Preproposal_Conference_Charts.pptx

Constant Speed Drive Performance-Based Logistics Pre-Proposal Conference

Bruce Giddings Contracting Officer Bruce.Giddings@us.af.mil

Eric Schroeder Program Manager Eric.Schroeder.6@us.af.mil

17 February 2016

Parts on Target Air Force Sustainment Center

(AFSC)

Global Logistics – Warfighter Focus

Agenda Welcome and Introductions PBL Overview Public Private Partnership Government Requirements Contract Type Contract Line Item (CLIN) Structure Source Selection Criteria Contract Award Schedule Tech Data Package Review DLA Storage and Distribution Question and Answer Period

Global Logistics – Warfighter Focus Welcome Sign-in Restrooms Emergency Procedures Dial in #: (405) 852-9999, meeting # 8871

CSD Team Mr. Eric Schroeder – Commodity Council CSD Program Manager Mr. Stan McKinney – Commodity Council CSD Program Manager Mr. Bruce Giddings– AFSC/PZA, Contracting Officer Ms. Beverly Mullins – AFSC/PZCF, Price Analyst Mr. Larry DeSalle – 422 SCMS, CSD Cell Lead Mr. Gary Norman – 422 SCMS, CSD Cognizant Engineer Ms. Angela Weaver – 76 CMXG Ms. Yvonne Hillmon – 552 CMMXS, CSD Production Flight Chief Mr. Art Steinhofer – DLA Aviation, Oklahoma City

PBL Overview Objectives: Increase availability of serviceable CSDs and decrease total sustainment costs.

Description: The contractor shall be responsible for meeting availability requirements by providing serviceable assets to the government as set forth in the statement of work.

Efforts include: Integrates maintenance, supply management, engineering and technical functions necessary to deliver serviceable CSDs, Integrated Drive Generators (IDGs), and components thereof.

Improve repair parts availability Improve efficiency of the repair shop Decrease CSD demands

PBL Overview Availability PBL Achieve and maintain 85% Requisition Objective (RO) fill for each NSN Contract KPI Price per flying-hour approach with price decrements for <85% RO PBL Integrator Make buy/repair decision to meet target Provide production requirement Provide depot materiel support to meet production plan Facilitate production Government Engineering, technical and item management authority Shop facility, equipment, touch labor, maintenance management

Make buy/repair decision to meet target Provide production requirement Provide depot materiel support to meet production plan Purchase, stock, and issue parts Resolve parts discrepancies Facilitate production Resolve bottlenecks Parts issues Test rejects Quality issues Improve maintainability

Public Private Partnership

848 SCMG:

Program Management Engineering/technical authority Tech data management Item management Requisition management Asset reconciliation

OC-ALC:

Touch labor Repair facilities / equipment Maintenance supervision Quality Assurance Contractor:

Forecasting/production collab.

Parts support Production support Engineering/technical support

Disclaimer RFP content takes precedence over Information provided in any Question & Answer Forum and/or any postings on Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps).

SOW Review Phase One - Transition 21 Months 90-day start-up 18-month RO ramp-up Incremental RO requirements Phase Two - Sustainment 85% RO sustainment requirement Phase Three - Exit Orderly transition back to organic support or new PBL Data requirements Unfilled RO compensation

AWP/WIP During Transition Organically supported

SOW Review Other Performance Requirements FMS/OS requirements OEM agreement Performance assessment Parts Cannibalization Inventory drawdown TO improvements PBL “battle rhythm”

PBL Battle Rhythm

Contract Type Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price, Non-Commercial, Requirements

Period of Performance: 10 years comprised of a 5-year basic ordering period and one 5-year optional ordering period.

CLIN Structure

(5 Years) 0101 - 0106 Foreign Military Sales / Other Service Requirements Base Period (5 Years) 0201 - 0209 Data Base Period (5 Years) 1001 - 1012 Air Force Performance Based Logistics Option Period (5 Years) 1101 - 1106 Foreign Military Sales / Other Service Requirements Option Period (5 Years) 1201 - 1207 Data Option Period (5 Years)

Source Selection Criteria Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination of factors deemed most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1: Logistical Support Approach Element 1: Supply Chain Management Plan Element 2: Production Support Plan Subfactor 2: Engineering/Technical Support Approach Element 1: On-Site Technical Support Element 2: Support Engineering Workarounds, Command 202s Element 3: OEM Agreement Subfactor 3: Small Business Participation Plan Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price For this acquisition, technical acceptability is a prerequisite to the best value analysis and potential trade-off between Past Performance and Price. For all technically acceptable proposals, Factor 2, Past Performance, is significantly more important than Factor 3, Price."

Factor 1: Technical

To be determined technically acceptable at the factor level, the offeror must be rated acceptable in each subfactor. A final unacceptable subfactor assessment will determine an overall technical unacceptable rating.

Factor 1: Technical Factor 1, Subfactor 1 (MTSF1): Logistical Support Approach Factor 1, Subfactor 1, Element 1. Supply Chain Management Plan Factor 1, Subfactor 1, Element 2. Production Support Plan Factor 1, Subfactor 2 (MTSF2): Engineering/Technical Support Approach Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 1. On-site Technical Support Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 2. Support Engineering Workarounds, Command 202s Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 3. OEM Agreement Factor 1, Subfactor 3 (MTSF3): SB

Factor 1, Subfactor 1, Element 1

Subfactor 1: Logistical Support Approach

Element 1. Supply Chain Management Plan The government will assess the offeror’s supply chain management plan.

The subfactor minimum is met when the offeror’s proposal ensures the requirements of SOW paragraphs 3.4.2.1 (a), (c), and (f) are met with little potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Factor 1, Subfactor 1, Element 2

Subfactor 1: Logistical Support Approach

Element 2. Production Support Plan The government will assess the offeror’s production support plan.

The subfactor minimum is met when the offeror’s proposal ensures the requirements of SOW paragraphs 3.4.2.2 (a), (b), (c), and (d) are met with little potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 1

Subfactor 2: Engineering / Technical Support Approach Evaluation The government will assess the offeror's proposed engineering / technical support approach. This subfactor is comprised of three elements

Element 1. On-site Technical Support Government will assess the offeror’s on-site technical support approach.

The subfactor minimum is met when the offeror’s proposal ensures the requirements of SOW paragraph 3.4.3(b) are met with little potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 2

Subfactor 2: Engineering / Technical Support Approach Evaluation The government will assess the offeror's proposed engineering / technical support approach. This subfactor is comprised of three elements

Element 2. Support engineering workarounds, Command 202s The government will assess the offeror’s approach to engineering workaround support.

The subfactor minimum is met when the offeror’s proposal ensures the requirements of SOW paragraph 3.4.3(c) are met with little potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Factor 1, Subfactor 2, Element 3

Subfactor 2: Engineering / Technical Support Approach Evaluation The government will assess the offeror's proposed engineering / technical support approach. This subfactor is comprised of three elements

Element 3. OEM Agreement The government will assess the offeror’s OEM agreement.

The subfactor minimum is met when the offeror’s proposal includes a copy and synopsis of a current OEM agreement which provides technical, engineering, and logistical support adequate to meet the performance requirements of the SOW paragraph 3.4.3(a).

Factor 1: Technical, Subfactor 3

Subfactor 3: Small Business

The government will assess the offeror's proposed SB Participation Plan. All offerors, both large and small businesses, will be evaluated on the extent of participation of small business concerns in performance of this contract opportunity.

Offeror’s proposal must meet the minimum mandatory total SB participation of 10 percent (through collective SB participation from any type of SB or sub-category SB). Participation will be measured in dollars as a percentage of total contract value. The work to be performed directly by a small business prime offeror will be evaluated as small business participation.

Factor 2: Past Performance

The Past Performance evaluation assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, including cost and schedule, based on a demonstrated record of performance. The Past Performance factor will receive one of the following performance confidence assessments:

This is a non-commercial effort utilizing FAR Part 15 Source Selection Procedures as supplemented.

Government shall assess all technically acceptable offers Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Price reasonableness Price realism Balance

Reasonableness Price proposal should address all RFP requirements Competitive market should establish price reasonableness PCO makes the determination of price reasonableness An incomplete Pricing Matrix will be considered unreasonable

Realism Proposed prices should be realistic for work being performed Price proposal should reflect clear understanding of requirement Proposal should be consistent with technical approach

Balance Pricing for one or more CLINs is significantly overstated or understated Increases performance risk & may result in unreasonable prices

The Government shall evaluate the TEP of all Offerors. The TEP is the sum of extended pricing for all years.

The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only.

Use of the pricing matrix is mandatory. The matrix will calculate the TEP based on the offerors pricing and the government provided best estimated quantities.

The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness.

Analysis of price proposals will be performed using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404 in order to determine price reasonableness. The government shall review for completeness. An incomplete Pricing Matrix will be considered unreasonable since pricing completeness is part of the price reasonableness criteria.

Proposed pricing will be evaluated for price realism

Proposed pricing must demonstrate adequate understanding of the requirement and does not pose a risk to performance. Proposed pricing shall be realistic for the work required.

Offerors’ proposals will be reviewed for unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items (CLINs) is significantly over or understated as indicated by application of price analysis techniques such that there is reasonable doubt the offer would result in the lowest overall cost to the Government, even though it is the lowest TEP.

Contract Award Schedule (Estimated)

Tech Data Package Review Current RO posture (as of 29 Jan 16) CSD RO history (2 years) CSD due-ins, PRs, contracts Flying hour history and forecast CSD demands (5 years) CSD production history (5 years) CSD test reject rate report AFMC IMT 202 report Material lists (BOMs+IPB) IPV consumption data (1 year) U6800 Direct Material List CSD Material list Part Difference file SKIL Material Issue Request example

DLA Storage and Distribution Utilize DLA workforce and existing processes for stocking, storing and issuing of material -- No need to recreate the brick and mortar and touch labor that DLA already has in place - BG Mark K. Johnson Nov 2014, DLA Ava CC

-- Experienced & well trained people, with security clearances, CAC Cards, established access to many different govt systems

-- Disciplined workforce: knows the work, the Customer, and has a strong sense of Mission Accomplishment – Supporting the War Fighter

TURN KEY Operation—ready to support the mission!

Govt POC: Art Steinhofer Arthur.Steinhofer@dla.mil 405-736-7038

Questions and Answers All questions asked during the open session and the respondent answers will be posted on FedBizOpps.gov at a later date

Questions

Wrap-up

Final Comments “Approval” of RFP content does not change during this pre-proposal conference. Changes shall only be approved via RFP Amendment.

Strongly recommend interested vendors to sign up for alerts within the Federal Business Opportunities website.

Proposals due 5 Apr 16, 3PM CST image8.png image9.png image10.png image11.png image12.png image1.jpeg image2.jpeg image3.png image4.png image6.png image7.png