Earlier today, in a statement by Ms. Lynne M. Halbrooks, Principal Deputy Inspector General, Department of Defense Inspector General before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform entitled, “Opportunities to Reduce Waste and Improve Efficiency at the Department of Defense and Other Federal Agencies,” she made a rather interesting comment about the US Army’s proposed replacement for the M4/M16 family.
In another example, we are auditing the Army’s acquisition of the individual carbine program, which is an acquisition the Department may want to re-evaluate. We expect to report concerns that DoD may not have an established need for this weapon nor developed performance requirements for the $1.8 billion acquisition. Currently, the Army is modifying its existing M4 rifle and, at the same time, seeking to develop a new rifle. However, key performance parameters such as accuracy, reliability, and lethality have not been established. In addition, it is unclear what additional capability this new rifle will have over the modified M4. Further, the Army is seeking to acquire more rifles during a time when their total force structure will be reduced. We expect to issue our draft report within the next two months that will further elaborate on these concerns and provide recommendations for the Department to increase efficiencies.
Considering the Army’s dual path strategy that is alluded to in the statement which concurrently improves the performance of existing M4A1 carbines while simultaneously working to acquire an entirely new weapon, it is no wonder that DoD is reconsidering the replacement half of the equation. Industry analysts have long questioned the notion that a new weapon would offer a dramatic increase in performance without first undertaking a caliber and associated ammunition change. The IC program does not adequately do this. And then there’s Sequestration…
