Downloaded from https://www.everyspec.com Measure of effectiveness (MOE) A quantifiable measure used in comparing systems or concepts or estimating the contribution of a system or concept to the effectiveness of a military force. The extent to which a combat system supports a military mission. Measure of performance (MOP) A quantifiable measure used in comparing systems or estimating the contribution of a system or concept to the effectiveness of a military force. The extent to which a combat system accomplishes a specific performance function.
New Equipment Training Test Support Package (NET TSP) A package first prepared by the MATDEV to support training development for new materiel and information technology, including conduct of T&E of new equipment and software. Based on the NET program, the MATDEV prepares, as appropriate, a NET TSP. The NET TSP is provided to the training developers and testers. It is used to train player personnel for DT and to conduct training of instructor and key personnel who train player personnel for OT. The training developer uses the NET TSP to develop the Training TSP.
Operational effectiveness The overall degree of mission accomplishment of a system when used by representative personnel in the expected (or planned) environment. Some examples of environment are: natural, electronic, threat, and so forth for operational employment of the system considering organization, doctrine, tactics, survivability, vulnerability, and threat (including countermeasures; initial nuclear weapons effects; nuclear, biological, and chemical contamination threats).
Operational suitability The degree to which a system can be satisfactorily placed in field use with consideration given to availability, compatibility, transportability, interoperability, reliability, wartime usage rates, maintainability, safety, human factors, manpower supportability, logistic supportability, and training requirements. Operational test (OT) Any testing conducted with the production or production like system in realistic operational environments, with users that are representative of those expected to operate, maintain, and support the system when fielded or deployed.
Operational tester A command or agency that plans, conducts, and reports the results of OT, such as USATEC, USASMDC, USAMED- DCOM, USAINSCOM, or COE. All Army operational testers use policies and procedures provided by USATEC. Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR) A review conducted, as deemed necessary by the operational tester, before each operational test of a system. The purpose is to identify problems that may impact on starting or adequately executing the test. Operational test readiness statement (OTRS) A written statement prepared by the combat developer, MATDEV, training developer/trainer, and test unit commander before the start of IOTs (or FOTs) for use during the OTRR.
The Operational Test Readiness Statement (OTRS) addresses or certifies the readiness of the system for testing in each member’s area of responsibility. OTRSs may also be required for some FDT/E and should be specified in the OTP. Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT) A DOD (or component-led) team usually composed of the former Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) Committee Chairperson, the applicable PM and PEO, and component and OSD staff principals or their representatives. The OIPT is involved in the oversight and review of a particular Acquisition Category (ACAT) 1D program.
The OIPT structures and tailors functionally oriented IPTs to support the MATDEV, as needed, and in the development of strategies for acquisition/contracts, cost estimates, evaluation of alternatives, logistics management, and similar management con- cerns. The OIPT meets immediately after learning that a program is intended to be initiated to determine: the extent of IPT support needed for the potential program, who should participate on the IPTs, the appropriate milestone for program initiation, and the documentation needed for the program initiation review.
After submission of final docu- mentation for a milestone review, the OIPT, together with the Component Acquisition Executive (CAE) will hold a formal meeting, chaired by the OIPT leader. This meeting will determine if any issues remain that have not been resolved earlier in the process, to assess the MATDEVs recommendations for future milestone reviews and documenta- tion, and to determine if the program is ready to go forward for a decision. Former DAB and service-level committees are replaced by OIPTs. 56 AR 73–1 • 1 August 2006