2021.05.18 PMA-226CAS_PMRF.HelicopterIndustryDayV5.pdf

Contracted Air Services (CAS)

Industry Day 18 May 2021

Presented to: Industry Partners

Presented by: PMA-226 CAS

DISTRIBUTION A. Approved for public release: distribution unlimited.

Hawaiian Operating Area Helicopter Services - N00421-21-R-0077

Schedule

0830-1200 – All Parties

• Industry Day Brief

1300-Completion

• One-on-ones as scheduled

Agenda

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

• DRAFT Sections L&M

• Summary & Path Forward

Welcome / Ground Rules

• All attendees must sign in

• No electronic recording of presentation or discussion

• Please silence your cell phones

• Conference Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

• This Industry Day conference constitutes an informal exchange of information

Provides insight into Government plans

The information shared today represents the Government’s current intentions with regard to the subject acquisition; however, the Government’s intentions may change based on today’s discussions and any follow-up comments / questions

The remarks made by Government officials during this exchange should in no way be construed as a guarantee of the Government’s final course of action

• The formal solicitation, when issued, is the ONLY document that should be relied upon in determining the Government’s requirement

• Attendance list and briefings approved for release to the public will be posted to solicitation N00421-21-R0077 on https://sam.gov

PMA-226 Specialized & Proven Aircraft Program

Manages specialized and proven platforms and systems to include 16 aircraft types in 9 countries (F-5, F-16, T-38, UH-72, OH-58, U-6A, X-26A, C-26, O-2A, UV-18, NU-1B, T-2, H-2, H-3, CN235 and A-4).

Manages Contracted Air Services (CAS) providing a broad array of capabilities through 12 contracts totaling 12.5K+ flight hours per year to supplement organic fleet.

• Contracted Air Services Fleet Training and Large Scale Exercise Support

• Opposing Force (OPFOR) (Fighter Jets, EW)

• Target and Banner Tow

• Air to Air Refueling (AAR)

• Close Air Support for Training

Program Test and Evaluation Support

• OPFOR, AAR, Range Support and Clearance for

ACAT program test execution

• Adversary Capability & Sustainment One F-16 and three F-5 squadron/s

• CLS contracts for NAWDC and F-5 sites

• F-16 Service Life Extension

• F-5 Safety & Sustainability Program

• USNTPS and NPS aircraft sustainment Out of Production Sustainment Support

• Safety, Capability and Obsolescence upgrades

• Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Out of Naval Inventory Aircraft Sustainment Support

• 22 FMS cases for 8 countries

Program Manager:

Captain Ramiro Flores Principal Deputy Program Manager:

Mr. Andy Wilkinson

• CAS provides critical aviation capability and capacity for Fleet

Training & Exercises as well as Acquisition Program T&E Support

• OPFOR (Air to Air, Air to Surface, EW)

• Aerial Refueling (Tanker)

• Target and Banner Tow

• Close Air Support for JTAC training

• Range Support and Clearance

• Essential to successful COMPTUEX, RIMPAC, Top Gun, SFARP…

• Mitigates readiness gaps and capability divestment

• Demand for services increasing by almost 50% through the FYDP

Contracted Air Services (CAS)

CAS Affordably Fills Critical and Mandatory Training Requirements

Preparing the Fleet to Fight Tonight and Tomorrow

DoN CAS

Acquisition

• PMA-226 works with Customers to determine Requirements: capability, capacity, location and scheduling

• Awards IDIQ type contracts through Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Procurement Group and other agencies to deliver these services

• Manages execution of contracts to optimize performance and meet Fleet and Program T&E needs

Airworthiness

• PMA-226 is responsible for the Airworthiness of CAS Public Aircraft Operations

• Working with NAVAIR Airworthiness and Cybersafe Office (ACO) for initial airworthiness, and

• Working with NAVAIR Aircraft Controlling Custodian Office (ACC) providing Government Flight

Representative (GFR) and Aviation Maintenance Management Teams (AMMT) for continuing airworthiness oversight.

23 Mar 2011, FAA published Notice of Policy Regarding Civil Aircraft Operators providing contract support to Government Entities - Public Aircraft Operations (PAO)

“government entities are cautioned that public aircraft operations performed by civil operators create a significant transfer of liability to the contracting government entity, and that FAA oversight ceases.” [76 FR 16349]

Subsequent Advisory Circulars (ACs) from the FAA have softened that verbiage… “government entities must be aware that PAO performed by civil operators create a significant transfer of responsibility to the contracting government entity, and that most FAA oversight ceases.” [AC 00.1.1A, and B]

To understand and mitigate liability and risk: DoD then Issued DoDD 5030.61 (May 2013)

“Military Department airworthiness authorities will assess and issue airworthiness approvals for manned and unmanned aircraft and air systems owned, leased, operated, used, designed, or modified by their respective Departments.” [DoDD 5030.61 CH3 dtd Aug 18]

Purpose of Industry Day

• Ensure common understanding between Government and industry of the content of the DRAFT Sections A, B, C, H, L, M, and Performance Work Statement (PWS)

• All information released to date and during this conference is to be considered DRAFT and for informational purposes only

• Internal source selection plans and procedures will not be discussed

Purpose of One-on-One Communications

• One-on-Ones provide an opportunity for Industry to present meaningful information to the Government regarding its potential solution to the requirements of the DRAFT Performance Work Statement (PWS) and evaluation criteria

• The Government is not interested in a “sales pitch”;

rather, Industry will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the Government's intentions

Questions and Answers

• The Government may answer questions during the conference.

However, all questions may not be answered today due to time constraints

• Initial questions relating to the DRAFT documents should have been submitted in accordance with https://sam.gov release instructions

• Additional questions must be submitted in writing to the Government via e-mail to lauren.wright@navy.mil, david.silverstone@navy.mil, rhonda.link@navy.mil and karl.ramdass@navy.mil by 12:00 PM EDT on 21 May 2021

• Answers to relevant questions received will be posted at https://sam.gov. (Exceptions: Any questions and answers which would divulge a potential Offeror’s competitive strategy/solutions will not be posted.)

• If necessary, related changes to documentation will be incorporated into the final RFP release

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

DRAFT Performance Work Statement (PWS)

Paragraph 1.0 Scope

• The contractor shall be required to provide CAS inclusive of helicopters capable of recovering and launching targets such as, but not limited to the following:

a. Mark (MK) 30 Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) target (recovery and launch)

b. Booster Target Drone Ground and Aerial Launched Mobile (BQM)-34 (recovery)

c. BQM-74 (recovery)

d. BQM-177 (recovery)

e. MK 40 (recovery)

f. MK 46 (recovery)

g. MK 48 (recovery)

h. MK 50 (recovery)

i. MK 54 (recovery)

DRAFT PWS Requirements (cont.)

Additional PAO Operations include:

a. Transport of C-4 and similar explosives and associated equipment in the Hawaiian OPAREA.

b. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) missions will be supported, if required.

c. Inserting and picking up of equipment and Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) personnel onto and from disabled USN vessels [one (1) person or no more than 300 pounds (lbs) authorized at a time].

Lifting of weapons systems such as, but not limited to, torpedoes may require a PAO declaration. Also, any time the contractor conducts a governmental function, a PAO declaration is required. The PAO declaration must be shared with the local FAA Flight Standards District Office having geographic oversight of the contracted operations.

Meet Helicopter Mission Profiles IAW Medium Lift Performance

- Medium Paragraph 3.1.1, Table 3.1.1

- Target Recoveries 3.1.1.2

- Visual Surveillance/Range Clearance/Sea State 3.1.1.3

- Transport Missions 3.1.1.4

- Extended Range Video System (ERVS) 3.1.1.5

Meet Helicopter Mission Profiles IAW Heavy Lift Performance

- Heavy Paragraph 3.1.2, Table 3.1.2

- Target Recoveries 3.1.2.2

- Visual Surveillance/Range Clearance/Sea State 3.1.2.3

- Transport Missions 3.1.2.4

- Extended Range Video System (ERVS) 3.1.2.5

- Firefighting 3.1.2.6

- Launch Targets 3.1.2.7

Paragraph 3.0 Requirements (cont..)

3.1.3 Stand Up

The contractor shall complete a stand up period from initial Task Order (TO) award for Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0001 Stand Up. Successful stand up is defined as the completion of the following elements:

• One (1) aircraft with a NAVAIR Interim Flight Clearance (IFC) and all GFP installed able to meet the performance requirements stated in PWS section 3.1.1 Medium Lift Capability Helicopter.

• One (1) aircraft with a NAVAIR IFC and all GFP installed able to meet the performance requirements stated in PWS section 3.1.2 Heavy Lift Capability Helicopter.

• Obtain the following licenses, approvals and certifications:

United States (US) Department of Transportation Special Permit (DOT-SP) authorized to transport explosives

USAF CARB certification via the Air Mobility Command (AMC)

Helicopter Operations from Ships other Than Aircraft Carriers (HOSTAC) approval for deck landings

Approved Civil Air Landing Permits (CALP)

Stand up, which consists of completion of the above elements, shall be completed six (6) months from the effective date of the initial TO containing CLIN 0001. Prior to conducting any PAO, the contractor shall meet the PWS threshold requirements and have NAVAIR IFCs issued IAW PWS section 3.3. No TOs including CLINs 0002 through 0006 will be ordered until after CLIN 0001 Stand Up is completed.

Paragraph 3.0 Requirements (cont..)

3.1.4 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

The contractor shall provide an IMS within 5 calendar days from the issuance of the first TO with updates delivered biweekly thereafter through receipt of the USN IFC(s) (Exhibit A, CDRL A008). If applicable, the IMS shall include the aircraft acquisition and import plan for each aircraft proposed, aircraft regeneration plan for aircraft which are not currently airworthy detailing efforts required to bring the aircraft into flyable status and aircraft modification plan for each aircraft that requires modifications to meet the requirements of PWS paragraph 3.1.

The contractor shall submit a schedule within Microsoft (MS) Project and populate this schedule IAW the instructions below.

3.1.4.1 Major Milestones

The schedule shall include all required tasks necessary to complete the stand-up effort from contract award through receipt of the USN IFC(s). Each aircraft proposed shall be included. The schedule shall, at a minimum, be inclusive of the following plans and major milestones (if applicable):

A. Aircraft Acquisition and Flight Plan

i. Aircraft Acquisition

ii. Obtain FAA Airworthiness Certificate

iii. Aircraft flight to PMRF Barking Sands

B. Aircraft Modification Plan

i. Dates of Required Modification Kits Available and Complete

ii. Delivery of Engineering Data to Support USN IFC

iii. Modification Start

iv. Significant Modification Events

v. Flight Testing or Functional Checks of Modified Aircraft

vi. Aircraft Modification Complete

Paragraph 3.0 Requirements (cont..)

3.3.2.2 Interim Flight Clearance (IFC)

All aircraft under this contract require a USN issued IFC (NAVAIRINST 13034.1F). All aircraft must be able to perform IAW PWS 3.1 and a complete substantiation data set shall be submitted IAW Exhibit A, CDRL A001. If additional substantiation data is required during the Government’s review, the contractor shall promptly deliver the data.

In the absence of FAA, OEM, or military approved data, it is good standard practice to follow the recommended repair and alteration processes and procedures described in:

AC 43-210A, Standardized Procedures for Obtaining Approval of Data Used in the Performance of Major Repairs and Major Alterations, the Major Repair and Alteration Data Approval Job Aid, or MIL-HDBK-516C, the DoD Handbook Airworthiness Certification Criteria. When the contractor submits IFC substantiation data for aircraft that have never received a USN IFC, the contractor shall identify any substantiation data which is similar to previously approved substantiation data provided on the same model and type of aircraft that have received USN IFCs. The USN will utilize read-across processes to substantiate previously approved data to the maximum extent possible to reduce IFC processing time when approving similar data used on similar aircraft.

Paragraph 3.0 Requirements (cont..)

3.3.3.1 Ground Operating Procedures (GOPs)

and Flight Operating Procedures (FOPs) (CDRL A001) The contractor shall establish standard GOPs and FOPs IAW DCMA 8210.1C, Change 1 and to the extent possible, ensure compliance with all applicable 14 CFR, ICAO Standards, and the civil aviation regulations of the country(s) of intended operation.

Procedures must be up to date, reflect the current scope of operations, and be clearly understood by company employees. GOPs and FOPs, and any revisions, shall be approved by the GFR prior to use. FOPs/GOPs will be updated and IAW DCMA 8210.1C, Change 1 and submitted to the GFR for review and approval 15 days after contract award.

Paragraph 3.0 Requirements (cont..)

3.9 Aircraft Basing

A. The Government has designated a permanent operating site for the medium and heavy lift primary aircraft at PMRF Barking Sands, Kauai, HI. The Government will provide hanger facilities at no cost to the contractor.

B. The contractor shall comply with CFR, Title 32, Part 766, Use of Department of the Navy Aviation Facilities by Civil Aircraft, AFI 10-1001 Civil Aircraft Landing Permits and AFI 10-1002 Joint Use Agreements for Military and Civilian Flying Facilities.

C. Items provided as GFP at the permanent operating site are listed in an Attachment in Section J upon contract award.

D. At the permanent operating site the contractor shall provide all equipment required to support operation and maintenance of the aircraft. In addition, the contractor shall maintain an Internet electronic mail account to receive and coordinate mission information, tasking, and general administrative matters.

Paragraph 4.0 GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT A GFR will perform, an initial and, at a minimum, subsequent semiannual inspections of the contractor’s operations and procedures. The purpose of these inspections is to evaluate the contractor’s compliance with contract requirements related to aircraft operations, including compliance with the applicable requirements of 14 CFR and the DCMA INST 8210.1C, Change 1. This will be applicable to the prime contractor and any subcontractors operating in support of this

PWS.

• A Safe For Flight (SFF) determination will be provided by the GFR prior to the contractor conducting operations, when any of the following circumstances apply:

• original issuance of a USN IFC

• substantial revision of a USN IFC

• addition of a new aircraft type

• new type of operation

• The contractor shall be responsible for identifying and correcting deficiencies in subcontractor operations. The prime contractor shall conduct an annual compliance inspection of its own operation, and any subcontractors’ operations, to ensure compliance with the contract, DCMA 8210.1C Change 1. The prime contractor shall submit a copy of the report, noted discrepancies, and any corrective actions to the GFR within 14-days after completing such compliance inspection.

4.1 FAA Inspection and Reviews

4.2 Aviation Maintenance Management Team (AMMT)

4.3 Investigations

4.4 Hazard Reports and Engineering Investigations (EI)

• Paragraph 5.0 Government Furnished Property

(GFP)

GFP is provided under this contract, which consists of the items identified in the GFP Listing in Section J. The contractor shall manage and report GFP (Section J). (Exhibit A, CDRL A006).

5.1 Accountability.

5.2 GFP Installation and Removal Requirements

5.3 Government Provisions

∙Paragraph 6.0 OTHER PERFORMANCE

REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Technical Assistance Agreements (TAAs)

6.2 International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)

Paragraph 7.0 Security

• Contractor shall adhere to the Contract’s DD-254, Contract Security Classification Specification

Note: For this requirement, aircrew must have a SECRET clearance

• Contractor shall implement and maintain security procedures and controls to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information and CUI and to control distribution of CUI in accordance with DOD 5220.22-M (NISPOM), and SECNAV M-5510.36.

• OPSEC plan to safeguard, identify and protect Critical Information

Paragraph 8.0 Data Deliverables

CDRL PWS Title Required Data

A001

3.2, 3.3.1, 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2, 3.3.1.3, 3.3.2.2, 3.3.2.3, 3.3.3, 3.3.3.1, 3.5.3.3, 3.5.6, 8.0

Airworthiness and Related Substantiation Data

Data as outlined in DI-SAFT-81905A to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A002 3.3.3, 8.0 Management Plan / Standard Operating Procedures

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-80004A to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A003 7.11, 8.0 NAVAIR Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81999A to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A004 3.5.2, 8.0 Fuel Chit Report / Fuel Tracking Report and Receipts

Data as outlined in DI-MISC-81461 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A005 3.5.4, 4.1, 8.0

Contractor’s Progress, Status and

Management Report / Monthly Status

Report

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81904 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A006 5.0, 5.1, 8.0

Government Furnished Property Inventory and Forecasting Report/GFP Inventory Report

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81947B to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

Paragraph 8.0 Data Deliverables

CDRL PWS Title Required Data

A007 3.4, 8.0

Airworthiness and Related Substantiation Data / Contractor's PAO Flight Schedule

Data as outlined in DI-SAFT-81905Ato include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A008 3.1.4, 8.0 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Data as outlined in DI-MISC-81183A to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A009 3.5.11, 8.0

Contractor’s Progress, Status and Management Report / Cost Usage Report

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81904 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A010 3.7, 8.0 Contractor Roster Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81596 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A011 3.5.1.1, 8.0 Briefing Material - Post-Award

Conference (PAC) Brief

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81605 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A012 3.5.1.2, 8.0 Briefing Material - Program Management Reviews (PMR) Brief

Data as outlined in DI-MGMT-81605 to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

A013 3.5.2.1, 8.0

Course Conduct Information Package / Fuel / AIR Card SOU and Training Certificates

Data as outlined in DI-PSSS-81522D to include all required content and/or as tailored in the DD1423 Block 16.

DRAFT PWS Appendix

• Appendix A: Definitions and Glossary

• Appendix B: Potential Bases of Operation and

Deployments

• Appendix C: Acronym List

• Appendix D: LSRTU Operating Characteristics

• Appendix E: ¼” Wavelength Molded Whip Antenna

10584-1

• Appendix F: PMRF Airfield

• Appendix G: BSURE BARSTUR Map

• Appendix H: PMRF OPAREA

• Appendix I: Building 384 First Floor Plan

DRAFT PWS Appendix

• Appendix J: ERVS

• Appendix K: C G Band Transponders

• Appendix L: Hook Pole Retrieval P-5210-F-0100-

• Appendix M: 240 Gallon Bambi Bucket

• Appendix N: Snare Retrieval 1551913 10001 FN 1 J_1

• Appendix O: Recovery System MK2 Mod 0 Cage 3180817

• Appendix P: Launcher-, Helicopter, MK 30 MOD 1

5205587_53711_FN_R

• Appendix Q: Mk 46 and Mk 54 Recovery Net

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

Contract Overview

• Single Award ID/IQ Services Contract

• Majority Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs

• Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) PART 15 Source Selection

• 4-year, 364-day Ordering Period (FY21 – FY26) In Compliance with 10 USC 2401

• No Ordering Period Extension Options

• Unrestricted Full and Open Competition

DRAFT RFP - Section B

If Stand-up CLIN 0001 are utilized, the number of months associated with the related fixed monthly CLIN will decrease commensurably.

CLINs Title Type Description Deliverable

0001 Stand Up FFP This CLIN is for the purpose of certifying the contractor’s aircraft to perform Contracted Air Services (CAS) operations In Accordance With (IAW) the PWS as well as to establish approved Ground and Flight Operations Procedures (GOPs/FOPs), as specified in PWS paragraph 3.3. See Section C Description

(Service) 1 Lot

0002 Aircraft Readiness FFP Price per month for operating costs for Medium and Heavy Lift Services. Shall include fixed costs that the contractor will incur regardless of the number of missions performed. See Section C Description

(Service) 60 months of labor

DRAFT RFP - Section B (cont.)

CLINs Title Type Description Deliverable

0003 Medium Lift Services FFP The contractor shall include all costs associated with flying aircraft capable of meeting the requirements of the PWS section 3.1.1, including costs that are specific to the mission associated with this CLIN such as the costs per flight minute for Medium Lift Services. Services shall be provided on a per Task Order basis. See Section C Description

(Service) 51,000 Minutes

0004 Heavy Lift Services FFP The contractor shall include all costs associated with flying aircraft capable of meeting the requirements of the PWS section 3.1.2, including costs that are specific to the mission associated with this CLIN such as the costs per flight minute for Heavy Lift Services.

Services shall be provided on a per Task Order basis. See Section C Description

(Service) 73,500 Minutes

CLIN Title Type Description Deliverable

0005 Travel, Material, and Shipping

COST For use to capture travel conducted for official purposes under the contract in support of CLINs 0003 and 0004. Material included under this line item shall not be included in the material priced under the Aircraft Readiness CLIN 0002 or in the flight minute unit price CLINs 0003 and 0004. See Section C Description

(Service) 1 Lot

0006 Aircraft Modifications COST For use when performing Advanced Technology Modification services, the contractor shall be required to provide advanced technology capabilities for training purposes. The cost for these services shall be reimbursed at COST, up to and not exceeding the NTE amount. The price for these services shall be negotiated.

See Section C Description

(Services) 1 Lot

CLIN Title Type Description Deliverable

0007 Administrative/ Technical Data

NSP The contractor shall provide technical and administrative data IAW Section C (applicable to all CLINs) and Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Exhibit A. See also PWS paragraph 8.0. This CLIN is not separately priced. See Section C Description

(Data) 1 Lot NSP

Draft RFP - Section H

H.1 Unallowable costs for cost type Other Direct Cost (“ODC”) CLIN

The Contractor did not propose burdens or indirect costs on the ODC CLIN checked below. Therefore, any burdens or indirect costs, including but not limited to General & Administrative (“G&A”), Fringe, or Overhead, will be unallowable costs under this contract and the task or delivery orders issued under this contract for the checked CLIN:

____CLIN 0005 Travel, Material, and Shipping

Only allowable direct costs may be charged to the CLIN checked above. A particular burden or indirect cost may only be considered allowable for an ODC

CLIN if that ODC CLIN is not checked above and the contractor proposed the burden or indirect cost in their proposal; if the ODC CLIN is checked above or the contractor did not include that particular burden in its proposal, the burden or indirect cost is unallowable.

No fee shall be applied to any ODC CLIN.

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

Source Selection Objectives

• Select the Offeror who’s proposal provides the best value to the Government, all factors considered

• Obtain the best value using a comprehensive evaluation process

• Use evaluation process that provides the fair and consistent evaluation of proposals

Source Selection Organization

SSA

SSEB CHAIR

SSEB Advisors

SSEB

TECHNICAL

ASSISTANT CHAIR

PRICE

PAST

PERFORMANCE

Evaluators

Source Selection Process

Generic

Source Selection Process

Req’ts Developed Plan the Approach

• ISTRAP/AP/Strategy

• SSP

Market Research & Early Exchanges w/Industry

• SOO/SOW

• PBWS

• Draft RFPs • One-on-ones • Industry Days • Tech. Library

Receive

Proposals

Compare

Proposals

Discussions w/ Offerors

(ENs)

Complete

Discussions

Evaluate

Proposals

Competitive

Range (or SSA Selects Source)

Technical

Past Perf

Evaluate FPRs

Price

Request Final

Proposal Revision (FPRs)

Debrief

Contract

SSEB SSA

SSEB SSA

SSEB SSASSA SSEB

SSEB/L&M

Formal

RFP

Select Source

Award on Initial Proposals?

Sections L & M

• Understanding sections L&M is the key to developing a good proposal.

• Section L – Instructions to Offerors:

– Tells Offerors what to put in the proposal

• Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award:

– Identifies what will be evaluated

– Identifies relative order of importance of factors

Proposals should use the same paragraph format as provided in Section L

Section L: General Instructions

• An “Offeror” is defined as the prime Contractor with its CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award

• A “Joint Venture” (JV) is a partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation when the prime Contractor consists of more than one legal entity.

“JV Team Members” are the entities that make up a Joint Venture

• The term “entity” is used to mean any or all of the following: prime Contractor, JV, JV team members, any subcontractor, and corporate parent, division, subsidiary, or affiliate (e.g., any Contractor with a different CAGE Code/DUNS than the Offeror)

• The following entities are defined as principal entities and only principal entities will be used in the past performance evaluations:

a) the prime Contractor;

b) JV Team Members;

c) other entities that are proposed to perform at least 20% of the proposed total price for the contract

Offerors are advised that in order to demonstrate work commitment, each principal entity must be identified in Volume 4 Price and associated with a commensurate dollar value.

Proposal Content and Volumes

• Annexes are used to provide supporting data

• Annexes do not count toward the suggested page count for each Volume

Volume Number Volume/Annex Title Suggested Pages

VOLUME 1 – EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY AND CONTRACT

ADMINISTRATION

VOLUME 2 - TECHNICAL

3 VOLUME 3 - PAST PERFORMANCE 25

4 VOLUME 4 – PRICE As Many As Needed

Annex A Contractual Documentation Support

(CDS) for Past Performance

As Many As Needed

Annex B Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Table T-2 Small Business Goals

As Many As Needed

Annex C DCAA/DCMA Reports, Audits, and

Determinations

As Many As Needed

DRAFT Order of Importance

Factors are listed in descending order of importance. Technical is significantly more important than

Past Performance. All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price. Price is not the most important evaluation factor, but its degree of importance will increase commensurably with the degree of equality among Offerors’ non-price factors.

Price

(FFP)

Technical (Technical

Compliance Rating and

Technical Risk Rating)

Past Performance (Performance Confidence Assessment

Rating)

Key: > greater than; >> Significantly More Important

Discussions

• The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions

• The Government may award based on initial proposals if . . .

– the Government receives proposals that conform to the requirements of the solicitation, and

– the proposals received provide the greatest overall benefit to the Government, all factors considered

• Offerors are advised that their initial offer should contain its best terms from a technical, past performance, and price standpoint since discussions may not be conducted

• The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions

General Proposal Preparation Guidance

• Demonstrate a thorough understanding of requirements, inherent risks, and sufficient resources to meet the requirements

• Support your statements with facts, analysis and substantiating data to illustrate that you have a valid and practical solution for all requirements

– Substantiate, don't simply make claims

– Provide information to allow an independent assessment

• Structure your proposal in accordance with Section L - Proposal Instructions

• Be consistent from Volume to Volume

• Provide clear and concise descriptions

– Drawings & diagrams complement narratives, but don't replace them

• Help the evaluator quickly find information

– Is it clear and well organized?

• Be attentive to all parts of the RFP

– Requirements, PWS

– Evaluation Criteria and Proposal Instructions

Typical Proposal Shortfalls

• Proposal Instructions are not followed

– Information not provided in the way it was requested

– Too little information

• Statements in the proposal are not well supported

– Not documenting assumptions

– Not substantiating performance and/or claims

• Proposals are not well organized

– Does not follow Proposal Instructions structure – requires the evaluator search for the information

• Past Performance POCs are not current

• DUNS/CAGE Codes references do not match

• Deficiencies - preclude award

– Information provided does not support claims of compliance

– Proposal is non-compliant to the requirements

• SF-33 not signed

Source Selection Summary

• The Source Selection process will assure that each offeror’s proposal receives a fair and consistent evaluation.

• Sections L&M are intended to help offerors provide the Government with its best value solution and instruct them in preparing a proposal that will facilitate the Government’s evaluation.

• Result in Offeror submitting a realistic proposal that demonstrates that the Offeror is likely to perform as proposed.

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

• DRAFT Sections L&M - Technical

Volume 2 DRAFT Section L: Technical

Volume 2 shall provide the Offeror’s approach to:

2.1: Stand-up

2.2: Aircraft Performance Requirements

2.3: Hoist Performance Requirements

2.4: Airworthiness Data

2.5: Aircraft Support

2.6: Aircraft Availability

2.7: Small Business Management

Price Information is not included in this Volume

Volume 2: Technical Cross Reference Matrix

The CRM is included to help the offeror develop its proposal and to ensure traceability of Section L paragraphs to the requirements

DRAFT Section M: Technical

The Government will evaluate the proposal to determine the Offeror's understanding of, approach to and ability to meet the solicitation requirements

The Government will assess the Offeror’s Technical Proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach

The evaluation will include an assessment of the Offeror's proposed

1) Capability Stand-up

2) Aircraft Performance Requirements

3) Hoist Performance Requirements

4) Airworthiness Data

5) Aircraft Support

6) Aircraft Availability

7) Small Business Management

DRAFT Section M: Technical

A Technical Rating and Technical Risk Rating will be assigned

The Technical Rating assignments reflect the Government’s assessment of the quality of the Offeror’s technical solution to meeting the Government’s requirement

• Exceeding the threshold in requirements that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government shall be considered a strength.

• Additionally, a proposal that provides the Government with a capability, service, or resource that is not specifically required, but benefits the Government, can have merit if it appreciably enhances performance and/or operations to benefit the Government.

The Technical Risk Rating assignments reflect the Government’s assessment of potential for disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need to increase Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance associated with the Offeror’s technical approach.

Technical Rating Definitions

Technical Risk Rating Definitions

• “Offerors are advised that during the evaluation process, a Technical Rating of “Unacceptable” or a Technical Risk Rating of “Unacceptable” is considered unawardable and will result in the entire proposal being found unacceptable

Technical - Risk Reducer

Risk Reducer Definition: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that reduces risk in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Affects Technical Risk Rating Provides appreciable risk reducing benefits to the Government that may mitigate weaknesses or further reduces the risk to performance

Each risk reducer may provide different degrees of benefit, thereby affecting the risk rating differently

Used to assess the risk associated with the proposed approach

Technical - Risk Reducer Examples

Reduces proposal risk by providing more than sufficient resources in order to respond to unknown conditions/situations

Reduces proposal risk by providing resources/capabilities that are in-place and ready to be used

Reduces proposal risk by providing plans that reduce/mitigates risks inherent in the proposed approach and program

Reduces proposal risk by providing performance margin

Technical - Significant Weakness

• A “Significant Weakness” A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (FAR 15.001)

Affects Technical Risk Rating Provides appreciable increased risk to the Government

Used to assess the risk associated with the proposed approach

Each significant weakness may provide different degrees of impact, thereby affecting the risk rating differently based on the likelihood of occurrence and the consequences

A combination of Significant Weaknesses could result in a Deficiency

Technical – Significant Weakness Examples

Marginal resources or capability to accomplish the effort

Approaches that rely on resources or actions not within the Offeror’s full control

Approaches that rely heavily on a single action or resource (aka single point failure)

Untested/unproven approaches

Lack of substantiation or full description of the approach

Lack of information to assess risk

Requirements can only be accomplished by impacting Government operations, capability or resources beyond that which is normal for this effort or system

Technical – Strengths

• A “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.

• Affects Technical Rating Provides performance or operational benefits to the

Government

Each strength may provide different degrees of benefit, thereby affecting the rating differently

Used to determine adequacy of approach and understanding of requirement

* Draft RFP Page 91

& 95

Technical – Strengths Examples

Proposal demonstrates performance, operational, or other capability benefit to the Government (Exceeds a requirement)

Proposal contains feature(s) that enhance operational or other program/product capability with appreciable benefits to the Government (Aspect of a proposal that has merit)

Technical - Uncertainty

• An “Uncertainty” An aspect of the proposal that affects the Government’s ability to determine if a requirement will be met. Note that an uncertainty will result in a Marginal Technical Rating.

An Uncertainty will result in a Marginal Technical Rating

Affects Technical Rating Not possible to make an assessment of what the offeror is proposing

It is unclear that the requirement will be met

Technical – Uncertainty Examples

Inconsistencies in the proposal that bring into question what is being proposed

Critical information required to enable the Government to determine if the requirement will or will not be met is missing

Technical - Deficiency

A “Deficiency” a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increase the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. (FAR 15.001)

Affects the Technical Rating (compliance) or both the Technical Rating and the Technical Risk Rating (due to a combination of significant weaknesses)

Results in an Unacceptable Rating and makes the proposal unawardable

Technical – Deficiency Examples

Proposal states it will not meet a requirement

Approach is assessed to be unable to meet a requirement

Combination of significant weaknesses that increase the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level

Failure to address part or parts of the technical factor caused by a lack of information may be assessed as a significant weakness or multiple significant weaknesses

An approach that relies on Government resources or operations not identified as available in order to comply with the requirement

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

• DRAFT Sections L&M - Past Performance

Past Performance

Experience is what you have done.

(not being evaluated for this requirement)

Performance is how well you did it!

Evaluation Concept

Look Back Look Forward

• Assess each Contract

Referenced

– Determine Recency /

Relevancy

• How did Offeror perform on current and/or past contracts?

– Review Offerors Past Record, e.g., CPARS, Questionnaires

• Assess any additional contracts found through Government research

• Roll up each contract reference assessment into an overall

Offeror Assessment

• Based on assessment of Offeror’s past performance (Look Back), how do we think they will perform on this requirement?

• Assign a Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating for this requirement

Price Information is not included in this Volume

Volume 3 DRAFT Section L:

Past Performance

• Only principal entities will be considered in the past performance evaluation. The following entities are defined as principal entities:

– The Prime Contractor;

– JV Team Members;

– other entities that are to perform at least 20% of the total proposed price for the contract.

• Offeror’s shall complete Past Performance Contract Data Sheet (PP-1) (Attachment L-4) for each Past Performance contract reference.

Volume 3 DRAFT Section L:

Past Performance Relevant Contract Data

Period and

Place of

Performance

Table PP-1 Past Performance Contract Data

1 Offeror Name

2 Entity Name (Prime or JV Team Member)

3 Contract Reference

4 Title of Contract

5 Contract Number

6 Contract Type

7 Relevant Delivery/Task Order Numbers (if applicable)

8 Subcontract Number/PO Number

9 Procuring agency

10 Description of product or service

Period of performance - Start Date MM/DD/YYYY

Period of performance - End Date MM/DD/YYYY

12 CAGE Code (if not the same as Offeror, explain)

Provide Relevant contract information for the proposed Prime (e.g. P1) or proposed JV team members (e.g. T1)

Only applies if performed as subcontractor on this reference

Volume 3 DRAFT Section L: Past Performance Relevant Contract Data

a. Scope

For each attribute below, briefly describe how the contract reference demonstrates relevance and list CDS references that document the scope of the past performance contract submitted.

Contracted Air Services involving Contractor Owned Contractor

Operated (COCO) helicopters for target recovery, visual surveillance, range clearing, transport of military/government personnel to/from ships or shore facilities, movement of hazardous material (ordinance), and firefighting support.

b. Magnitude

Contract total value of $5.0M (or greater) / Annual Task Order value of

$1.0M (or greater)

c. Complexity

For each attribute below, briefly describe how the contract reference demonstrates relevance and list CDS references that document the complexity of the past performance contract submitted.

Maintenance support and modifications of rotary wing aircraft.

External lift, transport of personnel, firefighting, search and rescue and visual surveillance utilizing rotary wing aircraft.

Obtaining Airworthiness Certificate(s) for rotary wing aircraft from the

FAA or other FAA or DoD recognized Civil and Military Airworthiness

Authorities.

Maintaining Continuing Airworthiness of rotary wing aircraft (FAA or

Military).

For each area in 13, explain how the past performance contract demonstrates relevance and list CDS references that document the relevant scope of the past performance contract submitted.

Relevant Contract Data

14 Date of last completed CPARs MM/DD/YYYY

15 Date past performance questionnaires were sent MM/DD/YYYY

16 Points of Contact who can validate performance on the contract refrence, delivery order or task order number referenced above.

17 Gov't PCO or Commercial Purchasing Agent

Name:

Phone:

Email:

18 Gov't ACO

Name:

Phone:

Email:

19 Gov't PM or Commercial PM

Name:

Phone:

Email:

20 Other POC:

Name:

Title:

Phone:

Email:

Ensure all contact info is current!!

Relevancy Documentation

• Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the referenced contracts are deemed relevant (as defined in Section M) to this solicitation’s requirements

• To demonstrate relevancy, Offerors should provide a comparative analysis to the scope, magnitude, and complexity or similarity of the referenced contract to this solicitation’s requirements

• Within the comparative analysis, Offerors should identify the relevant portions (sections, paragraphs, and page numbers) of the referenced contract’s CDS (Annex A) to clearly identify how past efforts performed are similar to this solicitation’s requirements and aligned with PP-1

Relevancy Documentation (continued)

• For Task or Delivery Orders, ensure that the CDS for the order is provided in addition to the basic contract

CDS

• If the Offeror performed as a subcontractor, the Offeror shall also provide a complete electronic copy of the CDS of the agreement between the prime and subcontractor that clearly defines the portions of the work effort that the Offeror performed as a subcontractor, facilitating the Government’s verification of the Scope, Magnitude and Complexity of the contract references.

• Please Do NOT provide self-assessed relevancy ratings. Only provide the comparative analysis as stated

Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

For any past performance problems:

• Identify systemic improvement actions taken to resolve any past problems identified in 3.4.b Past Performance Information

• Provide the records of such results and indicate where they are documented, preferably in Government record systems

• Describe the techniques, elements, and tools used to correct problems on the reference contract and, if applicable, how these techniques, elements, and tools may be used for the contract to be awarded as the result of this solicitation

• Provide quantifiable evidence or metrics that substantiate or demonstrate claims of improvement and to demonstrate that the past problem will not occur on the contract to be awarded as the result of this solicitation

• Consideration for discounting problems may be given when those problems are addressed through demonstrated systemic improvement

Past Performance Feedback

• Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) (Attachment L-3) will be the primary customer feedback data used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance

• For all contracts identified that do not have a CPARS or have CPARS older than five (5) years, the Offeror shall forward a copy of a PPQ to that contract’s PCO, ACO, and PM; or commercial contractor equivalents

Send to contacts within two weeks from release of the Final RFP

Request the POC submit a completed PPQ to the Government within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to the PCO/Contract Specialist, identified in Section L, Part A Section 4.1 (Proposal Submission)

Identify when and where the PPQs were sent on PP-1

DO NOT FOLLOW-UP on PPQs, other than to confirm receipt by the recipient, the Government will perform all follow-up actions

There are three aspects to the Past Performance Evaluation:

1. RECENCY: Past Performance will be considered recent if the contract/order has been performed within five (5) years of the solicitation release date.

2. RELEVANCY: The Government will use the following aspects to determine relevancy for this evaluation:

o Scope (Aircraft Performance Requirements per PWS paragraph 3.1):

Contracted Air Services involving Contractor Owned Contractor Operated

(COCO) helicopters for target recovery, visual surveillance, range clearing, transport of military/government personnel to/from ships or shore facilities, movement of hazardous material (ordinance), and firefighting support.

o Magnitude:

Contract total value of greater than $5.0 M, or annual task order value greater than $1.0 M.

o Complexity:

Maintenance support and modifications of rotary wing aircraft; external lift, transport of personnel, firefighting, search and rescue and visual surveillance utilizing rotary wing aircraft; obtaining Airworthiness Certificate(s) for rotary wing aircraft from the FAA or other FAA or DoD recognized Civil and Military Airworthiness Authorities; and maintaining Continuing Airworthiness of rotary wing aircraft (FAA or Military).

DRAFT Section M:

3. QUALITY: The Government will evaluate the overall quality of the Offeror’s recent relevant past performance. The Government will evaluate the Offeror, principal subcontractors, and JV team members performance and focus its evaluation on the following areas:

o meeting technical requirements, i.e., the quality of technical performance o meeting schedule requirements, e.g., on time or late delivery o managing the contracted effort o utilization of small business o regulatory compliance and o the demonstrated systemic improvement actions taken to resolve past problems.

DRAFT Section M: Past Performance

• Past performance information received will be evaluated for recency, relevancy, and quality.

Recency: Past performance will be considered recent if the contract/order has been performed within the past five (5) years of the solicitation release date

Relevancy: The Government will use the definitions in Section M for Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant and Not Relevant to determine relevancy as it relates to the evaluation of past performance

Quality: The Government will evaluate the overall quality of the Offeror’s recent relevant past performance.

• Only contracts determined to be recent/relevant will be considered in the past performance evaluation.

DRAFT Section M: Past Performance

Past Performance

• Offerors are advised that contracts assessed as not relevant will not be considered in the Past Performance assessment.

• A separate quality rating will not be assigned, rather the Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating is based on the Offeror’s overall record of past performance taking into account the recency, relevancy and quality of performance

Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings

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.

Neutral Confidence

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. The

Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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.

• Welcome, Disclaimers, Admin

• Program Overview & Requirements

• Contract Overview

• Source Selection Overview

• DRAFT Sections L&M - Price

DRAFT Section L: Price Price will evaluate the following:

• CLINs 0001 (Stand Up)

» The Offeror shall propose its unit price. The unit price multiplied by the quantity of 1 lot shall not exceed the Not-to-exceed (NTE) amount shown in Section B.

• 0002 (Aircraft Readiness), 0003 (Medium Lift), and 0004 (Heavy Lift)

» The Offeror shall propose the unit price multiplied by the quantity in Section B to develop the total price for each

CLIN.

• CLIN 0005 (Travel, Material, and Shipping)

» The Offeror shall propose in accordance with Section L Paragraph 4.3.1.

• CLIN 0006 (Aircraft Modifications)

» The Offeror shall propose the Government provided Not To Exceed (NTE) amount listed in Section B

DRAFT Section M: Price

Offerors’ Price Volume will be evaluated for reasonableness and to determine if the CLINs contain any material imbalances. Typically, adequate price competition establishes price reasonableness per FAR 15.404-1 (b)(2)(i).

Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs (0001-0004)

• The Government may use various price analysis techniques to perform the price analysis

Cost CLINs (0005 and 0006)

• The Government will confirm that the proposed price for CLIN 0005 does not exceed the Government estimated amount plus any proposed applicable burdens and CLIN 0006 equals the Government provided NTE.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP):

• The Government will use the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in the best value determination.

The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) is calculated as the sum of…