Project on Government Oversight Weighs in on Bollinger v. Northrop Data

By Michael DeKort,

This article comes to us from POGO.org.   POGO or the “Project on Government Oversight” make reference to me several times in their article.  The writer, Mandy Smithberger provides my readers with another perspective.

Deepwater Problems Motivated by Disinterested Malevolence?

An amended complaint filed by Bollinger Shipyards in the Eastern District of Louisiana last week may provide more insight into the problems with the Coast Guard’s Deepwater project.  Specifically, the complaint sheds more light on problems with the TEMPEST requirement–the government-wide communications protection standards.  The complaint alleges that Northrop Grumman changed the requirements on Bollinger late into the process and purposely withheld data–”motivated by disinterested malevolence”–and that the company owes Bollinger $12 million for work performed on the project.

In the past, we wondered if the technical and security problems with the 123 systems project should have prevented the Coast Guard from awarding Bollinger an $88 million contract for the design and construction of the Fast Response Cutter (FRC) for the Deepwater program.  The Coast Guard defended their decision on our blog, and Deepwater whistleblower Mike DeKort responded, questioning the timing of the first Bollinger suit occurring shortly after another contractor protested the award.  Over at War is Boring, David Axe argues that this lawsuit may suggest that the problems with the electronics for this project are the fault of Northrop, not Bollinger.  In its motion to dismiss, Northrop is blaming Lockheed Martin for late data delivery.

Coast Guard encourages boaters to go digital with new emergency beacons

by Public Affairs Det. Baltimore

BALTIMORE - The Coast Guard is encouraging mariners and aviators to make the switch to digital 406 MHz Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs) to keep pace with search and rescue technology.

Beginning Feb. 1, 2009, the Coast Guard and other search and rescue personnel will only receive distress alerts broadcast using digital 406 MHz EPIRBs. Search and rescue satellites will no longer process older model analog EPIRBs that only transmit on 121.5 or 243 MHz.

The 406 EPIRB’s signal is 50 times more powerful than the 121.5 beacon’s, allowing satellites to better detect its signal and provide a more accurate search area for rescue crews.

Furthermore, a GPS-embedded 406 EPIRB can shrink a search area to about 100 yards and can also pinpoint the position of a distressed mariner within minutes.

Additionally, the number of false alerts with digital beacons is significantly lower than analog beacons.

Satellites are not capable of distinguishing between beacon and non-beacon sources using analog frequencies.With analog beacons, the only way to determine if an alert is an actual emergency is to send rescue crews to the area, which costs thousands of dollars, takes resources away from actual emergencies and puts the lives of responders at risk needlessly.

EPIRB owners are required by law to provide emergency contact information and a vessel description by registering their beacons with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration <http://www.noaa.gov/>. This lets search and rescue personnel quickly confirm if a distress signal is real, and identify who and what type of boat or aircraft to look for. It also means accidental activation of an EPIRB may be resolved quickly with a phone call to the owner.

EPIRB users can register their beacons in the U.S. 406 MHz Beacon Registration Database at: http://www.beaconregistration.noaa.gov/ or by calling 1-888-212-SAVE. Beacon registrations must be updated at least every two years or when information such as emergency contact phone numbers and other vital information changes. Registration information is only available to authorized search and rescue personnel.

Equal Opportunity Advice: Keep Track of Follow-up Correspondence

by S. Mary Wills at the Black Factor

If you have to complain or have complained about racially based discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation–even if you haven’t specifically used those words–it’s important that you keep a record of all correspondence to follow-up on your complaint.

If you’ve met with a supervisor, director, VP, etc., you should document that face-to-face meeting, in writing, to get a record of what was said and any next steps that were promised.

But, more importantly, if you haven’t had a satisfactory response to your complaint, you should send a follow-up message asking about the status of your complaint, issue, question, etc.

A Day in the Life of the Commandant (Coast Guard Channel)

Forget the Refund – ICGS thinks it is OWED $ for the 123s?

And other things I learned from Bollinger v. Northrop

By Michael DeKort

I have received the documents relevant to Bollinger’s suit against Northrop over the 123s.  There is some extremely new and interesting news here.  Here are some of the big items.  I’ll provide greater summary and the court documents a future post.

• Bollinger is now suing Northrop for C4ISR issues – like TEMPEST for the first time – $7m worth.  (The overall amount is about $12m down from $15m)

• Northrop states that the government (Coast Guard) terminated the contract for “convenience for the government”.  It appears that means that not only is no refund due but ICGS is OWED money from the government – Coast Guard

• NG blames Lockheed for the late C4ISR data to Bollinger even though the Bollinger subcontract was only to Northrop.  Northrop states it is not responsible for Lockheed/ICGS not providing data or incorrect data (Even though NG is in ICGS)

• Northrop also suggests Bollinger may be due compensation if the government was responsible for the late or faulty data relative to C4ISR

• Bollinger says Northrop illegally terminated a contract for 49 ships not just the 12 it finished or was working on

• Northrop states a 3 year statue of limitations is up.  Bollinger refutes that

• Northrop states the issues may not be able to be determined until the DoJ AND the DHS IG finish their investigation (Keep in mind there is a Marinette Marine FRC award protest filed with the GAO.  The GAO completion date moved recently from 1/15 to 2/20)

• Bollinger and Northrop are arguing over which court has jurisdiction, whether arbitration is allowed, who can recover what money from who and whether or not 600 docs submitted after Bollinger’s original complaint are relevant

• There are open Motions to Dismiss the Case and to end Arbitration pending.  There is a meeting in the Louisiana court on 1/6 between all of the parties to discuss dates.  I was told no Motions have been decided on