Pre-Proposal Conference Brief Re-upoload.pptx

Ground Power Modernization (GPM) Pre-Proposal Conference

1 Nov 2021

Controlled by: AFLCMC/WN Controlled by: AFLCMC/WNZ CUI Category: CUI PROCURE Distribution/Dissemination Controls: FEDCON POC: Brandi Owens, (478) 222-1910

Relious “Rick” Grant Program Manager/AFLCMC/WNZ Brandi Owens Contracting Officer/AFLCMC/WNKAA

CUI

AFLCMC… Providing the Warfighter’s Edge

Disclaimer

CUI

CUI

The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of the information received at this event Discussions are for informational purposes only. The contents of the RFP take precedence over anything provided during this conference Questions and answers may be posted to beta.SAM.gov and are considered public record. No proprietary data will be posted Costs incurred as a result of this meeting are considered bid and proposal cost and will not be reimbursed by the Government All information in this briefing is current as of today but is subject to change

Overview

CUI

CUI

Agenda GPM POC List GPM Program Description Program Requirements Data Submittals Key Test Considerations Contract Strategy Source Selection Methodology Proposal Submission Requirements Pre-Proposal Conference Participants

Agenda

CUI

CUI

Day 1, 1 November 2021

* 10 min breaks will be taken as necessary

Agenda

CUI

CUI

Day 2, 2 November 2021

Each one-on-one session will last no more than 30 minutes 15 min breaks will be taken between each one-on-one session

GPM POC List

CUI

CUI

Joshua Beck Yucheng Zhang adit.alam@us.af.mil joshua.beck.10@us.af.mil yucheng.zhang@us.af.mil (478) 926-6289

(478) 222-1837

(478) 222-1762

(478) 222-1843 Financial Manager Katelyn Jackson katelyn.jackson.2@us.af.mil (478) 222-1713

Please note the PCO identified on this chart is the single point of contact for this effort

GPM Program Description

Maintaining AF's capability to provide aircraft with ground power Implement 60Hz split diesel and electric architecture Transition to the Flightline of the Future Electric AGE Use modular solid state power supplies and design architecture Provide higher quality output power meeting requirements of 5th Generation and beyond aircraft

Major Customers: All MAJCOMs

Contractor: Group A: 72 kW GPU, 144 kW GPU & 144 kW ULB Group B: 72 kW GPU

System Capability GPM program replaces legacy GPUs & ULBs with next generation system architecture to provide external ground power to all AF aircraft variants.

2,928 72 kW GPUs supporting F-16, C-17, A-10, F-15, UAVs & other platforms 250 144 kW GPUs supporting C2ISR, Strike Systems and KC-46 platforms 300 144 kW ULBs; tests various types of electrical power sources i.e., GPUs, motor generators, frequency converters, power supplies and B-52 on-board generators Description Programmatic

CUI

CUI

72kW Ground Power Unit (GPU) 144kW Ground Power Unit (GPU)

Universal Load Bank (ULB)

Program Requirements

CUI

CUI

Contractors responsible for integration, verification, and production of end item GPUs and ULBs, to include:

Program Management to include monthly status reports, meeting agenda/minutes, program management reviews Technical Reviews and Documentation (Preliminary & Critical Designs Reviews, Test Readiness Reviews) First Article Testing and all associated documentation Production Acceptance Test Procedure and Report Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI): unclassified information that laws, regulations, or Government-wide policies allow for, or require, safeguarding All CUI must be controlled until authorized for public release All contractor personnel handling CUI associated with this contract: have been properly trained, have been approved to handle CUI, have a valid need to handle CUI, and safeguard any CUI in their possession at all times

CUI

CUI

Obtain Common Access Card (CAC) All contractor/subcontractor personnel who require access to DoD computer networks/systems and DoD facility entry control under the contract/order The Group A contractor shall be issued a minimum of two (Primary and Alternate) and maximum of four CACs; the Group B contractor shall be issued two CACs (Primary and Alternate) Provide a list of contractor/subcontractor personnel who require a CAC to the PCO Access to Government system(s) Appropriate background check or security investigation conducted At the completion/termination of the contract/order or transfer/termination of contractor personnel, the contractor shall ensure the system account(s) are closed Air Force Cloud Hosted Enterprise Services Teams (AF365 Teams) AF365 Teams will be utilized to send/receive/upload/download/view data for tasks identified in the SOW In the event in-person conferences, meetings and program reviews can not be held, AF365 Teams virtual environment, may be supplemented as directed by the PCO Department of Defense Secure Access File Exchange shall be the secondary (backup) electronic data exchange

CUI

CUI

Technical Order (TO) Development TO Initial Guidance Conference held in conjunction with post award conference (Contractor A and Contractor B) TO requirements in accordance with TM-86-01 to include:

Identification plate, Unique Identification, transportation data, Operating Procedures and Corrosion treatment data plates Torque values for fastening hardware Complete wiring information Description of warranty process For GPUs, remove and replace procedures for only the engine, only the generator, and both at the same time Provisioning Provisioning Guidance Conference held in conjunction with post award conference (Contractor A and Contractor B) Top-down break down format to meet system and equipment operation and supportability First Article Restoration Following completion of all test events and procuring activity first article approval, each first article unit shall be restored to “like new” condition First article units undergoing salt fog and/or sand and dust environmental testing shall have wiring harnesses, wiring bundles, and/or other electrical and electronic components sensitive to potentially damaging environment testing conditions replaced to avoid nuisance fault Document all work accomplished to complete restoration of the first articles, and present the information to the procuring activity at time of acceptance

Data Submittals Contractors Progress, Status and Management Report Conference Agenda/Conference Minutes Technical Reports System Safety Program Plan System Safety Hazard Analysis Report Risk Management Framework Package Deliverables Software Assurance Evaluation Report Computer Program Identification Number Catalog Information Computer Software Product End Items Logistics Product Data Engineering Data For Provisioning Counterfeit Protection Plan

CUI

Pack-up Data First Article Test Plan First Article Test Procedure First Article Units Production Units Restored FA Units Technical Orders Test Inspection Reports Training Material Production Acceptance Test Procedure Engineering Change Proposal Notice of Revision Request for Variance Corrosion Prevention Plan

Key Test Considerations Testing must start no later than 330 days ARO, may begin earlier ALL testing must be complete no later than 850 days ARO Not all First Article units are required to undergo OT&E Each First Article unit undergoing OT&E must comply with OT&E prerequisite test requirements of SOW paragraph 3.6.2.3.4 Group A contractor’s test schedule is not required to align with the Group B contractor’s test schedule, except as specified in the SOW The Group A contractor individual test progression/test scheduling is not required to align with the 72 kW GPU, the 144 kW GPU, or the 144 kW ULB, except as specified in the SOW.

Permissible to continue some DT&E events during or after OT&E Intellectual property of each contract awardee will be protected; awardees not allowed to “peek under hood” or operate one another’s equipment

Contract Strategy

Structure of primary contract effort No more than 2, IDIQ, “D” type contracts awarded 1 Group A consisting of 144 kW GPU, 72 kW GPU, and 144 kW ULB consolidated into one contract – full and open competition 1 Group B consisting of the 72 kW GPU only - small business set-aside competition

10-year contracts, 2 ordering periods plus 1 option; 36-month basic period, 7 1-yr ordering years Ordering Period I: Basic and Ordering years I – II; Ordering Period II: Ordering years III - VII

Basic and Ordering year I priced with contract award

Ordering years will be priced in 'batches' of three years: Ordering years II – IV negotiated during ordering year I; Ordering years V – VII negotiated during Ordering year IV

Group A and Group B awardees each guaranteed minimum qty of 72 kW GPU in each ordering year 25% of annual estimated quantities based on funding received to be guaranteed to each awardee; remaining 50% competed

Firm Fixed Price with Cost Reimbursable-No Fee for travel

Source Selection Methodology Source Selection Procedures Trade-off methodology Technical Acceptability, Performance Price Trade-off (TAPPT) Past Performance is considered significantly more important than Cost/Price Evaluation Criteria:

Factor I: Past Performance Recent and Relevant Performance within fifteen (15) years from release of RFP Group A maximum of six (6) active or completed efforts Group B maximum of three (3) active or completed efforts Factor II: Technical (Acceptable/Unacceptable; not a part of tradeoff decision) Group A: 72 kW GPU/144 kW GPU/144 kW ULB Group B: 72 kW GPU Subfactor 1: Design Subfactor 2: Human Factors Subfactor 3: Output Power Rating Subfactor 4: Cooling System Design Factor III: Group A only, Small Business Participation (Acceptable/Unacceptable; not part of tradeoff decision) Factor IV: Cost/Price Reasonableness, Balance, and Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

Source Selection Methodology Gating and Proposal Submission Gate 1: Past Performance and RFP Compliance (initial proposal submission) Must receive “Satisfactory” or “Substantial” Performance Confidence rating Must be in compliance with RFP terms and conditions All Offerors not meeting above criteria will remain in Gate 1 Gate 2: Technical (proposal submission number 2) Must receive “Acceptable” rating in each subfactor All Offerors not meeting above criteria will remain in Gate 2 Gate 3: Small Business Participation and Price (proposal submission number 3) Must receive “Acceptable” Small Business Participation rating Large business offerors must have a compliant small business subcontracting plan Must have prices determined reasonable and balanced Should there not be a sufficient number of Offerors meeting Gate 1, Gate 2 and Gate 3 criteria, Government may “reach back” to either Gate 1 or Gate 2 to continue discussions with intent of bringing more Offerors forward All Offerors not meeting Gate1, Gate 2, and Gate 3 exit criteria will be eliminated from the competitive range Gate 4: Final Proposal Revision Requests

General Proposal Submission Requirements Only one proposal submission per offeror If proposing to both Group A and Group B, only one submission to include both group proposal requirements will be accepted English language; US dollars; font no smaller than size 12; paper sizes 8 ½” X 11” or 11” X 17” (see paragraphs L.II.A.1 and L.II.A.2) All offerors that submit timely initial proposals to be within the initial competitive range The Government reserves the right to make subsequent competitive range determinations throughout the evaluation process Proposals shall be submitted via DoD SAFE (https://safe.apps.mil) Offerors must request a drop-off link from both the PCO and the buyer The proposal submittal must be received by the PCO and/or the buyer by the proposal due date and time The request for drop-off link shall not be used for determining the timing of the proposal receipt

Gate 1 / Initial Proposal Submission Section L paragraph I.A. General Volume I (Completed RFP) and Volume II (Past Performance) Section L paragraph II.C, Volume I (Completed RFP) Completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued RFP signed, all amendments signed, and all fill-in clauses completed (RFP attachment 3 is provided as ‘checklist’ for offerors to ensure fill-in clauses are completed) Cover letter identifying any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with rationale, and clear identification of group(s) being proposed to Section L paragraph II.D, Volume II (Past Performance) Offeror past performance information included in both RFP Attachment 4: PPI Tool (must be requested from PCO and/or buyer and sent via DoD SAFE) and RFP Attachment 5: Relevancy Assessment Critical subcontractor definitions identified in Section L paragraph II.D.1 for both Group A and Group B Past performance efforts submitted for any subcontractors not meeting the critical subcontractor definitions will not be evaluated Clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the offeror’s team, to include joint venture members and critical subcontractors—identify the work to be performed by each entity and the percentage of overall work (this can be accomplished in the business relations section in the PPI Tool)

Gate 1 / Initial Proposal Submission (con’t) Section L paragraph II.D, Volume II (Past Performance) (con’t) Recency period: 15 years from date of RFP issuance Any efforts that did not have active performance during the time from 14 Oct 2006 to the present day will not meet the recency requirement Group A offerors may submit up to six (6) efforts for each team member Team member includes prime offeror, joint venture member(s) and critical subcontractor(s) if applicable Group B offerors may submit up to three (3) efforts for each team member All team members beyond the prime offeror shall sign a Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form (RFP Attachment 6); completed forms to be included in the Volume II submittal If the effort submitted for evaluation is an ordering type contract (performance only begins upon issuance of a delivery/task/purchase order), the individual order(s) must be identified in lieu of the basic contract Small business compliance shall be addressed for every effort submitted for evaluation Simply stating your company is a small business is not sufficient; offerors shall explain how they utilized small businesses in the performance of the effort submitted

Section L paragraph II.D, Volume II (Past Performance) (con’t) Offerors shall ensure the POCs identified in the PPI Tool are their customer POCs -- not POCs within the offeror’s company Offerors shall send each POC identified in the PPI Tool a copy of RFP Attachment 7, Present/Past Performance Questionnaire The Government will conduct interviews with the customer POCs utilizing the questionnaire as a guide Should commercial efforts be submitted for evaluation, a copy of the client authorization letter (RFP Attachment 8) that the offeror sends to the customer POCs shall be included in the Volume II submittal The Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information via any means available beyond the information submitted in Volume II Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions Oral discussions anticipated to begin within three (3) weeks of Gate 1 proposal submission Number and quality of proposals may extend this anticipated time Federal holidays may extend this anticipated time All oral discussions shall be recorded

Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions (con’t) Government will send written copies of any identified Evaluation Notices (ENs) to each offeror, along with a tentative schedule for oral discussions Offerors shall use RFP Attachment 2 in the preparation of the oral discussions presentation material Only EN and EN responses shall be discussed Should follow-on ENs be required, the offeror shall be provided the ENs prior to reconvening the oral discussions Upon conclusion of Gate 1 oral discussions, offerors shall either remain in Gate 1 or proceed into Gate 2 Must receive “Satisfactory” or “Substantial” Performance Confidence rating Must be in compliance with RFP terms and conditions All Offerors not meeting above criteria will remain in Gate 1 Offerors remaining in Gate 1 will receive notification of such Offerors proceeding into Gate 2 will receive notification of such; notification will include formal Gate 2 proposal submission request along with the specific proposal response date Any late proposals will be handled as a late proposal in accordance with FAR 15.208(b)

Gate 2 Proposal Submission Section L paragraph I.A. General Volume III (Written Technical Proposal) Page limit is 30 pages for Group A proposals and 10 pages for Group B proposals Engine derating calculation worksheet not included in the page limit; however the engine derating calculation worksheet shall not exceed 8 pages Section L paragraph II.E, Volume III (Written Technical Proposal) Address only one subfactor per section Avoid including subfactor discussions in multiple sections Use same headings/subfactor numbers/PD paragraph numbers/etc. as used in this Section L paragraph Group A offerors shall clearly delineate between the 72 kW GPU, the 144 kW GPU and the 144 kW ULB in each section Develop your company’s proposal with the view that the Government does not have knowledge of your company’s capabilities, facilities, etc.

Offerors proposing to both Group A and Group B can choose to use the same verbiage provided for the 72 kW GPU only – extrapolate the 72 kW GPU information and provide in a separate volume document

Gate 2 Proposal Submission (con’t) Section L paragraph II.E.2.1, Group A Subparagraph 2.1.1, Subfactor 1: 72 kW GPU, 144 kW GPU, and 144 kW ULB Design Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the design of the two GPUs and ULB Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out for each of the three end items Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.1.1 Subparagraph 2.1.2, Subfactor 2: 72 kW GPU, 144 kW GPU, and 144 kW ULB Human Factors Conceptual illustrations, isometric drawings, or model print outs required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the human factors of the GPUs and ULB Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out for each of the three end items Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.1.2

Section L paragraph II.E.2.1, Group A (con’t) Subparagraph 2.1.3, Subfactor 3: 72 kW GPU, 144 kW GPU Output Power Rating Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the output power rating of the two GPUs Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out for each of the two end items Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.1.3 Subparagraph 2.1.4, Subfactor 4: 72 kW GPU, 144 kW GPU, and 144 kW ULB Cooling System Design Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the cooling system design of the two GPUs and ULB Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out for each of the three end items Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.1.4

Section L paragraph II.E.2.2, Group B Subparagraph 2.2.1, Subfactor 1: 72 kW GPU Design Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the design of the 72 kW GPU Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.2.1 Subparagraph 2.2.2, Subfactor 2: 72 kW GPU Human Factors Conceptual illustrations, isometric drawings, or model print outs required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the human factors of the GPUs and ULB Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.2.2

Section L paragraph II.E.2.2, Group B (con’t) Subparagraph 2.2.3, Subfactor 3: 72 kW GPU Output Power Rating Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the output power rating of the 72 kW GPU Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.2.3 Subparagraph 2.2.4, Subfactor 4: 72 kW GPU Cooling System Design Detailed narrative proposal required to demonstrate a sound engineering approach for the cooling system design of the 72 kW GPU Proposal shall address every PD paragraph called out Supporting information shall be provided, and shall include at a minimum the data identified in subparagraph 2.2.4 Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions Oral discussions anticipated to begin within three (3) weeks of Gate 2 proposal submission Number and quality of proposals may extend this anticipated time Federal holidays may extend this anticipated time

Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions (con’t) All oral discussions shall be recorded Government will send written copies of any identified ENs to each offeror, along with a tentative schedule for oral discussions Offerors shall use RFP Attachment 2 in the preparation of the oral discussions presentation material Only EN and EN responses shall be discussed Should follow-on ENs be required, the offeror shall be provided the ENs prior to reconvening the oral discussions Upon conclusion of Gate 2 oral discussions, offerors shall either remain in Gate 2 or proceed into Gate 3 Must receive “Acceptable” rating in each subfactor All Offerors not meeting above criteria will remain in Gate 2 Offerors remaining in Gate 2 will receive notification of such Offerors proceeding into Gate 3 will receive notification of such; notification will include formal Gate 3 proposal submission request along with the specific proposal response date Any late proposals will be handled as a late proposal in accordance with FAR 15.208(b)

Gate 3 Proposal Submission Section L paragraph I.A. General Volume I (Small Business Subcontracting Plan), Volume IV (Small Business Participation) and Volume V (Price Proposal) Page limit is 5 pages for Volume IV (Small Business Participation) Section L paragraph II.C.2, Small Business Subcontracting Plan – Group A Large Business Offerors Only Small business subcontracting plan required by FAR 52.219-9, as supplemented by the DFARS and AFFARS Information submitted shall be in compliance with FAR 19.7, DFARS 219.7, AFFARS 5319.7, and all associated clauses within the RFP Section L paragraph II.F, Volume IV (Small Business Participation) – Group A Only Required from both large and small business offerors proposing to Group A Required for each teaming member (prime, joint venture member(s), critical subcontractor(s)) Only include information for the first tier of subcontractors Large business offerors shall not use the Small Business Subcontracting Plan required by FAR 52.219-9 in the place of the Volume IV submittal

Gate 3 Proposal Submission (con’t) Section L paragraph II.F, Volume IV (Small Business Participation) – Group A Only (con’t) Identify the extent of participation of proposed small businesses, to include the company names and associated CAGE codes Describe the subcontracted work these proposed companies are to perform Identify the associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total planned subcontracted dollars If limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist, provide rationale for such Do not simply acknowledge a goal is not met; rather, provide an explanation for why a goal is not met and what your company is doing to try to meet these goals For small business team members (prime, joint venture member(s), critical subcontractor(s)), include the work your company will perform when calculating the goals Section L paragraph II.G, Volume V (Price) Complete yellow highlighted cells in RFP Attachment 10, Price Spreadsheet for the Basic and Ordering Year I contract periods All other contract periods will not be proposed by the offeror Tabs are provided for both Group A and Group B; complete as required

Section L paragraph II.G, Volume V (Price) (con’t) Complete yellow highlighted cells in RFP Attachment 10, Price Spreadsheet for the Basic and Ordering Year I contract periods (con’t) Required CLINs to be priced are specified in paragraph L.II.G.1.a All prices shall be rounded to the nearest whole dollar Government will round any prices not meeting this requirement and the Government’s adjustment will become the proposed amount No pricing data shall be submitted in any other proposal volume Failure to comply with these submittal requirements may result in the rejection of the proposal Data in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) may be required Specific requests will be provided should the PCO be unable to determine price reasonableness In accordance with DFARS 215.371-3 and if no exception in FAR 15.403-1(b) applies, data submitted may be required to be certified Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions Oral discussions anticipated to begin within three (3) weeks of proposal submission Number and quality of proposals may extend this anticipated time Federal holidays may extend this anticipated time

Section L paragraph II.B, Oral Discussions (con’t) All oral discussions shall be recorded Government will send written copies of any identified ENs to each offeror, along with a tentative schedule for oral discussions Offerors shall use RFP Attachment 2 in the preparation of the oral discussions presentation material Only EN and EN responses shall be discussed Should follow-on ENs be required, the offeror shall be provided the ENs prior to reconvening the oral discussions Upon conclusion of Gate 3 oral discussions, offerors shall either proceed into Gate 4 (via Gate 3 evaluations or “reach back” evaluations) or be eliminated from the competitive range Must receive “Acceptable” Small Business Participation rating Large business offerors must have a compliant small business subcontracting plan Must have prices determined reasonable and balanced Should there not be a sufficient number of Offerors meeting Gate 1, Gate 2 and Gate 3 criteria, Government may “reach back” to either Gate 1 or Gate 2 to continue discussions with intent of bringing more Offerors forward All Offerors not meeting Gate1, Gate 2, and Gate 3 exit criteria will be eliminated from the competitive range

Upon conclusion of Gate 3 oral discussions, offerors shall either proceed into Gate 4 (via Gate 3 evaluations or “reach back” evaluations) or be eliminated from the competitive range (con’t) Offerors proceeding into Gate 4 will receive notification of such; notification will include formal closing discussions notifications and formal request for final proposal revisions, along with the specific final proposal revision response date Any late proposals will be handled as a late proposal in accordance with FAR 15.208(b) All offerors not proceeding into Gate 4 (to include offerors remaining in Gates 1 and 2) shall be eliminated from the competitive range

Gate 4 Proposal Submission Section L paragraph I.A. General Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) FPRs shall include a completed model contract FPRs shall clearly identify any proposal revisions made, with associated rationale for the changes to include the link between original proposal and revisions made FPRs must meet the criteria for Gates 1, 2 and 3 in order to be presented to the SSA for an award decision

Gate 5 – Source Selection Authority Decision

Conference Participants

CUI

CUI

Questions ?

image7.png image3.jpeg image6.jpeg image4.png image8.png image9.png image10.emf image1.jpeg image2.png image5.gif