Attachment 4 JA CISCO B7232 ISP_OSP Modernization.pdf

Limited Sources Justification and Approval (J&A)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 1 of 3

Contracting Activity: 7th Contracting Squadron, Dyess

Purchase Request / Local ID Number: F3YCFA3199AW01

Program / Project (and PE, if applicable): Dyess AFB Security Forces ISP and OSP Bldg 7232 Modernization

Program Type (PEO or Other Contracting): Other Contracting

Authority: Multiple Award Schedule Program (FAR 8.405-6)

Estimated Contract Cost (including options): $302,473.00

Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan? Yes No

Description of Limitation:

The contracting activity is requesting approval of this brand name specific Justification and Approval to purchase Cisco network switches. The network hardware will replace end of life/end of support switches supporting end buildings throughout Dyess AFB. Sole source contract is not a concern; however, brand name specific is a requirement.

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a) )

** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right: CSO Legal COCO CA SCO PEO AQC AQ Blank-1 Blank-2PM CO

Date

07 Jul 2023

Project Lead / Program Mgr / Requiring Activity Joseph H Mason Jr 7CS/SCX DSN 461-5564 Comm 325 696 5564

Signature X

Date

24 Aug 2023

Contracting Officer JERIME W. GORSE, TSgt, USAF

7 CONS/PKB DSN 461-5569

Signature X

Date

24 Aug 2023

Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) BRETT BURDYSHAW, Lt Col, USAF

7 CONS/CC DSN 461-2352

Signature X

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a) ) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right: COCO CO CA SPEPEO Blank

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 2 of 3

Remove guidance pages.

I. Contracting Activity.

Department of the Air Force, Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), 8th Air Force, 7th Bomb Wing and 7th Contracting Squadron.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

The contracting activity is requesting approval of this brand name specific Justification and Approval to purchase Cisco-branded servers and licensing for CISCO hardware. Sole source contract is not a concern; however, brand name specific is a requirement.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

Cisco networking switches in support of Air Force Global Strike Command Headquarters, 8th Air Force Headquarters, 7th Bomb Wing facilities to replace end-of-life/end-of-support network infrastructure equipment. The purpose of Cisco switches being acquired is to connect AFGSC 7 Bomb Wing network users to various resources. This intended acquisition will replace/upgrade current connectivity devices to mitigate end-of-life/end-of-support issues and to ensure continued support for 7 BW critical communications infrastructure components on Dyess AFB. Cisco products were chosen/contracted for Dyess AFB for the BITI modernization. Under the contemplated contract, a certified Cisco vendor will provide the supplies with estimated unit pricing listed in the below table:

CLIN DESCRIPTION/Model UNIT Qty Cost Total 00001 Cisco Catalyst 9300-24 P-A 24-port PoE+ Switch Ea 3 $7,078 $21,234 00002 Catalyst 9300 48-Port PA 48-port PoE+ Switch Ea 5 $7,927 $39,635 Totals $60,869

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

The authority for this Limited Sources Justification and Approval document is IAW FAR 8.405-6(b)(1), "This item is peculiar to one manufacturer." The existing Cisco solution within the AF Enterprise meets all of the government's technical and functional requirements. There are no other products on the market that satisfy the needs of the 7CS that offers a network-based approach for adaptable, trusted access everywhere, based on context. This product not only protects the Dyess AFB network, it also protect the AFNET enterprise. The Cisco infrastructure requires the necessary licenses and support and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)standard needed to fulfill the requirements for the network appliances. All the systems are required to be in compliance with NIST Security Technical Implementation Guide (STIG)s in accordance with DoD regulations. Due to the nature of the information computed and stored, it is critical that we are able to procure Cisco products and support in order to assure there is no mission impact. The service is beneficial to the Government that has in-house IT staff and requires anytime, direct access to Cisco for rapid issue resolution, the flexibility of device-by-device coverage, real-time troubleshooting, proactive notifications, and premium service levels to support Enterprise network devices with predefined workflows to expedite remediation in an air-gapped environment that supports the warfighter's initiatives. Lastly, it would be excessively costly to implement a change of manufacturer for all Cisco products across the enterprise to ensure compliance and compatibility; therefore, it would not be in the best interest of the Government.

March 2018 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Page 3 of 3

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

Price Fair and Reasonable determination will take place upon receipt of competitive pricing submitted in response to an official RFQ. The RFQ will be sent to as many schedule contractors as practicable, consistent with market research appropriate to the circumstances, to reasonably ensure that quotes will be received from at least three contractors that can fulfill the requirements. The ordering activity contracting officer shall ensure that all quotes received are fairly considered and award is made in accordance with the basis for selection in the RFQ. The anticipated cost will be determined fair and reasonable based on price analysis, to include but not limited to, comparison with the independent government estimate and historical contract data on similar efforts

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

Contacted various known service providers of premise wiring from a search on dynamic small business search. Received two interested vendors in the requirement. Based off of market research, we will be setting this requirement aside for 100% small business.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

- By purchasing Cisco products, Dyess will be able to match other AFGSC bases, and incorporate Cisco ICE and align with 802.1x industry standard mandates for network security.

- Additionally, the Air Force also requires any Cisco products to be mandatory use with GEMSS Enterprise Agreement (Contract# 204246961) - AF spends $160M over 5 years for this contract.

- Components facilitating network operations are more complex due to ever-increasing requirements for security. Vendors, operators, and maintainers are likewise faced with the dilemma of installing, configuring, and maintaining technical updates.

Cisco, a leading vendor, has constantly improved its platform to meet these challenges with both hardware and software and has a significant footprint with the Air Force and DoD. As such, continuous training, certification, and familiarity with Cisco platforms is crucial. This expertise comes at a cost not evident in base equipment price. A third-party vendor may offer a cheaper component that is not upgradeable and requires maintenance training on an entirely different operating system.

- Government technical training school for the airman/officer offers only Cisco products. Most airman have only experience on Cisco products.

- This hardware has been evaluated and tested by Department of Defense Information Network (DoDIN) Approved Product List (APL) and our systems engineering personnel and meets all the core networking requirements.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

Actions are being taken to push compatibility with higher headquarters as they are currently using Cisco brand network switches.

For this requirement and future requirements of Cisco brand network switches the authorized distributors of the Cisco brand switches will be considered for the requirement

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by my signature above, I have determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by my (our) signature(s) above, I (we) certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my (our) responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

March 2018 Page of Authority: Multiple Award Schedule Program (FAR 8.405-6) Is this a Bridge Action as defined in the AF Bridge Action Reduction Plan?

COORDINATION (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right:

APPROVAL (AFFARS 5306.304(a)) ** To remove a row, click the "X" next to the signature block.

** To restore the row, click the appropriate link to the right:

( See guidance at the end of this document for completing the following sections. ) I. Contracting Activity.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

GUIDANCE

I. Contracting Activity.

Fully identify the contracting activity responsible for the proposed contracting action. Include the name/phone number of the Contracting Officer. Specifically identify as a “Limited Sources” Justification. Identify purchase request number, if applicable.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being processed.

State whether the action is a new order or by modification to an existing order. Identify the GSA schedule number, the Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) number, the order number for the current action, and the Contactor(s). Indicate the Period of Performance (PoP). Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g. Firm Fixed Price, Labor Hour, etc).

III. Description of the supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

Specifically describe the supplies and/or services to be acquired including the price and quantity of each item in the order and state the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether the services are performance-based and, if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. Also state the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order.

IV. Identification of the justification/rationale for limiting sources and demonstration of the contractor's unique qualifications to provide the required supply/service.

This section is normally the most detailed part of the justification. To assist you in preparing this justification, an introductory sentence and the four circumstances of FAR 8.405-6 that justify restricting the number of schedule holders are provided below. Select the appropriate cite, then provide, in narrative form, a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited for limiting the number of schedule holders.

(Introductory sentence) FAR 8.405-6 requires an ordering activity to justify its actions when restricting consideration of schedule contractors to fewer than required in FAR 8.405-1 or 8.405-2.

After selecting the appropriate cite, next select one of the four sentences below and provide a detailed explanation supporting the specific circumstance cited.

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(B), “Only one source is capable of responding due to the unique or specialized nature of the work”. (Provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C), “The new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures.” The original order was not issued under sole source or limited source procedures. (Provide details on the previously competed order and explain how this order is a logical follow-on to that order. Explain fully the connection between the previous work/order and the current one. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(A), “An urgent and compelling need exists, and following the ordering procedures would result in unacceptable delays.” (Provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the schedule impact if time were to be taken to follow FSS ordering procedures. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.)

FAR 8.405-6(b)(1), “The item is peculiar to one manufacturer. A brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer.” (Brand name specifications should not be used unless the particular brand name, product or feature is essential to the Government's requirements. Therefore, explain why the particular brand item is essential to the Government's requirements, and why other companies' similar items, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or cannot meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's need. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. General statements are not acceptable.)

V. Determination by the ordering activity Contracting Officer that the order represents the best value consistent with FAR 8.404(d).

This section needs to be tailored based upon whether the order is for supplies/services not requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-1) or if the order is for services requiring a statement of work (FAR 8.405-2).

For FAR 8.405-1 orders the best value determination needs to be based upon the supply or service offered under MAS contracts by surveying at least three schedule contractors through the GSA Advantage! on-line shopping service, or by reviewing the catalogs or price lists of at least three schedule contractors. The ordering Contracting Officer's review of the Contractor's price list(s) and any price reductions sought is also required. (Contracting Officer should seek additional price discounts/concessions based on the specific order requirements on all orders over the micro-purchase threshold.) In addition to price, when determining best value, the ordering activity may consider, among other factors, past performance, special features of the supply or service required for effective program performance, trade-in considerations, probable life of the item selected as compared with that of a comparable item, warranty considerations, maintenance availability, environmental and energy efficiency considerations, and delivery terms.

When an order contains brand name specifications, the Contracting Officer shall post the Request for Quote (RFQ) along with the basis of the justification as required by FAR 8.405-6(b)(3).

For FAR 8.405-2 orders for services requiring a statement of work, FAR 8.405-2(d) requires that an evaluation be performed based on the criteria provided to the schedule contractors. Therefore, the justification must address how the FAR 8.404(d) requirement for an evaluation of the proposed level of effort and mix of labor will be conducted and include a statement that the Contracting Officer will perform a price reasonableness determination as part of the best value determination.

VI. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or explain why market research was not conducted.

Discuss market research that was conducted among schedule holders and the market research results that led to the conclusion to go sole source or to limit the number of schedule holders to be solicited. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of 8.405-1 and 8.405-2 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale.

VII. Other facts supporting the justification.

When FAR 8.405-6(a)(1)(i)(C) is cited for an follow-on acquisition as the basis for the justification, include an estimate of the cost that would be duplicated and the basis and derivation of the estimate, or provide details on why a delay to solicit additional schedule holders would be unacceptable.

Provide any other facts supporting the Limited Sources Justification.

VIII. Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services.

Describe all efforts to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that preclude the agency from meeting the requirements of FAR 8.405-1and FAR 8.405-2 before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.

IX. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

The contracting officer's signature on the signature page evidences that he/she has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

X. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel

As evidenced by their signatures on the signature page, the technical/requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein which is their responsibility is both accurate and complete.

9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785

7CS/SCX DSN 461-5564 Comm 325 696 5564 Name: JERIME W. GORSE, TSgt, USAF

7 CONS/PKB DSN 461-5569

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: BRETT BURDYSHAW, Lt Col, USAF

7 CONS/CC DSN 461-2352

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]