Justification_Other_Than_Full_and_Open.pdf

1 Ver 2.0 (01 July 2018)

Date: 14 August 2018

MEMORANDUM

Subj: USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION FOR AN ACQUISITION UNDER

THE SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION THRESHOLD

Ref: (a) PR Number(s): N3220582136101

I. BACKGROUND:

1. In considering the references, FAR 13.106-1(b)(1)(i) states for purchases not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, Contacting Officers may solicit from one source if the Contracting Officer determines that, under the circumstances of the contract action, only one source is reasonably available (e.g., urgency, exclusive licensing, brand-name, or industrial mobilization).

2. As required by FAR 13.106-3(b)(3)(i), this memorandum explains the absence of competition for this acquisition because only one source will be solicited for this requirement (or for a portion of the requirement) and the requirement is not expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.

II. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM OR SERVICE:

1. Provide a description of the item or service required, to include

a) the name of the required source or brand name

• MSC – Norfolk requires OEM Hewlett Packard (HP) ProLiant DL 360P GEN 9 small form factor (SFF) Server with various HP kits. The order quantity requested is 3 major parts kit

• MSC – Norfolk requires OEM Hewlett Packard (HP) T620 Thin Client kits. The order quantityrequested is 8 major parts kit

• MSC – Norfolk requires OEM CISCO System 4351/K9 Routers. The order quantity requested is

4major parts kit

• MSC – Norfolk requires OEM QNAP NAS devices. The order quantity requested is 3 major partskit

• MSC – Norfolk requires OEM APC Smart UPS. The order quantity requested is 4 major parts kit

b) the required delivery date/period of performance and

30 September 2018/1 October 2018 – 30 September 2018

c) its intended use.

MSC SIPR/NIPR network for new construction ship install

2. List the source(s) or known vendor(s) who are able to provide the above described item or service.

2 Ver 2.0 (01 July 2018)

III. THE DETERMINATION FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION IS BASED

ON THE FOLLOWING (select all that apply):

A. _____ Only one responsible source (select all that apply):

1. _____ RESTRICTIVE RIGHTS: the source has established proprietary rights, limited rights in data, patent rights, copyrights, or secret processes in the item or service.

a. Explain what is subject to the restrictive rights.

b. If drawings are included, who is identified as “owning” the drawings.

2. _____ EXCLUSIVE LICENSING AGREEMENTS: The item or service is only available from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), or there is ONLY ONE authorized distributor or technical representative for the OEM.

a. Identify the OEM and explain the circumstances surrounding why the item or service is only available from the OEM.

b. Identify the distributor / authorized technical representative for the item or service.

Provide evidence of the exclusive licensing agreement as an attachment to this document.

(NOTE: If there is more than one distributor / authorized technical representative, then use Part B – Brand Name.)

3. __X__ OTHER REASON:

a. _____ CRITICAL SHIP EQUIPMENT: The required item is critical ship equipment, the failure of which poses a hazard to the ship, the crew or the environment.

i. SMS Procedure Number: ___________________________

b. __X__ STANDARDIZATION / BRAND NAME: Per MSCs standardization initiative, 3 Ver 2.0 (01 July 2018) only the specified make/model of the equipment/parts will satisfy the Government’s needs for additional units or replacement items.

i. Identify Make / Model Number(s): Shipboard Management Information System (SMIS) XP Eradication

ii. Identify other vessels with this Make / Model: Class of ships supporting the SMIS Eradication System: T-AO, T-AKE, T-AOE, ESB, T-AKR, T-AKX, EPF, and T-ARS.

c. __X__ FORM, FIT, AND FUNCTION: Item is direct replacement parts / components for existing equipment and must be compatible in terms of form, fit, and function with existing equipment / configurations.

i. Identify Make / Model of existing equipment: Shipboard Management

Information System (SMIS) XP Eradication ii. Describe how the equipment must be compatible with the existing configuration.

MSC has made a significant investment in HP and CISCO products for their IT networks.

Introducing an alternate network device solution would add severe complexity to the implementation and migration plan, which would cause disruption of services for the Navy and MSC Fleet. Many MSC ships do not have extended yard periods for many years. When MSC’s Afloat networks were established and as they evolved, HP and CISCO were the only manufacturers of a combined router and WAN optimization solution that met the MSC WAN requirements. Therefore, both HP and CISCO emerged as the network device manufacturers for the size, scope, and complexity found in the MSC Afloat and Ashore networks.

By combining WAN Acceleration services within the router, MSC was able to engineer a solution that meets the limited rack space requirements found on MSC afloat units and provided the most cost effective solution. Based on the current infrastructure design, requirements, and the significant investment that has already been made in HP and CISCO network devices, HP and CISCO have been determined to be the network standard for MSC. HP and CISCO were previously stand-alone providers of their own routers and infrastructure. Each has entered into an agreement that shares their proprietary technical data rights with other.

d. _____ OTHER:

4. _____ UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING URGENCY: The supplies or services are of such unusual and compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits. Urgent requirements are supplies or services that will result in work stoppage, or are mission critical and the routine processing time would injure the Government. The determination that the procurement for the above is an urgent and compelling requirement is based on the following:

a. Date on which the requirement was identified: ______________________________

b. Required delivery date / Period of Performance: _____________________________

c. If the difference between a. and b. is more than one week, explain the delay in submitting the requirement.

4 Ver 2.0 (01 July 2018)

d. Estimated production lead time: ______________________________

e. Explanation of why delivery / commencement of services by the date required is needed: (explain the impact to the mission, any special circumstances or conditions, etc.)

f. CASREP Number: _________________________________________

IV. ANTICIPATED DOLLAR VALUE OF PROCURMENT:

5 Ver 2.0 (01 July 2018)