X hits on this document

PDF document

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA - page 49 / 153

354 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

49 / 153

If a vendor chose to develop a new design, the JPO stipulated that it had to be produced within 60 days of contract award. One manufacturer, IMG, did design and produce a new and different testable prototype within the 60-day window. The remainder of the manufacturers chose a modern adaptation of a mature, COTS, 30-year-old materiel solution, based on the BAE RG-31.

2.

Tailored Acquisition Approach

By January 31, 2007, the MRAP program had grown into an ACAT II program, a designation that would keep the procurement under the Navy’s purview. However, by February 8, then-Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics

(USDAT&L), significantly.

Kenneth Krieg, recognized the scope of Accordingly, he directed the Navy

the MRAP acquisition

program would grow executive who was

overseeing the MRAP program, Dr. Delores Etter, to plan for MRAP transition ID status (Sherman, 2007, March 15). ACAT-ID designations are reserved for

to ACAT programs

with procurement costs greater than $2.19 overseen by the OSD (Under Secretary of

billion (FY 2000 constant dollars), and Defense, 2003b, p. 21). Dr. Etter said

are she

approved a “tailored plan” for the MRAP MRAP office is making progress to get all

program

documentation

and added

that “the

program

documentation

in place to

support a

joint acquisition by the Army and Marine Corps” tailored plan granted leeway to the MRAP program, all facets of the DoD acquisition framework.

(Sherman, 2007, March 15). The allowing simultaneous execution of

Despite the MRAP program’s tailored approach, it was not granted waivers for any of the normal DoD acquisition documentation or required processes. DoD acquisitions are characterized by slow, deliberate and well-documented processes

intended

to

ensure

a

thorough

and

complete

system

design.

In

many

ways,

the

MRAP

program was no different, despite its rapid execution. require a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) prior verify that a system is technologically mature and ready

As an example, all programs to the Milestone C decision to for fielding. Due to the rapid

nature of complete

the MRAP program and its use of a technology readiness assessment

vehicles considered COTS, the JPO did not and requested a waiver of this requirement.

27

Document info
Document views354
Page views354
Page last viewedMon Dec 05 21:18:48 UTC 2016
Pages153
Paragraphs3344
Words40255

Comments