Mlf 8 7ww final

U.S. Army CommUniCAtionS-ElECtroniCS CommAnd

2014

readiness maintainer

maj. Gen. Bruce t. CrawfordCommanderU.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command

Major General Bruce T. Crawford assumed duties as the 14th commander of the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Com-mand (CECOM) on May 20, 2014.

A native of Columbia, S.C., Crawford was commissioned on May 28, 1986, after graduating as a Distinguished Military Graduate with a Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering through South Carolina State University’s Reserve Officer Training Corps pro-gram. He holds a Master of Science in administration from Central Michigan University and a Master of Science in national resource strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces.

During his 28 years of service, Crawford has served in a variety of leadership positions at tactical, operational and strategic levels. In his previous assignment, he served as the J6, director of C4/Cyber and chief information officer, U.S. European Command. Prior to that, he served as the commanding general, 5th Theater Signal Command, and G6, United States Army Europe in Wiesbaden, Germany.

His command assignments include the 516th Signal Brigade, Fort Shafter, Hawaii; 82nd Signal Battalion, 82nd Airborne Divi-sion, Fort Bragg, N.C. and Operation Iraqi Freedom, Iraq; and B Company, 51st Signal Battalion, 35th Signal Brigade, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg. His key staff assignments include director, Chief of Staff of the Army, Coordination Group, Office of the Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C.; division chief, LandWarNet Integration Division, Chief Information Office, G-6, Pentagon, Washington, D.C.; branch chief, Net Centric Assessments and Analysis Branch, later executive assistant to the J-6, the Joint Staff, Washington D.C.; and assistant operations officer, later corps emergency deployment readiness officer, 35th Signal Brigade, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, and Operations Desert Shield/Storm, Saudi Arabia.

His awards and decorations include the Distinguished Service Medal; the Defense Superior Service Medal; the Legion of Merit; the Bronze Star Medal; the Defense Meritorious Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster; the Meritorious Service Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters; the Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster; and the Army Achievement Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters. Crawford is authorized to wear the Combat Action Badge, the Master Parachutist Badge, the Ranger Tab, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge and the Army Staff Identification Badge.

Q: You assumed command of CECOM back in May. Tell me about your first months in command and what has guided you in mov-ing forward.

A: First and foremost, my family is truly honored with the oppor-tunity to lead our nation’s finest as the senior mission commander and commanding general of this phenomenal team of dedicated professionals here at Aberdeen Proving Ground and the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command. Given the broad depth and scope of our mission, which at its core involves developing, integrating, providing and sustaining the logistics readiness of our Army’s C4ISR weapon systems and enablers, we truly have an oppor-tunity to make a difference.

There is no place I would rather be or job I would rather have. Being here at CECOM and Aberdeen Proving Ground provides a great opportunity to help posture our Army for the future strategic environment. The future strategic environment that we will face as an Army makes it necessary for us as a command to adapt more quickly than we have in the past, with more innovative approaches, and with creative partnerships in order to sustain our global leader-ship role in C4ISR.

I see three key challenges that we must address as we move forward.

The first is developing and sustaining our competitive advan-tage, which is our quality workforce. It’s not a cliché to say that CECOM’s most important resource is the [group of] hard working

Major General Bruce T. CrawfordCommander

U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command

Readiness MaintainerDeveloping, Integrating, Providing and Sustaining Army C4ISR

Q&AQ&A

www.MLF-kmi.com U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command | MLF 8.7 | 1

U.S. ARmy CommUnICAtIonS-ElECtRonICS CommAnD

people around the world serving our armed forces and our allies. We talk a lot about no-fail programs that are critical to our success. In my opinion, the greatest no-fail mission is ensuring we have the most highly-trained and dedicated workforce in the world.

With that said, step one in the ‘how’ of developing and sustaining our workforce has to be illuminating the importance of strengthening the Army profession. Above everything else, we must continue to invest in and commit to developing a deeper under-standing and awareness of what it means to be a professional.

Although this observation is intuitive for some, there are times when we as leaders must remind our teammates (and sometimes ourselves) of why we chose to serve, [and remind them of] that feeling and sense of pride we all had when we took the oath for the first time.

We truly are in a noble, selfless calling that is successful because our predecessors earned the trust of the people we serve. If we are to remain the absolute most respected pro-fession on Earth, we must first re-establish a deeper understanding of why we serve this great nation.

We’ve got a lot of great minds at CECOM but we also have to live up to our solemn commitment to serve. Overcoming all other obstacles is possible when we first understand why we do what we do.

That leads into the second challenge, which is coming to grips with the fact that although we’ve made tremendous strides over the past 13 years, we must continue to evolve many of our enterprise processes and the policies that support them.

Make no mistake about it ... job one is supporting the current fight and emerging contingencies around the world. We owe it to those teammates (and their families) who are either in or preparing to go into harm’s way. But simultaneously, we have to take an introspec-tive look at those policies and processes that drive our core missions.

As an example, as we transition to sustainment, what repeatable processes do we put into place to create the predictability that feeds our organic industrial base? I consider [these processes] to be critical enablers to both sustainment and readiness.

Over the years, we’ve leveraged force generation and resourcing processes and policies to create predictability. We knew what units were on the patch charts and what equipment to expect at our indus-trial base facilities. Although not formally institutionalized, there was an actual informal handshake that existed between our C4ISR industrial base and our war fighting formations. Units turned in their equipment before they redeployed back to home station, and for the most part, by the time they returned from block leave and started the train up for the next mission, their original equipment had either been replaced or reset. With what do we replace the predictability pro-vided by our past force-generation models and other processes that govern and resource the development, integration and sustainment of capability in our Army and joint formations? The impact is felt immediately in both the efficiencies and effectiveness of our industrial base and our command elements that enable and deliver hardware and software sustainment. There are many other examples, but in

the end the fundamental question is: Can we achieve the evolutionary capability we envision by using the same incremental processes we’ve become accustomed to in the past 20 or 30 years?

Finally, do I have the right capability (training, engineering, field support) in place to enable readiness? As the CECOM commanding general, I need to assess whether we have the right capability in the right places to support an expeditionary Army that is in the process of evolving its fight upon arrival skill-sets. At first glance this chal-lenge may appear to be oriented only [in terms of] our tactical forma-tions. But this challenge actually includes the institutional Army and our force projection platforms where much of the training and leader development occurs. This is less about numbers of CECOM people than it is about ensuring that I have a versatile mix of training and maintenance capacity at our posts, camps and stations ‘to the left of the customer’s need.’

So now comes the fun part: [determining] what exactly we are going to do. I’ve been in command now for about 80 days and have taken the opportunity to visit about 60 percent of the organization in multiple locations to include a couple of our divisions. To be quite honest, I’m both encouraged and inspired by what I’m seeing. I’m about complete with my initial 90-day assessment, but in order to overcome the aforementioned challenges, my guidance has been the development of four initial priorities:

• Given the investment required to best leverage our competitive advantage (which is our people), focusing on command climate, quality of life and the profession is key.

• Readiness, both internal as a customer and external as a provider, [is essential]. All that we do must stand the audit test. Are we doing what we are chartered to do at the level that our customers expect and deserve?

• Accountability, in the end, is what our nation expects. It is fundamental to building trust both internally and externally … this is what has earned our military, year in and year out, the [reputation] of the absolute most respected profession on Earth. From treating people with dignity to being responsible

Increased investment in signal training, inclusive of mission training complexes, signal universities, and courses such as the Digital Master Gunner Class shown above, will be a critical to the success of the new field support construct and ensure that soldiers have the opportunity to build the skills needed to address operator-level issues in the field. [Photo courtesy of DoD]

www.MLF-kmi.com2 | MLF 8.7 | U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command


stewards, accountability is about who we are and what we stand for.

• Last but not least is the idea of “sustained relevance.” Thanks to some phenomenal leaders who came before me, CECOM has become the proverbial “gold standard” for many things across DoD. Now, I must ensure that I’m doing all that I can to posture this amazing command for the future.

It’s been well documented that the uncertainty of our future stra-tegic environment presents many challenges that we must prepare to meet head-on. But after only a few months in the seat, I must say that I like the team we have developing solutions both in CECOM and the greater C4ISR community, which includes our higher head-quarters at the Army Materiel Command (AMC), the DA staff and our teammates in the combatant commands and on the Joint Staff.

Q: In general terms can you offer an overview of CECOM’s budget priorities—with your insight on future funding?

A: Our near-term budget priority is timely and efficient execution of the FY14 operation and maintenance funding that we received to execute CECOM’s mission. We plan to meet this goal by the end of the fiscal year.

Defensewide reductions to funding, as well as audit readi-ness requirements, are causing us to relook how we do business

in general. We must support the mission within the [confines of the] resources available while achieving and maintaining audit readiness. One measure taken this past year that supports becoming more efficient and audit-compliant was a consolidation of resource management and information technology functions at the head-quarters. This change has enabled us to continue our support to the C4ISR mission, while meeting our headquarter staff reduction goals as directed by the Department of Defense.

One of CECOM’s budget priorities for the future is to manage an increased number of systems transitioning to sustainment with-out a corresponding increase in funding and personnel. A second priority for CECOM is streamlining field support as we decrease the requirement for field support representatives. This is driving us to look at the way we have been providing sustainment support in all areas to achieve efficiencies and still effectively support the warfighter. We are working closely with our partners in ASAALT to ensure that we are collectively ready to support systems that will [ease the] transition from production and fielding to sustainment in the next few years. One of our critical challenges will be sustain-ing a growing workload in post-production software support—in particular, ensuring systems remain protected against cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

Q: What does the workload for Tobyhanna look like now and what is the projection for work and staff over the next 12 months?



Whether helping our government use real-time intelligence or keeping our troops well equipped and safe, we have one focus–protecting our national security for future generations.

Our customers have a critical mission and they rely on us for solutions they can trust.

www.mantech.com

2014


Maj. Gen. Bruce T. Crawford

Commanding General

Gary P. MartinDeputy to the

Commanding General

Gary P. MartinDeputy to the

Commanding General

CECOM Leadership

Charles J. Glaser, G1Director for Personnel

and Training

James Lint, G2Director for Intelligence

and Security

Lane D. CollieDirector

Logistics and Readiness Center

Col. Federica KingDirector

Central Technical Support Facility

CECOM Staff

CECOM Centers and Commands

CECOM Special Staff

Maj. Young KimChaplain

Steve HartDirector

Directorate for Safety

Robert DiMichelePublic Affairs Officer

Maria EsparragueraChief Counsel


Sgt. Maj. Kennis J. Dent

Command Sergeant Major

Col. Charles GibsonChief of Staff

Patricia L. O’Connor, G6Chief Information

Officer

Col. Patrick L. KerrCommander

U.S. Army Information Systems Engineering

Command

Kent Woods, G3/5Director for Operations

and Plans

Liz Miranda, G8Director for Resource

Management

Michael Vetter, G4Director for Logistics

and Engineering

Larry M. MuzzeloDirector

Software Engineering Center

Col. Gerhard P.R. Schröter

CommanderTobyhanna Army Depot

Dominic D’OrazioDirector

Internal Review Office

Phillip Pierson Inspector General

Neslie EtheridgeDirector

Equal Employment Opportunity

VacantDirector

Office of Small Business Programs

Gene CatenaSecretary to the General

Staff

A: Let me start off by saying that Tobyhanna Army Depot, Pa., is a strategic enabler for our Army. It is the largest full-service electronics maintenance facility in the Department of Defense, and it is capable of providing total logistics support for hundreds of electronic systems to include sustainment, design, manufacture, repair and overhaul. It is a unique and critical facility operated by spe-cialized artisans with skillsets that, in many cases, do not exist elsewhere in the United States. Industrial bases such as Tobyhanna are a centerpiece of Army readiness, and CECOM works tirelessly to preserve this capability in a responsible, cost-efficient way.

At the beginning of the summer, the pro-jected ending workload in dollars for FY14 at Tobyhanna was about $652 million. As of July, the depot had received $600 million in workload. Some of the highest driver work-loads are the:

• Overhaul of Harris radios ($56 million) and Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System ($47 million)

• Repair, overhaul and tech assist support for Standard Integrated Command Post System/Tactical Operations Center ($27 million)

• Repair and tech assist support for PM CREW ($21 million) and Air Defense and Airspace Management CELL in support of Army Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Command (AMCOM) ($17 million)

• Overhaul, repair and tech assist support for the AN/TPQ-36/37 radar (Firefinder) systems ($26 million)

• Overhaul and fabrication support of AN/TPS-59 radar systems ($11.6 million) and AN/TPS-63 radar systems ($5.5 million) for the Marine Corps

• Overhaul of the AN/TPS-75 radar for the Air Force ($5.6 million)

Our projected depot workload for FY15 is around $485 million. Most of the high driver workload from FY14 remains consistent through FY15, with a few exceptions. We see the addition of the overhaul and maintenance of AN/ASM 146 shelters ($23 million); the fabrication, repair, modifications and technical assistance sup-porting the Vehicle Optics Sensor System ($6.6 million); and the overhaul of traffic control and landing systems for the Air Force ($15 million) as driving our workload.

Although we expect to see reductions in DoD budgets and asso-ciated reductions to core depot workload, Tobyhanna leadership has been very proactive in ensuring they remain competitive through a number of initiatives focused on reducing their overhead rates. As the new commander of CECOM, I intend to ensure maximum utili-zation of Tobyhanna’s capabilities as a critical part of my command’s mission to sustain C4ISR systems.

Q: When the services go looking for a facility to manage a joint program, like Gray Eagle, what’s involved in that process and why was Tobyhanna selected?

A: For a joint program such as Gray Eagle, the military services nomi-nate a depot to be evaluated for consideration to become the depot source of repair by following the Center for Industrial and Technical Excellence (CITE) designations.

Tobyhanna has the Army CITE designation for C4ISR and elec-tronics, avionics, and missile guidance and control, and the U.S. Air Force Technology Repair Center (TRC) designation for ground com-munications and electronics. The Gray Eagle payload and ground control stations fall under Tobyhanna’s CITE and TRC designations for the Army and the USAF.

After the services nominate a candidate depot to perform the workload, the Joint Program Office reviews the existing capabilities for the depots and makes a determination based on existing capabili-ties, facilitization costs and capacity.

I’m proud to say that Tobyhanna was selected based upon a best value analysis of all factors needed to establish an organic repair capa-bility from within the Department of Defense.

Q: One aspect of program control has been focused on the acquisi-tion process. What can CECOM do to streamline the way it manages acquisition of equipment, parts and services?

A: Our centers and subordinate commands are taking a proactive approach to improving how we do business in this area. For exam-ple, over the last year our CECOM Logistics and Readiness Center (LRC) completed two Lean Six Sigma black belt projects to map, document, and optimize the acquisition requirements documenta-tion package generation process for both Army and Foreign Military Sales acquisitions.

These efforts reduced the cycle time for generating these pack-ages by more than 50 percent, eliminating significant re-work and improving the quality of the packages as well. This will help reduce our overall contracting cycle times. The LRC currently has five follow-on streamlining projects underway to improve how they generate

Signal university students at Iron Horse University, Fort Carson, Colo., receive training on the AN/PSC-5 multiband radio. Signal universities are located at nine installations across the United States and have 31 staffed instructors and numerous training teams available to deliver C4ISR training when, where and how units require it. [Photo courtesy of DoD]



and manage requirements in the area of depot-level maintenance services for C4ISR systems.

We are expecting these projects to result in a much more accurate and reliable require-ments forecast. We also have collaborative efforts on-going with AMC Headquarters, AMCOM, U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Man-agement Command, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, and DLA to explore and develop acquisition methods, contract vehicles and acquisition practices that leverage the buying power of all of AMC for the procurement of not only equipment and parts, but also engineering and technical services.

Q: Under current conditions, is the statu-tory requirement of a 50/50 split between organic and commercial base workload a help or a hindrance to best practices?

A: This rule is one of several core logistics laws passed by Congress to protect the unique skills and capabilities of the organic industrial base and retain the capacity to expand to meet unforeseen future needs. By requiring that at least 50 percent of funds appropriated for depot-level maintenance and repair in any fiscal year must be performed by employees of the federal govern-ment, the 50/50 rule functions as both a help and a hindrance to our best practices.

Over the years, the statute has been helpful as it enables the establishment of public-private partnerships that are essential as we move to a more complex environment in the future. However, in order for the Army to better meet the intent of the statute, it must become focused not only upon the ratio or quantity of systems invested into organic and contractor activities, but also upon the quality of those investments to ensure Army core weapons systems are being maintained at an appropriate source of repair.

The core documents (core depot assessment/source of repair analysis) are critical to 50/50 as they ensure the health of the organic industrial base and the Army’s war fighting posture. These documents identify if new or unique repair capabilities or additional capacity must be added to supplement the existing capabilities and capacities at the organic hardware and software depots. They also determine the most cost effective source of repair for redundant core workloads and document a weapons system’s depot level repairables.

In summary, the 50/50 law enables DoD to maintain appropriate capabilities in our organic industrial base. However, with the signifi-cant reduction in overseas contingency operation funding and the corresponding impact on depot workload and equipment reset, the real challenge will be aligning industrial base capacity (organic and non-organic) to the realities of a smaller workload while maintain-ing compliance with the law.

Q: With a paradigm shift underway and the expectation that some communications and electronics repairs will be done by soldiers in the field, what has been the feedback at the soldier level?

A: This summer marks the beginning of a new era for C4ISR field support Army-wide, as leadership from the 1st Infantry Division and the C4ISR Center of Excellence have come together to kick off imple-mentation of a new field support solution.

When we first examined the C4ISR field support structure, we conducted site visits at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., and the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, La., and observed home-station training events at Fort Hood, Texas, and Fort Drum, N.Y. Our C4ISR team found that we were missing an opportu-nity to empower soldiers to handle operator- and maintenance-level tasks, so we developed the new model, piloted it, validated it, and today we stand ready to implement it.

Team C4ISR is working closely with a wide range of headquarters and supported units to develop and refine a new tiered concept for delivering field support. Basically, we are reinvesting in our soldiers so that they are able to maintain their own C4ISR equipment. Feedback at the soldier level has been positive because it is a fundamental fact that soldiers want to be able maintain their own equipment. However, we understand that there has to be a training plan to mitigate skill gaps that developed over years of contracted field service support for systems.

As we implement the home station concept for the first time at Fort Riley, Kan., we are tailoring the approach based on feedback from the 1st Infantry Division. We will continue to refine the concept as we start implementation at Fort Carson, Colo., in the first quarter of FY15. The initial planning meeting was held with the 4th ID staff in July to get their assessment of our planned way ahead.

In the concept, a typical brigade combat team will have five personnel assigned, inclusive of three multifunctional logistics assis-tance representatives (LARs), a digital systems engineer (DES) and a system-specific field support representative (FSR). This staff will be supported by an additional 10 professionals aligned to the divi-sion, to include the CECOM trail boss, four multifunctional LARs, four system-specific FSRs and one division DES, as well as by other system-specific experts that are regionalized.

Members of the Communication and Electronics Repair Section of the 322nd Support Maintenance Company, inspecting and putting the final touches on SINCGARS radio transmitters. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Army by/Steve Grzezdzinski]



Q: Has the Army done a good enough job articulating to industry its requirements to fully integrate life cycle management into all of its programs?

A: During the last dozen years of war the Army, and especially the C4ISR commu-nity, was challenged to quickly develop and field capabilities that were urgently needed on the battlefield. Providing for life cycle management was less of a priority in these cases as it was not known if these capabili-ties would remain as enduring systems that the Army would have to manage, and the overarching need to get the capability into the hands of our soldiers quickly. As we move forward into the peacetime acquisi-tion environment, we will be getting back to more comprehensive and well-integrated life cycle management practices.

Industry should expect to see greater emphasis placed on total cost of ownership versus performance and delivery timelines. This will achieve higher levels of reliability and maintainability, designing systems so that they can be more easily operated and maintained by our soldiers without the need for contractor field service personnel. This will enable our Army to continually self-assess and optimize our life cycle management strategies for C4ISR systems.

Q: How will you be looking at how you manage inventory? Do you think there are opportunities to fine tune how you order, trans-port and manage the CE inventory?

A: It’s obvious we’re working in an environment with real resource constraints. My team is always looking at opportunities to gain efficiencies and leverage technology to better manage our inven-tory. We’ve made great strides towards full automation, especially as it relates to working with our business partners. One of the tools we use to maintain proper inventory levels is our Procurement Advisory Group (PAG). The PAG is comprised of a team of dedicated individuals that review all repair and procurement actions prior to funds being obligated. We also leverage the sales and operations planning supply review process to identify and aggressively reduce excess inventory. Together, these processes allow us to make the right decisions and be good stewards of the taxpayers’ money.

Furthermore, our weapon system directorates and transporta-tion experts work in concert, through working-level reviews, to track assets throughout the transportation network and expedite movements whenever possible. This ensures we deliver materiel to the warfighter where and when needed, in the most efficient manner possible.

Q: Anything you care to add about the men and women of CECOM?

A: Upon taking command back in May, I noted that CECOM is one of the “crown jewels” of the military C4ISR community. This is

due to the thousands of dedicated professionals working around the globe ensuring our formations are equipped with the most state-of-the-art capabilities we can provide. I’m extremely proud of the distinguished legacy and reputation CECOM has with our many partners and customers.

However, CECOM cannot do this alone. We work closely with our C4ISR Center of Excellence partners and utilize the full force of AMC. Within our logistics core functions, we partner very closely with three other AMC major subordinate commands, the Army Sustainment Command (ASC), the Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC), and the Security Assistance Command (USASAC). Through ASC we leverage AMC’s single face to the field, the Army field support brigades (AFSB).

For example, we embed our team within the 401st AFSB’s redistribution property assistance teams to enable identifica-tion, classification and disposition of C4ISR equipment. We then leverage our partners at SDDC in order to move our equipment back through strategic sea and ground lines of communication to our industrial base activities. But the partnerships don’t stop there. We also work very closely with USASAC for our role in C4ISR security assistance, which helps build capabilities with our allies and coalition partners. This effort is not only a key enabler for our combatant commanders as they build the capac-ity of our partners and allies, but also provides an opportunity for AMC to maintain critical skills and workload within our organic industrial base.

At the end of the day, the capabilities and innovative services we provide come down to dedicated people—their commitment and support to our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. From our CECOM forward elements to our subordinate elements around the country to our C4ISR Center of Excellence campus, CECOM professionals from across the command provide an invaluable capability in logistics and sustainment services in support of operational readiness and retrograde operations. They truly are the critical link that drives C4ISR readiness. O

An APG Real-world Internships in Science & Engineering Program student learns how to solder metal parts together for building fuel systems in the CERDEC CP&I Reactive Flow Lab. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Army/by Allison Barrow]



Optics, sensors, scanners, helium trailers, generators and radios are very different types of equipment fielded to deployed troops that are supported by Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) personnel at the Electronic Sustainment Support Center (ESSC)/Regional Support Center (RSC), located in a corner of the 3-401st Army Field Support Battalion footprint, where units can access C4ISR maintenance, training and troubleshooting support.

The ESSC and RSC house technicians who provide maintenance support in communications, electronics, networking, fiber optics, software, HVAC/ECU, power generation and program manager sup-port for a veritable laundry list of highly specialized technical equip-ment used by U.S. and coalition forces. Some of the equipment is non-standard and commercial off-the-shelf equipment, and some is U.S. Army system or program of record equipment that requires very specialized tools or skills to maintain. In the case of Army equipment, it is either more cost- or time-effective to have CECOM technicians complete the repairs.

“It’s an umbrella organization,” said Robert L. Martin, ESSC man-ager. “The ESSC houses support capabilities and provides facilities and infrastructure to support various program manager programs.”

Martin said he had a sign placed on the front of the building listing 15 capabilities housed in the regional support center so units can become familiar with the one-stop support provided there. The list—which includes radar, radios, customs and biometrics—is not all-inclusive.

Martin listed at least 20 separate supported systems but noted that each system can have a number of variants and workers must be trained on each variant. Levels of support available vary but range from full maintenance and fly-away support, to direct exchange, to packing, wrapping and shipping. Many technicians are located at forward-deployed locations or are available to fly out on short notice to supply parts and expertise.

Support for Program Manager Programs and Equipment varies and is determined by the program manager. Support for Program Manager Ground Sensors vehicle optics sensor systems, for example, includes new equipment and refresher training for operators and maintainers; de-installing old or faulty equipment and installing new equipment; full maintenance; fly-away support, and technicians located at 10 locations in theater. Martin said his technicians will also pack, wrap and ship between operating, storage and maintenance locations. Support for persistent threat detection systems, the un-blinking eye in the sky, includes pack, wrap and ship only.

Martin said the contractors working in the RSC are ‘multi-skilled,’ and that helps reduce personnel numbers and costs. April Picart, an electronics technician who works on Harris and Thales radios, formerly supported only one system, but now supports mul-tiple systems. She said her work is important because vehicles must have radio capability to be considered mission ready.

While training is not a primary mission for the ESSC/RSC, con-tractors in the generator maintenance and environmental control unit shops have soldiers working with them to increase their skills and knowledge base.

“I’ve learned a lot in the last four to six months,” said Specialist Steven R. Murphy, 2nd Battalion, 44th Air Defense Artillery Regi-ment, and a native of Knoxville, Tenn. “I’m learning valuable tools to take back to Fort Campbell.”

“The more they can learn the better,” said Robert Stephens, ESSC generator maintenance shop lead.

Specialist Mark A. Ocampo, a Pohnpei, Micronesia native, also with the 2-44th ADA, is working with Peter ‘Pete’ McGinnis, ECU lead. He said he’s a wheel vehicle mechanic, but working with McGin-nis is giving him skills in other areas.

“I’ve learned a lot and can now troubleshoot generators,” he said. “I’ll be good in three fields.”

Andrew L. Thompson, CECOM senior command representative to the 401st Army Field Support Brigade, observed that everyone who works in the ESSC/RSC is very committed to supporting the warfighter.

“Treat every system and piece of equipment as if your child has to use it,” he said. “Once a soldier, sailor, airman and Marine go outside the perimeter they don’t get a chance to re-do their situation. The services and systems we provide have to be 100 percent … all the time … every time.” O

By Summer Barkley

Vehicular amplifier adaptors made by Harris are shelved awaiting repairs at the Communications-Electronics Command Electronic Sustainment Support Center/Regional Support Center. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Army/by Summer Barkley]

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

at www.mlf-kmi.com.

DeployeD Support enhanceS operational reaDineSS.

www.MLF-kmi.com


U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command | MLF 8.7 | 9

Every day, in locations around the world, U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) logistics assistance representatives and senior master techni-cians work toward one goal—to improve soldier skills and knowledge on communi-cations and electronics equipment that is vital to mission accomplishment.

CECOM’s mission is to develop, pro-vide, integrate and sustain the logistics and readiness of C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) systems and mission command capabilities for joint, interagency and multinational forces worldwide. To execute the mission, CECOM provides software and hardware engineers, logisticians, and maintenance personnel to the field supporting units. The ‘face to the field’ includes logistics assistance represen-tatives, field service representatives and field service engineers under the management of CECOM’s senior command representatives.

CECOM logistics assistance representa-tives (LARs) supporting Operation Endur-ing Freedom are usually assigned to a logistics support element nested in one of the battalions of the 401st Army Field Support Brigade. The LARs are a critical link between the deployed soldier and the solutions to battlefield problems that could delay or stop mission accomplishment. The CECOM LARs are subject matter experts who train and mentor soldiers to increase their knowledge and ability to work on and with C4ISR systems.

One of the CECOM LAR skill sets is LOG-IT, short for logistics information technology, and the men and women who are LOT-IT LARs are out working with supported units to train, advise and assist soldiers in keeping their black boxes (computers) talking.

Michael A. Madden, LOG-IT LAR, recently worked with a soldier from the 419th Combat Sustainment Support Battal-ion who was charged with ensuring approxi-mately 35 companies were able to update

data on equipment availability and readi-ness for use in planning missions.

“He [Madden] taught me just about everything I know so far,” said Specialist Sean M. Koski, 419th CSSB sustainment automation support management officer.

Koski said the knowledge he’s gained from Madden enables him to keep the com-puter systems for his supported companies functional for the unit.

“Anytime we have any issues, he [Mad-den] is here to give us the big picture,” said 1st Lieutenant Sylvia L. McDonald, 514th Support Maintenance Company, 10th Sustainment Brigade maintenance control officer. “Our brigade SASMO [sustainment automation support management officer] referred us to Mike.”

“We rely on our SAMS boxes for daily reports,” said Sergeant 1st Class Jamie Cox, 514th SMC maintenance control sergeant.

Madden said his job is to train, advise and assist soldiers on how things are sup-posed to work.

“I provide information and over-the-shoulder training and mentoring,” Madden said.

He said he acts as an ‘honest broker’ and focuses solely on training soldiers. He explained that he does not work for the soldier’s unit or command and also has no affiliation with the product.

Madden also said working so closely with soldiers in a deployed environment enables him and other LARs to take a lot of information back to the program managers who field equipment. He believes LAR feed-back can help identify potential problems, trends and solutions.

Madden was nearing the end of his sev-enth deployment as a civilian and sched-uled to return to his home station at Fort Hood, Texas, where he is a LOG-IT LAR in the 407th Army Field Support Brigade’s Logistics Support Element. O

Summer Barkley is with Army Mate-riel Command.

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

at www.mlf-kmi.com.

logiSticS aSSiStance repreSentativeS helpS SolDierS keep computerS talking.By Summer Barkley

A U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command logistics information technology assistance representative provides ‘over-the-shoulder’ training to the 419th CSSB sustainment automation support management officer, who is working with soldiers from 514th Support Maintenance Company, 10th Sustainment Brigade. [Photo courtesy of U.S. Army/by Summer Barkley]

www.MLF-kmi.com


10 | MLF 8.7 | U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command

Documents

Mlf 8 7ww final