The Government Accountability Office (GAO) looked at the Army’s rationale for waiving the competitive prototyping requirement for the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) program, and found it “sound.”
Photo: BAE Systems
The Army could have more fully evaluated potential benefits associated with reducing developmental risks, but “its decision not to pursue prototyping for the AMPV program appears sound,” the April 25 report said. “Recognizing that the intent of competitive prototyping is to reduce cost and risk, the Army has taken other actions that could achieve these goals, including reducing requirements to ensure no technology development was needed and basing its acquisition strategy on modifying an existing combat vehicle and using existing mission equipment.”
The Defense Department’s rationale for the competitive prototyping requirement waiver in the amended 2009 Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) addresses one of the two bases provided in the statute, the April 25 GAO report found.
Namely, “the cost of producing competitive prototypes exceeds the expected life-cycle benefits (in constant dollars) of producing the prototypes.”
The Army wants an AMPV family of vehicles that would consist of five variants to replace the M113 armored personnel carrier in the following mission roles: general purpose, medical evacuation, medical treatment, mortar carrier, and mission command.
General Dynamics [GD] had protested the Army’s AMPV acquisition strategy as the company felt it favored a potential competitor, and original equipment manufacturer of the M113–BAE Systems.
In a statement, General Dynamics said, “The GAO report is further evidence the AMPV program answer is a Bradley solution, which is why we need that data, because the waiver is based on ‘use of existing military vehicle with mature government-defined mission systems, which obviates the need for prototyping the vehicle.’”
That “existing military vehicle” in the Army inventory would be BAE’s Bradley.
Additionally, General Dynamics quoted the report saying: “the program plans to use mission equipment packages for each variant that are already fielded and will not change during system development.”
General Dynamics protest to Army Materiel Command was denied. The company determined to keep talking to the service, and not continue its protest.
The nine-page GAO report said the Army expects the risks of integrating the mission equipment and vehicle to be low to moderate.
In the waiver, DoD also concluded that the Army’s cost-benefit analysis, which examined acquisition strategies with system level prototypes of all five AMPV variants from one or two contractors, was reasonable.
“The Army’s analysis stated that these strategies would increase program costs by $198 million and $341 million (in base year 2013 dollars) and add 19 months and 31 months to the program’s schedule, respectively,” the report said. “These costs include not only the cost of developing and producing prototypes, but also government program management and testing costs.”
GAO authors said the AMPV program office also estimated zero dollars in life cycle benefits from both prototyping strategies. In contrast to the Air Force’s Combat Rescue Helicopter prototyping waiver, the Army did not include any potential benefits associated with reducing development risks.
In a statement, BAE said it “read with interest” the GAO report that supports the Army’s decision to waive competitive prototyping for the AMPV program.
“The conclusion is consistent with the Army’s established acquisition strategy, which plainly says the Army will downselect to a single vendor for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the program (without competitive prototyping),” the BAE statement said. “Clearly the Army expects the offerings to compete on their substantiated performance and values the importance of a low risk, cost effective solution that meets the Army’s critical survivability requirements. We welcome the opportunity to compete on the merits of our offering against the Army’s requirements.”
The report explained that WSARA required the Secretary of Defense to modify guidance to ensure that the acquisition strategy for each major defense acquisition program provides for competitive prototypes before Milestone B approval–which authorizes entry into system development–unless the Milestone Decision Authority waives the requirement.
Competitive prototyping, which involves commercial, government, or academic sources producing early prototypes of weapon systems or critical subsystems, can help DoD programs reduce technical risk, refine requirements, validate designs and cost estimates, and evaluate manufacturing processes before making major commitments of resources, it said. It can also help reduce the time it takes to field a system and, as a result, reduce its acquisition cost.
WSARA also provides that whenever a Milestone Decision Authority authorizes a waiver of the competitive prototyping requirement on the basis of what WSARA describes as “excessive cost,” the Milestone Decision Authority is required to submit notification of the waiver, together with the rationale, to the Comptroller General of the United States.
WSARA further provides that no later than 60 days after receipt of a notification of a waiver, GAO is to review the rationale for the waiver and submit a written assessment of that rationale to the congressional defense committees.
On Nov. 12, 2013, GAO received notice from DoD that it had waived the competitive prototyping requirement for the AMPV program.