Nouvelles

By: Shawn Snow Recon and infantry Marines only have been zooming around in the Corps' Polaris MRZR all-terrain tactical vehicles for a couple years now, but the Marines already are on the hunt for a replacement. According to a request for information posted by the Corps on Friday, the Marines want a new ultralight tactical vehicle with characteristics strikingly familiar to the MRZR. The Corps wants a highly mobile all-terrain light tactical vehicle capable of whisking wounded Marines off the battlefield, easily configurable to support a host of missions like electronic warfare, and internally transportable by CH-53 and MV-22. The Corps already has this capability in the Polaris MRZR. The Marines already have doled out nearly 248 of the all-terrain vehicles to infantry and recon Marines over the past couple years. The first batch of MRZRs were issued to the grunts in early 2017. But the life expectancy of the MRZR, or utility task vehicle, is only five years: “Therefore the Marine Corps is initiating research efforts to see what industry will have available that may meet the Corps' needs,” Manny Pacheco, a spokesman for PEO Land Systems, told Marine Corps Times in an emailed statement. The Corps has been innovative with its tactical dune buggy, even mounting a counter drone system on a pair of MRZRs. That system, known as the light Marine air defense integrated system, or LMADIS, uses electronic warfare to take down drones. An LMADIS system is currently deployed with the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The current MRZR fielded by the Corps is capable of hauling nearly 1,500 pounds of supplies, which alleviates some of the burden carried by infantry Marines. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/11/13/the-corps-is-already-looking-for-a-new-light-tactical-vehicle

Loren Thompson In the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, production of heavy armored vehicles like tanks and troop carriers almost became a lost art in America. The Army and Marine Corps repeatedly deferred development of new vehicles, leaving industry with little work besides upgrading combat systems developed during the Reagan years. As a result, there are only two integrated manufacturing sites left where new heavy vehicles can be produced -- one for tanks, the other for almost everything else. I wrote about the nation's sole surviving tank plant on November 2. Today's piece is about the plant where almost everything else is produced -- the sprawling BAE Systems manufacturing complex at York, Pennsylvania. BAE Systems is a contributor to my think tank and a consulting client, so I have a fairly detailed understanding of what goes on there. At the moment, York is in the midst of a renaissance, having recently won orders for a new Army troop carrier and a new Marine amphibious vehicle. It is also upgrading the Army's Bradley fighting vehicle and Paladin self-propelled howitzer. The company is investing heavily in new machining systems and other capital equipment to sustain an expected surge in output, and is hiring hundreds of workers who must be trained to a high level of proficiency in specialized skills such as the welding of aluminum armor. This is all good news for the local economy, but to a large degree what BAE Systems is doing at York involves building back capacity that was lost during the Obama years. BAE Systems has been highly successful at booking new business in the armored-vehicle segment of the military market as Army and Marine leaders have become increasingly worried about their reliance on Cold War combat vehicles. An industrial-base study released by the White House in September stated that over 80% of new armored-vehicle production for the two services will occur at York. The study speculated that all the new work might stress the production capabilities of the site. However, that issue was thoroughly analyzed by the Army before it awarded recent contracts for Paladin howitzer upgrades and a new Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle to replace Vietnam-era troop carriers in its armored brigades. The Army found no significant capacity constraints so long as BAE makes suitable investments and hires skilled workers. The findings of the Army's industrial-base analysis are not reflected in the White House report. Here are a few reasons why capacity concerns are overblown. First, although York is the final assembly point for diverse armored vehicles, it is only one part of a nationwide manufacturing network on which BAE Systems relies to produce combat vehicles. The company operates other manufacturing facilities in Alabama, Oklahoma and South Carolina, including one of the nation's largest integrated forges for producing track components. It also works closely with Army depots (as does the tank plant), and has a supplier network containing over a thousand industrial partners. Second, preparation of the White House report predated release of some details concerning how BAE Systems plans to invest in robotic welding, advanced machining technology and other cutting-edge capital equipment. The combination of these investments and programs with schools near manufacturing sites to train the necessary workforce will provide BAE Systems with more production capacity than it requires to address projected levels of demand. Third, the current level of production capacity at York is the inevitable result of uneven demand from U.S. military customers over the last decade. The White House report identifies lack of stable funding as a key factor explaining the fragility of the military supplier base, but fails to explicitly make the connection in explaining why York is facilitized to its current capacity level. BAE Systems is now investing heavily to meet future demand, but it is understandably wary about building capacity much beyond what it expects to need. The latter factor is critical in understanding why there are only two sites left in America capable of integrating heavy armored vehicles. There were many more in the past when high levels of demand were sustained for decades, but industry can't carry capacity indefinitely if no customer is prepared to fund the resulting costs. The reason the workforce assembling Abrams tanks at the Ohio plant dwindled to less than 100 personnel during the Obama years was that nobody was buying tanks. This is not a hard connection to grasp. York has some advantages over the tank plant because it produces a diverse array of vehicles for multiple customers, and the industrial skills required are fungible across its portfolio. But if the Army or Marine Corps were to trim their production objectives for ground vehicles as they have repeatedly over the last decade, it is inevitable that production capacity will adjust to match the reduced level of funding. That's how an efficient industrial base works: supply matches demand. At the moment, the York plant is generating products that satisfy all customer technical standards. There are no outstanding issues -- which is a good thing, because BAE Systems and its legacy enterprises have been the sole providers of Marine amphibious vehicles since World War Two and today manufacture a majority of the combat vehicles in the Army's armored brigades. Company executives do not anticipate problems as they gradually ramp up to two shifts per day at the site. But the point they stressed to me is that York is the central node of an industrial network scattered across the nation, and there is adequate capacity going forward not only to meet expected demand, but also to cope with potential surges. The company estimates that combined demand from the Army and the Marine Corps will be the equivalent of one-and-a-half armored brigades worth of equipment per year, and that should be easily manageable within the limits imposed by planned capacity. They are confident the company can deliver what warfighters need, when they need it. https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2018/11/13/bae-systems-leverages-industrial-network-as-ramp-up-of-armored-vehicle-production-approaches

Three performers selected to develop and demonstrate a novel ground-launched system to improve precision engagement of time sensitive targets The joint DARPA/U.S. Army Operational Fires (OpFires) program will soon kick off with three performers awarded contracts to begin work: Aerojet Rocketdyne, Exquadrum, and Sierra Nevada Corporation. OpFires aims to develop and demonstrate a novel ground-launched system enabling hypersonic boost glide weapons to penetrate modern enemy air defenses and rapidly and precisely engage critical time sensitive targets. OpFires seeks to develop innovative propulsion solutions that will enable a mobile, ground-launched tactical weapons delivery system capable of carrying a variety of payloads to a variety of ranges. Phase 1 of the program will be a 12-month effort focused on early development and demonstration of booster solutions that provide variable thrust propulsion across robust operational parameters in large tactical missiles. “OpFires represents a critical capability development in support of the Army's investments in long-range precision fires,” says DARPA's OpFires program manager, Maj. Amber Walker (U.S. Army). “These awards are the first step in the process to deliver this capability in support of U.S. overmatch.” The OpFires program will conduct a series of subsystem tests designed to evaluate component design and system compatibility for future tactical operating environments. Phase 2 will mature designs and demonstrate performance with hot/static fire tests targeted for late 2020. Phase 3, which will focus on weapon system integration, will culminate in integrated end-to-end flight tests in 2022. https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2018-11-09

OTTAWA — For the second year in a row, the federal government is expected to spend billions of dollars less on new military equipment than promised because of a combination of good and bad news: cost savings on some projects and delays in others. The Trudeau government in 2016 released a new defence policy that included dramatic increases in spending on new aircraft, ships, armoured vehicles and other military equipment over the next 20 years. The investments are vital to replacing the Canadian Forces' fighter jets, ships and various other types of aging equipment with state-of-the-art kit. Yet while new budget documents filed in the House of Commons show the Department of National Defence has so far been given authority to spend $4 billion this fiscal year, the policy had predicted total spending of $6.5 billion. The department does have until March 31 — when the federal government's fiscal year ends — to make up the $2.5-billion difference, but its top civilian official, deputy minister Jody Thomas, admitted Thursday that a large shortfall is likely. Part of the reason is that the department expects to save about $700 million on various projects that ended up costing less than planned, Thomas told The Canadian Press following a committee appearance on Parliament Hill. “We've delivered things more efficiently than was anticipated and so we don't need the money,” she said. “And we can apply it to projects, either new projects or projects that have a cost overrun.” But delays moving some projects through the military procurement system have also caused their fair share of problems, Thomas said, and the department is expecting to have to put off $1 billion to $1.3 billion in purchases it had planned to make this year. “We'd like to (spend) $6 billion every year. Can I guarantee to you that we're going to do that? No, there's slowdowns in projects, there's slowdowns with suppliers, there's changes in scope. Things change,” she said. “I'm hoping to get it below $1 billion. I'm not committing to getting it to below $1 billion. ... We're driving projects to get it as low as possible and spend funds efficiently and effectively. We're not wasting money.” The government spent $2.3 billion less than planned last year. That was also largely because of delays in projects such as the government's multibillion-dollar plan to buy new warships, though also because some things ended up costing less than expected. The government does deserve credit for having increased investments in equipment to levels not seen since the height of the war in Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011, said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “And if they can actually move as much as the deputy (minister) was saying, and they only leave $1 billion on the table, that will be the best year in the last several decades,” said Perry, who has previously warned that delays in the procurement system could derail the defence policy. “But there are a bunch of impacts from not being able to spend money on schedule. One is you don't have the actual gear to do what you want. And project budgets lose purchasing power when money is not spent on schedule. So it's not good to have delays.” https://windsorstar.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/ottawa-on-track-to-invest-less-on-new-military-kit-than-promised-for-second-year

France is leading a 10-country defense initiative in a bid to "face new threats" outside existing structures. Germany is wary that the project could entangle its military in foreign interventions and undermine the EU. Defense ministers from 10 European countries gathered in Paris on Wednesday to set the agenda for the European Intervention Initiative (EI2), a defense coalition spearheaded by French President Emmanuel Macron. "To face new threats, Europe needs a strong defense," the French Defense Ministry said in a tweet after the meeting. "With the European Intervention Initiative, 10 European countries are committed to its protection." EI2's goal is to create a results-based common strategic culture that allows for rapid response joint military operations, including in humanitarian efforts. As such, it is not aimed at establishing a supranational European army. However, as an initiative outside EU and NATO frameworks, the French Defense Ministry has tried to alleviate concerns that it would undermine defense structures in the bloc and alliance. "With the European Intervention Initiative, the whole European Union and the European pillar in NATO will also be strengthened," it added. 'Germany felt pressured' But France's efforts have done little to placate concerns in Berlin, which Paris sees as a pivotal actor in the initiative. Claudia Major, senior international security associate at the Berlin-based German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), told DW that German officials are wary because "it's explicitly and deliberately organized and set up outside the European Union's structures." "For the Germans, making a deliberate attempt to setting up something meaningful outside the EU's structures — and outside NATO — is not seen as a positive move but rather as undermining the EU," Major said. "In the end, Germany felt pressured to agree and engage in the initiative, because otherwise all the talk about France and Germany being the engine of Europe and the heart of Europe, and driving European integration and cooperation forward, would look cheap, wouldn't it?" Full article: https://amp.dw.com/en/germany-cautious-as-france-leads-european-defense-initiative/a-46201409

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Science Applications International Corp.,* Fairfield, New Jersey, has been awarded a $900,310,334 firm-fixed-price, requirements contract for supply and supply chain management of certain tires, supporting the Global Tire Program integrator contract. This was a competitive acquisition with two responses received. This is a five-year base contract with two two-year option periods, plus four two-month option periods. Locations of performance are Texas and other areas located outside the continental U.S., with a March 8, 2024, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and foreign military sales. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2019 through 2024 defense working capital funds; and foreign military sales funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio (SPE7LX-19-D-0029). WGL Energy Services Inc., Vienna, Virginia, has been awarded a $137,122,332 firm-fixed-price, requirements contract to supply and deliver retail electricity and ancillary/incidental services. This was a competitive acquisition with 11 offers received. This is a two-year contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Maryland; Washington, District of Columbia; and Pennsylvania, with a Dec. 31, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Information Systems Agency and other federal civilian agencies. Using customers are solely responsible to fund this requirements contract and vary in appropriation type and fiscal year. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (SPE604-19-D-8004). Ziehm Imaging, Orlando, Florida, has been awarded a maximum $135,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for radiology systems, accessories and training. This is a five-year base contract with one five-year option period. This was a competitive acquisition with 50 responses received. Location of performance is Florida, with a Nov. 8, 2028, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2018 through 2028 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2D1-19-D-0004). Constellation NewEnergy Inc., Baltimore, Maryland, has been awarded a $23,896,130 firm-fixed-price, requirements contract to supply and deliver retail electricity and ancillary/incidental services. This was a competitive acquisition with 11 offers received. This is a two-year contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and Pennsylvania, with a Dec. 31, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Air Force, Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Contract Management Agency and other federal civilian agencies. Using customers are solely responsible to fund this requirements contract and vary in appropriation type and fiscal year. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (SPE604-19-D-8003). Direct Energy Business LLC, Iselin, New Jersey, has been awarded a $7,082,242 firm-fixed-price, requirements contract to supply and deliver retail electricity and ancillary/incidental services. This was a competitive acquisition with 11 offers received. This is a two-year contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Maryland; Washington, District of Columbia; and Ohio, with a Dec. 31, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Marine Corps, Defense Logistics Agency and the Computer Science Study Group. Using customers are solely responsible to fund this requirements contract and vary in appropriation type and fiscal year. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (SPE604-19-D-8004). NAVY Enterprise Services LLC, Herndon, Virginia, is awarded a potential maximum value $485,965,204 modification under a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity existing Next Generation Enterprise Network contract (N00039-13-D-0013). This modification will add a new option period that will extend the potential ordering period by eight months from Oct. 1, 2019, through May 31, 2020. Current and future work will be performed throughout the U.S., Europe, Guam, Korea and Japan. No additional funding will be placed on contract or obligated at the time of modification award. This contract modification was not competitively procured because it is a sole-source acquisition pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1), One source or limited sources (Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 6.302-1). This action is a result of a justification and approval that authorizes extending the ordering period. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Cambridge, Massachusetts, is awarded $109,531,179 for modification P00001 to a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee contract (N00030-19-C-0001) to provide research into the applications of technologies to meet guidance requirements for operations on the common missile compartment for the U.S. Columbia-class program and the United Kingdom Dreadnought-class program; provide specialized technical knowledge and support for the hypersonic guidance, navigation and control application; provide technical and engineering services to support the guidance, navigation and control system that will support the Navy's hypersonic flight experiments. Work will be performed in Cambridge, Massachusetts (81 percent); and El Segundo, California (19 percent), with an expected completion date of Sept. 30, 2019. Fiscal 2019 weapons procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $11,306,900; operations and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $92,708,279; and United Kingdom funds in the amount of $5,516,000 will be obligated. Funds in the amount of $92,708,279 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was a sole-source acquisition pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1)&(4). Strategic Systems Programs, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. KBR Diego Garcia LLC, Houston, Texas, is awarded a $61,979,897 modification under a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N62742-17-D-3600) to exercise Option One for base operations support services at U.S. Navy Support Facility, Diego Garcia. The work to be performed provides for general management and administration services; command and staff (information technology services, information technology support and management, telephone services, telecommunication services, antenna maintenance); public safety (fire protection and emergency services); air operations (ground electronics, airfield facilities, and passenger terminal and cargo handling); port operations; supply (supply services and petroleum, oil and lubricant management and operations, and ship's store service activities); morale, welfare and recreation support; galley; bachelor quarters; facilities support (facility management, facility investment sustainment, restoration and modernization, custodial, pest control, integrated solid waste management, grounds maintenance, and pavement clearance); utilities (electrical, compressed gases, wastewater, steam, hot water and demineralized water, and potable water); base support vehicles and equipment; and environmental to provide integrated base operating services. After award of this option, the total cumulative contract value will be $118,107,288. Work will be performed in Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory, and is expected to be completed November 2019. No funds will be obligated at time of award. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance (Navy and Air Force); and fiscal 2019 non-appropriated funds in the amount of $43,553,618 for recurring work will be obligated on individual task orders issued during the option period, of which $42,716,660 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, and $836,958 is subject to the availability of funds for the next fiscal year. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command Pacific, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, is the contracting activity. Navy Transportation Partners JV, Virginia Beach, Virginia, is awarded a maximum amount $30,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity architect-engineering contract for traffic engineering and planning services in support of projects primarily located at military installations in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia. The work to be performed provides for comprehensive architect-engineering services required for transportation planning, design, and construction services in support of new construction, repair, replacement, demolition, alteration, and/or improvement of Navy and other governmental facilities. Projects may involve single or multiple disciplines, including, but not limited to, architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, civil, landscape design, fire protection, and interior design. Task order 0001 is being awarded at $199,921 for the design of an anti-terrorism perimeter and security entry point at Rome, New York. Work for this task order is expected to be completed by September 2019. All work on this contract will be performed at various Navy facilities and other government facilities within the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic area of responsibility including, but not limited to the Hampton Roads area of Virginia. The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months with an expected completion date of November 2023. Fiscal 2018 military construction, (Air Force) contract funds in the amount of $199,921 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 military construction (Navy); operations and maintenance (Navy); and Navy working capital funds. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with seven proposals received. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N40085-19-D-9008). Colonna's Shipyard Inc., Norfolk, Virginia, is awarded a $10,473,071 firm-fixed-price contract for a 121-calendar day shipyard availability for the regular overhaul and dry docking of USNS Zeus (T-ARC 7). Work will include furnishing general services for the ship, inspect main propulsion motors, cable handling upgrades, heavy overboard system replacement, antenna mast modification, high precision acoustic positioning upgrade, docking and un-docking vessel, propeller shaft inspection, underwater hull cleaning and painting, freeboard cleaning and painting, and sea valve replacement. The contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the total contract value to $13,429,595. Work will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia, and is expected to be completed by April 13, 2019. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $13,429,595 are obligated at the time of award. Contract funds will not expire. This contract was competitively procured with proposals solicited via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with three offers received. The Navy's Military Sealift Command, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N3220519C4151). ARMY AECOM Energy & Construction Inc., Greenwood Village, Colorado, was awarded an $117,338,000 firm-fixed-price contract for major rehabilitation, demolition, temporary facilities, surveying, dewatering and protecting lock chamber, blasting, removing and replacing horizontal concrete at Illinois River Basin, LaGrange Lock and Dam. Bids were solicited via the internet with one bid received. Work will be performed in Versailles, Illinois, with an estimated completion date of July 16, 2021. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of 24,700,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity (W912EK-19-C-0002). VERSAR Inc., Springfield, Virginia, was awarded a $25,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for support program management, contract administration, project engineering, quality assurance, real estate, and support staff for continued operations in Iraq. Bids were solicited via the internet with six bids received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 13, 2023. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Winchester, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W912ER-18-D-0012). IDS International Government Services LLC, Arlington, Virginia, was awarded a $22,037,300 firm-fixed-price contract for operations and maintenance (O&M) services for critical infrastructure, facilities, and Afghan national O&M vocation training for Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan in the planning and construction of Afghanistan National Security Forces facilities. One bid was solicited via the internet with once bid received. Work will be performed in Afghanistan with an estimated completion date of March 11, 2019. Fiscal 2018 Afghan Security Forces Funding funds in the amount of $14,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Winchester, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W912ER-19-C-0003). CORRECTION: A Thursday, Nov. 8, 2018, announcement that Deloitte & Touche LLP, Arlington, Virginia, was awarded an $18,056,941 firm-fixed-price contract to provide a cyberspace analytics capability was incorrect. That contract has not yet been awarded. CORRECTION: A Thursday, Nov. 8, 2018, announcement that Parsons Government Services Inc., Pasadena, California, was awarded a $15,837,195 firm-fixed-price contract to provide the Defensive Cyberspace Operations Mission Planning program was incorrect. That contract has not yet been awarded. AIR FORCE Pride Industries, Roseville, California, has been awarded a $14,193,270 modification (P00042) awarded for civil engineering services, and is for operations and maintenance, engineering, environmental, and grounds maintenance for 61st Civil Engineer and Logistics Squadron. Work will be performed at Los Angeles Air Force Base, California; Fort MacArthur, California; and Defense Contract Management Agency, Carson, California, and is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2019. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $10,429,104 are being obligated at the time of award. Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA2816-17-C-0001). *Small business https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1687755/source/GovDelivery/

By Aaron Boyd, The Defense Department isn't doing a good job determining how much to spend to prevent damage from nature's basic chemical reactions. Rust costs the Pentagon more money annually than many of its most expensive weapons systems—up to $21 billion per year, according to a Defense Department-commissioned audit released in March. The report indicates the corrosion of metals that make up modern weapons systems like fighter jets, ships, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons can sometimes approach one-third of the total operations and maintenance costs of those systems. The problem is so large, in 2002, the department established the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight to ensure big-dollar weapons systems weren't taken offline by oxidation and to help branches determine how much money ought to be spent on rust prevention. But the data being reported by the military branches has been inconsistent and the office has yet to issue guidance on how funding levels should be categorized, according to a related audit released Thursday by the Government Accountability Office. For example, “In fiscal year 2017, the Army and Navy used direct costs, such as salary and training costs, to identify their funding levels, but the Army also included other associated costs. The Air Force used the prior year's funding level and adjusted it for inflation,” the report states. These different methods led to funding requests based on different criteria, making it difficult for Congress to determine what an appropriate funding level should look like. It has also led to vastly different funding requests. In 2017, the Army requested $2.4 million and the Air Force $3 million, while the Navy only requested $220,000. Similarly, all three branches either failed to accurately report the supporting data or, in the Air Force's case, did not provide any data at all some years. “The Army data GAO received did not reconcile with data presented in the Corrosion Office annual reports to Congress for five of eight fiscal years,” auditors wrote. “The Navy data did not reconcile for two of eight fiscal years, and there was no supporting documentation identifying how these figures were calculated. Air Force officials did not provide any figures or supporting documentation for four fiscal years, stating that these figures were not available.” Army officials told GAO they're not able to accurately report how much is spent preventing or combating corrosion because many of those duties are performed by personnel who do many other things, as well. This includes the Army's lead corrosion executive, who also serves as the aviation logistics and safety officer for the Army G-4 logistics organization. “The corrosion-related costs of conducting the corrosion executive role are not separated from this other function,” they told GAO. The Navy had a similar issue but took a different tack. The Navy merely requested $220,000 for the corrosion executive's salary, despite the fact that “this method does not capture other costs, such as personnel assigned to other offices that provide support to the corrosion executive.” The misreported numbers don't appear to be malfeasance, according to the GAO report, but a natural consequence of a lack of direction from the Corrosion Office on how to identify funding needs and properly report that data. GAO made three recommendations to the Defense Department: Issue guidance for identifying and reviewing funding levels for performing corrosion executive duties. Ensure that the Corrosion Office develops a process to maintain documentation of its reviews of corrosion planning. Ensure that corrosion executives establish guidance on reviewing the adequacy of corrosion planning. Defense officials agreed with all three recommendations. https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2018/11/rust-costs-pentagon-21-billion-year/152709/

The Ministry of Defence has today announced plans for modernising its estate and establishing a broader and more diverse supply base. The Defence Infrastructure Organisation's (DIO) new procurement plan outlines a programme of major projects and contacts for the next five financial years. This includes work to construct new buildings, such as housing and accommodation, the refurbishment of current facilities; as well as services such as catering, waste management and cleaning. The plan also sets out ambitions to establish a broader and more diverse supply base, including doing more business with small and medium size enterprises (SMEs). Currently, around 75% of spending on maintenance at defence sites goes directly or indirectly to SMEs, and further diversifying the supply base will help build resilience into projects and provide more opportunities for smaller companies to work on key defence projects. By listing all the major projects and contracts, the procurement plan will make it easier for existing and potential suppliers to plan ahead, by offering advice on bidding for this work and greater transparency on working with the MOD. These measures will help in particular small businesses, who don't always have the skills and prior experience of working with the MOD in such areas. Minister for Defence People and Veterans Tobias Ellwood said: The defence estate is where our brave armed forces live, work and train and so it's crucial we give them the best supplies and facilities possible. Working with industry is critical to delivering this, and our new Procurement Plan ensures the private sector has a head start in bidding for this crucial work. Opportunities outlined in the Procurement Plan include the £4billion Defence Estate Optimisation Programme, the Future Defence Infrastructure Services contracts - which will provide facilities management across the UK's military bases- and the £1.3bn Clyde Infrastructure Programme. The plan also details several prominent works that demonstrate DIO's key role in supporting defence throughout the UK. These include essential maintenance work worth £568 million to support nuclear infrastructure capability at HMNB Clyde, as well as a £58m investment in a modern submarine training facility at the base. Alongside this, there are plans for an £8m investment in Bovington Camp to support the AJAX armoured vehicles which will enter service in 2020. Jacqui Rock, DIO Commercial Director, said: As DIO we recognise that our current and future suppliers are key to our success. We have worked with industry to produce the Procurement Plan and we are committed to building a broader, more diverse supplier base. We believe in being as transparent as possible in our procurements and through this new approach we are encouraging new entrants, including small and medium sized enterprises, to consider the benefits and opportunities that working with DIO can deliver. The Procurement Plan will help achieve the goals set out in our first ever Commercial Strategy. This set out our vision for how we do business and how we will work effectively with our suppliers. The Procurement Plan also sets out how DIO can deliver social and economic benefits throughout its supply chain by working to contribute to the government's aim of recruiting 20,000 apprentices through construction procurement and promoting sustainability through its supply chain. By 2020, DIO has committed to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 30%, a 30% reduction in domestic business flights, a 50% reduction in paper usage and reducing waste going to the landfill to less than 10%. The full DIO Procurement Plan can be found here The DIO Commercial Strategy sets the direction for future DIO Procurement Plans. The full DIO Commercial Strategy can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mod-sets-out-vision-to-diversify-supply-base--2

By: Joe Gould and Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The American defense industry is warning that defense cuts proposed by the Trump administration could undermine the Pentagon's efforts to modernize the military and address threats from Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and transnational terrorism. The Aerospace Industries Association, with the weight of the country's large and small defense firms behind it, issued a statement Thursday warning President Donald Trump and Congress “to provide steady and stable growth in defense spending in the fiscal year 2020 budget request and beyond” if they want to be able to meet those threats. The message comes as Democrats — expected to prioritize domestic spending and question record defense increases — won the House this week, and after White House budget director Mick Mulvaney ordered the Pentagon to prepare for a $700 billion national defense budget proposal for fiscal 2020. (For comparison's sake, the Pentagon is also continuing to prep the $733 billion budget it was expecting.) AIA argued in its statement that the last two years of budget growth have helped the Department of Defense and industry turn things around after years of war and budget instability, but not entirely. “As a result, military readiness is improving, and our industry is responding with more innovation and advanced capabilities,” the statement reads. “But the shortfalls of the last decade cannot be erased in the space of two years, and now the Administration has announced potential reductions in defense investment that could undermine the improvements that are just now materializing.” Last year, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis testified that the Pentagon needed 3 to 5 percent annual growth above inflation through 2023 to stay ahead of near-peer adversaries Russia and China. Congress responded with a $700 billion national defense budget for 2018 and $716 billion for 2019 — but also a $1 trillion tax cut that's grown the national deficit. National security adviser John Bolton said publicly, days before Tuesday's election, that the national debt is “an existential threat to society” and that Pentagon spending will have to “flatten out” in the near term. Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan had signaled in recent weeks that modernization programs like hypersonic weapons systems would take a hit if the budget falls. “It comes down to a judgment call, how fast do we modernize? And that's probably the biggest knob that we have to turn,” he said. Along similar lines, AIA argued that to achieve the Pentagon's National Defense Strategy — which "requires armed forces that are large and capable enough to meet multiple threats in multiple environments” — “we must continue to invest in the most effective technology and weapons we can provide.” “America's competitors and adversaries have made huge strides in their offensive and defensive capabilities, from submarines to cyberspace, and continue to develop advanced technology and sophisticated operational concepts,” the statement warns. Though it's unclear how sensitive the administration will be to this call, it has been vocal about its focus on the defense-industrial base in concert with Trump's emphasis on the American economy. A Trump-ordered study found roughly 300 gaps and vulnerabilities across America's network of defense suppliers; Pentagon officials are hopeful a third of those issues will be addressed in the next year. Whatever the administration does with its budget submission, it will be up to the new Congress to tweak it. Following the midterm elections, analysts have predictedlawmakers in next year's divided government will overcome gridlock to reach a budget deal that maintains flat defense spending. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/11/08/us-defense-industry-pushes-back-on-white-houses-proposed-33b-budget-cut