J&A_(Automated_Logic).pdf

Control No. 17-11

SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION

(Simplified Acquisition Procedures under FAR Part 13 below $150K)

1. Agency/Contracting Activity: USPFO for CT P&C

2. Description of Action:

Nature: New Requirement Follow-On Requirement Mod to Existing Purchase Order/Contract Number

Pricing: Firm-Fixed Price Time and Materials

Funds: OMA Other Funds: MILCON

3. Description of Supplies/Services:

a. The total estimated dollar value of the proposed action is $69,000.00.

b. The J&A is requesting approval to use the brand name for the Automated Logic direct digital controls (DDC) system. This item will be included in the Project No.

CEKT139042 at Bradley ANGB. This J&A is for requirements that involve the installation of new direct digital control systems in the existing building and the new apparatus bay addition.

4. Authority:

Action using Simplified Acquisition Procedures

FAR 13.106-1(b) (1): 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.

5. Reason for Authority Cited:

The base DDC system is the Automated Logic System. This system was mandated by the NGB several years ago and we have attempted to use non Automated Logic Systems Controls (ALSC) but have had no success integrating them into the base wide system. Because this project is constructing a new facility that must be managed by the ALSC it is imperative that the installed system is fully functional and usable with the current system. In addition, if specific components are not installed in conjunction with the existing system, the system will suffer from performance degradation, warranty nullification, and/or inoperability. In turn, this will result in increased project costs in terms of both time and money (system repair or replacement) to the Government.

6. Actions to Increase Competition:

FAR 5.202(a)(6) cites an exemption when using brand name justifications found in FAR 16.504(a)(i) which states “The Contracting Officer must justify restricting consideration to an item peculiar to one manufacturer (e.g., a particular brand-name, product, or a feature of a product that is peculiar to one manufacturer). A brand-name item, even if available on more than one contract, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer. Brand-name specifications shall not be used unless the particular brand-name, product, or feature is essential to the Government’s requirements and market research indicates other companies’ similar products, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency’s needs.”

7. Market Research:

For the Northeast region, there is only one authorized installer that can install Automated Logic Corporation Direct Digital Controls (DDC) system/interfaces.

8. Procurement History:

Previous Purchase Orders(s) or Contract(s): Yes No

Purchase order or contract number: DAHA06-02-F-0191, W91ZRS-15-F-0047 Was action competed? Yes No If action was not competed, state the cited authority, summarize rationale:______________________________________________________________________

9. Additional information to support the justification:

FAR 6.302-1(c) provides the use of brand name descriptions when the requirement can only be met by one brand name product. Automated Logic is the only local dealer of the company that has provided the existing control systems and the installation of existing systems. Another manufacturers system would not compatible with the current DDC system.

Automated Logic is the only authorized source for DDC system integration to the system that is presently in operation at 103 AW. At this time, the 103 AW can take no action to overcome competition barriers due to the nature of the system (software/equipment) to be installed and the requirement that the current system warranty remain valid.

10. Fair and Reasonable Price Determination: As Contracting Officer, I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

Basis for the determination: Comparison of the (anticipated) price with prices found reasonable on previous purchases and the Contracting Officer's personal knowledge of the item being requested.

11. Contracting Officer’s Approval:

I hereby certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Based on the foregoing, I approve this sole source justification subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and supplies herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Signature:_________________________________ Typed Name: THOMAS E. TORTORELLA Title: Contracting Officer Date: 12 January 2017