1. Limited Brand Named Sources Justification SCPT PRC-163 Apr 24.pdf

Limited Sources Justification and Approval (J&A)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 1 of 4

Contracting Activity: 18th Contracting Squadron

Purchase Request / Local ID Number: F2H0B74121AC01

Program / Project (and PE, if applicable): AN/PRC-163 Radio Purchase (L3 Harris Radios)

Program Type (PEO or Other Contracting):

Authority: Multiple Award Schedule Program (FAR 8.405-6)

Estimated Contract Cost (including options):

Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan? Yes No

Description of Limitation:

The USAF has a brand name requirement to procure only L3Harris Corporation ground-to-air radio and ancillary equipment to support local and tenant units in conjunction with Base Support Plans on Kadena Air Base and Forward Operating Locations.

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right: CSO Legal COCO CA SCO PEO AQC AQ Blank-1 Blank-2PM CO

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a) ) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right: COCO CO CA SPEPEO Blank

Date

05 Sep 2024

Contracting Officer ELZARA KIMALOVA, TSgt

18 CONS/PKA; DSN: 634-4712

Signature

X

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 2 of 4

Remove guidance pages.

I. Contracting Activity.

18 CONS/PKA

Unit 5199, Bldg. 95

Kadena Air Base, Japan

APO, AP 96368

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

The requirement is in support of the 18th CS for the procurement of L3 Harris Radios and equipment. Below is a breakdown of the items requested.

RF-335M-HH001 AN --- PRC-163 20M RADIO SYSTEM, MIL GPS --- QTY 25

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

The L3Harris AN/PRC-163 delivers breakthrough wide-band data speed and legacy narrow-band performance.

Equipped with MUOS-ready hardware, this manpack is 30% smaller and 35% lighter than any other currently in the field. The AN/PRC-163 is also a tactical radio with NINE Suite B encryption, allowing sovereign nations to securely interoperate with the U.S., NATO and regional tactical partners. This eliminates the time and expense of maintenance, training and logistical support for two separate radio systems.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

18 Wing has a requirement to maintain AN/PRC-163 radios to meet mission demands for several units across the installation and island. Procuring this model will significantly reduce training time for operators and technicians, as the models are currently employed at this base actively. A different radio may severely impact mission readiness as there is no comparable model available for use on the market to meet Kadena's demand for readily deployable communications assets.

Additionally, implementing standardized equipment across the Air Force permits immediate software and hardware interoperability should a failure occur, reducing downtime and maintenance costs. Standardization also prevents specialized training for different devices for the same type of device failure. Air Force Communications Squadrons are typically not trained on any equipment other than Motorola and Harris do not have the required software and hardware to bring a different vendor product online. Several key features of Harris that enhance mission readiness are not available on competing vendor's equipment.

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 3 of 4

FAR 8.404(d).

The radio kits purchased through this request will be utilized for agile combat employment (ACE) within the Pacific. These radios would allow significant C2 and reach back ability for operations in those remote locations, allowing the 18 CS to battle track and receive mission notifications and taskings as well as request support when required. These radios will fill a void in which there is not currently a valid option in place for the unit.

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

Market research was limited to the manufacturer with which order was placed due to the lack of scheduled contractors providing this specific model of radio system and accessories.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

Implementation of this Individual J&A will facilitate timely and cost-effective mission support by increasing the availability of 100% compatible radio units that meet each customer's unique requirements while significantly reducing duplication of costs in spare parts/accessories. Completion of this J&A does not preclude installation from purchasing other brand radios as needed (e.g. cost-effective radios for training} but allows the installation to directly purchase the radios that meet its specialized missions.

OCONUS bases and commonly deployed units often have to procure communications equipment that is the same as our allies and mission partners in the region. HQ ACC and USSOUTHCOM processed a J&A for Harris radios on IDIQ contract FA489016D0027 ($48M). Only Harris radios could be used in this case because, 'The Harris tactical radio suite is the standard radio system employed by all partner nations. The Government has invested significant funds in equipping, provisioning, and training all [counter-narcotics] partner nations within the USSOUTHCOM area of responsibility." Using a separate brand of radios in this case may cause significant operational issues and duplication in cost from procuring additional spares, retraining US troops and partner nations, and integrating another brand of equipment.

Radio purchases across the USAF almost always require unique/patented radio features from a specific manufacturer. Motorola and Harris radios account for approximately 97.7% of the current radio inventory. These radios are 100% compatible with the current systems in place.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

If new tactical air-to-ground radio products become available and will seamlessly operate with the existing USAF radio infrastructure, those items will be considered for future purchases.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by my signature above, I have determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 4 of 4

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by my (our) signature(s) above, I (we) certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my (our) responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

March 2018 Page of Authority: Multiple Award Schedule Program (FAR 8.405-6) Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan?

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right:

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right:

( See guidance at the end of this document for completing the following sections. ) I. Contracting Activity.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

GUIDANCE

I. Contracting Activity.

Fully identify the contracting activity responsible for the proposed contracting action. Include the name/phone number of the Contracting Officer. Specifically identify as a “Limited Sources” Justification. Identify purchase request number, if applicable.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

State whether the action is a new order or by modification to an existing order. Identify the GSA schedule number, the Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) number, the order number for the current action, and the Contactor(s). Indicate the Period of Performance (PoP). Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g. Firm Fixed Price, Labor Hour, etc).

III. Description of the supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

Specifically describe the supplies and/or services to be acquired including the price and quantity of each item in the order and state the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether the services are performance-based and, if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. Also state the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

This section is normally the most detailed part of the justification. To assist you in preparing this justification, an introductory sentence and the four circumstances of FAR 8.405-6 that justify restricting the number of schedule holders are provided below. Select the appropriate cite, then provide, in narrative form, a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited for limiting the number of schedule holders.

(Introductory sentence) FAR 8.405-6 requires an ordering activity to justify its actions when restricting consideration of schedule contractors to fewer than required in FAR 8.405-1 or 8.405-2.

After selecting the appropriate cite, next select one of the four sentences below and provide a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited.

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B), “Only one source is capable of responding due to the unique or specialized nature of the work”. (Provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C), “The new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures.” The original order was not issued under sole source or limited source procedures. (Provide details on the previously competed order and explain how this order is a logical follow-on to that order. Explain fully the connection between the previous work/order and the current one. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(A), “An urgent and compelling need exists, and following the ordering procedures would result in unacceptable delays.” (Provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the schedule impact if time were to be taken to follow FSS ordering procedures. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(b)(1), “The item is peculiar to one manufacturer. A brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer.” (Brand name specifications should not be used unless the particular brand name, product or feature is essential to the Government's requirements. Therefore, explain why the particular brand item is essential to the Government's requirements, and why other companies' similar items, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or cannot meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's need. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.)

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

This section needs to be tailored based upon whether the order is for supplies/services not requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-1) or if the order is for services requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-2).

For FAR 8.405-1 orders the best value determination needs to be based upon the supply or service offered under MAS contracts by surveying at least three schedule contractors through the GSA Advantage! on-line shopping service, or by reviewing the catalogs or price lists of at least three schedule contractors. The ordering Contracting Officer's review of the Contractor's price list(s) and any price reductions sought is also required. (Contracting Officer should seek additional price discounts/concessions based on the specific order requirements on all orders over the micro-purchase threshold.) In addition to price, when determining best value, the ordering activity may consider, among other factors, past performance, special features of the supply or service required for effective program performance, trade-in considerations, probable life of the item selected as compared with that of a comparable item, warranty considerations, maintenance availability, environmental and energy efficiency considerations, and delivery terms.

When an order contains brand name specifications, the Contracting Officer shall post the Request for Quote (RFQ) along with the basis of the justification as required by FAR 8.405-6(b)(3).

For FAR 8.405-2 orders for services requiring a statement of work, FAR 8.405-2(d) requires that an evaluation be performed based on the criteria provided to the schedule contractors. Therefore, the justification must address how the FAR 8.404(d) requirement for an evaluation of the proposed level of effort and mix of labor will be conducted and include a statement that the Contracting Officer will perform a price reasonableness determination as part of the best value determination.

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

Discuss market research that was conducted among schedule holders and the market research results that led to the conclusion to go sole source or to limit the number of schedule holders to be solicited. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of 8.405-1 and 8.405-2 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

When FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C) is cited for an follow-on acquisition as the basis for the justification, include an estimate of the cost that would be duplicated and the basis and derivation of the estimate, or provide details on why a delay to solicit additional schedule holders would be unacceptable.

Provide any other facts supporting the Limited Sources Justification.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

Describe all efforts to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that preclude the agency from meeting the requirements of FAR 8.405-1and FAR 8.405-2 before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

The contracting officer's signature on the signature page evidences that he/she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel

As evidenced by their signatures on the signature page, the technical/requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein which is their responsibility is both accurate and complete.

9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785

18 CS/SCPT / 630-5253

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: ELZARA KIMALOVA, TSgt

18 CONS/PKA; DSN: 634-4712

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]