Redacted_CJA.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND

RADM WILLIAM A. MOFFET BUILDING

47123 BUSE ROAD, BLDG 2272

PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND 20670-1547

IN REPLY REFER TO:

CJ&A_15_24830

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR USE OF OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. Contracting Activity.

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Headquarters

2. Description of the Action Being Approved.

This Class Justification and Approval (CJ&A) authorizes and approves the issuance of cost and fixed-price type orders on a sole source basis under Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA) N00019-15-G-0003 to

Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS) to procure supplies and services for the Tomahawk Cruise Missile

Program, for U.S. Navy and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers. Authority to act under this class justification expires 30 September 2020.

3. Description of Supplies/Services.

The effort procured under this Class J&A will include engineering, systems engineering, test, logistics, obsolescence/Diminishing Manufacturer Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS), Cost Reduction

Initiatives (CRI), and external program support/supplies/services for the Tomahawk Weapons System. This will include but is not limited to:

o Engineering/Systems Engineering and Logistics efforts related to Operational readiness and reliability, system configuration, system safety, software, firmware, and/or related hardware, weapon system mass properties or changes to weight of the weapon system, system performance or system performance capabilities, training or training improvements, support equipment, environmental requirements, integration, compatibility and installation of shipboard and/or air Components and Interfaces, energetics, power/propulsion, service life extension and/or special tooling and test equipment, logistics support plans, supportability due to engineering changes, maintenance plans, test program support, depot and recertification and/or logistics support analysis data.

o Modification and support for overall system and system interface, test and integration efforts.

o Design, fabrication, assembly, testing and results verification of prototypes or models to support engineering studies or analyses.

o Technical, engineering, investigations/studies, maintenance and documentation support, ancillary to the execution of Operational Test Launches, Functional Ground Tests, Production Acceptance Testing and related Navy Testing.

o Services, support, analysis studies and material necessary to repair, inspect, modify, and/or return to ready-for-issue condition items of Government property.

o Non-recurring and recurring efforts required to identify, analyze, project and track obsolescence and obsolescence impacts on the system/Program, as well as, design, resolve, and implement obsolescence solutions. Identify, evaluate, analyze, select, plan and execute viable CRIs that will reduce costs, and/or increase efficiencies of the Program.

o Non-recurring and recurring efforts required to design and integrate the Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2AD) hardware into the Tomahawk All-Up-Round (AUR) including technical support to the A2AD radio and network suppliers.

o System integration and verification of A2AD improvements including required upgrades of Operational

Embedded Software, Guidance Test Set (GTS), Government Furnished Property (GFP), Hardware-in-the-

Loop (HWIL), and Specialized Test Equipment;

o Tomahawk recertification planning and procedures;

o Engineering and system engineering studies and investigations, support analysis, system interface, test and integration efforts for external submarine and surface programs for the Tomahawk Cruise Missile

Program. External programs may include but not be limited to, Los Angeles Class (SSN688), Virginia Class

(SSN774), Virginia Payload Tube, Virginia Payload Module, SSGN, MK57 VLS interfaces, DDG1000 and

DDG113AF.

See Appendix A for Estimated Dollar Value

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.

As a result of a competitive procurement in 1994, RMS was selected as the sole producer of the

Tomahawk AUR missile and source for depot maintenance. RMS maintains and controls both the Level III technical data package (TDP) and the manufacturing documentation for the Tomahawk due to the performance-based nature of the development and production contracts.

Based on a Navy Analysis, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and

Logistics (OUSD(AT&L)) issued a memo dated 24 November 1999 that estimated that procurement of an adequate TDP for competitive purposes, together with the duplicated costs that would be incurred for tooling, test equipment, and qualification of second source would be approximately $130M (FY03$). This analysis, based on actual costs from prior similar missile programs, coupled with the quantities planned for procurement at that time showed that a substantial portion of these costs could not be recovered through competition. Accordingly, TDPs adequate for competition of both the Tomahawk missile and depot were not procured by the U.S. Navy.

The FY03 estimate to procure a Level III TDP for the Tomahawk missile program and develop a second source for production was updated to approximately $160M (FY08$) prior to award of the annual FY09 production contract with FY10 and FY11 options. RMS is not willing to sell the U.S. Navy the Level III

TDP, and rights which the Navy lacks, which would be required for a competitive procurement. RMS estimated that if the company was willing to sell the Level III TDP and additional rights, RMS' cost to the

U.S. Navy would be well in excess of $250M (FY10$). Additionally, RMS estimated that the cost to establish a second (prime) source and procure TDPs and additional rights from suppliers would significantly exceed $200M (FY10$) and confirmed that many suppliers would not sell their intellectual property.

RMS is the only source that possesses the current technical, configuration, manufacturing data, and unique expertise required to perform the tasks required under each anticipated order.

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

A formal market survey will not be conducted because the required effort cannot be described in a manner to promote competition due to the fact that a competitive data package does not exist. In accordance with

DFARS PGI 206.302-1 a sources sought was published on 14 July 2015 with no responses received.

Individual orders will be synopsized in the FedBizOpps. Any responses will be evaluated prior to award.

No additional market research was conducted because it is not practicable, for the reasons discussed in paragraph 5 above, for any company other than RMS to provide the required supplies and services.

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Cost.

In accordance with FAR 15.402, the Contracting Officer shall ensure that all supplies and services provided under this contract are procured at a fair and reasonable price. The Contractor will submit a formal price proposal with certified cost or pricing data or other than certified cost and pricing data, and sufficient information to support the accuracy and reliability of the estimate. Contractor proposals will be reviewed by experienced technical analysts, cost analysts and contract specialists with the aid of necessary field pricing support. The Contracting Officer will utilize cost and price analysis as the basis for negotiating a fair and reasonable price.

8. Actions to Remove Barriers to Future Competition.

For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 5, NAVAlR 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, NAVAIR will assess whether competition for future requirements is feasible. Because this effort 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 CJ&A was provided to the approval authority for review. Approval of this CJ&A signifies the approval authority has made the determination required by DFARS PGI 206.304(a)(ii).