DoDI 5000.02 and Resource-Informed
Army Modernization
Prepared for the RMS Partnership
Government-Industry Training Semina...
Purpose
• To provide a basis for discussion of how DoDI 5000.02 relates to resource-
informed Army modernization – from an...
Agenda
• DoDI 5000.02 – Selected Excerpts
• Future of Performance Based Life Cycle
Support
• Resource-Informed Army Modern...
DoDI 5000.02 – Selected Excerpts
“Evolutionary acquisition is the preferred DoD strategy for the rapid
acquisition of matu...
Total Life Cycle Product Support Cost Reduction
5
• Hon Jack Bell (DUSD L&MR) Delivered the Defense Department’s
Keynote A...
Driving Costs Down, Performance Up
6The Process OSD PBL Maturity Model
Perspective on the Army
Enterprise-Wide
Holistic
Sustain Prepare Reset Transform
Core Enterprises
•Readiness (FORSCOM)
•Hu...
Defense Acquisition Management System
8
First Principles
Congressional
Funding
Financial
Infrastructure
Warfighter
Needs
Accountability
?
Sub-optimized Tracking S...
LMP
GCSS-A
F/T
AESIP
SALE
IT Infrastructure
•Legacy Systems
•CLOE
•AILA
•BCS3
•LIW
•IUID
•SIM
•RFID
CBM+
Decision Support
...
Pivot Points
• November 17, 2008: Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with
Government of Iraq calls for withdrawal of all US...
Army Force Development: Parallel Streams
Reset
• 300,000+ items of
equipment being
retrograded from Iraq
• Depots have had...
Precepts
• Current and emerging commitments drive Army acquisition (and organizational structure)
– FCS: counterinsurgency...
Concluding Observations
• Given the “unusual” experience of the Army in the past year, it is difficult to draw
any durable...
Quo Vadis?
DoDI 5000.02
DoD Weapon
System
Product
Support
Assessment
PSAT FY 10
Work Program
15
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

DoDi 5000.02 And Resource Informed Army Modernization

1,500 views
1,346 views

Published on

An overview of the relationship between DoD 5000.02 and Resource-Informed Army Modernization. Specifically addresses Reset, Brigade Combat Team Modernization, and Ground Combat Vehicle planning. Emphasizes the importance of product support and technology insertion.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,500
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

DoDi 5000.02 And Resource Informed Army Modernization

  1. 1. DoDI 5000.02 and Resource-Informed Army Modernization Prepared for the RMS Partnership Government-Industry Training Seminar, November 17-18, 2009 “DoDI 5000.02 and You: The Impact on RMS/L & Systems Engineering” Dr. Russell Vacante, President William D. Bajusz, Ph.D. Senior Logistics Consultant William.Bajusz@goldbeltwolf.com www.LinkedIn.com/in/williambajusz Goldbelt Wolf, LLC. An SDB 8(a) Alaska Native Corporation 5500 Cherokee Avenue Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22312 www.goldbeltwolf.com
  2. 2. Purpose • To provide a basis for discussion of how DoDI 5000.02 relates to resource- informed Army modernization – from an RMS, logistics, and systems engineering perspective RMS Partnership’s President’s Editorial •Are there “lessons learned” from less than a year’s application of DoDI 5000.02? •Is there a common understanding between Services and industry partners? • How compatible is technology insertion with Performance Based Life Cycle Product Support requirements? Fluid Environment •Downward pressures on DoD budget •Reexamination of Product Support •Level of troop commitment to, and strategy in Afghanistan •Retrograde from Iraq •Imperatives for full scale Army modernization 2
  3. 3. Agenda • DoDI 5000.02 – Selected Excerpts • Future of Performance Based Life Cycle Support • Resource-Informed Army Modernization • Precepts • Concluding Observations 3
  4. 4. DoDI 5000.02 – Selected Excerpts “Evolutionary acquisition is the preferred DoD strategy for the rapid acquisition of mature technology for the user. An evolutionary approach delivers capability in increments, recognizing up front the need for future capability improvements.” Enclosure 2, 2.a “PMs for all programs shall formulate a viable Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) strategy that includes a reliability growth program as an integral part of design and development. RAM shall be integrated with the Systems Engineering processes, documented in the program’s Systems Engin- eering Plan (SEP) and Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP), and assessed during technical reviews, test and evaluation (T&E), and Product Support Reviews (PSRs). Enclosure 2, 5, d (5) “Life-cycle sustainment planning shall be considered during Materiel Solution Analysis, and shall mature throughout Technology Development. An LCSP shall be prepared for Milestone B.” Enclosure 2, 8, c (1), (a) “The PM shall work with the user to document performance and sustain- ment requirements in performance agreements specifying objective outcomes, measures Resource commitments, and stakeholder responsibilities. The PM shall employ effective Per- formance Based Life-Cycle Product Support (PBL) planning, development, implementa- tion and management.” Enclosure 2, 8, c (1), (d) 4
  5. 5. Total Life Cycle Product Support Cost Reduction 5 • Hon Jack Bell (DUSD L&MR) Delivered the Defense Department’s Keynote Address on “Maintaining Warfighter Readiness” at the Annual DoD Maintenance Symposium – October 28, 2008 • Army Business Case Analysis Policy issued 18 Aug 2005 – Implements guidance necessary to conform with USD/ATL BCA Policy Memos issued in 2004 – Identifies Type I (Feasibility) and Type II (Formal) BCAs • Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (ATL) PBL Guidance Document on “Implementing a Life Cycle Management Framework” Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Services – July 2008 Weapon System Acquisition Reform Product Support Assessment • Life Cycle Product Support Vision and Guiding Principles • New Business Model • Resource Misalignment • Governance • Partnership Sub-optimization Emphasizes and reinforces the use of Performance-Based Product Support strategies Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-23), signed May 22, 2009 DoDI 5000.02, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, signed December 8, 2008
  6. 6. Driving Costs Down, Performance Up 6The Process OSD PBL Maturity Model
  7. 7. Perspective on the Army Enterprise-Wide Holistic Sustain Prepare Reset Transform Core Enterprises •Readiness (FORSCOM) •Human capital (TRADOC) •Services and infrastructure (IMCOM) •Materiel (AMC) Organizing Principle: What are pragmatic RMS, logistics, and engineering actions to enable Readiness and Strategic Flexibility and to continue to meet rapidly changing current demands at lowest possible cost? Resource-Informed Modernization Strategy 7
  8. 8. Defense Acquisition Management System 8
  9. 9. First Principles Congressional Funding Financial Infrastructure Warfighter Needs Accountability ? Sub-optimized Tracking Systems Cause Needless Environmental Instability for the Government PM 9
  10. 10. LMP GCSS-A F/T AESIP SALE IT Infrastructure •Legacy Systems •CLOE •AILA •BCS3 •LIW •IUID •SIM •RFID CBM+ Decision Support Tools, e.g., PFSA, CASA GTA •ABCTM •Ground Combat Vehicle AC/RC Rebalance Support to Other Services Support From Other Services Balance CSS (AC/RC) Current Global Commitments OPLANS CONPLANS • NSS •NMS •GDF •DODD •DODI Concepts … Q D R JCS • Joint Staff •JPG • JROC • JCIDS … UCCs • Regional • Functional Logistics CPM OSD, e.g., •USD AT&L •USD P&R •Director, PA&E Other Army Logistics Initiatives & Programs, e.g., • PBL •Adaptive Logistics •ILAR •FLS OSD Initiatives, e.g., •DoD Logistics Roadmap •HCS •IUID •RFID •CBM+ •RBS DLA (BRAC 2005) Other Defense Agencies, e.g., •DCMA •DFAS •APS •Army Strategy • ASPG • ACP •ARPL • FMs •ARs • Memoranda Army Staff Army Secretariat, e.g., •ASA(ALT) •DUSA B/T AMC ILS (TLCMS) ASCC DRU AP3 FY 2010 DoD PresBud • Base Budget • Overseas Contingency Ops Off-Year PPBE •PCPs •PDM •BCPs •PBDs •OMB Submission •Execution Review PII (GPRA) •E.O. 13450 •OMB PBB •Outcome goals and objectives •PART •Logistics Portfolio AWCF DWCF G A O Congress •DoS •DHS •DoJ •DoA •MNF-I •NATO ISAF •(UN), (GOI), (GOA), (GOP) Public Private Partnerships An RMS Perspective: Issues, Processes, Programs & Stakeholders FORSCOM TRADOC Distribution IMCOM 10
  11. 11. Pivot Points • November 17, 2008: Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Government of Iraq calls for withdrawal of all US forces by 12/31/2011 – Redeployment – Equipment retrograde • April 06, 2009: Secretary Gates cancels vehicle component of Army’s Future Combat Systems program – Officially cancelled on June 23rd by Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Carter • Creation of Brigade Combat Team (BCT) Modernization effort – Technology insertion increments – For FCS “spin outs” • Creation of new Ground Combat Vehicle Program 11
  12. 12. Army Force Development: Parallel Streams Reset • 300,000+ items of equipment being retrograded from Iraq • Depots have had a 3-year backlog for 4 years running • Equipment being Reset to “zero miles” standard • Should Reset incorporate technology insertion? • Are the most cost-effective product support strategies in place for items being Reset? Brigade Combat Team (BCT) Modernization • Increment 1 well underway • Increment 2 in definition • Is the product support for each element of the increments the most cost- effective from Total System Life Cycle standpoint? • Optimization of partnerships? Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Modernization • Industry will play a major role in defining options • Initial focus on GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) • 2017 • Product Support Concept for family of vehicles Technology insertion arrangements for some vehicles sub-optimized – e.g., Stryker S Mod12
  13. 13. Precepts • Current and emerging commitments drive Army acquisition (and organizational structure) – FCS: counterinsurgency and close-quarters combat issues invalidated the engineering trade-space where lower weight, higher fuel efficiency and greater information awareness were judged adequate to compensate for less armor – MRAP: “urgent need” ~6,400 procured – M-ATV: “urgent need” – JROC Requirement for 5,200, with ~2,200 now being produced • Systems engineering process needs to be proactive and the SEP adaptive – QDR and new GDF will help but – Burden will be on the PM to be attuned to emerging issues • Army PM needs to have greater stability in funding – In macro: improved funding accountability systems and processes that are responsive to Congressional oversight requirements – In micro: longer duration (5-10 years) contracts with performance incentives that induce industry to bear greater share of the risk • Incremental development with technology insertion is key in current environment • Army PM has no ready access to technology maturation plan relevant to his/her program – Distributed technology development • In Army, e.g., LIA, RDECOM, PEOs • Across Industry – Information gathering and assimilation processes have been outstripped by the pace of technology • Army PM doesn’t have a convenient “window” into all relevant Army guidance, related Army program developments, and stakeholders • Army PM does not have the ability to readily access pertinent information about OSD or other Service programs and initiatives – DoD Logistics Roadmap 13
  14. 14. Concluding Observations • Given the “unusual” experience of the Army in the past year, it is difficult to draw any durable “lessons learned” from the application of DoDI 5000.02 – Secretary Gates’ decision on FCS certainly consistent with tenets of DoDI 5000.02 • However, have learned that DoDI 5000.02 provides sound framework for acquisition and RMS in an environment where the “unusual” has become the norm – Incremental modernization through technology insertion – Up front consideration of product support in the acquisition cycle • Is there a common understanding between the Services and their industry partners? – It depends on who you ask – PM and PSI may agree on need for longer duration contract, but that perception may not be shared by Service’s contracting authority or the Congress • Technology insertion and product support are not only compatible, they are inseparable in a resource-constrained environment • Need to be paying greater attention to technology insertion and product support in Reset, and product support in BCT Modernization • GCV is an opportunity to “get it right” from a DoDI 5000.02 perspective 14
  15. 15. Quo Vadis? DoDI 5000.02 DoD Weapon System Product Support Assessment PSAT FY 10 Work Program 15

×