MZA_TO3_JA_approved.pdf

COORDINATION AND APPROVAL DOCUMENT

CONTRACTING ACTIVITY: AFRL DET 8/RVKDT, Kirtland AFB, NM

CONTRACT #: FA9451-12-D-0163

PROGRAM/PROJECT: HEL-JTO 2012 BAA/Beam Control IDIQ with MZA Associates TYPE PROGRAM: Other Contracting AUTHORITY: 10 USC 2304(c), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii)(A) ESTIMATED CONTRACT COST: $1,146,793 Total ($359,879 this J&A) TYPE J&A: Individual

COORDINATION DATE

Don Seeley HEL-JTO Deputy Director 505-248-8205

David Romo-Garza AFRL DET 8/RVKDT Section Chief 505-846-8244

Carmen Chavira AFRL DET 8/RD Small Business Specialist 505-853-6241

APPROVED:

Anna Burkhalter AFRL DET 8/RVKDT Contracting Officer 505-853-4654 seeleyd Inserted Text Feb 2, 2015

1370140100C Typewritten Text 2 Feb 2015

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN

FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

FA9451-12-D-0163

I. CONTRACTING ACTIVITY

The Air Force Research Laboratory Directed Energy Directorate Contracting Division, on behalf of the High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office, is the activity responsible for the below described contracting action.

II. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION BEING PROCESSED

See Sections III and V below for description of the requirement.

The action will be awarded as an ordering period extension to an existing IDIQ basic contract FA9451-12-D-0163. The ordering period will be extended by 4.5 months to correct an administrative oversight which led to a cost-plus-fixed-fee task order being awarded after the current ordering period had expired.

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE

AGENCY’S NEEDS

Under the awarded task order, MZA Associates will provide the following services in support of the HEL-JTO program:

1. Design and Fabrication of the Helicopter Beam Director Subsystem (HBDS) Mounting Apparatus

2. HBDS Installation, Integration, and Checkout

3. Develop a test plan for the tests to be conducted

4. HBDS Line-of-Sight (LOS) Stabilization Tests

5. HBDS Acquisition, Tracking, Pointing (ATP) Tests

6. HBDS Removal at completion of the effort

7. Upon successful completion of this effort, the LOS stabilization and ATP performance of the HBDS shall have been tested while subjected to representative platform disturbances and the results of said tests documented.

8. Applicable data, software models, hardware and documentation deliverables

The estimated cost of the task order is $359,879, has a period of performance of 12 months with an additional 3 months for delivery of the final report, and is funded with 6.2 funds for applied research.

IV. STATUTORY AUTHORITY PERMITTING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN

COMPETITION

10 USC 2304(c), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii)(A).

V. DEMONSTRATION THAT THE CONTRACTOR’S UNIQUE

QUALIFICATIONS OR NATURE OF THE ACQUISITION REQUIRES THE

USE OF THE AUTHORITY CITED ABOVE (APPLICABILITY OF

AUTHORITY)

Under sponsorship of the Office of Naval Research, in support of the High Energy Fiber Laser (HEFL) Future Naval Capability (FNC) and under contract to NAVAIR, MZA is developing the Helicopter Beam Director Subsystem (HBDS). The HEFL FNC will demonstrate a High Energy Laser Weapon System (HELWS) deployed on a helicopter against tactical targets. The HBDS is a key component of the HEFL system. A key risk to the success of HEFL is the ability of the HBDS to maintain line-of-sight accuracy in the presence of significant platform vibration and acoustic disturbances. Furthermore, to demonstrate sufficient robustness and maintainability as a weapon system, the HEFL must be able to be repeatedly subjected to such disturbances without the need for frequent realignment procedures that would be disruptive to the CONOPS of weapons to be deployed in a harsh environment.

This effort establishes a course of action to emulate, instrument, and characterize the performance of the HEFL HBDS under representative disturbance conditions in a manner that will provide the "ruggedized" HEFL a significant reduction in risk in achieving its goals.

Because the HBDS is being developed by MZA, this acquisition is for continued performance of a highly specialized service.

The HEL-JTO believes that award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition. Duplicated costs would include the cost for another firm to develop a system equivalent to HBDS on which to perform the services acquired under this task order or the cost for the Government to transfer the HBDS to another firm to perform the tests plus any training and knowledge transfer required to familiarize the new firm with the program. The cost to the Government to run a competition is also included in the analysis of duplicated costs. Without performing detailed research into specific costs and considering the relatively low estimated cost of the task order ($359,879), any of the above mentioned costs would far outweigh the potential savings that could be obtained through competition of the tests.

Accordingly, MZA Associates is the only firm capable of providing the services described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing substantial duplication of cost that could not be expected to be recovered through competition.

VI. DESCRIPTION OF EFFORTS MADE TO ENSURE THAT OFFERS ARE

SOLICITED FROM AS MANY POTENTIAL SOURCES AS DEEMED

PRACTICABLE

A sources sought synopsis was not issued for this ordering period extension. In accordance with the exception listed at FAR 5.202(a)(11), this action was not synopsized because it was made under the terms of an existing contract that was previously synopsized. No other actions were taken to facilitate competition for this action because at the time the subject task order was awarded, it was believed that the ordering period was still valid.

VII. DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE

ANTICIPATED COST TO THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE FAIR AND

REASONABLE

A cost analysis was performed on the fully disclosed cost proposal for the subject task order. The contracting officer found the negotiated estimated cost and fixed fee to be fair and reasonable based on technical and quantitative evaluations, DCMA rate verification, and DCAA audits.

VIII. DESCRIPTION OF THE MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND THE

RESULTS, OR A STATEMENT OF THE REASONS MARKET RESEARCH

WAS NOT CONDUCTED

See Section VI above.

IX. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND

OPEN COMPETITION

The request from the HEL-JTO for a third task order to subject contract was received in mid June 2014. At that time, the contracting office referred to the basic contract document in order to determine the ordering period and total maximum ordering amount. The contract’s effective period was interpreted as the period of performance stated in clause F002 Period of Performance which states: “Period of performance under this contract shall end 48 months after effective date of the contract.” The effective date of the contract is 14 May 2012. Therefore, the ordering period was believed to extend through 13 May 2016.

Task order award was made on 23 September 2014. Subsequently, the misinterpretation of the ordering period was discovered. Clause F002 conflicts with 252.216-7006 Ordering which states:

“…orders may be issued from effective date of contract through 24 MARO.” This would make the last day to order 13 May 2014; four months prior to actual task order award. To verify the intended ordering period, the Acquisition Plan was referenced and specifies a 24 month ordering period.

Thirty-five IDIQ contracts and initial task orders, each for unique research projects, were awarded along with this contract as a result of a BAA published in 2011. The ordering period expiration dates range from 8 May 2014 to 27 September 2014. The 2013 iteration of the BAA resulted in 19 potential IDIQ awards which are currently being negotiated and processed for award. These 19 potential contracts have a 48 month ordering period, further adding to the confusion.

If the 24 month ordering period was understood in advance of expiration of subject contract, the ordering period would have been extended by 6 months from 13 May 2014 to 13 November 2014. The extension would be a 25% increase in ordering period but would not change the scope or ceiling of the basic IDIQ. The subject task order brought the total awarded value of all task orders under the basic IDIQ up to $1,146,793—significantly under the ordering limit of $3.5M.

Upon approval of this J&A, the administrative oversight will corrected by bilateral modification to the basic contract to extend the ordering period to 23 September 2014, the date the last task order was awarded.

X. LIST OF SOURCES, IF ANY, THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE

ACQUISITION

See Section VI above.

XI. A STATEMENT OF THE ACTIONS, IF ANY, THE AGENCY MAY TAKE TO

REMOVE OR OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS TO COMPETITION BEFORE

MAKING SUBSEQUENT ACQUISITIONS FOR THE SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

REQUIRED

As previously stated, this contract is one of 35 contracts awarded as a result of a 2011 BAA.

HEL-JTO releases a similar BAA approximately every other year with the intent of awarding dozens of research and development contracts in several high energy laser topic areas.

Historically, small businesses are well represented in the pool of awardees and HEL-JTO will continue to encourage participation from all qualified sources.

XII. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION

The contracting officer’s signature on the Coordination and Approval Document evidences that she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of her knowledge and belief (FAR 6.303-2(b)(12)).

XIII. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS PERSONNEL’S CERTIFICATION

As evidenced by their signatures on the Coordination and Approval Document, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein, which is their responsibility, is both accurate and complete (FAR 6.303-2(c)) http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/06.htm http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/06.htm