Back to news

September 20, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Obscure Pentagon Fund Nets $2B, Sets Pork Senses Tingling

John M. Donnelly

The Pentagon will soon have received about $2.3 billion in the last nine years — money the military never requested — for a special fund intended to help replace earmarks after Congress banned them, our analysis shows.

Buried deep inside the $674.4 billion Defense spending measure for fiscal 2019 that the Senate is expected to vote on this week is a chart with one line showing a $250 million appropriation for the Defense Rapid Innovation Fund, the latest installment of sizable funding for a largely unknown program that quietly disburses scores of contracts every year.

To supporters, the fund is a way to bankroll innovative systems that the military may not yet know it needs. To critics, the fund is just earmarking by another name.

The kinds of systems that net contracts from the innovation fund run the gamut. In fiscal 2016, they included programs to demonstrate artificial intelligence systems for aerial drones, anti-lock brakes for Humvees and underwater communications systems for undersea drones.

The systems may be technologies for which the military services have not yet established a requirement because they may not know what is technically possible. It is not clear how many of the systems actually become operational.

The defense fund's eclipsing of the $2 billion mark comes as debate heats up in Washington over whether to revive earmarks. And the special account highlights key elements of that debate.

Talk of earmarks 2.0

Earmarks have generally been defined as parochial spending, directed by lawmakers and received by people who have not competed for it.

In 2011, after earmarks were tied to several scandals and spending projects seen as excess, Congress barred them — or at least a narrow definition of them, critics contend, noting that, among other loopholes, committees could still add money for parochial projects without spelling out who supports them.

President Donald Trump suggested earlier this year that a return of earmarks, which were often used in horsetrading for votes, might be beneficial.

Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, has suggested he would aim to bring back earmarks if his party takes control of the House next year. The senior Democrat on Senate Appropriations, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, has also supported a comeback for the practice. Republican leaders are less vocal right now, but many of them also support a return to earmarks.

“I don't doubt that the next organizing conference for the next Congress will probably wrestle with this issue,” outgoing House Speaker Paul D. Ryan told reporters earlier this month.

Account quietly amasses funds

The Defense Rapid Innovation Fund was launched in 2010 (first as the Rapid Innovation Program) in the fiscal 2011 defense authorization law. It was a way to capture what proponents called the innovative spirit of programs called earmarks that were clearly about to be banned.

Unlike earmarks, the defense fund's money would be competitively awarded by the Pentagon, not directed by Congress, supporters of the idea pointed out.

Democrat Norm Dicks, then a senior Defense appropriator, and other advocates of the program described it at the time as a way to capture the innovation among smaller companies, including many who had received earmarks.

“We have not always had an adequate way of bringing these smaller firms and their innovation into the defense pipeline,” Dicks said in 2010.

Each year since its creation, the fund has received another installment of funds, never less than $175 million or more than $439 million.

The program has awarded several hundred contracts, averaging about $2 million each, mostly for small businesses with technologies that were relatively mature and that could address some military need, according to a fiscal 2017 Pentagon summary of the program's results.

Full article: http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/obscure-pentagon-fund-nets-2-billion

On the same subject

  • Next F-35 Contracts Under Negotiation, Deal Expected by Late September

    January 25, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Next F-35 Contracts Under Negotiation, Deal Expected by Late September

    Jan. 22, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak The F-35 Joint Program Office, Lockheed Martin, and Pratt & Whitney are negotiating prices for the 15th through 17th lots of Lightning II fighters and engines, aiming for a deal by the end of September. The contracting strategy is to negotiate a “base year” contract for Lot 15, with “two single-year options (Lots 16 and 17),” a JPO spokeswoman said. While the air vehicles are under negotiation, the “propulsion Lot 15-17 proposal is currently in technical evaluation,” the spokeswoman said. Although Lockheed quotes prices publicly for F-35s with engines included, the government negotiates with the engine maker separately. The Lightning II is powered by Pratt's F135 turbofan. The strategy likely buys time for the F-35 to finally exit engineering and manufacturing development and be declared ready for full-rate production, a milestone postponed last month for the third time by former Pentagon acquisition and sustainment chief Ellen Lord. The Lot 15-17 contracts will also mark the first major deals for the F135 engine conducted with Pratt under the ownership of Raytheon Technologies, which formally took over the engine maker in April 2020. Pratt was previously owned by United Technologies. The program office expects to conclude both the air vehicle and propulsion talks within fiscal 2021, the spokeswoman said. Lot 15 air vehicles “are planned to be fully funded and awarded in FY'21,” but the Lot 16 and 17 options would be exercised in fiscal year 2022 and 2023, respectively, “when funding becomes available.” The Lots 15-17 contracts were originally expected to include a multi-year “block buy” agreement including the U.S. However, by law, the U.S. cannot enter into a multiyear procurement arrangement for a weapon system until it has passed Milestone C, or full-rate production. The F-35 most recently was supposed to clear Milestone C in March, but Lord postponed that declaration until further notice, due to ongoing challenges integrating the F-35 with the Pentagon's Joint Simulation Environment—a wargaming system that helps Pentagon leaders decide on optimum force sizes for various weapon platforms. Lord's move leaves it up to the Biden administration to declare whether and when the F-35 is ready for full-rate production. When the Lot 12-14 contract was announced in October 2019, Lord said the F-35 had completed 90 percent of the tasks necessary to pass Milestone C. U.S. partners in the F-35 program are already participating in a “block buy” arrangement with Lockheed Martin. The $34 billion October 2019 contract, which covered Lots 12-14, achieved Lockheed and the JPO's longstanding goal of getting the unit cost of the F-35A below $80 million a copy. That contract, the largest yet for the fighter, included 478 aircraft; 291 for U.S. military services and 127 for foreign users. It also marked a 12.8 percent drop in the price of the Air Force version of the Lightning II over Lot 11. Engine costs had only declined 3.5 percent versus the previous lot. Lots 15-17 will likely involve a slightly larger number of aircraft. Industry officials said they expect smaller cost reductions in the F-35 from now on, as the production line is nearly at capacity and peak efficiency. The 2019 contract was the “big bang” deal, said one, in which Lockheed “pushed it” to get the unit cost below $80 million. At that price, the fifth-generation F-35 costs less than fourth-generation types like the F-15EX, but its operating cost remains significantly higher. Lockheed missed its delivery quota of F-35s in 2020 by about 20 airplanes, due to delays incurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. Michele Evans, former Lockheed aeronautics vice president, said in the fall the company expects to gradually make up those missed deliveries by around 2023, noting it did not want to disrupt the production enterprise for a brief surge to get back to par. https://www.airforcemag.com/next-f-35-contracts-under-negotiation-deal-expected-by-late-september

  • Australia accelerates missile upgrade program by several years

    April 6, 2022 | International, Aerospace

    Australia accelerates missile upgrade program by several years

    The new rearmament timetable comes after the Solomon Islands announced a draft security pact with China.

  • NASA Seeks Lunar Gateway Resupply Proposals

    August 20, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    NASA Seeks Lunar Gateway Resupply Proposals

    Mark Carreau NASA has issued a request for proposals (RFP) from U.S. companies capable of carrying out up to $7 billion in re-supply missions to its planned lunar-orbiting, human-tended Gateway. The request asks for a service similar to how multiple commercial providers deliver pressurized and unpressurized cargo to and from the six-person International Space Station (ISS) under commercial resupply services contracts. The major difference is that the ISS orbits in a high inclination orbit about 250 mi. from the Earth's surface. The Gateway is to orbit the Moon in a near rectilinear halo orbit, an elliptical track that comes as close to the lunar surface as 1,875 mi. (3,000 km) and as far as 43,750 mi. Under the Gateway cargo RFP, the craft would remain parked at the Gateway for six months, followed by an automated departure and disposal. Responses to the RFP, issued Aug. 16, are due Oct. 1. Under the Artemis initiative unveiled by NASA earlier this year, astronauts will return to the lunar surface via the Gateway by 2024 as the agency pursues a sustainable presence by 2028 and prepares for the human exploration of Mars. Under the RFP issued through NASA's Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the agency is prepared to commit up to $7 billion to contract with multiple U.S. suppliers for 15 years on a fixed-price basis. Each resupply service would be assured at least two missions. NASA is asking RFP responders to address logistics, spacecraft design, cargo mass capability, pressurized volume, power availability for payloads and transit time to the Gateway. “We chose to minimize spacecraft requirements on industry to allow for commercial innovation, but we are asking industry to propose their best solutions for delivering cargo and enabling our deep-space supply chain,” said Mark Wiese, NASA's Gateway logistics element manager at KSC, in an Aug. 19 NASA statement. “In addition to delivering cargo, science and other supplies with these services, private industry also has the opportunity to deliver other elements of our lunar architecture with this solicitation.'' Once the initial contracts are awarded, NASA may issue additional lunar cargo contract opportunities to keep the operations competitive. With advance permission from NASA, its providers also may use mission capabilities to deliver, remove and/or return non-NASA cargo if the additional activities do not interfere with the prime mission. In late November, NASA announced the selection of nine U.S. companies under its Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program, making them eligible to bid on the delivery of payloads to the lunar surface. The agency plans to invest up to $2.6 billion in CLPS over the next decade. https://aviationweek.com/space/nasa-seeks-lunar-gateway-resupply-proposals

All news