SAFS-2 TO1_TO2 EFO_SSC_PK Redacted.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

16 Jun 2022 Page 3 of 9

(4) Identification of the exception to fair opportunity and the supporting rationale:

FAR 16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold (set at $10,000) issued under multiple delivery-order contracts or multiple task-order contracts unless a statutory exception applies.

The specific exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for these acquisitions is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), "Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized."

Both of the MC SAFS task orders provide services that are considered unique or highly specialized due to the nature of the critical support at the programmatic and command level as well as the requisite quality of support received by the government to avoid both mission and command failure. Both Task Orders were awarded to support the MILSATCOM Directorate responsible for the planning, acquisition, and sustainment of space-enabled, global Military Satellite Communications (SATCOM) capabilities for National/Joint Force Operations and consisted of an integrated system of satellites, terminals, and ground segments providing communications to aircraft, ships, mobile and fixed sites. Over the course of execution for TO1 and TO2, MILSATCOM has dissolved in name however the programs supported have remained unchanged. This allowed the support to continue over the last four and a half years for the services procured under these task orders. The same programs, divisional staff and functionals are still being supported just under new mission area names. The justification below identifies the level of quality required that is being provided by each Task Order and the unique or highly specialized support being given.

Task Order #1 (TO1) - Financial Services The level of quality required under this task order requires highly specialized knowledge to ensure effective planning, programing, budgeting and execution to support financial management requirements to include performing reconciliation of commitments, obligations, expenditures, and provide budget integration activities to support the financial aspects of the programs to include international partnership agreements. The required specialized knowledge and understanding of each program is critical in ensuring smooth execution of a portfolio valued at approximately per year. The highly specialized support takes the form of information, advice, opinions, alternatives, analyses, evaluations, processes to eliminate waste, standardizing best practices, reducing cycle times/cost of doing business, and/ or recommendations to complement the Government's organic resources in accomplishing its program mission. The service support provided by MCR are uniquely qualified subject matter experts who have in-depth knowledge of the programs, long-term continuity with stakeholders, and in some cases establishment of TS/SCI security clearances for work required in the SAP environment.

Currently, all programs are going through the FY24 President's Budget Justification Books (FY24 PB J-Books) submission and Single Best Estimates (SBEs) updates to inform the FY25 Program Office Memorandum (POMs). The corporate knowledge held by the contractor team and their unique qualifications to include high-level clearances (TS/ SCI and SAP) ensure long-term continuity and the ability to meet stringent and decisive deadlines.

TO1 requires in-depth knowledge of approximately 21 programs, across four PEO led mission areas. This unique knowledge is vital to ensuring the correct dollars are available to fund these programs in order to allow mission critical execution. The government currently lacks the proper organic financial management resources and thus requires expert support to help manage the programs from a financial standpoint. Some examples of the programs being supported include Evolved Strategic Satellite, Protected Tactical SATCOM, Advanced Extremely High Frequency Space Modernization Initiatives, Enhanced Polar System, Wideband Global SATCOM, Air Force Wideband Enterprise Terminals, Advanced Extremely High Frequency - International Partners, Wideband Global SATCOM - International Partners. These programs, as well as those not listed, are critical to our nations safety in providing military communications and positioning, navigation an timing capabilities. Without the support provided by MCR for the requested 12 month extension mission failure is a real possibility. The unique and in-depth knowledge is critical for SSC to continue to develop, maintain, and preserve credible program cost estimates, perform Earned Value Management, 16 Jun 2022 Page 4 of 9 schedule analysis, and develop inputs for acquisition reporting and ensure funding is available. Without the proper understanding of what it means to execute financial managment capabilities, these programs cannot function.

Task Order #2 (TO2) - Acquisition and Organizational Support TO2 requires acquisition and organization support that is knowledgeable to support effective administration, management, and execution of resources for all Programs supported by this task order. Included in that support, there is a requirement for Executive Acquisition Support (EAS) to provide both the Directorate and Division acquisition support for reporting, schedules management, strategic planning, etc., which is focused on the Directorate and Program acquisition process; and Organizational Support Services (OSS) for human resource management, personnel, supplies, infrastructure, readiness, and information management for the Directorate, Divisions, and Functional Offices. As a result, the Directorate, Division, and Functional levels would be negatively impacted as well as mission partners and program customers if support was not approved for the next 12 months.

One part of the unique support being given by MCR includes the knowledge of the two re-structures that have occurred over the course of execution of this task order. During the SMC transformation to the current SSC structure, the individual programs carried TO2 acquisition support staff to the respective SMC 2.0 Corps (Development Corps, Production Corps, and Special Programs, Portfolio Architect) and then shifted to support the current re-structured PEO led mission area acquisition deltas (Military Communications & Positioning, Navigation, and Timing; Space Sensing;

and Space Domain Awareness & Combat Power; Space Systems Integration Office). FTE support was not increased beyond the scope of the task order, but rather the support shifted to adapt to the changing structure to SSC. For the next 12 months the level of quality required to support can only be given by MCR partly because of the unique knowledge the continuous support would provide regarding an understanding of the two re-structures.

The second part of the unique support provided under this task order involves the scope, complexity, efficiency, and responsiveness of the current contract requirement which also drives approval of this bridge action to best meet the government's needs. More specifically, for TO2, if this EFO is not approved the following impacts and mission failures would occur at the organizational level:

1) The TO2 staff oversees training requirements and obligations for 700+ staff members (each requiring up to 20 separate classes/certifications). Incomplete training results in revoked system privileges/clearances/accesses; lost certifications; statutory/regulatory/policy violations; and the inability of staff members to perform basic functions.

2) Modern offices are completely dependent on Information Technology (IT) to function. The TO2 IT staff managed, maintained and diagnosed SSIO IT resources, such as computers, network accounts, monitors, phones, printers, network servers, software, video telecommunications assets and specialized enclaves, for the entire organization. They responded to almost 8,000 separate IT support requests during the year; maintained inventories of all IT equipment; imaged, tested and deployed 500+ desktop computers; and installed 30 new multi-function printers throughout the facility. SSIO would cease to function without the foundational services that the TO2 IT staff provides.

3) Awards and decorations are pivotal to every military organizations esprit de corps and the TO2 staff managed those programs/opportunities. There are over a hundred separate opportunities for the 200+ SSIO military and civilian personnel every year and the career impacts of the proper recognition (at the correct time) cannot be underestimated.

Award and decoration nomination packages vary from a simple 6-line submission to a ten-part staff package detailing a lifetime of achievement. The TO2 decorations manager solicited nominations; tracked deadlines; assisted authors;

collected inputs; validated over 300 submissions last year; managed reviews/approvals; and submitted packages to the sponsoring office. “Taking care of people” is a responsibility of every organization and awards/decorations are a critical element of that obligation. Staff would be reduced from to two government employees; therefore, approximately 90% of award and decorations would not be processed.

4) It's not unusual for a military organization to experience 10-20% personnel turnover in a given year and the TO2 team diligently tracked inbound, outbound & deployed personnel; provided valuable transition assistance/guidance to military, civilians and contractors; tracked civilian hiring and personnel actions; and managed the utilization of 23

16 Jun 2022 Page 5 of 9

Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs) within SSIO, including the preparation of promotion packages.

5) Last year, the TO2 Directorate Action Group (DAG) team used the AF Task Management Tool (TMT) to review, distribute and disposition over 700 unclassified and 150 classified taskings from other PEO offices, SSC senior staff, Air Force & Space Force leadership, the Dept of Defense and Congress. Additionally, the SSC Public Affairs office forwarded another 150 documents to the TO2 DAG team for Security and Policy Reviews of publications prior to public release. The reduction of staff would result in 90% reduction in performance; therefore, approximately 90% of taksers would not be accomplished.

6) The TO2 team also manages the military and civilian performance management programs and processed 98 Officer Performance Reports (OPRs); nine Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs); 23 Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs); 98 civilian Acquisition Demonstration (AcqDemo) mid-term and annual evaluations; 48 DOD Performance Management and Appraisal Program (DPMAP) mid-term and annual evaluations; and ensured the submission of 92 civilian performance plans last year. As a a result, approximately 90% of the taskers would not be accomplished.

These efforts do not include the individual support provided to the individual delta, divisions and functional groups.

Further, this bridge action, if approved, is better positioned to maintain the required, qualified personnel that are inherent to the success of multiple mission areas as well as on an organizational level and is more likely to prevent a gap in these required services.

Failure to authorize this EFO would lead to a gap of critical mission support, drop in esprit de corps, and failure in execution for the Integration Office (BZ); Chief Engineer (S5); Director of Finance (SNF); Contracting (SNK);

Operations Support Division at Peterson SFB (CGM); SDA & Combat Power (SZM); International Affairs Office (IA), the Special Capability Division (SZM), and the Operations Support Division at Peterson SFB (CGM). These deltas and divisions would experience service degradation via loss of unique and specialized support for PEO-level acquisition financial management and directorate-level acquisition and organizational support and the end result will jeopardize mission success at both the programmatic and command level.

Market research for the overarching requirement for both task orders was not conducted due to the two re-structures and thus evolving support requirements. Efforts are currently in work, under each PEO led mission area acquisition delta to conduct market research and establish a plan for future competition.

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable based on comparisons with actual costs as well as historical information from the current task orders and in accordance with FAR

15.4. The rates for the bridge actions are expected to be based on actuals as well as current DCMA forward pricing rates.

The Contracting Officer also expects to verify proposed rates against the originally competed TO1 & TO2; both task orders were evaluated and determined to be fair and reasonable at the time of the original award and therefore use of historical information from the original award is an approved method. In addition, the technical team will conduct a technical evaluation to consider the level of effort and labor mix that is proposed to continue performance and will provide input to the Contracting Officer in determining a fair and reasonable price. Other tools such as review of similar work and comparison to an independent government cost estimate will also be used in determining a fair and reasonable price. Certified Cost or Pricing Data will be a requirement for both bridge actions.

It is anticipated that the CLIN structure, for both task orders, will be consistent with the current task order structures:

CLIN 1 - Labor (LAAFB) (CPFF) CLIN 2 - ODC (LAAFB) (Cost) CLIN 3 - Labor (Peterson AFB) (CPFF) CLIN 4 - ODC (Peterson AFB) (Cost) CLIN 5 - GSA Contract Access Fee (LAAFB & Peterson AFB) (Cost) CLIN 6 - Data and Reports (LAAFB & Peterson AFB) (Not Separately Priced)

16 Jun 2022 Page 6 of 9

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

When acquisition planning was executed for TO1 and TO2, the estimated period of performance for the current task orders did not account for programmatic shifts to accommodate two full center re-structures due to the effects of SMC

2.0 and then again, two years later, to the current SSC PEO-led mission focused acquisition deltas. These significant events expended the time provided by the current task orders to smartly establish the relevant mission needs to support the shift in programmatic support due to the dissolution and establishment of 1) re-organization from stove-piped Directorates (MILSATCOM) to the horizontal structure of SMC 2.0 (Development Corps, Production Corps, Special Programs, and Portfolio Architect); 2) the stand up of USSF (SMC to SSC); and 3) re-structure from SMC 2.0 (Corps) to SSC PEO-led mission focused acquisition deltas and support divisions (SN, CG, SZ, BZ, IA). Any work done by the government to identify the support requirements needed for the Corps under SMC 2.0 were rendered void. After the stand up of the USSF and the following re-structure to the current PEO-led mission focused acquisition deltas, support requirements have once again changed to accommodate each mission area supported under these Task Orders. The government is currently a) undergoing competitions for their mission area; or b) establishing the requirements and formulating plans to re-compete. SSC procures services via GSA led procurements or command led procurements via the contracting division. It is expected that the forthcoming competitions will be at the mission area acquisition delta level.

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to increasing fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services:

The initial competitions of these Task Orders under OASIS were tailored towards the needs of then SMC's MILSATCOM Directorate. Over the course of execution for both of these Task Orders, a shift occurred to support the change from stove piped directorates to a horizontal SMC 2.0 Corps approach, a shift that was not anticipated at award.

The current task orders included several option years at the time of SMC 2.0 to allow for a shift in support. This EFO will alleviate yet another unanticipated shift from SMC 2.0 to SSC acquisition deltas and will enable the Government to better establish proper requirements for each SSC delta supported under this EFO. These requirements are expected to be procured under future support contracts.

For example, Military Communications & Positioning, Navigation and Timing (SSC/CGF) is currently in the process of awarding their own support contract through GSA OASIS. The result will relocate the services currently being provided under these two Task Orders to the new award. Anticipated award is expected end of calendar year 2023.

Additionally, the most recent PEO-based reorganization combined new programs and projects under common infrastructure and the government will use the bridge period to identify the gaps, redundancies and shortages in support services and validate additional requirements driven by the evolving governance processes. Similarly, the deltas being supported under these Task Orders, e.g. SSC/SN, SSC/BZ, SSC/SZ and SSC/IA, are currently undertaking efforts to identify their individual requirements for expected future competed efforts. Upon approval of this EFO, efforts will resume to identify requirements and sources for the impending competitions. If a competition were to proceed without approval of this EFO, it would lead to a gap in critical unique support that the agency has identified and is required right now. Therefore, approval of this EFO to MCR for both TO's is necessary to maintain continuity of support, while preparations for re-competition are on-going.

(8) Program Manager's certification that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

(9) Contracting Officer's certification that the justification is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

16 Jun 2022 Page 8 of 9

Instructions for Completing the Template IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from FAR 16.505 (b)(2) and the supporting rationale. FAR16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,000 unless a statutory exception applies. The specific exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(__) [Insert A,B, C, D, or E]. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification, with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as 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”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of FAR 16.505(b)(1) and DFARS 216.505-70 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

16 Jun 2022 Page 9 of 9

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) This paragraph needs to be tailored based on the types of CLINs in the order and the pricing arrangements on the basic multiple award contract. If the contract did not establish the price for the supply or service, the Contracting Officer must establish prices for each order IAW FAR 15.4. The paragraph needs to describe the steps that will ensure that the prices/estimated cost of the order will be fair and reasonable. For example, even if firm-fixed prices were obtained under adequate price competition in the award of the multiple award contract, the Contracting Officer still needs to consider market conditions and other factors that may have changed since contract award and explain the basis in the determination that prices/costs are fair and reasonable prior to award of the order.

(6) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(7) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.