Responses to Questions 111121.pdf

Question Number SIR Section Reference Page Question Answer

1 B 3

Can the FAA please confirm that the Labor CLINs will be CLINs 1001A through 5001, consistent with the CLIN Summary table in B.4? The Labor line item below the table currently states that Labor will be CLIN's 1001A - 7001A, which we assume is a typographical error. The SIR has been corrected.

2 B 3 The column headings for the ODC and Travel CLIN table appear to be transposed. Please confirm that the table column headings should be reversed and that CLINs are 1001B - 5001B are for ODCs and CLINs 1001C - 5001C are for Travel. The SIR has been corrected.

3 B 3

On page 3 of the SIR under 'CLINS 1001B - 5001B [Other Direct Costs (ODCs)] and 1001C - 5001C [Travel]', the FAA provides dollar figures for the base year and subsequent option years. Attachment J004 also provides ODC and Travel estimates for the base year and option years. The values are different between the SIR and attachment J004 for Contract Year 3 thru Contract Year 5. Can the FAA provide clarification on which figures are correct for ODC and Travel? The SIR has been corrected.

4 B 3 On page 3 of the SIR under 'Pricing Terms,' the FAA refers to B.3 for pricing schedules. B.3 is focused on the guaranteed minimum quantity of work. Can the FAA clarify the section reference?

The reference to B.3 was errorneous and has been removed. The SIR has been corrected.

5 C 5 thru 10 The numbering for the different SOW areas appears to be incorrect (and different from the draft SOW released in May 2021). For Example the SOW jumps from C.1 to C.1.1.1 (i.e., there is no C.1.1, C.1.2, etc.). We recommend renumbering the SOW sections so that primary SOW sections are labeled as C.1.X and subsections are labeled as C.1.X.Y. The SIR has been corrected.

6 C 5 and 6

SOW Section C.1.1.4 (Modeling Research Development) identifies Modeling Research Support, Model and Data Development Support, and Analysis support as subsections.

However these 3 subsections are not labeled that way. Further, Model and Data Development and Support repeats SOW # C.1.1.4 and Analysis Support repeats SOW # C.1.1.5. We recommend correcting the SOW section numbering as noted in our above comment. The SIR has been corrected.

7 C 8 thru 10 The SOW numbering skips to C.9 (Operations Research Support) through C.13 (Additional Program Support). We recommend renumbering these sections to ensure a consistent SOW number system with the remainder of the SOW. The SIR has been corrected.

8 H 22 and 23

FAA AMS Clause 3.1.7-1.a(3) establishes that a contractor must recuse itself when placed in a position of "providing assessment and evaluation findings over itself, or another business division, or subsidiary of the same corporation, or other entity with which it has a significant financial relationship." Consistent with this clause and principle, we would strongly recommend that the FAA preclude any contractors who provide EOSH implementation support from submitting an offeror as the prime for this EMARIS IDIQ.

As AEE is specifically tasked with providing policy, oversight, and reporting and liaison on FAA environmental, sustainability, and energy issues under FAA Order 1050.21A, with such oversight including tracking FAA performance in meeting environmental program implementation, we do not see how it the holder of this contract would not be put in a position of evaluating its own work if it is helping to implement such environmental programs under an EOSH implementation support contract.

Some updates to the SOW have been made. Any action taken with regard to exclusions will be taken in accordance with AMS.

9 L.3.10.1 58

L.3.10.1 Volumes and Page Limits states that “each sub-section must be a separate document. If a Volume does not have a Sub-Section, the applicable Section must be a separate document.” We request that the government confirm that each volume should be a separate document? This is confirmed.

10 L 62

The SOW contains a diverse range of technical requirements that have not historically been accomplished by a single company and are unlikely to be in the future. However the FAA significantly limits the ability of responders to describe the full experience and capabilities of the entire team. Specifically, section L4 "Factor 3 - Relevant Previous Experience" instructs to present only 3 project references. As most responding teams likely include more than 3 firms each with many relevant contracts, limiting the scope of a team’s capabilities to only 3 contracts will provide FAA with an extremely narrow and likely distorted understanding of the offerors entire team true capabilities. Furthermore, the incumbent has an unreasonable advantage, as they are able to present the previous SEMRS contract which largely mirrors the unique combination of disparate capabilities in EMARIS SOW (claiming work performed by subcontractors irrespective of whether those capabilities are part of their proposed EMARIS team).

For section L.4.2 -- Relevant Experience Narrative, we are requesting that the government allow offerors to provide additional relevant experience, beyond the 3 past performance examples, that fully describes each teams' capabilities to successfully deliver against the full set of SOW requirements within the 8 page count.

The request is noted. However, the requirement stands. Spme language in Section L has been added.

11 L.5 62

Section L.5 Resumes and Letters of Commitment requires letters of commitment for five key staff. Provided that Attachment J004 – Resume Template also has a certification at the bottom of the template (with a signature line) that serves the same purpose, we would like to confirm that the certification and signature at the bottom of the resume is sufficient to satisfy this requirement. This is confirmed.

12 L 64

For instruction L.7.1 -- Past Performance, we are requesting that the government set three (3) past performance examples as a minimum and allow up to a maximum of five

(5) past performance examples. This will assist the FAA in better understanding the past performance of the prime offeror and its key team members. The request is noted. However, the requirement stands.

13 L.8.2.2 66

The SIR references solicitation coversheet as SF 33 and amendments as SF 30. These forms are required to be completed/signed as part of our proposal (page 66). Neither of the forms are standard SF 33/SF 30. They are modified version of/similar to SF 1449. In addition, Block E of the amendment form is not marked for offerors to sign and return, the first pages of both original and amended SIR marked SF 33 “reserved”. Would the government confirm if offerors are required to complete and sign both the solicitation and amendment coversheets and clarify the SF 33/SF 30 reference in section L.

Section L.8.2.2 (Contract Documents and Associated Information) has been modified to edit the instructions regarding this requirement to better align with the format of the cover sheets.

14 M 69 of 72

Evaluation Factor M.4.1.3 Factor 3 - Relevant Experience (Rated Factor) states that the FAA will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal to determine the extent to which the experience cited in accordance with Section L.2.13.3 is relevant to this requirement in terms of size, scope, and complexity and thus demonstrates a likelihood of successful performance of the requirement. Consistent with our prior request to consider additional experience references, we respectfully recommend that the FAA evaluate relevant experience across the entire team in order to better allow the FAA to understand how each offeror brings team-wide experience from a variety of projects (not just contracts), including highlighting relevant work for commercial and international clients in addition to government clients. The request is noted. However, the requirement stands.

15 Attachment J001/ Attachment J004

Attachment J004 asks for rates for labor categories including:

- EMS SME

- Sustainability SME

- Operations Analyst These categories are not included in the Attachment J001. Will the government provide descriptions / requirements for these labor categories?

Three additional labor category descriptions have been added to Attachment J001.

Additionally, the name of the document has been corrected inside the document (from Attachment J005).

16 Resume Template J003

The Resume Header in the word document attachments does not correspond to the correct attachment number. Please correct the header of all word document attachments.

The Header has been corrected in this document. Offerors may use either this edited version or the original version.

17 Resume Template J003

The SIR indicates that the font used in the response should be Calibri 10 (tables/charts/etc. can be size 8). However, the resume template is Times New Roman.

Please confirm that Calibri 10 should be used for each resume submitted. This is confirmed.

18 Resume Template J003

The date formatting under the employment section is set as MM/DD/YY. Would the government confirm that MM/YY is acceptable? That is acceptable.

19 Resume Template J003

Can the government define what should be used in the "SCLIN" field in the resume template?

This has been removed from the revised version. If an offeror elects to use the original version, it may enter N/A.

20 Resume Template J003

Can the government clarify what the "Professional Achievements" section should include in the resume template? Is the government referring to additional professional experience and/or credentials, awards, etc.?

Additional professional experience, credential, awards, etc. are acceptable. All evaluations will be conducted in accordance with the SIR.

21 Resume Template J003

Would the government confirm that only sections with relevant information should be included and that it is acceptable to remove a section (e.g. Education/Experience Substitutions) if it is does not have any content? It would be preferable to enter N/A.

22 Attachment J005

For Tab 3 -- Rates, will the FAA allow the Offeror to provide the subcontractor's fully burdened labor category rate in attachment J005 with the prime offeror's indirect costs and profit added to the subcontractor's rate to form the fully burdened rate for the prime offeror's rate card, with the subcontractor providing any required rate buildup or justification via a direct submission to the FAA? This will ensure that the FAA receives all required rate information for labor categories that will be staffed entirely by subcontractor personnel while allowing subcontractors to better protect rate information that they believe to be proprietary and confidential.

Required rate buildup and/or justification can be submitted directly by the subcontractor to the Contracting Officer via email.

23 L.2.16.1 65

The subcontracting Goals Table includes 2 separate small business subcontracting goals;

25% total contract dollars to small businesses and 45% total subcontract dollars to SB.

Would the government clarify which of the two overlapping goals is the primary that the prime offeror will be accountable for?

The first row of the table has been struck, and the relevant information is now solely included.

24 L.8.2.2 66

Volume 4 requires offerors to attach their teaming agreements. Since many academic institutions use a Memorandum of Understanding instead of a teaming agreement, would the government accept a "Memorandum of Understanding" with defined responsibilities from a teaming partner as a type of teaming agreement? That would be acceptable.

25 B 3

Section B.4 indicates that "ODCs include: 1. Materials purchased specifically for performance of work under the EMARIS contract that are not part of the Contractor’s burden rates. (e.g. training, supplies)

• Incidental services directly related to and necessary for the performance of work under the EMARIS contracts. (e.g. computer hosting services)."

Can subcontractor services that do not have a labor rate (e.g., laboratory analysis of environmental samples or purchase of EDR Reports) be charged as an ODC?

Yes. If the service is sold as a service, i.e., a set dollar amount for the actual service, it should be billed to the FAA as an ODC. However, this does not refer to consultant services, SME support, etc.

26 G 15

Section G.5 addresses travel costs but does not identify the appropriate policy for OCONUS travel. Can the government clarify if the appropriate policy for OCONUS travel is FAA Order 1600.61B - International Travel Security and Contract Reporting Requirements for FAA Employees and Contractors? This is confirmed.

27 I 29

Section I.2.5 3.2.4-5 Allowable Cost and Payment (October 2019) CLAUSE states "Any payments for costs under this contract, particularly for costs of Indirect Rates under paragraph (d), must be subject to the provisions of the "Limitation of Costs" clause, or the "Limitation of Funds" clause, if applicable. The Contractor must be responsible to manage and control the allowable cost of performance of the contract, such that payments for any allowable costs, including Indirect Rates under paragraph (d), must not exceed the estimated cost set forth in the schedule, or the funded amount, less an allowance for fee, if the contract is incrementally funded." We are unable to locate a Limitation of Funds or a Limitation of Cost clause in the SIR. Could you please provide the appropriate AMS clause relevant to Limitation of Funds or a Limitation of Cost? AMS Clause 3.3.1-14 Limitation of Funds (July 2018) has been added to the SIR. The government may add additional relevant clauses at the task order level.

28 K 44

Section K.1 provides a reference to AMS 3.2.1.5-5 Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors (INTERIM) Oct-21. Could the government please provide the full text of this clause as it did not appear on https://fast.faa.gov/contractclauses.cfm.

The clause reads: AMS Contract Clause 3.2.1.5-5 (INTERIM) Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors (OCT 2021)

a. Definition. As used in this clause - United States or its outlying areas means

(1) The fifty States;

(2) The District of Columbia;

(3) The commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands;

(4) The territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands; and

(5) The minor outlying islands of Baker Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Midway Islands, Navassa Island, Palmyra Atoll, and Wake Atoll.

b. Authority. This clause implements Executive Order 14042, Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors, dated September 9, 2021 (published in the Federal Register on September 14, 2021, 86 FR 50985).

c. Compliance. The Contractor must comply with all guidance, including guidance conveyed through Frequently Asked Questions, as amended during the performance of this contract, for contractor or subcontractor workplace locations published by the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force (Task Force Guidance) at https:/www.saferfederalworkforce.gov/contractors/.

Provided, however, that the Contractor must ensure that Contractor employees entering FAA facilities comply with the vaccination mandate by November 22, 2021 rather than the December 8, 2021 date in the EO and the Task Force Guidance for all other covered employees of the Contractor.

29 L 44

Section I.2.15 3.14-13 Use of Contractor-Equipment or Software - Permitted (October 2018) references FAA Order 1370.121 FAA Information Security and Privacy Program & Policy is found at the following link https://employees.faa.gov/tools_resources/orders_notices. However, 1370.121 is showing as (Cancelled). Would the goverment please confirm what provisions are applicable here? Any necessary changes to relevant clauses/provisions will be incorporated into the final awarded SOW.

30 L 58

Section L.2.10.1 states that "Each sub-section must be a separate document. If a Volume does not have a Sub-Section the applicable Section must be a separate document." Can the government please clarify that the intent is to have separate files submitted for the Volumes listed in Table 1 on page 60 of the RFP? For example, a separate document/file should be submitted for Volume 1 - Technical Volume, which will include the management approach narrative, technical approach narrative, relevant experience matrix, relevant experience narrative, and resumes combined in one file. Volume 2 will include the price worksheet and price narrative. Volume 4 will include the Exceptions, Deviations, and Assumptions; Contract Documents and Associated Information and a List of POC Information for All Sub-Contractors, Subcontracting Plan, and Conflict of Interest Plan. Or is the intent for each of the sections of Volume 1 to be submitted as separate documents/files. Please clarify.

Each subsection, if applicable, should be included in the appropriate Volume.

31 L 59 Section L.2.10.1, Table 1 requires submittal of a Letter of Commitment with resumes for the key personnel. Can the government provide a format or instructions on what should be included in the Letter of Commitment.

There is no required format. A simple, signed statement from the resource stating its intention to perform on the contract will suffice.

32 L 59

Section L.2.10.1, Table 1 identifies five resumes to be submitted as Key Personnel. To ensure FAA receives high quality technical support for such a critical SOW Area, we recommend that an ECU Task Lead be added as Prime Contractor Key Personnel with a requirement to submit a resume and commitment letter as part of Rated Technical Factor 4. Sections L.2.13.4 and M.4.1.4 should also be revised accordingly. The request is noted. However, the requirement stands.

33 L 60

Section 3.10.3 referenced AMS Clause 3.2.2.3.16. Could the FAA provide the full text for AMS T.3.6.1.8? This clause as it did not appear on https://fast.faa.gov/contractclauses.cfm.

The reference in Section 3.10.2 is to AMS Clause 3.2.2.3-16, “Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data (JUL 2004)." The reference in Section 3.10.3 is to AMS T.3.6.1.8 and can be found at https://fast.faa.gov/docs/procurementGuidance/guidanceT3.6.1.pdf#nameddest=guida nceT3_6_1_A_8.

34 L 62

Section L.4.2 states "the Offeror must provide a narrative of the work that it performed under each relevant experience cited". Can the government confirm that the "relevant experience cited" refers to the three contracts included in the Relevant Experience Matrix? Meaning that the narrative should be limited to only the three contracts included in the Relevant Experience Matrix and should not be broadened to include descriptions of other previous experience. This is confirmed.

35 L 63

Section L.6.1 Tab 3 – Rates states "The Offeror must provide fully burdened labor rates by filling in the grey shaded cells with proposed direct labor rates, indirect rates, profit, and escalation rates for each of the requested labor categories. The fully burdened labor rates must include all direct labor, indirect costs (such as fringe benefits, overhead, and G&A) and profit. Each Offeror must assume a contract start date of January 1, 2022 for the contract year 1. Only one rate per labor category will be allowed, whether the work is performed by the prime contractor or any of its subcontractors. The methodology used to develop the fully burdened labor rates must reconcile to the rates inputted in Tab 2, and to the narrative supporting the rate buildup, discussed in further detail in Section L.2.14.2 below." Section L.2.14.2 is not included in the SIR. Could the government confirm that the correct Section reference is L.6.2 - Price Narrative?

The SIR has been corrected.

36 M 70

Section M.4.3.1 states “The FAA will assess whether the Offeror has demonstrated that it can comply with the AMS clause 3.6.1-7 Limitations on Subcontracting (April 2016), which is incorporated into Section I of this SIR. A mere statement that the Offeror will comply with those requirements does not constitute demonstration of the ability to comply. FAA will not award to an Offeror that does not demonstrate the ability to comply with the requirement.” This section indicates that the Offeror must demonstrate "that it can comply with the AMS clause 3.6.1-7 Limitations on Subcontracting (April 2016)."

Please provide some guidance regarding what documentation is required to demonstrate compliance. It is difficult to demonstrate in advance how an Offeror would comply without clear guidance on what is required to demonstrate compliance.

As noted in the answer to Question 23, the table has been updated. The vendor should provide information that would enable the evaluators to determine whether the vendor can meet the required goals as enumerated.

37 M 72

Section M refers to T.3.2.3(A)(1)(d)(3). Can the government confirm it is referring to T3.2.3 - Cost and Price Methodology Revised 10/2007 on page 220 of the Procurement Guidance 9/2020? Or is the government referring to Number 3 Cost Accounting Standards Revised 9/2020 on page 234, Also, could the government please provide the most updated copy of the AMS Policy Guidance as there are newer clauses referenced in the SIR which are not currently available on the FAA's website.

The most recent version of the Procurement Guidance is dated 10/2021. T3.2.3 is Cost and Price Methodology, and T.3.2.3(A)(1)(d)(3) is Price Realism and located on page

209. The Procurement Guidance can be found at:

https://fast.faa.gov/PPG_Procurement_Guidance.cfm. The AMS clauses can be found at: https://fast.faa.gov/contractclauses.cfm. All clauses in the SIR should conform to the most recent clauses contained on that site.

38 M 71

Section M.5.1 states that "the TEP will be the sum of 1) The result from multiplying the government specified hours by the proposed fully burdened rate for each labor category." Will the Government establish a competitive rate range for each proposed direct labor rate included in Attachment J001 to be used internally to evaluate the TEP?

Establishing a competitive rate range for each proposed direct labor rate would allow the Government to assess cost realism by comparing an Offeror’s Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) rate card against real world data such as predecessor contract rate data; rate data from other FAA contract vehicles of similar size, scope and complexity; and/or a known Government standards (e.g., Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Service Occupational Classifications Employment and Wage Statistics).

Further, this approach provides the Government with the ability to select Offerors with the best technical solutions that fall within the cost/price range established by the Independent Government Cost Estimates (IGCE) while being assured that rates are available to effectively support contract execution.

The Government will perform its price evaluation in accordance with SIR Section M.

Per Section M, “the FAA will evaluate proposals for reasonableness in accordance with AMS Policy Section 3.2.3.1 and AMS Procurement Guidance Section T.3.2.3. The FAA reserves the right to perform price realism in accordance with AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1)(d)(3).

The FAA reserves the right to conduct cost analysis on labor rates if deemed necessary to support the price realism analysis.” Price analysis techniques, which are outlined at AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1)(b), will be used in assessing reasonableness of the TEPs and labor rates. The FAA does not intend on establishing a competitive rate range for proposed direct labor rates in evaluating the TEP.

39 M 72

On July 2, 2019, the Government Affairs Office (GAO) published a decision indicating that Government agencies should explain how an Offeror’s proposed labor hours and prices are, or are not, in line with rate data from predecessor contracts; other FAA contract vehicles of similar size, scope, and complexity; or known Government standards when conducting cost realism evaluations. This approach is superior to a simple comparison of offered prices (e.g., the lowest price was within 7 percent of the median which indicates no concerns about realism within the overall proposed prices by all Offerors).

Section M.5.1 indicates that "The FAA reserves the right to perform price realism in accordance with AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1)(d)(3)." Would the government please clarify how the price realism analysis will be considered as part of the overall evaluation? Specifically, how will the FAA determine if an Offeror's rates are deemed to be unrealistic and what will the FAA do if rates are deemed unrealistic (e.g., adjust evaluated rates upwards/cost realize-up based on the Most Probable Cost as defined in the AMS procurement guidance or lower an Offeror's non-priced factors score based on technical delivery risk due to unrealistic pricing)? If an offerors pricing is deemed to be realistic but is significantly lower than other bids will a technical risk be assigned given the likely difficulty associated with delivering technically qualified personnel at the lower range of market rates?

The Government will perform its price evaluation in accordance with SIR Section M.

Per Section M, “the FAA will evaluate proposals for reasonableness in accordance with AMS Policy Section 3.2.3.1 and AMS Procurement Guidance Section T.3.2.3. The FAA reserves the right to perform price realism in accordance with AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1)(d)(3).

The FAA reserves the right to conduct cost analysis on labor rates if deemed necessary to support the price realism analysis.” Price analysis techniques, which are outlined at AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1)(b), will be used in assessing reasonableness of the TEPs and labor rates. The FAA does not intend on establishing a competitive rate range for proposed direct labor rates in evaluating the TEP.

40 J J001

Given the extremely broad nature of the SOW and EMARIS will be a five year contract, can the government confirm that the contractor will be able to request additional labor categories during task order development to cover any requirements that are not addressed by existing LCATS listed in J001?

Flexibility may be avaiable at the task order level, although such flexiblity is not guaranteed.

41 J J003 Page 2 Section A includes the heading "PART I: FBSS OFFEROR INFORMATION", which appears to be a typo. Could the government please confirm if the heading should read "PART I:

EMARIS OFFEROR INFORMATION" The SIR has been corrected.

42 J J004 Attachment J004, Tab 2 only lists "DC CTR Site Fully Burdened Labor Rate Build-up." Does the government want Offerors to also submit government site rates?

Government site rates are not required as the vast majority of performance is contemplated to be off-site.

43 j J004

Attachment J004, Tab 2 includes EMS SME, Sustainability SME, and Operations Analyst labor categories but no labor category description is provided in Attachment J001. Could the government please provide a labor category description of the MS SME, Sustainability SME, and Operations Analyst LCATs. Please see the answer to Question 15.

44 J J004

Attachment J004, Tab 3 - Rates provides a table to enter indirect rates for travel and ODCs for Years 1 - 5 of the contract. It should be noted that future indirect rates entered in the table are subject to change based on our approved accounting practices. Would the government please clarify that the requirement to provide indirect rates in J004, Tab 3 is not intended to be a rate cap on indirects by period? Please also confirm that during contract execution, the contractor will be able to invoice costs incurred consistent with their own approved standard accounting practices.

This is confirmed.

45 L N/A

This SIR does not appear to be consistent with previous FAA solicitations. For example, there are no specific requirements for the Technical and Management approaches in Section L that define how the proposal should be organized, other than the table provided in Section L.3.10.1. Will additional instructions be provided? The table should provide enough information to submit a compliant proposal.

46 C Page 5 / C.1 It appears there are no specific management requirements (Task Order management, deliverables, etc.) in Section C. Will specific management requirements be provided?

Text in Section M "Management Approach (Rated Factor)" is explicit about the requirements.

47 D N/A There is no Section D - Inspection & Acceptance included in this solicitation. Will this be provided? Any such requirements would be included at the Task Order level.

48 C Page 6 / C.1.1.4 - C.1.1.

The numbering in Section C of the SIR appears to be inconsistent and contains duplicates (C.1.1.4 and C.1.1.5) and then goes to C.9. Will there be a SIR amendment with revised numbering for Section C? The SIR has been corrected.

49 Other N/A Would the FAA consider releasing an acronym list with this solicitation? An acronym list for language in Section C is now included.

50 L Page 65 / L.8.1 The first goal in the Small Business Subcontracting Goals table appears to be an FAA goal, and the second goal appears to be a Contractor goal. Please clarify the first two goals in the table. Please see the answer to Question 23.

51 B Page 3 / B.4 Travel and ODC values in Option Year 2, Option Year 3, and Option Year 4 in Section B.4 do not match those in Attachment J004 (Pricing Workbook). Please clarify intended values. The SIR has been corrected.

52 J Page 3/ Attach J001 Attachment J001 does not include labor category skill descriptions for the "EMS SME", "Sustainability SME", and "Operations Analyst" found in Attachment J004 (Pricing Workbook). Please provide skill descriptions for those categories. Please see the answer to Question 15.

53 M Page 67 / M.1

The table in this section references AMS clause 3.6.1-10: Evaluation of Contractor Participation in the FAA Mentor Protégé Program, which is incorporated by reference.

However, 3.6.1-9: Mentor Protege Program is not included and there are no instructions in Section L as to where the Offeror would address the FAA Mentor Protégé Program participation. Will these instructions be provided?

AMS Clause has been added to the SIR and other updates have been made as appropriate.

54 L

62-63, Attachment "Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications"

According to Section L.5 of the SIR "Resumes must meet or exceed labor category descriptions within Attachment Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications." The Labor Category that corresponds to the "Program Manager" position is "Technical Program Manager 1 or 2," which does not appear in the given attachment. The closest match in the given attachment is "Technical Project Manager." Will the Government confirm that the offeror is to use "Technical Project Manager" labor category instead of "Technical Program Manager" as a part of its response? If this is not the case, will the Government provide the Labor Category definition and requirements for “Technical Program Manager?” The SIR has been corrected.

55 L 65

On Attachment J0003 - Past Performance Questionnaire EMARIS – the PART 1 Heading says, “FBSS Offeror Information.” Additionally, in Part 1, the third line requests information about the “Company Name of the FBSS Performing Team Member.” Should FBSS be changed to EMARIS? If not, can the Government define what FBSS stands for?

Attachment J003 has been corrected. However, an offeror may elect to use the original version. FBSS refers to a previous FAA competition.

56 L Page 58 & 66 / L.3.10.1 & L.8.2.2

The SIR states: "Each sub-section must be a separate document. If a Volume does not have a Sub-Section, the applicable Section must be a separate document."

Will Offerors submit the following six (6), separate documents in support of Volume 4?

1. Subcontracting Plan

2. Potential Conflicts of Interest

3. Exceptions & Deviations, and Assumptions

4. SF 33 and SF 33

5. Reps & Certs

6. Subcontracts/Teaming Agreements This is confirmed.

57 L Page 57 / L.3.7

The SIR does not direct Offerors where to address Section L.3.7 Contractor Responsibility, but does include the statement: “The FAA may rely on information from compliance and regulatory agencies and/or independent investigation to determine an Offeror’s or Offerors’ responsibility.”

Are Offerors to address Contractor Responsibility?

Will Section M be updated with evaluation criteria for this requirement?

Section L has been updated to confirm that the Offeror is not responsible for a submission with its proposal.

58 L Page 56 / L.3.2

Some documents such as Forward Pricing Rate Recommendations have been marked Controlled Unclassified by DCMA. Is the FAA able to receive encrypted documents or is there a secure site where Offerors can post documents with this type of marking?

If such a submission is required, please contact the Contracting Officer directly to discuss how to provide it.

Sheet1