SATPC0042769 Tab 06 RDSS..pdf
PDF 120 KB Posted
- Attached to
- NETZSCH LFA 717 HyperFlash System
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC26944063Q
About this file
This is a NASA Shared Services Center Sole Source Justification and Recommendation document dated March 15, 2017 (Version 2.0). NASA recommends negotiating exclusively with NETZSCH Instruments North America, LLC for the procurement of a NETZSCH LFA 717 HyperFlash System. The estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is approximately seven weeks after receipt of order (ARO), with a redacted total estimated cost.
The procurement is justified as a sole source acquisition because the equipment will replace outdated NETZSCH Nanoflash thermal conductivity equipment currently in use at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) that is no longer operational due to multiple hardware and software issues and lack of manufacturer support. The new NETZSCH LFA 717 HyperFlash System represents an upgrade to meet modern research needs for multiple testing projects. The document identifies significant operational and financial impacts if an alternate vendor or brand were selected, including project timeline delays, budget implications, required personnel training, development of new operating procedures, software and data format integration efforts, method validation, and cross-comparison testing. The document concludes that pursuing evaluation or procurement of an alternate hardware solution would be both operationally and cost prohibitive.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SATPC0042769 Tab 04 4 SOW..pdf | ||
| SATPC0042769 Tab 07 Capability Statement.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- 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 NETZSCH Instruments North America, LLC only for NETZSCH LFA 717 HyperFlash System. The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is approximately 7 weeks
ARO.
OR
Brand Name Justification:
☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate only with vendors who can provide the subject brand name from Manufacture Name for Product being purchased. The total estimated cost of this effort is $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 products included in this procurement will be a part of a new Flash Diffusivity Instrument for thermal conductivity data intended to replace outdated Netzsch Nanoflash thermal conductivity equipment currently in use at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). After many years of use, the old instrument was determined to be not operational due to multiple hardware and software issues, and service is no longer supported by the company. New software and updated Windows versions are not compatible with the old instrument. The new instrument is not just a replacement, but an upgrade from the old instrument to adapt to modern research needs in testing for multiple projects.
2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand is used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.
The introduction of a new brand to meet this functional requirement would have repercussions on project timelines, budgets, and staff. Time delays would result from evaluating different products and transitioning to a potentially unfamiliar product. Procurement of a different system would require additional personnel training, development of new operating procedures, software and data format integration efforts, and additional time for method validation and cross-comparison of test results with existing equipment. Procurment of another brand would create implementation challenges for existing infrastructure and compatibility across the testing division. To pursue the evaluation or procurement of an alternate hardware solution would be both operationally cost and time prohibitive.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .