CD492-_Redacted.pdf

FORM CD-492 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

(REV. )

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

I recommend that the Department of Commerce negotiate only with

(Proposed Contractor(s)) for

(Description of Supplies or Services)

Requisition No. Cost Estimate $ (Include basic contract period and all options or total systems life costs)

Requesting Activity Contracting Activity

CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

I certify that the attached narrative justification is accurate and contains complete data necessary to support the recommendation for other than full and open competition.

The requisitioner further certifies that the attached narrative justification verifies the Government's minimum needs or schedule requirements and any rationale used to justify other than full and open competition procedures.

Requisitioner (Name and Title) Signature Phone No. Date

Use of this form is optional when: the justification contains all information required by FAR 6.303-2, is certified by the requisitioner and contracting officer and is approved at the appropriate levels.

Before requesting this acquisition, state the statutory authority for conducting this acquisition under "other than full and open competition" procedures in the following blank (use only one statutory authority). Also provide a narrative justification to this form. In accordance with FAR Subpart 6.3, the narrative justification must include the facts necessary to reasonably and legitimately lead to the use of the specific authority for other than full and open competition; including adequate information on the nature and/or description of the action being approved and a description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency's needs.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

41 USC ( )(1) - Only one responsible source

The supplies or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

41 USC )(2) - Unusual & compelling urgency The agency's need for the supplies or services is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals. (NOTE: This authority will not be approved if it is determined that the urgency is due to a lack of advance planning by the requiring activity. Solicitation from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances is required.)

41 USC ( )(3) - Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services

41 USC )(4) - International agreement The terms of an international agreement or a treaty between the United States and a foreign government or international organization, or the written directions of a foreign government reimbursing the agency for the cost of the acquisition of the supplies or services for such government, have the effect of requiring the use of procedures other then competitive procedures.

41 USC ( )(5) - Authorized or required by statute A statute expressly authorizes or requires that the acquisition be made through another agency or from a specified source, or the agency's need is for a brand-name commercial item for authorized resale.

41 USC ( )(6) - National security The disclosure of the agency's needs would compromise the national security unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals.

41 USC )(7) - Public interest The agency head (Secretary of Commerce) determines that it is not in the public interest to use full and open competition in the particular acquisition concerned, and notifies Congress in writing of such determination not less than 30 days before award of the contract.

MKS Instruments and its resellers

CHIPS R&D: Residual Gas Analyzers for Beamline 1 GPCN 2.11-LP03 (685/Steven Grantham_Pml)

NB305000-26-02504

CHIPS R&D: PML OAAM AMD

(303)497-3456 2024-09-24 16:53:48

41 USC 3304(a)(1) Only one responsible s

APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS

Phone No. Date ting - Not exceeding $ 0,000:

Title Phone No. Date

Advocate - Over $ ,000 but not exceeding $ million:

Title gnature Phone No. Date

- Over $ million:

Title Signature Date

NOTE: Use the total cost estimate specified on the front of this document in determining the necessary approvals. Each review must be preceded by lower level approval(s), e.g., over $ million all approvals are required.

09/02/2026

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Sensor Science Division, requires Residual Gas Analyzers (RGAs) for use at the SURF III synchrotron radiation facility. Based on the Government’s technical, operational, and interoperability requirements, the MKS RGA has been determined to be essential to the requirement. Accordingly, restricting competition to the MKS brand is justified based on the following considerations.

The SURF III facility has an established installed base of MKS RGAs, and facility personnel possess extensive experience operating, maintaining, and troubleshooting these systems. Continuing to use the MKS platform provides direct interoperability with the existing SURF III vacuum-monitoring infrastructure and allows the Government to leverage existing spare units, components, maintenance practices, and technical expertise. Introducing a different RGA platform would require additional integration and validation and could result in increased costs, implementation time, training requirements, maintenance burdens, and technical risk. Maintaining the existing MKS platform minimizes these risks and supports continuity with the facility’s established RGA infrastructure.

Based on the requiring activity’s operational experience and technical evaluation, the MKS RGA provides the required mass range, sensitivity, and overall performance necessary for the SURF III application. The requiring activity determined that alternative RGA brands would not provide the same level of compatibility and interoperability with the existing SURF III infrastructure without requiring additional integration and introducing associated technical and performance risks.

SURF III personnel evaluated multiple commercially available RGA brands to determine whether alternative products could satisfy the Government’s technical and operational requirements. Based on the evaluation and the facility’s extensive operational experience with MKS systems, the MKS RGA was determined to provide the required mass range, sensitivity, and performance for the intended application.

The MKS RGA was also determined to represent the lowest-cost solution among the alternatives considered when the associated integration, training, maintenance, and implementation considerations were taken into account. No alternative brand was identified that could satisfy the Government’s requirements while providing the same level of interoperability with the existing SURF III RGA infrastructure without introducing additional cost, integration, or performance risks.

Based on the technical evaluation, operational requirements, existing MKS infrastructure, and market research conducted by the requiring activity, the MKS RGA is determined to be essential to the Government’s requirements. Accordingly, restricting competition to the MKS brand is justified because the identified technical and interoperability requirements cannot be satisfied by an alternative brand without introducing unacceptable additional integration, cost, or performance risks.

The acquisition should therefore be conducted as a Brand Name Only requirement for the MKS RGA, consistent with the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements governing brand-name restrictions.