I know it doesn't explicity call it a title. Note the instruction at FAR 13.501(a)(1)(ii): As I explained above, acquisitions under the test program are not subject to the requirement for full and open competition, thus you should modify the format to call it Sole Source Justification. GOVCO, 253( c)(1) - 6.302-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements? Was the only sample I found that included references to my topic. The requirement to cite authority is one of those things placed in the FAR that has not been thought through by the authors of the regulation. Agree with the first two answers. [Not using the scenario above] What if I procured a brand name supply item under FAR Subpart 8.405-6. ", Sole Source Acquisition under FAR Subpart 13.5, specific identification of the document as a ?Justification for other than full and open competition, specific identification of the document as a "Justification for other than full and open competition, Contracting Legislation of the Current Congress, http://www.psc.gov/directory/jofoctemplate.pdf. Side note: I did find a sample justification, which was called a JOFOC, that cited a few examples of the authority: http://www.psc.gov/directory/jofoctemplate.pdf. However, there really is no express "authority" for sole source acquisitions under FAR Subpart 13.5, which merely recognizes that they happen and must be justified. 1. Yes use the FAR 13.5 approach for the citation. Do I write something similar to "this acquisition is under the authority of the test program as outlined in FAR Subpart 13.5," then include whether it is "section 4202 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996" or the "authority of the Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2003 (41 U.S.C. FAR 13.501 requires that you follow the "format" in 6.303-2, which does not prescribe a title for the document. FAR 6.302-2 Urgent and Compelling Sole Sourcing Decisions One of the exceptions to Competition in Contract Act “full and open” requirements is that government contracting agencies make invoke an urgent and compelling situation. The sole source justification and related material must be available to the public under FAR 6.305. I don't know about Clinger-Cohen. I have an aquisition to procure a particular commercial item supply or service. I understand there is a clear difference between sole source acquisitions and those where I am limiting the competition; and not necessarily to a single source. 10 USC 2304 and is implemented in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 6 (as supplemented by DoD, Air Force, and Air Force Materiel Command). Copyright @ 2020 Wifcon.com LLC I also understand Part 6 doesn't apply to Part 13; even though there are numerous things I must do that reference areas of Part 6. ...and that is all I needed to know. In reading Subpart 13.501(a)(1), I understand, to a point, (ii) Prepare sole source (including brand name) justifications using the format at 6.303-2, modified to reflect an acquisition under the authority of the test program for commercial items (section 4202 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996) or the authority of the Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2003 (41 U.S.C. Thanks for confirming my thoughts on question 3. Vern - Regarding your response to my first question, if I am to follow the "format" in 6.303-2 as I understand it, then how do you explain 6.303-2(a)(1), which says "Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a ?Justification for other than full and open competition.? Reference Item #4. What are you talking about? ... except for FAR 6.302-7, the justification for other than full and open. Powered by Invision Community, "Acquisitions conducted under simplified acquisition procedures are exempt from the requirements in Part 6. Emphasis added. That's the correct answer to GOVCO's question number 3. If I am procuring a supply item using the scenario above, then regardless of whether the item is brand name or not, the "justification" shall be identified as a "Justification for other than full and open competition." If the acquisition is under FAR Subpart 8.4, the proper title for the justification would be "Limited Sources Justification," because that how it is referred to in 8.405-6. Why would you want to call it a JOFOC or think it would make sense to call it that? 2. And, our office primarily does commercial item acquisitions. See FAR 6.303-2(a)(4), which says authority for other than full and open competition, which is not applicable under 13.5. When contracts will be awarded under 15 USC 637 (FAR 19.8), sole source awards under the 8(a) Program. Is calling it a JOFOC and citing 6.302-1 necessarily wrong? Sorry if anyone works here. I much rather do something right, or fix something that I have done wrong, as early on in my career as possible, then continue down a path of, "well, that's how we have always done it. See 13.500(a). Title the word processing document as a Sole Source Justification for the specific purchase order number, if applicable, and list any institutional policy numbers on why a sole source is required for this requisition. The title of the memo will not affect its legal sufficiency. The authority to be cited is the authority for sole source procurement. Suppose that is another reason why I didn't specify dollar amount. The rule clarifies that agencies must use the 8(a) sole source justification specified in FAR 6.303-2 when it is applicable — they may not substitute another justification for other than full and open competition set forth at FAR 6.302, such as unusual and compelling urgency. You cannot use FAR 13.106-1((1) as authority, because that authorizes sole source for acquisitions "not exceeding" the SAT. If over the SAT then use the term as noted by the V's as it is required. I am not saying one is right and one is wrong, just trying to figure this out. Nope still a justification and approval. I have only seen, and also prepared these justifications over the SAT, and when limiting the competition to a single source. In your No. Thanks Vern! 428a). Not Sole Source Justification right.... (See FAR Subpart 6.303-2(a)(1)). Through market research, I determine that the supply or service is only available from one source at a estimated cost of approximately $5 million. I have to disagree with Carl's answer for number 3, based on FAR 8.405-6 (g)(2)(i). "Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a ?Limited Source Justification.?" Why would you cite 6.302-1 when you don't need that authority? The test program does not raise the SAT to $6.5 million ($12 million); it authorizes the use of SAP in acquisitions of commercial items in amounts greater than the SAT up to $6.5 million ($12 million). I understand FAR Subpart 13.501(a)(1)(ii) tells me to modify my justification "to reflect an acquisition under the authority of the test program for commercial items ...." However, what is the actual authority I cite? I have only seen, and also prepared these justifications over the SAT, and when limiting the competition to a single source. And thanks everyone for commenting. "Sole Source Justification" or "Sole Source Justification and Approval" is proper, because that is what it is if you are soliciting and negotiating with only once source and that is how such acquisitions are referred to in FAR 13.106-1(. By 2. 3. FAR 13.501 requires that you follow the "format" in 6.303-2, which does not prescribe a title for the document.
Lomo Saltado Translation, Whose Or Who's In A Sentence, Career Aspirations In Performance Appraisal Examples, Folgers Classic Roast Ground Coffee, 48 Ounce, Essay On Friendship For Class 3, Division 2 Not Launching Pc, Best Air Cooler, Jo Sonja Paint Conversion Chart, A Million Dreams Flute Sheet Music,