Is the evaluation of alternatives done during a JCTD suitable to replace an AoA post ICD especially if we are trying to get a waiver for doing an ICD? What doesn't make sense is if we are picking a technology that is already a TRL6-7 and then transfer the technology to a PoR then why would we have to go through an AoA if we already delivered an operational capability?
Based on what the current CJCSM 3170_01I states (pp A10,A14-15), I could be interpreted that the MDA can make the decision on whether an AOA is required or if other studies can suffice. The justification would definitely need to be staffed through the FCB and the DCAPE (study guidance for AOAs).
Open full Question Details
The DoD5000.02 does not reference JCTDs or “other studies” for the AOAs.
The bottom line is that Mr. Kendall wants to cut out any unnecessary activities that we can in order to move forward in our programs. He just wants us to do it in a very informative and judicious way, not haphazardly. Since Programs have to be “certified in writing” at each MS according to U.S.C, the certifying official would have to agree on the terms of the AoA or other study to fit the assessment.
EXCERPT from the 3170-01I:
(d) Other Capability Requirement Portfolio Assessments. The FCB Chairs also have responsibility for monitoring ongoing activities impacting their capability requirement portfolios, such as progress of AoAs and other acquisition activities, implementation of Joint DCRs, progress in satisfying JUONs, JEONs, and DoD Component UONs, etc. The FCB Chairs may have the need to assess their capability requirement portfolios at other times throughout the year to support VCJCS or other senior leader decision making, or to obtain a baseline assessment of their capability requirement portfolio ahead of one of the annual activities such as CGA, PBR, or MRP.
It further states
(a) ICD Validation. Prior to validation, the draft ICD provides the validation authority and other stakeholders the opportunity to assess how the identified capability requirements and associated capability gaps impact the capability requirement portfolios. The validated ICD is a critical entry criterion for the MDD, and guides the Sponsor MSA phase activities and assessment of potential materiel solutions through an AoA or other studies. It also identifies associated DOTMLPF-P changes and guides development of other acquisition materials required for the milestone (MS) A review.
(b)Post-AoA Review. Following Sponsor completion of the AoA, the post-AoA review provides the validation authority and other stakeholders the opportunity to assess how the different alternatives address the validated capability requirements and associated capability gaps, and at what life cycle costs. The post-AoA review shall be completed in sufficient time to permit Sponsor preparation of a draft CDD or similar documentation prior to MS A, not submitted to the Gatekeeper for staffing and validation at that time, to inform the development of the request for proposals in support of the TMRR Phase.
(1) The post-AoA review considers all alternatives for not only highest performance in meeting validated capability requirements, but for cost-effectiveness and associated risk in meeting incrementally fewer or lesser requirements—determining the “knee in the curve” of diminishing return on investment with acceptable risk.
(2)The post-AoA review is not a validation of the AoA results, but rather informs the validation authority’s advice to the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) on the AoA results, recommended alternative(s), and proposed KPPs, Key System Attributes (KSAs), and Additional Performance Attributes (APAs). The validation authority may recommend alternative(s) different from those recommended by the sponsor when such a recommendation would better serve the management and prioritization of the capability requirement portfolio.