ARMY AL&T
SHAKING THE TREE
Af ter other methods fail, xTech helps PM Soldier Lethality find potential industry partners for the Precision Grenadier System.
by Andrew H. Cline, Maj. Eric B. Forsgren and Travis T. James I
n the dynamic landscape of defense innovation, bridging the divide between government requirements and industry’s readiness to invest can be a Herculean task. Tis challenge becomes particularly pronounced when dealing with weapon
systems lacking commercial market application or appeal, and when small businesses grapple with financial constraints despite their innovative potential.
Program Manager Soldier Lethality (PM SL), within the Program Executive Office for Soldier, has not been immune to this dilemma. Te Precision Grenadier System (PGS) program, which lacks commercial market opportunities and has yet to secure congressional budget approval, faced disinterest from industry. Year after year, market surveys yielded the same results: limited defense industry partners offering untested solutions to address some of the program’s requirements.
However, PM SL was determined to kindle industry inter- est, solicit
invaluable insights on PGS requirements, and
foster robust competition for fiscal year 2026. To turn this vision into a reality, PM SL recognized the imperative of initi- ating research and development efforts in fiscal year 2023, positioning the government for a genuine competition by fiscal year 2026.
Te solution lay in the prize authority outlined in 10 U.S.C. § 4025, which would offset contractors’ investment risks in the PGS program by progressively awarding prize money for each successful phase—phase one, white papers; phase two, techni- cal presentations; and phase three, demonstrations. Notably, the barriers to entry were low, requiring only a five-page white paper describing the proposed PGS solution.
Te government’s historical challenge to fund innovative programs, such as the PGS, left industry partners disenchanted and disin- clined to invest further. PM SL sought to rekindle industry enthusiasm and trust and to foster stronger relationships to over- come this impediment. Te team faced resource constraints and needed more time for major capability acquisition- or middle- tier authority-based development efforts. Nevertheless, they were steadfast in their commitment to persuade the industry to invest in and develop PGS prototypes, ensuring readiness for a robust PGS competition by fiscal year 2026. Despite limited initial funds, PM SL was eager to compensate vendors for demonstra- tions, through traditional procurement mechanisms, based on the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), other transaction author- ity or Procurement for Experimental Purposes (10 U.S.C. § 4023), were akin to product delivery to the government rather than a mere demonstration.
PM SL ventured into unfamiliar territory by delving into its acqui- sition resources and authorities. Discovering the prize authority under 10 U.S.C. § 4025, which recognizes outstanding achieve- ments in basic, advanced and applied research, technology development and prototype development for DOD, became a catalyst for the PGS program. PM SL joined forces with xTech to navigate this transformative journey.
XTech is a platform shepherded by Matthew Willis, Ph.D., director of the Army Applied Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) and prize competitions in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology. XTech was eager to partner with PM SL to transition competitions into real programs that could enhance defense capabilities, and swiftly became an essential collaborator in this innovation journey.
https://asc.ar my.mil 93
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
