SATPC0036664 Tab 06 RDSS..pdf

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 Techno-Sciences Incorporated (TSI). only for the Techno-Sciences Incorporated Search and Rescue Satellite Aided Tracking Mission Control Center (SARSAT MCC) version 2.9. The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 120 days after award.

OR

Brand Name Justification:

☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with only with vendors who can provide the subject band name from Manufacture Name for Enter Supply or Service to be procured. The total estimated cost of this effort is Enter Dollar amount and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is Date.

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.

TSI has developed a unique hardware/software suite that effectively controls the processing and routing of Search and Rescue Satellite Aided Tracking (SARSAT) emergency distress signals in conjunction with the TSI Mid Earth Orbiting Local User Terminals (MEOLUTs) produced by the vendor. The NASA Search and Rescue Team currently operates a TSI MEOLUT at the Goddard Spaceflight Center that directly interfaces with the items in consideration in this procurement. Market research was conducted reviewing 1 other vendor, with the other vendor unable to meet requirements for 406 MHz distress message routing without significant changes to existing ground infrastructure at the Goddard Spaceflight Center as the other vendor does not directly interface with TSI hardware as they are competitors within a small market share. The TSI Mission Control Center is a directly-interfacing hardware/software suite in conjunction with the already-existing MEOLUT at Goddard that the current vendor workforce already supports under the TSI MEOLUT Maintenance, Sustainment and Engineering Contract

2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand was used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.

Failure to procure the hardware developed by TSI would create undue technical burden on the US Government due to the proprietary nature of hardware/software interconnections between the TSI Mid- Earth Orbiting Local User Terminal (MEOLUT) that currently exists at Building 25 of the Goddard Spaceflight Center and any other vendor’s Mission Control Center hardware/software product. This would require government or contractor labor efforts with associated costs and interface control documentation data provisions that are currently not in the scope of the NASA Search and Rescue (SAR) Medium Earth Orbit Local User Terminal (MEOLOUT) Maintenance, Sustainment and Engineering Contract . Additionally, the US Government team would be unable to perform

Page 2 V2.0 3-15-2017 technical insight of the existing US Search and Rescue Satellite Aided Tracking (SARSAT)Mission Control Center as the US SARSAT Mission Control Center is currently a TSI Mission Control Center.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

8/9/2024

Technical User Name Date

Title

Office