1 year ago

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION


DoDI 5000.02, January 7,

DoDI 5000.02, January 7, 2015 (3) The DCAPE prepares an ICE for Acquisition Category (ACAT) IC and IAC programs at any time considered appropriate by the DCAPE or upon the request of the USD(AT&L) or the MDA. (4) For MDAPs for which DCAPE does not develop an ICE, the ICE supporting a milestone review decision will be provided to the MDA by the applicable Service Cost Agency or defense agency equivalent following review and concurrence by DCAPE. (5) DCAPE representatives will meet with representatives from the Service Cost Agency and program office no later than 180 calendar days before the scheduled Development Request for Proposals (RFP) Release Decision Point to determine what cost analysis, if any, will be presented at the decision review and who will be responsible for preparing the cost analysis. Following the meeting, DCAPE will notify the MDA of the type of cost analysis that will be presented. The type of cost analysis will vary depending on the program and the information that is needed to support the decision to release the RFP. For some programs, no new cost analysis may be necessary, and the DCAPE representative will present the Milestone A ICE or an update to the Milestone A ICE. In other cases, the cost analysis may be a cost assessment or a complete ICE. (6) The DCAPE reviews all cost estimates and cost analyses conducted in connection with MDAPs and MAIS programs, including estimates of operating and support (O&S) costs for all major weapon systems. To facilitate the review of cost estimates, the DCAPE receives the results of all cost estimates and cost analyses and associated studies conducted by the DoD Components for MDAPs and MAIS programs. (7) The DCAPE, DoD Components, and Service Cost Agencies will be provided timely access to any records and data in the DoD (including the records and data of each military department and defense agency, to include classified, unclassified, and proprietary information) it considers necessary to review cost analyses and conduct the ICEs and cost analyses described in sections 2 and 3 of this enclosure. (8) For MDAP and MAIS programs, the DCAPE participates in the discussion of issues related to and/or differences between competing program cost estimates, comments on methodologies employed and the estimate preparation process, coordinates on the cost estimate used to support establishment of baselines and budgets, and participates in the consideration of any decision to request authorization of a multi-year procurement contract for an MDAP. (9) The documentation of each MDAP or MAIS program cost estimate prepared by DCAPE and/or Service or Agency includes the elements of program cost risk identified and accounted for, how they were evaluated, and possible mitigation measures. DCAPE then assesses the proposed program’s baseline and associated program budget’s ability to provide the necessary high degree of confidence that the program can be completed without the need for significant adjustment to future program budgets. If the MDAP or MAIS program baseline or budget determined by DCAPE as appropriately high confidence is not adopted by the MDA, the MDA will document the rationale for the decision. For MDAPs, the next Selected Acquisition Change 2, 02/02/2017 142 ENCLOSURE 10

DoDI 5000.02, January 7, 2015 Report prepared in compliance with 10 U.S.C. 2432 (Reference (g) (h)), and for MAIS programs, the next quarterly report prepared in compliance with 10 U.S.C. 2445c will disclose the confidence level used in establishing the cost estimate for the MDAP or MAIS program and the rationale for selecting the confidence level. (10) In addition to O&S cost estimates included in the ICEs conducted at the reviews identified in paragraphs 2a(1) through 2a(4) of this enclosure, Military Departments must update estimates of O&S costs periodically throughout the life cycle of a major weapon system to determine whether preliminary information and assumptions remain relevant and accurate and to identify and record reasons for variances. Further, an independent review of O&S cost estimates must be conducted at post-Initial Operational Capability reviews. Each O&S cost estimate must be compared to earlier cost estimates and the program’s O&S affordability cap, and, as appropriate, this information will be used to update the life-cycle affordability analysis provided to the MDA and requirements validation authority. This comparison must identify the reasons for significant changes and categorize those reasons into external and internal factors. b. The MDA may request that the DCAPE, within the DCAPE’s discretion, develop cost assessments for any other program regardless of its ACAT. c. Per 10 U.S.C. 2434 (Reference (g) (h)), the MDA may not approve the engineering and manufacturing development or the production and deployment of an MDAP unless an independent estimate of the full life-cycle cost of the program, prepared or approved by the DCAPE, has been considered by the MDA. d. The DoD Component will develop a DoD Component Cost Estimate that covers the entire life cycle of the program for all MDAPs prior to Milestone A, B, and C reviews and the Full- Rate Production Decision; and for all MAIS programs at any time an Economic Analysis is due. e. The DoD Component and the Service Cost Agency will establish a documented DoD Component Cost Position that covers the entire life cycle of the program for all MDAPs and MAIS programs prior to the Milestone A, B, and C reviews, and the Full-Rate Production Decision or Full Deployment Decision Review. The DoD Component Cost Position must be signed by the appropriate DoD Component Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cost and Economics (or defense agency equivalent) and must include a date of record. f. At the Milestone A, B, and C reviews and for the Full-Rate Production Decision or Full Deployment Decision review, the DoD Component must fully fund the program to the Component Cost Position in the current Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), or commit to full funding of the cost position in the next FYDP, with identification of specific offsets to address any funding shortfalls that may exist in the current FYDP. The Component Acquisition Executive and the DoD Component Chief Financial Officer must endorse and certify in the Full Funding Certification Memorandum that the FYDP fully funds, or will fully fund, the program consistent with the DoD Component Cost Position. If the program concept evolves after a milestone review, the Service Cost Agency may update the DoD Component Cost Position, and the DoD Component may fully fund the program in the FYDP to the updated DoD Component Cost Position. Change 2, 02/02/2017 143 ENCLOSURE 10

joint program management handbook - Defense Acquisition University
OVERVIEW W - Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Joint Pub 6-02 - United States Department of Defense
Department of Defense Nonlethal Weapons and Equipment Review
Department of Defense (DoD) Information Enterprise Strategic Plan
department of defense agency financial report fiscal year 2012
department of defense agency financial report fiscal year 2012
Department of Defense Nonlethal Weapons and Equipment Review
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) - United States Department of ...
USAF ILA Handbook - ACC Practice Center - Defense Acquisition ...
Navy Cyber Power 2020 - Defense Innovation Marketplace
Space Acquisition - Air Force Space Command
department of defense more disciplined use of resources
Joint Service Chemical & Biological Defense Program Overview ...
December 2011 - North Dakota Department of Public Instruction
JP 4-02 Health Service Support - DMRTI - Defense Medical ...
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle - Defense Technical Information Center
COL Mike Zarbo - PEO STRI - U.S. Army
Download PDF - Department of Navy Chief Information Officer - U.S. ...
Volume 5, Number 1 - Space and Missile Defense Command - U.S. ...
JP 3-01 Countering Air and Missile Threats - Defense Innovation ...