Redacted F-15 AWBS J_A.pdf

Justification and Approval (J&A) for Other Than Full and Open Competition

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

August 2023 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 2 of 7

I. Agency and Contracting Activity.

This Justification and Approval to request authority for Other Than Full and Open Competition supports requirements generated for the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC)/WAQE. The contracting activity for this requirement is AFLCMC/ WAQK.

II. Nature and/or description of the action being approved.

Due to the circumstances described herein, the activity requests authority to acquire the services listed in this document using Other Than Full and Open Competition as prescribed by FAR 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements. This action will result in the award of a follow-on contract Indefinite Delivery/ Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract sole source to Lockheed Martin Corporation DBA Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (LMAC), CAGE:

81755. This IDIQ will consist of five (5) one-year ordering periods. The ID/IQ contract will include Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost Reimbursable-No Fee (CR-NF) contract line-item numbers (CLINs). The validity period of the ID/IQ is projected to be 31 Dec 2025 - 30 Dec 2030.

III. Description of supplies/services required to meet agency needs.

This requirement will provide sustainment services required to upgrade the F-15 Phase III Automated Form F (AFF) to continue the software development of the Automated Weight & Balance System (AWBS).

Major tasks include, but are not limited to, program management, engineering services, repair activity, sustainment services, data reporting, and travel.

The AWBS is a window-based computer software tool utilized to quickly calculate baseline weight, fuel, crew, mission equipment, and other payload factors; identify Center of Gravity (CG) and associated operational limitations via AFF; determine structural load optimizations; and estimate landing condition based on anticipated fuel consumption and flight duration in response to manually inputted fuels, weapons payload, and other sortie-specific configurations on various Department of Defense (DoD) aircraft systems such as the The AFFs are routinely reviewed during each pre-flight check in order to ensure the aircraft is within safety of flight tolerances.

The AFF uses aircraft effectivity data to determine the aircraft Model Design Series (MDS) type to calculate the forward and aft limits and determine fuel tank capacities. It calculates all Center-of-Gravity (CG) limits, in-flight limits, and fuel weights and moments. AFF also calculates the most forward and most aft conditions.

This requirement will require the contractor to investigate the latest Technical Order and create a new requirements specification document that shall include F-15 aircraft configurations and any new software/ hardware technologies to increase effectiveness and performance of the software for the F-15 AFF.

The total estimated contract value is . The USAF total estimated value is based on Option 4 of the previous contract, FA8505-20-D-0001, utilizing a 4% escalation factor per year rate increase for inflation. The total estimated value of will be based on Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) from LMAC for current year services, plus a 4% escalation factor per year. This estimate is in support of . The USAF requirements will be funded with Operations and Maintenance (3400) funds and a will be provided for the .

The following table provides the anticipated breakout of estimated expenditure per Period, Fiscal Year, and USAF and requirements:

August 2023 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 5 of 7

• Annual maintenance costs are based on contract FA8505-20-D-0001 adjusted for inflation.

Maintenance quantity is based on the monthly engineering services on contract and is used for the duration of the period of analysis (FY )

• Reverse engineering effort requires 5 years to complete. Investment costs are based on developing the technical data package (TDP) and approve the prototype. These costs are derived from a contractor estimate, detailed by fiscal year (FY2020-2024), and adjusted for inflation.

• While the reverse engineering effort is being accomplished, analysis assumes maintenance is sole source (FY2020-2024).

• Once a new source is qualified, maintenance costs are reduced by 10% based on estimated savings due to competition (FY ).

• The Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR) and Payback Period are provided below. A desired SIR is 1 or more, indicating that for every dollar invested, a dollar or more is earned as a return on investment. The Payback Period indicates how many years it takes to recoup dollars invested.

a. SIR = 0.42 ($0.42 return on every dollar invested)

b. Payback Period = 62.3 years

Based on the analysis, the savings gained through competition do not offset the costs of reverse engineering within the -year analysis. Overall, the analysis indicates sole source procurement is the least costly alternative.

More importantly, efforts to design/field an original automated weight and balance system would immediately disrupt the agency's ability to generate timely/accurate weight and balance measurements for F-15 aircraft, as well as disrupt existing interoperability of AWBS across many of the agency's weapon systems.

Accordingly, LMAC is the only firm capable of providing the requirements described in Section III above without the U.S. Air Force experiencing substantial duplication of cost that could not expected to be recovered through competition.

V. Description of efforts made to ensure that offers are solicited from as many potential sources as practicable, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by subpart 5.2 and, if not, which exception under

FAR 5.202 applies.

A Sources Sought (SS) synopsis was posted to the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) on Feb 11, 2025, with a response date of Feb 26, 2025 under Solicitation Number FA8505F-15AWBS. The SS requested responses from interested vendors that possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet qualification requirements for this effort. vendors responded to the SS. The vendors were evaluated for their capability and determined to be not capable based on no prior experience with AWBS and lack of appropriate proprietary data associated with the systems.

The requirement will be synopsized in SAM.gov in accordance with FAR 5.201. It is anticipated that sources having an interest in subcontracting may be identified through synopsis. Any source who responds to the Government as a result of this synopsis will be identified to the prime contractor as a potential subcontracting possibility.

August 2023 CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION Page 7 of 7 this F-15 AWBS requirement.

The market research concluded that LMAC is the only vendor capable of fulfilling the Government's requirements.

VIII. Any other facts supporting the use of Other Than Full and Open Competition.

None.

IX. List of any sources that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.

See Section VII above.

X. A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers to competition before any subsequent acquisitions for the supplies or services required.

To reduce barriers to competition, the Government will revisit the qualification of software for an organic automated weight and balance system during the period of this contract. If the organic capability does not become a viable option the Government will continue to engage with the OEM, LMAC, to determine the feasibility of procuring the TDP.

The plan to break barriers to competition in the prior J&A was the same as above. That plan was executed, as the team engaged regularly with LM, but the OEM continues to decline to sell the TDP to the Government. The OEM responded on 15 May 2025 and declined interest in selling the TDP. As discussed in Section IV, an organic solution was considered but determined to be cost-prohibitive.

XI. Certification by the Contracting Officer.

As evidenced by my signature above, I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

XII. Certification by the technical/requirements personnel.

As evidenced by my (our) signature(s) above, I (we) certify that any supporting data contained herein, which is my (our) responsibility, is both accurate and complete.