Ad Council

Sub Fleet Creating Canadian Controversies

Related Stories: Americas - Other, BAE, Contracts - Intent, Issues - Political, Legal, Lobbying, Other Corporation, Submarines, Support & Maintenance

Advertisement
SHIP SSK-876 HMCS Victoria
HMCS Victoria
(click to view full)

Canada’s aging fleet of Oberon class submarines had become simply too old to put in the water. In July 2000, their de facto retirement became official. The question was: what, if anything, would replace them? With long coastlines, and a significant portion of its iced-in northern seas used as running grounds for foreign submarines, Canada’s military believed that giving up its submarine capability was not a viable option for a country that wished to maintain its sovereignty.

Unfortunately, the country’s purchase of second-hand diesel-electric Upholder Class submarines from Britain ran into controversy almost from its inception. Refit and refurbishment costs for the renamed Victoria Class skyrocketed well past the initial GBP C$ 750 million estimate, and reliability problems ensued. Then, on Oct 5/04, HMCS Chicoutimi was sailing from Falsane, Scotland when it was disabled by a fire caused by the entry of seawater. One sailor died, 2 others were injured, and the boat had to be rescued by British frigates. HMCS Corner Brook [SSK 878] is currently the only Canadian submarine in service. HMCS Victoria [SSK 876] and HMCS Windsor [SSK 877] are undergoing repairs and upgrades, and HMCS Chicoutimi [SSK 879] is in drydock being used for spare parts, as it is not scheduled to have its fire damage repaired until 2010 or 2012.

SHIP_SSK_Victoria_Class_Cutaway.jpg
Victoria Class
(click to view full)

In early 2008, controversy flared again as the submarines’ C$ 1.5 billion Victoria Class In-Service Support Contract (VCISSC) became an issue. The government had finally pushed through a decision in January – but implementation ran into another lawsuit filed by the losing bidder, as well as strong pressure from a member of the Prime Minister’s own party. Who also happens to be the Canadian Parliament’s recognized authority on its submarines. Now there are revelations that Canada will have just 1 operational submarine until 2009, even as the Canadian Government issues its report re: health effects of the HMCS Chicoutimi fire, and overrides the protests to award the formal maintenance contact…

  • The Submarine Support Contract Controversy
  • Updates and Related News
  • Additional Readings & Sources

The Submarine Support Contract Controversy

SHIP SSK-877 HMCS Windsor Alan Rowlands
HMCS Windsor
(click to view full)

The VCISSC contract is seen as an important final stage in getting the Victoria Class into active service at last. It was put out for tender in September 2006, and 3 consortia bid. In January 2007, Canadian Submarine Management Group (CSMG) of British Columbia was deemed “most compliant” due to its points rating, and picked as the preferred bidder. A lawsuit by Irving Shipbuilding caused the government to break off negotiations, however, stalling the deal.

In November 2007, it was reported the government might cancel the deal, which represents about 150 of jobs in Victoria over 15 years. That drew outrage from local BC politicians. In January 2008, however, a decision was taken to re-start those negotiations with CSMG to get the deal done. DND spokesman David Martin has told the Canadian Press news agency that those negotiations are underway, and a final contract is expected in a few months.

The decision reportedly went all the way up to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s desk. Even so, the signing of that contract is about to face rough waters again.

SHIP SSK-876 HMCS Victoria Dry-Dock CFB Esquimalt
HMCS Victoria
(click to view full)

At the moment, HMCS Victoria is based at Esquimalt, British Columbia on Canada’s west coast, with a target date to re-enter active duty in 2009. The other 3 submarines, including the currently-serving HMCS Corner Brook, are based/drydocked in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The rising importance of the Pacific Rim is causing calls for 2 submarines to be based at CFB Esquimalt, but this is not yet reflected in Navy plans.

Independent-minded Canadian MP Bill Casey of Nova Scotia [Cons – Cumberland Colchester Musquodoboit Valley] is known as the Canadian Parliament’s foremost authority on the Victoria Class submarines, and his investigations began long before the HMCS Chicoutimi incident. He blasted the contract award, noting that HMCS Victoria experienced problems transiting the Panama Canal because the class is not designed to operate in warm waters, and lacks adequate cooling. Barring a sharp speed-up of ice melting that clears the Northwest Passage sooner than expected, or the use of Russia’s Northern Sea Route, a deficiency of that kind would make shuttling the subs between the maintenance yard in British Columbia and their base in Nova Scotia a difficult exercise at best.

Bringing HMCS Chicoutimi Home.jpg
Taking Chicoutimi home
(click to view full)

On the contractor end, one of the rival groups was led by BAE Systems (Canada) Ltd., and included the politically-connected east coast shipping giant Irving Shipbuilding, whose share of the work has been estimated at 50% if their consortium had won. Irving company Fleetway, Inc. was the 3rd member of this consortium.

Irving Shipbuilding is doing more than just protest, though they are making a public case about the costs to the taxpayer of shuttling the subs from the Atlantic to the Pacific for maintenance. The firm also says that it intends to file a lawsuit. VP Kevin Hudson called the award a “travesty,” and said that “We are proceeding with our court action and believe our case is very strong.” The firm has already been involved in 2 court actions over this contract.

Other Irving spokespeople called on the government to re-bid the contract.

Irving spokespeople point out that CSMG partner Weir Canada Inc. drew up initial plans for the contract’s statement of work and evaluation criteria, and cite that as “a grave conflict of interest and use of insider knowledge.” The company added that the winning bid failed to meet the necessary requirements, and the total estimated value of the contract’s scope of work was not included in the price evaluation.

For its part, Canada’s Navy is unwilling to re-bid, given delays to date and the needs of its submarine fleet. One “senior defence source” put it bluntly to CP: “Going back out to tender and getting it totally put to bed means three years. We can’t afford that.”

Updates and Related News

Windsor and Montreal
Windsor and HMCS Montreal
(click to view full)

July 3/08: The Government of Canada announces that it has awarded the victoria Class submarine maintenance contract to the Canadian Submarine Management Group (CSMG) of British Columbia, who were the original winners of the 2006 RFP solicitation.

The 5-year, C$370 million (currently $363 million) contract covers project management oversight to plan and organize the submarine refits; material acquisition; repair and overhaul; engineering services; and provides for scheduled refit and maintenance activities. Subject to continuing satisfactory performance, a number of extension options can be exercised to expand this work to provide for an additional 10 years of submarine fleet support that could bring the contract to a potential total value of C$1.5 billion (currently $1.47 billion). Canadian government release.

June 18/08: Tests performed by the National Research Council concluded that significant amounts of carbon monoxide, perdite, and other chemicals were released by the fire, and that it is reasonable to conclude the crew was exposed to carcinogenic material in the smoke. That is hardly surprising; the question is how much carcinogenic material, what the future risks may be, and whether there may be other health consequences.

The NRC report adds that It also states that any long-term health effects would probably manifest within hours or days after exposure to a 1-time event, which usually has a minimal cancer risk. At the briefing, Cmdr. Jeff Agnew said the report shows the chances of long-term health effects of inhaling smoke from the fire are “slim to none… But you can never say never.” The Canadian Forces recommends periodic monitoring of the submarine’s crew members.

Media reports do not appear to address the issue of subsequent health complaints by submarine crew members, except to note them. Canwest News | CTV | UPI

June 17/08: After the HMCS Chicoutimi’s fire in October 2004, many of the submarine’s 55-member crew had to breathe in the smoke and live in the ash for days as a mater of course, as they struggled to save and return their stricken submarine. Since that date, some of the crew members have reported breathing troubles and variety of neurological disorders. claims to Veteran’s Affairs have been held up, or even rejected due to lack of information.

A report covering exactly what the sailors were exposed to was expected in the 2005 board of inquiry, but the tests were not completed until just recently. The Canadian Press news service reports that a briefing on the subject is scheduled for June 18/08 in Halifax, involving Canadian vice-admiral Drew Robertson.

June 4/08: A Minister’s briefing that admits Canada will have just one operational submarine until 2009, in order to cover 3 oceans and one of the world’s longest coast lines, has put the Victoria Class submarine program back in the spotlight. Th briefing reportedly states that:

“If pressed on submarine availability [the Minister should focus on] a maintenance regime that plans for at least one submarine to be available for operations until steady state is achieved in late 2009, after which two or more submarines will usually be operational and available at all times…. and to repair Chicoutimi as part of that submarine’s already scheduled maintenance period in 2010-2012.”

A return to service in 2012 would b 2 years later than originally planned, and involve a total sideline period of about 8 years. CanWest News | CTV | Victoria Times | UPI

Additional Readings & Sources: The Victoria Class

Additional Readings: News & Events

  • Canadian DND, DAIP office (April 2007) – Reports access to information request #A-2006-01305. “VCISSC procurement information to include: the NSE questionnaire, correspondence etc between & in DND, including: DMEPM SM, DGIIP, ADM (Mat) & PWGSC containing the rationale, & including specific security interests for invoking the NSE for this project.”
  • Halifax Daily News (March 30/07) – Irving alleges sub conflict. “The company applied for a judicial review in front of the Federal Court in Ottawa. Irving claims the contract was awarded to a West Coast group unfairly, and under a conflict of interest.”