The Insider

Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) today announced plans to introduce legislation to “freeze action” on Defense Secretary Robert Gates' bid to eliminate the Virginia-based U.S. Joint Forces Command. Webb, who earlier this month announced plans for a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on JFCOM and other DOD efficiencies, issued a press release today, stating:

Today I have again called on the White House to refrain from making a final decision on the future of the U.S. Joint Forces Command until Congress has satisfactorily obtained a firm understanding of the process by which Secretary of Defense Gates arrived at his recommendation.

A decision of this magnitude poses significant implications for joint training and the development of joint war-fighting capabilities that are essential for successful 21st-century combat operations.  Any proposal to close or realign the command should be guided by a clear process and analytical basis that everyone can understand.  This is particularly important in light of Secretary Gates’s stated intention to consider consolidating or closing other military bases and facilities across the country.

In addition to the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing now promised to address the full range of the proposed defense efficiency initiatives, I will be introducing legislation to require the Secretary of Defense to provide full justification to Congress before any action is taken to close the Joint Forces Command.  This is fully consistent with Congress’s constitutional oversight responsibility as we work to improve our military’s joint warfare capabilities and operations.

Last month, Webb and other members of the Virginia delegation challenged the legal basis of Gates' recommendation to close JFCOM, urging the defense secretary to reconsider and “conduct a more complete review of JFCOM’s mission and activities without a predisposed intent to close the command.”

Pentagon acquisition executive Ashton Carter said the Defense Department plans to wrap up source selection of the Air Force's next-generation aerial refueling tanker this fall, but had not set a specific date.

As acquisition officials review KC-X proposals from Boeing and EADS, they have not set a specific date for selecting a winner, Carter said during a speech at an Air Force Association-sponsored conference in National Harbor, MD.

"It'll be done when it's done," Carter said. "Anyone that gives you a specific date doesn't know what they're talking about."

The Pentagon inspector general's office this week released a more-detailed response to a Senate report that called the Defense Department's accounting system "broken."

In its preliminary response released last week, the IG wrote that he was "refocusing" his office's audit priorities, InsideDefense.com reported on Monday:

Last week, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Charles Grassley (R-IA) released a report that "identified one all-important, central element that is adversely affecting every facet of the OIG audit program -- the DOD's broken accounting system."

"This dysfunctional system is driving the audit freight train," the report states. "The success or failure of an audit turns on the quality of financial data available for audit by competent examiners. Unfortunately, the quality of the financial data presented to OIG auditors by DOD during the period reviewed by the staff should probably be rated as poor to non-existent."

In a Sept. 10 letter to Grassley, DOD Inspector General Gordon Heddell promises to "carefully review" the report's recommendations.

"As you know, early last year as Acting Inspector General, I reached out to your office to share my vision for the future of the DOD Inspector General and welcomed an independent look at the focus and processes within Audit," Heddell's letter states. "The observations and recommendations in your report will be a valuable supplement to the efforts I have already initiated to reach my goal of providing timely, accurate, and relevant information to both the Congress and the Department."

In his more-detailed Sept. 13 letter to Grassley, Heddell writes that he has "directed the deputy inspector general for auditing and her staff to make concrete and specific proposals on how your report can be used to improve the time lines, focus and relevance of audit reports. Furthermore, I have directed that these proposals, to be completed no later than Oct. 15, 2010, are supplemented by a detailed plan listing specific initiatives to be implemented at the earliest possible date. The recommendations in your report will be an important tool in the transformation I have initiated since being confirmed as inspector general."

The National Defense Industrial Association recently released an updated guide for conducting integrated baseline reviews. According to its executive summary, the document "describes the purpose of the Integrated Baseline Review (IBR). It describes the overall, ongoing IBR process and specifically describes the IBR event, which is the formal review jointly conducted by the customer and supplier teams."

Further, the Sept. 1 document states:

While the overall IBR is a continuous process of analysis of the Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB) and its executability, the IBR event is a formal review that occurs at a point in time. Specific conditions within a project’s life cycle warrant an IBR event. These include the initial establishment of the project PMB, either before contract award (when a pre-award IBR is required) or after contract award as determined by the customer, as well as significant changes to the original PMB, e.g., a significant contract modification or a major project replan. IBR events may also recur any time a PMB assessment determines the need for a subsequent IBR. Recurring IBRs can be initiated by the customer Project Manager (PM) or supplier PM.

An effective IBR process leads to a better understanding of project risks and opportunities. With the common definitions and framework provided by this guide, the expectations and objectives of the customer and supplier will be better aligned and key stakeholder engagement will be enhanced. The IBR process enables PMs to effectively assess the PMB and to determine its adequacy for successful project execution.

Pre- or post-award IBRs are directed on all projects requiring Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS). The solicitation will specify which type of IBR applies. For pre-award IBRs, the supplier must establish the PMB and the organization that will manage it prior to contract award. For post-award IBRs the supplier must establish a PMB as soon as possible after receipt of the Authorization to Proceed (ATP) and begin preparations for the initial post-award IBR event. Both types of reviews should follow the structured approach for conducting the IBR review as described in this guide.

Inside the Pentagon reported on June 1 that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is slated to complete an IBR by the second quarter of fiscal year 2011. The review comes in the wake of a Defense Department report to Congress that strongly criticized the Lockheed Martin division that builds the JSF for ignoring key management rules. However, according to Lockheed the department has stopped short of revoking the contractor's management certification. Further:

In a report sent to Congress today, the Pentagon declares Lockheed's aircraft division in Ft. Worth, TX, "was determined to be non-compliant" with the department's standards for earned value management, Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter's preferred tool for managing the cost and schedule of major programs.

The "systemic corporate level problem" is "disappointing and unacceptable," the Defense Department writes, adding that the Pentagon is "challenging Lockheed Martin to deal with this issue on all levels."

Inside the Pentagon obtained a copy of the report, which details plans to continue the troubled F-35 program despite cost increases and schedule delays.

Carter's office uses earned value management to flag problems, forecast cost and schedule performance and get troubled programs back on track. The tool integrates the technical, cost and schedule parameters of a contract, letting program officials develop an integrated baseline and objectively measure progress.

Since late last year, Carter's office has been reviewing the Lockheed sector's failure to fully implement the management rules, as Inside the Pentagon has reported. Defense officials have weighed whether to revoke the sector's certification for its earned value management system (EVMS), which applies to all Lockheed aircraft built in Ft. Worth.

But despite the new criticism in the report, Lockheed spokesman Joe Stout said the contractor remains certified. "We have received no notice that affects our EVMS certification," Stout told ITP.

Lockheed has been working closely with the Defense Contract Management Agency to develop a corrective action plan that "will address all issues and lead to resolution of all concerns," Stout said. The agency is expected to approve details of the plan in the near future, he added, noting that Lockheed "will diligently work to meet the established milestones in the months ahead."

The report states DOD is providing Lockheed with scheduling, program management, technical, and earned value management compliance expertise and assistance. Carter writes that the corrective action plan is due to be completed and accepted by the agency by June 30, and that the plan is supposed to show "measurable progress leading to successful completion" of a compliance review, as determined by the agency, by the first quarter of fiscal year 2011. Successful execution of the integrated baseline review is slated for the second quarter of FY-11.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Ashton Carter, the Pentagon's procurement executive, will roll out “new acquisition and procurement initiatives guidelines” on Tuesday, according to a Pentagon announcement.

On June 28, Carter said he aimed to find as much as $12 billion in annual savings from the Pentagon's procurement of goods and services through more efficient practices, funds that could be plowed back into weapons procurement accounts.

The new initiatives, due to be unveiled at a 2 p.m. press conference at the Pentagon, are expected to reflect ideas proposed from within the defense bureaucracy as well as from suggestions proposed by defense industry. Inside the Pentagon last week reported that Carter will unveil the new efforts to an audience of senior Defense Department acquisition officials in a auditorium at the National Defense University earlier in the day.

As the Air Force continues to develop requirements for its long-range strike family of systems, its work will be focused on fielding a conventional weapon, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley said today.

Speaking at the Air Force Association's annual conference, Donley said the air service is approaching its LRS development from conventional capabilities perspective.

In March, a senior-level DOD working group explored options for long-range strike capabilities in the hopes of having the review complete in time to influence the fiscal year 2012 budget. As part of that review, group members drilled down into possible long-range strike scenarios involving force mix options of nuclear and conventional weapons.

While service officials working LRS development are also focusing on "complimentary capabilities" that could be included in the eventual platform, a nuclear LRS option will be shelved for the time being.

Donley noted the focus on conventional capabilities would prevent the burgeoning program from suffering the same fate as the Air Force's previous attempts to field a new bomber.

Service officials put the kibosh on the next-generation bomber effort after the program became weighed down, and ultimately delayed, by excessive requirements not integral to the long-range strike mission.

The Missile Defense Agency this morning released a statement giving more details on this month's failed Airborne Laser Test Bed intercept attempt. In a nutshell, it didn't aim where it was supposed to:

On Sept 1, 2010, the Missile Defense Agency executed the Flight Experiment Laser (FEL-01b) mission at the Point Mugu flight test range off the Southern California coast. The objective of this mission was for the Agency's Airborne Laser Test Bed (ALTB) to destroy a liquid-fuel, short-range ballistic missile during its boost phase. During the mission the Boeing 747 flying laser laboratory detected and tracked the target. However, the experiment terminated early when corrupted beam control software steered the high energy laser slightly off center.

While we continue analyzing the failure, preliminary indications are that a communication software error within the system that controls the laser beam caused misalignment of the beam. The ALTB safety system detected this shift and immediately shut down the high energy laser.

The Agency plans to resume flight experiments beginning with tests of the software repair on September 13 leading to a lethal shootdown experiment involving a solid-fuel target missile by the end of this month. A mid-October experiment is in the planning stages that will involve lasing a solid-fuel missile at three times the range of last February’s successful destruction of a liquid-fuel missile.

The test was the fourth attempt in recent weeks, with each try being delayed due to software or hardware issues with either the ALTB system or its target missile. As Inside the Pentagon reported yesterday:

The fourth intercept attempt was pushed back because of problems with the system's tracking laser, according to an Aug. 24 agency statement. In February, the ALTB program intercepted a missile at a distance greater than 50 miles.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has recommended keeping the program in a research and development status because of its high cost and questionable operational concept. When the Obama administration's fiscal year 2011 defense budget was unveiled in February, Pentagon officials announced that the former Airborne Laser program was being transferred to the office of the director of defense research and engineering (DDR&E) and being renamed the ALTB.

During an Aug. 19 breakfast with reporters, Zachary Lemnios, the DDR&E, said his office views the Airborne Laser Test Bed as just that -- a test bed.

"We're looking at using that platform to validate other high-powered laser concepts," Lemnios said. "We have a number of projects underway at the energy labs and also funded through DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] and funded through the Air Force to look at high-powered solid state lasers that would offer similar performance as the enormous coil laser" that's on the Airborne Laser Test Bed.