and I think that, in large part what we have been focused on over the last year or so, since that has been published, is frankly building the data foundation—ensuring that we understood across the department how to calculate, en- suring that we understood that we had the automated data pipelines to report that which we were now calculating. Services had to understand how to gather the informa- tion necessary to calculate the superordinate metrics. In capturing metrics we learned that operational availability is a more efective measurement at this point than cost per day of availability, but there’s still some work to be done. We must continue refning how we report. I think we have to refne how we calculate and continue to develop a better common lexicon across the department in terms of what we mean when we say these things. Now, with all of that said, I think in the macro we now have a better insight into the overall health of the depart- ment’s weapon systems, even if some on the margin say it’s not being calculated right. I mean we’re not of by or- ders of magnitude, but it certainly does highlight and give us a quantitative data foundation to assess the readiness of major weapon systems across the DoD. So, in that way it is helpful because it’s a frst step in the journey to as- sociating, quantitatively, investment to readiness returns. And we continue to build this out and start to dig deeper into regulations and cost per day of availability and in my ofce we apply artifcial intelligence to the data that are available to us. Now we’ll be able in a quantifable way to better understand the root causes and drivers of readiness degradation and to more defnitively establish resource re- quirements to move the readiness needle. This is defnitely a journey. It’s a process, and we are well on our way along the journey but not to the end. Q On the statutory core in 50/50 statutes, how is DoD doing in terms of maintaining a ready and controlled source of technical competence and resources for depot repair and staying within the 50/50 limits for contractor depot maintenance? Is there a trend, and what is your assessment of the ability to trend positively given the number of new weapon systems? A. I think that the OIB remains solid. All the Services are very diligent in maintaining their capabilities, developing their plans for their future, advocating for the necessary investments to keep the department’s industrial capacity relevant and resilient. Is there work to be done? Of course there is. And the job of my ofce is to help advocate for those priorities to ensure that the OIB continues to be maintained. Our posture is efective for the future, par- ticularly with regard to preparing for protracted confict. Now with that being said, we at this point don’t see any challenges complying with 50/50. We monitor it closely and certainly this year with the workforce fuctuations there may be some challenges, but nothing insurmount- able, nothing defnitive that we’ve seen at this point. We’ll continue to watch it closely. And so, with that said, no negative trends regarding 50/50 and that’s something
that, again, we watch closely. And we don’t anticipate any problems complying there. Q Right. My next question deals with the DoD Mainte- nance Symposium. When is that scheduled? A. It is scheduled, and we’ll make sure we get you some of these so you can distribute them. It is scheduled for December 9–12 in Louisville, Kentucky. Q Now we understand that this year’s session has the theme “Advancing Readiness to Exploit the Logistics Deterrent Effect: Maintaining the Capability and Capacity to Fight and Win.” Can you tell us a bit about the individual topics you plan to cover and who should attend the sym- posium? A. Well, everyone should attend because it is the best symposium that the DoD ofers. It is the largest mainte- nance and readiness focus symposium. If you are involved in, interested in, have oversight, execution, responsibil- ity for policy regarding maintenance, readiness, logistics, you should attend because it’s going to be great. We have got a range of topics that are fairly well established, and we started working on extracts and panel members. So planning is well underway. We have the under secretary’s endorsement and don’t anticipate any challenges. We’re going to run in parallel again the software sum- mit as we do every year. We’ve got some senior logistician panels to talk about the logistics deterrent efect, under- standing what I like to call the logistics kill chain. We’re going to talk about maintenance, the innovation challenge, application of artifcial intelligence, strategic capital, and how we explore public private partnerships in a diferent way—the opportunities in leveraging private capital. We are going to have a panel on conditions-based maintenance and predictive maintenance. We’ll have a panel of congressional staf members providing their per- spective on maintenance and readiness. And we’ll cover the overall health of the DoD maintenance industry and autonomy. So, we’ve got a very good agenda that is pertinent and relevant to the current environment in which we’re, if you think about it, in a competition crisis where we’re hope- fully not trending toward confict but certainly trending toward crisis. Q Do you see a need to strengthen or add certain as- pects of acquisition training and human capital de- velopment? How best can this be achieved? A. I think it’s clear from the administration’s priorities and from what we have heard from the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment that shaping our acquisition processes to be more respon- sive is absolutely a priority. So that, to be honest, is more on the acquisition side, more on the maintenance, repair, overhaul, and readiness perspective. And from there, I think an important component is our
12 | DEFENSE ACQUISITION | September-October 2025
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker