Friday, September 14, 2007
U.S. military awards $475 mn. security contract to British firm
Contracts
(Washington Post) - The U.S. military confirmed yesterday that it awarded the largest security contract in Iraq to a private British firm, Aegis Defence Services, in a deal worth up to $475 million over two years. Aegis won the high-stakes derby over six other contenders, said sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the confidential nature of the bidding process.
The deal, however, is being challenged by another British company that bid on the contract. Erinys Iraq is seeking an injunction from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to stop the Army from carrying out the contract. Erinys, which is also planning a separate appeal of the award to Aegis, had unsuccessfully sought to challenge the Army's decision in protests with the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
Members of Congress, meanwhile, continue to raise questions about the use of foreign private security forces, such as Aegis, to protect U.S. commanders and soldiers. Federal lawmakers have requested that the GAO look into the use of private security contractors in Iraq. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction also is conducting its second audit of Aegis, based on a request from a member of Congress who has expressed concerns about the firm's chief executive, Tim Spicer. He is a retired British military officer whose previous private military company, Sandline International, had been hired to quell insurgencies in countries such as Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone.
"We are very pleased to receive this award, which we believe is a fine reflection of both our previous performance and our ongoing commitment to serve our client, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gulf Region Division, to the best of our ability," Spicer said in a statement. Aegis holds the current contract, a three-year deal worth $293 million, to provide intelligence services to the Army and security for the Army Corps of Engineers on reconstruction work in Iraq.
While a military official in Baghdad confirmed Aegis as the contract winner, he did not elaborate; an announcement is expected soon. It was unclear yesterday why Aegis prevailed over what sources said was the other top contender, another British firm, ArmorGroup International. But over the past several months, sources said Aegis worked to show the military that it had a strong track record, stressing that none of its U.S. military clients had been killed in three years while traveling more than 3 million miles in Iraq. Sources also said Aegis underscored to the military that it made little sense to change contractors by bringing in another private firm to oversee a complicated security operation with offices throughout Iraq just as U.S. forces were seeking to scale back and eventually withdraw from the country.
Aegis was not the lowest bidder, but it was close in price to ArmorGroup's proposal, sources said. ArmorGroup, which is one of the largest security firms in Iraq, with more than 1,200 employees, tried to persuade the military that it was a better choice than Aegis in part by stressing its track record for protecting clients in Iraq, sources said. ArmorGroup spokesman Patrick Toyne-Sewell declined to comment.
ArmorGroup also tried to highlight some of the controversies involving Spicer and Aegis, sources said. After winning the first U.S. Army contract, Aegis quickly ran into problems. A special inspector audit found that the company failed to perform adequate background checks on some Iraqi employees. The company said it had just won the contract and immediately addressed the issue.
Erinys, which has about 1,000 employees in Iraq and provides security for some military personnel there under a separate contract, has maintained that the Army did not thoroughly review its proposal and failed to follow procurement rules. An attorney for Erinys declined to comment.
Members of Congress, meanwhile, continue to raise questions about the use of foreign private security forces, such as Aegis, to protect U.S. commanders and soldiers. Federal lawmakers have requested that the GAO look into the use of private security contractors in Iraq. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction also is conducting its second audit of Aegis, based on a request from a member of Congress who has expressed concerns about the firm's chief executive, Tim Spicer. He is a retired British military officer whose previous private military company, Sandline International, had been hired to quell insurgencies in countries such as Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone.
"We are very pleased to receive this award, which we believe is a fine reflection of both our previous performance and our ongoing commitment to serve our client, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gulf Region Division, to the best of our ability," Spicer said in a statement. Aegis holds the current contract, a three-year deal worth $293 million, to provide intelligence services to the Army and security for the Army Corps of Engineers on reconstruction work in Iraq.
While a military official in Baghdad confirmed Aegis as the contract winner, he did not elaborate; an announcement is expected soon. It was unclear yesterday why Aegis prevailed over what sources said was the other top contender, another British firm, ArmorGroup International. But over the past several months, sources said Aegis worked to show the military that it had a strong track record, stressing that none of its U.S. military clients had been killed in three years while traveling more than 3 million miles in Iraq. Sources also said Aegis underscored to the military that it made little sense to change contractors by bringing in another private firm to oversee a complicated security operation with offices throughout Iraq just as U.S. forces were seeking to scale back and eventually withdraw from the country.
Aegis was not the lowest bidder, but it was close in price to ArmorGroup's proposal, sources said. ArmorGroup, which is one of the largest security firms in Iraq, with more than 1,200 employees, tried to persuade the military that it was a better choice than Aegis in part by stressing its track record for protecting clients in Iraq, sources said. ArmorGroup spokesman Patrick Toyne-Sewell declined to comment.
ArmorGroup also tried to highlight some of the controversies involving Spicer and Aegis, sources said. After winning the first U.S. Army contract, Aegis quickly ran into problems. A special inspector audit found that the company failed to perform adequate background checks on some Iraqi employees. The company said it had just won the contract and immediately addressed the issue.
Erinys, which has about 1,000 employees in Iraq and provides security for some military personnel there under a separate contract, has maintained that the Army did not thoroughly review its proposal and failed to follow procurement rules. An attorney for Erinys declined to comment.
Labels: Aegis Defense Services, Armorgroup, Erinys Iraq, GAO, GRD, Iraq, security contract, Tim Spicer, U.S. military, USACE
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
British firms emerge as finalists for largest U.S. security contract in Iraq
Contracts, Reconstruction
(Washington Post) - Two British firms have emerged as finalists to win the largest U.S. security contract in Iraq, according to sources familiar with the matter. In what has become a contentious competition, Aegis Defence Services and ArmorGroup International are considered top contenders for a contract worth up to $475 million to provide intelligence services to the U.S. Army and security for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on reconstruction work in Iraq. Aegis won the initial contract in 2004, a three-year, $293 million deal.
The Army has eliminated another British firm, Erinys Iraq, but that company is contesting the decision in sealed documents filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, said sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the contract review process is confidential. It was unclear yesterday whether the Army had chosen other finalists, but two other firms confirmed that they, too, are out of the running -- Control Risks of Britain and Blackwater Security Consulting of North Carolina.
The battle for the lucrative contract has drawn the attention of members of Congress who have questioned the use of private security contractors, about 20,000 of whom operate in Iraq, and whether the military should be outsourcing such critical tasks as security and intelligence to private firms. Based on a request from a member of Congress, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction is conducting its second audit of Aegis.
Meanwhile, federal lawmakers have requested that the Government Accountability Office, Congress's investigative arm, also look into the use of private security contractors in Iraq. The GAO has begun to review contractors there, building on previous reports, spokesman Paul Anderson said. "We're still early in the process."
"The Army's decision to once again remove Erinys from the bidding process is bad economics and demonstrates the fundamental flaws in this procurement," said an Erinys spokesman. "We are taking steps to ensure that our proposal is given fair treatment on a level playing field, in accordance with applicable government laws and regulations."
ArmorGroup spokesman Patrick Toyne Sewell declined to comment. ArmorGroup already is one of the largest security firms in Iraq, with more than 1,200 employees. Aegis, which also has about 1,200 contractors in Iraq, declined as well to comment on the new contract, but Kristi M. Clemens, the firm's executive vice president, touted its work on the current contract.
The Army is expected to make a final decision soon. "We are proceeding with discussions and preparation for award," said Chuck D. Martino, deputy chief of staff of the Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan in Baghdad.
The Army has eliminated another British firm, Erinys Iraq, but that company is contesting the decision in sealed documents filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, said sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the contract review process is confidential. It was unclear yesterday whether the Army had chosen other finalists, but two other firms confirmed that they, too, are out of the running -- Control Risks of Britain and Blackwater Security Consulting of North Carolina.
The battle for the lucrative contract has drawn the attention of members of Congress who have questioned the use of private security contractors, about 20,000 of whom operate in Iraq, and whether the military should be outsourcing such critical tasks as security and intelligence to private firms. Based on a request from a member of Congress, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction is conducting its second audit of Aegis.
Meanwhile, federal lawmakers have requested that the Government Accountability Office, Congress's investigative arm, also look into the use of private security contractors in Iraq. The GAO has begun to review contractors there, building on previous reports, spokesman Paul Anderson said. "We're still early in the process."
"The Army's decision to once again remove Erinys from the bidding process is bad economics and demonstrates the fundamental flaws in this procurement," said an Erinys spokesman. "We are taking steps to ensure that our proposal is given fair treatment on a level playing field, in accordance with applicable government laws and regulations."
ArmorGroup spokesman Patrick Toyne Sewell declined to comment. ArmorGroup already is one of the largest security firms in Iraq, with more than 1,200 employees. Aegis, which also has about 1,200 contractors in Iraq, declined as well to comment on the new contract, but Kristi M. Clemens, the firm's executive vice president, touted its work on the current contract.
The Army is expected to make a final decision soon. "We are proceeding with discussions and preparation for award," said Chuck D. Martino, deputy chief of staff of the Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan in Baghdad.
Labels: Aegis Defense Services, Armorgroup, Blackwater Security Consulting, Chuck D. Martino, contracts, Control Risks, Erinys Iraq, GAO, Iraq, Iraq reconstruction, USACE
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Security companies challenge army over $475 mn contract
Business, Contracts
(Washington Post) - Two private security contractors have lodged formal protests against the Army, claiming they have been unfairly excluded from competing for one of the largest security jobs in Iraq, according to government documents and sources familiar with the matter.
The contract, potentially worth $475 million, is for providing intelligence services to the Army and wide-ranging security for the Army Corps of Engineers during reconstruction work in Iraq. It will replace another agreement that was to expire by month's end but is now being extended for up to six months while the challenges are resolved.
The Defense Department's process for acquiring weapons and other equipment has been rocked by recent scandals and the scrutiny of the "revolving door" that can benefit former Pentagon officials. The protests come at a time when members of Congress are demanding more scrutiny of private security contractors. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, said she has been frustrated in attempts to seek information about Aegis Defense Services, a British firm that holds the current security contract in Iraq. She has requested an audit of the firm by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.
"When [the Defense Department] refuses to provide information that should be public, I am -- what's the word? -- incensed," she said. The special inspector general has agreed to launch an audit, said spokeswoman Denise Burgess. Three years ago, DynCorp International challenged the awarding of the first security contract, worth $293 million, to Aegis, a firm led by Tim Spicer, a former lieutenant colonel in the Scots Guards whose previous firm, Sandline International, had been hired by warring factions in Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone in the 1990s.
Aegis is in the running for the new contract, but Blackwater Security Consulting is challenging the Army over the process. The Government Accountability Office, which is reviewing the protests, declined to provide a copy of Blackwater's written challenge, but in a copy obtained independently, Blackwater wrote that the Army's decision to exclude it was "defective" and "meaningless," in part because the military did not explain how it evaluated the contractor's offer.
Blackwater, which is based in North Carolina, also wrote that it "never had an opportunity to ask relevant questions" about how the Army eliminated its proposal. Blackwater provides security in Iraq under a State Department contract but does not participate in the Iraqi operations centers that fall under the new Army contract. Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell declined comment.
Erinys Iraq is also challenging the Army's decision to exclude its offer; in its protest, the British contractor contends that the Army did not thoroughly review its proposal and failed to follow procurement rules, according to a source familiar with the protest. Erinys already provides security for some military personnel in Iraq under a separate contract. Robert Nichols, Erinys's outside counsel, declined comment.
Christopher Krafchek, an attorney for the Army assigned to the case, also declined to comment. Under the Army's bidding guidelines, it can exclude contractors from what it calls the "competitive range" because it is using a negotiated procurement process, meaning that it will base its decision not on the lowest bid price but on what it determines is the best value.
Several other firms are competing for the new Army contract, sources say, in addition to Aegis, which works side-by-side with Erinys in Baghdad's Green Zone on similar but separate contracts. Aegis came under fire two years ago when the special inspector general found that the firm could not prove that its armed employees received proper weapons training or that it had vetted Iraqi employees to ensure they did not pose a threat. Aegis said that the government's audit was done shortly after the firm arrived in Iraq, before proper procedures were in place.
While Aegis declined to discuss its bid, it defends its work in Iraq. "Aegis has a very good track record," said Kristi M. Clemens, the company's executive vice president. "We've served the U.S. government very well in our current capacity."
The contract, potentially worth $475 million, is for providing intelligence services to the Army and wide-ranging security for the Army Corps of Engineers during reconstruction work in Iraq. It will replace another agreement that was to expire by month's end but is now being extended for up to six months while the challenges are resolved.
The Defense Department's process for acquiring weapons and other equipment has been rocked by recent scandals and the scrutiny of the "revolving door" that can benefit former Pentagon officials. The protests come at a time when members of Congress are demanding more scrutiny of private security contractors. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, said she has been frustrated in attempts to seek information about Aegis Defense Services, a British firm that holds the current security contract in Iraq. She has requested an audit of the firm by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.
"When [the Defense Department] refuses to provide information that should be public, I am -- what's the word? -- incensed," she said. The special inspector general has agreed to launch an audit, said spokeswoman Denise Burgess. Three years ago, DynCorp International challenged the awarding of the first security contract, worth $293 million, to Aegis, a firm led by Tim Spicer, a former lieutenant colonel in the Scots Guards whose previous firm, Sandline International, had been hired by warring factions in Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone in the 1990s.
Aegis is in the running for the new contract, but Blackwater Security Consulting is challenging the Army over the process. The Government Accountability Office, which is reviewing the protests, declined to provide a copy of Blackwater's written challenge, but in a copy obtained independently, Blackwater wrote that the Army's decision to exclude it was "defective" and "meaningless," in part because the military did not explain how it evaluated the contractor's offer.
Blackwater, which is based in North Carolina, also wrote that it "never had an opportunity to ask relevant questions" about how the Army eliminated its proposal. Blackwater provides security in Iraq under a State Department contract but does not participate in the Iraqi operations centers that fall under the new Army contract. Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell declined comment.
Erinys Iraq is also challenging the Army's decision to exclude its offer; in its protest, the British contractor contends that the Army did not thoroughly review its proposal and failed to follow procurement rules, according to a source familiar with the protest. Erinys already provides security for some military personnel in Iraq under a separate contract. Robert Nichols, Erinys's outside counsel, declined comment.
Christopher Krafchek, an attorney for the Army assigned to the case, also declined to comment. Under the Army's bidding guidelines, it can exclude contractors from what it calls the "competitive range" because it is using a negotiated procurement process, meaning that it will base its decision not on the lowest bid price but on what it determines is the best value.
Several other firms are competing for the new Army contract, sources say, in addition to Aegis, which works side-by-side with Erinys in Baghdad's Green Zone on similar but separate contracts. Aegis came under fire two years ago when the special inspector general found that the firm could not prove that its armed employees received proper weapons training or that it had vetted Iraqi employees to ensure they did not pose a threat. Aegis said that the government's audit was done shortly after the firm arrived in Iraq, before proper procedures were in place.
While Aegis declined to discuss its bid, it defends its work in Iraq. "Aegis has a very good track record," said Kristi M. Clemens, the company's executive vice president. "We've served the U.S. government very well in our current capacity."
Labels: Aegis Defense Services, Blackwater Security Consulting, DynCorp International, Erinys Iraq, private security contractors, Tim Spicer
