SP4701-23-S-C001 - DLA Contingency IT Support CSO.pdf

DLA CSO [SP4701‐23‐S‐C001]: Contingency Information Technology Support

A. Requests for Commercial Solutions

1. The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is conducting a commercial solutions opening (CSO) authorized by 10 U.S.C. § 3458 and Department of Defense Class Deviation 2022‐O0007 (https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA000138‐22‐DPC.pdf) to the challenge described in paragraph B.

2. Interested parties may submit proposals in accordance with paragraph C. Paragraph D describes how DLA will evaluate and potentially award one or more contracts. In accordance with the class deviation, any contract awarded may be under FAR Part 12 or an other agreement in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4022.

3. Paragraph E contains generally applicable information.

4. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact:

Mr. Eugene Marrone Agreements and Contracting Officer

DLA DCSO‐P5

DSCO.Other.Transactions@dla.mil and Accelerate@dla.mil

B. Topic 0001 – Contingency Information Technology Support

1. BACKGROUND

As America’s combat logistics support agency, the Defense Logistics Agency provides the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, other federal agencies, and partner nation armed forces with a full spectrum of logistics, acquisition, and technical services. DLA sources and provides nearly all the consumable items America’s military forces need to operate – from food, fuel and energy to uniforms, medical supplies, and construction material. Please visit us online http://www.dla.mil/.

The mission of the DLA Contingency IT Operations (CITOPs) Division is to develop and operate deployable IT capabilities tailored to the needs of DLA Expeditionary Teams enabling the delivery of logistics support for America’s Armed Forces and other Federal Agencies during Contingencies, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Responses. A typical deployment for the CITOPs team is:

● Two personnel

● Arriving via air (most common commercial airlines but military transport is possible)

● Individual carry capacity of <50 pounds

● Supporting 2‐40 end users and additional connected peripherals

DLA’s current communication methods for deployed environments cannot support its current mission of 6 simultaneous deployments, specifically utilizing a Ku band VSAT backhaul. Moreover, the DLA enterprise solutions demand more bandwidth and lower latency which increases the impacts felt by personnel supporting contingent missions. To address the latency/bandwidth problem, DLA and others in DoD are pursuing emerging backhaul communication methods such as Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and cellular 5G. However, the “right” communication method isn’t always known and can change during a deployment. To take advantage of the emerging communication methods and be positioned to use the best available, DLA must identify next‐gen terminals that can provide connectivity to austere environments.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENTS

i. Deployable Terminals ‐ DLA Contingency IT operators need deployable terminals capable of using multiple communication methods, such as satellite constellations (GEO, MEO, LEO, etc.)

and cellular technologies (4G, 5G), in order to establish internet connectivity in austere locations with less equipment.

Solution Considerations:

● The Contingency IT team most commonly uses commercial air transportation. Terminal solutions should adhere to commercial air regulations for size, weight, and component makeup.

DLA wants to take advantage of the communication method that offers the best customer experience in austere environments. This will vary by location and possibly change over time for the same location. Terminals should be able to take advantage of a wide range of communication methods as well as switch seamlessly from one to the next.

Related, DLA aims to leverage flexible WAN technologies that require minimal Tier 3 support and configuration in the deployed environment.

ii. Automated IT Connection ‐ DLA deployed personnel need ‘user‐friendly’ auto‐configurable IT communication solutions in order to quickly establish connectivity in austere environments.

3. BACKGROUND DETAILS:

● Communication equipment includes:

o Communication antenna (i.e. SATCOM Terminal, Cellular receiver, etc.)

o Tactical router and switches (virtual or physical) o Local server capabilities

▪ VM Platforms

▪ Domain Controller

▪ Local File Storage

● Capable of establishing IPSEC VPN, at a minimum, connection back to DLA WAN entry point

● Capable of complying with TRANSEC satellite communication encryption standards

● Remote management for CITOPs or other DLA IT staff for oversight or troubleshooting purposes

● Software‐Defined features that reduce the need for manual set up

4. Program Information.

i. The present budget for this project is approximately $250,000. However, DLA may consider solutions more or less expensive than this.

ii. Any contract award DLA would make from this CSO would be firm‐fixed price.

iii. A need for the above solution exists now. As such, solutions capable of rapid development and delivery are desired. In no situation should a proposed solution take more than two years to develop and deliver.

iv. Concerning intellectual property, DLA anticipates acquiring at a minimum:

a. In any software delivered, commercial licenses customarily provided to the public; and,

b. Technical data on the solution:

(1) Necessary for operation, maintenance, installation, or training; and,

(2) That describes the required overall physical, functional, and performance characteristics (along with the qualification requirements, if applicable) of an item, component, or process to the extent necessary to permit identification of physically and functionally interchangeable items. This is often called ‘form, fit, and function’ data (see 48 C.F.R. § 252.227‐7015(a)(3)).

v. A warranty customary provided to the public lasting at least one year from DLA acceptance of the delivered solution.

C. How to Submit a Solution Brief.

1. Prior to February 26, 2023, 1700 Philadelphia local time, electronically submit to the person identified in paragraph A(4) of this CSO an unclassified solution brief, utilizing the solution brief template provided, that:

a. Identifies who is proposing, appropriate contact information of a person empowered to act on behalf of the entity.

b. Describes the proposed solution, including:

i. How it will best address the need expressed in paragraph B.

ii. How the solution is ‘innovative’ as defined in 10 U.S.C. § 3458(e). Note that while DLA unilaterally decides whether a solution is ‘innovative’, DLA will carefully consider the entity’s rationale.

c. Explicitly agrees with providing DLA the required rights described at paragraph B(4)(iv) or offers DLA greater rights.

d. Explicitly agrees with providing DLA the warranty described at paragraph B(4)(v) or offer a greater warranty.

e. Provides a proposed schedule starting from award date to delivery. If any milestone payments are proposed, those should be integrated into the schedule.

f. States whether the entity, if awarded a contract, would prefer a contract under 48 C.F.R. Part 12 or an other agreement under 10 U.S.C. § 4022. Note that while DLA shall consider any expressed preference, DLA shall determine, unilaterally, whether to offer any awards and, if so, by what instrument.

g. Provides a proposed fixed price firm offer for 120 calendar days after proposal submission, which includes freight on board (FOB) destination delivery. When the entity prefers an other agreement under 10 U.S.C. § 4022, please additionally state:

i. Whether the entity qualifies under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(A) or 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(B) and, if so, why; and,

ii. If the entity qualifies under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(C), how the entity would satisfy the 1/3 cost share requirement. No entity should assume a determination described under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1)(D).

h. State the entity’s Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code or, if the entity has none, express acknowledgement that so registering is a necessary prerequisite for any award DLA may make.

i. State whether the entity is already registered in a government invoicing system (like Wide Area Work Flow) or, if the entity is not so registered, express acknowledgement that so registering is a necessary prerequisite for any award DLA may make.

j. Identify any foreign nationals. If the offeror proposes to use a foreign national(s) [any person who is NOT a citizen or national of the United States, a lawful permanent resident, or a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b (a) (3), as key personnel, they must be clearly identified. For foreign nationals, you must provide country of origin, the type of visa or work permit under which they are performing and an explanation of their anticipated level of involvement on this project.

2. Questions in response to this CSO are due no later than February 1, 2023, 1700 Philadelphia, PA local time. Please submit questions to the person identified in paragraph A(4) of this CSO.

2. DLA will consider the application as proprietary and shall not disclose it outside of the Government, except to non‐Government personnel for evaluation purposes, and shall not duplicate, use, or disclose it ‐‐ in whole or in part ‐‐ for any purpose other than to evaluate the applicable If, however, a contract is awarded as a result of ‐‐ or in connection with ‐‐ this applicable, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the application to the extent agreed upon by both parties in the resulting contract.

3. The solution brief must ‘stand alone’. While the solution brief may include references to outside materials, links to website, etc., DLA WILL NOT AND CAN NOT consider material not stated in the solution brief itself. Similarly, DLA will not consider any accompanying slides, sales materials, integrated or outside videos, or the like sent with the solution brief. DLA may reject, without further consideration, solution briefs sent with extraneous materials.

4. DLA does not anticipate that offerors will have a solution that combines both problem areas. Offerors should focus their responses on the particular problem statement to which they have relevant technology. Should an offeror have technology that is relevant to more than one problem area, it may submit separate solution briefs .DLA will consider only one solution brief per problem statement per entity. Should an entity submit more than one solution brief for the same problem statement, DLA will evaluate the last solution brief submitted and discard any earlier ones.

D. How DLA Will Evaluate and, Potentially, Make Awards.

1. As solution briefs are received, DLA will evaluate them for technical conformance with paragraph C. DLA will reject solutions briefs not conforming to paragraph C and so advise the submitting entity. The submitted entity may, if the date and time stated in paragraph C(1) has not passed, re‐submit a revised solution brief. While DLA intends to complete this review diligently, DLA is under no obligation to complete this review soon enough for an entity to submit a revised solution brief. Therefore, entities should submit their best solution briefs.

2. After the time and date stated in paragraph C(1) has passed, DLA technical peer experts shall review each solution brief against the below evaluation criteria.

a. Technical. How innovative and feasible is the solution in solving the problem described in paragraph B?

Sub Factor 1: Feasibility

Any solution must be feasible. This criterion measures whether the technology exists or is likely to be developed in the scope of this prototype effort. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

• Speed (time to value)

• Existing prototypes

• Demonstrated effectiveness

• Prior performance and subject‐matter‐expertise

• Relevant studies published in reputable scientific journals or by government entities

Sub Factor 2: Responsiveness Any solution must be responsive to the problem statement.

b. Importance to Agency Programs. How would the solution enhance the mission effectiveness of DLA?

Sub Factor 3: Viability Any solution must be viable within the existing technical and organizational environments. This criterion measures whether DoD could easily adopt the solution.

An example of something which is not viable is a technology that has no chance of passing DoD cyber security requirements. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

• Past certification/approval by relevant governing authorities (such as FDA or

NIOSH

• Testing and certification requirements

• Existing partnerships with other government organizations

• Domestic vs. international production

Sub Factor 4: Desirability Any solution must be desirable. This criterion measures whether end users are likely to adopt the offeror’s prototype solution. An example of something which is not desirable is a piece of field equipment that is so uncomfortable to carry that end users refuse to bring it into the field. Another example of something which is not desirable is a feasible, viable technology that does not meet the problem that end users are trying to solve. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

• Effectively meets goals described in the problem statement

• Cost and speed for development and production

• Capacity and scalability

• Ease of use, safety and effectiveness

Sub Factor 5: Time‐to‐Impact Time‐to‐impact measures the time it will take to develop and deploy within the DoD against the demonstrable value it will provide DLA’s end users. Solutions that offer major impacts with quick development and deployment timelines are better than solutions with negligible impacts and long timelines. The best solutions will begin to quickly deliver major gains while still in the iterative design and development phase.

c. Funds Availability. Is the fixed price proposed within the funds available?

Sub Factor 6: Rough Order Magnitude (ROM) The entity shall provide a proposed fixed price firm offer for 120 calendar days after proposal submission, which includes freight on board (FOB) destination delivery. The ROM shall include the total price to complete the solution. This information shall be utilized to determine if the price is fair and reasonable. This information can include, but is not limited to commercial price catalog or other proprietary information to help the Government assess project cost.

3. The reviewers shall provide their findings to the Agreements Officer. The reviewers may also recommend some, all, or no entity be offered an opportunity to further present their solution to DLA. The Agreements Officer will advise, in writing, any entity not selected for further consideration.

a. If the Agreements Officer decides to offer some or all entities an opportunity to further present, the Agreements Officer shall so notify those entities, provide the parameters including any additional criteria DLA will be evaluating, and schedule the presentation. After the presentation, the reviewers will again evaluate the solution brief and presentation using the criteria stated in paragraph D(2), plus any additional criteria the Agreements Officer advised the presenting entities of when first offering the presentation. The Agreements Officer will consider these reviews and decide whether to enter into negotiations with one or more entities or whether additional information is needed prior to making a decision on whether to enter into negotiations.

b. If the Agreements Officer decides no presentations are necessary, the Agreements Officer will consider the reviews and decide whether to enter into negotiations with one or more entities or whether additional information is needed prior to making a decision on whether to enter into negotiations.

c. If the Agreements Officer decides to issue a request for a Prototype Proposal (RPP), the entity shall utilize the following structure for submitting the RPP:

Technical Proposal (Section #1)

Title Page – Company Name, Title, Point of Contact Name, Date, E‐Mail Address, Phone, and Address and any subcontractors or team members. Include an abstract that provides a concise description of the proposal.

Approach – Describe the background and objectives of the proposed work, the approach, deliverables, and the resources needed to execute it. Include the nature and extent of the anticipated results. Include ancillary and operational issues such as certifications, algorithms, and any engineering/software development methodologies that you plan to use to perform. This proposal must include a Statement of Work (“SOW”).

You may refer to the solution brief that prompted this proposal request, but do not duplicate it.

Government Support Required – Identify the type of support, if any, the offeror requests of the government in general such as facilities, equipment, data, and information or materials.

Price Proposal (Section #2)

The offeror shall propose the total price to complete the prototype project and shall provide any other data or supporting information the parties agree is necessary for the determination of a fair and reasonable price. This can include commercial price catalog or other proprietary information to help the government assess project cost.

This must include a detailed project schedule that outlines the various phases of work to align with this basic paradigm for payment milestones:

• Collaborative Minimum Viable Product (“MVP”) Design.

• Awardee delivers MVP to government.

• Awardee delivers prototype to government.

For purposes of this CSO, the MVP is defined as the project blue print—the first step in the iterative process. After award, the successful offeror shall work with the government’s technical team to develop this detailed project plan for the eventual prototype. The government recognizes that, prior to award, offerors will have limited knowledge of the government’s relevant IT infrastructure and this collaborative phase allows the awardee to conduct relevant beneficiary discovery.

4. If the Agreements Officer awards a contract (which must be for a fair and reasonable price), the awardee counter signs the contract, and the Agreement Officer intends to make no further contract awards pursuant to this CSO, the Agreement Officer will notify any remaining entity, in writing, that DLA will no longer consider their solution for award.

E. Generally Applicable Information.

1. DLA provides no funds to offset any costs incurred in providing a solution brief, making a presentation, or otherwise participating in this process. Any funds will be disbursed only in accordance with a contract or other transaction agreement signed by the Agreements Officer and the awardee. Only the Agreements Officer identified in paragraph A(4) may bind DLA.

2. This CSO envisions one integrated solution to address this topic. However, DLA or other eligible federal entities may wish to purchase additional solutions. As such, any other transaction awarded under this CSO may result in a follow‐on production contract or agreement without further competition, in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4022(f), if the prototype is successfully completed.

3. Note that Chapter 21 of Title 41, United States Code, applies to all submitted proposals and any awarded contract, whether awarded under 48 C.F.R. § Part 12 or 10 U.S.C. § 4022.

4. Note that DLA can only award to a responsible entity. Please see 48 C.F.R. Part 9.