SATPC0041643 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 Space Environment Technologies (SET) only for developing a journal article and community resource on SABER/TIMED data . The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 12/31/26.

OR

Brand Name Justification:

☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with only with vendors who can provide the subject brand 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.

The proposed sole-source procurement is justified by the contractor’s highly specialized expertise and unique, irreplaceable historical knowledge of the SABER instrument spanning its ~24-year data record.

This deep, mission-specific experience is essential to provide accurate historical context regarding past calibration decisions and algorithm evolution, as well as to effectively mentor personnel on complex SABER algorithms, retrieval methodologies, and product interrelationships. Utilizing this specific source is critical to ensuring uninterrupted technical continuity and preserving scientific integrity. This is particularly vital as the mission prepares for the upcoming Version 3 reprocessing effort, a complex task that precludes the use of an alternate vendor lacking this extensive, hands-on background with the instrument.

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

If another vendor were used, the Government would experience unacceptable schedule delays, duplicative costs, and a high risk of compromised scientific integrity. A new contractor would face a prohibitive learning curve to understand 24 years of custom algorithms and historical calibration decisions, directly threatening the timeline and accuracy of the upcoming Version 3 reprocessing effort. Furthermore, without the suggested source's intimate historical knowledge of the mission, the Government would be unable to produce the required authoritative journal article and community resources, ultimately failing to achieve the required knowledge transfer and diminishing the scientific return on investment for the SABER mission.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: