J A_Redacted.pdf

MICC 2016-11 Leonard Wood 2016-1

For Official Use Only

JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENT

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM: Full Food Services for the Logistics Readiness Center (LRC), Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by Federal Acquisition (FAR) 6.302-1, Only One Or a Limited Number of Responsible Sources, and No Other Type of Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements

Estimated Amount: $7.5M

Prepared by:

Title: Contract Specialist, MICC-Fort Leonard Wood Date: 19 November 2015

Procuring Contracting Officer:

Title: Contracting Officer, MICC-Fort Leonard Wood Date: 19 November 2015

Technical/Requirements Representative:

Title: Food Program Manager, LRC Fort Leonard Wood Date: 19 November 2015

Management Representative:

Title: Director, LRC Fort Leonard Wood Date: 19 November 2015

Justification and Approval for Other than Full and Open Competition

1. Contracting Activity: Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri

2. Description of Action: Approval is requested to award a firm-fixed price contract to the Missouri Department of Social Services (the Missouri State Licensing Agency), for a period of 90 days. This contract is required to maintain continuity of services and allow sufficient time to solicit and award the follow-on contract. FY16 Operations & Maintenance funds will be used to fund this contract.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The US Army Sustainment Command (ASC), Rock Island, Illinois; 407th Army Field Support BDE, Fort Hood, Texas; Fort Leonard Wood Logistics Readiness Center (LRC), Supply and Services Division (FLW-LRC) has a requirement under the Army Food Program to provide Full Food Services (FFS) in ten (10) dining facilities (DFACs).

FFS operations are those activities that comprise the full operation of an Army dining facility.

These include, but are not limited to, requisitioning, receiving, storing, preparing, and serving rations. FFS facilities are staffed entirely by contractor personnel. This requirement is subject to the Randolph Sheppard Act (R-SA) of 1936. The estimated total value of this contract is $ M and the period of performance (PoP) will be 1 December 2015 – 1 March 2016.

4. Authority Cited: This action is authorized under provisions of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by Federal Acquisition (FAR) 6.302-1, Only One Or a Limited Number of Responsible Sources, and No Other Type of Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: The current contract, W911S7-09-D-0029, was awarded under this authority. This requirement is subject to the R-SA which provides a priority for blind vendors recognized and represented by State Licensing Agencies in the award of contracts for, among other things, the operation of cafeterias on Federal property.

(a) Background: The current contract for FFS is W911S7-09-D-0029 which was awarded to the State of Missouri State Licensing Agency (SLA) on a noncompetitive basis under the authority of 10 U.S.C.2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1. Acquisition planning for the follow-on required separating the procurement of DFA services from procurement of FFS. Consistent with decisions from the courts and statutory enactments during 2004-2006, the policy of the Army is that the term “operation of the cafeteria” (which is the predicate for applying the priority afforded the SLA under the R-SA) applies strictly to FFS only. Based upon reorganization at Fort Leonard Wood, there have been military reductions that have resulted in no military cooks remaining at Fort Leonard Wood. The approach was revised again to incorporate changes to the PWS prepared and promulgated by the requiring activity. The follow-on acquisition process was further delayed by ASC and MICC discussions regarding the way forward for food service at Fort Leonard Wood. The dynamic nature of the requirement has delayed the Army’s ability to develop a competitive follow-on award solicitation. Due to the delays noted above, five contract extensions have been awarded in order to allow the necessary time to process the follow-on contract: Extension 1) W911S7-09-D-0029-0024 Mod 09, PoP 1 June 2014 – 8 September

2014; Extension 2) W911S7-09-D-0029-0024 Mod 13, PoP 9 September 2014 – 17 December 2014; Extension 3) W911S7-09-D-0029-0026, PoP 18 December 2014 – 15 June 2015;

Extension 4) W911S7-09-D-0029-0028, PoP 16 June 2015 – 13 September 2015; and Extension

5) W911S7-09-D-0029-0029, PoP 14 September 2015 – 1 December 2015.

(b) Alternatives: There are two alternatives: Alternative 1; FFS ceases at 23:59 on 1 December 2015 until the new contract is in place; Alternative 2; award a contract for 90 days to continue services.

Alternative 1 may be viable at installations that are populated by permanent party Soldiers.

These personnel could conceivably be placed on separate rations and procure their own meals.

The situation at Fort Leonard Wood is different; the Soldiers here are in a training status with the majority of Soldiers being in One Station Unit Training (OSUT) or Basic Training (BT). These new Soldiers do not have the means to procure their own meals if placed on separate rations nor does the training rhythm permit the time required for these Soldiers to travel to an eatery and return to training without undue disruption to the training cycle. For these two reasons Alternative 1 is not a viable option for Fort Leonard Wood.

Alternative 2 is viewed as the only real option available to Fort Leonard Wood. As stated above the majority of Soldiers served by the FFS contract at Fort Leonard Wood are in an initial training status and have no viable alternative to the DFAC for their meals. Extending the services with the current contractor on a short term basis ensures that the initial entry training Soldiers will be able to maintain their training tempo while being sustained with the meal support that is critical to their mission accomplishment.

(c) Justification: The FFS effort at Fort Leonard Wood encompasses 10 DFACs and prepares and serves approximately 25,000 meals per day. Given the time constraints in this situation the SLA and attendant subcontractor are the only entity in position to ensure continuation of these FFS operations. For this reason 6.302-1 is the appropriate citation in this instance.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: MICC – Fort Leonard Wood posted a Sources Sought notice in the Army Single Face to Industry (ASFI) to conduct market research and target businesses that are capable of providing Full Food services at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The synopsis noted that R-SA procedures applied and thus the SLA would be awarded the contract for FFS if included in the competitive range. A total of 29 firms responded to the announcement expressing interest in the acquisition. Most respondents currently, or had recently performed FFS as a subcontractor to a SLA and were actually seeking visibility into the Missouri SLA subcontracting process.

a. Effective competition. The follow-on requirement is subject to the R-SA which makes the opportunity for effective competition minimal. In accordance with the R-SA, and Army Regulation (AR) 210-25, dated 30 June 2004, paragraph 6(b)(1), priority will be given to the SLA’s proposal if it is evaluated and determined to be in the competitive range.

b. Subcontracting competition. A subcontracting plan is required from the SLA. It will be reviewed to ensure the contractor obtains as much competition as possible in its subcontracting.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The follow-on requirement is subject to the R-SA which makes the opportunity to increase competition minimal. In accordance with the R-SA, and Army Regulation (AR) 210-25, dated 30 June 2004, paragraph 6b(1), priority will be given to the SLA’s proposal if it is evaluated and determined to be in the competitive range.

8. Market Research: In accordance with FAR Part 10, MICC – Fort Leonard Wood used the following methods to obtain market research:

a. AbilityOne [FAR 8.002(a)(2)(i)]: Initially, MICC-Fort Leonard Wood considered AbilityOne as an option for re-procuring this requirement. However, due to the verbiage outlined in Section 853(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY05, commonly referred to as the “no poaching provision”, there is no way the Committee for Purchase could approve the addition of another R-SA contract. Further, the JWOD does not displace the R-SA for acquisition of full food services even if the “no poaching” rule were not applicable. Mandatory Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) [FAR 8.002(a)(2)(ii)]: Currently, DoD has no mandatory schedules that apply to this requirement.

b. Optional FSS [FAR 8.002(a)(2)(iii)]: Currently, DoD has no optional schedules that apply to this requirement.

c. Federal Prison Industries (FPI) Inc. [FAR 8.002(a)(2)(iv)]: FPI does not offer services that can support this requirement.

d. MICC Enterprise Solution Contracts: The latest MICC enterprise solution contract list was reviewed and there are no existing MICC enterprise contracts that can fulfill this requirement.

9. Interested Sources: MICC – Fort Leonard Wood posted a Sources Sought notice in the Army Single Face to Industry (ASFI) to conduct market research and target businesses that are capable of providing Full Food services at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The notice invited interested concerns to submit a capability statement and provide responses to the following questions:

a. Is your business a small business under NAICS code 722310?

b. Does your firm qualify as a small disadvantaged business?

c. If disadvantaged, specify if your firm is certified under Section 8(a) of the Small Business

Act?

d. Are you a certified HUBZone firm?

e. Are you a woman-owned or operated business?

f. Are you a certified Service-Disabled Veteran Owned or Veteran Owned business?

g. Is your business a large business?

h. Is your business certified by a State Licensing Authority (SLA) under the Randolph

Sheppard Act?

A total of 29 firms listed on the table below responded to the announcement expressing interest in the acquisition.

Company Small Business Category(ies)

Nayyarsons Corporation SB, SDB

Military Logistics Consulting, LLC SB, SDVOSB

EDP Enterprises SB

JED Service Company SB

Dos Abuelitas, Inc. SB, WOSB

Hero Dining Services, LLC SB, SDB

VMC Services, Inc. SB, SDB, HUBZone, WOSB

Blackstone Consulting, Inc. None

KCA Corporation SB, HUBZone, WOSB

Treat America None

High Impact Consulting, LLC SB, SDB, WOSB, SDVOSB

Selrico Services, Inc. SB, VOSB

Worley Enterprises, Inc. SB, SDB, 8(a)

Hoosier Food Service, Inc. SB

Sage Street Services SB, 8(a)

Quality Coast, Inc. SB, SDB, HUBZone, WOSB

Son’s Quality Food Company SB

West Coast Trailer Construction SB

Missouri Department of Social Services

Taher, Inc. None

Innovative Federal Operations Group, LLC SB, VOSB

Crystal Enterprises, Inc. SB, SDB, WOSB

J.W. Mills Management, LLC SB, SDB, HUBZone

Cantu Services, Inc. SB, VOSB

Native Resource Development Company, Inc.

SB, SDB, 8(a), HUBZone, WOSB

Avery Group SB, SDB, WOSB

C2 Enterprises SB, HUBZone, WOSB

Serka Federal Services LLC

Sodexo Management Inc.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement history. See paragraph 5.d.

b. Other facts. Not Applicable.