9_JAN_2017_-_Letter_from_the_KO.pdf

9 JAN 2017

Contracting Officer’s Overview of Request for Proposal W9124G‐17‐R‐0002 for Ft Rucker Rotary

Maintenance

Industry Prospective Offerors, Happy New Year; we look toward a very enlightened and entertaining 2017.

We continued getting feedback regarding this solicitation. Thank you for your open and candid communication. I regret in our haste, we made several mistakes that you caught regarding the periods of performance and incentives. Clearly you are paying close attention.

Most of the questions we received to date reflect requests for more details in the Technical Data

Repository (TDR). The others focus on the various periods of performance regarding when incentives apply and the flight training hour projections. Both of those major issues are addressed in the

Amendment 0001. I feel issuing this amendment is a personal failure for me. I understand the confusion that my lack of attention to detail causes. I trust you will bear with me as I get things right.

In short, we have corrected the Section L flight hours for reflecting a 9.5 month flight profile in the first year of operation. This recognizes the inherit conflict between offering a phase‐in period and requiring full performance simultaneously. Second, we appropriately adjusted the incentive structure by removing the positive and negative incentives from the first quarter during the phase‐in period. We have also added a significant amount of data in the TDR, through Huddle and through the AMRDC SAFE secure upload system(s).

One specific question came back that disputes my position regarding data items regarding man‐hour history. While I realize that typically this information is provided as a baseline, we feel strongly that providing the specifics will send the wrong signal. In fact, the last solicitation limited the number of hours in the Aviation Maintenance Support Shops potentially stifling innovation. We changed our approach. This solicitation requests a bottoms‐up analysis of alternatives that demonstrates a thoughtful optimal approach. By providing the listing of facilities, details of equipment including location, flight hours, and other data for your use we feel that we provide the ingredients needed for meeting our solicitation. As I mentioned before, we are relying on industry providing innovative effective solutions to delivery student aircraft so they can train. We trust that our instruction and criteria and various TDR uploads lead you towards analyzing our problem and balancing alternatives to arrive at an optimal solution. I reiterate, pay particular attention to the Section L and M as you develop your proposal; if you do, I feel you will come to the same conclusion that providing historical data while typical provides little to no value added.

As a reminder, the TDR will only be available to potential prime contractors. If your company is planning to propose as a prime contractor and does not have access to the technical data repository, please contact Jennifer Hastedt, my junior Contracting Officer, at Jennifer.l.hastedt2.civ@mail.mil or Dean

Angell at burrel.d.angell.civ@mail.mil immediately with one company point of contact to receive a password to the technical data repository in Huddle and to access AMRDEC SAFE.

The initial cutoff for questions that facilitates our award schedule is fast approaching. Regardless my intent is getting it right. Considering the Government’s final requirements are always in writing it is essential that we are clear and consistent so that you follow the formal written solicitation.

I thank you for your perseverance and look forward to working with you throughout the next phases.

Dean Carsello

Ft Rucker Rotary Maintenance Competition Lead Contracting Officer