Description
Application for Brand Name Justification Each justification shall contain sufficient facts and rationale to justify the use of the specific authority cited. As required of FAR 6.302-1( c ), each justification shall include the following information: 1. Requesting Agency: U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Corporate Data Center Operations, Austin Information Technology Center Contracting activity: Center for Acquisition Innovation, Information Technology Acquisition Center, 1615 Woodward Street, Austin, TX 78772 2. Nature and/or description of the action: The CDCO operates a z890 series IBM server, model 2086-320 at its campus in Austin, Texas. This is a 131 MIP mainframe processor installed in January 2006. The CDCO is preparing paperwork and seeking approval to replace this machine with a more current model, most likely an IBM z10 BC 2098-M03. This Brand Name Justification has been prepared to document that IBM is the only brand name that meets the governments requirements. This is due to a lack of competition by other vendors in the IBM Compatible Marketplace. 3. A description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency's needs (including the estimated value): Both supplies and services are required in order to accomplish the replacement. A z10 series server will be delivered to the CDCO, configured appropriately for CDCO requirements. Services will be provided to install it and make it ready for use. The estimated value is omitted because it will appear in other paperwork related to this initiative. 4. An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition. This requirement is justified by FAR 6.302-1 ( c ) Application for brand name descriptions. 5. A demonstration that the proposed contractor's unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition that requires use of the authority cited. Historically there have been alternatives to IBM Brand Name servers which would run the IBM operating system. Amdahl and Fujitsu are two companies that had products in this market. The CDCO used Amdahl equipment in the 1980s. These vendors left the marketplace in 2000. The CDCO requires a 398 MIP (minimum), 96GB memory, 64 bit server capable of running the z/OS version 1.10 operating system; running z/VM 5.3 operating system; capable of linking with an existing IBM z9 mainframe via their coupling facility and Integrated Cluster Bus links; run all 3rd party vendor software currently running on the IBM z890; and capable of supporting FICON connectivity to EMC DASD. No vendor except IBM has a product meeting this specification. CDCO staff researched this information using Gartner online resources. Platform Solutions, Inc. (PSI) was previously a company that had entered the large-scale IBM compatible marketplace, but was bought out by IBM. CDCO analysts previously identified T3 Technologies as a company in the IBM compatible marketplace; however it is marketed for small-scale operations and is not capable of meeting the specifications. For example, its largest server is rated at 350 MIPS and max memory is only 64GB are at least 2 factors disqualifying it. 6. A description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as is practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies. This requirement will be solicited using the AACES V200P-909 contract. The existing hardware to be upgraded is under warranty and maintained under this contract, therefore any modifications must be pursued using this contract vehicle to maintain continuity of warranties and services. 7. A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable. The anticipated costs of $x.xx Million associated with this technical refresh are fair and reasonable 8. A description of the market research conducted (see Part 10) and the results or a statement of the reason market research was not conducted. CDCO staff reviewed Gartner research to determine if there were viable products from other manufacturers besides IBM. The results are detailed in answer to Question 5 above. 9. Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition No other information provided 10. A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition. None 11. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required. Future requirements of this kind will be evaluated to determine the current government need and the appropriate level of competition in accordance with current federal law, regulation and policy.