Both Congress and DoD continue to clearly articulate commitment to life cycle management and life cycle product support. Recent history is replete with examples, ranging from, but by no means limited to:

·         issuance of DUSD (L&MR) Policy Memo "Life Cycle Sustainment Outcome Metrics" (Mar 2007)

·         issuance of USD AT&L policy memo "Implementing a Life Cycle Management Framework" (July 2008)

·         establishment of the Product Support Manager (PSM) and reiteration of commitment to life cycle management in Section 805 of Public Law 111-84 (Oct 2009)

·         the  DoD “Weapon System Acquisition Reform: Product Support Assessment” (Nov 2009)

·         issuance of USD AT&L Policy Memo "Strengthened Sustainment Governance for Acquisition Program Reviews"  (Apr 2010)

·         identification of the PSM as a Key Leadership Position (KLP) in Acting USD AT&L policy memorandum entitled “Government Performance of Critical Acquisition Functions” (Aug 2010)

·          issuance of DTM 10-015, ”Requirements for Life Cycle Management and Product Support” (Oct 2010),

·         and most recently, Congressional reiteration of their commitment to Life Cycle Sustainment in the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) “112th Congress - HASC Proposed Oversight Plan” (Jan 2011)

So what are the key themes here?

·         Integrated Life Cycle Management is foundational

·         Acquisition and sustainment of systems cannot be viewed as separate and discrete activities

·         Weapons system should be designed, developed, fielded, maintained, and modified to continuously reduce the demand for logistics

·         Logistics support must be effective and efficient

·         the resources required to provide life cycle product support must be minimized while meeting Warfighter performance and availability requirements

·         Product Support is broader than logistics

·         Achieve optimized affordable readiness!

In many respects, the sustainment quad chart contained in the April 2010 USD AT&L "Strengthened Sustainment Governance for Acquisition Program Reviews" policy memorandum mentioned above captures these “big rocks” well, concisely addressing key questions such as:

·         What is my product support strategy?  What are my implementation challenges?

·         How am I doing meeting the most critical (hint: availability, reliability, ownership cost, and system downtime) primary product support metrics?

·         What is my product support strategy implementation roadmap? Key milestones?

·         What will my product support strategy cost? Is it affordable?

·         And ultimately, will/does my product support strategy deliver optimized affordable readiness to the Warfighter?

As the memo stated: “increasing visibility of sustainment factors is vital to ensuring we deliver a program that meets Warfighter materiel readiness objectives with long-term affordability consideration.” Enough said!