HAZMAT RESPONSE

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT FAR PART 6 JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION Program/Equipment: The requirement is for a sole source award to the Miller Environmental Group to render safe an inert M-47 series bomb that was emitting bromonicotinic acid. Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR Part 6.302-1 -- Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements. Amount: $2,831.89 Prepared by: REDACTED DSN: 688-XXXX Contract Specialist Date: 1 August 2018 Email: REDACTED Contracting Officer: Kymberly Y. Aviles DSN: 688-5861 Contracting Officer Date: 2 August 2018 Email:contact@example.gov Technical: REDACTED DSN: 688-XXXX Environmental Engineer Date: 2 August 2018 Email: REDACTED Requirements: REDACTED DSN: 688-XXXX Environmental Engineer Date: 2 August 2018 Email: Reviews: I have reviewed this justification and find it adequate to support other than full and open competition. (Revise the following signatures according to reviews required.) Program Manager: REDACTED Typed Name: Chief, Environmental Management Division, USAG WEST POINT DSN: 688-XXXX Signature: FAR Part 6 Justification and Approval for Other than Full and Open Competition 1. Contracting Activity: Mission and Installation Contracting Command-West Point 2. Description of Action: The USAG West Point Directorate of Public Works requests a firm-fixed-price new contract with the Miller Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG) 538 Edwards Avenue, Calverton, New York 11933. The Government projects award for 31 August 2018 and fiscal year 2018, Operations and Maintenance, (Base Operations) funds will be used. 3. Description of Supplies/Services: This was for an emergency hazmat response from the MEG to make safe an M-47 series bomb from the USMA Museum West Point that was emitting bromonicotinic acid. The MEG was the only company capable of responding to this emergency. The MEG removed the bomb from the museum and transported this to a safe location to render it safe. This was a onetime requirement that was completed on 12 June. Period of Performance: 12 June 2018 Total Value: $ 2,831.89 4. Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. 5. Reason for Authority Cited: This was an emergency situation where a device was emitting an unsafe chemical that had a potential to cause harm and or death to anyone approaching within the general vicinity of the bomb. The call was received from DPW at or about 1615 on 12 June which was at the end of the normal work day for most companies. The USMA Fire Department provided an immediate response and identified the unknown substance as bromonicotinic acid, a dangerous chemical substance and an immediate response was warranted. This action was beyond the capabilities of any West Point organization to render it to a safe condition. The MEG is the only known company that can provide an emergency response 24/7 to a hazmat situation. (a) As described at FAR 6.302-1(a)(2), when the supplies or services required by the agency are available only from one responsible source, or for DoD, NASA and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other types of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, full and open competition need not be provided for. The MEG provides a "Full Service Environmental Spill Response, Industrial Cleaning, and Remediation capability" and has been the only company known to have this capability to respond to West Point since at least 2004. (b) Alternatives: There were no viable alternatives present in this matter. A museum artifact, an inert M-47 bomb began leaking a toxic substance. The USMA Fire Department and DPW HAZMAT personnel responded and identified the substance as toxic and that it was beyond the capabilities of any West Point organization to properly handle or make safe. This was determined to be a life threating event and DPW sought out assistance from MICC- West Point. MICC -West Point called the MEG group to respond. The MEG has all the necessary tools, equipment and personnel to properly respond to any HAZMAT situation. (c) This J&A is prepared after the fact to document a sole source action. Had the work not been completed, someone may have died as a result of any failure to act. Failure to approve the J&A is not an option. 6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: This was a onetime requirement with limited sources available and a decision had to made in a short time that precluded any effort to compete the work. In accordance with FAR 5.202(a), this action will not be synopsized. In accordance with FAR 5.201(b)(i), this action does not meet the reporting threshold as per 5.101(a)(1) and or 5.101(a)(2) a. Effective Competition: Because this is a sole source action, effective competition is not applicable. b. Subcontracting Competition: Subcontracting competition will be achieved by N/a. This was a small operation handled by a single company and due to the lack of complexity, no subcontracting is required. 7. Actions to Increase Competition: For future HAZMAT responses a discussion has been initiated with DPW to review possibilities of seeking out new companies thru the use of multiple BPA's. The frequency of HAZMAT responses that have utilized the MEG are infrequent and do not support a "contract" yet a BPA may be an alternative solution to provide competition in a limited role. 8. Market Research: Formal Market research is not required. Based upon prior history of like events, Miller Environmental is the only known source. In accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 205.205-71, DFARS 206.302-1(d), and DFARS Procedures, Guidance and Information (PGI) 206.302-1(d), a sources sought notice was posted to Federal Business Opportunities) on 24 August for 6 days and there was one incomplete response from Principle Information Technology Company that provided a capabilities statement. 9. Interested Sources: There was one response to the Sources Sought Notice and it did not address the work as described in the notice. The company is listed as being in Houston, Texas and clearly is unable to meet the criteria for an emergency/immediate response in New York. There was no information submitted that showed they understood the requirement. See Paragraph 6 for the synopsis information. To date, no other sources have written to express interest in the acquisition. 10. Other Facts: a. Procurement History: (1) Miller Environmental has responded to a number of emergencies for hazmat related services over the last 14 years MILLER ENV GROUP SETASIDE SUMMARY W911SD-12-P-0134 UNRESTRICTED Mercury spill cleanup FAR 13.106(b)(1) W911SD-13-P-0207 UNRESTRICTED Hydraulic oil spill cleanup KACH FAR 13.106(b)(1) W911SD-13-P-0261 UNRESTRICTED Diesel fuel spill remediation FAR 13.106(b)(1) (2) All the above were sole source (3) All were procured under FAR 13.106(b)(1) Sole Source (4) The Miller Environmental Group is the only known source to be able to provide an immediate response. (5) If any prior contract for this requirement was accomplished using full and open competition, include a detailed explanation of the changed circumstances causing this action to now limit the sources.-No emergency hazmat procurements were competed. (6) There are no unusual patterns present. All the above were unforeseen events. (7) The previous award W911SD-13-P-0261 was in response to a fuel spill from construction equipment that was running down a road and was threating to contaminate the USMA water supply if uncontained. 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. Typed Name: REDACTED Date: Title: Chief, DPW Environmental Management Division 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. Typed Name: REDACTED Date: Title: Chief, DPW Environmental Management Division Signature: 13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. The prices are based off a published price list and when compared to previous services of a like basis. Certified Cost and Pricing data is not required for values under the SAT. This determination will be made using the following: ? cost analysis ? price analysis ? should cost ? IGCE ? audit: ? other: As a part of this basis, certified cost or pricing data: ? will be required. ? will not be required and the following exception applies (FAR 15.403): ? Prices that will be agreed upon are based on adequate price competition. ? Prices that will be agreed upon are based on prices set by law or regulation. ? A commercial item is being acquired. ? A waiver has been granted by the head of the contracting activity (HCA) in accordance with DFARS PGI 215.403-1. ? The contract action is a modification to a contract or subcontract for commercial item(s). ? The estimated cost of the contract action is less than the threshold for certified cost or pricing data. Typed Name: KYMBERLY Y. AVILES 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. Typed Name: KYMBERLY Y. AVILES Date: Title: Contracting Officer U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, West Point, NY Signature: