JARedacted.pdf

MICC Control No: 2013-85 MICC Fort Hood Control No: 13-29

JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENT

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Test Support Services for the United States Army Operational Test Command (USAOTC), Fort Hood, TX

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY: Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC)- Fort Hood, Contracting Division - ATEC, 1001 761st Tank Battalion Ave, Room W103, Fort Hood, TX 76544-5025

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Request approval to issue a three (3) month Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) interim bridge contract for test support services at Fort Hood, Texas on a limited competition basis rather than full and open competition. The period of performance is 1 October 2013 to 31 December 2013 with two option periods for three (3) months each. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) funds are available for this action upon contract award. The estimated value for this contract effort is $8,523,035.00. The contract will include FAR clause 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Terms of the Contract.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES: U.S. Army Operational Test Command (USAOTC) has a statutory mission to conduct independent operational tests of materiel and equipment prior to full scale production in accordance with Title 10 U.S. Code Section 2399. This contract provides services in support of the USAOTC test mission. The contractor shall provide all labor, management, supervision, supplies, materials, equipment, and tools, not otherwise provided as government furnished property (GFP), to perform the non-personal services required to support the operational test, data collection, and experimentation mission of the USAOTC. The contractor may also be required to perform testing, data collection, and experimentation in support of combined developmental and operational test, joint and multi-service tests, training activities, and other Department of Defense (DOD) activities. The contract will consist of the following general requirements:

a. Test operations support that includes test planning, field test support, data collection and reduction, data base management, and support for test report preparations.

b. Test operations logistics support that involves the preparation and maintenance, as required, of the test site.

c. Maintenance and non-developmental item (NDI) enhancement to existing test instrumentation systems that are provided to the contractor as GFP.

d. Maintenance and dispatch services for test support vehicles and generator fleet.

e. Design and build prototype instrumentation and brackets, and build or have Built designed items. Write software and firmware as required.

4. AUTHORITY CITED: The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(2) as implemented by Federal Acquisition (FAR) 6.302-2, Limited Competition, Unusual and Compelling Urgency.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED: This effort is a "corrective action" resulting from an Agency level protest of an interim bridge contract (W91151-13-C-0031) for USAOTC test support services. This bridge contract is necessary to maintain ongoing operational test activities and support services required for the conducting of multiple Army and Department of Defense level testing and production programs currently under separate contracts. Without such support, numerous separate testing and production contracts will be adversely affected which could result in substantial claims and reduction in the productivity of those supported contracts. This bridge contract was initially awarded as the result of the automatic stay imposed when the award of the follow-on contract for similar services was protested to GAO. The bridge contract was then the subject of an agency protest. In response to the Agency protest, the Agency is proposing limited competition as between the responsible offerors that submitted proposals previously competed in the GAO protested follow-on contract. The current bridge contract, for which this corrective action is being proposed, was awarded on 3 June 2013, for three (3) months with no option periods, however, clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services for up to six months was included. One month of the clause 52.217-8 was exercised; therefore, the current bridge contract expires on 30 September 2013.

a. Background: The initial protested contract W91151-13-D-0005 was awarded 18 April 2013, for an estimated contract value of $50,000,000 to Combined Technical Services. The contract is a three (3) year Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contract with no options. The acquisition was solicited as unrestricted full and open competition and awarded to a single contractor.

Five (5) proposals were received and evaluated in response to the solicitation. On 29 April 2013, the Fort Hood Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) was notified by GAO that Research and Analysis Maintenance, Inc (RAM) filed a protest against the contract award. The protestor, RAM alleged an improper and unreasonable evaluation of RAM’s and Combined Technical Services proposals and the award decision. As a result, contract performance was halted on 30 April 2013.

On 6 May 2013, an additional protest was received from ManTech, another unsuccessful offeror. ManTech alleged the Government committed errors in evaluating their Cost and Past Performance proposal that prejudiced their ability to fairly compete. An interim bridge contract W91151-13-C-0031 was awarded as a sole source on 3 June 2013, for an estimated cost of $4,500,000.00 to Combined Technical Services. This contract is a three (3) month Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract with FAR clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services for six (6) months. The contract was sole source awarded to Combined Technical Services (CTS) based on urgent and compelling circumstances and the fact that CTS was the incumbent contractor at the time of the protest due to the expiration of the previous contract on 4 March 2013. On 4 June 2013, RAM filed an AMC-Level Protest against the sole source bridge contract awarded to CTS. AMC dismissed RAM’s protest on 17 July 2013 based on the Agency’s decision to issue a new bridge contract award under limited competition.

b. Alternatives:

(1) Suspension of Contract support. The support services provided by the test support contractor are critical to mission accomplishment and cannot be suspended without major, if not critical, disruption to the USAOTC’s mission.

Therefore, this alternative is not acceptable.

(2) Use of In-House Resources. The USAOTC relies heavily on contracted test support services. USAOTC lacks sufficient manpower, technical expertise and resources to perform the required services if contract support lapses after 31 August 2013.

(3) Award a competitive contract. There is insufficient time for the MICC to award a new contract based on full and open competition to ensure continuity of services before 30 September 2013.

(4) Award a contract using limited competition. Limiting competition to the offerors who submitted proposals for the protested effort is the only viable option available to prevent service disruption. This option also satisfies corrective actions directed to resolve the agency protest.

c. Justification: USAOTC requires contract services to meet their statutory mission of testing and evaluating weapons and communications systems for the Department of the Army. Continued contract support for ongoing test missions is vital while protest remedies are being implemented. The only viable alternative is to award a second bridge contract using limited competition as authorized by the FAR.

Additionally, Title 10 U.S. Code Section 2399, mandates that a contractor performing operational test functions be free of conflicts of interest. The pool of contractors for the protested effort, are vetted and found to be free of any conflict of interest for this effort.

d. Prior Acquisitions: The current CPFF Bridge Contract, W91151-13-C-0031, was awarded on 3 Jun 13, for an estimated cost of $4,500,000.00 with a period of performance from 1 June 2013 to 31 August 2013. The previous contract, W9115U- 07-D-0003 was a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract with Research Analysis and Maintenance, Inc. (RAM), with a period of performance from 3 September 2007 to 4 March 2013 with a total estimated contract value of $191,416,128. Prior to this contract, DATM01-02-C-0004/W9115U-07-C-0001 was a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contract with Test and Experimentation Services Company (TESCO), a large business. The period of performance was 01 March 2002 through 30 September 2007 with a total estimated contract value of $222.4 million. Contract DATM01-96-C- 0005 was a CPAF contract with TESCO. The period of performance was 1997 – 2002 at an approximate annual cost of $20 million. Contract DATM01-93-C-0002 was a CPAF contract with TESCO. The period of performance was 1993-1997 at an approximate annual cost of $16 million.

e. Impact: To put the impact of failing to award a bridge contract into perspective, an overview of the Department of Defense and Department of Army Acquisition process is appropriate. A failure to execute operational testing in accordance with a program’s approved acquisition schedule constitutes mission failure not only for Operational Test Command, (OTC), which is responsible for the conduct of operational tests pursuant to 10 U.S. Code sections 139 and 2399, but also for its higher headquarters, U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC).

Every acquisition program has a defined acquisition strategy and acquisition schedule which is approved by the Army Acquisition Executive. Government “technical” testing may begin prior to or at a certain milestone in the acquisition process. Upon successful completion of the “technical” testing, the program must complete statutorily required “independent operational testing” by OTC. See U.S.

Code references above. Soldiers use test articles in an operational test, typically a Limited User Test (LUT). Successful completion of the LUT is a criterion for a second decision, after which the program typically is awarded a Low Rate Initial Production Decision (LRIP) to manufacture enough representative test articles for the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E). The results of a successful test are used to support a Full Rate Production Decision at the Secretarial level and fielding of combat systems to the Warfighter. If ATEC and OTC cannot complete the technical and operational test mission, each program affected will be forced to revise its acquisition strategy and schedule. Changes require at least Army Acquisition Executive level approval, and some programs on the Department of Defense (DoD) Oversight list, require DoD level approval. ATEC and OTC do not conduct operational testing on their own schedule. They are mandated to support the Army and/or DOD approved acquisition strategy. If an operational test is delayed, for example, by three weeks, this does not mean merely a three-week delay in fielding the equipment to the Warfighter. Because of the schedules which must be reconstructed, and downstream events to be managed, such a delay could add up to months or even years in getting critical equipment and systems into the hands of the Warfighters.

Mission failure will result and ultimately delay fielding of critical equipment and systems to our Soldiers if this J&A is not approved. Furthermore, delays will have a catastrophic impact on cost, schedule, and performance of over 15 major Army and Joint systems evaluation requirements in various stages of planning and execution.

Contractor support is vital to the conduct of these operational tests. Without this contractor support, OTC will not be able to support the operational test events below, and collect the essential data that evaluators require to support critical production decisions. Lack of operational testing support affects USAOTC and material developers/program managers, operational users (combat developers, trainers, and logisticians), system evaluators and test units (Soldiers). A tremendous amount of coordination takes place to reach the point of operational testing, and delays have numerous second and third order effects. Support contracts of program managers also would have to be extended to support any delays in operational testing support.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: A GAO protest was filed against the agency follow-on contract (W91151-13-D-0005) competed using full and open competition. The current bridge contact (W91151-13-C-0031) was awarded as an interim contract while GAO corrective actions are being addressed. The agency is seeking to limit competition for the bridge contract to those previously submitted proposals. The bridge contract is sustainably similar but shorter in duration and smaller in scope than the follow-on contract (W91151-13-D-0005) for which the proposals were originally submitted. Due to the urgency of need limiting competition to those offerors who were previously evaluated provides for the maximum competition practical in accordance with FAR 6.302-2(c)(2).

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION: There is an ongoing effort to take corrective actions and award the full and open competitive contract protested to GAO. In effort to increase competition for the second bridge contract, the Government will request cost proposal from the pool of contractor that participated in original competition. This will allow for increased competition for short-term bridge contact, decrease chances of a service disruption and satisfy requirements for agency corrective action for bridge contract.

8. MARKET RESEARCH: There are no indications that market conditions have changed since original competition. The specialized nature of this requirement creates a unique barrier to entry for any firm other than offerors that participated in the protested effort. Market research conducted on contract W91151-13-D-0005 indicates sufficient competition was available and obtained. The Small Business Coordination Record (DD Form 2579) for the interim requirement will be forwarded for approval with this J&A.

9. INTERESTED SOURCES: IAW FAR 5.202(a)(2), a synopsis will not be published to FedBizOpps due to the urgency and serious injury to the Government if the agency complies with the time periods specified in FAR 5.203. Interested sources are limited to the pool of offerors that submitted proposals for the original protested effort. The offerors’ include Combined Technical Services (CTS), Systems Application Technologies Services, Inc. (SA), Research Analysis and Maintenance Inc. (RAM), Geeks and Nerds (GaN), and ManTech.

10. OTHER FACTS:

a. Procurement History: See paragraph 5d.

b. Acquisition data availability: N/A. A performance based work statement suitable for full and open competition was included in the competitive solicitation under protest.

c. Unusual and compelling urgency: Extent of Injury to the Government (Unusual and Compelling Urgency). As previously stated, the lack of test support services would delay the deployment of weapons and communications systems to the Warfighter in the field. This would in turn have a significant negative impact on the success of overseas contingency operations. The Government would be seriously injured if this interim bridge action were not executed, as there would be no means for keeping test support services in place in the time available.

d. Subcontracting Competition: N/A

11. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance included in this Justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Date: 27 August 2013

Title: Chief, Contract Management Branch, G4 Signature:

12. MANAGEMENT REVIEW/APPROVAL: The requirement herein described is a valid requirement for the activity named in this Justification. The technical and requirements information contained in this Justification represent the minimum needs of the Government. The only way to satisfy this requirement is by limiting the competition as described herein.

Name: Date: 27 August 2013 Title: Director, G-4, Operational Test Command Signature:

13. FAIR AND REASONABLE COST DETERMINATION: I hereby determine that the anticipated price for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Contractor’s proposals will be evaluated pursuant to FAR 15.404-1and price analysis will be conducted on each offerors proposal to determine price reasonableness. Under this limited competition solicitation, offerors will propose to Government supplied labor categories, labor descriptions and performance hours. The lowest acceptable offeror will be awarded the contract. Name:

Date: 29 August 2013 Title: Contracting Officer Signature:

14. PROCURING CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION: I certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Date: 29 August 2013 Title: Contracting Officer Signature:

Approval

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement of a three (3) month interim bridge contract for Test Support Services on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(2) as implemented by Federal Acquisition (FAR) 6.302-2, Unusual and Compelling Urgency subject to the availability of funds, and provided that the services herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Signature:

Date:

Name: Christopher W. Chapple Title: Special Competition Advocate Agency: 418th Contract Support Brigade

18 September 2013

CHAPPLE.CHRISTOPHER.WENDELL.1079634480

Digitally signed by CHAPPLE.CHRISTOPHER.WENDELL.1079634480 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, cn=CHAPPLE.CHRISTOPHER.WENDELL.1079634480 Date: 2013.09.18 12:53:51 -05'00'