Justification_(W91ZLK-18-Q-0024).pdf

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

COMPLETION INSTRUCTIONS for:

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION for

SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS VALUED BELOW $150K

I. General Information

a. The purpose of the justification document is to ensure the requiring activity and contracting office have thoroughly evaluated the requirement and have considered all possible alternatives prior to deciding to restrict competition.

b. This is a legal document and will be made part of the official contract file. Ensure it is completed accurately and professionally.

c. The requiring activity is responsible for completing the first part of the document through Section 6. The contracting office verifies and completes the rest of the information.

d. Before submitting to the contracting office, the requiring activity should remove the instructions in “red” within the document. The below information is guidance supplemental to those instructions and is meant to aid the preparers in adequately completing the document.

e. References to the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) can be accessed at: http://farsite.hill.af.mil

II. Authorities to Limit Competition- For purchases not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), contracting officers may solicit from one source if the contracting officer determines that the circumstances of the contract action deem only one source reasonably available* (e.g. urgency, exclusive licensing agreements, brand name, or industrial mobilization).

*The FAR states that contracting without providing for full and open competition shall not be justified on the basis of a lack of advance planning by the requiring activity.

a. Sole Source: FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(i) Soliciting from a single source- Select this authority when procuring requirements on the basis of urgency, exclusive licensing agreements, brand name or industrial mobilization.

b. Brand Name: FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(ii) Brand name specification- Select this authority when a single source is identified to provide a portion of a purchase because that portion specifies a particular brand-name item. The documentation should state it is veering only the portion of the acquisition which is brand-name.

c. Brand Name or Equal*: If the commodity or service required meets the criterion for a Brand Name or Equal competitive action- STOP. This justification is not required.

*See supplemental information at the end of this instructions document.

III. Estimated Value (inclusive of options):

a. This justification template is only appropriate for use below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, $150,000.

b. Estimated value needs to be the total of the basic requirement plus any option years or option quantities.

IV. Form Completion

Section 1- Name of proposed sole source contractor or brand name manufacturer

Section 2- Brief description of supplies or services required and the intended use:

a. In layman’s terms, briefly describe the services or supplies to be provided, including make & model number where appropriate. Include quantities of supplies or period of performance for services. Provide information for any options included. If the action is a modification to an existing purchase order, distinguish clearly between the work covered by the basic order and the work to be obtained by the proposed modification.

b. General description of requirement- do not go into justification rationale here.

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

Section 3- Unique salient characteristics that limit availability to only one source, with the reason no other supplies or services can be used:

a. Explain factors/unique qualifications such as proprietary data or exclusive licensing rights, if applicable.

b. If brand name, explain why an adequate purchase description or other information suitable to solicit by full and open competition has not been developed or are not available.

Section 4- Reason why contractor is the only source capable of meeting mission requirements; specifically, the reason no other source can meet the unique capabilities in section 3:

a. Has the vendor provided a statement verifying the unique/specialized/proprietary nature of the requirement?

b. Follow-On Contracts: Defined as a separate, new contract action for which the price and terms are non-competitively negotiated with the incumbent contractor to continue or augment a specific program which is necessitated by prior procurement decisions. Discuss how the sole source action will avoid duplication of costs that is not expected to be recovered through competition, or discuss the unacceptable delays to the government. Provide an estimate of the costs that will be duplicated and explain how such estimate was derived.

c. If urgency is the basis for the justification, explain the chronological events leading up to the requirement and explain why time constraints cannot permit even a limited competition. Describe impact of required delivery/performance date. Describe the detrimental effects/serious injury to the mission of the requiring activity or to the government, financial or otherwise, that will result if this justification is not approved and the product or service cannot be provided by the intended sole source contractor.

Section 5- Market Research:

a. Reference FAR Part 10

b. Describe the extent of the market research conducted to identify all qualified sources and the results thereof. "Market Research" is defined as those attempts you made to ascertain whether other qualified sources exist, and can include contact with knowledgeable experts regarding similar or duplicate requirements, contact with industry, results of a sources sought synopsis, or draft solicitations. Research of the marketplace may consist of written, telephonic, or world wide web inquiries.

c. Procurement History: Identify contract numbers and whether those actions were competed or not.

Section 7- Actions to Increase Competition (for completion by ACC-APG Acquisition Personnel):

a. What supplemental market research has been done?

b. Has a sources sought, RFI, or notice of intent been posted?

c. Have any contractors identified their interest in this requirement?

d. Has the proposed contractor been contacted for verification of the information presented?

e. Have resellers/distributors been researched and identified?

f. Have the mandatory sources of FAR Part 8 been screened? (FPI/UNICOR, AbilityOne, GSA, FSS)

Brand Name or Equal (FAR 11.104)-

- Brand name or equal purchase descriptions must include, in addition to the brand name, a general description of those salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics of the brand name item that an “equal” item must meet to be acceptable for award.

- Use brand name or equal descriptions when the salient characteristics are firm requirements.

- The below chart details the difference between “Brand Name or Equal” and “Brand Name” actions under $150k:

Brand Name or Equal Brand Name Does NOT require a “Justification” Does require a “Justification”

Does not limit competition/Provides for greater competition

Does limit competition

Informally describe salient characteristics (via email, memo, etc.) in written form.

Formally describe salient characteristics via a “Justification”

No specific format Use Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition for Simplified Acquisitions <$150k

Allows for “or equal” similar/comparable items Must supply specific item (part number, model number, serial number etc.)

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION for

SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS VALUED BELOW $150K

☐ FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(i) Soliciting from a single source ☐ FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(ii) Brand name specification

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER:

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:

☐ New Requirement

☐ Modification

ESTIMATED VALUE (inclusive of options):

FUND TYPE: YEAR:

1. NAME OF PROPOSED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACTOR / BRAND NAME MANUFACTURER:

2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES REQUIRED AND THE INTENDED USE:

3. UNIQUE SALIENT CHARACTERISTICS THAT LIMIT AVAILABILITY TO ONLY ONE SOURCE, WITH THE

REASON NO OTHER SUPPLIES OR SERVICES CAN BE USED:

4. REASON WHY CONTRACTOR IS THE ONLY SOURCE CAPABLE OF MEETING MISSION REQUIREMENTS;

SPECIFICALLY, THE REASON NO OTHER SOURCE CAN MEET THE UNIQUE CAPABILITIES IN SECTION 3:

Is this a follow-on contract? yes☐ no☐ If yes, provide contract number: _____________________________

5. MARKET RESEARCH:

6. TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which is included in the sections above, is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

NAME AND TITLE OF CUSTOMER

DIGITAL SIGNATURE EMAIL ADDRESS DATE

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION (For Contracting Personnel Use):

8. CONTRACT SPECIALIST/PURCHASING AGENT REVIEW:

I have done my due diligence in verifying the information presented above by the requiring activity and have attempted to obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable.

NAME OF REVIEWER

9. ENDORSEMENT OF THE ACC-APG TENANT DIVISION CONTRACTING OFFICER

I hereby ☐approve / ☐disapprove this justification in accordance with the authority cited on this document.

Approval is based on the availability of funds and provided that the services and property herein described have been otherwise authorized for procurement.

NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

chanel.d.williams Highlight

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

CONTINUATION PAGE

Version 1, APR 2015 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

CONTINUATION PAGE

A search of the DSBS database using the keyword “cremator” returned three small business concerns (see attached). Two of the vendors (Therm-Tec and ACS) provide equipment capable of incinerating human remains. However, a review of the QC Supply website revealed that they do not provide equipment for the incineration of human remains. Further reviews of the Therm-Tec and ACS’s websites indicate that they do not provide the Matthews Power Pack 1 Cremation system.

A review of the GSA Advantage website found that MAS schedule 73/384 99 was found to be the closest schedule that could provide the Government’s need. A closer review of the schedule found that ACS is the only vendor that provides any kind of incineration system. The incinerators offered by ACS through GSA are not rated for the incineration of human remains and will not meet the Government’s requirements.

A search of the FBO website using keywords “cremator,” “incineration,” and “human remains.” A search was also conducted utilizing the NAICS 562213. The incinerator requirements that were found were for the incineration and disposal of waste and sensitive documentation. The searches also returned several mortuary service requirements, but these were for the internment of human remains and for the development/improvement of cemeteries and gravesites. The results found that there have been no similar requirements/purchases made in the last 365 days.

An intent to sole source will be posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website in accordance with FAR 5.101(a)(2) and FAR 6.302-1.