[House Report 115-57]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-57
======================================================================
DHS ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD ACT OF 2017
_______
March 23, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. McCaul, from the Committee on Homeland Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1282]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 1282) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
to establish Acquisition Review Boards in the Department of
Homeland Security, and for other purposes, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 4
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 4
Hearings......................................................... 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 5
Committee Votes.................................................. 5
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 6
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures 6
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 6
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 7
Duplicative Federal Programs..................................... 7
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 7
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 7
Preemption Clarification......................................... 7
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 7
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 7
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 7
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 8
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of
2017''.
SEC. 2. ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD.
(a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 391 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``SEC. 836. ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish an Acquisition
Review Board (in this section referred to as the `Board') to--
``(1) strengthen accountability and uniformity within the
Department acquisition review process;
``(2) review major acquisition programs; and
``(3) review the use of best practices.
``(b) Composition.--The Under Secretary for Management shall serve as
chair of the Board. The Secretary shall also ensure participation by
other relevant Department officials, including at least two component
heads or their designees, as permanent members of the Board.
``(c) Meetings.--The Board shall meet regularly for purposes of
ensuring all acquisitions processes proceed in a timely fashion to
achieve mission readiness. The Board shall convene at the Secretary's
discretion and at any time--
``(1) a major acquisition program--
``(A) requires authorization to proceed from one
acquisition decision event to another throughout the
acquisition life cycle;
``(B) is in breach of its approved requirements; or
``(C) requires additional review, as determined by
the Under Secretary for Management; or
``(2) a non-major acquisition program requires review, as
determined by the Under Secretary for Management.
``(d) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Board are as
follows:
``(1) Determine whether a proposed acquisition has met the
requirements of key phases of the acquisition life cycle
framework and is able to proceed to the next phase and eventual
full production and deployment.
``(2) Oversee whether a proposed acquisition's business
strategy, resources, management, and accountability is
executable and is aligned to strategic initiatives.
``(3) Support the person with acquisition decision authority
for an acquisition in determining the appropriate direction for
such acquisition at key acquisition decision events.
``(4) Conduct systematic reviews of acquisitions to ensure
that such acquisitions are progressing in compliance with the
approved documents for their current acquisition phases.
``(5) Review the acquisition documents of each major
acquisition program, including the acquisition program baseline
and documentation reflecting consideration of tradeoffs among
cost, schedule, and performance objectives, to ensure the
reliability of underlying data.
``(6) Ensure that practices are adopted and implemented to
require consideration of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and
performance objectives as part of the process for developing
requirements for major acquisition programs prior to the
initiation of the second acquisition decision event, including,
at a minimum, the following practices:
``(A) Department officials responsible for
acquisition, budget, and cost estimating functions are
provided with the appropriate opportunity to develop
estimates and raise cost and schedule matters before
performance objectives are established for capabilities
when feasible.
``(B) Full consideration is given to possible trade-
offs among cost, schedule, and performance objectives
for each alternative.
``(e) Acquisition Program Baseline Report Requirement.--If the person
exercising acquisition decision authority over a major acquisition
program approves such program to proceed into the planning phase before
such program has a Department-approved acquisition program baseline,
the Under Secretary for Management shall create and approve an
acquisition program baseline report regarding such approval, and the
Secretary shall--
``(1) within seven days after an acquisition decision
memorandum is signed, notify in writing the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the
Senate of such decision; and
``(2) within 60 days after the acquisition decision
memorandum is signed, submit to such committees a report
stating the rationale for such decision and a plan of action to
require an acquisition program baseline for such program.
``(f) Report.--The Under Secretary for Management shall provide
information to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate on an annual basis through fiscal year 2022 on
the activities of the Board for the prior fiscal year that includes
information relating to the following:
``(1) For each meeting of the Board, any acquisition decision
memoranda.
``(2) Results of the systematic reviews conducted pursuant to
paragraph (4) of subsection (d).
``(3) Results of acquisition document reviews required
pursuant to paragraph (5) of subsection (d).
``(4) Activities to ensure that practices are adopted and
implemented throughout the Department pursuant to paragraph (6)
of subsection (d).
``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Acquisition.--The term `acquisition' has the meaning
given such term in section 131 of title 41, United States Code.
``(2) Acquisition decision authority.--The term `acquisition
decision authority' means the authority, held by the Secretary
acting through the Deputy Secretary or Under Secretary for
Management to--
``(A) ensure compliance with Federal law, the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, and Department acquisition
management directives;
``(B) review (including approving, pausing,
modifying, or cancelling) an acquisition program
through the life cycle of such program;
``(C) ensure that acquisition program managers have
the resources necessary to successfully execute an
approved acquisition program;
``(D) ensure good acquisition program management of
cost, schedule, risk, and system performance of the
acquisition program at issue, including assessing
acquisition program baseline breaches and directing any
corrective action for such breaches; and
``(E) ensure that acquisition program managers, on an
ongoing basis, monitor cost, schedule, and performance
against established baselines and use tools to assess
risks to an acquisition program at all phases of the
life cycle of such program to avoid and mitigate
acquisition program baseline breaches.
``(3) Acquisition decision event.--The term `acquisition
decision event', with respect to an acquisition program, means
a predetermined point within each of the acquisition phases at
which the acquisition decision authority determines whether
such acquisition program shall proceed to the next acquisition
phase.
``(4) Acquisition decision memorandum.--The term `acquisition
decision memorandum', with respect to an acquisition, means the
official acquisition decision event record that includes a
documented record of decisions, exit criteria, and assigned
actions for such acquisition, as determined by the person
exercising acquisition decision authority for such acquisition.
``(5) Acquisition program.--The term `acquisition program'
means the process by which the Department acquires, with any
appropriated amounts, by contract for purchase or lease,
property or services (including construction) that support the
missions and goals of the Department.
``(6) Acquisition program baseline.--The term `acquisition
program baseline', with respect to an acquisition program,
means a summary of the cost, schedule, and performance
parameters, expressed in standard, measurable, quantitative
terms, which must be met in order to accomplish the goals of
such program.
``(7) Best practices.--The term `best practices', with
respect to acquisition, means a knowledge-based approach to
capability development that includes--
``(A) identifying and validating needs;
``(B) assessing alternatives to select the most
appropriate solution;
``(C) clearly establishing well-defined requirements;
``(D) developing realistic cost assessments and
schedules;
``(E) securing stable funding that matches resources
to requirements;
``(F) demonstrating technology, design, and
manufacturing maturity;
``(G) using milestones and exit criteria or specific
accomplishments that demonstrate progress;
``(H) adopting and executing standardized processes
with known success across programs;
``(I) establishing an adequate workforce that is
qualified and sufficient to perform necessary
functions; and
``(J) integrating the capabilities described in
subparagraphs (A) through (I) into the Department's
mission and business operations.
``(8) Major acquisition program.--The term `major acquisition
program' means a Department acquisition program that is
estimated by the Secretary to require an eventual total
expenditure of at least $300,000,000 (based on fiscal year 2017
constant dollars) over its life cycle cost.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 1(b) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.) is further amended
by adding after the item relating to section 835 the following new
item:
``Sec. 836. Acquisition Review Board.''.
Purpose and Summary
The purpose of H.R. 1282 is to amend the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-296) to establish an Acquisition
Review Board in the Department of Homeland Security, and for
other purposes.
H.R. 1282, the DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017,
seeks to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
provide the accountability and consistency in oversight needed
to manage components' major acquisition programs by authorizing
the Acquisition Review Board (ARB).
Background and Need for Legislation
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the DHS
Office of Inspector General (OIG) have consistently reported on
the longstanding challenges DHS faces in managing its major
acquisition programs, which cost the Department over $7 billion
each year. Every 2 years, GAO identifies areas in the Federal
Government that are ``high risk'' due to their vulnerabilities
to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. Since 2003, GAO has
identified DHS's transformation of 22 agencies into one
department, and the Department's subsequent challenges with its
management functions, as high risk. In GAO's 2017 high risk
update, GAO noted that DHS has made progress in addressing its
management challenges, but has not yet completed all the
necessary actions to fully address acquisition management.
Additionally, the OIG reports annually on major management
challenges facing the Department. In November 2016, the OIG
identified challenges in DHS's management of acquisition
programs. The Inspector General found that although DHS has
taken steps to improve acquisition management, it still
struggles to ensure that major acquisition programs cost what
was originally estimated, are delivered on schedule, and
provide the capabilities originally intended.
The Department's Acquisition Review Board (ARB) is the
mechanism by which senior Department officials provide critical
oversight of major acquisition programs. H.R. 1282 authorizes
the ARB and requires it to validate foundational acquisition
documents, such as the Acquisition Program Baseline that
establishes key cost, schedule, and performance requirements,
and requires the ARB to review such requirements. By
establishing the ARB in law and laying out its
responsibilities, Congress can ensure that this vital oversight
mechanism continues to contribute to DHS' progress toward
improving its oversight of major acquisition programs.
Hearings
No hearings were specifically held on H.R. 1282. However,
the Committee held oversight hearings on acquisition
management, as listed below.
114th Congress
On February 26, 2015, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Management Efficiency held a hearing entitled ``Assessing DHS's
Performance: Watchdog Recommendations to Improve Homeland
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from The
Honorable John Roth, Inspector General, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security; Ms. Rebecca Gambler, Director, Homeland
Security and Justice, U.S. Government Accountability Office;
and Dr. Daniel M. Gerstein, Senior Policy Researcher, The RAND
Corporation.
On April 22, 2015, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Management Efficiency held a hearing entitled ``Acquisition
Oversight: How Effectively is DHS Safeguarding Taxpayer
Dollars?'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Ms. Michele
Mackin, Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management, U.S.
Government Accountability Office; The Honorable Chip Fulghum,
Acting Deputy Undersecretary for Management and Chief Financial
Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Dr. Cedric
Sims, Partner, Evermay Consulting Group.
On September 18, 2015, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Management Efficiency held a hearing entitled ``Making DHS More
Efficient: Industry Recommendations to Improve Homeland
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Marc
Pearl, President and Chief Executive Officer, Homeland Security
and Defense Business Counsel; Mr. Harry Totonis, Board
Director, Business Executives for National Security; and Ms.
Elaine Duke, Principal, Elaine Duke & Associates, LLC.
115th Congress
On February 16, 2017, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Management Efficiency held a hearing entitled ``Watchdog
Recommendations: A Better Way Ahead to Manage the Department of
Homeland Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
The Honorable John Roth, Inspector General, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, and Ms. Rebecca Gambler, Director, Homeland
Security and Justice, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Committee Consideration
The Committee met on March 8, 2017, to consider H.R. 1282,
and ordered the measure to be reported to the House with a
favorable recommendation, as amended, by voice vote. The
Committee took the following actions:
The following amendment was offered:
An amendment offered by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi (#1); was
AGREED TO by voice vote.
At page 5, line 20 insert new subsection entitled ``(f) Report.''
and make conforming changes.
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded
votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments
thereto.
No recorded votes were requested during consideration of
H.R. 1282.
Committee Oversight Findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight
hearings and made findings that are reflected in this report.
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of Rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R.
1282, the DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017, would
result in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues.
Congressional Budget Office Estimate
The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, March 22, 2017.
Hon. Michael McCaul,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1282, the DHS
Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
Mark P. Hadley
(For Keith Hall, Director)
Enclosure.
H.R. 1282--DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017
H.R. 1282 would direct the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to establish an Acquisition Review Board to review major
acquisition programs and enhance accountability and uniformity
in the review process for DHS acquisitions. The bill's
requirements are largely consistent with existing DHS
procurement policies. Therefore, CBO estimates that
implementing H.R. 1282 would cost less than $500,000 annually;
such spending would be subject to the availability of
appropriated funds.
Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending
or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1282 would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
H.R. 1282 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz.
The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, H.R. 1282 contains the following
general performance goals and objectives, including outcome
related goals and objectives authorized.
The purpose of H.R. 1282, the DHS Acquisition Review Board
Act of 2017, is to codify in law certain acquisition management
oversight mechanisms in the Department of Homeland Security.
Duplicative Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of Rule XIII, the Committee finds
that H.R. 1282 does not contain any provision that establishes
or reauthorizes a program known to be duplicative of another
Federal program.
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits
In compliance with Rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the Rule
XXI.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
Preemption Clarification
In compliance with section 423 of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974, requiring the report of any Committee on a bill or
joint resolution to include a statement on the extent to which
the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt State,
local, or Tribal law, the Committee finds that H.R. 1282 does
not preempt any State, local, or Tribal law.
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings
The Committee estimates that H.R. 1282 would require no
directed rule makings.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this
legislation.
Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation
Section 1. Short Title.
This section provides that this bill may be cited as the
``DHS Acquisition Review Board Act of 2017''.
Sec. 2. Acquisition Review Board.
Section 2 amends subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland
Security Act by codifying the Acquisition Review Board (ARB)
and requiring the ARB to review foundational acquisition
documents of each major acquisition program, including the
Acquisition Program Baseline that contains cost, schedule, and
performance requirements. Because the ARB already exists in the
Department, section 2 does not create a new board.
Section 2 includes provisions to strengthen accountability
and uniformity within the DHS acquisition review process and
identifies ARB participants. To ensure component buy-in, this
section also requires at least two component heads or their
designees permanently serve on the Board. Additionally, this
section seeks to prevent delays in the acquisition process by
requiring the ARB to meet regularly to ensure all major
acquisition programs proceed through the acquisition process in
a timely manner.
Section 2 establishes responsibilities for the ARB and,
among other things, authorizes it to conduct systematic reviews
of acquisitions and consider tradeoffs among cost, schedule,
and performance objectives as part of the process for
developing requirements. Further, if the Under Secretary for
Management (USM) approves a major acquisition program to
proceed without an APB, section 2 requires the Secretary to
provide a report to Congress with the justification for the
decision. Section 2 also requires the USM to provide important
acquisition oversight documentation to the House and Senate
Committees on Homeland Security to enhance congressional
oversight of major acquisition programs. For example, the USM
must provide acquisition decision memorandums for each ARB
held, which provide key information on meeting participants,
outcomes, and the health of the program. This section also
includes relevant definitions related to acquisition
management.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Homeland
Security Act of 2002''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is
as follows:
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL;
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Acquisitions
* * * * * * *
Sec. 836. Acquisition Review Board.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--COORDINATION WITH NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES; INSPECTOR GENERAL;
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE; COAST GUARD; GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Acquisitions
* * * * * * *
SEC. 836. ACQUISITION REVIEW BOARD.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish an Acquisition
Review Board (in this section referred to as the ``Board'')
to--
(1) strengthen accountability and uniformity within
the Department acquisition review process;
(2) review major acquisition programs; and
(3) review the use of best practices.
(b) Composition.--The Under Secretary for Management shall
serve as chair of the Board. The Secretary shall also ensure
participation by other relevant Department officials, including
at least two component heads or their designees, as permanent
members of the Board.
(c) Meetings.--The Board shall meet regularly for purposes of
ensuring all acquisitions processes proceed in a timely fashion
to achieve mission readiness. The Board shall convene at the
Secretary's discretion and at any time--
(1) a major acquisition program--
(A) requires authorization to proceed from
one acquisition decision event to another
throughout the acquisition life cycle;
(B) is in breach of its approved
requirements; or
(C) requires additional review, as determined
by the Under Secretary for Management; or
(2) a non-major acquisition program requires review,
as determined by the Under Secretary for Management.
(d) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Board are
as follows:
(1) Determine whether a proposed acquisition has met
the requirements of key phases of the acquisition life
cycle framework and is able to proceed to the next
phase and eventual full production and deployment.
(2) Oversee whether a proposed acquisition's business
strategy, resources, management, and accountability is
executable and is aligned to strategic initiatives.
(3) Support the person with acquisition decision
authority for an acquisition in determining the
appropriate direction for such acquisition at key
acquisition decision events.
(4) Conduct systematic reviews of acquisitions to
ensure that such acquisitions are progressing in
compliance with the approved documents for their
current acquisition phases.
(5) Review the acquisition documents of each major
acquisition program, including the acquisition program
baseline and documentation reflecting consideration of
tradeoffs among cost, schedule, and performance
objectives, to ensure the reliability of underlying
data.
(6) Ensure that practices are adopted and implemented
to require consideration of trade-offs among cost,
schedule, and performance objectives as part of the
process for developing requirements for major
acquisition programs prior to the initiation of the
second acquisition decision event, including, at a
minimum, the following practices:
(A) Department officials responsible for
acquisition, budget, and cost estimating
functions are provided with the appropriate
opportunity to develop estimates and raise cost
and schedule matters before performance
objectives are established for capabilities
when feasible.
(B) Full consideration is given to possible
trade-offs among cost, schedule, and
performance objectives for each alternative.
(e) Acquisition Program Baseline Report Requirement.--If the
person exercising acquisition decision authority over a major
acquisition program approves such program to proceed into the
planning phase before such program has a Department-approved
acquisition program baseline, the Under Secretary for
Management shall create and approve an acquisition program
baseline report regarding such approval, and the Secretary
shall--
(1) within seven days after an acquisition decision
memorandum is signed, notify in writing the Committee
on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate of such decision; and
(2) within 60 days after the acquisition decision
memorandum is signed, submit to such committees a
report stating the rationale for such decision and a
plan of action to require an acquisition program
baseline for such program.
(f) Report.--The Under Secretary for Management shall provide
information to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate on an annual basis through
fiscal year 2022 on the activities of the Board for the prior
fiscal year that includes information relating to the
following:
(1) For each meeting of the Board, any acquisition
decision memoranda.
(2) Results of the systematic reviews conducted
pursuant to paragraph (4) of subsection (d).
(3) Results of acquisition document reviews required
pursuant to paragraph (5) of subsection (d).
(4) Activities to ensure that practices are adopted
and implemented throughout the Department pursuant to
paragraph (6) of subsection (d).
(g) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Acquisition.--The term ``acquisition'' has the
meaning given such term in section 131 of title 41,
United States Code.
(2) Acquisition decision authority.--The term
``acquisition decision authority'' means the authority,
held by the Secretary acting through the Deputy
Secretary or Under Secretary for Management to--
(A) ensure compliance with Federal law, the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, and Department
acquisition management directives;
(B) review (including approving, pausing,
modifying, or cancelling) an acquisition
program through the life cycle of such program;
(C) ensure that acquisition program managers
have the resources necessary to successfully
execute an approved acquisition program;
(D) ensure good acquisition program
management of cost, schedule, risk, and system
performance of the acquisition program at
issue, including assessing acquisition program
baseline breaches and directing any corrective
action for such breaches; and
(E) ensure that acquisition program managers,
on an ongoing basis, monitor cost, schedule,
and performance against established baselines
and use tools to assess risks to an acquisition
program at all phases of the life cycle of such
program to avoid and mitigate acquisition
program baseline breaches.
(3) Acquisition decision event.--The term
``acquisition decision event'', with respect to an
acquisition program, means a predetermined point within
each of the acquisition phases at which the acquisition
decision authority determines whether such acquisition
program shall proceed to the next acquisition phase.
(4) Acquisition decision memorandum.--The term
``acquisition decision memorandum'', with respect to an
acquisition, means the official acquisition decision
event record that includes a documented record of
decisions, exit criteria, and assigned actions for such
acquisition, as determined by the person exercising
acquisition decision authority for such acquisition.
(5) Acquisition program.--The term ``acquisition
program'' means the process by which the Department
acquires, with any appropriated amounts, by contract
for purchase or lease, property or services (including
construction) that support the missions and goals of
the Department.
(6) Acquisition program baseline.--The term
``acquisition program baseline'', with respect to an
acquisition program, means a summary of the cost,
schedule, and performance parameters, expressed in
standard, measurable, quantitative terms, which must be
met in order to accomplish the goals of such program.
(7) Best practices.--The term ``best practices'',
with respect to acquisition, means a knowledge-based
approach to capability development that includes--
(A) identifying and validating needs;
(B) assessing alternatives to select the most
appropriate solution;
(C) clearly establishing well-defined
requirements;
(D) developing realistic cost assessments and
schedules;
(E) securing stable funding that matches
resources to requirements;
(F) demonstrating technology, design, and
manufacturing maturity;
(G) using milestones and exit criteria or
specific accomplishments that demonstrate
progress;
(H) adopting and executing standardized
processes with known success across programs;
(I) establishing an adequate workforce that
is qualified and sufficient to perform
necessary functions; and
(J) integrating the capabilities described in
subparagraphs (A) through (I) into the
Department's mission and business operations.
(8) Major acquisition program.--The term ``major
acquisition program'' means a Department acquisition
program that is estimated by the Secretary to require
an eventual total expenditure of at least $300,000,000
(based on fiscal year 2017 constant dollars) over its
life cycle cost.
* * * * * * *
[all]