T-38AMP_Industry_Day_Briefing_--_final.pdf

This Briefing is:

UNCLASSIFIED

Headquarters Air Combat Command

T-38 Aircraft Maintenance Program

Industry Day

12 May 2015

Welcome

Mr. William Beechel

Deputy Director Program Management

Acquisition Management & Integration Center

Agenda

Rules of Engagement

Project Overview

Ms. LaGail Lowe

Project Lead

ACC AMIC/DRXA

Project Team

Project Lead LaGail Crews-Lowe, AMIC/DRXA

Program Manager Stephen Brannen, AMIC/PMAM

Contracting Officer Capt Crystal Champion, AMIC/PKCA

Contract Specialist Danielle May, AMIC/PKCA

Quality Assurance Manager Andy Lipko, AMIC/DRQA

Functional Expertise

MSgt Hector Rodriguez, AMIC/PMAM

MSgt Phillip Pittman, AMIC/DRQ

MSgt Robert Clanin, AMIC/DRQ

Errol Brown, AMIC/PLGS

Legal Advisor Beatrice Foster, ACC/JAQ

ACC Base Monitor Mr. Christopher Williams, AFICA/KC

ACC Director of Small Business Becky Carpenter, ACC/SB

AFPEO/CM Action Officers Farris Welsh, AFPEO/CM

Agenda

• Open Forum Briefing

• Break

• Panel/Q&A session

• Open Forum Conclusion

• One-on-Ones begin as scheduled through 14 May 2014

Topics of Discussion

• Rules of Engagement

• Project Information

• Program Overview

• Acquisition Strategy / Solicitation Overview

• Post Award Management Approach

Rules of Engagement

• Questions

• Questions welcome during the briefing or…

• Write Open Forum questions on the paper found in your packet and turn into marked box at the break

• Write One-on-One questions on paper and turn into marked box at the conclusion of the Open Forum briefing

• Proprietary Information

• Clearly identify any questions/information you consider proprietary

• Q&A Session

• All non-proprietary questions will be answered during the Q&A session as time allows

• Verbal answers are “Unofficial”

Rules of Engagement, cont

• The Government will consolidate all written questions received and post the “official” answers to FedBizOpps

• Proprietary question responses will be provided directly to the company

• All items briefed today and discussed at the One-on-Ones are preliminary and are subject to final acquisition strategy and solicitation approval

• All communications from potential offerors shall be sent to: ACCAMIC.T38.Recompete@us.af.mil

• After the final solicitation is released / posted, communications are limited to the Contracting Officer mailto:ACCAMIC.T38.Recompete@us.af.mil

AMIC Integrated Culture

• SPO Type / Acquisition Center of Excellence organization

• Dedicated Program Managers and Contracting Officers

• Functional support within organization and matrixed to programs

(i.e., Quality Assurance, Civil Engineering, Finance, etc.)

• Report to single Director

• Project Lead inserted in complex service acquisitions to facilitate the process and employ project management disciplines

• Maintain philosophy of partnering with contractors to create business-like environment conducive to meeting the mission

ACC AMIC Organization Chart

Air Combat

Command

Vice Commander

ACC/CV

Advisory &

Assistance

Services

AMIC/DRA

Financial

Management

Information

Management

Executive

Support

Legal

Advisor

ACC/JAQ

Acquisition

Management &

Integration Center

AMIC/DR/DD

Specialized

Acquisitions

Operations &

Training

Technology &

Environmental

Mission

Support

Civil

Engineering

Contracting Program Management

Surveillance

Logistics

Quality

Assurance

AMIC/DRQ

Comm -

Electronics

Aircraft

Maintenance

Plans &

Acquisitions

AMIC/DRX

Standards &

Training

Acquisitions

AMIC/DRXA

Strategic

Sourcing

Oversight and Approval

• Acquisition falls under the Air Force Program Executive

Officer for Combat and Mission Support (AFPEO/CM) portfolio since contract value is greater than $100M;

however, as the contract value is estimated to be below

$500M, it falls within the authority that has been delegated to ACC/CV

• AFPEO/CM: Mr. Randall Culpepper, SES

• ACC/CV: James Harris, Major General

• ACC/A3T: Col Nathan Hill, Acquisition Approval

Authority

• AFICA/KC: Col Morrison, Clearance Approval Authority

• Multi-Functional Independent Review Team (MIRT) is required at $50M+

T-38 Aircraft Maintenance

Program Overview

Mr. Stephen Brannen

T-38 AMP Program Manager

ACC AMIC/PMAM

Program Overview Topics

• T-38 AMP Mission

• T-38 AMP Role

• Customers

• Scope of Work

• Maintenance Concept

• PWS Overview

• Government-Provided Services

• T-38 AMP Program Risks

• Performance Incentive/Award Fee

T-38 AMP Mission

Provide intermediate and organizational aircraft maintenance services for the Air Combat Command

(ACC), Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) and 96

Test Group (Air Force Material Command (AFMC)) T-38 aircraft

T-38 AMP Supporting Role

• Supplemental aircraft to support each wing’s pilot training program

• Maintain airmanship and proficiency

• Resource to evaluate pilot proficiency

• Adversary Air (ADAIR) for F-22s

• CONUS Deployments to support F-22s

• Off-station training requirements

• Dramatic savings in cost per flying hour

Customers

• ACC Air and Space Operations (A3T / A3Y)

• AFGSC Air and Space Operations (A3T)

• 1st Fighter Wing (FW)

• 9th Reconnaissance Wing (RW)

• 49th FW

• 325th FW

• 509th Bomb Wing

• 96th Test Group

• NASA

• US Army Air Operations Directorate (White Sands)

• German Air Force

• 192 ANG

• 44 AFRC FG 16

Scope of Work

Aircraft maintenance services for

• ACC - 45 T-38A/AT-38B

• AFGSC - 14 T-38A

• AFMC 4 T-38C

• Flying Commitment ~ 17,100 hrs / 14,047 sorties yr.

• Engines – T-38A/B 118 installed; plus 22 spares

• T-38C 8 installed plus 2 spares

• Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE) – Total 553

Powered/Non-Powered (Holloman AFB)

• Two active aircraft modifications: dual radios and bomb rack to add electronic attack pod carrying capability 17

• Transient Mx at Holloman and Whiteman AFBs

• Weekend Flying support for Associate units at

Langley and Tyndall. Support paid on cost-reimbursable basis

• Provide limited aircraft maintenance support for:

• 96th Test Group (HAFB) T-38C aircraft (4)

• NASA (El Paso, TX)

• German Air Force (HAFB)

• US Army Air Operations (White Sands Missile Range)

• Options

1. Add operating location at Nellis AFB, NV

2. Establish capability for Functional Check Flight and Ferry

Pilot capability

3. Extend the contract 6-months

Flying Program Beale Langley Tyndall Whiteman 586 FLTS

Assigned Aircraft* 11 14 20 14 4

Flying Hours 3600 4200 4800 4100 400

ASD 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1

Sortie UTE Rate** 18.9 20.8 18.5 22.1

Max 1st Launch 6 8 8 6 4

Typical Turns

(Mix)

4 x 4 8 x 8

8 x 8 x 6

8 x 8 8

8 x 8 x 6

6 x 6

6 x 6 x 6

* Distribution of aircraft for at Langley and Tyndall may adjust before release of RFP

** Sortie UTE rates are approximate

Maintenance Concept

• One Centralized Repair Facility supporting 4 Operating

Locations (OLS)

• Holloman CRF – Director of Mx (MXG CC Equivalent)

• Provides Intermediate-level maintenance

• All 450/900/1800 hour aircraft inspections

• Full T-38 inspection and repair capability

• Supports operating locations and aircraft broken off-station

• Option #2 includes FCF/Ferry pilot capability

• Four Operating Locations (OLs) – Site Manager

• Inspect, launch, recover, minor repairs, deploy

• Beale - (11) mission: companion trainer

• Langley - (14) mission: ADAIR

• Tyndall – (20) mission: ADAIR

• Whiteman – (14) mission: companion trainer

• Option #1 Nellis – (11) mission ADAIR

All OLS provided limited host-base aircraft maintenance support

Maintenance Concept

CRF Mx Requirements:

• Aircraft Phase Inspection

• Avionics, Electronics/Environmental, Egress,

• Fuels, Hydraulics, Corrosion, Non-Destructive Inspections

• Structural Repair, Machine, Welding, Wheel and Tire

• AGE, Propulsion, Aircraft Repair and Reclamation,

• Functional Check Flights

• No plans to relocate

CRF occupies 14 facilities at Holloman AFB

PWS Overview

• PWS requires adherence to traditional directives;

performance-based where allowable

• Contractor determines internal management philosophy, organization/structures and many procedures

• Director of Maintenance (DOM) has most Mx Group

Commanders (MXG/CC) duties

• Site Managers represent DOM to wing customers and responsible for OL performance

• Supply

• Manage logistics to include supply chain, Material

Management, Demand Processing, MICAP Processing, Equipment/Property Management, Bench Stock, SPRAM assets, TNB, Cannibalizations, material handling and storage

• At each OL perform Combat Oriented Supply Organization

(COSO) functions meeting the objectives of ACCI 23-251, Chapter 2.. Ensure each OL has a qualified COSO person with experience to perform all required duties.

• Information technology

• Utilize Government approved Integrated Maintenance Data

Systems (IMDS)

• Windows based

• Section A: Description of Services

• 1.0 Management Philosophy and Scope

• 2.0 Program Management

• 3.0 Operations and Maintenance

• 3.1 Aircraft and Equipment Readiness

• 3.2 Operating Location Management (Beale, Langley, Tyndall, Whiteman)

• 3.3 Centralized Repair Facility Support (Holloman)

• 3.4 Transient Maintenance (Holloman & Whiteman Only)

• 3.5 Maintenance Recovery Team Support

• 3.8 Support of Holloman Tenants

• Section A: Description of Services (cont.)

• 4.0 Mission Support

• 4.1 Computer Systems Support

• 4.2 Communications

• 4.3 Security

• 4.4 Logistics Management

• 4.5 Vehicles

• 4.6 Facility Management

• Section B: Service Summary

• 1.0 Service Summary Narrative

• 1.1 Purpose

• 1.2 Components

• 1.3 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

• 2.0 Measurement, Analysis, and Improvement

• 2.1 Quality Assurance

• 2.2 Risk Assessment

Aircraft Availability: ≥ 65% Fleet Average

OL Minimum AA: ≥ 60% Beale

≥ 65% Langley

≥ 65% Tyndall

≥ 65% Whiteman

≥ 50% 586 FLTS

Aircraft Reliability: ≥ 85% Code 1

Total Abort Rate: ≤ 5%

Repeat/Recur: ≤ 5%

Mx Scheduling Effectiveness: ≥ 95%

Mx Cancellations: Major non-conformance on first go launches

Average Fleet Time: ≥ 205 hours and ≤ 260 Hours acceptable

< 205 Hours Major Non-Conformance

> 260 Hours Minor Non-Conformance

Configuration Management:

• Egress Life Sustaining Items: 100% accurate; zero overdue

• Time Change Items: 100% accurate; zero overdue

• Time Compliance Technical Orders: 100% complied prior to mandated completion period

• Engines: Zero Holes Acceptable

< 4 Spare J85M Minor Non-Conformance

0 Spare J85S Minor Non-Conformance

• Section C: Government Furnished Property and Services

• 1.1 Government Furnished Property

• 1.2 Government Furnished Facilities

• 1.3 Government Furnished Services

• 2.1 Government Provided Aircraft Maintenance Support

• 2.1.1 Aerospace Ground Equipment

• 2.1.2 Aircrew Flight Equipment

• 2.1.3 Crash Recovery

• 2.1.4 Egress

• 2.1.5 Electric and Environmental

• 2.1.6 Fuels Repair Facility

• 2.1 Government Provided Aircraft Maintenance Support (Cont)

• 2.1.7 Maintenance Operations Flight Plans and Scheduling

• 2.1.8 Maintenance Operations Center

• 2.1.9 Non-Destructive Inspection

• 2.1.10 Welding

• 2.1.11 Wheel and Tire

• 2.1.12 Test, Measurement and Diagnostic Equipment

• 2.2 Supply Support

• Section D General Information

Government-Provided Services

• Maintenance Operation Center

• Oil samples

• Egress *

• Life Support

• AGE *

• Wheel & Tire *

• Test Measurement & Diagnostic

Equipment

• Base Supply

• Land mobile radios

• Transportation of parts, supplies, equipment

• Wing Plans & Scheduling

* At Holloman AFB, contractor-provided

• POL

• Utilities

• Installation distribution

• Telephones

• Base Civil Engineer

• Runway/sweeper services

• LAN/e-mail connectivity

• Client Server Administrator

• Emergency medical services

Government-Provided Vehicles

• Whiteman Transient Maintenance

• MB-4 (or equivalent) tow vehicle

• One Bobtail

• Deicing vehicle (sign out)

• Air-Stair Truck (sign out)

• All other required vehicles for all locations must be leased

Appendices

A: Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms

B: Contract Data Requirements Lists

C: Publications and Forms

D: Government Furnished Equipment

E: Government Furnished Facilities

F: Performance Incentive/Award Fee Plan

G: Quality Management System

H: Flight Operations Plan

I: Contractor Plans

Appendices (cont.)

J: Proposal Incorporations

K: Workload Data

L: Contractor Certifications and Qualifications

M: Key Personnel Qualifications

N: Support Agreements

O: Security Information

• Mandatory publications listed in Appendices B & C

• Significant portions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 21-

101 CAF Sup I mandatory

• Mandatory compliance with all Technical Orders

• Extended work hour requirements located in

Appendix K

• Bid overtime requirements

T-38 AMP Risks

• Offeror’s approach to manage CRF workflow

• Aircraft inspection fleet time management (TDI)

• Quality Management System – AS9100/AS9110

• FCF/Ferry pilot support / new requirement

• Maintaining aircraft availability to meet the mission

• Trained and Qualified Workforce

• Transition

CRF Workload Management

If the contractor mismanages the workload flow of the Holloman CRF, then fleet health and aircraft availability will be severely impacted resulting in mission degradation/failure

Critical Processes:

- Aircraft Inspection management and execution

- Engine and fuels workload

- Maintenance Recovery Teams assistance to repair aircraft broken off-station, or beyond the repair capability of an OL

Control

Adequately outline the requirement within the

PWS, and provide accurate Appendix K Workload

Data. Utilize sections L and M of the contract RFP to solicit best approach. Evaluate IAW established

Section M criteria. After award CORs will audit the processes and execution.

Quality Management System.

If the contractor does not develop and implement an effective QMS, then ineffective contract management, poor performance, and degraded mission success rates will result, thereby increasing government surveillance, manpower requirements and costs.

Control.

Contract RFP requires documented AS9100/

AS9110 certification/registration. RFP also requires an effective approach for continuous pro-active, preventative-based monitoring, measurement, and analysis program in compliance with AS9100 or

AS9110 using quantifiable metrics with focus on conformance to the Appendix G of the PWS. This approach will be evaluated during source selection.

After award CORs will audit to ensure compliance.

Risk Event Risk Strategy

FCF/Ferry Flight Plan

If the contractor does not develop and sustain an effective and safe flight operations plan for

Functional Check Flight and ferry flights with a consistent focus on safety and established procedures, then program effectiveness will be impacted with significant potential for flight incidents or mishaps

Control

Adequately outline the requirement within the PWS and sections L and M of the contract solicitation.

Evaluate IAW established criteria. After award

CORs will audit the FCF and ferry flight control processes and execution.

Inability to Meet Aircraft Availability Rates

If the contractor cannot consistently provide safe, reliable aircraft to meet availability requirements, then the supported unit missions will be significantly degraded

Control

Adequately outline the requirement within the

PWS, develop and utilize effective service summary metrics. Through sections L and M of the contract solicitation solicit specific integrated processes and procedures to maintain required aircraft availability. Evaluate IAW established

Section M criteria. After award CORs will audit adherence to technical orders and safety requirements

Trained/Qualified Workforce.

If the contractor fails to provide trained/qualified personnel, adequate staffing levels and the proper functional skill mix, then contract performance thresholds and requirements may not be met, resulting in negative impact to mission success.

Control.

Contractor required to provide an acceptable human resources plan to attract, train, and retain qualified management and technical personnel.

The plan includes work force manning levels by functional level and skill mix. The approach will be evaluated during source selection.

Contract Transition.

If the contractor fails to execute effective and efficient transition milestones, then an interruption of O&M services may occur resulting in a negative impact to mission success.

Control.

The Contractor will provide key milestones, process flow, and organizational chart to illustrate how transition/phase in period will be managed.

The approach will be evaluated during source selection.

Contract Incentive Criteria

Objective

• Performance Incentive, Quality/O&M Service (50%)

• Based on point system: Potential for 18 pts per period

Subjective

• Award Fee Inputs (20%) / Customer Surveys (10%)

• AF Inputs: Government & Contractor Inputs

• Customer Surveys: 5 Surveys (avg. score)

• Special Interest Item (20%)* (e.g. transition, deployments etc.)

*If no Special Interest Items are identified for a given period, the 20% will be allocated equally to Performance Incentive and

Award Fee Inputs

Performance Incentive Criteria

• Quality/O&M Service (50%)

• Based on objective mission performance and proactive quality management system for a total of 18 points per 6 month period

• Service Summary Metrics (Max 12 points):

• 0 points earned for meeting all SS metrics

• -1 point earned for Corrective Action Request (CAR)

• Up to +2 points for exceeding Critical SS metrics

• +1 Total Aircraft Availability Rate (> 70%)

• +0.50 Average Fleet Time (225-245 hours)

• +0.50 Aircraft Code 1 Reliability ( > 90%)

• Quality Management System (Max 6 points):

• Zero points for one CAR

• +1 point for no CARs

• - 1 point earned for 2 CARs

• - .5 point for 3rd & subsequent CARs (Max -1 point per month)

Award Fee Criteria

• Award Fee Inputs (30%)

• Significant Achievements (max 5) (20%)

• Award Fee Inputs validated by CORs & Functionals

• Evaluated by Board members

• Raw Score: 1 - 100

• Customer Surveys (10%)

• Customer Surveys (OG CCs, Flying Sqd CCs, PM)

• Ratings from Outstanding (2) to Unsatisfactory (-1)

• Special Interest Item (20%)

• May be assigned each period by PM selected areas to measure schedule and performance

Performance Incentive / Award Fee

Example

• Semi-Annual calculation – $400K pool

• Quality/O&M Services

• Contractor earns 12 of 18 points during period

• ($400K x 50%) x 66.7% = $133,400

• Award Fee Inputs/Customer Surveys

• Award Fee Inputs: average of raw scores

• ($400K x 20%) x 80% = $64,000

• Customer Surveys: total survey score / max score per survey

• ($400K x 10%) x 73.33% = $29,332

• *Special Interest Item (Transition)

• Contractor identified/met all transition milestones

• ($400K x 20%) x 75% = $60,000

• Earned Fee: $286,732

Preliminary Acquisition

Strategy/Solicitation

Review

Ms. Danielle May

Contract Specialist

ACC AMIC/PKCA

Contracting Overview

• Key Contractual Aspects

• Source Selection Road Map

• Source Selection Methodology & Evaluation Process

• Draft Request for Proposal

• Site Visit/Pre-proposal Conference

• Bidders Library

• Acquisition Milestones

• One-On-One Sessions

• Points of Contact

Key Contractual Aspects

• Solicitation Number: FA4890-15-R-0007

• NAICS Code: 488190 - Other Support Activities for Air

Transportation (SBA Size Standard is $32.5 million)

• Government Furnished Equipment (GFE):

• Appendix D PWS

• FAR Part 45

• Government Furnished Facilities (GFF):

• Appendix E PWS

• FAR Part 45

(continued)

• Anticipate non-commercial acquisition (FAR Part 15)

• Small Business Set-Aside Determination not yet established

• Market Research Set-Aside Questionnaire posted to FedBizOpps

(FBO) on 15 Apr 15

• Government is currently evaluating Industry’s responses

• If Full & Open competition, Subcontracting plans required for Large Businesses IAW FAR Part 19 – Small Business

Programs

• Single Award,Fixed Price w/ Cost-Reimbursable Line Items

• Performance Incentive/Award Fee

• Period of Performance*

• Contract: 1 base year plus 6 option years

• Transition: 15 Aug 16 - 30 Sep 16 (45 days)

• Base Year: 1 Oct 16 – 30 Sep 17

• Option Year 1: 1 Oct 17 – 30 Sep 18

• Option Year 2: 1 Oct 18 – 30 Sep 19

• Option Year 3: 1 Oct 19 – 30 Sep 20

• Option Year 4: 1 Oct 20 – 30 Sep 21

• Option Year 5: 1 Oct 21 – 30 Sep 22

• Option Year 6: 1 Oct 22 – 30 Sep 23

• 6-month Ext: 1 Oct 23 – 31 Mar 24 *We propose/intend a base year plus 6 options yet this could change to not less than base plus 4 options, subject to acquisition approval.

• Draft Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure:

• Transition (FP)

• Operations at Various Locations (FP)

• Supplies (CR)

• Travel (CR)

• Performance Incentive/Award Fee

• Options*

*Optional CLIN for Nellis Site and Ferry Pilot capability

0001 - X001

ACC T-38 AMP Program Management for Organizational and

Intermediate Maintenance in support of T-38 operations at Holloman, Langley, and Tyndall AFBs in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.0.

FP

0002 - X002 ACC T-38 AMP Program Management for Organizational and

Intermediate Maintenance in support of T-38 operations at Beale

AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.0.

FP

0003 - X003 AFGSC T-38 AMP Program Management for Organizational and

Intermediate Maintenance in support of T-38 operations at Whiteman

AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.0

FP

0004 - X004 Organizational Maintenance for ACC T-38 support at Langley AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2.

FP

0005 - X005 Organizational Maintenance for T-38 support at Tyndall AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2

FP

0006 - X006 Organizational Maintenance for ACC T-38 support at Beale AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2.

FP

0007 - X007 Organizational Maintenance for AFGSC T-38 support at Whiteman

AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2

FP

0008 - X008

Organizational Maintenance Associate Unit Weekend Flying

Support. Cost reimbursement for services required to support associate unit weekend flying in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.2.11.

CR

0009 - X009 Intermediate maintenance services provided by the Holloman T-38

CRF in support of ACC T-38s assigned to Langley and Tyndall AFBs in accordance with PWS Section A, Paragraph 3.3.

FP

0010 - X010 Intermediate maintenance services provided by the Holloman T-38

CRF in support of ACC T-38s assigned to Beale AFB in accordance with PWS Section A, Paragraph 3.3.

FP

CLINs Description Type

0011 - X011 Intermediate maintenance services provided by the Holloman T-38

CRF in support of AFGSC T-38s assigned to Whiteman AFB in accordance with PWS Section A, Paragraph 3.3 FP

0012 - X012 Aircraft Maintenance Services for 96 TG/586 FTS T-38C aircraft at

Holloman AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2. FP

0013 - X013 Support 96 TG weekend/holiday flying per PWS 3.8.1.13 CR

0014 - X014 Transient Maintenance Services at Holloman AFB in accordance with PWs, Section A, Paragraph 3.4. FP

0015 - X015 Transient Maintenance Services at Whiteman AFB in accordance with PWs, SEction A, Paragraph 3.4. FP

0016 - X016

Support Services for National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA) Contract Field Team (CFT) in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.4 FP

0017 - X017 Support Services for U.S. Army Air Directorate, White Sands Missile

Range, in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.3 FP

0018 - X018 Support Services for the German Air Force (GAF) at Holloman AFB, NM in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.5 FP

0019 - X019 AGE support services for 846 SQ at Holloman AFB, NM, IAW PWS paragraph FP

0020 - X020 Full strip of ACC T-38s aircraft assigned to Langley and Tyndall

AFBs in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.3.12.3 CR

0021 - X021 Full strip of ACC T-38s aircraft assigned to Beale AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.3.12.3 CR

0022 - X022 Full strip of AFGSC T-38s aircraft assigned to Whiteman AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.3.12.3 CR 51

CLINs Description Type

0023 - X023 Full strip of AFMC T-38s assigned to Holloman AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.3.13.4.

CR

0024 - X024 Cost reimbursable travel for government directed and approved travel for conferences, meetings, aircraft off-station-recoveries, and training in support of ACC T-38 aircraft assigned to Langley and Tyndall

AFBs in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.4.8.

CR

0025 - X025

Cost reimbursable travel for government directed and approved travel for conferences, meetings, aircraft off-station-recoveries, and training in support of ACC T-38 aircraft assigned to Beale AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.4.8.

CR

0026 - X026

Cost reimbursable travel for government directed and approved travel for conferences, meetings, aircraft off-station-recoveries, and training in support of AFGSC T-38 aircraft assigned to Whiteman AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 2.4.8.

CR

0027 - X027

Cost reimbursable travel for Deployment Support Services for Air

Combat Command (ACC) T-38s assigned to Holloman, Langley and

Tyndall AFBs in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph

3.8.1.11

CR

0028 - X028 Cost reimbursable travel for Deployment Support Services for Air

Force Materiel Command (AFMC) T-38s assigned to Holloman AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 3.2.10

CR

0029 - X029 Supplies and GFE repairs in support of ACC T-38 aircraft assigned to Holloman, Langley and Tyndall AFBs. Purchases shall be approved in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.4.3.1

CR

CLINs Description Type

0030 - X030

Supplies and GFE repairs in support of ACC T-38 aircraft assigned to Beale AFB. Purchases shall be approved in accordance with

PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.4.3.1

CR

0031 - X031 Supplies and GFE repairs in support of AFGSC T-38 aircraft assigned to Whiteman AFB. Purchases shall be approved in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.4.3.1

CR

0032 - X032 Supplies and GFE repairs in support of AFMC T-38 aircraft assigned to 96 TG (586 FTS) at Holloman AFB. Purchases shall be approved in accordance with PWS, Section A, Paragraph 4.4.3.1

CR

0033 - X033 ACC (F-22) Support Performance Incentive/Award Fee FP

0034 - X034 ACC (U-2) Support Performance Incentive/Award Fee FP

0035 - X035 AFGSC Support Performance Incentive/Award Fee FP

0036 - X036 AFMC (586) Support Performance Incentive/Award Fee FP

0037 - X037 Wage and Health Adjustments FP

0038 Transition FP

0039 - X039 Functional Check Flight and Aircraft Ferry Support FP

0040 - X040 Organizational Maintenance for T-38 support at Nellis AFB in accordance with PWS, Section A Paragraph 3.2 FP

0041 - X041

Intermediate maintenance services provided by the Holloman T-38

CRF in support of ACC T-38s assigned to Nellis AFB in accordance with PWS Section A, Paragraph 3.3. FP

• Conduct Price Analysis -- normally established by

Adequate Price Competition (APC) ~ FAR preferred technique

Adequate Price Competition (APC) is a price based on

Two or more responsible offerors, competing independently;

Submission of priced offers that satisfy gov’t expressed requirement;

Award made to offeror whose proposal represents best value; and

No finding that price of successful offeror is unreasonable

• Determine if prices are balanced

Exists when price of one or more CLINs is significantly overstated

(despite acceptable total evaluated price)

Mathematically unbalanced – offer is based on nominal prices for some work and enhanced prices for other work

• Assess financial executability (budget)

Price Evaluation Process

Start

END

Source Selection Process Roadmap

Source Selection Methodology

• Tradeoff Source Selection Process IAW DoD Source

Selection Procedures effective 1 July 2011

• Evaluation Factors & Methodology

• Factor 1 – Technical Capability

• Factor 2 – Past Performance

• Factor 3 – Price

(Ranked in order of importance)

• The greater the equality of proposals for factors other than price, the more important price becomes in selecting the best value for the Government

• Factor 1: Technical Capability

• 3 Sub-factors: Program Management, Operations and

Maintenance and Transition

• Program Management and Operations & Maintenance are of equal importance and the most important sub-factors. Transition is the least important

• Technical evaluation criteria evaluated at the sub-factor level

Technical Capability

• Program Management

• Management & Integration

• Human Resources

• Quality Management

• Operations and Maintenance

• Centralized Repair Facility (CRF) Management

• Aircraft Availability Management

• Contractor’s Flight Operations Plan

• Transition

• Transition Plan

• Each Aspect will be evaluated for Strengths, Weaknesses and

Deficiencies. These findings will determine the final overall rating for each sub-factor.

Technical Subfactors

• Evaluate the quality of the offeror’s solution for meeting the PWS requirements

• Technical Capability Ratings:

Technical Evaluation Process

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements.

Proposal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

• Assessment of risk identifies proposal weakness(es), considering potential for disruption of schedule, increased price and Government oversight, decreased performance, or likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance

• Technical Risk Ratings:

Source Selection Methodology Technical Evaluation Process, cont.

Rating Description Low Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased price or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased price or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased price or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

• Factor 2: Past Performance

• Evaluation Methodology

• Recency: Contract performance within the last 3 years from when the solicitation is issued

• Relevancy: Past/present performance is assigned a relevancy rating based on like/similar work (Definitions on slide 62)

Past Performance

Past Performance Rating Process

Obtain Past Performance Information on Each Offeror and Determine Recency

Assess Relevancy for Each Recent Contract

Review Performance Quality for Each Contract

Review Offeror Relevancy and

Performance Ratings

Assign Offeror’s Past Performance Factor Rating

(Performance Confidence Assessment Rating)

Past Performance Relevancy

Rating Definition

Highly Relevant Past or present performance effort: Intermediate aircraft maintenance services contract on AF fighter or trainer aircraft maintained IAW AFI 21-101, utilizing a proven quality management system IAW AS9100 or AS9110, with a total contract value greater than $90M on a multiple year, firm fixed price contract. Demonstrated experience working with unionized workforce in past efforts.

Relevant Past or present performance effort: Intermediate aircraft maintenance services contract with military fixed wing aircraft maintained IAW technical directives with a proven quality management system IAW AS9100 or AS9110, with contract value greater than $65M on a multiple year cost or firm fixed price contract. Demonstrated experience working with unionized workforce in past efforts.

Somewhat

Relevant

Past or present performance effort: Organizational, intermediate or depot level aircraft maintenance services contract with military fixed wing aircraft IAW AS9100 or AS9110, with contract value of at least $40M on a multiple year cost or firm fixed price contract.

Not Relevant Past or present performance effort: Did not involve any of the complexity or magnitude of effort required.

• Performance Confidence Assessment Process

• Based on entire record, Offerors are assigned a Performance

Confidence Assessment

• Rating determines the quality and usefulness of an offeror’s past performance information

Past Performance Confidence Assessment

PERFORMANCE RATING DEFINITIONS

E

EXCEPTIONAL – The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s benefit.

The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

VG

VERY GOOD- The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

S

SATISFACTORY – The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective action taken by the Contractor appear to be or was satisfactory.

M

MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

US

UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NA NOT RATED - Unable to provide a score or does not apply to this contract.

Past Performance Confidence Assessment, cont.

• Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings:

Source Selection Methodology Past Performance Confidence Assessment, cont.

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

• Factor 3: Price

• Proposal should demonstrate price as Fair, Reasonable and

Balanced

• Adequate price competition – comparison of the offeror’s proposed prices

• Other than Cost and Pricing Data will be required

• Required Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Large Businesses)

• Basis of Award

• Award to offeror based on an integrated best value assessment

• Intend award without discussions, but discussions will occur if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government

Price

• Conduct Price Analysis – normally established by

Adequate Price Competition (APC): FAR-preferred technique

• Adequate Price Competition (APC) is a price based on

Two or more responsible offerors, competing independently;

Submit priced offers that satisfy Government expressed requirement;

Award made to offeror whose proposals represents best value; and

No finding that price of successful offeror is unreasonable

• Determine if prices are balanced

• Unbalanced pricing exists when price of one or more CLINs is significantly overstated (despite acceptable total evaluated price)

• Mathematically unbalanced – offer is based on nominal prices for some work and enhanced prices for other work

• Assess financial executability (budget)

Price Evaluation Process

Evaluation Process AWOD / Competitive Range

• Based on Initial Evaluation Activities, CO must decide to either:

• Recommend SSA Award Without Discussions (AWOD), OR

• Establish Competitive Range and enter into Discussions

• AWOD is the desired approach (submit best proposal with original submission)

• Offerors notified if entering Discussions and/or if eliminated from the competitive range

• If eliminated, can request pre- or post-award debriefing

Evaluation Process Discussions & Final Proposal Revisions

• Conducting Discussions

• Release ratings

• Release Evaluation Notices (EN)

Receive and evaluate response to ENs from offeror(s)

May need to follow-up with multiple rounds of ENs

• Government will make a determination when to close discussions based on evaluation of responses

Eliminate offeror(s) from competitive range

• After close of discussions, CO will issue a request for Final Proposal Revisions (FPR) to make the award recommendation

• Draft RFP tentatively scheduled to be posted to

FedBizOpps in August 2015 timeframe

• Industry review and input are encouraged

• Government will post responses to questions to

FedBizOpps

Draft Request for Proposal (RFP)

• Final RFP release projected for Nov 15

• Formal site visit before release of final RFP

• Projected for Holloman AFB, NM in Sep 15

• Information needed prior to site visit

• Name of attendees (no more than 3 per offeror/joint venture/partnership)

• Company Name

• Job Title

• Photo Identification

• Cell number, business and/or personal (24/7)

• Email, business and/or personal (24/7)

• Pre-Proposal Conference projected for Nov 15

Site Visit/Pre-Proposal Conference

• Will be located on FedBizOpps (www.fbo.gov)

• Instructions: TBD

• Accessibility: Please contact us at

ACCAMIC.T38.RECOMPETE@us.af.mil

Bidders Library http://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:ACCAMIC.T38.RECOMPETE@us.af.mil

Acquisition Milestones (tentative)

Milestones Date

Post Draft Performance Work Statement & Appendices 30 Apr 15

Industry Day / One-on-Ones 12-14 May 15

Release Draft Solicitation Aug 15

Site Visit Sep 15

Final Solicitation Issued / Pre-Proposal Conference Nov 15

Proposals Due (~60 days allotted for preparation) Jan 16

Source Selection (7 months allotted) Jan – Jul 16

Contract Award Jul 16

Transition (45 days allotted) 15 Aug – 30 Sep 16

Performance Start for some locations 1 Oct 16

Points of Contact

• ACC AMIC/PKCA

• Capt Crystal Champion, Contracting Officer

• Ms. Danielle May, Contract Specialist

ACCAMIC.T38.Recompete@us.af.mil

• Internet Links:

• www.FBO.gov (Reference No. FA4890-15-R-0007)

• http://farsite.hill.af.mil (Federal Acquisition Regulation) mailto:ACCAMIC.T38.Recompete@us.af.mil http://www.fbo.gov/ http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

One-on-One Sessions

• Location

• AMIC 5th floor Conference Room

• 11817 Canon Boulevard (SunTrust Bldg)

• Newport News, VA

• 12 – 14 May 15

• Questions/recommendations from Industry are highly encouraged

• Verbal dialog between Government and Industry, both during today’s open forum & one-on-one appointments, is unofficial

• Official responses to questions requires Industry submittal of questions to the Government on the blue/yellow question sheets

• The Government will post official responses to all Industry questions on FBO; however, the names of the Industry representatives and their companies will not be published

Reminder to complete questions

• Questions welcome during the briefing or…

• Write Open Forum questions on the paper found in your packet and turn into marked box at the break

• Write One-on-One questions on paper and turn into marked box at the conclusion of the Open Forum briefing

TURN IN ALL WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Break

Discussion Panel

Closing Remarks

TURN IN ADITIONAL QUESTIONS AND SURVEYS