00 alt magazine full issue 200304 · 2012-05-03 · july-august 2003; pb 70-03-4 claude m. bolton...

July-August 2003; PB 70-03-4

CLAUDE M. BOLTON JR.Assistant Secretary of the Army

for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology

EDITORIAL BOARDLTG JOHN S. CALDWELL JR.Director, Army Acquisition CorpsLTG STEVEN W. BOUTELLE

Chief Information Officer, G-6LTG RICHARD A. HACK

Deputy Commanding General, AMCMG LAWRENCE R. ADAIR

Assistant DCS, G-1MG LESTER MARTINEZ-LOPEZ

Commanding GeneralU.S. Army Medical Research

and Materiel CommandTINA BALLARD

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy andProcurement, Office of the ASAALT

WIMPY PYBUSDeputy Assistant Secretary for ILS

Office of the ASAALTDR. THOMAS H. KILLION

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Research and Technology

Office of the ASAALTDR. MICHAEL O’CONNOR

Director of R&DU.S. Army Corps of EngineersDONALD DAMSTETTER

Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Plans, Programs and Resources

Office of the ASAALTMICHAEL I. RODDIN

Executive Secretary, Editorial Board

EDITORIAL STAFFMICHAEL I. RODDIN

Editor-In-ChiefDEBBIE FISCHER-BELOUS

Executive EditorCYNTHIA D. HERMES

Managing EditorMEG WILLIAMSContract Support

To contact the Editorial Office call (703) 805-1034/1035/1038/1007 or DSN 655-1034/1035/1038/1007. Articles should be sub-mitted to: DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, ARMY ALT, 9900 BELVOIRRD, SUITE 101, FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-5567. Our fax number is(703) 805-4218. E-mail: [email protected].

Transforming Depots, Arsenals, And The Industrial BaseGEN Paul J. Kern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Transforming The Army’s AmmunitionCOL Jyuji D. Hewitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Future Of The Army’s Government-Owned Industrial BaseFrederick L. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

AMC And The AAE Partner To Implement Performance-Based Logistics

Michael D. Connor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Lean Manufacturing

Darlene Paukei, Deidre Eaton, Robert Katulka,Dr. Carol Sedlacek, and José Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Recapitalization And Army Transformation: The RoleOf Depots, Arsenals, And The National Maintenance Program

Dan McDavid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14ARDEC: Providing Decisive Lethality For The Army’sGo-To-War Weapons

Michael P. Devine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16PATRIOT IDSS Program Technology At RedstoneArsenal Supports Operation Iraqi Freedom

CPT James O. McLinnaham and Dr. Dennis G. Beeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Acquisition Excellence: Providing CriticalOperational Capabilities To The Warfighter

LTC Anthony W. Potts, Richard M. Szcepanski, and Alvin A. Abejon . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Taming The Data Monster

John W. Knapp and Susan Newell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

The staff of Army AL&T magazine extends a special thanks to John T. Kelly, ArmyAcquisition Support Center, for his role as Contributing Editor to this issue.

Acquisition

Logistics

Technology

Professional Publication of the AL&T Communityhttp://asc.rdaisa.army.mil/

FEATURES

COVER

DEPARTMENTS

Army AL&T (ISSN 0892-8657) is published bimonthly by theOASAALT. Articles reflect views of the authors and not necessar-ily official opinion of the Department of the Army. The purposeis to instruct members of the Army acquisition workforce rela-tive to AL&T processes, procedures, techniques, and manage-ment philosophy and to disseminate other information perti-nent to their professional development. Private subscriptionsand rates are available from the Superintendent of Documents,U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 or (202)512-1800. Periodicals official postage paid at Fort Belvoir, VA,and additional post offices. POSTMASTER: Send addresschanges to DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, ARMY ALT, 9900BELVOIR RD, SUITE 101, FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060-5567. Articlesmay be reprinted if credit is given to Army AL&T and the author.Unless specifically requested, photo credits are not given.Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

This medium is approved for official dissemination of materialdesigned to keep individuals within the Army knowledgeable of cur-rent and emerging developments within their areas of expertise forthe purpose of enhancing their professional development.

By order of the Secretary of the ArmyPETER J. SCHOOMAKER

General, United States ArmyChief of Staff

Official:

JOEL B. HUDSONAdministrative Assistant to the

Secretary of the Army0319708

The Army is improving the use and efficiency of its industrial base (arsenals,maintenance depots, and ammunition plants) where continued ownership isnecessary for operational readiness and national security.

Career Development Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27News Briefs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39ASC Launches New Web site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40New Army AL&T Editor-In-Chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Writer’s Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

July-Aug Contentpage.qxd 8/21/2003 12:11 PM Page 1

2 Army AL&T July-August 2003

IntroductionThe U.S. Army is in the midst of an

unprecedented transformation. TheArmy’s Objective Force will provide theJoint Force Commander a military thatis more responsive, deployable, agile,versatile, lethal, survivable, and sus-tainable. To meet the Army’s challenge,DOD’s entire logistical system—fromthe factory to the foxhole—must betransformed. This transformation mustinclude the operations of the Army’sorganic industrial base and its relation-ship to private industry, both essentialelements of the whole defense manu-facturing capacity on which ourNation’s warfighters depend.

Transformation of logistics fromthe factory to the foxhole makes a nicebumper sticker. But if we are reallyserious about transformation, we mustdevelop a common understanding ofthe problem. Many people in our fieldlogistics system and many in the pri-vate sector understand the details oftheir particular industry. But few peo-ple are familiar with our governmentindustrial base facilities such asdepots, arsenals, and ammunitionplants. True transformation requires aholistic approach, as the expressionfactory to foxhole implies. Reducingthe logistical footprint of our deployedforces requires an agile industrial baseto make up for what we ask our sol-diers to leave behind. Failure to investin our industrial base to ultimatelymake it more agile creates unaccept-able risk to forward-deployed soldierson the battlefield.

YesterdayAfter the Revolutionary War,

Alexander Hamilton advocated thedevelopment of a domestic armamentbase. Because the arms industry wasvery much in its infancy, the new gov-ernment built public ordnance facili-ties to help satisfy its need for warmateriel. Congress supported the pub-lic manufacture of arms and powder byappropriating funds for the establish-ment of federal arsenals, armories,depots, laboratories, and magazines sothe United States would become inde-pendent of foreign nations for essentialmilitary stores. In 1794, our first arse-nal was established in Springfield, MA.The arsenal served the Nation until itsdeactivation in 1968.

There has always been a precari-ous balance between the public andthe private sector. During the Revolu-tionary War, we relied almost entirelyon private and domestic sources toarm our troops. This relationship oftenproduced unsatisfactory results in bothquantity and quality of deliveries. Thisprompted President Washington to askCongress to approve a bill establishingseveral permanent arsenals to free therepublic from dependence on unreli-able private sources. However, com-plete independence from contractorsproved both infeasible and undesir-able. Arsenals also allowed the govern-ment to maintain a peacetime reposi-tory for ordnance knowledge thatcould be leveraged by the private sec-tor to expand production during war.

Connected to this relationship andalso central to the arsenals’ experience

has been the cyclical nature of theNation’s wars resulting in a boom-and-bust cycle for the arsenals. Privateindustry was the source for all artillery,gunpowder, and much of the smallarms produced during the Civil War.After the Civil War, the Nation reducedits capabilities and relied even more onprivate industry. Unfortunately, privateindustry did not maintain significantinvestments in production capacity forArmy munitions because of limiteddemand and profit. This further illus-trates the cyclical nature of defensemanufacturing. Fortunately, our arse-nals maintained the expertise neededby both government and privatedefense production in wartime. Thisknowledge was invaluable as theNation mobilized for the globalrequirements of total war during WorldWar II.

As we entered the Korean and Viet-nam Wars, we had an industrial basedesigned to support global operations.Fortunately, the nature and scale ofthese wars paled in comparison toWorld War II. The national strategyrelied more on strategic weapons thanconventional forces to meet the Sovietchallenge. Economic concernsprompted a long trend toward privatiza-tion of defense facilities. Many arsenalsand defense activities shut down whileothers simply concentrated on researchand development. Arsenals began com-peting with private industry for work.The Nation’s degree of industrial sophis-tication, defense budgets, and thepeacetime availability of private profitin arms manufacture have all played a

TRANSFORMING DEPOTS, ARSENALS,AND

THE INDUSTRIAL BASEGEN Paul J. Kern

Kern Lead 2-3.qxd 8/4/2003 9:31 AM Page 1

role in determining how successful thearsenals could be as repositories of theproduction know-how essential for pri-vate defense producers. These con-straints often placed frustrating limitson the arsenals as partners withdefense-industry counterparts.

TodayToday we look at the industrial base

as a mix of commercial and govern-ment industrial-base capabilities. TheArmy relies on the commercial indus-trial base to meet materiel require-ments to the maximum extent practica-ble. But we focus our organic govern-ment capabilities to maintain criticalindustrial technologies and to mitigaterisk associated with the lack or poten-tial loss of commercial capabilities.

These new conditions require theArmy to size and work our organiccapabilities to support peacetime andwartime requirements. The ArmyMateriel Command (AMC) must main-tain the government’s facilities in mod-ern operating condition to ensure qual-ity and enhance productivity whileencouraging public-private partner-ships to defray the cost of ownershipfor those commercial capabilities. Withsuch a reliance on the commercial sec-tor, the Army must be able to monitorand assess the health of the commer-cial industrial base to identify andmanage the potential risks.

The organic government industrialbase consists of the Army-owned arse-nals, maintenance depots, and ammu-nition plant activities. Some could callthis capability the Nation’s insurancepolicy. While acknowledging it mustdivest itself of excess industrial facili-ties, the Army also recognizes that ter-minating an organic government man-ufacturing capability or moving it tothe commercial industrial base mayresult in a capability being lost. Conse-quently, the Army must be judicious inits management of its inherent basebecause re-establishing a lost capabil-ity may be costly, politically and legallyprohibitive, and may take more timethan an emergency situation wouldpermit. Public-private partnershipstake on an increasingly more importantrole in maintaining the organic indus-trial base.

TomorrowAs we look into the future, we rec-

ognize we will continue to balance gov-ernment and private-sector capabilitiesto meet our defense needs. Affordabil-ity will demand that we always try tobalance the costs and risks of ourindustrial-base activities. In the future,we are likely to seek even closer rela-tionships between government andprivate activities. The goal will be tomake the most efficient use of scarceinvestment dollars while also leverag-ing the best characteristics of publicand private-sector capabilities.

AMC realigned the Rock Island, IL,and Watervliet, NY, arsenals under theGround Systems Industrial Enterprise,a single business unit at the ArmyTank-automotive and ArmamentsCommand, to optimize support forground systems across the Current,Interim, and Objective Forces. TheArmy has also aggressively pursued theArmament Retooling and Manufactur-ing Support Program to reduce the costof Army-owned ammunition produc-tion facilities, while maintaining neces-sary production equipment and askilled workforce. This initiative isbased on the proven best practices ofpublic-private partnerships success-fully demonstrated at the state andcounty level. The Arsenal Support Pro-gram Initiative is a major moderniza-tion effort modeled after the provensuccess of the Armament Retoolingand Manufacturing Support Programwith the ammunition industrial basefor our government arsenals. Under theArsenal Support Program, public-private partnerships generate revenueto modernize and consolidate corecompetencies. Army depots are desig-nated as Centers of Industrial andTechnical Excellence and maintain corecapabilities in the types of equipmentoverhauled, rebuilt, modified,upgraded, or repaired at their respec-tive facilities.

The Army’s organic industrial basetoday consists of facilities that produceammunition, store munitions, manu-facture components, and maintainequipment. The facilities, locatedthroughout CONUS, consist ofgovernment-owned, government-operated and government-owned,contractor-operated facilities.

At both government and contractorammunition facilities, the Army pro-duces, loads, assembles, and packs thevarious calibers of conventionalammunition such as small arms, mor-tar, and tank rounds used by all themilitary services. The government-operated munitions centers store anddistribute ammunition rounds, bombs,and missiles. The two government-operated manufacturing arsenals pro-duce items such as gun tubes, gunmounts, and other armament compo-nents for the Army, Navy, MarineCorps, and Foreign Military Sales.Finally, the five government-operatedmaintenance depots repair, overhaul,upgrade, and maintain helicopters;missiles; combat vehicles; tactical vehi-cles; and communication and elec-tronic equipment for all services andother countries.

ConclusionArmy leadership has been com-

mitted to improving the use and effi-ciency of the defense industrial basewhere continued ownership is neces-sary for operational readiness andnational security. The Army is com-mitted to establishing a more effectiveand efficient depot-level operation,enhancing productivity of its corecapabilities, and integrating innovativebusiness processes while ensuring thebest sustainment capability to thewarfighter to meet operational readi-ness. The Army is completely com-mitted to the readiness of the war-fighter and providing the requiredmateriel at competitive prices, not justreducing cost and infrastructure.

GEN PAUL J. KERN is the Com-manding General, Army MaterielCommand. He has a bachelor’sdegree from the U.S. MilitaryAcademy at West Point, master’sdegrees in both mechanical andcivil engineering from the Univer-sity of Michigan, and completed aSenior Service College Fellowshipat Harvard University.

July-August 2003 Army AL&T 3

Kern Lead 2-3.qxd 8/4/2003 9:31 AM Page 2


IntroductionNear the middle of the United

States, in a secluded area in South-eastern Oklahoma, is one of DOD’spremier strategic assets—McAlesterArmy Ammunition Plant (MCAAP).MCAAP is leading the way in ammu-nition life-cycle operations. Fromammunition production throughdemilitarization, MCAAP performs amyriad of ammunition projects whileapplying a broad spectrum of tech-nologies. The plant uses a wide rangeof techniques—from “dumb-bomb”production to cutting-edge precisionmunitions production. More than anindustrial complex, MCAAP providesstrategic ammunition logistical sup-port to warfighters.

With a passion to develop andmaintain the latest manufacturingtechniques, MCAAP works with pri-vate businesses such as Boeing,

Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics,PB/Nammo Demil LLC, Austin Pow-der Co., Pendulum Management Co.LLC, Raytheon, World Wide DemilLLC, and ML Marketing. Partneringwith these businesses also allowsMCAAP to maintain use of its facili-ties and remain current in the latestproduction techniques.

Covering almost 45,000 acres, theplant has the largest ammunitionstorage capacity in the United States,with more than 2,400 explosive andcomponent storage facilities covering7 million square feet. MCAAP is oneof the first installations called uponto load and ship ammunition duringa contingency. MCAAP’s ability tomeet national requirements of ship-ping 400 military vans a day for 30days was greatly improved after com-pletion of several strategic mobilityprograms costing $35 million.

MCAAP is able to accomplish itsstrategic responsibility because of itshighly trained and motivated work-force, established emergency loadingand shipping procedures, criticalequipment maintained at high-readiness rates, and a well-maintained ammunition stockpile.

About The PlantMcAlester’s leadership in apply-

ing modern manufacturing tech-niques makes it America’s flagshipammunition plant, one of the fewgovernment-owned, government-operated (GOGO) facilities in theUnited States. As a GOGO facility,McAlester provides a flexible andexperienced workforce capable ofresponding to the immediate needsof warfighters. MCAAP is consideredthe premier bomb-loading facility forDOD.

At MCAAP’s subordinate facility,the Red River Munitions Center(RRMC) in Texarkana, TX, skilledtechnicians perform the mainte-nance and fabrication of training sys-tems for a variety of missiles, includ-ing the Maverick and Stinger. Inaddition, RRMC also renovates high-explosive projectiles, 2.75- and 3.5-inch rockets, mortars, grenades, andother small-caliber munitions.

TRANSFORMINGTHE ARMY’S

AMMUNITIONCOL Jyuji D. Hewitt

MCAAP is able to accomplish its strategicresponsibility because of its highly trained andmotivated workforce, established emergencyloading and shipping procedures, critical equipment maintained at high-readiness rates, anda well-maintained ammunition stockpile.

Hewitt 4-6.qxd 8/4/2003 9:35 AM Page 1


ProductionMCAAP mixes explosives for all

types of bombs including conven-tional explosives such as Tritonal (amix of TNT and aluminum powder)and H6 as well as the less sensitiveplastic-bonded explosive. During theproduction process, the plant canalso apply a thermal coating to thethermal arc spray. This thermal coat-ing is designed to delay explosion inthe event of a fire, a safety featurethat emphasizes protecting theNavy’s ammunition handlers.

MCAAP’s production lines canload and assemble explosive bombsas well as inert bombs, which can beloaded with concrete or Filler E, amixture used to simulate explosive-loaded munitions. Other production-line work includes loading assembledwarheads for Harpoon missiles; load-ing, packing, and shipping propellingcharges for naval munitions; disas-sembly and demilitarization of Mav-erick missiles; and integration of theJoint Stand Off Weapon and HighSpeed Anti-Radiation Missiles.

Behind the activity of the pro-duction line is the production plan-ning office that is responsible foreach project, from job estimate to itscompletion. Production planning’sjob begins with an estimate thatincludes costs of labor and consum-able supplies. After funding isreceived, office personnel areinvolved in technical reviews toensure that the product is built tocustomer specifications. They alsowrite standard operating proceduresfor item production and take care ofmovement of all materials to andfrom the production lines.

The plant produces bombs thatare either cast-filled or melt-poured.Cast fill is a process by which theplastic-bonded explosive is injectedinto bombs from giant mixing bowls.Melt pour is achieved by pouring liq-uid explosive into the bomb body.

Both processes require strict qualitycontrol and attention to safety.

When the bombs are completed,they must be prepared for shipment.MCAAP produces its own metal andwooden pallets to specification forshipping. The current dunnage millfacilities have 17,000 square feet andan outload capability of 92,000 boardfeet per day. Dunnage is necessary toblock and brace munitions to preventmovement during shipment.

OperationsMCAAP has a number of facilities

that allow the plant to perform oper-ations associated with most types ofammunition. These operationsinclude production, modification,conversion, maintenance, disassem-bly, and demilitarization. A multipur-pose maintenance facility is used torenovate anything from 105mm car-tridges for the Army to 5-inch projec-tiles for the Navy.

MCAAP is implementing “leanthinking” throughout its processes.The basic tenet of the lean process isto eliminate “nonvalue” activitiesincluding wasted motion, excesspaperwork, inventory, and setuptimes. By fully implementing leanthinking, MCAAP can reduce waste-ful processes, thus saving moneyand hastening response time towarfighters.

MCAAP has two primary mis-sions: ammunition production andammunition logistics. Currently, 36percent of MCAAP’s workforce isinvolved in producing and renovatingmunitions, while 28 percent of theworkforce is engaged in ammunitionstorage and receiving operations.Power projection and storage capa-bilities are directly tied to the instal-lation’s logistics operations. MCAAP’spower-projection mission is to rap-idly load and ship ammunitionstocks to warfighters. The combina-tion of ammunition production with

ammunition logistics provides thestrength of power projection andmakes MCAAP a vital DOD asset.

EnvironmentThe plant is also a steward for

our Nation’s environment. Under anenvironmentally friendly programdeveloped in conjunction with theJoint Munitions Command at RockIsland, IL, and the Army Research,Development and Engineering Cen-ter at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, MCAAPis reusing explosives melted out ofobsolete munitions. Instead of burn-ing these explosives, MCAAP hasdesigned a system that allows it torecycle quality TNT flakes, withinmilitary specifications, that can bereused in new munitions. Based onthe projected quantity of TNT thatwas needed to support munitionrequirements 3 years ago, an eco-nomic analysis determined thatreclaiming TNT melted out of obso-lete munitions versus reactivating anold Army facility to manufacture newTNT would save $50.8 million over a5-year period.

MCAAP is implementing “lean thinking”throughout its

processes. The basic tenet of the lean

process is to eliminate “nonvalue”

activities including wasted motion,

excess paperwork,inventory, and setup

times.



MCAAP also performs demoli-tion of unserviceable and obsoletemunitions, working with the DefenseAmmunition Center (DAC) and lead-ing industrial companies to developsafer and more efficient methods ofdemilitarization to reuse, recover, orrecycle valuable resources. In fact,MCAAP’s ratio of environmentallypreferred processes to reclaim, recy-cle, reuse, or renovate (R4) versusopen burn/open detonation(OB/OD) is at 75 percent for R4 and25 percent for OB/OD.

One example is MCAAP’s on-going recovery of Tritinol from 750-pound bombs and old TNT from 8-inch howitzer shells that will beused to produce new bombs. MCAAPhas invested more than $83 millionsince 1996 on mission improvementssuch as TNT recovery systems.

A second program, scheduled tobegin in 2004, involves using a cryo-fracture process to demilitarize obso-lete munitions. The cryofractureprocess in general involves the freez-ing of munitions in liquid nitrogenand eventually transporting to a fur-

nace for burning. The DAC, GeneralAtomics, and MCAAP partnered todesign and build this fully automatedfacility that will provide an environ-mentally friendly method to decreasethe stockpile of obsolete munitions.This process is aligned with the JointMunitions Center’s goal to increaseuse of new technology to rid DOD ofunusable and obsolete munitions inan environmentally friendly manner.

StrategyThe strategic role MCAAP plays

in the Army’s joint mission is bestdemonstrated by its support of thewar in Iraq and the global war on ter-rorism. Since the terrorist attacks ofSeptember 11, 2001, MCAAP hasgrown from 850 employees to almost1,200. In addition, the number ofproduction-line workers has tripled.In fact, MCAAP, which has not used anight shift since the Vietnam War, isnow working multiple shifts on anextended workweek. Logistics opera-tions have seen a comparableincrease in workload. The chartbelow compares shipping and receiv-

ing figures in two categories: FY01/02and the first 6 months of FY02 versusthe first 6 months of FY03.

ConclusionWith its world-class shipping and

receiving operations and its flexibleand responsive workforce, MCAAPlives up to its reputation as the pre-mier bomb-making facility in DOD.In summary, McAlester Army Ammu-nition Plant’s technology-drivencradle-to-grave munitions manage-ment is proof positive that MCAAP ison the cutting edge in joint muni-tions production and renovation. Itsstrategic power projection, logisticsoperations, and environmentallyfriendly demilitarization strengthenits position. More importantly, as aresponsive and versatile GOGOinstallation, MCAAP is prepared torespond to any crisis at any time as amajor strategic player in our Nation’soverarching defense strategy.

COL JYUJI D. HEWITT is theCommander, McAlester ArmyAmmunition Plant. He has aB.S. in chemistry from the Uni-versity of Maine-Orono, an M.S.in systems management fromthe Florida Institute of Tech-nology, an M.S. in physics(nuclear) from the University ofNew Hampshire, and an M.S.in strategic studies from theU.S. Army War College.

Timeline Shipping(Short Tons)

PercentageIncrease or

Decrease

Receiving(Short Tons)

PercentageIncrease or

Decrease

FY 01/02 FY01 FY0256,796 60,523

6.60% increase FY01 FY0242,541 55,510

30.5% increase

First 6 months ofFY02 versusFirst 6 months ofFY03

FY02 FY0327,038 48,800

80.5% increase FY02 FY0324,854 41,025

65.1% increase

The first row shows a significant increase in shipping and receiving for FY02 (which incorpo-rates post-September 11, 2001, activity) as compared to the previous FY. The second row shows amore dramatic increase as the global war on terrorism heated up with combat action inAfghanistan and Iraq.



IntroductionAsk 10 people what they think the

Army should do with its government-owned industrial base in the future andyou will probably get 10 differentanswers. Some will argue that it is avaluable national treasure with criticalcapabilities of which the Army wouldbe foolish to divest. Some will arguethat it is an antiquated albatross with asignificant amount of unused capacity,high rates, an unwillingness to trans-form itself, and should be divested ofas quickly as possible. Others believethe answer lies somewhere betweenthese two extremes.

With the option to close many ofits installations available to DOD in2005, the Army must soon make a deci-sion on this controversial issue. If theArmy believes its government-ownedindustrial base is too antiquated, toocostly, and incapable of transforma-tion, it will have the opportunity tooffer much of it to the Secretary ofDefense as base closure candidates.This avenue creates an irreversibledecision that the Army should onlymake if it is sure it will never need con-trol of those capabilities again.

To help assess this situation, theArmy contracted with the RAND Corp.to study the government-ownedindustrial base and provide independ-ent recommendations on what to dowith it. RAND’s findings indicate thegovernment-owned industrial basedoes provide some critical capabilities,but the current statutory and regula-tory impediments create an environ-ment that makes it nearly impossiblefor these installations to operate effi-ciently. Their recommendation is toeither privatize the Army’s manufac-turing arsenals or form a Federal Gov-ernment Corporation (FGC) to managethem. By removing the arsenals fromDOD, they would be free to pursue

additional workload and operate morelike a business.

Privatizing the arsenals must begiven serious thought, for once thataction occurs, they are gone forever,including the Army’s only foundry andonly large caliber gun tube manufac-turing capability. Even though theoption of an FGC retains governmentownership of the arsenals, it removesthem from the direct control of theArmy. And, as RAND admits, gainingcongressional approval to do so maypresent an uphill battle and, even ifsuccessful, would likely take as manyas 7 years to implement.

So what is the answer? In a per-fect world, the Army would retain itsgovernment-owned industrial base andtransform it into an efficient and effec-tive business unit. This new businessunit would reduce the governmentinfrastructure, increase partnershipswith both private industry and the fieldArmy, significantly increase the use ofcapacity, and lower labor rates to alevel comparable with industry. Fur-thermore, this would all be possiblewithout the need for subsidized funds.Impossible, you think? Think again,and then say hello to the U.S. ArmyTank-automotive and ArmamentsCommand (TACOM) Ground SystemsIndustrial Enterprise (GSIE).

BackgroundThe GSIE was formed on Oct. 10,

2002, merging the capabilities of sixArmy facilities into a single Enter-prise—Anniston Army Depot inAlabama, the Lima Army Tank Plant inOhio, Red River Army Depot in Texas,Rock Island Arsenal in Illinois, SierraArmy Depot in California, and Water-vliet Arsenal in New York. GSIE was thebrainchild of MG N. Ross ThompsonIII, Commanding General of TACOM,and MG Wade H. McManus Jr., Com-

manding General of the then Opera-tions Support Command (now the JointMunitions Command). Both generalofficers understood the benefits ofleveraging the capabilities of thesevaluable complexes.

The intent of GSIE is to leverage thegovernment-owned ground systemsindustrial base in such a way as to cre-ate a complementary and synergisticmix of manufacturing, maintenance,storage, and outloading capabilities.Imagine the potential of combining 32million square feet of manufacturingand repair space, 36,000 acres of high-desert storage, a 7,168-foot runway,approximately 4,500 pieces of industrialplant equipment, and 481 of the latestComputer Numeric Code (CNC)machine tools, along with 5,600 dedi-cated employees. These highly skilledworkers include more than 300 engi-neers, 350 welders, and 500 machinists,many of whom are deployed aroundthe world at any point in time. Imagineif the installations that possess thesecapabilities would work togetherinstead of competing against eachother, sharing workload and acting asambassadors for one another. Andimagine if they were free from bureau-cracy in their business processes,reducing their rates so that they arecomparable with private industry with-out the need for subsidies. The goal ofGSIE is to make this a reality withoutthe Army having to lose control of thisvaluable resource.

The truth of the situation, though,is that these installations are currentlygoverned by a substantial amount oflegislation and government bureau-cracy. Eleven statutes affect work beingdone at Army industrial installations,most of which were introduced byindividual members of Congress forparticular reasons and to benefit par-ticular sites. While these statutes are

THE FUTURE OF THE ARMY’SGOVERNMENT-OWNED

INDUSTRIAL BASEFrederick L. Smith

Frederick Smith 7-8.qxd 8/4/2003 9:37 AM Page 1


well-intended, they tend to cause con-fusion and unneeded consternationabout exactly what work can andshould be performed at which installa-tions and under which law. To helpsimplify this situation, GSIE formallysubmitted, as one of its first initiatives,draft legislation that clarifies several ofthe most-used statutes in questionwhile continuing to meet their intent.This single piece of legislation comple-ments and reinforces the currentstatutes to pave the way for new andinnovative strategies for increasingworkload at the government-ownedinstallations.

Legislative reform is simply thefirst step in creating an efficient indus-trial enterprise. Another significantimpediment that must be addressed isthe current financial system. As anindustrially funded organization, GSIEfacilities must recapture all costs intheir rates, even though many of thesecosts have nothing to do with theactual cost of the product. For exam-ple, certain customers are paying theso-called fully burdened rate at oneinstallation so that the Army can payfor things such as environment-relatedissues at other installations. The phrase“put it in your rates” has become alltoo common and creates financialhavoc at GSIE installations. The morethese extraneous costs are included inthe rates, the higher the rates climb.The higher they climb, the less work-load that develops. This financial deathspiral must be reversed for the Army toretain its government-owned industrialcapabilities. To do so, GSIE installa-tions must be able to offer differentrate structures and firm-fixed-pricecontracts to certain customers whenthe situation permits.

GSIE ApproachGSIE’s plan of action encompasses

four objectives—continually improvesupport to soldiers, reduce infrastruc-ture, increase efficiency, and increaseworkload.

Continually Improve Support ToSoldiers. As the U.S. Army MaterielCommand (AMC) assumes more of thefield Army responsibilities, GSIE mustprovide a closer link between its instal-lations and the Army’s posts, camps,and stations. The transfer of the opera-tional control of the supply and main-tenance mission of the Fort KnoxDirector of Logistics affords TACOM a

chance to showcase its immense talentto the field Army. By proving their abil-ity to bring value-added assets to helpthe field, the TACOM workforce is lead-ing the way in logistics transformation.

Reduce Infrastructure. Nearlyeveryone acknowledges the existenceof excess infrastructure across theindustrial base, and reducing theunneeded portion of the infrastructureis a major GSIE initiative. The questionis how much to reduce and how to goabout it. Under GSIE, the requirementfor the government-owned footprintwill be reduced around the installa-tion’s critical capabilities, thereby free-ing up space for partnering or tenantuse. A footprint reduction has just beencompleted at Watervliet Arsenal, result-ing in 290,000 square feet of excessspace in three buildings, along with 527machines. This space is now availableto tenants who generate revenue thatoffsets costs to the Army.

Increase Efficiency. Increasing theefficiency of the retained capabilities isa never-ending journey with GSIE.GSIE installations are currently pullingfrom a kit bag of efficiency initiatives totailor a package that is best suited fortheir operations. One of the prominentefficiency initiatives being aggressivelyimplemented within GSIE installationsis the leaning of our operations. Leanmanufacturing is the process of reduc-ing waste and streamlining manufac-turing processes to better use resources(equipment, inventory, and labor) in anorganization. The lean philosophy is tocontinually improve processes by elim-inating non-value-added waste fromthe system. Using tools such as valuestream mapping, which refinesprocesses, and rapid improvementevents, which focus on rapid improve-ments in a specific work area, GSIE’sgoal is to increase the efficiency ofselected maintenance and manufactur-ing lines by 10 percent.

Increase Workload. Even with infra-structure reduction and increased effi-ciencies, it is important for the GSIE togenerate new workload for the installa-tions. While a significant increase forcannon assembly and gun mountorders is not likely, there are require-ments for the capabilities that makethese items. A major strategy for GSIEis to tap into new and innovative workthat matches with these critical capa-bilities. That work might come fromother services, the field Army, foreign

military sales, or private industry. It isimportant to note that GSIE does notintend to compete with private indus-try. Rather, the intent is to providepotential industry partners withanother source for hard-to-get items,or simply to offer them the capabilitiesthat can make them more competitivein the global marketplace.

GSIE OversightA GSIE Leadership Council consist-

ing of the installation commanders andGSIE corporate directors is managingthe accomplishment of these objec-tives. Their responsibilities are toapprove major workload assignments,capital expenditures, process improve-ments, and transformation initiativesacross the enterprise.

A GSIE Corporate Board of Direc-tors, consisting of major customerssuch as representatives from selectedProgram Executive Offices, the U.S.Army Forces Command, private indus-try, and academia, oversees the GSIE.The board’s responsibilities are toreview and approve major strategic andresource decisions for the enterprise,as well as ensure an integrated cus-tomer and industry partner interface.

ConclusionAll of these initiatives are designed

to offer the U.S. Army an efficient andeffective alternative to full privatizationor an FGC. By implementing the leg-islative and financial changes, improv-ing support to customers, reducinginfrastructure, increasing efficiencies,and attracting new workload, GSIE canachieve the benefits of privatizationwithout having to relinquish control ofthe assets. GSIE can, and will, continu-ously increase support to soldiers whilereducing the enterprise rate to a levelcomparable with industry without theneed for subsidies.

FREDERICK L. SMITH is theAssociate Deputy, TACOM GSIE.An expert in strategic manage-ment processes and member of theArmy Acquisition Corps, Smithhas 28 years of industrial baseexperience, has facilitated severalpublic and private partnerships,and has led numerous organiza-tional redesigns.

Frederick Smith 7-8.qxd 8/4/2003 9:37 AM Page 2


IntroductionThe Army Materiel Command’s

(AMC) traditional role is to provide justabout everything the warfighter needsto survive in battle and other opera-tions around the world. The phrase “if asoldier shoots it, drives it, flies it, oreats it, AMC provides it,” permeates thehallways of HQ AMC and its MajorSubordinate Commands (MSCs). FromAMC’s establishment in 1962 until lastyear’s completion of the realignment ofArmy program executive officers(PEOs) and program managers (PMs)under the Assistant Secretary of theArmy for Acquisition, Logistics andTechnology (ASAALT)/Army Acquisi-tion Executive (AAE), AMC staff hasdecreased in size while maintaining itscore missions of sustaining and sup-porting the Army.

AMC went through turbulent timesin the mid-1990s as the Army down-sized, but remained relatively robustacross commodity and some functionallines. In the 21st century, Army trans-formation and other initiatives underDOD’s Future Logistics Enterprise dic-tate that AMC solidify its role in thetransforming Army and change to bet-ter support its ultimate customer—thewarfighter.

There is no greater challenge thanadapting to a new way of planning,overseeing, and executing logistics—that is what performance-based logis-tics (PBL) requires. Since last year’smemoranda from the Under Secretaryof Defense for Acquisition, Technology,and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) and theASAALT directing the implementationof PBL, stakeholders have surfaced

many immediate and far-reachingchallenges and barriers to successfulPBL implementation. Those thatdirectly and jointly impact the AAE andAMC include proliferation of supportstrategies and structures; performance-based agreement (PBA) oversight, man-agement, and reporting framework;funding constraints; data collectionand evaluation; and core capabilitiesand infrastructure impacts.

AMC and its MSCs still provideprogrammatic advice and assistance toPMs. The major challenge to the AAEand AMC, however, remains how tointegrate the required “vertical” sup-port to the PEOs and PMs and theirweapon systems with the common or“horizontal” support AMC traditionallyprovides the Army—those supportarrangements that stretch acrossweapon systems and commodities.This is graphically portrayed in Figure 1. The Army Chief of Staff’sfocus on the three logistics enablers ofenhanced deployment, reduced com-bat support and combat service sup-port footprint, and reduced logisticscosts, demonstrates that the mainobjective of the AAE and AMC remainseffective support to the warfighter. Toaccomplish this, many value-added ini-tiatives are well underway at AMC.

Value-Added InitiativesLast fall, AMC established a PBL

Integrated Process Team (IPT) toinclude the MSCs and other subordi-nate agencies as well as ASAALT. TheIPT immediately began finalizing itscharter after AMC Commander GENPaul J. Kern approved an initial frame-

work for implementing PBL withinAMC and signed an ImplementationMemorandum. The IPT’s overarchingmission remains to influence Army PBLimplementation and develop AMCguidance and procedures along withinstitutionalizing them. Specifically, theIPT continues to develop and refinestrategies for implementing PBL withinAMC and managing PBAs. Thisincludes the following mission-essential tasks:

• Identify AMC goals andobjectives.

• Develop an AMC position on PBLimplementation within AMC and theArmy.

• Develop an internal structure tomanage PBAs.

• Develop and provide guidance tothe command.

• Develop a plan to market AMC’scapabilities and value-added initiatives.

AMC plans an integrated logisticsenterprise approach to support PBLimplementation within the Army. Thisapproach integrates economic andbusiness processes for PEO, PM, andsustainment communities and empha-sizes the use of partnerships. This ap-proach also leverages the expertise ofMSCs, structures required matrix sup-port, and exploits AMC’s newly estab-lished Research, Development andEngineering Command (RDECOM)along with other subordinate organi-zations and agencies. It also ensuresthat PBL initiatives are in concert withlean thinking, logistics transformationand, in the end, adds value to providing

AMC AND THE AAEPARTNER TO IMPLEMENT

PERFORMANCE-BASEDLOGISTICS

Michael D. Connor

PBL Article-Michael Connor9-11.qxd 8/4/2003 9:44 AM Page 1


required support to the warfighter. Assuch, AMC is developing integrated,economically and operationally feasi-ble PBL strategies from a total Armyperspective in concert with the AAE. Itwill continue to provide matrix sup-port to assist PMs in developing viablePBL strategies compliant with Army-specified boundaries, considerations,and decision criteria such as:

• Existing statutes, regulations, andArmy warfighting doctrine.

• Seamless integration into finan-cial and logistics business systemswhile maintaining total asset visibility,using distribution hubs and StandardArmy Management Information Sys-tems and remaining transparent to theuser.

• Consideration of the sunk costs ofmaintaining organic logistics infra-structure that cannot be downsized or disposed of without enablinglegislation.

• Independent validation ofbusiness-case analysis.

AMC intends to remain an activeparticipant in the coordination of con-cepts, doctrines, and policy initiativesin implementing PBL within the Army.AMC considers PBL an initiative thatboth energizes and synchronizes inter-nal and external logistics communitiesof excellence for the betterment of theArmy. PEOs and PMs are responsible

for the total life-cycle systems manage-ment of their programs. AMC retains avital role in supporting the PEOs andPMs while ensuring that organic logis-tics systems and the sustaining baseremain robust and flexible enough tobe competitive and viable. Other value-added capabilities that AMC providesPEOs, PMs, and warfighters include thefollowing:

• In-house contracting expertise.• Institutional knowledge.• RDECOM capabilities.• In-house industrial facilities.• U.S. Army Logistics Support

Activity database capability.• Experienced field service sup-

port expertise (e.g., logistics supportelement).

• Life-cycle managementexperience.

• Commodity managementexperience.

• Equipment distribution anddelivery.

• Spares management.

ImplementationHow does AMC plan to task organ-

ize for PBL while remembering thatintegration of “lean and mean” logisticsenterprises remains the key objective?There are three major PBL domainsthat require AMC’s participation—planning, oversight and approval, andexecution. Each is addressed below.

PlanningAMC provides matrix support to

the AAE’s PEOs and PMs under PBL.The key difference under PBL imple-mentation, however, will be morefocused and integrated participationon IPTs at the integration IPT (IIPT),supportability IPT (SIPT), or workingIPT (WIPT) level. Actions taken byAMC and AAE IIPT members at thebeginning of the PBL process wouldinclude requirements development,cost estimation, alternative evalua-tions, logistics management, cost-performance trade-offs, and PBL strat-egy development. Members shall alsoassist the PM in development of theWIPT structure. AMC representatives,most likely from the MSCs, will sit onthe SIPT where one key action will beto provide PBA development assis-tance. Along with any other roles andresponsibilities as directed by the PMand as outlined in DOD’s IPT Guide, anobjective of all IPTs is to elevate issuesto a higher level in a timely manner.This is where and how AMC Headquar-ters will participate in the oversightand approval process.

Oversight And ApprovalParticipation in the PBL and PBA

oversight and approval process inher-ently involves looking at regulatory,statutory, and resource implications forAMC and the Army in general. Figure 2shows the Army’s PBA staffing and

Figure 1.

WEA

PO

N S

YST

EM S

PEC

IFIC

SU

PP

OR

T

COMMON SUPPORT ACROSS WEAPON SYSTEMS



approval flow for an organic organiza-tion serving as the product supportintegrator (PSI). Key ancillary involve-ment by HQ AMC or its MSCs includesvalidating the economic and business-case analysis required before promul-gating any PBA between the PM and aPSI or product support provider (PSP).It also includes eventually being a PBAsignatory along with the PM. But whatabout the key tenets of PBL that wereenvisioned when implementation wasdirected by the USD(AT&L) just over ayear ago? The USD(AT&L) stated that,“as a minimum, product support man-agement planning shall address inte-grated supply chains; segmented sup-port by system or subsystem; main-taining a relationship with thewarfighter based on system readiness;selection of best value, long-term prod-uct support providers based on compe-tition, measuring support performancebased on high-level metrics …” Howdo AMC and the AAE plan to worktogether to execute those tenets?

ExecutionAMC, through its MSCs, plans to

market itself as the PSI or PSP of choicedepending on the weapon system anddifferent cost-benefit analyses. The

major focus of the AMC PBL IPT is toprovide and refine PBL guidance andpolicies concerning AMC participationin PBL product support as PSIs andPSPs. MSCs, with the assistance of HQAMC and ASAALT, will continue toresolve those barriers to total PBLimplementation during the life cycle ofa weapon system as identified through-out the acquisition and sustainmentcommunities. The MSCs have identi-fied early on that they need guidancein many areas to successfully completeand accomplish their role as the PSI orthe PSP. Some of their requirementsinclude the following:

• Ground rules (for engaging PEOsand PMs and competing with otherMSCs).

• Multilevel metrics (from existingmetrics).

• Tracking mechanism(s).• Marketing.• Problem resolution.• Training and contracting.• Reporting and monitoring.

ConclusionAs the AAE and his PEOs and PMs

find it necessary to transition to PBLpractices completely, and as more per-

tinent feedback and guidance maketheir way back to HQ AMC and MSCs,AMC will organize and apply best-business practices throughout the com-mand to include integrated logisticsenterprise principles. This, done inconcert with maintaining constant andtwo-way dialog with the ASAALT/AAEalong with the myriad of subordinateAMC organizations, will move AMC for-ward and embrace PBL and its imple-mentation with lean and mean vigor.

MICHAEL D. CONNOR is aSenior Logistics Analyst with Mili-tary Professional Resources Inc.,working in support of the Con-cepts and Requirements AnalysisDivision of AMC G-3 for FutureOperations. He holds a B.S. inmechanical engineering from theU.S. Military Academy and anM.S. in business administrationfrom Boston University.

Figure 2.



IntroductionFacing challenges is certainly not a

new experience for the Army MaterielCommand (AMC) workforce and itsleaders. However, the current environ-ment is one of unprecedented chal-lenge. The requirements of a futureworkforce, the impact of high technol-ogy, the global war on internationalterrorism, Operation Iraqi Freedom,supporting Army transformation, andthe evolving changes in our nationalculture all coalesce to present AMCwith huge challenges. This new envi-ronment calls for new approaches andnew ways of thinking about what we doand, in this, there is potential for greatprogress. Implementing “lean” prac-tices should catapult AMC to the fore-front of innovation and productivity inDOD and permanently establish theorganic base as a vital and essentialcomponent in future industrial basestrategies.

Tobyhanna Army DepotTobyhanna Army Depot (TYAD),

PA, is DOD’s largest facility for therepair, overhaul, test, design, and fabri-cation of communications-electronicssystems and components. Throughoutits 50-year history, TYAD has estab-lished a reputation for quality, produc-tivity, and efficiency. Striving to everimprove that record of performance,TYAD is aggressively incorporating leanthinking into all aspects of depot oper-ations. TYAD’s initial efforts began inJune 2002 with the establishment of afull-time Lean Core Team to leadimplementation of lean conceptsthroughout the organization.

Value-stream analysis on theSidewinder (AIM-9) guidance and con-trol section overhaul line and theAN/TRC-170 communication systemoverhaul line marked the depot’s firstof many lean events. The Sidewinder isthe primary air-to-air missile used bythe Air Force, Navy, and many foreignmilitary allies. The AN/TRC-170 is acritical piece of the tactical communi-cations networks used by the Army, Air

Force, and Marine Corps. Both systemshave shown improvements in materielmovement, flow days, and unit mainte-nance costs as a result of this analysis.

TYAD is also targeting industrialprocesses common to many of theirvalue streams for lean improvement.These include large- and small-component refinishing operations that support most depot projects andnumerous value streams. Lean effortsin these areas will improve every aspectof the depot’s performance of its main-tenance mission.

These activities are the prelude toTYAD’s aggressive plan of action for themonths ahead. TYAD will extend leanthinking to all operations to improveprocesses in every area of its commu-nications-electronics mission. TYADpersonnel are planning further leanevents for a robust list of additionalsystems critical to warfighter readinessthroughout the remainder of FY03.

TACOM’s GSIEThe Army Tank-automotive and

Armaments Command’s (TACOM’s)Ground Systems Industrial Enterprise(GSIE) is incorporating lean manufac-turing in its daily operations. GSIE hasfive installations conducting lean activ-ities: Red River Army Depot, TX; Annis-ton Army Depot, AL; Watervliet Arse-nal, NY; Sierra Army Depot, CA; andRock Island Arsenal, IL.

Red River Army Depot. The RedRiver Army Depot began implementinglean manufacturing in May 2002. InFebruary 2003, the depot completed itsfirst pass of lean implementation onthe Heavy Expanded Mobility TacticalTruck (HEMTT) engine and the SmallEmplacement Excavator (SEE) vehicle.

The HEMTT provides transportcapabilities for resupply of combat vehi-cles and weapon systems. The SEE is anengineering vehicle designed to exca-vate below the ground surface on whichthe machine rests. The vehicle is fittedwith a backhoe and a front-end loader.

Implementing lean concepts inboth projects resulted in the reductionof travel time by placing parts, tools,

and technical data within reach of theindividual (point of use) and a reduc-tion in throughput time by implement-ing standard work and one-piece flow.In addition, SEE lean efforts reducedthe parts inventory, which will allowfuture relocation of assembly-line sup-port operations immediately adjacentto the assembly line and will lead toadditional savings.

Lean implementation has begunon the Cummins 903 engine assemblyoperation used by both the BradleyFighting Vehicle and the MultipleLaunch Rocket System. The projectedsavings from lean implementation onthe HEMTT and 903 engine lines ismore than $2 million. Personnel willaccomplish these savings by convertingbatch engine assembly operations intoassembly lines, resulting in fewer laborrequirements to meet current demand.

Anniston Army Depot. AnnistonArmy Depot began in-house-supportedlean manufacturing efforts in May2002. These efforts were concentratedon the AVDS 1790 reciprocating engineprocess. Improvements to date includeproviding all parts necessary for engineassembly at point of use through kit-ting, instituting one-piece flow, elimi-nating non-value-added activities, andestablishing several pull “supermar-kets.” Successes to date includereduced man-hour expenditures andimproved on-time delivery.

In February 2003, the Annistondepot began initial efforts in the M1Abrams main battle tank turbine engineprocess. After performing a value-streamanalysis, the depot identified areas ofopportunity for improvement and estab-lished aggressive goals to improve pro-ductivity and customer support.

Watervliet Arsenal. Watervliet Arse-nal recently completed a lean projecton the T-53 helicopter rotor compo-nent. The component is an aircraftengine turbo prop carrier-reductionpiece that is used on various helicop-ters. Watervliet Arsenal has developedthe process for reclaiming the fivebores by chrome plating and grindingbore diameters to specified tolerancesand locations. Depot personnel studiedthis process using lean principles. Thisled to the identification of manufactur-ing and tooling problems, which weresubsequently resolved and resulted in areduction in manufacturing time.Watervliet Arsenal’s future lean projectsinclude the 60mm barrel process re-engineering project. In addition, Water-vliet Arsenal is anticipating benefits of

LEAN MANUFACTURINGDarlene Paukei, Deidre Eaton, Robert Katulka,

Dr. Carol Sedlacek, and José Martin

Lean Thinking 12-13.qxd 8/4/2003 11:07 AM Page 1


reductions in material handling andunit standard time.

Sierra Army Depot. Sierra ArmyDepot personnel began implementinglean efforts in January 2003. Thedepot’s first lean project involves ClassVIII medical supplies, storage, issues,and receipts. Presently, Class VIII med-ical is located approximately 9 milesfrom the main operations area, whichis not conducive to normal workflow ofoperations. Sierra personnel plan touse lean efforts to relocate the programto a more efficient work area. Sierra’sfuture lean efforts include long-termstorage (medical hospitals) andcentral-receiving projects.

Rock Island Arsenal. Personnel atRock Island recently completed theirfirst lean manufacturing value-streamanalysis on the Forward Repair System(FRS). Personnel use this system torepair battle-damaged heavy combatsystems onsite. Rock Island Arsenal willimplement lean tools to reduce directand indirect labor resources, decreasefloor space and tool load area, andimprove the production process. Thegoal is to reduce delivery time from 10months to 6 months by February 2004.Rock Island Arsenal has set an addi-tional stretch goal of a further reductionin FRS delivery time to 3 months in2005. The arsenal will start applyinglean thinking to improve processes inacquisition, the Contact MaintenanceTruck (Heavy) manufacturing andassembly lines, and the assembly of theExplosive Ordnance Disposal System.The arsenal is also integrating its cur-rent quality initiatives, such as six sigmaand ISO 9000, into its lean program.

AMCOMU.S. Army Aviation and Missile

Command (AMCOM), AL, personnelimplemented lean thinking in theBlack Hawk recapitalization at CorpusChristi Army Depot (CCAD), TX, and inthe Patriot recapitalization line at Let-terkenny Army Depot (LEAD), PA.

CCAD. At CCAD, the initial value-stream analysis on the Black Hawkrecapitalization line revealed a num-ber of opportunities for substantialimprovements. The main items foundwere lack of flow in the dock stageprocess (e.g., aircraft was stationarywithin major processes, aircraft statuswas difficult to determine, and wastedspace was found) and parts storageand retrieval problems (e.g., partsstacking and clutter, parts damaged orlost, and no smooth flow to or from

back shops). The conversion from theinitial dock stage to the flow processwas completed in June 2003. Once leanprocesses are fully implemented, turn-around time will be reduced by morethan 50 percent. Other significant met-ric improvements include approxi-mately 50-percent reduction of work inprocess, 75-percent reduction in air-craft moves, and an 80-percent reduc-tion in the total distance traveled bythe aircraft. CCAD personnel willimplement these improvements aspart of a 5-year plan to ingrain leanphilosophies throughout the organiza-tion. Additional projects include tri-service lines, back shops, and CH-47recapitalization.

LEAD. At LEAD, the initial value-stream analysis of the Patriot launcherrevealed similar issues as those atCCAD. However, the Letterkennyapproach has differed somewhat in that Patriot is truly a system-of-systems. This led Letterkenny person-nel to attack each individual system asits own value stream. LEAD personnelare currently focusing on the Patriotlauncher. The results to date indicatethat an overall 30-percent productivityimprovement and 40-percent floor-space reduction are achievable. LEADpersonnel expect to achieve the sameimprovements on the antenna mastgroup as on the launcher. Other LEADprojects where work is being accom-plished using lean tools could result ina 70-percent improvement in turn-around time and 36-percent reductionin floor space. Additional projectsinclude other major components of thePatriot System (i.e., the EngagementControl Station, Information Coordina-tion Center, and radar).

ConclusionAt AMC, lean thinking is not

another do-more-with-less slogan.Lean tools, techniques, and activitieshave been successful in both industryand government in improving manu-facturing processes and expediting theflow of ideas and development of newtechnology. Lean thinking involves theentire AMC workforce focusing onefforts to increase the value of its prod-ucts and services to the end users—oursoldiers. Lean thinking is not aboutreducing the workforce; it is aboutenabling the workforce to accomplishmore. Lean AMC organizations willhave world-class manufacturingprocesses and capabilities that willcompete with the best services pro-

vided by private industry. Successfullean implementation will ensure viabil-ity of organic capabilities for the longterm and will position AMC to meetthe enormous challenges of the 21stcentury. For more information on AMClean initiatives, go to:http://www.amc.army.mil.

DARLENE PAUKEI is a Pro-gram Analyst in the Lean Manage-ment Cell at HQ AMC. She holds abachelor’s degree in businessadministration from the Univer-sity of Wisconsin at Whitewater.

DEIDRE EATON is an Indus-trial Engineer with TACOM’snewly formed GSIE. She holds aB.S. in industrial engineering fromthe Georgia Institute of Technologyand an M.S. in management sci-ence from Troy State University.

ROBERT KATULKA is Directorof Lean Enterprise at TobyhannaArmy Depot. He holds a B.S. inelectrical engineering from Penn-sylvania State University and anM.B.A. from Wilkes University,Wilkes-Barre, PA.

DR. CAROL SEDLACEK isworking on a detail in the DeputyCommander for Systems SupportOffice, AMCOM. Her permanentposition is in the AMCOM Smalland Disadvantaged Business Uti-lization Office. She earned her A.A.certification, B.A., and M.S.degrees from Jacksonville StateUniversity and her Ed.D. from theUniversity of Alabama.

JOSÉ MARTIN is the SystemSupport Officer for Missiles andthe Deputy Director for Transfor-mation in the Office of the DeputyCommander for System Support atAMCOM. He has a B.S. inmechanical engineering from theUniversity of New Orleans and anM.S. in program managementfrom the Naval PostgraduateSchool, Monterey, CA. He is also agraduate of the MaintainabilityEngineering Program at theSchool of Engineering and Logis-tics, Texarkana, TX.

Lean Thinking 12-13.qxd 8/4/2003 11:08 AM Page 2


IntroductionIn the past, the Army’s mainte-

nance depots, arsenals, and its multi-echelon maintenance structure werelegacies of World Wars, the Cold War,and extended police actions. The arse-nals were set up to do heavy manufac-turing of things peculiar to the militaryand sized to do continuous productionof these things in quantities that couldsupport a large Army in a drawn-outwar. Depots, similarly, were there for acontinuous rotation of worn groundvehicles, aircraft, artillery, missiles, andelectronic equipment going in andchurning out new equipment afterextensive overhaul and repair. Effi-ciency came from constant work—andthat constancy came from a large,heavy Army engaged in extended con-flicts much of the time from World WarII through Vietnam.

Thirty years have brought a newenvironment of short-duration contin-gency operations that are much lessdamaging to the Army’s equipment.And modernization and transforma-tion of the Army brings lighter, morereliable equipment, which in turnrequires less maintenance and less ofthe “heavy-iron” manufacturing thatour arsenals do best. And yet theseshort-notice, short-duration conflictsbring new challenges to our ability tosupport and sustain. The need forrestoration of damaged and wornequipment remains, but at a reducedlevel. Readiness, and the ability tosurge production of specific items, putnew emphasis on modern, responsive

industrial facilities under the immedi-ate control of the Army. We are alreadyseeing influences that will force atransformation of depots and arsenals.Our job now is to complete the trans-formation of these facilities to onesthat efficiently produce the equipmentand components that keep the Armyready for war, can quickly increase pro-duction of any item or component thatis needed to meet a contingency, andcan just as quickly repair the damageand wear of a war to be ready for thenext one. If we had not begun thistransformation, and had left the depotsand arsenals as they were, they wouldbe only historically interesting relicsrather than the relevant facilities theywill be for the future Army.

Army TransformationThe Army continues to change

itself to a more balanced force that islighter, more responsive, and modern.This force will rely much more on con-trol of the battlefield through electron-ics than on just the brute force of a 70-ton tank. The transformation will takeplace in phases and include newunits—complete with modernizedequipment—being fielded one by oneuntil the Objective Force Armyemerges. This is a decades-longprocess and involves supporting twoArmies, the “legacy” and the modern-ized Armies.

As the Army reorganizes itself byforming new units and transformingold ones, there will be three distinctareas where the government-owned

maintenance and manufacturing basewill be involved. First, new and mod-ernized equipment will be producedand fielded. Expertise at the govern-ment facilities allows their involvementwith new manufacturing processes, or,even more so, with the modificationand upgrade of existing equipment to anew configuration. Second, there arelegacy systems that will remain in theinventory for some time, in some caseseven becoming part of the ObjectiveForce. Selected systems will be recapi-talized—essentially returned to an as-new condition with newer technologyinserted where the opportunity allows(such as using the latest microproces-sors or the newest version of an aircraftengine that still fits the old configura-tion). Finally, while we are modernizingand creating the Objective Force Army,we and our allies continue to operateolder systems that must be maintainedin a ready-to-fight condition.

Maintenance And ManufacturingWhile supporting Army transfor-

mation, depots and arsenals each havebedrock missions that are their reasonsfor existing. For depots, it is therestoration of Army equipment andmajor components to like-new condi-tion. Arsenals exist to manufactureitems that are entirely unique to themilitary. These missions are also theonly reasons for the Army owning andoperating the facilities themselves; wekeep them to be absolutely assured oftheir capabilities in times of emer-gency. Other work performed in depots

RECAPITALIZATION AND ARMYTRANSFORMATION:

THE ROLE OF DEPOTS, ARSENALS,AND THE NATIONAL MAINTENANCE

PROGRAMDan McDavid

McDavid 14-15.qxd 8/4/2003 11:09 AM Page 1


and arsenals is done to ensure eco-nomical operation of the facilities or tosubstitute for core work that is notalways available in peacetime. Workbeyond core is still important; however,if not for the core mission and the mili-tary necessity of keeping it in-house, itlikely would be economical to divest ofthe property and competitively con-tract for maintenance and manufactur-ing work as needed. The basic missionwill be performed for legacy, recapital-ized, and new or modernized systemsduring and after Army transformation.

Beyond or combined with theirbasic missions, arsenals, depots, andnational maintenance sites that per-form some depot-level componentoverhaul contribute to Army transfor-mation. One large contribution thatdepots will make over the years isrecapitalization of selected equipment.Recapitalization is a complete overhaulof a system, making it as near “zero-time, zero-miles” as is economicallyfeasible. Depots are big players in thiseffort, and because most of what theydo in recapitalization is identical workto their basic missions, they are majorcontributors to maintaining their corecapabilities and to making them eco-nomically viable. Both depots andnational maintenance sites repair com-ponents to a national maintenancestandard in companion to recapitaliza-tion. Repaired components (engines,transmissions, rotor blades, electroniccomponents, etc.) are available in thesupply system to replace worn or dam-aged components. The depots andnational maintenance sites repair all ofthese to the same standard—all wornparts replaced and the componentrestored to a known useful life. Thiseffort is essential to successful recapi-talization. Without the availability ofcompletely restored components, thefirst component replacement in thefield begins the “decapitalization”process.

Arsenals play a much smaller rolein recapitalization. Watervliet and RockIsland Arsenals will likely get somerestoration or replacement work on thegun tube and hard-metal parts of com-bat vehicles and artillery, but not asubstantial amount because theseitems don’t commonly wear out. PineBluff Arsenal, with its unique dual mis-

sion in specialty munitions and chemi-cal protective equipment, will beinvolved to the degree their equipmentis embedded in systems currentlyselected for recapitalization, or if theequipment itself is ever selected.

The modernization component ofArmy transformation—new systemsand major upgrades to existing sys-tems—is the part that is in some waysmost difficult to involve Army-ownedindustrial facilities. Yet this may be thebest place to ensure the economic via-bility and modernization of depots andarsenals themselves. By involving Armyfacilities, even in a small way while anew or improved weapon system isbeing produced, we gain expertise thatwill be invaluable in the long-term sus-tainment of the system. This is particu-larly valuable for maintenance depots.In depots, we have often used both theprivate sector and the depot to achievemajor upgrades. Since most upgradesinvolve a combination of overhaul ofthe basic equipment and manufactur-ing and installation of new compo-nents, it makes sense to use depots formuch of the overhaul and the privatesector for new manufacturing. Arsenalscan also be involved if the upgradeinvolves manufactured items withintheir core capabilities. For completelynew systems, it is still valuable toinvolve both depots and arsenals wher-ever they can be used to establish theirrelated core capabilities early in thesystem’s life.

ConclusionIf we are to maintain the viability

of the Army-owned maintenance andmanufacturing base, preserve the corecapability essential to the nationaldefense, and continue to support Armytransformation objectives, then depotsand arsenals must transform in a par-ticular way. First and foremost, allmaintenance and manufacturingprocesses must become as lean andflexible as possible. Flexibility hasalways been a strength of in-houseindustrial capability, but lean processeswill contribute to higher productivityand affordability. Second, we will con-tinue to operate as partners, not com-petitors, with the private sector.

Public-private partnerships haveemerged as the best way to smooth the

transition from the production of anew or improved weapon system to itslong-term sustainment, as well as aninnovative way to modernize our facili-ties. Long ago we proved the value ofpartnerships in overhaul andupgrade—witness the Paladin andAbrams programs. The next step,beginning with the Stryker Program, isto partner in manufacturing. This hasbenefits on both sides of the partner-ship, perhaps even more than in over-haul and upgrade. The private-sectorpartner can set up manufacturing atthe government site, avoiding the needto obtain a facility elsewhere. Thedepot gets some work during the man-ufacture, lease income from the facility,and eventually has the use of anupgraded facility for future mainte-nance. As we extend the partneringconcept to more maintenance facilitiesand arsenals, these benefits will accrue,lowering the cost and increasing theefficiency. We can complete the trans-formation by establishing nationalmaintenance standards for compo-nents overhauled by depots and otherArmy sites, ensuring that a steady sup-ply of overhaul, recapitalization, andupgrade projects are performed by ourdepots and their private-sectorpartners.

In a nutshell, transformation willgive us lean, flexible production inpartnership with the private sector, andprovide a seamless transition fromdesign to manufacturing to lifetimesustainment.

DAN MCDAVID is a GeneralEngineer at the Depot Mainte-nance and Arsenal Division, Officeof the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3,Headquarters, Army MaterielCommand (AMC). He has a bach-elor’s degree in engineering sciencewith a specialty in mechanicalproperties of engineering materi-als from the University of Ten-nessee. In addition, he received amaintainability engineering cer-tificate from the AMC InternTraining Center and completedgraduate work at East Texas StateUniversity.

McDavid 14-15.qxd 8/4/2003 11:09 AM Page 2


IntroductionSituated on a 6,500-acre military

installation located in the northwestcorner of New Jersey, the PicatinnyArmament Research, Developmentand Engineering Center (ARDEC) playsa unique role in the United States’ability to wage war. There is no othercomprehensive armaments facility likeit in the country; it is a one-of-a-kindfacility that provides virtually all of thelethal mechanisms used in Armyweapon systems.

Through the years, Picatinny’smajor developments in manufacturingand technology have reduced depend-ence on foreign sources and provided

greater accuracy and lethality to arange of weapons. During World WarII, it was the only facility in the UnitedStates producing ammunition largerthan 50 caliber.

While some applied research inexplosives, propellants, and pyrotech-nics was conducted, funding for overallresearch and development was almostnonexistent during the first half of thecentury. This all changed in the yearsfollowing World War II when Picatinnywas given a leadership role in theresearch, development, engineering,and production support for advancedweapon systems. From fuzes, propel-lants, fire control systems, and energet-ics to the lethal power of mortars,

tanks, and artillery, Picatinny managesthe process from birth to battlefield.

Matching Munitions To The Mission

At the same time that air strikesand cruise missiles were launched inOperation Iraqi Freedom, U.S. Armyground forces were advancing to takecontrol of cities throughout Iraq. Ourforces not only had to take the ground,they also had to hold it and, eventually,secure those areas. U.S. policy focusedon striking only legitimate military tar-gets and made every effort to protectinnocent civilians. The array of war-heads, projectiles, cartridges, fuzes,

ARDEC:PROVIDING DECISIVE LETHALITY

FOR THE ARMY'SGO-TO-WAR WEAPONS

Michael P. Devine

A soldier affixesa fuze in the

field. Picatinnyengineers,

scientists, andtechnicians

developedmany of the

techniques usedto design fuzes.

Devine-ARDEC 16-19.qxd 8/4/2003 11:17 AM Page 1


armament systems, and nonlethalmunitions developed and fielded bythe people at Picatinny provided fieldcommanders with the flexibility they needed to match the munition to themission.

Picatinny has high regard for themen and women who use its armamentsystems and makes a special effort toincorporate their input into weapondesigns and upgrades to achieve thehighest levels of reliability. Recently,soldiers from the Army’s 10th MountainDivision, who fought in Afghanistanduring the early stages of U.S. efforts totopple the Taliban, were invited toPicatinny to tell program managerswhat needed improvement. This inter-action between battle-tested soldiersand Picatinny scientists and engineersresulted in superior products tailored tothe needs of those who use them on thebattlefield. Even now, several Picatinnyrepresentatives are in the Iraqi theatermonitoring weapon performance.

Performance In IraqThe 25mm M919 cartridge, an

armor-piercing, fin-stabilized roundwith a discarding sabot and tracer, hasbeen one of the stellar performers dur-ing Operation Iraqi Freedom. Used forthe first time in actual combat, theM919 represents the state-of-the-art in

25mm armor-piercing ammunition forthe Bradley Fighting Vehicle. It com-bines higher energetic propellants anda low-drag profile depleted uraniumpenetrator core to deliver greaterlethality and survivability to our troops.Feedback from the field has beenextremely enthusiastic. Initial afteraction reports from the 3rd InfantryDivision and the 3rd Squadron of theArmy’s 7th Cavalry Regiment indicatethat this round has been used success-fully against BMPs (Russian-madevehicles) and T-72 tanks, as well asagainst other lightly armored targets.From all indications, the M919 car-tridge has met or exceeded expecta-tions for trace visibility, round-by-round accuracy, and lethality, provid-ing our soldiers with the best possiblearmaments.

The Paladin 155mm Self-PropelledArtillery System again proved its mili-tary value during the Iraqi war. Paladin,fielded just after Operation DesertStorm, can fire a round 30 secondsafter stopping, compared to the severalminutes required by older self-pro-pelled artillery systems. This greatermobility and firepower significantlyincreases platform survivability. At anygiven time during Operation Iraqi Free-dom, all three artillery battalions wereable to provide responsive, devastatingfires at ranges out to 30 kilometers.

The M141 Shoulder-LaunchedMultipurpose Assault Weapon-Disposable Bunker Defeat Munition(BDM) also proved to be extremelyeffective, particularly in the urbanenvironments of the Middle East. Thisshoulder-fired weapon system wasdesigned to defeat earth and timberbunkers, breach masonry walls, anddestroy caves with a single shot. DuringOperation Enduring Freedom, U.S.Forces used the BDM to turn Al Qaedahideouts into rubble. In close combatsituations within cities and outlyingareas of Iraq, it has performed equallywell.

Other Picatinny-developedweapon systems include ammunitionfor the 120mm main gun on theAbrams tank, which was widely used inboth the Gulf War and Iraq. In the GulfWar, Abrams tank crews engaged largenumbers of Iraqi tanks. Here, thekinetic energy long-rod penetratoroverwhelmingly defeated the mostadvanced heavily armored threats. InIraq, as the emphasis shifted to urbantargets (i.e., buildings, bunkers, anddug-in vehicles), Picatinny’s 120mmMulti-Purpose Anti-Tank round, whichwas designed specifically to counterurban targets as well as enemy helicop-ters, easily achieved its objective bycompletely destroying the intendedtargets.

The Paladin uses an onboard computer system to receive fire missions, compare firing data, select and take upfiring positions, automatically unlock and point its cannon, and then fire.



The ARDEC simulator has high-tech capabilities including an infrared spot tracker and two computers for data acquisition andcontrol.



Nonlethal WeaponsA variety of nonlethal capabilities

have been developed under Picatinny’spurview. Nonlethal weapons areimportant because they expand theoptions available to commanders insituations where the use of deadlyforce is not the preferred response.Nonlethal munitions developed andfielded by Picatinny have been usedwith great effect in Kosovo and wererecently made available for potentialuse in Afghanistan and Iraq. The 40mmnonlethal cartridge, or SpongeGrenade, is a prime example. Thisblunt impact munition can be point-fired from a standard rifle-mountedgrenade launcher against belligerentnoncombatants and has proved to beenough to halt the threat. However,should it not stop the threat, the sol-dier can immediately resort to lethalforce with his rifle’s 5.56mm ammuni-tion. In this way, the field commanderis provided with a range of forceresponse options to effectively conductthe mission.

A device called the Portable VehicleArresting Barrier is available for use atcheckpoints and other high-securitylocations to stop wheeled vehicles. Itemploys nylon webbing that can trap a14,000-pound vehicle doing 35 mphlike a fly in a spider’s web without fatal-ities or serious injury to the vehicle’soccupants. Another munition, the

Modular Crowd Control Munition(MCCM), a nonlethal variant of theClaymore mine, delivers a payload of600 rubber balls. It provides crowdcontrol and force protection by deter-ring hostile groups of noncombatantsand is another alternative to lethalforce options.

With an ever-widening role in thedevelopment of nonlethal systems—whether for use on the battlefield or inpeacekeeping missions—Picatinny iscurrently working on a nonlethal mor-tar projectile that will permit com-manders to use indirect-fire systems todeny areas to large numbers of hostilenoncombatants, including those foundin urban environments. This poses aunique challenge considering that theobjective is to create a payload deliverymechanism that will minimize collat-eral damage.

Developers say that the ultimateweapon will be truly “scalable” or tun-able to the level of force needed, a traitthat will allow field commanders todecide whether nonlethal or lethalforce is needed to deal with the threat.

Streamlining DevelopmentPicatinny’s mission is to support

Army transformation goals. In an effortto streamline the acquisition processand deliver the armaments that sol-diers need exactly when they needthem—and at an affordable price—

Picatinny has established increasinglyclose partnerships with universitiesand industry partners, involving themin collaborative efforts early in theresearch and development process.

Picatinny uses unique laboratoriesand special facilities to evaluate proto-type designs, thus reducing develop-ment cycle time. These facilities arealso available to Picatinny’s contractorsand other government agencies thatare part of the national energetic con-sortium established by Picatinny andthe Army Research Laboratory.

For example, Picatinny’s state-of-the-art integrated digital modeling andsimulation suite facilitates collabora-tive efforts among engineers, scientists,testers, users, and maintainers. Itallows product concepts to be evalu-ated for warfighting value and manu-facturability in a virtual environmentthat brings every partner into theprocess. The gains in speed-to-marketand reduced testing costs are alreadyan essential ingredient in the plans ofthe Future Combat Systems LethalityProgram.

ConclusionWhat will the battle of the future

look like? It will differ greatly fromtoday’s battles, with computers andcommunications dominating its shape.However, it will continue to remain anexercise of lethal effects. Whethermassed fire, networked fire, precisionstrike, or joint strike, future battles willcontinue to ultimately depend on thecombatants’ ability to do damage. Noother organization in the world canprovide this capability as well asARDEC. Picatinny has proved itsexpertise in developing the kind ofweapons that will keep the U.S. Armythe most dominant fighting force in theworld. As New Jersey Governor JamesE. McGreevy recently said, “Never hasPicatinny's mission been so clear, or itscontribution as valuable.”

MICHAEL P. DEVINE is theTechnical Director at ARDEC. Hehas a B.S. in physics from St.Joseph University and an M.S. inphysics from Drexel University.

The MCCM is a nonlethal variant of the Claymore mine. Its ability toincapacitate large, hostile groups gives the battlefield commanderthe option to apply nonlethal force as a first line of defense whereappropriate.



IntroductionAs far back as 1993, DOD had a

vision that handling tough diagnosticjobs would entail the use of expertswho may be on the other side of theworld from the weapon system beingdiagnosed. In February 1993, a Memo-randum of Agreement was signedbetween the Program Executive Office,Air and Missile Defense (PEO, AMD)and the Office of the Secretary ofDefense to use Patriot as a test bed forwhat was to become the IntegratedDiagnostics Support Demonstration(IDSD) Program. The IDSD Program,which integrated commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) and government off-the-shelf (GOTS) technology, was testedover a 3-year period using tacticalPatriot systems in both CONUS andOCONUS. Drawing on high-technologyexperience from Patriot, other systems,and the commercial world, IDSD inte-grated satellite communications;expert system technology; remotelycontrolled test, measurement, anddiagnostic equipment (TMDE); elec-tronic publications; digital video; andcomputerized data acquisition. Uponsuccessful completion in 1996, theIDSD Program transitioned to what isnow known as the Integrated Diagnos-tics Support System (IDSS). Between1996 and 1998, IDSS was to undergoanother series of unit tests that reallyemphasized the technology from thesoldier’s point of view. From the begin-ning of the IDSD/IDSS Program,acceptance of the concept of improv-ing maintenance through technologysteadily grew. The evaluation of IDSSdemonstrated that integrating thebasic building blocks of personal com-

puters, test equipment, and communi-cations provided a framework for effec-tive system support and low-costgrowth of additional capabilities.

Results of the IDSS evaluation indi-cated that the goals for maintenanceenhancement could be attained, andthat soldiers were very enthusiasticabout using these new tools and tech-nology. Access to up-to-date informa-tion was found to be instrumental inreturning a weapon system to an oper-ational status. Computers, normallyused to assist in troubleshooting andanalyzing data, were also found topotentially reduce errors and speed upprocedures.

IDSS Initial FieldingInitial fielding of IDSS technologies

to the Ordnance Missile and MunitionsCenter and School (OMMCS) TrainingDetachment was conducted Oct. 26 toNov. 5, 1999, at Fort Bliss, TX. ThePatriot Project Office, now a part of theLower Tier Project Office (LTPO), hadreceived final approval from theOMMCS Commandant on Oct. 20,1999, which set the stage for fielding tothe training detachment.

The fielding effort at Fort Blissbegan with the installation of soundcards and Institute of Electronic andElectrical Engineers 488.2 InstrumentInterface cards on seven Patriot Auto-mated Logistics System (PALS)AN/PSM-80 (V) 1 computers. Thesecards provide audio and instrumenta-tion support for the various IDSSfunctions. Upgraded hard drives withIDSS software enhancements werethen installed. The new softwareincluded: Microsoft® Windows ’95

Operating System; Interactive Author-ing Display System-based PatriotInteractive Electronic Technical Manu-als; Procomm by Quarterdeck to allowdata file transfers using the SingleChannel Ground and Airborne RadioSystem tactical radios; SymantecpcAnywhere for file application shar-ing and remote access and control;and Microsoft NetMeeting to facilitatevoice communications among nodeson the new Patriot local area network(LAN).

During the second week of theprocess, personnel from OMMCS andRaytheon Training Systems receiveddetailed training on the use of the IDSSsystem. IDSS field analysts began thesession by giving students a detailedoverview of IDSS Programs. They thentaught each student how to set up theLAN and employ the IDSS system usingthe latest technology. Analysts thentaught students the setup of therequired modernized TMDE used inthe performance of the Computer-Aided Procedures, which were devel-oped by CAS Inc. specifically for theIDSS Program. They also demonstratedthe capability to remotely control thetest equipment and monitor trouble-shooting efforts from locations externalto the unit.

In early 2000, the LTPO decided toupgrade the older computers to newDell™ 7500 laptops. Procurementaction was initiated, and the new Delllaptops were obtained as replacementsfor the PALS computers. This was amajor upgrade for the soldier in thefield because the Dell laptops hadnewer operating systems, more mem-ory, and larger hard drives.

PATRIOTIDSS PROGRAM TECHNOLOGY

AT REDSTONE ARSENALSUPPORTS OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM

CPT James O. McLinnaham and Dr. Dennis G. Beeler

IDSS PATRIOT 20-21.qxd 8/4/2003 11:20 AM Page 1


Expanding And Applying IDSSTechnology

During Operation Desert Storm,the limited data registered by nontacti-cal portable data recorders and otherprototype equipment in the Patriot sys-tems had to be sent to the UnitedStates for analysis via courier service orshipped via Federal Express. Thismethod of sending data for analysistook anywhere from 2-14 days depend-ing on the method used. Problems alsoexisted because of more stringentimport and export controls. It becameapparent early that a method wasneeded to expedite the transfer of datafrom remote locations anywhere in theworld back to the analysts in theUnited States. IDSS support personnelfrom CAS Inc. asked their system engi-neers for assistance with this issue.Using IDSS technology, system engi-neers designed a secure satellitecommunications system capable oftransferring the data from remote loca-tions to CAS Inc. servers. Once this wasin place, the data-reduction analystswere able to download the necessarydata from the servers at the Air andMissile Defense Data Analysis Network(AMDAN) facility. This new methodol-ogy provides the capability for sendingdata, voice, and video in a secure modeto the central AMDAN facility.

Not only does this technology pro-vide the logistical data needed, it alsoprovides a wealth of operational infor-mation for the analyst. The EmbeddedData Recorder (EDR) provides informa-tion such as whether a particularengagement was successful or, if not,why. If anomalies exist, the data-reduction analyst will be able to detectthem, and system engineers can rec-ommend corrective measures. Thiscorrective action may be eitherimproving software for a particularitem within the system or supportingthe issuance of a field bulletin to theunits in the field.

When available, the EDRs enableevaluation to determine specificaspects of functional areas of hardwareand software as well as overall systemeffectiveness. Without this data, criticscould argue, as they did after DesertStorm, that Patriot was not effective.However, the greatest benefit of re-corded data is in the investigation ofanomalous events. Recorded data canbe quickly distributed to analysts atRaytheon; Lockheed Martin; CAS Inc;

the research, development and engi-neering center; the LTPO; and othercontractors to quickly isolate causes ofphenomena that may be a result ofweather, atmospheric conditions, hard-ware faults, software problems, oroperational procedures. This can leadto responsive changes that protect theforce and enable warfighters to bemore effective.

Without recorded data, analystsmust speculate about observed prob-lems and, in many cases, it becomesimpossible to reproduce the anomalyor discover its cause. The net effect canbe delays in adjusting to battlefieldconditions, delays in correcting resid-ual problems, and reduced combateffectiveness.

The commander and the soldiersare critical links in the potential bene-fits that can result from recorded data.The commander must emphasize itsimportance, and the soldiers must acti-vate the recording of data and main-tain the data recorders.

Supporting OIFTo date, EDRs from Operation Iraqi

Freedom (OIF) have been invaluable inassessing Patriot performance andevaluating anomalous events. The lackof recorded data has in some casesimpacted ability to be as responsive asdesired to some field reports. The EDRsare not considered mission-criticalitems. The troops can fight withoutdata recording. However, the recordeddata and the insight it provides on sys-tem performance could be critical tofighting effectively and surviving tofight tomorrow’s battle.

This new technology provides liter-ally a foxhole-to-factory means ofobtaining data in a timely manner andthen being able to use such data asnecessary for the support of our sol-diers in the field.

ConclusionThe IDSS Program has truly been a

team effort. Patriot’s prime contractor,Raytheon, is responsible for the remotemaintenance monitor and getting IDSStechnology to the field. CAS Inc.,Patriot’s System Engineering and Tech-nical Assistance contractor, has playeda major role in IDSS assisting with thedesign and development of LANs, com-puter-aided procedures for performingremotely controlled TMDE processes,and secure satellite communications.

At the U.S. Army Aviation and Mis-sile Command Integrated MaterielManagement Center, the ElectronicsPublications Division manages special-ized publication needs. The logisticslaboratory has been responsible fordeveloping the video systems. Militaryusers have played an active role in thedefinition of the system itself and howit should be used. Representatives ofthe allied nations using Patriot havebeen an integral part of joint efforts toguide the overall development of IDSS.

While there are challenges associ-ated with integrating COTS and GOTScomponents, today’s environment offunding constraints and streamlinedacquisition dictates tailoring the use ofcommercial products and other inte-gration of technologies as a main-stream approach to contain both costand risk. Challenges will always exist toprovide the soldier with tools, technol-ogy, and interfaces that are intuitivewhile simultaneously imposing mini-mum impact to the existing supportinfrastructure. IDSS is meeting thischallenge.

CPT JAMES O. MCLINNAHAMis the Assistant Program Managerfor Logistics assigned to the LTPOat PEO, AMD. He was recentlyassigned as Joint Chief of Con-tracting in Sarajevo, Bosnia, insupport of Operation Joint Forge.He is Level III certified in con-tracting and has earned Level IIcertification in program manage-ment. He received his active dutycommission from Wake ForestUniversity and has a B.A. inbusiness administration fromWinston-Salem State University.He can be contacted at [email protected].

DR. DENNIS G. BEELER is a20-year Army Air Defense veteranwho retired as a CW4 in 1983.He holds an A.A.S. in electricaltechnology, a B.A. in business, anM.S. in contract and acquisitionmanagement, and a Ph.D. in busi-ness administration. He is theIDSS Division Manager for CASInc. and can be contacted [email protected].

IDSS PATRIOT 20-21.qxd 8/4/2003 11:20 AM Page 2


IntroductionSince Operation Desert Storm,

the Army’s urgency for a versatile dig-itized Blue Force Tracking (BFT) sys-tem for both ground and aviationplatforms has intensified. Since Sep-tember 11, 2001, Operation EnduringFreedom has been a major influencein shaping requirements for BFTcapabilities. The Army’s newlydeveloped BFT Aviation (BFT-AVN) System is a system-of-systems approach to satisfythe Army’s immediate andurgent requirement for pro-viding the maneuver com-mander with the near-real-time situational awareness(SA) data that are essential toa streamlined decisionmakingprocess. The BFT-AVN Systemis an integration of existingand modified commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) and govern-ment off-the-shelf hardwareand software used to trackboth ground and airborneplatforms and to provide a

dynamic aggregated SA picture ofthose platforms. The BFT-AVN Sys-tem employs the Force XXI BattleCommand Brigade and Below(FBCB2) hardware and software as adirect interface into the commonoperating picture (COP) via theGlobal Command and ControlSystem-Army (GCCS-A). The system

consists of an A-kit and a B-kit andpopulates the COP through GCCS-Avia satellite links. The A-kit is com-prised of aircraft modifications suchas wiring, cabling, circuit breakers,electrical power, and mounting hard-ware required for installation of theB-kit. The B-kit consists of BFT-AVNhardware and integrated software as

well as data communicationsand position/location com-ponents. The system inte-grates the most current ver-sion of FBCB2 hosted on amilitary computer, a COTS L-band transceiver, datacommunications router, anda standard Precision Light-weight Global PositioningSystem Receiver, housedwithin a robust mountingrack.

RequirementsGeneration

Initial requirements for aBFT System stem from theArmy Battle Command System

Blue Force Tracking—Aviation

ACQUISITION EXCELLENCE:PROVIDING CRITICAL

OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIESTO THE

WARFIGHTERLTC Anthony W. Potts, Richard M. Szcepanski,

and Alvin A. Abejon

Photo depicts a Blue Force Tracking Aviation Systeminstalled in UH-60L Black Hawk helicopter.

PottsSzcepanski 22-24.qxd 8/4/2003 11:22 AM Page 1


Capstone Requirements Document ofNov. 23, 1998, and the FBCB2 Opera-tional Requirements Document ofMarch 26, 2002. The FBCB2 System issupported by the Joint RequirementsOversight Council-approved MissionNeeds Statement for Horizontal Inte-gration of Battle Command dated Jan.10, 1995. The February 2002 Opera-tional Needs Statement for the BFT ofU.S. Army Central Commandexpanded BFT requirements toinclude the Balkans Digitization Ini-tiative (BDI) to support OperationEnduring Freedom and other CentralCommand operation plans. FurtherArmy Requirements Oversight Coun-cil decisions led to the OperationEnduring Freedom command, con-trol, communications, computers,intelligence, surveillance, and recon-naissance (C4ISR) effort, which theBFT-AVN System supports.

Acquisition ReformWith today’s acquisition stream-

lining initiatives, the “blocked-systems approach” is a practicalmethod used to provide warfighterswith critical operational capabilities(i.e., it is critical in providing a 90-percent solution now rather thanwaiting 5 years for the 100-percentsolution). The success of the BFT-AVN Program can be measured onthe three metrics of cost, schedule,and performance. Despite the criticaltimeline imposed on the system, theBFT-AVN Product Office was success-ful in effectively managing personneland funding resources. The programremarkably continues to stay withinbudget while maintaining an aggres-sive schedule; the product office per-formed approximately 2 years ofwork in only 6 months; and systemperformance has met or exceededuser requirements. By performingsimultaneous activities throughoutthe development of the program—aided by the effective teamwork ofnumerous organizations—the prod-uct office was able to break downpast acquisition paradigms and

achieve both incremental and overallprogram successes.

Participating OrganizationsAlthough numerous government

agencies and DOD contractors sup-ported the program, the followingorganizations played a critical role inexecuting the BFT-AVN Program:

• U.S. Army Aviation AppliedTechnology Directorate (AATD).Located at Fort Eustis, VA, AATD pro-vided the overall hardware design,configuration control, and appropri-ate antenna placement. AATD alsoprovided systems testing, manufac-turing, and integration oversight.

• Aviation Engineering Direc-torate (AED). AED is located at Red-stone Arsenal, AL, and was responsi-ble for generation of AirworthinessReleases (AWRs) on the four primaryaviation platforms on which the BFT-AVN Systems are mounted. The AWRscertify that the BFT-AVN A-kits andB-kits do not adversely affect theflight and missions and, where appli-cable, identify specific operationallimitations of the BFT-AVN System.AED was instrumental in implement-ing acquisition reform initiatives andtransforming development of BFT-AVN AWRs, which can take severalmonths to produce and issue to thefield. Because of the program’s highvisibility, AED’s management wasable to effectively prioritize theefforts and provide the manpowerrequirements to support the pro-gram’s accelerated schedulerequirements.

• BFT-AVN Product Office. TheBFT-AVN Product Office is locatednear Redstone Arsenal and is collo-cated with the Tactical OperationsCenters/Air and Missile DefenseCommand and Control Systems(TOCs/AMDCCS) Project Office inMadison, AL. However, the FBCB2Project Office at Fort Monmouth, NJ,provides oversight to the BFT-AVNProduct Office. The project offices ofboth TOCs/AMDCCS and FBCB2 are

within the organizational structure ofthe Program Executive Office forCommand, Control, and Communi-cations Tactical (PEO, C3T), alsoheadquartered at Fort Monmouth.The BFT-AVN Product Office isresponsible for the execution of theacquisition of planning, program-ming, budgeting, and life-cycle engi-neering support.

• Information Assurance Commu-nity. Functional and technical expertsfrom offices such as the DefenseInformation Systems Agency,National Security Agency, Depart-ment of the Army, and PEO, C3Tcoordinated to resolve major pro-gram issues regarding the DefenseInformation Technology Security andAccreditation Process, the secret andbelow initiative, an interim authorityto connect and operate, and otherC4ISR-related issues.

• Aviation and Missile Command(AMCOM) OLR Project Office. TheAMCOM OLR Project Office has facil-ities and personnel at various Armyinstallations throughout the UnitedStates and overseas. This teaminstalled BFT-AVN A-kits and B-kitson various aviation platforms.

• PEO, Aviation. PEO, Aviation islocated at Redstone Arsenal and wasresponsible for total life-cycle plan-ning of the Army's inventory of avia-tion platforms. PEO, Aviation pro-vided essential platform aviationexpertise.

• Prototype Integration Facility(PIF). PIF is located at Redstone Arse-nal and is a component of the Engi-neering Directorate of the Aviationand Missile Research, Development,and Engineering Center (AMRDEC).PIF provides an in-house, rapid-response capability for generatinghardware solutions; mechanical fab-rication, cable assembly, and integra-tion expertise; and platform integra-tion coordination and test support.This AMRDEC facility was para-mount in the rapid manufacturing ofprototypes and production of BFT-AVN Systems and spares. Considering



PIF’s intrinsic capabilities, its slo-gan—“Turning Ideas Into Reality”—could be considered an understate-ment.

• Redstone Technical Test Center(RTTC). RTTC performed the electro-magnetic environmental effects (E3)testing required on aviation plat-forms equipped with BFT and pro-vided support personnel and facili-ties. The E3 Test Branch successfullyconducted the appropriate levels ofelectromagnetic environmental test-ing to support AED’s developmentand issuance of AWRs.

• Aviation Unit Participation. Avi-ation units from Fort Campbell, KY,provided aircraft, aircrews, and criti-cal maintenance support—all ofwhich were necessary during theBFT-AVN Proof of Principle Demon-stration, integration of the BFT-AVNsystems-level mission packages, E3testing, and first article installations.

• U.S. Army Aviation LogisticsSchool (USAALS). USAALS assisted inthe development of training andoperating manuals for all four avia-tion platforms equipped with theBFT-AVN mission packages.

• U.S. Army Staff. Primary staffoffices included G-3 (Operations andPlans), G-6 (Communications), andG-8 (Programs). In addition, theOffice of the Assistant Secretary ofthe Army for Acquisition, Logisticsand Technology prioritized require-ments and provided fundingresources and program oversight.

Team SynergismThe Army-led BFT Team effec-

tively used the “flexibilities of acqui-sition reform” in the near-real-timedesign, development, and produc-tion of BFT Systems. Because ofnational priority, fielding require-ments, and time constraints imposedupon the system, the BFT ProductOffice assumed many risks—thenear-simultaneous design, manufac-ture, installation, and integration,qualification and flight testing ofBFT-AVN Systems contributed to

these risks. Concurrent activitiessuch as ordering long lead-timeitems and starting production priorto the release of approved engineer-ing drawings, unforeseen changes,and increased testing resulted inadditional program risks. Despitethese schedule, manufacturing, andintegration risks, the product officewas effective in managing overallefforts. For example, scheduling of A-kit and B-kit integration was updatedon a daily basis so that the integra-tion and subsequent fielding of BFT-AVN hardware was achieved withintime constraints. Even during thedesign, a total life-cycle system andsystems engineering approach wereestablished simultaneously as train-ing, logistics supportability, and sus-tainment plans were being devel-oped. The synergistic effects of theentire team were realized in the field-ing of 200 BFT-AVN Systems installedin different Force Mod aviation plat-forms to include the UH-60A/L BlackHawk, HH-60L MEDEVAC, Army Air-borne Command and Control Sys-tem, AH-64A Apache, AH-64DApache Longbow, and CH-47D Chi-nook helicopters.

ConclusionThe BFT-AVN Product Office has

been highly successful as a result ofthe synergism of its talented andproactive team members, astuteapplication of acquisition reform,and the use of bold leadership at alllevels of management. The BFT-AVNProduct Office has high visibility,national priority, and its successescan be used as a model for futureacquisition excellence initiatives andtransformation for larger programsthroughout the aviation and otherDOD communities. By eliminatingthe few remaining antiquated acqui-sition paradigms, and by implement-ing new and more innovativeapproaches, acquisition excellenceand streamlining can be realized andthe potential for program successcan be maximized regardless of the

program’s acquisition category. Nev-ertheless, the principal element ofany successful program is cohesiveteamwork across the spectrum ofdisciplines focused on the program’sgoals.

LTC ANTHONY W. POTTS wasthe Product Manager for BFT-AVNand the lead for BDI when thisarticle was written. He has bothan undergraduate and a master’sdegree from the University of Ken-tucky. He completed the DefenseSystems Management College’s(DSMC’s) Advanced ProgramManagement Course and is amember of the Army AcquisitionCorps (AAC).

RICHARD M. SZCEPANSKI isthe Deputy Product Manager forBFT-AVN. He has an undergradu-ate degree from the University ofWisconsin-Platteville and a mas-ter’s degree from Texas A&M Uni-versity. He attended DSMC’sAdvanced Program ManagementCourse and is Level III certified inProgram Management and Sys-tems Planning, Research, Develop-ment, and Engineering. He is anAAC member and was recentlyselected as a member of the YearGroup 2003 Competitive Develop-ment Group.

ALVIN A. ABEJON was a SeniorAnalyst for Science ApplicationsInternational Co. (SAIC) workingin support of the Product Man-ager, BFT-AVN in Huntsville, AL,when this article was written. Hehas an undergraduate degree fromEmbry-Riddle University and is aformer Army Acquisition Officerand Master Army Aviator. He com-pleted DSMC’s Advanced ProgramManagement Course and is anAAC member.



IntroductionSome time ago, the U.S. Army’s

Communications-Electronics Com-mand (CECOM) Acquisition Center’s(Fort Monmouth, NJ) leadership recog-nized that its disparate legacy systemswere adversely impacting its businesstransformation efforts. As processvisionaries, they knew significantimprovements could be made. Datarequired for monitoring, analyzing,answering data calls, and reportingpurposes were spread throughout anumber of major legacy systems anddozens of other smaller systems resid-ing on various desktop computers.Some of the data were redundant andrequired manual data entry, which pre-cipitated errors and severely impededaccurate and timely analysis. Reportingwas difficult, cumbersome, and time-consuming for all involved. Reportsfrom different systems used differentparameters, thus causing “apples andoranges” comparisons. Additional limi-tations were encountered when infor-mation from remote sites had to beconsolidated. To tame this unwieldydata monster, CECOM pursued devel-opment of the Acquisition ResourceCenter (ARC).

Project DescriptionThe ARC is a data mart coupled

with a suite of tools. It was designed bycontracting functional experts andallows management and end users toaccess disparate data, from small localdatabases to large legacy databases.This data can be consolidated into anintuitive “business intelligence” toolfor the contracting workforce andmanagers.

More than 75 CECOM AcquisitionCenter employees are currently usingthe ARC. These users represent all lev-els of the workforce (i.e., senior execu-tives, sector and group chiefs, and con-tracting officers). The ARC offers manybenefits, including Web-based dataentry screens incorporating data vali-dation logic, a data warehouse toreplace older stand-alone systems, anda robust and intuitive reporting tool.Data in existing enterprise-level sys-

tems are accessed directly rather thanduplicated. Users can now report ondata in existing systems as well as datapreviously available only in hard-copy,monthly produced formats. Informa-tion can be easily consolidated from allof the CECOM Acquisition Center’slocations.

Many positive impacts have beenrealized since the implementation ofthe ARC. In the past, CECOM’s Moni-toring and Analysis Group (consistingof procurement analysts) had to querymultiple sources residing in differentsoftware systems (i.e., Oracle®,Sybase®, Model 204®, SQL-Server®),and even hard-copy reports, to respondto data calls. The group was required toconstruct queries in the native softwarelanguages of the database that theinformation was stored in or had torely on the software development teamto create these queries. Further, thegroup was limited to using only onedata source at a time. Now the groupcan achieve the same results using“drag-and-drop” technology and hasthe ability to marry data from differentsources in one report.

Key business reports are publishedon the CECOM Acquisition Centerknowledge portal—the KnowledgeCenter—in PDF format. This gives theentire workforce access to the informa-tion. Reports are automaticallyrefreshed weekly during off-hours,thereby eliminating the need to impactdaily business processes.

Report SharingAnother way that ARC users share

reports is through BusinessObjects®, apowerful business intelligence tool.BusinessObjects is a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS), Microsoft® Windows-based reporting tool that enables usersto query and analyze data from a cor-porate database. Reports can be pub-lished to the BusinessObjects InfoViewWeb site where users can retrieve, view,and refresh the reports. Other Acquisi-tion Center campus offices needingreport information can create thereport and then be in complete controlof retrieving the data wheneverrequired. Numerous organizations thatformerly contacted the Monitoring andAnalysis Group for data were givenaccess to BusinessObjects and nowhave unprecedented access to theirown data. Remote users can easily editexisting reports for their particularneeds or create new reports or ad hocqueries from scratch.

Tying together different data sys-tems and sources has provided theopportunity to improve many ofCECOM’s business processes. There areseveral areas where these processeshave replaced tedious and time-consuming manual processes. Forexample, the reconciliation of the Indi-vidual Contracting Action Report (DDForm 350), a laborious report effortconducted at the end of each year, isnow automated and tracked through-out the year to ensure that reports are

TAMINGTHE

DATA MONSTERJohn W. Knapp

and Susan Newell

Data Monster-mam 25-26.qxd 8/4/2003 11:24 AM Page 1


timely and accurate. Additionally, thereis an automated process, which movesthis improved data from one databaseto another. Aside from eliminating aduplicative data entry burden, this newsystem has tremendously improveddata accuracy.

Other EffortsMany other process and access

areas were simplified and streamlinedby the ARC. Wherever possible, data areaccessed directly, rather then repli-cated. In most cases the ARC is able toconnect directly to CECOM’s legacysystems to cull reports. Supplementaldata are copied into a data mart andaugmented with data entered locally byCECOM Acquisition Center users foradditional management decision sup-port reports.

A number of smaller, local data-bases are not in an enterprise-level sys-tem, but rather reside on just one com-puter at an employee’s workstation. Ifthe data owner is on leave or on travel,or having PC problems, the data areunavailable, thus making these systemsundesirable “single-user” platforms.These systems are in the process ofbeing replaced with an enterprise-levelOracle database, Web-based front-enddata-entry screens, and Business-Objects reports. Customer-focused sys-tems are also being used to help vali-date data on the data-entry screens aswell as produce dynamic drop-downlists for a real-time list of values on thescreens.

The Knowledge Center is planningto integrate these enhanced systems toeffect an Armywide shift towardimproved knowledge management andbroader accessibility. This integrationpromises to further the AcquisitionCenter’s business transformation goals.

Decision Process The initial phase of the ARC project

evaluated current processes and estab-lished the potential for tapping intoexisting systems. The team began thearduous process of establishing whichsystems contained needed data, andhow and what to access. One of theinitial goals was to access the re-quired data without replicating it,

provided that the systems were alreadyenterprise-level. Local Access data-bases, Excel worksheets, and propri-etary stand-alone databases were eval-uated with an eye toward migratingthem to a robust enterprise-levelsystem.

Once the analysis and prioritiza-tion process was completed, availabletechnologies were evaluated. Threemain technological areas of the projectneeded to be addressed:

• First, a robust, intuitive reportingsystem needed to be selected.

• Second, a Web-based, front-enddata entry form technology had to beidentified.

• Third, a robust, enterprise-leveldatabase management system had tobe agreed upon.

For the project to succeed, the re-porting systems needed to be easy touse and intuitive. One of the project’sgoals was to shift report developmentfrom technical developers to end userswith domain knowledge of the data.These end users may or may not haveadvanced computer skills, making anintuitive application a necessity. Tochoose the appropriate tool, severalevaluation criteria were considered.These included scalability, integration,quick setup, ability to handle multipledata sources, and cost. After evaluatingthe major players in the business intel-ligence field, BusinessObjects was se-lected as the reporting tool for the ARC.

Because security was a major fea-ture to be considered, BusinessObjectswas evaluated and found to offer arobust security module enablingadministrators to restrict access to thesystem and to report categories, spe-cific reports, data sources, and evendata down to the field and record level.User roles can be created to group sim-ilar users. Password rules and changefrequency can also be established toensure that information security ismaintained.

IBM Lotus Notes® was selected as the tool of choice for the front-end development. It has a rapiddevelopment framework and ensureseasy integration with other CECOM

Acquisition Center systems also devel-oped in Lotus Notes. Similarly, Oraclewas selected as the relational databasemanagement system of choice to moreeasily integrate with existing legacysystems and tap into existingresources.

Conclusion The ARC has had a very positive

impact on the CECOM Acquisition Cen-ter. It has helped to streamline manybusiness processes and improved dataentry and reporting. These accomplish-ments include the elimination ofduplicative processes and manual dataentry, enhanced reporting through theability to join and migrate legacy andlocal information, and augmented dataentry by incorporating pick lists andonline data validation. This resulted inmajor time savings and improved accu-racy and detail suitable for all levels ofmanagement.

The flexibility and ease of reportsproduced using BusinessObjects hasimproved CECOM’s responsiveness todata calls and transformed the empha-sis from report production to analysisof the data. This will provide theCECOM Acquisition Center with theopportunity to pursue even moreimproved technological advances tofacilitate its extended business goals.For the time being, the monster hasbeen tamed.

JOHN W. KNAPP, a ProgramAnalyst with Symbolic SystemsInc., supports the U.S. ArmyCECOM Acquisition Center’sAcquisition Electronics InitiativesGroup. He has a B.S. in computerscience from Fairleigh DickinsonUniversity.

SUSAN NEWELL is a Procure-ment Analyst for CECOM’s Acqui-sition Electronics InitiativesGroup. She has a B.S. in educationfrom Glassboro State College (nowRowan University) and is Level IIIcertified in contracting.

Data Monster-mam 25-26.qxd 8/4/2003 11:24 AM Page 2


From The ASC FA51Proponency Officers

In an effort to achieve better customer relations andinformation exchange, the Lockheed Martin ProgramManagement Institute (PMI) has redesigned its curricu-

lum and opened its doors to military program managers.The executive-level course targets promotable majorsthrough colonels and is held in the Washington, DC,metropolitan area at the new Center for LeadershipExcellence in Bethesda, MD.

PMI’s objective is to get at least one uniformed officerfrom each Service at every course offering. There is notuition fee to military program managers and this calen-dar year has two remaining offerings: Sept. 9-12 and Oct.28-31, 2003.

The course is designed to be an intensive 3½ daysand will feature a number of Lockheed Martin and out-side speakers. Moreover, it will address the challenges ofmanaging large, complex programs, particularly thosewith high visibility and/or risk; share lessons learned andbest practices in program management techniques; andstrengthen intracompany program management cooper-ation and teamwork. The course is not mandatory and isoffered as professional development only.

Members of the Army Acquisition Support Centerattended the pilot offering in May 2003. A report on thecourse’s validity will appear in a future issue of ArmyAL&T magazine. Contact MAJ John Lemondes and Al Kinkella at the following addresses for military andcivilian workforce questions respectively:[email protected]@us.army.mil

Army Acquisition Corps BallThis year’s Army Acquisition Corps Ball will be held

Oct. 5, 2003, at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City, 2799 Jef-ferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. Cost of the ball anddinner is $65.00 per person. This year’s theme is “To TheSoldier,” and Program/Product Manager and AcquisitionCommanders of the Year Awards will be presented. Dressfor the evening is Army blue or mess and black tie forcivilians. For more details and reservation information,contact Jean Aleman (703) 806-3837.

ASC ShoulderSleeve Insignia And

Distinctive Unit InsigniaThere have been many questions about the Acquisi-

tion Support Center’s (ASC’s) shoulder sleeve insignia(SSI) and distinctive unit insignia (DUI). These questionsinclude: which individuals are authorized to wear theinsignias, and are they considered the Army AcquisitionCorps (AAC) insignia? This overview will clarify miscon-ceptions in the field about ASC’s SSI and DUI.

FROM THE DIRECTORACQUISITION SUPPORTCENTER

CAREER DEVELOPMENT UPDATE

I’m pleased to announce that the Acquisition Sup-port Center (ASC) has launched its new and improvedWeb site at http://asc.rdaisa.army.mil. The Web site isour prime means of communicating with prospectivemembers of the Acquisition, Logistics and TechnologyWorkforce (AL&TWF) and of promoting the accomplish-ments of current AL&TWF members. I hope you willbookmark our site and visit it at least once a day.

ASC is gearing up for this year’s Acquisition SeniorLeaders’ Conference, to be held August 11-14, 2003, inSeattle, WA. This invitation-only event, themed“Strengthening Our Link with the Warfighter,” is ouropportunity to meet with top senior acquisition leadersand spend some quality time with soldiers at Fort Lewis,WA.

Be sure to mark your calendar for the Fourth AnnualArmy Acquisition Corps (AAC) Ball that will be held atthe Hyatt Regency Crystal City, VA, Sunday, October 5,2003. The AAC Ball precedes the Association of theUnited States Army’s 2003 Annual Meeting, October 6-8,in Washington, DC. ASC will represent the AAC at thisprestigious event. So stop by, say hello, and take a look atour new booth, which showcases our many acquisitionprofessionals’ accomplishments and links those accom-plishments to our warfighters’ success on the battlefield.

I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome ASC’snew Strategic Communications Director, Mike Roddin.He is leading ASC’s efforts to promote the U.S. ArmyAcquisition Workforce Campaign Plan and all other ASCcommunication and outreach activities. (See relatedarticle on Page 40.)

COL Mary FullerDirectorAcquisition Support Center

CDU - From Director ASC 27-28.qxd 8/4/2003 11:32 AM Page 1


Background

The current SSI and DUI were approved by the Insti-tute of Heraldry for the U.S. Army Acquisition ExecutiveSupport Agency (AAESA) in 1998. When the AcquisitionCareer Management Office and AAESA were merged tocreate the Acquisition Support Center in 2002, ASCretained the SSI and DUI of AAESA.

ASC’s SSI and DUI patches are to be worn only bythose military personnel assigned to the ASC Table ofDistribution and Allowances (TDA). This includes thoseProgram Executive Offices (PEOs) and staff elementsassigned to the ASC TDA. Another indication that youare allowed to wear the patch is if your Military Acquisi-tion Position List (MAPL) number begins with “AE.” Thisis a position under the ASC TDA.

In a survey conducted last fall regarding the ASC SSI,respondents from various PEOs said that they would liketo have an SSI and DUI. Because all PEOs are assigned tothe ASC TDA, they are authorized to wear the ASC SSIand DUI. This includes the two most recent PEOs stoodup under ASC—Program Executive Office for Simulation,Training, and Instrumentation and Program ExecutiveOffice for Chemical and Biological Defense.

Although the patches are based on the AAC logo,they are not an Acquisition Corps SSI or DUI, nor arethey prescribed for wear by individuals not assigned tothe ASC TDA. Individuals assigned to other organiza-tions or units should wear the SSI and DUI of theirrespective organization or unit. For example, a contin-gency contractor assigned to the 82nd Airborne Divisionshould wear the SSI and DUI of the 82nd Airborne.

There is no plan to develop an AAC SSI or regimentalaffiliation. Although it is the Army Acquisition Corps,military personnel are actually managed as a functionalarea, not a true branch. Military personnel retain theirbasic branch and are managed by the Acquisition Man-agement Branch at U.S. Total Army Personnel Command.

For information on obtaining the SSI or DUI, contactSGT Dorothy Jackson, Administrative Noncommissioned

Officer, ASC, at (703) 805-2924, DSN 655-2924, [email protected].

CON 353 Pilot CoursesEffective Oct. 1, 2003, CON 353 will replace CON 301

and CON 333 and will be the new Level III courserequired for certification training in contracting. Twopilot courses are scheduled in the 4th quarter.

Individuals requiring Level III certification in con-tracting who have not completed CON 301 or CON 333should apply for one of the pilots.

As part of the e-mail notification of attendance, thestudent will be directed to the CON 353 course Web siteat http://qp.dau.mil/con353. Students will be given theirpre-course assignments at that site.

Pre-course work includes students starting assign-ments that they will finish in class. An example of one ofthe pre-course assignments is meeting with the supervi-sor to identify a local contracting-related challenge anddescribing the challenge to the class. As part of the course,students will recommend solutions to their supervisors.Specifically, they will develop a point paper and materialfor their organizations.

Another example of pre-course work is that the classwill be assigned a senior leader challenge to work as partof the course. Students will work together to take a posi-tion on the challenge and to develop recommendedapproaches and alternatives. Students will brief a seniorleader at the end of the course.

If you have completed CON 333 but not CON 301 bySept. 30, 2003, then your Level III contracting DefenseAcquisition Workforce Improvement Act certificationtraining requirements are satisfied, and you are notrequired to complete CON 353.

If you have completed CON 301 but have not com-pleted CON 333 by Sept. 30, 2003, then you will berequired to take the new CON 353. All but four CON 301classes will be removed from the 4th quarter DefenseAcquisition University schedule. All CON 333 classes willinitially be removed from the 4th quarter, then addi-tional classes will be added back to the 4th quarterschedule to support individuals who need CON 333 tocomplete their certification training this fiscal year.


ASC SSI Symbolism: Black,white, and yellow are the colorsof the AAC emblem. The Greekletters alpha and omega areadopted from the AAC’semblem and symbolize theintricate and continuous acqui-sition process and mission.

ASC DUI Symbolism: Black,white, and yellow are the colorsof the AAC emblem. The eagle,our national symbol, representsvigilance and military pre-paredness. Laurel symbolizeshonor and achievement. Pre-Course Resident Resident Pilot

Start Start End Location

Jul. 14, 2003 Aug. 12, 2003 Aug. 22, 2003 Fort Belvoir

Aug. 11, 2003 Sep. 9, 2003 Sep. 19, 2003 Fort Belvoir

CDU - From Director ASC 27-28.qxd 8/4/2003 11:32 AM Page 2


CDG Program MemberDefends Our Country

Competitive Development Group (CDG) Program YearGroup 01 member LTC Kenneth L. Wright, who was recentlyselected Product Manager (PM) on the FY04 LTC/GS 14PM/Acquisition Command Board, has been called to activeduty. He was mobilized for 90 days to Aberdeen ProvingGround, MD, where he served as Battalion Commander.

Wright is the Commander of the 326th MaintenanceBattalion, located in Owings Mills, MD. The 326th Mainte-nance Battalion has more than 700 soldiers assigned with avariety of maintenance specialties. The work performed isprimarily on wheeled equipment and vehicles. The 326thwas constituted in the U.S. Army in 1943 and served in theEuropean theater during World War II. The unit receivedcampaign participation credit for the Rhineland, Ardennes-Alsace, and Central Europe campaigns.

Wright is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps andthe CDG Program. His last civilian position was with Pro-ject Manager, Information Management and Telecommu-nications working on the Pentagon Renovation Program.Previously, he has been assigned as Acting Executive Offi-cer for the Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of theArmy for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology; Acquisi-tion Manager, on the Future Combat Systems Task Force;Staff Action Officer, Troop Support, Office of the DeputyChief of Staff for Logistics; and Assistant Program Managerwith the Marine Corps Systems Command and the NavySea Systems Command.

Wright has a bachelor’s degree from the University ofSouth Carolina and an M.B.A. from Strayer University. Healso graduated from the U.S. Army War College with a mas-ter’s degree in strategic studies and completed theAdvanced Program Manager’s Course at the Defense Sys-tems Management College. He is Level III certified in pro-gram management and acquisition logistics and Level I cer-tified in information technology. In addition, Wright is arecipient of the Achievement Medal for Civil Service andnumerous exceptional performance awards.

PERSCOM Notes . . .

FY02 Colonel PromotionBoard Results

The release of any promotion list is always followed byan exhaustive data analysis to “map” the characteristics ofthe considered and selected populations. This article sum-marizes the Acquisition Management Branch’s analysis ofthe Army Acquisition Corps (AAC) population for the FY02Colonel Promotion Board.

Overall AAC ResultsThe selection board chose 40 officers for colonel from

all zones of consideration. Board members reviewed thefiles of 55 AAC officers in the primary zone. From this popu-lation, 35 officers were selected for promotion. The result-ing selection rate of 63.6 percent was above the OperationalSupport Career Field rate of 54.7 percent and above theArmy Competitive Category rate of 52.8 percent. The ArmyCompetitive Category rates are based on published careerfield statistics.

Board members also reviewed the files of 30 AAC offi-cers from above the zone. From this population, three offi-cers were selected for promotion, a selection rate of 10 per-cent. The above-the-zone Operational Support Career Fieldselection rate was 5.5 percent, and the above-the-zoneArmy Competitive Category selection rate was 2.8 percent.

Board members further reviewed the files of 66 AACofficers from below the zone. From this population, twoofficers were selected for promotion, a selection rate of3.03 percent. The below-the-zone Operational SupportCareer Field selection rate was 6.7 percent; the below-the-zone Army Competitive Category selection rate was 6.5percent.

Primary Zone PromotionsOf the 35 AAC officers selected in the primary zone, 31

officers (88.57 percent) were either current or previous cen-trally selected product managers (PMs) or acquisition com-manders (ACs). Of these 31 officers, 26 had at least twocommand Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) in their boardfile.

The average number of command OERs for primaryzone officers selected was just under three. All officers hadonly DA Form 67-9 command OERs. Selectees had an aver-age of two above-center-of-mass command (ACOM) OERsand an average of less than one center-of-mass (COM)command OER. Officers selected had ACOM and COM+files.

Fifteen of the 35 primary zone officers selected (42.9percent) were not Senior Service College (SSC) graduates orselectees prior to the FY02 Colonel Promotion Board.

The majority of selectees (88.57 percent) served or arecurrently serving as a Command Select List (CSL) PM or AC.No trends were noted with respect to any other category ofduty positions.


CDU Continued 29-34.qxd 8/4/2003 11:38 AM Page 1


Eighty-one percent of the officers selected served in theMilitary District of Washington (MDW) at some time duringtheir acquisition careers. A large portion (22 percent) of theofficers also served at Fort Monmouth or Picatinny Arsenal,NJ. Other previous acquisition tour locations included Ari-zona, California, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland (out-side MDW), Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Texas, Vir-ginia (outside MDW), Bosnia, Germany, Korea, Kosovo,Saudi Arabia. (No military or civilian school locations wereincluded.)

A large portion of selectees had served in the ArmyMateriel Command (71 percent) or the Acquisition SupportCenter (65 percent). However, this is not indicative of anytrend; it is simply a result of which commands “own” acqui-sition positions.

Above And Below The ZoneAll of the officers selected above and below the zone

were current or former PMs or ACs. Eighty percent of thesecompleted or were selected to attend SSC. Duty locationsduring their acquisition careers varied (Arizona, California,District of Columbia, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, NewJersey, Virginia, Washington, Honduras, and Kuwait). Sev-enty-five percent of these officers had served in the MDW.As with the primary zone selectees, the above- and below-the-zone officers served in a wide variety of commands.Sixty percent were assigned to the Office of the AssistantSecretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Tech-nology at some point in their careers.

Selectee TrendsBased on this analysis, officers competitive for promo-

tion to colonel generally are serving or have served success-fully as a PM or AC. Command performance evaluationsinclude (on average) two ACOM and one COM ratingsunder the DA Form 67-9 OER system. Overall file qualitywas ACOM or COM+ (i.e., performed well in whatever posi-tions they have held).

Who Was Not Promoted?Of the 20 officers in the primary zone not selected for

promotion to colonel, two were either current or formerPMs or ACs. Eighteen officers not selected for promotionhad not served as a lieutenant colonel PM or AC.

As with selectees, other than CSL PM or AC, no trendswere noted regarding duty positions. With respect to assis-tant PM and deputy PM positions, officers selected for pro-motion did not hold these positions at any greater rate thandid officers who were not selected.

A large number of these officers (65 percent) servedacquisition tours in the MDW. Other previous tour loca-tions included Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Geor-gia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland (outside MDW), Michigan,Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas, Virginia (out-side MDW), Canada, Germany, Greece, Kwajalein Atoll,

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Several offi-cers also served short-term rotations in Saudi Arabia andSomalia. These duty locations are very similar to the dutylocations listed for the officers selected for promotion.

Officers not selected for promotion (regardless ofwhether they were current or former PMs or ACs) had anaverage of one ACOM and two COM DA Form 67-9 OERs.The majority of officers not selected for promotion hadoverall COM+ or COM performance files.

Nonselectee TrendsOfficers with straight COM OERs are not competitive

for promotion to colonel. Officers with COM+ and ACOMfiles are competitive if they have performed very well(strong COM+ or ACOM) as a lieutenant colonel PM or AC.Late selection for PM or AC can lead to nonselection if theofficers do not have any, or a significantly less than theaverage number of, PM or AC OERs in their board file. Lateselection is defined as being selected or activated from thealternate list on your third or fourth looks for lieutenantcolonel PM or AC (i.e., timing such that you could notexpect to have the average number of command reportsbefore your primary zone look for promotion to colonel).Duty positions (with the exception of PM or AC), duty loca-tions, and specific commands do not show any type oftrend.

General Observations The file quality of officers selected for promotion con-

tinues to be strong. Because of the tough competition, notall successful PMs or ACs will get promoted. Early selectionfor lieutenant colonel PM or AC can improve the chances ofselection simply because of the additional command evalu-ations available for the board’s review (assuming the evalu-ations support promotion). COM evaluations should havesubstantive narrative comments provided by senior raters,which should focus on an officer’s potential.

Summary Competition for promotion to colonel is extremely

high. Strongly documented duty performance (includingcommand) is the key to selection. Additionally, officers inall zones should personally review their Officer Record Briefand microfiche to ensure the information is accurate andcomplete. Photos that are more than 2 years old, are in full-length format, are not current (e.g., awards), or are not par-ticularly good should be replaced.

The bottom line is that promotion to colonel is verytough. Because of AAC shortages at the colonel level, theAAC received a promotion floor this year that resulted in asmall number of officers getting promoted who did notcommand at the lieutenant colonel level. However, overallfile quality in addition to ACOM/COM+ performance as alieutenant colonel PM or AC is crucial.




FY02 AAC Colonel SelecteesThe following is a list of acquisition officers selected for

colonel by the FY02 Colonel Promotion Board.

Abercrombie, Henry EugeneBonheim, Michael EugeneBrouse, Steven MichaelBurnett, Donald JamesCarson, Peggy RoxanneColon, Angel LuisCoutteau, Charles GeorgeDixon, Timothy DeanEberle, Nathan RoyEconomy, Anas Tommy IIIEveland, George Dean Jr.Fierko, Francis XavierGoddette, Timothy GerardGrubb, Susan KayHansen, Richard Donald Jr.Harris, Earnest DavidHarrison, Theodore CourtlandIncorvati, Anthony Ralph IIJones, Kermit CalvinKendrick, Robert IIILambkin, Glen David Jr.Mahanna, Cory WadeMcGuire, Paul Arthur Jr.Montford, Leonard Ray Jr.Neumann, Susan BottorffParker, William ErnestRalph, James Robert IIIRamos, EnriqueRider, Mark DevorScarbrough, Jess AllenSears, George Albert IIStevenson, William WayneStoleson, Michelle DarlingSullivan, Christopher CyrilUlsh, Gregory JayVaughn, John KendrickWaller, Henry HallWalters, StephenWolfe, Daniel GlennYarborough, Michelle Faith

FY04 LTC/GS-14PM/AC Board Results

The U.S. Total Army Personnel Command’s(PERSCOM’s) Acquisition Management Branch (AMB)recently completed an analysis of the FY04 Product Man-ager (PM)/Acquisition Command (AC) Board results andoverall command opportunity for Army Acquisition Corps

(AAC) officers and civilians. The selection board was heldDec. 7-13, 2002, and the selection list was released April 3,2003. The following paragraphs summarize the results andindicate possible trends.

Overall ResultsBoard members reviewed the files of 294 AAC members

and selected 48 principals for PM, AC, or contracting com-mand assignments. The selectees included 39 acquisitionofficers, 3 Medical Service (MS) officers, and 6 acquisitioncivilians. Of the 42 military officers chosen, 28 are slated forPM or AC assignments, while 14 are slated for contractingcommand assignments. The overall selection rate was 16percent. The military selection rate was 17 percent (42/241),and the civilian selection rate was 11 percent (6/53). Officerresults by year group (YG) are as follows (not inclusive ofrevalidated or MS officers): YG87 (6), YG86 (17), YG85 (9),YG84 (5), YG83 (1), and YG82 (1).

Who Was Selected?All of the civilians and more than 90 percent of the offi-

cers slated for PM or AC assignments served as assistant ordeputy PMs. Additionally, more than 85 percent of thoseslated in PM or AC assignments served on a major head-quarters staff (such as Army Test and Evaluation Command;Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,Logistics and Technology; or Army Materiel Command(AMC)) and/or an executive officer assignment. Eight of the14 officers (57 percent) slated to be contracting command-ers had at least 4 years contracting experience at either theDefense Contract Management Agency, Defense LogisticsAgency, AMC or Forces Command. Four officers with only aprogram management background were slated to contract-ing commands. Everyone selected has a master’s degree,and one officer has a Ph.D. Nine officers were not previouslyselected for resident Command and General Staff Collegebut completed the nonresident course.

General ObservationsConsistently strong evaluations were common among

selectees. The average number of Officer Evaluation Reports(OERs) under the new DA Form 67-9 was 4.6 for selectees,4.9 for alternates, and 4.9 for officers not selected as a prin-cipal or an alternate. The average number of above-center-of-mass OERs under the DA Form 67-9 was 3.5 for selectees,2.8 for alternates, and 1.8 for officers not selected as a prin-cipal or an alternate. The average number of center-of-massOERs under the DA Form 67-9 was 1.1 for selectees, 2.1 foralternates, and 3.1 for officers not selected as a principal oran alternate.

The civilians selected as principals and alternates hadvery strong comments on their Senior Rater Potential Evalu-ations (SRPEs). In addition, they had previously been




selected for either the Competitive Development GroupProgram, Senior Service College Program, or had per-formed duties as a deputy project/product manager. Formilitary officers, the trend for first-look selection contin-ues. For civilians, the principals and alternates wereselected on their second or third time considered.

ConclusionBefore future PM/AC boards convene, it is impera-

tive for officers to personally “scrub” their Officer RecordBrief and microfiche to ensure that accurate informationis conveyed to board members. Approximately 180 daysprior to the board convening, officers should check theirOfficial Military Personnel File (OMPF) online athttps://www.perscom.army.mil. (Click on the OMPFicon.) You will need your Army Knowledge Online username and password to access your OMPF. Traditionally,the board meets in December each year. Until the ArmySelection Board System is fully operational, AMB willscrub packets for officers in the zone of consideration30-45 days prior to the date of the board. If your officialphoto is more than 2 years old, replace it. Prior to takinga new photo, check the awards, branch, and U.S. insigniaon your uniform. Attention to detail makes a difference.Until further notice, two hard-copy photos must be for-warded to PERSCOM along with the electronic Depart-ment of the Army Photograph Management InformationSystem photo.

To be competitive for future selection as a PM orcommander, captains and majors should seek career-broadening experiences. Officers should seek jobs thatoffer experiences in program management, combatdevelopment, testing, and contracting. With a limitednumber of positions in program offices, PERSCOM willcontinue to rotate captains and majors at 24- to 36-month intervals to ensure a sufficient pool of experi-enced, qualified officers for future PM and commandpositions is available. Officers who want to be competi-tive for contracting commands should seek contractingofficer positions in pre-award, post-award, and contin-gency contracting officer environments.

Civilians should take time to ensure that their appli-cation packages are complete and contain all requireddocuments. Special attention should be given to ensur-ing the information contained on the Acquisition CareerRecord Brief (ACRB) is accurate. Dates reflected on theACRB should match dates shown on the résumé (e.g.,dates of assignments on ACRB should match datesrecorded on the résumé). Current ACRBs may beobtained from Acquisition Career Managers (ACMs) andsubmitted with application packages. Discrepanciessuch as missing evaluations should be explained.Remember, the application package reflects your careerand defines your training, education, and experience to

the board. Civilians must also stress to their supervisorsthe importance of the SRPE. Weak comments or the lackof comments may negatively impact the board’s selec-tion decision. Your ACM at PERSCOM is the best sourceof information with respect to board preparation.

Congratulations to the following lieutenant colonel,major promotable, and GS-14 PM/AC selectees. (Note:Civilians are indicated by an asterisk.)

Baez, Jose LuisBallew, Mark EdwardBarraclough, Brett AllenBernritter, Travis Laymon*Brewer, Carlton E.Bushey, Douglas BowersCarrick, Kenneth GeorgeCole, William EdwardContreras, AndresDaniels, Debra DeenaDay, James VictorDedecker, Craig AlanDietz, James EricFahy, Stephen RobertFinley, Alfonso JayFouse, Scott DaleHess, John PowersHinds, John ConradJacobsen, Scott AlanJones, WalterKelleher, John Henry Jr.Lazar, John MatthewLeaphart, John RussellLindsay, Michael AnthonyMarion, Robert Lee*Martin, Jose F.Mason, William RossMorton, Dwayne AllanNagel, James Roger*Nichols, Marvin W.Noble, Earl DavidPeterson, Kevin BryanRand, Jaimy SusannaRiggins, David Wilburn*Rubens, Shirley C.Schleder-Kirkpatrick, Lisa R.Smith, Earle IISmith, Todd LyndallTamilio, Douglas AlanTarcza, Kenneth Robert*Thomas, Robert L.Trulock, Troy EugeneWood, Kelvin Renard*Wright, Kenneth L.Young, Reed FisherZoppa, Robert Joseph




FY03 Army Experimental TestPilot Board

One of the responsibilities of the U.S. Total ArmyPersonnel Command’s Acquisition Management Branch(AMB) is to manage the Army’s Experimental Test Pilot(XTP) Program. This 11-month program is open to activeduty Army aviators and is offered at the U.S. Naval TestPilot School (USNTPS), Patuxent River Naval Air Station,MD.

AMB conducted the FY03 U.S. Army XTP SelectionBoard on Feb. 19-21, 2003. The XTP Board’s mission wasto select the best-qualified commissioned and warrantofficers as candidates to attend the USNTPS, with ulti-mate certification as a U.S. Army Experimental Test Pilot.Congratulations to the following “best-qualified” com-missioned and warrant officers selected to attend theUSNTPS:

Buhr, Todd CPTCrispino, Jesse A. CPT Frasier, Johnathan B. CPTGonzalez, Hector A. CPTPhillips, David C. CPTGoggin, Sean D. CW4Moore, Rucie CW4Grady, Stephen T. CW3Logwood, Clinton G. II CW3Wagner, Robert M. CW2

The board reviewed a total of 30 applicants (17 com-missioned officers and 13 warrant officers) per MilitaryPersonnel Message number 03-021. The FY03 boardselected five commissioned officers and five warrant offi-cers as primary (best-qualified) candidates. The boardalso identified an alternate candidate list consisting ofseven commissioned officers and three warrant officers.

Prior to the board convening, AMB provided a copyof the U.S. Army XTP Memorandum of Instruction toboard members. The board president stressed theimportance of the XTP Program because of the complex-ity and risk levels that are inherent in experimental anddevelopmental flight-testing and the significant invest-ment the Army has in each candidate. He also stressedthe importance of increased joint-service cooperation inthe fidelity of each applicant’s packet, to includeendorsements from the field, because the packet servesas the only means available to determine the applicant’spotential to qualify as an XTP.

The overall selection rate was 33 percent (10 bestqualified of 30 applicants). AMB has sent written notifi-cation of board results to all considered officers. AMB

will award commissioned officers selected by the boardthe Additional Skill Identifier of 4M (Acquisition Candi-date) and will subsequently manage the officer. The War-rant Officer Division will continue to manage board-selected warrant officers.

The board recommended the following changesredefining the commissioned officer application require-ments be taken into consideration for the FY04 U.S.Army XTP Board:

• Commissioned officer applicants must have at leasta bachelor’s degree in an engineering discipline or adegree with an engineering- or science-heavy curricu-lum that includes the following academic courses: calcu-lus I and II, classical physics, statics and dynamics (engi-neering mechanics), and computer science.

• Other desirable academic courses include differen-tial equations, aircraft stability and control, thermo-dynamics, heat transfer, strength of materials, fluidmechanics, propulsion, vibration analysis, and aero-dynamics and performance.

• Officers must be branch-qualified prior to closingdate of packet submission to the board, and a copy of abranch-qualifying Officer Evaluation Report must be inthe application packet.

• Officers must have a minimum of 200 hours ofpilot-in-command time in rotary-wing aircraft.

There were no changes recommended for applica-tion requirements of warrant officers.

XTP selectees will serve in utilization assignmentsbased on the needs of the Army. Initial tours will beserved at the Aviation Technical Test Center, Fort Rucker,AL, or the Aviation Applied Technology Directorate, FortEustis, VA. USNTPS graduates will serve as XTPs or inorganizational staff positions that directly affect the type,design, and configuration of Army aircraft.

For additional information, go to:https://www.perscomonline.army.mil/OPfam51/EXP.htm.

Commissioned officers interested in applying shouldcontact MAJ Keith Harvey at (703) 325-3128/DSN 221-3128 or e-mail [email protected]. War-rant officers interested in applying should contact CW3Kimberly Young at (703) 325-5228/DSN 221-5228 or e-mail [email protected].

FY04 White HouseFellowship Program

The President’s Commission on White House Fellowsannually selects exceptionally promising individuals toserve as White House fellows. The White House Fellow-ship Program is an opportunity for soldiers to receiveunique training and firsthand experience in the processof governing the Nation. Fellows write speeches, help




review and draft proposed legislation, answer congres-sional inquiries, chair meetings, conduct briefings, andotherwise assist high-level government officials. In thepast, fellows have worked for the Vice President, theWhite House Chief of Staff, and the National SecurityCouncil.

Candidates for the White House Fellowship Programmust progress through a highly competitive process. Appli-cants are expected to have a record of achievement in theircareers, the skills necessary to serve at the highest levels ofgovernment, and above-average leadership potential. To beeligible for the program, officers must meet the followingcriteria:

• Be a U.S. citizen.• Have no more than 19 years active federal commis-

sioned service as of September 2004.• Be available for a 2-year utilization tour following the

fellowship.• Be branch qualified at current rank. • Have no adverse actions pending.• Meet height and weight standards per Army Regula-

tion 600-9, The Army Weight Program.• Have a graduate degree.• Have no Army educational requirements system uti-

lization obligation at start of the fellowship.• Have potential for future military service. • Be competing solely for the White House Fellowship

Program and no other Army-sponsored program, fellow-ship, or scholarship.

The U.S. Total Army Personnel Command’s (PERSCOM’s) Acquisition Management Branch (AMB) willconduct a review board in December 2003 to select Acquisi-tion Corps officers for nomination to the program. Officersinterested in applying for the program should go to theAMB Web site at: https://www.perscomonline.army.mil/ OPfam51/WhiteHouseFellowship.htm

Please follow the procedures listed for submitting anapplication. The suspense date for submitting applicationsis Dec. 1, 2003. Officers are encouraged to review andupdate their Official Military Personnel File (on microfiche)prior to submitting their application. Applicants should alsoverify with their assignment officer that all college tran-scripts and a current photo are on file at AMB.

PERSCOM headquarters will forward Army officernominations to the White House Commission prior to Feb. 1, 2004. Regional finalists will be selected in March,followed by the selection of national finalists in May. TheWhite House Commission is scheduled to announce theselected fellows in June 2004. The fellowship year runs fromSeptember 2004 to August 2005. This is followed by a 2-yearutilization assignment that will begin in September 2005.

Officers incur an active duty service obligation (ADSO)for a period of three times the length of the fellowship. TheADSO begins the day after the fellowship is completed.

Additional information is available on the White HouseFellowship Program Web site at:http://www.whitehousefellows.gov/home.html.

FY05 Army CongressionalFellowship Program

HQDA has announced that the FY05 Congressional Fel-lowship Program will be conducted August 2004-November2005. This program offers top Army officers an outstandingopportunity to receive valuable training and experience byserving as staff assistants to members of Congress. Fellowsare typically given responsibility for drafting legislation,arranging congressional hearings, writing speeches andfloor statements, and briefing congressional members forcommittee deliberations and floor debates.

The U.S. Total Army Personnel Command’s AcquisitionManagement Branch (AMB) will conduct a review board inOctober 2003 to select Army Acquisition Corps (AAC) offi-cers for the program. On Dec. 2-4, 2003, the Army Congres-sional Fellowship Selection Board will convene to reviewapplications and make final selections. To be eligible for theprogram, officers must meet the following criteria:

• Hold the rank of major or lieutenant colonel with nomore than 17 years active federal commissioned service asof Jan. 1, 2004.

• Be a graduate of the Command and General Staff Col-lege (resident or nonresident).

• Be branch qualified at current rank.• Have no adverse actions pending. • Meet height and weight requirements per Army Regu-

lation (AR) 600-9, The Army Weight Program. • Be available for a utilization tour immediately follow-

ing the fellowship. • Not be competing for any other sponsored program,

fellowship, or scholarship. • Have potential for future military service.

The Congressional Fellowship Program begins with anAugust-December 2004 HQDA orientation and attendanceat the Force Integration Course and a variety of meetingsand seminars. Following the orientation period, fellowsserve as staff assistants to members of Congress fromJanuary-November 2005. After completing the program,officers incur an active duty service obligation of no lessthan three times the length of the fellowship (per AR 350-100) and must serve a 2-year utilization assignment in aposition that requires knowledge of congressional activities.

To apply for the FY05 Congressional Fellowship Pro-gram, AAC officers should go to:https://www. perscomonline.army.mil/OPfam51/Congres-sionalFellowship.htm.

Please follow the directions for submitting an applica-tion. The suspense date for submitting applications to AMBis Oct. 7, 2003.

Army civilians (GS-13 to 15 or equivalent pay-/broad-band) are also eligible for the program. For details, go to:http://cpol.army.mil/train/catalog/acfp.html.

Additional information on the Congressional Fellow-ship Program is available at the Office, Chief LegislativeLiaison Web site at:http://www.hqda.army.mil/ocll.



TARDEC DemosKey Vetronics ATDs

On March 13, 2003, the U.S. Army Tank AutomotiveResearch, Development and Engineering Center’s(TARDEC’s) Vetronics Technology Area associates hostedthe Vetronics Technology Integration (VTI) Program VIP Dayat McGregor Range, Fort Bliss, TX.

Vetronics, or vehicle electronics, is the discipline oftotal ground vehicle electrical and electronics systems inte-gration. TARDEC’s Vetronics Technology Area conductsresearch in intelligent systems, robotic mobility, crew sta-tions, embedded simulation, system architecture andtelematics while leveraging advanced automotive technol-ogy. This provides soldiers with the world’s most advancedground vehicle systems and logistics support equipment.

The VTI Program encompasses the Army’s Crew inte-gration and Automation Test (CAT) bed and the RoboticFollower Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD). ATDsare critical to the Army’s transformation and the ObjectiveForce, said TARDEC Executive Director for Research Dr.Grace M. Bochenek.

She added that ATDs are a vital part of the Army’s sci-ence and technology (S&T) program because they helpmature advanced technologies to upgrade existing systemsand enable development of next-generation and future sys-tems. Thus, personnel can experiment with technology-driven operational issues and be better informed whenpreparing requirements documents prior to milestonedecisions.

The Army needs smaller, lighter combat vehicles withincreased lethality, survivability, and mobility. In addition,the Army must assimilate and distribute more informationto, from, and within its vehicles. A digital battlefield alsorequires marked increases in vehicle command, control,communication, and computer system performance. Assuch, future combat vehicles need highly integratedmultimission-capable crew stations. The CAT ATDaddresses this need.

Moreover, the Objective Force will be rapidly deploy-able, extremely lethal, and highly survivable. Extensive infu-sion of unmanned ground vehicle systems offers a viablepath toward achieving those goals. The Robotic FollowerATD addresses a comparatively low-risk approach tounmanned ground vehicles than the more complex “out-front” robots.

VTI officials said the CAT ATD goal is to design anadvanced two-man crew station for a system of less than 20tons incorporating the Future Combat Systems (FCS) fight,carrier, reconnaissance, and command and control ofunmanned systems. TARDEC Vetronics Technology AreaDeputy Director Bruce Brendle said some of the key CATrequirements include vehicle crew stations, control ofunmanned systems, speech recognition, 3-D audio, indirectvision driving, autopilot, robotic follower path generation,drive by wire, position navigation, and embeddedsimulation.

Brendle explained that the Robotic Follower ATD woulddevelop, integrate, and demonstrate the technologyrequired to achieve unmanned follower capabilities forfuture land combat vehicles. This technology will provide acore capability to conduct a wide variety of FCS and Objec-tive Force applications such as ruck carrier, supply platoon,non-line-of-sight and below-line-of-sight fire, and rearsecurity. It will also support manned combat, tactical, andother support vehicles.

The March 13 ATDs were key to bringing combat andmateriel developers together with industry to explore thetechnical feasibility, affordability, and potential of technolo-gies to support current and emerging warfighting concepts.ATDs investigate technical options and eliminate unattain-able technologies in the early stages of a program. The FortBliss demos were important milestones in the VTI initiativeand will provide substantial data for FCS Milestone B.

The Fort Bliss VTI event showed contractors, JointRobotics Program officials, and a variety of key Army stake-holders that CAT and Robotic Follower technologies areready for integration into the FCS Program and are criticalto the Objective Force.

Attendees were briefed on what they would be witness-ing prior to heading to McGregor Range. The ATDs inte-grated CAT and Robotic Follower technologies onto aStryker chassis, and the attendees witnessed robotic fol-lower line-of-sight following that included perception tech-nology taken from the groundbreaking Demo III programthat was “migrated over.” Demo III was a Defense Depart-ment program aimed at developing and demonstratingnew, evolving, fully autonomous vehicle technologies withan emphasis on perception, navigation, task planning andintelligent system architecture.

Attendees also witnessed demos including high-speedautonomous Stryker road following; dismounted roboticfollower, where an experimental unmanned vehicleautonomously followed a soldier; a Robotic Follower chase,where guests piled into High Mobility MultipurposeWheeled Vehicles to chase and observe an autonomousStryker while it traversed rugged desert terrain; Robotic Fol-lower observation from a bus on a dirt road; and CAT oper-ation, where crew members tele-operated the experimentalunmanned vehicle and supervised the Robotic Follower inautonomous mobility mode. Finally, VTI guests viewed aStryker off-road following demo.

Bochenek said that the ATD demos were major mile-posts on the road to fielding the Objective Force. Sheadded, “The CAT ATD is the linchpin to advanced two-mancrew stations for FCS, and the Robotic Follower ATD seeksto mature and demonstrate key robotics technologyrequired for early insertion into FCS.”

Concluding, Bochenek stated that TARDEC’s VetronicsTechnology Area clearly showed how the ATD pacing tech-nologies are generating critical data to support FCS Mile-stone B. Additionally, TARDEC’s partners are playing amajor role in furthering these critical Army S&T objectivesfor FCS.

NEWS BRIEFS


Briefs 35-39.qxd 8/4/2003 11:58 AM Page 1

Parachute AccuracyImproved At YPG

A C-130H aircraft flown by members of the WyomingNational Guard recently droned over Sidewinder Drop Zoneat U.S. Army Yuma Proving Ground (YPG), AZ, at a height of15,000 feet above sea level, poised to drop a small electronicdevice. The several pound piece of hardware, known as a“drop-sonde,” gathers meteorological data for use in para-chute drops of cargo weighing more than 500 pounds.Through use of the device, heavy parachute drops that tookplace moments later were unbelievably accurate, hitting theground within 100 meters of the target.

We've all seen movies in which parachute drops of sup-plies to waiting soldiers went awry and fell into enemyhands. According to Paul Mortaloni, Acting Chief of the AirDelivery and Soldier Systems Division, that's exactly the sit-uation drop-sondes were designed to avoid.

Drop-sondes are deployed from aircraft through a chaffdispenser or by an unmanned aerial vehicle in advance of aparachute payload drop. “Drop-sondes provide real-timewind and meteorological information,” Mortaloniexplained. “This enables people onboard cargo aircraft torecompute the release point to make the actual drop moreprecise, based on the near real-time weather information.”In the past, parachute drops were computed with meteoro-logical data that were up to several hours old.

The drop-sonde itself is a very small device, weighingno more than a few pounds and is easily handled. However,each drop-sonde packs an electronic punch that can be agreat force multiplier.

Cargo loads ranging between 1,100 and 2,200 poundscan be dropped with great accuracy through use of thedrop-sondes. Although cargo loads at the proving groundare simulated with weights that weigh the same amount,actual parachutes are used. In the case of the parachutesused to drop the recent 1,100-pound loads, high-velocity26-foot parachutes delivered the cargo to the ground at 70to 90 feet per second. A cushioning system of honeycomb-like crushable corrugated cardboard takes up a great deal ofthe shock when the load hits. An actual load for this type ofdrop might consist of rations, blankets, boots, clothing, andmany other items.

According to Mortaloni, this type of testing is importantbecause it improves the precision of resupply drops. Thisparticular test has taken place for about 3 years. In general,the Army is focused on developing 100-meter accuracy forall resupply drops. This can be done in various ways, suchas using drop-sondes or guided technologies like globalpositioning systems (GPS).

YPG has performed the lion’s share of the developmen-tal testing for guided parachute systems. Most recently,Mortaloni returned from receiving his master's degree inaeronautical engineering at the Naval Postgraduate Schoolin Monterey, CA, where he developed the aerodynamicmodel for the ram air parafoil system for use in the devel-opment of guidance algorithms for precision-guided sys-tems. Precision-guided systems will eventually be capableof steering themselves to accurate, pinpoint landings. One

of the considerations is cost, so several technologies arecurrently being studied.

The Natick Soldier Systems Center, located in Massa-chusetts, manages the development of these systems for theArmy but relies heavily on YPG's airdrop systems expertise.YPG engineers help evaluate the systems being tested toeventually down select to a single precision-guided systemfor fielding.

Tests take place throughout the year with aircraft flyinginto the proving ground at least every other week to con-duct a number of parachute drop missions.

This article was written byChuck Wullenjohn, YPG Pub-lic Affairs Officer.

Apache Combat MissionSimulator Gets Rapid

Enhancement To SupportOperation Iraqi Freedom

The U.S. Army Program Executive Office, Simulation,Training, and Instrumentation (PEO, STRI) in Orlando, FL,recently commissioned Northrop Grumman Mission Sys-tems and CAE Inc. to add a critical training capability to anAH-64A Apache Combat Mission Simulator at theFliegerhorst Army base in Hanau, Germany.

Early in the Operation Iraqi Freedom conflict, severalU.S. Army Apache helicopters and their pilots experienced“brownout” over the sands of Iraq. A brownout results fromthe swirling sands and debris caused by rotor downwash,which diminishes pilot visibility and orientation. To addressthe brownout problem, the Army wanted the ability todeliver high-fidelity training for this condition to Apachepilots who would be deployed to the Gulf region in the nearfuture.

PEO, STRI; Northrop Grumman; and CAE Inc. per-formed a major upgrade to the Apache Combat MissionSimulator in Hanau over the past 20 months, and the simu-lator was nearing its formal “ready-for-training” date. Amajor part of the upgrade work was the addition of the CAEMedallion visual system, a state-of-the-art visual systemdesigned for high-performance, high-fidelity training. Inlate March 2003, the Army identified brownout training tosimulate the conditions experienced in Iraq as an immedi-ate requirement. The team quickly incorporated theenhancements requested, and 33 crews from the 1st Battal-ion, 501st Aviation Regiment began training April 1 for thebrownout conditions during day and night takeoffs andlandings.

“While we’ve provided the capability to conduct train-ing in blowing sand and brownout conditions in our AH-64A Combat Mission Simulators since the early 1990s, theexperiences of our Apache pilots in the early stages of Oper-ation Iraqi Freedom dictated that we needed a greater levelof visual realism in the simulator,” said COL Kevin S. Noo-nan, PEO, STRI Project Manager for Combined Arms TacticalTrainers. “The new visual system in our Apache Combat

NEWS BRIEFS



Mission Simulator is capable of delivering the fidelity andrealism required for special conditions such as brownout.The quick response by the Army/industry team enabled ourcombat pilots to more adequately prepare for missions theywere likely to encounter on the battlefields in Iraq,” headded.

PEO, STRI provides the life-cycle management of inter-operable training, testing, and simulation solutions for sol-dier readiness and the Defense community. The commandproduces a host of high-technology simulation programsfor the U.S. Army and is responsible for supporting most ofthe Army’s training systems around the world.

NEWS BRIEFS

AWARDS

Army TechnologyTransfer Awards

Scientists from the U.S. Army Soldier Biological andChemical Command’s Edgewood Chemical BiologicalCenter (ECBC) and Natick Soldier Center (NSC), bothcomponents of the U.S. Army Research, Developmentand Engineering Command (Provisional), received Fed-eral Laboratory Consortium (FLC) Awards for Excellencein Technology Transfer for 2003. Winners were honoredat the FLC Annual Meeting held in Tucson, AZ, this pastMay.

The FLC is a congressionally chartered network offederal laboratories designed to promote and strengthentechnology transfer nationwide. The FLC established thisannual award to recognize individuals or teams fromfederal laboratories and commercial sector partners whohave done outstanding work in transferring technologyto the commercial marketplace.

Nominations are submitted by the laboratories andare judged by a panel of technology transfer experts fromindustry, state and local government, academia, and thefederal laboratory system.

The Army received three of the four awards won byDOD laboratories this year. Recipients of these awardsand highlights of their achievements follow.

Design, Development, Training, Fielding, And Con-tinued Consultation For Mobile Laboratories. In theevent of a chemical, biological, or radiological terroristattack, first responders, military leaders, and local andfederal agencies need tools that will allow them to sam-ple and analyze materials in a precise and uniform man-ner. This will enable the efficient and accurate fieldanalysis of chemical and biological materials.

The technologies developed by the team of MonicaHeyl, Charles Henry, and Dr. Dennis Reutter includedturnkey capabilities that integrate and standardize fieldsampling as well as the analysis tools that support theusers. Numerous partnerships using various technologytransfer mechanisms contributed to the success of theproject. Some of these partners include PurifiedMicroenvironments, QuickSilver Analytics Inc., the FBI,and the FDA.

Both the public and private sectors have benefitedfrom these mobile laboratory technologies. This teamhas provided enhanced strategies that will ultimatelyhelp to improve law enforcement efforts to protect theU.S. against terrorism and the threat of weapons of massdestruction.

Antibody Engineering For Expression In Insect CellsAnd Larvae. This technology addresses an advancedmethod for manufacturing recombinant proteins ininsect cells and larvae. It consists of genes for a recombi-nant antibody that binds a biological warfare agent (bot-ulinum toxin). The genes were cloned in such a way thatmakes it possible to produce the antibody in insect lar-vae. These antibodies are currently used as the recogni-tion component of sensors that can detect biologicalthreat agents.

Award recipients included Dr. Kevin O’Connell,Patricia Anderson, and Dr. James Valdes of ECBC andTerry Chase of Chesapeake PERL Inc. (C-PERL). By wayof a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement(CRADA) between ECBC and C-PERL, C-PERL scientistsare pioneering a technology that transforms insect lar-vae into miniature protein factories. This represents thelatest attempt to manufacture biological material for usein a new generation of medicines and diagnostic tests.

The CRADA has proven successful for both parties,and the partnership has enabled C-PERL to more thandouble the size of its staff. Last year, the company wonthe Maryland Biotech/Life Sciences Incubator Companyof the Year Award.

Small-Scale Cogeneration Of Heat And ElectricalPower. The first practical, small-scale cogenerator, devel-oped by the NSC team of Don Pickard and Frank Dileo,efficiently provides the energy needs of a battalion-levelfield kitchen. Cogenerators produce heat and electricalpower from a single process that is 80 percent more effi-cient than separate heaters and generators. A high-temperature two-phase mixture of steam and water isinjected into an expander, and an alternator coupled tothe expander produces electrical power while theremaining heat is used for cooking and sanitation.

The team worked with engineers from Yankee Scien-tific, a company in Medfield, MA, to adapt the liquid



injection cogeneration process to field kitchens. Subse-quently, Yankee Scientific and ECR International formeda joint venture called Climate Energy LLC to furtherdevelop and market the technology. In 2001, the technol-ogy was fully developed and tested with kitchen appli-ances and was integrated into a fully functioning kitchenin 2002.

Electric power generation using small-scale cogener-ators offers significant environmental advantages andother benefits when compared to conventional powerplants—less fuel is burned, the burning is cleaner, andthe fuel is burned over a broader area, unlike the con-centrated pollution produced by a conventional powerplant.

Laboratory Director Of The Year Award. The FLCalso honors those laboratory directors who have mademaximum contributions to the enhancement of technol-ogy transfer in their organizations. Joseph (Jim) Zarzyckiof ECBC received a 2003 Laboratory Director of the YearAward for his initiative and tireless efforts in promotingtechnology transfer at ECBC. This resulted in more wide-spread dissemination of ECBC’s technologies and capa-bilities, the development of new business opportunities,strengthened relationships with industrial and academicpartners, and increased outreach to state and localagencies.

This article was submitted by James K. Wanko, theArmy Domestic Technology Transfer Program Manager atthe U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Adelphi, MD.

Value Engineering TeamReceives Award

DOD annually presents value engineering awards tothe commands that have exceeded their savings goal bythe greatest percentage. The U.S. Soldier and BiologicalChemical Command’s (SBCCOM’s) Value Engineering(VE) Team won the 2002 Value Engineering Award, mark-ing the second time in the past 4 years the team hasachieved this distinction. SBCCOM exceeded its goal by285 percent in 2002.

On May 22, 2003, SBCCOM Commander MG JohnDoesburg presented the plaque and certificate of appre-ciation to VE Team members Michael Ostrowsky andKenneth Rice. He stated that SBCCOM’s VE Program notonly meets its goals but also continually exceeds them.He added that although the systems that SBCCOM workson are small ones, the VE Team can make monumentalchanges for the soldier. “At the end of the day,” Doesburgsaid, “it’s all about what’s good for the soldier.”

VE is a process that encourages government andindustry personnel to work together to reduce develop-ment, acquisition, logistics, and sustainment costs. Sav-

ings can be generated through redesigns, modifications,changes in materials, elimination of unused or redun-dant parts, increased reliability or efficiency, andreduced maintenance and logistics support.

Joseph Mackoul, Office of the Product Manager,Force Sustainment Systems, joined Ostrowsky and Ricein accepting the award. Mackoul’s efforts on the BarracksReplacement Heater project was the largest contributorto SBCCOM’s savings, accounting for more than 50 per-cent of the total savings realized.

Rice said it was an honor to receive such a presti-gious award. He added that it is not just the office thatmanages the VE program that is responsible for the sav-ings, but also organizations such as the IntegratedMateriel Management Center and the program, project,and product manager (PM) offices. “That’s why wewanted to make sure we had Joe [Mackoul] here,” Ricesaid, “to ensure the PM gets the recognition also.”

Ostrowsky, VE Manager, said that his predecessor,Tony Yablonicky, can take much credit for SBCCOM get-ting the award, and that he would continue to work toincrease the savings realized through VE.

For more information about the Soldier SystemsCenter and SBCCOM, go to http://www.natick.army.mil.

Army Civilians and ContractPartners Receive

DSP AwardsThe Defense Standardization Program Office (DSPO)

honors individuals and organizations from military andDOD organizations who have achieved significantimprovements in interoperability, cost reduction, quality,reliability, and readiness standardization. Each year dur-ing a formal awards ceremony, DSPO recognizes theseoutstanding performers.

Martin L. Snyder, U.S. Army Tank-automotive andArmaments Command, was the sole recipient of the2002 Distinguished Achievement Award at the 2003 DODStandardization Symposium. He received the award forhis significant accomplishments in the development of anew, multivolt infrared-secure blackout driving lamp.Unlike previous versions, this lamp puts enough light infront of military vehicles to enable drivers to see wherethey are going while minimizing detection. The newlamp complies with international standardization agree-ments enabling interoperability with NATO forces, hasan estimated life of 100,000 hours, and is a direct fieldreplacement for all tactical and commercial vehiclesconfigured with blackout lights. The lamps were put intoproduction in June 2002 on the Army’s Heavy ExpandedMobility Tactical Truck and other tactical wheeled vehi-cle systems.

AWARDS



2003 SMART ConferenceThe U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Cen-

ter, Warren, MI, and the Army Model and Simulation Office, Arlington, VA, will co-sponsor the 2003 Simulation and Modeling for Acquisition, Requirements and Training(SMART) Conference Sept. 8-11, 2003, at the Hyatt Regency, Dearborn, MI. The theme ofthe Army’s premier modeling and simulation (M&S) conference is “Learning From OurFuture Combat Systems (FCS) Experiences: Synthesizing a Cross-Domain SMARTApproach to the Objective Force.” The goal is to sharpen the focus of military, civilian,and industry modeling and simulation professionals in using M&S technologies to fur-ther Army transformation. The conference objective is to establish an environmentwhere key lessons learned from FCS Milestone B experiences can be studied and appliedto the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) and to subsequent fielding of theObjective Force systems key to Army transformation.

Conference highlights will include guest speakers from the Big Three automakers(General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co., and DaimlerChrysler) and new Army leadershipwho will facilitate discussion and analysis of FCS lessons learned to date and the wayahead for the SDD. Tours of local M&S facilities and area technology and manufacturingcenters as well as a reception at the world-renowned Henry Ford Museum will be high-lights of the conference. The annual SMART Awards Banquet is scheduled for Sept. 10and will feature thought-provoking guest speaker Ray Kurzweil, inventor of the KurzweilReading Machine for the blind and noted author of “The Age of Spiritual Machines—When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence.”

For additional information, visit the Web site at:http://conference.brtrc.com/2003Smart/info/default.aspx.

A U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Com-mand (CECOM) team also won a 2002 DSP Award for itsaccomplishments in the development and implementa-tion of a tool to test and diagnose data buses built toMIL-STD-1553. When fully deployed, the single stan-dardized Advanced Multiplex Test System (AMTS) willsignificantly reduce the logistics footprint, enhancereadiness through onboard testing, and save dollars forArmy and multi-service platforms. For example, theApache Longbow pilot program demonstration projecteda 6-year payoff of more than $10 million dollars. TheAMTS can apply to all electronics systems using the MIL-STD-1553 data bus on their host platforms. The CECOM-combined Logistics Readiness and Software Engineering Centers’ team included Kenneth Capolongo

and Lisa Russo-German, CECOM; John Klubnick Sr. andJohn Lippert Sr., Aspen Consulting; and Gerard Boyan,ARINC Inc.

Additionally Bob Billmyre, U.S. Army Corps of Engi-neers, was recognized as a member of a joint team thatdeveloped a contract to enable service architects andengineers Internet access to nongovernment standards(NGS). These standards are established by organizationssuch as the American Society for Testing and Materialsand the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, andAir-Conditioning Engineers. Ready access to NGS allowsup-to-date technology to be applied, increases produc-tivity, and results in reduced construction and engineer-ing costs.

AWARDS

CONFERENCES




The Army Acquisition Support Center (ASC)launched its new Web site, http://asc.rdaisa.army.mil, May 19, 2003. ASC’s focus is preparing for thefuture and supporting the readiness of the Army’swarfighters. To do this, the latest cutting-edge tech-nology must be made available to the acquisitionworkforce so that they are able to provide theircustomers with the best products and servicespossible.

ASC’s new site is a valuable tool that will famil-iarize users with ASC’s striking new brand and makeinformation more readily available. A few new fea-tures on the site include the home page and itsfocus on the latest news and events impacting theacquisition community, a site map, and quick linksto program executive offices and other acquisition-related sites.

One of the biggest changes is that ASC’s Website is now a two-part site with a public focus and aportal used to share information within the ASCcommunity. This two-part approach enables usersto find the information they are seeking quickly andefficiently. Newcomers to the ASC site who are seek-ing general information on ASC, its programs,events, and career opportunities, or who are inter-ested in learning about joining the Army Acquisi-tion Corps, will find the information they need inthe public site. Users who need more detailed infor-mation, such as ASC policies, procedures, forms,access to ASC’s publications (Army AL&T magazine,the Career Management Handbook, etc.), or the

Acquisition Demonstration Project, will find theinformation in the new site’s portal section. Theportal contains the information from the old ASCWeb site, but in a more user-friendly format. If youcannot find the information you seek, use either thesite map or any of the new drop-down menus forspeedy navigation.

ASC Director COL Mary Fuller wanted a sitethat could be used as a tool to send and receiveinformation and, in turn, would better serve its cus-tomers and, ultimately, warfighters.

“Strong ties to the warfighter are key to effec-tively meeting the Army’s needs,” said Fuller. “Westrive to ensure professional development opportu-nities for our workforce through training, education,and broadening experiences. Our workforce must beprepared to operate in a dynamic environmentusing leading-edge concepts and technologies.”

Fuller has encouraged everyone in the acquisi-tion community to spend time looking through thenew site to familiarize themselves with the new lay-out, design, and site navigation.

“We want to hear from the workforce about thenew site,” Fuller added. “I urge you to use this newtool we developed and let us know what youthink—we need your feedback to make this a bettersite.”

Check out the new ASC Web site today! Com-ments and suggestions can be made by using thefeedback link at the bottom of every page.

ASC Launches New Web Site

Army AL&T Magazine Welcomes New Editor-in-ChiefIt is our distinct pleasure to welcome Michael I. Roddin to Army AL&T Magazine as

our new Editor-in-Chief. He joins the editorial staff from the private sector where hedirected the public relations, advertising and marketing communications initiatives forseveral national and international companies in the banking, financial services and tech-nology industries. In addition to his editorial duties and responsibilities, Roddin will alsobe responsible for oversight, management and execution of all Acquisition Support Cen-ter strategic communication programs and for providing direction and a comprehensiveapproach to communicating the vision and mission of the Army Acquisition Corpswithin the acquisition community and across the Army.

Roddin is a retired career U.S. Army Public Affairs Officer. His last assignment was as Editor-in-Chief/Managing Editor of the Army’s professional Journal, Military Review, at the U.S. Army Commandand General Staff College, Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth, KS. In a career that spanned morethan 20 years, Roddin also served as the Public Affairs Officer for the 2d Infantry Division, Camp RedCloud, Korea; the U.S. Army Third Reserve Officers Training Corps Region, Fort Riley, KS; the U.S. ArmyRecruiting Command, Fort Sheridan, IL; and as the Army Advertising Program Manager, The Pentagon,Washington, DC.

Roddin is a graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and holds a master’s degreein marketing from the University of Southern California. He is also a graduate of the Defense InformationSchool and holds Bachelor of Science degrees in English and journalism from the University of Maine.Roddin is an Army Training With Industry Program alumnus and three-time Army Keith L. Ware JournalismAward recipient.

CDU New Web Site 40-41.qxd 8/4/2003 12:47 PM Page 1


ARMY AL&T WRITER’S GUIDELINEShttp://asc.rdaisa.army.mil/

Army AL&T is a bimonthly professional development magazine published by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,Logistics and Technology. The address for the Editorial Office is DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, ARMY AL&T, 9900 BELVOIR RD, SUITE 101, FORTBELVOIR,VA 22060-5567. Phone numbers for the editorial staff follow:

Editor-in-Chief (703) 805-1035/DSN 655-1035Executive Editor (703) 805-1038/DSN 655-1038Managing Editor (703) 805-1034/DSN 655-1034Contract Support (703) 805-1007/DSN 655-1007

Fax: (703) 805-4218/DSN 655-4218

PurposeTo instruct members of the AL&T community about relevant processes, procedures, techniques, and management philosophy and to dissemi-

nate other information pertinent to the professional development of the Army Acquisition and Technology Workforce (AL&TWF).

Subject MatterSubjects may include, but are not restricted to, professional development of the Army’s AL&TWF, AL&T program accomplishments, technology

developments, policy guidance, and acquisition excellence. Acronyms used in manuscripts, photos, illustrations, and captions must be kept to a min-imum and must be defined on first reference. Articles submitted to Army AL&T will not be accepted if they have been scheduled for publica-tion in other magazines.

Length of ArticlesArticles should be approximately 8 double-spaced typed pages, using a 20-line page, and must not exceed 1,600 words. Articles exceeding

1,600 words will not be accepted. Do not submit articles in a layout format or articles containing footnotes, endnotes, or acknowledgement lists ofindividuals.

Photos and IllustrationsA maximum of 3 photos or illustrations, or a combination of both, may accompany each article in files separate from the manuscript. Please

ensure that artwork is accessible for editing and not embedded in the manuscript. Photos may be black and white or color. Illustrations must beblack and white and must not contain any shading, screens, or tints. All electronic files of photos must have a resolution of at least 300 dpi(JPEG or TIFF). If they do not meet this requirement, glossy prints of all photos must be submitted via U.S. mail, FedEx, etc. Photos andillustrations will not be returned unless requested.

Biographical SketchInclude a short biographical sketch of the author(s) that includes educational background and current position. Please also include acquisition

certifications and AAC membership if applicable.

ClearanceAll articles must be cleared by the author’s security/OPSEC office and public affairs office prior to submission. The cover letter accom-

panying the article must state that these clearances have been obtained and that the article has command approval for open publication.Individuals submitting articles that report Army cost savings must be prepared to provide detailed documentation upon request that verifies the

cost savings and their reinvestment. Organizations should be prepared to defend these monies if higher headquarters has a higher priority for them. Allarticles are cleared by the Acquisition Support Center Director.

Submission DatesIssue Author’s DeadlineJanuary-February 15 OctoberMarch-April 15 DecemberMay-June 15 FebruaryJuly-August 15 AprilSeptember-October 15 JuneNovember-December 15 August

Submission ProceduresArticle manuscripts (in MS Word) and illustrations/photos (300 dpi JPEG or TIFF) may be submitted via e-mail to

[email protected], or via U.S. mail to the address in the first paragraph at the top of this page. All submissions mustinclude the author’s mailing address and office phone number (DSN and commercial).

CDU New Web Site 40-41.qxd 8/4/2003 12:47 PM Page 2