W912DR-09-D-0010-0004_J A.pdf

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT FOR JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR

OPPORTUNITY

CONTROL NO. 13-11

PROJECT/EQUIPMENT: Expand Current MRS Boundary at Current Munitions Response Site, Joliet Army Depot, Joliet, IL

AUTHORITY: FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i) (C) AMOUNT: $554,000.00

Prepared By:

NAME

Tamara Wright

TELEPHONE NO

410-962-4958

TITLE

Contract Specialist

DATE

Contracting Officer

Linda Evans

TELEPHONE NO

410-962-3710

TITLE

Contracting Officer

Technical

Maria Orosz

TELEPHONE NO

410-962-2700

TITLE

Project Manager

Requirements

NAME (Type or Print)

Travis McCoun

TELEPHONE NO

410-962-6728

TITLE

Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED BELOW:

I have reviewed this J&A and find the justification adequate to support other than full and open competition

Deputy for Small Business

SIGNATURE DATE

NAME (Type or Print)

Tamika Gray

TELEPHONE NO

410-962-2587

Project Manager*

Maria Orosz

410-962-2700

Office of Counsel

NAME (Type or Print) Michael Shields

410-962-3347

DCC/CCC Contracting Chief

SIGNATURE

N/A

DATE

NAME (Type or Print) N/A

Field Competition Advocate

SIGNATURE

E1OCXMTS

Typewritten Text

11 FEB 2013

E1OCXMTS

Typewritten Text e1dexbwe

LTC Brad W. Endres 410-962-4546

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity

Utilizing FAR 16.505, Ordering

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY: The Contracting Agency responsible for this action is the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers – Baltimore District, Large Contracts, Environmental Architect/ Engineer Team.

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Approval is being requested for a new sole-source action with Advent Environmental, Inc.—W912DR-09-D-0010, under the Small Business Multiple Award Military Munitions Contracts (SB MAMMS). Advent is a member of a pool of five (5) small business Multiple Award Military Munitions Services (MAMMS) contracts with a shared capacity of $120 million. The period of performance for Advent’s contract is five years (19 December 2008-18 December 2013). The shared capacity for the multiple award contracts is $120,000,000.00 with an approximate current balance of $78,552,755.45. The amount of $554,000.00 has been reserved for this action. A new Firm-Fixed Price task order using FY13 DERP funds/appropriations is the goal. The profit/fee for the Contractor is 10%.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES: The environmental services to be procured under this action are for additional investigation requirements for Joliet Army Ammunition Plant, located in Joliet, IL that were not captured under the original performance work statement (PWS) developed in FY10. During the initial Remedial Investigation (RI) Material Potentially Presenting an Explosive Hazard (MPPEH) was confirmed at the current Munitions Response Site (MRS) boundary. The additional requirements are to expand the current MRS boundary and add the option to extend the boundary an additional 300ft. The expansion will increase the total MRS acreage from 201 acres to 483 acres. Approximately 12 acres of geophysical transects will be placed throughout the extended area. To fulfill the requirements of a Remedial Investigation, the Government is pursuing a contract action for approximately $554,000.00 to expand the MRS boundary and identify the extent of MPPEH surrounding the MRS.

4. AUTHORITY CITED: FAR 16.505(b) (2) (i) (C) The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED:

Background: During the RI fieldwork, MPPEH was found at the MRS boundary. The original PWS estimated an additional 10% of the acreage may need to be investigated if MPPEH was found at the MRS boundary. The Contractor proceeded to investigate an additional 10% beyond the MRS boundary and found MPPEH. The Contractor informed the Government that MPPEH likely extended several acres beyond the original MRS boundary. To fulfill the requirements of a RI the Government is required to pursue a contract action for approximately $554,000.00 to expand the MRS boundary and identify the extent of MPPEH surrounding the MRS. The Government is pursuing a sole-source contract as a logical follow-on action under the SB

MAMMS.

Justification: The decision to sole-source the action under the SB MAMMS to ADVENT was made based on the following:

(a) If a new Contractor was selected, the selection process, planning efforts, and document submittal could push the completion date of the RI out approximately 2 years. Such a delay would be unacceptable putting the Government at greater risk in regard to schedule, quality, and cost.

(b) Advent has extensive site history, knowledge of the site, and familiarity with regulators, and it would not be practical for allow another contractor to attempt to gain the same site knowledge through interviews and new relationships with the regulators and other interested parties.

(c) Additional costs would be incurred on the Government in the form of duplication of cost for the new Contractor to produce new planning documents for actions that has already been planned for by the current contractor. A new contractor would have to spend substantial amounts of time reviewing existing documents and meeting with interested parties to get up to speed on the significant and complicated historical engineering documentation of the site. Additionally, the Government would duplicate procurement administration expenses to conduct the fair opportunities process and to spend additional time getting the new contractor up to speed.

(d) The collaboration of two Contractors to produce one RI Report may increase the potential for contractor error, and would lead to complicated and expensive reviews among the multiple contractors. Additionally, liability for any errors would be confusing due to responsibility of multiple contractors for CERCLA remedial investigation.

Impact: If the Government were to award a new task order to a new contractor, the timeline requirements for completion of the current RI project for FY13 would not be met. This would result in significant schedule delays and may cause the Government to incur duplicate costs.

Therefore, it is in the Government’s best interest to sole-source the action to ADVENT.

Alternatives: The alternative available to the Government was to award a new task order via the competitive contracting process to another Contractor in the SB MAMMS pool. Normally, these take 3-6 months to get awarded, depending on the complexity of the action. If the Government were to start the process now, the contract would likely not get awarded until March/April. The Contractor would then have to prepare a new work plan to complete the geophysical investigation. The work plan would then have to be reviewed by the Government and the State.

The required review times for the State of Indiana are normally 45-90 days. This would lead to a field work start date of October 2013. The field work is required to be completed in September 2013. Therefore, this is not a viable/preferred option.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: Based on information in paragraph 5, above, competition for this action was not feasible.

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION: The initial order was competed amongst the MAMMS Small Business pool, of which Advent was selected and awarded the Task Order 0002 under W912DR-09-D-0010. The award was made utilizing fair opportunity based on the best value approach per the FAR. Due to the initial RI field work findings, it has been determined that a new order be issued as a logical follow on in order to fulfill project requirements per FAR 16.505(b) (2) (ii). The request for this follow-on task order is unique to the conditions discovered under Task Order 0002; this exception has not been used before for any task orders under this contract. For future task orders utilizing the MAMMS, fair opportunity will be applied as indicated in the contracts issued under the MAMMS solicitation and it is anticipated that any future follow-on activities for the next phases of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) process will be for full and open competition.

8. MARKET RESEARCH: No market research was conducted in an effort to identify interested sources for this action. While other contractors may be able to perform the work, in order to ensure consistency and quality, avoid additional costs and circumvent the learning curve that may result from seeking a different Contractor, utilizing the existing contractor to complete this requirement is most advantageous to the Government.

9. INTERESTED SOURCES: Since this is a follow-on action, no synopsis was published to identify additional sources. In accordance with FAR 5.202(a) (6), “The contracting officer need not submit the notice required by 5.201 when the proposed contract action is an order placed under Subpart 16.5,” no synopsis of this requirement was published to identify interested sources.

Within 14 days after award, a notice will be published in accordance with FAR 5.301 and this justification will be made publicly available.

10. OTHER FACTS:

a. Procurement History: The initial task order to Advent was awarded through the competitive contracting process using the SB MAMMS. The contract number is W912DR-09-D-0010-0002.

The contract was awarded on 04 Feb 2010. The contract was modified for $0.00 on 23 Feb 2010 to provide an updated PWS. It was determined after the original award that an older version of the PWS was inadvertently retained and a new version was issued. This sole source exception has not been utilized previously.

b. Acquisition data availability: N/A

c. Unusual and compelling urgency: N/A

d. Subcontracting Competition: Advent Environmental, Inc. is a small business; therefore a subcontracting plan is not required.

11. 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.

NAME: Travis McCoun DATE: _______________________

TITLE: COR SIGNATURE: __________________

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.

NAME: Maria Orosz____ DATE: ______________________

TITLE: PM/Technical Representative SIGNATURE: __________________

13. FAIR AND REASONABLE COST DETERMINATION:

I hereby determine, based on the above justification, that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

NAME: _____________________________ DATE: _________________________

TITLE: Contracting Officer_____________ SIGNATURE: _________________

14. CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION:

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

NAME: _____________________________ DATE: _________________________

TITLE: Contracting Officer SIGNATURE: ___________________ e1ctxlex

Linda M. Evans e1ctxlex Typewritten Text 11 October 2013 e1ctxlex Typewritten Text Linda M. Evans e1ctxlex

11 October 2013