Posts Tagged ‘david pugliese ottawa citizen’

CANADIAN ARMY MOVES AHEAD WITH PLAN TO ACQUIRE THERMAL WEAPON SIGHTS: DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN JOURNALIST

January 26, 2010

ARMY MOVES AHEAD WITH PLAN TO ACQUIRE THERMAL WEAPON SIGHTS

BY DAVID PUGLIESE

Ottawa Citizen

The Army is moving a step closer to acquiring thermal weapon sights for a variety of weapons.

Industry has been told that they are to have their proposals in to the government by Dec. 15.

Earlier this year, Army officers in the directorate of land requirements told an industry forum that the initial operating capability for the Thermal Weapon Sights (TWS) was to be by 2009, according to documents provided to Defence Watch.

But that isn’t going to happen and the IOC has slipped to next year, with full operational capability by 2012, sources have told Defence Watch.

The winning bidder must meet 326 listed requirements and have the lowest cost.

Some industry sources say that indicates that the program has a specific thermal weapon sight in mind, but others maintain that the requirements are flexible enough to promote competition and it is expected several firms will bid on the project.

DND has a requirement for a combined quantity of 826 Light, Medium and Heavy of TWS kits complete with accessories, spare parts and support equipment, and data, according to the details provided by the government on the MERX website. In-service support is also required for the repair and overhaul of the TWS Kits and for the provision of spare parts.

The requirement includes options to procure up to 1,128 additional TWS kits.

One request for proposal will cover two contracts to be awarded to the winning bidder. These two contracts are for the equipment acquisition, and in-service support. The proposed TWS kits must be “military-off-the-shelf.

Companies that do bid are required to have a minimum of 1,000 systems already sold or delivered to a NATO nation.

The delivery of the first Thermal Weapon Sight kits is required starting within three months of the contract award. Those would be for testing. The rest of the delivery would take place over a year-long period.

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

Advertisements

NORAD REVIEWS ITS AIR DEFENCE: DAVID PUGLIESE DEFENCE WATCH OTTAWA CITIZEN

January 26, 2010

DEFENCE WATCH COMMENTARY

By David Pugliese

Ottawa Citizen

NORAD is now examining the state of its air defence capabilities to see if it has the right mix of aircraft, number of bases and alert times to properly conduct its homeland defence mission.

And should the joint U.S.-Canadian military organization cut back on the number of aircraft and bases it needs to do the job?

The news of the review has sparked some angst in the U.S., with former U.S. Air Force officers suggesting that the process is being driven by budget cuts and will ultimately undercut North American air defences. Lt.-Gen. Thomas McInerney, a former commander for NORAD’s Alaska region, says he is concerned air defences could be cut back and that the U.S. is  “being lulled” into removing dollars from NORAD to put into other areas of defence.

The U.S. no longer conducts regular combat fighter aircraft patrols over its cities as it did in the years following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. Such missions were expensive, at one point costing more than $50 million a week.

But in an interview with Defence Watch, Canadian Maj.-Gen. Pierre Forgues, NORAD’s director of operations, played down the money angle. Forgues said although fighter aircraft and support planes are costly to operate, the price tag for such equipment wasn’t behind the decision to review the state of air defences.

He also suggested that the air defence status quo could continue.

Forgues said that the review will start “with a blank slate” and that there are no pre-conceived notions of what exactly would be needed to do such at job. But at the same time, Forgues readily acknowledged that NORAD is relatively happy with the current situation. “We’re comfortable at this point we’re meeting the requirements,” he added.

The New York Times reported that the study is focused on circumstances in which the attack would be aimed not at a public building or landmark but instead at a power plant or a critical link in the nation’s financial network, like a major electrical grid or a computer network hub.

But Forgues told Defence Watch that such scenarios have been on NORAD’s radar since Sept. 11, 2001.

So why this review now?

In January, the Government Accounting Office, similar to Canada’s Auditor General, called on the U.S. air force to improve the management of its operations to protect American airspace. It recommended that the U.S. portion of NORAD routinely conduct assessments to determine the requirements of air sovereignty alert missions as well as the appropriate numbers of personnel and aircraft assigned to support those operations.

In 2008, the GAO also took the Pentagon and NORAD to task for understating the security problems and vulnerabilities involved when NORAD moved from Cheyenne Mountain to Peterson Air Force Base.

Perhaps the GAO’s criticisms struck a chord with NORAD’ senior leadership.

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY DAY HOPES TO SET LONG TERM NAVAL STRATEGY BY DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN

July 22, 2009

By David Pugliese

Ottawa Citizen

As you may have read in my article in today’s Citizen, DND is co-ordinating an industry day in Gatineau next Monday and Tuesday for the shipbuilding industry. The idea is to get feedback from industry on coming up with some kind of coherent long-term shipbuilding strategy.

The stakes are high. The projected value of the upcoming contracts to rebuild the federal government’s fleets (Navy, Coast Guard) varies depending on who you talk to. Industry organization CADSI has been using $30 billion for the new ships and $20 billion for the in-service support contracts. Others use a starting figure of $40 billion, with a total around $60 billion. These are estimates of course but it’s obvious there is big money at stake.

Some industry reps have wondered whether this is going to be a repeat of the Fixed Wing Search and Rescue industry day, which was deemed by many of those who attended as a “disaster.” During that long-awaited industry day there was little information on the FWSAR project provided to industry, some of whom traveled across the country at great expense.

But Peter Cairns, president of the Shipbuilding Association of Canada, predicts the shipbuilding industry day will be much different.

“Is this going to be another industry day so government can say it consulted and that’s it?, asked Cairns. “I like to take the other view; we were further down the road with industry days than they were with Fixed Wing SAR.  We have already gone through AOPS industry days, we’ve been writing articles, we’ve been doing a lot of (advance) work, Senator (Colin) Kenny has been on this issue. So a lot of work has been done.”

Cairns is convinced that the federal government wants to develop this long-term strategy and that federal officials have already done a lot of the leg work.

“We really have an opportunity here,” he added. “There’s a lot of talk, there’s a lot of interest. But the question is;  ‘Who’s the champion for this (new policy)? Who’s in charge?”

He noted that DND was organizing the industry day as it had the biggest stake in getting a positive outcome. Public Works and Industry Canada are expected to take part as well.

The idea is to get input from industry on how to proceed.

“It is an opportunity for people to say their piece,” explained Cairns. “If you can get all these opinions and distill them into some kind of way ahead that would be really positive.”

If you want information on books by David Pugliese check out his Web site , view his biography or his photo website. Go to:

http://members.shaw.ca/dpugliese/

http://members.shaw.ca/dpugliese/David_Pugliese_Biography/index.html

http://davidpugliesemilitaryphotos.blogspot.com/

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news go to the Ottawa Citizen and David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

CANADIAN AIR FORCE RECOMMENDS CHINOOKS FOR PETAWAWA

June 23, 2009

 

The Air Force has made an internal recommendation that CFB Petawawa be the new home to the 16 Chinook helicopters it hopes to eventually receive.
Although no contract has been signed yet it is anticipated by this summer.
CFB Edmonton, CFB Bagotville and CFB Petawawa were in the running as the location.
The official line from DND is that no decision has been made on where to station the Chinooks. An estimated 450 personnel will be assigned to the location of wherever the helicopters are based.
The Basing Recommendation Briefing produced by the office of CAS Lt.-Gen. Angus Watt notes the following: “Petawawa was assessed as being the most operationally responsive location to support the Army and special operations forces while incurring a reasonable and proportionately minor infrastructure cost increase compared to Bagotville,” the briefing pointed out.
The main drawback of Bagotville, according to the briefing, was the lack of “army acculturation.” The CF defined that as the “beneficial personal effect of co-location between Army and (Chinook) personnel on an Army base.” CFB Bagotville is an air force base.
“Proximity with Army personnel in liaison, daily operations and personnel inaction is a key enabler to maximizing interoperability during training and operations,” the briefing noted.
It points out that extra costs to operate from CFB Petawawa would amount to $338 million while locating at CFB Bagotville would cost $341 million. CFB Edmonton was the most expensive option at $380 million.
“Petawawa was assessed as being the most operationally responsive location to support the Army and special operations forces while incurring a reasonable and proportionately minor infrastructure cost increase compared to Bagotville,” the briefing added.
Besides being the most expensive, the negative aspects of CFB Edmonton included its high cost of living, the far distance away from CANSOFCOM units–JTF2 located in Ottawa and CSOR in Petawawa, as well as concerns about urban encroachment, noise and night flying.
Petawawa has a large amount of space for operations and is far enough away from major urban centres.
The Bloc Quebecois has complained in the House of Commons about Bagotville being passed over.
But with no official decision yet announced will CFB Petawawa ultimately be the new home for the aircraft or will politics play a major role here?

BY DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN

The Air Force has made an internal recommendation that CFB Petawawa be the new home to the 16 Chinook helicopters it hopes to eventually receive.

 

Although no contract has been signed yet it is anticipated by this summer.

 

CFB Edmonton, CFB Bagotville and CFB Petawawa were in the running as the location.

 

The official line from DND is that no decision has been made on where to station the Chinooks. An estimated 450 personnel will be assigned to the location of wherever the helicopters are based.

 

The Basing Recommendation Briefing produced by the office of CAS Lt.-Gen. Angus Watt notes the following: “Petawawa was assessed as being the most operationally responsive location to support the Army and special operations forces while incurring a reasonable and proportionately minor infrastructure cost increase compared to Bagotville,” the briefing pointed out.

 

The main drawback of Bagotville, according to the briefing, was the lack of “army acculturation.” The CF defined that as the “beneficial personal effect of co-location between Army and (Chinook) personnel on an Army base.” CFB Bagotville is an air force base.

 

“Proximity with Army personnel in liaison, daily operations and personnel inaction is a key enabler to maximizing interoperability during training and operations,” the briefing noted.

 

It points out that extra costs to operate from CFB Petawawa would amount to $338 million while locating at CFB Bagotville would cost $341 million. CFB Edmonton was the most expensive option at $380 million.

 

“Petawawa was assessed as being the most operationally responsive location to support the Army and special operations forces while incurring a reasonable and proportionately minor infrastructure cost increase compared to Bagotville,” the briefing added.

 

Besides being the most expensive, the negative aspects of CFB Edmonton included its high cost of living, the far distance away from CANSOFCOM units–JTF2 located in Ottawa and CSOR in Petawawa, as well as concerns about urban encroachment, noise and night flying.

 

Petawawa has a large amount of space for operations and is far enough away from major urban centres.

 

The Bloc Quebecois has complained in the House of Commons about Bagotville being passed over.

 

But with no official decision yet announced will CFB Petawawa ultimately be the new home for the aircraft or will politics play a major role here?

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news go to the Ottawa Citizen and David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

If you want information on books by David Pugliese check out his Web site , view his biography or his photo website. Go to:

 

 

http://members.shaw.ca/dpugliese/

 http://members.shaw.ca/dpugliese/David_Pugliese_Biography/index.html

 

MACKAY ANNOUNCES BUILDING CONTRACTS BY DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN

March 16, 2009

 MacKay begins cross-country contract tour

 

Military infrastructure announcements part of government stimulus plans

 

By David Pugliese, The Ottawa Citizen

 

March 14, 2009

 

 

Defence Minister Peter MacKay says the infrastructure contracts he is announcing are ‘an important part of the government’s effort to stimulate the economy.’

 

Defence Minister Peter MacKay says the infrastructure contracts he is announcing are ‘an important part of the government’s effort to stimulate the economy.’

Photograph by: Mathieu Belanger, Reuters, The Ottawa Citizen

 

Defence Minister Peter MacKay launched a cross-country tour Friday to award infrastructure contracts on military bases in an effort to show the Harper government is helping put Canadians back to work during the recession.

 

Some of the projects are new while others have been under way or planned for some time. But defence insiders say the tour is designed to generate positive publicity in various regions for the Conservatives, as well as send the message the government is being decisive in pumping federal money into the economy.

 

In Victoria, MacKay announced $266 million worth of work, the bulk centred on the fourth phase of an ongoing modernization project for the navy’s fleet-maintenance facility. That project originally started in the early 1990s and has been unfolding over the years with the renovations of existing structures and the building of new ones.

 

Also included in the announcement is the construction of a hazardous-material facility. Work began last year on that project.

 

In addition, MacKay said a contract has been awarded to a Vancouver firm to design hangars and other facilities at Pat Bay, B.C., for the air force’s new Cyclone helicopters expected to arrive several years from now. The Defence Department’s contribution to road work near Canadian Forces Base Esquimalt was also included in Friday’s announcement.

 

On Sunday, MacKay will make an early-morning announcement at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton and then fly to Winnipeg that afternoon to unveil other infrastructure projects involving the air force’s 17 Wing.

 

The next day, MacKay will be at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown, N.B., to announce yet more construction contacts.

 

“This is a first round of announcements,” MacKay said of his cross-country tour.

 

He noted that other contracts will be made public in the coming months.

 

MacKay said the contacts are “an important part of the government’s effort to stimulate the economy.”

 

He said the contracts announced at CFB Esquimalt will generate an estimated 1,400 direct employment opportunities over the course of the work.

 

Some defence analysts have pointed out that infrastructure improvements to military bases could be used to significantly stimulate regional economies. The Defence Department’s infrastructure holdings are immense, including about 21,000 buildings; 5,400 kilometres of road; and 3,000 kilometres of water, storm and sewer pipes. Much of that infrastructure is aging and needs to be replaced or upgraded.

 

Some Conservatives have privately complained that the government’s previous announcements of big-ticket defence procurements have not generated the political goodwill they had hoped for.

 

In the summer of 2006, then-defence minister Gordon O’Connor announced billions of dollars in new projects to purchase transport aircraft, helicopters, supply ships and trucks.

 

But defence analyst Allen Sens said the Canadian public expected that the Harper government would re-equip the Canadian Forces. “When they did do that people just shrugged,” said Sens, a political scientist at the University of British Columbia. “So the Conservatives were left standing around wondering where was all the music and confetti from Canadians on this.”

 

In January, the government was also criticized in the Commons and by the Canadian Auto Workers union after MacKay went to Quebec to announce a $274-million contract for new army trucks. But the selected firm, Navistar, is going to build the vehicles in Texas. At the same time, Navistar is laying off 700 Canadian workers at its Chatham, Ont., truck plant.

 

Navistar has said it would cost too much to retool its existing truck-assembly plant in Chatham to build the army trucks.

 

In addition, domestic aerospace firms have complained they have been frozen out of the defence equipment projects the Conservatives announced in the summer of 2006 or that such contracts have not created high-quality jobs in Canada.

 

The infrastructure projects being announced by MacKay are different, however, since they involve local companies and the results can be seen directly in the communities involved, Sens said.

 

“I’m not surprised that MacKay is hop-scotching across the country announcing infrastructure contracts,” he said. “It’s when you start spending locally that not only do you get constituency attention and support, but you get a bit of countrywide attention.”

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news go to the Ottawa Citizen and David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

 

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

DEFENCE FIRMS TO GET NEW WORK BY DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN

March 8, 2009

 

 

 

Military contracts going to city firms; General Dynamics Canada, Thales net deals

 

By David Pugliese

 

The Ottawa Citizen

March 7, 2009

 

Two Ottawa companies will be awarded major military contracts on Monday as Defence Minister Peter MacKay moves to quell criticism that the Harper government has left domestic firms on the sidelines when it comes to supplying the Canadian Forces.

 

The deal will see major upgrades for the army’s existing command and control and communication systems, as well as the purchase of new software and equipment to improve how units share information and are controlled on the battlefield.

 

The army has earmarked around $260 million for the overall program, which will run until 2015. The project will begin this year.

 

General Dynamics Canada as well as Thales Canada, both of Ottawa, will be awarded the contracts, with the bulk of the work going to General Dynamics.

 

New jobs are expected to be created by the contracts, but at this point it is unclear how many positions will be added at the firms. The work will also maintain existing jobs.

 

Defence officials declined to discuss Monday’s announcement at headquarters.

 

But the award to the two firms will be portrayed by MacKay and Public Works Minister Christian Paradis as contracts being supplied to “Canadian” firms, according to defence insiders. Although General Dynamics Canada is owned by a U.S. corporation and Thales by a French consortium, both firms have a significant presence in Canada.

 

General Dynamics has about 1,500 workers in the Ottawa area as well as facilities in Calgary and Halifax. Thales has more than 260 Canadian employees, the bulk in Ottawa. It also has offices in Kingston and Quebec City.

 

The production work on the communications equipment will be done in Canada.

 

Monday’s announcement is in contrast to many of the other large-scale defence contracts announced over the last two years that went to American firms who did the work in the U.S.

 

Members of the country’s aerospace and defence industry, as well as opposition MPs, have been critical about the lack of work for Canadian-based firms from the multibillion-dollar equipment programs the Conservatives have under way for the Canadian Forces. In the summer of 2006, the Harper government announced that it would spend billions of dollars on C-17 and C-130 J transport planes and Chinook helicopters.

 

The C-17s, already delivered, were built in California while the C-130Js are going to be built in Georgia. The Chinook helicopters that the government is in the process of trying to acquire will be built in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

 

MacKay has also recently been pushing to launch a $3-billion program to buy new search-and-rescue aircraft for the Canadian Forces. His preferred choice is an Italian-designed aircraft being built in the U.S.

 

In January, MacKay came under criticism from Canadian autoworkers after he announced a $274-million contract to Navistar to build army trucks in Texas.

 

The same firm, however, recently laid off 500 Canadian workers at its assembly line in Chatham, Ont. Another 200 workers are expected to be laid off there by the spring.

 

Defence analyst Allen Sens said it is common for all governments to highlight military spending announcements as creating domestic jobs and supporting national economies. “But given all these big-ticket items purchased from foreign companies in the past couple of years, there’s a greater urgency to this particular announcement in highlighting the Canadian jobs it will create,” said Sens, a professor at the University of British Columbia.

 

MacKay has defended the awarding of various contracts to foreign firms, noting that, ultimately, Canadian companies benefit. In the case of the Navistar truck contract, he noted that the tires would be made in Canada and that Canadian mechanics would work on the vehicles.

 

Government officials also point out that each defence contract pays back more than its original value in what is known as industrial region benefits. In other words, foreign aerospace and defence firms that win contracts must spend at least the equivalent amount of the contract in Canada.

 

But the organization representing Canada’s aerospace industry has warned that domestic firms are not seeing quality work from the multi-billion-dollar defence contracts.

 

“Our industry remains acutely concerned that major defence procurements are proceeding in a way that will not fully engage and strengthen capabilities resident in the domestic industrial base,” Charles Lajeunesse, president of the Ottawa-based Aerospace Industries Association of Canada, wrote MacKay on Jan. 9. The association represents more than 400 companies in a industry that employs 90,000 workers.

 

There is a lack of “high value-added” jobs going to Canadian industry, Lajeunesse warned.

 

Those inside the Defence Department have been limited in what they can say publicly about the issue. But they privately argue that military needs come first and jobs for Canadians should be a secondary consideration.

 

Industry executives, however, say considering the ongoing economic problems facing the country, jobs for Canadians should be taken into account. They also argue that providing work to Canadian-based defence firms supports the military in the long run, since it develops and keeps much-needed expertise in-country.

 

Monday’s contracts are part of an ongoing army communications upgrade and support program that originally started in 2005. This is known as a “life extension” to that project, meaning that it will further modernize the equipment.

 

The work is designed to make use of improvements in technology to eventually electronically link various equipment in the military’s inventory so they can share information. In some cases, data from unmanned aerial vehicles and satellites would be quickly transmitted to troops. The project will also provide what is known as a “Battle Command on the Move” system to improve the flow of information from the battlefield back to senior officers.

 

 

CANADIAN DEFENCE PROCUREMENT LACKS OVERSIGHT

January 18, 2009

 

 The Ottawa Citizen

Monday, October 29, 2007

By David Pugliese

Source: The Ottawa Citizen

 

Twelve military equipment projects totalling $7.3 billion are considered “high risk,” have gone over budget and are at least two years behind schedule, according to a Defence Department review.

 

 

Taxpayers, however, will remain in the dark on exactly which programs have run into difficulty. The department has declined to release details. So far, $600 million has been spent on the programs in question.

 

Other equipment projects could also face cost overruns, but the department would not provide further details.

 

The analysis of capital equipment projects was done to identify higher-risk programs that warrant an audit, according to the study by the department’s chief of review services. It was produced in April and released recently.

 

“For the 12 higher-risk projects, project cost (or forecast) increased by 9 per cent on average and was behind schedule by 2.2 years,” the analysis said.

 

It added that those projects had not changed in terms of numbers, or type of equipment or capability to eventually be delivered .

 

The report also determined that non-competitive contracts could cost taxpayers extra, but it did not get into details about how much. “Sole-source acquisition can result in higher costs to the Crown, especially with amendments to the contract,” it pointed out. “Projects with competitively tendered contracts were considered lower risk,” the analysis said.

 

The analysis recommended the chief of review services conduct audits into five higher-risk projects. Because the department has limited auditing services available, it recommended that assistant deputy ministers conduct examinations into another six equipment programs.

 

The report says 64 per cent of 25 higher-risk projects have fallen behind schedule. That includes the 12 already identified to be in the most difficulty.

 

Such slippage is a strong indicator of the potential for delayed acquisition of the equipment or a capability as well as an increase in project management costs, according to the review.

 

The department recently put the document up on its website, but censored details about which projects have run into trouble as well as specifics about costs.

 

Defence officials declined to be interviewed about the review.

 

But in an e-mail to the Citizen, the department cited a provision under the access to information law that allows it to censor the report. It claims that the names of the equipment programs and other related details constitute advice to the department or to the defence minister, and thus cannot be seen by the public.

 

In its e-mailed response, the department said criteria for identifying projects for review could include the presence of high-risk transactions, cost or schedule changes, the initial risk assessment of the project, the overall value and a project’s history of meeting its set timetables.

 

The projects examined were those already under way in May 2006. The review examined 162 capital equipment projects totalling a little more than $51 billion.

 

The review did not look at the $24 billion in new equipment projects announced by the Conservative government between June 2006 and July of this year. Those new projects include the purchase of heavy-lift helicopters, the acquisition of C-17 and C-130J transport planes and new fleets of tanks, army trucks and supply ships. The Harper government also announced the construction of Arctic patrol ships, the establishment of a new training centre in the North and the modernization of the navy’s frigates.

 

Deliveries of C-17 aircraft have started, but most of the other programs are still in early stages, with the equipment to be delivered over the next decade.

 

Alan Williams, the department’s former assistant deputy minister for materiel, said the projects examined by the review could include equipment purchases, upgrades to existing equipment or in-service support contracts for various systems.

 

Mr. Williams said he found it significant that the review raised the question about sole-sourcing of military contracts. “In contrast to what the government has been saying, they’re acknowledging that you spend more money on sole-source contracts,” said Mr. Williams, author of Reinventing Canadian Defence Procurement. “Without competition, you can waste taxpayers’ dollars.”

 

The Harper government has come under fire in the last year in the Commons for what critics say are a series of non-competitive contracts awarded to defence firms. MPs with the NDP, Liberals and Bloc Québécois have all warned that directing contracts to particular firms without competition costs taxpayers money and limits the involvement of domestic firms.

 

The government has responded numerous times that the procurement process is fair, open and transparent. The equipment is needed quickly by the military, it contends.

 

The chief of review services’ analysis recommends strengthening the management of capital equipment programs by conducting audits early in the acquisition process. It also pointed out that more management control should be directed to programs based on their level of risk.

 

Idnumber: 200710290001

Edition: Final

Story Type: Business

Length: 781 words

 

PRODUCTION FIELDS

NDATE: 20071029

NUPDATE: 20071029

DOB: 20071029

POSITION: 1