X hits on this document

PDF document

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA - page 52 / 153





52 / 153

As the Joint Program Manager Paul Mann stated, the MRAP program was, “a program of adequacy. Adequacy in this sense is good” (personal communication, September 8, 2008).

On June 1, 2007, Secretary Gates assigned the MRAP program a “DX” rating under the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (Young et al., 2007, p. 5). Together, the prioritization and DX designation gave the MRAP program the highest priority concerning parts and material suppliers in the government and private sector. Combined with the early risk acceptance and tailored acquisition approach, Secretary Gates’ emphasis further streamlined the MRAP program and mobilized all resources in its support. This section of the report focuses on the execution of the program from its start through the time of this writing, with specific emphasis on the key aspects of the tailored MRAP acquisition approach.

1. Concurrency

“The early program objective to have significant numbers of MRAP vehicles fielded by the end of calendar year 2007 forced the program to plan for and manage all aspects of the process simultaneously rather than sequentially. That included contracting, testing, integration, transportation to theater and fielding” (Owen, 2008, p.6). Within the defense acquisition framework, from concept refinement through disposal, each step is

designed to be executed in making it faster but very simultaneously conducted

series. The MRAP program executed all steps in parallel,

difficult to manage. For example, developmental testing, operational

the MRAP program testing, production,

integration, fielding, and disposal, while increasing Explosively Formed Penetrator terrain of Afghanistan. This complicated

also refining requirements to account for an (EFP) threat and greater need in the restrictive management because the JPO could not focus

on any one phase within the acquisition framework at any given time. milestones could not be followed in their normal, sequential manner. Yet and documentation were still required (Hansen, 2008, June 10).

Additionally, all processes

Typically, ACAT I programs have an Acquisition Program Baseline Agreement (APBA) approved by the MDA prior to entering the procurement phase; this was not the 30

Document info
Document views544
Page views544
Page last viewedSun Jan 22 23:02:00 UTC 2017