Pre Solic Conference Minutes.doc

International IFS Pre-Solicitation Conference Date: 12/17/2009 Location: AETC CONS, Randolph AFB, TX

Contractor Attendees:

1. Tom Hannawa, American Aviation Academy

2. Tom Arko, Spartan College

3. Ken Smith, Doss Aviation

4. Barney Rummel, Doss Aviation

5. John Jackson, Lockheed Martin

6. Lee Heiser, Lockheed Martin

7. Rick Couch, Lockheed Martin

8. Jim Beamish, Grey Aviation

9. John Foncannon, Boeing

10. Jeff Breunig, ICF International

11. Robert Yarborough, I3

12. Wes Williams, Northern General Leasing

Government Attendees:

13. Major James Trimble, AFSAT

14. Major Pat Luna, AFSAT

15. Pat Barber, AETC CONS

16. Emma Hargrove, AETC CONS

17. Denise Krems, AETC CONS

18. Ralph LaRosa, AETC CONS

19. Ty Senour, AETC CONS

1. AETC CONS Brief (Ty Senour)

· Welcome and Introductions: Mr. Ty Senour, AETC CONS Contracting Specialist, stressed that this meeting was for planning purposes and no decisions shall be considered to be final. The goal of the meeting is for AETC CONS to receive advice and feedback from the contractors in attendance for preparation of the official solicitation.

· Mrs. Pat Barber, AETC CONS Small Business Specialist, was introduced and provided information on the small business program to the contractors. Whether not this will be a small business set-aside, small business shall play a role though partnering agreements and subcontracts. Partner and legal agreements are valid and large business must meet goals of the small business plan. Central Contractor Registration needs to be updated and must include the correct NAICS code for this requirement, which is 611512. Mrs. Barber informed the small businesses in attendance how they could improve their Small Business Administration (SBA) profile. Mrs. Barber may be reached at patricia.barber@randolph.af.mil or 210-652-7084.

· Mr. Senour continued with the brief with the following topics (PowerPoint slides are attached):

1. Background and Program Overview

2. Source Selection Type and Technical Acceptance

3. Evaluation Criteria

4. Contract Considerations

5. Contract Period of Performance

6. Major Acquisition Milestones

7. Summary

2. AFSAT Brief (Maj Patrick Luna) Major Patrick Luna, AFSAT Program Manager, summarized the goal of the International IFS program. AFSAT currently has one country committed to this requirement; however, several countries have expressed serious interest and the contract will be set up to allow other countries to join. Major Luna stressed the need of the contractors to be flexible when dealing with international training- the time frame and number of students may often change due to various factors dealing with the international sector.

3. Contractor Questions and Discussion The following are questions/comments provided by contractors during the open discussion. Answers were provided by Maj Luna or Ralph LaRosa (Contracting Officer):

Q: Is there a commander review process for the pass/fail of students?

A: The training records of any student whom the contractor suggests a failing grade will be forwarded to the program manager. A final decision, based on the information provided by the contractor, will be made by the AFSAT commander on a case by case basis. The commander may approve additional training; historically, we can accommodate the student and may approve 5 more rides to maximize cockpit time to validate the ability to fly the aircraft. Students who pass the program will not be subject to a commander review.

Q: Will there be military pilots providing oversight of the IPs in a quality assurance role?

A: Instructors will meet the program requirements and there will be no AF review.

Q: How long are the Defense Language Institute (DLI) classes that many students will be required to take?

A: It varies with each student, but it could take up to a year once a requirement is official before a student is available to come to training. DLI classes are offered on a weekly basis. Once again, some flexibility is required as students will vary in the time it takes to go through this process. Country manager are currently forecasting and identifying students and their language requirements.

Q: How many students do you forecast?

A: We only have one country (Kuwait) with a firm requirement; others will come on once the contract is in place. Our rough estimate is 240 students per year. We anticipate no more than 20 students per class.

Q: How will the contractor bill?

A: We plan for a Firm Fixed Price contract with billing done on a per student basis. However, this will be discussed and other options may be considered, including per class and per month. An additional line item may be included for “Additional Training” on an hourly basis, which will require approval by the program manager.

Q: Can you provide any information on the advanced training program for international students?

A: Any advanced training is still in development and is not part of this requirement.

Q: To what extent do the students from one country have to be separated from those of another country?

A: There is a security risk when dealing with international students. We would ask that the students are separated to the most practical extent possible, and a “closer eye” kept on the international students. This information will be updated in the final PWS.

Q: The PWS states that emergency response services must be on the field. What if the airport does not provide these services, but the services are near-by?

A: We may readdress this in the final PWS and provide a response time that must be met instead of a location.

Q: What are the small business goals for subcontracting?

A: They will be included in the final solicitation.

Other important discussion points:

· Students will be required to have passed with an 85 ECL before attending training.

· The contractor will be subject to any evaluations from agencies that govern their operations. The contractor may also be subject to quarterly evaluations by the AFSAT and AETC CONS with advanced notice.

· Students will not be given pilot licenses; only a training certificate and official training records will be required and submitted to AFSAT upon completion of course.

· An individual student shall train in one type of aircraft (i.e. a student should not start training in one type and end in another- it should be consistent throughout the training)

· Market research showed an average of 6 mpg for fuel; however, some flexibility will be considered in the final solicitation.

· An Economic Price Adjustment clause will be included to allow for drastic changes in fuels or other costs.

· In regards to the number of students, the government expects a slow start up to the contract. A firm number cannot be given, and a requirements or IDIQ contract will be used. Surges of students will be expected before the numbers eventually level off after the contract has been in place for awhile. Again, the contractor must remain flexible. The contractor will provide a training schedule, and the government will fill the available seats as needed. There will be a minimum number of students guaranteed and maximum number the government will not be able to exceed. Each country will have a separate task order. The government will discuss the best contract avenues available for the uncertainty of this requirement and more information will be provided.

· Anticipated schedule to be:

· In-process the first week to include the students receiving a medical screening, lodging, and training schedule.

· The training will begin the following Monday with 20 academic days (M-F with 8 hour days).

· Results of training program will be:

· The student passes and is capable for an aviation capacity or aircrew position; or, the student is not recommended for aviation career path

· The contractor will determine if the student can pass based on aptitude and attitude for either pilot or navigator- the same syllabus applies to both.

· In regards to the passing test scores:

a. AFSAT acknowledges that FAA guidance is in place that list the scores required to pass flight training.

b. AFSAT requires the student take both the FAA Knowledge (70%) and Presolo (80%) Knowledge test.

c. Schools are required by the PWS to develop training program, with AFSAT provided syllabus, that meets the requirements of the FAA.

· The PWS will not limit or state the requirements of aircraft pattern work. Scheduling training events is solely at the discretion of the contractor.

· The PWS will not distinguish between controlled or uncontrolled airfields, but it will require the contractor to coordinate with agencies to establish training areas. This is internal to the contractor as to where training occurs as long as the requirements of the contract are met.

4. Individual Meetings

Each contractor was given the opportunity to a private meeting with government officials. Any topics discussed have been included above.

The following companies attended a private a meeting:

Spartan College

ICF International Doss and I3

American Aviation Academy