FR026_LSJ_-_For_Public_Release.pdf

Limited Source Justification (LSJ) Multiple Award Schedule Program

Logical Follow-On to a Federal Supply Schedule Contract # GS-23F-9755H / Task Order # HSCG23-09-F-FR026

Justification for Using FAR Clause 52.217-8 to Extend Services By Up To Six Months

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

Justification for Using FAR Clause 52.217-8 to Extend Services By Up To Six Months

This acquisition is conducted under the authority of Section 201 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 501) Multiple Award Schedule Program FAR 8.401 and is justified by the following facts and rationale required under FAR 8.405-6(a)(C) as follows:

(1) Agency and Contracting Activity.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), United States Coast Guard (USCG) Headquarters, Office of Contract Operations (CG-9125), Formal Contracts Division V, proposed to extend a competitively-awarded contract on the basis of other than full and open competition.

(2) Nature and/or Description of the Action Being Approved.

The USCG has a requirement on a limited source basis for continued systems engineering, project management, and enterprise IT solution support services in support of the Fast Response Cutter (FRC) Program Office. The USCG anticipates an extension of services to:

Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) 8283 Greensboro Drive McLean VA 22102-3838

This LSJ is initiated to request an extension of the current requirement and address the guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). In GAO case B-401472, GAO held that in order for the FAR clause 52.217-8 to be used, it must have been included in the initial price evaluation or it is functionally an unpriced option. If FAR clause 52.217-8 was not included in the initial price evaluation, the agency must justify the use of noncompetitive procurement before exercising the unevaluated option.

The proposed action is an extension to an existing Time-and-Materials (T&M) contract. The estimated cost of the action is based upon using the current BAH Option Period 4 labor rates for an additional five months and ten days. The funds used for this action will be Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 Acquisition, Construction, and Improvement (AC&I) funds, which are valid for obligation until FY 2017.

(3) Description of Supplies / Services The current task order was awarded on 21 JAN 2009 with a one year base period, four one-year option periods, and the six-month option clause (52.217-8) was included in the basic contract. The final one-year option period, Option Period 4, began on 25 FEB 2013 and will expire on 24 FEB 2014.

The planned extension award will provide non-inherently governmental support for the Fast Response Cutter (FRC) project office with documentation and record management, correspondence review and tracking, and meeting coordination for project office personnel. The Contractor organizes and tracks both electronic and hard copy versions of FRC project documentation and Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) deliverables. Electronic versions are maintained in the CG-93 Integrated Digital Environment (IDE). The Contractor also assists in the preparation of acquisition documents and briefs, along with reviewing acquisition documentation and correspondence for completeness and formatting, providing input to Government personnel prior to routing, and tracking FRC project documentation and correspondence in the routing process. Additionally, the Contractor coordinates and schedules meetings for the project staff with Coast Guard technical authorities, support personnel, Justification for Using FAR Clause 52.217-8 to Extend Services By Up To Six Months and senior leadership. All work currently is, and will continue to be performed at USCG Headquarters located in Washington DC.

The total funded amount of the current one-year option period (Option Period 4) is $XXX. Although a six month extension is allowed in accordance with the Option to Extend Services Clause, FAR 52.217-8, the intent is to extend the period of performance up to five months and ten days. This will be executed by exercising the option to extend services up to two times. The initial extension will be two months based on milestones for a follow-on competitive award. The estimated value of the initial option exercise will be $XXX based on the current contract rates for a period of two months. If the follow-on award is protested to GAO, the option to extend services will be required again to allow for a continuation of services for an additional 100 days until a decision is reached. This 2nd exercise of the option, if required, will be $XXX based on current contract rates.

Based on this, the maximum planned value of the extension (and thus of this LSJ) is $XXX, which is 44.4% of the one-year $XXX figure.

(4) Identification of Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition.

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 8.405-6. This acquisition is being conducted under the authority of the Multiple Award Program (8.401), as implemented by FAR Subpart 8.405(a)(1)(i)(C), which justifies limiting sources in the interest of economy and efficiency when the new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures and the original order or BPA was not previously issued under sole-source or limited-sources procedures. In this case the work is a logical follow-on to the current effort and the original order was issued on a competitive federal supply schedule.

(5) Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the anticipated order represents the best value consistent with 8.404(d).

FAR 52.217-8 was included in the original solicitation for the award of Task Order HSCG23-09-F- FR026, but the extension price was not evaluated as part of the award decision. However, the price extension is at the same rates previously found fair and reasonable under the GSA schedule at award.

The Contracting Officer determines that issuing an extension of the current task order under FAR 52.217-8 to continue this effort represents the best value and will result in the lowest overall cost alternative considering price and administrative costs to meet the Government’s needs. The GSA has already negotiated fair and reasonable rates under the schedule contract.

(6) Description of Conducted Market Research.

Market surveys are continuously conducted to identify new sources of services necessary to support Coast Guard System Acquisitions. Due to the short time-frame required to perform this extension, the inclusion of FAR clause 52.217-8, and in the interest of economy and efficiency, abbreviated market research was conducted in support of this specific action in February. Prior to the existing award being made, the USCG Contracting Officer examined the prices offered by various GSA Schedule holders and competed the solicitation among those holders.

Additionally, to ensure that the current contract rates are fair and reasonable, the USCG Contracting Officer compared BAH’s contract rates to the rates of other contractors on the competitively awarded GSA Mission Oriented Business Integrated Services (MOBIS) schedules. The comparison showed that BAH’s current contract rates are comparable to BAH’s MOBIS rates, along with the rates of other MOBIS contractors.

(7) Any other Facts Supporting the Use of Other Than Full and Open Competition.

The current task order expires on 24 FEB 2014. USCG has begun work on a solicitation to award a new replacement task order. There is a reasonable chance that this new task order will not be awarded by 24 FEB 2014. The delay is due to several unforeseeable causes:

(1) Market research for the follow-on took longer than expected due to substantial interest in the

Request for Information (RFI), leading a high amount of RFI responses to review and a reconsideration of the projected contract type, which was changed from Time-and-Materials (T&M) to Firm-Fixed Price (FFP).

(2) The volume of feedback from the RFI responses lead to an adjustment in the statement of work (which became a Performance Work Statement or PWS) and the creation of a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan or QASP.

(3) The RFI responses and DHS regulatory updates during the pre-solicitation process lead to the Acquisition Plan (AP) being recreated and resubmitted for approval through the appropriate channels.

(4) Additionally, unforeseen issues related to the FRC production and other support service contracts diverted necessary resources of the Project Management Office away from the follow-on task order.

As explained in FAR Part 37.111, “Extension of Services”, “in order to avoid negotiation of short extensions to existing contracts, the contracting officer may include an option clause [FAR clause 52.217-8] in solicitations and contracts which will enable the [USCG] to require continued performance of any services within the limits and rates specified in the contract.”

The USCG FRC project is a multi-year Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Level 1 investment and a USCG Major Acquisition to replace the aging ISLAND class patrol boats. The FRC project utilizes a two phased production contract. The Phase I contract was awarded in 2008 to Bollinger Shipyards Lockport, LLC, and includes the design and construction of the lead FRC with options for up to 30 total cutters. The Phase II contract is expected to be awarded in FY15 for the acquisition of the remaining hulls (up to a total fleet size of 58). After successful completion of Acquisition Decision Event 3 (ADE3) in the 4th quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, the project transitioned from low rate initial production (LRIP) to full rate production.

The incumbent contractor provides crucial support in maintaining the electronic database used frequently by government personnel, assisting in document reviews, and providing coordination and tracking functions. Performance of these tasks is vital to the current FRC Phase I production, deployment and support, and execution of the phase II contract award. If the replacement task order is not awarded by the end of February 2014, and the extension is not awarded the resulting service gap will impact the project office’s ability to generate, review, and approve FRC II preliminary acquisition documents. This in turn would impact the reprocurement effort which plans to release a draft RFP to industry by May 2014. A break in these services will also impact delivery and deployment of Phase I Cutters which are required to perform the USCG’s mission.

(8) A Statement of the Actions, if Any, the Agency May Take to Remove or Overcome Any Barriers to Competition Before Any Subsequent Acquisition for Supplies or Services Required.

The USCG has begun work on a solicitation to award a new replacement task order. This replacement will be competed under the Technical, Acquisition, and Business Support Services (TABSS) Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) vehicle, in line with the requirements of DHS Directive 060-01, which mandates that all DHS components must use DHS Strategic Sourcing vehicles (like TABSS) whenever possible.

The full replacement task order for four years of service will be awarded on TABSS as soon as possible and USCG anticipates an award of this replacement task order before the extension expires.

Justification for Using FAR Clause 52.217-8 to Extend Services By Up To Six Months

The six-month extension will only be used to prevent a break in service and will be used only to the extent needed before the replacement task order can be awarded.

(Remainder of this page intentionally left blank)

(12) Contracting Officer’s Certification

I certify that this sole source justification supporting the recommended use of other than full and open competition is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date Contracting Officer (CG-9125)

(13) Technical/Requirements Personnel Certification I certify that this requirement meets the government’s minimum need and that the supporting data, which forms a basis for the justification, is complete and accurate.

FRC Project Manager (CG-9324)

(14) Legal Review and Concurrence I have reviewed this justification and deemed it legally sufficient.

Attorney Adviser (CG-0949)

(15) Chief of the Contracting Office I have reviewed this justification and recommend approval.

Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) (CG-912)

(16) Approving Official.

I have reviewed this justification and hereby approve it.

USCG Headquarters Procuring Activity Competition Advocate (CG-9131)