A02.06 GEOD_JA_V13 - APPROVED_Redacted.pdf

ERDC Control Number: 23-2816

Justification For an Exception to Fair Opportunity Under FAR 16.505(b)(2)

1. Contracting Activity: The ERDC Contracting Office (ECO) located at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199.

2. Description of Action: Approval is requested for the ERDC ECO to issue a sole-source follow-on, cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price task order (TO) under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) Ordering, to Battelle Memorial Institute (BMI) utilizing Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) funds in support of the Geospatial Research Lab (GRL). Pursuant to this authority, the order would be a �logical follow-on to a competitively awarded order� on an existing Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, namely, the One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) IDIQ.

3. Description of Services: The GEOD software suite provides geospatially enabled collaborative mission planning capabilities, services, and information to Army planners, staff, and leaders. These mission planning capabilities perform the collection, processing, storing, sharing, and displaying of authoritative data in geo-temporal (related to where a person or object is at different times) context. The models and algorithms are developed for use to create mission planning tools that inform decision-making commanders and planners. The contractor shall provide research in the discipline of numerical modeling and services as follows:

i. The contractor will develop program wide collaborative capabilities that support Army Design Methodology (ADM) and Operational Design.

ii. Development and integration of Courses of Action (COA) analysis through integrated digital war-games /Modeling and Simulation (M&S), and coordination with intelligence and sustainment (logistics) warfighting functions.

iii. Implementation of a system for automated dissemination of digital plans and orders across and down the echelons and roll up of data and information for running estimates and plan assessments during execution.

iv. Development of tools for data and analysis required for planners to understand the threat and environment.

v. Completion of tools to incorporate fires and protection (Air & Missile Defense) into planning software.

vi. Top Secret Security Clearance: The contractor will be required to maintain a Top Secret Security Clearance to perform the work through a classified network onsite at the ERDC.

The period of performance for this Task Order will be five years, with a base year and four, one-year options. The total estimated value is $98,058,472.74. Please see table one below for a breakout of the total estimated value by period.

Table 1: Total Estimated Value by Performance Period Performance Period FFP Est. Value CPFF Est.

Value Total Est.

Value

Base Year $4,689,076 $14,067,225 $18,756,301 Option Year 1 $4,793,641 $14,380,924 $19,174,565 Option Year 2 $4,900,539 $14,701,619 $19,602,158 Option Year 3 $5,009,821 $15,029,465 $20,039,286 Option Year 4 $5,121,540 $15,364,622 $20,486,162

TOTAL $24,514,617 $73,543,855 $98,058,472

4. Authority Cited: Title 10 U.S.C. § 3406(c)(3), as implemented by FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) Ordering. The contracting officer shall give every awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for a delivery order or task order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold unless the order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

5. Reason for Authority Cited:

a. Background: Initially, the effort to further develop and integrate the Mission Based Mapping Program (MBMP) started in 2009 as a Joint Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD) called Common Ground. Between 2009 and 2015, contract vehicles including SEAPORT-e, GSA, and CBRNIAC were used to obtain and execute contract support services with BMI. The specific contract numbers, contract values, and contract periods of performance for those previous actions are unknown. In 2015, the project was officially titled Map Based Planning Services (MBPS) and contract support was provided by Army Contracting Command (ACC) where a task order, W911NF15F0007, was competitively expended under the OASIS contract GS00Q14OADU402. To date, there have been two TOs awarded to BMI in connection with the MBPS and GEOD as outlined below in Table 2, Task Order History.

Table 2. Task Order History Task Order Number Contracting

Activity Amount of Task Order

Period of Performance

GS00Q14OADU402

W911NF-15-F-0007

ACC $49,729,237.00 29 September 2015-28 September 2019

GS00Q14OADU402

W9132V19F0005

GRL $59,010,520.98 29 September 2019-28 June

BMI�s initial effort to implement and develop the MBMP has been commonly referred to as the Map-Based Planning System (also known as the MBPS or the �Map-Based System�). This system was the result of gathering mapping data from a variety of sources, organizing and enhancing it, and then developing a usable system that the Army could utilize for expeditious planning in its military operations.

The MBPS has been highly successful. Consequently, due in large part to the success of the MBPS, the Department of Defense (DoD) has directed further development of the MBPS and its integration across the DoD.

i. Initial Work - Development of MBPS: BMI defined the parameters for the preparation, development, testing, and integration of the Map-Based prototype system on the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network for further Combatant Command (COCOM) assessment. BMI maintained the current prototype through software fixes and enhancements, helpdesk troubleshooting, compliance and certifications, quality control requirements, updating of training materials, and conduct of introductory training for COCOM planners. BMI continued the agile development process employed during the prior development of the prototype.

BMI also assisted GRL in identifying existing standards and Service frameworks to be leveraged by the MBPS. BMI developed a real time system architecture that supports a single virtual federated environment. BMI developed a services-oriented architecture that provides for abstraction between all major components.

This development represents the initial creation of GEOD.

The initial award to BMI (W911NF-15-F-0007) was competitively solicited utilizing the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted). Pool 4 contained forty-two contractors.

Fair Opportunity was provided to all contractors in the pool. BMI was the only contractor to submit a proposal to the requirement and was awarded a Task Order on 29 September 2015. The initial period of performance was for a one-year Base and three one-year Options.

ii. Initial Development of GEOD - As a follow-on to the MBPS, initial development of GEOD provided Joint and Service commands and subordinate units with rapid access to operational-design tools that leverage authoritative, geospatially-enabled planning data and tools to support the ability to efficiently and expeditiously plan and disseminate plans and orders in a dispersed, collaborative environment. This effort allowed the MBPS to be further assessed by COCOMs while enhancements were made to the system, including modernization, sustainment, system integration, implementation and operations of net-centric enterprise systems in support of the Defense Readiness Reporting System Implementation Office. This effort was designed to ensure sustainment and modernization of tools to support the Global Force Management enterprise systems; to support continuing transition to a fully net-centric service-oriented architecture; and to integrate with the distributed architecture that developed in support of the Office of the Secretary of Defense adaptive planning objectives.

The ERDC GRL�s requirement to further develop and implement the GEOD program by further developing and integrating the MBPS DoD-wide has been labeled the �GEOD project�. BMI began work on the GEOD project in September 2018 when GRL exercised the third option year of TO GS00Q14OADU402

W911NF-15-F-0007.

BMI is currently providing highly specialized research and development for the MBMP technologies under Task Order W913V19F0005 that was non-competitively awarded to BMI on 27 September 2019 under the authority provided by 10 U.S.C. 2304c(b)(3) (now 10 U.S.C 3406(c)(3)) as implemented by FAR Part 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) Ordering, for a one-year Base and three one-year Options. The order was non-competitively extended for nine months via modification on 28 September 2023. The initial period of this extension expires 28 June 2024. See section 10.a., Procurement History, for additional details.

b. Justification: A follow-on task order should be issued because BMI�due to the specialized knowledge and expertise it gained while developing the MBPS and its current work on the GEOD program�is uniquely positioned to offer the Government significant cost and time savings. Therefore, this is a logical follow-on requirement that can be awarded on a sole source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency.

As described in the background above, the GEOD project requirement is currently being executed under a pre-existing order. While the system has progressed through the various phases of development, the requirement remains the same to provide a map-based technology for combatant command decision making across DoD. As such, all GSA OASIS awardees were given a fair opportunity in to be considered for award of the original order, W911NF-15-F- 0007, which was competitively solicited amongst forty-two contractors under the Unrestricted GSA OASIS pool. The proposed follow-on task order is logically related to that pre-existing order and the current TO as it is for the continued development of the GEOD project, previously called the MPBS and MBMP under the historical Task Orders in earlier stages of its development.

(1) Efficiency

i. BMI has been instrumental in further developing and implementing Joint Planning Services (JPS) for the current phase of the GEOD project. Likewise, because of the unique knowledge and experience gained with JPS and its predecessor system, MBPS, under previous task order support, BMI has been integral to all previous phases of the GEOD project. ERDC GRL understands that an operational enterprise capability like JPS, that supports both operational design and every step of the military planning process does not exist, nor has it ever existed, anywhere in the DoD. The BMI team also includes subject matter experts who are former senior employees of the company that owns the commercial core software for JPS and the Command Post Computing Environment (CPCE), and who have provided continuous support to the GRL since the inception of the JPS concept over a decade ago.

(2) Economy

i. If the Government procures a continuation of these services through a new contractor, the onset of a new project team would result in inefficient processes leading to critical project progress delays in addition to the time and cost implications associated with soliciting, evaluating, and awarding a new acquisition tool, and the time and costs associated with onboarding a new contractor team.

ii. JPS has more than two hundred thousand lines of code and approximately fifty modules with various inter-dependencies. The complexity of JPS, coupled with its core commercial software and the niche capability of strategic and operational military planning in the DoD, presents an unusual combination of required expertise that is not commonly resident among contracting organizations. Due to this, new software developers would require six to nine months of on-the-job training to gain sufficient proficiency in developing production-level code for JPS.

This time includes three months to find a programmer, vet them for the required clearances, and then add them to the contract. This time does not include three to six months of onboarding, training, and mentoring which includes the needed time to familiarize the programmers with the military organization and military planning which provides the essential context for working on a military planning system and training on the specialized application program interfaces and processes that the core software uses, before they are able to function as a developer on JPS. In order to mitigate knowledge gaps and recoup the lost productivity, a new contractor team would need to hire additional personnel to obtain the requisite pool of expertise. As outlined below, these mitigation techniques will impose increased costs to the Government given the increase in time and labor.

iii. While it is difficult to estimate precisely, the current effort represents approximately twenty-three full-time equivalents (FTE). If the entire contractor workforce on this project were to change and implement known learning curve theory, the Government would need to assume zero measurable productivity for the first quarter, and fifty percent measurable productivity for the second quarter.

Based upon these productivity assumptions and the resulting scheduled delays caused by rework, it is estimated that the Government will incur an additional $4.7M more in contract labor or roughly thirty-eight percent of the requested dollar increase using the values supplied in the current Government cost estimate. Finally, even assuming a new contractor were to propose pricing at a thirty-eight percent cost reduction, the cost savings would not account for the lost productivity during the six to nine month ramp up time.

iv. Currently, BMI is the only source capable of providing the level of expertise that is required to continue the software development and enhancements of the JPS program. The Government achieves significant cost savings by awarding the continuation of these services to BMI because no alternative commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) products exist that would be able to replace what is being developed to satisfy the need to modernize the military planning process. BMI possesses the unique intellectual capital, specifically plug-ins for the commercial software, SitaWare HQ, that underpins both JPS and CPCE, experience and expertise in strategic and operational planning, combined with a proven track record of impactful software development, that is required to meet the immediate needs of the organization.

Continuing the system development as a sole source, logical follow-on with BMI is more efficient and economical than to award a new competitive task order. If competition of this requirement resulted in a new contractor with a new workforce, a nine month learning curve for the new contractor�s full-time equivalents (FTE�s) is anticipated, resulting in a duplication of cost of approximately $15,920,000.00, or approximately 16% of the independent government estimate for the follow-on award.

As stated above in Economy sub-paragraph ii., JPS is extremely complex and is reliant on the core COTS software to operate. Until programmers are fully familiar with the inter-dependencies of the approximately fifty modules already in existence, work on new capabilities will require additional testing, review, and rework to correct bugs before we can deliver, or �transition� these modules to our transition partners including various DoD agencies that will be using the software developed through this program including Program Executive Office Command Control Communications-Tactical (PEO C3T), Project Manager Mission Command (PM MC), and Program of Record - Command Post Computing Environment (CPCE).

Development of all capabilities in JPS follow the agile software development process. This process is tied to the agile process followed by CPCE. Any delay in our process will result in loss of alignment with our transition partners and a delay of transitioning the capability to them. Besides delaying the transition of capability to CPCE, we risk violating the deliverable timeline established in our Transition

Agreements (TAs) with our transition partners. The TA is essentially a Memorandum of Agreement and is a formal agreement for delivery or �transition� of software to transition partners. This document identifies the transition partners commitment to transitioning the capability into a program of record with an agreed upon timeline for transition. At the present time, there are two TAs in place, one Transition Agreement in draft, and one future Transition Agreement.

Failing to meet the already agreed upon deliveries and schedule requires a new TA to be developed and reporting the changes through the signatories on the document (from the transition partner (PM and PEO) through the Cross Functional Teams (CFT), and in accordance with the FY22 Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology (DASA (R&T)) TA guidance notification to Army Futures Command (AFC).

c. Alternatives: Three procurement methods were considered and analyzed for this requirement: 1) Full and Open Competition utilizing the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Restricted and Unrestricted), and 2) Full and Open Competition and 3) GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted) Task Order (Sole Source) to BMI.

i. Alternative 1 � Full and Open Competition under the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Restricted and Unrestricted). This method which uses FAR Part 15 Contracting by Negotiation, allows time for the Government to assess capabilities of both Small Business and Other Than Small Business Companies to compete based on technical capability rather than cost. This method was not considered because based on a Request for Information (RFI) posted through the GSA Market Research as a Service (MRAS), review of capability narratives submitted by interested parties demonstrated that there are no known contractors capable of providing the level of expertise that is required by the constraints to continue the software development and enhancements of the MBMP technologies program. Also, the Government�s risk could dramatically increase should an Offeror under bid this complex requirement. The current effort represents approximately twenty-three FTE (2080 hours/year/FTE or 47,840 hours total annually). If the entire contractor workforce on this project changed and we assume a nine month learning curve for all FTE, the duplication of cost would be approximately $15,920,000 or approximately 16% of the independent government estimate for the follow-on award. It is extremely unlikely that we would save over $15M through competition.

ii. Alternative 2 � Full and Open Competition: The Government considered full and open competition outside of the OASAS Pool 4 IDIQ in an open solicitation on SAM.gov. This alternative would require the Government to conduct market research, develop an acquisition strategy and plan, execute a request for proposal under FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, using source selection procedures, with a procurement lead time that would exceed the required service deadline. This alternative would introduce service downtime and increased costs associated with the onset of a new team and result in the Government realizing a delay for the GEOD project schedule as outlined in paragraph 5.a. above. Additionally, based upon ongoing engagement between industry and GRL technical experts and their participation during industry days and conferences, the Government has determined that no alternative COTS products exist that would be able to replace what is being developed to satisfy the need to modernize the military planning process. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude based upon current market knowledge, and previous interest in the GEOD project requirements, that this alternative would not produce a contractor capable of meeting the current project schedule for planning, completion, and transition for the GEOD project. Therefore, this alternative does not represent the best course of action for the Government.

iii. Alternative 3 � Sole-Source under the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted) to BMI. The authority cited herein supports a logical follow-on. This acquisition method was evaluated and determined to be the best method to allow a June 2024 award. It allows an expedited procurement schedule. The Government issued a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) on 15 December 2023. A formal RFP is projected to be issued no later than March 2024.

iv. Based upon the evaluation of the acquisition alternatives mentioned above, the PDT considers the Sole-Source under the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted) to be the best acquisition method considering schedule, cost, risk, and procurement efficiency (award and post-award).

d. Impact: The GEOD project develops government owned software that runs on a COTS core system through the GRL, using government and contractor personnel. The COTS core is necessary to align with our transition partners and is the only current existing system requirement for compatibility. The current Task Order acquisition will support this preexisting requirement and continue development on top of the COTS core. Absent the preexisting development on top of the COTS core, there is a high risk of software failures not only for JPS users but also for operational users of CPCE which impacts our warfighters� ability to conduct planning and operations. JPS �operational prototypes� would need to be locked down or taken offline due to insufficient cybersecurity support services. Even a short-term event would immediately impact the current user base by undermining ongoing operations that rely on JPS.

Warfighters rely heavily on the planning systems these services support to make decisions. Any delay/lapse in service would potentially have grave consequences, (e.g., high casualties from a poorly planned military operation).

The GEOD project develops Government owned software that runs on a COTS core system through the GRL, using Government and contractor personnel. The COTS core is necessary to align with DoD partners and is the only current and existing system requirement for compatibility.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), A Request for Information (RFI) was issued by the GSA MRAS Point of Contact, Brett Zumbrunnen, on 10 April 2023, and closed 14 April 2023. This RFI was issued to the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Restricted and Unrestricted) under NAICS 541715 Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (exact Nanotechnology and Biotechnology) with a size standard of 500 employees. The Government received eight total responses: two were from other than small businesses and six were received from small business. Two of the eight indicated they would not submit a proposal. Four of the remaining six respondents indicated they would be interested in submitting a proposal (two other than small businesses and two small businesses). Evaluation of the submitted capability narratives was conducted by a Subject Matter Expert in ERDC-GRL on 15 May 2023. Review provided that only the incumbent, BMI, possessed the capability to perform the requirement.

a) Effective competition: The original requirement (W911NF15F0007) was competitively solicited utilizing the GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted). Pool 4 contained forty-two contractors. Fair Opportunity was provided to all contractors in the pool. BMI was the only contractor to submit a proposal to the requirement and was awarded a Task Order on 29 September 2015. There is no competition anticipated for this procurement. A new TO will be issued on a sole-source basis where, in the interest of economy and efficiency, it is a logical follow-on to an existing order issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

b) Subcontracting competition: BMI is responsible for managing contract performance, including planning, awarding, and administering subcontracts as necessary to ensure they are providing any additional subcontracting opportunities while continuing to report as required based on the terms and conditions of the subcontracting plan incorporated into their OASIS 4 contract.

The feasibility and desirability for effective subcontract competition will be determined by review of the submitted proposal. There are no known barriers to overcome.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: GEOD develops software tools to enhance and extend the functionality of the existing MBMP technologies. GEOD software tools are in a development phase where Army planners, staff and leaders� requirements are being translated into software tools specifications that can be developed by software engineers. When GEOD completes the software development phase, the new tools and enhancements will be integrated in the MBMP technologies portfolio transitioning GEOD into the sustainment phase. GEOD�s sustainment phase will enable ERDC to look for ways to maintain the enhancements transitioned to the MBMP program so these can be smaller independent tasks that are executed via separate contract mechanisms.

8. Market Research: Based on market research completed by the ERDC from 31 May 2023 to 14 August 2023, in accordance with FAR Section 10.002(b)(2) and deemed to be commensurate with the duration, value and complexity of this requirement, it has been determined that there is no reasonable expectation of obtaining offers from two (2) or more small business concerns exhibiting the technical competence and capability to satisfy all the tasks at a fair market price. Therefore, based upon market research findings, the �rule of two� at FAR 19.502-2(b) is not met. Market research was conducted by performing market analysis on current Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products to determine if a commercial product was viable for fulfilling the government�s requirements. No such COTS products exist that would be able to replace what is being developed to satisfy the need to modernize the military planning process. GRL Technical representatives identified the incumbent, BMI, as the only source capable of providing the level of expertise that is required to continue the software development and enhancements of the MBMP technologies program. BMI possesses the unique intellectual capital that is required to meet the immediate needs of the organization. To date, no other sources are capable to provide the services necessary to develop, enhance, deploy, and train the MBMP software. A separate Subcontracting Plan is not required for this task order under OASIS, however BMI will provide subcontract reporting under their GSA managed subcontracting plan, to include efforts under this task order.

Table 3: Summary of RFI Responses Firm Business Size Capable (Y/N) Battelle Memorial Institute OTSB Y Booz Allen Hamilton OTSB N

DS2 LLC SB N

Lukos LLC SB, SDVOSB, 8a N

Based upon this market research, it has been determined that there is no reasonable expectation of obtaining offers from two or more small business concerns exhibiting the technical competence and capability to satisfy all the tasks at a fair market price. Therefore, based upon market research findings, the �rule of two� at FAR 19.502-2(b) Total small business set-asides, is not met.

This will be a sole-source Task Order under GSA OASIS Pool 4 (Unrestricted). In accordance with FAR 19.705-1 Responsibilities of the contracting officer under the subcontracting assistance program, a small business subcontracting plan will not be required, as BMI would have been required to submit a plan at the contract level.

9. Interested Sources: As provided in Paragraph 8, a RFI posted to the GSA OASIS Pool 4 contractors, both restricted and unrestricted, resulted in interest in this procurement. Although there are other contractors that provide similar capabilities and experience as provided in Section 8, due to the complex nature of the current system in place and the initial competition to procure this work, it remains in the Government�s best interest to continue with the current contractor due to the cost to replace this program being now more costly than the initial cost it was procured for in addition to the time associated with the lost invested effort in the learning curve and duplication of costs to date, estimated at approximately 47,840 FTE Hours Annually and $15,920,000.00.

10. Other Facts:

a) Procurement History: Previous Task Orders were awarded to BMI in connection with the MBMP, MBPS and GEOD.

(1) Task Order Number GS00Q14OADU402 W911NF-15-F-0007 was awarded for $49,729,237.00 on 29 September 2015. The period of performance ended 28 September 2019.

(2) Task Order Number GS00Q14OADU402 W9132V19F0005 was awarded for $49,525,698.00 on 27 September 2019. This Task Order was extended through 28 June 2024. The extended period of performance is nine months plus three, one month options to allow for a full twelve month extension. The current obligated amount under this Task Order is $59,010,520.98.

b) The authority previously cited for the sole source award authority of W9132V19F0005 was 10 U.S.C. 2304c(b)(3) (now 10 U.S.C. 3406(c)(3)) as implemented by FAR Part 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) Ordering � The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

c) If a prior contract was accomplished using Full and Open Competition, include details on why sources are not being limited: Not Applicable.

d) Explanation of unusual patterns in procurement history: There are no unusual patterns in the procurement history.

(Source Selection Information � See FAR 2.101 and 3.104-4)

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve issuance of a Task Order for specialized development, enhancement, testing and training of the Geospatially- Enabled, Operational Design (GEOD), in the amount of $98,058,472.74, against the GSA OASIS GWAC, on an exception to fair opportunity basis pursuant to Title 10 U.S.C. § 3406(c)(3), as implemented in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) Ordering, subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.