January 2020
At the other extreme, the Army decided to split procurement of their new AH-64E Apache helicopters into two separate programs: one for remanufactured aircraft and the other for new builds. A 2008 acquisition decisionmemorandum signed by the Army Acquisition Executive contains the following language:
As a recently delegated Acquisition Category IC program, the AH-64E Apache program is comprised of two separate programs, theRemanufactureprogramandtheNewBuildpro- gram. Each of these programs are (sic) separate and distinct with respect to theAcquisitionProgramBaselines (APB), and their funding lines; however, theyhave identical confgurations and are produced on the same production line. (Shyu, 2013)
The choice to create two MDAPs creates challenges for both the Army and OSD because it adds extra reviews and recordkeeping. Having multiple programs, as with subprograms, creates two triggers for an N-M breach, but it alsomeans that any breachwould afect only one of the two programs, whereas creating two subprograms would expose the entire program. It also splits what naturally feels like one program—indeed, the language in Shyu’s (2013) memorandum refers to it both as one program and as two in the same paragraph. Since both programs produce identical new AH-64E helicopters, why should they be separated? Although distinct for reporting purposes, they have common goals and management. They share a PM and a production contract, 10 but only the remanufacture program cost analyst reports any RDT&E costs. Even within Apache, both programs list “Other Support” funds in their SARs, and since the two programs are producing identical helicopters, how the Army decides whether a given support purchase will be credited to one program or the other remains unclear. One cannot understand what is going on in either programwithout considering the other, which would seem to violate the notion of what constitutes a program. Where there is only one distinct end item, having multiple programs is questionable. Defning multiple programs should only be considered as an option in the case of block upgrades to an existing program (as discussed earlier), or when the set of things to be procured by a proposed new program involves all of the following: • Signifcantly diferent product types with diferent acquisition risks • Multiple independent contracts with no real synergies • Few signifcant interoperability requirements among systems
51
Defense ARJ, January 2020, Vol. 27No. 1 : 28-59
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog