697DCK-25-R-00445 SIR eIPP -9.11.25.pdf

ELECTRIC VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING AND

ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY AIRCRAFT INTEGRATION

PILOT PROGRAM

PARTICIPANT SELECTION

SCREENING INFORMATION REQUEST

697DCK-25-R-00445

Date: September 09, 2025

Paperwork Reduction Act - OMB No. 2120-0595

697DCK-25-R-00445

September 09, 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 PROJECT TITLE

2 SCREENING INFORMATION REQUEST (SIR) NO

3 AGREEMENT TYPE

4 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

5 FUNDING

6 BACKGROUND

7 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

7.1 Introduction

7.2 SIR Submission Portal and Questions, Concerns, and Clarifications

7.3 Place, Date, Time, and Format for Submission of Proposals

8 OFFEROR PROPOSAL CONTENT

8.1 Executive Summary

8.2 Technical Documentation

9 PILOT PROGRAM SELECTION & OFFEROR PROPOSAL EVALUATION

9.1 Evaluation Methodology and Pilot Program Selection

9.2 Evaluation Criteria for Award

10 PERIOD OF OFFER

11 EXPENSES RELATED TO OFFEROR SUBMISSIONS

12 COMMUNICATIONS WITH OFFERORS

13 NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION OF OFFERORS

14 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

15 NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL PARTICIPATION

16 RESPONSIBLE PROSPECTIVE OFFEROR

17 CERTIFICATION OF REGISTRATION IN THE SYSTEM FOR AWARD

MANAGEMENT (SAM)

18 ATTACHMENT A: THE WHITE HOUSE, PRESIDENTIAL ACTIONS,

UNLEASHING AMERICAN DRONE DOMINANCE

19 ATTACHMENT B: SIR ACRONYMS

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Criteria I - Evaluation Rating and Description Table 2: Criteria II - Evaluation Rating and Description Table 3: Criteria III - Evaluation Rating and Description Table 4: Criteria IV - Evaluation Rating and Description Table 5: Criteria V - Evaluation Rating and Description Table 6: Criteria VI - Evaluation Rating and Description

1 PROJECT TITLE

Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) and Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Integration Pilot Program (eIPP) Participant Selection. Referenced as eIPP in this Screening Information Request (SIR).

2 SCREENING INFORMATION REQUEST (SIR) NO.

697DCK-25-R-00445

3 AGREEMENT TYPE

Other Transaction Agreement (OTA)

4 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The eIPP shall be from the date of award and conclude 3 years after the date the first pilot project becomes operational, unless the Secretary of Transportation determines that an extension is warranted in the national interest.

5 FUNDING

No funds are anticipated to be exchanged under the OTAs; however, if the Government and an OTA holder later agree that either party will provide funding, it would be within the scope of the OTA to make such a modification.

6 BACKGROUND

In Executive Order 14307, Unleashing American Drone Dominance, dated June 6, 2025, the President declared that it is the policy of the United States to accelerate the safe commercialization of UAS technologies and fully integrate UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS), as well as eVTOL and other AAM aircraft operations.1 The President directed the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA and in coordination with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), to establish an Integration Pilot Program under which State, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) governments can partner with private sector organizations with demonstrated experience in eVTOL or other AAM development, manufacturing, and operations, or new supporting technologies enabling AAM integration into the NAS.

Working with leading partners across industry and government, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the FAA are utilizing the opportunity provided by the Executive Order to demonstrate that America can build and deploy safe and beneficial

1 A copy of the President’s Executive Order has been placed in this docket and is Attachment A to this document.

AAM technologies. The DOT and FAA are seeking partners who can deliver successful outcomes by working cooperatively with a range of entities, which will accelerate these projects consistent with the high safety standards that the public expects from the aviation industry. These projects, once successful, are expected to deliver substantial data and lessons learned to inform the broader regulatory framework that will support and oversee the AAM sector.

The focus of this pilot program will be achieving ambitious national objectives in core areas that are in the public interest. Operations that are envisioned include piloted and unmanned approaches to:

• Air Taxis: Short range, on demand flying eVTOLs connecting to ground transport, demonstrating reduced noise impacts.

• Longer-range, fixed wing flights moving people in new forms of advanced regional aircraft with capabilities such as short takeoff and landing that could unlock new and more economically viable possibilities in air travel.

• Cargo: Using novel aircraft, including potentially fixed wing aircraft, to provide cargo services.

• Logistics and supply: Demonstrating new airlift and emergency management services, such as eVTOL operations for servicing energy facilities off-shore and improving medical transport capabilities with lower costs and impacts on local communities.

• Increasing Automation Safety: Demonstrating safe integration of aircraft with a range of automation technologies designed to enhance safety and/or efficiency in AAM operations.

While individual projects will likely focus on select national objectives, DOT and the FAA envision that each project would demonstrate broad public benefits, such as safety enhancements, quality of life enhancements (including reduced noise impacts versus traditional aircraft or current ambient noise), workforce development opportunities adding net new and high-paying jobs to the United States economy, advanced cooperative flow and traffic management with a range of aircraft including UAS, advanced manufacturing in the United States, supply chain security and independence, and cooperation across agencies of the Federal, State, tribal, territorial, and local governments including, for example, security coordination with the Transportation Security Administration as needed.

The eIPP implements this national policy under the FAA’s general authority to develop plans and policy for the use of the navigable airspace. 49 U.S.C. § 40103(b). The eIPP will remove barriers to the initial implementation of AAM to accelerate nationwide operations and address the requirements set forth in the 2024 FAA Reauthorization.

Through this eIPP, the FAA will work through selected SLTTs and their partner(s) to enable initial operations with an acceptable level of safety that can be tailored to their aircraft, operation, and location. As a result, that experience will inform the national policy and guidance, rules, best practices, and processes that focus on developing scalable models and significantly accelerating outcomes to enable routine eVTOL or other AAM aircraft operations

DOT and the FAA are seeking visionary, mission-focused participants who will captivate the imagination of Americans, showcase specific functions that AAM can perform for America in a short period of time, and drive a National Strategy forward.

This eIPP will afford opportunities to industry participants positioned to make large contributions to AAM, working with willing SLTT governments as sponsors. Offerors should be willing to coordinate approaches across all projects to gather meaningful data to accelerate solutions for scaling AAM. With safety as our highest priority, we expect this eIPP to provide valuable insight to assist DOT and the FAA in enabling the United States' advanced aviation aircraft industry to thrive.

Selected offerors will be expected to demonstrate advances in technological capabilities as well as operational concepts. While ensuring safety through appropriate mitigations, the FAA intends to expedite the evaluation and approval of eVTOL and other AAM operations beyond those currently permitted today. Activities under the eIPP will:

• Accelerate the safe and efficient integration of eVTOL and other AAM operations within the NAS;

• Generate data to inform the FAA's development of guidance and regulations;

• Foster and leverage public-private partnerships; and

• Provide opportunities to accelerate commercial-use operations.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The success of the eIPP will depend on the mutually beneficial partnerships between SLTT governments and their private sector partners. Successful partnerships will help rapidly establish operations and venues that enhance public awareness and understanding of AAM operations, which enable the use of eVTOL and other AAM aircraft for new and innovative applications. The eIPP will encourage an ambitious scale of pre-certification operations and will incorporate varied solutions where the most successful implementations become standards of practice for future scaling of operations.

DOT and the FAA will manage this program differently from the Drone IPP that launched in 2017, which focused primarily on evaluation and conducting operations in specific geographic areas within the boundaries of SLTT jurisdictions, including among several states. For this program, DOT and FAA will work with capable partners who can demonstrate the viability of new AAM technologies in ways that deliver new benefits to the public – and then to take the lessons learned from these projects to enable such operations at scale, consistent with the highest safety standards.

Consistent with the language of the EO, any SLTT government (as the eIPP Offeror) with at least one private sector partner(s) and a plan to achieve one of more national objectives is eligible to apply to participate in the eIPP. The SLTT will play a crucial role as the host of operations and planning while bearing a key responsibility to represent local community interests. However, projects should be closely coordinated with Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and operators and be flexible to adapt and expand as needed to include partners and contributors beyond individual communities for full operational implementation. For instance, a project focused on regional flights as described in this notice will necessarily feature work with more than one community, or a consortia of communities across states, to demonstrate those operational capabilities.

DOT and the FAA will evaluate all proposals received. A minimum of five proposals will be selected for participation. Once a proposal is selected, the Offeror will enter into an OTA with the FAA. The agreement will establish the responsibilities of the parties, describe the concept of operations to be undertaken, and establish any data sharing requirements. The eIPP shall conclude 3 years after the date the first pilot project becomes operational, unless the Secretary of Transportation determines that an extension is warranted in the national interest.

7 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

7.1 Introduction

7.1.1 The FAA, in coordination with DOT, is conducting a selection process to execute at least five (5) OTAs with SLTT governments in accordance with the EO. The FAA reserves the right to execute additional OTAs if resources permit (49 U.S.C.

§ 106(l)). The FAA will notify all SLTT government Offerors of the selection decisions.

7.1.2 Proposals should represent an SLTT government’s best efforts to respond to the SIR. Failure to submit any of the information required by this SIR will render the SLTT government Offeror ineligible for award, and the Offeror’s proposal will not be evaluated.

7.1.3 An SLTT may submit only one proposal as the Prime Offeror; however, an SLTT government may be included as a partner in proposals from one or more other SLTT governments.

7.2 SIR Submission Portal and Questions, Concerns, and Clarifications

An Offeror’s proposal must be submitted electronically through the eIPP Portal.

7.2.1 The eIPP Portal can be accessed at https://uas-support.faa.gov/s/?default=new.

Note: The Offeror must be a State, local, tribal, or territorial government. The FAA will only accept one primary Point of Contact for this solicitation through the eIPP Portal. All communications from the Offeror must be through this appointed individual. The FAA will accept only one email address per Offeror.

An alternate Point of Contact must be provided by the Offeror in their Executive Summary.

7.2.2 The Offeror is responsible for developing a working knowledge of the eIPP Portal prior to submission of its proposal. The Offeror is strongly advised to verify its browser configurations and functionality early and often, as some browsers may have limitations.

7.2.3 All questions from potential Offerors relevant to SIR content must be submitted through the eIPP Portal. If an Offeror encounters issues with the eIPP Portal, please contact both Contracting Officers listed below.

7.2.4 The following COs are the designated point of contact for this SIR:

Primary Contracting Officer (CO) Kristin T. Frantz UAS and Emerging Technologies Branch, AAQ-590 Federal Aviation Administration 1701 Columbia Ave College Park, GA 30337 Email: Kristin.T.Frantz@faa.gov

Alternate Contracting Officer Karina Espinosa UAS and Emerging Technologies Branch, AAQ-590 Federal Aviation Administration 1701 Columbia Ave College Park, GA 30337 Email: Karina.Espinosa@faa.gov

7.2.5 All Offeror’s SIR questions, concerns, and clarifications must be submitted via the eIPP Portal by 5:00pm ET on October 7, 2025.

7.2.6 The FAA intends to post all questions and answers to the SAM.gov website (without the author’s identification or any confidential proprietary information).

Offerors should not include identifying information in the question. In the event that identifying information is in the question, it will be redacted prior to posting, https://uas-support.faa.gov/s/?default=new or the question may not be answered. However, if answered, questions and associated answers determined by the FAA to be not suitable for public dissemination because they contain confidential, proprietary information submitted by the Offeror that cannot be sufficiently redacted will be provided only to the Offeror.

7.2.7 If an Offeror requests further clarification on a previously submitted question, the Offeror should refer to that question by its identification number and submit the desired clarification through the eIPP Portal. The Offeror must review all previous questions (by others when made publicly available) to ensure that the same question has not already been addressed.

7.2.8 It is the FAA’s intent to respond in writing to all written inquiries submitted via the eIPP Portal. Answers to the questions, concerns, and inquiries will be posted to the Sam.gov website.

7.2.9 The FAA reserves the right not to answer any question(s) received outside of the timeframes set out in this solicitation. Furthermore, the FAA reserves the right at its sole discretion to extend or not extend the proposal due dates on the basis of questions received.

7.2.10 The Offeror understands that, in the event that an Offeror withdraws from the selection process or a proposal is not submitted by the due date, access to the eIPP Portal will be terminated.

7.3 Place, Date, Time, and Format for Submission of Proposals

7.3.1 Proposals must be submitted through the eIPP Portal by 3:00 PM ET on December 11, 2025.

7.3.2 The FAA will not accept any submission made by email, facsimile, telex, telegraph, or similar devices; nor will paper copies be accepted.

7.3.3 The Offeror must submit all required responses to this SIR on the eIPP Portal.

Electronic submissions via the eIPP Portal will be the only means by which proposals will be accepted by the FAA.

7.3.4 If the Contracting Officer (CO) or his/her designated representative(s) does not receive a proposal (via the eIPP Portal) by the specified date and time, it will not be evaluated. Offerors assume full responsibility for ensuring that proposals are submitted no later than the date and time specified in this solicitation.

7.3.5 Proposals must be complete and conform to the instructions in this SIR;

incomplete proposals or those which deviate from the instructions will be deemed non-conforming and result in the exclusion of the proposal from further consideration. The FAA reserves the right to waive any requirements, minor irregularities, and/or discrepancies if it would be in the best interest of the Government to do so. General statements that the Offeror understands the requirements of the work to be performed will not be considered adequate and will result in lower assessments or may be cause for rejection of the proposal in its entirety.

7.3.6 All proposals will be initially screened for completeness, accuracy, and timeliness. Alternate proposals are not authorized, and the FAA will not evaluate any alternate proposal received.

7.3.7 It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure the completeness of the proposal. The evaluation of proposals will solely be conducted on the basis of the information contained in the written proposal. The Government will not assume that an Offeror possesses any capabilities not specified in the written proposal.

7.3.8 The resulting OTA must be signed by an official who is legally authorized to negotiate on behalf of the Offeror and who is legally authorized to enter into an Agreement.

7.3.9 Acronyms should be defined in the proposals.

8 OFFEROR PROPOSAL CONTENT

The Offeror must submit a separate PDF file to the eIPP Portal for each section outlined in sections 8.1-8.2. Offerors should note that individual files uploaded to the eIPP Portal cannot exceed two gigabytes each. The proposal should clearly define a mission objective and plans to address AAM integration challenges, e.g., establishing new regional air mobility services by adapting or building appropriate infrastructure, coordinating among key partners such as OEMs, operators, federal agencies, SLTT jurisdictions, and commercial partners that will work seamlessly with passengers or shippers. The proposal should define this objective, identify the partners, be sponsored by one or more SLTT governments s that are interested in achieving the mission objective, and remain flexible to adapt the operations and scope as needed to be successful. The proposal must include the following sections:

1. Executive Summary

2. The use of eVTOL or other AAM aircraft and technologies developed or offered by a United States-based entity.

a. Letters of attestation from United States-based private-sector partner(s) with demonstrated experience in eVTOL or other AAM development, manufacturing, and operations, or new supporting technologies enabling AAM operations integration into the NAS.

3. Overall representation of economic and geographic operations and proposed models of public-private partnership.

4. Overall representation of the operations to be conducted, including advanced air mobility, medical response, cargo transport, and rural access.

5. Policy and regulatory insight potential.

6. Aircraft and operational readiness.

7. Support for operations.

8.1 Executive Summary

8.1.1 The executive summary must include an overview of the project and participating entities.

8.2 Technical Documentation

8.2.1 Technical documentation addressing each of the following criteria must be submitted as separate PDF files as part of the proposal in the eIPP Portal:

Criterion Description

1. U.S.-Based Aircraft & Technology

The proposal must include the use of eVTOL aircraft or other AAM aircraft and AAM technologies developed/offered by a U.S.-based entity and:

• Letters of attestation from United States-based private-sector partner(s) with demonstrated experience in eVTOL or other AAM development, manufacturing, and operations, or new supporting technologies enabling AAM operations integration into the NAS. (Aircraft must be in the Type Certification Process) A United States-based company is defined as an entity that:

- Is organized or incorporated under the laws of a State, territory, or possession of the United States or the District of Columbia;

- Has its principal place of business in the United States; and

- Is not directly or indirectly owned or controlled by a foreign entity.

• Description of the Offeror’s flexibility to incorporate additional partnerships and contributions.

2. Overall Economic & Geographic Representation and Proposed Models of Public Private Partnership

The proposal should describe:

• How the proposed project promotes eVTOL and AAM aircraft operations integration, such as (as applicable):

o A phased approach to moving people in congested areas by air and connecting to ground support.

o Use of AAM aircraft for cargo deliveries between points in a distributed network

• Ability to collaborate or accommodate multiple partners to achieve objectives.

• Role and responsibilities of all entities within the partnership, how they contribute to achieving goals, and their ability to advance objectives supporting NAS integration.

• Potential current and future economic benefits and geographic footprints.

3. Overall Representation of Operations to be Conducted

The proposal should describe:

• How the proposal encourages the development and testing of new and innovative concepts of operations in a safe manner.

• The operations and environments (air and ground) proposed with sufficient detail to substantiate the efficacy of operations.

• Models should include plans for addressing AAM integration challenges, such as (as applicable):

o Demonstration of new regional air connectivity between two GA airports.

o Multiple industry collaborators to establish a required equipage and airspace management procedures to allow for a phased approach to successful autonomous flight, navigation, and integration with other piloted test aircraft.

4.

Policy/Regulator y Insight Potential

The proposal should describe:

• Applicable regulations not suitable without amendment and missing areas of guidance or regulation that need development.

• How the information and experience yielded by the proposed project will be valuable in informing the development of future regulations, initiatives, and integration of eVTOL and other AAM aircraft operations into the NAS.

5. Aircraft & Operational Readiness

The proposal should describe:

• Experience in eVTOL or other AAM development, manufacturing, and operations.

o A Type Certification Project must be underway for eVTOL or other AAM aircraft.

• Plans for enabling AAM operations integration into the NAS, including operational feasibility of proposed technologies.

6. Support for Operations

The proposal should describe:

• Any additional industry, academic, or government contributions that can be expected to enable project success.

9 PILOT PROGRAM SELECTION & OFFEROR PROPOSAL EVALUATION

9.1 Evaluation Methodology and Pilot Program Selection

OTA awards will be issued to the Offerors determined by the Secretary of Transportation and the FAA Administrator to best meet the Executive Order selection criteria that are included in this SIR and reflected in the evaluation of the proposals.

Proposals will be evaluated using the criteria outlined in Section 8 of the SIR. The evaluation process will ensure that the recommended awards collectively satisfy the goals and requirements of the Executive Order to the greatest extent possible.

A Technical Evaluation Team (TET) Lead will manage the evaluation with the CO.

Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with Section 9.2.1 of this SIR.

The TET will make award recommendations to the Senior Review Team (SRT). The CO serves as the business advisor to the SRT.

The SRT will review the recommendations using sound business judgment, consulting the TET Lead when necessary if additional information or analysis is required. The SRT may also seek the advice, expertise, and counsel of designated advisors to assist in its deliberations.

The SRT will prepare final recommendations for the Secretary of Transportation and the FAA Administrator. The Secretary of Transportation may also seek the advice, expertise, and counsel of designated advisors to assist in the selection of final OTA awardees. After due consideration of the SRT recommendations, and all underlying analysis and reports, the Secretary of Transportation will select the Pilot Program awardees. The Administrator will issue a final award determination to the Contracting Officer in writing before OTAs are executed.

9.2 Evaluation Criteria for Award

Proposals will be evaluated using the criteria outlined in Section 8.2.

The criteria in Section 8.2 are not equally important as outlined below. Criteria rated with high importance will be given more weight in the overall evaluation than criteria that are weighed with medium importance. Criteria with required importance will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis, and those Offerors who fail to meet the criteria will be eliminated from further evaluation.

Criterion Criteria

Importance

1. U.S.-Based Aircraft & Technology Required

2. Overall Economic & Geographic Representation and Proposed Models of Public Private Partnership High

3. Overall Representation of Operations to be Conducted High

4. Policy/Regulatory Insight Potential High

5. Aircraft & Operational Readiness Medium

6. Support for Operations Medium

9.2.1 Evaluation Criteria

DOT and the FAA are seeking Offerors willing to set specific plans for AAM operations and able to demonstrate willingness and capability to collaborate with multiple partners and contributors to achieve objectives. In making determinations, the government will evaluate proposals based on the criteria outlined below. A description of these criteria is provided in Section 8.2 Technical Documentation. Offerors should clearly and persuasively describe how the criteria are best met by their proposals.

Evaluation Criteria I: The use of eVTOL or other AAM aircraft and technologies developed or offered by a United States-based entity.

Table 1: Criteria I - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating Description

Meets

The application contains letters of attestation from United States-based private-sector partner(s), including capability statements and experience in eVTOL or other AAM aircraft development, type certification, manufacturing, and operations or support services. Aircraft in the proposal must have a type certification project.

Does Not Meet The application does not contain a letter(s) of attestation as described above.

Evaluation Criteria II: Overall representation of economic and geographic operations and proposed models of public-private partnership.

Table 2: Criteria II - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating Description

Excellent

The combined impact of the strengths of the response far outweighs the combined impact of any identified weaknesses.

• Proposal must describe a multi-state or regional deployment model with clear geographic diversity (urban, rural, coastal, tribal, etc.).

• Proposal clearly defines roles of all partners including industry, academic, local governments and how each contributes to the pilot.

• Proposal includes economic forecasts, benefits to underserved regions, and co-investment models.

Evaluation Rating Description

Good

The combined impact of the strengths of the response outweighs the combined impact of the weaknesses.

• Proposal provides a limited geographic scope but includes reasonable partner engagement and alignment with public-sector goals.

• Proposal mentions economic benefit projections but lacks quantification.

Satisfactory

Although there may be some weaknesses and areas in need of improvement in the response, these are offset by strengths in other areas.

• Proposed operations and impact are primarily local with few partners or limited overall representation of economic and geographic operations.

• Proposal describes intent to partner but no formal commitments evidenced.

• Proposal mentions economic benefits but does not substantiate them.

Does Not Meet

The combined impact of the weaknesses of the response outweighs the combined impact of the strengths.

• No public-private model articulated, no defined partner roles, and no economic or geographic representation rationale provided.

Evaluation Criteria III: Overall representation of the operations to be conducted, including advanced air mobility, medical response, cargo transport, and rural access.

Table 3: Criteria III - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating Description

Excellent The combined impact of the strengths of the response far outweighs the combined impact of any identified weaknesses.

Evaluation Rating Description

• Proposal includes multiple industry collaborators with aggressive integration objectives to enable broad integration and operations

• Proposal details comprehensive, phased operational plans across multiple use cases (e.g., cargo, medical, rural access). Includes technical details such as route structure, vehicle class, flight protocols, safety mitigation, and specific testing environments.

Demonstrates industry readiness and stakeholder support for execution.

Good

The combined impact of the strengths of the response outweighs the combined impact of the weaknesses.

• Proposal includes multiple industry collaborators with aggressive integration objectives to enable broad integration and operations

• Proposal describes clear operational goals with some variation in use cases. Phased approach is evident, but technical details or safety procedures are limited or high-level.

Satisfactory

Although there may be some weaknesses and areas in need of improvement in the response, these are offset by strengths in other areas.

• Proposal includes multiple industry collaborators with aggressive integration objectives to enable broad integration and operations.

• Proposal provides little to no evidence of phasing, stakeholder integration, or safety readiness.

Does Not Meet

The combined impact of the weaknesses of the response outweighs the combined impact of the strengths.

• Proposal does not include multiple industry collaborators with aggressive integration objectives to enable broad integration and operations

Evaluation Criteria IV: Policy and regulatory insight potential.

Table 4: Criteria IV - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating

Description

Excellent

The combined impact of the strengths of the response far outweighs the combined impact of any identified weaknesses.

• Proposal identifies specific regulatory gaps, such as airworthiness, ground risk, pilot certification, and proposes how the project will yield insights for the FAA.

• Demonstrates technical capability to directly collect data from operations and to provide metrics to the FAA to inform national policy, future regulations, and plans for integration in the NAS.

Good

The combined impact of the strengths of the response outweighs the combined impact of the weaknesses.

• Proposal identifies the need for regulatory insight and describes intent to inform general categories important to NAS integration such as urban routing and noise.

• Proposal generally describes mechanisms for feedback and evaluation of data and insights from proposed operations (e.g. no specific metrics or collection procedure is specified).

Satisfactory

Although there may be some weaknesses and areas in need of improvement in the response, these are offset by strengths in other areas.

• Proposal identifies relevant regulations but does not identify clear gaps or propose how operations will inform policy or regulations.

• Proposal relies on FAA to extract insights versus providing clear and policy-informing insights to the FAA.

Does Not Meet

The combined impact of the weaknesses of the response outweighs the combined impact of the strengths.

• Proposal does not include policy or regulatory insights, or gaps relative to proposed operations or aircraft. Proposal is focused mainly on demonstration.

Evaluation Criteria V: Aircraft and operational readiness.

Table 5: Criteria V - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating Description

Excellent

The combined impact of the strengths of the response far outweighs the combined impact of any identified weaknesses.

• Proposal includes aircraft that has achieved Type Certification.

• Proposal includes clear test plans, ground infrastructure, and timelines that meet eIPP expectations. Details show readiness to launch operations within 90 days of agreement.

Good

The combined impact of the strengths of the response outweighs the combined impact of the weaknesses.

• Proposal includes aircraft that is near Type Certification.

• Proposal includes clear test plans, ground infrastructure, and timelines that meet eIPP expectations are outlined in the proposal.

Details show readiness to launch operations within 90 days of agreement.

Satisfactory

Although there may be some weaknesses and areas in need of improvement in the response, these are offset by strengths in other areas.

• Proposal includes aircraft is under active development with testing evidence. Proposed aircraft will begin process for Type Certification and readiness plans commits to launching operations within 90 days of agreement.

Does Not Meet

The combined impact of the weaknesses of the response outweighs the combined impact of the strengths.

• Proposal does not indicate an ability to launch operations within 90 days of agreement.

Evaluation Criteria VI: Support for operations.

Table 6: Criteria VI - Evaluation Rating and Description

Evaluation Rating Description

Excellent The combined impact of the strengths of the response far outweighs the combined impact of any identified weaknesses.

• Proposal includes signed letters of support, MOUs, or funding commitments from stakeholders (government, industry, academia). Specifies resource contributions including but not limited to land, airspace access, data infrastructure, and funding).

Good

The combined impact of the strengths of the response outweighs the combined impact of the weaknesses.

• Proposal includes a mix of documentation but not all that details stakeholder support or engagement. Specific resources or funding commitments implied but not detailed. Operational support is highly probable but not fully documented.

Satisfactory

Although there may be some weaknesses and areas in need of improvement in the response, these are offset by strengths in other areas.

• Proposal includes documentation describing some stakeholder support or engagement but does not outline formal commitments or quantifiable resource contributions.

Does Not Meet

The combined impact of the weaknesses of the response outweighs the combined impact of the strengths.

• Proposal does not include evidence of stakeholder support and engagement. Proposal lacks enabling infrastructure and/or resource commitments.

Each evaluation criteria will be evaluated using the criteria in 9.2.1 Evaluation Criteria above. For each of the criteria, the evaluators will assign strengths and weaknesses as defined below.

Strength is a feature, element, or process contained in a proposal that increases the likelihood of meeting program goals and requirements.

Weakness is a feature, element, or process contained in a proposal that decreases the likelihood of meeting program goals or requirements.

10 PERIOD OF OFFER

The Offeror’s proposals must be binding for at least 180 calendar days from the date of the final submission. Proposals may offer more than 180 days.

11 EXPENSES RELATED TO OFFEROR SUBMISSIONS

The FAA will not pay for the information solicited, nor reimburse the Offerors for any costs incurred in the preparation or submission of any response to this SIR or in making necessary studies or designs for the preparation thereof.

12 COMMUNICATIONS WITH OFFERORS

The FAA expects to have communications with potential Offerors throughout the selection process. The FAA may enter into discussions with one or more Offerors regarding their proposal(s) without entering into discussions with all Offerors. The scope of these discussions may explore, but are not limited to, various topics, options, issues, and/or opportunities that result from this SIR, and are in the best interest of the eIPP Selection process.

13 NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION OF OFFERORS

Written notice of selection will be provided to all Offerors. Within three (3) business days following execution of the fifth (5th) OTA Offerors will be notified of their application status.

14 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

Proposals from unsuccessful Offerors will not be returned. The original proposals will be retained in the official SIR eIPP Portal.

15 NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL PARTICIPATION

(a) Offerors are advised that employees of firms identified in paragraph (b) may serve as advisors in the selection process. All non-Government employees are required to sign non-disclosure of information agreements. The exclusive responsibility for selection remains with the FAA. Any objection to disclosure of information to these non-Government employees must be provided in writing no later than 14 calendar days after the SIR release and must include a detailed statement with the basis of the objection. This objection must be emailed to the COs at:

Email: Kristin.T.Frantz@faa.gov and Karina.Espinosa@faa.gov The email subject should read:

“Objection to disclosure of information to non-Government Personnel– (insert Entity Name)

The email should read as follows:

“In accordance with Section 15 NON-GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL PARTICIPATION (insert Entity Name) is submitting a statement. The Offeror should attach detailed statement with the basis of the objection and the following information:

Entity Name:

Contact Name:

Email:

Phone Number:”

(b) The support service and technical advisors may include: The MITRE Corporation’s Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD), the FAA’s Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), and Cavan Solutions. Therefore, said parties will not be eligible to be an Offeror or Team Member for any of the OTAs that result from this SIR.

16 RESPONSIBLE PROSPECTIVE OFFEROR

Notwithstanding the evaluation methodology outlined in this SIR, the CO will determine whether the Offeror is responsible prior to the award of any resultant OTA. As a minimum, to be determined responsible a prospective Offeror must: have adequate financial resources to perform the OTA, or the ability to obtain those resources; have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; have a satisfactory performance record; have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls;

and/or be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

17 CERTIFICATION OF REGISTRATION IN THE SYSTEM FOR AWARD

MANAGEMENT (SAM)

In order to be issued an OTA, registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) is required. Offerors must include their SAM UEI number in the proposal Executive Summary.

The following clause is copied from the FAA Acquisition Management System and is applicable to this SIR.

mailto:Kristin.T.Frantz@faa.gov mailto:Karina.Espinosa@faa.gov

3.3.1-33 System for Award Management (January 2024)

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause

"Registered in the SAM database" means that the Contractor has entered all mandatory information, including the Unique Identity Identifier (UEI) or the Electronic Funds Transfer indicator, into the SAM database.

"System for Award Management (SAM) database" means the primary Government repository for Contractor information required for the conduct of business with the Government.

"Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)" (also known as the Unique Entity ID) means a number or other identifier used to identify a specific commercial, nonprofit, or Government entity. See www.sam.gov for the designated entity for establishing unique entity identifiers.

"Electronic Funds Transfer indicator" means a 4-character suffix to the Unique Entity Identifier. This 4-character suffix may be assigned at the discretion of the business concern to establish additional SAM records for identifying alternative Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) accounts for the same parent concern.

(b)(1) By submission of an offer, the Offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee must be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance, and through final payment of any contract, basic agreement, basic ordering agreement, or blanket purchasing agreement resulting from this solicitation.

(2) The Offeror must enter, in Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offeror’s Section of the solicitation, the UEI or EFT indicator that identifies the Offeror's name and address exactly as stated in the offer. The UEI will be used by the Contracting Officer to verify that the offeror is registered in the SAM database.

(c) If the Offeror does not have a UEI, it should contact www.sam.gov directly to obtain one.

The Offeror should be prepared to provide the following information:

(1) Company legal business name.

http://www.sam.gov/

(2) Tradestyle, doing business, or other name by which your entity is commonly recognized.

(3) Company Physical Street Address, City, State, and ZIP Code.

(4) Company Mailing Address, City, State and ZIP Code (if different from physical street address).

(5) Company Telephone Number.

(6) Date the company was started.

(7) Number of employees at your location.

(8) Chief executive officer/key manager.

(9) Line of business (industry).

(10) Company Headquarters name and address (reporting relationship within your entity).

(d) If the Offeror does not become registered in the SAM database in the time prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer may proceed to award to the next otherwise successful registered offeror.

(e) Processing time should be taken into consideration when registering. Offerors who are not registered should consider applying for registration immediately upon receipt of this solicitation.

(f) The Contractor is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the data within the SAM database, and for any liability resulting from the Government's reliance on inaccurate or incomplete data. To remain registered in the SAM database after the initial registration, the Contractor is required to review and update on an annual basis from the date of initial registration or subsequent updates its information in the SAM database to ensure it is current, accurate and complete. Updating information in SAM does not alter the terms and conditions of this contract and is not a substitute for a properly executed contractual document. If registered in SAM as a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), by submission of an offer, the offeror acknowledges that they are certified as an SDVOSB under the Small Business Administration’s Veteran Small Business Certification Program (VetCert).

(g)(1)(i) If a Contractor has legally changed its business name, "doing business as" name, or division name (whichever is shown on the contract), or has transferred the assets used in performing the contract, but has not completed the necessary requirements regarding novation and change-of-name agreements in AMS Procurement Guidance, the Contractor must provide the responsible Contracting Officer a minimum of one business day's written notification of its intention to:

(A) Change the name in the SAM database;

(B) Comply with the requirements of AMS regarding novation and change-of-name agreements; and

(C) Agree in writing to the timeline and procedures specified by the responsible Contracting Officer. The Contractor must provide the Contracting Officer with the notification, sufficient documentation to support the legally changed name.

(ii) If the Contractor fails to comply with the requirements of paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this clause, or fails to perform the agreement at paragraph (g)(1)(i)(C) of this clause, and, in the absence of a properly executed novation or change-of-name agreement, the SAM information that shows the Contractor to be other than the Contractor indicated in the contract will be considered to be incorrect information within the meaning of the "Suspension of Payment" paragraph of the electronic funds transfer (EFT) clause of this contract.

(2) The Contractor must not change the name or address for EFT payments or manual payments, as appropriate, in the SAM record to reflect an assignee for the purpose of assignment of claims. Assignees must be separately registered in the SAM database.

Information provided to the Contractor's SAM record that indicates payments, including those made by EFT, to an ultimate recipient other than that Contractor will be considered to be incorrect information within the meaning of the "Suspension of payment" paragraph of the EFT clause of this contract.

(h) Offerors and Contractors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the internet at http://www.sam.gov.

18 ATTACHMENT A: THE WHITE HOUSE, PRESIDENTIAL ACTIONS,

UNLEASHING AMERICAN DRONE DOMINANCE

The WHITE HOUSE

PRESIDENTIAL ACTIONS

UNLEASHING AMERICAN DRONE DOMINANCE

Executive Orders June 6, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), otherwise known as drones, enhance United States productivity, create high-skilled jobs, and are reshaping the future of aviation. Drones are already transforming industries from logistics and infrastructure inspection to precision agriculture, emergency response, and public safety. Emerging technologies such as electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft promise to modernize methods for cargo delivery, passenger transport, and other advanced air mobility capabilities.

The United States must accelerate the safe commercialization of drone technologies and fully integrate UAS into the National Airspace System. The time has come to accelerate testing and to enable routine drone operations, scale up domestic production, and expand the export of trusted, American-manufactured drone technologies to global markets. Building a strong and secure domestic drone sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains, and ensuring that the benefits of this technology are delivered to the American people.

Sec. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this order:

(a) The term “agency” has the meaning given to the term in 44 U.S.C. 3502(1).

(b) The terms “unmanned aircraft system” and “drone” have the meaning given https://www.whitehouse.gov/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-orders/ to the term “unmanned aircraft system” in 49 U.S.C. 44801(12).

Sec. 3. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to ensure continued American leadership in the development, commercialization, and export of UAS by:

(a) accelerating the safe integration of UAS into the National Airspace System through timely, risk-based rulemaking that enables routine advanced operations;

(b) advancing the domestic commercialization of UAS technologies at scale, including their safe and secure manufacturing, production, and integration, by supporting industry-led innovation, reducing regulatory uncertainty, and streamlining approvals and certification processes, including for consumer goods delivery and environmental reviews; and

(c) strengthening the domestic drone industrial base and promoting the export of trusted, American-manufactured UAS through updated economic policies and regulation, coordinated trade, financing, and foreign engagement tools.

Sec. 4. Expanding Commercial Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations. (a) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), shall issue a proposed rule enabling routine Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations for UAS for commercial and public safety purposes. A final rule shall be published within 240 days of the date of this order, as appropriate.

(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA, shall establish clear metrics for assessing the performance and safety of BVLOS operations, and within 180 days of the date of this order, shall identify and describe additional regulatory barriers and challenges to BVLOS implementation, with recommendations to the President through the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) for addressing such issues expeditiously and informing future rulemaking or legislative actions.

(c) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA, shall initiate the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) tools to assist in and expedite the review of UAS waiver applications under 14 C.F.R. part 107. These AI tools shall:

(i) support performance- and risk-based evaluation of proposed operations;

(ii) identify materially similar precedents and recommend consistent mitigation measures;

(iii) assist the FAA in identifying categories of operations with sufficient safety data or recurring approval patterns that may warrant further rulemaking to eliminate the need for individualized waivers; and

(iv) be used in accordance with guidance on Federal use of AI as detailed in Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-25-21.

(d) The Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA, shall immediately explore options to ensure that UAS flights beginning and ending in United States airspace, or United States-owned facilities in the high seas, can operate without being subject to the onerous requirements applicable to manned aircraft engaging in international navigation as referenced in the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

Sec. 5. Furthering Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration into the National Airspace System.

(a) Within 240 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA, shall publish an updated roadmap for the integration of civil UAS into the National Airspace System.

(b) The Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the FAA, shall ensure all FAA UAS Test Ranges are fully utilized to support the development, testing, and scaling of American drone technologies, with a focus on BVLOS…