AMCOM Logistics Support Facility Management Activity (LSFMA)

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Mar 29, 2012 4:41 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of previous notice to the draft RFP is to correct the answer previously posted to Question 28 and to answer additional questions. Questions 1 through 33 have previously been answered.

28. In the most recent amendment to the draft RFP, the Government states that the AS 9110 and AS 9100 certifications required under FAR 52.246-11 must be met by the prime contractor. Since we intend to submit our proposal as a Joint Venture, will the Government allow the ISO 9001, AS 9100 and AS 9110 certifications that are held by the individual owners of a Joint Venture to be attributed to the Joint Venture as the Prime Contractor for purposes of satisfying Subfactor A-Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications and FAR 2-246-11?

Answer: Offerors should ensure their approach complies with the "Limitation on Subcontracting clause 52.219-14". This procurement is a total small business set-aside, joint ventures contemplating the submission of a proposal in response to this request for proposal should be mindful of 13 CFR 121.103(h)(3).

Paragraph H-15. Is there a need to establish a heavy metals baseline for each employee and continued exposure testing program?

Answer: This narrative has been deleted in the formal RFP.

35. Paragraph H-18 of RFP states: "H-18 WAIVER OF ALLOWABLE COSTS. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this contract, for each of the contractor's accounting periods during the life of this contract, the parties agree that the Government shall not be billed or obligated to pay any of the following costs: (To be completed for offeror for any normally allowable cost, such as shift premiums, material handling, or facilities capital cost of money)."

Question: The term "such as" is used in the above reference. Is the Government requiring contractors to waive shift premiums, material handling, and facilities capital cost of money? Is this an opportunity to waive otherwise FAR based allowable costs or a mandate by this RFP?

Answer: This narrative has been deleted in the formal RFP.

36. Paragraph L-25. Will the Government add the clause for New Mexico Services tax (FAR 52.229-10) to the solicitation?

Answer: No.

37. Paragraph L-31 Item 3a(1) file Packaging - The Government is requesting in paragraph L-31 2(c) digital copies for each volume, apparently as separate disks. Paragraph L-31 Item 3a(1) says to zip all of the proposal files into one file entitled proposal zip. Does the Government require separate disks for each proposal volume or multiple disks that contain all proposal volumes zipped?

Answer: Paragraph L-29, 1) File Packaging has been revised in the formal RFP. Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted on a separate DVD-R. Offerors are instructed to submit their proposal in accordance with the instructions found in this section.

38. Paragraph L31 item 3c)(1) Contract Rate Pricing - In the establishing of contract rate pricing tables of firm fixed price and cost plus fixed fee rates; can an offeror submit rates for subcontractors for the same labor category as a separate line item or should the rates of the prime contractor and subcontractors be blended based on the estimated hours provided with the tables?

Answer: The Government's intention is to have FFP and CPFF rate tables that are inclusive of subcontractors proposed as team members by the prime contractor. (Note: This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 10% of the total proposed price.) See section L-29 of the RFP for further instructions regarding the Contract Rate Pricing. See also answer to Question #33.

39. If the rates are to be binding for fixed price task orders, it is recommended that a contractor offeror be allowed to separate the fixed price hourly rate for the prime offeror and each individual subcontractor. Is this approach acceptable to the Government?

Answer: See answer to question 38.

40. Will the Government provide an estimated number of labor hours by labor category to be used to form the offerors' basis for the rate pricing tables along with the estimate location of the support and provide a plug number for materials / ODC's based on historical orders?

Answer: See exhibit D in the formal RFP. Hourly rates should not be dependent upon the location of the support.

41. Will the contractor be allowed to adjust its proposed hourly fixed labor rate for the firm fixed
price rate table if a location not previously quoted in this solicitation is ordered or requested in an individual task order?

Answer: See answer to question 40.

42. Will the Government provide historical labor hour order information under the current
incumbent's contract to aid the offeror in determining number of estimated labor hours by location that have been / or are likely to be ordered in the future?

Answer: This contract is not a level of effort type contract. Hours will not be ordered. There is no distinction of effort by location for this LSFMA requirement.

43. Paragraph L31 item 3c)(1) Contract Rate Pricing - Background: Since there is no way for the Government to ascertain each specific future LSF task order requirements, an assumption is made that an IDIQ Multiple Award Contract (MAC) prime contractor (post IDIQ award) will be allowed to propose/add any subcontractors (subs, material vendors, service providers, consultants, other non-prime offeror support/materials) on a task order by task order basis to meet emerging Government warfighter requirements. At the point of Task Order Government Evaluation, the Government will evaluate subcontractor/materials proposal reasonableness.

Question: Does the Government concur that subcontractors/material providers can be added/proposed by an LSF MAC Prime on a task order by task order basis in order to tailor task order teams that meet unique LSF requirements?

Answer: Each successful offeror under the multiple-award IDIQ contract will submit proposals tailored to specific delivery order requirements and will be evaluated. See answer to question #38 regarding subcontractor pricing.

44. Section L, Volume I - Technical, Subfactor A - Corporate Capability, Page 67
(c)(vii) The minimum tool/equipment requirements identifies an "Aviation Tool Set" as part of requirement to support the LSFMA.

Question: Will the National Stock Number (NSN) for this Tool Set be provided as Government Furnished Equipment?

Answer: See Attachment 0015 of the RFP. Commercial equivalents are authorized where available.

45. As long as the prime contractor fulfills the 60 mile radius facility requirements for the solicitation, would there be any performance limitations for team members or subcontractors on task orders that they must be performed within the 60 mile radius?

Answer: The final RFP will reflect that the prime contractor's facility must be within 60 miles of Redstone Arsenal. The requirements in Section L&M are applicable to the prime contractor. Subcontractor opportunities are not restricted by the 60 mile requirement.

46. Question: In the initial sources sought solicitation the requirement for ISO certifications and FAA Part 145 certification pose a question as to when the actual certifications need to be in full force. The GAO, in their ruling on April 1, 2011, File B-404666, states that the certifications are due at the time of performance. Will AMCOM adhere to this ruling?

Answer: Upon the conversion of the RFP from draft to final, the certifications will be required by the effective date of the award.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Mar 15, 2012 6:23 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of previous notice to the draft RFP is to answer OCI questions previously submitted. Please note, some of these questions were submitted prior to the revised OCI clause dated February 09, 2012.

1) Question: Will the Government revise the language in the anticipated Organization Conflict of Interest clause in order to provide a boarder competitive environment for this solicitation?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

2) Question: Due to the broad range and unpredictable nature of services that may be required under this contract that could create OCIs for any contractor in the future, will the government revise the language in the anticipated Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) clause to allow contractors to implement mitigation strategies at the task order and technical instruction level?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

3) Is it the Government's intent to OCI out any company that is on an AMCOM Express team, whether or not the company currently has work on AMCOM Express?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

4) What will be the Government process for determining/evaluating OCI potentials for a subcontractor on LSFMA that is a subcontractor on an Express team that is doing CAAS type work for one Army Program office, but the LSFMA work may be for a different Army Program office?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

5) May a contractor participate on a winning LSFMA proposal though it may have work in a project office that is not a direct customer? An example could be that a subcontractor to an LSFMA Prime supports the PM-Cargo project office, but the LSFMA Task Order is for PM Apache. Taking this further, if an LSFMA subcontractor supports PM-Common Missile Defense System, do they have an OCI as an LSFMA subcontractor?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

6) Has the Government considered that implementation of the OCI clause, as currently drafted, could have the impact of limiting the participation of numerous, capable Huntsville area businesses on the LSFMA contract, and thus limiting competition? (Implementation of the OCI clause could impact the current team compositions (Subcontractors) of some potential Prime bidders, with the exception of the incumbent, who, to the best of our knowledge, does no AMCOM Express work.)

Answer: Yes.

7) Does the Government plan to make its decision on the final wording and/or implementation of the OCI clause, and advise Industry, prior to issuance of the formal LSFMA RFP? To delay a decision until the RFP is actually issued could have the impact of forcing some Prime bidders to quickly re-structure their subcontractor teams in a very limited amount of time, and potentially place them at a competitive disadvantage to the incumbent.

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

8) We respectively believe many bidders may not agree the AMCOM Express Technical, Programmatic or Logistics domains are generally involved in supporting the LSFMA Requiring elements in providing services that include elements in FAR Part 9.505. The AMCOM Express vehicle and many other contract vehicles are broad in nature and may not result in an OCI for the work contemplated in the LSFMA contract. The government in most cases has included OCI language that addresses potential OCI issues on a task order-by-task order basis or allows offeror's an opportunity to present OCI mitigation strategies, rather than excluding a large pool of bidders from participating in major Solicitations. We respectfully request the removal of the planned OCI language which will exclude AMCOM Express contractors and subcontractors, numbering up to 1400 companies, as we deem this to be a violation (contrary) to The Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) of 1984, as implemented in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 6, and Department of Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) Part 206, which sets the standard of competition in Federal contracts.

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

9) As the benefits of competition: drives cost savings, improves quality of products/services, enhances solutions and the industrial base, promotes fairness and openness leading to public trust and overall increases the likelihood of efficiencies and innovations, we believe excluding AMCOM Express contractors and subcontractors who should have the ability to address potential OCI issues as they may arise under this program, favors the incumbent and will not be deemed to be fair and reasonable, nor supportive of the requirements of FAR Part 6-Competion Requirements. We request excluding AMCOM Express contractors and subcontractors from the LSFMA Solicitation be deleted from the RFP, especially since such OCI issues are perceived and may not arise under the work contemplated by the RFP.

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

10) COMPANY A currently provides support to PM AME, specifically APM ABC that involves CAAS. Is APM ABC a requiring agency for LSF? If so, will COMPANY A be excluded from competition? In the past, we have dealt with potential OCIs by putting an adequate mitigation plan in place. Please advise.

Answer: APM ABC is not currently utilizing the LSF support contract. However, program offices are constantly added for the LSF program. The OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012 applies both pre and post award.

11) Is the intent of the W58RGZ-11-R-0231 Draft OCI Amendment language (as published) to result in any or a combination of the following?

i) Prohibit the participation of active AMCOM EXPRESS Prime Contractors, Team Members or Subcontractors on the LSFMA Solicitation?

Answer: See the amended OCI Clause posted 09 Feb 2012

ii) Prohibit the performance of active AMCOM EXPRESS Prime Contractors, Team Members or Subcontractors currently providing CAAS (of any type) directly to PEOAVN PMOs and PEOM&S PMOs on the LSFMA Solicitation?

Answer: See the amended OCI Clause posted 09 Feb 2012

iii) Prohibit the performance of active AMCOM EXPRESS Prime Contractors, Team Members or Subcontractors currently providing CAAS (technical expertise) to Government Engineering Organizations (e.g., AMRDEC) that serve PEOAVN PMOs and PEOM&S PMOs on the LSFMA Solicitation?

Answer: See the amended OCI Clause posted 09 Feb 2012

iv) Prohibit the performance of active AMCOM EXPRESS Prime Contractors, Team Members or Subcontractors that have an identified OCI from participating at the Task Order (TO) Level; post-contract award? Where OCI is identified as past, present or planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise as contractor, subcontractor, or consultant) relating to the work to be performed under the LSFMA TO and bearing on whether the LSFMA TO Team has a possible OCI with respect to being able to render impartial, technically sound, and objective assistance or advice, result in a biased work product or may result in being given an unfair competitive advantage.

Answer: See the amended OCI Clause posted 09 Feb 2012

12) I am assuming that if you are a contract provider of equipment for PEO AVN, then the OCI clause does not apply. For example, COMPANY A has one of its divisions supporting PEO AVN for a component of the Kiowa Warrior and has access to information needed to support that platform - Assume NO OCI??

Answer: If you have access to another company's proprietary data, you have a potential OCI. See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012.

13) Does the OCI clause apply to the Primes only or to the Primes and all teammates and subs?

Answer: See the amended OCI Clause posted 09 Feb 2012

14) How do you define the LSF Requiring elements that drive the OCI?

Answer: Any PEO Aviation program or supporting engineering offices.

15) How do you define "other contract vehicles"?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012

16) Will each Prime and its subs be required to have an OCI mitigation Plan?

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012

17) The clarification states that contractors providing CAAS under the AMCOM Express contract vehicle...are considered to have Organizational Conflicts of Interest. Is this meant to convey that having any contract under the AMCOM Express contract vehicle is considered to be an OCI? Or are there certain cases in which one can have a contract through AMCOM EXPRESS and it not be considered an OCI? As an example, providing technical support for training devices in a capacity that does not include the development of specifications or requirements that could later be competed under the LSFMA contract vehicle.

Answer: See the amended OCI clause posted 09 Feb 2012

18) The OCI instructions read, "If you are a prime contractor on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract, you are considered to have an OCI with the LSFMA program that will require a mitigation plan that, at a minimum, divests you from working on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract for any current or future work supporting a particular program office once the program office commences effort generating an LSFMA requirement. If you are a subcontractor to a prime on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract, you are considered to have an OCI that has the potential for issues during the life of the LSFMA contract and a robust OCI mitigation plan is required."

Are subcontractors also divested from working on the AM COM Express contract for any current or future work supporting a particular program office once the program office commences effort generating an LSFMA requirement?

Answer: If unable to mitigate the OCI, and continuing to work in the program office, yes it is a distinct possibility.

19) How are we, a Contractor, supposed to know when a PM has commenced effort to generate an LSFMA requirement?

Answer: Notification will be made when multiple-award contractors and team members receive information or are approached about a forthcoming requirement. It will be incumbent upon each successful offeror to notify the government of any OCI.

20) What is the operative action that triggers the "commencement of effort to generate a LSFMA requirement"?

Answer: When the LSFMA accepts the work, receives a draft requirement, or any engineering oversight.

21) Will the contractors overarching mitigation plan be evaluated as part of the proposal evaluation process and, if so, what are the evaluation factors associated with the overarching mitigation plan?

Answer: The OCI is not part of the source selection plan, but a mitigation plan is required.

22) The second paragraph of Section H-25, Introduction includes the following statement:

"An overarching mitigation plan is required to be submitted with the contractors competitive proposal for Government review and ultimately into the contract."

QUESTION: Will the contractors overarching mitigation plan be evaluated as part of the proposal evaluation process and, if so, what are the evaluation factors associated with the overarching mitigation plan?

Answer: No.

QUESTION: Will the overarching mitigation plan be submitted separately for approval before the final RFP is released so that contractors can ensure they are selectable before incurring the significant costs associated with developing a proposal?

Answer: No. The clause is comprehensive.

QUESTION: Given the complexity of this OCI issue, will the government consider conducting1-on-1 sessions with potential primes to discuss specific circumstances and concerns and then provide potential primes with an opinion as to the selectability of the potential prime?

Answer: No. The clause is comprehensive.

23) The second paragraph of Section H-25, Introduction includes the following statement:

""Contractor", as used in this clause, means any person, firm or corporation which has a majority or controlling interest in the contractor or in any parent corporation thereof, any person, firm, or corporation in or as to which the contractor (or any parent or subsidiary corporation thereof) has a majority or controlling interest."

BACKGROUND: Company A is an LLC co-owned by Company B and Company C. Company B & C each own 50% of Company A and have equal representation on the Board of Managers such that neither company has majority or controlling interest. Company A is an AMCOM EXPRESS prime and was also a prime on the predecessor contract, AMCOM Omnibus 2000 (O2K). Company A is managed by a President and administrative support staff that are all employees of the LLC (not Company B or C employees) and that do not provide direct support to any AMCOM EXPRESS task order. All work received through the EXPRESS prime contract is awarded to B & C, as subcontractors.

QUESTION: Does the government concur that Company B & C are subcontractors on AMCOM EXPRESS and not a prime contractors per the terms of the language in the LSFMA OCI Clause cited above?

Answer: No.

24) Section H-25, paragraph d., Task Order Level OCI indicates that LSFMA contractors may have "access to source selection or other acquisition information," may asked to draft "statements of work, specifications, cost estimates, or evaluation criteria of future procurement," or may be required to "assess and evaluate systems, subsystems, components, software, equipment, services, and other products developed/provided by Government contractors." These functions fall into the category of CAAS and are not consistent with the LSFMA PWS.

QUESTION: Will the government remove these requirements from the OCI clause as the LSFMA PWS does not address performance of CAAS services?

Answer: No.

25) Section H-25, paragraph (e) (4) Protection of Information, the Government states the contractor shall "indemnify the Government as to any cost/loss resulting from the unauthorized use or disclosure of any third-party proprietary information by its employees, the employees of subcontractors, or by its agents."

QUESTION: In the text above are the "employees" and "agents" those of the contractor?

Answer: Yes.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Mar 01, 2012 4:10 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of prevoius notice to the draft RFP is to answer additional questions. Questions 1 through 24 have previously been answered.

25. Is it a requirement that the Prime Contractor hold all of the certifications below, or is it acceptable that some of these requirements be met by a subcontractor teammember?

E-7 52.246-11 HIGHER-LEVEL CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENT FEB/1999

Insert AS9100, AS9110, ISO9001:2008, ISO 14001, and FAA 145 in the blanks within the above referenced clause.

TITLE NUMBER DATE TAILORING

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AS9100(REV C) 2009 N/A

AEROSPACE - QMS REQUIREMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATIONS AS9110(REV A) 2009 N/A

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ISO 9001:2008 2008 N/A

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STANDARD ISO 14001 CURRENT N/A

FAA REPAIR STATION FAA 145 CURRENT N/A

Answer: See questions 2, 3, 15 and 28.

26. Will the 50% limitation on Subcontracting Requirement below be enforced at the delivery order level or at the total contract level? In other words, can a Prime Contractor subcontract out more than 50% on a specific delivery order as long as it maintains a 51% or higher workshare on the total contract?

I-28 52.219-14 LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING DEC/1996

Answer: The limitations on subcontracting requirement will be enforced at the total contract level. Additional information will be provided in the RFP.

27. The AMCOM clause incorporated at G-2 (52.242-4001 PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF DD FORM 250) includes a mailing address, implying a need to execute hardcopy documents in addition to the WAWF submission required via G-1 (52.232-4003 INVOICING AND PAYMENT (WAWF) INSTRUCTIONS). Will hardcopy be required? If hardcopy is supplanted by WAWF by adding appropriate organization DODAACs, recommend updating the clause (or noting deviation for the hardcopy mailing portion of it).

Answer: This clause at G-2 has been removed from the RFP, therefore hard copy will not be required.

28. In the most recent amendment to the draft RFP, the Government states that the AS 9110 and AS 9100 certifications required under FAR 52.246-11 must be met by the prime contractor. Since we intend to submit our proposal as a Joint Venture, will the Government allow the ISO 9001, AS 9100 and AS 9110 certifications that are held by the individual owners of a Joint Venture to be attributed to the Joint Venture as the Prime Contractor for purposes of satisfying Subfactor A-Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications and FAR 2-246-11?

Answer: Offerors should ensure their approach complies with the "Limitation on Subcontracting clause 52.219-14". This procurement is a total small business set-aside, joint ventures contemplating the submission of a proposal in response to this request for proposal should be mindful of 13 CFR 121.03(h)(3).

29. Reference Draft RFP, Page 66, subfactor A - Corporate capability: Will the Government consider modifying the current corporate capability requirements - as pertains to both certifications and the industrial facility requirements - such that a demonstrated composite team capability with regard to meeting these is satisfactory and eligible for award? In conjuction with this question, we offer a suggestion in the form of implementing a Minimum Capabilities Matrix (MCM) along the lines of the enclosed sample, which could be used to ensure all desired certifications and industrial facility capabilities are satisfactorily met.

Answer: No, the RFP requirements will remain as stated. The offeror is responsible for providing a proposal that meets the requirements. This requirement is a Small Business Set Aside that requires the prime contractor entity to be certified to AS 9100, AS 9110, and ISO 9001:2008. The requirement for FAA Part 145 Certification may be met by a subcontractor. The facility requirements are listed in Section L. The proposal will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.


30. Reference - Draft RFP, page 66, Subfactor A - Corporate Capability: With regard to the requirement for AS9100/AS9110 substantiation, we understand that certification is a requirement to bid this program. However, a company newly certified to AS9100/AS9110 may not yet have the history and artifacts needed to adequately answer the RFP requirements. Since over 85% of the AS9100/AS9110 requirements are the same as ISO 9001 requirements, would the Government also consider the use of ISO 9001 historical data (audit results, quality monitoring, SIP, process improvements, etc.) as valid substantiation of an adequate corporate quality system?

Answer: No, the RFP requirements will remain as stated. The offeror is responsible for providing a proposal that meets the requirements. This requirement is a Small Business Set Aside that requires the prime contractor entity to be certified to AS 9100, AS 9110, and ISO 9001:2008. The requirement for FAA Part 145 Certification may be met by a subcontractor. The facility requirements are listed in Section L. The proposal will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.

31. Reference - draft RFP, Page 68, Subfactors B, C, and D - sample tasks 1, 2 and 3 respectively: It would be very helpful if the Government provides a pricing template in advance. Will the Government do so?

Answer: No, the pricing template (Exhibit D) will be released with the formal RFP. This exhibit contains both the contract rate matrix as well as the pricing templates for the sample tasks.

32. Draft RFP, Page 68, Subfactors B, C, and D - Sample Tasks 1,2 and 3 respectively: A 500 page proposal due within 45 days is a significant resource impact on a small business. Will the Government provide drafts or early release of sample tasks?

Answer: No, the Government intends to release the sample tasks with the formal RFP.

33. Reference - Draft RFP, Page 69, (1) Contract Rate Pricing: Will the government require that separate rates be submitted for the prime and each teammate or will one composite rate deck from the prime and all teammates be requested?

Answer: It is the Government's intention is to have FFP and CPFF rate tables that are inclusive of subcontractors proposed as team members by the prime contractor. The offerors should include the impact of any subcontractor performance and temporary labor into the proposed rate table.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Feb 09, 2012 5:36 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of previous notice to the draft RFP is to revise the draft OCI verbiage to reflect the following (Please submit any questions or comments regarding this revision by Close of Business Monday, February 20th, 2012):

H-25 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (OCI)

Introduction: The LSFMA contract will be a Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract and there will be continuing competition during the ordering period of the contract. The Government recognizes its responsibility to maintain the integrity of the competitive process by protecting the competitive sensitive data of the multiple awardees. However, the Government also recognizes that contractors providing support on multiple services contracts have the potential to severely affect mission accomplishment through conflicts of interest. The buying activity, ACC-Redstone, must be able to maintain competition on task orders under this and other contracts.

The LSFMA contract will receive a preponderance of requirements from aviation program offices located at Redstone Arsenal Alabama. These program offices, and the RDEC Directorates that provide aviation support (such as Aviation Engineering Directorate, Software Engineering Directorate, and Engineering Directorate) heavily utilize Contract Advisory and Assistance Services (CAAS) contracts and in particular the "AMCOM EXPRESS" contract. As a result, LSFMA contractors that participate in other CAAS contracts to specifically include the "AMCOM EXPRESS" contract are considered to have a high potential of OCI issues that will require robust mitigation plans. This is especially true as it relates to FAR 9.505-4, "Obtaining Access to Proprietary Information." An overarching mitigation plan is required to be submitted with the contractors competitive proposal for Government review and ultimately into the contract. In addition, each delivery order will be reviewed to determine if the overarching OCI plan meets the need for OCI protection or if a need to tailor the plan for any specific order will be required.
If you are a prime contractor on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract, you are considered to have an OCI with the LSFMA program that will require a mitigation plan that, at a minimum, divests you from working on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract for any current or future work supporting a particular program office once the program office commences effort generating an LSFMA requirement. If you are a subcontractor to a prime on the AMCOM EXPRESS contract, you are considered to have an OCI that has the potential for issues during the life of the LSFMA contract and a robust OCI mitigation plan is required. All Offerors are advised to review the OCI clause contained in their CAAS contracts and should provide a copy of their clause with their proposed mitigation plan.

a. Definitions.

"Organizational Conflict of Interest" means that because of other contractual activities or relationships with the Government or other persons, a person is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government, or the person's objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage. "Person" as used herein includes Corporations, Partnerships, Joint Ventures, Teaming Arrangements, and other business enterprises.

"Contractor", as used in this clause, means any person, firm or corporation which has a majority or controlling interest in the contractor or in any parent corporation thereof, any person, firm, or corporation in or as to which the contractor (or any parent or subsidiary corporation thereof) has a majority or controlling interest. The term also includes the corporate officers of the contractor, those of any corporation which has a majority or controlling interest in the contractor, and those of any corporation in which the contractor (or any parent or subsidiary corporation thereof) has a majority or controlling interest. All references to the "Contractor" as contained in this clause shall apply with equal force to all of these included.

"Contract", as used in this clause, means the basic contract or any task order issued there under as applicable to the level at which this clause is being invoked.

b. OCI Potential.

It is recognized by the parties hereto that the effort to be performed by the contractor under the LSFMA contract includes the repair and modification of components and end items, fabrication of hardware, logistic and technical support, trade studies and the update and maintenance of data and drawings, systems engineering as related to the requirement to perform a logistics task and a myriad of systems production efforts. Each requirement has a potential for access to other contractors' proprietary information. Consequently, performance of this contract creates potential OCIs such as are contemplated by FAR 9.505 or other applicable Federal Law current at the time of contract award or subsequently enacted thereafter. It is the intention of the parties that the contractor will not engage in any contractual or other activities which could create an OCI with its position under this contract; which might impair its ability to render objective/unbiased advice and recommendations on this contract or other contracts; or by which it may derive an unfair competitive advantage as a result of knowledge, information, and experience gained during the performance of this contract or other contracts and applied to this contract.

c. Contractor Responsibilities.

(1) The contractor warrants that to the best of its knowledge and belief, and except as otherwise set forth in the contract, the contractor does not have any organizational conflict of interest(s) as defined in paragraph a. above. The contractor agrees that, if after award, it discovers an actual or potential organizational conflict of interest at the contract level (basic contract or task order) it shall make immediate and full disclosure in writing to the Contracting Officer. Changes in the contractor's relationships due to mergers, consolidations or other unanticipated circumstances may create an unacceptable organizational conflict of interest which might necessitate such disclosure. The notification shall include a description of the actual or potential organizational conflict of interest, a description of the action that the contractor has taken or proposes to take to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the conflict, and any other relevant information that would assist the Contracting Officer in making a determination on this matter.

(2) The contractor agrees to maintain and implement a Conflicts of Interest (COI) Compliance Plan for the duration of this contract. The COI Compliance Plan shall identify the contractor's approach for adhering to the terms of this clause and shall describe its procedures for aggressively self-identifying and resolving both organizational and employee conflicts of interest. The overall purpose of the COI Compliance Plan is to demonstrate how the contractor will assure that its operations meet the highest standards of ethical conduct, and how its assistance and advice are impartial and objective. The COI Compliance Plan shall specifically address how the contractor will (a) Protect confidential, proprietary, or sensitive information; (b) Prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the contractor's judgment; and (c) Prevent an unfair competitive advantage. The contractor shall permit the Government to review the COI Compliance Plan at any time during the life of this contract.

(3) The contractor understands that, as a minimum, the following is considered an immediate OCI issue: access to competitive sensitive data such as other contractor cost or pricing information to include rates and development of hours, technical approaches, technical data and processes generated by a contractor and not readily available to the public, design and development information not readily available to the public. This is a representative list and is not all inclusive.

(4) The contractor shall review and become familiar with the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 9.5 "Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest (OCI)." Particular attention is directed to FAR 9.505, FAR 9.505-1, FAR 9.505-2, FAR 9.505-3 and FAR 9.505-4.

d. Task Order Level OCI.

(1) Specific efforts to be performed under this contract shall be defined by individual task orders issued hereunder. It is anticipated that the activities discussed below, which will likely arise under certain task orders, could lead to or result in the creation of an OCI. These activities are not exhaustive of all potential OCIs, but are common to contracts that produce data, a product, information, assistance services or are conducted in an area that provides access to other contracts and/or other contractor information.

Advanced Access to Acquisition Information - Task order performance under this contract may provide the contractor access to source selection or other acquisition information in advance of such information being provided to the public. Such information could provide the contractor a competitive advantage in a future acquisition and could be perceived as unfair by a competing contractor who is not given similar access to the relevant information. Unless otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer, the contractor is precluded from participating in contracting actions in which it was provided advanced access to acquisition information.

Development of Acquisition Data - Task order performance under this contract may require the contractor to participate in the development of Government data that will be utilized for a separate Government acquisition. Such performance may include the drafting of statements of work, specifications, cost estimates, or evaluation criteria of future procurements. This activity places the contractor in a situation that could allow it to manipulate key aspects of a future procurement in its own favor, creating an unfair advantage over competing vendors and/or in a position of improperly influencing its own potential work. Unless otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer, the contractor is precluded from participating in future acquisitions, either competitive or non-competitive, for which it has participated in the development of any acquisition data.

Assessment of Contractor Products and Services - Task order performance under this contract may require the contractor to assess and evaluate systems, subsystems, components, software, equipment, services, and other products developed/provided by Government contractors. It is imperative that the contractor render objective and unbiased advice to the Government in performing such tasks and that its impartiality not be undermined by the contractor's financial or other business relationship to the entity whose work is being assessed or evaluated. As such, unless otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer, the contractor shall not assess or evaluate any system, subsystem, component, software, equipment, services, or other product developed/provided by itself, or another business division, or subsidiary of the same corporation, or other entity with which it has a significant financial relationship.

(2) The contractor agrees that it will assess all LSFMA task order requirements and other Government contract opportunities for which it desires to participate either as a prime contractor, subcontractor at any tier, or consultant for perceived, potential, or actual conflicts of interests as described above. The contractor further agrees to promptly notify and seek the prior written approval of both the LSFMA Contracting Officer and the Contracting Officer on the other acquisition before participating in any contract action, as a prime contractor, subcontractor at any tier, or consultant to provide material, equipment or services for which a perceived, potential, or actual conflict exists. Requests for approval of the LSFMA Contracting Officer shall comply with the requirements set forth below. The contractor shall follow the OCI approval procedures of the other acquisition, if applicable, and provide a copy of that approval/disapproval to the LSFMA Contracting Officer.

(a) The contractor shall submit OCI approval requests on a task order-by-task order basis, unless the contractor is aware of multiple task orders that may create the appearance of a conflict, or be an actual conflict. In either case, the contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer as soon as the conflict/apparent conflict has been identified, but not later than the date set for receipt of task order proposals. Identification of the OCI and a copy of the request shall be included in the task order proposal.

(b) The contractor's request for approval to the Contracting Officer shall include a detailed mitigation plan describing how the conflict will be mitigated or otherwise avoided. The mitigation plan shall describe in detail the task order requirement that creates the potential conflict of interest, and outline in detail the actions to be taken by the contractor to mitigate or avoid the conflict.

(c) The Contracting Officer will consider the request for written approval and, at its discretion, may negotiate the terms of the mitigation plan to the satisfaction of the Government or, if the conflict cannot be adequately mitigated or avoided, determine the contractor ineligible to participate in the contract action. The Government reserves the right to reject any mitigation plan, if in the opinion of the Contracting Officer, such a plan is not in the best interests of the Government.

(d) Notwithstanding the existence of a conflict of interest, and if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to seek waiver of OCI restrictions accordance with FAR 9.503.

(e) The Contracting Officer's decision as to the existence or nonexistence of an actual or potential OCI shall be final. The contractor shall not commence work on any task order involving an actual or potential OCI until specifically notified by the Contracting Officer to proceed.

(3) The contractor shall permit the Government to review and assess the contractor's adherence to all approved OCI mitigation plans at any time during the life of this contract and for a period of one (1) year thereafter. Reviews of mitigation plans will be conducted at the discretion of the Contracting Officer and may consider changes in the vendor community due to mergers, consolidations, or any other unanticipated circumstances that could create an unacceptable OCI. The contractor agrees to fully cooperate with such reviews and shall provide all information relevant to the implementation of approved plans.

e. Protection of Information.

(1) Whenever performance of this contract requires access to another contractor's proprietary information (and in particular cost and hour development information), the contractor shall (i) enter into a written agreement with the other entity involved, as appropriate, in order to protect such proprietary information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary; and (ii) refrain from using such proprietary information other than as agreed to under this contract (e.g., to provide assistance to the Government during technical evaluation of other contractors' offers or products). An executed copy of all proprietary information agreements by individual personnel or on a corporate basis shall be furnished to the Contracting Officer within fifteen (15) calendar days of execution unless waived by the Contracting Officer.

(2) The contractor shall instruct and advise its employees, through appropriate means (such as formal training and promulgation of company policies and procedures), the principles of FAR Subpart 9.5 or other applicable Federal law current at the time of contract award or subsequently enacted thereafter. Such inculcation shall include, but not be limited to, training to ensure that employees refrain from using or disclosing proprietary information except as provided by executed agreement or as allowed by the contract. Further, the contractor shall obtain from each of its employees, whose anticipated responsibility in connection with the work under this contract may be reasonably expected to involve access to such proprietary information, a written agreement, which in substance shall provide that such employee will not, during his/her employment by the contractor or anytime thereafter, improperly disclose such data or information.

(3) The contractor agrees that it shall not release, disclose, or use in any way that would permit or result in disclosure to any party outside the Government, any information provided to the contractor by the Government during or as a result of performance of this contract or any task order issued there under. Such information includes, but is not limited to, information submitted to the Government on a confidential basis by other persons. Further, the prohibition against release of Government provided information extends to cover such information whether or not in its original form, where the information has been included in contractor generated work, or where it is discernible from materials incorporating or based upon such information. This prohibition shall not expire after any given period of time.

(4) The contractor shall hold the Government harmless and will freely indemnify the Government as to any cost/loss resulting from the unauthorized use or disclosure of any third-party proprietary information by its employees, the employees of subcontractors, or by its agents.

f. Compliance.

Compliance with the requirements of this OCI clause is a material obligation of this contract and any issued task orders. The rights and remedies described herein shall not be exclusive and are in addition to other rights and remedies provided by law, including those set forth at FAR Part 9.5, or elsewhere included in this contract. If the contractor takes any action prohibited by this clause or fails to take action required by this clause, then the Government may terminate this contract for default. For breach of any of the restrictions contained herein, or for nondisclosure or misrepresentation of any relevant facts required to be disclosed concerning this contract, the Government reserves the right to terminate this contract for default, disqualify the contractor for subsequent related contractual efforts, and to pursue such other remedies as may be available under law. If, in compliance with this clause, the contractor discovers and promptly reports an organizational conflict of interest subsequent to contract award, the Contracting Officer may choose to undertake termination of this contract for convenience of the Government, when such termination is deemed to be in the best interest of the Government.

g. Effective Period.

This clause shall have effect throughout the period of performance of this contract (and any applicable task order performance period that exceeds the basic contract ordering period), any extensions thereto by change order or supplemental agreement, and for one (1) year thereafter.

h. The contractor shall include the same terms as are expressed in this clause, including this paragraph, in all subcontracts awarded for performance of any portion of this requirement. When the provisions of this clause are included in a subcontract, any subcontractor requests for Contracting Officer approval required by the clause shall be submitted through the prime contractor. Subcontract restrictions will be limited to the technical area(s) addressed in the specific statements of work in the subcontractor's given task orders.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Feb 01, 2012 6:18 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of previous notice to the draft RFP is to address the following pending changes to the draft RFP:

1) The PWS will be revised to exclude both the Mi and Md Series aircraft. The revised PWS will be included in an amendment to the solicitation.

2) The anticipated release date of the formal RFP has been revised from 15 Feb 2012 to NLT 30 Mar 2012.

3) The Government will be adding an attachment 0006, Industry Questionnaire, on amendment 0001. Offerors will be instructed to use this attachment when submitting questions to Redstone-AMELSF@conus.army.mil.

4) Twenty-four questions have been reviewed and answered. We have recieved additional questions that are still in review. Those questions will be posted and answered at a later date. The first twenty-four questions are as follows:

1. Question: Reference subject Draft Solicitation, is there a geographical limitation on the location of required contractor provided facilities?

Answer: See A-9 on Page 2 of Draft RFP. "This is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside (Restricted to within a 60 mile radius of Redstone Arsenal)."

2. Question: With regards to Page 66, (1) Subfactor A - Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications, Can the requirements for offeror corporate certifications (AS9110, AS9100, ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and FAA 145) be met collectively by a proposing team, i.e. can a combination of prime contractor, partners and/or subcontractors certifications meet these requirements?

Answer: ISO 14001 will be deleted. ISO 9001:2008 needs to be a basic quality requirement that needs to be met by the prime, partners and subcontractors.

AS9100 and AS 9110 must be met by the prime contractor.

FAA 145 may be met by the prime, partners and/or subcontractors. The Government recognizes that the FAA part 145 certificate may need to be subsequently updated to include rotary and fixed wing platforms covered by the LSFMA contract.


3. Question: With regards to Page 66, (1) Subfactor A - Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications, If a prime offeror has performed relevant work as a significant subcontractor under a prime contractor's certifications for a relevant contract, will the Government accept other substantiation as a substitution for being certified?

Answer: No. AS 9100 and AS9110 require certified processes for the specific contractor performing the work. Using work performed under another contractors certified processes will not be acceptable. (See also Question 2)

4. Question: With regards to Page 66, (1) Subfactor A - Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications, Can any of the certifications be obtained after contract award?

Answer: No. All certifications must be obtained prior to contract award as they are part of the evaluation process.

5. Question: With regards to Page 66, (1) Subfactor A - Corporate Capability, (a) Corporate Certifications, Will the Government consider giving evaluation credit for individual certifications rather than a go/no go evaluation for all of them collectively?

Answer: No

6. Item B-0004 and clause at H-12 require manpower reporting but website (https://contractormanpower.army.pentagon.mil) appears to be incorrect. Please clarify.

Answer: Yes, the correct website is https://cmra.army.mil.

7. Para H-20.d says definitization of Over&Above items will be based on "the composite labor rate cited in Section B" but no requirement exists in Section B to include a composite labor rate. Please clarify intent.

Answer: Over and Above labor costs will utilize the labor rates incorporated into the awarded contract. Further information provided in RFP.

8. Para L-31.2.c lists page limits for the various volumes. It grants an exception for AS9110 and AS9011 audit results as well as for offeror procedures (e.g., Ground/Flight Procedures). Is the table of contents included within the page count limits?

Answer: No. Table of contents pages in any volume should be numbered using roman numerals. These pages will not be in the page count and not subject to evaluation. (See also question 18)

9. Para L-31.3.b.1.b.1.c after subpara (v) near bottom of page requires an organization chart of non-TI quality personnel "and data interaction." Please clarify intent of data interaction.

Answer: This is requesting an organizational chart and corresponding flow chart of how quality work is processed (e.g., who uses the quality information, who reviews and approves, and what decisions are made from the quality information).

10. Para L-31.3.b.1.b.1.c refers to "...the proposed quality management support approach contained in the overarching Performance Work Statement (PWS)" yet no quality requirements are specified in the PWS. Please clarify.

Answer: The quality requirements are outlined in Section E of the draft RFP.

11. Para L-31.3.b.1.b.1.c.v requests information on "demonstrated throughput ratio (reviews/day)." Request clarification on requirement or its intent.

Answer: This is only applicable with respect to maintenance and production "line" activities (i.e., when manufacturing or performing significantly repeatable and measurable tasks, quality data should be taken, tracked, and analyzed in accordance with some quantifiable action (reviews/inspections per day or reviews/inspections per system or reviews/inspections per action). It is the Government's intent to determine the method of measurement standard used.

12. Para M-3.a refers to the "mission capability volume" and M-3.c refers to the "mission capability proposal". Please confirm that both references are to the "Corporate Capability" section of the Technical Volume.

Answer: This is a typographical error, the reference should be to the technical volume (all parts).

13. CDRL: Block 5 (Contract Reference) refers to paragraph 4.0 of the PWS which does not exist. Recommend changing to paragraph 3.0.

Answer: This was a typographical error. Block 5 will be revised to refer to paragraph 3.0 of the PWS.

14. CDRL: Block 16 (remarks) includes tailoring of the content but references it to Blocks 12 and 13 (submission dates). Recommend the section starting with "Format to contain... and Estimate to complete" be referenced to Block 4 instead of Blocks 12 and 13.

Answer: No changes will be made to the CDRL.

15. Is it a requirement that the Prime Contractor hold all of the certifications below, or is it acceptable that some of these requirements be met by a Subcontractor teammember?

E-7 52.246-11 HIGHER-LEVEL CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENT FEB/1999

Insert AS9100, AS9110, ISO9001:2008, ISO 14001, and FAA 145 in the blanks within the above referenced clause.

TITLE NUMBER DATE TAILORING

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AS9100(REV C) 2009 N/A

AEROSPACE - QMS REQUIREMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATIONS AS9110(REV A) 2009 N/A

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ISO 9001:2008 2008 N/A

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STANDARD ISO 14001 CURRENT N/A

FAA REPAIR STATION FAA 145 CURRENT N/A

Answer: (See also Question 2)
ISO 14001 is deleted as a quality requirement.
ISO 9001:2008 The requirement must be held by the prime, partners and subcontractors.
AS9100 and AS 9110. These quality standards are specific to aviation, the first standard is aviation manufacturing and the second is maintenance/modification of Aviation. Both are specific to the LSF requirement and are pertinent to performance. There is a need for oversight of contractor facilities to include their procedures and processes from an airworthiness standpoint to insure the work is being done in a proper manner. In a competitive process, especially with an ordering contract, it is necessary to insure that the successful contractor has the appropriate procedures and processes in place at their facility. This allows the Government to know that any work performed under those standards will comply with Airworthiness and safety requirements. This necessitates evaluating the quality provision and processes in the source selection. The Government has
chosen the existing industry standards AS9100 and AS9110 that are directly applicable to the contract requirement. The requirements must be met by the prime contractor.

FAA Part 145 may be met by the prime or a subcontractor. The Government recognizes that the FAA part 145 certificate may need to be subsequently updated to include rotary and fixed wing platforms covered by the LSFMA contract.

16. Question: Reference L-31.3a) Page 65 - RFP Proposal files Section lists only the allowable page size as 8.5" x 11". Will the Government allow 11" x 17" foldouts for graphics?

Answer: No.

17. Question: L-31.3a)(2) Page 65 - Third sentence in this paragraph states "Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narratives discussion". Is the term "file" to be considered the same as volume? If so, are all these items required for each volume including volume IV?

Answer: Yes.

18. Question: L-31.3a)(2) Page 65 - Third sentence in this paragraph states "Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion". Is the required Table of Contents and Summary Section in each file excluded from the maximum page count in volumes I and III?

Answer: No. (See Also Question 8.)

19. Question: L-31.3d)(4) Page 70 - The new corporate entities discussion addresses submitting prior contract data from officers and employees. It does not allow data from new entities such as JVs. Will the Government allow prior and current contract data to be submitted from Joint Ventures? If so, will they allow each JV member to submit the same line of three contracts as shown for prime offerors stated in L-31.3d)?

Answer: For any new joint venture that has no past performance, the entities comprising the joint venture may submit individual past performance data. The Government does not understand the second question.

20. Question: L-31.3b)(2)-(4) - When does the Government anticipate releasing Sample Tasks 1,2, and 3?

Answer: The sample tasks 1,2 and 3 will be released when the draft RFP becomes the final version.

21. Question: How long will the response period be for the Final RFP scheduled for release on or about Feb 15 2012?

Answer: The contractors will have 45 days from the date the Final RFP is released to submit their proposals.

22. Question: L-31.3.b)(e) Page 68 - One of the management positions identified in this section does not have a corresponding labor category listed in attachment 0004, "Minimum Requirements for Labor Categories". Will the Government provide the expected roles and duties for the LSF Facility Director?

Answer: No

23. Attachment 0004, Minimum Requirements for Labor Categories - The experience requirement for the Director of Safety /Safety Manager states that a person must have Instrument Instructor Experience. This does not appear to be appropriate for a logistics support facility contract which provides aircraft modification/engineering activities. Will the Government remove the Instrument Instructor experience requirement? Suggest experience as Maintenance Test Pilot be substituted for Instrument Instructor.

Answer: Attachment 0004 will be revised to remove the Instrument Instructor Experience requirement.

24. L-31.3.d) and M-4.C.3 - Both these RFP sections state that submitted contracts must/should be in current performance or "awarded" during the past 3 years. Putting a time limit on contracts awarded within the past 3 years severely limits the usable contracts available for most bidders. Will the Government change the "awarded" requirement to the more standard solicitation requirement of "completed" within the past 3 years?

Answer: These sections will be revised to show "awarded and/or completed" during the past 3 years.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am Modified: Jan 13, 2012 3:31 pmTrack Changes The purpose of this Modification of previous notice to the draft RFP was to address two pending changes to the draft RFP: 1) The Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) referenced at H-25 and 2) To revise the quality requirements.

1) The draft OCI that we anticipate including in the formal RFP is as follows:

It is anticipated that this RFP will result in a Multiple Award IDIQ contract to a minimum of two Offerors. The Government intends to have continuing competition under the Multiple Award process. The successful Offerors will be required to execute Non-Disclosure Agreements with contractors providing Contract Advisory and Assistance Services (CAAS) to the Logistics Support Facility Management Activity (LSFMA) and to Program Offices and Government agencies supported by the LSFMA.

The contractors providing CAAS under the AMCOM Express or other contract vehicles under the Technical, Programmatic or Logistics domains are generally involved in supporting the LSF Requiring elements in providing services that include those elements described in FAR Part 9.505. These include providing Systems engineering and technical direction, preparing specification or work statements, providing evaluation services, or having access to proprietary data. The LSFMA IDIQ will require continuing competition. Those contractors under contract for CAAS services to the LSF or the requiring elements that it supports, are considered to have
Organizational Conflicts of Interest and will not be allowed to participate as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor team member on the LSFMA.

Any successful Offerors for the LSFMA will have a conflict of interest for CAAS services to a customers of the LSFMA under AMCOM Express or other contract vehicles upon award of the LSFMA contract.

Offerors should identify any potential conflicts of interest about which there are questions to the Contracting Officer for resolution as soon as possible.

2) The Government anticipates the removal of the ISO 14001 requirement from FAR 52.246-11, Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement.

As a reminder, only questions sent to Redstone-AMELSF@conus.army.mil will be considered.

Added: Jan 04, 2012 10:09 am A draft RFP for the LSFMA requirement has been released and can be found at the below website.

This is a draft Request For Proposal (RFP) only and submission of proposals will not be accepted at this time. This draft RFP does not commit the Government to any obligation as a result of its release. The Government reserves the right to modify the draft RFP at any time without notice. All communications should be directed through email to Redstone-AMELSF@conus.army.mil. TELEPHONE CALLS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR ANY REASON.