Sign In



Section 809 Panel Issues New Streamlining Acquisition Report 809 Panel Issues New Streamlining Acquisition Report2018-07-12T16:00:00Z,<div class="ExternalClass6D0175759CB545F2839DD1EB7EEE6B7D"><h3> </h3> Section 809 of the FY16 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) directed the Secretary of Defense to establish an <a href="">independent advisory panel on streamlining and simplifying acquisition regulations</a>.<br> <br> The Section 809 Panel’s <a href="">Volume 1 Report</a> was issued in January 2018. Their Volume 2 Report was recently issued in June 2018. According to their website, “In our <a href="" target="_blank">Volume 2 Report</a>, we cover topics such as enterprise capability portfolio management, operationalizing the Dynamic Marketplace concept, commercial source selection, the acquisition workforce, the Cost Accounting Standards Board, and services contracting. Additionally, you will see more information on decluttering Title 10 of the U.S. Code.”<br> <br> Of particular interest to the DoD life cycle logistics and product support management community are concerns raised about the Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP), Product Support Manager (PSM) and sustainment management in general, saying:<br> <br> “The (life cycle sustainment plan) outline is conceptually sound, but in execution, many programs bow to stakeholder pressures to meet performance needs at the expense of sustainment needs. For example, in the F-22 situation (described in the report), the PM and the product support team intended to consider maintenance staff and sustainability upfront, but user demand for a stealthy aircraft forced compromises that drove up sustainment costs.<br> <br> The PSM position needs attention as well. The position was intended to bring logistics and sustainment experience and expertise to the upper-management levels of the program office. Although the PSM roles and responsibilities are clearly defined, no specific resources are identified to support these efforts. PSMs must compete for program funding to achieve appropriate levels of sustainment planning and performance. Funding is often provided only in the year of execution, further hampering the PSM’s ability to establish long-term strategies to improve sustainment performance or incentivize lifecycle cost reductions.<br> <br> Sustainment management is implemented differently across DoD, but it is generally characterized by the following: <ul> <li>Lack of command unity.</li> <li>Metrics that indicate satisfactory performance but do not necessarily support or contribute to the desired overall result.</li> <li>Intellectual property rights issues that inhibit sustainment.</li> <li>Contracting issues that are constricted by statutes, regulations, and policies.”</li> </ul> <br> The panel then went on to outline five focus areas to address these concerns, saying:<br> <br> Sustainment management is a discipline encompassing all logistics elements. It also has the broader context of strategy, planning, and budgeting to ensure weapon systems’ full potential can be attained. Several concepts for achieving this discipline are being explored to support forthcoming recommendations. The following are included among them: <ul> <li>Improving sustainment planning in initial stages of an acquisition.</li> <li>Establishing a Sustainment Program Baseline (SPB) (akin to the <a href="/glossary/pages/1396.aspx">Acquisition Program Baseline (APB)</a>)</li> <li>Maturing LCSPs to enhance appropriate and affordable sustainment.</li> <li>Clarifying funding rules crucial to readiness and obsolescence management.</li> <li>Developing effective analytical tools to support decision making.</li> </ul> <br> The panel concluded by saying “Sustainment management is complex, and there is no single organizational entity responsible for the negative effects that frequently occur to weapon system readiness. Degradation has been exacerbated by a continuing series of reform initiatives that did not directly address problems, but instead established more unfunded policy and regulations; continued to address sustainment on an annual, rather than lifecycle, basis; and employed metrics that masked the enormity of readiness problems. It has taken decades to reach this state. Even with a substantial funding influx, training, and statute and policy changes, marked improvement will take time. The sustainment system needs realignment that places appropriate emphasis on sustainment, is consistent with the portfolio management model being recommended, and brings renewed long-term focus to the overall state of readiness. It would also benefit from establishing an SPB tied closely to the APB that drives planning, budgeting, and oversight to enable delivery of total logistic support to the weapon system. If PMs are incentivized to make decisions considering the portfolio management concept, warfighters will ultimately benefit. The Section 809 Panel’s specific recommendations required to implement Logistics and Sustainment Management at a program and portfolio level will be addressed in the Volume 3 Report” (due out later this year).<br> <br> See pages 45-52 of the <a href="">Volume 2 Report</a> for additional details.</div>string;#/training/career-development/logistics/blog/Section-809-Panel-Issues-New--Streamlining-Acquisition-Report
Interesting Perspectives on Improving DoD Sustainment Perspectives on Improving DoD Sustainment2018-07-12T12:00:00Z Sailors Flight Deck Personnel_20170105.jpg, Sailors Flight Deck Personnel_20170105.jpg Sailors Flight Deck Personnel_20170105.jpg<div class="ExternalClass7CE89FA997794543AD2186CF861AB8D2">Of potential interest to our life cycle logistics community is a June 25, 2018 article about sustainment improvement initiatives written by the former Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics entitled “<a href="">Version 4.0: The Unfinished Business of DoD Acquisition, Sustainment</a>”.<br></div>string;#/training/career-development/logistics/blog/Interesting-Perspectives-on-Improving-DoD-Sustainment
DoD Independent Technical Risk Assessment (ITRA) Framework Independent Technical Risk Assessment (ITRA) Framework2018-07-11T12:00:00Z,<div class="ExternalClass0DC00BCEA7AE4D4596E3FF458DC5E5DD">In case you hadn’t already seen it, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (R&E) issued a memo on June 18, 2018 entitled “<a href="">Framework for Risk Categorization for Use During Independent Technical Risk Assessments</a>”, along with the June 2018 “<a href="">DoD Independent Technical Risk Assessment (ITRA) Framework for Risk Categorization</a>”.<br> <br> According to the framework “Independent Technical Risk Assessment (ITRA) will assess technical risks for Major Defense Acquisition Programs as described in this framework and the <a href="">Department of Defense (DoD) Risk, Issue, and Opportunity (RIO) Management Guide for Defense Acquisition Programs</a> including risks related to critical technologies and manufacturing. For the purposes of this discussion, the term “risk” will refer to both risks and issues, although a risk differs from an issue in that risk occurrence is probabilistic whereas an issue is certain or has already occurred.<br> <br> In general, technical risks are those events or conditions typically emanating from areas such as mission/requirements, technology, engineering, integration, test, software, manufacturing/quality, logistics, and system security/cybersecurity that may prevent a program from meeting cost, schedule, and/or performance objectives.<br> <br> ITRAs will leverage ongoing program activities whenever practical, e.g., Technology Readiness Assessments (TRA), Manufacturing Readiness Assessments (MRA), Systems Engineering Technical Reviews, and Industry Days. These assessments and activities will inform the ITRA; however, the team will provide an independent assessment of any risks or maturity concerns identified. As such, there may not be a direct correlation between external assessments or measures, such as technology readiness levels, and the team’s assessment.”<br></div>string;#/training/career-development/logistics/blog/DoD-Independent-Technical-Risk-Assessment-(ITRA)-Framework-
Potentially Useful Military Logistics Reference Useful Military Logistics Reference2018-07-10T12:00:00Z Fields/DAU_Logistics Container_20170104.jpg, Fields/DAU_Logistics Container_20170104.jpg Fields/DAU_Logistics Container_20170104.jpg<div class="ExternalClass65CEDEF9C9E44508909DBC7A9A15BFB9">While not specifically endorsing the publisher or the content, wanted to make the life cycle logistics community aware of a recently issued June 2018 E-Book entitled “<a href="">Military Logistics</a>” available from Defense News, a commercial provider. According to their website, “this Defense News e-book features news coverage and commentaries detailing the global defense community's modern movement and maintenance of today's armed forces.”<br></div>string;#/training/career-development/logistics/blog/Potentially-Useful-Military-Logistics-Reference-