J and A attachment.pdf

V3.1_JULY2020

Policy #: 25016.0 PID Number: N66604-24-

SIMACQ-NPT-34-1214

[Type here]

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

UNDER FAR 13.5, SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURES FOR

CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ITEMS

JUSTIFICATION

1. Contracting Activity

The Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Code 02, Newport, RI.

2. Description of the Action Being Approved

Requesting approval to solicit and award a basic ordering agreement o source basis for Switch Matrix in support of from RA Wood Associates, LLC. This requirement pport of Code 34 Electronic Warfare (EW) Systems Program.

3. Description of Supplies/Services

The total estimated value of this requirement is and will be funded with Other Procurement, Navy (

The Government requires the procurement of quantity one (1) Switch Support Matrix. The anticipated delivery date is 10 months after date of award.

Estimated Dollar Value

FY24 Totals

SCN

OPN

RDT&E

O&MN

FMS

Total

The Government’s minimum needs have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open

Competition

The proposed action may specify brand name components using the procedures in FAR Subpart 13.501(a)(1)(ii) and in accordance with

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

CONTRACTING NEGOTIATOR IDENTIFICATION:

N

TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION (FAR 6.303-2(c)) 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. ______, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

TECHNICAL COGNIZANCE:

Name (Print) and Title (Code) o.

REQUIREMENTS COGNIZANCE:

Si

Name (Print) and Title (Code) o.

APPROVAL BLOCK (FAR 13.501(a)(2) for Approving Official) As Contracting Officer, I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and upon the basis of the above justification, I hereby approve, as Contracting Officer, the solicitation of the proposed procurement(s) described herein using other than full and open competition, pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(__).

CERTIFICATIONS ON JUSTIFICATIONS AND APPROVALS (J&As) The following signatures for technical/requirements certifications in J&As are required under the stated circumstances.

Dollar Level Signature

Technical Cognizance

>$700K to $93M Program Manager (PM), Deputy Program Manager (DPM), Assistant Program Manager, or Equivalent

>$93M PM, DPM, Equivalent, Deputy Commander/Executive Director for Directorate or Flag Officer/SES

Requirements Cognizance

>$700K to $93M PM, DPM or Equivalent

>$93M, or 2nd bridge Deputy Commander/Executive Director for to existing contract Directorate or Flag Officer/SES

Very Important Notes:

1. If a single individual within the approval authority listed above has cognizance over both technical and requirements information included in the J&A, use of only one signature line is appropriate and therefore should be communicated to the PCO or Contract Specialist prior to their drafting of the J&A [“Technical Cognizance:” and “Requirements Cognizance:” should be deleted and replaced with “Combined Technical and Requirements Cognizance:”.]

2. If anything within the J&A is not in strict accordance with the data and/or information cited in the AP, then the differences must be fully explained in the J&A and have the Deputy Commander/Executive Director for Directorate or Flag Officer/SES sign for Requirements Cognizance.

3. For all acquisitions that do not require written APs per DFARS 207.103(d)(i) or when the APs are written so generic as to not address specific acquisitions, the thresholds are $10M development and $25M for production or services to have the Deputy Commander/Executive Director for Directorate or Flag Officer/SES sign for Requirements Cognizance.

4. Bridge contracts are defined as sole source actions entered into with the incumbent contractor in order to maintain support when competitive procurement cannot be processed in time to meet the required award date. The following applies to all types of services contracts with the exception of contracts under the cognizance of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.

a. J&As for all bridge contracts, regardless of value, will include PEO/Directorate Head/Field Activity Commanding Officer/Technical Director signature under Requirements Cognizance.

Bridge J&As will also include a schedule for award of follow-on competition within Section 8 "Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition".

b. J&As for all bridge contracts greater than $10M and/or greater than 6 month period of performance, will be forwarded to SEA 00 for notification/review prior to approval by the cognizant SEA 02 SES or DASN (RD&A).

c. J&As for any subsequent bridge contracts (i.e., 2nd, 3rd bridge), regardless of value or period of performance, will be forwarded to SEA 00 for notification/review prior to approval by the cognizant SEA 02 SES or DASN (RD&A). This J&A must include rationale as to why the schedule in the initial bridge J&A was not achieved.

JUSTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL (J&A) AUTHORITIES

See the Threshold Quick Reference Guide

Very Important Note:

J&As drafted at NAVSEA Headquarters that fall within the Competition Advocate for the Procuring Activity threshold authority shall be prepared for submittal to the Designee of the Head of the Contracting Activity and approved by a SEA 02 SES Division Director or SEA 02 IAW FAR 6.304(b)(2).

INSTRUCTIONS

JUSTIFICATION

1. Contracting Activity

The Naval Sea Systems Command (insert Division Name) Contracts Division (insert Division Code) or Field Procurement Office (FPO) Name IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(1).

2. Description of the Action Being Approved

[IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(2), describe the authority being sought in general terms. For a Class J&A identify the date on which authority to act under the CJ&A ends (i.e., the last day an award is authorized, not the period of performance;

the CJ&A “expiration date.”)]

Example: Award of a basic ordering agreement on a sole source basis for system repairs and design agent engineering services in support of AN/SPQ-9B Radar System Program to Northrop Grumman Corporation. Authority to act under this CJ&A expires 31 January 2010.

3. Description of Supplies/Services

[Identify the supplies or services to be acquired, the estimated value, and the funding planned for the acquisition IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(3). Major items and associated quantities should be identified. Summarize long lists of items. Other items may be identified generically by logical groupings, such as “ancillary repair services” or “intermediate-level test equipment.” Option quantities should be separately identified. Briefly address the period of performance or completion date IAW NMCARS 5206.303-2(a).]

[IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) make a statement that “The Government’s minimum needs have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.”]

[Funding amounts should represent the estimated dollar value of the procurement and should be identified by fiscal year and appropriation. If several different types or years of funds are planned, consider providing the information in a chart format, such as the one below.]

Estimated Dollar Value1 FY16 FY77 FY18 FY19 FY20 Totals

SCN

OPN

RDT&E

O&MN

FMS

Total

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open

Competition

41 U.S.C.1901 or 41 U.S.C. 1903. Insert the title of the authority IAW FAR 13.501(a)(1)(ii).

5. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Statutory Authority

[Explain in detail why the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition applies to the proposed procurement IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(5). Provide your strongest argument. Avoid duplicative information. Be short, precise, and to the point.]

[If the explanation is based (whether fully or partially) on the lack of a performance specification, technical data package, specifications, engineering descriptions, a statement of work, or a purchase description suitable for full and open competition, explain why such a document has not been developed or is not available IAW FAR 6.303- 2(b)(9)(i).]

[When the basis for the sole source justification is due to being a follow-on acquisition as implemented in FAR 6.302- 1(a)(2)(ii) (supplies) or (iii) (services) IAW FAR 6.303- 2(b)(9)(ii) provide:

• A statement as to whether or not the original contract award was competed.

1 IAW NMCARS 5206.304(a) If the dollar value of the contract is negotiated at a level that exceeds the dollar threshold of the original justification approval authority, a new justification approval shall be obtained from the appropriate approval authority prior to award.

• An estimate of the cost to the Government that would be duplicated and an explanation of how the estimate was derived. The estimated cost can be based on the initial set-up costs, past actuals or estimates. The intent is not a detailed analysis but a trackable basis for drawing the conclusion that the estimated cost is so high that it will not be recouped through competition.

• An estimate of the length of the delay and an explanation of how the estimate was derived and why a delay of this length is unacceptable. Intent is to indicate if the time frame is prohibitive and would not support the program requirements. As indicated in FAR 6.301(c) this rationale does not apply when there is a lack of advance planning by the requiring activity.]

[When the use of other than full and open competition is necessitated by an unusual or compelling urgency under the authority of 10 U.S.C.(c)(2) as implemented in FAR 6.302-2, provide the estimated cost, data or other rationale IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(9)(iii) to demonstrate the extent and nature of the harm the Government would suffer or would have suffered, if the contracting activity could not limit competition.]

[For the mobilization exception, the approved Industrial Preparedness Plan (if one is required) must be cited.]

[For the international agreement exception, reference to the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) case or Letter or Offer and Acceptance (when the FMS case has not yet been assigned) stipulating the source is required. (A J&A is not required for DoD if a document describing the terms of an agreement or treaty which limits competition, is signed by the head of the contracting activity. See DFARS 206.302-4(c) and NCH 6.302-4 specifying procedures to be followed for this exception and providing a template.]

[IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) address any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition.]

6. Description of Efforts Made to Solicit Offers from as Many

Offerors as Practicable

At a minimum and IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(6), address:

• Any other sources that have expressed interest. If these included any respondent that is not identified in the J&A as a potential source, explain on what basis the activity concluded that the respondent would be unable to satisfy the requirements of the proposed contract.

• If a synopsis of the proposed procurement was not published in the FEDBIZOPS, explain why not, including the applicable FAR 5.202 regulatory exception.

• If you did not use Note 22 in your synopsis IAW FAR 6.303- 2(b)(10), explain why not.

• If market research was conducted in accordance with FAR Part 10, describe how the market research was conducted IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) and what the results were. If no market research was conducted, explain why not.]

Example: (i) The proposed contract was synopsized on the Federal Business Opportunities (FEDBIZOPS) website on 6 Jul 2005 and only EFG Corporation expressed an interest in this requirement. No additional market research was conducted because it is not practicable, for the reasons discussed in paragraph 5 above, for any company other than EFG to provide the required supplies and services.

(ii) The proposed contract was synopsized on the FEDBIZOPS website on July 6, 2005. In addition to EFG Corporation, responses were received from BBCC Company and from AGW Ltd.

Representatives of the Program Office and the contracting officer held discussions with BBCC and AGW. Subsequently, both companies, based on a better understanding of the Navy's requirements, indicated in writing they were no longer interested in pursuing a prime contract. No additional market research was conducted because it is not practicable, for the reasons discussed in paragraph 5 above, for any company other than EFG to provide the required supplies and services.

(iii) The proposed contract was synopsized on the FEDBIZOPS website on July 6, 2005 and no other potential sources expressed an interest in this requirement. In an effort to identify competitive interest, the Naval ABC Command, Industrial Sources Division, as part of their market research, provides more than 850 commercial entities, on an annual basis, a listing of items for which it is seeking competitive sources, as well as instructions for obtaining source approval information. Additionally, the availability of the listing is periodically publicized in FEDBIZOPS and feedback is requested regarding market capabilities. To date, no other companies have expressed interest in becoming qualified to compete for the items to be acquired under the proposed contract.

(iv) NAVCOM's ABC Division, the Navy's Center of Excellence for XYZ systems, maintains in-depth knowledge of XYZ technology developments and the XYZ industrial base. This includes insight into technologies that individual companies are focused on and their technical and production capabilities. ABC Division representatives maintain this knowledge through routine review of industry journals and attendance at industry symposia and conferences. They also periodically visit industry facilities for briefings on companies' IR&D efforts. Based on its knowledge and expertise, ABC Division has determined that no companies other than RST Corporation have the knowledge and technical capability required to provide the XYZ-24 systems. The lack of any responses to a synopsis of the planned contract published on the FEDBIZOPS website on June 5, 2005 validates ABC Division's determination.

(v) Members of OCONUS activity's technical, logistics and contracting community conduct market research on a continual basis. Annually they visit each site where system maintenance and component repairs are performed. During these visits, they meet with local contractors and on-site government representatives to review current capabilities and potential changes in system maintenance/repair requirements. Based on information gathered during their most recent visits, OCONUS activity has determined that only the current contractors are capable of meeting the Navy's requirements. A synopsis of these planned contracts has not been published. In accordance with FAR 5.202(a)(12), a synopsis is not required when the contract action is by a Defense agency and the proposed contract action will be made and performed outside the United States and its outlying areas, and only local sources will be solicited.)

(vi) For BOAs, include the following statement: Individual or classes of orders to be issued under this BOA will be published on the FEDBIZOPS website. Any responses received will be considered.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Costs

IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) enter the statement that “The Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government for the supplies/services covered by the J&A will be fair and reasonable.” Identify the actions to be taken to determine that the offeror’s proposed cost/price is fair and reasonable, such as:

• DCMA pricing assistance and/or DCAA audit of contractor’s proposal will be requested along with offeror’s certificate of current cost and pricing to support the fair and reasonable cost determination.

• Significant (or similar) quantities of this requirement have been purchased from this offeror in the past and cost/pricing information was received on those past procurements. This information should be sufficient to support the fair and reasonable cost determination of this procurement.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition

[IAW NMCARS 5206.303-2(a)(4) provide "(a)n explanation of all actions attempted to make the immediate acquisition competitive and the cost/benefit analysis reflecting costs associated with obtaining competition and anticipated benefits."]

[If there is currently no reasonable likelihood of future competition, use the following or similar language:

“For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 5, (insert contracting activity) has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the types of supplies/services covered by this document. If another potential source emerges, (insert contracting activity) will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.”]

[For BOAs greater than one year, include a statement that “the circumstances surrounding the need to obtain the required supplies/services without providing full and open competition will be reviewed annually by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).”]

[IAW FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) discuss any actions the activity plans to take to change conditions that preclude the use of full and open competition for acquiring the same or similar supplies or services in the future. In addition to acquiring a validated technical data package, such actions might include, for example, development of a performance specification, use of reverse engineering to develop a second source or, after justifying non-competitive procurement of emergency supplies/services on the basis of unusual and compelling urgency, using competition to award contract vehicles for requirements at quantities greater than the emergent need, or for similar items if needed to meet the future emergency situations.]

[If future competition is planned, provide the estimated date of the first competitive acquisition. If this is a one-time buy or a final buyout, so state.]

[If the Government anticipates acquiring a level III build-to-print technical data package or developing a performance based specification that will support competition including an estimated date, use the following or similar language:

Example: “The Government (or Program Office) expects to obtain a level III build-to-print technical data package (TDP) or performance based specification (PBS) that will support competition for future acquisitions of the same or similar items.”]