J A Rate Case Intervention CUP JBLM Redacted.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT

Single Source Justification (Simplified Acquisition)

FAR 6.302-3 Expert Services

Program: Commercial Utility Program (CUP) The U.S. Army Legal Services Agency, Environmental Law Division (USALSA-ELD) needs expert witness and utility analytical services for the Department of Defense (DOD), specifically for Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM).

Authority: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3) or 41 U.S.C.3304(a)(3), as implemented by FAR 6.302-3, Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services, and FAR 13.106-1(b)(1) Soliciting from a single source not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold.

Amount:

Prepared by: Bradley Kelley Contract Specialist

Email: bradley.m.kelley@usace.army.mil

Contracting Officer: Lisa L. Steenburn Contracting Officer

Email: lisa.l.steenburn@uasace.army.mil

Signature: _ __ Date: ________________

Reviews: I have reviewed this justification and find it adequate to support the Single Source Justification (Simplified Acquisition).

Program Manager:

Typed Name:

Signature: ___ Date:

Version – March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Sole Source Justification FAR 6.302-3 Expert Services

1. Contracting Activity: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Huntsville Center, RG300, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898

2. Description of Action: The Department of Defense (DOD), specifically for Joint Base Lewis- McChord (JBLM) requests a new firm fixed price contract with Exeter Associates, Inc.

(“Exeter”). The Government projects award for August 2024 and fiscal year 2024, using Operations and Maintenance funds with PR&C .

3. Description of Supplies/Services: On July 16, 2024, JBLM and USALSA-ELD received TPU’s 2024 Preliminary Cost of Service Analysis, providing information on TPU’s proposed electric rate increase over the next two years, including increases to the High Voltage General rate that JBLM pays for electric service.

This rate setting technical and expert services is to ensure fair and equitable charges for the Department of Defense (DOD), specifically for JBLM that are located within the Company's service territory.

Services shall provide expert witness services, material, labor, transportation, equipment, investigations, studies, and supervision to complete an analysis of the 2024 Preliminary Cost of Service Analysis (COSA) provided by Tacoma Public Utilities (TPU) as part of its biannual energy rate setting process, including the methods, calculations, formulas, and amounts assigned to the High-Voltage General rate that JBLM is served under. This analysis will include providing rate impacts to JBLM resulting from the proposed COSA. JBLM participates in this process pursuant to a settlement agreement resulting from litigation between TPU an JBLM. Additionally, the Contractor shall perform an extensive and detailed analysis of TPU’s COSA. The Contractor shall evaluate the impact and fairness of the proposed rate increases as outlined in the COSA and develop a position in coordination with the CUP PM and the USALSA-ELD. The Contractor shall provide a written report detailing the results of the analysis of the COSA, including any cost allocation, methodology, and rate design issues impacting JBLM. The Contractor shall deliver a draft report of recommendations and findings to the USALSA-ELD and the COR NOT LATER THAN 20 days after the publication of final rates.

A Final Summary Report shall be submitted no later than 10 days after the draft report has been approved subject to incorporation of comments.

Period of Performance: 52 weeks after receipt of order (ARO).

Total Value:

4. Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3) or 41 U.S.C.3304(a)(3), as implemented by FAR 6.302-3, Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3) The head of an agency may use procedures other than competitive procedures only when it is necessary to award the contract to a particular source or sources in order to procure the services of an expert for use, in any litigation or dispute (including any reasonably foreseeable litigation or dispute) involving the Federal Government, in any trial, hearing, or proceeding before any court, administrative tribunal, or agency, or to procure the services of an expert or neutral for use in any part of an alternative dispute resolution or negotiated rulemaking process, whether or not the expert is expected to testify.

41 U.S.C.3304(a)(3) further allows agencies to award sole source actions to procure the services of an expert for use, in any litigation or dispute (including any reasonably foreseeable litigation or dispute) involving the Federal Government, in any trial, hearing, or proceeding before a court, administrative tribunal, or agency, whether or not the expert is expected to testify; or to procure the services of an expert or neutral for use in any part of an alternative dispute resolution or negotiated rulemaking process, whether or not the expert is expected to testify;

As described in FAR 6.302-3(b)(1)(iii), full and open competition need not be provided for when it is necessary to award the contract to a particular source or sources to acquire the services of an expert or neutral person for any current or anticipated litigation or dispute.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The Government has selected Exeter because its consultants have superior expertise and experience for these unique issues when compared to the other firms considered. Further, Exeter is not conflicted from this case, and is readily available and appropriately staffed to consult and testify (as may be needed) to meet the scheduled deadlines in this case.

The lead attorney in this case has experience in the field of utility rate litigation, having interacted with various expert witnesses from different consulting firms. Based on the attorney’s knowledge of expert witnesses who provide testimony in utility rate cases, the ULFSC has determined Exeter is the most capable firm that can provide the consultation and testimony necessary to advance the legal interests of FEA in this case.

In accordance with FAR 5.202(a)(14), this action will not be synopsized.

Because this is a sole source action, effective competition is not applicable.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: Due to the time constraints placed upon the Government to secure experts for utility rate litigation, is it usually not possible to compete the requirements.

However, the Government will continue to perform market research and evaluate opportunities compete future requirements when practical to do so.

8. Market Research: Exeter is not conflicted from this case and is readily available and appropriately staffed to consult and testify (as may be needed) to meet the scheduled deadlines in this case.

9. Interested Sources: In accordance with FAR 5.202(a)(14), this action will not be synopsized.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History – There is no prior procurement history for this action.

b. Subcontractor Competition – Since this acquisition is for a single litigation expert, there is no opportunity to subcontract out any of the services rendered in this requirement. As a result, no subcontractor goals will be required.

11. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable in comparison to the Rough Order Magnitude (ROM).

12. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Typed Name: Lisa L. Steenburn Date:

Title: Contracting Officer

Signature: