19-33259_JA_RWR_-ISS_-_Corp_-_PMPCO_signed_(v1)_redact.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 15

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: AFLCMC/WNKD

Purchase Request / Local ID Number: FD2060-19-33259

Program / Project (and PE, if applicable): AN/ALR-56M Radar Warning Receiver Integrated Support Station (ISS) Support

Program Type (PEO or Other Contracting): PEO

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): J&A Type: Class Individual

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

Date

31 May 2019

Program Mgr Joe Harper AFLCMC/WNY / Comm. 478-926-7286

Signature

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

Date

02 Jul 2019

Lead Contracting Officer Erin Taylor AFLCMC/WNKD/Comm. 478-926-2759

Signature

HARPER.JOE.D.1061734

Digitally signed by

HARPER.JOE.D.1061734674

Date: 2019.05.31 11:01:04 -04'00'

TAYLOR.ERIN.B.128748

Digitally signed by

TAYLOR.ERIN.B.1287482562

Date: 2019.07.02 14:46:23 -04'00'

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 2 of 15

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

I. Contracting Activity.

This Justification and Approval (J&A) to request authority for Other Than Full and Open Competition supports requirements generated for the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Agile Combat Support Directorate, Electronic Warfare & Avionics Systems Division, Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Program Office (WNY). The contracting activity for this requirement is the AFLCMC, Electronic Warfare Contracting Branch (WNKD). This action will be awarded as a new contract utilizing cost plus fixed fee and firm fixed price line items. The purchase request number supporting this contracting action is FD2060-19-33259.

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

Due to the circumstance described herein, the activity requests authority to acquire the supplies and services listed in this document using Other Than Full and Open Competition (OTF&OC) as prescribed by FAR 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

This action is a combined effort for the Integrated Support Station (ISS) utilized by AN/ALR- 56M installed on C-130J and F-16, and the compilation of systems that create the F-15 Tactical Electronic Warfare System (TEWS): AN/ALR-56C, ALE-45, ALQ-128, MX-9287A (Blanker) , ALQ-135 Bands 1,1.5, 2, and 3. This testing tool is located in the Electronic Warfare Avionics Integration Support Facility (EWAISF) lab for Operational Flight Program (OFP) and Mission Data File Generator (MDFG) changes associated with aforementioned Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) programs and other interfaced systems and processes.

This effort will be awarded as a new sole source contract for the continued development and support of highly specialized equipment. The current contract, FA8528-14-C-0010, will expire on 25 September 2019. The period of performance (POP) is anticipated to be 26 September 2019 - 25 Jun 2020 or nine (9) months ARO. The estimated value of this effort, is based on labor hour actuals from the current contract and future efforts projected labor hours. The sole source requirement will be purchased from the following company:

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation 2340 Dulles Corner Blvd Herndon, VA 20171 Code: 5FVX5 Large Business

Fiscal year 19 operations and maintenance (3400) funding will be utilized for this effort. The following contract line items are anticipated: 0001 ISS engineering technical support, 0002 travel, 0003 materials, and 0004 data.

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

The purpose of this contract is to provide specialized knowledge of Radar Warning Receiver laboratory testing, advanced capabilities in coding using RWR Integrated Support Station (ISS) software, and prompt technical response to software analysis, software

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 3 of 15 deficiencies, configuration changes, and other development to meet mission requirements of the ISS. The RWR Systems is the system installed on the multiple DOD aircraft platforms that require engineering support. Northrop Grumman shall provide a full range of program and support management, software development, program security, test & evaluation, and configuration management for RWRs and associated support systems. The ISS is highly specialized equipment, a laboratory tool for testing software changes to Operational Flight Program and Mission Data File Generator software for the AN/ALR- 56M and F-15 TEWS in the EWAISF lab at Robins AFB, GA.

The ISS consists of commercial and custom hardware and software. The ISS is a tool for testing the changes to the Operational Flight Program (OFP) or the Mission Data Generation Tool software for the AN/ALR-56M Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) in the Electronic Warfare Avionics Integration Support Facility (EWAISF) at Robins AFB, GA.

The AN/ALR-56M ISS is used by engineers, technicians and contract personnel to support OFP changes to airborne electronic warfare systems installed on the F-15, F-16 and C-130J aircraft. The RWR systems provides protection for USAF aircrafts by detecting, displaying, generating and transmitting RF signals against threat radars and missiles while providing situational awareness to the pilot. The RWR systems require software/hardware updates to remain effective in a constantly emerging threat environment.

This contract was deemed a supply based on the predominance of the activity being executed on a supply type Contract Line Item Number (CLIN). The below table provides a depiction of each CLIN, the type of activity, and estimated total value.

CLIN Description CLIN Type Quantity Supply/Service Estimated Value 0001 Engineering - CPFF 1 LO Supply OFP and MDFG Development, Software deficiency analysis and studies 0002 Travel CRNF 1 LO Service 0003 Material CPFF 1 LO Supply -

0004 Tech Data NSP 1 LO Supply - Total

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

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

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 4 of 15

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 highly specialized services available from the above cited source, which possess unique capabilities demonstrated as follows: Northrop Grumman is the only source with the specific knowledge of the ISS hardware, software, and software algorithms required to modify the system's Operational Flight Program (OFP), Mission Data File (MDF), and Mission Data File Generator (MDFG) software.

Northrop Grumman, as the OEM has the system knowledge required to resolve certain highly technical issues. The software is proprietary to Northrop Grumman. The purchase of additional data would not satisfy the requirements of this effort and any other vendor would require 5 years, based on similar programs gain the required system knowledge. This will inherently require the USG to retain Northrop Grumman while other sources gained the required system knowledge. This support is critical to the overall functionality of the Electronic Warfare, of the F-16s, and the safety and welfare of our aircraft and aircrew.

Without this support, will result in the loss of capability against RF threats, and the possible inability to fly and operate in certain AOR's. Therefore the Government believes award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force's requirements.

Award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition. Northrop Grumman has been actively supporting the RWR systems with a detailed understanding of the system interoperability as well as aircraft systems and interface requirements. To develop an alternate source with the applicable technical experience equivalent to Northrop Grumman at this time would require an estimated amount in both direct start-up costs and indirect diminished-capability losses of and represent almost four full years of value on this effort to recreate the depth of ISS's capabilities and system knowledge. The cost is derived by estimating another contractor (similar system) operating at 65% of Northrop Grumman's capability for the first year (for the same price) and 75% in the second year, 85% in the third year, 95% in the fourth year, for a loss of 80% of one (1) current contract (.80*2.899M) = in lost capability costs where the systems knowledge would take time to build back up to where Northrop Grumman currently performs. This captures the lost capability to the government while the new contractor "warms up" to the level of performance of Northrop Grumman. Accordingly, Northrop Grumman is the only firm capable of providing the 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.

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

A Sources Sought Synopsis (SSS)/ Request for Information (RFI) was posted to Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website under solicitation contract number FA8523-19-R-0001 was posted on 2 April 2018 to evaluate market competition in accordance with FAR 5.201. Northrop Grumman was the only respondent.

The requirement will be synopsized in FedBizOpps in accordance with FAR 5.201. It is anticipated that sources having an interest in subcontracting may be identified through synopsis. Any source who responds to the Government as a result of this synopsis will be identified to the prime contractor as a potential subcontracting possibility.

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

The overall cost of this acquisition will be fair and reasonable to the Government. In accordance with FAR 15.403-3, the contractor will be required to provide other than certified cost or pricing data to be used to support the Government's evaluation of the proposed cost. The proposed skill mix of labor, labor hours, March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 5 of 15 types and quantities of material and other direct costs, and direct and indirect rates will be negotiated by the Government based on recommendations from AFLCMC/WNY sub-IPT expert technical personnel supporting the program. The contract price will be negotiated in accordance with 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.

Market research was conducted in accordance with FAR 10.001 and 10.002. The market research was started 16 Jan 2019 and completed 24 Jan 2019 by the Electronic Warfare and Avionics section engineering staff. Engineering is actively engaged in component product sustainment, staying current with industry developments by reviewing industry reports, trends and product developments, talking with field personnel, and reviewing applicable company portfolios on a regular basis.

As described in Section VI above, a SS/RFI was posted to FedBizOpps advising industry of the pending acquisition and soliciting inquiries from interested vendors. The SS/RFI was posted 2 April 2018 under Solicitation number FA8523-19-R-0001. Only one (1) vendor, Northrop Grumman, responded to the SS/ RFI. The vendor was evaluated for their capability and determined that Northrop Grumman is capable of performance of this effort with little or no risk.

Market Research Techniques used also included several industry-wide internet searches using the Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE) recommended component search engines, which were utilized in searching for other qualified sources.

• http://dsbs.sba.gov/dsbs/search/dsp profilelist.cfm?requestTimeout=180

• https://www.janes.com/article/search?query=electronic+warfare+integration

• https://www.marketresearch.com/Visiongain-v531/leading-Electronic-Warfare-companies-11909616

• https://www.naics.com/naics-code-description/?code=334511

Out of leading 20 Electronic Warfare Companies, only Northrop Grumman had a history of supporting the Integrated Support Station (ISS) in the EWAISF laboratories in the area covered by this effort.

A SBA Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) query was conducted utilizing North America Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 334511, i.e. engineering technical support, with AN/ALR-56M/C Integrated Support Station (ISS) Electronic Warfare development, modification and integration. This search yielded no small businesses providing those services. There are no opportunities for small business due the fact that the system OEM is the only source with the required knowledge, equipment, and expertise.

This subject Government requirement does not fit the definition of a commercial item as defined in FAR Part 2.101. This item is defined as military unique and is not customarily used by the general public or by non-Governmental entities. The Government requires parts that meet an exact form, fit, and function as determined by the specific mission. There are no aircraft in the commercial market with the same or similar components.

Also, after a review of Government proprietary component product database (Haystack) and JEDMICS, it was determined that Northrop Grumman (CAGE 5FVX5) is the only source that possesses the knowledge and capabilities to meet the Governments requirement.

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

The software used to interface between the Integrated Support Station and the Simulation equipment is proprietary to Northrup Grumman. We are buying a capability of expertise from the OEM on the station as well as access to the proprietary interface. The proprietary data is not available for purchase and reverse engineering it would be impractical. A sole source contract is considered appropriate for this effort; there

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 6 of 15 are no other responsible sources with the required ALR-56M Integrated Support Station system knowledge.

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

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.

The nature of this engineering support effort is such that it must be provided by Northrop Grumman at this time. Loss of the Northrop Grumman expertise would result in the loss of significant support and analysis expertise and would require significant investment and time to bring another contractor into position to support any urgent/emergency support requirements. The system will be in the fleet until approximately 2035 or until the F-35 comes on board. Full & open competition requires a performance spec or some other similar technical requirement that doesn't contain data rights with restricted rights. We are buying a capability of expertise from the OEM on the station as well as access to the proprietary interface. The software used to interface between the Integrated Support Station and the Simulation equipment is proprietary to Northrup Grumman, and not available for purchase; therefore, making reverse engineering impractical. With DoD budget cuts looming in the immediate future, the Air Force cannot afford the associated cost duplications. This would be on top of the current effort which can only be accomplished by the OEM. In summary, the proprietary data is not available for purchase and reverse engineering it would be impractical. This support is critical to the overall functionality of the Electronic Warfare of the Radar Warning Receiving Systems installed on USAF aircrafts, the safety and welfare of our aircraft and aircrew.

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 7 of 15

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

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 8 of 15 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

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 9 of 15

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

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 10 of 15 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

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 11 of 15

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.

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 12 of 15

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 authority at FAR 6.302-1, include a discussion of the actions planned to overcome barriers to competition established in the previous justification, the status of those actions, and the results of those actions. The approval authority shall determine whether the planned actions were completed. If the planned actions were not completed, the justification for the follow-on acquisition shall be approved by the approval authority one-level above the approval authority for the previous justification (see FAR 6.304). If the previous justification was approved by the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE), the approval remains at the SPE level.

[DFARS PGI 206.304(a)(S-70)(ii)]

XII. Certification by the Contracting Officer. (FAR 6.303-2(b)(12))

As evidenced by his/her signature, the contracting officer has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

XIII. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel. (FAR 6.303-2(c))

As evidenced by their signatures, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein, which is their responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

The following page contains a suggested template for “International Agreement Competitive Restrictions (IACR)”.

The authority to prepare an IACR has been delegated from the HCA to the Contracting Officer.

(AFFARS 5306.302-4)

International Agreement Competitive Restrictions ( IACR)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

Date Project Lead / Program Mgr / Requiring Activity [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Contracting Officer [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Communications and Info Systems Officer (CSO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Local Legal Reviewer [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Competition Advocate [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Senior Contracting Official (SCO or SCCO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date PEO / Commander (Requirements Cognizance) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Deputy Assistant Secretary (Contracting) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date SAF/AQ [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

Date Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Contracting Officer [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Competition Advocate [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date PEO [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Senior Procurement Executive [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018

I. Organization:

[ Contracting Activity (include base name and zip code) ] [ PCO (Name / Office Symbol / Phone) ] [ PR Number (If desired) ]

II. Description of Requirement:

[ Include estimated cost. ]

III. Nature / Description of the Action:

[ Include contract type, period of performance, cost and schedule, and rationale. ]

IV. Statutory Authority: 10 USC 2304(c)(4) as implemented by FAR 6.302-4, International Agreement.

V. Applicability of Authority:

[ State that the cited exception is applicable because (LOA #, treaty, agreement, etc.), dated ____________, directed that the requirement be obtained from __________________. ]

[ NOTE: Provide a copy of the page(s) of the agreement, treaty, or written directions that has the effect of restricting competition by the requirements activity and attach them to the IACR. ]

VI. Certification of Accuracy and Completeness:

As evidenced by his/her signature, the contracting officer has determined the IACR to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief. The CO also approves the IACR.

As evidenced by his/her signature, the program/technical/requirements manager(s) have/has determined that any supporting data contained in the IACR, which is his/her responsibility, is both accurate and complete.