The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
    • Editorials
    • Commentary
    • Columns
    • Water Cooler
    • Letters
    • Cartoons
    • Books
  • Sports
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Communities
  • Rebate Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Photos
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • World
  • National
  • Politics
  • National Security
  • DC Area
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Technology
  • Investigations
  • Faith
  • Energy
  • Environment
  • Headlines
  • Citizen Journalism
  • Business

    Toyota's bumpy ride began with race for growth

  • Security

    Chinese see U.S. debt as weapon in Taiwan dispute

  • World

    Obama ratchets up Iran sanctions threat

  • National

    Mid-Atlantic braces for new wallop of snow

  • Business

    European economies facing grim times

  • Politics

    Obama rejects starting over on health care

  • Politics

    Illegal immigration fell sharply in '08

Home » News » World

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Army's testing takeover raises body-armor costs

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

Private firms question efficacy

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
Please stand by, images loading!
  • ASSOCIATED PRESS
Army Secretary Pete Geren in February turned all testing of new body armor over to the Army's Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland, which manufacturers contend has raised the cost of testing by 500 percent.

More World Stories

  • U.S. climate envoy raps China
  • China jails earthquake activist
  • Russian military: 'Nyet' to missile defense
  • Obama ratchets up Iran sanctions threat

By Sara A. Carter

Manufacturers of body armor say the U.S. Army's decision to move testing from private companies to in-house has increased costs by more than 500 percent and undermined research and development of life-saving equipment.

In February, Army Secretary Pete Geren decided to move all testing of new body-armor products and protective gear already slated for troops overseas to the Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland in response to a Pentagon inspector general report that criticized Army quality-control procedures.

The Washington Times reported last week that the decision prompted an inquiry by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress.

An internal military e-mail recently obtained by The Times showed that the cost of testing armor at the Aberdeen facility is based on Defense Department rates, which are much higher than at private facilities.

"This testing will be done at contractor cost, but using DOD rates," said Aberdeen's ballistic technology officer, W. Scott Walton, in the Dec. 8 e-mail to military officials.

According to Mr. Walton's e-mail, the total cost for manufacturers testing enhanced small-arms protective inserts, known as ESAPI, at the Army's Aberdeen facility is about "$41,000" for initial tests, and tests for the newer inserts intended to stop the more deadly armor-piercing rounds, known as XSAPI, are about "$51,394."

Eric Dunn, president of H.P. White, a private ballistics test facility that previously held the main contract with the Army, said his company charged manufacturers "$7,875.00 for the ESAPI and approximately $11,000 for the XSAPI plates."

U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command spokesman Tom Rheinlander told The Times that "the test costs cited by outside sources ... did not include other governmental costs incurred by the Program Executive Office or other agencies." He said the Army is currently testing "to a much more rigorous set of protocols and is executing additional test events the commercial labs did not perform."

Mr. Rheinlander added that the Defense Department's inspector general requested a significant increase in test documentation, to include photos, video and test-article chain of custody.

"Most commercial labs do not have access to the full range of test center resources," he said.

Mr. Dunn said the Army's explanation is not valid.

"The Army justification for higher tests costs as a result of video, photography, increased test documentation and chain of custody are all items which are currently available by H.P. White and typically provided at little or no additional cost, depending on the item," Mr. Dunn said.

Army officials said the higher costs are a result in part of the introduction of a new laser tool that measures the impact of bullets hitting plate inserts.

Mr. Dunn said the technology is a laser-scanning arm that is readily available at private labs. He added that the GAO has asked his company about the "technical competency of the Army's new testing standard" used for tests on new equipment and on lots of protective gear going to troops overseas.

"All ballistic and nonballistic tests required by the old and new test standard can be performed by the private testing labs much cheaper than the government test lab," Mr. Dunn said.

Asia Fernandez, president of Armacell, a small body-armor manufacturing and research facility in California, said the Army's decision jeopardizes her company's research and development unit, with dire potential consequences for the safety of U.S. troops.

"It will make developing new, more innovative products more difficult for my company," she said.

If a product fails, then "I would have to consider whether I can afford to continue research on the product, if every time I have to test it, I'm paying more than $50,000," she said.

"We want to produce the lightest and most protective wearing product," Ms. Fernandez added. "Right now, the industry is giving the best of what we have, but it should be ongoing research and development to make it lighter and safer. A tired soldier is a dead soldier."

[Get Copyright Permissions] Click here for reprint permissions!
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. Stimulus foes see value in seeking cash
  2. Va. Senate OKs ban on sexual orientation bias
  3. Another storm approaches Mid-Atlantic
  4. LYNCH: Drug czar should go
  5. Obama's bipartisan call hits wall of dissent
More Top Stories »
  1. Ayatollah: Iran's military will 'punch' West
  2. Storm could put Super Bowl fans in dark
  3. Clinton: Islamist terror is No. 1 threat
  4. Super snow Sunday: Region digs out from 'historic' storm
  5. Prop. 8 trial stirs questions, emotions

Most Shared

  1. Stimulus foes see value in seeking cash
  2. BLANKLEY: Palin delivers sparkle, warmth
  3. Army warned about jihadist threat in '08
  4. New federal office for global warming
  5. STEYN: The 'corpseman' cometh
More Top Stories »
  1. Ayatollah: Iran's military will 'punch' West
  2. Obama's bipartisan call hits wall of dissent
  3. PRUDEN: Hatching the Silly Bowl
  4. EDITORIAL: Free the Baptist 10 in Haiti
  5. Another storm approaches Mid-Atlantic

Most Commented

  1. Obama's bipartisan call hits wall of dissent
  2. Palin: President run may be 'right thing'
  3. Clinton: Islamist terror is No. 1 threat
  4. New federal office for global warming
  5. Rep. Murtha dies at age 77
More Top Stories »
  1. BLANKLEY: Palin delivers sparkle, warmth
  2. Prop. 8 trial stirs questions, emotions
  3. EDITORIAL: Free the Baptist 10 in Haiti
  4. Ayatollah: Iran's military will 'punch' West
  5. Blacks face Senate shutout in 2011

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin

Question of the day

More and more states are legalizing medical marijuana use, and the District of Columbia and New Jersey now seem poised to join that group. How do you feel about the trend?

Blogs & Columns

  • Hot Button Blog

    White House communications chief to treat Fox differently than ABC, NBC

  • Belief Blog

    Anglican day of reckoning coming

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Technology

    (Almost) All about Apple's iPad

  • Redskins 360

    This is goodbye ... for now

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.