SATPC0041787 TAB 06 BNJ.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 Vendor Name only 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.

OR

Brand Name Justification:

☒I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate only with vendors who can provide the subject band name from TE Connectivity, Ltd. for CW22 - LIF2026 - Spare Optimus Components Purchase. The total estimated cost of this effort is $39,870.53 and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 9-22 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.

The CW22 test facility at NASA Glenn Research Center requires the procurement of an Optimus MSDI and 32HD Mini Module as spare components for the existing Optimus data acquisition system currently installed and operational. These components are proprietary to the Optimus system and are specifically engineered to ensure full compatibility with the current hardware and software configuration. Sourcing components from any other manufacturer could lead to incompatibility with the installed system and potentially compromise system functionality, reliability, and ongoing operations. Therefore, the Optimus brand is the only provider that meets the technical and compatibility requirements for this application, making it the sole option capable of fulfilling the facility’s operational needs.

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

Utilizing an alternative brand would necessitate comprehensive engineering assessment, interface development, system integration, and validation testing to ensure compatibility with the existing data acquisition system. This process could lead to significant schedule delays and increased costs. The data acquisition systems employed throughout NASA Glenn Research Center are standardized on the Optimus platform, making compatibility with current hardware and software essential for maintaining operational continuity. TE Connectivity is the exclusive manufacturer of modules fully compatible with the installed Optimus system. Substituting a different brand would require the design, development, and testing of a new interface, involving uncertain engineering effort and costs. These activities could postpone critical testing operations and may result in considerable financial impacts to the Government, potentially surpassing any savings that might be achieved through a competitive procurement process.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

Page 2 V2.0 3-15-2017

Donald Hammett 7/8/2026 Technical User Name Date

Title

****FOR NSSC SAT USE ONLY****

The above justification in pursuant to one of the following (only select one):

☐ - Recommendation and Determination to Solicit from One Source (RDSS): For open market purchases, pursuant to FAR 5.101(a) the proposed contract action in excess of $25,000 will be placed on SAM.gov.

☐ - Recommendation and Determination to Solicit from One Source (RDSS): For open market purchases, pursuant to FAR 5.101(a) the proposed contraction action is exempt from the posting requirement and will not be placed on SAM.gov, i.e., below $25,000.

☐ - Recommendation and Determination to Solicit from One Source (RDSS): For open market purchases, pursuant to FAR 5.202(a)(2), the proposed contract action is exempt from publication on SAM.gov because the government would be seriously injured if the Agency complies with the time periods specified in FAR 5.203.

☐ - Brand Name Justification (BNJ): For open market purchases, pursuant to FAR 12.102(a), the acquisition of the referenced brand name item is hereby justified.

☐ - SEWP/IDIQ Brand Name Justification (BNJ): For schedule/IDIQ purchases, pursuant to FAR 16.507-7(a), the acquisition of the referenced brand name item(s) is hereby justified (under $40,000)

☐ - SEWP/IDIQ Brand Name Justification (BNJ): For schedule/IDIQ purchases, pursuant to FAR 16.507- 7(c)(1), the acquisition of the referenced brand name item(s) is hereby justified. Any action over $40,000 the brand name shall be posted on the agency website used to solicit offers for orders.

☐ - Limited Source Justification (LSJ) Sole Source: For GSA orders, pursuant to FAR 8.401(b)(and by way of GSAR 538.7104-3(a)), only one source is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized. Action will be performed against GSA Contract Number: ________________.

☐ Source Justification (LSJ) Brand Name: For GSA orders, pursuant to FAR 8.401(b) (and by way of GSAR 538.7104-4(a)), the item is peculiar to one manufacturer. A brand name item, whether available on one or more schedule contracts, is an item peculiar to one manufacturer.

☐ - Exception to Fair Opportunity (EFO): For SEWP orders or orders placed against other IDIQ contracts, under the authority of the exemption under FAR 16.507-6(b) used is based on the following:

☐ (A) The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays ☐ (B) Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

☐ (C) The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is 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.

I hereby accept the above-mentioned recommendation and determine the circumstances of the contract action are deemed appropriate for this requirement.

Contracting Officer

Page 2 V4.0 APR 2026

X