The logistics purpose in this phase is to achieve a materiel availability capability that satisfies mission needs. Milestone C authorizes entry into Low Rate Initial Production, at which time the design should be mature. The supportability design feature requirements should have been verified and validated as operationally suitable and effective at an affordable cost. At this point, the support requirements should be fully defined and performance-based product support agreements and funding expectations documented and signed. Funding should also be identified and available for testing and implementation of the performance-based strategy. Once operational test and evaluations have determined the effectiveness, suitability, and supportability of the system, the full rate production and deployment decision is made.

5.4.4.2. Activities/Processes

During this phase, the emphasis is on finalizing equipment product support packages/ maintenance plans, managing and deploying the initial sustainment capabilities, and demonstrating the product support capabilities and effectiveness. Once they have been demonstrated, the emphasis is on fully fielding and implementing the sustainment capabilities to provide the users the capabilities identified in their requirements documents. Measuring the product sustainment package's effectiveness (including the associated supply chain) is an important aspect of the management responsibilities in this phase. Figure 5.4.4.2.F1 highlights the key phase activities.

Figure 5.4.4.2.F1. System support implications in the Production and Deployment Phase

5.4.4.2.1. Managing Product Support Package Fielding

The following are key program manager responsibilities in this phase:

Ensuring actions are taken to provide the user support required to sustain the system within the budget provided, including highlighting to senior management the consequences and impacts on the Sustainment KPP/KSAs of budget constraints.
Coordinating with the contractors, supply chain and operators to ensure each understands and is implementing responsibilities in accordance with the LCSP in an integrated fashion.
Monitoring any changes to the design, operational environment and supply chain and adjusting the product support elements within the product support package accordingly.
Looking for improvements to reduce the product support package cost.

During this phase, the reliability of contractor cost and performance data should be verified by monitoring contracts. Increased use of Defense Contract Management Agency and Defense Contract Audit Agency in overseeing contracts should be considered.

5.4.4.2.2. Maintenance Supportability Considerations

10 USC 2464 requires the establishment of the capabilities necessary to maintain and repair systems and other military equipment required to support military contingencies (i.e., core capabilities) at Government-owned, Government-operated facilities not later than four years after achieving initial operating capability. During the production and deployment phase, it is imperative for the PMs and Program Executive Officers to ensure the prior planning for maintenance support is executed to meet the supportability requirements of the system and/or subsystems. If organic depot maintenance is a portion of the selected supportability strategy, it will require the activation of the requisite organic depot maintenance capabilities.

5.4.4.2.3. Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan

The LCSP should be used to help manage the program's fielding efforts. It should focus on the product support implementation plan and schedule, with emphasis on putting into place the continuous process improvement management structure to review processes and remove bottlenecks or constraints encountered by the user. The following aspects should be emphasized along with the projected sustainment metric values by fiscal year over the FYDP:

The fielding plan details including any actions to adjust the product support package, ensure competition, and control costs.
The analytical and management processes for how the sustainment performance will be measured, managed, assessed and reported as well as and achieve and maintain the sustainment requirements.
The stakeholder roles in executing the sustainment strategy describing the relationships and responsibilities with key players, especially relative to the product support arrangements.

5.4.4.2.4. Measuring Sustainment Effectiveness

Under the total life-cycle systems management concept, the PM is responsible for the timely fielding of an effective product support package, measuring its effectiveness, and taking corrective actions when shortfalls are uncovered. The most effective time to catch problems is before the system is deployed, so including reliability, maintainability and supportability test requirements in the TEMP should be as important as other performance measures. Sustainment KPP/KSA driver metrics should be monitored thought out the test and deployment process to help provide confidence the system will achieve the sustainment objectives in an operational environment.

5.4.4.2.5. Pre-Initial Operational Capability Supportability Review

This review and its associated analysis should be performed at the DoD Component level in conjunction with the OTRR to:

Confirm design maturity and configuration of the system
Determine status of correction of any deficiencies identified
Confirm configuration control
Certify product support integrator/providers plan to meet user requirements
Verify product support integrator/provider agreements/contracts and funding are in place

5.4.4.2.6. Technical Reviews in Production and Deployment

Many of the actions and subsequent results in this phase are reviewed during technical reviews and should be accomplished even if the specific referenced reviews do not occur. The actions and results are tied to the reviews to reflect the relative timeframe in which they should be accomplished.

5.4.4.2.6.1. Sustainment Considerations in the Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR)

The OTRR is a product and process assessment to ensure the system can proceed into Initial Operational Test and Evaluation with a high probability of successfully completing operational testing. (See chapter 9 for additional information.) Many of the same actions used to prepare for the Test Readiness Review (TRR) should be used in preparation for this review. This test is critical because it provides the users the first real hands-on indication as to whether the system is operationally effective and suitable. Consequently, it is important the product support IPT members as well as independent sustainment subject matter experts participate in the review to ensure the test:

Is properly planned and resourced (e.g., people, facilities, data systems, support equipment, and any other product support elements) to achieve the test objectives. The Pre-Initial Operational Capability Supportability Review should be used to support this process.
Will verify and validate the key sustainment drivers to achieve the Sustainment KPP and KSAs are included. This should include ensuring system reliability, maintainability, and support performance features are included and demonstrated.
Is structured to include as much of the product support package that will be used in the operational environment. Where this is not possible, prototypes should be used to gain early user feedback on the product support package.

5.4.4.2.6.2. Sustainment Considerations in the Physical Configuration Audit (PCA)

The PCA examines the end-item actual configuration as defined by the Technical Data Package and sets the final production baseline under government control. Details can be found in section 4.2.16, but in summary the audit verifies that design documentation matches the item specified in the contract. In addition to the standard practice of assuring product verification, the PCA confirms that manufacturing processes, quality control system, measurement and test equipment, product support, and training are adequately planned, tracked, and controlled. As such, this review should be used to ensure the "as-produced" system is compliant with sustainment requirements and objectives. To the extent lead times will allow, ordering the product support package elements should be delayed until this review to ensure they are being bought for the right configuration.

5.4.4.3. Production and Deployment Phase Results/Exit Criteria

The focus of this phase is to deploy the initial sustainment capabilities and once the system (both the system and its product support package) are demonstrated to be operationally suitable and effective to then fully deploy the system. This should be demonstrated by:

The satisfactory achievement of the sustainment criteria in the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) and other tests.
Performance-based product support agreements being in place.
A fully funded sustainment program in the budget.

Implementing the process depicted in figure 5.4.4.2.F1 provides the materiel required to gain full rate production/deployment approval and produce the product support elements to sustain the system. The conclusion of this phase results in a fully fielded and supported system. Table 5.4.4.3.T1 identifies the most critical documents that should address sustainment considerations. Key logistics information complied during this phase should be used to update the acquisition documents, along with the latest sustainment strategy based on the actual technology development progress and/or follow-on increments if an incremental acquisition strategy is used. Also, the sustainment related data and performance-based requirements should continue to be included in product and sustainment contracts and agreements to ensure the system is effectively supported.

Table 5.4.4.3.T1 Sustainment Considerations in Production and Deployment

Entry Documents:

Test and Evaluation Reports

Acquisition Program Baseline

Operational Test Plan and Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP)

Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan

Exit Documents:

Update documents from MS C as appropriate

Physical Configuration Audit Report

Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan

Information Supportability Certification

5.4.4.4. Sustainment Considerations in the Production & Deployment Phase

All the product support elements should be considered and focus should be on refining and fielding them based on their demonstrated success and on confidence that the requirements will be achieved.

5.4.4.4.1. Sustainment Metrics

The results and experience demonstrated in all the tests (including follow-on operational test & evaluation (FOT&E)) and early operations should be considered in refining the metric estimates. This, along with key supply chain performance and effectiveness measures for similar fielded systems, should be used to increase the confidence levels for the PM's estimates. Supply chain performance, Sustainment KPP/KSAs, and key driver metrics should also be considered in the analysis. Special emphasis should be placed on tracking the metrics for the drivers of key enabler technologies that have been developed for the system or are critical for achieving the required materiel availability. Consideration should be given to revising the product support package and its agreements if major performance shortfalls are found.

5.4.4.4.2. Configuration Management

Special attention should be placed on configuration and data management, as design changes are made to ensure the product support package is developed and fielded to the same configuration(s) the user will be operating and supporting. Ensuring logistics and sustainment implications are considered and addressed during the Physical Configuration Audit (PCA), Physical Configuration Review, and Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR) can increase the probability both the system and its support package are deployed in a coordinated fashion.

When multiple production baselines are deployed or if the full product support package is not deployed to support test or operations, the program manager should consider the most effective support method. The alternatives considered can include employing mixes of contractor and organic support over varied performance periods for each configuration. This may result in the consideration of multiple performance agreements and/or support strategies. In determining the best mix, the results from the Production Readiness Review (PRR) and System Verification Review (SVR) should be considered to ensure the product support elements are developed for all configuration / block increments.

5.4.4.4.3. Contractor Logistics Support/Contractors on the Battlefield (CLS/COTB) Integration, In-Theater

Contractors can provide logistics support over a wide range of options, from interim contractor support covering the initial fielding while the product support package is being deployed, to supporting specific limited operations, to full contractor support. When support strategies employ contractors in a battlefield environment, PMs should, in accordance with Joint Publication 4-0 Chapter 5 and DoD Component implementing guidance, coordinate with affected Combatant Commanders. This coordination must be carried out through the lead DoD Component and ensure functions performed by contractors, together with functions performed by military personnel, and government civilians, are integrated in operations plans (OPLANs) and orders (OPORDs). During this process the Combatant Commanders will:

Identify operational specific contractor policies and requirements, to include restrictions imposed by international agreements;
Include contractor related deployment, management, force protection, medical, and other support requirements, in the OPORD or a separate annex; and
Provide this information to the DoD Components to incorporate into applicable contracts.

The intent of the coordinated planning is to ensure the continuation of essential services in the event the contractor provider is unable (or unwilling) to provide services during a contingency operation. Contingency plans are required for those tasks that have been identified as essential contractor services to provide reasonable assurance of continuation during crisis conditions. PMs should also coordinate with the DoD Component manpower authority in advance of contracting for support services to ensure tasks and duties that are designated as inherently governmental or exempt are not contracted.

5.4.4.5. Best Practices during the Production and Deployment Phase

5.4.4.5.1. Supportability Analysis

Supportability Analysis should continue to be expanded in depth and adjusted as necessary based on test results and operational experience. In examining additional information, a conscious decision has to be made as to whether or not the new data warrants a re-examination of previous analyses. Even if the change is not sufficient enough to warrant an adjustment to the support package, an analysis should be performed to assess the risk associated with the new information so key stakeholders can take risk mitigation steps.

Configuration control over the analysis and resulting data becomes important as the design changes. The program should take steps to ensure that as the system changes, the product support package is adjusted to take into account the various configurations the user will encounter and the product support elements stay in sync.

Even well into operations, programs should evaluate opportunities for transitioning, in whole or part, to performance-based logistics contracts by examining opportunities to leverage public private partnerships. Experience has shown that, even with existing capitalized infrastructure in place, legacy programs can transition to outcome based contracts across the spectrum of subsystem or functional process support segments.

5.4.4.5.2. Modeling and Simulation

M&S continues to support the program improvement efforts by analyzing the impact of proposed design refinement, maintenance processes, and budget alternatives on the sustainment metrics/mission effectiveness. M&S should be used in assessing the alternatives of both the system and its support system (especially the enabling technologies), ensuring all critical metrics are considered in parallel and not at the expense of others. In addition, taking early operational results and predicting likely trends (with confidence levels) can be used to proactively anticipate problems so corrective actions can be taken as the system is fielded to minimize adverse impacts on the users. This also helps to provide confidence the critical sustainment metrics will mature to sufficient levels when the system and supply chain are fully deployed and to identify any anticipated constraints or limitations.

Top of page

Previous and Next Page arrows