J&A_-_FBO_17C0027_Redacted.pdf

2 | P a g e J&A for Other Than Full and Open Competition: Integrated Water Solutions

Control Number: NWP-17-046

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY:

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Northwestern Division (NWD), Portland District (NWP), 333 SW First Ave., Portland, OR 97204-3495.

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:

Approval is requested to establish a firm fixed price, performance based service contract with Integrated Water Solutions, LLC, to support the Columbia River Treaty Program (CRTP) and the United States Entity (created by the President and consisting of the Administrator of Bonneville Power Administration and the Commander of USACE, NWD) under the authority of Surveillance of Northern Boundary Waters (SNBW). The requirement will be funded with non-expiring Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funds. The contract will be for a performance period of approximately three years; from date of award through 31 May 2020.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES:

Services will include providing project and program management support, technical paper development, internal and external facilitation, and communication management support services for the CRTP. The contractor will provide all materials, equipment, and labor to provide the following services in support of the CRTP:

1. Facilitate and document internal USACE management and technical team meetings;

2. Facilitate and document external meetings that may include the public, the Canadian

Government, the United States Department of State, Bonneville Power Administration, Sovereign Tribal Nations, and States and Local Governments;

3. Provide communication management through producing timely and accurate internal or external meeting minutes and through open communications with stakeholders for document and facilitation coordination, and;

4. Provide Program and Project Management support in maintaining the Treaty Program Management Plan, to include the Review Plan, Program Schedule, and Charters.

The Agency requiring justification and approval for other than full and open competition is the USACE, NWP Program and Project Management Team.

4. AUTHORITY CITED:

Only one responsible source and no other services will satisfy agency requirements. FAR 6.302- 1(a)(2)(iii)(B) - services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-on contracts for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely

3 | P a g e that award to any other source would result in -- unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED:

a. Background

The Columbia River Treaty (Treaty) is an International agreement between Canada and the United States on the development and operation of dams in the upper Columbia River basin for power and flood control benefits in both countries. The Treaty has no end date, but it includes an option for either country to terminate most Treaty provisions any time after 60 years (September 2024), given at least 10 years advance notice. In addition, when the Treaty was implemented, the U.S. purchased 60 years of assured flood control storage in Canada; that purchase agreement ends in 2024. The Treaty gives the U.S. rights to storage in Canadian reservoirs after 2024, but that operation fundamentally changes to a system referred to as “Called Upon” flood risk management, where the U.S. would have to call on Canada to change its reservoir operations in order to provide additional storage space to manage downstream flood risk in the U.S.

For a majority of the past decade, the USACE, NWD and BPA (on behalf of the U.S. Entity) have undertaken a series of studies to prepare for operation of the Columbia Basin in fall of 2024. The first phase of studies, known as the ‘Treaty Review,’ was initiated in fiscal year 2008 and primarily consisted of hydro regulation modeling analyses of the Columbia River System focusing on flood control operations and hydropower generation. A second phase of this effort was initiated in fiscal year 2009 and included the Flood Risk Management Stage-Damage analysis for the Columbia River system. Within this phase, both USACE and BPA, on behalf of the U.S. Entity and in collaboration with the Sovereign Technical Team (STT)1, undertook an assessment of potential effects of post-2024 Treaty alternatives on regional hydropower; flood risk management; ecosystem-based functions including anadromous fish, resident fish, wildlife, water quality, the estuary, and cultural resources; water supply; recreation; and navigation. The overall objective of each assessment was to use quantitative models and qualitative analyses to describe key conditions and responses to the current operations and ecosystem condition and post-2024 Treaty alternatives. The overarching purpose of the Treaty Review was to enable the U.S. Entity, working in collaboration with regional sovereigns and stakeholders, to make an informed recommendation to the U.S. Department of State (DOS) as to whether it is in the best interest of the United States to continue the Treaty, terminate the Treaty, or seek to negotiate with Canada to amend or modify the Treaty.

On Friday, December 13, 2013, the U.S. Entity delivered its final recommendation, the U.S.

Entity Regional Recommendation for the Future of the Columbia River Treaty after 2024 (Regional Recommendation), to the DOS. In the Regional Recommendation, the U.S. Entity recommended improvements to and modernization of the Treaty post-2024.

The current phase of the CRTP, which followed as a result of the Regional Recommendation (referred to as the Post-Recommendation phase but more formally known as Columbia River

1 The STT consists of four States: Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Idaho; fifteen Native American Tribes; and ten Federal Agencies.

4 | P a g e

Treaty 2024 Program (CRT 2024)), was initiated in fiscal year 2014. The Post-Recommendation phase supports the activities necessary to study, negotiate, and implement the Treaty in 2024, per the Regional Recommendation, and includes further hydro regulation and economic model development. The DOS has requested the U.S. Entity’s input during this phase. The U.S. Entity anticipates querying by the DOS over the next two years or more, depending upon the progress of negotiations between the two countries, on the specifics regarding the value of the Treaty and impacts to flood risk and hydropower operations due to potential basin operational changes. The consultation services needed in the next three years will directly support this phase of the CRTP.

In October 2016, the DOS received authority to conduct official negotiations with Canada. As a result, joint modeling studies between the U.S. and Canadian Entities are currently underway to analyze proposed post-2024 changes in Canadian and U.S. operations. The goal of these studies is to ensure the United States maintains a similar level of flood risk and maintains equitable coordinated power operations given the range of potential changes in operation and governance of the Treaty and Columbia River Basin. Consultation services are also needed to support these studies.2

b. Justification

Following the submission of the Regional Recommendation, USACE conducted an After Action Review (AAR) of the Treaty Review phase studies. Key lessons learned stressed that the CRTP is a unique, long-term, and collaborative effort that requires expertise, a consistent staff, and expert consultants to supplement in-house resources in order to be effective and achieve the Post- Recommendation phase of the CRTP.

Since the release of the AAR, the Treaty management team took the actions necessary to mitigate turnover of technical staff and to build the expertise ‘bench’ by establishing a Treaty Cadre. Because of the immense amount of information need to provide support under the Treaty Program, the Cadre members are required to dedicate a minimum of two years of full time work to develop the level of expertise required to understand Columbia Basin Operations and its hydro regulation model required for Treaty analysis. After the two years, the members either remain part of the Cadre or transition to a Treaty expert position for which they dedicate thirty percent of their time training and mentoring newer Treaty technical staff. In addition, outside consultants with expertise in the CRTP, which USACE needs to supplement and support the Treaty Cadre, must have a similar, if not higher, level of expertise in the Columbia Basin Operations and its hydro regulation model.

As such, outside consultants must have already developed a thorough understanding of the complex basin operations and hydro regulation model, as well as the knowledge of current Treaty issues, procedures, history, expertise and internal/external stakeholders. To support the

2 In addition, a recent Federal Court’s decision regarding USACE and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s (BOR) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) coverage on Columbia River System’s Operations has resulted in a requirement to complete a NEPA analysis within the next five years. As a result, USACE, BPA, and BOR must complete the Columbia River System Operation Environmental Impact Statement (CRSO-EIS) by 2021. Due to the overlap of Columbia Basin Operations expertise required to support both the EIS and the CRTP, the need for additional consulting services to help manage communications between governments and stakeholders has increased significantly.

5 | P a g e current phase of the CRTP, a contractor with specialized knowledge about, and background in, the CRTP is necessary to be able to provide immediate and comprehensive services. Successful performance mandates a contractor that possesses the following capabilities:

1. A thorough understanding of Columbia Basin operations, Water management practices, operational tradeoffs, and the subsequent technical studies required to evaluate operational tradeoffs;

2. A thorough understanding of the Treaty as it relates to the interactions between and varying interests of the U.S. Entity and the Canadian Entity (B.C. Hydro);

3. A thorough understanding of regional stakeholders, their perspectives, and expectations;

4. A thorough knowledge of Treaty team structure, management, and technical personnel;

5. Highly skilled in technical writing, facilitation and communication management;

6. Highly skilled in various scheduling methodologies and practices; and

7. A thorough understanding of USACE policy and standards as it relates to Hydrology, Hydraulics and Water Management.

Integrated Water Solutions, LLC (IWS) is the only known contractor with the requisite capabilities and knowledge to perform these services. IWS is an Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) that has been involved with the Columbia River Treaty Process since 2009. IWS has played a significant role in supporting the USACE with developing and managing the program while utilizing their experience in water management, USACE policy and standards, and facilitation. IWS provided the expertise and consistency needed to meet milestones of the CRTP. This required the ability to articulate and provide, without delay, the history of decisions and data developed by the program since 2009, to newer management and technical team members. The number of government employees with comparable institutional knowledge is extremely limited. Currently, there is only one Treaty management member that has consistently been involved since 2009 and only three technical members who have been consistently involved since 2009. Therefore, having the historical knowledge and experience of IWS is necessary to accomplish the mission.

Since the Treaty Review phase was initiated in 2008, it has become clear that a minimum of two years of full-time engagement is necessary in order to gain the necessary expertise to provide optimal services in support of the CRTP. As with a Treaty Cadre member, it would take a minimum of two years of full time engagement and significant internal resources to bring another contractor up to a reasonable level of knowledge to provide adequate and immediate assistance to Treaty management and technical personnel. No other contractors have been involved in the program to the extent necessary to obtain the level of expertise and capabilities necessary required to fulfill this action. The consistency that is brought with the knowledge of the current Treaty process, Treaty Program, views of the pertinent stakeholders, capabilities of the Treaty technical teams, the hydro regulation models, and current Columbia Basin Operations is imperative to provide effective services at this juncture in the Treaty program.

c. Impact: The Treaty process has required the U.S. Entity and their subsequent program, project, and technical managers to take steps to build and maintain the expertise required to develop, manage, and maintain the models and tools necessary to assess the impacts from a potentially changed Columbia Basin operation in 2024.

6 | P a g e

The institutional knowledge of IWS is critical in developing and maintaining Program schedules and allowing responsive product delivery to the DOS. There are few Corps members with the consistency, history, and level of knowledge of IWS. Hiring a contractor with less than the necessary level of expertise with which IWS has would be detrimental to the quality of information being generated to support Treaty Negotiations. Information flow, which continually needs to be managed, updated, and improved, would be unduly delayed. As discussed above, in accordance with the directive from the DOS, the foundation of the U.S.

Entity’s input to the modernization of the Treaty is needed by the end of 2019. The U.S. Entity is further anticipating querying by the DOS over the next two years on the specifics regarding the value of the Treaty and impacts to flood risk and hydropower operations due to potential basin operational changes. IWS is uniquely qualified to rapidly gather the data and input from the multiple experts and assemble it for senior Treaty managers and the U.S. Entity, who in turn can finalize it into a product suitable for the DOS. Without IWS, the Corps would be unable to make decisions regarding ongoing joint U.S. and Canada modeling efforts, including flood risk impact analysis and modeling efforts.

d. Alternatives:

The Corps has the option to utilize existing IDIQs that have basic services such as facilitation, scheduling, and project and program management assistance. However, the specific services sought and needed here could not be provided without significant time, resources, and effort – in turn causing undue delay. As stated above, it would take a minimum of two years of full time engagement and significant internal resources to bring another contractor up to a reasonable level of knowledge to accommodate adequate and immediate assistance to Treaty management and technical personnel.

There are few known internal Corps resources that could provide the level of service that IWS provides as it relates to the history and knowledge of the current Treaty process, water management, personnel and stakeholders. The current personnel with the requisite expertise that do exist are currently assigned to other critical Treaty positions. Backfilling of the critical Treaty positions would require the same significant time and effort to develop. Therefore, creating a full-time in-house position with the necessary expertise to provide these services would cause undue delay to this program.

In sum, if IWS’s consulting services are not used, the Corps will not be able to bring another consultant to the level of service that IWS provides within the time required. The Corps also does not have the in-house resources capable to perform these services in the time needed.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: A notice of intent to sole source was posted on FedBizOps on 16 February 2017 for 15 days. No vendors expressed an interest in this project or as a possible source in the near future based on the notice of intent to sole source.

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION: There are no known actions to increase competition at this time, as broadening the scope would not allow for USACE to receive the services required for this phase of the CRTP. The need for these services may change when