HQ0034-11-A-0001-0006_LSJ_for_DASD_SE__17_Nov_2015_redacted.pdf

4. AUTHORITY AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE: [FAR 8.405-6 (c)(2)(iv)]

DAC is currently, as defined by FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B), the “Only one source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized”. DAC has the unique knowledge and background working with DASD(SE) operations that are conducted on a daily basis, has the required staff, the specific technical expertise, and TS/SCI eligible clearances. Only continued, uninterrupted support from the incumbent contractor after 30 November 2015 can prevent a disruption to the current studies, projects, and budget formulation.

Ongoing DASD(SE) projects risk delay or unsuccessful completion without the technical support offered by the incumbent contractor personnel. The contractor has supported DASD(SE) since the current class of BPAs was awarded in 2010 and has the institutional knowledge and technical qualifications to continue support to DASD(SE) operations to meet critical schedule milestones.

Ongoing efforts, such as the Defense Acquisition Guidebook and Better Buying Power guidance, require expertise derived from lessons learned, industrial interaction, and knowledge of unique requirements and emerging technologies. If DASD(SE) support is suspended or if the support is provided by a contractor without the institutional knowledge and technical qualifications of the incumbent contractor it is expected that DASD(SE) guidance would be delayed. Delayed guidance delays adoption of systems engineering methodologies, delays sharing information that can prevent cost overruns, increases developmental and operational risks to each major program, and increases risk that warfighter requirements are incorrectly translated into DoD systems.

Acquisition planning for the new DASD(SE) requirement began in 2014 with a projected award of July 2015. Delays have occurred in the process of gathering information for the new descriptions of the work. The delays are the result of DASD(SE) work restructuring efforts and the complexities of changing to a cost type contract from the previous firm fixed contract.

Handling the complications of a cost type contract and restructuring the work packages significantly delayed completion of the revised PWS. A draft RFP was posted to FedBizOps on October 8, 2015 and industry responses received through October 23, 2105 have prompted RFP revisions.

Additionally, a four month extension should provide sufficient time to allow for the open market competition of the updated DASD(SE) requirement since DASD(SE) requires a cost plus fixed fee contract and no strategic sourcing vehicles deemed suitable or available at this time. WHS issued contract vehicles for fixed-price contracts and there is insufficient time to issue an order against OASIS. AD Acquisition Policy paragraph 7.102-90 (S-90) Policy – Predictive Milestone Tool (PMT) applies to the pending procurement of services because the estimated value is between the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and $100,000,000. The PMT shows that March 2016 is the earliest that an award can be made competitively.

5. REPRESENTATION OF THE BEST VALUE: [FAR 8.405-6 (c) (2) (v)]

The Contracting Officer will ensure that the final negotiated price is fair and reasonable in accordance with the techniques described in FAR 8.404(d), FAR I 5.404-l, and DPAP Deviation 2014-O00I 1 dated March 13, 2014.

6. DESCRIPTION OF MARKET RESEARCH: FAR 8.405-6 (c)

A Sources Sought notice was posted to FedBizOps on May 12, 2015, requesting responses no later than May 27, 2015. Five capability statements from companies listed in the chart below.

The three large businesses were able to meet the requirements of the PWS.

A listing of firms holding contracts under the GSA PES Schedule 871, SIN 871-3 System design, Engineering and Integration was generated as this SIN covers the work for SE. The list contains 559 contractors. A number of contractors that possibly could perform the work were identified by the Contracting Officer using the technique in FAR 10.002(b)(2)(i) and they are listed in the table below The NAICS code that represents the majority of the work for SE is 541330 Engineering Services. All GSA schedules listed below were awarded under the NAICS code 541330.

The following companies were identified by either submitting a capability statement or via search on GSA.

Vendor Name SIN/GSA Schedule

CAGE Business Size Source

Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.

SIN 871-3/

GS-23F-

0025K

17038 Large Submitted Capability Statement

Boeing Service Company

GS-23F-

0183K

54669 Large GSA Search

Lockheed Martin Services Inc

GS-23F-

0113N

78TG1/3JYS2 Large GSA Search

Modern Technology Solutions

GS-23F-

0033L

0X988 Large GSA Search

Raytheon Technical Services

GS-23F-

0263K

8Z992 Large GSA Search

Decisive Analytics

GS-23F-

0382K

06CT8 Large Submitted

Statement

Engility Corporation

N/A 02NP8 Large Submitted Capability Statement

Chitra Productions

GS-10F-

098BA

57QP4 8(a), WOSB, SDB Submitted

American Systems Corporation

GS-00F-

089CA

61443 Other than small business

GSA Search

Millennium Engineering & Integration Company

PES (SINs 1,2,3,4 and 6);

OASIS SB

Pools 4, 5B, and 6

1B5V4 Veteran Owned Small Business

Submitted

After review of all capabilities, the large firms were determined to have the knowledge to do the work required. Chitra Productions provided enough detail to show they could do the work, but Millennium did not provide enough detail to make a final determination. Based upon this review it was determined that this requirement cannot be specifically set aside for small business. The two small businesses depend heavily on recruiting existing personnel from the current contracts which would cause senior experts (whom the contract relies on) to loss benefits which would increase direct labor costs.

7. ANY SUPPORTING FACTS: [FAR 8.405-6 (c) (2) (vii)]

Alternate BPA(s) were researched for SE, but the specific technical expertise, TS/SCI eligible clearances, and access to intelligence systems and networks exceed standard classifications. A disruption in services would cause serious injury to DASD(SE)’s program with significant negative impact to matters of national security for the Department of Defense. This drop in service would be avoided by awarding a four month contract extension to American Systems Corporation. A disruption in services would be costly and unmanageable.

8. ACTIONS TAKEN TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO COMPETITION: [FAR 8.405-6 (c)

(2) (viii)]

Based on the market research that has been completed the solicitation for the new requirements will be unrestricted full and open competition. The government expects there to be adequate competition for this acquisition, as shown by the market research results discussed above.

Requirements have been written to maximize competition. The Contracting Activity plans to compete the DASD(SE) support requirement as a full and open requirement that will increase competition