13. BNJ_Redacted.pdf

1 | 5

BRAND NAME/SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION (SAM) SAT

LIMITED-SOURCES JUSTIFICATION (GSA) SAT

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

(ID/IQ TASK ORDER/DELIVERY ORDER) SAT

1. Description of Supplies/Services.

PART # DESCRIPTION QTY

8566B Spectrum Analyzer 1 EA N/A Calibration, NIST-Traceable 1 EA N/A Shipping 1 EA

The requested supplies services represent the minimum requirements of the Government, which have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.

2. Regulatory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition.

SAM

FAR 13.106-1(b)(i) Soliciting from a single source

FAR 13.106-1(b)(ii) Particular brand-name item

GSA

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(A) An urgent and compelling need exists

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(B) Only one source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(C) In the interest of economy and efficiency, the new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures (the original order or BPA must not have been previously issued under sole-source or limited-sources procedures).

FAR 8.405-6 (b) Items peculiar to one manufacturer (brand-name item) ID/IQ Task Order/Delivery Order (e.g. NASA SEWP or ARMY CHESS)

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A) The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the

2 | 5 contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order. [When utilizing this exception, the rationale shall describe why the relationship between the initial order and the follow-on is logical (e.g., in terms of scope, period of performance, or value).]

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D) It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E) For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) In accordance with section 1331 of Public Law 111-240 ( 15 U.S.C.

644(r)), contracting officers may, at their discretion, set aside orders for any of the small business concerns identified in 19.000(a)(3). When setting aside orders for small business concerns, the specific small business program eligibility requirements identified in part 19 apply.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(G) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in 6.302 ( 10 U.S.C.

3406(c)(5)). The public interest exception shall not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(7).

3. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Regulatory Authority.

a.) The Items Described in Paragraph 1 Must Be Compatible In All Aspects (Form, Fit And Function) With Existing Systems Presently Installed.

b.) A Patent, Copyright, or Proprietary Data Limits Competition.

c.) The Items Described in Paragraph 1 are “Direct Replacements” Parts/Components for Existing Equipment.

The Keysight Spectrum Analyzer 8566B is a direct replacement for an unserviceable and broken, beyond economic repair unit. This direct replacement for will support the requirements for electronics measurements as required by the instrument calibration procedures for

Currently, The radar test set and is designed to be tested

3 | 5 d.) Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Supported By A Case Letter.

e.) Unusual and Compelling Urgency.

f.) Other: If required, discuss any other rationale that supports the use of a brand name/sole source for this effort.

4. Implication of Procuring Another Brand/Manufacturer.

a.) Unacceptable Delays in Fulfilling the Agency’s Requirements.

Per the request and approval of Naval Surface

Warfare Center, Corona Division MS11 FMS section has been tasked to provide support by procurement of hardware equipment, No other brand has the capability to operate the Automation Laboratory system specifically located at the French Navy calibration laboratory in Cuers, France.

If another brand was procured, the delay would have a

In addition, if another brand/manufacturer is chosen, there will be

4 | 5 b.) Substantial Duplication Of Cost To The Government That Is Not Expected To Be Recovered Through Competition.

c.) Other: If required, discuss any other implication of procuring another brand/manufacturer.

5. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition.

CERTIFICATION

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and its supporting data/documentation, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

CUSTOMER:

9/3/2024

Name, Title, Code Phone No. Date

The impact in cost if another brand/manufacturer is estimated at a minimum of $50,000.00, which includes:

(1) Reviewing the new hardware for compatibility

(2) Testing the new hardware,

(3) Two leadership teams (French and U.S Governments) to approve the new hardware

(4) Approving the new hardware

(5) Training the lab technicians on the new hardware.

In addition, if a different brand was procured, the existing pulse function generators and radar test sets located at the Cuers, France calibration laboratory would also require to be replaced, costing an estimated $250,000.00, along with the cost of training necessary for basic through expertise levels of understanding on all new equipment procured, estimated at $72,000.00.

For the reasons set forth in paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Justification, Corona Division has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the type of supplies/services covered by this document. If another potential source emerges, the Corona Division will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

5 | 5

APPROVALS

I certify that the Customer representations above have been verified, and are complete and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the processing of this brand name/sole-source justification precludes the use of full and open competition.

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR/SPECIALIST:

Phone No. Date

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that completing this purchase as a brand name/sole source is in the best interest of the Government.

CONTRACTING OFFICER:

Phone No. Date

-07'00'