J A_14-28_APLS_redacted.pdf

MICC Control Number 14-28

JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENT

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

APLS Sustainment

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY. Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) Fort

Hood Contracting Division-Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC) 1001 761st Tank

Battalion Avenue Fort Hood, Texas 76544.

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION. Approval is requested to award a new contract for Airborne

Position Location System (APLS) sustainment services on a sole source basis to the original equipment manufacturer, SRI. This is a follow-on requirement to Contract Number W9115U-

10-D-0003, which was awarded sole source to SRI. This action will support ongoing operational testing at United States (U.S.) Army Operational Test Command (OTC), Airborne and Special

Operations Test Directorate (ABNSOTD) located at Fort Bragg, NC. The contract will be a Cost

Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The

Government will use Fiscal Year (FY) 14–20, Research Development Test and Evaluation

(RDT&E) Modeling and Simulation (M&S) 62C funds to fund this contract. SRI is the current incumbent and is the sole proprietor to the APLS hardware and software instrumentation used for the Governments APLS system requirements.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES. The Government requires non-personal support services to provide the maintenance and technical support for the APLS. The support includes depot level repair, maintenance, refurbishment, hardware/software maintenance and upgrade, training as well as on-site field support and training during contingency operations, and onsite service calls at Fort Bragg, North Carolina and contingency field sites. APLS hardware supported under this acquisition includes the: personnel units, Miniaturized APLS (MAPLS) units, pallet units, Tablet Computers, Autonomous Inertial Reference System (AIRS) pallet units, GPS re-radiators, and rapid data download/charger rack and analysis workstations. Contract period of performance for sustainment will be five years from date of award. The contract should consist of an initial base period of three years with an option to extend the contract for an additional two one-year periods. In addition, FAR Clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, will be included. Total estimated cost for this effort is approximately $750,000.00 for the overall five-year period performance period (06 Jan 2015–05 Jan 2020). The contract minimum will be

$100,000.00 and the maximum will be $750,000.00 over the anticipated five-year performance period.

4. AUTHORITY CITED. The statutory authority permitting sole source procurement is 10

U.S.C 2304(C)(1) as implemented by FAR Part 6.302.1(b)(1)(i), Only one Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Needs.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED. There is no other system besides the APLS, commercial or Government; readily available that can meet the data collection requirements in support of the ABSOTD mission. This is due to the performance requirement technical complexity, uniqueness of performance and condition of usage, and the rapid need to modify the

APLS system to meet changing test requirements over the APLS life cycle. To award the sustainment requirement to sources other than SRI, would result in duplication of costs, which the Government could not recover and expose the Government to high risk of performance failure.

a. Background. The APLS is produced solely for the U.S. Army Operational Test Command, Airborne and Special Operations Test Directorate (ABNSOTD) since the initial successful contract DATM01-01-C-0006 by SRI, Menlo Park, CA (see paragraph d below for additional information). Since that time SRI has successfully sustained, upgraded and provided field support for the APLS through several contracts, latest being W9115U-10-D-0003, Sustainment

Services. SRI has also developed and produced APLS hardware on multiple contracts (see sub-paragraph d below for details).

The Government anticipated incremental changes to the hardware and software over the APLS life cycle in response to changes in the data collection requirements for operational testing.

Therefore, the Government decided not to procure a technical data package suitable for competition as the cost to initially acquire and then update was not expected to be recouped by the Government due to competition. In addition, as SRI is the developer of the APLS software there is an additional cost to the Government associated with each new vendor becoming knowledgeable to the software, the cost of another contractor to become familiar with the system, purchase rights to the SRI proprietary software, and sustain the ABNSOTD APLS hardware and software would hinder ABNSOTD’s mission timeline, and ultimately could not be recovered through competition.

b. Alternatives. An extreme alternative could be to create new APLS equipment for sustainment services but the Government estimates it would take six to twelve months to create as sufficient software and hardware design to attempt to perform this service. Failure to perform would impede the OTC testing schedule, possibly halt operational testing of equipment and

Army/Air Force airborne operational training not to mention the additional costing to acquire the revised hardware and software technical data and coding to support follow-on acquisitions. As stated above, the purchase of a competitive data package (hardware and software) suitable for competition is not in the Government’s best interests.

c. Justification. The current contractor, SRI is the sole proprietor of the current software and the hardware used for the current design of the APLS. Market research for this acquisition has shown that there are no commercial businesses in this three state region (Texas, Oklahoma, and

Arizona) and nationwide that can provide or have knowledge of APLS that could perform the services required. In addition, the Government does not have a technical data package (hardware design and software) suitable for competition or the performance of the required support services. Finally, this award will be the last sustainment contract for APLS. The APLS program life is expected to end in approximately three to five years when projected advances in the technology used will be sufficiently mature and proven viable to support a competitive acquisition for a replacement to the APLS.

d. Prior Acquisitions. The initial APLS contract was awarded under full and open competition and then terminated for default when the vendor failed to meet the Government’s minimum performance requirements. On March 06, 2001, APLS prototype/production requirement-phase II was posted to the Commerce Business Daily with the Government's intent to award the requirement as a sole source contract under the authority of FAR 6.302-1 to SRI.

No other sources expressed interest. The Government then awarded the effort to SRI, the next low offeror on the original solicitation, who successfully developed and produced the APLS.

The following table lists the prior contracts that were solicited under Other than Full and Open

Competition as a sole source to SRI International. As stated, SRI has produced, upgraded, and maintained the APLS since its inception in 2001.

Table 1

Contract

Number

Contractor How

Procured

Contract

Amount (est.)

Period of

Performance

Contract

Type

Procurement

DATM01-

01-C-0006

SRI

International

Sole

Source

$3,091,531.00 5 March

2001-31

September

Fixed-

Price (FP)

APLS

Production

Prototypes &

Sustainment

W9115U-

07-P-0092

SRI

International

Sole

Source

$99,986.37 01

September

2007-31

August 2008

FP Sustainment

Services

W9115U-

08-P-0046

SRI

International

Sole

Source

$99,998.00 01

September

2008-31

August 2009

FP Sustainment

Services

W9115U-

10-D-

SRI

International

Sole

Source

$499,726.00 01 November

2009-05

January 2015

FP Sustainment

Services

e. The Government awarded the above previous contracts under fixed-priced performance based procurement with the premise that repairs, maintenance, and software updates could be determined during the life of the contract. However, as these contracts progressed, the

Government did not have sustainment tasks that expended all the funds, which resulted in excess dollars amounts to the contractor. Because of the nature of operational testing, the Government cannot accurately define the amount or need/type of repair, maintenance, and software updates until each actual event occurs. This procurement requires repairs, maintenance, software updates, and training on an as-needed basis in conjunction with contingency operations.

Therefore, the use of CPFF procurement will benefit the task base nature of this on-going requirement. The Government will be able to prioritize repairs and track expenses in terms of reducing risks associated with cost overruns.

f. Impact. Without this sustainment service, OTC will not be able to perform its assigned mission in support of ABNSOTD operational testing with events scheduled throughout Fiscal

Year 2015-2020. APLS is the only instrumentation system that ATEC automatically and visually can track the airdrop path of individually designated personnel and equipment from the exit of the plane to landing. The APLS incorporates the capability to collect and evaluate aerial delivery data from air dropped cargo and paratroopers. This is done by the APLS instrumentation installed on the paratrooper and cargo pallets. The APLS instrumentation records the position, rate of decent and inertial data of the jumper or cargo pallet. In addition, the APLS instrumentation records airspeed, altitude, position, and deck angle from the exit of the aircraft until landing. Without APLS, OTC cannot obtain the operational and safety assessment information required by Department of Army (DA), Department of Air Force (DAF), and

Department of Defense (DOD) to assess equipment performance and validate airborne operational tactics for the Army and Air Force.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION. The initial APLS developmental and production contract was solicited as full and open. However, that contract was terminated as the vendor failed to meet the Government’s minimum performance requirements. Subsequently, the

Government awarded the contract to SRI under a sole source that has successfully developed and produced the APLS. As stated above, the Government decided to not acquire a technical data package (hardware and software) as the cost (dollars) and time (for new vendors to become sufficiently technically familiar to successfully perform) over the life of the APLS would not be recovered due to competition and pose an unnecessary risk to the command’s mission accomplishment. Contractors could not meet the minimum requirements set forth in the PWS because the cost of obtaining proprietary information from SRI and the time constraints allotted for training and operations would not be conducive to the high pace ABNSOTD testing environment. The Government also posted a Sources Sought on Federal Business Opportunities on 24 December 2013 with a closing date of 13 January 2014, and no other sources expressed interest in this requirement.

6. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION. The Government anticipates that this acquisition is to be the last based on the life cycle of the current APLS. The Government, based on current life cycle projections, intends to have competed and awarded a replacement for the current APLS by the end of this contract. Therefore, the Government will not undertake any actions to increase competition for the current APLS design. The Governments intent is to obtain a technical data package suitable for competition for the APLS replacement system as part of the new replacement system’s contract.

7. MARKET RESEARCH.

a. ABNSOTD conducted market research during November and December 2013 through internet search engines and trade journals searches for companies with systems similar enough in nature to APLS that they could reasonably be expected to provide sustainment services but none could be found that were able to provide the requested requirement.

b. In addition to posting the Sources Sought to FBO, the contract specialist also emailed the

Sources Sought information on 06 January 2014 to multiple potential offerors (Rastrac, C&C

Technologies, Raytheon Company, Applanix, LLC., Novatel, Inc., Honeywell Aerospace, Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems, Boeing, SRI International, and Holman’s Inc.) while conducting market research through internet search engines (Google, Federal Procurement Data

System (FPDS), Thomas Net and historical data). Of these, only three companies (SRI

International, Novatel, and Honeywell Aerospace) responded to the email. The Government did not receive any other responses to the Sources Sought.

8. INTERESTED SOURCES. As stated, three companies responded to the Sources Sought. A summary of the Sources Sought respondent and its size classifications follows.

Table 4

Two companies (Novatel and Centella Inc. (subsidiary to Honeywell Aerospace)) responded to the email with regret that their respective companies could only provide some of the services and equipment needed to fulfill this requirement. Neither firm could perform the proprietary portions of the support requirement. Splitting the award of the support between two vendors, proprietary and non-proprietary, is neither cost efficient or financially prudent. Therefore, a single award to

SRI is in the overall best decision for the Government.

9. OTHER FACTS.

a. Procurement History: As stated in paragraph 5.d above, the APLS was produced for the

U.S. Army OTC, ABNSOTD under contract DATM01-01-C-0006 by SRI, Menlo Park, CA.

Subsequent contracts for both production and sustainment were awarded to SRI, see paragraph

5.d for a list of contracts. All follow-on contracts were awarded to SRI under 10 U.S.C

2304(C)(1) as implemented by FAR Part 6.302.1, Only one Responsible Source and No Other

Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Needs. The Government did not acquire a competitive technical data package as its cost to obtain and update over the anticipated APLS life cycle would not be cost effective to the Government due to competition. The Government would not recoup its investment during the life span of APLS to justify the cost of acquiring a technical data package for each end-item. As stated above, there is no other Government or industry source that can perform the required services.

b. Acquisition Data Availability. The hardware and software used as the basis of the APLS is the proprietary property of SRI International. The cost to acquire a competitive data package does not make good business sense, as the Government would not recover the cost to acquire and update over the life of the APLS through competition. In addition, the APLS program life is expected to end in approximately three to five years when projected advances in the technology used will be sufficiently mature and proven viable to support a competitive acquisition for a replacement to the APLS.

c. Unusual and Compelling Urgency. This justification and approval does not cite unusual and compelling as a basis for this procurement.

d. Subcontracting Competition. The vendor, as part of the solicitation, will be required to submit a Small Business Participation Plan with their proposal in accordance with FAR 10.702.

The Government will evaluate the plan in accordance with FAR Part 19, its supplements, and any MICC guidance to include an assertion that there are no subcontracting opportunities

Company Name Size Classification for

NAICS 811219

Cage Code Response

Method

Novatel, Inc Large 38757 Email response

Honeywell Aerospace

(Centella Inc.)

Large 1C8P3 Email response

SRI International Large 03652 Email response consistent with the successful, efficient performance of the contract. A Contracting Officer’s

Representative (COR) will be appointed for the contract and will be formally tasked to monitor the vendor’s subcontracting performance against the plan during the life of the contract.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. FAIR AND REASONABLE COST DETERMINATION. I hereby determine that the anticipated price for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. The techniques identified at

FAR 15.404-1(b)(2), specifically the previous production and sustainment contracts, will be used to ensure award will be at fair and reasonable prices. The Independent Government Cost

Estimate (IGCE) will primarily be an analysis of the contractor’s proposed cost. Additionally, the techniques identified at FAR 15.404-1(c)(2)(iii)) will be used to further ensure award will be at fair and reasonable prices.

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

14. APPROVAL. Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement of the sustainment to include repair and refurbishment of all APLS units, re-radiators, rapid data download/charger rack and analysis workstations, on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C 2304(C)(1) as implemented by FAR6-302-1, Only one Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Needs, subject to the availability of funds, and provided that the services herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Name: Dean Carsello Date

Title: Special Competition Advocate

Agency: Army Contracting Command (ACC)-MICC

Signature: