Robo-Met3D_JOFOC_Redacted.pdf

FY20 JOFOC

Robo-Met.3D Serial Sectioning System

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA)

GEORGE C. MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER (MSFC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION (JOFOC)

For a Robo-Met.3D Serial Sectioning System

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) Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC): The procuring agency is NASA and the contracting activity is the MSFC located in Huntsville, Alabama.

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 purchase order to UES Inc. for a single Robo-Met.3D serial sectioning system. The Robo-Met.3D serial sectioning system performs automated serialized metallographic sample sectioning, polishing, etching, and optical microscopy documentation of each microstructural slice. This system is being procured to support the NASA Additive Manufacturing (AM) certification rationale and requirements development and the Liquid Engine Office (LEO) development program for the RS25 liquid rocket engine. The Robo-Met.3D system would expand analysis capability and improve the throughput of analysis to support certification and development efforts in AM.

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 Robo-Met.3D sectioning system is required to support the AM certification and development efforts under the LEO Block IV task for product improvement within the Space Launch System (SLS) program. The total estimated cost of this effort is , and the estimated lead-time for delivery is 10 to 20 weeks. The estimated costs includes a sectioning system unit, a one-year manufacturer’s warranty, shipping and handling, installation, training of MSFC operators and three options to purchase subsequent annual service agreements after the original warranty expires. If all options are exercised, the total contract period would be four (4) years and six-months.

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 for acquisitions using the procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) subpart 13.5, Simplified Procedures for Certain Commercial Items, is 41 U.S.C. 1901 as implemented by FAR 13.501(b)(1)(i) for acquisition of supplies or services from only one source and that no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements such that full and open competition need not be provided for.

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 41 U.S.C. 1901 is for acquisition of supplies or services from only one source as described below.

UES Inc., is the original developers and manufacturers of the Robo-Met.3D system and are the only supplier for the system and sole supplier of the hardware, software and associated warranties, as well as, service agreements ensuring long term functionality. The Robo- Met.3D systems are offered for sale commercially to the public. As a result, the system, warranty and service agreements are considered commercial items as they are of a type customarily used by non-governmental entities for other than government purposes and have been sold or offered for sale, lease or license to the general public per FAR 2.101, Definition

- “Commercial Item.”

After conducting an industry research of multiple metallographic polishing systems, only one system, the Robo-Met.3D system, was identified to have all required capabilities to meet the agency requirements. UES Inc., is the original equipment manufacturer of this all-in-one automated serial polishing and microscopy system while other manufacturers only sell microscopes or automatic polishing units, but none offer a system with all the integrated features of the Robo-Met.3D. The Robo-Met.3D serial sectioning system uniquely satisfies the following required functionality in a single automated unit:

1. Provides automated high throughput 3D characterization of defects in additively manufactured materials; and

2. Automatically sequentially grind/polish metallographically mounted materials with micron level accuracy; and

3. Automated etching to reveal microstructural features; and

4. Automated ultrasonic wash and dry functionality; and

5. Automatic sequential collection of magnified microstructural images using an optical metallograph with motorized stage and multiple automatic objective lenses with a wide magnification range that is vibrationally isolated from the sample mechanical polishing processes; and

6. A computer controller for monitoring all automated functionality and for incorporation of sequential images into a 3D computer model; and

7. Computer operations control through either preprogrammed automation or through custom programmed automation; and

8. All operations are enclosed in a single housing to shield the operator from possible debris and chemicals.

The integration of these key eight (8) capabilities/elements into one system allows for the system to run autonomously after a single set-up thus improving throughput of data acquisition and offers significant increased efficiencies overall with regard to time savings and manpower resources. Due to the system’s unique capability to polish and perform microscopy autonomously, the system can automatically perform consistent serial sectioning and provide three-dimensional analysis of samples, defects and microstructure of materials.

This capability allows for the validation of several non-destructive evaluation testing methods that are being used for AM development and certification. The system would also improve the materials characterization capabilities of the MSFC lab allowing for better support of AM efforts and potentially other missions. Being an all-in-one system, the metallography and microscopy will be more consistent between users and enables higher throughput of sample preparation and data collection. Current methods require engineers to polish and etch samples manually then perform microscopy in a separate lab, and if 3D analysis is desired, consistency of results is heavily dependent on an individual’s polishing skills, and the process is extremely time consuming and tedious.

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 (beta.sam.gov) was published on 18 September 2020 in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. This posting informed potential sources of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source contract to UES 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 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 by using Robo-Met.3D system historical pricing as this system was recently purchases by NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC) for the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) located in Ohio. In addition, the systems proposed price will be compared to catalog public list prices of other automated polishing equipment with similar functionalities on the commercial marketplace.

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:

Market research and product evaluations were conducted by a NASA Materials Engineer based on internet resources, in-depth market knowledge, and product evaluations. Multiple vendors in the laboratory industry and their metallographic polishing and processing equipment were considered, such as Struers, Buehler, Leica, and Keyence. Reviews of publicly available information on existing equipment offerings included website information and brochures. This research identified multiple automated polishing systems that provided automated single surface polishing capability, but did not include automated incremental serial polishing combined with optical microscopy documentation to create a three-dimensional microstructural representation. After thorough research and further validation with the NSSC contract team, the capabilities and the features in the Robo-Met.3D system were further validated as UES Inc., being the only one source offering the equipment capable of performing the work needed to support AM development and certification efforts at NASA.

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

UES Inc. is the only manufacturer of the Robo-Met.3D and holds the intellectual property for the system. If this system is not purchased, AM development and certification efforts would be performed with major delays that would negatively impact AM certification and development efforts for the LEO Block IV task. This system is anticipated to help understand and certify in-situ monitoring systems on AM machines and characterizing the defect state of AM materials, and not acquiring this system would make performing this work at MSFC not feasible due to the amount of time it would take to perform this work by hand. An alternate solution, would be to send work to the GRC in Ohio for processing on their Robo-Met.3D which is not plausible due to the sheer volume of work required at MFSC in Alabama. Doing so would further negatively impact the work already being performed on that machine for projects supporting the GRC. In addition, pursuing this effort manually would far exceed using currently estimated man hour costs, and the Government would not expect to recover that additional cost.

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 will be synopsized when published on the GPE website (beta.sam.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above).

The Intent to Sole Source synopsis was posted on 18 September 2020 and closed on 24 September 2020 with no requests for consideration being received.

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:

Currently, there are no known actions that the agency may take to remove or overcome barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisition for the required support is sought, as the current market shows that this is the only system of its capability available. 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.

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

(JOFOC)

For a Robo-Met 3D Serial Sectioning System

SIGNATURE PAGE

I hereby certify the facts in this justification and any supporting data used for this justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.

I hereby certify that the above justification is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. In addition, I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

Kathryn Cooper Contracting Officer