PWS_-_Coastal_Fortification_RFQ.docx

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

A HISTORY OF ARMY ENGINEERS AND COASTAL FORTIFICATION

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The Office of History, HQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is preparing a series of survey histories on selected topics on the history of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from the American Revolution to the present. The contractor will research and write a volume in that series focusing on the Army Corps of Engineers and the history of Seacoast Fortifications and Strategic Defense in the United States. The text will be accompanied by informative and visually appealing images.

2. STATEMENT OF WORK

This volume will trace the history of the US Army Corps of Engineers and its efforts to defend its thousands of miles of coastland. Seacoast defense was a major concern for the United States from its independence until World War II. Before airplanes, America's enemies could only reach her from the sea, making coastal forts an economical alternative to standing armies or a large navy. For nearly 160 years, fortification designs evolved and became obsolete with changes in the technology available to both the attacking forces and the defenders. The evolution of the US seacoast defense system is generally identified among several systems, which are somewhat defined by the styles used, but more so by the events or trends which periodically stimulated new funding and construction. The division of the early forts into the First, Second, and Third Systems was made by later historians, and appears officially in an 1851 report by Chief Engineer Joseph Totten, probably the most prolific builder of masonry forts in American history. Dramatic change to design, purpose, and tactics came with the Civil War and both World Wars. With the advent of the Cold War and the introduction of new long-range aircraft and missiles, Army Engineers helped design and deploy new weapons systems to protect the nation from those threats. Themes to be examined by the contractor include the broader context of the American military in the years during and immediately after the American Revolution; the early evolution of coastal fortification in the United States to include the First and Second Systems; the role of foreign engineers in that early construction including the evolution of design and, specifically, the roles of Vauban and Montalembert; the advent of the Third System fortifications after the War of 1812 and the relative roles of Joseph Totten, Simon Bernard, and early West Point graduates; the training of engineers, pioneers, and builders through the nineteenth and well into the twentieth century; the advent of the Corps of Topographical Engineers in 1838 and the role of topogs going forward; the role of slaves in the construction of Third System construction; the effect of the Civil War, Fort Pulaski, and new technologies (like rifled artillery) in making these old forts effectively obsolete; the role of Congressional funding on the construction of coastal fortifications; the shift during the Civil War to reliance on masonry-revetted earthen fortifications; ongoing efforts between the Army and Navy to coordinate on coastal defense; the Congressional decision to cut off funding for Third System construction after 1867; the role of armored ships (monitors) and mines in harbor defense in the years after the Civil War; the causes and consequences of the general decline in coastal fortifications in the 1870s and 1880s; the origins and implementation of the Endicott Program (1895-1905); some language on the evolution of coast artillery weapons throughout; the 1901 reorganization; the Taft Board of 1905 and the establishment of a specific “Coast Artillery Corps” (CAC); the evolution of coastal fortifications in response to new risks like the submarine, airplane, and long-range battleship guns developed in the First World War; efforts to improve coastal defense in the years between the world wars; the impact of the attack on Pearly Harbor in demonstrating the obsolescence of coastal artillery that was not protected by air attack; the evolution of postwar defensive missiles; and, the construction, early in the Cold War, of Nike surface-to-air missile program to intercept long-range bombers; the role of ICBMs (and ABMs to protect the nation against ICBMs) – including construction and disbandment – in sharply curtailing nearly 160 years of American coastal defense; and, finally, the disbanding of all remaining harbor defense commands and the abolishment of the Coast Artillery Corps in 1950. Contractor should note that this is primarily a history of nineteenth and early twentieth century coastal fortification. Coverage of WWII and the Cold War era Nike, ICBM, and ABM programs will be relatively brief.

During the preparation of the manuscript, the contractor will work closely with the editors of the comprehensive history and the contracting officer’s representative (COR) for the contract. The contractor will also read related portions of the comprehensive history in order to insure continuity and coherence among the various volumes and coverage of all important topics. The history to be researched and written under this task order is to be an analytical and comprehensive synthesis relying largely on printed primary and secondary sources. Archival research, in addition to that required to obtain photographs and other images, will also be necessary; and the contractor should anticipate conducting, in coordination with the editors and COR, ten days of primary source research at the National Archives (NARA) and/or other appropriate Records Centers, private collections, etc. Up to an additional twenty days of additional archival research may be authorized under Options One and Two.

3. CONTENT

In addition to the major themes identified above, the contractor will cover the following general topics at a minimum:

· Identify and describe the First System Coastal Defenses (1794-1808) built mainly on contract under European engineers.

· Identify and describe the Second System Coastal Defenses (1808-1816) which relied on the innovations of French Engineer, the Marquis de Montalembert and saw the replacement of foreign engineers by American ones, many of whom were graduates of the new Military Academy at West Point.

· Discuss the role of First and Second System forts in the War of 1812 with particular attention given to Fort McHenry.

· Identify and place into a broader historical context key figures in the evolution of coastal fortifications in the United States to include Vauban, Montalembert. Joseph Totten, John J. Abert, Simon Bernard, John Gross Barnard, Quincy A. Gillmore, Andrew A. Humphreys, William Endicott,

· Discuss the evolution of construction methods to include design and building elements, labor, and management.

· Track the fifty-year history of the US Army Coast Artillery Corps (CAC) from 1901 to 1950 and its relationship to the Army Corps of Engineers.

· Identify and discuss funding impediments for coastal fortification throughout the nineteenth century. Also discuss the period of relative austerity after the First World War and its effects on coast defense forts that went into caretaker status.

· Discuss the World War II program that saw the construction of nearly 200 modern and modernized batteries in the continental US at a cost of $200 million giving the US the most powerful coast defenses in the nation’s history. Also discuss the evolution of military tactics and technology during the war.

· Address the technological transformation that shifted the concept of Strategic Defense from primarily coastal defense to first anti-aircraft defense, strategic deterrence through ICBMs, and later defense against long-range missiles.

· Provide brief overviews of the development and deployment of the Nike, ICBM and ABM systems

· Identify USACE built coastal fortifications and Strategic Defense (Nike, ICBM, and ABM) facilities. (Appendix).

4. RESEARCH

The research is to be conducted in published primary, secondary, and archival sources. Published primary sources may include congressional reports, hearings, and records; Corps reports; newspapers; and published reports of other agencies. Important published and unpublished sources include the following:

· Biographies and memoirs

· General histories of the Corps of Engineers

· Articles in scholarly journals

· Materials in the research collections of the Office of History, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

· Secondary sources including:

· USACE District and Division Histories available online.

· Coast Defense Study Group History

· National Archives (NARA) – Record Group 77 (RG77)

5. MAJOR WORK TASKS

Base Contract

a. Prepare outline and research proposal

b. Prepare detailed outline

c. Collect photographs and prepare captions and credits

d. Prepare supporting information for charts, graphs, and maps

e. Prepare draft manuscript

f. Prepare final manuscript

g. Prepare index

h. Prepare bibliographical essay

i. Prepare list of key index terms

Option One

a. Conduct ten additional days of archival research.

Option Two

b. Conduct ten additional days of archival research

The contactor shall include separate pricing for each Option. The offeror’s cost proposals must be submitted in accordance with the format provided in Table 1 which is displayed below for convenience.

Base Task

Option One

Option Two

6. SCHEDULE

a. Within five days of award, the contractor will meet with contracting officer’s representative (COR), Dr. Matthew Pearcy, at the Office of History, HQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in Alexandria, Virginia, to receive additional guidance. Additional telephone calls and meetings with the COR and with the editors of the history will be held at the request of any of the parties involved. All telephone calls and meetings are considered part of the task order, and no additional payment will be provided for participating in them.

b. Within 35 days of award, contractor will prepare and submit to the Office of History a preliminary outline and research proposal as well as a schedule for completion of the history. The outline will include a subject breakdown and indicate major themes. The research proposal will contain the contractor's research plans and a preliminary bibliography of works to be consulted. The Office of History's comments on the outline and bibliography will be returned to the contractor within 15 days of receipt.

c. Within four months of award the contractor will submit a detailed outline that establishes, in considerable detail, outlines the entire history, provides significant amount of information on each topic to be addressed, and includes a preliminary bibliography. The outline is a key step between research and writing, for it allows the contractor to compile and arrange their research, thereby demonstrating the contractor’s understanding of the material and allowing the COR the opportunity to alter the contractor’s research methodology or historical focus before writing begins.

d. A draft manuscript, including footnotes and bibliography, will be submitted to the Office of History not later than 10 months after the date of award. This draft will be returned to the contractor within 30 days of receipt.

e. The entire revised manuscript will be resubmitted to the Office of History within 30 days of receipt of the Office of History's comments. The Office of History will complete its review of the revised draft within 30 days of receipt and will send comments to the contractor. If further revisions or corrections are required, the contractor will have 30 days after receipt of the Office of History's comments to complete and return them.

7. FORMAT AND ORGANIZATION OF MANUSCRIPT

The draft and final manuscript will contain at a minimum the following elements:

a. Title page;

b. Acknowledgements;

c. Author’s preface, including a short, separate paragraph containing biographical information about the author;

d. Table of contents with chapter titles;

e. A minimum of 60 images to illustrate the text. The images will be provided in separate digital files complete with a table listing the appropriate captions and credits. Hard copy images will be scanned as 600 dpi TIFF files and provided to the government electronically. The contractor will provide digital images at a minimum resolution of 300 pixels per inch (ppi) at 5x7 inches, resulting in a minimum file size of approximately 1.6 megabytes. The contractor will also write the appropriate captions and credits for all of the images provided. The Contractor will also secure releases, where necessary, for all of the images. All photographs, illustrations, and graphics shall be captioned, properly credited, and keyed to the appropriate text. Where required, the Contractor will obtain permission to use a particular illustration and will deliver such permission to the PM and COR along with the manuscript.

f. A minimum of 3 draft map proposals.

j. The information necessary to produce the charts, graphs, and maps to accompany the manuscript. The cost of preparing the charts, graphs, and maps will be the responsibility of the government.

d. Text with endnotes (endnotes should be put at end manuscript, doublespaced);

e. Glossary, if necessary;

f. Bibliography.

8. FINAL PRODUCT

a. The final manuscript will be submitted on 8.5 by 11inch white bond paper using 12-point type and 1 inch margins. The manuscript will be doublespaced using Microsoft Word software. The text should be clean and clear. The entire narrative will be approximately 40,000 words not counting endnotes and bibliography. The narrative shall be descriptive and analytical and will conform in matters of format, style, and grammar to the latest edition of A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (University of Chicago Press) as modified by the Office of History “Style Sheet” prepared for the comprehensive history. Additional guidance will be available from Mr. Douglas Wilson, editor, Office of History, at (703) 428-6566.

b. The final manuscript will also be delivered in digital form in Microsoft Word format.

c. All copies of documents, including illustrations, collected during the research are the property of the Government and will be turned over to the Office of History upon completion of the history. Reference documents will be organized and submitted by chapter organization and illustrations will be submitted separately.

9. EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS

All equipment and materials will be provided by the contractor. The Corps will provide access to official files and documents in its possession. The Office of History will also provide the contractor with access to its copying and scanning equipment.

10. PUBLICATION DATA

All publications and other data furnished by the Government in support of this task order shall remain the property of the Government and shall be returned to the COR upon completion of the task order. All information and data generated in the course of accomplishing this task order shall become the property of the U.S. Government.

11. CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

The historian for the effort must demonstrate that they have at least a Master’s Degree in History (or closely related field) and five years of experience researching and writing military history. To qualify, a wide-ranging knowledge of the history and missions of the U.S. Army engineers is preferred. Writing experience will be based on the number and quality of historical publications completed.

Rating Definitions

Unacceptable

The Offeror’s proposal, if implemented, would introduce excessive risk, making it highly unlikely that performance would meet the Government’s requirements for quality. An “Unacceptable” rating indicates that the weaknesses of the proposed solutions significantly exceed any strength.

12. USE OF INFORMATION COLLECTED

The contractor will not use the information collected during this task order for any purpose prior to the public release of the printed material without the prior written consent of the CO or COR.

13. PAYMENTS

10% of the award price will be paid to the contractor after submission of a preliminary satisfactory outline and research proposal; 25% percent of the award price will be paid to the contractor after submission of a satisfactory detailed outline; and 40% of the award price will be paid to the contractor after acceptance of a satisfactory draft manuscript complete with images and the descriptive information necessary to produce the required charts, tables, and maps. The remainder of the award price will be paid after the contractor submits a satisfactory final manuscript and turns over to the Office of History all Government property as described above.

14. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

All contractor and all associated sub-contractors employees shall comply with applicable installation, facility and area commander installation/facility access and local security policies and procedures (provided by government representative). The contractor shall also provide all information required for background checks or background investigation and to meet installation/facility access requirements to be accomplished by installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. Contractor workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements as directed by DOD, HQDA and/or local policy. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any installation or facility change, the Government may require changes in contractor security matters or processes.

All new contractor employees will complete Level I OPSEC Training within 30 calendar days of their reporting for duty. Additionally, all contractor employees must complete annual OPSEC awareness training. The contractor shall submit certificates of completion for each affected contractor and subcontractor employee, to the COR or to the contracting officer (if a COR is not assigned), within 5 calendar days after completion of training. OPSEC awareness training is available at the following websites: https://www.iad.gov/ioss/ or http://www.cdse.edu/catalog/operations-security.html; or it can be provided by the RA OPSEC Officer in presentation form which will be documented via memorandum.

The Contractor must pre-screen Candidates using the E-verify Program (http://www.uscis.gov/e-verify) website to meet the established employment eligibility requirements. The Vendor must ensure that the Candidate has two valid forms of Government issued identification prior to enrollment to ensure the correct information is entered into the E-verify system. An initial list of verified/eligible Candidates must be provided to the COR no later than 3 business days after the initial contract award.

15. Local Security Policy. All contractor employees who require physical access to government controlled facilities or logical access to government information and or information systems are subject to a fitness determination and appropriate vetting. To assist in the vetting process, the contractor must submit a notice of visit form for each employee who will perform work on the contract, including at the minimum, the name, social security number and date of birth of each employee performing work on the contract that need physical and or logical access.

Documents containing personally identifiable information may only be submitted via encrypted email, by first class mail or it may be hand carried to the security office. Notice of visits must be submitted through the government contracting officer representative (COR) or technical representative who will deliver them to the security office. All notice of visits must be received three business days in advance of the contractor reporting for work.

The contractor will work through the COR or technical representative for the contract who will serve as the liaison between the security office and the contractor. Contractor employees who are not sponsored by a government employee will not be granted access to any facilities under HECSA control nor will HECSA security approve logical access to information systems if a notice of visit containing either the DOD ID number or the social security number is not provided to the security office.

Contractor personnel who do not require a common access card may be granted physical access based on favorable results of an NCIC III records check. Contractors who need a common access card must have the minimum of a favorably adjudicated NACI. If no investigation is on file the CAC will not be issued until a favorable FBI fingerprints check is received by the security office and the NACI has been initiated in PSIP. HECSA Security will initiate all NACI investigations. Contractors who require access to classified information must be performing work on a classified contract and the contract company is responsible for initiating all required investigations for the appropriate security clearance.

If an employee has been the subject of a previous favorably adjudicated investigation, it may be reciprocally accepted if there has not been a two year break in service and there is no presence of new and potentially unfavorable information that casts doubt about the subject’s suitability. When a background check is reciprocally accepted but is more than 5 years old, the security office may initiate an NCIC III check to ensure no new unfavorable information exists.

Contractor employees whose access to classified information has been suspended or revoked will not be authorized logical access to government information systems IAW AR 25-2 paragraph 4-14 b (2) until that investigation is favorably adjudicated. These personnel will also not be allowed unescorted access to government facilities until the investigation has been favorably adjudicated by the Command Security Manager. OPM Final Credentialing Standards allow agencies to deny a CAC or PIV card to any individual who has had their access to classified information denied or revoked. Further due process is not required in these situations. The contractor must provide employees who can be cleared to perform work and must immediately provide replacement employees for those who cannot be cleared.