Acknowledging that the initial PEO LS portfolio arrangement lacked what he called “domain logic,” Taylor highlighted a new way of operating, in which the PEO is “realigning legacy programs within the Marine Corps with their related developmental replacement programs.”
“In a number of cases we now have one program manager making effective decisions across both [legacy and development] efforts, based on what is best and right in support of the Marine Corps’ goals,” he said. “That is instead of what I previously observed. And this was a critical observation I made and relayed to Mr. [Sean] Stackley, the ASN RDA [Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Research, Development and Acquisition] in trying to justify some program realignments. With the initial standup of PEO Land Systems and the severing of synergy between developmental efforts and the related legacy programs, we had actually set the stage for competition between program managers – one managing a legacy system and one managing its replacement. So now we have realigned those legacy systems and their developmental replacements under one authority structure. And it’s working great.”
As an example, with the cancellation of the EFV program and the subsequent establishment of the ACV [Amphibious Combat Vehicle] program, the management of ACV, the Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC), and the Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV) vehicle programs has been consolidated within the PEO under a Program Manager, Advanced Amphibious Assault.
The new Logistics System Vehicle Replacement 16 tractor. The LVSR, older LVS models, the P-19 fire truck, and other heavy vehicles have been consolidated under PEO LS management. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Justin J. Shemanski
Another significant example of program realignment was the movement of the Marine Corps’ fleet of light, medium and heavy tactical wheeled vehicles from under Marine Corps Systems Command to the PEO LS structure. Moreover, trailer programs have now been realigned with their associated prime movers.
“For example, we acquired the HMMWV program from Marine Corps Systems Command and that’s now managed under the PEO, within one Light Tactical Vehicle Program Office by one program manager who, by the way, also manages Joint Light Tactical Vehicle for the Marine Corps,” Taylor said. “Likewise, we inherited the flatrack refueler, the P-19 fire truck, and the LVS, which is the legacy predecessor to the LVSR. And again, we aligned them all under one program manager with the same weight class of vehicles.”
“With respect to efficiencies, as just one example, we are able to manage multiple or similar programs with what has proven to be far fewer people that we had needed to manage those programs separately,” he added. “And that’s a big deal in and of itself.”
Taylor went on to highlight a number of recent and pending program milestones within the new PEO structure.
In terms of milestones within the amphibious fleet, he offered, “One of the Marine Corps’ premier programs, the ACV program, recently received a successful Materiel Development Decision and the Analysis of Alternatives is ongoing right now. That should run its course through the summer.”
Taylor also emphasized how PEO science and technology (S&T) efforts were being directed across the portfolio, offering the example of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) Adaptive Vehicle Make (AVM), “here referred to by another acronym, FANG. It represents a specific outgrowth of our S&T efforts. And I believe the Army has entered into a similar agreement with GCV [Ground Combat Vehicle]. We have actually signed an MOA [Memorandum of Agreement] with DARPA to allow them to essentially be a competitor in developing a manufacturing process for ACV.”
“We are working towards award of a follow-on MTVR contract,” he continued. “We will probably do so in the third quarter of this year. And, although we are buying additional quantities, in reality the Marine Corps is actually reducing the MTVR AAO [authorized acquisition objective] and utilizing this next contract to ‘rebalance’ the fleet configuration mix.”
“On LVSR we recently finalized the last delivery order that will deliver the remaining vehicles to satisfy the Marine Corps’ LVSR AAO,” he noted. “And, most recently, JLTV released their request for proposals for the EMD phase and, if all goes well, we should see Milestone B later in the spring and EMD contract award by the summer.”
“Although the Marine Corps’ number one stated priority is the ACV, because of the current budgetary environment and the result of our cost-informed trades process, the Marine Corps has come to the conclusion that they cannot simultaneously afford some of their priorities – i.e. the ACV and JLTV,” he explained. “So after reviewing the acquisition strategies of both programs we collectively came to the conclusion that the optimum strategy was deconfliction through time phasing of program procurements. So what you will see with the Marine Corps is an attempt to procure as many JLTVs as they can before ACV procurement becomes an issue around the 2022 timeframe. So, on behalf of the Marine Corps’ leadership, here’s the ‘foot stomp:’ It’s critical not only to JLTV but to ACV as well that the JLTV program remain on schedule.”
Reflecting on the possibility of future changes to the PEO portfolio structure, Taylor acknowledged that it still “lacks domain logic” in some areas and that one possible end state might include actions to stand up a second Marine Corps PEO that would focus on C4I capabilities.