April 9, 2020 | International, Land

COVID-19 Federal Funds, Benefits Lag For National Guard

President Trump has authorized only 34 states to receive federal funding and benefits for their Guard troops. While all of them get paid -- many out of rapidly depleting state coffers -- most aren't yet getting full health coverage.

WASHINGTON: Legal arcana and the narrow wording of President Trump's orders are complicating the mobilization of National Guard troops to combat the COVID-19 coronavirus. The Pentagon, the White House, and the states are working urgently to increase the number of troops with federal funding and full benefits, said Gen. Joseph Lengyel, the four-star chief of the National Guard Bureau, in a phone briefing with reporters this afternoon.

Part of the problem is that President Trump has not actually authorized federal funding and benefits for every state. Only 34 states and three territories are currently covered by his call-up orders, with 16 states and the District of Columbia still ineligible. (The full list is at the end of this article). Indeed, it's not clear that all states have even requested federal support for their Guard troops, especially in rural areas where the spread of the virus has been slower and suspicion of the federal government can be high.

Even once the president authorizes a given state, FEMA must still approve each request for funding. Finally, until yesterday, President Trump's orders only permitted Guard troops to operate under federal orders for up to 30 days – one day too short to qualify for federal health coverage and other benefits.

So how many servicemembers are affected?

28,400 personnel from both the Army and Air National Guard have been called up to help with the pandemic, Lengyel reported, a figure that's now rising by more than 1,000 troops every day.
However, more than 13,000 of those troops are currently mobilized under state legal authorities, at their states' expense. While their pay in this status is usually consistent with federal payscales — some states are less generous – their benefits are typically limited to basic workers' compensation. Worse, whatever they get may not be sustainable since state coffers are being rapidly depleted by the crisis.
Not quite 11,000 are currently mobilized under Title 32, Section 502(f), which allows state governors to retain command-and-control of their Guard in local emergencies but provides federal funding – a number that is “growing rapidly,” Lengyel said.
But even among Guard troops on those federal Title 32 orders, it appears that most don't yet enjoy the same benefits as members of the regular active-duty military and reserve working alongside them. In particular, most Guard troops aren't getting the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), which helps troops on duty far from home pay for lodging if the military can't provide it, and they don't get access to the military's nationwide healthcare network, Tricare. (Guard troops can go to military hospitals for free, but few of the coronavirus hotspots they've been called to are anywhere near a base).
Some 349 Guard troops have tested positive for COVID-19, although many of those were infected in civilian life and aren't being called up.

Why aren't all troops on federal orders already? And why aren't all the troops on federal orders getting full benefits? That has to do with the often-obscure laws governing the National Guard and the way President Trump has chosen to invoke them.

First, Trump hasn't yet authorized federally funded Title 32 call-ups across the country. Instead, on March 22, he authorized them only for Washington State, California, and New York – the three initial hotspots – and then began adding states a few at a time in subsequent orders on March 28, March 30th, April 2nd and April 7th.

“FEMA generally gives shorter duration mission assignments, normally two weeks,” Lengyel explained, since most domestic disasters take less than a month to resolve. “We in the National Bureau and the Department of Defense saw this [coronavirus] clearly is going to go into May and maybe beyond, [but] FEMA was restricted [in] writing the mission assignments to what was authorized in the presidential memorandum.

“I don't want to speculate on why they chose 30 days, but the difference between 30 and 31 is significant,” the general said. “We recommended a longer period of time at the beginning.”

The National Guard Association of the US, an influential independent advocacy groups for Guard units, members, and families, has been watching the situation intently and pressing for an expansion of the Title 32 orders.

Consistency has been lacking, lamented John Goheen, NGAUS's chief spokesman: “It's really a patchwork as you look around the country, and states are going to interpret things differently.

“Section 502(f) of Title 32 was never designed for this. As a result, we are seeing of lot of bureaucratic obstacles and inflexibility,” Goheen told me this afternoon. “Case in point is the limitation on the number of days. NGAUS will be looking to change the law in the future to provide more flexibility.”

The last time Title 32 was used on such a scale was Hurricane Katrina, Goheen said “There were some concerns [after Katrina] about the Defense Department being reimbursed so the Defense Department's been reluctant to use it,” he said.

However reluctant the Pentagon bureaucracy in general may be, Gen. Lengyel made clear he is trying to fix the situation. “We're authorized now to bring on up to 44,000 total members of the National Guard covered under ...Title 32 ... which gives them federal pay but state control, and now — because the [April 7th] memorandum allows them to be covered for up to 31 days — they will have full insurance and medical benefits,” he said.

But troops who were authorized earlier on shorter orders will have to be switched to 31 days, and making sure all new call-ups are for 31, is an ongoing process, Lengyel acknowledged: “There was some sand in the gears on making sure that we had the cost figures right so that FEMA had the exact numbers.”

Meanwhile, he said, his staff and the states have started planning for the annual hurricane season. “By hurricane season, which starts in June, obviously, we're hopeful this begins to lull,” he said, “[but] we in fact are looking at implications of what it might be like to do a hurricane response in a COVID environment.”

His staff and the states Guard headquarters, he said, are conducting their planning by telephone and video-teleconference (VTC) instead of the usual in-person meetings.

Below is the full list of which states President Trump authorized for federally-funded National Guard callups, by date:

March 22, three states: California, New York, and Washington.
March 28, five states and two territories: Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey; Guam and Puerto Rico.
March 30, three states: Connecticut, Illinois, and Michigan.
April 2, 10 states, one territory: Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Texas; US Virgin Islands.
April 7, 13 states: Arizona, Colorado, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/covid-19-federal-funds-benefits-lag-for-national-guard

On the same subject

August 14, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

For IT companies, the secret to success in defense is all about big growth
By: Jill Aitoro WASHINGTON — The secret to tackling the defense information technology market may be scale. Looking specifically at the pure-play IT companies that landed on the 2018 Defense News Top 100 list, many of those that have doubled down in some capacity saw defense revenue increase during fiscal 2017. That came on the tail end of another trend among the largest defense primes, to get out of the IT business. “The evolution started a couple years ago, where the large defense primes who had boned up on IT service work during the war [on terror] started to realize that for a variety of reasons they might not be able to compete as effectively, or extract the returns they want out of a business like that,” said Jon Raviv, senior analyst and vice president for aerospace and defense at Citi Research. Divestitures followed, and pure-play IT companies were able to quickly scale up not just in size and their ability to support massive contracts, but also in capability set. The acquisition of Lockheed Martin's IT business transformed Leidos from a $5 billion company to a $10 billion company. That deal closed in late 2016, explaining how the company saw double-digit growth in defense revenue in both 2016 and 2017 — despite the buy actually making the company less defense heavy overall. Similarly, CACI closed on the acquisition of L3 Technology's National Security Solutions for $550 million in February 2016 — three months before the end of its fiscal year. The associated revenue contributed to the 16 percent increase in defense revenue during 2017. Leidos CEO Roger Krone, in an interview with Defense News in 2016 soon after the acquisition closed, pointed to “scale, but not scale for scale's sake” as a big factor in the buy — noting, too, the importance of balancing the portfolio and geographic distribution. He also pointed to sheer numbers — 15,000 employees specifically — many with security clearances. The trend does seem to be continuing. CSRA chose to not participate in the 2018 Top 100 because its $9.7 billion acquisition by General Dynamics closed by the time data collection for the list kicked off. While General Dynamics is a top defense prime, its IT business functions as a largely separate entity, similar to the pure-play IT companies. The acquisition of CSRA, which reported $2.25 billion in defense revenue for fiscal 2016 — will add significant scale to GDIT. It is also likely to influence the company's Top 100 rank next year. The future promises more cyber and IT-related merger and acquisition activity in the vein of that deal, according to Daniel Gouré, a vice president with the Lexington Institute think tank. “Raytheon is still in acquisition mode with cyber, so it's an area that's still kind of churning,” he said. “I wouldn't be surprised to see some of these big players acquire some of the more defense-oriented cyber players.” Unclear is what the sweet spot may be for those exclusively IT-focused firms. “Where we sit right now, it's not clear what the right size is,” Raviv said. “GDIT and Leidos are about $10 billion in sales; SAIC and CACI and ManTech are lower tier. All of those companies say they are happy with scale but could do a deal. Whether they call it scale, or marrying capability sets — it's all marketing, I suppose.” And there are other tactics that achieve scale without acquisition. Perspecta emerged on the 2018 Top 100, having launched June 1, 2018 through the combination of DXC Technology's U.S. public sector business, Vencore, and KeyPoint Government Solutions. As one entity, Perspecta reported $2.73 billion in defense revenue and ranked 37. To put that in perspective, Vencore ranked 67 in last year's list, with $886.59 million in defense revenue. And all of these pure-play companies are increasingly marketing themselves as conduits to the “nontraditional players” that the Pentagon is so keen to attract. Amazon Web Services, for example, will often partner with government IT companies on defense contracts to hand off some of the contracting morass. That said, for all the potential, the bulk of the defense IT market is notoriously fickle. Services often set aside IT projects in an effort to preserve platform buys, and margins can be low. Agencies also struggle to balance upkeep of existing systems versus modernization efforts versus research and development into the next great technological marvel. But as Raviv noted, it's all IT. “Yes, there are companies working on high-end cyber, the ability to launch attacks through cyberspace or to harden the communication node on a new missile so it can't be hacked by, say, China. And while the word cyber came up a lot three or four years ago, now you hear a lot about AI, autonomy and machine learning. But it's all technology. And it's a lot of smart people working on a lot of advanced things many of us don't understand.” https://www.defensenews.com/top-100/2018/08/09/for-it-companies-the-secret-to-success-in-defense-is-all-about-big-growth/
October 9, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security

Space Development Agency wants someone to launch its first 28 satellites
Nathan Strout WASHINGTON — Now that the Space Development Agency has selected four contractors to build its first 28 satellites, the organization is looking for a launch provider to ferry them into orbit. According to a solicitation posted Oct. 6, the agency plans to select one company to provide launch services for all 28 satellites, with the first launch taking place in September 2022. Those 28 satellites will comprise tranche 0 of SDA's National Defense Space Architecture, a new proliferated constellation providing a whole host of services primarily from low Earth orbit. Among other things, the NDSA is anticipated to provide beyond-line-of-site targeting, hypersonic missile warning and tracking, and a space-based mesh network that will connect all of the services as part of the Pentagon's new Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control (CJADC2) approach. The constellation will ultimately include hundreds of satellites, but SDA isn't putting them all up at once. Rather, the agency has adopted a spiral development approach, where the most mature and ready technology is added to the constellation in two year tranches. This launch solicitation covers the first tranche, otherwise known as tranche 0. Slated to go into orbit in fall 2022, tranche 0 is what SDA calls its “war fighter immersion tranche.” “Its goal is to provide the data in a format that the war fighters are used to seeing on tactical timelines that they can be expected to see once we actually become operational,” SDA Director Derek Tournear told C4ISRNET. “The whole purpose of tranche 0 is to allow the war fighters to start to train and develop tactics, techniques and procedures so that they can create operational plans for a battle where they would actually incorporate these data.” With just 28 satellites, tranche 0 will not provide global, persistent coverage. Instead, it will provide periodic, regional capabilities. Tranche 0 will feature the inaugural satellites in the transport and tracking layers. The 20 transport layer satellites will form the base of a space-based mesh network, passing data from satellites to weapon systems along a high-speed, on-orbit corridor. Tournear has previously stated that the transport layer will serve as the space component of CJADC2, the Pentagon's effort to connect sensors to shooters across domains and services. The inaugural tracking layer will be made up of eight satellites. The tracking layer will be used to detect and track hypersonic threats, working with the transport layer to pass tracking data and custody from satellite to satellite—collaborating to keep an eye on globe-traversing missiles that can evade current missile warning capabilities. SDA has selected Lockheed Martin and York Space Systems to each build 10 of the transport layer satellites, while SpaceX and L3 Harris will split the eight tracking layer satellites. Because the SDA has given vendors flexibility in the designs of their satellites, there is some variety to the weight of the space vehicles being launched into orbit. While all 20 transport layer satellites will weigh approximately 200 kilograms, give or take 20 kilograms, there is a significant difference in the size of the eight tracking layer satellites. One vendor—either SpaceX or L3 Harris—will be contributing four tracking layer space vehicles weighing approximately 1,068 kg each. The other vendor's space vehicles will be significantly lighter at just 249 kg. In total, SDA is looking to put as much as 10,164 kg of hardware into orbit. The agency wants all 28 satellites delivered to two circular, 950 km near-polar orbits, with the tranche divided evenly into two planes of 14 satellites. The launch provider has until March 31, 2023, to put all payloads on orbit and has discretion as to how many launches it will use to do that. The goal is to have as many satellites up as close to September 2022 as possible. Proposals are due by Nov. 5 at 4 p.m. EST. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/10/08/space-development-agency-wants-someone-to-launch-their-first-28-satellites/
April 1, 2020 | International, Aerospace

The Air Force’s KC-46 tanker has another serious technical deficiency, and Boeing is stuck paying for it
By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The Air Force on Monday logged another critical technical flaw for the KC-46 tanker, this time revolving around excessive fuel leaks. Under its contract with the service, KC-46 manufacturer Boeing is responsible for paying for a fix to the problem, Air Force spokeswoman Capt. Cara Bousie said in a statement. “The Air Force and Boeing are working together to determine the root cause and implement corrective actions,” she said. “The KC-46 program office continues to monitor the entire KC-46 fleet and is enhancing acceptance testing of the fuel system to identify potential leaks at the factory where they can be repaired prior to delivery.” The problem was first discovered in July 2019, but the Air Force did not say why the issue had been escalated to Category 1 status — the designation given to problems with a significant impact on operations or safety. The service also did not immediately comment on questions about what sort of receiver aircraft were most involved with the deficiency or the severity of the problem. A Boeing spokesman said that the Air Force had discovered 16 aircraft in need of repair, and that seven have already been fixed. “The KC-46 fuel system is equipped with redundant protection for fuel containment. In some cases with this issue, aircraft maintenance crews are finding fuel between the primary and secondary fuel protection barriers within the system,” the company said in a statement. Boeing is working with “utmost urgency” to address the problem and implement a fix to the remaining aircraft, the statement said. A Boeing spokesman added it would take about 10 days to retrofit each aircraft at the rapid response depot facility in San Antonio, Texas. The fix was also being incorporated into production line in Everett, Wash., which is currently undergoing a temporary suspension due to COVID-19. The latest Category 1 deficiency brings the total up to four: The tanker's remote vision system or RVS — the camera system that allows KC-46 boom operators to steer the boom into a receiver aircraft without having to look out a window and use visual cues — provides imagery in certain lighting conditions that appears warped or misleading. Boeing has agreed to pay for potentially extensive hardware and software fixes, but the Air Force believes it will system won't be fully functional until 2023-2024. The Air Force has recorded instances of the boom scraping against the airframe of receiver aircraft. Boeing and the Air Force believe this problem is a symptom of the RVS's acuity problems and will be eliminated once the camera system is fixed. Boeing must redesign the boom to accommodate the A-10, which currently does not generate the thrust necessary to push into the boom for refueling. This problem is a requirements change by the Air Force, which approved Boeing's design in 2016. Last year, Boeing received a $55.5 million contract to begin work on the new boom actuator. Boeing's fixed-priced firm contract for the development of the KC-46 has a $4.9 billion ceiling that leaves the company responsible for any expenses billed in excess of that amount. So far, the company has paid more than $3.5 billion of its own money to fund corrections to ongoing technical issues. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/03/31/the-air-forces-kc-46-tanker-has-another-serious-technical-deficiency-and-boeing-is-stuck-paying-for-it/

All news