Questions and Answers.pdf

6973GH-20-Q-00149

Mohawk Mountain Helo Support

Questions and Answers

All questions are copied and pasted verbatim; however they are renumbered for reference purposes.

1. The RFQ has two pictures of the units being flown off the mountain but we were hoping for a picture of the overall unit (farther away).

FAA RESPONSE: These pictures are of the site prior to the most recent storm damage.

2. If you have a picture of the landing site on Mohawk Mtn please forward. If no pictures can be provided please provide a general description of size, terrain, and tall obstacles if any. From the images we were able to view on google earth look pretty rugged. Any pictures you could forward would be helpful.

FAA RESPONSE: These are aerial photos of the site after the most recent storm damage. There is a landing zone to the left as shown in the photo on the right that is small but will allow a smaller aircraft to land. The landing zone size is approximately large enough for a small aircraft to land and no heavy aircraft should anticipate using the landing zone. The landing zone is routinely used for CBP personnel aircraft and is relatively flat. The surface of the landing zone should be considered as shown in the foreground-left of the image provided on question one.

3. We would like pictures of the installation loads/materials, if you have them. If there are no pictures available can we have the drawings (as stated in the SOW)?

FAA RESPONSE: Yes, drawings are attached to the Q&A (see Q&A attachment 1). Please note the drawings are layout details and are not installation drawing for existing systems.

The picture on the left is part of the current installation; on the right is the batteries that will be taken off the mountain.

4. There a few weight inconsistencies throughout the SOW. Please clarify the following:

a. Solar skid 1: 4300 lb total / inconsistent with preferred lift sequence breakdown of 3300 lb solar skid plus 3000 lbs batteries – which totals 6,300 lbs not 4,300 lbs. Please clarify if the batteries weigh 1000 or 3000 lbs.

FAA RESPONSE: The inconsistency is a typo on the Installation section of Attachment A. A revised SOW correcting this typo has replaced the previous SOW with no other changes made.

The power skid or solar skid one has a total weight of 4,300 lbs and this will be the preferred lift weight unless batteries must be removed. IF batteries must be removed, the removed batteries would then likely require another lift of the 1,000 pounds (not 3,000 pounds) of batteries. The 3,000 pound number should have read 1,000 in the attachment. The additional lift of removed batteries could be worked into other lighter lifts but battery damage will have to be assessed should combining batteries with other materials be considered.

b. Solar Skid 2: 3700 lb total / this weight does not match the description or weight from the table provided on the last page of the SOW *We believe the solar skid 2 and cabinet skid are the same item, but each item has a different weight listed. Please confirm the weight of the Solar Skid 2.

FAA RESPONSE: Correct, the solar skid 2 and the cabinet skid are the same. The weight inconsistency is 100 lb (3700 in body of SOW and 3600 on table); use the 3700 lb weight. The same applies for solar skid 1 with 4300 & 4200 lb respectively, use 4300 lb.

i. The SOW states that this load cannot be broken down or separated. Is there any possibility that this load could be lightened, even if we lighted the load by our own personnel? If the load couple be lighted by a few hundred pounds it would be easier for the pilot to maneuver.

FAA RESPONSE: Solar skid 1 can be reduced by removing the batteries as we have suggested but Solar skid 2 cannot be broken down without disassembling the unit and creating extensive work for the installation crew on top of the mountain.

c. Can you confirm the weight of the schedule 40 tubing – SOW states 600 lbs, the table states 95 lbs per piece of 14 totaling 1,330 lbs? Please clarify if the schedule 40 tubing weighs 600 or 1330 lbs.

FAA RESPONSE: Use the weight of 1300 lbs for tubing.

5. We didn’t see the “Battery Bank (UPS) listed in the SOW, only the table. Can you confirm if these batteries are being flown onto or off of the mountain?

FAA RESPONSE: The Battery Bank (UPS) is another name for a listed item. In the SOW this was listed as palletized batteries, in the lift descriptions this was listed as batteries and in the table it was listed as battery bank. All of these items are the same thing and the weight is 1,000.

Dimensions provided are for the enclosure the batteries are currently installed in. Once it is determined the batteries will be removed from skid one then whether the batteries will be transported in enclosure on pallet or secured to pallet can be proposed as a part of the contractor’s flight plan.

6. Can you confirm the that each of the following loads will both be flown onto and off of the mountain:

a. Job box

b. Welder

c. Tool box 1

d. Too box 2

e. Water Buffalo (in full) (out half full)

FAA RESPONSE: Yes. The weights of the incoming items listed above (a through d) are not anticipated to change. Each of these items will be carrying some amount of consumables for the project but the change in weight is anticipated to be minimal. The water buffalo weight may change significantly or not. Water has to be onsite for fire protection during hot work and concrete mixing for anchors. The amount of water consumed will likely be less than half of the water transported in.

7. Will the U.S. Government consider a single aircraft solution? If yes, how would you like up to populate the Section B CLIN Data (i.e., currently states “Heavy Helicopter and Light Helicopter” hours and prices.

FAA RESPONSE: Yes, a single aircraft solution would be considered acceptable; however offerors are advised to review paragraph 3.0 if considering to propose any dual-rotor aircraft for this requirement. The FAA is pursuing the lowest priced solution that is technically acceptable and poses little to no risk to cost, performance, or schedule of a contract when/if awarded.

If offerors propose a single aircraft solution, it would be appropriate to enter “0” into CLIN fill-ins where appropriate or leave blank. Offerors are cautioned that CLIN fill-in information must be consistent with the proposed solution described in the cover letter narrative. An example of an unacceptable proposal would be if the proposed solution in the cover letter described the use of both a light and heavy lift aircraft, but indicated “0” or left blank any required CLIN fill-in information for either helicopter in the RFQ document.

8. Will any government personnel be transported via aircraft requiring CARB certification?

FAA RESPONSE: No.