Q and A.pdf

1202SA22R9201/0001

Helicopter Support Services (HSS) – Type 1

1. Section A, SF 1449, Block 10:

Q: Standard Form 1449 Block 10 indicates the solicitation is unrestricted. Will a Task

Order Request for Proposal be issued indicating the Exclusive Use Line Items will be

Small Business Set Asides?

A: See E.4(d). Updated for clarity. Reference amendment 1202SA22R9201/0001.

2. Section C, C.8, Ordering:

Q: Will a Resource Order issued by the National Incident Coordination Center be considered a “Task Order” within the meaning of paragraph C.8?

A: No.

3. Section C, C.9, HSTO Procedures:

Q1: Will a Task Order Request for Proposal (TORP) be issued for the Exclusive Use Line

Items identifying specific information unique to the missions and the Small Business Set

Aside status for the Exclusive Use Line Items?

Q2: Will the final evaluation criteria will be defined in the TORP?

Q3: Will the Government use the Tradeoff process, as described at FAR Subsection

15.101-1, as allowed under C.9?

A1: Yes. Additional mission-unique requirements may be identified in the TORP. Updated for small business clarity. Reference amendment 1202SA22R9201/0001.

A2: Yes. Any additional technical requirements will be clearly indicated on the task order request for proposals.

A3: The Government reserves the right to use the Tradeoff process, as described at FAR

Subsection 15.101-1, if clearly indicated on the task order request for proposals.

4. Section C, C.24, Mobilization/Demobilization:

Q: Should this paragraph include cost for the Service Vehicle Mileage in accordance with

C.18?

A: Updated for clarity. Reference amendment 1202SA22R9201/0001.

5. Section C, C.28, Economic Price Adjustment:

Q: Can the Non-Fuel Portion of the Specified Flight be reinserted to the solicitation in paragraph C.28?

6. Attachment 10, Helicopter Services Hourly Flight Rates, Fuel Consumption, and Weight

Reduction Chart:

Q: This Attachment and Pricing Workbook Spreadsheet have different flight rates. Will the

Workbook be updated?

A: The provided rates found in the PWB will be used for evaluation purposes only.

However, flight rates will be updated at award, and regularly thereafter.

7. Section B, Helicopter Payload Specifications, B.3(b)(1)(iii)(A):

Q: Paragraph B.3 (b) (1) (iii) (A) states the aircraft weighing shall be accomplished within

24 months prior to the due date of proposals, and for aircraft … operating outside of the

US, the current operating weight and balance will be submitted. We have an aircraft has been in Hawaii since 2007, this aircraft is schedule to return to our facility in September.

Does this meet the intent or “outside of the US”?

A: Hawaii and Alaska are included in the US.

8. Section B, B.7(b)(5)(vi), Flight Data Monitoring Systems:

Q: Is there a list of currently approved Flight Data Monitoring Systems similar to the currently approved FM Radio list?

A: Yes. FDMS are required for all helicopters shall be installed at time of aircraft inspection. Shall be provided by the vendor and the USFS will not be providing a source list.

9. Section E, E.3 & E.10:

Q: E.3… This paragraph indicates the offeror should submit our response to the solicitation in 5 Sections. E.10… This paragraph indicates we are to provide our response to the solicitation in 4 Sections. Granted all of the information is supplied under either format, however there is discrepancy between the paragraphs as to format. Which format is correct?

10. Section A, SF 1449 Block 10/Section C, C.4(b)(14):

Q: A conflict exists between these two cites. Does the FS intend to declare the MATOC unrestricted and restrict task orders to Small Business? Please clarify.

A: See Question/Answer 3.

11. Section B, B.4(d)(31), Electronic Weight and Balance:

Q: Multiple government aircraft managers request electronic versions of the load calculations - specifically when the aircraft is traveling, and the manager is days behind.

Consider allowing electronic versions?

A: Yes. Electronic weight and balance are acceptable as described in B.4(d)(31).

12. Section B, B.7(b)(5)(vi), Flight Data Monitoring Systems:

Q: Define all crash-hardened memory device specifications (i.e. ED-112, ED-155, DO-

160, etc.). If available, provide a list of approved devices?

A: It is up to the equipment manufacturer to demonstrate that their system meets our specifications. This has been done in several ways, including certifying systems to ED-

112; certifying to ED-155; and demonstrating survivability with a combination of DO-160 testing, providing data on memory shock, impact, and thermal resistance, and mounting the memory in a reinforced enclosure. Both Appareo and Rugged Video have provided documentation. Other manufacturers may meet the requirements and have not provided documentation at this point. There are multiple methods to meet this requirement. There are no considerations being given. FAA approved FDR's and CVR's meet this requirement.

13. Section B, B.10(b), Restricted Category Helicopters:

Q: Despite repeated attempts by DOD, FAA, HAI Restricted Category Working Group, and Restricted Category Aircraft Vendors, the Forest Service insists on retaining this arbitrary and capricious requirement. DOD and FAA documentation has been submitted to the FS unambiguously stating that it is improper to obtain the data identified in the specification. It is a violation of DOD regulations to fraudulently obtain the data and further, it is a violation of operator’s FAA issued Operating Certificate to take action on fraudulently obtained DOD data. Specifically, the requirement creates disparate treatment between restricted category aircraft operator competitors. The disparate treatment is based upon an arbitrary and capricious requirement that serves no purpose. Other, legal processes are in place and mandated by the statutory authority, the Federal Aviation Administration under which the contract requires operators to perform. This disparate treatment is in violation of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, FAR 1.602-2(b) Ensure that contractors receive impartial, fair, and equitable treatment. Further, the fact that the specification has been in existence through multiple solicitation cycles, the FS has inconsistently interpreted/inspected the requirement and competitors have relied upon past, yet inconsistent, interpretations. We request that the FS remove this specification from the solicitation.?

A: Noted.

14. Section B, B.15(a)(7), Operations:

Q: Currency of manuals containing hundreds of pages is in question while in the field. If off-line capability exists, and two devices are provided, would the gov't accept soft copies?

15. Section B, B.15(c), IFR/Night Flight:

Q: Is this limitation in effect considering the requirements stated in the solicitation?

16. Section B, B.18(h), Copilot and Second-in-Command:

Q: Will there be a flight observation for the Co-Pilots? If so, please provide the standards?

17. Section B, B.24(b)(3), Duty Limitations:

Q: To achieve maximum flexibility, the pilots and mechanics should be allowed to be on one schedule and the FSV driver on another. i.e. 12/12 for pilots/mechs and 12/2 for driver?

A: All crewmembers are not expected to be on the same schedule B.26 has exception for maintenance personnel. If there is need for a vendor to adjust other crewmembers schedule in option years that need can be communicated to CO and change will be considered.

18. Section B, B.41(b)(1), Inclement Weather Plan:

Q: 30 minutes is insufficient time to safely perform preflight of a Type 1 helicopter. One hour is required to complete load calcs, flight risk analysis, check weather, and check

TFR's etc.

A: Noted.

19. Section C, C.23(a), Payment For Overnight Allowance:

Q1: The government assigns locations that consistently exceed GSA FTR, especially during holiday assignments. It is fundamentally inequitable that these exceedances fall fully against the contractor. Consider the number of crew members assigned to a Type I helicopter. This inequity causes contractors to submit Contingency Pricing. The government is violating the Federal Acquisition Regulations through causation by this determination.

Q2: When rooms have been reserved and the government relocates the aircraft late at night, vendors are not falling within the cancellation window with most hotels and therefor having to pay for a second room. The government’s decision to move the aircraft is the cause of this excess cost. The govt must provide consideration based upon their actions to move the aircraft which result in damaging excess costs to the contractors.

A1: Reimbursement for lodging must be aligned with the FTR.

A2: See C.25(b)(ii) & (iii).

20. Section D, Exhibit 1(c), Type 1 Equipment:

Q: Is 180lbs correct?

A: Yes.

21. Section D, Exhibit 11(5)(ii), Certifications:

Current CWN modification changed this requirement to: The tank being offered and installed in the aircraft shall be filled to computed payload capacity via snorkel in no more than 90 seconds at 5000 feet pressure altitude and 30 degrees C, 200 pounds for each pilot and 1 1/2 hours of fuel.

Q1: Consider changing to the current CWN language, or

Q2: Define “calculated capacity” and the temperature for the standard day

A1: Noted.

A2: Calculated capacity is the allowable payload at sea level on a standard day (15 degrees C).

22. Section D, Attachment 16(b)(3), Pilot Mentorship Program:

Q: The contract and the FAA require that the aircraft and its operation are the responsibility of the PIC. This requirement is in direct violation/conflict with both contractual and regulatory authority/responsibility placed upon the pilot. This requirement negates PIC authority, and it must be changed.

23. Section D, Attachment 19, CH-47D, 10 Min PTIT Limit:

Q: The current performance information provided in the exhibit for the 10 min data for the

8000 25 and 7000 20 do not match the tab data provided in the flight manuals. Confirm which number the gov’t wishes operators to use.

A: See Attachment 11(7b). Contact the contracting officer prior to proposal submittal when a helicopter or STC is not listed or the Attachment 19 performance calculation is assessed as an error.

24. Pricing Workbook, Offered Aircraft Tab & Schedule of Items:

Q: Item 1, Broomfield: 13,000 lb requirement – Tank on Offered Aircraft Tab and Bucket on Schedule of Items. Update spreadsheet to confirm Tank or Bucket for item 1.

25. Pricing Workbook, Offered Aircraft Tab & Schedule of Items:

Q: Item 34, Lancaster: 11,000 lb requirement – Tank. Confirm this is a tanked aircraft?

Payload seems more accurate to reflect bucket capacity unless modifications major modifications were made to aircraft which would limit competition.

A: The PWB reflects Item 34/Lancaster as tanked.

26. Section B, B.4(d)(17), Variable Capacity Bucket(s):

Q: Can a vendor provide power fill gated buckets larger than the capacity of bucket #1 and

#2 since it’s volume is regulated by the pilot or is that the maximum capacity the gov’t requests for bucket size?

A: Yes.

27. C.9(b)(2), Pricing Workbook, Offered Aircraft Tab:

Q1: Continuation of SF 1449 Principal Base of Operations: SF 1449 has our corporate address. For the pricing workbook

Q2: is the principal base of operations where the aircraft will be dispatched from (i.e.

satellite hangar away from corporate location)?

A1: C.9(b)(2): Point-of-Hire: Shall be the Contractor’s Principal Base of Operations as specified in Section B or the location of aircraft at time-of-hire.

A2: See B.45: Principal Base of Operations: The primary operating location of a 14 CFR

121, 133, 135 or 137 certificate-holder as established by the certificate holder.

28. Section E, E.3(b)(3)(L):

Q: Copy of registration and airworthiness certificates for each proposed helicopter. If newly manufactured aircraft are offered, the Contract Line-Item Number and anticipated

Serial Number may be provided in lieu of the registration and airworthiness certificates.

The offer submittal format in E.10 does not indicate where to place the registration or how to name it.

A: Input the Serial Number in lieu of the registration.

29. BLR Fast Fin:

Q: Will you allow us to use the BLR information, i.e. weight and balance, performance / payload, etc. in our MATOC bid submission for our aircraft? The current bid submission date of September 12, will likely be before the BLR STC approval date scheduled for later in September but if allowed, the additional payload afforded our UH-60+ will give the government another competitive resource in the 5000 lb. payload category for both tanked operations and power fill bucket operations as we have both the Helitak tank and the

Bambi power fill bucket and conversion of one to the other configuration is accomplished in less than one hour.

A: No. Offer aircraft as currently configured.

30. B.4(d)(17)(i)(B)(1)

States bucket shall have a capacity setting +/- 5% commensurate with maximum OGE lifting capability of the helicopter at 5000/30 with 200lb pilots and 1.5 hrs fuel. This precludes carriage of larger water volumes at lower DA’s when performance is higher, or later in the cycle as fuel load is reduced. For our aircraft, a 660gal bucket would be required under these conditions when the aircraft is capable of nearly 1100gal at max gross weight. Tare weight difference between a 660gal bucket and 1320gal bucket is only 130lbs

(15 gal). Q: Recommend bucket capacity be set to allow for maximum capacity at the end of a fuel cycle at max gross weight if a gated powerfill bucket is used (allowing for partial fills as permitted in B.15 (e) (3) (iii) (B)).

Legacy language listed in question. Paragraph B.4(d)(17)(i)(B)(1) was clarified in earlier

DFRP: Bucket #1: Shall have a capacity setting (±5%) commensurate with the maximum

OGE lifting capability of the helicopter at 5000 PA and 30 degrees C and using 200 pounds for each pilot and 1 1/2 hours of total fuel. (Note "at 100% manufacturers rated capacity +/-5% has been removed therefore removing the preclusion of carrying a larger bucket better fitted for the end of a fuel cycle.)

31. B.4(d(17)(i)(B)(2)

States bucket shall have capacity setting commensurate with payload category (+/- 5%) for which the helicopter was contracted. Type I CWN payload category is 2100lbs jettisonable. As written, this would require a CWN CH-47 or S-64 to carry a 250gal bucket as its second bucket when it is capable of a 2600gal bucket. Q: Recommend bucket capacity be set to allow for maximum capacity at the end of a fuel cycle at max gross weight if a gated powerfill bucket is used (allowing for partial fills as permitted in B.15 (e)

(3) (iii) (B)).

Entire reference not listed in question. B.4(d)(17)(i)(B)(2) states, ‘Shall have a capacity setting commensurate with the payload category (+/-5%) for which the helicopter was contracted.’ Aircraft payload categories specific to the aircraft offered will be determined after verification of the submitted performance data. A bucket capable of the 250 gal will only be required if the performance calculation proposed and verified by the SSB equates to the payload category.

32. B.18(j)

Q1: Regarding Apprentice Helicopter Mechanics, is it intended that all mechanics assigned to an aircraft must be either fully carded or carded as Apprentice Helicopter Mechanics?

Q2: Can uncarded A&P certificate holding mechanics work under the supervision of the carded mechanic?

A1: No. The mechanic required by B.19 must be fully carded.

A2: Yes. An uncarded A&P can work underneath the supervision of the B.19 carded.

33. C.9(b)(1)

Q: EU Torp Procedures (general) are listed and the Pricing Spreadsheet shows EU line items to bid, but there is no specific reference to the EU Torp in this solicitation. Is the EU

Torp submission part of this solicitation, or will it be conducted separately per procedures in this paragraph?

A: Exclusive Use TORPs will be issued after parent contract awards are made. See E.4(d).

All vendors have the ability to submit EU line item pricing in addition to CWN pricing in the initial PWB (although not required). A refined PWB may be offered after the EU

TORP is posted.

34. Exhibit 11(5)(iii)

Q: States all tank data shall be submitted on the pg 188 form and validated by USFS prior to award. Is this form required as part of the bid package? It is not listed in E.10 files.

35. E.3(b)(3)(J)

Specifies summary table of modifications must include FAA approval documents for all equipment required by contract. As discussed in prior Q&A’s for the DRAFT contract, required equipment may not be available at time of bid submission due to high demand.

Additionally, the potential delay is compounded by the FAA approval process. This potentially affects installation of FDM, ATU, P-25 FM radios and ADS-B out systems as they are all either new or increased requirements for this contract. Q: As USFS previously offered, will submission of a P.O. in lieu of FAA approval documentation satisfy the requirement for FDM, ATU, P-25 FM radios, ADS-B out at time of bid submission?

A: The vendor can submit a PO for the required equipment to include specifications in the bid package. Above-mentioned equipment needs to be installed at time of inspection.

36. E.3(b)(8)

States offerors shall mail complete proposals on a USB flash drive. Q: Can proposals be delivered (on the required flash drive) in person as has been permitted on prior solicitations?

A: Yes. Offerors shall coordinate with respective CO when delivering in person.

37. General

We are currently in the process of building another CH-54A Skycrane anticipated completion spring of 2024. How would you like us to include this aircraft in our bid due to it not being fully complete yet.

A: See C.6, On-Ramp and Technology Insertion.

38. General

We are in the process of getting FAA approval for the T58-100 engines for the S-61. This is in the final steps of completion. There are no line items on the computed gross weight charts in section D with the Carson Main and Tail rotor blades with these engines. There is also no line item for our current configuration with the Carson Main and Tail rotor blades with the CT58-140-1 engines. How would you like us to proceed?

A: For any performance reference(s) not found in Attachment 19, please submit performance reference to the CO for potential addition.

39. E.3

We currently have purchased Flight Data Monitoring systems for all of our aircraft that aren't currently installed due to the aircraft fighting fires at this time. In section E.3 of the solicitation you state "summary table of all STC's and field approvals applicable to this contract must be completed by offering date of September 12th." How would you like us to proceed due to our aircraft currently being on contract?

A: In the summary table of all STCs and field approvals, list the purchased equipment as pending installation.

40. Section B, B.18(h):

While reviewing section "C" of the contract clauses (subsection "H", Copilot and Second-in-Command (SIC) Requirements, page 73) the following was noticed:

Q1. Subpart (1) states "Copilots and SICs are considered flight crew and, as such, shall be administratively approved (carded) for each make and model helicopter crewed, and shall meet the following requirements: (in this paragraph it states the co-pilots will be carded, which I believe is an error, as if they are not typed on the helicopter and do not meet the

1500 hour requirement for them to be to be carded that is not possible). What it is stating basically now is that there will be two carded captains on board.

Q2. Subpart 3 should also include a requirement of a 61.55 competency check in lieu of the other items for 133 operators such as ourselves (the current requirement for SIC's) which is basically what section 4 is asking for except there is no reference to 61.55.

A1: Copilots/SICs are not required to meet section B.18(d), Pilot-In-Command

Requirements (General) nor section B.18(e), Pilot-In-Command Requirements

(Experience). Copilots and SICs shall meet the requirements specified in section B.18(c), Pilot Approvals, Qualifications, and Records Check, and section B.18(h), Copilot and

Second-In-Command Requirements and as otherwise indicated in Exhibit 11, Modern

Helicopter Minimum Aircraft Requirements or Exhibit 8, Night Flying

Operations. Copilots and SICs will be administratively issued a pilot qualification card upon review by a FS pilot inspector. The qualification card will endorse the helicopter for which copilot and/or SIC privileges are authorized. The approval will not endorse special-use missions.

A2: Updated for clarity. Reference amendment 1202SA22R9201/0001.

41. E.3(b)(8)

States offerors shall mail complete proposals on a USB flash drive. Q: Can proposals be delivered (on the required flash drive) in person as has been permitted on prior solicitations?

A: Yes. Offerors shall coordinate with respective CO when delivering in person.

42. The flight rates on Attachment 10 differ from the flight rates listed on the pricing workbook. The two discrepancies are as follows:

S-61 Attachment 10 Flight Rate: $5,632.11

S-61 Pricing Workbook Flight Rate: $5,355.01

UH-60A+ Attachment 10 Flight Rate: $5,497.03

UH-60A+ Pricing Workbook Flight Rate: $5,276.98

A: The provided rates found in the PWB will be used for evaluation purposes only.

However, flight rates will be updated at award, and regularly thereafter.

43. Per E.3 Instructions, Offerors shall mail complete proposals in the format identified in

E.10. The proposal structure outlined in E.3 differs from the folder format outlined in E.10;

i.e., E.3 asks for the Pricing Workbook in Section 2, but E.10 includes the Price Workbook folder in Section 1. Can the government clarify which structure to follow?

44. We have recently applied for a revision to our 14CFR 91313(e) Certificate of Waiver. In conversation with our FSDO a question has come up regarding the intent of Paragraph

B.10 Certifications – Standard & Restricted (b) Restricted Category Helicopters (4):

(4) Have and maintain a current FAA Certificate of Waiver (CoW) from the provisions specified in 14 CFR Part 91.313(e) for each make and model helicopter and for operations conducted within the contiguous United States and Alaska.

This paragraph requires operators of restricted category helicopters to have a FAA certificate of Waiver from 14 CFR 91.313(e).

91.313(e) requires an Certificate of Waiver to operate a restricted category civil aircraft within the United States -

(1) Over a densely populated area;

(2) In a congested airway; or

(3) Near a busy airport where passenger transport operations are conducted.

Our FSDO has indicated that typical CoWs from 14 CFR 91.313(e) have been issued to allow resticted category aircraft to operate over densley populated areas or in congested airways or near busy airports in order to go to an airport to access fuel or maintnenace services. They have also indicated the CoW is not intended to allow “aerial work” in densley populated areas or in congested airways or near busy airports.

What is the intent of paragarph B.10 (b) (4)?