Questions and Answers 61 - 66.pdf

SIR 6974GH-25-R-00221

AVS SAFETY, ANALYTICAL AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 61 THROUGH 66

Question 61. Understanding the amendment will update the size standard to 541990, All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services, with a small business size standard of $19M.

Could you please confirm whether there remains any flexibility to consider alternative or additional relevant NAICS codes such as 541330 (Engineering Services, which carries a higher size standard of $47M for small businesses) or 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services) that might better align with the technical scope of the work? Using 541330 could potentially broaden competition from both full-and-open and small business entities. For context, our team has successfully proposed on FAA opportunities under NAICS 541611.

Answer 61: The Contracting Officer has gone back and reviewed detailed information on NAICS codes 541330, Engineering Services, 541611, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, and 541715, Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences. Based upon the specific NAICS code definitions for NAICS code 541330, there does not appear to be any information to show that Safety Analytical and Technical Support Services would fall under this NAICS code. The Contracting Officer has also closely read the information associated with NAICS code 541715 and does not believe that this NAICS code accurately depicts the type of work that is performed under the subject acquisition.

The Contracting Officer did spend quite a bit of time reviewing and researching NAICS code 541611. In order to try to make a comparison of the subject acquisition to this NAICS code, the Government went back and reviewed the individual Task Order Performance Work Statements for the current delivery/task orders and compared the scope of work to the types of efforts listed in the detailed information for NAICS 541611. Based upon this review, the Contracting Officer believes that this NAICS code comes closest to aligning with the scope of work for Safety, Analytical and Technical Support Services.

Question 62. During the pre-proposal conference, a statement was made to the effect that one of the allowed four past performance references should come from a “major teammate.” Can you please confirm if this is a requirement of the SIR and, if so, what constitutes a “major teammate”?

Answer 62: In accordance with AMS Clause 3.6.1-4 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (April 2025), paragraph (c)(9), subcontracting plans are required for any subcontract in excess of $750,000.

Question 63. To ensure accurate pricing and proper compensation aligned with the skill levels required to support the program, we request clarification on the response to Question 7, which states, "the rates should be based on delivery at the Washington, DC location." Our interpretation of your answer is that all rates should be calculated based on the Washington, DC geographic location. Please confirm, as mandating a specific geographic location eliminates negative pricing strategies such as leveraging lower- geographic location sites on certain labor categories to game bid pricing.

Answer 63: Yes, labor rates are to be based on the geographic location of Washington DC.

Question 64: Does the FAA/AVS intend to procure safety management software as a part of this effort? If so, will the prime contractor be responsible for selecting the system?

Answer 64: No

Question 65: Has the FAA/AVS contacted any potential primes prior to issuing this solicitation?

If yes, which companies?

Answer 65: The only communication that the FAA has had with industry prior to the issuance of the SIR was to request and review responses to the Sources Sought announcement posted to SAM.gov on July 3, 2024.

Question 66: As written, the answer to question 44 precludes the use of more than one live contract as past performance. Our understanding is that the FAA’s intent is to limit live contracts for past performance to those with more than one year of performance. Would the FAA consider rewording the requirement as follows: “offerors are able to utilize past performance references that were underway or completed within the past five (5) years and that those contracts underway must have at least one full year of completed performance?”

Answer 66: No, potential offerors are only allowed to utilize one (1) contract where performance is in-progress and at least one year of performance has been completed.