The decision of what to build and where, isn’t the Corps. They act as construction agents, meaning they’re tasked and funded by agencies that do make those decisions. Once an agency identifies a need and receives congressional authorization and funding, the Corps is tasked to build the project. Corps employees contract and oversee construction in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations and Corps guidance.

“It’s a difficult environment to build in,” said the general. “It definitely helps to have contractors we can count on to produce quality facilities.”

The original CLB contractor defaulted and the contract was put out for rebid. Turkish-headquartered Metag Construction Trade Co Inc., a project and engineering company, earned the estimated $25.6 million Shorabak contract. According to Eyre the company had issues when they first began building for the Corps in Afghanistan.

“Several years ago we had to really keep an eye on them. However, they’ve stepped it up and are producing some quality projects, like this one here,” Eyre said while surveying the site.

For Project Manager Eric Aubrey, Project Engineer Lori Gardner, Construction Representative Gary Desmarais and Afghan Senior Quality Assurance Representative Adress Hakimyar, having quality contractors helps. Each of them has many other projects they must shepherd.

At the CLB when issues needed correcting, the contractor was respectful and responsive, making his job easier said Desmarais. It wasn’t just correcting problems; the contractor added quality touches said Gardner. Adding tile instead of epoxy floors and shower doors instead of cheap curtains - things not required by the contract.

“Everything put in was quality and installed with pride,” said Gardner. “They take personal ownership of the project.”

For Hakimyar, as an Afghan, the project is personal, providing a stronger Afghanistan. He’s been working with the Corps for about six years and building a needed capacity. The Quality Assurance Representative, or QAR, program is something the Corps has been using for several years. Corps employees have access to the Shorabak projects, but some project areas are too dangerous and the Afghans, like Hakimyar, are trained to provide oversight at those. As the troop drawdown continues, the number of project sites Corps employees can access will diminish, making QARs even more valuable. In addition, they have a skill which can help build a stronger Afghanistan in the future, even without the Corps.

A ribbon cutting ceremony was held earlier in January for the CLB and another project Eyre toured, a $13.5 million 215th Crops Headquarters Complex also at Shorabak. Speaking at the ceremony, 215th Corps Commander ANA Gen. Syed Malok said the facilities will help overcome building shortages for military personnel and streamline activities. Getting the projects are critical steps for the 215th, providing the last bits of tools they need to operate independently, the way International Security Assistance Force officials envision.

Helmand Province Deputy Governor Ahmad Massoud Bakhtawar said civilian and military foreign aid was effectively used in Helmand and believed Afghan forces are poised to defend their country.

*Includes DoD contractors supporting U.S. Mission Iraq and/or Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq

Afghanistan Summary

• The distribution of contractors in Afghanistan by mission category are:

• Base Support: 10,925 (13%)
• Commo Support 3,198 ( 4%)
• Construction: 10,398 (12%)
• Logistics/Maintenance 24,715 (29%)
• Security 14,056 (16%)
• Training 1,864 ( 2%)
• Translator/Interpreter 6,300 ( 7%)
• Transportation 7,932 ( 9%)
• Medical/Dental/Social Services 148 ( 1%)
• Management/Administrative 3,203 ( 4%)
• Other* 2,789 ( 3%)
• Total: 85,528

*Includes Defense Logistics Agency, Army Materiel Command, Air Force External and Systems Support contracts, Special Operations Command and INSCOM.

• OEF Contractor Posture Highlights:
o In 4th quarter FY13 there were approximately 85.5K DoD contractors in Afghanistan. The overall contractor footprint in Afghanistan decreased by 16% from 3rd quarter FY13.
o The contractor to military ratio in Afghanistan is 1.28 to 1 (based on 66.9K military as of September 6, 2013).
o There will be substantial contractor reductions over this fiscal year, as a result of base closures, the return to expeditionary standards, and transition of security to the APPF.

Iraq Summary

• Contractor Posture Highlights: 
o In 4th quarter FY13, the total number of contractors supporting the U.S. Government in Iraq (DoD + DOS) was approximately 9.5K. The DoD and DOS continue to refine the requirements for contract support. Some contractor personnel employed under DoD contracts are supporting State Department and other civilian activities under the Chief of Mission, Iraq. These DoD contractors are provided on a reimbursable basis.
o There will be substantial contractor reductions beginning 1st quarter 2014, reflecting the transition of contracts from the US government to the government of Iraq.

General Data on DoD Private Security Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan

• Private security contractors (PSC) perform personal security, convoy security, and static security missions.

• USCENTCOM reports, as of 4th quarter FY 2013, the following distribution of PSCs in Afghanistan and Iraq:

*These numbers include most subcontractors and service contractors hired by prime contractors under DoD contracts. They include both armed and unarmed contractors.

• In Afghanistan, the transition from PSCs to the use of the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF) continues, but at a slower rate than originally expected.  In accordance with Presidential Decree 62, all security contracts except diplomatic security were to transition by 20 March 2012.  The APPF, however, is not at Full Operational Capability nor is there a firm date when the capability will be achieved. A bridging strategy negotiated between the Ministry of Interior (MoI) and US Forces-Afghanistan (USFOR-A) sequences the implementation of APPF provided security through the end of December 2014.

* These numbers reflect trained APPF and RMC supporting security for: internal GIROA requirements: private commercial interests; USAID implementing partners; and, USG agencies where appropriate. For DoD, the APPF has assumed limited responsibility for some convoy security and has begun to take over responsibility for security at some Forward Operating Bases. The transition is expected to continue through December 2014.

Improvements to Management and Oversight of DoD Contractors

• Operational Contract Support Drawdown Cell (OCSDC). The USFOR-A OCSDC was stood up in August 2012 with a mission to manage the programmatic drawdown of contracts, the contractor workforce and associated equipment in the Combined Joint Operations Area-Afghanistan (CJOA-A). Through the efforts of its Program Management Integration and Regional Teams, the OCSDC has influenced requirements reduction in the CJOA-A resulting in a net decrease of boots on ground contractors to under 86,000 in September 2013. Additional efforts to reduce requirements include LOGCAP de-scope of option Year 3 requirements and portfolio reviews of mission areas with USFOR-A. OCSDC, in cooperation with Deputy Chief Management Office (DCMO), develop a common operating picture tool that pulls data from SPOT and other sources of information. Collectively, this data facilitates effective program management of the contractor drawdown by allowing decision makers across the Department to more efficiently manage resources by synchronizing and deconflicting requirements and consolidating contracted resources as bases and installations are closed.

• CENTCOM Joint Theater Support Contracting Command (C-JTSCC). C-JTSCC has centralized oversight and authority to ensure all contracts executed in Afghanistan are visible and in compliance with contracting policy and procedures. In coordination with the OCSDC, C-JTSCC is evaluating local vendor capability to perform critically needed services previously provided by LOGCAP, but on a much smaller scale. This will ensure support to the warfighter continues while simultaneously reducing the number of US and other country national contractors.

• JP 4-10 (Operational Contract Support). The Joint Staff J4 is revising JP 4-10 Operational Contract Support which serves as the doctrine for planning, conducting, and assessing OCS integration and contractor management functions in support of joint operations. The second draft review package is being staffed for comment. Target print date is 2QFY14. The original version was published October, 2008.

• Defense Standards for Security Services.
o Business and operational standards for PSCs (which were required by Section 833 of the FY2011 NDAA) are now complete and were validated by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in early March 2012. The associated conformity assessment to enable third

party certification was published in April 2012. A maturity model, allowing companies and contract management to assess the degree of conformity with the standard, was approved by ANSI in January 2012.
o On May 22, 2012, DoD issued procedures, guidance and information (PGI) to the DFARS requiring compliance with the ANSI PSC standard for combat operations and other contingency operations. Standards and provision for third party certification in Section 833 of the FY 2011 NDAA will facilitate identifying technically acceptable contractors and best value. This will enable expedited contract award; mitigate risk of delay of services due to contract award protests; and mitigate risk of contractor non-performance or misconduct in critical early phases of contingency operations. Conformity assessment standards and the associated maturity model also provide valuable tools for DoD contract oversight.
o The United Kingdom has adopted the PSC ANSI standards as their national standard ensuring continuity between the key allies.

• Operational Contract Support (OCS) Functional Capabilities Integration Board (FCIB).
This senior executive-level governance forum was chartered by the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics), in March 2010 to provide strategic leadership to multiple stakeholders working to institutionalize OCS. Co-chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Program Support) [DASD(PS)] and Joint Staff, Vice Director J-4, the FCIB convenes quarterly (or as required) to address strategic issues impacting current and future contingency operations. During the 4th quarter FY13 meeting, key topics of discussion included:

o OCS Tools and Systems Way Ahead
o An update on the Defense Science Board
o OCS Action Plan Status
o An update on the OCS Joint Concept
o FY14 OCS FCIB Areas of Interest

The DCMO presented their framework for an end-to-end process that includes systems and tools, and the initial effort will focus on improving contractor accountability. The Army announced plans to establish an OCS governance structure, patterned after the OCS FCIB. The Army’s the draft charter is under development. The FCIB principals continue to institutionalize OCS across their organizations and have gained momentum in implementing the OCS Action Plan. The 1st quarter FY14 OCS FCIB Principal’s meeting will be held on November 19, 2013 in the Army G4-Executive Conference Room. Contact the Board Secretariat at [email protected] for additional information.

• Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office (JCASO). DASD (Program Support) has institutionalized this organization to perform program management of OCS and to provide a pre-planned approach for planning and implementing OCS policy and doctrine. JCASO provides a joint enabling capability to integrate, coordinate and synchronize OCS during peacetime, contingency operations, and post-conflict operations. Planning, implementation, and oversight of OCS are Commander's responsibilities and are essential to establishing a strategy for managing contractors on the battlefield as part of the DoD Total Force. JCASO has a deployable capability known as the Mission Support Teams and may be requested to provide OCS planning and program management (PgM) during peacetime, contingency and post-conflict operations. JCASO is also an essential part of DLA's combat support agency (CSA) role to support the mission objectives of the combatant commands, the Chairman of the Joint

Chiefs of Staff Title 10 responsibilities, as well as the Office of the Secretary of Defense for OCS policy and joint doctrine development and implementation. Examples of JCASO engagements include:
o Deploying teams for 6-month rotations to support the OCSDC and provide expertise in the drawdown efforts;
o Leading and managing the economic development initiative (i.e., local procurements) in the Central Asian States in support of the Northern Distribution Network (NDN) strategy in the USCENTCOM AOR;
o Leading and managing the Afghanistan Contract Transition Workgroup (ACTW) to facilitate the interagency coordination for planning and transitioning OCS from DoD to DOS; and
o Participating in joint exercises in 2013 (e.g., PANAMAX, ULCHI FREEDOM GUARDIAN) to integrate OCS in training and assess the effectiveness of OCS plans.

• JCASO Contingency Contracting Office (CCO): JCASO CCO provides a joint contingency contracting capability and implements local sourcing solutions, such as the USCENTCOM Central Asia States (CAS) procurement initiative. The CCO joint contingency contracting capability: extends/leverages DLA/JCASO capabilities and complements each Services’ capabilities; responds to demand signals from Combatant Commands and deployed forces; furthers best practices through a programmatic approach, and focuses on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief contract support. The anticipated fully operational capability date is 1 Jan 2014.

• JCASO Planners. Seventeen (17) JCASO planners are allocated among the Geographic Combatant Commands to assist the commander in identifying gaps where contractor support capability may be required. Planners integrate contractor support into operational plans and synchronize requirements with subordinate commands, the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, other USG Agencies, and coalition partners. The planners have been instrumental in integrating OCS into Combatant Command plans. Based on demonstrated need for additional OCS planning capability in USPACOM, JCASO recently established new planners at forward locations in USFK and USFJ.

• SPOT Configuration Control Board (CCB). ODASD(PS), as the functional sponsor for SPOT, co-chairs a quarterly CCB. This Board evaluates proposed enhancements to SPOT and prioritizes implementation to ensure consistency within funding parameters. Membership includes participants from across the DoD OCS community, DOS, and U.S. Agency for International Development.

• Operational Contract Support (OCS) Learning Framework. The Department continues to make progress on the Secretary’s and the Chairman's vision for OCS education and training. Several parallel efforts are underway to incorporate OCS into a holistic learning framework that includes education, individual and collective training, exercises, and lessons learned primarily aimed at non-acquisition personnel.

o OCS in Joint Professional Military Education (JPME). As reported, OCS has been a Chairman’s JPME Special Area of Emphasis each year since 2009. A 2012 study on OCS education and training observed a general lack of uniformity and depth in OCS content. To rectify this, Joint Staff (J4) OCS and Services Division (OCSSD) developed an OCS Curriculum Development Guide (CDG) to provide specific OCS learning objectives to help JPME faculty create and integrate effective OCS learning into all five JPME levels. Version 2.0 of the CDG, which was completed in October 2012, included authoritative reference material, was distributed to JPME institutions in December 2012. The OCS CDG incorporates distance learning through three Joint Knowledge Online (JKO) OCS courses. The Joint Staff (J4) briefed the faculty of the JPME schools on the FY2013 NDAA language requiring OCS as part of JPME in June 2013 at the Joint Faculty Education Conference. At this point, JPME faculty need time to incorporate OCS into their curricula. The Joint Staff (J4) is reviewing the Joint Combined Warfare School curriculum to make specific recommendations on OCS content needed to meet the CDG’s intent.
o Lessons Learned. The Department has prepared and is currently reviewing a comprehensive lessons learned report for submission to the House Armed Services Committee later this year. For tactical and operational lessons learned, the Joint Staff (J4), OCSSD is the focal point for documenting and processing lessons through the Joint Lessons Learned Program.
o Exercises. The first ever OCS Joint Exercise (OCSJX-14) is scheduled for January 2014 at Ft. Bliss, Texas. The exercise will train attendees on the OCS tasks for Contract Support Integration, Contracting Support and Contractor Management. The OCSJX-14 scenario is based on a complex catastrophe in the US NORTHCOM area of responsibility. The training audiences are OCS staff members from USNORTHCOM, USARNORTH, US Army Expeditionary Contracting Command's 412th Contract Support Brigade, US Air Force and Navy contracting personnel. Other key DOD stakeholders participating are; FEMA, USACE, DLA JCASO, DASD-PS, DPAP and NGB. Planning for the FY-15 exercise is underway and is tentatively planned for the US PACOM AOR.
o Collective and Staff Training. The Chairman’s Joint Training Guidance Notice (CJCSN 3500.01) provides annual guidance to all DOD Components for planning executing, and assessing joint training for three consecutive years. It includes High Interest Training Issues (HITIs) which are CJCS special-interest items that CCDRs should consider for emphasis in their training and exercise programs. OCS will be part of the Joint Logistics Enterprise HITI in this year’s notice. In October 2013, the Joint Staff (J4) will release the Joint Metrics and Readiness (JMR) Guide to assist planners in integrating OCS into exercises to comply with the Joint Training Guidance.
o Individual Training. DoD created three joint OCS courses in a computer-based training format in 2009. The three courses were “joint training certified” in 2013 and are hosted on JKO, the joint community’s web portal for providing key joint training. As of 4 September 2013, 608 personnel have completed these joint certified OCS courses. In addition to the JKO courses and Contracting Officer’s Representative training, the Joint Staff (J4) OCSSD is developing a Joint OCS Planning and Execution Course (JOPEC) and working with the Army Logistics University to develop a Joint OCS Requirements Development and Execution Course (JORDEC) from an existing Army OCS course. The initial JOPEC pilot was held from 16-25 July 2013 at Fort Lee, VA. The planned course rollout at Geographic Combatant Commands and their Service components for FY 14 follows:

─ NORTHCOM: 1st QTR FY14
─ EUCOM &AFRICOM: 1st QTR FY 14
─ PACOM: 2nd QTR FY 14
─ CENTCOM, SOCOM, &SOUTHCOM: 3rd QTR FY 14
─ USFK (U.S. Forces Korea) & USFJ (U.S. Forces Japan): 3rd QTR FY 14

o The JORDEC is under development, but will likely debut by the second quarter of FY2014.

OCS Planning. On October 18, 2012, the Joint Staff published the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual (CJCSM) 3130.03 Adaptive Planning and Execution (APEX) Planning Formats and Guidance. The CJCSM 3130.03 sets forth administrative instructions for joint operation plan formats. Specific to OCS planning, CJCSM 3130.03 details where OCS requirements will be identified and by whom. The Joint Staff (J4) is developing a separate manual, CJCSM 4301, OCS Planning, to assist OCS planners in developing procedures and guidance that integrate, synchronize, prioritize, and focus OCS capabilities on achieving a supported commander’s operational objectives and desired effects for various types of plans, including contingency plans.

OCS Joint Concept. JROC Memorandum 159-13, 07 October 2013, approved the OCS Joint Concept. This concept envisions that contracted support for military operations will be an interdependent capability of Joint Force 2020 (JF 2020). This concept addresses how JF 2020 can operationalize OCS to optimize contracted support capabilities of the total force partners to achieve operational effects across the range of military operations within acceptable and manageable risk levels. It builds upon ongoing efforts to institutionalize OCS in the present force and proposes a full spectrum doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, and personnel capability solution framework to deliver more responsive and accountable OCS. In April 2014 the JS J4 will update the JROC on the status for implementing the Joint Concept.