Blog · Rapid acquisition

Three Mistakes Companies Make When They Pitch Rapid Acquisition Authority

Chris A. Grable · October 4, 2026

When a company hears that a customer has an urgent need, rapid acquisition authority (RAA) often enters the conversation early. Change 1 to DOW Manual 5000.78, effective September 9, 2026, made that conversation more promising: a Military Department Secretary can now make a determination under Section 229 of the FY2024 NDAA to begin development against an emergent technology or emerging threat before the next budget cycle, once the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of War approves. It also made the conversation easier to get wrong. Three mistakes come up again and again.

Mistake 1: Planning against numbers that no longer apply

The 2019 edition of the manual listed four RAA categories and gave each $200 million of authority at the start of every fiscal year. Change 1 removed both the list and the figures. The ceilings now come from 10 U.S.C. 3601, and the Joint Rapid Acquisition Cell (JRAC) publishes the available categories and funding sources in an annual memorandum.

The statutory figures differ from the old text in the place that matters most to companies with a prototype:

Purpose	Annual ceiling
Combat casualty deficiencies	$200 million
Contingency deficiencies	$200 million
Cyber attack deficiencies	$200 million
Starting a rapid prototyping or rapid fielding project	$50 million, Department-wide
Section 229 Service-initiated development	$100 million, Department-wide

These are limits, not entitlements. Section 8126 of the FY2026 defense appropriations act allows up to $650 million in total, shared across all of these purposes, from amounts that act made available. None of these figures tells anyone how much remains uncommitted in a given year. A capture plan that still says "$200 million per category" overstates the prototyping door by a factor of four.

UDC recommends removing the 2019 framing from capture plans, briefings and training material, and planning against the statute, Section 229, the current appropriations provisions and the current JRAC memorandum.

Mistake 2: Assuming the authority comes with a contract

RAA lets the Department redirect money it already holds toward an urgent capability outside that money's appropriated purpose. It does not find the money and it does not award anything. Under Section 229, Chapter 221 of Title 10, which holds the competition requirements, cannot be waived. Change 1 does not say so; the statute does.

A Service that signs a Section 229 determination still needs a lawful way to buy, and three different things tend to get blurred together:

A competitive method selects a source: a commercial solutions opening or a broad agency announcement. A prize competition can surface promising solutions, but any later procurement needs its own award basis.
A contract vehicle, such as an existing IDIQ or an other transaction agreement, works only if the effort fits its scope, capacity and period. Orders under a multiple-award vehicle ordinarily need fair opportunity or a documented exception.
A noncompetitive authority, such as a follow-on production award under a prototype other transaction (10 U.S.C. 4022(f)), applies only when the prototype participants were competitively selected and the prototype was completed successfully.

UDC recommends that every RAA or Section 229 discussion with a customer include the award route, and an honest check of whether its conditions are met, before anyone talks about the determination.

Mistake 3: Arriving without a transition answer

A Section 229 determination memorandum must name an acquisition pathway and programmed funding to on-ramp the effort within two years. The effort itself must transition within one year of initiation, with a single one-year extension that requires written notice and justification to the congressional defense committees at least 30 days before it takes effect. Those are two separate clocks, and they should not be merged.

The government, not the company, identifies the programmed funding. A company can still make the sponsor's job easier by keeping three items distinct:

The target pathway, for example middle tier rapid prototyping or rapid fielding.
The award instrument, for example a follow-on production other transaction where its conditions are met.
The funding destination: an existing program element or procurement line the effort can join.

Naming a production other transaction does not establish the pathway or the money. Sustainment needs the same forethought. Change 1 extends the waiver to production, fielding and sustainment, but RAA may not fund sustainment for more than two years. A company fielding under RAA should plan the sustainment handoff at the start, not at month 23.

What a sound pitch looks like

The strongest position combines a Service with a specific need or threat, a focused effort sized to a narrow door, procurement or RDT&E funds available for obligation in the current fiscal year, an award route the customer can actually use, and a test and assessment package ready to hand over. Change 1 names human systems integration and system safety in the acquisition approach, and requests carry energy consumption, demand and supportability data where Department guidance calls for it.

Where the customer is a combatant command and the route to award runs through demonstration, Section 873 of the FY2026 NDAA may fit better than RAA. It lets the commander's written determination that a demonstrated capability meets the command's need serve as both the justification for other than competitive procedures and the validated need statement for follow-on acquisition. It expires September 30, 2028.

Public sources

The paper behind this post cites these public documents, among others.

The paper sets the 2019 manual beside Change 1 across seventeen topics in a single table, sets out the statutory limits the manual leaves out, and closes with a contractor's checklist and eight UDC recommendations.

Rapid Acquisition Authority After Change 1

See what is in the paper