22RJW70_24DJW70_J_A_Redacted.pdf

J&A Number: CR-22018 from storing any critical software or mission data when powered down. The AMP is planned for future utilization with manned platforms in support of MPRA.

It is anticipated that a quantity of AMP systems will be procured under the IDIQ with an estimated value of $17.1M, and $2.8M is estimated for spare parts. Repairs and lifecycle management have an estimated value of $2.4M, and the engineering services have an estimated value of $2.2M. Below is the estimated funding profile for the requirement:

Table 1: Estimated Dollar Value

Total

APN

O&MN

RDT&E

Total $24,550,000

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1). Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

5. Rationale Justifying Use of Cited Statutory Authority

Curtiss Wright is the Original Equipment Manufacturer of the AMMS, which is the predecessor mission computer and AMP. The Government lacks a technical data package suitable for full and open competition. To date, the Government only procured limited technical documentation (system specifications, interface requirements, software requirements, thermal and structural analysis reports, acceptance test procedures, and a top assembly technical data package) as a deliverable during the development of the AMP with Curtiss Wright maintaining proprietary data.

The AMP, to include the Curtiss Wright proprietary quad-core processor, is the only known item capable of instantaneous memory cache (SBC), capable of running the Minotaur MMS software, enterprise level data correlation, and sensor control application for ISR.

Curtiss Wright is the only source capable to provide the highly specialized AMP as this action is a continued development from previous contracts. The AMP was designed to be interchangeable with the AMMS, therefore the AMP architecture already exists, to include the United States (US) Navy, US Air Force (USAF), and Australia. The Curtiss Wright chassis design was previously airborne and environmental qualified for the AMMS;

therefore, as the AMP design was similar, NAVAIR waived the requirement for complete environmental qualification for the AMP. A non-recurring engineering redesign attempt by any source outside of Curtiss Wright would result in extensive duplication of costs to include re-engineering, recertifications, environmental qualifications, and overall schedule delays that will not support critical programmatic milestones that include Integrated Functional Capability (IFC) 4.0 Aircraft Retrofit supporting the achievement of Triton Initial Operating Capability (IOC).

Curtiss Wright previously developed the AMP under Defense Technical Information Center’s (DTIC) Information Analysis Centers (IAC) Multiple Award Contracts (MAC), which were leveraged for initial design, development, engineering, testing, and procurement of AMP lab and developmental prototypes. DTIC IAC MACs are Cost Plus Fixed Fee, competitive based contracts that were awarded to Alion and ManTech as the contractual primes in support of PMA-290 and PMA-262 requirements. Both prime contractors leveraged Curtiss Wright as a subcontractor and teaming partner to manufacture AMP specific hardware, software, and documentationdeliverables. Below are the prior actions associated with the AMP:

FA807514D0014 Task DSTAT-DT-16-1424: awarded to Alion Period of Performance (POP) of June 2017 to June 2022 (ceiling reached) Engineering costs and multiple parts ordered for the AMP Engineering Development Models and Prototypes, each, for total

FA807514D0020 Task DSTAT-DT-17-1658: awarded to ManTech POP of June 2018 to June 2022 (ceiling reached) Engineering costs and multiple parts ordered for the AMP Engineering Development Models and Prototypes, each, for total

Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA) N0016418GJV11 was established on a sole source basis with Curtiss Wright for the procurement of AMPs and associated incidental services for product and technical support. This anticipated contract is a follow-on to the BOA.

A substantial duplication of cost of $9,286,485.80 would result to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition and unacceptable delays of 48 months in fulfilling this requirement would result to award to any other source. This estimate was derived by a combination of set-up costs, established Naval Air Systems Command fees, past actuals, and minimal estimating based on known parameters and similar efforts.

The following is a breakout of the estimated substantial duplication of costs and unacceptable delay required prior to award to any other source. PMUAS PMA-262, as the primary AMP user, would incur duplication of costs of $6,975,485.80. MPRA PMA-290, while leveraging applicable PMUAS PMA-262 certifications, testing, and documentation (where applicable), would incur duplication of costs of $2,311,000.00.

Table 2: PMUAS PMA-262 Duplication of Cost and Time Delay

Description Cost Time (Months) Re-tool of Line 6 Reverse Engineer and Test Procedures 16 First Article of Test 3 Tempest Certification 4 Electrical Load Analysis 6 Stress Analysis 4 Publications/Reoccurring Costs 4 Flight hours 5 Ramp Fees * Total: $6,975,485.80 48

*concurrent with the flight hour time identified

Table 3: MPRA PMA-290 Duplication of Cost and Time Delay

Description Cost Time (Months) Re-tool of Line 6 Reverse Engineer and Test Procedures 16 First Article of Test 3 Tempest Certification 4 Electrical Load Analysis 6 Stress Analysis 4 Publications/Reoccurring Costs 4 Flight hours 5 Ramp Fees * Total: $2,311,000.00 48

*concurrent with the flight hour time identified

Full and open competition is not contemplated for the AMP requirements. Duplication of costs in the amount of $9,286,485.80 and a lack of existing production-level technical data package prevent full and open competition. Additionally, full and open competition is not contemplated due the unacceptable delay of 48 months that would not support the program requirements. As a result, Curtiss Wright is the only responsible source who can fulfill the Government’s requirements.

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

In an effort to broaden competitive resources, a Request for Information (RFI) was posted on the sam.gov website on 26 October 2021 for the AMP. The RFI described the Government’s intention to award a five year IDIQ contract and invited vendors to submit information, as well as express interest in proposing on the IDIQ. No responses were received.

The proposed contract was synopsized on the sam.gov website on 05 July 2022 and only Curtiss Wright expressed an interest in this requirement. To date, no responses have been received. No additional market research was conducted because it is not practicable, for the reasons discussed in paragraph 5 above, for any company other than Curtiss Wright to provide the required supplies and services.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Costs

The Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the Government for the supplies/services covered by the J&A will be fair and reasonable.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Competition

For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 5, NSWC-CR has no plans at this time to compete future contracts for the types of supplies/services covered by this document. If another potential source emerges, NSWC-CR will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible.

As this is a follow-on for supplies and services previously awarded on a non-competitive basis, in accordance with DFARS PGI 206.304(a)(i), the prior J&A was provided to the approval authority for review. Approval of this J&A signifies the approval authority has made the determination required by DFARS PGI 206.304(a)(ii).