JEFOP - OASIS TTBW (Final).pdf

Rev.: 2/2021

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

(Langley Research Center)

Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Technology Maturation Testing Study & Requirements

Development

Description of the action being approved:

This justification documents the basis for issuing a task order under the One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) contract (GS00Q14OADU405) using an exception to the Fair Opportunity process.

Description of the supplies or services required to meet the agency’s needs:

This justification provides the rationale for contracting by other than full and open competition to award a sole source cost-plus fixed fee (CPFF) task order to the Boeing Company (Boeing) under the GSA OASIS contract for research and development services to continue maturation of the Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) Technology by focusing on edge-of-envelope performance, safety, and environmental concerns of the TTBW configuration. This proposed new task order will include providing configuration and geometry information to conduct analyses in key challenge areas of system analysis, aerodynamics, acoustics, icing, and structures, trade studies for test article design and wind tunnel testing options, and technology maturation roadmaps to define future TTBW Technology development needs. The total estimated cost of the proposed task order is $1M and the estimated period of performance is six (6) months.

Identification of Exception to Fair Opportunity:

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A), The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C), The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D), It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E), For orders exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold a statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source.

FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) In accordance with section 1331 of Public Law 111-240 (15 U.S.C. 644(r)), contracting officers may, at their discretion, set aside orders for any of the small business concerns identified in 19.000(a)(3). When setting aside orders for small business concerns, the specific small business program eligibility requirements identified in part 19 apply.

Supporting Rationale:

There have been five prior phases of research and development contract work that have led to the current technology maturation of the Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW).

Phase I (2009-2010) – the key outcome of this study was the conceptual design of the Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration. This configuration showed significant potential to contribute to meeting NASA N+3 goals and also highlighted a significant uncertainty in the wing weight estimate.

Phase II (2010-2014) – further refined the TTBW configuration and reduced the uncertainty in the potential benefits with specific focus on reducing the uncertainty of the wing weight.

The study included the development of a detailed full-scale, finite element model (FEM) of the wing and fuselage used to optimize the wing design subject to multiple design constraints including flutter.

Phase III (2014-2016) – higher fidelity refinement of the TTBW design at M=0.745, as well as the design, fabrication, and wind tunnel testing of a 4.5-percent scale model to verify performance. Identified remaining technical challenges associated with the application of a truss-braced wing to a modern transport aircraft and provide recommendations. Further evolved the M=0.745 design to a higher cruise Mach number, approaching M=0.80, and provided a preliminary design report.

Phase IV (2016-2020) – Conducted a high fidelity refinement of the TTBW design at M=0.80, developed an advanced M=0.80 conventional tube-and-wing configuration for comparison, identified remaining TTBW technical challenges, and provided recommendations; designed and built a wind tunnel model of the M=0.80 configuration and conducted a high-speed wind tunnel investigation to verify performance. Conducted a high fidelity refinement of the high-lift system design and designed and built a high-lift configuration wind tunnel model, and conducted a low-speed wind tunnel investigation to verify performance and the aeroelastic Finite Element Model (FEM) was updated for the M=0.80 configuration, airplane center of gravity and inertias were determined to facilitate horizontal and vertical tail sizing, and wing control surface assessments were conducted to specify the control surface layout.

Phase V (2020-2022) – follow-on, low-speed wind tunnel investigation that is a continuation of the low-speed test conducted at the end of the Phase IV task and a new buffet wind tunnel model and wind tunnel investigation.

The first three phases were awarded competitively to Boeing under an Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate NASA Research Announcement on a Basic Ordering Agreement as well as under the Structures, Materials, Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics, and Acoustics Research and Technology Contract. The fourth and fifth phases were awarded noncompetitvely to Boeing under NASA’s Basic and Applied Aerospace Research and Technology Contract.

The work in this proposed new task order builds upon extensive past efforts with Boeing to develop TTBW technology directed at satisfying NASA’s goals of realizing revolutionary improvements in economics and environmental performance by developing technologies that enable reduced fuel burn and reduced emissions. Boeing has carried out five phases of work, as previously described, to evolve a TTBW configuration that was first tested in the Phase III wind tunnel investigation. Boeing proprietary methods have been used throughout these first five phases to develop the current unique and cutting-edge configuration. Key portions of the results, along with the current version of the configuration, were provided with limited rights. These limited rights data would make it prohibitive to award the proposed task to another company.

Boeing has developed the unique expertise relative to the design of the current TTBW configuration through their work on the successful efforts under Phases I through V.

The lessons learned throughout the evolution of the configuration provide a unique and high level of experience and understanding by Boeing that would be unmatched by any other contractor at this time. Because of their long history of designing, wind-tunnel testing, evaluating, and further evolving the TTBW configuration design, Boeing is the only source capable of providing the continued testing and development of TTBW technology. Boeing’s unique knowledge of the technology, including the design tools, testing processes, and previously resolved technical issues and upgrades make Boeing the only source capable of providing the required services within the timeframe specified and without substantial duplication of cost. Award to any other company would result in duplication of cost to NASA that would not be recovered through competition as NASA has already invested approximately $34M.

Determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable:

The Contracting Officer’s signature on this document indicates that the Contracting Officer has determined that the anticipated cost to the government will be fair and reasonable. The Contractor shall be required to submit a proposal to be evaluated and negotiated by the Government. Prior to execution of the contractual instrument, a proposal analysis will be performed. The proposal analysis will ensure that the final agreed-to price for the contract action is fair and reasonable. Detailed documentation and justification of reasonableness will be disclosed in the Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM) which will be prepared using the evaluation of Boeing quoted pricing, compared to the Independent Government Estimate (IGE), and the pricing of previous similar efforts.

Certified cost or pricing data will be obtained and used in determining a fair and reasonable cost.

Other Facts:

None

A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made:

LaRC may have future requirements that can only be met by Boeing. However, the Contracting Officer will continue to scrutinize all SOWs received to ensure fair opportunity is appropriately given. LaRC typically looks for proactive steps that can be taken to eliminate barriers to competition for future requirements. However, there are limitations with regard to the use of existing data, as Boeing has only authorized the Government limited data rights. Because of the design and configuration of the software tool components, it makes it difficult to compete amongst other vendors. Additionally, due to the substantial investment by Boeing and the propriety nature of the SUGAR TTBW configuration, LaRC lacks the ability to incentivize the other OASIS contractors to invest the substantial sums that would be required to establish an alternate source for this service. Nevertheless, the Contracting Officer will continue to examine the market in the future for alternative solutions or new sources before executing any subsequent acquisitions for the same requirements.

Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Technology Maturation Testing Study & Requirements Development

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

SIGNATURE PAGE

I certify that the requirements and technical data contained herein, and which form a basis for this justification are accurate and complete.

Susan J. Wilz Technical Representative

I hereby certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Based on the content herein, it is determined there is substantial evidence to justify this exception to fair opportunity.

Mercer T. Hurst Contracting Officer

CONCURRENCE:

Stephen DeLange Office of Chief Counsel

CONCURRENCE:

Susan E. Mcclain Procurement Officer

APPROVAL:

Based on the information provided in this justification, and as the approving official, I have determined that the exception at FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) applies to the order.

David F. Young Competition Advocate LaRC