Defense Acquisition Board

Defense Acquisition Board
Name	Defense Acquisition Board
Type	Senior advisory body
Formed	1989
Jurisdiction	United States Department of Defense
Headquarters	The Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia
Parent agency	Office of the Secretary of Defense

Defense Acquisition Board

The Defense Acquisition Board is the senior advisory forum for major procurement and development programs within the United States Department of Defense, providing programmatic review, milestone decisions, and policy guidance. It serves as a centralized venue linking acquisition program offices with senior officials across the Department of Defense, Office of the Secretary of Defense, and service secretariats to adjudicate technical, financial, and schedule risks. The board’s deliberations affect high-profile programs managed by the United States Air Force, United States Navy, United States Army, and defense industry partners such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman.

Overview

The board convenes to assess Major Defense Acquisition Programs designated by the Defense Acquisition System and to approve program milestones aligned with the Defense Acquisition Management Framework. It integrates inputs from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), and service acquisition executives like the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology). The board’s scope encompasses programs related to F-35 Lightning II, Virginia-class submarine, Zumwalt-class destroyer, Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, and others managed by contractors including Raytheon Technologies and General Dynamics.

History

The board traces origins to acquisition reform efforts in the late 20th century, influenced by commissions such as the Packard Commission and legislative changes like the Goldwater-Nichols Act. It evolved through policy documents including the Defense Acquisition Reform Act and institutional responses to program overruns exemplified by the A-12 Avenger II cancellation. Key historical inflection points include the establishment of milestone decision authorities under secretaries such as Caspar Weinberger and reforms overseen during administrations of Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump.

Mission and Responsibilities

The board’s mission is to enable informed milestone decisions—Materiel Development Decision, Milestone A, Milestone B, Milestone C—consistent with statutes like the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 and policies such as the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. Responsibilities include validation of acquisition strategies from program executives at Naval Sea Systems Command and Air Force Materiel Command, budget alignment with the Office of Management and Budget, and oversight of cost-estimating practices shaped by the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office.

Membership and Organization

Membership is chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and includes principal members such as the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the service secretaries of the United States Army, United States Navy, and United States Air Force. Senior participants also include the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, and representatives from the Defense Innovation Unit and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Support offices include staff from Program Executive Office (PEO) Aviation, PEO Ground Combat Systems, and Missile Defense Agency.

Decision-Making Process

Decisions are informed by formal review artifacts: Acquisition Program Baselines, Integrated Master Schedules, Test and Evaluation Master Plans, and Analysis of Alternatives produced by entities like the Mitre Corporation and RAND Corporation. The board evaluates independent cost estimates, developmental and operational test results from the Test and Evaluation Command, and risk assessments from the Defense Contract Management Agency. Milestone approvals require concurrence among milestone decision authorities and may trigger re-baselining, contract restructuring with firms such as Huntington Ingalls Industries, or direction to proceed to low-rate initial production.

Major Programs and Decisions

The board has adjudicated pivotal programs including the F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter; modernization efforts like the Columbia-class submarine program and the Next Generation Air Dominance initiative; strategic initiatives such as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent and Ballistic Missile Defense System upgrades; and high-profile shipbuilding programs including the Ford-class aircraft carrier and Littoral Combat Ship. Decisions have shaped international cooperative programs with partners including United Kingdom, Australia, and Japan under agreements like the Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement frameworks.

Criticisms and Reforms

Critics from oversight bodies such as the Government Accountability Office and committees including the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee have cited issues with cost growth, schedule delays, and concurrency conflicts in programs reviewed by the board. Reforms have been proposed and implemented drawing on lessons from reports by the Defense Science Board, the Commission on the National Defense Strategy, and academic analyses from Harvard Kennedy School and Stanford University think tanks. Proposed solutions include enhanced independent cost-estimating via the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, tightened milestone criteria under the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, and increased use of prototyping championed by the Defense Innovation Unit and DARPA.

Category:United States Department of Defense institutions