AMENDMENT 0001 - QUESTIONS RESPONSES.doc

DJMS-11-JPT-R-0023-0001

JPATS AIRCRAFT LEASING

SOLICITATION NUMBER: DJMS-11-JPT-R-0023

AMENDMENT 0001 – QUESTIONS & RESPONSES

AMENDMENT 0001 is issued to:

1. Correct FAR Clause 52.211-11, Liquidated Damages—Supplies, Services, or Research and Development shall read: “a. If the Contractor fails to deliver the supplies or perform the services within the time specified in this contract, the Contractor shall, in place of actual damages, pay to the Government liquidated damages of $29,900.00 per calendar day of delay.

2. Provide industry government responses to questions asked.

QUESTION #1: Our Company is a small business, if we submitted a proposal under this RFP, are we still required to submit a sub-contracting plan?

RESPONSE: Small business concerns are not required to submit a sub-contracting plan.

QUESTION #2: In the SOW, Paragraph F.3 states "Public Use Aircraft", does that mean the aircraft's FAA Standard Airworthiness Certificate would be surrendered and a "Public Use" Certificate of Airworthiness obtained?

RESPONSE: No, the aircraft will be registered in accordance with 14 CFR 91-203. (Have an appropriate and current airworthiness certificate.)

QUESTION #3: Since the Contractor will be providing the aircraft insurance, can the USMS provide pilot resumes or flight time/experience details of USMS pilots since insurance underwriters typically require this information.

RESPONSE: For privacy purposes, we cannot provide pilot resumes as part of an Amendment to the Solicitation. JPATS will make this detailed information available prior to award to the apparent successful offeror. However, if needed for insurance purposes, JPATS employs twelve (12) line and four (4) staff pilots. All pilots have multi-engine Airline Transport Pilot certification and are required to obtain type ratings in aircraft to be flown. Currently the pilots’ experience level ranges from 24 to 45 years (average of 32) with flight time ranging from 5,600 to 17,438 hours (average of 13,424).

QUESTION #4: In H.4, Section 2. Avionic/Navigation/Auto Flight System, Paragraph A states "FMS with a data base containing worldwide navigation data" Will the USMS be operating the leased aircraft for extended overwater operations? i.e. Victorville to Honolulu v/v? Or will there be any trips to the EU? As there is no mention of HF Comm installation or requirement, also there is a difference between 760 channel VHF Comm radios and 8.33khz spacing radios, presently FAA/FCC do not require domestically operated aircraft to have 8.33khz spacing radios, that is a requirement to enter EU Airspace only at present. Paragraph T states "Wiring for two (2) AirCell ST 3100 Iridium Telecommunication Systems" does the USMS require two (2) systems per aircraft or one (1) system per aircraft with cockpit and cabin handsets?

RESPONSE: a. JPATS will be operating these aircraft within the continental United States. There will not be any “extended overwater operations.” b. The VHF must meet the minimum requirements of 47 CFR 87.133 (720 or 760 channel 25 kHz). c. JPATS requires one (1) system per aircraft with two (2) handsets.

QUESTION #5: In H.4, Section 1. General Paragraph I states "MD-83 aircraft equipped with a standard three fuel tank configuration" the standard fuel tank configuration for the MD-83 is at least four (4) fuel tanks for a total of 6,981 U.S. Gallons.

RESPONSE: The requirement remains as stated, “Aircraft must have operational range capability equal to or greater than the MD-83 aircraft equipped with a standard three fuel tank configuration.”

QUESTION #6: Can a copy of the JPATS GOM be provided for review?

RESPONSE: For operational security reasons, the JPATS General Operations Manual will not be made available for review. However, all offerors should be assured that aircraft are operated in a manner consistent with the Aircraft Operating Manual and/or the Pilot Operating Handbook of the manufacturer.

QUESTION #7: Do the aircraft pictures (required in Paragraph H.5 of the SOW) count against the allotted 100 page count in the Technical Volume?

RESPONSE: No, the pictures do not count towards the 100 page limit of the Technical Volume.

QUESTION #8: Will the contractor be able to use the USMS Hangars to conduct Depot Maintenance?

RESPONSE: No, the contractor will not be able to use the USMS JPATS maintenance hangar for Heavy Maintenance.

QUESTION #9: Section 7, Page 20, Q.1 Key Personnel – request clarification on what "...shall be posted at their assigned duty sites 100 percent of the time..." means with regard to assigned duties. Are we expected to have all personnel on-site while aircraft are flying, or can they be scheduled around aircraft flight schedules?

RESPONSE: The sentence “With the exception of the Program Manager, individuals filling these positions shall be posted at their assigned duty sites 100 percent of the time." will be deleted from the SOW. The Director of Maintenance will manage his personnel as required.

QUESTION #10: Under Key Personnel SOW, pg 18, # 2 Director of Maintenance. The last sentence requires at least 5 years as an aircraft inspector. Many times in the commercial aviation industry a person may take a path into the Quality arena or stay within the maintenance side of the house throughout their career. Would the USMS accept significant over and above length of tenure in areas 1, 2 & 3 as an offset for a full 5 years of inspection?

RESPONSE: The individual proposed for this position must have the qualifications as listed. The USMS GMM requires 5 years of inspection experience. This could include experience as an RII inspector, a designated inspector, or as an Inspector Authorization.

QUESTION #11: Is it USMS' intention for the comments (SOW pg 13, Paragraphs K.22 & 23) concerning recent maintenance experience and training on leased aircraft T/M/S to be more restrictive than the Mechanics' Personnel Requirements shown in Paragraph P of the SOW?

RESPONSE: Paragraph K.22 is a recency requirement that ensures the individual has recently been employed as a certified mechanic within the past 24 months in accordance with 14 CFR 65.83. Paragraph K.23 is a training/experience requirement that ensures the individual has attended a training course and has at least six months working experience on the airframe selected.

QUESTION #12: For a significant cost savings, would the USMS consider an aircraft manufactured either in 1989 or 1990 if all other salient features are met and the accumulated time is lower than required?

RESPONSE: No, the USMS will not consider changing the requirement to include aircraft manufactured earlier than 1991.

QUESTION #13: Would USMS consider extending the Proposal due date be extended until June 20th to allow for more thorough aircraft review?

RESPONSE: The proposal due date is hereby extended to 12:00 pm EST (noon), June 20, 2011 and no further extensions will be granted. All other delivery instructions as stated in the RFP remain.

QUESTION #14: 1)

Background: The file format provided by the USMS on the FedBizOpps website is a non-searchable PDF document. Will the Government provide a MS Word or searchable PDF document for use by the prospective offerors?

RESPONSE: A MS Word copy of the Statement of Work is included with this Amendment.

QUESTION #15: Background: Under Section M. of the PWS, entitled Deliverables, the aircraft is to be delivered in its required configuration 4-weeks after contract award. There are many modifications that must be done during this 4-week period, one of the which is the requirements listed in the Section H.3.A of the Statement of Work is an “Operational forward self-contained and powered air stairs”. Neither the 737-400 nor the MD-83 have this equipment as a part of the standard delivery configuration for most models, and production or modification to either platform for this air stairs was very limited. In order for compliance, an aircraft must be modified to include the “Operational forward self-contained and powered air stairs”, however 4 weeks is insufficient time for this modification. Question: Will the Government consider a longer duration between contract award and the aircraft delivery for the modifications to have the aircraft fully configured to the specifications identified in Section H of the Statement of Work?

RESPONSE: JPATS’ requires the aircraft to be delivered within four (4) weeks after contract award.

QUESTION #16: Background: Incorporated Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Clause 52.211-11, requires payment of a penalty if the contractor does not meet the mission requirements specified in Statement of Work (SOW) Paragraph K.9. In addition, Paragraph K.6 of the SOW requires the contractor to provide a backup aircraft that meets the configuration requirements in the PWS for those times when the primary aircraft are down for scheduled and unscheduled depot maintenance. Question: Is it the desire of the Government, based on these PWS requirements and the liquidated damages clause, for the contractor to provide a 3rd aircraft to support the JPATS mission requirements?

RESPONSE: The contractor is required to provide a replacement aircraft when a leased aircraft is removed from service for scheduled or unscheduled maintenance. JPATS preference is always a dry lease aircraft (conformed to the requirements of the contract), but the contractor can provide a wet lease aircraft (not longer than fourteen (14) days). The replacement aircraft (whether dry or wet) is at no additional cost to the Government. If the contractor fails to provide a replacement aircraft, liquidated damages will be accessed at the rate of $29,900.00 per day.

QUESTION #17: Background: The Statement of Work (SOW) Paragraph Q.1 requires the contractor to provide resumes and letters of intent (commitment) for all the key positions identified in the PWS. These 7 key positions consist of a total 13 personnel (Reference SOW Paragraph P.2. Based on this requirement, coupled with the due date of June 6th, does not provide adequate time for to post job openings, received qualified resume’s, interview of potential candidates, make hiring decisions, and negotiate letters of intent for these positions. Question: a) Will the Government consider modifying the Section 6 requirement to include job qualifications, in lieu of resumes and letters of intent, which will be used to make hiring decision for the key personnel listed in Section Q.1 of the Statement of Work? b) If not, will the government consider an extension to the proposal due date of June 6, 2011, to allow offeror’s that do not currently employee these key personnel (existing contractor’s support JPATS aircraft in Oklahoma City) adequate to recruit, make offers to, and obtain letters of intent for submission.

RESPONSE: The proposal due date is extended to 12:00 pm EST (noon), June 20, 2011 and no further extensions will be granted. All other delivery instructions as stated in the RFP remain.

QUESTION #18: Background: Under the current RFP DJMS-11-JPT-R-0023, there is a requirement for the purchase of only 2 Aircraft assets currently under operation under the JPATS contract DJJ08-C-1669. Under that current one year with 7 one year options that ends in 2015, there was a total of 8 aircraft awarded. Questions: a) Does the USMS plan for the contract issued as a result of RFP DJMS-11-JPT-R-0023 to be a replacement for the existing program under Contract DJJ08-C-1669, in whole or in part? b) Does the USMS intend to combine the two programs at a later date?

RESPONSE: Contract # DJJ08-C-1669 expired on September 30, 2010, after the decision was made to not exercise Option Year 3, based on the change in the JPATS requirement. The contract that will result from RFP DJMS-11-JPT-R-0023 will be a replacement for the JPATS program.

QUESTION #19: Background: Section (C) under Federal Acquisition Regulation 52.212-5 of the RFP contains FAR Clause 52.222-41, entitled Service Contract Act of 1965. This FAR clause prescribes the requirement for adhering to specific Area Wage Determinations for the non-exempted positions associated with the anticipated contract work. The RFP did not include a specific Area Wage Determination for the location of operation. Question: Is it the Government’s intent to provide an Area Wage Determination for this RFP?

RESPONSE: Wage Determination # WD 05-2431 (Rev.-14) dated 11/03/2010 applies to this requirement. A copy of the Wage Determination can be found at www.wdol.gov QUESTION #20: Background: Section F of the Scope of Work, entitled Government Responsibilities, details the Government provided services. Missing from this list is Aviation Fuel. Question: Is it Governments intent to provide the aviation fuel for the JPATS operation?

RESPONSE: Statement of Work, Paragraph E.1 states, “The Contractor is responsible to provide insurance, full maintenance and logistics support, aircraft positioning/de-positioning, and all maintenance ferry flights to include fuel and associated expenses.” (i.e. flights to and from scheduled and unscheduled maintenance facilities and required maintenance test flights). Paragraph F.2 states “JPATS will be responsible for mission related fees to include: ground handling fees such as landing fees and parking fees, as applicable, aircraft and GSE fuel, and aircraft de-icing fees.”

QUESTION #21: With respect to the government’s actual operation of the aircraft, is it safe to assume that the government will self-insure itself for the government’s liability?

RESPONSE: The Government self-insures itself.

QUESTION #22: Is there a limit on number of clearances available for Contractor personnel? If we choose to use a higher number of mechanics (in order to more efficiently utilize their time), would we be penalized due to numbers of clearances allowed by DOJ?

RESPONSE: There is no limit on the number of clearances available; however the contractor is responsible for pre-screening prospective employees for suitability for work on this contract.

QUESTION #23: The government asks the contractor to indemnify the government for the contractor’s negligent acts or omissions. It is typical for the operator/lessee (here, the government) to indemnify the lessor (here, the contractor) for the government’s negligent acts or omissions. Why is typical provision not provided?

RESPONSE: The Clause remains as stated. Please be assured however, that, the Government understands its obligations and will accept responsibility for the Government’s negligent acts or omissions.

QUESTION #24: FAR 52.212-4(p) provides that the contractor will not be liable for consequential damages. The addendum to the FAR, at A(d) (Indemnification, Contractor Actions), provides a broad indemnification to the government for the contractor’s negligence. Does Section A(d) make the contractor liable for consequential damages, or is the indemnification “subject to” the limitation set forth in subsection (k)?

RESPONSE: The reference FAR 52.212-4(p) pertains to warranty issues and has no relevance to this Indemnification clause which pertains to a Contractor’s negligence.

QUESTION #25: Please confirm that one original Technical Proposal and one original Business/ Price Proposal plus a CD are to be delivered to Washington D.C.; and another six copies of the Technical Proposal, one copy of the Business/Price Proposal, and another CD are to be delivered to Oklahoma City.

RESPONSE: This is correct, one (1) original of the Business/Price Proposal and one (1) original of the Technical Proposal along with an electronic copy (CD is fine) are to be delivered to the Washington D.C. address AND one (1) copy of the Business/Price Proposal and six (6) copies of the Technical Proposal along with an electronic copy (CD is fine) are to be delivered to the Oklahoma City, OK address.