(a)

(1)

(2)

(A) completes a mission analysis that—

(i) identifies the specific capability gaps to be addressed by the project or program; and

(ii) develops a clear mission need to be addressed by the project or program; and

(B) prepares a preliminary affordability assessment for the project or program.

(b)

(1)

(2)

(c)

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2941.)

A prior section 571, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 542, related to Treasury and Navy Department jurisdiction, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.

(a)

(1) clearly defines the operational requirements for the project or program;

(2) establishes the feasibility of alternatives;

(3) develops an acquisition project or program baseline;

(4) produces a life-cycle cost estimate; and

(5) assesses the relative merits of alternatives to determine a preferred solution in accordance with the requirements of this section.

(b)

(1) The key performance parameters, the key system attributes, and the operational performance attributes of the capability or asset to be acquired under the proposed acquisition project or program.

(2) A detailed list of the systems or other capabilities with which the capability or asset to be acquired is intended to be interoperable, including an explanation of the attributes of interoperability.

(3) The anticipated acquisition project or program baseline and acquisition unit cost for the capability or asset to be acquired under the project or program.

(4) A detailed schedule for the acquisition process showing when all capability and asset acquisitions are to be completed and when all acquired capabilities and assets are to be initially and fully deployed.

(c)

(1)

(2)

(A) an assessment of the technical maturity of the capability or asset, and technical and other risks;

(B) an examination of capability, interoperability, and other advantages and disadvantages;

(C) an evaluation of whether different combinations or quantities of specific assets or capabilities could meet the Coast Guard's overall performance needs;

(D) a discussion of key assumptions and variables, and sensitivity to change in such assumptions and variables;

(E) when an alternative is an existing capability, asset, or prototype, an evaluation of relevant safety and performance records and costs;

(F) a calculation of life-cycle costs including—

(i) an examination of likely research and development costs and the levels of uncertainty associated with such estimated costs;

(ii) an examination of likely production and deployment costs and the levels of uncertainty associated with such estimated costs;

(iii) an examination of likely operating and support costs and the levels of uncertainty associated with such estimated costs;

(iv) if they are likely to be significant, an examination of likely disposal costs and the levels of uncertainty associated with such estimated costs; and

(v) such additional measures as the Commandant or the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating determines to be necessary for appropriate evaluation of the capability or asset; and

(G) the business case for each viable alternative.

(d)

(1)

(2)

(A) set forth an integrated test and evaluation strategy that will verify that capability-level or asset-level and subsystem-level design and development, including performance and supportability, have been sufficiently proven before the capability, asset, or subsystem of the capability or asset is approved for production; and

(B) require that adequate developmental tests and evaluations and operational tests and evaluations established under subparagraph (A) are performed to inform production decisions.

(3)

(A) the key performance parameters to be resolved through the integrated test and evaluation strategy;

(B) critical operational issues to be assessed in addition to the key performance parameters;

(C) specific development test and evaluation phases and the scope of each phase;

(D) modeling and simulation activities to be performed, if any, and the scope of such activities;

(E) early operational assessments to be performed, if any, and the scope of such assessments;

(F) operational test and evaluation phases;

(G) an estimate of the resources, including funds, that will be required for all test, evaluation, assessment, modeling, and simulation activities; and

(H) the Government entity or independent entity that will perform the test, evaluation, assessment, modeling, and simulation activities.

(4)

(5)

(A) proceed beyond that phase of the acquisition process that entails approving the supporting acquisition of a capability or asset before the master plan is approved by the Chief Acquisition Officer; or

(B) award any production contract for a capability, asset, or subsystem for which a master plan is required under this subsection before the master plan is approved by the Chief Acquisition Officer.

(e)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2942.)

A prior section 572, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 543, related to courts of inquiry, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.

(a)

(1) To demonstrate that the design, manufacturing, and production solution is based upon a stable, producible, and cost-effective product design.

(2) To ensure that the product capabilities meet contract specifications, acceptable operational performance requirements, and system security requirements.

(3) To ensure that the product design is mature enough to commit to full production and deployment.

(b)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(A) notify the program manager and the Chief Acquisition Officer of the safety concern as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days after the completion of the test and evaluation event or activity that identified the safety concern; and

(B) notify the Chief Acquisition Officer and include in such notification—

(i) an explanation of the actions that will be taken to correct or mitigate the safety concern in all capabilities or assets and subsystems of the capabilities or assets yet to be produced, and the date by which those actions will be taken;

(ii) an explanation of the actions that will be taken to correct or mitigate the safety concern in previously produced capabilities or assets and subsystems of the capabilities or assets, and the date by which those actions will be taken; and

(iii) an assessment of the adequacy of current funding to correct or mitigate the safety concern in capabilities or assets and subsystems of the capabilities or assets and in previously produced capabilities or assets and subsystems.

(c)

(1)

(2)

(A) cause all electronics on all aircraft, surface, and shore capabilities and assets that require TEMPEST certification and that are delivered after the date of enactment of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 to be tested in accordance with TEMPEST standards and communications security (comsec) standards by an independent third party that is authorized by the Federal Government to perform such testing; and

(B) certify that the assets meet all applicable TEMPEST requirements.

(3)

(A)

(B)

(4)

(5)

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2944.)

The date of enactment of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(A), (3)(A), (5), is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 111–281, which was approved Oct. 15, 2010.

A prior section 573, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 543, related to contempt of court, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.

(a)

(1) ensure there is a stable and efficient production and support capability to develop an asset or capability for the Coast Guard;

(2) conduct follow-on testing to confirm and monitor performance and correct deficiencies; and

(3) conduct acceptance tests and trials prior to the delivery of each asset or system to ensure the delivered asset or system achieves full operational capability.

(b)

(1) execute production contracts;

(2) ensure that delivered assets and capabilities meet operational cost and schedules requirements established in the acquisition program baseline;

(3) validate manpower and training requirements to meet system needs to operate, maintain, support, and instruct the assets or capabilities; and

(4) prepare an acquisition project or program transition plan to enter into programmatic sustainment, operations, and support.

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2947.)

A prior section 574, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 543, related to issuance of and penalties for failure to comply with subpoenas, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.

(a)

(1) a likely cost overrun greater than 15 percent of the acquisition program baseline for that individual capability or asset or a class of capabilities or assets;

(2) a likely delay of more than 180 days in the delivery schedule for any individual capability or asset or class of capabilities or assets; or

(3) an anticipated failure for any individual capability or asset or class of capabilities or assets to satisfy any key performance threshold or parameter under the acquisition program baseline.

(b)

(1) a detailed description of the breach and an explanation of its cause;

(2) the projected impact to performance, cost, and schedule;

(3) an updated acquisition program baseline and the complete history of changes to the original acquisition program baseline;

(4) the updated acquisition schedule and the complete history of changes to the original schedule;

(5) a full life-cycle cost analysis for the capability or asset or class of capabilities or assets;

(6) a remediation plan identifying corrective actions and any resulting issues or risks; and

(7) a description of how progress in the remediation plan will be measured and monitored.

(c)

(1) the capability or asset or capability or asset class to be acquired under the project or program is essential to the accomplishment of Coast Guard missions;

(2) there are no alternatives to such capability or asset or capability or asset class that will provide equal or greater capability in both a more cost-effective and timely manner;

(3) the new acquisition schedule and estimates for total acquisition cost are reasonable; and

(4) the management structure for the acquisition program is adequate to manage and control performance, cost, and schedule.

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2947.)

A prior section 575, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 543, related to arrest of deserters, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed as altering or diminishing in any way the statutory authority and responsibility of the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating, or the Secretary's designee, to—

(1) manage and administer department procurements, including procurements by department components, as required by section 701 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341); or

(2) manage department acquisition activities and act as the Acquisition Decision Authority with regard to the review or approval of a Coast Guard Level 1 or Level 2 acquisition project or program, as required by section 16 1 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414) and related implementing regulations and directives.

(Added Pub. L. 111–281, title IV, §402(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2948.)

Section 16 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, referred to in par. (2), is section 16 of Pub. L. 93–400, which was classified to section 414 of former Title 41, Public Contracts, and was repealed and reenacted as section 1702 of Title 41, Public Contracts, by Pub. L. 111–350, §§3, 7(b), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3677, 3855.

A prior section 576, act Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 544, related to allowances to and transportation of prisoners, prior to repeal by act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §§5, 14(v), 64 Stat. 145, 148, effective May 31, 1951.