Final_Pre-solicitation_Conf__Brief.pps
PPS file 2 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N00019-11-R-0016
About this file
The N00019-11-R-0016 attachment being provided via this post is the official Brief that was presented by the US Government last year on 22 March 2012 at the Pre-Solicitation Conference held in Orlando FL. The brief consists of slides 1 through 37 only as attached.
View the file
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Maintenance Contractor Field Team (CFT) Pre-Solicitation Conference March 22 - 23, 2012 Kuwait KC-130J
Disclaimer Statement Information provided herein is subject to change and in no way binds the Government to solicit for or award a contract. There is no commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation, to make an award or awards, or to be responsible for any monies expended by any interested parties before award of a contract for the effort mentioned herein
Agenda Thursday, March 22
| 0830 - 0900 Registration | |||
| 0900 - 0915 | Introductions | Maxine Birst | |
| 0915 - 0930 | Opening Remarks | Captain Guidry | |
| 0930 - 1000 | CFT Requirements | Robert Cress | |
| 1000 - 1030 | Source Selection Overview Maxine Birst | ||
| 1030 - 1100 | Break | ||
| 1100 - 1130 | Q & A | Robert Cress | |
| 1130 - 1300 | Lunch | ||
| 1300 - 1800 | One on One Sessions | Maxine Birst |
Friday, March 23 0900 - 1700 One on One Sessions Maxine Birst
Purpose
| To ensure a common understanding of: |
| Government’s requirements |
| Proposal instructions |
| Kuwait KC-130J Program and CFT requirements |
To gather questions and / or comments regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP)
Ground Rules Provide all questions in writing (use provided forms)
This brief and official answers to written questions will be published to Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) (https://www.fbo.gov)
Terms and Conditions will have adjudicating authority over anything discussed here that may be inconsistent with the RFP
No recording devices
Background The Kuwait Ministry of Defense (KMOD) and Kuwait Air Force (KAF) are procuring three (3) KC-130J aircraft under a United States Navy (USN) Foreign Military Sales (FMS) case managed by Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Tactical Airlift Adversary and Support Aircraft Program Office (PEO-A) Program Management Air (PMA) 207
Kuwait KC-130J aircraft are scheduled to be delivered 1st quarter of 2014
*All dates are based on calendar year
Requirements
Provide Organizational “O” and authorized Intermediate “I” level aircraft maintenance, management, logistics support, and material management services to support maintenance actions
Authorized “I” level maintenance consists of systems common with legacy C-130/L-100 models, such as tires, wheels, brakes, hose reels and battery support capabilities
Provide all maintenance support in accordance with the applicable maintenance manuals
KC-130J Description The KC-130J is a self deployable tanker aircraft equipped with airdrop and cargo handling equipment, precision navigation, and secure command and control capabilities to enable the aircraft to effectively perform aerial refueling, rapid ground refueling, and other assault support missions
The KC-130J is powered by four (4) Rolls Royce AE2100D3 turboprop engines, six (6) bladed propellers, and digital avionics
Organization
APML
Robert Cress Kuwait IPT Lead Troy Wallace Principal Deputy Program Manager Douglas Dawson
FST
Scott Simpson
DAPML
Oscar Gonzalez
DIPTL
Amanda Wilson C-130 FMS Lead Ken Moritz Tech Data LEM Bianca Baca PMA 207 Program Manager Capt. Michelle Guidry
Lead BFM Catherine Smith
PCO
Maxine Birst Contract Specialist Lindsey Metcalf Legal Advisor Tim Bunting = US Gov’t
LEGEND
= MILITARY
Posted to FedBizOpps:
03 Nov 2010 - Sources Sought
17 Jan 2012 - Maintenance CFT Industry Day
27 Jan 2012 - Kuwait CFT Site Visit
07 Feb 2012 - Draft RFP and Draft Performance Work Statement (PWS)
Request For Information
Key Findings of Responses : Competitive Market exists for this effort
Execution Strategy Maintenance CFT personnel shall arrive in Kuwait NLT 90 days prior to the first aircraft DD250
| Aircraft: |
| 1st aircraft DD250 December 2013 |
| Pre-ferry Aircrew training 30 - 45 day deployment MCAS Cherry Point, NC |
| 2nd & 3rd aircraft DD250 January 2014 |
| Ferry aircraft to Kuwait upon completion of Pre-ferry Aircrew training |
CDRL A00F: The Contractor shall submit draft schedule as part of the proposal.
PWS Updates
| On the Job Training (OJT) |
| The OJT will be scheduled and instructed by a third party Contractor. The Contractor shall support OJT, in cooperation with the third party contractor, so as not to interfere with KAF operations |
PWS will be updated to reflect that the Contractor shall support the required OJT developed from a separate contract and will assist a third party Contractor in facilitating the training to the KAF
| Web-Based Information System (WIS) |
| The WIS must be a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) system that can be transferred to the KAF upon termination of contract |
| Operational Readiness Requirements |
| The PWS and H-1 Reduced Payments Clause will be updated with a new equation and rates: Ready For Tasking (RFT) Mission Capable (MC) rate of 65% and a Full Mission Capable (FMC) rate of 56% or higher |
The PWS rates will be adjusted so that the Contractor is not responsible for the Non Mission Capable Supply (NMCS) and Partial Mission Capable Supply (PMCS) rates
| KAF 4790.2G |
| KAF 4790.2G will be provided to vendors with final RFP |
| Over and Above Maintenance |
| Section C - Descriptions and Specifications will be updated to provide clarification regarding what will be included under the Over and Above Maintenance Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN) |
| Management Personnel Experience |
| PWS will be updated to reflect the following: |
Supervisor shall have at least ten (10) years of aircraft maintenance management experience, of which five (5) years must be with C-130 aircraft, and at least (5) years of experience directly managing aircraft maintenance operations
Maintenance Controller shall have at least ten (10) years of aircraft maintenance experience, of which five (5) years must be with C-130 aircraft
The Quality Assurance Supervisor shall have at least ten (10) years of aircraft maintenance experience, with five (5) years as a quality assurance supervisor, and five (5) years with C-130 aircraft
Provide an in-country site visit to potential vendors to obtain a better understanding of the Kuwait CFT requirement while avoiding possible protests, procurement integrity violations, and improper disclosure of sensitive, non-public information
| Kuwait site visit is scheduled for 23 April 2012 |
| 0830 - 0900 Transport USN & Vendors from Crowne Plaza Hotel |
to Al Mubarak Air Base (AB)
| 0900 - 1030 Introductions & Brief by Contracts / Legal | |
| 1030 - 1500 Visit prospective hangers, maintenance, ramp, supply | spaces, and “I” Level / Tire facilities on Al Mubarak AB |
| Deadline to register for the site visit is 28 March 2012 |
To register, contact Lindsey Metcalf lindsey.metcalf@navy.mil
Kuwait Site Visit
Formal Source Selection Process Overview
Choose the Contractor who provides the best value to the Navy, all factors considered
Source Selection Objectives
We use a “Qualitative” and NOT a “Quantitative” system
| Proposal Rating (Technical) |
| Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable |
| Proposal Risk (Technical) |
| Low, Moderate, High |
| Relevancy Rating (Past Performance) |
| Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant, Not Relevant |
| Confidence (Past Performance and Experience) |
| Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
Evaluation Grading
Proposal Rating Definitions Technical
| 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. |
Proposal Risk Assessment Definitions Technical
| Rating | Description |
| Low | Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost 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 cost 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 cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. |
Past Performance Relevancy Ratings
| Rating | Definition |
| Very Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Somewhat Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Not Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
Confidence Assessment Definitions Past Performance & Experience
High
| 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. |
Best Value
Use of Non - Proposal Information
Integrated Evaluation
“Unacceptable” Proposal Rating and / or “High” Proposal Risk may result in the entire proposal being found unacceptable and eliminated from the competition
Evaluation Criteria Reminders
The following three (3) slides are provided for informational purposes only and is an example of what the criteria and proposal instructions could potentially look like
The exact factors and associated criteria language will be approved by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) and released in the final RFP
Disclaimer
RFP “M” Evaluation Factors
TECHNICAL
(Rating & Proposal Risk)
PAST
PERFORMANCE
(Performance Risk)
EXPERIENCE
(Performance Risk)
PRICE
FOR INFORMATION ONLY
| For each recent relevant contract identified, provide: |
| Contract Data |
| Past Performance and Systemic Improvement Information |
Relate Past Performance to RFP requirements and proposed approach
| Evaluation based on: |
| Proposal Information |
| Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) |
| Customer Feedback through Questionnaires |
Provide selected Past Performance information three (3) weeks before proposals are due; this facilitates the evaluation process
Past Performance Instructions
| Small Business Concern Subcontracting Strategy |
| If Offeror is a large business, provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan |
| Price |
| Evaluate Price – Is it Reasonable and Realistic |
| Consistent with Technical Approach – Does the price reflect the proposed approach and reflect a clear understanding of the solicitation requirements (Completeness) |
Written Proposals
Demonstrate the Offeror has a thorough understanding of requirements and inherent risks, is able to devote resources to meet the requirements, and has a valid and practical solution for all requirements
Support your statements with facts, analysis and substantiating data to illustrate your approach is realistic and reasonable
Provide clear and concise descriptions / justifications
Understanding the evaluation criteria will help you know where to place emphasis in your proposal
Proposal Preparation Guidance
| Typical Proposal Shortfalls |
| Not being responsive to RFP instructions |
| Information not provided as requested |
| Information provided does not support claims |
| Deviation requests |
| H - Clauses |
| Spec (except where tailoring is permitted) |
| Deficiencies – may preclude award |
| Information provided does not support claims of compliance |
| Proposal is non - compliant to the requirements |
Proposal Preparation Guidance
| Can an Evaluator quickly find what he / she needs? |
| Is it clear? |
| Is it well organized? |
Drawings and diagrams complement narrative, but don't replace it
| Substantiate, do not simply make claims |
| Making claims such as "we understand, we are committed, we are capable, our experience ensures, we comply” |
| Show how experience is applied, results and benefits, prove the level of capability, and provide the basis and substantiating data |
| Give us a reason to believe you |
Proposal Preparation Considerations
Contracting Strategy
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) PART 15
Anticipated Full and Open Competition
Firm Fixed Price (FFP) with Cost Reimbursable CLINs
Delivery Order Contract (IDIQ)
Base Year with two (2) Option Years
Anticipated Single Award
Contract Overview Proposal Submission
| Submit and sign fully - executed RFP |
| Complete Sections B (prices) through K |
| Include Small Business Plan, if applicable |
| Submit proposals in accordance with Section L and Section L Attachments (1) through (3) of the RFP |
| Estimated release of final RFP July 2012 |
| Estimated turn-around of 60 days |
| Estimated award March 2013 |
Contract Overview Contract CLIN Structure
| Base Site Phase-In |
| Contractor Field Team |
| Over and Above Maintenance |
| Over and Above Maintenance Parts and Material |
| Travel and Per Diem |
| Base Relocation |
| Phase-out Transition |
Looking for the best value package
Objective is to make the process mutually beneficial
Summary
Submit all questions in writing to the registration table prior to the break
This brief will be posted to FedBizOpps (https://www.fbo.gov)
| Any additional questions may be submitted through 30 Mar 2012 via email to: |
| Contract Specialist, Lindsey Metcalf lindsey.metcalf@navy.mil |
| The USN intends to post the names of all the companies attending Industry Day for networking / subcontracting opportunities |
| If companies don't wish to have their names released or have any additional questions please contact Lindsey Metcalf |
Answers to all general questions will be posted to FedBizOpps
Closing
Submit Written Questions
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .