A02 - Justification_SAP_KO signed.pdf

Version 2, MAY 2018 PREVIOUS VERSION IS OBSOLETE

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION for

SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS VALUED BELOW $250K

☐ FAR PART 8.405-6(b)(1) Items Peculiar to One Manufacturer ☐ FAR Part 8.405-6(a)(1)(i) (?) Limited the Source

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:

☐ New Requirement

☐ Modification

ESTIMATED VALUE (inclusive of options):

FUND TYPE: YEAR:

1. NAME OF PROPOSED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACTOR / BRAND NAME MANUFACTURER:

2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES REQUIRED AND THE INTENDED USE:

3. UNIQUE SALIENT CHARACTERISTICS THAT LIMIT AVAILABILITY TO ONLY ONE SOURCE, WITH THE

REASON NO OTHER SUPPLIES OR SERVICES CAN BE USED:

4. REASON WHY CONTRACTOR IS THE ONLY SOURCE CAPABLE OF MEETING MISSION REQUIREMENTS;

SPECIFICALLY, THE REASON NO OTHER SOURCE CAN MEET THE UNIQUE CAPABILITIES IN SECTION 3:

Is this a follow-on contract? yes☐ no☐ If yes, provide contract number: _____________________________

5. MARKET RESEARCH:

6. TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which is included in the sections above, is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

NAME AND TITLE OF CUSTOMER DIGITAL SIGNATURE EMAIL ADDRESS DATE

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION (For Contracting Personnel Use):

8. CONTRACT SPECIALIST/PURCHASING AGENT REVIEW:

I have done my due diligence in verifying the information presented above by the requiring activity and have attempted to obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable.

NAME OF REVIEWER DIGITAL SIGNATURE EMAIL ADDRESS DATE

9. ENDORSEMENT OF THE ACC-APG TENANT DIVISION CONTRACTING OFFICER

I hereby ☐approve / ☐disapprove this justification in accordance with the authority cited on this document.

Approval is based on the availability of funds and provided that the services and property herein described have been otherwise authorized for procurement.

NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER DIGITAL SIGNATURE EMAIL ADDRESS DATE

chanel.d.williams Highlight

CONTINUATION PAGE

CONTINUATION PAGE

Other systems reviewed:

-Xsens: focused on gaming industry; not customizable (sensors are only assigned to a particular body segment); analysis software is not robust; Army collaborators do not use.

Market research have concluded Noraxon is the only vendor capable of fulfilling the Government need. Research determined other vendors optical systems will suffer from a lower resolution in the measurement. Kinect markerless motion capture will also have technical challenges due to resolution issues and not customizable. Based upon market research findings it is recommended this requirement will be posted Via FBO as a notice of intent to award sole source to Noraxon.

There are various sensors on the market that measure motion, but the portable lab solution is a combination hardware and software solution that meets our mission requirements. The system is capable of meeting various testing requirements due to its customization. The seamless integration of hardware and software reduces post-processing time for data analysis.

-Noraxon sensors can be assigned to body segments (or object) on a test by test basis. Additionally, the system is customizable to use only the sensors necessary for the interested measurements.

-Noraxon’s portable lab system is self contained and ready to be deployed for use in the lab environment or field setting.

-Noraxon’s data collection can take place on-board the data logger if/when test subject is out of range of antenna.

-Noraxon portable lab is modular and can be expanded to include additional hardware. This will ensure that the test center’s equipment is compatible with other Army entities (namely CCDC Soldier Center and ARL).

-Noraxon’s hardware and software seamlessly integrate to provide calibration for sensors and analysis.

-Noraxon is focused on research.

#4 continued:

It is vital to mission success that the test center use equipment and protocols that have been vetted by Army researchers. Using products/protocols that have not been vetted could compromise the quality of test data generated by the test center resulting in inaccurate assessments of Soldier-worn gear and questionable customer reports. Without maintaining the latest performance testing capabilities, the test center risks not providing the highest quality independent tests and reports for the customers.