BNJ_Redacted.pdf

PDF 286 KB Posted

Attached to
Rockwell Collins Radios
Solicitation number
N6426725Q4116
Issued by

About this file

This is a Brand Name/Sole Source Justification (SAM) document for Rockwell Collins radio equipment. The procurement involves eight specific radio and communication components, including fixed site VHF-UHF radio transceivers, slide kits, remote control units, desk top mounts, audio connector kits, CD-ROM remote controls, handsets, and antenna kits. All items are exclusively from Rockwell Collins and are intended to be direct replacements for existing equipment, with justification based on compatibility, system reliability, and avoiding potential delays or duplicative costs associated with alternative manufacturers.

The document indicates this is an all-or-none requirement for the Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command, with the procurement justified under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 13.106-1(b)(ii) for a particular brand-name item. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane Operation (NSWCCO) has noted no immediate plans to compete future contracts for these types of supplies/services, but will assess competition feasibility if another potential source emerges. The justification emphasizes that the current system components have completed developmental testing, low-rate initial production, and are proven reliable in their current configuration.

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

2 | 7

REV 11-2023

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 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.

3 | 7 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.

. All components of the WISS have been through DT&E and LRIP and they have found to be compliant with their respective KPPs and KSAs.

EOC Comms has already been through all the necessary milestones to be in FRP.

Each component has already been tested and verified in the DT&E. The entire system has already proven to be reliable in its� current state with its� current components in LRIP.

4 | 7 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 beli

CUSTOMER:

Name, Title, Code Phone No. Date

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:

For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 3(f) and 4(b) NSWCCO has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the types of supplies/services covered by this document.

If another potential source emerges, NSWCCO will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .