Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,695,195 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

American forces press service (Oct. 4, 2005): special panel to identify fixes for DoD's acquisition woes.


WASHINGTON -- The U.S. military's weapons-development and acquisition programs are broken and need big fixes, a senior Defense Department official said here Oct 3.

Capitol Capitol, seat of the U.S. Congress
Capitol, seat of the U.S. government at Washington, D.C. It is the city's dominating monument, built on an elevated site that was chosen by George Washington in consultation with Major Pierre L'Enfant.
 Hill legislators' and senior Pentagon Pentagon

Huge five-sided building (1941–43) in Arlington, Va., that is the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Defense. Designed by George Edwin Bergstrom, it was, on its completion, the world's largest office building, covering 34 acres (14 hectares) and offering
 executives' concerns about increased weapons costs, lengthy development times, and proper oversight and accounting of taxpayer dollars have prompted the department to conduct a top-to-bottom review of its entire acquisition process, the senior official told reporters at a Pentagon roundtable.

That review, the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Project, was directed by acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England in July, the official said. The review's recommendations are to be presented to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in November.

"I am authorizing an integrated acquisition assessment to consider every aspect of acquisition, including requirements, organization, legal foundations," England wrote in a June 7 memorandum that outlined his philosophy for the review.

The review project will produce "a recommended acquisition structure and processes with clear alignment of responsibility, authority, and accountability," England continued in the memo, noting, "Simplicity is desirable," and "restructuring restructuring - The transformation from one representation form to another at the same relative abstraction level, while preserving the subject system's external behaviour (functionality and semantics).  acquisition is critical and essential." The U.S. military continues to receive the best equipment in the world, the senior DoD official said. The project seeks to identify and then implement ways to change the present acquisition system to more efficiently manage taxpayer dollars and better serve warfighters, he explained.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish, Ret. (born April 6, 1948) is a United States Air Force officer who rose to head the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and the Missile Defense Agency within the United States Department of Defense. , the former director of DoD's Missile Defense Missile defence is an air defence system, weapon program, or technology involved in the detection, tracking, interception and destruction of attacking missiles. Originally conceived as a defence against nuclear-armed ICBMs, its application has broadened to include shorter-ranged  Agency, chairs the DAPA DAPA Diaminopimelic Acid
DAPA Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor
DAPA Diplomate of the American Psychotherapy Association
DAPA Distribution And Pricing Agreement
DAPA Defense Acquisition and Program Administration (South Korea) 
 project's five-member primary panel. The project is also soliciting opinion from acquisition and defense industry experts from inside and outside the government, the official noted.

The official said the results from the project would be rolled into the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review
"QDR" redirects here. For the computer technology called QDR, see Quad Data Rate SRAM.


The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is a report by the United States Department of Defense that analyzes strategic objectives and potential military
, which identifies what the military needs to accomplish its missions.

The panel is still collecting data and isn't ready to announce recommendations, the official said. But, he noted, unlike the Packard Commission study of military acquisition processes that was conducted 20 years ago, many of this panel's approved recommendations would be implemented.
COPYRIGHT 2006 Defense Acquisition University Press
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2006, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Gilmore, Gerry J.
Publication:Defense AT & L
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2006
Words:332
Previous Article:American forces press service (Oct. 3, 2005): Pace issues guidance to help military 'shape the future'.(Peter Pace)
Next Article:Air force print news (Oct. 5, 2005): capability assessment helps af prepare for future.
Topics:



Related Articles
AGB's role increases with new charter.(Policy & Legislation)(Acquisition Governance Board)
Military equipment valuation to achieve a clean audit: who cares?(ACQUISITION PROCESS IMPROVEMENT)
Military equipment valuation: achieving a clean audit.
Translating strategic vision into tactical implementation: interpretive vs. analytical thought in AFRL technology development.(CASE STUDY)
Director, defense procurement and acquisition policy holds procurement conference.(CONFERENCES, WORKSHOPS & SYMPOSIA)
DFARS Change Notice 20050916.(Policy & Legislation)
GAO reports.(Policy & Legislation)(Government Accountability Office)
Subject: Question Unusual Practices and Organizational Structures.(Policy & Legislation)
Program Execution: it all comes down to making the hard decisions.(Kenneth Krieg)
Defense Science Board (February 2006); Transformation: a Progress Assessment, Volume I.(Brief article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles