ARMY AL&T
Lessons Learned The transition from LOGCAP III to LOGCAP IV incorpo- rated lessons learned that strengthened contract oversight. One of the most significant lessons learned was to consolidate multiple unique task orders into standardized task orders with baseline pricing. By applying this concept, LOGCAP’s entire contracting process changed from requirements generation to contract completion.
Another lesson learned was to increase staff levels at the head- quarters to better manage contract administration, planning, operations, training, and exercises. This enables the LOGCAP Program Management Office (PMO) to better support deployed LOGCAP teams with improved requirements generation and program execution.
The tailoring of LOGCAP training for unit-level contracting officer’s representatives provides better contract oversight and execution in forward locations. With improved training and staffing, forward-deployed Department of the Army civilians, contracting officer’s representatives, and LOGCAP planners can fully use LOGCAP PMO reachback support.
Spotlight: Afghanistan In Afghanistan, the concept of LOGCAP Camp (LOGCAMP) is reducing the time it takes to get materials into theater for new Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) or to expand capacity at existing FOBs. As an innovation to Force Provider, organic prepackaged tents and camp equipment for rapid deployments, LOGCAMP is referred to as a “FOB in a box.” By standard- izing the LOGCAMP requirements, units are able to select the right-size options for their needs and capabilities.
The greatest advantage of LOGCAMP is having an experienced contractor workforce to quickly and efficiently construct FOBs and furnish basic life-support operations, allowing warfighters to focus on executing their assigned mission. LOGCAP IV has negotiated pricing for FOB construction, operations, and main- tenance services in five supported population ranges, from 300 to 20,000 personnel.
LOGCAP support officers (LSOs), located at various camps in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan, serve as the program interface to the supported units. The LSOs assist customers in develop- ing Statements of Work and Performance Work Statements for required services, as well as overseeing the life cycle of the requirements from development through delivery.
Spotlight: Iraq LOGCAP also supports other government agencies, the larg- est being the Department of State in Iraq. LOGCAP services for the State Department include base life support, equipment maintenance, theater transportation, and postal operations.
A Soldier takes a break at a recreation center in Iraq. LOGCAP provides base sup- port, such as Morale, Welfare, and Recreation services for Soldiers in theater. (U.S. Army photo by Galen Putnam, U.S. Army Sustainment Command Public Affairs.)
Many of these services were provided by the Army and shared with the State Department during OIF.
LOGCAP is committed to providing the best support to our commanders as they execute President Obama’s directive to draw down forces from Iraq by the end of 2011. The end state for the LOGCAP team in Iraq during drawdown is the success- ful withdrawal of forces, return of bases to the government of Iraq, and complete and accurate property disposition.
To facilitate drawdown, LOGCAP staffs at unit locations synchronize plans with the Base Closure and Assistance Teams, which consist of contracted multifunctional logisticians assigned to guide units through the process, adhere to estab- lished procedures, and determine best practices for transferring bases to Iraqi authority. Property at the base is inventoried and designated, as appropriate, for use in Iraq, Afghanistan, or other government agencies. A portion of a base might be returned to the government of Iraq, while U.S. forces retain a presence. The gradual turnover of the facilities allows for a smaller U.S. foot- print and a smaller logistics support effort by LOGCAP.
Spotlight: Haiti In January 2010, when a large earthquake in Haiti caused widespread devastation, LOGCAP responded by awarding a task order to Fluor with the mission to assess a possible support requirement for the U.S. military’s humanitarian effort. Since the U.S. military presence was expected to be temporary, Army leaders determined that short-term, expeditionary support was appropriate, rather than a long-term, LOGCAP-style, contrac- tor support structure.
APRIL –JUNE 2011 81
C O N T R A C T I N G C OMMU N I T Y H I G H L I G H T S
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
