Website Modernization QA Updated.pdf

Selective Service System Website Modernization FAQ June 18, 2026

Section 1 – Solicitation Administration & Proposal Submission

Q1.1 – Proposal volume clarification - Section L 2.a states four (4) separately submitted bound Volumes but then enumerates five Volumes (I, II, III, IV, V). Please confirm whether the offeror is expected to submit four bound volumes or five separate volumes. | Section L 2.a, 23

A) We apologize for the confusion. The reference to "four (4) separately electronically submitted bound Volumes" is a typographical error. Offerors shall submit five (5) proposal volumes as identified in the solicitation:

• Volume I – Administrative Proposal

• Volume II – Technical Proposal

• Volume III – Past Performance

• Volume IV – Price Proposal

• Volume V – Contract Documentation

Offerors should prepare and submit all five volumes in accordance with the proposal instructions and content requirements provided in the solicitation. We appreciate your attention to this discrepancy.

Q1.2) Evaluation Factors -Table 1 identifies Volume V as “Factor 5 – Contract Documentation,” but Section 52.212-2 lists only four evaluation factors. Please confirm whether Volume V is evaluated as a separate factor or treated as an administrative/compliance volume only.

A) Yes. Volume V – Contract Documentation corresponds to Evaluation Factor 5. Offerors shall submit Volume V in accordance with the solicitation instructions. Evaluation of Volume V will be conducted in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation.

Q1.3 – Technical and pricing assumptions - Please confirm whether offerors may propose technical assumptions in Volume II and related price assumptions in instructions to Offerors Solicitation. pp. 27 to 29

A) Yes. Offerors may identify reasonable technical assumptions in Volume II and corresponding pricing assumptions in their Price Proposal, provided those assumptions are clearly stated, consistent with the solicitation requirements, and do not take exception to, qualify, or materially alter the Government's requirements. Offerors should clearly document any assumptions used in developing their technical approach, staffing methodology, level of effort, pricing, schedule, or proposed solution. SSS will evaluate proposals based on the requirements of the solicitation and the offeror's demonstrated understanding of those requirements.

Important Note: The Initial Draft Project Plan and Comprehensive Project Timeline shall be submitted with the Technical Proposal. Pages associated with these required submissions are excluded from, and will not be counted toward, the 80-page limitation applicable to Volume II.

Q1.4 Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) - Please provide the Government's Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE), budget, total project funding, or anticipated cost range for this requirement.

A) SSS has not established or disclosed a Government estimate, target budget, funding ceiling, anticipated contract value, or expected level of effort for proposal purposes.

Offerors shall independently determine the resources, staffing, labor mix, technologies, hosting services, licenses, integrations, migration activities, security activities, testing, deployment activities, and other elements necessary to satisfy the solicitation requirements and shall base their pricing on their proposed approach.

SSS will evaluate proposals in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria.

Offerors should clearly document any assumptions that affect pricing, schedule, staffing, or technical performance.

Q1.5 - PPQ subcontractor submission process - Please confirm whether the one required past performance reference must be from the prime offeror only, given the evaluation language stating that past performance where the offeror or subcontractor was not listed as a prime will not be considered relevant. Factor 3 Past Performance, Solicitation pp. 27 to 36

A) Offerors may include information regarding proposed subcontractors and their relevant experience as part of their proposal. Offerors may also identify subcontractor past performance references and include completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), if available, in Volume III. References are responsible for completing PPQs.

Offerors shall make reasonable efforts to obtain completed PPQs and include them in Volume III of their proposal submission. If a completed PPQ is unavailable by the proposal due date, the offeror may provide the reference's contact information and identify its efforts to obtain the completed PPQ. The Government reserves the right to contact references directly to obtain or verify past performance information. Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria and relevancy requirements. Offerors should clearly identify the role and scope of work to be performed by any proposed subcontractor and explain how the subcontractor's experience supports successful contract performance.

Q1.6 – PPQ submission process -The PPQ instructions state that the reference shall complete and submit the PPQ, while the solicitation states the offeror shall submit the completed PPQ with the proposal package. Please confirm whether the completed PPQ must be submitted directly by the reference, included by the offeror in Volume III, or both.

Attachment 2 PPQ, Factor 3, Solicitation pp. 27 to 28.

A) Offerors may include information regarding proposed subcontractors and their relevant experience as part of their proposal. Offerors may also identify subcontractor past performance references and include completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), if available, in Volume III.

References are responsible for completing PPQs. Offerors shall make reasonable efforts to obtain completed PPQs and include them in Volume III of their proposal submission. If a completed PPQ is unavailable by the proposal due date, the offeror may provide the reference's contact information and identify its efforts to obtain the completed PPQ. SSS reserves the right to contact references directly to obtain or verify past performance information.

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria and relevancy requirements. Offerors should clearly identify the role and scope of work to be performed by any proposed subcontractor and explain how the subcontractor's experience supports successful contract performance.

Q1.7 Review and approval timelines - What review and approval timelines should offerors assume?

A) SSS will make reasonable efforts to review and provide feedback on deliverables in a timely manner. Specific review timelines have not been established for proposal purposes.

Offerors should incorporate realistic review, comment, revision, testing, and approval periods into their proposed schedules. The contract award is expected to be made by July 15, 2026, or a date close to this day.

Q1.8 – Post-award meeting date correction - Please confirm whether the post-award meeting due “within 3 business days of award, but no later than September 30, 2026” should be interpreted as within 3 business days of award. | PWS 7.1 | Attachment 1, p. 16

A) The correct date for the post award meeting should read July 20, 2026, three business days after the awarding of the contract on July 15, 2026.

Q1.9 – Substantial Completion Milestones (Website delivery) - Please clarify what activities are included within the September 25, 2026 substantial-completion milestone.

A) For purposes of this solicitation, the September 25, 2026 substantial-completion milestone represents completion of the implementation activities necessary to support SSS's planned deployment objectives for the modernized website solution.

By the substantial-completion date, the Contractor shall have completed all required discovery, design, development, configuration, migration, integration, testing, training, documentation, deployment preparation, and other implementation activities necessary to deliver a production-ready solution to SSS. The solution should be fully configured, tested, and prepared for operational cutover, subject to final Government acceptance and any remaining authorization activities.

SSS may accept a solution that is "cutover ready" by September 25, 2026, provided all required implementation activities have been completed, required testing has been successfully performed, critical defects have been resolved, deployment readiness has been demonstrated, and all required authorization activities are progressing in accordance with the approved security and authorization process.

The September 25, 2026 milestone does not alter the requirements applicable to operations and sustainment activities, transition activities, option periods, or other post-implementation requirements identified elsewhere in the solicitation.

Offerors shall propose an approach that satisfies the solicitation requirements, milestones, and schedule and should clearly identify any assumptions regarding Government reviews, approvals, authorization activities, dependencies, or deployment sequencing.

Q1.10 – Proposal file formats - Section 2(b) states that proposal files shall be submitted in Microsoft Word or Excel formats and that PDF files are permitted for executed documents such as the Cover Letter. Please confirm whether Technical, Past Performance, Administrative, and other proposal volumes may be submitted in PDF format for readability, formatting control, and electronic review. | Section L, Proposal Structure and Details

A) Offerors shall follow the file format instructions identified in the solicitation.

SSS acknowledges that clarification may be required regarding acceptable proposal file formats and submission requirements. SSS will review the solicitation language and provide clarification through a solicitation amendment, if necessary.

Until further clarification is issued, offerors should prepare proposal submissions in accordance with the instructions contained in the solicitation.

Q1.11 – Proposal compliance verification - Volume II requires offerors to provide verification of compliance with the security requirements identified in PWS Section 2.4.

Please clarify the level and format of detail expected for this verification (e.g., narrative confirmation, attestations, certifications, supporting documentation, or evidence of existing compliant capabilities). | Volume II; PWS 2.4

A) Offerors should provide sufficient information to demonstrate compliance with the security requirements identified in PWS Section 2.4.

Verification may include narrative descriptions, attestations, existing authorizations or certifications, supporting documentation, architectural descriptions, security controls, compliance approaches, or other evidence the offeror determines appropriate to substantiate compliance with the solicitation requirements.

SSS will evaluate submissions in accordance with the solicitation requirements and evaluation criteria.

Section 2 – Evaluation, Past Performance & Staffing

Q2.1 – PPQ process - Section 52.212-1 Addendum, Volume III, states: "the offeror shall also send the Past Performance Questionnaire at Attachment 2 to the one designated reference and have them complete it and the offeror shall submit the completed Attachment 2 questionnaire to the Government with their proposal package by the submittal closing date." However, Attachment 2 itself instructs the reference to "complete this Questionnaire and e-mail to Contracting Officer, G. Hendricksen" and "Contract Specialist, Shimere Cooper" directly. Please clarify the required submission method: (a) Should the completed PPQ be emailed directly by the reference to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist? (b) Should the Offeror collect the completed PPQ from the reference and include it in the Offeror's proposal package? (c) Both? Section 52.212-1 Addendum, Volume III (Pages 27-28); Attachment 2, 27-28; Attachment 2, Page 1

A) Offerors may include information regarding proposed subcontractors and their relevant experience as part of their proposal. Offerors may also identify subcontractor past if available, in Volume III. References are responsible for completing PPQs.

Offerors shall make reasonable efforts to obtain completed PPQs and include them in Volume III of their proposal submission. If a completed PPQ is unavailable by the proposal due date, the offeror may provide the reference's contact information and identify its efforts to obtain the completed PPQ. The Government reserves the right to contact references directly to obtain or verify past performance information.

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria and relevancy requirements. Offerors should clearly identify the role and scope of work to be performed by any proposed subcontractor and explain how the subcontractor's experience supports successful contract performance.

Q2.2 – PPQ evaluation treatment - If the Offeror's designated reference is unable to submit the completed Attachment 2 (PPQ) by the proposal due date of June 30, 2026, despite the Offeror's diligent efforts, will the Government accept a late-submitted PPQ from the reference, or will the Offeror's past performance be rated as "Neutral" per the evaluation criteria in Table 5? Section 52.212-2 Addendum, Factor 3, Table 5 (Performance Confidence Assessments), 36

A) Offerors are responsible for ensuring that past performance information is submitted in accordance with the solicitation instructions and by the required deadline.

SSS will evaluate past performance using the information submitted with the proposal, information obtained from references, CPARS reports, and any other sources identified in the solicitation. SSS cannot guarantee that past performance information received after the proposal due date will be considered during the evaluation process. If sufficient past performance information is not available for evaluation, SSS will assign a past performance confidence assessment in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria, including the Neutral Confidence rating, when applicable.

Q2.3 – Subcontractor experience - The instructions for Volume III-Factor 3-Past Performance & Capability Statement state that “The offeror shall provide one (1) Past Performance reference using the Past Performance Questionnaire at Attachment 2. The reference shall be from relevant and recent contracts, on-going contracts, subcontracts and/or task/delivery orders accomplished within the past three (3) years.” Can the Government confirm that the Offeror (either prime or subcontractor on this SSS solicitation) can submit a past performance for work that they have performed as a subcontractor? Addendum - Instructions 2.f, 27-28

A) Offerors may submit past performance references for work performed as a subcontractor, provided the reference is relevant in size, scope, and complexity to the requirements of this solicitation. Past performance information from proposed subcontractors or teaming partners may be considered when the offeror demonstrates how that experience is relevant to the proposed solution and how the proposed subcontractor or teaming partner will meaningfully contribute to contract performance.

SSS will evaluate past performance in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria. The Government will review any apparent inconsistencies between the submission instructions and evaluation criteria and provide clarification through a solicitation amendment, if necessary.

Q2.4 – Labor category structure - The solicitation requires price backup detail by labor category and labor hours. Does the Government have a preferred labor category structure, or should offerors propose their own role-based labor categories? Price Proposal, Solicitation pp. 28 to 29

A) The solicitation requires offerors to provide pricing support at the labor category and labor-hour level; however, the solicitation does not appear to prescribe a specific Government labor category structure or standardized labor category matrix.

Accordingly, offerors may reasonably interpret the solicitation as allowing them to propose their own labor category structure, provided the proposed labor categories clearly align with the technical approach, staffing plan, labor mix, and performance requirements, and provide sufficient detail for the Government to evaluate price realism, reasonableness, and completeness.

Q2.5 – Commercial references - Please confirm whether the single required past performance reference may be from Federal, State, Local/Municipal, or Commercial customers, provided it is recent and relevant? Volume III / Factor 3 – Past Performance;

Evaluation – Past Performance, pp. 27–28 and p. 35

A) Offerors should submit recent and relevant past performance references in accordance with the solicitation instructions. References may be from Government or commercial customers, provided they demonstrate experience relevant to the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate all references in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria.

Q2.6 – Prime/subcontractor relevancy - Please confirm whether the one required past performance reference must be from the prime offeror only, given the evaluation language stating that past performance where the offeror or subcontractor was not listed as a prime will not be considered relevant. Factor 3 Past Performance, Solicitation pp. 27 to 36

A) Offerors may include information regarding proposed subcontractors and their relevant experience as part of their proposal. Offerors may also identify subcontractor past if available, in Volume III.

References are responsible for completing PPQs. Offerors shall make reasonable efforts to obtain completed PPQs and include them in Volume III of their proposal submission. If a completed PPQ is unavailable by the proposal due date, the offeror may provide the reference's contact information and identify its efforts to obtain the completed PPQ. The Government reserves the right to contact references directly to obtain or verify past performance information.

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria and relevancy requirements. Offerors should clearly identify the role and scope of work to be performed by any proposed subcontractor and explain how the subcontractor's experience supports successful contract performance.

Q2.7 – Commercial References - May offerors submit commercial-sector references, or are references limited to Federal Government contracts?

A) Offerors may submit references from Federal, state, local, tribal, commercial, or other organizations, provided the work is relevant in size, scope, complexity, and technical characteristics to the requirements of this solicitation.

SSS will evaluate past performance based on the degree to which the referenced effort demonstrates experience performing work similar to the requirements of this solicitation.

The customer type is less important than the relevance of the work performed.

Q2.8 – Past Performance References - Must the submitted past performance reference involve Federal website modernization or Federal digital services projects?

A) No. References are not required to involve Federal website modernization projects specifically. Offerors may submit references that demonstrate relevant experience performing similar website modernization, content management, cloud hosting, application integration, cybersecurity, digital experience, conversational AI, or related services.

SSS will evaluate past performance in accordance with the solicitation's stated evaluation criteria, including relevance in size, scope, and complexity.

Q2.9 – Reliance on subcontractors to demonstrate capabilities - May the prime contractor rely on the experience of proposed subcontractors to demonstrate capability and past performance?

A) Yes. Offerors may reference the experience and past performance of proposed subcontractors when such subcontractors are expected to perform meaningful portions of the contract effort. Offerors should clearly identify the proposed subcontractor, the work the subcontractor is expected to perform, and the relevance of the referenced experience to the requirements of this solicitation.

Q2.10 – Small business workshare - Does the prime small business offeror's workshare count toward small business participation?

A) For this 100 percent Small Business Set-Aside, the prime contractor's proposed performance of the contract may be included as part of the overall small business participation approach. Offerors shall comply with applicable limitations on subcontracting and submit the documentation required by the solicitation. A separate subcontracting plan is not required unless specifically identified elsewhere in the solicitation.

Q2.11 – Total estimate level of effort -- Section 52.212-2, Factor 4, refers to the "total estimated level of effort cited in the PWS." Please identify where the Government-provided estimated level of effort is located.

A) SSS is not aware of a Government-provided estimated level of effort identified in the solicitation. Offerors shall independently determine the staffing, labor mix, level of effort, and resources necessary to successfully perform the requirements of the solicitation and should clearly document any associated assumptions.

Q2.12 – Prescribed labor categories - Will SSS provide prescribed labor categories, labor hours, staffing levels, or labor mix requirements?

A) SSS has not established prescribed labor categories, staffing levels, labor hours, or labor mix requirements for proposal purposes. Offerors shall propose the personnel, labor categories, staffing approach, and level of effort they determine necessary to successfully perform the solicitation requirements and should clearly identify any assumptions affecting staffing, schedule, or performance.

Q2.13 – Mapping personnel - Are offerors required to map personnel to specific Government labor categories?

A) No specific Government labor category structure has been established for proposal purposes. Offerors may utilize their own labor category structure, provided proposed personnel qualifications, responsibilities, and experience clearly demonstrate the capability to successfully perform the solicitation requirements.

Section 3 – Pricing, CLINs & Contract Structure

Q3.1 – Operations Testing Platform pricing - Please confirm whether the Operations Testing Platform optional CLIN should be priced for the base period, option years, or both, and whether it should be included in the initial technical schedule. PWS Part 6, CLIN 5001, Solicitation p. 8 and Attachment 1, pp. 14 to 15

A) CLIN 5001 is identified as an optional CLIN. Offerors shall provide pricing for the Operations Testing Platform in accordance with the solicitation's pricing instructions and their proposed technical approach. SSS has not established specific quantities, periods of use, labor-hour estimates, or exercise timing for this optional CLIN. Offerors should develop reasonable assumptions and provide sufficient supporting detail to substantiate their proposed approach and pricing.

Offerors may include activities associated with the optional Operations Testing Platform in their proposed schedule to the extent necessary to demonstrate readiness to perform the work if the CLIN is exercised. Actual implementation, timing, scope, and period of performance for CLIN 5001, if exercised, will be determined by the Government in accordance with the contract.

For evaluation purposes, the Government will assess the Offeror's technical approach for performing the requirements associated with CLIN 5001. Although Offerors are required to submit pricing for this optional CLIN, the proposed price for CLIN 5001 will not be separately evaluated and will not be included in the Government's calculation of the total evaluated price for award purposes.

Q3.2 – Website enhancement and features - Regarding the CLIN structure: please confirm that Option Year CLINs cover continuing hosting, operations and sustainment, security monitoring, and chatbot optimization (PWS 5.2) at steady-state, and clarify how the Government intends CLIN 0004 (Enhancement & Feature Development) to be priced — e.g., as a Government-defined level of effort, NTE pool, or other structure.

A) SSS has revised the solicitation through amendment to designate the requirements identified in PWS Part 5, including PWS 5.2, as required contract requirements to be addressed within the applicable CLIN structure and pricing schedule.

Offerors shall propose the labor mix, level of effort, technical approach, and pricing they determine necessary to successfully perform the required contract services and deliverables identified in the solicitation. SSS is not prescribing a specific level of effort, not-to-exceed value, staffing level, labor mix, or pricing methodology beyond what is identified in the solicitation and associated pricing schedule. Offerors shall complete the pricing sheet in accordance with the solicitation instructions.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's proposed technical approach for satisfying the requirements associated with this CLIN in accordance with the solicitation's technical evaluation criteria. Proposed pricing will be evaluated as part of the overall price evaluation in accordance with the solicitation.

Q3.3 – Base Pricing - The 52.212-2 Addendum (Factor 4, Price Proposal Evaluation) states that any proposal "not within the total estimated level of effort cited in the PWS" shall include an explanation; however, the PWS does not cite an estimated level of effort, labor hours, or budget range. Please provide the estimated level of effort or clarify how price realism will be assessed in its absence., Section V, 52.212-2 Addendum, Factor 4, 36.

A) Offerors shall propose pricing based on their own technical approach and the requirements set forth in the solicitation. SSS is not prescribing a specific level of effort, not-to-exceed value, staffing level, or pricing structure beyond what is identified in the solicitation and associated pricing schedule. Offerors shall propose the labor mix, level of effort, and pricing they determine necessary to successfully perform the requirements.

Offerors should clearly document any assumptions that materially affect pricing, staffing, schedule, or performance.

Q3.4 – CLIN Pricing - Amendment 0002 states that SSS can accept a "cutover ready" solution to support the September 25, 2026 deadline. Please clarify whether the September 25, 2026 substantial-completion date applies only to implementation activities or whether it also includes operations and sustainment activities under CLIN 0003, transition activities, and optional CLINs.

A) The September 25, 2026 substantial-completion milestone applies to the implementation, modernization, migration, integration, testing, deployment readiness, training, documentation, and related activities necessary to achieve the required project objectives. Operations and sustainment activities, transition activities, option periods, and optional CLINs, if exercised, will be performed in accordance with their respective contract periods, performance requirements, and contract terms.

SSS may accept a solution that is "cutover ready" by the required completion date, provided all required authorization activities are progressing in accordance with the approved security and authorization process.

Q3.5 – AI Chatbot - If the Government's existing conversational AI platform is leveraged, who is responsible for licensing, subscriptions, usage-based charges, and recurring costs during the base period and option years?

A) If an offeror proposes to leverage a Government-furnished conversational AI capability, SSS will provide additional information regarding ownership, licensing, subscription arrangements, and associated responsibilities following award, as appropriate.

Offerors should clearly identify any assumptions regarding licensing, subscription costs, consumption-based charges, and ongoing operational support within their proposals and pricing.

Q3.6 – AI Chatbot Messaging - Will SSS provide written authorization to use SSS-generated FAQs, user guides, and public-facing documentation to build the chatbot?

A) SSS may provide approved public-facing content, including FAQs, user guides, website content, policy information, and other Agency-approved materials, for use in configuring and supporting the conversational AI solution. The chatbot knowledge base will be derived from Government-approved content sources. Any use of Government content shall comply with the solicitation's AI governance, privacy, security, and data protection requirements. Additional details regarding approved content sources, formats, and governance processes will be provided following award, as appropriate.

Q3.7 – Transition Out Phase - PWS Part 5.5 requires migration from the Contractor-hosted cloud environment to a Government-designated environment during transition-out. Please clarify whether the production environment is expected to remain contractor-hosted during the base period and option years.

A) The solicitation contemplates a contractor-provided hosting environment during contract performance. The transition-out requirement is intended to ensure the orderly transfer of website assets, data, configurations, documentation, application components, and related materials to a Government-designated environment or successor contractor at the conclusion of performance.

SSS has not established a requirement for migration to a Government-owned environment during the base period or option periods unless otherwise directed.

Q3.8 – Transition-out pricing - Please confirm whether transition-out support under CLIN 6001 should be priced as an optional CLIN, included in the base price, or priced only if separately exercised. CLIN 6001, PWS 5.5, Solicitation p. 9 and Attachment 1, pp. 13 to 14

A) CLIN 6001 is identified as a separate CLIN for transition-out support. Offerors should provide pricing for CLIN 6001 in accordance with the solicitation's pricing instructions and should not include transition-out support costs within the base contract pricing unless otherwise reflected in their proposed pricing structure.

SSS has not established a specific quantity, labor-hour estimate, or exercise date for transition-out activities. Offerors should develop reasonable assumptions and provide sufficient supporting detail to allow evaluation of the proposed pricing. Transition-out support will be performed only if required by SSS and in accordance with the terms of the contract. Offerors should clearly identify any assumptions used in developing their proposed pricing for CLIN 6001.

Q3.9 – Small Business Participation and Contract Structure - The solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside and Volume V requires contract documentation related to small business participation. Please confirm whether the prime small business offeror’s own proposed workshare counts toward the required small business participation commitment and whether a separate subcontracting plan is required.

A) For this 100 percent Small Business Set-Aside, the prime contractor's proposed performance of the contract may be included as part of the overall small business participation approach. Offerors shall comply with the applicable limitations on subcontracting and submit the documentation required by the solicitation. A separate subcontracting plan is not required unless specifically identified elsewhere in the solicitation.

Q3.10 – Scope of Substantial Completion vs. Contract Periods - Amendment 0002 states that SSS can accept “cutover ready” for the ATO timeline in order to meet deadlines.

Please clarify whether the September 25, 2026 substantial-completion date applies to initial modernization/development, testing, UAT, and cutover readiness only, or whether it also applies to operations and sustainment activities under CLIN 0003, transition-out activities, and optional/future CLINs.

A) The September 25, 2026, substantial-completion milestone applies to the implementation, modernization, testing, migration, integration, deployment readiness, and related activities necessary to achieve the required project objectives. Operations and sustainment activities, transition activities, option periods, and optional CLINs, if exercised, will be performed in accordance with their respective contract periods and requirements.

SSS may accept a solution that is "cutover ready" by the required completion date, provided all required authorization activities are progressing in accordance with the approved security and authorization process.

Q3.11 – Post-Award Meeting and Contract Kickoff Structure - Amendment 0002 confirms the anticipated award date is July 15, 2026. PWS 7.1 schedules the Post-Award Meeting “within 3 business days of award,” but also states “no later than September 30, 2026.” Please confirm whether the September 30, 2026 date is intentional or should be corrected.

A) The Post-Award Meeting shall occur within three (3) business days of contract award.

Based on the anticipated award date of July 15, 2026, the intended meeting date is July 20, 2026. The September 30, 2026 date appears inconsistent with the solicitation schedule and should be considered a clerical error pending formal correction.

Q3.12 – Contract Deliverable Structure - Does substantial completion require a fully operational production deployment by September 25, 2026?

A) The September 25, 2026 milestone is intended to ensure the modernized website, integrations, migration activities, testing, and deployment preparations are completed and ready to support SSS deployment objectives. SSS may accept a solution that is cutover-ready by the required completion date, provided testing, deployment readiness, and authorization activities are substantially complete and progressing in accordance with the approved implementation and authorization process.

Q3.13 – Contract Performance Schedule - Please clarify the relationship between the September 25, 2026 substantial-completion date and the subsequent operations and sustainment period. Does contract performance end upon delivery of the modernized website, or does performance continue under a separate operations and sustainment period beginning September 26, 2026?

A) The September 25, 2026 substantial-completion milestone applies to the implementation phase of the effort, including modernization, design, development, migration, integration, testing, security documentation, deployment readiness, and related implementation activities necessary to achieve the required project objectives.

Contract performance does not end upon substantial completion of the website. Following substantial completion, operations and sustainment activities shall continue in accordance with the applicable contract line items (CLINs), contract periods of performance, and solicitation requirements. For planning purposes, offerors should assume that implementation activities culminate with substantial completion on September 25, 2026, and that the subsequent operations and sustainment period begins immediately thereafter, consistent with the contract structure and periods of performance identified in the solicitation.

Transition-out activities, option periods, and any optional CLINs, if exercised, shall be performed in accordance with their respective contract requirements and performance periods.

Section 4 – Schedule, Reviews & Deliverables

Q4.1 – Substantial completion - The solicitation states all work must be “substantially completed” by September 25, 2026. Please define “substantial completion” (e.g., production launch, Government acceptance, completion of testing/UAT, completion of content migration, ATO status).

A) For purposes of this solicitation, substantial completion refers to the successful production deployment of the modernized website by September 25, 2026. Activities required to achieve full operational capability, including final documentation, training, transition, chatbot implementation, security authorization activities, and other post-deployment requirements, may continue in accordance with the approved project schedule and contract requirements.

Q4.2 – Deployment readiness - Please clarify the acceptance criteria for “substantially completed” by September 25, 2026, including whether this means production deployment, UAT completion, security approval, content migration completion, ATO approval, training completion, and closeout. Technical Capability and Project Schedule, PWS 7.1, Solicitation p. 25 and Attachment 1, pp. 16 to 17

A) For proposal purposes, "substantially completed" means that the modernized website solution is functionally complete and ready for transition to production operations by September 25, 2026. At a minimum, SSS expects core development, testing, content migration, training, and user acceptance activities necessary to support deployment readiness to be substantially complete.

The solicitation does not establish detailed acceptance criteria or mandatory completion milestones for individual activities such as production deployment, final content migration, training completion, security authorization issuance, contract closeout, or other post-implementation activities. SSS will work collaboratively with the successful contractor after award to refine implementation milestones, deployment readiness criteria, testing requirements, authorization activities, and transition planning.

Q4.3 – Government review timelines - What are SSS's expected timelines for design approvals, security reviews, AI conversation approvals, and UAT sign-off? Can SSS support expedited review cycles (24–72 hours) given the compressed schedule? Government Review Process; Timeline and Schedule Feasibility

A) SSS will make reasonable efforts to review and provide feedback on discovery deliverables, design specifications, security documentation, AI governance submissions, UAT results, production readiness materials, and other required deliverables in a timely manner.

SSS has not established specific review, comment, approval, or acceptance turnaround times for proposal purposes. Offerors should propose a realistic project schedule that includes adequate time for SSS reviews, comments, revisions, testing activities, stakeholder coordination, security authorization activities, and approval processes.

Offerors are responsible for identifying and managing schedule dependencies, assumptions, risks, and Government review activities within their proposed project plans.

Q4.4 – Award/kickoff correction - Please confirm whether the post-award meeting due “within 3 business days of award, but no later than September 30, 2026” should be interpreted as within 3 business days of award. | PWS 7.1 | Attachment 1, p. 16

A) The correct date for the post award meeting should read July 20, 2026, three business days after the awarding of the contract on July 15, 2026.

Section 5 – Security, RMF & Authorization

Q5.1 – Security framework - Does SSS have an existing Authority to Operate (ATO) for the current website that the contractor will inherit and update, or will the contractor be responsible for building a new ATO from scratch under this contract?

A) The modernized website and supporting solution will require authorization as a new system. Offerors should assume responsibility for supporting the security, compliance, documentation, testing, and authorization activities necessary to achieve an Authority to Operate (ATO) for the contractor-provided solution in accordance with applicable Federal and agency requirements.

To support the required implementation timeline, the Government may accept a solution that is "cutover ready" while final authorization activities are being completed, provided all required security, testing, compliance, and deployment readiness criteria have been satisfied and the Government determines that deployment can proceed in accordance with applicable risk management and authorization processes.

The solicitation establishes the Government's security and compliance objectives but does not prescribe all detailed ATO documentation, control implementation, assessment procedures, or authorization timelines for proposal purposes.

SSS will work collaboratively with the successful contractor after award to refine authorization requirements, provide applicable domain and system information, coordinate security activities, and support the completion of required ATO-related activities.

Q5.2 – Authorization responsibilities - Regarding Authority to Operate (ATO) requirements: (a) Does the current SSS website have an active ATO? Will the new website solution inherit an existing system security boundary, or will a new ATO package be required from scratch? (b) Will the Selective Service System designate an Information System Security Officer (ISSO) and Authorizing Official (AO) for this effort? Is the contractor expected to provide ISSO support? (c) Is the contractor expected to achieve a full ATO within the September 25, 2026, deadline, or will an Interim Authority to Operate (IATO) or

Authority to Test (ATT) be acceptable at launch? | PWS Part 2.4 / Section V, Factor 2, Items 9-10 Solicitation pp. 26-27

A) The modernized website and supporting solution will require authorization as a new system. Offerors should assume responsibility for supporting the security, compliance, documentation, testing, vulnerability management, assessment, and authorization activities necessary to achieve an Authority to Operate (ATO) for the contractor-provided solution in accordance with applicable Federal and agency requirements.

The solution shall be designed and implemented consistent with applicable Federal cybersecurity requirements, including Risk Management Framework (RMF) processes, FIPS 199 Moderate impact-level requirements, NIST security controls, vulnerability management requirements, and other applicable agency security standards.

To support the required implementation timeline, SSS may accept a solution that is cutover ready while final authorization activities are being completed, provided all required security, testing, compliance, remediation, and deployment-readiness criteria have been satisfied and SSS determines deployment can proceed in accordance with applicable risk management and authorization processes.

Following award, SSS will provide available Government-furnished security information, inherited control information, authorization artifacts, templates, architecture information, interface documentation, and other materials necessary to support contract performance, as appropriate. Because the modernized website and supporting solution will be authorized as a new system, offerors should not assume that all requested security artifacts currently exist in a form directly reusable for the new authorization effort.

The solicitation establishes SSS's security and compliance objectives but does not prescribe all detailed authorization boundary definitions, control implementation approaches, assessment procedures, vulnerability remediation processes, documentation requirements, or authorization timelines for proposal purposes. SSS will work collaboratively with the successful Contractor following award to refine authorization requirements, coordinate security activities, identify inherited controls a

Q5.3 – CMS authorization boundary - For a custom-developed CMS that is not a separately marketed commercial product, the CMS would be documented and authorized as part of the overall system ATO at FIPS 199 Moderate under the NIST Risk Management Framework, rather than holding an independent FedRAMP authorization. Please confirm that this approach is acceptable for meeting the security compliance requirements at PWS 2.4, provided the CMS is fully covered by the system's SSP, control implementation evidence, and ATO boundary documentation., Attachment 1, PWS 2.4 (Security Compliance and Access and Authentication), 4-5 (Attachment 1, Pages 4-5)

A) SSS has not prescribed a specific authorization approach for individual application components, content management systems, or software modules within the proposed solution.

Offerors may propose solutions that satisfy the solicitation's security, authorization, hosting, content management, and compliance requirements. Offerors should clearly describe their proposed architecture, authorization boundary, security control implementation approach, and how all components of the proposed solution will be addressed within the applicable authorization package, system security documentation, and authorization process.

For proposal purposes, SSS does not require a separate FedRAMP authorization, independent Authority to Operate (ATO), or standalone authorization package for individual CMS components that are part of the overall proposed solution. The Contractor shall be responsible for demonstrating how the proposed solution satisfies applicable security and authorization requirements.

Proposed solutions will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation requirements and evaluation criteria.

Q5.4 – SSS cybersecurity Support - Please confirm whether SSS will provide existing security artifacts, including current SSP, security boundary diagrams, inherited/shared control matrix, POA&M, FedRAMP inheritance expectations, prior assessment results, penetration test reports, and continuous monitoring requirements. | Attachment 1 PWS 2.4 and 7.2 Attachment 1 pp. 4-6, 17-19 / PDF pp. 41-43, 54-56

A) Following award, SSS will provide available Government-furnished security information, documentation, inherited control information, security requirements, architecture information, assessment documentation, authorization artifacts, templates, and other materials necessary to support contract performance, as appropriate.

Such information may include, if available and applicable, security documentation, system architecture information, inherited/shared control information, authorization artifacts, assessment results, continuous monitoring requirements, templates, and other relevant materials.

Because the modernized website and supporting solution will be authorized as a new system, offerors should not assume that all requested artifacts currently exist in a form directly reusable for the new authorization effort.

Q5.5 – Cybersecurity monitoring - Please identify any SSS-required cybersecurity tools, SIEM destinations, log formats, monitoring integrations, vulnerability scanners, ticketing systems, or reporting templates that the Contractor must use or integrate with. | Attachment 1 PWS 2.1, 2.4, 2.8, and 5.3 Attachment 1 pp. 2-7, 12 / PDF pp. 39-44, A) Following award, SSS will provide available information regarding required security integrations, monitoring requirements, reporting requirements, interface specifications, Government-furnished services, and other technical requirements necessary to support contract performance, as appropriate.

At this time, SSS has not prescribed specific cybersecurity products, SIEM platforms, vulnerability scanners, ticketing systems, log formats, monitoring tools, or reporting templates beyond the requirements identified in the solicitation. Offerors may propose solutions that satisfy the solicitation's security, monitoring, logging, reporting, compliance, and operational requirements.

Where integration with Government-managed security services, monitoring capabilities, reporting processes, or other enterprise services is required, detailed technical requirements and interface information will be provided to the successful contractor following award, as appropriate.

Q5.6 – Contractor-managed cloud environment - If the solution is hosted in a Contractor-managed cloud environment, please clarify whether SSS requires direct administrative access, read-only audit access, security tool access, billing visibility, source code repository access, and cloud configuration visibility. Attachment 1 PWS 2.1, 2.4, and 5.5 | Attachment 1 pp. 2-6, 13-14 / PDF pp. 39-43, 50-51

A) SSS requires sufficient access, visibility, reporting, and oversight capabilities necessary to support contract administration, security oversight, audit activities, incident response coordination, compliance verification, and operational requirements.

The Solicitation does not currently prescribe requirements regarding administrative privileges, cloud account ownership, source code repository access, billing visibility, security tool access, audit access levels, or cloud configuration access. The specific access, reporting, monitoring, and visibility requirements for the contractor-managed environment will be coordinated with the successful contractor following award.

Offers should describe their proposal approach for providing appropriate Government visibility into system operations, security posture, compliance activities, reporting, and performance while maintaining effective management of the contractor-provided hosting environment.

Q5.7 – Disaster Recovery Capabilities - Please clarify whether the Contractor must provide disaster recovery capabilities for only the public website and CMS or also for chatbot, staging, analytics, logs, document storage, integrations, and optional testing platform components. | Attachment 1 PWS 2.1, Cloud Infrastructure and Hosting; PWS 8.1, Attachment 1 pp. 2-3, 22-26 / PDF pp. 39-40, 59-63

A) The Contractor's disaster recovery and continuity capabilities should address the contractor-provided solution and any contractor-managed components necessary to satisfy the solicitation's availability, security, operational, and recovery requirements.

This may include, as applicable, the public website, content management system (CMS), conversational AI capability, contractor-managed storage, logging, monitoring, analytics, integration…