N00164_16035_J A.pdf

NCH 53.6-2 (SEP 2011)

J&A Number: 16-035

Code: GXMQ

PR Number: N00164-16-T-GM47

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

JUSTIFICATION

1. Contracting Activity

Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane

Division (NSWC Crane), Code 0221.

2. Description of the Action Being Approved

The action being approved is award of a contract on a sole source basis for a System-On-A-Chip (SOC) test system in support of the programs listed within the tables in section

5 to Advantest America, 3061 Zanker Road, San Jose, CA

95134-2127.

3. Description of Supplies/Services

The SOC test system will be used for the test and evaluation of microelectronic devices to provide continued engineering support of the Trident D5LE and Longbow programs, as well as

Anti-counterfeit and Anti-Tamper efforts. The mission of anti-counterfeit is to assure that only authentic electronic components make it into military systems and not fraudulent or substandard imitations. The goal of anti-tamper is to assure that the military’s critical program information and technology remains out of adversary hands and prevent reverse engineering of critical military systems. The system will be a replacement for an existing Government Verigy 93K test system. The new system must be capable of testing to specification all past microelectronic components using the preexisting hardware from the old Verigy 93K Single Density system and have the additional capability of testing Radio

Frequency (RF) components. The relationship between Verigy and Advantest America is explained in section 5.

The Government’s minimum needs have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

CRANE DIVISION

NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER

300 HIGHWAY 361

CRANE INDIANA 47522-5001

IN REPLY REFER TO:

The contract will be funded from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriations as identified in the chart below.

Estimated Dollar Value

FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 Totals

RDT&E $2,272,000

Total $2,272,000 $2,272,000

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open

Competition

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), only one responsible source for the item being procured and no other supplies will satisfy the agency requirements.

5. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Statutory Authority

As set forth below, Advantest America (Advantest) is the only responsible source capable of providing the required supplies. Award to a source other than Advantest is likely to result in substantial duplication of cost to the

Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition and unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

There are three testers located at NSWC Crane and all are compatible as far as mainboard and device interface hardware are concerned. The mainboard fits on all three testers. The testers were procured under contract numbers N00164-01-C-

6201, N00164-04-C-6517 and N00164-09-C-GM07.

Hewlett Packard first developed the test system. Verigy then purchased the rights to the complete technical data package for these test systems. Verigy was subsequently purchased by

Advantest. With each business transaction the complete technical data package was acquired by the receiving company.

The older testers are referred to as 'single density' and the most recent is referred as 'pinscale'. These terms apply to the inner electronics and not the mainboard hardware. Advantest plans to stop support for the older single density systems in the future. There has not been an official date set for End of Advantest Support (EOAS). The diminishing parts availability and reduced demand for single density spares, as more customers migrate to the pinscale architecture, will dictate this date. The Government plans to replace one of the older systems with the newer pinscale architecture. This will provide NSWC Crane code GXMQ with two newer, supportable systems and only one old one.

Code GXMQ has been using 'HP93000' to refer to the older, single-density systems, and 'V93000' to denote the newer, pinscale system. This same referencing methodology will be used in the remainder of this document.

The Requiring Technical Activity (RTA) has estimated that procuring a different test system other than the Advantest

V93000 would result in an estimated $4.7M in cost duplication and would impact the schedule by as much as six years in terms of restoring full capability. The following tables were developed by code GXMQ engineering staff and are based on roughly 14 years of historical data associated with training, hardware and software development and maintenance of the existing test system. Table I estimates the cost impact to the Government if a system other than the

Advantest V93000 is procured. Table II estimates the cost impact to the Government if the Advantest V93000 is procured. Neither table includes the costs associated with procuring the new system itself (as those costs would simply offset because the cost of the new system applies under both scenarios), but the tables include just the costs associated with restoring capability (Table I, $7,219,600) if a different system is procured and converting capability

(Table II, $2,524,800) if the Advantest V93000 is procured.

The cost difference is $4,694,800.

Table I – Estimated Cost to restore capability if a different test system is purchased

Labor Full-time employee

(FTE) Hours

Labor Rate (Fully

Burdened)

Training for engineers to develop hardware and software on new system (3 FTEs, one year) 3 2080 120 748800

Re-design Trident Hardware and Software for new system (3 FTEs, 4 years) 3 8320 120 2995200

Re-write Trident Test Procedures for new system (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Verify new hardware and software for new system (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Trident Configuration Management (10 FTEs, 72 hours) 10 72 120 86400

Re-design Longbow Hardware and Software for new system (2 FTEs, 2 years) 2 4160 120 998400

Re-write Longbow Test Procedures for new system (1 FTE, 2 weeks) 1 80 120 9600

Verify new hardware and software for new system (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Longbow Configuration Management (5 FTEs, 12 hours) 5 12 120 7200

Re-develop Anti-Counterfeit and Anti-Tamper hardware and software (2 FTEs, 3 years) 2 6240 120 1497600

Materials Quantity Unit cost Total re-designed Trident load boards 26 2500 65000 re-designed Longbow load boards 10 2500 25000 re-designed Anti-counterfeit and Anti-tamper loadboards 10 2500 25000

Service Quantity Unit cost Years

Calibration and emergency repair 3 43,000 3 387000

Total Cost $7,219,600.00

Table II – Estimated Cost to convert capability if Advantest 93K test system is purchased

Labor Full-time employee

(FTE) Hours

Labor Rate (Fully

Burdened)

Training for engineers to develop hardware and software on 93K system (3 FTEs, 3 weeks) 3 120 120 43200

Use existing hardware 0 0 120 0

Convert software (3 FTEs, 13 weeks) 3 520 120 187200

Update Trident test procedures (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Verify hardware and software by comparing to baseline data (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Trident Configuration Management (10 FTEs, 72 hours) 10 72 120 86400

Use existing hardware 0 0 120 0

Convert software (3 FTEs, 170 hours) 3 170 120 61200

Update Longbow test procedures (1 FTE, 2 weeks) 1 80 120 9600

Verify hardware and software by comparing to baseline data (1 FTE, 6 months) 1 1040 120 124800

Longbow Configuration Management (5 FTEs, 12 hours) 5 12 120 7200

Re-develop Anti-Counterfeit and Anti-Tamper hardware and software (2 FTEs, 3 years) 2 6240 120 1497600

Materials Number of loadboards Unit cost Total

Use existing Trident load boards 26 0 0

Use existing Longbow load boards 10 0 0

Use existing Anti-counterfeit and Anti-tamper loadboards 10 0 0

Service Quantity Unit cost Years

Calibration and emergency repair 2 43000 3 258000

Total Cost $2,524,800.00

These test systems are currently used to perform qualification and lot acceptance electrical tests of twenty-six different electronic devices that are used in the Trident

MK6 D5LE Guidance system. Electrical testing done on the

HP93000 is controlled by test software and test hardware that were developed by test engineers in the Component Engineering

Branch, code GXMQ. Because each of the twenty six electronic devices is different, each device required its own test software and test hardware. Each piece of test software and test hardware had to be individually developed, audited for accuracy, peer reviewed by Crane and other entities (other labs and SSP program office), and configuration controlled.

This effort required three electrical engineers working in a full time status for at least four years. The labor cost of the engineering effort alone was $2.9M as called out in the second line under labor in Table I. As indicated in the second line of Table II, the V93000 will utilize existing hardware while the third line of Table II indicates that software conversion is estimated to require three individuals in a full time status for 13 weeks at a total estimated cost of $187,200. The software and hardware is not compatible with and cannot be transferred to another test system. In terms of the software, compatibility is determined by Agilent 93000

Smartest Software for SOC Series Test System, Production s/w rev. 4.1.10, 19-Mar-04. In terms of hardware, custom load board configurations require the test system to have channel and power specific layouts to work. If an Advantest V93000 test system is not procured, this effort will need to be duplicated to continue mission support of this program.

The twenty six devices mentioned above are used in the guidance module for the Trident D5 Submarine Launched

Ballistic Missile. These electronic devices are required by the SSP program office to be high reliability devices and the only failsafe method to ensure this is to perform exhaustive initial electrical, post environmental, and post radiation electrical testing. Because of the high reliability requirement and the fact they are destined to be used for controlling the flight path of a ballistic nuclear missile, the requirements for electrical testing are more rigorous and demanding than what is typically done in industry. The software and hardware development that is required to be performed by the code GXMQ NSWC Crane engineering staff takes years to develop and is not compatible with and cannot be transferred to a new test system. If new test systems were to be procured other than the Advantest V93000, the enormous development, peer review, accuracy verification and software/hardware configuration management effort would need to be repeated. In short, new test systems would require a complete overhaul of all test software and hardware developed by code GXMQ for all twenty six devices, as well as final approval by the program office for each piece of test software and each piece of test hardware.

The cost of procuring a test system other than the Advantest

V93000 also manifests itself in terms of training personnel to operate the new test systems, as well as the training required to be able to develop new test software and hardware specific to the new test system. Based on the time required to become familiar with the existing HP93000 test systems, it’s estimated that it would take at least one year for a full time engineer to become proficient with new test systems. Based on the projected amount of workload to support incoming Air Force, Navy, Missile Defense Agency (MDA), Office of Naval Research (ONR), Anti-counterfeit, and Anti-

Tamper work, as well as existing Trident and Longbow testing, it will require at least three full-time engineers to be trained if the V93000 test system is not purchased. This cost is estimated to be $750K as called out in the first line under labor in Table I.

The electrical testing performed with these systems is also used by system designers who are tasked by the SSP program office to perform missile builds. NSWC Crane’s testing schedule is derived from their production schedule. As illustrated above, procuring new test systems other than the

Advantest V93000 would cause a six year delay to NSWC Crane’s testing schedule due to the time delays incurred by NSWC

Crane code GXMQ engineering staff to restore capability.

Given the close interface and coordination that is required to take place between the testing facility experts within code GXMQ and the system designers performing missile builds, there would be a corresponding six year delay to the system designer’s production schedule. This delay is considered an unacceptable mission impact.

The significant duplication of effort and cost is not limited to the Trident program. Test hardware and software were also developed by code GXMQ engineers to test ten separate devices for the Longbow program, the surface-to-surface Hellfire

Missile manufactured by Lockheed Martin. Similar to Trident, each device required its own hardware and software. The hardware and software development required two engineers working in a full-time status for two years. Configuration management is also required for this program, along with test procedures. If entirely different test systems were purchased, these efforts would need to be repeated to continue support for this program.

An extensive amount of hardware and software has also been developed to support the Anti-counterfeit and Anti-tamper work discussed earlier in this document. The amount of effort is estimated as requiring two engineers working in a full-time status for three years, plus material costs to purchase device load boards. Based on the labor and materials, this cost is estimated as $1.5M and would need to be duplicated if the Advantest 93K test system is not purchased.

In addition, code GXMQ currently has in place a support contract for the three 93K test systems. The cost of this agreement is $130K each year to cover all three test systems.

A new Advantest 93K test system comes with three years of free maintenance. By replacing one of these systems with the newest Advantest 93K test system, the Government will save

$129K over three years on calibration and emergency repair.

6. Description of Efforts Made to Solicit Offers from as Many

Offerors as Practicable

Market research was performed to locate other vendors besides Advantest, but none could provide a test system that would fulfill all of the required technical specifications without significant modifications and additional cost. The following vendors were researched as potential test system solutions: Advantest America, Teradyne, Astronics Test

Systems, and Aeroflex INC.

A Request For Information/Sources Sought synopsis was issued on 1/14/2016 but no responses were received.

A synopsis of the procurement will posted to Federal

Business Opportunities (FEDBIZOPPS) simultaneous with issuance of the Request for Quotation (RFQ) in accordance with the Simplified Acquisition Procedures within FAR 13.5.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Costs

The Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government for the supplies covered by this J&A will be fair and reasonable. It is anticipated that price history, published pricing and commercial sales history will be utilized to make this determination.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition

For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 5, NSWC Crane has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the types of supplies/services covered by this document. If another potential source emerges, NSWC Crane will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

TECHNICAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION (FAR 6.303-2(b))

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and its supporting acquisition planning data, including Acquisition Plan

No. N/A, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

TECHNICAL COGNIZANCE:

Signature Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No. Date

REQUIREMENTS COGNIZANCE:

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW (NMCARS 5206.303(90))

I have determined this justification is legally sufficient.

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION (FAR 6.303-2(a)(12))

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

APPROVAL BLOCK (FAR 6.304 for Approving Official)

Upon the basis of the above justification, I hereby approve, as

Competition Advocate for the Procuring Activity, the solicitation of the proposed procurement(s) described herein using other than full and open competition, pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1).

(Competition Advocate for the Procuring Activity)

Signature Name (Print) Date