SAVES HWSW Q_A Amendment 0004 20251210.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 32 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 697DCK-25-R-00302
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) document for the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Strategic Sourcing for the Acquisition of Various Supplies and Equipment (SAVES) procurement. The solicitation seeks multiple-award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts for commercial hardware and software products, including network infrastructure components, personal computing devices, peripherals, audio/visual equipment, and related product-based services. The document addresses 64 specific questions from potential offerors, covering topics such as pricing model requirements, past performance submissions, OEM authorization, and product configuration details.
Key response highlights include the government's requirement for offerors to provide pricing for all items across a 10-year period, with both small business and unrestricted pricing models. The proposal due date has been extended multiple times, most recently to January 16, 2026, at 1700 ET. The FAA intends to award approximately eight contracts, with strict requirements around OEM authorization, past performance documentation, and comprehensive product pricing. Notable requirements include demonstrating at least five OEM authorized reseller relationships for small businesses and providing detailed pricing for all listed manufacturers, with failure to do so resulting in proposal disqualification.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 65 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Question Number | Reference SIR Section | Reference SIR Subsection and Paragraph Number | Quote Specific SIR language in question | Question | Suggested resolution (if applicable) | Government Answers |
| (if applicable) | ||||||
| 1 | Section L | L.11.2.3 VOLUME III, COST/PRICE | Attachment 2A, Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet | The document is locked | provide unlocked spreadsheet | Per Section L.10.1 If FAA locked or otherwise “protected” a cell, the cell must remain locked or otherwise “protected.” Please refer to Section L.11.2.3 and Attachment 2A Instructions and Assumptions to fill out worksheet. |
| 2 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLINs: 0001B, 0001E, 0001F, 0001G, 0001H, 0001I, 0001J, 0001K, 0001L, 0001M, 0001N, 00010O, 0001Q, 0001R, 0001U, 0001TT, 0001VV,0001WW,0001XX | CLINs 0001B, 0001E, 0001F, 0001G, 0001H, 0001I, 0001J, 0001K, 0001L, 0001M, 0001N, 00010O, 0001Q, 0001R, 0001U, 0001TT, 0001VV,0001WW,0001XX | These Cisco CLINs are all $0 options that are added to a configuration for an appliance. We want sure the government understands that these are Not Seperately Priced (NSP) parts that are priced at $0. | Please clarify if the offeror is supposed to quote these CLINs. | The government understands that these are not separately priced by the OEM. See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 3 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN(s): 0001X and 0001Y | Mfr. P/N: 210-BEXB and Mfr. P/N: 210-BRQC | These Dell part numbers do not match the CLIN description and this appears to be two CLINs for the same product. | Based on the description, Dell Premier states that part number should be I210-BRQK. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 4 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001CC | Mfr. P/N: 26D32AA | The part number given does not match the description. This appears to be the wrong manufacturer part number. | The manufacturer part number that matches the description is 5TW10AA (non-TAA). | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 5 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001DD | Mfr. P/N: 4J0J0AA#ABA | This product is EOL before proposal submission and cannot be quoted. | The OEM's replacement product is: HP Thunderbolt 4 Ultra 180W G6 Dock 9X4A1AA#ABA (TAA) | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 6 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001EE | Mfr. P/N: 4J0J9AA#ABA | This product is EOL before proposal submission and cannot be quoted. | The OEM's replacement product is: HP Thunderbolt 4 Ultra 280W G6 Dock AW5N3AA#ABA (TAA) | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 7 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001GG | Mfr. P/N: 9VA80AA, Description: HP Inc. 128 LSR Wired Mouse | The part number and description do no match, as the part number is for a HP 320M mouse. | The HP 128 mouse's correct OEM past number is 265D9AA | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 8 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001KK | Mfr. P/N: 210-BKXF | This product is EOL and cannot be quoted in Dell Premier. | The closest OEM replacement is: Dell Pro Micro Plus Desktop (QBM1250). | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 9 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001OO | Mfr. P/N: 9Y2V4AV | This product is EOL and cannot be quoted through HPI's configuration tool. | The closest OEM replacement is: HP EliteBook 6 G1i 16. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 10 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001PP | Mfr. P/N: 8N374AV | This product is EOL and cannot be quoted through HPI's configuration tool. | The closest OEM replacement is: HP EliteBook 8 G1i 16. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 11 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001QQ | Mfr. P/N: EDC360G11 | This product is EOL and cannot be quoted through HPI's configuration tool. | The closest OEM replacement is: HP EliteBook 8 Flip G1i 13 | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 12 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002B | Mfr. P/N: 210T-IDEA, Description: Adobe Acrobat Professional DC - Includes Acrobat Professional - Per User | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 210-3275-V1-25CC01A12. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 13 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002C | Mfr. P/N: 210T-CAP, Description: Adobe Captivate Enterprise Term license – Per User - 12 months | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 210-3225-V1-39CC01A12. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 14 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002D | Mfr. P/N: 210T-CCP; Description: Adobe Creative Cloud Pro Term License – Per User - 12 month term | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 210-3282-V1-30012025. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 15 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002E | Mfr. P/N: 210T-PHEL, Description: Adobe Photoshop Elements Enterprise Term license - per user - 12 mos. | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 210-3207-V1-64CC01A12. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 16 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002R | Mfr. P/N: 8200000942, Description: Government Cloud Plus | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 200000942. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 17 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002F | Mfr. P/N: 413-31000, Description: APPIAN ON-PREM PLTFM USER II 1Y (7998122) | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is 403-31002. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 18 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002W | Mfr. P/N: USER-ELA-EDITION-GCH-25000, Description: ZS-USER-ELA-EDITION-GCH-25000 | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is ZS-USER-ELA-EDITION-GCH-25000. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 19 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0002X | Mfr. P/N: PREM-FED-PLUS-GCH-1, Description: ZSCALER PREM SUP PLUS GOV 1U (8292132) | The description and the part number do not match. The correct OEM part number for the given description is ZCES-SUP-PREM-FED-PLUS-GCH-1. | Please change the original description to match the product requested from the original part number, or update the part number to match the description. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 20 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001II | Mfr. P/N: 210-BLNB | This product has reached EOL and cannot be quoted on Dell Premier. Therefore, we can't price it. | The closest replacement is a Dell Pro Max 16 (16") | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 21 | L.11.2.3 and Attachment+2A+-+Small+Business+Price+Model+Evaluation+Worksheet+20250925 | CLIN/SLIN: 0001JJ | Mfr. P/N: 210-BLWL | This product has reached EOL and cannot be quoted on Dell Premier. Therefore, we can't price it. | The closest replacement is a Dell Pro 16 Plus PC16250 (16") | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. |
| 22 | Section M | M.3.2, Past Performance Evaluation | “Annual Awarded Value” (as indicated on Attachments 4 and 5) for an contract, is calculated as the aggregated awarded price for all orders awarded to the offeror (or team member, as the case may be) under that contract, divided by the number of years of the period of performance of that contract that have been completed by the offeror (or team member) to date." | Question: |
If an offeror references a relevant Task Order issued under a GWAC or IDIQ contract vehicle (e.g., SEWP V), is it acceptable to report the Annual Awarded Value based on the overarching contract vehicle rather than the individual Task Order?
Rationale:
Obtaining PPQs from GWAC program offices is often difficult. We want to highlight our successful performance for the GWAC; therefore, if it is permissible to provide Annual Awarded Value information at the contract vehicle level, we can better demonstrate our performance and relevance to the SAVES solicitation. We will include CPARS or PPQ documentation for the Task Order itself, but the most relevant information will be about the GWAC. GWAC: Government Wide Acquisition Contract IDIQ: Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity SEWP V: Solutions for Enterprise Wide Procurement V
| PPQs: Past Performance Questionnaires | Yes, it is acceptable to use Contract Level, for GWACs, to calculate "Annual Awarded Value" as long as all the services on the GWAC are relevant to the SIR. Relevancy as defined in SIR Section M. | ||||||
| 23 | Section M | M.3.2 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFOMANCE EVALUATION B) | In the case where the Offeror is a joint venture, one of the past performances must be for the joint venture itself as the prime contractor. The FAA will evaluate the past performance presented by the joint venture members in the aggregate. | Section L.11.2.2.1 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION states that “In the case where the Offeror is a joint venture, the Offeror’s proposal must provide at least one (1) example of a contract performed by the joint venture itself, or at least one (1) example of a contract performed by each individual member of the joint venture. Additionally, Q&A #97 confirms this with “If you are part of a joint venture (JV), you must submit either one form from the JV as a whole or one form from each of the JV members.” However Section M 3.2 states, “In the case where the Offeror is a joint venture, one of the past performances must be for the joint venture itself as the prime contractor. The FAA will evaluate the past performance presented by the joint venture members in the aggregate.” Please confirm that Section M should align with Section L and Q&A #97 in that where the Offeror is a joint venture, one of the past performances can be for the joint venture as a whole or one form from each of the JV members. | Please modify M 3.2 B) to align with Section L 11.2.2.1 and Q&A #97 by stating that where the Offeror is a joint venture, one of the past performances can be for the joint venture as a whole or one form from each of the JV members. | See Amendment for Section M.3.2.B. Section M.3.2.B now aligns with Section L and the previous answered question. | |
| 24 | Q&A Response | Q&A Government response to #224 | There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, which is inclusive of the template sections A-E, as well as the narrative, sections F-G, to be completed on the provided template, and to be submitted as one template per past performance example. | The Q&A response to #224 states, “There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, which is inclusive of the template sections A-E, as well as the narrative, Sections F-G, to be completed on the provided template, and to be submitted as one template per past performance example.” However, A-E extends to the second page of the required template. Will the government please confirm the narrative in response to Sections F-G can utilize 3 full pages? | Please allow Section F to start on a full page to allow 3 full pages for Section F and G past performance narratives. | See Amendment for upated Attachment 4. The new limit is 5 pages in total. | |
| 25 | Attachment 3 - OEM Authorization Relationship | Cell A8 | HPE | Should the OEM listed in cell A8, "HPE", match the OEM in Attachment 2A, Cells C34-C39, "HPI"? | Please change the OEM name in Attachment 3 from "HPE" to "HPI". | See Amendment for updated Attachment 3. | |
| 26 | L.11.2.2.2 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES (ATTACHMENT 5) | All Paragraphs | All Paragraphs | Regarding the revised Attachment 5: Some of our customers already completed and returned a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). Please confirm you'll still accept the PPQs submitted directly to FAA prior to release of Amendment 0002 on 9/30/25 with updated Attachment 5. | Requesting acceptance of PPQs submitted directly to FAA prior to release of updated Attachment 5 to offer our customer relief from duplicating their efforts. | Agree to accept PPQ that were already submitted to the FAA prior to the release of Amendment 0002. | |
| 27 | Attachment 2A - Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet 20250925 | Price Evaluation Small | Rows 28-30, 40-50 |
Asset Tag or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades." The last portion of the item Description includes the wording "… Asset Tag or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades."
| Does this pertain to the "Asset Tagging" listed on the line above? | Please clarify as to what "or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades" applies. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. | ||
| 28 | Attachment 2A - Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet 20250925 | Price Evaluation Small | Rows 28-30, 40-50 |
or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades." The last portion of the item Description includes the wording "or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades."
| Does this pertain to instances when the requested item is no longer available and affords the offeror the ability to change the system to another model from that OEM? | If this pertains to End of Life systems, please update item specifications to currently available configurations. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. | ||
| 29 | Attachment 2A - Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet 20250925 | Price Evaluation Small | Rows 28-30, 40-50 |
or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades." The last portion of the item Description includes the wording "or current OEM offerings for similarly configured system upgrades."
As this is a pricing-related item which is a key factor in proposal evalution and award determination, please clarify the Government's defintion of "similarly configured."
| Provide definition. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. | ||||||
| 30 | OEM Authorization Relationship and Letters of Authorization: | Do we need to complete the full OEM sheet, or only for the manufacturers we are submitting LOA's | All Offerors must complete the entire sheet. | ||||
| 31 | (b) Subfactor 2 - | OEM Authorization Relationship and Letters of Authorization: | Will a new Attachment 3 LOAAttachment 3, OEM Authorization Relationship document be released.? The current documents does not allow the change from "HPE" to "HPI" in the current format. | See Amendment for updated Attachment 3. | |||
| 32 | Attachment 2A and Attachment 2B | Column L - Column AC | The FAA intends to compete future requirements at the delivery order level, however, Offerors are advised that FAA reserves the right to utilize any of the prices as proposed on this spreadsheet within the first 6 months of the Contract Award per Section B.3, Section G.4.1, Section L.11.2.3 and Section M.3.4, and therefore, Offerors must ensure that the proposed pricing is reasonable and balanced. | The new pricing spreadsheets (Attachments 2A and 2B) include pricing for 10 years of option periods. However, offerors are only obligated to provide the items in Attachments 2A and 2B at the proposed prices for the first 6 months after award. Could the Government please clarify the purpose of the option year pricing? | Recommend revising Attachments 2A and 2B to remove the Option Year pricing. | The Government does not intend to modify this requirement. Per Section L.11.2.3 For evaluation purposes, the worksheet represents a 10-year period, consisting of a 5-year base period and a 5-year option period of identified hardware and software items. | |
| 33 | Attachment 2A and Attachment 2B | Attachment 2A: Row 74, CLIN 0002N, 2R RedHat Application Foundations | |||||
| Attachment 2B: Row 87, CLIN 0002AA, 2R RedHat Application Foundations | Red Hat part number MW02000 was discontinued on September 27, 2025. Please replace this with an active part number. | Replace Red Hat part number MW02000 with an active part number. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. | ||||
| 34 | Joint Venture | Joint Venture | If a JV currently does not have a GWAC or IDIQ contract, can each Prime provide its own Past Performance? | Per Section L.11.2.2.1 Past Performance must include one (1) example from the Prime Offeror. Additional examples may be from either the prime contractor and/or first tier subcontractor(s). In the case where the Offeror is a joint venture, the Offeror’s proposal must provide at least one (1) example of a contract performed by the joint venture itself, or at least one (1) example of a contract performed by each individual member of the joint venture. The FAA will evaluate the Past Performance presented by the partners |
to the joint venture in the aggregate.
| 35 | Joint Venture | Joint Venture | If a JV currently does not have a GWAC or IDIQ contract, can each Prime provide its own GWAC pricing? | The pricing sheet must be from the entity that is responding to the SIR. Past performance submissionns are allowed for individual members of a JV, not pricing. | |||
| 36 | LOA's | LOA's | Are Letters of Authorization to a JV member acceptable or does the LOA need to reference the JV? | Yes, LOA's from a JV member are acceptable | |||
| 37 | Section G.4.3 | Section G.4.3 | Section G.4.3 if new or updated versions of existing product cannot be included in the Technical refresh does that only mean that we should not use CLIN 4 to add them? | Correct, in practice the new or replacement for a current Item does not need a new CLIN. | |||
| 38 | Section G.4.3 | Section G.4.3 | Section G.4.3 how should new versions of existng hardware projects be added? | New versions will be added using the process outlined in Section G.4.3, the Government will provide the CLIN and items to be quoted in the RFQ process. | |||
| 39 | Attachment 2B | Attachment 2B | If a part is not on another GWAC, does it need to be added to that contract before the SAVES submission in order to be referenced on Attachment 2B? | No, just need to provide the quote for the items in Attachment 2B | |||
| 40 | Amendment 2: L.10.1, Attachment 4; Q&A #224 response | L.10.1: Table, Volume II row; Attachment 4 page 2, end of Section E; Q&A #224 response | Amendment 2, response to Q224 states: "See amended SIR Section L.10.1 Proposal Volumes and Page Limits and SIR Section L.11.2.2.1 Past Performance Information. There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, which is inclusive of the template sections A-E, as well as the narrative, sections F-G, to be completed on the provided template, and to be submitted as one template per past performance example." SIR Sections L.10.1 table states "Past Performance Narratives must not exceed 3 pages per example." Attachment 4 states: "The narrative for F–G below should not exceed three (3) pages per example." | Can the government update SIR Section L.10.1 and Attachment 4 to reflect its response to Q224? | Please update SIR Section L.10.1 and Attachment 4 to reflect the 4-page limit as shown in the response to Q224: "There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example... " | See Amendment for upated Attachment 4. The new limit is 5 pages in total. | |
| 41 | Amendment 2: L.11.2.2.2 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES (ATTACHMENT 5) | L.11.2.2.2 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES (ATTACHMENT 5) | "...by the deadline for proposal submissions." | Given that Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire, was updated and redistributed with Amendment 2, please confirm that completed questionnaires will be accepted after the proposal due date should the government shutdown disrupt roles and responsibilities of customer points of contact previously in place to complete them. | Please confirm that completed Attachment 5 questionnaires will be accepted after the proposal due date should the government shutdown disrupt roles and responsibilities of government customer points of contact identified to complete them. | See Amendment for most recent closing date. Questionnaires are due by the closing date. | |
| 42 | Amendment 2, M.3.2.A, and Q132 | Amendment 2, M.3.2.A), and Q132 | |||||
| M.3.2.A) states "Past Performance will be evaluated in accordance with AMS Guidance T.3.2.2.3.A.9(d) and as described below." Response to Q132 states: "To ensure full compliance, we recommend Offerors review the guidance directly through the FAA's official website at https://fast.faa.gov/" | Amendment 2 Q&A response to Q132 suggests the FAA's official website provide the guidance in question; however, there is no clear definition of AMS Guidance T.3.2.2.3.A.9(d) on the website. Will the government please provide the exact wording for this guidance so offerors can ensure compliance? | Please provide the exact wording for the definition of AMS Guidance T.3.2.2.3.A.9(d) so that offerors can ensure compliance. | The current wording as per AMS Guidance T.3.2.2.3.A.9(d): Past Performance Evaluations. The past performance evaluators assess the performance risk associated with each proposal. The final assessment describes the degree of confidence in the offeror’s likelihood of successful contract performance based on that offeror’s demonstrated record of performance under similar contracts. (See AMS Procurement Guidance T3.2.2.3.B.2 for guidance on evaluating past performance.) For real property acquisitions, past performance will be considered as part of vendor responsibility determination. (See AMS Procurement Guidance T3.2.2.7)... Please note that while this is the latest wording available, it is recommended verifying this information directly on the FAA's FAST website at https://fast.faa.gov/ to ensure compliance with any recent updates or changes. | ||||
| 43 | Attachment 2B | Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet | Escalation Rate | FAA is requesting offeror's to provide 10 years of pricing with escalation rates. OEM's product lifecycles are typically only 1 - 3 years before products become obsolete, and new differentiated products are released. OEM's will not guarantee pricing, nor availability for a 10 year period. Without pricing from the OEM's, it is impossible to give reasonable and representative price estimates out that many years. | Recommend removing the escalation rate and evaluating Year 1 of the Price Model Evaluation Worksheet. | The Government does not intend to modify this requirement. Per L.11.2.3 For evaluation purposes, the worksheet represents a 10-year period, consisting of a 5-year base period and a 5-year option period of identified hardware and software items. | |
| 44 | Attachment 2B | Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet | Escalation Rate | FAA is requesting offeror's to provide 10 years of pricing with escalation rates. Typically, escalation rates are used in services based contracts where the hourly rate can be tied closely to the pace of wage inflation and the category of work is not likely to change over time. OEM's do not provide expected escalation rates for the cost of their products, nor their product categories. Typical product lifecycles are 1 - 3 years, after which OEM's release new products with differentiated features and funtions. Any escalation rates out over a 10 year period for OEM products will not be reasonable nor representative of the prices available in those future periods. | Recommend removing the escalation rate and evaluating Year 1 of the Price Model Evaluation Worksheet. | The Government does not intend to modify this requirement. Per L.11.2.3 For evaluation purposes, the worksheet represents a 10-year period, consisting of a 5-year base period and a 5-year option period of identified hardware and software items. | |
| 45 | Attachment 2B | Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet | "… or current OEM offering for similarly configured system upgrades … " | Within the Price Model Evaluation Worksheet, FAA states " …. Or current OEM offering for similarly configured system upgrades … ". By requesting offerors to bid on replacement models, this leaves pricing open for interpretation and does not provide oversight for offerors' to meet FAA's actual requirements. | Recommend FAA clearly state the models and configurations they plan on purchasing, and require all offerors to bid on the models provided within the Price Model Evaluation Worksheet. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. The OEM has the right and expectation to change their products. The FAA requirements are provided in the description of the requested item. | |
| 46 | Attachment 2B | Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet | Total Evaluated Price | Given the rapid pace of technology evolution and potential product obsolescence, would FAA consider evaluating proposals based solely on Year 1 for Total Evaluated Price, rather than across the full ten-year period? Changing the evaluation to Year 1, rather tha all ten years, will help the FAA evaluation by receiving realistic quotes. Most product lifecycles do not go 10 years due to obsolescence , discontinuation or EOL. Most OEMs do not provide product quotes that far out, leaving the pricing for years 5 - 10 up to an offeror's best guess. | Recommend evaluating the Total Evaluated Price of Year 1, as opposed to the entirety of the ten year contract. | The Government does not intend to modify this requirement. Per L.11.2.3 For evaluation purposes, the worksheet represents a 10-year period, consisting of a 5-year base period and a 5-year option period of identified hardware and software items. | |
| 47 | B.3 | B.3 Pricing Term, paragraph 1 | The contractor must provide all documentation necessary at the | ||||
| ordering level for the Government to verify their proposed pricing. | Could the Government please specify what documentation will be considered sufficient to verify proposed pricing at the ordering level? | Any identifying information that specifies the contract vehicle where the price may be referenced | |||||
| 48 | Section L; Section M | L.11.2.2.2; M.3.2 | Past Performance Questionnaires | Will FAA please confirm that if Past Performance Questionnaires have already been received by FAA then they do not need to be resubmitted? | We ask that the government accept Past Performance Questionnaires that have already been completed and submitted. | Yes, Agree to accept PPQ that were already submitted to the FAA before Amendment 0002. | |
| 49 | Section G | G.4 | "In the event the requirement is estimated (based on the Government’s internal estimate) to be under $250,000.00, the | ||||
| competition for the requirement will be limited to the small business contract holders." | In order to facilitate Government small business goals, will the Government reserve the right to restrict delivery order competition to small business awardees even if the estimated value is over $250,000? | Government reserves the right to restrict competition to small business awardees regardless of estimated order value. | Per G.4 In the event the requirement is estimated (based on the Government’s internal estimate) to be $250,000.00 and above, the delivery order will be competed amongst all contract holders. The Government will evaluate quotes received and will award to the lowest price contract holder that meets the requirement. | ||||
| 50 | L.11.2.3 VOLUME III, COST/PRICE | L.11.2.3 | The Government does not accept any adjustments or alternate pricing to the CLINs. | Please consider removing or making optional the Oracle and Proofpoint lines on this BOM at this stage of the procurement. As it stands, these companies are currently choosing who they will supply pricing to, which dictates who can submit a compliant bid,thus limiting competition and moving the lever of competition into the control of these companies instead of competition being open and fair. | Making these two OEMs optional allows a higher degree of competition for the rest of the RFP and gives the lever of competiton back to the collective industry. If Oracle wants to sell product to the FAA, they will need to work with industry, not dictate who can get access to this contract. | The Government will not change this requirement. | |
| 51 | Section L | L.11.2.3 | if they become aware of any OEM’s that have been acquired and/or items that have reached end of life or becoming obsolete | The government has eliminated this verbiage from the SIR, but still included products that have gone EOL as of 9/30/25 or will go EOL soon. For example, the HP Elite x360 830 13in G11 went EOL 9/30/25. Will the government accept replacement models for EOL items? | Government will accept replacement models when applicable. | See Amendment for Section L.11.2.3. Please quote based on the OEM simlarly configured product that meets the Governments standard as reflected in the Attachments 2A and 2B. | |
| 52 | Attachment 3 | HPE | The OEM still states "HPE" on "Attachment 3 - OEM Authorization Relationship". Can this please be updated? These cells are locked so we are unable to change them | Updating "HPE" to "HPI" to reflect the changes to the SIR. | See Amendment for updated Attachment 3. | ||
| 53 | OEM | Attachment 3 references "HPE" as an OEM. Will the Government be issuing an updated Attachment 3? Or is it acceptable for the Offeror to replace HPE with HPI, per Amendment 0002 updated language/references to HPI from HPE? | Issue updated Attachment 3 with HPI instead of HPE. |
Or
| Allow offerors to update to HPI in the existing template as part of their proposal response. | See Amendment for updated Attachment 3. | |||
| 54 | 1. Is it the intention of the pricing model worksheet to create an award/evaluation priority based on OEMs through the variances in the product quantities listed within the worksheet? | No, the pricing model worksheet is an example list of FAA purchased items that pricing will be evaluated in total. See instructions and Assumptions on page one (1) of Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet or |
Attachment 2B – Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet
| 55 | 1. Is it the government's intent to give competitive preference to those Offeror's who currently hold the highest-level partnership status with and receive the greatest discounts from software OEMs on licenses / subscriptions versus those Offerors who have equally high status and low pricing from hardware OEMs (i.e., 60,000 software licenses versus 500 laptops)? | The Government will not provide a specific response to this question. | |||||
| 56 | Section L | L.11.2.2 Factor 2 | See amended SIR. Each should be submitted on its own sheet. The SIR has been amended in order to clarify and revise the page limitation submission requirements for Attachment 4, Past Performance Information Sheet. See amended SIR Section L.10.1 Proposal Volumes and Page Limits and SIR Section L.11.2.2.1 Past Performance Information. There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, which is inclusive of the template sections A-E, as well as the narrative, sections F-G, to be completed on the provided template, and to be submitted as one template per past performance example. | Question 224 of the QA states a 4 page limit for past performance examples. Sections A-E on Attachment 4 take up 2 pages, and there is a maximum 3 pages for sections F-G. Is the page limit 4 or 5 pages. | Please clarify Page limit for Attachment 4 | See Amendment for upated Attachment 4. The new limit is 5 pages in total. | |
| 57 | Section M | M.3.4 | The evaluation model is flawed, since it may award a large business who's offer may not be as competitive as a small business offerer that was not selected for award in the small business evaluation. | Carry forward non-awarded, technically acceptable small business offers to compete in the unrestricted evaluation. | The Government does not intend to modify this requirement. | ||
| 58 | Section L | L.11.2.1 paragraph (b) | "The Offeror must provide their level of OEM authorization relationship between the Offeror and the following | ||||
| Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), who have been and/or are currently high volume/spend within DOT/FAA" | How many product lines does the offeror need to be authorized for? | In accordance with Section L.11.2.1b " including the ability to supply the Government with the full breadth and depth of that OEM’s technology" | |||||
| 59 | SIR 697DCK-25-R-00302 20250807 | ||||||
| Section L | L.11.2.3 VOLUME III, COST/PRICE | Attachment 2A - Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet 20250925 | |||||
| The solicitation states that for technical acceptability, small businesses must demonstrate at least five (5) OEM authorized reseller agreements using Attachment 3. However, the pricing instructions (Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet) state that failure to provide pricing for all items will result in removal from consideration. | Can the Government please clarify whether proposals that demonstrate five (5) authorized reseller agreements but cannot provide complete pricing for all twelve (12) OEMs will still be evaluated for award? | No. All items in Attachment 2A and 2B must be priced. Per Section M.3.4 Failure to propose on all items per Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet or |
Attachment 2B – Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet, will result in an Offeror’s proposal being removed from further consideration for award.
| 60 | SIR 697DCK-25-R-00302 20250807 | ||||
| Section L | L.11.2.3 VOLUME III, COST/PRICE | Attachment 2A - Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet 20250925 | If full pricing for all OEMs is required, can the Government confirm whether it intends to provide a mechanism for small businesses to submit “No Bid” entries (e.g., N/A or Not Authorized) for OEMs where they do not have an agreement? | Alternatively, will the Government consider revising the evaluation criteria to align the technical requirement (five OEM agreements) with the pricing requirement, so that offerors are only required to submit pricing for those OEMs with whom they have an authorized reseller agreement? | No |
| 61 | SIR 697DCK-25-R-00302 20250807 | ||||
| Section B | B.3 Pricing Terms | The Government intends to compete future requirements at the delivery order level; however, Offerors are advised that the FAA reserves the right to utilize any of the prices as proposed on the Price Model Evaluation Attachment 2A or Attachment 2B spreadsheet within the first 6 months of the Contract award per Section G.4.1, Section L.11.2.3, and Section M.3.4, and therefore, Offerors must ensure the proposed pricing is reasonable and balanced. | Since this procurement will be awarded on a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) basis, can the Government clarify how it intends to evaluate proposals that otherwise meet the technical threshold but cannot obtain OEM pricing for all required line items? | All items in Attachment 2A and 2B must be priced. Per Section M.3.4 Failure to propose on all items per Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet or Attachment 2B – Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet, will result in an Offeror’s proposal being emoved from further consideration for award. | |
| 62 | SIR 697DCK-25-R-00302 20250807 | ||||
| Section L | L.11.2.3 VOLUME III, COST/PRICE | In the Technical Evaluation section, the requirement states: |
“For Small Business, the completed Attachment 3 must demonstrate at least five (5) OEM authorized reseller relationships with the OEMs as indicated on the template.”
In the Pricing section, the requirement states:
| “Failure to propose on all items listed in Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet or Attachment 2B – Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet will result in the Offeror’s proposal being removed from further consideration for award.” | However, Attachment 2A includes 13 OEMs. For small businesses, it is often not feasible to hold authorized reseller status for all 13 OEMs, and therefore it is not possible to obtain pricing for every OEM product listed. | ||||||
| Given this challenge, would the Government consider removing the requirement for small businesses to provide pricing for all items in Attachment 2A, or alternatively allow small businesses to propose pricing only for the OEMs with which they have authorized reseller agreements? | No, all items in Attachment 2A and 2B must be priced.Per Section M.3.4 Failure to propose on all items per Attachment 2A – Small Business Price Model Evaluation Worksheet or Attachment 2B – Unrestricted Price Model Evaluation Worksheet, will result in an Offeror’s proposal being emoved from further consideration for award. | ||||||
| 63 | SIR L.2.2.1 and Amendment 2 Q&A | Questions and Answers 224 and 50 and SIR L.10.1 | A 224: See amended SIR. Each should be submitted on its own sheet. The SIR has been amended in order to clarify and revise the page limitation submission requirements for Attachment 4, Past Performance Information Sheet. See amended SIR Section L.10.1 Proposal Volumes and Page Limits and SIR Section L.11.2.2.1 Past Performance Information. There is a 4-page limit for each past performance example, which is inclusive of the template sections A-E, as well as the narrative, sections F-G, to be completed on the provided template, and to be submitted as one template per past performance example. A50: Confirmed, also see answer to Q35: The SIR has been amended in order to clarify and revise the page limitation submission requirements for Attachment 4, Past Performance Information Sheet. L.10.1: Past Performance Narratives must not exceed 3 pages per example. | In the Q&A, question #224 notes that our Past Performance forms should be no more than 4 pages total, inclusive of all information A-G. However, question #50 and the references within the SIR still only note that Attachment 4 has a page restriction of 3 pages for questions F and G. As questions A-D in the Attachment 4 template take more than one page, this direction further limits our answers to questions F and G to 2.5 pages. Could you please clarify, whether the government will accept the PP length of 4.5 pages, which accounts for the 3 pages limit for questions F and G? | Allow 3 pages for questions F & G. | See Amendment for upated Attachment 4. The new limit is 5 pages in total. | |
| 64 | SIR L.11.2.2.2 | PPQ submissions | As the extension was only released the day before the due date for the proposal, and our PPQs had already been received by the FAA at that time, is it acceptable to utilize those PPQs? | Allow PPQs previously submitted to be used. | Yes, allowed |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .