MFR_Limiting_Competition_MUE ISF DC Power Plant 2nd Buy_Redacted.pdf

5821400000A

"KIT,480 VOLT OPTION " 2

513793

"CB MCB 4P 800A KA 65VDC HYDRAULIC F " 12

520894DCP

"KIT,4-POS LUG ADAPTER " 12

582140000 "NetSure 8200 Power System " 2

1M830BNA565806

"NCU W 565806 SOFTWARE" 2

582140000102

"NS8200, MAIN COMB. BAY, A/F PDSC" 2

582140000131

"NETSURE 8200 AC CAB, 480VAC, 65KAIC" 2

5821400000A

"KIT,480 VOLT OPTION " 2

513793

"CB MCB 4P 800A KA 65VDC HYDRAULIC F " 12

520894DCP

"KIT,4-POS LUG ADAPTER " 12

582140000 "NetSure 8200 Power System " 2

582140000112

"NS8200, SUP. COMB. BAY, A/F PDSC" 2

582140000131

"NETSURE 8200 AC CAB, 480VAC, 65KAIC" 2

5821400000A

"KIT,480 VOLT OPTION "

513793

"CB MCB 4P 800A KA 65VDC HYDRAULIC F "

520894DCP

"KIT,4-POS LUG ADAPTER "

582140600 2

58214060009 "BDFB Frame, 8 Panel, 30W x 24D"

58214060015

"BULLET DIST MODULE, 16 POSITION"

58214060043 "Input Shunt Feed Assy, 25mV "

58214060016 "Internal Ground, Full 8 Panel Bay"

1M832DNA563436

"MONITOR W 563436 SOFTWARE"

58214060052 "Dressing Bar, 24"" Deep Bay " 2

58214060067 "Pre-Installed Load Mtg Hardware" 2

58214060048 "2400A Internal Ground Assy" 2

150596 "20A Fuse, White/Green, 450AIC @ 60VDC" 140 redesigning the facility. Any redesign would delay completion of the MILCON project, increase cost, and require reengineering of integrated AC/DC circuitry already embedded within the building structure.

WSMR also operates other VERTIV systems and is familiar with their configuration, operation, and maintenance, making VERTIV the logical and technically consistent choice for the ISF. CORe could not produce a generic, vendor‑neutral design because each DC power manufacturer uses unique installation requirements, bay configurations, distribution layouts, and electrical interfaces. The DC power backup system could not be designed after construction, as the supporting circuitry, conduit routing, and distribution pathways are physically built into the ISF’s infrastructure. As a result, the VERTIV system is the only configuration compatible with the approved design baseline and is required to complete the ISF DC power installation without causing mission‑impacting delays or cost growth.

c. Deviation from the VERTIV‑specified components would require extensive Design During Construction (DDC) re‑engineering to identify, validate, and integrate an alternate manufacturer’s equipment. There is no available funding or manpower to perform the substantial research, electrical calculations, and compatibility analyses required for such a retrofit. Any redesign effort would also trigger mandatory modifications to the USACE‑designed Classified and Unclassified data center hot‑aisle containment systems, including changes to equipment spacing, thermal management, cable routing, and power distribution pathways. These changes would result in significant construction impacts, schedule delays, and cost growth. Because the DC power architecture is fully integrated into the ISF’s built‑in infrastructure, substituting non‑VERTIV components at this stage is not feasible without materially disrupting the MILCON project and jeopardizing facility readiness.

7. Publicizing Contract Actions:

a. The public display and synopsis requirements of FAR 5.101(a) and FAR 5.101(d) ☒ apply and will be followed

b. Requirement to post justification in accordance with, FAR 12.102(a)(2) unless:

☐ Action is not a brand name restriction and is under SAT, no posting required.

☐ Action is a brand name restriction, under $40K, no posting required.

☐ Action is a brand name restriction over $40K but will not be posted due to the following exception:

☐ FAR 6.301(e)

8. Market Research: Market research confirmed that only one manufacturer’s equipment can be installed in the new ISF building. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CORe) design plans were developed exclusively around VERTIV DC power components, and no other vendor’s equipment is compatible with the engineered electrical architecture. Review of the CORe design documentation verified that the ISF DC power system was designed specifically for VERTIV equipment, and CORe provided a separate written statement affirming this requirement. As CORe stated, “Deviation from the VERTIV manufactured components would necessitate significant Design During Construction (DDC) efforts for which there is little to no funding for manpower to execute the required research and calculations for a compatible retrofit.

The potential redesign effort would undoubtedly result in mandatory changes to USACE‑designed Classified and Unclassified data center hot aisle containment layouts and infrastructure resulting in significant modifications and schedule delays.”

Based on these findings, market research concluded that VERTIV is the only brand that capable of providing equipment that meets the approved design baseline without triggering extensive redesign, construction impacts, or unacceptable schedule delays.

9. Other Facts:

a. Mission failures. The requirement is directly tied to the ISF building’s ongoing construction. Redesign cannot begin until the Government completes a full and open competition and awards to a new DC Power vendor. Only afterward could CORe reengineer the ISF to match the new equipment specifications. Following redesign, CORe would also be required to renegotiate construction pricing with the current contractor to account for revised electrical, mechanical, and infrastructure requirements.

b. All dependent construction activities—and all contracts tied to those activities— would be suspended until the redesigned systems are integrated and construction can resume. This would halt progress across multiple trades, disrupt coordinated construction sequencing, and delay the overall facility completion timeline.

c. Failure to approve this action would also result in significantly increased costs for the Government. These costs include stop‑work impacts, redesign of the DC power system, negotiations with the construction contractor, potential claims from construction vendors, and substantial Government manpower to execute the additional engineering, contracting, and oversight tasks. Avoiding the brand name action would create a duplication of cost estimated at four to five times the value of the current requirement, with no added benefit to the Government. Such delays and cost growth would jeopardize timely delivery of the ISF and impair mission readiness.

d. This requirement is to procure the remaining VERTIV DC power equipment that could not be delivered following the termination for convenience (T4C) of contract W91151‑24‑C‑0006. The outstanding components are necessary to complete the DC power system installation in the ISF and are part of the original USACE‑designed configuration. Without acquiring these remaining items, the ISF DC power infrastructure cannot be completed in accordance with the approved design baseline.

10. Technical/Requirements 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.

11. Contracting Officer Certification/Approval: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable.

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that completing this purchase as a brand name is in the best interest of the Government. Additionally, I approve this justification to limit competition subject to the availability of funds and provided that the services or supplies herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.