Attch 3_ Brand Name Justification.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 1 of 5May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 1 of 5

Is this a brand-name justification? Yes No Please provide the product title and description. [ FAR16.505(a)(4)(i) ]

Brand-Name Product Title: Giant Voice Upgrades and Repairs

Brand-Name Product Description: Federal Signal mass notification equipment.

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

Contracting Activity: 934 CONF/PK

Purchase Request / Local ID Number:

Program Name (and Program Element, if applicable): Giant Voice Upgrades and Repairs

Estimated Cost/Price of the Order (including options): $65,000

Type of D etermination: Individual Class Expires: [ click and select ]

Click here for instructions to complete the boxes below.

(1) Contracting Activity:

934 CONF/PK

(2) Nature and/or description of the action being approved:

Giant Voice upgrades and repairs are being requested by the 934th Communications Squadron. This is critical for upkeep and optimization of the Giant Voice system for life safety. All maintenance and troubleshooting will be accomplished by fully qualified and professional maintainers for mass notification.

This contract will provide the following repairs and upgrades:

a. Repairs at 9 separate GV outdoor sites.

b. Labor for siren technicians.

c. Warranty Coverage: 2 years for material and/or workmanship. 60 on-site warranty service after the completion of the installation.

(3) Description of the supplies/services required to meet the agency's needs:

The current products that we have in place for the Giant voice is equipment by the Federal Signal brand Authority Cited: FAR 8.405-6(b)(1): Only vendors offering Federal Signal products are capable of responding to the unique and specialized nature of the current installation. While other vendors produce their own version of mass notification hardware, it would not be cost-effective or operationally feasible to fully tech-refresh (TR) all the mass notification equipment base-wide just to accommodate purchasing a different brand name's equipment.

(4) Justification for restricting consideration to a brand-name item:

DAFFARS 5313.501 - 10 U.S.C. 3572, Implementation of Simplified Acquisition Procedures (41 U.S.C. 1901)

May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 2 of 5May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 2 of 5

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The proposed unit price of giant voice repair components and labor was compared to historical prices paid through market research and the IGE. Rationale for Limiting Sources: The existing Federal Signal devices have demonstrated reliable performance. Introducing a fragmented, non-communicating system from a different manufacturer would create critical gaps in emergency notification, which is unacceptable from an operational and life safety standpoint.

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

Market research was conducted to identify other potential sources for giant voices repair with similar capabilities. TMarket research indicates the proposed brand is the only brand able to satisfy the government's requirement for seamless integration with the existing system. The requirement will still be posted to promote competition among authorized Federal Signal resellers and distributors to the maximum extent practicable.

Steps to Preclude Future Single Source Awards: The 934th AW determined that the circumstances of this contract action deem only a single brand is reasonably available at this time to integrate with the existing infrastructure. We will continue to monitor technical guidance, the business market, and publications in an effort to remove competition barriers for future requirements and acquisitions.

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to decreasing the use of brand-name items before any subsequent acquisition of the supplies or services:

The primary barrier to competition for this requirement is the proprietary nature of the Federal Signal brand. We will continue to research the marketplace to identify whether this brand has established authorized third-party resellers, distributors who can offer competitive pricing under future solicitations.

(8) Program Manager's certification that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

(9) Contracting Officer's certification that the justification is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(10) Approving Official's determination that FAR16.505(a)(4)(i) applies to the order:

As evidenced by my signature below, I hereby determine that the use of brand-name restriction applies.

REMOVING ROWS: CAUTION (click here first) NOTE: The text in the signature blocks below is editable, including the title.

Date

23 Jul 2026

Program Manager Jonah Scarset

934 CS/SCXP

Signature

X

May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 3 of 5May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 3 of 5

Date

23 Jul 2026

Contracting Officer Michelle L. Hogan

934 CON/PK 612-713-1430

Signature

X

May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 4 of 5May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 4 of 5

Instructions for Completing the Template

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from RFO 16.507-6(b) and the supporting rationale. RFO 16.507-2(a) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold unless a statutory exception applies. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(1): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. 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.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(2): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception 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.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(3): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(4): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(5): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(6): “For DoD, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in part 6.103 (10 U.S.C. 3406(c)(5)). The public interest exception must not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(7).”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of fair opportunity could

May 2026 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 5 of 5 not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(6) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

New RFO 6.103 Exceptions for drop down 6.103-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements 6.103-2 Unusual and compelling urgency 6.103-3 Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services 6.103-5 Authorized or required by statute 6.103-6 National security 6.103-7 Public interest https://usaf.dps.mil/sites/AFCC/KnowledgeCenter/templates_admin/aqc-front.jpg https://usaf.dps.mil/sites/AFCC/KnowledgeCenter/templates_admin/aqc-back.jpg Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction May 2026 Page of Is this a brand-name justification?

Please provide the product title and description. [ FAR16.505(a)(4)(i) ] Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan?

Type of D etermination:

Fair Opportunity Exception: RFO 16.507-6(b) (Check the applicable subparagraph below.)

(1) Contracting Activity:

(2) Nature and/or description of the action being approved:

(3) Description of the supplies/services required to meet the agency's needs:

(4) Justification for restricting consideration to a brand-name item:

(4) Identification of the exception to fair opportunity and the supporting rationale, including a demonstration that the proposed contractor's unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the exception cited. If the contracting officer uses the logical follow-on exception, the rationale must describe why the relationship between the initial order and the follow-on is logical (e.g., in terms of scope, period of performance, or value):

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to decreasing the use of brand-name items before any subsequent acquisition of the supplies or services:

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to increasing fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services:

(8) Program Manager's certification that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

(9) Contracting Officer's certification that the justification is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(10) Approving Official's determination that FAR16.505(a)(4)(i) applies to the order:

As evidenced by my signature below, I hereby determine that the use of brand-name restriction applies.

(10) Approving Official's determination that one of the circumstances in RFO 16.507-6(b) applies to the order.

As evidenced by my signature below, I hereby determine that the fair opportunity exception checked on page 1 applies.

NOTE: The text in the signature blocks below is editable, including the title.

Instructions for Completing the Template

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts. (Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from RFO 16.507-6(b) and the supporting rationale. RFO 16.507-2(a) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold unless a statutory exception applies. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(1): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. 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.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(2): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception 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. Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(3): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(4): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(5): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(6): “For DoD, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in part 6.103 (10 U.S.C. 3406(c)(5)). The public interest exception must not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(7).”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of fair opportunity could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(6) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

New RFO 6.103 Exceptions for drop down 6.103-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements 6.103-2 Unusual and compelling urgency 6.103-3 Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services 6.103-5 Authorized or required by statute 6.103-6 National security 6.103-7 Public interest 9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785