The Department of Defense did not consistently hold Lockheed Martin accountable for F-35 poor sustainability performance in its 2024 contract, according to a Dec. 19 inspector general audit of the performance.
The F-35 Joint Program Office was found to not have adequately overseen contractor performance on the June 2024 air vehicle sustainment contract, resulting in paying Lockheed Martin $1.7 billion by July 1, 2025, without “economic adjustment,” despite a 50% aircraft readiness rate.
Although the Full Mission Capable, Mission Capable and Air Vehicle Availability rates did not meet the minimum requirements of the military services, the department still paid more than $1 billion.
“The average Air Vehicle Availability rate for all F-35 aircraft in FY 2024 was 50 percent, meaning the aircraft were not available to fly half of the time,” an OIG memo says.
The audit, conducted by The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, found that the JPO did not hold Lockheed Martin accountable for “poor performance” related to F-35 sustainment, even while monitoring the aerospace company’s performance.
“This occurred because the F-35 JPO did not include aircraft readiness performance or other measurable contract requirements and did not enforce material inspection and government property reporting requirements in the air vehicle sustainment contract,” the audit says.
The audit also discovered that the JPO did not effectively use contracting officer’s representatives to oversee performance requirements at F-35 aircraft sites.
The JPO is tasked with F-35 production and sustainment contracting and upholding a comprehensive sustainment plan.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft is the defense department’s largest acquisition program, with an estimated cost of over $2 trillion to buy, operate and sustain the aircraft, through its service life.
F-35s have a service life of about 8,000 flight hours, but testing of the F-35A variant has shown that it could potentially last up to three service lives, meaning 24,000 flying hours, according to Simple Flying reporting.
The OIG office made recommendations to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Program Executive Officer for the F-35 JPO to remedy this.
Key recommendations set forth by the office include modifying the contract to incorporate incentive metrics that support the military service performance requirements; orienting the contracting officer’s representative responsibilities to better effectively monitor and report “impactful evaluation data” on Lockheed Martin’s performance; and evaluate and adjust appropriate staffing levels at all bases where F-35 oversight is required.
“The official Performing the Duties of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, responding for the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Program Executive Officer for the F-35 JPO, generally agreed with our recommendations,” the audit reads.
Of the seven total recommendations, six are deemed resolved but remain open and one is unresolved, according to the audit.
The office requests that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment provide comments on the unresolved recommendation within 40 days of the final report.
OIG will close the resolved recommendations when management shows documents that proves they have implemented the agreed-upon actions.
Cristina Stassis is an editorial fellow for Defense News and Military Times, where she covers stories surrounding the defense industry, national security, military/veteran affairs and more. She is currently studying journalism and mass communication and international affairs at the George Washington University.
Read the full article here
