J_A Duke FoS IDIQ Extension Signed (Final Redacted).pdf

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

Control Number: JA-26-C-0744

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

JUNE 2025

6. Reason for Authority Cited: The Government anticipates the cost over the next 5 years to be approximately $2.1 million. To solicit this requirement competitively, the Government would have to acquire the technical data packages (TDP) Duke systems . The cost to acquire the TDP for these versions .

a. Background: SRCTec, LLC. is the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of the Duke

FoS. A J&A for this contract was approved in May 2020 under FAR 6.302-1(a)(2). As the OEM, they are the only source with the technical expertise, facilities, and experience to continue as the prime contractor for sustainment of the Duke FoS. As explained in the 2020 J&A for this contract, the Government procured a technical data package (TDP) from SRC for the Duke systems in 2013 but determined that competition for sustainment on just systems was not cost effective to the Government because older and newer versions of Duke FoS were, and remain, fielded by the Army. Competition for sustainment on Duke systems would likely result in award to SRC due to familiarity with the systems, no down time in setting up facilities, and the ability to order parts on economies of scale for all Duke systems. Market research has consistently resulted in SRC being the only company that can provide the services required by the Government.

1) The previous acquisition of Duke TDP cost the Army in 2013. Due to obsolescence and significant updates to the firmware and software for Duke , the TDP acquired in 2013 is essentially obsolete. To support competition, the

Army would have to acquire an updated TDP from SRC. Factoring in the substantial updates to firmware and software for Duke , plus the associated manpower hours required to put together the TDP, the Army would expect to pay SRC ; estimation based on the previous price paid and conversations with the vendor prior to award of this IDIQ in late 2020. Considering that the annual cost of sustainment is less than $500k, the systems becoming obsolete , and the potential downtime and learning curve if another vendor were to take over sustainment, the Government has declined to purchase any additional TDPs from SRC.

2) Due to the age and growing obsolescence of the Duke FoS it is unlikely other vendors would invest in developing the facilities, hardware, and engineering capabilities to compete for these services, resulting in award to SRC or sizeable pass-through costs to SRC. The contracting officer would be unlikely to justify the pass-through charges IAW FAR 15.404-1(h)(2)(i). This would result in non-value added, excessive pass-through charges to the Government.

b. Alternatives: The alternative to not approving this J&A would be for the Army to acquire the TDP for Duke , which would cost . Then, the Army could solicit this requirement to industry and attempt to make an award to a vendor other than SRC, which, in addition to the costs of acquiring the TDP, would incur additional costs to the Government via pass-through costs and additional expenses. These additional costs would result from a vendor needing to either hire SRC as a subcontractor or consultant; as well as

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

the time and significant capital investment it would take for the new vendor to establish or reverse engineer processes that SRC already has put in place in its nearly 20 years of managing this requirement.

Impact if not approved: The impact of disapproval would be duplication of costs of at least to acquire the TDP for Duke FoS that would not be recovered through competition. In addition, any additional investment required by a new vendor to acquire the infrastructure and develop the processes used by SRC to maintain the Duke FoS requirement.

depth of experience and significant investments made to sustain Duke FoS, a new contract would more than likely result in significant pass-through costs. SRC likely needs to be hired as a subcontractor or consultant in order for a new vendor to perform this requirement.

7. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The Government conducted market research as recently as March 2025 via a publicly posted Sources Sought Notification (SSN) and the only viable response was from SRC. The Contracting Officer has published the notices required by FAR

5.201 and any bids or proposals received shall be considered.

a. Effective competition: Based on previous efforts to obtain competition, (See, Section 11) the Government does not anticipate effective competition for this action. The Government will continue to post notices IAW FAR 5.201 and any bids or proposals will be considered.

b. Subcontracting competition: An approved subcontracting plan is incorporated in the current contract. This plan contains goals for subcontracting with small business concerns to include small-disadvantaged business concerns, women-owned small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, and service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns.

8. Actions to Increase Competition: The Government has kept market research up to date for Duke FoS sustainment services. The systems are becoming obsolete but will remain fielded until a viable replacement is available. PL EA is responsible for providing to the Army and is working on developing a new, commercially competitive requirement such as that may be a suitable replacement for Duke FoS. The Army purchased the TDP for the Duke FoS in 2013 and it did not lead to any increased competition for sustainment services.

9. Market Research: On 19 March 2025 ACC-APG Division C posted a SSN on SAM.gov to identify industry sources with a ready capability to provide sustainment services for the Duke FoS. This SSN closed on 2 April 2025 and resulted in two responses, one from SRC and one from DCS Corporation. SRC met all the requirements of the SSN in demonstrating knowledge and capabilities to sustain Duke FoS. DCS indicated some capabilities to meet the would require time and significant private capital investment to develop new facilities, reverse engineer Duke systems, or utilize SRC as a subcontractor. The

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

D-S205. When this requirement was competitively solicited for W15P7T-09-D-M615 and W56KGY-16-D-0002, SRC was the only offeror to bid to these requirements. This acquisition pattern indicates that SRC has consistently been the only vendor capable of performing the contract requirements of the Army, and as stated previously, despite acquiring TDP to support competition in 2013, the Army has found that other vendors no longer find it viable to compete for Duke FoS requirements due to system obsolescence and/or the required capital to develop new facilities, reverse engineer Duke systems, or utilize SRC as a subcontractor.

b. Other facts. N/A

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

Approval

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement of sustainment services, hardware, and testing for the

Duke Family of Systems on an other than full and open competition basis, pursuant to the authority of Title 10 U.S.C. §3204(b)(B)(i) as implemented in FAR 6.302- 1(a)(2)(ii)(A) Substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition. The estimated value of the modification is $2.1 million for a five-year extension to the period of performance from 11 December 2025 to 10 December 2030. The approval is subject to availability of funds, and provided that the supplies and/or services herein described have otherwise been authorized for this acquisition.

Command Advocate for Competition

ACC-APG