NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California THESIS

Transcription

1 NAVAL PSTGRADUATE SCHL Monterey, California THESIS EVALUATIN F THE SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS MMAND (SPAWAR) ST AND PERFRMANCE MEASUREMENT by Drew G. Flavell an Timothy E. Dorwin December 1999 Thesis Avisor: Lawrence Jones Approve for public release; istribution is unlimite. jflugqtjalesy naahsqted

2 REPRT DCUMENTATIN PAGE Form Approve MB No Public reporting buren for this collection of information is estimate to average 1 hour per response, incluing the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing ata sources, gathering an maintaining the ata neee, an completing an reviewing the collection of information. Sen comments regaring this buren estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, incluing suggestions for reucing this buren, to Washington heaquarters Services, Directorate for Information perations an Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 124, Arlington, VA , an to the ffice of Management an Buget, Paperwork Reuction Project (74-188) Washington DC AGENCY USE NLY (Leave blank) 2. REPRT DATE December TITLE AND SUBTITLE : Evaluation of the Space an Naval Warfare Systems Comman (SPAWAR) Cost an Performance Measurement 6. AUTHR(S) Flavell, Drew G. an Dorwin, Timothy E. 7. PERFRMING RGANIZATIN NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Naval Postgrauate School Monterey, CA REPRT TYPE AND DATES VERED Master's Thesis 5. FUNDING NUMBERS 8. PERFRMING RGANIZATIN REPRT NUMBER 9. SPNSRING / MNITRING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) N/A 1. SPNSRING/ MNITRING AGENCY REPRT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NTES The views expresse in this thesis are those of the authors an o not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. 12a. DISTRIBUTIN / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approve for public release; istribution is unlimite. 12b. DISTRIBUTIN DE 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 2 wors) This thesis examines the Cost an Performance Measurements within four Program Directorates at the Space an Naval Warfare Systems Comman (SPAWAR). SPA WAR is the Navy's full-spectrum research, evelopment, test an evaluation, engineering an fleet support center for Comman, Control an Communications Systems, cean Surveillance Systems an the integration of those systems that overarch multiplatforms. In the era of lean military bugets, public an congressional emans for improve performance within government an performance base bugeting, Commans must justify their bugets an resource allocation relating to costs an outputs. How can commans etermine the efficiency of their organizations without accurate cost an output measurement? The primary focus of this thesis is to escribe the cost an performance measurement systems applie in the SPAWAR Program Directorates to etermine what types of cost, scheuling an performance information they provie for the comman. This was accomplishe by conucting personal interviews of SPAWAR personnel an reviewing official SPAWAR recors. The components of the Program Directorates, the Program Manager Warfare use a wie variety of locally esigne computer programs an tracking systems to measure cost, scheuling an performance. This thesis forms a founation for further analysis on cost an performance measurement in SPAWAR. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Performance Measurement, Cost Measurement, Acquisition Program Measurement 15. NUMBER F PAGES SECURITY CLASSIFICATIN F REPRT Unclassifie 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIN F THIS PAGE Unclassifie 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATIN F ABSTRACT Unclassifie 16. PRICE DE 2. LIMITATIN F ABSTRACT UL NSN Stanar Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribe by ANSI St

3 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 11

4 Approve for public release; istribution is unlimite EVALUATIN F THE SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS MMAND (SPAWAR) ST AND PERFRMANCE MEASUREMENT Drew G. Flavell Lieutenant Commaner, Unite States Naval Reserve B.A., Central Connecticut State University, 1986 an Timothy E. Dorwin Lieutenant, Unite States Naval Reserve B.B.A., Gran Valley State University, 1989 Submitte in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the egree of MASTER F SCIENCE IN MANAGEMENT from the NAVAL PSTGRADUATE SCHL December 1999 Authors: Drew G. Flavell Approve by: 1X1

5 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK IV

6 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the Cost an Performance Measurements within four Program Directorates at the Space an Naval Warfare Systems Comman (SPAWAR). SPA WAR is the Navy's full-spectrum research, evelopment, test an evaluation, engineering an fleet support center for Comman, Control an Communications Systems, cean Surveillance Systems an the integration of those systems that overarch multiplatforms. In the era of lean military bugets, public an congressional emans for improve performance within government- an performance base bugeting, Commans must justify their bugets an resource allocation relating to costs an outputs. How can commans etermine the efficiency of their organizations without accurate cost an output measurement? The primary focus of this thesis is to escribe the cost -an performance measurement systems applie in the SPA WAR Program Directorates to etermine what types of cost, scheuling an performance information they provie for the comman. This was accomplishe by conucting personal interviews of SPA WAR personnel an reviewing official SPA WAR recors. The components of the Program Directorates, the Program Manager Warfare use a wie variety of locally esigne computer programs an tracking systems to measure cost, scheuling an performance. This thesis forms a founation for further analysis on cost an performance measurement in SPAWAR.

7 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK VI

8 TABLE F NTENTS I. INTRDUCTIN 1 A. BACKGRUND 1 B. PURPSE : 5 C. RESEARCH QUESTINS 6 D. SPE, LIMITATINS AND ASSUMPTINS 7 E. METHDLGY 8 F. RGANIZATIN F THE STUDY 1 II. SPA WAR MISSIN AND PERFRMANCE 11 A. ACQUISITIN PRGRAM MANAGEMENT Acquisition Management Process SPA WAR IT21 Implementation Plan 16 a. IT 21 Process 17. b. Buget Controls 18 c. Lan Base Test Network 19.PIT 19 e. Capability Investment Matrix 2 f. Prouct Resources Boar 22 g. Battlegroup Planning an Engineering Process 23 h. Battlegroup Implementation Review Process 24 i. Improve C4ISR Measures of Performance 24 III. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 15 - GLBAL INFRMATIN AND NETWRK SYSTEMS 27 A.MISSIN ; 27 B. STRUCTURE 27 C. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs 3 4. Cost Measurement 3 5. Performance Measurement Bugeting : 31 D.PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 34 E. PMW T Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 38 F. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs 39 Vll

9 4. Cost Measurement 4 5. Performance Measurement Bugeting 41 IV. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 16 - INFRMATIN AND ELECTRNIC SYSTEMS 43 A.MISSIN 43 B. STRUCTURE 44 C. ST MEASUREMENT/BUDGETING 45 D. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement 5 6. Bugeting 52 E. PMW Mission." Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 57 V. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 17 - MMAND, NTRL AND MMUNICATINS AND MPUTERS 59 A.MISSIN.'. 59 B. STRUCTURE 59 C. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting ^. 65 D. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs... ' Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 7 E. PMW Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 74 VI. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 18 - INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RENNAISSANCE (ISR) 77 A.MISSIN 77 B. STRUCTURE 78 C. ST MEASUREMENT/BUDGETING.79 D.PMW181 8 Vlll

10 1. Mission 8 2. Structure 8 3. Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 84 E.PMW182 ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.SS 1. Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement 9 6. Bugeting 91 F.PMW183 ZZZZZZZZZZ9I 1. Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement/Estimation Performance Measurement Bugeting 94 G.PMW 185 ZZZZZZZZZZI95 1. Mission Structure Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 99 H. PMW187 ZZZZZZZZÜZ 1. Mission I 2. Structure I 3. Proucts/utputs Cost Measurement Performance Measurement Bugeting 14 VII. SUMMARY AND NCLUSINS 15 A. SUMMARY 15 B. NCLUSINS '.."'" 18 C. TPICS FR FUTURE RESEARCH ZZZZ Centralize Vs.Decentralize rganization Utilization of Earne Value Managemention Mission Funing Vs Reimbursable Funing Utilization of Activity Base Costing Prouct Measurement Metrics 117 APPENDIX A: NTCSS DEPLYMENT SCHEDULE ZZZZZZZZZZ. 119 APPENDIX B: GLBAL MMAND AND NTRL SYSTEM-MARITIME (GCCS-M) APB 121 APPENDIX C: TC ESTIMATES: ADNS APPENDIX D: NAVMACS II/SMS ST MDEL 3 ZZZ. 127 APPENDIX E: PRGRAM STATUS VS. BENCHMARKS 131 APPENDIX F: ENGINEERING CHANGE PRPSAL (ECP) APPENDIX G: BLU JP FY99 FINANCIAL STSTUS (&M.N) APPENDIX H: SUBMARINE LF/VLF VMEBUS RECEIVER (SLVR) ACATIVT (SPNSR N61)139 APPENDIX I: NAVY HIGH FREQUENCY SATELLITE MMUNICATIN PRGRAM (NESP).141 IX

11 APPENDIX J: JINT (UHF) MILSATM NETWRK INTEGRATED (JMINI) NTRL SYSTEM APPENDIX K: PRJECT DESCRIPTIN: FSS J45 APPENDIX L: FY 98 FINANCIAL VERVIEW l41 APPENDIX M: ADS PRJECTED FUNDING l f 151 APPENDIX N: ST ANALYSIS SEPTEMBER 1999 APPENDIX : GLBAL PSITINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT INSTALLATIN STATUS 153 LIST F REFERENCES ^7 INITIAL DISTRIBUTIN 13/

12 I. INTRDUCTIN A. BACKGRUND From the post Worl War II era to the present, the Unite States an NAT, an the Soviet Union an the Warsaw Pact nations were engage in the Col War. Significant expenitures an the use of vast national resources marke this perio by both sies to gain an hpl military an economic avantages over the other. During this perio of intense competition between these two blocks, avantages gaine though military technologies were particularly prize. These leaps in technology provie numerous avantages for the country that invente, evelope an exploite the avantage. First, new technology coul provie a istinct military avantage. This is the most obvious military benefit from new technology. The nuclear power program for the Navy is an example. This program provie the Navy submarine force with significant benefits over existing forces, an provie a tangible benefit to the Navy an the nation. The nuclear Navy provie the capability for the Polaris program, that to this ay is a viable part of the tria national efense force. Seconly, new technology provies the nation with a sense of international prie in the international arena. The successes of the space program, for the Soviets in the late 195s is a case in point. At the time of the Sputnik launch, the Unite States an much of the worl believe that the Soviet Union was not as technologically avance as the western powers were. The success of Sputnik change this belief overnight, an altere 1

13 the way in which the Soviet Union was viewe by the rest of the worl. A similar reaction was seen as the Unite States progresse with the Apollo Space Program uring the 196s. The Unite States enjoye a new perio of international respect as successive Apollo mission reache new heights of technological superiority. This sense of heightene respect by the international community was an important ae bonus to whatever scientific an scientific gains were mae. A case coul be mae that the international prie the Apollo programs gave the Unite States was the most significant benefit. Thirly, the Unite States investe in new technology as a force moifier. The Soviet Union an the eastern block enjoye a numerical superiority of groun forces an equipment uring much of the Col War. The Unite States an allies countere this numerical superiority with technological superiority. Superiority in technology prouce weapons systems that forme the basis for the theory of force moifiers. This theory ictate that an American weapons system coul be so technology avance that it woul have the battlefiel equivalent of two or more Soviet weapons systems. Therefore, the improve technology, although it might be more costly, woul allow the Unite States to overcome the numerical superiority of the enemy. Lastly, improvements in military technology can have spillover effects into the civilian sector. Satellite technology an global positioning systems are programs that began as military programs, but have come to have significant civilian benefits as well. Satellite communication began as military programs with military applications. In time, this technology was transferre or co-evelope with the civilian sector. Toay, satellites

14 are critical to all telephone networks aroun the worl. This technology, seee with military ollars, has now become a civilian technology in its own right. There are many other examples of military applications having profoun civilian applications in the meical an other fiels. The evelopment of penicillin uring Worl War II in a superb example. ne of the common threas to all of these technological avantages is that they were fune an evelope in perios.of relative prosperity. The Unite States was obsesse with the Col War an the threat that the Soviet Union possesse for the safety of the Unite States an allies. This was also a time of prosperity for most Americans. This combination allowe a prolonge research an evelopment perio; which was the catalyst for technologically avance harware an weapons systems. The cost of these systems was seconary to the benefit to be gaine from the military operations perspective. These programs may be casualties of the their own success, as a historical review inicates. The Reagan efense builup of the early to mi 198s was the en of the high spening ays for the Unite States military. The Department of Defense share of the feeral buget has ecrease from 9.3% in 1962 to 6.3% in 1986 to 3.2% in [Ref. 1] The Berlin wall fell in The Soviet Union began its breakup in 199, an the Col War effectively ene in the early 199s. At this time, more political an public emphasis was place on the buget eficit. The last buget surplus was in the Johnson Aministration in 1968 an the cumulative national ebt grew to $5.5 trillion by 1998, when the next surplus appeare. The Col War an the subsequent military builup of

15 the 198s is generally believe to be a major factor in this eficit, although in reality entitlement programs have also been a large factor. From 198 to 1998, efense spening, even with the Reagan builup of the 198s, fell as a percentage of GDP from 4.81% to 3.19%. In the same perio, the combination spening of health care, Social Security, Meicare an interest payment on the ebt rose from 8.13% to 11.7% of GDP. [Ref. 1] In spite of these facts, the military continues to be viewe as a major "cash cow" in the feeral buget. This is particularly the case when the collapse of the Soviet Union consiere. Although the Department of Defense buget makes up only 15.9% of the feeral buget, it oes represent almost one-half of the FY99 iscretionary buget. As such, it has become a target for cost savings uring the 199s. All of these factors have cause cuts in successive efense bugets. As this occurre, all government agencies have been uner increasing scrutiny to spen taxpayer ollars more efficiently an effectively, an to reuce costs to prouce a buget surplus. The 1993 Government Performance an Results Act an MB Circular A-76 are just two of the measures that have been passe by Congress or orere by the Executive to cut costs an increase efficiency. This Act is iscusse later, but it is important to note that Government Agencies are coming uner increasing pressure to cut waste an inefficiency, an be more cost effective. As this philosophy becomes more prevalent, Government Agencies not irectly affecte by these executive orers or legislation are still attempting to become more responsive an cost effective. It is this philosophy that has lea Department of Defense commans such as SPAWAR to take a renewe look at their accounting an cost proceures.

16 B. PURPSE The purpose of this thesis is to examine the cost an performance associate with the operation of four program epartments of the SPAWAR Comman. SPA WAR is an immense comman, comprise of over 6,139 civilian personnel, with an annual buget of over $ billion in FY99. In prior fiscal years throughout the col war, SPAWAR (i. e., its component organizations) was primarily concerne with improving technology an capability to the fleet. Although this is still the primary concern, as the Department of Defense an Navy buget continues to be pressure into the next century, the cost of weapons systems, as.well as the associate benefits gaine from the corresponing expeniture of funs, will come uner increasingly scrutiny. SPAWAR is clearly concerne with better output analysis of its programs to help ensure that scarce funs are properly utilize. This thesis is a first step in assessing how SPAWAR currently ientifies an reports its proucts an output an how to better measure costs an outputs in the future. To better tie costs to output, it is necessary to ientify both costs an proucts. The emphasis of this thesis is on prouction an output ientification in SPAWAR. Cost analysis is a seconary concern after proucts an outputs are ientifie, an the process for output measurement are evaluate.

17 C. RESEARCH QUESTINS The central goal, of this thesis is to better unerstan how SPAWAR's prouction an financial systems are structure to support its mission. Seconly, this thesis explores how prouction an financial support systems are structure to support output measurement an cost analysis. The primary research question of this stuy is: - How oes SPA WAR measure prouction an performance? The seconary research questions inclue: - What types of proucts oes SPA WAR prouce? - How oes SPA WAR measure outputs prouce? - How oes SPA WAR measure the proucts they prouce? - How oes SPA WAR relate the costs of the proucts they prouce to performance, prouction an outputs?

18 - What measures of internal service activities or proucts (measures of goos an services prouce within the comman for other internal comman units) are available at present an how are these ata collecte, analyze an use? - Are cost ata linke to output or performance ata? If so for what services an proucts? D. SPE, LIMITATINS, AND ASSUMPTINS SPA WAR is a large an complex organization. The Program Directorates are the prouction components of the comman. There are other ivisions within the comman that play a large role in the SPA WAR organization (i. e. comman heaquarters, an research) that fall outsie the scope of this thesis. There are also classifie programs of SPA WAR that are also outsie the area of this research. The four Program Directorates are the focus of this thesis. The other ivisions are stuie only as they affect how the Program Directorates perform their missions. SPAWAR is an evolving organization. Even without the impetus of feeral governmental change, (e. g. following the National Performance Review), ifferent managers an leaers in SPAWAR an the Program Directorates from time to time have mae significant changes in management control systems, an financial systems. Further, the comman has been completely reorganize an restructure as its heaquarters has been relocate from the Washington D. C. beltway area to San Diego in the past five years. SPAWAR officials believe these changes will better support their mission of 7

19 supporting the fleet an other military comman. Some organizational changes are, in effect, experiments an improvement is uner continuous evaluation. Some change will continue into the future an may be expane, potentially within the Program Directorates, an possibly between the Program Directorates. Some initiatives may be assesse as failures to be scale back or iscontinue. Therefore, as with any one-time "snapshot" of a large an complex organization, especially one as ynamic as SPA WAR, the image will become less reflective of reality over time. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate prouction an performance measurement in the Program Directorates selecte, an to place measurement inicators in the Program Directorates into the context of the nee for improve performance an cost measurement an analysis across the entire SPA WAR organization. It must, therefore be kept in min that the scope of this thesis is not to explore measurement in all of the systems an programs in each Program Directorate. That task alone woul require its own thesis or more for each Program Directorate. The goal here is to gain a better unerstaning of performance an prouct measurement, an cost analysis for selecte programs in four SPA WAR Directorates. E. METHDLGY The primary ata collection metho to be employe are: personal interviews with SPA WAR officials, SPA WAR ocument review, telephone calls, survey an literature review on topics of prouction, performance an cost measurement an reporting.

20 Interviews were conucte to assess comman functional tasks an outputs, workflows an professional responsibilities in the four Program Directorates. It was critical to interview ecision-makers in each Program Directorate to assess the processes use in each Program Directorate an Program Managers Warfare, for prouction, performance, output an cost measurement. To successfully assess the four SPAWAR Program Directorates, two primary methoologies were employe: empirical an archival research. Both types of research serve the subject matter well for the reasons iscusse below. Archival analysis is useful to efine an investigate with organizational, financial an prouction ata. There are "paper trails" from one segment of the comman to the next, proviing relatively accurate an complete ata. Although this process is aruous, transaction flows often can be reconstructe. "The [archival] avantage lies in the ability to access an manipulate a vast quantity of har, an very often factual, information." [Ref. 2] Data sources analyze will inclue buget requests, buget justifications, buget transfers, an expeniture reports. These ocuments are critical in unerstaning the bugeting an financial relationships to prouction cost an output measurement within the Program Directorates. Analytical research will be the secon major metho use as a compliment to archival research. "An obvious avantage of analytic research is obviation of the nee to search for aitional ata. Instea there is a search for meaningful relationships among the ata which are reaily available." [Ref. 3] Archival ata cannot be unerstoo without conucting analytical research in an attempt to tie information together to form a

21 more complete picture of the structure an interrelationships that form the backbone of the prouction an financial structures of SPA WAR. These two methoologies are interrelate. Interviews will be conucte, an ata gathere from each Program Directorate source an in turn more questions will be aske as the interview research process evelops. In time, a more complete picture will emerge to aress the research questions pose in the thesis. F. RGANIZATIN F THE STUDY This stuy is organize into eight chapters. Chapter II reviews the SPA WAR mission an current performance measurement approaches. Chapters III through VI etail the structure, cost an performance measurement systems of Program Directorates 15, 16, 17 an 18. Chapter VII compares an contrasts the ifferent measurement methos use by the four Program Directorates, summarizes the results, provies conclusions an presents recommenations for further stuy. 1

22 II. SPAWAR MISSIN AND PERFRMANCE "Take all the various ifferent technological components an horizontally integrate them to provie the warfighters with state of the art, integrate en to en, operational capability." Rear Amiral John Gauss SPAWAR's mission is to provie integrate information solutions through elivery of fully integrate, teste an supportable systems an training of Sailors an Marines by perational Platform. SPAWAR also provies technical support an repair services to the fleet through the utilization of the System Support Centers 24 hours a ay, seven ays a week. The four Acquisition Categories (ACATs) were establishe to facilitate ecentralize ecision making an compliance with statutorily impose requirements. The categories etermine level of review, ecision authority an applicable proceures. ACAT I are the major efense acquisition programs. They have unique statutorily impose acquisition strategy, execution an reporting requirements. Milestone ecision authority for these programs is hel by the Uner Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, on acquisition category ID, or if elegate by the Uner Secretary, the Cognizant DoD Component Hea (acquisition category IC), or if elegate by the Component Hea, the Component Acquisition Executive. These programs typically excee $355 million of RDT&E or $2.1 billion of procurement. Acquisition Category II establishes the Milestone Decision Authority at the level of the DoD Component Acquisition Executive. These programs typically excee $14 million of RDT&E or $645 million of procurement. 11

23 They have unique, statutorily impose, requirements in the test an evaluation area. Acquisition Categories III an IV allow the DoD Component Heas to elegate milestone ecision authority to the lowest level eeme appropriate within their respective organization. [Ref. 3] TTAL SPAWAR PRGRAMS ACAT1 3 AC AT 2 3 ACAT3 19 ACAT4 19 NN-ACAT 12 TTAL 56 Figure 1- Total Programs The majority of SPAWAR acquisition programs are ACAT IE an ACAT IV. The Program Executive fficer (PE) an the Milestone Decision Authority are esignate to the Commaner, SPAWAR. Performance of the SPAWAR Comman is governe by the DoD acquisition regulation 5.2R which specifies how Acquisition Program Management will be conucte in DoD. It is also uner the authority of the SPAWAR IT 21 Strategic Plan which implements the DoD's IT 21 Strategy. Thirly, it is governe by Acquisition Program Bugeting within the DoD Buget process, focusing on performance an unit cost bugeting. 12

24 A. ACQUISITIN PRGRAM MANAGEMENT For nearly 25 years, Department of Defense Directive 5.1 an Instruction 5.2 R have been the cornerstones of efense acquisition policy an proceures. In 1996, the upate DoD 5.1 Directive an DoD 5.2R Instruction integrate the acquisition policies an proceures for both weapons systems an automate information systems. The goal of the revise instruction is to efine an acquisition environment that enables DoD to be the smartest, most responsive buyer of goos an services, at the best ollar value over the lifecycle of the prouct that meets the warfighter's nees. 1. Acquisition Management Process The acquisition process is intene to be structure in logical phases, separate by major ecision points calle milestones. The process begins with the ientification of broaly state mission nees that cannot be satisfie by nonmaterial solutions. Acquisition program stakeholers consier the full range of alternatives prior to eciing to initiate a new Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) or Major Automate Information System (MAIS). Threat projections, system performance, unit prouction cost estimates, life cycle costs, interoperability, cost-performance-scheule trae-offs, acquisition strategy, afforability constraints, an risk management are major consierations at each milestone ecision point. [Ref. 5] Part 2 of the DoD 5.2 R instruction establishes the Program Definition. Program efinition is the process of translating broaly state mission nees into a set of 13

25 operational requirements from which specific performance specifications are establishe. An important consieration uring the Program Definition phase is the evaluation of Comman, Control, Computers, Communications, Intelligence, Surveillance an Reconnaissance (C4ISR) Support. The C4I Support Plan shall inclue a system escription, employment, an operational support requirements incluing C4I, testing an training, interoperability an connectivity characteristics, management, an scheuling concerns. Part 3 of the DoD 5.2 R efines program structure an elements that are necessary to structure a successful program. These elements are propose by the Program Managers an etermine by the Milestone Decision Authority. Program strategies are etermine base on goo jugment, an provie innovative ways to achieve program success. Every acquisition program establishes program goals for the minimum number of cost, scheule, an performance parameters that escribe the program. Program goals are ientifie in terms of objectives an threshols. Each parameter inclues an objective that is the esire result (e.g., elivering a system uner buget) versus a threshol that efines a minimum acceptable result (e.g. elivering a system on buget). All acquisition programs must have an Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) to ocument the cost, scheule, an performance objectives an threshols ofthat program, beginning at program initiation. The performance measures evolve as the program is better efine. At Milestone ne, performance measures are efine in broa terms; uring this stage the measures of performance focus on neee capabilities in a program. As the program evolves, more specific program parameters are ae to characterize the 14

26 major rivers of operational effectiveness an suitability, scheule, technical progress an cost. The Acquisition Program Baseline must contain the key performance parameters state in the perational Requirement Document (RD). The value of an objective or threshol in the APB must be consistent with the RD. Since these performance parameters may not completely efine the operational effectiveness or suitability, the MDA may a aitional performance requirements. For Automate Information Systems, an important performance parameter can be economic benefit or return on investment. Scheule parameters inclue program initiation, major milestone ecision points, initial operating capability, an any other critical system events. These specific events are propose by the Program Manager an approve by the MDA for each program. [Ref. 6] Cost parameters shall be limite to Research, Development, Test an Evaluation (RDT&E) costs; procurement costs; an the costs of acquisition items if procure with operations an maintenance funs; total quantity (to inclue fully configure evelopment an prouction units); average unit procurement cost (efine as total procurement cost ivie by total procurement quantity); program acquisition cost (efine as the total of all acquisition relate appropriations ivie by the total quantity of fully configure en items); an any other cost objectives esigne by the MDA, (e.g. total life cycle costs). The cost parameters must reflect the total program cost an be realistic cost estimates, base on a careful assessment of risk an realistic appraisals of the total program cost. The amount bugete for a program cannot excee the total cost threshol establishe in the APB. [Ref. 6] 15

27 2. SPAWAR Information Technology 21 Implementation Plan Information Technology for the 21 st century, IT 21, is a customer riven requirement to moernize the Navy's C4I infrastructure. IT 21 provies for accelerate implementation an customer riven C4I innovations an existing C2 programs that are fune in the buget. The goal is to enable the warfighter to exchange classifie an unclassifie, tactical an non-tactical information from a single esktop computer, to shorten timelines, an to increase combat power. IT 21 is also one of the Navy's responses to aapt an evelop new operational concepts in an ever-changing environment. The military must aapt to new technology to shift from platform centric to network centric warfare. The traitional platform centric warfare focuse on mass versus mass, requiring extensive physical infrastructure, large overhea an immense capital expeniture. Network centric warfare leverages intellectual capital, focuses on information, increasing combat power while reucing infrastructure an overhea, resulting in a shift from attrition base warfare to spee of comman. Establishment of the IT 21 Functional rganization aresses the full range of other critical network-centric warfare eneavors, using an en to en, technical an programmatic approach. The technical approach enforces system engineering, integration an testing iscipline that mitigates variables an risks from user to user, crale to grave incluing requirements analysis, esign, acquisition, installation an operations. SPAWAR comman-wie responsibilities start with architectures an technology investigations, an planning for technology insertion. The next level system engineering 16

28 an resource allocation functions fuse in the component of IT 21, relating specific capabilities to specific expenitures. The Program Director (PD) an Program Manager Warfare (PMW) structure is organize to manage applications jointly an to support Local Area Network/Wie Area Network (LAN/WAN) infrastructure proucts. This facilitates technical management an scheuling of closely linke proucts. The Raio Frequency (RF) components are also co-manage to provie a single source of throughput capability, supporting the applications. Security Engineering, an Proucts Definition an Development are manage in a single PD with a cross- cutting interface that extens across the PD structure. The PDs provie for the commercial-off-the-shelf (TS) an governmentoff-the-shelf (GTS) proucts for IT 21. Key functions inclue system integration, test, support, certification an operation require. SPA WAR has put the comman Flag billets where they are most closely couple to the Fleet: SPA WAR 3 (perations), SPA WAR 4 (Installations), an SPA WAR 5 (Chief Engineer). a. IT 21 Process The IT 21 process starts with a review of Fleet perational nees an then translates them into requirements. Typically, component programs of strategies like IT 21 have current, valiate perational Requirements Documents an other ocumentation that provie traceability of valiate requirements through testing, 17

29 evaluation an implementation. The Navy now relies on the Copernicus Requirements Working Group (CRWG), which provies a forum for the fleet to review programs, to provie capabilities an nees, an to prioritize user requirements. The IT 21 strategy buils on this process to capture, analyze, valiate an prioritize system requirements. A ata base of user requirements is maintaine by PNAV N6 to track user requirements an comments. The CRWG atabase is reference in eveloping plans an analyzing capability nees. As eficiencies an nees are ientifie by the operating components, they are valiate by the ffice of the Chief of Naval perations an the Commanant of the Marine Corps. These RDs represent the baseline of IT 21 requirements. SPA WAR translates the capabilities efine through the CRWG an RDs into technology solutions, ientifying programs that meet the requirements or fining new technologies to meet the fleet's nee. Solutions that are ientifie are submitte for funing through the N6 Program bjectives Memoranum (PM) input. The coorination between SPAWAR an PNAV N6 results in the SPAWAR program an buget for IT 21. Through its IT 21 investment strategy, SPAWAR attempts to enable the Navy to moernize its C4ISR to meet projecte threats, an to leverage technologies that contribute to mission accomplishment. b. Buget Controls After requirements an capabilities have been ientifie, they are translate into the Capabilities Matrix to ientify buget controls. This process is similar 18

30 to the Acquisition Program Baseline mentione previously. Ring Charts which are en to en configuration rawings provie a baseline to accurately price the cost estimates of a propose system. Ring Charts also enable the system engineers to ientify any eficiencies in the available proucts an technology. As implementation Ring Charts are provie for review, pricing an available resources are reviewe an approve. The SPA WAR Chief Engineer's office leas these efforts, but works as a team with acquisition an subject matter experts locate in the PMWs. Details are refine to insure that roles an responsibilities are well efine an that coorination between activities is smooth an efficient. c. Lan Base Test Network As esigns transition to acquisition, the Lan Base Test Network becomes a critical resource, proviing all team members with the capability to test at the component, subsystem or en-to-en level. The utilization of the LTBN early in the process reuces risk an provies the fully integrate an teste proucts require for smooth an timely installation. The LTBN is a flexible, virtual network enabling connection an testing of isperse assets. It also supports connection beyon the LTBN to at-sea units when require.. PIT Pre-installation, test an check-out (PIT) is a key process in which the final assembly is complete, the entire software package is loae an evaluate for risk, "burn in" testing is complete an all components are package for shipment. PIT 19

31 inclues all TS software, an any other custom-esigne software. It consiers rack configuration an the propose network for each installation. Testing is complete in real an simulate environments. The final step in the PIT process is the elivery of the system to a consoliate warehouse, where the Automate Information Technology kits are assemble an bunle for shipment to the final estination. At this point the system is reay to install on a ship or shore site. The result of the PIT is an en-to-en process for testing an integrating all components versus a piecemeal test an check of systems. The resulting system is a single prouct, an IT 21 system reay for elivery, with a return on investment comparable to inustry, an within an acceptable level of risk. e. Capability Investment Matrix The Capability Investment Matrix (the Cube) is being evelope as a planning an bugeting tool to analyze an match assignment of ollars to capabilities. The initial phase of the Cube will analyze specific IT 21 Capabilities an relate costs to the Battlegroups (BGs) receiving them. The open architecture of the system will allow incorporation of aitional target groups, such as the Marine Expeitionary Forces (MEF), Amphibious Reay Groups (ARG) an shore sites as ata becomes available. The Cube uses three major axes to relate capabilities to activities, to BGs an to iniviual platforms. Activities are accounte for in a Work Breakown Structure (WBS) that is compatible with the new SPA WAR network centric organization. The WBS is use to ecompose a system by assemblies, subassemblies an components to 2

32 illustrate each task an to organize all tasks into their hierarchical relationships to the proucts an system. The WBS is manatory for project planning because it provies the basis for work assignments, bugeting, scheuling, risk assessment, cost collection, an performance status evaluation. The SPA WAR WBS elements inclue Project Management, System Engineering, Prime Mission Proucts/Engineering, System Test an Evaluation, Shipboar Installation, Integrate Logistics Support, perations an Maintenance, an Facilities. The primary ata elements of the Cube will be Appropriation Type (PN, M&N, R&D), Fiscal Year, WBS elements, Capabilities/Alterations an BG/Ship. Users will be able to access ata through Fiscal Year roll-ups or through focuse, customize queries. The ata moel will enable analyses of WBS elements. Aitionally the Cube will support Total wnership Cost tracking by linking key TC elements to the Cube WBS an ata structure. Users will be able to access the Cube via a web-base interface, with iffering levels of access an eiting capabilities. The Cube is being evelope an will be maintaine by SPA WAR 5. The ata in the Cube is supplie by the PDs an PMWs via excel spreasheets. DoD currently utilizes the Visibility an Management of perating an Support Costs (VAMSC) which provies historical operating an support cost ata for weapons systems, organize in a stanar cost element structure. The cost elements inclue mission personnel, unit level consumption, intermeiate maintenance, epot maintenance, contractor support, sustaining support an inirect support. The DoN VAMSC atabase inclues these costs for 217 ship, aircraft, electronics, missile, torpeo, an automate information systems. The Naval Center for 21

33 Cost Analysis (NCCA) manages the DoN VAMSC atabase. SPA WAR systems will be ae to the atabase starting in FY 2. / Prouct Resources Boar The Prouct Resource Boar, comprise of the PDs, the Comptroller of SPA WAR, the Chief Engineer, an Chief Installer, will irect the SPA WAR capital planning process with an integrate approach to ientifying an managing IT investments, irecting continuous ientification, selection, control, life cycle management an evaluation of IT investments. This structure process will provie a systematic metho to minimize risks while maximizing the return of C4/IT investment resources. The three phases of the capital planning process are: selection, control an evaluation. In the selection phase, SPA WAR an N6 etermine priorities an make ecisions on which projects will be fune. All projects are screene against a set of criteria an threshols to etermine if they meet minimal requirements. The costs, benefits, risks an contribution to mission nees of all IT 21 projects are assesse, compare an ranke for priority. The selecte projects make up SPAWAR's portfolio of IT 21 investments. The selection phase enables SPA WAR to pursue the projects that best support Navy mission nees, an ientifies potential returns before a significant amount of resources are spent. This phase intens to ensure that SPA WAR chooses its investments base on accurate, an current ata, focusing on how the projects irectly contribute to mission accomplishment. 22

34 The control phase helps ensure that SPA WAR is only supporting projects that continue to fit the IT 21 strategy. nce a project is selecte, it will be controlle an manage consistently. Progress reviews will examine cost, scheule an expecte mission benefits at key milestones in the project's life cycle. The evaluation phase compares actual versus expecte results to assess the project's impact on mission performance; to ientify an make changes or moifications that may be neee; an to revise the investment management processes base on lessons learne. SPAWAR's institutionalization of this capital planning process is intene to synchronize with the architecture process, PPBS, an the acquisition process to ensure that resources are irecte to satisfy the information nees of the Navy. [Ref. 7] g. Battlegroup Planning an Engineering Process The Battlegroup Planning an Engineering Process is concerne with top level initiation of the planning effort, overseeing this effort as it evelops, an monitoring the status. It will assist in making ecisions, establishing policy, an proviing ocumentation of facts by battlegroup, emphasizing the complete testing of all components installe on the various ships. The Battle Group Installation Chart provies a timeline to review processes as they are incorporate into each battlegroup installation timeline. Some of the key activities are: 23

35 . Target Architecture Evolution - This ongoing activity manages the projecte system level functional requirements base on planne C4I system installations. The target architecture is use for initial cost estimates an bugeting.. System Design/Integration - This is the process of esigning the C4I system to be installe in the target BG. The system esign is complete upon the conclusion of the system esign review an after the BG buil functional baseline has been establishe. Software Development an TS harware integration are performe, followe by Critical Design Review. Proucts inclue interface catalogs an configuration rawings. h. Battlegroup Implementation Review Process The Battlegroup Implementation Review Process enables a structure, sequential set of reviews to initiate, track an monitor status, to assess risk, to allocate resources, to set policy, to irect an steer implementation, to access progress, to track issue correction an to istribute information throughout the life of the BG. The overall iea is, for each iniviual process, to have the workers an evelopers of the BG implementations prouce an provie material to a Technical Review Boar to review, to analyze, an to conense ata into a summary technical report for the Prouct Review Boar. L Improve C4ISR Measures of Performance Development of improve C4I metrics is a critical element in establishing goo performance inicators for process improvement initiatives in fleet warfare. Improve metrics shoul enable the Navy to make the best acquisition ecisions in C4I 24

36 Improve metrics shoul enable the Navy to make the best acquisition ecisions in C4I R&D programs an to emonstrate the positive impact of IT 21 on the Navy's mission performance. Performance measurement is the key for each program, project an acquisition through institutionalization of outcome-oriente results that can be evaluate over time. Performance measurement is the application of a measure or a set of measures to the ecision making an operations of an organization to assess achievement of mission goals an priorities. For a broa program like IT 21, the ability to evelop an measure performance will help to ensure success in competing for funing an programmatic support at all levels in the Navy. The goal of IT 21 performance measurement is to provie a systematic metho for evaluating the inputs (resources), outputs (programs, projects), transformation (acquisition, evelopment), an prouctivity (contribution to the mission) of the program. Success in IT 21 will not only cause evaluation of program success relating to cost, scheule, an risk. It will also efine what kin of information is available to the ecision maker an how it shoul be use for tactical/strategic avantage. Effective IT 21 metrics must inclue acquisition measures an performance/proficiency (mission) metrics. SPA WAR has establishe a Total Cost of wnership Website for all SPA WAR programs, incluing the Program Managers Plan to reuce the cost of existing programs over the life cycle of the program as an acquisition metric. The SPA WAR IT 21 plan establishes performance-base C4I metrics to enable en-to-en testing, focusing on overall success by operational Fleet performance. 25

37 By using IT 21 systems an processes, the valiity of C4I reainess inicators shoul significantly improve. Performance measures shoul allow SPA WAR to translate their business strategies into plans of actions to benefit Navy C4I. 26

38 PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 15 - GLBAL INFRMATIN AND NETWRK SYSTEMS A. MISSIN PD 15 is the Global Information an Network System Program Directorate. The mission of PD 15 is the transformation of the C4ISR warfighting process transformation in support of The IT 21 mission. PD 15 goal is to establish esktop to esktop capability for Network Management, Metropolitan Area Network/Base Area Networks, Local Area Networks an personal computers at sea an ashore with all require software an harware, provie tactical an support applications, provie messaging/ an atabases to the fleet. PD 15 focuses on the fleet also inclues tactical an tactical support integration. Tactical integration inclues Comman an Control, Sensor Data Fusion, Threat Analysis, Decision Ais, an Weapons Fire Control. The tactical support integration inclues maintenance, supply, aministration, manpower, meical, equipment analysis, ornance an fuel. Implementation of the PD 15 programs will require a Base Level Information Infrastructure (BLII). The BLII will provie the information technology assets that support base wie connectivity with ship an Deployable Information Resource Requirements an interface joint DoD systems such as GCCS, GCSS, DMS an other Navy wie information systems. B. STRUCTURE PD 15 is structure similar to the other program irectorates within SPA WAR. There is a Director an Deputy Director of PD 15. Below the Deputy Director are four 27

39 ivisions that have istinct an unique programs within PD 15. These ivisions are calle Program Managers Warfare (PMW). The following PMW make up PD 15, PMW 151 Navy Tactical Comman Support Systems (NTCSS) Program ffice, PMW 152 Naval Messaging Systems Program ffice, PMW 157 Global Comman an Control System Maritime (GCCS-M) Program ffice, an PMW 158 Naval Integrate Networks Program ffice. These PMWs are iscusse below. Three main offices support the Director an Deputy Director. They are PD 15E Engineering, PD 15L Logistics, an PD 15P Financial Management. The Engineering Department provie top-system level technical irection in the evelopment, acquisition, eployment an support of PD15 integrate network systems an software applications through translation of operational requirements into engineering terms across the Program Directorate's programs. The logistics management office provies centralize integrate logistics support services to provie effective an economical support of PD15 cognizant network systems an software applications over their lifecycle. The logistics management office also provies Integrate Logistics Support inputs to the Program Managers to assist in the Planning, Programming, an Bugeting process. The Financial Management ffice provies business an financial support to the Program Managers. This support inclues program analysis an evelopment, buget formulation, buget execution incluing PPBS actions, submission of Program bjective Memoranum input an ocumentation, financial acquisition planning an management, an management analysis an reporting. This office also coorinates with the Project 28

40 Engineers in preparing the yearly spening plans in all programs aressing all tasks an activities. The utilization of the spening plans with the PMWs forms the basis for the obligation plans. During the year, they receive an upate plans from the PMWs to reflect the functions actually being performe an the applie funing. They also provie the Director with a consoliate spen plan an respon to higher level tasking. [Ref. 8:interview A] C. PMW Mission PMW 151 mission is the Naval Tactical Comman Support System (NTCSS). The NTCSS program provies stanarize support ata processing capability to afloat an shore base activities. 2. Structure PMW 151 is implementing the Naval Tactical Comman Support System through an integrate master scheule. PMW 151 provies an open forum for collaborative inustry an government system solutions maximizing the use of Commercial-ff-the- Shelf (TS) an Non-Developmental Item (NDI) technologies for the purposes of promoting joint interoperability an reucing life cycle costs in support of DoD's IT 21 plan. 29

41 3. Proucts/utputs The prouct of PMW 151 is the integrate NTCSS system. This system incorporates the Shipboar Non Tactical ADP Program (SNAP), Naval Aviation Logistics Comman Management Information System (NALMIS) an Maintenance Resource Management System (MRIS). NTCSS is the stanar migratory system for the Navy uner the Joint Maritime Comman Information Strategy (JMCIS), the Global Comman an Control System (GCCS), an the Global Comman Support System (GCSS). Appenix A shows the eployment scheule of the NTCSS program assuming the program's buget, performance an scheule oes not change in relationship to other Navy priorities. 4. Cost Measurement Naval Tactical Comman Support System is an ACAT I program with financial reporting requirements to the DoD Defense Acquisition Boar. In May 1998, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development an Acquisition require the resubmission of the Acquisition Program Baseline in support of the Total Cost of wnership Reuction Plans. The specific cost rivers of the NTCSS program were ientifie as (a) mission personnel costs, (b) software maintenance costs, (c) intermeiate an epot harware maintenance costs, () harware procurement an installation costs. The Acquisition Program Baseline ocumente the rebaselining of the NTCSS installation scheule as a result of funing cuts in FY 99 through FY 2. The Total Cost of wnership is efine as the total cost of a program to the Navy over its lifecycle. 3

42 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement of the NTCSS Program is governe uner the DoD 5.2 R that specifies reporting requirements relating to cost, scheule an performance. Base on the resubmitte Acquisition Program Baseline iscusse above, the main area of risk for this program is the buget because the NTCSS program line PM no longer inclues the funs to procure or install local area networks either afloat or ashore. The scheule outline in the Acquisition Program Baseline require coorination within the Navy to ensure that the appropriate local area network is available to support the NTCSS installation scheule. As a result the afloat NTCSS installation scheule will shift from FY 2 to FY 5 thus slowing the implementation scheule of the IT 21 plan. 6. Bugeting The PM has ha a significant impact on the installation scheule of the NTCSS program. The funing line for PM inclues no funs to procure or install local area networks either afloat or ashore. The $42 million ollar shift in funing from FY 99 to FY 2 to FY 3 through FY 5 will result in the eferring of installations of NTCSS software on a large number of ships, Naval Air Stations, Marine Aviation Logistic Squarons until after FY 2. [Ref. 9] The Navy has reirecte these funs to other programs manage by program offices. The reallocation of the bugete funs for the NTCSS program reflects the shifting in priorities of acquisition programs an systems resulting from political an operational necessities. If NTCSS is a major component of the Navy's IT 21 strategic 31

43 plan, hopefully funing will become available through reuctions in lower priority programs. D. PMW Mission The mission of PMW 152 is the integration of the Defense Messaging System Ashore (DMS) Joint Program an the DMS Afloat/Navy Moular Automate Communications System (NAVMACS II). 2. Structure PWM 152 is structure aroun two integrate prouct teams, one team working on the Defense Messaging System Ashore Joint Program an another team working on the DMS Afloat/Navy Moular Automate Communications System. The goal of the integrate prouct teams is to provie an integrate system which can provie the functionality of these systems in support of the IT 21 plan. 3. Proucts/utputs The prouct of PMW 152 is the integrate Defense Messaging System. The DMS system will provie organizational an iniviual messaging within a secure, accountable, reliable, electronic messaging system. The DoN DMS program will centrally procure an enabling capability for all Navy, Marine Corps, an Coast Guar organizations. The NAVMACS JJ system provies automate reception, transmission, cryptology control, an the processing, storage, an LAN istribution of rganizational 32

44 an Tactical Messaging while replacing antiquate systems. The NAVMACS II funing will also be utilize to support implementation of the SPA WAR Single Messaging Solution (SMS) in FY. Appenix B reflects the costing moel use to estimate the Total Cost of wnership for the NAVMACS H/SMS program. [Ref. 1] The fieling plan provies a bench mark that can be use to monitor the program's status via the work breakown structure an installations. Any variances in these projecte costs an installations can be further investigate allowing management to exercise internal controls as appropriate 4. Cost Measurement The integrate Navy Moular Automate Communications System (NAVMACS II) is an ACAT IV program with financial reporting requirements to the MSPAWAR. The Acquisition Program Baseline was reestablishe in FY 98 in accorance with the manate from the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development an Acquisition in support of the Total Cost of wnership Reuction Plans. The specific cost rivers ientifie of the NAVMACS II program were (a) Inirect/Infrastructure' support, (b) Sustaining Support, (c) Prime Mission Prouct, () System Integration an installation. Cost management is focuse on the total cost of systems installe on each platform with the goal of not exceeing buget authority in a given fiscal year. SPA WAR currently oes not have a stanarize cost atabase to track obligations an expenitures but is eveloping this capability as outline in Chapter 5. All of the PMWs 33

45 in PD 15 utilize the Financial Management Information System to assist in the management of Acquisition Programs an measurement of performance relating to buget an execution an the number of systems installe or achievement of milestones as efine by the Acquisition Program Baseline. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement of the NAVMACS II Program is efine by MSPAWAR specifying objectives an threshols relating to cost, scheule an performance. Base on the resubmitte Acquisition Program Baseline iscusse above, the main areas of risk for this program are buget an scheule. The installation scheule as efine by the Acquisition Program Baseline requires coorination an cooperation within the Navy an Coast Guar to ensure that the (a) initial procurement quantities, (b) initial installation quantities, (c) cumulative number of procure systems, () cumulative number of installe systems, (e) harware upgrae quantities, (f) software upgrae quantities can be accomplishe over the time frame FY 1 -FY Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 152 was one base on an engineering estimate of the Total wnership Cost over the program lifecycle by fiscal year because no actual cost ata exists on the fieling cost of the NAVMACS II system since the initial installations are not scheule until FY 1. The Work Breakown Structure efines the anticipate costs of each activity broken own into specific tasks i.e. initial spares an repair parts is subivie into large ships, meium ships, small ships, Coast Guar by fiscal year. As 34

46 this program progresses, the annual bugets will reflect the acquisition program goals for a given fiscal year. E. PMW Mission The mission of PMW 157 is the integration of the Global Comman an Control System (GCCS-M) Afloat/Ashore an the cean Surveillance Information System (SIS) Evolutionary Development (ED) programs in support of the Navy's IT 21 plan. The GCCS-M system provies afloat, joint an allie commaners a single, integrate Comman, Control an Intelligence (C2I) system that receives, processes, isplays an maintains current geography location information on lan, sea an air forces integrate with intelligence an environmental information. 2. Structure PMW 157 is structure as an integrate program team implementing the Global Comman an Control System Afloat/Ashore an the cean Evolutionary Development systems in support of the Navy IT 21 program. 3. Proucts/utputs The GCCS-M ashore will provie the CN an the Fleet Commaners an suborinate commans ashore with automate C4I support to receive, process, maintain, an isplay operational information to assess unit reainess an warfighting capabilities, an to support allocation of resources. This system provies resource information on 35

47 assigne forces an positional information on hostile, neutral, allie, an own forces integrate with environmental an other nationally erive information. GCCS-M supports efficient afloat/ashore information exchange an critical connectivity to all echelons of comman. The ED system is a multilevel secure intelligence system proviing on-line, automate, near real time support to National, Joint an Naval Commaners. This system supports comman, control an intelligence assessment, incluing inications an warnings an power projection; maintains ynamic atabases to support a common air, lan, sea an littoral battlefiel picture using groun force an maritime symbology. The integration of the GCCS-M an NTCSS programs has establishe another system requirement in support of the DoD IT 21 initiatives. The new requirement is for a LAN that provies shipboar classifie an unclassifie information transfer for network centric warfare. This LAN will implement fiber/copper backbone, switching an routing, commercial basic network an information istribution services such as , office applications an web cache. Utilization of fast Ethernet technologies will be critical to meet user requirements. [Ref. 11] Appenix C escribes some of the key performance parameters of the GCCS-M system in relationship to the Acquisition Program Baseline. The technical specifications will provie management with objectives an threshols that can be use to monitor the program as it continues towar fieling in the fleet. The specific number of systems is not applicable with this system; what is important is the technical performance of the existing systems which are being upgrae. 36

48 4. Cost Measurement The Global Comman an Control System-Maritime (GCCS-M) is an Acquisition II program with financial reporting requirements to MSPAWAR. The cost rivers ientifie of the GCCS-M an ED programs were (a) inirect an infrastructure support, (b) fieling support, (c) system integration an installation. Cost management is focuse on the total anticipate cost of systems installe on each platform with the goal of not exceeing buget authority in a given fiscal year. SPA WAR is currently eveloping a stanarize cost atabase to track obligations an expenitures an enable "what-if' analysis if a program's funing is reprogramme to another fiscal year an the impact on the number of systems procure an installe. 5. Performance Measurement Performance Measurement is base on the Acquisition Program Baseline. Since this program is still in evelopment at Milestone II, the key performance parameters of this system are relate to the technical aspects for threshols an objectives. These technical objectives are relate to system performance. For example, the Database Query Process objective is less than 1 secons an the threshol is less than 17 secons. As this program progresses the scheule of events has efine the objective an threshol for etermining if the program is on scheule. For example, the perational Test an Evaluation objective is ctober 2 with a threshol of April 21. The Acquisition Scheule provies a goo internal control to track progress of the system in relation to the scheule efine for the program. [Ref. 12] 37

49 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 157 was one base on an engineering estimate of the Total wnership Cost over the program lifecycle because no actual cost ata exists on the fieling cost of the GCCS-M/ED program, since the initial operating capability is not expecte until December 2 at the earliest. As this program progresses through the acquisition milestones an phases, bugete cost of the program will change an the flexibility of the Program Manager to implement this program will be a major challenge. F. PMW Mission The mission of PMW 158 is to integrate the Automate Digital Networking System (ADNS) as a unifie comprehensive replacement for many existing shipboar "stovepipe" communication systems by automatically an ynamically realigning the various share communication systems. ADNS provies shipboar an shore base exterior communication service management for the maximum utilization of available resources. Resources inclue automate raio room control, integrate voice, vieo an ata, efficient harware/system source selection, an integrate network management through the utilization of TS, NDI an commercial stanars. 2. Structure The structure of PMW 158 is an integrate project team working on the integration of the ADNS system with the Sensitive Compartmente Information ADNS 38

50 an the Integrate Shipboar Network System (ISNS) to transition the existing networks installe aboar afloat units, with transportable C4I shelters into a centrally manage an configuration controlle naval intranet information infrastructure. 3. Proucts/utputs The prouct of the PMW 158 will be a centrally manage an configuration controlle naval intranet information infrastructure. The ADNS system will be network interface with the SCIADNS an ISNS to transport real time sensitive information an sensitive compartmente information between ship-to-ship an shore-to-ship. The ISNS program will integrate existing capabilities provie by the Global Comman Control System-Maritime (GCCS-M) an the Naval Tactical Comman Support System (NTCSS). The ISNS program also utilizes resources provie by the Automate Digital Networking System (ADNS) to ensure flexible an reliable external communication links. The Integrate Shipboar Network System is esigne to provie every Navy ship, incluing submarines, with a reliable, high spee Local Area Network that will provie internal istribution an off-ship connectivity to the Defense Information System Network (DISN) Wie Area Networks. [Ref. 13] Appenix D is the Total wnership Cost estimation of the ADNS program. The estimate costs are broken own by work breakown structures by fiscal year. Inclue in the TC plan is the initial procurement quantities, initial installation quantities, initial Battlegroup Ship Spares, an cumulative number of installe systems by platforms. This information provies management some tangible objectives to measure this program's progress. 39

51 4. Cost Measurement The Automate Digital Networking System (ADNS) an the Integrate Shipboar Networking System (ISNS) are ACAT III programs with financial reporting requirements to MSPAWAR. The Acquisition Program Baseline was reestablishe in FY 98 in accorance with the manate from the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development an Acquisition in support of the Total Cost of wnership Reuction Plans. The specific cost rivers were ientifie for the ADNS an ISNS Programs. The ientifie cost rivers of the ADNS program were (a) sustaining support, (b) mission personnel, (c) system integration an installation, () inirect an infrastructure support an () prime mission prouct. The ientifie cost rivers of the ISNS program were (a) sustaining support, (b) system integration an installation, (c) prime mission prouct an () mission personnel. [Ref. 13] Cost management in PMW 158 is again focuse on the total cost of systems installe on each platform with the goal of not exceeing buget authority in a given fiscal year. The Acquisition Program Baseline an subivie Work Breakown Structure enable financial management of these programs relate to obligations an expenitures in comparison to the annual buget an overall program proviing useful management information. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement of the ADNS an ISNS Programs are efine by MSPAWAR specifying objectives an threshols relating to cost, scheule an 4

52 performance. Base on the resubmitte Acquisition Program Baseline iscusse above the main areas of risk for these programs are buget an scheule. The Work Breakown Structure as efine in the Total wnership Cost estimates for these programs efines the installation scheules an relate costs by fiscal year. As a management control" tool, these estimates provie a goo overview of what will be accomplishe by fiscal year given proper bugetary, installation scheules, an anticipate program milestones. Given the uncertainty of the buget process an changes in Navy priorities these TC plans are living ocuments to be upate to reflect changes in the external environment beyon the control of the SPAWAR comman. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 158 for these programs was base on unit cost per platform because of the availability of a FY 98 actual cost ata. The TC estimates were utilize to project the bugetary nees in support of PM. The Work Breakown Structure previously escribe helpe in the formulation of the PM submission an as SPAWAR evelops their own internal cost atabase, planning, programming an bugeting in the future shoul be supporte by reaily available cost ata available on all SPAWAR programs. 41

53 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 42

54 IV. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 16 - INFRMATIN AND ELECTRNIC SYSTEMS A. MISSIN Program Directorate 16 (PD 16), Information an Electronic Systems, is one of four Program Directorates within SPA WAR. The total integration of electronic communications an computer systems in the open environment has immensely improve the capabilities of civilian an military communications. It has also greatly increase the ability of an aversary to isrupt, estroy or intrue into these systems. PD 16 was create to evelop an prouce systems that can operate in this arena, that can perform whatever goal is require to support the nees of the Navy. To this en, PD 16's mission is comprise of 3 main objectives- information protect, information attack an information exploit. The information protect portion of PD 16, is the portion of the electronic information spectrum that is concerne with the enial, monitoring, etection, reaction, management an support of Navy communications systems. [Ref. 14] The information attack portion of PD 16 eals with the intrusion, egraation, isruption, eception an estruction of the enemy's electronic information systems. [Ref. 14] The exploit portion PD 16 eals with the etection, classification, tracking, intention, targeting an assessment of the electronic information spectrum; as well as eveloping techniques to exploit that arena. [Ref. 14] 43

55 When interlinke, these mission areas form the backbone of the PD 16 mission. The system that will link all of these projects together is the Joint Maritime Information perations System (JMIS). JMIS will support future Information Warfare (1) operations by proviing interoperability an integration of all exploit, attack an efen components. PD 16's mission is the crale-to-grave management an evelopment of all assigne electronic 1 systems within SPA WAR. This inclues all associate infrastructures as well as the analysis of require assets. In short, the mission of PD 16 is to provie fleet commaners with the 1 capabilities that are available now, an those that will be require in the future. These systems must be fully integrate across the Protect, Defen an Exploit omains. PD 16 must lea an rive the acquisition process in orer to provie the fleet this capability. B. STRUCTURE PD 16 has a similar structure to the other Program Directorates within SPA WAR. There is a Director an Deputy Director of PD 16. Below the Deputy Director are three ivisions that each have istinct an unique programs within PD 16. These ivisions are calle Program Managers Warfare (PMW). The following PMWs make up PD 16- PMW 161 Information Systems Security (INFSEC), PMW 162 Naval Information Warfare Activity an PMW 163 Naval Electronic Combat Surveillance Systems (NECSS) Program ffice. These PMWs will be iscusse below. There are also three main offices that support the Director an Deputy Director. They are PD16E Chief Engineer, PD16L Logistics, an PD16P Business an Finance. 44

56 The Chief Engineer an his staff support the esign, evelopment an testing of the harware an most of the software evelope by the Program Directorate. The Logistics ffice ensures material support for the prouct or system that is either currently in evelopment, or scheule for future evelopment. The L coe ensures requirements are measure, the reliability of parts an equipment are checke an availability is verifie. The L coe also evelops an verifies epot level support. Although PD 16 is comprise of three PMW offices, only two of these offices are physically locate at SPA WAR heaquarters in San Diego. PMW 161 an PMW 163 are locate at the heaquarters, while PMW 162 is locate at the Naval Maritime Information Center in Suitlan, Marylan. Due to its mission an projects, PMW 162 is a highly classifie organization. Due to these factors, PMW 162 will not be analyze in this stuy. C. ST MEASUREMENT/BUDGETING PD 16 is a ecentralize organization in many areas. As such, each PMW operates in an autonomous fashion. This autonomy oes not flow own to the financial management "P" coe however. This may be a result of having only two PMWs to support. The Business an Finance ffice for PD 16 is comprise of a epartment hea an four assistants. This office serves all of the finance nees of the PD as well as PMW 161 an 163. The P coe works with the Director an the PMW heas, as well as the APMs when eveloping the buget. Each APM is involve with the buget call. PD 16 is ecentralize to such an extent that the APMs work irectly with the program sponsors 45

57 in orer to obtain funs. In this way, the PD an PMWs serve more as coorinators than controllers for bugetary matters. D. PMW Mission PMW 161 is taske to enhance the operational capability of the combat commaner while reucing the effectiveness of ynamically evolving threats. PMW 161 is an integral component of the overall Information Warfare (1) program that provies Naval commaners with information superiority by controlling the flow an integrity of the information of the Unite States an her allies, while enying the enemy the same capabilities. PMW 161 cites a recent General Accounting ffice (GA) report on information security that note the increasing number of unauthorize iniviuals an groups who are gaming access to sensitive unclassifie information in the Department of Defense information systems. Aitionally, the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) believes that that there were over 25, attacks on DoD systems in 1995 alone. 65% of those attacks were believe to be successful. [Ref. 14] These attacks have resulte in stolen, compromise an corrupte ata. PMW 161 must provie information security systems that prevent this type of threat from successfully attacking Navy electronic communications systems. PMW 161 must also evelop an manage the Navy's information security research an evelopment program an support evelope systems throughout their lifecycle. 46

58 2. Structure PMW 161 is an autonomous organization that eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors, Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR. These offices inclue the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 161 is run by a Program Manager, with a Deputy Program Manager (A) as an assistant. There are three ivisions in PMW 161 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APM). These ivisions are comprise of Infrastructure Division, Secure Data Division an Secure Voice an System Integration Division. 3. Proucts/utputs Unlike the majority of PMWs throughout SPA WAR, PMW 161 prouces systems, an provies support functions for the fleet. In terms of prouction, PMW 161 prouces harware an software in three main areas. The first is the Electronic Key Management System (EKMS). EKMS is comprise of both secure voice systems, such as the STU-III system an secure ata systems. There are three levels of secure voice cryptologic equipment: type I, type II an type III. This area also prouces key management systems. The secon main area of prouction is network security systems. This inclues truste computer processes, TEMPEST, in-line network encryptors, antivirus software, network intrusion monitors/etectors, an compartmente moe workstations. The last main area of prouction is cryptologic security evices. This 47

59 inclues computer protection evices, crytolographic evices, Fortezza cars an secure terminal equipment. The evelopment an prouction of computer software is a significant portion of these programs. PMW 161 also provies security engineering services, which, as note above is fairly unique within SPA WAR. These services are primarily comprise of eveloping an installing firewall an intrusion etection systems. Although naval commans have the option of obtaining these services, form civilian companies, the system must be approve by PMW 161. PMW 161 is mission fune to provie this service to the fleet. This service is usually provie to major commans incluing CINCPAC. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) are provie as time an funs ictate. nce a request is approve, a preliminary plan is evelope to support the request. The harware an software requirements are checke against the current inventory sub-components, an are orere as require. (PMW 161 procures estimate quantities of TS components on an annual basis in orer to conserve funs.) Four weeks-prior to the installation, a site survey is one to ascertain the exact harware, software an programming requirements. Prefabrication is one at the prime contractor site or at PMW 161. The Fiel Activity or Contractor's laboratory completes the require programming an software integration. Historically, FY98 is a more representative year to view for this type of service. In FY99, IDS services were given a lower priority ue to the nee to perform fleet wie Y2K upgraes. (In FY99 there were Y2K upgraes at 36 sites throughout the worl at a cost of $ 4.8 million.) In FY98 IDS systems were installe or upgrae at 3 major an 25 minor sites throughout the fleet at a cost of $ 3.77 million. These services are comprise of both 48

60 shore-base an ship-base IDS systems. Further, these systems support classifie LANs, unclassifie LANs or both. Also, some of these systems must be configure to support interoperability between the Navy an other services, as well as with allies an potential allies. The uniqueness of all of the current capabilities, an with the requirements of each comman, create a situation where no two systems are even remotely alike. So we just can not pump these out [the software an the. precise harware configurations] an have them laying on the shelf for a quick install. [Ref. 8:interview B] 4. Cost Measurement The Business an Finance ffice or "P coe," performs limite cost measurement in PMW 161. Cost measurement is focuse on the timely performance of obligations an executions. The major concern of the P coe is ensuring that all financial an scheuling benchmarks are met. These benchmarks are receive for the SPA WAR Comptroller. Benchmarks change year to year, an occasionally within the fiscal year. The main measurement for benchmarks is the receipt of eliverables an the submission of vouchers from Contractors an Fiel Activities. PD 16 can only measure these eliverables as they are reporte to its office or to the PMWs or APMs. The official ates an milestones are in the contacts hel by the Comptroller. The P coe is not necessarily apprise of the benchmarks because the contracts are change an moifie frequently. Therefore, cost measurement is also performe by the cognizant APM. "They know the benchmarks, an are provie the obligation an expeniture amounts monthly." [Ref. 8:interview C] The P coe, PMW an APM have monthly meetings where they review financial ata which is charte with the planne amount, obligation benchmark, current 49

61 bligation, expeniture bench mark an current expeniture. Appenix E is an example of this ata. At this point ecisions are mae on follow on action. If the benchmarks are being met, than follow on action is not require. If the benchmarks are not mae, then the activity is notifie of the eficiency an action is taken to rectify it. Depening on the amount of the eficiency, the program can be checke weekly until it is "back on track." The PD 16 P coe uses an Initiation, bligation Plan atabase, which is an access program. This is an ol SPAWAR program which serves the nees of PD 16. PD 16 oes not have the funs (or oes not eem it avantageous) to invest in the Financial Information Management System (FIMS) which has been ictate by SPAWAR. In the Security Engineering Services area, cost measurement is virtually impossible. n the unit level, cost measurement can be evelope. The site survey evelope by PMW 161 personnel is transforme into a site plan with performance an cost parameters. These parameters can be teste once the system is installe. But eveloping cost measures that encompass the whole of IDS installations over the fiscal year is virtually impossible. As escribe above, there are a litany of factors that contribute to the cost of the IDS installation. Each installation is unique. There are also multiple installations at some sites. Therefore to evelop a cost measurement that can be applie to all services is ifficult at best, an is not attempte at any scale in PMW Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 161 is much the same as it is throughout other acquisition programs in other PMWs: cost, scheule an performance. As with virtually 5

62 all PMW stuie at SPAWAR, performance is measure ifferently for Fiel Activities than it is for Defense Contractors. Assistant Program Managers (APM) work closely with Defense Contractors, usually through Process Teams. These teams evelop buil plans for the prouct an track it through to completion. The primary measurement in this area is scheuling an technical performance. As note above, the primary systems prouce by PMW 161 are software upgraes, cryptographic evices an assist services. The Contractor, the Navy Sponsor or the Fiel Activity normally proposes these upgraes. If the sponsor proposes a change, the information is relaye to PMW 161. If a change is submitte by someone other than the Defense Contractor an PMW 161, then this change is propose to the Integrate Control Working Group (ICWG). This group is comprise of the Programs Sponsor, the fleet user, the Contractor, the Navy Fiel Activity an PMW 161. If this group approves the change in principle, than it is sent to the more technical Configuration Control Boar (CCB) for review. If the Defense Contractor has a change proposal, it is brought up at the CCB. The CCB is comprise of the Defense Contractor or Navy Fiel Activity an PMW 161. The proposal is iscusse in terms of scheuling, cost an performance. All of these changes must be approve in orer for the proposal to be accepte. If the proposal is accepte, then an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) is written an the change is incorporate into the technical baseline, which becomes a buil plan, as note in Appenix F. The buil plans have, testing, scheule an cost milestones that are tracke by the APM an to a lesser egree by the P coe. The Buil Plans have testing, cost an scheuling milestones which are tracke by the APM an to a lesser egree by the P coe. Performance measurements for 51

63 Services are riven by the site plan. The site plan has performance parameters that must be meet for a successful IDS installation. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 161 is performe by the PD 16 Business an Finance ffice as outline previously. N64 provie PMW 161 $74.81 million in FY99. f this amount, $19.7 million was RDT&E Navy, $4.9 million RDT&E Army, $39.1 million PN an $12 million &M, N. The bugeting for PMW 161 is program specific from the sponsor, an there are reprogramming threshols given by the Sponsor. E. PMW Mission PMW 163 is taske to manage the efinition, esign, evelopment, test an evaluation, prouction, integration, installation, operational support, an moernization of tactical electronic warfare, shipboar countermeasures, an relate Navy shipboar Cryptologic/Information Warfare (IW) sensor programs. To support the Navy's missions, these sensors must also support the cryptologic exploitation component of the Information Warfare (1) Comman an Control Warfare (C2W) system, an the Space an Electronic Warfare (SEW) mission requirements. To carry out this tasking, PMW 163 supports the Program Sponsor in translating Navy operational requirements into weapons systems acquisition programs that fall uner PMW 163 s cognizance. PMW

64 must evelop an prouce systems that are common, scaleable an interoperable with other services an with U. S. allies. 2. Structure PMW 163 is an autonomous organization that eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors, Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 163 is run by a Program Manager, with a Deputy Program Manager (A) as an assistant. There are four ivisions in PMW 163 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APMs). These ivisions are comprise of Technology ari Avance Division, Technology Transition an Integration, Acquisition Management Director, an Joint Project ffice. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 163 prouces information warfare systems in seven main programs. The Cooperative UTBARD Logistics Upate (BLU) is a joint initiative with the Unite Kingom to upate all UTBARD systems by replacing 84% of the equipment, thereby improving its capability an logistics supportability. This project uses a common core system that uses moular LAN esign concepts, which improves scalability. The Common High Banwith Data Link-Shipboar Terminal (CHBDL-ST) is a wie ban, full uplex igital ata link that supports several Navy an Joint airborne 53

65 sensor programs which require ata communications with shipboar processors. This system allows surface platforms to transmit an receive SHF intelligence ata real time. The Battle Group Passive Horizon Extension System Surface Terminal (BGHES- ST) system extens the range an capabilities of the CHBDL-ST system by proviing over-the-horizon VHF/UHF range. BGHES-ST uses significant amounts of TS harware with PMW 163 evelope software. The Combat DF system is an. RF Direction Fining signal acquisition an irection fining system with the capability to etect, locate an ientify enemy targets at long range. This system also has the capability to input this information irectly into ship tactical ata systems. Combat DF offers improve capabilities of the UTBARD system by proviing the ability to exploit unconventional an low probability of intercept (LPT) signals. The Ships Signal Exploitation Equipment (SSEE) provies the battle group with the capability to exploit signals of interest by proviing a-state-of-the-art system which etects, acquires an collects ata on potential threats to the battle group. This system is esigne to upgrae an automate these functions for a variety of surface ships. The Cryptologic Carry-n Program (CP) provies portable, carry-on cryptologic an 1 quick reaction capability for air, surface an subsurface platforms. This system will augment existing organic SSES capabilities an provie capabilities where no SSES exists. Cryptologic Unifie Buil (CUB) is a library of reusable software segments to meet the requirements of PMW 163 cryptologic systems. These segments are augmente 54

66 by PMW 163 evelope segments for sensor management an operation an signal analysis. [Ref. 14] The largest an most expensive project for PMW 163 is the CHBDL system. As escribe above, this system is vital to the entire 1 warfare effort. In FY-97 two Engineering Demonstration Moels (EDM) were prouce by L3 Communications uner irection from PMW 163. These EDMs were installe on the USS John F. Kenney CV- 67 an teste in Three systems were prouce in FY98, an four in FY99. There are four scheule to be complete in FY. These systems cost $6.1 million per unit, with installation costs of $1.2 million. riginal bugets calle for prouction of 4 to 5 CHBDLs per year, but future year's bugets call for 2 to 3 systems with ae capabilities. There will be a total of 31 CHBDL systems prouce for large eck ships, with a proposal to a two aitional systems for the LPD-17 program. 4. Cost Measurement Cost measurement in PMW 163 is performe the same as it is for PMW 161. The P coe in the PD 16 office performs limite cost measurement for PMW 163. Cost measurement is focuse on the timely performance of obligations an executions. The major concern of the P coe is ensuring that all financial an scheuling benchmarks are met. These benchmarks are receive from the SPA WAR Comptroller. They change year to year, an occasionally within the fiscal year. The main measurement for benchmarks is the receipt of eliverables an the submission of vouchers from Contractors an Fiel Activities. PD 16 can only measure these eliverables as they are reporte to its office or 55

67 to the PMWs or APMs. The official ates an milestones are in the contracts hel by the Comptroller. The P coe is not necessarily apprise of the benchmarks is the contracts as they are change an moifie frequently. Therefore, cost measurement is also performe by the cognizant APM. The P coe, PMW an APM have monthly meetings where they review financial ata which is charte with the planne amount, obligation benchmark, current obligation, expeniture bench mark an current expeniture. At this point ecisions are mae on follow on action. If the benchmarks are being met then follow on action is not require. If the benchmarks are not mae, then the activity is notifie of the eficiency an action is taken to rectify it. Depening on the amount of the eficiency, the program can be followe weekly, using the format shown in Appenix G, until it is back on scheule. The PD 16 P coe uses an Initiation, bligation Plan Database, which is a Microsoft access atabase. This is an ol SPAWAR program which serves the nee of PD 16. PD 16 oes not have the funs (or oes not eem it avantageous) to invest in the Financial Information Management System (FTMS) which has been ictate by SPAWAR. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 163 is much the same as it is throughout other acquisition programs in other PMWs: cost, scheule an performance. As with virtually all PMWs stuie at SPAWAR, performance is measure ifferently for Fiel Activities than it is with Defense Contractors. Assistant Program Managers (APM) work closely 56

68 with Defense Contractors, usually through Process Teams. These teams evelop buil plans for the prouct an track it through to completion. The primary measurement in this area is cost, scheule an technical performance. As note above, the primary system prouce by PMW 163 are software upgraes an 1 warfare evices. As with all programs at SPA WAR, "technical performance an scheules rive cost." [Ref. 8 interview C] A stanar proceure is followe by PMW 163 for all upgraes an propose changes to a system uner evelopment. The process is then similar for all proposals. There is an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) evelope by SPA WAR, the Contractor or the Fiel Activity. The office that proposes the ECP is the one that writes it. At that point it is approve, rejecte or moifie. If it is ultimately approve, the ECP is use to evelop Buil Plans. There is a point in time in all contracts, where there is a "freeze" in ECPs. This freeze enables the program to be prouce without further elay. Changes to the system must then be mae at the next moification. nce in prouction, the Contractor will issue a monthly Cost Scheule Status Report (CCSR) to PMW 163. This CCSR states progress for all three major parameters, cost, scheule an technical performance. If prouction is one by a Navy Fiel Activity, then a letter is sent to PMW 163 with the same information. For more technical issues, a Progress, Status an Management Report (PSMR) is issue. 57

69 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 163 is performe by the PD 16 Business an Finance ffice as outline previously. N64 provie PMW 163 $17.3 million in FY99. f this amount, $21.95 million was RDT&E (DCP), $2.7 million RDT&E Navy, $129.3 million PN an $16.4 million &M, N. The bugeting for PMW 163 is program specific from the sponsor. 58

70 V. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 17 - MMAND, NTRL, MMUNICATINS AND MPUTERS A. MISSIN PD 17 is responsible for eveloping an installing high capacity, inter-operable Navy communication systems that are integrate, flexible, seamless an afforable in the joint warfare environment. The functions of PD 17 inclue managing the evelopment, acquisition an life cycle support of integrate communication systems esigne to enhance the warfighting capabilities of the joint/coalition commaner; management of programs featuring equipment which support reception an transmission of satellite voice an ata information using'state-of-the-art algorithms over the complete electromagnetic spectrum. Participation on the SPA WAR Boar of Directors, Executive Steering Group an Integrate Prouct Teams attempt to ensure that PD 17 systems meet fleet requirements an interoperability goals while complying with the overall SPA WAR system engineering an architecture guiance, policies an stanars. B. STRUCTURE PD 17 is structure similar to the other program irectorates within SPA WAR. There is a Director an Deputy Director for PD 17. Below the Deputy Director are three ivisions that each have istinct an unique programs. These ivisions are title Program Managers Warfare (PMW). The following PMWs make up PD 17, PMW 173 Submarine Communications, PMW 176 Navy Satellite Communications, PMW 179 Avance Automate Tactical Communications. These PMWs are iscusse below. 59

71 There are also three main offices that support the Director an Deputy Director. They are PD 17E Chief Engineer, PD 17L Logistics, an PD 17P Business an Finance. The Chief Engineer an his staff provie top-system level technical irection in the evelopment, acquisition, eployment an support of PD 17 integrate communication systems an relate proucts through translation of operational requirements into engineering terms across proucts an processes of the Program Directorate's programs. The Logistics Management ffice provies centralize integrate logistics support services to provie effective an economical support of PD 17 cognizant communication systems over their life cycle. The Logistics Management ffice also provies Integrate Logistics Support inputs to the Program Managers to assist in the Planning, Programming an Bugeting process. [Ref. 8:interview D] The Business an Financial Management ffice provies business an financial support to the Program Managers. This support inclues program analysis an evelopment, buget formulation, execution incluing PPBS actions, submission of Program bjective Memoranum input an ocumentation, financial acquisition planning an management, an management analysis an reporting. This office also, coorinates with the Project Engineers in preparing the yearly spening plans in all programs aressing all taskings an activities. The utilization of the spening plans by the iniviual PMWs form the basis for the obligation plans. During the year, they receive an upate the PMW plans to reflect the functions actually being performe an the applie funing. They also provie the Director with a consoliate spening plan to be provie to MSPAWAR as require. 6

72 C. PMW Mission PMW 173 is the single point of contact within SPA WAR for submarine communication programs. Guie by the PNAV N87/N6 Submarine Communications Master Plan an in concert with the Navy Satellite Communications (NAVSATM) program, PMW 173 is eveloping a communications support system common to all classes of submarines an fully compliant with the Joint Staffs "C4I for the Warrior" communications architecture. 2. Structure PMW 173 is implementing the Submarine Communications Master Plan through an integrate master scheule of all relate programs. PMW 173 promotes an open forum for collaborative inustry an government system solutions maximizing use of Commercial-ff-the-shelf (TS) an Non -Developmental Item (NDI) technologies for the purpose of promoting joint interoperability an reucing life cycle costs. Submarine communications capabilities will be incrementally increase every 2 years using a phase approach continuing through the year 25. Phase upgraes are being planne for SSN 688 Class, Trient Class an SEAWLF Class submarines. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 173 is coorinating the evelopment of the new Attack Submarine, Virginia Class, exterior communication system with the Ship Acquisition Project 61

73 Manager (SHAPM) PMS 45 an the shipbuiler, Electric Boat Division, General Dynamics. All initiatives are coorinate with the fleet to ensure user nees are met in an efficient an afforable manner. PMW 173 also has responsibility for Life Cycle for the fixe base, low frequency communications systems Very Low (VLF) an Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) for strategic communications with submarines. PMW 173 also coorinates with all SPA WAR program offices to ensure submarine requirements an nees are mutually achievable, integrate an supporte as well as evelopment an elivery of all exterior submarine communication systems such as high ata rate antennas, an phase array antenna systems. External coorination with Naval Sea Systems Comman is require for shipboar evelopment an elivery of exterior shipboar installation of all communication systems. [Ref. 8:interview E] Appenix H etails the amount of total procurement quantities for the Submarine Low Frequency/Very Low Frequency Communication Receivers (SLVR) from FY 99 to FY 4. [Ref. 16] 4. Cost Measurement As previously state, the Acquisition Program Baseline efines what the anticipate cost of a system or prouct will be over its life cycle while ocumenting the cost, scheule an performance objectives an threshols of the program. The Acquisition Program Baseline also establishes the program buget by efining the cost objectives an threshols that must be met as a program progresses through the milestones to final fieling on platforms an for lifecycle management. 62

74 Cost management is focuse on the total cost of systems installe on each platform, with the basic bugetary goal of not exceeing buget authority (BA) in a given fiscal year. SPA WAR currently oes not have a stanarize cost atabase to track obligations an expenitures but, it is eveloping this capability through the utilization of the "Cube" as previously escribe. PMW 173 utilizes the Financial Management Information System (FMIS). FMIS enables the Financial Managers to ientify, maintain an control the program requirements within the appropriate level of funing in a given fiscal year. FMIS focuses on PMW fiscal year requirements an allows the P coe personnel the ability to track an monitor the assigne expenitures through execution, for comparison of obligate vs. expene funs. FMIS utilizes a Work Breakown Structure erive from the Acquisition Program Baseline to ientify the functions (parts of a system) to establish cost rivers an assign costs, specifying the correct appropriation, scheuling tasks an monitoring the status of funs. FMIS also assists in evelopment of the Acquisition Plan as it ientifies the appropriation, obligation an outlay of expenitures. Due to the relatively low buget $55 million of the PMW 173 communication systems, the stability of the annual buget is questionable given that the technology changes in the C4I arena every six months. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 173 is riven by the factors important to any acquisition program: cost, scheule an performance. The C4I plan for submarines, the IT 21 requirements an the system integration requirements rive performance 63

75 measurement. System integration is riven by communication system computability, with the risk of equipment unavailability. The C4I plan for submarines is riven by performance of the communication system that has the risks of cost overruns an meeting performance parameters. The PMW 173 program manager has to tailor his program to meet the buget cycle while proviing the eliverable (system installations) to meet the Battle group Fitting Scheule. [Ref. 8:interview F] The SPAWAR IT 21 plan assists in performance measurement in its focus on eploying battlegroups by fiscal year. The Navy wants the each battlegroup to have the same communication capabilities. PMW 173 personnel meet two times a year with the fleet to iscuss how well their proucts perform, to resolve issues an to get feeback on what communication improvements Navy users wants. These meetings are in aition to the communications, proviing monthly status reports from the System Centers that supply the maintenance an irect customer service to the fleet. [Ref. 8:interview G] PD 17 measures the following inicators in relationship to their programs an the IT 21 Core Program Components: technical performance, cost, scheule, funing, test an evaluation, prouction, logistics, software, contract status. These performance inicators provie a snapshot at a point-in-time to inicate program problems or areas that nee special attention. The installation scheule is shown as a graph of the acquisition program status, as inicate by milestones. Inicators outsie the threshols are explaine with a propose resolution. This information is use by MSPAWAR to oversee the programs uner his control. These status reports are provie twice a year an 64

76 upate monthly within the PMWs. Appenix E provies an overview showing the major metrics reporte an the installation scheule for a PMW 173 prouct. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 173 is one on a unit cost basis ue to the fact this is a mature acquisition program an cost per unit is available base on previous installation an procurement information. PMW 173 oes buget submittals for perations an Maintenance Navy, Research an Development, an ther Procurement Navy. The buget submissions reflect the cost elements of each system, quantity an unit cost by fiscal year. This information provies a key element to match program performance with bugete an actual costs. The acquisition program baseline provies a plan reflecting the number of systems to be procure an installe in a fiscal year. Ajustments to the program buget are reflecte by either an increase or ecrease in systems procure an installe in the fleet. A major issue for PMW 173, as state, in this chapter is the small relative size of the buget for their programs. Given Navy emphasis on equivalent capability across eploying platforms, PMW 173 is likely to continue to receive funing to meet this goal. D. PMW Mission PMW 176 provies a joint interoperable, integrate en-to-en Naval ship an shore communications capability in the spectrum above 1GHz. These proucts represent 65

77 the most capable, cost-effective communications mix of military an commercial solutions consistent with integrate C4I architecture. They also satisfy the Navy's vision of a seamless, interoperable, user-oriente information environment. 2. Structure PMW 176 is matrixe into the following areas: (1) The Integrate Terminal Concept of Navy Satellite Communication, (2) The Navy Extremely High Frequency (EHF) Satellite Communication, (3) Avance systems engineering an integration efforts on "cross-iscipline" areas relate to proper execution of commercial solutions. 3. Proucts/utputs The Integrate Terminal Concept of Navy Satellite Communication implements a "strategy of afforability" to meet future requirements for high capacity satellite communications for ships, submarines, an shore commans. This strategy fiels terminal, antenna, an supporting equipment to provie en to en SATM technical solutions for the military an commercial spectrum from L through Q bans, using innovative procurement, aggressive evelopment/fieling, an non-traitional leasing approaches. bjectives of the strategy inclue (a) a migrating current "stovepipe" military SATM systems, that operate above 1 GHz, to open architecture, moular, multiban terminal systems, (b) maintaining systems eploye in the fleet an ashore in the highest state of reainess possible, (c) maximizing the use of TS proucts operating in SATM frequencies, () promoting avance technologies for low observable an multifunction antennas to reuce the impact of topsie systems on 66

78 shipboar survivability, (e) taking the initiative in those areas where warfighter requirements lag operational nee, an (f) proposing an implementing strategies to leverage current an future military an commercial proucts. The ACAT I Navy EHF SATM Program (NESP) is the Navy segment of the joint Milstar program'. It provies interoperable, low an meium ata rate anti-jam, low probability of intercept/etection connectivity for submarines, ships an ashore. Program focus areas inclue (a) eveloping an integrating terminals to provie Navy units with networke, point-to-point or broacast EHF connectivity, (b) eveloping an integrating communication interfaces that are unique to the joint Milstar program, (c) monitoring avance technology insertions incluing waveform enhancement, improve submarine report-back capacity, encryption, an automate satellite han-over, () coorinating Navy efforts in support of eveloping the next generation of avance EHF (AEHF) capability, incluing efforts in support of the groun, space, an communications planning segments. Avance system engineering an integration efforts focus on several "crossiscipline" problems relate to proper execution of communications systems, incluing (a) coorinating the integration of antenna solutions for new construction ships an for benefit platforms, (b) eveloping an coorinating the transition an technology insertion concepts to enable communications Science an Technology/Research an Development efforts to become prouction reay, (c) coorinating satellite communication technology emonstrations, an () coorinating baseban integration among various program an inustry partners. [Ref. 8:interview H] 67

79 Appenix I outlines the total cost of the NESP program an the number of total units after the reefine acquisition program baseline. Aitional information provie inclues the historical average unit procurement cost an program acquisition unit reflecting how program changes have impacte on these cost measures. The programme unit cost ata provies a bench mark that can be use to monitor the program's status. Any variances in these projecte costs an installations can be further investigate allowing management to exercise internal controls as appropriate. 4. Cost Measurement The Navy Extremely High Frequency Satellite Communication Program (NESP) is ah ACAT I program with financial reporting requirements to the DoD Defense Acquisition Boar. In May 1998, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development an Acquisitions require the resubmission of the Acquisition Program Baseline in support of the Total Cost of wnership Reuction plans. PMW 176 has focuse on return on investment of cost reuction initiatives to support program funing. The Total Cost of wnership is efine as the total cost of a program to the Navy over its lifecycle. The NESP Total Cost of wnership was estimate at $4.6 billion for FY , of which $1.6 billion are sunk costs an $3 billion are future variable costs. Three TC reuction initiatives in FY 98 focuse on high impact future costs incluing: replacement of the Traveling Wave Tube with a Soli State Power Amplifier; consoliate Installation Process which is a strategy that views all installation jobs from 68

80 the perspective of the platform an utilizes a platform installation team to plan all the require equipment installations as an integrate job; an Software Replacement with a Moern Program Language. The cumulative cost avoiance over was estimate at $21 million in return for a cumulative investment of $41 million (FY 98 ollars) from FY 2 to FY25. The Traveling Wave Tube replacement initiative was the most effective cost reuction opportunity an was recommene as a NESP High Payback Initiative. The RI when evaluate using optimistic (i.e. most likely), an pessimistic scenarios resulte in RI gross potentials of 15% to 25% in the FYDP 2-25 time frame, an 51% to 67% RI in the FYDP. [Ref. 15] The Acquisition Program Baseline cost upate mae by the Program Manager of PMW 176 inicate no breach for the key Average Unit Prouction Cost an Program Average Unit Cost Parameters. In fact, the propose averages are lower than those currently in the APB. Given the tightening buget for all programs, this ACAT I program appears to be competitive in the RI arena. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement of the NESP Program is governe uner the DoD 5.2 R that specifies reporting requirements relating to cost, scheule an performance on a quarterly basis. The next NESP program performance measurement will be in November 1999 when the Milestone Decision Review perational Test etermines whether the program is reay to provie the Navy with "Core" an "Har Core" 69

81 Communications in all levels of conflict an survivability uner extreme conitions, e.g. electromagnetic, physical. The NESP program nees to achieve the threshols of the perational Test since the Acquisition Program Baseline threshol of April 1999 has alreay been breache. Future funing of this program coul be impacte if the perational Test is not successful. Aitionally, the NESP program is epenent on the timely launch of the MELSTAR Flight 3 Satellite. 6. Bugeting Bugeting for the NESP Program follows the Acquisition Program Baseline note in this chapter. Due to the tight ollar threshols, NESP faces more scrutiny from the PNAV an the Secretary of Defense. While the buget reflects unit cost installation of NESP systems by platform, an emerging issue is the lack of unerstaning of Program Management by buget personnel. The Acquisition Reform Initiatives began in 1993, but not all buget personnel have been traine in the DoD Program Management process, as evience by the enless ata calls requiring program manager time an financial personnel time to respon. Ieally, once a program is approve an bugete for in the FYDP, annual justifications of the program shoul not be necessary. However, given congressional, DoD an Navy oversight requirements, this is not possible. 7

82 E. PMW Mission PMW 179 consoliates an automates Navy tactical raio systems into open, flexible, moular systems that allow evolutionary harware an software improvement an upgraes. This consoliate approach focuses on baseban-to-raio Frequency an tactical raio communication systems evelopment, an provies technical expertise on USN, USMC, Joint an Foreign Military Sales Programs. The objectives of the approach are met through integrate system engineering initiatives, an examination an implementation of mobile tactical communication systems. 2. Structure PMW 179 is structure to focus in the following areas: (1) Automation of raio room functions an raio room requirements by eveloping an centralize (Tech Control) component controller, (2) Implementation an support of state-of-the art IT control an switching systems consistent with approve SPA WAR 5 architectures, (3) Implementation an support of naval shipboar an shore tactical Raio Frequency (RF) systems that operate between lkhz to 2GHz. Automation of raio room functions an reuction of raio room requirements inclues eveloping centralize (Tech Control) component controllers, that, in final form, inclue the following moules: (1) System Configuration: Setup, Management an System Control, (2) System Monitoring: Automate System Monitoring an Perioic Performance Testing, (3) System Security: Authorization checks on operator/system user 71

83 inputs, (4) Information Security Monitoring/Monitor System Security, (5) Theater Spectrum Management, (6) Information Warfare/C2W Tactical Spectrum Management. Implementation an support of state-of-the-art IT control an switching systems is intene to be consistent with approve SPA WAR 5 architectures, with focus on: (1) Automating configuration control an monitoring of Raio Communication System (RCS) circuits, (2) Planning, monitoring, an controlling of existing raio communications networks, circuits an virtual networks through computer controlle resource/network management, (3) Stanarizing ship an shore base switching an multiplexing systems, (4) Proviing real-time circuit monitoring, fault etection an localization. [Ref. 8 interview H] 3. Proucts/utputs Proucts inclue implementation an support of naval shipboar an shore tactical Raio Frequency (RF) systems that operate between 1 khz to 2 GHz. This inclues High Frequency Systems, Very High Frequency Systems, Ultra High Frequency Systems, UHF Line of Sight Systems an UHF Satellite Communication Systems. Specific initiatives inclue: (1) Managing general tactical RF communication programs such as the Joint Military Satellite Communication Network Integrate Control System (JMEN1) which provies centralize control an ecentralize management of voice an ata communications operating over non-processe 5-kHZ an 25-kHZ to Joint Chief of Staff valiate users. (2) Proviing situational awareness intelligence RF programs such as the Commaner's Tactical Terminal (CTT) which provies near-real-time tactical 72

84 information beyon the battlegroup to the entire theater of operations in support of Theater Ballistic Missile Defense. (3) Fieling naval expeitionary warfare communication raio programs such as the Digital Wieban Transmission System (DWTS) which provies ship-to-ship an ship-to-shore ata transmission links, an avance RF transmission components through the utilization of Digital Moular Raios (DMR). (4) Analyzing existing architectures an current system life cycle costs to etermine if existing equipment shoul be replace with more robust an/or more cost effective tactical RF communication systems within the 1kHz to 2 GHz spectrums, proviing raio systems esigne to be centrally linke that also support avance communication networking an raio room automation. [Ref. 17] Appenix J outlines the installation scheule for the Joint UHF Satellite Communications Network Integrate (JMINI) Control System. The total number of units to be procure an installe equal 6 over the FY to FY 4 time frame. 4. Cost Measurement Cost measurement in PMW 179 is very similar to that in PWM 173. MSPAWAR is the Milestone Decision Authority, an these programs are small in terms of total cost. Since these are mature systems being upgrae in support of the IT 21 initiative, actual costs of these systems an installation costs are available, making cost measurement relatively easy to o within the PMW. Cost measurement is, again, focuse on the total cost of systems installe on each platform within the buget authority appropriate in a given fiscal year. Due to the 73

85 relatively small ollar amounts of PMW 179 communication systems, the stability of the annual buget is always an issue because program reuctions are easy to justify. However, the SINCGARS system became a Congressional Interest Item in FY 99, an therefore program execution against bugete cost will be closely monitore. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 179 is riven by the factors note as important to any acquisition program: cost, scheule an performance. The Program Manager of PMW 179 has the same risk issues as face in PMW 173, i.e., tailoring the program to meet buget constraints while proviing the eliverable (upgrae capability) to meet the Battle Group Fitting Scheule. The performance inicators tracke in PMW 179 relate their programs to the IT 21 Core Program Components previously iscusse in this chapter. The installation scheule an acquisition program status are manage as previously iscusse. Status reports are provie to MSPAWAR twice a year an are upate monthly within the PMW. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 179 also is conucte on a unit cost basis ue to the fact that this is a PMW with mature acquisition programs an cost per unit ata available base on previous installation an procurement information. PMW 179 prepares similar buget submittals as those of PMW 173, reflecting the cost elements of each system, quantity an unit cost by fiscal year. [Ref. 16] 74

86 The next milestone for this program is the Voice an Data perational Test in the first quarter of FY. If the operational test is successful, the SINCGARS program may receive some preference for funing to help ensure program success. 75

87 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 76

88 VI. PRGRAM DIRECTRATE 18: INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RENNAISSANCE (ISR) A. MISSIN Program Directorate 18 (PD 18), Intelligence, Surveillance an Reconnaissance (ISR), is one of 6 Program Directorates within SPA WAR. PD 18's mission is comprise of 3 main areas- intelligence, surveillance, an reconnaissance. The intelligence portion of the PD is efine as "the prouct resulting from the collection, processing, integration, analysis, evaluation, an interpretation of available information concerning foreign counties or areas." [Ref. 18] The surveillance portion of PD 18 eals with "the systematic observation of aerospace, surface, or subsurface areas, places, persons, or things by visual, aural, electronic, photographic, or other means." [Ref. 18] The reconnaissance portion of PD 18 eals with "the missions or efforts to obtain information about the activities an resources of an enemy an to secure ata concerning the meteorological, hyrographical, or geographic characteristics of a particular area." [Ref. 18] These assignments place together form the backbone of the PD 18 mission. This mission is the crale-to-grave management an evelopment of all assigne ISR evelopment an acquisition programs within SPA WAR. This inclues all associate infrastructures an the analysis of require assets. In short, PD 18 esigns systems, that are the eyes, ears an brains of the fleet. These systems must receive ata an 77

89 intelligence in all omains, an relay this to support systems that integrate these ata in to usable information for the fleet. They must evelop, test, engineer an fiel all systems an proucts uner their cognizance an, in turn, support the proucts an systems that they sen to the fleet. PD 18 must insure that their ISR systems are esigne an installe so that they can be successfully integrate in all maritime an joint applications. Lastly, PD 18 must serve as the ISR expert for the Navy. B. STRUCTURE PD 18 is structure similar to the other program irectorates within SPA WAR. There is a irector an eputy irector of PD 18. Below the Deputy Director are five ivisions that each have istinct an unique programs within PD 18. These ivisions are calle Program Managers Warfare (PMW). The following PMWs make up PD 18- PMW 181 Fixe Surveillance, PMW 182 Mobile & Deployable Surveillance, PMW 183 Avance Deployable Systems, PMW 185 METC Systems an PMW 187 Global Positioning Systems. These PMWs will be iscusse below. Three main offices also support the Director an Deputy Director: PD18E Chief Engineer, PD18L Logistics, an PD18P Business an Finance. The Chief Engineer an his staff support the esign, evelopment an testing of the harware an most of the software evelope by the Program Directorate. The Logistics ffice ensures material support for the prouct or system that is either currently in evelopment, or scheule for future evelopment. The L coe ensures requirements are measure, the reliability of 78

90 parts an equipment are checke an availability is verifie. The L coe also evelops an verifies epot level support. C. ST MEASUREMENT/BUDGETING As note above, PD 18 is a ecentralize organization. As such, each PMW operates in an autonomous fashion. This autonomy carries own to the Finance an Business P coe offices. The P coes each manage their financial bugeting an tracking systems ifferently. SPA WAR as a whole has worke with a contractor, PSA, who evelope a financial management tool calle the Financial Management Information System (FMIS). Although the Government owns the FIMS program, PSA hols the contract for the installation, instruction an ata loaing of the system for SPA WAR. The PMWs have been "irecte" to use this system, but there are two perceive problems with it. First, although it has significant capabilities, many analysts o not see sufficient avantages to using it. It has only limite interface with the Financial Information Management System (FIMS), that is the system that is use by SPA WAR as the comman's buget execution tool. Comments such as "its. K." an "I'm not totally happy with it, but it oes work" were common when escribing the FMIS. [Ref. 8:interview I] Aitionally, FMIS is costly. ne PMW spent $117, for the package. Even within SPA WAR, this is a large sum to spen on a management system if the benefits are not apparent. Subsequently, only one PMW (PMW 181), uses FMIS. The rest of the PMWs track spening an scheuling with their own Excel spreasheets. These were all evelope in-house by the P coe or by personnel in the PMW. The 79

91 bottom line is that there is no centralize or even common bugeting or tracking tool use within PD 18. D. PMW Mission PMW 181 is taske to provie Fixe Surveillance Systems for the fleet. These systems comprise of a wie array of assets incluing broa area fixe, passive, unersea surveillance systems for the etection, classification, localization, an tracking of submarines. This system is comprise of three main elements which inclue Soun Surveillance Systems (SSUS), Fixe Distribute Systems (FDS) an Surveillance Direction Systems (SDS). 2. Structure PMW 181 is a fairly autonomous organization that eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 181 is run by a Program Manager, with major offices comprise of the Deputy Program Manager (A), Business & Finance (P) an Logistics (L) There are 12 ivisions in PMW 181 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APMs). These ivisions are comprise of International Programs LANT, International Programs MED, International Programs PAC, Anti-Submarine Warfare C4I, FDS-C, Shore Systems Design an Development, Ship 8

92 perations, UWS an Shore Facilities Installation an Maintenance an System Testing an Evaluation. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 181 is coorinating the continue evelopment an upgraing of all Fixe Surveillance systems with the fleet. These systems are comprise of Soun Surveillance Systems (SSUS), Fixe Distribute Systems (FDS) an Surveillance Direction Systems (SDS). PMW 181 has "crale-to-grave" lifecycle an maintenance responsibility for these systems. PMW 181 is not currently at the prouction level, but is at the "maintain an upgrae" level. [Ref. 8 interview I] There are no true prouction efforts scheule through FY1. The main project for PMW 181 recently has been the evelopment an prouction of the Shore Processing System. This shore processing systems package is a maintenance an upgrae package. This is consiere a "technology refresh" which will "economically" enhance their capabilities. [Ref. 8 interview I] The specific scheule of these upgraes is classifie, but there are to be approximately 1 accomplishe, 3 in the Unite States an 7 out NUS. There were approximately 2 to 3 accomplishe in FY98, 2 to 3 in FY99 with this pace to continue until all 1 sites are complete. f the 1 sites, there are approximately 4 to 5 ifferent versions of the system. This makes the upgrae packages both more complex an more costly, then if only one version was in the fiel. The earlier upgraes were $2.5 million per unit, with the last one bugete at $1.6 81

93 million. Due to inustry innovation, the latter systems will be more capable, even at 64% of the initial cost of the system upgrae. 4. Cost Measurement The P coe technician assigne performs cost measurement in PMW 181. Due to the relatively small cost of the systems in PMW 181, MSPAWAR is the Milestone Decision Authority. Cost measurement is focuse on the total cost of the upgrae an maintenance to the system in question, within the buget authority given by the Program Sponsor an allocate by the Program Manager to that system. Cost an buget information is measure an tracke by the P coe using the Financial Management Information System (FMIS), as iscusse above. Cost an scheuling information is receive aily from the Contractors, Fiel Activities an APMs an is isseminate to the APMs an PMs weekly an when require. The P coe also interfaces irectly with Government Fiel Activities an Defense Contractors when cost an scheule performance measurements appear to be out of specification. PMW 181 "Does not require cost performance in any contracts." [Ref. 8interview J] There are some milestones built into contracts with Defense Contractors, but they are not consiere true measurements. Cost measurements are consiere ifficult because of the variety of ifferent upgraes an maintenance being performe on a wie variety of variants on the systems in question. 82

94 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 181 is much the same as it is throughout other acquisition programs in other PMWs: cost, scheule an performance. As with virtually all PMWs stuie at SPA WAR, performance is measure ifferently for Fiel Activities than it is with Defense Contractors. APMs work closely with Defense Contractors, usually through Process Teams. These teams evelop buil plans for the prouct an track it through to completion. The primary measurement in this area is scheuling an technical performance. As note above, most of the systems prouce by PMW 181 are upgrae an maintenance packages. The Contractor, the Navy Sponsor or the Fiel Activity normally proposes these upgraes. If the Sponsor proposes a change, the information is relaye to PMW 181. The process is then similar for all proposals. There is an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) evelope by SPAWAR, the Contractor or the Fiel Activity. The office which proposes the ECP is the one which writes the ECP. This ECP is jointly esigne, reviewe an coste. At that point it is either approve, rejecte or moifie. If it is ultimately approve, the ECP is use to evelop Buil Plans. The Buil Plans have testing an cost milestones, which are tracke by the APM an to a lesser egree by the P coe. The PMW 181 personnel state that there is "No formal proceure" [Ref. lnterview A] for this process, an many of these steps are elete or not followe epening on the scope of the project, the Contractor or the personnel involve. If a ealine passe without action, the P coe woul notice that the comman was not bille as expecte for the accomplishment of the milestone, or the APM woul 83

95 not receive technical notification of the complete milestone. At that point, the Contractor or Fiel Actively woul be calle an questione about the misse milestone. The scheule woul be altere, or the specification change accoring to the circumstances. The PMW personnel consier this as more of a "go-no go" test [Ref. 8:interview K] than a performance measurement. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 181 is one on a "level of effort" test [Ref. 8:interview J] basis as oppose to a true unit cost metho. As note earlier, there are many moels, of similar systems, an many unique upgrae an maintenance packages. Therefore it is very ifficult for the PMW to buget on a unit cost, as shown in Appenix K. This bugeting process is similar to a "bottom up review." The APMs work with the sponsors an etermine what work nees to be one, an then buget accoringly. This is the case because virtually all PMW 181's are mature, post milestone III programs. PMW 181 receives funs from the following accounts: perations an Maintenance Navy (&MN), Research an Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Ship Construction Navy (SCN) an ther Procurement Navy (PN). The sponsor for PMW 181 is N87, who provie $58.2 million in FY99. Each of these buget submissions reflects the following cost elements: quantity, unit cost, ate of first elivery, elivery scheule, an installation scheule an program justification. This information provies key elements to match performance with bugete an actual costs.' 84

96 E. PMW Mission PMW 182 is taske to provie the fleet with a moern mobile maritime surveillance capability in littoral regions an open ocean areas of vital national interest in support of Joint an Naval Task Force Commaners. PMW 182 provies the mobile portion of the Navy's Integrate Unersea Surveillance System (IUSS). This is a versatile Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) system that provies wie-area ocean surveillance that is both mobile an responsive, against all ASW threats, both eep ocean an shallow water. Recently, the Navy has begun to evelop an active system to enhance the passive capability of the IUSS system. This has been the most recent thrust of PMW Structure PMW 182 is also fairly autonomous within SPA WAR in that it eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors, Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 182 is run by a Program Manager, with major offices comprise of the Deputy Program Manager (A), Business & Finance (P), Logistics (L), IUSS Systems (C), MIUW (M), an Training (R). There are six ivisions in PMW 182 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APMs). These ivisions are comprise

97 Passive Automatic/FSP, Active Sensors/CLFA, T-GS-23 Integration, Joint Projects, Prouction an Littoral Systems Engineering. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 182 prouces an upgraes both mobile an eployable maritime surveillance systems. In the mobile area, the Surveillance Towe Array Sensor (SURTASS) system is the primary Navy system currently use in the fleet. The SURTASS system provies the central architecture require for integration an fleet operations an for new capabilities evelope with PMW 182. This is comprise of passive towe array systems, utilizing Commercial ff the Shelf (TS) base computer processing an a communications infrastructure to relay gathere ata. There are several components of this architecture. The towe array sensor itself is comprise of a series of hyrophones that receive information an relay this ata to processors aboar ship. An ajunct to this system is the Low Frequency Active (LFA) transmitting sonar that supports monostatic an bistatic missions. This 7-ton, 18-transucer sonar expans the current passive operating system. The LFA gives the Navy the capability to acquire, reacquire an track submarines in quiet operating moes as well as measuring ranges. A sister system to the (LFA) is the Compact Low Frequency Active (CLFA) system which provie an active transucer to enable LFA eployment on SWATH-P T-Agos ships. In the software area, PMW 182 is contributing to Joint Task Force Surveillance (JTFS) by proviing software infrastructure that enhances the correlation/tracking functions to integrate non-acoustic or aitional acoustic sensors. 86

98 In shallow water ASW, PMW 182 is proucing Twin-Line array systems. This system is comprise of two horizontally separate arrays an signal processors in orer to provie improve acoustic performance in high surface clutter environments. This is vital to Navy interests, as shallow water ASW ha not been of significant Navy interest uring the Col War. As emphasis is place in naval operations in the littoral regions, this area of research an prouction will become ever more significant. In the area of research, PMW 182 has a number of significant programs. The Scientific Research Program (SRP) is a phase program esigne to help fill critical knowlege gaps concerning low frequency soun, an its effects on the maritime environment. Aitionally, this program is researching how future PMW 182 programs can support the evelopment of the SURTASS LFA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). PMW 182 is also working on the Commonality Initiatives. This is a joint effort with both the submarine an surface tactical ASW programs to reuce costs, enhance operability, an combine R&D programs for new sensors an architectures. PMW 182 is also eveloping the Common perator Machine Interface (MI). Lastly, PMW 182 provies Research & Development an prouction services for the Mobile Inshore Unersea Warfare (MIUW) program. The emphasis in this program is for eployable surface an subsurface surveillance for inshore areas throughout the worl, using acoustic, optic an raar sensors. The major effort of PMW 182 recently has been evelopment an prouction of two major programs. ne is the upgrae towe array for the SURTASS passive surveillance system. This array will be employe on SWATH an T-AGS ships as the 87.

99 current systems are. ne array was built with FY99 funs, an will be elivere in PY. This array was built for the U. S. Navy, but PMW 182 will prouce two more passive towe arrays for foreign military sales in FY an FY1. These arrays cost $4.1 million per unit. There were to be more arrays prouce earlier, but ue to buget shortfalls, this program was both scale back an elaye approximately two years. The secon major program for PMW 182 was the SURTASS Low Frequency Active (LFA) system. As note above, this system will give the Navy critical, stanoff active ASW capabilities. The original plan calle for the acquisition of 17 LFA systems. Currently, only two have been built. Both were built in 199; one is on a MSC research vessel an one is in storage. This program has been seriously elaye ue to the bankruptcy of Halter Marine who was contacte to buil the SWATH platform for this sonar. The first ship is now scheule to be complete in FY. The cost of this system was $13.5 million per system with a follow-up engineering services contract totaling $12.5 million. This is an ACAT II level program. PMW 182 hopes to get aitional funs for further procurement of these systems once the two systems are operational. 4. Cost Measurement The P coe assigne performs cost measurement in PMW 182. Cost measurement is focuse on the total cost of the upgrae to the systems, as well as the cost of the system as a whole, as is shown in Appenix L. The programs are manage within the buget authority given by the Program Sponsor an allocate by the Program Manager to that system. PMW 182 is sponsore by N-874 for SURTASS systems an N- 88

100 6 for MIUW systems. Most of the proucts prouce by PMW 182 are systems upgraes, save for the two major programs outline above. This makes initial cost measurements more precise an somewhat easier to estimate than with new evelopment programs. Estimates for upgrae programs are base on the cost of the original program or the most recent upgrae. Many of these programs are significant software improvements only, an are supporte by TS harware, which allows for accurate cost estimation. These estimates are performe either by the Contractor with APM approval, or in the case of Fiel Activities, are "Engineering Estimates" [Ref. 8 interview L] performe by the APM with other Navy officials. The cost measurement of the LFA system is base on three main criteria. The first, is the cost of pervious active sonars evelope for either the submarine or surface fleet. SPA WAR an the Contractor working in partnership for the prototype an follow on prouction then make an engineer's estimate. nce the prototype is built, follow on prouction can be better estimate. Cost an buget information is measure an tracke by the P coe using an Excel sprea sheet of their own evelopment. This information is receive aily an isseminate to the APMs an PMs weekly an when require. The P coe notifies the cognizant APM when cost an scheule performance measurements appear to be out of specification. At that point the APMs take whatever action is eeme necessary. Usually, a telephone call is mae or sent to the APM's counterpart in the Fiel Activity or Contractor office. Resolution is attempte at this level, prior to formal ocumentation being sent. 89

101 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 182 is much the same as it is throughout other acquisition programs in other PMWs: cost, scheule an performance. As with virtually all PMWs stuie at SPA WAR, performance is measure ifferently at the Fiel Activities than it is with Defense Contractors. Assistant Program Managers (APM) work closely with Defense Contractors, usually through Process Teams. These teams evelop buil plans for prouction an track the project through to completion. The primary measurement in this area is scheuling an technical performance. As note above, the primary systems prouce by PMW 182 were major sonar systems an passive arrays. The LFA program is an ACT two program. With major programs of this caliber, an Acquisition Program Baseline cost estimate was mae. All cost performance objectives an threshols of the program were evelope an tracke. The program is currently suspene, pening completion of the support structure. The rest of the prouction buget is comprise of upgraes. The Contractor, Navy Sponsor or the fiel activity normally proposes these upgraes. The process is similar to the one outline in PMW 181. PMW 182 personnel state that there is "no formal proceure" [Ref. 8:interview L] for this process, an many of these steps are elete or not followe epening on the scope of the project, the contractor or the personnel involve. 9

102 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 182 is primarily conucte on a unit cost basis for upgraes. Research an Development bugeting is base on "contractors estimates" for various components of the system, an are "rolle up" [Ref. 8 interview M] into a prototype cost. Except for the two major programs iscusse, all of PMW 182's programs are post milestone III programs. This makes bugeting base on previous systems procurement an installation cost the most accurate available. PMW 182 is fune by N-6 for SURTASS systems, an N-874 for MIUW programs. ut of a total buget of $74.5 million, $22.6 million was for Research & Development. PMW 182 receives funs from the following accounts: perations an Maintenance Navy (&MN), Research an Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Ship Construction Navy (SCN) an ther Procurement Navy (PN). Each of these buget submissions reflects the following cost elements: quantity, unit cost, ate of first elivery, elivery scheule, an installation scheule an program justification. This information provies key elements to match performance with bugete an actual costs. F. PMW Mission PMW 183 is taske to evelop an provie the Avance Deployable System (ADS) for unersea surveillance to provie eployable, real time, accurate ata for Joint Force an Naval Task Force Commaners. The nee for a eployable capability to etect 91

103 quiet iesel-electric submarines an mine-laying activities in shallow littoral regions has been emerging since the en of the Col War an the avent of possibly hostile states with brown water only capabilities. In 1995, PMW 183 was esignate the major office for the ADS. 2. Structure PMW 183 is autonomous within SPA WAR in that it eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 183 is run by a Program Manager, with major offices comprise of the Deputy Program Manager (A), Business & Finance (P), Logistics (L) an Engineering Projects (C). There are five ivisions in PMW 183 heae by APMs. These ivisions are comprise of ADS Engineering Projects, Comman, Control, Communications, Computers an Information (C4I), Unerwater Segment, Procurement an Analysis Segment an System Integration an ptical Deployable Systems. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 183 has not yet prouce the ADS. The program is currently nearing completion of the Program Definition an Risk Reuction (PDRR) phase of the Department of Defense major program acquisition process. A milestone II review is 92

104 scheule for December If approve, the ADS program will enter the Engineering an Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase in January 2. Ultimately, PMW 183 hopes to prouce nine shore segment Process Analysis Segments (PAS) suites an six installation segment Platform Alpha (PA) suites. This will require major sub-components, which inclue, but are not limite to 37 shore sensor arrays an 26 Inter-noe cable packs. Unerwater components inclue 8 sensor-arrays, 15 repeaters an 75 inter-noe cable packs. [Ref. 19] 4. Cost Measurement/Estimation Estimate cost for this program total $1.2 billion through FY21. This inclues $134.6 million in EMD phase U costs, $624.6 million in prouction costs an $322.6 million in operations an support phase costs. (All amounts are in then-year ollars.) As an ACAT II program, the estimates were not compare to any inepenent cost estimate (ICE). However, a Naval Center for Cost Analysis (NCCA) representative participate in the cost estimating Integrate Prouct Team (IPT) for both the ADS Milestone U AA assessment an the milestone U program estimates. The moel use to calculate the cost was the Automate Cost Estimating Integrate Tools (ACEIT) platform. This is the stanar SPA WAR cost analysis program. Prouction costs represent approximately 6% of the total remaining cost for the ADS. The Work Breakown Structure (WBS) was use as the framework of the lifecycle cost estimate. This is essentially the same moel use by other PMWs within SPA WAR for cost estimating, bugeting an planning purposes. [Ref. 19] 93

105 ffice of the Secretary of Defense (SD) guiance irects the use of a reference system for estimating costs. The systems comman, in this case SPA WAR, attempts to fin an existing operating system with a similar mission to that of the propose system, to serve as a reasonable baseline for estimating an comparing costs. PMW 183 looke to two other PD 18 programs, SSUS an FDS. Although they i provie some relevant information for components of the system, as a whole they were eeme inaequate. The ADS mission is more of a temporary one, measure in terms of weeks or months. SSUS an FDS are strategic, high reliability systems esigne for markely longer perios of up to 24 years. Clearly, on the whole, these programs are more unique than similar. Therefore, the moels iscusse above were more useful. [Ref. 19] 5. Performance Measurement Specification an scheule information for the ADS program is efine in the Cost Analysis Requirements Description (CARD). The CARD escribes technical information, incluing the WBS an the technical performance characteristics of the harware. Performance will be measure against these an other technical specifications in the numerous test an evaluation milestones throughout the life of the prouction. 6. Bugeting The FY99 PMW 183 buget is $47.1 million; the FY98 buget was $39.5 million. This buget is totally comprise of Research & Development funs provie by N87. 94

106 PMW interfaces irectly with N87 for all bugetary matters. The current buget is riven by the Program Life Cycle Cost Estimate (PLCCE) for the ADS. The EMB portion of the buget is expecte to peak in FY4 at $25.2 million, as is shown in Appenix M. The prouction buget will begin in FY5. The ADS buget is expecte to peak in FY9 at $66.8 million. G. PMW Mission PMW 185 is taske to provie integrate meteorological an oceanographic (METC) information systems an tactical ecision ais an information for warfare commaners, fleet operators an weather forecasters. In caring out this tasking, PMW 185 systems must gather, ientify an integrate a significant amount of complex an varying ata in orer to create an accurate, useful an timely meteorological picture. This ata is comprise of weather information gathere above an below the surface of the ocean. For each area that has tactical an strategic significance, METC systems gather ata that inclues win spee an irection, air temperature, humiity refractive effects an precipitation, as well as both commercial an biological ambient noise. At or below the surface, ata inclues water temperature, salinity, win-riven circulation, thermal graients, ties an turbiity. n the ocean floor itself, sub-bottom structures, acoustic epenencies, slopes an shelves of the ocean floor an false targets an wrecks must be locate. All these ata points must be gathere, by ifferent platforms, at ifferent locations an be integrate an transmitte to the fleet in a timely manor. 95

107 2. Structure PMW 185 is also fairly autonomous within SPA WAR in that it eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors, Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 185 is lea by a Program Manager, with major offices comprise of the Deputy Program Manager (A), Business & Finance (P) an Logistics (L). There are nine ivisions in PMW 185 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APMs). These ivisions are comprise of IN-SITU systems, METMF(R), Space Systems, Integrate Tactical Systems, Fleet Requirements, Fleet Systems, Systems Architecture an Engineering, Systems Engineering an Y2K an Research an Development. 3. Proucts/utputs The main system currently maintaine an upgrae by PMW 185 is the Tactical Environmental Support System/Navy Integrate Tactical Environmental Subsystem (TESS/NITES). This upgrae is comprise of procuring workstations, servers, input/output control evices, as well as software to support the evolutionary acquisition TESS. These upgraes are conucte at the Fleet Numerical Meteorological Centers (FNMC) as well as at six other major shore sites an numerous afloat an smaller shore sites. This system collects all ata receive from a wie variety of sensors. The ata are then processe an use at the site, as well as uploae to the FNMC. Collection 96

108 systems that are uner cognizance of PMW 185 inclue the Shipboar Meteorological & bserving ceanographic System (MRIAH), Mini-Rawin System (UMQ-12A MRS) an the Automate Surface bserving System (ASS). This ata is up loae to one of several satellite systems uner PMW 185s cognizance. These systems inclue the Meteorological Satellite Program USMC [METMF(R)] an the Environmental Satellite Receiver Recorer (SMQ-11). ther communications inclue the Supplemental Weather Raio (SWR) an the Next Generation Raar Principal User Processors (NEXRADPUPS). A future system in the evelopmental stage is the Geoetic/Geophysical Satellite Follow-n (GF). 4. Cost Measurement The P coe assigne performs cost measurement in PMW 185. Due to relatively small cost of the systems in PMW 185, MSPAWAR is the Milestone Decision Authority for all programs. Cost measurement is focuse on the total cost of the upgrae to the system in question, within the buget authority given by the Program Sponsor an allocate by the Program Manager to that system. Because SPA WAR is the sole systems comman for the sponsor in these areas, funing has not been an issue for these programs in recent years. PMW 185's sponsor, N96, provie $7.9 million of the $72.9 million buget. This is the only PMW that N96 sponsors in SPA WAR, so both players can manage the program on a more personal basis. Cost an buget information is measure an tracke by the P coe using her own excel spreasheet. This information is receive aily an isseminate to the APMs an PMs monthly an when require. This 97

109 technician is very aggressive in interfacing irectly with Government Fiel Activities an Defense Contractors when cost an scheule performance measurements appear to be out of specification. The highest priority system for PMW 185 is the TESS/NITES. Per PMW 185 personnel, tracking cost performance is "extremely ifficult" in this PMW ue to the "excessive number of variations of current systems an the amount of execution plan changes." [Ref. 8:interview N] Appenix N is an example of a PMW 185 buget ocument. There are over 1 significant shore installations an 28 shipboar assets that have TESS/NITES equipment. The range of these upgraes is between $13, an $3.8 million. This amount can fluctuate epening on how an "upgrae" is efine. A "new keyboar" was recently sent out to the fiel. This cost was uner $1, but it actually is an upgrae. But to compare the technical scope an cost ofthat to other multimillion ollar programs is absur. The PMW is currently not require to answer that question. The costs of these estimates are all base on engineer's estimates an inepenent government cost estimates. The accuracy of these estimates is further weakene by the large amount of improvements mae prior to installations. So even if the estimates are accurate initially, as the upgraes are moifie, the buget estimates egrae. 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 185 is riven by the three main factors foun throughout SPAWAR-cost, scheule an technical performance. In this type of 98

110 "evolutionary acquisition system" performance measurement is "not performe beyon the early research an evelopment stage." [Ref. 8:interview N] The Naval Research Laboratory, the ffice of Naval Research an the Naval Postgrauate School evelop the software. These research an evelopment sites estimate the amount of increase performance that will be attaine by the software. The Program Sponsor, with avice form PMW 185 etermines if the program shoul procee. nce the upgrae is initiate, the performance measurements, excluing scheuling, ens. 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 185 is conucte on a "cost as an inepenent variable" [Ref. 8:interview N] approach. This approach is taken ue to the significant amounts of unique upgraes performe. Since each upgrae must be iniviually coste, a buget estimation is mae an as many upgraes as possible are performe within the subsequent buget constraints. As note above, there is a significant number of upgraes, of varying scope being conucte on a large number of platforms. The Sponsor, N96 informs PMW 185 of the propose buget. PMW 185 then informs the Sponsor what upgraes can be conucte on that buget, given the Sponsor's priorities. All of PMW 185's programs are now post milestone El programs. This woul appear to make bugeting base on previous systems procurement an installation cost more accurate. But as note above, there is a large amount of variation from upgrae to upgrae. PMW 182 receives funs from the following accounts: perations an Maintenance Navy (&MN), Research an Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), Ship Construction Navy (SCN) 99

111 an ther Procurement Navy (PN). Each of these buget submissions reflects the following cost elements: quantity, unit cost, ate of first elivery, elivery scheule, installation scheule an program justification. This information provies key elements to match performance with bugete an actual costs. H. PMW Mission PMW 187 is the centralize program management site for the Navy, Marine Corps an the Coast Guar for the integration an evelopment of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) an avance navigation systems. Within this tasking, PMW 187 has a litany of GPS systems that must be installe on aircraft, ships an submarines of the Navy an Marine Corps team in orer to increase the ability to complete tactical mission an enhance navigation capabilities. 2. Structure PMW 187 is also fairly autonomous within SPA WAR as it eals irectly with Program Sponsors, Defense Contractors, Fiel Activities an various other offices within SPA WAR incluing the Comptroller (1), Contracts (2), Installation an Logistics (4) an Chief Engineer (5). PMW 187 is lea by a Program Manager, with major offices comprise of the Deputy Program Manager (A), Business & Finance (P), Logistics (L) an Navy Deputy to Joint Programs ffice. There are ten ivisions in PMW 187 heae by Assistant Program Managers (APMs). These ivisions are comprise of GPS 1

112 User Equipment, Tactical Aircraft, Ship GPS & NAVSSI, SABER, CSEL, Support an Trainer Aircraft, Fleet Introuction, Avance Navigation Systems, Electronic Navigation an GPS Moernization. 3. Proucts/utputs PMW 187 coorinates a vast array of GPS an navigation systems throughout an extensive spectrum of Naval an Marine Corps assets. Recent successes with proucts evelope by PMW 187, most notably GPS navigation systems, have le to an increase in funs an installations of GPS systems throughout the fleet. Congress has manate that 4,435 military aircraft be fitte with GPS systems by FY-5 as shown in Appenix. Currently, 269 aircraft have been upgrae with GPS navigation an targeting systems. Until this system is fully operable, the Interim Portable GPS (IPGPS) systems are being procure an place on aircraft throughout the fleet. The Navigation Sensor System Interface (NAVSSI) an ship GPS integration are also uner prouction. This navigation suite will allow surface ships to integrate, monitor, manage an istribute precise position, velocity an time ata between ships an aircraft. This will also allow ships systems to choose automatically the most accurate an reliable navigation source for C4I combat an weapons systems. There are currently 6 ships with this increase capability, with an aitional 115 scheule. At the iniviual level, the Combat Survivor Evaer an Locator (CSEL) system architecture is being evelope by PMW 187. Preecessors to this system were use 11

113 successfully in Bosnia an the Persian Gulf War. This system is being procure to ensure survivability of owne pilots an small combat teams. Deliveries are scheule to begin in May 21. Lastly, PMW 187 is eveloping secure GPS systems, which are coming uner increasingly high threat of jamming an etection. This effort by PMW 187 inclues increase power evelopment, user protection, separate channels, an increase satellite capabilities. 4. Cost Measurement The P coe assigne performs cost measurement in PMW 187. Due to relatively small cost of the systems in PMW 187, MSPAWAR is the Milestone Decision Authority. Cost measurement is focuse on the total cost of the upgrae an maintenance to the system in question, within the buget authority given by the Program Sponsor an allocate by the Program Manager to that system. Cost an buget information is measure an tracke by the P coe using her own unique excel spreasheet. Cost an scheuling information is receive aily from the Contractors, Fiel Activities an APMs an is isseminate to the APMs an PMs weekly an when require. The P coe also interfaces irectly with Government Fiel Activities an Defense Contractors when cost an scheule performance measurements appear to be out of specification. As previously state, the Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) was use for the initial evelopment an prouction of the GPS system. The APB efines what the anticipate cost of a system or prouct will be over its lifecycle while ocumenting the cost, scheule an performance 12

114 objectives an threshols of the program. The APB also establishes the program buget by efining the cost objectives an threshols that must be met as a program progresses through the milestones to final fieling on platforms. This system was use extensively by PMW 187 when eveloping the current GPS system. PMW 187 also measures an analyzes cost performance using Earne Value Measurement (EVM). Planning is central to the EVM process. EVM measures an tracks programs an milestones, inicating when the program is not reaching scheuling or financial milestones. This forces managers to plan as early an as accurately as possible. Leaers within PMW 187 state that obligation an expeniture benchmarks are "their number one priority" [Ref. 8:interview ] when it comes to monitoring financial performance. Personnel state that they are "very alert" to expense an scheuling benchmarks, an that they "get what [they] measure." [Ref. 8:interview ] 5. Performance Measurement Performance measurement in PMW 187 is much the same as they are throughout other acquisition programs: cost, scheule an performance. As with virtually all PMWs stuie at SPA WAR, performance is measure ifferently for Fiel Activities than with Defense Contractors. Within PMW 187, Process Teams are evelope with the Air Force, Contractor an Fiel Activities in orer to evelop performance measurements. These teams are forme on an a hoc basis whenever a significant upgrae is contemplate. 13

115 6. Bugeting Bugeting within PMW 187 is primarily conucte on a unit cost basis. This is the case because virtually all PMW 187 programs are mature, post milestone III programs. This makes bugeting base on previous systems procurement an installation cost the most accurate available. PMW 187 receives funs from the following accounts: perations an Maintenance Navy (&MN), Research an Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E), an ther Procurement Navy (PN). Each of these buget submissions reflects the following cost elements: quantity, unit cost, ate of first elivery, elivery scheule, an installation scheule an program justification. This information provies key elements to match performance with bugete an actual costs. Since PMW 187's major current system is the GPS aircraft installation ictate by Congress, the buget is quite stable. 14

116 VII. SUMMARY AND NCLUSINS A. SUMMARY Chapter I provies the backgroun for the thesis. It iscusses the strategic an bugetary legacy of the Col War an how relate factors have influence managing the Department of Defense. It also iscusses the Feeral buget eficit, an the current an future impact it will have on the Space an Naval Warfare Systems Comman (SPAWAR). Chapter I also outlines the purpose, research questions, methoology an organization of the thesis. Chapter II escribes an analyses performance measurements in SPAWAR. As an acquisition comman, SPAWAR falls uner the irection of the DoD 5.2R acquisition regulation, that specifies how acquisition programs shall be arrange an reporte. Chapter II inicates how this regulation to a great extent ictates cost performance measurement such as the Acquisition Program Baseline. Also escribe are Total wnership Cost an the Information Technology 21 (IT 21) Strategic Implementation Plan as they pertain to SPAWAR. Chapter HI escribes an analyses the mission an structure of Program Directorate 15, Global Information an Network Systems. PD 15 is comprise of PMW 151, PMW 152, PMW 157 an PMW 158. The mission, structure, proucts an outputs, cost measurement an bugeting of each of these PMWs is presente. PD 15 prouces software an limite harware for Metropolitan Area Networks, Base Area Networks, Local Area Networks, an other DoD Network Information Systems. PD 15 prouces 15

117 communications systems that integrate the Naval Tactical Comman Support System (NTCSS), the Defense Messaging System, the Global Comman an Control Systems- Maritime an the Automate Digital Networking System (ADNS). PD 15 measures performance base on cost, scheule an performance. The primary tool use is the Acquisition Program Baseline. The iniviual PMWs track cost scheule an performance using a variety of locally evelope computer programs, an spreasheets. Bugeting is base on a combination of engineering estimates of the lifecycle costs of the iniviual programs. Chapter IV escribes an analyzes the mission an structure of Program Directorate 16, Information an Electronic Systems. PD 16 is comprise of PMW 161 an PMW 163. The mission, structure, proucts an outputs, cost measurement an bugeting of each of these PMWs was researche. PD 16 provies both services an proucts to the fleet, which makes it rather unique. PMW 161 provies computer network support functions that inclue security engineering services. PD 16 also prouces cryptologic equipment, Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), an combat surveillance systems such as the Common High Banwith Data Link-Shipboar Terminal (CHBDL-ST). The majority of programs in PD 16 are post-milestone three upgrae programs vice strict acquisition programs. PD 16 measures performance base on cost, scheule an performance. The primary tools use are the locally evelope computer programs, spreasheets an bugeting tracking tools. Bugeting is base on engineering estimates mae by Fiel Activities, Defense Contractors an SPA WAR engineers. 16

118 Chapter V escribes an analyzes the mission an structure of Program Directorate 17, Comman, Control, Communication an Computers. PD 17 is comprise of PMW 173, PMW 176 an PMW 179. The mission, structure, proucts an outputs, cost measurement an bugeting of each of these PMWs is analyze. PD 17 prouces integrate communications systems for submarines, surface ships an for fleet to shore communications. These proucts inclue Very Low Frequency (VLF), Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) communications systems an the Extreme High Frequency (EHF) Satellite Communications system. PD 17 measures performance base on cost, scheule an performance. The primary tool use is the Acquisition Program Baseline combine with locally prouce tracking systems. Bugeting is base on combinations of engineering estimates of the lifecycle costs of iniviual programs. Chapter VI iscusse the mission an structure of Program Directorate 18, Intelligence, Surveillance an Reconnaissance. PD 18 is comprise of PMW 181, PMW 182, PMW 183, PMW 185 an PMW 187. The mission, structure, proucts an outputs, cost measurement an bugeting of each of these PMWs is covere. PD 18'prouces Soun Surveillance Systems (SSUS), Surveillance Towe Array Sensors (SURTASS), Tactical Environmental Support System/Navy Tactical Environmental Subsystem (TESS/NITES) upgraes an Global Positioning System (GPS). PD 18 is currently in the Program Definition an Risk Reuction (PDRR) phase of the Avance Deployable System (ADS). The majority of programs in PD 16 are post-milestone three upgrae programs vice strict acquisition programs. 17

119 PD 18 measures performance base on cost, scheule an performance. The primary tools use are locally evelope computer programs an spreasheets. Bugeting is base on engineering estimates mae by Fiel Activities, Defense Contractors an SPA WAR engineers. B. NCLUSINS Base upon extensive review of four major Program Directorates an 14 Program Manager Warfare Divisions a basic unerstaning of performance measurement metrics currently applie at SPA WAR was establishe. These metrics inclue Total wnership Cost, cost, scheule an performance criteria as efine for DoD Acquisition Commans, an Earne Value Management. SPA WAR is an acquisition comman with the efine mission of proviing integrate information solutions through elivery of fully integrate, teste an supportable systems, an the training of Sailors an Marines in the use of these systems by operational platform. The IT21 Plan provies a framework for the integration of SPA WAR systems an proucts with a focus on proviing eploying battlegroups with afforable, state-of-the-art technology. SPA WAR is also governe by acquisition program bugeting an the PPBS process within the DoD. SPAWAR attempts to maintain a focus on performance measurement an unit cost bugeting. The challenge for SPAWAR an other acquisition commans is how to be the smartest, most responsive buyer of goos an services, at the best ollar value over the lifecycle of the proucts that meet warfighter nees. 18

120 The majority of SPA WAR acquisition programs are Acquisition Category (ACAT) HI an IV. DoD Regulation 5.2R oes not efine specific performance metrics relating to cost, scheule an performance for SPA WAR systems an proucts. SPA WAR Program Managers have establishe acquisition program metrics relating to the cost, scheule, an performance parameters that enable management of the programs. Program goals are ientifie in terms of objectives an threshols. Each parameter inclues an objective that is the esire result (e.g., elivering a system uner buget) versus a threshol that efines a minimum acceptable result (e.g. elivering a system on buget). As previously mentione in this thesis, the starting point is the Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) that ocuments cost, scheule, an performance objectives an threshols by program, beginning at program initiation. Performance measures evolve as the program is efine an evelops. At Milestone ne, performance measures are efine in broa terms. During this stage, measures of performance focus on neee capabilities in a program. As the program evolves, more specific program parameters are ae to measure the major rivers of operational effectiveness an suitability, scheule, technical progress an cost. As presente in Chapter II, the IT 21 process starts with a review of fleet operational nees an then translates these into requirements. As eficiencies an nees are ientifie by the operating components, they are valiate by the ffice of the Chief of Naval perations an the Commanant of the Marine Corps. These perational Requirements Documents (RD), represent the baseline of IT 21 requirements. 19

121 Performance measurement is, an will continue to be, critical for SPA WAR programs in the future as each program, project an acquisition will attempt to institutionalize outcome-oriente results measurement so that prouction an even outcomes can be better evaluate over time to assess comman achievement of mission, goals an priorities. For a broa program like IT 21, the ability to evelop an measure performance will help to ensure success in competing for funing an programmatic support at all levels in the Navy. The.goal of IT 21 performance measurement is to provie a systematic metho for evaluating the inputs (resources), outputs (programs, projects), transformation (acquisition, evelopment), an prouctivity (contribution to the mission) of the program. C. TPICS FR FUTURE RESEARCH Currently, SPA WAR is organize as a ecentralize, program management-base organization whose mission is to provie integrate warfare an communication systems for the Navy. While each Program Directorate employs an essentially ifferent management an control system, the goal of SPA WAR is to provie integrate systems for installation on Navy platforms an maintain the state-of-the-art of these systems over their lifecycles. Given the operational an bugetary requirements place on SPA WAR in elivering these systems an common functionality across battle groups, SPA WAR as an organization has to implement better business practices to meet current an future challenges. A significant amount of SPA WAR, incluing 4 Program Directorates an 14 11

122 Program Managers Warfare has now been stuie. The question now becomes, where shoul future stuy be irecte? The first issues are whether this stuy has inicate eficiencies in the current structure at SPAWAR. Does the current structure an organization operate effectively? Are there significant eficiencies that nee to be aresse? What performance measurements are important to whom? What is the hierarchy of these metrics? Are they currently being met by SPAWAR? There are at least four areas to analyze in attempting to fin answers to that question. The first is to focus on leaers an technicians at SPAWAR itself. Many of the personnel interviewe voice concerns about where SPAWAR is presently, relative to its history, an how SPAWAR shoul evelop in the future. The secon area is the leaership of SPAWAR itself. How o the Program Directorates an the heas of the major support ivisions, such as Logistics, the Comptroller an the Chief. Engineer view how SPAWAR is accomplishing its mission? How oes the Commaner of SPAWAR assess the manageability of the Comman? Thir, how are other DoD an non-dod organizations with similar missions organize an how o they conuct business? What is the "inustry stanar" for Navy systems commans? Are there lessons for SPAWAR relative to how NAVAIR an NAVSEA are organize? What methos of prouction an effectiveness o they use? Also, the military appears to o a poor job of learning lessons across services. Army an Air Force systems commans shoul be stuie to learn how they are structure an how they measure performance effectiveness. Ill

123 Lastly, the customer shoul be more involve. There are two immeiate SPA WAR customers. The first are the resource sponsors. They eliver the majority of funs to enable SPA WAR to prouce systems. Are the sponsors please with the cost, scheule an technical performance of the systems procure by SPA WAR? ne way to investigate this woul be to research one sponsor that has provie funs to SPA WAR, NAVSEA an NAVAIR. N6 may well have provie funs to all three. ne might investigate how the three commans performe on programs that are similar in scope (in terms of buget, time frame an system type) over the last 5 years. Investigating non-dod organizations that provie SPA WAR funs coul exten this examination further. The National Security Agency (NSA) has fune PD 16 for cryptologic communications systems. If they have fune the Army or the Air Force, one coul investigate how this sponsor juge the proucts an services they receive. DoD entities woul have less veste interest in proviing critical information concerning SPAWAR's performance. The fleet is immeiate user of most systems prouce by SPA WAR; therefore they are the primary customers. How o those serve assess SPA WAR performance? Are SPA WAR systems filling require gaps in war fighting nees? More immeiately, how oes SPA WAR perform in installation an training functions that irectly an immeiately impact the fleet? All organizations can increase performance quality. There shoul be continuous process improvement at SPA WAR. If the organization is lagging behin comparable organizations or failing to accomplish its mission in some areas, then changes may be require. Conversely, if SPA WAR is at the forefront of its community, consistently 112

124 proucing quality proucts on scheule an within price guielines, then only minor improvements may have to be mae to keep up with technology an management practice. It is critical to know how SPA WAR compares before major action is taken with respect to organizational change. 1. Centralize vs. Decentralize rganization SPAWAR currently is a highly ecentralize organization. Each Program Directorate an Program Manager Warfare has its own unique mission; its own unique segment of the Navy's war fighting mission. Therefore, each Program Manager Warfare concentrates on the programs an systems that irectly impact their iniviual missions. The SPAWAR Strategic Plan concentrates on the goal of horizontal integration of systems by eploying platforms by having all the PDs an PMWs coorinate their efforts in attempt to ensure battlegroups achieve system compatibility to support their eployment scheules. Unfortunately, each PMW is fune as a separate program from the Program Directorate level, an many ifferent resource sponsors influence which systems are evelope, installe an upgrae in accorance with the iffering priorities of each resource sponsor. SPAWAR is implementing a partnership with N6 which has alreay assiste in funing the communication systems of PD 17, with emphasis on upgraing the communication platforms of submarines. Another issue is the reporting responsibilities of the PDs an PMWs. The majority of the SPAWAR programs are ACAT m an rv, which makes MSPAWAR the Milestone Decision Authority. While the MSPAWAR enables the PDs an 113

125 PMWs to carry out their programs, the resource sponsors eal irectly with the PMWs regaring buget execution an scheule/prouct characteristics, etc. ptions shoul be consiere with respect to how SPA WAR is fune to execute all programs so that program ajustments might be mae centrally to support SPAWAR's mission an/or eliminate ual reporting requirements, an to streamline buget an program management given that SPA WAR oes not presently control program funing for the PMWs as they eal irectly with the resource sponsors. 2. Utilization of Earne Value Management Earne Value Management is a tool for effectively integrating cost, scheule an technical performance measurement. Earne Value Management relates resource planning to scheules an technical performance requirements, planning all work for'the program through completion, integrating program work scope, scheule an cost objectives into a baseline plan that enables measurement of progress against a baseline. This process attempts to assesses objectively the progress at the work performance level an to allow variance analysis from the plan to better forecast the impact of program changes. It also intens to provie useful ata to ecision makers. The work packages provie the builing blocks for the Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB). The PMB contains all the essential elements for each activity. The PMB is a roll up of all the work packages, which creates a time-phase buget plan. As the PMB tracks the buget plan, it is state in ollar terms. Currently, SPA WAR is eveloping a Total Cost of wnership (TC) plan for each program. The PMB is 114

126 intene to enable management to track program performance using analysis of variances. Uner this proceure, each activity is ientifie as a work package that can be monitore at any point in time to see if progress is on scheule, within buget or not, an to project whether the total project will be fiele within the buget constraint. Base on interviews conucte, the utilization of this management system woul be relatively easy to implement an woul allow SPA WAR to monitor program status, relating cost to completion milestone of the program. Unfavorable variances relating to cost, scheule an performance coul be analyze so the root causes of problems coul be etermine. Since SPA WAR contracts for actual system evelopment an installation, this management tool coul help Program Managers by proviing timely cost an scheule information to help ientify potential problems while they are still manageable. 3. Mission Funing vs. Reimbursable Funing SPA WAR is mission fune for the civilian personnel, an the projects are fune with a mix of appropriate an reimbursable funing. SPA WAR oes not allocate the cost of personnel to the systems it prouces; these costs are not part of the system costs. While mission funing, may appear to be a goo iea for the Commaner an Heaquarters of SPA WAR, how woul the comman account for the number of upgraes, replacements an repairs neee for systems? Another issue is whether it woul be cost effective to try to account for all upgraes. DoD now estimates these costs an will o so in the future. If the Navy fully implements its IT 21 strategy an bugets 115

127 by eploying platform, an resource sponsors stanarize how cost estimation an cost information will be collecte, it may make sense to mission fun SPA WAR in the future. 4. Utilization of Activity Base Costing The Acquisition Program Baselines inclue in the Total Cost of wnership Plans provies the framework for Activity Base Costing (ABC) because it ientifies the activities that consume resources, an assigns costs to these activities. Currently, SPA WAR oes not inclue inirect costs into the costing of prouct/proucts. Therefore, a major management issue of importance is whether an how to allocate inirect costs an primarily personnel costs, into the cost of the prouct/proucts. Another benefit of the TC framework is ientification of cost rivers associate with each activity. The SPA WAR TC plans clearly efine the anticipate cost of an activity; then ata are use to estimate the cost of each unit procure or installe. SPAWAR coul implement ABC through utilization of the TC plans, establishing an accounting atabase for costs. A major issue for SPAWAR an DoD is the stanarization of cost allocation methos an system costing methoology. Accoring to our interviews, SPAWAR contracts ut the cost estimates for all its programs because the expertise oes not exist in-house. The cost estimating personnel locate in the Comman Comptroller's Department coul perform some of these estimate analysis. In this area, an issue to be consiere is that although ABC provies more information about prouct costs, woul the aitional costs of recor keeping justify the management information gaine? Base on interviews of SPAWAR personnel, these 116

128 aitional recor keeping costs woul not be cost effective. The resource sponsors are more concerne about buget execution an not exceeing project bugets than having the management information that coul be gaine through ABC. However, the comman perspective is not the same as that of the sponsor. 5. Prouct Measurement Metrics Currently, SPA WAR utilizes prouct measurement metrics that relate to cost, scheule an performance of their systems in accorance with the Acquisition Program Baseline an milestone requirements. Depening on what milestone the SPAWAR programs are in, the DoD 5.2 efines what the general program requirements apply for that stage. Base on our interviews, SPAWAR is attempting to apply metrics such as "installations per battlegroup," as a metric that can be use to guie program fieling once they have reache this stage of prouction. Current acquisition program guielines as efine by DoD provie goo program guiance for fieling new systems. However, with DoD more concerne with Total Lifecyle Costs of a program from crale-to-grave, there are no metrics to efine the value of system upgraes, nor is there aequate guiance on how to evaluate new technology. This is a major management issue to be aresse by program sponsors an SPAWAR, perhaps through partnerships with private inustry, to gain the expertise necessary to evaluate program effectiveness an evaluate new technology opportunities. 117 i-

129 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 118

130 APPENDIX A NTCSS DEPLYMENT SCHEDULE

131 V) in c^ t~- r- o\ in < <s * * <N «s f- V <* "H / e t >- fl\ ^ <S V3 ^- in»h» 1 s o i» ja u G S V E a. a» Q Xfi V H < * o \ PHH hv) TT I m V f~ r-* i l o u-> cs V <N m «H 1H t f> ^* m V ^ f» f- ^ "3- in w* in m f*> T-4 3 t; a. o ptimize Shi IMA (MALS) IMA (NAS) MA(Sqns) SCN Training/Supp TTAL 12

132 APPENDIX B GLBAL MMAND AND NTRL SYSTEM-MARITIME (GCCS-M) ACQUISITIN PLAN BASELINE

133 GLBAL MMAND AND NTRL SYSTEM - MARITIME (GCCS-M) ACQUISITIN PRGRAM BASELINE Section A. PERFRMANCE Key Performance Parameters Database Query Process - Single Conition Database Query Process - Multiple Conition Analysis Queries Archival Query Throughput Correct Correlation Percentage Mtscorrelation; Misse Initiation Miscorrelation; Mis-Association Track Fragmentation Percentage Ambiguity Percentage perational Availability (Ap) Probability of establishing tactical communications connectivity with a selecte unit within 2 NM of the TSC within 1 minutes ffvv Number of missions which can be simultaneously irecte/controlle over a 72 hour perio 1 Number of air sorties which can be simultaneously an continuously supporte over a 72 hour perio 1 ' Section B. GCCS-M 4.x Prouct Stanars Du E compliance Software evelopment Year 2 compliance Security guieline compliance Documentation / Training Section C. SCHEDULE Dates Estimate Streamline Acquisition Management Plan (SAMP H) Approve In House Reviews (INHR's) / Acq. Coor. Team (ACT) / IPT perational Test an Evaluation (T&E) Follow-on perational Test an Evaluation (FT&E) NPDM / Milestone HEB Initial perational Capability (IC) GCCS-M Tactical / Mobile Specific Performance Parameters FY MS-HIA GCCS-M 4.x (Increment 1) BJECTIVE / THRESHLD ^ 1 secons /<, 17 secons 3 minutes/^5 minutes <: 15 minutes / 3 minutes <, 6 minutes / <, 8 minutes > 1% / ä 95% > 1%/ 85% ä%/ 6% <%/ 6% <%/ 6% <;%/<:i2% >.99/2: Fixe TSC: 3 MCC: 1.5 Fixe TSC: 12 MCC: 6 FYMS-IHA GCCS-M 4.x (Increment I) Goal: Level 7 / Minimum: Level 5 Develope to common GCCS segment guielines Full Year 2 compliance Complies with security guielines "Migration to online ocumentation an context-base training FY MS-mA GCCS-M 4.x (Increment I) BJECTIVE / THRESHLD Dec98/Jun99 Jan99/ct ct/aprl Janl/Junl Dec/Jun1 Dec/Jun1 122

134 APPENDIX C TTAL WNERSHIP ST ESTIMATES: ADNS

135 TCESTIMATE: ADNS (Note all costs are in FY98 $M) % r r *}- *)- ^ % %%,%%\%^^^ K? <? %. ^ > *> *&./& ^o v DEVELPMENT PRIME MISSIN PRDUCT HARDWARE RECURRIN AWUSQ-I44B<Vg PLATFRMS: AN/SQ-144C(Vg PLATFRMS: AK/USQ-WDfVp PLATFRMS: ANflJ5Q-144(V)3 PLATFRMS; 24JI S.T 34.72» S » W.42 jt9m 52.» 4LS5 35.P 12JS _333 NCTAMSEURCENT MCTAMS BAHRAIN yctamsiant NCTAMS PACIFIC HARDWARE NNRECURRING ' SFTWARE RECURRINQ AWUSQ-WBfVg PLATFRMS: AN/USQ-144C(Vg PLATFRMS: AWUSQ-144P(V)2 PLATFRMS: 435 J3 37 an SUBMARINE ANVUSQ-WffiP PLATFBI X1.XL L2 NCTAMSEURCENT 2J NCTAMS BAHRAIN NCTAMS LANT NCTAMS PACIFIC SFTWARE NKRECURRM SYSTEM INTERATIN / ttctallatis SYSTEM WTERAnN DESIGN (PSA) ANArSQ-WBfVg PLATFRMS: AWPSQ-144CTQ2 PLATFRMS: AWÜS»I44D(V» PLATFRMS:.19 n.\ us 3L J7 AN/USQ444lVg PLATFRMS: SYSTEM INSTALLATIN QLM) AH/ÜSQ-144BQQ2 PLATFRMS: AN/USQ-144C(V)2 PLATFRMS: AN/USQ-144P<Vg PLATFRMS: SUBMARINE AN/USQ-I44{V)B PLATFRMS: ADNS ASHRE NCTAMSEURCENT NCTAMS BAHRAIN S4 vm SS2 SSI 137 NCTAMS PACIFIC PRRAM MANAGEMENT. SYSTEMS ENINEERIN SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATIN INITIAL TRAINING CLASSRM TRAINING AFLAT/ SUBMARINE ST F TRAINING URSE MPN ST F STUDENTS UM N-TEE-JB TRAINING AFLAT/SUBMARINE DATA/DCUMENTATIN PECULIAR SUPPRT EQUIPMENT MMN SUPPRT EQUIPMENT PERAnMAL/STTE ACTIVATIN PCDUSTRIALFAaLrnES INITIAL SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS L PERATIN * SUPPRT MISSIN PERSNNEL AFLATiSUBMARPg PERATRS ASHRE PERATRS UNIT LEVEL KSÜMPTP3N INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE DEPT MAINTENANCE _ VERHAUL AND REPAIR FLEET MDERNIZATIN DESIGN AND PLANNING SERVICES MISCELLANEUS REWRK ouiyrriinq AND SPARES MISCELLANEUS NTRACTR SERVICES INTERIM NTRACTR SUPPRT NTRACTR LISnCS SUPPRT THER MBC NTRACTR SERVICES SrSTADN SUPPRT ENINEERIN AND TECHNICAL SERVICES PRGRAM MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ENGINEERING pt SPARES (INSTALLATIN AND CHECK-E 3A13 SFTWARE MAINTENANCBREPLACEMENT SrrWARE UPDATES ftech REFRESH) ANAraQ-144B(V)2 PLATFRMS AN/USQ-144C(V)2 PLATFRMS AN/USQ-144P(Vg PLATFRMS 562SS» J SUBMARINE AN/USQ-1«4(VP PLATFR] 3-&2.I-2.I SFTWARE SUPPRT FEES TRAINJN (FLLW-N) AFLAT/SUBMARINE CLASSRM TRAINING ST F TRAINING URSE MPN ST F STUDENTS N-THE-IB TRAINING PUBLICATINS AMMUNTnWHANDUN 124

136 # - - ' V s%\% \\\\%,\\% > *> & ** & 7 <e.*> fa %>.'! % SMULATR PERATINS 3 it <* EQUTiENTREPLACTMENT 33.7 its J M HW REPLACEMENT (TECH REFRESH) L ixa AFLAT 33.7.L X ASA AN/USQ-144B(V)2 PLATFRMS: 3A7.U X L4 AN/US-144VB PLATFRMS: J v* AWGSQ-1442XV» PLATFRMS: S SUBMARINES « ASHRE S S HWWSTAI2-ATIN (TECH REFRESH) uo « v* ixa 1L LJ36S 1L AFLAT ANrtB-144B(V) i77 33* 1.S PLATFRMS: ANUS-l**C(V)2 PLATFRMS: JB ZG5 AWSq-WWVB PLATFRMS: L7 S3 1J7 zm J J SUBMARINE I S aso 1.6 J.3 AWU3-144fVJ3 PLATFRMS: "1( J an aso INDIRECT/ INFRASTRUCTURE J 17 2J2 3J J S41 ACQUISITIN SUPPRT on.lt 21 Jl H ^31 MISSIN PERSNNEL INDIRECT PAY 3.7,4 (US J DISPSAL DEMniTARIZATRW an S L7 ass 1JD J AFLAT I3 99 oto 54 AN/US-144C(YJZ PLATFRMS: on S a«6 ai3 aot 6 X AN/US-144(V)3 PLATFRMS: CB Q9 S aw 6 13 aot S 6 6 au ! Z THER DEMILITARIZATIN AND DISPSAL AFix>ATFiEiiafrepiJW, :.v.--'-.--'v^---^."v^ -,r X t s * s 6 2 C cv inn LHA 1 AF 1 - AS 1 7 AN/USQ-l+<D(?FFttfcraE IS DD AE SSN 1 3 t X S r*m.**t%i»ftwf^tlsyitet S « S t Srfxiario* AN/U5-144MJ PUfixms: AN/U3-144Kv'B Phtfctms I 9 13 IS It Stimm** AN/US-144W1 PMfixmK It IS 13 IS 13 IS

137 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 126

138 APPENDIX D NAVMACS II/SMS ST MDEL

139 NA VMACSII/SMS ST MDEL (Note: AB costs arc in FY98 $M) \ -^>-\^^^^^^\>\\\^>^^^^\ X DEVELPMENT PRDUCTIN TTAL KTRACTa, PRME MISSIN PRDUCT HARDWARE RECURRING ASTGUARD SUBMARINE-SSN SUBMARINE-SSBN PATRL ASTAL SCICARRY-N INTERNAL INTEGRATIN 3.4 AST GUARD SUBMARINE-SSN SUBMARINE-SSBN PATRL ASTAL SCICARRY-N HARDWARE NNRECURRIN MARKET RESEARCH _ HARDWARE INTEGRATIN KEW TECHNLGY INSERTIN DCUMENT UPGRADES SFTWARE RECURRING PURCHASED SFTWARE MEDIUM SHIP AST CARD SUBMARINE-SSN PATRL ASTAL SCICARRY-N J3 33 ftt MT i.a 34 M 32,44 2J3 lig &2.3 ai9 aq3.1 INTERNAL PTTERATIN MEDIUM SHIP AST GUARD SUBMARINE-SSN SPBMARINB-SSBN PATRL ASTAL SCICARRY-N 24J3J3.1 SFTWARE NNRECUKRINQ MARKET RESEARCH SFTWARE INTEGRATIN (CT. NEWTECHNLYINSERTIN ZL1223 DCUMENT UPRADES DISTRIBUTIN ST SYSTEM INTERATIN/INSTALLAnpN PRGRAM MANAGEMENT 5YSTEM3 BNMEERIN SYSTEMS TEST A EVALUATIN DEVELPMENTTEST * EVALUATIN PERATINALTEST * EVALUATIN J TEST * EVALUATIN SUPPRT TEST FACHJUJgi SUPPRT EQUIPMENT^ PERATINAL/STTE ACTIVATiN INDUSTRIAL FACILTnES INITIAL SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS MEDIUM SHIP AST GUARD SUBMARINE-SSBN PATRL ASTAL SCICARRY-N TTE TTAL VERNMENT PRIME MISSIN PRDUCT ~ SYSTEM INTERATIWMSTALLATIN PREPCTALLATTN ~" INSTALLATIN * SVT U4 J7 31 U3 JX ai4 an.1t aot mi4lst _JU«&M 1134 AST GUARD SUBMARINE-SSN SUBMARINE-SSBN PATRL ASTAL "~ SCICARRY-N TTE PRGRAM MANAGEMENT ~ SPAWAR 4 HELPPESK r-shp SUPPRT Y2K SUPPRT APMSUPPRT PRDUCTIN SUPPRT NTRACTR MANAGEMENT - " SYSTEMS ENBJEERgJ 3 3,16 JL21 1-6«R32 ast J J

140 % \ '->>\>%\\\\\\>^^>>>^>^>> \ # MITRE SYSEN 2X a» an aso aso aso aso a.11.1* oxs X3 X3 23 X3 X3 rr-heno an ai4.14 J4 ai4 ai4 1.2 IMPIEMENTATIN SDPPRT au au X3 au 5)1 LGISTICS SUPPRT 2XX an an a» ais JI ais LGISTICS KNINEERINQ X1 ao2.2.2 X2 am aoa SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATIN 2XJ an an an X1 asi an nrc ' '.17.2» att 33 Q.V ft 11 X3 oxs 2X5 SEMR/VALXDfTY tt X9 X X X.4 X6 XS aot X1 oxs oxs XS 72«X1 36 4S.43 6 LJ3 X SYSTEM ADMINISTRATR CLASSES 2XjJ4.6 J J3 ai3 X3 X3 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 2X6X au X4 X.3 a<2 ac 42 a42 16S MANPWER AND PERSNNEL H6X.1 41 ao2 X3 aos NCEPTS A REQUIREMENTS 12X.4 2X.7.6 aio a 13.U.13 X3 au an.12 ai2 42 an au 7 MPUTER RESURCE SUPPRT 2X7X aoi X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X5 MMN SUPPRT EQUIPMENT 2X8 2X9 PERATIHAUSITE ACTIVATIN 111 2X41 DTIAt SPARES AND REPA1RPARTS 1X ao6 aoe aoe.3 X3 X3 X8 PERATIN A SUPPRT UNtf LEVEL NSUMPTIN ENERY NSUMPTIN X6 X6 ao6 3 X3 X5 X ? 3X X1 3X2 DEPT LEVEL REPAIRABLES 323 TRAININ MUNITINS / EXPENDABLE STl 3X4 PURCHASED SERVICES MISCELLANEUS NTRACTR SUPPRT » X 19X X7 1J1 46X X SX X L19 L99 no in 13X6 1X7 6X X X J9 2X7 «94 1X X ENIKEERIN AND TECHNICAL SERVICES 3X.1 X7 X X2 32 X2 X2 X2 32 X2 32 X2 X2 X2 X2 X2 X an ais aw au X3 au 43 au an au.u au au au au au NPIURATR» MANAGEMENT 3X4X.9 X9 ft» X9 X9 9 X9 X9 X9 X9 X9 9 X9 JS ao9 X9 X9 X9 X9 X9 9 1X3 WARRAMYTRACKING X7.7 X7 ao7 X7 ao7.7.7 ao? X7 ao7 X7 X7.7 ao? X7 X7.7 X7 ao7 X7 L am ao3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 aos X3.3 X3 X3 am X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 QftT 3 63 DCUMENT MAINTENANCE 3M X4.M as* au X4 a»4.s4.s4 X4 a»4 a»4 as4 as4 X4 X4 a»4 JM as4 as4 as4 X4 aw SSA MANAGEMENT 3XX.U U X3 ai3 ai3 X3 X3 X3 X3.13 au.u au au au.u X3 au ,12 on au an X3 an ai au au 43 X3 au au au au au au au 173 <TSJtTS) 3XX.IX ai3.13 au X3 X3 au.13 X3 ais au au au au au au au au 43 au au au 173 TS SW MAINTENANCE RTR TRA 16X1.4 X4 ao4 X4 X4 a4.4 X4 X4 X4 a4.4 4 X4 JM.4 X4 ao4 ao4 X4.4 X4 S4 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE l«?t,1 oxs oxs oxs ao» oxs oxs aos X8 J» J» oxs aos ox» oxs XS aos aos X8 oxs aos oxs 1.72 HELP DESK M.7,1,6.«ox» ox» oxs an oxs aos X8.S oxs.s oxs aos aot oxs aot oxs aos oxs aos oxs 1J5S CUDSCS/NMSSA 16X4,7 X3 X3 X3 X5 oxs X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 X5 X3 X3 X3 X5 X3 X5 X3 5X5 _X4 T. _Mi JÜÜ _y±t 3,«,l,?,t 1«7,7,7 4 ao7.7 aio an a».1» a» ais.1s ais.1» 48 ais 48 ais ais ais 349 UUtUESHli" X6XXX1 X1.3 X3 aoi 3 aos aos aos J» aos X3 aos.3 X3 X3 aos X3.5 X5 X3 aos X4 NAVMACSn 16X7 22 X1 411 X1 X2 2 X3 X3.3 X3 aos ao3.3.3 aoo 3 am X3 X3 X3 X3 X3 SMALL SHIP l«7?7-% aoi.1.1 X2 X3 X4 X4 X4 JM JM X4 ao4 X4 X4 X4 X4.4 ao4 ao4 X4 X4 aso AST GUARD 3*5.7.27,4 X X aoo aoo aoo. J» X J» aw aoo X aoo X X X aos i«?*-» < aoi X1 X1 X1 X1.1 X1.1 aoi X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 aoi aoi ao» I'"?," aoo.1 aoi an aoi ao«.4.4 ao4 X4 ao4.4 ao X4 ao«x4 JM ao4 X2 SBMARINE-SSBN 3,4,3,7.17. X. aoo aoo aoi X1 X1.1 aoi X1 X1.1 aoi X1 aoi X1 aoi X1 X1 aoi a» aoo aoo. aoo J» X aoo X. aoo. aoo aoo aoo X X aoo aoo ao4 S CARRY-N 16X119 L. aw TRAVEZ/tRADN 3.«3 a77 1X9 L46 2J4 1S3 4X6 4X6 4X X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 4X6 73X3 AMMUNITIN HANDLIN X SIMDLATR PERATINS lit«supprt EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT X4 7X 1X3 1X X1 1X3 1X4 17X X3 8X X1 1X5 8X4 17X 196X S S6 17J9 22X7 X2 7.» X7 92 7X X ill 2X J1 LTJ 1S X1 L X3 41X SX X W 1X2 X6 IÄ X3 X X6 1X X6 1X X X3 J5 3X X3 J «X X3 oxs AST GUARD SMALL SHIP an 82 asz 16.74J L9 L9 1X ,74.6 LS an XS » 6S X» XX 1.7«28X7 3X I X1 aio 42 1X3 aio.42 1X X3 aio 42 «.64 PATRL ASTAL X3 44 X3.44 X3 44 X X6 X X6 4J2.1? X6 X1 X3 X3 oxs.1 au X3 X8.1 ais X3 X8 aoi au X3 X8 X1 X9.».7 ai6 J» X7 ai6 a» X7 ai6 9 X7.16 a» L43 X1 a«x3 ao4 X1 X2 aos ao4.1 am X5 X4 aoi ao2 X3 X4 aoi 53 SMALL SHIP 16.7X3 X3 X3 X1 X4.7 aio aoi X4 X7 aio X1 X4 X7 4 aoi X4 ao7 aio X1 92 AST DARD aoi X1 aoi X1 SÜBMARNE-SSN 16.7X6 2 aoi X1 oxa aio X1 aas 4 X1 X3 aio aoi X3 aio 62 SUBMARIHE-SSBN 3.6.7X7 H aoo aoo.1 ao2 aoo.1.2 aoo X1 ao2 aoo X1.2 SCI CARRY-N 16XXS X X1 J» aoi X aoi X aoi 3.6.7X9 oxs 3.7 3XS 3X6 6X6 9X XX itxo 1SX itxo 11X X 1SX 18X X 1SX 11X 18X 18X 327X7 ACISmN SUPPRT a2i X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 an X1 X1 an X1 4X CENTRAL 17X - - U±J_ ±J± JJJ» 17.5 CENTRAL PERSNNEL/MEDICAL CENTRAL TRAININ JJ L ais 1JS» ais 1X X7 ais IX» ais ua 166 NAVMACSrV) 4.1 1m "T7T TTELDlSGPtJiNr^S^^: 41X SX X X X X X ^*:** LARGE SHIPS MEDIUM SHIPS « AST GUARD MSC S I

141 *b. v--*-\^^\%^>^^^^>>^^ \ TtfllTMfrtMlil T *" I 4 45 SHALL SHIPS S IS " ~ SMALL SHIPS _ AST GUARD use S IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS 1* IS IS PATRL ASTAL ~" 3CICARRY.N TTE « SHALL SHIPS IS IS It IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS IS PATRL ASTAL SHALL SHIPS AST TARD use SDBUARCa-SSN SUBMARWE-SSBN PATRL ASTAL I I AST ARD S SÜBMARWE-SSN PATRL ASTAL S CARRY-N TTE

142 APPENDIX E PRGRAM STATUS VS BENCHMARKS

143 * : -* j*: CZ ZJ JS E XI E < CD Z cz E o cz m CZ o ' * ' o cz CD o cz cz! a CD CD LZZZ Q Q X3 XI X X Q_ Ü LU LU Q S3 8 1 ( * o o w u c "5..,3 E' 2 o 1 5 to 8 to 9- -1! s I c - -. o ** c a* - a on o o> z 5 < u. o o o" 5^ o Ö o o o Ö o CD o Ö o o Ö o * o Ö E x: o c m.s>.a o c Ui 132

144 APPENDIX F ENGINEERING CHANGE PRPSAL (VER) 134 ENGINEERING CHANGE PRPSAL (PAGE 1)

145 24 September Science Applications International Corporation An Employee-wne Company Defense Contract Management Comman 7675 Dagget Street, Suite 2 San Diego, CA Attention: Reference: Denise Farnsworth, Coe GSE Contract N39-95-C-94 Subject: CDRL M2, Engineering Change Proposal (EC?) for the Changes To Eition Fiels, National Short Title Valiation, An ther Class I Changes To The Tier 1 System (ECP-12) Dear Ms. Farnsworth: Copies of the CDRL item M2, Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) for the Changes To Eition Fiels, National Short Title Valiation, An ther Class I Changes To The Tier 1 System (ECP-12), as specifie in the DD-1423 of the reference contract for the Tier 1 System are submitte for approval. Please contact Mark Hary, the SAIC esignate Point of Contact, at (858) if there are any questions. Sincerely, SAIC, Software an Systems Integration Group Gary D. Allar Tier 1 System Deputy Program Manager cc: encl Eleanor Summers, Coe 2-3IS (without enclosure) rganization Coe Copies SPAWAR PMW161-12C 2 NRL 5541 DC DDW-GSE CEM SED SSC Charleston 42 Booz-Allen & Hamilton 126 Campus Point Drive, San Diego, CA (619)

146 ENGINEERING CHANGE PRPSAL (ECP), PAGE 1 1.DATE (YYMMDD) 2/3/98 Public reportlna boren form«^lt^»» iwonna ""» «'»»^ J,,, Y j vowing th, ootl.ctlon ol InlormaUon. Sw * B,rCh^S.^«Ä. büx'.äta««y ovh»r..^t omh.. clbctai of Information, Inclulns «wrtlon. I«r«*u=lno IM. burrian to commanl«regaring lhl, J"^.*"'*"H...rlara s.rvlcaalreclorate tor Inforroailon parallona»n Rapori». «15 J.Haraon D.vl«Highway, S'S'lSS'irtESSn^SSwSwan to IX «. rt M«wg«n«il «" Bug.1. P.p/rwor* R.ucllon Preset (7M1U). Wnhlnalen. DC Sull. 124, Arlington.VA "1 2 :" * en lo in. "" FRM T EITHER F THESE ADDRESSES. RETURN MPLETED FRM T THE Form Approve MB No PRCURING ACTIVITY N. N3B 3. DDACC 4. RIGINATR Raylheon Systems Company a. TYPED NAME (FIRST. MIDDLE. INITIAL LAST) Company B. ECP DESIGNATIN a. MDEL/TYPE b. CAGE DE SURTASS. ECP N. RSC SPECIFICATINS AFFECTED a. SYSTEM b. DEVELPMENT e. PRDUCT 5B69 b. ADDRESS (STras'. City. State. Zip Coa) Naval an Maritime Syatema Post ffice Box 331 Fullerton. California 92B c. SYSTEM DESIGNATIN AN/UQQ-2(V)1 SURTASS B.TYPE CAGE E Spaelllcallon/Doeumenl No. REV. 13. TITLE F CHANGE Telametry Receiver Unit - Universal (TRU-U) 14. NTRACT N. & LINE ITEM N39-96-C-73 IS. NFIGURATIN rtem NMENCLATURE SURTASS TX an Next Evolution System P SCN I. REV. 5. CLASS F ECP 12. DRAWINGS AFFECTED I 6. JUST. DE 7. PRIRITY 9. BASELINE AFFECTED FUNCTINAL I ALLCATED X I PRDUCT 1. THER SYS/NFIG ITEMS AFFECTED I YES I X I N CAGE DE NUMBER REV. NR 13. PRGUFIING NTRACTING FFICER a. NAME (First, Mile Initial, Last) J. Sullivan b. DE 2-22A c. TELEPHNE N. (619) IN PRDUCTIN "~JTIYESI IN 18. LWEST ASSEMBLY AFFECTED NMENCLATURE SURTASS Telemolry Receiver Subsystem PART N. NSN 19. DESCRIPTIN F CHANGE Th. TRU-U I*» be evelope» a repbcamanl ol ma AT&TTalametty Receiver Unli (TRU) «n «tar. otter array spoofe «Mn The TRU-U It a TS-baae leleme^ rrato that In -SitLnK, auooortnn *Tfiw mweal SURTASS towe array, (a. well aa the ProoueSon Baseline Array), wil provie Increase «liability an enhance cperamuy. The cnanoa InvorvM?M 37SS 2 X*to*Zn' BW conirt» m. components o. IN, TRU-U (pna. W. power komtan unit «rr» coe rec*var. spaaker. I/ par»! an ^ port harware lor arrav Inlortoco an power lupprv (base on type)]. The configuration ol lha TRU-U utilize» harware components with a graat oaora. ol commonalny wtlh the Data Proeesaing Subsystorn. TS proo^tr win b7zn!s»rlwa'a.hal Z b. evelope to unr,ers»»y.uppon all array type, with. v.ry May.o u.a oparalor Inl.rfeca. Aitionally. Ihla chan9» require, several cable, an Interface paneu lo b««place In oroc lo be eomoallbla wllh the new «quemenl 2. NEED FR CHANGE TWa Chan» la require lo allow lha TX an Nart Evolution system lo Intartoca lo the nawe.1 SURTASS lowe array. (A1BR. TwWiwR»n RDA w/ax low cable). A*oJhe ejrmnrj llljz,rb«lln. Irray (PBA) Mart» equipment (SCU an AIU) I. nearlng an ol IB. an I. no....ily.upport.. A common Racaärar architecture woul provie a alanar harware an Mitwar» configuration, uaar Irtanly oparalor macnine ttlerteoe. an mcreaae malntainablllry lor all Jhlp «yslarru. 21. PRDUCTIN EFFECTIVITY BY SERIAL NUMBER N/A 23. RETRFIT a. REMMENDED ITEM EFFECTIVITY c. ESTIMATED SHIP DELIVERY SCHEDULE 24. ESTIMATED STS/SAVINGS UNDER NTRACT 28. SUBMITTING ACTIVITY AUTHRIZED SIGNATURE a. AUTHRIZED SIGNATURE 22. EFFECT N PRDUCTIN DELIVERY SCHEDULE N/A b. SHIP/VEHICLE CLASS AFFECTED T-AGS 8 (T-8). T-9. TI9. T-2. T-21.T-22. ant-23. LCATINS R SHIP/VEHICLE NUMBERS AFFECTED T-AGS a (T-8). "M. T13. T-2, T-21. T-22. an T-23 2S. ESTIMATED NET TTAL STS NRE S463 RE PER SHIP $267 b. TITLE M. Holm Manager, Contracts. Naval an Maritime Systems 27. APPRVAL/DISAPPRVAL a. CLASS I APPRVAL REMMENDED A GVERNMENT ACTIVITY DISAPPRVAL REMMENDED b. CLASS II I APPRVED I DISAPPRVED c. CLASS III NCUR IN CLASSIFI- CATIN'F CHANGE 8. SIGNATURE, D NT NCUR IM CLASSI- FICATIN F CHANGE I. DATE (YYMMDD) fl. APPRVAL h. GVERNMENT-ACTIVITY I. SIGNATURE J. DATE (YYMMDD) APPRVED DISAPPRVED D Form 162. APR 82 Pmlous tltlom tn obtoltla. 135

147 THIS PAGE INTENTINALLY LEFT BLANK 136

148 APPENDIX G BLU JP FYPP FINANCIAL STATUS (&M,N)

149 CQ f -1 os s ä so a; c~ s s 1 so S o~ s so S os so IP. 1 S CN S ^ [^ 3 os os so to S S Ü 15 a c c Slo 1^ «& os S S so co > s S S S <s- <o s S S c~ S S S S C3 *,_( s r~ a* oö > fa if o so lo o < VI ff oj!* < ' T ' 1 S S S T3- -s <o r~ St«en S S a- so S o CN S Q. a» S 1 6 Q *r a- C-- o i 1 so C3 " S so f 1 I i- o o so S o 55 CD & s *> J it I I2 o o (-> oooooooooo o oscoc soio-fl-cncs-h 1 Vi a 2 a.2 "I f Pi S c^ cq $ W <fl.y -a "A s B. 5 o. stf CJ a X.o + (g fi <» ft ii< 138

150 APPENDIX H SUBMARINE LF/VLF VMEBUS RECEIVER (SLVR) ACAT IVT

151 14

152 APPENDIX I NAVY HIGH FREQUENCY SATELLITE MMUNICATIN PRGRAM (NESP)

153 «* V-l *' v in <n C- in V V r- n f> <o < o «-H r- ov >n <* t> >n vo Ti o o ** CN vo * t~ ** o o vq vo v"> t~- (S VN in * «n n rt m co' ^ oo' V CN rf *N t~ co * mm N * co V V oo I "33 58 <s ffl os s a o u 3 5 4> 3 "I «6 >T1 j " ** r-i r- «s oo oo m rtnin CN <-i vo r~ oo o * es <t vo 1 *-> «t «s ov o in CN V N Pg P «>.fe -a»» 2 T3 ft & ' J* 142

154 APPENDIX J JINT (UHF) MILSATM NETWRK INTEGRATED (JMINI) NTRL SYSTEM

155 144