Limited_Source_Justification_Affordability-PostAward.doc

LIMITED SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FOR FEDERAL SUPPLY SCHEDULE PROGRAM

Upon the basis of the following justification, prepared in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-5(c), I, hereby approve the use of sources limited to fewer than those required in FAR 8.405-1, FAR 8.405-2, and FAR 8.405-3 pursuant to the authority of 41 U.S.C. 251 as implemented by 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B). This acquisition is conducted under the authority of the Multiple-Award Schedule Program (41 U.S.C. 251, et seq, and 40 U.S.C. 501).

1. Identification of the agency and the contracting activity.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management plans to award a limited source Task Order against the GSA Multiple-Award Schedule for services detailed in Paragraph 3.

2. Nature and/or description of the action being approved.

The Agency intends to award a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Task Order. This Task Order will be a fixed price order, solicited with limited competition, to the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). The task order will be for one year.

3. A complete description of the supplies and/or services required to meet the agency’s needs.

As required by Congress, the Agency must contract with the specified independent contractor (NAPA) to develop a definition and framework for community affordability that would be suitable for supplementing existing decision making procedures and analysis used for meeting Clean Water Act (CWA) objectives.

The Agency requires the contractor to produce a report with findings, conclusions and recommendations that shall be suitable for submission to Congress. The work shall include evaluation of the procedures, metrics and analysis suggested by EPA’s existence guidance on municipal financial capability assessments and include evaluating the comments and reviews from the Agency’s Environmental Financial Advisory Board relative to the 1997 FCA guidance and to the 2014 Financial Capability Assessment Framework.

The definition and framework for community affordability shall identify appropriate metrics and analysis that can be used to supplement the procedures and analysis identified in the EPA’s financial capability guidance. In addition, the Contractor shall identify metrics, local factors or considerations that can be used to characterize unique considerations for small communities and supplement the analysis of community affordability.

4. An identification of the LSJ rationale, and if applicable, a demonstration of the contractor’s unique qualifications to provide the required supply or service.

FAR Subpart 6.302-5. Authorizes contracting without providing for full and open competition when authorized or required by statute.

The 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law (CAA), 114-113, directs the EPA to contract with “the National Academy of Public Administration – an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization chartered by the U.S. Congress—to conduct an independent study to create a definition and framework for ‘community affordability’.” The Act further provides direction for EPA to contract with NAPA to consult “with the EPA, States and localities, and such organizations, including, but not limited to the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors; review existing studies of the costs and benefits associated with major regulations under such laws as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; and determine how different localities can effectively fund municipal projects.” The Act requires a report to Congress with NAPA’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations no later than 1 year after the date of contract award with EPA.

Public Law 98-257 granted a Congressional charter to NAPA. The Congressional Charter states, that “whenever called upon by Congress, or the Federal Government, [the Academy] shall investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of government, the actual expense of such investigations, examinations, and reports to be paid by the Federal Government.”

FAR Part 6.302-5(c)(1)(iii)(B) states that this limitation does not apply “To any contract requiring the National Academy of Sciences to investigate, examine, or experiment upon any subject of science or art of significance to an executive agency and to report on those matters to the Congress or any agency of the Federal Government”. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy of the Office of Management and Budget states that “NAPA is situated similarly to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and as such, should be treated like NAS for contracting purposes.”

Section 3 of the NAPA’s Congressional Charter specifically addresses its mission. The Academy is organized to provide the range of services enumerated in this Section. The Academy’s source of expertise is its membership of Fellows, which includes over 800 current and former Cabinet officers, members of Congress, governors, mayors, legislators, jurists, business executives, public managers, and scholars. Section 17 of the charter specifically states: “The National Academy of Public Administration shall, whenever called upon by Congress, or the Federal Government investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of government….”

5. A determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

In accordance with FAR 8.404(d), GSA has already determined the prices of supplies and fixed-price services, and the rates for services offered at hourly rates, under schedule contracts to be fair and reasonable. Therefore, by placing an order against a schedule contract in accordance with FAR 8.405, the ordering activity concludes that the order represents the best value. The EPA will obtain a cost proposal from NAPA in support of this effort, and evaluate the proposed rates against the GSA schedule rates and the IGCE developed for this effort.

6. A description of the market research conducted among schedule holders, and the results of the research, or a statement why market research was not conducted. A statement must be made that the supplies and services are available from the FSS.

The services to be performed are available under the Federal Supply Schedules. Congress specifically directed EPA through the CAA to contract with NAPA; therefore, market research outside of review of existing GSA contracts was not performed. The GSA Contract GS-10F-0414R with NAPA under the Federal Supply Services Industrial Group 874 provides the supplies and services required by EPA.

7. Any other facts supporting the limited source justification.

None

8. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency will take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for supplies and services is made.

At this point, EPA knows of no other source that may fulfill the direction from Congress to develop the required independent study. The Agency has no intention to pursue additional supplies and services beyond the scope of this one-year acquisition.

9. The ordering activity Contracting Officer’s certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of the Contracting Officer’s knowledge and belief and evidence that the supporting data that form a basis for the justification have been certified as complete and accurate by technical/program personnel.

Certification

10. Contract Level Contracting Officer Representative:

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and which form a basis for this justification, are complete and accurate.

//signed// Robin Danesi 9/1/2016

Signature Date

Contracting Officer:

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

___//signed//_Courtney Stallworth____________ 9/1/2016____________

Signature

Date

One Level Above Contracting Officer:

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this LSJ and which form a basis for it, are complete and accurate.

____//signed//_Noelle Mills

______9/2/2016_________

Signature Contracting Officer

Reviews and Approvals

Activity Competition Advocate (if < $700K and > $13.5M):

For a proposed order or BPA with an estimated value exceeding $700,000, but not exceeding $13.5 million, the justification must be approved by the advocate for competition of the activity placing the order. This authority is not delegable.

I have reviewed this justification and find it to be accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Since this LSJ does not exceed $13.5M, this review serves as approval.

//signed// Susan Moroni

9/6/2016

Signature