N6572615T0013_REDACTED_J A.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL SEA LOGISTICS CENTER

5450 CARLISLE PIKE

P. 0. BOX 2060

MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055-0795

LSJ Number:

Code:

P.R. Number:

IN REPLY REFER TO

15-0013-1

NSLC 02

TBD

LIMITED SOURCE JUSTIFICATION

J. . Con tracti.ng Acti. vi. ty

The contracting agency is the Naval Sea Logistics Center (NSLC), Contracts Management Division; NSLC 02, Mechanicsburg, PA.

2. Description of the Action Being Approved

This action will serve as a Bridge Order from an existing competitively award GSA Schedule Task Order (TO), to a competitively awarded SeaPort-e TO. It is for the award of a six month, Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) TO, issued in accordance with the procedures of FAR 8.4, for Professional Engineering Services.

The estimated amount of this requirement is $ period of performance will be from 22 December 2015.

The 2014 thru 21 June

3, Description of Supplies/Services

The present acquisition is for the continuation of professional support services for the NSLC managed NAVSEA Planned Maintenance Systems (PMS) Program, which is currently supported via GSA Contract GS23F0108J, TO N6553809F0038, with URS Federal Technical Services (URS) .

The PMS program provides ships and activities with a simple and standard means for planning, scheduling, controlling, and performing planned maintenance of all Shipboard Systems and Equipment. The Naval Sea Logistics Center is tasked by NAVSEA 04 as the PMS Coordinating Activity for the entire Fleet and is responsible for centrally developing, managing, coordinating and disseminating all 0-Level shipboard maintenance requirements.

The Naval Sea Logistics Center distributes PMS products to the

NAVSEALOGCEN DET FAIRFIELD

~!~e~~.s~:s~~j~:~~~ve, Suite A

NAVSEALOGCEN DET NORFOLK

Norlolk Naval Shipyard, Bldg 13 Portsmouth, VA 23709-5000

NAVSEALOGCEN DET INDIAN HEAD

P.O. Box 100 Indian Head, MD 20640-0100

NAVSEALOGCEN DET PORTSMOUTH

P.O. Box 2058 Portsmouth, NH 03804-2058

NAVSEALOGCEN DET MAYPORT

P.O. Box 280062, Mayport NAVSTA Jacksonville, FL 32228-0062

NAVSEALOGCEN OET SAN DIEGO

4755 Railroad Way San Diego, CA 92136-5503 visit the Naval Sc:a Logistics Center liomc Page ut www.nslc.navsea.navy.mil

J&A Number: 15-0013-1

Fleet and shore activities, receives and processes Electronic ·Technical Feedback Reports (ETFBRs) and provides PMS installation and PMS training support.

In support of the PMS program, a software package known as SKED is used for scheduling shipboard and shore-based PMS actions and to maintain data associated with the PMS program.

The Government is procuring Professional Engineering support services in support of the PMS Program. The intended vendor is tasked with providing support services related to PMS documentation development, maintenance, and distribution; PMS scheduling software (SKED) training; management of data in the PMS Management Information System (MIS); and, related PMS program management support.

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than FUll and Open Competition and Supporting Rationale

(A) Statutory Authority

As this requirement is to be met through issuance of a GSA order, this procurement is exempt from the FAR Part 6.

Instead, the action is to be conducted under the authority of 41 U.S.C 152(3) (A), as implemented in FAR Part 8. The procedures and authority for limiting sources in the process of issuing a GSA order are found at FAR Part 8.405-6.

Specifically, the authority supporting this limited source justification is 8.405-6(b) (3), "An urgent and compelling need exists, and following the ordering procedures would result in unacceptable delays."

(B) Supporting Rationale

This work is planned to roll onto our SeaPort-e Logistics Management Services (LMS) Support Order that is currently being solicited and is projected for a mid-March 2015 award (based on an aggressive schedule). The SeaPort-e action is taking longer than planned due to the high number of competitive proposals received in response to the Seaport-e solicitation. The current TO, N6553809F0038, received significantly fewer proposals, so this high number of proposals was not anticipated.

The cost and technical review of the vendors' initial proposals has revealed that significant discussions will be required with all vendors. This in turn will lead to revised proposals from the vendors which will require re-

~~ bAcre'b e~pY .

evaluation. Based upon the detailed nature of the questions asked during the solicitation phase, it was believed that the vendor community had a firm understanding of the requirements in the solicitation. We could not have anticipated the extent to which the vendors did not fully understand those requirements and the corresponding level of discussions that are now required to get to the point of requesting Final Proposal Revisions.

Based upon the above, award of the competitive SeaPort-e follow-on TO will not be possible prior to the expiration of the current GSA TO on December 22, 2014. It is considered prudent that the Government proceed with the process of awarding a six-month bridge TO with URS, a large business, while concurrently soliciting this requirement as part of a larger acquisition, presently being solicited as a Small Business Set-Aside under SeaPort-e; rather than issuing a new competitive bridge order with another vendor for a six month duration. Awarding to a new contractor during this short period of performance will seriously harm NSLC's ability to provide the continuity of services necessary to support NAVSEA's mission. No company other than URS has sufficient time to obtain the expe.rience required to meet the Government's needs. The additional time required for another contractor to make the transition and obtain the knowledge of the multiple requirements necessary to provide the level of service required would cause unacceptable delays and would impact operational schedules. If this bridge TO were not awarded to continue support for the NAVSEA PMS Program, it will jeopardize the readiness of the Navy ships currently at sea as follows:

• Loss of our ability to execute the PMS project with sufficient coverage to ensure getting proper maintenance procedures to the ships in a timely fashion.

• Backlogs of maintenance requirements and Fleet maintenance questions would develop.

• System and equipment material condition and mission readiness would suffer.

• Sailor safety could be impacted.

This bridge action is determined to be in the Government's best interest because it will allow for an orderly transition period from the large business incumbent to the small business follow-on contractor, and, it will avoid any interruption of support for this requirement thereby protecting the readiness of associated ships and their systems operations at sea.

5. Determination of Best Value

The NSLC Contracting Officer will make a best value determination consistent with FAR Part 8.404(d) at time of award. Proposal analysis shall be conducted in accordance with 15.404-1.

6. Market Research

Market Research was not conducted because this is a justification for a limited-source logical follow-on action.

7. Other Facts Supporting the Justification

Not applicable.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition

As stated in paragraph 4(8) above, the present requirement is included in a larger solicitation being competed under SeaPort-e.

Market research was conducted for the aforementioned SeaPort-e solicitation.

1tl DA CTit> · CO P'j

COPY

J&A Number: 15-0013-1.

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION (FAR 8.405-6 (c) (2) (x))

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and its supporting acquisition planning data, including Acquisition Plan No. N/A, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. The Government's minimum needs have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel identified below.

TECHNICAL COGNIZANCE:

Signature Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No. Date

REQUIREMENTS COGNIZANCE:

Signature Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No. Date

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW (NMCARS 5206.303(90))

I have determined this justification is legally sufficient.

Signature Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No. Date

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION (FAR 8. 405-6 (c) (2) (ix))

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. This certification will also serve as approval Per FAR 8. 405-6 (d) (1).

Signature Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No. Date

Enclosure 1