Back to news

April 28, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

What the Pentagon should (and should not) get in the next stimulus bill

By:

As Washington begins to draft another stimulus spending bill to combat coronavirus, the Pentagon needs a new plan to articulate its needs to lawmakers. Simply submitting unfunded lists whole cloth comes across as tone deaf and opportunistic. A better plan would be to focus on the health, safety and continuity of all the Pentagon's workforce: uniformed, civilian and contractor.

Capitol Hill is (virtually) busy as ever these days, completing another injection of funds into the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act last week. Congress and the White House will now begin formulating a phase 4 bill. President Donald Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have indicated they would both like to see domestic infrastructure spending inside. Negotiations are just beginning, but this bill will open the spending aperture compared to the CARES Act.

For national defense, this legislation must focus on taking care of people and protecting jobs. Even as the U.S. military mobilizes to support the fight against COVID-19, the disease is hitting the Defense Department and its workforce much the same as the rest of America.

The first order of business is for the Pentagon to ensure health and wellness for service members, their families, civilians and contractors by encouraging safe and flexible work policies. The Pentagon will need additional funding to pay for COVID-19 support deployments, mitigate the effects of stop-movement orders, increase the availability of personal protective equipment and sanitation, and expand its IT infrastructure for telework.

Second, Congress and the Pentagon should provide financial assistance to the thousands of small businesses, subcontractors and suppliers to defense contractors building weapons, conducting maintenance or developing classified software. The defense-industrial base is built for maximum efficiency, not resiliency. Even seemingly minor production pauses of weeks are combining with broader quarantine restrictions to wreak havoc on program schedules.

While the Pentagon has many tools at its disposal — accelerating awards and progress payments as well as lifting contracting restrictions — the acquisition team simply cannot respond to this crisis without more resources available. Absent additional liquidity, contractors face the impossible choice between letting workers go or facing the reality that they will have no jobs to return to.

Small businesses and subcontractors are particularly vulnerable, as they have far less slack to respond to crises. Many live contract to contract, as indicated by a 2018 Department of Defense report on industrial base fragility. These small firms providing needed materials, labor and technology to companies designated as “essential” are struggling with COVID like everyone else. Their employees are either afraid to come to work out of fear of contraction and contagion, or they're sick with the virus. The vicious cycle — where people want to work but can't — means schedules slip. If there is no work, there is no revenue, which means layoffs.

Already around the country, a major defense contractor had to shut down two plants; a shipbuilder is struggling to get employees to show up; another defense firm has laid off employees; and still others can't get to work because classified spaces are off limits.

To ensure workforces remain intact, lawmakers need to move quickly to pay contractors who cannot work because of COVID-19 effects, as delays are now averaging three months. Fixing this is as simple as measuring the impact of COVID-19 on contracts and ensuring a reasonable payment for that delay, which will be billions of dollars, according to acquisition czar Ellen Lord. It's no different than legal remedies for “acts of God.”

Also, the DoD can consider a subset of its unfunded priorities list to get projects on contract that are executable very quickly and inject liquidity into the defense contractor workforce. These unfunded priorities run the gamut, from weapons production to software development. Similarly, there are always “incremental” projects that can be accelerated, like facilities sustainment and depot maintenance. Using unfunded priorities to inject liquidity into the defense-industrial base isn't the ideal tool, but all options must be brought to bear to deal with this crisis.

The majority of defense dollars allocated to the big prime contractors go back out the door to their suppliers and vendors — many of which are small businesses. While many of the easiest financial levers to pull involve getting contracts to primes, Congress and the Pentagon need to emphasize that this money — whether it be new contracts, accelerated contracts or increased progress payments — must be passed on to major suppliers and subcontractors.

If the behemoths of defense industry don't share the wealth and take care of their supply chain, there won't be more money, contracts or authority for additional progress payments from Congress. Contractor leadership must take care of workers — including those of its vendors.

Lastly, Congress can provide Defense Production Act Title III funding to directly target injections of cash to the emergent needs of small businesses and subcontractors, including many up-and-coming innovative firms and single-source suppliers. So far, DPA funding has been focused on contracting for additional personal protective equipment, but the DPA was equally built to protect the defense-industrial base.

The industrial base was already hurt by the Budget Control Act, and it's been busy rebuilding under Trump, only to get whacked again by COVID-19. Employees need to know the work is there, their safety is a priority and their jobs are safe. If the Pentagon and primes don't take care of their suppliers and subcontractors, the defense-industrial base will contract again, losing crucial skills and talents permanently — and possibly seeing those companies bought up by China.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/27/what-the-pentagon-should-and-should-not-get-in-the-next-stimulus-bill/

On the same subject

  • Exclusive: Boeing deepens strategy cuts as operations take center-stage -sources | Reuters

    December 11, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    Exclusive: Boeing deepens strategy cuts as operations take center-stage -sources | Reuters

    Boeing Co has embarked on deeper-than-expected cuts in its strategy ranks, halving the number of planners working within key divisions as it refocuses energies on tackling industrial pressures, people familiar with the matter said.

  • Accrete wins contract from Pentagon for AI threat detection software

    November 17, 2022 | International, C4ISR

    Accrete wins contract from Pentagon for AI threat detection software

    Argus uses artificial intelligence to read, understand and learn from unstructured data to spot bad actors.

  • Special US fund to replace Russian equipment in Europe is shifting its strategy

    March 19, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Special US fund to replace Russian equipment in Europe is shifting its strategy

    By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — A U.S. State Department fund to help European nations replace Russian-made weapons with American equipment has expanded to eight countries, but will be eschewing a second wave of funding in favor of targeted investments. In 2018, the State Department quietly launched a new effort known as the European Recapitalization Incentive Program, or ERIP, a new tool developed alongside U.S. European Command to speed up the process of getting allied nations off Russian gear. The U.S. benefits both strategically — getting partners and allies off Russian equipment to improve interoperability and deny Moscow funds for maintenance — and financially, thanks to the sale of American weapons abroad. ERIP funds, reprogrammed from unused dollars such as regional Foreign Military Financing, come in one-time bursts to help a country buy American-made alternatives to Russian kit. To get the money, the European nation must pledge to not buy Russian equipment in the future, while also at least matching the dollar value of the ERIP grant with domestic funding. The initial funding round consisted of six countries, totaling $190 million in reprogrammed fiscal 2017 dollars. As of last May, the State Department was considering a second round of ERIP grants and was at least in early discussions with Latvia about the funding. But in the time since, the department decided there won't be a second round, but rather ERIP will become a tool best used on a rolling basis. (Discussions with Latvia turned to different pots of money other than ERIP, according to a source.) “There was a lot of discussions about a second round, but the way it's kind of evolving is, rather than look at it as rounds is, look at it as opportunities,” a senior State Department official told Defense News on condition of anonymity. “It's a tool that we can use when opportunities arise for us to work with a partner to make a difference.” All told, the department has given out roughly $277 million in ERIP grants in the last two years — but, the official said, those relatively small dollars helped lock in roughly $2.5 billion in U.S. weapons sales. That's a win in “pure economic terms,” the official said, even before getting into the hard-to-quantify policy and political benefits. “It was a pretty bold decision in trying to help some of these countries acquire a pretty high capability capital intensive, and for some of them it's their first major [Foreign Military Sales] case, period.” Going forward, there may be tie-in money from EUCOM, which could kick in $1-3 million in small grants to nations that received ERIP dollars in order to help nations with maintenance costs on the newly bought American equipment. That money would likely come from DoD's Section 333 authority. Asked about that potential. DoD spokesman Lt. Col. Uriah Orland said the department "continues to work closely with the Department of State in the planning of security assistance with our European partner nations that enables them to reduce their dependencies on Russia's defense industry and build and/or sustain their own defense capabilities.” Targeted, ongoing funding Bulgaria presents a notable example for how the thinking on ERIP is evolving. The country spent several years debating what fighter jet to purchase, with the finalists coming down to new F-16s from Lockheed Martin, secondhand F-16s from Portugal, Eurofighter Typhoons from Italy and Saab Gripens from Sweden. As ERIP was envisioned, it would be used only for rotorcraft or ground vehicles. But with the government in Sofia teetering on the edge of rejecting the Lockheed deal, the U.S. State Department stepped in and used $56 million in ERIP dollars to push the F-16s over the edge and finalize a deal that could exceed $1.6 billion in costs. “For countries where it's a politically contentious issue, whether for economic or political reasons” the fund can help make a deal happen, the official said. “We were able to close that gap with an ERIP grant that enabled them to make the purchase and acquire the capability.” The second nation to get a targeted ERIP grant has been Lithuania, which in October announced plans to buy six UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters to replace its Soviet-made Mi-8 fleet. The State Department kicked in $30 million of ERIP funding to help complete that deal. In fact, no one piece of equipment has benefited from ERIP as much as the UH-60, of which three of the eight ERIP grants has helped procure. The eight projects to date are: Albania: $30 million for UH-60 procurement. The UH-60 is produced by Sikorsky, a Lockheed Martin subsidiary. Bosnia and Herzegovina: $30.7 million for the Bell Huey II. Croatia: $25 million for Bradley fighting vehicles, manufactured by BAE Systems. Croatia is also working to stand up local maintenance for the equipment. North Macedonia: $30 million for Stryker vehicles, produced by General Dynamics. Slovakia: $50 million for UH-60 procurement. Greece: $25 million earmarked, but the government is still debating what to buy. Likely to either be Bradley vehicles or the M1117 Armored Security Vehicle from Textron. Greece stands out because, as a higher-income nation, they are technically ineligible for Foreign Military Financing dollars, but a political decision was made to support them with ERIP anyway, the official said. Lithuania: $30 million for UH-60 procurement. Bulgaria: $56 million for eight Lockheed-produced F-16s. All of those deals except Greece and Lithuania are under contract, with a letter of request from Lithuania expected in the next few weeks. As to future opportunities, “we always kind of have our eye open, and we rely on the country teams out in the field to bring us these opportunities and think about them,” the official said. Although at the moment there are no potential ERIP projects in the works. “We continue to look at the Baltics, we look at the Balkans,” the official said, adding that “countries within Eastern Europe, the Baltics, the Balkans moving towards a new ground mobility or rotorwing systems with something to divest would be our top candidates.” All of those deals except Greece and Lithuania are under contract, with a letter of request from Lithuania expected in the next few weeks. As to future opportunities, “we always kind of have our eye open, and we rely on the country teams out in the field to bring us these opportunities and think about them,” the official said. Although at the moment there are no potential ERIP projects in the works. “We continue to look at the Baltics, we look at the Balkans,” the official said, adding that “countries within Eastern Europe, the Baltics, the Balkans moving towards a new ground mobility or rotorwing systems with something to divest would be our top candidates.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/18/special-us-fund-to-replace-russian-equipment-in-europe-is-shifting-its-strategy

All news