BNJ.pdf
PDF 278 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Moog MD90 Control Load System & Coupling SW Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC24883502Q
About this file
This document is a Brand Name Justification (BNJ) related to a federal contract opportunity. The NASA Shared Services Center is recommending the sole-source purchase of the Moog MD90 Control Load System and Coupling Software to be incorporated into a flight simulator at the NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center. The justification cites the unique functional and performance requirements of this specific brand, as well as the need for prompt delivery of system documentation. The key impacts of using another brand are cited as significant schedule delays and the need for modifications to the planned simulator layout. The related federal contract opportunity (Solicitation Number 80NSSC24883502Q) seeks to acquire the Moog MD90 Control Load System and Coupling Software for this requirement.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
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
PICK ONE
Sole Source:
☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with Vendor Name only for . The total estimated cost of this effort is Enter Dollar amount and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is Date.
OR
Brand Name Justification:
☒I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate only with vendors who can provide the subject brand name from Moog Inc. for Moog MD90 Control Load System - 4MD100-6HD200-10GS- 19-ECAT+2CDB & Moog Electronic Coupling Software . The estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 26 Weeks ARO .
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.
NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) requires the purchase of the Moog MD90 Control Load System and the Coupling Software which will be incorporated into a flight simulator here at AFRC.
The simulator will be used for engineering development and flight training for the X-66 experimental aircraft. This specific brand is necessary because this unit met our requirements for size, torque/force, required drawings and documentation from the vendor and linkages needed to connect with our simulator. This project is a mutual effort between NASA and Boeing. This system was selected for it’s functional and performance requirements and for the prompt delivery of system documentation from the vendor. This is the only product that will work because it meets our unique specifications and system requirements.
2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand is used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.
If another brand was used, this would result in significant schedule delays which we are already currently behind in. Also, we would have to modify for our specific needs any new product, so it fits as well as the current system selected which would require modifications to the planned simulator layout. As well as considerable effort, time, and cost to go with another brand.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .