How To Use the NDAA Pages

Back to NDAA Contents

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED MATTERS

Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

P. L. 114-

House Conference Report. 114-270

(1) review the acquisition regulations applicable to the Department of Defense with a view toward streamlining and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the defense acquisition process and maintaining defense technology advantage; and

(2) make any recommendations for the amendment or repeal of such regulations that the panel considers necessary, as a result of such review, to—

(A) establish and administer appropriate buyer and seller relationships in the procurement system;

(B) improve the functioning of the acquisition system;

(C) ensure the continuing financial and ethical integrity of defense procurement programs;

(D) protect the best interests of the Department of Defense; and

(E) eliminate any regulations that are unnecessary for the purposes described in subparagraphs (A) through (D).

(d) Administrative matters.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide the advisory panel established pursuant to subsection (a) with timely access to appropriate information, data, resources, and analysis so that the advisory panel may conduct a thorough and independent assessment as required under such subsection.

(2) INAPPLICABILITY OF FACA.—The requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the advisory panel established pursuant to subsection (a).

(e) Report.—

(1) PANEL REPORT.—Not later than two years after the date on which the Secretary of Defense establishes the advisory panel, the panel shall transmit a final report to the Secretary.

(2) ELEMENTS.—The final report shall contain a detailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the panel, including—

(A) a history of each current acquisition regulation and a recommendation as to whether the regulation and related law (if applicable) should be retained, modified, or repealed; and

(B) such additional recommendations for legislation as the panel considers appropriate.

(3) INTERIM REPORTS.— (A) Not later than 6 months and 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report to or brief the congressional defense committees on the interim findings of the panel with respect to the elements set forth in paragraph (2).

(B) The panel shall provide regular updates to the Secretary of Defense for purposes of providing the interim reports required under this paragraph.

(4) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after receiving the final report of the advisory panel, the Secretary of Defense shall transmit the final report, together with such comments as the Secretary determines appropriate, to the congressional defense committees.

(f) Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund support.—The Secretary of Defense may use amounts available in the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund established under section 1705 of title 10, United States Code, to support activities of the advisory panel under this section.

The House bill contained no similar provision.

The House recedes.

Senate Report 114-49 to accompany S. 1376 as it was reported out of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Advisory panel on streamlining and codifying acquisition regulations (sec. 808)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to establish an advisory panel on streamlining acquisition regulations. This panel would be under the sponsorship of the Defense Acquisition University and the National Defense University.

25 years ago, the committee proposed the establishment of an advisory panel to streamline acquisition laws. This panel, referred to as the Section 800 Panel, was mandated in the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991 (Public Law 101-510) and resulted in many of the reform recommendations that were enacted in the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-355) and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-106). The Committee believes that in the intervening quarter of a century the acquisition system is again burdened by unnecessary laws and regulations that are creating incentives to slow down acquisition and not obtain the best value when purchasing goods and services for the warfighter and the taxpayer. The committee plans to continue to review and propose streamlining measures to eliminate unnecessary laws that hamper the Department of Defense and its contractors. The committee believes that a parallel effort should be conducted by the Department of Defense with regards to the current regulatory environment.

The provision would create a panel that would be composed of at least nine individuals who are recognized experts in acquisition laws, regulations, and policy. The committee intends that persons appointed to the Advisory Panel be able to devote a substantial amount of time to this drafting effort. The Advisory Panel should not operate as a board that directs the work of a staff. Rather, the primary work should be done by the members of the Panel, with staff serving to provide administrative support and routine research assistance.

The purpose of this Advisory Panel would be to prepare a pragmatic, workable set of recommended changes to current acquisition regulations. The committee recommends that the first set of regulations to review be those that are independent of any statutory mandate. For those regulations based in law, the committee expects that the Advisory Panel would review whether those regulations have evolved over time and may differ from the original intent. The Advisory Panel's mandate should be to trace this evolution and recommend changes where regulatory trends have resulted in actions that have limited necessary discretion or flexibility that exists in current law. The Advisory Panel should seek to limit regulatory provisions to those necessary to structure buyer-seller relations in the context of government procurement, ensure the financial and ethical integrity of government programs, and protect other fundamental governmental policies.

There are several significant industrial base evolutions that did not exist at the time of the section 800 panel report that the Advisory Panel should be cognizant of when it conducts its evaluation. The first is the increasing consolidation of the defense unique industrial base both at the prime and sub-tier levels. The second is the growing dominance of commercial
technologies in many areas that are important to the Department of Defense. The third trend is the globalization of the defense and commercial industrial bases and proliferation of advanced commercial and defense technologies.

While the final report of the Advisory Panel would be delivered to the congressional defense committees not later than 2 years after the Panel's establishment, interim reports would be required 6 months and 18 months after the enactment of this Act.