Resource Architecture for the Environmental Strategy (RAES) Project JSEM Conference April 13, 2005

1Sustain the Mission — Secure the Future

Resource Architecture for the Resource Architecture for the Environmental Strategy (RAES) Environmental Strategy (RAES)

ProjectProject

JSEM ConferenceApril 13, 2005

Project Sponsor, John Fitipaldi, AEPIProject Manager, Steve Siegel, ESG


AGENDAAGENDA

Present the results of the RAES project.

• Project Purpose and Background• Project Approach• Overview of HQDA–Level Requirements

& Resource Processes• Findings• Recommended Courses of Action (COA)


ASE Road MapASE Road Map

VISION

STRATEGY

Implementation Plan

Implementation Plan

Implementation Plans…

Implementation Plan

“Sustain the Mission – Secure the Future”

6-Page Glossy Document

Detailed Plans, Goals, Status, Reporting in Specific Focus Areas

Overall Integration DocumentSTRATEGIC PLAN

Public Involvement Investment/FundingFocus Focus

Darden School

“Roll-out” throughout next several months.


Project PurposeProject Purpose

Develop integrated architecture alternatives that will enable the Army to resource and execute the Army Strategy for the Environment (ASE) effectively and efficiently.


Project BackgroundProject Background

• Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff establish Army-wide Sustainability Policy with the initiation of the Army Strategy for the Environment (ASE) - signed October 1, 2004

• ASE Goals– Foster sustainability ethic as an Army value – Strengthen Army operational capability – Meet current and future training, testing, and other

mission requirements– Minimize impacts and total ownership costs – Enhance well-being – Use innovative technology


.

Overview of HQDA-Level Overview of HQDA-Level Requirements and Resource Requirements and Resource

ProcessesProcesses


Change inForceStructure

-TAA- ACP/ Modularity

ValidateRequirements

PrioritizeRequirements

ProgramFunding

Decisions

CombatantCommanders

MACOM/PEOs

Army Doctrine (TRADOC)QDR

Strategic Planning Guidance (SPG)The Army Plan (TAP)

HQDA

Installations(Environmental

Req)

G3HQDA G3-

DAMO-CIR

IMA

PEGs

G3/G8

Identify TotalForce

Structure&

RelatedRequirements

(e.g. sustainment)

Overview of Requirements and Resource ProcessesOverview of Requirements and Resource Processes

- Laws and Policy- CSA

G3, G4 ASA-ALTDASA-CE


What kinds of changes in capability is What kinds of changes in capability is the Army looking for?the Army looking for?

• Mobility• Lethality• Maneuverability• Weight Reduction• Deployment• Communications• Information Processing• Sustainable• Availability• Maintainability

• Storage• Perishability• Replacement• Affordability• Survivability• Protection• Stealth• Detection• Simplicity• Productivity . . . Etc.

Any change that improves capability in areas, such as:


Requirements and Resource Requirements and Resource ProcessesProcesses

• Changes in Force Structure to meet the National Military Strategy and Defense Planning Guidance– Combat/Operational Effectiveness

assessed in terms of metrics such as force exchange ratios (function of lethality, vulnerability, range…)

– Strategic Mobility assessed in terms of metrics such as• Tons and cubic feet of throughput (inter

and intra- theater) over a period of time • Number of soldiers deployed over a period

of time



• Army Transformation

– Creates a modular Army that is “brigade based”, more responsive with increased rotational depth enabling joint and expeditionary capabilities

– A brigade anywhere in the world in 96 hours after lift-off, a division on the ground in 120 hours, five divisions in 30 days – this is strategic responsiveness



• Sustainment – Sustainment Requirements: from Training

Resource Model -TRM (measured in terms of miles & flying hours)

– Sustainment Costing: from Operating and Support Management Information System (OSMIS) which calculates costs to support sustainment requirements -- Army buys repairs and spares (NSN) to sustain weapon system (LIN)

• Environmental requirements are not directly derived from the Force Structure process.



PEGs and Prioritization

• MDEP proponents, SMEs, and as appropriate, representatives of commands and agencies participate in Program Evaluation Group (PEG) deliberations which review and prioritize resources to support key Army capabilities

• Each PEG builds an executable program.

• PEG process rank orders validated programs as input to overall POM 1-n list.

PEGsII - InstallationEE - EquippingMM – ManningOO – OrganizingSS – SustainingTT - Training


.

Findings


FindingsFindings(from interviews with HQDA and literature review)(from interviews with HQDA and literature review)

• ASE Goals regarded as most important:- Strengthen Army operational capability - Meet current and future training, testing, and other

mission requirements

• Environmental program resources should increase contributing to key Army goals.

Army Strategic GoalsI. Conduct Forcible EntryII. Mobilize the ArmyIII. Execute Prompt ResponseIV. Shape the Security EnvironmentV. Support Civil AuthoritiesVI. Sustain Land Dominance


FindingsFindings

• Those outside (and some inside) the Army environmental community are looking for tangible near-term successes from ASE implementation

• Army environmental community should focus on how the Army currently does business

• Implementation of ASE Goals will be difficult given the existing environmental requirements and resource processes in the Army

- Army environmental requirements come in late in the game.

- If environmental metrics and requirements are not in the process from the beginning (TRADOC) there is no way that they will be effectively addressed later


FindingsFindings

• Need better coding of environmental resources

• Need to clearly define environmental resources and sustainability resources

• When dollars migrate across PEGs (and MDEPs) they are difficult to track and manage

• The way to address environmental requirements is to link them to Integrated Logistics and Support (ILS) to ensure environmental concerns are integrated into checklist process


FindingsFindings

• Programs and tools exist that can be leveraged to support ASE goals of strengthening operational capability, increasing sustainability, and minimizing costs

− Installation Resource Evaluation Methodology (IREM) links installation and operational requirements with resource/environmental carrying capacities and costs (both inside and outside the fence) – model is being used in support of Army stationing

− OSMIS calculates sustainment costs for weapon systems - links acquisition and sustaining resources


FindingsFindings

• Programs and tools exist (cont.)– Installation Sustainability Programs

exist that prioritize installation resources to sustain mission needs

– Army Compatible Use Buffers (ACUB) - land buffers minimize encroachment and increase training readiness (and share costs with NGO)

– Energy is key – e.g., portable Army photovoltaic systems are currently deployed overseas in theater (reducing logistic footprint by requiring less fuel and related items)


Issue: Sustainability vs. SustainmentIssue: Sustainability vs. Sustainment

Sustainment: (DoD) “the provision of personnel, logistic, and other support required to maintain and prolong operations or combat until successful accomplishment or revision of the mission or of the national objective.”

Sustainability (ASE): …simultaneously meeting current as well as future mission requirements worldwide, safeguarding human health, improves quality of life, and enhances the natural environment.

Sustainability (DoD): See military capability.

Military capability: (DoD) The ability to achieve a specified wartime objective (win a war or battle, destroy a target set). It includes four major components….a. force structure--Numbers, size, and composition of the units that comprise US defense forces; b. modernization--Technical sophistication of forces, units, weapon systems, and equipments. c. unit readiness--The ability to provide capabilities required by the combatant commanders to execute their assigned missions. This is derived from the ability of each unit to deliver the outputs for which it was designed. d. sustainability--The ability to maintain the necessary level and duration of operational activity to achieve military objectives. Sustainability is a function of providing for and maintaining those levels of ready forces, materiel, and consumables necessary to support military effort.

Source: [DoD] Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms and Army Strategy for the Environment


.

Recommended Courses of Action


Recommended Courses of ActionRecommended Courses of Action

• Initiate Sustainability Strategic Partner Program: Civilians from Army environmental program would work at selected HQDA offices for 1 or 2 year rotations

Support key Army goalsRespective learning and liaisonDevelop and apply sustainability

concepts and practices



• Leverage current tools, projects to produce near-term results

• Focus on ASE goals: – Strengthen Army operational

capability – Meet current and future training,

testing, and other mission requirements



• Develop validation process that incorporates key Army priorities and objectives (including environmental requirements)

• Develop framework that provides incentives for installations and organizations to invest in sustainability

• Expand and implement Installation-level Sustainability Programs Army-wide


Recommended Courses of ActionRecommended Courses of ActionBasic TenetsBasic Tenets

• Develop programs/projects that will create low-cost, near-term successes

• Work within existing Army processes and framework, and transform as the Army transforms, not as a reactive process

Resource Architecture for the Environmental Strategy (RAES) Project JSEM Conference April 13, 2005

Documents

Transcript of Resource Architecture for the Environmental Strategy (RAES) Project JSEM Conference April 13, 2005