After Protests, Army Restarts Boeing Emarss

 

USAF photo

Jul 25, 2011 By Amy Butler AviationWeek.com

After nearly nine months of protests over the selection of Boeing to build a new fleet of intelligence-collecting aircraft, the U.S. Army has revalidated the contactor’s role and begun work on project.

The company won the $323 million development contract in late November 2010 over bids from Northrop Grumman, L-3 Communications and a Lockheed Martin/Sierra Nevada team. Raytheon and SAIC were winnowed out earlier in the program.

Lt. Col. Dean Hoffman, project manager for the Army’s Medium-Altitude Reconnaissance and Surveillance System, says the stop-work order, which was put in place after the protests were originally filed, was lifted June 16. Another period of potential protests closed July 11 at midnight without objection from the losing bidders. And the Army kicked off its planning meetings with Boeing for the project July 12.

Meanwhile, Boeing had purchased a HawkerBeechcraft King Air 350ER, the platform selected to house the Enhanced Medium-Altitude Reconnaissance and Surveillance System (Emarss). Hoffman says the company is now “demodding” it to establish a baseline for the aircraft and start using it as a flying testbed as early as August. The aircraft will be used to gain approval from FAA for use of the altered nose and radome features needed for the aircraft’s mission systems, including electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) sensors, communications intelligence collectors, data links and survivability equipment.

Meanwhile, the contract calls for four development aircraft (for deployment to Afghanistan). There is an option for two additional development aircraft that could be used for developmental trials and limited-user testing in the U.S.

The plan is to eventually buy two low-rate initial production aircraft and conduct a competition to build 28 more at an undetermined date .

Emarss was the Army’s most recent strategy to purchase a new intelligence fleet following the demise of the Aerial Common Sensor program, which called for a larger, jet-powered platform.

Emarss originally was intended to field the first aircraft for operations in Afghanistan within 18 months of contract award; nine months have passed, however, as the government reviewed protests from the losing bidders. Hoffman says his team is assessing how soon the deliveries can be made. Contractually, there is financial incentive to Boeing to deliver within 15 months.

As a result of the original protests from all three bidders, the Government Accountability Office, which adjudicates such matters, found that the Army likely improperly accounted for the past performance of a Boeing subcontractor. And the GAO attorney on the case “expressed concerns over the adequacy of the agency’s evaluation of the performance of the EO/IR sensors as part of the offerors’ proposed Emarss system,” according to GAO’s June 15 decision.

The Army’s remedy was to reevaluate Boeing’s bid without considering the past performance of the subcontractor in question, and the service also agreed to re-examine the EO/IR portion of all bids. This would lead to a new source-selection decision.

Another Protest

Northrop Grumman, however, found this remedy inadequate and filed another protest. GAO denied this claim and found that “nothing in Northrop Grumman’s protest demonstrates that the agency’s approach was an abuse of discretion” in selecting the remedy. Hoffman declined to discuss the remedy owing to a protective order from GAO.

Though the Army has finally moved on with Emarss work, the path forward is not necessarily free of turbulence. Some lawmakers are proposing that the Air Force transfer its HawkerBeechcraft 350 fleet of MC-12W Project Liberty aircraft to the Army. L-3, one of the losing Emarss bidders, was the prime contractor on the Air Force project.

If this measure gains traction, an industry official speculates the Army could modify the MC-12Ws to the Emarss standard far more cheaply than buying a new fleet. Furthermore, some Pentagon officials suggest the Army should cancel the program outright owing to increasing budget pressures. This issue will likely be addressed as the Pentagon crafts its fiscal 2013 budget proposal due to Congress in February.