J A_FA8501-15-R-0013_Redacted.pdf

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN

FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

I. CONTRACTING ACTIVITY

This Justification and Approval to request authority for Other Than Full and Open Competition supports requirements generated by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Product Data Services Division at Robins AFB GA. The contracting authority for this requirement is AFSC/PZIOA, Operational Contracting Branch/Production Support, Robins AFB, GA 31098. The purchase request numbers supporting this contract action are F3QCAM5014A001 and

F3QCAM5014A002.

II. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION BEING PROCESSED

Due to the circumstances described herein, the activity requests authority to acquire the services listed in this document using Other Than Full and Open Competition as prescribed by FAR 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements. This acquisition is required to ensure continued performance of highly specialized technical services at Robins Air Force Base (AFB) in support of product data systems, data management, conversion and migration processes, and transformation initiatives. This contract action will result in a follow-on Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract covering a five-year period of performance. The estimated date of award for this IDIQ is on or before 10 September 2015. The total estimated contract value is $80,000,000. Pricing arrangements will include firm-fixed price, cost plus fixed-fee, and cost reimbursable contract line items (CLINs). The sole source requirement will be used to obtain services from the following source:

Northrop Grumman Technical Services, Inc.

2340 Dulles Corner Blvd Herndon, VA 20171-3400

CAGE: 0JRC1

Large Business

This will be an individual J&A.

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE AGENCY’S NEEDS

This acquisition is required to ensure continued performance of highly specialized technical services at Robins Air Force Base (AFB) in support of product data systems, data management, conversion and migration processes, and transformation initiatives. Below is a high-level summary of performance areas requiring the acquisition of these technical support services:

• Product and engineering data processes and improvement efforts, to include those required to prepare/transform data into new/updated Air Force data standards and to transition data and capabilities into Air Force enterprise-level systems currently in various stages of planning, development and/or implementation.

• Management, maintenance, and administration of primary and contingency product data systems and tools, which enable/facilitate data improvement initiatives and data management, creation, sustainment, storage and distribution processes.

• Management and execution of processes to facilitate migration of product data to higher intelligence levels and to establish relationships between various types of product data.

The technical requirements associated with this acquisition require tight integration of the various service disciplines that are necessary to support data processes and the supporting systems infrastructure. Robins AFB currently manages approximately 54,000 technical order documents/increments, comprising an estimated 8,000,000 pages of various sizes; over 17,000,000 engineering data images; over 400,000 Computer Aided Design (CAD)/Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) models and files; and over 5,000,000 part indenture configurations consisting of over 19,000,000 part records.

Electronic capture, conversion, and update processes constitute a large portion of USAF technical data management functions and consume a substantial part of available technical data funding. These functions include activities related to the transition of data from one format to a more intelligent format. At the lowest level, conversion processes facilitate the transition of paper and raster image documents to portable document format (PDF) or indexed portable document format (IPDF). Current TO PDF conversion, quality assurance and loading efforts result in approximately 250,000 PDF/IPDF TO pages being added to, or updated within the electronic repository monthly. TO data may be further transitioned to editorial sustainment formats--Desktop Publishing (DTP), Standardized General Markup Language (SGML), to eXtensible Markup Language (XML), and/or ultimately to Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETMs). Engineering data support requirement include data improvement processes such as those necessary to convert and assemble individual raster images to single, text searchable PDF files, and to associate those files to related parts configuration data.

The product data systems infrastructure at Robins AFB includes both DoD standard systems and locally developed systems used for the management, storage and retrieval of digital technical data for all Robins AFB-managed weapon systems and for data managed by organizational entities at other USAF locations. Technical support services include system architecture, administration, database management/administration, and other technical support services necessary to support all hardware infrastructure and software components utilized in the capture, storage, maintenance, electronic distribution, conversion, editorial and data linking processes.

The requirements associated with these technical services are considered performance-based and are expected to recur over the next five years; however, the nature of the program is dynamic. The fluidity in the program requirements can be attributed to multiple external factors. Evolving data standards, legislation-driven system environment and policy changes (designed to reduce IT duplication and consolidate physical data centers), system compliance regulations, and efforts to transition capabilities and data to enterprise-level standards and systems in various stages of planning and development all contribute to fluctuations in the type and quantity of services required.

As Air Force enterprise-level systems are implemented and reach necessary levels of maturity, a decrease in the amount and scope of work associated with RAFB-specific product data systems support is expected. The impact of these external factors, and of widespread efforts to reduce funding levels across the DoD will most likely drive an overall reduction in program cost. However, the timelines associated with these external programs are notional at present, budget impacts are unknown, and accurate cost projections are difficult to determine. The work performed in support of this effort will not be done under an ACAT I or II program.

To allow maximum flexibility and efficiency, the desired contract structure for these requirements is a five-year Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) services contract. The period of performance/ordering period will begin September 2015 and end August 2020. The maximum dollar value of the contract is $80,000,000. This estimate is based on the level of support necessary to develop and execute processes to transform/migrate data upon implementation of USAF enterprise-level system initiatives/capabilities, historical funding levels for this requirement, as well as an analysis of contract expenditures to date. The contract will be awarded pursuant to FAR Part 15, and a combination of O&M (3400) and CSAG (4930) appropriations will be utilized for satisfaction of these military-unique requirements.

Performance Period CSAG Funding (4930)

O&M Funding (3400)

Annual Funding

Basic (September 2015-August 2016) Option 1 (September 2016- August 2017) Option 2 (September 2017-August 2018) Option 3 (September 2018-August 2019) Option 4 (September 2019-August 2020) Total

The current task order (FA8771-04-D-0004-Q615) was awarded sole source under the NETCENTS IDIQ contract to Northrop Grumman, with a period of performance from 01 July 2013 through 30 June 2015. In accordance with modification FA8771-04-D-0004-P00035 of the basic contract, the period of performance for Option III will be extended to 09 September 2015.

IV. STATUTORY AUTHORITY PERMITTING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

10 USC 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, 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)

The agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by the unique supplies or services available from the above cited source, which possesses the unique capabilities demonstrated as follows:

The requirements associated with early acquisition efforts were initially competed amongst all service providers under the AFWAY Information Technology Services (ITS) contract vehicle in the summer of 2004. The current contractor, Northrop Grumman Technical Services, submitted the only bid in response to the government’s initial request for proposal and was issued the initial contract award in September 2004.

The Robins AFB product data environment provides one-of-a-kind capabilities to customers supporting operation, maintenance, and supply chain activities through the utilization of tightly integrated Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), content management, workflow tools and data processes enabled within state-of-the-art infrastructure. The complexity of the existing product data environment is illustrated in Attachment 1, which depicts the hierarchical data-to-system relationships managed within the environment. The tight integration of separate but related systems, subsystems and tasks increases the complexity of the program but is essential to sustainment of the environment and to attainment of program and policy objectives.

Northrop Grumman, the incumbent contractor, is the only source capable of successfully providing the supplies and services as described in Section III above. They currently possess the level of highly specialized skills required to sustain this complex environment, and they are the only source capable of facilitating the transition of capabilities and data collections into consolidated and/or enterprise-level solutions. They are the only source possessing the full depth and breadth of skills in big data management of USAF-peculiar product data, metadata and data relationships within PLM and content management environments. They are the only source capable of concurrently sustaining the supporting systems environments such that they remain compliant with fluid DoD/USAF data and system security requirements. The knowledge and skill set held by the incumbent contract team is critical to the Government’s ability to provide uninterrupted access to critical product data while facilitating rapid response to fluid data, system sustainment, and compliance requirements. A loss of these skill sets necessary to rapidly respond to changing system and data operating environments, as well as, security and policy driven changes, would result in substantial periods of unavailability of data. Awarding the contract to any other source would inject unacceptable levels of risk into the program, result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force’s requirements, and cause substantial duplication of cost to the Government that could not be expected to be recovered through competition.

For example, data replication requirements necessitate that a total of approximately 50TB of critical product data from the production systems located at Robins AFB be incrementally replicated (on a daily basis) at an off-site location in a different geographical area. Currently, those requirements are satisfied through use of Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) located within a facility provided by the incumbent contractor. This arrangement affords the Government the benefit of the incumbent contractor’s investment in their facilities in Oklahoma City, OK for satisfaction of requirements associated with ‘warm’ site capabilities, and of their local facilities for retention of both classified and unclassified off-site backup requirements. Established contingency plans currently outline directives for utilization of these ‘warm’ site and backup capabilities for support of critical user access and data sustainment activities in the event of persistent system outages in the production environment. The duration of a project to migrate capabilities and data to a new contingency environment could require a period of performance from nine to twelve months and would require a decreasing level of duplicate expertise until full migration was completed. Based on environmental and security requirements associated with contingency site and off-site backup capabilities, the cost estimates associated with establishment and transfer of the existing ‘warm’ site systems and backup storage capabilities to another, vendor-provided environment would equate to over , considering the cost associated with facilities, equipment, travel and highly specialized labor.

While outlay of an additional may seem insubstantial when considering the overall contract value of $80,000,000, movement of this capability would not ultimately achieve compliance with the intent of data center reduction initiatives/policy. Data center consolidation activities mandated by the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) require transition of capabilities and data to enterprise-level systems, and/or cloud or consolidated data center environments, with the migration paths dependent upon external initiative timelines and compliance processes which are not fully defined and certainly not yet mature. DoD targets currently require elimination of most stand-alone data centers by 2018, but compliance with the overarching policy is to be achieved by moving capabilities and data to cloud environments. USAF pilot programs to test the viability of commercial cloud environments are currently being planned and our organization has been listed as the first candidate for USAF pilot program participation. Loss of the incumbent knowledge would eliminate our ability to participate, would delay our ability to achieve necessary costs savings, and would eliminate a rare opportunity to shape the future of cloud computing for our customers and for the

USAF.

Establishment of a new ‘warm’ site capabilities and duplication of resources that would be required to sustain the current production environment and concurrently achieve compliance with NDAA-driven policies are only examples of drivers to cost increases that could not be recovered through competition. The cost and mission impacts associated with loss of expertise necessary for successful system consolidation/transition, and with degradation of data must also be considered. Since USAF weapon systems/assets cannot be operated or repaired without associated product data, delays in the Government’s ability to provide up-to-date, technically accurate product data critical to the operation and maintenance of USAF assets would also result in increased costs, though those are not directly measurable by this acquisition program.

VI. DESCRIPTION OF EFFORTS MADE TO ENSURE THAT OFFERS ARE SOLICITED FROM AS

MANY POTENTIAL SOURCES AS DEEMED PRACTICABLE

This requirement will be synopsized on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web page as required by FAR 5.201. It is anticipated that sources having an interest in subcontracting may be identified through synopsis posting. If that is the case, any source who responds to the Government as a result of the synopsis posting will be identified to the prime contractor as a potential source for subcontracting opportunities.

VII. DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE ANTICIPATED COST TO THE

GOVERNMENT WILL BE FAIR AND REASONABLE

Pricing data will be analyzed and negotiated prior to award of the IDIQ contract to ensure contract labor categories will provide the required types of specialized skills at a fair and reasonable price. The contractor will be required to submit certified cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403-4, and the Government will utilize forward pricing rate agreements and determine adequacy of the contractor’s accounting system as required. Comprehensive analysis to be accomplished will include a technical evaluation of the type of labor proposed to be utilized for the IDIQ contract, and of the type and quantity of labor to be utilized for satisfaction of requirements outlined in individual tasks orders to be awarded under the contract vehicle. Negotiations will be conducted by the Government based on recommendations from the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and expert technical personnel supporting the program. The contract price will be negotiated IAW the procedures in FAR Part 15 ensuring the ultimate cost to the Government is fair and reasonable.

VIII. DESCRIPTION OF THE MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND THE RESULTS, OR A

STATEMENT OF THE REASONS MARKET RESEARCH WAS NOT CONDUCTED

Multiple market research efforts associated with the requirements for Product Data Systems, Data Management and Migration Support have been accomplished in accordance with FAR Part 10 since initial award. The Market Research Report associated with the most recent market survey was completed on 20 January 2015.

Historical market research efforts are summarized below:

• September 2006: Sources-sought synopsis titled Enterprise Information System Services for Technical Data (EISS-T), resulted in receipt of ten responses, with only one (the incumbent) describing sufficient, relevant past or related experience to be deemed fully capable to meet the requirements.

• March 2008: Request for Information (RFI) resulted in a total of fourteen responses, with four from companies not responding to the original RFI. Again, only the incumbent described sufficient relevant past or related experience to be deemed fully capable of meeting the requirements.

• February 2011: Multiple keyword searches were executed within the Dynamic Small Business Search tool to attempt to identify vendors with experience in implementation and sustainment of PDM/PLM systems supporting military technical data. Query results did not identify any vendors with experience supporting the specific product data/lifecycle management systems utilized at Robins AFB.

• October 2011: Sources sought synopsis titled Product Data Systems, Data Management and Migration Support (PDS-DM-MS) resulted in receipt of three responses. Of the three responses received, only one (the incumbent) described sufficient, relevant past or related experience to be deemed fully capable to meet the requirements.

• November 2012: Market survey titled Product Data Systems, Data Management and Migration Support was submitted to all eight vendors available under the NETCENTS I contract. A total of three companies submitted responses, with only one (the incumbent) describing sufficient, relevant past or related experience to be deemed fully capable to meet the requirements.

The most recent market research efforts included execution of queries within the DSBS tool, and accomplishment of a RFI were techniques utilized to evaluate the market. North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 518210, Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services/Custom Computer Programming Services, was determined to be the most appropriate for the requirements.

In February 2014, a RFI was prepared in order to again attempt to identify sources possessing the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the full spectrum of requirements associated with Product Data Systems, Data Management and Migration support. Provided with the RFI was the draft performance work statement which contained a detailed description of the requirements and a Contractor Capability Survey. The Contractor Capability Survey included thirty-four (34) questions which are summarized within the associated Market Research Report. Only two companies, the incumbent contractor, Northrop Grumman, and BackOffice Associates, LLC, submitted responses to the RFI/capabilities survey. Both vendors are considered large businesses and are domestically-owned, non-government companies. Neither is Woman- or Veteran-Owned; nor a Hub Zone certified company.

• The response submitted by Northrop Grumman (CAGE Code 0JRC1) described sufficient, relevant and/or related past experience to be deemed fully capable of supporting the full spectrum of requirements. The Northrop Grumman response contained appropriate responses detailing highly relevant experience to each capability question.

• The response submitted by Back Office Associates, LLC (CAGE Code 50AP4), contained little information related to the actual requirements, other than those associated with the company’s tools and capabilities in the data migration and data governance areas. While migration of data and functionality into enterprise system solutions is included in the requirements, the Back Office Associates response repeatedly described data migration and governance capabilities in response to other key performance area questions not associated with data migration or governance. In response to some of the other key performance questions, Back Office Associates indicated they would work with or augment the staff performing the duties necessary to meet the requirements. Those responses provide a clear indication that the company lacks experience in the vast majority of the key requirement areas, and therefore cannot be deemed capable of supporting the full spectrum (or even a small portion) of the requirements.

The results of the February 2014 RFI and the subsequent DSBS queries are discussed in more detail in the Vendor Survey section of the associated Market Research Report. While the rating assigned to each vendor response was based on the vendor’s articulation of expertise and experience in the full complement of requirements, questions associated with the operating environment, compliance areas and product data-centric experience were considered most critical.

In July 2014, DSBS queries were executed using NAICS code 518210 and various key program elements as search criteria.

• Utilizing the key word ‘Product Data’ yielded zero firms matching the criteria.

• Utilizing the key word ‘Data Management-Migration’ yielded zero firms matching the criteria.

• Utilizing the key word ‘Data Management’ returned results listing three vendors, none of whom outlined any capabilities in the major critical components of the program.

Program personnel will continue to assess the market periodically using internet searches, direct contact with firms expressing interest, and formal RFI techniques in order to identify additional vendors capable of performing against the requirements.

Clearly, at this time, no other vendor besides the incumbent currently possesses the highly specialized skills and level of experience necessary to meet the full spectrum of requirements specified for this acquisition.

IX. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

As stated above, the requirements associated with product data system support services were initially competed amongst all service providers under the AFWAY Information Technology Services (ITS) contract vehicle, and subsequent market research results repeatedly confirmed the non-competitive nature of the program. The depth and breadth, and the complexity of the program have significantly increased as the complexities of the technology, data and processes supported within the product data systems environment have increased. In addition there are limitations in the Government’s ability to provide the level of organic staff necessary to satisfy the requirements; this also contributes to the sole source nature of the acquisition.

In spite of the historical market research results, the initial intent during acquisition planning was to pursue competitive methods to satisfy requirements. Program personnel were hopeful that attendees at the ACE meeting could offer insight into how to effectively compete the requirement to ensure the acquisition approach was structured in such a way that risks could be mitigated/managed. It was during the most recent (January 2014) ACE meeting associated with the program that questions regarding competition effectiveness were again raised and the requirement to re-accomplish market research, assessing vendors submitting responses as either fully capable or not capable (vs assessing as partially capable) was identified to program personnel. Per the advisement from the Robins Small Business Office, an attempt was made to identify additional vendors for response to the recent RFI; however, the results rendered no additional viable candidates (small or otherwise).

X. LIST OF SOURCES, IF ANY, THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE ACQUISITION

See Section VI.

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 stated previously in paragraphs above, multiple factors make identification of a viable approach to competition difficult to identify. While the requirements to support enterprise-level system initiatives and achieve data center consolidation objectives are two of the factors which contribute to the non-competitive nature of the program, satisfaction of those requirements will also result in elimination of a large portion of the requirements associated with this acquisition.

The system capabilities resulting from the USAF PLM initiative (PLMi) will subsume the Robins product data systems capabilities and data. That initiative is currently in step three of the Service Development and Delivery Process (SDDP), wherein the Materiel Development Decision (MDD) recommendation should be presented to the USAF corporate structure for approval (ECD: 26 Jan 15). Once approved, subsequent steps to plan and build, test and deploy the solution will be taken. While the schedule associated with this initiative may be considered notional at present, the most recent program information available indicates that legacy systems and data migration strategy will span SDDP steps three and four. Considering the extent of efforts necessary to prepare for, and execute data transformation/migration processes, it is reasonable to expect those activities to begin well prior to initial functionality rollout scheduled to begin in March 2018. Therefore, it is expected that efforts to identify legacy product data sources and develop data migration strategies will begin soon after the MDD decision in January 2015. Successful migration will result in a reduction in the scope of the requirements associated with this program, thereby reducing the criticality of retention of the highly specialized skills currently required to support the Robins product data environment.

It has been determined that the only viable approach to reduce or eliminate competitive barriers and increase competition available at this time is to proceed with efforts to:

(1) Continue to increase and strengthen the program requirements associated with system and process documentation, making detailed system architecture, administration, process and training documentation a critical step in configuration control processes and mandating completion prior to implementation.

(2) Contractually require the incumbent contractor to support efforts to transition capabilities and data to enterprise-level systems, directing the incumbent to prepare and deliver transition plans that encompass all primary systems, related sub-systems and processes. Deliverables will provide foundation for transition activities, whether organic, contractor or enterprise-level.

Inclusion of requirements and contract line items associated with extensive, detailed documentation and support of enterprise-level initiatives in the PWS for this program will enable transfer of knowledge from the incumbent contractor to organic and contract resources supporting enterprise-level initiatives. These actions will increase the Government’s ability to acquire necessary support services via a competitive process in the event the larger-scale enterprise-level programs, which are currently expected to satisfy most of this program’s product data and systems related requirements, are not fully implemented prior to the conclusion of the 5-year period of performance associated with the current services acquisition for this program.

XII. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION

The contracting officer’s signature on the Coordination and Approval Document evidences that he/she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief (FAR 6.303-2(b)(12)).

XIII. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS PERSONNEL’S CERTIFICATION

As evidenced by representative signatures on the Coordination and Approval Document, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein, which is their responsibility, is both accurate and complete in accordance with FAR 6.303-2 (c).

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN

FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

ATTACHMENT 1

Product Data Systems, Data Management and Migration Support Hierarchical Data-to-System Relationships