Battle over packs:Lawmaker questions how Corps chose MOLLE?s replacement

[thedrifter]

Issue Date: May 10, 2004

Battle over packs
Lawmaker questions how Corps chose MOLLE?s replacement

By Gordon Lubold
Times staff writer

Marine rucks are supposed to be tough enough for extreme environments, especially the battlefield.
But now the pack chosen by the Marine Corps to succeed the problem-prone MOLLE system will be tested on a new battlefield. Marines are about to find out how the pack fares on the political front.

A California congressman who earlier this year called for a review of the acquisition process ? which he claimed was biased against a home-district company ? now is demanding better answers from the Corps.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., turned up the heat in an April 28 letter responding to the Corps? assurances that its chosen pack was the ?best value? for Marines, and that an internal review found the process to be in compliance with federal regulations.

Now, Issa wants a more thorough review.

?Your response to my inquiry regarding the selection of a new supplier for the Improved Load Bearing System is unacceptable,? Issa said in his letter to Maj. Gen. Tony L. Corwin, legislative assistant to the commandant.

?Inferior and cheaper?

In addition to claiming the process was prejudiced against Bianchi International of Temecula, Calif. ? which lost out on the contract ? Issa has said the chosen pack, designed by Arc?Teryx Equipment Inc., of Vancouver, B.C., is of lower quality.

Issa says data used in the selection process showed the Bianchi pack was better than the Arc?Teryx pack.

?Congressman Issa is most concerned that Marines have the best quality equipment available,? said spokesman Frederick Hill. ?In regard to this specific case, we?re trying to determine what exactly happened.?

Corps officials aren?t moved by the congressman?s concerns, saying the Arc?Teryx pack ? manufactured in a partnership with Propper International ? is the right pack for Marines.

?The Marine Corps stands by its decision to award the Improved Load Bearing Equipment system to Propper International,? said Maj. Jason Johnston, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters. ?The contracting process used to select Propper International was fair and equitable, taking into account the company?s technical ability, past performance, field user evaluations and price.?

Johnston declined to comment on ongoing discussions between members of Congress and the Marine Corps.

Although it is unclear when fielding began, the Corps is issuing about 5,000 new packs per month, including several hundred to Marines in Iraq, according to Johnston.

Bianchi company officials had no comment on the matter. Tom Kellum, a spokesman for Propper International, also declined comment.

A sensitive issue

The pack issue is a sensitive one among many Marines.

Two years ago, Marine officials scrapped the military-designed MOLLE system after the pack?s external frame broke at rates as high as 15 percent in some units deployed to Afghanistan.

Under pressure to find a suitable replacement, Marine officials in summer 2002 looked to the private sector. Marine Corps Systems Command, which ultimately chose the winning pack, winnowed an initial list of about a dozen contenders down to two, the Arc?Teryx and the Bianchi packs, then ran extensive field-tests with Marines, using the MOLLE as a baseline.

Issa, whose district includes Camp Pendleton, first voiced his concerns in a Jan. 30 letter to Brig. Gen. Duane D. Thiessen, the Corps? inspector general. The congressman contends the Corps? own ?field user? data showed that Marines favored the Bianchi pack by a significant margin.

Citing a technical report compiled in June 2003, Issa told Corwin in the April 28 letter the Bianchi pack fared better than the Arc?Teryx pack in at least three tests, including the ?stand to prone? test, which measures the ease with which a Marine can go from a standing position to a prone firing position while wearing a pack. Other ?marching? tests demonstrated impact and stability performance. The tests included just 12 Marines but gave an indication of how well each pack would perform.

There was no significant difference between the packs in several other tests measuring the physiological impacts on a Marine carrying each pack. The packs also fared comparably during marksmanship and fighting-configuration tests, Issa?s letter states.

The tests showed that of the 12 Marines, five chose the MOLLE pack, six chose the Bianchi pack. No Marines chose the Arc?Teryx pack the Corps later selected.

?It appears that the official statements of the Marine Corps contradict the facts and that the decisions made during the evaluation process prejudiced the outcome in favor of a product that was found less desirable by Marines in the field,? Issa wrote.

Other data from the selection process may bolster Issa?s concerns.

Both packs initially met the Corps? criteria and several people familiar with the selection process said either pack would have served Marines well.

Yet many people close to the selection process expressed surprise that Systems Command officials at Quantico, Va., picked the Arc? Teryx pack, since Marines gave the Bianchi pack a 96 percent ?favorability rating,? compared to the Arc?Teryx, which was given an 87 percent rating. Performance included durability, reliability, comfort and convenience.

Systems Command compiled the Marines? opinions after field testing in early June, before making a final selection. Much of the data used in the selection process was obtained by Marine Corps Times last winter.

The pack not taken

But Marine officials say the data was just a part of what was used to determine which pack would replace MOLLE.

What lost it for Bianchi was the changes the company made to the pack halfway through the testing process, officials say. The losing Bianchi pack was so significantly modified after Marines tested it that the changes took it out of the running.

Both companies were given an opportunity to address concerns Marines had with their packs.

In Bianchi?s case, Systems Command officials did not like the design of the pack?s mortar-round pouches, and the company submitted a modified pack intended to address those concerns.

Marine officials say that the modified pack was so different from the one that was tested that it failed to meet the needs of Marines.

The changes made to the Arc? Teryx pack, on the other hand, made it considerably better, putting it ahead of Bianchi?s product.

Corwin noted that the Marine Corps had no obligation to allow Bianchi to submit a revision to its final submission and therefore chose not to do so.

Issa believes therein lies a major concern.

?While I understand that the Marine Corps may not have had a legal requirement to accept an altered proposal, I am shocked that such a decision was made,? Issa wrote.

That the Corps opted not to allow the company to change the pack suggests the Corps made a ?subjective assessment,? he said.

?It begs the question, was the process deliberately structured in this way to put Bianchi International at an unfair disadvantage?? Issa wrote.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/sto...PER-2872346.php

Ellie