22_Sept_FairOpportunity_App__Redact_Redacted.pdf

EXCEPTION TO THE FAIR OPPORTUNITY PROCESS

CONTENT & FORMAT

FAIR OPPORTUNITY EXCEPTION (FOE) JUSTIFICATION

I. Contracting Activity

The contracting activity responsible for this action is AF , Tinker AFB, OK. The Contracting Officer is , DSN . The post award contracting officer is , DSN

This is an Exception to Fair Opportunity Justification.

The Purchase Request Number is _____

II. Nature and/or Description of the Action Being Processed

This action is for a sole source award, Firm Fixed Price, to

, Cage , under the Small Business , contract number . This requirement is for the contractor support services for the legacy

B-52H Multi-Function Color Display (MFCD) monitor systems, subsystems, and components. The MFCD requirement will require repair services provided by Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) due to the unavailability of proprietary data, processes, equipment and facilities. Contractor support services consist of:

• logistics

• engineering

• engineering support to the field personnel

• repair

• configuration management

• inspection

• fault isolation

• manufacture

• travel and meeting administrative support

This effort is required to repair Multi-Function Color Display (MFCD) units for a period of performance of nine months ( ). This proposed contract fills a supportability gap and optimizes the availability, reliability and maintainability of the B-52H to enable the successful execution of critical, global strike and persistent attack missions. The effort follows the contract Contractor Systems Support

III. Description of the Supplies/Services Required To Meet the Agency’s Needs

The Air Force requires the repair services of eight-teen (18) Multi-Function Color Displays (MFCD) and delivery of repair data. This service will affect the entire legacy B-52H fleet.

Nomenclature QTY COST MFCD 18 ea

Total $

The total estimated acquisition cost of this effort is based on a Rough Order Of Magnitude (ROM) dated . The contractor is the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for the Multi-Function Color Display (MFCD).

IV. Authority Permitting a Fair Opportunity Exception

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), Only one such contractor is capable of providing the services or supplies at the level of quality required because the service or supplies ordered are unique or highly specialized.

V. Demonstration of the Contractor’s Unique Qualifications or Nature of the Acquisition Requires the Use of the Authority Cited Above to Provide the Required Supply/Service (Applicability of Authority)

This is a contract for highly complex sustainment and delivery of repairs and spares, and support equipment. Contractor support services are needed to bridge this supportability gap and safely and effectively operate, maintain and sustain this system.

solely possesses the unique and highly specialized data, processes and capabilities needed to support this system.

a. No drawings or technical data were procured to support the competition of this requirement or the qualification of other potential sources. Funding is not available to purchase the needed data and acquire assistance to qualify alternate vendors. The government does not have the manpower, facilities and other resources needed to reverse engineer the proprietary data, processes, specialized test equipment and facilities.

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 these urgent requirements.

b. It is the Government’s estimation that to setup another vendor with the experience and knowledge would take at least 5 years or more to become competent enough to provide the same level of effort that can provide for the B-52H MFCD requirement.

c. Unacceptable delay of delivering the critical combat capability provided by the MFCD requirement would occur due to the probability of failing to achieve performance, schedule, or cost objective; thus the overall risk associated with using a vendor other than for this acquisition is high. The primary risks are the cost and scheduling. The overall high risk assessment is based upon the following elements:

1) Management: A new vendor would need to duplicate the tools and processes that has developed in order to successfully provide sustainment. A new vendor would have to develop the capability to access all required data, facilities, tools, equipment, and personnel required to successfully repair all components that make up the MFCD system. A new vendor would have to establish subcontracts relationships to provide the parts that make up the MFCD and would have arranged for storage of those kits. Anew vendor would have to deliver and manage contractor installation of all commodity modification kits in support of the aircraft installation, deliver spares for selected part numbers, and provide support for aircraft installation kits. It is the Government’s estimate that it would take 5 years for a new vendor to duplicate these processes.

2) Technical: maintains significant programming expertise to maintain and develop B-52H aircraft MFCD hardware.

3) Cost: experience on MFCD sustainment have allowed them to develop stable, cost effective manufacturing and assembly processes that are well understood by the government. N new vendor other than would likely encounter unstable cost during setup resulting in a large cost to the Air Force. It is the Government’s estimate that it would take another vendor at least 2 years to develop a history of pricing for cost estimates.

4) Performance: As a result of experience on MFCD sustainment, the support requirements are currently stable and well understood by . It is the Government’s estimate that it would take at least 5 years for a new vendor to become proficient at this program, resulting in diminished quality during the learning curve.

5) Schedule: is the only source with the unique experience, expertise and facilities to satisfy the requirements. Another contractor would be faced with finding, hiring and moving experienced personnel which could take up to a year. The contractor would have to gain the expert knowledge and data access to be fully sufficient and able to meet the Government’s highly specialized requirements.

VI. Description of Efforts Made To Ensure Competition Between All Awardees

In accordance with FAR 16.505(a)(1), orders under indefinite-delivery contracts do not have to be synopsized. Paragraph V, above, justifies why competition among all awardees is not possible for this acquisition.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/16.htm%23P399_69627 is the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for the MFCD’s. possesses the unique technical expertise, service capacity, and facilities to accomplish repair of these systems.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer That The Anticipated Cost to the Government Will Be Fair and Reasonable

The cost of this acquisition will be fair and reasonable. Actions anticipated to ensure reasonableness of the price will be accomplished with the procedures and criteria contained in the Federal Acquisition Regulation under Parts 30 – Cost Accounting Standards, and 31 – Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, and Subpart 15.4 – Contract Pricing, as appropriate. Detailed documentation and justification of price reasonableness will be disclosed in the official Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM), to be prepared upon completion of negotiations.

VIII. Description of Market Research Conducted Among All Awardees and the Results Or A Statement of the Reason Market Research Was Not Conducted

As described in Section VI above, market research, in accordance with FAR Part 10, was conducted. Market research determined this acquisition to be sole source to based upon the following.

Without the specific repair data for this technology, potential alternate repair sources cannot effectively compete for this service. The B-52 Program Office has determined that the requirements herein can only be met by an alternate source if the original repair data from the design contractor is purchased by the government and provided to any potential service contractor.

Additionally, owns the test equipment necessary for repair. This property would need to be purchased by the government or by a new contractor if the contract was opened to other competition. The necessity of specialized equipment would increase the cost of the contract. Transportation costs and test equipment purchases could eliminate savings from open competition.

IX. Other Facts Supporting the Justification

The MFCD repair capability expired 30 September 2014 and the sustainment management of the MFCD will transfer to the Supply Chain Management by Fiscal Year 2015. The follow-on repair services contract is schedule to award by September 2015.

The impact will be an eleven-month gap (October 2014 – September 2015) between contract award.

X. List of Any Awardee That Expressed Interest in the Acquisition

N/A

XI. Actions the Agency May Take to Remove or Overcome Any Barriers To Increasing Fair Opportunity Before Any Subsequent Acquisition For the Supplies or Services

The data is currently not available to support full and open competition. The non-acquisition of technical data packages and engineering descriptions precludes prime contact competition.

XII. Contracting Officer’s Certification

The contracting officer’s signature on the signature page evidences that has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

XIII. Technical/Requirements Personnel’s Certification

As evidenced by their signatures on the signature page, the technical personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein which is their responsibility are both accurate and complete.