SATPC0042554 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 with only with vendors who can provide the subject band name from Precision Fluid Controls for Cryogenic ball valves, cleaning, and certifications. The total estimated cost of this effort $103,475.00 and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is 22-24 weeks.

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 manually operated valves specified in the procurement are required for the operation of high pressure gaseous nitrogen. SSC has requirements for specific materials used in the valves to ensure cleanliness and prevent contamination to downstream equipment, hardware, and end users (supports ground-based rocket testing). PFC has demonstrated their capabilities and reliability by previously providing SSC with state-of-the-art valves and in-house cleaning/testing services.

Market research has shown that there are limited manufactures/vendors capable of meeting SSC capability and cleanliness requirements with a history of reliability for SSC’s specific operating conditions.

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

Precision Fluid Controls (PFC) has demonstrated their capability and reliability of their valves through multiple procurements over the last decade. Their valves have outperformed other manufactures as well as provided exceptional customer service. Source inspections have previously been performed with PFC. If another brand is used, the government will need additional funding for source inspections for manufacturing, cleaning, and testing. Previous valve procurement whereas manufactures have met SSC requirements on paper failed to deliver the hardware that met SSCs requirements, or expectations for reliability and customer service. An example includes a procurement of over 10 valves whereas after multiple valves had to be reworked after installed due to poor workmanship before and shortly after the 1 year warranty period. This resulted in excessive costs for gases used in outages, temporary spool builds, repairs, removing and reinstalling the valves.

Page 2 V2.0 3-15-2017

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

Quote attached are for reference and supplied by local representation for Stennis Space Center.

Brandon Ladner Technical User Name Date 8/11/2026 Project Engineer Title

EA01

Office

****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