USDA FS NLFW Solicitation Responses 03092023.pdf

Existing text (cut and paste as appropriate)

Recommended text, proposal or question

Rational Question Answer

Is government paying for

AFF?

Is government paying for AFF The draft reads as if the gov is paying for aff?

The Government will reimburse the contractor for SATCOM data usage "as applicable in B-8 for the mission."

Please be more specific-who defines convenient?

Who determines such?

This is very subjective and unclear If the inspector passes aircraft as the radios are convenient -can somebody else then decide they are not?

Airworthiness / Avionics Inspectors will inspect if the radios meet the installation and performance standards of the solicitation. The program will determine if radios are convenient.

PED tolerance It would seem there is only one way/STC to comply with this

You’ve given Liberty a monopoly

Any STC meeting the listed requirements is acceptable. The referenced STC is one way to accomplish the requirement but not the only way.

If we have aircraft that we are bidding on other missions, but we expect them to meet additional mission requirements before next May, do we bid them as paper airplanes for those additional missions (with registration and airworthiness cert)?

Offerors are expected to clearly articulate what is currently installed and if awarded is ready for dispatch and what is theoretical or paper when proposed. One way to make that clear would be a "Currently Equipped" package for each aircraft and a "Paper" addendum so each is clearly articulated.

OEM/TC inspection program

There’s already an oem mx programs- what is USFS after with this requirement ?

A mission specific mx program might b difficult to obtain from some OEM/TC holders as we are a small market to some

Clear as written: The Forest Service requirement is to have a OEM inspection program appropriate for the special mission the aircraft will perform.

(vi) All cameras must have continuous mechanical zoom and/or digital zoom, step zoom is not acceptable.

Can the government provide a reference turret that is commercially available which meets the continuous zoom requirements as stated in B- 8(b)(vi) that also meets the other sensor requirements outlined in B- 8(b)(vi)? In our extensive research, we have observed that all high-resolution, long focal-length modern sensors rely upon step zoom at least in part to provide enhanced zoom over what is possible with a continuous zoom camera.

We want to field the most capable sensor possible, and this requirement would seem to prevent sourcing a current available solution.

Correction Made

On Page 105, Aircraft Technical Assessment (a)(viii) asks for photos "within the required parameters of B-3(h)"; however, B-3(h) does not exist in the solicitation. Please provide the correct reference.

B-4 (h)

The minimum crew configuration for the mission of three (3) is:

(i) Flight crew (PIC)

Please confirm the only requirement for a pilot in Mission 4Aa is a single Pilot in Command

(PIC).

Clarification needed Only a single pilot is required for Mission 4A

(3) The minimum crew configuration for the mission of three (3) is:

(ii) Primary Aerial Observer (AOBS)

For Mission 4A, will the "Primary Aerial Observer" be provided by the contractor or the USFS? If this person is a contractor, will the Agency publish requirements for this position?

Clarification needed The Primary Aerial Observer will be provided by the USDA Forest Service.

(ii) Engine start, taxi and takeoff from 4,500’ MSL at ISA plus 20. Climb to 22,000’ MSL pressure altitude cruise 150 nm in under 30 mins, descend to working/loiter altitude of 14,500’ MSL pressure altitude, loiter at no less than 1.3 Vs1 (Vs1 is defined for this contract as the aircraft configuration you intend to loiter at. (i.e., flaps approach, gear up)), for a minimum of 3 hours.

For Mission 4A, the loiter altitude is not clear. Can the loiter altitude specific to Mission 4A be provided? And if above 14,000 ft, can the "mountainous terrain" pilot experience requirement be removed?

Clarification needed Clear as written. Mountainous terrain experience is required for mission 4A, 4B, and 4C.

Contractors shall hold a current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Carrier Operating Certificate.

Aircraft offered shall be listed by make, model, series, and registration number on the Operators Certificate at the time of offering and throughout the contract period of performance.

“Paper airplanes” submitted with proposal must be carded by May the following year or will be removed from award using unilateral modification.

Section B-2 states "Aircraft offered shall be listed by make, model, series, and registration number on the Operators 135 Certificate at the time of offering . . ." However, C-21(b)(1)(ii) allows for "paper airplanes" to be submitted with the proposal. Can the USFS please clarify which is correct?

Clarification needed Offerors are expected to clearly articulate that the aircraft currently exists, what requirements it meets and if awarded is ready for dispatch and what capabilities are theoretical or "Paper" when proposed. One way to make that clear would be a "Currently Equipped" package for each aircraft and a "Paper" addendum so each is clearly articulated. All of the Mandatory Documents have to exist for the offered aircraft. The only thing that can be "Paper" is described in E.2 Part II Technical, Aircraft Technical (a)(iii): "For equipment not installed on the aircraft at the time of submission, submitting a “proposed weight and balance, equipment list and other documentation” is paramount to the consideration and evaluation for best value to the government. This must include a detailed description to include the FAA installation approvals required and timeline of any proposed but uninstalled equipment."

Special Mission Fire Aircraft (Mission Category 1, 2 (A/B), 3 (A/B), 4 (A/B)) must also meet the following requirements:

Mission 4A does not call for a SIC.

The observer is described as being in the rear of the aircraft.

What is the purpose of the audio system with individual volume controls, 3 VHF Comms, 3 FM Comms, 2 mile traffic range?

Clarification needed Fixed wing flight manager may be in either position (SIC or AFT) additionally both seats may be filled during aerial obsever training. B-7 (a) (2) deleted 4 (A/B). Inserted B-7 (a) (4) Mission Category 4 (A/B) must meet the following requirements (i) A Traffic Advisory System (TAS).

The offered solution (aircraft and sensor) must be capable of performing under day or night conditions at a rate of 300,000 acres per hour or better in standard acquisition profile.

The offered solution (aircraft and sensor) must be capable of performing under day or night conditions at a rate of 50,000 acres per hour or better in standard acquisition profile.

Mission 4A identifies two sensors as acceptable. The large fire mapping camera system must be capable of mapping up to 300,000 acres per hour, while the fire perimeter mapping camera system only requires mapping at 50,000 acres per hour. Both sensors are vastly different in capability and price. Under an LPTA award, how will the USFS evaluate offerors each presenting one of the two "acceptable" sensor options?

Clarification needed The sub groups of the sensors will be comparied with their respective like/kind type. (I.e Larger Fire Mappping w/ Larger Fire Mappping and Perimeter Mapping with Perimeter Mapping)

"Additional Mission Specific Requirements" section

Are the additional mission-specific requirements listed in B- 8(d) required for all missions? If not, can clarification be provided as to what additional equipment is needed for each Mission?

Clarification needed Will clarify language by changing "Additional Mission Specific Requirements" to "Equipment Specifications" Referenc B-8 (a) 1-8.

(i) C Band Radio Module For the Tactical Datalink, a C Band Radio Module has been requested. Would the USFS consider an L band module as an option?

Clarification needed The USDA Forest Service is bound by liscencing (NTIA) for C band radios.

Page 65, Section C-16: Will the Period of Performance for the 1st segment task orders be for 3 years, as in a 3 year contract with no options, as defined by C-16 (Period 1: 1 Jan 24- 31 Dec 26)? Or will there be one base year plus 2 options years for

For call when needed it will be a 3 year period. Task orders may be issued for differing periods of performance.

On page 65, Section C-23(b) identifies Mission 4A as exclusive use; however, Exhibit 5 “Exclusive Use Bases” does not have base(s) identified for the Mission 4A. Will the Agency please provide Exclusive Use Bases for Mission 4A?

The base locations will be identified throught the TORP.

Can the USFS provide a listing of task orders it intends to issue for each Mission?

Not at this time.

Can you confirm items (b) and (j) in Section E-2:

Mandatory Documents are the same requirement?

Both ask for current Part 135 Ops Specs.

Changes made to E-2 for clarification.

As a company who provides Resource Reconnaissance on a CWN basis I’m am looking for insight for what the contracting entity is using to substantiate daily availability rates. From this perspective, it is very difficult to offset a fixed cost of annual operation with a variable unknown amount of days on contract. I can understand pure variable risk. However, it is hard to understand this mechanism attempting to provide economic stability in an undefined environment.

I can see how this mechanism works when applied to EU style contracts.

It is expected that pricing proposed to the government is similar to how you charge other customers for similar services. Typically, this is done with two factors: Fixed Cost = Availability, Variable Cost = Flight Rates.

Attachment 5 is listed as a requirement in two places: Mandatory Documents (h) and Aircraft Technical Assessment (a)(ii). Does this attachment need to be saved in both submission documents

Yes

Under the "Organizational Experience" on page 107- 108(c) Mechanic Experience, it reads "proof of meeting B-9(c)"; however, B-9(c) does not exist in the solicitation. Please provide the correct

B3 (b) is the correct reference. Change made

If we purchase an additional aircraft next year will we be able to add it to our current MATOC Aircraft ability list before the 2027 re-pricing?

No

Document: Mandatory Documentation The MD document seems to have a lot of aircraft specific info. Does each aircraft proposed need its own MD file? Or do we have to include all the different aircraft specific files into this one MD document? Or will the aircraft info get moved to the ATA document?

Ops specs are listed twice, para b partial and j complete. Can we just submit the complete ops specs as a separate file/attachment?

Document: ATA Para a, viii: there are photo requirements for ATGS in para vi, and trainee para vii. What aircraft position do they want photos for viii?

Changes made to E-2 for clarification.

I am not sure how the full daily rate format is supposed to work in the case of missions 5, 6 and 7.

I understand on fires the duty day is 14 hrs, but what about missions that are only a few hours long.

Example, we get called for a detection mission at 1100. We show up at 1000 and prep the airplane then fly a 4 hour mission followed by another hour to fuel the aircraft and put it back in the hangar. So a 6 hr duty day and 4 hrs FT. Will the Daily rate be pro-rated? Sure seems like a standby hourly rate would be easier for these kind of scenarios. Also, does the daily rate apply when flying from your

It is expected that pricing proposed to the governmnet is similar to how you charge other customers for similar services. Tyipically, this is done with two factors: Fixed Cost = Availability, Variable Cost = Flight Rates.

The specific word “Freon” was removed does this mean that if the aircraft has a stock OEM installed air cycle machine that provides heating/cooling and pressurization is acceptable even though you left in the sentence “ A Portable or Stand-alone air-cyle system in not acceptable” is OEM air cycle machine sufficent?

Yes

Why did the laser range finder Min distance change from 15 KM to 20 KM

This change makes it even more difficult for 12 inch gimbals to be considered for the medium-altitude mission.

This is especially problematic when the low altitude sensors have a 11 inch size maximum.

Currently, there is no place for our 12 inch (Trakka TC-300) gimbal. Even if we install the desired cameras.

Clear as written

Why do you specify the maximum size and weight of the Sensor 11” and 50 lbs

With our 12 inch gimbal unable to work with the 20 KM range finder we are now left without any place for utilization in the contract. Please consider a revision of the medium altitude specification to better accommodate Trakka gimbals there are one of the top 3 gimbal manufacturers in the world.

Correction Made

Are the large fire mapping camera and the perimeter mapping camera going to be considered for the same task orders? Are they equivalent?

Due to the significant difference in acreage per hour coverage specification, are these cameras considered equivalent for future Task Orders since they are both acceptable for the same mission?

The sub groups of the sensors will be comparied with their respective like/kind type. (I.e Larger Fire Mappping w/ Larger Fire Mappping and Perimeter Mapping with Perimeter Mapping)

On the CWN task orders are you expecting 7 day a week coverage? Example If a relief pilot can not be in place for a 36/6 situation will a “unavailability penalty day” be awarded? or just unpaid unavailability for that day?

The task order will identify the specifics pertaining to anticipated days, work location, hours of operation, and may identify anticipated flight hours. The example provided "36/6 situation" is at the governmnets discression. Relief pilot requirements to mitigte 36/6 will be identified in the TORP.

(3) The following equipment will not be deferred:

(i) Emergency Locator Transmitter

(ii) Transponder

(iii) Static pressure, altimeter, and automatic altitude reporting system

If redundant equipment is installed can these items be deferred?

ie. What if we have multiple transponders why could we not defer one so long as it is above the contract minimum?

The MEL section was clarified due to historical misunderstandings of how they are used in conjunction with contract requirements and their inappropriate use during previous mission flights. During this process, we determined that deferrals of the identified systems are not in the best interest of the Government.

The Contractor is required to give three (3) day notice for substitution of aircraft for required maintenance, other substitutions or replacement request will be on a case-by-case basis. All requests for substitutions or replacements shall be coordinated with an AMI, the Contracting Officer and the COR or designee.

Why do you specify a 3 day notice for aircraft substitution If the contractor has an immediate need for substitution due to mechanical breakdown will the contractor be penalized 3 days of unavailability having the requirement to give this 3 day notice?

Maybe the intent was for scheduled maintenance rather than required?

As stated "other substitutions or replacement request will be on a case-by-case basis."

Page 69 C-22 Why is there a 12 month requirement to notify the government as there is no compensation being made to retain the aircraft availability during non-task order periods. Example If the contractor sells an aircraft does he have to notify the government 12 months in advance?

Correction Made

Page 70 C-23 (2) Please Define Ordered Availability Period: is this day by day or ???

What if I need to pull my aircraft from a cwn assignment due to a EU aircraft breaking and needing replacement? When am I allowed to do

All orders will identify the availability period upon request (TORP). All approvals to remove an aircraft from ordered service will be approved by the CO or designee.

Page 94 E-5 What rating scale is used in exhibit 4 for review and evaluation of each safety component? No scale is shown.

Each evaluator independently reviews and rates the materials provided by the vendor against Attachment 4. The materials are evaluated against Parts. The Source Selection Board will generate consensus to derive acceptability determination. To be considered acceptable in SMS, no more than a third of the reference numbers in Part 1 and Part 2 combined may be considered insufficient, no more than two thirds of them can be missing both reference and evidence, and the offeror must have a sufficient accident rating as described in Part 3.

Safety Management Systems (Part 1): The Government will validate responses to Attachment 4 to determine if both or either of the references and evidence are sufficient.

Safety Management Systems (Part 2): The Government will evaluate the references and evidence against the requirement description found in Attachment 4 to determine if they are sufficient.

Accident Rate (Part 3): The Government will convert the offeror’s number of accidents and hours flown in the last five years into an accident rate per 100,000 flight hours. The Offeror’s accident rate is compared to 1.25 times the overall USFS suppression aircraft accident rate for the previous five years, which equates to 2.93 accidents per 100,000 flight hours. Offerors with zero accident rates or an accident rate of 2.93 or less accidents per 100,000 flight hours will be considered sufficient for Part 3. Offerors having an accident rate greater than 2.93 accidents per 100,000 flight hours will undergo a review of the documentation the offeror provided regarding the circumstances around their accidents and a determination of if it is sufficient or insufficient to the government based off how the company addressed those accidents within their SMS program/processes (Did the Offeror utilize its SMS program as its SMS Manual describes and what were the results from utilizing its SMS program, i.e., developed lessons learned, implemented changes etc. in regards to those accidents). Additionally, for offers who have an accident rate greater than 2.93 accidents per 100,000 flight hours without providing documentation regarding the circumstances around your accidents and/or those accidents are not addressed within your SMS program/processes, will be determined insufficient for Part 3.

(2) Medium-Altitude HD Full Motion Video (FMV) Camera System Full Motion Video (FMV) gimbal, with Electrical- Optical (E/O) and Mid- Wave infrared (MWIR) OR Long-wave infrared (LWIR) cameras that meets the following:

(i) Camera System (Gimble/Cameras) must weigh less than 120 lbs.

(ii) Sensor system dimensions shall be less than 16 inches in diameter.

(iii) 1 Digital, High- Definition Mid-Wave infrared (MWIR) camera

(iv) 1 Digital, High- Definition Short-Wave infrared (SWIR) camera Indium Gallium Arsenide (InGaAs) based SWIR is preferred.

(v) 1 High-Definition E/O Camera

Top paragraph reads MWIR or LWIR but item (iii) below specifies MWIR and item (iv) Specifies SWIR. Is this a typo?

Mwir or Lwir above but not below

Corrected made

Performance figures for all missions: does the 30 min requirement to fly the designated NM start at Top of Climb or Take Off?

Performance figures begin at takeoff for all missions.

Matt M discussed prorated daily availability for the assignment ie forest health where a full day (14 hrs) is not used. Please elaborate on this topic.

Would this also be the case for the large fire perimeter mapping missions which are often flown from about 6 pm-midnight?

Additionally what about early release from CWN Air Attack? Before there was a noon clause and I cant seem to find anything similar.

It is expected that pricing proposed to the governmnet is similar to how you charge other customers for similar services. Tyipically, this is done with two factors: Fixed Cost = Availability, Variable Cost = Flight Rates. Services will be reimbursed based on service rendered. If you are ordered to be available you are paid availability, if you are released from availablity you will not be paid. Ordered flights will be paid.

On Mission 4A are the operators (or other company personnel) going to be required to produce the (NIROPS) maps? ie the past nirops (end product) contract or will we be sending the data to one of the agency's IRINs for interpretation and product creation? This will change the price of the mission in a substantial way and pricing can not be provided realistically without the ability to adjust if map product generation is required by a task order.

It seems to me your trying to accommodate the current EU nirops contract and the past end products contract under 4A and they are extremely different missions if flow similar to the past. Maybe this is also where the large discrepancy in mapping camera ability is coming into play.

Mission sensor operator's for all mission will preform some level of product creation (raster, vector, videos). Interpretation and services beyond on-board activates is not a flight crew responsibility, unless specified by the task order.

Part II Technical - "b" asks for specific OpSpecs as applicable. "j" asks for all OpSpecs. Seems redundant. Are those listed in "b" sufficient?

Changes made to E-2 for clarification.

See Section B-9 Personnel for additional mechanic requirements.

See Section B-3 ............. It's correct Correction Made

(ii) One VHF-FM Radio (FM 1) required for Missions 1-7, two required (FM 1 and FM 2) for fire detection missions.

What is the rationale for such a requirement?

(ii) One VHF-FM Radio (FM 1) required for Missions 1-7

We have operated single engine Cessna's in this arena for years. We have always been equipped with one panel mount FM and an aux provision. In all the years we have only used the aux provision one time and only use the one panel mount a handful of times during a flight.

The new requirement brings added cost to the Forest Service for equipment that is not necessary, is expensive to install in panels that are already at capacity, and invites radio interference issues with the crowding of too many antennas into too close a proximity.

Clear as Written

(ii) Engine start, taxi and takeoff from 4,500’ MSL at ISA plus 20. Climb to 10,500’ MSL pressure altitude cruise 75 nm in under 30 mins, descend to working/loiter altitude of 7,000’ MSL pressure altitude, and loiter at no less than 1.3 Vs1 (Vs1 is defined for this contract as the aircraft configuration you intend to loiter at. (i.e., flaps approach, gear up)), for a minimum of 2 hours.

Recommended Text:

B-4 AIRCRAFT REQUIREMENTS

(a) Single engine aircraft shall meet the following performance:

(1) Aircraft shall have a power loading of not more than 13.5 pounds per horsepower.

(2) Positive single engine rate of climb when equipped for the contract and carrying a pilot weighing 210 lbs., one observer weighing 210 lbs., fuel for 4 hours plus a 30-minute reserve.

Questions:

What is the basis for the performance requirement? To what aircraft is the requirement written to? Has the Forest Service decided that these Single Engine Cessna aircraft are unsafe? Is the Forest Service trying to weed these aircraft out?

We have safely operated single engine Cessna's doing fire detection for years. The performance requirement for B- 4 is sufficient. It need dot differ from what is called out in B-1. It's conflicting, unnecessary, and without basis.

Clear as written.

Can you define the term, "Special Mission Aircraft?" It is used in B-4(i), which requirements I would think to include point to point, it is used in the title of B-7, which applies to missions 1-7, and it is used in B-7(2) which only applies to some mission categories.

Point to Point is not a Special Mission. Forest Service policy defines Special Use Mission Flight as: Any flight that is not Point-to-point. Special Use Mission Flights are incident or project flights conducted for the express purpose of performing, or directly supporting, an agency for management of an incident or project. Special Use Mission Flights may require special pilot endorsements, flight evaluations, training, and/or specialized aircraft equipment. All UAS missions are considered Special Use Missions. Also referred to as a “Mission Flight.”

(i) Mission 7: Other Special Use Non-Fire light fixed wing operations

Attachment 8 - Schedule of Items shows Mission 7 as being for "Alaska light fixed wing operations." In B-1 (i) Mission 7 doesn't make any reference to being limited to Alaska. Is Mission 7 only for Alaska?

Should be consistent. Correction Made

Do we have to send in copies of our CPARS for Forest Service past performance reviews or will the evaluators look them up?

Vendors are not required to submit Forest Service CPARS documentation

B-5 (B) Are there limitations in the Flight Manuals that we are being asked to exceed for the AA mission?

These aircraft were Type certificated to perform certain flight profiles and any limitations where published in the Flight manual. In what other industry is a mission specific maintenance program a requirement? All modifications done to these aircraft have been either STC or DER/DAR approved with limitations provided either by ICAs or FM supplements. What is the advantage of this requirement? Adding more maintenance to an aircraft is never a bad idea but as I read in this MATOC maintenance downtime has been reduced more than the previous AA E/U contract. (Reduced by a 66%) The vendor is always penalized for being down for maintenance but yet we want to add maintenance and reduce the number of days we have to perform maintenance with no penalty. Some aircraft inspections require more than the 10 hours left in a day between the 14 hour required availability.

B-5 (C) This requirement will have a great impact on the

As part of a recent accident the Forest Service agreed to require an inspection program or supplement from the OEM/TC holder for the special mission as described in the solicitation.

Some Forest Service Special missions have been shown to be more severe due to the flight profile flown and have required inspection program revisions. The airtanker flight profile has shown that the segment of the flight at higher weights and lower altitudes (under 5000 ft) is more damaging to the aircraft than the maneuver loads and drop segment of the flight. The aerial supervision mission is not a point to point flight and is flown "circling will average 2,500’ AGL and be no lower than 501’ AGL." Concerning maintenance and unavailability while on an Exclusive Use task order there is latitude given in B-22(d). There is always a balance struck between being available for the mission the aircraft is on contract to perform and allowing latitude for maintenance to be performed on contract. As to the requirements in B.5(c), due to a recent accident (https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=103452) our requirements have increased above the FAA minimum standard. The OEM of the aircraft is the most qualified to determine what repairs are and are not best for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft they manufactured.

Section B (f) SENSOR and MISSION EQUIPMENT

MAINTENACE REPORTING (2)

A maintenance flight check after a regular software update is not required, a ground function check is all that the OEM calls for. Why is this required?

This is to ensure full mission readiness, proving that all systems meet operational specifications (ex IMU) that cannot be validated by ground test. Minor updates do not requre flight testing, only major (enabling new features, or version upgrade) updates require flight testing.

Regarding Attachment 10 Mission 3A tab Column N, Should column N read: Fuel burn in LBS. to 22,000 msl from 4500 msl in order to match the language on page 8 sect (c)(4)?

Yes, updated performance workbook

Regarding Attachment 10 Mission 3A Column O, Should column O read: Time to climb to 22,000 msl from 4500 msl in order to match the language on page 8 sect (c)(4)?

Yes, updated performance workbook

Regarding Section E-2, a), Aircraft Technical Assessment-Can a vendor's FAA approved Part 135 system for recording digital weight and balance, showing the same information as example 6, suffice for contract requirements or does it have to a "foreflight" product.

Changes made to E-2 for clarification.

C-21 & E-2 68 & 103 (b)(1)(ii) If a contractor is bidding a "paper airplane" can the mandatory documentation be provided at a later date or would the Government prefer "proposed" documents such as a proposed equipment list or weight & balance? This might apply to an aircraft undergoing modification that will not be complete before the proposal due date but will be ready for carding prior to May the following year.

Offerors are expected to clearly articulate what is currently installed and if awarded is ready for dispatch and what is theoretical or paper when proposed. One way to make that clear would be a "Currently Equipped" package for each aircraft and a "Paper" addendum so each is clearly articulated.

C-18 65 (a) Should "Pilot" in key personnel read "Chief Pilot"?

Yes, correction made.

Attachment 10 Mission 2A Tab Column N Should it read Fuel burn in LBS to 22,00 MS from 4500'MSL per page 7 (b)(4)?

Yes, updated performance workbook

Attachment 10 Mission 2A tab Column O Should it read: Time to climb to 22,00 MS from 4500'MSL per page 7 (b)(4)?

Yes, updated performance workbook

B 7 (b) Shouldn't there be an aircraft performance difference between 4A and 4B?

No, Clear as written.

Without having any EU type agreements, working solely on CWN mentality, how are we supposed to calculate fixed business costs into a variable number of days? What line of thought is accepted here from the contract issuance side?

It is expected that pricing proposed to the governmnet is similar to how you charge other customers for similar services. Tyipically, this is done with two factors: Fixed Cost = Availability, Variable Cost = Flight Rates.

On the MD document, Ops specs are listed twice, para b partial and j complete.

Made global edits to E-2 to clarify.

We have safely operated single engine Cessnas doing fire detection for years. The performance requirement for Mission 5A is not written to accommodate these aircraft.

What is the basis for the performance requirement? To what aircraft is the requirement written to? Has the Forest Service decided that these Single Engine Cessna aircraft are unsafe? Is the Forest Service trying to weed these aircraft out?

Clear as written.

If I read the avionics requirements correctly the requirement is now for two VHF-FM radios in all detection aircraft. What is the rationale for such a requirement? We have operated single engine Cessnas in this arena for years.

We have always been equipped with one panel mount FM and an aux provision. In all the years we have only used the aux provision one time and only use the one panel mount a handful of times during a flight. The new requirement brings added cost to the Forest Service for equipment that is not necessary, is expensive to install in panels that are already at capacity, and invites radio interference issues with the crowding of too many antennas into too close a proximity.

Clear as written.

C-21 If we are bidding aircraft on other missions, but we expect them to meet additional mission requirements before May, should we propose them as "paper airplanes" for those additional missions? What documentation is required for a "paper airplane".

Offerors are expected to clearly articulate what is currently installed and if awarded is ready for dispatch and what is theoretical or paper when proposed. One way to make that clear would be a "Currently Equipped" package for each aircraft and a "Paper" addendum so each is clearly articulated.

B(c)(i) Experience requirements; What is accepted as proof of experience?

Require additional reference to the question. Proof of experience can be in the form of a professional resume, certificates of competition licenses, employment history

Sheet1