1_MQ-9_CAT_CWD__Industry_Day_Briefing.pptx

MQ-9 Contract Aircrew Training (CAT)/Courseware Development (CWD) Industry Day 22 August 2017

This Briefing is:

UNCLASSIFIED

Headquarters Air Combat Command

Welcome ACC/A3M Remarks

A3M Mission Develops and oversees operations policy for the ACC MQ-1/9, RQ-4, U-2, and Advanced RPA enterprises

CAF lead to organize, train and equip ACC persistent attack and reconnaissance weapon systems

CAF lead for policy, doctrine, TTP development, and FAM

Ensures readiness and combat crew training to meet CCMD reqs

98% of MQ-1/9, 94% of U-2, and 93% of RQ-4 sorties support combat ops/GFMAP Organize, Train, and Equip Persistent Attack & Reconnaissance Forces ACC Operations Lead for MQ-1/9, RQ-4, U-2, and Advanced RPA

Agenda Topics of Discussion Rules of Engagement Program Overview

Ms. Shannon Satterfield Project Lead

ACC AMIC/DRX

Agenda

- Agenda

- Acquisition Team Roles & Responsibilities

ACC/TRSS Program Manager 10:00 – 10:45am - MQ-9 CAT/CWD Acquisition Overview & Contractual Aspects* Ms. Imelda Reantaso AMIC Contract Manager

OPEN FORUM (22 Aug 2017)

INDIVIDUAL ONE-ON-ONE SESSIONS (22/23 Aug 2017) 30-minute sessions are available (by appointment only) beginning at 12:30pm on Tuesday, 22 Aug, at the following address:

Crowne Plaza Hampton-Marina 700 Settlers Landing Rd, Hampton, VA 23669 Peninsula Room A

Topics of Discussion Rules of Engagement Administration Communications with the Government Project Overview MQ-9 Program Overview Acquisition Strategy/Solicitation Overview Open Forum Questions One-on-One Sessions

Slide contains sample language; update as appropriate

Administration Crowne Plaza – Hampton Marina Restrooms Emergency Exits Smoking Areas

Industry/Attendee Folders Agenda Briefing Official Industry Day Question Sheets (Open Forum & One-On-One) Government Questions for Industry Day

Reference Documents Latest Draft PWS Latest Draft Sections 6 & 7 of the RFP

Communications with the Government Industry Day Questions:

Submit open forum questions in writing on blue question forms Submit one-on-one questions in writing on yellow question forms (included in folders) Proprietary Information:

Clearly identify to the Government any information you deem proprietary

Government will consolidate all non-proprietary written questions received and post the answers to FedBizOpps

Request all communications from potential offerors be sent to: accamic.pkb.mq9recomp2018@us.af.mil

Standard language

AMIC Overview

Direct Reporting Unit under ACC’s Vice Commander

Provide cradle-to-grave integrated program and contract management for complex service acquisitions (>$100M), as well as specialized contracting in support of ACC

Primary Mission Partners: ACC Directorates, ACC Tenants, ACC Wings, Host Nations, COCOMS, and MAJCOMs

Manage 15 complex programs supporting various mission sets

Contract portfolio exceeds $15B

AMIC Global Footprint

AMIC HQ

AMIC Personnel and/or Major Program Site AMIC Contract Performance Location

USNORTHCOM

USSOUTHCOM

USAFRICOM

USPACOM

USEUCOM

USCENTCOM

AMIC PROGRAMS/CONTRACTS IN 37 COUNTRIES

AMIC Integrated Culture Only SPO Type / Acquisition Center of Excellence organization in the Air Force Dedicated Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Quality Assurance personnel Embedded Functional support (i.e., Comm/Electronics, Logistics, Civil Engineering, Finance, Legal, etc.)

Report to single Director

Utilize project management principles for complex service acquisitions. Project Lead assigned to facilitate team and employ project management discipline

Develop contracted programs and manage them with a mission-focused mindset (Measure of our/your success)

Standard language

AMIC Organizational Chart AMIC Director

(SES)

PK (NH -04)

Deputy Director, Contracting

PM (NH -04)

Deputy Director, Program Management

DD (O-6)

Deputy Director Det 1 North Warning Sys Ottawa, Canada

PMS

Mission Support Division

PMT

CN&GT

Division

PMA

Aircraft MX Division

PCE

Civil Engineer Division

PMC

AFCENT Support Division

PLG

Logistics Division

DRQ

Quality Assurance Division

SEM

Sr Enlisted Manager

XO

Executive Officer

DRE

Executive Support

PKC

Contracting Division

PKS

Contract Spt Division

PKA

Contracting Division

PKB

Contracting Division

PKD

Contracting Division

JWAC

Contracting Division

DRR

Financial Mgt Division

DRJ

Legal Division

DRX

Plans & Programs Division Det 2

25 AF

Contracting Support

DSS

Director’s Support Staff 16 - Officers 116 - Enlisted 253 - Civilian 31 - CMEs

FY17 Total AMIC Manpower Workforce - 424

MQ-9 CAT/CWD

Acquisition Oversight Acquisition falls under the Air Force Program Executive Officer for Combat and Mission Support (AFPEO/CM) portfolio

AFPEO/CM delegated to HQ ACC; appointment will be at GO/SES-level:

Source Selection Authority (SSA) Acquisition Approval Authority

Air Force Installation Contracting Agency (AFICA/KC):

Clearance Authority

Multi-functional Independent Review Team (MIRT) will be utilized for third-party contracting and technical reviews

Projected Milestones

Program Overview

Mr. William Law Program Manager

ACC TRSS

Program Manager/Requirement Owner/Speaker

Program Overview Combat Mission Current Contract New Contract Scope of Work Performance Work Statement (PWS) Risks

Slide contains sample language; at a minimum include:

- Mission

- Sites/Locations

- Scope of Work

- PWS Overview

- Risk

Combat Mission

MQ-9 Reaper: Armed, multi-mission, medium-altitude, long-endurance remotely piloted aircraft employed as an intelligence-collection asset and against dynamic execution targets to include kinetic engagements.

…self explanatory…

Current Contract Provides for CAT/CWD and Instrument Refresher Course (IRC) in support of operations at Holloman, Creech, March and Hancock Competitively awarded (LPTA) to CAE USA Inc., in 2013 under full and open competition Hybrid Firm Fixed Price with Cost Reimbursable Travel and New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax (NMGRT) CLINs Contract expires 30 Sep 18

New Contract Sites/Locations

March ANGB Holloman AFB Creech AFB Hancock Field

Scope of Work MQ-9 Contract Aircrew Training and Courseware Development (CAT/CWD) to include IRC Except for the property a services specifically stated as Government-furnished in PWS, Section 3, the contractor is responsible for furnishing all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and all other items and services required to perform and support MQ-9 CAT/CWD and IRC

Potential growth areas Additional CONUS locations to support training Distributed Mission Operations (DMO) training capability

PWS Overview Aircrew Training Supports MQ-9 Syllabi (IQT, LRQT, IUT, SLQT, FAM, & FMSGT)

Academic Instruction Includes Instrument Refresher Course

Simulator Instruction

Mission Flying Instruction

Launch and Recovery Flying Instruction

Courseware Development CW Team will be located Holloman AFB Develop, Revise, and Review courseware IAW with ISD regulations set forth in ACCI 36-2250 and applicable regulations identified in Appendix 3 Estimated Workload

General Tasks Operational Test and Evaluation Support No workload. If required, offsets to work will done Required Reports (Appendix 4) Conferences/Meeting Minutes Master Files Training Support Positions/Responsibilities Schedulers Registrars GTIMS/Training Specialists

JICO

Lead Scheduler/GTIMS Associate

JJTOC/MMS

Training Specialists

CSA

Console Operators Support Specialists

General Tasks (cont.)

Learning Management System Internet based knowledge portal to manage courseware and other academic material for the MQ-9 community May be one stand-alone system or a collection of systems which provides a portal for the student to access courseware and other training reference material Needs to allow for multi-site collaboration for development and approval of courseware Must be operational at all times 24/7, year-round Any exceptions have to be approved by Program Office identified-Government Subject Matter Experts (SME) SMEs functional similar to Contracting Officer Representative

Contractor Plans Submit with Proposal Transition Plan (Phase In and Phase Out) Training Workload Management Plan Instructor Training and Certification Plan Quality Control Plan Recruitment and Retention Plan

Submit 10 business days after award Instructional Systems Development Management Plan Strike Mitigation Plan

Service Summary Identifies critical factors for the successful performance of requirements States performance objective, standard, and threshold for each critical success factor (accept/reject point)

Quality Assurance Government Subject Matter Expert’s Observe instruction on a random basis Courseware 100% Reviewed

Facility Clearance Requires Secret Clearance by contract award

(Service Summary)

PM may choose to summarize SS or include sub-headings/tables directly from PWS…either way the PM should be able to “talk to” the requirement not read directly from the slide…

Program Risks/Issues Trained/Qualified Workforce

If the contractor fails to provide and retain 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.

Risk Event Risk Strategy Known issue the Government anticipates Instructor Pilot Shortfall

Acquisition Strategy / Solicitation Overview Ms. Imelda Reantaso Contract Manager

ACC AMIC/PKBB

Contracting Overview Key Contractual Aspects Contract Type/Period of Performance CLIN Structure Source Selection Methodology Evaluation Factors and Subfactors Source Selection Process Draft RFP Posting Site Visit/Pre-Proposal Conference Points of Contact One-On-One Information

Key Contractual Aspects Solicitation Number: FA4890-18-R-0001

NAICS Code: 611512 – Flight Training SBA Size Standard is $27.5 Million

Source selection will be conducted IAW FAR Part 15, DoD Source Selection Procedures, dated 31 Mar 16 and AFFARS 5315.3

Small Business Set Aside Determination not yet established Market Research Questionnaire posted to FedBizOpps (FBO) on 7 Jul 17 Commerciality Determination: FAR Part 15 vs. Part 12 Market Research questionnaire posted on 7 Jul 17

If Full & Open competition, Small Business Subcontracting goal will be considered Subcontracting plans required for Large Businesses IAW FAR Part 19 – Small Business Programs

Key Contractual Aspects (cont.)

Use as many slides as necessary…

Contract Type

Single Award Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) w/ Cost-Reimbursable (CR) Line Items

Period of Performance Contract: 1 base year plus 4 option years

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

CLIN Structure

X107 (Optional) MQ-9 Training Device Instruction (TDI)(3) Labor – TDI (3) (Holloman)

Note: CLINs are FFP unless noted otherwise

X will be 0 for the Base Year (FY15), then 100X for OY1, 200X for OY2, etc. 6-month extension, if exercised, will be 500X CLINs.

CLIN Structure

Note: CLINs are FFP unless noted otherwise CLINs for the option years will follow the same structure; 1101 – 2101 – 3101 – 4101 & so forth

X will be 0 for the Base Year (FY15), then 100X for OY1, 200X for OY2, etc. 6-month extension, if exercised, will be 500X CLINs.

Evaluation Factors Initial Eval

Ratings

Initial Evaluation Debrief Offeror Proposals

Award w/o Discussion

Initial Evaluation Brief

Interim Evaluation

Competitive Range Determination Discussions ENs

Final Evaluation

Revise Ratings Award

Source Selection Decision Briefing Best Value Decision

ENs Final Proposal Revision Brief Close Discussions

Receive Final Proposals

Evaluation Process

Evaluation Methodology Best Value Tradeoff IAW DoD Source Selection Procedures dated 31 Mar 16 and AFFARS 5315.3 We are considering efficiency language based on the interest in this requirement Evaluating 3 Factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability Subfactors– Shall receive combined technical/risk rating with the technical capability factor Factor 2 – Price Complete, Balanced, Realistic, and Reasonable Factor 2 – Past Performance Minimum 3 maximum 6 (12 months of performance within 3 years of solicitation date) / relevant contracts Ratings: Overall Confidence Assessment Order of Importance: Technical Capability is significantly more important than Price and Past Performance with Price more important than Past Performance and Past Performance as the least important factor

Factor 1: Technical Capability Subfactor A: Training Workload Management Plan, Manpower Analysis, and Recruitment and Retention Process/Plan Training Workload Management Plan Manning Workload Analysis Recruitment and Retention Process/Plan Analysis

Subfactor B: Organizational Structure, Roles, Responsibilities and Communications Training Management Roles, Responsibilities and Communications

Subfactor C: Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan, Instructor Training and Certification Plan Transition Plan Quality Plan Instructor Training and Certification Plan Evaluation Methodology (cont.)

Technical Evaluation Subfactors

Factor 1: Technical Capability (cont.)

Subfactor D: Learning Management Systems and Contractor Furnished Equipment Learning Management System Contractor Furnished Equipment

Subfactor order of importance:

Subfactor (A) is significantly more important than subfactors (B), (C) and (D) Subfactors (B), (C) and (D) are of equal importance

Technical Evaluation Subfactors

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor A – Training Workload Management Plan, Manpower Analysis, and Recruitment and Retention Process/Plan Aspect 1: Training Workload Management Plan Training Workload Management Plan approach clearly demonstrates methods, innovations and policies which ensure all required work is accomplished IAW the PWS.

Provides detailed breakdown of each skills annual work capability to include: direct time, indirect, ancillary time, scheduled leave, holidays, and any other workload capability factors which may affect proposed manpower.

Provides effective processes for daily and long range scheduling that mitigate risk associated with workload fluctuations or other factors to ensure all PWS work is accomplished.

Subfactor 1, Aspect I

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor A – Training Workload Management Plan and Manpower Analysis Aspect 2: Manning Workload Analysis Presents detailed manning workload analysis that clearly explains all proposed manning, manning mix, full and part-time employees, if used, for CAT instruction and management at each site. Analysis clearly shows how offeror arrived at proposed manpower ensuring all PWS requirements are met.

Presents detailed courseware workload analysis for all courseware requirements that clearly explains the proposed development time in hours for each lesson instructional hour, provided a percentage breakdown of each proposed courseware skill for each type of courseware, and clearly identified proposed manpower for each skill to meet all PWS requirements. Develop a detailed plan explaining proposed manning for all PWS support positions

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor A – Training Workload Management Plan and Manpower Analysis Aspect 2: Manning Workload Analysis (cont.)

c. Demonstrates a clear understanding of all proposed support position manpower requirements provided proposed manning which meet all PWS requirements.

Aspect 3: Recruitment and Retention Process/Plan Analysis Demonstrates an effective and comprehensive recruitment process that ensures sufficient, qualified personnel are hired and trained for each job category/position and specifically identifies and addresses hard to fill positions to execute all PWS requirements.

Demonstrates an effective and comprehensive retention process/plan to retain sufficient, qualified personnel for each job category/position and specifically identifies and addresses hard to fill positions to execute all PWS requirements.

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor B – Organizational Structure, Roles, Responsibilities and Communications Aspect 1: Training Management Demonstrates an effective organizational structure detailing contractor’s line(s) of authority to include sub-contractors and/or teaming partners.

Aspect 2: Roles, Responsibilities and Communications Demonstrates cohesive functional relationships and effective roles and responsibilities that ensure effective communication procedures both within the company and with the government representatives to effectively execute the PWS requirements.

Subfactor 2, aspects I and II

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor C – Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan, and Instructor Training and Certification Plan Aspect 1: Transition Plan Provide a Phase-In plan that includes:

Demonstrates a clear understanding of priority allocation of resources and personnel Provides risk factors and plans for mitigating any identified risk Provides a spreadsheet that clearly depicts all Phase In actions with start and completion dates which ensures the offeror is prepared on the contract start date.

Explains how the offeror will train and certify new personnel.

Explains how the incoming contractor shall interface with Government personnel in a manner that minimizes disruption of student training activities.

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Aspect 1: Transition Plan (cont.)

Provide a Phase-Out plan that includes:

Explains how the contractor shall ensure continuity of services in the event the incumbent does not receive the follow-on award.

Explains how the contractor shall provide for a smooth/uninterrupted transition of the incumbent personnel if the incoming contractor wants to retain such personnel.

Aspect 2: Quality Control Plan Presents a quality plan that clearly provides an inspection system that covers all item listed in the PWS Service Summary which includes frequency of inspections and methods of inspection Demonstrates a documentation process which includes corrective or preventative actions taken and provides for the Government visibility throughout contract performance.

Demonstrates a clear understanding of security control process and procedures for Government provided cipher combinations, keys, lock combinations and safe combinations (PWS 4.3.2).

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Aspect 3: Instructor Training and Certification Plan Demonstrates a clear understanding of instructor qualification requirements for each major block of training to be instructed, qualification/evaluation performed before a previously qualified instructor instructs, and written notification of each instructors’ qualifications for conducting unmonitored student instruction.

Clearly explains all ISD training accomplished to personnel supporting the CWD effort.

Clearly explains the re-qualification process/procedures when an instructor is de-certified or goes non-current.

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Subfactor D – Learning Management System and Contractor Furnished Equipment Aspect 1: Learning Management System Detailed approach that describes how you will provide an internet based knowledge portal which manages courseware and other academic material for the MQ-9 community.

Demonstrate how your LMS will be operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year except when down for scheduled maintenance.

Process to ensure LMS format and internet processes are standardized across all work locations and available to all FTUs and associated squadrons.

Approach for network operating maintenance that ensures capability sufficient to support the data base and meet computer network requirement of all users.

Describe in detail how access of unclassified material will be accomplished through a portal on the FTU/TRSS unclassified LAN and all classified material is located on a classified server that can be accessed via the SIPRNET web page with PASSWORD controls.

Evaluation Subfactors Technical Evaluation Criteria Aspect 1: Learning Management System (cont.)

Describe in detail how access of unclassified material will be accomplished through a portal on the FTU/TRSS unclassified LAN and all classified material is located on a classified server that can be accessed via the SIPRNET web page with PASSWORD controls.

Describe how LMS software/licenses, if required, and appropriate servers are approved and online and available for use at all sites on the contract start date and all systems and operation are in compliance with all Government Security regulations.

Aspect 2: Contractor Furnished Equipment Demonstrates that proposed CFE is compliant with the Air Force Network Integration Center approved product list.

Demonstrates that proposed CFE is sufficient to meet all PWS requirements.

Evaluation Methodology (cont.)

Technical Assessment Finding Definitions Meets: Explanation of how the proposal meets the requirement Strength: An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Significant Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance

Technical/Risk Subfactor Ratings

Technical Subfactor Risk Assessment Ratings

Conducting price analysis to determine Reasonableness Price must represent to gov’t what a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to market prices Usually based on Adequate Price Competition (2 or more offerors) Balance Unbalanced pricing exists when price of one or more CLINs is significantly overstated (despite acceptable total evaluated price) Realism Evaluating proposed price/costs to ensure they are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirement, and are consistent with the offeror’s technical proposal The price of each offeror will be evaluated on the total, overall evaluated price, which consists of the total proposed price (FP and CR CLINS) of the transition period, base contract period, optional CLINs, and all optional contract periods (to include a six-month extension of services IAW FAR 52.217-8)

Factor 2 - Price

Offerors authorized to submit references on themselves, joint venture/teaming partners, and subcontractors (Total possible: a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of six (6) references) References (aka Past Performance Information (PPI)) are used to evaluate past performance Three components of evaluation Recency Demonstrated performance (min 12 months) during the last 3 years from date the solicitation was issued

Past Performance

Factor 3: Past Performance Relevancy:

Reference is evaluated to determine if Relevant to effort using below definition (See definitions on next chart)

Quality:

Review recent Contract Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) related to the effort Review Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) information Conduct telephone interviews Offeror given opportunity to respond to any adverse ratings

Assign Confidence rating based on integrated assessment of above areas

Evaluation Methodology Past Performance - Relevancy

Total contract value was in excess of $150M.

Performed aircrew training (academic, simulator and flying instruction) simultaneously at multiple locations.

Performed courseware development and maintenance utilizing Instructional Systems Development (ISD) model.

Relevant Effectively managed a military aircrew training program as prime contractor supporting RPA aircraft involving essentially the same level of complexities as this solicitation, where cost, schedule and performance were measured/evaluated.

Total contract value was in excess of $75M.

Performed aircrew training (academic, simulator and flying instruction) simultaneously at multiple locations.

Performed courseware development and maintenance utilizing Instructional Systems Development (ISD) model.

Total contract value was in excess of $40M.

Performed aircrew training services which included academic and simulator instruction. Performed courseware development utilizing an industry accepted quality control model.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Evaluation Methodology (cont.)

Past Performance – Confidence Ratings

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Source Selection Process Overview

Award Without Discussions

MIRT Review Legal Reviews Clearance Approval Debriefings

Final Evaluation Activities

Evaluate FPR Prepare Final SSEB Report Prepare CAR Prepare SSDD Conduct SSDB Select Source

Pre-Final Proposal Revision (FPR) Evaluation Activities

Provide notifications to offerors Provide Interim Ratings Conduct Discussions Prepare Interim SSEB Report Conduct Pre-FPR Briefing Request FPR Initial Evaluation Activities

Receive & Review Proposals Conduct Evaluations Consolidate & Rate Evaluations Develop ENs Prepare Initial SSEB Report Conduct IEB Establish Competitive Range Award & Debriefings

Provide notifications to unsuccessful offerors Award contract Conduct Post-Award Debriefings

OR

This is a visual representation of the source selection process

Evaluation Process AWOD / Competitive Range The SSA will decide, based on Initial Evaluation Activities (per the CO’s recommendation), to either:

Award Without Discussions (AWOD), OR Establish Competitive Range (CR) and enter into Discussions

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

Offerors notified if entering Discussions and 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 All offerors now technically acceptable, or 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 Request for Proposal (RFP) Draft RFP tentatively scheduled to be posted to FedBizOpps in Oct 2017 timeframe Industry review and input is encouraged Government will post responses to questions to FBO without publicizing the originating source(s)

Site Visit / Pre-Proposal Conference Formal site visit before release of final RFP Tentatively scheduled for Jan 2018 timeframe Location(s): Holloman AFB, NM 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)

Points of Contact / References

ACC AMIC/PKB

Capt. Hannah J. Kosirog, Contracting Officer – (757) 225-2153 Ms. Imelda Reantaso, Contract Manager – (757) 225-5797

Submit questions/comments: accamic.pkb.mq9recomp2018@us.af.mi)

Internet Links:

www.FBO.gov or www.FedBizOpps.gov (Reference No. FA4890-18-R-0001) http://farsite.hill.af.mil (Federal Acquisition Regulation)

One-on-One Information Location 22 / 23 Aug 17 – Crowne Plaza, Hampton VA Ballroom A

Questions/recommendations from industry are encouraged

Break

TURN IN ALL WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Discussion Panel

Closing Remarks

TURN IN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND SURVEYS

image2.png image3.jpeg image4.png image5.png image6.png image7.emf image8.png image1.png