Draft RFP Range Operations Support Services

Added: Nov 25, 2015 2:13 pm Invitation for Industry comments on draft Request for Proposal (RFP).

The United States Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command - Fort Hood (MICC-FH) has a requirement for Range Operations Support Services at Fort Hood, TX. This draft RFP is for market research and acquisition strategy planning purposes only and shall not be construed as a solicitation or as an obligation on the part of the MICC-FH. The purpose of this notice is to solicit industry feedback relative to various aspects of the proposed contract effort and its associated documentation. The services anticipated for this effort may include, but not be limited to the following functions:

Range Operations
Maintenance and Repair
Supply and Support Services

The draft RFP are provided for reference and industry comment and are subject to significant change.

MICC-FH does not intend to award a contract on the basis of responses, nor otherwise pay for the preparation of any information submitted, nor will respondents be notified of the MICC-FH review of the information received. The information obtained from this notice will be utilized as market research for consideration in acquisition planning for this requirement. Interested sources shall provide all feedback in writing to the Point of Contact (POC) listed below no later than 8:00 AM Central Standard Time (CST), on 10 December 2015.

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code applicable to this requirement is 561210 "Facilities Support Services" with a size standard of $38.5 Million.

Information Sought:

(1) Please provide feedback on areas of the draft RFP that, in your opinion have an overall positive and/or negative impact on the process of evaluating contractor performance. Are there any areas which appears unduly burdensome to either the Government or the contractor towards the goal of achieving superior contractor performance or counterproductive to goals and objectives in general.
(2) The performance objectives of the attached Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) are considered to be major elements for successful execution of the contracts. Based on corporate experience of similar contracts, for this type of range operations support services, are the objectives listed consistent with this type of service or are there additional objectives which would/could/should be assessed to ensure optimal performance of the contractor?
(3) Please provide feedback on what motivates a contractor's performance in a highly dynamic arena and the potential risk, if any, of each motivator, and to whom?
(4) Please provide feedback on the Best Value Continuum for the source selection approach. The draft RFP utilizes a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) process. What are the advantages and/or disadvantages to this approach? What would be the benefits and/or weaknesses of using a Tradeoff process?
(5) Are there opportunities to provide innovative and/or cost saving solutions in the proposal for this requirement that would cause the Government to be willing to pay more than the lowest price for a technically acceptable proposal? If so, please explain.