JFEFO.pdf

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity

Requisition No. ZEROREQ-OCIO-19-0203

1. Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity”: This is a Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity under a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) multiple award contract for Maintenance, Operation, and Modernization Support of Legacy Systems (“MOM FA2”).

2. Nature and/or description of the action being approved.

The action to be approved is a noncompetitive modification to Leidos Innovations, Corp.

(Leidos) MOM FA2 Contract No. NRC-HQ-11-C-33-0060, Task Order No. NRC-HQ-12-T- 42-0015 to add an option year for the period of 9/26/2019 through 9/25/2020.

A description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

Under the task order, Leidos is currently supporting NRO Enterprise Project Management, eRAI, CIPIM, CRC, Voices, iTravel, Contract Database and Business Intelligence. This is a non-personnel services contract to provide expert-level technical support for maintenance, operations, and support activities for Microsoft SharePoint platforms currently deployed or being considered for deployment in the NRC environment. These systems operate in test, development, and production environments.

The total estimated cost for the additional one-year option period (see included IGCE) on the task order is $1,949,005.76 which is $1,063,803.79 above total current ceiling of $14,843,895.99.

The estimated value of the additional one-year period is $1,200,000.00, which would increase the task order ceiling from $14,843,895.99 to $16,043,895.99.

3. Identification of the exception to fair opportunity (see 16.505(b)(2)) and the supporting rationale, including a demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the exception cited. If the contracting officer uses the logical follow-on exception, the rationale shall describe why the relationship between the initial order and the follow-on is logical (e.g., in terms of scope, period of performance, or value):

Exception that applies: FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C). The modification to add the option year is a logical follow-on because the task order was competed among all MOM FA2 awardees.

Even if the other MOM FA2 awardees could become proficient in NRO Enterprise Project Management eRAI, CIPIM, CRC, Voices, iTravel, Contract Database and Business Intelligence, it is also impractical to do so given the future NRC acquisition plan to support NRO Enterprise Project Management requirements. The NRC intends to compete future NRO Enterprise Project Management support under NRC’s GLobal INfrastructure and Development Acquisition (GLINDA) multiple award blanket purchase agreement awardees by end of FY 2021, including the work for the aforementioned MOM FA2 task order. Therefore, investing significant resources for a new awardee to become sufficiently https://acquisition.gov/far/current/html/Subpart%2016_5.html#wp1095799 proficient to support NRO Enterprise Project Management for a brief period (end of FY 2020) only to have to re-compete for that work under GLINDA. This proposed action will make the most efficient use of NRC resources and will ensure the continued operational stability of the NRO Enterprise Project Management and smoothest transition from Leidos to the new GLINDA awardee.

4. A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

The Contracting Officer (CO) will perform price analysis and only award a modification to the MOM FA2 task order after determining that the price to the Government is fair and reasonable.

5. Any other facts supporting the justification:

None.

6. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made:

The Acquisition Management Division (AMD) will continue to closely scrutinize any subsequent requests for acquisition of similar services and will ensure that any restrictions to competition are adequately supported and documented.

7. Evidence that any supporting data that is the responsibility of technical or requirements personnel (e.g., verifying the Government’s minimum needs or requirements or other rationale for an exception to fair opportunity) and which form a basis for the justification have been certified as complete and accurate by the technical or requirements personnel.

The signature below represents the Contracting Officer Representative’s (COR) certification that the Government’s minimum needs or requirements or other rationale for an exception to fair opportunity) and which form a basis for the justification have been certified as complete and accurate by the technical or requirements personnel.

John E Shea

8. The contracting officer’s certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of the contracting officer’s knowledge and belief.

The signature below represents contracting officer’s (CO) certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of the contracting officer’s knowledge and belief.

Heriberto Colón, Jr.

Concurrence:

Joseph L. Widdup, Branch Chief

APPROVAL:

9. A written determination by the approving official that one of the circumstances in

(b)(2)(i)(A) through (E) of this section applies to the order.

Competition Advocate signature below constitutes determination by the approving official that FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) applies to this modification.

Monique B. Williams