LOGCAP_VI_26-28JAN_Dallas_Industry_Day_Slides_FINAL_20260116.pdf

CUI

Version Number 2.0 As of 23 SEP 2025

CUI

ACC-RI & ASC

LOGCAP Industry Event

Controlled by: Army Contracting Command-Rock Island Controlled by: CCRI-VOF Category: SSEL Distribution/Dissemination Controls: NOFORN POC: Michael.a.coon21.civ@army.mil

Agenda and Government Roster

CUI

DAY 1: 26 Jan 2026 0730 – 0800 Registration/Check-In

0800 - 0900 Opening Comments & Government Introductions

0900-1100 Government Led Discussion - Questions & Common Themes from Responses

1100 – 1200 Break for Lunch

1200 – 1740 One-on-One Meetings

DAY 2: 27 Jan 2026 0800 - 1650 One-on-One Meetings

DAY 3: 28 Jan 2026 0800 - 1720 One-on-One Meetings

Government Personnel Organization Name

ASC Mr. John Dengler ASC Mr. Jason Morelock ASC Ms. Katie Olson ASC Mr. Jude Stork ASC Mr. Scott Johnson

ACC-RI Ms. Stephanie Brown

ACC-RI Ms. Kristine Pennock ACC-RI Mr. Jacob Harrison ACC-RI Mr. Michael Coon ACC-RI Mr. Shaun Peterson ACC-RI Mr. Ben Graw ACC-RI Ms. Alyse Hardin

ABNS Global LLC Bailey’s Premier Services, LLC

Ecolog International

FZE

Immediate Business Solutions

Loyal Sources Gov.

Services LLC QBMS, LLC Team Housing

Solutions

Veteran Enterprise Technology Services

Active Deployment Systems BHPE LLC EDS Holdco LLC Imran Equipment

Export USA Inc.

Maginot Support Services Recovery Logistics Technica LLC Vibrant Work

Acuity International

LLC

Bowhead Gov.

Support Services Empower AI

International SOS Gov. Medical Services

Maytag Aircraft LLC Response AI Solutions Terrestris LLC Vighter LLC

Akima Facilities Operations Catalyst Solutions Environmental

Chemical Corp International Trade Management GroupMCS Gov. Services

RK Strategic Management Solutions

The Logistics Company LLC Virtus 9 Corp.

Akima Global Logistics, LLC

Ceder International Services

Expeditors International of Washington

J&J Maintenance Inc.

Miami Tech.

Services RMGS Inc Tidal Basin Gov.

Consulting Vision Quest Solutions

Alutiiq Operations Services, LLC

Cherokee Nation Gov. Solutions Fairwinds Tech. Jones Group Int. Michael Stapleton

Associates Rock-It Cargo USA Togiak Logistics Services V2X

Amazon Cherokee Nation Management & Consulting

Flour JRG Services Mission First, LLC Rumi LLC TRAX International Waypoint Global

Apex Site Services Chokma-MS2- Akana JV Fontaine Consulting KBR N2IA Tech. SAWTST, LLC Tunista Operations

Support Services Wesco

APLS Cotton Logistics Gamechanger Logistics & Consulting

Katmai North America

National Industries for the Blind SkyQuest Aviation USA Up Star WESTECH

International LLC

Arkel International, LLC

Crowley Gov.

Services

Global Indirect Markets Kihomac Parsons SLSCO LTD. Vali, Inc WillScot

Aspen Medical USACulmen International Green Tara, LLC Kikaha Solutions Patriot Defense

Group SOS International Vanquish Worldwide Xeless LatAM SAS

ASRC Federal De Lune Corp HII Mission Tech. KNS Culinary Group

People, Technology & Processes, LLC SRM Group LLC Venatore

ATCO’s Frontec USA’s

Disaster Management Group

LLC

Hudson Edge, LLC KVS, LLC PhilTX Heavy Equip.

Strategic Solutions Unlimited Vergence

Atlantic Diving Supply Inc. Dynamic Group IAP World Services Lemoine Professional

Contract Services

Taylors International Services

Versar

Industry Partners in Attendance

Opening Comments

Ms. Stephanie Brown

• Director – LOGCAP, APS, Security, and OPM-SANG

(LASO), Army Contracting Command – Rock Island Mr. John Dengler

• LOGCAP Acquisition Strategy Manager, Army Sustainment Command

Aligning LOGCAP VI with National Defense Priorities

Supporting the National Security Strategy (NSS): The LOGCAP VI acquisition strategy is fundamentally designed to build a resilient, agile, and enduring logistics framework. This directly supports the NSS's emphasis on global campaigning, integrated deterrence, and the need to out-compete strategic rivals in a complex and dynamic global security environment.

Executing the AR 700-137 Mandate: In accordance with AR 700-137 (Logistics

Civil Augmentation Program), this strategy operationalizes the requirement to provide premier, expeditionary contracted logistics to sustain the joint force across the full range of military operations, from humanitarian aid to large-scale combat.

Enhancing Global Readiness and Flexibility: The NSS requires a logistics enterprise that can pivot rapidly and provide sustained support across multiple theaters. The proposed Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) structure and the requirement for partners to propose on all COCOMs are direct responses to this need for global readiness and strategic flexibility.

Fostering an Adaptive and Resilient Industrial Base: To meet the challenges outlined in the NSS, the Army must leverage the full capability of its industrial base.

This strategy's focus on clear evaluation criteria (HTRO), robust small business participation, and best-value trade-offs is intended to foster a competitive and resilient partner network ready to deliver support wherever the mission requires.

LOGCAP – Services

• Engineering

• Minor Construction

• Refurbishment

• Wells Maintenance

• Facilities Management, e.g. roads and grounds Services, perimeter fencing, Clamshell/Tent Repairs

• HAZMAT Management/Storage

• Vector & Pest Management

Services

• Laundry Service Operations

• Food Service Operations

• Morale, Welfare, and Recreation

(MWR) Services

• Power Generation Services

• Water Production Services

• Billeting Maintenance

• Waste & Sewage Management

• Material Handling Equipment

(MHE) Operations

• Reefer Maintenance

• Vehicle Maintenance

• Agricultural Cleaning

• Transportation Motor Pool

Operations

• Class III Retail Operations

• Fire Fighting & Protection

Services

• Oxygen Generations Operation &

Maintenance

• Postal Services

• Material Yard Operations

• Forward Redistribution Point

(FRP)

• Supply Support Activity (SSA)

• CLASS I Yard Operations

• Airfield Operations & Management

Services

• Theater Transportation & Theater

Movement Control

• Container & Cargo Management

• Janitorial Services

• Redeployment Staging Base

Operations

LOGCAP VI - Milestones

•Requirements Package Submitted/Received

•Acquisition Strategy Approved •Acquisition Plan Approved

•Source Selection Plan Approved •Solicitation Review Board (SRB) Start •SRB Complete •Issue Solicitation/Proposal Request

•Solicitation Closing •HTRO Scoring Matrix Evaluation •Brief SSAC on Final Evaluation Results •SSDD Legal Review •Announcement Of Awards •Phase 2 - TO Proposal Submission

•Live Domonstrations / Oral Presentations •Fair Opportunity Closing •Technical Evaluation •Small Business Evaluation •Pricing Evaluation •Meaningful Exchanges •Announcement Of Awards

Mar

Oct

Feb

Aug

Jan

Background – Market Research Goals

1. Put Industry in the Drivers Seat

2. Maximize Industry Participation

3. Discover

What the USG is doing well currently and/or identify blind spots New ways of thinking Industry ideas and capabilities that align with recent DoW initiatives and the LOGCAP program

23 April 2025 – 01 December 2025 The Advance Planning Briefing to Industry in Rock Island, IL 3 Sources Sought

100+ Individual Responses from Industry 1000+ Pgs of Data

All Data Used in Development of the Planned Draft Acquisition Strategy

LOGCAP VI Draft Strategy MATOC vs. SATOC Overwhelming Industry Support for MATOC

Global Capability Competition Flexibility

“…redundancy and resiliency go hand in hand when it comes to logistics.”

Contract Type

FFP & CPFF

Award Fee & Incentive Types – Available but Not Likely Utilized

“…FPIF introduces complex pricing structures and administrative burdens, while CPAF relies on the subjectivity of award fee evaluations and has historically resulted in poor profitability…”

What Other Means of Contractor Incentive Moves the Needle?

Small Business Integration Small Businesses are Seeking an Active and Meaningful Role in the

LOGCAP VI Program, Reflecting a Strong Desire for Direct Participation and Utilization

How Do We Do This?

• Encourage Mentor-Protégé

• Stringent Small Business Participation Evaluation

• Hold Primes Accountable to Small Business Subcontracting Goals

(i.e CARs and/or CPARS)

• TO Competition Ordering Procedures to Consider Proposed vs.

Executed Small Business Participation

“As a small business, we bring meaningful, high-value capability to the mission, but the scale and complexity of LOGCAP require us to focus our participation where our expertise, resources, and past performance create the greatest impact for the prime and the government.”

Geographic Alignment Current State = COCOM Specific TOs

NORTHCOM

INDOPACOM

SOUTHCOM

EUCOM

CENTCOM

AFRICOM

Future State – Same as Above With Single Change

NORTHCOM E

NORTHCOM W

“A COCOM based MATOC structure would allow us to apply our regional experience, local partner networks, and global readiness model wherever the Government requires support.”

The National Security Strategy guides DoW decisions, potentially altering both COCOM structures and award strategies

HTRO Evaluation Strategy (FAR 15)

What we know:

Industry Capability Against PWS Intend to establish Multiple Award IDIQ holders via HTRO with a scoring matrix Matrix evaluation will be entirely objective with no subjective evaluations Currently, no plan to evaluate Price at the FAR Part 15 / HTRO level Best Value Trade-Off competition for Task Order awards

Price will be evaluated at the Task Order level

“When structured this way, an HTRO model supported by a transparent and evidence-driven, self-scoring matrix gives the Government a fair, efficient, and defensible way to identify the most capable LOGCAP prime contractors.”

HTRO Evaluation Strategy (FAR 15)

What We Don’t Know / Need Input On:

Scoring matrix criteria

“The key is ensuring that the matrix reflects the real requirements…global readiness, ability to operate across multiple COCOMs, depth of international infrastructure, subcontractor integration, financial capacity, and proven rapid deployment performance.”

If there will be additional Acceptable / Unacceptable evaluations at IDIQ level Past Performance Technical

Best Value Trade-Off Competition (FAR 16.5)

What we know:

Industry Capability Against COCOM Mission / Workload Trade-off at the Task Order level under FAR Subpart 16.5 Trade-off: Technical, Small Business Participation, and Price

Intention is to evaluate Small Business Participation CONUS and OCONUS

HTRO evaluation will NOT be included in the Trade-Off Each Offeror Will Be Required to Propose to Every COCOM

This approach is designed to ensure a robust competitive environment and maximum flexibility for the Government across all theaters from the start of the contract

“For LOGCAP to remain adaptable, cost-effective, and competitive, especially in CONUS and COCOM-specific MATOCs, the Government must preserve a path for small businesses to meaningfully participate.”

“As a prospective industry partner, it is in our best interest to position ourselves competitively across all COCOMs. At the same time, we recognize that proposing on every COCOM requires significant resources and the ability to credibly demonstrate past performance, staffing depth, and geographic readiness.”

Best Value Trade-Off Competition (FAR 16.5)

What We Don’t Know / Need Input On:

Defining the "Technical" Factor: How Should We Balance Innovation with Proven Solutions?

We recognize that the "best" technical approach can be a groundbreaking new method

("innovation") or a highly effective, proven, and reliable existing one ("fit-for-purpose").

Our goal is to create an evaluation factor that appropriately values both. We want to reward measurable improvements without penalizing the efficiency of proven methods.

We need your input: How can we structure the "Technical" evaluation criteria to give meaningful credit to both novel approaches that enhance outcomes and highly efficient, tried-and-true solutions that guarantee mission success?

How to evaluate Past Performance Proposals

Structure Relative Order of Importance

“To allow industry to bring these innovations forward, the evaluation framework should reward measurable improvements in readiness, speed, transparency, and cost avoidance rather than focusing primarily on lowest price.”

“We believe the USG does allow for innovation in both technical and management approaches….

Whether an approach is a first-of-a-kind solution, and defined as innovative, as compared to a tried-and-true approach is irrelevant to evaluating and providing credit for proposals that result in fit-for-purpose solutions…”

Coming Soon Peformance Work Statement

Currently in working status. When provided, we are looking for feedback on what areas can be more commercial and how to do that.

HTRO Matrix After the 1v1 sessions, the USG will begin assembling the matrix categories and weightings. The USG requires feedback to determine if the matrix categories and scoring system is achievable and the types of documentation that will be best suited to validate contractor scoring.

Open Q&As