NIDS III J&A $16M and 27 Months.pdf

Justification and Approval (J&A) for Other Than Full and Open Competition

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 1 of 9

NOTE: If a Justification and Approval was approved for the preceding acquisition, a copy of the approved J&A for the predecessor action must be included in the staff package for approval of the instant J&A. This applies to J&A staff packages that are submitted for review and approval at a level above the contracting officer. The predecessor J&A will be used as a reference document by the approving official.

Is this a new or amended J&A Document? New Amended ( Prior to Award Only! )

Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan? Yes No

Funding level for this acquisition: < $700K > $700K and < $13.5M > $13.5M and < $93M > $93M

Contracting Activity: 55 CONS/PKT, 106 Peacekeeper Lane, Ste 2N3, Offutt AFB NE 68113

Purchase Request / Local ID Number: FA4600-14-D-0001

Program / Project (and PE, if applicable): National Target Base Desired Ground Zero (DGZ) List (NDL) Integrated Development System Version III (NIDS III)

Program Type (PEO or Other Contracting): PEO (AFLCMC/HB)

Authority: 6.302-1 – 10 USC 2304(c)(1), Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements

Estimated Contract Cost (including options): $16,000,000 J&A Type: Class Individual

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a) ) Sign and Save Procedure

** The text in the signature blocks below is editable, including the title.

** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block. CAUTION: Once removed, it can only be restored by downloading the BLANK FORM again.

Date

16 Jul 2019

Program Manager

BRUCE D. MULLER, AFLCMC HBCC

DSN 272-7119 or 402-232-7119

Signature

X

Date

07 Aug 2019

Contracting Officer

RAMON NEGRON-CANCEL, 55th CONS/PKT

DSN 272-6571 or (402)-232-6571

Signature

X

Date

19 Aug 2019

Requesting Agency

STACY A. K. FURCINI, AFLCMC/HBC

DSN: 271-2332, (402)-294-2332

Signature

X

Date

17 Aug 2019

Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) JENNIFER A. MAPP, Maj, USAF 55 CONS/CC, DSN: 272-6358 or (402)-232-6358

Signature

X

Date

23 Aug 2019

Legal Reviewer

KURT H. EBERLE, AFLOA/JAQK

DSN 612-6698 or (240) 612-6698

Signature

X

Date

11 Sep 2019

Competition Advocate

STEVEN L. NERENBERG, AFICC/KC, OL-ACC

Deputy Director of Contracting

DSN 574-5372

Signature

X

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 2 of 9

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

Date

27 Sep 2019

Program Executive Officer, Digital

STEVEN D. WERT, SES, USAF

AFMC AFLCMC/HB / DSN 845-9120 or (781)-225-9120

Signature

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 3 of 9

I. Contracting Activity.

The Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, 55th Contracting Squadron, Offutt AFB, NE is the contracting organization responsible for the individual justification for other than full and open competition. The Contracting Officer is Ramon Negron-Cancel.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

This J&A is required to authorize the use of other than full and open competition procedures by the Department of Defense (DoD) to: (1) Increase the cost ceiling for contract FA4600-14-D-0001 from the current ceiling of $40,749,563.35 to $56,749,563.35, an increase of $16,000,000.00 and (2) Increase the period of performance for contract FA4600-14-D-0001 from the current expiration date of 31 March 2020 to 30 June 2022, an increase of 27 months. This 27 month extension is for all Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), Firm Fixed Price (FFP), and Cost Reimbursable Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN).

Background: The current provider of service for this contract is Leidos, Inc. These services were awarded on 01 Oct 13, using best value source selection procedures in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 215.3, the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) 5315.3, and DoD Source Selection Procedures, competed under full and open competition. NIDS III has $621,671.63 remaining in scope.

The follow-on work done in support of the NIDS 4 source selection was halted in order to determine if a potential contract strategy change would be necessary, specifically combining all of the MPAS contracts and utilizing a Multiple Award IDIQ contract. The approval and use of an HBC Software Factory significantly changed the landscape for all MPAS contracts, therefore requiring the customer to alter the follow-on contract strategies for all of these contracts. Because of this, the follow on contract for NIDS III will no longer be ready by September 2020. Therefore, an extension to the current NIDS III contract is required to ensure the continuation of NIDS services and will serve as a bridge to enable the consolidated follow-on acquisition strategy adequate time for completion.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

Air Force Operations and Maintenance (3400) and Air Force Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (3600) appropriations will be used during this 27 month extension.

The Integrated Strategic Planning and Analysis Network (ISPAN) is a system of systems that provides planning capabilities to United States Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) in support of their Unified Command Plan (UCP) responsibilities for strategic deterrence and global strike. ISPAN is an Acquisition Category One (ACAT I) program and is the nation's only nuclear planning system. ISPAN is comprised of two major subsystems, the Mission Planning and Analysis System (MPAS) and the Global Adaptive Planning Collaborative Information Environment (GAPCIE).

NIDS III falls within MPAS which consists of five separate contracts functioning together as a system to fulfill USSTRATCOM's nuclear planning capability. MPAS is the nation's only comprehensive system for developing “Level 4” nuclear plans and options for fielded nuclear forces and the President of The United States' Nuclear Decision Handbook in support of Operations Plan 80XX.

The applications presently developed or maintained under NIDS III include the Aimpoint Construction System (APCS), Option Structure Editor (OSE) and Early Plan Design (EPD). APCS implements the capabilities required for the DGZ process. APCS supports both automated and manual DGZ construction, generates aimpoints for nuclear weapon application, and improves performance and accuracy. OSE is used to maintain the Option Final configuration and propagate option changes throughout the planning process. EPD allows for excursion plans to be developed and later implemented by MPAS. The services required will be the same as the current NIDS III IDIQ contract until this contract can be re-competed.

NIDS III is a subsystem of the ISPAN supporting assigned Operational Plans, to include OPLAN 80XX, Theater

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 4 of 9

Planning, and Global Strike Support Documents, and new UCP tasking and related products through target selection and DGZ Construction capabilities. NIDS III is a "rule based" system that has removed "hard-coded:

war-planning guidance" allowing user greater flexibility in complying with changing database schema's and war planning guidance. NIDS III software will provide new capabilities to plan adaptive, deliberate, and crisis missions, optimize those missions, provide decision support for course of action (COA) selection, and provide management and oversight of the planning process.

USSTRATCOM requires continued Leidos NIDS III software development support to sustain and enhance the following nuclear target planning capabilities:

A. DGZ coding and facility updates;

B. Database Manager for the Enterprise Database (EDB) data used by NIDS applications;

C. Provide the users with an Integrated User Interface;

D. Construct Nuclear Aimpoints and DGZs;

E. Load facility data from the National Target Base (NTB);

F. Build Target Islands (geographical groupings of nearby facilities and/or targets);

G. Validation of facility data for targeting purposes;

H. Provide a graphical display capability of the facilities, DGZs, etc., as needed throughout the planning process

I. Provide a toolbox of reports and other functionality needed during DGZ construction or NTB activities

J. Provide early planning capabilities

K. Provide option structure editing capabilities.

Software Sustainment and Development: USSTRATCOM requires Leidos to retain a staff of software developers capable of providing required sustainment and enhancement software deliveries as directed by the government. The NIDS application has been developed over 20+ years, in various software programming languages including Ada, Java, Javascript, C, C++, and FORTRAN. Additionally, developers require experience with hardware and software infrastructure to include Linux, Weblogic, Oracle databases, Virtual Machines, providing interfaces with other MPAS subsystems, Ansible scripts for software deployment, and developing automated testing procedures. Currently, Leidos possesses the required software expertise and possess intimate knowledge as subject matter experts of the nuclear planning mission through years of experience.

On-site Support: USSTRATCOM requires Leidos to provide on-site support subject matter experts (SMEs). On-site SMEs are system domain experts and possess a Top Secret clearance based on a Special Background Investigation and are eligible for NC2 and Special Access Program access. On-site SMEs provide same day on site technical support to analyze, identify, and resolve complex issues for the software mentioned above.

Current on-site SMEs have a thorough understanding of the various inputs, and outputs, for the applications and ensure full integration and coordinate problem resolution. A requirement of on-site SMEs is to provide software maintenance during routine, emergency and USSTRATCOM exercise periods including 24 hour support as dictated by mission needs.

Contractor Development Testing and Evaluation: Leidos is required to conduct functional, validation and verification, performance, security, and interoperability testing in a government environment prior to government development test and evaluation.

The $621,671.63 in remaining contract scope is not sufficient to provide support during the extension period.

Thus, as scope increase of $16M is being requested (per subject J&A) for a new total scope of $56,749,563.35 to ensure continued NIDS III support for this 27 months Extension (April 2020 through June 2022). The following contract line item numbers (CLINS) are affected:

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 5 of 9

Cost Estimate by year:

CLIN Title Appropriation PoP Value

FY20 X001 M&S Labor 3400 1 Apr 2020- 30 Sep 2020 $ 1,175,000.00 X002 ODCs/Travel 3400 1 Apr 2020- 30 Sep 2020 $ 125,000.00 X003 Inc 5 Labor 3600 1 Apr 2020- 30 Sep 2020 $ 2,000,000.00 X007 Onsite Support 3400 1 Apr 2020- 30 Sep 2020 $ 200,000.00 FY21 X001 M&S Labor 3400 1 Oct 2020- 30 Sep 2021 $ 2,350,000.00 X002 ODCs/Travel 3400 1 Oct 2020- 30 Sep 2021 $ 250,000.00 X003 Inc 5 Labor 3600 1 Oct 2020- 30 Sep 2021 $ 4,000,000.00 X007 Onsite Support 3400 1 Oct 2020- 30 Sep 2021 $ 400,000.00 FY22 X001 M&S Labor 3400 1 Oct 2021- 30 Jun 2022 $ 2,000,000.00 X002 ODCs/Travel 3400 1 Oct 2021- 30 Jun 2022 $ 200,000.00 X003 Inc 5 Labor 3600 1 Oct 2021- 30 Jun 2022 $ 3,000,000.00 X007 Onsite Support 3400 1 Oct 2021- 30 Jun 2022 $ 300,000.00 Total: $ 16,000,000.00

Ceiling Scope PoP (6 month extension) Original Contract $35,883,761.00 1 Oct 2013 - 30 Sept 2018 (1 Oct 2018 - 31 Mar 2019)

December 2017 J&A $4,865,802.35 1 Oct 2018 - 31 Mar 2020 (1 Apr 2020 - 30 Sept 2020) Current Total $40,749,563.35

J&A Request $16,000.000.00 1 Apr 2020 - 30 June 2022 (1 July 2022 - 31 Dec 2022) New Total $56,749,563.35

IV. Statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition.

IAW 10 USC 2304(c)(1), as Implemented by FAR 6.302-1 FAR 6.302 -- Circumstances permitting other than full and open competition 6.302-1 -- Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

(a) Authority.

(1) Citations: 10 U.S.C 2304(c)(1) or 41 U.S.C. 253(c)(1)

(2) When the suppliers or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source, or for Department of Defense (DOD), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, full and open competition need not be provided for.

(iii) 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:

(A) Substantial duplication of cost to the government that is not expected to be recovered through competition, or

(B) Unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirements. (See 10 U.S.C. 2304(d)(1)(B)).

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 6 of 9

V. Demonstration that the contractor's unique qualifications or nature of the acquisition requires the use of the authority cited above (applicability of authority).

The ISPAN Program is an ongoing ACAT I program with special interest by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The ISPAN nuclear planners rely heavily on the NIDS III contract to plan and provide information to support nuclear weapons employment, plan development, analysis, and maintenance. Therefore this acquisition will be a contract for the continued sustainment and development of a highly specialized, major system. The current NIDS III contract (FA4600-14-D-0001) expires on 31 March 2020 with a six month extension to 30 Sep 2020. This extension and scope increase will serve as a bridge to enable the consolidated follow-on acquisition strategy adequate time for completion.

There are two drivers facilitating the need to extend the contract: The first driver is that the follow on contract is not ready because of a new contract strategy to better support the HBC Software Factory. The approval of the HBC Software Factory and its construction is the second driver.

The follow on contract is not ready because of a relook of contract strategy to better support the HBC Software Factory. All of the MPAS contracts, including NIDS 4, were originally planned to be single-award IDIQ contracts.

The first contract to be recompeted, Air Vehicle Planning System (APS) VI, is the template for all MPAS recompete contracts to follow. Therefore, work on the APS VI recompete directly impacted the follow-on contract for NIDS III. APS VI completed market research, briefed the ASP to the PEO, held an Industry Day, posted draft documents (requirements, evaluation criteria, key personnel, etc.) and were addressing industry comments when HBC received word approving Bldg. 500 space allocation for the HBC Software Factory. The work done on APS VI (and thus all of the MPAS contracts) is on hold in order to determine if a potential contract strategy change is necessary, specifically combining all of the MPAS contracts and utilizing a Multiple Award IDIQ contract. The approval and use of an HBC Software Factory significantly changes the landscape for all MPAS contracts, therefore requiring the customer to alter the follow-on contract strategies for all of these contracts. Because of this, the follow on contract for NIDS III will no longer be ready by September 2020.

Therefore, an extension to the current NIDS III contract will be required to ensure the continuation of NIDS services. Please see more under Section XI.

The HBC Software Factory will be constructed within the current USSTRATCOM headquarters building (Building 500, Offutt AFB, NE). Building 500 is scheduled to be vacated by 1 Jan 2020. Once the building is vacated, HBC will begin a complete physical reconstruction of the rooms allocated to HBC in Building 500. When the rooms are ready for transition, each MPAS contractor facility will be migrated, one at a time, to the new HBC Software Factory. This will ensure there is no break in operations to the fielded system, allow for a systematic, organized transition of equipment, information and personnel into the facility, and allow for adjustments on lessons learned to remaining transitions. In addition, by staggering the transitions in this way it not only reduces the technical risks associated with moving but also saves a significant amount of money verses buying all new equipment which would be required if all applications transitioned at one time. The current estimated value of all MPAS government furnished equipment (GFE) is $14M. The series of transitioning MPAS starts with the APS contract followed by the MASS contract, NIDS contract, and lastly the MPACS contract.

The current timeline to begin transitioning the NIDS III development software from the current contractor software facility (Leidos) to the new government Software Factory (HBC) is APR 2021. It is estimated to take from Apr 2021 thru Jun 2022 to: reconfigure GFE from another contract for NIDS 4 use in the new Software Factory; duplicate all of the software executables, development tools, documentation, etc.; demonstrate the ability to maintain software in the new Software Factory and begin transition of the offsite GFE back to the government for reutilization to completely support the next MPAS contract transition. The enclosed schedule shows, at a high level, the basic steps and timeline for transition into the HBC Software Factory.

Leidos offers highly qualified personnel with an extensive background and practical experience in national security, intelligence, and the nuclear strategic planning capability that only USSTRATCOM provides. Currently, Leidos collectively provides 23 FTEs with a combined 230 years of experience under all areas of the nuclear strategic planning umbrella, and therefore has the expertise required and will retain the personnel to support the NIDS III effort without interruption of service to the ISPAN mission during the re-compete. Please refer to section III for in depth capabilities the contractor has maintained, sustained, and or produced over the current

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 7 of 9 life of the contract.

Award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force's requirements. As NIDS and MPAS are fielded one of a kind system(s) the support of NIDS applications must continue without any degradation to the mission. Failure to extend the current contract would likely result in a break in service for the NIDS software for at least a year due to the extremely tight labor market for software developers with the required security clearances, both in the local area and nationally. Any break in service would be catastrophic to our nation's nuclear planning capabilities.

Additionally, this acquisition will be a bridge action, given that the risk to recompete the contract during the final development phase prior to declaring full operational capability (FOC), combined with transitioning operations to a software factory in the local area posed an unacceptable risk for delays. Accordingly, Leidos Corporation is the only firm capable of providing the supplies and services described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing unacceptable delays in fulfilling its requirements.

VI. Description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable.

On 4 June 2019, the Government posted a notice of proposed contract action and a request for information on the Federal Business Opportunities website to publish the intent to extend the NIDS III contract and to seek sources that could provide full performance of the contract starting at current contract completion. No capable sources submitted a response, confirming the Government's assumptions regarding the capability of industry to perform these efforts in the time frame required.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

The anticipated cost will be considered fair and reasonable based on historical pricing. Requirements under this contract have been negotiated utilizing certified cost and pricing data, technical evaluations, forward pricing rate agreements, and cost analysis. New task orders under this contract will be negotiated, and the cost/price will be determined for each order.

VIII. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or a statement of the reasons market research was not conducted.

As described in Section VI above, market research in accordance with FAR Part 10, was conducted by synopsis of the proposed acquisition, advising industry of the pending acquisition and soliciting responses from interested parties. Market research determined that no other source other than the incumbent is capable of performing these efforts to prevent unacceptable delays and duplication of cost.

IX. Any other facts supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition.

NONE

X. List of any sources that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

See Section VI above.

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 8 of 9

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 discussed, there is a requirement for a follow-on contract. Research is currently being done on an HBC-wide multiple award contract that would better support the HBC Software Factory. The HBC Software Factory removes many of the barriers to competition for NIDS 4 including removing the requirement for a contractor to have a classified facility for development, reducing contract transition as there will not be a need to arrange for movement of GFE development from one contractor facility to another and facilitating the ability to provide a bidder's library in a completely running environment (rather than only static code/documentation).

As stated above, the approval of the new HBC Software Factory significantly changes the landscape for all of the follow-on contracts, as it changes the location and other important factors for performance. Therefore, the previous follow-on contract plan needed to be reviewed in order to assure that this would be the best path forward for the government. The idea of an HBC Software Factory initiated after the APS VI ASP on 2 Jul 18 with Mr. Wert, Program Executive Officer for the ISPAN contracts. The MPAS recompete team looked hard at that idea and briefed the ASP to him again on 2 Oct 18, during which he approved the idea. While the APS VI recompete actions continued, HBC continued to work the details and approvals for the HBC Software Factory.

The first step was getting space allocated, which was approved on 13 May 19 by the 55th Wing Base Facilities Board. These spaces will not be available until at least Dec 2019 to begin room construction. Because of the approval of the Software Factory space, the recompete team put the APS VI follow-on contract actions on hold and began discussions to determine if a new contract strategy would be better for the HBC Software Factory.

On 22 May 2019, a Sources Sought Notice was posted for feedback/interest in the HBC Multiple Award IDIQ Contract, utilizing the HBC Software Factory - Facilitating AgiLe CONtracts (FALCON). The estimated timeline is:

Aug 2019 - Early Strategy Briefing (ESIS) Nov 2019 - ASP Briefing to PEO Nov 2019 - Industry Day Feb 2020 - Release RFP Sept 2020 - Award MAC

Feb 2022 - Award NIDS 4 Task Order Mar 2022 - Begin NIDS 4 Transition

Jun 2022 - Full NIDS 4 Performance

As a risk reduction, if the HBC Software Factory is delayed, FALCON will be structured to allow off-site development until it is ready. Additionally, the new task order for NIDS 4 is supposed to be awarded by February 2022, before the end of NIDS III on 30 June 2022 with approval of this J&A. This allows for delays in the timeline that may occur outside of the control of the customer, such as factory or Building 500 transition delays.

The requirements approval document for NIDS 4 has been completed and signed by Mr. Wert/PEO (doument number 35935).

XII. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by my signature above, I have determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

XIII. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by my (our) signature(s) above, I (we) certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my (our) responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 9 of 9

Remove the Guidance pages below. Remove the IACR pages below.

March 2018 Page of International Agreement Competitive Restrictions (IACR) Page of March 2018 NOTE: If a Justification and Approval was approved for the preceding acquisition, a copy of the approved J&A for the predecessor action must be included in the staff package for approval of the instant J&A. This applies to J&A staff packages that are submitted for review and approval at a level above the contracting officer. The predecessor J&A will be used as a reference document by the approving official.

Is this a new or amended J&A Document?

Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan?

Funding level for this acquisition:

J&A Type:

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) ** The text in the signature blocks below is editable, including the title.

** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block. CAUTION: Once removed, it can only be restored by downloading the BLANK FORM again.

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) NOTE: A signature block will appear here based on the funding level selected above.

(See "Specific Guidance for Completing this Template" below.)

I. Contracting Activity.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

IV. Statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition.

V. Demonstration that the contractor's unique qualifications or nature of the acquisition requires the use of the authority cited above (applicability of authority).

VI. Description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

VIII. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or a statement of the reasons market research was not conducted.

IX. Any other facts supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition.

X. List of any sources that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

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.

XII. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

XIII. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

Specific Guidance for Completing this Template ( For general guidance, refer to the J&A Preparation Guide. )

I. Contracting Activity.

Fully identify the contracting agency and organizational activity responsible for the proposed contracting action.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(2))

State whether the action will be awarded as a new contract or by modification to an existing contract (identify contract number) and identify the type contract planned (e.g., firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-incentive-fee, etc.). If exception 2 is cited (unusual or compelling urgency), state date of UCA/contract/modification issuance and amount.

An individual J&A cannot be used to support more than one contract irrespective of the quantities or the dollar value stated therein. If a proposed contract will contain unpriced options (including NTE prices), those options must be supported by a separate J&A prior to option exercise or the J&A supporting the basic contract must be a Class J&A. For Class J&A situations (covers more than one contract) where the number of contracts in the class can be identified: (1) Provide a brief general description of actions; (2) identify the supplies and services that are being acquired; and (3) for each contract in the class identify the contractor, estimated value, type of contract and rationale for contract length, and estimated award date. Where the same information applies to more than one contract within the class, it need only be stated one time.

III. Description of the supplies/services required to meet agency needs. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(3))

Specifically describe the supplies and/or services to be acquired, the total estimated value of the acquisition - including options (provide cost estimate by year and, for class J&AS, by contract action), and the estimated delivery dates/periods of performance If commodities are being procured, provide quantities. All contract line items (CLINs) e.g., technical data, support equipment, support services, etc., should be listed. If all of the ancillary requirements associated with a particular item are not specifically described in the J&A, those ancillary requirements cannot be included in the resulting contract and would require a second J&A. Also, state the type of appropriation (e.g., 3600, 3010, and 3400) that will be used to fund each requirement listed.

If approval for more than one fiscal year requirement is needed, give the rationale for this request. Generally, the scope of these actions is limited to current requirements only, so that actions may be taken to facilitate competition for out-year requirements.

In some cases, there are no feasible actions that could develop future competition, and it is reasonable to seek approval for more than one fiscal year's requirements.

For ID/IQ or requirements contracts, use the maximum dollar value of the total estimated orders as the estimated J&A dollar value.

IV. Statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(4))

10 USC 2304(c)(?) (see Note 1 below), as implemented by FAR 6.302-? (see Note 2 below), and required by FAR 6.303-2(b)(4).

Note 1: Complete the 10USC 2304(c) citation with the statutory subparagraph cited in the (a) Authority (1) Citations portion of the Competition exception used for your J&A.

Note 2: Complete the FAR citation with the appropriate subparagraph.

Note 3: For class J&As, all contracts within the class should fall within the same statutory authority. Where a different authority must be used for any contract action, a separate J&A should be prepared.

V. Demonstration that the contractor's unique qualifications or nature of the acquisition requires the use of the authority cited above (applicability of authority). (FAR 6.303-2(b)(5))

Provide, in narrative form, a detailed explanation supporting and clearly relating to the conditions described by the FAR for using the particular authority cited. This section is normally the most detailed part of the justification as the essence of the justification is presented here. For acquisitions that include both supplies and services, separately justify the use of the authority for the services and supplies.

Contracting without providing for full and open competition shall not be justified on the basis of lack of advance planning by the requiring activity or concerns related to the amount of funds available (e.g., funds will expire) (FAR 6.301(c)). To assist you, the following information is provided:

A. Only One Responsible Source (FAR 6.302-1)

When using this authority, thoroughly describe the contractor's unique/highly specialized capabilities and/or qualifications (e.g., facilities, personnel, special tooling acquired), and why no other type of supplies or services will satisfy the agency requirements. This authority shall be used, if appropriate, in preference to the authority in FAR 6.302-7. This authority shall not be used when any of the other authorities apply.

This authority also applies to the use of restrictive brand name descriptions in requirements documentation. An acquisition that uses a brand name description or other purchase description to specify a particular brand name, product, or feature of a product peculiar to one manufacturer does not provide for full and open competition regardless of the number of sources solicited. If a brand name will be used, you must justify it and clearly explain why a specific brand produced by a single company is required, as opposed to allowing full and open competition. The justification should indicate that the use of such descriptions in the acquisition is essential to the Government's requirements, thereby precluding consideration of a product manufactured by another company. (FAR 6.302-1(c)) Brand-name or equal descriptions do not require justifications and approvals to support their use.

In the case of a follow-on contract for continued development or production of a major system or highly specialized equipment/services, the rationale must first justify the supplies/services as being a “major system” or “highly specialized.” The rationale must then justify “either” substantial duplication of cost to the government that is not expected to be recovered through competition, or unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirements, whichever situation applies. If both of these situations apply, the rationale can be based on either of these two situations, or both. Justifications for follow-on contracts should be organized as below:

Subsection 1

(a) Describe the system or support element to which supply/service to be procured under the contemplated acquisition relates in terms of its purpose and its capabilities. Describe how the contemplated acquisition relates to that system or support element. Describe the previous acquisition history, to include a description of the work the contractor has been performing. Additionally, include the current contract number, basis of award for that contract (competitive/sole source), when the contract was awarded, and when the contract will expire. If the work the contractor will perform under the contemplated acquisition is being done under an ACAT I or II program, state that designation. If the work will not be done under an ACAT I or II program, provide a detailed explanation from a technical perspective as to why the supplies/services to be procured are “highly specialized.” This section must summarize your justification by including the main point(s) of the justification.

(b) If the planned acquisition is a “bridge” effort, which contains options, so state and explain why options are necessary.

(c) Add a concluding sentence to the end of this paragraph, suitably tailored; e.g., “Therefore, this acquisition will be a follow-on contract for the continued production of a major system,” or “Therefore, this acquisition will be a follow-on contract for the continued development of highly specialized equipment,” or “Therefore, this acquisition will be follow-on contract for the continued development of a major system,” or “Therefore, this acquisition will be a follow-on contract for the continued production of highly specialized equipment,” or “Therefore, this acquisition is for continued performance of a highly specialized service.”

Subsection 2

Begin with the following sentence, as applicable: "Award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition” or “Award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force's requirements” or “Award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition and unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force's requirements.” Then, discuss either or both of the following situations (although only one of these situations is needed; if the facts exist to support both, then provide that information):

(a) When the rationale is based on substantial duplication of costs, estimate the amount of duplicated costs and offset that by the amount of cost savings that are likely to be generated by competition, if feasible. Include the rationale for the amount of cost that would be duplicated (e.g., training required so that another source could acquire the skills necessary to perform the effort, equipment, facilities) and how the estimates were derived (e.g., development costs incurred by the Government under the existing contract or similar programs). (FAR 6.303-2(b)(9)(ii))

(b) When the rationale is based on unacceptable delay, provide the length of the anticipated delay, state how long it would take another source to obtain this capability (e.g., months, years) and why (if applicable), provide a description of exactly what is being delayed, and provide a detailed explanation of the impact or problem caused by the delay. For example, the impact of not adding additional quantities of launch support services staff-hours to an existing contract might cause a launch to not occur as scheduled, thus delaying the operational use of a spacecraft, thus reducing the constellation's operational availability - and thus reducing (or precluding) the ability of the war fighter to accomplish specific missions.

Subsection 3

Include one of the following sentences, whichever is applicable:

(a) “Accordingly, XYZ Corporation is the only firm capable of providing the supplies and 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.”

(b) “Accordingly, XYZ Corporation is the only firm capable of providing the supplies and services described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing unacceptable delays in fulfilling its requirements.”

(c) “Accordingly, XYZ Corporation is the only firm capable of providing the supplies and 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 and unacceptable delays in fulfilling its requirements.”

B. Unusual and Compelling Urgency (FAR 6.302-2, DFARS PGI 206.302-2)

Contracting Officers shall contact SAF/AQC at usaf.pentagon.saf-aq.mbx.saf-aqc-workflow@mail.mil as soon as practicable when contemplating an award under the authority cited in FAR 6.302-2 for J&As requiring SPE approval. Provide an explanation why (1) the supplies or services are needed at once because of fire, flood, explosion, or other disaster, or (2) essential equipment or repairs to that equipment are needed at once, e.g., to preclude impairment of launch capabilities or mission performance of missiles or missile support equipment, eliminate imminent grounding of the XX fleet crucial to what mission of the USAF and Defense of the Nation. In other words, identify the anticipated serious injury to the Government, the nature of the urgency, the reasons for it occurring and why it is “urgent and compelling” to preclude adverse impact to military readiness. Merely citing a Joint Urgent Operational Need (JUON), Force Activity Designator (FAD) rating, Program Management Directive (PMD)/Program Action Directive (PAD) guidance, or DX priority rating is not in and of itself sufficient reason to use this exception from the requirement to obtain full and open competition. Note that only the minimum quantity required to satisfy the unusual and compelling urgency qualifies for this exception; thus, this exception might not suffice to justify option quantities. For example, a JUON covering an entire program may not necessarily warrant a class J&A for all program requirements. The inclusion of future “unknown” requirements in class J&As proceeding on this basis is disfavored. In addition, actions covered by a relevant JUON should, a) cite the JUON, b) describe the nature of the need covered by the JUON, and c) describe the relationship between the JUON and the requirements contemplated under the J&A (e.g., whether the J&A includes requirements not covered by the JUON, whether the J&A covers just a portion of the JUON's scope, etc.). JUONs can provide important support for the J&A; however, the J&A is a stand-alone document and should not rely solely upon the fact that a JUON has been issued as a basis for approval. Activities are under a continuing duty to ensure maximum competition practicable under the circumstances, and JUONs do not automatically provide relief from that duty.

The exception for “unusual and compelling urgency” does not authorize a sole source contract. This exception only authorizes limitation to the greatest number of potential sources that can fulfill the requirement in the time needed. Therefore, the J&A should also describe the method and rationale for identifying the sources to which the solicitation will be limited. If the solicitation is to be limited to only one source, the J&A must be based on an exception that authorizes selection of a single source.

C. Industrial Mobilization; or Engineering, Developmental, or Research Capability (FAR 6.302-3)

The most important part of justifications citing this authority is demonstrating the need to maintain the capability possessed by the identified source(s). Some form of market survey may be critical in demonstrating the uniqueness of this capability.

D. Authorized or Required by Statute (FAR 6.302-5)

It is imperative to identify what is being acquired and the applicable statute authorizing other than full and open competition. Note: Some statutes do not require a written J&A.

E. National Security (FAR 6.302-6)

Provide the minimum essential information needed to establish validity of the justification. This information will make the J&A a classified document. Special handling procedures are required for processing such documentation to the approval authority. Only parties with a “need to know” and the proper level of security clearance should be permitted access to the documentation. Such acquisitions are also exempt from synopsis under FAR 5.202(a)(1).

This statutory authority requires that agencies shall request offers from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances. This exception may be utilized to authorize limited competition in certain narrow circumstances; however, contracting officers may not authorize sole-source contracts solely through use of the national security exception unless disclosure of the agency's need to more than one source would compromise national security.

F. Public Interest (FAR 6.302-7)

(NOTE: Requires D&F in lieu of J&A.) This authority may only be used when none of the other authorities is appropriate and may not be made on a class basis. Provide detail addressing the reasons full and open competition is not in the public interest and why no other authority is appropriate for use.

VI. Description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable.

(FAR 6.303-2(b)(6))

Describe all efforts taken (or to be to be taken) to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable under the circumstances. Although Market Research is covered in Section VIII, the information in Section VI should correlate with the Market Research described in Section VI. The following issues should be addressed in this paragraph:

Sources Sought Synopsis (utilized as part of market research). If a sources sought synopsis was issued, state the date the synopsis was issued and a brief description of its content. If any responses were received, describe in detail the results of the screening process and the rationale for determining the unacceptability of any synopsis respondents. This is particularly important when citing the authority of 10 USC 2304(c)(1), “Only one (or a limited number of) responsible source(s)”, since it is this survey of the market place that confirms our assumptions regarding the capability of industry to meet our needs.

Specify whether this acquisition will require a Notice of proposed Contract Action (NOCA) IAW FAR 5.201. Include whether a NOCA was or will be publicized, and specify the dates or expected dates of publication of the NOCA. If the NOCA was not or will not be issued, cite the specific authority for not doing so (FAR 5.202) and the rationale for the NOCA exception. Note that, although a NOCA initiated pursuant to FAR 6.302-2 may not be required, use of this authority is not an automatic exemption from the NOCA requirement (FAR 5.202(a)(2)). If a NOCA is issued, the J&A cannot be signed until the required publicizing time IAW FAR 5.203 has been satisfied and the NOCA results have been included in the J&A package."

Other Actions. In this paragraph, discuss any other actions taken or planned to facilitate competition for this acquisition. The discussion should include actions tried or considered even if the actions were unsuccessful. If the efforts were unsuccessful, so state and describe why.

Qualifying Country Sources. If qualifying country sources have expressed interest, but are to be excluded, provide supporting rationale.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer that the anticipated cost to the government will be fair and reasonable. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(7))

Include a statement by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost will be considered fair and reasonable and provide the basis for this determination. The steps that will be taken to ensure the final contract price will be fair and reasonable are also described here. Describe the extent of cost or price analysis anticipated including the requirements for certified cost or pricing data, technical evaluations, and audits.

VIII. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(8))

Discuss any market research conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10 and describe results of that research. Market research is any effort undertaken to determine if sources capable of satisfying the agency's requirements exist and to determine if commercial items or non-developmental items are either available or can be modified so that they will satisfy the agency's needs. Market research should be focused not only on identifying alternate sources, but also on alternate equipment or substitutes that might fulfill the Government needs with only minor modification. Regardless of the approach used, the results should provide a high level of confidence that no other qualified sources exist.

Generally, some form of market research should be conducted. But it is most critical when citing the authority of FAR 6.302-1. Under such circumstances, use the following sentence: “As described in Section VI above, market research, in accordance with FAR Part 10, was conducted by synopsis of the proposed acquisition, advising industry of the pending acquisition and soliciting inquiries from interested parties.”

When other exceptions from the requirement to obtain full and open competition are relied upon, the market research might be limited to an examination of the acquisition history and experience with the marketplace under previous acquisitions for the same or similar items.

If no market research was conducted, so state and provide the rationale.

IX. Any other facts supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(9)(i))

Provide any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition, including an explanation of why technical data packages, specifications, engineering descriptions, statements of work, statements of objectives, or purchase descriptions suitable for full and open competition have not been developed, are not being developed, are not being used, or are not available. (FAR 6.302-1(b)(2) and 6.303-2(b)(9)(i)).

X. List of sources, if any, that expressed interest in the acquisition. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(10))

If a sources sought synopsis was done and all interested sources are included in Section VI, it is acceptable to state, “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. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(11))

Describe any actions taken or to be taken to foster competition for future acquisitions of the supplies or services being acquired. Describe potential actions that could be taken to remove the barriers to competition that have been identified in the justification and include a milestone schedule, where available, for accomplishing these actions. For example, if a follow-on competitive acquisition is planned, so state and provide the planned award date (FAR 6.303-2(b)(11)), or state that the Government will attempt to acquire rights in technical data and computer software sufficient to compete follow-on acquisitions as a priced option in the contract action that is the subject of this J&A, or (if applicable) state how the Government intends to challenge nonconforming markings on technical data and computer software delivered to it under previous contracts so those markings can be removed in order that the technical data and computer software may be used in support of a follow-on competitive acquisition, or describe plans to qualify additional sources.

Address efforts to ensure competition for future spare parts and maintenance in support of systems or equipment covered by the justification, even when these acquisitions will be accomplished by other organizations. Include a discussion on available breakout data.

If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons. If approval is sought for more than one year, explain why a sole source effort is required for the planned time duration.

For a non-competitive follow-on acquisition to a previous award for the same supply or service supported by a J&A citing the…