D-6. CRD Validation and Approval Phase

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 12 из 20Следующая ⇒

a. JROC Validation and Approval. The JROC has validation and approval authority for all CRDs unless granted to USCINCSOC. The first step in obtaining validation is the JROC formal review of the document, and the summary of the analysis used to support the CRD development. The SOOP-RV will forward the CRD package to the Joint Staff as part of the validation phase to determine JROC interest. Refer to CJCSI 3170.01A for detailed discussion on JROC review process.

b. USSOCOM Approval. The SOCREB/CDB will designate a CRD lead during MNS approval process, and direct specific actions and timelines for CRD development. The CRD lead is responsible for developing, drafting, and sponsoring the CRD through the USSOCOM validation and approval process as well as through the acquisition milestone reviews to ensure the CRD mission area capabilities and the ORD system functional and interoperability requirements are properly addressed. The CRD lead will identify all validated MNSs and ORDs that fall under the CRD.

c. CRD Review and Revalidation. The CRD lead should review the document annually and update as necessary or when directed by the JROC, or Director, SOOP. Changes in any KPP, or significant changes in required capability, threat or doctrine are reasons for CRD update.

D-7. For further amplification on the development of a CRD, and IER KPP, refer to CJCSI 6212.01B, dated 8 May 2000. The following CRD Checklist is provided to assist in developing a CRD presentation for the SOCREB/CDB.

CAPSTONE REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT (CRD) TITLE:	YES	NO
1. General Description of Operational Capability. Does the CRD clearly describe the mission area, proposed, anticipated operational and support concepts, and mission need/deficiencies which warrant a family of systems, or system of systems solution?	x	x
2. General Description of Operational Capability. Is the CRD concept linked to specific elements of a mission area analysis, mission needs assessment, and/or specific mission tasks/subtasks (such as strategic planning process core, essential, and supporting tasks)?	x	x
3. General Description of Operational Capability. Are all related documents that impact CRD (MNS or other CRDs) or are impacted by this CRD (other CRDs or ORDs) already in existence identified?	x	x
4. General Description of Operational Capability. Does the CRD identify possible implications for change to Joint Doctrine?	x	x
5. General Description of Operational Capability. Does the CRD identify possible implications for change to SOF Doctrine, Organization, Training, Leadership Development, Personnel, and/or Facilities?	x	x
6. Operational Concept. Does the CRD define the mission area operational concept. Is the operational concept linked to new warfighting and support concepts? If so, provide details and background.	x	x
7. Operational Concept. Does the CRD define the C4ISR operational concept	x	x
8. Operational Suitability and Infrastructure Support. Does the CRD define general and specific parameters for suitability and infrastructure support?	x	x
9. Are other support considerations defined?	x	x
10. Threat. Does this section of the CRD clearly define the threat in terms of the future threat to be countered, the operational environment.	x	x
11. Threat. Is threat information traceable to Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) validated documents?	x	x
12. Shortcomings in Mission Area and Existing Systems. Does this portion of the CRD address the specific nature of the current system shortfalls/ deficiencies within the mission area (e.g., weapon systems, interoperability, planning)?	x	x

CAPSTONE REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT (CRD) TITLE (Cont.):	YES	NO
13. Shortcomings in Mission Area and Existing Systems. Does this portion of the CRD describe why existing C4ISR operational, systems and technical architectures cannot meet current or projected future (joint) requirements for the proposed FoS/SoS? (Describe the shortfall within the currently established architectures that needs a materiel solution.)	x	x
14. Capabilities Required. Does this section of the CRD clearly identify operational performance parameters (capabilities and characteristics) required?	x	x
15. Capabilities Required. Is each capability and characteristic listed in terms of a threshold value required satisfy the mission need and objective value?	x	x
16. Capabilities Required. Are thresholds values derived from mission area analysis, analysis of alternatives, or widely accepted minimum standards needed to satisfy the mission need? (NOTE: military judgment or project officer opinion is not acceptable criteria)	x	x
17. Capabilities Required. Does this section of the CRD identify Information Exchange Requirements as a KPP?	x	x
18. Capabilities Required. Does this section of the CRD identify Interoperability requirements as a KPP?	x	x
19. System performance. Are key performance parameters (KPP) recommended and do those parameters have measurable threshold values?	x	x
20. System Performance. Is each key performance parameter (KPP): 1) Essential for defining the family of systems; and 2) substantiated by rational and analysis?	x	x
21. Other. Do Information Exchange Requirements support the basis and measures for system(s) Interoperability KPP threshold and Objective?	x	x
22. Program Support. CRD are inherently joint requirements. Does this section discuss the any unique considerations of USSOCOM Components, TSOC, and parent Services joint development and use?	x	x

⇐ Предыдущая 7 8 9 10 111213 14 15 16 Следующая ⇒

Date: 2015-08-06; view: 292; Нарушение авторских прав; Помощь в написании работы --> СЮДА...

mydocx.ru - 2015-2024 year. (0.008 sec.) Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав - Пожаловаться на публикацию