The Insider

The Federal Aviation Administration today released its first annual roadmap how to integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the U.S. airspace.

"This roadmap will illustrate the significant undertaking it is to build the basis for the [national airspace] to transition from UAS accommodation to UAS integration," the roadmap states.

The report highlights the importance of government-industry collaboration and the development of key technologies like sense-and-avoid and communications systems. In addition, the "harmonization" of standards with the international community would be a boon for UAS operations outside of the U.S., the roadmap states.

Integrating unmanned drones into U.S. skies has proved to be a tricky issue, in part because the standards for manned aircraft are based upon pilots' ability to see and communicate while in the cockpit. Other challenges revolve around what happens when an unmanned drone loses its link back to its controller.

"In the long term, the principal objective of the aviation regulatory framework is to achieve and maintain the highest possible uniform level of safety while maintaining or increasing the efficiency and the environmental performance of the NAS," the roadmap states. "In the case of UAS, this means ensuring the safety of all airspace users as well as the safety of persons and property on the ground."

The Air Force's senior civilian acquisition official informed Congress two weeks ago that the service came within 24 hours of having to break a fixed-price contract during the recent government shutdown, without naming the program. An Air Force spokesman today confirmed the program in question was the KC-46 tanker development effort, making this the second time in two years the service has warned it came close to losing the good deal it got from Boeing in 2011.

The first time, in 2012, occurred because the combination of sequestration and a continuing resolution threatened to leave the Air Force without enough money to pay for the program's planned increase in expense from fiscal year 2013 to FY-14. This time, the 16-day government shutdown that ended Oct. 17 with the signing of a continuing resolution put the service in an uncomfortable contractual position, according to Bill LaPlante, the Air Force's principal deputy acquisition executive. He testified before the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee on Oct. 23.

"The program in question was KC-46," service spokesman Ed Gulick said in a statement this morning. "We were facing unique challenges trying to meet contractual obligations with no appropriations budget or continuing resolution. The resulting CR allowed us to meet these obligations."

LaPlante told InsideDefense.com after the hearing, "It was a particular contract where it was very simple in that we needed to have money to pay the contractor, and we did not have [FY-14] money because we had no budget, so we were within, I think, 24 hours. It was nothing certain that it would have breached the contract, but it put us at significant risk, just because they have to be paid.

"If you're not paid, the contractor can say . . . I need compensation for not being paid. It was not a little contract, either. I can't tell you what contract it was, but it was one of the big contracts, so this is real."

LaPlante has since been nominated by the White House to take over the long-vacant and Senate-confirmed Air Force acquisition executive position.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will lay out six priorities for budget and strategy deliberations in a speech this morning at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, according to a senior defense official.

"This is Secretary Hagel’s second speech focused on how the Department of Defense must adapt to a changing strategic and fiscal landscape, picking up on the themes of his April National Defense University address," the official said. "The speech this morning reflects clear guidance -- in particular six priorities -- that Secretary Hagel discussed with the Service Chiefs and Combatant Commanders at their meeting last week."

The priorities are informed by lessons learned from the Strategic Choices and Management Review and will serve as inputs to the fiscal year 2015 budget proposal and the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, the official said. Hagel will also provide his take on emerging national security challenges and the role DOD should play in U.S. foreign policy goals.

“With the end of the Iraq war and the winding down of the combat mission in Afghanistan, President Obama has been moving the nation off a perpetual war footing -- one in which America’s priorities, policies, and relationships around the world were dominated by the response to 9/11," Hagel will tell the audience, according to excerpts released by the Pentagon.

“No other nation has the will, the power, the capacity, and the network of alliances to lead the international community," the excerpts state. "However, sustaining our leadership will increasingly depend not only on the extent of our great power, but an appreciation of its limits and a wise deployment of our influence.”

The Senate Armed Services Committee this afternoon approved 394 pending military nominations in the Army, Navy and Air Force as well as several civilians, among them Jamie Morin as director of the Pentagon's cost assessment and program evaluation office.

In response to advance policy questions submitted to the committee earlier this month, Morin -- up until now the Air Force's comptroller -- said he plans to review the organization's workforce, which has been singled out as a problem area since its inception.

If confirmed, Morin said, he would move to review the size, shape and organization of the CAPE workforce "in detail to ensure the organization is aligned to meet current and future needs." As Inside the Pentagon reported Oct. 17:

CAPE was established by the 2009 Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act to "provide independent analysis and advice" to senior defense officials on a variety of issues -- including cost estimation and cost analysis for major defense acquisition programs and major automated information systems. CAPE replaced the department's now-defunct Program Analysis and Evaluation office.

However, CAPE has struggled to build up a staff suited to perform its expanded responsibilities. And now the tight fiscal environment may force the office, along with other agencies across the department, to reduce staffing and resources, such as money for federally funded research and development centers, Morin wrote.

"If confirmed, I expect to immediately undertake a review of the organization and its ability to fully meet statutory requirements, with the goal to provide clear recommendations regarding changes to organizational structure and additional resource demands," Morin said. "Given the significant statutory responsibilities under WSARA and the relatively limited growth of CAPE staffing since its enactment, I plan to be both an active manager of organizational resources and a strong advocate for the organization's mission."

Last year, CAPE launched a data-gathering effort on the workforce size, grade, demographics, and education and experience levels, according to a spring report signed by CAPE's then-director Christine Fox.

Other nominations approved by the committee today include:

Michael Lumpkin to be assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict;

Jo Ann Rooney to be under secretary of the Navy; and

Kenneth Mossman to be a member of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

The Pentagon released a report to Congress this week assessing the impact of corrosion on Defense Department facilities and infrastructure.

"The enclosed facilities and infrastructure corrosion evaluation study identified key corrosion cost drivers, assessed a planned facility construction program, and examined documentation of maintenance and facility engineering processes in regards to corrosion," Defense Department acquisition chief Frank Kendall writes in the cover letter to the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services committees.

While the report's evaluation team "found the military services are doing what they can in the areas of corrosion prevention and control (CPC) . . . opportunities for improvement exist throughout DOD," the report states, adding: "The study team also noted that corrosion is often perceived as rust and oxidation of metals, rather than the more comprehensive definition in congressional language. Discussions of corrosion challenges became more fruitful after a clear definition of corrosion was understood. That lack of awareness did not diminish the compelling need of the facilities and infrastructure community to address materials degradation."

Among the report's main findings:

* The study team identified key cost drivers using maintenance databases. These cost drivers were then confirmed during site visits. Policy makers and facilities maintainers can use these cost drivers as a reference point for addressing strategic enhancements in the sustainment of their installations.

* Installations located in severe environments (as measured by the Environmental Severity Index, or ESI) are subject to greater corrosion costs, as indicated by a recent cost-of-corrosion study.

* After an extensive review of DoD facilities and infrastructure policies and criteria5 in relation to corrosion mitigation, the study team compiled a list of guidance documents that specifically address CPC in the acquisition, development, and long-term management of DoD facilities and infrastructure. The study team noted considerable variability in the awareness and implementation of these CPC policies and guidance.

* Congress requested an assessment of a planned facility construction program. The D, CPO selected a construction program in an extreme ESI to assess CPC considerations during the planning, design, and construction phases. The study team noted that several design-phase requirements from that project included CPC material and installation criteria that were drawn from established DoD guidance and the experiences of the design community. The study team's assessment demonstrated that appropriate CPC planning and decisions made during the planning phase directly enhance a facility’s life cycle—a good model of military construction from a CPC perspective.

* Maintenance and facility engineering processes in relation to CPC vary to some degree from installation to installation; however, most sites included in the study had similar CPC processes and practices, despite differences in mission and facility objectives.

* Resource constraints were a consistent concern at all sites included in the study. Compliance with required programs (such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design [LEED], Anti-Terrorism Force Protection, and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966) reduces the funding an installation commander has available to eliminate or control the negative effects of corrosion.

* The study team noted several opportunities to improve the content and delivery of CPC training for the facilities and infrastructure community. Increased on-the-job and formal CPC training of facilities and infrastructure personnel would result in better corrosion-related decision making and help balance investments in preventive and corrective maintenance.

* Corrosion mitigation technology in the buildup of future facilities is purposefully explored by the military services, with some research and development funding provided by the D, CPO. The study team found that installations are reluctant to implement all but the most mature technologies, because of the inherent risk of failure and fear of losing scarce resources. These concerns can be alleviated somewhat; only proven and mature corrosion mitigating technologies are transitioned into the design and construction criteria.

* The process of transitioning new technology into criteria can be cumbersome and time consuming, resulting in large time lags before the new technology can be easily included in a contract.

* The study team believes better cross-installation communication would improve the dissemination and sharing of CPC best practices and accelerate the acceptance and implementation of new technologies.

* Effectiveness of contracting for facilities and infrastructure maintenance and repair varied across the services and installations. Where contracting personnel were familiar with facilities and infrastructure requirements, better CPC outcomes were achieved. Where contracting personnel were not familiar with facilities and infrastructure requirements, improved outcomes were not achieved. User involvement in the contracting process (from public works and engineering staff) improved the identification of CPC requirements and delivery of effective contracting solutions.

House Armed Services Committee leaders today announced a series of hearings aimed at illuminating military aspects of the Obama administration's pivot to the Asia-Pacific region. Led by Randy Forbes (R-VA), the seapower and projection forces subcommittee chairman, and panel member Rep. Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI), the series is expected to last through early 2014.

Of the five hearings slated to take place, four will be more or less explicitly about China. Topics are the 2013 annual report of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission; the Defense Department's role in the government's orientation toward the Asia-Pacific; responding to China's military space capabilities; maritime disputes in the region; and the People's Liberation Army's “naval and aerospace modernization,” according to a fact sheet handed to reporters at a roll-out event today.

An Oct. 10 hearing about the Pentagon's Air-Sea Battle concept marked the beginning of the hearing series, according to the document.

The Pentagon's Joint Test and Evaluation Program is calling on the services and other military agencies to nominate efforts in need of testing, according to a recent memo.

"The Office of the Secretary of Defense-sponsored Joint Test and Evaluation (JT&E) Program is requesting joint test nominations (now a biannual process) for the first cycle of fiscal year 2014," a Sept. 3 memo states, adding: "The JT&E Program Manager requests the Services, Joint Staff, combatant commands (CCMD), and other Department of Defense (DOD) agencies provide candidate nominations to the JT&E Program Office (JPO) for consideration no later than November 29, 2013." Further:

Nominations should contain sufficient detail to convince the Planning Committee and JT&E Program Senior Advisory Council (SAC) members that the proposed joint test will significantly improve joint warfighter operations and capabilities. If a nomination package does not contain the required information or sufficient detail, JPO will return the package to the nominator with specific rationale and guidance. JPO will invite the nominator to submit a revised package for consideration during the ongoing joint test nomination cycle. If the nomination package still does not contain all of the required information, JPO will once again return the package to the nominator with specific rationale and guidance, and invite the nominator to submit a new package for consideration during the next joint test nomination cycle.

A "planning committee" will meet on Jan. 29, 2014, to determine which nominations to forward to the JT&E Program Senior Advisory Council for consideration at its meeting the following month, according to the memo.