Redacted_Approved_JA CECT-NWO 21-01 - BV sole source Design WGF EAFB_07Jan2021.pdf

Control No. CECT-NWO-21-01

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR

OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY: The responsible contracting agency is the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, Northwestern Division, Omaha District, Contracting Division (CENWO-CT), 1616 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, NE 68102.

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Request approval to enter into a sole source, firm-fixed-price C-type contract with Black & Veatch Engineering (B&V) for architect-engineer (A-E) design services to advance the 35% concept design to 100% design through construction award of a Weapons Generation Facility (WGF) at Ellsworth Air Force Base (AFB), South Dakota.

B&V is the designer of record for similar WGFs located at Malmstrom AFB, F.E. Warren AFB and Barksdale AFB. The reinforced concrete WGF places all nuclear maintenance and storage operations in a single facility to minimize the effects of weather in operations, improve operations security (OPSEC), and increase security posture. The A-E services contract is to provide complete design through construction award of this WGF at Ellsworth

AFB.

This project will utilize Military Construction (MILCON) Planning & Design (P&D) appropriated funds.

The Government intends to award a base contract for the efforts to advance the concept design to the 100% design through construction award .

The Government will use design phases to complete the A-E design services. AFCEC issues code authorizations to fund each required design deliverable. USACE anticipates that AFCEC will issue the “Code 6” authorization for the services required in this J&A to complete the 100% design documents as required for the construction contract. The total estimate for this A-E contract includes design services and technical support services. Compliance with the A-E statutory 6% design fee limitations (see 48 CFR 836.606-73; DFARS 236.606-70) for the preparation of designs, plans, drawings, and specifications will not be exceeded and will be estimated within the Independent Government Estimate and will be analyzed and documented throughout the proposal and negotiation process.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES:

a. The requirement is for A-E design services to advance the 35% concept design to the

100% design through construction award of a WGF at Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota.

The WGF will be approximately 4,850 Square Meters (52,210 Square Feet). The WGF is a reinforced concrete facility that places all nuclear maintenance and storage operations in a single facility to minimize the effects of weather in operations, improve OPSEC and increase security posture. WGFs are single hardened facilities within a protective zone. Backup generators are a requirement for the facility for the critical operations in the facility. Nuclear certified hoists and cranes are also required to perform asset handling and maintenance functions.

This project meets applicable criteria/scope specified in Air Force Manual 32-1084 for Facility Requirements. This project will also comply with Department of Defense (DoD) S-5210.41M for Nuclear Weapon Security, and Ammunitions and Explosives Safety Standards will comply with DoD Manual 6055.09 Vol 2. All future construction will meet requirements for essential facility system nuclear design certification per Air Force Manuals (AFMAN) 91-118, AFMAN 91-119, and Facilities Criteria 04-420-07F. The project storage, maintenance and administrative areas will comply with DoD physical security of sensitive conventional arms, ammunition, and explosives per DoD 5100.76- M. The design shall conform to criteria established in the Air Force Corporate Facilities Standards, the Installation Facilities Standards, but will not employ a standard facility design because there is no Air Force standard facility design for this project, and there is no applicable standard design from Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC). Due to the highly technical and critical design constraints associated with handling nuclear weapons, each facility must be engineered based on local conditions at each installation.

Additionally, design constraints associated with the actual weapons are frequently updated and revised by the scientists who are involved with the development of the weapon system itself. While the various WGFs are similar in function and layout, these complex requirements are constantly evolving throughout the life of the program. As B&V is the only A-E firm that has developed the engineering capabilities in-house

The A-E will be required to possess Secret level security clearances for the discipline leads that would be accessing classified information or making site visits.

The design shall be treated as Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information (UCNI) as described under section 148 of the Atomic Energy Act. UCNI is controlled information on a need to know basis and must be controlled and labeled accordingly. Design drawings cannot be transmitted via unencrypted email.

b. The requiring activity is the AFCEC and Air Force Global Strike Command. AFCEC has provided a “Code 1” authorization; defined by AR 420 as authority to negotiate a design contract with an A-E firm. AFCEC has issued a “Code 2” authorization to execute a 35% concept design for cost validation purposes with the Office of the Secretary of Defense and Air Force Headquarters.

AFCEC will then provide a “Code 6” authorization for the services required in this J&A to complete the 100% design documents as required for the construction contract. The justification covers the anticipated advancement of the 35% design upon AFCEC providing the “Code 6” authorization.

c. Market Research conducted by Omaha District analyzed small and large business capabilities and capacity to perform the unique engineering and design requirements of this project, which supports the U.S. Air Force’s nuclear deterrence mission. After review of the A-E responses to the sources sought announcement, NWO recognized that the specialized nature of the engineering and design requirements would result in one A-E firm with the required expertise and capabilities to execute the work (discussed further in paragraphs 8 and 9).

4. AUTHORITY CITED: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, gives DoD the authority to set aside requirements when there is only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. FAR 6.302-1(a)(2) states: When the supplies or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source, or, for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, full and open competition need not be provided for.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED: This J&A is based upon FAR 6.302-1(a)(2) and is necessary for this requirement based on the following rationale:

a. Background.

The Air Force’s Global Strike Command and AFCEC are in the midst of a multi-year effort to design and construct several highly complex and unique nuclear WGF projects at Air Force installations within the contiguous United States (CONUS).

b. Justification.

A-E design services for the Air Force’s WGF projects contain highly specialized services that require specialized and unique expertise related to the specific DoD and Global Strike nuclear enterprise requirements for nuclear blast engineering/design as well as compliance with the numerous accreditation agency requirements. The unique nature of the facility and very prescriptive design requires substantial understanding of nuclear criteria, nuclear surety, fire hazard analysis, blast containment and anti-terrorism force protection (ATFP) exclusive criteria for the facility type.

. These are complete non-standard facilities that currently do not exist anywhere else. As mentioned in Paragraph 3a above, there is no Air Force standard facility design for this Ellsworth project, and there is no applicable standard design from AFCEC as this facility is unique than that of F.E. Warren, Malmstrom and Barksdale. Attributable to the highly technical and critical design constraints associated with handling nuclear weapons, each WGF must be engineered based on local conditions at each installation. The Ellsworth AFB WGF differs from the other facilities due to local soils, seismic, and climatic conditions.

Additionally, design constraints associated with the actual weapons are frequently updated and revised from the scientists who are involved with the development of the weapon system itself. While the various WGFs are similar in function and layout, Even though this facility will entail more unique capabilities due to the differing functionality, the same specialized attributes will be required per DoD and Global Strike nuclear enterprise requirements for nuclear blast engineering/design. If a new firm were used for this design, the firm would have to duplicate research, acquire engineering expertise for the highly complex nuclear design implications, and understand the history of how the current research and engineering was developed. The lack of an A-E firm’s experience and understanding of these highly specialized WGFs will increase risks to the operation of the facilities, to include life and safety risks, and will duplicate costs. The costs for either acquiring or developing these in-house capabilities for another A-E firm would likely amount to several million dollars.

Reference the Substantial Duplication of Costs section with respective Table 1 below.

Substantial Duplication of Costs:

• If pursued competitively, A-E source selection would follow the Selection of

Architects and Engineers Statute source selection process. In accordance with FAR 36.602-1, Selection Criteria, the Source Selection Board will select the firm most qualified to execute the project. The selection criteria under FAR 36.602-1(a) includes but not limited to, specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required; location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time.

If the above A-E source selection process was to occur, according to the procurement acquisition lead time (PALT) model for a complex A-E request for proposal, it is estimated that procurement costs for Contracting personnel alone would be an estimated to procure.

• Duplication of Research and Engineering Knowledge.

TABLE 1:

Description Estimated Cost Impacts of Duplicative Services

A-E Selection Procedures

Research & Development of Engineering Expertise

TOTAL

In summary, the additional estimated cost of of total estimated contract value) to the project based on the items identified above would not be recovered by a competitive action under FAR Subpart 36.6, especially when under these A-E selection procedures, cost is not an evaluation factor.

c. Impact.

d. Alternatives

USACE to execute a “concept design” for Air Force and DoD programming purposes.

Per AR 420 definition, an approved Code 2 – Concept Design is considered to be 35% of the total design effort.

Another alternative is to award to a new A-E firm. As described in Paragraph 5.b above, this alternative would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government since any other source would require a design, review and verification processes from scratch

The additional cost to duplicate the effort would not be recovered through competition and would create unacceptable delays in completion of project design and the beginning of construction.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: Based on information in paragraph 5 above and conclusions from previous market research, competition for this sole source action was determined not to be reasonable due to the duplicative costs.

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION: The WGFs are discrete, stand-alone construction projects, having their own separate design features. Each WGF is not a recurring requirement at one location, These actions have been competed in the past with minimal to no interest and with only one firm that continues to demonstrate that they are the most highly qualified.

While competition has been minimal to non-existent to support this particular type of facility, the Omaha District Contracting Office continues to have a suite of indefinite delivery contracts to provide professional A-E services for “Preparation of Studies, Analysis and Design Services for Military and Civil Projects within the Northwestern Division.” These IDCs were awarded in FY19 for a total of $99M (four (4) OTSB awards totaling $49M, three

(3) SB awards totaling $30M, and three (3) SDVOSB awards totaling $20M, all with a five year performance period (one 5-year base period and no option periods). Although these pools of Contractors are performing A-E services for a variety of projects, none have the experience with WGF designs.

8. MARKET RESEARCH: Extensive market research was conducted for this effort to include application of personal knowledge from the F.E. Warren WGF’s project delivery team (PDT), Seattle District’s market research and J&A for the Malmstrom, AFB WGF project, recent results from searches on the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) engine, a review of existing contracts with design A-E firms for blast engineering services and the most recent sources sought conduct by the Omaha District for this AE design effort in June 2020. The sources sought information and responses are outlined in Paragraph 9 below.

a.

b. As part of its market research process, Seattle District posted a sources sought notice on 4 May 2017 for the design of the Malmstrom AFB WGF. Seattle District received seven (7) responses to the sources sought notice

Several technical items that the team reviewed were the following:

• ability to work on classified projects;

• experience integrating and managing specialty subcontractors;

• experience mitigating specific aggressor-threats using a security engineering approach; and

• experience related to DoD Nuclear Facilities.

Seattle District then posted an A-E synopsis on 21 July 2017 for 30 days

c. A search was conducted on the SBA’s DSBS site using NAICS 541330 and keywords

"Design Weapon Facility" with no results. A second search was conducted using NAICS 541330 and keywords “Weapon Facility" with one result:

d.

e. A sources sought was also posted on Beta.SAM with minimal responses. This is discussed in more detail in Paragraph 9 below.

9. INTERESTED SOURCES: On 9 June 2020 Omaha District posted a sources sought notice on Beta.SAM.gov as required by DFARS PGI 206.302-1(d) to identify A-E firms that have the knowledge, skills, and capability to perform the subject project. The responses were to include experience in the following:

• Physical security systems;

• Intelligence Community Directive (ICD)-705 standards;

• Cold weather Construction Practices;

• Initial Nuclear Surety Inspection (INSI) practices (timelines and material qualifications);

• Explosive-sited facilities;

• Lightning Protection Systems (LPS) (to include an LPS certified designer);

• Classified projects or installations where members of the firm held a minimum of a secret security clearance at time of project execution; and

• DoD Nuclear facilities to include the ability to perform comprehensive on-site security engineering and vulnerability assessment surveys for antiterrorism/force protection to determine threats and vulnerabilities for critical facilities and individual assets.

Three (3) sources expressed interest and submitted a response by the due date of 1 July 2020:

The responses were sent to the Technical Representative for review and analysis. The summary of that analysis is provided below:

In addition to the sources sought notice, a notice of intent (NOI) was published in accordance with FAR 5.203(a) on 14 December 2020. The NOI stated that the USACE Omaha District intended to award a sole source, firm-fixed-price A-E Services contract to B&V to advance the 35% concept design to 100% design through construction award for the WGF at Ellsworth AFB. Any responsible source who may interested in this action had to respond by noon on 30 December 2020. No responses were received.

10. OTHER FACTS: The approved, redacted J&A will be posted in accordance with FAR 6.305.

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL (J&A)

$8.5M A-E Design/Weapons Generation Facility

Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota Omaha District

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve subject $8.5M sole source J&A, A-E Design Weapons Generation Facility, pursuant to the authority 10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1 and DFARS 206.302-1, only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

CONCURRENCE:

Office of the Chief Counsel

APPROVAL:

Alternate Advocate for Competition (AFC)