SS12D0004.pdf

Justification and Approval for Other Than Full and Open Competition 7 September 2011

J&A Log Number: 11-158

1. The Contracting Activity: The Contracting Activity responsible for this action is the US Army Medical Research Acqusition Activity (USAMRAA) in support of the Armed Forces Medical Examinor (AFMES) Armed Forces DNA Indentification Laboratory (AFDIL).

2. Description of Action: This approval is being requested for a new, multi-year, firm-fixed-price, IDIQ contract. Funding will be obligated upon the issuance of a delivery order.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: The AFMES-AFDIL requires an IDIQ contract for the purchase of profiency testing supplies from Orchid Cellmark. The required testing supplies are:

DNA Neat Sample Test Blood Stain Test

The estimated total value of the action, including option years, is $350,400.00

4. Authority Cited: The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1). The FAR citation is 6.302-1, Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: The purchase of the required proficiency tests from Orchid Cellmark is vital to continuing the requiring agencies work. The Armed Forces DNA Indentification Laboratory (AFDIL) is a forensic lab accredited by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD). This accreditation is vital to maintaining the validity of the AFDIL’s test results for use in identifying fallen US service members. In order to maintain this accreditation, the AFDIL is required to complete periodic proficiency testing prescribed by the FBI’s DNA Laboratory Quality Assurance Standards, the DNA Act of 1998, and the accrediting organization (ASCLD). The ASCLD has currently accredited several proficiency testing providers nationwide. Orchid Cellmark is the only provider that supplies the specific testing supplies to allow for autosomal STR, YSTR, and mtDNA testing as required by the ASCLD/LAB accreditation criteria. ASCLD has recognized Orchid Cellmark as a qualified provider of neat evidence sample, and database bloodstain cards proficiency testing for AFDIL. The use of any other proficiency testing supplies would jeopordize the accreditation status of the AFDIL and result in duplication of costs and severe delays which are not expected to be recovered through competition.

6. Efforts to obtain Competition: Market research confirmed that there are a limited number of proficiency testing supplies providers that are accredited by the ASCLD. Only one of those sources, Orchid Cellmark, is accredited to supply the specific testing supplies required by the AFDIL. A notice of the Government’s intent to award a sole source award was posted to the GPE to allow for all interested parties to respond. No competition is expected.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The current requirment was published to allow for maximum competition. In the event that the accrediting board or the laboratory protocols allow the consideration of other testing supply providers, it may be feasible to compete future requirements on an unrestricted basis. Validating an alternate source at this time is not feasible, as the validation and accreditation process would result in unacceptable delays.

8. Market Research: An examination of the accrediting board (ASCLD) website revealed a list of the accredited proficiency test providers. After examining the accredited providers and the testing supplies approved by the board, it was confirmed that no other providers are approved to supply the required testing supplies.

9. Interested Sources: A synopsis was posted to the GPE to announce the Government’s intent to award a sole source contract, as required by FAR 5.201. The synopsis allowed all interested parties to show evidence that competition would be in the best interest of the Government, and that all bids or proposals would be considered. The synopsis was posted to the GPE on August 23, 2011. To date, no sources have written to express an interest.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History – The previous procurement of these supplies was awarded on a sole source basis, and was not competed. A synopsis of the intent to award a sole source award was posted to the GPE at that time in accordance with regulatory and statutory requirements.

b. Acquisition Data Availability – A purchase description suitable for full and open competition is not practical for the reasons described in the jusitification above, any substitute or equal product from an alternative source would not be acceptable.

c. Unusual and Compelling Urgency – Not applicable.

d. Subcontracting Competition – No subcontracting opporutnities exist for this requirement.

11. Technical Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

12. Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine the anticipated cost to the government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

It is anticipated that the price analysis technique of comparing the proposed price with prices of similar, commercially available products will be utilized. Additionally, it is expected that the proposed price will be consistent with that of published commercially avialable price lists and prices found reasonable on past purchases. Cost and pricing data was not obtained as this action does not meet the $750,000 threshold for requiring cost and pricing data.

Date

14. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Date