Notice of Intent - Logical follow-on for two (2) additional Marine Common Aircrew Trainer(MCAT) devices.

On 30 August 2016, delivery order N36140-12-D-5116-0002 for five Marine Common Aircrew Trainers (MCATs) was awarded to Kratos Technology and Training Solutions. Pursuant to FAR Subpart 16.505(b)(1) fair opportunity was given to all Prime Contractors under the Training Systems Contract III (TSC III) LOT I, a Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) Multiple Award Contract (MAC). Following the award of the initial delivery order a requirement for two new MCAT devices has been established. These two devices will be procured on a sole source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency pursuant to FAR Subpart 16.505(b)(2)(C) as a logical follow on to the initial delivery order awarded on 30 August 2016. All TSC III LOT I contract holders were offered a fair opportunity to submit proposals against the original order requirements as stated in RFP N61340-16-R-0006. The subsequent requirement to procure two (2) additional MCAT training devices is the result of a revised approach that was previously anticipated to be upgrades of pre-existing prototype devices. Procuring trainers with the same technical configuration will provide significant economies and efficiencies. The 2 additional MCATs will maintain the exact same technical performance requirements procured under the original solicitation. The logical follow-on approach will leverage the pre-existing technical reviews and testing events. Furthermore, the trainers will be delivered within a similar timeframe and will benefit from efficient maintainability over the life cycle of all devices. Utilization of the same source on this acquisition allows the government to realize significant efficiencies including: - Elimination of significant non-recurring programmatic and engineering costs and the elimination of significant additional time that would be required to conduct non-recurring engineering and logistics support activities, due to establishing and maintaining two separate configuration baselines which would occur if a separate acquisition approach were to be implemented; - Elimination of and/or significant reduction of time and associated costs needed to conduct in-plant and on-site configuration item interface testing as well as detailed performance validation and verification testing activities when compared to a separate acquisition. - The original order includes purposefully tailored and minimized validation and verification testing activities for production units 3, 4, and 5 which would not be able to be implemented on a separate acquisition. The proposed logical follow-on would allow for the use of the same tailored and minimized testing activities on the additional devices. - Delivering and maintaining the same configuration item baseline across all MCAT training devices would ensure common operational performance and reduce operational support requirements, reduce maintenance and repair times and allow for minimizing procurement of initial spare configuration items required to ensure operation after delivery. Fewer or none of these efficiencies or economies would exist if the two (2) additional MCATs were procured utilizing a different acquisition approach, which may also result in a different trainer design. Considering the above, the logical follow-on nature of the acquisition, including efficiency and economy requires use of the exception cited. Pursuant to FAR Subpart 5.202(a)(6) and 16.505(a)(1), this contract action is exempt from synopsizing the proposed contract action. However, pursuant to FAR subpart 5.301(a)(2)(ii), contract award of this action will be synopsized. In addition, pursuant to FAR Subpart 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(D), a public notice and the justification for an exemption to Fair Opportunity will be posted to fedbizopps for a minimum of 30 days after the modification is complete to the existing delivery order. Only TSC III LOT I Prime Contractors (LOT I contract holders previously awarded a contract under TSC III) are considered an interested party in this contract action. If an interested party believes the basis for this approach to be inaccurate or flawed, the following information is requested in its response: - Estimated delivery date of each device and all technical information and data from contract award. - Rough order of magnitude/Not to exceed amount for the price of both devices. A estimated price for each device must be provided. Please contact Fez Shah at contact@example.gov if you have any information to submit pertaining to this posting.