JA Other Than Full Open Comp for PERFECTA CUTTER AT PORT HUENEME2_Redacted.pdf

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

DLA CONTRACTING SERVICES OFFICE – NEW CUMBERLAND

5404 J AVENUE, BUILDING 404

NEW CUMBERLAND, PENNSYLVANIA 17070-5059

Date: 06-27-2024

Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition IAW FAR 6.3

1.Nature and/or description of the action being approved:

DLA Document Services Ops West has a need for a maintenance service contract for production equipment without using competitive procedures. This need arises based on current Perfecta 92UC Paper Cutter at Port Hueneme requiring maintenance and service, which can only be provided by Print and Finishing Solutions in California for Perfecta Cutters.

2. A description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

A preventative maintenance contract designed to minimize down-time of the Perfecta 92UC Paper Cutter must properly maintain the machinery in a professional fashion, and guarantee that any failure of the machinery will be classified as a first-priority repair. Vendor must agree to perform TWO (2) scheduled inspections on the equipment and up to FOUR (4) additional emergency service calls, as deemed necessary, for machinery. The following items must be included in each scheduled inspection:

1) A thorough inspection of the machine.

2) Cleaning, adjustment, and lubrication of essential working parts.

3) Replacement of defective parts provided by customer or purchased from PFS.

4) A complete performance evaluation and summary.

5) Travel expenses to and from the equipment's location.

The estimated value is $

3. An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

41 U.S.C. 1901

4. A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

Print and Finishing Solutions is the only authorized dealer in California to perform maintenance on Perfecta Cutters.

5. A description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as is practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies:

The sole source justification will be posted to SAM.gov IAW FAR 5.20 (a)( ).

6. A description of the market research conducted (see Part 10) the results or a statement of the reason market research was not conducted:

OEM was contacted and stated that only one source was authorized to conduct maintenance on the equipment.

Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition, such as:

Explanation of why technical data packages, specifications, engineering descriptions, statements of work, or

When 6.302-1 is cited for follow-on acquisitions as described in 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii), an estimate of the cost to the Government that would be duplicated and how the estimate was derived.

Include a copy of the previous justification.

The approval authority shall determine whether the planned actions were completed. If the actions were not completed, the justification for the follow-on acquisition shall be approved by the approval authority one-level above the approval authority for the previous justification (see FAR 6.304). If the previous justification was approved by the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE), the approval remains at the SPE level. DFARS PGI 206.304 (a)(s-70)(ii) When 6.302-2 is cited, data, estimated cost, or other rationale as to the extent and nature of the harm to the Government.

A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition (Include the results of the request for information or the sources sought notification in accordance with DFARS PGI 206.302-1 or include the waiver from the HCA or designee):

OEM provided email stating only one source of maintenance available for location.

9. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

The only way to overcome barriers would be for the OEM to allow more than one company to work on their equipment.

I certify that any supporting data that is the responsibility of technical or requirements personnel and which form a basis for the justification are complete and accurate.

Technical Personnel

Approval:

The justification, as presented above, is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Additionally, I have determined that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

Contracting Officer

Competition Advocate (Above $650K) Head

Head of the Procuring Activity (Above $12.5 million but not exceeding $85.5 million)

Senior Procurement Executive (Above $85.5 million and as required by DFARS PGI 206.304(a)(S- 70)(ii))