Affordability and DoD Contracts
Affordability plays a huge role in the contracts the Department of Defense (DoD) signs for various projects.
This DoD acquisition process is now regulated by new laws that were enacted by the government recently.
Defense Secretary's $101 billion "efficiency initiative" was created in order to ensure that the Department of Defense makes as many savings as it possibly can in the coming years, in line with the spending cuts that the entire country is trying to push through.
Every military service has now been required to find $2 billion of savings in 2012, $3 billion in 2013, and $5 billion by 2014.
The list goes on, until 2016 when $10 billion of savings should be achieved by the United States military and its various branches.
These savings will fund military pay and benefits as well as weapons acquisition programs.
The fact is that DoD acquisition contracts are now directly linked to how much money they can save.
The country has created a deficit of almost $2 trillion and can no longer frivolously spend on defense contracts that the army sees fit to enact.
Only money that is being saved can be spent.
While Gates came up with a good savings plan, Ashton Carter, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, came up with further contracting reforms to save the military money.
The first principle Carter brought into law is that affordability is as important as technical capability when it comes making decisions about weapons programs, such as the Army Ground Combat Vehicles and the Air Force Long Range Strike Missiles.
Any programs that are not financially viable must be let go of and all programs must strictly comply with regulations that inhibit spending on new equipments and maintaining current ones.
Similarly, there are now portfolio capability reviews that will be conducted to ensure that any program that is redundant is let go.
The Air Force's Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program is one that is particularly at risk of being shut down for its huge costs and limited effectiveness.
The Army's Medium Extended Air Defense System is also being threatened, because shutting down these and a few other programs could save the army billions of dollars.
They are looking to find programs that cost between $10 to $12 million each and do not rip holes in the United States Treasury's budget.
There are other policies as well, and these are merely two examples of how both the Defense Secretary and his undersecretary are striving to reduce United States Military spending, especially in the DoD acquisition process, while still maintaining our status as the primary army in the world.
This DoD acquisition process is now regulated by new laws that were enacted by the government recently.
Defense Secretary's $101 billion "efficiency initiative" was created in order to ensure that the Department of Defense makes as many savings as it possibly can in the coming years, in line with the spending cuts that the entire country is trying to push through.
Every military service has now been required to find $2 billion of savings in 2012, $3 billion in 2013, and $5 billion by 2014.
The list goes on, until 2016 when $10 billion of savings should be achieved by the United States military and its various branches.
These savings will fund military pay and benefits as well as weapons acquisition programs.
The fact is that DoD acquisition contracts are now directly linked to how much money they can save.
The country has created a deficit of almost $2 trillion and can no longer frivolously spend on defense contracts that the army sees fit to enact.
Only money that is being saved can be spent.
While Gates came up with a good savings plan, Ashton Carter, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, came up with further contracting reforms to save the military money.
The first principle Carter brought into law is that affordability is as important as technical capability when it comes making decisions about weapons programs, such as the Army Ground Combat Vehicles and the Air Force Long Range Strike Missiles.
Any programs that are not financially viable must be let go of and all programs must strictly comply with regulations that inhibit spending on new equipments and maintaining current ones.
Similarly, there are now portfolio capability reviews that will be conducted to ensure that any program that is redundant is let go.
The Air Force's Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program is one that is particularly at risk of being shut down for its huge costs and limited effectiveness.
The Army's Medium Extended Air Defense System is also being threatened, because shutting down these and a few other programs could save the army billions of dollars.
They are looking to find programs that cost between $10 to $12 million each and do not rip holes in the United States Treasury's budget.
There are other policies as well, and these are merely two examples of how both the Defense Secretary and his undersecretary are striving to reduce United States Military spending, especially in the DoD acquisition process, while still maintaining our status as the primary army in the world.
Source...