KAI and IAI Enter a Collaboration Agreement for Manned and Unmanned Teaming Systems

On the same subject

• 

  February 8, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - February 05, 2021

  NAVY Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., a Lockheed Martin Co., Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded a $478,605,019 firm-fixed-price modification (P00102) to a previously awarded contract (N0001914C0050). This modification exercises options for the procurement of five Lot Three low rate initial production Presidential Helicopters Replacement Program (VH-92A) aircraft, and associated interim contractor support, two cabin interior reconfiguration kits, support equipment, initial spares, and system parts replenishment. Work will be performed in Stratford, Connecticut (50%); Coatesville, Pennsylvania (36%); Owego, New York (10%); Patuxent River, Maryland (2%); Phoenix, Arizona (1%); and Quantico, Virginia (1%), and is expected to be completed in December 2023. Fiscal 2021 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount $478,605,019 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Invicta Global LLC,* Fort Worth, Texas, was awarded a $14,600,550 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity modification for the exercise of Option Three under a contract for base operating support services at various installations in the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) Washington area of operations (AO). After award of this option, the total cumulative contract value will be $39,316,621. The work to be performed is all labor, material, equipment, management and administration for utilities, transportation and facility support services to include fire protection services, facilities management and investment, base support vehicles and equipment, urgent, emergency and routine services for facility support services. Work will be performed in NAVFAC Washington AO, including but not limited to Bethesda, Maryland (40%); Washington, D.C. (40%); Indian Head, Maryland (10%); and Dahlgren, Virginia (10%). This option period is from Feb. 1, 2021, to Jan. 31, 2022. No funds were obligated at time of award. Operation and maintenance, (Navy); and fiscal 2021 Navy working capital funds in the amount of $6,488,840 for recurring work will be obligated on individual task orders issued during the option period. NAVFAC Washington, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N40080-19-D-0311). (Awarded: Jan. 29, 2021) Opal Soft, Inc., Sunnyvale, California, is awarded an $11,979,099 cost-plus-fixed-fee bridge contract for software support services in support of Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Keyport. Work will be performed in Keyport, Washington, and is expected to be completed by September 2021. This contract includes an option which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $19,049,565. Work is expected to be completed by December 2021. Fiscal 2021 service cost center (Navy) $3,154,151 (82.12%); 2015 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) $246,982 (6.43%); 2017 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) $246,982 (6.43%); 2021 defense working capital fund (Navy) $84,895 (2.21%); 2021 other procurement (Navy) $42,474 (1.11%) 2019 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) $37,996 (0.99%); and 2018 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) $27,092.45 (0.71%) funding will be obligated at award. No contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c) (1) (only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements). The Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Keyport, Keyport, Washington, is the contracting activity. (N0025321C0004) DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY US Foods, La Mirada, California, has been awarded a maximum $114,700,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for full-line food distribution. This was a competitive acquisition with two responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are California and Alaska, with a Feb. 4, 2026, ordering period end date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2026 defense working capital funds. The contracting agency is the Defense Logistics Agency, Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE300-21-D-3307). ARMY Oshkosh Defense LLC, Oshkosh, Wisconsin, was awarded a $61,002,554 firm-fixed-price contract for 1,081 Underbody Armor Kit upgrade kits for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, with an estimated completion date of June 30, 2022. Fiscal 2019, 2020 and 2021 European reassurance initiative funds in the amount of $61,002,554 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-21-C-0084). Dyncorp International LLC, Fort Worth, Texas, was awarded a $42,000,000 modification (P00121) to contract W58RGZ-19-C-0025 for aviation maintenance services. Work will be performed in Afghanistan and Iraq, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 31, 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $42,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity. Coastal Contractors Inc.,* Baton Rouge, Louisiana, was awarded a $9,450,839 firm-fixed-price contract for flood control of the Comite River. Bids were solicited via the internet with eight received. Work will be performed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with an estimated completion date of Apr. 8, 2022. Fiscal 2021 civil construction funds in the amount of $9,450,839 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, is the contracting activity (W912P8-21-C-0005). Escal Institute of Advanced Technologies Inc., North Bethesda, Maryland, was awarded a $9,443,000 modification (P00004) to contract W911S0-19-D-0009 to provide training and certifications as required to verify and validate student proficiency in cybersecurity roles. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 5, 2022. U.S. Army Field Directorate Office, Fort Eustis, Virginia, is the contracting activity. Cottrell Contracting Corp., Chesapeake, Virginia, was awarded a $9,416,500 firm-fixed-price contract for maintenance dredging of Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Camden County, Georgia. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in Kings Bay, Georgia, with an estimated completion date of April 25, 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (defense-wide funds) in the amount of $9,416,500 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, Florida, is the contracting activity (W912EP-21-C-0008). WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES Systems Planning and Analysis Inc., Alexandria, Virginia (HQ0034-21-F-0089), has been awarded a firm-fixed-price and time and materials contract in the amount of $34,891,509. This contract is to provide support to the Office of Industrial Policy in carrying out its mission to ensure robust, secure, resilient and innovative industrial capabilities within the Department of Defense. The contractor will provide program support for the Defense Production Act Titles I and III, Industrial Base Assessments, Industry Engagement/Outreach and Strategic Communications and Business Intelligence and Analytics. Work performance will take place at the Mark Center, Alexandria, Virginia; and the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Appropriate fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds will be obligated at the award. The expected completion date is Feb. 6, 2026. Washington Headquarters Services, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2495622/source/GovDelivery/

• 

  September 25, 2018 | International, Land

  SAIC boss tackles Engility acquisition, space market and revenue goals

  WASHINGTON — News that SAIC would buy Engility was just the latest in a recent string of acquisitions among the professional services firms. But if you ask the CEO of SAIC, Tony Moraco, unlike some of the company's peers this was not transformational. This was instead a merging of two complementary businesses. In his words, “a momentum builder, as we are stronger together in the marketplace.” It's also the next phase for a company that technically formed five years ago, with the split of the $11 billion legacy company with the same name. Defense News sat down with Moraco to see how the acquisition fits into SAIC's future strategy, and how far the company has come since gaining independence. About a year after SAIC split from Leidos, I asked you about your vision for the company. And you said to return to an $11 billion company. How does this acquisition fit into your vision for SAIC these days? The Engility acquisition is very much consistent with our current strategy. It is not a deviation or a reset, as perhaps some of the other major transactions have been for some of our peers. But it really is about the theme of being stronger together, with [particular] compatibility of the intelligence community ... and also attributes in space market segments that we think we can both serve better. For us, this is opening market access to channels that we didn't have. It's momentum building, a vision and a strategy that was five years in the making, and it's a continuation of that strategy going forward. So have you been looking for an extended period of time? And why Engility specifically? We consistently look at the market. We were not going to be a high-volume buyer, but more selective. The Scitor [acquisition] was more than three years ago. But we felt that we had a good position in the marketplace to grow organically. And we proved very strong performance over five years and since [that last acquisition of] Scitor. And then we've looked at many deals, large and small, to see what makes the most sense to us, staying true to our strategy. The attraction with Engility was probably first sparked by the multi-intelligence agency portfolio that they have. Instead of buying a number of smaller concentrated firms, we could get a couple agencies in one larger deal. The company is large enough, they have a mature system. Again, in contrast to perhaps some of the small businesses, we think it has been through its own cultural shift to align very much to ours. Also of interest is the space market. Today, with denied access and with the threats that we have, space is becoming a much more serious domain. The U.S. wants to invest more in it for a range of reasons. And when we think about space, it does cross, in fact, with the intelligence community, the defense sector with Air Force and the other services, and then also the civilian agencies with NASA, [and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration]. As that market evolves, I think the U.S. government will be a principal customer. I believe that the commercial space entities will find a way where they'll also require key outsourced space services just as the government had. So for a single transaction at scale where we could in fact use our equity, [and face] probably fewer buyers, filling three or four of our strategic initiatives in market access and in capabilities — we felt it was worth a serious look. But it's not just about space and intel. Defense will still be the largest part of our portfolio — 55 percent after we close [from 61 percent]. With the benefit of having the broader diversification in intel and federal civilian agencies, that serves all of our customers from a technology transfer perspective. We've seen an interesting transition in the market, where the big primes are shedding portions of their services segments. Have we officially returned to the days when manufacturers focus on platforms only and leave the rest to the professional services companies? I think we [for a period of time] faced a market that was uncertain. Our customers were reprioritizing their mission areas, and the industry was doing the same — looking at where they were going to focus their precious dollars, identify businesses they were going to protect, and areas that maybe weren't core. Then as the market started to improve and move away from cost reductions to protect margins to having some cash and some flexibility, you started seeing more portfolio shaping from the larger players. It's not just about scale. There's [a focus on] the diversification because as you know, the whole business is based on past performance and on what qualifications you have in people and in contract vehicles; if you have a broader base concentrated in a few key areas, your ability to compete and win in those domains is improved. There are a lot of technologies that are more heavily influencing the battlefield — whether ISR, electronic warfare, even still cyber, which is evolving. It seems those areas don't fit quite as neatly in one model or the other. We've been around. It's not a body shop service that we run. It is services and solutions. But technology integration is a direct link to the customer's demand for modernization, the interest in innovative solutions from nontraditional players, the ability to field capabilities faster in a much shorter development cycle, and that leads you to a technology integration model that we have. It allows us to take mission understanding and translate requirements into capability needs. So we can integrate, we can innovate with the technology and we can implement the solutions, which is fundamentally what the customer needs to migrate them from a current state to a future state. But we're seeing more and more opportunities through the [Defense Innovation Unit], the [other transaction authorities], and other contract vehicles that provide a little more rapid prototyping flexibility. SAIC bid for the Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle and is now working to compete for the Army's Mobile Protected Firepower program.How does that all fit into the broader strategy? We do see it as a viable area, and I would characterize it as the next tier of complex technology integration, system integration. It's an extension of our command-and-control and ISR integration. I recall we pushed through 30,000 MRAP systematic build packages. That kind of integration of subsystems into a platform is what we felt was a baseline business that we could look to expand; and as the customer looked at, in this case, starting with Assault Amphibious Vehicle. Not a start-from-scratch build — the survivability upgrade really was around the armor, the underbelly and then your armaments protecting the vehicle. And then the related mobility requirements to change out transmissions and engines to support that extra weight. We felt that those subsystems and our mission knowledge afforded us the ability to extend to a little more of the physical platform itself. We're doing work on the next-gen combat vehicle. And we're using a services model for MPF. Again, nondevelopmental, major integration of existing platforms for rapid field development. That fits well into our technology and integration model. We see the ground vehicles and perhaps maritime [areas] as one that was probably more approachable versus, say, airframes. Modernization of aircraft has its own barriers of entry of getting flight readiness and the like. We've extended our test-equipment knowledge to partnering with Lockheed on the propulsion system for torpedoes, for example. So we're just looking for selective areas to do more complex system integration under this broad technology integration umbrella. It just happens to be bigger subsystems. Complex system integration sets us apart from some of the current peers in the marketplace right now. But we're selective in what we go after. How hard of a hit was the loss of the Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle in moving forward with that? It's disappointing. We try to be practical and objective about our market position. It's an alternative model. It's still early in the life cycle. But I think that as we see different opportunities, we learn from it as the customers get more comfortable. So yes, disappointing on ACV, but at the same time we learned a lot from it and I think the customer ultimately got a very good result by having a competitive phase. And we think that the Army [with MPF] will be as successful and come up with [the] best solution if they can maintain a competitiveness early in the process. When the split first happened, you and Leidos were generally two different companies. With this acquisition, and with the Leidos acquisition from Lockheed, have you all started to mirror each other more? I think we may be looking a little more alike. Five years ago I did not expect it. I think we had very clear strategies that [we] were intending to diverge, and therefore we did not have any formal noncompetes. We were looking at the services business model, and Leidos was looking to do more system development. I think their execution of that didn't play out as fast as they'd like. Roger [Krone, Leidos CEO], buying back in the services, more of the information system side, was a bit of a surprise. So if anything, they came back towards us versus us changing direction. So I'd say they probably navigated slightly different than expected. But even today we're still two different companies. We're still very focused on letting our investors and customers know what we do, and Leidos still has a pretty diverse portfolio from health systems and some engineering services. We compete in similar subsegments but not in all. We're also organized very differently, we go to market differently. When the deal closes, where does that put your total revenue at? Right around $6.5 billion. You told me you wanted to get back to $11 billion. Should we expect more? No, not right away. That was very tongue in cheek at the time. You knew I'd remember though. Oh, I know. I remember it too, actually, because we laughed. There are lots of things we can do, but I felt very comfortable then and still do that we've got a great future and can grow the business organically as well as through acquisition. But it's not to chase the size. It really is about the market leadership. Running good margins and providing good mission capabilities for our employees. I think our market is still very motivated by mission. Our employees are very motivated to serve in different capacities whether it's in uniform or not. https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/2018/09/24/saic-boss-tackles-engility-acquisition-space-market-and-revenue-goals

• 

  February 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - February 19, 2020

  NAVY Bristol Engineering Services Co. LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (N39430-20-D-2221); Dawson Enterprises LLC,* Honolulu, Hawaii (N39430-20-D-2222); GSI-Pond JV LLC,* Flemington, New Jersey (N39430-20-D-2223); Reliable Contracting Group LLC,* Louisville, Kentucky (N39430-20-D-2224); Aptim Federal Services LLC, Alexandria, Virginia (N39430-20-D-2225); CAPE-Burns and McDonnell JV, Kansas City, Missouri (N39430-20-D-2226); Weston Solutions Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania (N39430-20-D-2227); and Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions Inc., Blue Bell, Pennsylvania (N39430-20-D-2228), are each being awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, multiple award construction contract to provide sustainment, restoration and modernization services for petroleum, oil and lubricant (POL) systems at various locations worldwide. The work to be performed provides for design, engineering, inspection, testing, maintenance and repair and new construction of POL fuel systems such as pipelines, fuel storage tanks, and associated facilities at POL facilities worldwide. The maximum dollar value of the 60-month ordering period for all eight contracts combined is $880,000,000. Aptim Federal Services LLC is being awarded the seed task order in the amount of $623,600 for clean, inspect and repair services of POL fuel storage tanks located at Naval Base Point Loma. Work for this task order is expected to be completed by November 2020. All work on this contract will be performed worldwide. Based on current trends, work will be distributed to the continental U.S. (CONUS) (35%); Far East (35%); Hawaii (15%); Europe (10%); and Marianas (5%). For the CONUS locations, the 35% is estimated to be distributed to California (10.5%); Virginia (10.5%); Florida (5.25%); Washington (5.25%); Texas (1.75%); Georgia (0.35%); Louisiana (0.35%); Maryland (0.35%); Nevada (0.35%); and North Carolina (0.35%). The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months, with an expected completion date of February 2025. Fiscal 2020 defense working capital funds (DWCF) in the amount of $693,600 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Future task orders will be primarily funded by DWCF. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website with 18 proposals received. These eight contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contract. The Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center, Port Hueneme, California, is the contracting activity. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., a Lockheed Martin Co., Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded a $470,813,279 firm-fixed price modification (P00084) to a previously-awarded fixed-price incentive-firm contract (N00019-14-C-0050). This modification exercises options to procure six low rate initial production lot II VH-92A aircraft, interim contractor support and six cabin interior reconfiguration kits in support of the Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program. Work will be performed in Stratford, Connecticut (50%); Coatesville, Pennsylvania (36%); Owego, New York (10%); Patuxent River, Maryland (3%); and Quantico, Virginia (1%), and is expected to be completed in December 2022. Fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $470,813,279 will be obligated at the time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Raytheon Co., Tewksbury, Massachusetts, is awarded a $121,507,441 cost-plus-incentive-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-17-C-5145 for the Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG) 1000 ship class integrated logistics support and engineering services. The DDG 1000 ship class is a multi-mission surface combatant designed to fulfill volume firepower and precision strike requirements. DDG 1000 combat systems provide offensive, distributed and precision firepower and long ranges in support of forces ashore while incorporating signature reduction, active and passive self-defense system and enhanced survivability features. Work will be performed in Portsmouth, Rhode Island (40%); Tewksbury, Massachusetts (27%); San Diego, California (16%); Bath, Maine (6%); Ft. Wayne, Indiana (5%); Los Angeles, California (3%); Marlboro, Massachusetts (2%); and Nashua, New Hampshire (1%), and is expected to be completed by January 2021. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Navy) funding in the amount of $15,660,190; fiscal 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount of $2,650,000; and fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funding in the amount of $621,000 will be obligated at the time of award, and funds in the amount of $16,281,190 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., a Lockheed Martin Co., Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded a $40,029,200 modification (P00036) to a previously-awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-16-C-0048). This modification procures organic capability pilot repair material, technical publications, peculiar support equipment re-design and acquisition and logistical support in support of lot 2 CH-53K aircraft. Work will be performed in Shelton, Connecticut (78%); Stratford, Connecticut (21%); and Cherry Point, North Carolina (1%), and is expected to be completed in December 2024. Fiscal 2018 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $40,029,200 will be obligated at the time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. ARMY FN America LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, was awarded a $119,216,309 firm-fixed-price contract for the M4/M4A1 carbines. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 30, 2025. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (W15QKN-20-D-0006). DRS Network & Imaging Systems LLC, Melbourne, Florida, was awarded a $21,470,307 firm-fixed-price contract for mission system computers, chief of section displays (CSD) and CSD chargers for the M777A2 Digital Fire Control System. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 19, 2025. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (W15QKN-20-D-0020). AIR FORCE L3 Harris Corp., Colorado Springs, Colorado, has been awarded a $32,076,011 cost-plus-incentive-fee modification (P00020) to contract FA8819-19-C-0002 for combat mission systems support sustainment Option Year One. Work will be performed in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and is expected to be completed by Jan. 31, 2021. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $24,978,900 are being obligated at the time of award. Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity. WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES JAB Innovative Solutions LLC, Bristow, Virginia, has been awarded an $8,849,120 firm-fixed-price and time and material contract for Defense Innovative Unit (DIU) scientific and technical consulting support services. DIU requires program management consulting services, with experience in scientific and technical industries, to assist with meeting the DIU core mission as the interface node between the Department of Defense (DoD), entrepreneurs, start-up firms, and commercial technology companies in Silicon Valley, California; Boston, Massachusetts; and Arlington, Virginia, to increase DoD access to leading edge commercial technologies and technical talent. Work performance will take place in Arlington, Virginia; Boston, Massachusetts; and Silicon Valley, California. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $8,849,120 are being awarded. The expected completion date is Sept. 18, 2021. Washington Headquarters Services, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (HQ0034-18-F-0434). *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2088143/source/GovDelivery/