Sol Q and A_0003.pdf

140D8020R0019 – Questions & Answers Amphibious Scooper SEATs

Question 1a) B10.2.7.1 line C mentions 100 hours in ASES and B10.2.7.2 C mentions 200 hours ASEL.

Should they both be the same?

Answer 1a) B10.2.7.1 remains unchanged. B10.2.7.2 is revised to read as follows.

B 10.2.7.2 - PIC Qualification with low level tactical and formal scenario based training

(a) 1,500 hours…total in all aircraft.

(b) 1,200 hours…in airplanes.

(c) 200 hours…airplane single engine sea (ASES)

(d) 100 hours…of documented Primary Pilot/Aircraft Commander Close Air Support ordinance dispensing (CAS) military experience, in a low-level, contour-flying or nap-of-the-earth (NOE) environment (sorties that did not descend below 500' AGL for CAS do not apply to this qualification), using a fixed-wing aircraft designed primarily for CAS mission profiles.

(e) 40 hours… in the same make and model to be flown, including a minimum of 25 hours in scenario based training see Exhibit.

(f) 200 hours…of low-level flight in airplanes as defined in B 10.3.

(g) 200 hours…in mountainous terrain or 100 hours after successfully graduating from a recognized mountain flying school. See Exhibit 5 for recognized schools. Mountainous terrain experience is defined as experience in operating airplanes in mountainous terrain as identified in 14 CFR 95 Subpart B, Designated Mountainous Area.

Operating includes maneuvering near terrain, crossing ridgelines, and evaluating conditions such as wind, temperature, and density altitude.

(h) 100 hours…in airplanes in the last 12 months.

(i) 10 hours…in airplanes in the preceding 60 days.

(j) 5 hours…5 hours…in make and model in the last 12 months, including (1) five takeoffs and landings to a full stop on the water and (2) 5 water scooping evolutions dropping at least two salvo loads of fire suppressant material (water or retardant) accurately on a designated target.

Question 1b) If this is correct, would several years of SEAT experience and training meet the .2 or does it have to be military?

Answer 1b) See Question 1a

Question 2) We are in the midst of adding two Fire Bosses to the fleet. They will both be completed by year end. One very well may be completed and have a Weight and Balance and MEL done by the submission date for the Solicitation. We own the aircraft, we own the floats, gates and avionics. We may just not have all of it put together for a final Weight & Balance by 11/23. In that case, how should we handle listing the aircraft?

Answer 2) As per Section B32.1, referenced by D4.11.1.2, provide a weight and balance for each proposed aircraft with the aircraft in contract configuration. The proposal must include at least one aircraft that meets the minimum requirements of this solicitation. Section C17 is added to the Solicitation to define procedures for adding aircraft after initial award(s). Also see Exhibit 16 Add/Remove Aircraft/Equipment Request Form.

Question 3) Section A1 states the Aircraft Configuration required for listing in response to the Solicitation. For a Contractor to offer an aircraft in response to this solicitation, does the aircraft need to be in operational Fire Boss contract configuration, including an acceptable Weight & Balance (in accordance with Section B32) and Equipment List that would allow the Aircraft Questionnaire to be filled out?

Answer 3) A proposal must include at least one aircraft that meets the minimum requirements of Section A1, and all related requirements and documentation as stated in the solicitation, to include a current weight & balance report, Exhibit E-2 and Exhibit E-3. Additional aircraft may be offered after initial award as detailed in Question 2. See Question 2 for adding aircraft after initial award(s), and see Exhibit 16 Add/Remove Aircraft/Equipment Request Form.

Question 4) In Section A1, why has the Fuel Service Vehicle/Seat Support Vehicle requirement from the previous On-Call Fire Boss contract been changed to Fuel Service Vehicle only for this contract? How are vendors who have already invested heavily in FSV/SSV trailers that combine fuel and retardant mixing capability based on previous DOI contract requirements expected to respond to this change?

Answer 4) The Fuel Service Vehicle (FSV) may be combined with the SEAT Support Vehicle (SSV). The SSV is not required, only FSV. Until the SSV is ordered by the Government, the combined FSV/SSV will only be considered an FSV. It is up to the Vendor to offer an SSV if they want to provide that service.

Question 5) The Base Period is date of award through April 30, 2021 in Section A1. Should this read April 30, 2022?

Answer 5) The Base Period end date referenced is revised to read as April 30, 2022.

Question 6) A tank capacity of 799 US gallons is listed in section A1. B2.2.1 states a tank capacity of 800 US gallons. Which value is correct?

Answer 6) B2.2.1 is revised to read as 799 gallons.

Question 7) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that after retardant operations, aircraft must be “appropriately” cleaned prior to beginning scooper operations. Could you please define what “appropriately” means?

Answer 7) An aircraft/hopper rinse or wash to ensure retardant will not contaminate water source.

Question 8) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that aircraft “may” be required to have the tank and gating system cleansed after operations in water that have known invasive species. Since compliance with this requirement may require specialized equipment and procedures, does the government have a more specific invasive species policy for scooper aircraft? What specialized equipment will be required? Will vendors that have already invested in invasive species equipment and procedures be ranked higher than those that have not?

Answer 8) Typically, nothing more than a hot pressure wash which requires a pressure washer is utilized.

Always take into consideration if products are compatible with aircraft metals. Reference material was published by NWCG https://www.nwcg.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pms444.pdf No, this will not be included in the evaluation criteria.

Question 9) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that the use of water enhancers with on-board injection systems are not permitted to be used on federally contracted aircraft, or on federal lands. There is language later in this solicitation that ground mixing of water enhancers is permitted. Could you please clarify whether this new prohibition is directed at onboard injections systems on Fire Bosses (gel and foam) or the general use of water enhancers? Does the same prohibition apply to CL-415s or helicopter onboard foam injection systems that have been in use for years under other federal contracts?

Answer 9) As per Section B.1.1, the use of water enhancers mixed with on-board injection systems are not allowed on federal lands or on federally-contracted aircraft. The use of water enhancers mixed through a proportioner and loaded from ground-based equipment is acceptable according to their qualified applications/approvals as specified on the Qualified Products List (QPL).

On-board injection/blending systems can be installed for other agency’s use; however, working federal fire or if working as a federal contracted aircraft, policy does not allow the use of them. The requirements in this solicitation only apply to aircraft performing on a resulting awarded contract.

Question 10) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that several State fire agencies require/prefer on-board mixing systems for gel and rely on Federal aircraft to have this capability when responding to fires on cooperator lands. The Federal Government is currently studying the use of on-board mixing systems.

Can the prohibition regarding on-board mixing systems be removed from this solicitation given the demand for system use by cooperator agencies, those systems are currently being evaluated by Federal fire agencies, and the use of those systems may be required in future TORPs requested by the BIA?

Answer 10) At the time of this solicitation, the use of water enhancers with on-board injection systems are not permitted to be used on federally contracted aircraft, or on federal lands (Section A1, Notes).

Question 11) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that one FSV per two aircraft working out of the same location is permitted. Does this only apply to situations where one vendor is supplying both aircraft? What if different vendor aircraft are paired at the same location? Is one vendor expected to fuel the other vendor’s aircraft?

Answer 11) This note only applies to aircraft operated by the same vendor. The use of a single Fuel Service Vehicle (FSV) per two aircraft at the same location is at the sole discretion of the vendor.

Question 12) Section A1 Pg 7 Notes state that an SSV is not required, however if offered and when ordered for services will be paid at $500.00 per day. How does this apply to vendors that only offer combined FSV/SSV trailers?

Answer 12) The Fuel Service Vehicle (FSV) may be combined with the SEAT Support Vehicle (SSV). Until the SSV is ordered by the Government, the combined FSV/SSV will only be considered an FSV.

Question 13) B2.2.5 states that a 10-gallon-per-minute (GPM) flow rate delivered by the filter and pumped at the nozzle is the minimum size acceptable. This is new language compared to the previous On-Call Fire Boss contract. Can you please explain what this requirement means?

Answer 13) The minimum flow rate at the nozzle must be 10-gallons-per-minute.

Question 14) B10.2.7.1(c), the 200 hours ASES is a difficult standard for vendors to meet and may not guarantee the training and experience necessary to safety pilot a Fire Boss (e.g. 200 hours on a light seaplane). It will be difficult for vendors to recruit pilots that have 200 hours of seaplane time while meeting other pilot experience requirements (e.g. low-level ag or fire dispersal). Why has the 50-hour with manufacturer’s approved Fire Boss training program option incorporated into the previous On-Call Fire Boss contract been removed in this contract? Can other minimum training and/or experience standards be considered? For example, 50 water scoops/drops with a qualified Fire Boss instructor in a dual-seat Fire Boss or monitored by a qualified Fire Boss instructor when pilot candidate is flying a single-seat aircraft.

Answer 14) The requirements at section B10.2.7.1 will remain as written.

Question 15) B10.2.7.2 (c), why does the low level tactical and formal scenario-based training option only require 200 hours … airplane single engine land? Shouldn’t a significant amount of seaplane experience be required as per B10.2.7.1 (c)?

Answer 15) See Question 1a.

Question 16) B19.6.5 states the pilot is responsible for determining the aircraft’s weight and center of gravity using standard weights. This paragraph lists the weight of foam … a water enhancer that is only mixed through an aircraft’s onboard injection system. Is the use of foam and an onboard injection system approved for this contract?

Answer 16) As per Section B.1.1, the use of water enhancers mixed with on-board injection systems are not allowed on federal lands or on federally-contracted aircraft. The use of water enhancers mixed through a proportioner and loaded from ground-based equipment is acceptable according to their qualified applications/approvals as specified on the Qualified Products List (QPL).

Question 17) Section C pg 33 - Substitute Aircraft. Does a vendor have to submit both the Aircraft Questionnaire (Exhibit E-2) and Aircraft Information Form (Exhibit E-3) with requests for aircraft substitutions? Does this process apply to aircraft additions vs. substitutions after contract award?

Answer 17) Yes, both Exhibits E-2 and E-3 must be submitted for aircraft substitutions, along with other required documents as stated in the solicitation. Required documents for submission are required for all aircraft contractors request to be evaluated for performance on the contract. Section C17 is added to define the addition process.

Question 18) Section C pg 33 - Adding Aircraft. We cannot find language within the Solicitation that describes how additional aircraft could be added (vs Substitution) to the contract in the future. Is it your intention to allow additional aircraft to be added during the Contract Period?

Answer 18) Section C17 is added to define the addition of aircraft process.

Question 19) C12.6 - The Suspension of Pilot reference of C7 is incorrect. It should be C10.2.

Answer 19) C12.6 is revised to reference Section C10.2.

Question 20) C15.1.2 - Ordering activity will select the contractor it deems to offer the best value to the Government. Will the rankings from the evaluation of proposals for this solicitation be used to quantify best value during the ordering process? If so, will non-price factors, when combined, be significantly more important than evaluated price as per D8.1.2 of the solicitation?

Answer 20) As stated in C15.1.2, selection criteria for urgent orders (on-call pick-ups) may be based on aircraft location, price, and/or other considerations at the discretion of the ordering activity.

Question 21) Section D2 - What is the current small business size standard under 115310? $20.5 million?

Answer 21) The small business size standard for NAICS 115310 with Exception 1 for direct Forest Fire Suppression service is $20.5M.

Question 22) D4.3.1 #3 - Why are scanned pages not acceptable? It is critical that some material be scanned to meet solicitation requirements (e.g. aircraft Weight & Balance Reports).

Answer 22) D4.3.1 #3 is revised to read as “Scanned pages are acceptable, as long as they are legible.”

Question 23) D8.4.2 - This section indicates that the Government “may” contact some or all of the Offeror’s customers (Government and commercial). Will the Government change this evaluation procedure to “will contact all of the Offeror’s customers” given the relatively small vendor pool, the significant value of the contracts, and the challenging nature of operations? We believe the effort would be worth the time.

Answer 23) D8.4.2 and topic-related other solicitation sections will remain as-is. The Government applies a very thorough effort in gathering recent and relevant past performance for the source selection process.

Question 24) D8.4.2 - Why are relevant contracts defined as “aviation support operating and maintaining a Single Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) airplane to support water/retardant application for fire suppression operations in the contiguous 48 States”? Can the definition of relevant be amended to single engine amphibious water scooping fixed-wing aircraft services for the BLM and other federal and state agencies in the contiguous 48 States and Alaska? Are scooper aircraft and Alaska experience considered important evaluation criteria? Should greater weighting be given to single engine amphibious water scooping services than to wheels SEAT services?

Answer 24) The D8.4.2 sentence referenced is revised to read as “Relevant contracts include performance of efforts involving aviation support operating and maintaining a Single Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) airplane and amphibious water-scooping variants to support water/retardant application for fire suppression operations in the contiguous 48 States and Alaska that are similar in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation.”

Question 25) Does the language in Section D10 conflict with the language in D8 and D8.1.2 (i.e. selection on the basis of fair and reasonable pricing proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptable standards for non-cost factors vs. awarding a contracts to offerors whose offers will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered where non-price factors are significantly more important than evaluated price)?

Answer 25) D8.1.2 is deleted, in order to deconflict and clarify the intent of the solicitation.

Question 26) Exhibit E-2: Can a vendor include an aircraft in its offer that will not be delivered to that vendor in Fire Boss configuration until after the solicitation closes? Would it be acceptable for the vendor to base its empty weight and payload calculations on an aircraft in wheel configuration with estimates on what the Fire Boss will weigh after installation of avionics, a fire gate, and Wipaire floats and accessories (Accurate W&B; Equipment List; and performance calculations would not be completed until after aircraft delivery in Fire Boss configuration)?

Answer 26) See Questions 2 & 3.

Question 27) Exhibit E-4: The dates for contracts read 2014, 2015, and 2016. Should this be updated to accommodate more current contract information (i.e. 2018, 2019, and 2020)?

Answer 27) Exhibit E-4 is revised to reflect 2018 – 2020.

Question 28) Exhibit E-5 #9: Please explain the requirement in this section? 14 CFR Part 135.63 does not apply to Part 137 operations. The Operations Specifications “Aircraft Listing” is already covered by the request to submit a complete electronic copy of the entire FAA Operations Specification in the section above (#8).

Answer 28) Exhibit E-5 is revised, #9 is omitted.

Question 29) I am requesting in writing, historical data excluding this past fire season, on the average use of Fire Boss assets per fire season, the number of days Fire Boss aircraft were contracted in each season, the total number of hours Fire Boss aircraft were utilized per season, and the number of Fire Boss assets in service during the season for each data set.

Answer 29): D16PC00160 and D16PC00161 are the two current and soon to expire predecessor contracts. Statistical data is as follows.

BLM Data Year Flight Time Total # aircraft available on DOI contracts 2016 1,211 13 2017 2,147 13 2018 2,990 13 2019 2,124 15 2020 2,069 19

Question 30) B10 Pilot Qualifications - page 20 Page 21 - B10.2.5 - Must submit an experience resume or an OAS-64C for each pilot offered for approval. The requirements to submit the above documents are not listed under Section D – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS. Are they to be submitted with bid documents and under what section?

Answer 30) Pilots qualifications are not included in the evaluation. Section B10.2.5 is addressing the documents that must be submitted at time of inspection after award.

Question 31) Scenario Based Pilot Training. Exhibit 9 – pages 67-69 This Exhibit is not listed under Section D – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS. Should these pages be completed and submitted with bid documents and under what section?

Answer 31) The Exhibit 9 Scenario Based Pilot Training documents on Solicitation pages 67-69 are not required to be submitted with a proposal package. Pilot qualifications are not evaluated for contract award. The documents are to be presented post-award, at time of pilot inspection.

Question 32) SECTION D - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, Proposal Instructions: pages 74-75 D4.2 states 3 hard copies of each volume outlined below and 1 soft copy D4.5 states only one hardcopy set of all volumes (the complete proposal) labeled “original”.

D4.9 states Proposals shall be submitted to the government in three (3) separate volumes as set forth below:

How many hard copy proposals are being requested, the D4.2 would require 9 hard copies (3x3 volumes) and D4.9 would require 3 more hard copies?

Answer 32) The references to “volumes” is revised. Each of the three hard copies and one digital copy must contain the “Offer”, “Technical Capability” and “Past Performance” sections as revised in the Solicitation. Please review the Solicitation for revision details.

Question 33) Regarding the aircraft questionnaire, aircraft equipment list and aircraft performance data and the 200 page technical limitation”. Can we submit the individual Aircraft Questionnaire, Exhibit E-2, with its weight and balance calculation and Aircraft Information Form, Exhibit E-3, but submit a “typical equipment list and performance charts” due to the document size limitation? If not the document size needs to be increased as just the aircraft information and SMS information will take up approximately 170 pages of the 200 page limit.

Answer 33) The referenced 200 page limit is revised to read as 300.

Question 34) EXHIBIT E-4 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEETS: states only include recent (not more than 3 years) yet the form has boxes for 2016-2015-2014. Can you change the form to 2020-2019- 2018, or should we just note the more recent years?

Answer 34) See Question 28

Question 35) On Exhibit E-2, the Maximum Takeoff Weight description states “at 8,000 Feet and 25 degrees C”. Shouldn’t this elevation be 3,000 feet?

Answer 35) All solicitation references to 8,000 ft are revised to read as 3,000 ft., including in Section A1, Exhibits 17 and 18, and Exhibits E-2 and E-3.

Question 36) The sample fuel requirement calculation of 2.5 x 6.7 x 86 should equal 1,440.5 vs. 864.3 pounds. The 864.3 pounds is based on the SEAT requirement of 1.5 hours of fuel. It would also be better if the sample used a fuel burn rate of 90 gallons/hour since all Fire Bosses are equipped with -67F engines. The revised sample fuel requirement would then read 1,507.5 pounds. The sample fuel requirement calculation is not a big deal, but the maximum takeoff weight and temperature is.

Answer 36) The fuel requirement calculation referenced as 864.3 lbs. is revised to read as 1,440.5 lbs.

Christopher Bothwell Contracting Officer

CHRISTOPHER BOTHWELL

Digitally signed by

CHRISTOPHER BOTHWELL

Date: 2020.11.13 11:51:28 -07'00'