B09_44042665_Solicitation_Q0034_Amendment_0001_Questions___Answers_1_0001.pdf

140L6326Q0034 Amendment 0001

Questions and Answers

Question 1:

The acreage identified in the SOW differs from the acreage shown on the attached project map, particularly for the Long Creek and Trail Creek areas. Which acreage and/or AOI boundaries should contractors use for pricing and flight planning?

Answer 1:

The project map PDF has the correct acreage and boundaries. Contractors should use the acreage provided on the map for pricing and flight planning.

To reiterate, the correct acreages are as follows:

Long Creek: 1038 acres

Trail Creek: 155 acres

Greenstone Creek: 122 acres

Poorman Townsite: 686 acres

Solomon Creek: 37 acres

Flat Creek: 94 acres

Question 2:

Will the BLM provide authoritative GIS boundary files for the six collection areas, such as SHP, KML/KMZ, GeoPackage, or another geospatial format? This will be very helpful.

Answer 2:

The BLM is unable to provide these types of files as they were not fully compatible with the acquisition programs when the solicitation was posted on SAM.gov. These files will be provided to the contractor upon award.

Question 3:

Does BLM require any portion of the LiDAR acquisition, processing, QA/QC, or final deliverables to be performed by an Alaska-licensed Professional Land Surveyor?

Answer 3:

For this acquisition, a licensed Professional Land Surveyor is not required.

Question 4:

For a UAS-based or hybrid UAS/crewed-aircraft approach, what documentation will the BLM require to demonstrate compliance with DOI covered-UAS requirements?

Answer 4:

Please refer to Section 6 and Section 7 of OPM-11 for documentation requirements to ensure compliance with DOI UAS requirements for cooperators.

Question 5:

FAR 52.212-2 appears to contain placeholder language concerning the evaluation factors.

Can BLM clarify the evaluation factors and the relative importance of technical approach and price?

Answer 5:

Thank you for your question. The contracting office included the requirement for price and technical factors in block 20 of the SF 1449 and the BLM intends to award a contract to the responsible offeror whose quote addresses how the offerors technical approach will meet all of the requirements in the SOW and key areas as reiterated in the SF 1449. A firm fixed price contract will be awarded to the offeror whose price is lowest among all proposals that were deemed to be technically acceptable.

Question 6:

Would the BLM accept a hybrid acquisition approach utilizing crewed fixed-wing LiDAR for primary collection and compliant UAS LiDAR for targeted infill or reacquisition, provided that all data are processed and delivered under a common QA/QC standard and meet the required specifications?

Answer 6:

Yes

Questions 7:

(Question for clarification) The acreage shown in the Statement of Work differs from the acreage shown on the accompanying project map for several of the survey areas.

For example, the SOW identifies Long Creek as approximately 750 acres and Trail Creek as approximately 360 acres, while the map identifies Long Creek as approximately 1,038 acres and Trail Creek as approximately 155 acres.

Could you please confirm which acreage figures or survey boundaries should be used for pricing and flight planning?

Answer 7: Please refer to Answer 1.

Question 8:

If available, would BLM be able to provide the authoritative AOI polygons or GIS boundary files for the six survey areas?

Answer 8: Please refer to Answer 2.

Question 9:

The solicitation requires the quotation to address the technical method, personnel, anticipated timeline, equipment, and the Section 3.0 requirements of the SOW.

Could you please confirm whether these items constitute the complete technical evaluation criteria, and whether there is any stated relative importance between the technical factors and price?

Answer 9:

Thank you for your question. The contracting office included the requirement for price and technical factors in block 20 of the SF 1449 and the BLM intends to award a contract to the responsible offeror whose quote addresses how the offerors technical approach meets all of the requirements in the SOW and key areas as reiterated in the SF 1449. A firm fixed price contract will be awarded to the offeror whose price is lowest among all proposals that were deemed to be technically acceptable.

Question 10:

The SOW requires cloud- and fog-free conditions between the aircraft and ground and generally snow-free ground conditions, while allowing light undrifted snow with prior approval.

Is BLM expecting the LiDAR acquisition to be completed during a specific preferred seasonal window, or may the contractor schedule collection at any point during the period of performance when the required ground and atmospheric conditions are met?

Answer 10:

The contractor may perform collection at any time within the period of performance when the required ground and atmospheric conditions are met.

Question 11:

The SOW states that geospatial data is due 60 days prior to the end of the period of performance to allow time for comments and revisions.

Could you please confirm whether BLM anticipates a formal review and comment cycle on the geospatial deliverables and, if so, whether there is an expected turnaround time for Government comments that contractors should account for in the project schedule?

Answer 11:

The BLM anticipates a formal review and comment cycle. The requirement for providing the geospatial data 60 days prior to the end of the period of performance is to account for this review and comment period. The turnaround time is unknown as it is highly dependent on the deliverables received.

Question 12:

If this were to be executed with a drone and drone LIDAR payload, do both need to be NDAA compliant?

Answer 12:

Yes, in compliance with the requirements of the 2024 NDAA, the DOI adopted the policies listed in section 6 of OPM-11 to ensure that all UAS-related activities, acquisitions, and operations align with the Act’s provisions. Please refer to Section 6 of OPM-11.

Question 13:

Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past.

Answer 13:

This is a brand-new project.

Question 14:

The acreages shown in Section 3.0 of the SOW differ from those shown on the attached project map, particularly for Long Creek and Trail Creek. For example, the SOW identifies Long Creek as approximately 750 acres and Trail Creek as approximately 360 acres, while the attached map identifies approximately 1,038 acres and 155 acres, respectively. Which boundaries/acres should offerors use for fixed-price quotation purposes?

Answer 14:

Please refer to Answers 1 and 2.

Question 15:

Will authoritative GIS polygons/shapefiles be provided following award?

Answer 15:

Yes.

Question 16:

Section 3.2 requires an RTK or PPK GNSS receiver. Would post-processed direct georeferencing using an Applanix APX-series GNSS/INS processed through POSPac with Trimble CenterPoint PP-RTX or an equivalent precise post-processing solution satisfy this requirement, provided trajectory logs, absolute in-flight positioning metadata, and the required swath-to-swath accuracy report are delivered? RTK may become degraded within certain BLM areas, PPK observations from a GNSS base station may be affected by tall tree canopies.

Answer 16:

Per Section 3.2 of the SOW, the mapping system must utilize an RTK or PPK GNSS receiver and the BLM will only accept that.

Question 17:

For a UAS-based approach, what documentation does BLM require with the quotation to demonstrate compliance with DOI OPM-11 and the covered-UAS restrictions? Would documentation identifying the exact aircraft configuration and manufacturer/component compliance certification be sufficient, or is a specific DOI/OAS approval or form required before award?

Answer 17:

Per OPM-11, the cooperator/ affiliate and vendor pilots and aircraft operating under DOI operational control must have an approval letter issued from OAS. Please refer to Sections 5, 6, and 7 of OPM-11.

Question 18:

For Poorman Townsite, Solomon Creek, and Flat Creek, the SOW notes that summer terrestrial access is unavailable and rotary-wing access is possible. Following award, can BLM provide known landing-zone locations, current local access information, or relevant land-manager/miner contacts to assist the contractor with arranging lawful access and rotary-wing insertion?

Answer 18:

Yes.

Question 19:

The SOW states that geospatial data are due 60 days prior to the September 30, 2027 end of the period of performance and the Final Report is due 30 days prior. Please confirm that the intended delivery dates are approximately August 1, 2027 for geospatial data and August 31, 2027 for the Final Report.

Answer 19:

This is correct.

Question 20:

(The interested party included a sample KMZ file for review and approval. In our understanding of the question, it is a request for a pre-approval of a portion of the offer prior to the fair and balanced evaluation of all quotes)

Answer 20:

Thank you for this question. Unfortunately, it is not appropriate for the Program Manager or Contracting Officer to pre-approve any portions of offers prior to the evaluations.

Question 21:

May I have the correct KMZ for flight planning purposes?

Answer 21:

Please refer to Answers 1, 2 and 15.

Question 22:

We have identified historical and current references to a private airstrip/runway in the Poorman area. Is BLM aware of the current operational condition, ownership/contact information, or availability of the Poorman airstrip for contractor fixed-wing access?

Answer 22:

The BLM is aware of this airstrip but is not the landowner, is not aware of the owner or contact information for the owner, nor its availability for use and has not used this airstrip.

Equipment and vegetation were observed on the airstrip that would need to be managed prior to a fixed wing landing in addition to contacting the owner/ operator and acquiring written permission to use it.

Question 23:

Is Government-furnished rotary-wing transportation available for the inaccessible southern AOIs, or should offerors assume all rotary-wing transportation must be independently procured and included in the firm-fixed price?

Answer 23:

All transportation must be independently procured and included in the firm-fixed price.

Question 24:

The solicitation shows a POP beginning October 1. Given the potential for deteriorating weather and snow in the Ruby area, would BLM allow acquisition prior to October 1 if award and mobilization could occur sooner?

Answer 24:

The contract must be awarded prior to October 1 however coordination with the program office may be limited because of manpower availability constraints.

Question 25:

The SOW specifies RTK or PPK positioning. Given the remoteness of the project areas, would BLM also accept a high-precision PPP GNSS/INS trajectory solution, provided we meet the specified LiDAR accuracy, swath alignment, and QC requirements?

Answer 25:

Per Section 3.2 of the SOW, the mapping system must utilize an RTK or PPK GNSS receiver and the BLM will only accept that.

Question 26:

Could you please provide, if available, the KML, KMZ, shapefile, geodatabase, or other GIS polygon files defining the required survey boundaries for the following six areas?

• Flat Creek

• Solomon Creek

• Poorman

• Greenstone Creek

• Long Creek

• Trail Creek

Answer 26:

Question 27:

The SOW and maps are not identical. Could you please also confirm which GIS boundaries/acreages control for proposal and performance purposes?

Answer 27:

Question 28:

Are geospatial files (.kmz, .shp, etc) available for the AOI polygons for this solicitation?

Answer 28:

Question 29:

We noticed a discrepancy between the acreage shown in the Statement of Work and the acreage shown on the updated project map. The SOW table identifies approximately 750 acres at Long Creek and 360 acres at Trail Creek, while the updated map identifies approximately 1,038 acres at Long Creek and 155 acres at Trail Creek. There are also smaller differences for several of the other areas.

For proposal development and flight planning, can BLM please clarify which acreage and survey limits should be used as the basis of the proposal? Will BLM provide GIS polygons/shapefiles defining the required collection limits prior to proposal submission, or should offerors base their proposals on the limits depicted on the updated map?

Answer 29:

Please refer to Answer 1, 2 and 15.

Question 30:

Given the revised technical requirements and specifications included with the reissued solicitation, would BLM consider extending the quote due date from September 11, 2026 to September 18, 2026?

Answer 30:

Thank you for your question. The BLM will extend the quote due date from September 11, 2026 to September 14, 2026. Please refer to the SF 30 for more information.