The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) is delaying the introduction of the Army's multipurpose unmanned vehicle project as it continues to deliberate. In a situation where Hanwha Aerospace and Hyundai Rotem are competing, DAPA has not yet established a policy on the evaluation criteria for the highest performance. Hanwha Aerospace insists that the evaluation should be based on the performance reports previously submitted, while Hyundai Rotem argues that if the figures exceed those in the performance report, they should be taken into account.
This project, which is approaching the highest performance verification stage, was announced for bidding in April last year, with a goal of introduction in April this year. Unmanned vehicles are expected to be useful in transporting injured personnel or supplies on the battlefield. Hanwha Aerospace participated with Arionsmet, while Hyundai Rotem entered with Sherpa. From September last year to February this year, both vehicles received evaluations that they meet the Army's Required Operational Capability (ROC) through the purchase testing and evaluation conducted by the Army Evaluation Team. The type of vehicle will be determined after the highest performance verification.
The conflict between Hanwha Aerospace and Hyundai Rotem arose over how to verify the highest performance. DAPA's initially set evaluation criterion for the highest performance was that 'the figures indicated in the proposal will be regarded as the maximum performance.' This implies that performance exceeding that in the report would not be acknowledged. Hanwha Aerospace wrote down the maximum performance that Arionsmet could achieve, while reports indicate that Sherpa's performance submitted by Hyundai Rotem was lower than that of Hanwha Aerospace's prototype.
It has been reported that DAPA recently conducted an internal briefing indicating that they would accept new performance reports instead of the ones submitted by the companies vying for the multipurpose unmanned vehicle purchase project. This was in response to Hyundai Rotem's objections, stating, "We have not received a clear explanation regarding whether to consider the highest performance evaluation method and performance in the report as the highest performance. If the figures are higher than the report, they should be recognized."
Following the revelation that DAPA was reviewing changes to the evaluation method, Hanwha Aerospace protested. There has never been a precedent for accepting new performance reports for a project that has already been in progress. A representative from Hanwha Aerospace said, "If companies want to resubmit their performance, they need to obtain a new accredited performance report and undergo performance testing again. If there are disagreements afterwards, the procedure may have to be repeated."
In the industry, there are concerns that allowing modifications to proposals would jeopardize the fairness and objectivity of the evaluation process. A representative from the industry noted, "The performance report is an official document submitted by defense industry companies, and changing it at any moment could undermine DAPA's integrity or decision-making criteria. The already complicated progress of the project has led to controversy, and regardless of the decision, the rejected companies will protest."
DAPA stated that they adequately explained the evaluation method at the time of the initial project announcement. A DAPA official said, "The project team is continuing to review to find the optimal method, and nothing has been decided regarding whether to accept the reports again," adding, "We will conclude discussions with experts and related agencies on the evaluation plan by June and finalize it by July."