PA-2208 FOE SBS005523 Redacted.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

May 2026 Page 4 of 5May 2026 Page 4 of 5

Instructions for Completing the Template

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from RFO 16.507-6(b) and the supporting rationale. RFO 16.507-2(a) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding the micro-purchase threshold unless a statutory exception applies. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(1): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(2): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification, with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(3): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

RFO 16.507-6(b)(4): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(5): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

RFO 16.507-6(b)(6): “For DoD, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in part 6.103 (10 U.S.C. 3406(c)(5)). The public interest exception must not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(7).”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of fair opportunity could

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

May 2026 Page 5 of 5May 2026 Page 5 of 5 not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(6) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

New RFO 6.103 Exceptions for drop down 6.103-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements 6.103-2 Unusual and compelling urgency 6.103-3 Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services 6.103-5 Authorized or required by statute 6.103-6 National security 6.103-7 Public interest