J&A.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

UNDER FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (FAR) PART 6.3

OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Miscellaneous Design Services Contract Capacity Increase for the Memphis

District.

Authority: 10 U.S.C 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302‐1 (a)(iii) – Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

Amount: $700,000.00

Prepared by: Matthew Taylor A‐E Coordinator, Contract COR Date: 07 JUN 19 Email: Matthew.B.Taylor3@usace.army.mil

PCO: Steven O. Austin DSN/Comm:

Contracting Officer Date: 07 JUN 19 Email: steven.o.austin@usace.army.mil

Technical/ Matthew Taylor Requirements: A‐E Coordinator, Contract COR Date: 07 JUN 19

Email: Matthew.B.Taylor3@usace.army.mil

Reviews: I have reviewed this justification and find it adequate to support other than full and open competition.

A&E Project Manager:

Matthew B. Taylor

Signature___________________________________Date: 08 JUL 19

Legal Counsel:

Edward J. McNaughton

Signature ___________________________________Date: 08 JUL 19 b1ct9soa Cross-Out

1. Contracting Activity:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Memphis District Contracting Office, 167 N. Main

Street, Memphis, Tennessee 38103

2. Description of Action:

This is an action for additional contract capacity for miscellaneous Architectural‐

Engineering Services in the Memphis District. This action is predicated on the ability to efficiently and effectively utilize A‐E Services for the execution of Memphis District

Memphis and more specifically the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and associated funding.

The Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 3‐Year Contract, W912EQ‐ 17‐D‐0005, was awarded to Arcadis U.S., Inc. on 17 JUL 2017 in the amount of $3,000,000.00.

Presidential Budget and Supplemental Appropriations along with International and

Interagency Support funding will be used to perform evaluation and design of engineering products. The contract capacity increase will be $700,000, with no increase in contract duration.

3. Description of Supplies/Services:

The work consists of miscellaneous A‐E Services, including but not limited to engineering investigations, studies, analysis, reports, and design within and beyond the Memphis

District area of responsibility. More specifically, the bulk of the services anticipated under this addition of contract capacity will be focused on the design of the Helena Floodwall

Replacement Project as partially funded by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115‐

123) and the City of Southaven, MS Master Plan Study funded by the Planning Assistance to States (PAS) Program.

4. Authority Cited:

10 U.S.C.2304(c)(2) as implemented by FAR 6.302‐1(a)(iii), For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, 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 that award to any other source would result in — (A) Substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition; or (B) Unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited:

The proposed procurement meets the criteria for exclusion from full and open competition due to the necessity for project continuity, specifically for the execution of the project designs for the Helena Floodwall Replacement Project and the Southaven, MS

Master Plan Study. The Helena Floodwall Replacement Project is subject to the

Supplemental Appropriations requirements and the Southaven, MS Master Plan Study is subject to time constraints in the FY19 Presidential Budget and are susceptible to both duplication of cost and unacceptable delays if the work is required to be procured using full and open competition.

Background:

Under a variety of authorizations, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers designs, builds, and maintains features which reduce flooding and provide safe maritime navigation on the Mississippi River and its tributaries within the Memphis District boundary. The current Contract provides necessary A‐E support to the Memphis and Vicksburg Districts, ranging from infrastructure study and analysis, Mississippi River hydraulic modeling, project design, and construction quality assurance. This A‐E work is a necessary prerequisite to the solicitation and award of the related construction contracts. As such, the procurement of this A‐E work is mission critical.

The Memphis District does not typically have projects identified for A‐E Services prior to procurement of contracts. The Helena Floodwall Replacement project, however, was specifically funded by Congress as a result of flood damages recorded following the 2017 flooding along the Mississippi River. The Appropriation also included funds for the replacement of the Caruthersville, MO Floodwall. The District does not have sufficient internal resources to design both floodwall projects within the time necessary so the District’s Senior Leadership decided in July 2018 that the Helena Floodwall Replacement project design would be completed by contract A‐E services.

At the time of this decision, the replacement floodwall alignment was not yet determined. The alignment of the replacement floodwall is extremely critical to estimate the design level of effort required and construction costs. Due to a number of project limitations including, but not limited to, determining the proximity of and mapping existing adjacent facilities and site topography, as well as non‐Federal Sponsor financial constraints, the proper floodwall alignment was not finally determined until 29 April 2019. Additionally, in order to expedite the design execution for the Helena Floodwall Replacement Project, the site investigation work was previously awarded under the current Contract and is nearing completion, to allow for necessary site assessment tasks to be performed while the design order was under development. Similarly, Arcadis has already performed two task orders under the current Contract for Southaven, MS Master Plan Study, which is being developed incrementally based on annual appropriations. As such, continuing the related work under the current Contract is in the best interest of the Government.

As a result of the aggressive execution of the Congressional Appropriations in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the FY19 Presidential Budget, the Memphis District’s technical design resources are working at full capacity, requiring a greater than anticipated reliance on the A‐E contract for technical services. These increased appropriation and their corresponding additional project requirements has expended the current A‐E Contract capacity faster than anticipated, to a point where insufficient capacity exists to cover the work required for Historically, the Memphis District has not typically used the full contract capacities on A‐E Contracts prior to the expiration. The three‐year capacity of the current Contract, however, is anticipated to be fully used within the first two years.

Approximately $890,000 of orders have been obligated or expensed against the current A‐E Contract (including $370,000 for the Helena Floodwall Replacement project), and $300,000 in capacity was transferred to the Vicksburg District in July 2017, leaving a remaining available amount under the Contract through June 2020 of $1,033,286 with a current anticipated need for A‐E Services through June 2020 of $1,650,000 (the Helena Floodwall Replacement Project by itself is estimated to require approximately $1.5M in capacity), resulting in an anticipated short‐fall of $616,714.

Justification:

Requiring full and open competition for this additional work would result in both substantial duplication of costs and unacceptable delays to execution of the Memphis District mission. Arcadis U.S., Inc., the current A‐E Contractor, has already completed substantial work for the Memphis District, including portions of the Helena Floodwall Replacement project design. The remaining additional work necessary for the Helena Floodwall is substantially a continuation or follow‐on of the previously performed work, and would be accomplished under the existing Contract but for the insufficient remaining capacity. Since Arcadis is already engaged and generally mobilized, it is available to perform the required additional work with minimal preparation. Acquainting a new contractor with the project site and requirements would require a new contractor to mobilize and familiarize itself with the project, requiring additional time and cost. This additional time and costs, based upon the corresponding costs under the current contract, would include review and analysis of historical project documentation (estimated $15,000), geotechnical site investigations (estimated $177,000), surveying of the project site (estimated $175,000), an environmental site assessment (estimated $12,000) and complete project analysis and familiarization (estimated $30,000). Based upon the corresponding costs under the current contract, mobilizing and familiarizing new contractor with the Helena Floodwall Replacement project – including the work previously performed by Arcadis – would cost approximately $409,000. These costs cannot reasonably be expected to be recovered through competition and engaging a new contractor to perform this work would result in substantial duplication of costs to the Government and said costs would not reasonably be expected to be recovered through competition. As such, adding contract capacity to the current A‐E design services contract without full and open competition is appropriate pursuant to FAR 6.302‐1(a)(iii)(A).

Requiring full and open completion would also result in unrecoverable delay. As a specialty A‐E procurement, soliciting a new contract for the remaining design services for the Helena Floodwall Replacement project would be covered under FAR Part 36, which normally takes an additional 60 to 90 days to implement. It would also take additional time to share relevant data and integrate a new contractor into the Helena Floodwall Replacement. This delay could consume 35% to 50% of the remaining contract time to complete this critical project design. These unacceptable delays, could result in mission failure and prevent the Memphis District from fulfilling its congressionally mandated requirements. As such, adding contract capacity to the current A‐E design services contract without full and open competition is appropriate pursuant to FAR 6.302‐1(a)(iii)(B).

Impacts:

If the Memphis District is required to conduct a new procurement for these additional design services, the Government should expect increased cost as design is accelerated to meet uncontrollable external deadlines, increased likelihood of compromised project quality due to accelerated design, increased costs and time for a new contractor to review Arcadis’ work with the risk of a new contractor unwilling to accept and utilize the work of Arcadis’, potential issues with professional liability when multiple contractors are involved with the project design, and mandated projects not being awarded during the required period.

Any delay to the engineering efforts and related A‐E functions, therefore, may result in the District failing to fulfill its congressionally mandated requirements. As such, adding contract capacity to the current A‐E design services contract without full and open competition is appropriate pursuant to FAR 6.302‐1(a).

Alternative:

1) An alternative would be to award an A‐E Services contract to another contractor to support the required projects. However, as discussed previously in Section 5, this would require substantial duplication of costs and unacceptable delays to execution of the Memphis District mission.

2) A second alternative would be split the design contract into phases, one of which would be awarded to Arcadis and a separate contract, awarded a minimum of 60 days later. This approach, as previously discussed, would engage two separate contractors designing a single, mission‐critical project. This alternative would be unnecessarily inefficient and incur duplication of costs and unacceptable delays.

3) The third alternative considered would utilize the remaining contract capacity for the Southaven, MS Master Plan Study and procure a Design Build contract for the Helena Floodwall Replacement Project. This alternative would typically require 120 day procurement time and simultaneously duplicate a cost of no less than $409,000 as previously discussed.

Efforts to obtain Competition:

The Government is working aggressively to complete project designs so as to be able to construct the corresponding repairs and replacements to the flood control systems as soon as the river levels subside and before future catastrophic events. The impact of not completing these repairs would result in an unacceptable risk of flooding to the protected areas. Increasing the capacity of the current Contract to extend would be most efficient and economical method to accomplish the required work on the Helena Floodwall

Replacement project. The Memphis District is currently working toward awarding separate new contracts for A‐E Services, however, any such award will not be made until about September 2019. The Memphis District Contracting Office has determined that modifying the increasing the capacity of the current contract would be in the best interest of the government.

6. Actions to Increase Competition:

Determination by contracting officer: This action will use the contract unit price which is based on negotiations conducted prior to contract award. The price was determined fair and reasonable at the time of award.

7. Market Research:

USACE conducted market research before the base contract was solicited and competitive proposals were solicited for the 3‐year IDIQ contract. Over a dozen proposals were received. Arcadis U.S., Inc. was awarded the contract in 2017. The original market research included a sources sought for Small Business interest and received 11 responses.

After reviewing the responses to the sources sought, it was recommend that the A‐E

Design Services Contract Solicitation NOT be restricted. As a follow‐on contract under FAR

6.302‐1(a), the market research conducted prior to contract award does not impact this action.

8. Interested Sources:

To date, no other sources have written to express an interest.

9. Other facts:

None

10. Technical Certification:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief:

Name: Matthew Taylor, P.E.

Title: A‐E Coordinator, Technical Services Support Branch

11. Requirements Certification:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief:

Name: Matthew Taylor, P.E.

Title: A‐E Coordinator, Technical Services Support Branch

12. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination:

In accordance with FAR 15.404‐1(a) [Proposal Analysis Techniques] a fair and reasonable price determination was made on the Contractor’s proposal during the award of the base contract W912EQ‐17‐D‐0005. Cost analysis was utilized to evaluate other than certified cost and pricing data to determine cost reasonableness. The labor rates and pricing from the base contract were used to award the previous task orders for Helena Floodwall. No changes were made to the overall pricing structure. Therefore, the pricing for this modification is considered fair and reasonable. I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

Name: Steven O. Austin

Title: Branch Chief, A&E and Construction Contracting

13. Contracting Officer Certification:

Pursuant FAR 6.304(a)(1) – for a proposed contract not exceeding $700,000, the contracting officer’s certification required by 6.303‐2 (b)(12) will serve as approval unless a higher approving level is established in agency procedures.

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the $700,000 increase in capacity for contract W912EQ‐17‐D‐0005.

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

Name: Steven O. Austin

Title: Branch Chief, A&E and Construction Contracting

Signature___________________________________Date______________________ Steven O. Austin, Contracting Officer: