Redacted_JA for Capacity Increase Final.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100

JBPHH HI 96860-3134

IN REPLY REFER TO

J&A No. 24-002

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. Contracting Activity.

Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Pacific (NAVFAC PAC), Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii.

2. Description of the Action Being Approved.

Request approval to modify Contract No. N62742-18-D-1802 to increase the contract ceiling by $5M from $65M to $70M. This Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract was competitively awarded to Cardno GS – AECOM Pacific JV on 27 April 2018 for Architect- Engineer (A-E) Services for Environmental Applications and Related Studies at Various Navy and Marine Activities, NAVFAC Pacific Areas of Responsibility. The contract term is for a base year plus four one-year options or $65M, whichever occurs first. Contract Modification No.

P00010 exercised Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services) to extend the period of performance by six (6) months, from 27 April 2023 to 26 October 2023.

To date, fifty three (53) Contract Task Orders (CTOs) and ninety one (91) CTO mods have been awarded for a total contract obligation of $64,491,474, leaving a remaining contract capacity balance of $508,526. The contract’s ordering period has expired as of 26 October 2023, therefore the anticipated awards under this contract will be in-scope modifications to complete existing CTOs. An additional $5M in contract capacity is needed to support planned in-scope CTO modifications ($738K) and unplanned in-scope CTO modifications required to complete projects under the current IDIQ contract.

Demand under the contract has been greater than anticipated, primarily due to increased demand for large Environmental Impact Statements, Marine Mitigation in support of P-209 and Posture Projects in support of the United States Indo-Pacific Command:

In 2019, a task order and subsequent modifications were awarded for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Dry Dock & Dry Dock Production Facility at Pearl Harbor in the amount of $ .

In 2020, a task order and subsequent modifications were awarded for an EIS for Waterfront Infrastructure Improvements at Bremerton in the amount of $ .

In 2022, a task order and subsequent modifications were awarded for an EIS for Pacific Missile Range Facility succeeding leases and easements in the amount of $ .

In 2022, a task order for the Environmental Planning and Analysis Support and Development of Revised Draft and Final EIS/Overseas EIS for the Proposed Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Joint Military Training was awarded in the amount of $ .

In 2022, a task order and subsequent modifications were awarded for the Marine Mitigation in support of P-209 Dry Dock 3 Replacement at Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam in the amount of $

In 2022, two task orders were awarded in the amount of $ for the Posture Project Work Plans and the Resource Surveys at Yap Port.

In 2023, two additional task orders were awarded in the amount of $ for the Natural and Cultural Resources Surveys at Tinian Port and the Malakal port.

3. Description of Supplies/Services.

Contract N62742-18-D-1802 provides for preparation of environmental planning services, updating and reviewing of documents for the Department of Navy compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Executive Order (EO) 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, and related environmental planning requirements.

The services required include, but are not limited to, A-E services, environmental services for the preparation of environmental planning documents such as Records of Categorical Exclusions (RCE), Environmental Assessments (EA), and Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) under NEPA, as well as environmental reviews and environmental studies under EO 12114. Examples of tasks required to complete this work may include analysis of construction, renovation, and/or demolition of facilities and infrastructure, Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) actions, and proposed operational actions related to aircraft home basing and ship homeporting.

Additionally, other tasks, studies, surveys, or documents may be required to complete the environmental planning documents including, but not limited to, environmental documentation for aircraft and ship readiness and training operations at the home base and homeport locations and within Department of Defense (DoD)-managed airspace and sea space and Navy/Marine Corps training ranges.

Related technical services may include, but are not limited to, preliminary site assessment studies, feasibility assessments, and engineering services with associated multi-discipline AE support as required.

Examples include preparation of technical reports including conducting engineering investigations and concept studies, or feasibility assessments to obtain sufficient site data to determine the environmental impacts of a proposed action. A preliminary site assessment study may require additional analyses, including topographic, geotechnical, hazardous materials, unexploded ordnance, munitions and explosives of concern, munitions and explosives potentially presenting a hazard, environmental restoration, and infrastructural (roads, drainage, electrical, communications, water, sewage, etc.) aspects of proposed actions.

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other than Full and Open Competition.

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is Title 10 U.S.C 3204(a)(1) and (b)(B)(i) and (ii) as implemented by the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Only one responsible source and no other services will satisfy agency requirements. For the Department of Defense, services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-on contracts for the continued provision of specialized services when it is likely that an award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of costs to the Government not expected to be recovered through competition, or unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

5. Rational Justifying Use of Cited Statutory Authority.

The original contract awarded to Cardno GS – AECOM Pacific JV was competed using competitive procedures pursuant to 40 U.S.C. 1101, Selection of Architects and Engineers, as implemented by FAR 36.6. The contractor has prepared Environmental Assessments, Environmental Impact Statements, various types of environmental studies, reports, and surveys for the duration of this contract. Through this work, the contractor has unique and intimate knowledge of Navy and Marine Corps operations and the associated regulatory environment.

Cardno GS – AECOM Pacific JV (JV) is the only contractor with the required technical expertise, experience and background knowledge to provide the required support to complete all work under existing CTOs. The contactor has unique technical experience, having a strong depth of experience and ability to complete large NEPA projects since 2006. The combination of capability and capacity is not replaceable by any other contractor in the time frame required to ensure continued support without substantial duplication of costs and delays to mission critical military construction contract awards and real estate transactions. A new contractor would have an extremely steep learning curve on a multitude of issues, particularly the loss of corporate knowledge of the numerous project sites (Yap, CNMI, Palau), details of the work done to date and rebuilding existing trust levels and working relationships, particularly with the regulators and the other stakeholders.

In addition, the JV is the only contractor with the required technical expertise, experience, and background knowledge to handle the volume and complexity of the NEPA work needed at Navy and Marine Corps installations. The JV has the capability to provide the board expertise needed to perform a wide range of services and the ability to concurrently work on complex NEPA projects in various locations across the entire NAVFAC Pacific Area of Responsibility. Lastly, the JV is the only contractor that currently possesses a legally defensible/technically supported understanding of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) Joint Military Training (CJMT) Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives to ensure that U.S. Indo- Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) training requirements are met in the western Pacific.

Without this additional contract capacity, the Government would not be able to modify existing CTOs, which would result in substantial duplication of costs if this work is awarded to a new contractor. The Government would need to pay duplicate costs for new work/safety plans (can range from $5K to $15K) and duplicate mobilization/demobilization cost (can be up to $100K depending on the field crew size, equipment/supplies required and project location) to mobilize a new contractor to complete the additional work that would normally be added via a CTO modification, and more time and cost for the new contractor to accept the previous work and to become fully informed and conversant on CTO scope of works.

The inability to award in-scope CTO modifications for NEPA documents would significantly disrupt the legally mandated one year EA and two year EIS completion timelines. The additional time required to onboard and familiarize a new contractor with the regulatory and community intricacies of large and controversial NEPA documents being completed by the JV (e.g., CJMT EIS, Dry Dock 5 and Waterfront Production Facility EIS, PMRF EIS) would likely result in exceeding the timelines. In addition to the impact to operational support date, late NEPA documents that do not meet the mandated timelines are now required to be reported to Congress providing an explanation of why timelines could not be met.

Changing contract vehicles would result in an unrecoverable loss of prior year funds (that are no longer available for obligation under new CTOs). The approval of a capacity increase would allow the unexpended prior year funds left on CTOs to be used toward completion of these projects. Returning unspent prior year funding and asking supporting commands to provide current year funding to complete unfinished work under a new IDIQ contract would appear to violate the bonafide need rule and is not an acceptable solution.

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

Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Pacific has not published and does not intend to publish a Notice of Intent to Sole Source in accordance with FAR 5.203(a). This proposed contract action is made pursuant to the terms of an existing contract that was previously synopsized in sufficient detail to comply with the requirements in FAR 5.207 with respect to the current proposed contract action. Accordingly, the requirements for an exception under FAR 5.202(a)(11) have been met and no synopsis is currently required. A market survey was not conducted and an increase of the subject contract capacity is considered the only reasonable means to complete the work in a timely manner.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Cost.

The Government negotiated fair and reasonable rates for work under this contract and does not anticipate problems in negotiating fair and reasonable rates for each change identified in Paragraph 2.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Future Competition.

The synopsis for the follow-on IDIQ contract was posted on 22 March 2023, and statement of qualifications are being evaluated/reviewed. The new contract planned award date is December 2023. The replacement contract will be procured at a value intended to ensure that all known requirements would fit within the dollar limits established at the time of award.

J&A # 24-024

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance which are included in this Justification and its supporting acquisition planning documents, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Technical Cognizance:

Signature Name (printed) Telephone No.

Requirements Cognizance:

Signature Name (printed) Telephone No.

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW

I have determined this Justification is legally sufficient.

Signature Name (printed) Telephone No.

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Signature Name (printed) Telephone No.

ECHELON III CHIEF OF CONTRACTING OFFICE ENDORSEMENT

I endorse that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief

COMMANDER, NAVFAC PACIFIC APPROVAL

Upon the basis of the above justification, I hereby approve, the award of the proposed procurement action described herein using other than full and open competition, pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 3204 (a)(1) and (b)(B)(i) and (ii).