2006-0005 JA LOE increase.doc

Purchase Request Number: HC1028-08-D-2006-0005

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION (OTFAOC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Justification for OTFAOC Number: JA12-065 Upon the basis of the following justification, I, as Procuring Activity Competition Advocate, hereby approve the use of other than full and open competition of the proposed contractual action pursuant to the authority exception to fair opportunity 10 U.S.C. §2304c(b).

JUSTIFICATION

1. REQUIRING AGENCY AND CONTRACTING OFFICE (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(1)):

Agency:

HQ, US Air Force, Advanced Computer Flight Plan (ACFP) Program Management Office/Air Mobilty Command (AMC) A6IM, 203 West Losey Street, Scott Air Force Base, IL 62225

Contracting Office:

Defense Information Systems Agency // Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization (DISA/DITCO) Scott Field Office, 2300 East Drive, Bldg. 3600, Scott AFB, IL 62225-5406

2. NATURE/DESCRIPTION OF ACTION ( FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C):

The following is the background describing the effort to be placed on order via modification action.

This is an increase level of effort to be issued under Task Order (TO) 0005 against ENCORE II multiple-award, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract, HC1028-08-D-2006. The TO currently provides for the continuation of engineering and technical support to ACFP.

The following is a summary of the proposed action.

Contract Type: FFP

Estimated Amount: $5,000,000 Current TO Ceiling amount: $15,806.289.74 Type of Funding: TWCF

Year of Funding: FY12-FY13

Type of Action: Modification

POP: Option Period 3: 27 October 2011 to 26 October 2012, Option Period 4: 27 October 2012 to 30 September 2013 This action is to modify Data Systems Analysts Inc. (DSA) task order HC1028-08-D-2006-0005 against the ENCORE II multiple-award, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract. This order modification will provide for the acceleration of engineering and technical support to ACFP in order to implement critical Mission Index Flying capability needed to achieve $85M in aviation fuel savings in support of Executive Order 13423, dated 27January 2007, AFPM 10-1.1, dated 16 June 2009, and the Air Force Energy Plan, dated 2010, which includes guidance from the Secretary of the Air Force to decrease aviation fuel consumption 10% by 2015 based on a 2006 baseline. Also, work needs to be accomplished in order to further stabilize the system configuration baseline in order to allow for a smooth transition to a competitively awarded contract, which is forecasted for award on approximately 1 October 2013.

Program activities for ACFP are managed by the HQ AMC Communications and Information Directorate, C2 Mobility Systems Division, Programs and Integration Branch (HQ AMC/A6IM). Responsibilities of this office include managing funds, schedule, software development and implementation, hardware acquisition, and System Project Management (SPM). Supporting activities provided by the AMC Communications Group include System Management (SM), and contracted Operations Management (OM).

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES ((FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(3)):

The ACFP system provides information that is vital to the mission effectiveness of all AMC airlift and air refueling missions. It is the command and control planning system used by AMC to produced fuel optimized flight plans for airlift and air refueling missions throughout the world. It is currently used by the Tanker Airlift Control Center (TACC) at Scott AFB, Air Mobility Divisions (AMDs) at USAFE and PACAF, and at AMC and AMC supported units globally. All AMC managed flight missions use ACFP optimized flight plans. It is vital to the DoD overall mission and the continued capability of the AMC to provide the Global Reach portion of the DoD mission.

a. This task order modification will provide an increased level of effort in the continuation of technical support to ensure defects in the flight planning capability are more rapidly addressed and AMC achieves its projected $85M annual fuel savings in compliance with the above referenced directives. The order will provide program management of ACFP application support activities; perform required ACFP software maintenance activities; accelerate ACFP software modifications to ensure compatibility with external systems, and accelerate software modifications to more quickly integrate externally developed government software.

b. Integration of third party Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) software will require architectural changes to the ACFP code baseline. Independent of integration activities, additional effort will be required to ensure that, where it is not possible to use the COTS tool on certain aircraft, flight plans will still be available for those aircraft. Maintenance activities are to ensure that duplication of effort is eliminated while reducing the impact of the COTS on non-applicable flight plans.

c. Additional effort is required to meet the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) timelines for upgrading ACFP’s interface to remain compatible with the Digital Aeronautic Flight Information File (DAFIF). Additional maintenance efforts will be required to ensure ACFP successfully retrieves the navigational database information required for flight planning. NGA will be upgrading to DAFIF 8.1 in early 2012 and 9.0 in 2013.

d. An increased level of effort is required to implement an interface to Air Combat Command (ACC) developed air refueling tracks. ACC is replacing its aging Combined Mating and Ranging Planning System (CMARCHPS) that currently interfaces with ACFP with the new Coronet Air Refueling Planner (CARP) system. ACFP must be modified to interface with CARP before 1 June 2013.

e. Increased emphasis on data sharing within the Mobility Air Force (MAF) Enterprise Information Service (MEIS) require extensive data modifications to provide flight planning data in an enterprise wide data format. ACFP’s flight planning data is required to verify and validate fuel saving estimates in DoD directed fuel reduction mandates.

f. New interfaces with European Airspace Control and UK Airspace control for Electronic Route Availability Documents (ERAD) and Conditional Routing Allocation Message (CRAM) are required to enable AMC to utilize efficient routes over continental European and British airspace.

g. Modification of ACFP to use International Organization for Standardization (ISO) country codes for international flight plans required to interoperate with Command and Control (C2) systems.

h. Extend ACFP Weather databases to include tropopause and modify ACFP reports to display tropopause data and headwind components. This is needed to assist aircrew decision making in executing in-flight adjustments required to achieve DoD mandate to reduce mission fuel usage.

i. Address performance bottlenecks resulting from insufficient internal load balancing mechanisms.

j. Migrate ACFP to USTRANSCOM’s C2 network.

4. IDENTIFICATION OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY and DEMONSTRATION OF CONTRACTOR’S UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS ((FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)):

Statutory Authority:

10 U.S.C. §2304(b)(3) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C), The modification must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, in which all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

Demonstration of Contractor’s Unique Qualifications:

DSA has the unique expertise and capability to economically and effectively modify the ACFP application; plus continue to modify the configuration baseline to maintain current system capability and security DSA has provided and continues to provide the development of the ACFP program since FY2009. DSA is the original designer, developer, and integrator of the current ACFP architecture and infrastructure. DSA’s highly specialized architectural design was instrumental in the major infrastructure upgrade and accreditation achieving operational capability. Previous efforts in moving development and test environments to a new maintenance contractor required over 12 months to restore the environment to the extent required to continue development/maintenance of ACFP. The time required for any competitor to obtain the needed technical knowledge and expertise would result in unacceptable delays in implementing the Mission Index Flying capability pending the award of the new contract and meeting the program objective of completing integration of ACFP by FY13. Historically, transition of ACFP to a new contractor has required 12-18 months to implement the physical security requirements, establish the development environment, and achieve sufficient expertise to assume the maintenance capability. Analysis of previous transition efforts within ACFP demonstrates the cost for this required incubation of a new maintainer to be $2.1M.

A delay of 12 months would result in required maintenance activities beyond the anticipated life of ACFP and result in potential operational impact in performing AMC’s airlift mission. ACFP must remain viable in producing routes of flight that are both fuel efficient and safe. ACFP is designated a Mission Assurance Category 1 system critical to Command and Control and operational success. Insufficient maintenance will impact both and potentially result in mission failure or loss of life or aviation assets. DSA, and their subcontractor, On-Time Systems (OTS), possess the highly unique expertise in complex optimization algorithms required to choose the best route of flight that meets all flight planner/manager directed constraints. Under direction of OTS personnel, advanced ACFP algorithms were developed within the Air Force (AF) Rome Labs.

DSA is the only contractor currently possessing the requisite knowledge of the critical state-of-the-art capabilities, and the internal organization of the million-plus lines of code comprising ACFP that must be considered in maintaining the capabilities within ACFP’s existing framework. An award to another support contractor at this time would in all likelihood result in failure to meet the established operational augmentation of ACFP. ACFP must upgrade to the new navigational database file formats, otherwise, ACFP will cease to function; no alternate capability exists for ACFP. ACFP must complete its interface with Air Combat Command’s new air refueling application, otherwise AMC’s support capability for air refueling fighter aircraft across the Atlantic and Pacific is jeopardized, and errors resulting from human input could further impact the safe fuel escort of fighters when fuel is most critical.

The consequences of delays of implementing Mission Index Flying capabilities within the ACFP system shall result in a loss of an estimated $85M per year in available fuel budget to perform AMC airlift and air refueling. DoD has already removed these funds from the AMC budget and requires AMC to accelerate the implementation of this cost saving initiative. Failure to implement on an accelerated schedule is unacceptable to the war-fighter and would include the immediate and sustained loss of mission effectiveness and place American Forces at grave risk. ACFP automates the Airlift/Air Refueling flight planning process to meet the fuel efficiency targets to meet declining budget resources. Failure to implement additional fuel savings would greatly impair the flow of resources and manpower throughout the world; Impacting not only the current war time activities, but the capability for the United States to project and protect its interest (through the Global Reach mission). ACFP is the sole provider of flight planning optimization capabilities needed to conduct Airlift and Air-Refueling Mission planning in this wartime environment that do not exist in any other form. Organic capabilities are unavailable to provide these required services. Senior information technology and engineering support have been outsourced for decades. Any remaining government resources which might exist are employed elsewhere due to current ops tempo and wartime support. Consequently, the dollars and time it takes in both government resources and contractor resources make awarding a contract to a new contractor an unacceptable alternative at this time. This leaves the only acceptable alternative, which is to restrict competition to the incumbent contractor, DSA. DSA currently has the technical data, experienced personnel, and facilities in place to accelerate ongoing software development and repair, and development of the code necessary to support the integration of Mission Index Capability into ACFP with the least cost and delay to the government.

In summary, the impact to cost resulting from schedule delays is as follows:

1) The sooner the activities described in the J&A are completed, the sooner the Air Force can begin realizing the goal of approximately $85 million/year in fuel savings, which then can be redistributed to other Air Force critical activities.

2) Analysis of previous transition efforts within ACFP demonstrates the cost for this required incubation of a new Contractor to be $2.1M and will delay the start of necessary services, because of the historical spin-up time of 18 months and an additional 12 months to transfer and rebuild the hardware and applications of the government provided development environments.

This capably is necessary to maintain flight planning operations while accomplishing the DoD objective of achieving fuel consumption economies within the Fuel Efficiency program schedule and cost objectives.

5. COST/PRICE FAIR AND REASONABLE DETERMINATION (FAR 16.505(b)(ii)(B)(5)):

Rates have been established within the ENCORE II contract. All rates set forth in the contract, and used on individual orders, were based on competition among the DITCO ENCORE vendors and a price analysis was accomplished.

The labor rates used/set forth in the ENCORE II contract will remain the same. The prices were considered fair and reasonable based on competitive proposals in conjunction with price analysis. The total estimated value for this action is estimated at $5.0 million. The proposal will be reviewed to consider the level of effort and the mix of labor proposed to perform the tasks being ordered and to determine the total price is reasonable.

6. MARKET RESEARCH:

Market research was conducted with the initial award of ACFP Application Support Services in 2009 and a second market research was conducted in January 2011 with the documentation and results revaluated in February 2012. The market surveys were conducted to determine the best contract method and contract vehicle to meet requirements. In both instances of conducting the market research, the customer and contracting activity aided in decision making of the type of contract vehicle. The original request for this effort was a full and open solicitation competed among all the GWAC vendors.

This task is a continuation of the services provided on the original task and is proposed as a level of effort increase. The market research was conducted via randomly selecting firms from the source list of the ENCORE II vendors and firms responding to an RFI dated December 2010. (The RFI was issued by the AMC Contracting Office in preparation for the competitive follow-on contract). The review targeted both large and small businesses, to include Service Disabled-Veteran Owned Small Businesses, Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, Women-owned Small Businesses, and Small Disadvantaged Small Businesses. Each firm’s capabilities were assessed, as to its ability to perform the tasks recited in the PWS. The research was conducted using data from such sources as the GSA Schedule description, individual schedule award contracts, the Internet, Thomas Register, Central Contractor Registration, and experience of doing business with some of the firms.

Market research consisted of evaluating capabilities of 13 firms. Of the 13 firms, several did not provide relevant information necessary to evaluate capabilities needed to perform the required tasks. The remaining firms demonstrated that they had the requisite competency to complete the tasks. Nonetheless, only the incumbent demonstrated the ability to complete the tasks within the program schedule by having in place the necessary personnel, management, and equipment. (The firms, who provided indications of being capable of fulfilling the tasks, demonstrated that they would be viable sources for the follow-on competitive procurement.)

The market research confirms that no other business other than the incumbent has in its possession the technical data, expertise, and management experience necessary to implement the required increase in effort and continue to sustain ACFP through award of the replacement contract, O/A 1 October 2013.

7. ANY OTHER SUPPORTING FACTS: Indicate any other facts supporting the use of limited sources justification and approval (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(6)):

a. Duplicative Costs - Analysis of previous transition efforts within ACFP demonstrates the cost for this required incubation of a new maintainer to be $2.1M.

b. Unacceptable Delays –

i. Historically, transition of ACFP to a new contractor has required 12-18 months to implement the physical security requirements, establish the development environment, and achieve sufficient expertise to assume the maintenance capability.

ii. An award to another support contractor at this time would in all likelihood result in failure to meet the established operational augmentation of ACFP. ACFP must upgrade to the new navigational database file formats, otherwise, ACFP will cease to function; no alternate capability exists for ACFP. ACFP must complete its interface with Air Combat Command’s new air refueling application, otherwise AMC’s support capability for air refueling fighter aircraft across the Atlantic and Pacific is jeopardized, and errors resulting from human input could further impact the safe fuel escort of fighters when fuel is most critical.

iii. If fuel use reductions and associated cost reductions are not realized as programmed, other critical programs will suffer reduced funding levels to make up the shortfall. Advertised savings in fuel have resulted in $18.4M reductions in the AMC aviation fuel per year beginning FY12 per AMC’s Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budget driving the need to accelerate current software deliveries.

8. ACTIONS TAKEN TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO COMPETITION (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(7)):

At the conclusion of the planned performance period of this order, the acquisition of ACFP application support will be accomplished on a competitive basis. No more extension of this effort will be considered.

9. REFERENCE TO THE APPROVED ACQUISITION PLAN (AP) PROGRAM PLAN (PP): (DARS 8.405-6(g)(2)(S-91) & FAR 7.1): N/A. A written AP was not required.

TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION: "I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the J&A are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief." (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(9)).

NAME: Robert H. Ford.________________

SIGNATURE: _______________________

TITLE: ACFP Program Manager___________________

DATE: ________

REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION: "I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the J&A are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.” (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(9)).

NAME: Robert H. Ford______________________

SIGNATURE: _______________________

TITLE: ACFP Program Manager______________________

DATE: ________

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION: Include the following determination:

“I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.”

NAME: ___Aaron R Schwarz________

SIGNATURE:

TITLE: ___Contracting Officer__ DATE: __28 Feb 2012_ (For Approval signature select the appropriate approval level signatory and delete all others)

PROCURING ACTIVITY COMPETITON ADVOCATE APPROVAL

“I have reviewed this justification and find it to be accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Since this justification does not exceed $12.5M, this review serves as approval.”

APPROVED BY: (FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(C)(2))

Signature:

ANN M. VAUGHN, Procuring Activity Competition Advocate, PLA, 229-9608, 8 March 2012 Printed/Typed Name and Title

Organization Phone

Date

Enclosure 12c, J&A (Part 16)

Page 8 of 8 Pages

22Nov2011/v1.2