Pentagon criticized for armor contracts

YAHOO ^ | Wed Jul 11, 7 | RICHARD LARDNERandANNE FLAHERTY

[Dubya]

The Defense Department put U.S. troops in Iraq at risk by awarding contracts for badly needed armored vehicles to companies that failed to deliver them on time, according to a review by the Pentagon's inspector general.

The June 27 report, obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, examined 15 contracts worth $2.2 billion awarded since 2000 to Force Protection Inc. and Armor Holdings Inc.

The contracts were issued without the normal competition for government work because the military determined these companies were the only ones capable of supplying the vehicles fast enough to meet the demands of deployed troops.

Yet the inspector general's report concluded otherwise.

Overall, Force Protection of Ladson, S.C., received 11 contracts from the Army and Marine Corps worth $417 million for a variety of vehicles, including its Buffalo and Cougar mine-resistant trucks.

Force Protection failed to meet all delivery schedules, according to the report, and acquisition officials knew there were other manufacturers that might have supplied some of the vehicles in a more timely fashion. The report does not provide the names of those possible alternative sources.

[Dubya]

The Army received kits "with missing and unusable components, which increased installation time and required additional reinspection of kits," according to the report.

[retarmy]

I wonder if the people who run and work in these companies have any children serving in Afghanistan or Iraq or have served in either AOs themselves?

[stuartcr]

“...the military determined these companies were the only ones capable of supplying the vehicles fast enough to meet the demands of deployed troops...Force Protection failed to meet all delivery schedules, according to the report, and acquisition officials knew there were other manufacturers that might have supplied some of the vehicles in a more timely fashion...”

How do these things happen, without anyone getting in trouble?

[G Larry]

Waiting 18 - 24 months for a competitive proposal would have certainly helped.

[Weeedley]

The C-in-C failed to put the nation on a war footing thats why we are not getting material to the troops. In WWII we built 88,000 armored vehicles and 2,300,000 military trucks with half the population and 15,000,000 men under arms and out of the work force.

Moving all our manufacturing capacity to china, mexico etc etc dont help either.

[Shermy]

Because the punishment is forced retirement,

which is not much punishment at all,

because the forced pentagon retiree then takes a cushy and lucrative job,

with the very company he awarded the contract before,

it’s called a payoff on the back end.

[stuartcr]

There must be some honest people in positions of power...

[Lurker]

There must be some honest people in positions of power...

Diogenes, call your office.

L

[Shermy]

It’s best to assume they are dishonest and they have the “burden of proof” to show us otherwise.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Well, the companies themselves provided SOME of the vehicles in a more timely fashion.

The article isn’t specific enough, but it could be that they delivered say 3000 of the 4000 vehicles on time, while another company might have been able to deliver 1000 on time.

So at a greater expense, you could have split the contract I guess, and had two types of armor on vehicles, two contractors to manage, and two sources of headaches.

[CharlesWayneCT]

examined 15 contracts worth $2.2 billion awarded since 2000 to Force Protection Inc. and Armor Holdings Inc.

These contracts stretch back to 2000, which means they are CLINTON contracts. We weren't at war in 2000, at least OUR SIDE hadn't realised we were at war.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

This company is providing vehicles. Many vehicles have been ordered, and the company is expanding to fill the orders.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

These are relatively new contracts, and everything is being done to achieve performance. This is a very slanted article.

I cannot say, but I know about this.

[Dubya]

Yes we need to blame it on Clinton. I would bust them right in the mouth if I could. No telling how many Americans have died because of their greed.

Dub Sgt USMC

[JasonC]

Sure. Force Protection is a fine company doing a very necessary job and does not merit this flak.

But there is a more worrisome aspect of all this. I read recently that there are only 2 steel companies in the US still qualified to make the quality of armor plate needed for serious fighting machines. And looking them up further, I discover one of them is actually the US subsidiary (through takeovers) of a massive international Indian conglomerate, and the other one was bought last November by a Russian billionaire.

Which I'd call national insecurity...

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

I don’t know what companies you are referring to? US Steel comes to mind? I know that there are steel companies that merely recycle steel.

[JasonC]

Mittal (which bought LTV and a half a dozen other old-line US steel maker in or near bankruptcy, over many years) and Oregon Steel (bought by a Russian financier last November).

There are many US steelmakers making wire or thin sheet etc, but plate is a speciality. Oregon and one division owned by Mittal are the only US mills that make military grade plate.

Incidentally, the US share of world steel output now stands at 8%. It was 13% as recently as 10 years ago, and during WW II it was 45%. China's current share is 33%, and was 13% as recently as 10 years ago (when the two crossed).