Vigilant Fortress_Brand Name redated_Redacted.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

v 18 Jan 2024 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 2 of 5

(4) Justification for restricting consideration to a brand-name item:

FAR 6.302-1(c) advises that brand name applies when only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirement. Also when competition is limited into a specific brand name ( or product from specific manufacture). To further elaborate, FAR 6.302-1(c)(1)(i)states the acquisition using a brand-name description, "does not provide for full and open competition, regardless of the number of sources solicited."

Robins Air Force Base currently operates a critical, mission-essential security system which currently utilizes Vindicator Security Technology Intrusion Detection System (IDS) which is currently already in place on base. This existing system utilizes proprietary hardware, software and communication protocols unique to the vindicator ecosystem. The addition of a new IDS system MUST seamlessly integrate with the existing Vindicator SMS Platform to ensure unified command and control, centralized alarm monitoring and streamlined operator response. Integration with a different brand of IDS would require extensive costly and potentially impossible modifications to the proprietary Vindicator SMS.

Replacing the existing Vindicator infrastructure of attempting to integrate non-vindicator IDS would result in quantifiable and significant costs. All current security personnel, system administrators, and sustainment are trained and certified on the Vindicator platform. This justification focuses on the inherent qualities, compatibility, and necessity of the Vindicator brand itself, irrespective of its current corporate parent. The underlying technology and compatibility are unique to the specific brand and is not available from other manufactures. That being said this brand can be provided multiple GSA resellers and integrators of the Vindicator product.

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The anticipated cost for the Vindicator Silent duress system and installation will be determined to be fair and reasonable through competition among multiple authorized resellers holding a GSA or SAMs multiple award schedule contract. quotes will be solicitation via GSA ebuy and SAMs from such resellers. The prices offered will be compared against the awarded schedule contract prices, historical prices, and market research to ensure fairness and reasonableness prior to award.

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

The agency's current security operations and maintenance personnel including sustainment, administrators, and it's support posses extensive and specialized training and certifications specifically for the Vindicator platform. Requiring a different brand would necessitate comprehensive and costly retraining programs for personnel, impacting operational readiness and response times for critical security incidents. Maintaining a standard system such as the Vindicator system across the base will assist in alignment with the broader efforts of security and standardization. this insure interoperability, simplified maintenance, streamlined operations, and enhanced reliability for security functions.

(7) Actions the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to decreasing the use of brand-name items before any subsequent acquisition of the supplies or services:

Actions the Agency must take to remove or overcome any barriers to decreasing the use of brand-name items before any subsequent acquisition the supplies or service include: conducting market surveys and technology assessments, develop performance-based specifications, investigate open architecture solutions, promote interoperability requirements in future procurements, and conducting life cycle analysis for system Modernization.

(8) Program Manager's certification that supporting data is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my responsibility, is both accurate and complete.

v 18 Jan 2024 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 3 of 5

(9) Contracting Officer's certification that the justification is accurate and complete:

As evidenced by my signature below, I certify that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

(10) Approving Official's determination that FAR16.505(a)(4)(i) applies to the order:

As evidenced by my signature below, I hereby determine that the use of brand-name restriction applies.

Date Program Manager

Signature

Date Contracting Officer

Date Local Legal Reviewer [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Competition Advocate [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Senior Contracting Official (SCO) [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date Approval Authority [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ]

Signature

Date [ Title ] [ Name ] [ Office Symbol / Phone Number ] v 18 Jan 2024 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 4 of 5

Instructions for Completing the Template IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from FAR 16.505 (b)(2) and the supporting rationale. FAR16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,000 unless a statutory exception applies. The specific exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(__) [Insert A,B, C, D, or E]. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A): “The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. 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 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception 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.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order”. When using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D): “It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.”

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E): “For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of FAR 16.505(b)(1) and DFARS 216.505-70 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

v 18 Jan 2024 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 5 of 5

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) This paragraph needs to be tailored based on the types of CLINs in the order and the pricing arrangements on the basic multiple award contract. If the contract did not establish the price for the supply or service, the Contracting Officer must establish prices for each order IAW FAR 15.4. The paragraph needs to describe the steps that will ensure that the prices/estimated cost of the order will be fair and reasonable. For example, even if firm-fixed prices were obtained under adequate price competition in the award of the multiple award contract, the Contracting Officer still needs to consider market conditions and other factors that may have changed since contract award and explain the basis in the determination that prices/costs are fair and reasonable prior to award of the order.

(6) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(7) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.