[USC02] 10 USC Ch. 144: MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS
Result 1 of 1
   
 
10 USC Ch. 144: MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS
From Title 10—ARMED FORCESSubtitle A—General Military LawPART IV—SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

CHAPTER 144—MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS

Sec.
2430.
Major defense acquisition program defined.
2430a.
Major subprograms.
2431.
Weapons development and procurement schedules.
2431a.
Acquisition strategy.
2431b.
Risk management and mitigation in major defense acquisition programs and major systems.
2432.
Selected Acquisition Reports.
2433.
Unit cost reports.
2433a.
Critical cost growth in major defense acquisition programs.
[2434.
Repealed.]
2435.
Baseline description.
2436.
Major defense acquisition programs: incentive program for contractors to purchase capital assets manufactured in United States.
2437.
Development of major defense acquisition programs: sustainment of system to be replaced.
2438.
Performance assessments and root cause analyses.
2439.
Negotiation of price for technical data before development or production of major weapon systems.1

        

2440.
Technology and industrial base plans.
2441.
Sustainment reviews.
2442.
Prohibition on use of lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.
2443.
Sustainment factors in weapon system design.

        

Amendments

2018Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1081(c)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1985, made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 115–91, §834(a)(2), effective as of Dec. 12, 2017, and as if included in Pub. L. 115–91 as enacted. See 2017 Amendment note below.

2017Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §§832(a)(2), 835(a)(2), title X, §1081(a)(37), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1468, 1471, 1596, added items 2439 and 2442 and substituted "Risk management and mitigation in major defense acquisition programs and major systems" for "Risk reduction in major defense acquisition programs and major systems" in item 2431b.

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §834(a)(2), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1470, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1081(c)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1985, added item 2443.

2016Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §§842(c)(2), 849(c)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2290, 2294, struck out item 2434 "Independent cost estimates" and added item 2441.

2015Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §§821(a)(2), 822(a)(2), 831(c)(2), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 900, 901, 912, added items 2431a and 2431b and substituted "Independent cost estimates" for "Independent cost estimates; operational manpower requirements" in item 2434.

2011Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title IX, §901(k)(2)(B), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4326, added item 2438.

2009Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §206(a)(2), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1728, added item 2433a.

2008Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §811(a)(2), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4521, added item 2430a.

2004Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §805(a)(2), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2009, added item 2437.

2003Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title VIII, §822(a)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1547, added item 2436.

1994Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §§3005(b), 3006(b), 3007(b), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3331, substituted "Baseline description" for "Enhanced program stability" in item 2435 and struck out items 2438 "Major programs: competitive phototyping" and 2439 "Major programs: competitive alternative sources".

1993Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §828(a)(4), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1713, struck out items 2436 "Defense enterprise programs" and 2437 "Defense enterprise programs: milestone authorization".

1992Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(2), div. D, title XLII, §4216(b)(2), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2460, 2670, added items 2438 and 2440 and redesignated former item 2438 as 2439.

1987Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(1), (2)(B), (9)(B), Apr. 21, 1987, 100 Stat. 279, 280, substituted "Major Defense Acquisition Programs" for "Oversight of Cost Growth in Major Programs" in chapter heading, added item 2430, and transferred former item 2305a from chapter 137 and redesignated it as item 2438.

1986Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title XII, §1208(c)(2), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3976, inserted "; operational manpower requirements" in item 2434.

Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §§904(a)(2), 905(a)(2), 906(a)(2)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-134, 1783-135, 1783-137, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §§904(a)(2), 905(a)(2), 906(a)(2)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-134, 3341-135, 3341-137; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §§904(a)(2), 905(a)(2), 906(a)(2), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3914–3916, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273, added items 2435 to 2437.

Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §101(a)(4), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 994, added chapter heading and analysis of sections for chapter 144, consisting of sections 2431 to 2434.

1 Section catchline amended by Pub. L. 115–232 without corresponding amendment of chapter analysis.

§2430. Major defense acquisition program defined

(a)(1) Except as provided under paragraph (2), in this chapter, the term "major defense acquisition program" means a Department of Defense acquisition program that is not a highly sensitive classified program (as determined by the Secretary of Defense) and—

(A) that is designated by the Secretary of Defense as a major defense acquisition program; or

(B) in the case of a program that is not a program for the acquisition of an automated information system (either a product or a service), that is estimated by the Secretary of Defense to require an eventual total expenditure for research, development, test, and evaluation of more than $300,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1990 constant dollars) or an eventual total expenditure for procurement, including all planned increments or spirals, of more than $1,800,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1990 constant dollars).


(2) In this chapter, the term "major defense acquisition program" does not include—

(A) an acquisition program or project that is carried out using the rapid fielding or rapid prototyping acquisition pathway under section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note); or

(B) an acquisition program for a defense business system (as defined in section 2222(i)(1) of this title) carried out using the acquisition guidance issued pursuant to section 883(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. 2223a note).


(b) The Secretary of Defense may adjust the amounts (and the base fiscal year) provided in subsection (a)(1)(B) on the basis of Department of Defense escalation rates. An adjustment under this subsection shall be effective after the Secretary transmits a written notification of the adjustment to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

(c) For purposes of subsection (a)(1)(B), the Secretary shall consider, as applicable, the following:

(1) The estimated level of resources required to fulfill the relevant joint military requirement, as determined by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council pursuant to section 181 of this title.

(2) The cost estimate referred to in section 2366a(a)(6) of this title.

(3) The cost estimate referred to in section 2366b(a)(1)(C) of this title.

(4) The cost estimate within a baseline description as required by section 2435 of this title.

(d)(1) The milestone decision authority for a major defense acquisition program reaching Milestone A after October 1, 2016, shall be the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program, unless the Secretary of Defense designates, under paragraph (2), another official to serve as the milestone decision authority.

(2) The Secretary of Defense may designate an alternate milestone decision authority for a program with respect to which—

(A) subject to paragraph (5), the Secretary determines that the program is addressing a joint requirement;

(B) the Secretary determines that the program is best managed by a Defense Agency;

(C) the program has incurred a unit cost increase greater than the significant cost threshold or critical cost threshold under section 2433 of this title;

(D) the program is critical to a major interagency requirement or technology development effort, or has significant international partner involvement; or

(E) the Secretary determines that an alternate official serving as the milestone decision authority will best provide for the program to achieve desired cost, schedule, and performance outcomes.


(3)(A) After designating an alternate milestone decision authority under paragraph (2) for a program, the Secretary of Defense may revert the position of milestone decision authority for the program back to the service acquisition executive upon request of the Secretary of the military department concerned. A decision on the request shall be made within 180 days after receipt of the request from the Secretary of the military department concerned.

(B) If the Secretary of Defense denies the request for reversion of the milestone decision authority back to the service acquisition executive, the Secretary shall report to the congressional defense committees on the basis of the Secretary's decision that an alternate official serving as milestone decision authority will best provide for the program to achieve desired cost, schedule, and performance outcomes. No such reversion is authorized after a program has incurred a unit cost increase greater than the significant cost threshold or critical cost threshold under section 2433 of this title, except in exceptional circumstances.

(4)(A) For each major defense acquisition program, the Secretary of the military department concerned and the Chief of the armed force concerned shall, in each Selected Acquisition Report required under section 2432 of this title, certify that program requirements are stable and funding is adequate to meet cost, schedule, and performance objectives for the program and identify and report to the congressional defense committees on any increased risk to the program since the last report.

(B) The Secretary of Defense shall review the acquisition oversight process for major defense acquisition programs and shall limit outside requirements for documentation to an absolute minimum on those programs where the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program is the milestone decision authority and ensure that any policies, procedures, and activities related to oversight efforts conducted outside of the military departments with regard to major defense acquisition programs shall be implemented in a manner that does not unnecessarily increase program costs or impede program schedules.

(5) The authority of the Secretary of Defense to designate an alternative milestone decision authority for a program with respect to which the Secretary determines that the program is addressing a joint requirement, as set forth in paragraph (2)(A), shall apply only for a major defense acquisition program that reaches Milestone A after October 1, 2016, and before October 1, 2019.

(Added Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(2)(A), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 279; amended Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §817(b), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2455; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1502(a)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 502; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(1), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §206(b), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1728; Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title X, §1071(f)(18), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3511; Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §825(a), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §§807(b), 847(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2261, 2292; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §831, title X, §1081(a)(38), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1467, 1596.)

Amendments

2017—Subsec. (a)(1)(B). Pub. L. 115–91, §831(1), inserted "in the case of a program that is not a program for the acquisition of an automated information system (either a product or a service)," after "(B)".

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 115–91, §831(2)(A), substituted "include—" for "include", inserted subpar. (A) designation before "an acquisition program", and added subpar. (B).

Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 115–91, §1081(a)(38), substituted "subsection (a)(1)(B)" for "subsection (a)(2)".

2016—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 114–328, §847(a), designated existing provisions as par. (1), substituted "Except as provided under paragraph (2), in this chapter" for "In this chapter", redesignated former pars. (1) and (2) as subpars. (A) and (B), respectively, of par. (1), and added par. (2).

Subsec. (d)(2)(A). Pub. L. 114–328, §807(b)(1), inserted "subject to paragraph (5)," before "the Secretary determines".

Subsec. (d)(5). Pub. L. 114–328, §807(b)(2), added par. (5).

2015—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 114–92 added subsec. (d).

2014—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 113–291 substituted "section 2366a(a)(6)" for "section 2366a(a)(4)".

2009—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 111–23, §206(b)(1), inserted ", including all planned increments or spirals," after "an eventual total expenditure for procurement".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 111–23, §206(b)(2), added subsec. (c).

1999—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 106–65 substituted "and the Committee on Armed Services" for "and the Committee on National Security".

1996—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–106 substituted "Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives" for "Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives".

1992Pub. L. 102–484 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), in par. (2) substituted "$300,000,000" for "$200,000,000", "1990" for "1980" in two places, and "$1,800,000,000" for "$1,000,000,000", and added subsec. (b).

Effective Date of 2016 Amendment

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §807(b), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2261, provided that the amendment made by section 807(b) is effective January 1, 2017.

Effective Date of 2015 Amendment

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §825(c)(3), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 908, provided that: "The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) [amending this section and section 133 of this title] shall take effect on October 1, 2016."

Fire Suppressant and Fuel Containment Standards for Certain Vehicles

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title I, §142, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2040, directed the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy to issue guidance regarding fire suppressant and fuel containment standards for covered vehicles of the Army and of the Marine Corps, respectively, and to submit to the congressional defense committees, no later than 180 days after Dec. 23, 2016, reports on such guidance.

Implementation of Procedures for Designation of Milestone Decision Authorities

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §825(c)(1), (2), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 908, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees, no later than 180 days after Nov. 25, 2015, a plan for implementing procedures for designation of milestone decision authorities under subsection (d) of this section and directed the Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense, in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the service acquisition executives, to issue guidance to ensure that by no later than Oct. 1, 2016, the acquisition policy, guidance, and practices of the Department of Defense conform to the requirements of subsection (d) of this section.

Tenure and Accountability of Program Managers for Program Definition Periods

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §826, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 908, as amended by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §862(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2302, directed the Secretary of Defense to revise, not later than 180 days after Nov. 25, 2015, Department of Defense guidance for major defense acquisition programs to address the tenure and accountability of program managers for the program definition period of major defense acquisition programs and directed the Secretary to ensure that program managers have the appropriate expertise and are provided resources and support to meet their responsibilities under the revised guidance.

Tenure and Accountability of Program Managers for Program Execution Periods

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §827, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 909, as amended by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §862(b), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2302, directed the Secretary of Defense to revise, not later than 180 days after Nov. 25, 2015, Department of Defense guidance for major defense acquisition programs to address the tenure and accountability of program managers for the program execution period of major defense acquisition programs and directed the Secretary to ensure that program managers have the appropriate expertise and are provided resources and support to meet their responsibilities under the revised guidance.

Penalty for Cost Overruns

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §828, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 910, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §825(a), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1466; Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1081(d), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1986, provided that:

"(a) In General.—For each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022, the Secretary of each military department shall pay a penalty for cost overruns on the covered major defense acquisition programs of the military department.

"(b) Calculation of Penalty.—For the purposes of this section:

"(1) The amount of the cost overrun on any major defense acquisition program or subprogram in a fiscal year is the difference between the current program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram and the program acquisition unit cost for the program as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram, multiplied by the quantity of items to be purchased under the program or subprogram, as reported in the final Selected Acquisition Report for the fiscal year in accordance with section 2432 of title 10, United States Code.

"(2) Cost overruns for covered major defense acquisition programs that are joint programs of more than one military department shall be allocated among the military departments in percentages determined by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

"(3) The cumulative amount of cost overruns for a military department in a fiscal year is the sum of the cost overruns for all covered major defense acquisition programs of the department in the fiscal year (including cost overruns allocated to the military department in accordance with paragraph (2)).

"(4) The cost overrun penalty for a military department in a fiscal year is three percent of the cumulative amount of cost overruns of the military department in the fiscal year, as determined pursuant to paragraph (3).

"(c) Total Cost Overrun Penalty.—Notwithstanding the amount of a cost overrun penalty determined in subsection (b), the total cost overrun penalty for a military department (including any cost overrun penalty for joint programs of military departments) for a fiscal year may not exceed $50,000,000.

"(d) Transfer of Funds.—

"(1) Reduction of research, development, test, and evaluation or procurement accounts.—Not later than 60 days after the end of each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022, the Secretary of each military department shall reduce the research, development, test, and evaluation or procurement accounts of the military department by the amount determined under paragraph (2), and remit such amount to the Secretary of Defense.

"(2) Determination of amounts.—The reductions to research, development, test, and evaluation or procurement accounts of a military department referred to in paragraph (1) are the reductions to such accounts necessary to equal, when combined, the cost overrun penalty for the fiscal year for such department determined pursuant to subsection (b)(4).

"(3) Crediting of funds.—Any amount remitted under paragraph (1) shall be credited to the Rapid Prototyping Fund established pursuant to section 804 of this Act [set out as a note under section 2302 of this title].

"(e) Covered Programs.—A major defense acquisition program is covered under this section if the original Baseline Estimate was established for such program under paragraph (1) or (2) of section 2435(d) of title 10, United States Code, on or after May 22, 2009 (which is the date of the enactment of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–23))."

[Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §825(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1466, provided that: "The requirements of section 828 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114–92; 10 U.S.C. 2430 note), as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017], shall continue to apply with respect to fiscal years beginning on or before October 1, 2016."]

Improving Analytic Support to Systems Acquisition and Allocation of Acquisition, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Assets

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title X, §1058, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3501, which required the Secretary to review guidance on improving analytic support to systems acquisition and allocation of acquisition, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(36), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1849.

Limitation on use of Cost-Type Contracts

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title VIII, §811, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1828, directed the Secretary of Defense to modify, not later than 120 days after Jan. 2, 2013, the acquisition regulations of the Department of Defense to prohibit the Department from entering into cost-type contracts for the production of major defense acquisition programs on or after Oct. 1, 2014, except in the case of a particular cost-type contract that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics certifies to the congressional defense is needed to provide a required capability in a timely and cost-effective manner.

Estimates of Potential Termination Liability of Contracts for the Development or Production of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title VIII, §812, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1829, directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to review, not later than 180 days after Jan. 2, 2013, relevant acquisition guidance and ensure that program managers for major defense acquisition programs are preparing estimates of potential termination liability for certain covered contracts and directed the Comptroller General of the United States to submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than 270 days after Jan. 2, 2013, a report on the extent to which the Department of Defense is considering potential termination liability as a factor in entering into and in terminating covered contracts.

Assessment, Management, and Control of Operating and Support Costs for Major Weapon Systems

Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §832, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1504, as amended by Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title X, §1076(a)(12), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1948, which required guidance and maintenance of a database on operating and support costs for major weapon systems, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §836(b)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1473. See section 2337a of this title.

Management of Manufacturing Risk in Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §812, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4264, as amended by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §834, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1506, directed the Secretary of Defense to issue, not later than 180 days after Jan. 7, 2011, comprehensive guidance on the management of manufacturing risk in major defense acquisition programs and to ensure that the acquisition workforce chapter of the annual strategic workforce plan required by former section 115b of this title included an assessment of the critical manufacturing readiness knowledge and skills needed in the acquisition workforce and a plan of action for addressing any gaps in such knowledge and skills.

Developmental Test and Evaluation and Systems Engineering in the Military Departments and Defense Agencies

Pub. L. 111–23, title I, §102(b), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1714, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §813(a), title IX, §901(l)(1), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4265, 4326, provided for the development and implementation of plans to ensure the military department or Defense Agency concerned has appropriate resources and adequate numbers of trained personnel for developmental testing organizations and development planning and systems engineering organizations and provided for the submission an annual report on the implementation of such plans, beginning no later than 180 days after May 22, 2009, and continuing from 2011 to 2014 and required an annual assessment of the reports from 2010 to 2014.

Performance Assessments and Root Cause Analyses for Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 111–23, title I, §103, May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1715, which authorized the Secretary of Defense to designate a senior official as responsible for performance assessments and root cause analyses for major defense acquisition programs, was transferred to chapter 144 of this title and redesignated as section 2438 by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title IX, §901(d), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4321.

Acquisition Strategies To Ensure Competition Throughout the Lifecycle of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §202, May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1720, as amended by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §837, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1509; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title VIII, §825, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1833, provided that:

"(a) Acquisition Strategies To Ensure 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)(1) 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 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) Additional Measures To Ensure Competition at Subcontract Level.—The Secretary shall take actions to ensure competition or the option of competition at the subcontract level on major defense acquisition programs by—

"(1) where appropriate, breaking out a major subsystem, conducting a separate competition for the subsystem, and providing the subsystem to the prime contractor as Government-furnished equipment;

"(2) 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 major weapon systems;

"(3) providing for government surveillance 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; and

"(4) providing for the assessment of the extent to which a contractor has given full and fair consideration to qualified sources other than the contractor in sourcing decisions as a part of past performance evaluations.

"(d) Consideration of Competition Throughout Maintenance and Sustainment of Major Weapon Systems and Subsystems.—Whenever a decision regarding source of repair results in a plan to award a contract for performance of maintenance and sustainment of a major weapon system or subsystem of a major weapon system, the Secretary shall take actions to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with statutory requirements, contracts for such maintenance and sustainment, or for components needed for such maintenance and sustainment, are awarded on a competitive basis and give full consideration to all sources (including sources that partner or subcontract with public or private sector repair activities).

"(e) Applicability.—

"(1) Strategy and measures to ensure competition.—The requirements of subsections (a) and (b) 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 [May 22, 2009].

"(2) Additional actions.—The actions required by subsections (c) and (d) shall be taken within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act."

Prototyping Requirements for Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §203, May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1722, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §813(b), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4265, which directed the Secretary of Defense to make certain modifications to Department of Defense guidelines related to competitive prototyping for major defense acquisition programs and waivers, was repealed by Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §822(b), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 902.

Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §207(a)–(c), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1728, 1729, directed the Secretary of Defense to revise, not later than 270 days after May 22, 2009, the Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation to provide uniform guidance and tighten existing requirements for organizational conflicts of interest by contractors in major defense acquisition programs and directed the Panel on Contracting Integrity established pursuant to former section 813 of Pub. L. 109–364 (10 U.S.C. 2304 note) to present recommendations on measures to eliminate or mitigate organizational conflicts of interest in major defense acquisition programs.

Configuration Steering Boards for Cost Control Under Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §814, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4528, as amended by Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §830, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 912; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §826, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1467, provided that:

"(a) Configuration Steering Boards.—Each Secretary of a military department shall establish one or more boards (to be known as a 'Configuration Steering Board') for the major defense acquisition programs of such department.

"(b) Composition.—

"(1) Chair.—Each Configuration Steering Board under this section shall be chaired by the service acquisition executive of the military department concerned.

"(2) Particular members.—Each Configuration Steering Board under this section shall include a representative of the following:

"(A) The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

"(B) The Chief of Staff of the Armed Force concerned.

"(C) Other Armed Forces, as appropriate.

"(D) The Joint Staff.

"(E) The Comptroller of the military department concerned.

"(F) The military deputy to the service acquisition executive concerned.

"(G) The program executive officer for the major defense acquisition program concerned.

"(H) Other senior representatives of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military department concerned, as appropriate.

"(c) Responsibilities.—

"(1) In general.—The Configuration Steering Board for a major defense acquisition program under this section shall be responsible for the following:

"(A) Monitoring changes in program requirements and ensuring the Chief of Staff of the Armed Force concerned, in consultation with the Secretary of the military department concerned, approves of any proposed changes that could have an adverse effect on program cost or schedule.

"(B) Preventing unnecessary changes to program requirements and system configuration that could have an adverse impact on program cost or schedule.

"(C) Mitigating the adverse cost and schedule impact of any changes to program requirements or system configuration that may be required.

"(D) Ensuring that the program delivers as much planned capability as possible, at or below the relevant program baseline.

"(2) Discharge of responsibilities.—In discharging its responsibilities under this section with respect to a major defense acquisition program, a Configuration Steering Board shall—

"(A) review and approve or disapprove any proposed changes to program requirements or system configuration that have the potential to adversely impact program cost or schedule; and

"(B) review and recommend proposals to reduce program requirements that have the potential to improve program cost or schedule in a manner consistent with program objectives.

"(3) Presentation of recommendations on reduction in requirements.—Any recommendation for a proposed reduction in requirements that is made by a Configuration Steering Board under paragraph (2)(B) shall be presented to appropriate organizations of the Joint Staff and the military departments responsible for such requirements for review and approval in accordance with applicable procedures.

"(4) Annual consideration of each major defense acquisition program.—

"(A) Annual meeting.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary of the military department concerned shall ensure that a Configuration Steering Board under this section meets to consider each major defense acquisition program of such military department at least once each year.

"(B) Exception.—If the service acquisition executive of the military department concerned determines, in writing, that there have been no changes to the program requirements of a major defense acquisition program during the preceding year, the Configuration Steering Board for such major defense acquisition program is not required to meet as described in subparagraph (A).

"(5) Certification of cost and schedule deviations during system design and development.—For a major defense acquisition program that received an initial Milestone B approval during fiscal year 2008, a Configuration Steering Board may not approve any proposed alteration to program requirements or system configuration if such an alteration would—

"(A) increase the cost (including any increase for expected inflation or currency exchange rates) for system development and demonstration by more than 25 percent; or

"(B) extend the schedule for key events by more than 15 percent of the total number of months between the award of the system development and demonstration contract and the scheduled Milestone C approval date,

unless the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics certifies to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], and includes in the certification supporting rationale, that approving such alteration to program requirements or system configuration is in the best interest of the Department of Defense despite the cost and schedule impacts to system development and demonstration of such program.

"(d) Applicability.—

"(1) In general.—The requirements of this section shall apply with respect to any major defense acquisition program that is commenced before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008].

"(2) Current programs.—In the case of any major defense acquisition program that is ongoing as of the date of the enactment of this Act, a Configuration Steering Board under this section shall be established for such program not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

"(e) Guidance on Authorities of Program Managers After Milestone B.—

"(1) [Amended section 853(d)(2) of Pub. L. 109–364, set out below.]

"(2) Applicability.—The Secretary of Defense shall modify the guidance described in section 853(d) of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 [Pub. L. 109–364; set out below] in order to take into account the amendment made by paragraph (1) not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008].

"(f) Major Defense Acquisition Program Defined.—In this section, the term 'major defense acquisition program' has the meaning given that term in section 2430(a) of title 10, United States Code."

Preservation of Tooling for Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §815, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4530, directed the Secretary of Defense to issue, not later than 270 days after Oct. 14, 2008, guidance requiring the preservation and storage of unique tooling associated with the production of hardware for a major defense acquisition program through the end of the service life of the end item associated with such a program.

Duties of Principal Military Deputies

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title IX, §908(d), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 278, as amended by Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §802(c), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 879, provided that each Principal Military Deputy to a service acquisition executive has the responsibility to keep the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forced concerned informed of the progress of and certain developments on major defense acquisition programs and to ensure program managers and program executive officers make certain considerations during the acquisition process.

Requirements Management Certification Training Program

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VIII, §801, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2312, provided for the development of a training program to certify military and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense with responsibility for generating requirements for major defense acquisition programs, required that members of the Armed Forces or employees of the Department of Defense successfully complete the training program in order to participate in the requirements generation process after Sept. 30, 2008, and directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives reports on implementation of the program, with the final report due not later than Mar. 1, 2008.

Program Manager Empowerment and Accountability

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VIII, §853, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2342, as amended by Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §814(e)(1), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4530, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive strategy for enhancing the role of Department of Defense program managers in developing and carrying out defense acquisition programs and to revise, not later than 180 days after Oct. 17, 2006, guidance for major defense acquisition programs to address the qualifications, resources, responsibilities, tenure, and accountability of program managers for both the program development period and the program execution period and provided for reports to Congress by the Secretary and the Comptroller General by not later than 270 days after Oct. 17, 2006, and one year after such date, respectively.

Management of National Security Agency Modernization Program

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title IX, §924, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1576, directed the Secretary of Defense to mandate that, effective Nov. 24, 2003, acquisitions under the National Security Agency Modernization Program be directed and managed by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

Spiral Development Under Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title VIII, §803, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2603, which authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct major defense acquisition programs as spiral development programs and set out limitations on and requirements for such programs, was repealed by Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §821(b)(2), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 900.

Environmental Consequence Analysis of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title VIII, §815, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2819, directed the Secretary of Defense to issue guidance, before Apr. 1, 1995, on how to achieve the purposes and intent of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) by ensuring timely compliance for major defense acquisition programs and how to analyze, as early in the process as feasible, the life-cycle environmental costs for such major defense acquisition programs, directed the Secretary to analyze, beginning not later than Mar. 31, 1995, the environmental costs of a major defense acquisition process as an integral part of the life-cycle cost analysis of the program, and directed the Secretary to establish a data base for documents prepared by the Department of Defense in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 with respect to major defense acquisition programs.

Efficient Contracting Processes

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §837, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1718, as amended by Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5064(b)(2), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3360, directed the Secretary of Defense to waive regulations not required by statute that affect the efficiency of the contracting process within the Department of Defense.

Contract Administration: Performance Based Contract Management

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §838, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1718, as amended by Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5064(b)(3), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3360, which required the Secretary of Defense to define payment milestones for certain defense acquisition programs, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(37), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1849.

Defense Acquisition Pilot Program

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VIII, §803, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2604, as amended by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title VIII, §847(b)(2), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1845, which provided that the Secretary could waive sections 2399, 2432, and 2433 of this title, under certain conditions, for any defense acquisition program designated by the Secretary of Defense for participation in the defense acquisition pilot program, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(43), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1850.

Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5064, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3359, as amended by Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title VIII, §801(a), (b)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A-202, 1654A-203, which authorized the Secretary of Defense to designate certain defense acquisition programs for participation in the defense acquisition pilot program, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(42), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1850.

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title VIII, §819, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2822, which authorized the Secretary of Defense to designate certain defense acquisition programs for participation in the defense acquisition pilot program, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(41), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1850.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §833, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1716, as amended by Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5064(b)(1), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3360, which related to the use of mission-oriented program management in the Defense Acquisition Pilot Program, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(39), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1849.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §835(b), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1717, which related to funding for Defense Acquisition Pilot Program, and authorized the Secretary of Defense to expend appropriated sums as necessary to carry out next phase of acquisition program cycle after Secretary determined that objective quantifiable performance expectations relating to execution of that phase had been identified, was repealed by Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5002(b), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3350.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §839, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1718, which required the Secretary to collect and analyze specified information on contractor performance under the Defense Acquisition Pilot Program, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(40), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1849.

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title VIII, §809, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1593, as amended by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §811, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2450; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §832, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1715, which related to a pilot program to determine the potential for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the acquisition process in defense acquisition programs, was repealed by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §812(b)(38), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1849.

Definitions

Pub. L. 111–23, §2, May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1704, provided that: "In this Act [see Short Title of 2009 Amendment note set out under section 101 of this title]:

"(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.

"(3) The term 'major weapon system' has the meaning given that term in section 2379(d) [probably means section 2379(f)] of title 10, United States Code."

§2430a. Major subprograms

(a) Authority To Designate Major Subprograms as Subject to Acquisition Reporting Requirements.—(1)(A) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a major defense acquisition program requires the delivery of two or more categories of end items which differ significantly from each other in form and function, the Secretary may designate each such category of end items as a major subprogram for the purposes of acquisition reporting under this chapter.

(B) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a major defense acquisition program requires the delivery of two or more increments or blocks, the Secretary may designate each such increment or block as a major subprogram for the purposes of acquisition reporting under this chapter.

(2) The Secretary shall notify the congressional defense committees in writing of any proposed designation pursuant to paragraph (1) not less than 30 days before the date such designation takes effect.

(b) Reporting Requirements.—(1) If the Secretary designates a major subprogram of a major defense acquisition program in accordance with subsection (a), Selected Acquisition Reports, unit cost reports, and program baselines under this chapter shall reflect cost, schedule, and performance information—

(A) for the major defense acquisition program as a whole (other than as provided in paragraph (2)); and

(B) for each major subprogram of the major defense acquisition program so designated.


(2) For a major defense acquisition program for which a designation of a major subprogram has been made under subsection (a), unit costs under this chapter shall be submitted in accordance with the definitions in subsection (d).

(c) Requirement to Cover Entire Major Defense Acquisition Program.—If a subprogram of a major defense acquisition program is designated as a major subprogram under subsection (a), all other elements of the major defense acquisition program shall be appropriately organized into one or more subprograms under the major defense acquisition program, each of which subprograms, as so organized, shall be treated as a major subprogram under subsection (a).

(d) Definitions.—Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 2432(a) of this title, in the case of a major defense acquisition program for which the Secretary has designated one or more major subprograms under this section for the purposes of this chapter—

(1) the term "program acquisition unit cost" applies at the level of the subprogram and means the total cost for the development and procurement of, and specific military construction for, the major defense acquisition program that is reasonably allocable to each such major subprogram, divided by the relevant number of fully-configured end items to be produced under such major subprogram;

(2) the term "procurement unit cost" applies at the level of the subprogram and means the total of all funds programmed to be available for obligation for procurement for each such major subprogram, divided by the number of fully-configured end items to be procured under such major subprogram;

(3) the term "major contract", with respect to a designated major subprogram, means each of the six largest prime, associate, or Government furnished equipment contracts under the subprogram that is in excess of $40,000,000 and that is not a firm-fixed price contract; and

(4) the term "life cycle cost", with respect to a designated major subprogram, means all costs of development, procurement, military construction, and operations and support, without regard to funding source or management control.

(Added Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §811(a)(1), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4520; amended Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §814(a), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4266; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title IX, §912, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1536; Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §850, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2295.)

Amendments

2016—Subsec. (a)(1)(B). Pub. L. 114–328, which directed substitution of "major defense acquisition program requires the delivery of two or more increments or blocks" for "major defense acquisition program to purchase satellites requires the delivery of satellites in two or more increments or blocks" in par. (1)(B), was executed by making the substitution in par. (1)(B) of subsec. (a), to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

2011—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 112–81 designated existing provisions as subpar. (A) and added subpar. (B).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 111–383 designated existing provisions as par. (1), redesignated former pars. (1) and (2) as subpars. (A) and (B), respectively, of par. (1), inserted "(other than as provided in paragraph (2))" before semicolon in subpar. (A), and added par. (2).

§2431. Weapons development and procurement schedules

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress each calendar year, not later than 45 days after the President submits the budget to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, budget justification documents regarding development and procurement schedules for each weapon system for which fund authorization is required by section 114(a) of this title, and for which any funds for procurement are requested in that budget. The documents shall include data on operational testing and evaluation for each weapon system for which funds for procurement are requested (other than funds requested only for the procurement of units for operational testing and evaluation, or long lead-time items, or both). A weapon system shall also be included in the annual documents required under this subsection in each year thereafter until procurement of that system has been completed or terminated, or the Secretary of Defense certifies, in writing, that such inclusion would not serve any useful purpose and gives his reasons therefor.

(b) Any documents required to be submitted under subsection (a) shall include detailed and summarized information with respect to each weapon system covered and shall specifically include each of the following:

(1) The development schedule, including estimated annual costs until development is completed.

(2) The planned procurement schedule, including the best estimate of the Secretary of Defense of the annual costs and units to be procured until procurement is completed.

(3) To the extent required by the second sentence of subsection (a), the result of all operational testing and evaluation up to the time of the submission of the documents, or, if operational testing and evaluation has not been conducted, a statement of the reasons therefor and the results of such other testing and evaluation as has been conducted.

(4)(A) The most efficient production rate, the most efficient acquisition rate, and the minimum sustaining rate, consistent with the program priority established for such weapon system by the Secretary concerned.

(B) In this paragraph:

(i) The term "most efficient production rate" means the maximum rate for each budget year at which the weapon system can be produced with existing or planned plant capacity and tooling, with one shift a day running for eight hours a day and five days a week.

(ii) The term "minimum sustaining rate" means the production rate for each budget year that is necessary to keep production lines open while maintaining a base of responsive vendors and suppliers.


(c) In the case of any weapon system for which procurement funds have not been previously requested and for which funds are first requested by the President in any fiscal year after the Budget for that fiscal year has been submitted to Congress, the same documentation requirements shall be applicable to that system in the same manner and to the same extent as if funds had been requested for that system in that budget.

(Added Pub. L. 93–155, title VIII, §803(a), Nov. 16, 1973, 87 Stat. 614, §139; amended Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §805, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 538; Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §511(5), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2920; Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §909(c), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1120; Pub. L. 97–258, §3(b)(1), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1063; Pub. L. 98–525, title XIV, §1405(3), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2621; renumbered §2431 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(5), 110(d)(12), (g)(6), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 995, 1003, 1004; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XIII, §1314(a)(1), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1175; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1301(13), title XIV, §1484(f)(3), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1668, 1717; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3001, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3327; Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4321(b)(18), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 673.)

Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in Pub. L. 92–156, title V, §506, Nov. 17, 1971, 85 Stat. 429, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 93–155, §803(b)(2).

Amendments

1996—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(A)(i), substituted "Any documents" for "Any report" in first sentence.

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(A)(ii), substituted "the documents" for "the report".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–106, §4321(b)(18)(B), substituted "documentation" for "reporting".

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(a), substituted "not later than 45 days after" for "at the same time" and "budget justification documents" for "a written report" in first sentence and "documents" for "report" in second and third sentences.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(1), substituted "include each of the following:" for "include—" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (b)(1) to (3). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(2)–(4), capitalized first letter of first word in pars. (1) to (3) and substituted period for semicolon at end of pars. (1) and (2) and period for "; and" at end of par. (3).

Subsec. (b)(4). Pub. L. 103–355, §3001(b)(5) amended par. (4) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (4) read as follows: "the most efficient production rate and the most efficient acquisition rate consistent with the program priority established for such weapon system by the Secretary concerned."

1990—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(f)(3), substituted "covered and shall specifically include" for "covered, and specifically include, but not be limited to" in introductory provisions.

Pub. L. 101–510, §1301(13), redesignated subsec. (c) as (b), struck out "or (b)" after "under subsection (a)", and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: "The Secretary of Defense shall submit a supplemental report to Congress not less than 30, or more than 90, days before the award of any contract, or the exercise of any option in a contract, for the procurement of any such weapon system (other than procurement of units for operational testing and evaluation, or long lead-time items, or both), unless—

"(1) the contractor or contractors for that system have not yet been selected and the Secretary of Defense determines that the submission of that report would adversely affect the source selection process and notifies Congress in writing, prior to such award, of that determination, stating his reasons therefor; or

"(2) the Secretary of Defense determines that the submission of that report would otherwise adversely affect the vital security interests of the United States and notifies Congress in writing of that determination at least 30 days prior to the award, stating his reasons therefor."

Subsecs. (c), (d). Pub. L. 101–510, §1301(13)(C), redesignated subsecs. (c) and (d) as (b) and (c), respectively.

1987Pub. L. 100–180 made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5). See 1986 Amendment note below.

1986Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5), as amended by Pub. L. 100–180, §1314(a)(1), renumbered section 139 of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 99–433, §110(d)(12), substituted "Weapons development and procurement schedules" for "Secretary of Defense: weapons development and procurement schedules for armed forces; reports; supplemental reports" in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–433, §110(g)(6), substituted "section 114(a)" for "section 138(a)".

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–525, §1405(3)(B), substituted "30" for "thirty" and "90" for "ninety" in introductory text.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 98–525, §1405(3)(A), substituted "30" for "thirty".

1982—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–258 substituted "section 1105 of title 31" for "section 201 of the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 11)".

1981—Subsec. (c)(4). Pub. L. 97–86 added par. (4).

1980—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–513 substituted "section 201 of the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 11)" for "section 11 of title 31".

1975—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–106 substituted "or more than ninety, days before" for "or more than sixty, days before".

Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

For effective date and applicability of amendment by Pub. L. 104–106, see section 4401 of Pub. L. 104–106, set out as a note under section 2302 of this title.

Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–180 applicable as if included in enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–433, see section 1314(e) of Pub. L. 100–180, set out as a note under section 743 of this title.

Effective Date of 1980 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–513 effective Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701(b)(3) of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

Transition of Ballistic Missile Defense Programs to Military Departments

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1676(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1772, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVI, §1679, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2161, directed the Secretary of Defense to transfer, not later than the date on which the budget for fiscal year 2021 is submitted to Congress, the acquisition authority and the total obligational authority for each missile defense program that has received Milestone C approval or equivalent approval as of such date from the Missile Defense Agency to a military department, and directed the Secretary to submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than one year after Dec. 12, 2017, a report on the plans for such transition of missile defense programs.

Development of Persistent Space-Based Sensor Architecture

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1683, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1777, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVI, §1675(a)–(c), (d)(2), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2159, 2160, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in coordination with the Commander of the Air Force Space Command and the Commander of the United States Strategic Command, to develop a highly reliable and cost-effective persistent space-based sensor architecture capable of supporting the ballistic missile defense system, subject to the availability of appropriations, beginning fiscal year 2019, and to submit to the congressional defense committees and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, not later than one year after Dec. 12, 2017, a plan to carry out such development; and directed the Director to submit to such committees, not later than Jan. 31, 2019, a report on the options available to use other transactional authorities pursuant to section 2371 of this title to accelerate development and deployment of such architecture.

Boost Phase Ballistic Missile Defense

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1685, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1781, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVI, §1676, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2160, directed the Secretary of Defense to ensure that an effective interim kinetic or directed energy boost phase ballistic missile defense capability would be available for initial operational deployment as soon as practicable, directed the Secretary to submit to the congressional defense committees, together with the budget submitted to Congress for fiscal year 2019, a plan to achieve such capability, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, beginning fiscal year 2019, to carry out a program to develop kinetic boost phase intercept capabilities, required an independent study on the feasibility of providing an initial or demonstrated boost phase capability using unmanned aerial vehicles and kinetic interceptors, and directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a report on such study not later than July 31, 2019.

Ground-Based Interceptor Capability, Capacity, and Reliability

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1686, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1781, authorized the Secretary of Defense to increase the number of the ground-based interceptors of the United States and to advance missile defense technologies to improve the capability and reliability of those elements of the ballistic missile defense system, and directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than 90 days after the date on which the Ballistic Missile Defense Review commenced in 2017 is published, a report on those efforts.

Plan for Development of Space-Based Ballistic Missile Intercept Layer

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1688, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1783, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVI, §1680, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2161, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to develop a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer to the ballistic missile defense system, subject to the availability of appropriations, and to submit to the congressional defense committees and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, not later than one year after Dec. 12, 2017, a 10-year plan to carry out such development.

Designation of Department of Defense Senior Official With Principal Responsibility for Directed Energy Weapons

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title II, §219, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2053, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title II, §215, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1326; Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title II, §§212, 237, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1675, 1695, designated the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering as the official with principal responsibility for the development and demonstration of directed energy weapons for the Department of Defense, redesignated the High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office of the Department of Defense as the Joint Directed Energy Transition Office, which office was to report to the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, and directed the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary, to establish a program on the prototyping and demonstration of directed energy weapon systems to build and maintain the military superiority of the United States.

National Missile Defense Policy

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1681(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2623, provided that: "It is the policy of the United States to maintain and improve an effective, robust layered missile defense system capable of defending the territory of the United States, allies, deployed forces, and capabilities against the developing and increasingly complex ballistic missile threat with funding subject to the annual authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National Missile Defense."

Pub. L. 106–38, §2, July 22, 1999, 113 Stat. 205, which provided that it was the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the territory of the United States against limited ballistic missile attack with funding subject to the annual authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National Missile Defense, was repealed by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1681(b), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2623.

Designation of Certain Acquisition Authority

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1684(e), (f), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2627, provided that:

"(e) Designation Required.—

"(1) Authority.—Not later than March 31, 2018, the Secretary of Defense shall designate a military department or Defense Agency with acquisition authority with respect to—

"(A) the capability to defend the homeland from cruise missiles; and

"(B) left-of-launch ballistic missile defeat capability.

"(2) Discretion.—The Secretary may designate a single military department or Defense Agency with the acquisition authority described in paragraph (1) or designate a separate military department or Defense Agency for each function specified in such paragraph.

"(3) Validation.—In making a designation under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include a description of the manner in which the military requirements for such capabilities will be validated.

"(f) Definitions.—In this section:

"(1) The term 'Defense Agency' has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(11) of title 10, United States Code.

"(2) The term 'intelligence community' has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003)."

Technical Authority for Integrated Air and Missile Defense Activities and Programs

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1686(a), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2628, provided that:

"(1) In general.—The Director of the Missile Defense Agency is the technical authority of the Department of Defense for integrated air and missile defense activities and programs, including joint engineering and integration efforts for such activities and programs, including with respect to defining and controlling the interfaces of such activities and programs and the allocation of technical requirements for such activities and programs.

"(2) Detailees.—

"(A) In carrying out the technical authority under paragraph (1), the Director may seek to have staff detailed to the Missile Defense Agency from the Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense and the Joint Integrated Air and Missile Defense Organization in a number the Director determines necessary in accordance with subparagraph (B).

"(B) In detailing staff under subparagraph (A) to carry out the technical authority under paragraph (1), the total number of staff, including detailees, of the Missile Defense Agency who carry out such authority may not exceed the number that is twice the number of such staff carrying out such authority as of January 1, 2016."

Hypersonic Defense Capability Development

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1687, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2629, designated the Director of the Missile Defense Agency as the executive agent for the Department of Defense for the development of a capability by the United States to counter hypersonic boost-glide vehicle capabilities and conventional prompt strike capabilities that may be employed against the United States or its allies and directed the Director to establish a program to develop such hypersonic defense capability by not later than Mar. 31, 2017.

Required Testing by Missile Defense Agency of Ground-Based Midcourse Defense Element of Ballistic Missile Defense System

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1689, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2631, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, subject to certain exceptions, to administer a flight test of the ground-based midcourse defense element of the ballistic missile defense system not less frequently than once each fiscal year.

Pilot Program on Loss of Unclassified, Controlled Technical Information

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1692, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2636, provided that:

"(a) Pilot Program.—Beginning not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2016], the Director of the Missile Defense Agency shall carry out a pilot program to implement improvements to the data protection options in the programs of the Missile Defense Agency (including the contractors of the Agency), particularly with respect to unclassified, controlled technical information and controlled unclassified information.

"(b) Priority.—In carrying out the pilot program under subsection (a), the Director shall give priority to implementing data protection options that are used by the private sector and have been proven successful.

"(c) Duration.—The Director shall carry out the pilot program under subsection (a) for not more than a 5-year period.

"(d) Notification.—Not later than 30 days before the date on which the Director commences the pilot program under subsection (a), the Director shall notify the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate of—

"(1) the data protection options that the Director is considering to implement under the pilot program and the potential costs of such options; and

"(2) such option that is the preferred option of the Director.

"(e) Data Protection Options.—In this section, the term 'data protection options' means actions to improve processes, practices, and systems that relate to the safeguarding, hygiene, and data protection of information."

Plan on Full Integration and Exploitation of Overhead Persistent Infrared Capability

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1618, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1108, directed the Commander of the United States Strategic Command and the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to submit to the congressional defense committees and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, not later than 180 days after Nov. 25, 2015, a plan for the integration of overhead persistent infrared capabilities, and directed the Secretary of Defense to include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress for each fiscal year a determination of how such plan was being implemented.

Integration and Interoperability of Air and Missile Defense Capabilities of the United States

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1675, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1131, directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acting through the Missile Defense Executive Board, to ensure the interoperability and integration of certain specified air and missile defense capabilities of the United States, including by carrying out operational testing.

Boost Phase Defense System

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1680, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1137, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop and field an airborne boost phase defense system by not later than fiscal year 2025, and to submit a report on its efforts to the congressional defense committees not later than 120 days after Nov. 25, 2015.

Development and Deployment of Multiple-Object Kill Vehicle for Missile Defense of the United States Homeland

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1681, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1138, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to develop a highly reliable multiple-object kill vehicle for the ground-based midcourse defense system using sound acquisition practices, and to include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress for fiscal year 2017 a report on the funding profile necessary for the program.

Requirement To Replace Capability Enhancement I Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1682, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1139, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that all remaining ground-based interceptors of the ground-based midcourse defense system that are armed with the capability enhancement I exoatmospheric kill vehicle were replaced with the redesigned exoatmospheric kill vehicle before Sept. 30, 2022.

Additional Missile Defense Sensor Coverage for Protection of United States Homeland

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1684, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1140, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to deploy, not later than Dec. 31, 2020, a long-range discrimination radar or other sensor capability to defend the United States from long-range ballistic missile threats from Iran, and to include in the budget justification materials submitted to Congress for fiscal years 2017 to 2020 the plan to carry out such deployment.

Concept Development of Space-Based Missile Defense Layer

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1685, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1142, as amended by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XVI, §1683, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2624, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, in coordination with the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, to commence, not later than 30 days after Nov. 25, 2015, the concept definition of a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer to the ballistic missile defense system, and directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than 1 year after Nov. 25, 2015, a plan for developing one or more programs for a space-based ballistic missile intercept layer, and to commence research and development of such programs not later than 60 days after the submittal of the plan.

Development of Requirements To Support Integrated Air and Missile Defense Capabilities

Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title XVI, §1687, Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 1143, provided that:

"(a) In General.—Consistent with the memorandum of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of January 27, 2014, regarding joint integrated air and missile defense, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall oversee the development of warfighter requirements for persistent and survivable capabilities to detect, identify, determine the status, track, and support engagement of strategically important mobile or relocatable assets in all phases of conflict in order to achieve the objective of preventing the effective employment of such assets, including through offensive actions against such assets prior to their use.

"(b) Purpose of Requirements.—The requirements developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall be used and updated, as appropriate, for the purpose of informing applicable acquisition programs and systems-of-systems architecture planning that are funded through the Military Intelligence Program, the National Intelligence Program, and non-intelligence programs.

"(c) Supporting Activities.—The Vice Chairman shall also oversee the development of the enabling framework for intelligence support for integrated air and missile defense, including concepts for the integrated operation of multiple systems, and, as appropriate, the development of requirements for capabilities to be acquired to achieve such integrated operations.

"(d) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that new acquisition programs for applicable major systems or capabilities, or for upgrades to existing systems, should not be undertaken until the applicable requirements described in subsections (a) and (c) have been developed and incorporated into programmatic decision-making."

Testing and Assessment of Missile Defense Systems Prior to Production and Deployment

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title XVI, §1662, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3657, as amended by Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, §1677(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1774, prohibited the Secretary of Defense from making a final production decision for, or from operationally deploying, certain components of the ballistic missile defense system without sufficient and operationally realistic testing.

[For termination, effective Dec. 31, 2021, of reporting provisions in subsecs. (c)(2) and (d)(2) of section 1662 of Pub. L. 113–291, formerly set out above, see section 1061 of Pub. L. 114–328, set out as a note under section 111 of this title.]

Acquisition Plan for Re-Designed Exo-Atmospheric Kill Vehicle

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title XVI, §1663, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3658, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop an acquisition plan for the re-design of the exo-atmospheric kill vehicle of the ground-based midcourse defense system, and required the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on such plan.

Additional Missile Defense Radar for the Protection of the United States Homeland

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title II, §235, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 714, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to deploy a long-range discriminating radar against long-range ballistic missile threats from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, directed the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the Secretary was able to deploy additional tracking and discrimination sensor capabilities to defend the United States from future long-range ballistic missile threats from Iran, and required submission to the congressional defense committees of a report on the sensor capabilities of the United States not later than 180 days after Dec. 26, 2013.

Plans To Improve the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title II, §237, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 717, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to develop options to achieve an improved kill assessment capability for the ground-based midcourse defense system by not later than Dec. 31, 2019, to develop an interim capability for improved hit assessment for the ground-based midcourse defense system that could be integrated into near-term exo-atmospheric kill vehicle upgrades and refurbishment, and to submit a report on such development not later than Apr. 1, 2014, and directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to submit a plan to develop and deploy an upgraded enhanced exo-atmospheric kill vehicle not later than 120 days after Dec. 26, 2013.

Limitation on Availability of Funds for Missile Defense Interceptors in Europe

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §223(a)–(d), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4168, 4169, prohibited the expenditure of Department of Defense funds for the construction or deployment of missile defense interceptors in Europe until the host nation ratified a missile defense basing agreement and a status of forces agreement authorizing such interceptors and the Secretary of Defense submitted to the congressional defense committees the report on the independent assessment of alternative missile defense systems in Europe required by section 235(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111–84, 123 Stat. 2235).

Limitation on Availability of Funds for Procurement, Construction, and Deployment of Missile Defenses in Europe

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title II, §234, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2234, set forth reporting requirements for the use of Department of Defense funds for the acquisition or deployment of operational missiles of a long-range missile defense system in Europe, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §223(e), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4169.

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title II, §233, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4393, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(e)(3), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4374, prohibited the expenditure of Department of Defense funds for a long-range missile defense system in Europe unless the host nation ratified a missile defense basing agreement, and required a further certification to Congress by the Secretary of Defense.

Policy of the United States on Protection of the United States and its Allies Against Iranian Ballistic Missiles

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, §229, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 45, set forth as the policy of the United States to develop, along with its allies, a defense against Iranian ballistic missiles and to encourge the NATO alliance to accelerate its efforts to protect NATO territory against the threat of Iranian ballistic missiles.

Policy of the United States on Priorities in the Development, Testing, and Fielding of Missile Defense Capabilities

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §223, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130, set forth as the policy of the United States that the Department of Defense prioritize the development, testing, fielding, and improvement of effective near-term missile defense capabilities.

Plans for Test and Evaluation of Operational Capability of the Ballistic Missile Defense System

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, §234, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3174, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §225, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130, directed the operational and test components of the Department of Defense to prepare a plan to test the operational capability of each block of the Ballistic Missile Defense System, and directed the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation to submit a report to the congressional defense committees.

Integration of Patriot Advanced Capability-3 and Medium Extended Air Defense System Into Ballistic Missile Defense System

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §232, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1835, designated the Patriot Advanced Capability-3/Medium Extended Air Defense System air and missile defense program as an element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System, prohibited the Secretary of the Army from making any significant change to the baseline technical specifications or the baseline schedule for the PAC–3/MEADS program without the concurrence of the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, and directed the Secretary of Defense to establish procedures for determining the effect of a proposed change to the procurement quantity for the PAC–3/MEADS program and to submit to Congress a report describing such procedures not later than Feb. 1, 2005.

Baselines and Operational Test and Evaluation for Ballistic Missile Defense System

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §234, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1837, directed the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, to prescribe, not later than Feb. 1, 2005, criteria for operationally realistic testing of fieldable prototypes developed under the ballistic missile defense spiral development program, and to ensure that, not later than Oct. 1, 2005, any test of the ballistic missile defense system was conducted consistent with such criteria.

Report Requirements Relating to Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §221, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2484, related to annual submission of current performance goals and development baselines; research, development, test, and evaluation budget justification materials; and review of Missile Defense Agency criteria in relation to military requirements, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title II, §231(b)(3), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1339.

Provision of Information on Flight Testing of Ground-Based Midcourse National Missile Defense System

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §224, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2485, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to provide to the congressional defense committees information on the results of each flight test of the Ground-based Midcourse national missile defense system.

Missile Defense Agency Test Program

Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title II, §232(c)–(h), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1037–1039, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(2)(A), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486; Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title II, §221(b)(2), (c)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1419; Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title II, §233, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1836; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title II, §232, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3174; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §224, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2130; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, §225, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 41; Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title II, §231(a), (b), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4390, 4391; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(e)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4374; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title II, §232(c), title X, §1062(h), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1340, 1585, directed the Director of the Missile Defense Agency to ensure that critical technology for a missile defense program was successfully demonstrated before it entered into operational service, and directed the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation to conduct annual assessments of, and to report on, the program and the ballistic missile defense system.

[For termination, effective Dec. 31, 2021, of annual reporting provisions in section 232(h) of Pub. L. 107–107, formerly set out above, see section 1061 of Pub. L. 114–328, set out as a note under section 111 of this title.]

Missile Defense Testing Initiative

Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title II, §234, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1039, set out requirements for the testing infrastructure of the ballistic missile defense program, including specific requirements for ground-based mid-course interceptor systems for fiscal year 2002.

National Missile Defense Program

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title II, §231, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1661, provided that the Secretary of Defense was to ensure that the National Missile Defense Program was structured and programmed for funding so as to support a test, in fiscal year 1999, of an integrated national missile defense system that was representative of the national missile defense system architecture that could achieve initial operational capability in fiscal year 2003, and that not later than Feb. 15, 1998, the Secretary was to submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for the development and deployment of a national missile defense system that could achieve initial operational capability in fiscal year 2003.

Enhanced Cooperation Between National Nuclear Security Administration and Missile Defense Agency

Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [div. C, title XXXI, §3132], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A-455, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(3), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486, directed the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense to modify the memorandum of understanding entered into under section 3131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Pub. L. 105–85, formerly set out as a note below) to provide for jointly funded projects.

Pub. L. 105–85, div. C, title XXXI, §3131, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 2034, directed the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense to enter into a memorandum of understanding to improve and facilitate the use of the expertise of the national laboratories for the ballistic missile defense programs of the Department of Defense.

Ballistic Missile Defense Program

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, subtitle C, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 228–233, as amended by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title II, §236, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1665; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(6), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1041(c), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2646, known as the Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995, restructured the core theater missile defense program, directed the Secretary of Defense to prepare a plan to develop theater missile defense systems, prohibited the use of Department of Defense funds to implement an agreement between the United States and any independent state of the former Soviet Union that would establish a demarcation between theater missile defense systems and anti-ballistic missile systems or restrict United States theater missile defense systems, and repealed the Missile Defense Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title II, part C).

Compliance of Ballistic Missile Defense Systems and Components With ABM Treaty

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title II, §231, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2699, prohibited the use of funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for the development or testing of anti-ballisitic missile systems or components except as consistent with the ABM Treaty, limited the use of funds appropriated for the Brilliant Eyes program until the Secretary of Defense submitted a report to Congress on the compliance of that program with the ABM Treaty, and directed the Secretary of Defense to review the Navy Upper Tier program to determine its compliance with the ABM Treaty.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §234, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1595, contained findings of Congress, required compliance review, and limited funding pending submission of report, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(6), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 235.

Theater Missile Defense Master Plan

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §235, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1598, directed the Secretary of Defense to maximize the use of existing systems and technologies and promote joint use by the military departments of ballistic missile defense equipment in carrying out the Theater Missile Defense Initiative, to submit to Congress a TMD Master Plan, and to conduct a review of opportunities to streamline the weapon systems acquisition process applicable to the development, testing, and deployment of theater ballistic missile defenses.

Cooperation of United States Allies on Development of Tactical and Theater Missile Defenses

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §242(a)–(e), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1603–1605, stated congressional findings, required Secretary of Defense to develop plan to coordinate development and implementation of Theater Missile Defense programs of United States with theater missile defense programs of allies of United States, specified contents of such plan, required Secretary to submit to Congress report on such plan in both classified and unclassified versions, required Secretary to include in each annual Theater Missile Defense Initiative report to Congress report on actions taken to implement such plan, specified contents of such report, related to restriction on funds, stated sense of Congress that whenever United States deployed theater ballistic missile defenses to protect country that had not provided support for development of such defenses United States was to consider seeking reimbursement from such country to cover at least incremental cost of such deployment, and related to congressional encouragement of allies of United States to participate in cooperative Theater Missile Defense programs of United States and encouragement of participation by United States in cooperative theater missile defense efforts of allied nations, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(7), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 235.

Transfer of Follow-On Technology Programs

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §243, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1605, as amended by Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1073(e)(1)(E), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2658; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §225(b)(4)(B), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2486, provided that management and budget responsibility for research and development of any program to develop far-term follow-on technology relating to ballistic missile defense was to be provided through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or the appropriate military department, and directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a report identifying each program the Secretary had transferred from the Missile Defense Agency and the the agency or military department to which each such transfer was made.

Theater Missile Defense Initiative

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title II, §231, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2354, established the Theater Missile Defense Initiative to carry out all theater and tactical missile defense activities of the Department of Defense, effective 90 days after Oct. 23, 1992.

Missile Defense Program

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title II, part C, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1321, as amended by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title II, §234(a)–(d)(1), (e), (f), title X, §1053(1), (2), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2356, 2357, 2501; Pub. L. 103–35, title II, §§202(a)(2), 203(b)(1), May 31, 1993, 107 Stat. 101, 102; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §§232, 243(e), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1593, 1606; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title II, §233, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2700, specified that such provisions could be cited as the "Missile Defense Act of 1991", and related to missile defense goal of United States, implementation of goal, review of follow-on deployment options, definition of term "ABM Treaty", and interpretation of such provisions, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §238, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 233.

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior authorization act:

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title II, §221, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1511.

Stretchout of Major Defense Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title I, §117, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 1933, as amended by Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4321(i)(3), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 676, required Secretary of Defense to submit a stretchout impact statement for certain major defense acquisition programs at same time the budget for any fiscal year is submitted to Congress and to submit to Committees on Armed Services of Senate and House of Representatives, no later than Mar. 15, 1989, a report on feasibility and effect of establishing maximum production rates by December 1990 for certain major defense acquisition programs, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1041(c), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1885.

Prohibition of Certain Contracts With Foreign Entities

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §222, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1055, prohibited use of appropriated funds for certain Strategic Defense Initiative program contracts with foreign entities, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title II, §222, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4168.

Limitation on Transfer of Certain Military Technology to Independent States of Former Soviet Union

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §223, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1056, as amended by Pub. L. 103–199, title II, §203(a)(1), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2321, prohibited the transfer of technology developed with funds appropriated for the Ballistic Missile Defense Program to Russia or any other independent state of the former Soviet Union unless the President certified to Congress that such transfer was in the national interest and was to be made for the purpose of maintaining peace.

SDI Architecture To Require Human Decision Making

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §224, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1056, prohibited the Federal Government from funding or otherwise supporting the development of command and control systems for strategic defense in the boost or post-boost phase against ballistic missile threats that would permit such strategic defenses to initiate the directing of damaging or lethal fire except by affirmative human decision at an appropriate level of authority.

Prohibition on Deployment of Anti-Ballistic Missile System Unless Authorized by Law

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §226, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1057, prohibited Secretary of Defense from deploying anti-ballistic missile system unless such deployment was specifically authorized by law after Dec. 4, 1987, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(3), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 234.

Establishment of Federally Funded Research and Development Center To Support SDI Program

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §227, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1057, authorized the Secretary of Defense, using funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for the Strategic Defense Initiative program, to enter into a contract not to be awarded before Oct. 1, 1989, to provide for the establishment and operation of a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) to provide independent and objective technical support to the Strategic Defense Initiative program, and provided that no Federal funds could be provided to the new FFRDC after the end of the five-year period beginning on the date of the award of the first contract awarded.

Limitation on Establishment of Federally Funded Research and Development Center for Strategic Defense Initiative Program

Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title II, §213, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3841, prohibited the Secretary of Defense from obligating or expending any funds for the purpose of operating a Federally funded research and development center that was established for the support of the Strategic Defense Initiative Program after Nov. 14, 1986, unless the Secretary submitted to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with respect to such proposed center and funds were specifically authorized to be appropriated for such purpose in an Act other than an appropriations Act or a continuing resolution.

Should-Cost Analyses

Pub. L. 99–145, title IX, §915, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 688, as amended by Pub. L. 100–26, §11(a)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 288, required Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual report setting forth Secretary's plan for performance during next fiscal year of cost analyses for major defense acquisition programs for purpose of determining how much production of covered systems under such programs should cost, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1322(d)(2), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1672.

Requirement for Specific Authorization for Deployment of Strategic Defense Initiative System

Pub. L. 99–145, title II, §222, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 613, provided that strategic defense system developed as consequence of research, development, test, and evaluation conducted on Strategic Defense Initiative program could not be deployed in whole or in part unless President made a certain determination and certification to Congress and funding for deployment of such system was specifically authorized by legislation enacted after date of certification, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §253(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 234.

Annual Report on Ballistic Missile Defense Program

Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title II, §224, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1398, as amended by Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title II, §240, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1603; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title II, §244, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2463, provided that not later than March 15 of each year, the Secretary of Defense was to transmit to Congress a report on the programs and projects that constitute the Ballistic Missile Defense program and on any other program or project relating to defense against ballistic missiles, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1032(b)(1), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 751.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §231(a), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1059, provided that not later than Mar. 15, 1988 and Mar. 15, 1989, the Secretary of Defense was to transmit to Congress a report on the programs that constitute the Strategic Defense Initiative and on any other program relating to defense against ballistic missiles.

Pub. L. 98–525, title XI, §1102, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2580, required Secretary of Defense, at time of his annual budget presentation to Congress beginning with fiscal year 1986 and ending with fiscal year 1990, to transmit to Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Affairs of House of Representatives and Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations of Senate, a detailed report on programs that constitute SDI, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §231(b), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1060.

Plans for Management of Technical Data and Computer Capability Improvements

Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1252, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2610, directed Secretary of Defense, not later than one year after Oct. 19, 1984, to develop a plan for an improved system for the management of technical data relating to any major system of the Department of Defense and, not later than 5 years after Oct. 19, 1984, to complete implementation of the management plan, directed Comptroller General, not later than 18 months after Oct. 19, 1984, to transmit to Congress a report evaluating the plan developed, and directed Secretary of Defense, not later than 180 days after Oct. 19, 1984, to transmit to Congress a plan to improve substantially the computer capability of each of the military departments and of the Defense Logistics Agency to store and access rapidly data that is needed for the efficient procurement of supplies.

Consultation With Allies on Strategic Defense Initiative Program

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(h) [title VIII, §8104], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1904, 1942, conveyed the sense of Congress that the President should consult with other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Japan, and other appropriate allies concerning the research being conducted in the Strategic Defense Initiative program and that the Secretary of Defense should report the status of such consultations at the time of the submission of annual budget presentation materials for each fiscal year beginning after Sept. 30, 1984.

Antisatellite Weapons Test

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title II, §208, Dec. 4, 1986, 101 Stat. 1048, prohibited the Secretary of Defense, until Oct. 1, 1988, from carrying out a test of the Space Defense System (antisatellite weapon) involving the F–15 launched miniature homing vehicle against an object in space until the President certified to Congress that the Soviet Union had conducted, after Dec. 4, 1987, a test against an object in space of a dedicated antisatellite weapon.

Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title II, §231, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3847, prohibited the Secretary of Defense, until Oct. 1, 1987, from carrying out a test of the Space Defense System (anti-satellite weapon) against an object in space until the President certified to Congress that the Soviet Union had conducted, after Nov. 14, 1986, a test against an object in space of a dedicated anti-satellite weapon.

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior acts:

Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title XI, §1101], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-177, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title XI, §1101], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-177.

Pub. L. 99–190, §101(b) [title VIII, §8097], Dec. 19, 1985, 99 Stat. 1185, 1219.


Pub. L. 99–145, title II, §208(a), (b), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 610, prohibited the use of funds to test the miniature homing vehicle (MHV) anti-satellite warhead launched from an F–15 aircraft unless the President made a certification to Congress as provided in section 8100 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1985 (Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(h) [title VIII, §8100], formerly set out as a note below), and provided that no more than three such tests could be conducted before Oct. 1, 1986.

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(h) [title VIII, §8100], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1904, 1941, prohibited the use of funds to test the miniature homing vehicle (MHV) anti-satellite warhead launched from an F–15 aircraft unless the President made a certification to Congress that certain conditions had been satisfied, and provided that no more than three such tests could be conducted during fiscal year 1985.

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior authorization act:

Pub. L. 98–94, title XI, §1235, Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 695; as amended by Pub. L. 98–525, title II, §205, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2509.

East Coast Trident Base and MX Missile System Sites; Use of Funds Appropriated to Department of Defense; Assistance to Nearby Communities To Help Meet Costs of Increased Municipal Services

Pub. L. 96–418, title VIII, §802, Oct. 10, 1980, 94 Stat. 1775, as amended by Pub. L. 97–99, title IX, §904(b), Dec. 23, 1981, 95 Stat. 1382; Pub. L. 98–115, title VIII, §805, Oct. 11, 1983, 97 Stat. 785; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1322(f), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1672, authorized the Secretary of Defense to assist communities located near MX Missile System sites and the East Coast Trident Base, and the States in which such communities were located, in meeting the increased costs of municipal services and facilities resulting from the construction and operation of the MX Missile System or the East Coast Trident Base.

MX Missile and Basing Mode

Pub. L. 96–342, title II, §202, Sept. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1079, directed the Secretary of Defense to proceed with the development of the MX missile and a Multiple Protective Structure (MPS) basing mode in order to achieve an Initial Operational Capability not later than Dec. 31, 1986.

Development of MX Missile System

Pub. L. 96–29, title II, §202, June 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 79, directed the Secretary of Defense to proceed with the development of the Multiple Protective Structure (MPS) system concurrently with the development of the MX missile, unless and until the Secretary of Defense certified to the Congress that an alternative basing mode was militarily or technologically superior to, and was more cost effective than, the MPS system or the President informed the Congress that in his view the MPS system was not consistent with United States national security interests.

Reports to Congress of Acquisitions for Major Defense Systems

Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §811, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 539, as amended by Pub. L. 96–107, title VIII, §809, Nov. 9, 1979, 93 Stat. 815; Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §917(e), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1131, which required reports to Congress respecting acquisitions of major defense systems, including total program acquisition unit costs, was repealed by Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1107(b), Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 746, effective Jan. 1, 1983, as provided in section 1107(c) of Pub. L. 97–252, set out as an Effective Date note under section 2432 of this title. See sections 2432 and 2433 of this title.

Trident Support Site, Bangor, Washington; Financial Aid to Local Communities; Reports

Pub. L. 93–552, title VI, §608, Dec. 27, 1974, 88 Stat. 1763, authorized the Secretary of Defense to assist communities located near the TRIDENT Support Site in Bangor, Washington, in meeting the increased costs of municipal services and facilities resulting from the construction and operation of the TRIDENT Weapon System, and directed the Secretary to transmit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives semiannual reports on such assistance provided during the preceding six-month period.

§2431a. Acquisition strategy

(a) Acquisition Strategy Required.—There shall be an acquisition strategy for each major defense acquisition program, each major automated information system, and each major system approved by a milestone decision authority.

(b) Responsible Official.—For each acquisition strategy required by subsection (a), the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program, is responsible for issuing and maintaining the requirements for—

(1) the content of the strategy; and

(2) the review and approval process for the strategy.


(c) Considerations.—(1) In issuing requirements for the content of an acquisition strategy for a major defense acquisition program, major automated information system, or major system, the Under Secretary, or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program, shall ensure that—

(A) the strategy clearly describes the proposed top-level business and technical management approach for the program or system, in sufficient detail to allow the milestone decision authority to assess the viability of the proposed approach, the method of implementing laws and policies, and program objectives;

(B) the strategy contains a clear explanation of how the strategy is designed to be implemented with available resources, such as time, funding, and management capacity;

(C) the strategy is tailored to address program requirements and constraints; and

(D) the strategy considers the items listed in paragraph (2).


(2) Each strategy shall, where appropriate, consider the following:

(A) An approach that delivers required capability in increments, each depending on available mature technology, and that recognizes up front the need for future capability improvements.

(B) Acquisition approach, including industrial base considerations in accordance with section 2440 of this title.

(C) Risk management, including such methods as competitive prototyping at the system, subsystem, or component level.

(D) Business strategy, including measures to ensure competition at the system and subsystem level throughout the life-cycle of the program or system in accordance with section 2337 of this title.

(E) Contracting strategy, including—

(i) contract type and how the type selected relates to level of program risk in each acquisition phase;

(ii) how the plans for the program or system to reduce risk enable the use of fixed-price elements in subsequent contracts and the timing of the use of those fixed price elements;

(iii) market research; and

(iv) consideration of small business participation.


(F) Intellectual property strategy in accordance with section 2320 of this title.

(G) International involvement, including foreign military sales and cooperative opportunities, in accordance with section 2350a of this title.

(H) Multiyear procurement in accordance with section 2306b of this title.

(I) Integration of current intelligence assessments into the acquisition process.

(J) Requirements related to logistics, maintenance, and sustainment in accordance with sections 2464 and 2466 of this title.


(d) Review.—(1) The milestone decision authority shall review and approve, as appropriate, the acquisition strategy for a major defense acquisition program, major automated information system, or major system at each of the following times:

(A) Milestone A approval.

(B) The decision to release the request for proposals for development of the program or system.

(C) Milestone B approval.

(D) Each subsequent milestone.

(E) Review of any decision to enter into full-rate production.

(F) When there has been—

(i) a significant change to the cost of the program or system;

(ii) a critical change to the cost of the program or system;

(iii) a significant change to the schedule of the program or system; or

(iv) a significant change to the performance of the program or system.


(G) Any other time considered relevant by the milestone decision authority.


(2) If the milestone decision authority revises an acquisition strategy for a program or system because of a change described in paragraph (1)(F), the milestone decision authority shall provide notice of the revision to the congressional defense committees.

(e) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) The term "major defense acquisition program" has the meaning provided in section 2430 of this title.

(2) The term "major system" has the meaning provided in section 2302(5) of this title.

(3) The term "Milestone A approval" means a decision to enter into technology maturation and risk reduction pursuant to guidance prescribed by the Secretary of Defense for the management of Department of Defense acquisition programs.

(4) The term "Milestone B approval" has the meaning provided in section 2366(e)(7) of this title.

(5) The term "milestone decision authority", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, major automated information system, or major system, means the official within the Department of Defense designated with the overall responsibility and authority for acquisition decisions for the program or system, including authority to approve entry of the program or system into the next phase of the acquisition process.

(6) The term "management capacity", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, major automated information system, or major system, means the capacity to manage the program or system through the use of highly qualified organizations and personnel with appropriate experience, knowledge, and skills.

(7) The term "significant change to the cost", with respect to a major defense acquisition program or major system, means a significant cost growth threshold, as that term is defined in section 2433(a)(4) of this title.

(8) The term "critical change to the cost", with respect to a major defense acquisition program or major system, means a critical cost growth threshold, as that term is defined in section 2433(a)(5) of this title.

(9) The term "significant change to the schedule", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, major automated information system, or major system, means any schedule delay greater than six months in a reported event.

(Added Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(1), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 897; amended Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §848, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2292; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title X, §1081(a)(39), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1596.)

Amendments

2017—Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 115–91 inserted "(1)" before "The milestone".

2016—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 114–328, §848(1), in introductory provisions, inserted ", or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program," after "the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 114–328, §848(2)(A), in introductory provisions, inserted ", or the milestone decision authority, when the milestone decision authority is the service acquisition executive of the military department that is managing the program," after "the Under Secretary".

Subsec. (c)(2)(C). Pub. L. 114–328, §848(2)(B), struck out ", in accordance with section 2431b of this title" before period at end.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 114–328, §848(3), substituted "The" for "(1) Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, the" and, in par. (2), inserted "because of a change described in paragraph (1)(F)" after "for a program or system".

§2431b. Risk management and mitigation in major defense acquisition programs and major systems

(a) Requirement.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the initial acquisition strategy (required under section 2431a of this title) approved by the milestone decision authority and any subsequent revisions include the following:

(1) A comprehensive approach for managing and mitigating risk (including technical, cost, and schedule risk) during each of the following periods or when determined appropriate by the milestone decision authority:

(A) The period preceding engineering manufacturing development, or its equivalent.

(B) The period preceding initial production.

(C) The period preceding full-rate production.


(2) An identification of the major sources of risk in each of the periods listed in paragraph (1) to improve programmatic decisionmaking and appropriately minimize and manage program concurrency.


(b) Approach to Manage and Mitigate Risks.—The comprehensive approach to manage and mitigate risk included in the acquisition strategy for purposes of subsection (a)(1) shall, at a minimum, include consideration of risk mitigation techniques such as the following:

(1) Prototyping (including prototyping at the system, subsystem, or component level and competitive prototyping, where appropriate) and, if prototyping at either the system, subsystem, or component level is not used, an explanation of why it is not appropriate.

(2) Modeling and simulation, the areas that modeling and simulation will assess, and identification of the need for development of any new modeling and simulation tools in order to support the comprehensive strategy.

(3) Technology demonstrations and decision points for disciplined transition of planned technologies into programs or the selection of alternative technologies.

(4) Multiple design approaches.

(5) Alternative designs, including any designs that meet requirements but do so with reduced performance.

(6) Phasing of program activities or related technology development efforts in order to address high-risk areas as early as feasible.

(7) Manufacturability and industrial base availability.

(8) Independent risk element assessments by outside subject matter experts.

(9) Schedule and funding margins for identified risks.


(c) Preference for Prototyping.—To the maximum extent practicable and consistent with the economical use of available financial resources, the milestone decision authority for each major defense acquisition program shall ensure that the acquisition strategy for the program provides for—

(1) the production of competitive prototypes at the system or subsystem level before Milestone B approval; or

(2) if the production of competitive prototypes is not practicable, the production of single prototypes at the system or subsystem level.


(d) Definitions.—

(1) Concurrency.—The term "concurrency" means, with respect to an acquisition strategy, the combination or overlap of program phases or activities.

(2) Major defense acquisition program and major system.—The terms "major defense acquisition program" and "major system" have the meanings provided in section 2431a of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §822(a)(1), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 900; amended Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title X, §1081(a)(7), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2417.)

Amendments

2016—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 114–328 amended subsec. (d) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (d) defined terms "major defense acquisition program" and "major system".

§2432. Selected Acquisition Reports

(a) In this section:

(1) The term "program acquisition unit cost", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, means the amount equal to (A) the total cost for development and procurement of, and system-specific military construction for, the acquisition program, divided by (B) the number of fully-configured end items to be produced for the acquisition program.

(2) The term "procurement unit cost", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, means the amount equal to (A) the total of all funds programmed to be available for obligation for procurement for the program, divided by (B) the number of fully-configured end items to be procured.

(3) The term "major contract", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, means each of the six largest prime, associate, or Government-furnished equipment contracts under the program that is in excess of $40,000,000 and that is not a firm, fixed price contract.

(4) The term "full life-cycle cost", with respect to a major defense acquisition program, means all costs of development, procurement, military construction, and operations and support, without regard to funding source or management control.


(b)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress at the end of each fiscal-year quarter a report on current major defense acquisition programs. Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), each such report shall include a status report on each defense acquisition program that at the end of such quarter is a major defense acquisition program. Reports under this section shall be known as Selected Acquisition Reports.

(2) A status report on a major defense acquisition program need not be included in the Selected Acquisition Report for the second, third, or fourth quarter of a fiscal year if such a report was included in a previous Selected Acquisition Report for that fiscal year and during the period since that report there has been—

(A) less than a 15 percent increase in program acquisition unit cost and current procurement unit cost for the program (or for each designated subprogram under the program); and

(B) less than a six-month delay in any program schedule milestone shown in the Selected Acquisition Report.


(3)(A) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement for submission of Selected Acquisition Reports for a program for a fiscal year if—

(i) the program has not entered system development and demonstration;

(ii) a reasonable cost estimate has not been established for such program; and

(iii) the system configuration for such program is not well defined.


(B) The Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a written notification of each waiver under subparagraph (A) for a program for a fiscal year not later than 60 days before the President submits the budget to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31 in that fiscal year.

(c)(1) Each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter for a fiscal year shall include—

(A) the same information, in detailed and summarized form, as is provided in reports submitted under section 2431 of this title;

(B) for each major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram included in the report—

(i) the Baseline Estimate (as that term is defined in section 2433(a)(2) of this title), along with the associated risk and sensitivity analysis of that estimate;

(ii) the original Baseline Estimate (as that term is defined in section 2435(d)(1) of this title), along with the associated risk and sensitivity analysis of that estimate;

(iii) if the original Baseline Estimate was adjusted or revised pursuant to section 2435(d)(2) of this title, such adjusted or revised estimate, along with the associated risk and sensitivity analysis of that estimate; and

(iv) the primary risk parameters associated with the current procurement cost for the program (as that term is used in section 2432(e)(4) of this title);


(C) a summary of the history of significant developments from the date each major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram included in the report was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report and program highlights since the last Selected Acquisition Report;

(D) the significant schedule and technical risks for each such program or subprogram, identified at each major milestone and as of the quarter for which the current report is submitted;

(E) the current program acquisition cost and program acquisition unit cost for each such program or subprogram included in the report and the history of those costs from the December 2001 reporting period to the end of the quarter for which the current report is submitted;

(F) the current procurement unit cost for each such program or subprogram included in the report and the history of that cost from the December 2001 reporting period to the end of the quarter for which the current report is submitted;

(G) for each major defense acquisition program that receives Milestone B approval after January 1, 2019, a brief summary description of the key elements of the modular open system approach as defined in section 2446a of this title or, if a modular open system approach was not used, the rationale for not using such an approach; and

(H) such other information as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.


(2) Each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be designed to provide to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives the information such Committees need to perform their oversight functions. Whenever the Secretary of Defense proposes to make changes in the content of a Selected Acquisition Report, the Secretary shall submit a notice of the proposed changes to such committees. The changes shall be considered approved by the Secretary, and may be incorporated into the report, only after the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the notice is received by those committees.

(3) In addition to the material required by paragraphs (1) and (2), each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall include the following:

(A) A full life-cycle cost analysis for each major defense acquisition program and each designated major subprogram included in the report that is in the system development and demonstration stage or has completed that stage. The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that this subparagraph is implemented in a uniform manner, to the extent practicable, throughout the Department of Defense.

(B) If the system that is included in that major defense acquisition program has an antecedent system, a full life-cycle cost analysis for that system.


(4) Selected Acquisition Reports for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be known as comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Reports.

(d)(1) Each Selected Acquisition Report for the second, third, and fourth quarters of a fiscal year shall include—

(A) with respect to each major defense acquisition program that was included in the most recent comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report, the information described in subsection (e); and

(B) with respect to each major defense acquisition program that was not included in the most recent comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report, the information described in subsection (c).


(2) Selected Acquisition Reports for the second, third, and fourth quarters of a fiscal year shall be known as Quarterly Selected Acquisition Reports.

(e) Information to be included under this subsection in a Quarterly Selected Acquisition Report with respect to a major defense acquisition program is as follows:

(1) The quantity of items to be purchased under the program.

(2) The program acquisition cost.

(3) The program acquisition unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program).

(4) The current procurement cost for the program.

(5) The current procurement unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program).

(6) The reasons for any change in program acquisition cost, program acquisition unit cost, procurement cost, or procurement unit cost or in program schedule from the previous Selected Acquisition Report.

(7) The reasons for any significant changes (from the previous Selected Acquisition Report) in the total program cost for development and procurement of the software component of the program or subprogram, schedule milestones for the software component of the program or subprogram, or expected performance for the software component of the program or subprogram that are known, expected, or anticipated by the program manager.

(8) The major contracts under the program and designated major subprograms under the program and the reasons for any cost or schedule variances under those contracts since the last Selected Acquisition Report.

(9) Program highlights since the last Selected Acquisition Report.


(f) Each comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report shall be submitted within 30 days after the date on which the President transmits the Budget to Congress for the following fiscal year, and each Quarterly Selected Acquisition Report shall be submitted within 45 days after the end of the fiscal-year quarter.

(g) The requirements of this section with respect to a major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram shall cease to apply after 90 percent of the items to be delivered to the United States under the program or subprogram (shown as the total quantity of items to be purchased under the program or subprogram in the most recent Selected Acquisition Report) have been delivered or 90 percent of planned expenditures under the program or subprogram have been made.

(h)(1) Total program reporting under this section shall apply to a major defense acquisition program when funds have been appropriated for such program and the Secretary of Defense has decided to proceed to system development and demonstration of such program. Reporting may be limited to the development program as provided in paragraph (2) before a decision is made by the Secretary of Defense to proceed to system development and demonstration if the Secretary notifies the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives of the intention to submit a limited report under this subsection not less than 15 days before a report is due under this section.

(2) A limited report under this subsection shall include the following:

(A) The same information, in detail and summarized form, as is provided in reports submitted under subsections (b)(1) and (b)(3) of section 2431 of this title.

(B) Reasons for any change in the development cost and schedule.

(C) The major contracts under the development program and designated major subprograms under the program and the reasons for any cost or schedule variances under those contracts since the last Selected Acquisition Report.

(D) Program highlights since the last Selected Acquisition Report.

(E) Other information as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.


(3) The submission requirements for a limited report under this subsection shall be the same as for quarterly Selected Acquisition Reports for total program reporting.

(Added Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1107(a)(1), Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 739, §139a; amended Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1242(a), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2606; Pub. L. 99–145, title XII, §1201, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 715; renumbered §2432 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(5), 110(d)(13), (g)(7), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 995, 1003, 1004; Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §961(a)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-175, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §961(a)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-175; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §961(a), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3955, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(3), (k)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 279, 284; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XII, §1233(a)(1), title XIII, §1314(a)(1), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1161, 1175; Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §811(c), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1493; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §§1407(a)–(c), 1484(f)(4), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1681, 1717; Pub. L. 102–25, title VII, §701(f)(3), Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 115; Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VIII, §801(b)(2), title X, §1061(a)(14), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1412, 1473; Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §817(c), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2455; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3002(a)(1), (b)–(h), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3328, 3329; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1502(a)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 502; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VIII, §806, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2606; Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title VIII, §841(c), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1843; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(1), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title VIII, §821(a), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1181; Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1045(a)(6), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1612; Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §801(b)(2), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2004; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title X, §1071(g)(10), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2402; Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §811(b), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4521; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §812, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1491; Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title VIII, §812(a), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title X, §1071(g)(2), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3511; Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §§805(b), 841, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2255, 2288.)

Codification

Pub. L. 99–591 is a corrected version of Pub. L. 99–500.

Amendments

2016—Subsec. (c)(1)(G), (H). Pub. L. 114–328, §805(b), added subpar. (G) and redesignated former subpar. (G) as (H).

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 114–328, §841, substituted "30" for "45" before "days after the date".

2014—Subsec. (c)(1)(E). Pub. L. 113–291, §1071(g)(2), amended Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(3)(B). See 2013 Amendment note below.

2013—Subsec. (c)(1)(B) to (D). Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(2), added subpars. (B) to (D). Former subpars. (B) to (D) redesignated (E) to (G), respectively.

Subsec. (c)(1)(E). Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(3)(B), as amended by Pub. L. 113–291, §1071(g)(2), inserted "program acquisition cost and" after "current" the first place appearing.

Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(1), (3)(A), (C), (D), redesignated subpar. (B) as (E) and substituted "such program or subprogram" for "major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram", "those costs" for "that cost", and "December 2001 reporting period" for "date the program or subprogram was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (c)(1)(F). Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(1), (4), redesignated subpar. (C) as (F) and substituted "such program or subprogram" for "major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram" and "December 2001 reporting period" for "date the program or subprogram was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (c)(1)(G). Pub. L. 113–66, §812(a)(1), redesignated subpar. (D) as (G).

2011—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 112–81 substituted "45 days after the date" for "60 days after the date".

2008—Subsec. (b)(2)(A). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(1), inserted "for the program (or for each designated subprogram under the program)" after "procurement unit cost".

Subsec. (c)(1)(B). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(2)(A), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "for each major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "the program".

Subsec. (c)(1)(C). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(2)(B), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "the program".

Subsec. (c)(3)(A). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(2)(C), inserted "and each designated major subprogram" after "for each major defense acquisition program".

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(3)(A), inserted "for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program)" before period at end.

Subsec. (e)(5). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(3)(B), inserted "(or for each designated major subprogram under the program)" before period at end.

Subsec. (e)(7). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(3)(C), inserted "or subprogram" after "of the program" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (e)(8). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(3)(D), inserted "and designated major subprograms under the program" after "the program".

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(4), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "the program" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (h)(2)(C). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(b)(5), inserted "and designated major subprograms under the program" after "the development program".

2006—Subsec. (e)(7) to (9). Pub. L. 109–364 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 108–375, §801(b)(2). See 2004 Amendment note below.

2004—Subsec. (e)(7) to (9). Pub. L. 108–375, §801(b)(2), as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, added par. (7) and redesignated former pars. (7) and (8) as (8) and (9), respectively.

2003—Subsec. (h)(1). Pub. L. 108–136 inserted "program" after "for such" in first sentence.

2001—Subsecs. (b)(3)(A)(i), (c)(3)(A), (h)(1). Pub. L. 107–107 substituted "system development and demonstration" for "engineering and manufacturing development" wherever appearing.

1999—Subsecs. (b)(3)(B), (c)(2), (h)(1). Pub. L. 106–65 substituted "and the Committee on Armed Services" for "and the Committee on National Security".

1997—Subsec. (h)(2)(D) to (F). Pub. L. 105–85 redesignated subpars. (E) and (F) as (D) and (E), respectively, and struck out former subpar. (D) which read as follows: "The completion status of the development program expressed—

"(i) as the percentage that the number of years for which funds have been appropriated for the development program is of the number of years for which it is planned that funds will be appropriated for the program; and

"(ii) as the percentage that the amount of funds that have been appropriated for the development program is of the total amount of funds which it is planned will be appropriated for the program."

1996—Subsec. (b)(3)(B). Pub. L. 104–106 substituted "Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives" for "Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 104–201, §806(1), struck out "and" at end of subpar. (B), added subpar. (C), and redesignated former subpar. (C) as (D).

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 104–106 substituted "Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives" for "Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives".

Subsec. (e)(8), (9). Pub. L. 104–201, §806(2), redesignated par. (9) as (8) and struck out former par. (8) which read as follows: "The completion status of the program (A) expressed as the percentage that the number of years for which funds have been appropriated for the program is of the number of years for which it is planned that funds will be appropriated for the program, and (B) expressed as the percentage that the amount of funds that have been appropriated for the program is of the total amount of funds which it is planned will be appropriated for the program."

Subsec. (h)(1). Pub. L. 104–106 substituted "Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives" for "Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives".

1994—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(a)(1), struck out "for a fiscal year, reduced by the amount of funds programmed to be available for obligation for such fiscal year for advanced procurement for such program in any subsequent year and increased by any amount appropriated in years before such fiscal year for advanced procurement for such program in such fiscal year" after "procurement for the program" in cl. (A), "with such funds during such fiscal year" after "procured" in cl. (B), and last sentence which read as follows: "If for any fiscal year the funds appropriated, or the number of fully-configured end items to be purchased, differ from those programmed, the procurement unit cost shall be revised to reflect the appropriated amounts and quantities."

Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(b), inserted before period at end "and that is not a firm, fixed price contract".

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(c), substituted "means all costs of development, procurement, military construction, and operations and support, without regard to funding source or management control." for "has the meaning given the term 'cost of the program' in section 2434(b)(2) of this title."

Subsec. (b)(3)(A)(i). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(h)(1), struck out "full scale development or" before "engineering".

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(d), substituted second sentence for former second sentence which read as follows: "The Secretary of Defense may approve changes in the content of the Selected Acquisition Report if the Secretary provides such Committees with written notification of such changes at least 60 days before the date of the report that incorporates the changes."

Subsec. (c)(3)(A). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(f)(2), (h)(2), substituted "engineering and manufacturing" for "full-scale engineering" and inserted at end "The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that this subparagraph is implemented in a uniform manner, to the extent practicable, throughout the Department of Defense."

Subsec. (c)(3)(C). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(e), struck out subpar. (C) which required production information for each major defense acquisition program included in report that is produced at rate of six units or more per year.

Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(f)(1), struck out par. (5) which read as follows: "The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that paragraph (4) of subsection (a) is implemented in a uniform manner, to the extent practicable, throughout the Department of Defense."

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(g), struck out last sentence which read as follows: "A preliminary report shall be submitted for each annual Selected Acquisition Report within 30 days of the date on which the President submits the Budget to Congress."

Subsec. (h)(1). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(h)(3), substituted "engineering and manufacturing" for "full-scale engineering" in two places.

1992—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(c)(1), added par. (3) and struck out former par. (3) which read as follows: "The term 'major contract', with respect to a major defense acquisition program, means (A) each prime contract under the program, and (B) each associate or Government-furnished equipment contract under the program that is one of the six largest contracts under the program in dollar amount and that is in excess of $40,000,000."

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(c)(2), added par. (3) and struck out former par. (3) which read as follows: "A status report on a particular major defense acquisition program need not be included in any Selected Acquisition Report with the approval of the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives."

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(c)(3), added sentence at end and struck out former last sentence which read as follows: "A change in the content of the Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of a fiscal year from the content as reported for the first quarter of the previous fiscal year may not be made until appropriate officials of the Department of Defense consult with such Committees regarding the proposed changes."

Subsec. (c)(3)(C)(i) to (vii). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(c)(4), added cls. (i) to (vii) and struck out former cls. (i) to (vii) which contained similar specification and estimation requirements.

1991—Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 102–190, §801(b)(2), substituted "2434(b)(2)" for "2434(c)(2)".

Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 102–25 substituted "subsection (a)" for "section 2432(a) of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(2),".

Subsec. (h)(2)(A). Pub. L. 102–190, §1061(a)(14), substituted "(b)(1) and (b)(3)" for "(c)(1) and (c)(3)".

1990—Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 101–510, §1407(b), added par. (4).

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(f)(4)(A), substituted "include the following:" for "include—" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (c)(3)(A). Pub. L. 101–510, §1407(a), amended subpar. (A) generally. Prior to amendment, subpar. (A) read as follows: "a full life-cycle cost analysis for each major defense acquisition program included in the report that—

"(i) is in the full-scale engineering development stage or has completed that stage; and

"(ii) was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report for a quarter after the first quarter of fiscal year 1985;".

Subsec. (c)(3)(B). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(f)(4)(B), (C), substituted "If" for "if" and a period for "; and".

Subsec. (c)(3)(C). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(f)(4)(B), (D), substituted "Production" for "production" and "program) the following:" for "program)—" in introductory provisions, "Specification" for "specification" in cls. (i) to (iv), "Estimation" for "estimation" in cls. (v) to (vii), a period for a semicolon in cls. (i) to (v), and a period for "; and" in cl. (vi).

Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 101–510, §1407(c), added par. (5).

1989—Subsec. (b)(2)(A). Pub. L. 101–189 substituted "15 percent increase in program acquisition unit cost and current procurement unit cost" for "5 percent change in total program cost".

1987Pub. L. 100–180, §1314(a)(1), made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5). See 1986 Amendment note below.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(3)(A), as amended by Pub. L. 100–180, §1233(a)(1), redesignated pars. (2) to (4) as (1) to (3), respectively, and struck out former par. (1) which defined "major defense acquisition program".

Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(2)(A), inserted "The term" after each par. designation and struck out uppercase letter of first word after first quotation marks in each par. and substituted lowercase letter.

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(3)(B), substituted "programmed" for "programed" wherever appearing.

1986Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5), as amended by Pub. L. 100–180, §1314(a)(1), renumbered section 139a of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 99–433, §110(d)(13), struck out "Oversight of cost growth in major programs:" before "Selected Acquisition Reports" in section catchline.

Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(1)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(1), amended par. (3) identically, inserting provision that if for any fiscal year the funds appropriated, or the number of fully-configured end items to be purchased, differ from those programmed, the procurement unit cost shall be revised to reflect the appropriated amounts and quantities.

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(2)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(2), amended par. (4) identically, substituting "$40,000,000" for "$2,000,000".

Subsec. (b)(2)(B). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(3)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(3), amended subpar. (B) identically, substituting "six-month" for "three-month".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 99–433, §110(g)(7), substituted "section 2431" for "section 139".

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(4)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(4), amended subsec. (c) identically, enacting a new par. (2) and striking out former par. (2) which read as follows: "Each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be prepared and submitted with the same content as was used for the Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of fiscal year 1984."

Subsec. (c)(3)(C). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(5)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(5), amended subpar. (C) identically, inserting in provision preceding cl. (i) "that is produced at a rate of six units or more per year" after "report".

Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(a)(6)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(a)(6), amended section identically, adding subsec. (h).

1985—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 99–145 amended subsec. (c) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (c) read as follows: "Each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall include (1) the same information, in detailed and summarized form, as is provided in reports submitted under section 139 of this title, (2) the current program acquisition unit cost for each major defense acquisition program included in the report and the history of that cost from the date the program was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report to the end of the quarter for which the current report is submitted, and (3) such other information as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate. Selected Acquisition Reports for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be known as comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Reports."

1984—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(a)(1), substituted "funds programed to be available for obligation for procurement" for "procurement funds appropriated" and "of funds programed to be available for obligation" for "of funds appropriated".

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(a)(2), inserted "and that is in excess of $2,000,000".

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(a)(3), substituted "during the period since that report there has been— (A) less than a 5 percent change in total program cost; and (B) less than a three-month delay in any program schedule milestone shown in the Selected Acquisition Report" for "there has been no change in program cost, performance, or schedule since the most recent such report".

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(a)(4), substituted: "60" for "30", "45" for "30, and "A preliminary report shall be submitted for each annual Selected Acquisition Report within 30 days of the date on which the President submits the Budget to Congress" for "If a preliminary report is submitted for the comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report in any year, the final report shall be submitted within 15 days after the submission of the preliminary report".

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(a)(5), added subsec. (g).

Effective Date of 2014 Amendment

Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title X, §1071(g), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3511, provided that the amendment made by section 1071(g)(2) is effective as of Dec. 26, 2013, and as if included in Pub. L. 113–66 as enacted.

Effective Date of 2013 Amendment; Phase-In of Additional Information Requirements

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title VIII, §812(b), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 807, provided that: "Section 2432(c)(1) of title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a), shall apply to Selected Acquisition Reports after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 26, 2013] as follows:

"(1) For the December 2014 reporting period, to Selected Acquisition Reports for five major defense acquisition programs or designated major subprograms, as determined by the Secretary.

"(2) For the December 2019 reporting period and each reporting period thereafter, to Selected Acquisition Reports for all major defense acquisition programs or designated major subprograms."

Effective Date of 2006 Amendment

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title X, §1071(g), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2402, provided that the amendment made by section 1071(g)(10) is effective as of Oct. 28, 2004, and as if included in Pub. L. 108–375 as enacted.

Effective Date of 2004 Amendment

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §801(c), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2004, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [amending this section and section 2433 of this title] shall take effect on the date occurring 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2004], and shall apply with respect to reports due to be submitted to Congress on or after such date."

Effective Date of 1990 Amendment

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1407(d), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1681, as amended by Pub. L. 102–25, title VII, §704(a)(8), Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 119, provided that: "The amendments made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall take effect with respect to Selected Acquisition Reports submitted under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, after December 31, 1991."

Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by section 1233(a)(1) of Pub. L. 100–180 applicable as if included in enactment of the Defense Technical Corrections Act of 1987, Pub. L. 100–26, see section 1233(c) of Pub. L. 100–180, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

Amendment by section 1314(a)(1) of Pub. L. 100–180 applicable as if included in enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–433, see section 1314(e) of Pub. L. 100–180, set out as a note under section 743 of this title.

Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §961(c)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-176, Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §961(c)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-176, and Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §961(c), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3956, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273, provided that: "The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) [amending this section and section 2433 of this title] shall take effect on January 1, 1987."

Effective Date

Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1107(c), Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 746, provided that: "Sections 139a and 139b [now 2432 and 2433] of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect on January 1, 1983, and shall apply beginning with respect to reports for the first quarter of fiscal year 1983. The repeal made by subsection (b) [repealing section 811 of Pub. L. 94–106, formerly set out as a Reports to Congress of Acquisitions for Major Defense Systems note under section 2431 of this title] shall take effect on January 1, 1983."

Termination of Reporting Requirements

For termination, effective Dec. 31, 2021, of provisions in this section requiring submittal of reports to Congress, see section 1051(x) of Pub. L. 115–91, set out as a note under section 113 of this title.

Annual Reporting

Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §847(b), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2292, provided that: "The Secretary of Defense shall include in each comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report submitted under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, a listing of all programs or projects being developed or procured under the exceptions to the definition of major defense acquisition program set forth in paragraph (2) of section 2430(a) of United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(1)(C) of this section."

Selected Acquisition Reports for Certain Programs

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title I, §127, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1044, as amended by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §817(a), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2454, provided that:

"(a) SAR Coverage for ATB, ACM, and ATA Programs.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, a Selected Acquisition Report with respect to each program referred to in subsection (b), notwithstanding that such a report would not otherwise be required under section 2432 of title 10, United States Code.

"(b) Covered Programs.—Subsection (a) applies to the Advanced Technology Bomber program, the Advanced Cruise Missile program, and the Advanced Tactical Aircraft program.

"(c) Selected Acquisition Report Defined.—As used in subsection (a), the term 'Selected Acquisition Report' means a report containing the information referred to in section 2432 of title 10, United States Code."

Sense of Congress on Preparation of Certain Economic Impact and Employment Information Concerning New Acquisition Programs

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VIII, §825, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1134, related to the sense of Congress on preparation of certain economic impact and employment information concerning new acquisition programs, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104–106, div. D, title XLIII, §4321(i)(4), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 676.

Duration of Assignment of Program Managers for Major Programs

Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1243, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2609, as amended by Pub. L. 100–26, §11(a)(1), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 288, which related to waivable minimum four-year tour of duty of program managers for major defense acquisition programs, was repealed and restated in section 2435(c) of this title by Pub. L. 100–370, §1(i), July 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 848.

§2433. Unit cost reports

(a) In this section:

(1) Except as provided in section 2430a(d) of this title, the terms "program acquisition unit cost", "procurement unit cost", and "major contract" have the same meanings as provided in section 2432(a) of this title.

(2) The term "Baseline Estimate", with respect to a unit cost report that is submitted under this section to the service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary concerned on a major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram, means the cost estimate included in the baseline description for the program or subprogram under section 2435 of this title.

(3) The term "procurement program" means a program for which funds for procurement are authorized to be appropriated in a fiscal year.

(4) The term "significant cost growth threshold" means the following:

(A) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram, a percentage increase in the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(i) at least 15 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; or

(ii) at least 30 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(B) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram that is a procurement program, a percentage increase in the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(i) at least 15 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; or

(ii) at least 30 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(5) The term "critical cost growth threshold" means the following:

(A) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram, a percentage increase in the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(i) at least 25 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; or

(ii) at least 50 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(B) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram that is a procurement program, a percentage increase in the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(i) at least 25 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; or

(ii) at least 50 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(6) The term "original Baseline Estimate" has the same meaning as provided in section 2435(d) of this title.


(b) The program manager for a major defense acquisition program (other than a program not required to be included in the Selected Acquisition Report for that quarter under section 2432(b)(3) of this title) shall, on a quarterly basis, submit to the service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary concerned a written report on the unit costs of the program (or of each designated major subprogram under the program). Each report shall be submitted not more than 30 calendar days after the end of that quarter. The program manager shall include in each such unit cost report the following information with respect to the program (as of the last day of the quarter for which the report is made):

(1) The program acquisition unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program).

(2) In the case of a procurement program, the procurement unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program).

(3) Any cost variance or schedule variance in a major contract under the program since the contract was entered into.

(4) Any changes from program schedule milestones or program performances reflected in the baseline description established under section 2435 of this title that are known, expected, or anticipated by the program manager.

(5) Any significant changes in the total program cost for development and procurement of the software component of the program or subprogram, schedule milestones for the software component of the program or subprogram, or expected performance for the software component of the program or subprogram that are known, expected, or anticipated by the program manager.


(c) If the program manager of a major defense acquisition program for which a unit cost report has previously been submitted under subsection (b) determines at any time during a quarter that there is reasonable cause to believe that the program acquisition unit cost for the program (or for a designated major subprogram under the program) or the procurement unit cost for the program (or for such a subprogram), as applicable, has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold; and if a unit cost report indicating an increase of such percentage or more has not previously been submitted to the service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary concerned, then the program manager shall immediately submit to such service acquisition executive a unit cost report containing the information, determined as of the date of the report, required under subsection (b).

(d)(1) When a unit cost report is submitted to the service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary concerned under this section with respect to a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program, the service acquisition executive shall determine whether the current program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold, or the critical cost growth threshold, for the program or subprogram.

(2) When a unit cost report is submitted to the service acquisition executive designated by the Secretary concerned under this section with respect to a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program that is a procurement program, the service acquisition executive, in addition to the determination under paragraph (1), shall determine whether the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold, or the critical cost growth threshold, for the program or subprogram.

(3) If, based upon the service acquisition executive's determination, the Secretary concerned determines that the current program acquisition unit cost has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold or critical cost growth threshold or that the procurement unit cost has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold or critical cost growth threshold, the Secretary shall notify Congress in writing of such determination and of the increase with respect to the program or subprogram concerned. In the case of a determination based on a quarterly report submitted in accordance with subsection (b), the Secretary shall submit the notification to Congress within 45 days after the end of the quarter. In the case of a determination based on a report submitted in accordance with subsection (c), the Secretary shall submit the notification to Congress within 45 days after the date of that report. The Secretary shall include in the notification the date on which the determination was made.

(e)(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), whenever the Secretary concerned determines under subsection (d) that the program acquisition unit cost or the procurement unit cost of a major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold for the program or subprogram, a Selected Acquisition Report shall be submitted to Congress for the first fiscal-year quarter ending on or after the date of the determination or for the fiscal-year quarter which immediately precedes the first fiscal-year quarter ending on or after that date. The report shall include the information described in section 2432(e) of this title and shall be submitted in accordance with section 2432(f) of this title.

(B) Whenever the Secretary makes a determination referred to in subparagraph (A) in the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram during the second quarter of a fiscal year and before the date on which the President transmits the budget for the following fiscal year to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, the Secretary is not required to file a Selected Acquisition Report under subparagraph (A) but shall include the information described in subsection (g) regarding that program or subprogram in the comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report submitted in that quarter.

(2) 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 shall take actions consistent with the requirements of section 2433a of this title.

(3) If a determination of an increase by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold is made by the Secretary under subsection (d) and a Selected Acquisition Report containing the information described in subsection (g) is not submitted to Congress under paragraph (1), or if a determination of an increase by a percentage equal to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold is made by the Secretary under subsection (d) and the certification of the Secretary of Defense is not submitted to Congress under paragraph (2), funds appropriated for military construction, for research, development, test, and evaluation, and for procurement may not be obligated for a major contract under the program. The prohibition on the obligation of funds for a major defense acquisition program shall cease to apply at the end of a period of 30 days of continuous session of Congress (as determined under section 8677(b)(2) of this title) beginning on the date—

(A) on which Congress receives the Selected Acquisition Report under paragraph (1) or (2)(B) with respect to that program, in the case of a determination of an increase by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold (as determined in subsection (d)); or

(B) on which Congress has received both the Selected Acquisition Report under paragraph (1) or (2)(B) and the certification of the Secretary of Defense under paragraph (2)(A) with respect to that program, in the case of an increase by a percentage equal to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold (as determined under subsection (d)).


(f) Any determination of a percentage increase under this section shall be stated in terms of constant base year dollars (as described in section 2430 of this title).

(g)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), each report under subsection (e) with respect to a major defense acquisition program shall include the following:

(A) The name of the major defense acquisition program.

(B) The date of the preparation of the report.

(C) The program phase as of the date of the preparation of the report.

(D) The estimate of the program acquisition cost for the program (and for each designated major subprogram under the program) as shown in the Selected Acquisition Report in which the program or subprogram was first included, expressed in constant base-year dollars and in current dollars.

(E) The current program acquisition cost for the program (and for each designated major subprogram under the program) in constant base-year dollars and in current dollars.

(F) A statement of the reasons for any increase in program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost for the program (or for any designated major subprogram under the program).

(G) The completion status of the program and each designated major subprogram under the program (i) expressed as the percentage that the number of years for which funds have been appropriated for the program or subprogram is of the number of years for which it is planned that funds will be appropriated for the program or subprogram, and (ii) expressed as the percentage that the amount of funds that have been appropriated for the program or subprogram is of the total amount of funds which it is planned will be appropriated for the program or subprogram.

(H) The fiscal year in which information on the program and each designated major subprogram under the program was first included in a Selected Acquisition Report (referred to in this paragraph as the "base year") and the date of that Selected Acquisition Report in which information on the program or subprogram was first included.

(I) The type of the Baseline Estimate that was included in the baseline description under section 2435 of this title and the date of the Baseline Estimate.

(J) The current change and the total change, in dollars and expressed as a percentage, in the program acquisition unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program), stated both in constant base-year dollars and in current dollars.

(K) The current change and the total change, in dollars and expressed as a percentage, in the procurement unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program), stated both in constant base-year dollars and in current dollars and the procurement unit cost for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program) for the succeeding fiscal year expressed in constant base-year dollars and in current year dollars.

(L) The quantity of end items to be acquired under the program and the current change and total change, if any, in that quantity.

(M) The identities of the military and civilian officers responsible for program management and cost control of the program.

(N) The action taken and proposed to be taken to control future cost growth of the program.

(O) Any changes made in the performance or schedule milestones of the program and the extent to which such changes have contributed to the increase in program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost for the program (or for any designated major subprogram under the program).

(P) The following contract performance assessment information with respect to each major contract under the program or subprogram:

(i) The name of the contractor.

(ii) The phase that the contract is in at the time of the preparation of the report.

(iii) The percentage of work under the contract that has been completed.

(iv) Any current change and the total change, in dollars and expressed as a percentage, in the contract cost.

(v) The percentage by which the contract is currently ahead of or behind schedule.

(vi) A narrative providing a summary explanation of the most significant occurrences, including cost and schedule variances under major contracts of the program and any designated major subprogram under the program, contributing to the changes identified and a discussion of the effect these occurrences will have on future program costs and the program schedule.


(Q) In any case in which one or more problems with the software component of the program or any designated major subprogram under the program significantly contributed to the increase in program unit costs, the action taken and proposed to be taken to solve such problems.


(2) If a program acquisition unit cost increase or a procurement unit cost increase for a major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram that results in a report under this subsection is due to termination or cancellation of the entire program or subprogram, only the information specified in clauses (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) and the percentage change in program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost that resulted in the report need be included in the report. The certification of the Secretary of Defense under subsection (e) is not required to be submitted for termination or cancellation of a program or subprogram.

(h) Reporting under this section shall not apply if a program has received a limited reporting waiver under section 2432(h) of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1107(a)(1), Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 741, §139b; amended Pub. L. 98–94, title XII, §1268(1), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 705; Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1242(b), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2607; Pub. L. 99–145, title XIII, §1303(a)(2), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 738; renumbered §2433 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(5), 110(d)(14), (g)(8), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 995, 1003, 1004; Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §961(b)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-176, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §961(b)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-176; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §961(b), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3956, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(4), (k)(7), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 279, 284; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XIII, §1314(a)(1), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1175; Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §811(a), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1490; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1484(k)(10), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1719; Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §817(d), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2456; Pub. L. 103–35, title II, §201(i)(2), May 31, 1993, 107 Stat. 100; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §§3002(a)(2), 3003, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3328, 3329; Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title VIII, §833, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1842; Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §801(a), (b)(1), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2004; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title VIII, §802(a)–(c), (d)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3367–3370; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title II, §213(a), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2121; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title IX, §942(e), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 288; Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §811(c), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4522; Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §206(a)(3), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1728; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, §1073(c)(4), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2474; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(b)(34), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4371; Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §809(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1840.)

Codification

Pub. L. 99–591 is a corrected version of Pub. L. 99–500.

Amendments

2018—Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 115–232 substituted "section 8677(b)(2)" for "section 7307(b)(2)".

Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 111–383 substituted "section 2430a(d)" for "section 2430a(c)".

2009—Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 111–23 amended par. (2) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (2) related to cost growths in major defense acquisition programs or designated major subprograms.

Subsec. (g)(1)(G). Pub. L. 111–84 made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(iv)(I). See 2008 Amendment note below.

2008—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(1)(A), substituted "Except as provided in section 2430a(c) of this title, the terms" for "The terms".

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(1)(B), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "the program".

Subsec. (a)(4), (5). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(1)(C), (D), inserted "or designated major defense subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" wherever appearing and "or subprogram" after "for the program" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(2)(A), inserted "(or of each designated major subprogram under the program)" after "unit costs of the program" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (b)(1), (2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(2)(B), (C), inserted "for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program)" before period at end.

Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(2)(D), inserted "or subprogram" after "software component of the program" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(3), substituted "the program acquisition unit cost for the program (or for a designated major subprogram under the program) or the procurement unit cost for the program (or for such a subprogram)" for "the program acquisition unit cost for the program or the procurement unit cost for the program" and struck out "for the program" after "significant cost growth threshold".

Subsec. (d)(1), (2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(4)(A), (B), inserted "or any designated major subprogram under the program" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "for the program" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(4)(C), substituted "the program or subprogram concerned" for "such program".

Subsec. (e)(1)(A). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(5)(A)(i), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "for the program".

Subsec. (e)(1)(B). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(5)(A)(ii), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "that program".

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(5)(B), in introductory provisions, inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "for the program".

Pub. L. 110–181 inserted ", after consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight Council regarding program requirements," after "Secretary of Defense" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (g)(1)(D). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(i), inserted "(and for each designated major subprogram under the program)" after "for the program" and "or subprogram" after "in which the program".

Subsec. (g)(1)(E). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(ii), inserted "for the program (and for each designated major subprogram under the program)" after "program acquisition cost".

Subsec. (g)(1)(F). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(iii), inserted "for the program (or for any designated major subprogram under the program)" before period at end.

Subsec. (g)(1)(G). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(iv)(I), as amended by Pub. L. 111–84, inserted "and each designated major subprogram under the program" after "of the program".

Subsec. (g)(1)(G)(i), (ii). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(iv)(II), inserted "or subprogram" after "for the program" in two places.

Subsec. (g)(1)(H). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(v), inserted "and each designated major subprogram under the program" after "year in which information on the program" and "or subprogram" after "Report in which information on the program".

Subsec. (g)(1)(J). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(vi), inserted "for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program)" after "program acquisition unit cost".

Subsec. (g)(1)(K). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(vii), inserted "for the program (or for each designated major subprogram under the program)" after "procurement unit cost" in two places.

Subsec. (g)(1)(O). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(viii), inserted "for the program (or for any designated major subprogram under the program)" before period at end.

Subsec. (g)(1)(P). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(ix), inserted "or subprogram" after "the program" in introductory provisions and "and any designated major subprogram under the program" after "major contracts of the program" in cl. (vi).

Subsec. (g)(1)(Q). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(A)(x), inserted "or any designated major subprogram under the program" after "the program".

Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(c)(6)(B), inserted "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "the entire program" and after "cancellation of a program".

2006—Subsec. (a)(4), (5). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(a), added pars. (4) and (5).

Subsec. (a)(6). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(d)(2), added par. (6).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(1), substituted "cause to believe that the program acquisition unit cost for the program or the procurement unit cost for the program, as applicable, has increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold for the program" for "cause to believe—

"(1) that the program acquisition unit cost for the program has increased by at least 15 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program as shown in the Baseline Estimate; or

"(2) in the case of a major defense acquisition program that is a procurement program, that the procurement unit cost for the program has increased by at least 15 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program as reflected in the Baseline Estimate".

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(2)(A), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold, or the critical cost growth threshold, for the program" for "by at least 15 percent, or by at least 25 percent, over the program acquisition unit cost for the program as shown in the Baseline Estimate".

Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(2)(B), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold, or the critical cost growth threshold, for the program" for "by at least 15 percent, or by at least 25 percent, over the procurement unit cost for the program as reflected in the Baseline Estimate".

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(2)(C), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold or critical cost growth threshold or that" for "by at least 15 percent, or by at least 25 percent, as determined under paragraph (1) or that" and "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold or critical cost growth threshold, the Secretary" for "by at least 15 percent, or by at least 25 percent, as determined under paragraph (2), the Secretary".

Subsec. (e)(1)(A). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(3)(A), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold for the program" for "by at least 15 percent".

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(c), redesignated subpar. (B) as (C) and substituted "the Secretary of Defense shall—", par. (A) and introductory provisions of par. (B) for "the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress, before the end of the 30-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) a written certification, stating that—".

Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(3)(B), in introductory provisions, struck out "percentage increase in the" before "program acquisition" and substituted "increases by a percentage equal to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold for the program" for "exceeds 25 percent".

Subsec. (e)(2)(A). Pub. L. 109–364 added cl. (i) and redesignated former cls. (i) to (iii) as (ii) to (iv), respectively.

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(3)(C)(ii), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold" for "of at least 25 percent" in introductory provisions and subpar. (B).

Pub. L. 109–163, §802(b)(3)(C)(i), substituted "by a percentage equal to or greater than the significant cost growth threshold" for "of at least 15 percent" in introductory provisions and subpar. (A).

2004—Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 108–375, §801(a), added par. (5).

Subsec. (g)(1)(Q). Pub. L. 108–375, §801(b)(1), added subpar. (Q).

1997—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 105–85, §833(a), in concluding provisions, struck out "during the current fiscal year (other than the last quarterly unit cost report under subsection (b) for the preceding fiscal year)" after "designated by the Secretary concerned".

Subsec. (c)(1) to (3). Pub. L. 105–85, §833(b), inserted "or" at end of par. (1), struck out "or" at end of par. (2), and struck out par. (3), which read as follows: "that cost variances or schedule variances of a major contract under the program have resulted in an increase in the cost of the contract of at least 15 percent over the cost of the contract as of the time the contract was made;".

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 105–85, §833(c), struck out "(for the first time since the beginning of the current fiscal year)" after "the Secretary concerned determines".

1994—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(a)(1)(A), substituted "Baseline Estimate" for "Baseline Selected Acquisition Report" and "cost estimate included in the baseline description for the program under section 2435 of this title." for "Selected Acquisition Report in which information on the program is first included or the comprehensive annual Selected Acquisition Report for the fiscal year immediately before the fiscal year containing the quarter with respect to which the unit cost report is submitted, whichever is later."

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(a)(1)(B), struck out par. (4) which defined "Baseline Report".

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(b), substituted "contract was entered into" for "Baseline Report was submitted".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–355, §§3002(a)(2)(A), 3003(a)(2)(A), (c), struck out par. (1) designation and par. (2), redesignated subpars. (A) to (C) as pars. (1) to (3), respectively, substituted "Baseline Estimate" for "Baseline Report" in pars. (1) and (2), and struck out "current" before "procurement unit cost" in par. (2). Prior to amendment, former par. (2) related to submission of unit cost reports by major defense acquisition program manager to service acquisition executive designated by Secretary of Defense in certain circumstances.

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(a)(2)(B), substituted "Baseline Estimate" for "Baseline Report".

Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 103–355, §§3002(a)(2)(B), 3003(a)(2)(B), struck out "current" before "procurement unit cost" and substituted "Baseline Estimate" for "Baseline Report".

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(a)(2)(B), struck out "current" before "procurement unit cost".

Subsec. (e)(1)(A), (2). Pub. L. 103–355, §3002(a)(2)(C), struck out "current" before "procurement unit cost".

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(d), substituted "be stated in terms of constant base year dollars (as described in section 2430 of this title)" for "include expected inflation".

Subsec. (g)(1)(I). Pub. L. 103–355, §3003(e), amended subpar. (I) generally. Prior to amendment, subpar. (I) read as follows: "The type of the Baseline Report (under subsection (a)(4)) and the date of the Baseline Report."

1993—Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 103–35 substituted "an increase of at least 15 percent" for "a at least 15 percent increase" in introductory provisions and in subpar. (A), and substituted "an increase of at least 25 percent" for "a at least 25 percent increase" in introductory provisions and in subpar. (B).

1992—Subsec. (a)(4)(C). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(1), substituted "(e)(2)(B)" for "(e)(2)(B)(ii)".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(2), substituted "30 calendar days" for "7 days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays)" in second sentence.

Subsec. (c)(1)(A), (B), (2)(A), (B). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(3), substituted "at least" for "more than".

Subsec. (d)(1), (2). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(4)(A), substituted "at least" for "more than" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(4)(B), substituted "at least" for "more than" wherever appearing and "program. In the case of a determination based on a quarterly report submitted in accordance with subsection (b), the Secretary shall submit the notification to Congress within 45 days after the end of the quarter. In the case of a determination based on a report submitted in accordance with subsection (c), the Secretary shall submit the notification to Congress within 45 days after the date of that report. The Secretary shall include in the notification the date on which the determination was made." for "program within 30 days after the date on which the service acquisition executive reports his determination of such increase in such unit cost to the Secretary and shall include in such notification the date on which the determination was made."

Subsec. (e)(1)(A). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(5)(A), added subpar. (A) and struck out former subpar. (A) which read as follows: "Except as provided in subparagraph (B), whenever the Secretary concerned determines under subsection (d) that the current program acquisition cost of a major defense acquisition program has increased by more than 15 percent, a Selected Acquisition Report shall be submitted to Congress for the first fiscal-year quarter ending on or after the date of the determination and such report shall include the information described in section 2432(e) of this title. The report shall be submitted within 45 days after the end of that quarter."

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(5)(B), substituted "program acquisition unit cost or current procurement unit cost" for "current program acquisition cost".

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 102–484, §817(d)(5)(C), substituted "at least" for "more than" wherever appearing.

1990—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–510 struck out "the" before "such service acquisition executive" wherever appearing.

1989—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(1)(A), inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned".

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(1)(B)(i), inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (a)(4)(A). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(1)(B)(ii), substituted "Selected Acquisition Report submitted under subsection (e)(2)(B) that includes information on" for "unit cost report submitted under subsection (e)(2)(B)(ii) with respect to".

Subsec. (a)(4)(B). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(1)(B)(iii), substituted "subsection (e)(2)(B) with respect to the program during that three-quarter period, the most recent Selected Acquisition Report submitted under subsection (e)(1) that includes information on the program" for "subsection (e)(2)(B)(ii) with respect to the program during that three-quarter period, the most recent unit cost report submitted under subsection (e)(1) with respect to the program".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(2)(A), amended introductory provisions generally. Prior to amendment, introductory provisions read as follows: "The program manager for a defense acquisition program that as of the end of a fiscal-year quarter is a major defense acquisition program (other than a program not required to be included in the Selected Acquisition Report for that quarter under section 2432(b)(3) of this title) shall, after the end of that quarter, submit to the Secretary concerned a written report on the unit costs of the program. Each report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be submitted not more than 7 days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) after the date on which the President transmits the Budget to Congress for the following fiscal year, and each report for other quarters shall be submitted not more than 7 days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) after the end of that quarter. The program manager shall include in each such unit cost report the following information with respect to the program (as of the last day of the quarter for which the report is made):".

Subsec. (b)(4). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(2)(B), substituted "description established under section 2435 of this title" for "Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(3)(A), in introductory provisions, struck out "fiscal-year" after "time during a", and in concluding provisions, inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned during" and substituted "(other than the last quarterly unit cost report under subsection (b) for the preceding fiscal year)" for "(other than the unit cost report under subsection (b) for the last quarter of the preceding fiscal year)" and "such service acquisition executive a unit" for "Secretary concerned a unit".

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(3)(B), in introductory provisions, inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned a unit" and substituted "(other than the last quarterly unit cost report under subsection (b) for the preceding fiscal year)" for "(other than the unit cost report under subsection (b) for the last quarter of the preceding fiscal year)", and in cls. (A), (B), and (C), and concluding provisions, substituted "such service acquisition executive" for "Secretary concerned".

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(4)(A), inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned" and substituted "service acquisition executive shall determine" for "Secretary shall determine".

Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(4)(B), inserted "the service acquisition executive designated by" before "the Secretary concerned under" and substituted "service acquisition executive, in addition to the determination under paragraph (1), shall determine" for "Secretary concerned shall, in addition to the determination under paragraph (1), determine".

Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(4)(C), substituted par. (3) consisting of a single par., for former par. (3) consisting of subpars. (A) and (B).

Subsec. (e)(1), (2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(5)(A), added pars. (1) and (2) and struck out former pars. (1) and (2) which contained exceptions to the prohibitions in subsec. (d)(3)(B)(i) and (ii).

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(5)(B), in introductory provisions, inserted "If a determination of a more than 15 percent increase is made by the Secretary under subsection (d) and a Selected Acquisition Report containing the information described in subsection (g) is not submitted to Congress under paragraph (1), or if a determination of a more than 25 percent increase is made by the Secretary under subsection (d) and the certification of the Secretary of Defense is not submitted to Congress under paragraph (2), funds appropriated for military construction, for research, development, test, and evaluation, and for procurement may not be obligated for a major contract under the program." and struck out "in subsection (d)(3)(B)" after "prohibition", in subpar. (A), substituted "Selected Acquisition Report" for "report of the Secretary concerned" and "(2)(B)" for "(2)(B)(ii)", and in subpar. (B), substituted "Selected Acquisition Report" for "report of the Secretary concerned", "(2)(B)" for "(2)(B)(ii)", and "(2)(A)" for "(2)(B)(i)".

Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(a)(6), inserted at end "The certification of the Secretary of Defense under subsection (e) is not required to be submitted for termination or cancellation of a program."

1987Pub. L. 100–180 made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5). See 1986 Amendment note below.

Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(4), substituted "(1) The terms 'program' " for "(1) 'Major defense acquisition program', 'program' ".

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(7)(A), inserted "The term" after par. designation.

Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(7)(B), substituted "The term 'procurement' " for " 'Procurement' ".

Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(7)(A), inserted "The term" after par. designation.

1986Pub. L. 99–433, §101(a)(5), as amended by Pub. L. 100–180, §1314(a)(1), renumbered section 139b of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 99–433, §110(d)(14), substituted "Unit cost reports" for "Oversight of cost growth of major programs: unit cost reports" in section catchline.

Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 99–433, §110(g)(8)(A), substituted "section 2432(a)" for "section 139a(a)".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(b)(1)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(b)(1), amended subsec. (b) identically, inserting "(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays)" in two places in second sentence.

Pub. L. 99–433, §110(g)(8)(B), substituted "section 2432(b)(3)" for "section 139a(b)(3)" in first sentence.

Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [§961(b)(2)], Pub. L. 99–661, §961(b)(2), amended section identically, adding subsec. (h).

1985—Subsec. (d)(3)(B)(i). Pub. L. 99–145 inserted "percent" after "15".

1984—Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(1), added par. (4).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(2)(A), (B), struck out "not more than 7 days" before "after the end of that quarter" and inserted "Each report for the first quarter of a fiscal year shall be submitted not more than 7 days after the date on which the President transmits the Budget to Congress for the following fiscal year, and each report for other quarters shall be submitted not more than 7 days after the end of that quarter."

Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(2)(C), substituted "Baseline Report" for "baseline Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (c)(1)(A), (B). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(3), substituted "Baseline Report" for "baseline Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (d)(1), (2). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(4)(A), substituted "Baseline Report" for "baseline Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (d)(3)(B). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(4)(B)(i), substituted "funds appropriated for military construction, for research, development, test, and evaluation, and for procurement may not be obligated for a major contract under the program" for "additional funds may not be obligated in connection with such program".

Subsec. (d)(3)(B)(i). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(4)(B)(ii), struck out "but less than 25 percent" after "more than 15".

Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(5)(A), substituted "subsection (d)(3)(B)(i)" for "subsection (d)(3)(B)" and inserted "more than" before "15 percent".

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(5)(B), substituted "subsection (d)(3)(B)(ii)" for "subsection (d)(3)(B)" and inserted "more than" before "25 percent".

Subsec. (e)(2)(A). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(5)(B)(iii), inserted "and the Secretary concerned submits to Congress, before the end of the 30-day period referred to in subsection (d)(3)(B)(i), a report containing the information described in subsection (g)".

Subsec. (e)(2)(B). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(5)(B)(iv), substituted "subsection (d)(3)(B)(ii)" for "such subsection".

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(5)(C), substituted "at the end of a period of 30 days of continuous session of Congress (as determined under section 7307(b)(2) of this title) beginning on the date—

"(A) on which Congress receives the report of the Secretary concerned under paragraph (1) or (2)(B)(ii) with respect to that program, in the case of a determination of a more than 15 percent increase (as determined in subsection (d)); or

"(B) on which Congress has received both the report of the Secretary concerned under paragraph (1) or (2)(B)(ii) and the certification of the Secretary of Defense under paragraph (2)(B)(i) with respect to that program, in the case of a more than 25 percent increase (as determined under subsection (d)).",

for "in the case of a program to which it would otherwise apply if, after such prohibition has taken effect, the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives waive the prohibition with respect to such program."

Subsec. (g)(1)(I). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(6)(A), substituted "The type of the Baseline Report (under subsection (a)(4)) and the date of the Baseline Report" for "The date of the baseline Selected Acquisition Report".

Subsec. (g)(1)(K). Pub. L. 98–525, §1242(b)(6)(B), required the report to include the procurement unit cost for the succeeding fiscal year expressed in constant base-year dollars and in current year dollars.

1983—Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 98–94 substituted "procurement" for "procurment".

Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

Effective Date of 2009 Amendment

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, §1073(c), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2474, provided that the amendment made by section 1073(c)(4) is effective as of Oct. 14, 2008, and as if included in Pub. L. 110–417 as enacted.

Effective Date of 2006 Amendment

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title VIII, §802(e), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3370, provided that:

"(1) In general.—The amendments made by this section [amending this section and section 2435 of this title] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 6, 2006], and shall apply with respect to any major defense acquisition program for which an original Baseline Estimate is first established before, on, or after that date.

"(2) Applicability to current major defense acquisition programs.—In the case of a major defense acquisition program for which the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost, as applicable, exceeds the original Baseline Estimate for the program by more than 50 percent on the date of the enactment of this Act—

"(A) the current Baseline Estimate for the program as of such date of enactment is deemed to be the original Baseline Estimate for the program for purposes of section 2433 of title 10, United States Code (as amended by this section); and

"(B) each Selected Acquisition Report submitted on the program after the date of the enactment of this Act shall reflect each of the following:

"(i) The original Baseline Estimate, as first established for the program, without adjustment or revision.

"(ii) The Baseline Estimate for the program that is deemed to be the original Baseline Estimate for the program under subparagraph (A).

"(iii) The current original Baseline Estimate for the program as adjusted or revised, if at all, in accordance with subsection (d)(2) of section 2435 of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection (d) of this section)."

Effective Date of 2004 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 108–375 effective on the date occurring 60 days after Oct. 28, 2004, and applicable with respect to reports due to be submitted to Congress on or after that date, see section 801(c) of Pub. L. 108–375, set out as a note under section 2432 of this title.

Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–180 applicable as if included in enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–433, see section 1314(e) of Pub. L. 100–180, set out as a note under section 743 of this title.

Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–500, Pub. L. 99–591, and Pub. L. 99–661 effective Jan. 1, 1987, see section 101(c) [§961(c)] of Pub. L. 99–500 and Pub. L. 99–591, and section 961(c) of Pub. L. 99–661, set out as a note under section 2432 of this title.

Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1983, and applicable beginning with respect to reports for first quarter of fiscal year 1983, see section 1107(c) of Pub. L. 97–252, set out as a note under section 2432 of this title.

§2433a. Critical cost growth in major defense acquisition programs

(a) Reassessment of Program.—If the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost of a major defense acquisition program or designated subprogram (as determined by the Secretary under section 2433(d) of this title) 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—

(1) determine the root cause or causes of the critical cost growth in accordance with applicable statutory requirements and Department of Defense policies, procedures, and guidance; and

(2) in consultation with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, carry out an assessment of—

(A) the projected cost of completing the program if current requirements are not modified;

(B) the projected cost of completing the program based on reasonable modification of such requirements;

(C) the rough order of magnitude of the costs of any reasonable alternative system or capability; and

(D) the need to reduce funding for other programs due to the growth in cost of the program.


(b) Presumption of Termination.—(1) After conducting the reassessment required by subsection (a) with respect to a major defense acquisition program, the Secretary shall terminate the program unless the Secretary submits to Congress, before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the day the Selected Acquisition Report containing the information described in section 2433(g) of this title is required to be submitted under section 2432(f) of this title, a written certification in accordance with paragraph (2).

(2) A certification described by this paragraph with respect to a major defense acquisition program is a written certification that—

(A) the continuation of the program is essential to the national security;

(B) there are no alternatives to the program which will provide acceptable capability to meet the joint military requirement (as defined in section 181(g)(1) of this title) at less cost;

(C) the new estimates of the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost have been determined by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to be reasonable;

(D) the program is a higher priority than programs whose funding must be reduced to accommodate the growth in cost of the program; and

(E) the management structure for the program is adequate to manage and control program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost.


(3) A written certification under paragraph (2) shall be accompanied by a report presenting the root cause analysis and assessment carried out pursuant to subsection (a) and the basis for each determination made in accordance with subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph (2), together with supporting documentation.

(c) Actions if Program Not Terminated.—(1) If the Secretary elects not to terminate a major defense acquisition program pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary shall—

(A) restructure the program in a manner that addresses the root cause or causes of the critical cost growth, as identified pursuant to subsection (a), and ensures that the program has an appropriate management structure as set forth in the certification submitted pursuant to subsection (b)(2)(E);

(B) rescind the most recent Milestone approval for the program and withdraw any associated certification under section 2366a or 2366b of this title;

(C) require a new Milestone approval for the program before taking any contract action to enter a new contract, exercise an option under an existing contract, or otherwise extend the scope of an existing contract under the program, except to the extent determined necessary by the Milestone Decision Authority, on a non-delegable basis, to ensure that the program can be restructured as intended by the Secretary without unnecessarily wasting resources;

(D) include in the report specified in paragraph (2) a description of all funding changes made as a result of the growth in cost of the program, including reductions made in funding for other programs to accommodate such cost growth; and

(E) conduct regular reviews of the program in accordance with the requirements of section 205 of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009.


(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(D), the report specified in this paragraph is the first Selected Acquisition Report for the program submitted pursuant to section 2432 of this title after the President submits a budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, in the calendar year following the year in which the program was restructured.

(3)(A) The requirements of subparagraphs (B), (C), and (E) of paragraph (1) shall not apply to a program or subprogram if—

(i) the Milestone Decision Authority determines in writing, on the basis of a cost assessment and root cause analysis conducted pursuant to subsection (a), that—

(I) but for a change in the quantity of items to be purchased under the program or subprogram, the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram would not have increased by a percentage equal to or greater than the cost growth thresholds for the program or subprogram set forth in subparagraph (B); and

(II) the change in quantity of items described in subclause (I) was not made as a result of an increase in program cost, a delay in the program, or a problem meeting program requirements;


(ii) the Secretary determines in writing that the cost to the Department of Defense of complying with such requirements is likely to exceed the benefits to the Department of complying with such requirements; and

(iii) the Secretary submits to Congress, before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the day the Selected Acquisition Report containing the information described in section 2433(g) of this title is required to be submitted under section 2432(f) of this title

(I) a copy of the written determination under clause (i) and an explanation of the basis for the determination; and

(II) a copy of the written determination under clause (ii) and an explanation of the basis for the determination.


(B) The cost growth thresholds specified in this subparagraph are as follows:

(i) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram, a percentage increase in the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(I) 5 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; and

(II) 10 percent over the program acquisition unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(ii) In the case of a major defense acquisition program or designated major defense subprogram that is a procurement program, a percentage increase in the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram of—

(I) 5 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the current Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram; and

(II) 10 percent over the procurement unit cost for the program or subprogram as shown in the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram.


(d) Actions if Program Terminated.—If a major defense acquisition program is terminated pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a written report setting forth—

(1) an explanation of the reasons for terminating the program;

(2) the alternatives considered to address any problems in the program; and

(3) the course the Department plans to pursue to meet any continuing joint military requirements otherwise intended to be met by the program.

(Added Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §206(a)(1), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1726; amended Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(b)(35), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4371; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §§801(e)(4), 831, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1484, 1503; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title VIII, §813, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1829.)

References in Text

Section 205 of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, referred to in subsec. (c)(1)(E), is section 205 of Pub. L. 111–23, which amended section 2366b of this title and enacted provisions set out as notes under this section and section 2366b of this title.

Amendments

2013—Subsec. (c)(3)(A). Pub. L. 112–239 substituted "subparagraphs (B), (C), and (E)" for "subparagraphs (B) and (C)" in introductory provisions.

2011—Subsec. (b)(2)(B). Pub. L. 111–383 substituted "section 181(g)(1)" for "section 181(g)((1)".

Subsec. (c)(1)(B), (C). Pub. L. 112–81, §801(e)(4), struck out ", or Key Decision Point approval in the case of a space program," after "Milestone approval".

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 112–81, §831, added par. (3).

Reviews of Programs Restructured After Experiencing Critical Cost Growth

Pub. L. 111–23, title II, §205(c), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1725, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §813(e), title X, §1075(k)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4266, 4378, provided that: "The official designated to perform oversight of performance assessment pursuant to section 103 of this Act [set out as a note under section 2430 of this title], shall assess the performance of each major defense acquisition program that has exceeded critical cost growth thresholds established pursuant to section 2433(e) of title 10, United States Code, but has not been terminated in accordance with section 2433a of such title (as added by section 206(a) of this Act) not less often than semi-annually until one year after the date on which such program receives a new milestone approval, in accordance with section 2433a(c)(1)(C) of such title (as so added). The results of reviews performed under this subsection shall be reported to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and summarized in the next annual report of such designated official."

[Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §813(e), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4266, provided that the amendment made by section 813(e) to section 205(c) of Pub. L. 111–23, set out above, is effective as of May 22, 2009, and as if included in Pub. L. 111–23, as enacted.]

[For definition of "major defense acquisition program" as used in section 205(c) of Pub. L. 111–23, set out above, see section 2(2) of Pub. L. 111–23, set out as a note under section 2430 of this title.]

[§2434. Repealed. Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §842(c)(1), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2290]

Section, added Pub. L. 98–94, title XII, §1203(a)(1), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 682, §139c; renumbered §2434 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(5), 110(d)(15), (g)(9), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 995, 1003, 1004; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title XII, §1208(a)–(c)(1), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3975; Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 279; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XIII, §1314(a)(1), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1175; Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title V, §525, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 1975; Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VIII, §801(a), (b)(1), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1412; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3004, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3330; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title VIII, §814, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 395; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title VIII, §821(a), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1181; Pub. L. 111–23, title I, §101(d)(5), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1710; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VIII, §814(e), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4267; Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VIII, §831(a)–(c)(1), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 912, related to independent cost estimates.

§2435. Baseline description

(a) Baseline Description Requirement.—(1) The Secretary of a military department shall establish a baseline description for each major defense acquisition program and for each designated major subprogram under the program under the jurisdiction of such Secretary.

(2) The baseline shall include sufficient parameters to describe the cost estimate (referred to as the "Baseline Estimate" in section 2433 of this title), schedule, performance, supportability, and any other factor of such major defense acquisition program or designated major subprogram.

(b) Funding Limit.—No amount appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense for carrying out a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program may be obligated after the program or subprogram enters system development and demonstration without an approved baseline description unless such obligation is specifically approved by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.

(c) Schedule.—A baseline description for a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program shall be prepared under this section—

(1) before the program or subprogram enters system development and demonstration;

(2) before the program or subprogram enters production and deployment; and

(3) before the program or subprogram enters full rate production.


(d) Original Baseline Estimate.—(1) In this chapter, the term "original Baseline Estimate", with respect to a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program, means the baseline description established with respect to the program or subprogram under subsection (a) prepared before the program or subprogram enters system development and demonstration, or at program or subprogram initiation, whichever occurs later, without adjustment or revision (except as provided in paragraph (2)).

(2) An adjustment or revision of the original baseline description of a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program may be treated as the original Baseline Estimate for the program or subprogram for purposes of this chapter only if the percentage increase in the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost under such adjustment or revision exceeds the critical cost growth threshold for the program or subprogram under section 2433 of this title, as determined by the Secretary of the military department concerned under subsection (d) of such section.

(3) In the event of an adjustment or revision of the original baseline description of a major defense acquisition program or any designated major subprogram under the program, the Secretary of Defense shall include in the next Selected Acquisition Report to be submitted under section 2432 of this title after such adjustment or revision a notification to the congressional defense committees of such adjustment or revision, together with the reasons for such adjustment or revision.

(e) Regulations.—The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations governing the following:

(1) The content of baseline descriptions under this section.

(2) The submission to the Secretary of the military department concerned and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics by the program manager for a program for which there is an approved baseline description (or in the case of a major defense acquisition program with one or more designated major subprograms, approved baseline descriptions for such subprograms) under this section of reports of deviations from any such baseline description of the cost, schedule, performance, supportability, or any other factor of the program or subprogram.

(3) Procedures for review of such deviation reports within the Department of Defense.

(4) Procedures for submission to, and approval by, the Secretary of Defense of revised baseline descriptions.

(Added Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §904(a)(1)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-133, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §904(a)(1)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-133; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §904(a)(1), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3912, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; amended Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(6), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 280; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VIII, §803(a), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1125; Pub. L. 100–370, §1(i)(1), July 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 848; Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title XII, §1233(l)(4), Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2058; Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §811(b), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1493; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XII, §1207(b), title XIV, §1484(k)(11), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1665, 1719; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title IX, §904(d)(1), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1728; Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3005(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3330; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title VIII, §821(d), title X, §1048(b)(2), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1182, 1225; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title VIII, §802(d)(1), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3369; Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VIII, §806, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2315; Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title VIII, §811(d), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4524.)

Historical and Revision Notes

1988 Act

Subsection (c) is based on Pub. L. 98–525, title XII, §1243, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2609, as amended by Pub. L. 100–26, §110(a)(1), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 288.

Codification

Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(2)(B), (3)(B), (4)(B)(i), which directed amendment of this section by inserting "or subprogram" after "the program" in subsec. (b) and after "the program" each place it appeared in subsecs. (c) and (d), was executed by making the insertions after "the program" each place it appeared in those subsecs. except after "designated major subprogram under the program", to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 99–591 is a corrected version of Pub. L. 99–500.

Pub. L. 99–500, Pub. L. 99–591, and Pub. L. 99–661 added identical sections.

Amendments

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(1), inserted "and for each designated major subprogram under the program" after "major defense acquisition program" in par. (1) and "or designated major subprogram" after "major defense acquisition program" in par. (2).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(2), inserted "or any designated major subprogram under the program" after "major defense acquisition program" and "or subprogram" after "after the program". See Codification note above.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(3), inserted "or any designated major subprogram under the program" after "major defense acquisition program" in introductory provisions and "or subprogram" after "the program" in pars. (1) to (3). See Codification note above.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(4), inserted "or any designated major subprogram under the program" after "major defense acquisition program" wherever appearing, in par. (1), inserted "or subprogram" after "to the program", "before the program", and "at program", and, in par. (2), inserted "or subprogram" after "for the program" in two places. See Codification note above.

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 110–417, §811(d)(5), inserted "(or in the case of a major defense acquisition program with one or more designated major subprograms, approved baseline descriptions for such subprograms)" after "baseline description" and "or subprogram" before period at end and substituted "any such baseline description" for "the baseline".

2006—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 109–163 added subsec. (d). Former subsec. (d) redesignated (e).

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 109–364 inserted "prepared before the program enters system development and demonstration, or at program initiation, whichever occurs later" after "program under subsection (a)".

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 109–163 redesignated subsec. (d) as (e).

2001—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–107, §§821(d)(1), 1048(b)(2), substituted "system development and demonstration" for "engineering and manufacturing development" and "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics" for "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 107–107, §821(d)(2)(A), substituted "system development and demonstration" for "demonstration and validation".

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 107–107, §821(d)(2)(B), substituted "production and deployment" for "engineering and manufacturing development".

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 107–107, §821(d)(2)(C), substituted "full rate production" for "production and deployment".

Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 107–107, §1048(b)(2), substituted "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics" for "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology".

1994Pub. L. 103–355 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to enhanced program stability.

1993—Subsec. (b)(2)(B). Pub. L. 103–160 substituted "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology" for "Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition".

1990—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 101–510, §1484(k)(11), struck out closing parenthesis after "such Secretary" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–510, §1207(b), struck out subsec. (c) which read as follows: "Stability of Program Managers.—(1) The tour of duty of an officer of the armed forces as a program manager of a major defense acquisition program shall be (A) not less than four years, or (B) until completion of a major program milestone (as defined in regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense).

"(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned may waive the length of the tour of duty prescribed in paragraph (1). The authority under the preceding sentence may not be delegated."

1989—Subsec. (a)(2)(B)(iv). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(b)(1), substituted "production" for "development".

Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(b)(2)(A), substituted "service acquisition executive designated by such Secretary" for "senior procurement executive of such military department (designated pursuant to section 16(3) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(3))".

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 101–189, §811(b)(2)(B), substituted "180 days" for "90 days" in introductory provisions.

1988—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 100–456 clarified amendment by Pub. L. 100–180, §803(a). See 1987 Amendment note below.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–370 added subsec. (c).

1987—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 100–180, as amended by Pub. L. 100–456, substituted "under paragraph (1), and for which the total cost of completion of the stage will exceed by 15 percent or more, in the case of a development stage, or by 5 percent or more, in the case of a production stage, the amount specified in the baseline description established under subsection (a) for such stage; or any milestone specified in such baseline description will be missed by more than 90 days" for first reference to "under paragraph (1)".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(6), struck out subsec. (c) which defined "major defense acquisition program".

Effective Date of 2006 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–163 effective on Jan. 6, 2006, and applicable with respect to any major defense acquisition program for which an original Baseline Estimate is first established before, on, or after Jan. 6, 2006, see section 802(e) of Pub. L. 109–163, set out as a note under section 2433 of this title.

Effective Date of 1990 Amendment

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XII, §1207(b), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1665, provided that the amendment made by that section is effective Oct. 1, 1991.

Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–456 applicable as if included in the enactment of Pub. L. 100–180, see section 1233(l)(5) of Pub. L. 100–456 set out as a note under section 2366 of this title.

Effective Date

Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §904(b)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-134, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §904(b)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-134, and Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §904(b), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3914, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273, provided that: "Section 2435 of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)(1)), shall apply to major defense acquisition programs that enter full-scale engineering development or full-rate production after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 18, 1986]."

Review of Acquisition Program Cycle

Pub. L. 103–355, title V, §5002(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3350, provided that: "The Secretary of Defense shall review the regulations of the Department of Defense to ensure that acquisition program cycle procedures are focused on achieving the goals that are consistent with the program baseline description established pursuant to section 2435 of title 10, United States Code."

§2436. Major defense acquisition programs: incentive program for contractors to purchase capital assets manufactured in United States

(a) Establishment of Incentive Program.—The Secretary of Defense shall plan and establish an incentive program in accordance with this section for contractors to purchase capital assets manufactured in the United States in part with funds available to the Department of Defense.

(b) Defense Industrial Capabilities Fund May Be Used.—The Secretary of Defense may use the Defense Industrial Capabilities Fund, established under section 814 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, for incentive payments under the program established under this section.

(c) Applicability to Major Defense Acquisition Program Contracts.—The incentive program shall apply to contracts for the procurement of a major defense acquisition program.

(d) Consideration.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide consideration in source selection in any request for proposals for a major defense acquisition program for offerors with eligible capital assets.

(Added Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title VIII, §822(a)(1), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1546.)

References in Text

Section 814 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, referred to in subsec. (b), is section 814 of Pub. L. 108–136, which is set out in a note under section 2501 of this title.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 2436, added Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §905(a)(1)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-134, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §905(a)(1)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-134; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §905(a)(1), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3914; renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; amended Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(7), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 280; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VIII, §803(c), title XII, §1231(14), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1125, 1160; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1484(h)(4), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1718, related to establishment and conduct of the defense enterprise program, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(5), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1704.

Effective Date

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title VIII, §822(c), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1547, provided that: "Section 2436 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to contracts entered into after the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 24, 2003]."

Regulations

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title VIII, §822(b), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1547, provided that:

"(1) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations as necessary to carry out section 2436 of title 10, United States Code, as added by this section.

"(2) The Secretary may prescribe interim regulations as necessary to carry out such section. For this purpose, the Secretary is excepted from compliance with the notice and comment requirements of section 553 of title 5, United States Code. All interim rules prescribed under the authority of this paragraph that are not earlier superseded by final rules shall expire no later than 270 days after the effective date of section 2436 of title 10, United States Code [see Effective Date note above], as added by this section."

§2437. Development of major defense acquisition programs: sustainment of system to be replaced

(a) Requirement for Sustaining Existing Forces.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall require that, whenever a new major defense acquisition program begins development, the defense acquisition authority responsible for that program shall develop a plan (to be known as a "sustainment plan") for the existing system that the system under development is intended to replace. Any such sustainment plan shall provide for an appropriate level of budgeting for sustaining the existing system until the replacement system to be developed under the major defense acquisition program is fielded and assumes the majority of responsibility for the mission of the existing system. This section does not apply to a major defense acquisition that reaches initial operational capability before October 1, 2008.

(2) In this section, the term "defense acquisition authority" means the Secretary of a military department or the commander of the United States Special Operations Command.

(b) Sustainment Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall require that each sustainment plan under this section include, at a minimum, the following:

(1) The milestone schedule for the development of the major defense acquisition program, including the scheduled dates for low-rate initial production, initial operational capability, full-rate production, and full operational capability and the date as of when the replacement system is scheduled to assume the majority of responsibility for the mission of the existing system.

(2) An analysis of the existing system to assess the following:

(A) Anticipated funding levels necessary to—

(i) ensure acceptable reliability and availability rates for the existing system; and

(ii) maintain mission capability of the existing system against the relevant threats.


(B) The extent to which it is necessary and appropriate to—

(i) transfer mature technologies from the new system or other systems to enhance the mission capability of the existing system against relevant threats; and

(ii) provide interoperability with the new system during the period from initial fielding until the new system assumes the majority of responsibility for the mission of the existing system.


(c) Exceptions.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to a major defense acquisition program if the Secretary of Defense determines that—

(1) the existing system is no longer relevant to the mission;

(2) the mission has been eliminated;

(3) the mission has been consolidated with another mission in such a manner that another existing system can adequately meet the mission requirements; or

(4) the duration of time until the new system assumes the majority of responsibility for the existing system's mission is sufficiently short so that mission availability, capability, interoperability, and force protection requirements are maintained.


(d) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the applicability of subsection (a) to a major defense acquisition program if the Secretary determines that, but for such a waiver, the Department would be unable to meet national security objectives. Whenever the Secretary makes such a determination and authorizes such a waiver, the Secretary shall submit notice of such waiver and of the Secretary's determination and the reasons therefor in writing to the congressional defense committees.

(Added Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §805(a)(1), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2008.)

Prior Provisions

A prior section 2437, added Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §906(a)(1)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783-135, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §906(a)(1)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341-135; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §906(a)(1), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3915; renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; amended Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(8), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 280; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VIII, §803(b), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1125; Pub. L. 100–224, §5(a)(3), Dec. 30, 1987, 101 Stat. 1538, related to designation of defense enterprise programs for milestone authorization, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(5), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1704.

Effective Date

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VIII, §805(b), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2009, provided that: "Section 2437 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to a major defense acquisition program for a system that is under development as of the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2004] and is not expected to reach initial operational capability before October 1, 2008. The Secretary of Defense shall require that a sustainment plan under that section be developed not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act for the existing system that the system under development is intended to replace."

§2438. Performance assessments and root cause analyses

(a) Designation of Senior Official Responsibility for Performance Assessments and Root Cause Analyses.—

(1) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall designate a senior official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense as the principal official of the Department of Defense responsible for conducting and overseeing performance assessments and root cause analyses for major defense acquisition programs.

(2) No program execution responsibility.—The Secretary shall ensure that the senior official designated under paragraph (1) is not responsible for program execution.

(3) Staff and resources.—The Secretary shall assign to the senior official designated under paragraph (1) appropriate staff and resources necessary to carry out the senior official's function under this section.


(b) Responsibilities.—The senior official designated under subsection (a) shall be responsible for the following:

(1) Carrying out performance assessments of major defense acquisition programs in accordance with the requirements of subsection (c) periodically or when requested by the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Secretary of a military department, or the head of a Defense Agency.

(2) Conducting root cause analyses for major defense acquisition programs in accordance with the requirements of subsection (d) when required by section 2433a(a)(1) of this title, or when requested by the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Secretary of a military department, or the head of a Defense Agency.

(3) Issuing policies, procedures, and guidance governing the conduct of performance assessments and root cause analyses by the military departments and the Defense Agencies.

(4) Evaluating the utility of performance metrics used to measure the cost, schedule, and performance of major defense acquisition programs, and making such recommendations to the Secretary of Defense as the official considers appropriate to improve such metrics.

(5) Advising acquisition officials on performance issues regarding a major defense acquisition program that may arise—

(A) before certification under section 2433a of this title;

(B) before entry into full-rate production; or

(C) in the course of consideration of any decision to request authorization of a multiyear procurement contract for the program.


(c) Performance Assessments.—For purposes of this section, a performance assessment with respect to a major defense acquisition program is an evaluation of the following:

(1) The cost, schedule, and performance of the program, relative to current metrics, including performance requirements and baseline descriptions.

(2) The extent to which the level of program cost, schedule, and performance predicted relative to such metrics is likely to result in the timely delivery of a level of capability to the warfighter that is consistent with the level of resources to be expended and provides superior value to alternative approaches that may be available to meet the same military requirement.


(d) Root Cause Analyses.—For purposes of this section and section 2433a of this title, a root cause analysis with respect to a major defense acquisition program is an assessment of the underlying cause or causes of shortcomings in cost, schedule, or performance of the program, including the role, if any, of—

(1) unrealistic performance expectations;

(2) unrealistic baseline estimates for cost or schedule;

(3) immature technologies or excessive manufacturing or integration risk;

(4) unanticipated design, engineering, manufacturing, or technology integration issues arising during program performance;

(5) changes in procurement quantities;

(6) inadequate program funding or funding instability;

(7) poor performance by government or contractor personnel responsible for program management; or

(8) any other matters.


(e) Support of Applicable Capabilities and Expertise.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the senior official designated under subsection (a) has the support of other Department of Defense officials with relevant capabilities and expertise needed to carry out the requirements of this section.

(Added and amended Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title IX, §901(d), (k)(1)(F), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4321, 4325; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title X, §1076(f)(27), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1953; Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title X, §1077(b), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 998.)

Codification

Section 103 of Pub. L. 111–23, formerly set out as a note under section 2430 of this title, which was transferred to this chapter, renumbered as this section, and amended by Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d), (k)(1)(F), was based on Pub. L. 111–23, title I, §103, May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1715.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 2438, added Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(1)(B), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2459; amended Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title IX, §904(d)(1), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1728, required competitive prototyping of major weapon systems and subsystems prior to development under major defense acquisition program, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3006(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3331.

Another prior section 2438 was renumbered section 2439 of this title.

Amendments

2015—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 114–92 struck out subsec. (f) which related to annual report.

2013—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 112–239 inserted "the senior" before "official's".

2011Pub. L. 111–383, §901(k)(1)(F), substituted "Performance assessments and root cause analyses" for "performance assessments and root cause analyses for major defense acquisition programs" in section catchline.

Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d), transferred section 103 of Pub. L. 111–23 to this chapter and renumbered it as this section. See Codification note above.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d)(1), substituted "section 2433a(a)(1) of this title" for "section 2433a(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code (as added by section 206(a) of this Act)".

Subsec. (b)(5)(A). Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d)(2), substituted "before" for "prior to" and "section 2433a of this title" for "section 2433a of title 10, United States Code (as so added)".

Subsec. (b)(5)(B). Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d)(2)(B), substituted "before" for "prior to".

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d)(3), substituted "section 2433a of this title" for "section 2433a of title 10, United States Code (as so added)" in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 111–383, §901(d)(4), struck out "beginning in 2010," after "each year,".

Effective Date

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–383 effective Jan. 1, 2011, see section 901(p) of Pub. L. 111–383, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment note under section 131 of this title.

§2439. Negotiation of price for technical data before development, production, or sustainment of major weapon systems

The Secretary of Defense shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that the Department of Defense, before selecting a contractor for the engineering and manufacturing development of a major weapon system, production of a major weapon system, or sustainment of a major weapon system, negotiates a price for technical data to be delivered under a contract for such development, production, or sustainment.

(Added Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §835(a)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1471; amended Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §867, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1901.)

Prior Provisions

A prior section 2439, added Pub. L. 99–145, title IX, §912(a)(1), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 685, §2305a; amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §110(g)(3), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1004; renumbered §2438 and amended Pub. L. 100–26, §7(b)(9)(A), (k)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 280, 284; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title VIII, §805, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1591; renumbered §2439, Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VIII, §821(a)(1)(A), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2459, related to preparation of acquisition strategy for major programs and use of competitive alternative sources, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–355, title III, §3007(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3331.

Amendments

2018Pub. L. 115–232, §867(4), substituted ", production, or sustainment" for "or production" in section catchline.

Pub. L. 115–232, §867(1)–(3), inserted ", to the maximum extent practicable," after "shall ensure" and substituted "production of a major weapon system, or sustainment of a major weapon system" for "or for the production of a major weapon system" and ", production, or sustainment" for "or production".

Effective Date

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §835(a)(3), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1471, provided that: "Section 2439 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall apply with respect to any contract for engineering and manufacturing development of a major weapon system, or for the production of a major weapon system, for which the contract solicitation is issued on or after the date occurring one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017]."

§2440. Technology and industrial base plans

The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations requiring consideration of the national technology and industrial base, in accordance with the strategy required by section 2501 of this title, in the development and implementation of acquisition plans for each major defense acquisition program.

(Added Pub. L. 102–484, div. D, title XLII, §4216(b)(1), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2669; amended Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title X, §1071(a)(17), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2399; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XVI, §1603(c), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2063.)

Amendments

2013Pub. L. 112–239 inserted ", in accordance with the strategy required by section 2501 of this title," after "base".

2006Pub. L. 109–364 substituted "industrial base plans" for "Industrial Base Plans" in section catchline.

§2441. Sustainment reviews

(a) In General.—The Secretary of each military department shall conduct a sustainment review of each major weapon system not later than five years after declaration of initial operational capability of a major defense acquisition program and throughout the life cycle of the weapon system to assess the product support strategy, performance, and operation and support costs of the weapon system. For any review after the first one, the Secretary concerned shall use availability and reliability thresholds and cost estimates as the basis for the circumstances that prompt such a review. The results of the sustainment review shall be documented in a memorandum by the relevant decision authority. The Secretary concerned shall make the memorandum and supporting documentation for each sustainment review available to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment within 30 days after the review is completed.

(b) Elements.—At a minimum, the review required under subsection (a) shall include the following elements:

(1) An independent cost estimate for the remainder of the life cycle of the program.

(2) A comparison of actual costs to the amount of funds budgeted and appropriated in the previous five years, and if funding shortfalls exist, an explanation of the implications on equipment availability.

(3) A comparison between the assumed and achieved system reliabilities.

(4) An analysis of the most cost-effective source of repairs and maintenance.

(5) An evaluation of the cost of consumables and depot-level repairables.

(6) An evaluation of the costs of information technology, networks, computer hardware, and software maintenance and upgrades.

(7) As applicable, an assessment of the actual fuel efficiencies compared to the projected fuel efficiencies as demonstrated in tests or operations.

(8) As applicable, a comparison of actual manpower requirements to previous estimates.

(9) An analysis of whether accurate and complete data are being reported in the cost systems of the military department concerned, and if deficiencies exist, a plan to update the data and ensure accurate and complete data are submitted in the future.


(c) Coordination.—The review required under subsection (a) shall be conducted in coordination with the requirements of sections 2337 and 2337a of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VIII, §849(c)(1), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2293; amended Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §§816, 836(b)(2), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1462, 1473.)

Amendments

2017—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–91, §816, inserted at end "The Secretary concerned shall make the memorandum and supporting documentation for each sustainment review available to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment within 30 days after the review is completed."

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 115–91, §836(b)(2), substituted "sections 2337 and 2337a of this title" for "section 2337 of this title and section 832 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112–81; 10 U.S.C. 2430 note)".

§2442. Prohibition on use of lowest price technically acceptable source selection process

(a) In General.—The Department of Defense shall not use a lowest price technically acceptable source selection process for the engineering and manufacturing development contract of a major defense acquisition program.

(b) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) Lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.—The term "lowest price technically acceptable source selection process" has the meaning given that term in part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

(2) Major defense acquisition program.—The term "major defense acquisition program" has the meaning given that term in section 2430 of this title.

(3) Engineering and manufacturing development contract.—The term "engineering and manufacturing development contract" means a prime contract for the engineering and manufacturing development of a major defense acquisition program.

(Added Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §832(a)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1468.)

Effective Date

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §832(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1468, provided that: "The requirements of section 2442 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply to major defense acquisition programs for which budgetary authority is requested for fiscal year 2019 or a subsequent fiscal year."

§2443. Sustainment factors in weapon system design

(a) In General.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the defense acquisition system gives ample emphasis to sustainment factors, particularly those factors that are affected principally by the design of a weapon system, in the development of a weapon system.

(b) Requirements Process.—The Secretary shall ensure that reliability and maintainability are included in the performance attributes of the key performance parameter on sustainment during the development of capabilities requirements.

(c) Solicitation and Award of Contracts.—

(1) Requirement.—The program manager of a weapon system shall include in the solicitation for and terms of a covered contract for the weapon system clearly defined and measurable requirements for engineering activities and design specifications for reliability and maintainability.

(2) Exception.—If the program manager determines that engineering activities and design specifications for reliability or maintainability should not be a requirement in a covered contract or a solicitation for such a contract, the program manager shall document in writing the justification for the decision.

(3) Source selection criteria.—The Secretary shall ensure that sustainment factors, including reliability and maintainability, are given ample emphasis in the process for source selection. The Secretary shall encourage the use of objective reliability and maintainability criteria in the evaluation of competitive proposals.


(d) Contract Performance.—

(1) In general.—The Secretary shall ensure that the Department of Defense uses best practices for responding to the positive or negative performance of a contractor in meeting the sustainment requirements of a covered contract for a weapon system. The Secretary shall encourage the use of incentive fees and penalties as appropriate and authorized in paragraph (2) in all covered contracts for weapons systems.

(2) Authority for incentive fees and penalties.—The Secretary of Defense is authorized to include in any covered contract provisions for the payment of incentive fees to the contractor based on achievement of design specification requirements for reliability and maintainability of weapons systems under the contract, or the imposition of penalties to be paid by the contractor to the Government for failure to achieve such design specification requirements. Information about such fees or penalties shall be included in the solicitation for any covered contract that includes such fees or penalties.

(3) Measurement of reliability and maintainability.—In carrying out paragraph (2), the program manager shall base determinations of a contractor's performance on reliability and maintainability data collected during the program. Such data collection and associated evaluation metrics shall be described in detail in the covered contract. To the maximum extent practicable, such data shall be shared with appropriate contractor and government organizations.

(4) Notification.—The Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense committees upon entering into a covered contract that includes incentive fees or penalties authorized in paragraph (2).


(e) Covered Contract Defined.—In this section, the term "covered contract", with respect to a weapon system, means a contract—

(1) for the engineering and manufacturing development of a weapon system, including embedded software; or

(2) for the production of a weapon system, including embedded software.

(Added Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §834(a)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1469.)

Effective Date

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §834(b), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1470, provided that: "Subsections (c) and (d) of section 2443 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to any covered contract (as defined in that section) for which the contract solicitation is issued on or after the date occurring one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017]."

Implementation of Recommendations of the Independent Study on Consideration of Sustainment in Weapons Systems Life Cycle

Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §832, Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1857, provided that:

"(a) Implementation Required.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Aug. 13, 2018], the Secretary of Defense shall, except as provided under subsection (b), commence implementation of each recommendation submitted as part of the independent assessment produced under section 844 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 130 Stat. 2290).

"(b) Exceptions.—

"(1) Delayed implementation.—The Secretary of Defense may commence implementation of a recommendation described under subsection (a) later than the date required under such subsection if the Secretary provides the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] with a specific justification for the delay in implementation of such recommendation.

"(2) Nonimplementation.—The Secretary of Defense may opt not to implement a recommendation described under subsection (a) if the Secretary provides to the congressional defense committees—

"(A) the reasons for the decision not to implement the recommendation; and

"(B) a summary of the alternative actions the Secretary plans to take to address the purposes underlying the recommendation.

"(c) Implementation Plans.—For each recommendation that the Secretary is implementing, or that the Secretary plans to implement, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees—

"(1) a summary of actions that have been taken to implement the recommendation; and

"(2) a schedule, with specific milestones, for completing the implementation of the recommendation."

Engineering Change Authorized

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §834(c), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1470, provided that: "Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of Defense may fund engineering changes to the design of a weapon system in the engineering and manufacturing development phase or in the production phase of an acquisition program to improve reliability or maintainability of the weapon system and reduce projected operating and support costs."