CLASSIFICATION (U) 1 GATE 6 SUFFICIENCY REVIEW (SUSTAINMENT) PROGRAM NAME ACAT: ____ Joint Designation: ___ Program Manager Name; PM Code Requirements Officer Name; RS Code Briefer Name; Code Classified by: Reason: Decl on: Review Date MM/DD/YYYY CLASSIFICATION (U)

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Purpose Decisions Desired –Sustainment effectiveness and affordability review at IOC + NLT 4 years –Resolution of initial operational command sustainment issues (triggering events) –Assess affordability

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Purpose

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Membership [..not a briefing slide] Gate 6 Sustainment Membership Purpose: Readiness & Sustainability Assessment, Assess Affordability Briefer: PM and RO Co-Chair: ASN(RD&A), CNO/CMC Principal: VCNO/ACMC, USFF, MARFOR, CNI, NAVSUP/LOGCOM, ASN(FM&C), N00N, N8/DC, P&R/ DC, CD&I, N1/DC, M&RA, N2/N6, N3/N5/DC, PP&O, N4/DC, I&L, DON CIO, PDASN, Warfighter Enterprise Lead, SYSCOM, PEO As required: CNR, DC, Avn Advisory: ASN(RD&A)CHSENG, DASNs, N80, N81, N82, N81D, N091, USFF(N8), HQMC(CL, PA&E), OGC, DASN(FMB), DASN(C&E), SYSCOM Cost Director, Resource Sponsor, DirNIPO, OPPA

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Entrance Criteria 1. Accomplished System FRPDR 2. Achieved System IOC 3. Completed Supportability Assessment (ILA) 4. Updated Program cost estimates (in accordance with NCCA policy (i.e. MIL HDBK 881 and OSD CAIG protocols) 5. Updated Program LCSP and LRFS, including TOC initiatives Notes: Clearly explain reasons if Entrance Criteria is not met.

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Goals/Exit Criteria Note: Please provide performance against the listed Exit Criteria. 1. Concur with selected recommendations to resolve asset and mission readiness issues or shortfalls 2. Concur with TOC reduction opportunities 3. Concur with risk assessments 4. Acceptance of CPD capability requirements changes or recommend new or updated capabilities to meet evolving operational capability need 5. Satisfactory review of Program Health

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Describe what assets were fielded and when, to attain IOC (including initial spares, training, and support equipment) Identify operational units (including other services and/or agencies) that now employ this capability Discuss IOC Sustainment Review findings and status of resolutions Specify target date for FOC attainment IOC/FOC Schedule & Definitions

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Business Model Details Supportability Analyses Level of Repair Manpower Analysis and Reporting of Sustainment/Readiness/Cost Performance Sustainment Contracts PBL Strategy and evaluation Other Government Contractor Product Data Ownership/Usage LCSP Integrated Schedule/Milestones Life Cycle Sustainment Plan Page 1 of 3 Note: The content on this slide will likely require multiple slides to address.

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Life Cycle Sustainment Plan Manpower, Personnel, and Training Product and Technical Data Maintenance Strategy Levels of Repair Facilities and Infrastructure Logistics Footprint Describe as functions of systems design interface (including diagnostics), maintenance strategy, supply and transportation, manpower and training, etc. Safety and Environmental Compliance Page 2 of 3 Note: The content on this slide will likely require multiple slides to address.

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Note: The content on this slide will likely require multiple slides to address. Pre-decisional – Not for Release Sustainment Program Management –Assimilation within broader logistics infrastructures –LCSP adjusted to “replaced systems” sustainment planning Supply Management and Transportation Technology Refreshment, Obsolescence Management, and Corrosion Prevention Modernization opportunities (investment) Life Cycle Sustainment Plan Page 3 of 3

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Independent Logistics Assessment Item RatingRationale ILS Management G Budgeting and Funding G Maintenance Planning/Execution R No Maintenance Plan Design Interface Y Lack of BOM for DMSMS planning RAM Maturity Growth G Supply Support Y PBL Strategy ineffective Support and Common Equipment G Human Systems Integration (MPT&E) G Facilities & Platform Integration G Safety & EnvironmentG Product/Technical DataG Computer Resources & SW SupportYIntegration issues with existing database structure PHS&TG Note: Need to provide mitigation plans in backup for all items rated Yellow or Red. Legend Supports Activities Some Gaps Exist Significant Gaps Exist Results of Supportability Assessment (ILA) Pre-decisional – Not for Release

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Life Cycle Sustainment Metrics to include KPPs, KSAs, and target goals. Separate slides follow, one per parameter not at threshold value. CPD Parameter Metric Measurement Pre-decisional – Not for Release KPP/KSA/Other Attribute ThresholdPerformanceObjective Status/ Basis KPPT T T KSAT T OtherT Improving ConstantDegrading Legend Meets Objective Meets Threshold Below Threshold Basis Legend E = Estimated | C = Calculated T = Test Data | L = Legacy

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Program Funding & Quantities Program Budget versus Total Ownership Cost Estimate

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) * LRFS is the LCSP’s budget-to-requirements baseline for planning and life-cycle execution of systems “Sustainment” Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP) - Logistics Requirements and Funding Summary (LRFS) Note: Tailor template to program’s actual LRFS categories

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Pre-decisional – Not for Release15 ## $ RDT&E ABC IOCFOC $$ FYDP $$ LRIP Remaining LC FYs $$ by Year FRP – Qty/Period Note any life-cycle assumption changes FY# FY## FY## FY## FY## FY## PROCUREMENT MILCON MPN OM MP Updated TOC Profile CURRENT SCP Prior Yrs Spent $$ M/TY By Appropriation Across Projected Lifecycle TOC OBJECTIVE

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Describe concept of employment of the capability as employed. Mission area contribution to the Joint force including –Continued alignment with OSD capability guidance/vision and Navy/Marine Corps strategies Operational unit employment (numbers/organizations) Types and quantities of assets currently fielded Overview of logistics and sustainment operations –Fielding –Manning –Maintenance Management and Logistics IT –Supply Management (to include IUID) –Transportation Summary of CONOPS as Employed

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Provide Mitigation Plans in Backup Program Manager Recommendations Configuration Steering Board (CSB) Capability Changes Baseline vs. Recommendation Impact (Cost /Schedule) Derived Requirement Changes Baseline vs. Recommendation Impact (Cost /Schedule) Technical Configuration Changes Baseline vs. Recommendation Impact (Cost /Schedule) Safety Changes Baseline vs. Recommendation Impact (Cost /Schedule)

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Program Manager Recommendations Configuration Steering Board (CSB) Potential De-scope Options Vetted with Resource Sponsor with APB/Nunn-McCurdy implications (if approved APB exists) Est. Cost Avoidance LCC/TOC Acquisition Technology Insertion Opportunities (Including Technology Refresh) BCA Backup required Est. Schedule Avoidance

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Key O&S Phase cost drivers and root causes Update prior program TOC planning and ongoing execution Show execution results in terms of reducing cost toward the TOC Objective Proposed investment/modernization, targeting the SCP/TOC Objective delta within any span of the O&S phase that is not yet being addressed by a TOC reduction initiative Evaluation of TOC Reduction, Initiatives, and Investment Note: The content on this slide will likely require multiple slides to address.

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Annual call, that program sponsor proposals identify TOC mitigation/reduction initiatives, as part of the POM process. Some initiative may become TOC “pilot programs” Annual call to "Fleet Readiness Enterprise" and "Logistics Providers” for enterprise-wide, economy-of-scale, initiatives. Viable TOC initiatives to be briefed to VCNO and RD&A. Results and lessons of TOC initiatives/pilots published in a TOC Guidebook First Guidebook limited to advice to programs on TOC-related aspects of the Gate Review process [This slide is not part of Gate Review] Another Approach towards making TOC a strategic pursuit, in Navy

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Reporting Slides (CORE / POPS Slide Title) Page # of Description GATE IBR 6 CDR 6 CPD 6 FRP DR 6 Sustain- ment AoA Proposed Study Guidance 7X Total Ownership Cost Estimate 10 XXXXXXXX Total Ownership Cost of Alternatives 12 X TOC Profile for Preferred Alternative 13 X Warfighter Review of AoA Results 14 X Updated TOC Profile17 XXXXXXXX Total Ownership Cost Drivers18XXXXXXX Cost Estimate versus APB - $M/B Base Year 21XXXXXX Logistics Requirement and Funding Summary 22XXXXXXX TOC Estimate History (Guidebook only) 23XXXXXXX Evaluation of TOC Reduction Planning Initiatives & Investment 31X

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Solid denotes current system Dash denotes future system Arrow to Program XYZ denotes supports Program XYZ Arrow from Program XYZ denotes Program XYZ supports Indicates program are interdependent Interdependencies Programs, plus major public/private Sustainment infrastructure Interdependencies No known issues affecting inter-related programs Resolvable interface issues affecting programs Unresolvable interface issues affecting programs Program H Program I (upgrades) Program J Program K Program L Program M Program A Program B Program C Program D Program E Program F Program G Program XYZ C S P

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Schedule

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Significant Risks Risk Reporting Matrix Risk Management Board CAPT A. B. Seas – Title Mrs. A. B. Jones – Title Dr. D. E. Sailor – Title Mr. B. D. Doe – Title Ms. C. G. Smith – Title 5 Likelihood Consequence 4321 Risk #1 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation Risk #5 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation Risk #2 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation Risk #6 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation Risk #3 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation Risk #4 Title, and Root cause for the risk Approach to remedy/mitigation

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Program Health

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) PoPS “Green” state for each of 7 criteria under the sustainment metric at the Sustainment Gate Sustainment program logistically supports all system performance capabilities introduced to date, such that program technical and cost Key Performance Parameter (KPP)/Key System Attribute (KSA) capability parameters are assessed to be performing to (at minimum) threshold levels. The Sustainment Program is executing per the LCSP/LRFS and both planning and execution is rapidly adjusting to meet emerging sustainment needs due to changed operational environment, optempo, or program risk or funding. Revised Sustainment Program execution retains levels of systems readiness without adverse impact to sustainment costs. Sustainment related metrics are being measured, assessed, reported, used to revise the LCSP/LRFS, and have clearly driven Sustainment Program execution; especially in terms of timely corrective actions. Supply Management and a program of Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Material Shortages (DMSMS) is operating effectively across contractor and organic sources. No supply or obsolescence issues are adversely affecting systems KPP/KSA performance, sustainment, readiness, or ownership cost. Maintenance is reliability-centered and is operating to specified levels of repair. Maintenance operations are being adjusted to OPTEMPO changes and supported by timely and uniform technical data. No adverse impact to systems readiness, KPP/KSA performance, or ownership cost attributed to maintenance activity. The training system is operating to plan, is supporting the manpower KPP threshold (if applicable), and is effectively adjusting to systems fielding, deployment, and to the needs for operations and maintenance. The training program is supplied timely technical data, which it rapidly adopts towards uniform instruction. Facilities are in place and environmentally ready to support scheduled systems fielding, deployment, operations, and maintenance. Facilities and environmental analyses continue to ensure that changes in basing, fielding, deployment, OPTEMPO, or related regulations do not affect Sustainment Program cost or systems readiness.

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Decisions Reached Note: Please provide performance against the listed Exit Criteria Goals/Exit Criteria Approved/ Not Approved Additional Actions 1. Concur with selected recommendations to resolve asset and mission readiness issues or shortfalls 2. Concur with TOC reduction opportunities 3. Concur with risk assessments 4. Acceptance of CPD capability requirements changes or recommend new or updated capabilities to meet evolving operational capability need 5. Satisfactory review of Program Health

PROGRAM NAME GATE 6 Sustainment (CORE) DATE UPDATED CLASSIFICATION (U) Life Cycle Product Support Sustainment Sustainment-related Performance Capability Parameters O&S $ Data Sustainment Performance and Ownership Cost Governance, Metric Measurement, and Analysis Business Model and Life Cycle Sustainment Framework Parameter CDD/APB Threshold Current Estimate/ Actual (Date) Description of how value is calculated Availability KPP - Ao - MA 78% % ---- Specify both Ao (development phases) and MA (post- IOC/persistence readiness) threshold performance Reliability KSA - MTBC failure - MTBT failure 83.0 Hrs 32.0 Hrs 89.5 Hrs 41.0 Hrs KSA refined as to “criticality.” Mirror for software reliability KSA, when applicable Ownership Cost KSA - Cost [period of operation] $7.2B$8.9B All CAIG elements/total LCC Diagnostic/ Prognostics/ ---- Capabilities to target reduction in maintenance/supply, health monitoring, on-system training TY$ in MillionsFY09FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14FY15 O&M Mil Pers Total Approved LCSP Required Delta0.0 MILCON LCSP features, sustainment contracts, including details of planned maintenance levels and organic/contractor shared responsibilities. POA&M dates and details, covering sustainment program governance and events to date, along that POA&M path