Limited Source Determination.pdf

- 1 -

Control Number:

LIMITED SOURCE DETERMINATION

Far Subpart 13.106-1(b)

1. CONTRACTING AGENCY: U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers (USACE), Walla

Walla District (NWW District), 201 N. Third Avenue, Walla Walla, WA 99362- 1876.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION: This action is to obtain preventative and corrective maintenance services for the District’s Electronic Security System (ESS), as well as provide, configure, and install replacement/updated Video Surveillance System (VSS) components (e.g., cameras, related hardware, etc.).

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICES/SUPPLIES: The contractor will be required to provide, configure, and install replacement security cameras (including all hardware required for data/power feedback to the network video recorder (NVR) located in the server room). For compatibility and security reasons, the contractor must procure the following brand name components: seven (7) Q6100-E Axis cameras; nine (9) Q3538-LVE Axis cameras; and seven (7) Q6135-LE Pan, Tilt, Zoom (PTZ) Axis cameras.

4. AUTHORITY CITED:

FAR 13.106-1 (b)(2). (2) For purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. The requirements at 13.501(a) apply to sole-source (including brand-name) acquisitions of commercial products and commercial services conducted pursuant to subpart 13.5.

FAR 13.501(a). Sole source (including brand name) acquisitions.

(1) Acquisitions conducted under simplified acquisition procedures are exempt from the requirements in part 6. However, contracting officers must (a) justify the need to conduct a sole source acquisition (including brand name) in writing, (b) use the format in FAR 6.303-2 modified to reflect the procedures in FAR subpart

13.5 were used, and (c) make them publicly available.

FAR 11.105(a)(1), Items Particular to One Manufacturer. 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.

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITED:

- 2 -

a. BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District’s ESS needs to update, including security cameras that are part of the VSS and used for closed circuit television (CCTV). Recent security events involving the District Headquarters’ building were not captured by the existing VSS and were unable to be viewed by the District or law enforcement on the CCTV. Effective security systems are vital, critical, and mission essential for the protection of NWW District personnel, equipment, and assets.

Currently, the District HQ building VSS uses Axis cameras. Not only are the cameras missing certain security features (e.g., 360-degree field of view), but also the cameras are outdated, and the manufacturer will no longer be providing technical or hardware support within the next year. NWW proposes to procure new Axis brand cameras for several reasons. First, the Axis cameras are compatible with Honeywell Maxpro, the video management software used by NWW. Second, Axis cameras have already been approved for use by CIO/G6, which will save the district time, labor, money, and other resources in avoiding the need to seek and obtain specific CIO/G6 approval for an alternative product. Third, Axis products are compliant with federal laws that prohibit the use of ESS made with Chinese parts. Finally, the proposed Axis cameras have important security features that meet NWW’s unique requirements. For example, the Axis cameras have 360-degree field of view, high-speed PTZ with Optimized Infra-Red up to 820 ft, and Light finder 2.0 for clear, sharp overviews. These features will capture excellent details in demanding light conditions, such as NWW’s parking lots and shipping/receiving areas, eliminating the need for additional lighting.

b. IMPACT: If the district is unable to procure the proposed Axis cameras via a brand name specification, the district will continue to use its existing VSS/CCTV system pending the planned upgrades. The contractor for the ESS services and upgrades may ultimately propose use of Axis cameras or an alternative brand of camera to meet contract specifications. However, if an alternative is proposed, it will need to be approved by CIO/G6. Additional time, labor, and cost will be required to research and identify compatible cameras and delays in obtaining approval are anticipated. Delays in upgrading the VSS increase security risk for the district and could impede the mission of keeping NWW District personnel, assets, and equipment safe and secure.

ALTERNATIVES: Alternative CCTV camera brands are available and may be compatible with the district’s existing brand of network video recorder (Maxpro). However, the CIO/G6 has only approved the Axis brand for District use of CCTV cameras. To obtain approval of another brand, as well as obtain appropriate virtual servers and CCTV camera licenses, it is estimated that an additional six (6) months would be needed to fully test and receive approval from the CIO/G6 App Portal reviewers. This will greatly increase the Government’s time and cost for upgrading the system, which is not in the best interest of NWW.

- 3 -

Additionally, alternative cameras and camera components with features similar to the Axis Cameras are available but use Chinese parts. These brands are not feasible for use with the Government’s system, as certain foreign components in telecommunications equipment are prohibited under Section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act.

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION: Axis products are widely available;

therefore, price competition among vendors is expected and should result in a fair and reasonable price.

7. DETERMINATION OF FAIR AND REASONABLE COSTS: There are several sources from which the products can be obtained. Therefore, price competition should result in a fair and reasonable price; however, no contract will be awarded unless the price is determined fair and reasonable.

8. MARKET RESEARCH: A comprehensive review of FIP 201 compliant cameras from three leading manufacturers: Axis, Bosch, and Pelco, was conducted.

The analysis revealed that all of the cameras reviewed are high-quality options with advanced features and capabilities. However, the Axis cameras stood out for their superior specifications and performance. The Axis Q6100-E, Q3538- LVE, and Q6135-LE PTZ all offered better resolution, zoom capability, and field of view compared to the equivalent models from Bosch and Pelco. (Table 1)

Notably, the HQ Building utilizes Axis brand cameras in its existing infrastructure, and they have been approved for use by CIO/G6 and the Security Center of Excellence. This existing relationship and approval process make it easier to integrate additional Axis cameras into the existing system, reducing the complexity and cost associated with introducing new vendors.

All the cameras reviewed are competitively priced, with similar pricing structures across the different manufacturers with availability.

Table 1: Comparison of FIP 201 Compliant Cameras

Camera Type Axis Bosch Pelco 360 Dome Q6100-E Flexidome Sarix

3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps

2x zoom 2x zoom 1x zoom

360° field of view 103° field of view 72° field of view

IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux

Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor

$1,799 $1,899 $1,764

Box Camera Q3538-LVE Dinion Sarix IME

3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps

4x zoom 2x zoom 2.08x zoom

- 4 -

120° field of view 90° field of view 90° field of view IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux

Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor

$2,199 $1,999 $1,964

PTZ Camera Q6135-LE PTZ Autodome Sarix IMZ

3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps 3840x2160, 30fps 32x zoom 20x zoom 20x zoom

360° field of view 360° field of view 360° field of view

IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux IR, 0 lux

Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor Indoor/outdoor

$2,649 $2,499 $2,364

9. Technical Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Signature:

Title: Security Specialist (Physical)

DETERMINATION: In accordance with the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 13.106-1(b) and based upon the foregoing, I hereby determine that a brand name procurement is authorized and is in the best interest of the Government.

Prepared by:

Title: Contract Specialist Signature:

Approved by:

Title: Contracting Officer Signature:

Reviewed for legal sufficiency: Michaela Murdock Title: Deputy District Counsel Signature: