12-00620_J A_Redacted.pdf

or selected item drawing as defined by the current version ASME Y14.100, Engineering Drawing and Related Documentation Practices. Suitable technical data, Government data rights, or manufacturing knowledge is not available to permit manufacturing by any other sources. Although, by ASME Y14.100 definition, altered and selected items shall have an adequate technical data package, data review discloses that required data and data rights are not in Government possession and cannot be economically obtained. Delivery schedule will be 8ea.

per month commencing 90 days after contract award.

IV. STATUTORY AUTHORITY PERMITTING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

10 USC 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2), only one or a limited number of responsible sources and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

V. DEMONSTRATION THAT THE CONTRACTOR’S UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS OR NATURE OF

THE ACQUISITION REQUIRES THE USE OF THE AUTHORITY CITED ABOVE

This agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by the unique supplies or services available from only the above cited qualified source that possesses unique capabilities demonstrated as follows:

Research identified BAE Systems (CAGE 81413) and Herley Industries (CAGE 32187) as the only qualified sources. Due to the complex nature of the device, the low usage rate, and the lack of a government owned production level drawing package, there are no commercial vendors for this product. The only sources of procurement are the original manufacturer of this subassembly, BAE Systems (CAGE 81413), and its qualified supplier, Herley Industries (CAGE 32187), as specified in the BAE source control drawing. The operating characteristics for the product listed above are contained in a BAE-owned source control drawing as listed in performance requirements above. The source control drawing only lists the operating characteristics of the device and does not contain any data related to the manufacture or repair of the item. The drawing also does not list any internal components of the device. Therefore, the government does not possess a complete engineering data package that would enable a new vendor to successfully build to print for this item. The government only owns the Technical Requirements Documents (TRDs) for the device and does not own the program data for the programmable devices located on the board. Given this fact, the Program office could submit an appropriate budgetary request for Research & Development project funds on this item for inclusion in the next available budget call. Once funded, an interested company could attempt to produce a similar assembly. To qualify this new assembly will take approximately 3 years (not including contracting lead time) from receipt of funding. The new source would be required to supply as a minimum: functional block diagrams, outline drawings including reference designators, schematic diagrams (electrical, mechanical and electro-mechanical), Preferred Parts Selection List (PPSL), Non-Standard Parts List, Detailed Troubleshooting & Fault Diagnostic Procedures, Detailed Repair Procedures, Special Materials & Process Guide, Identification of Special Tooling, Environmental Qualification Procedures, Acceptance Test Procedures, Special Test Equipment requirements, Obsolete parts and identification of alternatives or requisite redesigns, and the means to validate all of the above. This will take a vendor approximately two years to accomplish given the historical data on similar projects. An additional year will be required for the government to approve the source and begin procurement of the item. Based on previous engineering efforts to qualify new sources, the overall costs would be greater than $5,000,000. It would be uneconomical for the government to qualify a new source since the ALR-56M is still in production.

VI. DESCRIPTION OF EFFORTS MADE TO ENSURE THAT OFFERS ARE SOLICITED FROM AS

MANY POTENTIAL SOURCES AS DEEMED PRACTICABLE

This requirement will be synopsized on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web page as required by FAR 5.201. Large and small businesses having an interest in subcontracting may be identified through synopsis.

The cognizant Government contracting office will direct the interested party to contact the approved sources for possible subcontracting opportunities.

VII. DETERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER THAT THE ANTICIPATED COST TO

THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE FAIR AND REASONABLE

At the time of the writing of this J&A, the Government is currently contacting BAE to determine if they are indeed going to propose independently of Herley. If this is the case, Adequate Price Competition (APC) will determine the prices fair and reasonable. However, if it is determined that APC will not be achieved through receipt of independent, competitive proposals from both companies, then the anticipated costs to the Government will be determined fair and reasonable IAW FAR 15.403-4, and the contractor will be required to provide certified cost and pricing data to be used in supporting the Government’s evaluation of the proposed cost. The proposed skill mix of labor, labor hours, types and quantities of material, other direct costs, and direct and indirect rates will be negotiated by the Government based on recommendations from the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and expert technical personnel supporting the program. The contract price will be negotiated in accordance with the procedures in FAR Part 15 ensuring the ultimate cost to the Government is fair and reasonable.

VIII. DESCRIPTION OF THE MARKET RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND THE RESULTS, OR A

STATEMENT OF THE REASONS MARKET RESEARCH WAS NOT CONDUCTED

Market research was conducted by the ALR-56M engineering staff. Engineering is actively engaged in component product sustainment, staying current with industry developments by reviewing industry reports, trends and product developments, talking with field personnel, reviewing applicable company portfolios on a regular basis, and maintaining an active dialog with the sustainment parts suppliers. Review of several industry-wide searches using the Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE) recommended component search engines, which were utilized in searching for other qualified searches. Also, after a review of Government proprietary component product database (Haystack) and JEDMICS, current contracting activity and interaction with the Subject Matter Expert and Lead System Engineer, it was determined that BAE Systems (CAGE 81413) and Herley Industries (CAGE 32187) are the only sources that possess the knowledge and capabilities to manufacture this end item.

It was also determined that reverse engineering would be uneconomical for the government. Even though a reverse engineering effort could be started for the end item for acquisition, the time line for such an effort would be at least three (3) years based upon previous experience with this type of item. Two (2) years would be necessary for drawing creation, prototype manufacture, fit-check, environmental testing and flight test. One (1) additional year would be required for Change Control Board (CCB) approval, System Program Office (SPO) approval, Technical Order (TO) updates, federal stock listing and cataloging actions. Costs would most likely be >$5,000,000 for the first two (2) prototypes and additional cost if full data packages were purchased. These assumptions do not include the time required to request funding through the POM process and the possibilities for receiving a declination of funding requested. The qualifying costs are based off of similar efforts that engineering has accomplished to qualify new vendors. Air Force Material Command is no longer approving engineering projects for reverse engineering when there is already a valid and responsible source, so the requirement would have to be submitted for the POM. It would never be funded due to low priority.

Companies in the business of supplying components such as the one discussed here have opted not to incur the enormous cost of taking on a design and qualification process such as would be required to produce the above mentioned component. The enormous cost and the small number of items purchased per period have historically driven away any competition of the product. The fact that this device was designed for this specific military application alone also limits competition. In addition, this item was previously listed as a reparable asset. The 638 SCMG/PKB office solicited Herley for repair of this asset in November 2011 and Herley stated that it was cheaper to procure this item than repair. The AFSC Program Office took an action and made the item a consumable. Since the item was previously listed as a reparable, the result was small spare procurement efforts. In an email dated 1 March 2013, the Government contacted Herley and asked the company if they would sell the data necessary to allow the Government to produce this item or procure it using Full and Open Competition procedures. In a response dated 4 March 2013, Herley stated that they will not sell the data.

IX. ANY OTHER FACTS SUPPORTING THE USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN

COMPETITION

The Government has determined that reverse engineering is cost prohibitive due to the fact the ALR-56M is still in production. It was also determined to be cost prohibitive after examining previous engineering projects that resulted in qualifying a new source. These projects ranged from $5 million to $21 million. Also, the funding vehicle to qualify new sources no longer exists if there is current valid source. See Section V. In an email dated 8 February 2013, BAE stated to the Government Program Manager that in order to procure the parts from a new manufacturer, the new supplier would need to develop this unique part in accordance with all of the requirements of the source control drawing. In addition, qualify it to the test requirements of the drawing. The new supplier’s parts would need to be thoroughly tested in a 56M system to ensure full compatibility before BAE will add this alternate source to the drawing. There is a significant amount of NRE that would be required to accomplish this. Therefore, BAE recommends a direct buy from Herley.

X. LIST OF SOURCES, IF ANY, THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE ACQUISITION

See Section VI above.

XI. A STATEMENT OF THE ACTIONS, IF ANY, THE AGENCY MAY TAKE TO REMOVE OR

OVERCOME ANY BARRIERS TO COMPETITION BEFORE MAKING SUBSEQUENT ACQUISITIONS

FOR THE SUPPLIES

The AFSC Program Office will engage with the OEM and its approved source to pursue other vendors that could possibly manufacture this asset. Since the system is still in production, BAE continues to qualify new vendors to decrease costs for the United States Government. In an email dated 1 March 2013, the Government contacted Herley, the manufacturer of the item, and asked the company if they would sell the data necessary to allow the Government to produce this item or procure it using Full and Open Competition procedures. In a response dated 4 March 2013, Herley stated that they will not sell the data.

XII. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION

The contracting officer’s signature on the Coordination and Approval Document evidences that the contracting officer has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of the contracting officer’s knowledge and belief (FAR 6.303-2(b)(12)).

XIII. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS PERSONNEL’S CERTIFICATION

As evidenced by their signatures on the Coordination and Approval Document, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein, which is their responsibility, is both accurate and complete (FAR 6.303-2(c)).