Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF APRIL 25, 2004 FBO #0881
MODIFICATION

15 -- Amendment to Aerial Surveillance Platform in support of the Coalition Provisional Authority - Iraq

Notice Date

4/23/2004
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

NAICS

336411 — Aircraft Manufacturing
 

Contracting Office

US Army Aviation and Missile Command (Aviation), ATTN: AMSAM-AC, Building 5303, Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5280
 

ZIP Code

35898-5280
 

Solicitation Number

W58RGZ04R0547
 

Response Due

5/3/2004
 

Archive Date

7/2/2004
 

Point of Contact

Carole Hubbard, (256)876-3390
 

E-Mail Address

Email your questions to US Army Aviation and Missile Command (Aviation)
(carole.hubbard@redstone.army.mil)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Description

This is Amendment 0001 to combined synopsis/solicitation W58RGZ-04-R-0547 for the purpose of providing industry questions and government responses. The proposal due date has not been changed. Proposals are due either by email or facsimile no later than 3 May 2004, 4:00 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST). For those questions/responses that resulted in a change to the requirement, you will need to make a pen and ink change to the original synopsis/solicitation. Solicitation W58RGZ-04-R-0547 will not b e reprinted in its entirety. Other questions have been received and will be posted along with the government responses on 26 April 2004. Due to the immediate need for these aerial surveillance platforms, the cutoff date for submission of industry questio ns is 28 April 2004, 2:00 p.m. CST. Q1: This solicitation requires a significant amount of effort to produce a compliant proposal, even if a company was aware of the specific requirements of the solicitation. The response date of 03 May 2004 does not pro vide an offeror sufficient time to do so. Request that the solicitation due date be changed to 24 May 2004 to provide contractors a reasonable time to respond to the solicitation and remove a possible basis for protests. A1: With the current hostilities in Iraq, it is imperative that we field this platform as soon as possible. Allowances have been made so that potential offerors could submit a proposal via email or facsimile. Because this solicitation is for a commercial off the shelf aircraft purchase, specifications and price lists should be available for preparation of a proposal within the specified timeframe. No extension is granted and the due date and time for proposals remains 3 May 2004, 4:00 Central Standard Time. Q2: Section 3.5 requires th at the contractor shall deliver new, fully integrated and operational aircraft to Iraq under the following schedule: two within 30 DAC, two within 90 DAC, etc. It is unlikely that offerors have new, fully integrated and operational aircraft sitting on th e ramp, when the first time the requirements were made known was when the solicitation was released. It would take 7-12 days just to ferry aircraft from CONUS to Iraq. This may raise questions that the outcome of this solicitation has already been determ ined. Has the outcome of this solicitation already been determine? If so, recommend that the solicitation be cancelled and reissued as a sole source with appropriate justification. If not, recommend that the delivery plan be changed to a more realistic schedule of two aircraft 9 months after contract award (MACA), and no more than two aircraft per month thereafter. This provides a more realistic delivery schedule and removes suspicions that the solicitation outcome has already been determined. A2: The solicitation outcome has not been pre-determined. Multiple vendors have indicated interest in this solicitation. There are no plans to cancel the solicitation and reissue as sole source. The combined synopsis/solicitation is revised to remove the GO/NO GO evaluation on delivery schedule. However, the delivery schedule stated in the solicitation is the desired delivery date. All proposed delivery schedules will be evaluated to determine the best value to the government. Q3: FAR clause 52.212-2 states t hat the delivery schedule is a GO/NO GO rating, and if all offerors are NO GO then the schedule will be evaluated on best value. This evaluation criterium may not provide the government with the best value for the overall program. For example, contractor A has a best value rating of 100, and is very close to meeting the delivery schedule, but does not. Contractor B has a best value rating of only 50, but can meet the schedule. It may be clear to the government that Contractor A provides the best value, however, the government would be forced to award the contract to contractor B. Replace the GO/NO GO criteria for delivery schedule with best value criteria whi ch would truly provide the best value to the government. A3: The combined synopsis/solicitation is revised to remove the GO/NO GO evaluation on delivery schedule. However, the delivery schedule stated in the solicitation is the desired delivery date. All proposed delivery schedules will be evaluated to determine the best value to the government. Q4: Section 3.2 states that for pilot training, the contractor may assume previous qualified pilot experience. The section is silent on previous qualificatio ns of the maintenance technicians. May the contractors assume that the maintenance technicians set for specific aircraft training have previous qualifications equivalent to an FAA A&P license? If not, what are their previous qualifications? We need clar ification to properly bid the program. A4: Previous qualifications are not FAA A&P licensed mechanics. You can assume these are Iraqi military trained mechanics. Q5: Section 3.0.5 requires an encoding transponder for ATC identification and for operation s within civil and military ATC infrastructure. Does the program require a transponder with IFF capability, and if so, what modes? A5: The system does not require IFF capability. Q6: Section 3.0.1 requires an aircraft to complete and 8 hour mission in t he environmental conditions expected in Iraq. It gets very hot in Iraq and 8 hours is a long time to be in a non cooled aircraft. Even at the surveillance altitudes the ambient temperatures are hot and vent fans would only blow hot air on the crew. Fati gue and degraded mission effectiveness would be the result. Include the requirement for an air conditioning system in the aircraft specifications to correct a significant mission effectiveness weakness in the requirements. A6: There is no requirement fo r air conditioning in the aircraft. Q7: Regarding section 3.2, not all pilots and mechanics successfully complete a training course within the prescribed syllabus events and require retraining. This is especially true when the student qualifications are not well known. What are the provisions for retraining pilots and mechanics who have failed to successfully complete requirements in the specified time? Please clarify so that we may properly bid the program. A7: No retraining requirement has been iden tified. It is assumed that the offeror will propose a training plan focusing on success, not failure; therefore a retraining requirement should not occur. The offeror may submit retraining information as part of their proposed training, if desired. Q8: The solicitation does not provide the funding level of the program. Offerors may have several potential aircraft that meet the requirements, some would be more robust and would provide a better value to the government. However, if the better value aircra ft is outside the available funding, then the offeror would not waste the effort to bid that aircraft. Please provide the available funding for the program to provide the offerors with the boundary within which to propose their best value solution. A8: T he funding level of the program will not be stated. If an offeror has more than one aircraft that can meet the requirements, that offeror can submit separate proposals for each aircraft. Q9: Section 3.6 requires the contractor to conduct extensive test f lights and the CPA will perform an acceptance check flight prior to delivery of each aircraft. This type of activity is usually conducted at the manufacturer/modification location where all the support equipment and technical personnel are readily availab le. The solicitation is silent as to the location of this activity. Recommend the solicitation state that the contractor functional check flights and CPA acceptance check flight shall be conducted at the contractors facility. Additionally, the governmen t should take ownership of the aircraft at the contractors facility following the successful completion of the acceptance check flight. The government may stil l require the contractor to ferry the aircraft to Iraq, however, ownership should transfer after the acceptance, i.e. FOB origin. Clarify to avoid future misunderstandings. A9: Test flights may be conducted at the contractors facility. Delivery of the a ircraft is FOB destination to Basrah International Airport in Iraq as stated in the solicitation. Q10: As a commercial item being procured under FAR Part 12, the FAR clause 52.232-31, Invitation to Propose Commercial Financing Terms, has not been included within the solicitation. Would the government add this clause in order that the contractor may propose his commercial financing terms and align this procurement to commercial industry practices? A10: FAR clause 52.232-31 will not be included in this re quirement. Q11: What is the anticipated contract award date? A11: If award can be made without holding discussions, the anticipated contract award date is 16 July 2004. However, if discussions are necessary, the anticipated contract award date is 31 Aug ust 2004. Q12: Does the government anticipate awarding CLINs 0001 through 0004 simultaneously at contract award? Clarify for purposes of planning and bidding. A12: Yes, CLINs 0001 through 0004 will be awarded simultaneously. Q13: The government has ide ntified CLIN 0001 as eight (8) each aircraft. With a quantity measurement of each, this implies the government may order one aircraft at a time. If the government intends to order all 8 aircraft at once, the quantity measurement should reflect LOT. The government needs to define the quantity measurement desired for CLIN 0001, i.e. EACH or LOT. If the government intends to order on the basis of a quantity measurement of EACH, this is incompatible with the schedule reflect for the aircraft deliveries. A1 3: The government has identified the quantity measurement of EACH for CLIN 0001. As stated in Q&A 12 above, the initial award will include the purchase of 8 aircraft. The EACH quantity measurement will facilitate payment for each aircraft upon delivery. Q14: As a commercial item being procured under FAR Part 12, it would be more in compatible with commercial practices if the government modified the requirements of ??????in accordance with CDRL XXXX- to ??????the CDRL shall be used as a guide. Modify the CDRL requirements to reflect they be used as a guide in lieu of in accordance with to align this procurement to commercial practices. A14: The requirements of the solicitation are changed to allow the CDRLs to be used as a guide. Contractor formats are acceptable. Q15: The solicitation requires delivery of CLIN 0001 aircraft to the Basrah International Airport but does not mention the actual permanent beddown location. For planning and pricing purposes, the governments permanent beddown location should be provided to the competitors in advance. Is the Basrah International Airport going to be the permanent beddown site for this proposed acquisition? A15: The US Government will not be the operator of the aircraft. Aircraft beddown base locations are s ubject to change. There is no requirement for the contractor to be collocated with the beddown base. Follow-on contractor maintenance is depot only. Q16: The solicitation requires all aircraft, parts and materials delivered and warranted for a period of two (2) years beginning on the date of delivery. It also states that all individual OEM warranties shall be their standard warranty issued IAW best commercial practices and shall pass through to the end user. Standard OEM parts warranty for this company is for a period of 6 months from date of delivery. Does the government want a two-year warranty on parts or the standard OEM warranty? A16: Government market survey indicates standard OEM warranties are indeed in the two year range. Basic airframe-2 ye ars; paint-1 year. Subcomponents, such as radios and navigation equipment, engines, propellers and instruments are based on the OEM warranty. Q17: We had some news today that the government might have contracted a different company to produce and deliver the aircrafts specified in this RFP. Is this true? Is the new solicitation that was posted for this tender open and alive and you are expecting bids for this work by May 3rd? A17: The solicitation is open and valid. No contract has been awarded for these aircraft. Proposals for this requirement are due May 3, 2004, 4:00 p.m. central standard time. Q18: Would airplanes or helicopters be more useful for you here? A18: This requirement is for a fixed wing aircraft. Q19: Who will be handling the export of the A/C and sensors? The 30 day delivery for the first 2 will not even allow enough time to get an expedited export license. If the US Army is doing it t hen no export license will be required. A19: The US Government will handle any export contingencies as necessary. Q20: I assume that you are aware that the recognition distance for the IR sensor will require a fairly high performance system which also ge ts into the export license issue. Are there any restrictions as to what will be considered for export and what will not? A20: There are no restrictions with which the bidder should be concerned. The US Government will handle any export contingencies as necessary. Q21: Section 3.0.2 requires commercial fuel (MOGAS 80-87 octane). Will the army accept turbine powered aircraft? A21: No. Q22: Paragraph 2.0 Applicable Document. This paragraph reflects the requirement for FAA FAR Part 23 Airworthiness St andards. As this will be a government user is Military Certification sufficient to satisfy this solicitation? A22: No. It must be certified as per FAA FAR Part 23 for the purpose of adhering to Acquisition regulations. Q23: Also in Paragraph 2.0, there is a cryptic reference to FAA FAR Part 121 Operating Requirements. What specifically does that mean? Most such operations are conducted under Part 121 Operating and Flight Rules. Part 121 mostly refers to air carrier operations. A23: This FAA FAR Part was included so as to ensure that the aircraft adheres to regulations as they pertain to construction, safety and maintenance, e.g. to include such things as, but not limited to, 121.235 Fuel Valves, 121.237 Oil lines and fittings in designated fire zones , 121.239 Oil valves, etc. Q24: Paragraph 3.0.2 Requirements. Please clarify the statement that aircraft should be approved for operation in day/night VMC and be capable of operations in IMC. Does this mean that the aircraft does not require IMC certif ication? A24: The aircraft must be certified for IFR (IMC). It need not be certified for icing conditions. Q25: Also in Paragraph 3.0.2. Solicitation reflects that aircraft shall require only commercial fuels (MOGAS 80-87 octane). Are other commercial fuels, such as AVGAS 100 low lead or Jet A fuel acceptable? A25: No. Q26: Paragraph 3.2 Maintenance Training. (Contractor) has considerable experience in training foreign maintenance personnel. Has any assessment been done of the skill levels of Iraqi maintenance personnel International aircraft maintenance skills seldom come up to FAA standards without extensive training and follow-on maintenance supervision. We do not see a reference in the solicitation to a requirement for ongoing skills develop ment by qualified supervisory maintenance personnel. A26: Previous qualifications ARE NOT FAA A&P licensed mechanics. Assume Iraqi military trained mechanics. No retraining requirement has been identified. You may propose ongoing training if desired. Q27: Paragraph 3.3 Pilot Training. This same question should be asked regarding assessment of Iraqi pilot skills. Can they be expected to have night and instrument flight experience and IFR ratings? A27: Assume Iraqi military trained fixed-wing pilots. No retraining requirement has been identified. You may propose ongoing training if desired. Q28: Paragraph 3.5 Aircraft Delivery Plan. The aircraft delive ry plan seems very aggressive, particularly given uncertainties about the skills. A28: The combined synopsis/solicitation is revised to remove the GO/NO GO evaluation on delivery schedule. However, the delivery schedule stated in the solicitation is the desired delivery date. All proposed delivery schedules will be evaluated to determine the best value to the government. Q29: There is no reference in the solicitation to the identity of the sponsoring agency. What is the entity? Is it possible to meet with that agency to more fully discuss the requirement and to define the full range of capabilities of (the contractors) reconnaissance aircraft? We would like to do so at the earliest opportunity. A29: The US Army Aviation and Missile Command is the co ntracting agency for this requirement in support of the Coalition Provisional Authority. This is a competitive acquisition and meetings with potential offerors will not be allowed. Q30: There is no mention in the solicitation of provision of and training in the use of NVG equipment. Also, there is no mention of making aircraft panels compatible with NVG use. Are NVGs a requirement and is it required to have NVG panels in the aircraft? A30: There are no NVG requirements. Q31: There is no mention of ty pes of sensor displays for the imaging system. Are there specific requirements, e.g., night vision capability and/or resolution requirements for displays? A31: Displays must be visible in a dark environment, due to the 24/7 Day/Night requirement. Paragraph 3.0.3 addresses the type of sensor suite requirement. The point of contact for this action is Carole Hubbard, Contracting Officer, fax number (256) 955- 8364 or email to carole.hubbard@redstone.army.mil.
 

Place of Performance

Address: US Army Aviation and Missile Command (Aviation) ATTN: AMSAM-AC, Building 5303, Martin Road Redstone Arsenal AL

Zip Code: 35898-5280

Country: US
 

Record

SN00571956-W 20040425/040423212249 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |