JA_for_SOTAS_Redacted.pdf

CMO Control Number: 2017-112 the offer meets the minimum technical requirements. Using a full trade-off SSEB process that includes evaluation of cost and not cost factors would likely result in additional time beyond the nine month timeline.

(ii) Qualification of a New Prime Contractor (7 months): Prior to awarding a competitive action to a new source, the Government would perform a pre-award survey to assess whether the new contractor could meet contractual requirements (1 week); validation of manufacturing processes (for example: software development, fabrication, testing, outsource processes) (4-6 months); qualification of quality systems (International Standards Organization (ISO) 9001:2008 (Quality Management Systems) compliance) (2 weeks); as well as verification of contractor’s familiarity with Government Production Quality Deficiency Reports (1 week).

(iii) Technical Drawings and Logistics Data (3 months): The update and delivery of technical drawings and logistics data for a new intercom system would require approximately 3 months including all performance requirements and drawings necessary to produce a conforming system.

(iv) Validation and Verification (VAL/VER) of technical data (6 months): It would take approximately 6 months to validate and verify the technical data and logistics documentation against the vehicle Prime Item Specification and TDP.

(v) VAL/VER of Software (6 months): It would take approximately 6 months to validate software requirements for a new Intercom system and compatibility with existing vehicle software platform.

(vi) Field Testing and VAL/VER of Compatibility (6 months): Approximately 6 months would be required to evaluate a new intercom system using the same environmental conditions and operational procedures currently used in KSA. The validation and verification will also test the compatibility of the new Intercom system with the existing vehicles software and electronics equipment. Field-testing and VAL/VER testing can be conducted concurrently with software validation and verification testing mentioned above.

(vii) New Platform Unique Specialized Equipment, Tooling and Fixtures Design and Fabrication of Fixtures, Development of Manufacturing Fixtures, Processes, (6 months): Production of SWORD vehicles has been an ongoing process since 2010.

Existing fixtures, brackets, mounts and an established manufacturing process are in place for installing the SOTAS M2 Intercom system using at specific stations in the manufacturing line. It would take approximately 6 months to establish new fixtures and create a new installation process for an Intercom system other that the SOTAS M2 system.

(viii) Establish Supply Chain (6 months): A new contractor would have to establish and qualify a supply chain of sources of supply to provide parts or materials that are compliant with specifications.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The Government will continue to survey the communications market to determine if additional sources are capable of producing and delivering an intercom system capable of integration into the existing RSLF communications infrastructure or any communications requirements supporting the SWORD program.

8. Market Research: ACC-WRN published a Market Survey in FedBizOpps on 06 April 2017 to assess the current market’s capabilities for delivering the SOTAS M2 Intercom System. The Market Survey referenced the potential procurement of SOTAS M2 Intercom Systems. Also included in the survey were technical requirements and specific part numbers included in the SOTAS M2 Intercom system. The survey encouraged potential sources to respond to the notice with a capabilities statements and information relating to experience and past performance with the SOTAS M2 or similar systems. The Market Survey closed 21 April 2017 with zero responses received.

Thales Nederland has the experience, technical data, and resources necessary to produce and deliver an Intercom system that conforms to the testing and design of the M1A2S combat vehicle. No other firm is currently capable of meeting this requirement.

9. Interested Sources: The contract action for this requirement will be synopsized in FedBizOpps in accordance with FAR 5.201. To date, no other sources have written to express an interest in the M1A2S Intercom requirement. However, the Government will evaluate and consider any proposals received in response to the synopsis.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History:

(1) Contract Award Date

W56HZV-15-C-0013 09 OCT 2014

W56HZV-11-C-0329 P00004 20 DEC 2012

W56HZV-11-C-0329 P00003 16 MAY 2012

W56HZV-11-C-0329 05 AUG 2011

W56HZV-09-C-0385 31 MAR 2009

To date, Thales Nederland has delivered 386 SOTAS M2 Intercom systems for the SWORD program with a total cost of $5,864,081.00.

(2) All previous procurements were awarded on a sole-source basis to Thales Nederland.

(3) All previous contracts for the SOTAS M2 systems cited the authority of Title10 U.S.C. Section 2304(c)(4) and FAR 6.302-4. This authority states that full and open competition need not be provided when precluded by the terms of an international agreement or treaty between the US and a foreign government, or the written directions of a foreign government reimbursing the agency for the acquisition of supplies or services for such government.

(4) The Government will continue to survey the communications market to determine if additional sources are capable of producing and delivering an intercom system capable of integration into the existing RSLF communications infrastructure.

(5) No prior awards of the SOTAS M2 Intercom systems was accomplished by full and open competition.

(6) No unusual patterns have been revealed by a review of the procurement history.

(7) Previous procurements identified above were executed under Case SR-B- VTC, which identified Thales Nederland as the requested sole source for the Intercom system. Although the LOR for the follow-on FMS Case (SR-B-VTF) sighted the SOTAS M2 intercom specifically, KSA did not include sole source designation requests for any item or service. The reason for omitting sole source requests are unknown to the Government at this time.

11. Technical Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DANIEL P. SIMON Date: 30MAY2017 M1A2S Project Manager, Saudi Arabia Management Office (SAMO) Signature: /S/ Daniel Simon

12. Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

CHAD D. YOUNG Date: 30MAY2017 Chief, Saudi Arabia Management Office (SAMO) Signature: /S/ Chad Young

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this requirement will be fair and reasonable.

Certified Cost or Pricing Data will be required and will form the basis for negotiating a fair and reasonable price.

MICHAEL R. CHANEY Date: 1 August 2017 Procuring Contracting Officer Heavy Combat, Foreign Military Sales Team Signature: Michael R. Chaney //s//

14. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

MICHAEL R. CHANEY Date: 1 August 2017 Procuring Contracting Officer Heavy Combat, Foreign Military Sales Team Signature: Michael R. Chaney //s//