ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORTarmyengineer.com/PDF/RS_part3_online.pdf · ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE...

ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORT

AN IN-DEPTH SERIES • PART THREE

NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015 ARMY ENGINEER u 1

volume 23 | number 6NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015

[ ONLINE SUPPLEMENT ]

contents

ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORT: PART THREE

6 Afghan Divestment Strategy: Right-Sizing the ANDSF Basing Strategy for Force Optimization

8 Infrastructure Training Advisory Team

11 Building Facility Management Capacity within the ANA

14 A Signature Facility for the ANA: New Ministry of Defense Headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan

16 The New Afghanistan Ministry of Interior Headquarters Complex

20 Advising Afghan Engineers 22 Responsive Engineering:

Meeting the Needs of the U.S. Forces–Afghanistan

27 Reverse Engineering: Reducing the U.S. Footprint in Afghanistan

30 U.S. Forces Afghanistan Environmental Program

34 Prime Power in the Combined Joint Operations Area – Afghanistan (CJOA-A)

35 Engineers and EOD Work Together for a Safer Afghanistan

38 Task Force POWER in Resolute Support

42 Force Protection While Descoping During Resolute Support

44 United States Army Corps of Engineers Civilians in Afghanistan

46 Transatlantic Afghanistan District: Drawing Down to Meet Resolute Support Requirements

23

37

FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR | [email protected]

27

Pulaski County Tourism Bureau • St. Robert, MO

877.858.8687

TAKE IT BACK TO WHERE IT ALL STARTED

Plan Your Next Reunionat Fort Leonard Wood, MO

PulaskiCountyUSA.com/AE

• Complimentary itinerary planning & assistance obtaining bids for hotels, catering, meeting space & much more!

• Guided installation tours • State-of-the art Engineer Museum

• Dine in a mess hall & interact with soldiers

• Central location with direct daily flights

Contact The Specialists ToPlan Your Reunion

• Home of the Sapper Memorial Wall

-

Rendering by Varabyeu P

artners

BUILDING FOR THE FUTUREThe U.S. Army integrates a legacy of core traditions with innovative training to build a well-prepared force that’s always ready for future challenges. At AECOM, we are honored to take part in projects that support this mission, like the award-winning Joint Interagency Training and Education Center at Camp Dawson, West Virginia.

Find out more at www.aecom.com.

-

.

Our long standing DoD expertise enables us to infuse past experience

and lessons learned into every project

www.dewberry.com

Fort Bragg Conference and Catering Facility in Fort Bragg, North Carolina

Neal T. Wright, PE, FSAME, VP757.498.1148 • [email protected]

2 t ARMY ENGINEER NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015 u ONLINE SUPPLEMENT NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015 ARMY ENGINEER u 3

notes, news, updatesFROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR | [email protected]

army engineer associationVISIT OUR WEBSITE | www.armyengineer.com

EXECUTIVE OFFICEArmy Engineer AssociationP.O. Box 30260Alexandria, VA 22310-8260Executive DirectorCOL JACK O’NEILL, USA (Ret)703.428.6049703.428.6043 FAX [email protected] & Finance ManagerKIRSTINA COLVIN703.428.6953703.428.6043 [email protected] CoordinatorLINDA MITCHELL703.428.7084703.428.6043 [email protected]

REGIMENTAL OPERATIONSArmy Engineer AssociationP.O. Box 634Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473-0634Director, AEA Regimental OperationsCSM JULIUS B. NUTTER, USA (Ret)[email protected], Regimental OperationsMSG JOE VIGIL, USAR (Ret) 573.329.6678 Voice/[email protected] Store ManagerCSM GLENN STINES, USA (Ret)573.329.3203 Voice/[email protected]

ARMY ENGINEER Provided under services contract withEditorBETH O’HARA2339 Wismer AvenueSt. Louis, MO [email protected]

BOARD OF DIRECTORS & ASSOCIATESPresidentMG Clair F. Gill, USA (Ret)Executive DirectorCOL Jack O’Neill, USA (Ret)Director, FLW OperationsCSM Julius Nutter, USA (Ret)

Serving Board of DirectorsCOL Carl F. Baswell, USA (Ret)MG Randal Castro, USA (Ret)Lloyd C. Caldwell, USACE, SESCOL Harold Chappell, USA (Ret)John D’Aniello, USACE, SES (Ret)BG Peter DeLuca, USA (Ret)CSM Robert M. Dils, USA (Ret)CW5 John F. Fobish, USAESMG Russell L. Fuhrman, USA (Ret)COL Edward C. Gibson, USA (Ret)MG Robert H. Griffin, USA (Ret)CW5 Michael A. Harper, USA (Ret)CSM Bradley J. Houston, USAESCSM Antonio S. Jones, USACEMG Richard S. Kem, USA (Ret)MG William A. Navas, USANG (Ret)LTG Max W. Noah, USA (Ret), President Ex-OfficioCOL Michael C. Presnell, USA (Ret)COL/SES Geoffrey G. Prosch, SES (Ret)MG Don T. Riley, USA (Ret)COL James Rowan, USA (Ret)LTG Daniel R. Schroeder, USA (Ret)LTC Richard E. Sharp, USA (Ret)MG Pat M. Stevens IV, USA (Ret)LTG Theodore G. Stroup, USA (Ret)COL Jeffrey A. Wagonhurst, USA (Ret)COL James A. Wank, USA (Ret)BG Keith Wedge, USA (Ret) Frank Weinberg, President Ex-Officio

General CounselRobert Nichols, Covington & BurlingBoard EmeritusMG Charles J. Fiala, USA (Ret)MG Carroll N. LeTellier, USA (Ret)Regimental Historical AdvisorJohn C. Lonnquest, USACE Office

of HistoryArmy Engineer Museum DirectorTroy Morgan, USAESChief of the CorpsLTG Thomas P. Bostick, Chief of EngineersChief Warrant Officer of the RegimentCW5 John F. Fobish, USAESSergeant Major of the RegimentCSM Bradley J. Houston, USAESHonorary Colonel of the RegimentMG Randal Castro, USA (Ret)Honorary Chief Warrant Officer of the RegimentCW5 Michael A. Harper, USA (Ret)Honorary Sergeant Major of the RegimentCSM Robert M. Dils, USA (Ret)

MEMBER BENEFITS

The Army Engineer Association (AEA) is a member–based, nonprofit corporation specifically organized to facilitate cohesion, interaction, and networking within the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ total family of soldiers, civilians, family members, and alumni. As such, AEA serves as both the “Honor Fraternity” and “Alumni Association” for the U.S. Army Engineer Regiment.

AEA provides its members with an Army Engineer Network for Life. Why is this important? Army Engineers excel at completing complex and demanding missions in war and peace, always performed with uncommon dedication, ingenuity, and unsurpassed standards of excellence. All members of this network are thus inseparably linked for life by their service.

Benefits include:

1. Affordable rates.

A 12-month regular membership is only $25, a 24-month regular term is $45, and a 36-month regular membership is a $60 value.

There are even lower junior rates for currently serving soldiers and DA civilians in the following grades: PVT–SFC, 2LT–1LT, W1–W2, GS1–GS9. These lower rates are as follows: 15 months at $15, 27 months at $25, and 36 months at $35. First-time, 36-month members, and lifetime members receive a complimentary Engineer regimental coin.

Lifetime membership for $300 is available with one-time or consecutive-payment options.

2. Subscription to Army Engineer.

3. Opportunities for professional development.

4. Participate in award and recognition programs.

5. Discounts at the Engineer Regimental Store.

6. Eligibility for the award of academic scholarships.

Visit www.armyengineer.com to join!

AEA AGAIN WILL organize and conduct a vendor exhibition at Fort

Leonard Wood, MO. The purpose of the exhibition is to offer supporting firm members the opportunity to showcase their capabilities to the Engineer School commandant, staff, and faculty, and the Fort Leonard Wood community at large. It will be on 19 and 20 April 2016. Other upcoming AEA events for 2016 include support for the Best Sapper team competition, also at Fort Leonard Wood, on 20 April, as well as the Regimental briefing to industry in the DC area on 16 June and the Castle Ball on 5 August.

Please remember you can donate to the “Guardians” program online by clicking on the “Guardians of the Castle” tab online.

I again wish to thank the many volunteers of the Army Engineer Spouses’ Club. Each year they spend a couple days stuffing thousands of letters for us. They join us at the AEA offices at the Kingman Building to work the letters. AEA also makes a $750 donation to the AESC scholarship fund.

Attention, AEA corporate members: You know good opportunities for businesses to engage senior engineer leaders are fewer and fewer. Reduced military travel expenditures make it tougher and tougher to reach the right Army customer. Now, more than ever, advertising in your Army Engineer publication is a valuable option. Ad rates are the lowest in our space. We have not increased our rates in more than six years. The readership covers the full spectrum of Army engineers—from motivated engineer soldiers serving the maneuver forces worldwide, including National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve units, to DPWs serving on Army installations, to the USACE labs, districts, and DC headquarters. Equally important are the hundreds of corporate readers of AEA supporting member firms. Plus,

I honestly can say that Army Engineer is great reading, and it’s typically read from cover to cover. Please take advantage now of AEA supporting firm member ad rates. See details on www.armyengineer.com.

ESSAYONS!

Jack O’Neill

NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015 ARMY ENGINEER u 5

in other wordsFROM THE EDITOR | [email protected]

ARMY ENGINEERADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

1. TO CHANGE A MAILING ADDRESSVisit www.armyengineer.com and click on log in to make changes securely and quickly.

OREmail LINDA MITCHELL at [email protected]

ORCall 703.428.6953

OR Mail a note to:Army Engineer AssociationP.O. Box 30260Alexandria, VA 22310-8260

NOTICE: Magazines are not forwarded automatically by the U.S. Postal Service if you move. Keep your mailing address current.

2. ORIGINAL ARTICLESEditorial guidelines pertaining to articles submitted for publication are available at www.armyengineer.com.

Article and advertising CLOSE dates:

ISSUE DEADLINE

MAR/APR 2016 4 JAN 2016MAY/JUN 2016 1 MAR 2016JUL/AUG 2016 2 MAY 2016SEP/OCT 2016 1 JUL 2016NOV/DEC 2016 1 SEP 2016

JAN/FEB 2017 2 NOV 2016

3. RECEIPT OF A MAGAZINE DAMAGED IN MAILINGEmail LINDA MITCHELL at [email protected]

OR Mail a note to:Army Engineer AssociationP.O. Box 30260Alexandria, VA 22310-8260

PUBLICATION: Army Engineer is published six times

a year and produced using Mac hardware and Adobe

Creative Cloud (CC) software. It is printed in Rolla,

MO, by Scotts Printing Company and mailed from Fort

Leonard Wood. Main body text and most headlines are

set in Avenir.

T HE PRINT ISSUE for November/December was a little shorter, a little lighter, but still jam-packed with great stories of our Engineer

family and how we care for our own and our communities.

WHAT YOU ARE READING HERE IS PART THREE OF THE RESOLUTE SUPPORT SERIES, AN ONLINE SUPPLEMENT to the print version.

Please note in the left column of this page the advertisement and article submission deadlines for the 2016 publishing year.

And please note that if you need subscription help or need to change your address, LINDA MITCHELL is your point of contact.

NO SURRENDER! NEVER. EVER.

Beth O’Hara, Editor

ADVERTISERS IN THIS ISSUEAECOM ............................................ c2Bobcat/Kipper Tool .......................... c3Caterpillar ...................................24–25Dewberry ............................................3Pulaski County Tourism Board .......... c2TAG ....................................................4

CONTRIBUTING WRITERSBODNER, KarleneCLAYTON, WhitneyDALEY, CPT KevinFAUDREE, SFC WesleyGILL, JimHARRIS, LoanHELTON, LTC Michael, PMPHOGEBOOM, LTC C. Patrick IVLARDINOIS, CPT ScottMAY, MAJ JohnMEDSKER, MAJ BrettMURPHY, Bryan (USN)NACHABE, Abe (USN)SHUPAK, CPT Shane G.SPARLING, Chief RonaldSPENDLOVE, Andrew D.WEVER, MAJ Paul (USAF)

by KARLENE BODNER and CPT SCOTT LARDINOIS

ture portfolio is oversized for a force of 352,000 soldiers and unsustainable based on the $4.1 billion budget the U.S. will pro-vide. CSTC-A has estimated the yearly shortfall for the ANDSF at $110 million for sustainment and $89 million for fuel; the U.S. will no longer fund these. This imbalance is the problem that the Afghan Divestment Strategy (ADS) seeks to address.

AFGHAN DIVESTMENT STRATEGY: RIGHT-SIZING THE ANDSF BASING STRATEGY FOR FORCE OPTIMIZATION

THE MISSION OF THE COMBINED SECURITY TRANSITION COMMAND– AFGHANISTAN (CTSC-A) is to build the framework for the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) to properly establish a national defense force. In addition to personnel and equipment, the physical infrastructure is a key component to the success of such an endeavor. As GIRoA looks to right size the Army, Police, and Special Operations Forces, the Afghanistan National Defense Security Forces (ANDSF) must conduct a critical review of the needed infrastructure to keep the force structure and physical inventory in balance. ANDSF must divest any physical capacity deemed excess to reduce the overhead costs in both dollars and manpower. Add to the conversation the threat of leaving ungoverned spaces as insurgent safe havens, and you have several reasons why the ANDSF need a correctly proportioned physical portfolio.

Over the last decade, the U.S. has invested $8.9 billion in con-struction projects for the ANDSF. In addition to the new facilities

built specifically for the ANDSF, as Coalition forces drew down the Afghans took ownership of the installations left behind. The ANDSF were instructed to strongly deter Coalition forces from demolishing any installa-tions, per the NSC Spanta letter 1719. The size of the ANDSF will remain at 352,000 soldiers until the end of 2017. CSTC-A estimates the current infrastruc-

u FOB Airborne.

The ADS is a joint initia-tive led by CSTC-A Combined Joint-Engineer (CJ-ENG) and is broken into three phases. The first phase, initiated in Decem-ber 2014, consisted of a survey of 365 bases for the Afghanistan National Army (ANA) and 1,115 facilities for the Afghanistan National Police (ANP). CJ-ENG, regional Train, Advice and As-sist Command (TAAC) leaders, advisors, and ANDSF facility engineers evaluated each loca-tion to determine appropriate candidates for divestment. The team assigned each location a score based on its proximity to future security operations and the economic value it presents for commercial use.

The analysis in Phase 1 revealed that 161 of 365 ANA bases and 205 of 1,115 ANP facilities were excess. The study also identified that of the 366 bases and facilities screened, 263 are easy to divest. CJ-ENG consulted with the Ministry of Interior (MoI) and Ministry of Defense (MoD) leaders and developed a prioritized divest-ment list based on these 263 locations. Divestment options include transfer to other GIRoA agencies and selling or leasing the facilities for commercial de-velopment. Mothballing or cold basing a facility requires a lower sustainment cost and is another option for the ANDSF to retain installations for future use.

The potential for economic development is most substantial at existing airfields. Airfields are highly established centers of gravity in contrast to some of the smaller operating bases under consideration. Because of the requirements neces-sary for an airfield to function and because of co-location of Coalition forces, these locations received a disproportionate

amount of infrastructure invest-ment. In some locations, such as Bagram and Kandahar, these airfields resemble small cities rather than austere military posts. For example, the 56 megawatts of power generation available at Bagram rivals most Afghan cities. Furthermore, Kandahar has some of the largest cold-storage ware-housing in the region and its own water-bottling plant. A few of the runways at these locations are even capable of landing a space shuttle. Herat and Mazar-e-Sharif airfields are geographically posi-tioned next to large population centers and abundant natural resources. The opportunities for GIRoA and other investors to de-velop these airfields are limitless and present an encouraging way forward for a variety of industries.

Phase 2 of ADS is currently under development by the Assis-tant Secretary of the Army Instal-lations, Energy, and Environment [ASA (IE&E)]. This phase will pro-vide a defensible analysis of the existing infrastructure to include targets, milestones, guidelines, and recommendations for divest-ment. Recommendations will be offered to the ANDSF leadership for concurrence to ensure that forces have optimal facilities and infrastructure for mission accomplishment while remain-ing financially sustainable on a permanent basis.

Phase 3 of ADS also is cur-rently under development by the ASA (IE&E) in anticipation of a future need to decrease the Tahsikil end-strength below 352,000. This phase will focus on identifying only those specific bases and facilities that provide critical operational capacity to the ANDSF mission.

Similar to Americans who weathered the Great Depression, years of poverty have taught the Afghans to keep everything they

can hold. Consequently, a strat-egy to divest excess bases and facilities is a culturally bold initia-tive. In the case of the ANDSF facilities, however, this culture simply is unsustainable given GIRoA’s current GDP and the decreased contributions of the Coalition. As GIRoA continues to establish itself as an indepen-dent, sovereign, and democratic nation, the U.S. and Coalition partners must advise them down a path of long-term success. It is critical that the ANDSF accept and implement the ADS strategy for the economic stability of Afghanistan’s military.

KARLENE BODNER is a long-term Department of the Army civilian senior construction program manager with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who volunteered to become a ministry of defense advisor with the Afghan Ministry of the Interior. She is currently serving with the ANP Branch of CSTC-A, CJ-ENG on Camp RS in Kabul, Afghanistan. [ [email protected] ]

CPT SCOTT LARDINOIS has been a U.S. Army Reserve engineer officer for more than 11 years, and he is currently serving as an ANA Project Manager for CSTC-A CJ-ENG in Kabul, Afghanistan. He served as a route clearance platoon leader in Ramadi, Iraq, in 2006–2007. In his civilian life, he is a full-time firefighter for the City of Madison, WI.

[ [email protected] ]

ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORT

AN IN-DEPTH SERIES PART THREE


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E A F G H A N D I V E S T M E N T S T R A T E G Y l B O D N E R / L A R D I N O I S

THE INFRASTRUCTURE TRAINING ADVISORY TEAM (ITAT) is a unique organization within the coalition forces. ITATs were originally created during Operation Iraqi Freedom as an afterthought when the coalition forces finally realized a need for the national security forces to sustain their own buildings and critical infrastructure. After its establishment in Iraq, it was not until 2010 that COL Michael Wehr established an ITAT under NATO Training Mission–Afghanistan. The team’s responsibility is to train host-nation personnel to maintain the billions of dollars of infrastructure built by coalition forces since 2001. For nearly a decade, the coalition has rapidly built infrastructure as Afghan National Defense Security Forces (ANDSF) stood up and trained to establish security across the nation. ANDSF lacked the ability to self-perform sustainability tasks for all the infrastructure and facilities. The ITAT advises the ANDSF Facilities Engineers (FEs) on a wide range of facility- and infrastructure-related areas, gradually decreasing their reliance on external contracts. The team also is responsible for facilitating ongoing training for FE personnel to ensure sustainment of all the facilities the ANDSF receive and are responsible to maintain. The ITAT efforts help ensure that all facilities at ANDSF locations are operational and in good working order. Advising efforts to ANDSF predominantly include critical infrastructure: power, water, wastewater, and building sustainment.

Along with providing leader-ship and support to the Train Ad-vise and Assist Command (TAAC) ITATs, the ITAT HQ advises the ministerial-level organizations that support the FEs. These orga-nizations for both the Ministry of Defense (MOD) and the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) include the Construction Property Manage-ment Department (CPMD) in the MOD and the MOI Facilities Department (FD) in the MOI.

The ITAT HQ assists CPMD with creating, developing, and modifying their current policies, processes, and proce-dures. These efforts include the development of their Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs); the creation of standardized Op-erations and Maintenance (O&M) contract templates; the review of proposed Tashkil (authorized al-location of equipment/personnel per unit) modifications for both the personnel and equipment Tashkils; creation and review of their budget for the upcoming fiscal year; and everyday ongo-ing Train Advise Assist (TAA) efforts with the CPMD staff.

The MOI FD, much like the equivalent on the MOD side, is advised by the ITAT HQ to assist them with creating and modifying their current policies, processes, and procedures. The MOI FD is going through an entire reorganization effort cur-rently to create a functional facili-ties support group. This group will cover multiple geographical-ly dispersed facilities and ensure that they will be able to keep the buildings in good working order for years to come. Significant ad-vising efforts include recreating Tashkils and the budget review and approval processes. The ongoing TAA of the MOI FD and the MOI HQ FE staff has and will continue to ensure the path ahead improves and ensures a sustainable future.

The ITATs at the TAACs ad-vise the facilities departments at the Afghan National Army (ANA) Corps and Afghan National Po-lice (ANP) Provincial level. There is an ITAT in each of the TAACs, which currently include TAAC- North, East, South, West, and Capitol. There also are two ad-

ditional Advise and Assist Com-mands (AACs) in the Southeast and Southwest who provide ITAT support. The ITATs work with the FEs in the ANA Corps and Bri-gades to improve the processes and procedures; establish O&M of critical infrastructure and facilities; write O&M contracts as needed; submit MOD 14s (Min-istry of Defense Form 14 – Re-quest Form) for Tashkil fills and Tashkil change requests; develop and submit the yearly budget requirements; program for future on-budget construction projects; and transition coalition construc-tion projects to the ANA. This is in addition to the ongoing TAA of the FE staff at the sites for the daily items and issues that arise. ITATs accomplish TAA in the ANP by advising the FEs at the Provincial Headquarters. Similar to the ANA, the ITATs work with the FEs at the Provincial HQs to improve the processes and pro-cedures, budget requirements

planning for the upcoming year, and transition coalition projects to the ANP. This is in addition to the day-to-day TAA of the FE staff at the sites. The changes occurring at the MOI FD are directly affecting the Tashkils for the ANP FEs.

The ITAT key engagements have included development of the Institutional Training Program; development of the Marshal Fahim National Defense University (MFNDU) campus; oversight of the new MOD and MOI HQ facilities; support with identifying infrastructure for the Afghan Divestment Strat-egy (ADS); standardized O&M contract templates; and the total revamping of the MOI FD and ANP FE structure. The ANA En-gineer School (ANAES), located in Mazar-e-Sharif, provides the only institutionalized FE train-ing in the entire country. This is where FEs initially learn how to conduct O&M on facilities,

prepare budgets, and learn all the forms, processes, and procedures required to perform their duties. MFNDU is the ANA’s elite military education campus, and it includes two schools as commissioning sources. The National Military Academy of Afghanistan (NMAA), modeled after the U.S. Army’s West Point, trains cadets to earn a four-year bachelor’s degree and a commis-sion in the ANA upon gradua-tion. Their campus completed construction in 2012. The ANA Officers Academy (ANAOA), following the British Sandhurst school model, offers a commis-sion after one year of training. The construction of permanent ANAOA facilities is ongoing and nearing completion. The ITAT will ensure a smooth transition of the completed buildings to the ANA. The ITAT also will help establish an O&M program specific to the facilities, including training for the tradesmen who

INFRASTRUCTURE TRAINING ADVISORY TEAMby CPT SHANE G. SHUPAK


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E I N F R A S T R U C T U R E T R A I N I N G A D V I S O R Y T E A M l S H U P A K

will be responsible for maintain-ing the ANAOA facilities. The ITAT supports the divestiture of excess infrastructure by the ADS program. This will involve divest-ing 36% of the current ANA facilities and 50% of the ANP facilities across the country. The standardized O&M contract tem-plates will assist the FE depart-ments with uniform and detailed requirements for future power, water, wastewater, and building O&M contracts. These contract templates will ensure that all the necessary items are in each O&M contract moving forward and will be covered every time. These O&M contracts supple-ment the FEs at locations where they are unable to perform these duties on their own. The remod-eling of the MOI FD and ANP FE sections is necessary to ensure their sustainability as they move into the future.

The ITATs will continue to support the ANDSF in their abil-ity to sustain their infrastructure

footprint and their transition to ANDSF-led O&M contracts, as well as further develop functional lines of communication within the FE departments and insti-tutionalized FE courses at the ANAES for all ANDSF to ensure the future sustainability of the Af-ghanistan national government.

The ITATs are crucial to the future sustainment of the ANDSF. They directly influence the development, operation, maintenance, and sustainment of the ANDSF infrastructure and the transition of facilities from the coalition forces to the ANDSF. ITATs’ direct involvement with the facilities engineers in this country will ensure the ANDSF’s infra-structure will endure through the years. The construction phase of nation-building is nearly over, just as the level of international involvement is decreasing. Cre-ated late in the nation-building cycle, and as an afterthought, the ITAT carries the important mission of sustainability. This

lesson should not be lost only to be rediscovered in our future en-gagements. As for Afghanistan, Afghan Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) in the ANA Engineer School FE Course will provide enduring advisor capability after the ITAT mission ends. The SMEs will be responsible for carrying the torch into the future.

CPT SHANE G. SHUPAK served as an ITAT Advisor, CJ-ENG Directorate, CSTC-A, from 17 July 2014 to 5 May 2015. He originally is from Brenham, TX.


FACILITY MANAGEMENT (FM) IS ESSENTIAL to maximizing the useful life of infrastructure. Be it buildings, plumbing, electric runs, or roads, the initial invest-ment of infrastructure is recuper-ated in part by extending its useful life.

This article discusses de-veloping a Facility Manager (FM) and Facility Engineer (FE) training program to the Afghan National Defense Security Force (ANDSF) and the ongoing efforts to enable their independent operation at their centralized training site, the Afghan National Army Engineer Branch School (ANA EBS), Mazar-e-Sharif, Balkh Province, Afghanistan.

The FE program will ensure a right-sized cadre of personnel at each unit, capable of maximizing the useful life of infrastructure Early in the ANA development, the Facility Engineering Agency (FEA) was identified as one of eight sustaining institutions.

Starting as only 18 personnel in 2004, the FEA has evolved into the Construction Prop-erty Management Department (CPMD) with a Tashkil of 3,092 personnel. CPMD falls under the First Deputy Minister of Defense, and, as such, FE units report di-rectly to CPMD, but are respon-sible for the infrastructure at the unit to which they are assigned. FM is poised to optimize the ini-tial investment undertaken with coalition forces in extending the lifetime of ANDSF infrastructure.

The FM training program is a work in progress. Initial training for facility management took place regionally, and in 2014 efforts were made to move all

training to the ANA EBS. Nation-al Training Mission – Afghanistan (NTM-A) sent one officer and one contracted mobile training team to train the first set of staff instructors. Beginning with fun-damentals, it was quickly realized that the Staff Instructor Candi-dates (SIC) were fresh students and not experienced personnel. To overcome this, a contract was developed to operate Train to Instruct (T2I) courses for the SICs. The T2I courses lasted six weeks from August to September 2014. After this instruction period, the FM course began in October 2014. Since the Officer SICs were new to the material, the three SICs attended the first ten-week course alongside ten students. Seven students and three SICs completed the course, and after a month of preparation and course re-development, the first ANDSF-led FM officer course was led by two staff instructors with six weeks of course material. No material was taken out; rath-er, the initial class timeline was a guestimate and the final course duration took into account a reduced need for translation.

The FM course covers the topics of CPMD and FE organiza-tion; project, asset, work order, and material management; budgeting; contracting; and sup-ply. The course capacity is twenty students and is offered four times per year. The FM syllabus is updated after each course, and staff instructors are responsible for finding new material to teach.

The FE Advanced NCO course has sufficient depth to enable basic repairs and mainte-nance needed for the majority of

infrastructure available across the ANDSF. The FE course began alongside the FM T2I program, but it quickly became appar-ent that the inexperience of the instructors could lead to safety concerns especially in the electri-cal field.

NTM-A changed to Com-bined Security Transition Com-mand–Afghanistan (CSTC-A) and they continued the Mobile Training Team by issuing a new contract with the capability to train plumbing, electrical, carpentry and masonry, and road survey and design courses. These courses were intended for SICs only, but an additional 80+ students were added to increase the overall number of trained FEs. The SICs have labored to learn the course material in preparation of teaching it.

The initial course began with a three-week preparation of the course material intended to act as a way for the SICs to have a first look at the course material. The first FE course began in late January 2015, and the results are varied.

Efforts are now underway to ensure the continued develop-ment of the technical abilities of the SICs. Milestones have been identified for the interim period between classes and, much like the FM instructors, the FE instructors will be expected to teach the next class of students with oversight from experienced personnel. The FE course is designed to train ten person-nel per trade and will offer four 14-week courses per year. The FE capability is imperative to developing a baseline capabil-

BUILDING FACILITY MANAGEMENT CAPACITY WITHIN THE ANA

by MAJ PAUL WEVER, USAF


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E B U I L D I N G F A C I L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T C A P A C I T Y W I T H I N T H E A N A l W E V E R

ity for CPMD units in the field. The basic repairs and preventive maintenance capability of the FEs will ensure cost savings by extending the useful life of cur-rent infrastructure.

Doctrine development is the next important step for the ANDSF FE training program. While the initial training enables them to develop the first set of standardized, skilled NCOs, the long-term benefit of central-ized training will be its ability to adapt the needs of the ANDSF. Adaptation requires a well-de-veloped process for incorporat-ing lessons learned and research into subsequent procedures, standards, and training.

Right now, doctrine develop-ment offices exist at both the ANAES and at CPMD, but little has been produced from these offices. Because the lessons learned from the field will take time to develop, it would greatly benefit the ANDSF to place per-

sonnel who can test new ideas through CPMD’s research lab, research existing standards, and develop ANDSF standards that maximize the use of local materi-als and capabilities.

The ANDSF FE program will ensure the long-term use of its current infrastructure, but doc-trine development rests on the shoulders of the ANDSF. Training officers and enlisted soldiers initiates the capability and, over time, the lessons learned should be used to develop new courses and course material. The long-term benefit of setting up a FE capability will be realized as FEs develop cost-saving methods through experience and expo-sure to different technologies. Doctrine development is impera-tive to continually improving the cost savings realized by the ANA CPMD. While they have been given a leg up in the shared initial costs, once facilities reach the end of their useful life, only

a well-established doctrine pro-cess will position the ANDSF to quickly adapt their next genera-tion of facilities to minimize initial and long-term costs.

MAJ PAUL WEVER is an Afghanistan/Pakistan Hand serving in the CSTC-A, attached to the ANA Hybrid Advisor Team from November 2015 to September 2016. He is putting his 13 years of Air Force civil engineer experience to the test by standing up the ANA EBS FE training program.


t p ANA EBS courses develop organic FE capability.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E B U I L D I N G F A C I L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T C A P A C I T Y W I T H I N T H E A N A l W E V E R

FROM THE MOMENT AFGHAN-ISTAN’S MINISTER OF DEFENSE OCCUPIED THE BUILDING in the summer of 2015, the new Ministry of Defense (MoD) Head-quarters (HQ) became the focal point of Afghanistan’s military planning and operations. Vital national security decisions will be made at the Afghanistan’s MoD HQ, the equivalent of our Pentagon.

The National Military Com-mand Center personnel were scattered among several build-ings in the Kabul area, to include the existing MoD HQ, a five-storey, Soviet-era office build-ing. The goal was to provide a 2,500-personnel building that will become the symbol of the Afghan National Army (ANA) and house the offices of the MoD’s senior leadership and support staff.

MoD DESIGN COMPETITIONTo reflect Afghanistan’s culture and heritage, a design competi-tion was developed by the Plan-ning and Design Team (PDT) to encourage local university talent to present their designs for the prestigious National MoD HQ.

Design competitions were held among Afghan architec-tural engineering students from the Kabul Poly Technic Univer-sity (KPU) and Kabul University to design the elevations and other architectural features of the proposed building. The PDT assembled a competition design package consisting of the 35% design floor plans (sanitized) for each of the five floors and roof, building and wall sections, site utility plan, and brief scope of work.

On 19 September 2008, a jury of MoD general officers,

MoD Infrastructure Manage-ment Department Compound, Combined Security Transition Command (CSTC-A), and Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC) personnel judged the top four entries. Khaja Masood’s design from KPU was the win-ning submission, Waheda Frotan came in second, and Ahmad Tamin and Ahmad Ramin Sadiq finished third. Masood worked with the PDT to incorporate the elements of his design into the 35% design drawings. The final design drawing was a combina-tion of the first and second place winners.

MoD CONSTRUCTIONThis project is the result of a tremendous coordination effort between CSTC-A, MoD, ANA, and AFCEC. Achieving a bridge between cultural and language

barriers ensured a success-ful collaboration on this huge endeavor. After 16 months of coordination, the Minister of Defense approved the new MoD HQ building schematic and design. Construction of the 38,511-square-meter six-floor building, in the heart of Ka-bul, Afghanistan, initially was awarded as a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract by AFCEC on 21 April 2009.

Due to myriad challenges, setbacks, delays, and exhausted funds, the construction on the MoD HQ building stalled and the site “winterized” in prepara-tion for a follow on Firm-Fixed Price re-procurement on 31 December 2013.

At the time funds were ex-hausted, construction was only 83% complete. The U.S. media perceived this as a high-profile indignity.

In April 2014, MG Harold Greene sought to obtain fund-ing from the U.S. Congress to “Complete the Mission.” MG Greene previously served as the Army’s Deputy for Acquisi-tion and Systems Management, a role in which he oversaw acquisition reform initiatives. His acquisition and engineering background structured the MoD HQ re-procurement. CSTC-A proposed moving forward by combining the remaining scope into one Firm-Fixed Price con-tract and to control costs by im-proving both contract oversight and project management.

MG Greene was instrumen-tal in crafting both a funding solution and a contract delivery method that U.S. officials could support. His relationship with high-ranking Ministry of Finance (MoF), MoD, and ANA officials was essential as he successfully conveyed to the Afghans that the reconfiguration of the MoD

HQ contract did not indicate a lack of U.S. or Coalition Force support. Rather, he helped them understand that we have an obligation to be good stewards of our nation’s fiscal resources and that the reconfiguration of the MoD contract was critical to fulfilling that obligation. Without MG Greene’s endorsement, the project would likely not have been re-procured.

CSTC-A was successful in clearing obstructed business license concerns regarding the prime contractor and gaining clearance for Leahy Amend-ment certifications on the $60 million FY14 FAP previously budgeted. On 31 July 2014, the AFCEC awarded a contract and the contractor given immediate notice-to-proceed on preliminary administrative tasks to complete construction of the MoD HQ considered critical to Afghani-stan’s future.

With attacks in Kabul rising, the MoD contractors, Gilbane Federal and SSCC, did a remark-able job in solving latent con-structability issues and overcom-ing challenges that overwhelmed previous teams for more than five years. Team morale was high and focused on a “Complete the Mission” attitude.

Gilbane’s sound work plan—which includes optimal working sequences and ideal timing for executing each individual activ-ity—enhances work efficiency and enables contractors to fulfill the contract within budget and on a reduced construction sched-ule while enhancing/maintaining safety and quality. Furthermore, by starting de-mobilization early and maintaining current resource levels of 650 daily onsite workers throughout project completion, Gilbane was able to forecast an earlier project turnover.

A SIGNATURE FACILITY FOR THE ANANEW MINISTRY OF DEFENSE HEADQUARTERS IN KABUL, AFGHANISTAN

by LOAN HARRIS

u Winning North Elevation

u Second Position, by Waheda Froton.

MoD HQ OCCUPATIONCompleting the construction of the HQ building is just the first step toward operational capabil-ity. MG Semonite, Commanding General CSTC-A, championed the installation of furniture, IT, specialized equipment, and se-curity systems upon construction completion to fast-track occupa-tion for the MoD staff by July 2015. Coordination between CSTC-A and the ANA to ensure a timely and smooth turnover of facilities is underway.

MG Greene was killed in action on 5 August 2014 while touring new construction in Kabul, becoming the highest-ranking U.S. officer KIA since the Vietnam War. The MoD team dedicated a plaque in his honor at the building’s entrance.

A June 2015 ribbon-cutting event was scheduled to cele-brate construction completion of the MoD HQ. The new MoD HQ will help make the ANA more efficient in their daily operations. The transfer of this building marks an important milestone when Afghan soldiers will take the lead for security across the country.

LOAN HARRIS is assigned at Headquarters Resolute Support in Kabul, Afghanistan, as the AFCEC program manager, as part of CSTC–A, CJ-ENG Directorate. She is a career civil servant with more than 14 years of experience in military infrastructure engineering.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E A S I G N A T U R E F A C I L I T Y F O R T H E A N A l H A R R I S


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E T H E N E W A F G H A N I S T A N M I N I S T R Y O F I N T E R I O R H E A D Q U A R T E R S C O M P L E X l H E L T O N

by LTC MICHAEL HELTON, PMP

INTRODUCTION THE NEW MINISTRY OF INTERIOR (MoI) HEADQUARTERS WILL BE AFGHANISTAN’S NATIONAL FACILITY INTENDED TO OVERSEE ALL AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE (ANP) FUNCTIONS. This article provides an overview of the history of the New MoI HQ, its procurement/construction, and process and challenges that Combined Security Transition Command–Afghanistan (CSTC-A), Combined Joint Engineers (CJ-ENG), and MoI advisors encountered as we selected the way forward on the occupation plan. We will discuss how CSTC-A decided to build the New MoI HQ in order to give Afghanistan a respectable facility

from which to command and control all six pillars of a growing ANP force. We also will talk about the three-phase approach to the procurement and construction. Phase I included the primary and secondary entry control points and perimeter wall construction. The New MoI HQ and communications buildings, along with water, electric and sewage utilities make up Phase II, and Phase III consists of the National Police Command Center (NPCC), dining facility, auditorium, barracks, and administrative buildings. Finally, CSTC-A CJ-ENG and key MoI advisors have partnered with senior leaders from the MoI to map the way forward for the procurement and installation of furniture, information technology (IT) wiring and equipment, and the MoI HQ Building security

system. We also will discuss how CJ-ENG built the team to execute the off-budget furniture, IT, and security system procurements.

NEW MoI HQ BACKGROUNDThe MoI ensures the security of Afghanistan from internal threats, and it is charged with protection of its values. Deputy Ministers (DM), such as the Deputy Minister of Security and Deputy Minister of Support, have special responsibilities for key operational, planning, and administrative sectors of the ANP.1 These DMs report to the MoI; they are required to man-age, train, and equip their staffs and field operatives. During the last several years, the MoI increased the size of the ANP force to 157,000 personnel in or-der to support the MoI’s ten-year

vision for the ANP to “become a unified, capable, and trustworthy civilian police service. Its primary responsibility will be to enforce the rule of law; maintain public order and security; detect and fight crimes; control borders; protect the rights, assets, and freedoms of both Afghans and foreigners in Afghanistan ac-cording to national laws; and operate without ethnic, gender, language, or religious discrimi-nation.”2

The MoI had good reason to want a new MoI HQ. The cur-rent MoI HQ had deteriorated facilities, and the NPCC, Facility Department, and other key MoI functions were spread out in different parts of Kabul from the MoI HQ compound, inhibiting close lines of communication. Further, the MoI had become a large national-level institution with 157,000 personnel and a critically important mission to the people of Afghanistan. An organization with the importance of the MoI should have quality facilities; this warranted the con-struction of a new HQ facility.

PROCUREMENT/CONSTRUCTIONLocated just west of the Kabul Afghanistan International Airport (KAIA), the MoI chose the plot on which the New MoI HQ rests because it was the only piece of land owned by the MoI that had adequate space to join the MoI HQ, all of its DM functions, and NPCC at one location. The New MoI HQ project was so large, with more than 30 buildings, that CSTC-A decided to divide the project into three phases.

Phase I — The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) awarded the Phase I contract in September 2011 to Abdulhai Gardezi Construction Firm (ACF). Construction consisted of an asphalt access road, interior ac-

cess road network, entry control point, interior site grading and drainage, parking and utilities. The entry control point includes a canopy, guard shack, and gate house. Utility work consists of telecommunication and electrical system duct banks for the new ECP and existing Guard Tow-ers. USACE completed Phase I construction in July 2014. USACE transferred Phase I to CSTC-A in September 2014.

Phase II — USACE awarded the Phase II contract to Yuksel In-saat A.S. in June 2013. The work includes the construction of the MoI HQ building, communica-tions building, water supply and distribution, wastewater treat-ment plant, power plant, fuel storage, utility distribution, and other supporting infrastructure. This contract was a re-solicitation due to termination for default of the previous contractor, Technologists Inc. The project is complete with the exception of minor deficiencies that USACE is addressing with the contrac-tor. Modification for the interior signage is underway. USACE will issue a separate contract for ter-razzo tile flooring on stairs within the building. Other features of the contract included an entry control point, supporting struc-tures, parking, force protection, grading, and drainage.

Phase III — Macro Vintage

Levant JLT (MVL) is the Phase III contractor. Overall, the project consists of the NPCC and various administrative buildings, life sup-port and mission support facili-ties to include barracks, dining facility, auditorium, warehouse, vehicle maintenance facility, ammunition secure storage, and a running track. The original contractor, Lakeshore Toltest Corporation (LTC), completed approximately 56% of the con-

tract before USACE terminated them for default. The bonding company (AIG) agreed to take over the contract and entered into a contract with MVL to com-plete the construction. USACE modified the original contract to incorporate the surety takeover agreement; USACE and AIG agreed to a 480-day period of performance to complete the project. Construction is ap-proximately 73% complete and scheduled to be complete on 26 December 2015 with a projected beneficial occupancy date of 30 June 2016. CSTC-A submitted letters of direction for a water solution for all phases, secu-rity, an addition of a helicopter pad, terrazzo tile stairs, and interior signage. Modifications for security, helicopter pad, and interior signage are underway. USACE currently is evaluating a water solution with the designer of record due to the insufficient quality of water. Additionally, CJ-ENG and USACE are developing a gender area for female ANP service members. These facilities will include a barracks, daycare, conference center, and gym.

The greatest issue and concern with these projects is their interdependence. The facilities and infrastructure in Phases I and III depend on the completion and integration of the power, water, and sewer utilities contained in the Phase II contract. These utility systems are required and essential to support Phases I and III. Phase II needs the support buildings of the Phase III, administration, barracks, etc. Completion of all three project phases are required for a completely usable facility.3

CROSSING THE FINISH LINECSTC-A’s goal always was to ensure that the MoI moved into a complete and useable facil-ity. During a 31 January 2013

THE NEW AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF INTERIOR HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX

p The new MoI HQ building, from concept drawing to completion.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E T H E N E W A F G H A N I S T A N M I N I S T R Y O F I N T E R I O R H E A D Q U A R T E R S C O M P L E X l H E L T O N

briefing to the MoI HQ transition committee, CSTC-A and MoI advisors briefed MoI leaders that the MoI was responsible for determining space alloca-tion and determining telephone and internet requirements. The MoI also was to plan, budget, order furnishings, fixtures, and equipment as well as establish all service contracts. Between the 31 January 2013 briefing and September 2014, the MoI did little to no planning, program-ming, and budgeting for furni-ture or IT systems and service contracts. On 16 September 2014, MoI advisors held a coor-dination meeting with a different MoI HQ transition committee. CSTC-A made it clear that it was their responsibility to procure furniture and IT equipment to meet a summer 2014 turnover.

Additionally, CJ-ENG MoI Branch advisors told the MoI transition committee that they needed to validate the Space Allocation Plan that the CJ-ENG contractor AMEC developed or send it back to us with correc-tions. The Space Allocation Plan clearly lays out the loca-tion of each MoI department. At the time, the MoI needed to conduct this staff analysis of which department was going to go where so that CSTC-A, CJ-ENG could adjust the Space Allocation Plan for the MoI’s IT and Furniture Procurements that they had agreed to do. Again, seeing no action on the part of the MoI transition committee, CSTC-A took 36"x 36" copies of the Space Allocation Plan developed by AMEC to the MoI major general in charge of the transition committee. CSTC-A asked him to conduct analysis with his turnover committee, mark the “blown up” Space Allocation Plan with any needed changes, and return it to CSTC-A by 30 October 2014. Once again

CSTC-A saw no action on the part of this MoI major general or his transition committee.

On 11 December 2014, dur-ing a visit to the new MoI HQ, MG Semonite, Commanding General of CSTC-A, told CSTC-A CJ-ENG that he wanted to have the ribbon-cutting for the New MoI HQ building in June 2015. He expressed that CSTC-A CJ-ENG needed to determine the way forward to make that hap-pen (FIGURE 1). CSTC-A CJ-ENG quickly led a mission analysis session with key MoI Logistics, IT, and Procurement advisors to de-termine the way forward on the procurement and installation of furniture and IT for the new MoI HQ building. CJ-ENG quickly de-termined that we needed to take the furniture off-budget, as we clearly had the expertise to craft the PWS to procure the furni-ture. Further, we already had the furniture layout plans from AMEC that would go into the PWS. The MoI HQ Building and NPCC IT was a different story. Our MoI IT advisors felt strongly that we did not have the expertise on the coalition side to develop adequate specifications for the state of the art IT infrastructure that we wanted in the new MoI HQ and NPCC. The IT advisors and coalition G-6 believed that the MoI IT department, which had significant experience in running their own IT infrastruc-ture, would be better suited to develop these specifications. So, we made the decision to give the MoI an opportunity to procure the IT systems with money that CSTC-A allocated in the MoI’s budget. IT advisors worked with the MoI ICT (Information, Com-munications, and Technology) Department for the next month to develop the requirements. By 19 January 2015, though the MoI had contributed a bet-ter effort toward developing a

requirements package, CJ-ENG determined that we would have a much better chance of meet-ing MG Semonite’s June 2015 ribbon-cutting date if we pro-cured the IT systems off budget. When CJ-ENG notified the new chair of the Afghan MoI HQ tran-sition committee, he completely supported our decision, stating that he did not believe the MoI ICT Department was capable of meeting our timeline.

BUILDING THE TEAMGiven the decision to take the new MoI HQ Compound off-budget, CJ-ENG needed the in-house expertise to manage the program. As stated previ-ously, the MoI ICT advisors and G-6 did not have the expertise available given their mission set. CJ-ENG reached out to DISA, USACE, and CEW to find program managers to assist in end-to-end management of the operational requirements of the new MoI HQ compound and new MoD HQ building, which included IT, furniture, and electronic security systems. After the CJ-ENG MoI Branch investigated multiple options, we finally located our first PM. This PM, which CJ-ENG leader-ship assigned to be the MoI PM, arrived on 22 February 2015. She quickly learned all the new MoI HQ project background, requirements, and timeline. The new PM and team routinely briefed the timeline (Figure 3) to the CSTC-A Deputy Command-ing General (DCG). CJ-ENG used the timeline to synchronize all contract actions with our contracting agencies. Huntsville District, USACE, joined the team as consultants and technical evaluators for contractor propos-als. Additionally, PEO-EIS has as-sisted in IT acquisition strategy, requirements refinement, and procurement package develop-

ment. These teams from around the world came together at least once per week by VTC and telecon to synchronize efforts to deliver a state-of-the-art facility in a time-constrained environ-ment to the MoI.

CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, CSTC-A is deter-mined transfer a complete and useable MoI Headquarters facil-ity to the Afghanistan MoI. When complete, the New MoI Head-quarters facility will be capable of overseeing a national police force of 157k personnel. USACE has done a commendable job of procuring and constructing this signature facility for the MoI. CSTC-A CJ-ENG was unsuc-cessful at convincing the MoI to procure the furniture and IT systems for the new facility. How-ever, CJ-ENG and key MoI advi-

sors received guidance from the CSTC-A commanding general, developed a well thought out plan, and are now well on their way toward ensuring that the new MoI HQ facility has all furni-ture and IT systems necessary to give the MoI as much of a turn-key solution as possible. CSTC-A CJ-ENG surely will face addition-al challenges during the delivery and installation of furniture and IT equipment, but CJ-ENG has established a professional team capable of delivering a quality product to the MoI.

LTC MIKE HELTON has been the MoI Branch Chief for CSTC-A CJ-ENG since July 2014. He is a 1998 graduate of the United States Military Academy. He is stationed at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, and was the 94th EN BN S-3 and XO, followed by an

assignment as the 4th MEB S-3. He has been selected for command of the 35th EN BN and will assume command upon return from this deployment.


ENDNOTES 1 Strategic Basing Plan for

the Afghan National Police AMEC Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc. September 2014, pp. 5, 7.

2 Afghanistan National Police Plan, p. 6.

3 Mazur, Kristin. USACE White Paper: Ministry of Interior Headquarters / National Police Command Center, 18 February 2014.

p FIGURE 1. New MoI Headquarters status update.

ADVISING AFGHAN ENGINEERS HUMBLED ME. I found the conventional wisdom of taking several weeks or even months to gain full acceptance by our Afghan engineer counterparts to be incorrect. A counterpart is the assigned Afghan official to the advisor, based on similar backgrounds and skills appropriate to the mission. My counterpart is the department head of the Construction & Property Management Department (CPMD), responsible for all facilities within the Afghan National Army (ANA). The department head and his directors solve problems and provide guidance the same as my division chiefs and I do. The leadership of the CPMD performs equally to facility engineers everywhere in the world. I led the largest overseas United States Army Garrison (USAG) Public Works for five years at Grafenwöhr, Germany. My experiences in combining

subordinate commands while downsizing the force is directly analogous to my counterparts experience in growing and overseeing the entire ANA’s facility program during a time of base divestiture. The challenges I faced at USAG Grafenwöhr were similar to those faced by my Afghan counterparts, albeit at a greater scale in Afghanistan.

My first encounter, as the senior advisor to the brigadier general who heads the CPMD, illustrates the engineer differ-ence I experienced. Trying to be respectful and get through my long agenda without appear-ing pushy, I hesitated and the general asked if he could look at my list. Of course, I handed him a copy and, from that moment, the general drove the discussion by addressing all the points.

Why do we believe that we can advise senior Afghan lead-ers that are fully competent in their fields? Understanding our corporate history explains this. The U.S. military facility engi-

neer learned from more than a hundred years of experience in hundreds of bases located all over the world. We derived our experience from the deserts of the Gobi and Sahara, cold regions from Antarctica to North America, jungles of Asia to Africa, literally all over the world. The training of the U.S. military facility engineer, perhaps the best in the world, utilizes this vast experience. As advisors, we must pass this information on to our counterparts, just as we received it.

Sometimes as advisors, we spend too much time focus-ing on the differences and not enough on the common bonds. All of us want the same thing; to provide for our families, to pro-duce meaningful work, and to garner respect for our contribu-tions. In Afghanistan, problem-solving is more by consensus than by direction. Pressuring sister organizations or pass-ing a negative report to higher command brings friction. We

need to keep in mind that we are trying to train people in ways that are socially acceptable for our system, which may not be so acceptable by their social

customs. Empathy is the first step in letting your counterpart know that you care, but it is not enough. You need to compre-hend their situation. Too many people listen only with their ears and are already trying to fix the prob-lem in their mind. To listen with compre-hension is to think about the information given, understand the situation, and then apply your background knowledge to problem-solving. Otherwise, the Afghans will realize that you are not really listening. This means you do not care and are solving the wrong problem.

Acceptance is not automatic. These high-level folk have a lot of work to do and the advisor needs to show that he can help them. To do this, I established my credentials, showed respect, and recognized their greater ex-perience. I outlined my 30 years as a facility engineer. I showed respect by wearing a suit and tie to every engagement. What probably had the largest impact in building partnership was ad-mitting that my ideas might not work in their situations. Listening with empathy and understanding with comprehension is vital in building trust.

I found the biggest chal-lenges were a lack of resources, both money and human capital, and to get outside organiza-tions to support the CPMD. The entire ANA structure is new, only about a decade old

ADVISING AFGHAN ENGINEERS

t The CPMD department head with three of his directors, meeting a coalition general and the author.

u Addressing a group in the Afghan sun.

compared to our 200+ years. Defining the relationships and lines of communication requires effort and patience during this developmental stage. Training new young engineers will take another decade before they are ready in the quantities and quali-ties needed. We, as advisors, need to realize this.

The Afghan society is one of politeness. The Afghans will avoid coming outright and saying, “No.” Rather, they will politely intimate that your ideas may not work. Empathic listening will serve you well in these situ-ations. I have found that team-work still is the best method. Just like me, my Afghan counterparts want to do a good job, but sometimes we put them into a no-win situation by applying our systems and deadlines to them. When I write an agenda, it is our agenda, not my agenda. Some-times I must promote the U.S. agenda. Work together as equals and succeed. Tell them how to do their job and fail. The CPMD engineers provide improved facilities for the ANA. Together,

we are building a better Afghanistan.

ANDREW SPENDLOVE is a career civil servant with more than 30 years of experience in fields ranging from facility engineering, real property maintenance, and master planning to disaster preparedness, and personnel & project management. He has more than 21 years of service in overseas locations, including Germany, Greece, and Alaska. He was the Director of Public Works for United States Army Garrison Grafenwöhr for the previous 5 years.


by ANDREW D. SPENDLOVE


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E A D V I S I N G A F G H A N E N G I N E E R S l S P E N D L O V E

by MAJ BRETT MEDSKER

HOW DO WE PREVENT PERIM-ETER WALL BREACHES CAUSED BY FLOODING? WHAT IS THE COST OF BUILDING REPAIRS? WHERE CAN A FACILITY AND FUNCTION BE RELOCATED AND AT WHAT COST? What is an expedient design using local construction means and methods for a 100-meter bridge crossing multiple canal eleva-tions? How can we improve force protection at base entry control points? These engineering prob-lems are just a selection of those directed to the 553rd Engineer Detachment, Forward Engineer Support Team–Advance (FEST-A) during the team’s first 75 days on the ground. FRONT LINE POINT-OF-ENTRYWorldwide, the FEST-A provides engineering solutions to U.S. forces deployed to remote, for-ward locations. The FEST-A is an expeditionary eight-person team with competencies and capabili-ties of working in civil, structural, environment, electrical, mechani-cal, and geospatial engineering disciplines. Members of a FEST-A team bring the depth of their expertise and apply the breadth of their experience to unique requirements in austere and risky environments. The FEST-A addi-tionally serves as the “front line point-of-entry” for the warfight-er. Through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Reachback

Operations Center (UROC), the FEST-A provides access to the resources of the world’s largest engineering agency.

A lot is asked of FEST-A members. Their work encom-passes the ability to quickly assess a situation, determine the engineering requirements vice organizational wants, and deliver solutions in ever-changing and challenging environments. The contingency operating environ-ment impacts the engineer’s as-sessment and solution. Because of the topographic constraints, available construction material, and local construction means and methods, FEST-A members are adaptive and agile. They must rely on their breadth of experiences to think and apply their expertise in any given situ-ation.

The 553rd FEST-A, from the USACE New York District, has displayed these skills during the detachment’s nine-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2015. For the first time in theater, one FEST-A was responsible for support to the entire U.S. Forces–Afghanistan (USFOR-A). Throughout the Combined Joint Operations Area–Afghanistan (CJOA-A), the 553rd FEST-A has augmented the engineering and planning capabilities in support of decisionmaking. Within the first 75 days in theater, the team has completed more than twenty projects totaling more than $7 million in design work and as-sessments.

RESPONSIVE TECHNICAL ENGINEER SUPPORTAs the sole FEST-A in theater, our strength is our inherent abil-ity to move quickly to project sites, complete requirements, and provide products to meet the needs of our higher head-quarters and their operational planning and goals. The 553rd is funded through the USFOR-A’s Overseas Contingency Opera-tions funds and maintains a tacti-cal control command relation-ship with the USFOR-A’s Joint Engineer (JENG) Directorate. This allows the FEST-A to rapidly support the JENG in emerging engineer requirements across the entire theater.

Each FEST-A rotation into the-ater has seen differences in its command relationships as well as the type of projects asked to execute. The 553rd’s command relationship at the USFOR-A level is appropriate for the 2015 mission set. This mutually benefi-cial relationship has allowed the JENG to establish the FEST-A’s priority of work and effort and allowed the FEST-A to support multiple Train, Advise, Assist Commands over the course of the deployment.

In support of the overall Resolute Support mission, the FEST-A’s established priorities are focused on providing techni-cal engineer support to U.S. forces. The team fills a capability gap that is not inherent within the traditional U.S. Army force structure as well as the U.S. force

structure supporting Resolute Support. The 553rd’s work effort for the first 75 days in theater is focused within four broad cate-gories: base camp development and planning, force protection, facility development, and Com-mander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP) projects.

Within two weeks of as-suming the FEST-A mission in Afghanistan, the 553rd was asked to conduct a base camp master planning assessment for one of the few remaining bases in the CJOA-A. As bases close and operational and support functions move or consolidate, much planning is required to

RESPONSIVE ENGINEERING: MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE U.S. FORCES–AFGHANISTAN

ABSTRACT: THE FORWARD ENGINEER SUPPORT TEAM–ADVANCE’S TECHNICAL COMPETENCIES AND CAPABILITIES HAVE BEEN IN HIGH DEMAND THROUGHOUT OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM. DESPITE THE REDUCTION OF FORCES FOR THE NATO’S RESOLUTE SUPPORT MISSION, THE TEAM REMAINS CONTINUALLY ENGAGED IN MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF U.S. FORCES.

p UNDER CONSTRUCTION: The Jabal Saraj 45-foot gabion basket retaining wall designed by FEST-A member Tychsen Yager.

u 553rd FEST-A members Richard Allahar and Rito Sabanal prepare to conduct a field survey on Bagram Airfield.

relocate base and operational services. With specific training in establishing and closing base camps, the FEST-A is able to apply its working knowledge of

the base camp development process and develop overall base site planning documents. This particular project required a multi-disciplinary team of


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E R E S P O N S I V E E N G I N E E R I N G : M E E T I N G T H E N E E D S O F T H E U . S . F O R C E S – A F G H A N I S T A N l M E D S K E R

621G Wheel Tractor Scraper

815F Soil Compactor

966H Medium Wheel Loader

D9R-II Dozer

730 Articulated Truck

420D Backhoe Loader

120M Motor Grader

CS-56 Vibratory Compactor

613C Water Distributor

D7R-II Dozer 963D Track Loader

DEUCE Earthmover

924H Small Wheel Loader

D6K Dozer

279D Compact Track Loader

320D L Excavator

Cat SimulatorsVirtual technology. Operator training. Real results.Contact your account manager for more information.

277C Multi Terrain Loader

Military Fleet of Cat® Equipment

10K-13K ATFLAll Terrain Fork Lift

25K Rough Terrain Cargo Handler

DEUCEEarthmover

Today you face many challenges as you procure equipment and manage your fleet. You need to determine which machines burn the least amount of fuel. What equipment can you acquire to ensure the safest jobsite? How does the new equipment meet sustainable operation objectives? How will you support equipment in remote locations? Most importantly, how can you acquire equipment that provides the best value at the lowest cost? Your team at Caterpillar understands these challenges and works with you to minimize your risk with cost, safety, sustainability and support.

We listen to your input to build products that provide you the lowest life-cycle cost of ownership for your constrained budgets. Cat equipment incorporates several industry leading safety features that provide your organization safe work zones while providing sustainable solutions that lessen the impact on the environment.

Our Cat Dealers provide you the most extensive worldwide network to ensure you have support to accomplish your mission.

For more information on Caterpillar Defense & Federal Products visit: catdfp.com

© 2015 Caterpillar. All Rights Reserved. CAT, CATERPILLAR, BUILT FOR IT, their respective logos, “Caterpillar Yellow” and the “POWER EDGE” trade dress as well as corporate and product identity used herein, are trademarks of Caterpillar and may not be used without permission.

Armored D7R-II Dozer

»

Fred Erstp: [email protected] US Army- US Army Public Works- US Army National Guard- US Army Reserves - US Army Corps of Engineers

Ike Malsonp: [email protected] US Army- US Army Public Works- US Army National Guard- US Army Reserves- US Army Corps of Engineers

Scott Tomblinp: [email protected] US Marine Corps- US Navy- USMC/USN DPW

Jason Walkerp: [email protected] US Air Force- US Air National Guard- DRMO

CONTACT yOUR CATERPILLAR ACCOUNT MANAGER

HELPING yOU ACCOMPLISH yOUR MISSION

civil, electrical, mechanical, and geospatial engineers to conduct a thorough assessment of all key base infrastructure and make recommendations for the reloca-tion, adjustment, or alternate solutions of key base services for future use.

Having an experienced and licensed surveyor with supple-mental surveying equipment provided to the team has been greatly beneficial in the sup-port provided to the USFOR-A, particularly for projects at the team’s base on Bagram Airfield. The team’s geospatial special-ist, Richard Allahar, has assisted numerous times in the design and sighting in of various force protection and facility improve-ments. The ability to quickly gather site and elevation data and then stake the new require-ment on the ground following design has enabled the FEST-A to be more responsive to our customer’s needs. Annually, the west side of Bagram Airfield tends to be inundated with water seeping onto the base as local villagers irrigate nearby fields. Armed with survey data, Allahar engineered a solution to solve the problem rather than move the problem (water) to another location as had been previously executed.

The FEST-A has been called upon to propose engineering solutions to multiple facility improvement requirements. The continued emphasis to remove old wooden structures—and the increased availability of relocat-able buildings because of force drawdown—has caused the FEST-A to form a project delivery team to quickly provide consoli-dation and replacement designs. Consisting of engineers Donna Johnson, Kevin O’Brien, and Rito Sabanal, this core group has worked on several projects of

this nature. A project on a space-constrained site at Jalalabad Airfield required the team not only to provide a site design for the replacement of deteriorating wood buildings but also to phase the construction work and sched-ule not to interfere with current operations on the site.

Other facility improvement projects the team and others have been asked to complete include electrical and structural-specific projects. As prime power has become more reliable over the years, there is a continued emphasis to place more facili-ties as well as relocated facilities onto existing base power vice spot generators. Additionally, the FEST-A’s structural engineer, Miow-yu Siow, was asked to develop a design for a 45-foot tall tower using expedition-ary means. In developing the solution, while most would look to traditional structural steel construction, he utilized material strictly available on the base to expedite the design and con-struction of the tower.

During our deployment, the 553rd also is prepared to conduct reconnaissance mis-sions and propose engineering solutions that support CERP initiatives for the Bagram Ground Defense Area Task Force. The team was requested on one of these initiatives to review an initial design concept and com-plete design documents for a 100-meter-long bridge. Not be-ing your typical bridge crossing site, special consideration for the local villagers had to be made to cross seven different canal and main stream elevations.

Another CERP project involved the design of a 45-foot-tall gabion basket retaining wall designed and constructed to protect the penstocks on a hydroelectric plant near Jabal

Saraj in the Parwan Province. This project highlighted what the breadth of experience can provide to agile and adaptive engineers as the design com-pleted by Tychsen Yager was completed strictly from photos taken of the site.

LASTING SUCCESSAs the 553rd FEST-A moves into the second half of its deploy-ment, the team looks forward to meeting the emerging require-ments and solving the engineer-ing problems faced across the CJOA-A. The FEST-A has proven itself a force multiplier to U.S. forces during years of conflict in Afghanistan, and the 553rd is proud to continue meeting these requirements as the sole team in country. The team’s success is due to its depth of expertise and breadth of experience creating the agile and adaptive engineer, responsive to the needs of the warfighter.

MAJ BRETT MEDSKER is the Commander, 553rd Engineer Detachment, FEST-A, USACE New York District. He was previously deployed to Iraq in support of OIF. He holds master’s degrees in civil engineering from the University of Missouri, Rolla, and in building construction science and management from Virginia Tech.


by MAJ JOSH MAY

SINCE THE END OF THE SURGE OF U.S. FORCES TO AFGHANI-STAN IN 2012, THE U.S. MILI-TARY CONTINUES TO REDUCE ITS PHYSICAL FOOTPRINT IN AFGHANISTAN. In the past four years, the U.S. and Coalition forces have closed or transferred back to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan nearly 900 bases. These bases range from small squad-sized checkpoints to fully operational bases with a population number-ing in the thousands. The transi-tion to Resolute Support (RS) not only marked a change in mission but also a significant reduction in U.S. forces on the remaining bases. As of March 2015, RS has

21 bases remaining open with the U.S. responsible for 14 loca-tions. The transition from OEF to RS also dramatically reduced the number of military engineers in the Combined Joint Opera-tions Area-Afghanistan (CJOA-A) primarily due to force manage-ment level limitations. One of the consequences of the reduction in engineer numbers meant the majority of work associated with reducing base camps fell to contractors with the remaining military staff engineers providing oversight.

MILITARY MANAGED, CONTRACTOR EXECUTEDAmong the remaining engineers, a Construction Management Team (CMT) has the responsibil-

ity to serve as the theater man-ager of a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) which directly executes base camp reduction. The CMT is under the command of the Resolute Support Sustainment Brigade (RSSB) which has the responsibil-ity to execute the retrograde of material and equipment out of theater. However, the CMT also works in close coordination with the U.S. Forces-Afghanistan (US-FOR-A) JENG and the military engineers on the RS (NATO) staff to plan and coordinate engineer efforts at transitioning bases with U.S. Title X equities.

The CMT provides construc-tion management or, in this case, “de-construction,” across the CJOA-A by controlling the allocation of the MATOC teams to support the CJOA-A base reduction plan. The CMT sends out an Liaison Officer/Non-Com-missioned Officer (LNO) to meet with the Base Commander (BC) and Base Operating Support-In-tegrator (BOS-I) engineer several months before the arrival of the MATOC team(s). The purpose of this visit is to review the BC’s base reduction plan and conduct a thorough walkthrough of the base. The primary output of this initial visit is to develop an estimate of how many “platoon months” (the amount of work an average Army construction pla-toon can complete in a month) of work it will take to reach the desired base endstate. The CMT

REVERSE ENGINEERING: REDUCING THE U.S. FOOTPRINT IN AFGHANISTAN

t SFC Brian Hart and SSG Michael Jones of the 573rd CMT (JBLM) ensure the electricity is de-energized before grading and leveling on a project site at Bagram Airfield.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E R E V E R S E E N G I N E E R I N G : R E D U C I N G T H E U . S . F O O T P R I N T I N A F G H A N I S T A N l M A Y

LNO continues to visit the base periodically, or as required, to re-validate requirements if the BOS-I executes a reduction project in support of base “right sizing” which in turn reduces the scope of work for the MATOC team.

The initial assessment by the LNO provides input into the MATOC allocation chart which is broken down by team, location, and month. The CMT in coordi-nation with the USFOR-A JENG adjusts the schedule and repub-lishes it as necessary to meet requirements based off updated guidance or changes in scope.

The LNO also is responsible for developing the detailed Scope Of Work (SOW) for each individual project on a base prior to the MATOC team’s execution of the project. After completing the approval process, this serves as the tasking order for the MATOC team. The LNO visits regularly once a MATOC team is on a base to track progress, adjust SOWs, or develop new SOWs for reduction work that is uncovered as the result of com-pleting a prior project.

RESOURCES OF REDUCTION The MATOC is structured for the

creation of up to eight teams of approximately 20–35 personnel each. Each team can be tailored to meet the base reduction requirements. Currently, seven of the eight teams are comprised of one expat overseeing 3–5 Other Country Nationals (OCNs) with the remainder of the team com-prised of Local Nations (LNs). The eighth team is split into two squads of 10 OCNs each and is trained to recover large Tension Fabric Structures (TFS) which are placed back into the Army Preposition Stock if they are in a usable condition.

At each base, the contractor procures the required equip-ment off the local economy. Some equipment is used regu-larly (bucket loaders, excava-tors, flatbed and dump trucks) while some projects require the procurement of specialized equipment (a recent project required the use of a 100-ton crane). The MATOC has proven adept at completing a wide va-riety of projects from B-Hut and Concrete/Masonry Unit building teardown, HESCO and fence removal, various force protec-tion barrier removal/relocation, concrete water tank destruc-tion, removal of all electrical

and environmental control units on Re-Locatable Buildings and Containerized Housing Units, recovery of TFS, the teardown of unused guard towers, and other projects as required at bases across the CJOA-A. While they are capable of completing the required tasks and their schedule can be adjusted as required, they are not as agile as military engineers and are allocated 30 days to relocate from one base to another.

Base and garrison command-ers must use the full gambit of available tools to assist with base descoping requirements. MA-TOC, unit (self) along with indefi-nite delivery/indefinite quantity, low-cost contracts (LCC), and “no-cost” contracts (NCC) are used to reduce a base location. While not necessarily new, LCC or NCC are typically short-duration contracts executed by a LN contractor. The BC and BOS-I identify base reduction proj-ects which support base “right sizing” and determine which projects are good candidates for a LCC or NCC. The BC pays the LN contractor a fair local wage for the project under a LCC; for a NCC, the contractor is allowed to keep the material from the

structure(s) he tears down (the most common item for NCCs is lumber). These contracts allow the BC to complete base reduc-tion projects at a reduced cost and in a timely manner without having to wait for the arrival of the MATOC team(s).

The BC and BOS-I need to be familiar with the various base reduction enablers that will help them successfully draw down the base. A wide variety of resources are available but, because of their limited numbers, many re-quire theater-level coordination. Contracted property assessors (both real property and personal property, known as Base Closure Assistance Teams); property handlers (think Theater-Provided Equipment, Retrograde Property Assistance Team [RPAT], and Mo-bile RPAT); equipment maintain-ers; Defense Logistics Agency Destruction Services; and trans-porters (both air and ground) all assist with base reduction, a majority of which fall under RSSB mission command. Some of these enablers have military per-sonnel within their ranks, but the majority of the work is executed by contractors. While they are capable of performing the tasks associated with base reduction, they sometimes require longer notification times in order to get their personnel and equipment moved to new locations.

PLANNING BASE CAMP REDUCTIONSimilar to base camp construc-tion, in order to go smoothly base camp reduction requires a significant amount of plan-ning and preparation. The BC is responsible for the develop-ment of the detailed plan and timeline for the reduction of the base. There are a number of fac-tors which shape the reduction timeline:

1. Ongoing operational/mission requirements

2. Personnel numbers (military, government civilians, contrac-tors)

3. Identification of all U.S. property which requires retro-grade, transfer, reduction, or, in some cases, abandonment

4. What needs to be done with critical infrastructure (waste-water and water treatment plants, electrical grid and power plants, solid waste management)

5. Force protection enablers6. Contracts (number, type, end

dates, their reduction timeline requirements, property on the base, etc.)

7. Environmental mitigation, if any

8. Who the base is going to be transitioned to and what it will look like at the end

These factors only serve to shape the initial planning time-line and synchronization matrix. Often answering one ques-tion generates others. Starting early is essential in order to allow enough time to gather all initial and follow-on facts. Higher head-quarters and tenant units must provide accurate information to the BC in order to help paint an accurate picture of the required effort and available resources.

Once initial facts and answers are gathered, the BC can attack some easily identifiable projects which support “right sizing” of the base while it puts the remain-ing pieces into place on the base reduction synchronization matrix. This involves reducing services on the base, taking down unused tents and buildings, retrograding equipment which is no longer required, and other tasks which support the movement of equip-ment and material off the base. Base reduction is a team effort

and not exclusively an engineer task. Timing the arrival of theater enablers is extremely important as they are a finite resource and often have to move to a follow-on mission.

NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIESAs we withdraw from Afghani-stan after nearly 14 years of building numerous facilities across the CJOA-A, we have a responsibility to properly remove unusable infrastructure and other property. While it is not a glam-orous or exciting task, we want to leave Afghanistan better than we arrived, which means leaving the government with facilities and bases that it can use and maintain after we have gone. As engineers we play a significant role in ensuring that the physical footprint of each base is reduced timely, safely, properly, and in ac-cordance with the commander’s intent.

MAJ JOSH MAY is currently assigned to the 573rd CMT, 555th EN BDE, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. He holds a BS in geospatial information science from the U.S. Military Academy, a MS in geological engineer from the Missouri University of Science and Technology, and is a certified Project Management Professional. He has deployed to Iraq three times and is currently on his first deployment to Afghanistan.

p A MATOC team on Bagram Airfield takes down portions of the old fuel point.



E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E R E V E R S E E N G I N E E R I N G : R E D U C I N G T H E U . S . F O O T P R I N T I N A F G H A N I S T A N l M A Y

u Unserviceable battery sorting at Bagram’s Solid Waste Management Complex.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E U . S . F O R C E S A F G H A N I S T A N E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O G R A M l M U R P H Y / N A C H A B E

byBRYAN MURPHY, USN, and ABE NACHABE, USN

FIRST, THERE WAS STUNNED SILENCE UPON BY MY ANNOUNCEMENT THAT I WAS MARCHING OFF TO WAR AS THE U.S. FORCES AFGHANISTAN (USFOR-A) ENVIRONMENTAL CHIEF. Then, after the initial shock had subsided, there was some well-intentioned advice about getting my head examined. Finally came the questions about the reason for even having an environmental program in a country ravaged by continuous warfare since 1978 following the Communist takeover. While not immediately obvious, the U.S. military has compelling reasons in a contingency environment to exercise responsible environmental stewardship. The standards and processes applicable to USFOR-A are certainly not as stringent as stateside counterparts, but nonetheless adequately protect health, support mission accomplishment, comply with legal requirements, and minimize impacts on the environment.

The U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) governing regulation for protection and enhancement of environmental assets in its area of responsibil-ity, including Afghanistan, lists the following environmental program goals:

1. Protecting the health of U.S., coalition, and host-nation (HN) personnel while en-hancing mission capabilities through pollution prevention and minimized exposure to hazardous substances.

2. Demonstrating environmental stewardship by minimizing the impact of U.S. military opera-tions on the HN environment and natural resources.

3. Integrating applicable U.S., international, and HN environ-mental laws and standards.

4. Exhibiting environmental leadership through assisting coalition and HN personnel in proper environmental man-agement and stewardship.

5. Establishing a life-cycle and sustainable approach to operations of U.S. forces and sites within the USCENTCOM area of responsibility.

Afghanistan is a challeng-ing environment to implement and sustain an environmental program. At its peak, USFOR-A had more than 100,000 active duty personnel in Combined Joint Operations Area Afghani-stan (CJOA-A) with up to twice that number of DoD civilians and contractors. These forces were spread across the breadth of Afghanistan in up to 800 installations of various sizes and sophistication. Afghanistan has very little infrastructure to sup-port a western-style environmen-tal program for a force that large, and, frankly, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghani-stan (GIRoA) has more pressing priorities now than developing one. Land-locked Afghanistan is surrounded by countries not always sympathetic to the U.S. need to retrograde materiel and hazardous waste out-of-theater. After 13 years of bringing in a lot more weapon systems and life support for several hundred thousand people than has gone

out, the U.S. withdrawal and disposal of materiel has been a significant effort. And, finally, there’s the security environment in which local companies that work with the U.S. military have suffered threats, kidnappings, and physical assaults.

Despite the challenges, or perhaps because of them, USFOR-A does promote respon-sible environmental stewardship in support of the U.S. military mission while minimizing impacts on the environment throughout CJOA-A. The program evolved over the years as the U.S. mission, force structure, and circumstances changed, but also in response to lessons learned from operating in a contingency environment. Two guiding prin-ciples have remained constant throughout:

1. The U.S. will leave its closing or transferring installations and high-explosive training ranges in as good or better environmental condition than we found them.

2. The U.S. will leave behind no hazardous waste when we depart.

Several organizations have a hand in managing environmental aspects of the U.S. mission. The Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contractors do the heavy lifting on most bases—managing collection and disposal of solid (non-hazardous) and hazardous waste, treatment and/or disposal of wastewa-ter, and so on. The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) takes in all forms of excess or non-serviceable equipment which

it either redistributes locally for reuse, de-militarizes (i.e., shreds or cuts into little pieces) for local recycling, or ships out-of-theater for disposal. The USFOR-A Environmental Branch role is assessment and assistance with environmental regula-tory compliance, spill response, environmental corrective actions, and hazardous waste treatment for in-theater disposal. We all coordinate our efforts to make the whole program work.

USFOR-A engages a handful of contract environmental sci-entists and engineers to assess the environmental compliance posture of all U.S. installations throughout their lifecycles. An assessor conducts an Environ-mental Baseline Survey (EBS) of a new U.S. installation within 30 days of occupation. The EBS describes the site’s environmen-tally interesting features and current use and documents its current environmental condition. An assessor will return annually thereafter to conduct an Envi-ronmental Conditions Report (ECR) to document changes to the environmental baseline and

assess the site’s current compli-ance with applicable U.S., DoD, USCENTCOM, and USFOR-A laws, regulations, directives, instructions, and standard oper-ating procedures. The assessor briefs the installation’s leadership on identified deficiencies and recommends appropriate cor-rective actions. Finally, 90 days prior to closing or transferring the installation, an assessor will conduct an Initial Environmental Site Closure Survey (ESCS) to identify deficiencies that require correction for an environmentally compliant release. The asses-sor will return within seven days of closure/transfer to verify that the installation accomplished the required corrective actions and document the installation’s environmental posture in a Final ESCS. To date, the USFOR-A en-vironmental team has conducted more than 1,800 assessments and surveys which USCENTCOM will archive as protection from future liability.

The environmental assessors possess a wealth of knowledge that USFOR-A leverages for more than just assessments. They

serve as “independent duty” en-vironmental managers at smaller installations without dedicated environmental positions, and train collateral duty environmen-tal officers and assist with setting up environmental programs for deployed units and tenant com-mands.

The second USFOR-A environmental contract for an Environmental Response Team (ERT) was born of necessity in 2011. Initially, DLA disposed of most U.S.-generated hazardous waste in CJOA-A via ground transshipment through Pakistan to Karachi, then by sea for final disposition. After the closure and subsequent reopening of the Pakistan ground line of com-munication (GLOC), hazardous waste was no longer allowed to transit the route. As hazard-ous waste began accumulating on installations across CJOA-A, USFOR-A established the ERT, composed of hazardous waste managers, scientists, and handlers, to increase in-theater hazardous waste disposal. The ERT established hazardous waste transition yards at several

U.S. FORCES AFGHANISTAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E U . S . F O R C E S A F G H A N I S T A N E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O G R A M l M U R P H Y / N A C H A B E

CJOA-A logistic hubs (Bagram and Kandahar Airfields, Camp Leatherneck) where the teams prepared various hazardous and controlled-waste streams for in-country disposal via evapora-tion, neutralization, incineration, demilitarization and recycling, and soil farming. In total, the ERT has treated and recycled 64,500,000 kg of liquid waste, treated and disposed of another 1,230,000 kg of liquid waste, treated 43,541 cubic yards of contaminated soil, and demili-tarized 85,330 kg of lead acid batteries. The result has been a disposal cost avoidance of more than $200M.

In addition, the ERT has responded to 121 environmental incidents such as fuel and chemi-cal spills. After the first respond-ers, typically the fire department, have stabilized the situation, the ERT will remove and treat the contaminated soil. Also, ERT ap-plies corrective actions to lesser environmental incidents, such as disposal of solid or liquid waste, including barrels of mystery oil, abandoned on the installation. ERT has proven so versatile that USFOR-A has pressed it into ser-vice to resolve one-off environ-

mental exigencies. For example, when Pakistan finally reopened its border to transshipment of U.S. hazardous waste in 2014, ERT sorted and packed 2.2M lbs of batteries, many of them lithium—categorized a hazardous waste—that had accumulated in CJOA-A since 2010. At that point, DLA was able to ship them to Germany for recycling. ERT also got into the mold-abate-ment business, greatly improving the indoor air quality of 264 con-crete B-huts throughout Bagram Airfield.

Similar to the transformation of hazardous waste management from shipment out-of-theater to treatment and disposal in- theater, the environmental leadership at Bagram Airfield is giving solid waste manage-ment a fresh look. This was once a simple matter of digging an open-air pit and burning the re-fuse to reduce volume. In 2010, at the direction of Congress, U.S. installations in CJOA-A began the transition to incinera-tors over burn pits, leading to much cleaner, more thorough waste disposal. Unfortunately, incineration requires a lot of fuel which exacerbates one of the

U.S.’s primary force protection challenges, fuel truck convoys. Also, incinerators will not outlive the U.S. mission. In the past when the U.S. has transferred installations with functioning incinerators, the cash-strapped Afghan National Security Forces reverted to open-air burn pits over incineration rather than pay for the fuel. In response, Bagram Airfield has recently accelerated the trend of its solid waste man-agement processes away from incineration to a greater reliance on recycling. The key players spearheading this effort include the Environmental Chiefs of Ba-gram Airfield Garrison and Fluor (the LOGCAP prime contractor), the ERT, and a local recycling company under contract with the Bagram Garrison. In essence, Bagram has become a labora-tory of sorts for transforming total waste management in a contingency environment. None of the tried and true engineer-ing changes, recycling, and alternative fuel sources is earth-shattering or ground-breaking. However, combining them with a laser focus on driving down fuel consumption in the incinerators is unique:

• The local recycler developed manufacturing facilities in the Kabul area capable of pro-ducing watering cans, flexible hose, shoes, and toilet paper from recycling Bagram’s waste plastic and cardboard. It also developed a distri-bution network for wood-construction debris, coveted on the local economy as heat-ing fuel. This infrastructure made recycling economically feasible, thereby providing Bagram with a reliable outlet for disposal of these three significant waste streams.

• The local recycler also devel-oped a composting operation which converts food waste from the dining facilities into compost. Incinerating this “wet” waste had consumed a disproportionate amount of fuel. Instead, the recycler turned it into a useful, profit-able product.

• The local recycler hauled away excess mattresses, bed-frames, and cabinets resulting from the reduction in person-nel at BAF over the past year along with excess paint. He used his distribution network to give these items away to local schools and community centers.

• Elimination of the above waste streams allowed Bagram to close one of two incinerator sites which used older incinerators in favor of newer, more fuel-efficient models.

• In the meantime, Fluor in-stalled a purifier that removed moisture and contaminants from waste oil and spent fuel to make them suitable for in-cinerator fuel. It also ordered a small bio-diesel generator

to convert the significant quantity of cooking oil and grease from the dining facili-ties into fuel for the incinera-tors. These measures displace a like amount of new fuel.

The early returns from these adjustments to the Bagram waste management processes are en-couraging. Average daily incin-erator fuel usage dropped from 4,130 gallons from 1 October through 21 December 2014 to 2,425 gallons from 22 December 2014 through 24 February 2015, a 41% decrease. We expect further savings as alternative fuel sources increasingly displace new fuel. Also, solid waste disposal at Bagram has transitioned from almost 100% incineration to 55% recycling/40% incineration/5% landfill today.

Looking ahead, several other potential systemic improvements to waste management in contin-gency environments might merit further consideration.

• Off-the-shelf contingency incinerators that incorporate waste to power capability;

• Closer examination of the “cradle to grave” require-ments, packaging and other material used in a contingen-cy environment;

• Reorganization of how waste is managed in theater to bring hazardous, solid, and regu-lated medical waste functions under a single organization instead of splitting responsi-bilities three ways or more;

• Seed money from host-nation development funds to build waste management infrastruc-ture such as properly engi-neered landfills and compost-ing, and recycling facilities for plastics, cardboard, metals, bio-sludge from wastewater treatment plants, and so on.

The USFOR-A environmental program fulfills the USCENT-COM mandate to protect the health of U.S., coalition, and host-nation personnel and promote responsible environ-mental stewardship that sup-ports the U.S. military mission while minimizing impacts on the environment. The program, while not without challenges, has more than kept pace over the years as the U.S. mission, force structure, and circumstances have changed. It has benefited from a wealth of talented profes-sionals with the experience and motivation to experiment with better ways of doing business in the future.

BRYAN MURPHY is the USFOR-A Environmental Chief, on TDY since August 2014 from his permanent job as a Branch Head, Environmental Division, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, VA. He is a retired naval aviator and University of Notre Dame graduate.


ABE NACHABE is an Environmental Engineer at the Chief of Naval Operations. He is registered professional engineer. He is on TDY to Afghanistan as the USFOR-A Deputy Environmental Chief.


t Mattress reuse by local community.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E P R I M E P O W E R l G I L L / E N G I N E E R S A N D E O D W O R K T O G E T H E R l F A U D R E E

by JIM GILL

PRIME POWER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFE GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICAL POWER SUPPORTING U.S. OPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN. It is akin to the power companies in stateside neighborhoods and municipalities. Its scope is much the same as the municipal power companies but with the added challenges of a war-time contingency environment with limited resources. This includes the fuels that are used, the maintenance materials that must be readily available, and the work force to operate the generator equipment and switchgear.

Currently, the generating facility and the operations and maintenance of the distribu-

tion system are performed by contractors with oversight by the U.S. Army’s 249th EN BN (Prime Power). The battalion provides soldiers who are experts in pow-er generation to United States Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) to serve as on-site contracting officer technical representa-tives (COTR) and power system subject-matter experts (SME). They bridge the gap between the installation customers (i.e., the garrison and its tenants) and the contractors themselves.

In addition to providing expert advice, they provide oversight of larger maintenance and equip-ment installation projects. An ex-ample of the more complicated types of maintenance and repair issues that a 249th soldier would have to deal with would be the repair of a 10-MW turbine gen-erator. These million dollar plus machines can develop tremen-dous power in a relatively small footprint, but changing out the

turbine inserts is a delicate pro-cess that can be extremely ex-pensive if not precisely installed and properly maintained. This particular type of turbine insert replacement has a delivery lead time of approximately 6 months, so mistakes on installation would be far reaching in terms of the power generation mission if something goes wrong.

Still, there are other smaller, but just as critical projects that require the same type of atten-tion to detail to ensure seamless power production, such as the installation of smaller diesel-type generators to power individual fa-cilities. Although the central gen-erating plants are the first choice for power, particularly over and above individual (spot) generators due to the lower fuel-to-power efficiency of smaller generators, there are situations when spot generation is necessary. That need is generally associated with base transitions where spot generation

PRIME POWER IN THE COMBINED JOINT OPERATIONS AREA – AFGHANISTAN (CJOA-A)

bySFC WESLEY FAUDREE

COMBAT ENGINEERS AND EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (EOD) HAVE ALWAYS HAD A TUMULTUOUS RELATIONSHIP EXAGGERATED BY A CLASH OF MISSION—from the combat engineer’s mission of breaching obstacles to EOD’s mission of rendering unexploded ordnance (UXO) and improvised explosive devices (IED) safe—in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the need for additional combat power and effective clearance teams brought about the combined arms route clearance operation (CARCO) and the integration of EOD teams to combine the locate and the clearance phases. Some might argue that IEDs are just another obstacle on the battlefield and should be cleared by engineers, but long ago we learned that defeating

the IED threat requires multiple avenues of approach. While destroying the IED in place is the safest method to defeat the device, it does not provide the forensics information necessary to attack the network. Train the force also is a critical function of defeating the IED threat and is one in which engineers and EOD have come together to support coalition and Afghan forces.

As the official combat mis-sion in Afghanistan came to an end on 31 December 2014, the theater switched from a primary mission of combat operations to a train, advise, and assist mission designed to provide the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) with the support it requires to create a lasting legacy of success. The Ministry of Defense placed all engineers and EOD functions together under the Engineer Corps in the Af-ghan National Army. In turn, this has led to a close relationship

between the engineers and the Counter IED Advisor Cell, com-posed primarily of EOD techs, Electronic Warfare Officers, and Joint IED Defeat Organiza-tion (JIEDDO) personnel in the Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan. Similar to the CARCO combination to defeat IEDs, these two groups are actively engaged under Op-eration Resolute Support at the ministerial level to engage the Afghan general officers involved in the C-IED fight.

The combined relationship even reaches into Joint Task Force–3 (JTF-3) / U.S. Forces – Afghanistan (USFOR-A) head-quarters; the Joint Engineer (JENG) staff section hosts the only EOD representative on the USFOR-A staff. While slightly un-orthodox, the office pairing has proven to be as successful a rela-tionship as the one on the battle-field. EOD has provided critical support to the High Explosive

ENGINEERS AND EOD WORK TOGETHER FOR A SAFER AFGHANISTAN

is required to close the gap be-tween demobilization of contracts and the power required until the last day of base operations. Prepa-rations for spot generation include consolidating remaining mission requirements and base functions to minimize the infrastructure footprint and associated power re-quirement. In addition, an analysis of where to judiciously connect to the existing power grid is crucial for overall efficient operation and maintenance of the sub-systems. There always is a balancing act between required power and how to get that power to the custom-ers with the least amount of ad-ditional hardware to install.

In summary, the prime power soldiers in this theater cover a range of power needs as broad and varied as the missions that they support. Rain or shine, these soldiers can be depended upon to deliver power that not only keeps the lights on but powers the full spectrum of mission– support requirements from din-ing facilities to aircraft hangars and everything in between.

JIM GILL works for the Facilities Policy Division of the HQ, Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management in the Pentagon. He has a bachelor’s

in mechanical engineering from The Ohio State University and a master of science from the University of Wisconsin, Parkside. He currently is deployed to Afghanistan working in the USFOR-A Joint Engineering Directorate as the Chief of Task Force Protect Our Warfighters and Electrical Resources (TF POWER).


q 10-MW turbine generator under repair.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E E N G I N E E R S A N D E O D W O R K T O G E T H E R l F A U D R E E

Training Range (HETR) clearance program. This program is instru-mental to increasing the safety of U.S and coalition forces, the Afghan people, and assisting the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) in meeting their goal of being “Mine Free in 2023.” While the U.S does not use landmines, the removal of UXO from training ranges is included in the GIRoA goal of being mine free. To date, the HETR clearance program has removed more than 51,000 UXO and 10 million pieces of scrap accumulated over 13 years of range operations.

The technical knowledge of EOD also has been an important factor in multiple force protec-tion projects. Indirect Fire (IDF) is a constant threat on Bagram Airbase and usually comes in the form of 107mm rockets. The T-wall, a movable concrete wall

section, is the preferred force protection measure to counter the IDF threat. However, with any protective measure comes limit-ing factors such as availability and cost. It is imperative that T-walls are placed in the locations where they provide the most protection and EOD has been able to support this through analysis of potential fragmenta-tion patterns and rocket trajecto-ries. Engineers and EOD remain in two separate Army corps but must continue to support each other to accomplish the mission.

Essayons and Initial Success or Total Failure!

SFC WESLEY FAUDREE is currently assigned to U.S. Forces – Afghanistan as the Explosive Ordnance Disposal NCOIC. His home unit is the 203rd MI BN in which he serves as a platoon sergeant and senior weapons

technical intel analyst. He has served in the military for 17 years, including 9 on active duty, and is a graduate of Oklahoma State University.


p EOD prepares to dispose of a large cache of captured enemy munitions.

p A PackBot robot heads downrange to place a charge on a suspected IED.

p CPT Kevin Daley receives training on the disposal of ordnance containing white phosphorus from EOD.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E T A S K F O R C E P O W E R I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l G I L L

by JIM GILLwith contributions from CHIEF RONALD SPARLING

OVERVIEWTASK FORCE PROTECT OUR WARRIORS AND ELECTRICAL RESOURCES (POWER) CONSISTS OF TWO LINES OF EFFORT: THE ASSURANCE OF BOTH FIRE AND ELECTRICAL SAFETY.

This Congressionally mandat-ed program directs the inspec-tion of all facilities occupied by U.S. personnel for electrical or fire protection deficiencies that concern life, health, and safety hazards.

This task force applies lessons learned and best practices from the Task Force Safety Actions for Fires and Electricity (TF SAFE) developed in Iraq in August 2008 in response to electrocu-tions associated with faulty elec-trical building practices, which resulted in the deaths of several soldiers in expeditionary shower facilities.

Later, Congress passed the FY 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, Sec. 807, thereby enacting legislation fur-ther enforcing the requirement for the military to take necessary steps to alleviate electrical and fire safety hazards at all instal-lations occupied by U.S. forces, civil servants, and contractors.

The Fire Safety line of effort is similar to the electrical safety component, with added respon-sibilities of providing training for fire wardens and fire brigades, evaluating potential candidates for time-based deviation waivers to fire-protection building codes, providing government oversight of contracted fire-protection

services, and contributing to con-struction inspection.

TF POWER: ELECTRICAL SAFETYCurrently, TF POWER electri-cal inspectors are performing inspections on more than 20 coalition military installations of varying sizes and locations throughout Afghanistan. The group consists of 10 two-man contracted electrician teams, with oversight by government master electricians, who focus on those buildings and facilities that are not receiving maintenance via the Logistics Civil Augmenta-tion Program (LOGCAP) Base Operating Support (BOS) con-tract. There are two additional two-man teams operating under the direction of the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) with focus on those facilities which are maintained by LOGCAP.

The primary objective of the electrical inspection teams is to seek out and identify electrical hazards on circuits of 600 volts or less (considered low voltage) so that they may either be fixed on the spot if only a minor repair is required, or de-energized and rendered safe. In the event that major repair or renovation is required to eliminate the hazard, facility users and leadership are advised of the situation in order to pursue the appropriate resolu-tion.

A typical problem in Afghani-stan has to do with improper grounding and bonding of electrical circuits. Grounding and bonding ensures that anyone coming in contact with a piece of equipment or appliance will not be shocked by absorb-ing an electric current through their bodies. A typical type of

grounding and bonding repair that is made by the hundreds on a weekly basis involves adding a grounding “pigtail” wire from the ground wire in the wiring cable to a junction box itself. This eliminates any chance for a shock from contact with any other metal parts connected to the box such as the switch cover screws that secure covers to the box. This type of box could be a simple junction box used to hold a light switch or a plug-in recep-tacle for appliances. Although this is a fairly simple fix, it is this kind of detail that saves lives as it separates people from electri-cal currents.

The danger for this type of shock is amplified many times when this sort of grounding issue is associated with a wet environ-ment such as a shower or laun-dry facility and is exactly the kind of failure mechanism that led to the electrocutions that took place in Iraq. This scenario is played out time and time again as the inspectors meticulously work through facilities junction-by-junction, circuit-by-circuit, connection-by-connection, leav-ing no stone unturned as they search out any and all opportu-nity for the slightest contact with even the lowest of currents and voltages.

In addition to the detailed work listed above, TF POWER, in concert with prime power technicians, also deals with more glaring and imminent danger issues associated with high- and medium-voltage distribution and equipment such as Main Disconnect Panels (MDP) and transformers. These panels are the connection points between the prime power grid transform-ers and the first electrical panel

TASK FORCE POWER IN RESOLUTE SUPPORT

t Ungrounded junction box.

p Grounded junction box.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E T A S K F O R C E P O W E R I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l G I L L

downstream of the transformer with a circuit breaker. Most of us never deal with these panels and transformers or know that they exist until the power goes out and the power company shows up. However, with the draw-down and the associated reloca-tion and demolition of buildings on installations, there is quite a bit of MDP work disconnecting and reconnecting these main panels to support the Resolute Support mission going forward.

In summary, whether it is a periodic inspection of billeting quarters or response to more urgent issues such MDP failures, TF POWER is on site to mitigate potential hazards wherever they may be.

TF POWER: FIRE SAFETYThe fire safety program has overall responsibility to provide theater-wide technical guidance. The U.S. Forces–Afghanistan (USFOR-A) Fire Chief and Depu-

ty Fire Chief manage the CJOA-A Fire and Emergency Services (FES) program. This program develops policy and guidance, provides oversight and technical services to the installations, and serves as the senior FES advisor to the USFOR-A Command.

The main objective of the USFOR-A fire safety program is to provide a fire-safe environ-ment for all personnel working and living in the CJOA-A. One of the ways we accomplish this is to ensure all installations abide by the USFOR-A Fire Prevention Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and has an active fire-warden program. Fire wardens ensure sound fire-prevention procedures are established and practiced in their area of responsibility. At installations that do not have established fire services, the USFOR-A Fire Chief and Deputy provide fire-warden and fire-brigade training. Fire wardens and fire brigades are an

integral part of assuring over-all safety of our personnel by providing immediate corrective action to identify and mitigate or eliminate fire hazards and deficiencies.

Fire wardens perform monthly fire-prevention inspections in all areas under their supervision. Many of the fire hazards that are identified are not only poor housekeeping practices, but improper use of electrical equip-ment. All electrical equipment should be inspected for service-ability and electrical standard compliance.

Our goal in the fire program is to educate and train person-nel to recognize fire hazards before there is a fire. Properly trained personnel can recognize materials and equipment that is either improperly being used or equipment that does not meet an internationally recognized standard, as required by USFOR-A’s Fire Prevention SOP.

USFOR-A Fire Prevention Standard Operating Procedure, 1 November 20125-9. Electrical Equipment: Electrical equipment will be manufactured in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR 1910.399 Subpart S and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1 Section11.1. Installation and use will be in accordance with NFPA 70 Article 90.7, National Electric Code. All components shall meet Underwriters Laboratory (UL), European Marking of Conformity (CE) or equivalent nationally recognized safety requirements and shall be labeled appropriately. Operation of all electric equipment that is not appropriately labeled or is recognized to be unsafe or hazardous will be discontinued immediately.

a. Cooking appliances such as coffee makers, toasters, toaster ovens, hot water heaters, microwaves, frying pans etc, are prohibited in all living areas

(B-Huts, CONNEX housing, RLBs, Brick and Mortar dormitory, tent or any other area where personnel are billeted).

b. All approved appliances shall be directly connected to their respective power supplies; the use of extension or power strips is not authorized.

In conclusion, the TF POWER program in Afghanistan contin-ues to operate a robust preven-tative safety program including daily physical inspection and repair activity, as well as edu-cational and hands-on training campaigns.

This critical program adopts and applies best practices learned from years of experi-ence operating in expeditionary environments and have proven vital to mission support by ensur-ing the safety of both personnel and property. This model is now a standard component of the

warfighter’s toolkit for future contingencies.

JIM GILL works for the Facilities Policy Division of the HQ, Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management in the Pentagon. He has a bachelor’s in mechanical engineering from The Ohio State University and a master of science from the University of Wisconsin, Parkside. He currently is deployed to Afghanistan working in the USFOR-A Joint Engineering Directorate as the Chief of TF POWER.


u Downed electrical distribution panel in water.

t Uncertified transformer.

byCPT KEVIN DALEY

THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR COMMANDERS THROUGHOUT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE SAFETY OF OUR SERVICE MEMBERS, COALITION PARTNERS, CIVILIAN WORKFORCE, AND CONTRACTORS. THIS IS ALL ENCOMPASSED WITHIN BASE FORCE PROTECTION MEASURES.

Despite the years of construc-tion, there still is a requirement for consolidation projects and force protection improvements as U.S. Forces–Afghanistan (USFOR–A) supports train, advise, and assist (TAA) opera-tions under the Resolute Support mission. The need to build may be counterintuitive in the face of continued base transitions, descoping of temporary infra-structure, and drive to continue the drawdown of personnel and equipment. The circumstances have brought a plethora of chal-lenges to meet force protection construction requirements.

Planning for future base transitions, descoping, and the continued drawdown of mate-rial and force manning levels is a major priority for USFOR–A. The force protection projects are weighted against the descoping timeline.

As engineers, providing the commander a suitable plan that supports deconstruction efforts while not compromising the level of protection necessary was the priority. In order to align

the force-protection plan with descoping efforts, the need to compare construction timelines to base closure dates is critical. There are some cases in which it is not beneficial to construct a project due to the fact that by the time the project is complete it may only be used for a short period. While in the past a force-protection project would be approved and constructed, now other mitigation mea-sures are given closer scrutiny. For instance, the relocation of personnel and functions within a base is given greater weight vice executing more construction.

Within a few hours of arriv-ing in country, I was tasked with taking over a force-protection project. To familiarize myself with the project, I looked over old archived files from earlier force-protection projects. The files showed a decade’s worth of force-protection improve-ments which transformed the base into an extensive and complex fortress. Therefore, we turned inward to find materials to complete the project, and our eyes were opened. The Sapper saying “P for plenty” can explain the amount of construction materials we found available for force protection. The drawdown of personnel and functions plus years of continuous improve-ments left an abundance of construction materials including bunkers, T-walls, fencing, etc. By coordinating efforts with Garrison Command and others around the base, we were able to obtain those materials and take from other descoping efforts. This

alone decreased the overall con-struction timeline significantly, generated a cost savings, and helped ongoing base descoping efforts.

Another challenge when consolidating an operational base is that space within the smaller footprint becomes a premium. The newly required force-protection project was to mitigate the significant threat of a vehicle-borne improvised ex-plosive device (VBIED). Standoff distance was an important factor which was difficult to concede.

While searching for a solu-tion, we sought subject-matter expertise from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Reachback Operations Center (UROC) lo-cated at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Cen-ter (ERDC).

The reachback capability was extremely helpful in solving the problem related to our specific force-protection mitigation blast situation. We provided UROC/ERDC with the problem set of threat, restricted space, plus available materials, and the professionals were able to rec-ommend a suitable design. The plan was quickly developed with an in-depth analysis of person-nel, equipment, and structure survivability against various-sized VBIED threats.

ERDC provided the data, analysis, and mitigation strate-gies that allowed for a decrease in standoff distances by utilizing a combination of materials and design which saved in space. The Forward Engineer Support Team–Advance (FEST–A) was

then able develop the full project scope and detailed design. An ancillary benefit was that it also prevented multiple facilities from hav-ing to be relocated which indirectly gave more options to the base master planner.

The initial draft force-protection project plan was heavily scrutinized against the aforementioned factors of cost, time to construct, and future base descoping plans. The team sought ways to reduce both cost and time while mitigating risks. Given the necessity to quickly get the blast wall in place, our approach was to seek simple solutions which mini-mized time and effort to construct. Taking advantage of UROC enabled us to consult with subject-matter experts and develop a plan that saved both space and time. The use of the proposed design and existing force-protection materials further decreased the timeline and cost by an estimated 40%.

The ongoing base descoping makes the proposal to build seem like a counterproductive idea. However, as bases consolidate, pro-tecting our forces remains a top priority.

This necessitates that engineers continue to innovate, taking full advantage of the skill, expertise, and material both here in country and back in the States in order to take on any challenge and to get the job done.

FORCE PROTECTION WHILE DESCOPING DURING RESOLUTE SUPPORT

p Project Manager Mr. Hamrick from BAF Garrison Command directs local nationals in the placement of T-walls according to the force-protection plan.

CPT KEVIN DALEY currently is assigned to U.S. Forces–Afghanistan Joint Engineers on BAF. He holds a B.S. in civil and environmental engineering from Rowan University, NJ. He has served as a platoon leader and an XO in a horizontal engineer company.



E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E F O R C E P R O T E C T I O N W H I L E D E S C O P I N G D U R I N G R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l D A L E Y

byLTC C. PATRICK HOGEBOOM IV

SINCE 6 APRIL 2004, WHEN THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE) AFGHANISTAN ENGINEER DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED, 6,770 CIVILIAN AND MILITARY PERSONNEL HAVE SERVED IN THE AFGHANISTAN COMBAT ZONE. Today, the Afghanistan Engineer District is now called the Transatlantic Afghanistan District (TAA) and it relies on an all-volunteer force of highly motivated USACE civilians.

TAA is focused on national security by supporting NATO coalition partners and the Af-ghan construction requirement

owners. The district is providing the Afghan government with facilities and services to build and maintain a safe and stable Afghanistan. USACE has com-pleted more than 1,000 projects while simultaneously maintain-ing an all-volunteer, deployable civilian workforce. Civilians make up more than 85% of the district with a third of the employees on their first deployment. As the rest of the NATO coalition force draws down, USACE is push-ing to complete the currently assigned projects by December 2017. The healthy mix of first-time and veteran deployers have helped USACE complete the nearly $11 billion Afghanistan program.

In 2015, USACE had just more than 110 civilians, repre-senting nearly every USACE divi-sion and district. These dedicat-ed professionals are delivering vital facilities and services to the Afghan people. Although most coalition forces in Afghanistan were directed to cut their military presence by as much as 75%, USACE was able to maintain its personnel strength due to a half century of reform, converting military specialties to civilianized Department of Defense posi-tions.

Working overseas on military programs was not always a USACE responsibility. After tak-ing over the military construction mission from the Quartermaster

Corps in the 1940s, USACE has been busy performing military program work around the world. From 1940 to 1964, USACE worked in the British Atlantic territories, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Afghanistan, and Iran. From 1976 to 1986, USACE constructed a $14 billion Saudi Arabia Foreign Military–funded program, which is still the largest program ever constructed in USACE history. By 1990, USACE civilians had all but taken over the most technical jobs within the Corps of Engineers. When Kuwait was invaded by Iraq, a few USACE civilians were caught in the crossfire and safely evacu-ated, and some returned to help rebuild Kuwait. Due in part to the success of USACE civilians deployed to support the Gulf War, the decision was made to deploy more USACE employees to support the Iraq and Afghani-stan construction efforts.

USACE has more than 33,000 highly trained professionals stationed throughout the United States and in more than 30 countries around the world; how-ever, only in the past 20 years has USACE deployed civilian employees to a combat zone. Afghanistan is still dangerous and is one location most would not expect civilians to be sta-tioned. Normally the rebuilding phase comes after the cease fire or the end of the conflict. Eco-nomic catalysts, building partner capacity, and the construction of facilities for the rapid increase in the Afghan Army and National Police forces to counter ongo-ing insurgent activity required immediate USACE involvement.

p USACE Transatlantic Afghanistan District employees (left to right) Frank Garcia, Andre Baker, Portia Stagge, James “Mike” Lee, and Rito Sabanal, outside the District Headquarters on Bagram Airfield, 28 February 2015.

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CIVILIANS IN AFGHANISTAN

USACE civilians have been given the opportunity to work along-side the military during Op-eration Enduring Freedom and Operation Freedom’s Sentinel. Employees like James “Mike” Lee, District Resource Manager, views his recent deployment as a “once-in-a-lifetime event.” When asked why a USACE civilian should deploy, Mike said, “I be-lieve any USACE employee who has the ability should deploy at least once, because it will be the highlight of their professional career.”

USACE civilians have de-ployed to fill a variety of posi-tions, to include project engi-neers, geospatial information systems specialists, administra-tive support personnel, and contracting officers. FEST-A and specialists who were able to tackle avalanche studies, earthen dam assessments, maintain operations and maintenance contracts all have been essential to the overall USACE mission. Gordy Simmons, TAA Chief of Engineering and Construction, is proud of his employees. He encourages other Chief of E&Cs from across USACE to “send me your best and I guarantee to send them back better.”

The USACE civilians in Af-ghanistan have done a remark-able job executing the USACE priorities. The work the District completed during the past 11 years has enabled the Afghani-stan government to take the lead in providing security to the Afghan people. The work in Af-ghanistan isn’t finished. USACE employees will continue to be called upon.

LTC PATRICK HOGEBOOM, P.E., served as the Deputy District Commander for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Transatlantic Afghanistan District from June 2014 through June 2015. He commanded the 1-361st EN BN (TF Redhawk). He holds engineering degrees from Virginia Tech and Missouri University of Science and Technology.


If you are interested in learning more about USACE deployment opportunities, please go to http://www.tad.usace.army.mil/Careers/Deployments.aspx to see what contingency area positions USACE currently has available.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E U N I T E D S T A T E S A R M Y C O R P S O F E N G I N E E R S C I V I L I A N S I N A F G H A N I S T A N l H O G E B O O M

byWHITNEY CLAYTON

THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS HAD A PRESENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST FOR DECADES, ASSISTING WITH THE IMPROVEMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES, SO IT IS NO SURPRISE THAT THEY WOULD BE TASKED WITH REBUILDING AFGHANISTAN AS WELL.

The work that was completed during the past twelve years has made Afghanistan a safer, more well-designed place to live and

TRANSATLANTIC AFGHANISTAN DISTRICT: DRAWING DOWN TO MEET RESOLUTE SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

has given the Afghan people the ability to conduct govern-ment and military operations out of structurally safe and modern conditions.

For twelve years, USACE personnel have deployed to support projects; with that came the daunting task of logistics, to set up and deconstruct each Forward Operating Base (FOB) as missions change and projects close down. With the drawdown of troops and the change of mission in Afghanistan from Operation Enduring Freedom to Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, USACE continues to close out

projects and right-size the staff with the intent to be functional with a smaller workforce. What used to be two full-sized dis-tricts, with several smaller area and project offices to support all over the country, is now one headquarters element with three project offices and two area offices.

Perhaps one of the most daunting aspects in contingency logistics, especially with the constant restructuring and down-sizing of the USACE footprint, is maintaining property account-ability. Currently, the logistics personnel at USACE Transat-

lantic Afghanistan District (TAA) are working on Operation Clean Sweep. This program requires logistics staff members to visit the remaining locations where USACE personnel and property exist and to account for 100 per-cent of property and supplies. Visiting FOBs and accounting for property allows USACE logisti-cians to ensure excess property is disposed of properly and that all sensitive items and required property are assigned to the appropriate property book and hand receipt. As the remain-ing FOBs draw down to meet Resolute Support requirements, having property completely accounted for will make the lo-gistical component of the office closure more successful.

One of the biggest transitions USACE experienced is the sig-nificant downsizing of what was once Transatlantic Afghanistan-South District to the Kandahar

Resident Office within a year. The space in Kandahar, known to most as the Castle Compound, was the largest consolidated USACE presence in Afghani-stan. Due to the guidance on the drawdown of troops and personnel, the Kandahar office underwent a massive downsizing in calendar year 2014 in order to have minimal presence by the end of the year. The scope of the Kandahar office may have posed a logistical nightmare to some, but because of the professional-ism and dedication of the USACE employees stationed there, the overall downsizing of this office was viewed as a success.

As part of the right sizing, long-time contracts for Global and sub-contractor Vertical were eliminated, allowing USACE to use their internal J2/J3 assets to perform their own ground movements, provide security, and schedule various forms of military airlift. The diminished contractor support left logistics responsible for turning in more than 1,100 items valued at more than $500K.

The Castle Compound on Kandahar Airfield operated out

of eleven buildings which served as office space; billeting; and morale, welfare, and recreation facilities. In October 2014, four of the buildings were turned over to the Kandahar Garrison to be used by the U.S. Air Force and one was completely decon-structed. Four additional build-ings were mothballed for later use by future occupants, and personnel currently stationed at this project office use two buildings to live and conduct operations. The decommission-ing and repurposing of these buildings was a huge under-taking and resulted in several property transfers. More than 850 pieces of office furniture, valued at more than $730K, were transferred to other units and more than 1,900 items valued at more than $4M were turned into the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) for disposition. Between USACE’s Automated Personal Property Management System (APPMS) and the Army’s Property Book Unit Supply Enhanced (PBUSE) organizational property books as well as Theater-Provided Equipment (TPE), the logistics

p Building 10 at the USACE compound at Kandahar is deconstructed.

t MRAPs are moved from Kandahar to Bagram Airfield.


E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E T A A : D R A W I N G D O W N T O M E E T R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T R E Q U I R E M E N T S l C L A Y T O N

team at Kandahar Airfield had an incredible amount of prop-erty to account for and turn in. In January 2014, there were more than 1,900 items on the APPMS property book, valued at more than $4.5 million; as of March 2015, that property book now only holds 120 pieces of equipment (mostly IT and small electronics) to support the staff, with a value of roughly $437K. The PBUSE property has been turned in to DRMO or returned to commands who loaned the property; in January 2014, the hand receipt consisting of 214 items, mostly weapons and secu-rity team property, was valued at just under $2M. Finally, the TPE property that was turned in held the largest value with 642 items valued at more than $39M. In under a year, the Kandahar office was able to turn in more than $45.5M worth of equipment.

In addition to the everyday equipment that was turned in, the Kandahar logistics team was also responsible for containers and vehicles that were used to support missions throughout the Afghanistan South area of responsibility (AOR). During the transition, 21 tactical vehicles, consisting mostly of different styles of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, were turned in or transferred. For the smaller FOBs in Helmand and Herat that did not have turn-in capabilities, the logistics team arranged for a mobile Redistri-bution Property Accountabil-ity Team (RPAT) to accept the

vehicles and accompanying parts for turn-in. With the assistance of the USACE Force Protection drive teams, logistics was able to have the vehicles transported to a mobile site once the equip-ment was nominated for turn-in and all proper paperwork was completed; any equipment the mobile RPAT could not accept for turn in would then be sent to Kandahar for turn-in. This mobile system allowed for more efficient turn-in procedures and assisted in minimizing the time and back-log of the RPATs on Kandahar Airfield. Another huge logistics undertaking was the turn-in or transfers of more than 160 containers throughout the AOR. The USACE Castle Compound had a two-storey container facil-ity consisting of 16 containers that was deconstructed as part of the drawdown. Once all equip-ment from the container yard was properly disposed of, the 16 containers from the facility and an additional 2 containers, stored elsewhere on the compound, were turned in. Across other lo-cations in the AOR, four contain-ers were turned in at Herat and a combined 146 containers from three FOBs were transferred to the 215th Corps Afghan National Army.

Overall, USACE logisticians in Afghanistan are working business as usual to operate in the Reso-lute Support environment. Clos-ing down multiple FOBs, moving the headquarters’ location, and drawing down the largest USACE office from a district, to an area

and then to a resident office in a year could have failed if it weren’t for the dedicated logisti-cians that USACE employs.

Day-to-day logistics op-erations continue to support mission requirements from the current headquarters location in Bagram while the projects and staffing draw down to a number that mirrors Resolute Support requirements to sustain and assist Afghanistan. USACE logisticians, as with logisticians in any command, will continue to have a presence in Afghanistan until the last project is finished and the remaining engineers and support staff are ready to redeploy and prepare for the next mission.

WHITNEY CLAYTON served for 6 months with TAA-HQ as the J-4 Fleet Manager. She has worked for USACE for more than years as the Deputy, Chief of Logistics and Transportation Officer for the Middle East District, Winchester, VA.


48 t ARMY ENGINEER NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2015 u ONLINE SUPPLEMENT

E N G I N E E R I N G I N R E S O L U T E S U P P O R T l A N I N - D E P T H S E R I E S l P A R T T H R E E

800-295-9595 | [email protected] | Kippertool.com

BOBCAT TOOLCATAvailable at KipperTool®

MIR 5610

ATTACHMENTS FOR ANY JOB!

M aximize your production and capability by connecting your Toolcat™ utility work machine

to one of more than 40 front-mounted attachments. Changes take less than a minute- so it’s simple to mow in the morning, remove downed trees in the afternoon and dig post holes in the evening. It’s an investment you can leverage a different way every day, all year round.

The panoramic cab offers a clear view of your attachments and surroundings. Everything you need to operate is cleanly laid out, within easy reach, and most importantly, simple to operate. The Toolcat utility work machine’s simple, responsive joystick provides hassle-free attachment control. A simple switch or lever activates most features.

The 5600 & 5610 is engineered to meet the same standards as the rest of the Bobcat equipment lineup. Many of its components—such as the engine and cooling system—are the same as those found in our legendary loaders and excavators. These

components are rigorously tested in a wide range of applications, including construction, agriculture, military and more. Bobcat designs the durable 5600 Toolcat machine with maintenance points that are easy to find and reach, because when upkeep is quick and easy, maintenance is more likely to get done. That means you’ll get peak performance day in and day out for years to come.

ARMY ENGINEER ASSOCIATION

ENGINEERS’ CREEDAS A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, I DEDICATE MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL TO THE ADVANCEMENT AND BETTERMENT OF HUMAN WELFARE.

I PLEDGE:

n TO GIVE THE UTMOST OF PERFORMANCE;

n TO PARTICIPATE IN NONE BUT HONEST ENTERPRISE;

n TO LIVE AND WORK ACCORDING TO THE LAWS OF MAN AND THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT;

n TO PLACE SERVICE BEFORE PROFIT, THE HONOR AND STANDING OF THE PROFESSION BEFORE PERSONAL ADVANTAGE, AND THE PUBLIC WELFARE ABOVE ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.

IN HUMILITY AND WITH NEED FOR DIVINE GUIDANCE, I MAKE THIS PLEDGE.

ADOPTED BY NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, JUNE 1954

ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORTarmyengineer.com/PDF/RS_part3_online.pdf · ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE...

Documents

Transcript of ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE SUPPORTarmyengineer.com/PDF/RS_part3_online.pdf · ENGINEERING IN RESOLUTE...