Sole Source J&A

Added: May 31, 2016 2:52 pm GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

BAS Upgrade Project

Center for Medicare and Medicaid Head Quarters (CMS HQ)

Woodlawn, MD

 

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION UNDER FAR 6.3

 

 

1. 
   
2. IDENTIFICATION OF AGENCY AND CONTRACTING AUTHORITY:
   

 

      This document constitutes a justification and approval for other than full    and open competition for the acquisition described herein as procured    through the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings           Service (PBS).

 

1. 
   
2. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION BEING APPROVED:
   

 

A solicitation is being prepared for the construction of the Building Automation System (BAS) Replacement Project at CMS HQ in Woodlawn, MD.  The project is to accomplish the following two goals:

 

                      i.        CMS BAS System was installed originally in 1994. The system primary building controllers are obsolete and the owner is now unable to procure replacement parts and service. The system needs to be replaced.

                    ii.        The GSA Smart Building initiative mandated by governmental directives requires the installation of new control systems to meet all Smart Building requirements. The new system must adhere to these requirements up to but not including connecting the new system to the GSA WAN.

 

This office requests approval to permit the construction of this project to specify BAS controller equipment manufactured by Siemens. The specifications may reference pars that are branded Siemens. 

 

 

3.   DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES REQUIRED:

 

The scope of the project is limited to primary building controllers.

The replacement strategy is to install a new IT backbone to support new BACNET/IP controllers installed within the existing BAS enclosures, reusing conduit and wire where possible.

 

The existing system is currently operational throughout all of the CMS HQ building. This includes the North Building, South Building, Central Building, and the Warehouse.

 

 

4.   IDENTIFICATION OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY:

 

This justification is issued under the authority of 41 U.S.C. 253(c) (1), as

Detailed in FAR 6.302-1 – only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

 

5.   DEMONSTRATION THAT THE ACTION REQUIRES USE OF THE              AUTHORITY CITED:

 

During the site survey portion of the Design Phase, the following facets of the installed existing BAS were noted and contributed toward making the decision to design the system as an ‘in-place’ upgrade of Siemens, instead of designing a system to be vendor neutral.

1.    All controller enclosures are installed without any easy access to wiring with conduit entering the enclosures on all sides. This would necessitate another vendor to replace all enclosures and reconfigure conduit in order to perform the same task Siemens can do with a migration kit built to fit inside their existing enclosures. This reduces installation cost dramatically, particularly with Electrical subcontractor costs.

2.    All terminal equipment controllers use Siemens proprietary communications protocol to communicate with a Siemens building controller. Since the upgrade of these devices is not in scope, they naturally would communicate with a new Siemens controller. However, to have another vendor attempt to integrate to these controllers would be a more costly installation.

3.    Occupant satisfaction and minimal systems impact. Upgrading in place reduces the time to return to normal control and reduces the potential for damage to existing controls components. Since all upgrading is happening within the existing enclosure, no impact to the distributed wiring and communication channels of the existing operating network.

4.    Leveraging the existing Apogee software knowledge base on site coupled with the vast experience with the Siemens system by the above average local CMS technicians. Consider all of the on-site maintenance personnel have known this system for, on average, 12 years, without exposure to other vendor systems, the life cycle adjustment costs to an untrained staff can be high.

 

6.   DESCRIPTION OF EFFORTS TO SOLICIT AS MANY SOURCES AS         PRACTICABLE:

 

Construction services will be procured through the GSA / PBS Region 3 Electrical Multiple Award Construction IDIQ contract, which has geographic coverage throughout the State of Maryland. A Request for Quote (RFQ) will be sent to all four (4) contractors that were awarded IDIQ contracts: Brown & Heim Inc, Enterprise Electrical Company, TISSA Enterprises, Inc, and Union Light & Power Company. These firms can further compete this equipment amongst multiple suppliers.

     

 

7.   DETERMINATION FROM CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE     ANTICIPATED COST WILL BE FAIR AND REASONABLE:

 

 

The Government will utilize the estimate developed by the designer of record to determine price reasonableness.   Also, adequate price competition will be obtained from the term IDIQ contractors.

 

 

8.   A DESCRIPTION OF THE MARKET SURVEY CONDUCTED AND THE    RESULTS OR A STATEMENT OF THE REASONS A MARKET SURVEY WAS NOT CONDUCTED:

 

The A/E made the following determination on the cost implications of using a vendor outside of Siemens.

 

All other vendors control system installations would require a design and implementation that would require all CMS HVAC systems current sequences of operation. Each non-Siemens vendor would have to implement new programming to control the associated systems. This process poses 3 very costly impacts to the decision point;

a.    The down-time, occupant impact and potential for error increases substantially.

b.    The labor for installation would be similar to a new BAS installation. For a facility of this size the costs to install would more than double.

c.    The commissioning of the systems would be more extensive and therefore more expensive.

 

 

 

9.   ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE USE OF OTHER THAN FULL    AND OPEN COMPETITION:

     

Conversations took place to confirm that the above information is correct at different instances with the designer of record, the Project Engineer, and the Project Manager.  

 

10. LIST OF THE SOURCES, IF ANY, THAT EXPRESSED, IN WRITING,        AN INTEREST IN THE ACQUISITION:

 

            No other source has expressed in writing an interest in the acquisition.

 

11. A STATEMENT OF THE ACTIONS, IF ANY, THE AGENCY MAY TAKE     TO REMOVE OR OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS TO COMPETITION             BEFORE ANY SUBSEQUENT ACQUISITIONS FOR THE SERVICES         REQUIRED:

 

      None applicable