Page 1

The Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

Special Pull-out supplement

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Maintenance Optimizer John B. Johns Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Maintenance

April 2013 Volume 7, Issue 3

Exclusive Interview with:

Lt. Gen. C.D. Moore II Commander Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Red River Army Depot O Shelters for Disaster F-35 Life Cycle O Managing the Supply Chain


April 2013 Volume 7, Issue 3


Cover / Q&A

Who’s Who Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Special Pull-Out Supplement


Exclusive interview with Lieutenant General C.D. Moore II

Commander Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

12 4



The Department of Defense’s supply chain management system has long been burdened by a host of problems, including billions of dollars in unneeded spare parts. The U.S. military turns to private-sector practices to improve its supply chain management. By Marc Selinger

Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II sets new standards of performance for multi-role fighters as a fifth-generation aircraft. The program is highly innovative too in its incorporation of life cycle cost planning from the very beginning. By Henry Canaday

Providing temporary or longer-term shelter for victims of disasters is one of the first duties of relief agencies. Options partly depend on local circumstances. What are the options for providing protection and comfort in times of need? By Henry Canaday

Strengthening Supply Chains

For the Long Haul


Shelters for Disaster


Depot Profile: Red River Army Depot

For over 71 years, Red River Army Depot (RRAD) has provided support to America’s armed forces. RRAD is designated by the Secretary of the Army as the Center for Industrial and Technical Excellence for tactical wheeled vehicles, including the MRAP and the HMMWV. By Adrienne Brown

Industry Interview

2 Editor’s Perspective 10 Supply Chain 19 Resource Center

Larry Harper President CribMaster


John B. Johns

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Maintenance

“The maintenance, supply, and transportation communities— basically the entirety of the logistics community— have been working continuous process improvement initiatives and programs intensively for a decade and a half.” - John B. Johns

Military Logistics Forum Volume 7, Issue 3 • April 2013

Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community Editorial

Editor-In-Chief Jeff McKaughan Managing Editor Harrison Donnelly Online Editorial Manager Laura Davis Copy Editors Sean Carmichael Laural Hobbes Correspondents Heather Baldwin • Christian Bourge Peter Buxbaum • Henry Canaday Cheryl Gerber • Hank Hogan • Marc Selinger Karen Thuermer

Art & Design

Art Director Jennifer Owers Senior Graphic Designer Jittima Saiwongnuan Graphic Designers Scott Morris Eden Papineau Amanda Paquette Kailey Waring


Associate Publisher Jane Engel

KMI Media Group Publisher Kirk Brown Chief Executive Officer Jack Kerrigan Chief Financial Officer Constance Kerrigan Executive Vice President David Leaf Editor-In-Chief Jeff McKaughan Controller Gigi Castro Marketing & Communications Manager Holly Winzler Operations Assistant Casandra Jones Trade Show Coordinator Holly Foster Operations, Circulation & Production Operations Administrator Bob Lesser Circulation & Marketing Administrator Duane Ebanks Circulation Barbara Gill Data Specialists Raymer Villanueva Summer Walker

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE Has industry consolidation affected the rate of competitive bids for DoD? Between 2008 and 2012, DoD reported that the competition rate for all contract obligations fell by 5.5 percent. Recent data shows that for 2012 the Defense Logistics Agency had the highest rate of competition at 83.3 percent, while the Air Force tallied the lowest rate at 37.1 percent. For the majority of contracts that were awarded on a noncompetitive basis, the availability of only one contractor—as deemed by the contracting command—was the primary reason given for using noncompetitive procedures. Is the process fair and balanced if the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) has a stronghold on contract awards throughout the life cycle of Jeffrey D. McKaughan Editor-IN-CHIEF a particular item or system? Does it—or should it—make it unfair and unbalanced if the OEM, by nature of close connection to the system, maintains the upper hand in future contract awards for that system? There is also the issue of single contractor bids—contracts that are awarded when there is only one bidder in the process. There are contracting requirements that are in place to stimulate multiple bids; such requirements ensure sufficient response time, keep contract requirements from being unnecessarily restrictive, and ensure verification that all offers received are fair and reasonable. Reforming the contracting process to ensure fair and balanced outcomes based on set criteria will become more challenging in the future. How the budget cuts and sequestration will impact programs has caused uncertainty in the industrial base and the impact of the cuts will soon be felt across the services. Not every company will survive and, in some areas, competition may suffer as a result. What is needed is a contracting process that ensures not only the equality of the process for all bidders but also the best result for the warfighter. The disappointing fact is that this is what every single contracting regulation was designed and written for, but the collective result has missed the mark.

KMI MedIa Group LeadershIp MaGazInes and WebsItes Border & CBRNE Defense

Ground Combat Technology

Geospatial Intelligence Forum

Military Advanced Education

Military Information Technology

Border Threat Prevention and CBRNE Response


Integrated Fixed Towers

A Proud Member of: Subscription Information

Military Logistics Forum

ISSN 1937-9315 is published 10 times a year by KMI Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission is strictly forbidden. © Copyright 2013. Military Logistics Forum is free to qualified members of the U.S. military, employees of the U.S. government and non-U.S. foreign service based in the U.S. All others: $65 per year. Foreign: $149 per year.

Border Protector

June 2012 Volume 1, Issue 1

Michael J. Fisher Chief U.S. Border Patrol U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Leadership Insight: Robert S. Bray Assistant Administrator for Law Enforcement Director of the Federal Air Marshal Service Transportation Security Administration

Wide Area Aerial Surveillance O Hazmat Disaster Response Tactical Communications O P-3 Program

Medical Military Training Military Logistics Military & Veterans Forum Technology Affairs Forum

Special Operations Technology

Tactical ISR Technology

U.S. Coast Guard Forum

Corporate Offices

KMI Media Group 15800 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 300 Rockville, MD 20855-2604 USA Telephone: (301) 670-5700 Fax: (301) 670-5701 Web:

Performance-Based Logistics (PBL) are an effective solution in improving military readiness while saving billions. Under Boeing PBL programs, the Apache Longbow has exceeded readiness targets by 19.3%, the F/A-18 Super Hornet by 17.5%, while C-17 flying hour costs have been reduced by 26% since 2004. An AIA study estimates PBL savings to be $25-$30 billion per year. That’s performance we can’t afford to lose.

The U.S. military turns to private-sector practices to improve its supply chain management. By Marc Selinger, MLF Correspondent The Department of Defense’s supply chain management system has long been burdened by a host of problems, including billions of dollars in unneeded spare parts. Since 1990, the Government Accountability Office has classified DoD’s supply chain management as high risk due to serious flaws in managing inventory, forecasting spare-part demand and implementing new technology. But DoD and service officials say they have made significant progress in recent years by adopting commercial supply chain practices. And industry and academia say they are doing their part to help DoD incorporate private-sector standards.

DLA The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), DoD’s largest logistics combat support agency, has adopted several commercial supply chain practices that have improved the agency’s effectiveness and efficiency, said Army Major General Ken Dowd, DLA’s director of logistics operations. The DLA Enterprise Business System uses commercial off-the-shelf products to 4 | MLF 7.3

provide an enterprise resource planning solution approach to manage items from acquisition to disposal and provides sophisticated forecasts of demand, Dowd explained. Buying food, medical supplies, tires and other commercial products as they are needed reduces the need to store such items. And the agency routinely meets with industry to garner best practices. “These commercial practices allow DLA to reduce uncertainty and variation in the supply chain to allow the agency to buy the right items at the right time at the right place,” Dowd told Military Logistics Forum. To guard against the proliferation of counterfeit parts, DLA is turning to botanical DNA markings, a commercial practice used to mark cash in transit. Starting in November 2012, DLA requires that all microcircuits be marked with DNA that can be detected with a handheld laser reader. “Beyond microcircuits, we are identifying other procurements at high risk for counterfeiting during contract pre-award by leveraging advance fraud detection technology similar to those used by the credit card industry,” Dowd said.

The GAO warned in a February 2012 report that the prevalence of counterfeit parts in the global supplier base “can seriously disrupt the … DoD supply chain, harm weapon systems integrity, and endanger troops’ lives.”

Army The Army has fielded its Logistics Modernization Program (LMP), a system that uses private-sector supply chain technology to manage about $22 billion in spare parts for aircraft, communication systems, missiles, tanks and other equipment. Developed and sustained by CSC, LMP replaced decades-old, stovepiped systems with a single database. LMP, whose final phase was fielded in 2010, has allowed the Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) Logistics Center to shrink its $12 billion spare parts inventory by about $2 billion, said Keith Roberson, director of the center’s Cost Wise Readiness Program. At work stations or on laptops, the system gives supply chain managers a more precise picture of the current inventory, demand history and forecasted demand of individual parts, Roberson explained.

“It’s helping us to become much more accurate in predicting how our consumption rates of those parts are going to be in the future, so we may not have to hold on to as much inventory as we had in the past,” he said. A smaller inventory saves money by reducing the number of parts the Army has to buy and store. “It usually doesn’t result in an instant check back to the Treasury, but it does save the government some dollars in the form of having to stock those component parts or handle those component parts,” Roberson said.

Air Force The Air Force is also improving its supply chain management using a mix of commercial and military best practices, including better forecasting techniques, increased collaboration with suppliers, faster disposal of excess inventory and having vendors deliver parts directly to users instead of government warehouses, said Jan Mulligan, chief of the

Air Force’s Integrated Life Cycle Management Policy Division. The Air Force, whose parts demand forecasts were inaccurate 70 percent of the time two years ago, has cut that rate to 40 percent and hopes to push it down to 25 percent, Mulligan said. Customer wait time for parts now averages 5.6 days, well below the goal of 7.5 days. And unneeded parts represent 6.2 percent of the Air Force’s overall inventory, well within DoD’s goal of 10 percent. “We’ve been using commercial supply chain practices for a very long time, and it’s important for us to continue to do that, because we’re focused on looking for ways to reduce our inventories and to make the supply chain more efficient, especially in this time of reduced budgets,” Mulligan said. The Air Force also tried to incorporate commercial supply chain technology into its Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS), which was intended to provide a single, integrated logistics system, including transportation, supply, maintenance and repair, engineering and acquisition. But Air

Force officials told the Senate Armed Services Committee in April 2012 that program performance was “poor” and that ECSS would be restructured. ECSS is currently under review, Mulligan said. CSC, which was the prime contractor for ECSS, stands “behind the work accomplished to date which can provide a solid foundation for the program’s future,” company spokeswoman Heather Williams said.

Navy The Navy’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, which the service began fielding in 2008, provides a single database that contains more than 400,000 Navy line items of repair parts, components and assemblies for ships, aircraft and weapons. The system uses a SAP Corp. product that allows the Navy to unify, standardize and streamline all of its business activities into one integrated system, drawing upon commercial supply chain practices. It yielded $200 million in savings in fiscal year 2012, said Rear Admiral Mark Heinrich, commander of Naval Supply




In fact, we helped drive the development of a Customer Pay program that mandates the only time our OEM gets paid is when a part is delivered to the military assembly line. The following results speak for themselves: No G-coded vehicles coming off the lines • Parts inventories reduced from $100 million to $25 million • 28 million parts for 25,000 Humvees were delivered with only 52 misses • Named 2008 LEAD supplier of the year

For Warehousing & Logistics, Technical Services, Products, or Kitting and Packaging, choose Williams Logistics and Consider It Done. Albany, GA

| Chambersburg, PA | Scranton, PA | New Boston, TX Call 1-800-999-0933

MLF  7.3 | 5

Systems Command and chief of the Navy Supply Corps. “Navy ERP has been the invaluable enabler to understand where every dollar is spent, including decisions about the purchase, storage and usage of spare parts,” Heinrich said. “Leveraging Navy ERP allows us to take a deepdive analysis into such costs, which will ultimately increase inventory velocity and reduce total inventory costs.” The system, which handles accounting, distribution, human resources, maintenance and purchasing, also allowed the Navy to retire 265 legacy applications in fiscal year 2012, saving $286 million in information technology costs.

FedEx, UPS FedEx’s advertising slogan used to be, “When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight.” But now the company helps the military and other customers decide whether a shipment really needs to be delivered first thing in the morning or whether a less rapid, lower-cost option would make more sense, said Kirstin Knott, managing director of FedEx Services. In addition, FedEx has encouraged the military to review its shipping policies to ensure it isn’t restricted from using all commercially available services. FedEx also has briefed several military units on its SenseAware service, which provides near real-time data about a shipment. A multi-sensor device, roughly the size of two smartphones side by side, travels with the shipment, sending information back to a

web-based application that provides updates on location, temperature, exposure to light, humidity and barometric pressure. “This could be a valuable tool for military services since it can be used for monitoring critical shipments like blood and plasma, but SenseAware is not limited to health care and life sciences use,” Knott said. “It can track any high-value item, like aircraft maintenance parts, providing visibility and security all along the route.” UPS is also involved in the defense arena. UPS advises DoD on commercial supply chain best practices through informal discussions and a government-industry committee. While the military’s main concern has traditionally been ensuring troops have the tools they need, the private sector brings the perspective of being focused on containing costs, said Randy Strang, vice president of customer solutions for UPS. UPS also manages an Atlanta-area warehouse for Pratt & Whitney that distributes military and commercial aircraft engine parts worldwide. UPS helps the United Technologies Corp. (UTC) subsidiary determine appropriate inventory levels and the type of transportation to use for a particular shipment. With the warehouse achieving a 99 percent ontime delivery rate and inventory records that are accurate 99.98 percent of the time, UPS has received UTC’s prestigious Supplier Gold award three years in a row, Strang said.

Academia The military is also getting help from academia to implement commercial supply

chain practices. Penn State University’s Center for Supply Chain Research, for instance, has offered courses to “familiarize Marine Corps logisticians with ‘cutting edge’ civilian industry best practices; provide a commercial orientation for our Marines assigned to acquisition, life cycle management and depot rebuilds; and introduce students to new and innovative commercial logistics concepts and processes,” a DoD website says. The center offers a total of seven courses, and they are well-attended by military personnel, said W. L. “Skip” Grenoble, the center’s executive director and senior research associate. The courses can lead to certificates in supply chain management, supply chain leadership and supply chain operational excellence. “The military has been very quick to take us up on it,” Grenoble said. Meanwhile, the center is nearing completion of a report on how counterfeit parts affect supply chain management and how such risks could be better managed through improved prevention and detection. Grenoble believes the report’s findings could have major implications for the military, which has experienced “a lot of horror stories in both aircraft parts and electronics.” O

For more information, contact Editor-in-Chief Jeff McKaughan at or search our online archives for related stories at

Demand Planning and Forecasting is easier with ILS solutions... • Support BOM forecasting with supply and demand trend data. • Build costs projections with catalog and historic quote pricing points. • Locate critical obsolete parts with the ILS global supplier network. • Discover alternate part numbers and procurement sources through the ILS Government Research Tool.

Inventory Locator Service,® LLC 1-901-794-5000 (Worldwide) • 1-800-233-3414 (North America) • • MLF_April2013.indd 1

6 | MLF 7.3

3/27/2013 09:27:56 AM

By Henry Canaday MLF Correspondent Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II sets new standards of performance for multi-role fighters as a fifth-generation aircraft. The program is highly innovative too in its incorporation of life cycle cost planning from the very beginning. The latter innovation is especially crucial in an era of budget austerity and the Defense Department’s commitment to address life cycle costs on all new platforms both early and strenuously. It is still early in the F-35 program, so real-world data on F-35 life cycle costs is skimpy and preliminary. Nevertheless, both Defense Department managers and Lockheed Martin personnel are confident they are headed down the right path. The right path in this case would be a superb airplane with unprecedented capabilities that will be no more expensive to operate and maintain than many less-capable aircraft. The joint program office (JPO) is the product support manager for F-35 sustainment and is charged with governing life cycle cost planning to improve reliability and maintainability of the weapons system, explained Joseph DellaVedova, public affairs director for the F-35 JPO. At present, more than 3,000 F-35s are projected to be in the fleet for the three U.S. military services, eight partner nations and under at least two foreign military sales. “We manage a complex life cycle program,” DellaVedova noted. The JPO is now in the early phases of its life cycle curve models. “We have airmen, Marines and sailors out on the flight lines collecting data and gaining hands-on experience about F-35 operations,” DellaVedova said. Today, F-35s fly training and test sorties from four military sites. Five years from now, F-35s will operate from 17 locations. “As the program matures and we collect more information from the field, the JPO is replacing its parametric models with bottom-up reviews and analysis informed with real-world data,” DellaVedova said. “This will greatly enhance

Government, industry still confident in F-35 life cycle planning.

our ability to more accurately estimate costs and identify life cycle efficiencies.” The JPO is also in the midst of conducting a business case analysis to evaluate its overall sustainment approach. “We have incorporated affordability initiatives such as deep dives, spares procurement strategy and technicalrefresh solutions to drive savings into the program,” DellaVedova said. “We have more work to do and the F-35 enterprise will get there.” The JPO remains committed to working with warfighters and maintenance professionals to make smart life cycle decisions that will yield positive results for the F-35 program now and in the years to come. Lockheed Martin said it remains confident that F-35 operation and support costs will be comparable to or lower than that of the seven legacy platforms that it will replace. The company says this economy will hold, even though the aircraft provides U.S. and allied forces with the unprecedented fifthgeneration fighter performance capabilities of radar-evading stealth, supersonic speed, agility and the most comprehensive integrated sensor package of any fighter aircraft. Lockheed predicts the F-35 will achieve cost advantages over the platforms it will replace chiefly by a large-scale deployment supported by a single system. The F-35 exploits economies of scale gained by operation of the aircraft by three U.S. service branches and by international partnerships. Yet all these aircraft will have common logistics, maintenance, training and supply chain infrastructure. Demonstrating this advantage, a recent competition in Japan for the Air Self Defense Force’s next-generation fighter aircraft selected the F-35 because of its lower life cycle cost compared with all the fourth-generation fighters that were in the competition. In addition to the advantage of large scale supported by common infrastructure, the autonomic logistics information system

(ALIS) enables F-35 operators to plan ahead to maintain and sustain its systems over the entire life cycle of the aircraft. “ALIS provides the information technology backbone and capabilities to continuously capture and analyze the fleet’s overall readiness in support of current and future warfighters across the U.S. services and the world,” Lockheed said. ALIS integrates a broad range of capabilities, including operations, maintenance, prognostics and health management, supply chain, customer support, training and technical data. Thus a single, secure information environment provides users with up-to-date information on any of these areas. Moreover, ALIS uses web-enabled applications on a distributed network. It serves as the information infrastructure for the F-35, transmitting aircraft health and maintenance action information to the appropriate users on a globally distributed network to technicians worldwide. ALIS also receives health reporting codes via a radio frequency downlink while the F-35 is still in flight. This enables the prepositioning of parts and qualified maintainers so that when the aircraft lands, downtime is minimized and efficiency is increased. In addition, ALIS allows F-35 support systems to deliver operational and training execution for both pilots and maintainers with innovative technologies that meet the demands of everyday use. Lockheed noted that ALIS version 1.0.3 is currently deployed at Edwards, Eglin and Nellis Air Force Bases and at Yuma Air Station. The U.S. Air Force and Marine Corps have both approved ALIS 1.0.3 for authority to connect enabling operations to move forward at all F-35 operational, test and training sites. O For more information, contact Editor-in-Chief Jeff McKaughan at or search our online archives for related stories at

MLF  7.3 | 7

for Disaster

Providing protection and comfort in time of need. By Henry Canaday, MLF Correspondent Providing temporary or longer-term shelter for victims of disasters is one of the first duties of relief agencies. Options partly depend on local circumstances. In wealthy countries like the U.S., temporary shelters may be arranged in public buildings and longer-term placement be made in trailers or homes. In poor counties, facilities are not so available. It can be essential to provide minimal shelters like tents or other structures to help people survive. The choices here are determined by local climate and resources available. Three-quarters of post-disaster response activities of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies include a shelter, according to Graham Saunders, head of shelter and settlements at the IFRC. Thirty percent of IFRC expenditures on disaster recovery are on shelter or reconstruction. Average yearly spending on shelters is at least $240 million. But “immediate post-disaster needs, that is the number of affected households, significantly exceed financial and material resources available,” Saunders stressed. Typical funding made available after a disaster averages $50 per household. Many households receive nothing while others receive anywhere from $20 to $2,000, depending partly on media attention and international donors. Most disaster victims prefer to receive shelter materials, such as tarps, ropes, fixings, metal roof sheeting and tools, or cash, which they combine with their own assets to reconstruct homes, rather than tents or shelters made from unfamiliar materials. Cash is increasingly preferred to enable households to meet shelter needs, because it can purchase materials, pay workers or rent temporary accommodations. But shelters such as tents, prefabs or alternative structures are still needed in three cases: where the local economy has been significantly affected and cannot support repair and reconstruction; when households 8 | MLF 7.3

have been displaced and temporary solutions are required; and when cold climate or technological disasters require safe shelters instantly to prevent loss of life. Depending on circumstances and funds, IFRC provides shelter kits, cash, tents, more durable frames and enclosures, or help with repairs and rentals. IFRC has pre-positioned many shelter kits and tents in regional logistics units around the world and has procurement agreements with major suppliers to rapidly scale up resources. Saunders said finding shelters is not a challenge. “There are many solutions in the marketplace, but most have a price far exceeding humanitarian funding available in disasters.” What is most needed is innovation in use of traditional materials in hazardous locations and getting shelter supplies to disaster areas quickly. “We do not need Bethlehem Steel to design a steel house that humanitarian agencies and governments cannot afford. We need companies to find ways to rapidly scale up after the disaster the availability of common steel sections for appropriate shelter solutions, either temporary or longer term.” Monica Noro, chief of the Shelter and Settlement Section at the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, said, “We usually intervene to assist large numbers of people who are suddenly displaced across borders. In many instances, people are accommodated in camps where shelter tents are provided as an initial emergency assistance.” Research and development for improvement of family tents’ technical performance continues so as to make tents stronger and lighter. The lifespan of a tent is typically six months to a year, depending mainly on climate conditions. These family tents may have a veranda and total about 23 square meters in size. Refugee families usually participate in setting up their tent themselves with some basic training. Noro said other shelter options could be adopted depending on context and phase of assistance. In some instances, plastic sheets,

wood or bamboo frames as well as toolkits could enable beneficiaries to build a basic shelter that gradually can evolve into semipermanent and eventually more durable shelter. For these more durable solutions, it is important that refugees participate in construction of their shelters, and that shelters respect cultural habits and make use of local materials so that construction boosts the local economy. The UNHCR is interested in alternative shelters that might be offered on the global market. As part of its research and development efforts, UNHCR is exploring alternative materials and technologies. Private firms offer shelter options that vary widely in expense, strength and durability. Western Wall Tents’ temporary shelters have been used around the world, according to President Brian Mosher. It has provided tents to relief agencies such as Global Aid Network and Matthew 25 Ministries. Western both manufactures and imports tents. “Probably one of our main distinctions is that we are inexpensive,” Mosher said. “We can get tents manufactured in China and elsewhere abroad, and if someone orders 10,000 tents they want them inexpensive.” Most emergency use of Western’s tents is outside the U.S. Mosher said U.S. victims of disasters usually want more permanent shelters, such as trailers. Western’s tents are readily deployed. “It is a really simple design, with a singe ridge pole, very easy to set up,” Mosher explained. For protection, these tents come in different types, with single, double or triple layers. “It depends on what people are willing to pay and how bad the elements are,” Mosher said. Some buyers find that single-layer tents do not provide enough waterproofing in tough conditions. The triple-layer tents are meant for winter, with insulation to hold heat inside. Durability depends on the elements. In Haiti’s wet and humid climate a tent might last only a year. In a drier climate the same shelter would last for several years. The

standard Western living tent is 4-by-4 meters, but the company also makes large hospital tents and dining tents that can be up to 20-by40 feet in size. Utilis USA makes robust, quick-erect shelter systems that can be set up in minimal time but last for a long time, according to Business Development Manager Adam Bement. “They can be used for anything from personnel housing to a hospital to a command and control center,” Bement explained. These are tents made of fabric. The largest is 650 square feet and can be set up by five people in five to seven minutes. Utilis warranties them for three years, but these shelters have lasted up to five years in the field. The smallest Utilis shelter is 200 square feet. Utilis shelters can come with insulated internal liners that give them approximately an R4 insulation rating, “not exactly the insulation level of a house, but pretty good for a tent,” Bement noted. The company is working with the Air Force Research Laboratory on a shelter system with an external thermalfly solar barrier to make air conditioning in hot climates more efficient. Bement said Utilis pricing is competitive for high-quality, durable tents, about $20,000 for the 650-square-foot version. The tents are built to military specification, including military testing for protection against rain, snow and wind. The company has not worked extensively with disaster-relief customers because these agencies tend to want less expensive shelters and not need five to seven years of durability. “We are absolutely ready to support them if they need a highly durable shelter system for short- or long-term use,” Bement noted. HDT makes a wide range of shelters for both military use and disaster response, said James Maurer, vice president of business development at the company’s Expeditionary Systems Group. Some are based on folding metal frames while others have an inflatable air-beam structure. All are high-performance systems with advanced features. In addition to shelters, HDT also provides support equipment, such as mobile power, heating and cooling. For remote areas without road access, HDT makes precision-guided air delivery systems to deliver supplies by GPS-guided parachute. Due to volume and its broad customer base, HDT usually has product available for immediate delivery when emergencies occur. And each HDT shelter can be used as a standalone unit or can be interconnected in larger complexes scalable to the size of the incident.

years in European conditions. They can usuHDT also makes chemical, biological, ally be installed in one day. radiological and nuclear filtration systems Sea Box makes a number of temporarythat are integrated with shelters to protect shelter products, according to Bill Begley, against these hazards. And it offers negativedirector of modular shelters. pressure isolation systems for quarantines. The first is the Shelter Pack, designed Maurer said HDT shelters are distincas a “sleeve” that fits inside a standard 20tive in their lightweight, rapid-deploying or 50-foot shipping container. This product capabilities, so responders can deliver equipcomes on a pallet with all the tools and caulkment quickly. “Just as important is very high ing necessary to set it up. It takes two men strength. Unlike flimsy, recreational shelters, about 45 minutes to insert the sleeve and, HDT products perform in the most severe when finished, it furnishes a living shelter wind, snow, rain and temperature extremes, with finished walls and ceiling, power entry which are often the conditions in disaster and fluorescent light bulbs. When shelter situations.” duty is over, the sleeve can be removed and HDT has developed a new line of shelters the container is available to be used again for called Base-Xpress. “In addition to being shipping. lighter and more mobile, these shelters have a The second product is the Flat Pack, commuch lower price point, making them affordprising three or four knocked-down shelters able for a larger range of users,” Maurer said. that are compressed into one pack, about the HDT is also focusing on energy-efficiency size of a 20-foot shipping container. Two men and self-sufficient power generation and has using a forklift can assemble and erect each developed alternative solutions such as solar, shelter in five to six hours. wind and intelligent power Each shelter is made of about management. “This capability 50 pieces. is ideal for disaster-recovery The third product is the environments where there CRS, a 20-foot, one-piece conmay be no or limited power tainer that collapses on itself or in a remote area where and can be popped up and there is no power infrastructurned into a shelter with a ture.” Like all HDT products, fork lift in 10 to 15 minutes. these solutions are designed Begley said Sea Box is workto be compatible with each ing on CRS for the U.S. miliother and operate as a sysBill Begley tary, but it would be available tem. For example, HDT offers for disaster uses. “It goes on a a solar-powered field hospital truck in one piece; you can put it up for one for serving patients where there is no power. day or five years, then drive it to another locaLindstrand USA makes inflatable struction. You could put it up or down 10 times a tures such as hangars and shelters, storday.” age and decontamination units, as well as Sea Box also makes ancillary systems for bespoke buildings and permanent roofs shelters like ice machines and ladders. designed to customer requirements, accordBegley stressed that all Sea Box shelters ing to Marketer Cheryll Lopez. are very durable. The Shelter Pack is as Air-cell structures are made with two laydurable as the metal container it fits within. ers of material and fabric formers in between. The two other shelters are made of composite Self-supported by air fans, these structures tin, aluminum and fiberglass panels and can need no foundations, hardware or guy wires last 20 years or more, “as long as a house,” and can be used in any environment. They act Begley said. as permanent structures and can withstand These structures have two to six inches of wind up to 80 knots and up to 140 kilograms insulation made of rock wall or foam and can of snow per square meter. These inflatable have insulation at R11, R22, R35 standards, buildings have great thermal and sound insuor R42 for ceilings, depending on specificalation properties and tolerate temperatures tions set by buyers. “We can match any from -30 C to 70 C. requirements,” Begley said. O Lindstrand’s inflatable buildings comply with fire-retardancy and anti-fungal standards applicable to pneumatic buildings. For more information, contact Editor-in-Chief Jeff McKaughan at Life expectancy depends upon climate and or search our online archives for related stories levels of ultraviolet light. Outdoor structures at should survive 10 years in tropics and 20 MLF  7.3 | 9


Compiled by KMI Media Group staff

Contractor Logistics Support for NAVAIR M7 Aerospace LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems of America LLC, will be working with BAE Systems to provide contract logistics support (CLS) for the T-34, T-44 and T-6 aircraft under a contract awarded to BAE Systems by the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR). Under its NAVAIR contract, BAE Systems awarded M7 a subcontract of approximately $50 million to be performed over a five-year period. “We are pleased to team with BAE Systems for this opportunity and to serve the United States Chief of Naval Air Training,” commented

Newest JHSV Conducts Builder Trials Joint High Speed Vessel ( JHSV) 2, the future USNS Choctaw County, recently conducted builder’s sea trials. The ship, now under construction at Austal USA, is the second ship of the JHSV class. “JHSV 2 is the second ship in this class to go through rigorous builder’s trials testing,” said Strategic and Theater Sealift Program Manager Captain Henry Stevens. “At this stage, JHSV 2 is more complete than the lead ship, and we are benefitting from JHSV 1’s lessons learned. This was the first step in preparing the ship for acceptance trials and delivery later this year.” JHSV is designed to commercial standards, with limited modifications for military use. The vessel is capable of transporting 600 short tons 1,200 nautical miles at an average speed of 35 knots and can operate in shallow-draft ports and waterways, interfacing with roll-on/ roll-off discharge facilities. Other joint requirements include an aviation flight deck to support day and night aircraft launch and recovery operations. JHSV 2 will have airline style seating for 312 embarked forces with fixed berthing for 104.

10 | MLF 7.3

Raanan Horowitz, president and CEO of Elbit Systems of America. “At Elbit Systems of America, our mission is to develop innovative solutions that protect and save our warfighters’ lives. With this opportunity we are providing mission capable, safe-for-flight aircraft for our nation’s warriors as they train for the future.” M7 Aerospace will provide CLS on the T-34 aircraft assigned to satellite sites, T-34/44/6 organizational and intermediate level maintenance, supply chain management and engineering Services. The work will support training

at Naval Air Station Corpus Christi in Texas, Naval Air Station Pensacola and Naval Air Station Whiting Field in Florida.

AFLCMC Awards Command & Control Agreement Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has been awarded a prime contract by the U.S. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) to provide command and control (C2) applications information services development to the Air Combat Command. Under the contract, SAIC will provide C2 applications information services development for air, space and cyberspace domains, enabling the migration of capability from older, antiquated applications and hardware to a contemporary infrastructure using modern tools, techniques, and processes. SAIC is one of seven contractors eligible to compete for task orders under this contract. “We look forward to providing applications and information services to the Air Force warfighter, enabling them to produce decision-quality information at the right place and time,” said Dan Harris, SAIC senior vice president and business unit general manager.

Recognized Performance Two of AAR’s businesses have earned the 2012 Boeing Gold Performance Excellence Award. It is the third time that both AAR Defense Systems and Logistics and AAR Aircraft Component Services in Europe have earned Boeing’s Gold Award. The Boeing Company issues the award annually to recognize suppliers who have achieved superior performance. AAR maintained Gold composite performance ratings for each month of the performance period, from October 1, 2011, to September 20, 2012. AAR is one of only 153 suppliers to earn the Gold level of recognition for 2012 and is further distinguished by receiving awards at more than one facility. “We value our long-term relationship with Boeing and are especially proud to be recognized for our performance in support of both commercial and defense programs,” said

Tim Romenesko, president and chief operating officer of AAR Corp. “Our employees’ hard work and commitment to excellence are how AAR continues to meet customer expectations and provide superior service.” AAR’s Defense Systems and Logistics division was recognized for their supply chain management services in support of The Boeing Company’s Harrier Integrated Supply Support performance-based logistics contract. The program supports AV-8B Harriers operated by the U.S. Marine Corps, Italy and Spain from Cherry Point, N.C., where AAR manages inventory and logistics for the versatile fixed-wing aircraft. AAR’s Aircraft Component Services division in Europe earned an additional award for performing in-house component repairs and managing a network of component repair subcontractors in support of European airlines operating the 717 and 737NG aircraft.

Integration Maximizer Lt. Gen. C.D. Moore II Commander Air Force Life Cycle Management Center


Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Integration Maximizer

Q& A

Enabling Cross-Portfolio Integration and Innovation

Lieutenant General C.D. Moore II Commander Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Lieutenant General C.D. Moore II is commander, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. The organization is the single center responsible for total life cycle management covering all aircraft, engines, munitions and electronic systems. Moore is a distinguished graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, as well as the top graduate in engineering. A Guggenheim Fellow, he completed a Master of Science degree in aeronautical engineering at Columbia University before entering flight school in 1981. He served as a T-38 instructor pilot, an operational F-15 pilot and as an experimental test pilot. Moore also served as commander of the first F-22 squadron as well as a group commander at Eglin AFB, Fla., Materiel Wing director of the F-16 System Program Office, Materiel Wing commander of the F-22 System Program Office and vice commander of the Aeronautical Systems Center. His staff assignments include director of special programs in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, deputy director of the Global Power Directorate in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, and deputy program executive officer of the F-35 Joint Program Office. Moore served as the chief of air operations, Multi-National Forces-Iraq in 2004, and he is a command pilot with more than 3,000 flight hours in 30 types of aircraft. Prior to assuming his current position, Moore was vice commander, Air Force Materiel Command. His awards and decorations include: Defense Superior Service Medal with oak leaf cluster; Legion of Merit with two oak leaf clusters; Defense Meritorious Service Medal; Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters; Aerial Achievement Medal with two oak leaf clusters; Joint Service Commendation Medal; Air Force Commendation Medal; Air Force Achievement Medal with two oak leaf clusters; Combat Readiness Medal; Iraq Campaign Medal; Global War on Terrorism Service Medal; and Air Force Expeditionary Service Ribbon with Gold Border. Q: Tell me about the command structure and responsibilities that are centered here at AFLCMC as a result of the overall Air Force Materiel Command reorganization.

A: AFLCMC streamlined oversight formerly shared amongst seven centers: acquisition offices from ASC, ESC, AAC; program management and product support pieces of WR-ALC, OO-ALC, OC-ALC; and AFSAC’s FMS oversight responsibilities. AFLCMC integrates across multiple portfolios—aircraft and propulsion systems, munitions, electronic/cyber systems and strategic systems—and enables cross-portfolio integration and innovation that is vital since few, if any, systems exist entirely independent of other systems. Essentially, if it’s an Air Force system, and is not in orbit, it’s probably managed by AFLCMC. The PEOs within AFLCMC have programmatic execution responsibility while the HQ AFLCMC staff provides policy guidance, supports cross-portfolio integration, promotes standard, more efficient processes, and works resource management to maximize center output. The PEOs wear two different but related hats: The first hat represents the program executive officer role with a programmatic focus, where the PEO reports directly to the Service Acquisition Executive [SAF/AQ]; the other hat represents a directorate lead role where they manage their respective organizations and work within the center to place the right people and equipment to maximize program execution [cost/schedule/ performance]. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center | MLF 7.3 | 1

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Lt. Gen. C.D. Moore Commander

Michael Gill Executive Director



John Miller Agile Combat Support

Steven Wert Battle Management

Robert “Shof” Shofner Business & Enterprise Systems

Maj. Gen. Craig S. Olson C3I & Networks

Maj. Gen. Dwyer L. Dennis Fighters and Bombers

Col. Eric Fick ISR/SOF

Maj. Gen. John F. Thompson Tanker

Kevin Buckley Mobility

Brig. Gen. Daryl Hauck Strategic Systems

Brig. Gen. Scott W. Jansson Weapons


Col. Duke Richardson Vice Commander

Brig. Gen. Peter Sefcik Jr. Mobilization Assistant

Col. Howard (Chris) Davis Director of Staff

Chief Master Sgt. Maxwell Grindstaff Command Chief

Directorates & Support

Ralph Garcia Propulsion

Brig. Gen. James Haywood AF Security and Cooperation

John Artuso Acquisition

John Day Personnel

Jorge Gonzalez Engineering

Carolyn Gleason Finance

Col. Peter Bailey Intelligence

Steve Miley Contracting

Lynn Eviston Plans & Programs

Col. Keith Bearden Program Development & Integration

Cathy Snyder Logistics

Jon Kocara Safety

Col. Cassie Barlow 88 ABW

Col. Lester A. “JR” Weilacher 66 ABG

Dave Bakke High Power Directed Energy

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Previous center commanders were dual-hatted as PEOs. That is not the case within AFLCMC. My primary responsibly as center commander is ensuring the center is operating as effectively and efficiently as possible. This includes maximizing integration and innovation across program portfolios to yield the most dominant, affordable Air Force capabilities. You could say that previous center commanders had program depth in their organizations, but their breadth was limited. As AFLCMC/CC, I do not get as deeply involved in day-to-day programmatic details, but I have a very broad scope of responsibility and considerable latitude to enhance the center’s performance and programmatic output. Another way of looking at it is to say that AFLCMC’s creation was about breaking down many self-imposed borders and unnecessary barriers. These took multiple forms: Acquisition and product support: [These areas were] formerly managed by multiple organizations, even for the same weapon system. The AFLCMC construct recognizes that the two disciplines are really part of a greater, integrated whole, and we benefit by assigning a single manager from within the center to oversee performance “cradle to grave.” FMS case managers and program offices: FMS is a vital part of building partnerships with our allies and coalition partners. Case management used to be under a separate center, the Air Force Security and Assistance Center [AFSAC]. AFSAC was an independent center even though its mission required close interaction with the weapon system program offices. Now AFSAC [same acronym, but new name: Air Force Security and Cooperation] Directorate is part of AFLCMC, and as such, is an equal partner in the same organization that provides the materiel and programmatic support to FMS customers. Regional fiefdoms: One of the problems with the previous multi-center construct was that most of the centers were geocentric around a single base. By being so localized we ended up with the Base X way of doing business, or the Base Y way, effectively sub-optimized for that location. We could become more effective by embracing centerwide ways of doing business. AFLCMC uses the best of breed ideas as the starting point for cross-center standardization. Where a best practice originated is not relevant; we capitalize on best ideas no matter the origin. Q: Has the command started to realize the synergies in productivity and savings in cost efficiencies that were hoped for? Any examples you can share? A: We continue to work across the board to standardize our business processes. As part of AFLCMC stand-up, we reviewed business processes across the various locations and adopted the most effective and efficient approaches. Part of this involves reducing redundancy and streamlining in order to become a more efficient and effective organization. For example, in our financial management area we have had success in streamlining the funds distribution process. Where previously there were multiple sub-allocations required to transfer funds across center lines, AFLCMC’s wide scope of responsibility across many locations allowed the center to receive allocated budget authority and directly fund the location and program executing those funds. 4 | MLF 7.3 | Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Another benefit has been simplified and increased visibility across the total AFLCMC funding portfolio from the beginning of a program to the end of its life cycle. This combination of increased visibility and application of streamlined processes has led to better, more timely decisions. Q: How has General Wolfenbarger’s direction, in light of the memo from General [Larry] Spencer and Under Secretary of the Air Force [Jamie] Morin, affected the AFLCMC? What projects/ programs have been most affected so far? Have you reduced staff? A: The sequestration and year-long continuing resolution present many challenges to the Air Force and to AFLCMC. In preparation for these challenges we have implemented steps in accordance with Air Force and AFMC direction. For example, we are greatly reducing our travel expenses, curtailing supply purchases, implementing a civilian hiring freeze, and deferring all non-emergency facility sustainment, restoration and modernization projects across our installations. All of the investment programs in AFLCMC will be impacted by the sequester, which can drive up unit costs and delay followon software, flight testing, and the delivery of capability to our warfighters. In addition, as directed AFLCMC is taking the necessary preparations for a potential civilian furlough. Because we rely heavily on our civilian workforce, we have serious concerns about the long-term impacts of sequestration and the detrimental effect of losing over 2 million man-hours of productive work within the center. Q: As the command turns the corner on its first operational year, have you adjusted your guidance and focus as Air Force Materiel Command went from a new organization on paper to fully operational? Do you expect the command to look much like it does today, one year from now? A: For starters, we recognize that we didn’t get it perfect at IOC [initial operational capability]. That’s why we set an FOC [fully operational capability] date to allow time to make minor adjustments and to mature our new way of doing business. Since declaring IOC, structurally we have made a handful of organizational changes. Since stand-up, we’ve elevated logistics and safety as directorate-level organizations. Both are functional areas that warranted an equal voice at the center level; logistics in particular serves to add weight to the product support side of our mission. There may be a few more adjustments over the next six months, but the emphasis right now is on process improvement rather than structure, and in that sense we will continue changing and getting better. While our overall mission responsibility of acquisition and support will not change, we are constantly working on ways to improve how we deliver to that mission. In guiding this necessary change, we have established objective champions—senior leaders from across the center—who pursue ways to improve our center in key areas, from delivering cost-effective acquisition solutions to ensuring a safe, secure, quality work environment.

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center To govern this change management, we have established a standards and processes board which finds and improves upon the best of breed processes from across the organization. This ensures centerwide standardization using the most effective and efficient processes. The board has identified a set of key and critical processes which they are actively improving, implementing and tracking. Although the board’s work will take time, we are confident this process improvement focus will dramatically enhance the center’s performance in supporting the warfighter. Q: Have the PEOs’ structure and responsibilities remained constant or did the reorganization directly affect them as well? A: PEO responsibilities expanded A U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker sits in the inspection hangar on Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma City, Okla. [Photo by Staff Sgt. Caroline considerably under the re-organi- Hayworth, courtesy of U.S. Air Force] zation. From the outside, the easiA: The age of our aircraft is a growing concern for the Air Force. est changes to see are the organizational adjustments. We continue to investigate opportunities for modernization and We eliminated PEO Theater Command & Control [TC2] and service life extension. The Air Force adheres to the tenets of intedistributed the portfolio to Battle Management and C3I&N. That grated life cycle management [ILCM], and AFLCMC both institumove balanced out the portfolios in the critical electronic and tionalizes and clears the way for implementing ILCM practices. cyber realms. Prior to AFLCMC, we tended to operate with a distinct organiWe also removed PEO responsibilities from the center comzational separation between the acquisition and product support mander’s duties. Although I am PEO-qualified and retain the communities. Once a system was fielded it was often “thrown responsibility under special circumstances [e.g., overseeing over the fence” to a product support team. In contrast, AFLCMC F-15SA, the FMS case for Saudi Arabia], my primary focus as cenintegrates both acquisition and product support under a single ter commander is not programmatic; rather, my focus is building program manager. the most effective and efficient organization for executing acquisiIn addition to this single manager concept, we have impletion and product support responsibilities. My key objective is to mented the product support manager [PSM] role where the PSM ensure the programs and PEOs have the right tools and necessary works hand in hand with the SPM and within the acquisition resources to maximize productivity. team. The PSM ensures system reliability, availability, and supThe new organization also allowed us to clearly define PEOs portability are addressed early and continuously for both new and single program manager [SPM] responsibilities. The concept systems and upgrades. of a PEO, and SPM under them, is to have a single decision authorAs for our industrial base, this also relates to the concept of ity and streamlined chain of command for overseeing a portfolio cradle-to-grave management and joining acquisition and product of related weapon systems. Previously this was not the execution support. Under the new AFLCMC construct, we proactively affect model. Before the reorganization, PEOs managed the acquisition the industrial base by addressing product support and sustainof a system or modification, but did not regularly have control ment strategies early and often throughout the program life over product support [i.e., ensuring system availability of a fielded cycle. In doing so, we seek opportunities not only to reduce sussystem]. It’s like having responsibility for researching and purtainment costs and supportability footprint, but also to enable our chasing a car, but not having a say over how it’s maintained after customers greater flexibility in determining how best to support a it leaves the lot. system during the life cycle. The reorganization allowed the PEOs and the SPMs under To that end, all programs within AFLCMC identify and manthem to have true cradle-to-grave managerial responsibility for age industrial base constraints and options throughout the life their weapon systems. cycle. Q: How is the Air Force managing the life cycles of a number Q: What processes are in place to keep the supply chain free of of mature aircraft? Are there challenges in keeping an industrial counterfeit parts? base going to keep parts available when needed?

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center | MLF 7.3 | 5

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center A: We are taking multiple actions to decrease the probability of counterfeit items affecting Air Force systems. For instance, we ensure contractors and subcontractors actively report suspected or confirmed counterfeit items into the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program system. This system serves as DoD’s central reporting repository for these problems. We are also taking actions to decrease the probability of counterfeit items across the Air Force and DoD by reporting suspected or confirmed counterfeit items using the product quality deficiency reporting process. Q: Were there any cultural issues that had to be addressed as one might expect when people are moving around and chains of command are shifted? How did the workforce adjust? A: Culture takes time to change, so everywhere I go—and I encourage my leadership team to do this in their interactions as well—I emphasize AFLCMC’s key principles: speed with discipline—delivering capabilities to the warfighter faster and more efficiently through standard, lean, tailorable and smarter processes; trust and confidence—making sure we meet commitments to all our stakeholders; and unity of purpose—producing a collective team attitude with all internal AFLCMC players and external stakeholders to include the air staff, AFMC HQ and my sister centers. Part of what I preach in unity of purpose is something we call “geographic-agnosticism” or being “geo-agnostic.” AFLCMC has 77 locations, many of which contain major sub-organizations or large numbers of the center’s workforce. We are not a hub with many spokes—we are a multi-polar system. One of the tenants of the re-org was to limit personnel moves across geographic boundaries; the reorganization was not about starting from scratch, but rather using the existing capabilities and talents at each location in a more integrated and efficient manner. We are capitalizing on that talent today and AFLCMC is actively establishing standard best practices across those sites. In keeping with geo-agnosticism, these best practices take the best of the breed ideas regardless of geographic origin. As I said before, cultural shifts like this take time, but geoagnosticism is catching on and will continue to grow because it makes sense and energizes the team to be better. I’ve already witnessed many examples of the workforce embracing the use of shared resources from across the center to solve problems, something that wasn’t natural in the old multi-center construct. It is not unusual to see AFLCMC workers at one location reach out to subject matter experts at another location to address an issue; a year ago these individuals were part of different centers and had to report through separate chains of command. Now they are on the same team and the communication shackles have been removed. The geo-agnostic behavior is changing, and in its wake the culture is changing. AFLCMC is morphing into a one-team culture and mindset across 77 locations. Q: Why were product support responsibilities given to AFLCMC instead of AFSC? A: One of the weaknesses AFLCMC addresses is the gap between acquisition and product support mission areas. Previously the 6 | MLF 7.3 | Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

The AFLCMC ensures that all aspects of program management and supply chain come together to ensure maximum operational readiness. [Photo by Staff Sgt. Caroline Hayworth, courtesy of U.S. Air Force]

acquisition community would design a system and hand it off to another organization to manage. The problem with that handoff model is the integrated nature of acquisition and product support decisions that impact life cycle costs. Product support options can be overly constrained by decisions made early on during the acquisition process. While we can do wonders in upgrading and extending systems already in use, we have much more flexibility if we consider product support early in the life cycle. AFLCMC brings together the acquisition and product support responsibilities and ensures up front collaboration, optimization, and life-cycle-based decision making. That being said, we do work very closely with AFSC in crafting product support strategies. In addition, AFSC has an important function in doing much of the repair and overhaul work that keep our systems operating, and in many cases they are the ones who implement the product support plans. This brings up another benefit of AFLCMC’s geo-agnostic organization. Our product support elements are directly linked with the acquisition professionals, and in many cases this combined AFLCMC team sits near their AFSC sustainer counterparts and teammates at places like Hill, Tinker and Robins. In short, the teamwork between AFLCMC and AFSC is critically important for effective product support planning and execution. O


Compiled by KMI Media Group staff

Generating Power While Saving Fuel and Space According to the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Summary Report, a document included in the assessment report detailing the system’s performance throughout the evaluation process, the DHS’s intelligent power technology system reduced fuel consumption by over 60 percent. The NIE 13.1 began in October and lasted through November during which a range of military equipment was tested in the field and in lab studies for efficiency, interoperability and durability. The intelligent power technology was entered into NIE as a system under evaluation to determine its ability to improve operational energy on the battlefield. During NIE, the system was used to power the Brigade Support Battalion TOC and three company command posts. The TRADOC summary report concluded that the DHS generators consumed fuel at over a 60 percent savings compared to the analog generators operating under the same conditions. It stated that under the loads experienced during

the exercise, traditional generators consume 300 gallons of fuel per day. The intelligent power technology system, a micro-grid of six generators of varying outputs totaling 222 kW, consumed an average of 109 gallons of fuel per day— that consumption rate is only 36.33 percent of the rate of traditional analog generators. Overall, the system conserved 191 gallons of fuel per day, resulting in a total fuel saving of 63.67 percent. Not only did intelligent power technology conserve fuel but it also decreased the number of generators needed to supply power to the BSB’s operations centers. The number of generator sets needed decreased from 10 to six, thus lightening the load by 40 percent. DHS Director of Federal Programs Tim Taets was present at NIE 13.1 and said, “NIE 13.1 was major for intelligent power technology. The system performed exceptionally well on many fronts, but we were most pleased with its extraordinary capability for fuel saving. DHS demonstrated that it is an industry leader in military power generation.”

Navy Environmental Remediation Contract Tetra Tech Inc. recently announced that it had been awarded a $100 million remedial action contract by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command’s Atlantic Division. Through this five-year indefinite delivery/ indefinite quantity contract, Tetra Tech will provide environmental remediation services primarily for the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps installations. This single award contract supports the Navy’s primary environmental remediation program covering the Atlantic area of responsibility including North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Africa, and Vieques, Puerto Rico.

Mobile Air Traffic Tower System Delivered Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) delivered the first low rate initial production (LRIP) mobile tower system (MOTS) to the U.S. Army ahead of schedule. The LRIP contract was awarded in March 2012 for 10 MOTS. An early development MOTS has been deployed with the 3rd Infantry Division in Afghanistan since November 2012. “This first production delivery from SNC marks a major milestone for the MOTS program. Once fielded, MOTS will enable improved maintainability along with a higher operational readiness for our air traffic controllers supporting aircraft movement at airfields around the world,” said Colonel Jerry Davis, Army project manager, Aviation Systems. Davis attended a ceremony marking the first delivery, March 14, 2013, at SNC’s facility in Sparks, Nev. “SNC strives to meet our customers’ needs at every level,” said Greg Cox, corporate vice president of SNC’s communication, navigation and surveillance/air traffic management business area. “Today’s delivery of the first production of the MOTS demonstrates the valued relationship we have with the U.S. Army.” The MOTS is a rapidly deployable air traffic control (ATC) system with secure and non-secure communications radios and support equipment. The modular MOTS includes an ATC tower with organic

18kW power generators, a medium intensity solar powered airfield runway lighting system, and meteorological sensors. MOTS is capable of being airlifted by C-17 aircraft or by CH-47 helicopter and supports military ATC operations by networking with other air traffic service and battle command systems. The MOTS complies with Federal Aviation Administration/ International Civilian Aviation Organization

regulations, and is also equally adept in supporting civilian applications, including disaster relief efforts, forest fire mobile operations, and temporary tower operations anywhere in the world, with minimal logistical requirements. The new AN/MSQ-135 MOTS will replace the Army’s aging AN/TSW-7A air traffic control tower. The MOTS system will also provide a world-wide deployable ATC capability to U.S. Army aviation.

MLF  7.3 | 11

Maintenance Optimizer

Q& A

Working With All Stakeholders to Meet Maintenance Goals John B. Johns Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Maintenance John B. Johns is Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Maintenance. He is responsible for oversight of the department’s annual $90 billion maintenance program. In 2010, Johns served in Iraq as director, Training and Advisory Mission, Iraqi Ministry of Defense, and Director, Iraqi Security Forces Logistics where he was responsible for both the full range of advisory and training functions required to establish governance of Iraqi Defense operations, as well as for the development of the logistics infrastructure and processes to maintain readiness of both conventional military forces and police forces. In past assignments, Johns has served the Army and Navy in technology development, engineering, program management and logistics positions. His assignments with the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command included associate director for systems, Aviation Research, Development, and Engineering Center where he was responsible for the provision of engineering support to all Army aviation systems; principal assistant deputy for systems acquisition where he was responsible for life cycle management of over 20 Army aviation, missile, and ground systems with an annual budget of approximately $1 billion; and deputy commander for systems support where he managed overhaul and maintenance, or reset, of all aviation and missile systems redeployed from Iraq and Afghanistan. He also served as special assistant to the commanding general, U.S. Army Materiel Command from July 2004 to August 2005. In August 2005, he joined the Navy as a member of the Senior Executive Service as the director of industrial operations, Naval Air Systems Command, and deputy commander of fleet readiness centers, naval air forces where he was responsible for naval aviation maintenance operations across six subordinate commands, with a workforce of over 14,000 personnel and an operating budget of approximately $4 billion. Johns holds a Bachelor of Science in aerospace engineering from Penn State University and a master’s in aeronautics and astronautics from Purdue. He is also a graduate of the National Security Management Program, National Defense University. Q: Are there changes anticipated coming from Title 10 in fiscal year 2013 and FY14 that will affect depot maintenance? A: The simple answer is we will implement policy changes to address the critical ambiguities and shortcomings of the existing statutes. The longer answer to that is we had been working with all of the stakeholders within our community, inside the government, industry, labor, congressional staff for the last two years on what we believe are essential changes to the governing statutes for depot maintenance. We had a couple key objectives. The first of those objectives was to reduce ambiguity and improve consistency of interpretation. This objective involves improving clarity with regard to how we actually execute 12 | MLF 7.3

maintenance coincident with upgrades and installation of modifications and how we characterize those modifications. The second objective was to introduce provisions that dealt with changes in our operations, both within maintenance and in how we acquire and support systems. This last area has to do with the nontraditional acquisition of equipment purchased in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which fall outside the specific language of current depot maintenance statutes, but now must be sustained as enduring elements of force structure. This area also addresses the rapidly growing area of software maintenance. We had been working these areas and turning these issues and desires into statutory language for 2011 and 2012. We were partially successful, which actually means we were unsuccessful. Our first attempt resulted in general improvements, with some critical flaws, in the FY12 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act]. We attempted to preserve the improvements and correct the flaws in the FY13 NDAA, but we were unable to gain sufficient support for the changes and instead the FY12 language was repealed in the FY13 NDAA. Given this experience, we do not intend to pursue the same course of action for future years. What we are going to do is take those critical issues, and those changes to reduce ambiguity, improve consistency of interpretation, and address changes in how we do business, and incorporate those changes into departmental regulation and policy. Having discussed this with the congressional staff and the departmental lawyers, we believe we can do that within the framework of existing statute.





pa rts

If you can’t move it, you can’t use it. That’s why customers worldwide rely on the awardwinning team of logisticians at AM General to deliver critical parts and services, affordably and on time around the world. With more than 50 years of experience in shipping tens of millions of parts around the globe for the more than 1.5 million vehicles we have produced, AM General is the proven logistics solution for mission readiness and success.

Q: Do you expect to get a final answer as to whether they think you can do that, or do you expect that you will have to move forward and get an answer after you’re down the road with it? A: We would never move without input from all stakeholders. Just like we did with statutory language, now with departmental regulation and policy, we will proceed openly with all of the stakeholders. We will incorporate lessons learned and be sensitive to reasons why some of the stakeholders were sensitive to the past legislative changes and try to address those in appropriate ways within regulation and policy—but we’ll do it openly. We’ll do it with legal counsel and in coordination with congressional staff, labor and industry. The objective of course is to be successful in getting the critical changes in place that will benefit the entirety of the community. Q: Do you think that there are some maintainers in leadership positions that see Title 10 regulations to be too confining? A: I believe if you ask that question within the maintenance community you will get a different answer to that question for each stakeholder you ask. There are some that believe the current statutory provisions are too restrictive and cause bad behavior, and then there are members of our community that believe they are not restrictive enough, and therefore cause bad behavior. So it really depends on who you ask, on what their opinion is of the restrictive nature, or lack of restrictions associated with the statutory provisions. This widely varying interpretation or perspective is, in fact, why we were not successful in getting appropriate legislation in place, because there are very strongly held beliefs across our community and they vary widely. Our challenge as individual stakeholders is to define what we absolutely must have, and what we absolutely can’t tolerate, or our “red lines.” And our challenge as community is to demonstrate integrity and come together for the greater good. Q: When the equipment starts to flow back heavily from Afghanistan, is the current depot system for all the services organized in such a way to handle that significant increase in workload? A: The way I would characterize the preparation for reset of the retrograde equipment about ready to come out of Afghanistan is we have had 10 years of preparation to receive that equipment. In fact, the reset of equipment out of Iraq and with the drawdown from the surge in Afghanistan gave us a decade of practice. That practice, the correction of damage associated with deployments in very harsh environments in high op tempos, extended the life of valuable equipment and enabled the success of operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan through the support of the force generation strategies of each of the services. While I say it has been practice, it actually has been the key to us enabling operations and extending useful life of equipment. We’ve been doing this for a decade, so what we’re about to do in the drawdown in Afghanistan is pretty much the same as what we’ve been doing for the last decade. The level of workload is actually diminishing. You could view it as a continuum from highs in 2009/10/11 to sustaining levels two to three years, post-conflict or post-retrograde of equipment. Q: One of the reasons that I think Iraq was successful is that we had Kuwait as a staging point to draw equipment out of and to do some processes while the equipment was there. 14 | MLF 7.3

A: We learned a lot with the retrograde of massive amounts of equipment from Iraq and we will be applying all those lessons learned to what we need to do in Afghanistan. But the geography of, and therefore the logistics operations in, Afghanistan is fundamentally different. We will be using every practical method to retrograde equipment from theater; it will generally be multimodal with no single collection or processing point. With multiple retrograde routes there will be multiple processing points. Q: What initiatives will help drive efficiencies and savings in maintenance and inventory parts management? A: The maintenance supply and transportation communities—basically the entirety of the logistics community—have been working continuous process improvement initiatives and programs intensively for a decade and a half. We have been implementing Lean Six Sigma, theory of constraints, adopting best commercial practices from the private sector and incorporating them into our operations organically, and establishing public-private partnerships to leverage the capabilities in both the private and public sector to the benefit of the department in our logistics and war fighting capability. These things have been going on for a long time, but we know this effort is without end—we have not reached optimal efficiency because we believe that journey is continuous—hence the name “continuous process improvement.” We’ve had major successes in the past by optimizing workflow, creating pulse lines, implementing better ways of tool control, kitting operations and supply chain management. In this last area, we are looking at better ways of forecasting so the supply community has a better idea of what the demand will look like, so they can buy in a more accurate way and stock in a more efficient manner. Q: What about optimizing workloads? A: Appropriate allocation of workload across our depot system and within each service is key to future efficiencies. Each service has a strategic plan and business model that emphasizes this. Additionally, we’ve spent the last year and a half working with all the services in a collaborative environment to both leverage centers of excellence and generate efficiencies by cross-service workload reallocation. We have had some success there, but the area that shows most potential is in assignment of new workload, to establish new capabilities. We now have a draft Department of Defense instruction in coordination that recognizes that potential and optimizes the allocation of workload through assignments to centers of industrial and technical excellence. The instruction enables cross-service assessments and adjudication of any conflicts and resolution of any potential multi-site requirements. This instruction should allow us to leverage existing capabilities in the most optimal way and help shape our maintenance industrial base as new systems and capabilities are introduced. While the instruction is not yet approved, we have already had success in applying its principles to the establishment of organic capability for maintenance of medium and large unmanned aerial systems. Q: Regarding the asset visibility and in-transit visibility systems, do we need to improve those systems to get where you would like to be as far as inventory control? A: As a maintainer, my perspective on inventory management is simple—I want the right part at the right place at the right time and I want to pay a reasonable price for it. In other words, I want the supply

chain to be effective and efficient. Also, as a maintainer, we recognize we have a critical part to play in this—we must ensure we are operating efficiently and working with the supply community to produce as accurate a demand forecast as possible. Both communities recognize this, and initiatives over the past several years have focused in these critical areas. You can see the success in reduced wait times, relatively high readiness rates in harsh environments and high op tempos, all with reduced inventory levels. Those are, in fact, the goals that we’re achieving in parallel. While it’s working, further integration and collaboration between the maintenance and supply will just help us be even more effective and efficient—there is still much room for improvement. The tools the supply community has been employing with regard to asset visibility are a key part of this. Q: What do you see is the future trend of using field service representatives or industrial contractors performing maintenance-type functions forward in operations? A: Just like every other part of our business, the issue is balance and appropriate allocation of all possible assets, critical capabilities and skills. Over the past decade, we’ve used contractors in critical support roles that have brought unique knowledge, skills and abilities to the battlefield while allowing us to appropriately place military personnel and government maintainers in the right places. This has enabled us to generate focused augmentation to our organic workforce and create an overarching optimized maintenance capability in support of operational readiness.

Contractors do not take the place of government personnel and government decision making but instead provide much needed technical capabilities and allow us to effectively and efficiently adjust to fluctuations in workload, either in critical surge operations or in managing drawdown of capacity. Q: Does your office have a role, or has it had a role, in assisting the Afghan military and government in developing their own professional maintenance regime, command structure and functions? A: I’d like to address the issue of advice and training to foreign security forces in general before I talk about Afghanistan specifically. The department has begun to see this area as a critical and inherent capability and mission—one that can potentially reduce the requirement for U.S. military presence and engagement by enabling and strengthening our strategic partners. Accordingly, the department has strengthened past capability and established new initiatives focused on our ability to competently provide advice and training to foreign security forces. The leads in this have been OSD policy, DSCA [Defense Security Cooperation Agency], and institutional training elements of the military services. They’ve done a very good job of supporting the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Specifically within Afghanistan OSD Policy and DSCA have had great success with the MODA [Ministry of Defense Advisors] program. Building on the success in Afghanistan and related experience in other countries, they have moved on to a more formal global approach

The service you need, guaranteed.

From Afghanistan to Argentina, military forces around the world rely on Rockwell Collins every day to ensure and extend the life cycle of critical equipment. At Rockwell Collins, we’ve built a global network of reliable 24/7 service and support, tailored to fit your MRO needs today and long into the future. Anywhere. Anytime. Every time.

Tailorable, FlexForce™ life cycle service solutions Performance-based solutions Smart technology updates © 2013 Rockwell Collins. All rights reserved.

MLF  7.3 | 15

for advice and training, and have embedded this as a key part of their response to the national security challenge. They are looking at assignments now in Montenegro, Bosnia and Peru, and they have also been operating in countries like Colombia, and providing critical advice in a variety of different functional areas to include logistics operations. One of the things that we all have to remember is that the true capability within a foreign security force has only partially related to the type and quantity of equipment they have; it has more to do with the skill in how that equipment is operated and sustained. In fact, if you can’t sustain it, you do not have an enduring capability. Their program is focused around enabling that capability and capacity for foreign security forces through focused advice and training. So it’s in that context that we have been working with them across the board on their MODA program in support of Afghanistan and their global program across multiple countries. In support of Afghanistan, we supported pre-deployment training for the 13th Expeditionary Sustainment Command [ESC] as part of the logistics advice and training surge. We collaborated with the 75th Training Command and 162nd Infantry Brigade to provide a four-month train-up prior to their deployment to Afghanistan. All feedback has indicated that the logistics advice and training surge with the 13th ESC was successful and can be seen in the developing institutional capabilities of the Afghan National Police and Army.

specialty skills and capabilities in those sectors, we can have a win-win situation in both sectors. I should add, whatever partnerships that we do engage in, they need to be oriented toward performance metrics that are related to war fighting capability. They need to be oriented toward that common metric or goal that drives behavior on all sides of the partnership—a focus on a single objective of providing required war fighting capability at best cost. Equally important, the documents that define the relationships, the contract, the partnership agreement and the implementation agreements, all need to be synchronized with appropriate incentives and governance framework. Q: Are there feasible ways that are being or have been considered for the maintenance organizations of the various services to cooperate, perhaps even combine efforts?

A: My personal experience in Iraq includes a year deployment in 2010 serving as the director of advice and training for strategic logistics for both the Iraqi Police and military, and as the director of the Advice and Training Mission for the Iraqi Ministry of Defense supporting the generation of increased capability and capacity in multiple functions across the entire ministry. I was very fortunate and honored to work for, and with, some exceptional leaders within U.S. forces, NATO and Iraq, and equally fortunate to have had very talented and committed people on our team. These roles don’t exist there anymore; we have transitioned to the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq under State Department lead. They are in the process right now of completing transition to full governance by the Iraqi military and police.

A: As far as I know, there are no initiatives that are on the table to create anything like DLA with regard to maintenance—nor would I recommend it. I believe execution of maintenance is best handled by the military services that have the responsibility under Title 10 to train, man and equip our forces. I think that’s where it belongs. However, I do believe that collaboration should be encouraged and incentivized. We currently operate a governance structure that links all of the maintenance executives, flag officers, and general officers that are responsible for programs and policy, as well as, execution of maintenance across the entire department. We call it the maintenance executive steering committee [MESC] and it’s a collaborative body, meeting regularly and exploring ways to improve our effectiveness and efficiency. Above the MESC is the joint logistics board [JLB] and other higher-level bodies within the department’s governance structure designed to encourage collaboration, assess initiatives and attack the most pressing problems and challenges. There have been many successes over the past year and a half that have come from the MESC and JLB, to include reallocation of limited workload from one service to another, and establishing new capability with optimal distribution of workload. So yes, there is opportunity and we believe we have a governance structure in place that is capable of taking advantage of that opportunity, within existing statutory constraints, and I don’t see any need to establish any kind of new defense agency to further enable that.

Q: Are public-private partnerships still in vogue, and how can they be executed to bring out the value to DoD?

Q: How would you summarize DoD’s maintenance policy programs to Congress?

A: Not only are they in vogue, but we believe they are absolutely key in this environment of reduced resources to protect and strengthen national maintenance industrial capability. They’re absolutely essential. As we come out of Afghanistan and draw down we must do it wisely. We have to identify and protect critical capabilities, and we have to recognize those critical capabilities are not only in the private sector nor only in the public sector, but they are in fact in both. Our challenge will be creating partnerships and relationships that leverage those critical capabilities and protect them so that we ensure national capability is strong. That’s where partnerships come into play. Our ability to leverage them will be based on not only past successes, but also, trust, collaboration and competence. In general, I would say we need to take advantage of the private sector’s expertise and skills in enabling supply chain management and engineering capabilities, and in the public sector, touch labor, and facilities and equipment. If we can structure partnerships around leveraging those

A: I would talk about the workforce—from the artisan to the technician that actually executes our maintenance, all the way up to the leadership that is responsible for establishing and shaping our programs and policies. This is a very capable workforce; we know our mission, we know that war fighting capability, national security and lives hang in the balance on what we do and how we do it. That’s within the government and industry, on the floor, in the hanger, motorpool and shipyard, and on the ramp, in the field and at sea, through our commands and headquarters all the way to the Pentagon. This workforce is devoted; they’re among the most patriotic citizens in this country. It is this workforce that creates the critical capability that enables materiel readiness. It is this workforce that continually seeks improvement in its own effectiveness and efficiency and is continually focused on what must be done and how best to do it. It is this workforce that has been a key enabler to our military success in Iraq and Afghanistan and U.S. military readiness throughout the world. O

Q: Did you do something similar in Iraq?

16 | MLF 7.3

Building it as if our lives depend on it—theirs do. By Adrienne Brown

For over 71 years, Red River Army Depot (RRAD) has provided support to America’s armed forces. Though the missions have changed one thing remains the same—the depot has continually provided quality equipment and service to soldiers in the field. A dedicated workforce of 6,000 people (government and contractor employees) are engaged in work ranging from producing timber to remanufacturing the mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicle. Over 8 million square feet of floor space provides employees at Red River the capability to rebuild a large variety of vehicle systems and components. The depot houses the only facility in the world capable of remanufacturing road wheels and track for various combat systems. RRAD’s rubber product division removes worn rubber from unserviceable track and road wheels, and then uses stateof-the-art equipment to clean and paint the track and road wheels in preparation for the application of new rubber. Since 1953, the depot has produced nearly three million track shoes and over 700,000 road wheels. Red River is also designated by the Secretary of the Army as the Center for Industrial and Technical Excellence (CITE) for tactical wheeled vehicles, including the

MRAP and the high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV). In addition, the depot is also the CITE for the Bradley fighting vehicle system (BFVS), the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) and the small emplacement excavator. Red River is also the host installation for the joint services’ MRAP University. MRAP-U is a one-stop shop providing a unique cross training platform to prepare instructors and maintenance personnel with the knowledge to conduct field level support on the MRAP family of vehicles. Since 2003, Red River has deployed more than 5,000 government service civilians to provide vehicle sustainment support to the warfighter in Southwest Asia—that’s more civilian deployments than any other Army Materiel Command organization. While in theater, RRAD employees provide sustainment to a variety of platforms and programs, including the heavy equipment transporter electrical upgrades, the stored theater provided equipment-Iraq, container assistance assessment team, Taji Joint Base Workshop, United States Equipment Transfer to Iraq, depot level maintenance support to both the heavy expanded mobility tactical truck and MRAP in Afghanistan, and numerous

contracting officer representative missions executed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Red River continues to utilize the LeanSix Sigma methodology as a transformation catalyst to establish processes which result in reduced problems and waste, while focusing attention on continual process improvement. By eliminating waste, the depot is able to continually improve cost, quality and schedule to the most important customers in the world—our soldiers in the field. Though Lean is practiced in every area of Red River, there is one production area that has surpassed all expectations. The HMMWV production facility reached a goal of remanufacturing 40 HMMWVs per day. Once able to only produce three vehicles per week, the employees of the HMMWV production facility reengineered the entire HMMWV repair process changing it from bay style to a flow assembly line with various stations. Each station has just a few functions that are required before it moves to the next station. This ensures that the RRAD employees at each station are extremely efficient at the processes associated with their station, eliminating waste and decreasing process time. Every 23 minutes a HMMWV rolls off the RRAD line to fill a need in a unit somewhere. MLF  7.3 | 17

Employees of the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle production facility listen as RRAD Commander Col. Doyle Lassitter speaks about the facility’s accomplishment of remanufacturing 40 vehicles per day. Each HMMWV leaves the assembly line at zero miles/zero hours meaning it’s a new vehicle. [Photo courtesy of Red River Army Depot]

techniques. Each entity gains tremendously Red River Army Depot understands the from this process and walks away from it at importance of partnering for the soldier. the end of the contract with a better trained The depot has over 49 existing partnerand more capable workforce as well as a ships. Since 2009 the depot has generated positive relationship with the partner that over $200 million in revenue with direct contributes to the ease with which future sales contracts. Public-private partnerships partnerships are established. Many of the allow the depot and private industry to work depot partners have had lengthy associatogether to accomplish the mission and tions, some in excess of 15 years. avoids placing depots and private industry In addition to partnering with industry, in direct competition. As budgets decrease Red River has expanded partnering into correspondingly to the decrease in deploythe realm of education and training by ments, the amount of funding available for implementing the Student Career Experidepot level work will decrease. The smart ence Program. The program allows students approach to that situation for both private from both Texarkana College industry and the depot sysand Texas A&M Universitytem is to partner and share Texarkana to receive on-thethe workload. job training and concurrently Beyond the obvious take on a regular college workload advantages of partcourse schedule. In May nerships, both Red River and 2011, Texarkana College and its partners achieve tremenTexAmericas Center joined dous technical and process forces to open a training faciladvantages. An element of ity for RRAD employees. The the partnership effort is the TC@TexAmericas Off-Camsharing of expertise, Lean Col. Doyle Lassitter pus Center, located near the processes and manufacturing 18 | MLF 7.3

depot, specializes in courses ranging from technical training on engine and transmission repair to administrative workshops. The center emphasizes the importance of a trained workforce always capable of responding to the needs of our nation’s warfighters. The depot is in midst of a major military construction effort set for completion in the summer of 2014. The Maneuver Systems Sustainment Center will transform how the depot executes its mission. The four phase construction project, which totals over 300,000 square feet of space, includes a tactical body repair facility and a tactical vehicle processing facility. The final phase will deliver the tactical vehicle assembly facility, which will expand the depot’s capability and capacity. In addition to the new sustainment center, Red River also has the capability to refill automatic fire extinguishing systems (AFES) on a variety of vehicles, including the BFVS, MLRS, HMMWV and the MRAP. Red River is also capable of refilling the AFES in other vehicle systems not remanufactured by the depot. Employees have taken AFES work beyond reset and are now able to provide certification capability, which consists of rebuilding the head of the extinguishing system. This saves approximately $1,200 per system. Red River’s intent is to take on DoD AFES requirements by becoming the one-stop shop for the rebuild of the extinguishing systems. “Just as in the past, we prepared to adapt our ever-evolving processes to meet the requirements of our nation and the soldiers that depend on us to reset and rebuild their vitally important equipment,” said RRAD commander Colonel Doyle Lassitter. “Our job is to continue to strengthen our team with our community, our employees and our business partners. We must continue to build quality products that meet the timelines supporting our soldiers and the needs of our military and our nation.” Red River Army Depot is proud of its many successful missions. The depot’s motto, “Our Best—Nothing Less for the Soldiers,” is at the core of all work performed. O Adrienne Brown is the public affairs officer for Red River Army Depot. For more information, contact Editor-in-Chief Jeff McKaughan at or search our online archives for related stories at

The advertisers index is provided as a service to our readers. KMI cannot be held responsible for discrepancies due to last-minute changes or alterations.



AM General...................................................................................13 Aviall............................................................................................ C4 Boeing.............................................................................................3 DHS.............................................................................................. C2 Inventory Locator Service LLC.....................................................6 Rockwell Collins..........................................................................15 W.W. Williams Logistics.................................................................5

April 8-10, 2013 Sea-Air-Space National Harbor, Md.

September 16-18, 2013 Air & Space Conference National Harbor, Md.

April 9-11, 2013 AUSA Army LandPac Symposium Honolulu, Hawaii

September 20-23, 2013 NGAUS Conference Honolulu, Hawaii

April 22-24, 2013 Tactical Vehicles Summit Alexandria, Va.

September 24-26, 2013 Modern Day Marine Quantico, Va.

May 7-9, 2013 Army Sustainment Symposium Richmond, Va.

October 14-17, 2013 Logistics Officer Association Conference Dallas, Texas


Northrop Grumman Technical Services.................................. C2 Northrop Grumman Technical Services.................................2-3

June 12-14, 2013 National Logistics Forum Arlington, Va.

MLF  7.3 | 19

INDUSTRY INTERVIEW Military Logistics Forum Larry Harper President CribMaster Larry Harper is president of CribMaster, a company within the Advanced Industrial Solutions group of Stanley Black & Decker. Harper is responsible for the Global CribMaster business and develops strategies that keep CribMaster the leader in the indirect material management market. Q: Please describe some background on CribMaster and the company’s work with DoD. A: Since 1992, CribMaster has been providing inventory management solutions to companies around the world to manage and control indirect inventory. We work with DoD in several facets, both direct and through DoD suppliers. Most of our DoD interface is through our FOD [foreign object damage]-control program or managing tools around an aircraft. Starting with the Apache helicopter in 1997 to the present day F-35, large aerospace manufacturers have been utilizing CribMaster to automate the processes of issuing tools used on the aircraft while at the same time maintaining the traceability and accountability to reduce the potential risk of FOD. On the MRO side, we support various branches of the U.S. military through effective inventory management with the repairs, maintenance and modernization of the existing fleet. Q: What is CribMaster’s strength in partnering with the military to enhance mission readiness? A: With the recent sequestration, the emphasis is on maintaining the existing fleet with a reduced workforce. On-time completion of tasks plays a critical role in maintaining the readiness of the fleet. Automation is a key component. Our system controls material usage and removes costly productivity barriers to ensure that on-time completion deadlines of the fleet are met. Managing work order instructions, PPE, MRO, or any other type of indirect material through vending and RFID technology has created more efficient 20 | MLF 7.3

processes to make items available and to finish the job more quickly. Q: What are some of the challenges facing maintenance operations and depots involving the processes associated with inventory management? A: In the military, the workforce is always changing. Rules are implemented and when one group is deployed or moves on, then the rules are changed or modified. With an inventory control system, the process is easy to follow, and if there is a modification, it is a seamless transition from one person to the next. Additionally, gaining tighter controls through effective inventory management will result in lower costs of ownership, less manpower required to support it, reduced inventory value and less usage. Q: How does CribMaster support DoD efforts with FOD prevention as it relates to tool control compliance? A: FOD has always been and will always be a major concern for those who are manufacturing, maintaining or overhauling aircraft. It is a major cause of aircraft damage and unscheduled maintenance. There are tremendous risks at hand when maintenance tasks and repairs are performed on a regular basis. All these tasks involve tools. Every tool that is used on the aircraft must be accounted for at the end of the shift or the end of the day, so that when an aircraft is fired up, there is the assurance that there is not anything unintentionally left on or in the aircraft that could cause damage. By utilizing passive RFID technology paired with tool tracking software and point-

of-use dispensing, the CribMaster system can track and monitor the movement of each tool in and out of the cabinet. Onscreen notification indicates when an item is missing, and with one click, management can determine who was responsible for removing the tools and what job they were working on, which bay location or work cell. Coupled with these RFID devices, monitors and scanners help reduce the search time and pinpoint the exact location of the tool. The key is to ensure FOD compliance is to make sure that tools are not on the aircraft, and if tools are missing that they are located quickly and accounted for. The CribMaster system helps to achieve both. Q: Do you have an example of how CribMaster has provided positive results in reducing FOD risks? A: One of our larger aerospace customers manages 35,000 hand tools on their floor every day. At the end of the day, they generate a report looking for lost tools or potential FOD issues. Generally, the list consists of a large number of missing tools. A report is sent to the managers to conduct a search and account for the missing tools. Utilizing the CribMaster system, management identifies the tools and inspects the cabinet to ensure the tools are accounted for before the next shift. Although initially it’s a large number, the list is significantly reduced so that some action may be taken. Otherwise, these tools would have been potential FOD. Q: How is CribMaster positioned to move forward and grow with DoD in 2013? A: Our knowledgeable and experienced government team is strategically located to provide the highest level of service to the DoD. Additionally, we will be obtaining the DIACAP accreditation. As we move forward, CribMaster continues to provide inventory management and asset tracking solutions to help our military reduce costs, increase productivity, and establish lean inventory processes to help the DoD stay mission ready. O


May 2013 Vol. 7, Issue 4

The Publication of Record for the Military Logistics Community

Cover and In-Depth Interview with:

Brig. Gen. John F. Wharton Commander U.S. Army Sustainment Command

Special Section Life Cycle Management

The Army owns a lot of MRAPs. What does the life cycle management process look like for that fleet type?

Features Predictive/Preventable Maintenance

Can technology deliver an operationally beneficial system, and can the military afford one?

Reset Roundtable

How to manage a reset solution when budgets are tight and equipment is worn out.

Who’s Who at the Air Force Sustainment Center A special pull-out supplement featuring an exclusive interview with Lt. Gen. Bruce Litchfield, commander of the Sustainment Center. The two-page Who’s Who pictorial spread will be a detailed look at the organization. Also included will be a look at AFSC’s top critical contracts and insight on doing business with the command.

Warrior-Proof Computing

Are computers at the desktop and laptop level disposable or is there a long-term sustainment capacity?

Public-Private Partnerships

How can these relationships evolve as the services draw down?

Bonus Distribution AUSA Sustainment Conference

Insertion Order Deadline: April 15, 2013 • Ad Material Deadline: April 22, 2013 To Advertise, Contact: Jane Engel, MLF Associate Publisher 301.670.5700 x 120 •

25,000 More than 25,000 military and commercial customers worldwide rely on Aviall’s proven forecasting, extensive inventory and reliable on-time delivery. We work hard to provide you with exactly what you need, precisely when you need it. Aviall Delivers.


Government Sales: 1-972-586-1594

MLF 7-3 (April 2013)  

Military Logistics Forum, Volume 7 Issue 3, April 2013, with Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Who's Who

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you