JA Rate Case Ft. Liberty_KO - FINAL_Redacted.pdf

Version – March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Sole Source Justification

FAR 6.302-3 Expert Services

1. Contracting Activity: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Huntsville Center, RG300, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898

2. Description of Action: The Department of Defense (DOD), specifically for Fort Liberty, North Carolina requests a new firm fixed price contract with Exeter Associates. The Government projects award for May 2024 and fiscal year 2024, using Operations and Maintenance funds with

PR&C .

3. Description of Supplies/Services: On January 31, 2024, Duke Energy Progress, LLC (DEP or

Company), filed an application with the State of North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC or

Commission), NCUC Docket No. E-100 Sub-190, requesting approval of Company’s proposed updated Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The Company supplies retail electric service to approximately 1.5 million customers in North Carolina, including service to Fort Liberty and other military installations. On January 17, 2024, the Commission issued its scheduling order for the proceeding.

This rate intervention is to ensure fair and equitable charges for the Department of Defense

(DOD), specifically for Fort Liberty that are located within the Company's service territory.

Services shall provide expert witness services and analytical evaluation and recommendations on

DEP’s proposed IRP and settlement discussions to the Commercial Utilities Program (CUP)

Program and Project Managers, the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), and to the

USALSA-ELD staff in upcoming proceedings, hearings, and negotiations related to the

Company’s January 31, 2024, filing with the Commission.

The IRP analysis shall include an assessment of the Company’s proposed additional capacity and energy storage resources provided for in the resource model based on the utility’s data and utility consultant/expert analyst services. The Contractor shall provide additional utility rate and risk analysis as needed. The Contractor may be required to travel to North Carolina to interview stakeholders as deemed necessary by the Government to provide expert witness testimony at hearings. The Contractor shall prepare a written report of recommendations regarding corresponding positions the Government should take in the Company’s rate filing proceeding.

The Contractor shall review the pertinent documents filed with the Commission, provide technical assistance and guidance, prepare cross-examination questions for DOD/FEA counsel, prepare discovery requests, and provide testimony or comments, both written and oral, to the Commission to assist DOD/FEA on the potential impact of the proceeding and rulings as it pertains to these filings. The Contractor shall review DOD briefs, position papers, and goals.

Period of Performance: 52 weeks after receipt of order (ARO).

Version – March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Total Value: $

4. Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3) or 41 U.S.C.3304(a)(3), as implemented by FAR

6.302-3, Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3) The head of an agency may use procedures other than competitive procedures only when it is necessary to award the contract to a particular source or sources in order to procure the services of an expert for use, in any litigation or dispute (including any reasonably foreseeable litigation or dispute) involving the Federal

Government, in any trial, hearing, or proceeding before any court, administrative tribunal, or agency, or to procure the services of an expert or neutral for use in any part of an alternative dispute resolution or negotiated rulemaking process, whether or not the expert is expected to testify.

41 U.S.C.3304(a)(3) further allows agencies to award sole source actions to procure the services of an expert for use, in any litigation or dispute (including any reasonably foreseeable litigation or dispute) involving the Federal Government, in any trial, hearing, or proceeding before a court, administrative tribunal, or agency, whether or not the expert is expected to testify; or to procure the services of an expert or neutral for use in any part of an alternative dispute resolution or negotiated rulemaking process, whether or not the expert is expected to testify;

As described in FAR 6.302-3(b)(1)(iii), full and open competition need not be provided for when it is necessary to award the contract to a particular source or sources to acquire the services of an expert or neutral person for any current or anticipated litigation or dispute.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The Government has selected Exeter because its consultants have superior expertise and experience for these unique issues when compared to the other firms considered. Exeter has unique knowledge of Duke’s electric generation infrastructure and the potential costs associated with expanding that infrastructure as proposed in the pending IRP proceeding.

Exeter is also familiar with the details of Commission procedures and has previously assisted

Army with settlement negotiations between the Company, Commission staff, and other regular intervenors in Duke Energy Progress cases. Exeter is familiar with the negotiation positions of

Duke and Commission staff as Exeter has previously participated in settlement negotiations involving Duke.

Further, the Commission has already reviewed Exeter’s expert testimony in the past, it would be useful for the Army to maintain continuity of representation in this new case. Switching experts creates a risk. Exeter has already presented credible expert testimony to the Commission that was accepted as correct and persuasive. Bringing in new experts presents a risk, as the

Commissioners may not find new experts as credible or qualified. And given Exeter’s familiarity with North Carolina Commission procedures, with Duke’s operations, and with Fort Liberty’s requirements, the Army will be better served by using Exeter in this matter instead of hiring a new expert who is not familiar with these matters.

In accordance with FAR 5.202(a)(14), this action will not be synopsized.