LSJ_Redacted.pdf

PDF 1 MB Posted

Attached to
Up to 3 month lease of 126 MFDs
Solicitation number
SP7000-25-0027
Issued by

About this file

This is a Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) document from the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) dated January 14, 2025, seeking approval for a sole source contract extension for multi-functional device (MFD) leasing services.

The justification covers a 2-month extension (February 1 - March 31, 2025) with a 1-month option (April 1-30, 2025) for contracts SP7000-20-F-0053 and SP7000-20-F-0058, which provide 140 and 16 leased MFDs respectively. The extension is needed to maintain continuity of services until replacement devices are delivered under new contracts SP7000-25-F-0031, SP7000-25-F-0047, and SP7000-25-F-0087. The incumbent contractor CTI is the only vendor who can continue leasing the existing equipment, as they retain title/ownership of the devices. The services include full maintenance, consumable supplies (excluding paper), operator training, networking functionality, and security accreditation. No notice is required per FAR 5.101(a)(1), and no other vendors expressed interest in the acquisition.

View the file

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

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

, A

Date

Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition IAW FAR .

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

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

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

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

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:

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

7. 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 purchase descriptions suitable for full and open competition have not been developed or are not available.

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.

8. 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):

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:

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 $ K )

Head of the Procuring Activity (Above $1 .5 million but not exceeding $ million)

Senior Procurement Executive (Above $ million and as required by DFARS PGI 20 0 ( ))

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