GROUND TRUTH
By using a robust mix of potential facilitating agents now, the Army could realize near- and mid-term advances that will contribute to long-term successes.
satisfied.” Don’t over-specify. For exam- ple, define what constitutes basic issue items (BII) but do not describe the BII for the system. Also, ensure that the inte- grated master schedule tracks exactly to the project’s scope and deliverables.
LL_885: During development of the test and evaluation master plan (TEMP), we found value in conducting a TEMP “lockdown” meeting with all stakeholders. Tis meeting forces the stakeholders to provide their required information at one time.
Background A three-day, in-person meeting was held with all of the program’s test and evalu- ation stakeholders to determine what information was required from each ser- vice to develop the TEMP. Each section of the document was reviewed and action items were assigned. Additionally, stake- holders provided information about their roles in the development of the TEMP. Most of the TEMP was completed at this time, reducing the time and work associ- ated with emailing the document to all stakeholders for review and comment.
Recommendation Consider conducting a TEMP meeting to streamline the development of
the
document and reduce the time required to generate the final product. Ask stake- holders to provide information about their roles and responsibilities, and ensure that meeting attendees are autho- rized to make decisions on behalf of their
38
MORE BANG, LESS BUCK Soldiers with the 2nd Battalion, 319th Airborne Field Artillery Regiment conduct testing June 4 on the M119A3 Light Towed Howitzer at Fort Bragg, NC. One PEO was able to reduce its costs by consolidating its purchases after determining that two programs within its office used the same muzzle velocity system used by systems such as the howitzer. (U.S. Army photo by CPT Joseph Bush, 82nd Airborne Division Artillery )
organizations. Finally, consider using a similar process to develop other acquisi- tion documents that require input from multiple stakeholders.
OVERSIGHT, REVIEW AND DOCUMENTATION
LL_662: Te Weapon Systems Acquisi- tion Reform Act requires a competitive prototyping waiver for a major defense acquisition program entering the tech- nology maturation and risk reduction
(TMRR) phase, not competitively awarding prototype development con- tracts to industry.
Background Early in the materiel solution analy- sis (MSA), a program determined that using the government organic industrial base to accomplish technical develop- ment during TMRR would be the most cost-effective method. Terefore, no new contracts would be awarded during the TMRR phase. With the absence of contract awards, program management officials believed that the program did not require a competitive prototyping waiver. However, legal reviews late in the MSA process identified the requirement for a competitive prototyping waiver on the basis that multiple sources were not competitively developing prototypes.
Army AL&T Magazine October-December 2015
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 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208
