Attachment_1_-_SOL_140D424R0120_-_Questions_and_Answers_(FINAL)_0001.pdf

SOL Section Contractor Question Government Answer

Could you please confirm whether both the BLM and the FAA would accept adherence to European Union regulation 965/2012 annex VIII - Part SPO, Commercial Specialized Operations, in lieu of certification under 14 CFR Part 137 or the Canadian equivalent for aerial firefighting operations?

Please refer to Section B2 Certifications, specifically B2.1 of the solicitation, as it states The Contractor must be certified under 14 CFR Part 137, "Agricultural Aircraft Operations," or the Canadian equivalent.

2 Overall Solicitation

Will U.S. and Canadian operators be considered for Award of the contract? If Canadian operators are allowed, will preference be given to U.S. contractors? If so, in what way?

Please refer to Section B2.3 regarding Canadian operators and Section D10.5 Past Performance

A2.2 Additional Pay Items – Schedule Sub-Item v – Page 12 Reference to helicopter should be removed.

Section A2.2 Additional Pay Items Schedule, Schedule Sub-Item v has been updated to replace "helicopter" to "aircraft."

B1 Scope of Contract – top of

Does “Wetting agents (foam) and chemical fire retardant may be utilized at the Government’s discretion in the Contractor’s aircraft.” Include water enhancers and gels?

Water enhancers and gels are not included.

B7.7 Flight Data Monitoring Systems

– Page 21

This is a new requirement for Single Engine Scooper (SES) contracts. Currently, no type of system being requested is available from the OEM of the SES. What systems does the government expect/suggest us to use? Is there a list of FAA approved Cockpit Recorders and Flight Data Recorders that can be referenced? For what length of time will the data need to be recorded and stored? Will data review only be required upon the occurance of an accident or incident?

Appareo Aircraft Image Recording System (AIRS) 400 when paired with Recoverable Data Module (RDM) Model 300 is known to meet this requirement.

Added to the Solicitation: C9.7 Data Images and Voice Recordings.

All data collected through contractually required devices, including recorded data, images and voice data collected or stored from radios, sensors, audio, and image recording devices is the property of the DOI while on contract. This includes but is not limited to Automated Flight Following, Automated Telemetry Units and Flight Data Monitoring Systems. Collected data is prohibited from use outside the scope of this contract. The contractor will provide copies of all collected data when requested by the government.

Single Engine Scooper Solicitation 140D0424R0120 Questions and Answers

B10.4.1, bullet point #4 – Page 24

At the current time, there is no training course offered by the STC holder (Wipaire). In the absence of this, how should/can we comply with this?

Bullet #4 under B10.4.1 has been deleted in its entirety.

7 B10.5 – Page 24

We wanted to confirm that a Level 1 or a Level 2 pilot can be a primary pilot on this contract, if they meet the criteria between B10.5.1 and B10.5.2.2. Is this correct?

Yes, this is correct. Section A1, Crew Compliment Required, Bullet B, has been revised to add B10.5.

8 B10.5.2.2 – Page 25

The approved agency form can be found at the https://www.nifc.gov/about-us/our-partners/blm/aviation/seats link, but it is not obvious which form it is….could lead to people not finding and filling out the form – can you make it easier to locate?

Section B10.5.2.2 was updated to add the form name, SEAT Pilot Evaluation , to clarify which form is required. The link remains the same.

B10.6.4 Flight Evaluations – Page

Does this section mean that our pilots will now need to go to one of these two locations for their OAS check ride and/or will they still be conducted at each contractor’s company training? Additionally, those two locations may not be conducive to scooping and dropping water early in the season (March-April). The could impact a contractor's ability to be called up earlier in the season.

B10.6.4 will remain as is; however, solicitation language has been updated to state that Additional evaluation sites may be considered by OAS on a case by case basis.

10 B10.8.1 – Page 26

This section seems more appropriate for a LAT contract versus a SEAT/SES contract.

SEAT/SES pilots are Initial Attack Carded from the outset. What are you trying to accomplish with this section?

Section B10.8.1 has been deleted in its entirety.

11 B13.1.2 – Page 28

We are happy to see that the Government is considering proficiency flights after 7 days of no flying by the pilot. We see this as a major step forward in improving the safety of the SES fleet to increase the proficiency and currency of pilots (experienced and newer pilots). In an effort to guarantee that step in the right direction in the pursuit of improved safety across the SES fleet, we would like to suggest that the term “may” in this sentence will be changed to “will”: “MCTFs may be conducted every seven (7) calendar days for pilots if no fire missions have been flown”.

More frequent proficiency flights or usage of the aircraft in general keeps pilots current, proficient and ready to respond safely. Sitting for 14 days with no flying creates a potentially dangerous level if inactivity.

Section B13.1.2 has been updated to replace "…may be conducted…" to "…shall be conducted…"

12 B21.15 – Page 32

How does the briefing occur and is there a discrepancy between vendors and their respective SOPs, how do we determine which SOP to adhere to?

Section B21.15 has been revised for clarity.

13 B33.1 – Page 37

Is there any possibility that estimated Weight & Balances would/could be accepted (ie – paper airplanes will not be accepted)? Will the government require that aircraft submitted for consideration be completely built and operational at the time of submission of a response to this RFP (10/24/24)?

Estimated Weight & Balances are not acceptable. Aircraft submitted for consideration are to be complete contract compliant aircraft.

Section C – page

39 – 3rd paragraph under “Personnel”

This sentence caught our attention: “The aircraft used for the evaluation(s) must be the same make, model, and series awarded for this contract and be equipped with dual controls” Is this language from a LAT or Helicopter contract or is the Government requiring all 4 SESs to be dual-seat? The commercial feasibility of requiring that will ensure that there will be no response to the Solicitation as there are only four (4) dual seat SESs in the United States, each owned by different contractors and the OEM.

Section C, 52.212-4(A)

INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE,

Personnel, paragraph three has been revised to remove reference to dual controls.

Section C - 52.217- 8 Option to Extend Services (NOV 1999) – Page 50

Is exercising the option to Extend a contract something that is mutually agreed upon by the Government and the Contractor or is it unilaterally determined by the Government?

In accordance with FAR Subpart 43.103(b)(3), A unilateral modification is used to make changes authorized by clauses other than a changes clause. The FAR Clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services gives the Government the authority to issue an extention to the IDIQ contract provided the CO provides a written notice to the Contractor within 30 days of contract expiration.

16 C5.2.1 – Page 53

EPA for Insurance – as Insurance is a direct fixed cost burden to the contractor, and not a cost incurred only when flying the aircraft, could we make the adjustment to the Daily Rate versus the Flight Time Rate? Reasoning is based on the fact that a Contractor will have to bear the burden of increased insurance regardless of how much or how little flying actually occurs.

Section C5.2 Economic Price Adjustment - Insurance has been updated to change the adjustment from Flight Time Rate to Daily Rate.

17 C5.2.5 – Page 53

What specific information will you be evaluating regarding the insurance premium changes between industry related cost increases and contractor related circumstances? An increase in Insurance Premiums is not broken out by the insurance company in a way that clearly lays out industry versus contractor specific reasons for the increase are occurring.

See the language changes in Section C5.2 Economic Price Adjustment - Insurance. Historically, contractors have provided documentation that breaks out the Premiums by the Insurance Companys.

18 C5.2.6 – Page 54

Why only “one half” of the increase or decrease of insurance-based EPAs? While we appreciate the willingness to provide an EPA for insurance cost increases, we would hope that the Government would see the reasoning for 100% of the difference between the Base Price and the Reference Price.

See the language changes in Section C5.2 Economic Price Adjustment - Insurance.

19 C9.3.1 – Page 56

Our SMS requirements should not follow Part 135 for air tour operators. We are still FAA part 137, Correct?

Section C9.3.1 has been updated to replace Part 135 with Part 137.

C15 Optional Extension of Exclusive Use Period – Page 61 – see also question Section C - 52.217- 8 above

The language in this section seems to make it very clear that Extensions are not mutually agreed upon decisions. The unilateral nature of this section may lead to the Contractor compromising other contract obligations to different land management agencies if the Extension extends into another agency’s contracting period. Why is this not a mutually agreed upon decision to Extend?

Section C15 has been revised to change the language from unilaterally extending the exclusive use period to mutual agreement by bilateral modification.

21 C21.5 – Page 63 Vertical Reference Proficiency Flight – how does this apply to SESs?Section C21.5 deleted in its entirety.

Section C – Exhibit 1 – B8.1.2.2 – Page

Previous contracts for the Government have required 6 hours of usable fuel in the vehicles tanks plus whatever is in the airplane. Why has this requirement changed to 8 hours?

This may require contractors to make a significant investment in larger fuel tanks on the GSVs/FSVs. What is driving this change?

Section C, Exhibit 1, B8.1.2.2 has been revised to change 8 hours of usable fuel to 6 hours of usable fuel.

Section C – Exhibit 1 – B8.1.2.6 – Page

“Spark plugs and other exposed terminal connections must be insulated to prevent sparking in the event of contact with conductive materials.” What are you requiring the terminals and connections be insulated with? We assume you will be requiring the highest standard insulation material. Some vendors will just use black electrical tape which can lead to fires and explosions.

Section C, Exhibit 1, B8.1.2.6 will remain as is.

24 D4.15 – Page 93

If an aircraft is not listed on D085 for a contractor, how can a compliant Weight & Balance Report be submitted by the RFP submission date? This would mean the aircraft would not have been put on scales and weighed prior to solicitation response date.

This encourages the bidding or “Paper Airplanes” and is anti-competitive and unfair in nature if other Contractors are bidding actual fully built and operational SESs that have been weighed on scales in the last 60 months at the time of submission of the response to the solicitation. Will you be allowing the offering of “paper airplanes” on this solicitation response?

Section D4.15 has been deleted in its entirety.

25 D4.16 – Page 94

“The Offeror must provide evidence of meeting FAA SMS requirements for Part 135 or air tour operators operating under § 91.147 no later than May 28, 2027 (FAA Final Rule, May 2024).” Not sure this language applies to SES SMS needs.

Section D4.16 has been revised to remove 135 and change to 137.

26 D10.2 – Page 96

Will each section have greater weighting than other sections in the Evaluation? The definition provided seems ambiguous and could lead to confusion and uncertainty to how decisions were made in the evaluation of submitted proposals. How will the Evaluation Committee be weighing the different decision factors in a more quantitative manner?

No changes will be made to Section D10.2 of the solicitation.

27 D10.3.1 – Page 96

If the contractor’s aircraft exceeds the Minimum Aircraft Requirements in certain ways that improve safety or performance, how should we highlight these exceedances? Will contractors who offer these additional benefits receive any additional positive weighting during evaluation of the proposed response to the Solicitation?

See Exhibit E-3, Aircraft Information Form, "Describe any visibility enhancements for the Government observers that your aircraft may have" allows for contractors to highlight exceedances.

28 D10.3.3 – Page 96

If an aircraft is not listed on D085 for a contractor, how can a compliant Weight & Balance Report be submitted by the RFP submission date? This would mean the aircraft would not have been put on scales and weighed prior to solicitation response date.

This encourages the bidding or “Paper Airplanes” and is anti-competitive and unfair in nature if other Contractors are bidding actual fully built and operational SESs that have been weighed on scales in the last 60 months at the time of submission of the response to the solicitation. Will you be allowing the offering of “paper airplanes” on this solicitation response?

Section D10.3.3 has been deleted in its entirety.

29 D10.5.1 – Page 97

Will you be accessing and reviewing the CPARS database for those contractors bidding on this Solicitation or should we include CPARs in our bid submission?

The Government will be accessing and reviewing CPARS database for offerors who submit proposals in response to the solicitation.

30 D10.5.3 – Page 97

We would like to suggest that the first sentence in this section have the work “may” changed to “will”: “The Government may contact some or all of the Offeror’s customers to ask whether or not they believe…”. Given the significant dollars associated with this contract and the Government’s interest in selecting the most capable and professional contractor for Award, we would assume that you would make a call to the customers listed in Exhibit E-5 to conduct a thorough reference check from those customers the contractor has worked with before. Is there a willingness to change the term “may” to “will” in this section’s first sentence?

The solicitation language will remain as is.

31 D10.5.4 – Page 97

In what way will greater weight be given to contractors whose experience directly supports Fort Wainwright and Alaska and who have experience working fires in Alaska?

Please refer to Section 10.5.2 in regards to relevant performance.

32 Section E

So many sections of this part of the Solicitation do not apply to the services that we are providing. Which sections and Exhibits will we be required to respond to? Please provide each specific section and Exhibit required to be filled out by the Contractors bidding.

All of the Exhibits in Section E are applicable and need to be filled out and provided with the contractor's proposal.

Section B7.7 Flight Data Monitoring Systems

It is noted that this is the first time this requirement has been added to a Single Engine Scooper contract. Due to the limited or potentially no currently approved Flight Data recorder systems available for installation in an Air Tractor 802 single engine. Does the DOI/BLM have a designated piece of equipment that is recommended to satisfy this requirement? Current recording capabilities in the airplanes are limited to the Electronics International MVP-50 and the Garmin Avionics. Further Development and installation of such systems in Part 23 Single Engine aircraft could be cost prohibitive.

See the response to question #5.

B10.6.4 Flight evaluation's locations.

Is this a change to the carding process requiring evaluations to only be conducted in Boise, ID and Twin Falls, ID? Or will it still be possible to schedule with DOI OAS evaluators to conduct evaluations during company training at other locations as has been accomplished in the past? If it is now required for the evaluations to take place in Boise or Twin Falls, will the government pay for expenses so that one company does not have an advantage if they are based within a closer vicinity to Boise or Twin Falls, ID?

See the response to question #9.

35 A1 - Item Requirement

It is stated the solicitation seeks to award a single IDIQ contract. If a vendor were to submit an offer for two (2) aircraft, would the Government consider awarding two contracts?

No.