Defense Acquisition Regulations Council

Defense Acquisition Regulations Council
Name	Defense Acquisition Regulations Council
Formation	1978
Type	Federal advisory body
Headquarters	The Pentagon
Region served	United States
Leader title	Chair
Parent organization	Department of Defense

Defense Acquisition Regulations Council The Defense Acquisition Regulations Council is a senior advisory body within the United States Department of Defense charged with coordinating acquisition policy, regulatory development, and procurement guidance across multiple defense components. It operates at the intersection of procurement law, contract management, and defense industrial policy, engaging with executive branch entities, congressional committees, and industry stakeholders. The Council’s work influences acquisition practices used by the military departments and defense agencies for major weapons programs, sustainment, and supply chain management.

History

The Council traces its roots to reforms following the Military Procurement Act debates and congressional oversight in the 1970s, influenced by high-profile inquiries such as the Rogers Commission investigations and the aftermath of procurement problems in programs like the M1 Abrams development. Its establishment paralleled statutory changes embodied in the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act and reforms associated with the Packard Commission. During the 1980s and 1990s the Council adjusted to initiatives from the Goldwater-Nichols Act and to acquisition stewardship promoted by successive Secretaries of Defense including Caspar Weinberger and William Perry. Post-9/11 exigencies and programs like the F-35 Lightning II program prompted further procedural evolution, while oversight responses from panels such as the Commission on Wartime Contracting and reports by the Government Accountability Office shaped its modern role.

Organization and Membership

The Council is chaired by a senior official from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and includes representatives from the military departments: Department of the Army (United States), Department of the Navy (United States), Department of the Air Force (United States), as well as defense agencies such as the Defense Logistics Agency and Missile Defense Agency. Ex officio members typically include senior counsel from the Office of Management and Budget, liaisons from the Department of Justice, and representatives from the General Services Administration when interagency matters arise. Membership has also featured participation from the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the Defense Contract Management Agency, and offices tied to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for technology-transfer issues. The Council engages with congressional committees including the House Armed Services Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee through briefings and legislative coordination.

Responsibilities and Functions

The Council’s principal functions include developing Department of Defense acquisition regulations, coordinating proposed rule changes, and harmonizing defense-specific procurement policy with broader Federal statutes such as the Competition in Contracting Act and the Truth in Negotiations Act. It issues policy memoranda that affect solicitation practices for programs like the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and Virginia-class submarine procurement, and provides direction on contract types used in programs such as the KC-46 Pegasus tanker and Patriot missile sustainment. The Council also acts to align acquisition approaches with industrial base strategies driven by bodies like the Defense Innovation Unit and initiatives connected to the National Defense Industrial Strategy.

Rulemaking Process

Rulemaking proceeds through a structured process involving interagency review, public notice, and coordination with the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs when necessary. Proposed changes are drafted into defense-specific sections which then undergo review alongside the Federal Acquisition Regulation codification, employing the Administrative Procedure Act procedures and solicitation of comments in the Federal Register. High-impact rules for programs such as SpaceX procurements, Raytheon Technologies contracts, or shipbuilding solicitations often trigger extended coordination with the Department of Commerce, Federal Aviation Administration, and congressional overseers. Final promulgation requires concurrence from senior officials and publication in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement.

Relationship with Federal Acquisition Regulations

The Council operates in close coordination with the Federal Acquisition Regulation framework while promulgating defense-unique provisions in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. It reconciles department-level requirements with FAR articles influenced by statutes like the Service Contract Act and the Buy American Act, and works to implement policy directions from Secretaries such as Leon Panetta or Mark Esper. When FAR revisions occur—often involving agencies like the General Services Administration and National Aeronautics and Space Administration—the Council negotiates applicability to programs administered by the United States Special Operations Command or the United States Space Force.

Major Policies and Initiatives

The Council has overseen initiatives on acquisition reform tied to programs like the Joint Strike Fighter and modernization efforts associated with the National Security Strategy. It has advanced policies on small business participation guided by the Small Business Administration and initiatives stemming from the Defense Production Act. Recent initiatives include strengthening cybersecurity requirements in contracts aligned with guidance from Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and incentivizing technology transition in collaboration with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the National Security Council. Supply-chain resilience efforts have connected the Council’s work to sanctions and export controls administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security and the Office of Foreign Assets Control.

Oversight, Accountability, and Criticism

Oversight of the Council’s decisions involves entities such as the Congressional Budget Office, the Government Accountability Office, and congressional subcommittees that examine procurement outcomes like those in the Afghanistan War logistics efforts. Critics, including think tanks like the Rand Corporation and watchdogs formerly associated with the Project on Government Oversight, have argued that Council processes may insufficiently restrain cost growth in programs exemplified by the Zumwalt-class destroyer or lack transparency in source-selection policies highlighted in disputes involving firms like Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Reforms advocated by panels such as the Defense Business Board and recommendations from the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction have pressed for enhanced metrics, auditability by the Defense Contract Audit Agency, and closer congressional reporting to improve accountability.

Category:United States defense procurement