TOPICS
TOPICS
Navy looks to lighten Intranet contractor's load
The Navy Marine Corps Intranet, a massive computer network for service personnel, will be less of a financial burden to its prime contractor once more users are connected, Navy Secretary Gordon England said Tuesday.
Navy officials also might renegotiate payments to EDS considering the unexpected complexity of the project, England said during the 2004 NMCI Industry Symposium in New Orleans. Currently, the NMCI contract is worth as much as $8 billion.
"EDS has gone through some hard times on this program with us," England said. The project represents the largest government information technology contract worldwide. EDS invested money in the program up front, but is only slated to reap financial gains in relation to the number of users.
Schedule delays have forced EDS to shoulder an unexpected financial burden until more people can connect to the network. "From the beginning of the program, we were struggling with schedules," England said.
He described the initial timelines as "far too optimistic" and said that EDS and Navy officials "did not fully understand" the complexity of the program.
"NMCI turned out to be a very complex program, but that's because the Department of the Navy is a very complex entity," he said.
England made a point, however, of supporting the program and its contractor.
"It is costly, but it is a real service," he said. "EDS has been doing a very good job for the Department of the Navy."
Navy Rear Adm. Charles Munns agreed with England that EDS is on the brink of greater financial returns. More than 360,000 users are now connected to NMCI and 340,000 more "seats" are in the process of being incorporated, according to Navy officials.
England would not speculate on what will happen to NMCI if EDS's financial fortunes do not improve. He also declined to discuss a potential restructuring of the NMCI arrangement to help EDS, saying, "I'd rather not comment on conjecture."
The services and EDS share responsibility for development of the network, England and Munns said. The Navy might increase its payments to EDS, England added, considering the work that was more difficult or costly than anticipated.
"We're always going to work with EDS on what's equitable to do," England said. "EDS has gone the extra mile ... we will negotiate in good faith. We do want to pay people for the work they have done."
An EDS spokesman said the company will refrain from public statements on fiscal matters pending the release of its quarterly financial report, scheduled for July 28.
COMMENTS
- This development is very disturbing. We are falling back on the 1980's tactic of reducing requirements to meet a contract, then saying the program is not in trouble because we have met all the requirements, of course we have reduced the requirements to the point that they are meaningless. In the past year or so we have been reliving the times of $900 hammers, the B-1 bomber, the A-12 and the bradley fighting vehicle. We reduce requirements, fake tests, and put up meaningless statistics to justify a billion dollar program, just so some bureaucrat can say that they were not wrong. We are now paying more, for less capability! I guess corruption in the Pentagon never dies. There are enough cronies in uniform that lack integrity to make an ethical decision to hide or gloss over the truth. Bottom line, EDS and the Navy failed to do the proper planning, they failed to have a realistic assessment of the job required, and the Navy failed to hold a contractor to it's commitments. Now the Navy wants to save face instead of trying to address the problem. GovExec.com reader Posted July 18, 2004 2:22 PM
- So the Navy wants to lighten the load for the NMCI contractor huh? Well boys and girls, I got a hot news flash for ya. There's a "load" that needs to be lightened, but ain't the darn vendor's! For crying out loud! You can't tell there's a guy from Texas in the White House with all the horse's hindparts running around Washington now can ya?! How about you all "T for D" this thing and be done with it? Oh ya, that's Termination for Default to all you admirals, SES'ers and other high brow muckee muckee folks. Or, in plain language, cut this sucker loose! Make like John Paul Jones and jump ship or go drown with the rats. Art Doss Posted July 4, 2004 1:09 PM
- If this were a government agency that was failing miserably, there would be no load lightening. There would be outsourcing, and the failing agency would be phased out. I'd rather see mature and sensible management being applied in this instance than simple minded rhetoric. Government business which is funded with taxpayer dollars, is supposed to run like a business, not a charity to benefit already rich conglomerates. GovExec.com reader Posted June 24, 2004 11:41 AM
