Security System Installation

OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION (OFOC) SSA-ODAR Mt. Pleasant, MI Proposed Action: Issue a Purchase Order to R.J. Beck Protective Systems, Inc. in the amount of $40,300.00. The purchase order includes the installation of a new security system that includes an intrusion detection system, CCTV system, and duress alarm system. Security system to be installed in the SSA ODAR lease location at 4035 Sweeney, Mt. Pleasant, MI. Description of Supplies or Services Required: The purchase order includes the installation of a new security system that includes an intrusion detection system, CCTV system, and duress alarm system. Identification of Statutory Authority: 41 U.S.C. 253(c)(1) Description of Efforts to Solicit as Many Offers as Practicable: GSA initially planned for the Lessor (via Supplemental Lease Agreement) to complete the SSA required security system installation. GSA and SSA submitted the request for DHS-FPS services to develop SSA's security system SOW in April 2010. Due to lack of resources, DHS-FPS was not able to forward the SOW to GSA/SSA until late July 2010. GSA then forwarded the SOW to the Lessor in early August 2010. Lessor sent the scope of work to three security system contractors for a bid. Lessor then submitted a cost proposal to GSA in August 2010 (based on the lowest price security contractor bid). Description of Contractor's Unique Qualifications: R.J. Beck is the only Contractor that can install the security system by the required timeframe (emergency basis) as the other contractors require a 2 - 3 week lead time on materials. Demonstration that the Anticipated Cost will be Fair and Reasonable: Cost is determined to be fair and reasonable per the Department of Homeland Security - FPS' Government Cost Estimate (GCE). FPS' Cost Estimate is based on line item rates per GSA federal schedules. The Contractor's cost proposal is not based on GSA federal schedule rates. See attached SOW and GCE. Description of Market Survey Conducted: Not applicable. Other Facts Supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition: GSA initially planned for the Lessor (via Supplemental Lease Agreement) to complete the SSA required security system installation. GSA and SSA submitted the request for DHS-FPS services to develop SSA's security system SOW in April 2010. Due to lack of resources, DHS-FPS was not able to forward the SOW to GSA/SSA until late July 2010. GSA then forwarded the SOW to the Lessor in early August 2010. Lessor sent the scope of work to three security system contractors for a bid. Lessor then submitted a cost proposal to GSA in August 2010 (based on the lowest price security contractor bid). Through the months of September and October, GSA then went through extensive negotiations, as the Lessor's cost proposal appeared to be high based on the GCE provided by DHS-FPS who completed the SSA security system scope of work. During the month of November 2010, GSA and Lessor came to a mutual agreement on the security system costs. Lessor then notified the Contractor. However, the Lessor and Contractor came to an impasse regarding the terms and conditions of the proposed contract between the Lessor and the Contractor. Lessor then notified GSA that a contract with the security contractor was not feasible. Security Contractor was geared up to start work but now had to cease as a result of the impasse. As a result of not having a security system in their space, SSA has been contracting for 24 hour/7 days a week guard service since September 2010 resulting in expensive costs incurred by SSA (that did not originally budget for the 24 hour guard service). SSA has been expending costs for 24 hour guard service for 3 months as a temporary measure until their security system is installed. SSA's space must be secured 24 hour/7 days a week due to highly sensitive personnel records/files housed in the SSA office. Competitively procuring this work is not a cost effective approach considering the cost of 24 hour/7 days a week is more expensive and SSA does not have any more funds to continue the guard service. It has been determined that due to these uncontrollable circumstances, it is in the best interest of the Government to award the contract to RJ Beck Protective Systems (who is familiar with the SOW and was the lowest price from the Lessor bids), would result in the quickest and most cost efficient resolution to SSA's dire need for a security system. Statement of Actions to Overcome Barriers to Competition: Future competition will be planned in the future. The reason for this sole source was a result of this unique circumstances which involved the uncontrollable impasse experienced between the Lessor and the Contractor. These unique circumstances have resulted in the need for this urgent procurement. Contracting Officer's Determination and Certification: I certify the facts and representations under my cognizance included in this justification form are complete and accurate basis for the justification. CERTIFIED BY: ________________________________________ Tiffani Sally Date Project Manager CONTRACTING OFFICER: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. _________________________________________ Melissa McKenna Date Contracting Officer