CISCO Justification Redacted

Control Number: 26-0027

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT

RFO FAR Part 6 Justification and Approval
for Other than Full and Open Competition
Program/Equipment: Class approval for Cisco products for the Walla Walla District Operating projects to include Mill Creek, McNary, Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, Lower Granite, Dworshak, and Lucky Peak Dams for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District.
Authority:
Title 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) §3204(a)(1) as implemented in Revolutionary Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Overhaul (RFO) FAR 6.103-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. RFO FAR 6.103-1(d) Application for brand-name descriptions. Class justification is authorized by RFO FAR 6.104(c).

Prepared by:

Levi Van Stedum
Chief, Electrical Design

Contracting Officer:

Brooke Moore
Phone:
Contracting Officer
Date: Reviewed
E-mail: [email protected]

Technical:

Levi Van Stedum
Phone:
Chief, Electrical Design
Date: Reviewed
E-mail: [email protected]

Requirements:

Levi Van Stedum
Phone:
Chief, Electrical Design
Date: Reviewed
E-mail: [email protected]

Phone: 509.939.4750
Date: 27JAN2026
E-mail: [email protected]

CUI//SP-PROCURE

Control Number: 26-0027
network and on the DoD Approved Hardware List. Because of this, the Walla Walla District has standardized the use of Cisco hardware. Procurement of another brand name would cause issues with standardization, interoperability, and stability. Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5139.101-90(a)(1) states, "The Army's Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software and Solutions (CHESS) program, under the Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems, is the mandatory source for commercial IT hardware and software purchases. CHESS contracts provide IT products and services that comply with U.S. Army Network Enterprise Technology Command, Army and DoD policy and standards." For network hardware offered by CIO-6 OrderTrak, equipment is almost exclusively Cisco supplied. Because of this, the projects have standardized the use of Cisco hardware. Procurement of another brand name would cause issues with standardization, interoperability, and most importantly network security. The current field administrat
support staff are trained and have significant experience with Cisco brand name network equipment. Utilizing an alternative brand would require