JEFO MEP_Leidos_ Final_Redacted.pdf

Justification & Approval for Other Than Full and Open Competition Template v3.7 (Oct 2025)

This requirement is for the recapitalization and installation of MEP systems to support established NII operations at designated ports of entry. Leidos possesses extensive experience operating within port environments, including a demonstrated understanding of the unique construction challenges, operational constraints, and regulatory requirements inherent to these locations. This familiarity ensures Leidos can efficiently address unforeseen issues that may arise during the installation and upgrade process, thereby minimizing risk to project execution.

Additionally, Leidos has established strong working relationships with key port personnel and points of contact, which are critical for effective coordination and execution of the required tasks. These relationships facilitate rapid problem-solving and streamlined communication, both of which are essential for maintaining operational continuity during construction activities.

CBP has agreed to install additional systems at these ports of entry under the WFTC Act.

To maximize efficiency and cost savings, CBP seeks to execute these installations concurrently with Leidos’ ongoing construction activities at the affected sites. Leidos is currently mobilized at these ports and fully integrated into the existing operational environment. Engaging a new contractor at this juncture would necessitate a substantial transfer of institutional knowledge, establishment of new working relationships, and familiarization with the port environment and existing systems. This would result in significant delays, increased costs, and heightened risk to the successful and timely completion of the project.

No other contractor possesses the unique combination of qualifications, proprietary knowledge of the existing systems, and established relationships with port personnel required to fulfill the agency’s requirements within the required timeline. Attempting to compete this requirement would jeopardize CBP’s ability to meet critical operational and legislative deadlines, and could disrupt ongoing port operations.

For these reasons, Leidos is the only responsible source capable of meeting the agency’s requirements efficiently and effectively. Full and open competition is not feasible for this procurement, as no other contractor can provide the necessary NII MEP systems and associated services without compromising operational continuity, schedule, or cost.

(b) Details covering what events lead to the situation requiring use of other than full and open competition procedures including whether any portion of the work can be segregated to allow for competition;

The requirement to recapitalize and upgrade existing NII MEP systems at designated port locations necessitates the use of other than full and open competition procedures. Leidos is already present at these ports or is scheduled to be onsite under existing contracts. They have completed detailed site surveys and system designs for the contracted NII MEP systems, giving them a distinct operational advantage. Leidos’ specialized knowledge of the specific port environments, including land requirements, infrastructure, and logistical, enables them to efficiently plan and execute system installations. Their familiarity with specific locations and integration needs ensures that any new NII MEP systems can be installed with minimal disruption.

Importantly, any current NII MEP systems are proprietary to Leidos. Introducing a new vendor at this time would not be feasible due to significant system compatibility and integration risks. A different vendor would face challenges interfacing with Leidos’ proprietary technology, potentially resulting in incompatibility with existing infrastructure and operational systems. This would also require additional training for CBP personnel, further delaying deployment and increasing costs.

Leidos’ ongoing engagement at these ports means they have established relationships with port authorities and key points of contact, facilitating efficient coordination and timely execution of required tasks. Their comprehensive understanding of the existing systems and site-specific operational requirements is critical to minimizing operational risks and ensuring continuity. Bringing in a new vendor at this stage would require CBP to start from ground zero, losing valuable time to transfer operational knowledge, familiarize the vendor with the systems and port environment, and establish new working relationships. This would likely result in significant project delays, increased costs, and potential disruption to mission-critical operations, jeopardizing CBP’s ability to meet the WFTC Act timeline for system deployment.

After careful review, it has been determined that no portion of the work can be reasonably segregated to allow for competition. The required services are highly integrated with ongoing projects and existing site conditions. Attempting to divide the work among multiple vendors would introduce significant coordination challenges, increased risk of incompatibility, and potential impacts to operational timelines. The integration of new systems with existing proprietary infrastructure and ongoing construction activities requires a single, qualified contractor with site-specific expertise.

Segregating the work would create inefficiencies, increase the risk of delays, and compromise the success of the project and the agency’s mission objectives.

Therefore, the entirety of the requirement must be performed by Leidos to ensure seamless execution, operational continuity, and mission success, while minimizing risks to system compatibility, integration, and training.

1) Engaging a New Contractor Through Competitive Procurement:

This alternative was deemed impractical due to the proprietary nature of the existing systems and the unique expertise required to perform the recapitalization and upgrades. A new contractor would lack detailed knowledge of the system’s design, integration, and functionality, resulting in significant risks of incompatibility, inefficiencies, and delays.

Additionally, the time and resources required to transfer knowledge and familiarize a new contractor with the port environment and operational requirements would jeopardize the ability to meet the required timeline and increase costs unnecessarily.

2) Segregating Portions of the Work for Competition:

quantities and of a satisfactory quantity (Section is required to be completed when the J&A includes the exception listed under FAR 25.103(b)(2) or FAR 25.202(a)(2)).

Not applicable.

7. Description of Efforts Made to Ensure that Offers are Solicited from as Many Potential Sources as is Practicable.

(a) If an announcement has already been made in SAM.gov, provide the date of publication;

An announcement was not made in SAM.gov for this specific task order because the requirement is being fulfilled under an existing multiple-award IDIQ contract. The original IDIQ contract was competitively awarded on March 1, 2021, to three vendors— Leidos, Rapiscan, and Smiths Detection—using full and open competition. Subsequent delivery orders under the IDIQ are issued in accordance with Fair Opportunity procedures as outlined in FAR 16.506(b) (FAR Class Deviation 26-04).

(b) If an announcement is being planned for posting in SAM.gov, provide the estimated date of publication.

No new announcement is planned for publication in SAM.gov for this delivery order, as it falls under the scope of the existing IDIQ contract.

(c) If an announcement will be published, identify the applicable exception under FAR 5.302.

An exception to publicizing this requirement applies under FAR 5.202(a)(6), which exempts actions under an existing indefinite-delivery contract that was previously awarded through full and open competition. The original IDIQ contract was publicly announced and competed, ensuring that offers were solicited from as many potential sources as practicable at that time.

8. Determination by the Contracting Officer that the Anticipated Cost to the Government will be Fair and Reasonable.

The proposed task order is being issued under the existing IDIQ contract, which was competitively awarded on March 1, 2021, to three vendors—Leidos, Rapiscan, and Smiths Detection—using full and open competition. The pricing structure established under the IDIQ contract was determined to be fair and reasonable at the time of award. The proposed task order pricing aligns with the rates and terms negotiated under the IDIQ contract.

Additionally, the Contracting Officer will review and evaluate the cost breakdown for the task order as provided by the contractor, including unit prices, labor rates, and material costs, and determined if the proposed pricing is reasonable given the scope of work, technical complexity, and operational requirements.

9. Description of Market Research.

(a) Describe the market research techniques utilized, the specific results of the market research, the date when the market research was conducted, and how the market research was used by the contracting officer to determine price reasonableness.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) Program Management Office (PMO) conducted extensive market research to determine the IDIQ award in accordance with FAR Part 10. The techniques utilized included:

• Internet Research: CBP conducted searches to identify vendors capable of delivering Multi-Energy Portal (MEP) systems that meet agency requirements.

• Historical Contract Data: CBP reviewed past contract awards for similar systems, including the MEP and Low Energy Portal (LEP) systems, to develop an Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE).

• Technology Demonstrations: Vendors participated in demonstrations at various locations, including Rapiscan/AS&E (World Trade Bridge), Leidos (Veterans Bridge), and L3 (Savannah Seaport).

• Draft Requests for Proposals (RFPs): CBP issued two Draft RFPs in FY 2017 and FY 2020 to gauge vendor interest and capability. The FY 2020 presolicitation notice (NII-MEP-051219 DAR) resulted in responses from four large vendors:

Leidos, Rapiscan/AS&E, Smiths Detection, and L3.

• Follow-Up Survey: A follow-up survey conducted in April 2020 identified three vendors—Rapiscan, Leidos, and L3—offering systems that could be reasonably modified to meet CBP’s requirements.

The results of the market research revealed that while no vendor solution met all requirements as-is, reputable firms could deliver production-ready systems with modifications. CBP identified three viable vendors (Leidos, Rapiscan, and Smiths Detection) capable of fulfilling the requirements, and the initial IDIQ contract was competitively awarded to these vendors on March 1, 2021. The systems procured under the original IDIQ, as a result of this market research, have met the functional requirements of CBP.

(b) Describe the market research results that support the determination that the items are nonavailable (Section is required to be completed when the J&A includes the exception listed under FAR 25.103(b)(2) or FAR 25.202(a)(2)).

This section is not applicable, as the procurement complies with the Buy American statute and no exception under FAR 25.103(b)(2) or FAR 25.202(a)(2) is being requested. Market research confirmed that sufficient domestic sources are available to meet CBP’s requirements.

(c) If market research was not conducted, a reason for its absence must be cited here.

Not Applicable.

This task order is a follow-on action under the legacy IDIQ contract, and transitioning to a new contractor outside of the IDIQ would result in significant duplicated costs. These costs include:

• Re-engineering Costs: Developing new systems to meet CBP’s specifications,

• Integration Costs: Re-integrating new systems with existing infrastructure at Ports of Entry (POEs), .

• Training Costs: Retraining CBP personnel to operate and maintain new systems,

• Operational Downtime: Delays in deployment and operational readiness, resulting in potential mission impacts and increased risks at POEs.

These estimates are based on historical data from similar acquisitions and the costs associated with transitioning to a new contractor. By issuing this task order under the legacy IDIQ, CBP avoids these duplicated costs and ensures continuity of operations.

(d) For a proposed contract subject to the restrictions of FAR 6.103-2(c) (FAR Class Deviation 25-11) or HSAR 3006.103-2(c)(70) (HSAR Class Deviation 25-01) and where FAR 6.103-2 (FAR Class Deviation 25-11) is cited as the authority, describe the exceptional circumstances allowing for an award for a period of performance in excess of the one-year limitation (applicable to all federal agencies) or the DHS-specific statutory 150-day limitation

This acquisition is not subject to the restrictions of FAR 6.103-2(c) (FAR Class Deviation 25-11) or HSAR 3006.103-2(c)(70) (HSAR Class Deviation 25-01) for unusual and compelling urgency. As this task order is being issued under the IDIQ contract, the period of performance aligns with the terms and conditions of the IDIQ, and no exceptional circumstances requiring an extension apply.

11. A Listing of the Sources, if Any That Expressed, in Writing, an Interest in the Acquisition.

Not Applicable. This task order is being issued under the MEP IDIQ contract, which was competitively awarded on March 1, 2021, to three vendors: Leidos, Rapiscan, and Smiths Detection. As this acquisition falls under the scope of the existing IDIQ, no additional sources were solicited or requested to express interest in writing.

12. 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.

(a) Will the Government revise overly technical specifications, acquire data rights, etc?

This task order is being issued under the MEP IDIQ contract, which was competitively awarded on March 1, 2021, to three vendors: Leidos, Rapiscan, and Smiths Detection. The IDIQ structure was designed to promote competition among the awardees for subsequent delivery orders under Fair Opportunity procedures, ensuring that barriers to competition are minimized within the scope of the IDIQ.

For future acquisitions beyond the scope of the current IDIQ, CBP will take the following actions to increase competition:

• Market Research: CBP will conduct updated market research to identify additional vendors capable of meeting the agency’s requirements for Multi-Energy Portal (MEP) systems, including assessing emerging technologies and solutions that may expand the pool of qualified sources.

• Specification Review: CBP will review and revise overly technical specifications, if applicable, to ensure that requirements are not unnecessarily restrictive and allow for broader vendor participation.

• Data Rights Acquisition: CBP will evaluate whether acquiring data rights or technical documentation from the current vendors would enable other contractors to compete for future requirements without compromising system performance or operational continuity.

• Small Business Outreach: CBP will continue to engage with the Small Business Office to explore opportunities for small business participation, including subcontracting plans and partnerships with larger vendors.

The IDIQ contract remains an effective mechanism for promoting competition among the awarded vendors, and CBP will continue to leverage this structure to meet emergent and future needs while exploring ways to enhance competition for subsequent acquisitions.

(Remainder of this page left blank intentionally)