1. Product Support Assessment Team (PSAT) Tom Simcik Performance Learning Director – Acquisition Logistics LCL FIPT 14 Nov 08

2. 2 PSAT Overview Implementation memorandum from DUSD L&MR (Jack Bell) on 5 Sept 2008. Support contract awarded to PRTM Management Consultants on 17 Sept 2008. Kickoff meeting held at LMI on 25 Sept 2008. Purpose: – Where have we been? – What worked? – What doesn’t? – What’s changed? – What’s new? – What’s the priority (the need)? – Recommend the way forward. With respect to Weapons System/Materiel Life Cycle Product Support

3. 3 PSAT Overview (cont.) Where to start: – Identify existing life cycle product support policies, guidebooks and legislation. – Assess the Services’ implementation of life cycle product support strategies. – Survey Components and Industry for impediments experienced during implementation. – Assess long term impacts of current and proposed OSD and other policy on critical military-industrial interfaces. – Make recommendations and chart the course for next generation life cycle product support management (including PBL). We’ve done this before: – “ The Revolution in Military Logistics ” – Army Logistician (Jan/Feb 1999) – “ Reduction in Total Ownership Costs (RTOC) ” – USD AT&L (May1999) – “ Product Support for the 21 st Century ” – DUSD L&MR (Nov 2001) – “ Management Initiative Decision (MID) 917 – PBL ”- DEPSECDEF (Oct 2004)

4. (Revised & Proposed) Problem Statement The Department’s weapon system life cycle management program is not meeting war fighter financial and performance requirements (expectations). Impending budget cuts, relentless readiness requirements, and administration changes will add to the challenges. An acceptable weapon system life cycle management program will: 1.Have a governance structure that establishes accountability, responsibility, consistency and alignment with other actions to achieve Department financial and operational objectives. 2.Have tools and Department-wide end-to-end measures for making informed rationale enterprise-wide decisions on: – Improvements – Cost drivers and obstacles – Balancing cost, war fighter readiness/availability requirements, and risk 3.Comply with Title X and other legislative responsibilities, to ensure reliable industrial base and other strategic imperative capabilities remain.

5. Assess Progress, Determine Future Requirements, Develop Way Forward Oct 08NovDecJan 09FebMarAprMayJunJulAugSep Discovery and Assessment Product Build Implementation Ramp-up Timeline: 4 months Assess overall progress against 1999’s Product Support Vision Executed via: Discussion: Facilitated Working Group discussions of As-Is environment Analysis: Fact-based weapon system program analysis Timeline: 5 months Develop the guidance and implementation roadmap for future Lifecycle Product Support Executed via: Discussion: Facilitated Working Group discussions of To-Be environment (future state strategy, processes, organization, and resources) Product Build: Develop future Lifecycle Product Support vision, policy, and implementation roadmap Interim Assessment and Key Recommendations Future Policy and Implementation Roadmap Timeline: 3 months Finalize roadmap actions Executed via: Product Build: Finalize final written report Briefings: Facilitate Service / Agency / Industry buy-in through executive out- briefs

6. Combine Working Group Sessions with Weapon System Programs Analysis Oct 08NovDecJan 09FebMarAprMayJunJulAugSep Assess Weapon Systems Adoption & Program Success Assess Weapon Systems Adoption & Program Success Examine Best Practices Document Interim Recommendations Document Interim Recommendations Develop Lifecycle Product Support To-Be Recommendations and Chart the Course Develop Lifecycle Product Support To-Be Recommendations and Chart the Course Facilitate Stakeholder Buy-in and Plan Implementation Facilitate Stakeholder Buy-in and Plan Implementation Working Group Meetings Senior Steering Group (SSG) Meetings PSAT Bi-weekly Workshops (PSAT Working Group) Facilitated PSAT Team Activities Supporting Analysis Review Current Policy Review Policy Intent Focus for November 13 Working Group Working Groups will help develop, guide, and vet the “To Be” implementation roadmap

7. Objectives for Upcoming Working Groups (Next 3 months) DateWorking Group ObjectiveFocus Topic Areas 30-Oct-08Review and Assess Milestone Review Process Milestone Reviews DOD 5000 Acquisition Process 13-Nov-08Assess Organizational Alignment of DoD in Implementing Product Support Guidance Adoption of End-to-end approach Collaboration/consistency across Services and Agencies 4-Dec-08Assess use of Tools and Metrics for Lifecycle Cost Planning and Measurement Cost Drivers (DMSMS, Energy and Environment, etc.) TLCSM / TCO O&S Costs 18-Dec-08Assess Business Case Analysis and Lifecycle Budget Process BCA Joint Value Propositions WCF Budget Cycle 8-Jan-09Assess Legislative, Coalition, and Strategic Constraints CORE / 50-50 PBL, PBA, PPP, Color of Money FMS      Discovery and Assessment

8. January 22 Working Group and Beyond January 22 Working Group: Synthesize our findings from the As-Is assessment to build the interim Assessment deliverable – Share our consolidated findings from the weapons system reviews (~40 programs) – Review consolidated findings from our Working Group meetings (spider charts, etc.) – Review the draft Assessment document with Working Group – Garner feedback and input from the Working Group to refine the interim deliverable “Product Build” Working Groups: Focus on topics that support To-Be for future Lifecycle Product Support – Future Milestone / TLCM Process – Future Metrics – Required Cost Models and Approaches – ERP / Information Systems Requirements – Governance –TLCM Organizational Roles and Responsibilities –Public –Private Partnerships –PBL / PBA –Others TBD Discovery and Assessment Product Build

9. Questions & Answers