Approved_Exception_to_Fair_Opportunity_Justification_Redacted.pdf

Control No: CAO-18-0109

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT

FAR PART 16 EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY JUSTIFICATION

For Actions Exceeding the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT)

Program/Equipment: Software testing support for new systems software development, product improvement programs and systems software block development, integration, and demonstration efforts.

Authority: Title 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 2304c(b)(2) as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 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.

Amount:

Prepared by:

Contracting Officer:

il

Technical:

Requirements:

il

Reviews: I have reviewed this justification and find it adequate to support an exception to fair opportunity.

QESA Director:

Legal Counsel:

FAR Part 16 Exception to Fair Opportunity Justification Under Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Contracts

For Actions Exceeding the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT)

1. Contracting Activity: U.S. Army Contracting Command – New Jersey

2. Description of Action: The U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) requests a cost-plus fixed fee task order with a base year and four (4) option years utilizing a General Services Administration (GSA) One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) contract with Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, 2340 Dulles Corner Blvd., Herndon, VA 20170. The Government projects award for March 2018 and fiscal year will be used.

An acquisition plan is not required because this procurement does not meet the threshold at Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 207.103(d)(i)(B).

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The Software Qualification Branch, under the U.S. Army ARDEC, Quality Engineering and System Assurance (QESA) Directorate, supports tactical software information technology development and testing for the broad range of products and customers supported by the ARDEC. Support extends to all products, prototypes, developmental items, and integrated software systems under the purview of ARDEC and its customers.

Software testing is directly linked to all aspects of systems’ development and support;

from the establishment of systems requirements through development and testing to assure that products are testable, reliable, maintainable, and logistically supportable throughout the product lifespan. The Government requires software testing support for test planning, preparation, execution and reporting of new system development programs, technology demonstrations, and system software Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs). Additionally, support for software Configuration Management, Information Assurance, and training, as well as meeting war-time surge requirements for software intensive weapon systems and their interfacing software, is required. Support extends to both the contiguous United States (CONUS) and outside the contiguous United States (OCONUS) activities, and Foreign Military Sales (FMS).

4. Authority Cited: Title 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 2304c(b)(2) as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation (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.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: This requirement is being awarded under a GSA OASIS contract with Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (NGSC). NGSC has developed a proprietary Field Artillery Training course and testing tools specific to all of the required systems that are imperative for QESA customers to have in place. These tools increase efficiency of the test team during Formal Qualification Testing by reducing cycle time for each test event.

NGSC has also developed the

Additionally, NGSC has developed the

The Field Artillery training was created utilizing the systems developed at ARDEC and uses the equipment present at ARDEC to give hands on demonstration of

These tools, as well as specialized experience involving software testing on a variety of field artillery systems and subsystems, are required to fulfill this effort. The contractor would need in-depth experience with the following systems being supported:

• M777A2 Digital Fire Control System

• M119A3 Digital Fire Control

• M109A6 Fire Control System

• Paladin Integrated Management (PIM)

• Diagnostic and System Health (DASH)

• Automated Test System (AT)

The support is not limited to the above and would also include other subsystems relating to field artillery.

A variety of market research was conducted, including postings to both FedBizOpps (FBO) and GSA OASIS websites, and only one source, Northrup Grumman, was determined to be capable of performing all the engineering support services required due to their experience with field artillery systems and subsystems. Under prior contracts, Northrup Grumman has developed extensive knowledge on QESA’s software support to specialized equipment such as prime movers and field artillery. Northrup Grumman is the only contractor that has the experience with prime movers that is required for this effort.

Prime mover support requires driving these vehicles/movers during all phases of software and developmental testing, which is a highly specialized skill. An example of this is driving Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) and High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV) to tow the M777A2 and M119A3 and interoperating with Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS) to process survey control points and process fire missions based on the GPS location of the howitzer and range from the missions transmitted from alternate locations.

The majority of the Government’s requirements require in depth knowledge of field artillery and software testing processes in order to execute efficiently and effectively in a Capability Maturity Model - Integrated (CMMI) 5 environment. While some of the responses to the Sources Sought Notice demonstrated experience with software testing, none other than Northrop Grumman demonstrated software testing experience with field artillery systems in a CMMI 5 environment as part of an independent test organization.

The Armament Software Engineering Center (ASEC) applies a rigorous systems engineering approach to software development to include requirements definition/analysis, architectural design, systems software design and analysis, software engineering and integration, software verification testing, Cyber Security accreditation, software fielding, software acquisition support, configuration management, and process assurance. QESA assists ASEC by managing the Software Engineering Verification & Validation Test competencies. Northrop Grumman provides field artillery software test support to QESA’s customers within the ASEC that utilize the CMMI for Development model v1.3 for the M777A2, M119A3, and PIM programs. They have demonstrated adherence to the CMMI core v1.3 Process Areas that relate to software testing such as Validation, along with contributing to the level 5 process areas of Causal Analysis and Resolution and Organizational Performance Management. This support has assisted ASEC in achieving CMMI level 5 designation when audited by outside agencies during the last three appraisals. Operating within a CMMI 5 environment requires detailed knowledge of the process areas in order to optimize and quantitatively manage the software development lifecycle. It would be difficult for a respondent without prior CMMI experience to be inserted into ASEC without taking extensive training on the CMMI for Development v1.3 framework and training on how to apply the framework within ASEC's approach to CMMI.

The services required are not commercial services and specific skills are required to support this effort. The tasks require supporting ARDEC systems engineers to implement best practices and tools. Successful execution of these tasks requires not only generic systems engineering skills and abilities, but in-depth knowledge of ARDEC’s systems engineering processes, procedures, methodology, templates, guidance documents, metrics, training material, and organizational structure. Northrup Grumman has supported the development of ARDEC’s competency for over sixteen (16) years on prior contracts. There would be a significant learning curve for a new contractor to learn the current methods and processes used by QESA, which would cause a significant delay in advancement of these and other current requirements. Northrup Grumman has unique and specialized knowledge that is required for the continuing advancement of QESA’s practices. For another contractor to meet the Government’s requirement, it would take at least of training to learn the CMMI for Development model v1.3 framework and then be trained by in-house personnel on how to apply the framework within the ASEC. It would take at least for QESA engineers to integrate a new contractor to operate efficiently in accordance with the best practices defined by QESA Software Quality Engineers for Software Test Planning, Test Readiness Review preparation, and drafting Software Test Descriptions. It would also take an additional for QESA engineers to train new contractors to support the field artillery software integration at Yuma Proving Ground. These estimated hours are all based on the time it took NGSC to be trained prior to performing on the previous efforts.

This would result in significant delays of approximately for the software test support QESA provides to its customers, which in turn would delay the fielding of updated software to the warfighter for the M777A2, M119A3, PIM, DASH and AT programs. These delays would be for of training in each program (or total) and would lead to cost overruns which cannot be absorbed by QESA’s customers in the current environment of limited funding for Post Production Software Support projects. QESA customers are not budgeting additional training nor test support for the software test teams beyond what has already been estimated. In order to fund the additional labor that will be incurred by schedule delays to train a new contractor to meet the requirements, integrate them into the existing software development teams and train the complex technology to be tested, schedule delays of , costing approximately per program, are estimated. Therefore, this would amount to an estimated total of to fund all six supported programs. There are also additional field artillery subsystems that require support throughout the contract years that are not taken into consideration with this estimate which would add to the total labor costs associated with training a new contractor. This additional labor would be necessary to ensure full competence of the test teams to fully validate and verify the software and discover any and all safety and performance critical defects.

Alternatives:

Seeking another vendor is not possible, because of the time saving tools developed by NGSC. Also, an alternate vendor would require significant time to develop the required technical capability, knowledge and experience to perform this effort. NGSC has built this technical capability over the past by working directly on multiple field artillery programs that are supported by the Software Qualification program such as M777A2, M119A3, M109A6, PIM, DASH and AT. They have been providing field artillery and software test expertise in support of these programs which has led to the fielding of multiple versions of software that operate safely and reliably. Additional funding and time is not available to educate or train a new contractor on the current effort. It is estimated that an additional would be required to train a new contractor as delineated in the following:

Hours Rate Total dollars

CMMI Training- Picatinny

QESA / In house training

Yuma - Training

Total

The estimated hours above would span and fund engineers to train a new contractor. Suspending operations would not be possible, as it would put multiple initiatives and projects at risk of failure. Lastly, it would not be possible to utilize in-house resources because the QESA Directorate does not currently have the in-house resources to support this effort.

Failure to approve this exception to fair opportunity justification would adversely impact the development of QESA’s capability and result in poor software support on projects/programs that ARDEC supports, thereby causing increased project/program risks. Any other plan of action would risk a break in service and lack of appropriate skillsets required for this effort. If a version of software is fielded with a safety critical defect, this could lead to a catastrophic hazard and there would be an immediate “stop work” order released to the field for the warfighter to cease using the system/software with the defect. The warfighter would be without this essential field artillery capability until a new software version is released and uploaded to all fielded systems. This turnaround is dependent on the level of complexity of the defect, but could result in a delay during which time the warfighter would have to revert to a previous version of software that has limited capability. Fielding a version of software with a safety critical defect is considered unacceptable and potentially catastrophic. Having to revert back to a previous version of software is a byproduct of this scenario and would degrade the warfighter’s ability to fully meet their mission as older software has limited capability (e.g.

a smaller set of ammo or shorter firing range capability).

To bring in a new contractor to meet the requirement, the Government would lose extensive field artillery experience which introduces the risk that a new contractor would not have the sufficient technical expertise to identify safety critical defects. This technical expertise can only be gained through years of field artillery operation and test execution.

6. Actions to Increase Competition: Market Research was performed on both FBO and OASIS in the form of sources sought notices. Only Northrup Grumman responded with all required capabilities and experience. At this time, the Government does not plan to seek competition for QESA Software Engineering Support. However, the Government will continue to conduct market research before any subsequent acquisition of these services to determine if other sources have obtained the knowledge and experience required to support QESA with Software Engineering Test Support.

7. Market Research: Market Research, in the form of a sources sought notice (W15QKN-17-X-0ANR) was posted to FedBizOpps by ACC-NJ on 20 July 2017 and closed on 21 August 2017. Additionally, ACC-NJ issued a Sources Sought Notice via email in the GSA OASIS environment on 14 July 2017. A total of seven (7) respondents submitted information from both sources sought notices. Only Northrup Grumman was found to be fully capable of meeting the Government’s needs. The results are as follows:

Company

CAGE

Location

Business size

Capability/Experience

The results of these formal notices indicate that other than Northrup Grumman, none of the respondents have the necessary experience working with field artillery systems or conducting specialized testing utilizing prime movers. Also, although some of the contractors are proficient in CMMI, none have the requisite experience in a CMMI 5 environment as part of an independent test organization, which is a vital part of the contractual requirements.

Additional Market Research was conducted from August 23 – September 10, 2017 by QESA and ACC-NJ, via the following:

• Contacted Contracting Officers from ACC and ENCORE II

• Contacted knowledgeable people within ARDEC.

• Used Internet tools and performed searches to research potential suppliers on websites such as www.marketresearch.com and www.thomasnet.com.

• Reviewed results of recent market research on previous requirements that were awarded by the organization to determine if those suppliers were still relevant.

All market research conducted led to a determination that any type of small business or socio-economic set-aside is not appropriate, and most importantly, that none of the potential sources, small or large, with the exception of Northrop Grumman, had the relevant system experience, field artillery experience, and prime mover support experience required for this effort. Without these skillsets, any other interested source would be unable to adequately support the Government’s requirements and would not be able to accomplish the work described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

8. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History:

Contract:

Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation Award Date: 11 September 2014 Competitive Status: Fair Opportunity Provided (only one offer received)

Contract:

Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation Award Date: 8 April 2011 Competitive Status: Fair Opportunity Provided (two (2) offers received)

b. During the performance of the most recent effort, NGSC developed the test tools mentioned in paragraph 5 that are unique to their company. The fair opportunity given in the last two efforts would no longer be cost effective for the Government, given the development of these new tools. They are integral to the effort at this juncture.

9. Technical Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

10. Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

11. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

This determination will be made using the following: X cost analysis price analysis should cost IGCE audit: identify the audit type other: identify the methodology or combination of methodologies that will be used

As a part of this basis, certified cost or pricing data will be required.

12. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.