SEWP VI Batch 7 Published 12.17.24.pdf

sewp6_rfp_all_questions

Question Id

Original Question Published Answer

1690 on page 103, 2nd paragraph, if subcontractor experience is used for an REP, does the SB offeror need to submit a Teaming Agreement? or is an MRCL what is required?

Amendment 10 updated the cited instructions regarding small business subcontractor experience for REPs and Past Performance.

1693 reference: Item 12 and Table 1 on pages 108-109 Please confirm that Item 12 and Table 1 do not apply to the 3 contract references used in response to A.3.7.2 (a) items 1-10 on pages 106-107. Many small businesses may not be able to provide references that address three different Content Representative Areas.

Additionally please confirm that the response to Item 12 and Table 1 is not included in the 10 page limit for the Past Performance volume in the table in A.3.6 (B) on page 96.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

1694 Please confirm item 11 on page 107 is not restricted to the 3 contract references used to address items 1-10.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

1738 "Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors." Given AbilityOne subcontractors are required for a subset of the overall NAICS codes, please clarify if this should say 2% of the overall contract value OR 2% of the overall value of all task orders placed under AbilityOne NAICS codes (as indicated by the tables in

RFP A.1.34).

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that falls under the designated NAICS codes

(marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

1740 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." To be consistent with the language from A.3.5., please clarify whether this statement should read, "…more than one joint venture or CONTRACTOR

TEAMING ARRANGEMENT per category."

Amendment 10 updated the wording to Contractor Teaming Arrangement.

1745 "If proposing a CTA…a copy of the agreement must be provided in accordance with FAR 9.6." FAR 9.6 defines two types of CTAs. Based on the way NASA has spoken about CTAs throughout the RFP, we believe your intent is to define CTAs as 9.601(1) CTAs, " Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor." This is the "traditional" CTA that includes two companies having privity of contract and jointly submitting an offer. The other FAR 9.6 CTA (FAR 9.601(2)) simply refers to any time a prime has 1st tier subcontractors who do not have privity of contract and are not considered co-offerors as demonstrated by the 9.601(2) language: "A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program."

Please confirm that in the context of this RFP, NASA's reference to CTAs throughout the document is specific to FAR 9.601(1) scenarios where 2+ companies form a partnership or JV to act as a single prime contractor. By doing so, NASA avoids requiring every prime contractor from submitting the company-sensitive data of their 1st tier subcontractor teaming agreements, which will amount to thousands of documents and tens of thousands of pages of material that NASA must keep secure and does not require per the NASA

SEWP evaluation criteria.

Contractor Team Arrangements are defined in accordance with 9.601 of the

FAR.

1877 Page 102, Technical Area Tabs states, “The proposed offerings shall reflect all possible solutions that can be acquired by the government for the given Technical Area.” The term “all possible solutions” is very vague. How will offerors know if they’ve satisfied the “all possible solutions” requirement?

Amendment 10 removed the phrase “all possible solutions” from the instructions for the Technical Approach evaluation factor.

1904 The RFP states that "Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors." Does this apply to all contract holders or just those competing and awarded a SEWP contract under NAICS Codes identified with an asterisk in the associated tables in section A.1.34?

The 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that falls under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

2000 Categories B and C on page 104 include specific requirements for general Small Businesses and separately for HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, WOSB, EDWOSB, 8a offerors. Shouldn't Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) be included with the other socioeconomic businesses?

Amendment 10 added SDBs to the list.

2135 If the company bids Category B and Category C as a Small business and uses past performance, can the company be a sub to another company on SDVOSB for Category C SDVOSB and use the same past performance?

If all criteria in Section A.3.5. and in accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g) are met, then a small business prime may be a first-tier subcontractor on one other proposal within the same category.

2220 RFP Section A.1.35, page 64, paragraph 3 states that “Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.”

Question: Is this 2% of all SEWP VI task orders performed by a contract holder, or only 2% of the contract holder’s task orders with the referenced (*) NAICS and PSCs?

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that fall under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

2454 Proposal Preparation A.3.7.2 (a) Page 109: For Categories B and C, where the solicitation lists socio-economic categories that require a reduced number content representative areas, the offeror requests that Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs) who qualify as SDBs IAW FAR 19.304 and 13 CFR 124.1001, be included in this list.

Amendment 10 added SDBs to the list.

2462 A.3.7.3 (b) MANAGEMENT APPROACH (SUBFACTOR B), (4), ii Page 112-113:

Does the requirement to scale to the broad scope of SEWP requirements apply for SB offerors? If so, does the Government intend to evaluate SB offerors in the same manner as a Other Than SB Offerors, even though the company size, resources available, and business capacity of these two types of firms vary greatly?

Wording has been updated in the Management Approach to further clarify that there is not a requirement for any company to scale to the broad scope of SEWP requirements.

2576 Our company has 3 questions regarding Meaningful Relationships within a Corporate Structure as written in the 2nd paragraph of A.3.5 of the Final RFP.

1. If an offeror uses a Meaningful Relationship to share resources, can a sister company within the same Corporate Structure submit a proposal as well?

2. If an offeror does not use a Meaningful Relationship and submits a proposal, will the Government also accept a separate proposal from a sister company within the same Corporate Structure?

3. Will the Government accept the following scenario? If Companies A and B are from the same corporate structure and both elect to use meaningful relationships but not the same proposal evaluation elements and/ or committing resources such as Company A uses contracts 1, 2, and 3 and

Company B uses contracts 4, 5, and 6, is that acceptable?

Section A.3.5 PROPOSALS REQUESTED outlines when and how MRCLs are applicable.

2707 80TECH24R0001 SEWP VI Final RFP, Section A.2.1 GSFC 52.211-101 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS. (NOV 2022), Page 88 QUESTION: No indications of specific fill-ins in the clauses and provisions are provided. Can the Government please indicate, by specific Section and Page numbers in the Final RFP, what required fill-ins in the clauses and provisions must be submitted with the proposal?

The Offeror shall complete SF1449 Blocks 12 (if applicable), 17, and 30 and the indicated Offeror required fill-ins in the clauses, provisions/representations and certifications, and attachments as appropriate for the Offeror's business size and other dependencies.

2741 Section A.1.53, page 64 of the RFP requires "2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors." Will the Government please confirm that the referenced overall contract value is specifically to the in-scope NAICS TO that requires AbilityOne subcontracting, and not 2% of the entire Offeror IDIQ award value across all NAICS?

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that fall under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

3022 Reference: RFP Section A.3.7.2(a) 12, Past Performance Volume, Information from the Offeror, Past Performance History, page 108 and A.4.4, Phase Three

Mission Suitability, page 118 Question: If an Offeror receives a Pass rating for Volume I and a Satisfactory or Neutral rating for Volume II, will the Government please further explain the specific types of “inconsistencies” which could then impact the Volume III

Mission Suitability High Confidence rating?

The following examples are not meant to be all inclusive of possible inconsistencies: Example 1: Relying heavily on subcontractors in Past

Performance, but not conveying any information related to those subcontractors in Mission Suitability. Example 2: Providing a relevant REP and not providing any Past Performance.

3095 For the AbilityOne requirement; do bidders need to acknowledge/demonstrate an effort to meet the 2% goal? OR Do we need to meet the 2% goal of AbilityOne subs every quarter?

As stated in A.1.35 AbilityOne SUBCONTRACTING the annual report is used to identify if the 2% goal was met.

3166 Bullets 1-10 seem to be applicable to individual Past Performances, but 11-12 seem to be more global in nature (e.g., applicable to all offeror awards, not just those chosen as Past Performances). Validate that is the case. If so, their inclusion in the same list is confusing.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

3234 RFP Ref: A.3.7.1, Page 103, RFP Text - A Relevant Experience Project (REP) for mandatory experience is defined as a single contract or task order as either a prime or subcontractor per REP area. Question: Are you considering REPs only from the Prime contractor?

Amendment 10 updated the cited instructions regarding small business subcontractor experience for REPs and Past Performance.

3265 The Government states, "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." Does this mean that a mentor could support multiple JV bids as long as they provide different evaluation elements?

No. A mentor can only bid in one Mentor JV per category.

3341 Final RFP Document, A.2.1 GSFC 52.211-101 List of Attachments, Pg. 88:

Section "A.2.1 GSFC 52.211-101 List of Attachments" provides a list of contract attachments, some of which are due with the proposal but were not provided with the solicitation. Will the Government please provide all of these attachments, but specifically, the Commercial Small Business Subcontract Plan

(Other than Small Businesses) that is required with proposal submission so Offerors can utilize the NASA Attachment I?

These attachments shall be provided by the Offeror.

3379 "The RFP states ""Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.""

Question: Is the 2% goal based on Total Contract Value or is the 2% based on the total subcontracted dollars?"

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that fall under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

3384 "The RFP states ""Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.""

Question: Is the 2% goal based on Total Contract Value or is the 2% based on the total subcontracted dollars awarded only to AbilityOne subcontractors?"

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that fall under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

3565 What is the Government's rationale for the extreme difference between the required minimum value of an REP ($30 Million) and the minimum average annual cost/fee for a past performance contract ($2.5 Million)?

There is no relationship between REPs and Past Performance requirements.

The REP value is total contract value and Past Performance is an annual cost/fee and are for different purposes.

3566 If the minimum average annual cost/fee of $2.5 Million is deemed relevant/pertinent for a past performance contract, why must the minimum for the REPs be so much higher ($30 Million total value)?

There is no relationship between REPs and Past Performance requirements.

The REP value is total contract value and Past Performance is an annual cost/fee and are for different purposes.

3567 Does the government require a line of credit or submission of financial statements in order to satisfy FAR 9.104? If not, can the Government provide more detail as to what information they believe would satisfy this requirement.

The wording with regard to 9.104 was updated in Amendment 8.

3587 Can a bidder utilize a project from a proposed subcontractor to meet the past performance requirement?

Amendment 10 updated the cited instructions regarding small business subcontractor experience for REPs and Past Performance.

3751 Will the Goverment treat legal Joint Ventures comprised of SB protege and Other Than Small Mentor as a SB entity, when the SBA has approved the JV, the JV has established uniqe legal entity status?

Information regarding the make-up of SBA approved Mentor-Protege Agreements and allowance to propose as a SB can be found at 13 CFR

125.9(d).

3783 What % can an offeror claim for work they performed under a JV in which they are the managing JV member?

This question is unclear. The requirements of 80TECH24R0001 are outlined in the RFP Documents.

3916 How can we provide past performance for credit card orders? Is the process the same as for other orders?

The process for providing past performance for credit card orders is the same as for other orders.

3946 Please confirm if the government is requesting us to address how we will support permanent staff in an OCONUS environment or just OCONUS travel?

Amendment 10 removed the reference to OCONUS.

3984 Please clarify where offerors shall insert any applicable assumptions. Any proposal that deviates or takes exception to instructions from this solicitation or contract terms and conditions in Volume I is not acceptable to the Government and will be removed from the competition.

4000 How should we calculate the average annual value of a new project that has less than a year of performance for inclusion in past performance?

In accordance with A.3.7.2 (a)(4): The current contract expenditures incurred to date, the date in which the expenditures have been incurred through, and the Average Annual Value to Date. For example (note, these example numbers are not related to this specific procurement): For a contract with only 9 months of performance (9/12 year) and $6M expenditures through 9 months, the average annual value would be $8M ($6M divided by 9/12 year). NOTE:

Per the solicitation, projects that have been under contract for less than six months prior to submission of offer cannot be proposed.

4017 Will the government please clarify the maximum number of past performances that can be used for a single task area? Also, what is the maximum number of past performances allowed in total for all task areas?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4070 May large businesses (other than small) be subcontractors to a small business prime (or small business JV or CTA) and provide REPs and/or past performance?

No, a large businesses (other than small) can be subcontractors to a small business prime (or small business JV or CTA) as long as they are not utilized for REPs and/or past performance 4084 page 134 section (k) does not have any boxes checked. Is that an oversight? Amendment 10 updated this section.

4088 In section A.3.7.2(a), for item 10 Small Business Subcontracting Plan history, please confirm that this does not relate to the specific past performance reference being discussed in items 1-9, but instead refers to the company's past performance as a whole.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4089 In section A.3.7.2(a), for item 11 List any contracts terminated, please confirm that this does not relate to the specific past performance reference being discussed in items 1-9, but instead refers to the company's past performance as a whole.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4090 In section A.3.7.2(a), for item 12 Past Performance History, please confirm that this does not relate to the specific past performance reference being discussed in items 1-9, but instead refers to the company's past performance as a whole.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4098 What percentage of work can the managing JV member claim if they performed work under a JV?

This question is unclear. The requirements of 80TECH24R0001 are outlined in the RFP Documents.

4134 A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME, (a) Information from Offeror, page 107 states "The offeror shall provide the following information on all past/current contract references that meet the above criteria for the prime offeror:"

However, number 11. "List any contracts terminated (partial or complete) within the past three years and basis for termination (convenience or default).

Include the contract number, name, and the telephone number and e-mail address of the terminating officer (please verify information). Include contracts that were "de-scoped" by the customer because of performance or cost problems. (Excluded from the page limitation)." This number does not appear to relate to the past performance projects but appears to be a general question related to the Offeror's past three years of all work. Can the government please clarify if #11 should be addressed separately.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4174 Regarding paragraphs 10,11 and 12: Will the Government please specify whether these items are related to all recent and relevant past performance or limited to the one to three past performance references included in Volume II?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4185 Will the government please provide a file to be filled in for all components requiring checkboxes / fill in like Reps and Certs?

No.

4199 A.3.7.2(a) 10-11, Page 107,Information from the Offeror..This section asks for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan history and a list of terminated contracts. Please confirm that these sections apply to the entire portfolio of contracts and not limited to the past performance references.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4206 Pg 104 Category C: First tier subs: can they be large or do they have to be small?

A large businesses (other than small) can be subcontractors to a small business prime (or small business JV or CTA) as long as they are not utilized for REPs and/or past performance 4210 Pg 112: para (4) i.: Please clarify what is meant by “handle” requirements? Amendment 10 was updated to provide examples of types of actions that a company may take upon receipt of an RFQ.

4227 Section A.1.53, page 64 of the RFP requires "2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors." Will the Government please confirm that the referenced overall contract value is specifically to the in-scope NAICS TO that requires AbilityOne subcontracting, and not 2% of the entire Offeror IDIQ award value across all NAICS?

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors applies only to task orders that fall under the designated NAICS codes (marked with an asterisk in A.1.34).

4228 For the past performance matrix, can we have 10 content representative areas on the left and customer name or contact details on top to optimize page utilization?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4229 With regards to the required AbilityOne Commitment Letter, are we committing our company to make an attempt to meet the 2% business goal or are we committing that we will achieve the 2% business goal for services every quarter?

As stated in A.1.35 AbilityOne SUBCONTRACTING the annual report is used to identify if the 2% goal was met.

4242 Can an Offeror comprised of a CTA between 2 companies also are have executed teaming agreements with other small businesses, or do all have t be included in the CTA?

In accordance with A.3.5: Only one proposal per 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.

The above limitations do not preclude a prime contractor from acting as a first-tier subcontractor on one or more proposals within a category if they are not providing REP or Past Performance references for another Offeror's proposal.

These limitations apply only to the number of prime Offeror proposals a company can participate in (as a CTA/JV or standalone prime), not on the number of times they can act as a first-tier subcontractor.

4244 Can a small business form a CTA with an approved Mentor/Protegee JV to submit as a Prime Offeror?

This question is unclear. The requirements of 80TECH24R0001 are outlined in the RFP Documents.

4255 Page 107 Document RFP A.3.7.2(a)11. "List any contracts terminated (partial or complete) within the past three years and basis for termination

(convenience or default). " Please confirm, this information is for all contracts performed within the past three years. Please confirm that this information is excluded from the page count and follows Customer Evaluations.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4298 On Page 133, section b) MANAGEMENT APPROACH (SUBFACTOR B)-evaluation: The offeror shall also address how they will support both CONUS and OCONUS opportunities. If we have not supported OCONUS, will that effect our evaluation for effectiveness, reasonableness, and efficiency. Can the government change CONUS or OCONUS instead of CONUS and OCONUS.

Amendment 10 removed the reference to OCONUS.

4593 Can a prime offeror use REPs and Past Performance references from a subcontractor?

The question is vague as there are several scenarios related to subcontractors.

The solicitation requirements are outlined in the RFP Documents including the utilization of subcontractors.

4600 Can a prime offeror use REPs and Past Performance references from a subcontractor?

The question is vague as there are several scenarios related to subcontractors.

The solicitation requirements are outlined in the RFP Documents including the utilization of subcontractors.

4700 Does the Government expect that each awardee will be capable of executing both CONUS and OCONUS task orders, or will some CONUS-only providers be considered?

Amendment 10 removed the reference to OCONUS.

4702 On the final RFP, page 107, the Government requests: recent customer evaluations; small business subcontracting plan history; and terminated contracts. These items appear to be non-customer-specific and are instead vendor-specific. However, the context in which they appear is in a numbered list, the rest of which consists of items desired on a per-past-performance-example basis. Can the government confirm whether these three items are intended to be specific to past performance examples being submitted, or whether they are intended to appear in their own separate, dedicated sections.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

4889 Reference SEWP VI RFP; page 102; A.3.7.1; The RFP states the offerors "proposed offering shall reflect all possible solutions that can be acquired by the government of a given Technical Area." Does this mean that every possible CLIN for a given Technical Area should be entered on the tab, even if it significantly exceeds the number of CLINs specified? For example, the Designated Provider in our primary technical area may have in excess of

10,000 CLINs - should all be included?

The words "all possible" were removed in Amendment 10.

4890 Reference SEWP VI RFP; page 102; A.3.7.1; The RFP states the offerors "proposed offering shall reflect all possible solutions that can be acquired by the government of a given Technical Area." Does this mean that every possible CLIN for a given Technical Area should be entered on the tab, even if it significantly exceeds the number of CLINs specified? For example, the Designated Provider in our primary technical area may have in excess of

10,000 CLINs - should all be included?

The words "all possible" were removed in Amendment 10.

4936 A.7. ELECTRONIC PROCESSES: “The Contractor must be able to automatically transmit, receive and process information to and from the SEWP PMO via electronic means as identified in Attachment D.” Attachment D is the CDRL list and does not include a document associated with information transmission, receipt, and processes. Please clarify this reference.

The reference was updated in Amendment 10.

5157 A.1.35 AbilityOne Subcontracting Target Goal. QUESTION: Does the 2% AbilityOne target goal only apply to the NAICS codes requiring utilization of

AbilityOne subcontractors?

Yes.

5159 A.1.35 AbilityOne Subcontracting states “Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.” QUESTION: Is the 2% calculated only on task orders which include NAICS codes requiring utilization of AbilityOne subcontractors?

Yes.

5170 Page 102, Paragraph 4 states, "The proposed offerings shall reflect all possible solutions that can be acquired by the government for the given Technical

Area." However, the government has indicated that each Technical Area will not be limited only to the descriptions as written. Can the government please define what is meant by "all possible solutions?

The words "all possible" were removed in Amendment 10.

5173 A.1.35 AbilityOne Subcontracting states “Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.” QUESTION: Is the 2% calculated annually or cumulatively by task order?

As stated in A.1.35 AbilityOne SUBCONTRACTING the annual report is used to identify if the 2% goal was met.

5292 Reference Volume II Past Performance, 12. Past Performance History:

1. Can NASA expand instructions to describe what exactly is needed and expected here?

2. The Content Representative Area lists are ordered by the draft RFP rather than final RFP. Did NASA want to update this? Also, Category B is missing 11b:

Program Management and Ancillary Services and Supplies and Category C is missing 11c: Program Management/Ancillary Services.

3. Is it permissible to use a multiple-award IDIQ in this?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

5334 "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." This language appears to restrict companies that are Offerors but not companies that are subcontractors or JV members that are not submitting as a prime. Can a company that is not submitting as a prime appear as a subcontractor or JV member on multiple proposals?

The noted limitations do not preclude a prime contractor from acting as a first-tier subcontractor on one or more proposals within a category if they are not providing REP or Past Performance references for another Offeror's proposal.

These limitations apply only to the number of prime Offeror proposals a company can participate in (as a CTA/JV or standalone prime), not on the number of times they can act as a first-tier subcontractor.

5379 The RFP language in Section A.3.7.1 (page 103) regarding subcontractor and affiliate past performance is confusing and appears to inadvertently limit the consideration of affiliates and predecessor company past performance to instances where those entities are first-tier subcontractors, which is not possible for a predecessor company. Specifically, the RFP states: “Information from subcontractors, affiliates, and predecessor companies will be evaluated or taken into consideration for first-tier subcontractors to small businesses…” Will the Government clarify that it will consider information from first-tier subcontractors, affiliates, AND predecessor companies where the offeror shows those entities will be meaningfully involved in contractor performance?

Yes, the Government will consider information from first-tier subcontractors, affiliates, AND predecessor companies where the offeror shows those entities will be meaningfully involved in contractor performance and are small businesses.

5380 Does the "2% of overall contract value" target goal for AbilityOne subcontracting apply to 2% of the value of eligible task orders, or across all task orders?

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors

5423 How are offerors to notate past performance references from subcontractors on the Past Performance Matrix? The instructions only refer to contracts performed by the offeror as a subcontractor, not those performed by the offeror's first-tier subcontractors (either as prime or subcontractor).

The instructions for the matrix were updated in Amendment 10.

5429 "The scope of items 1-12 is ambiguous as some of these items could apply to individual contracts and others apply to an offeror's past performance corpus as a whole. For example it is ambiguous for item #9 whether these evaluations are required only for the references selected by the offeror or for all of an offeror's recent past performance.

Would the Government please provide more detail as to the applicability of paragraphs 1-12 in this section?"

Amendment 10 updated this section.

5432 The scope of paragraph (a)(12) is unclear, particularly where referenced on page 109. Does paragraph (a)(12) end after the one paragraph on page 108, after the description of content representative areas on pages 108-109, or after the paragraphs on page 109 that state the number of areas required?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

5440 For offerors that are only proposing direct services (performed only by the offeror and not involving outside "solution providers") is it sufficient to state as such for the Commitment to Product and Services Diversity?

The referenced section was removed in Amendment 10.

5443 We currently do product and services business to support the NASA SEWP Office. What OCI documentation is needed to ensure we can continue to support them with great services, but not be ruled-out for consideration for a NASA SEWP VI prime contract? Is there an OCI concern at the IDIQ / COntract level or is this just a concern at the Task Order level?

Please refer to to Offeror's current contract as to guidance regarding OCIs. In accordance with 80TECH24R0001, SEWP Contract Holders shall adhere to the guidelines and procedures of FAR subpart 9.5 regarding OCI at the task order level. In the event that a task order requires activity that would create an actual or potential conflict of interest, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Ordering CO of the conflict, submit a plan for mitigation, and not commence work until specifically notified by the Ordering CO to proceed; or, identify the conflict and recommend to the Ordering CO an alternate approach to avoid the conflict. The Ordering CO will review the information provided by the Contractor and make a determination whether to proceed with the task order and process a request for waiver, if necessary.

5475 Section A.3.0; page 89; FAR 52.207-6 is included by reference. Please confirm this limits Small Business offerors to small business subcontractors and NO Other Than Small Businesses may be a subcontractor to a Small Business

Offeror.

Small Businesses can subcontract with large businesses, however cannot submit a large Businesses' REP or past performance as stated in 13 CFR

125.2(g).

5541 Category B - "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.

Each Project must have had a minimum of $4M in total value size of a single order or contract and must be described using the Exhibit 1 REP template."

Does this also apply to offerors who are a considered a Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB)? If so, will the Government the solicitation to reflect this?

Amendment 10 added SDB to the cited list.

5597 Please define first-tier subcontractor. First-tier subcontract means a subcontract awarded directly by the Contractor for the purpose of acquiring supplies or services (including construction) for performance of a prime contract.

5602 Can the Offeror propose a first-tier subcontractor if the Offeror meets all the minimum requirements to submit a proposal but wants to fill a technical area by providing the subcontractors past performance reference?

Please refer to A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME(a). For information on how first-tier subcontractors can be used for Past Performance references.

5609 Will the agency review past performance of large business subcontractors, or only small business subcontractors, as per the guidelines on page 103 of the solicitation?

Please refer to A.3.7.2 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME(a). For information on how first-tier subcontractors can be used for Past Performance references.

5640 “Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors.” Is this 2% an allocation of value under the master SEWP VI contract and all awarded Task Orders, or is the Offeror expected to allocate a 2% goal for performance on each individual

Task Order award through SEWP VI?

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors

5676 Pages 93 and 97, Offeror - Paragraph A.3.5 States the following: 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.

Paragraph A.3.6 States the following: In no event can an offeror compete as a prime and as part of more than one joint venture or teaming arrangement per category.

Can the Government Clarify.

The noted limitations do not preclude a prime contractor from acting as a first-tier subcontractor on one or more proposals within a category if they are not providing REP or Past Performance references for another Offeror's proposal.

These limitations apply only to the number of prime Offeror proposals a company can participate in (as a CTA/JV or standalone prime), not on the number of times they can act as a first-tier subcontractor.

5725 Category B and C REP requirements for "HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, WOSB, EDWOSB, 8a, offerors" - does this also apply to offerors who are Small

Disadvantaged Business (SDB), but may not be 8(a)? If so, will the Government update the solicitation to reflect this?

Amendment 10 added SDB to the cited list.

5752 Section A.3.7.3 states that Offerors "shall include a discussion on the staff, resources and processes planned or in place to handle requirements that can be expected to be more than 100 requirements in a day for Category A and ten requirements in a day for Category B and C." Will the government define the phrase, "handle requirements?" What is the Governments expectation for contract holders in this regard?

Amendment 10 was updated to provide examples of types of actions that a company may take upon receipt of an RFQ..

5765 For Categories B and C (Volume II), do HUBZone, SDVOSB, EDWOSB, 8a businesses need to show relevance in at least 2 content representative areas for each past performance included in response or in total of all past performance projects included in response?

Amendment 10 updated this section.

5855 General - Please confirm if a large business is allowed to bid as a subcontractor with two or more small business companies under this RFP.

A large business is allowed to bid as a subcontractor with two or more small business companies under this RFP if they are not providing REP or Past

Performance references for another Offeror's proposal.

5864 Can a JV bid on both Category B small and Category C, and can a member of that JV also be a subcontractor with another team in the same category?

Yes, as long as they are not providing REP or Past Performance references for another Offeror's proposal.

5872 The requirement to provide "any contracts terminated within the past three years" is unclear due to its location in the RFP Past Performance list as it is a sub-bullet (#11) under the past performance reference information. Will the Government please clarify that this requirement is at the contract level not corporate-wide .

Amendment 10 updated this section.

5876 Please clarify the terms "cost" and "expenditures" as used in this section. Does the government require details on the offeror's costs and/or expenditures

(the cost incurred by the contractor to procure or perform), or the amount the government itself is spending? Many or most of Category A references will be

Firm Fixed Price contracts and cost data is not typically shared.

No, details are not required. For Offerors submitting FFP Past Performance reference, Cost/Fee incurred refers to Cost/Profit incurred.

5901 Within the Exhibit 3a - Category A Solutions Spreadsheet, the "Technical Area Tabs" states, "the proposed offerings shall reflect all possible solutions that can be acquired by the government for the given Technical Area." The paragraph goes on to list a required number of CLINs. It is our recommendation that the Government remove the requirement for listing "all possible solutions" because this is contradictory to the Evaluation Criteria.

The words "all possible" were removed in Amendment 10.

5929 In Section 6 of the PPQ, you are asking for Initial Value and Current Value. Are you looking for funded value or the total value (funded and non funded amounts) of the contract/order?

The Offeror should provide the Total Value (inclusive of all options).

5967 In A.4.4 you state "The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan to support both CONUS and OCONUS opportunities, specified in Section A.3.7.3(b)(4)(iii) for effectiveness, reasonableness, and efficiency." For Category A: Are you looking for us to address our experience with OCONUS product-based deliveries or address FTEs and getting services-based personnel into OCONUS locations for Task Order support?

Amendment 10 removed the reference to OCONUS.

5994 How does the government intend to evaluate Commitment to Product and Services Diversity in section B of Volume III? Can more clarification and information be provided to Offerors?

The referenced section was removed in Amendment 10.

5996 REFERENCE TEXT: 13 CFR 125.2(g) "Capabilities, past performance, and experience. When an offer of a small business prime contractor includes a proposed team of small business subcontractors and specifically identifies the first-tier subcontractor(s) in the proposal, the head of the agency must consider the capabilities, past performance, and experience of each first tier subcontractor that is part of the team as the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime contractor if the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime does not independently demonstrate capabilities and past performance necessary for award."

QUESTION: 13 CFR 125.2(g) states clearly that there are three (3) criteria which must be satisfied in order to utilize this authority: (1) the prime contractor offeror must be a small business; (2) the prime contractor small business offeror must include a proposed team of small business subcontractors; and (3) the prime contractor small business offeror must specifically identify the first-tier subcontractor(s) in the proposal. Of significance here is criterion #2 as cited within this question which requires that the prime contractor small business offeror must include a proposed team of small business subcontractors. How then is it that the NASA SEWP VI Contracting Office intends to apply the authority at 13 CFR 125.2(g) to the

NASA SEWP VI solicitation such that prime contractor small business offerors will be credited with information / qualifications from first-tier subcontractors that are other than small businesses (i.e., the proposed team does not consist of small business subcontractors and therefore does not satisfy criterion #2 as cited within this question / is present within 13 CFR 125.2(g)) in a scenario where the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small

6001 REFERENCE TEXT: "Information from first-tier subcontractors, affiliates, and predecessor companies will be taken into consideration for only small businesses in accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g) when the Small Business prime offeror does not independently demonstrate capabilities and/ or past performance necessary for award. Small business offerors may submit the experience of such other business entities for consideration, but such experience shall only be considered to the extent that the Meaningful

Relationship Commitment Letter clearly demonstrates that the resources (e.g., financial resources, overall oversight and management, or other resources) of the other companies will meaningfully affect the performance of the proposed contract."

QUESTION: What regulatory authority and/or precedence permits evidence of a meaningful relationship / utilization of a Meaningful Relationship

Commitment Letter (MRCL) as the qualifying basis by which a prime contractor small business offeror may be credited with information / qualifications from first-tier subcontractors that are other than small businesses?

This question is unclear. The requirements of 80TECH24R0001 are outlined in the RFP Documents.

6006 Could Government confirm the reference to Attachment D in Attachment A, Section A.7 "General policies and procedures shall be established and published (Attachment D) by the SEWP PMO is accurate and it should not, in fact, be Attachment C ATTACHMENT+C-

+SEWP+Contractor+Holder+User+Manual?

The reference was updated in Amendment 10.

6008 REFERENCE TEXT: "Information from first-tier subcontractors, affiliates, and predecessor companies will be taken into consideration for only small businesses in accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g) when the Small Business prime offeror does not independently demonstrate capabilities and/ or past performance necessary for award."

QUESTION: Please confirm that information from first-tier subcontractors, and solely those first-tier subcontractors that are small businesses, will be taken into consideration for only small businesses in accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g).

Amendment 10 updated this section.

6019 "Contract holders shall allocate a target goal of at least 2% of the overall contract value to AbilityOne subcontractors." Given AbilityOne subcontractors are required for a subset of the overall NAICS codes, please clarify if this should say 2% of the overall contract value OR 2% of the overall value of all task orders placed under AbilityOne NAICS codes (as indicated by the tables in

RFP A.1.34).

Amendment 10 clarifies that the 2% goal to use AbilityOne subcontractors

6043 If an MRL is required to show ownership of acquired contracts not yet novated, does the restriction still apply that only one proposal may use the

MRL sharing proposal evaluation elements?

Yes.

6045 If an MRL is required to show ownership of acquired contracts not yet novated, is it correct to assume the restriction that only one proposal may use the MRL sharing proposal evaluation elements DOES NOT apply if one of the proposals is from a Mentor Protégé JV?

Yes.

6153 (pg 96) Past Performance Volume II: (b) Cover Page, Indices, Customer Evaluations, and Terminations - (pg 109) section (b) PRIOR CUSTOMER

EVALUATIONS PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES and pg 110 section (c) Independent Past Performance Information - The requirements listed on Pg

96 for Past Performance Volume II Sections B and C do not align - can the government please confirm that Past Performance Volume II includes the following: Section (a) Information from the Offeror, b) PRIOR CUSTOMER

EVALUATIONS PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES, and section (c) Independent Past Performance Information.

Amendment 10 updated this section.

6188 We currently do product and services business to support the NASA SEWP Office. What OCI documentation is needed to ensure we can continue to support them with great services, but not be ruled-out for consideration for a NASA SEWP VI prime contract?

Please refer to to Offeror's current contract as to guidance regarding OCIs. In accordance with 80TECH24R0001, SEWP Contract Holders shall adhere to the guidelines and procedures of FAR subpart 9.5 regarding OCI at the task order level. In the event that a task order requires activity that would create an actual or potential conflict of interest, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Ordering CO of the conflict, submit a plan for mitigation, and not commence work until specifically notified by the Ordering CO to proceed; or, identify the conflict and recommend to the Ordering CO an alternate approach to avoid the conflict. The Ordering CO will review the information provided by the Contractor and make a determination whether to proceed with the task order and process a request for waiver, if necessary.

6193 Page 95 and 96 of the RFP PDF appear to be an image, not searchable. Please consider revising those pages to make them searchable.

The RFP PDF file was fixed in Amendment 10.

6219 "Section A.3.7.2 Past Performance Volume, (a) Information from the Offeror, provides an example of how to estimate the value of past performance contracts.

a. Will there be any formula to calculate the annual value of a Past Performance?

b. What if my Past performance is 7-8 months old, it meets the 6 months requirement, but how will the annual value be calculated?"

There is no set formula for calculating the annual value of past performance contracts. The current contract expenditures incurred to date, the date in which the expenditures have been incurred through, and the Average Annual Value to Date.

6226 Should we complete the Reps & Certs? Which volume should we include the Reps & Certs in?

The Offeror shall complete SF1449 Blocks 12 (if applicable), 17, and 30 and the indicated Offeror required fill-ins in the clauses, provisions/representations and certifications, and attachments. An Offeror’s Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code in SAM.gov shall match the

Offeror’s name on the SF1449. The signed SF1449 and the pages with the required fill-ins must be submitted with the proposal. 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 submitted.

Failure to provide a signed SF 1449 and acknowledgement of all subsequent solicitation amendments will result in the Offeror being eliminated from competition.

6228 For Category B, If we are bidding as Prime and one of the subcontractors, Can Subcontractor submit REPs and How many REPs can a subcontractor submit?

Section A.3.5 and A.3.7.1. provides guidance on REP submission.

6229 If we are submitting a proposal as JV, should we complete Reps and Certs as JV and as well well as individual companies or just JV is sufficient?

As the JV.

6230 For Category C, If we are bidding as Prime and as one of the subcontractors, Can Subcontractor submit REPs and How many REPs can a subcontractor submit?

Section A.3.5 and A.3.7.1. provides guidance on REP submission.

6235 Section A.3.7.1; Page 98; Just wanted to clarify that we only need to submit the signed SF1449 and the pages with the required fill-ins; not all Reps and

Certs.

The Offeror shall complete SF1449 Blocks 12 (if applicable), 17, and 30 and the indicated Offeror required fill-ins in the clauses, provisions/representations and certifications, and attachments. An Offeror’s Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code in SAM.gov shall match the

Offeror’s name on the SF1449. The signed SF1449 and the pages with the required fill-ins must be submitted with the proposal. 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 submitted.

Failure to provide a signed SF 1449 and acknowledgement of all subsequent solicitation amendments will result in the Offeror being eliminated from competition.

6239 Referring to section “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).” Do we need to submit three Past performance that will showcase the relevant work in three (3) Content representative areas.

Our Question is What If our three Past performances cannot suffice to showcase relevant work in three areas and we would need to showcase more past performances. Is that permissible?

The total number of content…