2023.07.13 - ATEPS II Draft SIR - Vendor Q+As.pdf

# Section SIR Section

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

1 C Statement of Work Quality Control/Quality Assurance C.2.10.1 10 “A finalized transition plan is required within fifteen (15) business days after award.”

The last sentence references the transition plan submission. Is this a misplaced sentence? (C.2.3)

The FAA will make the adjustment in the final SIR.

2 C Statement of Work Program Management Support Costs

C.2.2.2 5

The Draft SIR states, “PM Costs are allocated among all TOs issued under this contract. Contractors may elect to recover PM Costs through an acceptable accounting practice as defined in the Contractor’s accounting policies and procedures.” Given the size, scope and complexity of ATEPS II, recommend that FAA consider awarding a program management task order for the overall management of ATEPS II consistent with FAA practices under other IDIQs. If FAA accepts this recommendation, recommend that FAA add a requirement in the Management Volume for the Offeror to describe their program management organization (PMO).

No changes will be made to the current task order structure.

3 C Statement of Work Transition In Plan C.2.3.1 6

The Transition In Plan does not include requirements for knowledge transfer or an organizational change management (OCM) component. Knowledge transfer and OCM will be important to smooth transition. OCM is particularly important since team members will need to adapt to the new contract.

Recommend FAA consider adding OCM and knowledge transfer to the requirement for the Transition In Plan.

Please see Section C.2.3.1 for guidance on what should be included in the Transition In Plan. The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

4 C Statement of Work Transition Out Plan C.2.3.2 6

The Transition Out Plan does not include requirements for knowledge transfer or an OCM component.

Again, knowledge transfer and OCM will be important to smooth transition, and team members will need to adapt to the changes.

Recommend FAA consider adding OCM and knowledge transfer to the requirement for Transition Out Plan.

Please see Section C.2.3.2 for guidance on what should be included in the Transition Out plan. The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

5 C Statement of Work Functional Task Areas C.4 13 of 32 Could this small business set aside be expanded to also include Women Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) versus only being available to Small Disadvantage Businesses (SDB)? Expanding this set aside ensures the FAA can select the best services.

The FAA does not intend to revise the SDB Set Aside to include

WOSB.

The FAA is implementing a tiered evaluation approach for the SDB functional task areas if there is not a qualified SDB. This impacts Small and SDB only. It is the only anticipated change to the ATEPS II acquisition strategy.

6 C Statement of Work Program Management Support C.4.1 13

The Program Management Support functional task area describes the activities required to support and advance FAA programs. The second paragraph introduces an alphabetical list of a wide range of FAA program management activities. The first sentence of the second paragraph states, “The Contractor must establish and maintain a program management organization to manage all Contractor resources, personnel, subcontractors, and activities involved in the performance of the Contract.” This sentence appears to be misplaced and would better fit in Section C.2.2, Contract Program Management. Recommend FAA consider moving the first sentence of the second paragraph from Section C.4.1 to Section C.2.2.

The FAA will make the adjustment in the final SIR as appropriate.

7 C Statement of Work Section C C.4.1.a,b, f, C.4.2 14 Developing schedules, EVMSs, monitoring earned value, and supporting financial and acquisition management are areas of functionality that could be allocated to small businesses.

The FAA will NOT adjust this requirement. The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

8 C Statement of Work Functional Task Areas C.4 Will the FAA consider considering small businesses as well for individual functional task areas that are currently designated for unrestricted competition or small disadvantaged businesses set aside?

The FAA will NOT adjust the requirements in the final SIR.

9 C Statement of Work Program Management Support C.4.1.r, .z 15 Items r. and z. appear to be duplicates – is this correct? The FAA will make the adjustment in the final SIR.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

10 C Statement of Work Program Management Support C.4.1.r, .z 15 These two items appear to be duplicated. Both appear to be development of KSN workflows. The FAA will make the adjustment in the final SIR.

11 C Statement of Work Program Management Support C.4.1.r, y, z 15 Developing and maintaining KSN document repositories and workflows and advanced features in KSN / SharePoint represents an area that could easily be allocated to small business.

The FAA will NOT adjust this requirement. These Functional Task Areas will remain as written.

12 C Statement of Work Training Assistance Support C.4.16 26 Training Assistance using ADDIE is an area that could easily be allocated to small business. The FAA will NOT adjust the requirements in the final SIR.

13 C Statement of Work Financial and Acquisition Management

C.4.2 16 Can you elaborate on the reasons for putting Earned Value Management (SOW C.4.2.d) under Unrestricted category C.4.2 Financial and Acquisition Management? Would you consider moving it to C.4.23 Business Management Support for SDBs?

The FAA will NOT adjust the final SIR.

14 C Statement of Work Program Management Support and Strategic Plannign Support

C.4.21, C.4.1

Strategic Planning, which is allocated to small business, includes development of As-Is, To-Be, and Alternatives analysis. Program Management Support also includes business process re-engineering support. Please clarify or allocate all business process re-engineering to small business.

The FAA will NOT adjust the final SIR. This requirement is needed in multiple functional task areas.

15 C Statement of Work Information System Security Support

C.4.8 21 The Draft SIR requirement does not include any mention of zero trust architecture.

Recommend that FAA consider including zero trust architecture in this requirement since many FAA organizations and the FAA network are working towards achieving this goal.

The FAA will NOT adjust the requirements in the final SIR.

16 J J-1 Attachment J-1 RESERVED Attachment J-1

Attachment J-1 currently states, “Personnel in telework status are considered as performing at “Government sites”.

a. If personnel in telework status are considered to be at government site, will the Government provide laptops to those individuals to perform their work?

b. To ensure that offerors are consistent in their bid approach, will the government consider modifying J-1 (a) and L.10.5.2 (d)(6) to explicitly state that Contractor Site rates should assume full-time at Contractor Site facility and exclude full- time telework at private residences. Additional clarification would reinforce the direction provided in Attachment J-1 under the header “Government vs Contractor Site” which states “Personnel in telework status are considered as performing at Government Site”

Laptops will be provided on a case-by-case basis. Personnel in telework status are considered as performing at government site, and their rates will be negotiated at the task order level after the contract award.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

17 J J-1 Attachment J-1 RESERVED Attachment J-1

Attachment J-1, Information Tab, Time and Material (T&M) TOs paragraph (a) reads, “Unless otherwise specified in the TO, the Contractor may deliver ninety percent (90%) to one hundred and ten percent (110%) of the hours specified for each labor category without a formal modification as long as the Contractor does not exceed the obligated funding for the TO. For instances where the contractor exceeds 100% of the hours, the contractor must submit an Excess Labor Hours report, see Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL). This report identifies the labor category for which hours were exceeded, the number of hours exceeded, and the rationale for the excess.” The requirement then goes on to further clarify under paragraph (d), “The Contractor must perform the work ordered in the TO and must not re-allocate hours between labor categories unless authorized by the CO by TO modification.”

We recommend the Government revise Attachment J-1, Information Tab, Time and Material (T&M) TOs Section to remove the requirement for Contractors to manage within the proposed hours/cost by labor category and require an administrative modification prior to incurring additional hours/cost against a particular labor category. Recommend the Government impose a requirement that Contractors manage to the total Not to Exceed (NTE) ceiling at the individual task order level. This approach will afford the Government and Contractor the flexibility to shift priorities in execution while still managing to the total NTE ceiling for the task order thus protecting the Government’s interests.

The FAA will make the adjustment in the final SIR as appropriate.

18 J J-10 Labor Categories (LCAT) and Skills Level Descriptions

Attachment J-10

As provided in Attachment J-10, aside from the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Specialist, all Level I LCATs have a minimum of 2, 5 or 6 years of experience with no LCAT levels available for offerors to provide interns or early career professionals. To assist the government with providing a diverse workforce capable of fulfilling all requirements of delivery, would the Government please consider adding another level or adjust the minimum requirements of the existing levels to accommodate additional staffing solutions, such as changing the Level 1 experience requirement to 0-5 years for those LCATs where the experience requirement is currently 2-5 or 1-4 years?

The FAA will make the adjustment in final SIR to revise LCATs as appropriate.

19 J J-2 Examples of ATEPS II Programs Attachment J-2 Attachment J.2 is a combination of current programs, cancelled/deferred programs, organizations, efforts, and groupings thereof. Does the ATEPS program office intend to revise this list to just current and planned programs, or will it remain as a combination of these disparate things?

Attachment J.2 contains examples of supported programs and is not intended to be an all-inclusive list.

20 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Proposal Volume Requirements L.10

The Section L requirements appear to be written primarily for the unrestricted proposal for Tasks 1 to 20 (e.g., 45-page limit in major volumes, bid-model (Attachment L-2) with 400 to 500 FTE).

(1) Recommend the FAA clarify, if necessary, any differences that are anticipated in the proposal requirements for small business and small disadvantaged business offerors bidding on the restricted contracts with one or two SOW functional task areas (in Tasks 21-25) compared to the unrestricted proposals.

(2) In numerous locations throughout Section L and M there are statements like “demonstrate their ability to support the Functional Task Areas identified in Section C.4” or “in relation to the functional task requirements of the SOW (i.e., Section C.4).” These statements appear without reference to the unrestricted contract (Tasks 1 to 20) or one of the restricted contracts (Tasks 21 to 25, as appropriate).

Please clarify that the references to the SOW in the Section L requirements are limited to the SOW tasks included in the contract on which the Offeror is bidding (e.g., in our case, the unrestricted contract, Tasks 1-20).

Agree. The FAA intends to revise the final SIR to clarify that the references to the SOW in Section L requirements are limited to the SOW tasks included in the contract on which the Offeror is bidding as a Prime vendor.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

21 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1;

Factor 1

L.10.1 19 Factor 1 only addresses Task Areas 1 through 20, which are designated for the unrestricted proposals.

Is Factor 1 applicable in any way to the functional Task Areas designated for set- aside? If so, what are the applicable instructions to offerors in this regard?

The Go/No-Go factor is applicable to Unrestricted business proposals only.

22 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 19 Please confirm that Factor 1 is only applicable to unrestricted offerors?

Correct. The Go/No-Go factor is applicable to Unrestricted business proposals only.

23 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach Factor 1 L.10.1 19

The 25 Functional Areas described in Section C.4 are “segmented” with areas 1-20 allocated to Unrestricted Large and 21-25 allocated separately across the four set-aside contracts. Section L.10.1, Technical Approach, only requires Factor 1 for the first 20 Unrestricted Large Functional Areas, which will support a “GO/NO-GO” decision by the Government. Will the FAA please verify that small business set-aside bidders are not required to provide Factor 1?

Correct. The Go/No-Go factor is applicable to Unrestricted business proposals only.

24 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach Factor 1 L.10.1 19

The 25 Functional Areas described in Section C.4 are “segmented” with areas 1-20 allocated to Unrestricted Large and 21-25 allocated separately across the four set-aside contracts. Section L.10.1, Technical Approach, only seems to require Factor 1 for the first 20 Unrestricted Large Functional Areas, which will support a “GO-NOGO” decision by the Government. If small business set-aside bidders are not providing Factor 1 in the Technical Approach, will there be a GO-NOGO decision for those contracts, and if so, what will be its basis? Related, is there other information SBSA Offerors should include for Factor 1 or is that section simply N/A in the Technical Volume?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity. The Go/No-Go factor is not applicable (N/A) to SBSA.

25 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 19

The first sentence in Section L.10.1 says Offerors must describe their “technical approach to meeting the Government’s requirements.” However, none of the Section L Factors that follow explicitly address technical approach(es). Please clarify if offerors are required to explicitly address technical approach(es) beyond responding to the requirements in the three Factors that follow (i.e., SOW GO/NO GO, Core Capabilities, and Mission Alignment) and, if so, please specify how offerors are to describe their technical approach.

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

26 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 19

The first sentence of this section says offerors must describe their “technical approach to meeting the Government’s requirements.” However, none of the Section L Factors explicitly address technical approach(es): Factor 1 focuses on Size, Scope and Complexity of previous projects; Factor 2 on experience with respect to the Core Capabilities; and Factor 3 on the offeror’s Team, its abilities, knowledge and understanding.

Request the Government clarify whether and how offerors should explicitly address Technical Approach(es), and, if it is to be addressed, how it will be evaluated in Section M.

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

27 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach Factor 2 L.10.1 19

“Offeror must describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas, described in Section C.3. The Offeror must provide a narrative detailing their experience in each Core Capability.” With the set-aside contracts explicitly including only one or two Functional Areas, please clarify that set-aside Offerors are not expected to provide such a narrative across all 26 Core Capabilities?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

28 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach Factor 3 L.10.1 19

“Offerors must provide an executive summary of the Offeror’s proposed Team and include a matrix with supporting narrative that summarizes the Team’s ability to support the complete list of ATEPS II Core Capabilities.” With the set-aside contracts explicitly including only one or two Functional Areas, please clarify that set-aside Offerors are not expected to provide such a summary/matrix across all 26 Core Capabilities?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

29 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach Factor 1 L.10.1 19 Confirm Factor 1 should only be submitted for unrestricted tasks 1-20. A Small business does not need to respond to Factor 1?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity. The Go/No-Go factor is only applicable to the unrestricted portion.

30 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1;

Factor 2

L.10.1 20

We recommend that the Government assess the applicability of the Core Capabilities to each of the Task Areas designated for set-aside. Some Core Capabilities seem inappropriate to be applied to particular Task Areas. For example, Core Capability #12 – Integrated Laboratories does not seem relevant to Task Are #25 – Communications Support. We suggest including a table that indicates applicability of each Core Capability to each Task Area.

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

31 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 – Factor 2

L.10.1 20

While Section L.10.1 Factor (2) states "Offeror must describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas, described in Section C.3. The Offeror must provide a narrative detailing their experience for each Core Capability." section M.9.1.(b)substantially increases the complexity of the evaluation by requiring: The Government will evaluate "The effectiveness and efficiency to which the Offeror demonstrates their ability to apply these capabilities to the ATEPS II scope of work efforts required under Section C.4". There are 26 core capabilities and at least 20 unique efforts in C.4. To comprehensively address the evaluation criteria as provided, Offerors will need to address 26x20=520 items. Some of these combinations may not apply, which will be a judgement call by the offerors. Regardless, the combinatorics of the evaluation was made significantly greater with the wording of Section M.

Recommend that the second bullet in M.9.1.(b) be removed or restricted to a smaller/limited number of areas, out of the 520, the government views as most critical to the success of ATEPS II.

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

32 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 20 Will SBs and SDBs be required to address each Core Capability in C3 as currently stated in Factor 2? The majority of the core capabilities only apply to C4.1-4.20. Can the FAA specify desired Core Capabilities for C4.21-4.22, 4.23, 4.24, and 4.25?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

33 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 20 Will SBs and SDBs be required to provide a team that supports the “complete list of ATEPS II Core Capabilities” as stated in Factor 3?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

34 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 – Factor 3

L.10.1 20

"Technical Approach - Factor 3 states, “The Offeror must describe the team’s knowledge and understanding of the FAA supported programs identified in Attachment J-2…” As the title indicates, Attachment J-2 includes Examples of Programs ATEPS II Offerors May Support. The J-2 doesn’t include E-IDS, FMDS, TBO Integration, and TBFM for example. Will the government consider allowing an offeror to include or use other example programs that are part of a listed FAA organizations supported by this contract, but not listed in J-2?

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

Attachment J.2 contains examples of supported programs and is not intended to be an all-inclusive list.

35 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 – Factors 1, 2 and 3

L.10.1 19-20

Factor 2 states, “Offeror must describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas, described in Section C.3. The Offeror must provide a narrative detailing their experience for each Core Capability.” Factor 3 states, “Offerors must provide an executive summary of the Offeror’s proposed Team and include a matrix with supporting narrative that summarizes the Team’s ability to support the complete list of ATEPS II Core Capabilities.” Thus, following the instructions in L.10.1 will result in duplicating content for Factors 2 and 3.

The same is true for Factors1 and 3. Factor 1 states, “Offerors must submit relevant past experience through a single project that encompasses all types of experience in managing or performing Section C functional task areas …” Factor 3 states, “…demonstrate their ability to support the Functional Task Areas, identified in Section C.4… The proposal must detail the Offeror’s breadth and depth of NAS-relevant experience in relation to the functional task requirements of the SOW (i.e., Section C.4).”

Thus, following the instructions in L.10.1 will resulting in duplicating content for Factors 1 and 3.

We recommend those elements within Technical Approach – Factor 3 that are duplicative of elements in Factors 1 and 2 be combined or removed. This will provide the government with the information they seek and simplify their evaluation of proposals by avoiding duplication.

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

36 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1;

Staffing Approach – Volume 2

L.10.1 & L.10.2 20 - 21 How many resumes and key resumes will be required for the Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business proposals? The maximum of 25 seems to be relevant only to the full & open bid.

Twenty-five represents the total maximum number of allowable resumes. It is not representative of the total number of key personnel nor is it the minimum number of required resumes. The content of the proposal, including the number of resumes, is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

The list of FAA-identified Key Personnel will be included in Section H.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

37 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1;

Staffing Approach –

L.10.1 & L.10.2 20 & 21

Factor 2 under Volume 1 requires offerors to, “describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas, described in Section C.3. The Offeror must provide a narrative detailing their experience for each Core Capability.”

Factor 4 under Volume 2 requires offerors to, “provide a narrative detailing the team’s technical knowledge for each core capability listed in Section C.3.

For each core capability, the proposal must detail the team’s breadth and depth of NAS-relevant experience in relation to the specific functional task areas of the SOW (i.e., Section C.4) under which the Offeror is proposing.”

These requirements request nearly identical information.

Is it the intent of the Government for offerors to provide duplicated information in both Volume 1 and Volume 2? If not, will the Government please clarify how the information required in Volume 2, Factor 4 is different than the response required under Volume 1, Factor 2?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

38 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Volume 1 L.10.1 Factor 2 – Core Capabilities

L.10.1 Technical Approach – Volume 1 must describe the Offeror's technical approach to meeting the Government's requirements. Volume 1 must address Factors 1, 2, and 3 as defined below. Offerors must identify risks and benefits throughout their proposal responses. The Offeror must identify areas of risk associated with the described approaches, and plans, and must propose mitigation strategies.

The Offeror must demonstrate its technical understanding of, capabilities and expertise in, and experience to effectively and efficiently perform the ATEPS II requirements.

Is it the Government's intention that offerors identify the risks and benefits when providing a narrative detailing their experience for each core capability per Factor 2 – Core Capabilities?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

39 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L, C.3, and Section M

L.10.1 Factor 2 – Core Capabilities C.3 Core Capabilities M.9.1 (b) Factor 2

– Core Capabilities

L.10.1 Breadth refers to the extent that the prime Offeror or members of its team exhibit knowledge or experience with the range of Core Capabilities.

Depth refers to the amount of knowledge or experiences the Offeror or members of its team exhibit within an individual Core Capability area.

M.9.1.1, (b) Factor 2 – Core Capabilities.

• The degree to which the Offeror demonstrates their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPSII Core Capabilities and their detailed sub-elements, as described in Section C.3.

• The effectiveness and efficiency to which the Offeror demonstrates their ability to apply these capabilities to the ATEPS II scope of work efforts required under Section C.4.

Is it the Government's intent to evaluate a small disadvantaged business (SDB) on the range (e.g., 1 -

26) of Core Capabilities or the amount of knowledge and experience within an individual Core Capability area that aligns with the functional task area they are bidding on?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

40 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L, C.3, and Section M

L.10.1 Factor 2 – Core Capabilities C.3 Core Capabilities M.9.1 (b) Factor 2

– Core Capabilities

L.10.1 Offeror must describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas, described in Section C.3. The Offeror must provide a narrative detailing their experience for each Core Capability.

M.9.1.1, (b) Factor 2 – Core Capabilities.

• The degree to which the Offeror demonstrates their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capabilities and their detailed sub-elements, as described in Section C.3.

• The effectiveness and efficiency to which the Offeror demonstrates their ability to apply these capabilities to the ATEPS II scope of work efforts required under Section C.4.

Is it the Government's intent that a small disadvantaged business (SDB) that is restricted to responding to one functional task area (e.g., communications support) of the SOW will demonstrate their breadth and depth of knowledge in a range (e.g., 1 -26) of ATEPS II Core Capabilities and their detailed sub-elements or should offerors align their response to the functional task area they are bidding (e.g., 6.Communications: Technical knowledge and experience in the ground, air, and satellite-based communication systems, standards, policies, and procedures)?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

41 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L, C.3, and Section M

L.10.1 Factor 2 – Core Capabilities C.3 Core Capabilities M.9.1 (b) Factor 2

– Core Capabilities L.10.2 Factor 4 – Technical Experience

L.10.1 Breadth refers to the extent that the prime Offeror or members of its team exhibit knowledge or experience with the range of Core Capabilities.

Depth refers to the amount of knowledge or experiences the Offeror or members of its team exhibit within an individual Core Capability area.

M.9.1.1, (b) Factor 2 – Core Capabilities.

• The degree to which the Offeror demonstrates their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capabilities and their detailed sub-elements, as described in Section C.3.

• The effectiveness and efficiency to which the Offeror demonstrates their ability to apply these capabilities to the ATEPS II scope of work efforts required under Section C.4.

Factor 4 – Technical Experience Offeror must provide a narrative detailing the team's technical knowledge for each core capability listed in Section C.3.

For each core capability, the proposal must detail the team's breadth and depth of NAS-relevant experience in relation to the specific functional task areas of the SOW (i.e., Section C.4) under which the Offeror is proposing.

Is it the Government's intention for offerors to provide a narrative detailing the Team's technical knowledge for each core capability listed in Section C.3 in Technical Approach – Volume 1, Factor 2 – Core Capabilities and Staffing Approach – Volume 2, Factor 4 – Technical Experience?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

42 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L L.10.1 Factor 3 – Mission Alignment

Factor 3 – Mission Alignment:

Offerors must provide an executive summary of the Offeror's proposed Team and include a matrix with a supporting narrative that summarizes the Team's ability to support the complete list of ATEPS II Core Capabilities.

Is it the Government's intention to have offerors provide an executive summary of the Offeror's proposed Team and include a matrix with a supporting narrative that summarizes the Team's ability to support the complete list of ATEPS II Core Capabilities or the Team's ability to support the Functional Task Areas, identified in Section C.4?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

43 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L L.10.1 Factor 3 – Mission Alignment

Factor 3 – Mission Alignment:

The Offeror must describe the team's knowledge, and understanding of the FAA- supported programs identified in Attachment J-2;

Is it the Government's intention that a small disadvantaged business (SDB) that is restricted to responding to one functional task area (e.g., communications support) of the SOW will demonstrate the Team's knowledge and understanding of the 30 FAA- supported programs identified in the Attachment J-2 or should offerors align their response to the programs associated with the functional task area they are bidding?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

44 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L

L.10.1 Factor 3 – Mission Alignment L.10.2 Staffing Approach – Volume 2, Factor 1

– Staffing, Recruitment, and Workforce Development

Factor 3 – Mission Alignment:

Demonstrate their ability to support the Functional Task Areas, identified in Section C.4, with knowledgeable resources; and demonstrate their ability to apply resources in a manner consistent with directorate, group, and program goals.

L.10.2 Staffing Approach – Volume 2 must describe the Offeror's staffing approach to meeting the Government's requirements. Volume 2 must address Factors 1 through 4 as defined below. Offerors must identify risks and benefits throughout their proposal responses. The Offeror must identify areas of risk associated with the described approaches or plans and must propose mitigation strategies.

• Factor 1 – Staffing, Recruitment, and Workforce Development Offeror must describe their proposed approach for staffing, recruitment, and workforce development to ensure recruitment and retention of qualified personnel with difficult-to-obtain skill sets, which build an efficient and effective team supporting multiple task orders. The proposal must describe the Offeror's: o Strategies to identify, recruit and retain qualified personnel, o Strategy for acquiring difficult-to-obtain skill sets, o Strategy for employing and building an efficient and effective team, o Policies and procedures for managing fluctuating staffing levels that may occur through newly awarded or expiring task orders, and o Prior experience with recruiting and hiring the specialized staff of a magnitude comparable to that needed to meet ATEPS II staffing requirements, in a short period of time.

Is it the Government's intention for offerors to demonstrate their ability to support the Functional Task Areas identified in Section C.4 with knowledgeable resources; and demonstrate their ability to apply resources in a manner consistent with directorate, group, and program goals in Volume 1 Factor 3 – Mission Alignment and L.10.2 Staffing Approach – Volume 2, Factor 1 – Staffing, Recruitment, and Workforce Development and Factor 2 – Skill Mix of Key Personnel?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

45 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Vol 1, Factor

L.10.1 Factor 1

In paragraph beginning, “If Contractor performed as the prime contractor, the description must provide…” Recommend FAA change “budget” to “budget or contract ceiling.”

The FAA will adjust the final SIR.

46 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Vol 1, Factor 2 Core Capabilities

L.10.1 Factor 2

The Draft SIR states, “Offerors must describe their breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capability areas.” Recommend change to “Offerors must describe the breadth and depth of knowledge in the ATEPS II Core Capabilities areas for their proposed team.” This change will benefit the FAA by providing a comprehensive summary of the capabilities of the contractor teams that are expected to submit ATEPS II proposals, thereby providing FAA with confidence that there will be robust industry competition to meet ATEPS II requirements.

The FAA will not remove this requirement but will adjust the final SIR as appropriate.

47 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Technical Approach – Vol 1, Factor 2 Core Capabilities

L.10.1 Factor 3

The Draft SIR states, “The Offeror must provide an executive summary of the offeror’s proposed team…” Given that FAA does not specify the order the information must be presented in the proposals, nor page limits by Factor, recommend this be changed to “Offerors must describe the offeror’s proposed team…”

The FAA will not remove this requirement but will adjust the final SIR as appropriate.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

48 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Volume 2 L.10.2 21 Does the resume limitation of 25, as stated in Factor 2, apply to SBs and SDBs responding to C4.21 – 4.22, C4.23, C4.24, and/or C4.25? Will section H consider the scope for C4.21 – 4.22, C4.23, C4.24, and/or C4.25?

Twenty-five represents the total maximum number of allowable resumes. It is not representative of the total number of key personnel nor is it the minimum number of required resumes. The content of the proposal, including the number of resumes, is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

The list of FAA-identified Key Personnel will be included in Section H.

49 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Volume 2 L.10.2 21 What is the maximum number of resumes required for SDB offerors pursuing one of the categories in C.4.23 through C.4.25?

Twenty-five represents the total maximum number of allowable resumes. It is not representative of the total number of key personnel nor is it the minimum number of required resumes. The content of the proposal, including the number of resumes, is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

The list of FAA-identified Key Personnel will be included in Section H.

50 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Volume 2 L.10.2 21 Will SBs and SDBs be required to “detail the team’s technical knowledge for each core capability listed in Section C.3” as stated in Factor 4? Can Small Businesses address only relevant Core Capabilities to C4.21 – 4.22, C4.23, C4.24, and/or C4.25?

The FAA will adjust the SIR for clarity.

The content of the proposal is left to the discretion of the Offeror however; it must address all requirements, based on the Section C.4 Functional Tasks, for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal as a Prime vendor, in association with the applicable Section C.3 Core Capabilities as determined by the Offeror's proposed solution.

51 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2, Factor 2, Skill Mix of Key Personnel

L.10.2 – Factor 2

Staffing Approach Factor 2 – Skill Mix of Key Personnel states, “Offerors must submit a resume for all Key Personnel located in Section H.2.4 (d) with skills and relevant experience in each relevant functional task area identified in Section C.4.”

1) Please provide H.2.4 (d) Key Personnel.

2) Please confirm that the “relevant functional task areas” apply to the contract for which the Offeror is submitting a proposal (e.g., SOW Tasks 1 to 20 for unrestricted contract).

This factor also states, “Offerors are limited to twenty-five (25) resumes, inclusive of the Program Manager.”

3) Does the FAA anticipate identifying 25 Key Personnel in Section H.2.4 or do these 25 resumes include Key Personnel and other named staff for which the Offeror decides to include resumes?

Twenty-five represents the total maximum number of allowable resumes. It is not representative of the total number of key personnel nor is it the minimum number of required resumes. The content of the proposal, including the number of resumes, is left to the discretion of the Offeror.

The list of FAA-identified Key Personnel will be included in Section H.

52 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2, Factor 3, Team Structure and Experience

L.10.2 – Factor 3

For Staffing Approach Factor 3, Team Structure and Experience, the stated requirements are not related to “staffing” per se. The Draft SIR requests information related to “rationale for organizational structure and teaming approach… subcontract management approach…include an organizational chart.” These requirements seem to be more appropriate for the Management Approach volume.

Recommend that this factor be relocated to the Management Approach, Volume 3 and renamed Team Structure and Management.

The FAA will not remove this requirement but will adjust the final SIR as appropriate.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

53 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2, Factor 4, Technical Experience

L.10.2 – Factor 4

Volume 2, Factor 4 – Technical Experience instructs Offerors to detail their knowledge “for each core capability listed in Section C.3.” Offerors must address the “breadth and depth of NAS-relevant experience in relation to the specific functional areas of the SOW (i.e., Section C.4).”

The requested information is not related to “staffing” per se but the capabilities of the organization.

Furthermore, these exact instructions are duplicated in Volume 1, Factors 2 and 3, requesting the same information as Volume 2.Recommend that the FAA eliminate Staffing Approach – Factor 4 since it is not related directly related to the ability to hire and retain qualified resources to staff the ATEPS II contract and this information will already be submitted in the Technical Approach.

The FAA will not remove this requirement but will adjust the final SIR as appropriate.

54 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2

L.10.2 Factor 3 – Team Structure and Experience L.10.3 Factor 3 – Subcontract Management

Factor 3 – Team Structure and Experience Offerors must describe and provide a rationale for their organizational structure and teaming approach. Offeror must demonstrate how the teaming and subcontract management approach will ensure effective, efficient, and quality performance.

Factor 3 - Subcontract Management Offerors must describe how their proposed approach to managing subcontractors will ensure that subcontractor personnel perform in an effective and efficient manner and meet the prime Contractor's quality standards.

The Offeror must demonstrate its approach to ensuring subcontractor personnel are in place as needed, and subcontractor personnel are integrated into the Contractor team.

The proposal must include descriptions for the following:

o For Small Business Prime Offerors only, the approach to ensure at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel must be expended for employees of the prime Contractor.

o Approach to monitoring the performance of subcontractor teams in requirements and contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity of this contract.

o Approach to ensure timely and accurate submission of subcontractor invoicing.

o Approach to manage multiple subcontractors on complex task orders.

o Approach to establish and maintain effective communications between Contractor and subcontractor.

o Approach to ensuring subcontractor personnel are in place as needed, and subcontractor personnel are integrated into the Contractor team.

Is it the Government's intention for offerors to describe and provide a rationale for their organizational structure and teaming approach and demonstrate how the teaming and subcontract management approach will ensure effective, efficient, and quality performance in Staffing Approach – Volume 2, Factor 3 – Team Structure and Experience and Management Approach – Volume 3, Factor 3 – Subcontract Management?

Please refer to Section L.10.2, Team Structure and Experience, and Section L.10.3, Subcontract Management, for the ATEPS II requirements.

55 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2 L.10.2 Staffing Approach

Factor 2- Skill Mix of Key Personnel Offerors must submit a resume for all Key personnel located in Section H.2.4 (d) with skills and relevant experience in each relevant functional task area identified in Section C.4. Offeror must describe all qualifications, expertise and experience of each proposed

Key Personnel and the degree to which they are available and committed to the ATEPS II program.

Offerors must demonstrate that the proposed personnel reflect an optimum skill mix and have the education, background, domain knowledge, capability, and availability to accomplish the SOW requirements. Offerors are limited to twenty-five (25) resumes, inclusive of the Program Manager.

Key Personnel Reference in Section H, but Section H is not available.

There are no other references to “Key Personnel” in the DSIR. Can the FAA Amend the DSIR to include Section H, so we know what LCATs are the key personnel?

Key personnel will be provided in Section H of the final SIR.

Name SIR Subsection Name SIR Section # Page # Vendor Comment/Question FAA RESPONSE

56 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Staffing Approach – Vol 2

L.10.2 Staffing Approach – Volume 2, Factor 2

– Skill Mix of Key Personnel

Is it the Government's intention that offerors insert the Attachment J-11 Resume Template in our response to Factor 2 – Skill Mix of Key Personnel as a PDF?

Key Personnel resumes should be submitted using the format provided in Attachment J-11, Resume Template, and submitted as a PDF document.

57 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Management Approach – Volume 3

L.10.3 21 Since C4.23 is a new ATEPS function, can the FAA define what work needs to be transitioned to C4.23? . This is a not a new function.

58 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Management Approach – Volume 3 L.10.3 21 Will the FAA amend Factor 1 to specify that the comprehensive transition plan is limited to the scope of a vendor’s proposal? Bidders for C4.21 – 4.22, C4.23, C4.24, and/or C4.25 should not need to develop a plan that also addresses C4.1-C4.20.

The FAA intends to adjust the final SIR to provide more clarity

59 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Management Approach – Volume 3 L.10.3 22

Factor 3 states “For Small Business Prime Offerors only, approach to ensure at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel must be expended for employees of the prime Contractor. “

Does this also apply to the Small Disadvantaged offerors?

Yes; This requirement is applicable to the Prime vendor or similarly situated companies.

60 L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Management Approach – Vol 3, Factor 1, Transition Approach

L.10.3 – Factor 1

Factor 1 -…