Redacted Exception to Fair Opportunity Justification over Redacted.pdf

Control No: JA-26-Adel-0603 Supply/Service:

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT

FAR PART 16 EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY JUSTIFICATION

For Actions Exceeding the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT)

Programs/Equipment: Support and Improvement – Within-Scope Ceiling Increase Request

Authority: FAR 16.505(a)(4) – Restricting consideration to an item peculiar to one manufacturer (e.g., a particular brand-name, product, or a feature of a product that is peculiar to one manufacturer.

Total Value: $4,339,131.44

Prepared by: DSN: N/A Program Manager Date:09/02/2026 Email:

Contracting Officer: Phone:

Contracting Officer Date: 09/02/2026 Email:

Technical: DSN: N/A Program Manager Date: 09/02/2026

Requirements: DSN: N/A Program Manager Date: 09/02/2026

Control No: JA-26-Adel-0603 Supply/Service:

The nature of this contract modification is intended only to accommodate higher than anticipated demand for the services provided on this task order. The contractor will be performance the same work within scope as defined by PWS. There are no additional deliverables to be included and no changes in requirements because of this modification.

4. Authority Cited: RFO FAR 16.507-6(d)(2) – Exception to fair opportunity justification for orders valued above the SAT. “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.”

5. Reason for Authority Cited: requires a modification to the total ceiling amount of the existing order placed under the multi-award IDIQ vehicle to allow for additional work required under this contract.

The contractor Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) is tasked with support and improvement services that include development and maintenance function with the program office. As a joint service office, future mission requirements for Navy and Air Force that are shared with existing Army mission requirements are not entirely predictable and may need to leverage existing contract vehicles provided by the Army to assist with more rapid deployment of related services. ARA’s current support for development on this Army task order contract was identified by Navy stakeholders in the program office to cover the working scope of planned requirements for their own investment in development.

The nature of this modification is to accommodate additional work for an existing task order that has been determined to meet the full working scope of the additional funding needed to fulfill this requirement. ARA is the sole contractor currently working development support for Initiating a new contract request purely for competitive purposes would yield redundant results as ARA is the sole source vendor capable of meeting this requirement. Choosing to initiate a new contract requirement that is identical in scope as this existing order would cause unnecessary delays in achieving mission requirements for rapid deployment of support services as contract development takes place in addition to the cost savings (i.e., not incurring additional cost) resulting from not having to create a new Contract/Task Order Further, choosing another vendor other than ARA would cause a duplication of costs to the Government as multiple vendors would be performing the same work on one program in parallel with each other, which would not contribute to a fair value for the Government. In accordance with RFO FAR 16.507-6(d)(2), this modification to the subject task 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. All awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order as detailed in the base Task Order file.

Based on the above, it is determined that modifying the task order to increase the existing total value ceiling on the contract is the most acceptable option for the Government to pursue additional contracted work within scope.