T-58 Aero-Engine repair and overhaul support and services

Table of contents

• 1. Background and Introduction
• 2. Project Requirement
• 3. Attestation of assurance
• 4. Objectives of the fairness monitor assignment and methodology
• 5. Fairness Monitor specific activities and findings
• 6. Reference Documents

1. Background and introduction

As Fairness Monitor (FM), Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. and Hill International Inc. in Joint Venture (hereafter referred to as the Fairness Monitor) hereby submits its Fairness Monitor Contractor’s Final Report pertaining to the competitive procurement process for T-58 Aero Engine Repair and Overhaul Support and Services. This procurement process was undertaken by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) for the Department of National Defence through Letters of Interest (LOI) Solicitation Numbers W8485-152455/C and W8485-152455/D, and Request for Proposals (RFP) Solicitation Number W8485-152455/A.

Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. and Hill International Inc. in Joint Venture is an independent third party with respect to this activity.

This Final Report covers our activities from the start of our involvement in the Industry Engagement Phase on March 2, 2015 through the RFP phase, the evaluation of Proposals received and the selection of a recommended bidder.

This report includes our attestation of assurance, a summary of the scope and objectives of our assignment, the methodologies applied, and details of our activities, including any relevant findings from the activities undertaken.

2. Project requirement

The Department of National Defence has a requirement for a repair and overhaul support and services for the CH124 Sea King Helicopter T58GE-100 Turboshaft Aero-Engine.

The Contractor will be required to provide repair and overhaul services including disassembly, inspection, cleaning, parts, calibration, repair, overhaul, assembly, testing and packaging to restore to a serviceable condition the items forecasted for repair and overhaul of the T58 Turboshaft Aero-Engine.

In addition, the Contractor will provide on an “as required basis” Technical Investigation and Engineering Services (TIES), Logistical Support Services (LSS) and Mobile Repair Parties (MRPs).

3. Attestation of assurance

The Fairness Monitor (FM) hereby provides the unqualified assurance statement which follows concerning the competitive procurement process for T-58 Aero Engine Repair and Overhaul Support and Services.

It is the professional opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the competitive procurement process for T-58 Aero Engine Repair and Overhaul Support and Services was conducted in a fair, open and transparent manner.

“Fair” is defined as decisions made objectively, free from bias, favouritism or influence and conform to established rules.

“Open” is defined as an activity that is accessible to all potential participants, without unjustified restrictions as to who may participate.

“Transparent” is defined as providing information to the public and interested parties in a timely manner that facilitates public scrutiny.

Note: For all references in this report concerning fairness related comments being provided to project officials, it is confirmed that, as necessary, project officials provided clarification to the FM or took appropriate action to address the comments, and as a result no fairness deficiencies were recorded.

4. Objectives of the fairness monitor assignment and methodology

The overall objective was to provide independent observation of the process and to submit fairness related comments to project officials for the procurement, as early as possible, so that appropriate action could be taken to address the comments before fairness was impacted. The Director Fairness Monitoring would be advised of any fairness related concerns that were not addressed promptly. At the conclusion of the procurement process an assurance statement as to its fairness would be provided. 

To accomplish the objective we undertook the following activities and, where applicable, provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority:

• became familiar with the project governance structure and background information;
• reviewed the LOI and RFP in draft and final form;
• reviewed all amendments to the LOI and RFP including questions submitted by bidders and answers provided;
• observed Industry Day and One-on-One Industry Day Meetings;
• reviewed the procedures to be used for the evaluation of responses and the guidance provided to the evaluation team;
• observed the evaluation of responses to the RFP to ensure that the specified bid evaluation and contractor selection procedures and departmental policy were followed and consistently applied during the evaluation and selection process; and
• observed the debriefing of bidders. (This activity will be reported on in an addendum to this report after any debriefings.)

5. Fairness Monitor specific activities and findings

5.1 Fairness Monitor activities and findings during the letter of interest industry engagement phase

During the period March 2 to 4, 2015, we reviewed a draft of a Letter of Interest (LOI 1) (Document 1) which included a draft Request for Proposal (RFP), and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On March 10, 2015 we reviewed the LOI as posted on BuyandSell including the attached draft RFP. Appropriate action was taken by project officials. On March 27, 2015 we reviewed proposed revisions to the draft RFP with the Contracting Authority. No fairness deficiencies were identified with the LOI.

On April 22, 2015 we observed Industry Day and three (3) One-on-One Industry Engagement Meetings. At the Industry Day session, background information and the procurement process was presented to suppliers and answers were provided to questions. During the One-on-One Meetings proponents were able to ask questions and answers were provided at the meeting or were provided later in writing. Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On June 2, 2015 we reviewed answers to questions asked by interested suppliers during the Industry Engagement Phase. No fairness deficiencies were identified. The questions and answers were posted on BuyandSell in a second LOI (LOI 2) under the same solicitation number, on June 5, 2015 (Document 2).

5.2 Fairness Monitor activities and findings during the request for proposal phase

On June 13, 15 and 21, 2015, we reviewed the RFP as posted on BuyandSell (Document 3). Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On June 23, 2015, we reviewed the Evaluation Plan which had been revised as a result of our comments of June 21, 2015. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

On June 29, 2015 we reviewed Amendment 1 to the RFP (Document 4) and on July 7, 2015 we reviewed Amendment 2 to the RFP (Document 5) which incorporated the revised Evaluation Plan and revised Integrity Provisions. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

5.3 Fairness Monitor activities and findings on the evaluation phase

On July 24, 2015 we reviewed with the Contracting Authority the results of his review of Mandatory Proposal and Technical Requirements. On the same day we observed the discussions of the Evaluation Team at which consensus scores for all Rated Technical Requirements were agreed. Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

Also on July 24, 2015 we reviewed the results of the financial evaluation with the Contracting Authority. There were no fairness deficiencies. There was only one compliant proposal so there was no need to tabulate total scores.

On July 28, 2015 we were advised that the Evaluation Review Committee had conducted its due diligence of the evaluation and fully endorsed the results.

6. Reference documents

The following documents are referenced by number in this report. Unless otherwise indicated, these documents are available through the T-58 Aero Engine Repair and Overhaul Support and Services Contracting Officer.

Table summary

The following table includes a list of documents referred to in the report such as the Request for Proposal (RFP), amendments, clarification letters, debriefing letters, etc. Each row is numbered, followed by the document title, then a document identifier such as a date or document number.

no.	Document	Additional information
1	Initial Letter of Interest (LOI 1)	Published on Buyandsell.gc.ca on March 4, 2015
2	Second Letter of Interest (LOI 2)	Published on Buyandsell.gc.ca on June 5, 2015
3	Request for Proposals (RFP)	Published on Buyandsell.gc.ca on June 11, 2015
4	Amendment 1 to RFP	Published on Buyandsell.gc.ca on June 29, 2015
5	Amendment 2 to RFP	Published on Buyandsell.gc.ca on on July 6, 2015

Addendum to the final report
August 7, 2015

Addendum to fairness monitor final report dated August 5, 2015, concerning the T-58 Aero-Engine repair and overhaul support and services project

This Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Final Report covers post evaluation and selection activities, notifications and debriefings provided to the Bidders.

The Contract was awarded on July 30, 2015. On the same day we reviewed the “regret letter” sent later that day to the unsuccessful Bidder. The letter provided the reasons the Bidder’s Proposal had been unsuccessful and offered to provide more details. On August 5, 2015 we observed a detailed verbal debriefing provided to the unsuccessful Bidder. A full description was provided as to the strengths and deficiencies in the Bidder’s Proposal. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

Fairness Monitor attestation of assurance

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the post evaluation and selection activities, including the debriefing of the unsuccessful bidder, were carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.