3. V-22 Pre Sol Conf FLCY PCO Pres.pdf
PDF 2 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N6264920R0032
About this file
This document provides information for a pre-solicitation conference regarding a solicitation for maintenance and repair services for V-22 aircraft. Interested parties are asked to register for the conference no later than February 11, 2020 by providing names of up to five attendees to the contracting officer. The conference will be held on March 3, 2020 at Naval Air Facility Atsugi and will allow parties to provide feedback on draft solicitation documents and ask questions. Attendees must have proper documentation for base access and non-Japanese nationals will need a valid passport. Vendors are responsible for their own lodging and food during the event. The solicitation will be for an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity multiple award contract for scheduled and unscheduled depot-level maintenance and repair services for V-22 aircraft for a period of up to 9.5 years. The incumbent contractor is Subaru Corporation. Pricing will be firm-fixed-price. Task orders will be competed based on lowest evaluated price considering past performance evaluation ratings for quality and schedule.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 68 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
READY. RESOURCEFUL. RESPONSIVE.
Procuring Contracting Officer
Presented to:
Industry
Presented by:
Vanessa Schwaner
PCO
3/3/2020
Note: In the case of a conflict between these slides and the solicitation, the solicitation will take precedence.
NAVSUP is a Fleet-Focused Organization with Global Reach
Yokosuka
Jacksonville
Norfolk/VA. Beach
Puget Sound
San Diego
Mechanicsburg
USPACOM
NAVSUP
Weapon Systems Support
(WSS)
NAVSUP
Fleet Logistics Centers
(FLC)
NAVSUP
Business Systems Center
(BSC)
Navy Exchange Service Command
(NEXCOM)
Naval Supply Systems Command
Pearl Harbor
USSOUTHCOM
USPACOM
USEUCOM
USAFRICOM
Philadelphia
Sigonella
Bahrain
USCENTCOM
USNORTHCOM
NAVSUP Enterprise
• Proposal Volumes
• 1 – Executive Summary
• 2 – Past Performance
• 3 – Combined Technical/Technical Risk
• 4 – Price
• Page Limitations
Section L Overview
Volume Section Title Page Limitations
(1) 1.0 Executive Summary
1.1 Offer Letter 2 page limit
1.2 Completed Section K No page limit
1.3 Business Systems Status No page limit
1.4 Company Financial Profile No page limit
(2) 2.0 Past Performance Proposal 15 page limit per contract reference
(3) 3.0 Combined Technical/Technical Risk Proposal
3.1 Technical Performance at Contractor Facility 55 page limit
3.2 Program Management at Contractor Facility 45 page limit
(4) 4.0 Price Proposal No page limit
Source Selection Approach (Best Value):
Tradeoff Process NOT Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)
Evaluation Criteria:
Past Performance > Technical Risk > Price
Potential ordering period:
Up to 9.5 Years (5 base years, plus 4 one-year option periods, plus 6 month extension)
Anticipated Solicitation Release:
Mid-to late Spring with 60 day response window
Acquisition Strategy
Incumbent Contractor is Subaru Corporation
Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ)
Scheduled Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Services
Unscheduled Maintenance and Repair Services -Over & Above -In-Service Repair (ISR) -Customer Service Request (CSR) -Aircraft Modifications
Multiple Award Contract (IDIQ)
At least two awardees
PMI Task orders competed by price and performance thereafter.
Task Orders for unscheduled maintenance awarded based on lowest evaluated price.
Multiple Award Contract (IDIQ)
Stage 1 The Government will first evaluate the Past Performance of all Offerors. Only Offerors with Past Performance assessed as either “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” (including those offerors who are rated as having “Neutral Confidence) will be evaluated for Combined Technical/Technical Risk.
Stage 2 The Government will then evaluate the remaining Offerors’ written technical proposals for the offeror’s technical understanding of the requirements and assess Combined Technical/Technical Risk. Only Offerors with assigned Combined Technical/Technical Risk Rating of either “Acceptable,” “Good” or “Outstanding” will be considered for a MAC award.
Stage 3 Offerors whose proposals are still being considered for award will then be evaluated for price.
Evaluation Criteria – 3 Stages
Anticipated Workload
Fiscal Year Scheduled Inductions
Fiscal Year Scheduled Inductions
2021 4 2026 5 2022 4 2027 5 2023 5 2028 6 2024 6 2029 5 2025 5 2030 6
The Government is under no obligation to evaluate Offeror’s Past Performance that is not backed by a fully completed and properly submitted Past Performance Questionnaire.
Past Performance Questionnaires must be completed in their entirety and are submitted directly from the Offeror's customer to the FLCY PCO.
The Government may obtain and evaluate additional Past Performance Data, including contracts not identified in the Offeror’s proposal.
Past Performance
Unless otherwise specified in this PWS, the Contractor shall provide all common tools and equipment (including personal protective equipment (PPE) and confined space detection equipment) necessary for performing these services.
Government furnished equipment (GFE) will be provided for Contractor use and, with the occasional exception of Contractor provided equipment and material, the Government will supply the material for this work.
Contractor Support Equipment
The Government will provide full supply support.
The Government may request the Contractor to augment their supply chain in special cases.
Procedures for processing 7R and 3B(D) repairable items will be developed after contract award and according to the Contractor’s location.
Supply Support
Adequate Price Competition (FAR 15.403-1(c)).
Price Analysis based on Comparison of Offers (FAR 15.401-1(b)(2)(i)).
Only One Offer Received (DFARS 215.371)
Certified Cost or Pricing Data (DFARS 215.371-3(b)(2))
DCMA Field Pricing Assistance (DFARS PGI 215.404-2(a))
DCAA Audit Assistance (DFARS PGI 215.404-2(c))
Price Evaluation
Price analysis will be conducted on the total evaluated price, including all options. For evaluation purposes, the price for the Option to Extend Services Clause 52.217-8 will be calculated as 50% of the offeror’s proposed price for the last option year (Option Year 4).
Each Offeror’s total price shall be evaluated to ensure that it is fair and reasonable. The Government intends to make a determination of fair and reasonable price on the basis of adequate price competition. However, in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, the Government may use any of the analytical techniques in that section either singly or in combination with each other to determine that the final price is fair and reasonable. Award will not be made to an Offeror whose price is determined to be other than fair and reasonable.
Although price is the not the most important evaluation factor, it has the potential to become more significant during the evaluation process. The degree of importance of price will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the other factors on which selection is to be based. The importance of price will also increase when a proposal's price is so significantly high as to diminish the value to the Government that might be gained under the other aspects of the offer.
Price Evaluation
The MAC task order competition strategy applies to scheduled maintenance PMI inductions and all unscheduled maintenance activities (e.g. Technical Directives, In Service Repairs, Customer Service Requests, etc.). Task orders will be competed amongst all MAC holders following the fair opportunity guidance at FAR 16.505(b)(1).
Any exceptions to fair opportunity will be in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2).
Task orders will be awarded to Mac holder with the lowest evaluated price.
Evaluated prices will be determined using the formula:
(Proposed Price) X (Quality Weighting Factor) X (Schedule Weighting Factor) = Evaluated Price
Task Order Competition
Table 1 – Past Performance Quality Sub-factor Weighting Scheme Quality Sub-factor Measure Quality Weighting Factor If there is no MAC PMI delivery, quality weighting will be neutral.
N/A 1.0
If there is no Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Quality rating for either of the 2 most recent 12-month periods, quality weighting will be neutral.
N/A 1.0
Number of accepted critical, major, and minor deficiencies documented in Aircraft Acceptance Inspection Deficiency Report (AIDR) for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
0 0.9
Number of accepted minor deficiencies documented in AIDR for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
1 – 10 1.3
Number of accepted minor deficiencies documented in AIDR for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
Greater than 10 1.5
Number of accepted critical or major deficiencies documented in AIDR for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
Greater than 0 1.7
MAC CPARS Quality rating for either of the 2 most recent 12-month periods.
Marginal or Unsatisfactory 2.0
The Past Performance Weighting Factor is comprised of two (2) sub-factors, Quality and Schedule. The weighting scheme for each sub-factor is as follows. If a MAC holder meets two or more quality sub-factor measures, the highest quality weighting factor met will be used in the formula. If a MAC holder meets two or more schedule sub-factor measures, the highest schedule weighting factor met will be used in the formula.
Table 2 – Past Performance Schedule Sub-factor Weighting Scheme Schedule Sub-factor Measure Schedule Weighting Factor If there is no MAC PMI delivery, schedule weighting will be neutral.
N/A 1.0
If there is no Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Schedule rating for either of the 2 most recent 12-month periods, schedule weighting will be neutral.
N/A 1.0
Total contract Turn Around Time (TAT) less Government delays as determined by the DCMA ACO meets objective TAT for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
365 days and less 0.75
Total contract TAT less Government delays as determined by the DCMA ACO is 0-24% below threshold TAT for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
481-364 days 0.9
Total contract TAT less Government delays as determined by the DCMA ACO meets threshold TAT for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
482 days 1.0
Total contract TAT less Government delays as determined by the DCMA ACO is 0-20% over threshold TAT for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
483-578 days 1.2
Total contract TAT less Government delays as determined by the DCMA ACO is greater than 20% over threshold TAT for most recent MAC PMI delivery.
579 days and over 1.5
MAC CPARS Schedule rating for either of the 2 most recent 12-month periods.
Marginal or Unsatisfactory 2.0
If a MAC holder meets two or more measures, the highest schedule weighting factor met will be used in the formula.
The basis for Award of each MAC Task Order will be Lowest Evaluated Price.
The Government reserves the right to award task orders based factors that will yield the required result. These factors will be determined on a case-by-case basis and documented in the request for quote for the task order.
Vanessa Schwaner (PCO) Email: Vanessa.Schwaner@fe.navy.mil Phone: 046-816-6292
William Koeditz (Division Director) Email: William.Koeditz@fe.navy.mil Phone: 046-816-8412
Seiji Yoshino Email: Seiji.Yoshino.ja@fe.navy.mil Phone: 046-816-7861
FLCY Points of Contact
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .