FY25-246 NetApp SAM Maint Renewal JA Brand Name - R.pdf

JUSTIFICATION FOR BRAND NAME

SECTION 1: IDENTIFICATION OF THE AGENCY AND THE CONTRACTING ACTIVITY

Department of State Contracting Activity

☒ Office of Acquisitions Management

Requiring Activity Global Financial Services Center (GFSC), Global Systems Operations (GSO)

SECTION 2: NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION BEING APPROVED

The Justification and Approval (J&A) on a brand name only basis is for the renewal of NetApp hardware and maintenance services. GFSC is requesting a firm-fixed priced order for NetApp Filer storage maintenance and support to maintain GFSC Production Network Servers. Current storage requirements need to be maintained at all times in order to support the data held within these high-performance, mission critical products.

SECTION 3: DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE AGENCY’S NEEDS

NetApp provides hardware and software for GFSC’s data storage infrastructure. This hardware provides a high availability storage environment for the core production financial applications, office productivity applications, and electronic messaging services for GFSC, as well as the data replication and mirroring services for the GFSC

Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) facility. The mission critical nature of this hardware requires the annual maintenance renewal to ensure continual service and resolution should a hardware problem arise. This hardware maintenance and replacement can only be performed by NetApp or a NetApp certified reseller/servicer.

Hardware components for this platform are the intellectual property of NetApp and are there not available from another commercial vendor. GFSC needs to purchase the following:

Maintenance and support of this mission-critical infrastructure component are crucial as periodic incremental upgrades are necessary to preserve performance characteristics under regular increases in user and data volumes. All GFSC System Administrators that manage and maintain NetApp equipment are specifically trained in managing and maintaining NetApp equipment that is on the IRM BPA approval list for use.

When hardware components fail, we are required to call upon this maintenance contract for a replacement component that is the intellectual property of NetApp. As such, it is not available from another commercial manufacturer. In this request, maintenance include support of equipment and memory that must be manufacturer-approved and may not be compatible, remanufactured, or refurbished equipment provided by another manufacturer. Maintenance must be covered under the manufacturer’s warranty and procured through manufacturer-approved distribution channels. Sellers must be able to document their ability to provide items through NetApp approved distribution channels upon request.

SECTION 4: IDENTIFICATION OF THE EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY AND THE

SUPPORTING RATIONALE

This acquisition is conducted pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 4103 and 4106 as implemented by FAR 16.505(b)(2) and substantiated by the following:

FAR 16.505(a)(4)– Only one Brand is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or high specialized.

As this is a brand name only justification, no one contractor’s unique qualifications are cited as the basis for this justification. NetApp products are highly specialized because they are the intellectual property of NetApp and can only be provided by NetApp or an authorized reseller of NetApp. Additionally, because NetApp does not release its source code to other manufacturers, it remains proprietary to NetApp. The NetApp Filer storage maintenance meets the changing mission needs of the Department.

SECTION 5: DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE ANTICIPATED COST

TO THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE FAIR AND REASONABLE

Vendors must quote prices at or below their NASA SEWP V established contract unit ceiling prices for each item. The SEWP contracts are FAR Part 12 Commercial Contracts, and additional price analysis was done in accordance with the following: The price design for SEWP is a proposed discount off the offeror’s commercial list price. Price analysis was conducted in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1), to ensure that a "fair and reasonable" price is paid by the Government.

Reasonableness of proposed prices was established in accordance with 15.403-1(c)(1)(i)(B) which provides that a price is based on adequate price competition if two or more responsible offerors, competing independently submit priced offers that satisfy the Government's expressed requirement and there is not any finding that the price of an otherwise successful offer is unreasonable. To verify price reasonableness, offerors were instructed to submit their published price catalog or published schedule of list prices in a form regularly maintained by the manufacturer or offerors, such as a catalog, price list, schedule, or other verifiable and established record.

Additionally, each contractor proposed a discount off of product categories (such as input-output device) of IT equipment.

These discounts remain for the life of the contract. Therefore, when new technology is added or list prices change due to market fluctuations, the SEWP price remains fair and reasonable. There are several other price reasonability checkpoints in SEWP:

• When items are added or prices updated on a SEWP contract, prices are automatically compared to other SEWP contracts and must be within a reasonable price of all other contracts

• All SEWP Delivery Orders are subject to fair opportunity through competitive procedures through the

SEWP RFQ Tool. This internal competition provides an incentive for Contract Holders to provide the best possible price in order to be selected for award.

Pursuant to FAR 16.202-2(a) the Contracting officer can establish fair and reasonable prices at the outset when there is adequate price competition.

By signing the justification, the Contracting Officer makes a determination that the price paid under this delivery order are fair and reasonable.

SECTION 6. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE USE OF THIS JUSTIFICATION:

The maintenance identified by brand name herein have been identified as the only products that meet GFSC’s requirements on the IRM approval list for use. It is anticipated that this request will be competed among

NetApp approved authorized resellers. An award will be made based on the limited NASA SEWP V GWAC competition.

GFSC shall continue to conduct market research prior to filling the requirements for IT hardware of this nature.

In cases where the NetApp brand name is deemed the only responsible source (brand name only), the DoS shall continue to justify, with proper approvals and procedures as required by regulation and policy, all actions that limit competition. GFSC shall continue to publicize such justifications, to ensure public forum and to provide any unknown alternative source/alternative manufacturer with an opportunity to respond.