N00421-16-R-0018_Industry_QAs_final_5-25-17.docx
DOCX document 171 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Propeller Based Aircraft Solicitation
- Solicitation number
- N00421-16-R-0018
About this file
Industry Q&A's
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
N00421-16-R-0018 Industry Q & A/Government Responses
| Industry Question |
| Government Answer |
| 1 |
| Other than being a propeller aircraft are there any specific requirements? i.e. turbine or piston, single or multi engine, or any speed or size minimums? |
The specific requirements for this solicitation are included in the Performance Based Work Statement-Attachment 1 to the RFP.
| 2 |
| Ref Attachment 5 – Schedule of GFP – The Description Column is truncated. Please provide non-truncated descriptions of the Scheduled GFP. |
| Revised Attachment 5 will be included in a forthcoming RFP amendment. |
| 3 |
| Ref PBWS Attachment 1, Appendix 2 -- Performance Requirements -- Ceiling & PBWS Para 10 – Mission Requirements – |
| a |
| Attachment 1, Appendix 2 – “Ceiling: Not less than 15,000 feet MSL or 24,000 feet AGL.” |
Question – Why 15,000 ft. “OR” 24,000 ft.? There should only be one set of requirements. Secondly, all references to altitude should be “MSL” (Mean Sea Level) versus AGL (Above Ground Level) whichever is lower because 24,000 ft. AGL could be as high as 38,440 ft. if the mission is conducted over the Rocky Mountains! Prop aircraft are rarely if ever capable of operating at 38,000 ft Performance requirements are surface to 15K MSL. Section updated in Revision 1 of the PBWS.
| b |
| PBWS para 10.2.1 – “Flight profiles may require the capability for up to 5 hours of on station time at an altitude of surface to 24,000’ Above Ground Level (AGL) (FL240).” Question as stated in (a) above |
| Typical profiles will require extended flight and loitering up to |
three (3) hours as far as 100 miles off-shore, operating between 500 feet and 15,000 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) during daylight hours, and between 1,000 feet and 15,000 feet MSL at night. Typical cruise speed straight and level will be at least 170 knots. Section updated in Revision 1 of the PBWS.
| c |
| PBWS para 10.2.2f – “(5 hours of on station time at an altitude to surface to 24,000’ AGL (FL240).” Question as state in (a) above |
| Deleted requirement and added UAV Emulation requirement. |
| 4 |
| Ref PBWS Attachment 1, Appendix 2 – Configuration and Special Equipment -- Spectrum Analyzer “provisions (only two systems required)” |
Question / Clarification 1: Please clarify if this element does require both the “provisions” in all aircraft plus two contractor furnished Spectrum Analyzers capable of being installed in any/all four minimum aircraft?
Question / Clarification / Recommendation 2: “IF” the answer above is for all aircraft are to be configured with the provisions then due to the significantly high cost of modifying all aircraft with Spectrum Analyzer provisions, we high recommend that the requirement to be changed to require only two of the aircraft to be delivered with the provisions but that all aircraft be “capable” of having the provisions. Then if there proves to be a significant need to have all aircraft provisioned the remaining aircraft can be configured.
Only two aircraft must be provisioned for and equipped with two removable systems.
| 5 |
| Ref RFP Section B -- There is no Special Mission Operator (SMO) CLIN. Some of the listed missions will require at least one SMO, with the potential to increase to two SMOs if there is a multi-role mission. Without knowing the percentage of each type of mission, accurate manpower costing is impossible. In order to reduce risk, the vendor must make assumptions regarding additional manpower cost that will needlessly be factored into the flight hour rate, increasing the cost to the Government. Adding a SMO CLIN would allow the Government to more accurately evaluate, and have more control of the actual cost of the contract. |
| The Government expects the vendor to incorporate this into the flight minute rate. |
| 6 |
| RFP Section B – There also is no CLIN for SMO ground efforts to support integration, pre-flight programming, etc. of GFE nor to provide pier-side training & testing support. |
| The Government expects any SMO support will be incorporated in the minutes rate. |
Pier Side operations for UAV emulation is not included in this contract.
| 7 |
| Section B CLINs 0001 & 0002 & 5252.216-9506 MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM QUANTITIES -- The changes in this RFP represent a significant increase in the contractor’s capital expenditures ($5 million or more plus a significant increase in fixed operating costs) while the Government’s confidence in the actual number of flight hours/minutes of the 11,725/703,500 maximum flight hours/minutes has gone down by 10% from the existing contract’s 8% minimum. This makes this RFP extremely risky and/or virtually impossible for any contractor, especially a small business contractor, to finance the huge amount of equipment that must be furnished. (Specifically, a minimum of four “TURBINE PROPELLER” multi-engine aircraft, aircraft modifications and provisions for GFP, and contractor furnished mission equipment.) |
Question: If the Government is not sufficiently confident of its requirements to guarantee and/or set a significantly higher number of flight hours/minutes than 100 FHs/6,000 FMs, then how could the Government ever determine that any bidder would be “responsible” as required by FAR 9.1. Without a minimum of at least 50% or 75% of the maximum, the contractor/bidder must base his bid on a 50% or an even lower estimate of the maximum flight hours/minutes which could make the contract unaffordable for the Government.
Government changed minimum to 98,400 minutes.
Changed RFP - 5252.216-9506 MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM QUANTITIES (NAVAIR)(MAR 1999) As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 “Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 98,400 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
| 8 |
| Minimum and Maximum Quantities. The current minimum is 100 flight hours over the life of the five year contract, which adds significant risk to the contractor based on the large scope increase in terms of aircraft and equipment compared to previous years and therefore increases the price to the Government. |
| Government changed minimum to 98,400 minutes. |
As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 “Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 98,400 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
| a |
| Would the Government consider increasing the flight hour minimum based on projected minimum requirements to mitigate risk? |
| Government changed minimum to 98,400 minutes. |
As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 “Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 98,400 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
| b |
| As an alternative, would the Government consider evaluation of a hybrid model of fixed and variable pricing for CLINs 0001 and 0002 similar to other NAVAIR Contract Air Services contracts? The fixed price component would be comprised of fixed costs to maintain the basic capability to support the various missions, and the variable cost would consist of operational utilization and the capability to surge. Such a model would reduce overall costs to the Government by providing programmatic stability and mitigating some Contractor risk. |
| Government changed minimum to 98,400 minutes. |
As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 “Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 98,400 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
| 9 |
| PBWS Appendix 2 Performance Requirements. The Government lists the Foster 970 as the required TACAN. |
| a |
| Will the Government accept other TACAN systems that supply both bearing and range (DME) to the selected TACAN. |
| The government will not accept other TACAN systems. The Government provided TACAN systems meet the military frequency bands and provide air to ground and air to air range and bearing. |
| b |
| If not, can the Government explain the rationale for the Foster 970 as the sole solution? |
| These TACANS are for military use only. See answer (a) above. |
| c |
| The Government provides TACANs as Government Furnished Property (see Attachment 5- Government Furnished Property). Would the Government consider issuing TACANs as GFP for increased savings on the flight hour cost? |
| The Government is issuing TACANs as GFP. |
| 10 |
| Can the Government forecast a date for expected award to allow for proper equipment acquisition and integration? |
| The anticipated award date is 15 Jan 2018. |
| 11 |
| Place of Performance |
| a |
| Can the Government provide current Wage Determination data for the locations within the 150 NM distances listed? |
| This is not a labor service contract so wage determinations do not apply |
| b |
| The Performance Work Statement lists the west coast location as within 150 NM of N 3155” and W11930”. Based on a map plot (below) of that location, there are limited basing locations including. |
| North Island is expected to be the main base. |
| i |
| Can the Government confirm that the coordinates are correct or provide an updated location? |
| Coordinates are correct. It is within 150 NM radius of where missions will be flown. |
| ii |
| If the coordinates are correct, will the Government make facilities available at NAS North Island for Contractor use? |
| Yes if space is available. At this time, the Prop aircraft is located at NAS NI; future planes will be stationed there as long as NAS NI has space available. |
| 12 |
| The scope of this effort is significantly larger than previous propeller-based Fleet support efforts with turbine powered aircraft vs piston aircraft. Can the Government provide information on previously executed total and annual flight hours on the current contract (CAS Propellers)? |
| Increased scope and training need has increased this effort. |
The Government is unable to provide information on previously executed total and annual flight hours on the current contract. Please propose in accordance with the solicitation.
| 13 |
| PBWS 10.2.2.d. ADC&R Relay, Link-16 Interference Trainer |
| a |
| The PBWS states HF or UHF ADC&R communications relay. Is the requirement to provide the ability to simultaneously support each frequency band (i.e.- and / or), or will the contractor be tasked to support only one band per sortie? |
| The Fleet operates on either HF and/or UHF frequencies, and may kick to the other spectrum if jamming or intrusion is observed. The requirement is for the aircraft to be able to receive on both HF and UHF during the flight, and forward those comms on a separate UHF frequency to a ground station. |
| b |
| Can the Government confirm what format of ADC&R communication is required for relay (voice, data, messaging, etc.)? |
| Unencrypted voice format. |
| c |
| Will cryptographic materials be required to support participation in the ADC&R network? |
| No Crypto support required |
| d |
| Can the Government provide other system specifications on the relay system to facilitate ADC&R system acquisition and ensure technical compliance (typical nomenclature, manufacturers, how currently employed etc.)? |
| ADC&R Relay, Link -16 Interference Trainer: aircraft may be tasked to provide continuous relay of High Frequency (HF) or Ultra High Frequency |
(UHF) Air Defense Command and Reporting (ADC&R) communications to an independent UHF net. That same aircraft may be simultaneously or independently tasked to provide Link-16 interference training. The ADC&R Relay capability is intended to continuously monitor and receive uncovered ship ADC&R HF and/or UHF communications, and forward any transmissions received from those frequencies to a shore based receiver on second, independent UHF net. The Comms relay and organic interference will not interfere with the aircraft's ability to navigate or communicate on a third independent UHF radio. The Contractor provided Link-16 Interference Trainer shall be capable of generating up to 100Watts ERP on at least 17 independent Link-16 channels and will include notches and provisions to eliminate any interference within the FAA's Identification, Friend or Foe (IFF) spectrum. The contractor will include a description of their technical approach to both the ADC&R Comms Relay and Link Interference Trainer, limited to not more than 6 pages as an ANNEX to their proposal.
Upon award the contractor will provide any supporting documentation required to facilitate the government obtaining a frequency clearance for the operation of the Contractor's trainer.).
| e |
| Is the Government currently providing these ADC&R systems as GFE, and if so, would the Government consider supporting as GFE for this effort? |
The Government is not currently providing these ADC&R systems as GFE, and does not intend to consider supporting these systems as GFE for this effort.
| f |
| Can the Government provide other system specifications on the Link 16 Interference Trainer to facilitate system acquisition and ensure technical compliance (nomenclature, manufacturer, etc.)? Current Link 16 systems providers are unfamiliar with the PBWS terminology. |
| ADC&R Relay, Link -16 Interference Trainer: aircraft may be tasked to provide continuous relay of High Frequency (HF) or Ultra High Frequency |
(UHF) Air Defense Command and Reporting (ADC&R) communications to an independent UHF net. That same aircraft may be simultaneously or independently tasked to provide Link-16 interference training. The ADC&R Relay capability is intended to continuously monitor and receive uncovered ship ADC&R HF and/or UHF communications, and forward any transmissions received from those frequencies to a shore based receiver on a second, independent UHF net. The Comms relay and organic interference will not interfere with the aircraft's ability to navigate or communicate on a third independent UHF radio. The Contractor provided Link-16 Interference Trainer shall be capable of generating up to 100Watts ERP on at least 17 independent Link-16 channels and will include notches and provisions to eliminate any interference within the FAA's Identification, Friend or Foe (IFF) spectrum. The contractor will include a description of their technical approach to both the ADC&R Comms Relay and Link Interference Trainer, limited to not more than 6 pages as an ANNEX to their proposal.
Upon award the contractor will provide any supporting documentation required to facilitate the government obtaining a frequency clearance for the operation of the Contractor's trainer.).
| g |
| Is the Government currently providing these Link 16 Trainer systems as GFE, and if so, would the Government consider supporting as GFE for this effort? |
| The Government is not currently providing Link 16 as GFE, and does not intend to consider supporting these systems as GFE for this effort. |
| 14 |
| 10.2.2.d and Appendix 2 of the PBWS labels the Link 16 system as a Link 16 “Interface Trainer”. |
| a |
| Can the Government please clarify “interface” vs “interference”? |
| This is a typographical error in Appendix 2. It should read “Link – 16 Interference Trainer”. |
| 15 |
| PBWS 10.2.2.e. Wideband Instantaneous Frequency Measurement and Appendix 2 Performance Requirements. This section lists the required frequency ranges as 100 hz to 20 MHz, but Appendix 2 lists frequency ranges of 100 MHz to 18,000 MHz. |
| Wideband Instantaneous Frequency Measurement: Aircraft may be tasked to monitor, detect, identify and geolocate radio signals and electronics emissions (between 100 MHz and 18,000 MHz) during exercises with Emissions Control (EMCON) in place. Signal geolocation must be verifiable to within |
5nm while the aircraft is cruising at a 50nm standoff. The contractor will include a description of their technical approach, including OEM performance capabilities and antennae placement requirements, limited to not more than 6 pages as an Annex to their proposal. A Special Mission operator will be required for all Electronic Surveillance missions.
| a |
| Can the Government please clarify the requirement for frequency coverage? |
| 100 MHz to 18,000 MHz |
| b |
| Is there a specific acquisition bandwidth that the Government requires? |
| 100 MHz to 18,000 MHz |
| c |
| Are there any environmental / temperature or MIL STD constraints for this equipment? |
| The equipment is expected to operate throughout the aircrafts flight envelope, supporting year round operation at the East Coast and West Coast airfields. |
| d |
| Are there any analytical software requirements, measurements required associated with the system? |
| While recognizing a specific signal may be a value added, the intended use is to be able to identify emissions and attribute them to ships based on signal geolocation. Reports should state that energy was observed on xxxx frequency from xxxx location at xxxx time. Additional signal parameters, (pulse width, PRI, frequency hopping) could be a value added. |
| e |
| Is this data to be recorded, reported, or disseminated? If so in what manner and via what media? |
| Voice reporting at the time of detection. Post flight logs to be faxed to the Range Operations Center to include time, frequency, Pri and any additional information. |
| 16 |
| PBWS 10.2.2.f/g. ISR and Close Air Support Training. The PBWS states a requirement for an electro-optical infrared (EO/IR) sensor to conduct support operations at altitudes to FL240. |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| a |
| Does the Government require additional sensor capabilities to conduct these missions, such as Laser Illuminator, IR Pointer, Laser Range Finder, Laser Designator, Laser Spot Tracker (LST) etc.? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| b |
| Does the Government require any specific resolution, field of view, etc. as part of this requirement? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| c |
| What type of sensors are required vs desired: day color TV, IR, Low Light (near IR)? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| d |
| PBWS10.2.2.g discusses integration with FW and RW CAS aircraft and simulation of a fires asset for Close Air Support training. What is the concept for providing this training from the contractor’s aircraft? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| e |
| Will Government personnel operate the sensor and provide the training from the contractor’s aircraft? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| f |
| If contractor personnel will be providing the training can the Government describe experience and qualifications required of the contractor’s sensor operator? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| 17 |
| 0.2.2.h. Real-time EO/IR Full Motion Video (FMV). Can the Government provide any further technical information on the FMV requirement such as transmission ranges, frequency bands, waveforms and interoperability (e.g. ROVER compatible)? |
| PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time. A clarified UAV emulation requirement replaces paragraph f. |
| 18 |
| PBWS Appendix 2 Performance Requirements. Analog and Digital L-band Full Motion Video (FMV) Receivers. |
| An updated PBWS Appendix 2 will be included in a forthcoming RFP amendment. The Government has elected to delete this requirement. |
| a |
| Can the Government clarify if contractors are required to provide L Band transmitters or if there is a requirement to provide both transmitters and receivers? |
| One L-band Antenna supporting the UAV COMET emulation. |
| 19 |
| Attachment 5 Schedule Government Furnished Property. |
| a |
| Subject document lists current GFP which is assumed to be provided for the current contract. |
| Yes |
| b |
| Is it the Government’s intent to issue these items as GFP under this task or is the form intended for informational purposes and would be populated with appropriate equipment on an as needed basis? |
| Government’s intent is to issue the items in the GFP listing as GFP. |
| 20 |
| Vendor could not open GFE List |
| Patty sent document directly to vendor |
| 21 |
| Why was an Industry Day not held? |
| It was determined via the Sources Sought there was ample competition for this requirement. |
| 22 |
| What is the current contract number? |
| N00019-15-D-0020 |
| 23 |
| Current Incumbent Contractor? |
| Located in the RFP Section L 3.0 Vol 3, Section 3.6.page 72 |
| 24 |
| Current Total Contract Value? |
| The Government is not able to release the current total contract value. |
| 25 |
| Current Incumbent contract Period of Performance? |
| The Government is not able to release the period of performance for the current contract. |
| 26 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.1 Propeller Aircraft (CLIN 0001) the contractor shall provide a minimum of four turbine propeller aircraft for a simultaneous presentation. Can the Government pleas confirm the CLIN is specifically requirement Twin Turbine-Propeller aircraft? The incumbent is operating twin engine piston aircraft. |
| Yes, the Government is requiring four twin turbine propeller aircraft. No change to PBWS or RFP |
| 27 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2.1. Typical profiles will require extended flight and loitering up to three (3) hours as far as 100 miles off-shore, operating between 500 feet and 15,000 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) during daylight hours, and between 1,000 feet and 15,000 feet MSL at night. Flight profiles may require the capability for up to 5 hours of on station time at an altitude of surface to 24,000’ Above Ground Level (AGL) (FL240). Typical cruise speed straight and level will be 170 knots. The Contractor shall provide services for: |
Can the Government please clarify the intent of 15,000 MSL vs 24,000 AGL as these two altitude limits appear contradictory?
Performance requirements are surface to 15K MSL. Time on station 3.0 hours assuming enroute distance 100 NM each direction.
| 28 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2.1. Typical profiles will require extended flight and loitering up to three (3) hours as far as 100 miles off-shore, operating between 500 feet and 15,000 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) during daylight hours, and between 1,000 feet and 15,000 feet MSL at night. Flight profiles may require the capability for up to 5 hours of on station time at an altitude of surface to 24,000’ Above Ground Level (AGL) (FL240). Typical cruise speed straight and level will be 170 knots. The Contractor shall provide services for: |
Can the Government please provide more detail for the travel to station distance related to 5 hours of endurance?
Performance requirements are surface to 15K MSL. Time on station 3.0 hours assuming enroute distance 100 NM each direction.
| 29 |
| Per PBWS Section 4.1(d) Due to normal crew day limitations, the Contactor may be required to provide additional flight crew in order to meet extended day presentation requirements. In the event the mission requires additional flight crew, the Government will provide notice to the Contractor at least 21 days in advance of the requirement. If the Government has a mission requirement and is unable to provide the 21-day advance notification, the Contractor retains the right to decline the request. |
Would the Government consider compensating the Contractor for the occasional extra flight crew required for extended days? At minimum can the Government estimate the number of days per year where additional flight crew will be needed?
The government would pay for travel if an additional crew was required. This has never been executed in the past, but we entered this provision in the event that an exercise would last longer than normal and took in account for pilot fatigue regulations.
The Government cannot estimate the number of days per year where additional flight crew will be needed.
| 30 |
| Per PBWS Section 7.4.3. Security Program - Although hardware is not expected to be classified except for COMSEC equipment, classified documents and data may have to be transported, generated, or written onboard the aircraft in the normal performance of the contract. The Contractor’s aircrew will be exercising classified aspects of front line aircraft. The Contractor shall be accountable through its security program for safeguarding the classified information. |
Is the Contractor required to install a GSA approved safe in the aircraft for transportation and storage of classified information?
No the Contractor is not required to install a GSA approved safe in the aircraft for transportation and storage of classified information.
| 31 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.1 Propeller Aircraft (CLIN 0001). The Contractor shall provide a minimum of four turbine propeller aircraft for a simultaneous presentation. This minimum includes two (2) aircraft on the East coast and two (2) aircraft on the West coast. |
The current incumbent on the contract is operating piston twin aircraft. Please confirm the government desires four (4) multi-engine turbine powered (turboprop) aircraft?
Would the government consider a single engine turboprop if all aircraft requirements listed in the PBWS can be met?
The Government requires four (4) multi-engine turbine powered aircraft. Per Appendix 2 “ The means of aircraft propulsion shall be by two or more turbine propellers”.
The Government will not consider a single engine turboprop.
| 32 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2. Propeller Aircraft Missions - The Contractor shall fly missions as defined by the SO at specified locations per TO Task Order. Mission durations will vary but the Government expects 98,400 flight minutes (1,640 flight hours) per year. All events will be ordered by individual TOs. CLIN 0001 (Propeller A/C) shall be used for special missions requiring a special technical expert. |
Can the Government estimate the ferry time in addition to the estimated mission hours of 1,640 hours across four aircraft?
Per the RFP, the Ferry CLIN is (0002). The quantity is 211,500 minutes for the 5 year IDIQ.
| 33 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.4. Ferry Missions (CLIN 0002) - The Contractor shall ferry aircraft under CLIN 0002 to deployment sites when instructed by Task Order. The Contractor shall be reimbursed for travel and per diem for ferry missions from the Contractor's home base to the deployment sites under CLIN 0005. |
Please confirm that the Contractor will be reimbursed for the hourly usage of the aircraft under CLIN 002 during Ferry Missions?
The government will only reimburse for the time the AC is being ferried. There will not be a minute usage(CLIN 0001) on top of the ferry minutes (CLIN 0002).
| 34 |
| Per PBWS Section 14.4. The Contractor shall use this CLIN 0003 for support of system advanced technology in support of current and future threat modification requirements. |
Can the Contractor charge under CLIN 0003 for the initial and startup aircraft modifications required pursuant to the PBWS?
No, the intent of CLIN 0003 is for future threat capability that is not currently identified in the contract.
| 35 |
| Per FAR 5252.216-9506 MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM QUANTITIES (NAVAIR)(MAR 1999) |
As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 " Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 6,000 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
Can the Government please confirm that the minimum guarantee for the five years contract is 6,000 flight minutes (100 hours)?
Changed RFP - 5252.216-9506 MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM QUANTITIES (NAVAIR)(MAR 1999) As referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR 52.216-22 “Indefinite Quantity" of this contract, the contract minimum quantity is 98,400 Flight Minutes and the maximum is the ceiling value of the contract.
| 36 |
| Per FAR 5252.215-9503ANTICIPATED AWARD DATE (NAVAIR) (FEB 1995) |
The anticipated award date for this requirement is 15 Jan 2018. This information is provided for use as a basis for schedules and burden (labor, overheads, G&A, etc.) mid-point calculations.
Can the Government clarify the anticipated award date and the minimum timeframe the Contractor shall be allotted to configure the four aircraft?
The anticipated award date is 15 Jan 2018.
| 37 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2.2.G Close Air Support training: Aircraft may be tasked to provide electro-optical infrared (EO/IR) sensor full motion video coverage training events. The contractor provided ISR aircraft will integrate with fixed-wind (FW) and rotary-wing (RW) CAS aircraft to locate and simulate attacking actual opposing forces (enemy), simulated by live role-players. |
Can the Government specify EO/IR Capability requirements related to range of motion, video type, sensor bandwidth, range finding/designator requirements?
PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time.
| 38 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2.2.H. Real-time EO/IR Full Motion Video (FMV): Aircraft may be tasked to provide real-time electro optical/infrared full motion video to video-downlink (VDL) receivers. The live streaming video feed via the VDL shall include telemetric data from the sensor, allowing training instructors and students to make on-scene tactical decisions. |
Can the Government clarify required range, frequency, and video protocols required for the FMV-VDL functions?
PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time.
| 39 |
| Per PBWS Section 10.2.2.I. Signals Intelligence (SIGINT): The aircraft may be tasked to provide SIGINT and must be capable of accepting SIGINT equipment and shall provide 110V AC power for carry on systems. Aircraft shall be capable of carrying at least 2 SIGINT customer operators. Passive and active systems must not interfere with ISR operations. Any required integration of systems will be accomplished prior to support operations. Aircrew must be familiar with airborne SIGINT TTPs and operations and capable of making secure communications simulating VHF/UHF PTT lines of-bearing (LOBs). |
Can the Government clarify the frequency and power (in KVA) of the 110VAC requirements for carry on systems?
PBWS section 10.2.2 paragraph f, g, h and i are stricken from PBWS. Not a requirement at this time.
| 40 |
| We believe the RFP should include verbiage that all aircraft must be operated under Part 135 regulations and remain on the Part 135 certificate during the duration of the contract. |
I recently reviewed the Propeller Based Aircraft Solicitation and it does not address the requirements under 32 CFR 861. 32 CFR 861 requires aircraft that are performing Operational Support Services to be on a FAA Part 135 certificate and listed on the OpSpecs during the duration of the contract.
This contract would fall under the Operational Support Services Category as the aircraft are performing range services. The regulation also states that it is not limited to just range services.
For your reference the following FAA operating categories are below:
Part 135 – Operators that hold an air carrier or operator certificate
Part 91 – Operators that do not hold a certificate The regulation states that:
(l) Operational Support Services. Missions performed by air carriers that use fixed or rotary-winged aircraft to provide services other than air transportation services as defined in paragraph (b) of this section. Examples include, but are not limited to, range instrumentation and services, target-towing, sling loads, and electronic countermeasures target flights. Air carriers providing only operational support services do not require advance DOD approval and are not subject to the initial or periodic onsite survey requirements under this part, unless directed by the CARB or higher authority. All air carriers providing operational support services to DOD must have a FAA or CAA certificate and are required to maintain applicable FAA or CAA standards absent deviation authority obtained pursuant to 14 CFR 119.55 or similar CAA rules. (d) Status of Aircraft Performing Services for DOD. All air carriers providing air transportation or operational support services to the DOD shall have FAA or CAA air carrier or commercial operator certificates and shall remain under FAA and/or CAA regulatory and safety oversight during performance of the DOD mission. Aircraft performing services for or on behalf of DOD shall be on the air carrier's operating certificate, and remain on that certificate while performing the DOD mission. The installation of any special equipment needed to perform services for DOD shall be FAA or CAA approved or an appropriate FAA or CAA waiver obtained.
I have attached the regulation to this email for your reference. I also want to point out that aircraft that are operated under Part 91 are not required to perform maintenance, at all. Part 91 aircraft are only required to perform inspections. This was clarified in a recent FAA interpretation. There are major safety issues supporting Navy operations including not having to overhaul engines.
Operating an aircraft in Part 91 category does not meet the safety and quality requirements of the DOD.
We believe the RFP should include verbiage that all aircraft must be operated under Part 135 regulations and remain on the Part 135 certificate during the duration of the contract.
The contract does NOT ask the vendor to provide "Air Transportation Services", and they are not functioning as an "Air Carrier".
32 CFR 861 title is DoD Commercial Air Transportation. We are not contracting for Transportation, so 32 CFR 861 is not applicable.
To be on the Op Spec for a 135 or 121 operation, the aircraft has to have a Standard Airworthiness Certificate. Given that, if you impose 32 CFR 861, you eliminate every operation that is now using an Experimental, Restricted, or Limited certificated aircraft.
n8900_410.pdf
Distribution: Electronic Only Initiated By: AFS-300
NOTICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION N 8900.410
National Policy Effective Date:
3/31/17
Cancellation Date:
3/31/18
SUBJ: Clarification of Inspection and Overhaul Requirements Under Part 91
1. Purpose of This Notice. This notice clarifies the differences between overhaul processes and the inspections that make up required inspection programs under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 91.
2. Audience. The primary audience for this notice is Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO), certificate management offices (CMO), and Airworthiness aviation safety inspectors (ASI) with oversight responsibilities for certificate holders operating under part 91. The secondary audience includes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) headquarters (HQ) and Flight Standards Service (AFS) divisions and branches in the regions.
3. Where You Can Find This Notice. You can find this notice on the MyFAA employee website at https://employees.faa.gov/tools_resources/orders_notices. Inspectors can access this notice through the Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS) at http://fsims.avs.faa.gov. Operators can find this notice on the FAA’s website at http://fsims.faa.gov. This notice is available to the public at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices.
4. Background. There have been several recent issues surrounding the interpretation of whether compliance with the manufacturer’s recommended time between overhaul (TBO) intervals are required under part 91.
5. Discussion. The term “maintenance” is defined in 14 CFR part 1, § 1.1 as “Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.” While this definition has been around for a very long time, differences between some of the elements that make up maintenance (such as inspection and overhaul) have not always been clearly understood. In this notice, we discuss the key differences between inspection and overhaul and the implications of those differences.
a. Inspections. Inspections are visual examinations and/or manual checks to determine the condition of an aircraft or component. An inspection can range from a routine visual examination to a detailed inspection involving complete disassembly and/or the use of complex inspection aids, such as X-ray, ultrasonic, eddy current, or magnetic particle equipment.
3/31/17 N 8900.410
UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN DOWNLOADED
Check with FSIMS to verify current version before using
(1) Inspection Program Content. Not all tasks classified or described as “inspections” are part of the inspection “program.” Inspection programs refer to a list of scheduled inspection items and associated intervals whose main purpose is to determine the condition of the aircraft and its components (airframe, engines, propellers, rotors, appliances, survival equipment, and emergency equipment). In other words, they are scheduled items done at a defined interval to check for hidden damage and continued serviceability. Typically, unscheduled inspections constitute a maintenance action, such as when damage is known and a discrepancy must be cleared. These inspections are event-driven from a known malfunction or discrepancy, such as a hard landing or prop strike. The intent of these inspections is to determine the level of damage so that maintenance actions may be taken to restore the aircraft to a known good condition.
Similarly, inspections that are part of a larger maintenance process, such as inspections performed during an overhaul, are also classified as a maintenance action and not a part of an inspection program for the reasons stated above.
(a) Inspection Programs vs. Maintenance Programs. Maintenance personnel should not confuse an inspection program with the elements that make up a more extensive maintenance program. An inspection program will only capture a list of scheduled inspections whereas a maintenance program will encompass many elements, to include inspections, overhaul requirements, repair schemes, Corrosion Prevention and Control Programs (CPCP), and the scheduled replacement of parts.
(b) Overhauls are Maintenance. By definition, overhauls are a form of maintenance, not inspection, and are not included in an inspection program. Overhauls are part of the maintenance program. Part 91 operators are not required to comply with a manufacturer’s entire maintenance program; as such, overhauls are not mandatory for part 91 operators.
(c) Part Replacements. Scheduled replacement of parts (such as filters, seals, etc.) are also maintenance. Part replacement is a part of the overall maintenance program and are not to be included in an inspection program. However, if an inspection of an item is destructive in nature and mandates the replacement of the part after the inspection, it is still appropriate to include these items in the inspection program.
(d) Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) Notes. FAA legal interpretations state TCDS notes containing overhaul limits are not mandatory under our regulations. TCDS notes define the design of the aircraft and how that design meets the certification basis it is certificated under, not to define how it is maintained. Some manufacturers have attempted to put information into a TCDS that defines requirements for continuing maintenance of their aircraft; however, such information is not regulatory and is outside the purpose of the TCDS notes. Information not specifically referencing the design and configuration of an aircraft, such as ongoing maintenance requirements, is inappropriate and not binding on the owner/operator in a regulatory sense. The Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) has published FAA Order 8110.121, Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) Notes, that explains the intent and design of TCDS notes in greater detail, including descriptions of appropriate content.
(e) Differences Between Operating Rules. Although we have focused on part 91 aircraft, it is prudent to mention that many other operating rules do require compliance with some form of a maintenance program (beyond the inspection program requirements).
greggfahrenbruch
Highlight
Title 14 CFR part 135 (nine or fewer) requires compliance with at least the manufacturer’s recommended maintenance program. (Refer to part 135, § 135.421.) Part 135 (10 or more) and 14 CFR part 121 require a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP), which includes a more extensive maintenance program. (Refer to §§ 135.411 and 135.423 through 135.443; and part 121, §§ 121.135, 121.367, and 121.369.) The only form of scheduled maintenance required under 14 CFR part 125 is compliance with the manufacturer’s recommended overhaul periods. (Refer to part 125, § 125.247.) Part 91 subpart K (part 91K) operators are only required to comply with scheduled maintenance items if they elect to develop their own CAMP under part 91, § 91.1109(b)(5). (Refer to §§ 91.1411 through 91.1443.)
Likewise, part 91K operators are only required to comply with overhaul limits if included in their CAMP program developed per § 91.1109(b)(5).
Note: Certain part replacements (life-limited parts, parts affected by Airworthiness Directives (AD), etc.) remain mandatory for aircraft operated under part 91 due to other regulatory requirements, even though they are not part of the inspection program.
Note: While scheduled items of maintenance (other than inspections) are not required to be included in the inspection program, they become mandatory if the operator chooses to include them in an Approved Inspection Program (AIP), such as one developed under § 91.409(f)(4). However, items of scheduled maintenance, that are not inspection tasks, which the manufacturer has inserted in its inspection programs are not mandatory to operators utilizing a program under § 91.409(f)(3).
(2) Manufacturer’s Inspection Programs. Recently, there have been questions surrounding what is specifically required under § 91.409(f)(3) and what constitutes a program recommended by the manufacturer. First, consider what an aircraft manufacturer is required to provide as part of the certification process in the certification rules, which includes instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA). All certification rules have nearly identical wording, which specifies the ICA must be in the form of a manual or manuals that must provide for a practical arrangement. For example, 14 CFR part 23 appendix G specifies the requirements for the ICA, prepared by the aircraft manufacturer. Additionally, the ICA must contain the following information:
“(b) Maintenance instructions. (1) Scheduling information for each part of the airplane and its engines, auxiliary power units, propellers, accessories, instruments, and equipment that provides the recommended periods at which they should be cleaned, inspected, adjusted, tested, and lubricated, and the degree of inspection, the applicable wear tolerances, and work recommended at these periods. However, the applicant may refer to an accessory, instrument, or equipment manufacturer as the source of this information if the applicant shows that the item has an exceptionally high degree of complexity requiring specialized maintenance techniques, test equipment, or expertise.
The recommended overhaul periods and necessary cross reference to the Airworthiness Limitations section of the manual must also be included. In addition, the applicant must include an inspection program that includes the frequency and extent of the inspections necessary to provide for the continued airworthiness of the airplane.”
Being a program created by the aircraft manufacturer, an owner or operator does not need to research every engine, propeller, appliance, and equipment manual for potential inspection items.
The certification rules requires the aircraft manufacturer provide ICA for their aircraft, which includes required inspection programs for those aircraft, including installed equipment.
Additionally, modifying the aircraft, such as through a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) or field approval, does not make a manufacturer’s inspection program inappropriate. In such cases, the owner/operator must comply with the inspection program recommended by the manufacturer as well as any identified inspection program items from the ICA of aftermarket equipment and/or modifications. This is no different than compliance with additional inspections called out in applicable ADs.
(3) Approved Inspection Programs (AIP). There are several rules requiring aircraft to have an AIP, but the programs are basically identical in structure and required content. For example, we typically refer to an inspection approved under § 135.419 as an Approved Aircraft Inspection Program (AAIP), while we call an inspection program approved under § 91.409(f)(4) simply an AIP. While the terminology may vary slightly, the intent and design are the same. The same can be said for §§ 91.1109 and 125.247. If the rule requires the inspection program to be approved, it can all be generically referred to as the AIP for that aircraft. Note, though, some operating rules also require operators to comply with a maintenance program, which are either the manufacturer’s recommended items or something developed by the operator (depending on the rule). This is in addition to the inspection program requirements. Finally, we have rules that allow, or require, a CAMP. These are all-inclusive programs that have even more requirements that the basic maintenance and inspection program requirements required elsewhere.
(4) Functional Checks. Functional checks are a form of an inspection and can be called for in a number of different situations, which can make classifying them difficult. They can be included in an inspection program, which would make them a mandatory inspection. Or they can be performed as part of the return to service after a specific maintenance activity, which makes them part of the maintenance procedure and excludes them from the inspection program.
Additionally, they could be part of a pilot’s pre- or post-flight procedure and not classified as maintenance items at all. Perhaps the best way to classify functional checks is to reference the source document. If it is listed in the inspection program, it is a Required Inspection Item (RII).
If it is listed in an Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), it is an item of maintenance; and if it is listed in an Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) or pilot’s operating handbook (POH), it is an operation item.
b. Overhaul. The term “overhaul” is mentioned in only a few places in the rules, and is not really defined. Title 14 CFR part 43, § 43.2(a) essentially states that an overhaul consists of disassembly, cleaning, inspection, repair, reassembly, and testing. However, several FAA legal interpretations have stated all of these steps are not necessarily required for a maintenance action to be an overhaul. In fact, the words “as necessary” appear after repair, and it is not clear in the text if that applies only to the word “repair,” as it would seem, or to all previous list items. In any case, the FAA has taken the position that only the steps that can logically be performed would be required to call an item “overhauled.” For example, a part that cannot be disassembled without destroying it, such as a turbine blade, can still be considered overhauled if following the manufacturer’s overhaul instructions.
(1) Mandatory or Not. While the concept of part 91 operators not having to comply with manufacturer’s TBO limits is well known, the reasons behind it have not been very well documented, although, Advisory Circular (AC) 20-105, Reciprocating Engine Power-Loss Accident Prevention and Trend Monitoring, has provided guidance since 1998. The regulations require that part 91 operators have an “inspection program” of some sort. The program could be a 100-hour, annual, manufacturer’s recommended inspection program, or one of the operator’s own design, depending on aircraft type. However, part 135 (nine or fewer) operators must have a “maintenance and inspection program.” It is this extra mention of a “maintenance” program that makes TBOs required in part 135 (and some other operational rules), but not for part 91. Recall the definition of maintenance, “Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.” In the definition, “overhaul” and “inspection” are separate items, showing overhauls cannot be inspections, rather they are both unique forms of maintenance. Remember, overhauls are a maintenance process, not an inspection process.
(2) Overhaul vs. Inspection. The difference between an overhaul and the inspections performed as part of an inspection program is the purpose of the action.
(a) Inspection Program. The primary purpose of an inspection program is to perform examinations to determine the condition of an aircraft or component so any necessary repairs can be made. Essentially, inspection programs are focused on finding hidden problems that may impact airworthiness. In a typical inspection, items are not replaced unless they are actually defective.
(b) Overhaul. The primary purpose of an overhaul is to restore an article to a known good condition that will give a reasonable assurance of operation for a specified amount of time, referred to as the “time between overhauls (TBO).” While inspecting individual components is an integral part of the overhaul, this is just one part of the overall overhaul (maintenance) process. For example, during the inspection phase in an overhaul, a mechanic may be prompted to replace a part after inspecting it, even though it is not broken and is still performing its intended function. But, the wear might be such that the manufacturer has confidence the part would not make it to the next overhaul period. These tolerances are typically identified by the manufacturer as the “overhaul limits.”
(3) Compliance with Manufacturer’s Service Bulletins (SB). Manufacturers publish many forms of maintenance-related information, using varying names, such as Service Bulletins (SB), Service Instructions (SI), etc. We will refer to them hereafter as SBs for simplicity. These documents typically contain information that supplements a manufacturer’s published maintenance manual or ICA.
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .