PA-2097 SBS005503 (SSDP CFA Study) COCO _Redacted V3 JA reviewed PA Concurred.pdf

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity or to Use Brand-Name Restriction

16 Jun 2022 Page 2 of 5 nature of the satellite constellation architecture and functionality featured by the Iridium Satellite LLC NEXT satellite constellation.

Many Department of War (DoW) users purchase satellite communication services from satellite operators and their resellers via PLEO IDIQ contracts and other contract vehicles. So, Space Security & Defense Program (SSDP) is investigating global, multi-mission PLEO systems featuring inter-satellite links (ISL) to discover vulnerabilities in those ISL. An ISL is a communications link that transmits/receives signals directly between two artificial satellites, rather than between a satellite and an earth station. An ISL solves the problem created by a satellite that is constantly moving and thus cannot always see a ground station on Earth --and thus cannot transmit or receive data until a ground station is in "view" -- by routing data through a chain of satellites in space until a satellite is in "view" of a ground station, thereby achieving uninterrupted Earth coverage.

The Government's market research of multi-mission PLEO systems reveals that Iridium Satellite LLC is the only source that provides satellite communications services that feature functionality sufficient to successfully provide the supplies described in Section 3. The Iridium NEXT constellation is a mature, fully deployed global constellation operating with robust ISL, thereby making that satellite constellation the ideal test bed to analyze routing resilience, signal susceptibility, and network security for next-generation military and commercial PLEO systems. That constellation also hosts critical secondary payloads (ADS-B for global aircraft tracking and military-grade communication transceivers). As a result, this test bed will allow SSDP to establish security requirements for how commercial networks should securely transmit sensitive or tactical government data. Moreover, the Iridium NEXT constellation has the longest operational history and provides the widest array of services featured by any PLEO multi-mission constellation.

In contrast, the current generation of PLEO satellite constellation does not feature ISL and PLEO satellite constellation does not feature enough satellites to provide continuous global coverage. Sensor systems ( ) do not provide user data transport and thus cannot simultaneously perform multiple missions. While SpaceX performed a similar study for the , the SpaceX Starlink constellation is topologically different than Iridium NEXT's constellation (i.e., the SpaceX Starlink constellation is a multi-layer, decentralized mesh network topology comprised of approximately 6,000 satellites with multiple inclinations whereas the Iridium NEXT constellation is a circuit-switched and packet-switched multi-hop routing topology comprised of 66 active satellites in six polar orbital planes with ISL to neighboring satellites) such that the study would be of limited utility for SSDP. Other satellite constellations are not yet fully operational (Telesat Lightspeed and Amazon LEO) or are not PLEO contractors. Resellers of PLEO communication satellite services do not have the ability to provide the supplies described in Section 3 because they do not operate the satellites of ground stations and thus lack the detailed architectural knowledge, access to the satellite and ground station manufacturer's trade secrets, and historical telemetry and anomalous event databases necessary to build the models required to analyze those systems to successfully provide the supplies described in Section 3. Which means no PLEO satellite constellation other than Iridium Satellite LLC's NEXT constellation can provide the unique supplies described in that section of this JEFO due to that constellation's ability to accurately emulate adversary tactics.

(5) Contracting Officer's determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

With the assistance of a Cost and Price Analyst, and in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), the Contracting Officer will determine whether Iridium's proposed price is fair and reasonable before award. Certified cost or pricing data is not required for this commercial acquisition, in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b)(3). Proposal pricing of the sole source provider will be compared to the independent government cost estimate, based on historical data available from the Mission Partner and other contracts for similar services. Based on this analysis, the Contracting Officer will determine whether the negotiated price is fair and reasonable.

(6) Other facts supporting the justification:

The Government conducted market research for this requirement by issuing a Request for Information (RFI) (SBS005503) to four PLEO contractors on May 8, 2026. Only one PLEO contractor submitted a response to the RFI by the May 15, 2026 due date established for responses: Iridium Satellite LLC. Between March 2025 and May 2026, the Government analyzed whether any PLEO contractor other than Iridium Satellite LLC could provide the supplies described in Section 3, and concluded no other PLEO contractor could for the reasons described in Section 4.

16 Jun 2022 Page 4 of 5

Instructions for Completing the Template IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)

(2) State whether the action is a new order or a modification to an existing order. Identify the basic multiple award contract number and the order number for the current action. Also identify the type of the order/line items on the order (e.g., Firm Fixed price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc.).

(3) Specifically describe the supplies/services to be acquired including the price/cost and quantity of each item in the order and the total estimated value of the order. For services, state whether services are performance-based, and if not, provide rationale for not being performance based. State the delivery/performance schedule/period for the items under the order. Explain how the requirement/order fits under the scope of the basic multiple award contracts.

(Note: The Contracting Officer must ensure that the order is issued within the period of performance and within the maximum value of the contract).

(4) Include the appropriate exception from FAR 16.505 (b)(2) and the supporting rationale. FAR16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer to provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,000 unless a statutory exception applies. The specific exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(__) [Insert A,B, C, D, or E]. If a brand name product description is being justified, use this section to explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements and why other companies' similar products/services do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet, the agency's needs.

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”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification with supporting documentation that explains the exact urgency of the requirement and the mission impact if awarded to any other contractor. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information. Recommend attaching supporting documentation to the back of the document. General statements of urgency are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized”. When using this exception provide a detailed justification, with supporting documentation, as evidence of the “unique or highly specialized” nature of the procurement. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

Supporting documentation may be attached to the back of the document. General statements are not acceptable.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C): “The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as 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 using this exception provide information on the previously competed order under this contract and detail the economies and efficiencies that will be obtained by going sole source for the follow-on order. The user/customer typically provides this supporting information.

General statements are not acceptable.

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.”

Discuss the market research that was conducted by the user/technical team/contracting officer among the supplies/services of all awardees that resulted in the conclusion that a fair opportunity exception applied. The narrative in this section should provide a high level of confidence that the requirements of FAR 16.505(b)(1) and DFARS 216.505-70 could not be met. If no market research was conducted, state so and provide the rationale. If any other awardee expressed interest in fulfilling the requirement, but was not considered a potential source, explain why that awardee cannot provide the required supplies/perform the service.

16 Jun 2022 Page 5 of 5

If the use of a brand name purchase description is being justified, the market research should include an analysis of any industry proposed alternative products or approaches to meeting the requirements. Additionally, the Government's efforts to identify as many potential sources as practicable offering the required brand name item(s) should be addressed.

(5) This paragraph needs to be tailored based on the types of CLINs in the order and the pricing arrangements on the basic multiple award contract. If the contract did not establish the price for the supply or service, the Contracting Officer must establish prices for each order IAW FAR 15.4. The paragraph needs to describe the steps that will ensure that the prices/estimated cost of the order will be fair and reasonable. For example, even if firm-fixed prices were obtained under adequate price competition in the award of the multiple award contract, the Contracting Officer still needs to consider market conditions and other factors that may have changed since contract award and explain the basis in the determination that prices/costs are fair and reasonable prior to award of the order.

(6) Provide any other facts supporting the use of exceptions to the fair opportunity process.

(7) Include a statement of the actions, if any, to be to be taken to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made. If no actions are planned, so state and provide reasons.