Atch_1_-_RPA_FA4890-16-R-0032_Sources_Sought_Questionnaire.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR COMBAT COMMAND

ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT AND INTEGRATION CENTER

JOINT BASE LANGLEY-EUSTIS VA

Agile Combat Power

16 Jun 2016

MEMORANDUM FOR POTENTIAL OFFERORS

FROM: ACC AMIC/PKCA

SUBJECT: Solicitation FA4890-16-R-0032 Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA), Market Research Questionnaire

1. The U. S. Air Force, Air Combat Command, Acquisition Management and Integration Center (ACC AMIC), Joint Base Langley-Eustis, VA, is in the process of determining the acquisition strategy to obtain non-personal services for the follow-on Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) MQ-1 and MQ-9 Organizational-Level Maintenance (O-Level) Contract at Continental United States (CONUS) and forward deployed Outside Continental United States (OCONUS) locations. The follow-on contract support will include the addition of the MQ-1/MQ-9 Launch and Recovery Element (LRE) aircrew pilot and sensor operators at multiple forward-deployed OCONUS locations as well as consolidating the Global Hawk RQ-4 O-Level Maintenance support at Naval Air Station (NAS) Sigonella and Anderson Air Force Base (AFB), Guam, transitioning from an existing Air Force Material Command (AFMC) contract.

a. The Government is contemplating a hybrid incentive award fee-type contract with both cost reimbursable and fixed priced line items to fulfill this requirement based on historical data and market research. However, a determination of contract type has not yet been made.

b. The Government anticipates issuing Request For Proposal (RFP) on or about 19 Dec 16 with an estimated award date of 20 Nov 17. Please note: this is an estimated posting timeframe and it is the responsibility of the interested parties to monitor the Federal Business Opportunity website at http://www.fbo.gov for all subsequent postings. A draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) is posted in conjunction with this notice to provide the size, scope, and complexity of this requirement.

c. The current RPA contract was awarded competitively to a large business under full and open competition. The Government is seeking industry input to determine if there are adequate small business concerns that are capable of performing the follow-on requirement.

A determination regarding the set- aside status for this effort has not been made.

d. This is not a formal RFP, and no contract will result from this notice, nor does it commit the Government to any acquisition for these services. All interested parties should submit a capabilities package (please limit to no more than 10 pages total) outlining their key business abilities relevant to the performance of this requirement and addressing the questions found paragraph 4 of this memorandum. Please submit the requested information to this office NLT the closing date and time (6 Jul 16, 12:00 p.m. EDT) to Ms.

M. Joy de Lande at accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil.

http://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil

Note for Small Business Concerns: Offerors responding to this notice as a small business concern must be registered in SAM under NAICS 488190.

e. This information will only be used for market research purposes and will not be used for proposal evaluation later. All information received will be protected and safeguarded as source selection information in accordance with FAR 3.104, Procurement Integrity.

Information will be used solely to formulate acquisition strategy and for the development of the solicitation. The internet and e-mail shall be used as the primary means of disseminating and exchanging information. Hard copies of documents posted on FBO will not be made available. The Government will provide an email confirmation acknowledging receipt of information submitted. If you have difficulty in emailing your response and/or confirmation of receipt is not received, then you are encouraged to contact Ms. Joy de Lande at (757)764- 9358 or Ms. Sheila Watford, Contract Manager at (757) 764-9488.

1) Please include the following information about your organization in your response:

• Name of Organization

• Address

• Telephone Number

• Point(s) of Contact

• E-Mail Addresses

• Cage Code

• DUNS Number

• Size of Business: ________Small _________Large

• Business Size Status:

• SBA 8(a) Business Development Program Concern:

• Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Zone Concern

• Small Disadvantaged Business Concern:

• Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern:

• Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern:

• Women-Owned Business Concern:

• Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Business Concern:

2) Request that you submit the information requested above by e-mail, NLT the closing date and time (6 Jul 16, 12:00 p.m. EDT). Information should be sent to the AMIC RPA Re-compete Inbox at accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil. Request that you use title "[Company Name] - Sources Sought" in the e-mail subject line. Other questions can be directed to Ms. Sheila Watford at sheila.watford@us.af.mil or the undersigned at m.delande@us.af.mil.

2. OBJECTIVE OF MARKET RESEARCH: This market research is conducted to assist in determining acquisition strategy for the subject procurement. Specifically, feedback is sought from industry in regards to commercial practices to obtaining the required services, as well as the capability of industry in providing the required services within our military environment. Contract type, commercial practices, potential set-aside strategy as authorized by FAR Part 19 and performance-based specifications are being considered in development of the solicitation. Your input will greatly assist in this development. A draft PWS has been posted with this questionnaire mailto:accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil mailto:sheila.watford@us.af.mil mailto:m.delande@us.af.mil to www.fbo.gov, and you are invited to review this document and provide feedback on the document itself, as well as to the below questions.

3. INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM INDUSTRY: Please review the associated draft PWS posted to this site and the following questions, and provide any input you would like considered as we formulate the acquisition. In order for the Contracting Officer (CO) to set aside any acquisition over $150,000 for small business, there must be a reasonable expectation that offerors can satisfactorily perform contract requirements and that award will be made at a fair market price. Total set-asides cannot be made unless such a reasonable expectation exists. The Government believes that it is mutually beneficial to determine the capability of offerors eligible for set-asides early in the procurement process in order to preclude the need for a modification of the acquisition strategy later. The Government is not requesting technical/management proposals, only capability information that will be used as market research to develop the acquisition strategy and solicitation.

Questions from prospective offerors and the subsequent answers will be posted throughout the pre-solicitation phase of the procurement. We expect to make further postings of draft documents (including a draft solicitation) in the coming months, in anticipation of issuing a final solicitation within the year. Your continued input is welcome throughout this process.

4. QUESTIONS

a. GENERAL:

1) Do you intend to submit a proposal as a prime contractor for this requirement?

2) The anticipated NAICS code for this procurement is 488190, which has a small business threshold of $32.5M. Provide any inputs regarding your capabilities as a small business under NAICS 488190 to accomplish the work as a prime contractor, or any other information relative to setting aside the procurement for small business participation only.

3) Are Operational and Maintenance support services similar to our requirement typically performed utilizing standard, commercial regulations/standards? Do other commercial contracts include any industry-specific training, certification, or inspection requirements that are in conflict with the referenced Air Force standards? Please note any major differences in the government’s requirement and similar requirements found in the commercial marketplace.

4) We anticipate an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with the labor for each task order being Firm Fixed-Price to cover the day to day support with travel, and Department of State Allowances procured on a cost-reimbursable basis. Identify any limitations to fixed-pricing any of the requirements.

5) Are there any concerns with using labor categories with pre-priced labor rates as a negotiated maximum allowable rates with an IDIQ contract type?

http://www.fbo.gov/

6) What areas/suggestions do you have for pre-pricing as much as possible up front at the IDIQ award level? (Ex: training costs)

7) Should this effort be competed as an LPTA or a Trade-Off? If you support a Trade-Off, what do you see as trade space? Support your position.

8) What are the advantages and disadvantages of combining these efforts: MQ-1/MQ- 9/RQ-4 O-level Maintenance and LRE aircrew (pilot and sensor operators) into a single contract versus competing them in separate contracts? Are there any unique challenges executing this effort given the 3 distinct technical areas of expertise required?

9) What do you consider to be the optimum amount of proposal preparation time after release of the final RFP? Take into consideration that the government plans to provide draft solicitation documents via its Federal Business Opportunities website prior to the release of the final RFP.

10) Do you see any organizational conflicts of interest regarding this effort?

11) This effort may involve contract support at multiple deployed sites at contract start.

What do you see as the major risks in transitioning multiple sites? Do you see an inherent advantage in simultaneous transition at all sites or would it be better to stagger transition and the start date at the deployed sites? Please support your position.

12) What other issues, questions, or concerns should the Government consider?

b. SMALL BUSINESS/SUBCONTRACTING:

1) In the event this acquisition is solicited as unrestricted, there will be a requirement for

Large Business offerors to provide a small business subcontracting plan. The Government is interested in input from industry regarding possible small business subcontracting opportunities. What is a realistic small business subcontracting goal for Large Businesses to achieve?

c. COMPANY CAPABILITIES:

1) Does your company have the capability to provide a trained RQ-4/RD-2 maintenance workforce if the Government is unable to provide a training aircraft or ground control station during transition?

2) Is your company able to utilize a web-based program management information system

In Accordance With (IAW) PWS paragraph 2.22 accessible by government functions?

Address issues or risks to include data security/encryption, accessibility from government networks, cost, and technical supportability.

3) Discuss any risks or concerns with your company’s ability to provide and maintain a

Quality Control Program that includes the provision and maintenance of an inspection system that meets the Government’s inspection/quality requirements.

4) Can your company provide respirator and confined spaces training for your employees?

5) Are there any other technical training requirements not covered in the Government-provided Services section of the PWS that your company cannot provide?

d. PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT:

1) What changes, if any, do you suggest we make to the draft PWS to allow for a more performance-based requirement? What percentage/areas of the PWS requirements do you see as being performance based vs non-performance based? Please identify any portions of the draft PWS that, as written, are too restrictive or prohibit the flexibility to perform according to your established practices.

2) Do you anticipate any problems with acquiring and retaining a trained workforce to support the level of effort described in the draft PWS? Identify any risks/concerns you may have. Provide any information/obstacles on commercial practices to train RPA technicians and industry standards for certification.

3) What is the ideal minimum deployment length for forward-deployed locations? Support your position.

4) What do you see as advantages and disadvantages of incentive fees and award fees?

Which do you support and why?

5) What would you consider to be key critical performance measurements and minimum standards to be met? What industry standards exist for performance metrics for this type effort?

6) Do you have any recommendations for additional performance objectives?

e. INDUSTRY PRACTICES:

1) Are there industry standards, instructions or procedures that would meet AF needs or replace Government directives that are listed in the PWS?

5. Feedback is welcome at any time, although we request responses to the above information to accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil no later than 12:00 PM EDT on 6 Jul 2016. All questions must be in writing.

M. JOY de LANDE Contracting Officer

ACC AMIC/PKCA

mailto:accamic.rpa.recomp2016@us.af.mil