REDACTED_J A.pdf

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 1

CLASS JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION FOR

RAYTHEON ENTERPRISE-WIDE STRATEGIC CORPORATE CONTRACTS

OTHER CONTRACTING

I. CONTRACTING ACTIVITY

This Class Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition supports requirements generated for the Air Force Sustainment Center (AFSC) and all subordinate units. The contracting activity for this requirement is the AFSC/PZABA, Robins AFB, GA 31098. The purchase request number supporting this contract action is FD2060-12-30025.

II. NATURE AND/OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION BEING PROCESSED

This contract action establishes an “Enterprise Wide” strategic corporate contract to support continuing AFSC requirements to the Raytheon Company. This effort consolidates support included in the Raytheon “All Others” corporate contract, F09603-02-D-0101, and the Raytheon “Goleta” corporate contract, FA8523-04-D-0001 into two individual 5-year corporate contracts;

one contract for commercial items and one contract for non-commercial items. Each contract supports continuing requirements and provides long-term sustainment coverage of attached NSNs until the retirement of system(s) or the end of contract performance period is realized.

Long term strategic corporate contracts foster comprehensive supplier relationships, provide certainty to the supply chain, and enable efficiencies in the delivery of materials, products, and services that support the warfighter. Estimated award of this effort is November 2014 with a contract ordering period from November 2014 through 31 March 2020.

Due to the requirements of this contracting action falling under both FAR Part 12 and FAR Part 15, this Class Justification & Approval (J&A) supports two individual 5-year corporate contracts, one under FAR Part 12 and one under FAR Part 15. This J&A provides authority to acquire repairs, spares/buys, and engineering services for both efforts using Other Than Full and Open Competition as prescribed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

Each contract will be used to acquire repairs, spares/buys, and engineering services where the supplier is the only responsible source, to support sustainment for various weapon systems, platforms, Shop Replacement Units (SRUs), Line Replacement Units (LRUs), and Test Replacement Units (TRUs). Each contract shall consist of five (5) one-year ordering periods to support National Stock Numbers (NSNs) identified as a sole source requirement IAW FAR 6.302-

1. The requirement is for sustainment of repairs, spares/buys, and engineering services where the supplier is the only responsible source to support equipment utilized on but not limited to Department of Defense agencies and Foreign Military Sales supported by the USAF. The FAR Part 15 contract will be predominantly Firm Fixed Price (FFP) with limited Cost Reimbursement (CR) and Time and Material (T&M) efforts; the FAR Part 12 contract will solely utilize a FFP arrangement. Both contracts will be awarded to:

Raytheon Company 2201 El Segundo Blvd.

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 2

El Segundo, CA 90245

CAGE: 4C2N0

Large Business

The primary corporate contract source address/CAGE code is identified above. CAGE codes associated with work to be completed under these contracts are identified in attachment A.

To allow maximum flexibility and efficiency, these two indefinite delivery (ID) contracts will utilize decentralized ordering with the overall contract management remaining under the 638th Supply Chain Management Group (SCMG). An Indefinite Delivery contract provides for filling all actual purchase requirements of designated Government activities for supplies or services during a specified contract period, with deliveries or performance to be scheduled by placing orders with the contractor for the sole source requirements listed in the scope and documentation of this effort. Additional ceiling has been included in the J&A value to allow for the possible addition of repairs, spares/buys, or engineering services that screening has shown to be sole source to Raytheon. This additional ceiling allows the two contracts to remain flexible to new developing systems or changes to existing support structures not contemplated at this time and allows for the reduction of Administrative Lead Time (ALT) required for obtaining individual contract coverage. Repairs, spares/buys, and engineering services will be incorporated as an amendment to the J&A. Any J&A amendment for these additions will be processed through the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), coordinated through the Small Business Office, and approved by the local AFSC Competition Advocate (CA) who will validate the effort meets the sole source requirements established in this J&A prior to inclusion in the contract. Attachments D, E, or F shall be utilized for these amendments and for documenting the process for approval by the local Competition Advocate. Any repairs, spares/buys, or engineering services currently approved and cited on this contract can be subjected to competition regardless of this J&A.

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUPPLIES/SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE AGENCY’S NEEDS

A. This effort provides services where Raytheon Company is the only responsible source, to support the sustainment of SRUs, LRUs and TRUs on various weapon systems and platforms that are sole source to Raytheon. Under this enterprise effort, Raytheon will provide supplies and services of various items supported by the AFSC sustainment community.

Other agencies may also use this corporate contract under the decentralized ordering guidelines as set forth in the Raytheon Corporate Contract User’s Guide. Raytheon Company shall provide all labor, services, facilities and replacement parts necessary to return unserviceable Government SRU, LRU, and TRU assets to “serviceable” condition. The total estimated cost for all items will be expressed in terms of Best Estimated Quantities (BEQs) including all ordering periods.

B. This requirement provides sustainment support for the NSNs identified in attachments B and C through repairs, spares/buys, and engineering services where the supplier is the only responsible source, related to the AN/ALQ-184; AAQ-13 and -14; ALQ-161; AN/APG-63, -70, and -82; APQ-122; AN/GPN-22 and TPN-25; ALQ-172; APX-119 and -114; LAU-118A(V)4/A;

ARC-187 and other systems and components that are sole source to Raytheon Company.

Attachment G “NSN List with Associated System(s)” identifies the current NSNs and their

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 3 associated systems. The estimated contract amounts are shown in the following two tables.

The repair and spares/buys estimates were derived from forecasts in D200 computations with an additional 10% of the average number of repairs multiplied by the average cost of each repair for each year to allow for unknown demands requiring inclusion. Additional ceiling has been included for known requirements for repairs and spares/buys which could not provide sole source documentation at the time of contract development but were in process.

The principal scope and level for this corporate contract is for the manufacture of spares/buys and repair services associated with NSNs listed on the contract. An engineering service CLIN has been included to provide a vehicle for acquiring technical support.

Engineering service efforts that are considered under this contract will pertain to an NSN already on the contract. Engineering services described in this J&A document will be processed through individual task orders. The scope of the engineering service will be limited to cost effective, non-developmental item (NDI) solutions for operation, maintenance, and support of systems and components supporting NSNs sole source to Raytheon on the basic contract. Each contemplated individual engineering services task order that is issued against the basic contract must be supported by its own sole source documentation and documented at the task order level. Each individual task/delivery order that is issued against the basic contract will identify the estimated delivery dates/periods of performance. Engineering services estimates are based on historical information and estimated future workload requirements that directly support the NSNs identified herein.

Market research must be conducted to support each engineering services task order included within the scope of this J&A. An amended “Justification for Sole Source Engineering Services” (Attachment F) must be processed and approved by the Competition Advocate for each engineering services task order. These task orders will be accomplished within the ceiling of this J&A.

The following is the total estimated requirement to be supported by the Raytheon Company under FAR Part 15. Individual work to be completed under this section is identified in attachment B “FAR Part 15 Requirements”.

Dollars in Millions

FY15

Ordering Period 1

FY16

Ordering Period 2

FY17

Ordering Period 3

FY18

Ordering Period 4

FY19

Ordering Period 5

Totals

Repairs Spares Eng. Services Totals

FAR PART 15 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONTRACT VALUE: $235,381,299.

C. The following is the total estimated requirement to be supported by the Raytheon Company under FAR Part 12. Individual work to be completed under this section is identified in attachment C “FAR Part 12 Requirements”.

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 4

Dollars In Millions

Ordering Period 1

Ordering Period 2

Ordering Period 3

Ordering Period 4

Ordering Period 5 Total

Repairs

FAR PART 12 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONTRACT VALUE: $50,361,078.

D. The total estimate for all actions contemplated under FAR Part 12 and FAR Part 15, including all ordering periods, is $285,742,377. Predominately CSAG fund appropriations will be used for these efforts. Other funding types will be used as appropriate.

IV. STATUTORY AUTHORITY PERMITTING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

10 USC 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, only one responsible source and no other 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 (APPLICABILITY OF

AUTHORITY)

The agency’s minimum needs can only be satisfied by the unique supplies or services available from the above cited source. The above cited source possesses unique capabilities demonstrated by the following paragraphs.

Unacceptable Delays

A. Raytheon is currently supporting the supplies/services identified in section III through two corporate contracts awarded under authority 10 USC 2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1: F09603-02-D-0101, awarded 30 June 2003 and expired for ordering 10 March 2013 (deliveries continue until completed), and FA8523-04-D-0001 awarded 27 February 2004 and expiring 26 February 2014. The current contracts provide support for multiple organizations. This contracting action is to cover the entire Air Force Sustainment Center for multiple distinct sustainment activities. The individual paragraphs below provide the applicability of authority. These acquisitions will be sole source, follow-on contracts for continued support.

B. Raytheon is the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for these NSNs and is the only source capable of providing the supplies and services identified in section III for the specific NSNs identified in attachments B and C that meet the necessary minimum requirement.

Raytheon is the only source that has the expertise, facilities, equipment, and repair data to repair, build spares, and provide engineering resolution for obsolescence issues in support of NSNs covered via this contract. Raytheon is the only source that can provide the highly specialized depot or technical expertise necessary for repairs. This expertise includes years of engineering design, repair, test, and evaluation of multiple versions and upgrades. This includes expertise for the highly specialized production and repair of technically complex items, as well as performance of engineering services. Many of the aforementioned processes involve use of highly specialized test equipment as well as facilities to house this equipment.

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 5

C. All NSNs included or to be included in this effort either has or will have an AFMC Form 761 Screening Analysis Worksheet (SAW) and/or AFMC Form 762 Contract Repair SAW (CRSAW) sheet which states an Acquisition Method Code (AMC) and Acquisition Method Suffix Code (AMSC) or Repair Method Code (RMC) and Repair Method Suffix Code (RMSC) that indicate a sole source requirement to Raytheon Company exists. AFMC Form’s 761 and 762 were accomplished for each NSN by the cognizant engineer . NSNs were determined to be sole source to Raytheon Company and included in this contract for a variety of reasons.

Raytheon Company is the only company with the proprietary production and/or repair data, technical expertise, facilities, and equipment to satisfy the Government’s requirements for continued sustainment of the specific NSNs identified in attachments B and C. The overwhelming reason for sole source determination was based on Raytheon Company owning the proprietary repair and/or production data necessary to repair and/or build new spares.

D. The Government does not have adequate technical data/drawings to procure spares and repairs of items for the systems listed in attachments B, C and G. These LRU’s are components of fifteen (15) different systems that were developed during the 1970s and 1980s. At the time of system development and production, the Government did not procure data on some items; on others, the data procured was mostly Level I drawings and Illustrated Parts Breakdowns which do not provide enough detail for competition. Since the technical data is insufficient to allow for competition, the screener and/or engineer coded each SAW based on the data available in the Government’s repositories. Raytheon was determined to be the only source available to build or repair the items covered by this J&A.

The items referenced in this J&A are categorized as follows: a) highly technical requirements with limited data available for other companies to perform the repairs, b) no data available for other companies to perform repairs, c) technically complex requirements that would require Raytheon to validate performance/integration and other companies would require Raytheon support to develop comprehensive reverse engineering technical data required to build and/or repair an item, or d) low usage items for which reverse engineering an item would not be a cost effective means to obtain competition. All items included in this corporate contract J&A are required to support warfighter demand and to keep Air Force aircraft operational. The Government contacted Raytheon Company in February 2012 regarding the Government’s interest in procuring data packages to compete the purchase or repair of the NSNs listed in attachment G. While Raytheon initially indicated some willingness to at least discuss selling some degree of data rights for selected NSNs, they subsequently advised that they were not interested in relinquishing any rights for covered items. Since the data package is not for sale, it is not possible to provide a package that would be suitable for competition or for qualification testing of an alternative part.

There are no Government approved depot-level Technical Orders releasable to Department of Defense (DoD) contractors. Raytheon owns special test equipment that is essential for troubleshooting and testing of applicable assets that has not been procured by the Government to troubleshoot end items at the subassembly level. The drawing package for test stations/equipment is owned by Raytheon . Highly technical skills, using the relevant technical data, are also required in order to satisfactorily service and maintain the current

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 6 system SRUs, LRUs and TRUs. No opportunities for sole source to small or disadvantaged businesses were identified for specified actions. Regardless, opportunities could exist for Raytheon to partner with available small business sources for subcontracting in support of the Government’s socio-economic goals, rather than issuing separate individual contracts.

E. Even if the Government possessed a technical data package suitable for competition, there would be unacceptable delays of six (6) to seven (7) years in fulfilling the U.S. Government’s sustainment requirements for aircraft platforms or test stations supporting operational missions. Without serviceable systems, DOD equipment and personnel will be placed at greater risk of catastrophic damage or injury. Failure to execute these missions inhibit or prevent the achievement of critical military objectives around the world. WR-ALC lead engineers, using their expertise/experience and requirements called out in AFMCI 21-101, section 1.2.3 and 10 USC 2464, estimate the time needed to establish initial repair capability at four (4) years. The estimated timeline is based upon one (1) year for securing and verifying repair data and three (3) years to secure the proper test equipment, develop test program sets (TPS), and prepare for a competitive repair contract solicitation. The Common Electronics Commodity Council (CECC) integrated master schedule template for large dollar contracting activities prescribes a minimum of two (2) years from a requirements identification to contract award. Therefore, non-execution of a repair requirement with the qualified repair source (Raytheon Company) would result in unacceptable delays, totaling six (6) to seven (7) years, in meeting USAF and FMS user requirements. The APX 119 Program Office estimates reverse engineering of APX-119 NSNs would take eight (8) or more years with an additional four (4) years to establish a depot capability. The depot capabilities required to support the AN/APX-119 system are representative of all of the systems covered by this justification. A similar analysis was conducted for the other systems/components as they were transitioned from the production phase of their life cycle to the sustainment phase.

Cost Duplication

F. There are no other qualified companies currently available to provide the necessary supplies and services for the NSNs listed in attachments B, C and G. For each NSN, Raytheon is the only company that has the knowledge, data, test equipment, facilities, and trained technicians to build and/or repair each item. Raytheon has informed the Government that they are unwilling to sell the data necessary for competition. Additionally, reverse engineering is a high risk/cost option and not a feasible option at this time due to the complexity of each system covered by this J&A.

One example we highlight is the complexity of the APX-119 System. The APX 119 Program Office estimates reverse engineering of APX-119 NSNs would cost approximately $20-$30M each. Purchasing repair data and/or establishing organic capability to compete the repair requirements would involve duplicating costs already expended with Raytheon for test equipment, facilities, and repair technician training. At present, procurement of repair data to compete for repair requirements would be of limited value, since new SRUs and LRUs continue to be fielded to achieve greater capability and reliability. Thus, buying repair data for currently fielded LRUs would result in a situation where the procured data would quickly become outdated. Therefore, the evolutionary development schedule (planned system

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 7 upgrades) precludes recouping repair data costs through competition since the return on investment period is short for many of the LRUs. Therefore, using Government supplied repair data to compete the repair requirements would be a duplication of costs already incurred with Raytheon, and the development of the core capability would not present the typical cost savings associated with competition. The result would be higher repair costs for the user which would impact the operational availability of the fielded systems. The depot capabilities required to support the AN/APX-119 system are representative of all of the systems covered by this justification. A similar analysis was conducted for the other systems/components as they were transitioned from the production phase of their life cycle to the sustainment phase.

A second example is based on inputs from the F-15 System Program Office. The projected life of the F-15 AN/APG-63 V(0) radar system is through FY2025. This system is utilized on the F-15C/D aircraft, however, more than half of these aircraft have retired with many more expected in the future. This leaves a minimal number of APG-63 V(0) systems to support.

The projected life of the F-15 AN/APG-70 radar system is through FY2030. However, the AN/APG-82 radar system is currently in flight testing and is scheduled to start fielding in 2013 to replace the obsolete AN/APG-70 radar system. The APG-82 fielding is expected to take between 10 and 14 years. This will result in fewer and fewer APG-70 radars requiring sustainment. Based on the projected life of both F-15 radar systems (imminent draw-down/retirement), along with the excessive costs, schedules, and risks associated with the Government trying to set up an organic depot repair or competition, acquisition of the technical data would not be beneficial to the Government as a positive return on investment would never be realized nor would a savings in cost be incurred. The AN/APG- 63 and -70 are representative of all of the systems covered by this justification in that they will continue to be sustained for their remaining life cycle. During the screening process, the remaining life cycle of each NSN is considered to determine the economic feasibility of enhancing its competitive status. Changes to the forecast life and future usage are considered during subsequent re-screening to assess the impact of extensions or increases in future use.

Raytheon is the only qualified source that has capability of providing the repair, spares/buy, and engineering services described in attachments B, C and G that will satisfy agency requirements without the U.S. Air Force experiencing substantial duplication of costs. The duplicated cost could not be recovered through competition and would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling requirements. Based on Raytheons response to the Government request to procure technical data, competition is not possible at this time.

While competition is generally expected to reduce cost, there must be sufficient future activity (e.g. spares or repairs procured) to recover the investment (e.g. data acquisition costs, reverse engineering cost, qualification testing, etc.).

AFMC Forms 761s/762s screening documentation shows the lack of Government owned technical data/drawings. Screening results also reflect additional efforts to improve competitive status relative to data acquisition have been rejected by Raytheon or are not economically feasible with respect to the cost of new source qualification. The Air Force Sustainment Center believes that award to any other source would result in substantial

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 8 duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition and unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force’s requirements.

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

MANY POTENTIAL SOURCES AS DEEMED PRACTICABLE

The U.S. Government does not have the technical data required for repair and/or production of spares. This data would enable other companies to fulfill the Government's requirements, thus fostering competition. Raytheon was contacted and asked if they would sell the data to the Government. When asked to quote a price for the data, Raytheon responded that the data was not for sale. The Government then determined, independently, whether or not other companies would be able to compete. The non-availability and/or the proprietary nature of technical data restricts competition. Raytheon's approved procedures are used for all SRU, LRU, and TRU repairs. There are no Government approved depot-level Technical Orders releasable to Department of Defense (DoD) contractors. Furthermore, Raytheon owns special test equipment that is essential for troubleshooting and testing of applicable assets and has not been procured by the Government. The drawing package for test station/equipment is owned by Raytheon. The Government currently does not own a data package suitable for publication and therefore cannot provide a data package to any potential suppliers. Since Raytheon is unwilling to sell the required data necessary to perform the required services, it is not practicable that other companies could adequately bid on/fulfill the workload requirements.

AFMC 761 Forms and 762 were used to determine the capability of supporting the repair and/or manufacture of the relevant parts. See Attachment I “Screening / Breakout Program Bullet Background Paper.” Market research has been accomplished in advance of the synopsis referenced in the next paragraph.

This requirement will be synopsized on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web page citing conditions which preclude Full & Open Competition. Sources expressing an interest as a result of the synopsis will be investigated for their capabilities to perform on this and/or future requirements. This is a pre-award synopsis of proposed contract action as required by FAR 5.201(b) in advance of issuance of the solicitation.

Other Actions: Efforts to solicit additional sources for competition of engineering services will be completed in the individual task orders associated with those services. Results of these efforts will be processed through the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), coordinated through the Small Business Office, and approved by the local AFSC Competition Advocate (CA).

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

GOVERNMENT WILL BE FAIR AND REASONABLE

This acquisition will contain both commercial (FAR Part 12) and non-commercial (FAR Part 15) items. The overall cost of this acquisition will be considered fair and reasonable to the Government.

For commercial items, in accordance with FAR Part 15.403, the CO will require the contractor to submit other than certified cost or pricing data. Price analysis or cost analysis based on

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 9

“information other than certified cost or pricing data” will be used to examine and evaluate the proposed prices to determine that the overall cost of this acquisition is considered fair and reasonable. Price analysis techniques include comparison of proposed prices to historical prices paid for a same or similar item; comparison with published price lists, offered catalog prices and prices obtained through market research for a same similar item; comparison of proposed prices with independent Government estimate; or analysis of data other than certified cost and pricing information. Negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 12.

For non-commercial items, in accordance with FAR Part 15.403-4, the contractor will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data to be used supporting the Government’s evaluation of the proposed cost. The proposed skill mix of labor, labor hours, types and quantities of material and other direct costs, and direct and indirect rates will be negotiated by the Government based on recommendations from the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), 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 accordance with FAR Part 10 and was completed in March 2013. The multi-functional team was involved in conducting and documenting the market research effort. In-depth guidance was provided by the Robins Acquisition Center of Excellence (ACE) subject matter expert (SME), as well as the Robins Small Business Office SME. The following market research techniques were used:

A. Current: The Government engineering team conducted research through review of up to date AFMC 761 forms, SAW and AFMC 762 forms, and CRSAW documents completed in accordance with AFMCI 23-113.

B. Current: The Government conducted a vendor survey; results are detailed in Attachment H “Vendor Survey.” Review of the subject NSNs procurement history was conducted to identify if the Government had previously contracted for these requirements from a company other than Raytheon. During the vendor survey, several vendors were identified and contacted. Results yielded either the vendor was a sub to the OEM, manufactured a component or sold the product line to Raytheon who is the OEM.

C. Current: 100+ searches were accomplished utilizing the SBA Quick Market Search tool.

Results of the SBA market search revealed no qualified sources other than Raytheon that could provide the services needed to support this contracting effort. None of the contacted vendors could repair or build the subject NSNs without the technical data package.

Additionally, each vendor surveyed required a production model to review before they could provide a viable quote to build or repair these items.

D. Current: Internet searches on item descriptions specific to the covered NSNs ranging from lower level components such as a circuit card, power supply, and cable assembly to more

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 10 complex assemblies such as the global positioning system, radar warning receiver, and radar transponder; these queries were performed using multiple search engines including www.thomasregister.com, www.google.com and yahoo.com. Results from these internet queries found no valid vendor or entity that could manufacture or repair the NSNs covered via this contract during the specified performance period.

E. Historical: Market research for the previous contract relied primarily on spares/repair screening results, reviews of procurement history, and interrogation of DOD data systems performed at the time a firm requirement for purchase or repair was identified. For this follow-on contract the same reviews have already been accomplished.

F. Forward-Looking: Market surveillance continues through the monitoring of technical literature, discussion with other engineers, and attendance at expos for potential repair sources/suppliers of the subject NSNs.

G. Forward-Looking: System program managers will use a Business Case Analysis to determine if procuring repair data maximizes the lifecycle sustainment related support. All life cycle sustainment decisions must conform to the most recent Depot Source of Repair (DSOR) determination.

H. Forward Looking: Additional Market Research in accordance with FAR Part 10 will be conducted for each individual engineering task order or new NSN to be associated with this effort.

The Air Force accomplishes continuous market surveillance and periodic review of the adequacy of its technical data for competition (See attachment I “Screening Breakout Program Bullet Background Paper”). The technical data for every item to be acquired or repaired is reviewed under a formal acquisition engineering process (known as the 761/762 screening process) that determines the appropriate acquisition approach in view of the specific item-unique detailed data the Air Forces possesses and its adequacy for competition. Wherever possible, items related to or part of these systems are already coded for competitive acquisition; the items to be acquired under this contract are those for which the screening processes determined that technical data is inadequate for competition. Raytheon is the only known source that can provide the items and/or services described herein. Additional Market Research, in accordance with FAR Part 10, will be conducted for each individual engineering task or new NSN to be associated with this effort.

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

None.

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

The attached Vendor Survey shows the list of companies that initially expressed interest in this requirement. However, when contacted by the Air Force with specific questions regarding their capabilities and their ability to meet the requirement, all vendors provided responses

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 11 explaining why they were no longer interested in pursuing this contract nor capable of performing it.

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 OR SERVICES REQUIRED

The systems/sub-systems for the subject NSNs are stable and mature in the sustainment lifecycle. While the current Market Research indicates a sole source environment for these NSNs, there are steps the Government will take to overcome barriers to competition for future acquisitions.

1. Review the items on this contract to identify opportunities where procurement of technical data/drawings would return a positive ROI and justify competition or performance by Government personnel,

2. Solicit for technical data/drawings or pursue third party engineering services where feasible, for a proposal to enhance the data as necessary to render it suitable for competition or performance by Government personnel,

3. Request funding to acquire technical data/drawings for competition in the appropriate fiscal cycle to yield the purchase of sufficient data packages where procurement of technical data/drawings would return a positive ROI or other benefit and justify competition or performance by Government personnel, and

4. Execute funded projects to obtain technical data/drawings.

Once the data/drawings are available, the Government will be postured to compete future requirements.

XII. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION

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

XIII. TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS PERSONNEL’S CERTIFICATION

As evidenced by representative 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(b)).

FD2060-12-30025 Page | 12

List of attachments Atch A: Raytheon CAGE Codes / Addresses (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch B: NSN Requirements, FAR Part 15 (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch C: NSN Requirements, FAR Part 12 (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch D: Amendment to J&A for Sole Source Repair (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch E: Amendment to J&A for Sole Source Spare/Buy (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch F: Amendment To J&A for Sole Source Engineering Services (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch G: NSN List with Associated System(s) (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch H: Vendor Survey (as of 1 Jul 13) Atch I: Screening / Breakout Program Bullet Background Paper (as of 15 Mar 13) Atch J: Glossary (as of 1 Jul 13)