When the 82nd Airborne Division deployed to take command of training, advising and assisting Iraqi security forces, its partnership with the 900th Contracting Battalion was already solid.

by Maj. Timothy G. Godwin

The key to successful operational contracting support (OCS) in complex environments is a partnership between the supported headquarters and the contracting unit—a partnership that should begin months before both units board a plane to deploy. The future joint task force (JTF) and the aligned contracting unit must work together, plan together, train together and deploy together. Only through an established and codified relationship can the two units navigate environments in which contracting increasingly has become a critical element of the operational concept of support.

The 900th Contracting Battalion and the 82nd Airborne Division, both based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, integrated their efforts as they prepared to deploy for Operation Inherent Resolve, in June 2015. That integration of efforts provides a case study in how two different but complementary units can plan, train and deploy together and, once operations begin, work together immediately and efficiently. In this case, the 82nd Airborne Division became part of Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve and assumed the mission to provide command and control of coalition troops training, advising and assisting Iraqi security forces. The 900th Contracting Battalion became Regional Contracting Center – Operation Inherent Resolve, providing mission command and contracting support for all contingency contracting in the area of operations. Operation Inherent Resolve is the name for the U.S. military intervention against the Islamic State group, including the campaigns in Iraq and Syria.

MOVING THE MISSION FORWARD
Pfc. Michael Calhoun and Sgt. Kendall Smalls, both with the 1st Infantry Division Sustainment Brigade, load ammunition for transit near Erbil, Iraq, in January. More than 5 million rounds of small arms ammunition have been donated to aid in the fight against the Islamic State group. (U.S. Army photo by Cpl. Jacob Hamby)

FORMING A TEAM
A clear understanding of operational contracting support (OCS) is an essential part of the relationship between contracting personnel and the supported headquarters. Simply put, OCS is the process of planning and obtaining supplies, services and construction from commercial sources in support of commander-­directed operations. As stated in Joint Publication 4-10, “Operational Contract Support,” OCS requires commanders and staffs to fully consider cost, performance, schedule and contract oversight requirements as well as many other contract support-related matters (for example, risk of the contractor’s failure to perform, civil-military impact and operations security) across the joint force.

The three elements of OCS are contracting support integration, performed by the supported command; contracting support, performed by the contracting office; and contractor management, performed by both. Having actionable OCS knowledge requires constant collaboration between contracting and the supported unit. All of which brings us to the first lesson learned: Work together.

As soon as the 82nd Airborne Division received the warning order in early 2015 to deploy in support of Operation Inherent Resolve, the 900th Contracting Battalion received a similar order. Both units started performing mission analysis. Sustainment in Iraq relies on expensive air movement and, as the result of presidentially directed manning levels, depends on contractor support. Both units saw that the contracting support structure was unusually complex, given not just these challenges, but also that Iraq is a sovereign nation that must provide diplomatic clearance to contractors. There were also challenges of supporting a large coalition and the ongoing considerations of contractor security. The Iraq of Operations Iraqi Freedom and New Dawn is not the Iraq of today.

To facilitate working together, COL Michael R. Fenzel, then the 82nd Airborne Division chief of staff, offered space within the division headquarters to LTC Amanda Flint, the 900th Contracting Battalion commander, to embed military contracting personnel within the division headquarters. Assigned to the position and still reporting to the 900th Contracting Battalion, the author served as a member of the 82nd Airborne Division staff for contracting support and assistance.

ANATOMY OF AN INTEGRATION CELL
The 82nd Airborne Division established the operational contracting support integration cell of the Coalition Joint Forces Land Component Command – Iraq with officers, warrant officers and senior NCOs representing a spectrum of skills, all of whom understood the complex tactical and operational environment of the JTF. The 900th Contracting Battalion assisted the cell as a mentor and business adviser. (SOURCE: 82nd Airborne Division)

OCS AS A PLANNING FACTOR
The next lesson learned was: Plan together. OCS planning, however, is primarily the responsibility of the requiring activity, not a contracting function. Only the requiring activity fundamentally understands what it will need to accomplish its mission.

Unfortunately, proficiency in OCS can be hit-or-miss because of a lack of resident knowledge and skills, even with a contracting officer on hand. Because of the myriad contracting options, the wide variety of contracting authorities and the overall complexity of OCS, it is not commonly incorporated into plans. A key to a feasible, acceptable and suitable plan is to recognize OCS as a mission-essential task with proper command emphasis and a properly trained staff. This is possible through the establishment of an operational contract support integration cell.

The organizational construct for the cell is not fixed. Rather, it depends on the scope, scale and complexity of the mission environment. Accordingly, the author advised the 82nd Airborne Division to select personnel with a variety of specific skill sets, emphasizing integration across multiple staff sections and, most importantly, the ability to effectively translate mission requirements to actionable requirement packets.

The 82nd Airborne Division heeded the advice and focused on establishing an integration cell with officers, warrant officers and senior noncommissioned officers (NCOs) representing a spectrum of skills but all capable of understanding the complex tactical and operational environment of the JTF. To use 82nd Airborne Division terminology, they chose “studs” for the operational contract support integration cell mission. Personnel from various specialities formed the Coalition Joint Forces Land Component Command – Iraq’s OCS integration cell. The 900th Contracting Battalion assisted the cell as a mentor and business adviser.

TWO UNITS, ONE EFFORT
Soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division operational contract support integration cell, the 82nd Airborne Division G-8 and the 900th Contracting Battalion work together at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, to provide operational contract support to Operation Inherent Resolve coalition members and Iraqi security forces. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Timothy Godwin)

THINK TRAINING IS HARD? TRY LOSING.
The next lesson learned was arguably the most important: Train together. The 900th Contracting Battalion and the 82nd Airborne Division participated in several training exercises together, from standard day-to-day operations at division headquarters to a U.S. Africa Command simulation that spanned multiple continents.

The first priority, though, should be the two-week OCS course offered by the Army Logistics University. NCOs and officers who complete the course are awarded the 3C OCS additional skill identifier. The integrated contracting unit should encourage the supported headquarters to send as many personnel to the course as possible. This course will give the OCS integration cell personnel, in particular, the necessary skills to generate requirements. It is important for supported customers to understand that requirements generation and planning form the foundation for the entire OCS process and play a significant role in determining success or failure.

After the members of the OCS integration cell have been identified and have received initial training, their training should continue with opportunities to generate real-world requirement packets through the local contracting battalion and U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command office. Performing management, forecasting and administration of real-world requirements is an important step in taking OCS from a conceptual idea to a tangible process for the integration cell. In addition, such opportunities can help the aligned contracting battalion to strengthen the relationship between the battalion and the cell, and identify the cell’s strengths and weaknesses.

The contracting battalion and supported headquarters should conduct joint training exercises in which OCS is incorporated within the mission-essential task list. In March 2015, elements of the 900th Contracting Battalion participated in Judicious Response 15.2 at Grafenwoehr, Germany, which certified the 82nd Airborne Division as a JTF. The integration efforts of the 900th Contracting Battalion as an enabling JTF staff proponent in the 82nd Airborne Division headquarters allowed simulated contracting actions to be a major part of the simulated noncombatant evacuation order operation. The efforts created a ­realistic training exercise for the future JTF headquarters and provided opportunities for the 900th Contracting Battalion to perform simulated contracting actions in a deployed environment.

IT DOESN’T GET EASIER; YOU GET BETTER
Finally, the contracting unit and requiring activity should deploy together. The U.S. Army Contracting Command is in the final stages of aligning contracting battalions with Army divisional units. This effort will enable the associated contracting battalions and division headquarters to maintain the same rotational cycle, which is necessary to allow the two organizations to maintain an enduring operational relationship.

To be clear, though, deploying together does not simply mean stepping on the plane together. It consists of the required training and preparation that go into a deployment. The contracting battalion should do its predeployment site survey with its supported headquarters, enabling contracting personnel and the customer to gain the same view of their future operating environment. The contracting battalion should do as much of the required theater training with its customer as possible, including qualification ranges. These training events build bonds between the contracting unit and the customer that will pay dividends later.

Once deployed, the contracting unit and the supported customer should work as closely as possible. Presently at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, members of the 900th Contracting Battalion and the 82nd Airborne Division operate in the same workspace, providing seamless transfer of requirements from requiring activity to contracting support. Resource managers from the 82nd Airborne Division Combined, Joint Assistant Chief of Staff for Financial Management (CJ-8), the 82nd Airborne Division OCS integration cell and 900th Contracting Battalion personnel perform their daily tasks together. For a complex contracting environment such as Operation Inherent Resolve, clear communication among requiring activity, contract support and resource managers greatly reduces the OCS fog of war.

LIFESAVER
U.S. Marines assemble a water storage unit at Al-Taqaddum Air Base, Iraq, in June 2015. With help from the 900th Contracting Battalion, the Marines secured necessary life support items such as bulk water at Taqaddum. Contracting support allows coalition forces to focus on their primary mission to advise and assist Iraqi security forces in their fight against the Islamic State group. (U.S. Army photo by Cpt. Christopher Noll)

CONCLUSION
When the future JTF and the aligned contracting unit commit themselves months in advance to work together, plan together, train together and deploy together, they produce a cohesive effect.

The 82nd Airborne Division and the 900th Contracting Battalion recently completed their Operation Inherent Resolve deployment, making a noticeable impact throughout theater and establishing a benchmark for follow-on units. Supported by the teamwork between contracting personnel and the OCS integration cell, coalition efforts against the Islamic State group continue to make a significant impact against the terrorists. Together, contracting personnel and the OCS integration cell are providing contract solutions to operational problems, satisfying warfighter requirements in terms of procurement cost, quality and timeliness.

The 82nd Airborne Division, as the Coalition Joint Forces Land Component Command – Iraq, is able to plan contracting into its concept of support and its concept of operations with realistic capabilities and limitations. Ultimately, contracting personnel and supported units can build upon the successes of the 900th Contracting Battalion and the 82nd Airborne Division to provide even greater operational contracting support for future operations.

For more information on Regional Contracting Center – Operation Inherent Resolve, contact the author at timothy.g.godwin.mil@mail.mil. For more ­information on Operation Inherent Resolve, go to http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0814_Inherent-Resolve.

MAJ. TIMOTHY G. GODWIN serves as the operations officer, 900th Contracting Battalion and Regional Contracting Center – Operation Inherent Resolve. He holds an M.A. in procurement and acquisition management from Webster University and a B.S. in parks, recreation and tourism management from Clemson University. He is Level II certified in contracting.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Sustain internally, outsource the whole job—or recognize that, as complex as artillery systems are these days, few organizations have all of the expertise needed to sustain them. So two Army commands, two Marine Corps commands and a major defense contractor collaborate to sustain the U.S. howitzer fleet.

by Mr. Christopher Hatch

Sustaining towed artillery platforms for the Army, U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and allied customers is one of the challenges the Program Executive Office (PEO) for Ammunition’s Program Management Office for Towed Artillery Systems (PM TAS) faces on a daily basis. As the life-cycle manager for the M777A2 and M119A3 howitzer systems, as well as survey equipment, PM TAS continuously evaluates sustainment strategies to find the right balance to achieve the ultimate goal: operational availability.

Modern weapon systems rely on advanced technology, materials, electronics and software to meet warfighter requirements. Gone are the days when one organization could sustain such systems alone. DOD recognized this in 2009, requiring program managers (PMs) for acquisition category I (ACAT I) and PMs with multiple products to have product support managers who are specially trained to orchestrate sustainment. PM TAS takes an enterprise approach to managing sustainment, leveraging the strengths of organic and contractor organizations.

While the M119A3 primarily uses a traditional organic sustainment strategy, the M777A2 uses a hybrid, relying on both organic organizations and contractors, with a performance-based life-cycle sustainment (PBLCS) strategy approved by the USMC and the Army acquisition executive (AAE).

LOCK AND LOAD
Soldiers from 4th Battalion, 319th Airborne Field Artillery Regiment (FAR), 173rd Airborne Brigade prepare an M119A3 howitzer for firing during the Exercise Shardana at Capo Teulada, Italy, conducted in October 2015. PM TAS continuously evaluates field artillery sustainment strategies to find the right balance to achieve operational availability. (U.S. Army photo by Visual Information Specialist Graigg Faggionato)

SUSTAINMENT ENGINEERING
PM TAS prides itself on its hands-on approach to engineering and sustainment, working directly with the U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) and the original equipment manufacturers to develop and support the systems we manage. While ARDEC’s Benét Laboratories at Watervliet Arsenal, New York, is well known for its expertise on cannon systems, not as many people are familiar with the organic expertise found at ARDEC for the digital fire control systems (DFCS) on the M777A2 and M119A3.

While the original M777A2 DFCS was developed by industry, the software required to operate the system was developed in-house by ARDEC’s software lab, level 5 certified under the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) process improvement program. The knowledge gained in developing the system-level software, and having full intellectual property rights, has allowed the PM to use a different approach while addressing obsolescence and refresh of the systems’ aging electronic line replaceable units (LRUs). LRUs include items like computers, displays and power supplies. PM TAS is using a “breakout strategy,” breaking out each individual LRU and developing specifications and competitively procuring each of them using the Army Contracting Command – New Jersey’s (ACC-NJ) expertise to ensure best value, which is critical in an environment of declining budgets.

These strategies not only lower costs through competition, but further reduce them by eliminating the additional layer of costs from a prime system contractor. There is no free lunch, as this approach does increase the need for internal staff. However, developing organic, in-house expertise that can be used on multiple platforms pays long-term benefits as electronics obsolescence and refresh of aging components are two of the largest cost drivers in sustainment. With systems expected to last up to 50 years, the electronics may undergo four or five refresh cycles during a system’s life cycle.

PM TAS and the Fires Center of Excellence (Fort Sill, Oklahoma) are now using the lessons learned from these efforts in the development of strategies for the next generation of survey equipment. The existing, legacy system uses proprietary, contactor-developed software. One of the strategies under consideration is government-owned software that would enable the PM to develop a systems architecture and compete the individual LRUs that constitute the system. This will not only save initial procurement costs, but pay long-term dividends in sustainment.

IT TAKES A TEAM
The sustainment team for the howitzer includes two Army commands, two USMC commands and a major defense company. (SOURCE: U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center)

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Another key to operational availability is delivering the right parts at the right time to the warfighter. The M119A3 program uses a traditional organic system with TACOM providing all spare parts to support demand from the field and the Anniston Army Depot (ANAD), Alabama. PM TAS works with TACOM to identify high-demand items and has several active redesign efforts to improve system reliability, which will increase operational availability while reducing the demand for spare parts. One such effort is a major redesign of the recoil system, whose main function is to absorb and control the rearward movement of the cannon and return it to its original firing position. The recoil system, and the spare components required to maintain it, were identified as a significant cost driver in sustaining the M119A3. Working with PM TAS, engineers at ARDEC simplified many of the system’s components while reducing the total part count, resulting in a more reliable, easier and less costly system to maintain. (See “Adapting Artillery,” Page 32, Army AL&T magazine, October – December 2014.)

The M777A2 PBLCS strategy uses a competitively awarded firm fixed-price contract with BAE Systems to provide unique spares as well as various engineering and logistics support activities. These activities include tracking part requisitions and collecting reliability data from the field to identify opportunities to reduce operational costs. A life-cycle cost model was developed and is used to give the government return-on-investment data so the PM can make data-driven decisions. Sometimes the analysis results in redesign of components while other times just a change in maintenance strategy will reduce support costs. The Defense Logistics Agency and TACOM, which is the primary inventory-control activity, provide the spares. A key tenet of the PBLCS approach is end-to-end supply chain management of spares (vs. stockpiling) to achieve defined delivery metrics developed to achieve high operational availability. Under the terms of this contract, BAE Systems owns the spares until delivery, so the government does not have to fund the “iron mountain” of spares that risk excessive stockpiling or obsolescence.

In 2008, PM TAS conducted a business-case analysis to support the services’ approval of the PBLCS strategy. The analysis estimated an initial $109 million cost avoidance from the establishment of an organic pipeline. The warfighter achieved an additional $7 million per year in cost avoidance, as competing the contract resulted in lower spare parts cost for a total cost avoidance of $179 million over the potential 10-year period of performance for this contract. The contractor is evaluated annually on multiple areas of performance, including spare parts delivery, and awarded subsequent one-year award terms (up to a 10-year maximum duration) if they meet performance metrics. This contract is currently in its third year of performance, and operational availability has consistently exceeded 90 percent.

A TEAM APPROACH
Soldiers and Marines perform all field- and sustainment-level maintenance to organically maintain and support both ­howitzer systems. ANAD and Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow (California) perform depot-level maintenance for the Army and Marine Corps respectively. The depots rely on the organic supply chain for M119A3 parts and the hybrid (organic and contractor) supply chain for M777A2 parts.

Originally, the M777A2 PBLCS contract did not include metrics for unique parts being delivered to the depots. Seeing the benefits to depot workflow planning, TACOM and Marine Corps Systems Command have worked with PM TAS to include these metrics as part of the performance measures under the PBLCS contract.

The M777A2 has been in service since 2005, and recently workers at ANAD found several cracked cradles, a major structural component fabricated from thin-wall titanium, on howitzers undergoing routine overhaul. While these particular howitzers had seen extensive use in Afghanistan, the entire fleet was at potential risk. In response, TACOM released a maintenance advisory message requiring all M777A2 cradles to have an external visual inspection, and the Marine Corps released a Naval message to the same effect. In addition to the external visual inspection, PM TAS conducted internal inspections of the suspect areas using endoscopic equipment, much like doctors use to perform internal examinations on patients, as this method can detect small stress indicators before they propagate into cracks. Under the PBLCS contract, BAE is also part of the team performing metallurgical analysis, establishing condemnation criteria and developing repair options. All of this information is critical to developing the coordinated fleet-wide repair strategy, ensuring continued operational availability for the fleet.

TRAINING PRODUCTS
As part of initial fielding, PM TAS provides operator and maintainer new equipment training to Soldiers and Marines. PM TAS, in concert with ARDEC and the Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI), is developing and fielding a suite of training aids, devices, simulations and simulators (TADSS) for the M777A2 and M119A3 towed howitzers. The purpose of these products is to provide operators and maintainers tools to maintain their proficiency on their assigned platforms. The importance of TADSS products has increased with shrinking training budgets as well as the number of nonstandard missions that Soldiers and Marines perform in the current threat environment.

The TADSS suite being fielded includes individual training products for the section chief and various crew members, as well as crew-level products whereby laptops are linked together to provide a collective training capability with multiple crew members operating a single virtual howitzer. The PM is also fielding a classroom version of these products at specific Army and USMC locations.

All these products are based on the howitzers’ tactical software, providing a realistic experience to the user, and will be updated as the M777A2 and M119A3 DFCS software is updated. With ARDEC developing and maintaining the DFCS software and TADSS products, the government retains full rights for the update of products and can also use them to train Soldiers and Marines when new DFCS software is released.

ADJUSTING TO TARGET
A gun chief and his assistant gunner assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division Artillery check the sights on their M119A3 howitzer during a gun raid as part of a Jan. 20, 2016, division artillery readiness test on Fort Bragg, North Carolina. PM TAS and ARDEC streamlined the M119A3 recoil system by reducing the total part count, resulting in a more reliable, easier and less costly system to maintain. (Photo by Cpt. Joe Bush, 82nd Airborne Division Artillery)

CONCLUSION
The value of these approaches is reflected in the interest allied nations have expressed in joining the M777A2 sustainment contract. Australia and Canada have been actively monitoring sustainment performance as part of a memorandum of understanding signed in 2012. The Navy International Programs Office has negotiated and is staffing a project arrangement that would allow allied participation under the PBLCS contract. Allied participation would save the United States a projected $1 million annually.

These approaches are not without obstacles as they have met resistance under the traditional Army budget and funding process. The current Army funding process has sustainment funding flow through the U.S. Army Materiel Command, which has the latitude to redistribute funding according to changing priorities during the year of execution. A PBLCS approach requires funding to flow to the PM at the start of the fiscal year so the strategy can be successfully executed. The Army is currently evaluating the value of PBLCS strategies while developing the process for funding PBLCS in a system traditionally geared to organic support.

In spite of these funding challenges, PM TAS’ innovations and performance are getting noticed. The assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology is using the M777A2 experience with PBLCS to develop a pilot template of how it measures sustainment for ACAT I programs (M777A2 is ACAT II). The goal is to establish metrics for various sustainment elements with program assessments, called operational sustainment reviews, conducted every five years.

Just as our weapon systems require technology innovations to stay one step ahead of our adversaries, the way we sustain systems requires a fresh approach to ensure that we provide our warfighters the systems they need in an evolving threat environment.

For more information on PM TAS products, go to http://www.pica.army.mil/peoammo/.

MR. CHRISTOPHER HATCH is the PM TAS deputy program manager. He holds an M.S. in the management of technology from Stevens Institute of Technology and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Manhattan College. He is Level III certified in program management, Level II certified in system engineering and a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Official corruption has been likened more than once to cancer—it’s a disease that destroys systems from the inside out, betraying everyone—and Afghanistan has one of the worst reputations in the world. But a CSTC-A effort aims to help President Ghani cut out that cancer by taking an operational approach.

by Col. Charles Worshim III

Establishing a legitimate procurement system for Afghanistan has been a major initiative of President Ashraf Ghani since he took office in 2014. He has taken the reins of a nation where trust in the national unity government remains low because of the volatile security environment across the country, and where the cancer of corruption runs deep within the government. Ghani’s fight is not only with the Taliban, but also against the corruption in the procurement system of Afghanistan. On March 5, 2015, Minister of Interior Noorulhaq Uloomi identified corruption as a greater threat to the national security of Afghanistan than the Taliban, Daesh (otherwise known as the Islamic State group) or the Haqqani network.

Long-term procurement reform—coupled with transparency, accountability and oversight—is the only chance Afghanistan has of winning its war against corruption. Procurement reform in Afghanistan reduces the opportunities that public officials have to steer contracts to selected companies that have paid bribes to win them, instead of conducting fair and open competition. Promoting fair and open competition legitimizes the procurement system in Afghanistan and instills confidence among international donors that Afghanistan is making much-needed change.

Instituting a functioning rule-of-law system that holds public officials accountable for breaking Afghan procurement law will have the greatest impact. Accountability will serve as a forcing function for behavioral change among bad actors in the system and send a clear message to the citizens of Afghanistan that no one is above the law—not even public officials.

POLICE LOGISTICS
Brig. Gen. Wilson A. Shoffner Jr., deputy chief of staff for communications for the Resolute Support Mission, visits the Afghan National Police National Logistics Center in Wardak province to learn about the Materiel Management Center and the Ministry of Interior Support Center. (U.S. Air Force photo by Capt. Kevin M. Limani, CSTC-A)

AN AGENT FOR CHANGE

Established in late 2014 within the Administrative Office of the President, the National Procurement Authority is the agency charged with bringing about procurement reform for all 64 ministries and procurement entities across Afghanistan. The agency’s goal is to foster institutional reform to provide better goods and services for Afghanistan through an effective, efficient and transparent procurement system.

Reforming or changing a dysfunctional system is never easy, especially one viewed as having corrupt individuals in senior leadership positions. In understanding Ghani’s vision for the Afghanistan procurement system and the role of the National Procurement Authority, the Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan (CSTC-A) established the Procurement Reform Branch in the Contracting Enabler Cell in September 2015 to train, advise and assist the authority on its efforts. One of the underlying challenges facing the National Procurement Authority is how to bring reform to a system fraught with corruption for decades, and still keep a functioning procurement system during a time of war.

SMALL TEAM, BIG IMPACT
U.S. and Afghan personnel make up the Procurement Reform Branch. (U.S. military photo by Lt. Charity A. Edgar, CSTC-A Public Affairs)

In a perfect world, a radical approach might be best—just dissolve the current procurement system and start over—but that’s not realistic when Afghan soldiers and policemen are losing their lives every day to bring security to their homeland. They need a functioning procurement system to provide them with the goods and services necessary to continue the fight.

Under the leadership of Dr. Beth Rairigh, deputy director of the Contracting Enabler Cell, the Procurement Reform Branch is tasked with helping the National Procurement Authority develop a plan allowing for incremental reforms at the tactical and operational levels that have significant strategic impacts on the larger Afghanistan procurement system. The uniqueness of this CSTC-A train, advise and assist effort is that the impacts reach beyond just the Afghan national defense and security forces. The reforms proposed by the National Procurement Authority ultimately affect every procurement entity within the Afghan government.

In partnership with the authority, Rairigh and her team took a page from Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, “Joint Operation Planning,” and used an operational approach to map out Ghani’s vision for procurement reform. For such an approach to succeed as envisioned in JP 5-0, elements of the operational environment must be synchronized. Thus the team focuses on achieving unity of effort for all procurement entities across Afghanistan by synchronizing elements within the procurement system with the goal of enduring reform. The unified team agreed that lasting procurement reform in Afghanistan would best be achieved by addressing four lines of effort: people, processes, policy and transparency. These four lines of effort would be crosscutting: Multiple actions could take place simultaneously in different functional areas to create enduring procurement reform.

UNIFIED EFFORT, IMPACT

Each line of effort offers Afghanistan a chance at real procurement reform. Addressed individually, each creates a singular approach to reform. Linked together, they create opportunities for unified actions to occur along each line of effort that focus directly on procurement reform.

When assessing the current conditions of the Afghan procurement system, the National Procurement Authority, along with CSTC-A’s Procurement Reform Branch, identified multiple shortfalls that contribute to the system’s inefficiency and ineffectiveness and foster a culture of corruption. Antiquated procurement law, a purely paper-based, lengthy bureaucratic process, untimely planning, lack of adequately trained professionals, lack of systemic accountability and a lack of contract management and oversight are just some of the many challenges the team must address in order to reform the corrupt and ineffective procurement system.

PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
Maj. Gen. Gulami Sahki, left, CSTC-A DCG MG Daniel P. Hughes and Dr. Beth Rairigh of the Ministry of Defense Requirements Approval Board meet Feb. 24. The board is an element of the Procurement Reform Branch, which CSTC-A established in September 2015 to support the National Procurement Authority. (Photo by Jenell Stith, CSTC-A Contracting Enabler Cell)

As the change agent for Afghan procurement, the National Procurement Authority has fully championed enduring reform and is committed to confronting the challenges. In the authority’s short existence, it has made great progress in implementing systems and processes across all four lines of effort in order to get changes moving in the right direction.

The National Procurement Authority conducts regularly scheduled training sessions and professional development courses to enhance the procurement workforce. It is also creating the Afghanistan National Procurement Institute to replace the Public Procurement Training Center, and is updating curricula to incorporate recent revisions to public procurement law and the rules of procedure for public procurement. In addition, the Procurement Reform Branch has opened discussions with the Defense Acquisition University to develop a certification program for Afghan procurement professionals, similar to the one for DOD acquisition professionals.

In modifying Afghanistan’s procurement processes, the National Procurement Authority has been instrumental in streamlining them for greater efficiency, while still maintaining the appropriate level of oversight to identify and eliminate potential corruption. As one of its major duties, the authority serves as the final quality control mechanism for all procurements of goods and services over $300,000. By serving as the independent agent for Afghan procurement, the authority identifies inconsistencies with contract packages that could be associated with potential corruption and makes recommendations to Ghani’s procurement commission on the award of the contract. Transparency in the procurement system provides the citizens of Afghanistan the assurance they need to begin the initial steps in trusting the government.

IN SEARCH OF TRANSPARENCY
CSTC-A Deputy Commanding General (DCG) Maj. Gen. Daniel P. Hughes, left, and senior leaders listen as David King, inspector general analyst in the DOD Office of Inspector General, discusses how CSTC-A can leverage inspections to increase transparency and accountability throughout Afghanistan, in August 2015. (U.S. military photo by TSgt Robert Sizelove, Headquarters, Resolute Support)

Changes in policy proposed by the National Procurement Authority have been instrumental in attempting to curb corruption. The changes have strengthened oversight and accountability in the procurement system throughout all of the procurement entities in Afghanistan. The updated procurement law also established the Disputes Resolution Commission, a body specifically designed to allow vendors to bring procurement irregularities and disputes forward for resolution. Before the commission’s creation, vendors who had procurement complaints didn’t have a viable system to pursue a lawful resolution.

The changes in policy and procurement laws are long overdue and will take time to penetrate the procurement system, but the foundation is being laid for lawful reform.

CONCLUSION

The government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan must realize a transparent procurement system if there is any chance of legitimacy taking hold in the country. In the absence of a transparent system, Afghanistan will always struggle to break free of its designation as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. The National Procurement Authority has taken great strides to increase the transparency of the public procurement system in Afghanistan, but more work is needed.

The operational approach developed between the National Procurement Authority and the Procurement Reform Branch offers Afghanistan the best chance at creating the long-term unity of effort that is needed to make Ghani’s vision a reality for Afghanistan’s procurement system. Contrary to popular belief, the national unity government is moving Afghanistan in the right direction with the governance to make the country a viable, independent nation providing security and economic prosperity for all its citizens.

EARNEST MONEY
Personnel from the 205th Corps of the Afghan National Army accept bids for three solar power projects and a separate construction project in June 2015 in Kandahar. (Photo courtesy of 7th Infantry Division)

For more information, go to the National Procurement Authority’s Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/National-Procurement-Authority-833952173357446/.

COL. CHARLES WORSHIM III is director of CSTC-A’s Contracting Enabler Cell. He holds a Master of Strategic Studies degree from the U.S. Army War College, an MBA in computer information systems from the University of Texas at El Paso and a BBA from Texas A&M ­University – Kingsville. He is Level III certified in program management, test and evaluation, and information technology, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Leaders of PEO C3T and CECOM discuss how, by synchronizing efforts across differing missions, Army partnerships can make sustainment more effective and support the best possible solutions for the warfighter.

by Ms. Nancy Jones-Bonbrest

Advances in communications, networking and computing technology present unprecedented opportunities to provide Soldiers with capabilities that deliver technical overmatch on the battlefield—such as software-defined radios, expeditionary satellite communications and mission command applications. Advances such as these also inspire new approaches to developing, delivering and ultimately sustaining capabilities. Sustainment, after all, accounts for nearly three-quarters of the lifetime costs for a weapon system.

New approaches to sustainment mean new partnerships and better use of existing alliances. In fact, Army organizations across the acquisition and sustainment communities are using these partnerships to meet the challenge of equipping the next-generation Soldier.

BRAIN TRUST
Larry Muzzelo, left, deputy to the CECOM CG, and Gary Martin, PEO for PEO C3T. The two recently talked at length about various aspects of the future of sustainment and the partnership of their organizations. (Photo by Nancy Jones-Bonbrest, PEO C3T Public Affairs)

Case in point: The Program Executive Office for Command, Control and Communications – Tactical (PEO C3T), which fields the Army’s tactical network, and the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM), a subordinate command of U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC) that provides, integrates and sustains command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) system readiness, have partnered on initiatives that span licensing, training and software assurance.

In a joint interview conducted on Dec. 23, 2015, at Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), Maryland, Gary Martin, program executive officer for PEO C3T, and Larry M. ­Muzzelo, deputy to the commanding general (CG) for CECOM, discussed these efforts and other Army sustainment initiatives both current and planned.

Jones-Bonbrest: Army sustainment means different things to different people. What does it mean to you?

Martin: Simply stated, sustainment ensures that all of the efforts associated with the equipment we provide to Soldiers in times of peace and conflict—training, operation, maintenance and support—are considered. The traditional efforts required to build a sustainment capability are currently being challenged as we focus on incorporating more commercially developed technologies than ever before. These often involve rapid technology evolution and increasingly rapid rates of obsolescence. Rapid change in technology does cause us to revisit the way we deliver training, repair and spares support for these systems.

Muzzelo: I would agree with that. After equipment fielding has been completed, these systems come into the life-cycle management commands, which have responsibilities to support the program offices in ensuring that the systems remain operationally supportable. As Gary mentioned, in our domain we use a lot of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment integrated into these weapon systems. As a consumer, you might throw out an old phone, but the Army isn’t going to throw things out, so we need to make sure they continue to operate as intended. We make sure the software is working, the parts are available for repair, the Soldiers understand how to use systems—and, as new Soldiers transition into units, we make sure training is provided to potential new users.

Martin: But the Army has a unique challenge when it comes to sustainment that many of the other services don’t: We generally have significantly larger quantities and varieties of systems as the result of mission and organizational constructs. Although the Army is getting smaller, we still have the responsibility to modernize the Army, Army Reserve and National Guard units. We can’t afford to equip the entire force overnight, so it generally takes many, many years to fully field a new system. Consequently, without sustainment, the technology can become obsolete before you can get to the end of fielding. So, as a result of the time it takes to field the entire force and the rate of technology advancement, we often have many different versions and variations of systems. That’s true of software as well as hardware.

For example, since the late 1990s we have fielded our situational awareness and friendly force tracking system, Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2). An important part of our command and control, FBCB2 is currently on more than 100,000 platforms and found in every brigade combat team in the Army. Upgrading this system is a massive process. We had to field the upgrade in increments due to resourcing and maturation of technology, starting with Joint Capabilities Release and now turning to the newest iteration known as Joint Battle Command – Platform (JBC-P).

With the upgrade come significant features and a greatly increased density of systems within each unit—all things the next-generation Soldier expects—but it also takes time. So we have to prioritize and field in accordance with available resources to make the most of the capability and get it into the hands of our Soldiers as quickly as possible.

MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER
Combat and tactical vehicles integrated with WIN-T Increment 2 provide satellite and line-of-sight mobile communications and situational awareness. CECOM and PEO C3T recently teamed on a review of commercial software licenses for the system with an eye to buying licenses collectively, an effort that could yield more than $200 million in savings for WIN-T Increment 2 over the 20-plus years of the program. (Photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T Public Affairs)

Jones-Bonbrest: So how important, then, is the partnership between the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)) community and the sustainment community?

Muzzelo: From my perspective, it’s extremely important. Systems are in the field for several years. So, as sustainment strategies are developed, we look at who are the vendors, are we buying data rights, is it sole-source, are there commercial products integrated in that capability, and what are the strategy and cost for that capability over the long term. If the sustainment and life-cycle management communities aren’t talking, you’ll have many challenges and obstacles in developing the strategy and then implementing it. On the sustainment side, in support of the program offices, we’re responsible for sustaining systems for many years. So if we’re not in sync, that leads to serious organizational and programatic challenges, and at the end of the day it really impacts our ability to provide the best support to Soldiers.

Martin: The fact of the matter is that decisions made by project managers [PMs] early in the program can significantly impact what happens on the back end. With approximately 70 percent or more of the costs for a weapon system over its life being executed on the sustainment side, it is prudent that there is mutual understanding and mutual partnering on the front end. A decoupling there can result in significant inefficiencies and costs. We’re seeing that today, and it is the essence of the partnership that exists between AMC on the sustainment side and ASA(ALT) on the acquisition side. It’s critical. The better the partnership and engagement throughout the entire program life cycle, the more effective the program will be.

Muzzelo: I would also add that in sustainment, we are never funded to the full amount we need. So if the PM implements strategies to be as cost-efficient as possible on the acquisition side, that also comes into play when we’re sustaining the systems. We have many competing priorities, sometimes within different PMs that are in the same PEO, so that partnership and prioritization can only be successful if there’s a relationship and conversation between both organizations.

Jones-Bonbrest: Can you give examples of this partnership that are already in place?

Martin: There really are four issues that we have selected locally as opportunities to partner. Each addresses a couple of areas where we have seen a need for improved efficiencies. They include security patching, software assurance, software licensing and field support.

Muzzelo: Security patching is a good place to start. I mentioned that we use a lot of COTS products, at least in PEO C3T’s domain of weapon systems, and there are certain challenges that come with this. For example, Microsoft and Apple have to patch their systems. Most consumers are familiar with that process. The Army faces some of the same challenges. The Army’s process historically has been to send out CDs on a quarterly basis with security patches, which requires Soldiers to manually install software from the CD. In today’s high-tech environment, that’s a nonstarter. So we’re working collaboratively with PEO C3T to get the patches integrated, tested and posted to one site where users can download those patches for tactical systems. We’ve started that initiative with Fort Campbell and Fort Bragg, and we’ll go to Germany next. That’s a partnership that is beneficial not only to us but also the Soldier, and it really reduces the security risk of our tactical Army networks and systems.

FOCUS ON FIELD SUPPORT
The new field support concept for network and mission command systems embraces Soldiers as the first line of defense for troubleshooting, backed by a construct of multifunctional support. Field support is one of the key issues that PEO C3T and CECOM have joined forces to address in their search for efficiencies. (U.S. Army photo by Vanessa Flores, ASA(ALT) System of Systems Engineering and Integration Directorate)

Martin: The initiative, a partnership with PEO C3T, CECOM’s Software Engineering Center and the U.S. Army Network Enterprise Technology Command, is leveraging the network enterprise centers at post, camp and station as the facilitator for connectivity to download these patches. Each of the efforts has shown we can improve the delivery of patches through automated means. Soldiers are leveraging this to reduce the fairly significant burden a unit would have to undergo to individually patch these systems.

Muzzelo: We now know it’s technically feasible. Our challenge will be to implement this on a much larger scale. So it is no longer, “Is this doable or not?” It’s, “How do I scale this for the entire Army?”

Muzzelo: If you look at the systems we have in sustainment, we’re really seeing an exponential growth in software. A decade ago, we had a couple systems in sustainment. Now we’re up to the point where in the next few years, we’ll have 120 or 130 different individual programs of record and 300,000-plus individual platforms. So you’re not at the point anymore where you can do a manual inspection of code and ascertain if that code is of quality, of sufficient reliability and security. We are at the point where we must use automated tools to do the analysis for us and understand if there are vulnerabilities in that code as early in the process as possible. So we started an initiative to use a suite of automated tools to give us results that we can then go back and provide to the developers to modify or reprogram the code.

Martin: Right, and I suspect there will be some side benefits as well. Although PMs execute and deliver individual systems, they all must operate together to effectively deliver mission command and networking capabilities. The greatest challenge in this portfolio is the integration of these systems into a system-of-systems solution. I believe that rigor in our software assurance process, particularly if you start from the beginning of the development process, will pay dividends in terms of reducing the integration risk down the road.

Martin: Another initiative is buying things collectively to ensure that we as a community are more effective. We mentioned the reliance on commercial items; well, one of the biggest costs in sustainment, particularly on our software-intensive systems, is the procurement of licenses for these commercial products where we do not own the intellectual property or source code. We must pay annual lease fees in order to get the vendors to provide security patches and the other things you need to maintain the appropriate level of cyber defense for these systems. License fees across the C4ISR portfolio cost over $100 million each year. Often similar commercial software products (such as Microsoft, Cisco, Oracle, etc.) are used on multiple programs. We can achieve significant cost reductions if we procure these licenses collectively under enterprise license agreements [ELAs].

MAKING CONNECTIONS
Networked vehicles provide on-the-move communications, mission command and situational awareness that commanders need to lead from anywhere on the battlefield. PEO C3T and CECOM have different but overlapping responsibilities for the C4ISR system readiness that supports the Army network. (U.S. Army photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T Public Affairs)

Muzzelo: We are targeting a few specific products. This includes working to put in place an ELA that both organizations can buy from. Specifically, we’re looking at one for the PEO C3T community, one on the PEO for Intelligence, Electronic Warfare & Sensors (IEW&S) side, and then something jointly that would satisfy the needs of both IEW&S and C3T as well as CECOM. That effort is underway.

Martin: A few years ago, we started to do reviews on programs of record to look at which software licenses are required for procurement and delivery, and how many of those same products are required for sustainment. In many cases we found that we did not have an integrated enterprise approach to buying licenses. As a recent example, Larry’s team and the project manager for War­fighter Information Network – Tactical Increment 2 (WIN-T Inc 2) took a look at licenses for commercial software within the WIN-T system and how we can buy those licenses as a collective team to leverage that same enterprise contract. We are projecting more than $200 million in savings for WIN-T Inc 2 over the 20-plus years of the program. Now we’ll start to go through other high-priority programs and bring in PEO IEW&S, also located at APG, because they use a lot of the same COTS software applications that we use.

Martin: For the past 10 to 14 years, Soldiers have relied extensively on contractor support and field technical assistant teams. CECOM, PEO C3T and PEO IEW&S conducted an analysis of field support technical assistance across our programs. By assessing trouble tickets entered by units during their combat training center rotations, we uncovered patterns and trends highlighting opportunities for technical assistance right-sizing as well as areas where units were struggling with gaining proficiency in systems operations and maintenance. This insight has resulted in a number of actions, including improvements to system initialization and configuration steps and processes to reduce the Soldier burden.

We are now working to assess options for working collectively to improve the availability and delivery of home station training. There are a number of challenges associated with this, including the availability of time to conduct new equipment training (NET), rotation of Soldiers shortly after NET has concluded and the volume of new systems being fielded collectively under capability set fielding, etc. MG [Bruce T.] Crawford (CG, CECOM), BG [Mitchell L.] Kilo (U.S. Army Forces Command G-6), BG [Thomas A.] Pugh (CG, U.S. Army Signal School) and I are working together to assess ways to synchronize training efforts at the Signal School, in new equipment training, at the mission command training centers and at the signal universities to better support the units and improve sustainment training. As we reshape training, part of that same process is rebalancing the technical assistance. That’s a delicate balance.

LEARNING INITIATIVE
Soldiers with the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) train on mission command applications Jan. 5 at the Fort Campbell, Kentucky, Kinnard Mission Training Complex. (Photo by Nancy Jones-Bonbrest, PEO C3T Public Affairs)

Muzzelo: We already started re-evaluating the training packages we have and are leveraging the mission command training centers and signal universities for sustainment training on the systems. Often the field tech assistance providers are not part of NET, and the training centers and universities don’t have the latest equipment and software, so they can’t build the technical competence to conduct the sustainment training for these new systems we’re fielding.

Martin: In January, PEO C3T and CECOM began a phased implementation of a new home station training initiative with the 101st Airborne Division that will help determine the skill gaps and how do we train for those better. We’re excited to see the results as this moves forward.

Jones-Bonbrest: What’s on the agenda when it comes to the future of sustainment?

Martin: One of the efforts we are going to take as a challenge for this coming year is to take a more critical look at ways to reintroduce competition as we buy our sustainment services. We have a real challenge in this community with the pace of obsolescence and the proprietary nature of the technologies we buy. We have started a conversation about assessing our highest-cost programs in sustainment and are looking for innovative ways to reintroduce competition.

Muzzelo: For example, we might buy a warranty that is good for three or five years, and then the system gets transitioned to sustainment. We’re looking at why we can’t put something on the contract for another five-year warranty that I can exercise at the point when the system comes into sustainment. Is there a way of getting a better deal? Another concept we are pursuing is to buy licenses in perpetuity when the system is contracted for and in a competitive environment when there may be a willingness to give the Army a better deal if we ask the question.

Martin: Right, and if you really look at Better Buying Power, the basic principle is being smarter about how we do business. The ways we incentivize our industry partners—driving competition, being smarter buyers—are what we are looking to do. When it comes to sustainment, these objectives are much more achievable if we work together. The real gains will come from early and persistent engagement by both the PEO and AMC community throughout the entire program life cycle.

For more information, visit http://www.cecom.army.mil/organizations.html or http://peoc3t.army.mil/c3t/.

MS. NANCY JONES-BONBREST is a staff writer for DSA Inc., providing contract support to PEO C3T. She holds a B.S. in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park. She has covered the Army’s tactical network for several years, including multiple training and testing events.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

A technique called ‘clean-sheeting’ lets project managers work from the ground up to hunt for cost savings when dealing with a sole-sourced product with proprietary technical data.

by Maj. Kenneth B. Fowler and Mr. Robert E. Steere III

How do you know you’re paying what you should be paying for a state-of-the-art, first-of-its-kind product, particularly if it’s being produced in a sole-source environment from a proprietary technical data package?

The Product Manager for Guided Precision Munitions and Mortar Systems (GPM2S) faced this question regarding the M1156 Precision Guidance Kit (PGK). Although the product manager employed traditional cost-estimating techniques to develop and update the program office estimate, whether the government was paying the right price remained uncertain because the unit production price was higher than the initial estimate. To answer this question, the product manager employed a bottom-up technique known as “clean-sheeting” to better understand the cost of the PGK and to identify opportunities for cost savings.

PGK WITH CANARD COVER
As a sole-sourced, first-of-its-kind product, the PGK—shown here with canard cover—was a good candidate for clean-sheet analysis, which lets the government understand the cost of an item from each component up. Without that understanding, the manufacturer has a lot more leeway to set the price higher. (Photo courtesy of Product Manager GPM2S)

Similar to the engineering cost-estimating method, when you build an estimate of what an item will cost based on the price of the subcomponents plus assembly, clean-sheeting serves as an unbiased, versatile tool to assist with these types of strategic decisions. In many cases, actual product costs aren’t clear, and suppliers are rarely comfortable revealing all data associated with their manufacturing processes and costs. A clean-sheet provides a cost estimate that develops an optimal “should cost” or “could cost” by modeling both material-related and non-material-related costs in an optimized manufacturing scenario. The assumptions in the model are based on industry standards, world-class processes and competitive pricing to produce the best possible should-cost potential for the design. The model also compares the should-cost to the current cost to identify cost gaps, which can be seen as opportunities for future reductions.

The goal of clean-sheeting is not to uncover the ultimate truth in numbers, nor to provide all information required for an accurate estimate. Instead, clean-sheeting provides cost transparency to help identify material savings, opportunities and profit, as well as new ideas for design and process improvements, such as a different process flow, manufacturing footprint or production technology.

WHY PGK?
The GPS-enabled PGK attaches to explosive projectiles, using one component—its canards—to guide the projectile toward its target and make minor corrections. (Photo courtesy of Product Manager GPM2S)

Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, is the home of Product Manager GPM2S, a subordinate organization of the Project Manager for Combat Ammunition Systems (PM CAS) in the Program Executive Office (PEO) for Ammunition. PEO Ammunition is responsible for life-cycle management across all ammunition families with a mission of developing, equipping and sustaining lethal armament and protective systems enabling joint warfighter dominance.

After an initial competition, the PGK program selected one prime contractor, which was later awarded a sole-source production contract. PEO Ammunition selected the PGK program for the clean-sheet process, and the information from the clean-sheet informed the full-rate production decision and acquisition strategy; as an expensive product obtained from a sole source, PGK is a good candidate for the ground-up analysis of clean-sheeting to make sure the government is getting its money’s worth.

PGK DETAILS

The PGK is a GPS-based trajectory-correcting system with fuzing functions that provides near-precision capability for 155 mm conventional, high-explosive artillery projectiles. It is screwed into the fuze well of the M795 or M549A1 high-explosive projectiles and fired from the M777A2 Lightweight Towed Howitzer or M109A6 Paladin Self-Propelled Howitzer. The fuze can function in proximity or point-detonating mode, with a demonstrated “circular error probable” of less than 30 meters—which means that when rounds are fired, at least half land within 30 meters of the target (See Figure 3.) The PGK possesses a safety feature that will render the projectile inert if it is not going to hit close to its assigned target.

PGK attained urgent material release in March 2013 and was fielded to limited Army field artillery units shortly thereafter. PGK attained full material release in December 2015 and is currently being fielded to all Army field artillery units.

Figure 3: COMPARING ACCURACY
With PGK, projectiles fired from a howitzer land closer to the target more frequently. So it’s highly valuable—but a clean-sheet helps answer just how valuable, and at what cost. (SOURCE: Robert Steere, PM CAS)

THE CLEAN-SHEET PROCESS

The first step of the clean-sheet process is to visualize the product manufacturing flow. Then the required raw materials and processes are identified. The third step is to allocate resource costs for material, labor and equipment. Finally, overhead costs are added to the model; these include the indirect resources needed to run plants, the amortization of one-off investments in research and development, equipment and tooling, and the effects of currency exchange and taxes. The more detail included in the model, the more useful it is. This creates more opportunities to improve processes and design and provides compelling leverage when negotiating with suppliers.

Obtaining data to perform a clean-sheet analysis can be challenging. Therefore, a well thought-out strategy must be developed early in the effort to obtain a complete set of parts for analysis, gain visibility into major components, contractor cost and pricing data, and build processes. Nondisclosure agreements will ensure that contractors’ confidential and proprietary information is protected. Funding must be allocated if a consultant will be used. Various components of the product also may need to be torn down and analyzed in order to determine raw material and manufacturing processes that contribute to unit cost.

Clean-sheeting is an intense process requiring time, resources and subject-matter expertise. To be successful, the government must build an integrated project team to lead and support the clean-sheet effort. This team must have a dedicated government team lead and, at a minimum, consist of financial analysts, engineers and product subject-matter experts. Partnering with a third-party consultant to provide manufacturing and modeling expertise can be beneficial. Participation by the prime contractor is essential to understanding the design and manufacturing process.

OUTPUT YIELDS INSIGHTS

The clean-sheet provides insight on costs at both the component and final assembly levels. Figure 1 shows a gap between the clean-sheet should-cost price and the current price, as well as the various costs included in the clean-sheet price.

Figure 1: SAMPLE COMPONENT CLEAN-SHEET
This clean-sheet chart shows that the current price of a sample component is 59 percent higher than it could or should be, assuming the best possible production rates and material costs. To determine this percentage, clean-sheet analysts start from the bottom up, building the item from scratch. (SOURCE: Robert Steere, PM CAS)

Figure 2, dives deeper into details of the cost gaps. With the knowledge obtained from clean-sheeting, the PM has the insight to make better-informed decisions on the program’s acquisition strategy, as well as to develop better positions in future negotiations. In addition, the knowledge gained from the clean-sheet process can be leveraged to identify opportunities to comply with Better Buying Power initiatives—including “achieve affordable programs,” “achieve dominant capabilities while controlling life cycle costs” and “eliminate unproductive processes and bureaucracy”—and achieve savings for the government.

Figure 2: CLOSING THE GAP
A clean-sheet not only finds a gap between the actual price and the should-cost price, but can also determine why that gap exists. Because the clean-sheet model assumes the best possible conditions, and it’s not always possible to enforce those, the whole gap might not be able to be closed. But this clean-sheet identifies three opportunities to narrow the gap. (SOURCE: Robert Steere, PM CAS)

CLEAN-SHEETING AS A BEST PRACTICE

The best times to conduct a clean-sheet are in the operations and support phase of the acquisition life cycle, and again during low-rate initial production (LRIP). Unlike the parametric and analogy cost-estimating methods typically used early in development, clean-sheeting is specific to a product’s design. (Parametric estimating uses historical information; analogous methods are used to estimate project cost when little detail about the project is available.) As such, clean-sheeting cannot be effectively employed until the product’s design and manufacturing processes are stable. Implementing the clean-sheet process during LRIP provides great insight for the full-rate production acquisition strategy, identifying cost-saving initiatives and planning for future negotiations. Ideally, the product manager and prime contractor work together to pursue cost-saving opportunities identified through the clean-sheet process. The product manager should consider contract vehicles that create incentives for the contractor to reduce costs in production, such as a fixed-price-incentive, firm contract that shares savings with the contractor. A clean-sheet review during LRIP enables the government to address potential cost savings as early as possible, once the final product design is established and in production.

PGK PREVIEW
Pfc. Nathaniel Pounds, left, and Pfc. Rudolfo Lechuga, both cannon crew members assigned to Field Artillery Squadron, 2nd Cavalry Regiment, prepare to fire a M777A2 howitzer during an artillery demonstration at Grafenwoehr Training Area, Germany, in July 2015. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. William A. Tanner)

Clean-sheeting should be considered a best practice to understand and control costs in production. It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that it can be done repeatedly or effectively without a significant organizational commitment.

It is not a rebranding of the existing cost-estimating techniques. Rather, it is a true bottom-up approach that requires in-depth knowledge not only of the product, but also of world-class manufacturing processes, from raw materials to the end product, along with detailed accounting knowledge to properly understand indirect costs throughout the supply chain. The government has most of the subject-matter expertise to do this analysis in the research and development centers, acquisition centers and PEOs. But bringing this capability together in a coordinated, repeatable way is a significant challenge for a PM.

To conduct an accurate clean-sheet, PEOs must be prepared to maintain a dedicated team that will identify, gather, analyze and review the required data from government and contractor records. This team must have the resources and leadership emphasis to work thoroughly and quickly in support of program milestones. Weekly in-process reviews and frequent updates to organization leadership should be conducted to keep the project on track.

A NEGOTIATING TOOL

One of the benefits clean-sheeting provides the government is that it identifies areas of opportunity for cost-saving initiatives and can be used to develop strategies for future procurements. Clean-sheeting provides insight into the best possible could-cost for a given design, which can serve as a cost target for the government-contractor team to work toward. Another benefit is the ability to modify assumptions within the model and explore the effects of different production scenarios.

Armed with the clean-sheet analysis, Product Manager GPM2S is preparing for the next negotiation with the prime contractor. By sharing the component clean-sheets with the contractor, Product Manager GPM2S is confident that the cost of sub-vendor component parts can be lowered and that the negotiations should yield cost savings. Looking further in the future, PEO Ammunition is discussing whether to continue working with a contractor who specializes in clean-sheeting or bring the capability in house.

CONCLUSION

Upon the completion of a clean-sheet, the government is armed with most of the data required to identify the specific should-cost or could-cost. Although it may not account for all variables, a clean-sheet provides a valuable estimate of the production cost of an item under a specified set of assumptions.

Despite the benefits of clean-sheeting, challenges exist. It is a labor- and time-intensive process, requiring a diverse team of experts with extensive knowledge and resources to conduct the analysis. It also provides an aggressive estimate that initially assumes ideal processes and pricing. For example, initial analysis is based on top-quartile industry standards and market pricing for materials that may not reflect reality or the present state of the situation or program. It assumes mature processes and efficient production volumes, when in reality the processes and teams may be new or inexperienced.

In addition, low production levels and no guarantee of future orders may limit a prime contractor’s ability to procure materials in efficient volumes, and not all data required for an accurate clean-sheet is easily accessible or readily available.

Finally, a comprehensive database of manufacturing industry standards is required and needs to be maintained by the clean-sheet contractor, who pulls the information from subscription websites. Most importantly, at the end of the clean-sheet process, it is imperative for the PM and the contractor to analyze and understand the gaps, determine what portion of the gaps can be closed, implement applicable recommended practices and work throughout the supply chain to bring “current cost” closer to “should cost.”

For more information, contact Maj. Kenneth B. Fowler at Kenneth.b.fowler4mil@mail.mil.

FIRST OF ITS KIND
Pfc. Brent Rhodes, a cannon crew member assigned to Field Artillery Squadron, 2nd Cavalry Regiment, fires an M777A2 howitzer system during the first firing of a PGK-enabled artillery system in Germany, near Grafenwoehr, in July 2015. Using clean-sheet analysis—a kind of should-cost analysis that delves into why an item should cost what it does—helped PEO Ammunition ascertain that the government was paying the right price for this sole-sourced capability. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. William A. Tanner)

MAJ. KENNETH B. FOWLER is the PGK assistant product manager for PM CAS, Picatinny Arsenal. He holds a B.S. in criminal justice from South Carolina State University. He is Level I certified in program management and a Lean Six Sigma black belt.

MR. ROBERT E. STEERE III is a project management officer within PM CAS at Picatinny Arsenal. He is Level III certified in engineering, Level III certified in production, quality and manufacturing, and a Lean Six Sigma green belt. He has a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the University of Rhode Island and holds nine U.S. patents.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

DAWDF helps commands support the Army Acquisition Workforce

From the Director, U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center

Craig Spisak
Director, U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center

The Army Director for Acquisition Career Management (DACM) Office in the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (USAASC) is responsible for sustaining and managing the careers of 36,000-plus Army acquisition professionals. Our 50 experts in three branches support this workforce with everything related to acquisition careers, from certification and education to mentoring and leader development. One of the sustainment tools we use to successfully accomplish this daunting task is financial support from the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund (DAWDF).

FURTHERING WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

DAWDF was established by Section 852 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008 to support DOD acquisition organizations with additional funds to help them develop and train their workforce, fill capability gaps, oversee contractors and achieve best value and return on investment for the taxpayer.

Funding for DAWDF comes from expiring appropriations for the Army’s operation and maintenance account. Instead of terminating, those funds roll over to support DAWDF. Until recently, DAWDF itself was scheduled to “sunset” in 2018, but it became permanent in January with the passage of the FY16 NDAA, bringing more predictable funding and making it easier to plan programs. This permanence instills confidence in acquisition organizations, which now know that they can count on DAWDF annually. We are looking forward to the innovative initiatives this will bring to the Army Acquisition Workforce.

The Army DACM Office manages and approves all Army DAWDF-­implemented initiatives from Army acquisition commands and organizations, including the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology, U.S. Army Forces Command, program executive offices, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, U.S. Army Materiel Command, U.S. Army Installation Management Command, U.S. Army Medical Command, the U.S. Army Reserve and the Army National Guard. Each of these organizations submits a DAWDF request to the DACM for initiatives in the current fiscal year, as well as estimates and planning for subsequent fiscal years.

According to Jason Pitts, program manager for Section 852 (DAWDF), all initiatives processed by his team must support the Army acquisition executive’s strategic objectives: to improve certification rates; build acquisition functional and leadership skills; increase core competencies; and recruit, retain and recognize the best talent.

“We gather all of the requirements from all the commands and screen them for deficiencies and clarification to ensure that what they submit is a clear, solid initiative,” he said. “We roll it up into one big plan and brief it to acquisition senior leaders, from the DDACM [deputy DACM] to the DACM, to make sure what we are doing with DAWDF meets the DACM’s intent.”

Once the plan receives leadership endorsement, it goes to the Human Capital Initiatives Directorate in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OUSD(AT&L)) for approval.

Pitts’ team also reaches out to the commands to help with ideas for initiatives using DAWDF.

“I found that not every command or organization knows what they can do with it. We hold monthly telephone calls where we talk about best practices and lessons learned,” Pitts said.

Also, personal visits help kick-start innovations using DAWDF. “When I meet with commands individually and let them throw out ideas that they’ve had, some of them are very creative, and if [such an initiative] meets the intent, we go with it.”

DAWDF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The $108.3 million in FY15 Army funding for DAWDF supported a wide variety of initiatives to develop and sustain the Army Acquisition Workforce (AAW). Now a permanent program, DAWDF promises to continue contributing to innovative ways to support the workforce for years to come. (SOURCE: USAASC)

CLEARLY INVENTIVE

In one training initiative success story, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Directorate of Contracting used DAWDF to sustain its contracting professionals by creating an on-the-job training program. The program, developed to address weaknesses in contracting procedures identified from procurement and command reviews, is twofold: It attacks real-time problems in a positive, constructive manner and gives contracting leadership an in-person opportunity to coach, train and mentor the future force of the organization.

Taught by seasoned procurement analysts in one- to two-hour workshops, the on-the-job training covers topics such as justifications and approvals, contract closeout procedures, price negotiation memorandums, determination and findings, market research and contract formation checklists. In FY14, this DAWDF-funded program provided hands-on training to more than 3,000 acquisition professionals in multiple functional areas, including contracting, small business, facilities engineering and program management.

CONCLUSION

Since 2008, the Army has received more than $650 million in DAWDF funding to help us build and retain a high-quality, agile and adaptive workforce.

Our DAWDF initiatives include the Student Loan Repayment Program, the Army’s premier retention tool, which by itself has attracted more than 4,400 participants, and targeted training to fill acquisition and leadership gaps. Successful pilot programs include the Army Acquisition Leader Preparation Course, a program to prepare newly centrally selected acquisition leaders for their new leadership roles and duties, and the tireless Ellie, the virtual acquisition career guide and computer-generated mentor, available 24/7 to answer questions and offer career feedback. All of these initiatives are made possible through DAWDF.

In an April 2015 memorandum, the Hon. Frank Kendall, USD(AT&L), stated that it is imperative for the services to sustain and build on the investments made to increase the capacity and capability of the acquisition workforce. The Army DACM Office takes that quite seriously. With help from DAWDF funding to boost our capability, we will continue our commitment to sustain, maintain, train and retain the Army Acquisition Workforce as world-class professionals dedicated to our warfighters in providing the best weapons, services and technology as quickly as possible.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Pseudolites help pave the Army’s path to assured positioning, navigation and timing, providing a ‘protective bubble’ for Soldiers when satellite signals are degraded or denied.

by Maj. Troy Houston

If your personal GPS is wrong, the consequences can be maddening. If a Soldier’s GPS is wrong, the consequences can be disastrous. GPS has become so integral to daily life, and to military operations, that it’s easy to take for granted. But when GPS satellite signals are impeded or denied in a combat environment—by terrain conditions or enemy actions—it affects units’ ability to maintain initiative, coordinate movements, target fires and communicate on-the-move.

As the threat environment changes and adversaries become more sophisticated in attacking existing GPS capabilities, Army senior leaders have stressed the need to achieve assured positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) information by other means. With more than 200 different Army systems that require PNT data, the Army is DOD’s largest user of PNT.

So what does it mean to have assured PNT, and how can the Army Acquisition Corps deliver the capability quickly and affordably to the battlefield? The Pseudolite program—short for “pseudo-satellite”—provides a glimpse.

MULTISYSTEM SUPPORT
An M777 howitzer crew assigned to the 2nd Battalion of the 17th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division (2-2 SBCT) loads a 155 mm round in preparation for firing during the unit’s Division Artillery Readiness Test in October 2015 at Yakima Training Center, Washington. PNT data is used in Army systems as diverse as the M777, Stryker, Nett Warrior and Rifleman Radio, requiring an enterprise approach to assured PNT. (U.S. Army photo by CPT Meredith Mathis, 2-2 SBCT)

DATA SOLDIERS CAN TRUST

Having accurate PNT information is mission-critical in all environments, but it becomes especially important in environments where adversaries are using anti-access and area-denial (A2AD) capabilities to try to deny our forces freedom of movement and freedom of action.

To deliver data that Soldiers can trust even amid these challenges, assured PNT (A-PNT) has two components:

• Integrity: the right signal.
• Assurance: a trusted connection to accurate PNT information.

Integrity describes the reliability of the PNT information received on a GPS device. It answers the questions: Does the signal contain the data the receiver expects? Does the signal come from an authorized and trusted source?

Assurance, meanwhile, measures the accuracy of the PNT information received on a GPS device. It answers the questions: Does the GPS receiver provide an accurate PNT solution? Does the GPS receiver have an active link to a PNT source?

Together, integrity and assurance of the GPS signal minimize operational risk and collateral damage, and maximize the probability of mission success.

The Army is seeking to provide this capability through the A-PNT program, which senior leaders describe as a major priority and critical enabler for the U.S. Army Operating Concept, “Win in a Complex World.” A-PNT comprises four subprograms—Pseudolites, Mounted PNT, Dismounted PNT and Anti-Jam Antennas—that will work together to augment GPS and provide PNT information that Soldiers can trust.

THE PSEUDOLITE SOLUTION

The A-PNT program of record is in its early stages, with the Army science and technology community transitioning solutions and requirements being developed. The most advanced of the subprograms to date is Pseudolites—pseudo-satellites that can pinch-hit for the GPS satellite constellation when needed for operations at brigade-and-below.

Deployed on both unmanned aerial vehicles and ground vehicle platforms, pseudolite transmitters in effect “pull down” the GPS satellite constellation closer to the ground—delivering users a high-power signal that’s more difficult to exploit or deny in A2AD or geographically difficult environments. By leveraging advances in commercial technology and by taking an accelerated, competitive acquisition approach, the Pseudolite program is progressing on schedule through the milestone process in pursuit of its ultimate goal: provide PNT information independent from GPS.

A BETTER PATH TO A-PNT
U.S. Army Reserve combat engineers from the 374th Engineer Company (Sapper) program their grid coordinates using a Defense Advanced GPS receiver, on a team-based land navigation course in August 2015 during the Sapper Stakes competition at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas. The Pseudolite program is a response to the vulnerability of GPS as the threat environment changes and adversaries become more sophisticated in attacking existing GPS capabilities. (U.S. Army photo by MSG Michel Sauret, 200th Military Police Command)

As a component of the A-PNT architecture in the brigade combat team (BCT), pseudolites augment GPS by providing PNT data to users within a protected area. Using terrestrial- or near-terrestrial-based transmitters as an alternative source of GPS-like signals, pseudolites create a sort of protective bubble for the BCT. The bubble activates when access to the GPS satellite signal is degraded by either friendly or enemy electronic transmission or by natural obstacles such as canyons, urban areas or heavy foliage.

Pseudolites consist of an Anti-Jam Antenna System (AJAS), non-GPS augmentation, GPS receiver, transmitter, and a command and control application. Each pseudolite will use the AJAS to maintain connection to the GPS constellation for as long as possible. Non-GPS augmentation will then step in to provide additional information to the final PNT solution. The pseudolite transceiver will receive and process command, configuration and synchronization data from existing computing and communications equipment within the BCT, and rebroadcast a high-powered GPS-like signal that is recognized and processed by the military GPS receivers within the area of operations.

The planned implementation for pseudolites is at the BCT level, enabling a sufficient level of command and control as well as the ability to react rapidly to changes in the operational environment. To enable A-PNT coverage for the BCT, pseudolites will be integrated onto select ground and aerial platforms within the unit that offer the proximity and availability to provide direct support to maneuver battalion operations. Pseudolites will be fielded as modular, lightweight, self-contained systems compatible for use with aerial platforms, fixed or semifixed structures, antenna masts, towers or aerostats available to the BCT.

THE BIG PICTURE
Pseudolites are to be fielded at the BCT level—as shown here using an infantry BCT (IBCT) as an example—allowing for sufficient command and control as well as enabling rapid response to changes in the operational environment. (SOURCE: PM PNT)

Given the prevalence of GPS in today’s formations, these systems will not be fielded in a vacuum, but instead as part of a “tool kit” that leverages current equipment for maximum effectiveness. Users will control pseudolites through application software on existing network and spectrum management tools within the BCT. Current Military GPS User Equipment (MGUE) devices will receive updates allowing them to use pseudolites as a PNT source, while future MGUE devices will be designed to receive and process the pseudolite signal. As the Army phases in the capability, the pseudolite signal will not cause any harmful effects to user equipment that has not been or cannot be updated.

To further streamline their integration into the force, pseudolites employ an open systems architecture design, aligned with the Sensor Computing Environment baseline as part of the Army’s Common Operating Environment. This modular approach provides the flexibility to integrate various software, hardware and human components designed to satisfy A-PNT. Over time, it will allow the Army to implement software upgrades and modifications to enhance A-PNT, enabling continuous innovation and evolution while minimizing the impact to existing equipment.

A CROSSCUTTING CAPABILITY

With PNT data used in Army systems as diverse as the Stryker, Nett Warrior, Rifleman Radio and the M777 howitzer, A-PNT is a capability that crosses multiple acquisition portfolios. As its different components are developed and fielded, almost every program executive office (PEO) in the Army will have at least one project manager in need of A-PNT.

Formally recognizing the criticality of A-PNT and the need for coordination across and beyond the Army, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)) recently streamlined the A-PNT acquisition process by designating the PNT program office as a direct reporting program manager to the ASA(ALT). This designation enables a faster decision cycle, resulting in the delivery of enhanced capabilities to the Soldier in a compressed timeline.

Managing the program through ASA(ALT) allows the Army to address broader projects and initiatives, such as the Army PNT System of Systems Architecture, that will enable an enterprise approach to assured PNT and prevent an uncoordinated approach by programs with redundant solutions. The structure also enables Program Manager (PM) PNT to plan for the cross-PEO integration efforts required to outpace threats and increase efficiencies in PNT implementation.

Against this backdrop, pseudolites were the first of the family of A-PNT systems to receive a milestone (MS) decision. In May 2015, the subprogram received an MS A decision to enter into the technology maturation and risk reduction phase. PM PNT is now leveraging industry expertise in GPS and GPS alternatives through competitive prototyping. Each company is charged with delivering pseudolite prototypes and laboratory testing. This lab testing will provide the government with data to assess the capability of the prototypes up to Technology Readiness Level 6 in preparation for an MS B review.

READY TO RECEIVE
A Soldier from the 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB) installs radio communication equipment as the sun sets over Fort Stewart, Georgia, in January. More than 200 different Army systems require PNT data, making the A-PNT program a major priority and critical enabler for the U.S. Army Operating Concept, “Win in a Complex World.” Pseudolites are the most advanced of the four A-PNT subprograms. (Photo by SPC Scott Lindblom, 3rd CAB Public Affairs)

CONCLUSION

While we think of GPS as the gold standard, it is simply one materiel solution to deliver PNT. As the technology and threat landscape continue to shift, the A-PNT program is breaking ground with several alternative means to provide trusted PNT data to Soldiers.

As the first A-PNT element “out of the gate,” the Pseudolite program is using an accelerated acquisition approach to deliver modular, scalable technology that is flexible to BCT commanders’ needs, integrates with current equipment and can smoothly incorporate future evolutions in antennas, receivers and other technology. Each step in the process takes us closer to the ultimate vision for a pseudolite: a Soldier can turn it on, and the pseudolite will be able to determine its PNT anywhere in the world, without the aid of the GPS constellation, and be totally transparent to the user.

For more information, visit https://www.pmpnt.army.mil/.

MAJ TROY HOUSTON is the assistant product manager for pseudolites, part of the Army’s A-PNT program. He holds an MBA and a B.S. in finance from Illinois State University. He is Level II certified in program management.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Winning in a complex world means that the Army must prepare for combined arms maneuver and wide area security, and that means area denial. However, systems like FASCAM have significant problems, including age and policy restrictions, so it falls to PM CCS, TACOM and ARDEC to sustain an aging stockpile and design successors.

by Mr. Edward Chin, Mr. Christopher E. Kramer (Lt. Col., USA, Ret.) and Mr. Ken R. Schulters

The Army has significantly increased its emphasis on training for combined arms maneuver (CAM) and wide area security (WAS) operations in contemporary and future operational environments.

This increased emphasis has led to a dramatic resurgence in the demand for and usage of many legacy area-denial systems that had been infrequently employed during the last decade-plus of counterinsurgency operations, which did not require extensive or large-scale operations by mounted and dismounted forces against peer or near-peer level mounted and dismounted forces.

Large-scale operations frequently require a means of shaping large blocks of terrain—that is, enabling or restricting the movement of enemy forces through the employment of explosive ground-based munitions and other means. In the past, mines performed this function. Future operations will require more advanced munitions that are policy-compliant and much more capable than the “dumb” conventional mines they will replace.

The increase in terrain-shaping system usage has resulted in a variety of sustainment challenges. Compounding these challenges are the age and landmine factors inherent in some legacy Family of Scatterable Mines (FASCAM) systems.

Collaborative efforts by the Project Manager, Close Combat Systems (PM CCS) within the Program Executive Office (PEO) for Ammunition; U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC); and U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command have provided extensive and successful support to the user community to overcome these challenges. The effects of this support are visible at the proponency level, at the level of units in the field, and at combat training centers.

Some of the sustainment challenges with legacy area-denial systems include system age; battery life and obsolescence; changes in ground and air prime mover platforms; the demand for and availability of repair parts; priority of sustainment funding; unit familiarity with maintaining and operating the systems; and evolving policy guidance and treaty requirements.

Military forces use FASCAM systems to rapidly emplace terrain- shaping obstacles onto specific geographic locations with the intent of altering or ceasing the enemy’s movement in a manner desired by friendly forces, to gain tactical advantage. Multiple systems, both air and ground, exist to accomplish this goal.

MUCH WORK TO DO
The Volcano system, shown here before refurbishment, is a mass scatterable mine delivery system that delivers mines by helicopter or ground vehicle. The age of such systems presents a variety of sustainment challenges, including battery life, changes in the air and ground vehicles that emplace them, and many others. (Photo courtesy PEO Ammunition)

A BATTERY OF CHALLENGES
One of the primary challenges with older systems that contain electronic components, such as the Volcano, is the constant advance of technology. Keeping pace with the rapid evolution of electronic technologies is a tremendous challenge, and systems like the Volcano require periodic attention to ensure they do not become obsolete.

Separately, many systems share a challenge with battery life­span and performance. Many of the Army’s advanced munition capabilities are particularly dependent upon battery lifespan and reliability, as these munitions require dependable, constant and immediately available power, and they cannot be attached to external power. Many batteries in the legacy ­FASCAM munitions systems such as the Volcano are embedded within the individual munitions and are reaching or exceeding their design life. Since the munitions were designed with safety, reliability, performance and avoidance of tampering as key priorities, the batteries were placed in the munition. This leads to sustainment issues when unused munitions approach the end of their predicted shelf life.

The batteries were designed to provide the required power for full operation of the munitions for many decades after they are fielded. However, the chemicals in the batteries may break down over time, which may reduce the amount of available power or the time it takes to provide the power to the system when needed. This failure may be accelerated as harsh environmental conditions are encountered for prolonged periods of storage. While battery performance and shelf life have greatly improved, all batteries have a finite lifespan. Ongoing studies on current FASCAM system batteries will inform decisions on the appropriate sustainment strategies needed to continue to provide the FASCAM capability.

The ongoing battery studies employ known aging strategies and techniques to predict shelf life. These include exposing the batteries and electronic components to extreme temperatures and elevated humidity levels for as long as months at a time. The high temperatures and humidity levels are typically higher than the storage and operating environments that would be encountered when deployed, but lower than the known conditions that cause failures or unwanted changes. For example, if liquid water is a key component in a tested sample, researchers may not want to expose it to 212 degrees Fahrenheit at normal atmospheric pressure since boiling may have a negative effect on the sample.

However, if the sample is typically used in an environment where temperatures reach 160 degrees Fahrenheit, then exposing the sample in the study to 200 degrees may provide the needed data. In the case of FASCAM, operating temperatures may reach higher than 100 degrees in the desert at the hottest point during the day even when shaded from direct sunlight. The batteries and electronics are designed to survive desert conditions; however, there is a negative impact on battery shelf life after repeated and prolonged exposure to such conditions.

Another technique used to predict shelf life is to cycle the temperature and humidity through high and low extremes, to simulate the changing conditions during a 24-hour period. Constant changes in temperature and humidity could weaken or degrade seals, cause surfaces to deform or warp and cause joints to separate, which may break electrical circuits and prevent the flow of electricity when needed.

As samples are removed from the test chambers, they are checked to determine if they are still operable, whether they are working as they were originally designed and how much degradation has been encountered. Mathematical analysis provides an estimate of predicted lifespan. The shelf life study is scheduled to be completed by September 2016.

INTERIM SOLUTION
A Volcano system after refurbishment. While ARDEC took the lead on system and subsystem technical data packages to find replacement parts for obsolete components, TACOM developed a new refurbishment process to get aging systems up to speed. But existing policies surrounding mine systems present other challenges. (Photo courtesy of PEO Ammunition)

PAST ITS USE-BY DATE
While battery shelf life is a concern, it is not the sole failure mode for advanced munitions. Plastics and electronic components are also subject to deterioration over time. Potting material may lose its integrity and no longer provide the physical support required for high G-forces during launch and ground impact. From the electronic side, solder can break down and cause the growth of “tin whiskers” that can create unwanted paths for current to flow. Additionally, circuit boards can delaminate, breaking needed pathways for current flow.

With the Volcano system, ARDEC began its support by reviewing the various system and subsystem technical data packages to identify modern replacements for the obsolete legacy components. TACOM then developed a new repair-and-replacement process at its depot facility to refurbish the aging Volcano systems. TACOM proved out this program on a limited quantity of Volcano systems in FY15, and is now planning to continue the sustainment work when funding is made available.

PM CCS and ARDEC initiated a long-term study of currently fielded FASCAM systems to look for evidence of deterioration as the result of the different failure modes mentioned previously. The goals of this study include determining remaining shelf life of the systems and applying lessons learned to the development of new FASCAM systems.

Policy guidance also introduces legacy system sustainment challenges. There are both age and treaty compliance challenges inherent in most legacy FASCAM systems. U.S. landmine policy and two 2014 White House announcements on antipersonnel landmines (APL) ban the use of persistent landmines, which, if not removed or destroyed, can remain deadly indefinitely, and restrict the use of APL outside of the Korean Peninsula.

In September 2014, the White House published “Fact Sheet: Changes to U.S. Anti-Personnel Landmine Policy.” This document stated that the U.S. “will not use APL outside the Korean Peninsula; not assist, encourage, or induce anyone outside the Korean Peninsula to engage in activity prohibited by the Ottawa Convention; and undertake to destroy APL stockpiles not required for the defense of the Republic of Korea.”

The use of persistent landmines ended in 2010. Since that time, U.S. forces had only been allowed to employ self-destructing or self-deactivating APLs and antivehicle landmines (AVL). This left U.S. forces with two legacy area-denial system options for employment outside the Korean Peninsula: the M87A1 Volcano and the Remote Anti-Armor Mine. The current, available FASCAM systems lack “human-in-the-loop” control capability and scalable lethal and nonlethal effects. Additionally, current U.S. FASCAM systems are approaching or are beyond their original design life.

MINE THE TRAINING
Soldiers from Alpha Troop, Regimental Engineer Squadron, 2nd Cavalry Regiment load dummy rounds onto an M139 Volcano mine system during Saber Junction 15, an exercise held in April 2015 at the U.S. Army’s Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Hohenfels, Germany. Systems like the Volcano require periodic attention to ensure that they do not become obsolete. (U.S. Army photo by SPC John Cress Jr.)

CONCLUSION
To address this change, and to meet the warfighting requirements in unified land operations anywhere in the world, the joint force is developing rapidly emplaceable and treaty-compliant scatterable munition systems. PM CCS is leading an effort, directed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, to establish a program of record to develop an Ottawa Convention-compliant air-delivered, operator-controlled munition system that will provide both antivehicle and antipersonnel munitions and will replace the current GATOR system, with an initial operating capability goal by FY25.

Despite the various challenges faced with the resurgence and continued needs for the legacy weapon systems, PM CCS is aligned with the Army’s priority to use existing capabilities in new ways to provide increased lethality, survivability and overmatch to both the mounted and dismounted joint force in the close fight. The FASCAM replacement with human-in-the-loop initiated effect will ultimately provide the commander with the capability to prevent, shape and win in order to accomplish their mission and meet the needs of the 21st century operational environment.

For more information, contact the authors at edward.w.chin.civ@mail.mil, christopher.e.kramer.ctr@mail.mil or ken.r.schulters.civ@mail.mil; or go to the PM CCS website at http://www.pica.army.mil/pmccs/MainSite.html.

MR. EDWARD CHIN is PM CCS’ project officer for the Selectable Lightweight Attack Munition, Claymore and legacy mine systems. He holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Polytechnic Institute of New York and has more than 34 years of system acquisition experience. He is an Army Acquisition Corps member and is Level III certified in program management and systems planning, research, development and engineering.

MR. CHRISTOPHER E. KRAMER (Lt. Col,, USA, Ret.) provides program management contract support to PM CCS through the Millennium Corp. He holds an M.S. in geology from Baylor University and a B.S. in geology from Monmouth College. He has more than 25 combined years of active-duty service and support to the U.S. Army as an engineer officer and to PM CCS as a support contractor.

MR. KEN R. SCHULTERS is PM CCS’ project officer for nonlethal launched munitions. He holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the City University of New York, City College of New York and has more than 15 years of system acquisition experience. He is Level III certified in program management and systems planning, research, development and engineering.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

As ubiquitous as ‘the cloud’ is in the commercial world, that is not the case with the Army because of security requirements. But an Army cloud is not far away and offers significant benefits for sustainment and cost-savings—and the information Soldiers need.

by Col. John E. Rozsnyai

The keys to sound decision-making and effective action are good information—perhaps with a few specialized tools and services thrown in to help make sense of it all—and reliable communications. This is true no matter where you are or what you are doing—on the battlefield or in the office, conducting major combat operations, responding to a humanitarian crisis, training or planning.

Today, communications, the collection, delivery and sharing of information, and the applications that help us use and understand the information have a common denominator: They are network-dependent, and the demand for them is high and constantly increasing. At the same time, the scope and diversity of Army mission requirements are growing, budgets and staff levels are declining, and cybersecurity threats and attacks are becoming more sophisticated and more frequent.

This environment challenges the Army’s ability to maintain readiness and warfighting superiority. Innovative approaches that preserve resources and the Army’s technological edge, while fulfilling readiness requirements, are the solution. Cloud computing provides just such a transformational opportunity.

THE POWER OF CLOUD COMPUTING
Cloud computing adds five distinct advantages to the best features of data center computing. Resources can be shared between programs and used as needed—an improvement on the over-provisioning that occurs with data centers. (SOURCE: CIO/G-6 and Microsoft)

Delivering the enablers that warfighters and decision-makers need through traditional information technology (IT) infrastructure is inherently less secure and has become far too expensive to sustain. Cloud computing, however, offers an avenue to significantly improve the Army’s overall cybersecurity posture, lower IT hardware and software costs and provide the flexibility to develop and deliver more quickly the capability enhancements the force needs.

WHAT CLOUD COMPUTING IS NOT
Cloud computing is not merely a data center that has been optimized for performance and efficiency. Even the most optimized data center still requires significant management to operate, secure, sustain and provision computing resources (e.g., processing, memory, storage). In a standard data center, computing resources are dedicated to specific system and application owners (one computer is assigned to run only one application) based on predicted peak levels of demand, which often exceed actual need. This is known as over-provisioning, and these resources are rendered unavailable to other systems—whether or not they actually are being consumed—and the system owner pays to sustain them even when they’re not being used.

WHAT CLOUD COMPUTING IS
In contrast, cloud computing encompasses all of the efficient features of an optimized data center while adding five essential characteristics:

1. On-demand self-service, where system and application owners can provision, and de-provision, available computing resources without data center management intervention.

2. Broad network access to support multiple types of devices.

3. Shared pooling of configurable computing resources, which can be released for other uses when demand is low.

4.Rapid elasticity, which enables automatic scaling of resources up or down of resources based on actual demand.

5. Measured services through a metering capability, which ensures that system and application owners pay only for the resources they consume.

CLOUD SERVICE MODELS
In general, cloud computing provides capabilities through three service models, which can be deployed on- or off-premises in a private, community, public or hybrid environment, depending on the level of security required:

Software as a Service (SaaS): The cloud service provider (CSP) operates, secures and sustains all of the computing infrastructure, including servers, operating systems (platforms) and applications (software). SaaS is a complete service offering that requires very little intervention beyond the CSP, with the exception of some minor user-level customization, which may be offered as part of the service.

EFFICIENCY AND SECURITY
Each piece of the hybrid cloud puzzle can handle a different level of security to cover each data impact level. Ensuring that cloud resources can support Soldiers deployed to austere, contested environments with limited bandwidth is one challenge to the transition to the cloud. (SOURCE: CIO/G-6)

Platform as a Service (PaaS): The CSP operates, secures and sustains the computing infrastructure, including servers and operating systems. PaaS is a mid-level service offering that requires the application owner to self-provision and sustain all services and associated data, including cybersecurity updates and incident response.

Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS): The CSP operates, secures and sustains only the hardware. IaaS is the minimum-­level offering. It requires system and application owners to self-provision and secure the entire operating environment, including the operating system, application services and associated data, and to provide the required cybersecurity updates and incident response.

BENEFITS TO THE ARMY
Today’s data center environment, with more than 1,000 locations, is cost-­prohibitive to sustain and nearly impossible to secure because of the vast cyber­attack surface and inconsistent, untimely cybersecurity practices. This target-rich environment prevents the Army from adequately protecting its information resources and fully exploiting economies of scale. It also prevents the Army from keeping pace with emerging technology and setting conditions to harness the power of “big data” analytics—working with data sets so large or complex that traditional data processing applications are inadequate.

Cloud computing upends this paradigm. When the appropriate cloud service model is used, the Army reaps a slew of benefits. Application owners no longer acquire specific, dedicated computing resources; rather, they contract for these resources as a service from a CSP, which then hosts applications and data in a common, shared computing environment. Overall software licensing costs drop through centralized delivery.

In the aggregate, the Army’s cybersecurity posture improves dramatically. Instead of 1,000 or more open connections to the network that must be supported today, DOD intends to have fewer than 85. Additionally, centrally managed and pushed patches for software and operating systems speed the implementation of fixes to “zero day” vulnerabilities (vulnerabilities that the developer is not aware of but a hacker may have found, and therefore the developer has zero days to fix them) and lower hands-on labor requirements.

ASSEMBLING THE CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE
The Army isn’t relying on a single kind of CSP. There’s a place in the Army IT infrastructure for each different configuration of cloud service—on-premises, off-premises, DOD and commercial. (SOURCE: CIO/G-6)

Additionally, the user experience becomes more consistent and less technically complex, through a common set of applications and consistent end-user device interfaces, which reduces training requirements and costs. And capability enhancements are fielded much faster; with computing infrastructure available to research and development (R&D) communities through on-demand, self-service portals, there is no need to wait on long procurement cycles for R&D to begin enhancing capabilities. The Army also can take advantage of the commercial R&D efforts that can readily be ported from and into the cloud.

WHAT THE ARMY IS DOING
Hybrid cloud: The Army Cloud Computing Strategy encompasses a hybrid deployment model that includes on-premises DOD (for example, milCloud, which is housed in DOD facilities) and commercial CSPs and off-premises federal (such as NASA or the Department of Homeland Security) and commercial CSPs and cloud computing infrastructure in the tactical environment. The Army determines the “best cloud” deployment and service for each application through an engineering evaluation process that considers migration readiness, information security requirements, mission requirements and cloud service provider capabilities.

Off-premises cloud pilots: The Army is leveraging the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) cloud pilot program, which uses an off-premises commercial CSP. The pilot is not only evaluating the security capabilities provided by the CSP, but it also is helping to shape the security requirements for DISA-provided cloud access points (CAPs), which provide boundary security for the Department of Defense Information Network. The final CAP architecture is now in place and is in the early stages of integrating additional CSPs and DOD applications. The objective is to test their capabilities to increase the pool of potential bidders, and ultimately to accelerate migration of applications to the cloud and closure of data centers. As a follow-on effort, the Army will begin a pilot in FY16 for “common services” (user and device authentication, Active Directory services, scanning and information assurance vulnerability assessment) provided from off-premises CSPs.

On-premises cloud pilot: The Army also is pursuing an on-premises commercially owned, commercially operated (COCO) cloud service offering at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. A proof of concept, this effort is focused on reducing the risks associated with providing an Armywide, COCO private cloud that accommodates more sensitive information, up to the secret level.

Acquisition vehicles: Although there are acquisition vehicles that can be leveraged now, the Army is adapting to recent lessons learned and changes to the DOD Federal Acquisition Regulations. In November 2015, the Army’s Program Executive Office for Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS) issued a draft request for proposals to industry to refine requirements for an Army Cloud Computing Enterprise Transformation (ACCENT) contract, to be awarded in FY17. Intended as an enterprisewide cloud acquisition vehicle, ACCENT will provide commercial cloud solutions for eligible Army enterprise applications (email, collaboration, SharePoint—any application used across multiple installations).

CHALLENGES AND THE WAY AHEAD
First, the Army must ensure that it does not compromise its mission by unrealistically trading the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical data and information in pursuit of the cloud’s potential benefits. Because cloud computing within DOD is still evolving, measuring overall security vulnerabilities and other inherent risks is difficult. The Army is significantly changing how it operates the network and we don’t necessarily know what we don’t yet know. Collectively, all DOD components are working to mitigate the risks that are known, both at DOD’s network boundary as well as within CSPs’ infrastructure. Additionally, we are evaluating how to effectively integrate the use of big data analytics to rapidly mitigate insider and external threats to the network.

CUSTOMIZED MODELS
Depending on the level of service and security required, customers can choose how much to lean on a cloud service provider and how much to do themselves. With the transition to the cloud, the Army’s cybersecurity posture improves overall. (SOURCE: National Institute of Standards and Technology)

Assured level of communications: One of the biggest challenges is that deployed forces are not assured the level of communications availability and bandwidth to which they are accustomed at home station, which could impact their ability to reach the cloud. The Army must be able to deploy forces far away from its fixed infrastructure, into austere and highly contested environments, where they will have to operate for extended periods of time in disconnected, intermittent and limited communications conditions.

Cultural resistance: Changing mindset is not an easy endeavor for an enterprise as large as the Army. It’s hard work convincing organizations and agencies that own and operate their own systems and applications to accept that someone else can provide the same or better level of service at a reduced cost.

Application/data determination: The Army is taking a close look at what types of applications and data elements are the highest risk to the mission and the overall force protection effort. This will determine which must always be available locally in case of disconnection and which lesser-risk elements forces can wait for.

CONCLUSION
While network security, operational efficiency and cost are driving factors in the move to cloud computing, they are not the primary goal. Increasing mission effectiveness is the main objective. Cloud computing will make information and IT services, such as collaboration, communication and analysis tools, available wherever Soldiers and commanders are, whenever they need them. As a result, split-base operations, where certain elements deploy forward and others remain outside the operational theater (and even at home station), will become much easier to execute. With fewer people and less materiel forward, operational sustainment requirements will decrease. At the same time, quicker, more complete collection of data—made readily accessible regardless of the source’s or the user’s location—and the ability to use big data analytics have the potential to simplify anticipation and fulfillment of the sustainment needs that remain.

Developing a rapidly deployable cloud capability is not an easy endeavor when you start to consider all of the variables. However, it is achievable, and it is imperative for the Army to maintain its warfighting superiority in the 21st century.

For more information on the Army cloud computing strategy, go to Army Cloud Computing Strategy, Version 1.0, March 2015. For more information on Army guidance on the use of and migration to commercial cloud service providers, go to http://ciog6.army.mil/Portals/1/Army_Cloud_Computing_Strategy%20Final_v1_0.pdf.

COL JOHN E. ROZSNYAI is the chief, Enterprise Architecture Division, within the Office of the Chief Information Officer/G-6, and the Army Cloud Transition trail boss. He holds an M.S. in information technology management from Webster University and a B.S. in business administration from Limestone College.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

With the changing coalition mission in Afghanistan, contingency contracting has also changed markedly, requiring a broader array of skills and training for a wider range of responsibilities.

by Mr. Gordon Jones and Maj. Miriam Harris

At the height of the surge in 2010, with approximately 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the Bagram Regional Contracting Center (RCC) and the Kandahar RCC had more than 50 personnel assigned at each location, with multiple smaller RCCs all over Afghanistan providing similar contingency contracting support. The RCCs were made up of seasoned contracting professionals, military and civilian, from the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. The workload was nonstop, with as many as 300 to 400 open purchase requests at a time.

The requirements were typical of a large-scale operational effort: bottled water, HESCO barriers, T-walls, concertina wire (C-wire) and small construction projects, including setting up relocatable buildings. The efforts of these contingency contracting professionals were absolutely crucial to provide basic necessities to sustain coalition forces and to protect U.S. forces and our coalition partners from suicide bombers and rocket attacks, which were a daily occurrence in 2010.

Fast forward to 2016: The mission in Afghanistan has changed dramatically over the last five years to a train, advise and assist role in support of the Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan (CSTC-A) mission and the U.S. Forces – Afghanistan mission. The roles of those deployed to carry out contingency contracting in an RCC also have changed considerably; Soldiers expecting to come to their first contingency contracting assignment to buy bottled water and C-wire will find they are required to work in a much broader role.

READY TO RESPOND
Mark-81 bombs destined for A-29 Light Attack Craft are inventoried and loaded onto Afghan National Army trucks for delivery to ANDSF bunkers. While the battlefield environment changes frequently, ECC leadership has developed a responsive contracting structure capable of multifunctional mission execution without the need for complex staffing adjustments or realignments. (U.S. Air Force photo by Capt Kevin M. Limani, CSTC-A)

A JOINT ENDEAVOR
This expanded role is supported by well-trained contracting battalions ready to deploy when called upon. The 925th Contracting Battalion, stationed at Fort Drum, New York, deployed to Kabul, Afghanistan’s capital, in October 2015 to take responsibility for RCC-Capital, one of three RCCs under the Expeditionary Contracting Command – Afghanistan (ECC-A). RCC-Capital’s location and mission focus is the Afghan capital area, with its primary effort being support for CSTC-A.

CSTC-A is a joint service endeavor in partnership with the government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) to provide support to the Afghan national defense and security forces (ANDSF). “CSTC-A is charged with developing ministerial capability and capacity in the areas of budget development and execution, payment of salaries, acquisition planning and procurement. CSTC-A must continue to guide and develop budgeting, acquisition planning, procurement, financial management and contract management expertise within both the GIRoA Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Interior,” said COL Charles Worshim III, director of ­CSTC-A’s Contracting Enabler Cell in Kabul. “These key skills are essential to the independent operation of the Afghan security institutions [which include ANDSF as well as the Afghan Border Police, the Afghan Criminal Investigation Department and the Afghan Public Protection Force] and ultimate transition to an enduring Department of State-led presence in Afghanistan,” he said.

While the command’s goal is to transition procurement actions to GIRoA, presently CSTC-A partners execute a large percentage of requirements to equip, train and sustain ANDSF to enhance the security of Afghanistan. One of CSTC-A’s tenets is to assist Afghans in developing their own procurement system. If the Afghans cannot execute a requirement, CSTC-A pulls the requirement to the U.S. side, where the RCC executes a contract to accomplish what’s needed.

Additionally, CSTC-A’s charter includes training, advising and assisting Afghanistan’s National Procurement Agency in refining procurement law, regulations and processes to facilitate the government’s efforts in building an autonomous procurement system. “It is imperative that we succeed in developing those requisite skills and experience to enable the ministries to operate successfully within Afghanistan while independently providing for the national security needs of Afghanistan,” said Worshim.

GROUP EFFORT
The RCC-E team includes, clockwise, from upper left, SFC Kelly McFarlin and MAJ Adam Patten, working in the Commodity Section; SSG Jessica Skaggs and SSG Timothy McMillan, in the Services Section; and Administrative Contracting Officers Chris Griffin, Doll Burnett and Ryan Buhman. (Photos by LTC Pamela Stephens, RCC-East)

FULFILLING AFGHAN REQUIREMENTS
CSTC-A is unique in that it uses the Afghan Security Forces Fund, an appropriation authorized by Congress. As Worshim said, “CSTC-A is the sole DOD organization responsible for safeguarding appropriated Afghan Security Forces Fund resources that directly support the Afghan National Army and Police.” Upholding procurement integrity is paramount at a time when DOD programs are under scrutiny to protect against fraud, waste and abuse.

Three primary processes fulfill requirements in support of the ANDSF. The first method available to requirement owners is to submit a memorandum of request through the Security Assistance Office – Afghanistan to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency for a foreign military sales-type procurement process for large acquisitions such as aviation packages. The second is to use a military interdepartmental purchase request for goods, services and construction projects executed through U.S. agencies. The third existing procurement method for requirement owners is submission of a purchase request and commitment to RCC-Capital.

RCC-Capital’s support of CSTC-A is the right solution for requirement owners, as it provides a local resource for cradle-to-grave acquisition in Afghanistan. RCC-Capital stands ready to execute contracts through award to U.S.-based and local vendors for services, supplies and minor construction projects. “Providing solid business advice early in the acquisition process is the most valuable resource we provide commanders. Providing this advice requires daily interaction, and there is really nothing better than face-to-face interaction,” said Lt. Col. Wyeth Anderson, commander of the 925th Contracting Battalion.

Upon arrival in theater, the battalion immediately postured itself to accept requirements and streamline the processes necessary to provide high-quality, responsive contracting support for requirement owners, transforming RCC-Capital into a customer-­focused organization. “Having the right people here is the most important factor, and Expeditionary Contracting Command – Afghanistan has done a great job resourcing RCC-Capital with smart and qualified military and civilian personnel,” said Anderson.

Building a rapport with customers, including CSTC-A requirement owners, is a component of RCC-Capital’s model to make it the “go to” organization for finding the right contracting solution in the capital region. An emphasis on contracting practices in accordance with regulations and policy underscores the organization’s reputation for being straight shooters who work with customers to develop an acquisition strategy that will meet mission requirements. “Safeguarding these resources [appropriations] will maximize the U.S.’s ability to successfully accomplish the Resolute Support Mission to build a safe, stable country that addresses the needs of its people and eliminate safe havens that breed terrorism,” said Worshim.

CHECKING IN
Gilberto Ponce, right, checks basic-issue items as personnel turn in vehicles at Logistics Task Force Bagram, Afghanistan, in May 2015. Ponce, who deployed from U.S. Army Sustainment Command headquarters, where he serves as a logistics management specialist, volunteered to spend six months helping Army Field Support Battalion – Afghanistan bridge a personnel gap. With the changing coalition mission in Afghanistan, Soldiers on contingency contracting assignments find they are required to work in a much broader role than before the drawdown. (Photo by Summer Barkley, 401st Army Field Support Brigade)

Within the next several years, the CSTC-A team plans to transition the procurement of requirements to GIRoA for cradle-to-grave execution and management. In the interim, RCC-Capital provides the contracting solution for acquisition planning and execution within ECC-A for CSTC-A.

CELL DIVISION
Another example of the expanded role of contingency contracting is the U.S. Army Contracting Command (ACC) decision in 2012 to create a contingency contracting administration services (CCAS) cell at its headquarters with these new missions in mind. The command’s CCAS cell has developed a two-week CCAS course at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, for 51Cs and 1102s (noncommissioned officer and civilian contracting specialists, respectively) deploying to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility to train and guide personnel with this mission, but it will be up to the Soldiers and civilians deployed post-2015 to make it work.

On Jan. 9, 2016, Col. Daryl P. “Rick” Harger, commander of ECC-A, accepted the transfer of authority for contract administration over six legacy contracts with performance in Afghanistan from Lt. Col. Freddy L. Adams, commander of Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) – Afghanistan. Performance of the contract administration function over these first six legacy contracts, which include the two largest contracts being performed in Afghanistan, with a combined contract value exceeding $16 billion, will be augmented over time by more than 100 additional contracts awarded by ACC.

According to Harger, “This CCAS mission will represent a departure from the CCAS mission being currently performed in Kuwait.” The Kuwait CCAS mission was formulated using a battalion manning structure, with all personnel dedicated to performing just the CCAS mission. In Afghanistan, the CCAS mission is assigned to the RCCs, with some of the personnel “dual-hatted” to execute either contract awards or contract administration as needed.

“This will allow us to utilize the synergy between the pre- and post-award functions, and to cover surges in either arena with any excess capacity from the other,” said Harger. “We’re one team, one fight; it’s a two-way street.”

Harger has affirmed that all 51C personnel should be exposed to both pre- and post-award contracting functions, as it will broaden their experience in all facets of the contracting profession and make them better contract specialists and contracting officers as they progress in their career field. This additional exposure also increases the operational readiness of the 51C members, allowing a more rapid response to a broader variety of contingency operations. “Everybody wins,” Harger noted. “The 51C builds a more comprehensive resume, and the Army builds a cadre of personnel with skill sets able to respond to a wider range of operations.”

CONCLUSION
Harger and his CCAS staff applauded the cooperation that the DCMA team members extended to them during the transition from DCMA – Afghanistan to ECC-A, and noted that they were tireless in sharing information, documentation, procedures and checklists to ensure a seamless transition. To support continued high performance, DCMA agreed to act as a force provider and supplement the civilian staffing with seasoned professionals to perform as administrative contracting officers (occupational specialty 1102), quality assurance specialists (occupational specialty 1910) and property administrators (occupational specialty 1103). These experienced DCMA force providers have ensured continuity during the potentially chaotic transition from one administration philosophy to another.

“In addition to the transition of authority from one agency to another, our CCAS team must also navigate the movement of our contracting officer’s representatives from the now-disabled Virtual Contracting Enterprise – Contracting Officer’s Representative system to the OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense]-mandated Contracting Officer’s Representative Tracking Tool, and ensure that documents and data are incorporated into the Paperless Contracting File official contract file,” Harger said. “Without motivated and dedicated personnel, this successful migration would not be possible.”

MOVING AHEAD
Following a ceremony recognizing the completion of construction for the Afghan National Army Officer Academy, which provides training to Afghanistan’s next generation of military leaders, Afghan National Army cadets and employees from State Corps Ltd., an Afghan company that helped construct the facilities, walk across campus for the official ribbon-cutting. While the goal of CSTC-A is to transition procurement actions to the Afghan government, CSTC-A partners execute a majority of the requirements to equip, train and sustain ANDSF to enhance the nation’s security. (U.S. military photo by LT Charity A. Edgar, CSTC-A Public Affairs)

With the battlefield environment in a constant state of flux, Harger noted that the organizational and operational structure of the contract award and contract administration functions must allow for maximum flexibility, mobility and readiness to be successful. ECC leadership has formulated a structure that is both dynamic and capable of multifunctional mission execution without the need for complex staffing adjustments or realignments.

“We have [personnel with] the right skill sets that are cross-trained, motivated and capable to deliver quality services and supplies to the warfighter during situations and circumstances that would overcome most other units,” he said. Simply put, he added, “ECC has given us the right tools to put in our tool kits.” Working together, the dedicated and diverse group of military 51Cs, DA civilians and the DCMA force providers have turned the CCAS idea into reality—in Harger’s words, “Done Right—On Time.”

For more information, contact Mr. Gordon Jones at Gordon.jones@afghan.swa.army.mil.

MR. GORDON JONES is lead administrative contracting officer for CCAS, ECC-A. He holds a master’s degree in administrative science, a B.S. in physics and biology and a B.A. in management from the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He is Level III certified in contracting and Level II certified in property management, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

MAJ MIRIAM HARRIS is a U.S. Army reservist presently deployed as chief of the Services Division, 925th Contracting Battalion and RCC-Capital. She holds a master of public administration degree in government contracting from Troy University and a B.A. in music from the University of North Carolina at Asheville. She is Level II certified in contracting. In her civilian capacity, she is a contract specialist for the Air Force Test Center at the Arnold Engineering Development Center, Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

An urgent need leads to a quick off-the-shelf acquisition—a common story. PEO EIS adds two footnotes: Buy the data rights upfront, and get the original manufacturer to write the technical manual. If you end up relying on that quick purchase for years to come—not a far-fetched possibility in this budget environment—the costs of those two things will be justified by big savings.

by Maj. Jonathan W. Judy and Ms. Ruby P. Hancock

Army logisticians around the world depend on a worldwide satellite communications (SATCOM) system that was conceived as a quick fix, and consequently the Army jumped a few steps in the usual acquisition process to get it fielded. The system—the Combat Service Support Very Small Aperture Terminal (CSS VSAT)—was never intended to be a permanent solution.

A response to a joint urgent operational needs statement, it provides an invaluable capability: a global SATCOM network dedicated to the Army’s logistics information systems. “Because of the mandate to get something out quickly, CSS VSAT was a commercial off-the-shelf product introduced at the production and deployment phase,” said Peter Nesby, program officer for Combat Service Support SATCOM in the Program Executive Office for Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS).

GEARING UP
Soldiers and civilians participating in Network Integration Evaluation 15.2 prepare a CSS VSAT to support the May 2015 exercise. Because it does not have the data rights for CSS VSAT, the government cannot reverse-engineer comparable parts, and the Army is limited to purchasing replacement parts through the original equipment manufacturer. (Photo by MAJ Jonathan W. Judy, Project Manager Defense Communications and Army Transmission Systems (PM DCATS))

Ten years on, PEO EIS’ Product Lead for Defense-Wide Transmission Systems (PL DWTS), which owns the CSS VSAT mission, continues moving CSS VSAT along the unusual path from quick fix to enduring system, by returning to earlier stages of the usual acquisition life cycle to transition the project to long-term sustainability. PL DWTS planned to rely on contractor logistics support, as many rapidly fielded programs do. Now, transitioning to organic sustainment, PL DWTS faces the challenge of maintaining and updating the 3,620 fully fielded systems that are projected to remain in service indefinitely—well beyond the initial expectation that War­fighter Information Network – Tactical (WIN-T) terminals would replace CSS VSATs by 2009.

GETTING TO SUSTAINMENT

“Today we depend on a limited number of contractor’s field engineers for CSS VSAT maintenance and repair,” said LTC Jeff Etienne, the PL DWTS. “Transitioning from contractor support to organic [support] enables us to provide more comprehensive support than would be practical or affordable otherwise. It also provides numerous benefits to Soldiers in terms of decreasing operational readiness downtime, and supports the DWTS strategic mission to provide the best-value solutions for enabling information dominance Armywide.”

Organic sustainment replaces the contractor’s six regional field engineers with 13 field service representatives from the U.S. Army Communications – Electronics Command (CECOM). Their efforts will be supplemented by the introduction of on-site support from 786 active-duty Soldiers from the 94 series military occupational specialty (MOS)—electronic and missile maintenance.

To provide the same level of support to fielded CSS VSATs as organic support makes available, PL DWTS would have to more than double the number of contractor’s field engineers. “Our [94 series] Soldiers are already trained to do stuff like this,” said CW4 Michael Nelson, capability developer for integrated logistics supportability at the Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM). “We do it with other systems already. So budgetwise, it should be an improvement because Soldiers are doing what they’re actually supposed to be doing.” Another advantage of adding support from 94 series Soldiers who are co-located or nearly co-located with the system will be to reduce operational readiness downtimes to days—or even hours—after repair parts are received. Current downtimes for CSS VSATs can stretch from one to four months while the system waits for the contractor field service representative assigned to that region to be available to perform the repair—on top of the five- to six-week wait to receive the necessary parts.

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER
SPC Matthew J. Cavey, left, of the 4th Battalion, 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) and SGT Benford J. Holland of the Alabama Army National Guard simulate troubleshooting a CSS VSAT system error during the logistics demonstration. The demonstration was completed in July 2015—unusual timing for a product that was fielded a decade ago and has since supported military and humanitarian efforts around the world. (Photo by Jeff Wright, PM DCATS)

As part of the transition from contractor-led sustainment to organic sustainment, PL DWTS completed the logistics demonstration of CSS VSAT in July 2015. This timing was unusual for a product that began fielding nearly a decade ago and has since supported critical operations worldwide in combat zones and special humanitarian missions such as for Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Pakistan earthquake relief in 2013 and Operation United Assistance: Ebola in 2014. The standard Army acquisition life cycle requires programs to conduct a logistics demonstration, a rigorous evaluation of the program’s maintenance concept and supportability strategy, before the initial operational test to evaluate the readiness of the system support package; fielding occurs sometime after that.

With successful completion of the logistics demonstration, CSS VSAT moves one step closer to providing enhanced sustainment support for the long term, well beyond its original life span. It also confronts two lessons learned that should apply to all rapid fielding initiatives during their early planning stages.

BUY DATA RIGHTS UPFRONT

First, it is critical to include procurement of the technical data rights in the original competition. Given the originally planned short life cycle for CSS VSAT, paying the upfront cost for the technical data rights did not seem justified; there was simply no intention to sustain the system long term. However, other programs in planning stages should err on the side of caution when making this decision, and favor paying the cost of procuring the data rights from the outset if a reasonable likelihood exists that the program will ever be extended into sustainment.

Because it does not have the data rights for CSS VSAT, the Army is limited to purchasing replacement parts through the original equipment manufacturer. No competition exists among vendors, and the government cannot reverse-­engineer comparable parts.

The Better Buying Power (BBP) tenet of promoting effective competition, first outlined in BBP 1.0 and continued in BBP 2.0 and now 3.0, underscores the importance of planning the procurement of data rights early in the product life cycle to leverage competition. Experience confirms the importance of this initiative. For rapid fielding programs, an intellectual property plan that includes procuring data rights must consider—and weigh heavily—the likelihood of extended contingency operations.

FIELD SUPPORT
Soldiers with the 106th Support Battalion replace a generator on an M1A1 Abrams main battle tank at Camp Shelby Joint Forces Training Center, Mississippi, in July 2015. Soldiers tasked with performing combat field repairs often rely on communications enabled by CSS SATCOM to order replacement parts. (Photo by SPC Brittany Anderson, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 155th Armored Brigade Combat Team)

GET THE TECHNICAL MANUAL

With the data rights now too expensive to procure for CSS VSAT, the government has spent substantial time and money to produce a technical manual for the system from scratch. This leads to the second lesson learned: If the program might transition to organic sustainment at any point in the future, build the technical manual into the original contract.

While the system was in development, the CSS VSAT contractor did not produce a technical manual for the government. Only now are the contractors who support the system developing a technical manual based on their years of experience in the field. System developers generally possess a more intimate knowledge of the system as a whole and should be able to produce a detailed technical manual more readily than the field engineers who have been involved only with maintaining it.

Relying on field engineers’ expertise will produce a high-quality manual but will greatly lengthen the process because it requires translating hands-on, trial-and-error approaches to diagnose and repair failures and convert that information into reliable, step-by-step instructions that Soldiers can use in the field. This delays the entire transition of the system to CECOM sustainment.

Validation and verification of the CSS VSAT technical manual will take more than a year and stretch into FY17, representing the longest piece of the transition process. Validation and verification events require page-by-page scrutiny of the manual by the system’s proponent, CASCOM, working with the program office to confirm the accuracy and clarity of every step, every word and every National Stock Number. The time and costs associated with this roundabout way of developing a technical manual should provide a cautionary tale for other rapid fielding initiatives. Upfront procurement of the technical manual, as with data rights, enables industry competition and ultimately provides the government with a better price.

CONCLUSION

TROUBLESHOOTERS
Sgt. James A. Hayes of the Alabama Army National Guard, rear, and CPL Damian L. Morton of the 4th Battalion, 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) use the CSS VSAT technical manual to troubleshoot a staged critical system fault in June 2015. (Photo by Jeff Wright, PM DCATS)

As CSS VSAT approaches readiness for organic sustainment, the lessons brought to light in that transition are already a consideration in planning for the next iteration of the capability. PL DWTS, CASCOM, HQDA G-4’s U.S. Army Logistics Innovation Agency and end users are capturing requirements that will expand the role of CSS VSAT to carry more enterprise resource planning systems and more maintenance data in the program’s next generation.
When the current terminals are replaced to meet those expanding requirements, the PL DWTS acquisition strategy will seek to buy a terminal that is supportable over the long run, with a technical manual developed by the original equipment manufacturer and technical data rights included in the initial competition.

Other input for future iterations will come from the WIN-T transport convergence effort. Transport convergence seeks to collapse all of the Army’s disparate transport layers (for example, the intelligence system Trojan Spirit; MED VSAT, the joint telemedicine network; CSS VSAT; and PAO VSAT, the public affairs system) into the WIN-T network by moving transports off of commercial teleports and onto Army regional hub nodes. This effort will significantly cut the Army’s spending to lease use of commercial SATCOM networks by moving the traffic onto a singular Army network.

The current generation of CSS VSATs is well-suited to integrate into this effort and continue meeting the sustainment community’s enduring requirement for real-time communication to support sustainment, repair and resupply efforts at the front. While the Army will replace some networks’ terminals immediately with WIN-T terminals, CSS VSATs will assimilate into WIN-T at the transport layer.

For now, the current and future success of CSS VSAT remains a top priority for the G-4, and PL DWTS is prepared to continue providing worldwide network access for Army sustainers by keeping CSS VSAT mission-ready for the long term.

For more information, go to CSS VSAT’s website, https://peoeis.kc.army.mil/csscomms/SiteAssets/default.html, or the PEO EIS website, http://www.eis.army.mil/index.php/programs/dwts; or contact Peter Nesby, program officer for CSS ­SATCOM, at 703-806-8650 or peter.l.nesby2.civ@mail.mil.

MAJ. JONATHAN W. JUDY is the assistant product manager for PL DWTS at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He has an MBA from the Naval Postgraduate School and a B.S. in computer science from the University of Georgia. He is Level II certified in program management.

MS. RUBY P. HANCOCK is a logistics management specialist and sustainment lead for PL DWTS. She holds an M.S. in community service from Central Michigan University and a B.A. in human resource management from Saint Leo College. She is Level III certified in acquisition life-cycle logistics and Level I certified in program management, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Six Army programs arrived at a single enterprise resource planning solution independently, then turned better buying power into best buying power by working together to bring the licensing costs down for the unexpectedly popular software.

by Col. Harry Culclasure and Mr. Thomas Neff

Category management is a growing trend in today’s marketplace that focuses on the way companies and organizations consolidate contracts, leverage buying power and drive consistent purchasing practices. For a private company with one mission and one pool of money, category management seems straightforward enough; however, for DOD, specialized requirements and initiatives funded with different types of money (for example, procurement, research and development (R&D) and operations and maintenance (O&M) dollars) make category management a major challenge.

By embarking on a unique contracting strategy to buy SAP enterprise resource planning (ERP) software licenses for users to modernize their solutions and execute the business processes using the best planning and management tools, the Army is using an innovative approach to category management, thus turning better buying power into best buying power for six of its ERP programs.

A NEW WAY OF DOING BUSINESS

Under the direction of the Program Executive Office for Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS), ERP software, which consists of a set of integrated applications, has transformed the way the Army does business by creating a unique enclave of shared data, detailed reporting, improved asset tracking and financial auditability. This powerful environment is enabled by SAP’s commercial off-the-shelf ERP software platform, which in turn enables the programs to:

• Improve the management and tracking of tactical-level supplies and equipment (Global Combat Support System (GCSS) – Army).
• Standardize financial management (General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS)).
• Fully integrate national-level supply support (Logistics Modernization Program (LMP)).
• Improve data sharing and integration (Army Enterprise Systems Integration Program (AESIP) Hub).
• Support the environment (Headquarters Army Environmental System).
• Enhance project management (eNOVA).

These systems are integral to Army operations worldwide and represent an enormous volume of business conducted by nearly 200,000 users. For example, LMP alone manages $19 billion in inventory, processes 7 million transactions daily and interfaces with more than 80 DOD systems. Three of the six ERP programs are Acquisition Category I major automated information system programs and represent a combined $10 billion investment over nearly two decades.

SELECTING, MANAGING REQUIREMENTS AND VENDORS

Before 1999, the Army procured numerous, independent software applications to separately manage specific missions, such as finance, national-level logistics and tactical-level logistics. With those systems becoming outdated, the Army made a strategic decision in 1999 to begin migrating to a modern, off-the-shelf ERP platform to transform its business operations. Over several years, each of the Army’s logistics and financial ERP programs evaluated different software platform solutions. Based on its ability to provide a variety of capabilities, as well as the company’s extensive experience supporting DOD and its unique requirements, all six programs selected SAP, separately awarding over 20 contracts to purchase more than 50,000 licenses and maintenance packages from SAP and its licensed resellers.

INSTRUMENT HANDLING
Staff Sgt. Christopher McKinnon, the 440th Army Band (AB) supply sergeant, conducts logistical operations using the GCSS-Army program at his unit in Raleigh, North Carolina, in May 2015. The 440th AB is one of the first Army National Guard (ARNG) units trained in the new Army logistics program. (ARNG photo by Sgt. 1st Class Craig Norton, 382nd Public Affairs Detachment)

In 2011, the Army recognized that it would need approximately 80,000 additional licenses over the next four years. With that, AESIP recognized a significant category management opportunity to bulk-buy SAP licenses to save the government millions of dollars and streamline support for ERP users across the programs. AESIP established an SAP integrated product team (IPT) with the Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software and Services (CHESS) program office and the Army Contracting Command – National Capital Region (ACC-NCR). In partnership with the SAP IPT, ACC-NCR awarded the first SAP enterprise license agreement (ELA) by employing industry best practices, including category and requirements management, relationship management and demand management to obtain the best pricing and terms available.

Over the course of the SAP ELA 1, from 2011 to 2015, programs made larger-than-expected purchases to take full advantage of the favorable pricing and terms and, as a result, reached the contract ceiling nearly two years earlier than planned. It was evident that the Army needed a new contract to manage the ERP programs’ software requirements through 2020 to support continued fielding of new and expanded SAP functionality across the enterprise. This follow-on contract became the SAP ELA 2, which addressed emerging ERP requirements, such as enterprise aviation, business intelligence/business warehouse, Army prepositioned stock, ammunition management and shop floor automation, and included annual maintenance renewals, as well as the ability to purchase 181,000 additional licenses.

At the start of the SAP ELA 2 acquisition process, an expanded SAP IPT was established with new representatives from each program and the contracting community, including Army Contracting Command – Rock Island (ACC-RI), Illinois. This new IPT faced three main challenges—ensuring continuity in software maintenance for existing licenses; obtaining the best price for software licenses to meet each ERP’s growth and demand, and to support each program’s fielding schedule within budget; and accelerating the contract procurement to eight months from the average 12 to 18 months it normally takes for this type of acquisition. The SAP IPT had to overcome these challenges to mitigate the potential risks of cost overruns and schedule delays.

LEVERAGING BUYING POWER

Traditionally in government procurement, programs manage their own funding, IT inventory and mission requirements. However, through the use of CHESS ELAs, the Army has achieved significant cost savings of nearly $110 million and business efficiencies across the board. In the instance of the SAP ELA 2, the Army ERPs have been able to leverage buying power to negotiate approximately 51 percent discounts, streamline the acquisition process, centralize software inventory management and promote the sharing of software licenses.

For the SAP ELA 2 to be successful, the SAP IPT and ERP program personnel engaged in daily collaboration, communication and cooperation. The team took a judicious approach to achieve sourcing excellence by taking Better Buying Power 3.0 principles and lessons learned from the previous ELA to further streamline requirements by grouping similar needs and synergizing related efforts, like supply chain planning and financial management, while continuing to share and reuse licenses.

The SAP IPT, with representation from each of the six ERPs, CHESS and ACC-RI, accomplished several major successes that led to “best buying power.” First, the team collaboratively wrote presolicitation requirements that were focused on enterprise mission needs. Then, the team provided documentation to industry partners early and often to further refine the solicitation. The team also came to the negotiation table as a collective entity, gaining major leverage for the government, given the size and scope of the combined requirements.

THAT WAS EASY
Spc. Joe Emanuel Clark, a U.S. Army South (ARSOUTH) supply clerk, receives and verifies office supplies from Henry Ford, a warehouse operator, in January 2015 at the ARSOUTH warehouse on Fort Sam Houston, Texas. The supplies were ordered and processed through the new GCSS-Army structure. The Army is replacing several aging, stovepiped, tactical logistics and financial management systems with a single Web-based ERP solution that provides tactical commanders with near-real-time logistics management information. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Mahlet Tesfaye, ARSOUTH Public Affairs)

In all, this effort resulted in no gaps in maintenance support, obtained best value for the government and delivered a timely contract award that coincided with fiscal year end and maintenance renewal cycles to keep the programs on track. Additionally, the collaborative writing process avoided lengthy reviews and editing by multiple organizations.

There was no back and forth among the acquiring organizations, internal compliance review or bidders since the content was clear and concise, allowing responses to be turned around within hours rather than days or weeks. Finally, the streamlined requirements review process placed all six ERP programs together to create a collective set of requirements. Together, they established an enterprise portfolio of common end-to-end software needs that combined contract line items for all six ERP programs versus having multiple contract line items for various ERP programs. Ultimately the consolidated portfolio equates to reduced costs.

“SAP and the ELAs have transformed Army business processes by leveraging commercial technology and best business practices,” said Col. William Russell, GFEBS project manager. “Engaging with industry allowed GFEBS to provide mature capability quicker and with fewer problems to over 35,000 users while also moving the Army one step closer to a fully auditable solution.”

WHAT MAKES THIS CONTRACT UNIQUE

Through ELAs, vendors and government entities are optimizing spending and maximizing the support they receive to get the most of what’s needed, which, in this case, are SAP licenses and maintenance support. However, this contract represents so much more than that—it represents the power of solid relationships.

“The current ELA represents the true value of strategic sourcing, a collaborative partnership among the ERP programs that are fielding SAP-based solutions across the Army, and the software procurement experts with CHESS and ACC-RI,” said Terry Watson, acting PEO EIS. “The Army has built relationships with SAP software suppliers that enable more than just acquiring software at the lowest price. Open and transparent communication with industry partners enables the Army to remain fully informed on industry trends for the next software agreement while eliminating the overhead that results from redundant government contracts.”

HEAD OF THE CLASS
Sgt. 1st Class Marion Fox instructs his fellow classmates as part of his training for Phase 1 of the 94th Training Division’s Finance Senior Leaders Course, held in November 2015 at Fort Dix, New Jersey. Fox was explaining the finer points of master data elements in the Defense Travel System and GFEBS. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class Phillip Eugene)

A good working relationship with industry allowed the Army to leverage its size, scope and customer history to establish the current five-year SAP ELA 2 for $279 million, providing significant cost avoidance in deferred maintenance costs and new procurement price locks, reflecting pricing and maintenance support at rates even lower than the original SAP ELA 1. This contract also provides the Army with significant discounts from the General Services Administration Schedule, an estimated $1.2 billion in cost avoidance, while securing the best end-user license agreement terms and conditions and ensuring additional future savings for the term of the agreement.

Inability to amply license the ERP user community would cripple the Army’s ability to supply, sustain, track and manage materiel and finances to support today’s military landscape. With rising technology costs and falling DOD budgets, finding ways to streamline requirements, obtain best value and reduce costs are essential to the ERP programs’ future.

CONCLUSION

With future estimates of more than 300,000 Army ERP users worldwide, being able to buy SAP software licenses and maintenance support packages in bulk while capitalizing on best price break points have put new meaning to category management for military technology. As part of the SAP IPT, each stakeholder used lessons learned from previous contracts to establish this well-designed consolidated buy and category management package, breaking with the military’s tradition of being unlikely to buy technology as a group.

The Army’s ERP programs support the Better Buying Power mission: “the implementation of best practices to strengthen the Defense Department’s buying power … and provide the U.S. Army an affordable, value-added military capability to the warfighter.” In the end, SAP ELA 2 has made the Army a skilled practitioner of collectively buying technology to support multiple missions, seeing the finest in contract negotiations and turning better buying power into best buying power to support the Army ERP missions worldwide.

For more information on Army software and hardware procurement, go to https://chess.army.mil. For more information on ERP, go to https://www.eis.army.mil.

A SOFTWARE TRANSFORMATION
ERP software represents a dramatic change in the way the Army does business, consolidating systems for data sharing, reporting, asset tracking and financial auditing. (SOURCE: U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center)

COL HARRY CULCLASURE, AESIP project manager, is responsible for a portfolio of programs, including two of the Army’s major ERP initiatives: GCSS-A and LMP. He holds a master’s degree in procurement and contract management from the Command and General Staff College, a Master of Strategic Studies degree from the U.S. Army War College and a B.S. in business management from The Citadel, where he earned his commission into the field artillery. He is Level III certified in program management and contracting, and a member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC).

MR. THOMAS NEFF is the CHESS project leader. He entered the Army in 1982 as a private and was later commissioned as a second lieutenant from the U.S. Army’s Officer Candidate School. He is currently a major assigned to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology’s Army Reserve Element. He holds an M.Ed. from Loyola University – Chicago, an M.S. in information management from Syracuse University and a B.A. in international relations and government from Lehigh University. He is a graduate of the Senior Acquisition Course at the Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy at National Defense University (NDU), and holds the Federal Chief Information Officer and Chief Information Security Officer Certificates from NDU. He is Level III certified in program management and information technology, and is an AAC member.

This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

By Michael Bold

FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 5, 2016) — Government and industry working together to ensure that warfighters have the equipment they need is the theme of the July- September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine, online now at . That collaboration, and the innovation that results when it’s working properly, is essential to giving Soldiers a decisive advantage on the battlefield. Especially during times of austere defense budgets, a consistent and thorough dialogue with industry partners is vital to mission success.

With its decisive military overmatch a thing of the past, the United States seeks to marshal all possible resources to drive innovation and provide the latest capabilities. Army AL&T’s editors found that the picture of collaboration that emerges is far from complete, in “MAKING INNOVATION HAPPEN.”

Big data analytics is a big thing in the world of high technology, and it’s especially important in cyber. A government off-the-shelf, open-source platform, part of a pilot program involving the Program Executive Office (PEO) for Enterprise Information Systems and U.S. Army Cyber Command, could lower costs and lead the way ahead. See “OPEN SOURCE BIG DATA.”

From opening up export markets for U.S. armament manufacturers to finding ways to keep industrial base partners in business, a range of articles explores how PEO Ammunition keeps looking for new ways to work with industry.

“While we constantly strive to develop breakthrough technologies in our labs and research, development and engineering centers, we also encourage the development of innovative solutions from industry partners, including small business firms,” the Honorable Katrina McFarland, acting assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology and the Army acquisition executive, writes in “HIGH STAKES, HIGH REWARD.”

The PEO for Command, Control and Communications – Tactical keeps up with rapid technological changes by taking a competitive approach to buying the latest commercial products to get the best to Soldiers faster, in “NETWORK MARKETPLACE: OPEN FOR BUSINESS AND GROWING.”

An Army acquisition officer thought his advancement plans were derailed when he received orders to attend the resident course at U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. Instead, the course was life-altering. See “AN ADVOCATE FOR INNOVATION.”

Learn how the U.S. Army Medical Materiel Agency finds efficiencies in medical materiel procurement, fielding and sustainment to reduce the logistical footprint and optimize readiness with limited resources in “INTEGRATING ARMY MEDICINE.”

Craig A. Spisak, director of the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center, explains how Soldiers training with industry helps Army acquisition work better in “SHRINKING THE DIVIDE,” while an Army officer tells of learning firsthand where Amazon’s corporate values and those of the military merge and diverge, in “ONE ‘PECULIAR’ FELLOWSHIP.”

Even if you’re a die-hard hard copy reader, there are many reasons to take a sneak peek online. Go to http://usaasc.armyalt.com/#folio=1 to read the e-magazine, or visit the archives at http://asc.army.mil/web/magazine/alt-magazine-archive/ to download the PDF version.

For more information on how to publish an article in Army AL&T magazine, go to http://asc.army.mil/web/publications/ to check out our writers guidelines, upcoming deadlines and themes.

Strong partnerships with industry are more important than ever as R&D funding declines and need for innovation grows

From the Honorable Katrina McFarland

 In recent years, Army AL&T magazine has covered various facets of the Better Buying Power program that provide a framework to help us improve how we conduct business, including leveraging small business innovations, revamping acquisition and strengthening tradecraft of the acquisition workforce. This issue highlights another aspect of the program that remains integral to our mission: effective partnerships with industry. While the dynamics of our relationship with industry may evolve with the changing acquisition landscape, the fundamental need for a collaborative exchange of ideas with industry remains constant.

One of the hallmarks of the Army acquisition enterprise is our unwavering commitment to innovation. We welcome innovation from all sources, not just our own. For example, while we constantly strive to develop breakthrough technologies in our labs and research, development and engineering centers, we also encourage the development of innovative solutions from industry partners, including small businesses. This respect for innovation regardless of origin is what keeps the Army in the top ranks of small business obligations among the services. In Army acquisition, we also work closely with the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and welcome its expansion to form ARL-West. This partnership between ARL and the Institute for Creative Technologies at the University of Southern California will leverage the subject matter expertise and innovation in the region’s technical centers.

EXPOS KEEP WORKFORCE UP TO DATE
Jim Simson, a vendor with Automated Business Power Inc., speaks to Sgt. Maj. Ricardo Samudio, U.S. Army Europe G-6 sergeant major, during the semiannual U.S. Army Garrison Wiesbaden Tech Expo Feb. 2 in Wiesbaden, Germany. (U.S. Army photo by William B. King, 5th Signal Command Public Affairs)

COMMUNICATING IS KEY
Our collaboration with industry ensures that we safeguard our technological superiority against our adversaries. However, with the considerable mutual advantage of industry collaboration comes increasing responsibility to maintain efficiency and professionalism throughout the acquisition life cycle. One way we accomplish this is by maintaining consistent and thorough dialogue with industry partners.

Previous issues of AL&T magazine also have explored the role of requirements in the acquisition process, noting that requirements lay the groundwork for acquisition and play a major part in determining the success or failure of a program. If sound, achievable requirements are the foundation of the acquisition life cycle, then communication takes it one step further. Dialogue among industry and program managers from the government and military prevents the inefficient use of time and funding in pursuit of “unobtanium” and addresses affordability and feasibility issues in requirements while they are still fixable.

This communication with industry is necessary to leverage the public funds provided to industry for independent research and development (IR&D). Industry’s IR&D yields critical innovation for both DOD and the private corporations, which is why the government allows contractors access to these public funds. There is also contractor research and development (CR&D) funding that does not come from public funds.

HUMAN, MEET COMPUTER
As part of their research to improve human-computer interaction, Institute for Creative Technologies researchers and engineers experiment with delivering virtual humans over mobile phones. (Photo by Stephanie D. Kleinman, SDK Photo & Design)

As the Army’s research, development and acquisition funding has declined, the defense industry has also reduced its CR&D. This makes IR&D more valuable. The Army has succeeded in preserving its science and technology investment in the past year with funding for basic research and technology development that will help offset some of the CR&D reduction. However, in this fiscally constrained environment, it is even more important to collaborate with industry on IR&D to ensure that we leverage these capabilities to support our warfighters.

FACE-TO-FACE ENGAGEMENTS
We recognize that open communication is the backbone of military-industry collaboration at all levels. From a leadership perspective, we in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)) welcome the opportunity to engage with countless industry representatives at annual forums such as those of the Association of the United States Army, the National Defense Industrial Association and the Army Aviation Association of America.

We facilitate industry CEO engagements across the Army staff. Through the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (DASA) for Defense Exports and Cooperation, we advocate for increased international sales that allow American companies to maintain a skilled workforce and sharpen capabilities even in times of decreased U.S. military spending. In FY15, these international sales had a case value over $20.4 billion.

AN INVITATION TO LEARN AND DISCUSS
Dr. Bill Lewis welcomes vendors to the AMRDEC Aviation Development Directorate Science and Technology Industry Day March 2 at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. During the two-day event, speakers briefed industry participants on AMRDEC’s contracting processes and timelines so that private-sector suppliers get a sense of what collaborating with the government is like. (Photo by Nikki Montgomery, AMRDEC Public Affairs)

Through the Office of the DASA for Procurement, we have extended the Superior Supplier Incentive Program (SSIP) to the Army. SSIP, originally a Navy program, is a tool for helping industry see which business units are performing at their highest potential, as well as to guide companies toward areas of improvement.

Collaboration with the private sector also extends to program executive offices (PEOs) through regular industry day events. These industry days serve a dual purpose: They allow program managers to assess the technologies available in the marketplace while providing a forum for dialogue and collaboration between industry and government to efficiently design and field new capabilities.

Through the Office of the Army Director for Acquisition Career Management, we encourage participation in the Training with Industry (TWI) program. TWI allows Army Acquisition Workforce members to participate in a hands-on developmental assignment in a private corporation, affording a well-rounded perspective that enhances continued collaboration upon return to the acquisition enterprise. With each of these avenues for industry partnership, we strengthen our potential for innovation, from the leadership level down to individual members of the workforce.

CONCLUSION
This partnership is not without its challenges and opportunities, as this issue of Army AL&T will explore. With so much at stake as we work to develop and field the best capabilities to Soldiers, we need to constantly ask ourselves how we can improve our partnerships with industry and the dialogue necessary to sustain them. Are we getting the most out of our TWI program? Are we effectively navigating the often tangled web of intellectual property rights as we pursue open systems architecture? Are we using PEO industry days, Army leadership CEO meetings and trade shows to the highest extent as forums for communication and idea sharing?

We ask ourselves these questions and devote our attention to this matter because we understand that our relationship with industry strengthens our relationship with the warfighter. Collaborating with industry is a fundamental necessity in our mission to equip Soldiers with capabilities at the forefront of innovation.

WHAT WE’VE BEEN UP TO
Anthony Steele, center, with the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) Weapons Development and Integration Directorate, explains AMRDEC’s missile portfolio during the Association of the United States Army’s 17th annual Missile Symposium April 19 at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. (Photo by Nikki Montgomery, AMRDEC Public Affairs)

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

PEO C3T keeps up with rapid technological changes by taking a competitive approach to buying the latest commercial products so that it can get the best to Soldiers faster.

by Mr. Joe Welch, Lt. Col. Jack “Shane” Taylor and Mr. Michael Beery

For years, the Army pursued communication systems the same way it developed tanks—fielding a “big bang” capability intended to last for decades. But with today’s exponential progress in information technology, the Army’s network strategy has shifted from revolutionary to evolutionary—continuously building on the latest models with faster, stronger and more powerful capabilities. Think of the latest version of a smartphone, or the most recent model year of a car.

Now that the Army can leverage the latest commercial technology while still executing integration, interoperability and fielding, the emphasis has shifted to competition, whenever and wherever possible.

Taking a nondevelopmental item (NDI) competitive approach, the Army’s first prominent application was in tactical radios, which enabled the competitive acquisition of the latest radio technology that met specific requirements and was compatible with government-owned waveforms. (See related article, “To a Network Marketplace,” Army AL&T magazine, April-June 2015.)

In essence, the NDI approach opened the radio marketplace.

Now, the Program Executive Office for Command, Control and Communications – Tactical (PEO C3T), responsible for fielding the Army’s tactical network, is expanding that concept across its portfolio. This approach broadens and deepens the PEO’s partnership with industry, which is now invested earlier and more often in the process of system development.

SHOOT. MOVE. TALK.
A Soldier from the 101st Airborne Division, wearing a portable, tactical radio, prepares his next move during a live fire rehearsal in April at the Peason Ridge Training Area of the Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, Louisiana. Soldiers at the team, squad and platoon levels carry handheld Rifleman Radios, some of which will be procured under contracts awarded by the Army in April 2015 to Harris Corp. and Thales Defense and Security Inc. (U.S. Army photo)

EVOLVING THE RADIO MARKETPLACE
The Army continues to advance its next-generation, software-defined radios, which act like minicomputers and enable Soldiers to stay connected even in the most austere and remote locations.

Over the past three years, as more and more radio vendors successfully loaded government-owned waveforms onto their new radio platforms, the Army implemented its radio marketplace acquisition approach, which aims to lower costs and deliver radios more quickly using NDI products. This approach, which was approved by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, relies on industry to provide already developed, mature radios that can meet specific requirements and are compatible with government-owned waveforms.

Using the NDI strategy, radios will be fielded more quickly and at a lower cost, since vendors do not have to create their own waveforms. Instead they will use existing waveforms from the Joint Tactical Networking Center Waveform Information Repository. With government-owned waveforms, vendors can focus on developing their radio hardware and pushing technology forward, and it ensures interoperability across the services, since the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps can use Army-developed waveforms.

Recent examples of successful NDI competitions include the Army’s contract awards to multiple vendors to procure the Manpack and Rifleman radios after full and open competition. The Army worked closely with industry to refine requirements by hosting industry days and one-on-one forums, allowing vendors to ask questions and gather information. Meeting with various vendors enabled the Army to learn about new technologies in the commercial environment. It also meant vendors were tied into the development process sooner than ever before.

Now that contracts have been awarded for the Manpack and Rifleman radios, qualified vendors will compete for smaller-quantity delivery orders on a regular basis to fill the hardware requirements, while using existing government-owned waveforms that are maintained in the Waveform Information Repository. This structure enables the Army to choose from numerous technologies and to release a new contract if radio technology changes significantly after the initial contract award.

Vendors whose technologies mature after the initial competition and operational tests can join the competition, and vendors that do not pass qualification testing will be removed. The consistently competitive acquisition strategy is expected to reduce radio procurement costs as the Army continues to modernize the network amid fiscal constraints.

URBAN COMMUNICATION
Soldiers from the 1st Armored Division use the Manpack radio, which can be mounted in a vehicle or carried in a rucksack. A marketplace approach to acquisition shifts the Army away from big one-time procurements and toward the kind of incremental evolution that smartphone companies use to keep their products up to date. (U.S. Army photo)

PEO C3T’s project manager for tactical radios (PM TR) is employing a similar construct for future procurements. This includes the potential development of a two-channel Rifleman radio and airborne radios.

While the Army procures the next generation of software-defined radios using the radio marketplace, it is also evolving the software waveforms, which provide the link for the radios to communicate. These networking waveforms are integral to continuously improving the Army’s tactical communications network by connecting to network infrastructures, such as Warfighter Information ­Network – Tactical (WIN-T).

BUILDING TO A COMMON,PREDICTABLE ENVIRONMENT
Perhaps the best fit for the marketplace concept is with mission command—where stand-alone, hardware-based systems are already beginning to be replaced by software applications.

The process of modernizing mission command systems by transitioning away from a major contract award to a smaller, more agile award strategy comes at the same time the Army is embracing the Common Operating Environment (COE) as a way to drive competition. This “app store” approach to development brings a standardized and open computing environment and is changing the way mission command capabilities are created. Through the command post computing environment (CP CE), part of the COE, software development kits will allow third-party contributors to build to tactical applications, similar to how apps are built for smartphones.

This could improve opportunities for small businesses to participate in competitions. Aimed at attracting innovative software-based solutions, maintaining a reference architecture is key, because it enables vendors to build against a requirement following a set of standards. CP CE is helping to drive common, cross-cutting capabilities across warfighting functions and “widgetizing” the command post with web-based apps.

Leveraging a government-developed infrastructure that is well-known and understood, then defining standards to support that effort, provides a predictable environment so a wider array of developers can deliver products more quickly.

THE APP APPROACH
This shift toward tactical applications, or TacApps, is where industry collaboration and a single architecture environment work together. Currently, commercial, mobile operating systems like iOS and Android have provided software development kits that have enabled nearly anyone to build an application into their marketplace. The acquisition efforts of PEO C3T’s project manager for mission command (PM MC) will mirror that environment, enabling companies large and small to develop applications that can run on an established framework.

This approach forces the government to be more disciplined with specifications while allowing for more competition from organizations traditionally outside of the DOD arena.

TACTICAL APPS
By allowing third-party contributors to build tactical applications, the command post computing environment promises to expand opportunities for small businesses to participate in com­petitive procurements by enabling them to build to a clear set of standards. (Photo by PEO C3T)

In essence, it gives PM MC the opportunity to leverage innovation from industry while ensuring competition in future capability development, enabling any business—no matter how large or small—to compete and resulting in cost savings for the Army.

One initiative in support of mission command modernization, under this acquisition model, involves the standard and shareable geospatial foundation. The program office plans to issue a competitive task order (TO) through a blanket purchase agreement for industry to bid on. Vendors will be able to compete at the TO level, allowing the government to award an effort quickly.

In the past, a major award to a single vendor serving as the lead systems integrator would take many months. With the new marketplace model, PM MC has reduced the time frame by 80 percent, from several months to weeks. This method also injects much-needed flexibility into the contracting process.

Work packages assigned to project managers are mapped to a task or delivery order and integration is done on-site in laboratories or in the Defense Intelligence Information Environment, the online collaborative environment for industry partners to execute TOs.

Project managers will now be responsible for managing integration of a capability coming from different vendors. But with government serving as part of the technology solutions, product managers can start to drive toward an open architecture and set themselves up early in the process to understand transitions in sustainment and how they’ll handle security requirements.

MOVING BEYOND THE RADIO MARKETPLACE
Realizing that the NDI concept could be applied across the PEO C3T portfolio, project managers began to look at other innovative acquisition models for their portfolios. Nowhere was this a better fit than with its on-the-move tactical network, WIN-T.

WIN-T enables commanders and Soldiers to pass critical voice, video and data across the formation and while on the move. WIN-T is made up of many parts; by applying the marketplace concept, the Army can maximize the benefits of emerging technology by inserting competition in new ways.

DON’T INHALE
Smoke obscures tents of the 1st Armored Division during a decisive action rotation in April at the National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, California. PEO C3T, responsible for fielding a tactical network that keeps Soldiers connected despite environmental challenges like low visibility, shops on the commercial marketplace to keep up with rapidly changing communication technologies. (U.S. Army photo by Pfc. Daniel Parrott, Operations Group, NTC)

LEVERAGING SBIR
One way to leverage competition from the commercial marketplace is through the use of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contracts. The Army recently awarded a contract to GATR Technologies for its inflatable antenna system to satisfy the early-entry satellite communications (SATCOM) system known as the Transportable Tactical Command Communications (T2C2), part of the WIN-T system. This new duo of lightweight, portable satellite terminals will provide early-entry units in air-to-land missions, as well as follow-on units at the tactical edge, with a light and heavy variant of high-bandwidth, deployable satellite dishes to keep Soldiers and commanders connected to the network and well-informed.

The SBIR program’s three-phase competitive process allows proposals to be submitted in response to DOD’s emerging requirements. SBIR significantly reduces risk through reusing testing and logistics data from other services. It also creates an environment that allows the quick adaptation of commercial hardware and software while opening up new markets to small businesses.

In a separate effort, the PM for WIN-T is able to apply innovative solutions by using the DOD-wide Global Tactical Advanced Communication Systems (GTACS) contract, which it manages. (See “Innovation Through Competition.”) The GTACS contract was used recently to improve the marketplace for the Army’s new and developing Pseudolites program. This program enables the continued operation of positioning, navigation and timing-enabled systems such as Blue Force Tracker, the Army’s premier friendly force positioning system, in electronically or physically challenged environments. Pseudolites provide a terrestrial radio navigation similar to satellite GPS for GPS-denied environments.

Under the GTACS contract, the Army competed a limited-rate production for pseudolites, choosing two vendors that are going head-to-head to develop the most innovative, cost-effective solution to fill this unique requirement. The victor will conduct the full-rate production.

CONCLUSION
To keep pace with today’s rapid evolution in technology, the Army is growing the cadre of tools it can use to get new capabilities into the hands of Soldiers. This new network marketplace concept builds on lessons learned while instilling an atmosphere that encourages trying new approaches in acquisition and embraces competition as never before.

For more information, go to PEO C3T’s website: http://peoc3t.army.mil/c3t/.

INNOVATION THROUGH COMPETITION As Army network contracts for GTACS and CHS-4 expire, PEO C3T builds in provisions to support rapid acquisition of innovative technology. As part of its continual network modernization, the Army is looking for products that significantly increase capability; reduce system complexity to make the network easier to operate and maintain; and decrease size, weight and power—all at a fair price to the taxpayer. Part of the Army’s strategy to meet these requirements includes promoting competition as a catalyst for industry to think outside the box and drive invention. In that light, as two of the Army’s main network contracts, GTACS and Common Hardware Systems (CHS)-4, near expiration, the Army is preparing to compete new versions that are expected to increase efficiencies, promote competition and spur innovation. SPEEDIER PROCUREMENT These two competitive contracting mechanisms, both managed by PEO C3T, will serve to expedite innovative technology and smartly enable rapid acquisition. The new GTACS II contract is being designed to promote product innovation and provide the best capability possible for Soldiers at competitive prices. The contract provides one-stop shopping for a broad range of C3T hardware and services, with an emphasis on tactical satellite communications. Among its many benefits, GTACS II is expected to significantly reduce delivery times and provide greater opportunities for small business. ACQUISITION CAPABILITY IN HAND A Soldier uses a CHS ruggedized handheld device in the field. The CHS contract enables a one-stop, rapid acquisition capability for modified commercial information technology hardware. (U.S. Army photo) GTACS II is a 10-year, $6 billion, multiple-award, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract for the rapid acquisition of a wide variety of tactical C3T hardware, software, and engineering, logistics, test and system-related support services. The contract enables the customer to design a capability, then produce, test, field and sustain that capability with one contract. It simplifies and consolidates the entire process across the product life cycle. The goal of GTACS II is to establish a set of qualified vendors who can quickly respond to requests for proposals on delivery and task orders with the potential to be awarded in 120 days, enabling the Army to provide critical capabilities to the field at an accelerated pace. To achieve this decreased timeline, the program office, in union with the U.S. Army Contracting Command, will be instituting standardized documentation and processes, which should significantly decrease review cycles and establish a one-team approach to the entire contracting process. The source selection process will result in an award to about 30 prime contractors that will be able to compete for the broad spectrum of work under the contract. Each delivery order will be an opportunity for industry to promote product innovation, provide the optimum resolution of requirements and deliver the best overall value for the Army and DOD. Of the approximately 30 contracts, the Army expects roughly a third to be awarded to small businesses, with a percentage of that set aside for women- and veteran-owned and disadvantaged or underutilized small businesses. The GTACS II contract increases the number of prime contractors from 20 to 30, which is anticipated to increase competition. This also could result in more innovative solutions at a fair market value being bid on its requirements. GTACS II also will allow more small businesses to participate in competitions—10 instead of the current six. The GTACS I contract expires in October 2017. Under the current timeline, the Army expects to issue the final request for proposal in November 2016, with contracts awarded in October 2017. While the GTACS contract supports new requirements development and full systems integration, including hardware, software and services for tactical network systems such as ground satellite terminals, the CHS contract enables a one-stop, rapid acquisition capability for modified commercial information technology (IT) hardware. CUTTING-EDGE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CHS provides state-of-the-art computing and networking equipment that improves connectivity, interoperability, logistics and maintenance support to Soldiers, and is available for use by all DOD and federal agencies. Designed as a rapid execution vehicle to meet tactical requirements, the CHS contract supports Army and DOD programs that require increased ruggedness, configuration management, end-of-life configuration changes, and hardware to meet an operational need; or that do not have well-defined requirements. BEFORE THE DEAL The Army hosted a pre-solicitation day for the GTACS II contract on March 4 at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Used recently on the Army’s nascent Pseudolites program, GTACS II aims to get new technologies to the field more quickly. (U.S. Army photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T Public Affairs) Valued at more than $3 billion, the CHS-5 contract will enable the rapid procurement of total life cycle system management solutions in support of tactical programs. The contract’s consolidated acquisition approach can design, develop, modify, ruggedize, environmentally test, procure, support and provide configuration management for commercial IT hardware systems, all made available via a single contract action and a single part number. The program structure for CHS-5 includes a single-step, full and open competition, leading to a best value award of an IDIQ contract for a five-year period of performance (a three-year base with two one-year options). Much of the CHS-5 contract is focused on enabling supported programs to develop life cycle sustainment plans for commercial IT during the hardware procurement phase. As the commercial industrial base adapts to fit a leaner Army, the organic industrial base will be called upon to provide more holistic life cycle sustainment support. The CHS-5 contract will require vendors to establish a public-private partnership with Tobyhanna Army Depot, Pennsylvania, to facilitate product support for programs procuring hardware via CHS-5 and having core logistics capability requirements. This partnership leverages the innovation, resources and leadership skills of both Tobyhanna and CHS to provide the best value to the warfighter. Since its launch in 1987, the CHS program has provided a consolidated acquisition approach for tactical technology solutions, offering economies of scale and complete life cycle management and warranty for hardware of all sizes and varying levels of ruggedness. Combining a prime contractor with options for small business procurement and Army organic support, CHS, as part of PEO C3T, serves as a broker uniting Army programs with the technologies that meet their requirements. The rapid execution of the contract is what makes CHS valuable to the Army. CHS coordinates with multiple programs to facilitate efficient procurement and sustainment of hardware items across the Common Operating Environment, while leveraging industry innovation to supply the latest technologies to Soldiers. This holistic approach to Army tactical hardware resulted in a cost avoidance totaling $205 million in FY15. The current CHS contract, CHS-4, ends in August, and on the current timeline the Army expects to issue the final request for proposal in September, with contracts awarded in December 2017. CONCLUSION As the Army continues to modernize its tactical communications network, GTACS II and CHS-5 will provide competitive contracting mechanisms to facilitate the acquisition of innovative technology and service solutions, thus helping the Army retain its military dominance on the battlefield. For more information, email usarmy.APG.peo-c3t.mbx.pao-peoc3t@mail.mil; for more information about GTACS, email usarmy.apg.peo-c3t.mbx.pm-win-t-gtacs@mail.mil. —MR. JAMES SAWALL, assistant product manager, Commercial Satellite Terminal Program, and MR. BRECK TARR, product lead, CHS.

MR. JOE WELCH is PM TR’s chief engineer. He holds a master’s in systems engineering from the Stevens Institute of Technology and a B.S. in electrical engineering from Tufts University. He is Level III certified in program management and in engineering. He is an Army Acquisition Corps (AAC) member.

LT. COL. JACK “SHANE” TAYLOR is the product manager for tactical mission command. He holds an M.S. in industrial engineering and operations management from Clemson University, an MBA from Pennsylvania State University and a B.S. in business administration with a minor in business law from Oklahoma State University. He is Level III certified in program management and Level I certified in information technology and contracting, and is a member of the AAC.

MR. MICHAEL BEERY is the deputy product manager for SATCOM. He holds an M.S. in industrial and systems engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and a B.S. from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is Level III certified in program management and is a member of the AAC.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

PEO EIS and ARCYBER found something interesting in analyzing the government’s off-the-shelf big data systems: Nearly all are built using high-quality, open-source software. With a similar, government-owned platform, DOD would no longer pay high licensing fees. It could increase the competitive playing field and make all of its big data analytics work together.

by Maj. Isaac J. Faber and Ms. Elissa Zadrozny

Big data analytics—the process of examining massive data sets containing a variety of data types to uncover hidden patterns, correlations and other strategic business and operational information—is among the hottest trends in information technology and one of the Army’s highest priorities. The Army chief information officer/G-6 (CIO/G-6), in releasing the Army Data Strategy in February 2016, stated, “The Army will utilize a two-pronged approach for managing big data. First, the Army will redouble its efforts to implement effective data management methodologies to ensure that data are authoritative, timely, secure and of the highest quality. Second, the Army will develop a process for the identification, development and implementation of efficient decision support and analytical tools to best maximize the use of information derived from big data extrapolation.”

Toward this end, the Program Executive Office for Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS) and the U.S. Army Cyber Command (ARCYBER) have been piloting a government off-the-shelf (GOTS), open-source platform based on open-source software and open standards. This effort is intended to potentially inform the way ahead.

The Army CIO/G-6 understands that Army data scientists, technologists and acquisition professionals need to work together and focus on identifying the best and most efficient ways to partner with industry to help the Army realize the promise of big data.

That’s because, in adopting a big data system, you gain an ability to sift through large volumes of data from a variety of sources at a faster rate than traditional databases. This is done by breaking the data into smaller pieces and spreading the processing of that data across many machines in “parallel” and returning the response to a consolidation point. This is known as parallel computation, and it’s what is needed to tackle the data management challenges faced by our cyber network defenders. Google is the most recognized pioneer in tackling the big data challenge of indexing and searching the unceasing volume, variety and velocity—known as the 3Vs of big data—of structured and unstructured data.

BIG DATA TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGY: A PRIMER
Hadoop is a free, Java-based programming framework that supports the processing of large data sets in a distributed computing environment. It is also an important tool to consider when implementing a big data strategy. Hadoop is sponsored by the Apache Software Foundation, which is dedicated to supporting open-source software projects for the public good. At its simplest, Hadoop provides a parallel-processing computing framework for data storage and processing. This is important for enterprise-level analysis because of physical limitations on how quickly a single machine can process information.

For example, when deploying a basic Hadoop system you first build all indexing strategies. These indexes are what allow you to organize data in a way that makes it quickly searchable, like a table of contents. For organizations looking to develop products to support big data, this first step has become a point of product differentiation, as performance is based on how well data is indexed. Product differentiation is key for companies looking to distinguish their product or service in the marketplace. Other differences (or divergences) become more evident as applications are built on top of the data store. Differences in visualizations, data science libraries, cloud architecture and access management are a few examples. While many of the same open-source distributions are used as a starting point, the end result is a product that is intended to work, on its own, from infrastructure to the user.

A HANDFUL OF OPTIONS
A vendor- and product-neutral government off-the-shelf (GOTS) platform provides an environment for developing complex, cyber-hardened systems that lend themselves to frequent technology refreshes and rapid insertion of cutting-edge technology. (SOURCE: USAASC/Exdez/iStock)

The government is developing a strategy to enable communities with big data needs to have access to this technology. There are special considerations that need to be taken into account to ensure that this is done in a sustainable manner. A strategy of an open government platform with vendor-provided applications and infrastructure is an approach derived, in part, from the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) cloud computing reference architecture. Big data systems leveraged for cyber analytics are typically built using cloud standards and technology. For the end user, this means access to all of the services through a modern Web browser. For engineers, it means building access through a modular framework of infrastructure, platform and software applications (or “apps”).

Consider the following: This morning, you probably awoke to an alarm that you set on your mobile phone. In addition, you probably reviewed email messages or read today’s headlines over coffee. Perhaps you checked the weather or traffic before leaving home for the day. All on the same device.

You probably rely on several apps on your phone to improve productivity and quality of life. What you probably do not think about is how different organizations develop each of these apps across a very diverse and competitive industry. Most modern software development efforts are based on a NIST-type modular framework, where applications are built to operate on a common, shared platform. For example, Apple iOS, Android, Xbox and PlayStation are platforms that provide an environment in which innovation can flourish. The environment in which an app is created and deployed is completely separate from the app itself. This environment includes not only the platform, but an entire development system that encourages seamless integration. The user doesn’t see this technical nuance, but it’s enormously important when considering life cycle costs and quality.

With software sustainment, the choice of platforms is the linchpin that allows for versioning, expansion, adaptability and flexibility. A robust platform enables independent apps to have limited deployments that can scale to a large user base when ready. In the same way, applications can be added or removed without impact to related services. Using a common platform is a distinct tradeoff for end users. Applications will be limited to platform services; however, more individuals can participate in development. This creates more diversity and competition. The personal choice of your mobile phone platform is an excellent example where you might choose a device based on the variety of applications that can be built and used on it.

THE LOCK-IN PROBLEM
One of the major challenges with the government procurement approach to acquiring technical solutions is “vendor lock-in.” Vendor lock-in occurs when a customer using a specific product or service cannot easily transition to a competitor. It is usually the result of proprietary technologies that are incompatible with those of competitors.

Historically, large technical system contracts have been awarded for total solutions that create dependencies on a particular vendor or provider. These dependencies make a single contractor the sole provider for an extended time because the startup investment for a new solution is cost-prohibitive.

Consider weapon system software developed using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products that are relevant to today’s standards and technology. If the initial award is given to a firm using a proprietary platform, the government may be forced to continue working with that firm for decades, even if the firm sells the technology or operates under a different company name. This type of lock-in is created because of government reliance on existing solutions and long development and procurement cycles for replacements.

BIG DATA PARTNERSHIP
How can the Army reduce the risk of vendor lock-in when it comes to big data? The answer is simple: Partner with industry to develop standards for interoperability and place a premium on adaptive and iterated innovation control. (SOURCE: 4X-image/iStock)

Operating systems, databases and office productivity suites are other examples of capabilities that, once purchased, are nearly impossible to re-compete without massive organizational effects. Throughout the enterprise, proprietary solutions can become the center of policy and workflow, making product changes difficult and cost prohibitive. So, how can the Army reduce the risk of vendor lock-in when it comes to big data?

The answer is simple: Partner with industry to develop standards for interoperability and place a premium on adaptive and iterated innovation control. The Army should build a core, standards-based platform and encourage vendors to develop applications that are adaptable and responsive to new requirements on that platform.

The cybersecurity domain offers an excellent test bed to explore this approach. Within the cyber domain, an enormous amount of data has to be collected and analyzed to find the most advanced threats. With this come significant requirements that cross technical and policy considerations. The capability required by the cyber community comes from the service (an “analytic”) or services that sit on top of a platform.

With product differentiation, nearly every analytic vendor uses a proprietary platform when building an analytic. This creates a potential vendor lock-in trap. There is a legitimate fear that when committing to a vendor-specific analytic, a proprietary platform will come along with it, excluding participation from other vendors. Lack of portability and interoperability of this type of solution lessens big data’s potential for the Army to store and share data in one place for use with different analytics from a wide variety of sources.

Because the level of effort to migrate data to a platform is so high, most likely there would not be available funding for investment in multiple platforms. To this end, over the past few years, PEO EIS and ARCYBER have been experimenting with a big data cyber-analytics pilot.

Reviewing the technical requirements in the big data community uncovered something interesting: Nearly all vendor products are now based, largely, on high-quality open source distributions from the Apache Software Foundation. In addition, there are existing capabilities within DOD built for specific cyber use cases.

The pilot leverages these two resources to build a no-cost licensed platform that enables multiple participants to provide software. The platform uses open standards where most big data vendors’ products can easily be adapted. More importantly, the cyber community can develop its own small-scale capabilities without any additional contracting actions. This enables a competitive environment whereby vendors of all sizes can participate and the government has low risk of vendor lock-in.

CONTROLLING COSTS
The undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics directed 22 years ago that all DOD components and agencies use open systems specifications and standards for acquisition of weapon systems implemented through what is called open systems architecture (OSA). OSA is a key tenet of Better Buying Power (BBP) 3.0 for promoting competition. OSA principles are also supportive of and consistent with the use of open source software (OSS), which is considered commercial computer software, in systems.

The big data cyber analytics pilot looks to OSS as a way to encourage industry partnerships. It also seeks to obtain maximum use of limited resources while avoiding vendor lock-in and licensing fees. Cloud-based access and the use of OSS development tools that allow participatory community feedback has created a force multiplier, bringing together multiple vendors under partner DOD organizations to create a GOTS big data platform. Other Army and DOD components can also be made aware of the platforms’ availability and are then able to deploy COTS or other apps to further their organizations’ missions.

The Army can help meet its missions by reducing barriers to sharing software through the use of OSS. The advantages include increased transparency and openness with industry. Writing contracts that favor maximum sharing, collaboration and adequate data rights to the government allows release of software as OSS by default. The technical core of openness is supporting competition and the ability to rapidly deploy capabilities to the force with the ability to add components and build larger systems. Development of competing components is motivated by larger marketplaces for those components.

Within the Army’s elite cyber units, including protection teams and regional defensive cyber operations divisions, capabilities are poorly interconnected single-vendor solutions, each only meeting one or two requirements. In an odd paradox, the security for the DOD Information Network is, in some way, dependent on how well our defenders navigate the capabilities they are provided. This increasingly complex web of disparate solutions is a call to reconsider future materiel developments and change the paradigm of vendor-bundled COTS solutions as a cure-all for competitive sourcing, rapid deployment and cost control. The common big data platform is just one example of how it’s possible to have openness with industry that still promotes competition and innovation at a low cost.

CONCLUSION
A vendor- and product-neutral GOTS platform provides an environment for developing complex, cyber-hardened systems that lend themselves to frequent technology refreshes and rapid insertion of cutting-edge technology. Sharing that platform with industry through the open source communities or common application programming interfaces inserts key capabilities as needed at the lowest possible cost through competitive sourcing rather than closed proprietary solutions. The adaptability and innovation needed to address legitimate national security concerns about maintaining a defended cyberspace domain can be achieved by supporting the Army’s efforts around big data cyber analytics and BBP 3.0 goals of achieving dominant capabilities while controlling life cycle cost.

For more information, contact Maj. Faber at isaac.j.faber.mil@mail.mil.

MAJ. ISAAC J. FABER is the lead data scientist at ARCYBER, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in industrial and systems engineering from the University of Washington and a B.S. in computer information systems from Arizona State University. He holds an academic rank of assistant professor with the United States Military Academy at West Point.

MS. ELISSA ZADROZNY is the Technical Management Division chief for the project director for enterprise services within PEO EIS, Fort Belvoir. She holds an M.A. in computer resources and information management from Webster University and a B.A in international relations and American studies from the University of Richmond. She is Level III certified in information technology and program management, Level II in engineering and a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

When GPS goes out, the chip-scale atomic clock may be coming to the rescue.

by Mr. John Delcolliano and Mr. Paul Olson

Accurate time is crucial to our military. It enables all the warfighting functions of an expeditionary force: radio communications, network synchronization, information gathering, weapon systems, manned and unmanned systems, maneuvers, fires, electronic warfare and all types of sensors.

In addition to relying on the positioning capabilities of the Global Positioning System (GPS), many Army systems use GPS, which was developed by the U.S. military, for its highly accurate time. That’s because if you know where you were 10 seconds ago, you can determine where you are now based on very sophisticated calculations.

CLOSING THE 12,000-MILE GAP
GPS satellite receivers like the one used by this Soldier are vulnerable to conditions that impede the signal transmission. The chip-scale atomic clock provides the Soldier a backup source of accurate time and a quicker recovery when the GPS signal is restored. (U.S. Army photo)

Timing is everything. GPS satellites, which have atomic clocks on board, send out signals at precisely timed intervals. On Earth, a GPS receiver calculates exactly how long it took to get the signal from the satellite to the ground. One measurement enables the receiver to determine the precise time of day, and three more triangulate the position of the GPS receiver on Earth.

However, more than 12,000 miles separate the Earth from the GPS satellites, leading to a fragile signal by the time it reaches the receiver. This makes GPS unreliable in some environments, such as dense forests or urban areas with large skyscrapers, and vulnerable to jamming from enemies. Today GPS receivers use ordinary quartz clocks. During signal drop-outs, the clock drifts during short intervals, making reacquisition of the signal difficult. If a receiver had an additional source of accurate time—such as its own atomic clock—that would allow for easier and quicker GPS recovery.

VERY ACCURATE, VERY BIG
Atomic clocks are recognized for their accuracy. But the typical atomic clock is rack-mounted, weighs 50 to 60 pounds and requires lots of power. They’re great for fixed-base tactical operation centers and large platforms such as ground and air vehicles, but not for dismounted Soldiers.

WHICH WOULD YOU RATHER CARRY?
Full-scale atomic clocks are the most accurate, telling time to the nanosecond, but they weigh 50 pounds or more, not including the weight of the power supply. At a very portable 15 cubic centimeters, the chip-scale clock tells time in microseconds or better. (Photos by U.S. Army CERDEC)

At the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC), the Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) Division strives to enable true navigation, timing and total situational understanding for the dismounted Soldier and commander in varying conditions, including degraded or GPS-challenged or -denied environments. The division is part of the Command, Power and Integration Directorate (CP&ID) of CERDEC, home to the Army’s experts for Soldier and manned-unmanned ground platforms.

The CP&ID drives PNT innovation so that Soldiers will have an optimal solution regardless of the circumstances they might encounter; these innovations span the areas of identifying potential threats, anticipating future needs and making science and technology investments that will help the Soldier beyond 2025.

SEEKING ATOMIC CLOCK CAPABILITIES
In 2002, the National Institute of Standards and Technology demonstrated a rudimentary physics package that proved the feasibility of a miniature-scale atomic clock. CERDEC and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) set out to mature this proof of concept and provide complete atomic clock capabilities for weapons, weapon systems and the dismounted Soldier.

This collaboration resulted in the chip-scale atomic clock (CSAC), a microchip-sized prototype that would support highly accurate location and battlefield situational awareness, even in the temporary absence of GPS.

SMALL WONDER
CSAC is a microchip-sized prototype that can support highly accurate location and battlefield situational awareness, even in the temporary absence of GPS. Since it’s both very accurate and very small, it is highly relevant to the Army’s expeditionary vision.

CSAC is one of the most game-changing PNT technologies developed in a long time, and DOD has just begun to scratch the surface of its potential. CSAC enables a device to hold accurate time at sub-microseconds for hours after losing access to GPS. At 15 cubic centimeters, about the size of two books of matches, CSAC can be integrated into a platform, weapon or handheld device while being transparent to the user.

While CSAC’s precision is not that of a full-scale atomic clock, which is accurate to about a nanosecond or less, its accuracy is acceptable, making it a trusted source of time with advantages in size, weight and power. If GPS is degraded or disrupted, a CSAC could provide precise time to the GPS receiver to enable rapid recovery.

Such a device is considered game-changing because CSAC provides 100 to 1,000 times better accuracy than clocks of the same size and format, enabling new capabilities in radios, GPS receivers and other military electronics. But it was saddled initially with labor-intensive manufacturing processes that produce small quantities at high cost. CSAC was highly impractical at $8,700 per item, and the manufacturing capability was enough to turn out just tens of devices a month in a laboratory environment. These manufacturing challenges had to be addressed to ensure consistent, repeatable quality at a lower cost per unit.

CALLING IN MANTECH
In an effort to reduce production costs, CSAC transitioned to the U.S. Army Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program in 2010.

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
The Army relies on GPS not only for navigation but also for timing. Orchestrating the variety of weapon systems, information- and intelligence-gathering systems and communication technologies that support the modern Army’s operations requires highly accurate time. Thus GPS vulnerabilities make the entire Army vulnerable.

ManTech, under the deputy assistant secretary of the Army for research and technology (DASA(R&T)), works closely with the defense industrial base to provide affordable and timely solutions in a low-risk production environment for high-priority Army acquisition projects that face manufacturing challenges.

Upon funding a project, the ManTech office tracks cost, schedule, performance and implementation planning. Thus it enables the efficient transition of these critical technologies to the warfighter on a large scale.

Initiated by DARPA, the CSAC Manufacturing Technology Objective was jointly funded by the Army, the Air Force GPS Directorate and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. CERDEC served as the lead by managing the program and supporting the technical development, requirements verification and testing.

Through ManTech, CERDEC worked with three industry vendors to reduce the cost of parts for CSAC to $300 per unit in production lots of 20,000 or more per month.

As interest in CSAC grows across DOD, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Aviation Administration, the ManTech effort may enable mass production of CSAC in thousands of units per month, allowing for a significantly lower unit cost for DOD. Additionally, the lower cost could lead to the availability of CSAC in the commercial sector.

In September 2013, the CSAC effort transitioned to the program manager for positioning, navigation and timing (PM PNT), who reports directly to the Army acquisition executive. In support of PM PNT, CERDEC is continuing to look at how to integrate CSAC into various systems as well as mounted and dismounted platforms; how the environment will affect it; and how it could be an asset to various programs of record. CSAC’s continued improvements in power, size and accuracy will lead to new applications with benefits reaching beyond DOD.

PRECISION NAVIGATION AND TIMING
The goal of CERDEC’s PNT Division is complete situational awareness for Soldiers in all circumstances, eliminating their vulnerability to GPS jamming or disruption by environmental conditions. A CSAC on board could provide precise time to the GPS receiver to enable rapid recovery or to protect receivers from interference. (Photo by U.S. Army CERDEC)

CONCLUSION
The small size, low power consumption and low cost of CSAC will enable its use within small devices—handheld radios and GPS receivers, for example—in which atomic clocks would not have been practical, thereby enabling atomic timing precision for a whole new host of applications. Maintaining accurate time when GPS is not available will be important to the warfighter to maintain communications, network synchronization, electronic warfare and GPS reacquisition once the GPS signal is available again. Our warfighters will achieve overmatch as a result.

For more information on CERDEC or to contact the authors, go to www.cerdec.army.mil.

MR. JOHN DELCOLLIANO is the PNT Integrated Systems Branch chief in the PNT Division at CERDEC, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. He holds a B.S. in electrical engineering from the Stevens Institute of Technology. He is Level III certified in engineering and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC).

MR. PAUL OLSON is the chief engineer of the PNT Division. He holds an M.S. in electrical engineering from Fairleigh Dickinson University and a B.S. in electrical and computer engineering from Clarkson University. He is Level III certified in engineering and is a member of the AAC.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Tasked with delivering ammunition for weapons ranging from handguns to tanks, PM MAS customizes strategies and partnerships with the private sector to develop the best solutions for the warfighter.

by Col. Moises M. Gutierrez, Lt. Col. John Todd Masternak, Mr. Christopher R. Seacord and Lt. Col. Kyle A. McFarland

From the handgun ammo supplier who straddles the commercial demand-driven market to the unique, military-only tank ammunition supplier who must rely on foreign military sales to retain market competitiveness, each segment of the DOD direct fire ammunition portfolio demands different, multiprong, process-driven strategies to gain the best value and profit while maintaining product overmatch.

The project manager for maneuver ammunition systems (PM MAS) develops all Army direct fire munitions and manages DOD direct fire procurements with government-to-industry partnerships. As one of the project managers within the Program Executive Office for Ammunition, which executes the role of single manager for conventional ammunition, PM MAS leverages multiple strategies, processes and key partnerships for each of the family of products.

ENGAGING TARGETS—AND INDUSTRY PARTNERS
Pfc. Francisco Rodriguez, an M240B machine gunner with the 24th Infantry Regiment, engages targets at an M4 range at Fort Wainwright, Alaska, in March. (Photo by Sgt. Corey Confer, 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division Public Affairs)

SMALL-CALIBER DIVIDENDS
Cooperation between the Army’s ammunition enterprise and Orbital ATK Inc. continues to pay dividends three years into the operating contract for the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant (LCAAP) in Missouri. An April – June 2013 Army AL&T magazine article titled “Competition Case Study” discussed the government-encouraged investment in LCAAP, the Army’s premier small-caliber ammunition manufacturing facility, through a competitive acquisition strategy. Bidders responding to the request for proposals had an incentive to propose investment plans in exchange for commercial use authorization. A win-win situation for the Army and the operating contractor resulted in reduced costs, improved production efficiencies, a continuous workforce and less downtime for equipment. This innovative strategy required documenting governance controls and clearly defined procedures up front.

Orbital ATK’s capital investment in LCAAP has resulted in improvements to many areas of the plant: design and implementation of advanced material handling and control; design and implementation of process control technology; replacement of water traps on test ranges; implementation of safer primer delivery containers; and modernization of packaging equipment and processes. The investments have resulted in more efficient and sustainable production; delivery of higher-quality small-caliber ammunition; and a better and safer workforce environment.

Army and Orbital ATK leadership are generally in agreement on the future vision for LCAAP. However, the team diverges at times on plant priorities and project scopes. To work through these differences, the government adopted Orbital ATK’s proposed establishment of an investment board consisting of two members from the Army ammunition enterprise and two members from Orbital ATK’s program management leadership. At its monthly meetings, the board provides joint oversight and coordination at the appropriate level to make sound and timely decisions. This partnership enables the team to resolve conflicts while continuing to move plant improvements forward.

MAKING SMALL SAFER
Small-caliber ammunition encompasses 5.56 mm, 7.62 mm and .50-caliber rounds, and includes cartridges for combat (ball, tracer, armor-piercing and incendiary) and training (blank, short-range training, marking and dummy). Because there’s a commercial market for small-caliber ammunition, the industry is less vulnerable to swings in DOD demand, so the Army and Orbital ATK, a contractor that runs the government-owned LCAAP, have been able to focus on improving ammunition quality and improving safety at the plant. (U.S. Army photo)

Although Army and Orbital ATK leadership agree this structure improves execution of the investment plan, both would recommend establishing and documenting clear governance controls and procedures earlier in contract execution to allow leadership to focus more on developing the vision and making good investment decisions.

MEDIUM-CALIBER PARTNERSHIPS
The product director for medium-caliber ammunition (PD MC) strategically focuses on two areas in its partnership with industry: industrial base preservation and development collaboration.

While it may seem counterintuitive that an industrial base could be at risk despite our continued conflicts, the reality is that the medium-caliber sector production quantities have been in decline since 2009. The decline was the result of reaching healthy training and combat stockpiles with a simultaneous reduction in the requirement.

The decline has had a significant effect on the industrial base, leading to consolidation at the supplier and sub-tier supplier levels. In order to preserve the medium-caliber industrial base, the product office developed a plan to combine calibers across services and limit the playing field to our known suppliers to save key production capabilities at the supplier and sub-tier supplier levels, with the goal of ensuring long-term viability.

The plan, created in partnership with industry, was put into action in 2009 and is known as the Medium-Caliber Family Acquisition (MCFA). The intent was to right-size production lines, preserve dual-source suppliers for key capabilities and lower costs. The first contract awarded under this plan was implemented in 2013. Since its initiation, the MCFA has met, and in some cases exceeded, its goals by maintaining dual-source viability for key production capabilities, lowering unit costs while reducing quantities and ultimately delivering the highest-quality munitions to the warfighter.

VICTIM OF ITS OWN SUCCESS
The medium-caliber ammunition family, used with medium handheld and crew-served weapons, includes armor-piercing, high-explosive, smoke, illumination, training and anti-personnel cartridges to defeat light-armored targets. The medium-caliber ammunition industry was to some extent a victim of its own success: The Army was able to produce enough ammunition for active use and develop a healthy stockpile quickly enough that production has declined steadily since 2009. To preserve the industrial base, PD MC combined orders with those from other services and stuck with known suppliers. (U.S. Army photo)

The second area in which PD MC engages our industry partners in a novel way is through the development of new munition solutions to meet identified gaps in warfighter capabilities. As the capability gaps are discussed, we engage our in-house research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) asset, the U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC), and our industry partners through industry days spanning our entire portfolio and engagements of more targeted scope (National Defense Industrial Association conferences, market surveys, project industry days, etc.) to get each organization to spend its limited RDT&E funds on the technical solutions that can meet these gaps. We motivate them to invest by showing them the Army’s path forward—specifically, the capability gaps we are trying to address for the warfighter.

This targeted development helps refine and advise the requirement as it’s being developed and staffed, ensuring that the solution is feasible. It also can accelerate the acquisition development phase, shortening the time from concept to fielding.

Our primary vehicle to share and partner in the development of new solutions is the cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA). Under a CRADA, government and industry can share ideas and test theories that minimize program risk for each party and ensure the best solution. This approach was initiated several years ago, and we believe it will deliver timely solutions to meet urgent warfighter needs.

LARGE-CALIBER ALTERNATIVES
The product manager for large-caliber ammunition (Product Manager LC) continuously works with industry to maintain critical capabilities and opportunities for competition. Firing projectiles from cannons at high speed is a unique function. As such, there is little to no demand in the commercial marketplace for certain components and materials used in large-caliber ammunition. Product Manager LC works with suppliers to ensure that budgets and requirements stay at levels appropriate both for Army requirements and industry sustainability. While maintaining this balance, Product Manager LC also has worked to sustain two qualified system-integrating contractors. This facilitates competition, which drives more innovation in developmental programs and lowers costs in production.

BIG CALIBER, BIG CHALLENGES
The family of large-caliber ammunition for tanks faces two challenges: First, there’s almost no commercial market for it, so suppliers are wholly dependent on DOD sales. Second, large-caliber armor-piercing ammunition is one of the last uses for depleted uranium, so suppliers need special licenses and again depend heavily on DOD sales. PM MAS helped one supplier reorganize its manufacturing space to cut overhead and operating costs so the supplier is less vulnerable to decreased demand. (U.S. Army photo)

Armor-piercing tank cartridges are one of the last military uses for depleted uranium. No other material has demonstrated the same lethality against hard targets, which makes it a critical component for Product Manager LC. However, working with depleted uranium requires special licensing and handling procedures. While some commercial applications exist, the commercial workload alone will not sustain a full-time depleted uranium supplier. Realizing this, Product Manager LC began working with Aerojet Ordnance Tennessee Inc. in 2012 to reduce its manufacturing footprint by approximately 46,000 square feet, while maintaining sufficient capacity to meet government requirements. The effort led to a $1.5 million reduction in annual operating costs and decontaminated unneeded facilities for return to other uses. Product Manager LC is continuing to work with Aerojet and Orbital ATK to ensure that production continues with minimal gaps to maintain the capabilities essential to national defense.

Combustible cartridge cases are also a unique application for ammunition. The cases are important since they reduce volume of expended material after firing, and space is at a high premium inside a tank. A case that burns completely in under the tenth of a second it takes to fire a tank round is similar to cardboard, yet it must support projectiles weighing over 40 pounds, in some cases.

SHARING THE BENEFITS
LCAAP, with this newly automated 7.62 mm and .50-caliber ammunition can printer, has benefited from a public-private cooperative agreement whereby the government owns the plant and Orbital ATK Inc. operates it and uses the plant to make ammunition for the commercial market. (Photo by Orbital ATK Inc.)

Balancing these requirements is a niche skill that Esterline Defense Technologies has performed well for several decades. However, the Army currently requires a fraction of the tank rounds it did 10 or 20 years ago. That has put a strain on Esterline to maintain this needed capability at economical rates. To help sustainment, Product Manager LC worked with Esterline and product offices under the project manager for combat ammunition systems, which rely on related products, to ensure that sufficient business exists. Product Manager LC also works with HQDA G-4 and G-8 to plan future year procurement to avoid large swings in quantities from year to year, which would make it difficult for Esterline to continue efficient operation.

Despite the drastically reduced quantities in tank ammunition requirements, Product Manager LC continues to work with two prime system contractors: Orbital ATK and General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems. While either contractor likely has the capacity to produce all of the Army’s requirements in the current environment, maintaining multiple sources offers several benefits. It provides ample surge capacity to the national industrial base, which reduces risk for future contingencies. It also develops secondary sources of supply at component levels, which reduces the overall risks to the product office as a whole. Perhaps most importantly, it sustains competition for development of new ammunition. Maintaining two prime contractors has facilitated competitive prototyping into the engineering and manufacturing development phase for the last two large-caliber programs of record.

This approach, while marginally increasing administrative requirements for the government, greatly reduces cost and performance risk for development programs. It allows for more innovation going into development, increases the chances of identifying a feasible solution and puts competitive pressure on the contractor’s pricing.

CONCLUSION
Preserving the competitive edge for tactical direct fire capability requires multiple, unique relationships with our industrial partners. These partnerships require the unified visions of industry and the government based on give-and-take. Although profit is a significant consideration, it is the joint long-term visions that are unique in function, with industry partners offering capabilities that demand sustainment.

We have taken on the challenge of sustaining those capabilities while increasing performance for the Soldier. Doing so requires routine engagement with industry to adjust to changing environments that meet the government’s requirements while respecting industry’s economic viability.

For more information, go to http://www.pica.army.mil/peoammo/, or contact the authors at moises.m.gutierrez.mil@mail.mil; john.t.masternak.mil@mail.mil; christopher.r.seacord.civ@mail.mil; or kyle.a.mcfarland.mil@mail.mil.

FUELING THE FIRES
A tank crew from the 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division (1/1 CD) fires the 120 mm main gun of an M1A2 Abrams main battle tank at a target in December 2015 at the Sugar Loaf Multi-Use Range at Fort Hood, Texas, during training before deploying to the Republic of Korea. The industrial base for tank ammunition requires particularly close cooperation with the Army. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Christopher Dennis, 1/1 CD Public Affairs)

COL. MOISES M. GUTIERREZ is the PM MAS for PEO Ammunition, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. He holds an M.S. in systems acquisition management from Webster University, an M.S. in national resource strategy from the Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy and a B.A. in pre-law from the University of New Mexico. He is also a graduate of the Armor Officer Basic and Advanced Courses, the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and the Defense Systems Management College of Defense Acquisition University. He is Level III certified in program management.

LT. COL. JOHN TODD MASTERNAK is PEO Ammunition’s product manager for small-caliber ammunition. He holds an M.S. in systems engineering from the Stevens Institute of Technology and a B.S. in industrial and systems engineering from Ohio State University. He has served in the Army as an Ordnance Corps and Acquisition Corps officer for more than 20 years. He is Level III certified in program management, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC).

MR. CHRISTOPHER R. SEACORD is PEO Ammunition’s PD MC. He holds an M.S. in information management from Marymount University in Virginia and a B.S. in computer and information systems engineering from the University of Florida. He has served in the Army as an engineer officer and Acquisition Corps officer for 23 years, and after retirement from active service continues to serve in the Acquisition Corps as a DA civilian. He is Level III certified in program management and science and technology management and Level I in information technology. He is a member of the AAC.

LT. COL. KYLE A. McFARLAND is the Product Manager LC for PEO Ammunition. He holds an M.S.E. in mechanical engineering from the University of Texas at Austin and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He has served in the Army as a field artillery and Acquisition Corps officer for more than 17 years. He is Level III certified in program management and Level I certified in contracting, and is a member of the AAC.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

‘America’s cannon factory’ used a public-private partnership to save its skilled workforce from a postwar dip in demand and preserve a critical manufacturing capability in the Army’s organic industrial base.

by Ms. Mary Kate Aylward

DOD has only one source for large-caliber cannons: Watervliet Arsenal, in operation in Watervliet, New York, since 1813. As the home of Army-­designated “critical manufacturing capabilities,” which don’t exist anywhere else in the U.S. industrial base, Watervliet, its forges and the skilled workers who operate them are assets that a commercial supplier simply cannot replace. But the loss of that workforce is exactly what the arsenal faced in 2011 after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wound down. Revenue had dipped to $88 million, down from $133 million in 2009, as the Army required fewer of the high-tech, high-powered cannon, howitzer and mortar systems that Watervliet produces.

The arsenal saved its critical capabilities by forging a public-­private partnership with Electralloy, G.O. Carlson Inc., a privately held metals company, that lets Electralloy use Watervliet’s facilities—so its workload becomes the arsenal’s workload. Workers at the arsenal—all government employees—fulfill orders for DOD, but also for Electralloy and its customers. “Our workload alone couldn’t sustain this,” said Joseph Turcotte, the arsenal’s deputy commander.

BIGGER, BETTER
Tracy Rudolph, president and chief operating officer of Electralloy, and Col. Lee H. Schiller Jr., Watervliet Arsenal commander, stand in front of the three Electralloy furnaces as they display an American Bureau of Shipping certificate. The certificate expands the number of products the arsenal can manufacture, bringing more work to the arsenal than was originally anticipated under the public-private partnership. (Photos by John B. Snyder, Watervliet Arsenal Public Affairs)

Between 2002 and 2010 as the Army fought two wars, orders for gun tubes and armor kits for High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs) kept the arsenal’s forges busy. But production declined when the wars and defense spending wound down, and the arsenal lost workers. Sequestration worsened the pain. “We had to furlough employees, and that prompted many to think about retiring, so that made skills retention even more urgent,” Turcotte said.

Operating the 1970s-era rotary forge that produces gun tubes (and other cylindrical objects) is “an expensive machining process,” Turcotte explained. It’s a unique piece of equipment with a high fixed cost of ownership, including salaries and training for specialized workers, maintenance and supplies, whether it’s producing 100 gun barrels or 1,000.

The jump in demand after 9/11 masked the deeper difficulty of keeping the forge running and retaining a skilled workforce independent of the cycles of conflict and peacetime. The skilled workforce is as much of an investment as the forge equipment, and a trained metal processor can’t be easily or cheaply replaced. It can take up to four years before a metal processor reaches full potential: 12 to 18 months to earn a forge operation certification, followed by welding certifications and specialized training from GFM, the company that made the rotary forge. Workers need advanced hand-foot-eye coordination and a fundamental understanding of metallurgy (how much heat a given metal or alloy can tolerate and at what stage), plus knowledge of welding, composite manufacturing and heat treatment.

In 2013, just five workers, all nearing retirement age, staffed the rotary forge at Watervliet. Today there are 20. The upgraded rotary forge is fed by new gas furnaces that are 20 percent more efficient. And while the fiscal environment has not materially changed, the arsenal’s future looks much brighter.

SUCCESS NOT GUARANTEED
How did they go about it? Turcotte and Tracy Rudolph, president and chief operating officer of Electralloy, both point to trust as the thing that made the partnership possible. The government had to clear regulatory hurdles that took years to navigate, and Electralloy had to be willing to invest “well over $10 million” up front, according to Rudolph. They credit “a real trust at the outset,” built on weekly supervisory meetings, consultations with employees and years of open, frank discussion as factors in overcoming the challenges that occurred as they set up the partnership. And in hindsight, it’s clear that the partnership could have fallen victim to any number of business-as-usual biases, from “that’s not how we do things” to “the government moves too slowly.”

A READY WORKFORCE
Metal processor Sean Stephenson applies resin to composite fiber on a bore evacuator at the Watervliet Arsenal in October 2015.

In 2011, when negotiations began, public-private partnerships (P3s) were new territory for the Army. The arsenal was used to dealing with industry through direct sales, “but we weren’t real comfortable with sharing our processes and capabilities with a company,” Turcotte said.

Watervliet Arsenal also lacked the statutory authority to enter into such partnerships. The designation that allows an Army installation to be part of a P3 was granted only to depots until a 2013 rule change.

Additionally, arsenal workers were apprehensive about losing their jobs and protective of the equipment. “The fear was real at the employee level,” Turcotte said. “When Electralloy came to us and said, ‘We want to use your forge,’ the guys who run it, that’s their baby. They didn’t want to let anyone else use it [and possibly] damage it.”

The slow nature of government acquisition was another hurdle. “If I were to give one piece of advice to another company about to do this, I’d say it’s gonna take time,” Rudolph said. “No matter what. But if you’re going to get into it, you have to put skin in the game … you’re in it for the long haul.” Turcotte added, “I have 37 years in government, and I’m still continually surprised by how rules-bound the government is, especially in acquisitions.”

That government moves more slowly than private industry is hardly news, but it doesn’t have to be a deal breaker. Arsenal leadership kept Electralloy informed as the process moved through government wickets. Lesson learned: Being as specific as possible helped manage expectations. For example, “We’re not going to be able to do step X in two weeks; it’s more like three months,” as Turcotte recalled.

PUTTING ‘SKIN IN THE GAME’
The team reassured workers early on that the partnership represented job security since it brought much-needed workload. It then opened a broader discussion with employees. To address concerns about wearing out the equipment, Rudolph and Electralloy suggested establishing a baseline for “what level we’ll maintain [equipment] at, what parts do we need to keep on hand, and so on, and then once we all agree on the baseline, we’ll assume responsibility for maintenance.” The government, from the line employees to arsenal leadership, needed to see that Electralloy had skin in the game, and gathering employee input first demonstrated that commitment. “Our employees saw that and said, ‘Hey, this company is good for us efficiency-wise and safety-wise,’ ” Turcotte recalled.

If the deal had reduced the number of government employees, as public-private cooperation sometimes does, fears of job loss could have been harder to allay. But the government insisted that the workers at the forge be government employees. This highlights another lesson learned: Know what problem you want the P3 to solve, and let that guide where you can give and where you can’t. Because the core problem was retaining a skilled government workforce (and not, for example, growing revenue), this wasn’t a point where the arsenal could compromise. “That was a key factor in our negotiation,” Turcotte said. “Tracy had to get comfortable with the idea that he’d have employees under government control.” The arsenal found a way to compromise and ease Electralloy’s apprehensions on that score, by making some of its cannon-forging processes similar to Electralloy’s solid-steel processing. Thus, work for DOD and work for Electralloy have more in common, and the risk of errors as employees switch between tasks is lower.

LEAVING THE COMFORT ZONE
Another lesson learned? The government needs to think outside the box. When Electralloy first expressed interest in the arsenal’s capabilities, Watervliet had basically one way of dealing with industry, as Turcotte describes it. “We wanted to treat it like a direct sale: We’ll process your work and here’s what we’ll charge for it. That wasn’t working. Tracy came back to us and said, ‘We’d like to truly partner.’ That’s when we had to work through the authorities and think outside the direct-sales box.”

Getting the authority to formally enter into a partnership was a greater challenge. The U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC), the arsenal’s higher headquarters, tried for several years to get the Army’s Center for Industrial and Technical Excellence (CITE) designation, which recognizes that an installation has a technical capability not found elsewhere and confers authority to join a P3 to preserve that capability. Until 2013, only depots could earn this designation. AMC repeatedly proposed making arsenals eligible, starting in 2008.

CAUTION: CONTENTS MAY BE HOT
Metal processor Matthew Briscoe removes 155 mm howitzer tubes from an Electralloy furnace. Watervliet also produces the 120 mm Abrams tank gun and 60 mm and 81 mm mortars. The arsenal is reaping the benefits of a public-private partnership that helped strengthen its workforce and level its workload.

While they waited for the CITE designation, the partners took a leap of faith and signed an agreement with an understanding that it would be renewed every five years.

Thinking outside the box also means being willing to take suggestions from the industrial partner. For example, arsenal personnel used to be employed under narrowly specific job descriptions: crane operator, welder, heat treater. Rudolph “prodded” the government, as Turcotte put it, to use more multitalented job categories. Now all employees are classified as metal processors and are cross-trained in all the critical skills to operate the forge, creating a flexible, diversified pool of workers less vulnerable to individual departures.

Being open to the changes and compromises that a full partnership demands has yielded other benefits for Water­vliet. The arsenal’s equipment has been upgraded and is maintained by a partner with equal incentive to keep it in shape, and can move faster to keep it up to date. “Electralloy can make investments much more readily than we can,” ­Turcotte noted. And since becoming an on-site presence at one part of the arsenal, Electralloy has identified other equipment that wasn’t being used. “Now we’re looking at expanding work downstream on machining,” Turcotte said, which means even more skills retained and work gained. “That’s a totally unexpected benefit that wasn’t in our analysis [of the initial proposal].”

CONCLUSION
In 2015, the arsenal renewed the partnership with Electralloy for 20 years. DOD recognized the Watervliet-Electralloy partnership as a “best of breed” exemplar of public-private cooperation at the 2015 DOD Maintenance Symposium in Phoenix, Arizona. Both are strong indicators that the partnership is working well for both sides.

The key indicator, though, is that the partnership solved the skills-retention problem, with the jump from five to 20 employees and increased workload. The arsenal’s headquarters, however, initially evaluated the success of the partnership based on its effect on the arsenal’s revenue. Revenue did go up, but that wasn’t the main goal. So higher-ups weren’t getting the full picture of the partnership’s success. Turcotte and Rudolph are working to change that.

“After we won the DOD best of breed [award], we told everyone who would listen that this wasn’t a revenue thing,” Turcotte said. Watervliet’s headquarters has recently started to evaluate the partnership based on its effect on skills sustainment and readiness—harder to quantify, but in the end the most important measure.

For more information, contact John Snyder at john.b.snyder.civ@mail.mil or visit the arsenal on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WatervlietArsenal.

PARTNERSHIP FUNDS UPGRADE
One of the benefits of the arsenal’s public-private partnership with Electralloy was a major maintenance upgrade to this rotary forge. Electralloy funded the maintenance contract for the March 2016 upgrade.

MS. MARY KATE AYLWARD provides contract support to the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (USAASC). A writer and editor at SAIC with eight years’ experience in communications, writing and editing on foreign policy, political and military topics, she holds a B.A. in international relations from the College of William & Mary.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.

Harvard and Walter Reed scientists collaborate in an effort to protect humans from a mosquito-borne virus.

by Col. Nelson L. Michael and Col. Stephen J. Thomas

Researchers at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) in Silver Spring, Maryland, moved quickly to develop and begin testing a Zika vaccine candidate early this year. The fast-moving virus, which is transmitted by infected mosquitos and through sexual contact, alarmed the world as it spread through South and Central America, causing serious birth defects. A preclinical study published June 28 in the journal Nature indicated the feasibility of a vaccine to prevent Zika infection in humans. The study was completed by WRAIR and collaborators at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center at Harvard Medical School.

BREEDING TEST SUBJECTS
A. aegypti, the mosquitoes that transmit the Zika virus, are reared by the thousands at WRAIR for use in preclinical Zika vaccine experiments and research. (Photos by Jonathan Thompson, WRAIR Medical Audio Visual)

The WRAIR and Harvard teams are now testing this vaccine in a second preclinical model. If everything goes well, the plan is to start human testing later this year. On July 6, WRAIR announced a cooperative research and development agreement with Sanofi Pasteur to transfer its vaccine technology to the pharmaceutical company to explore advanced and larger-scale manufacturing and production.

“The Army has an interest in supporting development of countermeasures against Zika,” said Dr. George V. Ludwig, acting principal assistant for research and technology for the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command. “Infectious diseases have traditionally been the greatest threat to Soldier health and readiness both in the field and in the garrison. …Similarly, it’s also important to support the health and welfare of our Soldier-dependent population here in the United States by finding ways to protect them from this emerging disease.”

INFECTION TIME
Uninfected A. aegypti, the main transmitters of the Zika, Dengue and chikungunya viruses, are transported in pint containers from the main WRAIR insectary to specialized laboratories to be infected with the Zika virus.

The mosquitoes that transmit Zika virus, Aedes aegypti, are also the ones responsible for spreading the dengue, yellow fever and chikungunya viruses. These mosquitoes, and the viruses they carry, have been expanding their geographic reach. Until last year, Zika was limited to the tropics of the Indian Ocean basin and the South Pacific. The wide range of A. aegypti and their ability to breed anywhere there is even a tiny amount of stagnant water makes them hard to control. That’s why prevention strategies are needed that are directed at the mosquito as well as the human host.

Although Zika manifests clinically in only 20 percent of those infected and generally causes a mild disease of self-limited fever and muscle or joint pain, the virus can cause neurologic disease and death in developing fetuses. Zika virus is also unique among mosquito-borne diseases in that it can be transmitted through sexual contact.

However, a vaccine that limits the amount of virus in the blood will likely prevent transfer of the virus from mother to child or between sexual partners and interrupt transmission within at-risk populations.

The Zika virus disease was originally discovered in 1947, in the Zika Forest of Uganda. Dr. Alexander J. Haddow was the first to study the virus after a rhesus monkey developed a fever from the bite of an A. africanus mosquito.

ZEROING IN ON ZIKA
Russell A. Olson, Viral Vaccines Section head at WRAIR, examines cell cultures for the Zika virus.

His grandson, Dr. Andrew D. Haddow, followed in his footsteps to become a virologist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, where he also studies the disease on the other half of the research spectrum—basic research. He and his colleagues are doing the work that lays the foundation for understanding the virus.

“Everyone here understands the gravity of the situation, and the impact that our work will make for not only our service members but also populations around the globe,” said Haddow. “Our number one goal is to move good science forward as rapidly as possible.”

For more information, see the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research website: http://wrair-www.army.mil/.

COL. NELSON L. MICHAEL earned his M.D. and Ph.D. from Stanford University and graduated summa cum laude from the University of California, Los Angeles with a degree in biology. He also trained in internal medicine at Harvard.

COL. STEPHEN J. THOMAS earned his M.D. from Albany Medical College and a B.A. with honors in biomedical ethics from Brown University.

RELATED LINKS
WRAIR Center for Infectious Disease Research
Inside the US Army lab racing to create a Zika vaccine
An Army Specialist Helped Create a Possible Zika Vaccine

This article will be printed in the October – December issue of Army AL&T magazine.

Subscribe to Army AL&T News, the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce.