SATPC0036330 Tab 06 BNJ..pdf
PDF 142 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Inficon Leak Detector Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC24880115Q
About this file
This document is a Justification for Sole Source or Brand Name Procurement related to the acquisition of an Inficon Leak Detector for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Shared Services Center.
The justification states that NASA recommends negotiating only with Inficon, Inc. to provide an Inficon Leak Detector, with a total estimated cost of the effort and a 6-week delivery timeline. The rationale is that the existing facility has one Inficon UL1000 Helium Leak Detector, and this additional unit is required as a spare, replacement, and parallel system to ensure at least one leak detector is always operational. Using the same brand and model is necessary to leverage existing spare parts, fittings, and personnel training. Procuring a different brand could result in compatibility issues, additional costs for modifications, and disruptions to critical leak detection activities.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SATPC0036330 Tab 10 RFQ Open Market Template.pdf | ||
| SATPC0036330 Tab 04 4 SOW..pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Page 1 V2.0 3-15-2017
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
NASA SHARED SERVICES CENTER
RECOMMENDATION AND DETERMINATION TO SOLICIT FROM ONE SOURCE
OR BRAND NAME
PICK ONE
Sole Source:
☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with Vendor only for . The total estimated cost of this effort is Enter Dollar amount and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is Date.
OR
Brand Name Justification:
☒I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate only with vendors who can provide the subject brand name from Inficon, Inc. for Inficon Leak Detector. The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 6 Weeks ARO.
This recommendation is for the acquisition of supplies or services determined to be reasonably available from only one source/only one manufacture. Competition is impractical for the following reasons (please answer the questions below):
1. What are the reasons for soliciting only the suggested source/suggested brand name? Please provide the unique characteristics of the items or services along with the supporting rationale and the market research performed to substantiate your reason for the suggested source/brand name.
ST15 currently has one Inficon UL1000 Helium Leak Detector. This additional unit is meant to be utilized as a spare, direct replacement, and parallel system all at once. This means that both units need to have the capability to use the same fittings and connection points. We have spare parts and compatible fittings that exist within the facility. Additionally, we would like to have a backup/spare in case we need to repair the other one since they use the same accessories. It is vital to facility operations to have at least one online leak detector at all times. Lastly, it is sometimes necessary to simultaneously leak check multiple areas of the facility. This is not possible with only one leak detector.
2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand is used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.
Personnel are already trained to use this leak detector. A new leak detector would require labor cost for training on the new detector. This exact model of leak detector is also trusted from many years of use.
Other brands may not provide the same quality, which may negatively affect leak detection activities.
Also, other brands may not connect to the same existing interfaces, which would require modification to the chamber feedthroughs, a task that may create additional complications and cost to the government.
Finally, the loss of the existing leak detector to repairs without a spare would impact testing activities, which would be a massive impact to both time and budget; having to quickly reoutfit chambers to adjust to a different fitting from another brand’s leak detector in the case of damage to the existing detector would be cumbersome and potentially cause damage to existing systems.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .