Joint Statement by FBI and CISA on PRC Activity Targeting Telecommunications | CISA

Sur le même sujet

• 

  12 février 2024 | International, Naval

  Rebellion to supply software for Navy’s secretive Project Overmatch

  Project Overmatch is the Navy’s clandestine contribution to Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control, or CJADC2.

• 

  19 novembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - November 18, 2020

  ARMY Hydrogeologic Inc.,* Reston, Virginia (W9128F-21-D-0006); Cape Environmental Management Inc.,* Norcross, Georgia (W9128F-21-D-0007); Environmental Chemical Corp.,* Burlingame, California (W9128F-21-D-0008); Bhate Environmental Associates Inc.,* Birmingham, Alabama (W9128F-21-D-0009); Bay West-Ahtna JV LLC,* Saint Paul, Minnesota (W9128F-21-D-0010); Bristol Environmental Remediation Services LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (W9128F-21-D-0011); Kemron Environmental Services Inc.,* Atlanta, Georgia (W9128F-21-D-0012); and North Wind-CDM JV LLC,* Idaho Falls, Idaho (W9128F-21-D-0013), will compete for each order of the $176,250,000 hybrid (cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price) contract for environmental remediation projects. Bids were solicited via the internet with 21 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 17, 2025. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., Poway, California, was awarded a $93,293,554 hybrid (cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price) contract for research, development, test and evaluation of artificial intelligence for the smart sensor prototype unmanned aerial platform. Bids were solicited via the internet with 999 received. Work will be performed in Poway, California, with an estimated completion date of March 2, 2023. Fiscal 2021 research, development, test and evaluation (Army) funds in the amount of $13,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W911QX-21-C-0001). B.L. Harbert International LLC, Birmingham, Alabama, was awarded a $46,500,000 firm-fixed-price contract for repair and replacement of existing taxiway pavements, shoulders, drainage, signage, lighting systems, duct banks, paint and markings and temporary taxiways. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 11, 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $46,500,000 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W912DR-21-C-0002). DEFENSE HEALTH AGENCY Logistics Health Inc., La Crosse, Wisconsin, was awarded a $162,000,000 modification to their current indefinite-delivery bridge contract (HT0011-19-D-0002). This award, titled “Reserve Health Readiness Program,” provides health readiness support services to the military service components to meet medical and dental standards essential in maintaining a deployable force. This extension to the current bridge contract will permit time to complete evaluations and award of a competitive follow-on to this requirement. Services include immunizations, physical examinations, periodic health assessments, post-deployment health reassessments, mental health assessments, dental examinations, dental treatment, laboratory services, and other services as required to satisfy military service component health readiness needs. Services are delivered at military service component designated sites during group events, through the contractor's call center, and within an integrated network. The work will be performed in every U.S. state, U.S. territory, the District of Columbia, and Germany with period of performance from Dec. 1, 2020, to Nov. 30, 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds will be obligated on task orders issued under this award. This contract was awarded on an other than full and open competition basis; pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1). The Defense Health Agency, Falls Church, Virginia, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY The Bell Boeing Joint Program Office, California, Maryland, has been awarded a maximum $36,546,991 firm-fixed-price modification (P00009) to three-year delivery order SPE4AX-18-D-9433 against base contract SPRPA1-17-D-009U to extend the period of performance for delivery of V-22 spare consumable and depot-level repairable parts. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. Locations of performance are Maryland, Texas, and Pennsylvania, with a May 10, 2023, performance completion date. Using military services are Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. NAVY Sikorsky, a Lockheed Martin Co., Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded a $16,441,085 modification (P00001) to firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost reimbursable order N00019-20-F-0024 against previously issued basic ordering agreement N00019-19-G-0029. This modification provides for fiscal 2021 special progressive aircraft rework sustainment efforts in support of the VH-3D/VH-60N executive helicopter. Specifically, this modification provides security, project engineering, integrated logistics, material, sustainment engineering, training and program support. Work will be performed in Stratford, Connecticut (88%); and Quantico, Virginia (12%), and is expected to be completed in November 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $16,441,085 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY GE Research, Niskayuna, New York, has been awarded a $14,313,300 cost contract, including options, for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Atmospheric Water Extraction (AWE) program. In Phase 1 of the program, GE Research proposes to develop and select promising water extraction materials. The key objective will be to fabricate an Air2Water prototype device for the production of potable water that will be powered by readily-available fuel and builds directly from pioneering sorbent materials for water harvesting from desert air. Work will be performed in Niskayuna, New York (77%); Berkeley, California (18%); Chicago, Illinois (3%); and Mobile, Alabama (2%), with an estimated completion date for Phase 1 of November 2022. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $858,975 are being obligated at time of award. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (HR001121C0020). AIR FORCE Tunista Services LLC, Honolulu, Hawaii, has been awarded a $7,606,147, firm-fixed-price modification (P00011) to contract FA4855-18-C-0001 for continuation of operations, maintenance and support services at Melrose Air Force Range, New Mexico. The contract modification provides for the exercise of Option Year Three procured under the basic contract. Work is expected to be completed Nov. 30, 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds in the full amount are being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $29,954,509. The 27th Special Operations Contracting Squadron, Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico, is the contracting activity. CORRECTION: The multiple award contract announced on Sept. 10, 2020, for a not-to-exceed amount of $95,000,000 for maintenance, repair and minor construction work at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada; Creech AFB, Nevada; and Nevada Test and Training Range, Nevada, also includes Valwest Construction, Gilbert, Arizona (FA4861-21-D-0003), as an awardee. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2420033/source/GovDelivery/

• 

  29 octobre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Does major joint military procurement really work in the Baltics?

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — On paper, the Baltic nations appear to have closely aligned defense modernization needs that make the joint procurement of advanced military equipment a no-brainer. After all, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania have historically shared national interests, are currently facing a similar threat from Russia and each have relatively small defense budgets. Joint procurement would drive down costs for large defense articles by allowing the smaller Baltic nations to buy in greater numbers. It would also allow the countries to share maintenance responsibilities, which would save money. And it would drive greater interoperability in countering an adversary's simultaneous attack all three nations. But then there's the reality of the situation. “I think there are many misperceptions on Baltic integration,” Janis Garisons, state secretary for the Latvian Ministry of Defence, told Defense News during a September visit to Washington. “I think this is a little bit of a wrong perception that there is a lot of added value in those common procurements.” Garisons, the No. 2 civilian at the ministry, said he is not against joint procurement efforts, but believes such initiatives work best when purchase ammunition, small arms, or chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear defense equipment — purchases already in the works among the European neighbors. But for major defense articles, the legal and logsitical challenges of coordinating a trilateral contract, combined with a lack of major savings, means it might not be worth it. “We do common procurements when it's possible, but I have to say, I haven't seen much savings on those because even if you combine all three numbers, it's not like the U.S. buying together with the U.K. — thousands and thousands. It is still numbers that are very small,” Garisons said. Lithuania's vice minister for defense, Giedrimas Jeglinskas, agrees that joint procurement of major defense articles may never be feasible among the three Baltic nations. “Joint procurement, multinational procurement — I don't think it exists that much in the world,” Jeglinskas told Defense News during a visit to Washington in October. “Most of the programs out there are joint development. But when you talk about something like three-country procurement, it has been really hard for us to achieve.” Like Garisons, Jeglinskas said smaller transactions have proven successful, specifically the joint procurement of mines with Estonia and gas masks with Latvia. But even then, “the syncing of the budgets and the procurement plans for each country [is difficult]. Say we are ready to buy gas masks this year, but the Estonians may buy them two years ahead. And that's just the small things.” Kusti Salm, the director of the Estonian government's Centre for Defence Investment, told Defense News that joint procurement among the Baltic states is challenging given the need to sync up defense budget cycles, noting that “the amounts we procure are small and do not always bring us the economies of scale.” While the idea of joint procurement is popular, there is a “genuine disconnect” between the idea and the reality, according to Chris Skaluba, a former Pentagon official who is now the director of the Atlantic Council's Transatlantic Security Initiative. Skaluba points to two reasons for this: The first is that while the Baltic states are concerned about Russia, both Latvia and Estonia are more directly concerned with the threat of “little green men” — a reference to masked soldiers in green uniforms who led Russia-backed separatists in the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine. The concern steps from the high populations of ethnic Russians in Latvia and Estonia. In response, those two countries are focuses on homeland defense, whereas Lithuania is focused on resisting a direct Russian invasion — an approach that requires a different set of equipment. Secondly, America's famously convoluted security cooperation process makes trilateral procurement from the Western ally tricky. Small purchases of ammunition or night vision goggles are doable, but the more advanced the gear, the higher the costs and the stricter the regulations. Throw in three separate national budget cycles and the process “can be daunting and just not worth the squeeze when you're through with all that work,” Skaluba said. “Do I think all sides could be more determined and find creative ways to do this? I do. I think maybe something that is technically difficult but not super expensive, like unmanned aerial vehicles, would be a good test case,” Skaluba said. “But I'm also sympathetic that because of how regulations work, the congressional requirements, having to work through [the U.S. Department of] State and the Pentagon, any major purchase is difficult. Trying to do that times three is three times as hard.” National priorities The question of maintenance is another issue for joint procurement in Garisons' eyes. The idea of having shared maintenance facilities spread across the area — for example, one tank depot in Lithuania and one helicopter depot in Estonia to service all three Baltic nations — creates vulnerabilities during an invasion, he said. “I would be very cautious assuming that we will be able to freely import, to bring everything, all supplies needed. Our goal is to ensure that all the basic things, like small arms, ammunition, the maintenance of vehicles, the maintenance of major equipment — that can be done locally,” he said. “For operational reasons we can't have shared maintenance because during wartime we will not be able to bring vehicles, for example, to any other state. “It complicates common procurements because it is not so easy to agree on joint procurements, where the maintenance base will be held and other issues. For us, I think of paramount importance to have a maintenance base.” Ultimately, Latvian officials and their regional counterparts are making informed decisions about their respective country's security, Skaluba said. “These are all really serious governments. They really feel a threat. They know precisely how they think this would work in a crisis situation and what they need to have available to them,” he said. “At a strategic level, of course it [joint procurement] makes sense, but if you're a politician or defense planner or minister of defense, your first responsibility is to defend your country. And of course you want to make sure you have resources available to you.” While skeptical of joint procurement efforts, Garisons was supportive of joint education and training across the region, calling Baltic military cooperation “as strong as any you can find.” He noted that the three nations share a high-level military education center, the Baltic Defence College in Tartu, Estonia. Estonia's Salm considers interoperability among the Baltic states critical to successful joint procurement efforts. “Defense in Estonia cannot be separated from defense in Latvia and Lithuania, as we form a single region from the military point of view,” he said. One example of that raised by both Salm and Garisons is the creation of NATO's Multinational Division North, a headquarters operation organized by Latvia, Estonia and Denmark. Garisons called it “the first attempt when we will have joint command structure, which will be able also to feed into the NATO command structure.” The command-and-control aspect of joint operations is vital, he added. A pair of major exercises in Latvia toward the end of the year will serve as test beds for the NATO division, which is expected to reach initial operational capability in early 2020. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/10/28/does-major-joint-military-procurement-really-work-in-the-baltics/