NAF Sole Source Justification - CO Signed.pdf

Sole Source/ Brand Name Justification

Section A: General Contract Information Contracting Activity: 377 MSG/PKA Purchase Request Number:

Project/Program Name: Linen Services for Kirtland AFB Lodging Estimated Cost including Options:

$100,200 (NAF)

Section B: Description of the Supplies/Services Required The contractor shall provide all management, supervision, personnel, equipment, tools, supplies, transportation, materials, and other items necessary to ensure that laundry services are performed for Roadrunner Inn [Lodging] as defined in this Performance Work Statement (PWS), and in accordance with contract requirements. This service utilizes Non Appropriated Funds (NAF).

Section C: Justification for Soliciting from a Single Source Mission Linen Supply is the only known local company capable of handling the large volume of laundry and sorting specifications that Roadrunner Inn requires on a short notice. The current contract between Roadrunner Inn and Mission Linen expires on 30 September 2024. Lodging anticipated the construction of a linens facility to be completed by 2024. However, construction for the facility has been suspended and is now estimated to be completed in 2027. Lodging is now seeking to recompete this requirement with an updated PWS that is more acutely tailored to their needs. To provide the customer with the necessary time to develop a PWS, and perform appropriate market research, a six-month bridge contract will be awarded.

Section D: Efforts to Obtain Competition The current contract FA9401-19-C-A001 between Roadrunner Inn and Mission Linen Supply expires on 30 September 2024. In 2018, Mission Linen Supply was the only local company capable and willing to handle the large volume of laundry and sorting specifications that Roadrunner Inn required, and thus, they were the only company to provide a proposal for the effort. Throughout the 5-year period, the customer and contracting office have performed continuous market research in hopes of uncovering an additional vendor that was capable and interested in performing the requirement. In the absence of clear competition coupled with an evolving and complex requirement, lodging pursued a request for construction of a linens facility to be completed by 2024 so that they could perform the services with Government personnel. However, construction for the facility has been delayed, and is now estimated to be completed in 2027. Lodging is now seeking to establish a new 5-year effort for this requirement with an updated PWS that is more acutely tailored to their needs. As of today, there are not any additional known vendors capable and willing to provide a proposal for the next 5-year solution, and as a result, there are not any known companies that can provide a short term 6-month solution expeditiously. To provide the customer with the necessary time to develop a concise PWS accurately capturing their service needs, as well as perform more market research in hopes of obtaining competition, a six-month bridge contract will be awarded to Mission Linen Supply. This bridge contract will continue the performance of service as specified in the current performance work statement and current contract.

Section E: Steps to Preclude Future Single Source Awards For the follow-on linen service contract, the following steps will be taken to avoid a sole source award:

-Internet searches will be conducted, as well as a robust Sources Sought/RFI to identify potential new contractors and see if there is any room for the PWS to be adjusted to make the mission. Further, discussion with other federal and state agencies in the local area such as the VA and hospitals to capture how they get support for their requirements.

-The SBA Albuquerque District Office will be contacted to see if other local linen businesses exist since the last time market research was conducted.

Section F: Manufacturer/Contract information

POC: Ben Strasshofer Phone: 505-344-4838 Email: bstrasshofer@missionlinen.com Address:

Mission Linen Supply 4315 Hawkins Street NE Albuquerque, NM 87109

Presently a quote for 6 months of performance has not been received. The estimated price is based on the current Option Year 4 contractual pricing under NAF awarded contract FA9401-19-C-A001.

Section G: Contracting Officer Determination

I have determined that the circumstances of this award action deem only a single source is reasonably available.

Date

14 August 2024

Typed Name and Rank/Grade of Contracting Officer

Heather Shepard, Contracting Officer, GS-13

Signature of Contracting Officer

GUIDELINES FOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATIONS

1. Technical and requirements personnel are responsible for providing and certifying as accurate and complete necessary data to support their recommendation for other than full and open competition. The justification must demonstrate that only one company can perform. The following are examples of basis for sole source acquisitions:

a. The supplies or services to be acquired are unique to a contractor.

b. Time is of the essence and only one known source can meet the Government’s needs within the required timeframe.

c. Data is unavailable for competitive procurement.

d. It is necessary that the item being acquired from the one source be compatible and interchangeable with existing equipment.

2. The following elements must be addressed in the sole source justification:

a. Clearly state the Government’s requirements. Make sure that the entire requirement is covered by the justification.

b. Explain why the contractor is the only company that can meet the Government’s requirement. The documentation necessary to adequately substantiate the two most common bases of sole source is discussed below:

(1) If the contractor has a unique capability, whether it be an item or service, it is insufficient to simply say that the contractor is unique. If the item is unique to the contractor, the unique characteristics must be set forth. If the contractor has unique expertise, that expertise must be described. If the contractor has unique equipment or facilities or he has proprietary data, it must be explained.

(2) If only one contractor can perform within the required timeframe, the timeframe must be explained:

(a) provide the date by which the supplies or services must be delivered.

(b) indicate how that date was determined and its significance.

(c) indicate the impact of delay beyond that date in terms of program schedules, milestones, etc.

(d) state how long it would take another contractor to acquire the capability to perform (learning period), how much it would cost another contractor to get up to speed, and if appropriate, what it would cost the Government in terms of dollars and man hours to get another contractor up to speed. State the bases for the above estimates.

c. State how the decision to go sole source was reached. Generally, technical personnel’s knowledge and experience can be used to support sole source. The following are examples of documentation supporting this element:

(1) Explain requisition originator’s experience that would indicate that he knows that only one source can perform.

(2) Explain that technical publications, symposiums, or conferences clearly indicate that only one company can perform. List publications read and symposiums and conferences attended.

(3) State what is being done to foster future competition.

(4) Justification must be signed and dated.

d. There are several other points to be made:

(1) The two most often cited bases for sole source are uniqueness and timeframe. There are often confused and inappropriately interchanged. If a contractor is unique and if his uniqueness is adequately substantiated, a discussion of timeframe is inappropriate. If the basis for sole source is timeframe, a discussion of uniqueness should not be made or alluded to. Timeframe does not make a contractor unique.

(2) In cases where an unsolicited proposal has been received, the justification limiting acquisition to a single source must verify that the proposal represents the product of original thinking by the submitting contractor and could not be obtained competitively without revealing the original thinking.

(3) Statements that a contractor has the best capability, offers the lowest price, or is the only qualified source are not bases for sole source. Such determinations can only be made through competitive acquisitions. A strong presentation which merely establishes that the recommended source is most highly qualified to perform but does not establish why other sources cannot perform is unacceptable.

(4) Incumbency does not justify sole source.

(5) Administrative delay or lack of adequate advanced planning do not create an urgency that justifies sole source acquisition.

3. Brand name Requirements

a. A requirement for brand name procurement exists when only one manufacturer's item fills a customer's needs. The customer must provide, in writing, a specific brand name justification. The justification must state why a particular brand name is the only one that can meet the minimum essential needs of the government. If the requirement is for a large-dollar system and incorporates a brand name item, the written justification must be provided for the specific brand name item within the total system. Soliciting a specific brand name does not constitute full and open competition regardless of the number of sources solicited for that brand-name requirement.

b. When attempting to justify a brand-name requirement above $5000 prepare the justification and support in essentially the same way as paragraphs 1-3 above except the focus is on the brand name and not the source providing the brand-name product.

GUIDELINES FOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATIONS