Combined_Tab_6_FOE_Docs_Redacted.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Is this a brand name product justification? Yes No If yes, please provide the following information.

Brand Name Product Title:

Brand Name Product Description:

1. Contracting Activity: AFLCMC/AZS/Hanscom

2. Purchase Request: FA8721-15-D-0009 0002

3. Program Name (and Program Element, if applicable): Engineering Technology Acquisition Support Services (ETASS) II

4. Estimated Cost/Price of the Order (including options):

5. Type Program (see AFFARS 5302.101 for definitions): PEO Program Other Contracting

6. Fair Opportunity Exception: FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i), subparagraph (A) (B) (C) (E)(D)

7. Type Determination: Class Individual

Date

06 Jun 2016

Program Manager

Signature

Date

06 Jun 2016

Contracting Officer

Date Local Legal Reviewer Signature

Date Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO)

Date Competition Advocate

AFLCMC/PK/PZ

Signature

Date Signature

Date Signature

Date Approval Authority

Click here to access the instructions for the boxes below.

(1) Contracting Activity:

The contracting organization responsible for this Fair Opportunity Exception justification is Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Strategic Services Division (AZS), 20 Schilling

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Circle, Bldg. 1305, 3rd Floor, Hanscom AFB, MA 01731. The Contracting Officer is . The Program Manager is .

(2) Nature and/or description of the action being approved:

This proposed procurement is a modification to ETASS II contract FA8721-15-D-00090002 PEO AFLCMC/HN Directorate Task Order and includes additional support to Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) and Cost Reimbursable CLINs. This additional scope is required to avoid gaps in service. The additional effort is a result of the lag in time between when the HN ETASS II Task Order was solicited and when it was finally awarded and allowed to proceed (approximately two years).

The additional effort includes the following work with PoPs, 1 Sep 16 to 31 Aug 17 (Option Year 1), and 1 Sep 17 to 31 Aug 18 (Option Year 2). This exception to fair opportunity is due to the extent of the growth in requirements. At task order award, the total contract value was $61,478,934. The base year has been negotiated and awarded, totaling approximately $12M. Local AFLCMC/AZS policy states that anything above 30% of the original contract value is considered out of scope. Since this action is estimated at , which includes both the growth in requirements since solicitation and additional new requirements that have arisen since TO award, we are well over the 30% threshold, thus requiring an FOE.

(3) Description of the supplies/services required to meet the agency's needs:

ETASS II is the mandatory Strategic Sourcing contract vehicle for AFLCMC-Hanscom's engineering and technically oriented A&AS requirements. ETASS II provides a broad range of knowledge-based A&AS services to AFLCMC/HN for Systems Engineering, Configuration and Data Management, Decision and Design Analysis, Quality Assurance, Manufacturing, Program/Project Planning, Requirement Analysis, Risk Management, Sustainment Support, Technical Management and Control, Validation and Verification, Information Assurance and Integration, OSS&E and Certification Support, Pre-Program Acquisition Planning, Technical, Software Engineering, Structural/Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, COTS Integration, Computer and Communication Engineering, Experiment Support, Acquisition Intelligence, Environmental Engineering, Enterprise Resource Planning, Fielding Support, Engineering Baseline, Enterprise Technical review, and Enterprise Integration Engineering Support Services for approximately 55 system/ program activities. The work necessary for both the growth in requirements since solicitation and the new requirements fall under this scope of work.

New Projects

The projects identified below were added to HN's portfolio after the ETASS II baseline was established in late 2013, and require A&AS ETASS support as outlined in Section 2 of this document:

HNA - Space Aerial & Nuclear Networks Project ID 360, Aerial Networking Staff, add Systems Engineering, Configuration Data Management and logistics support in the option years Project ID 689, Minuteman MEECN Program Upgrade (MMPU), add Test, Logistics, Software Engineering, Information Systems Assurance and Configuration Data Management support in the options years Project ID 1123, Waveform/Link16, add Systems Engineering and Technical Specialist support in the option years Project ID 2057, Airborne Network Global Information Grid (GIG) Interface (ANGI), add Information Systems Assurance and Technical Specialist support in the option years Project ID 678, FMS US Coalition, add Systems Engineering support in the option years Project ID 2371, Tactical Data Link (TDL) Planning Analysis Monitoring (PAM), add Systems Engineering support in the option years

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

HNC - Cryptologic and Cyber Systems Project IDs 565, 1105, 1816 Rapid Cyber, add Information Systems Assurance, Test, Systems & Network Engineering and Configuration Data Management support in the option years Project ID 2393, Classified Data at Rest (CDAR), add Systems Engineering support in the option years Project ID 2405, COMSEC CCI, add Logistics support in the option years Project ID 2407, Integrated Data Denial (IDD), add Systems Engineering support in the option years

HNI - C3I Infrastructure Project ID 1909, Arch & Standards Managed Services Office (MSO), add Test, Systems & Network Engineering, Configuration Data Management and Project Management support in the option years Project ID 2411, Enterprise Enclave Program, add Information Systems Assurance, Systems & Network Engineering and Logistics support in the option years Project IDs 2087, 2088, Cyber Security & Control System (CSCS), add Network Engineering support in the option years

HNS - FAB-T

Project ID 2301, 2302, 2303 and 2387, Presidential National Voice Conferencing (PNVC), add Logistics support in the

Additional Support Existing Projects

Justification for each individual program requiring additional A&AS support is listed below:

HNA - Space Aerial & Nuclear Networks

Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN), Project ID 950, add Airworthiness and Information Assurance support in the option years Until recently Airworthiness support has always been provided under the PASS contract and therefore not included in ETASS II's baseline requirements. As airworthiness is an ETASS function, it was transitioned to the ETASS II contract to be covered appropriately. This level of effort is the same as the historical trend to support BACN airworthiness requirements. BACN's information assurance requirements have grown over the last few years. Particularly with the integration of cybersecurity policy and operational requirements for connecting to DoD networks. This increase of activity requires additional expertise to ensure BACN software adheres to the policies and requirements levied by the Department of Defense and Air Force to ensure this operational system maintains a viable Authority to Connect certification to meet mission demands.

Tactical Data Network Lab (TDN), Project ID 1475, add Network Engineering support in the option years TDN Lab is an enterprise-wide entity that supports airborne networking communication programs. Additionally the lab supports development, prototyping, integration and test, and experimentation/exercise types of activities across program life-cycles to mitigate risk to the portfolio of programs. An increase in support activities has occurred with programs such as ANGI, JSTARS, AWACS, and Digitally Aided Close Air Support experiments which has resulted the lab's increased need for ETASS support.

Common Data Link (CDL), Project ID 370, add Systems Engineering support in the option year Additional requirements levied by SAF/AQ have resulted in an increased need for ETASS support. As part of a new memorandum of agreement with the Executive Agent, the program office has taken on a much more active role in coordinating activities between the joint program office and other services. Also, the Army is in the final stages of awarding an IDIQ contract for new test set development. ETASS engineering is required to review technical material and mitigate potential obsolescence issues.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

5th to 4th Generation Gateway, Pocket J, Project ID 655, add Information Assurance and Configuration Data Management support in the option years When the 5th to 4th requirement was first generated, the true scope of the program had not been fully understood.

Originally there was little very little known about system integration requirements and the role of the platform integrator. A new contract is being developed with the F-15 platform integrator, resulting in the need for additional ETASS support.

Global Aircrew Strategic Network Terminal (Global ASNT), Project ID 681, add Logistics and Systems Engineering support in the option years Increased Fielding support is also required based on lessons learned from the initial site surveys for the four IOC sites.

The Global ASNT prime contract only required one site survey per site by the prime contractor. However, after the first few IOC site surveys, the PMO realized that additional site pre-surveys to each site would be required. The PMO modified the contract to enable the prime to perform an additional pre-survey per IOC site. For the remaining 40 FOC sites, the PMO plans to uses ETASS support to conduct the additional surveys instead of using the prime contractor.

Furthermore, the lead MAJCOM (AFGSC) has requested an accelerated site survey schedule in order for sites to assess the facility changes required for Global ASNT early enough so each site can secure the required funding to make necessary site modifications. This issue resulted in increased ETASS workload that was not anticipated and accounted for in the ETASS II RFP.

Additionally, the initial/ current Global ASNT contract requirements require the contractor to support the legacy DIACAP certification process.

Since the Global ASNT contract was awarded in Dec 2013, the program is now required to transition from DIACAP to the new RMF process, requiring implementation of additional IA controls, during Global ASNT production.

Additionally, the program is now required to implement new security overlays (NC3 Overlay, Classified Overlay, Intelligence Overlay) in addition to implementing RMF. These issues resulted in increased ETASS workload that was not anticipated and accounted for in the ETASS II RFP. Increased SE support is also required to support the startup of Global ASNT Inc 2. After the ETASS II RFP was released, the PMO requested an early "new start" approval via an ATR which was approved in late FY15. This enabled the PMO to start program initiation activities, such as early systems engineering, earlier than planned. The accelerated Global ASNT Inc 2 schedule resulted in increased ETASS workload requirement earlier than planned that were not anticipated and accounted for in the ETASS II RFP.

Cursor on Target (CoT), Project ID 628, add Software Engineering support in the option years Software engineering support was previously provided under a Federally Funded Research and Development Center contract. This specific work transitioned to ETASS II after the original baseline was established in late 2013.

Initial Fielding Support (IFS), Project ID 682, add Systems Engineering support in the option years Currently the services are upgrading Link 16 terminals on ground and various aircraft platforms. This upgrade will require extensive training. Additional platforms' that have never had Link 16 on their aircraft will also require training and Systems Engineering support. With the new terminals being installed as well as the current workload, additional support in required.

HNC - Cryptologic and Cyber Systems

Information Assurance Technical Assistance Center (ITAC), Project ID 1531, add Test and Evaluation support in the option years There are several new programs transitioning from acquisition to sustainment including but not limited to VACM, RRK, IFF, CKG and ARC-234M. In addition, numbers of existing COMSEC devices fielded has also increased necessitating additional technical support. ITAC's primary mission is to provide technical support to all AF users of Airborne and

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Ground COMSEC products fielded by the AF. Work load has increased substantially and available resources are no longer sufficient to provide timely and effective support to critical communication systems and users.

Space Modular Common Crypto (SMCC), Project ID 1270, add Logistics, Test, Systems, and Software Engineering, and Technical Specialist support in the option years The SMCC schedule, approach, and requirements changed significantly since the original ETASS II solicitation in 2013.

In 2014, the Program Office awarded three Technology Maturation Risk Reduction studies to obtain input for the SMCC EMD acquisition strategy. The results of all three studies recommended breaking SMCC into two distinct efforts: a Small/Cube Satellite solution and Medium/Large Satellite solution. This approach greatly reduced the risk of meeting the two IOC dates defined in the CDD for Small/Cube and Medium/Large. However, this approach also increased the documentation/technical review workload more than initially anticipated for a single solution, as the breakout will now involve multiple NSA certifications and separate technical design reviews. Additionally, the Program Office sought and received PEO approval to further reduce EMD risk, to preserve ability to meet IOC dates, by conducting additional risk reduction activities centered around modifying existing ground operating equipment (GOE) to prepare for SMCC interoperability testing and developing an AES-256 Crypto Engine Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). These efforts will alleviate the need to develop GOE-like devices and new ASICs during the SMCC EMD phase, but require additional ETASS II staff to successfully implement prior to testing for the actual SMCC development efforts. These requirements were not known in 2013, so the contractor could not have anticipated these changes based on the information provided by the Government at that time. The changes in the Government's acquisition strategy and NSA certification approach necessitate additional ETASS II support.

Air Force Key Management Infrastructure (AF KMI), Project ID 27, add Information Systems Assurance and Logistics support in the option years Between the time that the original requirements were identified for ETASS II and the time that the contract was awarded, the AF KMI Transition Program moved from MS B to MS C and began fielding the system to AF users. This fielding activity is a 6-month process for each AF user receiving the system. Additionally, the program's shift towards spiral software development has resulted in the need for increased engineering support due to the extensive prototyping and testing required. Without additional support the program will unable to meet DoD CIO and NSA mandated fielding requirements.

Bounty Hunter, Project ID 957, add Systems Engineering and Logistics support in the option years Bounty Hunter had only one ETASS position for approximately 3-4 years. The program was fielded as a Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) in 2011. In 2014 a program named RAIDRS was terminated by AFSPC. In 2015 the Bounty Hunter capability was named by AFSPC to become the system to fulfill requirements left vacant by RAIDRS termination and was subsequently named to become a Program of Record (PoR). The amount of work required for Bounty Hunter moving from a QRC to a PoR grew substantially in the last quarter of FY15 and continues on into FY16 and beyond. The requirement for ETASS II support has also grown substantially. The Bounty Hunter Program Management Office (PMO) requires support for technical documentation, testing and procurement and logistics actions. This is why Bounty Hunter has gone from needing one position to needing six ETASS II positions in FY16.

Space COMSEC, Project ID 930, add Systems Engineering, Technical Specialist and Logistics in the option years The program requires additional organic depot support for Space COMSEC customers. Specifically, the additional Space COMSEC Maintenance Technician will repair at the component level recently procured mission data boxes (KGT/ KGR-42s, KGT-777s) and existing ECUs still in the inventory. Additional System Engineering Support will assist in writing technical documents and CDRLs for the next software update to KS-252 and for procurement documents to acquire additional KG-327A.

HNI - C3I Infrastructure

Air Force Network NIPR Gateways (AFNET NIPR GW), Project ID 1858, add Systems/Network Engineering and Project Management support in the option years

Boundary Modernization, Project ID 1849, add Information Assurance and Systems Engineering support in the

Theater Deployable Communications (TDC), Project ID 1856, add Configuration Management support in the option years

Operations Architecture and Engineering Branch, Project ID 1848, add Systems/Network Engineering, Project Management, Information Assurance and Configuration Support in the option years

Air Force Cyberspace Defense (ACD), Air Force Intranet Control Weapon (AFINC), Enclave Control Node (ECN), Project ID 1849, add Systems & Network Engineering and Logistics support in the option years

Base Information Transport Infrastructure (BITI), Project ID 1862, add Logistics support in the option years

Justification:

Own the technical baseline activities.

. Thus, OTB is a high priority initiative to re-establish ownership of the technical baseline whereby the Government and the prime contractor together own the knowledge of the weapon system and both entities work competently and collaboratively together to make proper decisions that achieve successful acquisition outcomes.

Support to this initiative has spawned a number of sub-initiatives within the HNI Division which has resulted in an increased need for ETASS engineering and logistics support. The responsibility for supporting these sub-initiatives has transferred from the systems integrator to the program offices. The following are some of the major sub-initiatives have been established since the ETASS II baseline was first set.

Sub-Initiatives and their Description

AFGW Host Server Virtualization (HSV) Switch: This is in addition to the virtualization host infrastructure at each of the Gateways as the current Virtual hosts have reached capacity. The switches are to increase the 10G vMotion backbone. Scope of work also includes the HSV, Switches and SAN upgrades.

AFGW Management Storage Area Network (MSAN): Modernize/replace the current NetApp storage with an EMC VNX5400 SAN and FC SAN switches.

NIPRNet & SIPRNet Service Delivery Point (SDP): Organic effort with SI - AFINC engineering providing testing and installation oversight

Airborne NW Global Information Grid Interface (ANGI) Pilot: Provide AFNET connectivity, both SIPR and NIPR, to AF Aircraft crews using the Hickam Gateway. There are a number of old sites that are being decommissioned and need to be replaced with modern alternatives. This initiative was driven by contractual requirements for the new AF Tanker that is being built. In which AFINC Engineering provided a AF base simulated environment for testing.

Joint Regional Security Stack (JRSS) SSA: Organic effort with DISA, 26NOS and AFINC PMO

10G CONUS Upgrades - upgrade all CONUS gateways from copper to fiber interconnect : Upgrade the network connectivity for all devices in the gateway to support fiber cabling. Also provide media converters from the DISA connection to the gateways.

MEDCOI Intranet Connection to the AFNET: Provide engineering support and design to allow the Medical Community

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

of Interest to connect to the internet through the current AFNET gateways while providing protection for PII. Ensure connectivity provided security of the Medical data from the AFNET as well as provide the security of the gateway defense-in-depth architecture.

AF Gateway TLS/SSL Interception: Visibility appliance will be installed at each Gateway site to provide a means of decrypting SSL traffic. Traffic will then be delivered to network security devices. Device will be deployed into the gateways, then into the field.

Red Hat Management Server: Install Red Hat Management Server (Satellite) into the IMS which will allow the 26NOS to deploy, manage, update and monitor Red Hat Enterprise Linux systems. Leverage other organic Satellite deployment in the INOSCs into the IMSs to support the current gateways.

Generation 1 Server Replacement: The Generation 1 Server Upgrade is a form, fit, function replacement that supports replacing the existing EOL/EOS Gateway/IMS architecture to maintain the integrity of the current Gateway and IMS capabilities. Scope of work involves utilizing already purchased servers from another program and adding the necessary hardware.

McAfee Email Gateway upgrade: The current McAfee Email Gateways (MEG) located at the IMSs and Gateways are End-of-Support. Work with the PMO, 26NOS and McAfee professional services to upgrade the servers, both software and BIOS, at all 16 gateways and IMSs.

In particular, to successfully execute and support these initiatives, more technical skill sets are required to meet the following OTB goals and support activities set forth below, necessitating the in-sourcing/hiring of highly skilled engineers.

OTB Goals - Deep understanding of system and sub-system designs and architectures; ability to conduct end-to-end performance models of the system combined with a continuous technical effort to update and validate system models using testing and engineering data; ability to continually assess and mitigate system cyber vulnerabilities; ability to understand and actively mitigate technology and system integration risks; quantitative understanding of how related legacy systems or the system being upgraded is used and how it performs operationally (e.g., reliability/availability, key performance metrics, etc.); ability of test designers and planners to competently conduct post-test analysis; ownership and active management of integrated master schedules and, as needed, software schedules; and establishment and maintenance of open interface standards, with the ability of the Government program office to compete block upgrades to the system.

OTB Activities - Capture, quantify and trace changes to program baselines; decompose and baseline existing systems;

quantify the extent to which requirements documentation can be traced to design and test documentation, source code, database schematics, deployment artifacts, and production configurations; assess what systems and code are actually doing vice “intended to do”; reverse engineer and decompile application code and systems; evaluate the quality of systems and software by performing functional, systems and regression testing; and estimate the amount of change and cost incurred; and deliver the requisite OTB documentation.

AFNET Ops Support Branch, Project ID 1867 add Systems/Network Engineering, Information Assurance and Systems Analyst to the Option Years

• The USAF is consolidating its global IT service management processes supported by an enterprise-based implementation of the BMC Remedy ITSM suite. BMC Remedy 2.0 deployment has been transferred to ETASS II due to delays in deployment under the Telos NETCENTS task. This in-turn has increased the engineering resource composition within HNI. Resources with the following skills and competencies are required in order to support this initiative:

• Knowledge of ITSM and the BMC EITSM tool suite including Remedy v 7.1 and 8.1

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

• Capabilities to support the sustainment and integration/upgrade of the Air Force's EITSM on both NIPRNet and SIPRNet

• Experience and capabilities in providing systems engineering, integration, system test & evaluation, training, data, deployment, implementation, and support of the current and upgraded EITSM systems, and implementation of architectural and design improvements

• Ability to analyze, design, and implement mechanisms to integrate with other asset databases as well as facilitate bulk import of assets to include Logical-Multiple installations, Parent-Child, CI-to-CI relationships, and Ownership/Support/Management relationships to ensure appropriate asset access restrictions

HNS - Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T)

FAB-T, Project ID 1858 add Systems Engineering, Test Engineering, and Systems Analyst support in the option years The FAB-T program was successful entering into low rate initial production (LRIP) in late-FY15 for the first two antenna configurations; however, the development efforts for the remaining three antenna configurations are still ongoing.

This concurrency of production and development in the program results in a demand for additional technical support in the areas of System Engineering and Test and evaluation.

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

The exception to Fair Opportunity is IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C). This action is being awarded on a sole source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow on to an order already issued under the ETASS II IDIQ. All IDIQ awardees were provided a fair opportunity to be considered for the Basic Task Order award which this action is modifying. Abacus Technology Corporation is the contractor that was awarded the Basic Task Order. This Task Order is for A&AS support to the AFLCMC/HN Directorate. To conduct a new fair opportunity competition for this additional support would create a gap in service, since there is not enough time to have a new contract vehicle in place prior to the beginning of Option Year 1 (1 SEP 16). The requirement for this task order was put out for solicitation in the Fall of 2013. Due to protests outside of the Government's control, the task order was not awarded until the Fall of 2015.

The ETASS II Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract was awarded on 25 Mar 15. On 22 Apr 15, the first task order for C3I & Networks Directorate was awarded to Abacus Technology. Due to a protest that was ultimately denied, the period of performance started on 1 Sep 15 with a 30 business day transition period from ETASS interim to ETASS II. HN's ETASS II requirements were baselined in the Fall of 2013. Since that time, HN has initiated several new programs and expanded the scope of many of its existing projects. This FOE covers the scope of the growth in requirements since solicitation for option years 1 and 2, in addition to new requirements that have developed after TO award. These new requirements will be captured in an RFP once the FOE is approved, and negotiated as a single action in order to update the option years to accurately reflect the necessary work to be performed prior to exercising.

Additional Costs

1. Award to any other contractor would likely result in substantial duplication of costs to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition

Re-competing the services currently being performed would result in substantial duplication of cost to the

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition. If the Government conducted a new fair opportunity, if a different contractor than the incumbent won the task order, there would be an inefficiency of costs during transition that would result in significant cost impacts to the Government. These costs exist because of the ramp-up time required for a potential new contractor to fully perform the requirements of the PWS in the HN Division.

A detailed breakdown of these costs can be found in Tab 4: Estimate of Additional Costs Memo.

Additionally, there would be significant costs to the Government associated with an un-planned fair opportunity.

These costs include the following: time to develop new requirements, issue the solicitation, perform technical and cost evaluations, award the task order, defend a protest at either the Government Accountability Office or the Court of Federal Claims.

2. Potential Mission Impact of multiple transition periods

The HN requirements were initially supported by the ETASS II contract. Abacus won the HN task order under the ETASS II IDIQ contract. Most importantly, per the AFLCMC/CC 20 Mar 2014 memo, once the PoP on this task order lapses, all A&AS support currently being performed under ETASS II will transition to the EPASS IDIQ which will require an additional transition to the new contractor. If the new work covered by this FOE is competed under ETASS II before moving to EPASS, it is likely that the program offices within HN will have to work through multiple contractor transitions involving multiple contractors within several years. During these transitions, significant Government resources are expended to fully integrate employees into HN's mission. Additionally, changing contractors could require changes in personnel and the costs associated with contractor orientation such as re-badging, training and security clearance validations.

3. Impractical to have two contractors in the Directorate

ETASS II envisioned awarding task orders at the Directorate level ensuring that one contractor would perform the requirements of one Directorate. It is impractical for the Government to carve out the additional work that was not originally competed and award that work under a new task order. If the incumbent contractor did not win the new task order for the additional work, it would be very impractical for two contractors to be working within the same Directorate. The delineation of tasks to be provided by more than one ETASS II contractor within a Directorate would remove any economies and efficiencies that the original HN ETASS II TO awardee could realize by performing all ETASS II Tasks within the Directorate. From a program management perspective, it is unclear how any new work after the award of the task order associated with the incoming work would be apportioned if there were two contractors in the Directorate. This is because the new contractor would be working on the same programs as the incumbent contractor and it would be extremely difficult to identify which contractor is responsible for which portion of the program. Having two contractors working on the same tasks would add a large degree of difficulty to the COR's duties (i.e. working with two (2) Task Managers, completing two (2) different Surveillance and verifying the hours and work completed per contractor invoice, etc). The additional overhead costs associated with having two contractors support one Directorate as opposed to one contractor to the Government would not provide any savings that could be recovered from competing the effort.

4. Inefficient, costly, and a strain on the HN mission to have multiple fair opportunities with in a three year period with the costs unlikely to be recovered through competition

It would be inefficient and costly to have an additional fair opportunity competition between now and the mandated move to EPASS. Given the time periods (as outlined in the paragraph below) historically associated with fair opportunity selections under ETASS II and EPASS, it would be impractical to award the initial HN task order under ETASS II, and immediately begin the process to compete the new HN task order under EPASS.

The HN task order under ETASS II was awarded on 22 April 2015. Since the requirements for this FOE are generally

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

known, it would take approximately 12 months to award under a new fair opportunity. This 12 months allows 3 months to gather requirements and put the RFTOP together, 1 month for solicitation, 3 months for evaluation and task order award, 4 months for protest and re-award, 1 month for phase-in and contract start. Additionally, as discussed above, due to the mandated move to the EPASS contract, HN is scheduled to be competed under the EPASS IDIQ at the end of the ETASS II task order period of performance (Aug 2018). Under the EPASS IDIQ, 26 task orders have been successfully awarded. The average amount of time under these 26 task orders to collect requirements, evaluate offerors, and award the task order is 14 months (this period does not include a potential protest). Since both task orders would likely be protestable, the time period between award of the new task order under ETASS II and the start of the source selection process for the task order under EPASS, is almost eliminated. There are 27 months remaining for the period of performance under ETASS II, assuming the process to re-compete under ETASS II starts on 1 July 2016 that would have contractor performance start on 1 June 2017 (assuming a denial of potential protest). If we add 4 months to account for a potential protest to the 14 month historical period for award of EPASS task orders, requirements collection would need to start 1 Mar 2017, which is three months before contract performance would begin on the interim ETASS II task order.

When the HN task order was awarded, it was envisioned that the contractor would perform a base year with two option years. With the mandated use of EPASS in the near future, an additional fair opportunity in the interim would involve significant, unplanned government costs and potential disruption to the program offices' mission from requirements generation and personnel needed to conduct technical evaluations, to assisting the new contractor with its transition activities. These additional costs are highly unlikely to be recovered as a result of competition under an additional fair opportunity.

(5) Determination by the Contracting Officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Government will obtain certified cost or pricing data from Abacus and perform a comprehensive technical evaluation and cost/price analysis of the submitted proposal. The final contract cost will be negotiated in accordance with procedures in FAR Part 15, which will ensure the cost to the Government is fair and reasonable. The independent government cost estimate for the proposed work outlined in this document is .

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

If the AFLCMC/HN FOE is not approved, the gap in service that is anticipated will have a detrimental effect on the PMO's ability to sustain the C3I&N Directorate. The requested additional personnel needed and new requirements requested for new projects are critical to the successful execution of many critical Air Force programs. Additionally, the majority of these programs directly support current and/or future warfighter needs. The programs outlined within this FOE (see section 3) include many key C3I & Networks Directorate (HN) programs where additional ETASS support is required. Failure to approve this request will adversely affect their ability to deliver war-winning capabilities to USAF and coalition partners on-time and on-cost. Without question ETASS is a vital part of our Directorate's success.

Without additional support from our ETASS contractors, the programs listed above will incur immediate and costly impacts, degrading our ability to support the warfighter.

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

There are 8 ETASS II IDIQ contract holders. As of October 2015 there have been three (3) ETASS II Task Order awards to two (2) different small businesses (Abacus Technology Corp, and Oasis Systems, LLC). For each ETASS II Task Order awarded, all IDIQ holders were provided a fair opportunity to submit offers.

The basic task order was competitively awarded on 22 April 2015 with full performance beginning on 15 October 2015.

Given the recency of this competition, it would be inefficient to compete this new work within the same Directorate.

In addition, the acquisition strategy and the Basic IDIQ state that it is the Government's vision to award task orders at the Directorate level.

AFLCMC/AZS has taken all requisite approaches and maximized industry participation in the ETASS II competitive effort. ETASS II is a total small business set-aside, multiple award IDIQ contract. Per Policy Memo, Guidance on the Mandatory Use of Advisory & Assistance Services (A&AS) Contract Vehicles (supersedes ESC/CC Policy Memo #08-006, 20 Feb 08), dated 30 July 2012, issued by Lieutenant General C.D. Moore II, ETASS II is a mandatory use and centrally managed contract vehicle.

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

The Contracting Officer's signature on the signature page provides evidence that he/she certifies that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

(9) Certification of technical/requirements personnel that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by his/her signature on the signature page, the Program Manager certifies that any supporting data contained herein, which is his/her responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

(10) Determination by the approving official that one of the circumstances in FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i) applies to the order

As evidenced by my signature on the signature page, I hereby determine that the fair opportunity exception checked in block 6 (Page 1) applies.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT CENTER (AFMC)

Hanscom air force base massachusetts

25 May 2016

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

FROM: AFLCMC/AZS

SUBJECT: Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) to Support the Engineering and Technology Acquisition Support Services (ETASS) II Contract Modification (FA8721-15-D- 0009 0002).

1. The below spreadsheet shows the estimated burn rate for each division. The overall IGCE is about and the breakdown is detailed below.

Option Year 1 REA (01 Sep 16 – 31 Aug 17 (12 Months)) Division Labor Travel Total

REA HNA $447,899.51

REA HNC $206,130.08

REA HNI $137,029.58

REA HNS $0

TOTAL

Option Year 1 New Requirements (01 Sep 16 – 31 Aug 17 (12 Months))

HNA $288,000

HNC $93,000

HNI $215,000

HNS $10,000

Option Year 2 REA (01 Sep 17 – 31 Aug 18 (12 Months))

REA HNA $429,629.93

REA HNC $202,544.63

REA HNI $136,125.40

REA HNS $0

Option Year 2 New Requirements (01 Sep 17 – 31 Aug 18 (12 Months))

HNA $288,000

HNC $93,000

HNI $215,000

HNS $10,000

Debit Credit

Absolute Value Net Change

2. Financial Coordination and Approval

Funding is Currently Available: Yes No

If no, please provide a brief explanation:

5/26/2016

X Program Manager Signed by:

Term Definition Example Debit Cost of New Work –Positive number, i.e $1,000,000.00

Credit Descoped Value – Negative number, i.e.

-$200,000.00

Absolute Value

Value of Debit plus positive value of Credit

$1,000,000.00 + $200,000.00 = $1,200,000.00

Net Change Debit reduced by the Credit, i.e. $1,000,000.00 - $200,000.00 = $800,000.00

24 May 2016

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

FROM: AFLCMC/AZS

SUBJECT: Estimate of Additional Costs for re-competing Support of the Engineering Technology Acquisition Support Services (ETASS) II HN Contract (FA8721-15-D-0009 0002).

1. The below spreadsheets details the estimated inefficiencies while the HN task order transitions to a new contractor. The overall estimate of the ineffieciencies and additional Government work is about $2,633,625.66 and the breakdown is detailed below.

Inefficiency Costs

Month/Efficiency Inefficiency of Cost

Avg Mon.

Burn Rate

End Cost of Performance

Month 0 (60% incumbent efficiency) $515,724.80 $1,289,312.67 $1,805,307.47

Month 1 (65% efficiency) $451,259.43 $1,289,312.67 $1,740572.10 Month 2 (70% efficiency) $386,793.80 $1,289,312.67 $1,676,106.47 Month 3 (85% efficiency) $193,396.90 $1,289,312.67 $1,482,709.57

Total $1,547,174.93

The costs in the above table take into account the inefficiency of transitioning to a new contractor.

The average monthly burn rate for the work to be completed under the FOE was extrapolated from the IGCE. Month 0 assumes that during the transition period the incumbent contractor will not be able to work as efficiently while performing phase out activities such as, transferring work to the new contractor, and spinning the new contractor up on recent activities and statuses. The remaining months (1, 2 and 3) take into account the time it takes a new contractor to become fully ramped up and working at 100% efficiency. If the average monthly burn rate is multiplied by the percent efficiency, that will equal the Inefficiency of Cost column. When the Inefficiency of Cost is then added to the Avg Mon. Burn Rate it equals the End Cost of Performance, or what the Government could reasonably pay while the new contractor is transitioning and learning a new program.

This costs in the above table includes the effort to gather requirements by the program office, the core team to manage the fair opportunity (one PM, one PCO, one Buyer, one quarter JA), two PM's from the program office to conduct the technical evaluation, as well as one Coster and half a Pricer to perform the cost realism analysis. Monthly salary includes fringe, overhead, and benefits. PM's, Pricer, Coster and Buyer were estimated to be at the GS-12 equivalent, the PCO was at the GS-13 equivalent and the JA support at the GS-14 equivalent. This cost estimate also assumes that the fair opportunity process can be completed in 11 months which is based off of historical re-competes previously conducted.

Contract Management Costs Labor category Monthly Salary Months Needed Total cost

Additional COR Duties $9,411.00 48 (1/2 Time for

24 months times 4 CORs)

$451,728.00

Indirect PEO Costs $9,411.00 3 $28,233.00

Total $479,961.00

The costs in the above table take into account the additional duties that would be placed on the COR and the indirect costs assoiciated with managing the contract. There would be siginificant work added onto the COR if two contractors were to work in the same program office, i.e.

working with two (2) Task Managers and doing two (2) different Surveillances and verifying the hours and work completed per contractor invoice. Besides this the COR would constantly struggle with deciding which contractor received the incoming work. The indirect PEO costs reflects the time it takes to manage their "health of services" they too need to track all these contracts in CORT, surveillance and report up the chain.

Government Team Costs for un-planned Fair Opportunity Labor category Monthly Salary Months Needed Total cost

Government "Core" Team

PM $9,411.00 11 $103,521

Pricer $9,411.00 5.5 (1/2 Time) $51760.50 Coster $9,411.00 11 $103,521 Buyer $9,411.00 11 $103,521

PCO $11,191.00 11 $123,100.5

JA $13,224.00 2.75 (1/4 Time) $36,366.73

Program Office Support

PM (Evaluator) $9,411.00 4 $37,644

PM (Evaluator) $9,411.00 4 $37,644

PM (Rqmts Generation) $9,411.00 1 $9,411.00

Total $606,489.73

Inefficiencies Costs $1,547,174.93 Government Team Costs $606,489.73

Contract Mgmt. Costs $479,961.00

TOTAL $2,633,625.66

2. If you have any questions, please contact

5/24/2016

X Program Manager, AZS Signed by: