1 / 11

Life Cycle Logistics FIPT

Life Cycle Logistics FIPT. FIPT Action Items 19 OCT 12. Current Action items (AUG12 FIPT) :

delano
Download Presentation

Life Cycle Logistics FIPT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Life Cycle Logistics FIPT FIPT Action Items 19 OCT 12

  2. Current Action items (AUG12 FIPT): • ACTION ITEM 1: “Need to work with DACMs, DAU Scheduling, and HCI to ensure life cycle logisticians registering for non-logistics courses which are part of the life cycle logistics certification requirements (e.g., ROM 110, BCF215, ACQ 265, and SYS 101) are given a priority 1 or 2 designation, rather than a priority 3, as though our workforce members were being ‘cross-certified’ vice obtaining a certification in their primary career field. {POC: DAU PRM; Suspense: Update at October 2012 FIPT)” Status

  3. Action Item # 1 Students coded as a level III LOG career field registering for one of the courses listed under “Functional Training” to obtain their certification, they will be coded as Training Priority 1. For the non-LOG courses listed in the pick list (ACQ 265, BCF 215, LOG 204, RQM 110); they will be coded as Training Priority 1 for the first course that they take. If they choose to take another course on the pick list after having satisfied the certification requirement of completing one of the courses, they will be coded as Training Priority 3. Students coded as a level III LOG career field registering for one of the courses listed under “Core Plus Development Guide”, they will be coded as a Training Priority 3. For ACQ 265, if they’ve already completed one of the other courses on the pick list and decide to take ACQ 265, they will be coded as Training Priority 3. Partial list of the “Core Plus. …” Note:The explanation provided is based on the Services properly maintaining their certification metrics in their Training Application Systems and the students are properly coded in DCPDS/ATRRS.

  4. Current Action items (AUG12 FIPT): • ACTION ITEM 2: “CAPT Jerry Reid will provide a copy of the LCL PCD Guide to Ms. Lisa Smith for distribution to the other Services for consideration. (Suspense: August 31, 2012)” • ACTION ITEM 3: “Should we add a CLM for Cataloging and Provisioning? Yes, and determine the scope. Focus will be on why and when. (Suspense: Update at October 2012 FIPT)” • STATUS: DAU will put this in work this FY. Recommend CLOSE. • ACTION ITEM 4: “CLM # 052 Data Rights'' development status. Final CLM decision pending based on best utilization of this content - course, modules, both, etc.; DAU will schedule presentation at Oct 2012 FIPT.” • STATUS: Open. Assigned PLD unable to brief FIPT until APR13 meeting due to schedule conflicts.

  5. Current Action items (AUG12 FIPT): Status ACTION ITEMS 5/6: “DAU will distribute the ELOs for review. Inputs needed by August 31, 2012. Need to reconfirm that PL 111-84, Sec 805 and DTM 10-015 PSM duties have been mapped to LOG 365 ELOs/TLOs. Action POC: Mr. Steve Brown. (SUSPENSE: Update at October 2012 FIPT)”

  6. Comments Action Item # 5/6 • General Comment: ELOs x.2 in several places uses “analyze.” The PSM needs to provide inputs into those documents. “Analyze” implies those documents will be provided and the PSM will “examine” or “investigate” the documents. In practice the PSM will be required to generate or provide inputs to the documents. If the teaching strategy is to proved a notional strategy with its associated notional documents, using “analyze” is okay. However if that is not the strategy, recommend changing the word. (B. Houts) • ELO 1.5: Evaluate the role of the PSM in implementing affordability initiatives directed at improving productivity and reducing life cycle costs. • Comment: Recommend including “logistics footprint.” It is a major driver of the elements listed and is included in DoDD 5000.01. (B. Houts) • TLO 2.0: Describe the role of the Product Support Manager (PSM) in deriving the operational capability  requirements of a system, assumptions for its operational use and its planned logistical support. • Comment: Shouldn’t this be suitability vice capability? The PSM is responsible for the “ility” attributes of the system, not its war fighting capability. The PSM does need to understand how maintainability, etc. impacts availability, etc. as well as O&S costs (JB)

  7. Comments Action Item # 5/6 • TLO 2.0, cont. • Comment: I hope that discussion of TLO 2.0 activities addresses an apparent paradox, inherent to PSMs and the JCIDS/MSA phases of Acquisition: PSMs do not formally exist prior to pre-program initiation activities and the PSM "function" is not responsible for setting sustainment-related performance capability criteria, although PSMs are dependent on 2.1-2.4 outcomes for having set for them a good start towards shaping a subsequent product support program. How then, can PSMs exert influence as functional experts where there is no clear organization entrée for during these earliest processes? I believe there is a "book" answer ..but then this is a seminar. (C. Borsch) • TLO 4.0: Describe how the Product Support Manager (PSM) will interface with the Systems Engineering process and other technical activities to ensure the system is designed for reliability, availability, maintainability and cost. • Comment: TLO 4.0 and several places within the ELOs. Recommend changing “activities” to either “functions” or “organizations.” Think it more clearly describes the intent and avoids the perception that we are talking about tasks. (B. Houts)

  8. Comments Action Item # 5/6 • TLO 6.0: Describe how the Product Support Manager (PSM) will establish credible cost estimates, ensure program affordability and control cost growth. • Comment: Change the tone to also include the PPBE role as well as the PSM’s involvement in the financial process (all phases)) It is implied in ELOs 6.3-6.5 but the intent is not clear based on the introduction. Without a strong financial management role the PSM cannot execute the functions described in the earlier TLOs. (B. Houts) • ELO 6.5: Evaluate affordability issues and their impact on financial planning and management .   • Comment: What does "planning and management" refer to specifically? In terms of their key financial management responsibilities within the annual POM process, PSMs should understand, defend and otherwise contribute to programming, budgeting and perhaps execution decisions. (“S3” MR staff) • TLO 7.0: Describe the role of contracting and contracting management in the design, development and execution of the Product Support Plan. • Comment: It is not a Product Support Plan, it should be either the Product Support Strategy or LCSP. (B. Houts)

  9. Comments Action Item # 5/6 • TLO 8.0: Explain PSM’s roles related to production of system Product Support Package (PSP), Independent Logistics Assessments (ILAs), operational testing, and fielding/deployment. • Comment: TLO 8 in several places. Recommend taking the ILA reference out of this section and moving it into section 1.0 (e.g. general management functions). ILAs are important even before PSMs start acquiring the Product Support Package. (B. Houts) • TLO 9.0: Describe the role of the PSM in Sustaining Engineering including the technical tasks required to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of a system with managed risk. • Comment: Change “maintenance” to “sustainment.” There is more than just the maintenance aspects of the supply chain than can be considered.(B. Houts) • ELO 9.2: Describe PSM’s responsibilities for conducting post-IOC support reviews of product support and validating system product support strategy using Business Case Analysis. • Comment: Change “validating” to “refining” and delete “using Business Case Analysis.” There is a family of processes being used to refine the strategy and a smarter way to validate the strategy then (sic) performing another BCA. (B. Houts)

  10. Way Ahead Action Item # 5/6 • Comments received (and any subsequent suggestions received) will be addressed when reviewing TLO/ELO recommendations from the contractor. • LOG 365 short-term schedule: • Questions from vendor--due 10/17 • Govt. responses--due 10/29 • Vendor response to solicitation--due 11/1 • Technical evaluation report--due 11/16 • Task Order Award--11/21 • Kick Off Meeting--12/5 (tent.)

  11. Action Item Questions?

More Related