Justification_FBO.pdf

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. This justification for other than full and open competition is prepared by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC).

2. The nature and/or description of the action being approved.

This justification provides the rationale for a noncompetitive sole source acquisition to TESCAN for a TESCAN S8000G variable pressure Gallium-source Focused Ion Beam Scanning Electron Microscope (FIB/SEM) with Oxford Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) and Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD) detectors.

3. A description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs (including the estimated value).

The NASA KSC Laboratories and Test Facilities Division (NE-L) provides science and engineering services to NASA and contractor customers at KSC. Within NE-L, there are laboratories in three Branches which support mishap or accident investigations, failure investigations, non-conformances, identification of unknown contaminants during flight hardware processing, and materials testing for all major programs at KSC including Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Space Launch System (SLS), Orion, Commercial Crew Program (CCP), Launch Services Program (LSP), Center Managed Operations (CMO), and Research and Technology Development (R&TD). The laboratories have a suite of characterization equipment and the FIB/SEM dual system would further enhance the ability to provide fast-turnaround, highly-critical laboratory results to all KSC programs. It is intended that the FIB/SEM would allow for imaging and cross sectioning samples in-situ (within the chamber during one session) which would reduce the current sample preparation, handling, and analysis time from days to hours, thus providing relevant results back to the customers much faster.

Due to the nature of the work in NE-L, the FIB/SEM system needs to be very versatile in accommodating various size samples because the system will be used for large failed parts as well as high-resolution ion milling and imaging to determine the subsurface features of a part at the micron-scale. Several FIB/SEM systems were created specifically to service the semiconductor industry and are designed to fit flat samples such as a silicon wafers in the chamber, however, systems that can only accommodate flat samples are not suitable for KSC requirements and to support all potential samples that are submitted to the labs for characterization. The KSC team decided that the best system would have the following:

• Allow for imaging both in vacuum for conductive samples and in variable pressure for non-conductive samples

• Have the largest sample accommodation available such that larger and non-flat samples, such as topographical fracture surfaces, could still fit in the chamber

• Have a wide range of stage motion in the x, y, z directions as well as full rotation and high angle tilt

• Ability to image at low magnification for sample identification

• Include an energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) elemental silicon drift detector that can perform live x-ray dot mapping for elemental and chemical identification

• Include an electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) detector for phase identification

• Have a high ion beam probe current to allow for more milling (cross sectioning) capability during one session. This capability is needed to look at features in the micron scale such as pits under coating, representative microstructures (which are usually micron-sized grains), and fast material removal, having the potential to eliminate the use of other metallographic techniques which can take hours to days to perform.

The FIB/SEM will be a capability that will be used by various directorates at KSC and CMO selected it as a great candidate for investment funding. The total allotted cost of this system is $999,098.00.

4. An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition.

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1), which is in accordance with FAR 6.302-1(b)(1)(ii); the agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by unique supplies that are available from only one or a limited number of sources or from only one or a limited number of suppliers with unique capabilities.

5. A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited.

A NASA team of microscopy experts conducted market research and thorough review of available technology. Samples were sent out to three companies that were down-selected from an industry of five possible vendors that can provide the FIB system. Based on the KSC laboratories’ needs, virtual demonstrations were requested to test capabilities of other similar systems. The team agreed that the S8000G by TESCAN was able to provide the largest chamber size with the widest envelope of stage movement in x and y, and can accommodate a maximum specimen height of 90 millimeter (mm) with rotation and 132 mm without rotation. One important feature for the NASA labs is to be able to image within the SEM at low magnifications when performing fracture analysis. The TESCAN system has the wide field optics feature which allow samples to be imaged as low as 1X magnification, a feature unique to TESCAN. The S8000G can also provide full imaging of a complete 12” diameter sample at 0 degree tilt, meaning full range of motion is available to image all parts of a 12” diameter sample. The TESCAN system provides additional flexibility with its variable pressure mode up to 500 Pa for imaging non-conductive samples, ion beam probe currents to 100 nA for more milling capability, and standard two in-beam and four in-chamber detectors (multidetector, axial detector, E-T detector and retractable backscatter detector). Reviewing other available technology, the NASA team found that not all systems had variable pressure, and the 100nA ion beam probe current was the highest available for a Gallium system which will allow for more material milling at one time. Other companies had a maximum 65 nA beam current, so the TESCAN system correlates to much higher milling capability and shorter milling time for rough milling. The TESCAN unit will also include the EDS and EBSD detectors from Oxford. The NASA NE-L team has training and experience in using the Oxford detectors and the software interfaces. The commonality will allow for a quick learning curve to use the new system and current desk licenses for data analysis can still be used. TESCAN is the only vendor that can provide the required system that meets the Agency’s requirements.

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 FAR subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under FAR 5.202 applies.

TESCAN is the sole distributor of the S8000G variable pressure Gallium-source FIB/SEM with Oxford EDS and EBSD detectors. No other vendor has the capability to meet the Agency’s requirements.

7. A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

Market research shows that this type of acquisition has been purchased before by other Government Agencies, for the same or similar requirements. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404(b) by the Contract Specialist to determine that the price will be fair and reasonable to the Government.

8. A description of the market research conducted and the results or a statement of the reason market research was not conducted.

Market research has been performed in accordance with (IAW) FAR 10.001(a)(2)(ii) Policy and FAR 10.002(b)(2)(v) Procedures. Market research concludes that there is only one company that offers the S8000G variable pressure Gallium-source FIB/SEM with Oxford EDS and EBSD detectors, which is required to meet the Agency’s need. The number of vendors available for dual beam systems is limited and the companies that were researched were Carl Zeiss, JEOL, Hitachi, TESCAN and Thermo Scientific. From online searches and talking to SMEs, the KSC team asked for quotes and virtual demonstrations from Hitachi, TESCAN and Thermo Scientific. The same type of metallic sample was sent to the three companies and each company conducted a three- to four-hour virtual demonstration to a KSC team of 8 to 10 microscopists. Detailed notes were taken of all vendors and a comparison matrix was created to determine the adequate procurement. When all the details were analyzed, the team determined that TESCAN had unique physical capabilities that the other vendors could not match, namely the physical size of the chamber and the milling capability.

Because of the use of the SEM/FIB for failure investigations of components of various sizes, geometries, and material types, the other systems were not able to meet the NASA requirements for versatility.

9. Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition.

TESCAN offers the only system that is capable of providing the largest chamber size with the widest envelope of stage movement and sample height accommodation. This system has 130 mm stage movement in x and y, and it can accommodate a maximum specimen height of 90 mm with rotation and 132 mm without rotation. The TESCAN full magnification mode is from 1X to 2,000,000X range. No other system reviewed by NASA offered such a wide range.

10. A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

N/A

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.

Market research will continue to be conducted to determine if any other vendors have the capability to meet NASA KSC’s future requirements.

Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition for TESCAN S8000G Electron Microscope

Technical Officer: I certify that the supporting data presented in this justification are accurate and complete.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx M. Clara Wright Date Supervisory Materials Engineer

Contracting Officer: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lisa Morales Date Contracting Officer xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx CONCURRENCE: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Michael S. McCarty Date Procurement Officer xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx APPROVED: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Kelvin Manning Date Center Competition Advocate