Justification_Redacted.pdf

Justification and Approval For Other than Full and Open Competition

Plan ID Number: P20260029

Form Updated 4/14/2023

Justification & Approval

As a legislative branch agency, the Library is subject to the competition and advertising requirements of 41 U.S.C. § 6101. Like the Competition in Contracting Act and the FAR, 41 U.S.C. § 6101 does not require competition when a contracting officer certifies that only one source or brand-name item is available, when dictated by public exigency, or when otherwise authorized by law.

This document sets forth the justification and approval for award of a contract or order by means providing for other than full and open competition per 41 U.S.C. § 6101, LCR 7-210, and, as applicable, FAR 6.302, FAR 13.106-1, FAR 8.405, and FAR 16.505. Contracting without competition shall not be justified on the basis of a lack of advance planning or concerns related to availability of funds.

This form shall be used to support instances where competition will be limited to a single source, a limited number of sources, including where a brand name product is required.

Part 1 – Identification

1. Contracting Agency and Activity: Library of Congress, FEDLINK

2. Nature of Action Being Approved

Contract (or modification) LoC or Leg Branch Order (or modification) GSA Schedule or GWAC: Identify Schedule/Contract Other: Identify

Plan ID Number:

Contractor (or Brand Name): Apex CoVantage (AX) Estimated Value (Base and all options): $450,000.00 Period of Performance: 09/30/2026 – 04/30/2027

3. Description of Supplies or Services Required to Meet Library Needs

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) possesses a significant collection of historical records in various physical formats, dating from 1978 to the present. These records are essential for meeting the mission of the agency. Due to the age and physical nature of these materials, they are at risk of deterioration and are not easily searchable.

Digitization is necessary to preserve these records for the long term, improve accessibility for staff and potentially the public, and enhance efficiency in records management. This project will ensure these records are converted to modern digital formats while adhering to federal standards for quality, accessibility, and security.

The NTSB has a requirement for the digitization of approximately 300,000 aperture cards into high-quality digital formats in accordance with FADGI guidelines.

Plan ID Number:

Form Updated 12/10/2025

Part 2 – Program Office Justification & Approval

4. Authority for Contracting Without Competition Over $350,000 For this requirement over $350,000, under FAR part 6, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

There is only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy Library requirements.

41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(C); FAR 6.302-1.

Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by contractor’s unique capabilities or products. FAR 6.302-1(b)(1).

Source controls copyrights, patents, raw materials, or secret processes cannot be acquired otherwise, or similar circumstances. FAR 6.302-

1(b)(2).

Other exception identified in FAR 6.302-1: Identify the exception

There is such unusual & compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured if competition is not limited.

41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(B); FAR 6.302-2. Option years are not permitted.

Source is expressly authorized or required by statute (e.g., AbilityOne, UNICOR, GPO, GSA Public Buildings Service, Appropriations Act, etc.) per 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 6.302-5: Identify the authority

Other basis authorized in 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b) or FAR part 6.302: Identify the exception

Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product or item which is essential to the Government’s requirement. FAR 6.302-1(c).

The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

IT Standard Data Sheet)

Up to and including $350,000 For this requirement up to $350,000, using simplified acquisition procedures under FAR part 13, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

Only one responsible source is reasonably available to meet Library requirements. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b); FAR 13.106-1.

Product or service is reasonably available from only one source.

Source controls copyrights, patents or other exclusive licensing arrangements.

Urgent circumstances; only one source can reasonably deliver by required date. Option years are not permitted.

Source is expressly authorized or required by statute: Identify the authority

Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product The Product is listed the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

IT Standard Data Sheet)

GSA Schedule Order For this GSA schedule order under FAR part 8, the basis for not competing among GSA schedule-holders and/or specifying a brand name product or item is:

An urgent and compelling need exists, and following GSA procedures would result in unacceptable delays.

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(A).

Only one GSA source is capable of fulfilling the requirement at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized. FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B).

In the interest of economy and efficiency, the new work is a logical follow-on to an original order that was placed competitively among GSA schedule-holders (i.e., the original order was not sole-source or limited-source.) FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C).

Library’s needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

Order Under Multiple Award Indefinite-Delivery Contract or GWAC For this order under FAR subpart 16.5, the basis for contracting without providing for full and open competition is:

The need is so urgent fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(C) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A).

The Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by contractor’s unique capabilities or products. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR

16.505(b)(2)(i)(B).

A logical follow-on order in the interest of economy and efficiency. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(i)(2)(C).

To satisfy a minimum guarantee. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(D).

Authorized or required by statute. 41 U.S.C. § 6101(b)(1) and FAR 16.505(b)(2)(E).

The Library’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by a brand-name product or item which is essential to the Government’s requirement. 41

U.S.C. § 6101(b)(2)(B) and FAR 16.505(a)(4)(i).

The Product is listed on the Library of Congress Enterprise Architecture Repository (LCEAR) database (Attach applicable

5. Rationale for Contracting Without Competition

To begin, FEDLINK is authorized to limit competition on the basis of the citation in section 4 because the original task order (NTSBAX261005) was competed under fair opportunity procedures among the eight (8) FEDLINK Preservation Lot 1 Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract holders. When the requirement was competed, four (4) vendors participated and the task order was subsequently awarded to Apex CoVantage. This satisfies the requirement of FAR 16.507-6(b)(3), Exceptions to Fair Opportunity, that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original award.

Second, this follow-on requirement is for the digitization of approximately 300,000 aperture cards for the NTSB, which Apex CoVantage currently has in its possession at their facility as part of its work under its current task order with the NTSB. The NTSB had originally believed it possessed 25,000 aperture cards when it sent its collection to Apex CoVantage for digitization. After Apex CoVantage inventoried the collection, it realized that the NTSB has approximately 300,000 additional aperture cards that require digitization.

FAR 16.507-6(b)(3), Exceptions to Fair Opportunity, states that an order above the micro-purchase threshold can be awarded on a sole source basis if it is in the “interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract…” As Apex CoVantage currently has all of the NTSB’s aperture cards in its possession and has already begun processing the 25,000 aperture cards that the NTSB had originally accounted for, it is in the interest of economy and efficiency to allow Apex CoVantage to complete the task of digitizing the NTSB’s remaining aperture cards as the costs (both in time and money) of a new competition and the shipment of the 300,000 aperture cards to (potentially) another vendor outweigh any possible benefit the Government would receive by recompeting this requirement. Further, this task order encompasses work that is part of the NTSB’s Congressional mandate to make their historical records accessible to the public, which has a strict deadline. The NTSB has confirmed that they need the aperture cards digitized by early 2027, and this timeline is not flexible. Competing the work for the additional 300,000 aperture cards will negatively affect this timeline and may result in the NTSB missing its mandated deadline. Thus, awarding this follow-on task order to Apex CoVantage is both efficient and economical and in the best interest of the Government.

6. Actions to Overcome Barriers to Competition Before Subsequent Contract Is Required

This logical follow-on award is being made to Apex CoVantage on the basis of economy and efficiency. Generally, FEDLINK provides fair opportunity for all of its new requirements and intends to continue doing so.

7. Program Office Certification

I certify that the description of the Government’s minimum needs, schedule requirements, and technical information that provide the basis for this justification are accurate and complete.

Name

Title

Signature

Date

0BPART 3 – CONTRACTING OFFICER DETERMINATIONS & CERTIFICATION

8. Efforts to Solicit from As Many Potential Sources As Practicable Unless a justification is based on FAR 6.302-2, Unusual and compelling urgency, contracting officers shall post justifications for other than full and open competition, including brand name justifications, to the Contract Opportunities website on sam.gov (or eBuy for Brand Name Justifications under FAR Part 8) prior to requesting a proposal or otherwise entering into negotiations.

Advance notice will be published in sam.gov for 15 days before a contract is awarded. FAR 5.203(a).

Advance or concurrent notice will be published in sam.gov for a reasonable time for commercial items FAR 5.203(a) and 12.204(b).

Advance notice will not be published because the action meets the following FAR exception:

Notice would compromise national security. FAR 5.202(a)(1).

Unusual and compelling urgency; notice period would seriously injure Government. FAR 5.202(a)(2).

Expressly authorized or required to be made through another Government agency. FAR 5.202(a)(4).

Order will be placed against an IDIQ contract awarded under FAR 16.5. FAR 5.202(a)(6).

Order will be placed against GSA schedule or other competitively-awarded contract. FAR 5.202(a)(11).

Other:

Advance notice will not be published per 41 U.S.C. § 6101; see attached deviation from the FAR per LCR 7-210 § 3.A.

We made the following efforts to interest potential sources in this award:

N/A

9. Listing of Sources That Expressed Interest in Writing

The following sources expressed interest in this award: None

10. Additional Information

The following additional information is relevant to this justification and approval: N/A

11. Contracting Officer Determination that Price Is Fair and Reasonable As explained in detail below, I have determined that the prices for this contracting action are fair and reasonable based on comparison of the prices to the following (see FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)):

Historical prices paid by the Government Published competitive price lists Library’s Independent Government Estimate Prices obtained through market research Other: Prices obtained through competitive proposals

The following analysis supports my determination: The Contracting Officer has reviewed the prices obtained through competitive proposals for the digitization of aperture cards in response to solicitation LCFDL26R0004, which resulted in the original task order with Apex CoVantage. These prices are as follows:

[REDACTED]

While Apex CoVantage’s pricing for the 300,000 additional aperture cards has risen from $1.00/card to $1.50/card, this is due to this task having the same deadline for digitization as the original 25,000 aperture cards (February 12, 2027) with a start date nearly seven months later in the base year. To meet the February 2027 deadline, performance will be at a significantly higher level of effort with more resources being required by the vendor, resulting in a higher unit price. Thus, Apex CoVantage has significantly less time to digitize significantly more aperture cards. Based on these circumstances, as well as the pricing offered by other vendors during the original competition, the Contracting Officer finds this pricing ($1.50/card) to be fair and reasonable.

12. Contracting Officer Determination of Responsibility Checked System for Award Management (or will check in the case of competitive proposals for a brand name product)

13. Contracting Officer Determination of Best Value I have determined that this action represents the best value to the Government because: as described in Section 5 above, award to Apex CoVantage is in the best interest of the government for the reasons stated throughout this justification.

14. Contracting Officer Certification I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, this justification is accurate and complete. For those actions up to $900,000, I approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

Signature

Part 4 – Competition Advocate Approval (Required for actions valued at greater than $900,000)

Approved. Based on the information, determinations, and certifications provided by the program office and the contracting officer, and in accordance with the instructions below, I approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

Option periods: No Yes, Number through Date

Not Approved. As explained below, I do not approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

Comments or instructions:

________________________ Assist/Assoc General Counsel __________________________________ ________________ Name Title

Signature

Part 5 – Senior Procurement Executive (Required for actions valued at greater than $20,000,000)

17. Head of the Procurement Activity Approval

Approved. Based on the information, determinations, and certifications provided by the program office and the contracting officer, and in accordance with the instructions below, I approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

Not Approved. As explained below, I do not approve contracting without competition for this requirement.

Comments or instructions:

Director, Contracts and Grants

Signature