Sole-Source JA B10656 Repair Interior Finish-Redacted.pdf

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

JBSA LACKLAND, AFB - B10656

REPAIR INTERIOR FINISH OUT REVISION

CESWF-EC-AM

1. Contracting Agency - U.S. Department of Army

US ARMY Corps of Engineers Fort Worth District

Contracting Division Fort Worth, Texas 76102

2. Describe the supplies or services required (including the estimated value).

The Contractor will provide updated design Drawings, Specifications, and Design

Analysis that have had an unintentional delay due to lack of funding resulting from mold remediation. The exterior work for the building was completed on a previous D-B contract. The Primary HVAC AHU (Air Handling Unit) was installed to provide conditioned air while the building was vacant awaiting new funding to complete the interior work. All Interiors, HVAC (minus the AHU), Electrical, Lighting, Communication, Security Systems, and Plumbing need to be completed before the building can be occupied. Frankfurt Short Bruza (FSB) as the original DOR will provide an updated design package that can be used to complete the interior finish out work. The level of effort incurred to provide this service is approximated at

3. Statutory Authority.

FAR 6.302-1: “Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.” Subparagraph (a)(iii) of this section states, “For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-on contracts for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in- (A) substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition; or (B) unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.” This authority is codified in Title 10 U.S.C.

2304(d)(1)(B).

4. State the qualifications of the proposed contractor to meet the requirements.

Frankfurt Short Bruza (FSB) is the current Designer of Record (DOR) for a previous Design-Build expired contract (W9126G-14-D-0070) at Lackland AFB, TX to Repair B10656. As the DOR FSB is in a unique position to complete the revision and recertify the revised package in a timely and efficient manner for the Government. They have previously been hired as a fully capable firm thru an IDIQ contract for this type of design work. FSB though as the DOR is intimate with the existing design and this alone makes them an easy selection to continue with the updating of the design.

This action is for architect and engineering services for a military facility that is partially completed and will bring the building to completion and fully usable. If this action were to be solicited and awarded to a new firm, the Government would incur significant delays in the procurement process due to the Brooks-Act procedures. The Procurement Action Lead Time (PALT) goal for an A/E action of this scope is 80 days. The current estimate for the update of the existing drawings is approximately which has a PALT goal of 40 days, a reduction of 50% in the amount of time required to procure the requirement.

Further, if the action was re-solicited, a complete design would be required due to DOR liability for the re-design of the facilities.

Based on the above information the Government would benefit from utilizing the authority provided at FAR 6.302-1 by realizing a substantial reduction in time to receive the updated completed design and an even more substantial reduction in costs to the Government.

5. Describe efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as is practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by FAR subpart 5.2.

This action will be publicized in accordance with FAR subpart 5.2 as required by

FAR 6.302-1(d)(2). Any proposals that are received as a result of the publication requirements shall be considered along with the proposal received from KFN to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as is practicable.

6. Determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the

Government will be fair and reasonable.

The estimate of for this action is based on the rough order of magnitude developed by the estimating team at USACE. This amount is derived from various estimating databases available to the USACE estimating team which are generated from historical data. The contracting officer anticipates receiving a fair and reasonable proposal similar to that of the estimate based on previous proposals received from FSB.

7. Describe the market research conducted and the results, or a statement of the reason market research was not conducted.

The value of the contract will not exceed the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) and there is adequate information to justify the costs therefore, in accordance with FAR 10.001(a)(2)(ii), market research is not required. Also, given that this action is for the review of the drawings that the DOR has already provided and that design firm will be the recipient of the sole-source solicitation, broad market research would not be necessary.

8. List facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition.

There is a time limit that influences the decision to follow this route rather than to open for full and open competition. We are using current year funding will expire on Sep. 30, 2020 if not contracted for construction by that date. Using FSB will shorten the time needed to update the design. If we choose to go with full and open competition we would need to acquire an AE, go through the full DBB process to include Charrette, Initial, VE Study, Interim, Final, and Corrected Final design and reviews, receive Solicitation documents, obtain BCOES, solicit for construction award, and so on. Ultimately, we do not have the time available to award to another AE with competition.

Further, transferring the design to a different AE firm would result in a significant increase in design cost and administrative cost burdens on the requiring activity as well as on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This would not be a fiscally responsible use of Government funds.

9. A listing of other sources, if any, which expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

At this time there are no other known interested sources.

10. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required, if necessary.

The agency does not foresee that these services will be required beyond this contract. To overcome barriers to competition in the future USACE will consider the length of required service, dollar amount, and the necessity for full and open competition. USACE will take measures to budget sufficient time and funds in order to ensure that the full process of design utilization from AE contract to Design-Bid-Build contract may occur.

CESWF-CTM

11.APPROVAL STATEMENT:

The justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve this acquisition to proceed by soliciting from only one source subject to the availability of funds and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Signature:________________________ Date:____________________

Linda D. Eadie Contracting Officer

24-Jun-2020