Contents
Since the technical baseline is intended to serve as the baseline for developing LCCEs, it should provide information on development, testing, production, operations and maintenance, planned upgrades, and disposal. When multiple alternatives are under consideration, in general, a separate technical baseline should be prepared for each alternative. Although technical baseline content varies by program (and possibly even by alternative), it always entails a number of sections, each focusing on a particular aspect of the program being assessed. Table 4 describes typical technical baseline elements.
Table 4: Typical Technical Baseline Elements
| Element | Description |
|---|---|
| System purpose | Describes the system’s mission and how it fits into the program; should give the estimator a concept of its complexity and cost |
| Detailed technical system and performance characteristics | Includes key functional requirements and performance characteristics; the replaced system (if applicable); who will develop, operate, and maintain the system; descriptions of hardware and software components (including interactions, technical maturity of critical components, and standards); system architecture and equipment configurations (including how the program will interface with other systems); key performance parameters; information assurance; operational concept; reliability analysis; security and safety requirements; test and evaluation concepts and plans |
| Software description | Includes type of software, software sizing metrics, functionality, development schedule |
| Work breakdown structure | Identifies the cost and technical data needed to develop the estimate |
| Description of legacy or similar systems | A legacy (or heritage or predecessor) system has characteristics similar to the system being estimated, often the new program is replacing it. The technical baseline includes a detailed description of the legacy hardware and software components; technical protocols or standards; key performance parameters; operational and maintenance logistics plan; training plan; phase-out plan; and the justification for replacing the system |
| Acquisition plan or strategy | Includes the competition strategy, whether multiyear procurement will be used, and whether the program will lease or buy certain items; it should identify the type of contract awarded or to be awarded and, if known, the contractor responsible for developing and implementing the system |
| Development, test, and production quantities and program schedule | Includes quantities required for development, test (e.g., test assets), and production; lays out an overall development and production schedule that identifies the years of its phases; the schedule should include a standard Gantt chart with major events such as milestone reviews, design reviews, and major tests; and that addresses, at a high level, major program activities, their duration and sequence, and the critical path |
| System test and evaluation plan | Includes the number of tests and test assets, criteria for entering into testing, exit criteria for passing the test, and where the test will be conducted |
| Deployment details | Includes standard platform and site configurations for all scenarios (peacetime, contingency, war) and a transition plan between legacy and new systems |
| Safety plan | Includes any special or unique system safety considerations that may relate to specific safety goals established through standards, laws, regulations, and lessons learned from similar systems |
| Training plan | Includes training for users and maintenance personnel, any special certifications required, who will provide the training, where it will be held, and how often it will be offered or required |
| Disposal and environmental effect | Includes identification of environment impact, mitigation plan, and disposal concept |
| Operational concept | Includes program management details, such as how, where, and when the system will be operated; the platforms on which it will be installed; and the installation schedule |
| Personnel requirements | Includes comparisons to the legacy system (if possible) in salary levels, skill-level quantity requirements, and where staff will be housed |
| Logistics support details | Includes maintenance and sparing plans, as well as planned upgrades |
| Environmental plan | Includes how the environment may be impacted or any environment liability |
| Changes from the previous technical baseline | Includes a tracking of changes, with a summary of what changed and why |
Source: DOD, DOE, and ICEAA | GAO-20-195G
Programs following an incremental development approach should have a technical baseline that clearly states system characteristics for the entire program. In addition, the technical baseline should define the characteristics to be included in each increment, so that a rigorous LCCE can be developed. For programs with a spiral development approach, the technical baseline tends to evolve as requirements become better defined. In earlier versions of a spiral development program, the technical baseline should clearly state the requirements that are included and those that have been excluded. This is important because a lack of defined requirements can lead to cost increases and delays in delivering services, as case study 7 illustrates.
Given its strategic location, Guam serves as an important staging base and operating location for mobilizing U.S. military forces and equipment within Asia and the western Pacific. In 2006, the United States and Japan planned to relocate 17,600 U.S. Marines and dependents from Japan to Guam. However, in 2012, representatives from the countries developed a revised plan under which 6,300 Marines and dependents would relocate to Guam.
Despite the reduction of Marines and dependents relocating to Guam, DOD had not yet revalidated the public infrastructure requirements based on the revised realignment plan or differentiated between requirements needed to address long-standing conditions and those related to the realignment. At the time of our assessment, the revalidation was not expected to be completed until 2015. Even so, DOD had requested over $400 million for Guam public infrastructure projects in its budget requests since fiscal year 2012. However, it was unclear if all of the infrastructure projects were necessary given the reduction in forces. For example, if DOD decided to locate the Marines on the naval base that handles all of its own water/wastewater needs, public water/wastewater improvements would not have been needed to support the Marines.
GAO reviewed DOD’s $1.3 billion cost estimate for improvements to Guam’s water and wastewater systems used to support budget requests for fiscal years 2013 and 2014. GAO determined that the estimate minimally met the best practice criteria for three characteristics of a reliable cost estimate—comprehensive, well documented, and accurate—and did not satisfy best practice criteria for the credible characteristic.
GAO determined that the estimate was not comprehensive, in part because the water and wastewater systems estimate did not include a technical baseline describing the scope and technical details of the program. A brief discussion and description of individual projects were provided in a technical memorandum, but none of the water or wastewater projects were sufficiently defined to understand the scope of work. In addition, there was no indication that the projects’ scope or complexity had been updated to reflect more current environmental studies or reports, infrastructure inspections, or other reviews. Understanding the program—including the acquisition strategy, technical definition, characteristics, system design features, and technologies to be included—is key to developing a credible cost estimate. Without these data, the cost estimator will not be able to identify the technical and program parameters that will bound the cost estimate.
GAO recommended that, to provide DOD and Congress with sufficient information regarding the requirements and costs associated with DOD’s Guam realignment plans and the public infrastructure necessary to support that realignment, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Department of the Navy’s Joint Guam Program Office in concert with the Office of Economic Adjustment to fully incorporate the best practices identified by GAO for developing high-quality cost estimates as future cost estimates for Guam public infrastructure projects are developed. As a result of GAO’s recommendation, in August 2015 DOD followed the standards set forth in GAO’s Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide and revised its cost estimates for public infrastructure needs on Guam. In doing so, DOD reduced its estimate and future budget requests.
Fully understanding requirements up front helps increase the accuracy of the cost estimate. While each program should have a technical baseline that addresses each element in table 4, each program’s aspects are unique.