Naval Aviation

In May 1992, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition approved the Navy's request that the F/A-18E/F development be designated as a major modification of its existing F/A-18C/D, instead of a new program. He decided that acquisition regulations did not require a Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis for this modification, and he waived certain live fire testing requirements. The Under Secretary based his decision on (1) Navy analyses that indicated that the E/F development was a low to moderate risk and (2) recommendations made by the Conventional Systems Committee of the Defense Acquisition Board. Applicable defense acquisition regulations allow management discretion in these matters for the purpose of minimizing development time and reducing costs. By treating this as a modification, some steps normally followed for new acquisitions have been skipped. GAO is not in a position to conclude whether the decision made thus far will have a positive or negative effect on the program.

GAO found that: (1) DOD based its decision to classify F/A-18E/F development as a major modification of existing aircraft on a Navy risk analysis and recommendations of a defense acquisition committee; (2) the Navy considers E/F aircraft to be larger, more capable versions of F/A-18C/D aircraft; (3) the Navy cannot modify existing F/A-18C/D aircraft to E/F configurations because of the significant differences between the two aircraft; (4) the Navy did not consider other alternatives for performing tactical missions before approving E/F development; (5) DOD has the discretion to minimize development time and costs by skipping some acquisition steps required for new programs, but the Navy did not fully document its threat assessment and needs; (6) the Navy awarded a sole-source contract for E/F development, since only one responsible source was capable of meeting its requirements; and (7) it cannot determine whether DOD classification decisions will have a positive or negative impact on the F/A-18E/F program.