11.2.1.2. International Considerations within the Defense Acquisition Management System
Establishing and maintaining cooperative relationships with friends and Allies are critical to achieving interoperability of equipment and services to be used by the U.S. Armed Forces and our coalition partners; to achieving access to technology from sources worldwide; to achieving economies of scale with our investment resources; and to expanding our influence in critical areas of the world (USD(AT&L) Memorandum, Support for International Armaments Cooperation Activities, January 23, 2006)
International programs may be established at any point in the defense acquisition management system when justified as a prudent business judgment. Figure 11.2.1.2.F1 depicts the key considerations for each phase to include consideration of program protection concerns, which are part of the overshadowing technology security and foreign disclosure process, further discussed in 11.2.1.3.
Figure 11.2.1.2.F1. Key International Cooperative Considerations During Acquisition.
Determination of User Needs & Exploring Technology Opportunities (Early Technology Projects). The efforts needed to identify cooperative development opportunities before entering into a formal acquisition program are often challenging, but such activities capitalize on high payoffs in cost savings and interoperability when successful. Formulation of cooperative development programs involves resolution of issues in the areas of requirements harmonization, cost sharing, work sharing, intellectual property rights, technology transfer, including technology security and foreign disclosure (TS&FD) considerations, and many others. While multinational force compatibility may increase system acquisition cost, it can provide more cost-effective defense for the whole force through increased interoperability and reduced life-cycle costs. Cooperative opportunities identification and formulation should be pursued during the earliest stages of the pre-systems acquisition research and development process to maximize the chance for success. DoD Instruction 5000.02, Enclosure 3, paragraph 2, identifies technology projects and initiatives.
Using the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System process, representatives from multiple DoD communities formulate broad, time-phased, operational goals, and describe requisite capabilities in the Initial Capabilities Document. They examine multiple concepts and materiel approaches to optimize the way the Department of Defense provides these capabilities. This examination includes robust analyses that consider affordability, technology maturity, and responsiveness.
Several important mechanisms available to provide insight into the needs of potential foreign partners are exploratory discussions, international forums, studies, and the exchanges of information and personnel:
Exploratory Discussions. Before entering into an international project, many forms of dialogue can take place with potential partners. These informal discussions are usually called exploratory discussions or technical discussions--they are NOT called "negotiations," which requires a legal authority and formal permission from the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Exploratory discussions are characterized by the avoidance of any binding commitments on the part of the U.S. Government, and the absence of any draft, international agreements. Other than the two exclusions above, the parties may discuss most other topics, provided release authority has been obtained for any information provided by DoD representatives or defense contractors.
International Forums. There are many international forums dedicated to discussing mutual armaments needs and early technology projects. These forums include the Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD), whose U.S. representative is the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)). The CNAD's subsidiaries are the "Main Armaments Groups," particularly the NATO Army Armaments Group, NATO Navy Armaments Group, and the NATO Air Force Armaments Group. The NATO Science and Technology Organization conducts and promotes cooperative research and information exchange in NATO. The Technical Cooperation Program with Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom is another multilateral forum dedicated to cooperation in conventional military technology development. In addition there are about 30 bilateral forums, such as the U.S.-Japan Systems and Technology Forum and the U.S./Canadian Armaments Cooperation Management Committee, that have a similar purpose. Also see International Cooperation in Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Handbook, Chapter 11.
Studies. It is normal for the DoD and potential partners to conduct studies before entering into a cooperative acquisition project. These studies can be conducted years before the project starts, and are often called feasibility studies, or pre-feasibility studies. Industry, government agencies, or a combination of both generally conduct the feasibility studies, with the objective of providing a technical appraisal of the feasibility of developing and producing equipment. These studies can develop input for the Analysis of Alternatives required by DoD before the start of a new acquisition program.
International Exchanges of Information and Personnel. A common source for cooperative program opportunity identification is the Defense Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Information Exchange Program (IEP), which provides a standardized way of conducting bilateral science and technology information exchange (formerly called data exchange). The IEP has proven extremely useful as a means of cooperative opportunities formulation. Another source for identifying cooperative opportunities is the Defense Personnel Exchange Program, especially the Engineers and Scientists Exchange Program (ESEP).
Pre-Systems Acquisition. Decisions made during the Materiel Solution Analysis and Technology Development phases of Pre-Systems Acquisition generally define the nature of the entire program. Once the program enters the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase, it is difficult to adopt major changes without significant schedule or cost adjustments. Consequently, the decision to include international partners needs to be addressed as early as possible, preferably during development of the Initial Capabilities Document, but no later than during the Materiel Solution Analysis phase.
To meet the requirements of Title 10 U.S.C. 2350a(e), the Technology Development Strategy (TDS) prepared for Milestone A or the Acquisition Strategy for Milestones B and C must follow the mandatory TDS and Acquisition Strategy (AS) outline addressed and provided in DAG Chapter 2.8. The outline addresses milestone document preparation, including a section for international involvement.
International involvement must be addressed in the TDS and AS as follows:
International Involvement
- Indicate any limitations on foreign contractors being allowed to participate at the prime contractor level.
- International Cooperation.
- Summarize any plans for cooperative development with foreign governments or cognizant organizations. List the memorandums of agreement (MOAs) in place and identify the contracting activities.
- Summarize plans to increase the opportunity for coalition interoperability as part of the developing DoD program.
- Employ the AT&L-developed Technology Development Strategy/Acquisition Strategy template to provide a coalition interoperability section in the Acquisition Strategy. Using the template will satisfy the cooperative opportunities document requirement of 10 USC 2350a.
- Foreign Military Sales. Specify the potential or plans for Foreign Military and/or Direct Commercial Sale and the impact upon program cost due to program protection and exportability features.
These considerations are based on 10 U.S.C. 2350a requirements. They encourage the consideration of alternative forms of international cooperation. Even if cooperative development is impractical, cooperative production, foreign military sales, licensed production, component/subcomponent co-development, or incorporation of subsystems from allied or friendly foreign sources should be considered where appropriate.
DoD Components should fully investigate potential cooperative opportunities as part of the Technology Development Strategy and Acquisition Strategy development. Program proponents should consult with the appropriate international programs organization to obtain assistance in addressing international considerations during Technology Development Strategy or Acquisition Strategy development for programs in all acquisition categories.
The Defense Exportability Features (DEF) Pilot Program. DEF was established in the fiscal year 2011 National Defense Authorization Act to develop and incorporate technology protection features into a system or subsystem during its research and development phase. By doing this, exportable versions of a system or subsystem could be sold earlier in the Production and Development phase, thereby (1) enabling capability to be available to allies and friendly companies more rapidly and (2) lowering the unit cost of DoD procurements. Prior to the Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase, programs should investigate the necessity and feasibility (from cost, engineering, and exportability perspectives) of the design and development of differential capability and enhanced protection of exportable versions of the system or subsystem.
Acquisition programs candidates may be considered for the DEF pilot program via nominations from the DoD components. AT&L / International Cooperation (IC) is available for consultation regarding potential DEF candidate nominations. After a favorable preliminary assessment of exportability and differential capability / program protection needs, AT&L / IC will approve DEF candidates. Specific differential capability / program protection requirements will be determined by DoD technology security, foreign disclosure, anti-tamper processes. With sufficient industry and government support, a feasibility study will be conducted to determine the cost to implement the differential features and the associated design specifications. If a DEF candidate is pre-Milestone A, the feasibility study should be incorporated into the appropriate technology development requests for proposal (RFPs) and contracts. Otherwise, the feasibility study should be contracted through the prime contractor if funding is available. If government and industry agree that the differential capability / protection determined by the feasibility study should be implemented, and funding arrangements are agreed upon, the required design specifications should be incorporated into the engineering and manufacturing development RFP and/or contract, depending on when the feasibility study was completed.
Engineering and Manufacturing Development. After program initiation, during Engineering and Manufacturing Development, key elements of the system design are defined, and system/subsystem development begins. Major changes often present schedule delays that program managers are unwilling to accept; however, there have been numerous examples of successful subsystem cooperative development partnerships that have been formed during the Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase. Once a program has reached this phase, absent cooperation in earlier stages, there will be only limited opportunity to bring other nations on as full cooperative development partners. Consequently, if the opportunity for cooperation in subsystem development arises prior to or during Engineering and Manufacturing Development, consult with the appropriate international programs organization to obtain further assistance.
Foreign Comparative Testing. A viable alternative to development is the acquisition of commercial items. While individual acquisition programs can conduct evaluations with their own resources, the Foreign Comparative Testing Program offers a structured and funded means for program offices to evaluate the suitability of a foreign developed item for purchase in lieu of developing a similar U.S. item.
International Test Operations Procedures. The International Test Operations Procedures (ITOP) program provides for international agreements that document state-of-the-art test techniques for technical testing of military material and allows the exchange of test data to avoid redundant testing when foreign equipment is purchased. Currently there are over 130 ITOPs with Germany, France, and the UK covering a variety of test types and/or equipment class. Through ITOPs, the U.S. has access to latest test technology and procedures of our allies, which could possibly be utilized by DoD program managers. The ITOP program is managed at OSD by the Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation. See the International Cooperation in Acquisition, and Logistics Handbook Chapter 6 Section 6.4.3.
Production and Deployment Phase. There are three basic mechanisms for transfer of U.S. produced defense articles and associated production capability to other nations: sales, co-production and cooperative production. Sales under the Foreign Military Sales Program foreign co-production of a U.S. developed system, fall under the purview of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA). The Department of State is responsible for transfer of defense articles and associated production capability under export licenses. Both DSCA and the Defense Technology Security Administration coordinate closely with the responsible DoD Component regarding the development and implementation of DoD co-production policy in their respective areas of responsibility. USD(AT&L) is responsible for oversight of the third basic mechanism, cooperative production. Cooperative production is a joint or concurrent international production arrangement arising from a cooperative development project. Examples of this type of production program are the Rolling Airframe Missile and the Multi-Functional Information Distribution System. Cooperative production falls under the authority of the Arms Export Control Act Section 2751.
Operations & Support Phase. Cooperative logistics refers to cooperation between the U.S. and allied or friendly nations or international organizations in the logistical support of defense systems and equipment. Cooperative logistics is part of the acquisition process, but as a substantial part of military operations, much of the implementation process involves Security Assistance processes and procedures.
Cooperative logistics support includes:
- Logistics Cooperation international agreements (IAs), used to improve sharing of logistics support information and standards, and to monitor accomplishment of specific cooperative logistics programs;
- Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements;
- Host Nation Support;
- Cooperative Logistics Supply Support Arrangements;
- Cooperative Military Airlift Agreements;
- War Reserve Stocks for Allies;
- Agreements for acceptance and use of real property or services;
- Standardization of procedures under American/British/Canadian/Australian/New Zealand auspices;
- International Standardization Agreements developed in conjunction with member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and other allies and coalition partners, as described in DoD 4120.24-M, "Defense Standardization Program (DSP) Policies and Procedures" and as listed in the Acquisition Streamlining and Standardization Information System (ASSIST) database (login required);
- Consideration of the interoperability implications of these agreements when constructing Work Breakdown Structures; and
- Planning support provided by the Program Manager's e-Tool Kit.
Each participant or party involved in cooperative logistics agreements should benefit from the agreement. Benefits could be tangible, such as the U.S. receiving support for its naval vessels when in a foreign port; or intangible, such as the foreign nation receiving the implied benefit of a visible, U.S. naval presence in the region. Other cases are more obviously quid-pro-quo: cross-servicing agreements, for example. In a cross-servicing agreement, each party receives the equivalent of the materiel or services provided to the other party. Besides the obvious material benefits, such agreements have the collateral effects of opening dialog and creating relationships between the parties. Such dialog and relationships may serve to strengthen political bonds. While not a program manager responsibility, DoD acquisition personnel should be aware of the international consequences of their activities and appropriately support such efforts. See the International Cooperation in Acquisition, and Logistics Handbook Chapter 5.
DAG Tutorial 
