LSJ_10_Jan_19_Redacted.pdf

Limited Sources Justification and Approval

Under the Authority of FAR 8.405-6, Multiple Award Schedule Program

1. Identification of the Contracting Activity and the Requiring Agency: The Contracting Activity is the General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Acquisition Service’s, Contracting Division. The requiring activity is the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Program Development and Integration Directorate (XZ) and the Simulation and Analysis Facility (SIMAF), operated by the Simulation and Analysis Division (AFLCMC/XZS).

2. Nature/Description of Action

It is the intent of AFLCMC/XZS to obtain a B-2 Intelligence Mission Data (IMD) Cost Capability Analysis (CCA) Modeling, Simulation, Analysis (MS&A) effort requiring development, prototyping, studies and analysis, and test support to be procured under GSA. This limited source task order will continue the Phase I project that was previously awarded to MTSI on behalf of AFLCMC/XZS through the Army’s Contracting Command. The requested action will be issued as a GSA Task Order against MTSI’s Professional Services Schedule and will begin on or about March 1, 2019, ending one year from award. No option year period is included in this request.

3. Description of Supplies and Services

The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Program Development and Integration Directorate (XZ) and the SIMAF, operated by the Simulation and Analysis Division (AFLCMC/XZS), requires performance-based Modeling, Simulation and Analysis (MS&A) to support integrated capabilities development and analyses of current and future weapon systems as well as other materiel and non-materiel warfighting solutions. The B-2 IMD CCA Phase II project will result in an extension of unclassified and Secret software to the Top Secret/Special Access Required (TS/SAR) network; re-hosting of legacy software, development of phase II software, and support of the IMD CCA study. Total contract ceiling of this effort is not expected to exceed $550,000.00.

4. The authority and supporting rational and demonstration of the proposed contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required service.

Pursuant to FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B), 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. Those conditions are met in this case.

This authority applies because there is only one company capable of performing the effort due to their competencies and skillset in the area of modeling, simulation and analysis. SIMAF conducted market research and concluded there is only one company that possesses the capabilities of performing the specific efforts (technical information collection-studies, demonstrations, proof of concepts, prototypes of design and development). If the contract were awarded to any other source, SIMAF would not receive technical information at the appropriate level necessary to fulfill the Air Force’s requirements, resulting in a substantial duplication of costs to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition and unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency requirements.

Modern Technology Solutions, Inc. (MTSI) performed as the prime contractor for the B- 2 IMD CCA Phase I which resulted in the upgrade of the B-2 cockpit displays, integration of National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) threat, and MITRE Electronic Support Measures (ESM) simulation models. MTSI is uniquely qualified to perform the IMD CCA Phase II work because the team is experienced in the simulation software development using EAAGLES. Performance of the services for B-2 IMD CCA Phase II requires a detailed understanding of the SIMAF Master Process (SMP) and MS&A artifacts of interest, experience developing and documenting software within the EAAGLES environment, and security clearances that meet all SIMAF security requirements. Based on the highly specialized skills required to perform the B-2 IMD CCA Phase II effort, it is estimated it will take a new company years to develop the capability to demonstrate proficiency on SIMAF systems and perform the work required on this effort.

Additionally this task order requires TS/SAR accesses, to which the MTSI team is already cleared. These same accesses or eligibility for access to new program requirements, is necessary immediately after contract award. The time required to process and obtain the required security and B-2 program clearances would cause significant delays of 6-12 months before the TS/SAR work could be started. These delays would result in a failure to meet Government deadlines for the analysis products that result from this effort. Completing background investigations and the Program Access Request process for new contractors would result in unacceptable delays and adds risk to mission execution. The services MTSI will provide are not only unique in nature;

they are a logical follow-on and continuation of the previous work that was awarded to MTSI by the Army. While the previous order was not issued as a Schedule order; having MTSI complete the services under a GSA schedule task order is in the government’s best interest and ensures economy and efficiency.

5. A determination by the contracting officer that the order represents the best value to the government consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

GSA’s schedule procedures provide agencies with a simplified process for obtaining commonly used commercial supplies and services, FAR § 8.401(a), and, although streamlined, satisfy the requirement for full and open competition. 41 U.S.C. § 259(b)(3) (2006); FAR § 6.102(d)(3). See Perot Systems Government Services, Inc., B-402138, 2010 CPD ¶ 64. GSA schedule contracts require all schedule contractors to publish an "Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Pricelist." FAR 8.402(b). The pricelist contains all supplies and services offered by a schedule contractor. Of relevance here, services listed on the schedules are priced either at hourly rates (the case here), or at a fixed price for performance of a specific task. Because prices in schedule contracts already have been determined by GSA to be fair and reasonable, ordering activities are not required to make a separate determination of fair and reasonable pricing prior to issuing an order against a schedule contract. FAR 8.404(d). However, ordering activities may seek additional discounts before placing an order.

In this case, the Contracting Officer has determined that adequate technical and pricing information is available to determine that the anticipated cost to the Government of the services covered by this task order will be fair and reasonable. The Government will utilize the posted schedule labor rates from MTSI and other schedule holders to compare to the labor hours and rates proposed by MTSI for this task order award. The Government will also analyze MTSI’s proposed labor rates, labor mix and labor hours against their historical pricing.

6. A description of the market research conducted among schedule holders and the results or a statement of the reason market research was not conducted.

Program security restrictions preclude publishing a sources sought synopsis. The requirement owner conducted market research along with literature search (Industry, Government lab, Research Institutes and other government institutions) which identified eight providers to advance knowledge in the specified technical areas of modeling, simulation and analysis.

The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. (AEgis) Clear Creek Applied Technologies, Inc. (CCAT) Modern Technologies Solutions, Inc. (MTSI) SimIS Inc.

LinQuest Corporation NextGen Federal Systems, LLC.

Integrity Applications Incorporated (IAI) Renaissance Sciences Corporation

It was determined that of the eight companies identified in the market research, only MTSI possesses the required capabilities and security accesses to successfully perform as prime contractor at this time.

7. A statement of the actions if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies/services required.

The Government has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the types of services covered by this document.

8. Other facts supporting the justification.

There is a high degree of risk to national security associated with releasing any information relating to this program in order to seek additional potential sources.

Granting access to multiple contractors would increase the potential disclosure of classified information which would compromise national security by revealing systems, capabilities and vulnerabilities. Adversaries would have insight into highly sensitive information on multiple aircraft, systems and subsystems that are utilized by not only the Air Force, but the entire DoD. Adversaries would know the capabilities of the aircraft