Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition_UPDATED_Redacted.pdf

Rev.:01/2021

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:

This requirement will be synopsized and posted on beta.sam.gov in accordance with FAR

5.201. Synopsis results will be included in the official contract file. Based on the authority cited in paragraph 4, it is concluded that our minimum needs are only reasonably available from the selected source. NASA will continue to look for opportunities to open up competition for this requirement and will monitor the marketplace for potential competition in the future.

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:

Before making award, the Contracting Officer will determine that the proposed price is fair and reasonable based on one of the techniques identified in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 13.106-3 – Award Documentation. This procurement is for a commercial item. Thus, the price can be determined fair and reasonable based on a comparison of the established market price, historical pricing, and current price lists. NASA has historical contract information from previous awards with Vision Research and there are no anticipated issues that would circumvent a fair and reasonableness price determination. The Contracting Officer will determine price reasonableness during the proposal evaluation process prior to contract award.

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

JEOL USA INC is not available through SEWP or GSA. Furthermore, a Google search was conducted on 7/18/2022 to determine availability of the product in the open market. The research yielded JEOL USA Inc as the supplier for this product. The best benefit to the Government is to sole source to JEOL USA INC to ensure cost and project continuity. The goal is to execute a combined Synopsis/Solicitation to see if there are any other vendors capable of providing these commercial products. In addition to the market research that has been conducted a thorough review of the equipment has been completed to ensure its compatibility with current equipment within the laboratory. The equipment from this sole source will ensure software compatibility and for future maintenance work require only one procurement resulting in less time and funding be utilized. This is a further direct benefit to the various multi-user customers as testing information can be provided all in a similar format that can be exchanged between equipment with no need to adjust or reconfigure resulting in potential errors or omission of critical data. The cost savings of not having to procure additional software packages, additional upgrades to equipment that is not obsolete and not having to provide potential facility modifications including but not limited to power, facility architecture, and laboratory reorganization ensure that the potential flight hardware and other testing is completed within budget as well as within all required safety standards.

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

This is a commercial off the shelf (COTS) unit with known commodity inputs/outputs and maximum power and working pressures built to known standards that are acceptable for COTS utilization at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). The utilization of this unit and vendor ensures that no additional impacts will not befall the various customers, programs, and projects that would utilize this equipment. Those impacts are as follows:

• This vendor/model procurement ensures that the no facility modifications would be required for the equipment. This equipment has the same physical footprint as the previous item. This is a direct cost savings as facility modifications would result in not only new funding requirements but would result in time constraints/delays as modifications could take longer than anticipated. The various customers, program and projects do not have the funding to absorb the cost of various facility modifications.

• The use of a current electromagnetic interference cage would be utilized from the previous instrument that is an exact fit to the new instrument. This results in a direct cost savings as funding would not be required to complete a new design, design review, and procurement of a new cage. At this time the various customers, programs and projects would be unable to absorb this potential cost.

• The current accessories and other required items for operation of this unit including sample specimen holders are compatible with the new system and will not require a new procurement. This results in a potential cost savings to the various customers, programs, and projects that would utilize this equipment.

• Savings in time and schedule would be provided if current vendor/instrument is used due to similarities in software and instrument operation. The use of this equipment ensures that additional extensive training for laboratory personnel would not be required as all personnel are currently trained on the same version. If the current vendor/instrument is not utilized there would be a direct cost impact in additional labor charges from operators requiring official training on the operation of the unit as well as on the job training. This could also result in additional training for required operational training from another vendor, as well as additional safety and health training.

• Additional cost savings include the compatibility of this unit to all other equipment currently utilized. If another unit is utilized there would be a direct combability issue with other equipment and would require an upgrade of software, computer systems, and other equipment to ensure compatibility. This is a cost that the various customers, programs and projects cannot absorb at this time.

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).

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:

No subsequent acquisitions are planned at this time.