Navy submarine suffered long-term damage to ballast tank from errant test: report

On the same subject

• 

  July 3, 2023 | International, Aerospace

  Israel to buy 25 more F-35 stealth jets in $3 billion deal

  Israel has approved the purchase of a third squadron of F-35 stealth fighter jets in a deal worth $3 billion, the Ministry of Defense said on Sunday.

• 

  April 14, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Newest DoD industry guidance clarifies repayments, makes prototyping easier

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — As part of its ongoing effort to bolster the defense industrial base, the Pentagon has issued two new pieces of guidance — one focused on workers, and one focused on prototype contracts. Overall, the department has now issued 17 different actions, ranging from basic guidance for industry to memos changing how the department pays contractors, since March 5. In an April 6 memo, acquisition head Ellen Lord changed the rules for issuing prototype contracts through other transaction authorities. OTAs are small contracts awarded to companies of any size, in theory targeted at nontraditional defense contractors, with the purpose of conducting research or prototype efforts on a specific project; they are not subject to Federal Acquisition Regulation rules. By comparison, SBIR contracts are targeted at small businesses in order to act as seed money for them to conduct research and development efforts; they are subject to the FAR rules. According to data gathered by Govini, the Pentagon issued $16.3 billion in OTA contracts between fiscal 2015 to fiscal 2019. Those numbers grew year over year during that time period, from $0.7 billion in FY15 to $7 billion in FY19. Lord's memo, which like other Pentagon industrial base guidance will last “for the period covered by the COVID-19 emergency declaration,” includes three pieces of guidance: Prototype project contracts in excess of $100 million can now be issued by the directors of the defense agencies/field activities, commanding officers of combatant command, and the director of the Defense Innovation Unit. Prototype project agreements and any follow-on production contracts in excess of $500 million can be issued by the senior procurement executives of the military departments, the director of DARPA and the director of the Missile Defense Agency. OT prototype actions between $100 and $500 million can be delegated to lower officials as seen fit by the leaders of those organizations. Perhaps most notably, the memo attempts to make it easier to get prototype contracts specifically related to COVID-19 up and running, by relaxing a requirement to give the congressional defense committees a 30-day advance notice before issuing a transaction in excess of $500 million for projects that are tied into the ongoing pandemic. Instead, the goal will be to make a notification “as soon as practicable after the commencement of such a transaction.” Meanwhile, the department has also given new guidance related to a part of the recent Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act stimulus package, which allows agencies to reimburse contractors for payments to their workforce, should they be prevented from working due to COVID-19 facility closures or other restrictions. Under the new guidance, contracting officers at the department may decide not to reimburse in situations where employees or subcontractor employees were able to work, including remote or telework options, but choose not to; when the costs seeking reimbursement were not associated with keeping employees in a ready state; when costs were incurred prior to January 31, 2020, or after September 30, 2020; or when the contractor has been or can be reimbursed by other means. Additionally, the reimbursement is not an option for costs not related to COVID-19 and, notably, is “subject to the availability of funds,” per a department statement. Advance payments are also not an option. https://www.defensenews.com/coronavirus/2020/04/09/newest-dod-industry-guidance-clarifies-repayments-makes-prototyping-easier/

• 

  May 22, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

  State, DoD Letter Warns European Union to Open Defense Contracts, Or Else

  By PAUL MCLEARY Europe has bristled at a letter sent to the EU from the Pentagon and State Department, which says proposed EU defense programs are unfair to the US defense industry. WASHINGTON: Pentagon and State Department officials have told the European Union they're “deeply concerned” over plans to potentially exclude US defense firms from competing for billions worth of new arms deals, suggesting the US could slap restrictions on buying European defense equipment in retaliation. At issue is the proposed $14 billion European Defence Fund, and a host of procurement programs under the the Permanent Structured Cooperation, or PESCO, the European economic alliance is undertaking. While the May 1 letter from Ellen Lord, Pentagon procurement chief, and Andrea Thompson, State's undersecretary for arms control and international security, expressed general support for the EU initiatives, it made clear the US would like to see significant changes in the draft language before the 28-country bloc votes on them as early as next month. The language in both documents, the US argues, feature intellectual property and export control restrictions that would act as “poison pills” to “effectively preclude participation by any company that uses U.S.-origin technology.” Overall, Lord and Thompson write, the conditions outlined in the EDF and PESCO documents “represent a dramatic reversal of the last three decades of increased integration of the transatlantic defense sector.” If the restrictions are kept in place, the US officials warn, “it is clear that similar reciprocally imposed U.S. restrictions would not be welcomed by our European partners and Allies, and we would not relish having to consider them in the future.” But EU officials defended their efforts this week. Asked about the US letter, an EU spokesperson replied in an email that the EDF and PESCO will “complement and strengthen NATO,” at a time in which the Trump administration has made that a key policy goal, and “enable Europe to shoulder its fair share of the burden and responsibility for global security.” But it's clear the letter has rankled the Europeans. “The EU has an open and competitive defense procurement framework, in fact more so than the US procurement market,” the spokesperson wrote. “In the EU, there is no ‘Buy European Act.' 81 percent of the total value of international defense contracts in Europe go to US firms. The US defense market is three to four times larger than that of the EU, and yet imports from the EU are marginal for the US, while EU imports from the US are significant.” The official said that American companies with subsidiaries in the EU will remain eligible for funding under the EDF subject to security conditions “which are similar – in fact less restrictive – to the ones that EU companies face in the US.” The EU's High Representative Federica Mogherini told reporters Tuesday that PESCO projects aren't meant to be a vehicle to increase transAtlantic ties, and the EU will gladly continue doing business with non-EU defense companies. The program “is not defined to be an instrument for partnership,” she said. “It does not substitute other partnerships, including in the defense industry and research that we have already in place and that are essential for us,” she added. For years, non-NATO countries like Sweden and Finland have drawn closer to NATO and have increased ties with US defense firms while also building their own domestic defense capabilities, though the relationship hasn't always been smooth. While the US government is concerned over US companies being excluded, the PESCO effort has been developed explicitly to bolster the ability of European countries to produce their own weapons systems, cyber capabilities, and surveillance technologies. So-called “third states” — non EU members — may ask to participate in PESCO projects, but all of the member states must vote to allow them in. Lord and Thompson argue that walling-off EU projects from NATO efforts would lead to duplication and waste, while decreasing interoperability between the EU and NATO. It could also “potentially tum the clock back to the sometimes divisive discussions about EU defense initiatives that dominated our exchanges 15 years ago.” In the end, the US letter is just the latest turn in what has been a complex, up and down relationship between the US and Europe under the Trump administration. The president has loudly condemned Washington's closest allies in Europe for not spending enough on their own defense, while threatening to pull out of NATO. At the same time, the US has increased troop levels in Europe and pumped over $11 billion into the European Deterrence Initiative over the past two years, in an effort to upgrade US and allied basing, increase joint exercises, and modernize equipment on the continent to counter the Russian threat. https://breakingdefense.com/2019/05/state-dod-letter-warns-european-union-to-open-defense-contracts-or-else/