B08 Brand Name justification Attachement 2 PMIS309889 SOLE SOURCE CS signed.pdf

PDF 237 KB Posted

Attached to
LAKE 20-1378-FLASHING ROAD SIGNS - Install of 9 ne
Solicitation number
140P8120Q0070
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Sol_140P8120Q0070_Amd_0001.pdf PDF
A04 Specifications 3099889.pdf PDF
sign locations and specs.docx DOCX document
Wage Determinations Clark County NV.pdf PDF
140P8120Q0070 Supply Clauses.docx DOCX document
Sol_140P8120Q0070.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

ATTACHMENT 2

JUSTIFICATION & APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

for SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS OVER $3,500 ($2,000/$2500 for Construction/Services) AND

UP TO $150,000

(See FAR 13.106-1)

Date: ___ 29 April 2020 __________ PR Number: __309889___________

1. Nature and/or description of the item/service being procured and its intended use (include the anticipated cost):

Solar powered flashing caution signs furnished and installed approximately $116,000.

2. Sole Source Justification rationale (Check one and explain below):

_____ Only one responsible source.

_____ Urgent and compelling circumstances exist. Include critical delivery or performance dates, and when you became aware of the requirement. Provide a specific statement of the impact on Government operations, financial or otherwise, if the required delivery or performance dates are not met.

__X__ Other

Explain:

We already have existing signs so:

Single source, for uniformity, ease of maintenance, software upgrades, warranties, spare parts and usability for both the LE Rangers and maintenance.

Existing systems need to be updated (amongst other things for uniformity). Cost savings with multiple units from the same source.

There would be a compatibility issue. Different providers have different in house software that run their signs. So we would have two that would always be out of sync with the six new ones. Maintenance would have to maintain two different sets of spare parts. LE and Maintenance would have to learn and maintain two sets of O&Ms.

3. Market Research. Please explain the results or why one was not performed. State whether any other offers were received or anyone expressed interest:

Prices are very competitive so we would not really see a big difference in price so no real cost savings with a best value determination. Going with another vendor/manufacturer, guaranteed to cause us lots of headaches if we have two systems to maintain. Not to mention user confusion as to what sign is where and how one functions differently from another....and if there was a legal case possibly questioning the calibrations, software... different systems, human factor, chances very high for confusion and possible errors.

ATTACHMENT 2

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

for SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS OVER $3,000 ($2,000/$2500 for Construction/Services AND UP

TO $150,000

(See FAR 13.106-1)

PR Number ___309880____________

4. If this is a determination for sole source, the contracting officer certifies:

a. Only one source is available, or urgent and compelling circumstances exist.

b. The anticipated price will be determined fair and reasonable using the price analysis techniques described in FAR Part 13.106-3(a).

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date)__________________________

Type or Print Name: __________________________________________ Title:

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date) ___________________________

Type or Print Name: __________________________________________ Contracting Officer

Over $25,000:(if applicable)

(Signature) _______________________________________ (Date) ______________________

Warranted Individual 1 Level Above Contracting Officer

Claudina Brizuela Civil Engineer

29 April 2020

07/20/2020

2020-07-20T10:17:08-0700
JAMES READ

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .