SubHDR LRUs_Justification and Approval_redacted.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER DIVISION

1176 Howell Street

NEWPORT RI 02841-1708

IN REPLY REFER TO:

Number: 17030.1

Control #: 180275

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

JUSTIFICATION

1. Contracting Activity

The Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Code 02, Newport, RI.

2. Description of the Action Being Approved

Award a five (5) year Indefinite Delivery/lndefinite Quantity type contract with both Firm Fixed

Price and Cost Plus Fixed Fee provisions to Raytheon Company for T

3. Description of Supplies/Services

The Government cost estimate is further broken-down by Statement of Work tasks as follows:

J&A

Task 2 RUORs are required on the following LRUs and sublevel components:

LRUs

Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) — Only one responsible source.

5. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Statutory Authority

The SubHDR System and associated subassemblies and components were initially developed and acquired under competitive Contract awarded to Raytheon Company on 23 October

1996. The SubHDR Acquisition Program Office, , has awarded all subsequent contracts for the production, repair, upgrade, or replacement of SubHDR Systems and associated components to

Raytheon Company under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), the property or services needed by the agency are available from only one responsible source or only from a limited number of responsible sources and no other type of property or services will satisfy the needs of the agency, and 10 U.S.C. 2304(d)(B)(i) substantial duplication of cost to the United States which is not expected to be recovered through competition.

Raytheon Company is the only company that has completed functional, performance, and environmental qualifications of the SubHDR MG LRUs and subcomponents. Due to the complex nature of the SubHDR MG, the environmentally challenging underwater outboard use, and the rigorous certification criteria for SubHDR MGS, LRUs and subcomponents, Raytheon

Company is the only source that currently possesses the knowledge and expertise required to perform the Tl&Es and RUORs. currently procures SubHDR MGS sole source from Raytheon Company and does not possess Level Ill Technical Data Packages (TDP) that would be necessary for the competitive acquisition of LRU and sublevel component TI&E and

RUOR.

has procured the Level 11 TDP from Raytheon Company, but while sufficient to perform organic

SubHDR MG diagnostics and LRU replacement, the Level Il TDP is not sufficient to support full and open competition of the SubHDR MG LRUs and sublevel component TI&E and RUOR, necessitating that failed LRUs and sublevel components must be returned to Raytheon Company for TI&E and RUOR.

In order to develop LRUs and sublevel components via alternate sources, Level Ill TDPs would need to be acquired from Raytheon Company. The development of LRUs and sublevel components via alternate sources would also require significant nonrecurring engineering, requalification and certification testing and evaluation, product configuration baselining, and integrated logistics support infrastructure changes.

The Government estimates that the total cost to acquire a Level Ill TDP from Raytheon

Company for each of the eight (8) LRUs would be . The cost is estimated as follows:

The TDP development by Raytheon Company would cost approximately Once acquired, the TDP would go through validation testing by the Government via functional and physical configuration audits. These configuration audits would require the disassembly of each

LRU for comparison against the TDP (separate cost of $ ). Upon completion of the configuration audits, any necessary corrections or updates to the drawing package would need to be accomplished by Raytheon Company at an estimated cost of . The estimated time for completion of the validation process would be one (1) year. At this point, the Level Ill TDPs would be validated for a competitive procurement.

Once the Level Ill TDPs are validated, the Government estimates that to develop alternate sources for the development of the eight (8) SubHDR MG LRUs (identified in paragraph 3) it would cost approximately per LRU and take a minimum of three (3) years to complete.

The resulting LRUs would have to be compatible (form, fit, function) with the SubHDR Mast and other system components, as well as meet all performance and environmental requirements

(e.g., shock, vibration, thermal, UNDEX).

Table 2, lists the cost and schedule basis of estimate to develop and qualify each LRU developed by alternate sources with Tasks 1-8 being required to qualify all eight (8) LRUs at a cost of . If all LRUs are developed by the same source, Tasks 5 and 6 are only required for the initial and one (1) retest, resulting in a final cost of to qualify all eight (8) LRUs.

.J&A

Table 2

\*Only required for initial and one retest for eight (8) LRUs provided by the same vendor.

6. Description of Efforts Made to Solicit Offers from as Many Offerors as Practicable

This requirement was synopsized in FEDBIZOPPs on 29 June 2015 and again on 16 March 2016.

A Sources Sought Announcement was published in FEDBIZOPPs on 21 November 2017, with a response date of 28 November 2017. One response was received from US Technologies. Soon after receipt, US Technologies withdrew their interest after further review.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Costs

The Govemment will conduct a price analysis in accordance with FAR Part 15.404-1 (b) as well as a cost analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 (c) to ensure a fair and reasonable price is obtained.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition

NUWCDIVNPT the In-Service Engineering Agent (ISEA) for the SubHDR System, has investigated alternate sources of supply for drop-in replacements to the current Raytheon parts used in the SubHDR MG. The ISEA determined that there are no non-developmental form, fit, and function alternate parts currently available that meet the performance and environmental requirements.

In order to be able to develop alternate components or sources of supply, it could cost the an estimated for Level 111 TDP, for LRU development, and for configuration audit process) and would result in significant qualification efforts that could last up to three (3) years. Since the SubHDR system is a mature system that is deployed beyond full operating capability and is well within the operations and sustainment life cycle phase, this level of cost and effort is not a viable option to remove barriers to competition.

Based on the current Fleet-wide deployment, stability of the system requirements, maturity of the existing system design, and the continued availability of key components from Raytheon

Company, no major near-term performance requirements or obsolescence driven redesign efforts are anticipated. The NUWCDIWNPT ISEA for the SubHDR will continue to evaluate diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortage risks and look for competition opportunities when obsolescence forces component redesign and replacement. In the event that new performance requirements occur, competition for these upgrades will be evaluated at

Technical Insertion opportunities.

For reasons set forth in Section 5, NUWCDIVNPT has no plans at this time to compete future requirements for the supplies and services covered by this document. NUWCDIVNPT will continue to conduct market research and if another potential source emerges or if SPAWAR changes their overall acquisition strategy, NUWCDIVDPT will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

CONTRACTING NEGOTIATOR IDENTIFICATION:

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION (FAR

I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Signature and Date

0222 (401) 832-

Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No.

TECHNICALIREQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION (FAR 6.303-2(b))

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance, which are included in this justification and its supporting acquisition planning data, including Acquisition Plan No.

17030.0, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

TECHNICAL COGNIZANCE:

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW (NMCARS 5206.303(90))

I have determined this justification is legally sufficient.

Name (Print) and Title (Code) Phone No.

ADVOCATE FOR COMPETITION CONCURRENCE

I

APPROVAL BLOCK (FAR 6.304 for Approving Official)

Upon the basis of the above justification, I hereby approve, as the Designee of the Head

Procuring Activity, the solicitation of the proposed procurement(s) described herein using other