Reissues DoD 4140.65-M (Reference (a)) in accordance with the authority in DoD Directive 5134.12 (Reference (b)) to establish guidance for the issuance, use, and disposal of wood packaging material (WPM) in compliance with International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) Number 15 (Reference (c)).

As we examine our acquisition processes for opportunities to deliver more capable forces for less cost, the cost of energy, and specifically fuel, is of particular concern. Our current total ownership cost estimation practices do not give us enough insight into the second and third order cost of design, technology and performance decisions on the energy demand of systems. As the conflicts of the last decade have demonstrated, the cost of fuel itself, plus the logistics costs, force protection costs, and losses of U.S. personnel and contractors add greater cost and operational risk than our decision processes currently consider.

To address this challenge section 332 of Public Law 110-417 requires the Components to perform Fully Burdened Cost of Energy (FBCE) analyses to help inform cost, schedule and performance trade decisions in Analyses of Alternatives and acquisition programs, consistent with. This direction applies to all Acquisition Category (ACAT) I and II systems that may demand fuel or electric power in an operational environment.

This Instruction, in accordance with the authority in DoD Directive 5106.01 (Reference (a)), establishes policies and assigns responsibilities for receiving, reporting, and investigating contractor disclosures of a violation of Federal criminal law involving fraud, conflict of interest, bribery, or gratuity violations found in title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.) (Reference (b)) or a violation of the False Claims Act, section 3729 of title 31, U.S.C. (Reference (c)), in connection with the award, performance, or closeout of any contract or subcontract.

This Instruction establishes policy and assigns responsibilities concerning the integrity of scientific and engineering activities that the DoD conducts, and science and engineering information it uses to support public policy and management decisions in accordance with the authority in DoD Directive (DoDD) 5134.01 (Reference (a)), and the guidance in Presidential Memorandum (Reference (b)) and Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy Memorandum (Reference (c)).

The purpose of this memorandum is to remind everyone of the longstanding statutory requirements to set  aside contracts for small business where the contract value is equal to or less than the simplified acquisition threshold unless the "rule of two" is not met, and to request that efforts are redoubled to ensure these requirements are followed consistently.

Operations and Support (O&S) costs comprise 60 to 70 percent of total ownership costs. We must find ways to lower our O&S expenditures while maintaining the right readiness for our Warfighters. A key method to lowering O&S costs is the implementation of sustainment strategies that optimize readiness at best value. Appropriate use of Performance-Based Logistics (PBLs) will help to achieve affordable sustainment strategies and is a method for achieving our Better Buying Power (BBP) goals.

This memorandum supersedes the December 26, 2007, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration memorandum, "Designation of Major Automated Information System Programs and Information Technology Services Acquisitions Oversight List."

The definitions of a MAIS program and Other Major Information Technology Investment Program have been codified in section 2445a of title 10, U.s.C. The updated MAIS Oversight List (Attachment I) includes baselined and un-baselined programs that meet these definitions and must report under chapter 144A of title 10, U.S.c. The list is sorted by the lead DoD acquisition component and indicates each program's Acquisition Category, Milestone Decision Authority, Overarching Integrated Product Team, and Joint Capability Area assignments.

This Guidebook provides:
 - A consolidated overview of internal Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM) acquisition processes. The Guidebook is designed to leverage and support Competency Aligned Organization (CAO) principles (Reference (a)).
 - A quick, ready reference for identifying the major reviews, approval levels, and documentation requirements.
 - Helpful advice from our "corporate memory" to Program Managers (PMs) and their Integrated Product Teams (IPTs), as well as team members who are new to MARCORSYSCOM and/or to the acquisition process. For example, Enclosure (o) of this Guidebook ―12 Steps to Program Success - Tips for the PM‖ provides lessons learned and advice to assist the PM in executing a successful program.
- Hyperlinks to MARCORSYSCOM guidance and higher level policy and references.
 - A list of key acquisition experts and process managers to assist the PMs/IPTs.

Frank Kendall, Acting Undersecretary of Defense (AT&L), discusses his priorities in relation to the recently released defense strategy. At a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Kendall said his highest priority program is the government workforce and having a more capable and qualified acquisition community.

Kendall said, “If we’re going to be successful, we’re going to have to change. We have to change how we think about the money, how we value it, how we spend it and how we do our business. The change has to be real. It can’t be superficial...we’ve got to change what we actually do. It takes a lot of work. It takes tenacity.”

Starting in November 2011 , CON 115, Contracting Fundamentals, will replace CON 110, Mission Support Planning, as a core training requirement for PM Level II DA WIA certification. After December 2011, Defense Acquisition University (DAU) will no longer offer CON 110. More details appear in the attached memo.

This memorandum provides direction and procedures for collecting and reporting the international aspects ofMDAP and MAIS programs for Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics (OUSD(A T &L» management and oversight. This information will inform analyses and analytics to ensure the programs' international cooperative strategy is sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement for a Cooperative Opportunities Document (Title 10 USC 2350a), requirements for coalition interoperability for DoD systems, units, and forces (DoD Directive 5000_01 and DoD Instruction 5000.02) and requirements for program protection (DoD Instruction 5200.39).

Within 60 days of the date of this memorandum, Components shall report the data elements listed in Attachment 1. Thereafter, International Program Aspects (IPA) data shall be submitted and validated as current at least quarterly. This data will be reviewed in conjunction with the monthly DAES meeting review process. Components using AV Web Services for data submission will continue to do so. Components lacking such capabilities shall manually enter IPA data into the DAMIR FMS data entry screen, as described in Attachment 2.

MEMO: https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Lists/Policy%20Documents/Attachments/3311/a_Implementation_MDAP-MAIS_Programs_10-20-2011.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1:
https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Lists/Policy%20Documents/Attachments/3311/b_Attachment1_IPA_DataElements.xls

ATTACHMENT 2: https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Lists/Policy%20Documents/Attachments/3311/c_Attachment2_IPAMemo.pptx

A memorandum of thanks from Dr. Carter as he transitions from his USD(AT&L) role to Deputy Secretary of Defense.

On September 14, the PDUSD(AT&L) issued Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) guidance and a newly developed LCSP outline. The guidance references earlier PDUSD(AT&L) direction to separate the LCSP from the Acquisition Strategy and requires an LCSP for all acquisition programs. The outline is designed to be a tool for programs to effectively and affordably satisfy life-cycle sustainment requirements. The PDUSD(AT&L) memo provides additional implementation detail.

Implementation and Operation of the Defense Acquisition System and JCIDS  SECNAVINST 5000.2E September 1, 2011

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE DEFENSE ACQUISITION SYSTEM AND THE JOINT CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM

For product development programs, some understandable confusion exists as to how to implement both "should-cost" and "affordability as a requirement," particularly early in a program's life cycle before engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) and production. The two are compatible, but they must be balanced differently across the product life cycle. The emphasis prior to Milestone B should be on defining and achieving affordability targets. Past this point, the emphasis shifts to defining and achieving should-cost estimates. This memorandum offers greater detail on should cost and affordability.

For those programs where the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) is the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA), OIPTs are a wellestablished and integral part of our defense acquisition oversight and milestone decision review process. While OIPTs are not decision-making bodies, they provide a mechanism to coordinate and conduct staff preparation for DAE program decisions and to help execute those decisions. This memorandum is intended to clarify the expectations for OSD OIPT Leaders and the respective OIPTs that they lead.

The Program Management (PM) Functional Integrated Product Team (FIPT) met on September 8, 2010. The Component and 4th Estate Directors, Acquisition Career Management, agreed that several online courses (BCF 102, BCF 103, and LOG 103) be added as requirements for PM Level III certification, and that two courses (ACQ 265 and ACQ 370) be added as PM Level III Core Plus beginning in Fiscal Year 2012. More information can be found in the attached memo.

On June 23, 2011, PDUSD(AT&L) issued this direction designed to improve the effectiveness of the milestone review process. The new procedures ensure that there is an adequate opportunity for MDA review of program plans prior to release of the Final RFP, the point at which the Department's requirements, schedule, planned program content, and available funding should be firm and available for review. These procedural changes constitute expected business practice and shall be applied to programs in acquisition categories I and IA and II-IV.

As noted in the "Better Buying Power" memorandum issued last year, the process for conducting Technology Readiness Assessments (TRAs) has strayed from its original intent and should be reformed. TRAs should focus only on technology maturity, as opposed to engineering and integration risk, and the responsibility for ensuring that technology maturity risk is adequately identified and mitigated should rest with the Program Manager (PM), Program Executive Officer, and Component Acquisition Executive, subject to ASD(R&E) review. New instructions for conducting TRAs are contained in updated "TRA Guidance" (http://www.acq.osd.mil/ddre/publications/docs/TRA2011.pdf).

On September 14, 2010, Dr. Ashton Carter, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, issued a memorandum on the subject of Better Buying Power for the Department. In that memorandum, the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy was directed to develop a cash flow model to be used by all contracting officers contemplating financing other than customary progress payments, such as Performance Based Payments (PBP). In addition, guidance was to be developed that ensures that the improved cash flow opportunities provide benefit to both industry (at both the prime and subcontractor level) and the taxpayer. Further details on that guidance are provided within this memorandum.

The purpose of this memorandum is to establish policy with regard to achieved savings as a result of successful "should-cost" program execution. At some point, Service Acquisition Executives will declare that program should-cost savings have been achieved (for example, the negotiated price of an annual production lot of a system is equal to or better than a should-cost program target). That assertion should be validated by the Service Assistant Secretary (Financial Management and Comptroller). Savings would then generally be retained by the Service and reallocated to the highest priority needs as determined by the Service Secretary or a senior leader designated by the Service Secretary.

An exception to the aforementioned guidance would apply if the Secretary of Defense or appropriate designee determines that the savings are required to meet high-priority Department-wide needs, such as financial requirements generated by Joint Urgent Operational Needs. In that case, the savings would be diverted to these departmental requirements.

The September 14th Better Buying Power memorandum directed a review of the documentation required by DoDI 5000.02 in support of the acquisition process.  On April 20, 2011, the PDUSD(AT&L) issued streamlined, annotated outlines for the Technology Development Strategy/Acquisition Strategy and the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) - the LATTER is attached to this post.  These outlines have been completely re-written and re-focused on information central to the purpose of the document.  The outlines constitute expected business practice and are effective immediately.  Additional document outlines will be distributed as they are completed.  They will be included in the Defense Acquisition Guidebook and referenced in the next update to DoDI 5000.02.  The PDUSD(AT&L) memo provides additional implementation detail.

This Instruction establishes policy and assigns responsibilities for the DoD DEMIL program in accordance with the authority in DoD Directive 5134.01 (Reference (a)) for mandatory DEMIL training, oversight of DEMIL functions, DEMIL code assignment accuracy, and DEMIL life cycle planning in accordance with section 1051 of Public Law 105-261 (Reference (b)).

In accordance with the authority in Reference (a), this DTM, consistent with the direction of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to immediately enhance reliability in the acquisition process and with recent Secretary of Defense direction to improve the efficiency of the Defense acquisition system:

• Amplifies procedures in Reference (b) and is designed to improve reliability analysis, planning, tracking, and reporting.
• Institutionalizes reliability planning methods and reporting requirements timed to key acquisition activities to monitor reliability growth.
• Is effective upon its publication to the DoD Issuances Website; it shall be incorporated into Reference (b). This DTM shall expire effective November 23, 2011.

This DTM applies to:

• OSD, the Military Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within the DoD (hereafter referred to collectively as the “DoD Components”).
• Major Defense Acquisition Programs (except Information Systems) and designated special interest programs.

The Heads of the DoD Components shall implement and ensure Component compliance with the procedures in the Attachment. These procedures shall be applied to other than Acquisition Category I programs by designation of the Component Acquisition Executive.

Consistent with the Department of Defense's (DoD) intent to obtain greater efficiency and productivity in defense acquisition, I am eliminating the Program Manager's (PM) reporting responsibility for the Post-Critical Design Review (CDR) Report currently required by DoD Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 2, para 6.c.(6)(c)(l). The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Systems Engineering) (DASD(SE)) will participate in program CDRs and prepare a brief assessment of the program's design maturity and technical risks which may require Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) attention. Consequently, PMs of Major Defense Acquisition Programs shall be required to invite DASD(SE) engineers to their system-level CDRs and make available CDR artifacts. The draft CDR assessments will be coordinated with the PM prior to forwarding to the MDA. PMs shall continue to document CDRs in accordance with component best practices.

This procedural change is effective immediately and constitutes expected business practice. It will be documented in the Defense Acquisition Guidebook and institutionalized in the next update to DoDI 5000.02. I encourage Component MDAs to consider similar assignment of CDR reporting responsibilities for acquisition programs under their cognizance.

With expenditures of over $500 billion annually on contracts and orders for goods and services, the federal government has an obligation to conduct our procurements in the most effective, responsible, and efficient manner possible. Access to current market information is critical for agency program managers as they define requirements and for contracting officers as they develop acquisition strategies, seek opportunities for small businesses, and negotiate contract terms. Our industry partners are often the best source of this information, so productive interactions between federal agencies and our industry partners should be encouraged to ensure that the government clearly understands the marketplace and can award a contract or order for an effective solution at a reasonable price. Early, frequent, and constructive engagement with industry is especially important for complex, high-risk procurements, including (but not limited to) those for large information technology (IT) projects. This is why increasing communication, in the form of a “myth-busters” educational campaign, is one of the key tenets of the Office of Management and Budget’s 25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal IT Management.

The purposes of this memorandum are to:

1) identify common misconceptions about vendor engagement that may be unnecessarily hindering agencies’ appropriate use of the existing flexibilities, and provide facts and strategies to help acquisition professionals benefit from industry’s knowledge and insight;

2) direct agencies to remove unnecessary barriers to reasonable communication and develop vendor communications plans, consistent with existing law and regulation, that promote responsible and constructive exchanges; and

3) outline steps for continued engagement with agencies and industry to increase awareness and education.

This document provides the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for managing Congressional new start notification letters (Investment) for new start requests below the threshold requiring prior approval. SOPs include the rules of engagement for receiving, staffing, controlling, and final disposition. Due to the fact SAF/FMBI is responsible for new start notifications (Investment), they are also the OPR for the SOPs. SOPs pertain to the overall coordination process; the new start notification letter originator may have internal coordination procedures as well.

These SOPs were coordinated with SAF/LL and SAF/FMBL as the Air Force Congressional liaison offices; they are the authority on any direct liaison activities with Congress. This SOP applies to all members of 2 Letter SAF/HAF Organizations.

On August 9, 2010, I directed that any new proposal or initiative, large or small, be it policy, program or ceremony, come with a cost estimate. To implement this plan, the Director, Cost Assessment & Program Evaluation, working with the MILDEPs, established a Cost Guidance Group to develop guidance, methods and tools that assist DoD employees in estimating costs associated with the Department's business activities. This memorandum outlines the resulting guidance and support tools that have been made available on an internal DoD website (https://www.cape.osd.mil/costguidance) to any DoD employee who has a Common Access Card.

The DoD has prepared the following report, “A New Approach for Delivering Information Technology Capabilities in the DoD,” to provide an update on progress toward developing a new acquisition process for information capabilities, to discuss the timeframe for implementation, and anticipates the legislative changes that will be required to fully implement the new acquisition process. The Department considers IT critical to accomplishing its national security mission, and is committed to working with Congress to build a process that matches the dynamic nature of today’s information age and the evolving needs of our forces.

Mr. Frank Kendall, Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, has announced that Ms. Katrina McFarland has been selected as the President of the Defense Acquisition University (DAU). In this capacity, Ms. McFarland will be responsible for continuing and building upon DAU's outstanding reputation as DoD's primary learning institution for the 147,000 members of the Defense Acquisition Workforce while overseeing the development of new curriculum and learning opportunities that facilitate implementation of the Under Secretary of Defense's (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) "Better Buying Power" initiatives.

Section 813 ofthe John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 directed the Secretary of Defense to establish a "Panel on Contracting Integrity" to conduct reviews ofthe progress made by the Department of Defense (DoD) to eliminate areas of vulnerability ofthe defense contracting system that allow fraud, waste, and abuse to occur. As part of these reviews, the Panel determined the need to address requirements development, which has been identified as a weakness in the Department and has led to cost and schedule overruns on many programs. Requirements development is paramount to successful acquisition outcomes. Properly developed requirements enhance competition, ensure sound business strategies, provide the basis for realistic Government estimates, mitigate requirements creep, and help enable the Department meet critical acquisition timelines.

Dr. Carter: As detailed in my September 14, 2010 Guidance to acquisition professionals, I am seeking to obtain greater efficiency and productivity in defense spending by pursuing initiatives in the following five areas: (l) Target Affordability and Control Cost Growth; (2) Incentivize Productivity and Innovation in Industry; (3) Promote Real Competition; (4) Improve Tradecraft in Services Acquisition; and (5) Reduce Non-Productive Processes and Bureaucracy.
This memorandum specifies actions that I expect you to execute either immediately or in the time frame indicated in order to implement the September 14 Guidance. Additional actions in support of these five initiatives will be developed over the next few weeks and months.

This DTM 10-015 establishes policy to implement and institutionalize the requirements of section 805 of the FY10 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 111-84), which directed a number of changes to DoD policies designed to improve weapon systems life cycle management and product support by establishing new requirements that directly impact acquisition, fielding, and sustainment decisions. The DTM states that “it is DoD policy that a mandatory Product Support Manager (PSM) position shall be identified and assigned for each ACAT I and ACAT II system and filled by a properly qualified Military Service member or full-time employee of the Department of Defense.”

This DTM reissues DTM 08-048 (Reference (a)), updating policy and responsibilities. Establishes policy and a defense-in-breadth strategy for managing supply chain risk to information and communications technology (ICT) within DoD critical information systems and weapons systems in accordance with National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 (Reference (b)). Directs actions in accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.39 (Reference (c)) to mitigate and manage supply chain risk, as defined in the Glossary, using a multi-disciplinary approach for SCRM pursuant to Reference (b).

For over 50 years, NCMA has led and represented the contracting profession. The association currently has over 19,000 members and has operating chapters across the United States and in more than 13 countries. However, NCMA's biggest value is in the day-to-day practice of contract management. NCMA provides a collection of neutral networks or communities, at the local and national level, where contract management professionals from all types of government and industry agencies and organizations can come together with a common goal: To enhance their professional expertise in a non-adversarial environment, thus enabling them to more effectively accomplish the mission of their organizations.

Underscore the importance of system reliability as a major problem for Department of Defense (DoD) acquisitions

Dr. Ashton Carter's blueprint for eliminating inefficiencies in the $400 billion that DOD spends annually on contracts for weapons, products and services is in a three-page directive, with three accompanying briefing slides.  The memo gives acquisition professionals an initial look at his plan to use incentives to industry and new government practices to achieve efficiencies, part of a broader effort by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to find savings.

Section 8121 of the DoD Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. Law No. 111-118), imposes competition requirements on congressionally directed spending items and earmarks intended for award to a "for-profit" entity. The statutory competition
requirements mandated by section 8121 are more stringent for congressionally directed spending items and earmarks intended for award to a "for-profit" entity sponsored solely by members of the House of Representatives than for those sponsored by members of the Senate. This memorandum provides compliance guidance with respect to section 8121.

Air Force Acquisition Policy Fact Page Issue 9

The memo is entitled:  Preparation for Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) Meetings, DAB Readiness Meetings (DRM) and DAB Planning Meetings (DPM), April 23, 2010. It is about internal processes associated with DAB preparation and conduct of DABs.