[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12388-12399]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR PASSAGE OF H.R. 2101, WEAPONS ACQUISITION SYSTEM REFORM 
    THROUGH ENHANCING TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE AND OVERSIGHT ACT OF 2009

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the 
motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 432, 
on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 432.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 428, 
nays 0, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 252]

                               YEAS--428

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Adler (NJ)
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boccieri
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Castor (FL)
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cohen
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Driehaus
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Graves
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Harper
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NY)
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMahon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olson
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quigley
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Bachmann
     Murtha
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Stark
     Tanner


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes 
remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1729

  So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and 
the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 432, H.R. 2101, 
as amended by the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in 
the bill, is considered as passed; S. 454, as amended by the text of 
H.R. 2101 as passed by the House, is considered as passed; and the 
House is considered to have insisted on its amendment and requested a 
conference with the Senate thereon.
  The text of the Senate bill, S. 454, is as follows:

                                 S. 454

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

[[Page 12389]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Weapon 
     Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.

                   TITLE I--ACQUISITION ORGANIZATION

Sec. 101. Reports on systems engineering capabilities of the Department 
              of Defense.
Sec. 102. Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation.
Sec. 103. Assessment of technological maturity of critical technologies 
              of major defense acquisition programs by the Director of 
              Defense Research and Engineering.
Sec. 104. Director of Independent Cost Assessment.
Sec. 105. Role of the commanders of the combatant commands in 
              identifying joint military requirements.
Sec. 106. Clarification of submittal of certification of adequacy of 
              budgets by the Director of the Department of Defense Test 
              Resource Management Center.

                      TITLE II--ACQUISITION POLICY

Sec. 201. Consideration of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and 
              performance in the acquisition of major weapon systems.
Sec. 202. Preliminary design review and critical design review for 
              major defense acquisition programs.
Sec. 203. Ensuring competition throughout the life cycle of major 
              defense acquisition programs.
Sec. 204. Critical cost growth in major defense acquisition programs.
Sec. 205. Organizational conflicts of interest in the acquisition of 
              major weapon systems.
Sec. 206. Awards for Department of Defense personnel for excellence in 
              the acquisition of products and services.
Sec. 207. Earned Value Management.
Sec. 208. Expansion of national security objectives of the national 
              technology and industrial base.
Sec. 209. Plan for elimination of weaknesses in operations that hinder 
              capacity to assemble and assess reliable cost information 
              on acquired assets under major defense acquisition 
              programs.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) The term ``congressional defense committees'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 101(a)(16) of title 10, 
     United States Code.
       (2) The term ``major defense acquisition program'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 2430 of title 10, United 
     States Code.

                   TITLE I--ACQUISITION ORGANIZATION

     SEC. 101. REPORTS ON SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CAPABILITIES OF THE 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Reports by Service Acquisition Executives.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the service acquisition executive of each military department 
     shall submit to the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics a report setting forth 
     the following:
       (1) A description of the extent to which such military 
     department has in place development planning organizations 
     and processes staffed by adequate numbers of personnel with 
     appropriate training and expertise to ensure that--
       (A) key requirements, acquisition, and budget decisions 
     made for each major weapon system prior to Milestones A and B 
     are supported by a rigorous systems analysis and systems 
     engineering process;
       (B) the systems engineering strategy for each major weapon 
     system includes a robust program for improving reliability, 
     availability, maintainability, and sustainability as an 
     integral part of design and development; and
       (C) systems engineering requirements, including 
     reliability, availability, maintainability, and 
     sustainability requirements, are identified during the Joint 
     Capabilities Integration Development System process and 
     incorporated into contract requirements for each major weapon 
     system.
       (2) A description of the actions that such military 
     department has taken, or plans to take, to--
       (A) establish needed development planning and systems 
     engineering organizations and processes; and
       (B) attract, develop, retain, and reward systems engineers 
     with appropriate levels of hands-on experience and technical 
     expertise to meet the needs of such military department.
       (b) Report by Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
     Technology, and Logistics.--Not later than 270 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall 
     submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives a report on the system engineering 
     capabilities of the Department of Defense. The report shall 
     include, at a minimum, the following:
       (1) An assessment by the Under Secretary of the reports 
     submitted by the service acquisition executives pursuant to 
     subsection (a) and of the adequacy of the actions that each 
     military department has taken, or plans to take, to meet the 
     systems engineering and development planning needs of such 
     military department.
       (2) An assessment of each of the recommendations of the 
     report on Pre-Milestone A and Early-Phase Systems Engineering 
     of the Air Force Studies Board of the National Research 
     Council, including the recommended checklist of systems 
     engineering issues to be addressed prior to Milestones A and 
     B, and the extent to which such recommendations should be 
     implemented throughout the Department of Defense.

     SEC. 102. DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENTAL TEST AND EVALUATION.

       (a) Establishment of Position.--
       (1) In general.--Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 139b the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 139c. Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation

       ``(a) There is a Director of Developmental Test and 
     Evaluation, who shall be appointed by the Secretary of 
     Defense from among individuals with an expertise in 
     acquisition and testing.
       ``(b)(1) The Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation 
     shall be the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense 
     and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
     Technology, and Logistics on developmental test and 
     evaluation in the Department of Defense.
       ``(2) The individual serving as the Director of 
     Developmental Test and Evaluation may also serve concurrently 
     as the Director of the Department of Defense Test Resource 
     Management Center under section 196 of this title.
       ``(3) The Director shall be subject to the supervision of 
     the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
     and Logistics and shall report to the Under Secretary.
       ``(4)(A) The Under Secretary shall provide guidance to the 
     Director to ensure that the developmental test and evaluation 
     activities of the Department of Defense are fully integrated 
     into and consistent with the systems engineering and 
     development processes of the Department.
       ``(B) The guidance under this paragraph shall ensure, at a 
     minimum, that--
       ``(i) developmental test and evaluation requirements are 
     fully integrated into the Systems Engineering Master Plan for 
     each major defense acquisition program; and
       ``(ii) systems engineering and development planning 
     requirements are fully considered in the Test and Evaluation 
     Master Plan for each major defense acquisition program.
       ``(c) The Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation 
     shall--
       ``(1) develop policies and guidance for the developmental 
     test and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense 
     (including integration and developmental testing of 
     software);
       ``(2) monitor and review the developmental test and 
     evaluation activities of the major defense acquisition 
     programs and major automated information systems programs of 
     the Department of Defense;
       ``(3) review and approve the test and evaluation master 
     plan for each major defense acquisition program of the 
     Department of Defense;
       ``(4) supervise the activities of the Director of the 
     Department of Defense Test Resource Management Center under 
     section 196 of this title, or carry out such activities if 
     serving concurrently as the Director of Developmental Test 
     and Evaluation and the Director of the Department of Defense 
     Test Resource Management Center under subsection (b)(2);
       ``(5) review the organizations and capabilities of the 
     military departments with respect to developmental test and 
     evaluation and identify needed changes or improvements to 
     such organizations and capabilities; and
       ``(6) perform such other activities relating to the 
     developmental test and evaluation activities of the 
     Department of Defense as the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics may prescribe.
       ``(d) The Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation 
     shall have access to all records and data of the Department 
     of Defense (including the records and data of each military 
     department) that the Director considers necessary in order to 
     carry out the Director's duties under this section.
       ``(e)(1) The Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation 
     shall submit to Congress each year a report on the 
     developmental test and evaluation activities of the major 
     defense acquisition programs and major automated information 
     system programs of the of the Department of Defense. Each 
     report shall include, at a minimum, the following:
       ``(A) A discussion of any waivers to testing activities 
     included in the Test and Evaluation Master Plan for a major 
     defense acquisition program in the preceding year.
       ``(B) An assessment of the organization and capabilities of 
     the Department of Defense for test and evaluation.
       ``(2) The Secretary of Defense may include in any report 
     submitted to Congress under

[[Page 12390]]

     this subsection such comments on such report as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 4 of such title is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 139b the following new 
     item:

``139c. Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation.''.

       (3) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 196(f) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics'' and all that follows 
     and inserting ``the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Director of 
     Developmental Test and Evaluation.''.
       (B) Section 139(b) of such title is amended--
       (i) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (6) as 
     paragraphs (5) through (7), respectively; and
       (ii) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph (4):
       ``(4) review and approve the test and evaluation master 
     plan for each major defense acquisition program of the 
     Department of Defense;''.
       (b) Reports on Developmental Testing Organizations and 
     Personnel.--
       (1) Reports by service acquisition executives.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the service acquisition executive of each military department 
     shall submit to the Director of Developmental Test and 
     Evaluation a report on the extent to which the test 
     organizations of such military department have in place, or 
     have effective plans to develop, adequate numbers of 
     personnel with appropriate expertise for each purpose as 
     follows:
       (A) To ensure that testing requirements are appropriately 
     addressed in the translation of operational requirements into 
     contract specifications, in the source selection process, and 
     in the preparation of requests for proposals on all major 
     defense acquisition programs.
       (B) To participate in the planning of developmental test 
     and evaluation activities, including the preparation and 
     approval of a test and evaluation master plan for each major 
     defense acquisition program.
       (C) To participate in and oversee the conduct of 
     developmental testing, the analysis of data, and the 
     preparation of evaluations and reports based on such testing.
       (2) First annual report by director of developmental test 
     and evaluation.--The first annual report submitted to 
     Congress by the Director of Developmental Test and Evaluation 
     under section 139c(e) of title 10, United States Code (as 
     added by subsection (a)), shall be submitted not later than 
     one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
     shall include an assessment by the Director of the reports 
     submitted by the service acquisition executives to the 
     Director under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 103. ASSESSMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL MATURITY OF CRITICAL 
                   TECHNOLOGIES OF MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   PROGRAMS BY THE DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH 
                   AND ENGINEERING.

       (a) Assessment by Director of Defense Research and 
     Engineering.--
       (1) In general.--Section 139a of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c)(1) The Director of Defense Research and Engineering 
     shall, in consultation with the Director of Developmental 
     Test and Evaluation, periodically review and assess the 
     technological maturity and integration risk of critical 
     technologies of the major defense acquisition programs of the 
     Department of Defense and report on the findings of such 
     reviews and assessments to the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
       ``(2) The Director shall submit to the Secretary of Defense 
     and to Congress each year a report on the technological 
     maturity and integration risk of critical technologies of the 
     major defense acquisition programs of the Department of 
     Defense.''.
       (2) First annual report.--The first annual report under 
     subsection (c)(2) of section 139a of title 10, United States 
     Code (as added by paragraph (1)), shall be submitted to 
     Congress not later than March 1, 2011, and shall address the 
     results of reviews and assessments conducted by the Director 
     of Defense Research and Engineering pursuant to subsection 
     (c)(1) of such section (as so added) during the preceding 
     calendar year.
       (b) Report on Resources for Implementation.--Not later than 
     120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Director of Defense Research and Engineering shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees a report describing any 
     additional resources, including specialized workforce, that 
     may be required by the Director, and by other science and 
     technology elements of the Department of Defense, to carry 
     out the following:
       (1) The requirements under the amendment made by subsection 
     (a).
       (2) The technological maturity assessments required by 
     section 2366b(a) of title 10, United States Code, as amended 
     by section 202 of this Act.
       (3) The requirements of Department of Defense Instruction 
     5000, as revised.
       (c) Technological Maturity Standards.--For purposes of the 
     review and assessment conducted by the Director of Defense 
     Research and Engineering in accordance with subsection (c) of 
     section 139a of title 10, United States Code (as added by 
     subsection (a)), a critical technology is considered to be 
     mature--
       (1) in the case of a major defense acquisition program that 
     is being considered for Milestone B approval, if the 
     technology has been demonstrated in a relevant environment; 
     and
       (2) in the case of a major defense acquisition program that 
     is being considered for Milestone C approval, if the 
     technology has been demonstrated in a realistic environment.

     SEC. 104. DIRECTOR OF INDEPENDENT COST ASSESSMENT.

       (a) Director of Independent Cost Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, 
     as amended by section 102 of this Act, is further amended by 
     inserting after section 139c the following new section:

     ``Sec. 139d. Director of Independent Cost Assessment

       ``(a) There is a Director of Independent Cost Assessment in 
     the Department of Defense, appointed by the President, by and 
     with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Director shall 
     be appointed without regard to political affiliation and 
     solely on the basis of fitness to perform the duties of the 
     Director.
       ``(b) The Director is the principal advisor to the 
     Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, and the Under 
     Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) on cost estimation and 
     cost analyses for the acquisition programs of the Department 
     of Defense and the principal cost estimation official within 
     the senior management of the Department of Defense. The 
     Director shall--
       ``(1) prescribe, by authority of the Secretary of Defense, 
     policies and procedures for the conduct of cost estimation 
     and cost analysis for the acquisition programs of the 
     Department of Defense;
       ``(2) provide guidance to and consult with the Secretary of 
     Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
     Technology, and Logistics, the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller), and the Secretaries of the military 
     departments with respect to cost estimation in the Department 
     of Defense in general and with respect to specific cost 
     estimates and cost analyses to be conducted in connection 
     with a major defense acquisition program under chapter 144 of 
     this title or a major automated information system program 
     under chapter 144A of this title;
       ``(3) establish guidance on confidence levels for cost 
     estimates on major defense acquisition programs, require that 
     all such estimates include confidence levels compliant with 
     such guidance, and require the disclosure of all such 
     confidence levels (including through Selected Acquisition 
     Reports submitted pursuant to section 2432 of this title);
       ``(4) monitor and review all cost estimates and cost 
     analyses conducted in connection with major defense 
     acquisition programs and major automated information system 
     programs; and
       ``(5) conduct independent cost estimates and cost analyses 
     for major defense acquisition programs and major automated 
     information system programs for which the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics is the 
     Milestone Decision Authority--
       ``(A) in advance of--
       ``(i) any certification under section 2366a or 2366b of 
     this title;
       ``(ii) any certification under section 2433(e)(2) of this 
     title; and
       ``(iii) any report under section 2445c(f) of this title; 
     and
       ``(B) whenever necessary to ensure that an estimate or 
     analysis under paragraph (4) is unbiased, fair, and reliable.
       ``(c)(1) The Director may communicate views on matters 
     within the responsibility of the Director directly to the 
     Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense 
     without obtaining the approval or concurrence of any other 
     official within the Department of Defense.
       ``(2) The Director shall consult closely with, but the 
     Director and the Director's staff shall be independent of, 
     the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
     and Logistics, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), 
     and all other officers and entities of the Department of 
     Defense responsible for acquisition and budgeting.
       ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall 
     report promptly to the Director the results of all cost 
     estimates and cost analyses conducted by the military 
     department and all studies conducted by the military 
     department in connection with cost estimates and cost 
     analyses for major defense acquisition programs of the 
     military department.
       ``(2) The Director may make comments on cost estimates and 
     cost analyses conducted by a military department for a major 
     defense acquisition program, request changes in such

[[Page 12391]]

     cost estimates and cost analyses to ensure that they are fair 
     and reliable, and develop or require the development of 
     independent cost estimates or cost analyses for such program, 
     as the Director determines to be appropriate.
       ``(3) The Director shall have access to any records and 
     data in the Department of Defense (including the records and 
     data of each military department) that the Director considers 
     necessary to review in order to carry out the Director's 
     duties under this section.
       ``(e)(1) The Director shall prepare an annual report 
     summarizing the cost estimation and cost analysis activities 
     of the Department of Defense during the previous year and 
     assessing the progress of the Department in improving the 
     accuracy of its costs estimates and analyses. The report 
     shall include an assessment of--
       ``(A) the extent to which each of the military departments 
     have complied with policies, procedures, and guidance issued 
     by the Director with regard to the preparation of cost 
     estimates; and
       ``(B) the overall quality of cost estimates prepared by 
     each of the military departments.
       ``(2) Each report under this subsection shall be submitted 
     concurrently to the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary 
     of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, the 
     Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), and Congress not 
     later than 10 days after the transmission of the budget for 
     the next fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31. The 
     Director shall ensure that a report submitted under this 
     subsection does not include any information, such as 
     proprietary or source selection sensitive information, that 
     could undermine the integrity of the acquisition process. 
     Each report submitted to Congress under this subsection shall 
     be posted on an Internet website of the Department of Defense 
     that is available to the public.
       ``(3) The Secretary may comment on any report of the 
     Director to Congress under this subsection.
       ``(f) The President shall include in the budget transmitted 
     to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31 for each 
     fiscal year a separate statement of estimated expenditures 
     and proposed appropriations for that fiscal year for the 
     Director of Independent Cost Assessment in carrying out the 
     duties and responsibilities of the Director under this 
     section.
       ``(g) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the 
     Director has sufficient professional staff of military and 
     civilian personnel to enable the Director to carry out the 
     duties and responsibilities of the Director under this 
     section.''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 4 of such title, as so amended, is 
     further amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 139c the following new item:

``139d. Director of Independent Cost Assessment.''.

       (3) Executive schedule level iv.--Section 5315 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, 
     Department of Defense the following new item:
       ``Director of Independent Cost Assessment, Defense of 
     Defense.''.
       (b) Report on Monitoring of Operating and Support Costs for 
     MDAPs.--
       (1) Report to secretary of defense.--Not later than one 
     year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Director of Independent Cost Assessment under section 139d of 
     title 10 United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), 
     shall review existing systems and methods of the Department 
     of Defense for tracking and assessing operating and support 
     costs on major defense acquisition programs and submit to the 
     Secretary of Defense a report on the finding and 
     recommendations of the Director as a result of the review, 
     including an assessment by the Director of the feasibility 
     and advisability of establishing baselines for operating and 
     support costs under section 2435 of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       (2) Transmittal to congress.--Not later than 30 days after 
     receiving the report required by paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall transmit the report to the congressional defense 
     committees, together with any comments on the report the 
     Secretary considers appropriate.
       (c) Transfer of Personnel and Functions of Cost Analysis 
     Improvement Group.--The personnel and functions of the Cost 
     Analysis Improvement Group of the Department of Defense are 
     hereby transferred to the Director of Independent Cost 
     Assessment under section 139d of title 10, United States Code 
     (as so added), and shall report directly to the Director.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 181(d) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting ``the Director of Independent Cost 
     Assessment,'' before ``and the Director''.
       (2) Section 2306b(i)(1)(B) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``Cost Analysis Improvement Group of the Department 
     of Defense'' and inserting ``Director of Independent Cost 
     Assessment''.
       (3) Section 2366a(a)(4) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``has been submitted'' and inserting ``has been 
     approved by the Director of Independent Cost Assessment''.
       (4) Section 2366b(a)(1)(C) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``have been developed to execute'' and inserting 
     ``have been approved by the Director of Independent Cost 
     Assessment to provide for the execution of''.
       (5) Section 2433(e)(2)(B)(iii) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``are reasonable'' and inserting ``have been 
     determined by the Director of Independent Cost Assessment to 
     be reasonable''.
       (6) Subparagraph (A) of section 2434(b)(1) of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) be prepared or approved by the Director of 
     Independent Cost Assessment; and''.
       (7) Section 2445c(f)(3) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``are reasonable'' and inserting ``have been 
     determined by the Director of Independent Cost Assessment to 
     be reasonable''.
       (e) Comptroller General of the United States Review of 
     Operating and Support Costs of Major Weapon Systems.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report on growth in operating and support costs 
     for major weapon systems.
       (2) Elements.--In preparing the report required by 
     paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall, at a minimum--
       (A) identify the original estimates for operating and 
     support costs for major weapon systems selected by the 
     Comptroller General for purposes of the report;
       (B) assess the actual operating and support costs for such 
     major weapon systems;
       (C) analyze the rate of growth for operating and support 
     costs for such major weapon systems;
       (D) for such major weapon systems that have experienced the 
     highest rate of growth in operating and support costs, assess 
     the factors contributing to such growth;
       (E) assess measures taken by the Department of Defense to 
     reduce operating and support costs for major weapon systems; 
     and
       (F) make such recommendations as the Comptroller General 
     considers appropriate.
       (3) Major weapon system defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``major weapon system'' has the meaning given that term 
     in 2379(d) of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 105. ROLE OF THE COMMANDERS OF THE COMBATANT COMMANDS IN 
                   IDENTIFYING JOINT MILITARY REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 181 of title 10, United States 
     Code, as amended by section 104(d)(1) of this Act, is further 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as 
     subsections (f), (g), and (h), respectively; and
       (2) by adding after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection (e):
       ``(e) Input From Combatant Commanders on Joint Military 
     Requirements.--The Council shall seek and consider input from 
     the commanders of the combatant commands in carrying out its 
     mission under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) and in 
     conducting periodic reviews in accordance with the 
     requirements of subsection (f). Such input may include, but 
     is not limited to, an assessment of the following:
       ``(1) Any current or projected missions or threats in the 
     theater of operations of the commander of a combatant command 
     that would justify a new joint military requirement.
       ``(2) The necessity and sufficiency of a proposed joint 
     military requirement in terms of current and projected 
     missions or threats.
       ``(3) The relative priority of a proposed joint military 
     requirement in comparison with other joint military 
     requirements.
       ``(4) The ability of partner nations in the theater of 
     operations of the commander of a combatant command to assist 
     in meeting the joint military requirement or to partner in 
     using technologies developed to meet the joint military 
     requirement.''.
       (b) Comptroller General of the United States Review of 
     Implementation.--Not later than two years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
     report on the implementation of the requirements of 
     subsection (e) of section 181 of title 10, United States Code 
     (as amended by subsection (a)), for the Joint Requirements 
     Oversight Council to solicit and consider input from the 
     commanders of the combatant commands. The report shall 
     include, at a minimum, an assessment of the extent to which 
     the Council has effectively sought, and the commanders of the 
     combatant commands have provided, meaningful input on 
     proposed joint military requirements.

     SEC. 106. CLARIFICATION OF SUBMITTAL OF CERTIFICATION OF 
                   ADEQUACY OF BUDGETS BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TEST RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 
                   CENTER.

       Section 196(e)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new 
     subparagraph (B):
       ``(B) If the Director of the Center is not serving 
     concurrently as the Director of Developmental Test and 
     Evaluation under subsection (b)(2) of section 139c of this 
     title, the certification of the Director of the Center

[[Page 12392]]

     under subparagraph (A) shall, notwithstanding subsection 
     (c)(4) of such section, be submitted directly and 
     independently to the Secretary of Defense.''.

                      TITLE II--ACQUISITION POLICY

     SEC. 201. CONSIDERATION OF TRADE-OFFS AMONG COST, SCHEDULE, 
                   AND PERFORMANCE IN THE ACQUISITION OF MAJOR 
                   WEAPON SYSTEMS.

       (a) Consideration of Trade-Offs.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop and 
     implement mechanisms to ensure that trade-offs between cost, 
     schedule, and performance are considered as part of the 
     process for developing requirements for major weapon systems.
       (2) Elements.--The mechanisms required under this 
     subsection shall ensure, at a minimum, that--
       (A) Department of Defense officials responsible for 
     acquisition, budget, and cost estimating functions are 
     provided an appropriate opportunity to develop estimates and 
     raise cost and schedule matters before performance 
     requirements are established for major weapon systems; and
       (B) consideration is given to fielding major weapon systems 
     through incremental or spiral acquisition, while deferring 
     technologies that are not yet mature, and capabilities that 
     are likely to significantly increase costs or delay 
     production, until later increments or spirals.
       (3) Major weapons system defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``major weapon system'' has the meaning given that term 
     in section 2379(d) of title 10, United States Code.
       (b) Duties of Joint Requirements Oversight Council.--
     Section 181(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) in ensuring the consideration of trade-offs among 
     cost, schedule and performance for joint military 
     requirements in consultation with the advisors specified in 
     subsection (d);''.
       (c) Review of Joint Military Requirements.--
       (1) JROC submittal of recommended requirements to under 
     secretary for atl.--Upon recommending a new joint military 
     requirement, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council shall 
     transmit the recommendation to the Under Secretary of Defense 
     for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics for review and 
     concurrence or non-concurrence in the recommendation.
       (2) Review of recommended requirements.--The Under 
     Secretary for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall 
     review each recommendation transmitted under paragraph (1) to 
     determine whether or not the Joint Requirements Oversight 
     Council has, in making such recommendation--
       (A) taken appropriate action to solicit and consider input 
     from the commanders of the combatant commands in accordance 
     with the requirements of section 181(e) of title 10, United 
     States Code (as amended by section 105);
       (B) given appropriate consideration to trade-offs among 
     cost, schedule, and performance in accordance with the 
     requirements of section 181(b)(1)(C) of title 10, United 
     States Code (as amended by subsection (b)); and
       (C) given appropriate consideration to issues of joint 
     portfolio management, including alternative material and non-
     material solutions, as provided in Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3170.01G.
       (3) Non-concurrence of under secretary for atl.--If the 
     Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
     determines that the Joint Requirements Oversight Council has 
     failed to take appropriate action in accordance with 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (2) regarding a 
     joint military requirement, the Under Secretary shall return 
     the recommendation to the Council with specific 
     recommendations as to matters to be considered by the Council 
     to address any shortcoming identified by the Under Secretary 
     in the course of the review under paragraph (2).
       (4) Notice on continuing disagreement on requirement.--If 
     the Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council are 
     unable to reach agreement on a joint military requirement 
     that has been returned to the Council by the Under Secretary 
     under paragraph (4), the Under Secretary shall transmit 
     notice of lack of agreement on the requirement to the 
     Secretary of Defense.
       (5) Resolution of continuing disagreement.--Upon receiving 
     notice under paragraph (4) of a lack of agreement on a joint 
     military requirement, the Secretary of Defense shall make a 
     final determination on whether or not to validate the 
     requirement.
       (d) Analysis of Alternatives.--
       (1) Requirement at material solution analysis phase.--The 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics shall ensure that Department of Defense guidance on 
     major defense acquisition programs requires the Milestone 
     Decision Authority to conduct an analysis of alternatives 
     (AOA) during the Material Solution Analysis Phase of each 
     major defense acquisition program.
       (2) Elements.--Each analysis of alternatives under 
     paragraph (1) shall, at a minimum--
       (A) solicit and consider alternative approaches proposed by 
     the military departments and Defense Agencies to meet joint 
     military requirements; and
       (B) give full consideration to possible trade-offs between 
     cost, schedule, and performance for each of the alternatives 
     so considered.
       (e) Duties of Milestone Decision Authority.--Section 
     2366b(a)(1)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting ``appropriate trade-offs between cost, schedule, 
     and performance have been made to ensure that'' before ``the 
     program is affordable''.

     SEC. 202. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW AND CRITICAL DESIGN 
                   REVIEW FOR MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Preliminary Design Review.--Section 2366b(a) of title 
     10, United States Code, as amended by section 201(d) of this 
     Act, is further amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) has received a preliminary design review (PDR) and 
     conducted a formal post-preliminary design review assessment, 
     and certifies on the basis of such assessment that the 
     program demonstrates a high likelihood of accomplishing its 
     intended mission; and''; and
       (4) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by paragraph (2) of 
     this section--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting ``, as determined by the Milestone Decision 
     Authority on the basis of an independent review and 
     assessment by the Director of Defense Research and 
     Engineering; and'';
       (B) by striking subparagraph (E); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (E).
       (b) Critical Design Review.--The Under Secretary of Defense 
     for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall ensure that 
     Department of Defense guidance on major defense acquisition 
     programs requires a critical design review and a formal post-
     critical design review assessment for each major defense 
     acquisition program to ensure that such program has attained 
     an appropriate level of design maturity before such program 
     is approved for System Capability and Manufacturing Process 
     Development.

     SEC. 203. ENSURING COMPETITION THROUGHOUT THE LIFE CYCLE OF 
                   MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Ensuring Competition.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     ensure that the acquisition plan for each major defense 
     acquisition program includes measures to ensure competition, 
     or the option of competition, at both the prime contract 
     level and the subcontract level of such program throughout 
     the life cycle of such program as a means to incentivize 
     contractor performance.
       (b) Measures To Ensure Competition.--The measures to ensure 
     competition, or the option of competition, utilized for 
     purposes of subsection (a) may include, but are not limited 
     to, measures to achieve the following, in appropriate cases 
     where such measures are cost-effective:
       (1) Competitive prototyping.
       (2) Dual-sourcing.
       (3) Funding of a second source for interchangeable, next-
     generation prototype systems or subsystems.
       (4) Utilization of modular, open architectures to enable 
     competition for upgrades.
       (5) Periodic competitions for subsystem upgrades.
       (6) Licensing of additional suppliers.
       (7) Requirements for Government oversight or approval of 
     make or buy decisions to ensure competition at the subsystem 
     level.
       (8) Periodic system or program reviews to address long-term 
     competitive effects of program decisions.
       (9) Consideration of competition at the subcontract level 
     and in make or buy decisions as a factor in proposal 
     evaluations.
       (c) Competitive Prototyping.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall modify the acquisition regulations of the Department of 
     Defense to ensure with respect to competitive prototyping for 
     major defense acquisition programs the following:
       (1) That the acquisition strategy for each major defense 
     acquisition program provides for two or more competing teams 
     to produce prototypes before Milestone B approval (or Key 
     Decision Point B approval in the case of a space program) 
     unless the milestone decision authority for such program 
     waives the requirement on the basis of a determination that--
       (A) but for such waiver, the Department would be unable to 
     meet critical national security objectives; or
       (B) the cost of producing competitive prototypes exceeds 
     the potential life-cycle benefits of such competition, 
     including the benefits of improved performance and increased 
     technological and design maturity that may be achieved 
     through prototyping.

[[Page 12393]]

       (2) That if the milestone decision authority waives the 
     requirement for prototypes produced by two or more teams for 
     a major defense acquisition program under paragraph (1), the 
     acquisition strategy for the program provides for the 
     production of at least one prototype before Milestone B 
     approval (or Key Decision Point B approval in the case of a 
     space program) unless the milestone decision authority waives 
     such requirement on the basis of a determination that--
       (A) but for such waiver, the Department would be unable to 
     meet critical national security objectives; or
       (B) the cost of producing a prototype exceeds the potential 
     life-cycle benefits of such prototyping, including the 
     benefits of improved performance and increased technological 
     and design maturity that may be achieved through prototyping.
       (3) That whenever a milestone decision authority authorizes 
     a waiver under paragraph (1) or (2), the waiver, the 
     determination upon which the waiver is based, and the reasons 
     for the determination are submitted in writing to the 
     congressional defense committees not later than 30 days after 
     the waiver is authorized.
       (4) That prototypes may be required under paragraph (1) or 
     (2) for the system to be acquired or, if prototyping of the 
     system is not feasible, for critical subsystems of the 
     system.
       (d) Comptroller General of the United States Review of 
     Certain Waivers.--
       (1) Notice to comptroller general.--Whenever a milestone 
     decision authority authorizes a waiver of the requirement for 
     prototypes under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (c) on 
     the basis of excessive cost, the milestone decision authority 
     shall submit a notice on the waiver, together with the 
     rational for the waiver, to the Comptroller General of the 
     United States at the same time a report on the waiver is 
     submitted to the congressional defense committees under 
     paragraph (3) of that subsection.
       (2) Comptroller general review.--Not later than 60 days 
     after receipt of a notice on a waiver under paragraph (1), 
     the Comptroller General shall--
       (A) review the rationale for the waiver; and
       (B) submit to the congressional defense committees a 
     written assessment of the rationale for the waiver.
       (e) Applicability.--This section shall apply to any 
     acquisition plan for a major defense acquisition program that 
     is developed or revised on or after the date that is 60 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 204. CRITICAL COST GROWTH IN MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Authorized Actions in Event of Critical Cost Growth.--
     Section 2433(e)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (E);
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new 
     subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D):
       ``(B) terminate such acquisition program and submit the 
     report required by subparagraph (D), unless the Secretary 
     determines that the continuation of such program is essential 
     to the national security of the United States and submits a 
     written certification in accordance with subparagraph (C)(i) 
     accompanied by a report setting forth the assessment carried 
     out pursuant to subparagraph (A) and the basis for each 
     determination made in accordance with clauses (I) through 
     (IV) of subparagraph (C)(i), together with supporting 
     documentation;
       ``(C) if the program is not terminated--
       ``(i) submit to Congress, before the end of the 60-day 
     period beginning on the day the Selected Acquisition Report 
     containing the information described in subsection (g) is 
     required to be submitted under section 2432(f) of this title, 
     a written certification stating that--
       ``(I) such acquisition program is essential to national 
     security;
       ``(II) there are no alternatives to such acquisition 
     program which will provide equal or greater capability to 
     meet a joint military requirement (as that term is defined in 
     section 181(h)(1) of this title) at less cost;
       ``(III) the new estimates of the program acquisition unit 
     cost or procurement unit cost were arrived at in accordance 
     with the requirements of section 139d of this title and are 
     reasonable; and
       ``(IV) the management structure for the acquisition program 
     is adequate to manage and control program acquisition unit 
     cost or procurement unit cost;
       ``(ii) rescind the most recent Milestone approval (or Key 
     Decision Point approval in the case of a space program) for 
     such program and withdraw any associated certification under 
     section 2366a or 2366b of this title; and
       ``(iii) require a new Milestone approval (or Key Decision 
     Point approval in the case of a space program) for such 
     program before entering into a new contract, exercising an 
     option under an existing contract, or otherwise extending the 
     scope of an existing contract under such program;
       ``(D) if the program is terminated, submit to Congress a 
     written report setting forth--
       ``(i) an explanation of the reasons for terminating the 
     program;
       ``(ii) the alternatives considered to address any problems 
     in the program; and
       ``(iii) the course the Department plans to pursue to meet 
     any continuing joint military requirements otherwise intended 
     to be met by the program; and''.
       (b) Total Expenditure for Procurement Resulting in 
     Treatment as MDAP.--Section 2430(a)(2) of such title is 
     amended by inserting ``, including all planned increments or 
     spirals,'' after ``an eventual total expenditure for 
     procurement''.

     SEC. 205. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THE 
                   ACQUISITION OF MAJOR WEAPON SYSTEMS.

       (a) Revised Regulations Required.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics shall revise the Defense Supplement to the Federal 
     Acquisition Regulation to address organizational conflicts of 
     interest by contractors in the acquisition of major weapon 
     systems.
       (b) Elements.--The revised regulations required by 
     subsection (a) shall, at a minimum--
       (1) ensure that the Department of Defense receives advice 
     on systems architecture and systems engineering matters with 
     respect to major weapon systems from federally funded 
     research and development centers or other sources independent 
     of the prime contractor;
       (2) require that a contract for the performance of systems 
     engineering and technical assistance (SETA) functions with 
     regard to a major weapon system contains a provision 
     prohibiting the contractor or any affiliate of the contractor 
     from having a direct financial interest in the development or 
     construction of the weapon system or any component thereof;
       (3) provide for an exception to the requirement in 
     paragraph (2) for an affiliate that is separated from the 
     contractor by structural mechanisms, approved by the 
     Secretary of Defense, that are similar to those required for 
     special security agreements under rules governing foreign 
     ownership, control, or influence over United States companies 
     that have access to classified information, including, at a 
     minimum--
       (A) establishment of the affiliate as a separate business 
     entity, geographically separated from related entities, with 
     its own employees and management and restrictions on 
     transfers for personnel;
       (B) a governing board for the affiliate that has 
     organizational separation from related entities and 
     governance procedures that require the board to act solely in 
     the interest of the affiliate, without regard to the 
     interests of related entities, except in specified 
     circumstances;
       (C) complete informational separation, including the 
     execution of non-disclosure agreements;
       (D) initial and recurring training on organizational 
     conflicts of interest and protections against organizational 
     conflicts of interest; and
       (E) annual compliance audits in which Department of Defense 
     personnel are authorized to participate;
       (4) prohibit the use of the exception in paragraph (3) for 
     any category of systems engineering and technical assistance 
     functions (including, but not limited to, advice on source 
     selection matters) for which the potential for an 
     organizational conflict of interest or the appearance of an 
     organizational conflict of interest makes mitigation in 
     accordance with that paragraph an inappropriate approach;
       (5) authorize waiver of the requirement in paragraph (2) in 
     cases in which the agency head determines in writing that--
       (A) the financial interest of the contractor or its 
     affiliate in the development or construction of the weapon 
     system is not substantial and does not include a prime 
     contract, a first-tier subcontract, or a joint venture or 
     similar relationship with a prime contractor or first-tier 
     subcontractor; or
       (B) the contractor--
       (i) has unique systems engineering capabilities that are 
     not available from other sources;
       (ii) has taken appropriate actions to mitigate any 
     organizational conflict of interest; and
       (iii) has made a binding commitment to comply with the 
     requirement in paragraph (2) by not later than January 1, 
     2011; and
       (6) provide for fair and objective ``make-buy'' decisions 
     by the prime contractor on a major weapon system by--
       (A) requiring prime contractors to give full and fair 
     consideration to qualified sources other than the prime 
     contractor for the development or construction of major 
     subsystems and components of the weapon system;
       (B) providing for government oversight of the process by 
     which prime contractors consider such sources and determine 
     whether to conduct such development or construction in-house 
     or through a subcontract;
       (C) authorizing program managers to disapprove the 
     determination by a prime contractor to conduct development or 
     construction in-house rather than through a subcontract in 
     cases in which--
       (i) the prime contractor fails to give full and fair 
     consideration to qualified sources other than the prime 
     contractor; or

[[Page 12394]]

       (ii) implementation of the determination by the prime 
     contractor is likely to undermine future competition or the 
     defense industrial base; and
       (D) providing for the consideration of prime contractors 
     ``make-buy'' decisions in past performance evaluations.
       (c) Organizational Conflict of Interest Review Board.--
       (1) Establishment required.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall establish within the Department of Defense a 
     board to be known as the ``Organizational Conflict of 
     Interest Review Board''.
       (2) Duties.--The Board shall have the following duties:
       (A) To advise the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics on policies relating 
     to organizational conflicts of interest in the acquisition of 
     major weapon systems.
       (B) To advise program managers on steps to comply with the 
     requirements of the revised regulations required by this 
     section and to address organizational conflicts of interest 
     in the acquisition of major weapon systems.
       (C) To advise appropriate officials of the Department on 
     organizational conflicts of interest arising in proposed 
     mergers of defense contractors.
       (d) Major Weapon System Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``major weapon system'' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 2379(d) of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 206. AWARDS FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL FOR 
                   EXCELLENCE IN THE ACQUISITION OF PRODUCTS AND 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     commence carrying out a program to recognize excellent 
     performance by individuals and teams of members of the Armed 
     Forces and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense in 
     the acquisition of products and services for the Department 
     of Defense.
       (b) Elements.--The program required by subsection (a) shall 
     include the following:
       (1) Procedures for the nomination by the personnel of the 
     military departments and the Defense Agencies of individuals 
     and teams of members of the Armed Forces and civilian 
     personnel of the Department of Defense for eligibility for 
     recognition under the program.
       (2) Procedures for the evaluation of nominations for 
     recognition under the program by one or more panels of 
     individuals from the government, academia, and the private 
     sector who have such expertise, and are appointed in such 
     manner, as the Secretary shall establish for purposes of the 
     program.
       (c) Award of Cash Bonuses.--As part of the program required 
     by subsection (a), the Secretary may award to any individual 
     recognized pursuant to the program a cash bonus authorized by 
     any other provision of law to the extent that the performance 
     of such individual so recognized warrants the award of such 
     bonus under such provision of law.

     SEC. 207. EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Enhanced Tracking of Contractor Performance.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
     and Logistics shall review the existing guidance and, as 
     necessary, prescribe additional guidance governing the 
     implementation of the Earned Value Management (EVM) 
     requirements and reporting for contracts to ensure that the 
     Department of Defense--
       (1) applies uniform EVM standards to reliably and 
     consistently measure contract or project performance;
       (2) applies such standards to establish appropriate 
     baselines at the award of a contract or commencement of a 
     program, whichever is earlier;
       (3) ensures that personnel responsible for administering 
     and overseeing EVM systems have the training and 
     qualifications needed to perform this function; and
       (4) has appropriate mechanisms in place to ensure that 
     contractors establish and use approved EVM systems.
       (b) Enforcement Mechanisms.--For the purposes of subsection 
     (a)(4), mechanisms to ensure that contractors establish and 
     use approved EVM systems shall include--
       (1) consideration of the quality of the contractors' EVM 
     systems and the timeliness of the contractors' EVM reporting 
     in any past performance evaluation for a contract that 
     includes an EVM requirement; and
       (2) increased government oversight of the cost, schedule, 
     scope, and performance of contractors that do not have 
     approved EVM systems in place.

     SEC. 208. EXPANSION OF NATIONAL SECURITY OBJECTIVES OF THE 
                   NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL BASE.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 2501 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Maintaining critical design skills to ensure that the 
     armed forces are provided with systems capable of ensuring 
     technological superiority over potential adversaries.''.
       (b) Notification of Congress Upon Termination of Mdaps of 
     Effects on National Security Objectives.--Such section is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) Notification of Congress Upon Termination of Major 
     Defense Acquisition Program of Effects on Objectives.--(1) 
     Upon the termination of a major defense acquisition program, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress of the effects 
     of such termination on the national security objectives for 
     the national technology and industrial base set forth in 
     subsection (a), and the measures, if any, that have been 
     taken or should be taken to mitigate those effects.
       ``(2) In this subsection, the term `major defense 
     acquisition program' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 2430 of this title.''.

     SEC. 209. PLAN FOR ELIMINATION OF WEAKNESSES IN OPERATIONS 
                   THAT HINDER CAPACITY TO ASSEMBLE AND ASSESS 
                   RELIABLE COST INFORMATION ON ACQUIRED ASSETS 
                   UNDER MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Chief Management Officer of 
     the Department of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     setting forth a plan to identify and address weaknesses in 
     operations that hinder the capacity to assemble and assess 
     reliable cost information on the systems and assets to be 
     acquired under major defense acquisition programs.
       (b) Elements.--The report required under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) Mechanisms to identify any weaknesses in operations 
     under major defense acquisition programs that hinder the 
     capacity to assemble and assess reliable cost information on 
     the systems and assets to be acquired under such programs in 
     accordance with applicable accounting standards.
       (2) Mechanisms to address weaknesses in operations under 
     major defense acquisition programs identified pursuant to the 
     utilization of the mechanisms set forth under paragraph (1).
       (3) A description of the proposed implementation of the 
     mechanisms set forth pursuant to paragraph (2) to address the 
     weaknesses described in that paragraph, including--
       (A) the actions to be taken to implement such mechanisms;
       (B) a schedule for carrying out such mechanisms; and
       (C) metrics for assessing the progress made in carrying out 
     such mechanisms.
       (4) A description of the organization and resources 
     required to carry out mechanisms set forth pursuant to 
     paragraphs (1) and (2).
       (5) In the case of the financial management practices of 
     each military department applicable to major defense 
     acquisition programs--
       (A) a description of any weaknesses in such practices; and
       (B) a description of the actions to be taken to remedy such 
     weaknesses.
       (c) Consultation.--
       (1) In general.--In preparing the report required by 
     subsection (a), the Chief Management Officer of the 
     Department of Defense shall seek and consider input from each 
     of the following:
       (A) The Chief Management Officer of the Department of the 
     Army.
       (B) The Chief Management Officer of the Department of the 
     Navy.
       (C) The Chief Management Officer of the Department of the 
     Air Force.
       (2) Financial management practices.--In preparing for the 
     report required by subsection (a) the matters covered by 
     subsection (b)(5) with respect to a particular military 
     department, the Chief Management Officer of the Department of 
     Defense shall consult specifically with the Chief Management 
     Officer of the military department concerned.

  The text of S. 454, as amended by the text of H.R. 2101 as passed by 
the House, is as follows:

                               H.R. 2101

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Weapons 
     Acquisition System Reform Through Enhancing Technical 
     Knowledge and Oversight Act of 2009''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                   TITLE I--ACQUISITION ORGANIZATION

Sec. 101. Independent performance of acquisition oversight functions.
Sec. 102. Oversight of cost estimation.
Sec. 103. Oversight of systems engineering.
Sec. 104. Oversight of performance assessment.
Sec. 105. Assessment of technological maturity of critical technologies 
              of major defense acquisition programs by the Director of 
              Defense Research and Engineering.
Sec. 106. Role of the commanders of the combatant commands in 
              identifying joint military requirements.

                      TITLE II--ACQUISITION POLICY

Sec. 201. Acquisition strategies ensuring competition throughout the 
              lifecycle of major defense acquisition programs.

[[Page 12395]]

Sec. 202. Additional requirements for certain major defense acquisition 
              programs.
Sec. 203. Requirement for certification of major systems prior to 
              Milestone B.
Sec. 204. Critical cost growth in major defense acquisition programs.
Sec. 205. Organizational conflicts of interest in the acquisition of 
              major weapon systems.
Sec. 206. Awards for Department of Defense personnel for excellence in 
              the acquisition of products and services.
Sec. 207. Consideration of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and 
              performance in the acquisition of major weapon systems.

                   TITLE I--ACQUISITION ORGANIZATION

     SEC. 101. INDEPENDENT PERFORMANCE OF ACQUISITION OVERSIGHT 
                   FUNCTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 145. Principal advisors for acquisition oversight 
       functions

       ``(a) Assignment of Acquisition Oversight Functions.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall designate an official within the 
     Office of the Secretary of Defense as the principal advisor 
     to the Secretary for each acquisition oversight function 
     specified in subsection (c). An official may be designated to 
     perform one or more of such functions. The performance of 
     duties pursuant to a designation under this section shall not 
     limit or otherwise affect the performance of any other duties 
     assigned to such official by the Secretary or by other 
     officers of the Department responsible for the management and 
     direction of such official except as necessary to satisfy the 
     requirements of subsection (b).
       ``(b) Qualifications.--In designating an official for a 
     function pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     ensure that the official reports directly to the Secretary in 
     the performance of such function and is--
       ``(1) highly expert in matters relating to the function;
       ``(2) assigned the appropriate staff and resources 
     necessary to carry out the function;
       ``(3) independent from those engaged in the execution of 
     acquisition programs;
       ``(4) free of any undue political influence; and
       ``(5) free of any personal conflict of interest.
       ``(c) Acquisition Oversight Functions.--(1) The acquisition 
     oversight functions to be performed by officials designated 
     pursuant to subsection (a) are as follows:
       ``(A) Cost estimation.
       ``(B) Systems engineering.
       ``(C) Performance assessment.
       ``(D) Such other acquisition functions as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(2) Each acquisition oversight function specified in 
     paragraph (1) shall cover all phases of an acquisition 
     program, including setting of requirements, formulation and 
     execution of budgets, and program execution.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``145. Principal advisors for acquisition oversight functions.''.

     SEC. 102. OVERSIGHT OF COST ESTIMATION.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 137 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2334. Acquisition oversight: oversight of cost 
       estimation

       ``(a) Issuance of Policies, Procedures, Guidance, and Cost 
     Estimates.--The official assigned oversight of cost 
     estimation pursuant to section 145 of this title shall issue 
     the following:
       ``(1) Policies and procedures governing the conduct of cost 
     estimation and cost analysis generally for the acquisition 
     programs of the Department of Defense.
       ``(2) Guidance relating to cost estimates and cost analyses 
     conducted in connection with major defense acquisition 
     programs under chapter 144 of this title or major automated 
     information system programs under chapter 144A of this title.
       ``(3) Guidance relating to the proper selection of 
     confidence levels for cost estimates generally, and 
     specifically, for the proper selection of confidence levels 
     for cost estimates for major defense acquisition programs 
     under chapter 144 of this title or major automated 
     information system program under chapter 144A of this title.
       ``(4) Guidance relating to full consideration of life-cycle 
     management and sustainability costs of major defense 
     acquisition programs under chapter 144 of this title or major 
     automated information system programs under chapter 144A of 
     this title.
       ``(5) Independent cost estimates and cost analyses for 
     major defense acquisition programs and major automated 
     information system programs for which the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics is the 
     Milestone Decision Authority--
       ``(A) in advance of--
       ``(i) any certification under section 2366a or 2366b of 
     title 10, United States Code;
       ``(ii) any decision to enter into low-rate initial 
     production or full-rate production;
       ``(iii) any certification under section 2433(e)(2) of this 
     title; and
       ``(iv) any report under section 2445c(f) of this title; and
       ``(B) at any other time considered necessary by such 
     official or upon the request of the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
       ``(b) Review of Cost Estimates, Cost Analyses, Cost 
     Indexes, and Records of the Military Departments.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the official 
     designated for oversight of cost estimation pursuant to 
     section 145 of this title--
       ``(1) promptly receives the results of all cost estimates 
     and cost analyses conducted by the military departments, and 
     all studies conducted by the military departments in 
     connection with such cost estimates and cost analyses, for 
     major defense acquisition programs and major automated 
     information systems of the military departments, and is 
     authorized to comment on such estimates, analyses, and 
     studies; and
       ``(2) has timely access to any records and data in the 
     Department of Defense (including the records and data of each 
     military department and including classified and proprietary 
     information as appropriate) that the official considers 
     necessary to review in order to carry out any duties under 
     this section.
       ``(c) Participation, Concurrence, and Approval in Cost 
     Estimation.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the 
     official designated for oversight of cost estimation pursuant 
     to section 145 of this title is involved in all discussions 
     relating to cost estimation and the estimation of resource 
     levels required for major defense acquisition programs and 
     major automated information systems of the Department of 
     Defense generally at all stages of such programs and may--
       ``(1) participate in the formulation of study guidance for 
     analyses of alternatives for major defense acquisition 
     programs;
       ``(2) participate in discussion of resources associated 
     with requirements;
       ``(3) participate in the discussion of any discrepancies 
     between an independent cost estimate and the cost estimate of 
     a military department for a major defense acquisition program 
     or major automated information system of the Department of 
     Defense;
       ``(4) approve or disapprove, at such official's sole 
     discretion, the confidence level used in establishing a 
     baseline description or budget estimate for a major defense 
     acquisition program or major automated information system of 
     the Department of Defense at any of the events specified in 
     paragraph (5) of subsection (a) of this section;
       ``(5) concur in the choice of a baseline description or 
     budget estimate for use at any of the events specified in 
     paragraph (5) of subsection (a) of this section; and
       ``(6) participate in consideration of any decision to 
     request authorization of a multiyear procurement contract for 
     a major defense acquisition program.
       ``(d) Disclosure of Confidence Levels for Baseline 
     Estimates of Major Defense Acquisition Programs.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of cost estimation 
     pursuant to section 145 of this title, in approving a 
     confidence level for use in a major defense acquisition 
     program pursuant to subsection (c)(4), shall--
       ``(1) disclose the confidence level used in establishing a 
     baseline estimate for the major defense acquisition program, 
     the rationale for selecting such confidence level, and, if 
     such confidence level is less than 80 percent, the 
     justification for selecting a confidence level of less than 
     80 percent; and
       ``(2) include the disclosure required by paragraph (1) in 
     any decision documentation approving a baseline estimate for 
     the major defense acquisition program, in the next Selected 
     Acquisition Report pursuant to section 2432 of this title for 
     the major defense acquisition program, and in the next annual 
     report submitted under subsection (f).
       ``(e) Relationship to Cost Analysis Improvement Group.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of cost estimation 
     pursuant to section 145 of this title shall be assigned 
     responsibility for the management and oversight of the Cost 
     Analysis Improvement Group of the Department of Defense.
       ``(f) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, 
     beginning on March 1, 2010, the official designated to 
     perform oversight of cost estimation pursuant to section 145 
     of this title shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report on the activities undertaken pursuant to 
     this section during the preceding year. The report shall be 
     in an unclassified form but may include a classified 
     annex.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2334. Acquisition oversight: oversight of cost estimation.''.

     SEC. 103. OVERSIGHT OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 137 of title 10, United States 
     Code, as amended by section 102, is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2334a. Acquisition oversight: oversight of systems 
       engineering

       ``(a) Issuance of Policies, Procedures, and Guidance.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of systems 
     engineering pursuant to section 145 of this title shall--
       ``(1) issue policies, procedures, and guidance for all 
     elements of the Department of Defense concerning--
       ``(A) the use of systems engineering principles and best 
     practices, generally;
       ``(B) the use of systems engineering approaches to enhance 
     reliability, availability, and maintainability on major 
     defense acquisition programs;
       ``(C) the development of systems engineering master plans 
     for major defense acquisition programs, including systems 
     engineering considerations in support of life-cycle 
     management and sustainability;

[[Page 12396]]

       ``(D) the inclusion of provisions relating to systems 
     engineering and reliability growth in requests for proposals;
       ``(E) the appropriate use of development planning to reduce 
     the time from system development to deployment, to reduce 
     development risk and cost growth, and to provide future 
     benchmarks against which to trade requirements, cost, and 
     schedule;
       ``(F) developmental test and evaluation generally;
       ``(G) in coordination with the Director of Operational Test 
     and Evaluation, the integration of developmental test and 
     evaluation with operational test and evaluation;
       ``(H) in coordination with the Director of Operational Test 
     and Evaluation, the development of test and evaluation master 
     plans for major defense acquisition programs; and
       ``(I) the use of developmental test and evaluation as part 
     of a coordinated systems engineering approach to system 
     development; and
       ``(2) provide advocacy, oversight, and direction to 
     elements of the acquisition workforce responsible for 
     functions relating to systems engineering, developmental test 
     and evaluation, and life-cycle management and sustainability.
       ``(b) Participation in Requirements Discussions.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of systems 
     engineering pursuant to section 145 of this title shall 
     provide input on the inclusion of systems engineering 
     requirements in the process for consideration of joint 
     military requirements by the Joint Requirements Oversight 
     Council pursuant to section 181 of title 10, United States 
     Code, including specific input relating to each capabilities 
     development document.
       ``(c) Access to Records of the Military Departments.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of systems 
     engineering pursuant to section 145 of this title shall have 
     access to any records or data of the Department of Defense 
     (including the records and data of each military department 
     and including classified and proprietary information as 
     appropriate) that the official considers necessary to review 
     in order to carry out any duties under this section.
       ``(d) Assessment of Military Department Capabilities for 
     Systems Engineering and Developmental Test and Evaluation.--
     The official designated to perform oversight of systems 
     engineering pursuant to section 145 of this title shall--
       ``(1) periodically assess the capabilities of the military 
     departments for systems engineering (including development 
     planning) and developmental test and evaluation;
       ``(2) provide such assessment, along with such 
     recommendations for improvement as the official considers 
     necessary, to the Secretary of Defense and the Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics; and
       ``(3) include such assessment and recommendations in the 
     annual report required by subsection (g).
       ``(e) Review and Approval of Plans for Major Defense 
     Acquisition Programs.--The official designated to perform 
     oversight of systems engineering pursuant to section 145 of 
     this title shall review and approve the following plans with 
     respect to any major defense acquisition program:
       ``(1) The systems engineering master plan.
       ``(2) The developmental test and evaluation plan within the 
     test and evaluation master plan.
       ``(f) Reporting Through Under Secretary.--The official 
     designated to perform oversight of systems engineering 
     pursuant to section 145 of this title shall report to the 
     Secretary of Defense through the Under Secretary of Defense 
     for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
       ``(g) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, 
     beginning on March 1, 2010, the official designated to 
     perform oversight of systems engineering pursuant to section 
     145 of this title shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report on the activities undertaken pursuant to 
     this section during the preceding year. The report shall be 
     in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter, as amended by section 102, is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2334a. Acquisition oversight: oversight of systems engineering.''.

     SEC. 104. OVERSIGHT OF PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 137 of title 10, United States 
     Code, as amended by section 103, is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2334b. Acquisition oversight: oversight of performance 
       assessment

       ``(a) Issuance of Policies, Procedures, and Guidance for 
     Performance Assessments.--The official designated to perform 
     oversight of performance assessment pursuant to section 145 
     of this title shall be responsible for the issuance of 
     policies, procedures, and guidance governing the conduct of 
     performance assessments for the acquisition programs of the 
     Department of Defense, including assessment of the extent to 
     which acquisition programs--
       ``(1) deliver sufficient capability to the warfighter;
       ``(2) achieve timely delivery of such capability; and
       ``(3) deliver a level of value consistent with resources 
     expended.
       ``(b) Assessment of Baseline Quality.--The official 
     designated to perform oversight of performance assessment 
     pursuant to section 145 of this title shall periodically 
     assess the suitability of the baseline descriptions required 
     by section 2435 of title 10, United States Code, of major 
     defense acquisition programs for providing a basis for 
     performance assessment and make such recommendations to the 
     Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics as the official 
     considers necessary to improve the suitability of baseline 
     descriptions for such purpose.
       ``(c) Earned Value Management System.--The official 
     designated to perform oversight of performance assessment 
     pursuant to section 145 of this title shall be responsible 
     for the management and oversight of the records of the earned 
     value management system of the Department of Defense.
       ``(d) Participation in Certain Program Reviews.--The 
     official designated to perform oversight of performance 
     assessment pursuant to section 145 of this title is 
     authorized to present an assessment of the performance of a 
     major defense acquisition program during--
       ``(1) any discussions prior to certification under section 
     2433(e)(2) of this title;
       ``(2) any discussions prior to entry into full-rate 
     production; and
       ``(3) consideration of any decision to request 
     authorization of a multiyear procurement contract for a major 
     defense acquisition program.
       ``(e) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, 
     beginning on March 1, 2010, the official designated to 
     perform oversight of performance assessment pursuant to 
     section 145 of this title shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a report on the activities undertaken 
     pursuant to this section during the preceding year. The 
     report shall be in unclassified form but may include a 
     classified annex.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter, as amended by section 103, is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2334b. Acquisition oversight: oversight of performance assessment.''.

     SEC. 105. ASSESSMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL MATURITY OF CRITICAL 
                   TECHNOLOGIES OF MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   PROGRAMS BY THE DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH 
                   AND ENGINEERING.

       (a) Assessment by Director of Defense Research and 
     Engineering.--
       (1) In general.--Section 139a of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c)(1) The Director of Defense Research and Engineering 
     shall periodically review and assess the technological 
     maturity and integration risk of critical technologies of the 
     major defense acquisition programs of the Department of 
     Defense and report on the findings of such reviews and 
     assessments to the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
       ``(2) The Director shall submit to the Secretary of Defense 
     and to the congressional defense committees by January 1 of 
     each year a report on the technological maturity and 
     integration risk of critical technologies of the major 
     defense acquisition programs of the Department of Defense.''.
       (2) First annual report.--The first annual report under 
     subsection (c)(2) of section 139a of title 10, United States 
     Code (as added by paragraph (1)), shall be submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees not later than March 1, 
     2011, and shall address the results of reviews and 
     assessments conducted by the Director of Defense Research and 
     Engineering pursuant to subsection (c)(1) of such section (as 
     so added) during the preceding calendar year.
       (b) Report on Resources for Implementation.--Not later than 
     120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Director of Defense Research and Engineering shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees a report describing any 
     additional resources that may be required by the Director, 
     and by other research and engineering elements of the 
     Department of Defense, to carry out the following:
       (1) The requirements under the amendment made by subsection 
     (a)(1).
       (2) The technological maturity assessments required by 
     section 2366b(a) of title 10, United States Code.
       (3) The requirements of Department of Defense Instruction 
     5000, as revised.

     SEC. 106. ROLE OF THE COMMANDERS OF THE COMBATANT COMMANDS IN 
                   IDENTIFYING JOINT MILITARY REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 181(d) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Under Secretary''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Council shall seek and consider input from the 
     commanders of the combatant commands in carrying out its 
     mission under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) and in 
     conducting periodic reviews in accordance with the 
     requirements of subsection (e). Such input may include, but 
     is not limited to, an assessment of the following:
       ``(A) Any current or projected missions or threats in the 
     theater of operations of the commander of a combatant command 
     that would inform the assessment of a new joint military 
     requirement.
       ``(B) The necessity and sufficiency of a proposed joint 
     military requirement in terms of current and projected 
     missions or threats.
       ``(C) The relative priority of a proposed joint military 
     requirement in comparison with other joint military 
     requirements within the theater of operations of a commander 
     of a combatant command.

[[Page 12397]]

       ``(D) The ability of partner nations in the theater of 
     operations of the commander of a combatant command to assist 
     in meeting the joint military requirement or the benefit, if 
     any, of a partner nation assisting in development or use of 
     technologies developed to meet the joint military 
     requirement.''.
       (b) Comptroller General of the United States Review of 
     Implementation.--Not later than two years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
     report on the implementation of the requirements of (1) 
     subsection (d)(2) of section 181 of title 10, United States 
     Code (as amended by subsection (a)), for the Joint 
     Requirements Oversight Council to solicit and consider input 
     from the commanders of the combatant commands, and (2) 
     subsection (b) of section 181 of title 10, United States Code 
     (as amended by section 942 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 
     122 Stat. 287)). The report shall include, at a minimum, an 
     assessment of the extent to which the Council has effectively 
     sought, and the commanders of the combatant commands have 
     provided, meaningful input on proposed joint military 
     requirements.

                      TITLE II--ACQUISITION POLICY

     SEC. 201. ACQUISITION STRATEGIES ENSURING COMPETITION 
                   THROUGHOUT THE LIFECYCLE OF MAJOR DEFENSE 
                   ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

        (a) Acquisition Strategy Ensuring Competition.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the acquisition 
     strategy for each major defense acquisition program 
     includes--
       (1) measures to ensure competition, or the option of 
     competition, at both the prime contract level and the 
     subcontract level (at such tier or tiers as are appropriate) 
     of such program throughout the life-cycle of such program as 
     a means to improve contractor performance; and
       (2) adequate documentation of the rationale for the 
     selection of the subcontract tier or tiers under paragraph 
     (1).
       (b) Measures To Ensure Competition.--The measures to ensure 
     competition, or the option of competition, for purposes of 
     subsection (a) may include measures to achieve the following, 
     in appropriate cases if such measures are cost-effective:
       (1) Competitive prototyping.
       (2) Dual-sourcing.
       (3) Unbundling of contracts.
       (4) Funding of a second source for interchangeable, next-
     generation prototype systems or subsystems.
       (5) Use of modular, open architectures to enable 
     competition for upgrades.
       (6) Use of build-to-print approaches to enable production 
     through multiple sources.
       (7) Acquisition of complete technical data packages.
       (8) Periodic competitions for subsystem upgrades.
       (9) Licensing of additional suppliers.
       (10) Periodic system or program reviews to address long-
     term competitive effects of program decisions.
       (c) Consideration of Competition Throughout Operation and 
     Sustainment of Major Defense Acquisition Programs.--In 
     carrying out this section, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     ensure that, with respect to maintenance of a major defense 
     acquisition program, consideration is given to capabilities 
     within the Department of Defense to perform maintenance 
     functions.

     SEC. 202. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN MAJOR DEFENSE 
                   ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Additional Requirements Relating to Milestone B 
     Approval.--Section 2366b of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The milestone decision 
     authority may''; and
       (B) by striking the second sentence and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Whenever the milestone decision authority makes such 
     a determination and authorizes such a waiver--
       ``(A) the waiver, the determination, and the reasons for 
     the determination shall be submitted in writing to the 
     congressional defense committees within 30 days after the 
     waiver is authorized; and
       ``(B) the milestone decision authority shall review the 
     program not less often than annually to determine the extent 
     to which such program currently satisfies the certification 
     components specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection 
     (a) until such time as the milestone decision authority 
     determines that the program satisfies all such certification 
     components.'';
       (2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively, and inserting after subsection (d) 
     the following new subsection (e):
       ``(e) Designation of Certification Status in Budget 
     Documentation.--Any budget request, budget justification 
     material, budget display, reprogramming request, Selected 
     Acquisition Report, or other budget documentation or 
     performance report submitted by the Secretary of Defense to 
     the President regarding a major defense acquisition program 
     receiving a waiver pursuant to subsection (d) shall 
     prominently and clearly indicate that such program has not 
     fully satisfied the certification requirements of this 
     section until such time as the milestone decision authority 
     makes the determination that such program has satisfied all 
     certification components pursuant to subsection (d)(2)(B).'';
       (3) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) has received a preliminary design review and 
     conducted a formal post-preliminary design review assessment, 
     and certifies on the basis of such assessment that the 
     program demonstrates a high likelihood of accomplishing its 
     intended mission or that no preliminary design review is 
     necessary for such program to demonstrate a high likelihood 
     of accomplishing its intended mission; and''; and
       (D) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by subparagraph (B) 
     of this paragraph--
       (i) in subparagraph (D), by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting ``, as determined by the Milestone Decision 
     Authority on the basis of an independent review and 
     assessment by the Director of Defense Research and 
     Engineering; and'';
       (ii) by striking subparagraph (E); and
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph 
     (E).
       (b) Certification and Review of Programs Entering 
     Development Prior to Enactment of Section 2366b of Title 
     10.--
       (1) Determination.--(A) Except as provided in subparagraph 
     (B), beginning not later than 270 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, for each major defense acquisition 
     program that has not received a Milestone C approval, or Key 
     Decision Point C approval in the case of a space program, the 
     Milestone Decision Authority shall determine whether or not 
     the program satisfies the certification components specified 
     in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of section 2366b 
     of title 10, United States Code.
       (B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a major defense 
     acquisition program that has been reviewed pursuant to 
     section 2366b of title 10, United States Code, prior to the 
     date that is 270 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, or a major defense acquisition program that has not yet 
     received Milestone B approval.
       (2) Annual review.--The Milestone Decision Authority shall 
     review any program determined pursuant to paragraph (1) not 
     to satisfy the certification components of subsection (a) of 
     section 2366b of title 10, United States Code, not less often 
     than annually thereafter to determine the extent to which 
     such program currently satisfies the certification components 
     specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of such 
     section until such time as the Milestone Decision Authority 
     determines that the program satisfies all such certification 
     components.
       (3) Designation of certification status in budget 
     documentation.--Any budget request, budget justification 
     material, budget display, reprogramming request, Selected 
     Acquisition Report, or other budget documentation or 
     performance report submitted by the Secretary of Defense to 
     the President regarding a major defense acquisition program 
     which the Milestone Decision Authority determines under 
     paragraph (1) does not satisfy the certification components 
     specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of 
     section 2366b of title 10, United States Code, shall 
     prominently and clearly indicate that such program has not 
     fully satisfied such certification components until such time 
     as the Milestone Decision Authority makes the determination 
     that such program has satisfied all certification components 
     pursuant to paragraph (2).
       (c) Reviews of Programs Restructured After Experiencing 
     Critical Cost Growth.--The official designated to perform 
     oversight of performance assessment pursuant to section 145 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by this Act, shall 
     annually review each major defense acquisition program that 
     has been considered pursuant to paragraph (2) of section 
     2433(e) of title 10, United States Code, and which has been 
     certified as necessary to continue pursuant to such 
     paragraph, to assess the success of the program in achieving 
     adequate program performance after the completion of such 
     consideration. The results of reviews performed pursuant to 
     this subsection shall be included in the next annual report 
     of such official.

     SEC. 203. REQUIREMENT FOR CERTIFICATION OF MAJOR SYSTEMS 
                   PRIOR TO MILESTONE B.

       (a) Certification.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     beginning not later than 270 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, for each major defense acquisition 
     program that has not received Milestone B approval, or Key 
     Decision Point B approval in the case of a space program, the 
     Milestone Decision Authority shall certify, after 
     consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight Council on 
     matters relating to program requirements and military needs--
       (1) that the program fulfills an approved initial 
     capabilities document;
       (2) that the program is being executed by an entity with a 
     relevant core competency as identified by the Secretary of 
     Defense under section 118b of title 10, United States Code;
       (3) if the program duplicates a capability already provided 
     by an existing program, the duplication provided by such 
     program is necessary and appropriate;
       (4) that a cost estimate for such program has been 
     submitted to the Milestone Decision Authority and that the 
     concurrence of the official designated to perform oversight 
     of cost estimation pursuant to section 145 of title 10, 
     United States Code, has been obtained regarding the choice of 
     a cost estimate; and
       (5) that a schedule identifying the time and major 
     activities required to reach Milestone B

[[Page 12398]]

     approval, or Key Decision Point B approval in the case of a 
     space program, has been submitted to the Milestone Decision 
     Authority.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to a major 
     defense acquisition program that has received a certification 
     as required by section 2366a, title 10, United States Code.
       (c) Reports.--
       (1) Relating to cost growth or schedule delay of programs 
     certified under subsection (a).--With respect to a major 
     defense acquisition program certified by the Milestone 
     Decision Authority under subsection (a), the Milestone 
     Decision Authority shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report in accordance with this subsection if, 
     prior to Milestone B approval--
       (A) the projected cost of the program exceeds the cost 
     estimate for the program submitted to the Milestone Decision 
     Authority in accordance with subsection (a)(4) by more than 
     25 percent; or
       (B) the schedule submitted to the Milestone Decision 
     Authority in accordance with subsection (a)(5) is delayed by 
     more than 25 percent.
       (2) Relating to cost growth of programs certified under 
     section 2366a.--With respect to a major defense acquisition 
     program certified by the Milestone Decision Authority under 
     section 2366a of title 10, United States Code, the Milestone 
     Decision Authority shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report in accordance with this subsection if the 
     program manager submits a notification to the Milestone 
     Decision Authority pursuant to section 2366a(b).
       (3) Matters covered.--Any report submitted pursuant to 
     paragraph (1) or (2) shall--
       (A) identify the root causes of the cost or schedule 
     growth;
       (B) identify appropriate acquisition performance measures 
     for the remainder of the program; and
       (C) include one of the following:
       (i) A written certification (with a supporting explanation) 
     stating that--

       (I) such program is essential to national security;
       (II) there are no alternatives to such program that will 
     provide acceptable military capability at less cost;
       (III) new estimates of the cost or schedule, as 
     appropriate, are reasonable; and
       (IV) the management structure for the program is adequate 
     to manage and control program cost and schedule.

       (ii) A plan for terminating the development of the program 
     or withdrawal of Milestone A approval (or Key Decision Point 
     A approval in the case of a space program) if the Milestone 
     Decision Authority determines that such action is in the 
     interest of national defense.
       (4) Time of submission.--A report required by this 
     subsection shall be submitted--
       (A) in the case of a report required by paragraph (1), not 
     later than 30 days after the Milestone Decision Authority 
     determines the cost growth or schedule delay described in 
     that paragraph; and
       (B) in the case of a report required by paragraph (2), not 
     later than 30 days after the Milestone Decision Authority 
     receives the notification from the program manager described 
     in that paragraph.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Major defense acquisition program.--The term ``major 
     defense acquisition program'' means the following:
       (A) A major defense acquisition program as that term is 
     defined in section 2430 of title 10, United States Code.
       (B) An acquisition program of the Department of Defense 
     that the Secretary of Defense expects to become a major 
     defense acquisition program (as defined in such section 2430) 
     upon Milestone B approval, on the basis of the cost estimate 
     submitted in accordance with subsection (a)(4) of this 
     section or subsection (a)(4) of section 2366a of title 10, 
     United States Code.
       (2) Initial capabilities document.--The term ``initial 
     capabilities document'' has the meaning provided by section 
     2366a (c)(2) of such title.
       (3) Entity.--The term ``entity'' has the meaning provided 
     by section 2366a(c)(4) of such title.
       (4) Milestone b approval.--The term ``Milestone B 
     approval'' has the meaning provided by section 2366(e)(7) of 
     such title.

     SEC. 204. CRITICAL COST GROWTH IN MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Authorized Actions in Event of Critical Cost Growth.--
     Paragraph (2) of section 2433(e) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2)(A) If the program acquisition unit cost or 
     procurement unit cost of a major defense acquisition program 
     or designated major subprogram (as determined by the 
     Secretary under subsection (d)) increases by a percentage 
     equal to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold 
     for the program or subprogram, the Secretary of Defense, 
     after consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight 
     Council regarding program requirements, shall--
       ``(i) determine the root cause or causes of the critical 
     cost growth including the role, if any, of--
       ``(I) changes or growth in requirements;
       ``(II) unrealistic baseline estimates;
       ``(III) any design, engineering, manufacturing, or 
     technology integration issues;
       ``(IV) changes in procurement quantities;
       ``(V) inadequate program funding or funding instability;
       ``(VI) poor performance by government or contractor 
     personnel responsible for program management; or
       ``(VII) other causes as identified by the Secretary;
       ``(ii) subject to subparagraph (B), determine whether to 
     terminate such program or to restructure such program after 
     assessing--
       ``(I) the root causes of cost growth identified pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A);
       ``(II) the validity and urgency of the joint military 
     requirement;
       ``(III) the viability of the acquisition strategy;
       ``(IV) the quality of program management;
       ``(V) a broad range of potential material and non-material 
     alternatives to such program; and
       ``(VI) the need to reduce funding for other programs due to 
     the cost growth on such program;
       ``(iii) submit the determination made under clause (ii) to 
     Congress, before the end of the 60-day period beginning on 
     the day the Selected Acquisition Report containing the 
     information described in subsection (g) is required to be 
     submitted under section 2432(f) of this title; and
       ``(iv) if a report under paragraph (1) has been previously 
     submitted to Congress with respect to such program or 
     subprogram for the current fiscal year but was based upon a 
     different unit cost report from the program manager to the 
     service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary 
     concerned, submit a further report containing the information 
     described in subsection (g), determined from the time of the 
     previous report to the time of the current report.
       ``(B) A program may be restructured pursuant to a 
     determination under subparagraph (A)(ii) only if--
       ``(i) a written certification (with a supporting 
     explanation) is submitted along with the determination 
     stating that--
       ``(I) such program is essential to national security;
       ``(II) there are no alternatives to such program which will 
     provide acceptable military capability at less cost;
       ``(III) new estimates of the program acquisition unit cost 
     or procurement unit cost are reasonable;
       ``(IV) the program is a higher priority than programs whose 
     funding must be reduced to accommodate cost growth on such 
     program; and
       ``(V) the management structure for the program is adequate 
     to manage and control program acquisition unit cost or 
     procurement unit cost; and
       ``(ii) the most recent milestone decision is revisited and 
     results in the approval of such restructured program.''.
       (b) Total Expenditure for Procurement Resulting in 
     Treatment as Major Defense Acquisition Program.--Section 
     2430(a)(2) of such title is amended by inserting ``, 
     including all planned increments or spirals,'' after ``an 
     eventual total expenditure for procurement''.
       (c) Requirement To Include Cost Growth Funding Changes in 
     Report.--When a program is restructured under paragraph (2) 
     of section 2433(e) of title 10, United States Code, the next 
     Selected Acquisition Report for such program submitted 
     pursuant to section 2432 of such title occurring after the 
     submission of the budget for the fiscal year following the 
     fiscal year in which the program was restructured shall 
     contain a description of all funding changes included in the 
     budget for that fiscal year as a result of the cost growth on 
     such program, including reductions made in the budgets of 
     other programs to accommodate such cost growth.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2433(e)(3) of such 
     title is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or (2)(B)'' and 
     inserting ``or (2)(A)(iii)''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) by striking ``or (2)(B)'' and inserting ``or 
     (2)(A)(iii)''; and
       (B) by striking ``paragraph (2)(A)'' and inserting 
     ``paragraph (2)(B)''.

     SEC. 205. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THE 
                   ACQUISITION OF MAJOR WEAPON SYSTEMS.

       (a) Requirement for Panel To Present Recommendations.--Not 
     later than one year after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Panel on Contracting Integrity established pursuant 
     to section 813 of the John Warner National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364; 
     120 Stat. 2320) shall present recommendations to the 
     Secretary of Defense on measures to eliminate or mitigate 
     organizational conflicts of interest in the acquisition of 
     major weapons systems.
       (b) Revised Regulations Required.--Not later than 180 days 
     after receiving recommendations pursuant to subsection (a), 
     the Secretary of Defense shall revise the Defense Supplement 
     to the Federal Acquisition Regulation to address 
     organizational conflicts of interest by contractors in the 
     acquisition of major weapon systems.
       (c) Potential Organizational Conflicts of Interest.--The 
     organizational conflicts of interest considered during the 
     preparation of the recommendations required pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall include conflicts that could arise as a 
     result of any of the following:
       (1) Lead system integrator contracts on major defense 
     acquisition programs and contracts that follow lead system 
     integrator contracts on such programs, particularly contracts 
     for production.
       (2) The ownership of business units performing systems 
     engineering and technical assistance functions, professional 
     services, or management support services in relation to major 
     defense acquisition programs by contractors who 
     simultaneously own business units competing to perform as 
     either the prime contractor or the supplier of a major 
     subsystem or component for such programs.
       (3) The award of major subsystem contracts by a prime 
     contractor for a major defense acquisition program to 
     business units or other affiliates

[[Page 12399]]

     of the same parent corporate entity, and particularly the 
     award of subcontracts for software integration or the 
     development of a proprietary software system architecture.
       (4) The performance by, or assistance of, contractors in 
     technical evaluations on major defense acquisition programs.
       (d) Extension of Panel on Contracting Integrity.--
     Subsection (e) of section 813 of the John Warner National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 
     109-364; 120 Stat. 2321) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Termination.--(1) Subject to the restriction in 
     paragraph (2), the panel shall continue to serve until the 
     date that is 18 months after the date on which the Secretary 
     of Defense notifies the congressional defense committees of 
     an intention to terminate the panel based on a determination 
     that the activities of the panel no longer justify its 
     continuation and that concerns about contracting integrity 
     have been fully mitigated.
       ``(2) The panel shall continue to serve at least until 
     December 31, 2011.''.

     SEC. 206. AWARDS FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL FOR 
                   EXCELLENCE IN THE ACQUISITION OF PRODUCTS AND 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     commence carrying out a program to recognize excellent 
     performance by individuals and teams of members of the Armed 
     Forces and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense in 
     the acquisition of products and services for the Department 
     of Defense.
       (b) Elements.--The program required by subsection (a) shall 
     include the following:
       (1) Procedures for the nomination by the personnel of the 
     military departments and the Defense Agencies of individuals 
     and teams of members of the Armed Forces and civilian 
     personnel of the Department of Defense for eligibility for 
     recognition under the program.
       (2) Procedures for the evaluation of nominations for 
     recognition under the program by one or more panels of 
     individuals from the Government, academia, and the private 
     sector who have such expertise, and are appointed in such 
     manner, as the Secretary shall establish for purposes of the 
     program.
       (c) Award of Cash Bonuses.--As part of the program required 
     by subsection (a), the Secretary may award to any individual 
     recognized pursuant to the program a cash bonus authorized by 
     any other provision of law to the extent that the performance 
     of such individual so recognized warrants the award of such 
     bonus under such provision of law.

     SEC. 207. CONSIDERATION OF TRADE-OFFS AMONG COST, SCHEDULE, 
                   AND PERFORMANCE IN THE ACQUISITION OF MAJOR 
                   WEAPON SYSTEMS.

        (a) Review of Mechanisms for Considering Trade-Offs.--The 
     Comptroller General shall review the use by the Department of 
     Defense of certain mechanisms for considering trade-offs 
     among cost, schedule, and performance in the acquisition of 
     major weapon systems.
       (b) Mechanisms Included.--The mechanisms reviewed pursuant 
     to subsection (a) shall include--
       (1) the Tri-Chair Committee, as defined in section 817 of 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 
     (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 225);
       (2) Configuration Steering Boards as established pursuant 
     to section 814 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 
     122 Stat. 4528);
       (3) any mechanism that is used or that may potentially be 
     used by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller) for considering trade-offs among cost, 
     schedule, and performance in the acquisition of major weapon 
     systems; and
       (4) any other mechanisms identified as allowing for the 
     consideration of trade-offs in the report on investment 
     strategies for major defense acquisition programs required by 
     section 817 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181).
       (c) Assessment of Mechanisms.--The review shall describe 
     and evaluate the effectiveness of the mechanisms identified 
     in subsection (b).
       (d) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit 
     to the congressional defense committees a report on the 
     review and assessment performed pursuant to this section. The 
     report shall include such recommendations as the Comptroller 
     General considers appropriate on the matters reviewed, 
     including recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the 
     mechanisms included in the report.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, H.R. 2101 is laid on the 
table.
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________