SLE_QA_Matrix_wFAA_Responses_FINAL_01MAY25.pdf

# Reference SIR Section

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

Section B 1 Attachment B-1

Pricing Schedule Row 64 column D Est Hours "514,650"

The Offeror must provide a detailed response that describes the steps and procedures it would take to successfully transition-in the following estimated level of effort at time of Contract award: Task Order chart provided list 8 SLE Support Estimated Task Orders with 228 FTE.

The estimate hours of "514,650" conflicts with the stated 228 FTE stated in Section L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach, Subfactor 2 - Transition (2) Transition-In Scenario.

There is no conflict between the two documents. The 228 FTE reflected in the 'Transition-in Scenario' is a hypothetical FTE count developed for vendor response to SIR Factor 1.

2 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

B.1 General, B.4.1.4 Due to the nature of the anticipated requirements, resources may be required on a fluctuating schedule, less than full-time basis, or even required to provide excess hours (See SECTION B.4.1.4, ‘Application of Excess Hours/Extended Work Week (EWW)’) in support of business needs. The unique aspect of this Contract is the need for a flexible workforce that can rapidly respond to fluctuating mission requirements. All terms and conditions contained in this document unless otherwise specified, will be applicable to all Task Orders issued against this Contract without any requirement to so state.

The Contractor agrees to perform this Contract, so far as practicable, without using excess hours, particularly as a regular employment practice, except when lower overall costs to the Government will result or when it is necessary to meet urgent program needs.

Will the Government confirm that individual contract employees may work in excess of 1880 annually?

Yes

3 SOW Appendix B. List of Current Systems

CTAS, DSR, DSSC, TMA, etc. are no longer operational in the NAS. Would the Government update the SOW Appendix B to include only current systems?

Attachment C-1 'Statement of Work was revised to update current systems.

4 Attachment B-1, Pricing Schedule" and Attachment C-

2, "SOW LCAT

Qualifications"

Attachment B-1, Tab B Ordering Periods 1-

Attachment B-1, Pricing Schedule" includes billable hours for "Program Support," however, Attachment C-2, SOW LCAT Qualifications, does not include a "Program Support" labor category.

Would the government provide "Program Support" LCAT descriptions for the three FTE positions in C-2, SOW LCAT Qualifications?

Attachment B-1, 'Pricing Schedule' has been revised to remove reference to a Program Support LCAT.

5 SIR Section B.4.1.3 N/A "Performance under this Contract will utilize Government 'on-site' rates." Because this contract vehicle has historically utilized both on and off site personnel as a result of type of work and availability of office space at the WJHTC, will the Government consider the addition of "Off- Site" rates to this requirement to allow for future shifts in work location?

Modify SIR Section B.4.1.3 and Attachment B-1, Pricing Schedule accordingly to allow for Off-Site proposed rates.

No, place of performance for this effort is anticipated to be on-site only.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

6 Attachment B-1 Attachment B-1 Pricing Schedule workbook

Labor category: Engineer The spelling for the Engineer labor category in Attachment B-1 Pricing Schedule appears to be misspelled and does not match the spelling for “Engineer” in Attachment C-2, Minimum Labor Category Qualifications.

Can the Government please provide an updated attachment with the correct spelling of the Engineer labor category?

Provide a revised Attachment B-1 Pricing Schedule file with corrected spelling.

Attachment B-1, 'Pricing Schedule' Tab B and Tab C have been updated to correct the misspelling of 'Engineer' labor category.

Section C 7 Attachment C-1

Statement of Work

12.1.1 On-boarding of

Personnel

Onboarding of personnel must be conducted in accordance with AMS clauses 3.14-2 ‘Contractor Personnel Suitability Requirements’ (Apr 24) and 3.14-4 ‘Access to FAA Facilities, systems, FAA property, and Sensitive Unclassified Information’ (Apr 24).

Can the offeror assume that incumbent employees under the existing contracts meet the Contractor Personnel Suitability Requirements?

No.

8 Attachment C-1 Statement of Work

12.1 Phase-In

Transition Plan

Within 30 calendar days of award and in collaboration with the FAA, the Contractor must draft and deliver, for COR approval, a Phase-In Transition Plan. The plan must cover the transition timeframe approved by the FAA, which can be up to 60 calendar days.

This Phase-in Transition Plan must describe an integrated and comprehensive approach for a successful transition, including transition of activities started but not yet completed from the existing contract to this effort and estimated resource requirements from the incumbent.

Can the Government confirm the number of days between contract award, and the notice for the contractor to proceed with transition?

No. Transition under this Contract is anticipated to commence with the issuance of funded Task Order(s). While the Government intends that task order awards will occur shortly after Contract award, it cannot confirm durations in advance.

9 Attachment C-1 Statement of Work

12.1.1 On-boarding of

Personnel

Onboarding of personnel must be conducted in accordance with AMS clauses 3.14-2 ‘Contractor Personnel Suitability Requirements’ (Apr 24) and 3.14-4 ‘Access to FAA Facilities, systems, FAA property, and Sensitive Unclassified Information’ (Apr 24).

Can the Government provide the number of incumbent staff under each contract?

As of April 4, 2025 Contract DTFACT-17-D- 00004 utilized a total of 83 FTEs and Contract DTFACT-17-D-00005 utilzied a total of 117

FTES.

It should be noted that the FTE count during performance fluctuates based on requirements of AJM.

10 Attachment C-1 Statement of Work

5.9 Training The Contractor must provide system training as required. The Contractor must provide System Training Course materials for each student. The Contractor must prepare a Training Plan for each System Training course provided that defines the training approach for the System Training. The Contractor must assist the FAA in preparing Academy training materials -in accordance with FAA Academy requirements and agreements.

The SOW work requires the contractor to develop course materials and administer system training. However, there are no trainer, instructional system designer, or training developer labor categories included in C-2 SOW labor category qualifications.

Would the FAA consider adding these labor categories with level of 1 to 5 for each to ensure that qualified personnel are available to support the required training tasks?

No additional labor categories will be added for these requirements.

The FAA considers that the training requirements can be satisfied by the Process Improvement Specialist and/or Technical Writer as requirements dictate.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

11 Attachment C-1 Statement of Work

5.10 Asset

Management and Logistics Support

The Contractor must provide support in the areas of asset management and logistic support.

The SOW work requires the contractor to provide detailed asset management and logistic support. However, there is not logistics analyst labor categories included in C-2 SOW labor category qualifications.

Would the FAA consider adding a logistics analysts labor category with level of 1 to 5 to ensure that qualified personnel are available to support the required logistics tasks?

No addditional labor categories will be added for these requirements.

The FAA considers that the asset management and logistics support requirements can be satisfied by the Program Analyst and Technical Specialist as requirements dictate.

Attachment C-2, 'SOW Minimum Labor Catergory Qualifications' was revised to update the Program Analyst and Technical Specialist Skill Definition.

12 Attachment C-1 Statement of Work

5.12 Security The Contractor must take effective cybersecurity measures at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels.

The Contractor must support the FAA’s efforts to monitor federal cybersecurity policies and regulations and assess their subsequent effect/impact as it applies to the scope of this Contract.

The Contractor must provide information system security support in any or all security domains as defined and described by the International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium (ISC²) ® Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) ® certification

The SOW work requires the contractor to provide detailed IT and cyber security support. However, there are no INFOSEC/Cyber Security Specialist or Information Technology Specialist labor categories included in C-2 SOW labor category qualifications. Would the FAA consider adding these labor categories with level of 1 to 5 for each to ensure that qualified personnel are available to support the required security tasks?

No addditional labor categories will be added for these requirements.

The FAA considers that the security requirements can be satisfied by the follwing labor categories as requirements dictate:

Engineer, Computer Scientist, Database Specialist, Documentation Specialist and the Technical Writer.

Attachment C-1, 'Statement of Work' paragraph 5.12 as well as Attachment C-2, 'SOW Minimum Labor Catergory Qualifications' was revised to update the Technical Writer Skill Definition.

13 Attachment C-2 SOW Labor Category Qualifications 3- 20-2025

"Attachment C-2 provides job descriptions and qualifications for all labor categories to be priced except for Program Support, levels 1-3. Could the Government please provide job descriptions and qualifications for the Program Support LCAT?"

See response to Question 4

14 SOW 3. SCOPE AJM-2 requires SLE support as defined throughout this Statement of Work (SOW) to the systems and services defined below.

a. Enroute and Oceanic,

b. Terminal,

c. Communication, Flight Service, and Weather Engineering,

d. National Airway Systems Engineering,

e. ISS,

f. Administrative Computer Systems, and

g. Business Operations.

Because c. Communication, Flight Service, and Weather Engineering, and d. National Airway Systems Engineering, were part of the previous TNT contract, would the government consider removing these from the requirements?

Update to reflect AJM- 2 required support.

Attachment C-1 'Statement of Work' paragraph 3 was revised to remove reference to these systems/services.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

15 SOW and SIR Section 4.2.1 Contract Management Database

Section 6.

DELIVERABLES

4.2.1 states "The Contractor must utilize the Government-provided Contract Management Database as a repository..."

There are, however, conflicts with Deliverable Table on Page 24, which states that the Contract Management Database must be delivered Thirty (30) business days after start of contract.

Would the Government clarify whether the Contract Management Database is government provided or a contractor-developed deliverable?

The Contract Management Database is a Government database, to which access will be granted to the awardee in order to meet the requirements of this SOW paragraph.

The Contract Management Database is a Government database, in which the awardee will be provided access in order to meet the requirements of this SOW paragraph.

Attachment C-1, ' Statement of Work' paragraph 4.2 and 6 were revised to remove reference to a Contract Management Datbase Report.

16 Section C SOW Appendix B.

List of Current Systems

Datacomm is defined twice (DataComm and DATA COMM) please remove one.

Attachment C-1 'Statement of Work' has been revised to remove the duplication of the DataComm reference in Appendix B.

17 Section C 5.12.1 Information System Security Support

"a. Methods of storing, handling, marking, and disposing of classified and Sensitive Unclassified Information (SUI)/Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI)."

If SLE program may have access to classified information, shouldn't the Prime Offeror be required to provide a DD254 at the time of proposal submission?

In accordance with SIR Clause H.26, access to classified data is not anticipated under this Contract; therefore, there is no DD254 requirement.

Attachment C-1, 'Statement of Work' has been revised to strike the word 'classified' from SOW paragraph 5.12.1.

18 SOW Section 5.12 Security and Attachment C-2 SOW Labor Category Qualifications

5.12.1 Information

System Security Support

"The Contractor must provide information system security support in any or all security domains as defined and described by the International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium (ISC²) Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) certification."

To enable offerors to meet Section C requirements for CISSP certifications, however no job description captures the certification requirement. Would the government update Schedule B to include a security job description?

There is no requirement in this Contract for a CISSP Certification.

Attachment C-1 'Statement of Work' paragraph 5.12 was revised.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

Section F Section F F.2 Place of

Performance Services under this Contract will be performed “on-site” at Government locations. The primary performance location is at the WJHTC for Advanced Aerospace in Atlantic City, NJ, however, support may be at other Continental United States (CONUS) FAA locations (on-site rate). Some tasks may require the Contractor to travel to more than one location in support of the work effort. Refer to SECTION C, Attachment C-1, ‘Statement of Work,’ paragraph 7, ‘Place of Performance’ for additional details.

Can the customer please clarify how many personnel will be stationed at other referenced locations full-time?

The Government cannot confirm how many on-site FTEs may be required at other FAA CONUS locations during performance of this Contract. Requirements under this Contract will may fluctuate with hours ordered as mission requirements dictate.

However, for informational purposes only, on-site support, including but not limited to, the following may be required:

- Oklahoma City, Oklahoma - 1 FTE

- Honolulu, Hawaii - 1 FTE

- Sierra Vista, Arizona - 1 FTE

- Omaha, Nebraska - 1 FTE

- Southeast OSF located at the Atlanta TRACON (Georgia) - 1 FTE

- North Texas OSF located at Dallas Fort Worth TRACON (Texas) - 1 FTE

- Pacific OSF located in San Diego, California -

1 FTE

- FAA Headquarters located in Washington

DC - 1 FTE

- Tampa, Florida - 1 FTE

- New England OSF located in Nashua, New Hampshire - 1 FTE

Section H

SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

H.6 CONTRACTOR

PERSONNEL

QUALIFICATION

Contractor Personnel include employees of the prime contractor, and all subcontractors engaged by the prime contractor to perform work efforts under this Contract.

All personnel, regardless of whether employed by the prime contractor or its subcontractor(s), must satisfy the specific educational, experience, and technical qualifications expressed in SECTION C, Attachment C-2, ‘Statement of Work - Minimum Labor Category Qualifications’. Reference is also made to SECTION F Clause 3.8.2-22, ‘Substitution or Addition of Personnel’.

Will the Government confirm that assigned Program Manager is required to be available full time?

The SIR reference notedin Column E for this question is not applicable to the Program or Contracts Manager positions, as these are indirect personnel. The requirements for Indirect Contract Personnel are provided at SIR Clause H.7.

It is Offeror discretion on how it intends to utilize the Program Manager under this Contract to meet the requirements of this Contract.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

21 Section H H.7 INDIRECT

CONTRACT

PERSONNEL

The Contractor must assign a Program Manager and a Contract Manager to represent the Contractor as primary points of contact to resolve issues, to perform overall Contract-level duties, and other functions that may arise relating to the Contract and all Task Orders awarded under the Contract.

The Program and Contract Manager must be employees of the prime contractor and have experience managing, administering and resolving problems on contracts of similar scope and complexity.

The Contractor must ensure that the Contracting Officer has current point of contact information for both the Program Manager and Contracts Manager.

In the event of a change in personnel for either of these positions, the Contractor must notify the Contracting Officer and provide all point of contact information for the new personnel within five (5) calendar days of the change. No costs for the Program or Contract Manager may be billed as a direct expense to this Contract.

Further, the following administrative tasks are not an allowable direct cost;

contract administration, subcontract management, human resources/staffing, and contract/invoice accounting.

Will the Government provide on-site office space for the Program Manager and Program Analysts?

On-site cubicle space will not be provided for the Program Manager position. Hoteling space, if needed in support of contract efforts, may be made available as needed.

On-site cubicle space will be provided for the Program Analyst position.

22 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

H.7 INDIRECT

CONTRACT

PERSONNEL

The Contractor must assign a Program Manager and a Contract Manager to represent the Contractor as primary points of contact to resolve issues, to perform overall Contract-level duties, and other functions that may arise relating to the Contract and all Task Orders awarded under the Contract.

The Program and Contract Manager must be employees of the prime contractor and have experience managing, administering and resolving problems on contracts of similar scope and complexity.

The Contractor must ensure that the Contracting Officer has current point of contact information for both the Program Manager and Contracts Manager.

In the event of a change in personnel for either of these positions, the Contractor must notify the Contracting Officer and provide all point of contact information for the new personnel within five (5) calendar days of the change. No costs for the Program or Contract Manager may be billed as a direct expense to this Contract.

Further, the following administrative tasks are not an allowable direct cost;

contract administration, subcontract management, human resources/staffing, and contract/invoice accounting.

Will the Government confirm that travel processing is required by the offeror's indirect personnel and not at the task order level?

Yes, travel processing is an indirect expense under this Contract.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

23 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

FINAL.pdf

H.7 INDIRECT

CONTRACT

PERSONNEL

"No costs for the Program or Contract Manager may be billed as a direct expense to this Contract."

Why is the PM not a direct billable resource? Consider making the Program Manager a direct billable resource and a key personnel member, as this would reinforce to the Governmert the offeror's expereince.

The PM as a direct billable resource and key personnel member would provide value essential for successful contract performance.

The requirement for this Contract is for the Program Manager to be an indirect expense to the Contract.

24 SOW 4.1.1, SIR

H.23

Post-Award Conference

There appears to be conflicting post-award dates in SIR H.23 (" within thirty

(30) calendar days after Contract award") and SOW section 4.1.1 ("within ten

(10) days from Contract award").

Would the government clarify which timeframe is correct?

SIR Amendment 01 corrects Clause H.23 to reflect that the post-award conference is to be held "within thirty (10) calendar days after Contract award."

Section K 25 Section K 3.2.2.3-3 Affiliated

Offerors

(b) The offeror must represent below in (c) whether it has affiliates. If the offeror represents that it "has" affiliates, it must provide the required information below in (1) and/or (2).

(1) The names and addresses of all affiliates.

(2) The names and addresses of all persons and concerns that exercise control or ownership over the offeror and all the offeror's affiliates, regardless of how they exercise control or ownership.

Can the customer clarify if we are to list parent affiliates and only those showing meaningful involvement for this opportunity?

Provide clarification on affiliate requirement.

Offerors must list all affiliates in AMS clause 3.2.2.3-3 "Affiliated Offerors", regardless onm if they are meaningfully involved in this opportunity. The purpose of this clause is for the FAA to be informed of all legal relationships.

Section L 26 Section L Section L.11.1.1, '

Volume 1, Tab, Factor 1- Staffing Approach'

Subfactor 1 – Staffing Plan, para 3(h)

(h) Information demonstrating the Offeror’s performance history as it pertains to historical retention rates on projects of similar size, scope and complexity to the subject requirements (e.g., % of contractor employees hired to perform under the project remained on the project at its completion).

Would the government confirm that the retention rate is the Priming Offeror and not from the teammate affiliates or a combination of affiliates?

It is at the Offerors discretion on how to respond to the requirement at SIR Section L.11.1, paragraph 3.

However, should retention rate information be provided as part of any response for this Section, the FAA would expect that retention rates for the Offeror (as defined in SIR Section L.1) would be provided.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

27 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - 'Staffing Approach'

Subfactor 2 - Transition, paragraph

(2) 'Transition-In Scenario'

The Offeror must provide a detailed response that describes the steps and procedures it would take to successfully transition-in the following estimated level of effort at time of Contract award:

Can the Government provide the required labor categories for each of the 8 Task Order for Subfactor 2?

No, the Governement will not be providing any additional information relative to the Subfactor 2 - Transition-In Scenario.

28 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach

Subfactor 2 - Transition (2), 'Transition-In Scenario'

For purposes of this response, the Offeror is to assume the transition period will not exceed sixty (60) calendar days, all eight (8) Task Orders are issued concurrently with execution of the Contract, and all FTEs funded for at least a period of 30 calendar days.

Section 12.1 of the Statement of Work requires a Transition Plan delivered within 30 days of contract award.

Can the Government confirm that for purposes of the Transition-In Scenario response, there will be a gap of no less than 30 days between contract award and the start of transition?

No. Transition under this Contract is anticipated to commence with the issuance of funded Task Order(s). For purposes of the Transition-In Scenario response, Offerors should not assume that there will be a 30 day window from Contract award to the commencement of transition.

29 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach

Subfactor 2 - (1), 'Transition Plan'

The Offeror must provide a detailed Transition Plan that clearly describes at a minimum, each of the following:

(a) Steps that will be taken to commence work under this Contract and the timeframe for each of those steps.

(b) Approach to transitioning on-going work under multiple task orders concurrently to ensure little to no disruption in the AJM-2 SLE mission.

(c) Approach that will be taken during the transition period to hire new and/or retain existing employees (where appropriate) to ensure continuity of support during the transition period. This response must include discussion of how their company’s infrastructure will be able to handle the surge in personnel required to support the transition of work required under this contract.

(d) The time frame by which full staffing levels are anticipated to be achieved.

Will the Government confirm that the offeror should detail the transition of ONLY the qualified incumbent TnT and EoSS employees onto the SLESS contract in L.11.1.1 Subfactor 2 - (1) Transition Plan ?

It is at the Offeror's discretion to propose a transition plan that meets the requirements of this SIR.

30 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach

Subfactor 2 - (2), 'Transition-In Scenario'

The Offeror must provide a detailed response that describes the steps and procedures it would take to successfully transition-in the following estimated level of effort at time of Contract award:

Will the Government confirm that the Transition-In Scenario requires the offeror to detail the approach for transferring the incumbent employees and hiring new employees to meet the 228 FTE's within 60-days?

For the Transition-In scenario, the Offeror must provide a detailed response that describes the steps and procedures it would take to successfully transition-in the estimated level of effort (228 FTE) within a transition period that will not exceed 60 calendar days.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

31 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach

Subfactor 2 - (2), 'Transition-In Scenario'

For purposes of this response, the Offeror is to assume the transition period will not exceed sixty (60) calendar days, all eight (8) Task Orders are issued concurrently with execution of the Contract, and all FTEs funded for at least a period of 30 calendar days.

Will the Government confirm that resumes for new hires will be approved promptly in accordance with AMS 3.8.2-22

SUBSTITUTION OR ADDITION OF

PERSONNEL?

Yes, the Government anticipates prompt review of resumes.

32 Section L L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach

Subfactor 2 - (2), 'Transition-In Scenario'

"Total FTE 228.00" The SIR mentioned that there are a total of 228 FTEs. The Attachment B1 Pricing Schedule, Tab B Ordering Periods 1-7, shows 514,650 hours per year. Using the table provided showing 228 FTES which equals a productive man year of 2257 hours, is that productive year accurate or will the total FTE count be greater than 228?

Provide FTE clarification.

The SIR Section L.11.1.1 reference to a total 228 FTE count is a hypothecital scenario and is only relevant to the required 'Tranisiton-In Scenario' response.

The Attachment B-1, "Pricing Schedule' estimated labor hours is based upon an FTE of 1,880 hours. During performance, hours ordered can be more or less than what is reflected in the Attachment B-1, 'Pricing Schedule'.

33 Section L L.11.1.3 Volume 1, Tab 3, Factor 3 - Corporate Experience

The Offeror must provide information for a minimum of three (3) maximum of five (5) recent contracts or task orders that are relevant (as defined in SECTION M.3.4) to this requirement in terms of size, scope, complexity, and type with a specific focus on SECTION C, Attachment C-1, ‘Statement of Work’ paragraph 5, ‘Technical Requirements’. Recent means that the contract or task order must be ongoing or have been completed within the last five (5) years. Contracts may include work performed for the Federal Government, agencies of state and local governments, and commercial customers. The FAA retains the right to contact any points of contact provided to verify information submitted in the Offeror’s experience cited.

Corporate Experience must include at least one (1) example from the prime Offeror. Additional examples may be from either the prime contractor and/or first tier subcontractor(s) or, to the extent allowed in the SIR, an affiliate.

If the relevant experience cited is as a first-tier subcontractor, only the work performed by the subcontractor should be described in the narrative.

Will the Government confirm that affiliate corporate experience/past performance will be treated as corporate experience/past performance of the prime offeror?

Yes, as long as the affiliate's corporate experience reflects that the affiliate will have actual and meaningful participation in the performance of the Contract. (Reference SIR Sections L.11.1.3).

SIR Sections M.3.4.2 and M.3.5.1 have been updated in SIR Amendment 01.

34 Section L L.11.1.3 Volume 1, Tab 3, Factor 3- Corporate Experience

The Offeror must use the matrix format provided at Attachment L-1, ‘Corporate Experience Matrix’ to present background information about the relevant corporate experiences cited. The Offeror may modify the table to apply landscape orientation (11" X 17") and add additional columns to encompass up to the maximum five (5) relevant corporate experience limitation. Examples (“e.g.”) are provided in italic font.

Please confirm the 11x17 table will count as 1 page.

Please validate page count.

For Corporate Experience only, an 11x17 landscape view page will count as 1 page. SIR Amendment 01 clarifies this requirement in SIR Section L.10.2 (a).

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

35 Section L L.11.1.3 Volume 1, Tab 3, Factor 3- Corporate Experience

"Corporate Experience must include at least one (1) example from the prime Offeror. Additional examples may be from either the prime contractor and/or first tier subcontractor(s) or, to the extent allowed in the SIR, an affiliate."

For a Joint Venture is being proposed, shouldn't the One Party to the joint venture that complies with the criteria defined in paragraph (a) of this clause, and AMS Guidance at T.3.6.1A.7 Joint Ventures, be required to show at least one of the contracts to ensure they have at a minimal the ability to execute a program of this size?

The references noted in Column G for this question are innaccurate as the requirements to qualify as a joint venture are contained in AMS Guidance T3.6.1A.6 not T3.6.1A.7.

Notwithstanding, SIR L.11.1.3 clearly states in part, that "Corporate Experience must include at least one (1) example from the prime Offeror. " If a joint venture is being proposed, experience of each joint venture partner is considered experience of the prime.

36 Section L L.11.1.3 Volume 1, Tab 3, Factor 3- Corporate Experience

"Corporate Experience must include at least one (1) example from the prime Offeror. Additional examples may be from either the prime contractor and/or first tier subcontractor(s) or, to the extent allowed in the SIR, an affiliate."

Would the government consider requiring the Prime Offeror be required to show at least one example of size, scope, and complexity of the SLE opportunity and managing a minimal of 4 concurrent task orders?

No, the Evaluation Criteria for Corporate Experience remain the same.

37 Section L

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Evaluation Survey_FINAL

L.11.1.4 Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance

The Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance submission must include copies of the Attachment L-2 ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ forms with Part A completed by the Offeror.

There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, inclusive of the narrative, for Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section A. There is no page limit associated with the survey submission associated with Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B.

Customer completed survey forms (Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B) must not be submitted by the Offeror, they must be submitted directly to the FAA per Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ instructions.

Will the Government please confirm that Section A of Attachment L-2 should also be provided in Volume 1, Tab 4 within the proposal response submitted by the Offeror?

Yes, in accordance with SIR Section L.11.1.4, "The Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance submission must include copies of the Attachment L-2 ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ forms with Part A completed by the Offeror."

38 Section L

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Evaluation Survey_FINAL

L.11.1.4 Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance

The Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance submission must include copies of the Attachment L-2 ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ forms with Part A completed by the Offeror.

There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, inclusive of the narrative, for Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section A. There is no page limit associated with the survey submission associated with Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B.

Customer completed survey forms (Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B) must not be submitted by the Offeror, they must be submitted directly to the FAA per Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ instructions.

Will the Government please confirm that both Section A and Section B of Attachment L-2 should also be submitted to our customers who in turn will submit directly to the Government?

Yes

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

39 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Evaluation Survey_FINAL

L.11.1.4 Volume 1, Tab 4, Factor 4 Past Performance

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Evaluation Survey_FINAL

There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, inclusive of the narrative, for Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section A. There is no page limit associated with the survey submission associated with Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B. Customer completed survey forms (Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B) must not be submitted by the Offeror, they must be submitted directly to the FAA per Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ instructions.

Will the Government confirm that the offeror may manipulate Attachment L-2 Past Performance Evaluation Survey_Final and edit it in Word so that the offeror is able to complete all aspects, including the narrative field, in Section A?

Yes. A Microsoft Word version of the Attachment L-2 is provided with SIR Amendment 01 for this purpose, if needed.

40 Section L L.11.2.1 Volume 2, Tab 1, Contract Documents and Associated Information

3. Signed Representations, Certifications and Acknowledgements, in accordance with SECTION K.

Please clarify how the offeror is to sign Section K as the SIR does not offer a line. Is the offeror to insert a signature block?

SIR Amendment 01 provides a stand-alone Section K for Offeror completion, with a signature line included. This stand-alone Section K must be provided in Volume 2.

41 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

L.11.2.1 Volume 2, Tab 1, Contract Documents and

2. Signed SF33 for the SIR and each amendment (SF30) and/or acknowledgment of each amendment on signed SF33.

Please clarify how the offeror is to prepare and submit the SF33 as one was not issued with the SIR.

An SF33 for the SIR released on 3/20 was inadvertantly omitted with the SIR posting and is provided with SIR Amendment 01.

42 Section L L.11.2.1 Volume 2, Tab 1, Contract Documents and

2. Signed SF33 for the SIR and each amendment (SF30) and/or acknowledgment of each amendment on signed SF33.

Because the solicitation materials and attachments provided do not appear to include an SF 33, would the government provide this as part of Amendment 1?

Provide SF 33. An SF33 for the SIR released on 3/20 was inadvertantly omitted with the SIR posting and is provided with SIR Amendment 01.

43 Section L L.11.2.1 Volume 2, Tab 1, Contract Documents and Associated Information

5. Copies of any subcontracts and/or teaming arrangements. (including, but not limited to Mentor Protégé agreements and Letters of Approval from FAA’s Small Business Office and SBA approved Mentor Protégé agreements).

Please confirm that the Government is requesting the offeror to submit subcontract Teaming Agreements?

The Government confirms that any Mentor- Protégé Agreements must be provided. If any subcontract teaming agreements exist, they must also be provided. However, the Government realizes that teaming agreements may not be finalized at the time of proposal submittal;in such instances teaming arrangements must be provided.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

44 Section L L.13.11.3.2 Volume 3, Tab 1, Attachment B- 1 Pricing Schedule

Offerors must propose a single fixed, fully burdened labor rate for each labor category for each Ordering Period of this Contract, utilizing the labor category descriptions within Attachment C-2, Minimum Labor Category Qualifications.

Attachment B-1 Pricing Schedule lists “Program Support” (levels 1 – 3) as a labor category to be priced. However, Attachment C-2 Minimum Labor Category Qualifications file does not list Program Support as a labor category.

Can the Government confirm if Program Support is an actual labor category to be priced, and if so, can the Government provide the labor description and qualifications?

Provide Price Volume clarification.

Refer to Government answer to Question 4.

45 Section L L.13.11.3.2 Volume 3, Tab 1, Attachment B- 1 Pricing Schedule

Offerors must propose a single fixed, fully burdened labor rate for each labor category for each Ordering Period of this Contract, utilizing the labor category descriptions within Attachment C-2, Minimum Labor Category Qualifications.

For the Program Support in Tab B, column B line 18-20, are bidders allowed to develop their own LCAT solution because there are no LCAT descriptions provided in Attachment C.

Provide Price Volume clarification.

Refer to Government answer to Question 4.

46 Section L L.10.2 (a) Proposal content must be formatted using Times New Roman, 11-point font (no reduction permitted), letter sized (8.5 x 11 inches), single-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all sides. All pages must be numbered. Tables, charts, graphics (including callout boxes or similar), captions, headers, footers, and figures must be formatted using Times New Roman or Calibri and should not use fonts smaller than an 8-point font.

Please clarify if offerors are allowed to use 11 x 17 paper size in proposals. If allowed to use, please confirm if the 11 x 17 will count as 1 or 2 pages.

Clarify page count. For Corporate Experience only, an 11x17 landscape view page will count as 1 page. SIR Amendment 01 clarifies this requirement in SIR Section L.10.2 (a).

47 Section L L.11.1.4 There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, inclusive of the narrative, for Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section A. There is no page limit associated with the survey submission associated with Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B. Customer completed survey forms (Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’, Section B) must not be submitted by the Offeror, they must be submitted directly to the FAA per Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Evaluation Survey’ instructions

Can the customer please clarify that the General Description Narrative provided in the Past Performance Evaluation Summary can be no longer than 4 pages?

Additionally, are Vendors to submit both Section A and Section B to the customer?

Should the narrative provided in the Section A be included in a separate Volume 1 Tab 4, factor 4 – Past Performance Volume?

Provide format clarification.

Per SIR Section L.10.1, the page limitation for Attachment L-2, ‘Past Performance Survey’, Part A: 4 pages per Past Performance Reference (inclusive of the narrative required in Section A.)

Yes. Both Section A and Section B of Attachment L-2 shall be submitted to your customers who in turn will submit directly to the Government.

The narrative required in Part A must be included within the Factor 4 Past Performance volume.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

48 Section L L.11.1.3 The Offeror must use the matrix format provided at Attachment L-1, ‘Corporate Experience Matrix’ to present background information about the relevant corporate experiences cited. The Offeror may modify the table to apply landscape orientation (11" X 17") and add additional columns to encompass up to the maximum five (5) relevant corporate experience limitation. Examples (“e.g.”) are provided in italic font.

Can the customer confirm that we are to use only one matrix for all provided experience examples at the start of the Corporate Experience Volume?

Provide format clarification.

Yes.

49 Section L L.11.1.3 If the Offeror provides experience of an affiliate as part of its corporate experience submittal, the Offeror must clearly demonstrate and make a commitment that the affiliate will actually and meaningfully participate in the performance of the Contract in the corporate experience narrative requirement discussed below. The narrative must include an explanation as to how the affiliate will contribute to the performance of specific task areas of the Section C, Attachment C-1, ‘Statement of Work’ in which the affiliate will participate, which must be evident and consistent with the Offeror’s proposed Staffing and Management Approaches detailed within its Factor 1 and 2 responses.

Can the customer confirm that as long as a vendor demonstrates meaningful involvement, affiliates do not need to be formal subcontractors?

Provide affiliate clarification.

An affiliate does not need to be a formal subcontractor. However, the Offeror must be able to show that the affiliate will have actual and meaningful involvement in contract performance.

50 Section L L.11.1.3 L.11.1.3 states "If the Offeror is proposing to meet the requirements of this SIR with a joint venture agreement, the FAA must consider work done and qualifications held individually by each individual member to the joint venture as well as any work done by the joint venture itself. Therefore, corporate experience of each individual member to the joint venture must be provided as well as corporate experience of the joint venture." If corporate experience does not exist for the joint venture itself, then, the Offeror must notate within the corporate experience narrative that ‘joint venture experience does not exist’.

Does this mean that the FAA will require the Protégé partner, in a 8(a) Mentor Protégé Joint Venture, submit at least one Corporate Experience contract reference, in order to satisfy the $64M aggregate total annual value.

Provide 8(a) Mentor Protégé Joint Venture clarification.

Per SIR Section M.3.4.2, "If the Offeror is comprised of a joint venture as a separate legal entity, the corporate experience evaluation will consider the corporate experience of each individual joint venture partner as well as the experience of the joint venture itself. The corporate experience of the individual joint venture partners is considered corporate experience of the prime Offeror."

If a Mentor- Protégé Joint Venture is proposed, the FAA will evaluate the corporate experience in accordance with AMS guidance T3.1.B.6c.

SIR Amendment 01 provides a revision to Section M.3.4.2 to clarify the how the Government will evaluate corporate experience of a Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture.

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

Section M

51 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

M.1.2 Ground for Rejection of Proposals (c) and M.3.6 Volume 3 Cost/Price Evaluation

Unrealistically low proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an unrealistic proposal.

The Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated in accordance with AMS Policy 3.2.3, ‘Pricing Methodology, Principles and Standards’ and AMS Procurement Guidance T3.2.3, ’Cost and Price Methodology’. The FAA will evaluate the proposals for reasonableness, completeness, consistency and traceability.

The FAA will only make award to Offerors with a fair and reasonable price.

The Cost/Price proposals will not be scored or rated. Any understatement or overstatement of costs/prices or inconsistencies between the Technical and Cost/Price proposals may reflect a lack of understanding of the work and could impact the technical rating(s) and/or risk rating. Therefore, any inconsistency between the proposed performance and cost/price should be explained in the proposal.

The FAA will evaluate the proposals for reasonableness, and review for completeness, consistency, and traceability, defined as follows:

• Reasonableness – The FAA will evaluate each cost/price proposal for reasonableness in accordance with AMS Policy Section 3.2.3 ‘Pricing Methodology, Principles and Standards’ and AMS Procurement Guidance T3.2.3, ‘Cost and Price Methodology’. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

Section M.1.2 states that unrealistically low proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal, however the Government included cost reasonableness and did not include a price realism evaluate.

Would the government include a price realism evaluation?

Reference is made to SIR Section M.3.6 'Volume 3 - Cost/Price Evaluation', paragragh 5, which states "The FAA reserves the right to perform price realism analysis in accordance with AMS Guidance T3.2.3, ‘Cost and Price Methodology’ at the Contracting Officer’s discretion. In the case that price realism analysis is performed, and an Offeror’s price is found to be unrealistic, it may render the proposal ineligible for further evaluation and no longer considered for contract award."

52 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

M.2 Evaluation Methodology/Process

This acquisition is issued in accordance with AMS Policy 3.2.2.3, ‘Complex and Noncommercial Source Selection’. The FAA intends to award a single contract resulting from this SIR to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the ‘best value’ to the Government, all factors considered. ‘Best value’ describes the offer that is most advantageous to the FAA based on the evaluation of all stated criteria in this SIR and will be determined by evaluation of the Offeror’s Technical Proposal: Staffing Approach (Factor 1), Management Approach (Factor 2), Corporate Experience (Factor 3) and Past Performance (Factor 4) and evaluation of the Cost/Price Proposal. The ‘best value’ determination will be based upon a trade-off analysis of the evaluation results of the Technical Proposal: Staffing Approach (Factor 1), Management Approach (Factor 2), Corporate Experience (Factor 3) and Past Performance (Factor 4) and the evaluation results of the Cost/Price Proposal. Therefore, Offerors are advised that the proposal meeting the SIR requirements with the lowest price may not be selected for award if a higher priced proposal is determined to be more beneficial to the Government.

Section L.11.1.1 Volume 1, Tab 1, Factor 1 - Staffing Approach, Subfactor 2 - Transition

(2) Transition-In Scenario requires the transition of 228 FTE. A poorly written transition plan creates greater risk for the Government to receive timely services. Will the Government consider increasing the weighting of Factor 2 to be higher than Factors 3 and 4?

Factor 2 is weighted higher than Factors 3 and 4.

SIR Section M.2.2, 'Relative Order of Importance' states, "The technical evaluation factors listed in Section M.2.1, ‘Technical Evaluation Factors’ are listed in descending order of importance. "

Reference SIR Subsection and

Paragraph Number (if applicable)

Quote specific SIR language in question Question Suggested resolution (if applicable)

FAA Response

53 SIR_692M15-25-R-

00001_20MAR25_

Final

M.3.4.2 Relevancy Rating

For this factor, greater weight will be given to the prime Offeror's experience, as either a prime or a subcontractor, than the experience performed by any proposed subcontractor. For purposes of this factor, for either the prime Offeror or any proposed subcontractor(s), the experience that they gained as a prime contractor or subcontractor will be weighted equally. If the Offeror is comprised of a joint venture as a separate legal entity, corporate experience of the joint venture partners is considered corporate experience of the prime Offeror.

The following relevancy criteria will be applied to the Corporate Experience factor:

Size: At least one (1) of the contracts cited has an annual awarded value* of $64M or more. For purposes of this evaluation, the Government will accept the aggregated experience of three (3) cited references, as a substitute for one reference with an annual awarded value of $64M as long as, each of the references possess an annual awarded value of $15-$25M and each and have concurrent periods of performance.

Example for use of aggregated…