A federal judge has barred the Air Force from moving forward with awarding Sikorsky a $980 million sole-source contract for rolling upgrades to the HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopter, arguing the service failed to justify the length and timing of the planned deal.
Largely siding with plaintiff Sierra Nevada Corp., which alleged the service did not adhere to competition rules when announcing its intent to award Sikorsky an indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity contract, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims found the length of the five-year deal was “improper” and that the agreement “exceeds the government’s demonstrated need.”
“The [justification and approval] conclusion that a sole-source award is necessary for five years is irrational,” stated the court’s opinion, which was filed under seal on July 1.
The decision stems from an April 12 complaint Sierra Nevada filed in federal claims court in the months after the Air Force opted to move forward on helicopter upgrades solely with Sikorsky, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin that is developing the HH-60W to replace the legacy HH-60G Pave Hawk. At the time, the service cited “unacceptable delays” if it chose another company, largely tied to the prime contractor’s “technical expertise [and] technical data” -- as well as the unavailability of a complete technical data package.
Without the data package, the Air Force has argued, a company would have to reverse-engineer the technology to complete those upgrades, a process the service had anticipated would result in a six- to eight-year delay.
The court found it was “generally reasonable” for the service to conclude that Sikorsky presently “is the only contractor capable of performing the upgrades immediately.” However, the court concluded the justification and approval document failed to explain how the lack of a technical data package “justifies a sole-source award for the entirety of the [Combat Rescue Helicopter] upgrade contract.”
“That omission is particularly glaring in light of the government’s admission that Sikorsky is contractually required to provide a full TDP in the near future,” when other contractors would be capable of performing the helicopter upgrades, the opinion noted.
A spokesman for Sierra Nevada didn’t immediately return a request for comment today on the order.
The opinion, which questioned why the Air Force hadn’t pursued a multiple award IDIQ contract, concluded there wasn’t a need to move forward with an immediate, sole-source contract award to Sikorsky and that the service failed to share evidence that such a contract should cover more than the first three capability upgrades.
The Air Force released its justification and approval document Feb. 11, though the deal wasn’t expected to be finalized until early 2022.
In a follow-up order and judgment, delivered after receiving input from the Air Force, the court prohibited the service from awarding Sikorsky delivery orders under the IDIQ contract for any new capability upgrades after one of two things happen: Sikorsky delivers the complete technical data package or the service awards orders to kick-start the first three capability upgrades.
It remains unclear whether Sikorsky has yet delivered that technical data package, which had been expected by spring, to the Air Force. The service and prime contractor were “in dispute” over intellectual property rights to the package, a February justification and approval notice showed.
Service spokesman Capt. Josh Benedetti recently declined to answer questions about the status of the TDP, writing in a June 29 email the service “is actively working with Lockheed Martin-Sikorsky to resolve this dispute and cannot publicly comment on it at this time.”
The Air Force and Lockheed Martin didn’t immediately provide comment today regarding the court’s opinion and the bearing it has on their dispute.