[Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 32, Volume 1] [Revised as of July 1, 2003] From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 32CFR73.4] [Page 371-372] TITLE 32--NATIONAL DEFENSE CHAPTER I--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PART 73--TRAINING SIMULATORS AND DEVICES--Table of Contents Sec. 73.4 Policy. (a) General. (1) It is DoD policy to optimize the operational readiness of the total forces by effecting the development and acquisition of training devices, in accordance with DoD Directive 5000.1. The requirement for development and acquisition of training devices shall be based on a Military Service's training requirements analysis process. The analysis shall define the training need, determine whether existing training devices shall satisfy the training requirement, and evaluate the benefits and tradeoffs of potential alternative training solutions. This process shall consider how recommended training devices shall function in the National Guard and Reserve environment and how they shall meet any unique National Guard and Reserve training needs. (2) All training devices supporting and unique to a major system acquisition should be documented and reviewed with the parent major system. Major system training devices shall be identified in the acquisition process in the Integrated Program Summary (IPS), in accordance with DoD Instruction 5000.2. Those training devices that are not included in a major system acquisition should be identified and justified in relation to a specific training program or course. The Military Services shall ensure that all development, procurement, operation, and support costs are programmed and funded. (3) These policies do not imply that a training system, simulator, or device must be procured from the prime contractor for the defense system being supported. (4) The acquisition of a training system that supports a new defense system or equipment shall be assigned the same priority as that of the parent system or equipment. (5) Those training devices dedicated to defense systems or equipment should be available in time for the fielding of the parent system. (6) These policies and the guidelines to implement them apply to acquisition funds from advanced development through procurement. (7) Joint-Services acquisition of common training devices should be fully considered in each Military Service's training analysis and planning. (b) Development planning guidelines. (1) Once a training device requirement has been established, the training device program must be described and documented in a Military Service's approved development plan (DP) or equivalent before development of the training device may proceed. (2) The DP, which documents the Military Service's training requirement, must integrate the proposed, specific training device hardware or software system being developed and acquired with the training system for which it is intended. (3) The DP shall address the following items as data become available: (i) Assessment of Training need and expected benefit from the training device(s). (ii) Description of the training device(s). (iii) Acquisition and modification schedule. (iv) Ability of the training devices to maintain or improve safety. (v) Course and training estimates including projected student flows and loads, requirements for instructors and other staff, location of training facilities, and other training requirements. (c) Acquisition guidelines. (1) Training device alternatives including, but not limited to, trainers, general versus specific devices, real equipment versus [[Page 372]] simulated equipment, and embedded training capability should be evaluated by the Military Service concerned. Where applicable, economic analyses of alternatives should be conducted in accordance with the methods and assumptions in DoD Instruction 7041.3. The evaluation of each alternative should consider as appropriate: (i) Life-cycle use versus costs. (ii) Trade-off with requirements for munitions, if applicable. (iii) Capability of the training device(s) to accommodate changes made to the parent defense systems based on data on minimum and maximum changes made over the life cycle of similar defense systems. (iv) Student load and curriculum changes or field application training changes anticipated during the life cycle. (2) When military specification equipment is not required to meet performance needs, commercial practices and equipment should be used to contain initial procurement and follow-on support costs. Commercially available training programs also deserve serious consideration. (3) Specifications should cover training functions, performance levels, and required proficiency. (d) Training effectiveness evaluation guidelines. Analysis of training capability and potential should focus on data based on actual experience.