The past few days have brought much (arguably reasonable) hand-wringing from Congress that the Coast Guard lacks the resources to complete its missions. But it's important to remember where a lot of those resources have been wasted: the Deepwater program, which has increased its costs 63 percent (going from $17 billion to over $27 billion) and is 5-15 years behind schedule.
To be fair, the program has made significant progress: the Coast Guard brought the lead systems integrator function in-house, changed the procurement to an asset-by-asset strategy rather than the complex systems-of-systems approach, and has gone back to following its own acquisition policies (as is common in defense contracting, the problems aren't usually rooted in the rules, but in the government and contractors not following them). Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) — Chair of the House's Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure — has conducted careful oversight of the program for years and admitted last week that he was impressed by how far the Coast Guard has come, saying it was "phenomenal."
At today's confirmation hearing for Vice Admiral Robert J. Papp, Jr., to become the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, the leadership of the Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation asked important questions to ensure that the progress will continue. As Subcommittee Chair Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) noted, while there has been progress, the program is "nowhere near where it should be."
Senator Cantwell focused most of her questions on costs in the Deepwater program. She opened the hearing by reminding Vice Admiral Papp that taxpayers can't afford to repeat the mistakes of the Deepwater program, and the Senator made sure that he was on the record saying that the Coast Guard would follow its own acquisition policies. Additionally, she made him promise that the Coast Guard would seek outside advice to make sure that taxpayers were paying a fair price for National Security Cutters. Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) focused on schedule, asking the Vice Admiral if there were opportunities to accelerate the program, and he told her the Coast Guard was looking into a 5 year plan — something the current Commandent was criticized for lacking yesterday in a hearing before the House's Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security.
Still, there are a few questions we wish that the Senators would have asked to make sure that the Vice Admiral would make a strong commitment to recouping as much waste, fraud, and abuse in the Deepwater program as possible. For example:
- Deepwater is 5-15 years behind schedule, and costs have gone from $17 billion to over $27 billion, even though no additional assets are planned above the original baseline. That is a 63 percent increase in costs. Please describe what you consider to be the causes of those increases, including who, in your opinion, was at fault for each cause you identify.
- Given the huge cost overruns in this program, is it important to make sure that the government recoups any taxpayer dollars that they can for this program? Will you instruct the men and women of the Coast Guard to come forward with any information they may have regarding the Deepwater program that would help the government secure refunds and hold contractors accountable, particularly in regards to the False Claims Act suit against Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS) and its partners Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman?
- In your opinion, how did ICGS perform as a lead system integrator (LSI)? Was the Coast Guard ever misled by ICGS, or was any program information purposely withheld from you?
- Is there any validity to contractor claims in legal documents that the Coast Guard is at fault for the hull problems with the 123-foot Island-class Patrol Boats because they did not maintain the 110-foot Island Class Patrol Boats properly, and that the Coast Guard terminated the Coast Guard program without proper cause?
We regret that the Senators didn't go as far as they could have to recover taxpayer funds, but we applaud them for asking the right questions to help ensure that the program is on strong footing to prevent waste in the future.
-- Mandy Smithberger
Comments