Overview
FAR Part 34 establishes policies and procedures for the acquisition of major systems, prioritizing mission-oriented requirements and long-term competition over rigid technical specifications. It integrates specific management mandates, including the use of Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS) for large-scale development and the utilization of industrial resources developed under Title III of the Defense Production Act.
Key Rules
- Mission-Oriented Solicitations: Agencies must express needs in terms of mission capabilities and objectives rather than specific technical systems or hardware specifications to encourage innovation.
- Effective Competition: Competition must be sustained between alternative system concepts and sources for as long as it is economically beneficial to the government.
- Earned Value Management System (EVMS): Major acquisitions for development must comply with Electronic Industries Alliance Standard 748 (EIA-748). Offerors without a compliant system must submit a plan for compliance but cannot be eliminated solely for lacking a pre-existing certified EVMS.
- Phased Acquisition Approach: The regulation outlines a progressive lifecycle: Concept Exploration (short-term/refining concepts), Demonstration (testing/pricing), Full-Scale Development (production pricing), and Full Production (agency head approval required).
- Defense Production Act (Title III): The government is required to pay for the testing and qualification of industrial resources developed under Title III of the DPA when incorporated into major systems.
- Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR): When EVMS is required, the government must conduct an IBR to verify technical content, resource realism, and schedule accuracy.
Responsibilities
- Agency Head (or Designee): Responsible for establishing written implementation procedures, identifying key decision points, and granting final approval to proceed to full production.
- Program Manager (PM): Responsible for developing a tailored, written acquisition strategy and promoting full and open competition throughout the system's lifecycle.
- Contracting Officer (CO): Responsible for issuing mission-oriented solicitations, ensuring the continuity of concept development between contractors, determining the adequacy of EVMS plans, and modifying contracts for Title III testing.
- Defense Production Act Office: Consults with the CO to evaluate testing requests and provides the necessary industrial resources/materials to contractors for testing.
Practical Implications
- Focus on Outcomes, Not Specs: Contractors have the freedom to propose unique technical designs and "best-of-breed" solutions because the government defines the problem (mission need) rather than the solution (specific system).
- High Administrative Burden: Participation in major system acquisitions requires significant internal controls. Contractors must maintain—or be prepared to implement—an EIA-748 compliant EVMS, which involves rigorous monthly reporting and joint "deep-dive" audits (IBRs) with the government.
- Incremental Commitment: The government uses "short-period" contracts during initial phases. This means contractors must perform exceptionally well in the "Concept Exploration" and "Demonstration" phases to secure the highly lucrative "Full Production" awards.
- Strategic Sourcing: By including Title III industrial resources, the government actively pushes contractors to utilize domestic production capabilities essential to national defense, with the government footing the bill for the associated testing risks.