TCAQ Response to Industry Questions_29 Oct 09.pdf

Theater Express Solicitation Questions

29 Oct 09

Q1. We are looking at utilizing several airlines that have recently been approved through CARB.

It was mentioned at the last Theater Express meeting at Scott that the CARB process was more detailed than IATA requirements. Will the government except CARB certification in lieu of an audit by a third party IATA organization?

A1. The Government will accept CARB approved foreign flag subcontractor certification in lieu of an audit. To ensure compliance with the PWS, para 1.2, the prime contractor must submit a statement of compliance validating AMC/A3B has approved the foreign flag carrier.

Para 1.2.1.1. will be amended to read:

1.2.1.1. CRAF carriers (prime contractors) that will utilize a subcontractor to perform any portion of the airlift requirement must assess the level of safety of the subcontractor.

This assessment will be based upon a safety audit performed by the CRAF carrier or an independent International Air Transport Association (IATA) accredited 3 rd party audit organization. CARB approved foreign flag subcontractors are exempt from the audit as long as they remain on the AMC/A3B DOD-approved carrier listing.

Q2. Will the Government accept an United Nations safety audit in lieu of the CRAF carrier completing an audit program?

A2. No, the government will not accept a United Nations Safety Audit certification or United

Nations statement of compliance in lieu of a safety audit performed by the CRAF carrier or an independent International Air Transport Association accredited 3rd party audit organization.

Q3. Please clarify discrepancy between Solicitation, para 1.2.1.2, page 15 and Attachment 2, page 2.

Solicitation, para 1.2.1.2: Following completion of each safety audit, the CRAF carrier shall issue a “Statement of Compliance” to the contracting officer affirming each subcontractor complies with the technical requirements of paragraph 1.2

Attachment 2, page 2: Theater Express Carrier Safety and Oversight Audit Checklist

1.1.2: Following completion of this audit, the CRAF carrier shall issue a "Statement of

Compliance" to the contracting officer affirming each subcontractor complies with the safety requirements of this checklist

The PWS requires that we certify compliance with the "technical requirements" of PWS 1.2 and the checklist instructs us to certify compliance with the "safety requirements" of the checklist

There's a difference between the two. The implications of certifying safety can be much different than certifying technical. Please clarify which we’re to certify

A3. The contractor must comply with the PWS, para 1.2 requirements which state the prime contractor is required to complete a safety and audit oversight program on foreign flag subcontractors using the Theater Express Attachment 2, Safety and Audit Oversight Checklist.

Q4. Please clarify this sentence within the Attachment 2, Theater Express Carrier Safety and

Oversight Audit Checklist, Introduction paragraph that states: “CRAF carriers must ensure each foreign flag subcontractor is approved by the country-specific Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) prior to providing service to the following countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Djibouti, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, Yemen, Kenya, Sudan, and Ethiopia”.

Is each CAA to approve the subcontractor prior to flying into their country? So a UAE registered aircraft flying into Iraq would need Iraq CAA approval? Or is the intent that the CAA issuing the AOC grants approval, so in the same example only the UAE CAA would have to grant approval.

If the intent is the first situation, this becomes a significant burden on the CRAF carrier and subcontractor to obtain CAA approval from each country. We’re not sure of the process or time required to obtain such approval, nor if the CAA would even grant an approval.

If the intent is the second situation, suggested language is: CRAF carriers must ensure each foreign flag subcontractor is approved by a country-specific Civil Aviation

Authority (CAA) prior to providing service to the following countries.

A4. The intent of the statement is to ensure that the prime contractors only subcontract to foreign flag air carriers that have the country specific CAA authorization to fly in and out of the country where service is required.

Q5. The new THX checklist includes all of the items in the current DoD survey checklist, plus the

DoD Quality and Safety Requirements. Many of the items represent requirements that are not required to be a safe operator and will be expensive and problematic for potential carriers to implement or down right difficult for us to obtain access to evaluate.

For example:

Verification of validity of mechanic's licenses through the issuing CAA

Collection of mechanic turnover information

Drug and alcohol testing programs

Collection of union representation, negotiation and union/company relationship information

CASS program

Maintenance repair vendor oversight program that includes audits

Initial and recurrent training for a variety of particular maintenance programs (like engine run/taxi and RVSM). Initial might not be as difficult; it's recurrent that raises a concern.

Evaluate the qualification of their training instructors

Dedicated engineering department

Representatives at heavy check

Corrosion prevention programs

Fuel vendor audit program

Formal program to verify fuel quality at off line locations

Identification of crew member English level

Verification that subcontractor employees and suppliers conform to safety and security trade restrictions of the U.S. Government

Would the CRAF carrier be able to modify the checklist to the truly relevant requirements?

After award notification, would it be possible for the DoD to lead a discussion with CRAF carrier’s audit team to review the expectations for each checklist line item? Based upon the limited capacity within the region, multiple CRAF carriers may use the same subcontractor;

hopefully the results of an audit of the same subcontractor would be consistent.

A5. The CRAF carrier is not allowed to modify the checklist and must comply with the audit areas listed on the Theater Express Carrier Safety and Oversight Audit Checklist, Attachment 2.

Q6. If the Government is aware of additional banned carrier listings please provide the website(s).

Is the expectation the carrier can’t be on any banned list within the world, i.e. Argentina, or only banned for flights within the scope of the solicitation? When can we say we have done “due diligence” on searching out “banned lists”?

A6. PWS, para 1.2.1 will be amended to read:

1.2.1. The Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) carrier (prime contractor) is required to complete a safety and audit oversight program on all subcontracted air carriers. As a minimum, the contractor shall comply with the technical requirements identified in the attached Theater Express Safety and Audit Oversight Checklist (Attachment 2 ). In addition, the prime contractor shall not use carriers listed on the European Banned Carrier

Listing at http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air-ban/list_en.htm

Q7. Please clarify Attachment 2, Theater Express Carrier Safety and Oversight Audit Checklist, Scope para 2. The checklist is provided which is different and more stringent than International

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annexes 1, 6, 8, and 18. Please clarify if the subcontractor is to comply with the checklist of the Annexes.

A7. As a minimum, international air carriers must meet ICAO Annexes 1, 6, 8, and 18 to meet

ICAO requirements. The baseline requirement for the prime contractor’s audit process is to evaluate the foreign airline’s performance against those criteria specified in the applicable ICAO standards and Theater Express Safety and Audit Oversight Checklist, Attachment 2.

Q8. Will an audit be required for November numbered aircraft?

A8. Yes, if not controlled by a CARB-approved carrier.

Q9. Do you have any estimation of an award date and startup date?

A9. Continue to monitor the Federal Business Opportunities website.

Q10. Given the current monopoly with RUS Aviation in Iraq, how is the Prime carrier to get access to RUS Aviation aircraft to assure that this equipment complies to the requirements of areas 1.1.2 ? How should this requirement be addressed in our reply document?

A10. The CRAF carrier (prime contractor) is responsible to establish the applicable subcontracting relationships to comply with the contract. FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors, Part III, para b provides information on how offerors should respond.

Q11. Reference Theater Express PWS paragraph 3.5.2.1: We understand that logistics support varies by FOB/FOL location, but have some concerns with the statement, “…The contractor shall comply with the FOB/FOL reimbursement procedures for contractor logistics support services rendered.” Are the charges for “logistics support services rendered” standardized for all

FOB/FOLs or do they vary from location to location? Is there a place where we can research the charges? We’re sure this is not a problem but would like some specificity if it exists.

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air-ban/list_en.htm

A11. No, the level of contractor logistical support, as well as, the reimbursement procedures vary between the FOB/FOLs and are subject to the local leadership. It is the individual contractor’s responsibility to coordinate with local FOB/FOL leadership to verify the costs based on the support they require.

Q12. Proposal Preparation Instructions, Part II, Past Performance Information: Amendment 4 eliminates from the original Solicitation seven response categories which were to be addressed by offerors and adds a Past Performance Questionnaire to be completed by offerors’ past or current customers.

Request for clarification: Please confirm that the only information the Government seeks in Part II is past/current performance references and the completed questionnaires.

Note: Evaluation Factor 1 seems to be totally reliant on offerors references (past or current contracts).

A12. Offerors should refer to 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors, Part II, para c and d citing what information the offeror can submit. FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation –Commercial Items, para c cites how the Government will evaluate the information.

Q13. Proposal Preparation Instructions, Part III, Technical Proposal: Both subparagraphs a. and b.

refer only to para. 1.2, Safety and Audit Oversight Program, of the Performance Work Statement

(PWS).

Question/Clarification: Is the Government asking that offerors only address a plan for:

“… accomplishing the technical requirements in the PWS, para 1.2 …”, and

“… how the contractor will comply with the PWS, para 1.2 requirements for foreign flag carriers used in conjunction with the Iraqi Civil Aviation Authority (ICAA)/RUS Aviation agreement.”

Note: Evaluation Factor 2 seems to have only one sub-factor for evaluation, which is the safety and audit oversight program.

A13. The offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated on Subfactor 1, Safety and Audit

Oversight Program, PWS, para 1.2. Offeror’s should note that by submitting a signed offer they acknowledge and accede to the contract terms and conditions and PWS technical requirements

(see Part I, para (1)).

Q14. Proposal Preparation Instructions, Part IV, Pricing Proposal: To be eligible for an award offerors must provide service and rates to 86 mandatory city-pairs. As the Government is aware, recent changes implemented by the Iraq Civil Aviation Authority (ICAA) included, amongst others, designating RUS Aviation as an exclusive Iraq carrier (national carrier) requiring all commercial material (non-DoD exclusive flights) to be carried into Iraq by RUS Aviation. This essentially precludes, in most cases, other foreign flag carriers from obtaining landing rights in any location in Iraq. This raises critical questions/issues relative to this Solicitation/Amendment

4, to include:

a. RUS Aviation does not have a scheduled network to and from Iraq, therefore service level commitment is questionable from a Transit Time perspective.

b. RUS Aviation does not have sufficient airframes resulting in demand exceeding supply and a significant backlog being created in Sharjah.

c. RUS Aviation does not service all the locations in Iraq that are part of the 86 mandatory city-pairs. This will preclude offerors from being compliant with the Solicitation requirements to provide service and rates to 86 mandatory city-pairs.

d. RUS aviation is, in most cases, the single carrier for commercial cargo (non-DoD exclusive flights) into Iraq resulting in unpredictable prices and delivery commitments.

e. The current market rate structure to and from Iraq is unstable, until such time that a scheduled network is offered by RUS to and from IQ the suppliers will be reluctant to commit to a maximum bid rate as requested in the RFP.

f. The domestic service remains closed for most existing Theatre Express players.

g. The ICAA/RUS Aviation Agreement is beyond the control of the offerors and introduces significant unknowns and risks to the offerors to include unpredictable prices and delivery.

Questions: Can the Government comment on how offerors are to be protected from arbitrary actions from ICAA/RUS Aviation that could impact offerors price and performance?

Reference 3.f. above. How does the Government plan on solving the problem to create an open competitive environment for the carriage of THX product in and out of Iraq.

A14. Each interested offeror (e.g., CRAF carrier) has to make their own business decision on how to establish the necessary prime/subcontractor relationships to provide service under this program.

Q15. PWS, para 1.2, Safety and Audit Oversight Program: Amendment 4 deletes the requirement for a safety and audit oversight program that is equivalent to Federal Aviation Regulation Part

121 and replaces it with Attachment 2, Theater Express Carrier Safety and Oversight Checklist.

Attachment 2 requires CRAF carriers to ensure each foreign flag subcontractor is approved by the country-specific Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) prior to providing service to that country (18 countries are listed).

Questions: What approval is required? Through the normal day to day operations over-flight and landing approval is sought through the applicable CAA’s by submission of the standard required documentation i.e. AOC, CofA, CofR, Insurance etc. Without receipt of that approval the flight cannot be completed. Is this considered acceptable approval? The responsibility for Safety and

Airworthiness Oversight remains with the Authority of the State of Registration. It will be impossible to seek additional approvals from an authority that does not hold that responsibility.

What approval would we be requesting if the above is not acceptable?

Comment: Cooperation from the various states is required to ensure that these procedures can be applied and that day-to-day flexibility can be achieved. As an example, we submitted a request for approval for an additional aircraft to operate to IRAQ 8 weeks ago. No response has been received to date.

A15. The intent of the statement is to ensure that the prime contractors only subcontract to foreign flag air carriers that the country specific CAA has authorized to fly in and out of their country.

Q16. Amendment 004 significantly changes the requirements of the THX Solicitation and requires a re-thinking of strategy and approach to meeting the Government’s requirements. Also, the Government’s response to the above questions/clarifications will impact both approach and strategy. Accordingly, we request that the Government consider an eight week extension to the proposal due date.

A16. The solicitation has been extended to 01 Dec 09.

Q17. Is it possible to get copies of previous spot bids?

A17. FY09 Theater Express (TE) Awards (redacted) information was posted to the Federal

Business Opportunities website on 21 Oct 09.

Q18. Does USTC plan to release any information on the reason for the latest extension to the proposal submission date? I heard it was at least in part due to something with the ICAA.

A18. No

Q19. Is USTC aware of any restrictions moving cargo from Afghanistan into the UAE?

A19. No

Q20. Are N-registration tails (US) currently allowed into Iraq?

A20. Offerors should review the Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR 77) for information on Iraq. Any waivers to this policy must be approved by the FAA.