Project Director Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software, and Solutions (CHESS) has awarded an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) for Oracle licenses and maintenance that consolidates more than 250 existing maintenance contracts across Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS) and U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC), avoiding at least $10 million in costs and potentially as much as $50 million when taking into account contractual administration and other issues.
The ELA, awarded May 29, affords all PEO EIS programs and AMC organizations the unlimited use of 11 licensed products, quantity buys for an additional eight products, and discounts on others.
The Oracle product mix is based on the most commonly used products across PEO EIS and AMC, including Database Enterprise Edition, Advanced Security, WebLogic Suite, Real Application Clusters, Partitioning Identity and Access Management, Management Suite Plus Database Lifecycle, Management Pack, Diagnostics Pack, Tuning Pack, Spatial Business Intelligence, and the Server Enterprise Edition.
The ELA consolidates existing Oracle maintenance agreements into one agreement with a standardized period of performance of Jan. 1 through Dec. 31 for each year of the performance period.
All licenses will be owned, with a set amount for maintenance on licenses moving forward. The agreement should resolve any current compliance issues for the 11 ELA products. Overall benefits also include providing stable, locked-in prices for accurate budgeting, and a drastic reduction of administrative costs for tracking and monitoring the metrics.
Further, the first Army-managed SharePoint licensing portal tracker is being created to allow ease of issuance and tracking.
- ROBERT GRASSO is Deputy Project Director Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software, and Solutions. Grasso holds a B.S. in business from Monmouth University and an M.B.A. from Florida Institute of Technology. He is Level III certified in contracting and program management.
Submissions for the Association for Enterprise Information (AFEI) 2012 Excellence in Enterprise Information Awards are due by the close of business Sept. 14. The awards are given to government and industry project teams that display excellence, innovation, and best practices in information management and information technology.
The award winners are selected based on the following criteria: innovation; financial impact; operational consequence; and cultural change.
Nominations opened July 16 and will close Sept. 14. Winners will be notified the week of Oct. 15. Nomination forms are available by sending an email request to Betsy Lauer (email@example.com). Please include the name and organization of the person(s) requesting the nomination.
For more information on the award program, go to www.afei.org and click on “About” then “AFEI Awards.”
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (DASA) for Plans, Programs, and Resources (PPR) serves as the Chief Financial Officer and advisor to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASAALT), including program executive offices (PEOs) and Direct Reporting Units, which include the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center. Our subordinate organizations include the PPR, Performance Assessment and Root Cause Analysis (PARCA), and Manpower and Force Structure Directorates. DASA PPR’s focus is to effectively and efficiently administer the programming, allocation, and execution of more than $43 billion annually, including more than 650 acquisition programs and $157 billion across the Future Years Defense Plan.
As the co-chairs of both the Equipping and the Sustaining Program Evaluation Groups, DASA PPR manages the resources that enable the development and procurement of weapon systems and equipment for our warfighters. In addition, as Chief Information Officer for the community, DASA PPR oversees the Acquisition Information Technology Domain, which includes leading efforts to establish and maintain the Acquisition Domain Enterprise Architecture.
As the focal point for program analysis of the procurement and research, development, test, and evaluation budgets, DASA PPR collaborates and coordinates with key stakeholders on the research, development, and acquisition (RDA) portions of the Army Modernization Strategy, the Army Plan, the Quadrennial Defense Review, Total Army Analysis, and other forms of strategic planning guidance, such as the Army Strategy. DASA PPR is primarily responsible for developing, presenting, and adjusting the RDA portion of the Program Objective Memorandum and serves as the ASAALT proponent for the weapon systems review process.
During the past year, DASA PPR led the acquisition community by establishing our PARCA Directorate to complement the Office of the Secretary of Defense PARCA created under the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. This year, ASAALT PARCA visited each PEO and briefed the PEO and program management office (PMO) staff on “should cost” implementation as part of their annual performance reviews. (See Access AL&T article “Army PARCA Office.”)
DASA PPR planned, coordinated, and executed 68 Weapon Systems Reviews in the sixth cycle of a very successful initiative that began in 2005. This initiative provides a venue for presentation of Acquisition Category I, II, and special interest programs to a cross-Program Evaluation Group. The result was to reduce resourcing synchronization issues in the budget planning process.
This year, the DASA PPR’s goal is to work on Better Buying Power Affordability Initiatives specifically focused on instilling common processes and tracking should-cost goals to PEO and PMO levels. DASA PPR plans to develop and implement a common process for reviewing those goals. We will conduct the seventh cycle of Weapon Systems Reviews with the intent to review nearly 70 programs. DASA PPR expects fiscal challenges to increase as we work to cross-level resources to meet our warfighters’ needs and fund priority programs in a tight budget environment.
- From the DASA PPR.
In September 2010, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Plans, Programs, and Resources (DASA PPR) established the Army Performance Assessment and Root Cause Analyses (PARCA) office. The purpose was to realign the mission for program visibility, analysis, and reporting from the DASA for Acquisition and Systems Management and to include the related oversight of programs mission identified by the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) of 2009.
The responsibilities of the Army PARCA office are to:
- Provide program visibility and acquisition reporting for all Major Defense Acquisition Programs, Major Automated Information Systems, and Acquisition Categories (ACAT) I, II, and III programs in accordance with 10 United States Code Chapters 144 and 144-A and WSARA.
- Provide performance assessments and root-cause analysis for ACAT I, II, and III programs in accordance with WSARA.
- Provide Earned Value Management expertise for the Army.
- Work on efforts including the Better Buying Power Affordability Initiatives in accordance with the Nov. 3, 2010, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics memorandum Implementation Directive for Better Buying Power – Obtaining Greater Efficiency and Productivity in Defense Spending.
- Provide Office of the Secretary of Defense policy implementation and guidance for mission areas.
Over the past year, the PARCA office has acted as the Army lead for implementation of the “should cost” Better Buying Power initiative. In addition, the office has been active in DoD’s proposed changes to streamline reporting of Earned Value Management data.
- From the DASA PPR.
Tracey Goldstein and Steve Loftus
First of two installments
For the past few years, DoD budget reductions have been looming just on the edge of the horizon. Now those budget limitations are upon us. As such, costs are at the forefront of the decision-making process. Leaders rely on high-quality cost estimates, based on approved requirement descriptions, to support their decisions on using limited DoD resources. Acquisition program managers need to be prepared to provide cost descriptions and estimates earlier in the life-cycle process, to explain and justify methodologies used, and to prove that the program is resourced in accordance with the estimate. These descriptions are provided to HQDA.
Acquisition reform is forcing DoD to be more accountable for the way acquisition programs are executed by placing greater emphasis on cost, schedule, performance, and resourcing. Among other stipulations, Section 2366 of Title 10 states that a cost estimate for a Major Defense Acquisition Program must be submitted with the concurrence of the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, and that the level of resources required to develop, procure, and sustain the program is consistent with the priority level assigned by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council.
At each milestone decision, the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) must certify in writing that reasonable cost and schedule estimates have been developed, and that the program is fully funded through the Future Years Defense Plan.
The Army is well-positioned to meet the cost estimating needs of senior leadership to aid with difficult decisions brought on by budget constraints. But for leadership to make the best possible decisions, data are required well in advance.
Supporting Earlier Decision Points
DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5000.02, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, has been revised to better define mandatory early decision points. The push for earlier investment decisions affects not only the project management office (PMO), which must prepare the documentation and estimates, but also the HQDA agencies such as the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASAALT) and the cost community.
DoDI 5000.02 requires Service Cost Positions at Milestones A, B, C, and full-rate production decision reviews. For Acquisition Category I and special interest programs that have an MDA above the program executive office (PEO) level, these changes mean that the PMOs must plan and make life-cycle decisions and assumptions earlier in the process. In the past, service agencies did not develop estimates until Milestone B.
The Army has a process to develop Service Cost Positions, referred to as the Army Cost Positions (ACPs). In addition, program funds are aligned to the ACP through the Cost Review Board (CRB). (See Figure 1.) Until recently, most Army programs first surfaced at the HQDA level for a decision at Milestone B; Milestone A was effectively tailored out of the process and managed at the PEO level. The DoD leadership recently started requiring Milestone A for programs.
Each milestone requires analysis and evaluation to determine the program’s status. Documentation to support the analysis is required as part of the milestone decision. A complete list of documentation required at each milestone is available from the Army Systems Acquisition Review Council Executive Secretary. As programs move toward their respective milestone decisions, certain required documents are developed and become available to the analyst; they can be used to produce cost estimates using conventional cost estimating methodologies.
To properly cost an acquisition program, extensive information about it must be identified. Without the detailed information, life-cycle cost data cannot be derived. The detailed information provided in the Cost Analysis Requirements Description (CARD) provides a complete description of the system being estimated. The intent is to define the program to a sufficient level of detail that captures quantities, fielding, sustainment, and training strategies.
Currently, multiple estimates are developed to support acquisition decisions; the program office has an estimate that it develops internally, and the service cost centers develop a cost estimate. These estimates are built on the program description and capabilities as defined in the CARD. Multiple estimates are useful, because the delta between them can provide decision makers with information about the program’s risks and uncertainty. Estimates that are close to one another may mean that there are sufficient data to accurately project costs and that there should be confidence in the estimate. Estimates that are far apart usually indicate little supporting data or that the program contains risks.
Although multiple estimates help identify the range of possible costs, decision makers usually require a single estimate. In the past, decision makers were asked to pick an estimate without knowing the underlying quality of the data sources used, assumptions made, or methodologies.
The CRB recommends the program office provide draft copies of the CARD to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Cost and Economics (DASA-CE) and the ASAALT as early as possible, but no later than the established timeline to ensure an ACP to support the milestone decision. Note that submission of a draft CARD to DASA-CE does not constitute the beginning of the CRB ACP development process. PEO-signed and -approved CARDs are submitted to ASAALT to begin the formal process. (See Access AL&T article, “Journey of a Successful CARD.”)
Preparation Is Key
The Army is well-positioned to meet the cost estimating needs of senior leadership to aid with difficult decisions brought on by budget constraints. But for leadership to make the best possible decisions, data are required well in advance. It is essential to prepare well-developed CARDs that capture not only the responsibilities of the PMO but also the requirements for DoD. Operation and Support tails need to be planned in advance in order to feed the Army’s decision-making process. It is also essential to be able to produce cost estimates to support milestone decisions, and to develop the capability to provide cost estimates that support investment decisions earlier in a program’s life cycle.
The five major steps in the CRB process are to define and describe requirements through a well-defined CARD; estimate the costs via the Program Office Estimate and Independent Cost Estimates; reconcile the two estimates; conduct affordability analysis; and gain ACP approval. This enables leadership to make cost-informed decisions early when planning acquisition strategies. The results are well-defined programs with high-quality cost estimates that are documented, defendable, and affordable.
NEXT: The CRB process, step by step.
- TRACEY GOLDSTEIN is a Management Analyst for the DASA PPR. She holds an M.B.A. and an M.P.A. from Syracuse University. She is Level III certified in business – cost estimating and is Level I certified in program management. Goldstein is a U.S. Army Acquisition Corps (AAC) member.
- STEVE LOFTUS, an Army Field Artillery Officer for 10 years, is the Cost Review Board Director for the DASA-CE. Loftus holds a B.S. in math and computer science from The Citadel. He is Level III certified in business – cost estimating and Level I certified in program management. Loftus is an AAC member.
Proper preparation of a Cost Analysis Requirements Description (CARD) is a vital step in having a successful acquisition program. Here is how the CARD is completed:
The Program Management Office (PMO) staff prepares the CARD. The project manager then signs the CARD and submits it to the program executive officer (PEO) for approval. Once signed by the PEO, the CARD is submitted to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Plans, Programs, and Resources (DASA PPR) for staffing to Cost Review Board (CRB) representatives.
The representatives review the CARD sections that describe their respective functional areas for completeness, adherence to regulatory guidelines and laws, and mission priorities. Any deficiencies and concerns are identified through the staffing process, and the PMO adjudicates. The PMO then provides a formal CARD presentation to the CRB Working Group (WG) in preparation for the CRB members. DASA PPR schedules the brief, provides formats, and manages the CARD process and presentation to the CRB WG. Any changes are incorporated into the CARD and succeeding presentations.
After the CRB WG, the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Cost and Economics schedules the CRB CARD presentation, which uses the same format and slides as the CRB WG. The CRB members approve the CARD submission.
The process is a combined effort of the PMO and Army agencies that may be concerned with estimating the program’s cost and ensuring that they have an understanding of the program, its capabilities, and the system to plan and program as part of the Program Objective Memorandum.
DoD 5000.4-M, Cost Analysis Guidance and Procedures, provides specifics on CARD preparation.
- From the DASA PPR.
In today’s military environment of tightened budgets and staffing, empowering existing staff to organize, manage, share, and edit documents quickly and easily is critical to the success of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC).
To maintain maximum efficiency, immediate access is necessary for effective collaboration on mission-critical information. With this access, USAMRMC can spend more time doing what it does best: getting new medical capabilities to those who need them. As organizations within USAMRMC evolve and as individual projects grow and move forward, managing the thousands, or even millions, of paper and electronic documents can be both time-consuming and costly. Much of this information can become buried within email systems, lost across shared drives, or even hidden somewhere on individual workstations. Consolidating information assets in a secure, centralized repository can significantly reduce the amount of time spent managing and sharing documents.
The Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) is an existing system, in place and functioning today for USAMRMC. EDMS is based on LiveLink, a commercial-off-the-shelf software product for enterprise content management from OpenText Corp. that remains on the Army’s Certificate of Networthiness list. The USAMRMC Enterprise Information Technology Project Management Office (eIT PMO) has configured and conducted extensive testing to maintain compliance with two key groups: DoD Information Assurance and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). EDMS is part of a suite of products offered by the eIT PMO. The eIT PMO, whose most recent Authority to Operate was received in June 2011, provides medical research information technology capabilities in a secure, reliable, and FDA-compliant environment.
Fully integrated, Web-based, and designed for enterprise-wide implementations, this system provides the ability to store, manage, access, edit, and collaborate on millions of files in a centrally organized and hierarchical structure tailored specifically to USAMRMC and organizational needs. Version control and audit functions promote ease of collaboration on all content, while powerful search functionality allows users to find what they need, when they need it. Users from outside of the U.S. Army Medical Department (AMEDD) may obtain account access to EDMS through an account authorization process. For new EDMS users, critical information from across their respective organizations can easily and quickly be migrated into EDMS using the familiar Windows Explorer interface. In addition, everyday users can easily accomplish bulk loading of historical documents.
Within EDMS, each command or organization maintains complete control of access, storage, and design for their organizational areas, allowing documents to be stored in a manner that is intuitive to each area. Content and information can be shared only with those chosen by the organization. Each user is in complete control of an assigned Personal Workspace area, which can be customized to suit individual preferences.
With more than 400 users so far, EDMS averages 26 new users per month and continues to expand. Its target is to have 2,000 users by 2015.
EDMS is currently used by 14 USAMRMC organizations and 15 subordinate commands. Advanced Development Medical Integrated Product Teams have recently started using EDMS in their business procedures, with more than 69 percent of the IPT chairs obtaining accounts. With the command endorsing EDMS as the enterprise solution, collaboration efforts continue to improve within USAMRMC, across other DoD agencies, and even throughout nongovernment organizations. In light of this success, the eIT PMO will continue to release future capabilities, which will allow EDMS to serve as a versatile collaborative tool for the medical research community.
If you answer “Yes” to any of these questions, EDMS can help you and your organization:
- Do you need to share and collaborate on information, not just within but also outside of AMEDD?
- Do you work with industry and/or academia?
- Do you have a difficult time tracking document updates and inputs?
- Do you send documents back and forth via email, and run into mail system space limitations?
- Do you know if you are using the latest version of a form or document?
- Has someone else ever “accidentally” deleted a document from a shared drive?
- Do your data need to reside on an FDA-compliant system?
- CPT BRUCE W. BARNES is the Military Deputy Project Manager for the Enterprise Information Technology Project Management Office, USAMRMC. He holds a B.S. in information technology from the United States Military Academy. Barnes is also a graduate of the U.S. Army Medical Service Corps Officer Basic Course and Medical Information Management Course.
The adenovirus vaccine (officially known as the Adenovirus Type 4 and Type 7 Vaccine, Live, Oral) has been used since Oct. 24, 2011. It protects military trainees against febrile respiratory illness (FRI)—with fever plus symptoms such as coughing and sneezing—caused by adenovirus Types 4 and 7. The adenovirus vaccine goes into the mouth of every basic trainee of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.
It does not get there by accident.
The U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command manages the development of adenovirus vaccine. The Pharmaceutical Systems Division of the U.S. Army Medical Materiel Development Activity (USAMMDA) houses the product manager and support staff. The Integrated Product Team (IPT), chaired by the product manager, developed the concept for deployment and distribution of adenovirus vaccine well before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration licensed the vaccine in March 2011. The Milestone Decision Authority approved the basic distribution concept—just-in-time deliveries directly from the manufacturer to the points of use—at Milestone B and C decision reviews.
When basic trainees become ill, the U.S. government expends resources by diagnosing and treating illness, paying trainees who are too ill to train, and making adjustments to the training schedule. The use of adenovirus vaccine is cost-effective when the cost of vaccine is less than the sum of the costs avoided. Under the low-rate initial production contract, the Army procures adenovirus vaccine at a cost lower than the threshold cost, defined as the highest cost at which procurement of vaccine is favorable, as assessed in a cost-benefit analysis.
Analysis of data collected by the Naval Health Research Center shows that the use of adenovirus vaccine has had a very favorable impact on the FRI rate. Disease caused by adenovirus Types 4 and 7 is no longer an issue during basic training.
The manufacturer supplies adenovirus vaccine in a package of two bottles. The IPT’s logistics working group, which includes the manufacturer, conducted a series of test shipments to ascertain the effectiveness of procedures to maintain the cold chain for the vaccine, which must be kept at a certain temperature during transportation and storage. Adenovirus vaccine reached all of the points of use, the nine basic training installations for the U.S. military services, within 48 hours after packing—the period within which the packed vaccine could reliably be kept within temperature limits.
The number of shipping containers sent by commercial carrier varies from month to month and by destination. The product manager develops a shipping plan from estimates of the number of recruits who will arrive at each site. The services need approximately 240,000 doses per year, a figure that includes a safety margin. Upon receiving the shipping plan, the manufacturer ships the number of doses of vaccine needed to immunize recruits in the following month. Since shipments began in October 2011, the manufacturer has shipped 100,800 doses to the training sites without incident.
The Adenovirus Vaccine Product Management Office has two links to the field, both represented on the IPT. The Distribution Operations Center of the U.S. Army Medical Materiel Agency (USAMMA) communicates with relevant logistics personnel at each of the receiving sites to call their attention to imminent deliveries, inquire about the condition of vaccine received, and respond to any questions or concerns relating to shipments.
After the receiving personnel evaluate basic information from the temperature monitors, they ship the monitors to USAMMA, where its personnel download a complete data set and then contact the manufacturer for information and advice on any questions regarding vaccine quality.
The Military Vaccine Agency, a component of the Office of the U.S. Army Surgeon General, is the IPT’s link to preventive medicine staff at each installation, and to senior public health officers of each of the services. With these links, the product manager and IPT are well-positioned to acquire, process, and disseminate information on a timely basis, which remains critical to the distribution of this important vaccine.
- CLIFFORD E. SNYDER JR. is the Product Manager for Adenovirus Vaccine in the Pharmaceutical Systems Division of USAMMDA. He holds a B.A. in natural sciences from Johns Hopkins University, a Ph.D. in biology from the University of Virginia, and a J.D. from George Washington University. He is a graduate of the U.S. Army Medical Service Corps Officers Basic Course. Snyder is Level III certified in program management, and is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps.
A Joint Capability Technology Demonstration will use a distributed energy circuit, or microgrid, combined with other elements to ensure that critical military missions have a reliable, secure electrical supply after a power outage due to natural disasters or attack.
Called “Smart Power Infrastructure Demonstration for Energy Reliability and Security” (SPIDERS), the project will explore the advanced controls needed for utility-connected and islanded (operating without a connection to an electrical grid) modes of operation, cyber-security risk mitigation, and transition of microgrid technology to standards.
SPIDERS’ partners include the U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, five U.S. Department of Energy laboratories, the Engineer Research and Development Center of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (as technical manager), the four military services, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, local utility companies, and the States of Hawaii and Colorado. The three-year effort begins this year and will run through 2013.
A microgrid is a local grouping of electricity generation, energy storage, and loads usually connected to a traditional centralized grid, or macrogrid. This single point of common coupling with the macrogrid can be disconnected. The microgrid can then function autonomously. Microgrid generation resources can include fuel cells, wind, solar, or other energy sources, while storage can include such options as hydrogen storage and advanced batteries. Byproduct heat from generation sources, such as microturbines, can be used for local process heating or space heating, allowing flexible trade-offs between the needs for heat and electric power. Unneeded electricity from a microgrid can be “wheeled” back to the central grid, potentially at a profit to the microgrid owner.
Two DOD sites will have microgrids installed for the SPIDERS project: Camp H.M. Smith, HI, and Fort Carson, CO. In essence, the DOD sites provide a testbed for a capability that will have national implications. Successful demonstration and emergence of this technology will allow military installations and cities to take advantage of renewable energy and reduce fossil fuel use while also reducing the carbon footprint and providing a backup electrical supply. Further, it is becoming increasingly difficult for power companies to add generation facilities and transmission lines. Local or regional microgrids could augment the country’s existing electrical infrastructure.
This year, initial work will begin at Hickam Air Force Base, HI, in support of Camp Smith’s microgrid. The Hickam phase is a circuit-level demonstration to provide building blocks for Camp Smith’s future energy island. Planned activities begin with integrating the base’s existing renewables, diesel generators, and energy storage. A fuel cell will be added to back up critical loads on the installation circuit. The team will then perform an operational evaluation of the microgrid on mission loads to provide redundant power to simulate mission-critical functions.
Another goal is to validate the cyber-security strategies through a testbed simulation of the utility electric grid management systems with two-way communications, situational awareness, and the ability to safely reconnect with local utility grids. DOD must ensure that enhanced energy capabilities do not create new vulnerabilities to operations or systems’ health. Cyber-security elements of this demonstration will leverage ongoing work in the Departments of Energy and Homeland Security.
Successful demonstration and emergence of this technology will allow military installations and cities to take advantage of renewable energy and reduce fossil fuel use while also reducing the carbon footprint and providing a backup electrical supply.
At Camp Smith, the team will install an advanced metering infrastructure, implement demand-side management, and conduct an off-site simulation of the camp’s secure smart microgrid for a complete installation. The final configuration for Camp Smith at the project’s end will be an installation-wide, cyber-secure smart microgrid with battery storage and islanding capability. Successful demonstration will enable future Net Zero energy operations through the planning of investments in energy generation and renewable energy.
First-year activities at Fort Carson include tying the shared, distributed grid to backup generation, demonstrating the microgrid in the command area, and starting to incorporate photovoltaic (PV) renewable generation. Fort Carson’s completed system will be a large, smart microgrid with cyber defense and vehicle-to-grid storage that leverages 2 megawatts of existing PV generation and $20 million in recent electric upgrades.
SPIDERS will enter a transition phase with the completion of both demonstrations. It will begin with development of technology transition plans and result in:
- A template for DOD-wide implementation (i.e., standards).
- Guidance for insertion into contingency operations and design guides.
- Training plans, techniques, tactics, and procedures (associated with advanced energy management systems).
- Specifications added to the General Services Administration schedule for DOD.
- Transfer to the commercial utility sector.
- Transition of cyber security to the federal sector and utilities.
For more information, contact Dana Finney at 217-373-6714 or Dana.Finney@us.army.mil. For more information on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, visit http://www.usace.army.mil/Pages/default.aspx, or for more information on ERDC, visit http://www.erdc.usace.army.mil/.
- DANA FINNEY is a Public Affairs Specialist for the Engineer Research and Development Center. She holds a B.A. degree in science writing and editing from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Faced with the challenge of new programs and authorities, support for two wars and several contingency operations, and a dramatic upsurge in case value and visibility, the leaders of the Army Security Assistance Enterprise (ASAE) came together in October for a day-long security cooperation (SC) meeting to discuss major issues, shape expectations, and share information about the impact of developments in the Army and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD).
Keith B. Webster, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (DASA) for Defense Exports and Cooperation, and BG Christopher Tucker, Commanding General of the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command (USASAC), co-hosted the Oct. 27 meeting in Alexandria, VA, which was timed to coincide with the Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition in Washington, DC, to provide an opportunity for SC personnel from around the Army to attend. Invited guests included staff members from the host organizations as well as Security Cooperation Office (SCO) personnel from around the world, SC planners from the Geographic Combatant Commands and Army Service Component Commands, and representatives of various program executive offices (PEOs) and program management offices (PMOs).
Foreign Military Sales
Webster and Tucker described trends in the contemporary operating environment, shifting fiscal and operational realities, and the changing face of security assistance over the past decade. Along with the demands of supporting continuing relationships with more than 140 partner nations, Tucker noted, the enterprise has seen a dramatic increase in Foreign Military Sales (FMS) activity.
New Army FMS in FY10 totaled $14.6 billion, with 701 new cases, 462 modifications, and 1,017 amendments. This increased operational tempo reflects a trend over the past several years, as evidenced by a total of $62 billion in Army FMS from FY07 to FY10, compared with $18 billion in FMS over the preceding four-year period. This high case volume has put pressure on the enterprise, demanding decisions to direct the allocation of resources and staff time to the most strategically important cases. Webster issued this prioritization guidance at the direction of the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, committing to paper previously verbal guidance to focus efforts first and foremost on support to ongoing operations.
Security Cooperation Reform
In response to the evolving demands of the operational environment, OSD directed, through the 2010 Defense Planning and Programming Guidance, the formation of a task force on SC reform, with the mission of conducting a comprehensive review of DOD’s SC processes and examining ways to provide urgently needed capabilities to foreign partners in a more timely manner. COL Guy T. Cosentino, a representative of the Security Cooperation Task Force, gave a briefing on the task force’s mission, objectives, composition, and progress and provided useful context to members of the ASAE on the future of SC, including proposed changes in organizations, authorities, and processes.
Equipped with this knowledge, SC planners and SCO personnel can better understand how industrial capacity, acquisition processes, and contracting concerns can influence security assistance timelines, which will help them manage the expectations of both foreign partners and U.S. senior leaders.
Continuing with the meeting’s goal of managing expectations, Joseph M. Jefferson, an acquisition expert with the Office of the Director for Acquisition and Industrial Base Policy in the Office of the DASA for Procurement, familiarized participants with the basics of the acquisition process, helping them to better understand how international activities fit with the broader functions of the PEOs, PMOs, and industrial base. Anthony R. Incorvati, Director of Contracting Operations with the U.S. Army Contracting Command, explained how increased security assistance impacts the contracting community. Equipped with this knowledge, SC planners and SCO personnel can better understand how industrial capacity, acquisition processes, and contracting concerns can influence security assistance timelines, which will help them manage the expectations of both foreign partners and U.S. senior leaders.
During a working lunch, LTG Mitchell H. Stevenson, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4, addressed the audience on a number of subjects, including the integration of logistics policies, programs, and plans with the Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) model; the future disposition of Army equipment currently in Iraq; opportunities for the transfer of Excess Defense Articles; and the future of the Army’s Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) and MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle fleet. Stevenson outlined the many opportunities for the ASAE to take advantage of developments in the Army logistics community to build partner capacity and capability, again underlining the fundamental importance of coordination and communication between SC organizations and the Army’s equipping community—a relationship that is institutionalized through the nesting of the ASAE in the broader Materiel Enterprise.
The Oct. 27 meeting was a rare opportunity for members of the ASAE and other Army SC personnel, gathered in one room, to develop a common operating picture and discuss major issues affecting the community, and it offers a template for similarly successful coordination meetings in the future.
A series of briefings followed, focusing on specific security assistance-related topics including the organization and mission of the Project Management Office Non-Standard Rotary Wing Aviation, conducted by then-BG William T. Crosby, Program Executive Office Aviation; an introduction to the Excess Defense Articles program by COL David Dornblaser, Director of the Intensive Management Office of USASAC’s Washington Field Office; and a rundown of challenges and successes of the 1206 Global Train and Equip program, by Brandon Denecke, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency 1206 Team Leader. Their briefings provided details on three much-discussed, but perhaps poorly understood, topics in the security assistance community.
LTC Alfred Padden of the HQDA G-35’s Security Cooperation Policy and Concepts Division followed this with a briefing on the Army’s approach to security force assistance, efforts to build partner capacity by aligning modular brigades to security cooperation missions in a specific Geographic Combatant Command’s area of responsibility through the ARFORGEN process.
Wrapping up the day, Webster gave the audience an outline of the Materiel Enterprise International Engagement Strategy, part of an effort to shift the ASAE to a proactive, anticipatory footing, matching gaps in partner capability with possible materiel solutions in advance of a customer request, to allow for the timely elimination of potential barriers to sale.
The Oct. 27 meeting was a rare opportunity for members of the ASAE and other Army SC personnel, gathered in one room, to develop a common operating picture and discuss major issues affecting the community, and it offers a template for similarly successful coordination meetings in the future. Those who participated have a better understanding of the broader context into which their work fits and gained knowledge and contacts that will contribute to improved performance of their SC mission.
The slides from the Army Security Cooperation Meeting are available at https://www.us.army.mil/suite/files/25188558. Army Knowledge Online login is required.
- CHRISTOPHER J. MEWETT is a support contractor in the strategic planning directorate of the Office of the DASA for Defense Exports and Cooperation. He holds a B.A. in history from Texas A&M University and did graduate work in Central and Eastern European studies at Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland.