Coast Guard/Deepwater Update

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


I recently wrote about Michael DeKort, the former Lockheed engineer who has been blowing the whistle on Coast Guard contracting debacles for years. Late Tuesday evening, DeKort emailed me to pass on the news (from this source) that the Coast Guard will no longer be using Integrated Coast Guard Systems—a joint Northrop Grumman-Lockheed Martin venture—for any projects related to its Deepwater modernization program. That’s probably good news. ICGS, a so-called “lead systems integrator,” (PDF) was once in charge of handing out contracts for work on Deepwater. Not surprisingly, a lot of those contracts ended up going to Northrop and Lockheed, ICGS’s owners.

DeKort says it’s “a step forward to not award future contracts to ICGS,” because that means Northrop and Lockheed can no longer essentially “pick themselves” for future Coast Guard contracts. But this “certainly does not mean Lockheed and Northrop can’t still win,” he adds.

The true test of whether Lockheed and Northrop will suffer further for their alleged mistakes on Deepwater, DeKort says, will be whether or not they get big future shipbuilding projects coming down the pipe. The most important and lucrative contracts in the works are for five remaining 418-foot “National Security Cutters” and a new class of ships called “Offshore Patrol Cutters.” Those two groups of contracts may represent around half of Deepwater’s $25-billion budget.

DeKort thinks Northrop and Lockheed could win the contracts despite their past mistakes. “Seems to me it would take an act of God for Lockheed and Northrop not to win the remainder of the [National Security Cutters],” he says. “So the real issue is the [Offshore Patrol Cutters].  And that will come down to who else bids, how the competition is handled and who wins.  This all could very well be a boondoggle.”

A boondoggle would be bad. I will look into this more later today.

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate