Attachment J1 - Brand-Name Justification and Approval (5 Pages)_Redacted.pdf

Justification and Approval

BRAND NAME ONLY JUSTIFICATION

Plan ID Number: 2025-LGR-0220

Form Updated 4/14/2023

Justification & Approval

BRAND NAME ONLY JUSTICIATION

As a legislative branch agency, the Library is subject to the competition and advertising requirements of 41 U.S.C. § 6101. Like the Competition in Contracting Act and the FAR, 41 U.S.C. § 6101 does not require competition when a contracting officer certifies that only one source or brand-name item is available, when dictated by public exigency, or when otherwise authorized by law.

This document sets forth the justification and approval for award of a contract or order by means providing for other than full and open competition per 41 U.S.C. § 6101, LCR 7-210, and, as applicable, FAR 6.302, FAR 13.106-1, FAR 8.405, and FAR 16.505. Contracting without competition shall not be justified on the basis of a lack of advance planning or concerns related to availability of funds.

This form shall be used to support instances where competition will be limited to a single source, a limited number of sources, including where a brand name product is required.

Part 1 – Identification

1. Contracting Agency and Activity: Library of Congress, LCSG, RCS, NAVCC, PSS

2. Nature of Action Being Approved

Contract LoC or Leg Branch Order GSA Schedule or GWAC Other

Plan ID Number: 2025-LGR-0220 Contractor (or Brand Name): Technics, SME Estimated Value (Base and all options):

Period of Performance: Date of Award through delivery

3. Description of Supplies or Services Required to Meet Library Needs

Describe the supplies or services that are required to meet the Library’s minimum needs and the delivery schedule required to meet those needs. Do not focus on a description of the program.

The Library requires the following supplies or services:

The National Audiovisual Conservation Center (NAVCC) of the Library of Congress, develops, preserves and provides broad access to a comprehensive and valued collection of the world’s audiovisual heritage for the benefit of Congress and the nation’s citizens. The Audio Lab of the NAVCC uses a Simon Yorke turntable which is a high-end, precision-engineered turntable designed for audiophile and archival use.

The Audio Lab needs to replace its Simon Yorke turntables as the current units have reached the end of their lifespan. The existing Simon Yorke turntables, now over 25 years old, are no longer supported since the company is out of business. This presents an opportunity to upgrade to new, archival-grade Technics (Panasonic) turntable systems using SME M2-12R tone arms that both are actively supported products. Given that a significant portion of the Recorded Sound Collection consists of analog discs, this replacement is a mission-critical need to ensure the preservation and accessibility to the Library's collections.

This contract is for the replacement of the existing 25-year-old Simon Yorke turntables for new upgraded turntables. The Technics SP10R turntable system has been identified as uniquely capable of fulfilling the archival requirements of the Audio Lab. This would encompass the procurement of 2 (two) Technics SP10R turntable with custom plinth compatible with a 12” SME tone arm as detailed below and with an SME M2-12R tone arm that meet the requirements defined in the SOW. In addition, the work includes a three (3) year manufacture warranty on the SP10R turntables, plinths and a ten (10) year manufacture warranty on the SME tonearms.

Part 2 – Program Office Justification & Approval

4. Authority for Contracting Without Competition Over $250,000 For this requirement over $250,000, under FAR part 6, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

There is only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy Library requirements.

41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(C); FAR 6.302-1.

Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by contractor’s unique capabilities or products. FAR 6.302-1(b)(1).

Source controls copyrights, patents, raw materials, or secret processes cannot be acquired otherwise, or similar circumstances. FAR 6.302-

1(b)(2).

Other exception identified in FAR 6.302-1

There is such unusual & compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured if competition is not limited.

41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(B); FAR 6.302-2. Option years are not permitted.

Source is expressly authorized or required by statute (e.g., AbilityOne, UNICOR, GPO, GSA Public Buildings Service, Appropriations Act, etc.) per 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 6.302-5

Other basis authorized in 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b) or FAR part 6.302 Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product or item which is essential to the Government’s requirement. FAR 6.302-1(c).

The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

IT Standard Data Sheet)

Up to and including $250,000 For this requirement up to $250,000, using simplified acquisition procedures under FAR part 13, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

Only one responsible source is reasonably available to meet Library requirements. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b); FAR 13.106-1.

Product or service is reasonably available from only one source.

Source controls copyrights, patents or other exclusive licensing arrangements.

Urgent circumstances; only one source can reasonably deliver by required date. Option years are not permitted.

Source is expressly authorized or required by statute Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product The Product is listed the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

IT Standard Data Sheet)

GSA Schedule Order For this GSA schedule order under FAR part 8, the basis for not competing among GSA schedule-holders and/or specifying a brand name product or item is:

An urgent and compelling need exists, and following GSA procedures would result in unacceptable delays.

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(A).

Only one GSA source is capable of fulfilling the requirement at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized. FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B).

In the interest of economy and efficiency, the new work is a logical follow-on to an original order that was placed competitively among GSA schedule-holders (i.e., the original order was not sole-source or limited-source.) FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C).

Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

Order Under Multiple Award Indefinite-Delivery Contract or GWAC For this order under FAR subpart 16.5, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

The need is so urgent fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(C) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A).

The Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by contractor’s unique capabilities or products. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR

16.505(b)(2)(i)(B).

A logical follow-on order in the interest of economy and efficiency. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(i)(2)(C).

To satisfy a minimum guarantee. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(D).

Authorized or required by statute. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(E).

The Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product or item which is essential to the Government’s requirements. 41

U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(B) and FAR 16.505(a)(4)(i).

The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

5. Rationale for Contracting Without Competition

In supporting an action not providing for full and open competition, it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the contractor is exceptionally well qualified or even the best qualified, or that the required brand name product is well suited to the Library’s needs. The rationale must demonstrate that no one else, or no other competing product, can satisfactorily fulfill the Library’s requirement. Do not focus on the importance of the requirement; the issue is the rationale for not competing.

In supporting urgency, address the following: What are the unexpected facts or the unpredictable events that led to this situation? When is the required delivery or performance start date? Why this date? What specific harm to the Government will occur if the delivery is not made or performance not begun as scheduled? (Note that expiration of funds is not sufficient harm to justify not competing.) Demonstrate that the contract is only for items and quantities urgently needed until a competitive procurement action can be developed, or that a separate competitive follow-on is not practical.

In supporting a brand name justification, the brand name or feature must be essential to the Library’s requirements, and market research indicates that other company’s similar products or products with similar features cannot meet or be modified to meet the Library’s needs.

We are authorized to limit competition on the basis of the citation in section 4 because:

This justification is essential to the Library’s requirements because the Audio Lab needs to replace its Simon Yorke turntables as the current units have reached the end of their lifespan. The existing Simon Yorke turntables, now over 25 years old, are no longer supported since the company is out of business. The Technics by Panasonic brand-name product is the only acceptable solution to meet the Library's needs because of its ability to be configured to play 16” transcription discs, the archival-grade standards met by the turntable, and its unique features with one of the lowest wow and flutter rates (0.015% or lower) ensuring high fidelity playback. The SME manufactured M2-12R tone arm is the only acceptable solution to meet the Library’s needs because of its class leading performance, 12” length allowing for playback of 16” transcription discs and compatibility with current Library equipment: we currently have other model SME tonearms that share maintenance parts and setup/calibration standards.

Technics by Panasonic is a high-end audio brand specializing in turntables, amplifiers, and audio equipment. The Technics SP-10R is a high-end direct-drive turntable designed for professional and archival use. SP-10R is used by archival institutions that need precise, reliable playback for preserving historical recordings. The SP-10R is one of the most advanced turntables available in the market that builds on a long history of design by Technics. The Technics SP-10R archival turntable is unique in the marketplace, featuring an ultra-stable direct-drive motor that delivers an industry-leading < 0.015% wow and flutter. It supports multiple playback speeds and when paired with custom plinth, can accommodate larger 16” transcription discs in the Library’s collection.

The Technics by Panasonic produces turntables that meet archival-grade standards and are actively supported by the Library. Archival grades suggest that the turntables are designed to meet the high standards required for preserving and accurately playing historical or fragile recordings, such as transcription discs. A great bulk of the Recorded Sound Collection consists of analog discs, and this is a mission critical need to preserve and provide access to the Library's collections.

The selected tonearm for this turntable system is the SME M2-12R. The Library has been using SME tonearms on its current archival turntables, making them essential for maintaining compatibility with existing equipment, including head shells and cartridges, while also leveraging the Library’s stock of spare parts for maintenance. The SME M2-12R features a unique J-shaped arm with azimuth adjustment, a capability not found in other models and crucial for properly configuring the turntables for archival use. Additionally, it offers industry-leading tracking accuracy and minimum distortion, ensuring optimal performance. The design of the M2-12R tone arm specifically allows for the playback of 16” transcription discs of which the Library has a large collection of. This playback capability requires the need for the M2-12R tonearm as well as a custom plinth to accommodate the tone arm and turntable.

Brand-name equivalent is unacceptable for this procurement because equivalent products from other brands do not meet the same standards or unique features as specified in the Technics by Panasonic brand. This justification is covering all of the procurement as the brand-name product from Technica by Panasonic. Although this procurement specifies a particular brand-name, the competition method shall be full and open since multiple vendors supply this turntable brand and can provide suitable solutions for the required plinth design.

6. Actions to Overcome Barriers to Competition Before Subsequent Contract Is Required

State what actions, if any, the program office can take to overcome barriers to competition before a contracting for this requirement again, such as:

using action to provide time to develop specifications for a competitive procurement by a certain date; licensing copyrights or patents so other contractors may use the works; or breaking the requirement into parts that may be purchased competitively. If this is a one-time requirement, explain that action to increase future competition is not needed. If the source is expressly required by statute, state “Source is statutory.”

To increase competition, we will: Competition is available for this. Any authorized reseller of this equipment will be able to submit a quote to provide these products. While the competition is being limited to specific product brands, any business that is an authorized reseller of these products may provide a quote.

7. Program Office Certification

I certify that the description of the Government’s minimum needs, schedule requirements, and technical information that provide the basis for this justification are accurate and complete.

0BPART 3 – CONTRACTING OFFICER DETERMINATIONS & CERTIFICATION

8. Efforts to Solicit from As Many Potential Sources As Practicable Unless a justification is based on FAR 6.302-2, Unusual and compelling urgency, contracting officers shall post justifications for other than full and open competition, including brand name justifications, to the Contract Opportunities website on sam.gov (or eBuy for Brand Name Justifications under FAR Part 8) prior to requesting a proposal or otherwise entering into negotiations.

Advance notice will be published in sam.gov for 15 days before a contract is awarded. FAR 5.203(a).

Advance or concurrent notice will be published in sam.gov for a reasonable time for commercial items FAR 5.203(a) and 12.204(b).

Advance notice will not be published because the action meets the following FAR exception:

Notice would compromise national security. FAR 5.202(a)(1).

Unusual and compelling urgency; notice period would seriously injure Government. FAR 5.202(a)(2).

Expressly authorized or required to be made through another Government agency. FAR 5.202(a)(4).

Order will be placed against an IDIQ contract awarded under FAR 16.5. FAR 5.202(a)(6).

Order will be placed against GSA schedule or other competitively-awarded contract. FAR 5.202(a)(11).

Other: This brand name justification is being attached to the solicitation.

Advance notice will not be published per 41 U.S.C. § 6101; see attached deviation from the FAR per LCR 7-210 § 3.A.

We made the following efforts to interest potential sources in this award: N/A

9. Listing of Sources That Expressed Interest in Writing

The following sources expressed interest in this award: N/A

10. Additional Information

The following additional information is relevant to this justification and approval: This J&A documents the brand-name nature of these requirements. Any authorized reseller of these products can provide a competitive quote.

11. Contracting Officer Determination that Price Is Fair and Reasonable As explained in detail below, I have determined that the prices for this contracting action are fair and reasonable based on a comparison of the prices to the following (see FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)):

Historical prices paid by the Government Published competitive price lists Library’s Independent Government Estimate Prices obtained through market research Other: Informal Vendor Quotes Prices obtained through competitive proposals

The following analysis (based on attached pricing information) supports my determination: A fair and reasonable pricing determination shall be made before an award is executed.

12. Contracting Officer Determination of Responsibility Checked System for Award Management (or will check in the case of competitive proposals for a brand name product) SAM will be checked before an award is made

13. Contracting Officer Determination of Best Value I have determined that this action represents the best value to the Government because: This shall be a lowest priced technically acceptable competition. The lowest priced technically acceptable proposal shall be determined to be the best value.

14. Contracting Officer Certification I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, this justification is accurate and complete. For those actions up to $750,000, I approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

James R. Robinson James R. Robinson 06/04/2025

Name

Signature

Date