A.02.05 LSD LLA NavLock Cisco Redacted.pdf
PDF 255 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Lower Granite Dam Switchgear Cable Trays Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W912EF24Q0015
About this file
This document contains a brand name justification for the procurement of Cisco network equipment for the Lower Granite Dam Switchgear Cable Trays project through solicitation number W912EF24Q0015 issued by the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Engineering District Walla Walla. The brand name justification cites that Cisco hardware is the enterprise standard for the agency based on capabilities and security requirements. It notes that all testing and equipment is standardized to Cisco brands, the support staff is trained on Cisco equipment, and using other brands would require replacing the currently installed system and impact interoperability, stability, and security. The justification determines that Cisco products are the only ones compatible with the existing system and that market research found no equivalent alternative without a full system replacement. It indicates price competition is expected to result in a fair price but no award will be made without a fair and reasonable price determination.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| B.08.03 Solicitation Amendment 01 24Q0015.pdf | ||
| A.02.05 LSD LLA NavLock SEL Redacted.pdf | ||
| B.08.02 Solicitation 24Q0015.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
has standardized on Cisco hardware as well. Procurement of another brand name would cause issues with standardization, interoperability and stability.
3) All work is tested by HDC ACCS in a test bed environment and standardized matching equipment is required in order to ensure there are no Bulk Electric System failures.
4) The current field administrator support staff is trained and has significant experience with Cisco brand name network equipment.
5) Other competition was not sought because it would require complete replacement, testing, and verification of the currently installed system.
b. Impact:
If we do not use the Cisco brand network equipment, it would make critical assets vulnerable and increase our cyber-security risk. The Cisco Brand Name is the Enterprise standard based on careful consideration of product capabilities and best-of-breed systems to meet complex cyber-security and network configuration requirements. The new devices must be compatible with existing equipment and configurations. It is in USACE’s best interest to pursue this brand name action in order to maintain the integrity of the overall system, prevent potential hardware failures and to ensure that the adequate system support is available by the manufacturer. There is no alternative equipment that is able to be utilized at this time.
c. Alternative: These requirements cannot be met through any other computer and server equipment. Using other systems would result in additional costs to modify new systems to work with existing systems and could interfere with the current platform that is in place on this network and could cause failure and lack of compliance. For each failure, This would not be cost effective to the Government. There is no alternative equipment that is able to be utilized at this time.
6. DETERMINATION OF FAIR AND REASONABLE COSTS:
The market for these procure network switch is mature and Cisco Systems devices is competitive. Price competition should result in a fair and reasonable price; however, no contract will be awarded unless the price is determined fair and reasonable.
7. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION:
It is anticipated that there are multiple distributors of for the Cisco System devices.
8. MARKET RESEARCH:
Market Research shows Cisco Systems brand name products are the only identified products compatible with the existing system for this installation phase. Other sources have been vetted to meet current needs, but there is no alternative available without complete system replacement with an equivalent product. Also, the use of other brands would result in the aforementioned complications (see section 5).
Market Research
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .