The Missile Defense Agency’s (MDA) director last Friday told lawmakers the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI) is changing its acquisition strategy to have a down-select this month, rather than after the Critical Design Review (CDR).
In written testimony ahead of testifying before the House Armed Services’ Strategic Forces subcommittee on April 12, Lt. Gen. Heath Collins said the NGI program will transition from the technology development phase to the product development phase in May.
“In April 2024, MDA anticipates it will select the contractor to continue development, testing, production, and fielding of the nation’s Next Generation Interceptor.”
Collins wrote that both prime contractor teams completed their Preliminary Design Reviews (PDR) and Knowledge points #1.
MDA applied lessons learned from other large-scale defense programs that faced increasing costs caused by “extended design phases involving multiple competitive solution teams which adversely impacted schedule,” he said.
“Due to accelerated contractor execution schedules, MDA had an appreciably larger body of technical knowledge and data available to assess contractor performance ahead of a traditional systems development at this point in the design maturation process,” Collins continued.
Therefore, MDA was able to complete a best value determination using the contractor-provided evidence from the PDRs and Knowledge Points #1.
NGI aims to improve the interceptors used by the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system to defend the U.S. homeland from primarily North Korean and potential future Iranian ballistic missile threats.
In 2021, MDA chose teams led by Northrop Grumman [NOC] and Lockheed Martin [LMT] to start initial technology development and risk reduction work for the NGI. From that point, competition was expected to last at least through the CDR phase (Defense Daily, March 23, 2021).
Last year, former MDA Director Vice Adm. Jon Hill testified before the same subcommittee that both NGI competitors are running to be able to emplace the first NGI by 2027, rather than the program objective of 2028 and that the competition lasting through CDR is very useful (Defense Daily, April 21, 2023).
“What’s great about carrying two [competitors], the nation has the ability to go beyond the Critical Design Review, you could have two production lines, if you want to really build out capacity. You could neck down to one supplier at that point and have a single production line…or you can replace some numbers of those and then increase more as you go. So it’s a very flexible acquisition strategy. And I think those decisions do not have to be made today,” Hill said at the time.
Hill also said that MDA needed to work through PDR and gain a high confidence they can actually close the design before moving on to CDR, then follow-up with a down-select decision.
Last year, Lockheed Martin said it expected to reach CDR by the third quarter of fiscal year 2025 (Defense Daily, Oct. 16, 2023).
Similarly, in January Northrop Grumman said it plans to complete CDR in the spring of 2025 (Defense Daily, Jan. 31).
While Collins’s written statement said technical developments led to the upcoming down-select decision, when pressed by Rep. Dale Strong (R-Ala.) during the hearing, the MDA chief admitted it was a combination of contractor technical progress and budgetary pressure from the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
“I’d say sir it’s a combination of both,” Collins answered. “Both teams have progressed very, very well. But there was a catalyst that was driven by the fiscal decision as well.”
He underscored both competitors have completed PDR, full qualification of their parts for the radiation environment of space, and that many subcomponents have reached the critical design review stage of design.
“All that, brought together, we, the agency, believe we have a full in depth understanding of the designs from the two primes. We fully understand the transition to production plans and the risks that are still involved with both primes. And we believe that the level of risk is well below the department’s standard of making a decision such as this. So we believe we have the technical depth and knowledge and understanding of risk as we move forward to make that decision.”
He also admitted to Strong that despite confidence in technical developments, the consequences of NGI having problems are higher than in 2019 when the Redesigned Kill Vehicle (RKV) program was canceled and replaced with NGI, so the agency will be “focused on mitigating that risk as best as possible.”
Strong argued the existing GMD Ground-Based Interceptors are undergoing service life extension work to improve systems and extend useful life while NGI is under development, but if NGI has to be remodeled like RKV, they cannot be extended similarly again as adversary capabilities increase.
Strong also had Collins admit there has been no report or study done by MDA that supports this early down-select decision compared to the previous acquisition strategy.