FAR-52.217-8-JA W50S8625PA002 (KO Signed).pdf

FAR Part 6 Justification and Approval for Other than

Full and Open Competition

1. Contracting Activity: Alpena CRTC/AQ, MI ANG

2. Description of Action: The Alpena CRTC/AQ requests approval to utilize the clause identified at FAR 17.208(f), 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, available under W50S8625PA002. Government projects award for 25 September and fiscal year 2025 Operations & Maintenance funds will be used.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, utilities, and quality necessary to provide towing, lifting, laydown, storage, and maintenance support required for three (3) MKVI Patrol Boats. Services shall be performed at Contractor’s facilities.

The period of performance was a base period of four (4) months, and two (2) one-month option periods.

Base Period: 20 May to 19 September 2025 Value: $126,960.12 Option Period 1: 20 September to 19 October 2025 Value: $31,740.03 Option Period 2: 19 October to 20 November 2025 Value: $31,740.03 (Note, this option will not be exercised) FAR Clause 52.217-8 option: 6 Months Value: $84,860.06

4. Authority Cited:

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(2), as implemented by FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(i) and FAR 6.302-2, Unusual and compelling urgency.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: This contract was originally awarded using competitive procedures, with the intent of evaluating the clause at FAR 52.217-8 as part of the original competition. The contract was not expected to extend beyond the initial period of performance. This requirement is for storage and routine maintenance associated with 3 Mark VI Patrol Boats (Hull numbers 1201, 1205, and 1206) that were supposed to be sailed to Michigan from the Contractor’s facility in Newport News, Virginia. Inspection services were separately acquired under a different contract on a sole source basis due to proprietary components. The inspection services were delayed to rapidly changing requirements. During the inspection of the vessels, in September of 2025, issues were discovered that prevented two of the vessels (Hulls 1201 and 1206) from being shipped to Michigan. One of the vessels (Hull 1205) is began sailing to Michigan on 19 September 2025. To make this happen, Hulls 1201 and 1206 were cannibalized for parts to repair Hull 1205 prior to sailing. Hull 1201 is in pieces and is expected to be returned to DLA for disposal by November 2025. Hull 1206 had integral components removed and will be required to be repaired prior to sailing.

Hull 1206 is expected to sail in May of 2026, but will need repairs that will be procured under a different contract.

The purpose of the extension at FAR 52.217-8 is to give the government enough time to either sail the final vessels, dispose of them, or reprocure a longer-term contract.

Since the total period of performance is expected to expire prior to the next sailing season. The original contract included the clause at 52.217-8 for the purpose of being able to extend the contract in case there were issues discovered during inspection. However, due to the delays in the inspection contract, it was not discovered until late September 2025 that these vessels would not be sailing. There is not a reasonable amount of time to re-acquire the services competitively, the intent was to include and evaluate the clause at 52.217-8 and execute if necessary.

Additionally, since the vessels are unable to be moved at this time, only the current contractor can perform the storage services. Due to the urgency of this extension, it is in the best interest of the government to evaluate and exercise the clause at 52.217-8. Reprocuring this requirement on a competitive basis would significantly damage the government as 2 MK VI patrol boats would be left at a contractor’s facility with no contractual arrangement, no physical way to move the vessels unless they are repaired, and not enough time to reprocure the services before the first vessel is sailed on 19 September 2025.

IAW FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(i) and FAR 6.302-2(b):

This authority applies in those situations where-

(1) An unusual and compelling urgency precludes full and open competition; and

(2) Delay in award of a contract would result in serious injury, financial or other, to the Government

Alternatives available to the government were assessed. The first alternative was to reprocure the services competitively. This alternative was time and cost prohibitive. There wasn’t enough time from when the government discovered Hulls 1201 and 1206 would require continued storage to reprocure the requirement. Additionally, had the government reprocured the services, there would be a substantial cost impact in associated with moving the vessels, as Hull 1201 is in pieces awaiting disposition to DLA, and Hull 1206 requires a substantial repair to be able to be put in the water to transfer to another vendor. The government also assessed the alternative of disposing of both remaining vessels to DLA, but this alternative does not meet the mission requirement of having multiple MK VI Patrol Boats for operations training for the Michigan National Guard. The government had already invested costs associated with the storage of the contract, to include costs associated with having the vessels moved from another vendor facility (i.e. towing, lifting and crane fees).

When this requirement was initiated, it was determined to be within the best interest of the government to include the clause at FAR 52.217-8 since there were sufficient unknowns associated with sailing the vessels. The government failed to evaluate the clause at FAR 52.217-8 during the initial competitive solicitation, which now requires the government to justify its use.

The use of the clause at FAR 52.217-8 will gain the government an additional 2 months of service for Hull 1201 until it can be disposed of to DLA, and an additional 6 months of service for Hull 1206 until it can be repaired. The additional 6 months of service will allow the government the ability to assess the condition of the vessels and decide to either repair or dispose of the vessels and allow for a reprocurement of services should they be needed.

Competition may still not have been feasible if there was more time available due to the condition of the remaining vessels. Since one is not currently operational and both were cannibalized for parts, it is unlikely that they can be moved. However, if more time was available, the government may have been able to better determine if a new competitive acquisition was appropriate. Due to the timeframe between when the government realized two of the vessels were unmovable and the end of the period of performance, the use of the clause at FAR 52.217-8 is the best mechanism for continued services.

The intent of the vessels is to move them within the next 6 months. Due to this, it is also not practical for another contractor to fulfil the requirement. It is not anticipated that the requirement will continue to exist following the extension allowed by the clause at FAR 52.217-8, hence the reason it was included in the original solicitation and contract. The services were not originally expected to be required beyond the initial period of performance and is also not expected to be recurring following the completion of the return and sailing of the final two vessels. The costs associated with having another vendor perform the services are significantly greater than having the current vendor continue performance. There would be additional costs associated with lifting and towing the vessels. Having the current contractor perform saves the government approximately $92,311.00; $48,996.00 in lift and towing fees, and $43,315.00 for the difference in monthly storage price for 6 months.

Failure to have these services continued would seriously injure the government. With no mechanism for either moving the vessels and no contractual arrangement for continued services, the government would be in violation of the Antideficiency Act in the amount of approximately $21,160.00 per month until proper appropriations are obligated to the services. Additionally, due to the value of the vessels as a system, failure to properly repair and render the services would also injure the government. If services do not continue, there will be mission failure as the Michigan National Guard would be unable to supply the required warfighter training capabilities that these vessels provide because the only viable option would be to dispose of both vessels, wasting millions of dollars in usable government assets.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: This requirement was originally acquired through competitive acquisition procedures. Market research at the time indicated that three small business vendors in the Newport News and surrounding areas could meet the requirements. The clause at FAR 52.217-8 was included in the original solicitation, but the government failed to evaluate it prior to award.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: None. Due to the time constraints associated with this requirement, it is determined to be a urgent need to fill a lapse between the end of the existing contract and the government’s final disposition of the vessels.

8. Market Research: The original requirement was created following the Michigan National Guard’s acquisition of 3 MK VI Patrol Boars form DLA that were available to be procured by another agency. At the time, the seaworthiness was unknown. Due to this, the government issued a sole source solicitation using FAR 13 procedures to the vendor that had the vessels at their location. The vendor decided not to provide a response to that solicitation, so the government reissued the solicitation on a competitive basis. The market research was updated with the understanding that the vessels would be able to be towed. There were 3 local vendors that could provide the requirement.

9. Sources Sought: Not required for this action. A sources sought is required with this J&A only when the authority cited is FAR 6.302-1, which is not applicable to this action.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History

(1) Existing Contract Number is W50S8625PA002, which ends 29 September 2025.

(2) The original contract was competed as a total small business set aside. The government received 4 quotes in response to the solicitation.

(3) Due to the complexity of the MK VI vessels, the requirements and contracts used to support these vessels are also of increased complexity and the services have been rapidly changing. The government could not have anticipated the need for this urgent requirement until it was already emergent.

11. Technical/Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

BRIAN C. WYRZYKOWSKI, Lt Col, MIANG Chief of Staff, Alpena CRTC

12. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

In accordance with FAR 37.111 Extension of Services, the extension will be issued at the current rates specified in the contract. These rates were determined to be fair and reasonable at the time of award based on adequate price competition.

TIMOTHY D. FRASIER, MSgt, MIANG Contracting Officer

13. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

TIMOTHY D. FRASIER, MSgt, MIANG Contracting Officer