015-JOFOC SSFL Follow On 4.25.2022_.pdf

For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in

Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.

Get Adobe Reader Now!

http://www.adobe.com/go/reader

Rev.:01/2021

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

(JOFOC)

For Solicitation 80MSFC22R0013, Architect Engineering (A-E) Environmental Remediation Services at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory

(SSFL)

1. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.303-2(b)(1) – Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”

This document is a justification for other than full and open competition prepared by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC).

The procuring agency is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the contracting activity is MSFC.

2. FAR 6.303-2(b)(2) – The nature and/or description of the action being approved:

This justification provides the rationale for contracting by other than full and open competition to award a sole source contract with Jacobs Engineering (herein referred to as Jacobs) (formerly CH2M Hill, Inc.) for continued Architect-Engineer (A-E) Environmental Engineering Services at Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) located in Ventura County, California. Jacobs presently provides environmental compliance, monitoring, and remediation services at SSFL. NASA entered into a “Consent Order for Corrective Action” with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the Boeing Company, and the U.S. Department of Energy in 2007. NASA also entered into an “Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial Action (AOC)” with DTSC in 2010.

The above referenced Consent Orders establish remediation standards and requirements for NASA to achieve. Jacobs has been exclusively providing essential A-E services, supporting NASA in its effort to achieve these standards and requirements under the current contract 80MSFC18D0003, which expires on November 30, 2022.

3. FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) – A description of the supplies or services required, to meet the

Agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

The A-E Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) all Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract would provide professional engineering with experience in remedial investigation and clean-up, natural resources specialists, cultural resources specialists, chemists, risk assessors, community relations specialists, hydrogeologists, regulatory compliance, remediation services needed to maintain compliance with state and federal environmental regulations and respond to legally enforceable Consent Orders signed with DTSC.

With a $15,000,000 base year and a 5% inflation rate is incorporated into the ensuing years, the total estimated IDIQ contract value is $92,456,580. The following is a breakdown of the one (1) year Base Period and four (4) one-year Option Periods, and a potential 6-month Option Period.

Base Year $15,000,000 Option 1 Year $15,750,000 Option 2 Year $16,537,500 Option 3 Year $17,364,375 Option 4 Year $18,232,594 Potential 6-month Option $9,572,112

$92,456,580

4. FAR 6.303-2(b)(4) – An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is (10 U.S.C.

2304(c)(1)), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(1) Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. Per FAR 6.302-1(2)(iii)(B), for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-on contracts for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements. (See 10 U.S.C.2304(d)(1)(B)).

5. FAR 6.303-2(b)(5) – A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

The rationale supporting the use of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302- 1(a)(1) Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. is as described below:

For over fifty years, the SSFL was utilized for the development, test, and validation of various rocket engines, fuels, and solvents. The fuels and solvents were used to test and maintain the propulsion systems and testing facilities, which have over the years collected in the ground water and caused contamination. Federal and State environmental laws require remediation of the affected areas followed by a period of monitoring. California law requires that remediation be sustained, without cessation, through completion.

As mentioned in section two (2) above, NASA entered into an AOC with DTSC in 2010. This order requires soil cleanup to “background,” which is not the standard EPA risk-based approach and was not defined in the AOC at the time of signing. NASA, with the direct support of Jacobs’s staff, has completed extensive soil sampling, http://uscode.house.gov/browse.xhtml%3Bjsessionid%3D114A3287C7B3359E597506A31FC855B3 http://uscode.house.gov/browse.xhtml%3Bjsessionid%3D114A3287C7B3359E597506A31FC855B3 laboratory analyses on the nature and extent of soil contamination, and feasibility studies of applicable soil cleanup technologies.

NASA published a Record of Decision (ROD) to proceed with a risk-based approach known as “Suburban Residential” on October 2, 2020. A risk-based Suburban Residential Cleanup is protective of public health and environment, follows nationwide EPA guidelines, and is consistent with the cleanup standards imposed by DTSC across California. NASA is prepared to move forward with soil cleanup plans once the DTSC finalizes its Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR).

Due to DTSC having not published their PEIR, the circumstances and schedule of SSFL’s remediation status has changed very little since contract 80MSFC18D0003 was awarded on December 1, 2017. The approval of documents necessary to finalize NASA’s remediation designs - namely California’s PEIR and subsequent decision documents - for both groundwater and soil are eighteen to thirty-six months away. Due to the current disconnect between NASA and DTSC, there is a possibility of litigation and/or dispute resolution procedures, which would almost certainly inflict even further delays.

NASA continues to work with DTSC to resolve outstanding cleanup issues and to achieve a shared goal of implementing a SSFL cleanup that is based in science, protecting public health and the natural environment. Jacobs A-E services is essential to resolving outstanding cleanup issues with DTSC due to their mastery of: (1) the data from prior sampling and analysis, (2) the nature and extent of the contamination, and (3) the feasibility of specific cleanup technologies suitable to SSFL conditions.

Jacobs has successfully established trusted and respected relationships with remediation regulators, namely DTSC, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Ventura County Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) [a.k.a. Hazardous Materials Program], Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, and Ventura County Planning Department. These relationships are essential prerequisites to NASA achieving the remediation standards and requirements.

Jacobs holds historical, relevant, institutional knowledge and competence that is exclusively unique to NASA’s SSFL remediation circumstances. Moreover, Jacobs’ personnel have seasoned relationships with the regulator’s technical staff, which facilitates effective, expeditious communication since expectations and objectives are well known and understood.

Without Jacobs A-E service, NASA would have to find a substitute contractor. It would take years to re-develop the relationships with the regulators and for a new team to fully learn: (1) the data from prior sampling and analysis, (2) the nature and extent of the contamination, and (3) the feasibility of specific cleanup technologies suitable to SSFL conditions. Award to any other contractor would cause NASA to incur unacceptable delays to performance and schedule while duplicating cost in many areas, jeopardizing the goal of achieving an agreed upon remediation standard with DTSC.

6. FAR 6.303-2(b)(6) – A description of the efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies:

A notice to the Government Point of Entry (GPE) website (Sam.gov) was published on April 5, 2022, in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. This posting informed potential sources of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source contract to Jacobs. The results of this synopsis are summarized in Section 10 below.

7. FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) – A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer’s signature on this document indicates that the Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the government will be fair and reasonable. The Contractor shall be required to submit a proposal to be evaluated and negotiated by the Government. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a proposal analysis will be performed. The proposal analysis will ensure that the final agreed-to price for the contract action is fair and reasonable.

The A-E SSFL contract will be FFP IDIQ with work authorized by individual task orders utilizing fully burdened labor rates negotiated for the base and all option years based on historical data and the expertise of the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the requiring organization. Each task order proposal will be evaluated by the Government and negotiated with the contractor prior to issuance of the individual task orders. A determination by the Contracting Officer that the price of that individual task order is fair and reasonable is required in order for the Government to award a task order.

8. FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) – Description of the market research conducted, and the results, or a statement of the reasons a market research was not conducted:

A market survey was not conducted due to agreements as summarized throughout this document. Pursuant to FAR 5.201, this proposed contract action will be synopsized in the Government Point of Entry (GPE). Any requests for consideration received in writing will be dispositioned accordingly and incorporated within paragraph 10 below.

9. FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) – Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition:

None.

10. FAR 6.303-2(b)(10) – A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed an interest in writing in the acquisition:

A notice of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source action was synopsized on the GPE website (Sam.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above) from April 5, 2022 through April 22, 2022. Requests for consideration and associated disposition are noted as follows:

On April 12, 2022, Tetra Tech requested additional information from MSFC. MSFC reviewed the inquiry and responded (See Tab 019. Tetra Tech Request). Tetra Tech and other sources did not submit any capabilities or qualifications.

11. FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) – A statement of actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

There are no known actions which the Agency may take to remove or overcome barriers to competition for services required. The Agency will continue to examine the market in the future for alternative solutions or new sources before executing any subsequent acquisitions for the same requirements.

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

1. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.303-2(b)(1) – Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”

2. FAR 6.303-2(b)(2) – The nature and/or description of the action being approved:

3. FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) – A description of the supplies or services required, to meet the Agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

4. FAR 6.303-2(b)(4) – An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

5. FAR 6.303-2(b)(5) – A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

6. FAR 6.303-2(b)(6) – A description of the efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception un...

7. FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) – A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

8. FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) – Description of the market research conducted, and the results, or a statement of the reasons a market research was not conducted:

9. FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) – Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition:

10. FAR 6.303-2(b)(10) – A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed an interest in writing in the acquisition:

11. FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) – A statement of actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

Solicitation # 80MSFC22R0013, Architect Engineering (A-E) Environmental Remediation Services at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

SIGNATURE PAGE

I hereby certify that the above justification is complete and accurate and complete

PETER Digitally signed by PETER

ZORBA

Date: 2022.04.26 ZORBA_______________________09:28:00 -07'00'

Peter Zorba LD020 SSFL Program Director – Technical Representative

I hereby certify that the above justification is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Kathryn Cooper PS33 Branch Chief

CONCURRENCES:

John Cannaday Director, Office of Procurement

Joe L. Leopard Competition Advocate Marshall Space Flight Center

APPROVAL:

John Cannaday MSFC Head of Contracting Activity

2022-05-03T09:22:44-0500

MARY COOPER

2022-05-17T13:10:57-0500

TODD POSPISIL

2022-05-24T12:23:08-0500

JOE LEOPARD

2022-06-06T18:36:28-0400

John Cannaday