Nouvelles

By: Jorge Domecq The European Union's strategic autonomy in defense is on everybody's lips since it was put forward as a long-term goal in the EU's 2016 Global Strategy. Yet, it remains unclear what it means in practice and how it would impact NATO and our trans-Atlantic relationship. This has led to a mostly academic debate about the concept's end goal, fueled by doubts and fears stoked from both sides of the pond. However, the risk of too much abstract talk is that we get distracted from the concrete action needed to bring us closer to, what in my view, is a laudable objective. It is time we approach strategic autonomy more positively and look at it as a constructive project — not something directed against NATO, the United States or anybody else. It's about putting EU member states in a position where they can autonomously develop, operate, modify and maintain the full spectrum of defense capabilities they need. It's about giving the EU the option and tools — political, operational, technological, industrial — to take military action whenever needed, either together with partners (notably NATO) wherever possible, or separately if necessary. Instead of undermining trans-Atlantic trust and security, as some fear, a more robust and autonomous European defense will ultimately lead to a stronger NATO. It is in the interest of our trans-Atlantic partners to have a more capable and efficient EU in defense. The U.S. wants Europe to take on its fair share of burden in defense? A stronger and more credible European pillar in NATO will contribute to that. The EU's ambition, as stated in the 2016 Global Strategy, is to reach “an appropriate level of strategic autonomy” in order to “ensure Europe's ability to safeguard security within and beyond its borders.” However, it takes more than ambition and political will to get there. Strategic autonomy presupposes at least two things. First, that our member states' armed forces have at their disposal the full spectrum of military assets that, taken together, could enable the EU to take military action, and on its own if necessary. Second, that the functionality and usability of these assets is not restricted by any technological or political caveats controlled by non-European actors. Today, admittedly, this is not the case yet. Hence the need to invest more, and better, in defense. The good news is that we are moving in the right direction, both in terms of “more” and “better.” But more spending does not automatically guarantee more efficiency or interoperability. To achieve that, we must invest better through cooperation: from joint priority setting to the development, procurement and deployment of cutting-edge defense capabilities. Prioritization is the foundation stone on which all subsequent steps must build. It is already in place: the Capability Development Plan, developed through the European Defence Agency and revised in 2018, lists member states' joint priorities for the years to come. One of them targets cross-domain capabilities that can contribute to strategic autonomy. Using the priorities as a compass will ensure efforts and funding are spent on assets that are really needed and contribute to making the EU more efficient in military terms. The Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, another new tool to boost joint capability planning and development, will help keep the focus on agreed priorities. To achieve strategic autonomy, the EU must also be able to master cutting-edge technologies and their integration into defense products. That's why it is so crucial that it acquires, maintains and develops the technological knowledge and industrial manufacturing skills required to produce the defense equipment it needs. Those key strategic activities have to be preserved and strengthened if we want to turn the goal of strategic autonomy into reality. EDA, which is the EU hub for defense innovation and collaborative capability development, has for years been involved in this critical work. The agency identifies critical, overarching strategic research areas and other key strategic activities underpinning the EU's strategic autonomy. The aim is to identify, and then support, must-have technologies and industrial capacities, without which strategic autonomy isn't possible. Artificial intelligence, micro- and nanotechnologies, or unmanned and autonomous systems are only a few examples of such critical disruptive technologies that are reshaping defense. It's through concrete action — not political and academic rhetoric — that we can make progress toward strategic autonomy. At the same time, we must ensure coherence and avoid any unnecessary duplication with NATO, which will continue to be the cornerstone of collective defense for its members. EU strategic autonomy isn't necessarily just around the corner, but it is attainable. The closer we get to it and the more additional defense cooperation it triggers, the better. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/head-of-european-defence-agency-eu-strategic-autonomy-is-an-opportunity-not-a-threat

By: Ellen Lord The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment is rapidly transitioning from the former OUSD Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to an organization focused on enabling our services to use innovative business practices tailored to their needs. AT&L, the enterprise's former moniker, was a congressionally mandated organizational change for the purpose of streamlining business processes to speed capability delivery to the war fighter and maximize value for the taxpayer. On Sept. 4, 2018, we had our first official day as A&S. Though Department of Defense leadership has changed, our mission to support the war fighter through acquisition innovation remains constant. Over the past year, our team has worked to refine the A&S strategy using the National Defense Strategy as our guidebook. Six goals, each with nested sub-priorities, emerged from our senior leadership planning sessions: enable innovative acquisition approaches that deliver war-fighting capability at the speed of relevance; build a safe, secure and resilient defense-industrial base (commercial and organic); ensure safe and resilient DoD installations; increase weapon system mission capability while reducing operating cost; promote acquisition and sustainment initiatives with key international partners; recruit, develop and retain a diverse acquisition and sustainment workforce. A few initiatives that highlight some of these efforts are outlined below. Cyber Model Maturity Certification, or CMMC, is a strategic solution to make security foundational to DoD acquisition. Currently, the metaphorical “mark” is not being met — most defense supply chain partners are not in compliance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology 800-171. CMMC is a DoD certification process that measures a supply chain partner's ability to protect sensitive information through an independent third-party certification. The process will be managed by an accreditation body, which will certify, train, accredit these third parties and issue certificates. Recently, version V.06 of the model was released for review with a final version ready in January to integrate (in a phased-type approach starting fall 2020), as a mandate into all federal contracts. The Adaptive Acquisition Framework, our most transformational acquisition policy change in decades, is set to deploy at the end of this year. It is new in the sense that it directs using the minimum amount of process to enable program managers to acquire a capability versus previous models, which dictated all those things you might not do from a vast array of process steps. Essentially, this framework cuts superfluous bureaucratic process by empowering program teams to choose a pathway based on the specific product or service being acquired. It emphasizes critical thinking and “creative compliance.” A&S recently appointed an intellectual property leader to help develop DoD guidance and training, as well as to provide assistance across the DoD associated with acquisition, licensing and management of the newly published policy on IP (DoD 5010.44). PMs must proactively address protection of data rights at the inception of each program. Concurrently, we must continue our defense against cybersecurity threats that target U.S. IP by ensuring network security. Lastly, we are proactively strengthening the DoD supply chain against adversaries' creative market disruptions in the global marketplace. As such, we have formed a trusted capital, or TC, ecosystem where innovative companies connect with trusted investors. Though we will not promise business, we are creating an ecosystem in technology areas where we need more trusted sources for hardware, software and services to support our war fighter. Drone Venture Day, held on Nov. 13, 2019, represented the inaugural event in a series of TC opportunities to develop domestic manufacturing capabilities by growing and strengthening our defense-industrial base. These are a few examples of how A&S is reinventing DoD acquisition to simply and cost-effectively reduce the process of equipping our military with cutting-edge capability at the speed of relevance. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/pentagon-acquisition-boss-adapting-to-support-the-war-fighter

By: Mike Griffin Nov. 9 marked the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, an event followed within a couple of years by the reunification of Germany, the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the freeing of the Eastern European vassal states. Francis Fukuyama thought we had reached “the end of history,” that global great power conflict was at its end and that the ascendancy of the Western liberal concept was the permanent future. “We won the Cold War” — it says so in all the history books. Winning is great, except for the part where the losers retreat, rethink, retrain and try again; while the winner thinks the race is won once and for all — which is why the United States now finds itself running from behind in certain aspects of today's great power rivalry. How did we get here, and what should we do about it? It turned out that Fukuyama was optimistic; Russia and China never accepted Western ideals as future standards. Their adherence to and promulgation of authoritarian values and behaviors was, at most, slowed by the ascendancy of the Western alliance after World War II. Russia's resurgence and China's rise offer the sobering reminder that individual freedom, property rights, free trade in open markets, transparency and accountability in government, the rule of law, and the sovereignty of nations are not universally accepted as foundational principles for human society. They are privileges to be purchased by every generation, at a high price in blood and treasure. Where possible, the United States has paid with treasure rather than with blood. This principle guided our Cold War policies. Knowing that we could not outnumber our adversaries, we invested to prevail technologically and sustained that discipline through eight presidential administrations. President Ronald Reagan won the Cold War by doubling down on the policies of the seven presidents who preceded him. Premier Mikhail Gorbachev lost because the Soviet Union could not keep up. What did we buy with those investments? First was the nuclear triad: our land-based intercontinental missiles, fleet ballistic missile submarines and strategic bombers. That force left no option for an adversary to surprise the U.S. and its allies with a decapitating first strike because the certainty of complete annihilation following such a strike was always there. Equally critical was the ability to prevail against a larger force in a conventional fight. The U.S. seized the advantage with precision, with a precise conventional strike, enabled by pattern-matching seekers. With a global positioning system to guide force projection to the right place, stealth technology to hide our aircraft from enemy radar, encrypted high-rate communications to enable superior command and control, electronic warfare to deny that advantage to our enemies, unmanned aerial vehicles for both reconnaissance and force projection, and the uncontested dominance of the space domain to tie it all together, we prevailed. These capabilities were transformational when first deployed, beyond the reach of any other society on Earth. But many are now available commercially, and others, such as electronic warfare and stealth, are now widely understood. Some potentially transformative technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, 5G, and microelectronics are driven not by defense but by commercial interests, and not solely by our domestic industrial base. In certain areas with no present commercial applications, such as hypersonic flight, we are simply behind. And in space — once the uncontested linchpin of the U.S. war-fighting advantage — we are challenged by Russian and Chinese determination, and capability, to deny that advantage. In brief, the United States no longer possesses the unquestioned technical superiority to dominate a future fight. At this juncture, we have not undertaken concerted defense modernization in more than a generation, and therefore have made marginal improvements to existing capabilities. These will not affect the outcome of a conflict for which our adversaries, knowing how we fight, have been preparing for a generation. We know what we need to do. The National Defense Strategy outlines the investments we must pursue: a revitalized nuclear triad, microelectronics, cybersecurity, biotechnology, 5G, space, hypersonics, artificial intelligence, directed energy, autonomous systems, networked communications, missile defense and quantum science, among others. Superiority in these technologies, woven into a war-fighting architecture that challenges our adversaries rather than reacting to them, is the key to deterring or winning future conflicts. The taxpayers have been generous with the defense budget, but it is insufficient to purchase more legacy systems while also creating the future force. So we must decide: What near-term risks are we willing to take, and what current systems are we willing to let go, so that we can invest in capabilities that will impose costs on our adversaries and deter them from starting a fight because they know they cannot win? This is the critical national security challenge of our time. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/pentagon-rd-boss-the-challenge-of-our-time

By: Sen. Jim Inhofe Since World War II, the American people have believed our military has had the best of everything, but the technological superiority that kept us 20 years ahead of our competitors has rapidly diminished. In some cases, we're already behind. By 2030, unless we pursue “urgent change at significant scale,” as former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis put it, it's likely the U.S. will face an enemy with superior weapons, superior equipment and superior capabilities. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our strategic competition with China. China used to just steal our technology. Now, through heavy investment, they are improving it. The result? China is outpacing the U.S. in key areas like hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies — not to mention conventional capabilities. China isn't the only one. Technological development is accelerating across the globe, expanding to more actors and changing the very nature of war. We can't afford to let our advantage erode further. It is up to the Department of Defense and Congress to make sure that the defense-industrial base becomes, as the National Defense Strategy demands, an “unmatched 21st century National Security Innovation Base.” If we want to “sustain security and solvency,” we need to consider wholesale change to industry culture and its interface with the Department of Defense, shed outdated management processes, and reimagine a resilient supply chain that mitigates 21st century risks. This essay is part of the Defense News 2020 Outlook project. Click here for more. This begins with software, which is foundational to military capability. The DoD and its traditional hardware-dominant industry partners have been behind on software in almost every way — talent, tools, development and delivery processes. Software innovation has failed in countless DoD programs, including the Ford-class carrier, the F-35′s Autonomic Logistics Information System and the GPS next-generation operational control system. Instead of taking the Pentagon for granted as an endless source of cash flow, partners must refocus their attention on delivering secure capability that actually works. Next, the Department of Defense needs to continue to expand capacity — prioritizing speed of delivery and adapting its systems to maximize value and output. For too long we have been slow to expand our stockpiles of fifth-generation weapons required to fight peer adversaries. The second production line for JASSM-ER cruise missiles is a good start toward building the capacity needed to retain advantages that will make any enemy think twice before attacking. We must do the same for other fifth-generation weapons, including air-to-air missiles. Shipbuilding, including aircraft carriers, surface ships, submarines and our logistics fleet, is another area where our capacity is severely limited. The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy, which recently surpassed ours in size, is on track to reach 400 ships in 2025 and is nearly self-sufficient for all components. Size of the fleet isn't a sole consideration. We've focused on ensuring the capability of our fleet remains unmatched and bolstering suppliers of critical components, but we must also improve the construction performance of lead ships in new classes to maintain and build upon our capability advantage. The last thing we want is a fair fight. Innovation is best done at the subsystem level through a rigorous engineering-based process centered on building knowledge through full-scale prototypes, which can then inform ship design. We are eager to work with the Navy to identify and fund more of these prototypes, which will serve as the building blocks of the future fleet. We also must accelerate innovation. Recent defense authorization legislation encourages the DoD to streamline acquisition, take a business-minded approach to contracting, and tap into nontraditional suppliers and public-private partnerships. This must continue. Dilapidated testing infrastructure is holding us back from catching up to our enemies. Just look at hypersonic weapons: Beijing is parading around dozens of its newest weapons, and we have yet to build one. The DoD has looked to Silicon Valley, but we are competing with Chinese influence there as well, and the Pentagon has often proven an impossible customer due to its antiquated bureaucracy. Any technological improvements will be meaningless if vulnerable to being infiltrated or stolen. Recent legislation continues support for the DoD as it assesses and mitigates risks to its supply chains posed by adversaries. Both the government and contractors need to cooperate on and use modern verification tools to identify trusted suppliers and manufacturers, as well as fix vulnerabilities. To make these tools useful, the DoD must first establish a working digital model of its suppliers. Lastly, while we must continue to invest in the domestic, organic industrial base, it's important to remember that we can't take on China and Russia alone — which is why the National Defense Strategy emphasizes our network of allies and partners. We must remove unnecessary barriers to industrial cooperation that degrade our collective competitive edge. We do not have to make a false choice between investing domestically and in our allies — we can do both. Under our National Technology and Industrial Base partnership with Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, we can develop a more diverse, resilient industrial base, secure our supply chains, and become a “five eyes for defense procurement.” It's in our best interest to ensure our allies can leverage our technological advantages and we can leverage theirs. Without a strong national security innovation base, the Pentagon cannot implement the National Defense Strategy. Congress' job is to put the appropriate, tailored policy in place and provide sufficient, predictable resources to help the industrial base meet these challenges. Together, we can harness the power of American innovation to ensure that we are able to win the wars of the future. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/sasc-chairman-we-must-build-the-national-security-innovation-base-our-defense-strategy-requires

By: Jens Stoltenberg On June 6, 2019, we marked the 75th anniversary of the D-Day landings. This was a major turning point in the Second World War, leading to the liberation of Europe. And it was a colossal feat for the tens of thousands of Allied troops, many of whom paid the ultimate price for our freedom. Less than 5 years later, NATO was born. An extraordinary idea, driven by the visionary leadership of our 12 founding nations and by the deep desire of our citizens to live in peace and freedom. NATO leaders will gather Dec. 3-4 in London, the very first home of NATO's headquarters, at a critical time for our trans-Atlantic security. This is an opportunity to reflect on everything we have achieved over seven decades. In that time, allies in Europe and North America have built an unprecedented area of peace and prosperity. Our ironclad commitment to protect and defend one another guarantees freedom and democracy for our almost 1 billion citizens, making NATO the most successful alliance in history. But beyond marking those 70 years, leaders will look to the challenges that still lie ahead. Today we face the greatest security threats in a generation — from a more assertive Russia to instability across the Middle East and North Africa, and from cyber and hybrid attacks to the ever-present terrorist threat. At the same time, the global balance of power is shifting around us. And the rapid development of new technology promises to transform our societies — and security — as radically as the first industrial revolution. So we must be ready to respond to any threat from any direction. And that is exactly what NATO is doing. Since Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, NATO allies have implemented the largest reinforcement of our collective defense since the Cold War. We have strengthened our presence in the east of our alliance, from the Baltic to the Black Sea regions. And we have increased the size and readiness of our forces. This year we declared two new NATO commands operational: one in Ulm in Germany to improve military mobility in Europe, and one in Norfolk in the United States to ensure trans-Atlantic lines of communication. And we are delivering on our new NATO Readiness Initiative to field 30 air squadrons, 30 combat vessels and 30 land battalions within 30 days. As well as guaranteeing our security today, NATO is preparing for the challenges of tomorrow on land, at sea, in the air, in cyberspace and in space. NATO recently updated the core standards for civilian telecommunications, including 5G, in order to improve the resilience of our networks. And this year allies adopted NATO's first-ever overarching space policy. Finally, all allies are stepping up their investment in our security, not only in cash but also with new capabilities and contributions to NATO missions and operations. European allies and Canada have increased defense spending for five years in a row. By the end of next year they will have added an extra $100 billion to their defense budgets since 2016. More allies are on track to meet their pledge to spend 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense by 2024. But we have to do more because our freedom does not come for free. And in a more unpredictable world, we need to continue to keep our citizens safe. In London, NATO leaders will continue to strengthen our collective defense, modernize our alliance and invest in our shared security. And while NATO's 70th anniversary gives us cause for celebration, this is not the time for complacency. We must never take the trans-Atlantic bond for granted. We must never take freedom and democracy for granted. We must defend them every day. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/nato-secretary-general-alliances-70th-a-time-for-celebration-but-not-for-complacency

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, California, Maryland, has been awarded a maximum $218,749,892 modification (P00006) exercising the first one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPRPA1-20-F-CD01) with four one-year option periods for performance based logistics and engineering support for the V-22 platform. This is a firm-fixed-price requirements contract. Locations of performance are Texas and Pennsylvania, with a Nov. 30, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Foreign Military Sales to Japan. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2021 Air Force, U.S. Special Operations Command, Navy and FMS appropriated funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. NAVY Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, San Diego, California, is awarded a $74,726,993 cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for design agent engineering services for networks and network user systems on operational landing platform/dock (LPD)-17 class amphibious transport dock ships. Work will be performed in San Diego, California (80%); Norfolk, Virginia (15%); Mayport, Florida (5%) and is expected to be complete by December 2024. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance, (Navy) funding in the amount of $689,680 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c) (1), only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, as implemented by Part 6.302-1 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. This contract was issued on a sole-source basis to Raytheon Integrated Defense Services. This requirement is for design agent engineering and technical services for the overall management, development, testing, troubleshooting, repair, configuration, maintenance and fleet sustainment of fielded networks and associated network user systems/clients on operational LPD 17-class amphibious transport dock ships. These services are in support of Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division, Code 52, which is responsible for the lifecycle in-service engineering agent support of mission critical interior communications data networks. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity (N64498-20-D-0001). W.R. Systems, Fairfax, Virginia, is awarded a modification to a previously awarded (N65236-19-D-8001) indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee, with provisions for firm-fixed-price task orders, performance based contract. This single award contract (SAC) is currently in its first year with a Feb. 15, 2020, contract expiration date. This modification increases the basic contract estimated ceiling by $61,999,996, and changes the cumulative estimated value of the contract from $49,999,995, to $111,999,992. This SAC is for position, navigation and timing and geospatial information services support to naval ships and shore facilities. Work will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia, and is expected to be completed by February 2020. This SAC was previously procured competitively by full and open competition via the Naval Information Warfare Systems Command e-commerce central website and the Federal Business Opportunities website. This sole-source contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1) and only one responsible source (Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 6.302-1). The Naval Information Warfare Center, Charleston, South Carolina, is the contracting activity. General Dynamics/Electric Boat, Groton, Connecticut (N66604-20-D-D001); Huntington Ingalls/Newport News Shipbuilding, Newport News, Virginia (N66604-20-D-D002); and Oceaneering International Inc., Chesapeake, Virginia (N66604-20-D-D003) are being awarded a $49,921,536 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) multiple-award contract to fabricate submarine safety/Level 1 (SUBSAFE/L1) hardware, and provide technical and engineering services. For these base ID/IQ five-year contracts, funding will not be obligated at time of award; the $1,000 minimum guarantee will be executed on each awardee's initial task order. Work will be performed at the contractors' locations and minimally at government locations, and is expected to be completed by November 2024. This multiple-award contract was competitively procured with three acceptable offers received via the Federal Business Opportunities website. This requirement is to provide SUBSAFE/L1 (or related) hardware, systems engineering, technical analyses, mechanical and electrical design, manufacturing, installation, test and evaluation, maintenance and repair services required to support existing and future fleet programs. In accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1), only a limited number of responsible sources and no other supplies or services will satisfy the needs of the agency. This tasking was limited to those activities qualified to perform SUBSAFE work per the Naval Sea Systems Command Notice 5000, fiscal 2019 Navy working capital funds. The Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division Newport, Newport, Rhode Island, is the contracting activity. Washington State Community College District #3, Bremerton, Washington, is awarded a not-to-exceed $18,000,000 five-year indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for educational services in support of the apprenticeship, helper and after-hours program, which pays for tuition, lab fees, math fees, tutoring services and assessment fees in an effort to provide customers with quality, timely and cost efficient maintenance, modernization, and technical and logistics support by maintaining a highly trained and skilled workforce. These services are in support of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Facility in Bremerton, Washington. This contract does not include options. Work will be performed in Bremerton, Washington, and is expected to be complete by December 2024. No funding will be obligated at the time of award. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations Part 15, this was a competitive procurement with one offer received via the Federal Business Opportunities website. Operations and maintenance (Navy) funding will be obligated at the task order level prior to each semester. This is a commercial service contract that was competed in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 15. Only one proposal by the incumbent was received. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington, is the contracting activity (N4523A20D1300). ARMY General Dynamics Mission Systems, Taunton, Massachusetts, was awarded a $9,164,584 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to procure contractor field service representative support services for the warfighter. One bid was solicited with one bid received. Work will be performed in Taunton, Massachusetts, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 30, 2020. Fiscal 2019 other procurement, Army funds in the amount of $6,363,737 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W15P7T-20-F-0004). AIR FORCE Tunista Services LLC, Honolulu, Hawaii, has been awarded a $7,362,228 firm-fixed-priced contract modification (P00006) to previously awarded contract FA4855-18-C-0001 for continuation of operations, maintenance and support services at Melrose Air Force Range. The contract modification provides for the exercise of option year two procured under the basic contract. Work will be performed at Melrose, New Mexico, and work is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2020. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $22,676,639. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $7,362,228 are being obligated at the time of award. The 27th Special Operations Contracting Squadron, Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico, is the contracting activity. https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2029052/source/GovDelivery/

By: Martin Banks BRUSSELS – The Dutch chief of defense says it would be “stupid” if the UK did not continue to be closely involved in EU-funded defense projects even when it is no longer a member of the bloc. But British future involvement in EU-led initiatives such as the European Defence Fund and PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation) remains unclear, with EU member states yet to decide on a legal framework for third-party participation. With Brexit, the UK will technically become an outsider to the European Union's push for greater defense autonomy. That means London will no longer take part in EU decision-making or operational entities, and any British contribution to an EU operation will be subject to the rules that apply to third countries. Adm. Rob Bauer, chief of defense in The Netherlands, told Defense News he believes it is “imperative” that the UK remains “very closely” involved in such projects. Speaking at the sidelines of the annual European Defence Agency conference in Brussels on Thursday, Bauer said, “Remember, from a military point of view, the UK, even after Brexit, will still be a member of NATO and part of Europe. It is leaving the EU, not Europe. If the focus in Europe is on security then the UK should be part of that. To do otherwise would be stupid.” The PESCO initiative aims to develop and deploy forces at the EU level. Nearly 50 projects have been unveiled to date with the aim of pushing member states to work more closely together in the area of security and defense. So far, €13 billion has been allocated to the EDF which seeks to promote cross-border collaboration on defense research and technology projects, plus another €6.5 billion in the pipeline to upgrade roads, bridges, rail lines, ports and airports for military mobility, and €16 billion on space programs. Formal rules on third-party access to PESCO projects and the EDF are still being decided. Discussions are continuing at EU member state level, and no final decision is expected until the UK formally exits the EU, officials here said. London's departure has been delayed for the third time until Jan. 31, 2020. Bauer said, “I have spoken to the Brits about this and they have told me how difficult these discussions have been and continue to be. It is clear that agreement on access is certainly not a done deal.” “But we need to be pragmatic about this and continue to work together in the future.” His comments were broadly echoed by Lieutenant General Franz Leitgeb, Austria's Military Representative to the EU and NATO, another attendee at the EDA summit who told Defense News, “After Brexit, the UK will have third-party status, so third-party partnership rules will apply regarding its contribution to and participation in EU-funded projects like PESCO. “We still need to decide what precisely this means in the UK case but, whatever transpires, the UK has to realise this is a two-way street. That means that if the UK and its defense industry is to have access to EU-funded schemes and projects it has to contribute to these.” “Whatever happens we're going to need the current close relations on defense between the two sides to continue.” Further comment came from Benedikt Zimmer, state secretary at the German defense ministry, who took part in a session on PESCO and the EDF and said, “The more open cooperation is after Brexit, the better.” In a keynote address, Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, warned that UK involvement in EU defense and security would only become clearer once discussions start, probably at the start of 2020, on a political agreement between the two sides. Barnier told the packed audience, comprising senior military officials and personnel, that reaching agreement will be an “enormous challenge,” adding, “I do not want to interfere in the current UK election campaign but I am sure the Brits will still have an appetite for continued cooperation in the defense field. But, even so, they have to realize it will no longer be business as normal. I hope that UK defense companies, providing the rules are met, will still participate in European defense. We have the tools to make it happen but we still need to find a new framework for future cooperation.” More than 50 non-EU states have participated in Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) operations since its first mission in 2003, including four regional powers – namely Turkey, Russia, Brazil and South Africa. The official British position on security and defense is ambitious about the possible scope of the UK-EU relationship post-Brexit, talking about a “deep and special partnership” that would go “beyond existing third country arrangements.” However, little in the recent past suggests the UK would seek much CSDP involvement once no longer a member: the UK has not been the most enthusiastic supporter of the EU's defense agenda thus far, and it's questionable if this would change after Brexit. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/11/29/britains-defense-ties-to-the-eu-are-still-up-in-the-air-post-brexit/

28 November 2019 On November 28th 2019, Naval Group participates to the Defence & Security exhibition held at Rotterdam AHOY. During this event, Naval Group shares its vision on the development of the submarine community in the Netherlands. The project will generate a workload of 15 million man/hours and is expected to create over 2000 jobs in the Netherlands. In view of the Walrus capability replacement programme, Naval Group demonstrates their will to commit to a full submarine IP and knowledge-sharing with the Dutch knowledge centers and industry. This will empower the Netherlands submarine community to take part in the future design and build phase, thus reinforcing the existing knowledge and leading to an autonomous maintenance and upgrade of the submarine. Naval Group has successfully adopted this methodology in Australia, which is leading to the development of a game-changing capacity with a Barracuda-family submarine which offers outstanding acoustic superiority as well as expeditionary capabilities. Naval Group's vision of the future submarine project. “What is at stake in this project is not industrial workload for Naval Group in France-as our submarines factories will be quite busy along the next decades-but the European cooperation within the maritime industry of our two countries. Beyond the industrial workload which will be transferred to the Netherlands, Naval Group is totally committed to support the Netherlands in remaining fully autonomous on operational, strategical and technological aspects on the long- term basis.” declared Hervé Guillou during NEDS. With all the complexities and long lead-time involved in a submarine project, it is crucial to determine how strategic knowledge and expertise is shared, used and maintained over a period which exceeds thirty years. Defining all the required technical and operational trade-offs based on a value-mapping process through an in-depth dialogue with the client is key to reach the best possible submarine platform. For this purpose, Naval Group has released its plan for the future submarine design and production ecosystem at NEDS. One of the key features of Naval Group's vision to organize transfer IP rights and design authority to the Netherlands, which effectively will deliver to local industry and knowledge centers an in-depth understanding and mastering of the selected design. The submarine project will see the reinforcement of a submarine community whose contribution and expertise will grow over the years when key upgrades or changes are implemented on the chosen design. In this process, Naval Group has already qualified 30 new companies to be Tier 1 and 2 suppliers for this programme and other international programmes. In February 2019, Naval Group announced the partnership with Royal IHC. The two companies brought their complementary experience and expertise in designing and manufacturing complex maritime and defense systems together in order to offer the best submarine to the Netherlands and fully comply with the Defense Industrial Strategy (DIS). In continuity to this important first step, Naval Group now unveils one of its strategic partnerships: the teaming agreement with Contour, whose team possesses a comprehensive experience in providing simulation and digital training tools for the Netherlands MOD and notably the Royal Netherlands Army. Their expertise will allow modern simulation tools to be deployed to ease the crew's training period before the actual submarine is sent on trials. Using the Dutch world-class maritime ecosystem, Naval Group has identified more than 30 partners in the country partners of excellence which can provide critical systems and components for submarine and surface ships programmes alike. The submarine community will remain a center of excellence where the best Dutch expertise will be sustained.This ambitious industrial cooperation program is expected to generate over 2000 jobs, which represent 15 million man-hours, for the Netherlands economic growth during the design and build phase. Most of this capabilities will then be used for decades for through-life support. “Naval Group deliberately involves local partners in its international activities. The purpose of these agreements is to pool a Dutch submarine community for the Netherlands would Naval Group be selected for the Walrus replacement program. Key to a successful cooperation is a know-why methodology and a true IP and know-how repository to build-up and contribute that unique expertise, which will support in the long-term both the Netherlands' but also international submarine programmes” declared Mark van Rooij, Naval Group Netherlands CEO. A long-term commitment towards the Dutch industry The Dutch ecosystem has long been a partner with Naval Group on several major programmes; since 2013, a volume of 200 million euros contracts has been awarded to Dutch industrial and knowledge partners covering both French and international programmes. At NEDS, Naval Group deepens existing bonds with the Dutch maritime and defense industry, building and expanding existing relationships with more than 70 companies and knowledge institutes. The latest Naval Group surface ship (FDI) benefits from key Dutch technologies. Rubber Design has developed and supplied silencing elastic mounts to help reduce the ship's acoustic signature, whilst MAFO's door systems have been conceived as Radar Cross Signature reduction devices. Naval Group Netherlands, the Dutch subsidiary established in 2018 has played a significant role in the reinforcement of these long-term relationships. Sliedrecht-based company DBR has just been selected to supply key propulsion equipment on Naval Group's latest international ship programme. The company, well-known in the maritime industry, will for the first time enter the naval military market with this contract. For the Belgium-Dutch Mine Counter Measure Vessels program, several Dutch actors are about to be consulted. For instance, Dutch knowledge center Marin has already been selected by Naval Group in 2019 to test and improve its latest hull design, delivering improved hydrodynamic capabilities along with better energy-efficiency. For this program, other domains will be opened to Dutch competitors such as IPMS (Integrated platform management system), IBNS (Integrated Bridge Navigation System), radar, ventilation, firecontrol, speedboats and handling systems. Press contact Klara Nadaradjane Tel. +33 6 45 03 11 92 priya-klara.nadaradjane@naval-group.com View source version on Naval Group : https://www.naval-group.com/en/news/naval-group-shares-its-industrial-vision-with-the-submarine-community-and-broadens-strategic-partnerships-at-neds/

NAVY United Technologies Corp., Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, Connecticut, is awarded a $521,996,409 undefinitized contract modification (P00070) to a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee and fixed-price-incentive-firm-target contract (N00019-17-C-0010). This modification provides performance based logistics sustainment in support of the F-35 Lightning II F135 propulsion system for the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, non-Department of Defense (DoD) participants and foreign military sales (FMS) customers. Work will be performed in East Hartford, Connecticut (73%); Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (18%); Camari, Italy (3%); Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (2%); Edwards Air Force Base, California (1%); Hill Air Force Base, Utah (1%); Luke Air Force Base, Arizona (1%); and Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina (1%), and is expected to be completed in November 2020. Fiscal 2020 operation and maintenance (Air Force) funds for $72,261,440 will be obligated at time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This modification combines purchases for the Air Force ($179,272,654; 34%); Marine Corps ($134,605,633; 26%); Navy ($29,758,385; 6%); non-DoD participants ($124,483,008; 24%), and FMS customers ($53,876,729; 10%) under the FMS Program. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Kings Bay Support Services LLC, Alexandria, Virginia, is awarded a $20,049,858 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity modification for the exercise of the option to extend services for base operating support services at Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia. The work to be performed provides for all labor, facilities management, supervision, tools, materials, equipment, incidental engineering, environmental services and transportation to effectively execute base operating support services. After award of this option, the total cumulative contract value will be $342,241,061. Work will be performed in Kings Bay, Georgia. This option period is from December 2019 to May 2020. No funds will be obligated at time of award. Fiscal 2020 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds for $16,928,444 for recurring work will be obligated on individual task orders issued during the option period. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southeast, Jacksonville, Florida, is the contracting activity (N69450-11-D-7578). ARMY Seaside Engineering & Surveying LLC,* Baker, Florida (W9126G-20-D-6003); and Lowe Engineers LLC,* Robert, Louisiana (W9126G-20-D-6004) will compete for each order of the $240,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for professional land survey architect-engineer in support of the Southwestern Division Department of Homeland Security Border Infrastructure Program. Bids were solicited via the internet with 12 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 26, 2024. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock, Arkansas, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Orlando, Florida, was awarded a $134,707,194 modification (P00094) to contract W31P4Q-15-C-0102 for procurement of the Joint-Air-to-Ground Missiles. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 28, 2023. Fiscal 2019 procurement of ammunition, Army funds in the amount of $134,707,194 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity. Ames Construction Inc., Burnsville, Minnesota, was awarded a $58,784,850 firm-fixed-price contract for plant, labor, materials to construct a gated water control structure, dam walls, a vehicle service bridge, stilling basin, pre-formed scour hole, approach apron, a slope protection slab and approach walls. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in Fargo, North Dakota, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 16, 2024. Fiscal 2019 civil construction funds in the amount of $58,784,850 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is the contracting activity (W912ES-20-C-0001). Technica LLC,* Charleston, South Carolina, was awarded a $17,880,934 modification (0004BK) to contract W52P1J-12-G-0018 for logistics support services, maintenance, transportation, and supply support. Work will be performed in El Paso, Texas, with an estimated completion date of June 2, 2020. Fiscal 2020 overseas contingency operations transfer and operation and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of $10,477,200 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Orlando, Florida, was awarded a $7,563,160 modification (P00002) to contract W52P1J-19-F-0533 for Modernized Target Acquisition Designation Sight Pilot Night Vision Sensor Systems, subcomponent production and technical services for the Apache Attack Helicopter. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 1, 2023. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE KPMG LLP, McLean, Virginia, is being awarded a labor-hour contract option with a maximum value of $41,643,963 for audit services of the Army general fund and working capital fund financial statements. Work will be performed in McLean, Virginia, with an expected completion date of Nov. 30, 2020. This contract is the result of a competitive acquisition for which one quote was received. The modification brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $131,613,957 from $89,969,994. Fiscal 2020 Army operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $41,643,963 are being obligated at the time of the award. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Contract Services Directorate, Columbus, Ohio, is the contracting activity (HQ0423-17-F-0010). DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Apteryx Inc. Akron, Ohio, has been awarded a maximum $20,900,000 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for hospital equipment and accessories for the Defense Logistics Agency electronic catalog. This was a competitive acquisition with 101 responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Ohio, with a Nov. 26, 2024, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2025 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2DH-20-D-0025). R.A. Miller Industries Inc.,** Grand Haven, Michigan, has been awarded a maximum $8,737,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract for antennas and an antenna element. This was a competitive acquisition with one offer received. This is a three-year base contract with two one-year option periods. Location of performance is Michigan, with a Nov. 26, 2022, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio (SPE7MX20D0008). LVI, Pendergrass, Georgia, has been awarded an $8,696,995 modification (P00036) exercising the fourth one-year option of a three-year base contract (SPM1C1-14-C-0002) with four, one-year option periods for warehousing, storage, logistics and distribution functions. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment contract. Location of performance is Georgia, with a Dec. 1, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Army and Defense Logistics Agency. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2021 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. *Small Business **Woman-Owned Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2028834/source/GovDelivery/