5_BN FLUKE REDACTED.pdf

1 | 7

REV 11-2023

BRAND NAME/SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION (SAM) SAT

LIMITED-SOURCES JUSTIFICATION (GSA) SAT

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

(ID/IQ TASK ORDER/DELIVERY ORDER) SAT

1. Description of Supplies/Services.

PART # DESCRIPTION Brand QTY 1648927 Calibration Thermometer Readout model 1502A Fluke 1 1657354 Bath, Deep LOTEMP, -40 to 110 C, 110V Fluke 1 1270408 MIL-STD-129 Label Fluke 1 3393662 MIL-STD-130UID Label with UID Fluke 1 1656790 Bath, MID-Range Oil, 300C, 110 V 50/60HZ Fluke 1 1270408 MIL-STD-129 Label Fluke 1 3393662 MIL-STD-130UID Label with UID Fluke 1 3275867 A40B-20A Precision Current Shunt Fluke 1 3393662 MIL-STD-130UID Label with UID Fluke 1

Shipping and handling Fluke 1

The requested supplies services represent the minimum requirements of the Government, which have been verified by the certifying technical and requirements personnel.

2. Regulatory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition.

SAM

FAR 13.106-1(b)(i) Soliciting from a single source x FAR 13.106-1(b)(ii) Particular brand-name item

GSA

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(A) An urgent and compelling need exists

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(B) Only one source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized

FAR 8.405-6(a)(i)(1)(C) In the interest of economy and efficiency, the new work is a logical follow-on to an original Federal Supply Schedule order provided that the original order was placed in accordance with the applicable Federal Supply Schedule ordering procedures (the original order or BPA must not have been previously issued under sole-source or limited-sources procedures).

FAR 8.405-6 (b) Items peculiar to one manufacturer (brand-name item) ID/IQ Task Order/Delivery Order (e.g. NASA SEWP or ARMY CHESS)

2 | 7

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A) The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C) The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order. [When utilizing this exception, the rationale shall describe why the relationship between the initial order and the follow-on is logical (e.g., in terms of scope, period of performance, or value).]

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D) It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E) For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) In accordance with section 1331 of Public Law 111-240 ( 15 U.S.C.

644(r)), contracting officers may, at their discretion, set aside orders for any of the small business concerns identified in 19.000(a)(3). When setting aside orders for small business concerns, the specific small business program eligibility requirements identified in part 19 apply.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(G) For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, the order satisfies one of the exceptions permitting the use of other than full and open competition listed in 6.302 ( 10 U.S.C.

3406(c)(5)). The public interest exception shall not be used unless Congress is notified in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(7).

3. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Regulatory Authority.

a.) The Items Described in Paragraph 1 Must Be Compatible In All Aspects (Form, Fit And Function) With Existing Systems Presently Installed.

b.) A Patent, Copyright, or Proprietary Data Limits Competition.

c.) The Items Described in Paragraph 1 are “Direct Replacements” Parts/Components for Existing Equipment.

d.) Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Supported By A Case Letter.

e.) Unusual and Compelling Urgency.

3 | 7 f.) Other: If required, discuss any other rationale that supports the use of a brand name/sole source for this effort.

The requested Fluke calibration equipment is required to establish a U.S. Navy-sponsored calibration laboratory in Australia to provide essential calibration support for U.S. Navy ships and submarines scheduled to dock in, operate from, or transit the region. Establishment of this capability is necessary to support the fleet's calibration and maintenance requirements and to provide a standardized calibration capability in Australia.

The specified Fluke equipment is identified by manufacturer and model within existing U.S. Navy Instrument Calibration Procedures (ICPs) that will govern calibration activities at the Australian laboratory. These ICPs establish the equipment, calibration methods, technical specifications, and acceptance requirements necessary to perform calibrations in accordance with established U.S.

Navy requirements. Procurement of the specified Fluke equipment will therefore provide direct compatibility with existing, validated procedures and allow the laboratory to employ established calibration methods without requiring changes to the current technical baseline.

Use of equipment from another manufacturer, or substitution with different models, could require the applicable ICPs to be reviewed, modified, technically validated, and approved before the alternate equipment could be incorporated into the laboratory's calibration processes. Based on current estimates, this effort could delay establishment and operationalization of the Australian calibration laboratory by approximately 12–18 months. In addition to schedule impacts, substitution could introduce equipment compatibility, calibration accuracy, training, documentation, and operational risks.

A delay in establishing the required calibration capability could adversely affect the U.S. Navy's ability to provide timely calibration support to ships and submarines operating in or transiting the region. Timely procurement of the specified Fluke equipment will allow the laboratory to be established using existing procedures and technical requirements, minimizing implementation risk and avoiding the extensive procedural modification and revalidation associated with alternative equipment.

4 | 7

4. Implication of Procuring Another Brand/Manufacturer.

a.) Unacceptable Delays in Fulfilling the Agency’s Requirements.

b.) Substantial Duplication Of Cost To The Government That Is Not Expected To Be Recovered Through Competition.

Based on the existing U.S. Navy ICP requirements, the need for compatibility with established and validated calibration procedures, the requirement for a standardized calibration capability, and the significant schedule, technical, and operational impacts associated with evaluating and implementing alternative equipment, the specified Fluke calibration equipment is uniquely suited to meet the Government's requirement. Accordingly, procurement of the specified Fluke equipment is justified on a brand name to support timely establishment of the Australian calibration laboratory and the calibration and maintenance requirements of U.S. Navy fleet operations in the region.

The requested Fluke calibration equipment will be used to establish a U.S. Navy-sponsored calibration laboratory in Australia to support the calibration requirements of U.S. Navy ships and submarines planned to dock in Australia.

The specified Fluke equipment is identified by brand and model within existing Instrument Calibration Procedures (ICPs) and is listed in Navy Calibration Equipment (NCE). The equipment is incorporated into thirty-seven (37) existing ICPs that will support calibration operations for the fleet. These ICPs establish the equipment, methods, and technical requirements necessary to perform calibrations in accordance with established U.S. Navy requirements.

Procurement of a different brand or model would require the affected ICPs to be reviewed, modified, technically validated, and approved before the alternative equipment could be incorporated into the laboratory's calibration processes. This effort is estimated to require approximately 12–18 months, which would delay establishment and operationalization of the Australian calibration laboratory.

In addition to the schedule impact, use of an alternative brand would result in an estimated $814,873.20 in avoidable and unnecessary costs, based on the following calculation:

37 ICPs × 120 hours per ICP × $183.53 per hour = $814,873.20

5 | 7 c.) Other: If required, discuss any other implication of procuring another brand/manufacturer.

5. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition.

CERTIFICATION

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and its supporting data/documentation, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

CUSTOMER:

Name, Title, Code Phone No. Date

These costs would be incurred solely to modify and validate existing ICPs to accommodate equipment other than the equipment already specified in the NCE and existing procedures. The associated delay and additional costs could adversely affect Navy readiness across ships and submarines by delaying the establishment of the required calibration capability in Australia.

Procurement of the specified Fluke equipment will allow the Navy-sponsored calibration laboratory to leverage existing, established ICPs without requiring extensive modification and revalidation. This approach minimizes unnecessary cost and schedule impacts while supporting timely establishment of the laboratory and maintaining the required calibration capability for the fleet.

Based on the equipment's inclusion in Navy Calibration Equipment, its incorporation into thirty-seven (37) existing ICPs, the estimated $814,873.20 in avoidable costs associated with adopting an alternative brand, and the potential 12–18 month delay that could impact Navy readiness, procurement of the specified Fluke equipment is justified as a sole-source requirement.

For the reasons set forth in paragraphs 3 through 4 of this Justification, Corona Divisio has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the type of supplies/services covered by this document. If another potential source emerges, the Corona Division w assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

Sunmi Kim, ARP, MS02 951-393-5479 8/27/2026

KIM.SUNMI.

1255981737

Digitally signed by

KIM.SUNMI.1255981737

Date: 2026.08.27 14:35:29 -07'00'

6 | 7

APPROVALS

I certify that the Customer representations above have been verified, and are complete and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the processing of this brand name/sole-source justification precludes the use of full and open competition.

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR/SPECIALIST:

Name, Title, Code Phone No. Date

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that completing this purchase as a brand name/sole source is in the best interest of the Government.

CONTRACTING OFFICER:

Name, Title, Code Phone No. Date

GRONCKI.ELIZABETH.1

455702000

Digitally signed by

GRONCKI.ELIZABETH.1455702000

Date: 2026.08.27 16:09:28 -07'00'