DraftRFP10192006.pdf

CODE

(Hour)

PAGE(S)

until local time

X

A X B X C X D

EX

X

G F 79 - 86

87 - 98 X H 99 - 106 terri.francoeur@ustranscom.mil

RATING PAGE OF PAGES

7. ISSUED BY

(Date)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

Previous Edition is Unusable 33-134 STANDARD FORM 33 (REV. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

DO-C9 1 106

(If other than Item 7)

15A. NAME 16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO

AND

ADDRESS SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

OF

OFFEROR

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

15B. TELEPHONE NO (Include area code) 17. SIGNATURE15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

18. OFFER DATE

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

2. CONTRACT NO.

HTC711 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

See Item 7

9. Sealed offers in original and copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if handcarried, in the depository located in

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

10. FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

A. NAME (NO COLLECT CALLS)

TERESA M. FRANCOEUR 618-256-4300

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOLICITATION/ CONTRACT FORM

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/ COSTS

2 - 30

X I CONTRACT CLAUSES

DESCRIPTION/ SPECS./ WORK STATEMENT X

PACKAGING AND MARKING

31 - 51

J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

53 - 55

56 - 59 X K REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA 60 - 63 X

SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror) 64 - 65 X M

L INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

is inserted by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

to the SOLICITATION for offerors and related documents numbered and dated):

FACILITY

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

X

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION (X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 28. AWARD DATE

EMAIL:TEL: (Signature of Contracting Officer)

CODE CODE

B. TELEPHONE (Include area code) C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)( ) (4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7) CODE 25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

66 - 77

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

USTRANSCOM COMMAND ACQUISITION

508 SCOTT DR

SCOTT AFB IL 62265-5357

618-256-4300

618-256-4702FAX:

TEL:

FAX:

TEL:

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NO.5. DATE ISSUED4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

[ X ]

3. SOLICITATION NO.

HTC711-07-R-0001

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 Lot AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 1 AT21 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2007 - 30 Jun 2008 FOB: Destination

SIGNAL CODE: A

ESTIMATED COST

BASE FEE

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

MAX AWARD FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

0002 Lot AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 1 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2007 - 30 Jun 2008

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

0003 Lot Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 1, Year 1 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2007 - 30 Jun 2008

0004 Lot Travel

COST

Increment 1, Year 1 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2007 - 30 Jun 2008

0005 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 1 AT21 Developmentin accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2010 - 30 Jun 2011

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

0006 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 1 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2010- 30 Jun 2011

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

0007 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 2, Year 1 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2010 - 30 Jun 2011

0008 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 2, Year 1 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2010 - 30 Jun 2011

0009 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 1 AT21 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

0010 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 1 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

0011 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 3, Year 1 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

0012 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 3, Year 1 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

OPTION AT21 Post 3 Increment Support

CPAF

AT21 Post 3 Increment Support in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2016 - 30 Jun 2017

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2007 - 30 Jun 2008

Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2007 - 30 Jun 2008

OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 2 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1002 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 2 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1003 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 1, Year 2 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

1004 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 1, Year 2 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

1005 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 2 AT21 Developmentin accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1006 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 2 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1007 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 2, Year 2 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

1008 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 2, Year 2 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

1009 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 2 AT21 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1010 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 2 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

1011 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 3, Year 2 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

1012 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 3, Year 2 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2008 - 30 Jun 2009

2001 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 3 AT21 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2002 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 1, Year 3 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2003 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 1, Year 3 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

2004 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 1, Year 3 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

2005 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 3 AT21 Developmentin accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2006 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 2, Year 3 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2007 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 2, Year 3 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

2008 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 2, Year 3 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 01 Jul 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

2009 Lot OPTION AT21 Development

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 3 AT21 Development in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2010 Lot OPTION AT21 Operating and Maintenance

CPAF

Increment 3, Year 3 AT21 Operating and Maintenance in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

SUBTOTAL EST COST + BASE

2011 Lot OPTION Other Direct Costs (ODC)

COST

Increment 3, Year 3 Other Direct Cost in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

2012 Lot OPTION Travel

COST

Increment 3, Year 3 Travel in accordance with Performance Work Statement dated 19 Oct 2006 Period of Performance 1 Jul 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2009 - 30 Jun 2010

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2010 - 30 Jun 2011

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2010 - 30 Jun 2011

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2011 - 30 Jun 2012

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2012 - 30 Jun 2013

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2014 - 30 Jun 2015

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2015 - 30 Jun 2016

OPTION Base Fee

COST

Base Fee 1 Jul 2016 - 30 Jun 2017

OPTION Award Fee

COST

Award Fee in accordance with the Statement of Work dated 19 Oct 2006.

The contractor shall invoice for the amount of the award fee earned. The amount of award fee earned out of the award fee pool will be unilaterally determined by the Government Award Fee Determining Official (FDO) at the end of the award fee period in accordance with the Award Fee Plan. The award fee will be assessed semiannually and a modification issued by the Contracting Officer against the task order authorizing payment for the amount of award fee earned.

Unearned award fee will be deobligated by the Contracting Officer.

Award Fee 1 July 2016 - 30 Jun 2017

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

Performance Work Statement for

Agile Transportation for the 21st Century (AT21) Business Process Transformation for the United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM)

October 19, 2006

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

1.1 SCOPE

1.1.1 The scope of this effort will be to identify and implement business processes and systems that enable USTRANSCOM’s distribution planning, transportation planning, and transportation execution activities in support of the Distribution Process Owner (DPO) business enterprise. This effort will apply best business practices and leverage order management and transportation management technologies within a three-phased incremental acquisition.

The effort will focus less on capturing the “as-is” processes and more on providing a solution “blueprint” that best meets the program objectives (mission capability and performance), addressing and integrating the myriad of DPO enterprise-wide elements including: organization, culture, personnel competency, business processes, facilities and assets, and enabling information technology. The ultimate solution should define and enable end-to-end integrated processes to achieve transformational impact, rather than applying technology to existing processes for incremental improvement.

1.1.2 This requirement will be managed in increments as shown below. Initiation of each increment is not necessarily dependent on the completion of the previous increment. However, the Government requires funding and Milestone B approval prior to initiating Increments II and III. An executive-level decision will be required prior to acceleration of Increment 2 or 3.

Increment Description I Requirements Consolidation and Workflow Management II Strategic-Level Optimization and Scheduling III Operational-Level Optimization and Scheduling Post Incr III Post Increment 3 Support

The Capability Development Document (CDD) defines the performance-based functional and technical requirements for this effort.

1.2 BACKGROUND

USTRANSCOM, in partnership with the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), conducted an AT21 Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) from 2003 – 2005. During Oct - Nov 2004, USTRANSCOM and the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) conducted a military utility assessment (MUA) of the ACTD’s transportation planning system, in order to assess the operational and cost benefits of its concepts and capabilities. The eight-day exercise consisted of parallel transportation-planning operations for USCENTCOM’s deployment and redeployment transportation requirements using the ACTD’s system and the incumbent processes and systems.

The AT21 ACTD defined primary functional areas for process control, collaboration, optimization, and visualization. Supporting controlled processes with appropriate information technologies is seen as vital in enabling USTRANSCOM to achieve effective integrated transportation management within the larger DOD supply chain.

The AT21 ACTD demonstrated commercial off the shelf (COTS) supply chain execution (SCE) and supply chain management (SCM) technologies as a cost effective way to provide capabilities supporting the transformation of operations that would deliver more effectively to the war fighter.

Independent assessment of the MUA exercise revealed the following measured benefits of AT21 when compared to the incumbent system.

• 25% increase in planned on-time delivery by air and an 8% increase in planned on-time delivery by sea

• More effective load consolidation increased planned aircraft payloads by 9% for passengers and 8% for cargo

These benefits can be explained by the following observations regarding the AT21 ACTD system.

• The ACTD system demonstrated that it can generate transportation plans significantly quicker than the incumbent system, enabling system users to implement those plans sooner and respond to planning changes sooner.

• The automated processing within the ACTD allowed action officers to focus their efforts on exception processing rather than routine processing thus allowing action officers to be more productive.

• Increased staff efficiency requiring an expected 30% less effort will free action officer time for more detailed analysis of requirements and plans and for other tasks.

1.3 OBJECTIVES

The primary goal of the AT21 initiative is the attainment of a business process transformation resulting in a modern enterprise business system that enables USTRANSCOM to achieve the following objectives:

• Reengineering of USTRANSCOM distribution planning, transportation planning, and transportation execution processes through implementation of appropriate “best business practices.”

• Enhanced supply chain capabilities resulting in reduced deployment and distribution cycle times, increased customer satisfaction via tailored distribution support, and reduced customer wait time.

• Achievement of an environment that provides asset visibility throughout the supply chain and leads to decreased materiel costs.

The goal is to focus the distribution and transportation planning segments of the supply chain by reengineering business processes to bring best business practices into the USTRANSCOM environment that integrate robust, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) and/or government-off-the-shelf (GOTS) software. It is the USTRANSCOM’s intent to leverage robust COTS/GOTS product suites in lieu of designing, developing, and maintaining Government unique systems. USTRANSCOM’s desire to incorporate available technology is not only to reduce acquisition and operating costs, but more importantly to embrace both continuous business process improvement and technology insertion provided by such robust packages as enterprise resource planning (ERP) or advanced planning and scheduling (APS) software. USTRANSCOM desires technology currently in use by leaders within industry and/or government that provides cutting edge business practices and has proven track records as technologically superior in scalability and configuration. These objectives represent USTRANSCOM’s approach to meeting the requirements of the DOD Logistics Strategic Plan and the Joint Deployment and Distribution Enterprise (JDDE). AT21 will contribute to improved military readiness by implementing a more interoperable, integrated data environment and achieving the Joint Logistics (Distribution) Joint Integrating Concept [JL(D)JIC] imperative shortfalls: conduct JDDE assessment and planning, control JDDE operations, and conduct JDDE performance analysis.

1.4 BUSINESS MODEL

The USTRANSCOM vision is an enterprise business system supporting its core business as well as executive decision-making and rapid, cross-organization process automation and information sharing. It is critical to recognize that the USTRANSCOM business model is changing from the current environment of autonomous business units to a new environment consisting of one integrated deployment and distribution enterprise. This includes common business processes and data across transportation planning and execution activities. Additionally, the new business model will migrate the command toward a common enterprise business system and more reliance on detailed collaborative relationships with supported Combatant Commanders (COCOMs), the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), the Services, the Transportation Component Commands (TCCs), and industry partners.

1.4.1 USTRANSCOM BUSINESS STRATEGY

USTRANSCOM requires an enterprise business system that will inter-operate with existing and future COCOM, DLA, Service, and TCC systems to achieve these goals. The capability of an expanded supply chain, which reaches from the organic DPO capability, into the private sector, and out to our customers, will provide the DPO that visibility and access to global deployment and distribution information that it does not have today, improving the quality and velocity with which USTRANSCOM provides information to its customers. Continuous improvement in USTRANSCOM business practices is the primary objective to ensure that USTRANSCOM can deliver and sustain world-class performance.

To answer increasing demands on the DPO to support force projection and sustainment, AT21 is focused on identifying and applying best commercial business processes and practices and supporting COTS and GOTS software tools to improve the planning and managing of DPO distribution and deployment assets in support of the COCOMs. As the DPO continues to transform into a lead logistics provider, the AT21 business enterprise umbrella will bring the information from the execution elements (TCCs and commercial carriers) together and make the information readily available to our customers. The DPO will combine process, technology and best practices to manage the DOD distribution enterprise.

The USTRANSCOM Focus Warfighter I (FWI) initiative took place during spring 2005 when TCJ3 reorganized – involving COCOM-oriented branches and the redesign of the requirements/ validation process. This effort proved successful from both the COCOM and USTRANSCOM perspectives and resulted in better warfighter support. The follow-on FW II concept transformation realigns1 planning functions while realigning current processes to meet specific COCOM support requirements. FW II provides the baseline for IT development to increase effectiveness in delivering combat power to the warfighter while enhancing visibility and efficiency of the distribution process.

The concept permits USTRANSCOM to tailor its Deployment & Distribution Operations Center (DDOC) operations to respond to world events with the appropriate level of effort required—by standing-up COCOM-specific divisions in a Joint Operations Center. FW II transitions USTRANSCOM from the strategic planning/monitoring function to a more heavily focused end-to-end transportation planning/concept of operations (CONOPS) event management development role. FW III focuses on transportation planning and customer relationship management (CRM). The objective is to optimize controlled distribution processes by employing advanced, globally networked tools and techniques.

This initiative will directly support the JL (D) JIC imperatives and significantly contribute to Joint Deployment and Distribution Enterprise (JDDE) capability gaps. The Focus Warfighter initiative, as the process change driver for

1 The Focus Warfighter II realignment charter is to develop a process that capitalizes on a joint fused effort to assess and plan multi-modal end-to-end solutions. This process will synchronize the distribution of forces and sustainment into the theater through collaborative planning, proactive transportation analysis, performance monitoring, increasing distribution effectiveness and customer confidence. COCOM-oriented branches in the Fusion Center will process all COCOM end-to-end requirements and provide a natural link into the respective theater Joint DDOC (JDDOC).

AT21, rests on three pillars: Process improvement; Organization; and Information Technology. AT21 is just a portion of the larger USTRANSCOM effort to improve End-to-End (E2E) distribution for the Department of Defense (DOD).

USTRANSCOM Strategic Guidance 2006: The Strategic Plan’s goals, outcomes, and objectives are developed to support the Commander, USTRANSCOM’s Command Guidance and the JL (D) JIC to provide the best distribution possible to the warfighter distribution enterprise and sharing of distribution information with all our national partners.

The strategy to develop an environment based on collaboration to synchronize all distribution events across DOD is enabled by the JDDE. The JDDE provides the framework for a global distribution capability that supports adaptive planning and agile execution for the Joint Force Commander (JFC).

The backbone of the JDDE is the collaboration of the enterprise partners that enable delivery of joint capabilities either within the theater of operations or from the point of origin directly to the point of effect.

AT21 embodies the USTRANSCOM Strategic Guidance Hierarchy:

USTRANSCOM Strategic Guidance Hierarchy AT21 Requirements and Capabilities

1. The Joint Deployment and Distribution Enterprise

(JDDE)

• Create JDDA

• Simplify processes

• Improve forecasting and planning

• Improve JDDE execution control

• Improved analysis

1. Requirements data capture and requirements management work flow to facilitate visibility over all movement requirements, intermodal analysis and asse management decision-making, correlating complete, constrained (and unconstrained2) movement requirements with planning rationale, permitting deployment planners to visualize and analyze movement requirements and employ scheduling decision information (with respect to modal assets, weather, particular routing information, and infrastructure data)

2. Collaboration and Partnerships

• Transform workflow

• Streamline distribution portfolio

2. Generate information into a configurable collaborative environment that displays improved C2 situational awareness/decision-ready movement tracking information

3. Expeditionary Approaches

• Shape expeditionary tools for better COCOM support

• Adapt business models

• Implement Joint Theater Logistics

3. Materiel solutions in the form of Process Improvements enabled by COTS automated tools hold significant promise as keys to substantial improvement in responding to the deployment and sustainment demands of the warfighter and the increased operational tempo of expeditionary forces.

4. Enabling Joint Distribution Concepts

• Responsive mobility systems

• Appropriate mix lift assets/all domains

4. Information broker for constrained distribution/deployment requirements through a seamless CRM-like customer/user web-enabled interface, generating the single view to the customer for workflow status and exception management and requirements tracking as close as possible to the consuming theater unit, identifying each dynamic distribution/ deployment requirement through the

2 (Objective Requirement) workflow and feedback/ reporting processes

The goal of this procurement is to identify an approach to meet the ambitious strategic goals listed above.

USTRANSCOM would like to enhance the performance of business system inter-operability in response to the increasingly competitive business environment and changing customer needs. To achieve this, USTRANSCOM may find it necessary to realign and perform process and system improvements.

1.4.2 TEAM INTEGRATION

Effective implementation for an enterprise business system will require cooperation and knowledge sharing among the contractor, USTRANSCOM Integrated Product Teams (IPTs), and DPO functional and technical organizations.

USTRANSCOM and the contractor will jointly identify the desired USTRANSCOM operational participation required and time frames needed to support its implementation approach. Throughout the period of contract performance, USTRANSCOM will reserve the right to periodically review the level of USTRANSCOM resources identified and associated time frames in an effort to continually provide for the appropriate and required resources.

The program manager will be supported by an Executive Board chaired by a USTRANSCOM senior military officer that meets quarterly (or more frequently as needed), and involves customers and stakeholders from not only USTRANSCOM, but also its TCCs, COCOMs, DLA, other agencies as appropriate, and the contractor.

During solution development, change management tasks should support the Executive Sponsor, including the development and coordination of program expectations; re-enforcing program objectives; creating and distributing program-level communications; marketing the program, and tracking, reporting, and acting on feedback from stakeholders.

1.5 TASKS

The contractor shall perform the following tasks for each increment. Post Increment 3 activity shall be limited to the efforts identified in paragraph 1.5.3.

Task Paragraph Task Description 1 1.5.1 Project Management 2 1.5.2 Increments I – III, Design, Development, and Deployment 3 1.5.3 Interim Contractor Support

1.5.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The contractor shall manage the cost, schedule, and performance of the effort and identify key personnel assigned to the project. The contractor’s project leader shall be available for face-to-face meetings with the PMO and staff, as required, to ensure common understanding of all ongoing activities. Additionally, the contractor shall perform the following tasks:

1.5.1.1 Task Management. The contractor shall prepare a Task Order Management Plan (TOMP) to describe the technical approach, organization resources, and management controls required to meet cost, performance, and schedule requirements throughout TO execution. The contractor shall include, in their Task Order Management Plan (TOMP), testing of external interfaces to ensure the AT21 system interfaces correctly with other automated information systems The contractor shall provide a Monthly Status Report monitoring the program risk, quality assurance, configuration management, and security management applied to the TO. The monthly status report shall list, by each active task, the accomplishments of the reporting period by contractor name and hours worked against each task, describe the objectives for the next reporting period, and provide an overall evaluation of the task order to date including graphical depiction of the resources used for the current period and year to date with a delta below.

The report shall list the deliverables for each task and any issues, problem areas, or items that require Government review.

1.5.1.2 Work Breakdown Structure. The contractor shall develop a contract work breakdown structure (WBS) (due 30 days after contract award) to provide a framework for program and technical planning, cost estimating, resource allocations, performance measurements, and status reporting. The schedule risk shall be analyzed based on the project critical path. The WBS shall define the total application to be developed or produced; display the total process as a product-oriented family tree composed of hardware, software, services, data, and facilities; and relate the elements of work to each other and to the end product. Guidance for the WBS can be found in MIL-HDBK-

881. Once delivered, the contractor shall suggest changes, for Government approval, to the WBS and evaluate progress toward delivery of the AT21 process and product implementation.

1.5.1.3 Technical Interchange Meeting. The contractor shall conduct technical interchange meetings (TIMs) at the government location to document the requirements and schedule. Formal minutes shall be drafted by the contractor and staffed for approval and signed by the AT21 Program Manager within 5 workdays after the TIM.

Contractor will work with the AT21 program management team to arrange TIMS as required throughout the contract life. A Configuration Control Board (CCB) structure, which includes the PM, contractor, and user representatives, will be used to prioritize requirements for each spiral.

1.5.1.4 Earned Value Management. The contractor shall implement Earned Value Management in accordance with the American National Standards Institute/Electronic Industries Alliance Standard 748 (ANSI/EIA-748). The contractor shall deliver a resource-loaded Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (Data Item Description (DID) number DI-MGMT-81650) based on the WBS described in paragraph 1.5.1.2. Once delivered, the Government approval is required prior to changing the IMS. The contractor shall host a Government Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) to verify EVM compliance. Once the contractor’s EVM system is verified, the contractor shall deliver a Cost Performance Report (CPR) monthly. Metrics are to include schedule efficiency, budget efficiency, and overall project efficiency.

1.5.1.5 In-Process Reviews. The contractor shall present In-Process Reviews (IPRs) monthly, or at the AT21 Program Manager’s request. The IPR presentations shall describe project performance, cost and schedule status;

progress; concerns; and recommendations for project software, process implementation, change management or other issues impacting AT21. The contractor shall deliver a copy of the presentation slides NLT 3 work days prior to the IPR and minutes NLT 5 work days after the IPR. At a minimum, the minutes should reflect a record of meeting activity, decisions made, action items, date, location, and attendees.

1.5.1.6 Configuration Management. The contractor shall develop a configuration management process for control of releases, source code and documents and prepare a Configuration Management Plan. The Government will provide comments within 5 days and the contractor shall incorporate comments within 5 days.

1.5.2 DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEPLOYMENT

1.5.2.1 Business Process Improvement

1.5.2.1.1 Blueprinting. The contractor shall develop an end-to-end solution blueprint that details the recommended strategy and prioritization for implementing business process improvements, adopting best practices, and implementing supporting technology.

1.5.2.1.2 Business Processes. The contractor shall review documentation, conduct interviews, meetings, and working sessions to facilitate a single understanding of the business rules and processes. The contractor shall recommend best business practices for streamlining existing business processes and implementing “to be” business processes. Resulting business processes and rules are to be stored in a retrievable and reusable fashion. Contractor shall propose the delivery schedule for the associated deliverables.

1.5.2.1.3 Change Management. The contractor shall develop a change management plan for incorporating business process improvements into the USTRANSCOM culture and business environment. The contractor shall propose the delivery schedule for this deliverable.

1.5.2.2 Systems Engineering

1.5.2.2.1 Architecture Design. The contractor shall develop and deliver an end-to-end architecture design. The design will be at a detail level sufficient to ensure integrated capability for Increments 1-3. Contractor shall propose the delivery schedule for this deliverable. The design must include recommendations for procurement of hardware platforms, middleware, and application software needed for each increment.

1.5.2.2.2 Spiral Capability Design

Using process blueprints and business rules, the contractor shall incrementally develop the detailed design required to configure each specific software capability spiral.

Through discussions with the program manager and functional users, the contractor shall translate high-level requirements into actionable requirements with sufficient technical detail to design the AT21 system, including a logical data model of the AT21 data requirements compliant with current guidance from the USTRANSCOM CDO.

The contractor shall enter their findings into a consolidated requirements document and a requirements traceability matrix, which must be approved by the AT21 PM in a Systems Requirements Review (SRR). The functional community must have an opportunity to review the consolidated requirements at the SRR before approval to proceed is given. The consolidated requirements document and associated requirements traceability matrix become the requirements design baseline and subject to the configuration management directives mandated by the AT21 PM (see also section 1.5.2.3.3).

After the SRR, the contractor shall develop system functional specifications and a system verification plan. The contractor shall refine the functional specifications into (Design To) Configuration Item (CI) functional specifications and CI verification plans. The contractor shall present these CI functional specifications and verification plan at the Critical Design Review (CDR) for approval by the AT21 PM before further development proceeds (reference paragraph x.x.x).

Once approved at the CDR, the consolidated requirements and system design artifacts become the technical design baseline and are subject to the configuration management requirements mandated by the AT21 PM.

Similar reviews shall be accomplished for each development increment.

The development contractor may use results from the ACTD in their own development effort.

The contractor may use modeling and simulation during the development of the AT21 system, but it is not mandated.

The government will provide sample (real) data to the contractor within 10 days of the contractor request.

The contractor shall provide incremental functional capability in configured software spiral releases in accordance with the blueprinting and processes approved by the government. The contractor may propose recommended implementation strategies and timing of releases.

1.5.2.2.3 Systems Engineering Processes

The following systems engineering processes shall be used.

1.5.2.2.3.1 Reference Data Management

The contractor shall use enterprise reference data sources to provide a capability that maintains the current state of the transportation network infrastructure required to support distribution/transportation planning and execution process activities.

1.5.2.2.3.2 Verification and Validation

Verification and validation will occur via formal testing. Verification and validation of the AT21 system will be conducted as outlined in the Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). All formal testing will occur at the contractor test facility. The contractor will conduct informal testing before technical reviews, milestone reviews, and delivery of any increment. Feedback from test & evaluation efforts is part of the systems engineering process and should be incorporated into the AT21 system design as appropriate.

The TEMP is the responsibility of the government, with input from the development contractor. The TEMP includes testing the interfaces and testing between AT21 and other AISs. (The Government will coordinate this part of testing with the PMs of the other systems).

The Chief Systems Engineer (government) must approve all test plans used and results produced by the development contractor before the government commences full, formal T&E (this is the Test Readiness Review or

TRR).

1.5.2.2.3.3 Technical Reviews

The Systems Engineering Integrated Product Team (see section 1.5.2.3.4.2) will review the development contractor’s TOMP after award of the contract and upon its delivery to the government. If necessary (to ensure the technical development activities are adequately documented), the Chief Systems Engineer (government) may recommend changes to the TOMP through the AT21 PM after this review.

The SRR, CDR, and TRR reviews (see sections 1.5.2.3.2 and 1.5.2.3.3.2) ensure the AT21 program development is progressing as planned from a technical perspective. The AT21 PM has final approval to exit each design review.

AT21 program technical reviews will be held quarterly (or as recommended by the Chief Systems Engineer) upon start of development work. These reviews will include an overview of development progress, identification of technical risks, identification of challenging issues, and other topics of interest as determined by the Chief Systems Engineer or contractor. All technical reviews will also contain updates of measures as discussed in section

1.5.2.3.3.4. The deliverable is a presentation and, if warranted, a demonstration of system components. The contractor shall provide presentation materials and record minutes documenting each technical review.

Technical reviews are also triggered by the contractor missing the internal team deadlines of any given project milestone. This will give the Chief Systems Engineer an opportunity to review progress and determine a way ahead from the technical view.

1.5.2.2.3.4 Measures

There are several leading indicators or measures addressing the critical areas of systems engineering to assist the program management team in maintaining design discipline. They are useful for providing advance warning that the design or associated processes are not on track, and whether any potential exists for program cost overrun and schedule slip. The list of measures of interest are determined by the AT21 PM and Chief Systems Engineer.

Updates to these measures are due at each technical review and upon request from the AT21 program manager. The list includes:

• Changes activities against time. For example, requirements changes to baseline, corresponding changes to verification plans. Requirements changes directly impact design maturity, and therefore cost and schedule performance. This gives insight into “requirements creep.”

• Design documentation actual vs. planned. Gives insight into contractor progress in technical documentation and whether or not they will meet % complete requirements for the CDR. Ensure inclusion of the documentation schedule in the contractor’s TOMP.

• Trade studies complete vs. defined by topic. If the contractor indicates they will perform trade studies in their proposal, this metric lists studies performed and whether or not they are complete. Completion of all studies before the CDR, with results shared in the IPT meetings.

• Software work products tracked (complete vs. planned) against time. Track software work product completion against pre-planned completion plans for the various work products associated with the AT21 system development. These work products include items such as software requirements specifications, software interface specifications, top level designs, detailed level designs, code, unit test cases complete, etc.

• Technical Performance Measures (TPM) actual vs. planned with trend assessment. TPMs are system measures of performance and its parts. TPMs should always be measurable quantities. TPMs are all linked to KPPs. Relevant TPMs are detailed in the CDD.

1.5.2.2.3.5 Configuration Management / Configuration Control Board Configuration Management (CM) organization and practices will be consistently and uniformly applied throughout the AT21 lifecycle. The AT21 program will follow current USTRANSCOM/J6 guidance for CM. The Configuration Management Plan applies to all systems, software, hardware, and documentation. Overall responsibility for CM oversight is the AT21 PMO but will rely extensively on the CM tools and plans of the development contractor. CM support includes maintaining, tracking, and providing status accounting of the configured environments and the documents and other Configuration Items (CI) that are part of the non-developmental or operational environment. Changes to controlled CIs are controlled by the Configuration Control Board (CCB).

The CCB will ensure the insertion of technologies is consistent with AT21 CM practices, and will update the technology baselines appropriately.

The CCB is composed of technical and administrative representatives (a mix of contractor/government and technical/functional user personnel). The group provides approval/disapproval of proposed changes to a CI. The CCB is chaired by the AT21 PM (or designated alternate). Change Requests (CRs) are submitted to the CCB for review (through the Chief Systems Engineer or AT21 PM). The full membership of the CCB is determined by the

AT21 PM and FM. The CCB approves all proposed changes to a baseline item prior to implementation. The CCB provides status accounting reports to the CCB members and updates the status accounting databases to reflect CCB decisions.

1.5.2.2.3.6 Systems Engineering Tools

Additional SE tools used are TBD by the contractor.

1.5.2.2.3.7 Technical Documentation

The development contractor will create a comprehensive technical data package for the AT21 system. This includes, but not limited to: engineering drawings and specifications, process descriptions, interface control documents, logical data model, copies of…