A03RedactedJAW911QX15D0012.pdf

Control No. 15-01

Program/Equipment: Engineering Simulations and Analyses in Support of Army Vehicle Protection

Technologies

Authority: FAR Part 6.302-1 Amount: [redacted]

Prepared By:

Typed Name: [redacted] DSN: [redacted]

Title: General Engineer Date: 06 October 2014

Procuring Contracting Officer:

Typed Name: Daniel Balizan DSN: [redacted]

Date Reviewed: 06 October 2014

Technical Representative:

Title: General Engineer Date Reviewed: 06 October 2014

Requirements Representative:

Title: [redacted] Date Reviewed: 06 October 2014

Legal Review: I have reviewed this justification and find it adequate to support other than full and open competition.

DSN:

[redacted]

1.a. Contracting Agency

US Army Contracting Command, Adelphi Contracting Division CCAP-SCA, 2800 Powder Mill Rd., Adelphi, MD 20783-1197

1.b. Requiring Agency

U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL), [redacted].This action is being brought forward by [redacted].Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005.

2. Description of Action

Approval is requested to solicit for a new Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite- Quantity (IDIQ) task-order contract for the construction of physics-based engineering models and simulations in support of the Army Research Laboratory’s (ARL’s) Scientific Research, Technology Development, and Integrated Survivability/Lethality Analyses missions. Specific requirements cannot be predicted with precision and become manifest suddenly and in some profusion, and for this reason an Quantity (IDIQ) task-order contract for the construction of physics-based engineering models and simulations in support of the Army Research Laboratory’s (ARL’s) Scientific Research, Technology IDIQ type of contract is more beneficial than any other type of contract. The requested contract is for the renewal of services that were successfully brought forth under contract [redacted]with a period of performance 08 February 2007 – 31 Jan 2014. and referred to throughout as the “previous contract”.

Funding will be established within the individual Task Orders (TOs). It is anticipated that a contract containing an ordering period of five (5) years duration, and a ceiling value of [redacted]will be adequate for any foreseeable requirements. [redacted]

3. Description of Supplies/Services

The services to be provided will consist of non-commercial research and development (R&D), [redacted].

This subject effort is continuation of work that was started under contract [redacted] issued on 08 February 2007 also using sole source procedures based on the unique knowledge, skills and abilities GRA possesses in this field. In this role, GRA will continue the research and [redacted]. The models and simulations will take the form of computer codes that describe the processes that each subsystem must perform, and also consist of sets of parameters that may be varied by the user in order that he/she may assess its effect on the overall process. The vendor shall be required to exercise the codes as directed by the COR, analyze the results, offer instruction in their use, and prepare reports and briefings, which describe the functions of the simulations and their prediction of subsystems and overall protection system effectiveness. Much of this information and data will be classified at the level of SECRET.

4. Authority Cited:

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 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 Requirements.”

5. Reason for Authority Cited:

Gleason Research Associates, Incorporated, (GRA) 5537 Twin Knolls Road, Columbia, MD 20145-3270 is the only source for this requirement. GRA has developed a large number of protection system simulations, collectively referred to as the [redacted], that [redacted]. APS and other potential protective systems [redacted].These new types of protection systems are instrumental in preserving [redacted].

These simulations can be thought of as a "family" of simulations, most with the same basic structure, and with maximum usage of GRA previously developed algorithms and other code structures.

Following is a list of current simulations developed by GRA under contract [redacted]and earlier contracts:

[redacted]

Following are notable foreign systems that are not currently being utilized, but can be revived if necessary:

Testing is done to help in the design of APS and other protective systems, and to aid in the verification of performance. Testing is generally concentrated on components and subsystems with a few targeted tests to demonstrate system performance. Small numbers of system performance demonstrations are done because the testing is very expensive. Physics-based engineering level simulations provide estimates of system performance in large numbers of conditions, some of which would be difficult or impossible to test. The simulations also aid in the design of components and subsystems by providing stand-alone simulations of these components and, when placed in a full system simulation, the use of Monte-Carlo variational techniques incorporate component errors and reveal factors that have the greatest impact on system performance. As the developer of many of the algorithms and nearly all of the code in the simulations, GRA is the only source with the knowledge, skills and abilities to fulfill required non-commercial research and development activities in the area of construction and exploitation of physics-based engineering models and simulations of battlefield [redacted]. Based on their significant expertise in this niche market, GRA is the sole source that can optimize the usage of the developed algorithm/code base for further analysis.

It is determined to not be economical nor efficient to attempt to compete this requirement as the delays and duplication costs would far exceed any benefits that would be derived through competitive procedures. It is further determined that delays associated with a competitive procurement could potentially harm U.S. Warfighters as access to this critical technology would be delayed until a new contract is in place. In addition, a competitive procurement is significantly more risky to the Government since the outcome of another vendor’s success is an unknown variable, whereas GRA can readily fulfill the requirements of the Government in a satisfactory manner.

Without continuity of these research and development services from services with GRA, the Government would incur substantial duplication of cost to find and qualify a comparable contractor.

While the Government maintains the data rights to the algorithms/code base developed by GRA, it would take an estimated ten (10) man-years of contractor or Government effort to even begin to develop the expertise with the current code base in the [redacted] APS simulations, since no other source would be able to simply “pick up” where GRA left off. Such delays would not be in the best interest of the Government (FAR Part 6.302-1(a)(iii)(B) "Unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirements").

Further, attempting to compete this requirement would not be in the best interest of the Government from a cost standpoint in that using the average loaded rate assumed for this contract (i.e. considering the mix of employees used and their respective man-hours and loaded rates), which is approximately [redacted] per hour, and roughly [redacted] man hours this equates to a sunk cost of [redacted] for the Government in duplication of this effort. Based upon the above, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to issue a sole source award to GRA, Inc.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition:

Based on market research performed by the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) (see section 8) no other vendors other than GRA were found to be able to fulfill the government’s requirement without spending significant additional funds and losing potentially significant amounts of time.

7. Actions to Increase Competition:

To date, no contender has been identified that has the necessary knowledge and skills in engineering, scientific, mathematical, and computer science disciplines to replace the capabilities of GRA.

Nevertheless, ARL will continually search the marketplace to increase competition by attending conferences/exhibitions, conduct World Wide Web research, and maintain open discussion with industry experts in order to determine if other companies can meet the government’s strict requirements.

8. Market Research:

Market research was conducted through internet searches starting in November 2013 and continuing through March 2014. [redacted]

The internet search uncovered many simulation contractors, but most were developers of simulation products that are not related to our needs. Research indicated three (3) competitors: [redacted]

[redacted]produces a simulation of active protection systems for ground vehicles that looked like it could meet many of our needs, and required further evaluation. [redacted]

As stated in their brochure, [redacted]product specifically designed to support analytical research & development of active protection systems.” [redacted]allows modeling of APS with a test-bed capability, allowing component design to be evaluated in the context of a full system simulation. The existing Government simulations have been developed along a two-track approach, with some simulations allowing test bed capabilities, while many others having evolved into APS point-designs, for evaluation of specific contractor designs. The philosophy behind the Government’s simulation supports analytical research and development,[redacted] but also supports APS evaluation at significant milestones in acquisition programs of record. To better support acquisition programs, the Government’s simulation has added simplified vehicle vulnerability within the simulation (perf/no perf of vehicle armor) and linkages into detailed vehicle vulnerability simulations[redacted]

[redacted]

Off the shelf, [redacted]does not provide certain capabilities we currently have with the GRA family of simulations, and that are necessary to perform our design and evaluation mission. Some of the things we do that[redacted]either does not do or does at a simpler level follow:

[redacted]

9. Interested Sources:

A Synopsis was posted to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website on 2 October 2014 for fifteen (15) days with a closing date of 15 October 2014. To date, no responses have been received and no other sources have written in to express interest. The notices required by FAR 5.201 shall be published and all bids or proposals shall be considered.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement history.

(1) Contract numbers and dates of the last several awards.

(a) Previous contract: [redacted]issued 08 Feb 2007. This IDIQ contract expired 31 Jan 2014. Thirty-four (34) tasks were let under this contract – the period of performance of the last task, 0034, ends on 31 July 2014 (6 months after the expiration of the basic contract, per the basic contract clauses). Following is a funding summary of the 34 tasks, by fiscal year:

It should be noted that contract [redacted]issued 08 February 2007 only reflects the most recent formal contract ARL had with GRA. ARL has worked with GRA since 2002 in this particular area of R&D.

The Army’s involvement with GRA simulations was begun in 1996 by AMRDEC.

(2) Competitive status of these actions.

The previous contract, [redacted], was issued on a sole source basis to GRA, Inc. The contracts that used the GSA negotiated labor rates were also not competed.

(3) Authority previously used for less than full and open competition on the previous contract, [redacted]:

Sole source was requested IAW Title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 251, et seq.) as implemented by FAR 8.405-6(b)(1), only one source is capable of responding due to the unique or specialized nature of the work .

(4) If a justification was prepared to support the procurement made before this one, a summary of the contents of paragraph 7 of the justification for that procurement and an explanation of the results.

Paragraph 7 of the justification for the previous contract notes that the Objective Trade Study IPT, which was running a major study of APS in the years just prior to the previous contract being awarded, continually monitored the work of many Govt agencies and vendors working in the simulation area, and that a number of entities had been approached, including Government [redacted]. It further stated that each of these entities, upon their review of what is required, said they could not match what GRA had already done. Additionally, it was noted that the SWG, which has voting members from ARL, AMRDEC, AMSAA, ARDEC, CERDEC, and TARDEC, recognized that on specific areas outside the normal purview of the SWG, the SWG will turn to non-profits and Govt agencies outside of the Dept of the Army. This has been done before and continues to be an option for the future.

(5) If any prior award was accomplished by full and open competition, a detailed explanation of the changed circumstances.

Since the previous contract, nothing has changed. GRA, Inc. remains the sole provider of the engineering APS simulations.

(6) An explanation of any unusual patterns which may be revealed by the history; e.g., several consecutive, urgent buys.

No unusual pattern of buys developed. Tasks were awarded as needs came up and funds became available.

(7) If a justification was prepared to support the procurement made before this one, briefly describe the circumstances justifying the buy and whether there have been any significant changes.

GRA was the only source having the required capabilities. Funds obtained were directed specifically to continue the work by the RDECOM Objective Trade Study - IPT originally chartered by ASA(ALT). No significant changes. Requirements are now generated by a new APS S&T effort funded by ASA(ALT) entitled the Modular APS (MAPS) program.

b. Acquisition Data Availability.

GRA, Inc. is the sole supplier of the vehicle protection simulations discussed throughout this document.

A scope of work for the new IDIQ contract has been developed.

c. Unusual and Compelling Urgency. N/A

d. Subcontracting Competition.

The Government is procuring services directly from the prime contractor; therefore it is anticipated that there will be no subcontracting competition available. If it should be later determined, however, that the contractor intends to subcontract any portion of this acquisition, the clause found at FAR 52.244-2 –5 Subcontracts will be included and will require that the contractor receive written consent from the Contracting Officer before placing any possible subcontracting opportunities.

e. Follow-on Contracts

At the time of the award of the previous contract, it was noted that the Government would incur substantial costs, likely approaching the value of the contract, to develop new codes that could do what GRA could bring to bear immediately. Additionally, the Government would incur intolerable delays given the timeline for decisions at that time. The same situation is true with respect to the current MAPS program, which is a new, five (5)-year program that is making key decisions on its future path this year.

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.

Signer’s Title: General Engineer

12. 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.

Signer’s Title: Branch Chief, Advanced Systems and Lethality Branch

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination:

I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. The proposed cost will be determined fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR Part 15.404-1(b)(2)(ii) “Comparison of proposed prices to historical prices paid, whether by the Government or other than the Government, for the same or similar items.” In addition, price analysis from previous contracts and comparison to other commercial contracts with cost analysis conducted on a per task order basis. Cost or pricing data will not be required per FAR 15.403-1(C)(1)(iii).

14. Procuring Contracting Officer Certification:

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement of Engineering, Simulations, and Analysis in Support of Army Vehicle Protection Technologies for an ordering period not to exceed five

(5) years from contract award date with a ceiling value of [redacted] on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) and FAR Part 6.302-1, subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.