A5.1_JA_BEP_DELL.PDF

Control No. SWF18-17

For Official Use Only

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. Contracting Activity: Department of Army, US Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth

District, Contracting Division, Fort Worth, Texas 76102

2. Description of Action: This justification is to support the Bureau of Engraving

(BEP), Western Currency Facility (WCF) expansion in North Fort Worth, TX. This is a justification for other than full and open competition for a portion of the procurement to require that the Prime contractor obtain Cisco equipment to provide compatibility with the existing IT system. The estimated cost for the IT equipment is $22,000.00

3. Description of Supplies/Services: As a part of the design-bid-build contract, the contractor is to provide a fully integrated IT system that meets the requirements of

BEP.

Manufacturer Part Number Qty Dell Dell Power Edge R330 Server (210-AFEV) 6 Dell PowerEdge R330 Motherboard,v2 (329-BCXI) 6 Dell PowerEdge Server FIPS TPM 2.0 (461-AADM) 6

Dell PCIe Riser, 1x16 PCIe Gen3 FH slot (x8 PCIe lanes) 1x8 PCIe Gen3 LP slot (x4 PCIe lanes), R330 (330-BBFN) 6

Dell Cooling Fan (370-ABXV) 6

Dell On-Board LOM 1GBE Dual Port (BCM5720 GbE LOM) (542-

BBCQ) 6

Dell Intel Ethernet I350 DP 1Gb Server Adapter, Low Profile

(540-BBBV) 6

4. Authority Cited: The statutory authority permitting other than full and open

Competition for this procurement is 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1), implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a) (2) (ii) (A) Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: BEP has an extensive server farm of Dell enterprise products which allows the BEP to manage and monitor the equipment at all times.

New servers have to be compatible with our existing Dell Chassis M1000 and backward compatible.

If different brand names are procured, beyond those specified within this justification, BEP will sustain duplication of cost to the Government, because such duplication within the server farm environment must be supported and additional personnel staffed to support that environment. Further, a change in brand name requires establishing new IT standards, images, and standard operating procedures which would result in in added cost.

BEP currently uses Dell manufactured servers with a minimum 3 year gold support contract. Consequently, Dell manufactured equipment; specific to those servers is required. BEP has a limited number of system engineers support staff. The current server support staff is trained and has significant experience with the Dell product line.

Also, in order to minimize service interruptions to BEP, support staff can swap computers, components and parts without compatibility and functionality issues, because BEP is currently standardized on the Dell brand.

The Dell Chassis system only supports Dell servers. BEP’s current server infrastructure is Dell, and therefore no other vendors can be used. Dell blades have a proprietary form factor. While the components are all standards based, the connection mechanisms of the blades and chassis they fit into are unique to each OEM.

Therefore, no other vendor’s blades will fit into a Dell blade chassis, nor will Dell blades fit into another vendor’s chassis. Only Dell blades will work with current and proposed Dell blades systems. Dell Management Tools are already in use. If non Dell equipment is procured, new management tools will be require along with support staff training.

As with using anything other than Dell equipment, the introduction of a vendor's equipment other than Dell would be counterproductive due to the likelihood that it would not be compatible with the current system tools used and would require support staff to be cross-trained and have to acquire an equivalent amount of knowledge and experience. Thus, utilizing a different brand name equipment will result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition.

The new equipment will need to be compatible with BEP existing system, incompatibility will result in an impact to BEP’s operations and may result in an impact to National security and the U.S economy as the BEP WCF produces approx. 65% of the U.S currency each year and is only one of two facilities nationwide that produces U.S currency.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: In accordance with the Competition in Contracting

Act (CICA), the component identified above is identified as brand name; however, the overall procurement for construction of the BEP Expansion will be competed using an Unrestricted full and open competitive Best-Value acquisition.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: Competition is anticipated for the overall acquisition of the BEP Expansion construction. Which is estimated between $100M and $250M. It will be the responsibility of the offerors to obtain competitive pricing from the manufacturer/supplier of the DELL Equipment and to submit a proposal for the project.

8. Market Research: Previous projects, at the BEP Facility, have had problems with the interfacing using other vendors’ products. The system has proprietary language and/or characteristics that is not recognized by other manufacturers. Internet searches for other viable vendors were unsuccessful. Approval of these items as brand name is critical to ensure BEP’s critical services to Manufacturing / Production are not interrupted, interruptions to BEPs operations may impact National security and the U.S economy.

9. Interested Sources: At this time, there are no known other interested parties.

10. Other Facts:

a. BEP WCF is one of only two locations nationwide that produces U.S currency with the other location being located in Washington, D.C. Currently, the Fort Worth WCF produces approx. 65% of the U.S currency each year, which may grow as the WCF is in the process of a major construction expansion. Any impacts to the BEP WCF’s operations with the production of currency could severely impact the U.S economy.

b. Technical data packages, specifications, engineering descriptions and statements of work have been written to be suitable for full and open competition to the maximum extent possible.

11.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.”

Typed Name: Robert Lopez

Title: Project Coordinator

Date: _____________________ Signature: _____________________

12. 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.”

Typed Name: Tim Tran

Title: Program Manager

Date: _____________________ Signature: _____________________

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: “I hereby determine that the anticipated cost for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Cost and price analysis techniques will be used as the basis for this determination. The estimated m2ecstt9 Stamp

M2CTPLDE

Typewritten Text 5/10/18 cost does not meet the threshold for certified cost or pricing data.”

Typed Name: Linda Eadie

Title: Contracting Officer

Date: _____________________ Signature: _____________________

14. Contracting Officer Certification: “I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Typed Name: Linda Eadie

Title: Contracting Officer

Date: _____________________ Signature: _____________________

APPROVAL

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the IT equipment, for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Western Currency Facility on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S. Code 2304 - Contracts: competition requirements, subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services and property herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

Signature Date

M2CTPLDE

10-May-2018

M2CTPLDE

Typewritten Text 10-May-2018

M2CTPLDE

10-May-2018