A
Publication
www.npeo-kmi.com
The Future of Naval Aviation of data to command-and-control nodes. To meet the demand for persistent, multirole intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability, the Navy and Marine Corps are building a balVice Adm. anced portfolio of manned and Paul Grosklags unmanned aircraft focused on missions in the maritime environment. The Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) system will provide a persistent aircraft carrier-based There are several central themes ISR&T and strike capability as to our 2016 Naval Aviation Budget an integral part of carrier air-wing plan: fifth-generation fighter/attack Rear Adm. operations no later than the early capability; netted persistent multiMichael C. Manazir part of the next decade. MQ-4C role intelligence, surveillance, reconTriton will provide persistent naissance and targeting; supporting land-based maritime ISR and capabilities such as electronic attack, complement our P-8 multi-mission maritime patrol, and vertical lift; maritime aircraft (MMA); MQ-8 advanced strike weapons programs; Fire Scout will provide ISR support readiness recovery; and targeted to our frigates and other suitablymodernization of the force for equipped air-capable ships; and relevance and sustainability. smaller unmanned systems such First, we are acquiring F-35 Lt. Gen. Jon Davis as the RQ-21A Small Tactical Unfifth-generation fighter/attack manned Aircraft System (STUAS) aircraft while maintaining sufficient and RQ-7B Marine Corps tactical UAS tactical aviation (TACAIR) inventory capac(MCTUAS) will provide the shorter duraity. Our plan will integrate fifth-generation tion, line-of-sight reconnaissance capability technologies into the carrier air wing and integral at the unit level. expeditionary forces while maintaining and The fiscal year 2016 budget request modernizing the capability of the current enables naval aviation to continue recapitalTACAIR fleet. The F-35B and F-35C will ization of our aging fleets of airborne early replace Marine Corps F/A-18 and AV-8B airwarning, maritime patrol and vertical lift craft significantly increasing capabilities across platforms. The department is recapitalizing the range of military operations of Marine our fleet of E-2C airborne early warning sea- and land-based MAGTFs. The F-35C, aircraft with the E-2D, maritime patrol F/A-18E/F and EA-18G provide complemenand reconnaissance with the P-8A, airborne tary capabilities that enhance the versatility, electronic attack with the EA-18G, and carlethality, survivability and readiness of our rier onboard delivery (COD) with the V-22. air wings. F/A-18A-F and AV-8B aircraft will E-2D integrates a new electronically-scanned continue to receive capability enhancements radar that provides a two-generation leap in to sustain their lethality well into the next technology with the capability to detect and decade. Future avionics upgrades will enable network-centric operations for integrated fire control, situational awareness and transfer Continued On pAGE 8 ➥ Vice Admiral Paul Grosklags, Principal Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development and Acquisition), Rear Admiral Michael C. Manazir, Director Air Warfare, and Lieutenant General Jon Davis, Deputy Commandant for Aviation testified before the Seapower Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee on the Navy’s plans for its aviation programs going forward.
31 MAR
Plus: • PACFLT Senior Leaders Meet • Frank C. Jones Award
2015
Coast Guard Cutter Procurement By Ronald O’Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs The Coast Guard’s program of record (POR) calls for procuring eight national security cutters (NSCs), 25 offshore patrol cutters (OPCs), and 58 fast response cutters (FRCs) as replacements for 90 aging Coast Guard cutters and patrol craft. The NSC, OPC and FRC programs have a combined estimated acquisition cost of about $21.1 billion, and the Coast Guard’s proposed fiscal year 2016 budget requests a total of $449.9 million in acquisition funding for the three programs. NSCs are the Coast Guard’s largest and most capable general-purpose cutters. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $684 million per ship. The first four are now in service, the fifth through seventh are in various stages of construction, and long lead time materials are being procured for the eighth. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $638 million for the NSC program, including $91.4 million in acquisition funding for the NSC program. OPCs are to be smaller, less expensive and, in some respects, less capable than NSCs. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $484 million per ship. The first OPC is to be procured in FY17. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $18.5 million in acquisition funding for the OPC program. FRCs are considerably smaller and less expensive than OPCs. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $73 million per boat. A total of 32 have been funded through FY15. The 11th was commissioned into service on January 24, 2015, and the 12th is scheduled to be commissioned in March 2015. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $340 million in acquisition funding for the FRC program. Continued On pAGE 19 ➥
www.npeo-kmi.com
March 31, 2015
Table of Contents Editorial Editor
Jonathan Magin jonathanm@kmimediagroup.com Managing Editor
Harrison Donnelly harrisond@kmimediagroup.com Copy Editor
Crystal Jones crystalj@kmimediagroup.com Correspondents
The Future of Naval Aviation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Coast Guard Cutter Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress . . . . .1 Communications and Networks Discovery and Invention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Open Call for Nominations: Frank C. Jones Award for Vessel Alternations and Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 NSWC Crane Advanced Planning Briefings for Industry 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
J.B. Bissell • Kasey Chisholm • Catherine Day Michael Frigand • Nora McGann
Navy Networking Environment Shore Modernization Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Art & Design
STRATCOM Commander Emphasizes Need to Modernize Nuke Triad . . . . . . . .5
Art Director
Planning for Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Ads and Materials Manager
Surface Ship Sonar Domes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Jennifer Owers jennifero@kmimediagroup.com Jittima Saiwongnuan jittimas@kmimediagroup.com Senior Graphic Designer
Scott Morris scottm@kmimediagroup.com
PACFLT Senior Enlisted Leaders Discuss Mission Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Contract Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Graphic Designers
Andrea Herrera andreah@kmimediagroup.com Amanda Paquette amandak@kmimediagroup.com
Exclusive Subscriber Content
KMI Media Group Chief Executive Officer
Jack Kerrigan jack@kmimediagroup.com Publisher and Chief Financial Officer
Subscribers to Navy Air/Sea receive exclusive weekly content. This week’s exclusive content includes:
Constance Kerrigan connik@kmimediagroup.com Editor-In-Chief
Jeff McKaughan jeffm@kmimediagroup.com
•
Controller
Gigi Castro gcastro@kmimediagroup.com Trade Show Coordinator
Holly Foster hollyf@kmimediagroup.com
•
An update from the Naval Research Lab about research on types of rubber with the potential to provide better corrosion protection for amphibious assault vehicles. An article about the visit of the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Mike Stevens, to U.S. Naval Station Rota.
Operations, Circulation & Production Operations Administrator
Bob Lesser bobl@kmimediagroup.com Circulation & Marketing Administrator
Duane Ebanks duanee@kmimediagroup.com Circulation
Calendar of Events
Denise Woods denisew@kmimediagroup.com
Subscription Information
Navy Air/Sea is published 50 times a year by KMI Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission is strictly forbidden. © Copyright 2015
Corporate Offices
KMI Media Group 15800 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 300 Rockville, MD 20855-2604 USA Telephone: (301) 670-5700 Fax: (301) 670-5701 Web: www.NPEO-kmi.com
March 30-April 1, 2015 Joint Undersea Warfare Technology San Diego, Calif. www.ndia.org/meetings/5260
May 5-7, 2015 AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems Atlanta, Ga. www.auvsishow.org/auvsi2015
April 2, 2015 Coast Guard Intelligence Industry Day Chantilly, Va. www.afcea.org
June 23-25, 2015 Mega Rust Newport News, Va. www.navalengineers.org
April 12-15, 2015 Sea-Air-Space National Harbor, Md. www.seaairspace.org
September 1-2, 2015 Fleet Maintenance & Modernization Symposium San Diego, Calif. www.navalengineers.org/events
April 22, 2015 NRO Industry Day Chantilly, Va. www.afcea.org/events/nro/15/
2
|
March 31, 2015
www.npeo-kmi.com
Communications and Networks Discovery and Invention Communications technology that can provide seamless, robust connectivity is at the foundation of the Sea Power 21 Vision “... to have the right information, at the right place, at the right time ....” The performance of command and control (C2) systems and decision-making at all levels of command depends critically on reliable, interoperable, survivable, secure and timely communications and networking. The current evolution of naval warfighting from a platform-centric to a network-centric paradigm depends on successfully meeting the implied need for significantly enhanced communications and networking capabilities of C2, sensor and weapon systems. These systems are deployed on a variety of platforms and users, both manned and unmanned, operating under challenging battlefield conditions (lack of infrastructure, mobility, spectrum, interference, multipath, atmospherics, size/weight/power constraints, etc.) in different environments (space, terrestrial and undersea). The goal of the Communications and Networking Program within the Office of Naval Research (ONR) Code 311 is to overcome these challenges by developing measurable advances in technology that can directly enable and enhance end-toend connectivity and quality-of-service for mission-critical information exchange among such widely dispersed naval, joint, and coalition forces. The vision is to provide high throughput, robust communications and networking to ensure all warfighters—from the operational command to the tactical edge—have access to the data, information, and resources necessary to make timely, accurate decisions while performing their assigned missions or tasks. Proposals for potential fiscal year 2016 Exploratory Development/Applied Research (Budget Activity 2) projects are sought under the following focus areas. Highly innovative ideas in other general communications and networking areas that are not within the designated focus
www.npeo-kmi.com
areas below, but nonetheless are important to the Navy/Marine Corps, as determined under the synopsis section above may also be considered: • Nanosat optical and RF communications: Novel architectures, techniques and technologies specially focused on the hard problems. • Interference-aligned digital chaos for scalable spectrally-efficient LPI/LPD networking. • Dynamic scheduling, routing and topology control to efficiently and reliably deliver critical/high priority data to multiple nodes over directional tactical wireless network. • Innovative techniques for data forwarding and bridging networks with different routing mechanisms, protocols (e.g., IP and non-IP) and QoS parametrics. • Software-defined wireless networking architectures/protocols, and exploratory paradigms for control (centralized/distributed), network state sensing (link state, latency, etc.), and resource utilization. Funding and Award The Office of Naval Research (ONR) plans to award four to five technology development contracts (particularly costplus-fixed-fee (CPFF) type contracts) and grants that represent the overall value to the government in accordance with the evaluation criteria. The Office of Naval Research is seeking participants for this program that are capable of supporting the goals described in this announcement. Offerors have the opportunity to be creative in the selection of the technical and management processes and approaches to address the research topics. The overall funding amount for this program is approximately $2 million and ONR plans to fund $300,000 to $500,000 per year per award using Applied Research funds (Budget Activity 2). However, lower and higher cost proposals will be considered.
The average funding level of past awards was approximately $400,000 per year. The period of performance for projects may be from one to three years, with an estimated start date of on or about January 16, 2016, subject to date of final award and availability of new fiscal year funds. ONR has funded related technology development under numerous programs. If offerors are enhancing work performed under other ONR or DoD projects, they must clearly identify the point of departure and what existing work will be brought forward and what new work will be performed under this BAA. The award(s) will be made for the full performance period requested. Contacts Questions of a technical nature should be submitted to: Dr. Santanu Das Office of Naval Research 875 North Randolph Street—Suite 1115 Arlington, VA 22203-1995 703-588-1036 santanu.das@navy.mil Questions of a Business nature, and suggestions for improvement, should be submitted to: Alexander Gorelik Office of Naval Research 875 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-1995 703-588-2550 alexander.gorelik@navy.mil Questions of a security nature should be submitted to: Diana Pacheco Office of Naval Research Security Department, Code 43 One Liberty Center 875 N. Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-1995 diana.pacheco@navy.mil
March 31, 2015
|
3
Open Call for Nominations: Frank C. Jones Award for Vessel Alternations and Repair Deadline: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 The American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE) is seeking nominations for the Frank C. Jones Award for exceptional achievement in the field of major vessel maintenance and alterations. The award recognizes individual naval engineering professionals who, over a period of at least 10 years culminating in the current year, have substantially and significantly contributed to their agency’s intermediate- and/or depot-level ship maintenance and/or alteration programs involving the complex work of managing, planning, preparation and/or execution of extensive repairs, overhauls, upgrades and/or modernizations. The Frank C. Jones award will be presented during Fleet Maintenance & Modernization Symposium 2015 or another suitable venue depending on availability of the recipient. Previous Winners Include: • Charles Zerbe, U.S. Coast Guard Yard • Guy Victor Holsten, OPNAV N43 • William F. Clifford, BAE Systems Ship Repair • Craig Flynn, NUWC Division Newport • Dr. Thomas J. Murphy, Norfolk Ship Support Activity Please mail or fax one copy of the original nomination for delivery by March 31, 2015 to: Awards Committee Coordinator American Society of Naval Engineers 1452 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Fax: (703) 836-7491 or email a scanned copy to awards@navalengineers.org
4
|
March 31, 2015
NSWC Crane Advanced Planning Briefings for Industry 2015 Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division (NSWC Crane) is excited to be hosting its Advanced Planning Briefings for Industry (APBI) meeting on April 1, 2015 at the WestGate Academy. This year’s theme is “Collaborating for Innovative, Lasting Solutions.” The purpose of the APBI meeting is to provide industry and academia with information on future NSWC Crane technology efforts, requirements, potential contract opportunities and how to do business with NSWC Crane. The APBI forum provides presentation and discussion on how industry/academia and NSWC Crane can collaborate and build thriving partnerships to ensure future warfighter success. The meeting will include presentations from senior leadership covering the three mission focus areas: electronic warfare, special missions and strategic missions. Date & Time: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 Onsite Registration: 0700 - 0800 Agenda for 2015 NSWC Crane APBI: 0700 - 0800 Onsite Registration/Check-in 0800 - 0810 Introduction & Administrative Remarks 0810 - 0820 Welcome & Opening Remarks 0820 - 0840 NSWC Crane Strategic Direction 0840 - 0900 NAVSEA Service Contracts Guest Speaker - Ms. Sharon Rustemier 0900 - 0910 Q&A for NAVSEA Service Contracts 0910 - 0930 Break 0930 - 0950 NSWC Crane Deputy for Small Business 0950 - 1000 Q&A for Small Business 1000 - 1030 Current Contract Landscape 1030 - 1045 Q&A for Contracts Landscape 1045 - 1215 Morning Networking and Lunch 1215 - 1230 Strategic Missions Focus Area 1230 - 1245 Special Missions Focus Area 1245 - 1300 Electronic Warfare Mission Focus Area 1300 - 1320 Q&A for Mission Focus Areas 1320 - 1345 NSWC Crane Science & Technology Emphasis 1345 - 1355 Q&A for Science & Technology 1355 - 1530 Afternoon Networking and Break Out Rooms 1530 - 1600 Cyber Initiative and NSWC Crane’s Current Approach (Panel Discussion) 1600 - 1615 Q&A for Cyber Awareness Panel 1615 - 1630 Closing Remarks Location: WestGate Academy Conferencing & Training Center 13598 East WestGate Drive Odon, IN 47562 Cost & Registration: There is no cost to attend this meeting; however, registration is required. Primary Point of Contact: Patrick Conger Procurement Technician patrick.conger@navy.mil 812-854-3684
www.npeo-kmi.com
Navy Networking Environment Shore Modernization Support Navy Information Dominance Forces (NAVIDFOR) is a readiness Type Commander (TYCOM) with the global responsibility of identifying and submitting requirements for all Navy information dominance capabilities. The NAVIDFOR Shore Modernization and Integration Directorate (NAVIDFOR N46) was established to consolidate man-, train- and equip-focused activities in support of Navy enterprise network integration; command, control, communications, computers, collaboration and intelligence shore modernization; fleet strategic communications; and cybersecurity/portfolio management responsibilities for the domain. NAVIDFOR N46 is the TYCOM lead for planning and executing information environment integration, consolidation, readiness reporting and modernization efforts in support of Naval Networking Environment (NNE), Joint Information Environment (JIE), and Unified Capabilities initiatives. The NNE strategy was established to guide the Department of Navy towards a future net-centric enterprise environment that will provide a highly secure and reliable enterprise-wide voice, video and data network environment. The NNE will include the Next-Generation
Enterprise Network, Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services, Marine Corps Enterprise Network, and OCONUS Navy Enterprise Network. Transition to the NNE is critical to enabling the Navy’s cyber operations mission and providing warfighters with seamless connectivity and information-sharing capabilities on a global, regional and local scale. Additionally, achieving the target state NNE will serve as a key enabler to realizing the JIE. JIE is a framework defining the capabilities required to provide a secure information environment across the Department of Defense. JIE will be comprised of a shared information technology (IT) infrastructure, enterprise services and a single security architecture in order to achieve full spectrum superiority, improve mission effectiveness, increase security and realize IT efficiencies. As such, the Contracting Department, NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Center (FLC), Norfolk, Va., intends to negotiate a single-award, firm-fixed-price (FFP) indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract under FAR Part 12 Acquisition of Commercial Items and FAR Part 15 Contracting by Negotiation.
STRATCOM Commander Emphasizes Need to Modernize Nuke Triad their cyber capabilities Stretching from and proliferating these under the sea to satemerging strategic ellite orbit to cybercapabilities around the space, U.S. Strategic globe,” he said. Command’s areas of Russia is modernresponsibility cover izing their nuclear the globe, STRATtriad, which is bombers, COM’s commander, Adm. Cecil Haney missiles and submarineNavy Admiral launched missiles, and Cecil D. Haney, said associated industrial base, March 24 during a news briefHaney said, and Russian Presiing at the Pentagon. dent Vladimir Putin continues “For 70 years, we have to provoke the international deterred and assured. And while community. our nation’s nuclear enterprise “China has developed a cais safe, secure and effective, pable submarine and intercontiwe cannot take it for granted nental ballistic missile force and any longer,” the admiral told has recently demonstrated their reporters. counter-space capabilities,” the “For decades, we have admiral said. sustained while others have “North Korea claims to have modernized their strategic possession of a miniaturized nuclear forces, developing and warhead and frequently parades utilizing counter-space activitheir KN-O8 nuclear-capable ties, increasing the sophisticaballistic missile,” Haney said. tion and pervasive nature of
www.npeo-kmi.com
“And Iran recently launched a space vehicle that could be used as a long-range strike platform,” he added.
STRATEGIC DETERRENCE But strategic deterrence is more than nuclear deterrence, the admiral noted. It also includes space— a contested, congested and competitive environment—and cyberspace, where intrusions around the globe are also increasing at an unprecedented and alarming rate, Haney said. President Barack Obama’s proposed defense budget for 2016 balances national priorities with fiscal realities, the admiral said, noting it “leaves no margin to absorb new risks.”
The United States simply cannot afford to underfund its strategic capabilities, he said. “Any cuts to the president’s budget, including those imposed by sequestration, will hamper our ability to sustain and modernize our joint military forces and put us at real risk of making our nation less secure and able to address future threats,” Haney said. Deterrence is a whole-ofgovernment effort; no combatant commander can do it alone, the admiral said. “It requires us all to work together … so that we can provide the nation with the requisite capability for our national security,” he said. By Claudette Roulo, DoD News, Defense Media Activity
March 31, 2015
|
5
Planning for Success Involving 23 countries and taking place across Africa’s Gulf of Guinea, Exercise Obangame Express 2015 is one of the largest military exercises in Africa. The annual U.S. Africa Command-sponsored multinational exercise is designed to increase maritime safety and security in the Gulf of Guinea. In order to be successful, an exercise this broad in scope needs almost a year of planning from a collective network of navies. Like the exercise itself, preparation for it involved a network approach from all participating nations. The exercise is an opportunity for African, European, South American and U.S. ally and partner maritime forces to work together, share information and refine tactics, techniques and procedures intended to assist Gulf of Guinea maritime nations in building their capacity to monitor and enforce their territorial waters. The ability to govern their seas counters problems such as trafficking of persons and illegal material, oil bunkering, drug trade, illegal fishing and piracy. “When talking about piracy and illegal fishing, that affects the global economy,” said Commander Sean Rutter, exercise control group lead and planner for Obangame Express 2015. “If a sea lane is disrupted, it hurts more than just the local economy, so that’s why it’s important for all these countries to get involved, and we’re thankful they do.” Organizing a new exercise begins with the basics. Planners identify participating nations and locations, and consider available manpower and equipment from all involved when setting the stage for the next Obangame Express. This year marked participation of ships from the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Brazil, Germany and the United States as well as Portuguese maritime surveillance aircraft and vessels from all the Gulf of Guinea nations. These assets play a critical role in determining what training is possible, but the African host nations ultimately decide what needs to be done with these assets. Every nation sets its own priorities, so scenarios involving one nation may play toward counterpiracy, and another nation’s is built around stopping illicit trafficking or illegal fishing.
6
|
March 31, 2015
Some of these objective goals, such as honing skills in certain areas or deterring certain types of crime, are common; multiple partners may work on the same scenario. When plans become action and the documents are replaced with personnel on ships, land and in the air, exercise planners stay involved to ensure the exercise plays out correctly. The exercise control group (ECG) creates the scenarios and then sets them into motion to spur the exercise into taking action. “Here we constitute the brains of the exercise,” said Cameroon Navy Commander Emmanuel Sone, an exercise planner and liaison officer for Obangame Express 2015. “We want to make sure everything is going according to plan. We don’t just sit back and observe.” The planners monitor the action from a remote room at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Center in Accra, Ghana. Working on laptops in a makeshift work center, they manage multiple scenarios from Angola to the Ivory Coast, 2,000 miles away in real time. The ECG also monitors and evaluates the actions of 51 ships, 21 maritime operations centers and six aircraft taking part in the scenario.
As a scenario plays out on the gulf, the ECG throws additional challenges at the participants such as handling a medical emergency during a boarding. These ECG injects help guide the exercise along and tests the partner nation’s capabilities. “By injecting scenarios into the exercise, you can make sure the overall objectives are met,” said Sone. After it’s all over, the experience gained by participants has a real-world impact as they hone skills needed for information sharing and teamwork. The lessons learned from this exercise are also used to improve future exercises and strengthen the global network of navies. “It has brought together the Gulf of Guinea nations to tackle a common enemy,” said Commodore Mark Yawson, flag officer fleet, Ghana navy. “Now there’s awareness, information sharing and interoperability among the Gulf of Guinea maritime states, and even including the civilian maritime agencies. This has decreased illegal activity in the gulf.” By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class (SW/AW) David R. Krigbaum
www.npeo-kmi.com
Surface Ship Sonar Domes UTC Aerospace Systems has received a contract from the Naval Surface Warfare CenterCrane, Ind., to provide sonar domes for surface combat ships. The five-year, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract is valued at up to $39 million and covers deliveries through 2020 to the U.S. Navy and foreign military sales. In addition to the sonar domes, the contract includes shipping, installation and transportation fixtures, engineering and field services, inspection and repairs. Work will be performed by the Engineered Polymer Products (EPP) team in Jacksonville, Fla., which is part of
the Aerostructures business unit. UTC Aerospace Systems is a unit of United Technologies Corp. A sonar dome is an acoustically transparent housing that surrounds the sonar transducer array used for detection, navigation and ranging. The dome permits acoustic energy to pass through with minimal sound transmission interference. The contract covers two types of sonar domes: a sonar composite dome (SCD) and a sonar dome rubber window (SDRW). The SCD, mounted on the keel of FFG-7 frigates, uses a patented composite system designed to provide optimal struc-
tural and acoustic performance to the ship's sonar system. This allows for enhanced discovery and classification of underwater targets. SCDs replaced traditional rubber domes on U.S. and allied Navy frigates in 1997; they require less maintenance and are expected to last more than 30 years even under the most extreme operating conditions. The SDRW, bow-mounted on DDG-51 class destroyers as well as on CG-47 class cruisers, is a specialized rubber wire-reinforced structure that houses a ship’s sonar system. The rubber’s energy absorption and reflection properties enhance a ship’s
detection capability. EPP has produced more than 300 SDRWs in the past four decades. “Our proven ability to provide advanced acoustic products that maximize sonar system performance gives our sailors a significant at-sea advantage,” said Aerostructures President Marc Duvall. “Our dedicated team of engineers and manufacturing experts at EPP is committed to delivering superior acoustic technologies in support of the U.S. Navy’s most advanced surface combatants. We look forward to the opportunity to build upon our longstanding relationship with the U.S. Navy with this sonar dome contract.”
PACFLT Senior Enlisted Leaders Discuss Mission Readiness Senior enlisted leaders met at U.S. Pacific Fleet (PACFLT) headquarters for the annual Senior Enlisted Leadership Training Symposium (SELTS) March 23-25. The symposium allows senior enlisted leaders from around the Pacific Fleet to gather and review the effectiveness of current policies and ways to improve mission readiness in open-forum discussions. It also provides an opportunity for the participants to interact with U.S. Pacific Fleet Master Chief Marco Ramirez and various flag officers. “The tyranny of distance in the Pacific is so massive, and a lot of these senior enlisted leaders are so spread out,” said Ramirez. “So the main objective of SELTS is to bring them all together so that they can look at each other and get to know one another and discuss the issues that we have and to see how PACFLT runs. This allows them to get an understanding of what can be done better to support the Navy’s mission.” Rear Admiral Robert Girrier, PACFLT deputy commander, spoke with SELTS participants about the importance of synchronization between commands and understanding the hierarchy of guidance as well as the important roles that each of these leaders play at their commands. “You know what right looks like and that’s why you’re here ... you bring an incredible source of coaching and mentorship that’s important for the command climate, and the functioning and wholeness of the team,” said Girrier. “That’s a huge part of your job that goes beyond your technical expertise.” Girrier went on to add that the best way to take care of their team is to bring all of their sailors home as winners, which is what their families and America are counting on. A main focus of the discussions was Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) and the importance of sailors being the first line of defense. “Bystander intervention is one of the big things going on: shipmates looking after shipmates,” said Todd Schafer, PACFLT executive director and
www.npeo-kmi.com
U.S. Pacific Fleet Master Chief Marco Ramirez speaks with senior enlisted leaders at Pacific Fleet headquarters during the Senior Enlisted Leadership Training Symposium. The symposium is an annual event where senior enlisted leaders from across the Pacific Fleet gather to review the effectiveness of current policies and ways to improve mission readiness in open-forum discussions. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Brian M. Wilbur]
chief of staff. “We have to continue working on that. We need to get to the left of some of these problems and stop them before they happen. We have to spread that message as leadership.” The symposium provides the leaders the opportunity to assemble and exchange ideas, knowledge and personal insights to ensure they have a common objective to strengthen sailor and mission readiness. “One of the most beneficial parts of SELTS is when you bring in all the senior enlisted leaders from other branches and you can get a better idea of what’s going on between the branches,” said Command Master Chief John Ullery, commander, Navy Region Hawaii. “You get to understand some the challenges these leaders face and we can all see what each other’s challenges are and hopefully find a way to collectively solve them to better support our commands and sailors.” Over a span of three days, the symposium included team-building exercises, discussions about updating instructions, and CPO 365 training. By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Brian M. Wilbur, U.S. Pacific Fleet Public Affairs
March 31, 2015
|
7
The Future of Naval Aviation ➥ Continued From pAGE 1
TACTICAL AVIATION
track existing and emerging air-to-air and cruise missile threats in support of Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD). P-8A combines the proven reliability of the commercial 737 airframe with avionics that enable integration of modern sensors and robust communications. We have deployed our third P-8A squadron and are on a path to replace the P-3C by the end of the decade. Electronic attack capabilities, both carrier-based and expeditionary, continue to mature with the fielding of EA-18G squadrons while we continue development of the Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) to replace the legacy ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System. Finally, the department is planning to recapitalize its fleet of C-2A COD aircraft with an extended range variant of the V-22. The decision closes a capacity gap in the COD capability within an existing program of record. The Navy and Marine Corps are participating in joint future vertical lift efforts to identify leverage points for future rotorcraft investment. In FY16 the department continues to modernize vertical lift capability and capacity with procurement of MH-60R, AH-1Z, UH-1Y and MV-22B, and the continued development of the CH-53K and VH-92A (presidential helicopter replacement). The Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task ForceCrisis Response (SPMAGTF-CR), designed to support U.S. and partner security interests throughout the CENTCOM, EUCOM and AFRICOM areas of responsibility (AOR), leverages these vertical lift investments. The unparalleled speed and range of the MV-22B, together with the KC-130J and joint tanker assets, provides both SPMAGTF-CR with the operational reach to respond to crises throughout any AOR. Within our FY16 budget request, the department continues investment in advanced strike weapons programs. These include Air Intercept Missiles (AIM-9X/BLK II and AIM120D); Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II); Tactical Tomahawk Cruise Missiles (TACTOM/ BLK IV); the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM); the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM); the Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM); and the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS II). These capabilities enable our Navy and Marine Corps warfighters to deter and dominate potential adversaries in any environment.
F-35B/F-35C Lightning II The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) will form the backbone of U.S. air combat superiority for decades to come. Delivering this transformational capability into front line forces as soon as possible remains a top priority. JSF will replace legacy tactical fighter fleets of the Navy and Marine Corps with a dominant, multirole, fifth-generation aircraft, capable of projecting U.S. power and deterring potential adversaries. The Fiscal Year 2016 President’s Budget requests $1 billion RDT&E and $3.1 billion APN. The F-35 program is executing well across the entire spectrum of acquisition, to include development and design, flight test, production, fielding and base stand-up, sustainment of fielded aircraft, and stand up of a global sustainment enterprise. To date, all variants of F-35 have flown close to 28,000 hours close to 11,000 hours for the F-35B and more than 3,000 for the F-35C. Our overall assessment is that steady progress is being made on all aspects of the program. However, F-35 does continue to have its risks, inclusive of software development and integration. However, discipline instilled several years ago in the way software is developed, lab tested, flight tested, measured and controlled has resulted in improved and more predictable outcomes. The program is in the final stages of flight test for Block 2B software; Block 3i software is anticipated to deliver all planned capabilities; and Block 3F, which has the most software development risk driven by data fusion, is improving. Data fusion enables the aircraft to integrate onboard capabilities with information from multiple other sources, such as nonF-35 aircraft, satellites and ground stations, to provide the pilot complete and accurate battlespace awareness. This multiplatform fusion is the most complex remaining developmental activity and is being closely monitored. Block 3F complexity and technical challenges, combined with a delay in the start of 3F flight testing may result in delivery up to four to six months late. Overall, the Block 2B configuration, which will support the Marine Corps’ F-35B initial operational capability (IOC) will deliver during the summer of 2015 and is tracking to plan; Block 3i, the same capability as Block 2B but hosted on new and improved computers, is expected to be ready by the end
8
|
March 31, 2015
of calendar year 2015, and Block 3F capability will enable Navy to IOC the F-35C variant in 2018 along with the Marine Corps its first F-35C in 2020. The program has delivered 124 aircraft to test, operational and training sites, with the production line running approximately two months behind schedule. Due to government/ industry manufacturing management initiatives, production deliveries are improving and the current delays do not pose any long-term schedule or program delivery risks. Affordability remains a top priority. We have made it clear to the program management team and the F-35 industrial base that the JSF must finish development within the time and money allocated; continue to drive cost out of aircraft production; and reduce life cycle costs. To that end the program has engaged in a multipronged approach to reduce costs across production, operations and support. The government/industry team is reducing aircraft production costs through “blueprint for affordability” initiatives and reducing F-135 engine costs via ongoing engine “war on cost” strategies. These efforts include up-front contractor investment on cost reduction initiatives mutually agreed upon by the government and contractor team. This arrangement motivates the contractors to accrue savings as quickly as possible in order to recoup their investment, and benefits the government by realizing cost savings at the time of contract award. The goal is to reduce the flyaway cost of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) F-35A to between $80 and $85 million dollars by 2019, which is anticipated to commensurately decrease the cost to the Marine Corps F-35B and Navy F-35C variants. The program has set a goal of decreasing overall operating and support life cycle cost by 30 percent. F/A-18 Overview The F/A-18 Hornet continues to meet readiness and operational commitments. There are 26 Navy Super Hornet strike fighter squadrons and a total inventory of 521 F/A-18E/ Fs; deliveries and squadron transitions will continue through 2018. There are nine Navy and 11 Marine Corps F/A-18 A-D active strike fighter squadrons and a total inventory of 614 Hornets. Super Hornets and F/A-18A-D Hornets have conducted more than 214,000 combat missions since September 11, 2001. www.npeo-kmi.com
F/A-18 A/B/C/D Hornet The FY16 president’s budget requests $371.2 million in APN to implement aircraft commonality programs, maintain relevant capability, improve reliability and ensure structural safety of the inventory of 614 F/A-18 A-D Hornets. $148.2 million is for the service life extension program (SLEP). The F/A-18A-D was designed for, and has achieved, a service life of 6,000 flight hours. These aircraft have performed as expected through their design life. Service life management of this aircraft is intended to extend this platform beyond its designed 6,000 flight hours. Through detailed analysis, inspections and structural repairs, as required, the DoN has been successful in achieving 8,000 flight hours for many aircraft and is pursuing a strategy to go as high as 10,000 flight hours on select aircraft. Continued investment in SLEP, the high flight hour (HFH) inspection program, program related engineering, and program related logistics is critical for our flight hour extension strategy. In order to maintain warfighting relevancy in a changing threat environment, we will continue to procure and install advanced systems such as the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS), high order language mission computers, ALR-67v3, ALQ-214v5, Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS), APG-73 radar enhancements, advanced targeting forward looking infrared (ATFLIR) upgrades, and LITENING for the Marine Corps on selected F/A-18A-D aircraft. F/A-18 E/F Super-Hornet The F/A-18E/F will be a mainstay of Navy’s aviation carrier air wing strike fighter force through 2035. The FY16 president’s budget requests $507.1 million in APN to implement aircraft commonality programs, maintain relevant capabilities, improve reliability and ensure structural safety of the Super-Hornet fleet; and $153 million RDT&E to support the flight plan spiral capability development, development of advanced electronic attack and counter-electronic attack, and F/A-18E/F Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP). The F/A-18E/F significantly improves the survivability and strike capability of the carrier air wing. The Super-Hornet provides increased combat radius and endurance, and a 25 percent increase in weapons payload over F/A-18A-D Hornets. The production program continues to deliver on-cost and on-schedule. The Super-Hornet uses an incremental approach to incorporate new technologies and www.npeo-kmi.com
An AV-8B Harrier II hovers over the flight deck while demonstrating its vertical and short takeoff and landing capabilities aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Boxer (LHD 4) during flight operations. Boxer is underway conducting sea trials off the coast of Southern California. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Robert R. Sanchez]
capabilities, to include Digital Communication System Radio, MIDS Joint Tactical Radio System, JHMCS, ATFLIR with shared realtime video, accurate navigation, digital memory device, distributed targeting system, infrared search and track and continued advancement of the APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar. $19.7 million of the 2016 RDT&E supports the F/A-18E/F SLAP requirement. The F/A-18 E/F fleet, on average, has flown approximately 36 percent of the design life of 6,000 flight hours. The remaining design service life will not be adequate to meet long-term operational commitments through 2035. In 2008 the Navy commenced a three-phase F/A-18E/F SLAP to analyze actual usage versus structural test results and determine the feasibility of extending F/A-18E/F service life from 6,000 to 9,000 flight hours via a follow-on SLEP. The F/A-18E/F SLAP will identify the necessary inspections and modifications required to achieve 9,000 flight hours and increase total arrested landings and catapults beyond currently defined life limits. This extension is assessed as low risk. The service life management plan philosophy has been applied to the F/A-18E/F fleet at an earlier point in its life cycle than the F/A-18AD. This will facilitate optimization of fatigue life expended, flight hours, and total landings, thereby better aligning aircraft service life with fleet requirements. AV-8B Harrier Since the beginning of the war on terror, the AV-8B Harrier has been a critical part of the strike fighter inventory for the joint force. This aircraft has flown more than 54,000 hours
in combat since 2003 with zero losses from the enemy in the air but six losses on the ground when the enemy broke through our forces at Bastion air base in 2012. The FY16 president’s budget requests $83.3 million in APN funds to continue the incorporation of obsolescence replacement/readiness management plan systems, electrical and structural changes, inventory sustainment and upgrade efforts to offset obsolescence and attrition, LITENING Pod upgrades, and F402-RR-408 engine safety and operational changes. The FY16 president’s budget requests $39.9 million in RDT&E funds to continue design, development, integration and test of various platform improvements, to include Engine Life Management Program, Escape Systems, Joint Mission Planning System updates, Link 16 Digital Interoperability integration, Operational Flight Program (OFP) block upgrades to various mission and communication systems, navigation equipment, weapons carriage, countermeasures, and the obsolescence replacement/ readiness management plan. The AV-8B continues to deploy in support of operational contingencies. Each Marine expeditionary unit (MEU) deploys with embarked AV-8Bs. The AV-8B, equipped with LITENING targeting pods and a video downlink to ROVER ground stations, precision strike weapons, Intrepid Tiger II EW pods and beyond visual range air-to-air radar guided missiles, continues to be a proven, invaluable asset for the Marine air ground task force (MAGTF) and joint commander across the spectrum of operations. One squadron has flown more than 3,400 hours of strike sorties against ISIS with an average combat radius March 31, 2015
|
9
of 900 miles. Digital improved triple ejector racks have allowed us to load up to six precision guided munitions per aircraft, with tanks, guns, and Litening Pods exponentially increasing the combat viability of this platform. In FY16 the airborne variable message Format terminals will be installed in AV-8B to replace the current digital-aided close air support (CAS) technology. The program will continue development of the H6.2 Operational Flight Program to integrate Federal Aviation Administration compliant Navigation Performance/ Area Navigation (RNP/RNAV) capability, an update to the LITENING Common OFP to implement improvements to moving target tracking, and correct additional software deficiencies identified through combat operations. The program will also work on the H7.0 OFP which will integrate Link 16 functionality. As an out-of-production aircraft, the AV-8B program will continue its focus on sustainment efforts to mitigate significant inventory shortfalls, maintain airframe integrity, achieve full fatigue life expended, and address reliability and obsolescence issues of avionics and subsystems. Operations Odyssey Dawn, Enduring Freedom, and today’s Operation Freedom Sentinel confirm the expeditionary advantages of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) capabilities. Placing the Harrier as the closest multirole fixed-wing asset to the battlefield greatly reduces transit times to the battlefield and enables persistent CAS without strategic tanking assets. Airframe sustainment initiatives, capability upgrades, and obsolescence mitigation is essential and must be funded to ensure the AV-8B remains lethal and relevant. FA-XX The department is preparing to conduct an analysis of alternatives (AoA) to address the anticipated retirement of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft beginning in the mid-2020 timeframe. The FA-XX AoA will consider the widest possible range of materiel concepts while balancing capability, cost, schedule and supportability considerations. It will assess manned, unmanned and optionally manned approaches to fulfill predicted 2030-plus mission requirements. Analysis will consider baseline programs of record (current platforms), evolutionary or incremental upgrades to baseline programs (including derivative platforms), and new development systems or aircraft to meet identified gaps in required capability. The FY16 budget requests $5.0 million in RDT&E to conduct this AoA. 10
|
March 31, 2015
Strike Fighter Inventory Management The department remains challenged with end of life planning for F/A-18A-D and AV-8B aircraft that reach the end of their service life before replacement aircraft (F-35B/C) can be fully delivered into service. In the FY16 budget request the department was forced to cut 16 F-35Cs from the budget (FY16-20), delaying the stand-up of the first Marine Corps F-35C squadron by one year and delaying subsequent F-35C squadron transitions by two years each. Strike fighter inventory management risk increases with the FY16 budget request, further increasing the gap between supply and the department’s master aviation plan demand. The near-term inventory challenge is due to a combination of reduced strike fighter procurement, higher than planned TACAIR utilization rates, and F/A-18A-D and AV-8B depot facility production falling short of the 2013 and 2014 required output. Aggressive efforts across the department were instituted in 2014 to improve depot throughput and return more aircraft back to the fleet. Aviation depots are expected to improve productivity through 2017, and fully recover the backlog of F/A-18A-D by 2019 and Harrier by 2016; at which time the focus will shift towards F/A-18E/F service life extension. The Marines ran an independent readiness review of their AV-8B program to recover to a T-2.0 readiness level within their AV-8B fleet, meet their operational requirements and ensure they had an adequate bridge to the F-35. By following the plan, the AV8B fleet should be in the green in 17 months. The Navy and USMC strike fighter force continues to meet their operational commitments. However, we anticipate the inventory pressure to remain relatively constant through FY16 as we experience peak depot inductions of F/A-18A-D aircraft reaching 8,000 hours and entering extensive high flight hour (HFH) service life extension inspections, repairs and modifications. Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) / EA-18G Growler The FY16 president’s budget request includes $108.5 million in APN to implement aircraft commonality programs, maintain relevant capabilities, improve reliability and ensure structural safety of the Growler fleet; $56.9 million in RDT&E for Flight Plan spiral capability development, design and integration of jamming techniques optimization improvements, evolutionary software development and related testing; and $398.8 million RDT&E for NGJ Increment 1 and $13.0 million RDT&E for NGJ Increment 2. In 2009, the Navy began the transition from EA-6Bs to EA-18Gs. The EA-18G is a
critical enabler of the joint force, bringing fully netted capabilities that provide electromagnetic spectrum dominance in an electromagnetic maneuver warfare environment. The first EA-18G squadron deployed to Iraq in an expeditionary role in November 2010 in support of Operation New Dawn, and subsequently redeployed to Italy on short notice in March 2011 in support of Operations Odyssey Dawn and Unified Protector. The first carrier-based EA-18G squadron deployed in May 2011. Three active component Navy expeditionary squadrons, nine of 10 carrier based squadrons, and one reserve squadron have completed, or are in, transition to the EA-18G. The 10 carrier based EA-18G squadrons will fulfill Navy requirements for airborne electronic attack; six expeditionary EA-18G squadrons will provide the joint, high-intensity AEA capability required by the joint forces commander, which was previously fulfilled by the Navy and Marine Corps EA-6B. The Navy will be divested of EA-6Bs by 2015; the Marine Corps by 2019 leaving the E/A-18G as the only viable AEA platform in the DoD inventory. The inventory objective is 153 EA-18G aircraft. Since their initial deployment, Growlers have flown more than 2,300 combat missions, have expended approximately 6 percent of the 7,500 flight hour life per aircraft, and are meeting all operational commitments. Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) NGJ is a new electronic warfare capability that will replace the 42-year-old ALQ-99, currently the only Navy and Joint airborne tactical jamming system pod. The ALQ-99 has limited capability to counter tactically and technically advanced threats, is increasingly difficult and costly to maintain, and has a vanishing industrial supplier base. The Navy and Department of Defense (DoD) require NGJ to meet current and emerging EW threats. NGJ will have the necessary power and digital techniques to counter increasingly advanced and sophisticated adversary electronic warfare search, surveillance, and targeting-radars and communications systems. NGJ will be DoD’s only comprehensive tactical AEA capability—supporting all services and joint/coalition partners, and will be implemented in three increments: Mid-Band (Increment 1), Low-Band (Increment 2), and High-Band (Increment 3). NGJ is designed to provide improved capability in support of joint and coalition air, land and sea tactical strike missions and is critical to the Navy’s vision for the future of strike warfare. FY16 funding is vital to maintain schedule, allowing www.npeo-kmi.com
the program to complete technology maturation and risk reduction (TMRR) and transition into the engineering and management development (EMD) phase. Initial concept studies and formal program stand-up will begin in FY16 for Increment 2. Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) / EA-6B Prowler The FY16 president’s budget request includes $15.5 million in RDT&E for electronic warfare (EW) counter response, $2.8 million RDT&E for MAGTF EW, $23.2 million in APN for airborne electronic attack (AEA) systems, $9.8 million in APN for all EA-6B series aircraft, and $7.7 million APN for MAGTF EW. Currently, there are 37 EA-6Bs in the Navy and Marine Corps, which are distributed to three Marine Corps and one Navy operational squadron, one Navy flight test squadron, and one Marine Corps training squadron. The total includes five Navy ICAP II aircraft and 32 ICAP III aircraft. All ICAP III EA-6Bs are operated by the Marine Corps. Final retirement of the EA-6B from the DoN inventory will be in 2019. Marine aviation is on a path toward a distributed AEA ‘system of systems’ that is a critical element in achieving the MAGTF EW vision: A composite of manned and unmanned surface, air and space assets on a fully collaborative network providing the MAGTF commander control of the electromagnetic spectrum when and where desired. Included in this plan are the ALQ-231 Intrepid Tiger II communications jammer, UAS EW payloads, a Software reprogrammable payload and an EW services
architecture to facilitate collaborative networked EW battle management. Intrepid Tiger II development and procurement is in response to Marine Corps requirements for increased precision EW capability and capacity across the MAGTF and provides EW capability directly to tactical commanders without reliance upon the limited availability of the low density/high demand EA-6B Prowler. Intrepid Tiger II is currently carried on AV-8B and F/A-18 A++/C/D aircraft, has successfully completed nine deployments, and is currently deployed with both the 11th and 24th MEUs. Integration on Marine Corps rotary-wing aircraft is scheduled to be completed by the fourth quarter of FY15. Development of an Intrepid Tiger II counter-radar capability for the penetrating jammer mission will begin in FY16. E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AHE) The FY16 president’s budget requests $272.1 million in RDT&E for continuation of added capabilities, to include in-flight air refueling, tactical targeting network technology (TTNT), secret Internet protocol router chat, advanced mid-term interoperability improvement program, multifunctional information distribution system/joint actical radio system TTNT, counter electronic attack, sensor netting, and data fusion. In the third year of a 26 aircraft Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) contract covering FY14-18, the budget requests $1,053 million in APN for five full rate production (FRP) Lot 4 aircraft, advance procurement (AP) for FY17 FRP Lot 5 aircraft; and Economic ordering quantity funding for the MYP for FY18.
An MV-22B Osprey from the Greyhawks of Marine Medium-lift Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 161 takes off from the flight deck of the Waspclass amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2). Essex is underway conducting an amphibious squadron and Marine expeditionary unit integration training exercise with Amphibious Squadron (PHIBRON) 3 and the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit (15th MEU) in preparation for an upcoming deployment. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Sean P. Gallagher]
www.npeo-kmi.com
The E-2D AHE is the Navy’s carrier-based Airborne early warning and battle management command and control system. The E-2D AHE provides Theater Air and missile defense and is capable of synthesizing information from multiple onboard and off-board sensors, making complex tactical decisions and then disseminating actionable information to joint forces in a distributed, open-architecture environment. E-2D is also a cornerstone of the naval integrated fire control–counter air (NIFCA-CA) capability. Utilizing the newly developed AN/APY9 Mechanical/Electronic Scan Array radar and the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) system, the E-2D AHE works in concert with tactical aircraft and surface-combatants equipped with the Aegis combat system to detect, track and defeat air and cruise missile threats at extended ranges. The first Fleet E-2D squadron (VAW-125) was designated “safe for flight” in January 2014. IOC was achieved in October 2014.
ASSAULT SUPPORT AIRCRAFT MV-22 The FY16 president’s budget requests $87.9 million in RDT&E for continued product improvements, including engineering development of a Navy variant of the MV-22; and $1.48 billion in APN for procurement and delivery of 19 MV-22s (Lot 20). FY16 will be the fourth year of the 2nd V-22 MYP contract covering FY1317. The funds requested in the FY16 president’s budget fully fund Lot 20 and procure longlead items for FY17 Lot 21 MV-22 aircraft. The APN request includes $126.1 million to support operations and safety improvement programs (OSIPs), including correction of deficiencies and readiness improvements. The FY16 request includes funding starting in FY18 to procure a Navy variant in support of the carrier onboard delivery mission. MV-22 Osprey vertical flight capabilities, coupled with the speed, range, endurance of fixed-wing transports, are enabling effective execution of current missions that were previously unachievable. In 2014, a second Marine Corps SPMAGTF-CR was stood up in CENTCOM and the 12th and final MV-22 for HMX-1 “Greenside” logistics and passenger transport was delivered for support of the presidential transport mission. As the V-22 fleet approaches the 300,000 flight hour milestone it has proven to be the safest Marine Corps rotorcraft. The second MYP, which began in FY13, will procure at least 93 MV-22s over five years March 31, 2015
|
11
and results in savings of approximately $1 billion when compared to single year procurements. The stability of the MYP supports the Marine Corps’ retirement of legacy aircraft, benefits the supplier base and facilitates cost reductions on the part of both the prime contractor and sub-tier suppliers. Due to extremely high demand for MV-22 capability from the combatant commanders (COCOMs), and a resultant high operational tempo in 2014, the mission capability rates leveled-off and did not continue the year over year improvements seen since 2010. This was primarily due to our inability to train enlisted maintainers in the numbers and qualifications standard we need to sustain such a high demand signal. Right now we have 13 full operational capability squadrons, with two in build, and are executing to an overall 15 squadron demand signal. We are shifting resources and modifying standup, transition, and training plans, but the demand for the capabilities this aircraft brings to the COCOMs is creating growing pains. While we are confident these issues will be overcome, there has been an impact on our readiness rates. Despite a readiness rate decrement, the cost per flight hour has continued to decrease, with a total reduction of nearly 28 percent since 2010. FY16 OSIP provides a necessary and stable source of crucial modification funding as the Ospreys work to improve readiness and continue to reduce operating cost. Concurrent with our readiness and support initiatives, we are adding capabilities to the MV-22 that will make it even more valuable to the COCOMs. First, we are expanding the number of aerial refueling platforms that can refuel an MV-22, increasing the range of available options to capitalize on its long-range capabilities. We are also developing a mission kit to allow the MV-22 to deliver fuel to other airborne platforms. We see this as a critical enabler for both shore- and sea-based operations. We plan to deliver this capability by the summer of 2017 concurrent with the first Western Pacific deployment of the F-35B. We are also looking at options that will enable the delivery of precision-guided munitions from the MV-22, which will enhance its ability to operate autonomously and increase the lethality of our force. Finally, an important capability that is a priority for entire aviation force is digital interoperability (DI). We are testing and deploying the initial configuration of an onboard suite of electronics that will allow the embarked troop commander to possess unprecedented situational awareness via real time transmission of full motion video and other data generated by multiple air and 12
|
March 31, 2015
ground platforms throughout the battlespace. This DI suite will also be able to collect, in real time, threat data gathered by existing aircraft survivability equipment and off board data to accompanying attack platforms, thereby shortening the kill chain against ground and air based threats. In ongoing operations in the Middle East, the MV-22 has become the tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel (TRAP) platform of choice to rescue downed aircrew in hostile territory. Currently, Marines are on alert in Central Command to recover American and coalition aircrew executing strike operations. The speed, range, and aerial refueling capability have allowed the Osprey’s to remain in strategic locations throughout the area poised for rescue operations. With an unrefueled mission radius of 423 nautical miles, the Osprey can reach greater distances around the battlefield to increase the likelihood of recovering isolated personnel as the speed and altitude envelopes provide better survivability for the TRAP force and recovered aircrew. CH-53K Heavy Lift Replacement Program The FY16 president’s budget requests $632.1 million RDT&E to continue the EMD phase of the CH-53K program. Since entering into developmental test in December 2013 the ground test vehicle (GTV) has completed bare head light-off and shakedown light-off has commenced. Over the last year, the GTV has accumulated over 180 test hours. The first flight vehicle, engineering development model (EDM) 1, has completed its bare head light-off and initial bladed ground runs. The program is currently on schedule to execute its first flight by the end of 2015. During FY16, the program will continue to execute developmental test flights, deliver the final EDM, and continue assembly of system demonstration test article aircraft, which will be production representative aircraft utilized for operational test. The CH-53K will provide land- and seabased heavy-lift capabilities not resident in any of today's platforms and contribute directly to the increased agility, lethality, and presence of joint task forces and MAGTFs. The CH-53K will transport 27,000 pounds of external cargo out to a range of 110 nautical miles, nearly tripling the CH-53E’s lift capability under similar environmental conditions, while fitting into the same shipboard footprint. The CH53K will also provide unparalleled lift capability under high-altitude and hot weather conditions, greatly expanding the commander’s operational reach.
Compared to the CH-53E, maintenance and reliability enhancements of the CH-53K will improve aircraft availability and ensure cost effective operations. Additionally, survivability and force protection enhancements will dramatically increase protection for both aircrew and passengers. Expeditionary heavy-lift capabilities will continue to be critical to successful land and sea-based operations in future anti-access, area-denial environments, enabling sea-basing and the joint operating concepts of force application and focused logistics. Over the past 13 years, the CH-53 community accumulated over 95,000 combat flight hours. During this period, we suffered 10 aircraft losses, nine in combat and one in training. As our CH-53E community approaches 30 years of service, these sustained and unprecedented operational demands have prematurely aged our heavy-lift assault support aircraft, making it ever more challenging to maintain and underscoring the importance of its replacement, the CH-53K King Stallion. To keep the H-53E viable until the King Stallion enters service, the FY16 president’s budget requests $46.9 million in APN for both near- and mid-term enhancements. For both the USN MH-53E and USMC CH-53E helicopters these modifications include condition-based maintenance software upgrades, Kapton wiring replacement installations, and improved Engine Nacelles. The FY16 budget request includes nonrecurring engineering for upgrades to the MH53E’s antiquated cockpit. These critical safety and avionics upgrades will address obsolescence issues within the cockpit and increase overall situational awareness and mission effectiveness by improving minefield navigation displays, adding area navigation (RNAV) capability, and providing moving map and hover displays. Additionally, non-recurring engineering and kit procurements for the Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation System (EGI) will allow the MH-53E to utilize the full capability of the APX-123 transponder. The Marine Corps’ CH-53E fleet is continuing with the T-64 Engine Reliability Improvement Program, critical survivability upgrade (CSU), satellite communications (SATCOM) kit installations, and smart multi-function color display (SMFCD) procurements and installations.
ATTACK AND UTILITY AIRCRAFT UH-1Y // AH-1Z Marine Corps Cobra and Huey attack and utility aircraft have been critical for the success of the Marines in harm’s way and over the past 10 years, these aircraft have flown over www.npeo-kmi.com
196,000 hours in combat. The FY16 president’s budget requests $27.2 million in RDT&E for continued product improvements; and $856.2 million in APN for 28 H-1 upgrade aircraft: 12 UH-1Y and 16 AH-1Z. The program is a key modernization effort designed to resolve existing safety deficiencies and enhance operational effectiveness of the H-1 fleet. The 85 percent commonality between the UH-1Y and AH-1Z will significantly reduce life cycle costs and the logistical footprint, while increasing the maintainability and deployability of both aircraft. The program will provide the Marine Corps with 349 H-1 aircraft through a combination of new production and a limited quantity of remanufactured aircraft. The H-1 Upgrades Program is replacing the Marine Corps’ UH-1N and AH-1W helicopters with state-of-the-art UH-1Y “Yankee” and AH-1Z “Zulu” aircraft. The new aircraft are fielded with integrated glass cockpits, worldclass sensors, and advanced helmet-mounted sight and display systems. The future growth plan includes a digitally-aided, close air support system designed to integrate these airframes, sensors, and weapons systems together with ground combat forces and other capable DoD aircraft. Integration of low-cost weapons such as the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II provides increased lethality while reducing collateral damage. The UH-1Y aircraft achieved IOC in August 2008 and FRP in September 2008. The “Yankee Forward” procurement strategy prioritized UH-1Y production in order to replace the under-powered UH-1N fleet as quickly as possible. The last UH-1N was retired from service as of December 2014. The AH-1Z program received approval for FRP in November 2010 and achieved IOC in February 2011. As of February 2015, 148 aircraft (109 UH-1Ys and 39 AH-1Zs) have been delivered to the Fleet Marine Force. An additional 60 aircraft are on contract and in production. Lot 1-7 aircraft deliveries are complete for both the UH-1Y and AH-1Z. Lot 8 and 9 deliveries are complete for the UH-1Y, and Lot 10 UH-1Y deliveries are in progress and ahead of schedule. The H-1 program is in the process of integrating both the UH-1Y and AH-1Z into the larger digitally interoperable programs of the Marine Corps. With the integration of Intrepid Tiger II, the HMLA community will now be able to provide the MAGTF commanders with all six essential functions of Marine Air. Additionally, these aircraft will incorporate software reprogrammable payload (SRP) to utilize www.npeo-kmi.com
diverse networks and waveforms thus allowing maneuverability within the spectrum. SRP will employ systems as Link-16, Tactical Targeting Network Technology, Adaptive Networking Wideband Waveform and the Soldier Radio Waveform. MH-60 (Overview) MH-60 Seahawks have consistently met readiness and operational commitments. There will be 38 Navy Seahawk squadrons with 275 MH-60S and 280 MH-60R aircraft when transitions from the SH-60B, SH-60F, and HH-60H are complete. Production and squadron transitions will continue through 2017. Over the last 12 years of combat operations, deployed ashore and aboard our aircraft carriers, amphibious ships, and surface combatants at sea, Navy H-60 helicopters have provided vital over-watch and direct support to troops in combat across multiple theaters of operation and variety of missions; including support to special operations forces, air ambulance, surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, mine warfare, logistics support and humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief. MH-60R Seahawk The FY16 president’s budget requests $970 million in APN for 29 helicopters. The production program continues to deliver on-cost and on-schedule. The MH-60R multi-mission helicopter provides strike group protection and adds significant capability in its primary mission areas of Undersea Warfare and Surface Warfare; the latter including fast attack craft/fast in-shore attack craft (FAC/FIAC) threat response capabilities. The MH-60R is the sole organic air anti-submarine warfare (ASW) asset in the carrier strike group (CSG) and serves as a key contributor to theater level ASW. The MH60R also employs advanced sensors and communications to provide real-time battlespace management with a significant, active or passive, over-the-horizon targeting capability. Secondary mission areas include Search and Rescue, Vertical Replenishment, Naval Surface Fire Support, Logistics Support, Personnel Transport and Medical Evacuation. The $21.4 million RDT&E request supports the MH-60R Test Program, consisting of numerous system upgrades and pre-planned product improvements, to include the digital rocket launcher (DRL) with APKWS II, helicopter infra-red suppression system, multifunctional information distribution system - low volume terminal (LVT) block upgrade 2,
and the VHF omnidirectional ranging/instrument landing system. MH-60S Seahawk The FY16 president’s budget requests $28 million in APN for annualized support of the final deliveries of aircraft, trainers, ground support equipment, and publications required to complete the production program of 275 helicopters. The production program continues to deliver on-cost and on-schedule. The MH60S multi-mission helicopter provides strike group protection and adds significant capability in its primary mission areas of mine warfare and surface warfare. Secondary mission areas include combat search and rescue, support to special operations forces, vertical replenishment, logistics support, personnel transport and medical evacuation. The $5.2 million RDT&E request supports the MH-60S Test Program, consisting of system upgrades for airborne mine countermeasures (AMCM), armed helicopter FAC/FIAC defense, and the commencement of a service life assessment program. Armed Helo Block 3A Operational Test (OT) was completed in June 2007 and Block 3B (added Link 16 capability) OT was completed in November 2009. Test and Evaluation (T&E) of fixed forward firing weapon (FFW) (20mm gun system) was completed in FY12. T&E of initial FFW unguided rocket (UGR) capability was completed in FY13. T&E for digital rocket launcher APKWS II and expanded UGR capability for the FAC/FIAC threat is in work and planned to complete in FY16. Planned airborne mcm initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) and Follow-On Operational Test and Evaluation (FOT&E) periods were changed to operational assessments, with the final IOT&E aligned with LCS mine counter measures mission package IOT&E.
EXECUTIVE SUPPORT AIRCRAFT VH-3D/VH-60N Executive Helicopter Series The VH-3D and VH-60N are safely performing the executive lift mission worldwide. As these aircraft continue to provide seamless vertical lift for the president of the United States, the DoN is working closely with HMX1 and industry to sustain these aircraft until a presidential helicopter replacement platform is fielded. The FY16 president’s budget requests an investment of $76.1 million of APN to continue programs that will ensure the in-service presidential fleet remains a safe and reliable platform. Ongoing VH-60N efforts include March 31, 2015
|
13
the cockpit upgrade program, engine upgrade program, and a communications suite upgrade (wide band line of sight) that provides survivable access to the strategic communications network. The continuing structural enhancement program and the obsolescence management program applies to both VH-60N and VH-3D. The program has significantly reduced the cost and schedule of the VH-3D Cockpit upgrade program by focusing on critical obsolescence issues. These technology updates for legacy platforms will be directly leveraged for the benefit of the ensuing replacement program (VH-92A). VH-92A Presidential Helicopter Replacement Aircraft The FY16 president’s budget request includes $507.1 million of RDT&E to fund the VH-92 EMD contract and associated government activities. Significant progress has been made in the past year with completion of the Milestone B Review in March, receipt of the acquisition decision memorandum in April, award of the EMD contract to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation in May, completion of the system requirements review in August and completion of the Integrated Baseline Review in November. The Sikorsky S-92A aircraft will be used to execute the acquisition strategy of integrating mature subsystems into an air vehicle that is currently in production. Initial contractor testing on an S-92A aircraft is planned for 2015 and early 2016, and the critical design review is planned for the 4th quarter of FY16. The first of the planned operational inventory of 21 aircraft could begin fielding as early as 2020.
FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT KC-130J The DoN plans to procure two KC-130Js and continue product improvements. Targeted improvements include aircraft survivability through advanced electronic countermeasure modernization and obsolescence upgrades to the Harvest HAWK ISR/weapon mission kit. Fielded throughout our active force, the KC-130J brings increased capability, performance and survivability with lower operating and sustainment costs to the MAGTF. Forward deployed in support of ongoing operations since 2005, the KC-130J continues to deliver Marines, fuel and cargo whenever and wherever needed. In 2015 the KC-130J remains in high demand, providing tactical air-to-air refueling, assault support, close air support (CAS) and multi-sensor imagery reconnaissance (MIR) 14
|
March 31, 2015
A UH-1Y Venom Huey helicopter conducts night flight operations aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Peleliu (LHA 5) during Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) Exercise 2014. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Daniel Viramontes]
capabilities, in support of special purpose MAGTFs and deployed MEUs. First deployed in 2010, the roll-on/roll-off Harvest HAWK mission kit for the KC-130J continues to provide extended MIR and CAS capabilities. With almost 7,000 hours flown, over 200 Hellfire missile and 90 Griffin munition combat engagements, this expeditionary mission kit has proven its worth and made the KC-130J even more indispensable for Marines on the ground. All six mission kits have been fielded, and funding included in the FY16 budget request will be used to maintain operational relevance of this mission system through compatibility with additional Hellfire variants and an improved full motion video data-link. The Marine Corps has funded 53 of the 79 KC-130J aircraft in the program of record. The three aircraft included in the FY13 budget would complete the Active component (AC) requirement of 51 aircraft. However, the Marine Corps began using the AC backup aircraft to accelerate the Reserve component (RC) transition from the legacy KC-130T aircraft to the more capable and efficient KC-130J in FY14. The aircraft requested in the FY16 president’s budget will continue to increase KC-130J inventory as we strive to achieve full operational capability in the RC. Delays in procurement would force the Marine Corps to sustain the KC-130T aircraft longer than planned at an increased cost. It is also important to note that the U.S. Air Force C-130J procurement is expected to end in 2022. If the Marine Corps procures KC-130Js at a rate of two per year from FY16-22, we will have approximately 12 aircraft remaining to procure in order to reach the program of record
(POR) of 79 aircraft. This POR is expected to complete in 2029. After the USAF completes its C-130J procurement, NAVAIR will no longer be able to leverage USAF contracting services. Given the loss of USAF contracting services and the uncertainty of additional foreign military sales, the Navy and Coast Guard customers potentially could have a significant unit cost increase.
MARITIME SUPPORT AIRCRAFT P-8A Poseidon The P-8A Poseidon recapitalizes the maritime patrol asw, anti-surface warfare (ASuW) and armed ISR capability currently resident in the P-3C Orion. The P-8A combines the proven reliability of the commercial 737 airframe with avionics that enables integration of modern sensors and robust communications. The P-8A’s first operational deployment was completed in June 2014, and continuous 7th Fleet operational deployments are under way. As of February 2015, four fleet squadrons have completed transition to P-8A. All fleet squadrons are scheduled to complete transition by the end of FY19. The P-8A program is meeting all cost, schedule and performance parameters in accordance with the approved Acquisition Program Baseline. Boeing has delivered 21 aircraft (low rate initial production (LRIP) I/II/III) to the fleet as of February 2015, and three remaining LRIP III aircraft are scheduled to deliver by May 2015. LRIP IV (13 aircraft), and FRP 1 (16 aircraft) are under contract and will start delivering in May 2015. FRP 2 (nine aircraft) is planned to award in June 2015. The FY16 president’s budget procures 47 P-8As over the FYDP and www.npeo-kmi.com
sustains the P-3C to P-8A transition. In FY16 the warfighting requirement remains 117 aircraft; however, the fiscally constrained inventory objective for 109 aircraft will provide adequate capacity at acceptable levels of risk. As fleet deliveries of the Increment 1 configuration accelerate, integration and testing of P-8A Increment 2 capability upgrades continues. P-8A Increment 2 Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) 1 “Early Multi-Static Active Coherent (MAC)” FOT&E commenced November 15, 2014. The Navy is on track to field the ECP 1 “Early MAC” capability in Fiscal Year 2015 followed by Increment 2 ECP 2 “Full MAC” capabilities in FY16. The Increment 2 ECP 3 contract for High Altitude ASW Weapons Capability capabilities was awarded in December 2014. P-3C Orion The aging P-3 fleet will continue to provide critical ASW, ASuW and ISR support for joint and naval operations worldwide until the fleet completes transition to P-8A. The FY16 budget request provides $3.1 million in funding required to manage P-3C aircraft mission systems obsolescence during the transition. As of December 2014, 61 P-3 special structural inspection-kits have been installed (zero remaining); 87 Zone 5 modifications completed (last three aircraft in work); and 20 Outer Wing Installations completed (last nine aircraft in work). The P-3 aircraft is well beyond the original planned fatigue life of 7,500 hours for critical components, with an average airframe usage of over 18,400 hours. The FY16 request continues to fund the P-3 Fatigue Life Management Program so the Navy can maintain sufficient capacity to successfully complete the transition to P-8A. EP-3 Aries Replacement/Sustainment The EP-3E Aries is the Navy’s premier manned maritime intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and targeting (MISR&T) platform. The joint airborne signals intelligence (SIGINT) common configuration includes multi-intelligence sensors, robust communication, and data links employed by the flexible and dependable P-3 air vehicle to ensure effective MISR&T support across the full range of military operations. The FY11 National Defense Authorization Act directed Navy to sustain EP-3E airframe and mission systems relevance to minimize SIGINT capability gaps until the systems are fully recapitalized with a platform or family of platforms that in the aggregate provide equal or better capability www.npeo-kmi.com
and capacity. The FY16 request maintains the retirement dates from the previous year that were extended by one year to FY19 and FY20, respectively. Navy ISR family of systems approach shifts focus from platforms to payloads. The future force will rapidly respond to changing threats with modular, scalable, netted sensors and payloads on a range of sea and shore-based manned and unmanned systems, establishing persistent maritime ISR when and where it is needed. Navy’s ISR&T transition plan will deliver increased capacity and persistence by the end of the decade. However, due to fiscal and end strength constraints, the department will accept some risk in near-term capability and capacity. The FY16 budget request reduces risk compared to the previous fiscal year and the Navy continues to work with joint staff, DoD, and the fleet to optimize the ISR transition plan. The transition plan remains largely unchanged from FY15.
AIRLIFT/CARGO UTILITY AIRCRAFT COD Recapitalization (Navy V-22 Variant) The C-2A fleet, which provides long-range logistical support to carrier strike groups, will reach the end of its service life in the mid-2020s with continued sustainment investment. The Navy is planning to recapitalize the COD capability with an extended range variant of the V-22. FY16 investments support an affordable COD recapitalization plan that procures a version of the V-22 Osprey under the existing program of record (POR). The Navy’s variant of V-22 has been a component of the POR since program inception. This transition strategy allows the Navy to recapitalize the aging C-2 COD capability in an affordable manner and evolve the aerial logistics concept of operations from the CVN-centric “hub and spoke” model to a flexible sea base support concept.
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) MQ-4C Triton UAS The FY16 president’s budget enables MQ4C Triton entry into production with three LRIP aircraft in FY16. The FY16 president’s budget requests $227.2 million in RDT&E to continue Triton development activities, $150.9 million in RDT&E for Triton modernization, and $548.8 million of APN for procurement of the first lot of LRIP aircraft and for procurement of long lead materials for the second lot of LRIP aircraft.
Triton will start establishing five globallydistributed, persistent maritime ISR orbits beginning in FY18, as part of the Navy’s Maritime ISR&T transition plan. MQ-4C Triton test vehicles have completed 21 total flights as of February 2015 and are on schedule to begin sensor integration testing this spring. This rigorous integrated flight test program will support Milestone C planned for FY16. The MQ-4C Triton is a key component of the Navy maritime patrol reconnaissance Force. Its persistent sensor dwell, combined with networked sensors, will enable it to effectively meet ISR requirements in support of the Navy maritime strategy. The Navy currently maintains an inventory of four USAF Global Hawk Block 10 UAS, as part of the BAMS demonstrators, or BAMS-D program. These aircraft have been deployed to CENTCOM’s AOR for over six years. BAMS-D recently achieved over 14,000 flight hours in support of CENTCOM ISR tasking. These assets are adequate to cover all Navy needs through FY18. Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstration (UCAS-D) The FY16 president’s budget requests no funding for the UCAS-D program. The UCAS-D program is in its final year of funding ($35.9M in RDT&E for FY15). With the completion of the Autonomous Aerial Refueling test flights this spring, the demonstration will come to a successful close. The X-47B has met demonstration objectives and reduced technical risk by transferring lessons learned to the UCLASS program. The X-47B demonstrators have paved the way for the proficient introduction of a seabased unmanned aircraft system by digitizing the carrier controlled environment, achieving precision landing navigation performance, demonstrating a deck handling solution, and refining the concept of operations. Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) System The UCLASS system will provide the carrier strike group (CSG) with a persistent unmanned ISR&T and precision strike capability that is available organically to the CSG and comprehensively to the joint force. The CSG is often the first responder for the nation. The UCLASS system will enhance the CSG’s capability and versatility and enable sustained 24/7 operations from a single aircraft carrier. The FY16 president’s budget requests $134.7 million in RDT&E for UCLASS system development efforts. This funding will continue progress on the control system & connectivity, carrier segments and the government lead system integrator efforts, while the March 31, 2015
|
15
department conducts a strategic portfolio review of ISR&T systems and the future composition of the carrier air wing. The UCLASS system will be integrated with carrier air wing operations, increasing the effectiveness of current CSG ISR&T capabilities (airborne, surface, and sub-surface) beginning in the Fiscal Year 2022 timeframe. Once deployed, the UCLASS System will inherently provide reach-back to Navy and national architectures for command and control and for tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination. The UCLASS system will achieve these capabilities through the development and integration of a carrier-suitable, semi-autonomous, unmanned air system; a control system and connectivity segment; and Nimitz/Fordclass carriers. The development and integration effort is overseen by the government as the lead systems integrator, providing system-of-systems integration for the UCLASS Program. MQ-8 Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VTUAV) Fire Scout The MQ-8 Fire Scout is an autonomous system designed to operate from any suitablyequipped air-capable ship, carry modular mission payloads, and operate using the tactical control system and line-of-sight tactical common data link. The FY16 president’s budget requests $52.8 million of RDT&E, to continue development of the MQ-8C endurance upgrade, to include integration of ISR payloads, radar and short range air to surface weapons. Funding will also be used to continue payload and frigate integration with the MQ-8B and MQ-8C. The request for $142.5 million in APN procures MQ-8C air vehicles; MQ-8 system mission control systems; ancillary, trainers and support equipment; technical support; modifications based on engineering changes; and logistics products and support to outfit suitably-equipped air-capable ships and train the associated aviation detachments. Commonality of avionics, software, and payloads between the MQ-8B and MQ-8C has been maximized. The MQ-8B and MQ-8C air vehicles will utilize the same ship-based mission control system and other ship ancillary equipment. Fire Scout was deployed to Afghanistan from May 2011 until August 2013, and amassed more than 5,100 dedicated ISR flight hours in support of U.S. and coalition forces. Since 2012, the MQ-8B Fire Scout has flown more than 7,500 hours from Navy Frigates, performing hundreds of autonomous ship board take-offs and landings in support of special operations forces and Navy operations. The MQ-8C Fire Scout continues developmental test and has completed phase 16
|
March 31, 2015
II dynamic interface testing aboard the Navy destroyer USS Jason Dunham. The MQ-8C has flown more than 400 flight hours since October of 2013. The Fire Scout program will continue to support integration and testing for LCS-based mission modules. Tactical Control System (TCS) The FY16 president’s budget requested $8.6 million in RDT&E for the MQ-8 System’s tactical control system (TCS). TCS provides a standards-compliant open architecture with scalable command and control capabilities for the MQ-8 Fire Scout system. In FY16 TCS will continue to transition the Linux operating system to a technology refreshed mission control system, and enhance the MQ-8 System’s automatic identification system and sensor track generation integration with ship systems. The Linux operating system conversion overcomes hardware obsolescence issues with the Solarisbased control stations and provides lower cost software updates using DoD common application software. In addition, the TCS Linux upgrade will enhance collaboration with the Navy’ future UAS Common Control System. Small Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System (STUAS) RQ-21A Blackjack The FY16 president’s budget requests $11.1 million in RDT&E ($4.7 million USN, $6.4 million USMC); $55.0 million in APN for three Navy systems to support Naval Special Warfare; and $84.9 million in PMC for four RQ-21A systems (which includes 20 air vehicles) to address Marine Corps ISR capability requirements currently supported by service contracts. This Group 3 UAS will provide persistent ship- and landbased ISR support for expeditionary tactical-level maneuver decisions and unit level force defense and force protection missions. Blackjack entered LRIP in 2013, completed IOT&E in the second quarter of FY15, with full rate production planned for the first quarter of FY16. The RQ-21’s current configuration includes full motion video, communications relay package and automatic identification systems. The air vehicle’s payload bay allows for rapid deployment of signal intelligence payloads. The Marine Corps is actively pursuing technological developments for the RQ-21 system in an effort to provide the MAGTF and Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command with significantly improved capabilities. Initiatives include over-the-horizon communication and data relay ability to integrate the system into future networked digital environments; electronic warfare and cyber payloads to increase non-kinetic capabilities; and change
detection radar and moving target indicators to assist warfighters in battlespace awareness and force application. RQ-7B Shadow Marine Corps Tactical UAS (MCTUAS) The FY16 president’s budget requests $0.7 million in RDT&E for the RQ-7B Shadow to continue joint development efforts and government engineering support and $3.8 million in APN to acquire PRC-152A radios and weatherization kits.
STRIKE WEAPONS PROGRAMS Tactical Tomahawk (TACTOM) Block IV Cruise Missile Program The FY16 president's budget requests $184.8 million in WPN for procurement of an additional 100 TACTOM weapons and associated support, $28.0 million in OPN for the Tomahawk support equipment, and $17.7 million in RDT&E for capability updates of the weapon system. WPN resources will be for the continued procurement of this versatile, combat-proven, deep-strike weapon system in order to meet ship load-outs and combat requirements. OPN resources will address the resolution of Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control Station obsolescence, interoperability, and information assurance mandates. RDT&E will be used to continue engineering efforts for A2/ AD navigation and communication upgrades. Tomahawk provides an attack capability against fixed and mobile/moving targets, and can be launched from both surface ships and submarines. The current variant, TACTOM, preserves Tomahawk’s long-range precisionstrike capability while significantly increasing responsiveness and flexibility. TACTOM’s improvements include in-flight retargeting, the ability to loiter over the battlefield, in-flight missile health and status monitoring, and battle damage indication imagery, providing a digital look-down “snapshot” of the battlefield via a satellite data link. Other Tomahawk improvements include rapid mission planning and execution via global positioning system (GPS) onboard the launch platform and improved anti-jam GPS. Tomahawk Theater Mission Planning Center (TMPC) The FY16 president’s budget for TMPC requests $7.5 million in RDT&E and $43.2 million OPN for continued system upgrades and sustainment. TMPC is the mission planning and strike execution segment of the www.npeo-kmi.com
Tomahawk Weapon System. TMPC develops and distributes strike missions for the Tomahawk Missile; provides for precision targeting, weaponeering, mission and strike planning, execution, coordination, control and reporting. TMPC provides combatant commanders and maritime component commanders the capability to plan and/ or modify conventional Tomahawk LandAttack Missile missions. TMPC optimizes all aspects of the Tomahawk missile technology to successfully engage a target. TMPC is a Mission Assurance Category 1 system, vital to operational readiness and mission effectiveness of deployed and contingency forces. Planned upgrades support integration, modernization and interoperability efforts necessary to keep pace with missile upgrades. These required upgrades keep pace with new imagery formats, threat changes, improved GPS denied navigation capability, mission planning timeline improvements, upgraded communications architecture. Additionally, cybersecurity mandates will be implemented to reduce TMPC vulnerability to cyberattacks. These upgrades are critical for the support of over 180 TMPC operational sites worldwide, afloat and ashore, to include: cruise missile support activities (inclusive of US STRATCOM), Tomahawk strike and mission planning cells (5th, 6th, 7th fleet), carrier strike groups, surface and subsurface firing units and labs/training classrooms. Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW)/ Increment 1 Weapon The FY16 president’s budget requests $285.8 million in RDT&E for the completion of technology maturation and initiation
of integration and test of the air-launched OASuW/Increment 1 program. Increment 1 leverages the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) weapon demonstration effort. Increment 1 provides combatant commanders the ability to conduct ASuW operations against high-value surface combatants protected by integrated air defense system with long-range surface-to-air missiles and denies the adversary the sanctuary of maneuver. The OASuW/ Increment 1 program is a DoN led joint program, scheduled to field on the B-1 by the end of FY18 and the F/A-18E/F by the end of FY19. Next Generation Strike Capability (NGSC) The FY16 budget requests $9.6 million for initiation of efforts to develop a next generation strike capability (NGSC). As part of a long-term strike weapons strategy, NGSC will study long-range, survivable, multimission, multiplatform conventional strike capability options planned to IOC in the mid-2020 timeframe. NGSC will become the follow-on acquisition program to the current OASuW/ Increment I (LRASM) and Tomahawk weapon system modernization programs. The NGSC program will commence an analysis of alternatives (AoA) during FY16. The AoA will assess existing weapons systems, emergent technologies, and industry internal research and development activities; develop potential program of record costs, schedules, and risk assessments; and conduct additional threat assessments based on projected scenarios and operational environments. This analytical data will inform performance and relevant technology requirements to be matured as part
An F/A-18C Hornet from the Stingers of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 113, left, and two F/A-18C Hornets from the Mighty Shrikes of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 94, fly in formation before landing aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70). Carl Vinson is deployed in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility supporting Operation Inherent Resolve, strike operations in Iraq and Syria as directed, maritime security operations, and theater security cooperation efforts in the region. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class John Philip Wagner, Jr.]
www.npeo-kmi.com
of potential NGSC materiel solution(s) and associated kill-chain(s). Sidewinder Air-Intercept Missile (AIM-9X) The FY16 president’s budget requests $76.0 million in RDT&E and $96.4 million in WPN for this joint DoN and USAF program. RDT&E will be applied toward the engineering manufacturing development phase of critical hardware obsolescence redesign, Development test of missile v9.4 software, and the design and development of joint chiefs of staff directed insensitive munitions improvements. WPN funding is requested for production of a combined 227 all-up-rounds and captive air training missiles and missile-related hardware. The AIM-9X Block II Sidewinder missile is the newest in the Sidewinder family and is the only short-range infrared air-to-air missile integrated on Navy, Marine Corps and USAF strike-fighter aircraft and Marine Corps attack helicopters. This fifth-generation weapon incorporates high off-boresight acquisition capability and increased seeker sensitivity through an imaging infrared focal plane array seeker with advanced guidance processing for improved target acquisition; data link capability; and advanced thrust vectoring capability to achieve superior maneuverability and increase the probability of intercept of adversary aircraft. Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM/AIM-120D) The FY16 president’s budget requests $32.2 million in RDT&E for continued software capability enhancements and $192.9 million in WPN production of a combined 167 all-uprounds and captive air training missiles and missile-related hardware. AMRAAM is a joint USAF and DoN weapon that counters existing aircraft and cruise-missile threats. It uses advanced counter-electronic attack capabilities at both high and low altitudes, and can engage from beyond visual range as well as within visual range. AMRAAM provides an air-to-air first look, first shot, first kill capability, while working within a networked environment in support of the Navy’s theater air and missile defense mission area. RDT&E will be applied toward software upgrades to counter emerging electronic attack threats for AIM-120C/D missiles. Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II) The FY16 president’s budget requests $97.0 million in RDT&E for continued development of the Department of the Air March 31, 2015
|
17
Force led joint service SDB II weapon and bomb-rack program. SDB II provides an adverse weather, day or night standoff capability against mobile, moving, and fixed targets, and enables target prosecution while minimizing collateral damage. SDB II will be integrated into the internal carriage of both DoN variants of the joint strike fighter (F-35B and F-35C) as well as the Navy’s F/A-18E/F. The joint miniature munitions bomb rack unit (JMM BRU) BRU-61A/A is being developed to meet the operational and environmental integration requirements for internal bay carriage of the SDB II in the F-35B and F-35C, and external carriage on F/A-18 E/F. JMM BRU entered technology development in June 2013. Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) The FY16 president’s budget requests $0.4 million in RDT&E to address software integration and interoperability following the completion of efforts associated with operational testing in FY15, and $21.4 million in WPN to begin Captive Air Training Missile (CATM) software integration, continuation of telemetry instrumentation kit (TIK) non recurring engineering and re-life efforts, and shutdown of the JSOW production line. The department’s decision to terminate JSOW C-1 production was due to fiscal constraints, an analysis of targets determining there was sufficient inventory to handle current operational needs, and the ongoing focus to fund future capabilities. The DoN has submitted a final 2014 termination Selected Acquisition Report and Congressional notification. The Navy is preparing a transition plan to address the production termination decision and document the planned use of RDT&E, WPN, and O&M resources to complete JSOW C-1 operational test activities, missile and TIK production, CATM conversions, and long-term weapon system operation & support. Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) & AARGM Extended Range The FY16 president’s budget requests $12.9 million of RDT&E for Block 1 followon development and test program, $38.4 million of RDT&E for AARGM extended range (ER) development, and $122.3 million of WPN for production of 138 all-up-rounds and captive training missiles. The AARGM cooperative program with the Italian Air Force transforms the High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) into an affordable, lethal and flexible time-sensitive strike weapon system for 18
|
March 31, 2015
An EA-18G Growler from the Cougars of Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 139 launches from the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70). The Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group is deployed in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility supporting Operation Inherent Resolve, maritime security operations, strike operations in Iraq and Syria as directed, and theater security cooperation efforts. [Photo courtesy of the U.S. Navy/by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class John Philip Wagner, Jr.]
conducting destruction of enemy air defense missions. AARGM adds multi-spectral targeting capability and targeting geo-specificity to its supersonic fly-out to destroy sophisticated enemy air defenses and expand upon the HARM target set. The program achieved IOC on the F/A-18C/D aircraft in July 2012, with forward deployment to U.S. Pacific Command, and integration is complete for AARGM with release of H-8 System Configuration Set for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft. The development of an AARGM-ER modification program, involving hardware and software improvements, will begin in FY16. This effort will increase the weapon system’s survivability against complex, new and emerging threat systems and enable launch platforms greater stand-off range. Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) The FY16 president’s budget requests $25.9 million in RDT&E to begin a five-year integration effort of JAGM Increment 1 onto the Marine Corps AH-1Z in support of an initial operational capability by FY19. JAGM is a Department-of-the-Army led, joint pre-Major Defense Acquisition Program. JAGM is a direct attack/close-air-support missile program that will utilize advanced seeker technology and be employed against land and maritime stationary and moving targets in adverse weather and will replace the Hellfire and TOW II missile systems. In November 2012, the joint chiefs of staff authorized the JAGM incremental requirements and revalidated the DoN’s AH-1Z Cobra aircraft as a threshold platform. JAGM
Increment 1 is expected to achieve Milestone B certification in FY15. Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) The FY16 president’s budget requests $53.5 million in PANMC for procurement of 1,834 APKWS II precision guidance kits. APKWS II provides an unprecedented precision guidance capability to DoN unguided rocket inventories, improving accuracy and minimizing collateral damage. Program production continues on schedule, meeting the needs of our warfighters in today’s theaters of operations. IOC was reached in March 2012 on the Marine Corps’ AH-1W and UH-1Y.These platforms have expended more than 170 APKWS II weapons in combat. Marine Crops AH-1Z platforms will be certified to fire APKWS II in Fiscal Year 2015. The Navy successfully integrated APKWS II on the MH-60S for an Early operational capability in March 2014 and is on track to finalize a similar effort for the MH-60R in March 2015.
CONCLUSION We are an agile strike and amphibious power projection force in readiness, and such agility requires that the aviation arm of our naval strike and expeditionary forces remain strong. Mr. Chairman, and distinguished committee members, we request your continued support for the department’s FY16 budget request for our naval aviation programs.  www.npeo-kmi.com
Coast Guard Cutter Procurement ➥ Continued From pAGE 1
NSC Program
The NSC, OPC and FRC programs pose several oversight issues for Congress. Congress’s decisions on these programs could substantially affect Coast Guard capabilities and funding requirements, and the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base.
National Security Cutters (Figure 1), also known as Legend(WMSL-750) class cutters, are the Coast Guard’s largest and most capable general-purpose cutters. The Coast Guard’s POR—the service’s list, established in 2004, of planned procurement quantities for various new types of ships and aircraft—calls for procuring eight NSCs as replacements for the service’s 12 Hamilton-class high-endurance cutters. The Coast Guard’s FY15 five-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) estimates the total acquisition cost of the eight ships at $5.504 billion, or an average of about $688 million per ship.
Background Older Ships to Be Replaced by NSCs, OPCs and FRCs
Figure 1
The 91 planned NSCs, OPCs and FRCs are intended to replace 90 older Coast Guard ships—12 high-endurance cutters (WHECs), 29 medium-endurance cutters (WMECs), and 49 110-foot patrol craft (WPBs). The Coast Guard’s 12 Hamilton- (WHEC-715) class highendurance cutters entered service between 1967 and 1972. The Coast Guard’s 29 medium-endurance cutters include 13 Famous- (WMEC901) class ships that entered service between 1983 and 1991, 14 Reliance (WMEC-615) class ships that entered service between 1964 and 1969, and two one-of- a-kind cutters that originally entered service with the Navy in 1944 and 1971 and were later transferred to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard’s 49 110-foot Island- (WPB-1301) class patrol boats entered service between 1986 and 1992. Many of these 90 ships are manpower-intensive and increasingly expensive to maintain, and have features that in some cases are not optimal for performing their assigned missions. Some of them have already been removed from Coast Guard service: eight of the Islandclass patrol boats were removed from service in 2007 following an unsuccessful effort to modernize and lengthen them to 123 feet; the one-of-a-kind cutter that originally entered service with the Navy in 1944 was decommissioned in 2011; and Hamilton-class cutters are being decommissioned as new NSCs enter service. A July 2012 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report discusses the generally poor physical condition and declining operational capacity of the Coast Guard’s older high-endurance cutters, medium-endurance cutters, and 110-foot patrol craft. Missions of NSCs, OPCs and FRCs NSCs, OPCs and FRCs, like the ships they are intended to replace, are to be multimission ships for routinely performing seven of the Coast Guard’s 11 statutory missions, including • • • • • • •
search and rescue (SAR); drug interdiction; migrant interdiction; ports, waterways and coastal security (PWCS); protection of living marine resources; other/general law enforcement; and defense readiness operations.
Smaller Coast Guard patrol craft and boats contribute to the performance of some of these seven missions close to shore. NSCs, OPCs and FRCs perform them both close to shore and in the deepwater environment, which generally refers to waters more than 50 miles from shore.
www.npeo-kmi.com
NSCs are larger and technologically more advanced than Hamiltonclass cutters. The Coast Guard states that Of the Coast Guard’s white-hull patrol cutter fleet, the NSC is the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the Coast Guard. Each NSC is capable of operating in the most demanding open ocean environments, including the hazardous fisheries of the North Pacific and the vast approaches of the Southern Pacific where much of the American narcotics traffic occurs. With robust command, control, communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) equipment, stern boat launch and aviation facilities, as well as long-endurance station keeping, the NSCs are afloat operational-level headquarters for complex law enforcement and national security missions involving multiple Coast Guard and partner agency participation. NSCs are built by Ingalls Shipbuilding of Pascagoula, Miss., a shipyard that forms part of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII). The four NSCs are now in service (the fourth was commissioned into service on December 6, 2014), the fifth through seventh are in various stages of construction, and the eighth was funded in FY15. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $91.4 million in acquisition funding for the NSC program for structural enhancements on the first two NSCs and post-delivery activities on NSCs 5 through 8. OPC Program Offshore Patrol Cutters (Figure 2) are to be smaller, less expensive and, in some respects, less capable than NSCs. The Coast Guard’s
March 31, 2015
|
19
POR calls for procuring 25 OPCs as replacements for the service’s 29 medium-endurance cutters. Under the Coast Guard’s FY15 five-year CIP, it appears (based on programmed annual funding levels) that the first OPC is to be procured in FY18. The FY15 CIP estimates the total acquisition cost of the 25 ships at $10.523 billion, or an average of about $421 million per ship. The Coast Guard’s request for proposal (RFP) for the program, released on September 25, 2012, establishes an affordability requirement for the program of an average unit price of $310 million per ship, or less, in then-year dollars (i.e., dollars that are not adjusted for inflation) for ships 4 through 9 in the program. This figure represents the shipbuilder’s portion of the total cost of the ship; it does not include the cost of governmentfurnished equipment (GFE) on the ship, or other program costs—such as those for program management, system integration, and logistics—that contribute to the above-cited figure of $421 million per ship. Figure 2
first ship. The contractor will present the OPC design at the initial critical design reviews (ICDR) and final critical design review (FCDR) followed by a production readiness review (PRR). During Phase II contract performance, the contractor will be encouraged to submit a fixed price proposal (before construction begins on the Hull #6) for option Hulls #6 through #11 (LRIP 2). If the priced effort is deemed fair and reasonable the contractor shall be eligible for Hulls #10 and #11. If not, the contract will continue with the FPI structure and the contract will end with Hull #9. At least eight shipyards expressed interest in the program. The firms were: • • • • • •
Bollinger Shipyards of Lockport, La.; Eastern Shipbuilding Group of Panama City, Fla.; General Dynamics Bath Iron Works (GD/BIW) of Bath, Maine; Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) of Pascagoula, Miss.; Marinette Marine Corporation of Marinette, Wash.; General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (GD/ NASSCO) of San Diego, Calif.; • Vigor Shipyards of Seattle, Wash.; and • VT Halter Marine of Pascagoula, Miss. On February 11, 2014, the Coast Guard announced that it had awarded Phase I Preliminary and Contract Design (P&CD) contracts to Bollinger, Eastern and GD/BIW. A February 11, 2014, Coast Guard news release on the award stated:
The service states that OPCs will complement the Coast Guard’s current and future fleet to extend the service’s operational capabilities. The OPC will replace the service’s 210-foot and 270-foot medium endurance cutters. It will feature increased range and endurance, powerful weapons, a larger flight deck, and improved command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) equipment. The OPC will accommodate aircraft and small boat operations in all weather. The Coast Guard’s acquisition strategy for the first 9 to 11 ships in the program is as follows: The OPC procurement shall implement a two-phase down select strategy. Phase I entails a full and open competition for preliminary and contract design (P&CD) awarded to a maximum of three offerors. The Coast Guard intends to competitively award the Phase I contract in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. P&CD will culminate in a contract design review (KDR). After KDR, the three contractors will submit proposals which will result in a down selection to one contractor to continue with Phase II. (h) Phase II award is planned for FY ... Phase II’s down selection will be accomplished by exercising one option with a single contractor for detail design (DD) with additional options for long lead time materials, lead ship and eight to ten follow ships. DD will start after option exercise and be complete upon delivery of the
20
|
March 31, 2015
The U.S. Coast Guard today awarded three firm-fixed-price contracts for preliminary and contract design (P&CD) for the offshore patrol cutter (OPC) acquisition project. The contracts were awarded to Bollinger Shipyards Lockport LLC (Lockport, La.), Eastern Shipbuilding Group Inc. (Panama City, Fla.), and General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works (Bath, Maine). The total value of the award is approximately $65 million. Awarding multiple design contracts ensures that competition is continued through to a potential down-select for detailed design and construction, establishes a fixed-price environment for the remainder of the contract, and incorporates a strategy to maximize affordability. This strategy was developed by analyzing lessons learned from other major government shipbuilding programs and through collaboration with industry on how to best design and produce the most affordable OPC ... The Coast Guard issued the P&CD request for proposal (RFP) Sept. 25, 2012. Responses were received in January 2013, and the Coast Guard conducted a thorough evaluation of proposals based on technical, management, past performance and price factors. To support the effort to acquire an affordable OPC, the Coast Guard engaged industry prior to RFP release through industry day events, one-on-one meetings and providing opportunities for potential offerors to review and comment on OPC draft technical packages, specifications and solicitation language. HII and VT Halter Marine reportedly filed protests of the Coast Guard’s award decision on February 24 and 25, respectively. The Coast Guard issued stop work orders to Bollinger, Eastern and GD/BIW pending GAO’s rulings on the protests. On June 5, 2014, it was reported that GAO had rejected the protests, and that the Coast Guard had directed Bollinger, Eastern and GD/BIW to resume their work.
www.npeo-kmi.com
The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $18.5 million in acquisition funding for the OPC program for technical and project management ($4.7 million) and design and development work ($13.8 million). The Coast Guard states, “The Administration’s [FY16 budget] request includes a [proposed legislative] General Provision permitting a transfer [of additional funding] to the OPC project if the program is ready to award the next phase of vessel acquisition in FY16.”
The Coast Guard holds the data rights for the Sentinel-class design and on February 27, 2015, issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a contract that will include options for the acquisition of up to 26 FRCs (i.e., the remaining 26 ships in the program). Proposals from bidders are due by June 5, 2015. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY16 budget requests $340 million in acquisition funding for the FRC program.
FRC Program
NSC, OPC and FRC Funding in FY13-FY16 budget submissions
Fast response cutters (Figure 3), also called Sentinel- (WPC-1101) class patrol boats, are considerably smaller and less expensive than OPCs, but are larger than the Coast Guard’s older patrol boats.25 The Coast Guard’s POR calls for procuring 58 FRCs as replacements for the service’s 49 Island-class patrol boats. The FY15 CIP estimates the total acquisition cost of the 58 cutters at $3.928 billion, or an average of about $68 million per cutter. The Coast Guard states that The planned fleet of FRCs will conduct primarily the same missions as the 110’ patrol boats being replaced. In addition, the FRC will have several increased capabilities enhancing overall mission execution. The FRC is designed for rapid response, with approximately a 28 knot speed capability, and will typically operate in the coastal zones. Examples of missions that FRCs will complete include SAR, migrant interdiction, drug interdiction and ports waterways and coastal security. FRCs will provide enhanced capabilities over the 110’s including improved C4ISR capability and interoperability; stern launch and recovery (up through sea state 4) of a 40 knot, Over-the-Horizon, 7 m cutter boat; a remote operated, gyro stabilized MK38 Mod 2, 25 mm main gun; improved sea keeping; and enhanced crew habitability. Figure 3
Table 1 shows annual acquisition funding for the NSC, OPC, and FRC programs in the Coast Guard’s FY2013-FY2016 budget submissions. Table 1. NSC, OPC, and FRC Funding in FY2013-FY2016 Budget Submissions (millions of then-year dollars)
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
NSC program FY13 budget
683
FY14 budget
0
0
0
0
616
710
38
0
45
638
75
130
30
47
91.4
n/a
n/a
n/a
FY15 budget FY16 budget
n/a
OPC program FY13 budget
30
FY14 budget
50
40
200
530
25
65
200
530
430
20
90
100
530
430
18.5
n/a
n/a
n/a
FY15 budget FY16 budget
n/a
FRC program FY13 budget
139
FY14 budget
360
360
360
360
75
110
110
110
110
110
340
220
220
315
340
n/a
n/a
n/a
FY15 budget The FRC program received approval from DHS to enter full-rate production on September 18, 2013. A total of 32 FRCs have been funded through FY15. The 11th was commissioned into service on January 24, 2015, and the 12th is scheduled to be commissioned in March 2015. FRCs are currently built by Bollinger Shipyards of Lockport, La. Bollinger’s contract with the Coast Guard originally included annual options for building a total of up to 34 FRCs through FY14, but some of the annual options were not exercised by the Coast Guard to their maximum possible quantities, and Bollinger’s contract wound up covering the 32 FRCs. (The Coast Guard on February 27, 2015, exercised a final option under the contract with Bollinger for ships 31 and 32.) Ship awards under that contract are now completed.
www.npeo-kmi.com
FY16 budget
n/a
Total FY13 budget FY14 budget FY15 budget FY16 budget
852
410
400
560
890
716
885
348
640
585
768
505
450
780
792
449.9
n/a
n/a
n/a
March 31, 2015
n/a
|
21
Issues for Congress Planned NSC, OPC and FRC Procurement Quantities One potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the Coast Guard’s planned NSC, OPC and FRC procurement quantities. The POR’s planned force of 91 NSCs, OPCs and FRCs is about equal in number to the Coast Guard’s legacy force of 90 high-endurance cutters, medium-endurance cutters, and 110-foot patrol craft. NSCs, OPCs and FRCs, moreover, are to be individually more capable than the older ships they are to replace. Even so, Coast Guard studies have concluded that the planned total of 91 NSCs, OPCs and FRCs would be considerably fewer ships than the number that would be needed to fully perform the service’s statutory missions in coming years, in part because Coast Guard mission demands are expected to be greater in coming years than they were in the past. CRS first testified about this issue in 2005. The Coast Guard estimates that with the POR’s planned force of 91 NSCs, OPCs and FRCs, the service would have capability or capacity gaps in six of its 11 statutory missions—search and rescue (SAR); defense readiness; counter-drug operations; ports, waterways and coastal security; protection of living marine resources (LMR); and alien migrant interdiction operations (AMIO). The Coast Guard judges that some of these gaps would be “high risk” or “very high risk.” Public discussions of the POR frequently mention the substantial improvement that the POR force would represent over the legacy force. Only rarely, however, have these discussions explicitly acknowledged the extent to which the POR force would nevertheless be smaller in number than the force that would be required, by Coast Guard estimate, to fully perform the Coast Guard’s statutory missions in coming years. Discussions that focus on the POR’s improvement over the legacy force while omitting mention of the considerably larger number of cutters that would be required, by Coast Guard estimate, to fully perform the Coast Guard’s statutory missions in coming years could encourage audiences to conclude, contrary to Coast Guard estimates, that the POR’s planned force of 91 cutters would be capable of fully performing the Coast Guard’s statutory missions in coming years. In a study completed in December 2009 called the Fleet Mix Analysis (FMA) Phase 1, the Coast Guard calculated the size of the force that in its view would be needed to fully perform the service’s statutory missions in coming years. The study refers to this larger force as the objective fleet mix. Table 2 compares planned numbers of NSCs, OPCs and FRCs in the POR to those in the objective fleet mix.
POR. Stated the other way around, the POR includes about 58 percent percent as many cutters as the objective fleet mix. As intermediate steps between the POR force and the objective fleet mix, FMA Phase 1 calculated three additional forces, called FMA-1, FMA-2, and FMA-3. (The objective fleet mix was then relabeled FMA-4.) Table 3 compares the POR to FMAs 1 through 4. Table 3. POR Compared to FMAs 1 Through 4 (From Fleet Mix Analysis Phase 1 (2009)) Ship type
Program of Record (POR)
FMA-1
FMA-2
FMA-3
FMA-4 (Objective Fleet Mix)
NSC
8
9
9
9
9
OPC
25
32
43
50
57
FRC
58
63
75
80
91
Total
91
104
127
139
157
FMA-1 was calculated to address the mission gaps that the Coast Guard judged to be “very high risk.” FMA-2 was calculated to address both those gaps and additional gaps that the Coast Guard judged to be “high risk.” FMA-3 was calculated to address all those gaps, plus gaps that the Coast Guard judged to be “medium risk.” FMA-4—the objective fleet mix—was calculated to address all the foregoing gaps, plus the remaining gaps, which the Coast Guard judge to be “low risk” or “very low risk.” Table 4 shows the POR and FMAs 1 through 4 in terms of their mission performance gaps. Figure 4. Projected Mission Demands vs. Projected Capability/Performance From Fleet Mix Analysis Phase 1, Executive Summary
Table 2. Program of Record Compared to Objective Fleet Mix From Fleet Mix Analysis Phase 1 (2009) Ship type
Program of Record (POR)
Objective Fleet Mix From FMA Phase 1
Objective Fleet Mix compared to POR Number
%
NSC
8
9
+1
+13%
OPC
25
57
+32
+128%
FRC
58
91
+33
+57%
Total
91
157
+66
+73%
As can be seen in Table 2, the objective fleet mix includes 66 additional cutters, or about 73 percent percent more cutters than in the
22
|
March 31, 2015
www.npeo-kmi.com
Table 4. Force Mixes and Mission Performance Gaps (From Fleet Mix Analysis Phase 1 (2009)—an X mark indicates a mission performance gap) Missions with performance gaps
Risk levels of these performance gaps
Program of Record (POR)
Search and Rescue (SAR) capability
Very high
X
Defense Readiness capacity
Very high
X
Counter Drug capacity
Very high
X
Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security (PWCS) capacity
High
Living Marine Resources (LMR) capability and capacity
FMA-1
FMA2
FMA3
FMA-4 (Objective Fleet Mix)
FMA Phase 1 was a fiscally unconstrained study, meaning that the larger force mixes shown in Table 3 were calculated primarily on the basis of their capability for performing missions, rather than their potential acquisition or life-cycle operation and support (O&S) costs. Although the FMA Phase 1 was completed in December 2009, the figures shown in Table 3 were generally not included in public discussions of the Coast Guard’s future force structure needs until April 2011, when GAO presented them in testimony. GAO again presented them in a July 2011 report. The Coast Guard completed a follow-on study, called Fleet Mix Analysis (FMA) Phase 2, in May 2011. Among other things, FMA Phase 2 includes a revised and updated objective fleet mix called the refined objective mix. Table 5 compares the POR to the objective fleet mix from FMA Phase 1 and the refined objective mix from FMA Phase 2. Table 5. POR Compared to Objective Mixes in FMA Phases 1 and 2 (From Fleet Mix Analysis Phase 1 (2009) and Phase 2 (2011))
X
X Ship type
High
X
[all gaps addressed]
X
PWCS capacity
Medium
X
X
X
LMR capacity
Medium
X
X
X
Alien Migrant Interdiction Operations (AMIO) capacity
Low/very low
X
X
X
X
PWCS capacity
Low/very low
X
X
X
X
Figure 4, taken from FMA Phase 1, depicts the overall mission capability/performance gap situation in graphic form. It appears to be conceptual rather than drawn to precise scale. The black line descending toward zero by the year 2027 shows the declining capability and performance of the Coast Guard’s legacy assets as they gradually age out of the force. The purple line branching up from the black line shows the added capability from ships and aircraft to be procured under the POR, including the 91 planned NSCs, OPCs and FRCs. The level of capability to be provided when the POR force is fully in place is the green line, labeled “2005 Mission Needs Statement.” As can be seen in the graph, this level of capability is substantially below a projection of Coast Guard mission demands made after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (the red line, labeled “Post-9/11 CG Mission Demands”), and even further below a Coast Guard projection of future mission demands (the top dashed line, labeled “Future Mission Demands”). The dashed blue lines show future capability levels that would result from reducing planned procurement quantities in the POR or executing the POR over a longer time period than originally planned.
www.npeo-kmi.com
Program of Record (POR)
Objective Fleet Mix from FMA Phase 1
Refined Objective Mix from FMA Phase 2
NSC
8
9
9
OPC
25
57
49
FRC
58
91
91
Total
91
157
149
As can be seen in Table 5, compared to the objective fleet mix from FMA Phase 1, the refined objective mix from FMA Phase 2 includes 49 OPCs rather than 57. The refined objective mix includes 58 additional cutters, or about 64 percent more cutters than in the POR. Stated the other way around, the POR includes about 61percent as many cutters as the refined objective mix. Compared to the POR, the larger force mixes shown in Table 3 and Table 5 would be more expensive to procure, operate, and support than the POR force. Using the average NSC, OPC and FRC procurement cost figures presented earlier, procuring the 58 additional cutters in the refined objective mix from FMA Phase 2 might cost an additional $10.7 billion, of which most (about $7.8 billion) would be for the 24 additional FRCs. (The actual cost would depend on numerous factors, such as annual procurement rates.) O&S costs for these 58 additional cutters over their life cycles (including crew costs and periodic ship maintenance costs) would require billions of additional dollars. The larger force mixes in the FMA Phase 1 and 2 studies, moreover, include not only increased numbers of cutters, but also increased numbers of Coast Guard aircraft. In the FMA Phase 1 study, for example, the objective fleet mix included 479 aircraft—93 percent more than the 248 aircraft in the POR mix. Stated the other way around, the POR includes about 52 percent as many aircraft as the objective fleet mix. A decision to procure larger numbers of cutters like those shown in Table 3 and Table 5 might thus also imply a decision to procure, operate, and support larger numbers of Coast Guard aircraft, which would require billions of additional dollars. The FMA Phase 1 study estimated the procurement cost of the objective fleet mix of 157 cutters and 479 aircraft at $61 billion to $67 billion in constant FY2009 dollars, or about 66 percent more than the procurement cost of $37 billion to $40 billion in constant FY2009 dollars estimated for the POR mix of 91 cutters and 248 aircraft. The study estimated the total ownership cost (i.e., procurement plus life-cycle O&S cost) of the objective fleet mix of cutters and
March 31, 2015
|
23
aircraft at $201 billion to $208 billion in constant FY2009 dollars, or about 53 percent more than the total ownership cost of $132 billion to $136 billion in constant FY2009 dollars estimated for POR mix of cutters and aircraft. Potential oversight questions for Congress include the following:
Table 6. Funding in AC&I Account in FY2013-FY2016 Budgets (Millions of dollars, rounded to nearest tenth)
FY13 budget
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
1,217.3
1,429.5
1,619.9
1,643.8
1,722.0
951.1
1,195.7
901.0
1,024.8
1,030.3
1,084.2
1,103.0
1,128.9
1,180.4
1,228.7
1,017.3
n/a
n/a
n/a
FY14 budget
• Under the POR force mix, how large a performance FY15 gap, precisely, would there be in each of the missions budget shown in Table 4? What impact would these FY16 performance gaps have on public safety, national budget security, and protection of living marine resources? • How sensitive are these performance gaps to the way in which the Coast Guard translates its statutory missions into more precise statements of required mission performance? • Given the performance gaps shown in Table 4, should planned numbers of Coast Guard cutters and aircraft be increased, or should the Coast Guard’s statutory missions be reduced, or both? • How much larger would the performance gaps in Table 4 be if planned numbers of Coast Guard cutters and aircraft are reduced below the POR figures? • Has the executive branch made sufficiently clear to Congress the difference between the number of ships and aircraft in the POR force and the number that would be needed to fully perform the Coast Guard’s statutory missions in coming years? Why has public discussion of the POR focused mostly on the capability improvement it would produce over the legacy force and rarely on the performance gaps it would have in the missions shown in Table 4? Funding Level of Coast Guard’s Acquisition Account Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the funding level in the Coast Guard’s acquisition account, known formally as the acquisition, construction, and improvements (AC&I) account. The Coast Guard has testified that acquiring the ships and aircraft in its POR on a timely basis while also adequately funding other Coast Guard acquisition programs would require a funding level for the AC&I account of roughly $1.5 billion to $2.5 billion per year. As shown in Table 6 below, the Administration’s FY13 budget submission programmed an average of about $1.5 billion per year in the AC&I account. As also shown in the table, subsequent budget submissions have reduced that figure to roughly $1 billion or $1.1 billion per year. The Coast Guard has testified that funding the AC&I account at a level of about $1 billion per year would make it difficult to fund various Coast Guard acquisition projects, including a new polar icebreaker and improvements to Coast Guard shore installations. Coast Guard plans call for procuring OPCs at an eventual rate of two per year. If each OPC costs roughly $400 million, procuring two OPCs per year in an AC&I account of about $1 billion per year would leave about $200 million per year for all other AC&Ifunded programs. At an October 4, 2011 hearing on the Coast Guard’s major acquisition programs before the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the following exchange occurred: REPRESENTATIVE FRANK LOBIONDO: Can you give us your take on what percentage of value must be invested each year to maintain current levels of effort and to allow the Coast Guard to fully carry out its missions?
24
|
March 31, 2015
FY18
FY19
FY13
FY20
Avg. 1,526.5 1,020.6 1,145.0
n/a
n/a
ADMIRAL ROBERT J. PAPP, COMMANDANT OF THE COAST GUARD: I think I can, Mr. Chairman. Actually, in discussions and looking at our budget—and I’ll give you rough numbers here, what we do now is we have to live within the constraints that we’ve been averaging about $1.4 billion in acquisition money each year. If you look at our complete portfolio, the things that we’d like to do, when you look at the shore infrastructure that needs to be taken care of, when you look at renovating our smaller icebreakers and other ships and aircraft that we have, we’ve done some rough estimates that it would really take close to about $2.5 billion a year, if we were to do all the things that we would like to do to sustain our capital plant. So I’m just like any other head of any other agency here, as that the end of the day, we’re given a top line and we have to make choices and trade-offs and basically, my trade-offs boil down to sustaining frontline operations balancing that, we’re trying to recapitalize the Coast Guard, and there’s where the break is and where we have to define our spending. An April 18, 2012 blog entry stated: If the Coast Guard capital expenditure budget remains unchanged at less than $1.5 billion annually in the coming years, it will result in a service in possession of only 70 percent of the assets it possesses today, said Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mark Butt. Butt, who spoke April 17 [2012] at [a] panel [discussion] during the Navy League Sea Air Space conference in National Harbor, Md., echoed Coast Guard Commandant Robert Papp in stating that the service really needs around $2.5 billion annually for procurement. At a May 9, 2012, hearing on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY13 budget before the Homeland Security subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Admiral Papp testified, “I’ve gone on record saying that I think the Coast Guard needs closer to $2 billion dollars a year [in acquisition funding] to recapitalize—[to] do proper recapitalization.” At a March 12, 2014 hearing on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY15 budget before the Homeland Security subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, Admiral Papp stated: Well, that’s what we've been struggling with, as we deal with the five-year plan, the capital investment plan, is showing how we are able to do that. And it will be a challenge, particularly if it sticks at around $1 billion [per year]. As I've said publicly, and actually, I said we could probably—I've stated publicly before that we could probably construct
www.npeo-kmi.com
comfortably at about 1.5 billion [dollars] a year. But if we were to take care of all the Coast Guard’s projects that are out there, including shore infrastructure that that fleet that takes care of the Yemen [sic: inland] waters is approaching 50 years of age, as well, but I have no replacement plan in sight for them because we simply can't afford it. Plus, we need at some point to build a polar icebreaker. Darn tough to do all that stuff when you're pushing down closer to 1 billion [dollars per year], instead of 2 billion [dollars per year]. As I said, we could fit most of that in at about the 1.5 billion [dollars per year] level, but the projections don't call for that. So we are scrubbing the numbers as best we can. At a May 14, 2013 hearing on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY14 budget before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Admiral Papp stated the following regarding the difference between having about $1.0 billion per year rather than about $1.5 billion per year in the AC&I account: Well, Madam Chairman, $500 million—a half a billion dollars—is real money for the Coast Guard. So, clearly, we had $1.5 billion in the [FY]13 budget. It doesn't get everything I would like, but it—it gave us a good start, and it sustained a number of projects that are very important to us. When we go down to the $1 billion level this year, it gets my highest priorities in there, but we have to either terminate or reduce to minimum order quantities for all the other projects that we have going. If we’re going to stay with our program of record, things that have been documented that we need for our service, we're going to have to just stretch everything out to the right. And when we do that, you cannot order in economic order quantities. It defers the purchase. Ship builders, aircraft companies—they have to figure in their costs, and it inevitably raises the cost when you're ordering them in smaller quantities and pushing it off to the right. Plus, it almost creates a death spiral for the Coast Guard because we are forced to sustain older assets—older ships and older aircraft— which ultimately cost us more money, so it eats into our operating funds, as well, as we try to sustain these older things. So, we'll do the best we can within the budget. And the president and the secretary have addressed my highest priorities, and we'll just continue to go on the—on an annual basis seeing what we can wedge into the budget to keep the other projects going. Although the annual amounts of acquisition funding that the Coast Guard has received in recent years are one potential guide to what Coast Guard acquisition funding levels might or should be in coming years, there may be other potential guides. For example, one could envision potential guides that focus on whether Coast Guard funding for ship acquisition and sustainment is commensurate with Coast Guard funding for the personnel that in many cases will operate the ships. Observations that might be made in connection with this example based on the Coast Guard and Navy budget submissions include the following: • Using figures from the FY14 budget submission, the Coast Guard has about 12.9 percent as many active duty personnel as the Navy. If the amount of funding for the surface ship acquisition and sustainment part of the AC&I account were equivalent to 12.9 percent of the amount of funding in the Navy’s shipbuilding account, this part of the AC&I account would be about $1.8 billion per year.
www.npeo-kmi.com
• Again using figures from the FY2014 budget submission, funding in the Navy’s shipbuilding account is equivalent to about 51 percent of the Navy’s funding for active duty personnel. If Coast Guard funding for surface ship acquisition and sustainment were equivalent to 51 percent of Coast Guard funding for military pay and allowances, this part of the AC&I account would be about $1.7 billion per year. Multiyear Procurement (MYP) and Block Buy Contracting Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the potential for using multiyear contracting (i.e., multiyear procurement (MYP) or block buy contracting) in acquiring new cutters. With congressional approval, certain Department of Defense (DoD) programs for procuring ships, aircraft, and other items employ MYP or block buy contracting to reduce procurement costs. Compared to the standard or default approach of annual contracting, MYP and block buy contracting have the potential for reducing procurement costs by several percent. The statute that governs the use of MYP—10 U.S.C. 2306b—makes MYP available with congressional approval not only to DoD, but to other government departments, including DHS, the parent department of the Coast Guard. Congress also has the option of providing the Coast Guard with authority to use block buy contracting, as it has done for the Navy. All three of the Navy’s year-to-year shipbuilding programs—the Virginiaclass attack submarine program, the DDG-51 destroyer program, and the littoral combat ship (LCS) program—currently use MYP or block buy contracting. In contrast, the Coast Guard has not used MYP or block buy contracting for any of its cutter procurement programs. Section 223 of the Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014 (S.2444/P.L. 113-281 of December 18, 2014) states: SEC. 223. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR OFFSHORE PATROL CUTTERS. In fiscal year 2015 and each fiscal year thereafter, the secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating may enter into, in accordance with section 2306b of title 10, United States Code, multiyear contracts for the procurement of offshore patrol cutters and associated equipment. Potential oversight questions for Congress include the following: • Has the Coast Guard considered using MYP or block buy contracting for procuring NSCs, OPCs or FRCs? If not, why not? • What would be the potential savings of using MYP or block buy contracting for procuring the final two or three NSCs, for procuring OPCs or for procuring FRCs? • What are the potential risks or downsides of using MYP or block buy contracting for procuring NSCs, OPCs or FRCs? OPC Program: FY16 Funding Request Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the FY16 funding request for the OPC program. As shown in Table 1, the amount requested—$18.5 million—is $71.5 million less than the $90 million that was projected for the OPC program for FY16 under the FY15 budget submission. As also noted earlier, the Coast Guard states, “The Administration’s [FY16 budget] request includes a [proposed legislative] General Provision permitting a transfer [of additional funding] to the OPC project if the program is ready to award the next phase of vessel acquisition in FY16.” Potential oversight questions for Congress include the following:
March 31, 2015
|
25
• Why was the program’s FY16 funding request reduced from the $90 million projected under the FY15 budget submission to $18.5 million? • Who will determine whether “the OPC project if the program is ready to award the next phase of vessel acquisition in FY 16”? What criteria will be used to make this determination? • If additional funding is not transferred to the OPC program, what effect will this have on the program’s schedule? OPC Program: Cost, Design and Acquisition Strategy Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the Coast Guard’s acquisition strategy for the offshore patrol cutter. Potential oversight questions for Congress include the following: • Has the Coast Guard fully incorporated into the OPC acquisition strategy lessons learned from the NSC and FRC programs? What, in the Coast Guard’s view, are those lessons? • As mentioned earlier, the Coast Guard’s RFP for the OPC program establishes an affordability requirement of an average unit price of $310 million per ship, or less, in then-year dollars for ships 4 through 9 in the program. How was the $310 million figure determined? • What process is the Coast Guard using to evaluate trade-offs in OPC performance features against this target construction price? What performance features have been reduced or eliminated to meet the target construction price? • How much confidence does the Coast Guard have that the OPC that emerges from the trade-off process could be built within the Coast Guard’s target construction price? • As mentioned earlier, the Coast Guard plans to evaluate the preliminary and contract design (P&CD) proposals and then award one of the competitors a contract for detailed design development and ship construction. What process does the Coast Guard plan to use in evaluating the P&CD efforts? What evaluation factors does the Coast Guard plan to use, and how much weight will be assigned to each? 2012 Testimony Some of the above questions have been discussed over the past two years at hearings on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY13 and FY14 budgets. For example, at a March 6, 2012 hearing on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY13 budget before the Homeland Security Committee of the House Appropriations Committee, Admiral Robert J. Papp, then-commandant of the Coast Guard, stated: When I came in as commandant, I realized that this [the OPC program] was the most expensive project that the Coast Guard has ever taken on, honestly, as each [of the] 25 ships are a significant investment. And I also understood looking out at the horizon and seeing the storm clouds that restrict the budgets coming up there we needed to build a ship that was affordable. We rescrubbed the requirements. We have battled ourselves within the Coast Guard to make sure we're asking for just exactly what we need, nothing more nothing less. And I have said three things to my staff as we go on forward—affordable, affordable, affordable. And now I’m very pleased to say that just last week that the department [DHS] has reviewed—we passed a major milestone with acquisition decision event number two which validated our requirements for the type of cutter that we’re looking for and we are ready to go towards the preliminary and contract design work this next year.
26
|
March 31, 2015
Later in the hearing, the following exchange occurred: ADERHOLT: And there has been a discussion as to the capability of the OPC with objective design being more capable than the—than the threshold capability. What is the current plan and capability of the OPC and what capability thresholds are you considering? PAPP: We—the driving one as I said is affordability, but having said that—and I’m not—I’m not trying to be funny here, but the—the sea-keeping capability being, you know, to operate in Sea State 5 is probably the most important to us right now because with fewer national security cutters, at least fewer than the hindrance posed that we have right now. None of our medium endurance cutters—the 210-foot and 270-foot [medium-endurance] cutters that we have—can operate in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea and they do not have the long legs to be able to send them out in the—on some of the longer deployments that we do in the Pacific. So it has to be able to launch the aircraft and boats in Sea State 5, you know, which is standard offset in the Bering Sea and also have endurance that we’ll be able to keep it out there on station. And I believe it was 45 days [of operation at sea] we’re looking for without refueling. 2013 Testimony At an April 16, 2013 hearing before the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on the FY14 budget for the Coast Guard and maritime transportation, the following exchange occurred: REPRESENTATIVE DON YOUNG: Admiral, I understand this morning you told the corporation you're going to reconsider the requirement for the offshore patrol cutter and reopen the design competition; if that is correct, how long will this delay construction of much of the needy cutters, I mean, how long was—what will happen? ADMIRAL ROBERT PAPP, COMNMANDANT OF THE COAST GUARD: Sir, that wasn't quite an accurate report, I said that we remain committed to the offshore patrol cutter and I was asked if the ability to operate in Sea State-5 was hard and fast and I said the highest requirement for the offshore patrol cutter is affordability and as we evaluate the candidate vessels we may need to go back and look at some of the requirements, I'm hopeful that we don't have to. I think we hammered off these requirements, in fact reduce some of them when I came in as (inaudible) [sic: Commandant?] because I want to make sure this ship is affordable and I've reported to this subcommittee and other sub-committees that we are intent on making this an affordable ship for the Coast Guard. If we had opened it up to revise the see keeping capability there probably would be a delay but I have no intent to open that up at this point, we'd have to evaluate all the candidates that we have and I’m hopeful that we'll find three candidates that look affordable because we're going to need to operate this ship in Alaska and it’s going to need to be able to launch and recover boats and aircraft while operating the Bering Sea. Similarly, at an April 16, 2013 hearing on the Coast Guard’s proposed FY14 budget before the Homeland Security subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, the following exchange occurred:
www.npeo-kmi.com
REPRESENTATIVE (UNKNOWN): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral, there’s been much discussion as to the capability of the OPC specifically the requirement to operate at sea state 5. Admiral, why is this requirement important? And if the current proposals come in too high, will you decrease the sea state requirement in order to meet the target price? ADMIRAL PAPP: I would not like to do that because that would probably delay the process, but we may have to recomplete the request for proposals by changing that standard. The reason we need the standard is because we'll have only eight national security cutters and while they are tremendously capable ships, they can't be in the same places as 12 high-endurance cutters were that they are replacing. We’ve been comfortable with 12 high-endurance cutters because that gave us enough to operate in the Bering Sea and in the Gulf of Alaska and the broad ranges of the—of the Pacific given the fact that we’ll have fewer ships, in fact, we'll only have six national security cutters out on the West Coast because we need to keep two on the East Coast. We need to make sure that the offshore patrol cutters are capable of operating in Alaska. The 270-foot medium-endurance cutters that we have were originally intended to be able to operate everywhere. We've tried to operate them in Alaska. You can't launch and recover boats and you can’t launch and recover aircraft. They just aren't—cannot survive the sea state up there. And that is our—that is our world of work. We have to be able to launch boats for our boarding teams to go aboard fishing vessels. We need to be able to launch helicopters for search and rescue. So this requirement for sea state 5 has been our highest priority on that ship. I’m sorry. It’s not been the highest priority. The highest priority has been affordability. And when people have asked me what are the three most important things about the offshore patrol cutter, I’ve constantly said, affordability, affordability, affordability. So that will be the driving factor on our down select for these three candidates and I'm hopeful that all three will not only be affordable but be able to survive in sea state 5—I’m sorry, not survive, but operate in sea state 5. September 2012 GAO Report Regarding the Coast Guard’s requirements development process for the OPC, a September 2012 GAO report states: Coast Guard Took Positive Steps to Improve Requirements Development and Consider Affordability for the Offshore Patrol Cutter The Coast Guard took some steps to improve the requirements development process for the offshore patrol cutter—the largest acquisition in DHS’s acquisitions portfolio and, according to officials, the first acquisition in the deepwater surface fleet in which the Coast Guard had complete control over the requirements development process. The Coast Guard undertook studies and analysis that, in part, considered the measurability and testability as required by guidance of the following four key performance parameters: operating range, operational sustainment and crew, speed and patrol endurance. For example, the range requirement, which is the distance the cutter can travel between refueling, is clearly stated as a minimum acceptable requirement of 8,500 nautical miles at a constant speed of 14 knots to a maximum level of 9,500 nautical miles. Although cutters typically transit at various speeds over the course of a patrol, the Coast Guard conducted analysis to determine that the 14 knots speed at the minimum and maximum ranges would provide enough days between refueling given the percentage
www.npeo-kmi.com
of time that the Coast Guard normally operates at certain speeds. By developing a measurable range requirement, the Coast Guard helped to promote a clear understanding of offshore patrol cutter performance by potential shipbuilders and sought to balance the cost of additional range with the value that it provides. Furthermore, officials at the independent test authority—the Navy’s Commander Operational Test and Evaluation Force—told us that they have been actively involved through the requirements development process and many of their questions regarding testability have been resolved. Two other key performance parameters—seakeeping and interoperability—are not as consistent with the Coast Guard’s guidelines of measurability and testability as identified in the Major Systems Acquisition Manual. For example the seakeeping key performance parameter described in the requirements document states that the offshore patrol cutter shall be able to launch small boats and helicopters in 8.2- to 13.1foot waves. However, in the specifications document, which is used to translate the requirements document into a level of detail from which contractors can develop a reasonably priced proposal, the Coast Guard states that the offshore patrol cutter shall be able to launch small boats and helicopters in no more than 10.7 foot waves while transiting in a direction that minimizes the pitch and roll of the vessel—an important detail not specified in the requirements document. Further, the interoperability key performance parameter states that the Coast Guard must be able to exchange voice, video and data with the Department of Defense and Homeland Security agencies. However, it does not list specific external partners or substantial details regarding the systems required to exchange data and the types and size of these data that could be examples of measurability and testability. This key performance parameter does not make this distinction between parts of the military that the Coast Guard operates with most often, such as the U.S. Navy and the intelligence community, and simply requires interoperability with all of DoD. Similarly, the interoperability key performance parameter does not specify the DHS agencies for which the Coast Guard must exchange data with, which makes this parameter difficult to test. Coast Guard’s independent testing officials agreed that this key performance parameter, as currently written, is not testable in a meaningful way and stated that there are ongoing efforts to improve the clarity of this requirement. During the requirements development process for the offshore patrol cutter, the Coast Guard also made some decisions with respect to affordability. The following are examples where the Coast Guard made capability trades that are expected to help lower the program’s acquisition cost: • Speed—after a series of analyses, the Coast Guard decided to reduce the minimum acceptable speed from 25 to 22 knots thereby, according to officials, potentially eliminating the need for two diesel engines. According to a study completed by the Coast Guard, this trade could reduce the acquisition cost of each cutter by $10 million. • Stern Launch—the Coast Guard removed the stern launch ramp capability from the offshore patrol cutter design. While this tradeoff may inhibit the launch and recovery of small boats in certain conditions, such as substantial roll or side-to-side movement of the vessel, Coast Guard officials stated that it will reduce the cost of the cutter because a stern launch ramp requires the cutter to be heavier, thus adding cost. • C4ISR—the Coast Guard eliminated a minimum requirement for an integrated C4ISR system and instead is requiring a system built with interfaces to communicate between different software programs.
March 31, 2015
|
27
According to Coast Guard officials, the Coast Guard now plans to use a Coast Guard-developed software system—Seawatch—rather than the more costly lead systems integrator-developed software system currently installed on the national security cutter, even though this system does not provide the Coast Guard with the capability to exchange near real-time battle data with DoD assets. The improvements and affordability decisions that the Coast Guard has made in its requirements development process for the offshore patrol cutter are even more evident when compared with the process for generating requirements for its other major cutter—the national security cutter. Due to the nature of the lead systems integrator strategy that the Coast Guard initially used to buy the national security cutter, Integrated Coast Guard Systems developed the requirements, designed and began producing the national security cutter before the requirements document was completed. The Coast Guard did not have an operational requirements document at the time the Coast Guard awarded the construction contract for the first cutter in 2004, but the Coast Guard documented the requirements in 2006. Further, even as the third national security cutter was in production, Coast Guard was refining the requirements and, in January 2010, made the decision to clarify some key performance parameters such as anti-terrorism/force protection and underwater mine detection because the existing requirements were not testable. To further remedy the lack of clear requirements, Coast Guard officials stated that they are currently developing a second version of the requirements document that improves the specificity and definition of many of the national security cutter’s requirements and will be used as criteria during operational testing. To date, the Coast Guard has not reduced the national security cutter’s capability for the purpose of affordability as it has done for the offshore patrol cutter. However, according to Coast Guard officials, there is a revised acquisition program baseline under review which will reflect an ongoing effort to lower the acquisition cost of the vessel. Regarding the potential accuracy of the Coast Guard’s estimated procurement cost for the OPC, given the known procurement cost of the NSC, the September 2012 GAO report states: Major Cutter Requirements and Missions Have Similarities, but Costs Vary Greatly and Concerns Remain about Affordability The requirements and missions for the national security cutter and the offshore patrol cutter programs have similarities, but the actual cost for one National Security Cutter compared to the estimated cost of one offshore patrol cutter varies greatly. Even though the Coast Guard took steps to consider affordability while developing the requirements for the offshore patrol cutter, those affordability decisions do not explain the magnitude in the difference between these two costs.... This comparison raises questions whether the offshore patrol cutter could be a less expensive, viable substitute for the National Security Cutter or whether there are assumptions built into the offshore patrol cutter cost estimate, not related to requirements, which are driving the estimated costs down. With respect to the first, DHS, motivated by concerns about the affordability of the national security cutter program, completed a Cutter Study in August 2011 which included an analysis to examine the feasibility of varying the combination of objective—or optimal performing—offshore patrol cutters and national security cutters in the program of record. Through this analysis, DHS found that defense operations is a
28
|
March 31, 2015
key factor in determining the quantity of national security cutters needed and that the Coast Guard only needs 3.5 national security cutters per year to fully satisfy the planned requirement for defense-related missions. DHS concluded that with six national security cutters the Coast Guard can meet its goals for defense operations and mitigate some of the nearterm capacity loss of the five national security cutter fleet modeled in the Cutter Study. DHS Program Analysis and Evaluation officials stated that this, in conjunction with other information, helped to inform the decision to not include the last two National Security Cutter hulls—hulls 7 and 8— in the fiscal years 2013-2017 capital investment plan. However, the DHS Cutter Study also notes that the time line for the two acquisitions makes a trade-off between the national security cutter and the offshore patrol cutter difficult since the national security cutter program is in production whereas the Offshore Patrol Cutter program is only in the design phase. Similarly, we have reported that the Coast Guard may face an operational gap in its ability to perform missions using major cutters due to the condition of the legacy fleet. With respect to the second possibility that there are assumptions built into the offshore patrol cutter cost estimate that are driving the estimated costs down, the Coast Guard included three key assumptions in the offshore patrol cutter’s life cycle cost estimate, generally not related to the cutter’s key requirements, which lower the estimated cost in comparison to the actual cost of the national security cutter. These three assumptions are: • Learning Curve. The Coast Guard assumes that the shipyard(s) will generally continue to reduce the labor hours required to build the offshore patrol cutter through the production of all 25 vessels. This may prove optimistic, particularly for later ships in the class, because the amount of additional learning per vessel–or efficiencies gained during production due to improving the manufacturing process to build the ship in a way that requires fewer labor hours– typically decreases over time in a shipbuilding program. • Military versus Commercial Standards. The life cycle cost estimate assumes that certain areas of the offshore patrol cutter’s construction and material would reflect an average of 55 percent commercial standards—or construction standards that are typically used for military sealift ships that provide ocean transportation—and 45 percent military standards—or construction standards typically used for Navy combat vessels. Any changes in this assumption could have a significant effect on the cost estimate because military standards require more sophisticated construction applications, particularly in the areas of shock hardening and signature reduction, to prepare a ship to survive battle. Such sensitivity could help to explain the difference in costs between the Offshore Patrol Cutter program and the National Security Cutter program and officials stated that the latter program is being built to about 90 percent military standards. • Production Schedule. The cost estimate reflects the Coast Guard’s plan to switch from building one offshore patrol cutter per year to building two offshore patrol cutters per year beginning with the fourth and fifth vessel in the class. If the Coast Guard cannot achieve or maintain this build rate due to budget constraints, it may choose to stretch the schedule for the program which in turn could increase costs. Coast Guard program officials generally agreed that these three variables are important to the cost of the offshore patrol cutter and are key reasons why the Coast Guard expects one offshore patrol cutter
www.npeo-kmi.com
to cost less than half of one national security cutter. However, these officials recognized that the cost estimate for the offshore patrol cutter is still uncertain since the cutter has yet to be designed—thus, the national security cutter’s actual costs are more reliable. Coast Guard program officials also added that the cost estimate for the offshore patrol cutter is optimistic in that it assumes that the cutter will be built in accordance with the current acquisition strategy and planned schedule. They noted that any delays, design issues, or contract oversight problems—all of which were experienced during the purchase of the national security cutter—could increase the eventual price of the offshore patrol cutter. NSC Program: Preliminary and Operational Testing Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the results of preliminary and operational testing of the NSC. A June 2014 GAO report stated: The Coast Guard has some knowledge about the performance of the national security cutter, gained through operational deployments and preliminary test events, and the field portion of operational testing was recently conducted. The Coast Guard has been operating the vessel since 2008, conducted a preliminary operational test in 2011, and has received certifications to fully operate and maintain helicopters as well as, according to officials, to use the cutter’s information technology systems on protected networks. In addition, Coast Guard program officials stated that the national security cutter has demonstrated most of its key performance parameters through a myriad of non-operational tests and assessments, but a few key performance parameters, such as those relating to the endurance of the vessel and its self-defense systems have yet to be assessed. Verification of an asset’s ability prior to operational testing may be beneficial, but, as we have previously found, only operational testing can ensure that an asset is ready to meet its missions. Prior to testing, the Coast Guard encountered several issues that require retrofits or design changes to meet mission needs based upon operations, certifications, and non-operational testing. The total cost of these changes is not yet known, but changes identified to date have totaled approximately $140 million, about one-third of the production cost of a single national security cutter. The Coast Guard must pay for all of these and future changes due to the contract terms under which the first three ships were constructed and because the warranty on the remaining ships does not protect the Coast Guard against defects costing more than $1 million. Table 4 lists the retrofits and design changes costing more than $1 million. The table does not include all changes because the Coast Guard did not have data for some of the modifications. In addition to the $140 million in identified changes, the Coast Guard has established a program to supply the national security cutter with cutter small boats for an additional $52.1 million because the small boats originally planned to be delivered with the vessel did not meet requirements. Additional changes may be needed because the Coast Guard has not fully validated the capabilities of the national security cutter, though seven vessels have been delivered or are in production. This situation could result in the Coast Guard having to spend even more money in the future, beyond the current changes, to ensure the national security cutter fleet meets requirements and is logistically supportable. For example, the cutter is experiencing problems operating in all intended environments. The national security cutter requirements document states that the cutter will conduct assigned missions in a full spectrum of climate and maritime weather conditions, to include tropical, dry, temperate, and arctic climates. This document adds that although the national security
www.npeo-kmi.com
cutter will operate in regions in which ice is frequently encountered, it will not have an ice-breaking mission. However, Coast Guard engineering reports from December 2012 discuss problems operating in both warm and cold climates. These reports discuss several warm weather problems, including cooling system failures, excessive condensation forming “considerable” puddles on the deck of the ship, and limited redundancy in its air conditioning system—which, among other things, prevents the use of information technology systems when the air conditioning system needs to be serviced or repaired. In addition, according to operational reports, during a recent deployment, the commanding officer of a national security cutter had to impose speed restrictions on the vessel because of engine overheating when the seawater temperature was greater than 77 degrees. Cold climate issues include the national security cutter not having heaters to keep oil and other fluids warm during operations in cold climates, such as the arctic. Further, Coast Guard operators state that operating near ice must be done with extreme caution since the ice can move quickly and can “spell disaster” if the national security cutter comes in contact with it. Senior Coast Guard officials acknowledged that there are issues to address and stated that the Coast Guard has not yet determined what, if any, fixes are necessary and that it depends on where the cutter ultimately operates ... The Coast Guard has also encountered several issues with the C4ISR [command and control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] system that have required significant and costly changes, including replacing the original system. The original C4ISR system, which cost $413 million to develop and field, was designed and built as a tightly integrated system bundling large commercial and government software programs with contractorproprietary software, which made it difficult and costly to maintain—primarily due to its unique characteristics and large size. For example, according to program officials, the Coast Guard relied on the contractor to conduct even basic system updates, which required new software code because of how the system was integrated. As a result, in 2010, the Coast Guard began replacing the C4ISR software in two steps. First, to address immediate issues, the Coast Guard separated the weapons and command and control/navigation portions of the software but maintained the ability to share data between these portions of the system. Second, the Coast Guard has developed and is now installing a new software package that shares data between proven systems, which makes the system easier to maintain. For example, the communication/navigation system is largely based upon the Navy’s Global Command and Control System, a longstanding system maintained by DoD. In addition, the combat system is adapted from the Navy’s Aegis system. While the previous version of the C4ISR system also contained this software, the Coast Guard’s new configuration keeps these systems independent to improve performance and maintenance, while still allowing data to be passed back and forth between the software packages within the system. The Coast Guard has spent nearly $2 million to develop this new system, called Seawatch, which will have to be further developed for each asset on which it is fielded. For example, it will cost an additional $88.5 million in acquisition funds to purchase the software and hardware needed to field the system on the national security cutters. FRC Program: Operational Testing Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the results of operational testing of the FRC. A June 2014 report on Coast Guard acquisition programs states that:
March 31, 2015
|
29
DHS approved the fast response cutter and [the] HC-144 [maritime patrol aircraft] for full-rate production in September 2013 and October 2012, respectively. However, neither asset met all key requirements during initial operational testing. The fast response cutter partially met one of six key requirements while the HC-144 met or partially met four of seven. The fast response cutter was found to be operationally effective (with the exception of its cutter boat) though not operationally suitable, and the HC-144 was found to be operationally effective and suitable. As we have previously found for Department of Defense (DoD) programs, continuing with full-rate production before ensuring that assets meet key requirements risks replicating problems in each new asset until such problems are corrected. DHS officials stated that they approved both assets for fullrate production because the programs had plans in place to address most major issues identified during testing, such as supplying the fast response cutter with a small boat developed for the national security cutter. However, DHS and Coast Guard acquisition guidance are not clear regarding when the minimum performance standards should be met, such as prior to entering full-rate production. For example, DHS and Coast Guard guidance provide that the Coast Guard should determine if the capability meets the established minimum performance standards, but do not specify when this determination should be made. By comparison, DoD acquisition guidance requires that specific minimum performance standards, which are defined at the time assets are approved for system development, be met prior to entering full-rate production. In addition, DHS and Coast Guard acquisition guidance do not clearly specify how agency officials determine when a breach occurs and what triggers the need for a program manager to submit a performance breach memo. According to DHS and Coast Guard acquisition guidance, when programs fail to meet key performance parameters, program managers are required to file breach memorandums stating that the program did not demonstrate the required capability. Even though threshold key performance parameters on the HC-144 and fast response cutter were not met during operational testing, the Coast Guard did not report that a breach had occurred. Acquisition guidance is unclear as to whether or not failing to meet key requirements during operational testing constitutes a breach. According to Coast Guard officials, if the Coast Guard plans to re-test or re-design a deficiency in order to meet the threshold value, then a breach has not yet occurred. For example, the fast response cutter small boat did not meet the threshold seakeeping requirement, but a new cutter small boat has since been tested on its own and fielded to all fast response cutters. The Coast Guard plans to test this new cutter small boat with the fast response cutter during follow on testing. Program officials are confident that the cutter’s new small boat meets this requirement and that—therefore—a breach has not occurred. DHS acquisition guidance specifies the performance criteria used to determine whether or not a breach has occurred, but does not identify a triggering event for determining when a breach occurs. DHS’s Program Accountability and Risk Management officials stated that a program breach is not necessarily related to its performance during initial operational testing, which they state is a snapshot of a single asset’s performance during a defined test period. Without clear acquisition guidance, it is difficult to determine when or by what measure an asset has breached the threshold values of its key performance parameters and—therefore—when to notify DHS and certain congressional committees ...
30
|
March 31, 2015
COTF [Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force] determined in July 2013 that the fast response cutter, without the cutter’s small boat, is operationally effective— meaning that testers determined that the asset enables mission success. The cutter’s small boat was determined to not be seaworthy in minimally acceptable sea conditions and therefore could not support the cutter’s mission set. Further, COTF determined that the fast response cutter is not operationally suitable because a key engine part failed, which lowered the amount of time the ship was available for missions to an unacceptable level. Despite the mixed test results, COTF and DHS testers as well as Coast Guard program officials all agree that the fast response cutter is a capable vessel. Ultimately, COTF recommended that the Coast Guard proceed to field the vessel, but also recommended that the issues with the cutter’s small boat be remedied expeditiously and that follow-on operational testing be conducted once corrective actions have been implemented. Since the test, the Coast Guard has delivered a new small boat that meets the fast response cutter’s needs and determined that the engine part failure was an isolated event. The Navy also examined the extent to which the fast response cutter meets key requirements. The test demonstrated that it partially met only one out of its six key requirements; the other five requirements did not meet minimum performance levels or were not tested. Table 2 displays each key performance parameter for the fast response cutter, the test results, and a discussion of these results. The Coast Guard proactively sought to test the fast response cutter early in the acquisition process, but early testing limited the ability to fully examine the vessel. For example, the Coast Guard did not test the top speed of the vessel due to a fuel oil leak. As noted above, DHS approved the fast response cutter for full-rate production, but directed the program to develop corrections for the issues identified during operational testing and to verify those corrections through follow-on operational testing by the end of FY15.
Legislative Activity for FY16 Summary of Appropriations Action on FY16 Acquisition Funding Request Table 7 summarizes appropriations action on the Coast Guard’s request for FY16 acquisition funding for the NSC, OPC and FRC programs. Table 7. Summary of Appropriations Action on FY2016 Acquisition Funding Request (Figures in millions of dollars, rounded to nearest tenth) Request
Request
NSC program
91.4
OPC program
18.5
FRC program
340
TOTAL
House Appropriations Committee
Senate Appropriations Committee
Final
449.9
www.npeo-kmi.com
Contract Awards
27 March
ADGC Bonita Pipeline JV, Santee, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2419); CJW Construction Inc., Santa Ana, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2420); Kear Civil Corp., Phoenix, Ariz., (N62473-15-D-2421); Martin Brothers Construction, Sacramento, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2422); and Orion Construction Corp., Vista, Calif., (N6247315-D-2423), are each being awarded a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity multiple award construction contract for new construction, repair and renovation, of wet utilities projects at various locations within the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Southwest area of responsibility (AOR). The maximum dollar value including the base period and four option years for all five contracts combined is $99,000,000. The work to be performed provided for new construction, repair and renovation, primarily by design-build or secondarily by design-bid-build, of wet utilities projects. Types of projects may include, but are not limited to: water, steam, wastewater, storm sewer, pumping stations, treatment plants, storage tanks and related work. All structures (including buildings) that are integral parts of the water, steam and wastewater networks are included. Work on these contracts will be performed within the NAVFAC Southwest AOR including, but not limited to, California (90 percent), Arizona (6 percent), Nevada (1 percent), Colorado (1 percent), Utah (1 percent), and New Mexico (1 percent). The terms of the contracts are not to exceed 60 months, with an expected completion date of March 2020. Fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $25,000 are obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured as a set-aside for small businesses via the Federal Business Opportunities website with 11 proposals received. These five contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contracts. No task orders are being issued at this time. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity.
www.npeo-kmi.com
A&D GC Inc., Santee, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2403); Bristol General Contractors LLC, Anchorage, Alaska, (N62473-15-D-2404); Cox Construction Co., Vista, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2405); I.E.-Pacific Inc., Escondido, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2406); Insight Pacific LLC, Anaheim, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2407); and Penick Nordic JV IV, La Mesa, Calif., (N62473-15-D-2418), are each being awarded a firm-fixed-price, indefinitedelivery/indefinite-quantity multiple award construction contract for new construction and repair of general building construction projects at various locations within the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Southwest area of responsibility (AOR). The maximum dollar value including the base period and four option years for all six contracts combined is $99,000,000. The work to be performed provides for new construction and repair within the North American Industry Classification System Code 236220, primarily by design-build or secondarily by design-bid-build, of general building construction. Types of projects may include, but are not limited to: administration buildings, school buildings, hospitals, auditoriums, fire stations, gymnasiums, office buildings, hangars, laboratories and parking structures. Work on these contracts will be performed within the NAVFAC Southwest AOR including, but not limited to, California (90 percent), Arizona (6 percent), Nevada (1 percent), Colorado (1 percent), Utah (1 percent), and New Mexico (1 percent). The terms of the contracts are not to exceed 60 months, with an expected completion date of March 2020. Fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $30,000 are being obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured as a set-aside for small businesses via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with 42 proposals received. These six contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contracts. No task orders are being issued at this time. The Naval Facilities Engineering
Compiled by KMI Media Group staff
Command, Southwest, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity. Rolls-Royce Corp., Indianapolis, Ind., is being awarded a $93,553,851 modification to a previously awarded indefinite-delivery, requirements contract (N00019-14-D-0016) to exercise an option to provide intermediate, depot-level maintenance and related logistics support for approximately 223 in-service T-45 F405-RR-401 Adour engines and MKII gas turbine starters. Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station (NAS) Meridian, Miss., (47 percent); NAS Kingsville, Texas (46 percent); NAS Pensacola, Fla., (6 percent); and NAS Patuxent River, Md., (1 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2016. No funds will be obligated at time of award; funds will be obligated on individual delivery orders as they are issued. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training, Moorestown, N.J., is being awarded a $51,642,334 modification to previously awarded contract (N0002414-C-5106) for fiscal 2015 Aegis Modernization (AMOD) production requirements. This contract modification is for the production of Multi-Mission Signal Processor equipment sets; Ballistic Missile Defense 4.0.2 equipment; Aegis Weapon System AMOD Upgrade equipment; and associated spares, special tooling, and test equipment, to support the fielding of AMOD capabilities to the fleet. Work will be performed in Moorestown, N.J., (54 percent); Clearwater, Fla., (45 percent); and Owego, N.Y., (1 percent), and is expected to be completed by July 2017. Fiscal 2015 other procurement (Navy) and fiscal 2015 Defense-wide procurement funding in the amount of $51,642,334 will be obligated at the time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Baltimore, Md., is being awarded a $19,026,599
March 31, 2015
|
31
Contract Awards task order under previously awarded basic ordering agreement (BOA) (N0002412-G-4329) for littoral combat ship fleet maintenance sustainment support. The BOA was initially awarded to Lockheed Martin for the design and construction of the Freedom-class littoral combat ship. Lockheed Martin currently administers and performs fleet maintenance requirements through both the use of its resources and the original equipment manufacturer, and the use of nationwide subcontractors that are capable of working on systems and subsystems. Work will be performed in San Diego, Calif., and is expected to be completed by September 2015. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $19,026,599 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center, San Diego, Calif., is the ordering/contracting activity. Exelis Inc., Information Systems Division, Herndon, Va., is being awarded an $18,240,767 modification to previously awarded contract (N0017411-D-0002) to exercise option four for the continued procurement of post-production maintenance support of Navy crew fixed site systems. This action is to fulfill a requirement for equipment, maintenance and support for the Joint Service Explosive Ordnance Disposal Counter Radio Controlled Improvised Explosive Device Electronic Warfare (JSEOD CREW) program. The JSEOD CREW program provides all military explosive ordnance disposal services with a new electronic warfare capability to counter the threat from improvised explosive devices. Work will be performed in Boalsburg, Pa., and is expected to be completed by March 2016. No funds are being obligated at the time of award. No contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Division, Indian Head, Md., is the contracting activity.
32
|
March 31, 2015
Raytheon Co., Integrated Defense Systems, Sudbury, Mass., is being awarded a $16,663,927 firm-fixed-price delivery order under previously awarded basic ordering agreement (N0002414-G-5105) for fiscal 2015 Aegis modernization production requirements. This delivery order covers the production of Multi-Mission Signal Processor Ordnance Alteration (ORDALT) kits, kill assessment system ORDALT kits and spares, radio frequency coherent combiner kits, high voltage power supply sidewall capacitors, traveling waves tube monitoring circuits, and stabilized master oscillator ORDALT kits, as well as test and installation efforts, in support of the Aegis Modernization (AMOD) program. The AMOD program fields combat system upgrades that will enhance the anti-air warfare and Ballistic Missile Defense capabilities of Aegis-equipped Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers. This delivery order includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this delivery order to $24,821,438. Work will be performed in Norfolk, Va., (42 percent); Andover, Mass., (38 percent); Burlington, Mass., (12 percent); and Sudbury, Mass., (8 percent), and is expected to be completed by May 2017. Fiscal 2015 other procurement (Navy); fiscal 2015 Defense-wide procurement and fiscal 2015 research, development, test and evaluation funding in the amount of $16,663,927 will be obligated at the time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. Raytheon Co., Integrated Defense Systems, San Diego, Calif., is being awarded a $16,091,864 modification to previously awarded contract (N0002414-C-5128) to exercise an option for continuing platform systems engineering agent support of the Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) MK 2 development for aircraft carrier/amphibious Modernization Advanced Capability Build (ACB) 12/Technical Insertion 12 (ACB12/TI12).
Work to be performed includes the achievement of key milestones for nonrecurring platform systems engineering to further mature the ACB 12, a tactical product. ACB 12 is slated for deployment, initially on CVN 78, CVN 72, and LHD 2, then to be extended to CVN 73 and other SSDS MK 2 enabled platforms. Work will be performed in San Diego, Calif., (90 percent); Tewksbury, Mass., (2.5 percent); Portsmouth, R.I. (2.5 percent); St. Petersburg, Fla., (2.5 percent); and Tucson, Ariz., (2.5 percent); and is expected to be completed by December 2015. Fiscal 2011 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) and fiscal 2015 research, development, test and evaluation funding in the amount of $1,187,942 will be obligated at time of award. Funds in the amount of $977,942 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Mission Systems and Training, Manassas, Va., is being awarded not-to-exceed $9,078,625 for delivery order 1195 under previously awarded basic ordering agreement (N00104-10-G-A109) for the repair of the AN/UYQ-70 advanced display system and the Navy’s current generation of commercial-off-the-shelf display and processor systems for tactical and command, control, communication, computer intelligence (C41) applications for target acquisition and tracking, weapons control, theater air defense, anti-submarine warfare, battle group communication, and airborne surveillance and control. Work will be performed at Virginia Beach, Va., (10 percent), and various Lockheed Martin repair units located throughout the U.S. (90 percent), and work is expected to be completed by April 2016. Fiscal 2015 working capital funds (Navy) in the amount of $4,448,526 will be obligated at the time of award and these funds will not expire before the end of the current fiscal year. One company was solicited for the non-competitive requirement and one offer was received in response to this solicitation in accordance with 10 U.S.C.
www.npeo-kmi.com
Compiled by KMI Media Group staff
26 March
2304(c)(1). The Naval Supply Systems Command Weapon Systems Support, Mechanicsburg, Pa., is the contracting activity (N00104-10-G-A-109).
current fiscal year. The Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, is the contracting activity.
BAE Systems, Honolulu, Hawaii, is being awarded an $8,433,456 modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-14-C-4412) to support the repair and alteration of USS O’Kane (DDG 77). USS O’Kane is undergoing a scheduled drydocking selected repair availability which is the opportunity in the ship's life cycle to primarily conduct repair and alteration to systems and hull not available when the ship is waterborne. Work is being performed in Honolulu, Hawaii, and is expected to complete by November 2015. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $8,433,456 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the
iGov Technologies Inc., Reston, Va., is being awarded a $7,400,323 firmfixed-price task order under a previously awarded NASA contract (NNG07DA27B) for Marine Corps Enterprise Network (MCEN) Secret Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) (MCEN-S) Enterprise Service Stacks (ESS). The scope of this effort includes procuring and delivery of a technical solution, (i.e., hardware, software, and infrastructure), support services, user training, and lifecycle sustainment support to replace MCEN SIPR ESS. This task order includes options which, if exercised would bring the cumulative value of this order to $9,341,310. Work will be performed at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Quantico, Va., (44 percent);
Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, Ariz., is being awarded a $26,000,000 ceiling-priced undefinitized contract action for critical missile subassemblies and supporting components for 300 Lot 15 AIM-9X missiles for the Navy and Air Force. Work will be performed in Keyser, W.Va., (42.3 percent); Santa Clarita, Calif., (34.6 percent); and Hillsboro, Ore., (23.1 percent), and is expected to be completed in December 2017. Fiscal 2015 missile procurement (Air Force) and weapons procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $11,404,620 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S.C 2304(c)(1). This contract combines purchases for the Air Force ($16,755,556; 64.44 percent) and Navy $9,244,444; 35.56 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.
a $16,771,463 modification to previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee/incentivefee contract (N00024-10-C-4407) for USS San Diego (LPD 22) fiscal 2015 selected restricted availability. A select restricted availability includes the planning and execution of depot-level maintenance, alterations and modifications that will update and improve the ship's military and technical capabilities. This modification includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value to $18,796,615. Work will be performed in San Diego, Calif., and is expected to be completed by November 2015. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) funding in the amount of $16,771,463 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity.
BAE Systems San Diego Ship Repair, San Diego, Calif., is being awarded
www.npeo-kmi.com
Raytheon Co., El Segundo, Calif., is being awarded $16,380,000 for firmfixed-price delivery order 0062 against a previously issued basic ordering
Camp Pendleton, Calif., (14 percent); Camp Lejeune, N.C., (7 percent); Camp Foster, Okinawa, Japan (7 percent); Enterprise IT Center, Kansas City, Mo., (7 percent); Panzerkaserne-Barracks, Boblingen, Germany (7 percent); Marine Corps Base Kaneohe Bay, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii (7 percent); and Marine Forces Reserve, New Orleans, La., (7 percent). Work is expected to be completed on March 31, 2020. Fiscal 2013 procurement (Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $7,400,323 will be obligated at the time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This task order was competitively procured through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement Contract Holders; with four offers received. Marine Corps System Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity (M6785415-F-4444).
agreement (N00019-10-G-0006) for the procurement of six AN/APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array radar systems in support of the F/A-18 E/F aircraft. Work will be performed in Forest, Miss., (50 percent); Andover, Mass., (30 percent); and El Segundo, Calif., (20 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2017. Fiscal 2013 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $16,380,000 are being obligated on this award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity. DZSP 21 LLC, Marlton, N.J., is being awarded $13,861,642 for modification P00066 under a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract (N4019213-C-3001) to exercise an option for base operations support services at Joint Region Marianas. The work to be performed provides for general management and administration services; port operations; ordnance; supply material management; facility management;
March 31, 2015
|
33
Contract Awards
25 March
facility investment; electrical; wastewater; steam; water; base support vehicles and equipment; and environmental. After award of this option, the total cumulative contract value will be $869,433,858. Work will be performed at various installations in the U.S. territory of Guam, and work under this option
period is expected to be completed June 2015. Fiscal 2015 working capital funds (Navy, Transportation, Defense); fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy, Air Force, Army, Air National Guard, and Defense); fiscal 2015 family housing operation and maintenance (Navy); fiscal 2015 Defense Health
Program funds; and fiscal 2015 Defense Commissary Agency account contract funds in the amount of $13,296,230 are being obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Marianas, Guam, is the contracting activity.
Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., St. Augustine, Fla., is being awarded a $42,096,911 modification to a previously awarded indefinitedelivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N00019-14-D-0022) to provide depotlevel maintenance and services in support of 44 F-5N/F aircraft for the Navy and Marine Corps Reserves. Services to be provided include aircraft inspections, repairs, overhauls, emergency repairs, modification, engineering support and procurement of structural components required to sustain continued safe, reliable and available operations. Work will be performed in St. Augustine, Fla., (96 percent); Springville, Utah (3 percent); and Emmen, Switzerland (1 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2016. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy Reserve) and 2013 National Guard and Reserve equipment funds in the amount of $2,499,866 are being obligated at time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.
multiple award contracts. Each awardee will have the opportunity to compete for task orders during the ordering period. This three-year contract includes one two-year option period, which, if exercised, would bring the potential value of this contract to $33,275,314. Work will be performed San Diego, Calif., and work is expected to be completed March 24, 2018. No funding will be obligated at the time of award. Funding will be obligated via task orders are issued. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The types of funding to be obligated include research, development, test and evaluation, foreign military sales, and operations and maintenance (Navy). This contract was competitively procured via full and open solicitation via publication on the Federal Business Opportunities website and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command e-Commerce Central website, with four proposals received and three were selected for award. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity (N66001-15-D-0073).
assurance support. This is one of three multiple award contracts. Each awardee will have the opportunity to compete for task orders during the ordering period. This three-year contract includes one two-year option period, which, if exercised, would bring the potential value of this contract to $30,136,398. Work will be performed in San Diego, Calif., and work is expected to be completed March 24, 2018. No funding will be obligated at the time of award. Funding will be obligated via task orders are issued. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The types of funding to be obligated include research, development, test and evaluation, foreign military sales, and operations and maintenance (Navy). This contract was competitively procured via full and open solicitation via publication on the Federal Business Opportunities website and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command e-Commerce Central website, with four proposals received and three were selected for award. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity (N66001-15-D-0072).
Tactical Engineering & Analysis Inc., San Diego, Calif., is being awarded a potential $19,651,998 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide tactical data link systems support to include research; systems engineering; software engineering; configuration management; human factors engineering for software design; system-level hardware and software integration; test analysis and reporting; and quality assurance support. This is one of three
34
|
March 31, 2015
Computer Sciences Corp., San Diego, Calif., is being awarded a potential $17,844,438 indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee multiple award contract to provide tactical data link systems support to include research; systems engineering; software engineering; configuration management; human factors engineering for software design; system-level hardware and software integration; test analysis and reporting; and quality
Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Wakefield, Mass., is being awarded a potential $16,023,035 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide tactical data link systems support to include research; systems engineering; software engineering; configuration management; human factors engineering for software design; system-level hardware and software integration;
www.npeo-kmi.com
Compiled by KMI Media Group staff
24 March
test analysis and reporting; and quality assurance support. This is one of three multiple award contracts. Each awardee will have the opportunity to compete for task orders during the ordering period. This three-year contract includes one two-year option period, which, if exercised, would bring the potential value of this contract to $27,128,654. Work will be performed in Wakefield, Mass., (20 percent), and San Diego, Calif., (80 percent), and work is expected to be completed March 24, 2018. No funding will be obligated at the time of award. Funding will be obligated via task orders are issued. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The types of funding to be obligated include research, development, test and evaluation, foreign military sales, and operations and maintenance (Navy). This contract was competitively procured via full and open solicitation via publication on the Federal Business Opportunities website and the Space
and Naval Warfare Systems Command e-Commerce Central website, with four proposals received and three were selected for award. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity (N66001-15-D-0074).
Rolls Royce Corp., Indianapolis, Ind., is being awarded a $59,513,856 indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for integrated logistics support services for KC-130J aircraft propulsion systems (installed and spares), including supplies. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, Ind. (41 percent); Winnipeg, Canada (21 percent); Oakland, Calif., (16 percent); Sterling, Va., (14 percent); Al Mubarak, Kuwait (2.1 percent); Iwakuni, Japan (2 percent); Cherry Point, N.C., (1.3 percent); Miramar, Calif., (1.3 percent); and Fort Worth, Texas (1.3 percent), and is expected to be completed in February 2016. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy and Navy Reserve) and foreign military sales funds in the amount of $21,216,339 will be obligated at time of award, $16,252,549 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to the
FAR 6.302-1. This contract combines purchases for the Navy ($54,981,135; 92.38 percent) and the government of Kuwait ($4,532,721; 7.62 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-15-C-0009).
www.npeo-kmi.com
Beechcraft Corp., Wichita, Kan., is being awarded an $11,703,143 firmfixed-price contract for the procurement of one UC-12W aircraft for the Navy, including engineering technical services. Work will be performed in Wichita, Kan., and is expected to be completed in July 2016. Fiscal 2015 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $11,703,143 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N0001915-C-2017).
Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, is being awarded a $15,000,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee modification under a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N62583-11-D-0515) to exercise option period four for environmental services and technologies support at Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center, Port Hueneme, Calif. The work to be performed provides for environmental services and technology support to satisfy overall operational objectives of the Navy and Marine Corps installations and to other federal
Wartsila Defense Industries, Chesapeake, Va., is being awarded $7,602,804 for firm-fixed-price task order 0003 under a previously awarded contract (N00025-13-D-0001) for water jet alterations and repairs for the Improved Navy Lighterage System (INLS). The work to be performed provides for water jet condition assessments, alterations, repairs, and inventory parts management for the INLS. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, Fla., (86 percent), Norfolk, Va., (13 percent), and San Diego, Calif., (1 percent), and is expected to be completed by March 2016. Fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2015 other procurement (Navy) and fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $7,602,804 are being obligated on this award; of which $35,000 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. One proposal was received for this task order. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.
organizations worldwide. Support services include technology implementation, technical consultation, research and development, testing and evaluation, administrative support, range cleanup, sustainability and management, site operation and maintenance, climate change initiatives, green and sustainable remediation practices development, leadership in environmental and energy design support, and training. The total contract amount after exercise of this option will be $75,000,000. No task orders are being issued at this time. Work will be performed at various installations worldwide; and work for this option is expected to be completed in March 2016. No funds will be obligated at time of award; funds will be obligated on individual task orders as they are issued. The Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center, Port Hueneme, Calif., is the contracting activity.
March 31, 2015
|
35
Contract Awards
23 March
BAE Systems Controls Inc., Fort Wayne, Ind., has been awarded a maximum $383,033,935 firm-fixedprice, requirements-type contract for support of multiple weapon systems platforms. Estimated value cited is based on demand quantities for the life of the contract. This contract was a sole-source acquisition. This is a five-year base contract with one five-year option period. Location of performance is Indiana, with a March 19, 2020, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Defense Logistics Agency. Type of appropriation is fiscal year 2015 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Richmond, Va., (SPE4AX-15-D-9414). Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, Ariz., is being awarded a $109,583,490 cost-only contract for procurement of long lead material in support of fiscal 2015 Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) and Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) full rate production requirements and spares. Work will be performed in Camden, Ark., (64.5 percent); Andover, Mass., (17.2 percent); San Jose, Calif., (6.5 percent); Middletown, Conn., (3.3 percent); Warrington, Pa., (2.2 percent); San Diego, Calif., (2.1 percent); San Carlos, Calif., (1.1 percent); Joplin, Mo., (0.9 percent); Reisterstown, Md., (0.8 percent); Milwaukie, Ore., (0.7 percent); Tucson, Ariz., (0.4 percent); Tampa, Fla., (0.2 percent); and Mesa, Ariz., (0.1 percent), and is expected to be completed by March 2018. Fiscal 2015 weapons procurement (Navy) and fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) funding in the amount of $18,980,806 will be obligated at time of award and funds in the amount of $3,556,495 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1), as implemented in FAR 6.302-1 - the
36
|
March 31, 2015
supplies or services required are available from only one responsible source and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-15-C-5408). Lafayette Group Inc., Vienna, Va., is being awarded a potential $92,739,725 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee multiple award contract to provide technical assistance as well as research and development for the advancement of interoperable communications to federal, state, local, tribal and nongovernmental entities, and to support other command, control, communications, computers and intelligence efforts. This is one of two multiple award contracts. Each awardee will have the opportunity to compete for task orders during the ordering period. This fiveyear contract includes no options periods. Work will be performed in Vienna, Va., (50 percent), and at government facilities throughout the United States and its territories (50 percent). Work is expected to be completed March 22, 2019. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funding will be obligated via task orders as they are issued. The types of funding to be obligated include operation and maintenance (Navy) and interagency agreements through federal agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Commerce. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via Request for Proposal N6600113-R-0006 published on the Federal Business Opportunities website, and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command e-Commerce Central website, with two offers received. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity (N6600115-D-0028).
Science Applications International Corp., McLean, Va., is being awarded a potential $83,818,576 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee multiple award contract to provide technical assistance as well as research and development for the advancement of interoperable communications to federal, state, local, tribal and non-governmental entities, and to support other command, control, communications, computers and intelligence efforts. This is one of two multiple award contracts. Each awardee will have the opportunity to compete for task orders during the ordering period. This five-year contract includes no options periods. Work will be performed in McLean, Va., (50 percent), and at government facilities throughout the United States and its territories (50 percent). Work is expected to be completed March 22, 2019. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funding will be obligated via task orders as they are issued. The types of funding to be obligated include operation and maintenance (Navy) and interagency agreements through federal agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Commerce. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via Request for Proposal N6600113-R-0006 published on the Federal Business Opportunities website, and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command e-Commerce Central website, with two offers received. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, Calif., is the contracting activity (N66001-15-D-0029). Leidos Inc., Reston, Va., is being awarded a maximum amount $50,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity architect-engineering contract for design or architect engineering services for the implementation of National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects
www.npeo-kmi.com
Compiled by KMI Media Group staff
Abroad of Major Federal ActionsAircraft Homebasing and Related Operational Issues. The work to be performed provides for the preparation of various documents to support the proposed infrastructure-related actions with respect to aircraft home basing issues. Examples of taskings required to complete this work may include analysis of home basing of aircraft, construction, renovation, and/ or demolition of airfield facilities and infrastructure; base realignment and closure actions; and proposed operational actions related to aircraft home basing. Additionally, other tasks, studies, surveys or documents may be required to complete the environmental planning documents including, but not limited to, environmental documentation for aircraft readiness and training operations at the home base locations and within Department of Defense-managed airspace and Navy/Marine Corps training ranges. The principle geographic area covered by this contract encompasses Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Atlantic’s area of responsibility (AOR) and the adjacent waters of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, including the continental United States, the Caribbean, Europe and North Africa. Additionally, tasks associated with this contract may be assigned anywhere in the world. This contract may address task orders to support joint service or global efforts including the entire NAVFAC Atlantic and NAVFAC Pacific AORs worldwide. No task orders are being issued at this time. All work on this contract will be performed within the NAVFAC Atlantic AOR including, but not limited to, Virginia (30 percent), California (30 percent), Florida (20 percent), and Washington (20 percent). The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months with an expected completion date of March 2020. Fiscal 2015 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $10,000 are obligated on this award and will
www.npeo-kmi.com
expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website with five proposals received. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, Norfolk, Va., is the contracting activity (N62470-15-D-8005). Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Charlottesville, Va., is being awarded an $18,100,000 indefinitedelivery/indefinite-quantity, firmfixed-priced, cost-plus-fixed-fee, and cost-type contract for the production of the WSN-7 navigation system and spares and technical support in association with production. The AN/ WSN-7(V) ring laser gyro navigator system is a self-contained inertial navigator designed for Navy surface ships. Work will be performed in Charlottesville, Va., and work is expected to be completed by December 2021. Contract funds will not be obligated at time of award. Funding will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with authority 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)( 1) - only one responsible source. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-15-D-5208). The Boeing Co., Huntington Beach, Calif., is being awarded a $12,878,533 cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide design agent and technical engineering services in support of the AN/USQ-82(V) Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex Systems (GEDMS) program. GEDMS is a thirdgeneration shipboard network used for DDG 51 class destroyers. GEDMS transfers inputs and/or outputs for the machinery control systems, damage control system, steering control system, AEGIS combat system, navigation displays, and interior communications alarms and indicators. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative
value of this contract to $39,991,521. This contract combines purchases for the Navy (91 percent) and the governments of Australia (3 percent), Korea (3 percent), and Japan (3 percent) under the foreign military sales program. The work will be performed in Huntington Beach, Calif., (72 percent); Arlington, Va., (11 percent); Bath, Maine, (9 percent); Pascagoula, Miss., (3 percent); Georgetown, D.C., (3 percent); Richardson, Texas (1 percent), and Fairfax, Va., (1 percent), and is expected to be completed by March 2016. Fiscal 2014 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount of $3,179,520 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with authority FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii) – only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division, Dahlgren, Va., is the contracting activity (N0017815-C-2016). WR Systems Ltd., Fairfax, Va., is being awarded a $12,429,742 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract for engineering and program support services for the Relocatable Over-the-Horizon Radar system. Work will be performed in Chesapeake, Va., and work is expected to be completed by March 31, 2018. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $500,000 will be obligated at the time of award, and will expire by the end of the current fiscal year. The contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1) with one offer received in response to this solicitation. Naval Supply Systems Command Fleet Logistics Center, Norfolk, Va., is the contracting activity (N00189-15-DZ021).
March 31, 2015
|
37
Contract Awards
20 March
The Concourse Group LLC, Annapolis, Md., is being awarded a maximum amount $29,000,000 time and material, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for professional services in support of the Department of the Navy’s Public Private Venture Program. The work to be performed provides for all aspects of special venture acquisitions, including family and unaccompanied housing public private ventures, enhanced use leasing, and other public-private venture opportunities such as energy, utilities, and lodging. Work includes assistance in both pre- and post-deal closing environments to include pro forma development, financial proposal analysis, budget and audit reviews, reviews of financial and bank statements, and project cash flow distribution. All support shall be consistent with the privatization approach adopted by the Department of the Navy. Work will be performed primarily in Annapolis, Md., and Washington, D.C., and the term of the contract is not to exceed 36 months with an expected completion date of March 2018. Fiscal 2015 family housing operation and maintenance (Navy and Marine Corps) contract funds in the amount of $10,000 are being obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. No task orders are being issued at this time. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with three proposals received. This contract action is a re-award as a result of corrective action taken due to a Government Accountability Office protest. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, Norfolk, Va., is the contracting activity (N62470-15-D-6009). Systems Application & Technologies Inc., Oxnard, Calif., is being awarded a $16,368,016 modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixedfee contract (N68936-13-C-0083) to exercise an option for maintenance and operations of aerial and seaborne
38
|
March 31, 2015
target assets and associated equipment for the U.S. Navy, and the governments of Japan and Australia. Work will be performed at the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD), Point Mugu, Calif., (45 percent); Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme, Calif., (40 percent); NAWCWD China Lake, Ridgecrest, Calif., (7 percent); White Sands Missile Range, Las Cruces, N.M., (3 percent); Pacific Missile Range Facility, Kauai, Hawaii (2 percent); Utah Test and Training Range, Salt Lake City, Utah (2 percent); and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Lompoc, Calif., (1 percent). Work is expected to be completed in March 2016. Navy working capital funds and management and operations of the major range and test facility base funds in the amount of $8,803,543 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This option combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($15,876,975; 98 percent), and the governments of Japan ($327,360; 2 percent) and Australia ($163,680; 1 percent) under the Foreign Military Sales program. The Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake, Calif., is the contracting activity. Trijicon Inc., Wixom, Mich., is being awarded $6,934,400 for delivery orders 0005 and 0006 under a previously awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-12-D-1000) for 8,800 TA31 rifle combat optics with M4 reticles. Work will be performed in Wixom, Mich., and is expected to be completed by January 14, 2016. Fiscal 2013 procurement (Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $6,934,400 will be obligated at the time of award and funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity. MTU America Inc., Novi, Mich., is being awarded a $6,868,800 firm-fixed-price contract for three ship-
Compiled by KMI Media Group staff
sets of propulsion system hardware and two spare marine gears for the Israeli Navy Super Dvora fast patrol boats. This contract involves Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to Israel (100 percent). This contract to support the Israeli Navy under FMS case IS-PLHC is a follow-on effort, which was previously performed under contract N00104-06-C-K058. This contract will provide the propulsion system equipment necessary to support the ongoing fleet maintenance and life cycle support of the Israeli Navy. Work will be performed in Friedrichshafen, Germany (70 percent), and Kristinehamn, Sweden (30 percent), and is expected to be completed by March 2017. FMS funding in the amount of $6,868,800 will be obligated at the time of award, and contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(4) and FAR 6.302-4 International Agreement. The government of Israel is designated the sole source in its letter of offer and acceptance. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N0002415-C-4127). URS Federal Services Inc., Germantown, Md., is being awarded a $6,636,797 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for program management services in support of the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance-Demonstrator Program Office. Work will be performed in Germantown, Md., (75 percent), and Patuxent River, Md., (25 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2016. Fiscal 2015 operations and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $5,600,000 are being obligated on this award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1). The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00421-15-C-0020).
www.npeo-kmi.com