News

By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — A Ukrainian cargo plane that landed in Israel Aug. 3 carried trucks that will be used to support Iron Dome battery testing ahead of delivery in the United States, U.S. Army Futures Command confirmed. The Ukrainian plane was used to transport the trucks because of its capability to meet load requirements and delivery timelines, an AFC spokeswoman told Defense News. The U.S. Army has bought two Iron Dome batteries to fill a cruise missile threat gap as an interim solution while it continues to shape its future Indirect Fires Protection Capability being developed to battle against not just cruise missiles but unmanned aircraft threats, rockets, artillery and mortars. Congress mandated the Army buy and field two batteries no later than the end of fiscal 2020. The Oshkosh vehicles will be mated with the Iron Dome system and then be delivered to the United States in that form following factory acceptance testing in Israel. The first battery is expected to be shipped to the United States in December and the second in February, Brig. Gen. Robert Rasch, the U.S. Army's program executive officer for missiles and space, said at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium Aug. 4. While the Army has said it will not buy all-up Iron Dome systems as part of the IFPC program, officials developing the capability are considering incorporating parts of Iron Dome in the final solution. The service will conduct a shoot-off of best available options for integration into an enduring IFPC solution in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021. Rasch stressed the Army won't throw away its Iron Dome systems when IFPC comes online, but instead the service will continue to use the systems because it plans to ensure the batteries are interoperable with U.S. command-and-control capabilities. The Army plans to field Iron Dome by the end of the year, but it will still take time to train troops on the system before deployment. Some lawmakers are urging the Army to rapidly deploy the systems to the Middle East, arguing U.S. and coalition forces there need the protection from Iran and its proxies. As equipment to complete U.S. Iron Dome batteries arrived in Israel, American firm Raytheon Technologies and Israeli-based Rafael Advanced Defense Systems have formed a joint venture to build the Iron Dome missile defense system in the United States. Under the name Raytheon Rafael Area Protection Systems, the partnership is being set up to build a first-ever Iron Dome “all-up-round” facility stateside. The facility will build Iron Dome systems, the Tamir interceptor and launcher, and the SkyHunter missile (the U.S. version of Tamir). Seth Frantzman, Defense News Israel-based correspondent, contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd/2020/08/04/american-trucks-land-in-israel-to-support-iron-dome-testing-ahead-of-us-army-delivery/

Tony Osborne July 10, 2020 Over the last six years, an alphabet soup of defense initiatives has emerged from European leadership in Brussels. These European mechanisms for defense cooperation may have been slow to gain traction, but they are encouraging more pooling and sharing of assets, bolstering research and development funding, encouraging nations with similar requirements to work together and most of all, helping nations avoid repeating the mistakes governments made in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis. The EU is mulling over third-nation access to PESCO and EDF European defense took a decade to recover from 2008 financial downturn NATO nations are concerned about a second Trump administration And soon they could help Europe's embattled defense industrial base bounce back, once the dust from the novel coronavirus pandemic has settled. Agencies such as the European Defense Agency (EDA) and initiatives such as the European Defense Fund (EDF), Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), Preparatory Action on Defense Research (PADR) and the European Defense Industrial Development Program (EDIDP) have emerged from the European Union (EU) and European Commission's (EC) call for EU member states to take more care of their own security and be less reliant on the U.S. The initiatives are leading to new partnerships that would have been unlikely in the past, aiming to fill capability gaps that no single European nation alone could have achieved. The big question is whether governments can overcome nationalist tendencies and be more willing to cooperate. And if so, will the projects produce something tangible? European defense cooperation has existed in different forms for decades, through development of the Panavia Tornado by Germany, Italy and the UK; the Franco-German work on the C-160 Transall airlifter; and the MBDA Meteor missile shared between Germany, Italy, France, Sweden and the UK. The difference this time is that such relationships were forged by national governments, but the new wave of cooperation is being stimulated centrally with EU and EC money, to improve coordination between the nations in an attempt to change the perception that such collaborations can sometimes cost more overall. The joint efforts are now being applied to a multiplicity of programs, large and small, and not just to those considered unwieldy or complex. Consider the creation of the Multinational Multirole Tanker Transport (MRTT) Unit, which will see six nations—Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway—jointly operating a fleet of Airbus A330 MRTT refueling tankers. More than eight years in the making, the pooling and sharing initiative emerged from the EDA and boosts the number of aerial refueling tankers available to European nations, with governments paying for flight hours on an annual basis. The first of the tankers was delivered to the Netherlands in early July. There has been cooperation in demonstrations of unmanned systems and sensor technology for increased maritime awareness through the Ocean2020 project, a PADR initiative, and with enhanced airlifter and helicopter training through a series of EDA-arranged training exercises (AW&ST July 20-Aug. 2, 2015, p. 63). The push for deeper European defense cooperation emerged in the years after the deep post-2008 economic downturn that prompted many European governments to adopt austerity budgets, introducing sweeping cuts to public spending that sharply curtailed capability. Budgets in some of the smaller nations were reduced by as much as 30%, according to research by the German Council on Foreign Relations. Overall, about €24 billion ($27 billion)—equivalent to around 11% of Europe's total defense spending—was cut in the years following 2008. “It took until [2019] for defense spending [by] NATO's European members to recover in constant dollar terms back to the level where it was when that 2008 financial crisis hit,” Bastian Giegerich, director of defense and military analysis at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, tells Aviation Week. When allied air forces began flying missions over Libya in 2011, they lacked aerial refueling, electronic-warfare and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to find targets, and ended up relying heavily on U.S. assets that Washington had been reluctant to provide. The lessons only began being heeded when the European security situation deteriorated rapidly. The Arab Spring, which had caused the collapse of the Muammar Ghaddifi government in Libya and was continuing to ripple through North Africa and the Middle East causing instability on the edges of the Mediterranean, was quickly followed in 2014 by the Russian--backed insurrection in Eastern Ukraine and Moscow's annexation of Crimea. “This succession of events really highlighted to European leaders that they needed to get their act together,” says Daniel Fiott, security and defense editor at the EU Institute for Security Studies. As treasuries across Europe began to trickle money back into defense budgets, further alarm was generated by the rhetoric of U.S. President Donald Trump, who having berated several NATO members for not meeting the alliance's defense spending target of 2% of GDP, single-handedly “undermined alliance cohesion and coherence,” says Giegerich. Trump raised doubts about the U.S. commitment to NATO's Article 5, which states that an attack on one ally is an attack on all. That shock, “and the possibility that if Trump is reelected [this November] . . . he could do something radical within NATO,” has prompted a continued drive to modernize European capabilities, suggests Fiott. Britain's departure from the European Union provided the EU and EC with the impetus for reinforced defense cooperation; London had long resisted such attempts. “The UK line was always that the EU shouldn't try and develop certain mechanisms or capacities that they would see as potentially duplicating NATO,” says Fiott. In the fall of 2016, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told EU member states that Europe needed to “toughen up” and not “piggyback on the military might of others.” He added: “We have to take responsibility for protecting our interests and the European way of life.” According to the EC, the lack of defense cooperation between member states costs between €25-100 billion because of issues such as duplication of effort. It also notes that 80% of procurement and 90% of research and technology are run on a solely national basis. The EC claims that enhanced cooperation between member states could reduce annual defense expenditures across Europe by 30% through pooling procurement. Junker's words were followed up a year later with the EC's formation of the European Defense Fund for joint research and development of defense projects. The EDF was set up to incentivize joint development projects and provide co-financing if several member nations bulk-buy capabilities between them. This was preceded by the PADR and the EDIDP, a series of preparatory programs paving the way for the EDF (AW&ST June 12-25, 2017, p. 28). “[The] PADR and EDIDP test the way the institutions and the funding mechanisms work and help to generate some buzz in industry,” says Fiott. These programs began to deliver benefits in June, when the EC announced €205 million of funding to support 16 PADR and EDIDP initiatives. Projects including the development of a low-observable tactical unmanned aircraft system, research into high-resolution observation payloads for satellites, and studies for a beyond-visual-line-of-sight land-based battlefield missile system have been funded, a steppingstone toward creation of the EDF. Direct support is also envisaged for two large-scale projects, including the EuroDrone medium-altitude long-endurance aircraft system being developed by France, Germany, Italy and Spain and for the European Secure Software-Defined Radio (ESSOR) program. Some of the PADR and EDIDP initiatives are linked to the other major initiative, PESCO. Run by the European Defense Agency and the EU's External Action Service, PESCO calls on Euro-pean member states to make binding commitments to invest in and develop defense capabilities. PESCO projects are likely to receive funding from the EDF. There are currently some 47 PESCO projects supported by 25 member states. Several of the projects are aerospace-related programs. One is the Timely Warning and Interception with Space-based TheatER surveillance program (Twister)—led by France and supported by Finland, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain—to develop a capability to track and counter emerging threats, including hypersonic gliders and supersonic cruise missiles. Another, Airborne Electronic Attack, led by Spain with support from France and Sweden, calls for the joint development of a pod-mounted electronic attack and countermeasure capability for combat aircraft. PESCO programs are also focused on training, joint forces activity and cyberwarfare. There are, however, debates as to whether the PESCO initiatives will deliver new capabilities. Some are seen as vanity programs, others may merely be national programs for which some nations have roped in other partners in a bid to secure funding. A review of the PESCO projects is currently underway. “We can't prove that cooperation delivers anything, and we don't know the criteria for having good cooperation and for having bad cooperation,” says Christian Molling, research director for the German Council on Foreign Relations. PESCO has also ruffled feathers. Last year, Pentagon procurement officials wrote to the EU threatening to apply sanctions, incorrectly assuming that PESCO initiatives would prevent U.S. industry from pursuing business in Europe. The EU is currently exploring whether third nations—non-EU nations—can access PESCO and EDF initiatives. Initial proposals to allow third-nation access have been received favorably by some member states, but the discussions are bound up in deliberations about the next EU budget. The U.S. may have been alarmed at the longer-term goals of EDF and PESCO, which by providing political and financial incentives boost productivity, innovation and the competitiveness of the European defense industrial sector. “[It] strengthens the argument to buy European and do things together,” says Giegerich. “That is a long-range threat . . . that may explain why the U.S. administration had such an allergic reaction to the EDF and PESCO last year,” he adds. EU and EC-led plans are not the only cooperative initiatives taking place. Two new combat aircraft programs have taken shape over the last three years, linking unlikely bedfellows with very different views on defense. France, Germany, and Spain are working on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), while the UK is leading its Tempest project with Italy and Sweden. Such flagship programs could have “a structuring effect on defense industrial capability in Europe for the next couple of decades,” says Giegerich. The nations will have to reconcile their differences, though France and Germany, the leading nations on FCAS, have markedly different approaches to defense exports, doctrine and deterrence. Hopes from industry that the two projects could be combined may be wishful thinking. There may be only a short window of opportunity for that to happen, perhaps 18-24 months, suggests Giegerich, before too many decisions on each of the projects are finalized. FCAS was born out of French and German ambitions to become pillars of European defense. With the entrance of Spain into the initiative, the program is likely to be eligible for support from the EDF in the future. It is conceivable that Tempest could benefit from such funding in the future, too, if the EC allows so-called third nations. How defense cooperation evolves is likely to depend on how nations emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic and whether they choose to make cuts to defense, taking an austerity approach as in 2008, or to reinvigorate their economies with fiscal stimulus. The arguments for such cuts will be challenged in the current environment, suggests Giegerich. “While COVID is obviously a massive interruption to [European government] plans, none of the security problems that existed before have gone away,” he notes. In May, the defense ministers of the four major EU states—France, Germany, Italy and Spain—wrote to European leaders urging their nations to strengthen cooperation through efforts such as PESCO. “Security and Defense must therefore remain a top priority,” the letter states. “We want to live up to our responsibilities and be able to face present and upcoming challenges, at home and abroad. . . . Hence, we have to maintain, strengthen and develop our ability to act and react autonomously, as a Union.” The crisis has prompted governments to sit up and look at their strategic capabilities, critical industries and security of supply, says Fiott, and may prompt some nations to look closer to home again for their defense relationships. “The U.S. will always be a go-to player when it comes to certain capabilities,” says Fiott. “Dealing with the U.S. on one hand is really good. You get access to high-tech equipment and you can use it to undergird your defense relationship.” But buying from the U.S. means countries are exposed to the full force of U.S. legislative power. “You can't have any kind of autonomy in defense if ultimately Washington is able to veto you, the use of capabilities or even the exploitation of technology,” Fiott says. “That's certainly an issue that [European] governments are thinking about.” Another concern is that a deep economic recession in the U.S. could prompt Washington to reconsider its posture in Europe and speed up its repivot to China. U.S. plans to withdraw some 9,000 troops from Germany has sent ripples through NATO. The post-COVID-19 era could also provide an opportunity to put European defense mechanisms to good use. Reports that the EDF budget would be slashed as a result of the coronavirus crisis have proved unfounded. The EC plans to invest €9 billion in the EDF over the next seven years, down from the originally planned €13 billion, although this is still subject to approvals by EU member states. “There is now a time to make that argument that the EDF and the European military mobility initiatives should be fully funded and should perhaps even be beefed up compared to original plans,” says Giegerich. “The ball is now in the court of the EU member states.” “We are really fortunate in having already a lot of initiatives in place,” says Fiott. “It is not like we have to waste the next two, three, four years dreaming up new schemes.” https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/eu-initiatives-could-bolster-european-defense-post-covid

NAVY Bethel-Tech Pacific JV,* Anchorage, Alaska (N62473-20-D-1113); ECC Environmental,* Burlingame, California (N62473-20-D-1114); and CAPE-Weston,* Irvine, California (N62473-20-D-1115), are awarded a $240,000,000 firm-fixed price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, multiple award contract for environmental remediation projects located primarily within the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Southwest area of responsibility (AOR). This includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and other locations nationwide. The maximum dollar value for all three contracts combined is $240,000,000. Bethel-Tech Pacific JV is being awarded an initial task order at $189,037 to evaluate land use controls at Marine Corps Logistic Base, Barstow, California. Work for this task order is expected to be completed by July 2023. All work on this contract will be performed primarily within the NAVFAC Southwest AOR which includes California (95%); Arizona (2%); Nevada (2%); and the remainder of the U.S. (1%). The work to be performed provides for environmental remediation actions; removal actions; remedial design; expedited and emergency response actions; pilot and treatability studies; remedial systems operation and maintenance; corrective actions; and groundwater monitoring and other related activities associated with returning sites to safe and acceptable levels of contamination. The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months. Work is expected to be completed by August 2025. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance Navy (OM, N) contract funds in the amount of $189,037 are obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Future task orders will be primarily funded by OM, N funds. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website and18 proposals were received. These three contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contract. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Owego, New York, is awarded an $181,744,524 modification (P00016) to previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract N00019-19-C-0013. This modification provides for the production, delivery and integration of 24 Airborne Low Frequency Sonars (ALFS) for the government of India; eight ALFS for the Navy and seven ALFS for the government of Denmark, into MH-60R Seahawk aircraft. Work will be performed in Brest, France (77%); Portsmouth, Rhode Island (15%); and Owego, New York (8%), and is expected to be completed by December 2024. Fiscal 2018 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $37,280,928 and Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $144,463,596 will be obligated at time of award, $37,280,928 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Krempp Construction Inc.,* Jasper, Indiana, is awarded an $35,000,000 maximum amount, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for magazine and inert building maintenance and repairs at the Naval Support Activity Crane, Indiana. No task orders are being issued at this time. All work on this contract will be performed in Crane, Indiana. The work to be performed provides for magazine and inert building maintenance, repairs and construction services including but not limited to, concrete installation and removal, replacement of entire or portions of concrete docks, wing walls, steel doors, lead paint removal, replacement of dead lights, dome repair, grounding, seeding, mulching, removal and installation of bumper blocks, excavation, backfilling and incidental related work. The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months and work is expected to be completed by August 2025. Fiscal 2020 working capital (Army) contract funds in the amount of $5,000 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Future task orders will be primarily funded by working capital (Army) and working capital (Navy). This contract was competitively procured via the Contract Opportunities website and three proposals were received. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N40085-20-D-0080). Bell Textron Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $30,400,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee order (N00019-20-F-0162) against previously issued basic ordering agreement N00019-16-G-0012. This order provides non-recurring engineering and integrated logistics support to produce and qualify the structural improvement and electrical power upgrade solution for the UH-1Y Venom and AH-1Z Viper aircraft. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (70.4%); Grand Rapids, Michigan (26.3%); and Phoenix, Arizona (3.3%). This order provides for the integration of structural improvements and power upgrades, as well as the development of technical data and supporting documentation as it pertains to reliability, maintainability, damage limits and tolerances. Additionally, this order provides for the manufacture and delivery of two drives system accessory power quills, one modified combining gearbox, one test stand upgrade, as well as associated component qualification testing. Work is expected to be completed by December 2022. Fiscal 2018 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $17,503,510; fiscal 2019 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $8,659,045; and fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,237,445, will be obligated at time of award and $17,503,510 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Atlantic Diving Supply Inc., Virginia Beach, Virginia (M67854-20-D-5127); and Vizocom Government Services, El Cajon, California (M67854-20-D-5128) are awarded a $17,000,000 maximum amount, multiple award, firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the purchase of soft wall shelters and shelter repair parts. Work will be performed in Virginia Beach, Virginia; and El Cajon, California, and is expected to be completed by July 2025. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $151,483 will be obligated on the first delivery order immediately following contract award. Funds will expire the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was a competitively procured via beta.SAM.gov website and two offers were received. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Virginia, is the contracting agency. Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC, Northridge, California, is awarded a $12,190,753 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides depot sustainment support, guidance section and control section repair and common munitions built-in test/reprogramming equipment box 4 and 5 test and inspection in support of the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile weapon system for the Navy; the governments of Italy and Australia; and Foreign Military Sales customers. Work will be performed in Northridge, California (62%); Ridgecrest, California (31%); and Fusaro, Italy (7%). Work is expected to be completed by August 2023. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-20-D-0106). United States Marine Inc.,* Gulfport, Mississippi, is awarded a $7,572,364 firm-fixed-price delivery order to previously awarded an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract N00024-16-D-2215 in support of the government of the Azerbaijan for 15 9-meter Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Multi-Use EOD Response Craft. Work will be performed in Gulfport, Mississippi, and is expected to be completed by April 2022. Foreign Military Sales funding in the amount of $7,572,364 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. ARMY Aecom Technical Services Inc., Los Angeles, California (W91278-20-D-0041); Arcadis U.S. Inc., Highlands Ranch, Colorado (W91278-20-D-0042); Atkins North America Inc., Dallas, Texas (W91278-20-D-0043); Cardno GS Inc., Charlottesville, Virginia (W91278-20-D-0044); HDR Environmental Operations and Construction Inc., Englewood, Colorado (W91278-20-D-0045); Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., Dallas, Texas (W91278-20-D-0046); Leido Inc., Reston, Virginia (W91278-20-D-0047); WSP USA Solutions Inc., Washington, DC (W91278-20-D-0048); Tetra Tech Inc., Pasadena, California (W91278-20-D-0053); and Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Inc., Blue Bell, Pennsylvania (W91278-20-D-0055), will compete for each order of the $209,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for architect and engineering services to support the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers South Atlantic Division. Bids were solicited via the internet with 28 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 3, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile, Alabama, is the contracting activity. AHTNA Construction,* Anchorage, Alaska (W912BV-20-D-0039); APC Construction LLC,* Harvey, Louisiana (W912BV-20-D-0040); Gideon Contracting LLC,* San Antonio, Texas (W912BV-20-D-0041); Pontchartrain Partners LLC,* New Orleans, Louisiana (W912BV-20-D-0042); and Southwind Construction,* Edmond, Oklahoma (W912BV-20-D-0043), will compete for each order of the $49,500,000 firm-fixed-price contract for civil works construction projects in support of various military and civil works projects within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa District's boundaries. Bids were solicited via the internet with 15 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 3, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity. PHE-Baker JV2 LLC,* Rockville, Maryland (W91278-20-D-0050); Stell Environmental Enterprises Inc.,* Exton, Pennsylvania (W91278-20-D-0051); Swift River Vesar SB JV,* Anchorage, Alaska (W91278-20-D-0052); and Vernadero Group Inc.,* Phoenix, Arizona (W91278-20-D-0053), will compete for each order of the $40,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for architect and engineering services to support the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers South Atlantic Division Mobile District's planning and environmental division. Bids were solicited via the internet with 28 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 3, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile, Alabama, is the contracting activity. Radiant Mission Solutions Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, was awarded a $12,000,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide the Army Geospatial Center with remote ground terminal systems. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 4, 2023. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alexandria, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W5J9CQ-20-D-0006). Lockheed Martin Global Missiles and Fire Control, Orlando, Florida, was awarded a $9,958,534 modification (P00019) to contract W31P4Q-17-C-0173 for field support technicians. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 28, 2021. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE Martin Baker, Uxbridge, United Kingdom, has been awarded a maximum $150,000,000 five-year, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for T-6 and T-38 Sustainment. This contract provides for T-6 and T-38 replenishment spares. Work will be performed in Uxbridge, United Kingdom, and is expected to be completed Dec. 31, 2026. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2020 munitions procurement funds; NASA funds; Army funds; and Foreign Military Sales funds, in the total amount of $13,316, 027 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, is the contracting activity (FA8213-20-D-0004). DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY Northrup Grumman Systems Corp. (HDTRA1-20-C-0063) is being awarded a single-award services contract for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program. The mission of the CTR Program is to partner with willing countries to reduce threat from Weapons of Mass Destruction and related materials, technologies, facilities and expertise. The maximum dollar ceiling including the base period and option period for the contract is $24,775,693. Work will be performed at various locations throughout the world. The base period for this contract is two years with three one-year option periods. $4,000,000 has been incrementally funded for the base period and the contract will continue to be incrementally funded with current funding. This requirement was solicited as a sole-source award with supporting justification and approval document via solicitation HDTRA1-20-R-0015 and was approved by the Head of Contracting Activity. The government received one timely offer. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), CTR Contracting Office/DTRA/AL-ACC, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, is the contracting activity. *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2300395/source/GovDelivery/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The United States is developing new options for arms customers as a way to ensure allies and partners don't drop planned procurements as the world economy remains in shock from the impacts of COVID 19. Among the options, according to outgoing Defense Security Cooperation Agency head Lt. Gen. Charles Hooper, are allowing foreign countries to finance arms procurement through U.S. bank loans and altering existing payment schedules to stretch the costs over time. “The bottom line here is, we are willing to work with our allies and partners, when they raise the challenges that they have, to find ways for them to continue to buy American and to ensure that they can pay for the equipment along a payment schedule that reflects their own economic conditions,” Hooper said. During an exclusive exit interview with Defense News, Hooper declined to say which countries have already approached his agency about economic impact from the disease, but said that there are “certainly” customer nations that have reached out. “There are partners that, we're already seeing that they are having challenges. So we're standing ready to work with them. As soon as we can gain an appreciation and the understanding of the challenges, we can find ways to help them,” Hooper said. Hooper talked with Defense News two weeks before his Aug. 3 retirement. He is succeeded by Heidi Grant, the head of the Defense Security Technology Administration, a move that marks the first time a civilian has led the office since a previous agency was recognized into the current DSCA structure in 1998. The general expressed no concerns over that move, in large part, he said, because of Grant, a fixture in the international security cooperation world. Grant will have to hit the ground running, given the potential impact from COVID on the world economies. The good news, Hooper said, is that by March, DSCA had concluded that the global economy would be hurt by the disease and set up an interagency working group, called the Operations Planning Group, to study program-level impacts from global trends and develop solutions. The first step Hooper's team took was to revise the collection process of foreign payment in order to make them “a bit more flexible, to accommodate those partners that may be having some economic difficulties or may have reprioritized their budgets towards for example, economic recovery and away from defense.” Those options include delaying payments on planned procurements to future years, creating new payment plans for ongoing procurement efforts, and returning funds currently on deposit with the United States to the customer nations as well as new financing strategies. “One of the things we did is we are allowing our partners to draw on standby letters of credit from foreign banks operating in the United States, according to U.S. banking rules,” Hooper explained. “That offers a nation an opportunity to draw, for example, in that case, a standby letter of credit on one of their banks that operates in the United States, under United States banking rules, which ensures that there's no fiduciary risk to the United States.” DSCA officials had been considering adding such an option for some time, but the economic downturn pushed the agency to start offering it for customer nations, Hooper added. Lucie Béraud-Sudreau, director of the Arms and Military Expenditure Programme at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said that option sounds different from funding plans that have existed for some time in Europe, where specific entities in countries are responsible for guaranteeing arms-recipient states' loans thanks to the state treasury. “There are a number of economic factors globally, that we anticipate will likely have an impact on country's abilities to move forward,” Hooper said. “Obviously, energy prices are lower, and those countries all over the world that specialize in energy are going to see a fall in revenue. We see countries that, as a result of the pandemic, are having to shift funds from their defense budgets to more domestic missions like economic recovery and other things.” In addition to oil-reliant nations in the Middle East, Béraud-Sudreau said to watch the Pacific region, where “many countries have already decided to cut their military spending for this year, and planning decreases for 2021.” Indonesia, Thailand, South Korea, and the Philippines are among the nations that have already announced plans to cut defense spending, while Singapore is seeing delays in weapon deliveries due to supply chain issues. “If there are limited orders in 2020-2021, there will be repercussions later on, as these companies work on long-term projects. Hence the pressure, on both sides of the Atlantic, for the defense sector to be part of economic recovery packages and high levels of military expenditure,” she said. Over the course of his time at DSCA, Hooper oversaw almost 18,300 Foreign Military Sales actions, including 5,800 new agreements and various amendments and modifications to existing agreements, according to agency figures. He reduced three different surcharges on customers, saving customers millions of dollars as well. Also, timelines shrunk, with DSCA offering 50 percent of all new FMS cases that flow through the process to partner nations in 49 days or less by Hooper's exit. And while Hooper did not want to preview what weapon sales totals for fiscal 2020 will be, he did say that the United States remains “on a very positive trajectory... We remain the global partner of choice. And I'm very optimistic that we're going to continue to see positive trends in our foreign military sales this year and in the years to come.” https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/08/04/to-keep-weapon-sales-in-place-us-offers-new-options-for-payment/

By Aaron Gregg August 3, 2020 at 8:00 a.m. EDT A military equipment supplier that has been accused of fraudulently misrepresenting its size in order to benefit from privileges associated with being a small business has received a Paycheck Protection Program small business loan worth at least $2 million, public records show. Atlantic Diving Supply, a Virginia Beach, Va.-based reseller of specialized military gear, is the latest organization whose receipt of taxpayer-backed loans through the Paycheck Protection Program has raised questions about a program launched in early April to help sustain employment at small companies through the economic crisis. In late April, the Treasury Department retroactively clarified its rules after well-known restaurant chains, car dealerships and hotel companies reported receiving PPP loans. Several of them returned the loan funds following public uproar; others kept the money. The SBA has said it will audit all PPP loans above $2 million to determine whether the recipients were eligible. Representatives from the Small Business Administration and Atlantic Diving Supply did not comment on the company's receipt of SBA loans. The company's legal issues are detailed extensively in a report released Monday by the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight, known as POGO. A review of business data by POGO and the nonprofit Anti-Corruption Data Collective concluded that ADS was one of at least 27 PPP recipients estimated annual sales of more than $1 billion in 2019. Another 2,068 loan recipients cleared $100 million in sales last year, according to the analysis. Nick Schwellenbach, a senior investigator at POGO, questioned whether it's appropriate for ADS to receive small business coronavirus loans. Schwellenbach's investigation also found that two other firms allegedly tied to ADS ― including one that was named in a settlement with the Department of Justice ― separately received smaller PPP loans. “It's important that taxpayer funding reserved for genuine small businesses isn't siphoned off by companies that are not eligible,” Schwellenbach said. “As a top government contractor with revenues well over a billion dollars a year, it strains credibility that Atlantic Diving Supply is a real small business, especially given several recent settlements and law enforcement outcomes related to their alleged small business contracting fraud." Although it received a favorable ruling from the SBA as recently as November 2019, ADS's small business credentials have long been called into question. ADS started as a small, family-owned shop focused on the military diving community in Virginia Beach, which includes the Navy SEALs. It was transformed under the leadership of long-time chief executive Luke Hillier, winning its first major government contract in 2000. It grew quickly to meet an insatiable demand for military gear of all sorts in the years following 9/11. That fast growth became permanent business as the U.S. military presence in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere dragged on for nearly two decades. At one point, ADS filed papers to go public, something that is usually the purview of large corporations. In 2015 it purchased Theodore Wille International, a military food and equipment supplier with offices in seven countries. Its business has remained healthy despite recent troop reductions. ADS received more than $3 billion in unclassified government contract dollars in 2019, procurement records show. That's more than some well-known, objectively large government contractors, including Bechtel, KBR and CACI. ADS has already cleared $1 billion in federal contract receipts in 2020 despite the economic crisis. As it has grown ADS's continued status as a small business status has been critical to its participation in the Defense Department's Tailored Logistics Support, or TLS program, a lucrative military supply line that is largely restricted to SBA-approved small and disadvantaged businesses. In recent years, ADS's official headcount has teetered close to the SBA's 500-employee limit for small-company designation, and the company has fought off repeated challenges to its size status. If ADS were declared “no longer small,” it would not only be ineligible for SBA coronavirus assistance, but would also be forbidden from competing on small business set-aside contracts that drive its business. In 2017, ADS settled federal allegations that it used a network of allegedly-affiliated companies to rig bids and fraudulently misrepresent its size. The Justice Department called the $16 million settlement “one of the largest recoveries involving alleged fraud in connection with small business contracting eligibility.” Hillier, who has moved on from the CEO role but remained the company's chairman as of July 20, according to a company filing, separately paid $20 million to settle federal allegations that he “violated the False Claims Act by fraudulently obtaining federal set-aside contracts reserved for small businesses that his company was ineligible to receive.” The settlements resulted from a Qui Tam lawsuit brought by whistleblowers. Two of the alleged affiliate businesses — Karda Systems and SEK Solutions — were named in a related case in which Ron Villanueva, a former state lawmaker from Virginia Beach, pleaded guilty to federal charges that he conspired to defraud the United States. Villanueva admitted that he and a friend pretended both companies were run by people who qualified for particular grants and drafted a misleading letter to the SBA that mischaracterized the degree to which one firm relied on other suppliers. ADS briefly lost its small business designation as a result of those allegations when a Defense Department contracting officer, concerned by ADS's settlement, requested a formal SBA review of the company's size status and its degree of affiliation with other companies named in the whistleblower lawsuit, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post. That SBA review determined that ADS was “other than small,” which temporarily blocked the company from bidding on set-aside contracts. But ADS successfully appealed that ruling, which was reversed because it relied on old financial records. Today the company continues to receive federal contracts designated for small firms. Because the settlements arrived at by ADS and Hillier did not include a determination of liability, the company has been allowed to keep benefiting from the SBA's various small business programs. Its most recent size determination, which found it to be a small business, was finalized in November 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/03/defense-contractor-with-billions-sales-got-millions-pandemic-loans-intended-small-businesses

U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND GATR Technologies, Huntsville, Alabama, a subsidiary of Cubic Corp., was awarded a $172,000,000 maximum ceiling, single-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quality, firm-fixed-price contract (H92401-20-D-0003) with five one-year ordering periods for the procurement of 1.2 meter and 2.4 meter Ground Antenna Transmit and Receive (GATR) inflatable satellite communications terminals and ancillary equipment in support of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). Fiscal 2020 procurements funds in the amount of $5,000 are being obligated at the time of award. The contract will be funded with operations and maintenance funds, as well as procurement funds, from multiple fiscal years over the life of the contract. The majority of the work will be performed in Huntsville and is expected to be completed by August 2025. The contract is a Phase III Small Business Innovation Research award authorized under Title 10, U.S. Code 2304(b)(2) or Title 41, U.S. Code 253(b)(2). USSOCOM, Tampa, Florida, is the contracting activity. ARMY Grand River Aseptic Manufacturing Inc.,* Grand Rapids, Michigan, was awarded a $160,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for domestic aseptic fill and finish manufacturing capacity for critical vaccines and therapeutics in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed in Grand Rapids, Michigan, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 2, 2021. Fiscal 2020 Health and Human Services funds in the amount of $160,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W911QY-20-C-0086). Aspen Construction Co.,* Hackensack, Minnesota, was awarded an $8,354,252 contract for Phase II redevelopment site construction in Martin, Kentucky. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work will be performed in Martin, Kentucky, with an estimated completion date of March 3, 2023. Fiscal 2020 civil construction funds in the amount of $8,354,252 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington, West Virginia is the contracting activity (W91237-20-C-0007). NAVY Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Melbourne, Florida, is awarded a $34,712,366 cost-plus-fixed-fee order (N00019-20-F-0088) against previously-issued basic ordering agreement N00019-20-G-0005. This order provides non-recurring engineering for requirements development and systems engineering technical reviews and certification planning; initial requirements change requests; procurement strategy source selection package; performance based navigation certification plan; initial system safety; cyber; program protection and exportability analysis; integrated master schedule; and other associated technical deliverables in support of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye cockpit redesign. Work will be performed in Melbourne, Florida (99.76%); and Patuxent River, Maryland (0.24%), and is expected to be completed by January 2022. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $5,785,394 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Koman Construction LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska, is awarded a $10,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract with firm-fixed priced task orders that will be issued for the construction and repairs at the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland. The total cumulative contract value is not to exceed $10,000,000 over the duration of the contract. Work will be performed in Annapolis, Maryland, and the contract completion date is July 2021. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; funds will be obligated on individual task orders as they are issued. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command Washington, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N40080-20-D-0019). AIR FORCE Raytheon Co., Tewksbury, Massachusetts, has been awarded a $33,735,474, predominantly cost-plus-incentive-firm modification (P00068) to contract FA8730-15-C-0002 for National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System (NASAMS) integration and alternate Air Defense Operations Center (ADOC) installation. The contract modification is for the procurement, installation, integration and testing of NASAMS into the ADOC and alternate ADOC. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, Massachusetts, and is expected to be completed October 2021. This modification involves Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to Qatar. FMS funds in the in the full amount are obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $346,498,681. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, is the contracting activity. ROCCOR LLC, Longmont, Colorado, has been awarded a $15,998,168 cost-plus-fixed-fee modification (P00003) to contract FA9453-20-C-0003 for structurally combined aperture and reticulated locking expandable truss. This modification provides for the exercise of the option where ROCCOR will develop, build and test a flight quality demonstration unit for the Air Force Research Laboratory. The system will consist of a scaled and/or truncated system that provides guidance for the structural feasibility of a full scale meter operational system. Work will be performed in Longmont, Colorado, and is expected to be completed Aug. 3, 2022. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $4,945,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $16,998,086. Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, is the contracting activity. Aptima Inc., Woburn, Massachusetts, has been awarded a $9,900,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for research and development. The purpose of this research and development contract is operational experimentation, technology refinement and operational alignment related to improving and personalizing individual, team and larger group instructional training methods and better blending of live, virtual and constructive environments in and across operational contexts. Work will primarily be performed at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, and is expected to be completed Nov. 3, 2025. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and one offer was received. Fiscal 2020, research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $1,508,274 will be obligated at the time of award. Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8650-20-D-6243). *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2298575/source/GovDelivery/

By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The coronavirus pandemic has caused another delay for the U.S. Army's plagued M113 replacement program, which has struggled with manufacturing problems as the BAE Systems-made Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle entered low-rate initial production, according to the company's second quarter fiscal 2020 earnings briefing released last week. The company had to delay delivery of the first LRIP vehicles by roughly four to six months, moving delivery from March to July. But as BAE prepared to move ahead on delivery, the pandemic hit, bringing with it another delay of roughly a month, which pushed the vehicles' delivery date to August. The AMPV program entered LRIP in January 2019, but the program office indicated last year that delivery of the first vehicles would be delayed by two months and the completion of production qualification testing would be delayed by seven months due to tooling and assembly line challenges at BAE's facility in York, Pennsylvania. Because of the issues, the Army's AMPV budget request in FY21 showed the program took a hit. The service indicated it would buy 32 vehicles instead of the 143 planned for the fiscal year, and the program's budget was cut from $445 million to $193 million. The Army and BAE developed “a production approach that would allow us to incorporate efficiencies during LRIP that modernize manufacturing and increase the overall throughput of the program,” Amanda Niswonger, a BAE spokeswoman, told Defense News in an Aug. 3 statement. “This included installing new technology and processes such as robotic welding, digital X-ray, and advanced machining. And we worked closely with the Army to update and refine manufacturing processes to incorporate the most modern weld and inspection technology,” she said. “These changes had an impact on our delivery timeline which was not reflected in the original delivery schedule, but continues to meet the Army's fielding schedule.” The service and BAE had formalized the schedule change just as COVID-19 hit the U.S., which affected a large number of manufacturing facilities and supply chains globally. “We have worked tirelessly to mitigate the impacts from COVID-19 with our employees, supply network, and customer base to keep our manufacturing sites operational and continue to receive parts as needed,” Niswonger said. “Unfortunately we could not overcome all the challenges and our first delivery has slipped one month.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/08/03/pandemic-causes-latest-delay-in-us-armys-m113-replacement-program/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — After years of working various jobs related to security cooperation, Lt. Gen. Charles Hooper took over the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency in August 2017. It was an appointment that coincided with a major push by the Trump administration to increase weapon sales as an economic driver. Three years later, as he gets ready to retire, Hooper sat down with Defense News for an exclusive exit interview. This interview was edited for length and clarity. You came in as DSCA director in 2017, when the Trump administration was making a concerted push to increase arms sales abroad. Has that push been successful? Certainly I think the answer to that question is: “Yes, absolutely.” When I assumed responsibility at DSCA, we saw a convergence of three authorities that helped to create conditions that would help us to move forward and to elevate security cooperation. The first one was the fiscal 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, which [gave me] responsibilities in the Department of Defense to reform security cooperation, in ways that would make it more efficient and effective. The second one was the revision and the updating of the administration's arms transfer policies. And the third was the National Defense Strategy with which has three lines of effort, the second of which was strengthen alliances and attract new partners. So those three authorities created by convergence — what I call a perfect storm of authorities — and conditions to allow us to elevate and push for security cooperation and foreign military sales. And I made it my mission to take advantage of those conditions to move it forward. You have talked often about the need to both trim time and cost for partners and allies buying American systems. What are some highlights for you? In 2018, we lowered the admin surcharge rate from 3.5 to 3.2 percent. And since the new rates have gone into effect, our partners have saved $250 million on FMS cases. Next, we reduced the transportation rates in 2018. And since that reduction has gone into effect, since Aug. 15, 2018, our partners saved about $15 million. Then this year, we reduced the FMS contract administration surcharge from 1.2 percent to 1 percent. Although we don't have enough data as of yet to determine actual savings, we estimate that our allies and partners will save about 17 percent on contract administration over the life of each FMS case, which averages about seven or eight years. That perfect storm of authorities allowed us to move forward with many of the initiatives that we've been able to accomplish over my tenure as DSCA director. And then the Defense Security Cooperation University. I'm very proud of that, and we were able to bring that online in less than two years: The establishment of a civilian career field for security cooperation specialists, so that we are able to train and educate a cadre of people specifically focused on security cooperation, and foreign military sales through their mid-career and all the way to their capstone years. We all know one big FMS case can skew an entire year's numbers, but do you feel confident that enough has been done to ensure FMS sales will continue to grow? Although we tell everyone what the total value was of the cases that were implemented in that year, we think a three-year running average is a much more accurate measure of the success of FMS over time. And if you look at the three-year running average, over the past three years we're actually up around 16 percent, I believe. So the answer to your question is, yes, I think that we're still on a very positive trajectory. And I think that's the result of many of the changes that have taken place over the last three years that were made possible by the authorities that we were given. So for example, we looked at those surcharge [changes], we revised our financial collection policies to align collections with the actual anticipated billing requirements. And so by decreasing those early collections, foreign partners will experience less financial strain, aligning FMS procurement with fiscal realities. And we've also introduced new flexible financing options for our allies and partners to fit their own unique national budget and fiscal requirements. I'm very optimistic that we're going to continue to see positive trends in our foreign military sales this year, and in the years to come. The DSCA job is moving from a three-star role to a civilian job, with Heidi Grant taking over. You've often talked about the benefit of having years of relationships, going back to your younger officer days, with officers from other countries. Do you see any downside with the position being civilian? What's most important about this position is the person coming into it, and Heidi Grant has all the qualifications that you would need to be an exceptional DSCA director. She has time in combatant commands; of course time on the Air Force secretary's [staff]; her time as the director of the Defense Technology Security Administration. So it is the right person, with the right skill set, to be an upstanding director of DSCA and, frankly, I'm excited to see all the accomplishments that she's going to have. There is speculation that a potential Biden administration could roll back some of the arms control changes made under the Trump administration. If that were to happen, what would be the impact? I'm not going to hypothesize here about what ifs. What I can say is that we're clearly on a very positive trajectory as a result of the three steps that have taken place. And I think that the results that have come forward — I mean, the results that we've seen today are a reflection of the NDAA, the conventional arms transfer policies and National Defense Strategy. Future administrations will of course consider things as they will consider them. And I wouldn't want to speculate on that. But I think the progress we've made today speaks very, very strongly toward the effectiveness of the measures in place. We hear a lot about Russia and China looking at foreign arms sales as a way to exert influence around the globe. Are they successful in pushing the U.S. out of certain markets? Both of our main strategic competitors are mounting challenges to the United States, and I think we see that in a number of places all over the world. But I would say that the proper characterization of this is that they are challenging us. They are competing with us. Certainly they've mounted challenges around the world and in providing goods and services that are not quite the quality of the United States, trying to replace the United States as the partner of choice. Whether it's been successful or not, I think that we have recognized that they've mounted this challenge and we've taken some of the steps that I've articulated for you here that we've done to ensure that we remain the partner of choice and that we complicate their efforts to compete with us. In addition to providing partners with the hardware, our approach ensures that we strengthen these institutions — logistics, doctrine, infrastructure, institutional support, financial management — so that they can learn how to pay the people who will actually fix the equipment. And this is what makes our approach so unique. And this is why we will win this great power competition. Our values set us apart from the other great power competitors. You were the defense attache to the embassy in Beijing for two years, and obviously have a view on China's efforts from your current spot. How do you asses the country's defense export capacity? Certainly, the Chinese are going to look across the spectrum, but certainly they're looking in areas where they think they can challenge us. We know, of course, that the Chinese have marketed UAVs and other things. So they'll look for market niches in areas where they think they can be competitive with the United States. They have economic reasons for doing so, as well as strategic reasons for doing so. But once again, their approach stops at the point of sale. And this is the inherent weakness in their approach and the inherent strength in our approach. Do you think UAVs will be the main area that China targets? No. I used that solely as one example. We've seen attempts by the Chinese to compete across the spectrum, from small arms, small missile sets and others all the way up to more sophisticated equipment such as UAVs and others. We've seen a comprehensive effort by the Chinese to compete across the spectrum of defense articles and services. And I think we've seen a comprehensive effort on their part to try and market systems that replicate U.S. systems and U.S. capabilities across the spectrum, from small arms through artillery systems and other things. So I think we have to be vigilant across the spectrum of defense articles and services to where the Chinese are probing. I think the Chinese will generally try to press forward in areas where they sense that the U.S. position is perhaps a bit weaker, and they will push forward in those areas. And I think rather than having a strategy of competing in any particular sector of defense articles and services, I think that they're more interested in trying to compete across the spectrum, where what they perceive to be potential areas where they might be able to make some advances, and moving forward in those. In what areas is the U.S. potentially vulnerable, and are those where the U.S. needs to increase sales? I don't look at it that way. Defense exports are driven by a rapidly evolving security environment and emerging threats. And so we can't really predict this system or that system, or this category of systems. That said, we know what our military leaders are saying: that [the capabilities] they need in the field to ensure our strategic and operational edge [is what] our allies and partners will want as we move into the more modern areas of conflict. In the past, there was a lag between when the United States would introduce a system and when our allies and partners would ask for us to export it, and those days are behind us. We're in a world where interoperability is the key to success, and we cannot afford to have delays in when we introduce new technology and when we consider exporting them. Now, there are inherent challenges here, between conducting the cost-benefit analysis of risk versus gain, but we have the talent and the ability to rapidly assess these, and to move forward and provide our partners their defense articles and services that they want and that they need, and that will make them better allies and partners for the United States. So rather than predict any particular segment, I would say that the steps that we're taking to improve our overall approach will ensure that whatever the evolution of systems and the evolution of threats is, we will be able to respond and react quickly, and work with our allies and partners to provide them those defense articles and services in a timely fashion. Both the commercial and defense industries are investing heavily in new technologies, including artificial intelligence, which can be tricky to export. How does this work going forward? That's a great question. And I'll tell you, early this year I took a visit out to Silicon Valley and Stanford, and had an opportunity to talk to some of the people out there. Ever since I came back from that trip, I've been thinking about this question and related questions. And, to be honest with you, I think we've yet to determine — we know that this will be one of the principal challenges for security cooperation moving forward. We absolutely know this. And I'm confident that we're thinking deeply about this because I've had this discussion with my colleagues and others. I don't have any solutions for you right now. But I think we've all come to the conclusion that the rapid evolution of technology is going to require us to conduct risk assessments and cost-benefit analysis more quickly, without sacrificing the due diligence necessary to determine the relative cost and benefits of whether or not we want to move forward with [exporting] a certain technology. We all recognize that we have a challenge to come together and determine how we will move forward in the security cooperation realm to address space, cyber, artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies. Should there be a hard and fast rule for whether technology like AI can be exported, given its nature? Listen, never ever forget that security cooperation is a policy function at its core. That's why DSCA resides in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. And policy is a process of adjudicating on a case-by-case basis, based upon a number of economic, diplomatic and political factors, as well as the right steps to take to secure the security of the United States. Just as security cooperation now is a case-by-case consideration of a number of factors, I don't see why, as the technology evolves, it would be any different. All of this, everything we do, is on a case-by-case basis because our national security is predicated on a comprehensive assessment of the situation as it exists, the factors impacted on that situation and the ramifications of a decision for the security of the United States. https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/2020/08/03/us-weapon-sales-boss-talks-china-arms-exports-and-his-agencys-future/

By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — American firm Raytheon Technologies and Israeli-based Rafael Advanced Defense Systems have formed a joint venture to build the Iron Dome missile defense system in the United States, the companies announced Aug. 3. Under the name Raytheon Rafael Area Protection Systems, the partnership is being set up to build a first-ever Iron Dome “all-up-round” facility stateside. The facility will build Iron Dome systems, the Tamir interceptor and launcher, and the SkyHunter missile (the U.S. version of Tamir), according to a Rafael-issued statement. Tamir and SkyHunter are capable of intercepting cruise missiles, unmanned aircraft, rockets, artillery, mortars and other threats. The partnership expects to finalize a site location before the end of the year, the statement said. “This will be the first Iron Dome all-up-round facility outside of Israel, and it will help the U.S. Department of Defense and allies across the globe obtain the system for defense of their service members and critical infrastructure,” Sam Deneke, vice president of Raytheon Missiles & Defense's land warfare and air defense business. Rafael and Raytheon have had a long partnership developing and manufacturing Iron Dome. The system is widely fielded in Israel and, according to Rafael, is “the world's most-used system with more than 2,500 operational intercepts and a success rate exceeding 90 percent.” The U.S. Army has chosen Iron Dome as an interim capability to counter cruise missiles while it continues to develop a future Indirect Fires Protection Capability, or IFPC, to counter those threats as well as enemy drones, rockets, artillery and mortars. Congress mandated the service buy two batteries to cover urgent cruise missile defense gaps, and another set of two if the Army didn't come up with a way forward for its enduring IFPC. While the Army has said it will not buy all-up Iron Dome systems as part of the IFPC program, officials developing the capability are looking at the possibility of incorporating parts of Iron Dome in the final solution. The Army plans to field Iron Dome by the end of the year, but it will still take time to train troops on the system before deployment. Some lawmakers are urging the Army to rapidly deploy the systems to the Middle East, arguing U.S. and coalition forces there need the protection from Iran and its proxies. In and analysis conducted by the Army, it was concluded the Iron Dome launcher and the Tamir interceptor's performances are “highly reliant” on their own battle management systems and multimission radars. The analysis also determined that the launcher and interceptor would be a viable option for an enduring IFPC solution as long as it worked on the Army's future Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense Battle Command System, or IBCS, which is under development, according to a report sent to Congress earlier this year. But Gen. Mike Murray, the head of Army Futures Command, which is in charge of the service's modernization efforts, testified before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year that the Army has struggled to integrate Iron Dome into its IBCS system, mostly because the Israeli government has refused to provide critical source code needed for the integration. The Tamir interceptor's performance data proves its effectiveness when used within the Iron Dome system, but since data is lacking, it's uncertain how well it would perform when linked through IBCS to the Sentinel radar, which is used to alert air defense weapons of threats, the report noted. The service will conduct a shoot-off of best available options for integration into an enduring IFPC solution in the third quarter of fiscal 2021. The U.S. Marine Corps is also evaluating the system. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/08/03/raytheon-and-rafael-to-build-iron-dome-in-us/