Authority to Issue Interoperability Policy

Authority to Issue Interoperability Policy

Carolyn Wong
Daniel Gonzales
Copyright Date: 2014
Published by: RAND Corporation
Pages: 90
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt5vjxbp
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Authority to Issue Interoperability Policy
    Book Description:

    This report presents an approach and framework for determining what parties have authority to issue interoperability policy, the legal and policy origins and implementation paths of the authority, and the extent of the authority. The approach includes rigorous analysis by researchers to identify pertinent authorities in federal law and a means to facilitate discovery of roles and responsibilities in Department of Defense and Service policies.

    eISBN: 978-0-8330-8472-9
    Subjects: Technology, Political Science

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-ii)
  2. Preface
    (pp. iii-iv)
  3. Table of Contents
    (pp. v-vi)
  4. Figures
    (pp. vii-viii)
  5. Tables
    (pp. ix-x)
  6. Summary
    (pp. xi-xvi)
  7. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xvii-xviii)
  8. Abbreviations
    (pp. xix-xx)
  9. CHAPTER ONE Introduction
    (pp. 1-4)

    Achieving interoperability among Navy systems is instrumental to enabling critical functions, such as timely information exchange during operations and efficiencies in acquisition. Navy interoperability policy provides the means for realizing the benefits of the many facets of interoperability. These many facets imply that interoperability touches on a variety of arenas, and hence policy governing its establishment also intersects many arenas. For this reason, it is important to understand what parties have authority to issue policy that governs any facet of interoperability.

    The laws and policies that address interoperability reflect that interoperability has many facets and touches a variety of arenas....

  10. CHAPTER TWO Framework and Methodology
    (pp. 5-8)

    We developed a framework to distill and display the components in sections of federal law, defense policy, and Navy issuances pertinent to roles, responsibilities, and authorities of government executives. The framework has three components: citation of authority, caveats, and party with authority, as shown in Figure 2.1.

    The citation of authority contains the source information, such as document identifier and section number where the statement of authority is found, and a summary of the statement of authority. For example, Section 139(b) of Title 10 of the United States Code would be shown as 10 USC § 139(b). A summary statement...

  11. CHAPTER THREE Analysis of Authority to Issue Navy Interoperability Policy
    (pp. 9-20)

    This chapter demonstrates the methodology described in Chapter Two using authority to issue Navy interoperability policy related to MASE as the issue being investigated.

    We began our task by identifying and examining sections of U.S. law pertinent to interoperability, systems engineering, and responsibilities of Navy executives. Our previous studies on the roles and responsibilities of defense executives afforded us with starting points to examine federal law.¹ For example, Title 10 of the United States Code² and the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009³ both contain sections that address interoperability and systems engineering. Our analysis resulted in the identification of...

  12. CHAPTER FOUR ASN(RD&A) CHSENG Case Study
    (pp. 21-50)

    In this case study, we focus on the paths available to the ASN(RD&A) CHSENG to influence Navy interoperability policy related to MASE. In the previous chapter, Figure 3.7 shows that the ASN(RD&A) CHSENG has two direct paths traceable to federal law that can be cited to influence Navy MASE policy. In this chapter, we will describe in detail these two direct paths and also show how the ASN(RD&A) CHSENG can use four other indirect paths of authority to establish Navy MASE policy.

    All six paths stem from a common root consisting of five sections of the United States Code, three...

  13. CHAPTER FIVE Recommendations and Closing Remarks
    (pp. 51-54)

    We have presented a methodology and framework that can be used to create a network of guidance relevant to a particular issue. By applying the framework to the network of guidance, the analyst can create an R&R network of authority that identifies all parties with roles, responsibilities, or authorities with respect to the issue being investigated. Moreover, the R&R network shows the scope of the authority each official is assigned by guidance documents via the caveats the law and relevant policy place on the authority of each official. Hence, an analyst can compare the scopes of authority and either (1)...

  14. APPENDIX A Electronic Policy Improvement Capability (EPIC)
    (pp. 55-56)
  15. APPENDIX B Statements of Authority
    (pp. 57-64)
  16. APPENDIX C Authority of Other Officials
    (pp. 65-68)
  17. References
    (pp. 69-70)