JA_CAD.pdf

Control Number: Stewart 2015-06

-1-

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

(Actions NTE $650K for other than Simplified Acquisition Procedures)

1. Agency/Contracting Activity: MICC – FORT STEWART

2. Description of Action:

Nature: New Requirement Follow-on Requirement Mod to Existing Purchase Order/Contract Number

Pricing: Firm-Fixed Price Time & Materials Cost

Funds: OMA Other Funds:

Name of Proposed Contractor(s): Intergraph Corporation Street Address: 170 Graphics Drive BLDG 15, Suites A-B City, State, Zip: Madison, Alabama 35758 Phone: 703-264-5770

3. Description of Services or Supplies:

The total estimated value of the proposed action is $416,490.24.

Intergraph Government Solutions (IGS) will provide 24/7 technical support and software maintenance of the Computer Aided Dispatch System for the Fort Stewart/ Hunter Army Airfield 9-1-1 Center. The period of performance will include a one year base period with 4 one year option periods.

4. Authority:

FAR 13.106-1(b) (1): For purchases not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), contracting officers may solicit from one source if the contracting officer determines that the circumstances of the contract action deem only one source reasonably available (e.g. urgency, exclusive licensing agreements, brand name, or industrial mobilization.

5. Reasons for Authority Cited: The Fort Stewart/HAAF 9-1-1 Center relies on Computer Aided Dispatch software to respond to all types of emergencies. The CAD system is a proprietary software developed by Intergraph Government Solutions (IGS). Due to the proprietary nature of the software, IGS is the only source that can maintain it and provide the necessary patches and fixes.

One alternate is to solicit a new service provider to replace the existing system. Fort Stewart Emergency Services has used the IGS solution since 2004. In this time the CAD system has been integrated with numerous other Emergency Services systems and is now a repository for a vast amount of historical information. As such, it is impractical to solicit for a new CAD system. The potential cost benefits of re-competing would be greatly outweighed by the time, expense, and risk involved with changing systems. Due to the nature of the system which providing continuous support to emergency responders it would be a major undertaking to replace this system and integrate a new system without disrupting service. It would take a significant amount of time and resources to plan, rehearse, and execute a change in service providers. Additionally, the technical complexity of this procurement would require a significant amount of time and expense.

The only other option would be to discontinue the maintenance service. This would be unacceptable as it would put the community at risk as the emergency response time of first responders would be diminished should the system fail from lack of maintenance. Delaying the procurement of the maintenance also puts the system information at

-2-risk of loss should there be a catastrophic failure. Failure to continue technical support and software maintenance places the community at risk of diminished emergency service.

6. Actions to Increase Competition:

Fort Bragg has assembled an Integrated Product Team to investigate an enterprise level solution that can meet the technical requirements of the subordinate army posts and provide a more uniform set of capabilities.

7. Market Research:

Market research indicates that IGS is the only company that can provide the 9-1-1 Center with the required maintenance service. While other vendors may be capable of replacing the current system, the cost of such a solution would be extremely costly and would not be in the best interest of the Government. Currently there are no other vendors that have received proper training, licensing, or certification to provide technical support or maintenance for this system. Additionally, Fort Stewart/HAAF 9-1-1 does not have the organic technical expertise or ability to perform this service. Therefore, it is in the Government’s best interest to award the contract as a sole source to IGS.

8. Interested Sources: None

9. Procurement History:

Previous Purchase Order(s) or Contract(s): Yes No

Purchase order or contract number: W9124M-11-F-0106 Was action competed? Yes No If action was not competed, state the cited authority, summarize rationale, and describe the actions that were supposed to be taken to increase competition and the results thereof: N/A

10. Additional Information to support the justification: N/A

11. Technical / Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which is included in this abbreviated J&A is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

6/18/2015

X

-3-

12. Reviews:

Small Business (if value exceeds $150K)

I have reviewed this justification and have no Small Business concerns.

X Small Business Specialist

Legal Counsel (if value exceeds $150K)

I have reviewed this justification and find it legally sufficient.

X Attorney-Advisor

13. Fair and Reasonable Price Determination: As contracting officer, I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. The price of this service is in line with other Government awards for CAD maintenance. Also, the prices are below the prices listed on the GSA schedule.

14. Contracting Officer’s Approval: I hereby certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Based on the foregoing, I approve this sole source justification subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and supplies herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

GERAL BAXTER

Contracting Officer

BAXTER.H.GERA

L.1230007353

Digitally signed by BAXTER.H.GERAL.1230007353 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, cn=BAXTER.H.GERAL.1230007353 Date: 2015.07.28 15:05:45 -04'00'