Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DoDBuzz: Army Goofed On FMTV Award

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Veterans Donate to DU
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-15-09 06:51 AM
Original message
DoDBuzz: Army Goofed On FMTV Award
Army Goofed On FMTV Award
By Colin Clark Monday, December 14th, 2009 11:48 am
Posted in International, Land, Policy

UPDATED: Army Leaders “Reviewing” GAO Decisions and BAE Comments On Unique Cab Design

In yet another strike at the heart of the Defense Department’s acqui­si­tion sys­tem, th Government Accountability Office issued a rul­ing today that the Army made fun­da­men­tal mis­takes when it awarded the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) con­tract to Oshkosh.

In the words of one ana­lyst who closely watched this $3 bil­lion com­pe­ti­tion, “the Army con­ducted an incom­plete, unpro­fes­sional review of the pro­pos­als from BAE Systems, Oshkosh and Navistar. First, it wrongly stated that all three offer­ors had equal, excel­lent pro­duc­tion capa­bil­i­ties. Then, on that basis, it picked the win­ner solely on the basis of price, with­out a rig­or­ous test as to the real­ism of Oshkosh’s very low bid. So a com­pany that has never built the prod­uct beat the incum­bent by bid­ding 30 per­cent below the cur­rent ask­ing price — on a build-​​to-​​print con­tract! This is the sort of trav­esty the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act was passed to pre­vent,” said Loren Thompson, defense con­sul­tant and ana­lyst at the Lexington Institute.

BAE, incum­bent maker of the FMTV, argued pub­licly that Oshkosh did not pos­sess the exper­tise or expe­ri­ence to build the FMTV with­out a high degree of risk to the tax­payer. In par­tic­u­lar, BAE pointed to its patented cab design, which allows the addi­tion of armor when needed, as a capa­bil­ity Oshkosh lacked and would have to rein­vent or license from BAE. The pro­tes­tors also argued that Oshkosh’s bid price– 30 per­cent lower than theirs — was unsustainable.

“We are con­fi­dent that our skilled and expe­ri­enced work­force in Texas and Michigan will put us in the very best posi­tion to com­pete suc­cess­fully for con­tin­ued FMTV pro­duc­tion, espe­cially since the new Long-​​Term Armor Strategy cab is our design. Our cur­rent bridge takes pro­duc­tion through 2010, but deci­sions need to be made by this spring to sus­tain unin­ter­rupted FMTV pro­duc­tion into 2011. Our work­force remains focused and com­mit­ted to pro­vid­ing our men and women in uni­form with the world’s safest, most reli­able medium tac­ti­cal vehi­cles,” Dennis Morris, pres­i­dent of BAE Systems Global Tactical Systems, said in a Monday statement.

GAO agreed that the Army got the eval­u­a­tion wrong. “Our review of the record led us to con­clude that the Army’s eval­u­a­tion was flawed with regard to the eval­u­a­tion of Oshkosh’s pro­posal under the capa­bil­ity eval­u­a­tion fac­tor, and the eval­u­a­tion of Navistar’s past per­for­mance,” said Michael Golden, GAO’s man­ag­ing asso­ciate gen­eral coun­sel for pro­cure­ment law. But GAO did not agree with the pro­tes­tors on price. “We also denied a num­ber of Navistar’s and BAE’s chal­lenges to the award to Oshkosh, includ­ing chal­lenges to the eval­u­a­tion of Oshkosh’s price,” Golden said in his statement.


Rest of article at: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/12/14/gao-upholds-fmtv-protests/?wh=wh
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Veterans Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC