Small Business Suite RFI for LOGCAP VI 8APR26.pdf

1. Disclaimer and Purpose

Disclaimer: This market research is exclusively focused on shaping the LOGCAP VI Small Business Suite. This suite serves as a follow-on initiative designed to transition a subset of requirements currently performed under the Enhanced Army Global Logistics Enterprise (EAGLE) contract. This is separate and distinct from the market research for the global contingency and other work described in the LOGCAP VI Performance Work Statement (PWS) recently posted to SAM.gov. The Government is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.215-3 Request for Information or Solicitation for Planning Purposes. The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this RFI or otherwise pay for the information solicited. This is an RFI, your response will be treated as information only. Your response shall not be used as a proposal. FAR clause 31.205-18 is not applicable to this RFI. FAR clause 52.215- 3 Request for Information or Solicitation for Planning Purposes and 52.210-1 Market Research are incorporated by reference into this RFI.

Purpose: The U.S. Army Contracting Command – Rock Island (ACC-RI), on behalf of the Army Sustainment Command (ASC), is conducting market research to identify and gather information from capable small businesses interested in the Small Business portion of the LOGCAP VI program. This Request for Information (RFI) will solicit formal industry feedback to inform the development of our acquisition strategy.

2. Strategic Background: The "Why" Behind this Initiative

The National Security Strategy identifies "Contested Logistics" as a critical vulnerability, and the current separation of contracts like EAGLE and LOGCAP creates friction— specifically the "who does what" dilemma—during rapid mobilization. By merging these vehicles, we are building a logistics architecture that enables the rapid deployment and sustainment of forces, free from the contractual delays that can impede mission success.

The first step is a tailored approach to transitioning the current EAGLE workload, Mobilization Force Generation Installations (MFGIs) and Power Projection Platforms (PPP) with the preponderance of the mobilization missions being awarded to the NORTHCOM LOGCAP Prime vendor(s). For installations with lesser mobilization requirements, the strategy is a dedicated LOGCAP VI Small Business Suite, performing Supply, Maintenance, and Transportation (like what is currently being performed under EAGLE) with a LOGCAP Prime surge capability to perform any potential MFGI/PPP requirements.

3. Specific Questions for Industry

The USG requests responses from interested and capable small businesses to answer the following questions, keeping the "Small Business with Prime Surge" model in mind.

Section A: The "Small Business with Prime Surge" Model

1. Cooperation and Integration: The success of this hybrid model hinges on the seamless integration between the small business incumbent and the activated LOGCAP prime during a surge.

o What are the top three risks associated with this model from a small business prime's perspective (e.g. cost, schedule, performance)?

2. Associated Contractor Agreements: The USG is considering requiring a formal Associated Contractor Agreement (ACA) between the small business prime and the large prime surge.

The ACA would contain specific triggers for activating the prime surge. While the large business would be responsible for drafting these triggers, your perspective on their impact is critical.

o What types of events or metrics (e.g. specific operational thresholds, declaration of a national emergency) do you believe should serve as clear, contractually enforceable triggers to activate a prime surge?

o From a small business perspective, what are your main concerns regarding the activation of a prime surge? (e.g. potential for premature activation, impact on your operational autonomy).

During a surge, the small business prime would continue its mission, while the large business prime would take on a separate, complementary mission to augment overall capacity.

o How would you define the ideal roles and lines of communication between your company and a prime surge to ensure both missions can be executed simultaneously and effectively without disrupting your ongoing work?

o What methods of communication (e.g. joint status meetings, integrated reporting dashboards, designated liaisons) would be most effective for coordinating efforts and deconflicting resources?

A surge event would likely require the sharing of USG-provided resources.

o Government Furnished Property (GFP): If your company uses GFP (e.g.

vehicles, equipment), what is the most effective way to manage this property when a prime surge is activated? Should it remain under your company's control, or should there be a temporary transfer of accountability to the large business? Please explain your reasoning.

o Data and Systems: The prime surge will require access to USG systems that your company also uses (e.g. reporting dashboards, safety and environmental reporting systems). What are your primary concerns regarding simultaneous access, and what safeguards or protocols should be in place to manage data integrity, security, and operational continuity?

The effectiveness of the ACA depends on the commitment of both the small business and the large prime surge.

o What contractual mechanisms do you believe would be most effective in ensuring both parties comply with the terms of the ACA? For example, should ACA compliance be treated as a formal contract deliverable?

o As a small business, what are your primary concerns about being required to enter into a binding ACA?

o Would you be willing to sign such an agreement? Please provide any rationale or conditions that would influence your decision.

Section B: Prime Capability and Hybrid Contract Structures

1. Prime Contractor Experience: Please describe your company's experience as a prime contractor managing multiple, simultaneous service lines (e.g. supply, maintenance, transportation) at a single, installation or campus. Provide specific contract examples.

2. Contract CLIN Structure and Flexibility: The Army is focused on utilizing a flexible acquisition approach that tailors the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure to the nature of the work. This ensures that risk and cost incentives are appropriately balanced between the USG and our industry partners. We are seeking your input on the optimal CLIN structures for services within the supply, maintenance, and transportation scope.

o Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Services:

• During normal, "steady-state" operations, which specific services

(supply, maintenance and transportation) do you believe are best suited for a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) CLIN?

For each service you identify, please explain why it is suitable for a

FFP structure (e.g. well-defined requirements, low performance risk, predictable costs).

o Cost-Reimbursable Services:

• Which services are better suited for a Cost-Reimbursable CLIN structure?

Please provide specific scenarios or conditions that would justify a Cost-Reimbursable CLIN. For example, you might consider tasks with fluctuating workloads (like the initial phase of an operation before the prime surge is in place), uncertain requirements, or a high degree of technical risk.

4. Instructions for Response

Small businesses should submit a response (maximum 15 pages) addressing the questions above and the following company information.

• Company Name, CAGE Code, and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)

• Company Address and primary Point(s) of Contact (Name, Title, Email, Phone)

• Small Business Certification(s) and current EAGLE task order holder status, if applicable.

Please submit responses via email to shaun.y.peterson.civ@army.mil, alyse.m.hardin.civ@army.mil, benjamin.p.graw.civ@army.mil, and angela.kim6.mil@army.mil.

mailto:shaun.y.peterson.civ@army.mil mailto:alyse.m.hardin.civ@army.mil mailto:benjamin.p.graw.civ@army.mil mailto:angela.kim6.mil@army.mil