JA for Limited Source FAR Part 8.pdf

Defense Contract Management Agency Procurement Center

Limited Source/Brand Name Justification and Approval

(Use with FAR Part 8)

Identify Contracting Activity, Agency and Document: This limited source justification is requested by the Defense Contract Management Agency, Procurement Center, Chester, Virginia.

Nature and/or description of the action: The Defense Contract Management Agency DCMAIT is seeking a brand name award off of a Federal Supply Schedule for software. The contract will be for a base year and four option years. The value of the contract with options is $405,401.14.

Description of the supplies/services required: The Defense Contract Management Agency DCMAIT requires software to securely manage privileged account passwords. The password management software will provide automated password changes for over 150 critical service accounts.

Justification rationale: This justification is required when restricting consideration based on one of the following:

[ ] Only one source is capable of responding due to the unique or specialized nature of the work (FAR 8.405-6(b)(1).

[ ] The new work is a logical follow on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided the original order was placed competitively. Address if follow on contract to a different contractor will cause substantial duplication in cost or unacceptable delays in fulfilling the requirement (FAR 8.405-6(b)(2).

[ ] An urgent and compelling need exists (FAR 8.405-6(b)(3).

[X] Brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts.

Demonstrate the proposed contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply or service (FAR 8.405-6(a)(2).

[ ] Fewer offers received than required in FAR 8.405-1 or 8.405-2. If the acquisition is greater than the simplified acquisition threshold ($150K) offers must be received from at least 3 contractors (FAR 8.405-6(a)(1). Document that no additional contractors can fulfill the requirements could be identified despite reasonable efforts to do so.

Market research: There are a number of products that meet some of the requirements, but I only found one that meets DoD security requirements. Lieberman Software’s Enterprise Random Password Manager is developed in the U.S. The database (data-at-rest) is encrypted by FIPS 140-2 certified encryption module from Thales Inc., is CAC enabled, and has been thoroughly reviewed for security vulnerabilities, receiving a Certificate of Networthiness (CoN # 201007864) from the U.S. Army.

Best Value determination: The anticipated cost is $405,401.14 including base year and 4 option years. The resultant price of this contract action is fair and reasonable based on a review of past maintenance efforts and comparison to the GSA schedule. See attached market survey quotes.

Other facts supporting the justification: N/A

Subsequent actions: N/A

Technical Certification

I certify that the data and information forming the basis for this justification and approval, as presented above, are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Action Officer/ Requesting Activity Date

Contracting Officer Certification

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Contracting Officer (<$650K) Date

Competition Advocate Approval

Based on the above justification and findings, I hereby approve accomplishment of this acquisition by means other than using full and open competition.

Sallee S. Justis Date Competition Advocate ($650K and $12.5M)

Timothy Callahan Date

Head of Contracting Activity ($12.5M and $85.5M)

Charlie E. Williams, Jr. Date Senior Procurement Executive ($85.5M)