SEWP VI RFP Q_ A 7.24.24.pdf

Andrea M.T. Ross Sr. Contracting Officer

SEWP Procurement Office of Procurement

SEWP VI Answers to Final RFP Questions

T h e c o r n e r s t o n e o f N A S A ’ s c u r r e n t a n d f u t u r e m i s s i o n s

Analysis

Total Submissions: 6,792

Duplicates, redundant wording or asking the same question: 271

Suggestions & Comments (not questions): 2,336

Questions pertaining to the RFP submission process and content: 4,456

Disclaimer

Due to the volume of questions, not all questions with sequence IDs will have an answer. As stated in Section A.3.2, the Government will answer relevant and appropriate questions regarding this solicitation.

These FAQs include a consolidated response to questions submitted to the SEWP VI RFP application by the June 7 deadline.

Many questions that were received were duplicates of those NASA already responded to as part of the draft RFP or of another question already submitted for response to the final RFP.

These FAQs do not respond to the duplicate questions.

NASA encourages offerors to visit the Q&A that was previously published as part of the draft RFP and to re-read the solicitation.

www.nasa.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOPIC SLIDE #

TECHNICAL 5- 13

INSTRUCTIONS & CONTENT 14-16

NAICS & UNSPSC 17-19

AbilityONE 20-22

SUBCONTRACTING 23-25

JV & CTA 26-29

OFFER VOLUME 30-32

MULTIPLE PROPOSALS 33- 36

LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION 37- 39

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE PROJECT 40-42

PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME 43-45

MISSION SUITABILITY VOLUME 46-48

Technical Questions

SEWP VI Technical Questions (1 of 8) Security Clearance Requirements:

Question: Do we have to have our Top-Secret security clearance in place before we bid? If not, how long do we have to become compliant?

Answer: There is no requirement for any clearance at the contract level. Levels of clearances may be required on some requirements at the order level.

System Update Timing:

Question: How long do we have to make this update to the SEWP database?

Answer: It is the responsibility of the Contract Holder to maintain their internal system simultaneously with the SEWP Database of Record.

Database Environment Details:

Question: Could Government provide details of the current database environment?

Answer: SEWP is an IDIQ Government-Wide Acquisition vehicle utilized by the entire Federal Government. The database environment could be any environment in any Government agency performing any Government task.

SEWP VI Technical Questions (2 of 8)

Provider and CLIN Limitations:

Question: Why are Offerors limited to just one provider (OEM) with 1000 CLINs for a Technical Area?

Answer: There is no such limitation. One of the four proposed Technical Areas must be designated a primary designated area and have a minimum of 1000 CLINs from one primary provider and 50 CLINs from one secondary provider. Only the minimum requirement is required. Further offerings and providers may be submitted but will not be reviewed or evaluated and will only be utilized to establish the initial Contract Database of Record upon Contract award. (Section A.3.7.1(b))

Brand Treatment under Parent Company:

Question: Given that Legrand AV encompasses multiple brands within its portfolio, will these brands be treated collectively under the Legrand AV umbrella?

Answer: The provider is the parent company for the purposes of this proposal. If Acme Corp is in Enclosure 1 and an offeror proposes them as one of the four designated providers, then all products identified with Acme Corp and their subsidiaries and brands would all be identified as provider = Acme Corp (Section A.3.7.1).

SEWP Marketplace:

Question: Will the NASA SEWP VI Marketplace resemble GSA eBuy where RFIs and RFQs from other agencies are posted?

Answer: SEWP has a Quote Request Tool that Agencies can utilize to submit RFIs and RFQs through which SEWP Contract Holders can respond.

SEWP VI Technical Questions (3 of 8) Security Controls Clarification:

Question: Please change it to say "or related industry standards" because otherwise everyone must comply with ALL of the listed standards.

Answer: The RFP is stating what standards shall be addressed in the narrative discussion, not what standards are required to be complied with (Refer to A.3.7.3 (b)(1) iv).

Category C Threshold Restrictions:

Question: How does NASA intend to uphold the "rule of two" in conjunction with the threshold restrictions?

Answer: If a requirement is submitted to Category C within the limits of that Category and two or more businesses of sizes required within the regulations can fulfill the requirement, then the set-aside must be placed to that business size. The threshold restriction does not affect the rule of two.

Clarification on Breadth and Depth Beyond Technical Areas:

Question: Please provide clarification of "breadth and depth beyond the Technical Areas" - is the Government asking for emerging technologies?

Answer: As noted in the RFP, the Technical Areas are sample areas. The scope of each Category is the broad expanse of products, solutions, and services within the ITC/AV arena. Therefore, the breadth and depth is everything within Technical Areas and all other technology that fits the scope of each category as described in the RFP. (Refer to A.1.2)

Established Authorized Reseller Program (EARP)

Question: Will the EARP apply to Category C services?

Answer: EARP refers to a SEWP V process that is not planned for SEWP VI.

SEWP VI Technical Questions (4 of 8)

Sustainability Requirements:

Question: Can a response to this area be optional for small businesses?

Answer No. The degree and extensiveness of a sustainability management policy management system may vary significantly, but the offeror must address their commitment to sustainability as stated in Section A.3.7.3(b)(2) Commitment to Sustainability.

Application Services:

Question: Could Government provide the approximate number of mission-specific applications that need to be considered?

Answer: SEWP is an IDIQ Government-Wide Acquisition vehicle utilized by the entire Federal Government. The mission-specific application will be established at the order level. In SEWP V, tens of thousands of requirements are handled annually.

Attachment and RFP Section Alignment:

Question: Can the government explain the difference and purpose of these two documents?

Answer: Attachment A provides the narrative attached to the full scope and objectives of the SEWP VI Contracts and

Program. Section A.1.2 provides the technical areas within the broad scope of SEWP described in Attachment A.

SEWP VI Technical Questions (5 of 8)

Website Creation Timing:

Question: Do we need to create a website at time of submission or are these after-award requirements?

Answer: Actual implementation of a contract holder's responsibilities such as creating a SEWP website are post-award actions. (Reference Attachment C- CHUM)

Ancillary Products for Performance:

Question: What type of ancillary products is the government expecting from contractors?

Answer: It is up to the offeror to address service requirements which require products (i.e., ancillary products) such as software or hardware to complete a task and what risks exist and how they are mitigated (A.3.7.3 (b)(1)(ii)).

Pricing of CLIN Items:

Question: Is pricing required for these CLIN items at time of submission?

Answer: Specialized CLINs are automatically added to every contract at $0. They are priced at the RFQ/order level (Section A.1.23.1).

SEWP VI Technical Questions (6 of 8)

Line Items from Multiple OEMs:

Question: Are the line items limited to one OEM or multiple OEMs?

Answer: The 1000 CLINs are limited to the primary designated provider; i.e., a single provider (Section A.3.7.1 (b)).

Procurement under Footnote 18:

Question: Because of the predominance of hardware, how will the percentage be met?

Answer: Most requirements within SEWP historically are solutions which are a mix of products and services. The percentage requirement will be tracked at the contract level.

Clarification on the Scope of Work:

Question: How will the Government evaluate capabilities beyond the defined scope of work and technical areas?

Answer: As noted in the RFP, the Technical Areas are sample areas. The scope of each Category is the broad expanse of products, solutions, and services within the ITC/AV arena. Therefore, the breadth and depth is everything within Technical Areas and all other technology that fits the scope of each category as described in the RFP Section A.1.2.

SEWP VI Technical Questions (7 of 8)

LAN and WAN Infrastructure Components:

Question: Could Government specify the components and coverage of your LAN and WAN infrastructure?

Answer: SEWP is an IDIQ Government-Wide Acquisition vehicle utilized by the entire Federal Government. There are a multitude of LAN and WAN infrastructures currently in use throughout the Federal Government (Section A.1.2-Technical Area 1b: Enterprise-wide Network Services).

Specific Tasks and Corporate Risks:

Question: Will the government clarify which "specific tasks" and "corporate risks" associated with SCRM best represent NASA's concern with this requirement?

Answer: SEWP is an IDIQ Government-Wide Acquisition vehicle utilized by the entire Federal Government. The offeror should consider all possible tasks and risks that the Government faces (Section A.3.7.1).

SEWP VI Technical Questions (8 of 8)

Question: Can the government confirm if Category B and C offerors have a minimum required number of Labor Categories to be submitted with their proposal submission?

Answer: There is no minimum required number of Labor Categories for Categories B and C. Offerors are permitted to use their discretion in filling out Exhibit 3b and Exhibit 3c. (Reference: Section A.3.7.1(b))

Question: Will the government provide further guidance on specific service-based labor categories associated with SEWP VI Category B & C requirements?

Answer: The specific service-based labor categories should align with the offeror’s proposed solutions and the scope of the RFP. (Reference: Section A.3.7.1(b))

Question: Is a C-SCRM Attestation Form required for each category or is one sufficient?

Answer: A C-SCRM Attestation Form is required for each category. An Offeror shall submit a complete

C-SCRM Attestation Form with each of their categories’ proposal submission.

SEWP VI Instructions & Content Questions

SEWP VI Instructions & Content Questions (1 of 2)

Question: Can you clarify the file naming convention for documents within a Volume Folder as referenced in section A.3.6 (A) on page 95? Are the spaces in the naming convention required, and should each LOA be saved separately within Volume I?

Answer: The file naming convention requires spaces as shown in the provided examples. Each LOA should be saved separately within the Volume I folder and labeled as shown in the examples on page 92. (Refer to section A.3.6 (A), page 92 of the RFP)

Question: Which Proposal Components listed in the Proposal Submission Table under section A.3.6 (B) on page 93 should be saved separately within the same folder as their corresponding volume?

Answer: Proposal Components such as the Exhibits, ISO 9001 and LOAs should be saved separately within the same folder of their corresponding volume.

(Refer to section A.3.6 (A), page 92 of the RFP)

Question: What information needs to be included in the 10-page limit for the past performance volume, and should past performance information be excluded from this limit?

Answer: The 10-page limit for the past performance volume includes all the information requested in Section A.3.7.2 (a) Information from the Offeror, pages 103-107 of the RFP)

Question: Should exhibits, past performance, and LOAs be submitted as separate files within the category submission or as part of a single PDF submission attachments for their respective volume?

Answer: Attachments are be included as individual PDF files within the folder for their respective volume, and each proposal volume are to be submitted as a single PDF file. (Refer to section A.3.6 (A), page 93 of the RFP)

SEWP VI Instructions & Content Questions (2 of 2) Question: Does the prohibition against duplications or replicas in section A.3.6 (B)(7) pertain to each category?

Answer: The prohibition against duplications or replicas pertains to each category and its implementation applies to proposals within the same category not associated with a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter. (Refer to section A.3.6 (B)(7), page 97 of the RFP)

Question: Does the 120MB size limit apply to each file within the submitted zip file or to the entire zip file?

Answer: The 120MB size limit applies to the entire zip file. (Refer to paragraphs A.3.3 (d) and A.3.6.A.(3), pages 92 and 94 of the RFP)

Question: Is there a specific format required for submitting proposals?

Answer: The proposal shall clearly indicate which category is being proposed and use the format provided in Section A.3.6(A) and A.3.6(B) the RFP for consistency.

Question: Should spreadsheets be submitted in PDF format or in their original MS Office Excel format with working cell formulas?

Answer: Spreadsheets shall be converted to PDF for inclusion in the single PDF file for each proposal volume. Additionally, completed exhibits must be provided in MS Office Excel format with working cell formulas. (Refer to section A.3.6 (A))

Question: Are all Exhibits (e.g., 1, 2, 3a, 3b, and 3c) excluded from the page limit as per the table on pages 93-94?

Answer: Yes, all Exhibits are excluded from the page limit. (Refer to sections A.3.6 and A.3.7.1)

Question: Can offerors provide a response without including the exhibit instructions in the Exhibit 1 REP template? Should the project description section alone be three pages or the entire template?

Answer: The Exhibit 1 REP Template serves as a cover page and page 1 of 4. The project description shall not exceed 3 pages (Reference: Section A.3.7.1(b))

NAICS & UNSPSC Questions

SEWP VI NAICS & UNSPSC Questions (1 of 2)

Question: The RFP references a full list of in-scope UNSPSC codes to be found in Attachment C SEWP Contract Holder User Manual, but this list is to be made available via the Contract Holder Only Page (CHOP). Can the Government please provide this list or clarify how offerors can access it?

Answer: A full list of all currently identified in-scope UNSPSC codes was provided in Enclosure 2- UNSPSC Codes

6.13.24 with Amendment 2 published on 6.13.24. (Reference: Amendment 2)

Question: If an offeror is a Small Business under one of the NAICs in the crosswalk but NOT under 541512 or 541519, can they submit as a Small Business?

Answer: A contractor can compete for a SEWP VI contract using any of the eligible in-scope NAICS for the category in which they are competing and are not beholden to using NAICS 541512- Computer Systems Design Services in Category B and C or NAICS 541519e- IT Value Added Reseller in Category A. This exhibit is for the SEWP data repository and being collected to verify an Offeror’s size standard for each of the Offeror’s associated NAICS code.

(Reference: RFP Section A.1.35)

SEWP VI NAICS & UNSPSC Questions (2 of 2)

Question: For Exhibit 4 - NAICS Size Standard Crosswalk, should offerors provide their size standard for all NAICS codes listed within the category or only for the one used for competition and submitting past performance?

Answer: Offerors should provide their size standard for all NAICS codes listed within the category they are proposing under.

This ensures that the Offeror's size standard matches the NAICS information reflected in SAM.gov entity information.

(Reference: RFP Section A.3.7.1(c ))

Question: The RFP states "The offeror must provide past performance submissions as it relates to the NAICS code being used for competition." Does this mean that the past performance submissions must be the exact same as the overarching Category NAICS or can the past performance relate to any approved NAICS for the Category?

Answer: The past performance submissions must relate to NAICS codes being used by the Offeror for competition. For example, if an Offeror is competing for award under NAICS 541520, then the past performance references shall correspond with NAICS 541520. (Reference: RFP Section A.3.7.2)

Question: Please confirm if the NAICS Crosswalk needs to be submitted for each category or if one is sufficient.

Answer: A NAICS Crosswalk is required for each category. An Offeror shall submit a complete NAICS Crosswalk with each of their categories’ proposal submission.

AbilityOne Questions

SEWP VI AbilityOne Questions (1 of 2)

Question: Is the AbilityOne subcontracting requirement applicable to both products and services offered under this contract?

Answer: Yes, the AbilityOne subcontracting requirement applies to both products and services offered under the contract.

Section A.1.35 states that offerors must include AbilityOne NPAs in their subcontracting plans for both product and service categories.

Question: Can NASA confirm that if a company has a pre-existing agreement with an AbilityOne NPA, it will satisfy the subcontracting requirement?

Answer: Yes, a pre-existing agreement with an AbilityOne NPA will satisfy the subcontracting requirement, provided that the agreement meets the criteria outlined in Section A.1.35 of the RFP. The agreement must be documented and signed, and clearly outline the roles and responsibilities of both parties. The SourceAmerica/NIB representative shall acknowledge the pre-existing agreement with the qualified nonprofit agencies in the commitment letter.

Question: Are OTSB required to include AbilityOne Non-Profit agencies (NPAs) as a subcontractor in their proposal?

Answer: All Contractors competing and awarded a SEWP contract under NAICS Codes provided in A.1.34 NAICS and In-Scope NAICS Codes have a mandatory requirement to utilize AbilityOne non-profit organizations as Subcontractors on orders utilizing any of the referenced NAICS codes identified with an asterisk. Refer to Section A.1.34

SEWP VI AbilityOne Questions (2 of 2)

Question: What are the requirements for reporting on AbilityOne subcontracting performance?

Answer: The RFP outlines specific reporting requirements for AbilityOne subcontracting performance in Section A.1.35. The contractor is required to submit a quarterly report reflecting which orders have been subcontracted to qualified AbilityOne Non-profits. In the yearly report, if the goal is not met, then the contractor shall state what they will do to improve efforts to meet the goal.

Question: Are all offerors (both SB and LB) required to submit an AbilityOne subcontracting report?

Answer: Yes, all offerors, including both Small Businesses (SB) and Other-Than-Small Businesses (OTSB), are required to submit an AbilityOne subcontracting report, if you use specified AbilityOne NAICS codes and Product Service Codes (PSC) reference in Section A.1.35.

Question: Is a formal agreement with a NPA required for the AbilityOne subcontracting requirement?

Answer: Yes, a formal subcontracting agreement with AbilityOne Non-Profit Agencies (NPAs) is required to meet the AbilityOne subcontracting requirement. Refer to Section A.1.35

Subcontracting Questions

SEWP VI Subcontracting Questions (1 of 2)

Question: Will subcontractors to Other than Small Business (OTSB) be evaluated?

Answer: First-tier subcontractors of OTSB will not be evaluated. (Refer to Section A.3.7.2)

Question: Please confirm that an offeror may prime a category as an OTSB vendor, while also being a subcontractor to a small business prime in the same category.

Answer: The RFP allows for an offeror to prime a category as an Other Than Small Business (OTSB) vendor and simultaneously act as a subcontractor to a small business prime within the same category. 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.

Question: Are current approved commercial subcontracting plans acceptable instead of Individual Subcontracting plans?

Answer: SEWP VI Prime contract holders that are Other Than Small Businesses are required to submit subcontracting plans at the summary level only for agencies. An individual subcontract report and summary subcontract report may be submitted if a commercial subcontracting plan is not available. (Refer to Section A.3.7.2(a))

SEWP VI Subcontracting Questions (2 of 2)

Question: What is required to be submitted as part of the subcontracting plan?

Answer: The Offeror's subcontracting plan shall include items as listed in A.1.32.

Question: If the Offeror is a Small Business, is there a requirement for a separate subcontracting plan or does the AbilityOne Commitment Letter satisfy the subcontracting plan requirement?

Answer: For small businesses, the AbilityOne formal agreement between the Contract Holder and the AbilityOne Non-profit agency satisfies the subcontracting plan requirement associated with the AbilityOne requirement.

Question: Are Offerors required to submit a commercial small business subcontracting plan with their proposal in Volume I, or after award?

Answer: Section A.3.7.1 of the RFP specifies that offerors are required to submit a commercial small business subcontracting plan with their proposal in Volume I. This documentation must be included in the initial submission to demonstrate the offeror's commitment to meeting the subcontracting goals.

Joint Venture & Contractor Teaming Arrangement Questions

SEWP VI JV & CTA Questions (1 of 3)

Question: Are first-tier subcontractors formed under a CTA required to submit a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter?

Answer: No, a meaningful relationship commitment letter is not required. Amendment 5 will clarify this answer.

Refer to Section A.3.7.1

Question: How does NASA plan to accommodate the evaluation of Mentor-Protege Joint Ventures in order to comply with 13 CFR § 125.8(e)?

Answer: The Government will consider work done and qualifications held individually by each partner to the joint venture as well as any work done by the joint venture itself.

Question: Can JV members provide past performance references on behalf of a Small Business Prime Offeror JV entity?

Answer: Offerors can 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 as part of past performance.

SEWP VI JV & CTA Questions (2 of 3)

Question: Please confirm that an offeror may be a prime as part of a small business joint venture and also a subcontractor to a different small business prime within the same category.

Answer: An offeror can participate as a prime in one proposal and as a subcontractor in another proposal within the same category, as long as the proposals are compliant with Section A.3.6(B)(7).

Question: Can an SBA-approved Mentor-Protege SDVOSB (comprised of an SDVOSB Protégé and a Large Business Mentor) submit a bid as a Small Business under Category B?

Answer: An SBA-approved Mentor-Protege SDVOSB can submit a bid as a Small Business under Category B as per the criteria specified in Section A.3.5 and A.3.7.1.

Question: If a Joint Venture has no subcontracting plan history, is it acceptable to submit the latest ISR or SSR of one of the JV members?

Answer: If a JV has no subcontracting plan history, it is acceptable to submit the latest ISR or SSR of one of the JV members, as specified in Section A.3.7.2(a).

SEWP VI JV & CTA Questions (3 of 3)

Question: 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 an SBA mentor-protege approved JV bidding under Category A, Group A2 as well.

Answer: A small business may bid as a standalone prime and as a member of an SBA mentor-protege approved JV within the same category, as per the guidelines in Section A.3.5.

Question: When Offerors use joint venture contracts as REPs, should Offerors indicate in Exhibit 1 the relationship of the Offeror to the JV (e.g., Offeror is a member of the joint venture)?

Answer: Offerors should indicate the relationship to the JV/CTA in Exhibit 1 project description section to ensure clarity and proper evaluation, as detailed in Section A.3.7.2.

Question: Is the Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter required for an Offeror sharing resources with a Parent Company or only if there are two Offerors responding to this solicitation that are sharing resources of the same Parent Company?

Answer: 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

Offer Volume Questions

Volume I- Offer Volume (1 of 2)

Question: If we are a subsidiary but we aren’t using any resources from our parent company, is a meaningful relationship commitment letter needed?

Answer: No; a meaningful relationship commitment letter is not required if not using any resources, including financial or management oversight, from the parent company. Refer to Section A.3.7.1.

Question: For clarity, can the government confirm that the ISO 9001:2015 certification requirement will be met if a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter is provided that describes this relationship, even if the ISO 9001:2015 certificate is in the name of the parent company?

Answer: Reference Section A.3.7.1 (a) Offerors may NOT use the ISO 9001:2015 and/or CMMI certifications of a Parent Company, Affiliate, Division, and/or Subsidiary within a corporate structure.

Question: For verification of CMMI appraisal, please clarify what is meant by a copy of the Offeror’s “official Appraisal Disclosure Statement” from a CMMI Institute Certified Lead Appraiser. Is this a copy of our appraisal certificate issued by a CMMI Institute Certified Lead Appraiser?

Answer: As stated in Section A.3.7.1 (a) - Verification requirements include a copy of the Offeror’s official Appraisal Disclosure Statement from a CMMI Institute Certified Lead Appraiser. The official appraisal must be current (active, not expired) as of the date proposals are due. The Offeror must provide POC information including the name of the appraisal body and name, phone number, and email of the representative who provided the CMMI appraisal.

Volume I- Offer Volume (2 of 2)

Question: For the ISO 20243 / O-TTPS certification, will NASA accept self-assessed certification, or is third-party assessment required?

Answer: The offeror shall either fill out Exhibit 5: C-SCRM Attestation Form or provide a copy of a valid active Open Trusted Technology Provider™ Standard (O-TTPS) Certification to attest to meeting the ISO 20243 standard.

Question: Can we submit the same additional provider(s) for multiple Technical Areas as we can with designated providers (OEMs)?

Answer: The same additional providers can be used for multiple Technical Areas. Refer to Section A.3.7.1 (b).

Question: Will the government consider parent company-level ISO certification in lieu of certification at the subsidiary level?

Answer: In accordance with Section A.3.7.1 (a) Offerors may not use the ISO 9001:2015 and/or CMMI certifications of a Parent Company, Affiliate, Division, and/or Subsidiary within a corporate structure.

Question: Can the Government clarify if Exhibit 1 needs to be submitted in addition to Exhibit 3a for Category A?

Answer: Exhibit 1 is NOT required to be submitted for Category A. (Reference: Section A.3.7.1(b))

Multiple Proposal

SEWP VI Questions- Multiple Proposals (1 of 3)

Question: Can the Government please clarify if an SB wants to be able bid in “Unrestricted” solicitations at the order level and as well as SB solicitations, two separate proposals are required?

One proposal for Category B, Group B-1 and one proposal for Category B, Group B-2?

Answer: No. At the order level, a small business contract holder within a selected scope category will automatically have access to compete along businesses classified as Other than Small Business for solicitations submitted by an Ordering CO as full and open (unrestricted). Contract Holders will be identified by NAICS code and their associated businesses size standard to gain access to competitions at the order level.

Question: Can the government confirm that only one category should be included per proposal as relevant to that bid, or will proposals be allowed to include technical approaches for multiple categories in Volume III-A?

Answer: Only one category should be included per proposal.

SEWP VI Questions- Multiple Proposals (2 of 3)

Question: If we bid on the Small Business track of Category B and C, and win award will we still be able to bid on WOSB opportunities at the order level if we meet that socioeconomic status?

Answer: Yes, you can bid on WOSB opportunities at the order level if you meet the socioeconomic status and you have an award in both of those categories. The same applies to the other socioeconomic status.

Question: Will you consider allowing a bidder to submit a bid under both Category A groups (A1:

Unrestricted and A2: Small Business Set Aside)?

Answer: No, an Offeror can only have one (1) award per category regardless of which group a proposal was submitted therefore an offeror shall submit only one (1) proposal to a given category.

Question: Subsidiary A is submitting a proposal for Category A – A1 Unrestricted. Subsidiary A is also a part of a JV with Subsidiary B and submitting a proposal for A2-Small Business -Set-Aside.

Subsidiary A and Subsidiary B share a common parent. Confirm these are considered separate offers and that Subsidiary A and Subsidiary B are able to leverage a MRCL for each offer that cites its corporate reach-back services such as finance, accounting, quality, HR, training, security, safety, health environmental, and IT.

Answer: Yes, these are considered separate offers, and Subsidiary A and Subsidiary B can leverage a MRCL for each offer that cites its corporate reach-back services.

SEWP VI Questions- Multiple Proposals (3 of 3)

Question: When proposing as a prime and as part of a joint venture within the same Category may we submit the same technical approach?

Answer: Yes, when proposing as a prime and as part of a joint venture within the same Category, you may submit the same technical approach. Please refer to the duplication terms under Section A.3.6(b)(7).

Question: Do we need to register the company separately for each proposal submission on the NASA SEWP website?

Answer: No, only one registration per company on the NASA SEWP website is required to ensure access and ability to proper track your company’s proposal submission status.

Question: Can a single proposal contain both the offer for a single category and a JV/CTA offer for a separate category?

Answer: No, a single proposal cannot contain both the offer for a single category and a JV/CTA offer for a separate category. Separate proposals must be submitted for each offer. Refer to section A.3.5 for proposal guidelines.

Letter of Authorization (LOA) Questions (Applicable to Category A)

SEWP VI Letter of Authorization (LOA) Questions (Applicable to Category A) (1 of 2)

Question: Are LOAs without the reference for SEWP VI and without phone numbers acceptable?

Answer: LOAs (Letters of Authorization) must include a reference to SEWP VI and the POC’s position in the company. Additionally, a valid phone number, email, and address must be provided. (Refer to Section A.3.7.1(b)).

Question: Please confirm if an LOA must only be submitted if an offeror submits a proposal under Category A.

Answer: Yes, the Mandatory Experience Letter of Authorization (LOA) is only required for Category A submissions. (Refer to Section A.3.7.1(b)).

Question: Please confirm the format and page limit for the Letter of Authorization (LOA) from an OEM.

Answer: While the exact wording and format of the LOA can vary, the Point of Contact (POC) signing the LOA must include the name of the offeror, a reference to SEWP VI, and the POC’s position in the company. Additionally, the POC that signed the LOA must be the POC from the company of the designated provider identified in Exhibit 3a- Category A Solutions Spreadsheet, Point of Contact (POC) Info Tab. The POC must be a US Citizen, and identifiable as either the provider's federal sales representative or equivalent. A valid phone number, email address and physical address must be provided. The page limit is 3 pages per LOA. (Refer to Section A.3.7.1 (b)).

Question: Can a Letter of Authorization (LOA) come from the distributor of the OEM in question, or does the LOA have to come directly from the OEM?

Answer: Offerors shall provide a Letter of Authorization (LOA) from the designated provider (OEM) identifying that the OEM is aware and approves of the offeror proposing their solutions for the SEWP VI proposal. (Refer to A.3.7.1 Offer Volume).

SEWP VI Letter of Authorization (LOA) Questions (Applicable to Category A) (2 of 2)

Question: Is there a template for the Mandatory Experience LOA?

Answer: No, there is not a template for the Mandatory Experience LOA. The exact wording and format of the LOA can vary, but the Point of Contact (POC) signing the LOA must include the name of the offeror; a reference to SEWP VI and the POC’s position in the company. (Reference: Section A.3.7.1(b))

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

Answer: LOAs should be in the name of the entity proposing the solutions.

Question: Are Letter of Authorization required for products being offered not manufactured by the designated providers?

Answer: LOAs are required only for products from designated providers as specified in Section A.3.7.1(b).

Question: Is there a limit to how many additional providers an offeror can propose in the four Technical Areas? Also confirming LOAs are NOT required for the additional providers?

Answer: The RFP specifies a maximum of four LOAs for the designated providers. LOAs are not required for additional providers if they are not denoted as the primary designated provider for the Technical Areas.

Relevant Experience Questions

Volume I- Offer Volume- REP (1 of 2) Question: Can you use the same Relevant Experience Project (REP) to address more than one technical area?

Answer: Offerors must provide separate and different experiences for their Relevant experience projects to address more than one technical area.

Question: Can an offeror submit the same Relevant Experience Project (REP) for multiple categories or technical areas?

Answer: No, each REP must be unique to a specific category or technical area (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: A Relevant Experience Project (REP) provided by an Offeror shall meet the mandatory experience technical area for the category being proposed. How will the Government be verifying that an REP "meets" the technical area?

Answer: By evaluating the information provided in Exhibit 1 (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: Is there any benefit to submitting more Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) than the required number?

Answer: Only the required number of REPs associated with the proposed size standard shall be provided to demonstrate relevant experience for a category, extra REPs are not acceptable (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: What format and content should the Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) follow?

Answer: The REPs should follow the format and content guidelines provided in Exhibit 1 (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: When are Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) required to be submitted during the proposal process?

Answer: REPs must be submitted at the time of proposal submission in the Offer Volume as part of the initial evaluation.

Volume I- Offer Volume- REP (2 of 2) Question: What specific documentation is required to support each Relevant Experience Project (REP) submission?

Answer: Each REP submission should include detailed project descriptions, performance metrics, and relevant client references as specified in Exhibit 1 (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: How should Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) be submitted for joint ventures?

Answer: Joint ventures should submit REPs that reflect 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. (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: Can Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) also be used to satisfy past performance requirements?

Answer: Yes, REPs can be used to demonstrate both relevant experience and past performance, provided they meet the criteria specified in the RFP.

(Refer to Section A.3.7.1 and A.3.7.2).

Question: Is there a specific format that Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) must follow?

Answer: Yes, REPs must follow the format provided in Exhibit 1, including all required sections and supporting documentation (Section A.3.7.1, ).

Question: Are client references required for each Relevant Experience Project (REP)?

Answer: No, client references are not required for each Relevant Experience Project (REP) (Section A.3.7.1).

Question: How will Relevant Experience Projects (REPs) be scored during the evaluation process?

Answer: REPs are evaluated on a pass/fail basis, with the primary focus on relevance and completeness in meeting the mandatory technical areas (Section A.4.2).

Past Performance Questions

Volume II- Past Performance Volume (1 of 2) Question: Can Past Performance and REPs be the same record of work performed or do they have to be different?

Answer: Past Performance and REPs can be the same records of work performed if they meet the requirements specified in the RFP. (Section A.3.7.1 and Section A.3.7.2)

Question: The content representative areas listed under A.3.7.2 Past Performance does not account for all the technical areas listed in A.1.2. Are we required address the technical area scope versus what is listed for the content representative areas for Volume III past performance.

Answer: Offerors are required to address the content representative areas are specified for the given category.

(Section A.3.7.2(a))

Question: Will the government please clarify the minimum number of past performance references required to not be excluded from the competition?

Answer: A minimum of one past performance reference of your most recent similar contracts that are completed or ongoing within three years of the solicitation release date is required. An Offeror shall not be rated favorably or unfavorably if the offeror does not have a record of “recent” and “relevant” past performance or if a record of past performance is unavailable. In such cases the offeror will receive a “Neutral” rating.(Section A.3.7.2a and Section A.4.3).

Question: When referring to similar scope efforts, is that product and services scope and not dollar amount?

Answer: Similar scope efforts refer to content representative areas (Section A.3.7.2).

Volume II- Past Performance Volume (2 of 2)

Question: Does Technical Area 9a Product Based Services apply to the Category A Past Performance Content Representative Areas?

Answer: There are only 8 Content Representative Areas for Category A past performance. Technical

Area 9a- Product Base Services is not one of the 8 content representative areas (Refer to Section A.3.7.2).

Question: Could you please clarify if each individual contract provided must include references for 3 content areas or if the requirement is for the collective contracts (up to 3) to cover the total request content areas in total?

Answer: The requirement is for the collective contracts (up to 3) to cover the total requested number of content areas for a given scope Category.

Question: Does the quantity of references affect the ratings?

Answer: No, the quantity of references does not affect the ratings (Refer to Section A.4.3) .

Question: Will the Government consider the past performance of the prime's first-tier subcontractors?

Answer: First- tier subcontractor past performance information will only be evaluated for small business prime offerors. (Refer to Section A.3.7.2(a)).

Mission Suitability Questions

Volume III- Mission Suitability Volume

Mission Suitability Proposal Group

Question: Please clarify if "group" in the requirement "The Mission Suitability Proposal must specifically state for which group the offeror is proposing" means Category (A, B, or C).

Answer: Yes, "group" refers to the Category (A, B, or C) the offeror is proposing. (Reference: Section A.3.7.3)

Delivery and Other Charges

Question: Regarding A.1.29 DELIVERY AND OTHER CHARGES: Is this all CONUS or will it go OCONUS?

Answer: It is dependent on the specific task orders.

Four Acquisition Objectives

Question: What are the four Acquisition Objectives for SEWP VI?

Answer: The four Acquisition Objectives for SEWP VI are detailed in Attachment A- SEWP Scope Section A.1.

Subcontractor Management Approach

Question: Please clarify if offerors should submit a subcontractor management approach as part of the management approach section?

Answer: Yes, offerors should include a subcontractor management approach in the management approach section as specified in Section A.3.7.3(b)(4)(vii).

Volume III- Mission Suitability Volume Proposal Submission Requirements

Question: Please confirm if the Mission Suitability Volume is to be submitted as a single PDF file that includes both Subfactor A and Subfactor B, each with their own cover pages, TOC, list of figures, list of tables, and a 15-page limit for each subfactor.

Answer: Yes, the Mission Suitability Volume should be submitted as a single PDF file containing both Subfactor A and Subfactor B, each with their own unique cover pages, TOC, list of figures, list of tables, and a 15-page limit for each subfactor as specified in Section A.3.6.

Consistency in Proposal Volumes

Question: Section A.4.4 mentions the validation of consistency between all proposal volumes. Can offerors reference subcontractor capabilities in the Mission Suitability Volume even if not used in past performance or mandatory experience sections?

Answer: Yes, offerors can reference subcontractor capabilities in the Mission Suitability Volume as long as these references align with the overall proposal and demonstrate the offeror’s ability to meet the RFP requirements as specified in Section A.4.4.

Category B REPs Requirement

Question: Section A.3.7.3(a)(2) mentions that "For Other than Small Businesses: 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." Does this apply to small businesses as well?

Answer: This requirement specifically applies to "Other than Small Businesses" as per Section A.3.7.3. Small businesses should follow the guidelines specific to their category.

THANK YOU

WEBSITE

https://www.sewp.nasa.gov/sewpvi/ https://www.sewp.nasa.gov/sewpvi/