Attachment_0001.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

Army Regulation 70 – 1

Research, Development, and Acquisition

Army Acquisition Policy

Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 10 August 2018

SUMMARY of CHANGE

AR 70 – 1

Army Acquisition Policy

This mandated revision, dated 10 August 2018— o Incorporates Army Directive 2017 – 22, Implementation of Acquisition Reform Initiatives 1 and 2 (paras 1 – 7, 15– 8a(1), and 15–8b).

o Incorporates Army Directive 2017 – 31, Acquisition Reform Initiative #5: Aligning Sustainment Policy to Foster Cost Efficiency and Improved Readiness (paras 7 – 1, 7 – 2, and 7 – 3).

o Incorporates Army Directive 2017 – 34, Acquisition Reform Initiative #7: Improving Cost Estimation and Resourcing (para 11 – 2 and app B).

o Supersedes Army Directive 2017 – 30, Acquisition Reform Initiative #4: Streamlining Test and Evaluation and Minimizing Redundant Testing (paras 11 – 4 and 14 – 3).

o Adds a new chapter describing cybersecurity in the Defense Acquisition System (chap 14).

o Supersedes Army Directive 2017 – 29, Acquisition Reform Initiative #3: Improving the Integration and Synchronization of Science and Technology (paras 15–8a(2) through 15–8a(9)).

o Incorporates changes from the latest update to DODI 5000.02 (throughout).

o Incorporates changes resulting from Secretary of the Army direction to realign elements of the Capabilities Integration Directorate within the Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 3/5/7 (DAMO – CI) and merge them into the Force Development Directorate within the Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 8 (DAPR – FD) (throughout).

*This regulation supersedes AR 70–1, dated 16 June 2017; AD 2017–29, dated 15 November 2017; and AD 2017–30, dated 15 November 2017.

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

UNCLASSIFIED

i

Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC

*Army Regulation 70 – 1

10 August 2018 Effective 10 August 2018 Research, Development, and Acquisition

Army Acquisition Policy

History. This publication is a man-dated revision.

Summary. This publication imple-ments DODD 5000.01 and revisions to DODI 5000.02. It governs research, devel-opment, acquisition, and life cycle manage-ment of Army materiel solutions to satisfy approved Army requirements for warf-ighting capabilities. This regulation takes precedence over other Army regulations with respect to the management of Army acquisition programs. Statutes, the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, and mandatory DOD policies take precedence over this regulation with respect to con-tracting matters.

Applicability. This regulation applies to the Regular Army, the Army National Guard/Army National Guard of the United

States, and the U.S. Army Reserve unless otherwise stated.

Proponent and exception authority.

The proponent of this regulation is the As-sistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology). The proponent has the authority to approve exceptions or waivers to this regulation that are consistent with controlling law and regulations. The proponent may delegate this approval au-thority, in writing, to a division chief within the proponent agency or its direct reporting unit or field operating agency in the grade of colonel or the civilian equivalent. Activ-ities may request a waiver to this regulation by providing justification that includes a full analysis of the expected benefits and must include formal review by the activity's senior legal officer. All waiver requests will be endorsed by the commander or senior leader of the requesting activity and for-warded through their higher headquarters to the policy proponent. Refer to AR 25 – 30 for specific guidance.

Army internal control process.

This regulation contains internal control provisions in accordance with AR 11 – 2 and identifies key internal controls that must be evaluated (see appendixes E and F).

Supplementation. Supplementation of this regulation and establishment of com-mand and local forms are prohibited with-out prior approval from the Assistant Sec-retary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) (SAAL – PA), 2800 Crys-tal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202 – 2800.

Suggested improvements. Users are invited to send comments and suggested improvements on DA Form 2028 (Recom-mended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms) directly to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) (SAAL – PA), 2800 Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202 – 2800.

Committee management. AR 15 – 39 requires the proponent to justify es-tablishing/continuing committee(s), coordi-nate draft publications, and coordinate changes in committee status with the Office of the Administrative Assistant to the Sec-retary of the Army, Department of the Army Committee Management Office (AARP – ZA), 9301 Chapek Road, Building 1458, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060 – 5527. Fur-ther, if it is determined that an established “group” identified within this regulation later takes on the characteristics of a com-mittee, as found in the AR 15 – 39, then the proponent will follow all AR 15 – 39 re-quirements for establishing and continuing the group as a committee.

Distribution. This regulation is avail-able in electronic media only and is in-tended for the Regular Army, the Army Na-tional Guard/Army National Guard of the United States, and the U.S. Army Reserve.

Contents (Listed by paragraph and page number)

Chapter 1 Introduction, page 1 Purpose • 1 – 1, page 1 References • 1 – 2, page 1 Explanation of abbreviations and terms • 1 – 3, page 1 Responsibilities • 1 – 4, page 1 Application to Army programs • 1 – 5, page 4 Policy • 1 – 6, page 5 Procedures • 1 – 7, page 5

Contents—Continued ii AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

Chapter 2 Acquisition Program Categories and Compliance Requirements, page 11 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 1 • 2 – 1, page 11 Acquisition categories • 2 – 2, page 11 Acquisition program information requirements at milestones and other decision points • 2 – 3, page 12 Acquisition program baselines and baseline breaches • 2 – 4, page 12 Reporting requirements • 2 – 5, page 13 Clinger-Cohen Act compliance • 2 – 6, page 13

Chapter 3 Program Management, page 13 Relationship to Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 2 • 3 – 1, page 13 Acquisition chain of command • 3 – 2, page 13 Assignment of program executive officers • 3 – 3, page 13 Assignment of program management • 3 – 4, page 13 Program office structure and organizations • 3 – 5, page 14 Program management responsibilities • 3 – 6, page 14 International acquisition and exportability • 3 – 7, page 14 Industrial base analysis and considerations • 3 – 8, page 14 Life cycle management of information and data protection • 3 – 9, page 14

Chapter 4 Systems Engineering, page 15 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 3 • 4 – 1, page 15 Systems engineering plan • 4 – 2, page 15 Technical reviews • 4 – 3, page 15 Configuration management • 4 – 4, page 15 Software • 4 – 5, page 15 Reliability and maintainability • 4 – 6, page 16 Program protection • 4 – 7, page 16 Modular open systems architectures • 4 – 8, page 16 Corrosion prevention and control • 4 – 9, page 16 Environment, safety, and occupational health • 4 – 10, page 16 Insensitive munitions • 4 – 11, page 16 Item unique identification • 4 – 12, page 17 Spectrum supportability • 4 – 13, page 17

Chapter 5 Developmental Test and Evaluation, page 17 Relationship to Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 4 • 5 – 1, page 17 Overview • 5 – 2, page 17 Developmental test and evaluation management • 5 – 3, page 17

Chapter 6 Operational and Live Fire Test and Evaluation, page 17 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 5 • 6 – 1, page 17 Application to operational and live fire test and evaluation • 6 – 2, page 17 Operational test and evaluation management • 6 – 3, page 17 Resources and schedule • 6 – 4, page 18 Operational and live fire test and evaluation execution • 6 – 5, page 18 Operational test readiness • 6 – 6, page 18 Test and evaluation master plan evolution through the acquisition milestones • 6 – 7, page 18

Chapter 7 Life Cycle Sustainment, page 18 Relationship to Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 6 • 7 – 1, page 18

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 iii

Sustainment across the life cycle • 7 – 2, page 18 Life cycle sustainment plan • 7 – 3, page 18 Sustainment metrics • 7 – 4, page 19 Product support reviews • 7 – 5, page 19

Chapter 8 Human Systems Integration, page 19 Relationship to Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 7 • 8 – 1, page 19 General • 8 – 2, page 19 Human systems integration planning • 8 – 3, page 19

Chapter 9 Affordability Analysis and Investment Constraints, page 19 Relationship to Department of Defense Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 8 • 9 – 1, page 19 Overview • 9 – 2, page 19 Life cycle affordability analysis • 9 – 3, page 19 Lower acquisition category programs • 9 – 4, page 20

Chapter 10 Analysis of Alternatives, page 20 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 9 • 10 – 1, page 20 Analysis of alternatives procedures • 10 – 2, page 20 Analysis of alternatives funding • 10 – 3, page 20

Chapter 11 Cost Estimating and Reporting, page 21 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 10 • 11 – 1, page 21 Cost estimation • 11 – 2, page 21 Cost analysis requirements description • 11 – 3, page 21 Cost reporting • 11 – 4, page 21

Chapter 12 Requirements Applicable to All Programs Containing Information Technology, page 22 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 11 • 12 – 1, page 22 Application to programs containing information technology • 12 – 2, page 22 Clinger-Cohen Act compliance • 12 – 3, page 22 Cybersecurity • 12 – 4, page 22 Trusted systems and networks • 12 – 5, page 22 Department of Defense enterprise software initiative • 12 – 6, page 22 Department of Defense data center consolidation • 12 – 7, page 22 Information technology, including National Security Systems, interoperability • 12 – 8, page 22

Chapter 13 Urgent Capability Acquisition, page 23 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 13 • 13 – 1, page 23 Urgent operational needs and other quick reaction capabilities • 13 – 2, page 23 Procedures • 13 – 3, page 23

Chapter 14 Cybersecurity in the Defense Acquisition System, page 24 Relationship to Department of Defense instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 14 • 14 – 1, page 24 Cybersecurity in Army Programs • 14 – 2, page 24 Cybersecurity test and evaluation • 14 – 3, page 24

Chapter 15 Unique Conditions Applicable to Army Acquisition, page 25 Army-unique policies • 15 – 1, page 25 iv AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

Army acquisition workforce • 15 – 2, page 25 Acquisition-related activities outside the acquisition framework • 15 – 3, page 25 Highly sensitive, classified programs • 15 – 4, page 25 Program management organization transfers, mergers, disestablishments, or terminations • 15 – 5, page 25 Re-procurement and restarting terminated acquisition programs • 15 – 6, page 26 Modifications • 15 – 7, page 26 Additional Army acquisition policies • 15 – 8, page 26

Appendixes

A. References, page 31

B. Guidance for Developing Cost Estimates, page 40

C. Status of Policy Statements, page 41

D. Program Manager's Bill of Rights, page 43

E. Internal Control Evaluation for Non-Major Defense Acquisition Programs at Milestone Decision Reviews, page 44

F. Internal Control Evaluation Process for Major Defense Acquisition Programs at Milestone Decision Re-views, page 45

Table List

Table 1 – 1: Acquisition Program Reviews, page 6 Table C – 1: Status of incorporated and rescinded policy statements, page 41

Glossary

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 1

Chapter 1 Introduction

1 – 1. Purpose This regulation establishes policy, assigns responsibilities, and reflects the Army’s implementation of Department of De-fense directive (DODD) 5000.01 and Department of Defense instruction (DODI) 5000.02 for Army-managed acquisition programs. This includes Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) that have been identified as Defense Business Systems (DBS) by the chief management officer (CMO) in accordance with DODI 5000.75. If requirements contained in this publication conflict with later issuances or revisions of statutes and mandatory Department of Defense (DOD) policies, the proponent will direct expeditious development and implementation of interim policy that will be incorporated in this publication’s next revision in accordance with AR 25 – 30 and DA Pam 25 – 40.

1 – 2. References See appendix A.

1 – 3. Explanation of abbreviations and terms See the glossary.

1 – 4. Responsibilities This paragraph is intended primarily to identify positions the Army has assigned a responsibility identified in DODI

5000.02 as “Component” or “Service” without specific identification to a person or organization. It also provides a high-level summary of Army-assigned responsibilities associated with acquisition that is neither intended to be exhaustive, nor repetitive of responsibilities identified in other current Army administrative publications.

a. The Secretary of the Army.

(1) Pursuant to Section 3013 of Title 10, United States Code (10 USC 3013), the SECARMY is responsible for, among other matters, the equipping function (including research and development) of the Department of the Army (DA).

(2) Specific responsibilities in connection with major defense acquisition programs include:

(a) Balancing resources against priorities on the acquisition program and ensuring that appropriate trade-offs are made among cost, schedule, technical feasibility, and performance on a continuing basis throughout the life of the acquisition program in accordance with 10 USC 2546a.

(b) Considering cost, schedule, technical feasibility, and performance tradeoffs prior to Milestone A and B decisions in accordance with 10 USC 2366a and 10 USC 2366b.

(c) In each Selected Acquisition Report required under 10 USC 2432 certify that program requirements are stable and funding is adequate to meeting cost, schedule, and performance objectives for the program and identify and report to the congressional defense committees on any increased risk to the program since the last report.

b. Chief of Staff, Army. The CSA will—

(1) Assist the SECARMY in the performance of the following acquisition-related functions:

(a) The development of requirements for equipping the Army (subject, where appropriate, to validation by the Joint

Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) pursuant to 10 USC 181).

(b) Decisions regarding the balancing of resources and priorities and associated trade-offs among cost, schedule, tech-nical feasibility, and performance on MDAPs.

(c) The coordination of measures to control requirements that creep into the Defense Acquisition System.

(d) The recommendation of trade-offs among life cycle cost, schedule, and performance objectives, and procurement

(PROC) quantity objectives, to ensure acquisition programs deliver best value in meeting the approved military require-ments.

(e) Termination of development or PROC programs for which life cycle cost, schedule, and performance expectations are no longer consistent with approved military requirements and levels of priority, or which no longer have approved military requirements.

(f) The development and management of career paths in acquisition for military personnel, as required by 10 USC 1722a.

(g) The assignment and training of contracting officer representatives when such representatives are required to be members of the Armed Forces because of the nature of the contract concerned.

(2) Apart from the assistance rendered to the SECARMY in paragraph 1–4b(1), the CSA also authorizes and ensures the Commanding General (CG), Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC), on behalf of the CSA—

2 AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

(a) Supports the system acquisition, force development, and experimentation processes through overall management of the Army’s test and evaluation (T&E) programs.

(b) Conducts and chairs operational test readiness reviews (OTRRs) and integrated/combined developmental test read-iness reviews, as appropriate.

(c) Oversees the activities of ATEC, the Army’s lead developmental test and evaluation (DT&E) organization, lead test organization for operational test and evaluation (OT&E), including live fire test and evaluation (LFT&E), and the Army’s independent operational test activity.

(d) Reports directly to the Vice Chief of Staff, Army (VCSA) through the Director of the Army Staff (ARSTAF).

c. Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology). The ASA (ALT) is responsible for the overall supervision of the ALT matters of the DA and has sole responsibility for performing the acquisition function within Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA). The ASA (ALT) will—

(1) As designated by the SECARMY, serve as the Army acquisition executive (AAE), senior procurement executive, and senior official responsible for the management of acquisition of contract services, science advisor to the SECARMY, and senior research and development official for DA.

(2) Set the strategic direction for ensuring DA policies, plans, and programs related to ALT, PROC, the industrial base, and materiel related security cooperation (including security assistance and armaments cooperation) are executed con-sistent with law, regulation, and policy.

(3) Oversee the Office of the ASA (ALT) which is designated the single office for the acquisition function in HQDA and provide the CSA such staff support for acquisition matters considered necessary to perform the duties and responsi-bilities.

(4) Authorize and ensure program executive officers (PEOs) and direct reporting program managers (DRPMs), on be-half of the ASA (ALT)—

(a) Oversee the program portfolios assigned by the AAE.

(b) Supervise and evaluate their assigned program, project, and product managers (PMs) and materiel developers

(MATDEVs).

(c) Confirm compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements consistent with designated acquisition categories

(ACATs).

(d) Ensure their assigned PMs and MATDEVs appropriately tailor regulatory requirements and obtain the milestone decision authority (MDA) approval when either the AAE or Defense Acquisition Executive (DAE) retains MDA for a DRPM’s program or a program in a PEO’s assigned portfolio.

(e) Act as the approval authority for tailoring program information requirements detailed in DODI 5000.02 and this regulation, exercise materiel development decision (MDD) authority, and serve as MDA when the AAE delegates those authorities.

(f) Ensure MDAs for MDAPs as part of the MDA’s Written Determination before Milestone A and Certification and Determination before Milestone B, determine that the SECARMY and the CSA concur with the cost, schedule, technical feasibility, and performance trade-offs that have been made.

d. Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller). The ASA (FM&C) oversees the Army’s planning, programming, budgeting, and execution (PPBE) process; develops and issues Armywide PPBE policy; and over-sees the Office of the ASA (FM&C) which performs the equivalent cost estimating functions to those performed by the Director, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation at the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) level. The ASA (FM&C) also oversees the activities of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Cost and Economics (DASA – CE) who, on behalf of the ASA (FM&C), will—

(1) Approve the component cost estimate (Army cost position) for MDAPs and other programs where the AAE is the

MDA.

(2) Provide cost and economic analysis support to the Army planning, PPBE, affordability goals and caps, and other Army decision-making processes.

(3) Develop statutory independent cost estimates (ICEs) and component cost analyses in accordance with DODI 5000.02, and chair the Army Cost Review Board.

(4) Serve as the Army’s focal point for cost reporting policies, concepts, methods, and procedures.

(5) Oversee and manage historical operations and support (O&S) cost data input to the Army's tool to support the

Visibility and Management of Operating and Support Costs initiative in accordance with DODI 5000.73.

e. Deputy Under Secretary of the Army. The DUSA will oversee the T&E executive who—

(1) Oversees all Army T&E missions and functions, to include formulating overarching Army T&E strategy, policy, and program direction, providing policy oversight and managing resources.

(2) Approves test-related documentation (that is, test and evaluation master plans (TEMPs)) for HQDA and forwards them to the OSD for approval, if required.

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 3

(3) Coordinates and facilitates communication with OSD on all T&E matters.

(4) Serves as HQDA coordination agent for all T&E policy, resource programming, and related programmatics.

f. Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations, Energy and Environment). The ASA (IE&E) has the principal respon-sibility for all DA matters related to installations; real estate; and environment, safety and occupational health (ESOH).

The ASA (IE&E) will—

(1) Provide ESOH and installation recommendations during the MDD review process.

(2) Provide technical support to ASA (FM&C) for the development and validation of environmental quality life cycle cost estimates as part of the Army cost review process.

(3) Provide technical support to the ASA (ALT) in implementing green PROC programs.

(4) Ensure that ESOH considerations are incorporated into warfighting analyses and provide recommendations to the

ASA (ALT); the Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS), G – 3/5/7; the DCS, G – 4; and the DCS, G – 8 regarding environmental secu-rity and force protection issues.

g. Chief Information Officer/G – 6. The CIO/G – 6 is responsible for setting the strategic direction for and supervising the execution of Army policies and programs for information management (IM) and information technology (IT) for the Army, monitoring the effect of IM and IT on warfighting capabilities, creating network architecture and information shar-ing policy, modernizing Army resource management processes, and ensuring the synchronization of the Army's network activities. The CIO/G – 6 oversees the Army’s Office of the CIO, which is designated the single office in HQDA responsible for IM, performs the Army G – 6 functions, and provides the CSA such staff support they consider necessary to perform their duties and responsibilities. The Office of the CIO/G – 6, as the CIO/G – 6, will—

(1) Confirm 40 USC and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA) compliance of all programs that acquire IT, including National Security Systems (NSS).

(2) Maintain configuration control authority for the certified baseline for command, control, communications, comput-ers, and intelligence (C4I) systems.

(3) Review and approve the Cybersecurity Strategy prior to milestone decisions or contract awards.

(4) Serve as the Army’s interoperability certification authority.

(5) Make interoperability determinations for all Army IT and NSS in all mission areas.

(6) Require any information system (IS) using the Army Enterprise Infrastructure to obtain interoperability and net worthiness certifications before the system or capability can be connected to the Army's network.

h. Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 1. The DCS, G – 1 will develop, coordinate, and disseminate Army human systems integra-tion (HSI) program policy and guidance and has primary staff responsibility for HSI assessments and HSI domain assess-ments.

i. Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 2. The DCS, G – 2 will support the systems acquisition process for intelligence. (Refer to AR 381 – 11 and AR 70 – 77).

j. Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 3/5/7. The DCS, G – 3/5/7 develops Army policy and procedural guidance for force man-agement and integration, as well the development of non-materiel capabilities. The DCS, G – 3/5/7 will—

(1) Conduct force integration analyses to assess supportability and affordability for structure, manpower, equipment, fiscal resources, facilities, and training.

(2) Establish Army procedures for documenting the urgent operational need (UON) for a nonstandard and/or unpro-grammed capability to correct a deficiency or improve a capability that enhances mission accomplishment.

(3) Be the Army’s decision authority for validating and prioritizing UONs.

k. Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 4. The DCS, G – 4 is the principal military advisor for logistics to the ASA (ALT) and the principal ARSTAF advisor to the CSA on logistics and assists in acting as the agent of the SECARMY to carry into effect approved plans and recommendations. Under the supervision of ASA (ALT), for Army logistics and sustainment issues, the DCS, G – 4 develops and executes Army strategy, policy, plans, and programs for logistics and sustainment; ensures the execution of policies, plans, and programs consistent with law, regulation, and policy by other DA officials and organ-izations; and reviews and assesses the execution of Army logistics policies, plans, and programs. Additional specific re-sponsibilities are as assigned in DA General Orders 2017 – 01 and AR 700 – 127.

l. Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 8. The DCS, G – 8 is the Army’s lead for matching available resources to the defense strategy and the Army plan by leading the Army’s planning, development, and resourcing of programs in order to balance current force needs with future force capabilities. The DCS, G – 8 will—

(1) Provide governance of the Army Requirements Oversight Council (AROC) process, responsible for validation and approval of capability requirements documentation of warfighting capabilities to include IS categorized as NSS.

(2) Co-establish Army-level policy and guidance with the ASA (ALT) for conducting the analysis of alternatives

(AOA).

(3) Determine the Army’s approaches for streamlining the process for determining warfighting capabilities, to include procedures for documenting and approving Directed Requirement solutions to UONs.

4 AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

(4) Provide the Army’s affordability analysis and proposed affordability goals, and demonstrate the program will be fully funded within the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP).

(5) Present tentative affordability goals at MDD reviews, an affordability analysis and proposed affordability goals at Milestone A, and affordability caps for unit production and sustainment costs at program initiation (normally, Milestone B).

(6) Establish cost targets in support of the AOA for all ACATs.

m. The Surgeon General/Commanding General, U.S. Army Medical Command. TSG and CG, MEDCOM provides technical advice and assistance to the ASA (ALT) on medical matters and health hazard issues during systems acquisition.

TSG/CG, MEDCOM will—

(1) Tailor the acquisition process for health and medical programs.

(2) Perform the medical acquisition functions detailed in AR 40 – 5, AR 40 – 10, AR 40 – 60, and AR 385 – 10.

(3) Appoint the CG, Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (AMRMC) to serve as the Deputy for Medical

Systems for the ASA (ALT).

n. Capability developers. Army capability developers (CAPDEVs) develop operational and support concepts; doctrine, organization, and force structures; and determine materiel, non-materiel, and software capability requirements for equip-ping these force structures. As user representatives, CAPDEVs ensure that materiel, non-materiel, and software develop-mental efforts address user requirements. To ensure that acquisition programs fulfill the needs of the user, CAPDEVs will—

(1) Perform duties, responsibilities, and relationships applicable to the Army Force Modernization Proponent System, to include determining doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy (DOTMLPF – P) requirements in accordance with AR 5 – 22.

(2) Prepare, staff, review, validate, and approve Army capability requirement documents in accordance with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 3170.01I, the Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS), and AR 71 – 9.

(3) Present alternative sources of analysis where there is no AOA.

(4) In conformance with requirements detailed in AR 700 – 127, develop an initial life cycle sustainment plan (LCSP) to be transferred to the MATDEV at program initiation.

(5) The U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command performs the role of CAPDEV for intelligence, biometric, signals intelligence, offensive cyberspace operations, and electronic warfare systems and will provide counterintelligence support to Army acquisition programs, and MATDEVs.

o. Materiel developers. Army MATDEVs will acquire or develop materiel solutions to meet capability requirements.

Army MATDEVs follow DOD and Army acquisition procedures and direction from the Army acquisition chain of com-mand, unless otherwise directed by the AAE or DAE. This direction applies to the AMRMC when acquiring medical materiel under a delegation of MDA.

p. Materiel commands. Materiel commands will provide functional support and assist MATDEVs in planning, devel-oping, acquiring, and sustaining well-defined, affordable, performance-based product support strategies that meet require-ments for Army materiel and software throughout the life cycle of all acquisition programs. Materiel commands include the U.S. Army Materiel Command (USAMC), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and AMRMC.

(1) Materiel commands will provide the ASA (ALT), and its PEOs and PMs, science and technology (S&T) develop-ment support, support during all phases of the system's life cycle, and integrated system sustainment execution. Support will include technology research, development, and engineering; logistics; contracting; PROC analysis; production; mate-riel release; workforce; and other support services as required.

(2) Refer to AR 700 – 127, AR 700 – 142, and AR 10 – 87 for additional policy requirements and specified responsibilities to be used in conjunction with this regulation.

1 – 5. Application to Army programs This publication applies to Army-managed acquisition programs, including NSS and acquisition special access programs (unless specifically excepted per program charter). The ASA (ALT) Systems Special Programs Directorate (SAAL – SSP) serves as the Army focal point for all highly sensitive, classified program acquisition matters. The following items are excluded from the purview of this regulation:

a. Materiel requirements for the U.S. Army Civil Works Program, except for IT;

b. Functional medical clothing and equipment listed in the common tables of allowances (CTA) 8 – 100;

c. Distinctive articles of clothing and insignia worn and used by the U.S. Corps of Cadets at the U.S. Military Academy;

d. Centrally procured heraldic items in the initial and supplemental clothing allowances in CTA 50 – 900;

e. Other items excluded as directed by the proponent of this publication after proper Army Secretariat and ARSTAF coordination;

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 5

f. Medical materiel and IS that support fixed facility tables of distribution and allowances and health care missions within the Defense Health Program, which are managed under AR 40 – 60, AR 40 – 61, and AR 25 – 1.

1 – 6. Policy Army personnel involved in the acquisition process will apply the overarching management principles and mandatory policies that govern the Defense Acquisition System described in DODD 5000.01 and DODI 5000.02 to all Army-managed acquisition programs. This direction also applies to MDAPs identified by the CMO as DBS or when it conflicts with later issuances or revisions of statutes, mandatory DOD policies, or by other higher-level authority. Army personnel involved in the acquisition process will also maintain awareness of, and are responsible for complying with, new statutes and higher-level direction related to acquisition program management even if not incorporated into DOD issuances (see para 1 – 1).

Streamlining and tailoring, consistent with statutory requirements, are authorized and encouraged in order to facilitate policies and approaches that enhance the Army’s ability to achieve program objectives, eliminate bureaucracy, and address the unique aspects of the Army acquisition structure, organizations, functions, roles, and missions.

1 – 7. Procedures Except as noted above, Army personnel involved in research, development, acquisition, and support of Army-managed materiel and systems will be governed by the policies and procedures enumerated in DODI 5000.02. Army MDAs may tailor regulatory requirements and acquisition procedures to achieve program objectives, consistent with statutory require-ments. Army acquisitions will comply with tailored regulatory requirements and statutory requirements, unless statutory requirements are waived in accordance with relevant provisions contained in the statute. The Secretary of Defense may waive acquisition law or regulation to acquire a capability that would not otherwise be available to the DoD Components in accordance with Section 806 of Public Law (PL) 114 – 92. This waiver authority may not be delegated. The AAE deter-mines the MDA for all Army-managed acquisition programs. Each Army acquisition program (to include clothing and individual equipment (CIE)) will have only one designated MDA. All MDAs must be at the general officer (GO) or senior executive service (SES) level and meet statutory and regulatory requirements for education, training, and experience (refer to 10 USC 1735 and DODI 5000.66). The MDA is the final authority for acquisition program decisions. Staff members and staff organizations support and facilitate the MDA's execution of that authority.

a. Program reviews. In addition to the review forums detailed in DODI 5000.02, the Army has established six Army-level acquisition decision review forums. These six forums are described in paragraphs 1–7b through 1–7f. They either meet requirements for MDAP component-level reviews when the AAE is MDA, or they serve as pre-Defense Acquisition Board review forums when the DAE is MDA. These six forums have established membership and composition which is depicted in table 1 – 1. To support program decisions, streamline the requirements and acquisition milestone approval pro-cesses, and reduce resourcing requirements—

(1) For ACAT IC programs, to ensure the AROC and Army System Acquisition Review Council (ASARC) are com-bined/streamlined where possible, a combined AROC/ASARC milestone concurrence forum will be convened for:

(a) The initial capabilities document (ICD) AROC, and MDD ASARC.

1. The CSA approves the ICD.

2. The AAE approves the MDD for Service-level programs.

(b) At Milestones A and B to:

1. Provide information to the MDA to facilitate the approval of the milestone.

2. Provide information to the SECARMY and CSA, or designee, to facilitate their decision regarding whether to concur with the cost, schedule, technical feasibility, and performance tradeoffs for the acquisition program before milestone ap-proval.

(2) This policy applies to ACAT IC, IB, and lower ACAT programs, when feasible.

b. Materiel development decision review. The MDD is the formal entry into the Defense Acquisition System and is mandatory for all Army acquisition programs.

(1) The basis for requesting a new program start is an approved ICD or other approved capability requirement. When a need for a materiel solution is identified, the DCS, G – 8 will recommend the AAE consider potential materiel approaches.

These potential approaches will provide a baseline for selection of alternatives for the program AOA. The DCS G – 8 will request Deputy for Acquisition and Systems Management (DASM) consideration of an MDD upon AROC determination that a new-start acquisition program is being proposed to provide a required capability. An approved capability derived request for a materiel solution is the basis for initiating an Army-level MDD review; the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) (OUSD (AT&L)) directs potential ACAT ID new-start OSD level MDD procedures.

6 AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

(2) The AAE chairs Army MDD review forums except when MDA is delegated. All potential ACAT I programs will undergo an Army review (pre-MDD Army overarching integrated product team (OIPT) and AAE MDD review) before a DAE-level MDD review.

(3) For potential Army ACAT II and III programs, the ASA (ALT) DASM assesses the CAPDEV’s MDD request, and recommends to the AAE whether or not (and if so, to what organization) to assign office of primary responsibility (OPR) for materiel development, and whether or not to delegate MDA.

(4) The AAE may delegate responsibility for program execution, including responsibility for the MDD. Upon delega-tion, the designated MDA is responsible for executing and managing the program in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory policy requirements. When the AAE delegates authority to conduct the MDD review, its composition and membership are tailored by and to meet the needs of the delegated MDD authority.

c. Pre-materiel development decision Army overarching integrated product team. The pre-MDD Army OIPT is a small group meeting tailored to the situation and conducted on a periodic, as-needed basis. Except for programs where the AAE delegates MDA, the DASM (SAAL – ZS) conducts the pre-MDD Army OIPT, to determine if statutory and regulatory requirements have been sufficiently addressed, and if the potential acquisition program is ready to proceed to an MDD review.

d. Army Systems Acquisition Review Council. The Army Systems Acquisition Review Council (ASARC) is the Army's senior-level review body for Army acquisition programs when the DAE, DOD CIO, or AAE is the MDA. The ASA (ALT) chairs the ASARC. When the AAE delegates MDA, an ASARC is not required and the delegated MDA determines re-quirements for program reviews. The ASARC members make recommendations to the AAE. Normally, ASARCs convene at formal milestones to determine a program's readiness to enter the next phase in the materiel acquisition cycle; however, an ASARC may convene at any time the AAE directs it to review the status of a program. ACAT ID programs are subse-quently reviewed by the Defense Acquisition Board. The DA Systems Coordinator coordinates Army participation. The ASARC Executive Secretariat (SAAL – ZSA) is responsible for the administrative aspects of the ASARC meeting.

e. Army overarching integrated product team. Army OIPT forums meet before ASARCs when the AAE or DAE is the MDA. The DASM (SAAL – ZS) chairs these OIPTs. The Army OIPT either—

(1) Determines that issues should be resolved at a lower level forum (for example, a working-level integrated product team (WIPT)).

(2) Recommends a tailored ASARC with limited attendees or convening a full formal ASARC.

(3) Decides that unresolved issues require high-level review and recommends a Configuration Steering Board (CSB) or ASARC, as appropriate.

Table 1 – 1 Acquisition Program Reviews — Continued Members and Attendees Pre-MDD

OIPT1

MDD

Review2

Army OIPT1 ASARC2 CSB AOIPT1 CSB2

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology)

Chair Chair Chair

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army

X X

Principal Military Deputy X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acqui-sition Policy and Logistics)

X X X X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Pro-curement)

X X X X X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Plans Programs and Resources)

X X X X X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Re-search and Technology)

X X X X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (De-fense Exports and Cooperation)

X X X X X

Office of General Counsel X X X X X X

Deputy for Acquisition and Systems Manage-ment

Chair X Chair X Chair X

Program Executive Officer or Direct Reporting Program Manager

X X X X

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 7

Table 1 – 1 Acquisition Program Reviews — Continued Members and Attendees Pre-MDD

OIPT1

MDD

Review2

Army OIPT1 ASARC2 CSB AOIPT1 CSB2

Program, Project, or Product Manager X X X X

Under Secretary of the Army3

Deputy Chief Management Officer X X X X

Office of Business Transformation X X X X

Functional Lead X X X X

Vice Chief of Staff, Army X X

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Man-agement and Comptroller)

X X X

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Cost and Economics)

X X

Army Budget Office X X

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations Energy and Environment)

X X

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs)

X X

Deputy Under Secretary of the Army

Director, Test and Evaluation Office X X X X

Chief Information Officer/Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 6

X X X X

Principal Director for Governance, Acquisition, and Chief Knowledge Office

X X

Chief, National Guard Bureau X X X X X

Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 1 X X

Director, Human Systems Integration X X

Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 2 X X X

Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 3/5/7 X X

Director, Capability Integration, Prioritization, and Analysis

X X

Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 4 X X X X

Deputy Chief of Staff, G – 8 X X X

Director, Force Development X X X X

Program, Evaluation, and Analysis X X X X

Commander, Army Materiel Command X X X X X X

Commander, Training and Doctrine Command

(TRADOC)

X X X X X X

TRADOC Center of Excellence

TRADOC Capabilities Manager

Chief, Army Reserve X X X X X

Commander, Army Test and Evaluation Com-mand

X X X X X

Additional Attendees may be invited and/or ap-proved by the Chair (see Note 2)

Example "As-required" Attendees (determined by the chair)

Army General Counsel

Director, Small Business Programs

8 AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018

Table 1 – 1 Acquisition Program Reviews — Continued Members and Attendees Pre-MDD

OIPT1

MDD

Review2

Army OIPT1 ASARC2 CSB AOIPT1 CSB2

Chief of Engineers

The Surgeon General

Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Manage-ment

The Judge Advocate General

Chief of Chaplains

Provost Marshall General

Commander, U.S. Army Combat Readiness Center

Others as determined by the Chair

Example Attendees Invited and/or approved by the Chair

Office of the Secretary of Defense

Department of Defense Chief Information Of-ficer3

The Joint Staff

Others as determined by the Chair Notes:

1 Members are normally GO/SES level representatives of the listed Principals. Principals may delegate authority to alternates in the grade of colonel or the civilian equivalent. Representatives of subordinate organizations listed under the principal are normally attendees, participate in the forums, and may, if their principal authorizes it, serve as the principal’s delegated alternate representative.

2 For CSBs for ACAT I programs, the CSB includes broad executive membership including senior representatives from the OUSD (AT&L) (including the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition), the Joint Staff (Director of Force Structure, Resources, and Assessments, J – 8), Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (or designated representative), and the DOD CIO; empowered representatives from Army organizations (as indicated in the table) and other senior representatives from OSD and the Army, as appropriate, in accordance with Section 814, PL 110 – 417. Members are normally the principal or GO/SES level alternate representatives when delegated authority by the principal. Subordinate organizations listed under the principal normally attend, par-ticipate in the forums, and may, if their principal authorizes it, serve as the principal’s delegated alternate representative. Principals may delegate authority to alternates in the grade of colonel or the civilian equivalent. Representatives of subordinate organizations listed under the principal are normally attendees, participate in the forums, and may, if their principal authorizes it, serve as the principal’s delegated alternate representative.

3 Normally, only for DBS.

f. Army Configuration Steering Board. DODI 5000.02 requires that the AAE form and chair a CSB for ACAT I pro-grams following capability development document (CDD) or equivalent capabilities requirements document (CRD) vali-dation in accordance with Section 814, PL 110 – 417. Per DODI 5000.02, this requirement also applies to a DBS designated an ACAT I MDAP. Army CSB policy applies to all ACAT I programs. ACAT I programs in full-rate production (FRP) or full deployment (for software developments) may be reviewed by the Army CSB because of a potential significant deviation from or recommended change to the approved acquisition program baseline (APB) cost, schedule, or perfor-mance parameters. Army MDAs for lower ACAT programs are encouraged, but not required, to form and chair appropriate level and composition CSBs. An in-process review (IPR) can be used as a CSB-like review for Army ACAT II and III programs at the MDA’s discretion (refer to para 1–7g).

(1) The Army OIPT meets before CSBs when the AAE chairs a CSB for ACAT I programs. The DASM chairs and provides recommendations to the AAE.

(2) In accordance with Section 814, PL 110 – 417, as amended (see 10 USC 2430, note) the CSB for an MDAP will be responsible for monitoring changes in program requirements and ensuring the CSA, in consultation with the SECARMY, approves of any proposed changes that could have an adverse effect on program cost or schedule.

(3) CSBs are responsible for:

(a) Preventing unnecessary changes to program requirements and system configuration that could have an adverse im-pact on program cost or schedule.

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

(c) Ensuring that the program delivers as much planned capability as possible at, or below, the relevant program base-line.

AR 70–1 • 10 August 2018 9

(4) There are two types of Army CSB meetings, the “trigger event” CSB meeting and the annual descoping CSB meet-ing.

(a) A trigger event CSB convenes when an event occurs, or a change is proposed that significantly impacts a program’s APB approved cost, schedule, or performance parameters, and must be reviewed by the Army CSB before implementation.

Army MATDEVs will not implement changes that affect requirements (for example, performance, quantities, or delivery timelines) before obtaining concurrence from the affected CAPDEV approval authority until funds are identified and the MDA determines cost, performance, or schedule impacts cannot be mitigated.

(b) Annual descoping CSBs are held for programs that do not undergo a trigger event CSB meeting during the calendar year. The MATDEVs will coordinate with both the affected CAPDEV and resource approval authorities before making final decisions on implementing descoping options.

g. Additional review forums. The Army employs additional review forums on an ad hoc basis to assist the AAE and MDAs that have AAE-delegated authority manage the Army’s acquisition program portfolios. These forums do not have established membership and composition. Rather, their composition and membership are tailored by and to meet the needs of the AAE, DRPMs, and PEOs as follows:

(1) Acquisition in-process review. An IPR is the review forum after the AAE delegates MDA. Army MDAs determine the IPR requirements, content, and attendees. MDAs will conduct IPRs at acquisition milestones and may conduct addi-tional IPRs they deem necessary.

(2) Knowledge point review. All PEOs will ensure that acquisition strategies for all ACAT I and non-delegated ACAT II programs that have not passed Milestone C include knowledge point reviews (KPRs). Application of KPRs to all other ACAT programs is at the MDA’s discretion. The MATDEVs will tailor specific knowledge points to the program, leverage existing meetings to accomplish KPR activities, and avoid creating additional work or documentation to the maximum extent possible. At a minimum, MATDEVs will include the requirements for the capability development validation and request for proposal (RFP) release decision points specified in DODI 5000.02. When the MDA requires KPRs for ACAT II and III programs, the program manager (PM) will address the results at ACAT II program status reviews (PSRs) and ACAT II and III annual PSRs.

(3) Program status review. The AAE conducts annual program reviews of the status of all Regular Army acquisition programs.

(a) Acquisition category I Army program status reviews. The Army PSR provides the forum for each PEO and selected ASA (ALT) staff to provide the AAE with a high-level overview of ACAT I, ACAT II, and selected ACAT III programs.

The ASA (ALT) chairs this quarterly forum.

(b) Acquisition category II and III annual Army program status reviews. The AAE may review any Army acquisition program at any time. On a case-by-case basis, the AAE is likely to review ACAT II or III programs providing a quick reaction capability (QRC), in which the AAE has special interest, S&T initiatives, or that meet any of the AAE’s criteria that are published in a PSR letter of instruction.

(4) Sustainment reviews. The Army requires formal sustainment reviews (SRs) to ensure that the product support strat-egy and its implementation meets the established sustainment objectives and thresholds for coordinating the transition to post-production sustainment funding. AR 700 – 127 identifies the Army SR forums and provides Army SR policy.

h. Relationship between Army acquisition, capability requirements, and budgeting processes. Validated capability re-quirements provide the basis for defining the products that will be acquired through the Army acquisition system, and the Army budgeting process determines Army fiscal priorities and resource allocations and provides the funds necessary to execute planned programs.

(1) Army warfighting capability requirements. The Army approval authority for all Army warfighting capability re-quirements is the CSA.

(a) AR 71 – 9 establishes Army policies and assigns responsibilities for the identification, determination, and integration of required Army warfighting capabilities, implements JCIDS within the DA, and the associated guidance in the DODD

5000.01 and DODI 5000.02.

(b) Refer to the most current version of CJCSI 3170.01I, JCIDS, and AR 71 – 9 for details and additional information on warfighting…