Solicitation HTC711-10-R-R002 Questions Answers 1-31.pdf

Solicitation HTC711-10-R-R002 Questions/Answers

Question 1: Respectfully request that your office consider if the current solicitation response time of 21 days (17 March 2010) is reasonable given the complexity of the requirement under

FAR 5.203 (b).

Answer 1: Unfortunately, due to accelerated acquisition milestones we cannot grant any extensions at this time.

Question 2: Clarify the due dates for the Afghan STOL. The 1449 states 17 March, but page

113, Proposal Preparation Instructions states 9 March. Also, the past performance questionnaire states that it is due 5 Mar, but the Proposal Preparation Instructions state that the past performance volume is due with the proposal. Can you please clarify?

Answer 2: The proposal due date is 17 March 2010.

PWS Questions/Answers

Question 3: 1.2.1 states the bidder must operate IAW it's FAA Part 135 certificate, thus by assumption must be a US operator, however 1.2.5 states both .... FAA and CAA requirements, inferring that a non FAA Part 135 air carrier ( with maybe less standards than FAA) can operate under it's county's CAA for this contract. On one hand you state the operator must operate IAW

Part 135 but then you state that an operator must abide by it's CAA ( I.e. Russia) and is acceptable.

4.7.1 also provides for non FAA 135 operators, that may not have stringent crew duty requirements as FAA, to operate - and be at an economic advantage.

1.4 infers ALL aircraft must be maintained under FAA Part 135, however those operators that operate under another countries CAA (i.e Russia) can not nor required to do so, again giving them an economic advantage.

FAA is the US CAA but CAA could be any country without FAA-standards. The company's that are not required to operate or maintain under FAA which is very standardized can offer operations that may be unsafe. My concern is with Russian operators and other 3rd world type operators.

Who is qualified to provide competent oversight of non-FAA 135 air carriers and how will the government assure the bidder who are legitimate FAA part 135 operators have an even playing field given each CAA has different requirements that may or may not meet the FAA requirements

Will NON FAA certified Part 135 air carrier be allowed to compete on this solicitation?

Answer 3: Foreign air carriers operating under Civil Aviation Administration (CAA) equivalent to FAA Part 135 requirements will be allowed to participate in this acquisition. However, not all countries have CAA's that are considered equivalent to the FAA. Carriers in countries with a

CAA rated CAT 2 will not be considered. Please refer to the website below for a listing of countries and refer to DOD Instruction 4500.53 for specific information.

http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/iasa/

Click on the results tab for the listings.

Question 4: 1.1.7 – Awfully vague with respect to not landing in areas where there is fighting.

What does “active fighting” mean? “Aircraft are not to land…” sounds like a prohibition on us.

What does “recently” mean? This clause would be awfully difficult to interpret later.

Answer 4: Requirement is validated. Paragraph remains unchanged. SOP is to send contract aircraft to green FOBs only.

Question 5: 1.1.8 – Last sentence doesn’t seem to fit with paragraph heading of “Pilferage and

Loss.” Suggest liability sentence reworded to: “Contractor shall not be responsible for injury or death to passengers, save and except only where such injury or death was solely and proximately caused by acts or omissions of the Contractor.”

Answer 5: Requirement has been validated. Paragraph remains unchanged.

Question 6: 1.1.9.1: Should be changed from FMC to MC. If we defer an item and the aircraft is PMC and can be dispatched we should get credit for the aircraft’s availability.

Answer 6: Requirement has been validated. Paragraph remains unchanged.

Question 7: 1.2.1 – Says the aircraft must be equipped to fly IFR. Do they actually want them certified to fly IFR?

Answer 7: Yes,certify them to fly IFR.

Question 8: 1.2.8 –What are the host nation’s statutory limits of insurance for military contract aircraft operated by personnel accompanying the U.S. armed forces? Also, what “commercial standard” is being referred to?

Answer 8: The amount of insurance required to cover insurance liability is a carrier’s business decision.

http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/iasa/

Question 9: 1.3.4 – If the USG intentionally or negligently kills a contractor, it will likely be liable to the decedent’s estate, regardless of this poorly-worded disclaimer. Since I assume the

USG doesn’t intend to write an unenforceable provision into its contract, can we clarify that this clause is meant to apply to actions of enemy combatants only?

Answer 9: Covered in the DFAR. They cover mortuary affairs, training and the responsibility of the Government in regards to personnel recovery (DFRAS 252.225-7040)

Question 10: 1.5.2 – What does, “The contractor will maintain passengers until mission is complete” mean?

Answer 10: Contractor is responsible until passengers are turned over to ground personnel.

Question 11: 1.8.2 – What is the FAA approval relating to carrying passengers and cargo “in a combination mode.”

Answer 11: If aircraft are certified to carry both passengers and cargo, aircraft have the capability to provide "Combi" service.

Question 12: 3.2.1 – “[P]otable OR non-potable water” will be provided? Does the USG contemplate that we could be based at a site with no potable water? Also, what does it mean to say that internet access will be available at all sites “based on requirements”…whose requirements?

Answer 12: 1) Both. Aircraft will be based in locations with security, potable and non-potable water 2) Internet access may be available. Contractors will be subject to the same restrictions as

Soldiers. Contractors do have the option to purchase separate internet capability at their own expense.

Question 13: 3.5.1 – Says that USG will provide subsistence to personnel required to stay on military bases. Are we required to stay on military bases? If not, does the USG contemplate denying food for the reason that it’s not required that we stay on the military base?

Answer 13: All military and civilian personnel are required to live on a military installation in

Afghanistan.

Question 14: 3.7.1 – Says we will obey all published regs relating to vehicles (licensing, etc.).

Published by whom…USG only, or host nation, too?

Answer 14: Yes, contractors have to obey everyone's driving regulations.

Question 15: 3.11.1 – Does this working space referenced in this paragraph include hangar space? If hangar space is not provided, will land be provided to construct a hangar?

Answer 15: Land will not be provided to build a hanger. Hanger space will be coordinated based on availability.

Question 16: 4.2.2, 4.2.9 and 4.2.10 – Will they identify to us the orders relating to security that they want us to comply with? Although some are listed on page 10, it’s not an exhaustive list…unless the USG will say that’s the whole list?

Answer 16: The areas, bases or locations that the contractors operate fall under these stipulations. If the base requires them to have a certain type of badge they are under contract to comply to that requirement if mandated by the local commanders. We have no way of knowing all rules or regulations for all these locations the contractor will operate. These are catch-alls that tell the contractor they need to be aware that force protection rules or conditions may change from location to location and contractors will comply with these changes.

Question 17: 4.2.3 –What is required to participate in “RAM” (or Random Anti-Terrorism

Measures) Activities…is that term defined somewhere?

Answer 17: RAMS are local measures that need to be completed based on the threat for a specific location. Each location has different measures based on the local commander

OCONUS. These measures and how they are used are covered in DoDI 2000.16 and DoDI

2000.12-H. These cover general guidelines for FPCONS (Force Protection Conditions) and

RAM's.

Question 18: 4.2.5 – Does the notification requirement of personnel apply only to personnel in-country and only on this contract, or to other personnel, too? The scope of the requirement is unclear.

Answer 18: Any contractor personnel supporting this contract are covered. Primarily the "hands on" contractors doing the missions are the ones FP would be concerned about. Support personnel not directly supporting the mission covered in the deliverables would not be reported under this stipulation.

Question 19: 4.2.7 – I don’t know what “credible derogatory information” is, but if the USG says they have it on one of our folks, we have to remove him or her right away. Do we have a definition of that term? Any promise that the USG will act reasonably?

Answer 19: Credible derogatory information is covered in detail in Appendix 8 or DoDI

5200.2-R which handles clearances actions in DoD. DoDI 5220.22 does not cover this in detail.

DoDI 5200.2-R has been listed as a reference in the PWS to this fact. The derogatory information is reported to DISCO in this case and specifically in JPAS. Contractor FSO's would be notified in this matter to alert them of the pending information being sent to DISCO. This information comes from a variety of sources be must and will be evaluated by DoD/Government

Security Personnel before being submitted. Contractors violating directed security rules could be barred from bases and denied the ability to support this contract if deemed credible by DoD

Security Specialists who handle this type of information. All derogatory information is evaluated and determined IAW with frequency, nature of conduct or violation and circumstances surrounding the conduct just to name a few. A full detailed list and adjudicative process can be found in Appendix 8 (page 132) of the DoD 5200.2-R.

Question 20: 4.2.14 – Makes reference to “the international mission” with respect to OpSec, and looks like boilerplate cut from an intertheater SOW. Is that reference supposed to be there and, if it is, is it meant to limit the requirements of the whole clause?

Answer 20: The OPSEC requirement is required to protect movements of not only contractor employees but movement of troops and cargo on DoD missions. This is in there not as a

"boilerplate" but to let the contractor know they could be held responsible for releasing FOUO information that is not classified but is FOUO respectively. If this contract information is released and it is found that the contractor does not protect this information accordingly they could be held financially responsible for information released to outside sources.

An example of this would be posting mission flight plans that are released to outside sources due to improper security and posting to external websites that are not controlled.

Question 21: 4.2.15 – What is COMSEC GFE?

Answer 21: COMSEC is any equipment that has been furnished by DoD that will be used in flight or act a location that could received classified material. This government furnished equipment is items such as KOV switches or components that has been given to flight crews to receive threat information. Most of the time this will be issued by the COMSEC custodian for the government at certain locations if warranted during threat conditions that would require the COMSEC equipment.

Question 22: 1.5.4 “Aircraft will utilize appropriate aviation restraining devices” Does FAA

TSO satisfy the requirement?

Contractor required to provide all required ALSE; What are the requirements?

Answer 22: Air carriers must be compliant with moving passengers in accordance with FAA

Part 135 (or foreign CAA equivalent) rules.

Question 23: Reference paragraph 1.2.2: “The contractor shall provide passenger/cargo aircraft that are multi-engine, fixed wing, pressurized and have a capability of easy loading of palletized cargo with dimensions of 60” x 48” (wide door).” Paragraph 1.6.1 states: “Estimated largest piece is 60” x 48” with gross weight of 300 lbs each.” Cargo sized 60”x48” will not fit through a

60”x 48” door. Will the Government clarify this requirement.

Answer 23: Paragraph remains unchanged. The Governement has validated the requirement.

Question 24: This RFP requires a carrier with a Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) 135 certificate and aircraft with a minimum passenger capability of 19 passengers. A FAR 135 certificate allows the carrier to carry 30 passengers or less with a gross payload of 7500lbs. To operate an aircraft with a payload in excess of 7500lbs requires a FAR 121 certificate. Paragraph

1.5.1 states; “The actual number of passengers will be determined by the distance to and the altitude and temperature of the desired location. Planning weight for passengers plus their baggage is 400 lbs per person.”

Does the Government intend that the vendor restrict operations to a gross payload of 7500lb?

Answer 24: Yes, this is a FAR Part 135 requirement.

Question 25: Does the Government require flight attendants on aircraft carrying 20-30 passengers?

Answer 25: This is not a CENTCOM requirement. Please reference the applicable FAA requirments.

Question 26: Will the Government accept electronic delivery of proposals on or before the due date of 17 March 2010?

Answer 26: To be considered for award, hard copies of the proposal must be received NLT the proposal due date. However, the Governement also requires electronic copies. Please reference

Paragraph 6 of the Proposal Preparation Instructions in 52.212-1 Addendum

Question 27: Is there a comprehensive list of Government provided flight line support equipment (ground support equipment) available (ground power units, tugs, etc.)?

Answer 27: Yes, Please refer to Paragraph 3 of the PWS.

Question 28: 1) Is any relevant incumbent information available? If there is a current incumbent contractor, can you provide the contractor name and contract number? If there is not a current incumbent, are there any previous or ongoing related programs?

Answer 28: Presidential Airways is providing similar service. Contract numbers are HTC711-

08-D-0010 and HTC711-08-D-0014.

Question 29: What contract type is expected (i.e. Firm Fixed Price, Cost plus Fixed-Fee, etc.)?

Answer 29: Firm Fixed Price

Question 30: Are personnel who approve Shipper’s Declaration of Dangerous Good (SDDG) required to be DOD certified?

Answer 30: Yes.

Question 31: Reference para. 1.9. “Contractor will be required to provide to the Movement

Control Battalion (MCB) or Command Post at Bagram departure and arrival notification at all locations via phone, radio, or satellite phone.”

Would a real time Web interface be sufficient to provide this information to the MCB or

Command Post at Bagram?

Answer 31: Access to an operational system like "Blue Sky Tracker" will meet this requirement. If the Blue Sky Tracker on the aircraft is inoperable, phone calls will be required to pass movement times.