By Marina Malenic
The Senate Armed Service Committee’s (SASC) version of the FY ’11 Defense Authorization Bill would fence funding for a multinational air defense development effort until the Defense Department reports on possible alternatives, thorough future cost estimates and other details of the multibillion-dollar program.
“None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 and available for the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) may be obligated or expended until…the Department of Defense has completed the Critical Design Review and the System Program Review for the [MEADS] program and made a decision on how or whether to proceed with the program or an alternative to the program; [and] the Secretary of Defense has submitted to the congressional defense committees a report setting forth a detailed explanation of the decision,” the SASC report on the bill reads.
Pentagon officials have said they are firmly committed to the development with NATO allies Germany and Italy despite systemic cost growth and Army officials’ repeated attempts to kill or transfer responsibility for the effort to the Missile Defense Agency (Defense Daily, March 23).
An official with knowledge of the program said its cost has reached at least $3.5 billion.
The Senate provision further specifies that the Pentagon’s report should contain a cost estimate performed by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE); an analysis of alternatives (AoA); and a description of the planned schedule for the remainder of the development, production and deployment of the system.
The House version of the bill contains no parallel provision. But Hill sources familiar with the program said yesterday that some funding fence of some amount is expected to survive when the two are reconciled in conference.”
The program is currently in the Army’s air defense portfolio. In February, Army officials circulated a memo expressing renewed concerns that requirements for MEADS, formulated in 1999, “do not address current and emerging threats.” The Army instead advocates harvesting MEADS technologies and improving the Patriot program it was designed to replace (Defense Daily, Feb. 25).
Senior Army officials who met with representatives from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) in March reached no decision on the service’s plan to transfer management of MEADS to the agency. Senior representatives of both organizations agreed to continue discussing the possibility. In the meantime, both the Army and the CAPE office are conducting reviews and new cost estimates for the program (Defense Daily, March 23).
Last year, the program was given the go-ahead for production of a test system after the three countries considered and rejected the option of terminating the effort, with considerable cost overruns remaining a concern. MEADS last year completed a series of reviews of all its major components and began production of radars, launchers, tactical operation centers and reloaders needed for system tests this summer at White Sands Missile Range, N.M.
Lockheed Martin maintains that the program is still relevant and cost-effective.
“Today, MEADS makes more sense than ever,” a spokesperson for the company said via email in response to the Senate provision. “Our allied partners are committed to the program and through their collective contributions, the U.S. is developing the next-generation Patriot system for 58 cents on the dollar. We will continue to work with our government customers to ensure we deliver this critically needed capability.”
A multinational joint venture headquartered in Orlando, Fla., MEADS International‘s participating companies are MBDA in Italy, LFK in Germany and Lockheed Martin [LMT] in the United States. The United States funds 58 percent of the program, and European partners Germany and Italy provide 25 percent and 17 percent, respectively, as partners in the NATO Medium Extended Air Defense System Management Organization.
The program is progressing in accordance with a revised schedule toward Critical Design Review (CDR) in August, Lockheed Martin officials have said. The current schedule is based on a mutually agreed plan by top Pentagon weapons buyer Ashton Carter and his German and Italian counterparts in an amended memorandum of understanding that addresses cost increases and schedule delays late last year.
MEADS is a mobile system that is expected to replace Patriot in the United States, the Nike Hercules in Italy and both the Hawk and Patriot systems in Germany. It was designed for interoperability among the three allies and to provide 360-degree coverage for troops against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft.