Home » Land » JLTV Protest: Big Contract, Big Stakes

JLTV Protest: Big Contract, Big Stakes

By Colin Clark Monday, November 10th, 2008 6:21 pm
Posted in Land, Naval, Policy, Space

In these days of tanker, CSAR-X and other protests it will probably come as small surprise that Northrop Grumman has filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office since it lost on its bid to gain part of the $100 billion or so Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program.

“After careful examination of the data presented at the Nov. 5 [bid] debriefing, it is apparent that inconsistencies in the bid and evaluation process unfairly placed the Northrop Grumman team at a competitive disadvantage. Northrop Grumman requests that the GAO examine the process, which it believes is marred by unstated requirement changes and arbitrary maturity ratings,” the company said in a press release.

One is tempted to say, here we go again. But John Young, undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, and his procurement policy guru, Shay Assad, told reporters Oct. 30 that this year has not been an extraordinary one for protests and that, in some ways, it was actually quieter than many years past. Assad promised to come up with data to back up his claim and I understand it is still being compiled and should be in our hands shortly.

But I recently got copied on an email from a senior DoD official that made clear the building is now looking over its shoulder on virtually every major contract award. And a senior Pentagon official told me last week that one reason that the Transformational Satellite (T-Sat) contract award has been delayed was caution in the face of possible protests: “We want to make sure we’ve done it right and crossed every T and dotted every I.” So I bet that grinding sound is generated by John Young’s teeth as he contemplates another program delayed and opened to the possibilities of becoming a political football.

Northrop really went on the offensive in its press release, sounding not unlike Boeing in the opening days of its tanker protest. “Northrop Grumman offered the best solution for a Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, clearly meeting the battlefield needs of our nation’s warfighters,” the company said, adding that its version possesses “the most innovative design” and is “significantly” cheaper than its competitors.

Addressing what sounds like DoD’s main points against the offering from Northrop and Oshkosh, the release goes on to say that “American warfighters deserve more than last year’s model, hastily retrofitted for rapid deployment.” This clearly points to concerns voiced that the Northrop version was not sufficiently mature.

Here is the technical breakdown of the factors Northrop wants GAO to consider.

“The SSA [source selection authority] misapplied the stated evaluation criteria, elevating maturity level subfactors to a super factor status. The evaluation also reflected an unannounced agency decision to transform the solicitation from a TD phase to a defacto System Design & Development (SDD) effort.

“The SSA relied unreasonably on company self-evaluations of design maturity and failed to conduct an adequate, independent assessment of the submitted designs.

“The value of a demonstrator was not made clear, nor did the SSA make a meaningful assessment of demonstrator vehicles and their relevance to proposed designs.

“Cost was undervalued by the SSA in its determination, disregarding the significant cost savings offered by Northrop Grumman.”

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

	DensityDuck November 10th, 2008 at 8:18 pm So now it must be an officially-negotiated statement in the contract documentation that a working near-final prototype is preferable to a bunch of Powerpoint slides? Sheesh.
	eSemperFi November 11th, 2008 at 2:14 pm Did we just see the JLTV schedule slip to the right before development even began? Good thing we aren’t fighting a war. http://www.esemperfi.com/ForumThread.aspx?categ=General&postID=10_30_2008__4_46_PM9LUV8QWO9FMJJ3XIGHSP
	Shameonyou November 12th, 2008 at 9:52 pm This is not about winning a contract; it is about saving the lives of our troops. Does anyone see this as an injustice to our troops? Does anyone see this as an injustice to the GAO? It is shameful to protest under these circumstances. The GAO has a great bid process and is up-front throughout the proceedings. Sounds like these companies were asleep at the switch or quite simply, sore losers. The greatest trucks in the world have been chosen, now lets move on to Phase II and III. Let’s get our troops the protection they need without delay. Is a life less important than winning a contract?
	Militor November 13th, 2008 at 7:40 am My guess. Next time you want a contract Grumman. You need to throw more money around. It’s not about price, design or superior technology. It’s about corporate welfare and influence. Why else would jet airplane companies be interested in building army trucks? Price? Just the development costs alone sent the prices into the stratosphere. $418,000.00 per unit is the expected price per unit. For trucks that are, em? 5 years old already. All the designs are static. Non reconfigurable. Not mission adaptable. They are expensive to repair. Don’t swim. And about 100 other major obvious design problems. Hey Grumman, I offered you a superior design. You should have taken advantage of it. You would be hearing the whining, instead of doing it. You could have competed with a superior design. I have one. Now you don’t. But I think it’s too late. BAE or Lockheed have the lead now. Cookie cutter mentality. JLTV. What a joke!
	Militor November 13th, 2008 at 8:01 am When the requirements and potential bidders qualifications were being written. All the big guys decided to keep little people out of the running. Secret clearances, build 50 or 60 as soon as the contract is awarded. Linking production to the design. The two are different. Evil little cowards behind closed doors conspired to limit the amount of competition for this bid. The DOD really was disappointed by the prototypes they saw. But the big 8 or 10 pushed on. Regardless of the missing the mark. Or superior designs being available. Billions will be wasted on some vehicles with a limited lifespan. Hybrid garbage. Grumman, did you protest the exclusion of little companies competing on this project? By the way. Did you know? Lockheed and BAE had people reviewing your designs for you at the beginning. So they knew what you had. Did you know what they had? Yeah. Lockheed is the specialist contractor that evaluates the designs. They promised me that my design would be safe. I trust Lookheed. Why not? When they get the contract. Don’t be surprised. Corruption is bad. Only when it hurts you. But it’s ok when it hurts others. Like two pigs biting each others ears. I laugh. Ha, Hah.
	RocketMan November 13th, 2008 at 9:13 am Why is it that between these “Federalized Corporations” & what USED to be the Government(Now the “Reichsministry”) Nobody has an opportunity unless you are an “Approved Federalized Approved Reichsministry Corporation” there is absolutely ZERO chance for the little guy to get anything in the door, cuz it’ll slam soooo hard, if you put a peic of your body in that door, you WILL lose it. Its time for BAE to “come clean” (Why are we allowing a foreign based company buy all our military?) Its time for everyone to really start raising their voices ALOT and start yelling in these DISGUSTING senate ole boy/girl network committe (ex> “ReichsMinistry) to stop just handing out these contracts to ONLY these top 10 companies.….…. Then the whole world, especially US idiots who CARE, are surprised when they come up with CRAP and troops die!! Because they take a million bucks to build a vehicle (I want a flying saucer for a million bucks folks, pimped out too, with “spinners” a booming sound sys automatically targeting MG’s. nets, missiles, “airbags” no tires, but a cross between tracks and wheels, that “autochange if damaged”) < thats the short list. I wish, this is my REAL WISH, that they would NOT ALLOW any of these companies build an entire project, let us regular folks build it, and lets see how it comes out? What say you all? Time to start showing up in these Senate Sub Committees and start yelling and pointing fingers.
	jlsnyc November 13th, 2008 at 9:53 am I worked at Grumman when it was called Grumman Aerospace, I can tell you that Grumman had not received any major contracts since the Space Shuttle wings designs, or the Luna Module. Most of Grumman contrasts are subcontracts. The reason is for two 1) New York had a state government that doesn’t believe that people should be building killing machine (Cuomo). So we had no state support. 2) The federal government (republicans) doesn’t like New York State because the people are smart well educated. And because of the size of population, New York has influence on political issues. Finally NY State has always voted democratic.
	DensityDuck November 13th, 2008 at 1:51 pm Well, you mean that New York CITY has always voted democratic. Nobody cares about New York STATE because the entire state put together has less than one-third of the city’s population.
	Militor November 13th, 2008 at 3:20 pm Hey Rocketman. I agree with your opinions. BAE? I did some research on that outfit. Very interesting who owns them. They have two main branches. One In USA. The other based in the UK. The USA one mainly owned by the UK one. Also a few USA investors. But the British one. This one is owned by USA General Electric. A few Royals, Banks in the UK, Germany, South Africa, Australia. And a few other Defense groups. Mostly GE. GE has about 18 divisions. They are huge. Most of their money comes from power generation equipment, like nuclear power components. And other defense technology and consumer products. So instead of being known for killing people for profit. They finance BAE to do it. It should be called BAE/GE. The branch in the USA is a marketing arm for BAE/UK. And your right Rocketman about how much stuff they bought recently or already owned. It would be easier to say what they don’t own. Like the US. Railroads. DuPont,Colt, Lockheed, and Boeing. They rarely loose out in court or when they want something their way. Regardless of the consequences to the taxpayers or solders. GE we bring good things to life. OH! And we kill people too. And manipulate politicians. And compromise our military. And create monopolies. And corrupt people with money. GE also had 5 permits pending for Nuke plants in the south. Just before Catrina hit. Slightly delayed. Bottom line. Some of our defense industry is run by people in the USA. More of it is run by Banks in the UK. A coalition exists between Western nations, and a Anglo Christian/ Zion alliance. We rally against the Chinese in the Far East. Islamic factions. in the Middle East. Oil money verses-Manufacturing and farming money. BAE is at the front of it all! From Kevlar helmets and ammo belts. To Tanks, Ships, Apcs’, Submarines, Satellites, Nuclear bombs, Satellites, Trucks, Guns, Humvees’, and light bulbs. BAE is GE! OH! and unlimited Financing. GE would be the top three companies in the USA if they were put together. They got their start from ripping off TESLA. Nice company.
	Militor November 13th, 2008 at 3:41 pm OH! BAE/ Forgot Lockheed, Boeing and Ratheon. They own a marketing arm in the UK and works in Washington D.C. U.S.A. too. So you could pretty much overthrow a country with BAE. Like a big hardware store. The other lobby group is Ecostar or something like that. Sounds pleasant. It is really death by mail order. On every continent. I kinda feel sorry for the Islamic people and leaders. A big slaughter is in their future. They are just in the way. We are good at provoking people into wars. Like the way we frustrate China. Containment baby!
	UH34D November 13th, 2008 at 9:39 pm Frankly, all of these contractors are useless. First, they care more about the money for a project and not the lives of our troops. One need only look to some of the systems our military has been stuck with for decades. From body armor, to individual weapons, to wheeled and tracked vehicles, to aircraft…nothing but problems and cost overruns. Members of our armed forces have been getting screwed for a couple of decades as well as taxpayers by this out of control spening by DOD and their incestuous relationship with weapons systems manufacturers. It is time for some serious accountability and oversight. S/F Gordon
	Militor November 14th, 2008 at 7:32 am If you look at the board of directors of the largest U.S. defense contractors. You will see ex-joint chiefs or Army, Navy, or USAF,USMC Generals and program managers. These guys hop from DOD jobs directly into key procurement lobbyist jobs. Their is some competition. Not a whole lot. The prices are kinda set ahead of time. Like in the case of JLTV. They are all crap. None are acceptable for urban warfare. None will make a good logistics vehicle. All of them have missed the mark of the original expectations. These inferior designs are shoved down the throats of Army procurement people. Like the JLTV and the Stryker, Sgt. York, Armored Humvees, FMTV, MRAP. These are all looser designs. And a big rip off for the tax payers. Not to mention better designs exist. But the better designs never make it to the solders. JLTV at $418,000.00 is one of the biggest rip offs of the taxpayer in modern times. The whole concept is stupid. Who ever approves this boondoggle should be burned at the stake. Scrap this program. And start over. And open the competition.