JOFOC FE.pdf

Rev.:4/2023

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION (JOFOC)

NISTAR In-Flight Calibration and Ground Data Processing

1. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.303-2(b)(1) – Identification of the agency and the contracting activity, and specific identification of the document as a “Justification for other than full and open competition.”

This document is a justification for other than full and open competition prepared by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center.

The procuring agency is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the contracting activity is NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD.

2. FAR 6.303-2(b)(2) – The nature and/or description of the action being approved:

This justification provides the rationale for contracting by other than full and open competition to award a sole-source contract to L-1 Standards and Technology, Inc., for the support of the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Advanced Radiometer (NISTAR) instrument in-flight operation/calibrations and ground data processing.

3. FAR 6.303-2(b)(3) – A description of the supplies or services required, to meet the

Agency’s needs (including the estimated value):

The proposed current action is for the support of the DSCOVR NISTAR instrument continued in-flight calibration, instrument health monitoring, anomaly resolution, and ground data processing. The NISTAR calibrations includes the following support work: (1) Analyze Dark Space Calibration results; (2) perform filter intercomparisons; and (3) perform receiver intercomparison. In addition, the contractor shall provide continued instrument health monitoring and provide plans for anomaly resolution. Finally, the contractor shall develop.

further refinements of the NISTAR Level 1b ground data processing algorithms. The potential period of performance is three (3) years (Base period: 12 months; Option Period 1:

12 months; and Option Period 2: 12 months). The total estimate for this work is approximately $940K for the basic period and two option years.

4. FAR 6.303-2(b)(4) – An identification of the statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition:

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition is 10 U.S.C. 3204(a) (1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, “Only one responsible source and no other supplies and services will satisfy agency requirements”.

5. FAR 6.303-2(b)(5) – A demonstration that the proposed contractor’s unique qualifications or the nature of the acquisition requires use of the authority cited:

The rationale supporting the use of 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(1), “Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements” is described below.

In accordance with FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii), for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-on contracts for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

The NISTAR instrument was originally built by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and their contractor, Ball Aerospace Technology Corporation (BATC), from 1999 to 2001, and then shelved indefinitely. NASA program directives made this an active instrument again in 2011. In over the twenty (20) years since the original build, the NISTAR instrument expertise has been acquired by L-1 Standards and Technology, Inc., which is consequently the only responsible contractor with the requisite key knowledge of the original build and test of the NISTAR instrument to meet the government’s requirements.

The company is also in sole possession of the required instrument documentation which is required for the completion of this contract. Furthermore, L-1 Standards and Technology, Inc. has successfully performed the instrument in-flight calibration and related services since 2015, under contracts 80GSFC18C0035 and 80GSFC21C0029, making them uniquely qualified based on their knowledge and experience.

Any attempt to procure these services from other sources would cause unacceptable delays and duplication of costs. According to Adam Szabo, NASA Project Scientist, an effort to compete this requirement would result in the estimated cost duplication of greater than 100% (estimated to be around 1 WYE or $200,000.00) as well as an estimated schedule slip of twelve (12) months in order for a new contractor to get up to speed. This would endanger the health of the NISTAR instrument and significantly diminish the science return of the DSCOVR mission that is already in orbit.

Regarding the technical risk related to data production quality, it's crucial to note that while the spacecraft or instrument has successfully met the official mission success criteria during its prime mission, there's a potential risk that mission success during the extended mission could be compromised. The quality of data production remains paramount for achieving the mission's objectives and ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the gathered information.

Any issues or inconsistencies in data production during the extended mission phase could lead to compromised scientific results, incorrect conclusions, or even mission failure.

Although this risk may not manifest as a single point failure mode for flight components, it still warrants attention and mitigation strategies. Ensuring the robustness and reliability of data production systems is essential for maintaining the integrity of the mission, especially during the extended mission phase. Therefore, while the spacecraft has demonstrated success in its prime mission, the potential compromise of mission success during the extended mission underscores the importance of addressing and mitigating risks associated with data production quality to maximize scientific value and mission effectiveness.

6. FAR 6.303-2(b)(6) – A description of the efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by Subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under 5.202 applies:

A notice to the Government Point of Entry (GPE) website (Sam.gov) was published on January 26, 2024, in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. This posting informed potential sources of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source contract to L-1 Standards and Technologies, Inc. The results of this synopsis are summarized in Section 10 below.

7. FAR 6.303-2(b)(7) – A determination by the contracting officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer’s signature on this document indicates that the Contracting Officer (CO) has determined that the anticipated cost to the government will be fair and reasonable.

The Contractor shall be required to submit a proposal to be evaluated and negotiated by the Government. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a proposal analysis will be performed. The proposal analysis will ensure that the final agreed-to price for the contract action is fair and reasonable. The proposed costs will be evaluated by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer to determine that the direct labor rates, direct labor hours, skill mix, other direct costs, indirect costs, and fee(s) are fair and reasonable. This may also include support from external organizations such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency, as needed.

8. FAR 6.303-2(b)(8) – Description of the market research conducted, and the results, or a statement of the reasons market research was not conducted:

Based on knowledge, experience, ongoing research on publication, and attendance at conferences, the Contracting Officer's Representative states that no other entities currently exist that can perform the technical requirements of this procurement since they require detailed knowledge of the unique flight operation, calibration, and ground data processing of this instrument. Therefore, no formal market research was done as the NISTAR instrument was originally built and designed between 1999 and 2001 by NIST and BATC. The expertise and documentation for the instrument is proprietary and unique and is in sole possession of L-1 Standards and Technology, Inc., as stated in Section 5.

9. FAR 6.303-2(b)(9) – Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition:

None.

10. FAR 6.303-2(b)(10) – A listing of the sources, if any, that expressed an interest in writing in the acquisition:

A notice of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source action was synopsized on the GPE website (Sam.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above). The synopsis was published on January 26, 2024 and expired on February 12, 2024. No responses were received at the close of the synopsis.

11. FAR 6.303-2(b)(11) – A statement of actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services required:

L-1 Standards and Technology Inc. is the only known source with the capability, expertise, and familiarity with the NISTAR instrument requirements to support its continued performance without project delays or technical risks which could significantly impact the instrument. Currently, this is the barrier to overcome before any subsequent full and open competition acquisitions of these services are procured. Any Agency requirements for these services in the future would take into consideration the mission needs at that time.

The Agency will continue to examine the market in the future for alternative solutions or new sources before executing any subsequent acquisitions for the same requirements.

Digitally signed by

JULIE JANUS JULIE JANUS

Date: 2024.03.07 14:48:47 -05'00'

Digitally signed by Brian

Brian Leyda Leyda

Date: 2024.03.12 14:15:31 -04'00'

DSCOVR NISTAR Instrument

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

SIGNATURE PAGE

I certify that the facts presented in this justification are accurate and complete.

Adam Szabo Technical Representative

ADAM

SZABO

Digitally signed by ADAM

SZABO

Date: 2024.03.07 14:40:30 -05'00'

Contracting Officer: I hereby certify that the above justification is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Julie Janus Contracting Officer

CONCURRENCE:

Signing for Mary V. Stevens Procurement Officer

APPROVED:

Brian Leyda Brian K. Leyda

Digitally signed by Brian Leyda Date: 2024.03.12 14:15:59 -04'00'

Competition Advocate

GSFC