Redacted_Signed_limited_sources_J_and_A_Redacted.pdf

Limited Sources Justification and Approval (J&A)

April 2024 Page 2 of 6April 2024 Page 2 of 6

( See guidance at the end of this document for completing the following sections. )

I. Contracting Activity.

Department of the Air Force, PACAF, 673 Contracting Squadron, JBER, AK

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

673 CONS intends to procure Motorola brand Land Mobile Radios (LMR) via 771 ESS Sourcing Squadron's Blanket Purchase Agreement for Land Mobile Radio - Subscriber Equipment (LMR-SE).

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

The 673d Communications Squadron (673 CS) requires upgrade radios for its Motorola APX 6000 LMR to align Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson's (JBERs) fleet with the State of Alaska’s upcoming LMR infrastructure modernization. The 673 CS supports maintenance, communications, and emergency response units across JBER. To maintain warfighter readiness and provide seamless radio frequency (RF) support to Air Force, joint, and coalition partners, JBER’s local equipment must maintain direct compatibility with the state-wide communications backbone. This hardware refresh replaces legacy end-of-life equipment, ensuring JBER's LMR fleet supports the newly assigned frequencies required to operate on the upgraded State of Alaska LMR network.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

Ewings and AEG Group are the sole radio Motorola distributors on the LMR-SE. As of 21 Sept 2026, FIPS 140-3 certification requirement becomes mandatory, therefore, FIPS 140-3 is a mandatory requirement for SHP2026 products. Motorola brand items meet this requirement. Currently, L3Harris LMR products are not FIPS 140-3 certified and were not awarded yet. Further, alternatives to procuring new LMRs include introducing a different model or brand of LMR to the JBER radio network. JBER personnel are trained extensively on the use of the Motorola APX6000.

Introducing a new model would result in increased costs in additional technical training, new testing equipment, and new software, as well as inability to interchange radios with existing radio ancillary devices (batteries, antenna, holsters, etc. ).

Failure to upgrade hardware would result in failure of older radios, causing widespread Command and Control, wildlife management and conservation, and emergency service communication outage.

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with

FAR 8.404(d).

Although FAR 8.404(d) establishes that ordering activities are not required to make a separate determination of fair and reasonable pricing for GSA schedule items, the Contracting Officer (CO) will still document, sign, and place a formal Price Fair and Reasonable in the contract file prior to award to ensure optimal stewardship of Government funds.

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

A search on the AFICC Launchpad website showed an enterprise solution available for LMR-SE requirements. This solution offers Blanket Purchase Agreements with four (4) small business vendors, two (2) of which offer Motorola Solutions LMR radios and ancillary devices. These two (2) vendors also hold GSA 2GIT contracts and have a history of fulfilling requirements for Motorola APX6000 LMR and associated ancillary devices and software/firmware. This brand name requirement can be fulfilled by two (2) small business vendors and it is likely to receive competition during solicitation.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

Because JBER uses the Motorola trunking system, the installation must use Motorola-brand LMR as purchase of any other brand degrades mission readiness and increases cost of operation and waste of installed resources due to need for

April 2024 Page 3 of 6April 2024 Page 3 of 6 replacement. It is in the best interest of the Air Force to continue with use of Motorola APX6000 LMR and Motorola firmware in order to maximize standardization across the installation, creating further savings in training, maintenance, inventory, and replacement due to interoperability.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

As technologies develop and there is an ability to use non-Motorola radios on the Motorola LMR network while allowing Over the Air Rekeying (OTAR) and Over the Air Programming (OTAP), units may explore the option to purchase other brand LMR and ancillary devices. Similarly, if the ALMR is replaced with another network, units may explore solutions to fulfilling LMR requirements using other brand equipment. Future requirements for Motorola brand LMRs will include market research to determine if any new radios are introduced to the commercial market that may be compatible with existing LMR equipment in use on JBER. Research will be conducted to find new distributors, dealers, or other capable contractors who have become available to compete. Finally, should the LMR used by the unit become completely obsolete and need to be replaced, additional market research and cost analysis will be conducted to determine feasibility of alternate LMR that are compatible with other brand equipment. These actions may aid in expanding the pool of potential competitors and avoiding items peculiar to one manufacturer.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by my signature above, I have determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by my signature above, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

April 2024 Page 4 of 6April 2024 Page 4 of 6

GUIDANCE

I. Contracting Activity.

Fully identify the contracting activity responsible for the proposed contracting action. Include the name/phone number of the Contracting Officer. Specifically identify as a “Limited Sources” Justification. Identify purchase request number, if applicable.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

State whether the action is a new order or by modification to an existing order. Identify the GSA schedule number, the Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) number, the order number for the current action, and the Contactor(s). Indicate the Period of Performance (PoP). Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g. Firm Fixed Price, Labor Hour, etc).

III. Description of the supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

Specifically describe the supplies and/or services to be acquired including the price and quantity of each item in the order and state the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether the services are performance-based and, if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. Also state the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

This section is normally the most detailed part of the justification. To assist you in preparing this justification, an introductory sentence and the four circumstances of FAR 8.405-6 that justify restricting the number of schedule holders are provided below. Select the appropriate cite, then provide, in narrative form, a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited for limiting the number of schedule holders.

(Introductory sentence) FAR 8.405-6 requires an ordering activity to justify its actions when restricting consideration of schedule contractors to fewer than required in FAR 8.405-1 or FAR 8.405-2.

After selecting the appropriate cite, next select one of the four sentences below and provide a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited.

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B), “Only one source is capable of responding due to the unique or specialized nature of the work”. (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. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C), “The new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures.” The original order was not issued under sole source or limited source procedures. (Provide details on the previously competed order and explain how this order is a logical follow-on to that order. Explain fully the connection between the previous work/order and the current one.

The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(A), “An urgent and compelling need exists, and following the ordering procedures would result in unacceptable delays.” (Provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the schedule impact if time were to be taken to follow FSS ordering procedures. 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.)

FAR 8.405-6(b)(1), “The item is peculiar to one manufacturer. A brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer.” (Brand name specifications should not be used unless the particular brand name, product or feature is essential to the Government's requirements. Therefore, explain why the particular brand item is essential to the Government's requirements, and why other companies' similar items, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or

April 2024 Page 5 of 6April 2024 Page 5 of 6 cannot meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's need. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.)

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with

FAR 8.404(d).

This section needs to be tailored based upon whether the order is for supplies/services not requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-1) or if the order is for services requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-2).

For FAR 8.405-1 orders the best value determination needs to be based upon the supply or service offered under MAS contracts by surveying at least three schedule contractors through the GSA Advantage! on-line shopping service, or by reviewing the catalogs or price lists of at least three schedule contractors. The ordering Contracting Officer's review of the Contractor's price list(s) and any price reductions sought is also required. (Contracting Officer should seek additional price discounts/concessions based on the specific order requirements on all orders over the micro-purchase threshold.) In addition to price, when determining best value, the ordering activity may consider, among other factors, past performance, special features of the supply or service required for effective program performance, trade-in considerations, probable life of the item selected as compared with that of a comparable item, warranty considerations, maintenance availability, environmental and energy efficiency considerations, and delivery terms.

When an order contains brand name specifications, the Contracting Officer shall post the Request for Quote (RFQ) along with the basis of the justification as required by FAR 8.405-6(b)(3).

For FAR 8.405-2 orders for services requiring a statement of work, FAR 8.405-2(d) requires that an evaluation be performed based on the criteria provided to the schedule contractors. Therefore, the justification must address how the FAR 8.404(d) requirement for an evaluation of the proposed level of effort and mix of labor will be conducted and include a statement that the Contracting Officer will perform a price reasonableness determination as part of the best value determination.

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

Discuss market research that was conducted among schedule holders and the market research results that led to the conclusion to go sole source or to limit the number of schedule holders to be solicited. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of FAR 8.405-1 and FAR 8.405-2 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

When FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C) is cited for an follow-on acquisition as the basis for the justification, include an estimate of the cost that would be duplicated and the basis and derivation of the estimate, or provide details on why a delay to solicit additional schedule holders would be unacceptable.

Provide any other facts supporting the Limited Sources Justification.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

Describe all efforts to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that preclude the agency from meeting the requirements of FAR 8.405-1and FAR 8.405-2 before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

The contracting officer's signature on the signature page evidences that he/she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel

April 2024 Page 6 of 6April 2024 Page 6 of 6

As evidenced by their signatures on the signature page, the technical/requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein which is their responsibility is both accurate and complete.