Redacted_Hill_Enterprise_Data_Center_J&A.pdf

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

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 2 of 7

I. Contracting Activity.

AFSC OL:H/ PZIEB

6038 Aspen Avenue, Bldg. 1289 NE Hill Air Force Base, UT 84056-5838

DSN 586-7779, COM (801) 586-7779

Purchase Request Number: F2DCCR8114A032

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

A. The Air Force intends to issue a new indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) service contract which is a follow-on to the competitively awarded task order on the DESP III contract (FA8222-12-D-0001-0010), set to expire 15 September 2018. The ordering period will be 17 months with an 18 month period of performance (PoP). The PoP will be from 15 September 2018 - 14 March 2020. No task order performance will go beyond the 18 month PoP on this contract. It will include the extension of services clause (FAR 52.217-8) which will allow the extension of services for a period up to an additional 6 months at the task order level. This contract is for technical engineering, software development, maintenance, on-boarding of additional software application services and sustainment of HEDC operations.

In an effort to promote competition, multiple acquisition strategies were considered and researched, namely NETCENTS II, OASIS, Full and Open, and GSA. None were deemed suitable, feasible, or appropriate. This is a short-term solution to the long-term strategy of competing the HEDC requirement on the upcoming Small Business Enterprise Application Solutions (SBEAS) contract, which is currently under protest.

In the end, it was not feasible to use these avenues as the services are highly specialized and would take a new contractor 12 months to ramp up and obtain the necessary knowledge base, which was time the Government did not have. As part of the market research, the Government discovered that AES is completing less than 4% of the work and SI is completing over 96%. During this discussion AES agreed with the Government's assessment and acknowledged that SI is completing over 96% and AES would not be able to perform these services without SI as a subcontractor. This finding revectored the acquisition strategy toward the current subcontractor, SI.

The contractor for this effort will be:

- Company: Systems Implementers, Inc. (SI)

- Address: 1436 S Legend Hills Dr Ste 140 Clearfield, UT, 84015-2188.

- Cage Code: 1FNW9

- Small-Business

B. The contract type be a Firm-Fixed Price IDIQ type contract C. Estimated Value is: $21,500,000 D. Type of J&A: Individual E. Estimated date of Award: 15 September 2018

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

A. Under the contemplated contract, SI will provide technical engineering, software development, maintenance services, on-boarding of additional software application services and sustainment of HEDC operations for the 75th Air Base Wing, Communications and Information Directorate (75 ABW/SC) at Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. SI is responsible for the creation/update and implementation of DoD, AF, AFMC, AFSC, and Hill AFB mission partners' applications within the Hill Enterprise Data Center (HEDC).

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 3 of 7

B. The ordering period will be 17 months with an 18 month period of performance (PoP). The PoP will be from 15 September 2018 - 14 March 2020. Task order PoP may range between one month and 12 months. No task order performance will go beyond the 18 month PoP on this contract.

C. The total estimated cost is $21,500,000.00. This Government estimate is based on actual costs of prior contract awards with appropriate escalation. The Government anticipates an average monthly expenditure over the 18 months of approximately $1,194,000.00, including options. This action is using appropriated 3400 Operation and Maintenance funds.

D. The anticipated CLIN structure for this requirement will be as follows:

CLIN# CLIN Description CLIN Type Unit 0001 HEDC Sustainment FFP Month 0002 Application Onboarding FFP Month 0003 Data (CDRLs) NSP N/A **The Following CLINs are options to extend services up to 6 months at the Task Order Level** 1001 HEDC Sustainment FFP Month 1002 Application Onboarding FFP Month 1003 Data (CDRLs) NSP N/A

E. Approval request is for more than one fiscal year. There are no feasible actions that can be taken to promote competition during the period of this contract as described in Section V of this document.

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

10 U.S.C 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii) - Only One Responsible Source and no Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

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

A. SI possesses the entire package of capabilities, qualifications, and expertise for the highly specialized HEDC architecture which currently hosts hundreds of complex enterprise and maintenance applications. SI was the original developer of the HEDC architecture, subsequent applications, and the integration of mission partners' interfaces. SI has been managing the HEDC architecture for the last 13 years. SI employees have an average of 25 years of experience and subject matter expertise in the HEDC system. SI's insight and expertise implements and sustains the HEDC technology insertion strategy with a software first approach in line with commercial cloud hosting best practices. SI provides the unique skills, years of experience, and unmatched expertise in the fields of cloud based hosting within the AF enterprise. SI is the only company that currently has the hands-on experience and would require zero ramp up time to support the Government's need.

B. SI supports online transaction processing, data warehouses, legacy decision support systems (DSS), and modern business intelligence tools. These are mission essential applications hosted within the HEDC. HEDC supports various programs including, but not limited to:

· AFSC Maintenance Business System Modernization (MABSM)

· A10 System Program Office (SPO) Seimens Team Center

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 4 of 7

· AF Management Internal Control Toolset (MICT)

· AFSC Facilities and Equipment Maintenance (FEM)

· AF Inspector General Evaluation Management System (IGEMS)

· ACC File Services/SharePoint applications

· AFNWC Integrated Missile Database (IMDB)

· AF Program Budget Enterprise Service (PBES)

· AF Information Technology Investment Portfolio Suite (ITIPS)

C. 75 ABW/SC believes that award to any other source would result in an immediate impact to data center operations, and Government wide mission delays and failures. This would cause unacceptable delays in fulfilling Air Force and mission partner requirements. Awarding to anyone other than SI would cause a service interruption of at least six months while new personnel familiarize themselves with the HEDC architecture, subsequent applications, and customer interfaces. It would take at least 12 months for the new personnel to adequately achieve efficiency with the HEDC architecture before required upgrades and configuration changes could be implemented. Any delay in upgrades would have direct and indirect impact on the evolving security mandates and Air Force systems. Service interruptions cost the Government at least $1M per hour in lost production and downtime in just one of the Maintenance Wings that this effort supports. An interruption to the HEDC system would cause IT shutdowns in the programs listed above.

D. Accordingly, SI is the only firm capable of providing the services described in Section III above without the 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.

A. Sources Sought was published on 16 May, 2018. The Sources Sought Synopsis (SSS) number was FA8201-18-R-0010. The SSS was published for 30 days on FedBizOpps. the Closing date was 15 June, 2018. The SSS was used to identify what data center expertise is currently available in industry under NAICS code 541511. A draft Performance Work Statement was included in the SSS.

B. Seven responses to the Sources Sought were received:

1. Articom, LLC did not respond appropriately to the SSS. The company did not provide adequate information associated with the PWS and did not answer the questions asked by the Government in the SSS. The company responded with inadequate capability statements and irrelevant past performance examples. Based upon the information provided, the Government determined Articom did not demonstrate the capability to complete this contract without causing an unacceptable delay to the current Air Force mission.

2. CACI did not respond appropriately to the SSS. The company did not provide any information associated with the PWS, or to the questions asked by the Government in the SSS. They asked questions, which were answered on FBO.gov. Based upon the information provided and an exchange via questions from CACI, the Government determined CACI did not demonstrate the capability to complete this contract without causing an unacceptable delay to the current Air Force mission.

3. Techno Rescue did not respond appropriately to the SSS. The company did not provide adequate

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 5 of 7 information associated with the PWS and did not answer the questions asked by the Government in the SSS. The company submitted only a flyer as their response. Based upon the information provided the Government determined Techno Rescue did not demonstrate the capability to complete this contract without causing an unacceptable delay to the current Air Force mission.

4. Appddicition: did not respond appropriately to the SSS. The company did not provide adequate information associated with the PWS and did not answer the questions asked by the Government in the SSS. The company submitted only a flyer as their response. Based upon the information provided the Government determined Appddiction did not demonstrate the capability to complete this contract without causing an unacceptable delay to the current Air Force mission.

5. Woodbury Technologies, Inc: Woodbury Technologies stated that they are currently responsible for the tasks outlined in the PWS. However, they do not currently perform many of the key tasks/ requirements in the PWS and the government does not fully agree with their assessment. Woodbury Technologies currently provides only HEDC Microsoft Windows, Red Hat Enterprise Linux server, and VMWare ESX administration support for the HEDC through the limited scope Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) contract. Woodbury Technologies does not currently perform the tasks of HEDC engineering, architecture design/support, and onboarding of complex business intelligence applications required to fulfill the needs of this solicitation. Additionally, they did not specify how they currently, or in the future, will meet the requirements outlined in the accompanying questionnaire. The government does not believe they are a viable candidate. Based upon the information provided the Government determined Woodbury Technologies, Inc. did not demonstrate the capability to complete this contract without causing an unacceptable delay to the current Air Force mission.

6. Systems Implementers, Inc: responded fully to the SSS. Their response clearly demonstrated how they currently are, and would continue, successfully completing all the requirements of the draft PWS.

7. Aerospace Engineering & Support (AES): did not fully respond to the SSS. They simply expressed interest in the upcoming contract, as they are the incumbent. The Government discovered that AES is completing less than 4% of the work and SI is completing over 96%. A discussion was held with AES on 25 July 2018, regarding their minimal involvement as the incumbent. The Government's assessment is that AES would not be able to perform these services without SI as a subcontractor.

C. The requirement was synopsized on FedBizOpps as a notice of a proposed contract IAW FAR

5.201 on 1 August 2018.

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

A. The cost of this acquisition will be determined fair and reasonable by the responsible Contracting Officer. Actions anticipated to ensure reasonableness of the price will be accomplished with the procedures and criteria contained in the FAR under Parts 30 - Cost Accounting Standards, 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, and Subpart 15.4 - Contract Pricing, as appropriate. Further actions will be under the guidance of the Contract Pricing Reference Guides jointly developed by the Federal Acquisition Institute and the Air Force Institute of Technology. Detailed documentation and justification of price reasonableness will be disclosed in the official final Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM), to be prepared upon completion of negotiations.

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 6 of 7

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

A. Sources Sought was published for 30 days on FedBizOpps to identify what data center expertise is currently available in industry. Four questions were posted within the solicitation to help identify whether the respondent had the adequate expertise to meet the contractual requirements. After review of industry sources it was determined there were no alternate sources available to fulfill the Government's needs.

B. The Government reviewed the current contract and discovered that only two companies submitted proposals, but only one company was found technically capable. That company is AES, who had a business arrangement with SI as a subcontractor due to SI's unique capabilities and understanding of

HEDC.

C. As part of market research, a discussion was held with the incumbent contractor, AES on 25 July 2018, regarding their involvement on the current contract. The Government discovered that AES is completing less than 4% of the work and SI is completing over 96%. During this discussion AES agreed with the Government's assessment and acknowledged that SI is completing over 96% and AES would not be able to perform these services without SI as a subcontractor.

D. Other Actions: Additional market research included internet searches, discussions with subject matter industry experts, and operational users. While there were multiple vendors that could be considered partially capable due to data and cloud hosting experience, the Government determined from this research that no other vendor, besides SI, is considered fully capable of performing the requirements outlined in this effort without an unacceptable delay.

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

No further information.

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

Systems Implementers, Inc. 1436 S. Legend Hills Dr. Suite 140 Clearfield, UT 84015 : 801-710-1578 -Determined Technically Capable (See Section VI for more detail)

Articom, LLC 144 E. Potter Drive, Unit C Anchorage, AK 99518 Tel: 907 334-8307| -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

Techno Rescue 779 Peoria St Unit 15A, Aurora CO, 80011 Tel 303 482-2207 -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

Appddiction 14802 Jones Maltsberger Rd. #2202 San Antonio, TX 78247 Tel: 210.704.7828, ext 101 -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

Woodbury Technologies, Inc 1795 East 1450 South, Suite 200, Clearfield, UT 84015 : 808-864-8232 -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

March 2018 SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE Page 7 of 7

CACI International Inc. 14360 Newbrook Drive Chantilly, VA 20151 : 703-673-8529 -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

Aerospace Engineering & Support, Inc. 1307 W 2550 So Ogden, UT 84401 : 801-394-9565 -Determined Technically Incapable (See Section VI for more detail)

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.

A follow-on contract will be competed and awarded no later than March 2020 when this contract's period of performance ends. The Government intends to award a follow-on contract which will be competed full and open and as a single requirement on the upcoming Small Business Enterprise Application Solutions (SBEAS) contract vehicle, which is the follow on to the current NETCENTS II contract. The current NETCENTS II contract is currently not taking any additional orders at this time.

The Government anticipates soliciting the effort on the SBEAS contract approximately 6 months prior to the end date of this contract. The SBEAS is currently under protest from multiple vendors and it is anticipated the protest will be resolved in 8-12 months. The Government is required to use the SBEAS contract for future acquisitions of HEDC support as it is a mandatory use contract vehicle for this type of services under this NAICS code.

There are no actions that could be taken to promote competition during this short-term contract.

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.