror submit as a small business using REPs and Past Performance references under the NAICS in the crosswalk (not just the primary NAICS 541519e for Cat A or 541512 for Cat B&C)?

As stated in Section A.3.7.1 Offer Volume ‐ An offeror must select a single NAICS code that will be used to compete for a master SEWP VI contract award.

1855 For Category B & C, specifically for Small Businesses, can the government please confirm that the REP's must come from 3 different technical areas within the category whereas the past performance can encompass several different areas within the given category?

That is correct, for Category B and C for Small Businesses, REPs must come from 3 different technical areas within the category whereas the past performance can encompass several different areas within the given category.

1858 Reference: A.3.7.2(a)

The Government provides that, "A Small Business Prime Offeror may provide past performance references for first tier subcontractors to the extent the small business prime offeror does not independently demonstrate capabilities and past performance. The combined total of the Offeror’s (including JVs) and proposed first tier subcontractors’ past prime or subcontract experiences shall be limited to no more than three (3) reference contracts for the Offeror (including JVs) and no more than one (1) reference Contract for each first‐tier subcontractor for which performance occurred within the last three (3) years of the release date of the final

SEWP VI RFP."

Can the Government confirm that a CTA arrangement may exist with an OTSB acting as Prime wherein the

OTSB Prime may utilize a teammate's/first‐tier subcontractor's past performance? Can the Government please confirm whether there are any limitations on use of the CTA teammate/first‐tier subcontractor's contract reference(s)?

A CTA with an OTSB prime utilizing teammate/subcontractor past performance is allowed with limitations:

combined total of Offeror (including JVs) and proposed first‐tier subcontractors' past prime/subcontract experiences are limited to 3 reference contracts (Offeror/JVs) and 1 per subcontractor within the last 3 years of RFP release.

1870 Do files need to be zipped if they are under 120 MB uncompressed? Compressing files can sometimes cause issues after decompressing. We would like to avoid this risk if possible.

No, files do not need to be zipped if they are under 120 MB uncompressed. You can submit files under 120

MB uncompressed to avoid potential issues associated with file compression.

1889 A.3.5 says that "Offerors sharing resources from other entities by way of a Meaningful Relationship within a

Corporate Structure (including its Parent Company/Holding Company or any one or more of its affiliates, subsidiaries, business units, joint ventures, or any other types of independent business structures) may only submit one Offer (e.g., proposal) from that Corporate structure." SBA Mentor‐Protege Joint Ventures are not considered affiliates (per (13 CFR § 125.9), subsidiaries, business units or independent business structures within a corporate structure. Do SBA Mentor‐Protege Joint Ventures need to submit a Meaningful

Relationship Commitment Letter? "

No.

1890 A.3.5 says that "Offerors sharing resources from other entities by way of a Meaningful Relationship within a

Corporate Structure (including its Parent Company/Holding Company or any one or more of its affiliates, subsidiaries, business units, joint ventures, or any other types of independent business structures) may only submit one Offer (e.g., proposal) from that Corporate structure. More than one Offer, e.g., proposal, from a

Corporate Structure may be submitted if an Offeror is NOT sharing proposal evaluation elements and/or committing resources from other entities by way of a Meaningful Relationship within a Corporate Structure. If an Offeror submits more than one proposal with any Meaningful Relationships sharing proposal evaluation elements, only the first proposal received will be considered for evaluation and all other proposals received will be rejected and not evaluated." SBA Mentor‐Protege Joint Ventures are not considered affiliates (per (13

CFR § 125.9), subsidiaries, business units or independent business structures within a corporate structure.

Please confirm that this does not apply to a bid from an SBA Mentor‐Protege Joint Venture when the Mentor is also submitting a stand alone bid?

Section A.3.5 (regarding affiliate relationships) does not apply to SBA Mentor‐Protégé Joint Ventures where the mentor also submits a standalone bid, as they are not considered affiliates.

1894 The RFP states "Offerors may provide the past performance of a parent or affiliated or predecessor company to an Offeror (including Joint Venture companies as prime offerors and/or a parent or affiliated company being otherwise proposed as a subcontractor on this effort) where the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate or predecessor will affect the performance of the Offeror." This implies that the JV parent companies could be included only if propsed as a subcontractor. A JV bidding as a prime will include the resources of both parent companies without treating them as a subcontractor. Request the government clarify that past performance references may come from either JV partner or the JV itself.

Yes, past performance references can come from either joint venture partner or the joint venture itself, as long as the offeror demonstrates in their proposal how the experience is relevant.

1895 Offer Volume I requires "supporting Team Agreement/JV documentation." Can SBA Mentor‐Protege Joint

Ventures submit their Joint Venture Agreement to satisfy the "Team Agreement/JV documentation" requirement?

Yes.

1920 Would the government please clarify if items 10, 11, and 12 from Information from Offerors are related to the

3 references provided in the Past Performance Volume or are related to the offerors contracts in general?

Thank you.

Items 10, 11, and 12 of the “Information from Offerors” section relate to the Offeror's contracts in general, not specifically to the three references provided in the Past Performance Volume.

1925 Should volume III be separated into two volumes/separate PDF documents, Volume III‐A and III‐b? We see both have requirements for cover pages.

Yes, The documents associated with the Technical Approach should be placed in one folder and the documents associated with the Management Approach should be placed in a separate folder. Each subfactor should have its own unique cover pages, table of contents, list of figures, and list of tables. The two folders should then be combined into a single Volume III PDF File with the exception of Exhibit 5 which must be provided in MS Office Excel format with working cell formulas The Volume III pdf and Exhibit 5 Excel file should then be included in the Proposal zip file. (Note: if an O‐TTPS Certification is provided in place of

Exhibit 5, include the certificate in Volume III and do not provide Exhibit 5).

1931 Can you confirm the AbilityOne Formal Agreement does not need to be submitted with the offer? That is correct. The AbilityOne Formal Agreement does not need to be submitted with the offer.

1932 What needs to be in the AbilityOne commitment letter? Is there a template? The AbilityOne Formal Agreement with the Nonprofit Agency (NPA) will be required upon award. The

AbilityOne Commitment Letter needs to be provided at the time of proposal submission These are two separate documents.

1940 Can you confirm that there should be 1 zip file, with each category file folder inside. Or is there a zip file for each category

The proposal submission instructions specify that all electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than 120MB. The zip file should contain separate folders for each category if submitting proposals for multiple categories. Each category folder should contain the respective volumes labeled accordingly.

Therefore, there should be one zip file with each category file folder inside, rather than a separate zip file for each category.

1950 In A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME, do we have to provide “, the past performance history of the contract in “(a )12 Information from the offeror” of the same contract we are providing as past performance reference in (a) 1, 2, and 3 information from the offeror section?

No, the past performance history in Item 12 of the "Information from Offerors" section is not limited to the contract being used as a past performance reference in Items 1, 2, and 3. This information should reflect the

Offeror's overall past performance history on previous contracts within the past three years.

1951 In A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME, will each REP have a page limitation of 10 pages? It seems if an offeror is providing 3 past performance references, then the total pages will be 30, 10 for each reference?

Each Relevant Experience Project (REP) is not subject to a 10‐page limitation. REP submissions are limited to 3 page responses for each REP.

1965 Assuming offerors supply a complete acronym and abbreviation list, will the government allow offerors to omit spelling out acronyms in the body of the proposal, which either the government spells out or are considered to be commonplace? (e.g., IT, DOD, PWS, etc.)?

Yes, the government allow offerors to omit spelling out acronyms in the body of the proposal.

1973 RFP A.3.6 (B): "Other limitations/instructions identified as follows in A.3.6.b. Each proposal volume shall be submitted in a single searchable Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) file (compatible with ADOBE Reader version DC or 2017), with appropriate bookmarks to at least to the section header. Spreadsheets shall also be converted to PDF, in the most readable manner practicable, and submitted as part of a single PDF file."

Immediately above this requirement the Government gives required file names for each document within each volume, suggesting that each document in a volume should be submitted separately. Will the

Government please confirm that Offerors are limited to submitting three PDF files: File #1 – Volume I, File #2

– Volume II and File #3 – Volume III?

The Government confirms that Offerors are limited to submitting three PDF files: File #1 – Volume I, File #2 –

Volume II, and File #3 – Volume III. Each proposal volume shall be submitted in a single searchable Adobe

Portable Document Format (PDF) file (compatible with ADOBE Reader version DC or 2017), with appropriate bookmarks to at least the section header. Submission of Excel Spreadsheets will be clarified in an upcoming

Amendment..

1974 A.3.5 states, "Subcontractors from Other Than Small Businesses that creates a CTA will not be evaluated." Will the Government please clarify if this means A) Other than Small Businesses cannot create a CTA with any other business for the purpose of submitting as a Prime Offeror and/or B) Other than Small Businesses cannot be part of a CTA where the Other than Small Business is a 1st Tier Subcontractor to a Small Business. If the answer is B), please clarify that the only exception to this would be where the Other than Small Business is a

Mentor in a Mentor ‐ Protege Joint Venture.

The statement in A.3.5 means that Other than Small Businesses cannot create a CTA with any other business for the purpose of submitting as a Prime Offeror (Option A). Additionally, Other than Small Businesses cannot be part of a CTA where the Other than Small Business is a 1st Tier Subcontractor to a Small Business (Option

B). The only exception to this would be where the Other than Small Business is a Mentor in a Mentor‐Protégé

Joint Venture

1976 In A.3.7.1 it states, "An Offeror may submit a proposal under an existing CTA with a prime/subcontractor relationship or Joint Venture only if the existing Joint Venture or prime has a corresponding UEI Number in https://www.sam.gov and all the proposal submission documents are in the name of the existing Joint

Venture or prime. Joint Ventures without a corresponding UEI Number in https://www.sam.gov will not be evaluated or considered for award." The Government only recognizes a CTA as a Prime/Sub relationship or existing Joint Venture in this section. Will the Government please also address a CTA where both members of the CTA are Co‐Primes on the CTA with only one member being the CTA Lead. This is a CTA that is neither

Prime/Sub nor a Joint Venture.

No, a co‐prime CTA relationship with one member serving as the CTA lead will not be accepted for proposal submission or evaluation.

1977 Is more than one type of CTAs allowed under the same submission? For example an existing Joint Venture priming with First Tier Subcontractors supporting the Joint Venture proposal.

No, only one type of CTA is allowed under the same submission.

1988 Would a school district contract qualify as relevant under the requirement: "Offeror shall provide past performance information from NASA contracts, other Government contracts, and commercial contracts"?

Yes, a school district contract qualifies as relevant.

1989 Can Past Performance and REPS be the same record of work performed or do they have to be different? They can be the same as long as they meet the requirements of each section.

1992 Should these bullets be part of a cover letter or a section in the offer volume I?

¿For joint ventures the Offerors shall provide the work done and qualifications held individually by each partner to the joint venture as well as any work done by the joint venture itself.” What are these qualifications relative to?

‐Provide information addressing all the elements under FAR 9.104 to demonstrate responsibility (address the elements under this section that are not addressed in another proposal volume).

The information regarding JVs should be included in Volume I of the offer. The qualifications are relative to the work done under the contract or order being proposed on.

1999 RFP, A.3.6 B(7); In no event can an offeror compete as a prime and as part of more than one joint venture or teaming arrangement per category.

Will NASA confirm, two separate subsidiaries of the same Parent organization (different UEIs and CAGE codes), can individually compete for and be awarded contracts under SEWP VI for the same Category and size standard(s)?

Yes, two separate subsidiaries of the same Parent organization with different UEIs and CAGE codes, can individually compete for and be awarded contracts under SEWP VI for the same Category and size standard(s)

2003 In section A.3.5 of the RFP, the Government states “An Offeror can propose as the prime contractor one time per category and can propose one additional time as a member of a joint venture (JV) or contractor team arrangement (CTA) in that same category.” Please confirm that a small business may bid as a standalone prime under Category A, Group A2 (small business set aside) and also as a member of a SBA mentor‐protege approved JV bidding under Category A, Group A2 as well?

Yes, a small business may bid as a standalone prime under Category A‐Group A2 (small business set aside) and also as a member of a SBA mentor‐protégé approved JV bidding under Category A‐Group A2.

2014 Please confirm that the 10 page limit for Past Performance is for each Category; e.g. if offerors are proposing on both Category B and C they would have 10 pages for each Category or 20 pages total.

The page limitation is for each Category, 10 pages per category for Past Performance.

2019 If a contract's period of performance is extended due to external events like COVID‐19, would Govt. consider the extended period of performance while evaluating product relevancy and the three‐year look‐back period

(for REPs and Past Performance), or would Govt. only consider the original period of performance end date?

If a contract's period of performance is extended due to external events like COVID‐19, the Government will consider the extended period of performance while evaluating product relevancy and the three‐year look‐ back period (for REPs and Past Performance). The Government will consider past periods of performance in evaluating overall relevance

2021 Regarding 13 CFR 125.2(g), could you please clarify whether size and complexity will be considered by the

Government when evaluating a Small Business Prime Offeror's independent capabilities and past performance for a given technical area?

Specifically, if a Small Business Prime Offeror has some past performance, but not of the size and complexity required by the RFP, would the Government consider the past performance of the prime's first‐tier subcontractors?

Regarding 13 CFR 125.2(g), the Government will consider the size and complexity when evaluating a Small

Business Prime Offeror's independent capabilities and past performance for a given technical area. If a Small

Business Prime Offeror has some past performance but not of the size and complexity required by the RFP, the Government will consider the past performance of the prime's first‐tier subcontractors.

2022 Past Performance Volume item 12, page 108: It is noted that for Category C " shall provide past performance references showcasing relevant work in at least two (2) content representative areas for content to be rated relevant (pertinent)." Does this mean two content areas per past performance example or a a total of 2 (one for each past performance)?

For Category C, the requirement is to provide past performance references showcasing relevant work in at least two (2) content representative areas for content to be rated relevant (pertinent). This means a total of 2 content areas, which can be covered by one or more past performance examples.

2023 For the past performance matrix do we only insert the relevant content representative areas of our previously defined past performance, or columns for all content representative areas (example ‐ Category C has 10 CRAs do we insert all of those into the columns of the matrix)?

The information in the Past Performance Matrix shall match the past performance information with the relevant experience identified in paragraph (a)(12) of section A.3.4.2.

2030 In A.3.6 (B), page 96, the proposal submission table contained in the RFP indicates that Mandatory Experience

Exhibits are excluded from page limitations. Would the government please clarify that for Categories B and C, the RFP is referring to Exhibit 1, Relevant Experience Project Table?

Yes, the reference is to Exhibit 1 for Categories B and C.

2051 The RFP states, "Only one proposal per group for each scope category will be accepted per offeror. An Offeror can propose as the prime contractor one time per category and can propose one additional time as a member of a joint venture (JV) or contractor team arrangement (CTA) in that same category. For example, it is permissible for XYZ, Corp to propose as a prime contractor in Category A, and form a JV with 123, LLC to propose in category A. This example applies to all categories as well as CTAs

If we intend to bid as an SDVOSB for Category C as a prime with no subcontractors, is it also permissible for our company to bid Category B as a member of an SDVOSB joint venture, and if so, use the same past performance?

Yes, it is permissible for an offeror to submit as an SDVOSB for Category C as a prime with no subcontractors and also permissible to submit a proposal for Category B as a member of an SDVOSB joint venture and use the same past performance.

2052 Section A.3.3(d) states, "All electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than 120MB."

Section A(3) states, "Electronic files of Volume I, II, and III shall be in separate folders in 1 zip file, virus free, and no larger than 120MB per file." Is the 120MB limit for the ENTIRE zip file or for each file WITHIN the zip file?

The 120MB limit applies to the entire zip file, not to each file within the zip file. All electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than 120MB.

2053 Section A.3.6(A)(3) states, "Spreadsheets shall also be converted to PDF in the most readable manner practicable and submitted as part of a single PDF." The cover letter states, "The offeror's proposal shall include completed exhibits in Microsoft Office Excel format with working cell formulas." Would the government please clarify whether the spreadsheets should be submitted in their native Excel format or as a

PDF?

The Government clarifies that spreadsheets should be submitted in their native Excel format with working cel formulas as well as converted to PDF in the most readable manner practicable and submitted as part of a single PDF file.

2058 In reference to Section A.3.7.1, The solicitation states “A total of four (4) different REPs from different mandatory experience technical areas shall be submitted. Each Project must have had a minimum of $30M in total value size of a single order or contract and must be described using the Exhibit 1 REP template.” Would the government please confirm that the total value size of an ongoing project is calculated as the total potential awarded contract value with all options exercised and not the obligated value to date?

The total value size of an ongoing project is calculated as the total potential awarded contract value with all options exercised.

2061 In reference to Section A.3.6, The instructions say that Category B and/or C offerors should submit the

Category B and/or C Solutions Spreadsheet(s). Should we assume these are part of the Mandatory Experience

Exhibit listed in the Proposal Submission Table and should be included after the various Exhibit 1 Mandatory experience forms for each of our REPs in our submission file?

The information conerning Exhibit 3b / c will be updaed in an upcoming amendment.

2063 In reference to Section A.3.7.2, Can the government clarify whether the information required for each of the three Past Performances on pages 106 to 109 is IN ADDITION TO the information that will be provided in

Exhibit 2 for each reference or if the information on pages 106 to 109 is the information that will be provided in Exhibit 2 and does not need to be replicated in text in the proposal.

The information required for each of the three Past Performances on pages 106 to 109 will be provided in

Exhibit 2 and should not be replicated in the text of the proposal.

2064 To limit customer duplicative work, will the government please confirm that Exhibit 2 Past Performance

Questionnaire can be submitted once to be used in both a prime and joint venture bid?

The Government confirms that Exhibit 2 Past Performance Questionnaire can be submitted once to be used in both a prime and joint venture bid to limit customer duplicative work.

2082 A.1.35 AbilityOne Subcontracting (p.64): Will the Government provide a template for Attachment H:

AbilityOne Formal Agreement?

The AbilityOne Formal Agreement is Attachment H. Attachment H is to be provided by the contractor in coordination with the AbilityOne Nonprofit Agency (NPA) upon award. Reference Solicitation A.1.35

AbilityOne Subcontracting for guidance. Attachment I‐ Commercial Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Other than Small Businesses) is to be provided by the contractor and what is provided will be incorporated into the contract as Attachment I. For guidance on Attachment I‐ Commercial Small Business Subcontracting Plan

(Other than Small Businesses) reference FAR 52.219‐9(g).

2093 Document: 80TECH24R0001 SEWP VI Final RFP ‐ A.3.7.2(a) ‐ Information from the Offeror page 109 ‐

“Offerors identified as a Small Business in Category B and C shall provide past performance references showcasing relevant work in at least three (3) content representative areas for content to be rated relevant

(pertinent).

Q: Is the requirement for a total of "3 content representative areas" to be reflected or is the requirement for

"3 content representative areas" per past performance citation?

The requirement is for a total of "3 content representative areas" to be reflected across the past performance references, not per past performance citation.

2094 Document: 80TECH24R0001 SEWP VI Final RFP ‐ A.3.7.2(a) ‐ Information from the Offeror ‐ page 109 ‐

“Offerors identified as a Small Business in Category B and C shall provide past performance references showcasing relevant work in at least three (3) content representative areas for content to be rated relevant

(pertinent). Q: Can the requirement for "3 content representative areas" be addressed within one project or is the requirement that the "3 content representative areas" be addressed across differing projects?

The requirement for "3 content representative areas" can be addressed within one project or across differing projects. The total number of content representative areas for which the Offeror is proposing for a category does not need to be included in a single past performance reference.

2099 In Section A.3.7.1 (c), there is a requirement for a NAICS Size Standard Crosswalk. Could the Government clarify the purpose of this Crosswalk beyond what is in the RFP?

The crosswalk will be used to identify business sizes per NAICs code at the RFQ/order level.

2110 Does a JV require a meaningful relationship letter if it is only using past performance from members of the

JV?

Yes, JVs must provide a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter even if it is only using past performance from JV members.

2112 Will the Government accept a Task Order as a contract for a single past performance reference under a multiple award IDIQ contract since a Task Order falls under the definition of a contract (see FAR 2.101 and

16.501‐1)?

Yes, the Government will accept a Task Order as a contract for a single past performance reference under a multiple award IDIQ contract.

2113 FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(ii) requires that the Government “shall provide offerors an opportunity to identify past or current contracts for efforts similar to the Government requirement.” Since the Government’s acquisition strategy is to award multi‐awardee contracts to fulfill its requirement, will the Government accept past performance references to similar multi‐awardee contracts?

Yes, the Government will accept past performance references to similar multi‐awardee contracts as required by FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(ii)

2134 If the company bid Category B and Category C as a Small business, can the company be a sub to another company on SDVOSB for Category C SDVOSB

If a company bids on Category B and Category C as a Small Business, the company can also be a subcontractor to another company on SDVOSB for Category C SDVOSB.

2143 For the submission, should we submit all the docs (SF1449, REPs, Exhibits, LOA) within the same file? or inside the volume folder, do we need to create separate files?

For the submission, all documents (SF1449, REPs, Exhibits, LOA) should be included within the same volume folder but can be submitted as separate files within that folder. Each proposal volume shall be submitted in a single searchable Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) file, with appropriate bookmarks to at least the section header. Spreadsheets should also be converted to PDF and submitted as part of a single PDF file.

2149 Exhibit 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire‐ Section 2

What is the Government’s definition of a corporate or business relationship?

The Government defines a corporate or business relationship as follows:

"Affiliates" are business concerns that are affiliates of each other if, directly or indirectly, either one controls or has the power to control the other, or another concern controls or has the power to control both.

"Division" is a separate business unit of a company representing a specific business function.

"Subsidiary" means an entity in which more than 50 percent of the entity is owned directly by a parent corporation; or through another subsidiary of a parent corporation.

2157 Will the Government clarify that they are looking for summaries of points 1‐9 for each Past Performance example, and points 10‐12 request information from the offeror as a whole and not per past performance example?

The Government clarifies that they are looking for summaries of points 1‐9 for each Past Performance example, and points 10‐12 request information from the offeror as a whole and not per past performance example.

2159 In the Past Performance Category A,B & C are called "Content Representative Areas however, in section A.1.2

GSFC 52.211‐91 SCOPE OF WORK (FEB 2016) (pg.24) the individual areas under each category are referred to as "Technical Area 1a, 1b etc. is it the intent that the higher levels Category A, B & C be called "content

Representative Areas" and the subcategories under each category to be known as "Technical Areas" or

Section A.1.2 pertains to the Category Scope. The information requested for Past Performance relates to the technical content areas necessary for proposal submission.

2165 For Category A, can you use 541519 or does it have to be 33411? For Category A, you can use NAICS code 541519 (footnote 18 ‐ IT Value Added Reseller) or any of the other acceptable NAICS codes listed within the scope of SEWP VI. It does not have to be limited to 33411.

2172 The Solicitation states "Offerors sharing resources from a Parent Company, Affiliate, Division, and/or

Subsidiary within a corporate structure for evaluation purposes will need to provide a Meaningful

Relationship Commitment Letter, which will be treated as contractual promises and will be incorporated as an attachment to the resulting master contract." For offerors who are 100% employee‐owned in the construct of an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) in which all company stocks are held in a trust for the benefit of the employees, does an offeror need to incude a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter from the Trust to include in its proposal?

No, offerors do not need to include a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter from the Trust to include in its proposal.

2206 Where should bidders place their acceptance of A.3.4 in their submission document. Bidders should place their acceptance of A.3.4 in their submission document within the Offer Volume

(Volume I). By signing and submitting the SF1449, the Offeror has read, understands, and agrees to the terms and conditions of the RFP unless otherwise noted when the proposal is submitted.

2215 RFP paragraph A.3.3 (d), p. 92 states “All Electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than

120MB;” and RFP paragraph A.3.6.A.(3), p. 94 states “Electronic files of Volumes I, II, and III, shall be in separate folders in 1 zip file, virus free, and no larger than 120MB per file. Please clarify whether the 120BM size limit applies to (a) the submitted zip file containing all submission files, or (b) each submission file within the submitted zip file.

The 120MB size limit applies to the entire zip file containing all submission files. All electronic files shall be uploaded as a single zip archive file less than 120MB.

2222 RFP Paragraph A.3.7.2 (a), pp.106 indicates…