Inactive

THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. UNITED STATES ARMY TEST AND EVALUATION COMMAND (ATEC) POTENTIAL TEST RANGE SUPPORT CONSOLIDATION This is a Second Reque... THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. UNITED STATES ARMY TEST AND EVALUATION COMMAND (ATEC) POTENTIAL TEST RANGE SUPPORT CONSOLIDATION This is a Second Request for Information (RFI), which, as part of market research, is being issued in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 15.201(e). The Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC) is seeking industry feedback and interest regarding a potential consolidation of five of its test range contracts located across five ATEC test centers into one or more overarching fifteen year contract(s). This RFI is intended to gather information on the best acquisition strategy and acquisition approach, as well as determining industry interest and capability. These specific core capabilities are identified below, in Section 2, and in Attachment 1 of the DRAFT Performance Work Statement to this RFI announcement. This is not a solicitation/request for proposal and no contract shall be awarded from this notice. All interested parties should send company and/or descriptive literature along with responses to Mrs. Erin Weber, erin.k.weber.civ@mail.mil and Mrs. Melissa Sampson, melissa.k.sampson.civ@mail.mil. All responses should be received No Later Than 12:00 pm ET (noon) on 26 February 2021. All questions and comments must be in writing; no telephone calls or in person meetings will result from this RFI. The Government will not pay for any information received in response to this request, nor will the Government compensate any respondent for any costs incurred in developing the information provided to the Government. Section 1 – PURPOSE: ATEC is one of the Department of Defense’s (DoD) foremost test commands supporting both military and commercial materiel developers by testing a broad spectrum of equipment throughout its life cycle, from concept through deployment. ATEC is comprised of seven different test centers located throughout the Continental United States and is currently considering consolidation of range support services currently provided at the following five test center locations: 1. Aberdeen Test Center (ATC), Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), Maryland (MD); 2. West Desert Test Center (WDTC), Dugway, Utah (UT); 3. Electronic Proving Ground (EPG), Fort Huachuca, Arizona (AZ); 4. White Sands Test Center (WSTC), White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), New Mexico (NM); and, 5. Yuma Test Center (YTC), Yuma, Arizona (AZ), which includes Cold Regions Test Center, Fort Greely, Alaska. ATEC provides direct support to Army Futures Command and relevant, timely information to senior Army leaders regarding the results of rigorous developmental testing and independent operational tests and evaluations. ATEC equips Army decision-makers with unbiased knowledge and contextual understanding of whether systems are: safe; effective in providing intended operational capability; suitable for the Army and Total Joint Force; and, survivable against enemy action in the unforgiving crucible of combat. For the purpose of this RFI, ATEC’s Range Support Services (RSS) can be defined as services directly related to support of testing and evaluation, including engineering, test development, data collection and analysis, evaluation and reporting. Test efforts are generally funded by Army program executive offices, program, project, and product managers, evaluators, acquisition decision makers, and those directly supporting the Soldier. SECTION 2 – CORE CAPABILITIES: For details in the first RFI please go to: https://beta.sam.gov/opp/6943721fa199418ae7ba6069ca5dce57/view?keywords=%22atec%20enterprise%22&sort=-relevance&index=opp&is_active=true&page=1 The following is a representative of Core Capabilities that describe requirements/scope of work for range support services required at ATC, WDTC, EPG, WSTC, and YPG. Future requirements may be further defined as an acquisition strategy is more fully developed. Support may be required at locations to include Continental United States (CONUS) and Outside CONUS (OCONUS). The following contracts and locations are under consideration for consolidation: 1. U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Center (ATC). Contract W91CRB-15-D-0018: ATC’s Aberdeen Test Support Services (ATSS) Contract Type: Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Firm Fixed Price Contract Ceiling: $463M over a 5 Year Period of Performance FTEs: ~600 to 700 Unrestricted 2. U.S. Army West Desert Test Center (WDTC). Contract W911S6-19-C-0004: WDTC’s Mission Support Services (WMSS). Contract Type: Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contract Ceiling: $300M over a 5 Year Period of Performance FTEs: ~175 to 275 Unrestricted 3. U.S. Army Electronic Proving Ground (EPG). Contract W91RUS-16-C-0006: EPG’s Scientific and Engineering Support (ESES). Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee, Firm Fixed Price Contract Ceiling: $210M over a 5 Year Period of Performance FTEs: ~250 to 350 Unrestricted 4. U.S. Army White Sands Test Center (WSTC). Contract W91151-19-C-0008: WSTC’s Mission Support Services (MSS). Contract Type: Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contract Ceiling: $341M over a 5 Year Period of Performance FTEs: ~350 to 450 Unrestricted 5. U.S. Army Yuma Test Center (YTC), which includes Cold Regions Test Center (CRTC). Contract W9124R-18-C-0001: YTC’s Mission/Test Support Services (YM/TSS). Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee Contract Ceiling: $360M over a 4 Year Period of Performance FTEs: ~950 to 1050 Unrestricted The ATEC Enterprise RSS will support the Warfighter through T&E, tactics development, and training on current and emerging technologies and weapon systems. The ATEC Enterprise RSS vendor shall operate, maintain, and sustain the following range core capabilities: PLEASE NOTE: The Core Capabilities listed below have been further defined since the first RFI posted in Oct/Nov 2019. • Command Destruct & Flight Termination Systems • Communication Systems • Computer Systems • Data Analysis and Reporting • Instrumentation Systems • Mission Support • Mission Control • Modeling & Simulation • Ordnance • Signal Collection, Monitoring, and Measuring • Stimulation Systems • Systems Engineering • Targets • Telemetry Systems • Test Engineering • Threat Systems • Test Operations • Chemical and Biological Operations • Artificial Intelligence • Airdrop Systems The technical functions to operate, maintain, and sustain the above core capabilities often operate in unison and interdependently to achieve the desired T&E, tactics development, and/or training results. It is the intent of the ATEC Enterprise RSS contract to cross utilize resources required while operating, maintain and sustain the core technical functions to achieve the most effective and efficient result. Additional objectives for ATEC Enterprise RSS are as follows: achieve mission success, achieve synergy of operations, utilize Enterprise capabilities, implement repeatable and tailorable systems engineering, and implement innovative technical solutions. These objectives will foster the streamlining of operations to meet mission requirements, increase throughput, and improve overall effectiveness to realize cost efficiencies. SECTION 3 – QUESTIONS FOR INDUSTRY INFORMATION REQUESTED We look forward to reviewing your ideas for this acquisition. Please remember: accuracy, brevity and clarity. Each response should site the question number and the entire question. All responses should be in Microsoft Word (1.5 spaced 8.5”x11” using Arial 12 point font) and should not exceed 25 pages and include the following information: Company Information Company name Mailing Address Company Website Cage Code and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number Company Point of Contact Name Title Mailing Address Email Address Phone Number Please identify your company's business size standard based on the primary North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code of 541330. For more information, refer to http://www.sba.gov/. Large Business Concern Small Business (SB) Concern 8(a) Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) Woman-Owned Small Business Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUB Zone) Veteran-Owned Small Business Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Does your company possess the capabilities to provide the entire range of Core Capabilities listed in Section 2 and in the draft PWS attachment to the RFI? If not, please list which Core Capabilities your company can provide. Has your company performed this type of effort or similar type of effort (to include size, complexity, greater than five year period of performance, and multi-billion dollar contract value) in the past for another government agency or other non-government customer? Please provide up to three examples of similar work that your company has performed as the prime contractor supporting test range requirements. Specifically highlight how this experience is directly related to the Core Capabilities (from Q4) that your company can support. Specifically address whether or not these previous contracts included performance that spanned geographically distributed places of performance. Please provide details, if appropriate, regarding proposed joint ventures, teaming arrangements, strategic alliances, or other business arrangements to satisfy Core Capabilities. Discuss how you plan to utilize Small Businesses as partners for this effort. The notional goals for this procurement are as follows: Small Business: 23% of the total contract value; Small Disadvantaged Business: at least 5% of the total contract value; Women-Owned Small Business: at least 5% of the total contract value; Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business: at least 3% of the total contract value; Veteran Owned Small Business: at least 6% of the total contract value; Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business: at least 3% of the total contract value. Discuss any challenges you foresee in meeting or exceeding these goals based on the complexity of the requirement and geographic separation of the participating Test Centers (TC). Provide feedback on how the Government could most effectively incentivize cost control under a single award contract of this size and complexity over a 10 to 15 year period of performance? Provide feedback on how you will ensure you will sustain reasonable rates over a 10 to 15 year contract. For instance, an Engineer I making $30 an hour, starts in the base year of a contract and the requirements consistently require an Engineer I over the life of the contract – How will you maintain a reasonable rate over the life of the contract so that the Government is not paying $80 an hour in year fifteen of the contract, for example. The five test range contracts identified must adhere to various Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) and/or applicable Department of the Labor Wage Determinations. Describe your company’s experience with CBA negotiations and your plan to control cost growth in the out years when CBAs require re-negotiation. What is your approach for ensuring that cost to the Government will not deviate substantially from contract award throughout the life of the contract? Do you foresee greater unionization and/or creation of additional or larger CBAs as a result of consolidation? What impact could this have on ultimate cost to the Government? Presuming consolidation of the five range support contracts into one contract, do you anticipate overall cost savings resulting from reduced indirect add-ons to direct labor (e.g., profit, overhead, G&A, fringe, etc.) based on a larger workforce (economies of scale)? Do you expect indirect add-ons to be standardized across all Task Orders (TOs), under a consolidated effort? Please explain. If savings are anticipated, explain how these savings will reduce ultimate cost of support to the government? Describe your process to provide a staff of key personnel, qualified analysts, project managers, engineers, and technical experts with varying clearance levels from a Secret to a Top Secret. How would ensure all positions are filled with the appropriate clearances if this effort were awarded as a single award IDIQ contract for five geographically separated ranges across the United States. Notionally, each TC will have its own Task Order. TC contracts may transition into the consolidation at different times depending on timelines associated with incumbent contracts. How will you address various transitions and what challenges do you foresee? Provide a time phased ramp up to fully staff each TO (for estimating purposes use the FTEs listed in Section 2 of this RFI above for your response). Provide a plan for filling vacancies at the various locations and provide recommendations on reasonable time periods to fill any vacancies. Under a single award approach, how will your company support the management of 5 geographically separated TCs and assist the government in ensuring efficient range usage? For instance, if YTC’s range schedule is full for 4 months out, what is your approach to supporting the government as it works with the other TCs, who have availability, to shift work in order to get programs scheduled on the ranges? Provide recommendations on feasibility and lessons learned from any previous experience. Discuss the benefits and risks of consolidating the contracts of 5 geographically separated TCs into one single award IDIQ contract. How would your company approach the application of government mandated safety standards across geographically separated TCs? For instance, at WSTC ranges have to be cleared in order to shoot long range missiles, how will your company ensure 100% accountability, for your personnel, that ranges are clear and safe? Is there a safety mechanism that you will use? In the event of incidents, layout a timeline of incident reporting through appropriate parties to include the TO COR, Enterprise level COR, Range Commander, and ATEC Commander. Discuss any experience in developing safety plans in support of T&E support contracts. Under a single award approach, what are the benefits or risks of equipment sharing? Specifically address equipment sharing in the context of 5 geographically disparate TCs with varying test event schedules. Detail any experience you have had performing equipment sharing to include lessons learned. Describe what type of cost savings can be gained with equipment sharing. What is your experience with the use of Part Time On Call (PTOC) labor support? The Government is interested in using PTOC labor to effectively manage surges in test requirements, which can be significant at times. It is anticipated that PTOC individuals could be retired civilian, retired military or contractor employees in the lower technical skill set labor categories. What benefits/risks do you see with use of PTOC labor? What is your experience with Cost Plus Award Fee and Cost Plus Incentive Fee type contracts? What challenges do you see with either approach in the context of this proposed consolidation? Address your experience with oversight required for Award Fee or Incentive fee payments. Provide lessons learned with regard to Government oversight and fee payment from your perspective. What information and areas of the draft PWS do you feel need additional clarification? Provide specific feedback, after reviewing the draft PWS, of examples in which the Government requirement allows vendors to adequately propose in the Core Capability areas identified above. What aspects of the draft PWS do you feel are essential for vendors to address in their proposals to demonstrate capability to support the proposed ATEC Enterprise RSS effort? Any other comments to consider not addressed above.