HomeHomeAbout UsBrowseBack IssueNews DispatchesSubscribing to Army SustainmentWriting For Army SustainmentContactLinksBottom

Current Issues
Cover of Issue

Army Forces Command Presents New ARFORGEN Structure
at AUSA Sustainment Symposium

Brigadier General John R. O’Connor, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4, for the Army Forces Command
(FORSCOM), laid out changes to the Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) processes during the Army
Sustainment Symposium and Exposition hosted by the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) from 8 to 10 May 2012 in Richmond, Virginia.

The FORSCOM G–4 said that while the current ARFORGEN process has served well over the past 7 years, it is time for a change.

“There will be decreasing depth requirements changing force structures,” said General O’Connor. “We all know there’s a significant fiscal constraint [im]posed on our Army, so we need to have the right force ready at the right level and of course at the right time.”

The Army Chief of Staff approved a new ARFORGEN model on 28 April. This model includes three force pools: the mission force pool, the rotational force pool, and the operational sustainment pool.

"The old model attempted to manage the entire force in one force pool, and the new model again has three,” said General O’Connor, noting the return to a tiered readiness model.

The mission force pool distributes forces to a highdemand requirement and to theater-assigned forces that do not have sufficient force structure to be progressive. Units in this pool, including those in Korea and other forward-deployed locations and any “low density unit that must be at a high state of readiness at all times,” will be required to attain progressive readiness and stay

The rotational force pool includes units in and ready to enter Operation Enduring Freedom, Kosovo Force, and other rotational missions.

The operational sustainment pool is made up of National Guard divisions, the 21st Armored Division, the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, and other units that are required to meet operational requirements and to maintain a level of readiness in a “modified progressive” status. General O’Connor noted that these units can be pulled up into the available pool at any time but will be maintained at a lower state of operational readiness.

“You’re starting to hear the word ‘rotational Army force,’” said General O’Connor. “We’re going to align brigades to reach into CENTCOM [the U.S. Central Command] to Southeast Asia to the Pacific, and then it will be the XVIII Airborne Corps expeditionary forces. So you’re going to be aligned, and that’s how you’re going to set your conditions for future training.”

While the old ARFORGEN model was based on a supply base by default (generating a set amount of capability and capacity every year unless it is required to produce more), the new model is demand based. It activates only the forces needed to meet operational requirements.

Recently Published

Army Techniques Publication (ATP) 3–04.94, Army Techniques Publication for Forward Arming and Refueling Points, published 26 January 2012, describes forward arming and refueling
point (FARP) operations of aviation units. The ATP provides a comprehensive overview of the
purpose, organization, and operation of FARPs and includes planning considerations for the set up
and transportation of the class III (petroleum, oils, and lubricants) and class V (ammunition) needed for these operations. More detailed information on FARP operations is available in Field Manual (FM) 10–67–1, Concepts and Equipment of Petroleum Operations, and FM 4–30.1, Ammunition.

FM 1–04, Legal Support to the Army, was published 26 January 2012. The field manual provides
authoritative doctrine and practical guidance for commanders, judge advocates, legal administrators, and paralegal Soldiers across the spectrum of conflict. The field manual also outlines the modular organizational structure of the Judge Advocate General Corps and discusses the delivery of legal support to a modular force.

Operational Energy Panel Outlines Initiatives for Greater Flexibility on the Battlefield
The Army Sustainment Symposium panel on operational energy laid out the challenges that operational energy creates and the many options operational energy initiatives provide commanders in the warfight.

Colonel Paul E. Roege, chief of the Army’s new Operational Energy Office under the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4, Department of the Army, chaired the panel and noted that operational energy is a fundamental operational capability and makes the force more agile, lethal, expeditionary, versatile, and sustainable when used in the right way.

The Army faces three challenges concerning operational energy: situational awareness and the ability to manage the energy usage, the need for a smaller footprint, and the need for flexibility.

“That sounds like [we’re] saying that we need to use less, but the fact is, since we don’t have the management capability, we’re really wasting a lot of energy and not getting some of the synergies that we could,” said Colonel Roege. The operational energy chief noted that in the future Army leaders will use information, knowledge, and analysis to be more aware of how energy is used.

He said that solar panels and other technologies that reduce the number of convoys to forward operating bases (FOBs) save energy, and more importantly, they offer an alternative to commanders so that they are not relying on just one course of action.

Colonel Phillip VonHoltz, commander of the Army Petroleum Center, noted that in Afghanistan the Army is using an average of 22 gallons of fuel per day per Soldier—20 more gallons that the average Soldiers used during World War II. The Army also paid about a billion dollars more for fuel in fiscal year (FY) 2011 than in FY 2010, and it is on track to pay the FY 2011 amount again in FY 2012. Forty percent of the fuel dispensed in Afghanistan in FY 2011 was used in generators.

An initial capabilities document for the Army Operational Energy Office was approved by the Department of Defense J–4 on 18 April. This document outlines the gaps that exist and the changes that will be made to overcome operational energy challenges.

“We’re going to see that [a network concept] in terms of smart grids. We’re going to see that in terms of management systems. That’s going to be sort of pervasive in our energy management approach,” said Colonel Roege. “Today on the battlefield, our commanders don’t have that [situational awareness] in terms of operational energy, so we’ve got to give them that ability to just see where do I stand, when do I need to refuel, what kind of alternatives do I have available and just blend that into their operational activities, planning, and execution.”

Fielding of new technologies, including solar panels, water reuse systems, and new advanced medium-size mobile power source generators (which save a fifth of a gallon of fuel per hour of use and 4,800 gallons over the life of a 10-kilowatt generator), to FOBs have been the focus of initial operational energy initiatives. But changes to major systems, including the M1 Abrams tank and helicopters, are also coming.

“We’ve got an improved turbine engine program that we are going to build into our Black Hawks and Apache aircraft that’s going to save 20 percent on fuel consumption,” said Colonel Roege. He noted that the system change will also provide greater coverage of more terrain and better system performance.

The Bradley fighting vehicle also will receive drive train improvements to reduce fuel consumption and make it more maneuverable. Anyone interested in more information on Army Operational Energy projects can visit the Army Capabilities Integration Center webpage on operational energy located at www.arcic.army.mil/operational-energy.html.

Logistics Leaders Outline Force Design Changes
During the Army Sustainment Symposium, held in Richmond, Virginia, this May, key Army sustainment
leaders laid out how Army units will change to become the Army of 2020.

Brigadier General John R. O’Connor, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4, for the Army Forces Command
(FORSCOM), said that no later than fiscal year (FY) 2015, force structure reductions and equipment retrograde are expected to facilitate increased readiness and the ability to conduct home-station training. In the years that follow, FORSCOM’s predominant readiness focus will be contingency mission sets.

“No later than FY 16, sufficient joint, intergovernmental, multinational, and interagency capabilities will be available to corps and divisions,” said General O’Connor. “Not later than [FY] 17, end strength decreases for the Active component will be at 490,000, Army National Guard 450,000, and USAR [the Army Reserve] at 205,000.”

To support Army structure changes, the “Army 2020” effort shapes the force to meet the operational environment with this smaller end strength. Major General James L. Hodge, the commanding general of the Army Combined Arms Support Command, explained that under this design all brigade combat teams (BCTs) will include a third maneuver battalion. According to General Hodge, maneuver commanders also want a brigade engineer battalion (BEB) in each Stryker, infantry, and heavy BCT.“So we’re looking at converting special troops battalions into BEBs for those formations,” said General Hodge.

He noted that reductions in engineer vertical and horizontal capabilities inside of the BCT are being considered. So are eliminating military police and combat observation/lasing teams from the BCTs and migrating those capabilities to echelons above brigade.

Within the sustainment community, moving capabilities out of the brigade support battalion formations is being considered for water production, infantry troop transport, bulk fuel, and some distribution provided by heavy expanded-mobility tactical trucks.

“We’ll migrate that out of the BCT in order to help keep the force size where we want it,” said General Hodge. “And we’ll move those capabilities to echelons above brigade.”

In regard to fuel distribution, General Hodge noted that there is concern that so much echelons-above-brigade capability resides in the Reserve component, including petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) planning at the expeditionary sustainment command and theater sustainment command levels.

“Some of the specific gaps associated with it are early-entry tactical receipt distribution, mission command, POL liaison, quality assurance and quality supervision, the engineer oversight that you need when you put in the IPDS (the inland petroleum distribution system), and of course, some technical expertise at all echelons,” said General Hodge.

This is why a force design update (FDU) is currently underway for POL. Also undergoing review is the military occupational specialty 92Y (unit supply specialist) force design, which is expected to improve property accountability as units return to the unit maintained equipment program.

“We’ve identified through our processes that we have a significant gap in terms of something as simple as the basic number of Soldiers who are in company-level supply rooms,” said General Hodge. “This FDU gets at a phased approach of getting the right numbers of our Soldiers to work in the supply rooms to handle the tremendously significant number of transactions that they have to handle.”

Professional Development

New Commander’s Emergency Response Program Course Launched
by the Army Financial Management School

A new and extensive distance learning course has been developed to support the Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP). Authorized by Congress, CERP has allowed deployed military commanders to determine how U.S. tax dollars will be used to meet urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements for local populations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

During development, the new CERP course was under the management of the Army Financial Management School and the Training Development Directorate of the Army Soldier Support Institute. Although the initial CERP courseware launched in 2009 was only a 16-hour distributed learning course, the new course contains 62.5 hours of interactive multimedia instruction.

The CERP course consists of six tracks:

  • Track 1, CERP Foundation.
  • Track 2, CERP for Commanders.
  • Track 3, CERP for Resource Managers.
  • Track 4, CERP for Project Managers.
  • Track 5, CERP for Purchase Officers.
  • Track 6, Paying Agent Operations.

Once the first track is completed, students can enroll in any of the follow-on tracks, and they can be taken in any order. Having the option to opt-out of tracks will alleviate redundant training for students who have previous training and experience in CERP.

CERP training is designed for Active Army, Army National Guard, Army Reserve, and sister services supporting CERP in predeployment training environments and theater missions. The new CERP training can be accessed through the Army Learning Management System.

The Training Development Directorate’s point of contact for CERP training is A.D. Denson, who is available by telephone at (803) 751–8295 and by email at a.d.denson.civ@mail.mil.

Army Acquisition Corps Continues to Grow
Despite the overall downsizing trend the Army will see in coming years, the Army Acquisition Corps is expected to double its workforce by the end of fiscal year 2013.

The corps continues to seek qualified officers and noncommissioned officers (NCOs) to be part of its ranks. Officers should be in their 6th or 7th year of service and be a captain who is branch qualified in another specialty in order to transfer to functional area 51. On the NCO side, the Acquisition Corps is seeking sergeants and staff sergeants with less than 10 years of service who are in balanced or overstrength military occupational specialties (MOSs) to transfer to MOS 51C (acquisition NCO).

Interested Soldiers should send a reclassification packet through their appropriate human resources channels. The Army Acquisition Support Center at Huntsville, Alabama, holds quarterly boards to select the best-qualified Soldiers.

Troop Drawdown Turns Sustainment Leaders’ Focus to Property Accountability
As units prepare to leave Afghanistan and budgetary constraints tighten, sustainment leaders are placing more emphasis on property accountability. During the Army Sustainment Symposium, Lieutenant General Raymond V. Mason, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4, Department of the Army, told attendees that a task force led by Major General Timothy P. McHale has returned a report on the state of the Army’s property accountability.

“We compared it to the report done right after the Vietnam War,” said the G–4. “Many of the same observations of property accountability problems that were found in 1970 were found in 2012.”

According to General Mason, between 50,000 and 60,000 pieces of rolling stock are currently in Afghanistan.

“In fact, we’re drawing it down, but as we’re beginning to clean up these forward operating bases, we find more and more stuff, said the G–4. “Lots and lots of equipment is starting to bubble to the top, and that’s ok. We want to do that. We want to bring that to record and bring it back and get it to our units.”

One area the G–4 is focusing on to improve property accountability is a move back to the unit maintained equipment program (UME). General Mason said that while letting the Army Materiel Command and contractors manage equipment made sense in the short term, it came with unintended consequences, including a lack of individual responsibility for equipment.

One positive that has resulted from the Army’s years at war is the state of readiness of its vehicle fleet. General Mason noted that before 9/11 the Army’s vehicle fleet was only at 70 percent capacity. It is now at 90 percent at the macrolevel. “The readiness of our fleets [is] actually
magnificent,” said General Mason. “Our challenge of course is how to maintain it.”

According to Brigadier General John R. O’Connor, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4, for the Army Forces Command, 93 percent of deployed units will be executing UME by the end of fiscal year (FY) 2012. By FY 2013, 100 percent of units will be inducted into the program.

“[The] Army Sustainment Command will continue to offer contract maintenance and accountability augmentation to those forces as required,” said General O’Connor. “Under the UME contract, costs have been reduced $600 million in FY 10 to [a] now projected $91 million in FY 13, so you can see the steep decline in having a contract capability where we’re going to put it back into the hands
of the Soldiers to take care of this equipment.”

The command discipline programs for supply, maintenance, deployment, and contracting will play major roles in taking care of equipment too.

“It’s about reinvigorating systems that existed,” said General Mason. “We want to really leverage the skill sets that we’ve learned over the last 10 years . . . but then we need to add some of the things that we’ve let atrophy.”

In-Transit Visibility Equipment Recovered From Iraq
Along with the departure of troops and equipment from Iraq came the removal of fixed radio-frequency intransit visibility readers throughout the country. Product Manager, Joint Automatic Identification Technology has recovered and redistributed the readers to meet requirements
in Afghanistan and other locations and reassigned the supporting field service engineers who were stationed in Iraq.

At the peak of operations, 118 fixed reader sites throughout Iraq were reading and reporting information on up to 124,000 radio-frequency identification tags a month.

New MC4 Training Tool Simulates Medical System Used During Deployment
Medical Communications for Combat Casualty Care (MC4) has developed a simulation tool called the Simulation Medical Data Server (SMDS) that provides simulated data to the mission command application used by the medical community during deployments, the Medical Situational Awareness in the Theater (MSAT) portal. MSAT is the joint automated solution that serves as the joint medical community’s mission command system.

SMDS has the capability to provide operations and clinical operations sections with real-time information about casualties during simulation exercises. It has also been successfully integrated and synchronized with the casualty information resident within current battlefield simulators.

MC4 partnered with the Logistics Exercise and Simulation Directorate, the material developer for the Joint Deployment Logistics Module (JDLM), to integrate SMDS into JDLM. This integration has brought medical personnel deeper into training scenarios by making it possible for clinicians to track patient flow from role 1 to role 3 units during training. The integration also lets medical leaders determine if a nuclear-enhanced conventional weapon has been employed or if a chemical, biological, radiological event has taken place. SMDS also allows senior medical staff officers and medical mission command units to participate in large joint simulation training exercises using their go-to-war system.


In the May–June 2012 issue of Army Sustainment, the caption for the cover included an incorrect date. The Ordnance Corps Bicentennial was 14 May 2012, not 24 May 2012 as stated in the caption.

Also, the captions of the photos on pages 53 and 54 are reversed. The photo on page 53 shows an M1 Abrams tank being loaded onto a flatbed trailer. The photo on page 54 shows a piece of engineer equipment being loaded onto a trailer.

WWW Army Sustainment