DODI 5000.02 Enclosure 6: Life-Cycle Sustainment

1. PURPOSE

This enclosure describes the application of life-cycle sustainment planning policies and procedures. The enclosure addresses sustainment across the life cycle, and the elements of the Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) Initially prepared for Milestone A and updated for the Development Request For Proposal (RFP) Release Decision Point, Milestone B, Milestone C, Full-Rate Production Decision Review (FRPDR) and at least every 5 years after a system’s Initial Operational Capability (IOC). It contains the results of life cycle sustainment planning accomplished during the Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) phase and the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase and spans the system’s entire life cycle from Milestone A to disposal. The LCSP addresses how the program manager (PM) and other organizations will acquire and maintain oversight of the fielded system..

2. SUSTAINMENT ACROSS THE LIFE CYCLE

Sustainment planning, including the requirements in 10 U.S.C. 2337 (Reference (h)), and in Appendix E to Enclosure B of the Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System Supports the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in identifying, assessing, and prioritizing joint military capability requirements. (Reference (r)), must be an integral element of the capability requirements and acquisition process from inception.

a. The Program Manager Designated individual with responsibility for and authority to accomplish program objectives for development, production, and sustainment to meet the user’s operational needs. The PM shall be accountable for credible cost, schedule, and performance reporting to the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA)., with the support of the Product Support Manager (PSM), will:

(1) Develop and implement an affordable and effective performance-based product support strategy. The product support strategy will be the basis for all sustainment efforts and lead to a product support package to achieve and sustain warfighter requirements.

(a) The product support strategy will address, at a minimum:

1. An integrated product support capability implementing the program’s mix of government and industry providers supported by appropriate analyses included in 10 U.S.C. 2337.

2. Sustainment metrics mapped to the sustainment KPP and key system attributes to manage sustainment performance.

3. Implementation of a reliability improvement program based on Failure Modes, Effects and Critically Analysis (or defect tracking for software), other engineering data developed during the systems engineering process, system health information generated by applicable on-board and off-board technologies, and data sources in accordance with DoD Instruction 4151.22 (Reference (bi)).

4. CompetitionAn acquisition strategy whereby more than one contractor is sought to bid on a service or function; the winner is selected based on criteria established by the activity for which the work is to be performed. The law and DoD policy require maximum competition, to the extent possible, throughout the acquisition life cycle., or the option of competition, at the prime and subcontract levels for large and small businesses, and system and sub-system levels.

5. The necessary IPIncludes inventions, trademarks, patents, industrial designs, copyrights, and technical information including software, data designs, technical know-how, manufacturing information and know-how, techniques, Technical Data Packages (TDP), manufacturing data packages, and trade secrets. deliverables and associated license rights, consistent with and integrated with the program IP Strategy. Paragraph 6a(4) in Enclosure 2 of this instruction details IP policy.

6. How and when computer software and computer software documentation (as defined in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (Reference (al)) section 252.227-7014) and other material and activities required to maintain and sustain the software after Initial Operational Capability (IOC) In general, attained when selected units and/or organizations in the force structure scheduled to receive a new system have received it and have the ability to employ and maintain it. The specifics for any particular system IOC are defined in that system’s Capability Development Document (CDD) and Capability Production Document (CPD). will be provided to the government for systems that require core logistics support or when depot level software maintenance is required. Paragraph 3d(2) in this enclosure addresses core logistics requirements.

7. The use of existing government owned inventory prior to use of product support arrangements as required in 10 U.S.C. 2337 (Reference (h)).

8. The government accountable property system that documents all government owned property whether it is held and managed by the government, contractor, or third party, in accordance with 40 U.S.C. 524 (Reference (p)).

(b) Product support integrators and product support providers may be organic, commercial, or a combination.

(2) Ensure identification of obsolete parts in specifications and develop plans for suitable replacements in accordance with P.L. 113-66, section 803 (Reference (bj)) as part of the program’s plan to prevent the acquisition of counterfeit material in the DoD supply chain as required by DoD Instruction 4140.67 (Reference (ck)).

(3) Employ effective performance-based logistics (PBL)Synonymous with performance based product support, where outcomes are acquired through performance based arrangements that deliver Warfighter requirements and incentivize product support providers to reduce costs through innovation. These arrangements are contracts with industry or inter-governmental agreements. Sources of support may be organic, commercial, or a combination, with primary focus optimizing customer support, weapon system availability, and reduced ownership costs. planning, development, implementation, and management in developing a system’s product support arrangements. PBL is performance-based product support, where outcomes are acquired through performance-based arrangements that deliver warfighter requirements and incentivize product support providers to reduce costs through innovation.

(4) Continually assess and refine the product support strategy based on projected and actual performance.

(5) Employ a “Should-Cost” management and analysis approach to identify and implement system and enterprise sustainment cost reduction initiatives. Should-cost targets will be established and reviewed periodically based on analysis of acquisition sustainment costs and operations and support (O&S) cost element drivers. Program managers will capture product support metrics and cost data in DoD Component- and DoD-level information systems, and track performance against should-cost targets.

(6) Continually monitor product support performance and correct trends that could negatively impact availability and cost.

(7) Minimize unique automatic test equipment (ATE) by utilizing designated DoD automatic test system families for all ATE hardware and software in DoD field and depot operations.

(8) Begin demilitarization and disposal planning, including demilitarization and controlled inventory item coding of system, subsystems, or components, as required by DoD Manual 4160.28-M (Reference (bk)), with sufficient lead time before the disposal or retirement of the first asset to reduce costs and risks and to ensure compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements.

(9) Plan for corrosion prevention and control (CPC) in systems engineering and life cycle sustainment as required by DoD Instruction 5000.67 (Reference (bl)). Product support planning, especially maintenance planning and sustaining engineering, will incorporate appropriate mitigation of CPC risks inherent in the design to meet sustainment requirements.

b. DoD Components will:

(1) Ensure that sustainment factors are fully considered at all key life-cycle management decision points, and that appropriate measures are taken to reduce operating and support costs by influencing system design early in development, developing sound product support strategies, and addressing key drivers of cost.

(2) Periodically assess product support performance and assist program managers, users, resource sponsors, and materiel enterprise stake holders to take corrective action to prevent degraded materiel readiness or O&S cost growthA term related to the net change of an estimated or actual amount over a base figure previously established. The base must be relatable to a program, project, or contract and be clearly identified, including source, approval authority, specific items included, specific assumptions made, date, and the amount..

(3) Initiate system modifications, as necessary, to improve performance and reduce ownership costs, consistent with the limitations prescribed in 10 U.S.C. 2244a (Reference (h)).

(4) Ensure Program Managers responsible for renewal of sustainment contracts that include public-private partnerships with DoD maintenance depots will include the use of Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) storage and distribution capacity in the terms of renewal public-private partnership arrangements and negotiate the transfer of government-owned inventory from commercial to DLA facilities, as specified in the arrangement.

3. LIFE-CYCLE SUSTAINMENT PLAN (LCSP)

Program managers for all programs are responsible for developing and maintaining an Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) Initially prepared for Milestone A and updated for the Development Request For Proposal (RFP) Release Decision Point, Milestone B, Milestone C, Full-Rate Production Decision Review (FRPDR) and at least every 5 years after a system’s Initial Operational Capability (IOC). It contains the results of life cycle sustainment planning accomplished during the Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) phase and the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase and spans the system’s entire life cycle from Milestone A to disposal. The LCSP addresses how the program manager (PM) and other organizations will acquire and maintain oversight of the fielded system. consistent with the product support strategy, beginning at Milestone A. The plan will describe sustainment influences on system design and the technical, business, and management activities to develop, implement, and deliver a product support package that maintains affordable system operational effectiveness over the system life cycle and seeks to reduce cost without sacrificing necessary levels of program support. The Acquisition Strategy will also include an overview of the product support strategy and sustainment-related contracts.

a. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) (or as designated) will approve acquisition category (ACAT) ID, ACAT IAM, and USD(AT&L)-designated special interest program LCSPs.

b. The Component Acquisition Executive (CAE) Secretaries of the military departments or heads of agencies with the power of redelegation. In the military departments, the officials delegated as CAEs (also called service acquisition executives (SAEs)) are respectively, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASA(AL&T)); the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ASN(RD&A)); and the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition (ASAF(A)). The CAEs are responsible for all acquisition functions within their components. This includes both the SAEs for the military departments and acquisition executives in other DoD components, such as the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which also have acquisition management responsibilities. , or designee, will approve LCSPs for ACAT IC, ACAT IAC, and ACAT II and below programs.

c. The LCSP will be updated at each milestone and specified decision points to reflect the increased maturity of the product support strategy, any changes in the corresponding product support package, current risks, and any cost reduction activities.

(1) At Milestone A, the LCSP will focus on development of sustainment metrics to influence design and the product support strategy, and on actions that can be taken prior to Milestone B to reduce future operating and support costs, including software sustainment. Planning will use factors and assumptions consistent with those used in the analysis of alternatives and affordability analysis, or justify any deviation from those factors and assumptions.

(2) At the Development RFPA document used in negotiated acquisitions to communicate Government requirements to prospective contractors and to solicit proposals. RFPs for competitive acquisitions describe the Government’s requirement; anticipated terms and conditions that will apply to the contract; information required to be in the offeror’s proposal; and factors and significant sub-factors that will be used to evaluate the proposal and their relative importance. Release Decision Point and Milestone B, the LCSP will focus on finalizing the sustainment metrics, integrating sustainment considerations with design and risk management activities, and refining the execution plan for the design, acquisition, fielding, and competition of sustainment activities.

(3) At Milestone C, if applicable, the LCSP will focus on ensuring operational supportability and verifying performance.

(4) At the Full-Rate Production DecisionMilestone Decision Authority (MDA) review to assess the results of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) and initial manufacturing and deployment to determine whether or not to approve proceeding to Full-Rate Production or Full Deployment. Continuing into Full-Rate Production or Full Deployment requires demonstrated control of the manufacturing process, acceptable performance and reliability, and the establishment of adequate sustainment and support. or Full Deployment Decision Decision made by the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) of a Major Automated Information System (MAIS) acquisition program authorizing an increment of the program to deploy software for operational use. , the LCSP will focus on how sustainment performance is measured, managed, assessed, and reported; and the actions to adjust the product support package to ensure continued competition and cost control while meeting warfighter mission requirements.

(5) After IOC, the LCSP is the principle document governing the system’s sustainment. Programs will update the plan whenever there are changes to the product support strategy, or every 5 years, whichever occurs first, supported by appropriate analyses, sustainment metrics, sustainment costs, system components or configuration (hardware and software), environmental requirements, and disposal plans or costs.

d. The LCSP will include the following annexes:

(1) Business Case Analyses. The Program Manager Designated individual with responsibility for and authority to accomplish program objectives for development, production, and sustainment to meet the user’s operational needs. The PM shall be accountable for credible cost, schedule, and performance reporting to the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). will attach relevant assumptions, constraints, and analyses used to develop the product support strategy to the LCSP. The DLA will participate in supply support related business case analyses by developing and providing data for ACAT I, II, and III programs. PSMs will revalidate analyses based on changes to the assumptions, constraints, and operating environment, or every 5 years, whichever occurs first.

(2) Core Logistics Analysis. By Milestone A, the DoD Component will document its determination of applicability of core depot-level maintenance and repair capability requirements in the LCSP in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2366a (Reference (h)). For Milestone B, the Program Manager will attach the program’s estimated requirements for maintenance, repair and associated logistics capabilities and workloads to the LCSP in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2366b. The program’s maintenance plan will ensure that core depot-level maintenance and repair capabilities and capacity are established not later than 4 years after IOC in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2464. The Program Manager will ensure that a depot source of repair designation is made not later than 90 days after the Critical Design Review. Before entering into a contract for low rate initial production, supportability analysis must include detailed requirements for core depot-level maintenance and repair capabilities, and associated sustaining workloads required to support such requirements. Program plans will include the use of DLA-operated storage and distribution facilities where collocated with the DoD Component’s selection of organic depot maintenance.

(3) Preservation and Storage of Unique Tooling Plan. For Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) An acquisition program that is designated by the USD(AT&L) as an MDAP; or is estimated to require an eventual total expenditure for RDT&E including all planned increments, of more than $480 million in FY 2014 constant dollars or, for procurement, including all planned increments, of more than $2.79 billion in FY 2014 constant dollars., the plan, as outlined and required by section 815 of P.L. 110-417 (Reference (g)), is prepared to support Milestone C. It must include the review cycle for assessing tool retention across the life of the system. If a MDA (other than the Defense Acquisition Executive (DAE)) determines that preservation and storage of unique tooling is no longer required, a waiver will be submitted to the DAE for notification to Congress.

(4) IP Strategy Strategy to identify and manage the full spectrum of IP and related issues (e.g., technical data and computer software deliverables, patented technologies, and appropriate license rights) from the inception of a program and throughout the life cycle. The IP Strategy will describe, at a minimum, how program management will assess program needs for, and acquire competitively whenever possible, the IP deliverables and associated license rights necessary for competitive and affordable acquisition and sustainment over the entire product life cycle. The IP Strategy will be updated throughout the entire product life cycle, summarized in the Acquisition Strategy, and presented with the Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan during the Operations and Support Phase. Program management is also responsible for evaluating and implementing open systems architectures, where cost effective, and implementing a consistent IP Strategy. This approach integrates technical requirements with contracting mechanisms and legal considerations to support continuous availability of multiple competitive alternatives throughout the product life cycle.. The program’s IP Strategy will be included in the LCSP and updated appropriately during the O&S Phase (see paragraph 6a(4) in Enclosure 2 of this instruction for additional information).

(5) Additional Annexes. Program Managers will consider including additional annexes, or reference other documents that integrate a program’s sustainment planning or product support strategyThe business and technical approach to design, acquire, and field the product support package to execute the sustainment strategy. It begins as a broad concept and evolves into a detailed implementation plan documented in the Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP)..

e. Life-cycle sustainment for information systems may be provided via multiple approaches, including service level agreements, support agreements, performance work statements, and enterprise services. Where feasible and as approved by the MDA, programs may employ portfolio-level documents to satisfy their LCSP requirements. Commercial off-the-shelf and government off-the-shelf products used as intended will normally be supported via standard warranties and support agreements. Effective life-cycle sustainment requires continuous monitoring to ensure investments are maintained at the right size, cost, and condition, to include vulnerability management, to support warfighter and business missions and objectives. Information technology investment LCSPs will address Management-in-Use guidelines published in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-11 (Reference (c)).

4. SUSTAINMENT METRICS

The sustainment KPP Performance attribute of a system considered critical or essential to the development of an effective military capability. KPPs are contained in the Capability Development Document and the Capability Production Document and are included verbatim in the Acquisition Program Baseline. KPPs are expressed in term of parameters which reflect Measures of Performance using a threshold/objective format. KPPs must be measurable, testable, and support efficient and effective Test and Evaluation. Mandatory KPPs are specified in the JCIDS Manual. (Availability) is as critical to a program’s success as cost, schedule, and performance. ACAT I and II program managers Designated individual with responsibility for and authority to accomplish program objectives for development, production, and sustainment to meet the user’s operational needs. The PM shall be accountable for credible cost, schedule, and performance reporting to the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). will use availability and sustainment cost metrics as triggers to conduct further investigation and analysis into drivers of those metrics, to develop Should Cost targets, and to develop strategies for improving reliability, availability, and maintainability of such systems at a reduced cost. The materiel availability portion of the KPP will be based on the entire system inventory and supported by the following sustainment metrics:

a. Materiel Reliability. As required by the Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System Supports the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in identifying, assessing, and prioritizing joint military capability requirements. (Reference (r)), materiel reliability is the design metric that has the most significant impact on the program’s operational availability and O&S cost.

b. O&S Cost. DoD Components will ensure reliability and maintainability data from operational and developmental testing and evaluation and fielding informs estimates of O&S costs for major weapon systems.

c. Mean Down Time. The average total downtime required to restore an asset to its operational capability, measures the effectiveness of the supply chain and support infrastructure (e.g., customer wait time, logistics response time, retrograde time). It is an important element in assessing a system’s affordability across its life cycle and identifies constraints and opportunities of a system’s product support strategy and product support arrangements.

d. Other Metrics. Outcome metrics to support sustainment elements included in capability requirements documentation or required by the DoD Component to manage the system development, product support package, and supply chain to develop and maintain the system.

5. PRODUCT SUPPORT REVIEWS

a. The program’s PSM will assess logistics as a focused part of the program’s Program Support Assessments and technical reviews (e.g., systems engineering, test) to ensure the system design and product support package are integrated to achieve the sustainment metrics and inform applicable modeling and simulation tools.

b. The DoD Components will conduct independent logistics assessments (ILAs) for all weapon system MDAPs An acquisition program that is designated by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) as an MDAP; or is estimated to require an eventual total expenditure for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), including all planned increments, of more than $480 million in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 constant dollars or, for procurement, including all planned increments, of more than $2.79 billion in FY 2014 constant dollars. GAO-16-329SP, Assessment of Selected Weapon Programs, Mar 2016 FY17 Program Acquisition Cost By Weapon System, Feb 2016 prior to Milestones B and C and the Full-Rate Production Decision to assess the adequacy of the product support strategy, and to identify features that are likely to drive future operating and support costs, changes to system design that could reduce costs, and effective strategies for managing such costs. The reviews will focus on sustainment planning and execution, to include the core logistics analyses and establishment of organic capabilities. Each DoD Component will establish its criteria for independence, and will provide (1) guidance to ensure consistency within the respective Component and (2) the scope of the assessment for key acquisition decision points. At a minimum, these reviews will be chartered by the CAE and conducted by logistics, program management, and business experts from outside the program office.

c. After IOC, the DoD Components will continue to conduct ILAs at a minimum interval of every 5 years. DoD Components will provide results to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness. Assessments will focus on the weapon system-level product support performance in satisfying warfighter needs, meeting sustainment metrics, and providing best-value outcomes. They must specifically assess O&S costs to identify and address factors resulting in growth in O&S costs and adapt strategies to reduce such costs. Results will inform LCSP Initially prepared for Milestone A and updated for the Development Request For Proposal (RFP) Release Decision Point, Milestone B, Milestone C, Full-Rate Production Decision Review (FRPDR) and at least every 5 years after a system’s Initial Operational Capability (IOC). It contains the results of life cycle sustainment planning accomplished during the Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) phase and the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase and spans the system’s entire life cycle from Milestone A to disposal. The LCSP addresses how the program manager (PM) and other organizations will acquire and maintain oversight of the fielded system. and analyses updates.