SATPC0041046 Tab 10 2 BNJ_Redacted.pdf

Page 1 V2.0 3-15-2017

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

NASA SHARED SERVICES CENTER

RECOMMENDATION AND DETERMINATION TO SOLICIT FROM ONE SOURCE

OR BRAND NAME

Brand Name Justification:

☒I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate only with vendors who can provide the subject band name from Astrodyne Corporation.for Astrodyne Fuel Cell Testing Load Bank . The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 20 Weeks.

This recommendation is for the acquisition of supplies or services determined to be reasonably available from only one source/only one manufacture. Competition is impractical for the following reasons (please answer the questions below):

1. What are the reasons for soliciting only the suggested source/suggested brand name? Please provide the unique characteristics of the items or services along with the supporting rationale and the market research performed to substantiate your reason for the suggested source/brand name.

Glenn Research center intends to procure three Astrodyne TDI Model XBL-400-1K-12K-LM-LF water-cooled programmable DC load banks. Existing fuel cell test facilities currently utilize Astrodyne TDI load banks that have proven reliable and fully capable of supporting testing requirements. The proposed units offer equivalent specifications, ensuring compatibility with existing fuel cell stacks and infrastructure in Building 334.Standardizing on Astrodyne TDI allows for seamless integration as drop-in replacements and leverages existing personnel familiarity, eliminating the need for additional training or system modifications. Use of an alternate vendor would require significant reprogramming and integration effort, resulting in increased cost and schedule risk. This procurement maintains hardware commonality across the facility, improving operational efficiency and supportability. Accordingly, Astrodyne TDI is the only responsible source that meets the Government’s requirements without unacceptable delay or duplication of cost.

2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand is used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.

Selecting a vendor other than Astrodyne TDI would introduce additional cost, risk, and schedule impacts. Unlike Astrodyne TDI systems, which are already proven compatible with existing fuel cell test setups, an alternate load bank would require performance validation, consuming labor and test resources. This evaluation is further constrained by the lack of available spare fuel cell stacks and introduces risk to customer-owned hardware. Additionally, current facility control systems are configured to communicate with Astrodyne TDI load banks via RS232. A different vendor would require significant reprogramming and validation of PLC interfaces, resulting in increased engineering effort and delays. In contrast, Astrodyne TDI units provide seamless drop-in replacement capability, avoiding these costs. Finally, Astrodyne TDI’s modular design supports future system expansion, offering a more cost-effective path to increased capacity without requiring full system replacement.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

4/1/2026

Technical User Name Date

Title

GRC

Office