The Insider

By John Liang
December 19, 2012 at 4:48 PM

The Congressional Research Service recently issued a report that "provides background information and identifies issues for Congress regarding Department of Defense (DOD) alternative fuel initiatives, a subject of debate at congressional hearings on DOD's proposed FY2013 budget."

In the Dec. 14 report, CRS notes that the military services "have spent approximately $48 million on alternative fuels, and the Navy has proposed a $170 million investment in biofuel production capacity. By comparison, DOD purchases of petroleum fuels totaled approximately $17.3 billion in FY2011."

According to a Senate Armed Services Committee summary of the FY-13 defense authorization conference report agreed to last night, the legislative language:

* Does not include a provision of the House-passed bill that would have prohibited fiscal year 2013 funding for the production or purchase of an alternative fuel if the cost of producing or purchasing the alternative fuel exceeds the cost of traditional fossil fuel, with limited exceptions.

* Requires DOD to issue guidance for financing renewable energy projects.

* Authorizes $150.0 million for the Energy Conservation Investment Program.

* Authorizes $200.0 million in funding for the Defense Research and Development (R&D) Rapid Innovation Program to aid in technology transition across a broad spectrum of technologies, including those which will improve energy efficiency, enhance energy security, and reduce the Department's dependence on fossil fuels.

View the CRS report.

View the full FY-13 defense authorization conference report.

By John Liang
December 18, 2012 at 9:59 PM

With Egypt in political turmoil, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to halt the planned delivery of 20 F-16 fighter jets to that country beginning early next year.

In a statement released today, Inhofe said:

The Obama Administration should not be putting top-of-the-line aircraft in the hands of a government that is perpetuating instability in its region and showing aggression towards our ally, Israel. While this agreement for the F-16s was forged two years ago, Egypt's leadership has since changed hands, leaving open the question as to how this equipment might be used.

The first four jets are scheduled for delivery on Jan. 22, according to a Dec. 17 letter Inhofe sent to Clinton. He adds:

In light of the ongoing instability, aggression towards Israel, [Egyptian] President [Mohammed] Morsi's dictatorial decree, and absence of a constitution and parliament, this delivery should be stopped and subject to further review.

Until Egypt is able to establish [a] democratic parliament and ensure stability in the country, the delivery of F-16s to Egypt should be postponed for further review. I look forward to your response.

By John Liang
December 18, 2012 at 7:37 PM

At least one Wall Street analysis firm isn't too bullish on the defense sector next year.

In a "2013 Aerospace & Defense Outlook" released today, Credit Suisse analysts note that during 2012, "defense has outperformed aerospace (19.3 percent vs 2.1 percent), driven by high cash returns to shareholders at defense primes, a beat and raise trend, and the view by many that defense offered a relative safe-haven against wider economic uncertainty."

As for next year, however:

In 2013, we think defense will eventually succumb to more tangible pressure on topline by 2014, even without Sequester. As such, we favor aerospace, as do investors, according to our latest buyside survey. We specifically prefer [original equipment] suppliers [Precision Castparts], [Triumph Group Inc.] and [BE Aerospace] over [Boeing] as the latter could lag if orders slow, along with Q1 strike risk. Inside we review expectations for each end market, and draw on results from our new 2013 Investor Sentiment Survey.

And:

Defense -- Market Yet to Recognize CY14 Downside: Many defense names are at-or-near 52-week highs having waved off budget worries on the view that major cuts are too extreme to proceed, or that strong defense yields trump poor economic visibility elsewhere. We think this view could hold into H1’13 until the fiscal cliff issue is resolved. Thereafter, we expect the market to refocus on the greater relative downside to CY14 topline and so we look for a correction in defense in H2’13. We favor RTN for its higher electronics & int'l exposure, solid execution & bookings trends, stable mgmt. and well balance cash return strategy.

To view the full Credit Suisse analysis, click here.

By John Liang
December 17, 2012 at 9:09 PM

The Pentagon last week issued a policy document outlining how a U.S. state National Guard would enter into a partnership with a foreign military. Specifically, the Dec. 14 memo defines such a "State Partnership Program" like this:

A DoD security cooperation program under which a military-to-military relationship is established between the National Guard of a U.S. State and a partner nation's military forces for the complementary purposes of promoting mutual understanding; interoperability; furtherance of the Combatant Commander's theater security cooperation program objectives by building enduring relationships with, and, to the extent authorized by law, the capacity of, partner nation military forces; and promoting the readiness of U.S. National Guard forces.

Inside the Army reported last month that a debate had begun to emerge within the Pentagon about giving reserve forces unique missions, indicating that an explicit division of labor between the ground service components may be in the works. Specifically:

"We are on a little bit of a broader quest right now" to figure out what should be in the active component and what should be in the reserve component, a defense official told Inside the Army. Unlike the Air Force, the Army does not "have a good way to think about it. They take the [active component] and [reserve component] end strengths as given, then try to build the best AC and the rest goes in RC. It is more art than science," the official said.

As the Army tries to shape its future active and reserve components, the California adjutant general, Maj. Gen. David Baldwin is concerned that the active-duty Army is assuming more missions traditionally carried out by reserve forces. The two-star referred to "poaching" when describing what he perceived to be a trend by the active-duty Army to take these missions, which have included peacekeeping operations in Kosovo and Sinai, according to minutes from a Reserve Forces Policy Board meeting held in September (ITA, Oct. 15).

A National Guard Bureau spokesman declined to say whether the NGB shared Baldwin's position.

The Guard, for its part, is considering what unique missions it might be suited for, with cyberspace operations being a candidate. NGB spokesman Jon Anderson noted that many members of the Guard have strong technical skills gained through private sector job experience that could be put to good use especially in such missions as cyber security.

Unlike Baldwin, Army Reserve Chief Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Talley is "not concerned" that the active force will take the missions that Reserve forces would traditionally perform. The issue "really doesn't apply to the Army Reserve component because [the active component] has to come to us for all those enablers," Talley said during a Nov. 14 Defense Writers Group breakfast in Washington.

View the full Dec. 14 policy memo.

View more of InsideDefense.com's coverage of Reserve and National Guard issues.

By John Liang
December 17, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Senior U.S. and Canadian officials recently signed an agreement on cooperation in the Arctic.

According to a Dec. 11 statement, Army Gen. Charles Jacoby, head of U.S. Northern Command and NORAD, and Lt. Gen. Stuart Beare, head of the Canadian Joint Operations Command, signed the "Tri Command Framework for Arctic Cooperation" during a Canada-U.S. Permanent Joint Board on Defense meeting in Colorado Springs, CO. Further:

The Tri-Command Framework for Arctic Cooperation acknowledges the Arctic is not a region of conflict and the Canadian and U.S. militaries will support other departments and agencies in response to threats and hazards in the region when requested and directed. In that context, the goal of the Framework is to promote enhanced military cooperation in the Arctic and identify specific areas of potential Tri-Command cooperation in the preparation for and conduct of safety, security and defense operations. It strengthens an already unique and mature partnership where coordination and cooperation occurs on a regular basis. The Tri-Command Framework for Arctic Cooperation document is not a plan but rather outlines a process that supports the identification of opportunities for potential cooperation in the Arctic. Areas that continue to be improved, particularly in the Arctic, include planning, domain awareness, information-sharing, training and exercises, operations, capability development, and science and technology.

The NORAD and USNORTHCOM Commander and the CJOC Commander both have portions of the Arctic within their respective areas of operation and areas of responsibility. The Commands have complementary missions and work closely together to meet their individual and collective responsibilities as part of a whole-of-government effort in the Arctic. Given the safety and security challenges in the region, the commands often act in support of civilian authorities.

Inside the Navy reported in October that the service was looking to predict weather changes in the Arctic just like the service does in other regions through a next-generation fully coupled ocean atmosphere and arctic prediction system:

The system is important as the Navy plans an increase in operations in the Arctic, Rear Adm. Jonathan White, Navy oceanographer and navigator, said Oct. 23 at the Office of Naval Research's Naval Science and Technology Partnership Conference in Arlington, VA.

Between 2014 and 2040, the Arctic will allow for one month of ice-free operations, he said. Over the next eight years, the Navy wants a new prediction system to replace legacy systems, Frank Herr, ONR ocean battlespace sensing department director, said during the conference.

For polar regions, snow and ice have an immense impact on weather conditions, yet no current models incorporate atmosphere, ocean and cryosphere data into the models, Navy spokesman Robert Freeman wrote in an Oct. 25 email.

By John Liang
December 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

The Pentagon recently released a document that "sets forth the joint doctrine for the planning and execution of meteorological and oceanographic operations in support of joint operations throughout the range of military operations."

The joint doctrine document released this week "updates space weather information and its impacts on operations."

Inside the Air Force reported earlier this month that the service had awarded Northrop Grumman additional funds to facilitate an adjusted launch schedule for the last two remaining satellites in the service's Defense Meteorological Satellite Program. Specifically:

The service issued the contract modification on Nov. 16, providing an extra $36 million to the company to prepare the sensors on the last remaining satellites, DMSP-19 and DMSP-20. According to Gilbert Chan, Northrop's lead on DMSP, the company's original contract specified a 2010 time frame for both satellites -- a schedule that has since been moved to January 2014 for DMSP-19 and October 2014 for DMSP-20.

Chan said he's been given direction from the Air Force that the DMSP-20 launch will be moved to the latter part of the decade -- no earlier than 2016. However, the company's contract does not yet reflect that change. The funds provided through this modification will be used to recalibrate crucial sensors on both satellites.

"The majority of the work is that we are re-accepting the sensors and making sure that they are acceptable for launch in the 2014 time frame," Chan told Inside the Air Force during a Nov. 30 interview. "And in addition, the infrastructure that is required to provide the re-delivery of the sensor is what is also getting extended into the end of 2014."

The Air Force is early in the process of acquiring a new space-based weather capability, the Weather Satellite Follow-on (WSF), to replace the legacy DMSP, which launched its first satellite in 1962. A past effort to replace the system, the Defense Weather Satellite System, was canceled in 2011.

These last two DMSP satellites -- which were built in the 1990s with six-year design lives and have spent close to 20 years in storage -- will be utilized until WSF is operational.

Other updates from the September 2008 version of the joint doctrine document include:

* Eliminates information on weather observations taken by Army intelligence personnel as a nontraditional source of meteorological and oceanographic (METOC) data.

* Updates nontraditional sources of METOC data for the Army to include further information on tactical weather data.

* Updates nontraditional sources of METOC data for the Navy to include subsurface METOC data and astronomy, geophysics, and precise time.

* Updates Figure III-1, Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations Support Community.

* Establishes a senior meteorological (SMO) and joint meteorological and oceanographic officer planning checklist.

* Updates information on Marine Corps METOC forces.

* Updates information on special operations component METOC forces.

* Clarifies SMO designation in multinational operations.

* Clarifies SMO designation and relationship between the National Weather Service and Department of Homeland Security as it relates to interagency operations within the United States.

* Establishes a new vignette on METOC during Operation TOMODACHI.

* Establishes a new vignette on METOC in riverine operations.

* Replaces the term "Marine air traffic control squadron" with "Marine air control squadron."

* Replaces the term "civil support" with "defense support of civil authorities."

By John Liang
December 13, 2012 at 9:50 PM

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) today named the next heads of the panel's subcommittees.

"I selected these Members to be Subcommittee Chairmen for their long service on the Armed Services Committee and their dedication to our men and women in uniform. In the years ahead, this Committee must ensure our troops and their families have what they need to face increasing dangers abroad, in an era of declining resources at home. That tension between threats and resources will present our subcommittees with difficult choices, but I am confident in the leadership of our chairmen," McKeon said in a statement.

The subcommittee chairmen (minus the oversight and investigations subcommittee, who will be named later) are as follows, according to the statement:

Emerging Threats and Capabilities -- Rep. Mac Thornberry, Texas, Full Committee Vice Chair

Seapower and Projection Forces -- Rep. J. Randy Forbes, Virginia

Military Personnel -- Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina

Tactical Air and Land Forces -- Rep. Mike Turner, Ohio

Strategic Forces -- Rep. Mike Rogers, Alabama

Readiness -- Rep. Rob Wittman, Virginia

By John Liang
December 13, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Gus Hargett, president of the National Guard Association of the United States, has weighed in on the debate over fiscal year 2013 funding for the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.

In a statement released this afternoon, Hargett says:

"Fueled by misinformation from some Air Force officers, it appears a handful of House Armed Services Committee members are willing to circumvent the legislative process to force a budget on the Air National Guard that the governors, the adjutants general and most in Congress oppose.

"This is the kind of mischief that can occur during conference, when a handful from the House and Senate can go behind closed doors and literally change legislation in the name of forging compromise between the two chambers.

"The House and Senate both rejected the Air Force's fiscal 2013 budget request, which would take disproportionate cuts from the Air National Guard. Both chambers told Air Force officials to go back and work with the governors and the adjutants general on a new proposal that addressed state concerns.

"Unfortunately, Air Force officials have since ignored the governors and the adjutants general. Neither group has been able to provide meaningful input to a new budget plan. Nevertheless, Air Force officers have told members of Congress that they have a compromise plan in hand.

"For the record, the nation's governors and adjutants general favor a freeze on Air Guard manpower and force structure and the establishment of a National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force. Neither organization has agreed to any Air Force proposal. Both remain concerned that the cuts to the Air Guard would adversely affect domestic response.

"In addition, to our knowledge, the chief of the National Guard Bureau has not endorsed any compromise plan for the Air National Guard in the fiscal 2013 Air Force budget.

"Commissions are certainly not the ideal way to craft budget decisions. They are a last resort. But at this point, a commission independent from the Air Force is our only remaining hope for a transparent process that includes real input from the governors and Guard leaders."

Earlier this week, the Council of Governors sent a letter to senior House and Senate lawmakers asking that during the upcoming defense authorization conference negotiations they continue to support a freeze of Air National Guard manpower and aircraft throughout FY-13. As InsideDefense.com reported on Tuesday:

"In the absence of an agreement on the Air Force's budget proposal for FY2013, and without an agreement between governors and [the Defense Department] on a consultative process for future years, we request your continued support in conference for the freeze in ANG manpower and aircraft and for the Senate's proposed National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force," the council's Dec. 10 letter states. Inside the Air Force obtained a copy of the letter.

Council members sent the letter yesterday to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and Ranking Member John McCain (R-AZ), as well as their House counterparts Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA). In the letter, council co-Chairs Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) and Washington State Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) write that the council has "diligently" tried to work with DOD to address concerns surrounding the Air Force's FY-13 force-structure strategy and "avoid future budget disputes," but to no avail. National Governors Association Chairman Delaware Gov. Jack Markell (D) and NGA Vice Chair Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) also signed the letter.

The council, created by executive order to ensure that the relationship between state and federal governments runs smoothly, has requested that Congress maintain a freeze on manpower and aircraft just days after the Air Force sent lawmakers a compromise deal on its FY-13 force-structure strategy. The service submitted a revised force-structure strategy at the end of November in response to the criticism it received after its original plan, sent along with the FY-13 budget request, was met with sharp criticism by Congress and the Council of Governors. The revised strategy restores dozens of aircraft to the Air Force's inventory and re-missions a handful of Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard squadrons.

"As you know, through the Council of Governors . . . we have worked diligently with the Air Force this year to try to rectify the surprising and disproportionate cuts facing the ANG as part of the Air Force's FY2013 budget request," the letter states. "While we recognize the Air Force's recent attempt to revise its earlier proposal, there has not been sufficient time for all interested parties to fully review the details, assess impact and discuss modifications. We look forward to continuing to work with the Air Force on a proposal that could be implemented in FY2014."

View more of InsideDefense.com's coverage of Guard and Reserve issues.

By John Liang
December 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM

With more than $1.4 billion requested in fiscal year 2013 for operational energy initiatives, the Congressional Research Service has taken a look at potential issues for lawmakers regarding the Defense Department's fuel use.

"By some accounts, DOD is the largest organizational user of petroleum in the world. Even so, DOD's share of total U.S. energy consumption is fairly small," a Dec. 10 CRS report -- originally obtained by Secrecy News -- states, adding: "DOD is by far the largest U.S. government user of energy. The amount of money that DOD spends on petroleum-based fuels is large in absolute terms, but relatively small as a percentage of DOD's overall budget."

CRS notes that the Pentagon's fuel costs "have increased substantially over the last decade, to about $17 billion in FY2011," with petroleum-based liquid fuels being the department's largest energy source, "accounting for approximately two-thirds of DOD energy consumption."

The Air Force is the service that uses the most fuel, according to CRS.

About 75 percent of the Pentagon's energy use goes toward operational energy and the remainder goes toward installation energy, the report states.

Consequently, CRS lists the following "potential oversight issues for Congress regarding DOD's energy initiatives":

* DOD's coordination of operational energy initiatives being pursued by the military services.

* DOD's efforts to gather reliable data and develop metrics for evaluating DOD's energy initiatives.

* DOD's estimates of future fuel costs.

* DOD's role in federal energy initiatives.

* The Navy's initiative to help jumpstart a domestic advanced biofuels industry.

* The potential implications for DOD energy initiatives of shifts in U.S. military strategy.

View the full CRS report.

And for more InsideDefense.com coverage of Pentagon energy issues, check out Defense Energy Alert.

By Jason Sherman
December 12, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Canadian sticker shock over a new, independent $30 billion cost estimate for Ottawa's planned acquisition of 60 F-35s has put Canada's participation in the Joint Strike Fighter in question, with the government's "national fighter procurement secretariat" today announcing plans for how it will evaluate alternative aircraft to replace its aging CF-18s.

In reaction, the Defense Department did not dispute the findings of accounting firm KPMG's review of Canada's F-35 costs. "The model which produced the latest Canadian acquisition cost estimates aligns with similar U.S. cost estimates," said Joe Dellavedova, spokesman for the F-35 joint program office.

Rona Ambrose, Canada's minister of public works and government services, said in a statement today that the release of the terms of reference for the re-evaluation of alternative fighter aircraft demonstrates "that we are serious about looking at all available options to replace the CF-18s."

Dellavedova said the Canadian fighter review "is very similar to the review the U.S. performed in 2010," when the Pentagon was required by law to recertify the F-35 program's necessity in order to avoid termination in the wake of cost growth disclosures. "The U.S. review determined that there is no alternative to the F-35 that can provide the necessary capability at lower cost," Dellavedova said.

By Christopher J. Castelli
December 12, 2012 at 2:20 PM

The White House is condemning North Korea’s Dec. 11 missile launch, which defied United Nations Security Council resolutions.

U.S. missile warning systems detected and tracked the launch of a North Korean missile at 7:49 p.m. EST, NORAD said in a statement. “The missile was tracked on a southerly azimuth. Initial indications are that the first stage fell into the Yellow Sea,” the command stated. “The second stage was assessed to fall into the Philippine Sea. Initial indications are that the missile deployed an object that appeared to achieve orbit. At no time was the missile or the resultant debris a threat to North America.”

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor said the launch -- which used ballistic missile technology despite express prohibitions by United Nations Security Council resolutions -- “is a highly provocative act that threatens regional security, directly violates United Nations Security Council resolutions 1718 and 1874, contravenes North Korea’s international obligations, and undermines the global non-proliferation regime.”

“This action is yet another example of North Korea’s pattern of irresponsible behavior,” Vietor said. “The United States remains vigilant in the face of North Korean provocations and fully committed to the security of our allies in the region. Given this current threat to regional security, the United States will strengthen and increase our close coordination with allies and partners.”

On April 16, 2012, the United Nations Security Council expressed its “determination to take action accordingly in the event of a further [North Korean] launch.” Now, the United States will work with its Six-Party partners, the United Nations Security Council, and other U.N. member states to pursue “appropriate action,” Vietor said. “The international community must work in a concerted fashion to send North Korea a clear message that its violations of United Nations Security Council resolutions have consequences. The international community continues to insist that North Korea live up to its commitments, adhere to its international obligations, and deal peacefully with its neighbors.”

By John Liang
December 12, 2012 at 1:00 PM

The Pentagon this week announced slightly more than $1 billion in proposed foreign military sales to Israel and Japan.

According to a pair of Dec. 10 Defense Security Cooperation Agency statements, DOD has notified Congress of a proposed $647 million sale to Israel of 6,900 Joint Direct Attack Munitions tail kits and associated equipment as well as a proposed $421 million sale of Aegis Combat System upgrades to two Japanese destroyers.

On the specifics of the JDAM sale to Israel, DSCA states:

The Government of Israel has requested a possible sale of 6,900 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) tail kits (which include 3,450 JDAM Anti-Jam KMU-556 (GBU-31) for MK-84 warheads; 1,725 KMU-557 (GBU-31) for BLU-109 warheads and 1,725 KMU-572 (GBU-38) for MK-82 warheads); 3,450 MK-84 2000 lb General Purpose Bombs; 1,725 MK-82 500 lb General Purpose Bombs; 1,725 BLU-109 Bombs; 3,450 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs; 11,500 FMU-139 Fuses; 11,500 FMU-143 Fuses; and 11,500 FMU-152 Fuses. Also included are spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and technical support, and other related elements of program support. The estimated cost is $647 million.

The United States is committed to the security of Israel, and it is vital to U.S. national interests to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives.

The proposed sale of munitions will enable Israel to maintain operational capability of its existing systems. Israel, which already has these munitions in its inventory, will have no difficulty absorbing these additional munitions into its armed forces.

And as for the Aegis Combat System sale to Japan:

The Government of Japan has requested a possible sale for the upgrade of previously provided AEGIS Combat Systems as part of the modernization of two Atago Class Ships (DDG-177 ATAGO and DDG-178 ASHIGARA) with Integrated Air Missile Defense capability. The modifications/replacements consist of the following components: J6 AEGIS Weapon System Computer Program, 2 Multi-Mission Signal Processors for existing AN/SPY-1D(V) radar, 2 Common Processor Systems, 2 ship sets Common Display Systems (44 OJ-827(V)1 Tri Screen Display Consoles, 8 Display Processor Cabinets, 2 Video Wall Screen and Projector Systems, 46 Flat Panel Displays, and 2 Distributed Video Systems), 2 ship sets AN/SPQ-15 Digital Video Distribution Systems, 2 ship sets Operational Readiness Test Systems hosted in AEGIS Weapon Systems computing infrastructure, Ballistic Missile Defense (Mission Planner Blade server processors hosted in CPS, and 2 Kill Assessment Systems/Weapon Data Recording Cabinets), Vertical Launching System MK41 upgrade to Baseline 7 (24 Motor Control Panels MK 448 Mod 1, 48 Programmable Power4 Supplies MK 179 Mod 0, and 24 Launch Sequencers MK 5 Mod 1, 4 Fiber Optic Distribution Boxes, and 24 Single Module Junction Boxes), 4 Launch Control Units MK 235 Mod 7 with Global Positioning System Integrator, 2 ship sets Gun Weapon Systems MK 34, and 2 ship sets MK 20 Electro-Optical Sensor Systems. Also included: software updates, ordnance alterations and engineering changes, spare and repair parts, support equipment, tools and test equipment, technical data and publications, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $421 million.

By John Liang
December 11, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Pentagon procurement officials working on programs valued at $1 billion or higher are now required to take part in a "Service Acquisition Workshop or an equivalent program, as provided by the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) or other appropriate provider," according to a new Defense Department memo.

The Dec. 6 memo, issued by Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy Director Richard Ginman, states that unless it is waived, "this training is required before a service acquisition strategy will be approved by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Ginman adds that officials should also think about applying the requirement to efforts valued at more than $100 million. Further:

The SAW, as offered by DAU, is an interactive, centrally-funded course that applies performance-based techniques to services acquisitions. During a SAW, the DAU staff travels to the site of the multi-functional team to facilitate a four day workshop tailored to a given requirements set. Participants learn how to use the Acquisition Requirements Roadmap Tool (ARRT) to define and refine requirements in order to create an initial draft of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). This process has proven to significantly improve the quality of requirement documents while: reducing costs, increasing the likelihood of effective competition, and shortening acquisition lead times.

View the full memo.

By John Liang
December 10, 2012 at 4:43 PM

The Pentagon recently issued an updated doctrine statement on information operations.

The Nov. 27 document "provides joint doctrine for the planning, preparation, execution, and assessment of information operations across the range of military operations." According to a summary of changes to the prior doctrine, published in February 2006, the updated document:

* Identifies the information environment as the aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate or act on information.

* Defines information-related capabilities (IRCs) as tools, techniques or activities employed within a dimension of the information environment, which can be used to achieve a specific end(s).

* Introduces the information-influence relational framework as a model illustrating the use of means and ways, through the applications of IRCs, to achieve an end(s) through influence of a target audience (TA).

* Defines TA as an individual or group selected for influence.

* Describes information operations (IO) as the integrated employment, during military operations, of IRCs in concert with other lines of operation, to influence, disrupt, corrupt, or usurp the decision making of adversaries and potential adversaries while protecting our own.

* Designates the IO staff as the combatant command focal point for IO and the IO cell as the planning element responsible for integration and synchronization of IRCs to achieve national or combatant commander objectives against adversaries or potential adversaries.

* Emphasizes IO must be integrated into all steps of the joint operation planning process.

* Articulates that it is vital to integrate multinational partners into joint IO planning, in order to gain agreement on an integrated and achievable IO strategy.

By Gabe Starosta
December 7, 2012 at 10:19 PM

The United Launch Alliance announced this afternoon that it has identified the problem experienced by its Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle rocket booster during an October Air Force launch, and ULA says it is confident there is no risk that a launch planned for Tuesday will go awry.

In a statement from ULA spokeswoman Jessica Rye, issued after 5 p.m. today, the company said a fuel leak in the upper-stage engine of the Delta IV rocket booster used in October was to blame for the lower-than-expected thrust experienced during launch. The Air Force and ULA plan to send the service's X-37B spaceplane, also known as OTV-3, into orbit on Tuesday using an Atlas V booster, which uses a variant of the same RL-10 upper-stage engine. All "crossover" risks, though, have been taken care of, Rye said.

"The ULA investigation has concluded that a fuel leak occurred in a specific area of the interior of the thrust chamber, and that this leak started during the first engine start sequence," according to the statement. "Although the investigation into the flight data anomaly continues, all credible crossover implications from the Delta anomaly for the OTV-3 Atlas vehicle and engine system have been thoroughly addressed and mitigated, culminating in the flight clearance decision for the OTV-3 launch."

Inside the Air Force attended the Oct. 4 launch of a Global Positioning System satellite from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. The flawed launch triggered a formal accident investigation board from Air Force Space Command, only the second space-driven AIB in the last decade, as ITAF reported in the weeks following the event.