B-1_FOE_Redacted.pdf

FAIR OPPORTUNITY EXCEPTION (FOE) DETERMINATION AND APPROVAL

Contracting Activity: Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Air Force Materiel Command, Airspace Mission Planning Division, Hanscom AFB, MA Purchase Request/Local Identification Number: F2BDAZ5082B 104 Program Name (and Program Element, if applicable): B-1 Development and Maintenance Estimated Cost/Price of the Order (including options): $3,553,000.00 Type Program: PEO Program Authority: FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C)- Logical Follow-On Type Determination: Individual

--Program Manager: /~

Contracting Officer:

Local Legal Reviewer:

Chief of the Contracting Office

(COCO):

Competition Advocate:

;, fJ PK' 2a IS-- Date Signed

FAIR OPPORTUNITY EXCEPTION (FOE) JUSTIFICATION

I. Contracting Activity

The Contracting Activity for this acquisition is the United States Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Airspace Mission in D·vision Hanscom AFB, MA. The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) is This document is a Fair Opportunity Exception (FOE) Determination an pprov e Mission Planning Enterprise Contract (MPEC) II B-1 Delivery Order (DO) FA8720-10-D-0001, 0002 for B-1 Development.

II. Nature and/or Description of the Action Being Approved

This Fair Opportunity Exception Determination and Approval is for a modification to Delivery Order (DO) 0002 issued under The Northrop Grumman's (NG) Mission Planning Enterprise Contract (MPEC) II FA8720-10-D-0001 to incorporate the efforts identified in Section III. This effort adds Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0045, 0046, and 0047 to cover Fiscal Year (FY) 15, CLINs 0048, 0049, and 0050 for FY16, and CLINs 0051, 0052, and 0053 for FYI 7 in support of B-1 Release 9.0 for the Operational Flight Program effort. The CLINs for FY16 and FYI 7 will be option CLINs. The three CLINs for each FY will support the effort, the Data associated with the effort, and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) respectively. The contract type for the maintenance CLIN effort will be Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) and Cost forthe ODC CLINs.

The goal and scope of the original B-1 Mission Planning Development and Sustainment Delivery Order is to develop and maintain B-1 Bomber mission planning capabilities in the Joint Mission Planning System (JMPS) for all Sustainment Block (SB) upgrades or modifications to the B-1 aircraft and to field and sustain the existing and future B-1 Bomber Mission Planning Environment (MPE). The Basic delivery order includes Release 7.0 and 8.0 software development/delivery and software maintenance of existing fielded software. It includes options for additional software release 9.0 and additional options for software maintenance for FY12, 13 and 14.

Delays in the aircraft Operation Flight Programs (OFP) have pushed B-1 Mission Planning Enviornment (MPE) Release 9.0 into a period where no maintenance CLINs past FY14 are available in the current DO. The FY14 Maintenance CLIN (0019) ended in March 2015. Without the addition of these CLINs, no corrective actions could be performed in Release 8 software. Based on the scope of the original DO the addition of the maintenance CLINs are considered a logical follow-on.

III. Description of the Supplies/Services Reguired To Meet the Agency's Needs

This action will increase the current value of the DO from $19,566,375 by $3,553,000 to $23,119,375. The estimate was derivied from an approved Budget Cost Requirement

Document which will be included in the file documentation. The period of performance of the FY15 Maintenance CLINs will be from contract award to 30 June 2016. The ultimate period of performance (if all options are exercised) will be from award date of delivery order modification to 30 June 2018. The current period of performance for CLINs 0016 (development) and 0018 (Other Direct Costs) ends 01 March 2017. The current estimated award date for this contract action is 01 July 2015.

The approved MPEC II basic IDIQ ceiling is $919.6M. As of this determination, the total amount to date of all DOs awarded is $358.5M, well under the ceiling. The period of performance of this contract action requires an extension of the B-1 Delivery Order, 0002, from 01 Mar 17 to 30 Jun 18. This falls well within the scope of the period of performance of the MPEC II contract period of performance, 6 June 2020.

Although.this contract action falls within the scope of the MPEC II basic contract as described above, the CLINs needed to provide maintenance support for FY15 thru FYl 7 need to be added to the DO.

The following Descrepancy Reports (DRs) are to be corrected in FY15:

DR Number Title 2015-40750 Copy and Paste TOAGs

2010-28211 Initial Point symbol not available in Route Editor tool bar

2010-28714 (SCR00734) Launch Points Can Be Disconnected Points

2012-34939 Leg Editor- TOAG issue

2015-40577 (ITL00455) Impact Angle Reverts to Previous Value When Weapon Not Selected

2012-34934 (SCR01513) Leg Editor - Fixpoint Issue

2015-40613 (SCR01513) B-1 Unhandled Exceptions when using the JMPS FW Leg Editor, Refpt tab due to Route Update Watcher code conversion

2010-28073 (5f, SCR01075) R5.0 - Release Interval Updates II 2015-40588 (ITL00589) Leg Editor - Erroneous Error Message Displayed 2012-35093 Leg Editor-TOAG Tabbing Incorrect 2015-40587 (ITL00587) B-1 Rel 8.0 Minor Issues 2015-40590 (ITL00594) Quality Field for WCMD TOAGs Does Not Match

MMI

2012-35265 (SCR01383) Leg Editor - Route Point 'Quality' Value Not Initially

Displayed on the B-1 Launch Point Tab 2012-34997 (SCR01270) Leg Editor - Gravity Tab Default Is Incorrect

According to R7.0 B-1 UPC SRS 2015-40595 (SCR01436) JASSM TOAG Does Not Write Per ICD - Leg Editor

The following updates will be completed during FY15:

1) Host on Framework (FW) vl.5.302

2) WOW 64 bit Conversion

3) Digital Aeronautical Flight Information File (DAFIF) v8.l

4) Mission Planning Hardware Update

5) Inflight CF3 l laptop support

6) Launch Acceptability Region (LAR) Algorithm Catchup

Since the completion of Release 8.0 development efforts, the FW has been updated. This update includes corrections to issues found by B-1 B regarding collaborative mission planning.

Going forward all Standard Desktop Configurations (SDC) will be only 64 bit. B-lB requires updates to be compliant with operation in a 64 bit environment.

It must also address/Fix JTR Waivers (R8.0 B-1 UPC Executables and Installs Are Not Compatible with 64- Bit - JTR SYS-002).

NGA has migrated to a new version ofDAFIF compared to the one used in Release 8.0. DAFIF 8.0 will not be supported when Release 9.0 gets to the field. Release 9.0 will need ot operate with DAFIF v8.l.

ACC will be distributing in 2015 the NCS Stratus as the replacement desktop hardware suite including new interface drivers. B-1 B mission planning will need to operate and be tested on the NCS Stratus.

The CF-31 laptop is used to view mission planning data while in flight. The B-1 B mission planning will be loaded and tested with this hardware including the other applications expected to be operating in flight on the laptop.

The OFP over the last several updates has adjusted the LAR calculated for weapons while in flight. This has created a difference with what is calculated by mission planning leading to uses confusion. B-1 B mission planning will re-align and test its LAR calculation to better approximate what is seen on the in flight.

FY15 efforts consist of 15 DRs that are broken down and categorized as 6 easy, 7 medium, and 2 complex, in addition to the 6 updates identified above. FY16/FY17 efforts will be focused on a similar complexity breakdown, and will address 20 to 30 additional DRs each year respectively. The specific DRs will be selected by coordinating priorities with ACC and the B-1 B user during the start of each maintenance CLIN.

IV. Authority Permitting a Fair Opportunity Exception

MPEC II is a multiple award IDIQ contract that was awarded after full and open competition. FAR 16.505(b)(l)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee, under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,000 unless an exception applies. Pursuant to FAR 16.505(b )(2)(i)(C), this contract action is exempt from the fair opportunity process. FAR l 6.505(b )(2)(i)(C) provides: "The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order."

V. Demonstration of the Contractor's Unique Qualifications or Nature of the Acquisition Requires the Use of the Authority Cited Above to Provide the Required Supply/Service (Applicability of Authority)

The MPEC II contract was competitively awarded to five contractors, including NG, on 7 June 2010, for the purpose of providing MPEC II software development and maintenance with associated data and computer programs. The period of performance for DO 0002 is from 23 February 2011to01March2017. The content of Release 7 was well known at the time of the Request for Proposal (RFP) for DO 0002, but changes to the content of SB-16a (Release 8.0) and SB-17 (Release 9.0) were likely once the Operational Flight Program (OFP) further refined the suite content.

NG has been the B-1 prime since Rel 7.0, prior to that Boeing was the prime under the common bomber contract and NG was a sub to Boeing. Under MPEC II, through full and open competition, NG was the only contractor to bid on the delivery order, and was subsequently awarded the B-1 Unique Planning Component (UPC) Development and MPE Integration Delivery Order (0002) under the MPEC II contract on 23 Feb 2011 in the amount of $4,184,120, with a total potential value of $26,072,401, including all options. Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) have been accomplished for Rel 7.0 and Rel 8.0. The current Delivery Order value is $19,566,375.32, including all options.

Altogether, NG has over ten years developing the B-1 MPE.

To further the interest of economy and efficiency, it is logical to issue this sole source action to NG for the following reasons:

a) NG has been the prime for the B-1 mission planning development efforts since February 2011. Since NG is the only contractor currently performing B l Joint Mission Planning System (JMPS) Development, any potential replacement contractor would need a significant amount of time and labor hours to ramp up to accomplish the work. Based on analysis of previous efforts similar in scope such as the B-1 Release 8.0 ECP 06 and PoP extension, it is estimated that an additional six month development time, or $1,650,000, would be required for a new contractor to ramp up and become familiar with the existing codebase. This increase alone, that would be required to ramp-up, is larger than the FY15 maintenance budget.

b) NG, using current maintenance funds, already reviewed and provided an initial assessment for the majority of the approximately 80 open DR against the B-1 UPC. NG further worked with the user community to obtain a better understanding of the nature of the problem to establish a ranking and priority for these open DR. Those efforts would have to be repeated by a new maintenance team. The user community would have to spend more time away from operations to educate the new maintenance team to ensure they properly understood the DR and the desired correction.

c) Due to the complex nature of multi-ship planning, the B-1 MPE user community makes use of the collaborative planning functionality of the MPE.

In past testing and use, the B-1 team, including NG, found several issues in collaborative planning which were isolated to the Framework (FW) software.

The FW will correct the collaborative planning DR for FW 1.5.302 which is about to start development. As defined above, one of the maintenance tasks will be migrating to the new FW. NG is familiar with the problems being corrected and are best suited to work with the FW team to ensure the collaborative planning is corrected for B-1 MPE needs. A new team will not have that awareness leading to the potential that the B-1 MPE user will not be satisfied with the corrections.

d) NG is under contract to provide development updates to the UPC for Release

9.0 during an overlapping period with maintenance updates to be included by this ECP in Release 9.0. The addition of a new MPE developer would create a situation where two developers were attempting to edit the same baseline with no specific contractual arrangement between them. This will increase the costs for coordination and oversight as well as introduce configuration management risks. In turn, the productivity of the maintenance effort will be negatively impacted reducing the amount of DR work that can be accomplished. Further, the development work on Release 9.0 would be impacted by the need for additional coordination and configuration management.

e) Based on the historical average of timelines for five recently competed Delivery Orders awarded in Mission Planning, the estimated time from Delivery Order initiation to award is 3 73 days. The process of seeking competition for the FY15, FY16 and FYI 7 maintenance ECP includes the following:

• providing each MPEC II awardee a notice of the intent to compete effort '

• producing draft and final RFP materials (i.e., standalone SOW and stand-alone TRD, Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs/ Exhibits)

• preparation of a comprehensive bidders library

• multiple internal Government reviews

• affording each contractor responding to the notice a fair opportunity time to review RFP and ask questions

• providing time for bidders to prepare and submit an offer

• execution of a source selection process with a potential round of fact finding questions with multiple contractors.

The typical timeline for this process would significantly delay award beyond the planned award date for the maintenance ECP of 01 July 2015 and be costly to the Government, as specified in the above paragraphs. The incurred Release 9.0 schedule delay would put the MPE program in a position of not meeting its obligation to the SB-17 OFP and Long Range Anti Ship Missle (LRASM) IOC. Furthermore, the RFP process alone would take a minimum of90 to 120 days with contractors incurring proposal preparation costs that

· would be passed on to the Government.

Mission Impact Summary: Postponing maintenance efforts for competition, delaying award of the contract by a historical average of 3 73 days due to additional RFP process time (pushing beyond FY15), having two contractors performing updates on the software simultaneously, and adding six months additional development time for contractor ramp up will result not only in additional costs to the detriment of the Government, but will also cause .the delivered mission planning software to be without the critical corrections defined by the warfighter.

VI. Description of Efforts Made To Ensure Competition Between All Awardees

In accordance with FAR 16.505(a)(l), orders under indefinite-delivery contracts are not required to be synopsized. Paragraph V, above, justifies why competition among all awardees is not possible for this acquisition.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer That The Anticipated Cost to the Government Will Be Fair and Reasonable

NG will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data due to the value of the effort and their proposed rates will be evaluated and compared with Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) rates. The final contract price will be evaluated and negotiated by the PCO in accordance with FAR Part 15, to ensure the ultimate cost to the Government is fair and reasonable.

VIII. Description of Market Research Conducted Among All Awardees and the Results Or A Statement of the Reason Market Research Was Not Conducted

A competitive RFP was issued to the five MPEC II contractors and NG was selected as the best choice to fulfill the B-1 requirements. Competing this work and possibly awarding to a new contractor would introduce unacceptable delays and technical risk into the program. See Paragraph(s) V and VI above.

IX. Other Facts Supporting the Justification

NIA

X. List of Any Awardee That Expressed Interest in the Acquisition

In accordance with FAR 16.505( a)(l ), orders under the indefinite-delivery contracts do not have to be synopsized. The statement in paragraph V of this document justifies why competition among all awardees is not possible for this acquisition. However, the following. companies are available to compete under the MPEC II contract: Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems, The Boeing Company, BAE Systems Mission Solutions, DCS Corporation., and Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training. All of these companies had an opportunity to compete for DO 0002.

XI. Actions the Agency May Take to Remove or Overcome Any Barriers To Increasing Fair Opportunity Before Any Subsequent Acquisition For the Supplies or Services

B-1 acquisitions arising after this delivery order expires in 2017 will be competed under a subsequent delivery order under the MPEC II contract. A bidder's.library complete with previous software versions will be made available to potential bidders. All B-1 JMPS software and data are delivered with unlimited rights. DO 0002 period of performance will be extended (if all options are exercised) under this FOE from 01 March 2017 to 30 June 2018.

XII. Contracting Officer's Certification

The contracting officer's signature on the signature page evidences that he/she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

XIII. Technical/Requirements Personnel's Certification

As evidenced by their signatures on the signature page, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein which is their responsibility is both accurate and complete.