FA807519FA027_FOE_BAH_redact.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 2 of 6v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 2 of 6

3.5-1: Evaluation Review Summary Report

3.6-1: Joint Force Development Assessment Summary Report

(4) Identification of the exception to fair opportunity and the supporting rationale:

FAR 16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the CO to provide each awardee under a MAC a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold unless statutory exception applies. The specific exception to the fair opportunity process for this non-competitive modification action is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C). This modification must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is logical that a follow-on for the two months needed to complete the requirement be executed by the incumbent contractor on the order already issued.

The original requirement was solicited to all 15 Pool 1 IAC MAC contractors in the full and open competition pool under the IAC MAC contract. The current task order expires on 28 Apr 2024. This FOE is requesting an extension to the current order to provide time for the current contractor to finish the planning and execution for the Chairman, Joint Chief of Staff (CJCS) Globally Integrated Wargame 2024 (GIWG-24), Excursions 1 and 2 on

GIWG-24 is the premier event for assessing the CJCS's Joint Warfighting Concept 3.0 and seeks to directly improve the future Joint Force development and design. GIWG-24 will be attended by over 400 participants from across the U.S.

Joint Staff, to include the Vice CJCS and CJCS, the Combatant Commands, Office of the Secretary of Defense, and Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand nations high-level attendees. Delaying this event until after the award of the next contract creates an avoidable disruption to National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) scheduling, key personnel attendance, and is unacceptable to the high-level DoD leadership sponsoring the event.

The economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by granting this extension include leveraging Booz Allen Hamilton's expertise. The current contractor workforce has previous GIWG experience and has been involved with all aspects of Wargame planning, design, analysis, adjudication, and has participated in all events leading up to the main Wargame for the 2024 event. The contractor workforce is expected to play a pivotal role in the technical rehearsal at the end of March and the mid-April final planning event. The contractor is intimately familiar with Wargame processes and tools and the workforce is embedded in critical roles throughout the execution of Wargame Excursions 1 and 2.

This includes, but is not limited to, analysts that thoroughly understand the data collection and analysis plan embedded in each Wargame cell, tool operators, personnel in charge of the Wargame's work flow and information management, security experts with years of experience in understanding and handling the different classification levels of the Wargame data, and strategic communications personnel that have an established rapport with our high level GO/FO and SES attendees. Additionally, granting the extension will eliminate potential rework. A change in support will likely jeopardize the successful final planning and execution of this two-week, NGA hosted, Wargame Excursions 1 and 2 resulting in DoD leadership breaking faith with its Wargame partners and hindering allied cooperation in combined force design and development initiatives. Any lapse in coverage or delays due to transition will have a significant impact on the DoD's and supporting foreign nations' ability to support operations that directly improve the future Joint Force development and design.

Finally, the PWS requirements of FA8075-19-FA027 fall within the scope of the Survivability and Vulnerability technical focus area of the IAC MAC. At the time of award, the task order's period of performance complied with the terms and conditions of Section 4.2 of the basic IAC MAC contract, which states that a task order may include a period of performance up to, but not exceeding, a total of 60 months in duration. This action seeks to extend performance for this specific order from 28 April 2024 to 28 June 2024 for a total of 62 months in order to complete performance which has already begun. It would not be in the Government's best interest from a cost, time, and quality of deliverables perspective to establish a cut-off point during the Wargame events to complete them on another contract. Doing so would ultimately impact overall missions as well as the readiness and survivability of the warfighter.

v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 3 of 6v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 3 of 6

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The extension proposal will be evaluated by the CO and the Requiring Activity (RA) to determine price fairness and reasonableness. The RA will evaluate the proposed labor hours and skill sets to determine whether they are necessary and reasonable for successful performance of the requirements. The CO will engage with Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to obtain any forward pricing rate information for direct and indirect rates. This information will be used to conduct cost and price analysis to determine a fair and reasonable price. If necessary, negotiations will be conducted. At the conclusion of negotiations, should the value of the action exceed the threshold identified in FAR 15.403-4, the contractor will be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data.

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

This two month, non-competitive follow-on action, is the result of receiving competitive proposals for the follow on task order, which is currently in source selection. The follow-on effort is planned to be awarded upon the conclusion of GIWG-24, Excursions 1 and 2, allowing a sufficient transition from task order FA8075-19-FA027 to the new task order, minimizing impacts on the Joint Forces'. Failure to execute the extension of services would severely impact the DoD and supporting foreign nations' abilities to support operations that will increase competitive advantages of survivability and lethality in real-world scenarios.

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to increasing fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services:

FA8075-18-D-0004, FA8075-19-FA027 was awarded under the IAC MAC, which had a full and open competition pool of fifteen (15) contractors. Three (3) proposals were received and Booz Allen Hamilton was awarded the task order on 12 April 2019. The follow-on effort was also competed in the IAC MAC full and open competition pool and also received competition. The follow-on effort is currently in Source Selection and is planned to be awarded in time to allow for a successful transition following the GIWG event. Therefore, no additional actions are planned or required.

(8) Program Manager's certification that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

(9) Contracting Officer's certification that the justification is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(10) Approving Official's determination that one of the circumstances in FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i) applies to the order.

As evidenced by my signature below, I hereby determine that the fair opportunity exception checked on page 1 applies.

Date

28 Mar 2024

Program Manager Ron Rosenkranz Joint Staff J-7 / 757-203-7004

Signature

ROSENKRANZ.RONA

LD.L.1040038600

Digitally signed by

ROSENKRANZ.RONALD.L.1040038600

Date: 2024.03.28 07:59:11 -04'00' v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 4 of 6v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 4 of 6

Date

28 Mar 2024

Contracting Officer Brianna McGhee

774 ESS/PKD / 402-294-1062

Signature

Date

28 Mar 2024

Local Legal Reviewer Kenneth J. LeRoy

AF/JACQ-KLFSC / 402-250-0627

Signature

Date

28 Mar 2024

Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) Jared Dostal Director, 774 ESS / 402-232-5319

Signature

Date

09 Apr 2024

Approval Authority Anthony W. Everidge, SES Executive Director, AFICC / 937-257-1900

Signature

MCGHEE.BRIANNA.LE

E.1269237798

Digitally signed by

MCGHEE.BRIANNA.LEE.1269237798

Date: 2024.03.28 07:16:13 -05'00'

LEROY.KENNETH.J.11

01325209

Digitally signed by

LEROY.KENNETH.J.1101325209

Date: 2024.03.28 07:38:28 -05'00'

DOSTAL.JARED.1231

345163

Digitally signed by

DOSTAL.JARED.1231345163

Date: 2024.03.28 08:15:25 -05'00'

EVERIDGE.ANTHONY.

W.1230167814

Digitally signed by

EVERIDGE.ANTHONY.W.1230167814

Date: 2024.04.09 13:36:20 -04'00' v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 5 of 6v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 5 of 6

Instructions for Completing the Template IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from FAR 16.505 (b)(2) and the supporting rationale. FAR16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,000 unless a statutory exception applies. The specific exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(__) [Insert A,B, C, D, or E]. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification, with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(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 contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of FAR 16.505(b)(1) and DFARS 216.505-70 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

v 18 Jan 2024 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 6 of 6

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) This paragraph needs to be tailored based on the types of CLINs in the order and the pricing arrangements on the basic multiple award contract. If the contract did not establish the price for the supply or service, the Contracting Officer must establish prices for each order IAW FAR 15.4. The paragraph needs to describe the steps that will ensure that the prices/estimated cost of the order will be fair and reasonable. For example, even if firm-fixed prices were obtained under adequate price competition in the award of the multiple award contract, the Contracting Officer still needs to consider market conditions and other factors that may have changed since contract award and explain the basis in the determination that prices/costs are fair and reasonable prior to award of the order.

(6) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(7) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.