A-5_J A_Exponent.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Limited Sources Justification

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY: Department of the Army Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 1715 Baltimore, MD 21203-1715

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: The US Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District is requesting approval to award a contract to Exponent, Inc. to provide engineering and testing services at Ft. Detrick, Maryland for the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID) Replacement construction project. The Government will be issuing an order from Exponent Inc’s current Federal Supply Schedule Contract Number GS-23F-0390K.

This proposed sole source acquisition requires the contractor to test the special coatings systems and provide recommendations for removal and/or replacement of these special coatings systems.

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUPPLIES OR SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE

AGENCY’S NEED:

The research staff at USAMRIID works with neat (pure) and diluted biological agents in Bio- Safety Labs (BSL)-4 and BSL-3. These agents are extremely toxic and release can be lethal.

The coatings are designed to prevent absorption of the agents into the walls and prevent growth of any agents that may somehow come into contact with the walls, thus preventing contamination or spread. Thus, the proper performance of these coatings is a life safety issue.

These types of laboratories are required to have a certain classification rating for life safety reasons. The USAMRIID fire raised concerns about coatings both in a fire situation and as related to the ability to meet the required certification level.

The chemical composition of the BSL-3 coating system is similar to that of the BSL-4 coatings system; in particular, both systems are epoxy-based. The testing performed on the BSL-4 coatings revealed that the system failed the standards requirement of NFPA 101, known as the life safety code. This fact was not known prior to testing.

The requirement of Scope Element A in the original order required testing, a report and recommendations based on the testing results. Exponent advised that since the chemical composition of the BSL-3 coatings system is similar to that of BSL-4, it reasonable to be concerned about the ability of the system to meet the requirements of NFPA 101. In order to ascertain compliance, additional sampling of the BSL-3 coatings, additional physical samples must be taken and tested.

Although the rating of the laboratory, BSL-3 vs. BSL-4, is different, the laboratory use and the coatings are very similar and the laboratories are immediately adjacent to the BSL-4 laboratories.

e1ctxsla Typewritten Text e1ctxsla

Control Number:CENAB14-46

The following services are required to review the current design, and conduct a risk and hazard analysis to determine if the existing wall coatings should be used in the completed facility, or removed and replaced with another system.

A. Flammability Test on Coatings

1. Witness preparation of samples

2. Perform the following tests on samples prepared by FD Thomas:

ASTM E84

ASTM E1321

ASTM E1354-13

3. Prepare report on test outcomes and protocols utilized

B. Test Existing USAMRIID BSL4 Coatings

The contractor shall perform Flammability Tests on BSL-3 laboratory coatings based on the following requirements.

1. Prepare BSL3 (wall/ceiling) system coating samples. The existing coating system is Sherwin Williams KEM CATI-COAT HS Epoxy Filler/Sealer, High Performance Epoxy and ACROLON 218 HS Acrylic Polyurethane. There are two substrates on which the coatings have been applied; 5/8” Gyp Board and ½” Cement Board. Samples shall be taken in accordance with ASTM E1354 – 24 per substrate - 3.9” x 3.9” and ASTM E84– 12 per substrate – 96” x 24”

2. Perform the following tests on prepared samples:

o ASTM E1354 “Cone Calorimeter” test – 21 samples per substrate with the following test parameters:

25kW/m2 50kW/m2 75kW/m2

CHF

ASTM E84 “Steiner Tunnel” –9 samples per substrate

3. Prepare report on test outcomes and protocols utilized

4. Participate in teleconferences and onsite update meetings to assist USACE in development of risk analysis and path forward

5. Duration – 120 days

4. AUTHORITY CITED: FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B) – “Only one source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized.”

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED: USAMRIID is the U.S Army’s main institution and facility for defensive research into countermeasures against biological warfare. It is located on Fort Detrick, Maryland and is a subordinate lab of the U. S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC), headquartered on the same installation. USAMRIID is the only U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) laboratory equipped to study highly hazardous viruses.

USAMRIID has spearheaded research to develop medical solutions—vaccines, drugs, diagnostics, and information—to protect our military service members from biological threats.

Investigators at its facilities frequently collaborate with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and major biomedical and academic centers worldwide.

The project is the largest, most complex biocontainment facility constructed and significantly decompresses and increases USAMRIID's biomedical laboratory and vivarium research capabilities. This facility, when complete, will facilitate USAMRIID's mission: to conduct basic and applied medical research resulting in vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostic tools to protect military service members and the American public. This facility employs many technical enhancements allowing researchers to respond quickly to critical emerging biological threats, including the world's deadliest pathogens.

The USACE, USAMRIID Resident Office has been tasked with reviewing the current design, and conducting a risk and hazard analysis to determine if the originally specified wall coatings should continue to be used in the completed facility, or should be removed and replaced with another system. The review, testing, risk analysis and recommendations must be performed expeditiously in order to prevent substantially increasing Government-caused compensable delays to the contract. The estimated direct costing for this work is estimated to be $150,000.00.

USACE, Baltimore District (NAB) has looked at several full and open competitive procurement methods in order to maximize competition. Of the competitive acquisition methods, the most expeditious was to use the GSA schedule.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: The nature of this action has been described in above Paragraphs 3 and 5.

7. FAIR AND REASONABLE DETERMINATION: The proposed contractor, Exponent, Inc. is a world-renowned engineering and scientific consultant. It is very familiar with all the type of coatings associated with the USAMRIID laboratories. They have extensive knowledge of the testing procedures required and can rapidly respond to the USACE needs. Their knowledge of the prescribed coatings and their ability to rapidly respond makes them the most appropriate contractor for this action. Exponent, Inc has a GSA contract for engineering and testing services, with published rates for all disciplines and level of expertise required by this action.

8. MARKET RESEARCH: The commercial market for liquid applied coatings that can withstand the harsh operational environment unique to biomedical research laboratories in North America is extremely limited. There is not a single set of guide specifications for these products, nor is there a UL or similar rating for these products.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the most knowledgeable government authority on biomedical research liquid applied coating systems. In 2010 and 2011, NIH utilized Exponent, Inc to perform $10 million of research into these specialized products. In addition to being the most knowledgeable private authority on biomedical research applied coating systems, Exponent, Inc. has in-house fire experts and testing facilities as well as agreements with renowned fire testing laboratories, including University of Maryland, Baltimore County

(UMBC).

The A/E industry knowledge of these coatings is outdated, as the NIH has not released the results of its $10M research effort regarding BSL-4 coatings to the design industry to date. The design industry at large was not involved in the NIH research effort, and the corresponding information learned through this research was derived with only the support of Exponent, Inc., making it the only expert in this field.

Furthermore, the Governments’ concerns are awarding an engineering service contract that will not interfere with the current construction work, current construction schedule and feasibility of procuring a new contract without impact to the current beneficial occupancy date.

9. OTHER FACTORS SUPPORTING THE USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN

COMPETITION:

Procurement History: There is no current contract for testing of biomedical research special coating systems.

a. Acquisition Data Availability: The scope of limited competition for this justification is restricted specifically to the items listed in Paragraph 3 above. A purchase description has been prepared specifically for Exponent, Inc.

b. Unusual and Compelling: It is in the Government’s best interest to award a new contract to include the procurement of services to test the biomedical research special coatings systems at the USAMRIID Replacement Facility. Exponent, Inc. is the only source at this time that will satisfy agency requirements.

c. Subcontracting Competition: Exponent, Inc. has the capability of performing all tasks associated with this effort and subcontracting opportunities are not expected.

d. Follow-on acquisition duplication: No follow-on acquisition duplication is anticipated at this time.

10. INTERESTED SOURCES:

Informal surveys by the Government of known testing organizations directed the Government to NIH and Exponent, Inc. as the only expert in this field. No other sources have since expressed interest in this procurement.

11. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION:

Options to increase competition were examined during the market research as stated in Paragraph 8 above. As a result, no actions will be taken to obtain or increase competition.

Paragraphs 5, 6 and 9 document other factors supporting the use of other than full and open competition.

12. 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: Roger A. Moore, P.E., PMP Date: ______________________

Title: Ch, Office Engineering Section Signature: ____________________________

13. 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: Steve A. Bowers, CCM Date: ______________________

Title: Ch, Contract Admin Branch Signature: ____________________________

14. FAIR AND REASONABLE COST DETERMINATION:

“I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for these items will be fair and reasonable. This determination is based on the Government’s intent to conduct a price analysis of the offer from the General Contractor. The offered price will be compared to an independent government estimate, supplier quotes, and prices originally proposed by offerors prior to award when this item was included as an option.”

Name: ______________________ Date: ______________________

Title: Contracting Officer Signature: ________________________

15. CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION:

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

Name: ______________________ Date: ______________________

Title: Contracting Officer Signature: _________________________ e1ctxjtr

Jerome T. Rifkin e1ctxjtr

Jerome T. Rifkin

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement as defined in the Scope of Work, on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of FAR 8.405- 6(a)(1)(i)(B) – “Only One Responsible Source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized,” subject to the availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Name: __________________________________ Date:__________________

Contracting Officer e1ctxjtr

Jerome T. Rifkin