FD20601900107_REDACTED.pdf

Justification and Approval (J&A) for Other Than Full and Open Competition

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY14 Nov 2017

IV. Statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition.

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) (1) as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements required by FAR 6.303-2(b)(4).

V. Demonstration that the contractor's unique qualifications or nature of the acquisition requires the use of the authority cited above (applicability of authority).

The agency's minimum needs can only be satisfied by the unique supplies or services available from Chemring, Inc. as identified on the design requirements, source controlled drawings and Time Compliant Technical Order (TCTO):

Chemring Energetic Devices (CED) is the Original Equipment Manufacturer of the BRU‐44 Gas Generator after buying out Scot, Inc. in mid 2010. They have retained proprietary rights to the Gas Generator Technical Data Package (TDP). CED is the only available manufacturing source for these items. Acquisition of the Technical Data and Competitive Procurement Rights for the Gas Generator was attempted on 12 July 2018 through an email to Mr. Gregg Eichwedel, POC at CED. As of the date of this J&A, CED has not responded to the United States Air Force. Sufficient data is not available to award this effort to any other source.

The design knowledge and testing capability for the Gas Generator are essential for the safe operation of the rack. These gas generators are safety critical items that require special testing to compliance with the B‐2 Bomber operational requirements. CED designed the gas generators and has the proprietary rights to the design information and the TDP. This includes the test procedures and fixtures necessary to perform proof pressure testing on the Gas Generators. The design knowledge and testing capability of the Gas Generator are essential to ensure safe operation. Therefore, this acquisition will be for the continued production of highly specialized equipment.

Award to any other source would result in substantial and unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Air Force's requirements. Based on a prior re-design effort for a component of the BRU-44 the anticipated Reverse Engineering and Testing cost for the Gas Generator is approximately $ with an approximate three years period of performance. Also, an additional two to three years to place on contract and start receiving production quantities, it would be a total delay of five to six years which will not meet the requirements of the warfighter. Accordingly, CED is the only firm capable of providing the supplies described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing unacceptable delays in fulfilling its requirements.

The original design passed qualification and life testing; however, once it was fielded, a higher than expected rate of erosion was discovered on the surface of the gas tube port. CED revised the design of the gas tube port to incorporate a replaceable sleeve that sacrificially absorbs the damage caused by the expansion gases. The sleeve extends the useful life of the Gas Generator. All future Gas Generator buys will include the sacrificial sleeve feature. Reverse Engineering is not recommended, the current condemnation rate is due to the erosion issue (corrected with the sacrificial sleeve) and damage from the TCTO modification process (the TCTO has had multiple time extensions and is expected to be complete within another four years). Reduction of the corrosion damage will significantly decrease the need for replacement Gas Generators. This item is not available in the commercial marketplace due to only having a military application. No item exists that can be

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY14 Nov 2017 customized, modified, or tailored to meet the requirement. No commercial sale of this item exists.

The BRU‐44 Bomb Release Unit Gas Generator has been specially developed as part of the BRU‐44 bomb rack with requirements that are military unique.

Accordingly, CED is the only firm capable of providing the supplies and services described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing substantial duplication of cost that could not be expected to be recovered through competition.

VI. Description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable.

The Sources Sought Synopsis (SS) was posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website (http://www.fbo.gov/) on 23 July 2018 with responses due by 30 June 2017. The RFI was posted under number 1095-01-511-0577GG. The SSS contained a description of the BRU-44 Gas Generator. The SSS was conducted to identify potential sources that possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet qualification requirements to produce the BRU-44 Gas Generator.

One response was received from Load Max, who would be potentially capable if we had access to the

TDP.

The requirement will be synopsized on FedBizOpps web page as required by FAR 5.201, citing conditions which preclude full and open competition. Any source that responds to the Government as a result of this synopsis will be identified to the prime contractor as a potential source for subcontracting possibilities.

VII. Determination by the Contracting Officer that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

The overall cost of this acquisition will be fair and reasonable to the Government. In accordance with FAR 15.403-4, the contractor will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data to be used in supporting the Government's evaluation of the proposed cost. The proposed skill mix of labor, labor hours, types and quantities of material, other direct costs, and direct and indirect rates will be negotiated by the Government based on recommendations from Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and expert technical personnel supporting the program. The contract price will be negotiated in accordance with the procedures in FAR Part 15 ensuring the ultimate cost to the Government is fair and reasonable.

VIII. Description of the market research conducted and the results, or a statement of the reasons market research was not conducted.

Market research was conducted in accordance with FAR Part 10.001 and 10.002. The market research was completed on 26 Oct 2018. Techniques utilized included reviews of previous Air Force procurement programs and a web search of the Small Business Administration Dynamic Small Business Search (SBA DSBS) website. The SBA DSBS search was performed for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 332111 (Iron and Steel Forging) with keywords (manufacture, ISO-9001, or ISO9001). A Google search was performed attempting to gain additional information using the search phrase “stainless steel forgings manufacturer”. Four businesses were identified in the market research. Three of the four were deemed not capable because the Government does not have rights to distribute the TDP. The original manufacturer (CED) was deemed capable.

As described in Section VI above, a SSS was posted to FedBizOpps on 23 July 2018 advising industry of the pending acquisition and soliciting inquiries from interested parties. Responses were received

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY14 Nov 2017 from one contractor, Load Max.

The market research concluded Chemring, Inc is the only vendor capable of fulfilling the Government's requirement.

IX. Any other facts supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition.

None

X. List of any sources that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

See Section VI above.

XI. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before making subsequent acquisitions for the supplies or services required.

The Government does not possess the TDP for the BRU-44 Bomb Release -44 Gas Generator to support full and open competition. Multiple attempts have been made to purchase the TDP from CED, the most recent being 12 July, 2018. CED has declined all of these attempts. An ROI analysis compares the cost avoidance due to competition for the remaining life of the system in present value dollars and proposed investment in a reverse engineering effort. Due to the time it takes and the money involved in qualifying a new source or to reverse engineer this item, it would be very cost and time prohibitive to recover a ROI. The expected life of this program will extend through the year 2048 and it would take approximately 30 years to recover the qualification investment cost. It is anticipated that there will be follow-on purchases; however, the time-frame and quantities are unknown at this time. Continued request to CED to purchase the TDP will be pursued, with elevation to management level if responses are not received.

XII. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by his/her signature, the contracting officer has determined this document to be both accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge and belief.

XIII. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by their signatures, the technical and/or requirements personnel have certified that any supporting data contained herein, which is their responsibility, is both accurate and complete.