With about 8,000 employees, Engility has experience serving and performing for our customers in over 40 countries. They are strategists, planners, engineers, trainers, educators and logisticians. We are experts in capacity building, criminal justice, law enforcement, energy, agriculture, natural resources management, security and strategic defense.

ABOUT Engility Corporation 

Engility is an entirely new government services provider with over 40 years of combined experience across nearly 70 different legacy companies. Headquartered in Chantilly, Va., Engility was launched in July 2012 as a spin-off company of L-3 Communications.

We provide government services in engineering, professional support and mission support to customers in the U.S. Department of Defense, numerous Federal civilian agencies as well as allied foreign governments.
Our core offerings include SETA Support, Professional Services, Education and Training, Operational Support, Logistics, International Capacity Development.

Poor drainage caused the bridge erosion, so the project’s contractor must install edge drains along the road and provide a new reinforced-concrete bridge deck.

One of the more interesting problems for the contractor is designing what is known as “Friendship Circle,” described as “a traffic direction changing system that will allow vehicles to efficiently change driving sides at the border since Afghanistan and Pakistan drive on opposite sides of the road,” according to the Corps project specifications. Pakistanis drive on the left side; Afghans on the right.

While the United States is withdrawing its combat forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2014, the Corps is continuing a vast construction program there, primarily providing facilities for the planned 352,000-member Afghan National Security Forces, which include the Afghan army and its border and national police. According to a U.S. Army Web site, in 2012 the Corps office headquartered at Kandahar Airfield alone awarded 11 projects totaling $1.28 billion. During that same period, contractors completed roughly $795 million worth of projects, primarily for the Afghan National Security Forces.

One of the most exotic Corps projects was to revamp the power plant, lighting, ventilation systems and pavement of the Salang Tunnel, more than 11,000 feet up in the Hindu Kush mountains and a key part of the northern route for supplies going to U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan.

The $12.8 million contract for these short-term fixes to the Soviet-built tunnel was awarded to the Omran Holding Group, an Afghan company that has until October to finish the job. Meanwhile, the tunnel will be needed for U.S. and NATO military equipment both arriving in and leaving Afghanistan.

Just this month there were six other Corps construction contracts offered or amended, including a new $10 million forward-area arming and refueling point for the Afghan air force at Kunduz Civil Airport. It will not be completed until mid-2014. There’s also the fourth phase of the Afghan army’s Kabul training center, the cost of which could go as high as $100 million.

One project was canceled: the designing and building of austere border police stations, to be located “in remote and potentially dangerous locations east of Kabul Province.” They were to house up to 60 people, be served by helicopter and be constructed on site using “quick modular or panelized structures.” Sanitation was to be “outdoor toilets,” and the buildings would have had “simple ceiling fans and minimal lighting supported by minimal power requirements.”

The Corps said it could have been a $25 million or more project. But, it said, “the solicitation produced little competition, and little design innovation.” Now the plan is “to develop an innovative approach using in-house designers.”

As of Dec. 31, U.S. completed or planned construction of facilities for the Afghan army and national police has totaled at least $11.6 billion, according to the recent SIGAR quarterly report.

The special inspector general for Afghanistan, John F. Sopko, on Friday wrote to U.S. government departments and agencies working in that country, seeking details about all the projects underway or planned for the transition. He wants to conduct detailed oversight of the $75 billion appropriated for all Afghan reconstruction funding through the end of last year and to get an indication of what is planned for this year and next.

It is the first time such a request has been made, according to SIGAR officials.

Garst pleaded guilty in November to one count of bulk cash smuggling, but the Army veteran has recanted his earlier admission that the money came from a kickback scheme with an Afghan company. The 51-year-old Kansas man contends the money was winnings from extensive gambling at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan where he worked as a manager for the company between 2009 and 2011. He claims that his judgment was clouded by post-traumatic stress disorder from earlier deployments in Iraq and Kosovo.

Both the government and defense have declined to comment on the case before sentencing, but each side's sentencing memorandum to the court outlines their arguments.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jared Maag argued that the defendant used the war in Afghanistan to enrich himself with disregard to the ways the crimes damage the integrity of government contracting, disrespect those serving in Afghanistan and undercut the mission of reconstruction.

Maag contends Garst used his position as a private contractor to steer government subcontracts to an Afghan company that gave him a cut of the proceeds - an illegal agreement that promised to net him at least $610,000, of which he actually obtained more than $200,000.

The government cited his criminal record, including at least eight violations of military law that led to his discharge "under other than honorable conditions." Those violations included fraternization, sexual harassment, falsifying a promotion package with intent to deceive, theft of government property, dereliction of duty and misuse of a government credit card.

The defense's document recounts Garst's troubled upbringing, which led him to leave home at 15 and work two jobs while attending high school. He dropped out of college in 1982 to join the Army and quickly realized he had "found his calling."

A decorated veteran, full-time employee of the Army National Guard and eventually a civilian contractor, Garst served his country most of his life, attorney Christopher Joseph said. While serving in Iraq as a national guardsman, he was in charge of mortuary affairs, verifying remains and processing them to return home.

Joseph wrote that Garst's PTSD symptoms allow him only two or three hours of sleep a night. He has nightmares so vivid he can see the ice poured on the bodies to preserve them, the attorney said. Garst hears voices screaming at him and sees faces of dead soldiers when agitated, Joseph said, and stepping into sunlight reminds Garst of explosives.

The defense argues that Garst suffered from psychological troubles at the time of the crime, saying his capacity for good judgment was impaired. The felony charge drove him to realize the seriousness of his conduct, his attorney wrote.

"If any good has come from Mr. Garst's bad act, it is that the gravity of this situation has awakened him to the need to address his mental health issues - thoroughly and fully," Joseph told the court.

• OEF Contractor Posture Highlights:

1. There are currently approximately 110.4K DoD contractors in Afghanistan.  The overall contractor footprint in Afghanistan increased by .8% from 4th quarter FY12.
2. The contractor to military ratio in Afghanistan is 1.46 to 1 (based on 75.7K military).  While the military footprint was reduced over the last quarter, the contractor footprint remained relatively constant due to temporary and time-limited increases in transportation, translators and support services.  There will be substantial contractor reductions over this fiscal year, especially as a result of targeted reductions in LOGCAP personnel.
3. Local Nationals currently make up 37.4% of the DoD contracted workforce in Afghanistan.

Iraq Summary

• Contractor Posture Highlights:

1. The total number of contractors supporting the U.S. Government in Iraq (DoD + DOS) is now approximately 12.1K.  There will be substantial contractor reductions in 2013 reflecting consolidation of sites, completion of ongoing activity, and increased utilization of host country service and labor.
2. The Department of Defense and Department of State 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.

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

• Private security contractors perform personal security, convoy security, and static security missions.  Not all private security contractor personnel are armed.

• USCENTCOM reports, as of 1st quarter FY 2013, the following distribution of private security contractors in Afghanistan and Iraq:

DoD Private Security Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan

*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 Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF) Advisory Group is developing the planning for contracts to transition to the APPF in accordance with Presidential Decree 62.  The original intent was for all convoy and development contracts to transition by 20 March 2012 however, this timeline has been extended to enable the APPF to come to full operational capability. The APPF Advisory Group has established a transition plan to facilitate the transition of security for development sites and convoys.  Presently, International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) fixed site and military construction PSC contracts have until 20 March 2013 to be transitioned to the APPF.

Afghan Public Protection Force

* These numbers reflect APPF and RMC supporting DOS and USAID contracts. DoD has not yet begun transitioning to the use of APPF guards.

General Conditions Regarding Contracts and Contractor Personnel 

• The Combatant Commander has provided specific guidance on arming contractor personnel and private security contractors in the USCENTCOM AOR through a series of Fragmentary Orders (FRAGOs) and other authoritative guidance, including the following:

1. Private security contractor personnel are not authorized to participate in offensive operations and must comply with specific USCENTCOM Rules for the Use of Force (RUF).  Under these RUF, private security contractor personnel are authorized to use deadly force only when necessary in:  self-defense, defense of facilities / persons as specified in their contract; prevention of life-threatening acts directed against civilians; or defense of Coalition-approved property specified within their contract.
2. Private security contractor personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq must be properly licensed to carry arms in accordance with host nation law and must receive USCENTCOM / Coalition Forces’ approval of their operations.  DoD contractor personnel armed by DoD authority must report any use of force, including the firing of a weapon.  This requirement and the required information to be submitted are identified within the terms of the contract,  USFOR-A OPLAN 09-01, and Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-I) policy.

Improvements to Management and Oversight of DoD Contractors 

• Operational Contract Support Drawdown Cell (OCSDC). The United States Forces-Afghanistan Operational Contract Support Drawdown Cell (OCSDC) was stood up in August 2012 with a mission to manage the drawdown of contracts, the contractor workforce and associated equipment in the Combined Joint Operations Area-Afghanistan.  This includes synchronizing and aligning the contractor drawdown commensurate with base closures.  Since August 2012, the OCSDC has published a Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and executed the first phase of contractor drawdown, which focuses on reducing the footprint of Afghanistan's largest DoD contract, the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP).  Working in partnership with Army Materiel Command and the 1st Theater Sustainment Command (1st TSC), the Cell expects to achieve a 25% reduction in LOGCAP personnel and 30% reduction in LOGCAP equipment by 1 May 2012.

• 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. C-JTSCC headquarters has been re-located to Afghanistan with a small support staff remaining in Qatar and facilitates broader theater contracting oversight functions.  The command transitioned from two General Officers to one general officer.

• 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 operational contract support integration and contractor management functions in support of joint operations.  The first draft review package is currently out for review with comments due mid-February.  The original version was published in October, 2008.

• Defense Standards for Security Services. 

  • Business and operational standards for private security contractors (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.
  • On May 22, 2012, DoD issued instructions (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 which: enables expedited contract award; mitigates risk of delay of services due to contract award protests; and, mitigates risk of contractor non-performance or misconduct in critical early phases of contingency operations.

  • 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 directly impacting current and future contingency operations.  During the 1^st quarter FY13 meeting (November 27, 2012) the Board reviewed status of the McCaskill-Webb Comprehensive Contingency Contract Reform Act of 2012, the DoD to Department of State (DoS) Transition in Afghanistan; and  Joint Staff (J-4) efforts to establish an OCS Learning Framework.  The next quarterly OCS FCIB Principal’s meeting will be held on February 26, 2012 in the Army Conference Center.  For additional information please contact the Board Secretariat at [email protected].

• Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office (JCASO).  DASD (Program Support) has institutionalized this organization to perform program management of Operational Contract Support (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 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, 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: a) initial staffing of the USFOR-A OCSDC;  b) 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; c) leading and managing the Afghanistan Contracting Transition Workgroup (ACTW) to facilitate the interagency coordination for planning and transitioning OCS from DoD to DoS; d) deploying a team to Afghanistan to assist with the OCS drawdown effort in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, and;  e) participating in joint exercises in 2012 (e.g., PANAMAX, Ulchi Freedom Guardian) to integrate OCS in training and validate the effectiveness of OCS plans. 

• Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Notice (CJCSN) 4130.01, "Guidance for Combatant Commander Employment of Operational Contract Support Enabler-Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office (JCASO)" was signed on December 20, 2011.  It recognizes the role of JCASO as providing Geographic Combatant Commands and their subordinate commands with a capability to integrate, implement, manage, and execute OCS activities to improve DoD efficiency and effectiveness across the Total Force.  

• JCASO Concept of Operations (CONOPS).  A detailed CONOPS was signed on 27 June 2012, which further conveys JCASO's mission, role, and responsibility in OCS, to satisfy Combat Support Agency Review Team findings, and to complement the CJCSN 4130.01.  It will detail how JCASO engagement can help improve effectiveness and efficiency in managing OCS across DoD and whole of government.

• JCASO Contingency Contracting Office (CCO):  JCASO is establishing a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) contingency/expeditionary contracting capability that responds to demand signals from Combatant Commands and deployed forces; complements Services’ contracting capabilities; extends and leverages existing DLA/JCASO capabilities; develops common operating pictures to support synchronization of all DLA contracting efforts; takes a programmatic approach to contracting, supporting any part of the acquisition cycle (policy, planning, requirements development, market research, contracting, or transition to civil authority); focuses on whole-of-government humanitarian assistance, disaster recovery (HA/DR) and counter-insurgency (COIN) operations; furthers best practices and use of Contingency Business Environment (CBE) tools, such as the Synchronized Pre-Deployment & Operational Tracker (SPOT), the Government Purchase Card (GPC), and the Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS); and supports SECDEF OCS and budget initiatives.  CCO Initial Operating Capability is planned in October 2012. 

• 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.  They then help to integrate required contractor support into operational plans and synchronize requirements with subordinate commands, the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, other USG Agencies, and coalition partners.  The Secretary further directed an additional 146 planners / analysts to be integrated into the total force.  The planners have been instrumental in integrating OCS into Combatant Command plans.  In USCENTCOM alone, the planners were fundamental in the establishment of the JTSCC, planning the DoD to DoS transition in Iraq, Pakistan humanitarian efforts, increased operations in Afghanistan, as well as other critical operations supporting USCENTCOM’s theater engagement strategy.  Based on demonstrated need for OCS planning capability in the Combatant Commands, DLA recently authorized JCASO to place a planner at forward locations in USFK and USFJ.

• Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES).  It is the joint enterprise suite of systems employed for the management, tracking and visibility of contracted capability and contractors authorized to accompany the US forces during contingency operations.  SPOT-ES is comprised of four systems that collectively provide leadership with awareness of the contractor footprint and contracted capability in the Area of Operations.  SPOT (NIPRNet and SIPRNet) is the authoritative system of record personnel accountability database.  SPOT automatically generates a Letter-of Authorization (LOA) which identifies government furnished services authorized under the contract.  JAMMS captures movement and location information via an automated scan at key life support collection points.  JAMMS can read a variety of formats, such as a Common Access Card (CAC), LOA, biometric credentials, driver’s license and passport.  TOPSS is the business intelligence and reporting tool that integrates data from SPOT, JAMMS, and various other systems.  It has the ability to accept and convert manual files to full web services.  TOPSS currently includes 28 pre-generated standard reports as well as an ad hoc reporting capability.  It includes customizable geospatial mapping of data points and trend analysis.  SPOT-ES capability is continually evaluated to identify enhancements that will improve functionality and ease of user interface.  DoS is utilizing SPOT as the primary automated program management tool for all USG contractors in Iraq.

• SPOT Configuration Control Board (CCB). ODASD(PS), as the functional sponsor for SPOT, 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, Department of State, and U.S. Agency for International Development.  The next CCB will be held on 24 January, at which time the members will validate and prioritize enhancements for version 8.2.

• Transition of Responsibility for SPOT Operational Execution.  In January 2012 the USD(P&R) assumed operational control, responsibility, support, custody and management of SPOT, specifically within the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) under the Defense Human Resources Activity (DHRA).  This creates synergies between SPOT and the Joint Personnel Accountability Reconciliation and Reporting (JPARR) tool.

• Operational Contract Support (OCS) Learning Framework.  The requirement to educate, train and sustain a deployable contingency acquisition workforce and senior leaders to manage this force has long been recognized by DoD. Ongoing contingencies have stressed the military and civilian acquisition workforce, necessitating the deployment of personnel with limited experience in the execution of contracts in a contingency environment. Similarly, senior planners, program managers, and operational leaders deployed to the area of responsibility have limited experience in managing the large number of contractors accompanying the force. To correct this deficiency, the Department is striving to effectively educate and train operational military leaders, both officer and enlisted personnel across all grades, on operational contract support to include the management of contractors deploying with forces.In keeping with 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 depicted here that includes education, individual and collective training, exercises, lessons learned, and an on-line body of knowledge primarily aimed at non-acquisition personnel.

• OCS in JPME.  OCS has been a Chairman’s joint professional military education (JPME) Special Area of Emphasis (SAE) each year since 2009.  In 2012, under the Chairman's authority, the Joint Staff (J4) partnered with ODASD (PS), Joint Staff (J7), the Center for Joint and Strategic Logistics, and various Service and JPME schools to assess the degree that OCS is currently taught in JPME.  The study observed a general lack of uniformity and depth in OCS content and the broad OCS learning objectives in the OCS SAE may have contributed to this lack of uniformity. To rectify this, an OCS Curriculum Development Guide (CDG) was developed to augment the Chairman’s SAE by providing specific OCS learning objectives, tailored to the framework of the Chairman’s Officer Professional Military Education Policy (OPMEP), to help JPME faculty create and integrate effective OCS learning into all five JPME levels and to facilitate consistent and uniform interpretation and application of OCS learning outcomes.  Version 2.0 of the CDG was completed in October 2012 and includes authoritative reference material for each OCS learning objective to assist faculty in creating specific OCS curricula.  The OCS CDG and a CD ROM with all the authoritative OCS reference material were distributed to JPME institutions in December 2012.  The OCS CDG also incorporates distance learning through the three Joint Knowledge Online (JKO) OCS courses.

  The focus of the CDG and JKO courses are on the professional military education and individual training components of the larger OCS learning framework.  Going forward, the other components of the OCS Learning Framework, to include adaption and creation of collective OCS training courses and injection of OCS into joint exercises, are being pursued in 2013.

• DoD Directive (DoDD) 3020.49 on Orchestrating, Synchronizing, and Integrating Program Management of Contingency Acquisition Planning and its Operational Executionwas signed on March 24, 2009.  It establishes policy and assigns responsibilities for program management for the preparation and execution of acquisitions for contingency operations, and for the accountability, integration and management of all contractors supporting the DoD and all USG PSCs operating in an area of contingency operations.

• DoD Instruction (DoDI) 3020.41.  A revised version of DoDI 3020.41, “Operational Contract Support,” formerly entitled “Contractor Personnel Authorized to Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces,” was signed on December 20^th, 2011. It was also published as 32 CFR Part 158.  This version contains significant changes to the previous instruction including:  (1) incorporation of lessons learned from current operations; (2) requirements for the development of contractor oversight plans; (3) requirements for adequate military personnel necessary to execute contract oversight; and, (4) standards of medical care for deployed contractors.  Further, it reiterates the importance of the use of a common database for the accountability and visibility of contractors supporting DoD contingency operations.

• DoDI 3020.50, “Private Security Contractors (PSCs) Operating in Contingency Operations, Humanitarian or Peace Operations, or Other Military Operations or Exercises” was signed on August 1, 2011.  On August 11, 2011, a final rule entitled “U.S. Government Private Security Contractors Operating in a Contingency Operations, Combat Operations or Other Significant Military Operations,” applying to all US Agencies, was published in the Federal Register (32 CFR Part 159).  This Rule / DoDIprescribes the selection, accountability, training, equipping, and conduct of personnel performing private security functions under a covered contract in a designated area of combat operations for both DoD and other agency PSCs.  It also prescribes incident reporting, use of and accountability for equipment, RUF, and a process for the discipline or removal, as appropriate, of USG PSC personnel.  The DoDI responds to requirements of section 862 of the FY 2008 NDAA as amended.

• Operational Contract Support Concept of Operations (CONOPS).  The CONOPs, signed on March 31, 2010, outlines how the operational and acquisition communities plan and execute OCS during complex operations involving support, not just to the joint force, but to our multinational, other government agency and interagency partners as well.  The Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has endorsed the CONOPS.

 “We are pleased to build on the excellent reputation that our team has already established with NSPA and their U.S. and French clients at KAF and KAIA,” said Peter Gleave, Managing Director of G3 Systems. “This win will enable us to establish a greater operational presence at KAIA as we utilize our infrastructure build, works tasks, and O&M capabilities to serve the mission.”

The G3 Oqab facilities management team has begun mobilization, and G3’s Facility and Infrastructure Services group will construct a new Life Support Compound within the main International Security Assistance Force KAIA Base to support the contract. The team will be part of the Facilities O&M group in Afghanistan, which is already running the highly successful Medical Treatment Facilities O&M contracts at Kandahar Air Force base and KAIA, the NSPA Pass and Permits, and U.S. Re-Locatable Building FM contracts at Kandahar Air Force Base. The team will be supported by all functional areas at the UK G3 Systems headquarters including Human Resources, Finance, Quality, Environmental Safety & Health, Procurement, and Logistics.

ABOUT IAP SUBSIDIARY: G3 SYSTEMS LTD

G3 Systems Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of IAP operates in the UK and overseas providing government, commercial, and international clients with a wide range of facilities services and solutions. G3 Systems delivers Infrastructure, Construction Works, Equipment & Systems and Support Solutions as part of IAP’s Global Operations and Logistics business. G3 Systems has the capability to design, deliver, operate and maintain equipment and facilities on a global basis based upon our understanding and experience of the demands of operating in remote locations and harsh environments.

ABOUT IAP

IAP Worldwide Services, Inc. is a leading international contractor providing global mission support for commercial industries, the Department of Defense, and other U.S. government agencies. The Company’s core business competencies include facility management; base operations; logistics and contingency operations; emergency/disaster response; power solutions, and professional, scientific, health, environmental and technical services.

The lawsuit centered on actions that took place during October 2009. MAKS was working as a subcontractor for EODT, which had been hired to provide relocatable buildings for the U.S. military's use at Bagram Air Field in Afghanistan. EODT had also agreed to provide security for MAKS in Afghanistan.

In its suit, MAKS alleged that EODT employees staged a military-style raid on a MAKS compound and stole dozens of building modules from the company.

EODT filed its own countersuit and argued that MAKS had failed to meet the terms of its contract and that EODT was justified in terminating the subcontract and taking possession of the modules in question.

On  December 3, 2012, the jury awarded nearly $2 million to MAKS in connection with three breach-of-contract claims and $1 million on a conversion claim. One breach-of-contract claim referred to items that were also referenced in the conversion claim, and EODT has taken the position that MAKS must choose between that $975,000 breach-of-contract award and the $1 million conversion award. Joseph Hennessey, an attorney for MAKS, said the jury found EODT liable for both.

The jury rejected claims that EODT employees committed assault against two individuals. The jury rejected the breach-of-contract counterclaim filed by EODT against MAKS. Hennesseey said Monday that his clients were "grateful that the justice system was able to take an objective look at the facts and that the jury looked at all of the claims in detail and weighed the evidence and reached the just result based on the facts they heard."

In a prepared statement, EODT general counsel Erik Quist said the company was disappointed in the verdict because it maintains EODT did not breach its contract with MAKS. He went on to say that allegations separate from the contractual claims had been dismissed. "EODT has maintained all along that the allegations of assault and personal injury were meant only to harass and intimidate, and the jury agreed, finding no truth whatsoever in these allegations," he said.

Afghan National Army

 The Afghan National Army (ANA) is the main branch of the military of Afghanistan, which is responsible for land-based military operations and ground warfare to defend the state against foreign military incursions. It is under the Ministry of Defense in Kabul and is being trained by NATO alliance. The ANA is divided into six regional Corps, with about 200,000 active troops as of June 2012. The current Chief of Staff of the Afghan National Army is Lt. Gen. Sher Mohammad Karimi.

The ANA capabilities are increasing. The force has medical first responders, a growing aviation capacity, engineers, and logisticians. It is focused on professional development for both officers and enlisted soldiers. It maintains an effective kinetic special operations component and has recently added and began deploying more than 650 Mobile Strike Force Vehicles complete with trained mechanics and operators. Read more about Afghan National Army History

As of mid-2012, a steadily increasing concern over the past couple of years, while still not reflective of the readiness and state of Afghan forces and police as a whole, are the deaths of U.S. and coalition forces at the hands of Afghan forces. These individuals are either Taliban or other militant infiltrators, disaffected or disturbed soldiers, turncoats, or who were disturbed by perceived and/or actual improper conduct by coalition forces. It has worsened enough to the point where two decrees were issued by the Defense Department in the summer of 2012 stating that all American soldiers serving here are told to carry a magazine with their weapon at all times, and that when a group of American soldiers is present and on duty and Afghan forces are also present, one American soldier must stand apart on guard with a ready weapon.

Green on Blue attacks growing

Attacks on US-led troops are rapidly rising here in Afghanistan. But it is mostly Afghan security forces who target them-not the Taliban alone. These attacks are known as Green on Blue.

And so far this year, according to the US military , around 60 foreign soldiers have been killed in these attacks. Most of them were American and British. It is said to be a huge threat now for these soldiers.

But they were killed for different reasons. They say they turned their weapons on US-led forces either because of combat stress or disrespect to Islamic values by foreign troops. These attacks have jumped, especially after the burning of the Holy Quran by American forces in Bagram Air Base this year.

But it is also mounting civilian casualties that have turned the Afghan forces against the military presence of the US and its allies in this country. According to United Nations, over 900 Afghan civilians were killed in first half of this year alone. Both US forces and the Taliban were blamed for these deaths.

Green on blue attacks have greatly affected that relations between Afghan forces and US-led troops too. They do not trust each other very much now. US forces have stepped up security around and inside their bases. Most joint military compounds have also been separated. And both US and Afghan government seem worried about this trend.

They are taking these attacks very seriously now. The Afghan government has recently revised the vetting process of local people here as policemen and soldiers and their training methods.

Now if you want to be a soldier here, you need to bring at least three letters of recommendation from key tribal leaders in your birth place. So far though, such measures neither helped to avoid the shootings nor built confidence between Afghan and US-led forces as it is not only Afghan soldiers, but also local people who are tired of foreign troops presence in their country. So it seems there is no easy way out of this, especially for the foreign troops.

“This is a significant step forward for security in the region and Supreme is proud to be part of this exciting and essential development,” said Ernie Pallett, Director of Security for Supreme Group. “Our convoys not only provide integral security necessary for these convoys, but also employment for thousands of Afghan workers at our distribution centers and within transport companies.”

BG Gul Aqa Rohani, APPF Convoy Operations Director said “this is further evidence of Supreme’s commitment to
Afghanistan. The convoy development and the strategic planning that will allow it to succeed help to provide a greater
level of stability which the nation desperately needs.”

“This agreement will not only help protect the safety of the convoys and the Afghans responsible for them, but it will also reduce the influence of warlords and criminals that seek to undermine the stability of the nation,” stated Army COL Robert Baer, Director of the APPF Advisory Group for ISAF.

Victoria Frost: Director of Marketing and Communications
Supreme Group
Mobile: 00971 56 6832123
[email protected]

This means that the budget has been cut by $27.6 billion or 4.9% (Base request) but only by $2.7 billion or 2.3% (OCO request). Evidently, funding for activities overseas is not affected nearly as much as funding for the "regular" U.S. military (Base funding).

FY 2013

Turning to the budget for FY2013, (fiscal year starting October 1, 2012) the DoD is projected to spend a total of $613.9 billion dollars (discretionary). Of this amount, $525.4 billion is Base Request and $88.5 billion is for Overseas Contingency Operations.

A closer look reveals a decrease in the DoD budget of $31.8 billion or -4.9% from FY2012 to FY2013. This reduction is mainly due to a huge drop in OCO funding of $26.6 billion or 23.1% (mainly due to the U.S. bringing back military forces from Afghanistan). The Base Request is only reduced by $5.2 billion or 1%.

The Administration continues to invest in the Nation’s military service members and their families and provides them with the training, equipment, and infrastructure needed to maintain military readiness. The President's 2012 Budget for the Department of Defense (DOD) reflects that commitment, proposing $553 billion - an increase of $22 billion above the 2011 appropriation.

The Budget includes a series of management and acquisition reforms that will produce a net of $78 billion in savings through 2016.  Cost-cutting measures include the consolidation of several Air Force operation centers, reduced Army construction costs, and the Navy's use of multi-year procurement strategies.

The incremental costs of funding Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), including ongoing efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, are funded separately in the 2012 Budget.

Keep up with newly awarded overseas contracts

The Commission on Wartime Contracting reached a similar conclusion last year when it concluded DoD had wasted at least $31 billion to contracting waste and fraud because of inadequate oversight and management of contracts.

Alan Estevez, DoD's assistant secretary for logistics and materiel readiness, said there's no disputing things were bad.

"Five years ago, we had a gaping wound, self-inflicted as it may be," he told the House Armed Services Committee Wednesday. "We staunched the bleeding, we sutured it up, the scar tissue is healing. But what we haven't succeeded in yet is embedding it into the DNA or the muscle memory. That's what we're striving to do and that's what we must succeed in doing."

DoD wants to manage and train for contingency contracting under a framework dubbed Operational Contract Support so that contracting is treated as a critical warfighting capability in the future, not merely as an afterthought once troops get where they're going.

Importance of contingency contracting

After a years-long series of discussions and memoranda coming from the level of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff aimed at creating a new focus on the importance of contingency contracting to warfighting, the department is beginning to see evidence of a culture change, Estevez said.

"As an example, the first day after the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, Pacific Command established the Air Force as the lead service for contracting. That meant that all forces deploying to Japan had a clear understanding of the contracting authority and would not be competing against each other for scarce resources. That's a critical lesson we learned from our experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan," he said. "And the first operations order issued by Pacific Command in response to that disaster was the order establishing that contracting relationship."

DoD acquisition officials say they're working to instill the idea throughout the department that contracting is a military commander's responsibility. Now, Estavez said, contracting guidance for Afghanistan comes straight from Marine Corps Gen. John Allen, commander of the International Security Assistance Force.

"That's because it's part of his effort to win that fight in Afghanistan," he said. "That needs to go into our military education process and our civilian education process. When our junior officers go through their paces, that has to become part of their process.

They need to think, 'When I deploy, contractors are going to be part of the process. They can help me win the fight or they can impede me. I need to manage them to help me win.' We've been saying this at leadership levels, but we're all transitory. We need to have that idea inculcated into the workforce for the future."

Brig. Gen. Craig Crenshaw, vice director for the Joint Staff's logistics branch (J4), said DoD is also at the beginning of a nascent effort to incorporate contracting into specific operational training events.

"We've instituted training on this as we conduct our operational plans," he said. "It's an opportunity to take it from a strategic level and implement it through an exercise. We create scenarios where our planners can really zero in on what it takes to include contractors in a particular operational plan. We're not there yet, but the idea that we've been able to have a discussion and put this on paper really puts us in a positive direction."

Withdrawal from Iraq offers lessons for Afghanistan

Outside observers like the Congressional Research Service and the Government Accountability Office say DoD is definitely on the right track, but it's too early to tell if the Iraq and Afghanistan lessons will bear fruit in future operations.

Moshe Schwartz, a specialist in defense acquisition at CRS, said one enduring problem is the relatively short rotations that contract managers and overseers spend overseas before they're replaced with a fresh face.

"It's a learning curve," he said. "Someone gets to theater in a counterinsurgency operation and eventually says, 'Oh,I get it now.' But by then they're three months from going home and someone else comes in. It has a big impact on continuity. Even if the next person is someone who's worked for years and years on contracting to build roads, they may be focused on cost, schedule and performance. But they haven't had to worry before about people stealing the goods in a situation where you take them to court. They also have to think about the impact on the local village, and by the time they get up to speed, it's time to send them back home."

Tom DiNapoli, the director for acquisition and sourcing management at GAO, said the lessons learned aren't just valuable for future conflicts. He said one near-term opportunity is for DoD to take the contracting lessons DoD gleaned from the actual withdrawal of troops from Iraq and apply them to the similar pullout that will happen over the next two years in Afghanistan, both as DoD uses contracts to manage its exit from the country and closes out contracts it will no longer need.

"When you look at this 27-month period before withdrawal, we were really unprepared at about this time for our withdrawal from Iraq to think about what our requirements were. We tasked our contracting people in Iraq to come up with our requirements, and that was the wrong thing to do," he said. "We should have asked our warfighters, our base commanders, to tell us what services we need in order to draw down. That's what we need to do as we draw down from Afghanistan."

Crenshaw said that's just what DoD's trying to do. He said U.S. Forces Afghanistan has already established a special cell to manage the drawdown of contractors from the country.

"We're looking very hard at the lessons learned from the Iraq drawdown. Hopefully, it's going to let us avoid some of the issues we've had before," he said.

Still, Estevez said, that thought-out approach to contingency contracting still isn't embedded into the military's planning, training and doctrine for the future. That, he said, is the next step.

This story is part of Federal News Radio's daily DoD Report. For more defense news, click here.

DI has been selected for a task order to provide maintenance support services to RED HORSE vehicles and equipment at multiple locations in Afghanistan and Qatar.

Services will include providing transportation, management, labor, and selected equipment as necessary. The competitively-awarded task order has a one-year base period with one, one-year option and a total contract value of $3.4 million if the option is exercised.

“We are proud that the Air Force has selected DynCorp International to perform on these task orders, totaling five awards won on this contract in six months,” said Kenneth Juergens, group vice president, Global Logistics and Development Solutions, DynCorp International. “Furthermore, these task orders build upon our existing, strong presence and expertise in supporting projects in Afghanistan and Qatar.”

AFCAP is a 10-year indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contract to provide worldwide base-operating support and temporary construction capabilities for the U.S. Air Force on an as-needed basis.

About Dyncorp International 

DynCorp International is a global government services provider in support of U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives, delivering support solutions for defense, diplomacy, and international development.We provide expertly conceived and professionally executed services to meet the complex demands of today’s world. We have broad international expertise and over 60 years of experience working in remote, dangerous and austere environments. We integrate our many competencies to provide solutions that fit each customer and situation, and bring a culture of compliance, accountability, and relentless performance to each program and task.

Afghanistan Summary 

• The distribution of contractors in Afghanistan by contracting activity are:

Theater Support - Afghanistan: 20,291  (18%)

LOGCAP: 36,901  (32%)

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: 7,743  (7%)

Other:* 48,801  (43%)

Total: 113,736

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

• OEF Contractor Posture Highlights:

• There are currently approximately 113.7K DoD contractors in Afghanistan.  The overall contractor footprint has decreased 3% from the 2nd quarter FY12.
• The contractor to military ratio in Afghanistan is 1.19 to 1 (based on 95.4K military).
• Local Nationals make up 42% of the DoD contracted workforce in Afghanistan. 

Iraq Summary

• Contractor Posture Highlights:

• There was a 33% decrease in the number of DoD contractors as compared to the 2nd quarter 2012 due to the continued transition of DoD contracts to the Department of State.
• The Department of Defense and Department of State continue to refine the requirements for contract support.  We project that by the end of FY 2012, the USG contractor population in Iraq will be approximately 13.5K.  Roughly half of these contractors are employed under Department of State contracts.  Although the remainder are employed under DoD contracts, only approximately 4,000 will be directly supporting DoD mission areas.  The remaining 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.

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

• Private security contractors perform personal security, convoy security, and static security missions.  Not all private security contractor personnel are armed.

• In Afghanistan, The Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF) Advisory Group is developing the planning for contracts to transition to the APPF in accordance with Presidential Decree 62.  The original intent was for all convoy and development contracts to transition by 20 March 2012, however, this timeline has been extended to enable the APPF to come to full operational capability. The APPF Advisory Group has established a transition plan to facilitate the transition of security for development sites and convoys.  International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) fixed site and military construction PSC contracts have until 20 March 2013 to be transitioned to the APPF.

• USCENTCOM reports, as of 3rd quarter FY 2012, the following distribution of private security contractors in Afghanistan and Iraq:

DoD Private Security Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan

*These numbers include most subcontractors and service contractors hired by prime contractors under DoD contracts.  They include both armed and unarmed contractors.  They do not include PSCs working under DoS and USAID contracts.  

General Conditions Regarding Contracts and Contractor Personnel 

• The Combatant Commander has provided specific guidance on arming contractor personnel and private security contractors in the USCENTCOM AOR through a series of Fragmentary Orders (FRAGOs) and other authoritative guidance, including the following:

• Private security contractor personnel are not authorized to participate in offensive operations and must comply with specific USCENTCOM Rules for the Use of Force (RUF).  Under these RUF, private security contractor personnel are authorized to use deadly force only when necessary in:  self-defense, defense of facilities / persons as specified in their contract; prevention of life-threatening acts directed against civilians; or defense of Coalition-approved property specified within their contract.

• Private security contractor personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq must be properly licensed to carry arms in accordance with host nation law and must receive USCENTCOM / Coalition Forces’ approval of their operations.  DoD contractor personnel armed by DoD authority must report any use of force, including the firing of a weapon.  This requirement and the required information to be submitted are identified within the terms of the contract,  USFOR-A OPLAN 09-01, and Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-I) policy.

Improvements to Management and Oversight of DoD Contractors 

• Publication of DoD Instruction (DoDI) 3020.41.  A revised version of DoDI 3020.41, “Operational Contract Support,” formerly entitled “Contractor Personnel Authorized to Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces,” was signed on December 20^th, 2011. It was also published as 32 CFR Part 158.  This version contains significant changes to the previous instruction including:  (1) incorporation of lessons learned from current operations; (2) requirements for the development of contractor oversight plans; (3) requirements for adequate military personnel necessary to execute contract oversight; and, (4) standards of medical care for deployed contractors.  Further, it reiterates the importance of the use of a common database for the accountability and visibility of contractors supporting DoD contingency operations.

• Defense Standards for Security Services. 
  • Business and operational standards for private security contractors (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.
  • On May 22, 2012, DoD issued instructions (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 which: enables expedited contract award; mitigates risk of delay of services due to contract award protests; and, mitigates risk of contractor non-performance or misconduct in critical early phases of contingency operations.

• Joint Theater Support Contracting Command (JTSCC).  JTSCC has centralized oversight and authority to ensure all contracts executed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Kuwait are visible and in compliance with contracting policy and procedures. JTSCC headquarters is located in Qatar and facilitates broader theater contracting oversight functions.  There are two Flag/GO officers assigned to JTSCC; the Commander and the Senior Contracting Officer (SCO) in Afghanistan.

• JP 4-10 (Operational Contract Support).  The Joint Staff J4 has established a working group to embark on the revision of JP 4-10 (Operational Contract Support) which serves as the doctrine for planning, conducting, and assessing operational contract support integration and contractor management functions in support of joint operations.  Writing teams are currently staffing draft revisions to this doctrine which was originally published in October, 2008.

• DoD Directive (DoDD) 3020.49 on Orchestrating, Synchronizing, and Integrating Program Management of Contingency Acquisition Planning and its Operational Executionwas signed on March 24, 2009.  It establishes policy and assigns responsibilities for program management for the preparation and execution of acquisitions for contingency operations, and for the accountability, integration and management of all contractors supporting the DoD and all USG PSCs operating in an area of contingency operations.

• DoDI 3020.50, “Private Security Contractors (PSCs) Operating in Contingency Operations, Humanitarian or Peace Operations, or Other Military Operations or Exercises” was signed on August 1, 2011.  On August 11, 2011, a final rule entitled “U.S. Government Private Security Contractors Operating in a Contingency Operations, Combat Operations or Other Significant Military Operations,” applying to all US Agencies, was published in the Federal Register (32 CFR Part 159).  This Rule / DoDIprescribes the selection, accountability, training, equipping, and conduct of personnel performing private security functions under a covered contract in a designated area of combat operations for both DoD and other agency PSCs.  It also prescribes incident reporting, use of and accountability for equipment, RUF, and a process for the discipline or removal, as appropriate, of USG PSC personnel.  The DoDI responds to requirements of section 862 of the FY 2008 NDAA as amended.

• 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 directly impacting current and future contingency operations.  On June 12, 2012, DASD (PS) and VD J4 convened the 3rd quarter FY12 OCS FCIB Principals meeting.  Key topics of discussion included 1) a proposal to complete an OCS Action Plan by September 30, 2012; 2) Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) alternative strategy for executing contract quality assurance in future contingency operations; 3) 2012 DCMA Combat Support Agency Review Team (CSAR) Final Report recommendations, and 4) On-going efforts to streamline oversight and reporting of DoD efforts to implement applicable Commission on Wartime Contracting recommendations.  The Board fully endorsed the proposal to develop a comprehensive OCS Action Plan. The plan, when finalized, will identify steps the Department will take during 2013-2017 to close the 10 most critical OCS gaps, offices of primary responsibility, near-term cost, and performance measures.  The 4th quarter FY12 OCS FCIB Principal's meeting will be held on August 28, 2012.  For additional information please contact the Board Secretariat at [email protected].

• Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office (JCASO).  DASD (Program Support) has institutionalized this organization to perform program management of Operational Contract Support (OCS) policy and doctrine, as well as operational synchronization of theater related contracting support planning efforts.  JCASO is an on-call joint enabling capability providing OCS coordination and integration during peacetime and contingency operations.  Planning, implementation, and oversight of OCS are Commander's responsibilities and are essential to supporting and monitoring the contractor element of the DOD Total Force.  JCASO has deployed a Mission Support Team during real-world operations (i.e. most recently at the request of AFRICOM in support of executing Operation ODYSSEY DAWN) and  may be called upon in future contingencies to assist a Combatant Command or Joint Task Force in establishing a joint construct for contracting support.  JCASO also has the capability available, upon request, to provide OCS management and coordination to Commanders during peacetime and contingency 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, Joint Chiefs of Staff Title 10 responsibilities, as well as the Office of the Secretary of Defense for OCS policy development.  Recent examples of  JCASO missions include: a) facilitating USCENTCOM's theater engagement strategy in the South Caucuses and Central Asian States by assisting in the expansion of contract support in those countries, which enhances USCENTCOM's use of a Northern Distribution Network (NDN) to support OEF; b) participating in the Afghanistan Contracting Transition Workgroup (ACTW) to help plan the effective handoff of contracted support efforts from DoD to DoS at the appropriate time; and c) incorporating OCS into the operational training of the next forces into Afghanistan through participation in Exercise Unified Endeavor. 

• Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Notice (CJCSN) 4130.01, "Guidance for Combatant Commander Employment of Operational Contract Support Enabler-Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office (JCASO)" was signed on December 20, 2011.  It recognizes the role of JCASO as providing Geographic Combatant Commands and their subordinate commands with a capability to integrate, implement, manage, and execute OCS activities to improve DoD efficiency and effectiveness across the Total Force.  

• JCASO Concept of Operations (CONOPS).  A detailed CONOPS  was signed on  27 June 2012, which further conveys JCASO's mission, role, and responsibility in OCS, to satisfy Combat Support Agency Review Team findings, and to complement the CJCSN 4130.01.  It will detail how JCASO engagement can help improve effectiveness and efficiency in managing OCS across DoD and whole of government. 

• JCASO Contingency Contracting Office (CCO):  JCASO is establishing a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) contingency/expeditionary contracting capability that responds to demand signals from Combatant Commands and deployed forces; complements Services’ contracting capabilities; extends and leverages existing DLA/JCASO capabilities; develops common operating pictures to support synchronization of all DLA contracting efforts; takes a programmatic approach to contracting, supporting any part of the acquisition cycle (policy, planning, requirements development, market research, contracting, or transition to civil authority); focuses on whole-of-government humanitarian assistance, disaster recovery (HA/DR) and counter-insurgency (COIN) operations; furthers best practices and use of Contingency Business Environment (CBE) tools, such as the Synchronized Pre-Deployment & Operational Tracker (SPOT), the Government Purchase Card (GPC), and the Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS); and supports SECDEF OCS and budget initiatives.  CCO Initial Operating Capability is planned in October 2012. 

• JCASO Planners.  Fourteen (14) JCASO planners are allocated among the Geographic Combatant Commands to assist the commander in identifying gaps where contractor support capability may be required.  They then help to integrate required contractor support into operational plans and synchronize requirements with subordinate commands, the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, other USG Agencies, and coalition partners.  The Secretary further directed an additional 146 planners / analysts to be integrated into the total force.  The planners have been instrumental in integrating OCS into Combatant Command plans.  In USCENTCOM alone, the planners were fundamental in the establishment of the JTSCC, planning the DoD to DoS transition in Iraq, Pakistan humanitarian efforts, increased operations in Afghanistan, as well as other critical operations supporting USCENTCOM’s theater engagement strategy.  Based on demonstrated need for OCS planning capability in the Combatant Commands, DLA recently authorized JCASO to place a planner at forward locations in USFK and USFJ. 

• Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT).  We continue our transition from manual accounting of contractor personnel to SPOT, a web-based, database tool designed to track contractor personnel and contractor capability in theater.  A SPOT-generated Letter of Authorization (LOA) is required for contractors receiving government furnished services in the USCENTCOM AOR.  Joint Asset Management and Movement System (JAMMS) scanners capture movement of contractor personnel through key life support and movement nodes using their LOA or other identification cards.  SPOT capability is continually evaluated to identify enhancements to improve functionality and ease user interface.  SPOT is being used to account for both contractor and DoD civilian personnel in Iraq.  DoS continues to utilize SPOT as the primary automated program management tool as they assume the lead for all USG contractors in Iraq.

• SPOT Configuration Control Board (CCB). ODASD(PS), as the functional sponsor for SPOT, 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, Department of State, and U.S. Agency for International Development.

• Transition of Responsibility for SPOT Operational Execution.  In January 2012 the USD(P&R) assumed operational control, responsibility, support, custody and management of SPOT, specifically within the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) under the Defense Human Resources Activity (DHRA).  This creates synergies between SPOT and the Joint Personnel Accountability Reconciliation and Reporting (JPARR) tool.

• Programs of Instruction for the non-acquisition workforce.  Contingency Contracting is taught by the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) as a special subject for key acquisition personnel.  DoD has developed Programs of Instruction (POI) on contingency acquisition for our non-acquisition workforce to be taught at military staff and senior staff colleges.  This training focuses all leaders on determining requirements, translating those requirements into Statements of Work (SOW), and then overseeing work.  Additionally, JFCOM has developed a ‘Joint Knowledge Online’ program which provides globally available web-based individual training and knowledge services.  Online courses currently available include an ‘Intro to Operational Contract Support (OCS) Commander and Staff Course’ for our deployed Commander/Staff Officers and an ‘OCS FO/GO Essentials Course’ for our Flag and General Officers.  An OCS Planners Course has been added for the non-acquisition military planner.

• Operational Contract Support Concept of Operations (CONOPS).  The CONOPs, signed on March 31, 2010, outlines how the operational and acquisition communities plan and execute OCS during complex operations involving support, not just to the joint force, but to our multinational, other government agency and interagency partners as well.  The Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has endorsed the CONOPS.