search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ARMY AL&T


chemical-protective mask system consisting of mask, carrier, and acces- sories. It incorporates state-of-the-art technology to protect U.S. forces from actual or anticipated threats. The mask components are optimized to reduce their impact on the wearer’s performance and to maximize their ability to inter- face with protective clothing. The JSGPM is replacing the M40/M42 series of masks for the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) ground and combat vehicle operations, and the MCU-2/P series for the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy ground and shipboard applications.


Accelerating modernization of equip- ment is one aggressive measure aimed at improving capabilities, while reducing costs and logistics footprint. However, it is not the only focus of rethinking the way we do business. Another way of addressing areas to improve is through an enterprisewide approach to enhance relationships and business processes within the community.


Organizational Relationships Joint sustainment is the most chal- lenging part of the joint acquisition process. Successfully implementing joint sustainment strategies requires an understanding of the operating envi- ronment and proactively engaging all stakeholders early and throughout the acquisition process. Most importantly, it requires the development of rela- tionships that foster institutional trust among all parties. To this end, JPEO- CBD regularly hosts monthly and quarterly joint reviews where stake- holders come to discuss and resolve issues, which vary from systems in the acquisition process to post-fi elding


and sustainment activi- ties. These forums create a seamless integration of responsibility and author- ity at all stages of an equipment’s life cycle.


Working these issues and recommending these strat- egies is the purpose of the Joint Logistics Advisory Council for CBD (JLAC- CBD), which is chartered and composed of all stake- holders in the CBDP. Its main purpose is to recom- mend servicewide business process improvements that address best practices for the JPEO-CBD. The JLAC-CBD focuses on exploring total life-cycle systems management process improvements that are within the JPEO- CBD’s authority to implement. Chartered in 2006, this body promotes cooperation and open communication, identifi es and recommends business process improvements, and engages stakeholders throughout the acquisition process to promote joint sustainment strategies.


LCpl Michael C. Myers, CBRN Defense Specialist, 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force, adjusts the M50 JSGPM. The JSGPM is replacing the M40/M42 series of masks for the Army and USMC ground and combat vehicle operations. (USMC photo by LCpl Abigail Wharton.)


The Joint Materiel Release (JMR) Program is an example of the coop- erative nature of this body and the signifi cant impact its recommenda- tions have on joint sustainment. In September 2007, the U.S. Army del- egated Materiel Release Authority for CBDP to the Joint Program Executive Offi cer CBD, also the program’s


The JLAC-CBD focuses on exploring total life-cycle systems management process improvements that are within the JPEO-CBD’s authority to implement.


Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). The program’s goal is to take the four separate service processes and inte- grate them into a single JMR process to eliminate redundancy and streamline acquisition efforts while ensuring the joint forces receive safe, effective, suit- able, and supportable systems.


The JPEO-CBD ensures this happens through independent assessments known as the Joint Independent Logistics Assessment (JILA) process. When initiated early, the JILA process provides the JPM timely awareness of potential risk to the program, enabling him/her to mitigate or eliminate those defi ciencies. Additionally, the JILA pro- cess provides the JPM, the warfi ghter, and the MDA with an unbiased evalua- tion of the program, allowing the MDA to determine if the system satisfi es the


APRIL –JUNE 2010 9


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72