EFOM RCC 10N_Redacted.pdf

Exception to Fair Opportunity Template Update AUG 2018

JUSTIFICATION for an EXCEPTION to FAIR OPPORTUNITY for the placement of an order >$3,500 under a Multiple Award Contract (MAC)

Upon the basis of the following justification, I, Preston Carlson, as a Contracting Officer of Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (SWRMC), hereby approve the Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity Pursuant to FAR 16.505(b)(2).

JUSTIFICATION

l. Agency and Contracting Activity. Department of the Navy, Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (SWRMC).

2. Nature/Description of Action.

This is a fair opportunity exception to add new work to delivery order number N55236-23-F- 8433 for the USS OAKLAND (LCS-24) FY 2024 Docked Selected Restricted Availability (DSRA) awarded to BAE under Contract N00024-18-D-4325, Delivery Order N55236-23-F- 8433.

3. Description of Supplies/Services.

This procurement adds Work Item 980-90-007 to provide the ShipAlt LCS2-86670K, Total Ships Computing Environment (TSCE) Obsolescence Network Upgrade and ShipAlt 96597K IBS Integrated Bridge System Install conducted by the Alteration Installation Team (AIT) for USS OAKLAND FY24 DSRA as detailed in Request for Contract Change (RCC) 10N. Key dates are detailed in Section J Attachment J-5, Availability Milestones and Key Events, with an Availability start date of 12 Feb 2024 and an Availability completion date of . The value of this service is based on the Change Order Price Analysis (COPA) from BAE. Funding will be FY24 OPN. Project Manager (PM) has technically concurred with the COPA on 19 MAR 2024. The Government's minimum needs have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.

4. Identification of the Exception to Fair Opportunity. (FAR 16.505 (b)(2))

Identification/Justification for Exception:

a. The agency need for services is of such urgency that providing fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

b. Only one such awardee is capable of providing such services required at the level of quality required because the services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

c. The order 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 MAC, provided that all the awardees were given fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

BAE was issued the delivery order to complete the DSRA in support of the USS OAKLAND (LCS-24). The work is providing support services for ShipAlt 86670 total Ships Computing Environment (TSCE) Obsolescence Network Upgrade and ShipAlt

96597K IBS Integrated Bridge System (IBS) Install, in accordance with NAVSEA standard items. Additionally, this work is going to be accomplished under the cognizance of the TYCOM established “Red-Line conditions defined by reference (b) in the COMNAVSURFPAC /COMNAVSURFANTINST 3504.1D, Redlines. Currently, the TSCE and IBS system is inoperable. Without the TSCE and IBS system in operation, the ship will lose its obsolescence network equipment, which is responsible for maintaining active communications, navigational sensors, combat systems and ship’s network. The TSCE and IBS also troubleshoots and coordinates the restoration of all ship’s navigational sensors, network centric navigation data flow, communication circuits, engineering control systems, total ship’s computing environment, and mission package computing environment.

An inoperable status of the TSCE and IBS directly impacts the functionality and/or redundancy capability of the network and server infrastructure and poses serious risk to all ship warfare systems.

Competition would be inefficient and uneconomical and would lead to a duplication of costs for mobilization of equipment and personnel required to complete this work.

Additionally, if competed, the delay in award would cause the ship to not meet its ready status, adding additional costs to the ongoing availability. The potential cost savings from competition would be less than the costs for the duplication of equipment and personnel to accomplish the work.

Adding this work item to the existing Delivery Order under BAE is in the best interest of the Government in order to complete the scheduled availability with BAE support services already in place. Introducing another contractor at this stage will create inefficiencies during execution. The ship is already in their DSRA, at BAE shipyard. Opening this requirement for solicitation will result in further delays to the schedule and interfere with current contractor accomplishing the ship alt. Having another contractor or soliciting this work would delay the schedule and affect milestones putting Availability completion due date at risk which in-turn, affects multiple other Naval ship schedules in the fleet. The Contracting Officer reviewed the justification and has determined it to be accurate and complete to the best of his knowledge and has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government is fair and reasonable.

d. It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

e. For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

5. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Cost.

A thorough review and analysis, with regard to price and scope, of the pricing information provided by BAE will be conducted by the Project Team (PT) and verified by the Contracting Officer. Determination of fair and reasonable of BAE’s COPA has been accomplished by price analysis, cost element analysis, and technical analysis was for reasonableness of labor hours in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(vii) and FAR 15.404-1(e)(1). A combination of the MT technical knowledge and skills along with the awarded Section J Attachment J-3 was used to determine the COPA to be fair and reasonable.

The Contracting Officer has determined that, to the Government, this Acquisition will be fair and reasonable based on FAR 15.404-1(e)(1), technical analysis from the PM, FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(i)

– comparison of proposed prices of labor and material burden rates received in response to the solicitation, and FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(v), comparison with the IGE.

6. Description of Efforts Made to Solicit Offers From as Many Offerors as Practicable:

This Delivery Order has already been solicited to MAC IDIQ contract holders and all were provided the opportunity to submit their proposals. BAE, with this awarded delivery order contract, is contracted to provide services the ship will be in their facility, thus the inefficiencies of competing this requirement will not overcome the unacceptable delays that would accrue from waiting for a contract award to support installation services for ShipAlt 86670 total Ships Computing Environment (TSCE) Obsolescence Network Upgrade and ShipAlt 96597K IBS Integrated Bridge System (IBS), for each repair activity work performed during the contract performance period. Given the nature of the solicitation, the urgency and current ship location, award to the current contractor can satisfy the Agency’s requirement and will not result in serious injury to the government. A notice in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2 will not be publicized based on the exception in FAR 5.202(a)(2).

7. Actions Taken to Remove or Overcome Barriers that Led to the Exception to Fair Opportunity:

Upon discovery of the requirement for the support services for ShipAlt LCS2-86670K, Total Ships Computing Environment (TSCE) Obsolescence Network Upgrade and ShipAlt 96597K IBS Integrated Bridge System Install, discussions were commenced with Government leadership to analyze the best course of action given the Availability’s schedule and the available options.

Due to the time restraint on when the work was to be completed to not impact the overall availability schedule and various other sequenced working events, it was determined that there was not sufficient time to solicitate out the new work as this would take a minimum of 45 days to receive an awarded contract. Between the MAC IDIQ holders, it was not guaranteed that BAE would be successful in obtaining this scope of work, which means, there would have additional time delays to get the awarded company access into BAE’s shipyard and for this company to complete the work from set up to tear down. Cost was also a factor as BAE would most likely have the better price due to already having the ship in their shipyard and the services already made readily available. Due to the high likely hood of a higher cost to the government and unacceptable timeframes outside the awarded availability schedule, it is in the Government’s best interest to include this new work into the existing delivery order.

REVIEW:

2.0 BRANCH HEAD (FAR 16.505(b)(2)): (>$700K)

Signature:

Printed/Typed Name and Title Code Phone Date

APPROVAL:

COMPETITION ADVOCATE (FAR 16.505(b)(2)) (>$700K to $13.5M):

APPROVAL:

HEAD OF THE CONTRACTING ACTIVITY (FAR 16.505(b)(2)) (>$13.5M to $93M):