Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution System
This revision describes an enhanced Army Planning, Programming, and Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBES) that responds to the following–
o The new biennial cycle that began with the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) for fiscal years (FY) 1990-1994 (para 1-5).
o Implementation of the DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 (Act of 1 October 1986, Public Law 99-433, volume 100, US Statutes at Large, p.992), and later organizational changes (para 1-5).
o Implementation of recommendations of the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense Management adopted into law (section 2436, title 10, United States Code) (para 1-5).
o A 1987 statutory requirement to submit to Congress the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) underlying the President’s Budget (section 221, Title 10, United States Code) (para 1-5). (Beginning in 1990, the new 6-year Future Years Defense Program replaced the former Five-Year Defense Program) (para 2-2).
o Initial actions from the Defense Management Review directed by the President in February 1989 (paras 2-3 through 2-6 and 3-2 through 3-6).
o Change in which:
–Army major commands (MACOMS) and other operating agencies (now including program executive offices (PEOs)), submit operating requirements using field POMs instead of Program Analysis and Resource Reviews (PARRS) used before the FY 1992-1997 PPBES cycle (para 2-16 and chap 4).
–The Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) staff uses appropriationbased Program Evaluation Groups (PEGs) instead of functional panels to help build the Army program (POM), which then, unlike the functional panels, remain in operation throughout the PPBES cycle to track the program through budget analysis, program and budget defense, and execution (paras 2-15, 4-8, and 5-9).
–Commands and agencies submit a Command Budget Estimate (CBE) in the even year and Resource Management Update (RMU) in the odd year replacing yearly submission of a Command Operating Budget (COB) (para 6-7).