Northern Rockies Strategic Action Committee (SAC)
Meeting Notes, March 31, 2005
MT DNRC Fire and Aviation Conference Room, Missoula, MT
and Teleconference
In Attendance:
Tim Murphy, NRCG Contractor Liaison
Marci Giblin, MT DNRC , NRCG Business Committee
Roberta Whitlock, USFS, NRCG Business Committee
Kevin Erickson, USFS, NRCG Equipment Committed
Nancy Gibson, USFS NRCG Training Committee
Kathy Elzig, BLM, Dispatch (via Teleconference from NRCC)
Bruce Swick, MT DNRC, Contracting (via Teleconference from Helena)
Kathy Benson (final minutes only), USFS, Contracting (via Teleconference)
Absent:
Mark Romey, USFS, NRCG Operations Committee
Per Tim, today’s agenda will include:
1) Round-robin with updates from committee members
2) Issues from Forest Service Contracting Officers, relative to Best Value Contracting
3) Issues surrounding the draft description of roles of agency, local government, and
contractors in best value contracting.
4) Question that surfaced at the Regional FMO meeting, regarding contractor
representation on the SAC
Equipment Committee Update – Kevin: Equipment Inspector Workshop in Helena
trained approximately 63 students. Training covered all the basics, as well as CFR’s and
hands-on field inspection work. Another session will be held April 15. Approximately
150 inspectors have attended training in the NR Geographic Area in the last 4 years.
The question was asked whether there is truth to the rumor that these inspectors will have
to be DOT certified. Kevin says the FSH 5109.17 does have specific requirements for
the position that is identified as Equipment Inspector (EQPI). However, the way we
utilize these inspectors on incidents, they do not really fill the role of EQPI, but function
more like the “eyes and ears” of the contracting officers’ representatives, and really don’t
need that level of training and experience. Tim pointed out that the inspection program
and use of the inspectors is interagency, the EQPI position is not identified in the 310-1,
and our inspectors are actually THSP’s (technical specialists). The training we provide is
in a workshop format, and is not certification of anything.
SAC Meeting Notes, 3/31/05
1
Dispatch Update – Kathy Elzig: Consulted with the ROSS group and Ray Nelson to see
if data from 2003 and 2004 could be manipulated to better reflect whether individual
equipment used was agency or private. The answer was “no”, that is not possible for any
historic data. The ROSS group will look at some way to provide cleaner data of this
type for the future. Kathy thinks a line-by-line review of data will give us better numbers
of privet equipment used in ’03 and ’04. We also wanted a better “feel” for name
requests of equipment. This is another piece of information not available by ROSS data
query. Do we need to find some other way to get this information? Kathy thinks that the
data we have will give us pretty good numbers of private, cooperator and agency
equipment use. It was agreed to go ahead and do the line-by-line, “manual” analysis.
Tim said that our last discussion included the possibility of not limiting the number of
bidders or awards, so it may not be as critical to specifically identify numbers and types
of equipment needed, as we had defined the original task. Also, analyzing numbers and
types, by zone, will help provide more useful information. By identifying numbers and
types need in each zone, we may not need to determine the overall need across the
Geographic Area.
There was discussion about whether we will have the infrastructure needed to support an
unlimited or undefined number of contracts. Tim thinks numbers might be limited by
lack of qualifying equipment, or inconsistent levels of adequate work available. Kevin
feels that higher, more professional standards than currently in the EERA’s will probably
precipitate fewer, but high-quality contractors. This will also somewhat reduce the
inspection workload. Another factor that might limit numbers of bidders would be
assessing a fee for administration, as has been done in the Pacific Northwest. However,
Roberta and Bruce say that neither MT State nor the USFS can take in money in that
way. Bruce says that if funding was provided specifically for the establishment and
administration of these contracts, and that funding was associated with a fulltime
equivalent (FTE), management of the contracts might be supported in that way.
Roberta’s opinion is that with budget and personnel cutbacks, it’s doubtful FS could
provide and FTE. She thinks the pre-bid, award, and post-season workload would be
pretty well covered. She has major concerns about administration at the incident,
and the lack of COR’s and inspectors there. We need to have a balance of contracts
and COTR help at the incident. We really need to develop the dedicated positions
to provide the needed administrative support and the incident. This is a safety
issue, as well as a financial and administrative issue.
We need to keep this in mind as we continue to develop the overall best value proposal.
*May meeting Agenda Item: best value contract administration, preand post-season workload needs, and who will accomplish them.
Training Committee – Nancy: Re. performance evaluations, we agreed we will basically
follow the template from PNW. Mark (operations) is working on some elements or
narrative format that would be supplemental to the NWCG form. Nancy will tie in with
him.
SAC Meeting Notes, 3/31/05
2
Business Committee – Roberta: Per the business committee’s request, Kathy Benson is
working on another committee to complete the task of developing a scoring (point)
system to evaluate the bids. Operations and equipment committees will be involved.
Roberta is also working on actions/consequences for poor or non-performance, and
recommendations for contracting officers.
Marci says business committee member, Berta Lee, is working on defining roles of
EERA’s. Marci’s not sure of the status of that. The cost/share descriptions are still
somewhat up in the air. She handed out copies of some feedback from private entities
and DNRC, on the draft definition of roles and responsibilities of agencies, local
government, and contractors. This will be discussed later in this meeting.
Roberta has a copy of the PNW invitation to bid, and has been perusing it to see what is
most useable for us, and what needs to be adapted to contracting needs of the State of
Montana. It’s an excellent document and it seems we’ll be able to follow it fairly closely.
How do we want to proceed with developing our draft? She’ll continue to review and
recommend changes, if any. There may be some PNW folks at the April meeting, and
Tim suggests it would be good to bring a draft, if possible.
Roberta, Bruce and Bob Williams, PNW engine and tender contracting officer,
participated in a presentation and meeting with Northern Rockies Wildfire Contractors
Association (NRWCA) in Bozeman. A Forest Service contracting officer who attended
part of the presentation, wrote a letter to the Region 1 director of procurement, Sue
Prentice, expressing concerns about the direction we’re going with the development of
best value contracts. Some of the issues had to do with FS contracting requirements and
procedures, and Montana’s open meeting laws. It was agreed that we need to increase
levels of understanding about the best value contracts and the activities and direction of
the SAC. We have an opportunity to work with the Regional procurement staff to also
improve understanding among contracting officers and others involved in contracting.
Roberta has invited Sue Prentice to the April 19 SAC meeting. Some folks from PNW
will also probably be at this meeting, and may be able to help answer some of her
questions. We also discussed the possibility of more directly involving some FS
contracting people, including those in eastern MT, in SAC meetings, discussions, and
development of contracts. Roberta will talk with FS contracting organization to see how
this can be accomplished.
Kathy Benson joined the meeting in the last minutes, and will take the lead on setting up
a meeting with Sue P., Kathy B., Tim, Roberta, and Bruce. Kathy will invite Sue to the
May SAC meeting.
Roberta and Bruce said the contractors raised no new major issues at the Bozeman
meeting. Overall, they realize that no final decisions about best value contracts have
been made yet, and they provided input. Bruce says NAFTA, and out-of-state vendors
will probably continue to be an issue.
SAC Meeting Notes, 3/31/05
3
The task of defining roles and responsibilities of agencies, local government and
contractors, was assigned by the business committee to the MT DNRC business
committee. Representatives from two contractors’ associations also helped in developing
the draft definitions. The draft document generated comments and concerns from
NRWCA, local government and State and FS individuals. Some of the concerns raise
potential legal issues. Tim will take the draft and comments to NRCG, to determine the
next appropriate course of action on this task.
Tim explained that a Forest FMO had expressed concern that there is no official
contractor membership on the SAC. The committee still feels strongly that it’s not
appropriate to have a private person in the role of a “voting” member. Meeting agendas,
and notes are posted on the internet and well distributed. Attendance at meetings is open,
and contractors have opportunities to make input at meetings, as well as directly to Tim
and other committee members and NRCG member organizations.
Marci announced she will be leaving the SAC, to be replaced by the yet-to-be named MT
DNRC Fire Business Management Coordinator. Marci will transition with the new
person, and continue in her information sharing roles, etc. in the interim. Thanks, Marci
for all your hard work – we’ll miss you!
Upcoming Meetings/Topics
April 19, 20: SAC meeting at NRCC AFD., Missoula
- Develop EATiS white paper, justification for funding to adopt it in NR. PNW
will send some folks to assist?
- FS contracting officer participation?
- Report out on individual tasks
May 17, 18: SAC meeting at DNRC building, Spurgin Rd., Missoula
- Bob Williams & Terry Brown, PNW engine and tender contracting officer
will attend (Roberta will invite)
- Invite Sue Prentiss RO & Mary CO Billings BLM
- Fair share/cost sharing, administrative workloads and infrastructure
- Best Value Factoring report back from Kathy Benson’s subgroup
- Report out on individual tasks. (Assume each committee member is keeping
and eye on timelines.)
June 7: SAC meeting / teleconference at NRCC AFD
SAC Meeting Notes, 3/31/05
4
SAC Meeting Notes, 3/31/05
5