§3101. Definitions — Inbound Citations
10 U.S.C. § 3101
Cited by 105 provisions in release 119-102.
Citations to 10 U.S.C. § 3101 as a whole
-
(5) The term “service chief” has the meaning given in section 3101 of this title.
-
(3) coordinate with the relevant service chief (as defined in section 3101 of this title) when evaluating, modifying, or implementing requirements determinations, performance objectives, procurement quantity objectives, and materiel readiness objectives established under section 118(c) of this title;
-
(1) The term “best value” has the meaning given in section 3101 of this title.
-
(d) Each service chief (as defined in section 3101 of this title) shall—(1) assess each plan and certification developed by the Secretary concerned under subsection (a); and(2) submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than the date on which the Secretary concerned submits the plan and certification to such committees, an unaltered copy of the results of such assessment.
Citations to §3101(1)
-
The Department of Defense shall select service providers for auditing services based on the best value to the Department, as determined by the resource sponsor for an auditing contract, rather than based on the lowest price technically acceptable service provider.
-
(1) has the capacity, in both personnel and skills, needed to properly perform its mission, provide appropriate support to the assessment, planning, monitoring, execution, evaluation, and administration of security cooperation programs and activities described in subsection (a), and ensure that the Department receives the best value for the expenditure of public resources on such programs and activities; and
-
(a) Under regulations prescribed by the administering Secretaries, health care contracts shall be awarded in the administration of this chapter to the offeror or offerors that will provide the best value to the United States to the maximum extent consistent with furnishing high-quality health care in a manner that protects the fiscal and other interests of the United States.
-
(b) In the determination of best value under subsection (a)—(1) consideration shall be given to the factors specified in the regulations; and(2) greater weight shall be accorded to technical and performance-related factors than to cost and price-related factors.
-
(2) which has the technical expertise and business skills to ensure the Department receives the best value for the expenditure of public resources;
-
(b) The purpose of the Account is to ensure that the Department of Defense acquisition workforce has the capacity, in both personnel and skills, needed to properly perform its mission, provide appropriate oversight of contractor performance, and ensure that the Department receives the best value for the expenditure of public resources.
-
(c) The product support manager shall seek to achieve the objectives of the defense acquisition system established pursuant to section 3102 of this title and shall identify, develop, implement, incentivize, and measure quantifiable best value outcome-based product support that optimizes life-cycle cost, readiness, and operational capability of a covered system.
-
(1) The term “best value” has the meaning given in section 3101 of this title.
-
(iii) obtaining the best value for the military department by maximizing the purchase of renewable energy certificates from projects placed into service before January 1, 1999.
-
(D) Subparagraph (B) does not prohibit the Secretary of a military department from entering into an agreement outside of the centralized purchasing authority if the Secretary will obtain the best value by bundling the renewable energy certificates with the facility energy project through a power purchase agreement or other contractual mechanism at the installation.
-
(B) orders and contracts under such program result in the best value to meet the needs of the United States;
-
(4) Resource decisions for the defense acquisition system to prioritize best value and seek to balance life-cycle costs, schedule, performance, and quantity through continuous trade-off analysis informed by prototyping and direct feedback from end users.
-
(2) use data analytics to manage trade-offs among life-cycle costs, delivery schedules, performance objectives, technical feasibility, and procurement quantity objectives to maximize best value for the end user;
-
(3) Advise on trade-offs among life-cycle costs, delivery schedules, performance objectives, technical feasibility, and procurement quantity objectives to maximize best value for the end user.
-
(4) in the case of an award that is to be made on a best value basis, a written statement documenting the basis for the award and the relative importance of quality and price or cost factors; and
-
(C) Recommended engineering and design considerations that support cost-effective sustainment of the covered system and best value solutions in life cycle planning and management.
-
(2) Under the competitive procedures used, the factors to be considered in the evaluation of each proposed grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other transaction for a project under the program shall include the extent to which that proposed transaction provides for the proposed recipient to share in the cost of the project. For a project for which the Government receives an offer from only one offeror, the contracting officer shall negotiate the ratio of contract recipient cost to Government cost that represents the best value to the Government.
Citations to §3101(2)
-
(6) recommending joint capability requirements that—(A) describe the joint operational problem to provide necessary context for the joint capability requirement;(B) proposes nonprescriptive solutions to joint operational problems; and(C) ensures system interoperability, where appropriate, between and among joint military capabilities;
-
(A) describe the joint operational problem to provide necessary context for the joint capability requirement;
-
(9) evaluating effect of joint military capability requirements for the purposes of section 4376(a) of this title.
-
(e) Each service chief is responsible for the capability requirements of the armed force of such service chief.
-
(1) The term “joint capability requirement” means a capability that is critical or essential to address a joint operational problem.
-
(A) Initial assessments of partner capability requirements, potential programmatic risks, baseline information, and indicators of efficacy for purposes of planning, monitoring, and evaluation of security cooperation programs and activities of the Department of Defense.
-
(f) The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency shall assist the Joint Chiefs of Staff, combatant commands, and the military departments in establishing, coordinating, consolidating, and validating mapping, charting, geomatics data, and safety of navigation capability requirements through a formal process governed by the Joint Staff. Consistent with validated requirements, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency shall provide aeronautical and nautical charts that are safe for navigation, maps, books, datasets, models, and geomatics products.
-
(C) An identification and discussion of any risks with respect to meeting mission or capability requirements.
-
(A) that no longer align with a joint capability requirement (as defined in section 181 of this title) or other capability requirement established by the Secretary or relevant service chief; or
-
(1) The core depot-level maintenance and repair capability requirements and sustaining workloads, organized by work breakdown structure, expressed in direct labor hours.
-
(2) The corresponding workloads necessary to sustain core depot-level maintenance and repair capability requirements, expressed in direct labor hours and cost.
-
(3) In any case where core depot-level maintenance and repair capability requirements exceed or are expected to exceed sustaining workloads, a detailed rationale for any and all shortfalls and a plan either to correct or mitigate the effects of the shortfalls.
-
(7) A description of core capability requirements and corresponding workloads at the first level category.
-
(10) Whether the core depot-level maintenance and repair capability requirements described in the report submitted under this subsection for the preceding fiscal year have been executed.
-
(4) notify the Joint Requirements Oversight Council within 30 days after changes to a defense acquisition program that result in a material difference in capability requirements, procurement quantities, or delivery schedules;
-
(1) The development of capability requirement statements for equipping the armed force concerned that—(A) describes the operational problem to provide necessary context for the capability requirement;(B) proposes nonprescriptive solutions to operational problems; and(C) ensures system interoperability, where appropriate, between and among joint military capabilities (as defined in section 181 of this title).
-
(A) describes the operational problem to provide necessary context for the capability requirement;
-
(2) Implement strategies to support timely adjustments to capability requirement statements developed in paragraph (1).
-
(A) that no longer align with a capability requirement established by the Secretary of Defense; or
-
(2) The Secretary of Defense shall establish a policy to encourage the Secretary of each military department to reengineer management and business processes and adopt best-business and personnel practices at the Centers of the Secretary concerned in connection with the capability requirements of the Centers, so as to serve as recognized leaders in such capabilities throughout the Department of Defense and in the national technology and industrial base.
-
(A) the strategy clearly describes the proposed business case and capability management approach for the program or system, and to the maximum extent practicable, describes how capability requirements will be met through delivery of such program or system;
-
(B) the strategy contains a clear explanation of the resources, such as time, funding, and management capacity, necessary to meet capability requirements;
-
(B) includes a subsystem or assembly that is likely to have additional capability requirements, is likely to change because of evolving technology or threat, is needed for interoperability, facilitates incremental deployment of capabilities, or is expected to be replaced by another major system component.
-
(6) The term “program capability document” means, with respect to a major defense acquisition program, a document that specifies capability requirements for the program, such as a capability development document or a capability production document.
-
(3) awareness of the component capability requirements of major weapon systems, including scheduling and fielding goals for such component capabilities.
-
(C) how the proposed capability satisfies a capability requirement or performance attribute identified through—(i) the missile defense warfighter involvement process, as governed by United States Strategic Command Instruction 538–03, or such successor document; or(ii) processes and products reviewed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff or Joint Requirements Oversight Council;
Citations to §3101(3)
-
(A) if the Secretary of the military department concerned determines in writing based on mission requirements that the performance of such functions by military personnel is cost-effective, taking into account the fully-burdened costs of the civilian, military, and contractor workforces, including the impact of the performance of such functions on military career progression or when required by military necessity; or
-
(5) Identifying various options for cost-effective schedules for nuclear weapons production.
-
(B) Inpatient, outpatient, and comprehensive home health care supplies and services which may include cost-effective and medically appropriate services other than part-time or intermittent services (within the meaning of such terms as used in the second sentence of section 1861(m) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x)).
-
(2) the amount of space that would be so programed for the facility based upon the most cost-effective provision of inpatient and outpatient care to persons covered by sections 1074(b) and 1076(b) of this title.
-
(c) Under the specialized treatment facility program, the Secretary may waive, with regard to the provision of a particular service, the 40-mile radius restriction set forth in section 1079(a)(6) of this title if the Secretary determines that the use of a different geographical area restriction will result in a more cost-effective provision of the service.
-
(B) to analyze the operating and support costs to ensure cost-effective operation, management, and availability of the covered system.
-
(1) to provide a high-quality, cost-effective military-based educational experience for international students in furtherance of the military-to-military program objectives of the Department of Defense; and
-
(3) Other schools or programs, including certificate, certification, and undergraduate degree programs, that the Secretary determines necessary in order to operate the University in a cost-effective manner.
-
(a) The Secretary of Defense shall authorize the officials responsible for operation of commissaries and military exchanges to negotiate directly with private carriers for the most cost-effective transportation of commissary and exchange supplies to destinations outside the continental United States without relying on the Air Mobility Command, the Military Sealift Command, or the Military Traffic Management Command. Section 2631 of this title, regarding the preference for vessels of the United States or belonging to the United States in the transportation of supplies by sea, shall apply to the negotiation of contracts for sea-borne transportation under the authority of this section.
-
(ii) acquiring the property or entering into the lease would be more cost-effective than the use of the Department of Defense property; or
-
(3) Identifying more cost-effective technologies for cleanup of hazardous substances.
-
(2) The Secretary concerned may waive the limitations contained in paragraph (1) if such Secretary determines that, considering the useful life of the structure to be improved and the useful life of a newly constructed unit and the cost of construction and of operation and maintenance of each kind of unit over its useful life, the improvement will be cost-effective. If the Secretary concerned makes a determination under the preceding sentence with respect to an improvement, the waiver under that sentence with respect to that improvement may take effect only after the end of the 14-day period beginning on the date on which the Secretary submits, in an electronic medium pursuant to section 480 of this title, to the appropriate committees of Congress notice of the proposed waiver, together with an economic analysis demonstrating that the improvement will be cost effective.
-
(B) the Secretary determines that the improvement project is no longer cost-effective after a review of post-design or bid cost estimates.
-
(2) that participation in the Department of State housing pool is the most cost-effective means of providing housing for such personnel.
-
(g) A contract may be entered into for the lease of housing facilities under this section only after the end of the 14-day period beginning on the date on which the Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, submits, in an electronic medium pursuant to section 480 of this title, to the appropriate committees of Congress an economic analysis (based upon accepted life cycle costing procedures) which demonstrates that the proposed contract is cost-effective when compared with alternative means of furnishing the same housing facilities.
-
(a) Each contract entered into by the United States in connection with a military construction project or a military family housing project shall be carried out under the direction and supervision of a Secretary of a military department or Government agency (as approved by the Secretary of Defense) to assure the most efficient, expeditious, and cost-effective completion of the project.
-
(iii) in the case of damage to a facility rather than destruction, a certification that the replacement project is more cost-effective than repair or restoration; and
-
(3) Subject to paragraph (4), the Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a military department having jurisdiction over a military installation to enter into an agreement with a utility to design and implement a cost-effective program that provides incentives for the management of water demand and for water conservation and that addresses the requirements and circumstances of the installation. Activities under the program may include the provision of water management services, the alteration of a facility, and the installation and maintenance by the utility of a water-saving device or technology.
-
(2) The Secretary concerned may waive the application of the energy monitoring and utility control system specification required by subsection (a) with respect to a specific military construction project, military family housing activity, or other activity under this chapter if the Secretary determines that the application of the specification to the project or activity is not life cycle cost-effective. The Secretary concerned shall notify the congressional defense committees of any waiver granted under this paragraph.
-
(1) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a military department having jurisdiction over a military installation to enter into agreements with gas or electric utilities to design and implement cost-effective demand and conservation incentive programs (including energy management services, facilities alterations, and the installation and maintenance of energy saving devices and technologies by the utilities) to address the requirements and circumstances of the installation.
-
(2) is cost-effective over the life cycle of the facility.
-
(a) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the defense acquisition system expeditiously provides the armed forces with the capabilities necessary to operate effectively, to address evolving threats, and to sustain the military advantage of the United States in the most cost-effective manner practicable.
-
(ii) the merit-based selection of the most promising cost-effective proposals; and
-
(i) that entering into the proposed contract as a means of obtaining the vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle is the most cost-effective means of obtaining such vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle; and
-
(B) a determination that entering into the proposed contract as a means of obtaining the vessel is the most cost-effective means of obtaining such vessel; and
-
(2) The review of candidate proposals by the Department of Defense and by each Office of Small Business Programs of each military department and the merit-based selection of the most promising cost-effective proposals for funding through contracts, cooperative agreements, and other transactions for the purposes of carrying out the program.
-
(A) to support timely and cost-effective fielding of current and future technologies to the Department;
-
(4) A summary of actions taken by the Secretary to ensure that each covered system of the military department under the jurisdiction of the Secretary meets the applicable operational readiness requirements and materiel readiness objectives in the most cost-effective manner practicable.
-
(2) that meets applicable operational readiness requirements and materiel readiness objectives (established under section 118(c) of this title) in the most cost-effective manner practicable.
-
(C) Recommended engineering and design considerations that support cost-effective sustainment of the covered system and best value solutions in life cycle planning and management.
-
(3) require each Secretary of a military department to update estimates of operating and support costs periodically throughout the life cycle of a major weapon system, and make necessary adjustments to the life-cycle sustainment plan required by section 4324 of this title to ensure such major weapon system meets applicable operational readiness requirements and materiel readiness objectives (established in accordance with section 118(c) of this title) in the most cost-effective manner practicable;
-
(A) translate the most promising design approach into a stable, interoperable, producible, supportable, and cost-effective design;
Citations to §3101(4)
-
(1) evaluating global trends, emerging threats, and adversary capabilities to inform understanding of joint operational problems and to shape joint force design;
-
(2) coordinating with commanders of combatant commands to compile, refine, and prioritize joint operational problems;
-
(A) describe the joint operational problem to provide necessary context for the joint capability requirement;
-
(B) proposes nonprescriptive solutions to joint operational problems; and
-
(A) addresses joint operational problems; and
-
(8) maintaining a repository of joint operational problems and identification of capabilities to address those problems; and
-
(5) The Council shall seek views from private entities on commercially available technology to address joint operational problems or gaps in joint military capabilities.
-
(1) The term “joint capability requirement” means a capability that is critical or essential to address a joint operational problem.
-
(3) The term “joint operational problem”—(A) means a challenge across the joint force in achieving an assigned military objective based on current doctrine, emerging threats or future concepts; and(B) may include limitations in capabilities, capacity, resources, or the ability to effectively and efficiently coordinate across the joint force, with another combatant command, or among joint military capabilities.
-
(7) Approaches to workforce training and development that equally balance emphasis on functional and technical skills with skills in cross-functional integration, critical thinking, and innovative approaches that best deliver solutions to operational problems.
-
(A) describes the operational problem to provide necessary context for the capability requirement;
-
(B) proposes nonprescriptive solutions to operational problems; and
-
(d) In this section, the term “requirements document” means a document that establishes the need for a materiel approach to address an operational problem.
Citations to §3101(5)
-
(3) The Council shall seek and consider the views of the service chiefs in their roles as end users of capabilities delivered by the defense acquisition system on matters pertaining to a capability proposed by an armed force, Defense Agency, or other entity of the Department of Defense.
-
(e) Each service chief is responsible for the capability requirements of the armed force of such service chief.
-
(5) The term “service chief” has the meaning given in section 3101 of this title.
-
(A) Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, each of the secretaries of the military departments, in consultation with the service chiefs, shall appoint an independent Principal Cyber Advisor for each service to act as the principal advisor to the relevant secretary on all cyber matters affecting that military service.
-
(A) Service chief information officers.
-
(A) If a board of inquiry determines that an officer should be retained, the officer’s case is closed unless the board substantiated a basis for separation and, upon recommendation from the service chief, the Secretary of the military department determines that the board’s retention recommendation is clearly erroneous in light of the evidence considered by the board, a miscarriage of justice, and inconsistent with the best interest of the service. In such cases, the Secretary of the military department may separate the officer after providing a written justification of the decision to separate.
-
(3) coordinate with the relevant service chief (as defined in section 3101 of this title) when evaluating, modifying, or implementing requirements determinations, performance objectives, procurement quantity objectives, and materiel readiness objectives established under section 118(c) of this title;
-
(5) provide timely information to the relevant service chief, the Joint Staff, the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, and other officials identified by the Secretary of Defense on cost, schedule, and performance trade-offs of defense acquisition programs assigned to the portfolio acquisition executive;
-
(A) that no longer align with a joint capability requirement (as defined in section 181 of this title) or other capability requirement established by the Secretary or relevant service chief; or
-
(d) Each service chief (as defined in section 3101 of this title) shall—(1) assess each plan and certification developed by the Secretary concerned under subsection (a); and(2) submit to the congressional defense committees, not later than the date on which the Secretary concerned submits the plan and certification to such committees, an unaltered copy of the results of such assessment.
-
(a) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the service chiefs assist the Secretary of the military department concerned, in accordance with the objectives established pursuant to section 3102 of this title, in the performance of the following acquisition-related functions of such department:(1) The development of capability requirement statements for equipping the armed force concerned that—(A) describes the operational problem to provide necessary context for the capability requirement;(B) proposes nonprescriptive solutions to operational problems; and(C) ensures system interoperability, where appropriate, between and among joint military capabilities (as defined in section 181 of this title).(2) Implement strategies to support timely adjustments to capability requirement statements developed in paragraph (1).(3) Advise on trade-offs among life-cycle costs, delivery schedules, performance objectives, technical feasibility, and procurement quantity objectives to maximize best value for the end user.(4) In consultation with the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, prioritize—(A) capability needs for investment; and(B) resource allocation to meet operational readiness requirements (as defined in section 4324 of this title) and the materiel readiness objectives established under section 118(c) of this title.(5) Make available appropriate personnel to provide end-user feedback for the development of new capabilities.(6) Recommend modification, discontinuation, or termination of the development of capabilities—(A) that no longer align with a capability requirement established by the Secretary of Defense; or(B) that are experiencing significant cost growth, technical or performance deficiencies, or delays in schedule.(7) Build acquisition career paths for officers and personnel (as required by section 1722a of this title) to ensure such officers and personnel have the necessary skills and opportunities for career progression to fulfill the objectives established pursuant to section 3102 of this title.
-
(1) The Secretary of the military department concerned shall ensure that any requirements document for a major defense acquisition program may not be approved until the service chief concerned determines in writing that the requirements in the document are necessary and realistic in relation to the program cost and fielding targets established under section 4271(a) of this title.
-
(2) Consistent with the performance of duties under subsection (a), the service chief concerned, or in the case of a joint program the service chiefs concerned, with respect to major defense acquisition programs, shall—(A) concur with the need for a materiel solution as identified in the Materiel Development Decision Review;(B) concur with the life-cycle cost, delivery schedule, performance objective, technical feasibility, and procurement quantity trade-offs that have been made with regard to the program before Milestone A approval is granted under section 4251 of this title;(C) concur that appropriate trade-offs among cost, schedule, technical feasibility, and performance objectives have been made to ensure that the program is affordable when considering the per unit cost and the total life-cycle cost before Milestone B approval is granted under section 4252 of this title; and(D) concur that the requirements in the program capability document are necessary and realistic in relation to program cost and fielding targets as required by paragraph (1) before Milestone C approval is granted.