By Order of the Secretary of the Army:

RAYMOND T. ODIERNO

General, United States Army

Chief of Staff

Offcial:

U.S. Army Engineer School

(573) 563-8080/DSN 676-8080

COMMANDANT

BG Anthony C. Funkhouser 

563-6192

<anthony.c.funkhouser.mil@mail.mil>

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT

COL David Theisen

563-6192

<david.t.theisen.mil@mail.mil>

DEPUTY COMMANDANT

Mr. James R. Rowan

563-8080

<james.r.rowan4.civ@mail.mil>

REGIMENTAL COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR

CSM Butler J. Kendrick, Jr.

563-8060

<butler.j.kendrick.mil@mail.mil>

REGIMENTAL CHIEF WARRANT OFFICER

CW5 Scott R. Owens

563-4088

<scott.r.owens.mil@mail.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–USAR

COL Glenn A. Kiesewetter 

563-8045

<glenn.a.kiesewetter.mil@mail.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–ARNG

LTC Adam M. Calderon 

563-8046

<adam.m.calderon3.mil@mail.mil>

CHIEF OF STAFF

LTC Lars N. Zetterstrom

563-7116

<lars.n.zetterstrom.mil@mail.mil>

COMMANDER, 1ST ENGINEER BRIGADE

COL Heather J. Warden

596-0224, DSN 581-0224

<heather.j.warden.mil@mail.mil>

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING AND LEADER DEVELOPMENT

COL Jason L. Smallfeld

563-4093

<jason.l.smallfeld.mil@mail.mil>

DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRATION

Mr. Robert F. Danner

563-2845

<robert.f.danner.civ@mail.mil>

COUNTER EXPLOSIVE HAZARDS CENTER

COL Charles G. Phillips 

563-8142

<charles.g.phillips.mil@mail.mil>

ASSURED MOBILITY BRANCH, MSCoE CDID, RDD

LTC Larry J. Lyle Jr.

563-5055

<larry.j.lyle.mil@mail.mil>

ENGINEER DOCTRINE, MSCoE CDID, CODDD

MAJ Sally C. Hannan

563-2717

<sally.c.hannan.mil@mail.mil>

ORGANIZATION BRANCH, MSCoE CDID, CODDD

LTC Leonard B. Scott IV

563-6282

<leonard.b.scott.mil@mail.mil>

Engineer (ISSN 0046-1989) is published three times 

a year by the U.S. Army Engineer School and the Maneuver 

Support Center of Excellence G-37 Publications, Fort 

Leonard Wood, Missouri. 

Articles to be considered for publication are due

1 December, 1 April, and 1 August. Send submissions

by e-mail to <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx.engineer

@mail.mil>, or send an electronic copy in Microsoft® 

Word on a compact disk and a double-spaced copy of 

the manuscript to Engineer Professional Bulletin, 14010 

MSCoE Loop, Building 3201, Suite 2661, Fort Leonard 

Wood, MO 65473-8702. Due to regulatory requirements 

and the limited space per issue, we normally do not print 

articles that have been published elsewhere.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Engineer 

Professional Bulletin, 14010 MSCoE Loop, Building 3201, 

Suite 2661, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473-8702.

CORRESPONDENCE, letters to the editor, manuscripts, photographs, offcial unit requests to receive copies, and unit address changes should be sent to Engineer

at the preceding address. Telephone: (573) 563-4137, 

DSN 676-4137; e-mail: <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx

.engineer@mail.mil>; Web site:<http://www.wood.army.mil

/engrmag/>.

DISCLAIMER: Engineer presents professional information designed to keep U.S. military and civilian engineers 

informed of current and emerging developments within their 

areas of expertise for the purpose of enhancing their professional development. Views expressed are those of the 

authors and not those of the Department of Defense or its 

elements. The contents do not necessarily refect offcial 

U.S. Army positions and do not change or supersede information in other U.S. Army publications. The use of news 

items constitutes neither affrmation of their accuracy nor 

product endorsement. Engineer reserves the right to edit 

material submitted for publication.

CONTENT is not copyrighted. Material may be reprinted 

if credit is given to Engineer and the author.

OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION is targeted to all engineer 

and engineer-related units.

PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS are available for $24.00 

($33.60 foreign) per year by contacting the U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 

63197-9000.

ADDRESS CHANGES for personal subscriptions should 

be sent to the U.S. Government Printing Offce at the above 

address.

GERALD B. O’KEEFE

Administrative Assistant to the

Secretary of the Army

1434901
E R

DEPARTMENTS

02 Clear the Way

By Brigadier General 

 Anthony C. Funkhouser

04 Lead the Way

By Command Sergeant Major 

 Butler J. Kendrick, Jr.

05 Show the Way

By Chief Warrant Offcer Five

 Scott R. Owens

17 Book Review: The American 

 Enlisted Man

Reviewed by Staff Staff Sergeant

 Bryan W. Ehrhart

26 Engineer Doctrine Update

41 Engineer Writer’s Guide

56 GPO Order Form

Inside Back Cover: Engineers’ Creed

MANAGING EDITOR

Diane E. Eidson

EDITOR

Rick Brunk

GRAPHIC DESIGNER

Jennifer Morgan

COMMANDANT

Brigadier General Anthony C. Funkhouser

Volume 45 PB 5-15-1 Headquarters, Department of the Army January–April 2015

NGINEE

U.S. ARMY

ENGINEER SCHOOL

The Professional Bulletin of Army Engineers

January–April 2015 Engineer 1

Front cover: U.S. Army engineer Soldiers work 

with Liberian soldiers to construct an Ebola treatment unit site in Sinje, Liberia.

Back cover: U.S. Army photos

FEATURES

06 Tribal Knowledge II: Back to Basics

 By Colonel Adam S. Roth

09 Führen mit Auftrag: Mission Command From a German Point 

 of View

By Lieutenant-Colonel Jens Küster

12 The Engineer Regiment’s Resource Menu: A Tool to Facilitate 

 Lifelong Learning

By Staff Sergeant William W. Greer

14 A Team-of-Teams Approach: Combined Arms Route Clearance 

 During the Retrograde

By First Lieutenant Kevin N. Braam

18 Fort Carson Engineers Deploy on Short Notice to Operation 

 United Assistance

By Captain Garrett D. Anderson

20 Engineers Help Fight Ebola Outbreak in Africa 

 By Captain Andrew K. Hill

23 The Engineer Effort in Afghanistan

By Captain Donald E. Frier

28 Emergency Readiness Deployment Exercise: Unit Rehearses 

 for National Emergency Mission

 By Captain Ian S. Griffth and First Lieutenant Jessica M. Williams

31 Layer By Layer: A Geospatial Engineer’s Story

 By Sergeant Julius C. Lomosbog

32 USACE Builds Women’s Dormitory at the University of Herat 

 in Afghanistan

By Major Robert T. Moore

34 Serving in a USACE District

 By Lieutenant Colonel Jared L. Ware

38 Deconstructing the General Engineer Battalion

By Lieutenant Colonel Samuel L. Volkman and 

 Captain Jennifer G. Acojedo

42 Army Engineers and the Society of the Cincinnati

 By Mr. Gustav Person

45 A Framework for Planning Route Clearance Patrols 

 at the Platoon and Company Levels

By Captain John R. Chambers

48 Multinational-Joint Combined Arms Route Clearance 

 Operations

 By Captain Donald A. Schmidt II

52 The Essayons Button—Sun Mystery Solved

 By Colonel Bradley P. Welch

54 Technical Engineers Showcase Relevance in 

 Joint Operation

By Chief Warrant Offcer Two Matthew T. Lizotte
2 Engineer January–April 2015

 

Clear the Way

Brigadier General Anthony C. Funkhouser 

Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School

G

reetings to the Engineer Regiment! As I thought about what 

to write for this issue, I concluded that I should cover an area of 

current importance—the new Army 

Operating Concept (AOC).1

 If you are an 

engineer Soldier, noncommissioned offcer, or commissioned offcer, you might 

ask, “Why does this matter to me? I am 

just trying to train my Soldiers for the 

next mission.”

The answer is that it will affect the 

Engineer Regiment’s doctrine, organizational structure, and equipment in the 

future. We can either shape it the way 

we think it should be or just let it happen. I will attempt to lay out in an abbreviated manner how it could affect Army 

engineers today and into the future. 

The AOC is how we foresee the Army operating in the 

future. It is an intellectual framework to see how the Army 

will fght and how things will ft together. The last AOC 

that most of us are familiar with is AirLand Battle. This 

concept was developed for a known threat with known capabilities in a known region. It was developed to oppose the 

Soviet threat in Europe and “Fight Outnumbered and Win.” 

We were able to defnitively calculate the rate of fre against 

a foe that signifcantly outnumbered us, based on their formations and the topography. With a strategy of fring on 

the move, engaging multiple targets, and striking deep, we 

designed the Big 5 major systems:

■ M1 Abrams tank.

■ Bradley fghting vehicle.

■ AH-64 Apache helicopter.

■ UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter.

■ MIM-104 Patriot missile.

We were a threat-based Army that was designed to fght 

the most dangerous enemy in echelon, from deep to near, due 

to the volume of symmetric forces. Combat engineers would provided countermobility capability deep in the enemy 

rear to disrupt and emplaced obstacles 

near (at two-thirds of our maximum 

effective range) to buy time to destroy 

oncoming vehicles in a target-rich environment. Engineers provided mobility for large, offensive maneuvering 

to flank the enemy by breaching 

through complex obstacle systems 

with plows, mine-clearing line charges, 

and armored combat earthmovers. We 

provided survivability positions for 

Soldiers and vehicles, developed map 

products, and performed invaluable 

terrain analysis to use the folds of the 

terrain to our advantage. We effectively used this doctrine in Operation Desert Storm and, 

more recently, in Operation Iraqi Freedom I. 

Today, we are looking at a more challenging and complex environment with increasing threats around the 

world, changing coalitions, and evolving technologies. We 

do not know specifcally who, when, or where we will be 

expected to fght. Acknowledging these unknowns, the AOC 

mantra for the Army of 2025 and beyond is to “Win in a 

Complex World.” We must transition from a requirementsbased Army to a capabilities-based Army with a new Big 5 

effort. These include—

■ Optimizing Soldier and team performance.

■ Developing adaptive, innovative leaders and institutions 

 to understand and operate in complex environments.

■ Ensuring interoperability.

■ Building scalable and tailorable joint and combined 

 arms formations.

■ Leveraging concepts and technologies to maintain capa- 

 bility overmatch while speeding deployment and reduc- 

 ing logistical demand.

t

b

m

r

n

e

o

r

i

t

t

w

a

p

S

p

t

t

“One way we will seek to optimize our Soldier and team 

performance . . . is to increase our technical competencies 

across the force through credentialing and certifcations.”
Engineer 3

 

January–April 2015

At the U.S. Army Engineer School, we are determining 

how we will integrate into the AOC. One way we will seek 

to optimize our Soldier and team performance in the institution is to increase our technical competencies across the 

force through credentialing and certifcations. The number 

of these opportunities is expanding daily, and our goal is 

to make it possible for Soldiers in all military occupational 

specialties to earn civilian equivalency certifcations, credentials, and undergraduate degrees. Our commissioned 

offcers will have increased opportunities for credentials 

and master’s degrees. For details on this goal, visit <https://

www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/engineer-credentialing

-forum/overview>.

We are working to develop more adaptive and innovative leaders with increased developmental assignments to 

broaden their experiences and expose them to new ideas, 

which will allow them to consider a wider range of options 

and make better decisions. We are increasing opportunities for fellowships; positions in the Training With Industry Program; and developmental assignments at combat 

training centers, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

special operations forces. Many of these opportunities are 

in the newly published Department of the Army Pamphlet 

600-3, Offcer Professional 

. 

We are looking at increased opportunities to work with 

coalition allies to ensure interoperability and expanding 

the Route Reconnaissance and Clearance Course at the 

Counter Explosive Hazard Center to include international 

partners. We are opening up more short-term instructor exchanges with other international schoolhouses and 

looking at interagency exchanges. We recently added 

an instructor from the National Geospatial-Intelligence 

Agency to our team.

We continue to build on our joint and combined arms 

formations. We will complete the conversion to the brigade 

engineer battalions in the brigade combat team formation for Regular Army components in the next year and 

for the Army National Guard in the next 3 years. We are 

also redesigning our echelon-above-brigade units with a 

focus on making them more multifunctional to deal with 

the potential unknowns.

Finally, we are looking at a number of technologies to 

maintain overmatch. We are working to increase robotics 

capabilities, improve explosive hazard detection systems, 

replace mines with a new munition capability, and eventually replace the armored combat earthmover. 

There is much more to the AOC and to our future plans 

for Army engineers. These are just a few thoughts to provoke discussion and feedback. I believe that the Army is on 

track to become a more , professional, and profcient 

force—technically and tactically—over the coming years. 

We must do our part to ensure that we think through the 

challenges we face, that we develop an Engineer Regiment 

which continues to provide the maneuver commander with 

freedom of action throughout the entire range of military 

operations, and that we win in a complex world.

I look forward to your thoughts on the AOC and challenge you to write articles for Engineer. I also challenge 

you to discuss topics in forums such as the Engineer Regimental Resource Menu at <https://www.milsuite.mil 

/book/groups/usaes-commandant-resource-menu>. Such 

discussions will help us think through our future and help 

shape the Engineer Regiment. 

Thanks for all you and your Families do every day. 

Essayons!

Department of the Army Pamphlet 600-3, 

Offcer Professional and Career , 

3 December 2014.

Endnote:

1U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command Pamphlet 

525-3-1, The U.S. Operating Concept–Win in a 

World 2020-2040, 7 October 2014.
4 Engineer

 

Lead the Way

Command Sergeant Major Butler J. Kendrick, Jr. 

Regimental Command Sergeant Major

January–April 2015

G

reetings to Army engineers 

around the world. I hope you and 

your Families are ready for 2015. 

The year 2014 was full of adventure for 

the Engineer Regiment, and I’m sure that 

2015 will bring different challenges—but, 

as always, we will lead the way.

A lot has happened since my last column, and I will begin by talking about 

the Regular Army standing up 22 of its 

projected 32 brigade engineer battalions 

(BEBs). The Army National Guard has 

also begun activation ceremonies and 

currently has 6 BEBs. BEB activations 

remain a top priority for the Engineer 

Regiment, so please let us know when 

ceremonies are planned so that we 

can support them with senior leader 

attendance. 

Recently, I spent 5 days visiting engineers at the 

Interservice Training Review Organization advanced individual training (AIT) locations at Panama City, Florida; 

Gulfport, Mississippi; and Goodfellow and Sheppard Air 

Force Bases in Texas. First Sergeant Brett C. Boyer provided an overview of Army engineer diver capabilities and 

conducted a tour of the Naval Diving and Salvage Training 

Center at Panama City. The organization annually trains 

1,800 students from fve military services, other federal 

and state agencies, and allied nations in 21 courses. On 

a related note, our divers are scheduled to participate in 

Exercise Roguish Boy, an ice-diving event to take place in 

partnership with Canada. The next morning of my visit 

began at Gulfport with a vigorous physical ftness session 

of conditioning drills that included—

■ High jumpers.

■ Push-ups.

■ Sit-ups.

■ Side straddle hops.

■ Knee benders.

■ Stationary run.

■ Supine bicycle.

■ Cross-country skier.

■ All-fours run.

■ Mule kick.

■ Flutter kick.

■ Swimmer.

■ The engine.

First Sergeant Eric B. Winn, Company C, 169th Engineer Battalion, 

briefed us on their AIT platoon sergeants 

and the carpentry and masonry specialists in training. We fnished the day by 

inspecting the equipment used by AIT 

students and observing the joint relationship between the U.S. Navy, U.S. 

Air Force, and U.S. Army at Gulfport. 

At Goodfellow Air Force Base, Sergeant 

Major Tommy L. Love proudly showed 

us the Firefghter Detachment, 169th 

Engineer Battalion facilities, which are 

used to train Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, 

Airmen, Coast Guard personnel, Department of Defense civilians, and allied service members in frefghting skills. We 

also observed the detachment’s unique 

AIT, fre protection apprentice, and advanced and senior 

leader courses. The trip to Sheppard Air Force Base would 

not have been complete without an 0400 physical training 

session with the plumber AIT students. First Sergeant Mark 

A. Cain, Company D, 169th Engineer Battalion, explained 

the capabilities and skills that plumbers must learn before 

being assigned to their frst duty station.

I had the privilege of being the guest speaker for the 

Engineer Ball of the 224th Engineer Battalion, Iowa Army 

National Guard. It was a splendid evening spent with Soldiers, Families, and alumni. My driver, Sergeant Keven D. 

Cochran, also attended the event, which was the frst time 

he had been to an Army ball. We would like to thank the 

team for putting on a great performance. 

If you were not able to log on to view the third quarterly sergeant major/command sergeant major forum, I 

recommend that you visit <https://connectcol.dco.dod.mil 

/p6pety80czz/>. We had productive discussions about the 

current challenges and the future of the Engineer Regiment, 

with briefngs from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the 

NCO Academy, and the U.S. Army Engineer School. 

The Engineer Regiment still needs more Soldiers in 

grades sergeant to sergeant frst class to attend the Sapper 

Leader Course. (Waivers are available for specialists who 

serve as a combat engineer team leader.) And don’t forget 

the Best Sapper competition scheduled for 19–24 April 

2015. We hope to see your best teams come forward to take 

the trophy from last year’s winners from Fort Bragg, North 

Carolina.

Thanks for your dedicated service, professional 

engineers!

p

b

a

i

i

s

t

A

A

M

u

E

u

A

m

v

a
January–April 2015 Engineer 5

Chief Warrant Offcer Five Scott R. Owens

Regimental Chief Warrant Offcer 

Show the Way 

A

s I write this in December, I want 

to on two key events con-

.ducted at the U.S. Army Engineer 

School in 2014: the Engineer School on-site 

conference in September and the Regimental Command Council in November. 

These events were crucial azimuth checks 

to ensure that we synchronize and prioritize the Engineer School’s internal efforts 

for the coming year and inform key leaders across the Engineer Regiment. Even 

though the Regimental Command Council 

was conducted online due to Army conference restrictions, it was a productive event 

and engineer leaders across the world participated in the discussions. However, I 

noticed that warrant offcers were conspicuously absent from the sessions. Given the 

increased roles and responsibilities that 

engineer warrant offcers have in today’s Army, it is critical 

that senior warrant offcers be included in events such as this. 

Today’s warrant offcers are not only technical experts, but they 

are also key members of a commander’s staff. They assist in 

planning operations, identifying resource requirements, guiding training, integrating and maintaining systems, advising 

commanders, and mentoring junior warrant offcers.

With the Army drawdown and ongoing force structure 

changes, most engineer warrant offcers have been moved out of 

platoons and into battalion headquarters and higher. This is a 

large challenge for newly appointed warrant offcers one, especially for those assigned to a brigade engineer battalion (BEB). 

The BEB is structured with about 25 percent of its required 

capabilities, so it relies on other engineer assets to meet its 

mission. This means that a construction engineering technician warrant offcer will work on the BEB staff to help plan 

missions, identify outside resources required, and advise where 

these resources could originate. An important new position for 

a geospatial engineering technician is in the engineer brigade, 

coordinating with corps and division geospatial intelligence 

cells and Army service component command (ASCC) geospatial 

planning cells to obtain and distribute the Standard and Shareable Geospatial Foundation to deployed units. Additionally, the 

offcer in charge of the ASCC geospatial production cell and 

the senior geospatial engineering technician warrant offcer 

should be fully integrated into the command staff planning and 

operations. This will enable them to better determine the geospatial data and products required to support the ASCC and 

develop relationships with vertical and horizontal regionally 

aligned forces that they must support with the Standard Shareable Geospatial Foundation. The geospatial planning cell and 

its warrant offcers are key elements of 

the ASCC engineer team. 

These are but a few examples of the 

increased roles and responsibilities of 

engineer warrant offcers. To ensure that 

they are used most effectively, it is important to integrate these warrant offcers 

into staff processes so that they understand the commander’s intent, the unit’s 

mission, and the unit’s place in the overall picture. This will also enable them to 

develop relationships with their counterparts in regionally aligned forces across 

Army components. This is especially 

important since most engineer units are 

in the Reserve Components. 

Warrant offcers have often been called 

the quiet professionals due to their reputation as technical experts who do what it takes to get the job 

accomplished without fanfare or drama. However, quiet does 

not mean silent or invisible; so I ask commanders and staffs to 

challenge their warrant offcers by fully integrating them into 

staff processes and to include them in the Regimental Command Council and other professional development venues. This 

will help them understand the greater picture, see how they ft 

into it, and learn how they can better support the mission. 

I know that most warrant offcers who read this article are 

already doing this. I encourage you to drive on with your missions, continue to develop yourselves, and inject yourselves 

into the staff process if you are not already included. In short, 

be engaged, be visible, and be vocal!

Until we meet again, stay safe; and don’t forget to regularly 

check the latest discussions on the following warrant offcer 

and Engineer Regiment resource sites: 

■ Engineer Senior Warrant Offcer Group: <https://www 

 .milsuite.mil/book/groups/senior-engineer-warrant

 -offcer-group>.

■ Engineer Junior Warrant Offcer Group <https://www 

 .milsuite.mil/book/groups/engineer-branch-junior

 -warrant-offcer-group>.

■ Engineer Warfghter Forum <https://www.milsuite.mil 

 /book/groups/engineer-warfghter-forum>.

■ Engineer Regiment’s Resource Menu: <https://www.mil 

 suite.mil/book/groups/usaes-commandant-resource

 -menu>.

For information about how to become an engineer warrant 

offcer, log on to the U.S. Army Recruiting Command Web site 

at <http://www.usarec.army.mil/hq/warrant>.

it

th

in

e

th

t

in

s

m

a

d

p

A

im

in

th
6 Engineer January–April 2015

M

any themes were discussed during the U.S. Army 

Reserve Council of Colonels, Warrant Offcers, and 

Sergeants Major at the Devens Reserve Forces 

Training Area at Fort Devens, Massachusetts, in September 2014. Sitting among Soldiers who represented hundreds 

of years of military engineering experience, I realized that 

many of the skill sets that the leaders in attendance learned 

in their earlier years, grew up with in the Engineer Regiment, and practiced all the time were not being passed along 

to our junior leaders. The wars (and the modular unit mobilization along the Army force generation timeline) crowded 

out the time needed and made knowing these things virtu-

. Now there is a defnite generation gap and 

a lack of the “tribal knowledge” that defned engineers as 

a separate and distinct tribe. The purpose of this article is 

to highlight some of the key areas of that tribal knowledge 

and provide a primer for leader development programs at 

camps, posts, and stations before the remaining tribal elders 

leave the stage. Some of this information may seem Reserve 

Component-centric, but if you want to learn about time 

management, watch how the Reserve Component packs 

everything necessary into a very compact time frame. This 

will be a two-part article that starts with general knowledge 

in this issue and discusses engineer-specifc competencies in 

the next issue of Engineer. 

T

his was an art practiced and imparted by the wizards 

who were known as training noncommissioned offcers (NCOs). Many of us learned in our younger years 

how to take Soldiers, materiel, and a mission 

and program them to ensure that resourcing 

was available and locked in. There are many 

subsets of this critical job that require closer 

discussion: 

Developing the Mission-Essential 

Task List. Transformation to modularity 

radically changed this job in 2006–2007 when 

companies became “AA” units—virtually 

plug-and-play entities that were separate 

and distinct from their parent battalions.2

But taking a unit mission statement (formerly derived from the Army WARTRACE 

Program but now found on the unit modifed table of organization and equipment) 

and breaking down specifed, implied, and 

essential tasks into collective, leader, and 

Soldier level tasks has become a lost art.3

What was once known as the Army Training and Evaluation Program mission training plan is now a Combined Arms Training 

Strategy manual. However, the principles 

are timeless. Developing a mission-essential 

task list should be the frst order of business 

when taking command at any level. This is 

taught peripherally at the Engineer Basic 

1

h

a

w

s

d

T

r

c

p

a

B

m

P

f

a

e

S

W

i

i

S

a

t

Soldiers from the 3d Brigade Engineer Battalion participate in a feld w

training exercise.
January–April 2015 Engineer 7

Offcer Leader Course, but it is the responsibility of leaders 

to impart this key skill. This process explains why we are 

here and why we do what we do.

Developing the Yearly Training Calendar. This is 

where a commander has the proverbial 100 things to do, 

has time to do only 50 of them, and turns them into reality. Green-amber-red is still a viable methodology for scheduling drill dates and annual training. How many readers 

know how to do this and can digest the commander’s training guidance and turn it into the reality of the yearly training calendar? Scheduling is everything when doing this. 

Depending on location, a leader will also need to know when 

deer hunting season starts, when home games for the Tennessee Volunteers are scheduled, or when the Bristol Race 

is happening. It’s all about people, and the people have lives 

outside of the unit. If the two leaders may not get 

the expected turnout. 

Creating Training Schedules. This has truly become a 

lost art; and with it, we lost the 6-week (or perhaps 90-day) 

lock-in that constituted a contract with the brigade commander. Questions that must be answered include—

■ Do training schedules have the right references and iden- 

 tifed hip pocket training tasks on them? 

■ Is scheduled training resourced? 

■ Have the classes been rehearsed? 

■ Are the instructors qualifed? 

■ Do instructors need range certifcation? 

In the past, much of this was done for mobilizing units by 

others; but now it is incumbent on the unit junior leader to 

make these things happen.

Conducting Training. Many would say that training 

has become an implied task, based on the masses of “administrivia” a commander must accomplish. Good commanders 

know how to fence time for training and give junior leaders 

the opportunity to conduct the training (with the appropriate reference materials) and to ensure that documentation is 

completed and an after action review is conducted. If a unit 

has a recruiting and retention problem, look at the training 

program. If training is not taking place, Soldiers will fnd 

challenges elsewhere.

Conducting Motor Stables. Has the unit entirely outsourced its maintenance and services to agencies such as an 

area maintenance support activity shop, or does the unit take 

the time to perform proper preventive maintenance care and 

service with the proper manuals and with the entire system? 

Are the mechanics online with the operators as they are fnding and correcting faults so that the equipment never hits a 

deadline report? Do leaders take into account the entire system, checking not only the vehicle but also the radios? How 

often does nuclear, biological, and chemical protective gear 

get maintenance? Are weapons cleaned only immediately 

before and after the unit goes go to the range? Is there a fair 

and equitable system to ensure that those pesky unassigned 

weapons get cleaned? Is there a driver/operator training 

program that actually gets Soldiers licensed and profcient? 

Finally, are the names of the driver and vehicle commander 

on the windshield of the vehicle so that there is accountability and a sense of pride in each vehicle?

Understanding Load Planning. Back in the day, many 

leaders had to have detailed load plans for their vehicles. 

Had the balloon ever gone up in Germany in the late 1980s, 

our M-113 armored personnel carriers could barely contain 

our basic load for ammunition, let alone the A and B bags 

that were packed according to a tactical standard operating 

procedure. Today, the Army must cultivate an expeditionary mind-set. But how many units can pack all of their gear 

and move to a given location within a given time frame? Are 

we so reliant on third-party contractors that we have forgotten how to load out what’s inside our vehicles (wheeled or 

tracked) for a rail movement? Do we have the blocking and 

bracing equipment, turnbuckles, come-alongs, and other 

binding equipment? If so, can we use it safely?

Performing Additional Duties. Every job description 

in the Army has an implied sentence that is rarely seen; it 

reads, “other duties as assigned.” For junior offcers, this 

implies additional duties that may seem innocuous but which 

Soldiers dig a 

tank trench during a rotation 

at the National 

Training Center.
8 Engineer January–April 2015

represent bona fde functions that

must be accomplished at the company 

level. Are leaders setting up junior 

offcers for success and empowering them to accomplish duties such 

as unit maintenance offcer, physical 

security offcer, or the more boutique 

functions such as tax assistance or 

unit voting offcer? Do young offcers know how to fnd the authoritative regulation or Department of the 

Army pamphlet and then turn it into 

a workable program that could pass a 

command or inspector general inspection? Are the senior leaders assuming 

risk on these growth opportunities, or 

have they been so busy fghting the 

wars that they have forgotten how to 

do these things? Battalion commanders are grown by performing these 

kind of tasks as young offcers learn 

about the depth and breadth of what 

command is all about. 

Passing the Torch. I made sure that every offcer I 

commissioned in my battalion—whether from Offcer Candidate School or by direct commission—got a copy of Ar

Offcer’s Guide. Because the amount of training time that 

Engineer Basic Offcer Leader Course students receive 

is limited, many Army customs and courtesies are not 

imparted to newly commissioned offcers. Do leaders pass 

along books like this (and perhaps Reserve Forces Al anac) 

to show new offcers the kind of things they need to look 

at down the road? Do leaders inculcate in them the importance of the organizations that represent the interests of the 

Engineer Regiment, such as the Army Engineer Association, 

the Society of American Military Engineers, the Association 

of the United States Army, or the Reserve Offcers Association? Leaders are the ones to engage young offcers on 

these topics to propagate our species as Soldiers and as 

Army engineers.

Way Ahead

T

his is the second article in a series on tribal knowledge 

(see Engineer, Volume 44, May-August 2014).4 I will 

write more about engineer-specifc tribal knowledge 

in the May–August 2015 issue of Engineer. Consider this a 

challenge to the feld. I have posited only a few of the many 

and various skills and abilities required to be a journeyman 

in the engineer profession. Apprenticeship in the profession 

would start when the Engineer Basic Offcer Leader Course 

is completed, carry through assignments as platoon leader 

and executive offcer, and culminate as successful completion in the crucible of company command. Consider using 

some of these thoughts as starting points for leader development programs, and consider writing articles for this 

publication about the many other tasks that are required in 

the profession. 

In the spirit of the quote that began this article, I ask if 

we are wasting our time on this earth if we do nothing to 

share our tribal knowledge and propagate the species. As 

always, the author welcomes vociferous debate and can be 

reached at <adam.roth@us.army.mil>. 

Endnotes:

1Baseball Almanac, “Roberto Clemente Quotes,” <http://

www.baseball-almanac.com/quotes/roberto_clemente_quotes 

.shtml>, accessed on 16 December 2014.

2An “AA” unit identifcation code is a unique identifer of a 

single organization in the Army that is used in documentation, 

readiness reporting, Army planning, and digital tracking. 

3The Army WARTRACE Program aligns Regular Army and 

Reserve Component units under their wartime gaining commands as a way to improve planning, mission capability, and 

mobilization.

4Adam S. Roth, “Tribal Knowledge: What You Don’t Know 

About Promotion Boards Can Hurt You,” Engineer, Volume 44, 

May–August 2014, p. 6–8.

Robert J. Dalessandro, Ar y Offcer’s Guide, Stackpole 

Books, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 8 December 2008.

Debra M. Gordon, Reserve Forces , Uniformed Services Almanac, Inc., Falls Church, Virginia, February 2010.

Colonel Roth serves as the Chief of Staff (Reserve Affairs) 

at the Offce of the Chief of Engineers at the Pentagon and is 

a frequent contributor to Engineer. He is a resident graduate 

as the 

Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. He is a 

graduate of the U.S. and General Staff College and holds degree in engineering 

Boston University. 

Soldiers with the 3d Engineer Battalion check the mine-clearing line charge 

launcher during an exercise at Fort Hood, Texas.
January–April 2015 Engineer 9

A

ssault Group Granite, one of three assault groups led 

by First Lieutenant Rudolf Witzig and his airborne 

.engineers, boarded nine glider aircraft. Their target was Fort Eben-Emael, Belgium, approximately 60 miles 

west. Their task—and the intent of the higher echelon—was 

to seize the fortress, which secured three vital bridges over 

the Meuse River and the Albert Canal. The action was a 

prerequisite to ensure the rapid advance of the Wehrmacht 

across the Meuse River, through Belgium, and into France. 

A thoroughly planned attack was about to begin. The 

493 German soldiers comprising the force had assembled 

7 months earlier and begun a period of intensive training. 

A detailed study of the fort, the bridges, and the surroundings was made; and a replica of the area was constructed 

for training the airborne troops. Joint exercises between 

the parachutists and the glider pilots were carried out in 

the early spring of 1940, and a number of refnements were 

made to equipment and tactics.

Everything was set in the early morning hours in May 

1940 when Clausewitzian friction began. Shortly after 

departure, the glider carrying First Lieutenant Witzig had 

to make an emergency landing in a feld just outside Cologne. 

Immediately, Staff Sergeant Walter Meier assumed leadership, took decisive action by leading the force to the fortress, 

landed his glider on top of it, and successfully destroyed or 

disabled casemates and artillery pieces in time for First 

Lieutenant Witzig to join the fght hours later and destroy 

the primary targets. At 1230 the next day, the fortress 

surrendered. Sixty Belgian soldiers were killed, 40 were 

wounded, and more than 1,000 were taken captive. Assault 

Group Granite suffered six killed and 19 wounded.

This is just one historic example of Auftragstaktik, or 

“mission command,” a leadership principle that German 

armed forces have practiced in an exemplary way for more 

than 200 years.1

 Interestingly, it took a long time for mission 

command to fnd its way into military doctrine. And it wasn’t 

until 1953 that mission command was offcially recognized 

as part of the even more complex concept of Innere Führung,

or inner leadership, and incorporated into the newly developing Bundeswehr doctrine.2

 But obviously, German armed 

forces practiced a leadership principle before it was institutionalized and subsequently taught and trained. 

Was there a forerunner model from which mission command derives? What is the German Bundeswehr understanding of mission command in the context of Innere 

Führung? And fnally, where are the differences—from the 

By Lieutenant-Colonel Jens Küster

Time and date: 0430, 10 May 1940. 

Place: Cologne, Germany.

Objective: Fort Eben-Emael, Belgium.

Bundeswehr Colonel Rudolf Witzig in 1970
10 Engineer January–April 2015

German point of view—between the U.S. understanding of 

mission command as written in Army Doctrine Publication 

(ADP) 6-0, and the German doctrine?3

Mission command wasn’t an idea that was introduced 

into German military thinking by decree. Its implementation was a diffcult and long-running process that started in 

1806, following a disastrous defeat of the Prussians by Napoleon’s army at the Battle of Jena–Auerstedt. By 1812, the 

higher levels of leadership had learned that Clausewitzian 

friction in war leads to decisions based mostly on incomplete 

information. As a consequence, initiative and independent 

thought and action became important factors in German 

military thinking. Today, these are integral parts of mission 

command.

As it so often happens in military history, the next tier 

of mission command was dictated by technological progress 

in armament. The introduction of the breech-loading ri e 

in the middle of the 19th century allowed much more exible maneuvers. In the late 19th century, Field Marshal 

Helmuth von Moltke wrote that “it would be wrong if he 

[the offcer] had to wait for orders at times when no orders 

can be given. But most productive are his actions when 

he acts within the framework of his senior commander’s 

intent.”4 Another fundamental piece of mission command 

was born.

Auftragstaktik frst surfaced in military doctrine in 1890, 

and it was disdained as a threat to military discipline. It 

wasn’t until the early 20th century that the term found its 

way into military doctrine. All through the Great War and 

World War II, it had a frm place in German Army command 

and control philosophy.

What is the German understanding of mission command 

in the context of Innere Führung? In 1950, Germany (in close 

coordination with the United States, Great Britain, and 

France) began to think about rearmament. For Germany 

and its population, however, the traumatic experience of two 

world wars raised the question of the legitimacy of the new 

German armed forces. These would have to be strictly controlled without any special status by the democratic parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany. At the same time, 

it was deemed sensible not to discard leadership principles 

proven to be valuable and successful. The concept that did 

the trick was Innere Führung, which was developed between 

1951 and 1953 and has been valid ever since. It consists of 

the following pillars:

■ The integration of the military into the state and society.

■ The guiding principle of the soldier being a “citizen in 

 uniform.”

■ The ethical, legal, and political legitimacy of the military 

 mission.

■ The realization of fundamental constitutional and social 

 values in the armed forces.

■ The limits of order and obedience.

■ The application of the principle of mission command.

■ The observance of the statutory participation rights of 

 soldiers.

■ The observance of the freedom of association guaranteed 

 in the constitution.

The takeaway here is that mission command may be 

the only principle taken over from previous German armed 

forces. And from a German point of view, mission command 

is not a stand-alone principle but a concept that is seen and 

always applied by German military leaders in combination 

with the other pillars of Innere Führung. 

What are the differences between the American understanding of mission command and the German parent 

concept? Comparing a foreign philosophy with one’s own 

national concept is a diffcult endeavor. People are culturally imprinted through the environment in which they were 

raised and the education and training that they received. This 

is even truer for soldiers since their environment 

them more than any civilian environment. And it is true for 

me and my 14 years of civilian education and 26 years of military training and education. Still, I will give it try.

When comparing ADP 6-0 with the German parent 

document, two things especially caught my eye. The frst 

is the context or framework of U.S. mission command, 

which seems to be tightly linked to the concept of unifed 

land operations. Therefore, mission command is one of the 

foundations that supports the U.S. Army’s central aim to 

“seize, retain, and exploit the initiative to gain a position 

of relative advantage over the enemy. This is accomplished 

through decisive action.”5

 German mission command is 

linked to Innere Führung and thus, ultimately, to the German constitution. Mission command in Germany isn’t a 

stand-alone concept but is just one of the eight pillars of 

Innere Führung. Because of the challenging historical context in which the German concept was developed, it rests 

much more on ethical, legal, political, and social foundations than the U.S. approach. 

The second thing is the difference between the U.S. and 

German principles and elements of mission command. The 

principles of mission command in ADP 6-0 are6

 —

■ Build cohesive teams through mutual trust.

■ Create shared understanding.

■ Provide a clear commander’s intent.

■ Exercise disciplined initiative.

■ Use mission orders.

■ Accept prudent risk.

As a German offcer, I would happily sign them all without any hesitation. However, the question of how to implement the principles is the tricky part. Being complementary 

and similar in meaning, the fve German elements of mission command are—

■ Main effort. It is through the main effort that the com- 

 mander will achieve the decisive result in battle. The 

 main effort must always be specifed.
January–April 2015 Engineer 11

■ Commander’s place. Because the main effort is where 

 the leadership aims to achieve the decisive result, that 

 is where the commander should be on the battlefeld.

 This may mean taking personal command of subordi- 

 nate units, thereby making the effect of commands 

 felt lower down. Usually, the commander will direct and 

 coordinate frepower and other resources to support the 

 achievement of the aim. From this, it follows that sub- 

 ordinate commanders who are not on the main effort 

 must be capable of functioning for prolonged periods 

 with minimal supervision. And the commander’s staff 

 must have the competence and authority to act in the

 absence of the commander, in close accordance with his 

 or her overall intent.

■ Commander’s intent. To properly support the main 

 effort, military leaders require a clear understanding of 

 their commander’s overall intent and of the battle going

 on around them. But since a true picture of the battle 

 will never be available to anyone, all commanders must 

 be educated and prepared to act judiciously and deci-

 sively in the face of incomplete information. Also, com- 

 manders must exercise their creativity by focusing 

 on what is to be achieved rather than on how it is to be 

 achieved.

■ Immediate initiative. Opportunities to take decisive

 actions must be seized and exploited swiftly and vio- 

 lently. At all levels, immediate action without further 

 reference to higher authority is the key. From this, it 

 follows that concise, simple orders—rapidly issued using 

 a common vocabulary to ensure that they are clearly 

 understood—are essential. The motto for this would be 

 that “a good plan, violently executed now, is better than 

 a perfect plan next week.”7

■ Higher-level thinking. Depending on circumstances, 

 the commander may switch the main effort to reinforce 

 success. When this happens, the subordinate commander 

 at the new main effort will automatically be responsible

 for the coordination and employment of resources appro- 

 priate to a command up to two levels higher than his or 

 her own. The subordinate will need to operate at that 

 level until the commander can move to a position to 

To summarize, mission command ultimately relies on 

superiors who8—

■ Formulate their intent and the desired end state 

 and clearly.

■ Provide the necessary resources to allow success.

■ Trust their subordinates to act independently toward the

 given end state

■ Feel comfortable delegating and controlling tasks.

■ Accept a certain amount of mistakes and provide as 

 much as possible for their subordinates to

 allow effective, effcient, and innovative problem solving.

Mission command relies on subordinates who know 

their trade, understand the intent of their commander, feel 

comfortable taking on responsibility (frequently, above 

their rank and pay grade), and can see and exploit opportunities for decisive action without being able to check with 

higher echelons.

As the historical example shows, mission command is 

far from being free play and it poses no threat to military 

discipline. Nor does it fll in or substitute for poor planning. 

The contrary is true: mission command demands a high 

degree of discipline from commanders and subordinates and 

probably requires an even higher degree of trust and initiative. Good mission command is only possible after a thorough planning process conducted before execution. 

In conclusion, mission command will add value, especially in a diversifed branch like the engineers. Within the 

engineer branch—with its multiple felds of expertise, its 

many trades, and myriad related tasks—leaders must give 

a clear intent (and the resources to attain it), delegate tasks, 

and trust that their subordinates know their profession very 

thoroughly. This was true in 1940 and will be even truer 

in a more constrained, future environment where empowered initiative, and out-of-the-box thinking will 

gain importance.

Anker, Wirf!, or “Throw anchor!”9

Endnotes:

1Historically, and in this text, the terms Führen it 

Auftrag (literally, “leading by tasks”), Auftragstaktik (literally, “mission type tactics”), and mission command are used 

interchangeably. Führen it Auftrag is the correct term in 

German Army doctrine. Auftragstaktik is the more commonly 

known (but misleading) term since it incorrectly implies that 

this principle is a tactic. Mission command is the common and 

well-known translation used in English-speaking nations and 

in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, used here for practical purposes.

2

Innere Führung (literally, “inner leadership”) is offcially translated as “leadership development and civic education,” German Joint Service Regulation 10/1, Innere Führung, 

28 January 2008.

3ADP6-0, 17 May 2012.

4Werner Widder, “Battle Command: Augtragstaktik and 

Innere Führung: Trademarks of German Leadership,” Military 

Review, Vol. 82, No. 5, September/October 2002, p. 4.

5ADP 6-0, p. 1.

6

Ibid., p. 2.

7General George S. Patton, Jr., <http://www.generalpatton 

.com/quotes/>, accessed on 7 October 2014.

8Although stating the obvious, it is worth mentioning that 

in a military hierarchy, superiors are at the same time subordinates and vice versa.

9

 Anker, Wirf! is the order given to assemble a bridge; 

it is the motto of the German Army engineers.

Lieutenant Colonel Küster is the liaison offcer at the Maneuver Support Center of Excellence, Fort Leonard 

Wood, Missouri.
12 Engineer January–April 2015

T

he Army Leader Development Strategy (ALDS), published in June 2013, emphasizes the importance of 

education in developing Army leaders to meet the 

threats of tomorrow. It outlines the vision and strategy of 

Army senior leaders for developing Army professionals 

through lifelong training, education, and experiences. It 

also identifes the imperatives that will the development of leaders “with the required qualities and enduring leader characteristics.”1

 Chief among these are education and lifelong learning. Lifelong learning entails formal 

education and self-development. Traditionally, the quest for 

self-development has included a list of reading selections 

recommended by experts. In introducing his reading list, 

Army Chief of Staff General Raymond T. Odierno writes, “A 

course of personal study and contemplation is an essential 

component for the individual development of every Army 

professional. Each of us faces busy schedules every day, and 

fnding time to read and think is a recurring challenge. But 

even as we train our units and physically condition our bodies, we must improve our minds through reading and critical 

thinking.”2

The effectiveness of a reading list is determined by how 

well it balances available time with the distractions that vie 

for the attention of readers. A disciplined regimen of professional development for the Soldiers and civilians who 

comprise the U.S. Army team may be more important now 

than ever. Operational pictures have changed dramatically since the Cold War, and changes seem to occur almost 

instantaneously. 

The ALDS defnes education as “the process of imparting knowledge and developing the competencies and attributes Army professionals need to accomplish any mission the future may present. . . . Education occurs in the 

institutional, operational, and self-development domains.”3

The institutional domain provides education to enhance 

the potential of individuals, develop competence in their 

warfghting skills, and improve their duty performance. 

The institutional domain for Soldiers is composed of the 

schools and courses they attend as residents or through distance learning. The courses include military occupational 

specialty-producing courses, commissioned offcer professional courses such as the Basic Offcer Leader and Captain’s Career Courses, warrant offcer courses such as the 

Warrant Offcer Basic and Advanced Courses, and noncommissioned offcer (NCO) courses such as the Warrior Leader, 

Advanced Leader, and Senior Leader Courses. Education 

also occurs in advanced civil schooling, fellowships, and 

training with civilian industries. It provides the knowledge 

and develops the leadership attributes and competencies 

necessary for increased responsibility.
January–April 2015 Engineer 13

The operational domain occurs in deployable units and 

provides the lion’s share of leader development. Essentially, 

all training and education at the unit level develop leaders in the operational domain and prepare them to execute 

the unit mission-essential task list as required. Building on 

the foundation formed in the institutional domain, training 

in the operational domain focuses on individual and team 

skills and knowledge. 

The self-development domain implies the continuous 

process of lifelong learning. It should be encouraged as an 

important component during institutional and operational 

assignments. It bridges learning gaps between the institutional and operational domains. The three variations of selfdevelopment include—

■ Structured self-development, which consists of sequenced 

 learning modules to impart specifc learning objectives. 

 Good examples are the current structured self- 

 development modules that are part of NCO professional 

 development. 

■ Guided self-development, which is optional, recommended 

 learning that strives to enhance professional knowledge. 

 The traditional reading list is a good example.

■ Personal self-development, which is learning that a person 

 selects apart from dictated training. This form of self- 

 development helps a person meet personal training, educa- 

 tion, and experiential goals.

In late 2013, the U.S. Army Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, began laying the groundwork for its professional development program, including a suggested reading list for Soldiers and civilians in the Engineer Regiment. 

Engineer School Commandant Brigadier General Anthony 

C. Funkhouser and his staff developed the Engineer Regiment Leader Development Model. This model is a system of 

simultaneous, nested, and integrated building blocks that 

are divided into three levels of leaders with clearly defned 

education, experience, and training goals coupled with historical, doctrinal, and theoretical elements.

Next, the Engineer School director of training developed 

the reading list to guide the professional self-development of 

military and civilian personnel. An important aspect of this 

task was to determine how much professional reading that 

military personnel of all grades were accomplishing. End-ofcourse surveys revealed that most junior offcers dedicated 

relatively little time to professional reading. The amount of 

time was even smaller for NCOs. One could conclude that 

time constraints prevent professional reading or that reading is no longer the preferred method for assimilating information and advancing self-development. 

In March 2014, a committee of military and civilian 

members was formed to develop an accessible educational 

resource to foster professional development that would lead 

to individual contemplation, and collaboration. 

The committee sought to discover how Engineer Regiment 

personnel assimilate information and shape their military 

knowledge and education. By July 2014, the list of media 

resources included books, periodicals, movies, YouTubeSM

videos, audiobooks, podcasts, and others. Because it is more 

than a reading list, it is titled the Engineer Regiment’s 

Resource Menu (ERRM). The menu now includes topics in 

40 categories. Additional categories and resources may be 

added as needed.

The ERRM presents the material in learning bands that 

correspond to the professional level of the user:

■ Band 1—the broadest category—contains resources applicable to all grades and ranks. It describes historical trends

 over time and reasons for future changes. It focuses on 

 Army and joint engineer doctrine and presents

 materials to help develop critical thinking skills. 

■ Band 2 materials are most relevant for cadets, enlisted 

 Soldiers, and general schedule (GS) 1 through 11 civilian 

 employees. The band focuses on Engineer Regiment 

 history and battles and presents baseline engineer 

 doctrine. 

■ Band 3 resources are appropriate for company grade off-

 cers, chief warrant offcers one and two, junior NCOs,

 and GS-12 employees. The band focuses on combined 

 arms operations, campaigns, doctrine, theory, and 

 theorists. 

■ Band 4 is organized for feld grade offcers, chief warrant 

 offcers three and four, senior NCOs, and GS-13–GS-14

 employees. It focuses on the operational level of war, 

 joint doctrine, and service level theory and theorists. 

■ Band 5 is intended for general offcers, colonels, chief 

 warrant offcers fve, senior command sergeants major, 

 GS-15, and senior executive service employees. The

 selections focus on the joint, interagency, intergovern-

 mental, and multinational doctrine and strategy of war.

The ERRM represents a paradigm shift from traditional reading lists, which tend to be nested strictly in the 

“The self-development domain implies the continuous 

process of lifelong learning. It should be encouraged 

as an important component during institutional and 

operational assignments.”

(Continued on page 16)
14 Engineer January–April 2015

W

ith an increased focus on retrograde operations in 

Afghanistan, it has become a challenge for maneuver forces and engineers to effectively defeat the 

device. Route clearance remains one of the primary combat 

engineer missions for sapper and clearance companies in 

Afghanistan. In Regional Command (East), the threat of an 

improvised explosive device (IED) strike persists. As forward 

operating bases (FOBs) downsize and equipment is transported out of theater, large combat logistics patrols require 

engineers to clear the way. This effort is supported through 

the use of a new acronym and a team-of-teams approach to 

planning and executing route clearance. This is known as 

combined arms route clearance operations (CARCO). The 

very essence of CARCO is not unlike a route clearance package. A patrol still requires a security element, 

detection equipment, and the means to interrogate an explosive hazard. What has changed is 

the mandated condition to have enabler support 

for every patrol.

Internal enablers (such as handheld detectors, the Talon®

 robot, and the Gyrocam®) are still 

used and are still being improved. The regular 

integration of an intelligence, surveillance, and 

reconnaissance platform and the ready availability of an air weapons team or scout weapons 

team to provide coverage have made route clearance a truly combined arms operation. These 

assets were certainly not foreign to engineer company commanders on previous deployments, but 

a company operations section is now obligated to 

coordinate for these assets before every mission. 

Platoon leaders must also understand how to 

integrate each asset effectively. It is through this 

integration and combined arms execution that a 

real team-of-teams mentality has been evident 

within the 22d Engineer Clearance Company. 

d

g

t

f

t

u

i

r

b

t

a

a

p

a

c

P

i

i

r

Soldiers perform basic maintenance on a Husky.
January–April 2015 Engineer 15

The 22d Engineer Clearance Company, 14th Engineer 

Battalion, based at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, deployed in early October 2013 to FOB Fenty and 

Camp Phoenix. Their mission was to conduct route clearance on various routes in Regional Command (Capital) and 

on improved and unimproved roads across Nangarhar and 

Laghman Provinces. After a successful relief in place, the 

company’s two clearance platoons quickly achieved one of the 

highest utilization rates of any engineer unit across the combined joint operations area. As with many units before them, 

regular maintenance, concurrent training, and involved 

leaders kept Soldiers disciplined and motivated. Despite a 

lack of enemy activity early on, the various enablers provided a sense of security, with eyes overhead and regular 

communication with pilots. It was not until early 2014 that 

the 22d Engineers were truly tested. 

With missions supporting retrograde operations as the 

primary focus, the company was called upon to support 

unconventional units. Special operations and maneuver 

forces during the frst months of the deployment regularly 

requested the 22d Engineers to clear a route ahead of them. 

The main reason that route clearance support was requested 

was to ensure safety for combined operations between infantry units and the Afghan National Army or to reposition 

equipment and supplies around the battlefeld. The second 

reason was to support named operations as an attachment 

to an operational detachment alpha (ODA) team. The 2d 

Platoon supported one such operation to interdict drug traffcking. The Sappers provided maneuver support and established a wide security perimeter that allowed the ODA team 

to effectively cordon and search an area. Thorough communication and mission planning, combined with full-dress 

rehearsals and proper coordination of air assets, made an 

excellent display of the team-of-teams approach. Despite the 

signifcance of the operation and the expectation of enemy 

contact, the 22d Engineers did not have to face the enemy 

head-on. It was not until the next time the Sappers were 

integrated into an ODA mission that their training was 

called upon.

During mission planning for the next ODA support 

operation, it was made clear that 2d Platoon needed two 

fully mission-capable Husky vehicle-mounted mine detectors. To facilitate this, 1st Platoon was tasked to provide a 

Husky to 2d Platoon. On a cold, sunny morning in January, 

2d Platoon began deliberately clearing a route in southern 

Nangarhar Province. Moving at a steady pace and staying 

vigilant for IEDs, the Soldiers and the air support covering 

them had to fght their way through numerous ambushes. 

Through textbook coordination and disciplined fre control, 

the engineers showed that they were up to the task of their 

secondary mission of fghting as infantry. By late afternoon, 

the route turned to hard-packed dirt and became very constricted. It was when the patrol was near its turnaround 

point that a mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle was 

disabled by an IED. Unable to self-recover, and with enemy 

fghters closing in on the location, a request went out for a 

quick-reaction force. What arrived was not the traditional 

quick-reaction force unit. 

The 1st Platoon had been on standby in the company 

motor pool most of the day, ready to provide assistance at a 

moment’s notice. When the request for quick-reaction force 

support came in, the 22d Engineer Clearance Company leaders decided that 1st Platoon could depart the FOB and get 

to the objective quicker than the maneuver quick-reaction 

force. After making fnal precombat checks of equipment 

and vehicles, the platoon was en route to the blast site well 

under the normal expected timeframe.

A Soldier works on 

a Talon robot.
16 Engineer January–April 2015

The Soldiers of 1st Platoon moved deliberately down the 

same route, but with a heightened sense of urgency for what 

was ahead. Members of the ODA team had already begun 

their aspect of the operation and were unable to assist. It 

was on the engineers to support each other and move safely 

back to FOB Fenty. While clearing a route toward the objective, members of 1st Platoon found a command wire running 

out of a previous blast hole. After interrogation, they determined that the wire was part of a phased emplacement. 

They secured the wire and continued clearing. After linkup 

was made on the ground, the situation appeared even more 

complicated than initially expected. With the enemy threat 

neutralized before the arrival of the platoon, the new challenge was how to safely recover the vehicles. The roadway 

was extremely narrow, which made self-recovery and bypass 

diffcult. The noncommissioned offcers in the platoon immediately went to work, identifying turnaround points for each 

vehicle. Having little room to maneuver the vehicles into 

position, the engineers improvised a push-pull method to 

recover the damaged vehicle while avoiding damage to the 

property of local Afghans. 

After an exhausting, all-night process in the extremely 

confned area, the platoons moved their vehicles back to the 

main route and proceeded back to FOB Fenty. However, the 

mission was not complete without one last encounter with 

the enemy. As the platoons were nearing FOB Fenty early 

the next day, one round of indirect fre was shot at the trailing vehicle. The round hit the road in front of the vehicle, 

alerting the Soldiers that they were still in harm’s way 

despite their proximity to the FOB. The night had been long 

for the Sappers, but familiarity with Army warrior tasks 

and the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance coverage served as force multipliers. Excellent communication 

with the ground elements and the 22d Engineer Clearance 

Company tactical operations center throughout the operation was also helpful.

Through many deployments and some hard lessons that 

had to be relearned, the CARCO approach to route clearance is an excellent attempt at getting it right. The safety 

and discipline exercised by the 22d Engineer Clearance 

Company in early 2014 demonstrated the wisdom of adhering to a well-established standard operating procedure. 

However, to effectively defeat the device takes more than 

engineers using internal enablers and good change detection. A team-of-teams approach that brings together different assets is a proven methodology for fnding IEDs and 

having the necessary security to counter a resilient enemy. 

For the 22d Engineer Clearance Company, platoons of Sappers and heavy equipment operators helping each other 

and providing mutual support are fne examples of such

a mentality. 

First Lieutenant is the offcer in charge of the counterIED for Joint Base Lewis-McChord. He holds a bachelor’s 

degree in history College and a degree 

individual learning domain, where the process is contemplative and introspective. The ERRM is focused at the 

intersection of the institutional, operational, and selfdevelopment learning domains, where resources lead to 

dialogue, feedback, and collaboration. Reading lists usually require many hours of individual reading, but the 

resources of the 21st century include media that can be 

accessed and shared with others in a relatively short time. 

The ERRM provides a way to assimilate knowledge. A movie or video may be a user’s preferred method 

of learning and may, in turn, encourage the user to read 

professional journal articles or a recommended book on 

the topic. In the institutional domain, the ERRM has the 

potential for instructors and students to investigate and 

develop relevant military topics and issues or to supplement 

classroom instruction. In the operational domain, it can be 

used during leader professional development and NCO 

professional development programs and provide questions 

for local Soldier and promotion boards. Its uses in the selfdevelopment domain are immediately obvious. It allows 

the user to evaluate the proposed resources, post questions 

for discussion, collaborate with others, and even shape the 

menu by suggesting deletions or additions. Users are invited 

to evaluate and rate the current resources and recommend 

improvements. To use and shape the ERRM, users should 

access the site at <https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups 

/usaes-commandant-resource-menu> with a Department of 

Defense common access card.

Army Doctrine Reference Publication 6-22, Leadership, states that “lifelong learning involves study and 

to acquire new knowledge and to learn how to 

apply it when needed.”4

 Learning is imperative to ensure 

the development of leaders for higher levels of responsibility and to ensure success. It is the goal of the ERRM to 

make self-development a more manageable and rewarding 

experience. Questions can be posted on the ERRM home 

page or submitted by e-mail to the Engineer School at 

<leon.usaes.rf@us.army.mil>.

Endnotes:

1Department of the Army, “Army Leader Development Strategy,” June 2013, <http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/CAL/repository 

/ALDS5June%202013Record.pdf>, accessed on 29 October 

2014.

2Raymond T. Odierno, “Professional Reading List,” 30 July 

2014, <http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/105/105-1 

/index.html>, accessed on 13 November 2014.

3Department of the Army, “Army Leader Development 

Strategy,” p. 11.

4Army Doctrine Reference Publication 6-22, Leadership, 1 August 2012, p. 7-6. 

Staff Sergeant Greer is a training developer in the U.S. 

Engineer School Directorate of Training and Leader 

Fort Leonard Wood. He holds a degree 

(“Engineer Regiment’s Resource Menu,” continued from page 13)
January–April 2015 Engineer 17

Self-development is a major pillar in the growth of Army leaders. One tool to aid in this is the “Engineer Commandant’s Reading List” at <http://www.wood.army.mil/usaes/library/documents/ENGR_CMDT_READING_LIST_2012.pdf>. 

It includes a variety of books on history, politics, and culture that are appropriate for Soldiers and civilians in the Engineer 

Regiment. The list is not all-inclusive and will be updated over time.

Book reviews will be a feature in each issue of Engineer. Authors will summarize the contents of books of interest and 

will point out the key lessons to be learned from them. Readers who wish to submit book reviews may forward them to 

<usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx.engineer@mail.mil>. 

Enlisted Man: The Rank and File in 

Today’s Military, by Charles C. Moskos, Jr., Russell Sage 

Foundation, 1 January 1970, ASIN B0006CU9RG

Reviewed by Staff Sergeant Bryan W. Ehrhart

This book starts out with an old saying: “God must love 

enlisted men because He made so many of them.” The maxim 

describes the structure of the military, no matter which 

generation or branch of the military is being considered. 

Enlisted personnel make up the largest portion of every Service. Moskos explores and defnes the mind-set and hierarchy of the enlisted Soldier, giving a window into a world 

that no readers will experience unless they were enlisted 

members of the U.S. military. Published in 1970, the book 

describes an Army that is overwhelmingly male and which 

would be nearly unrecognizable to today’s Soldiers.

In most literature about the military, there is little material that covers the informal aspects of military life. It usually shows only the glossy, formal view of the strong, selfsacrifcing “man’s man” who lives only to serve his country. 

The Enlisted Man quickly points out in its frst 

three chapters that during America’s early wars, true volunteers among the enlisted ranks were few and far between. 

Most were “voluntold,” working class enlistees who were frequently coerced into joining the Service and had, at most, a 

high school education. 

Moskos describes the attitudes of the enlisted Soldiers 

when they dealt with high-ranking offcers and discusses 

how they felt about being used to “fll the needs of the Army” 

by getting trained in different military occupational specialties than they were promised when inducted. He shows 

the progressive growth of the enlisted Soldier’s bitterness 

caused by the privileges and entitlements of the offcers 

above him during World Wars I and II. This resentment also 

came to encompass the noncommissioned offcers who, while 

still enlisted, were held in higher esteem than the common 

enlisted man during the Korean War. The bitterness later 

spread to include the civilian war protesters on the home 

front who verbally attacked and, in some cases, brutalized 

the Soldiers who were returning home from Vietnam. Moskos paints a picture of how the enlisted Soldier became institutionalized and how the unit and company became his family and source of pride. 

In Chapters 4 through 6, the author discusses the life of 

the enlisted Soldier serving overseas tours with or without 

an accompanying family. He describes the aura of American 

culture that prevailed at those foreign duty stations (which 

included more than 20 countries, not counting Vietnam) 

with the use of American radio and television programs and 

post exchange complexes that included barber shops, snack 

bars, movie theaters, and other amenities that Americans 

would fnd at home. He discusses race relations and the cultural blending between the American enlisted man and the 

women in the countries where he served. He talks about the 

diffculties faced by the enlisted men’s children who resulted 

from such relations with local women and details the obstacles the enlisted man had to go through if he wanted to 

marry an international woman. Moskos also covers the integration of black American Soldiers into the ranks of previously all-white units. (Continued on page 19)
18 Engineer January–April 2015

U

nits such as the 82d and 101st Airborne Divisions 

are familiar with quick-response deployments. 

The 615th Engineer Company, 52d Engineer 

Battalion, Fort Carson, Colorado, recently discovered how 

overwhelming a quick-response deployment can be when 

it was assigned to construct facilities to support Operation 

United Assistance, which began in November 2014 to 

contain the spread of the Ebola virus in West Africa. 

The battalion has an extensive array of heavy engineer equipment, making the logistical movement and 

preparation signifcantly more diffcult than the quickresponse deployment of a light airborne unit. This 

article describes how the 52d Engineers met the challenges and lists lessons learned on how the Army can 

become more agile in the future. 

Challenges and Solutions 

T

he frst challenge was to recognize that the 

deployment window was small and that frustrations would be high in the effort to meet the 

mission. Normally, a unit is aware well in advance 

that it is scheduled for a potential deployment. This 

gives the unit plenty of time to train, acquire missionessential equipment, plan movements, and take block 

leave before deploying. The deployment preparation is 

usually a well-planned and well-defned process.

However, the 52d Engineers were in a train/ready 

phase, having recently supported a National Training Center rotation and returned to the installation 

in late September. Upon return, the leaders involved 

were immediately thrust into planning to deploy a 

horizontal construction unit within 6 weeks. The 

condensed timeline guaranteed that there would 

be signifcant challenges, but the Fort Carson units 

By Captain Garrett D. Anderson

The 52d Engineer Battalion movement offcer helps 

a U.S. Air Force loadmaster tie down a vehicle.
January–April 2015 Engineer 19

involved were able to surge to support the quick-response 

deployment. 

The second challenge was the uniqueness of the mission 

and its effect on equipment requirements. The 615th Engineer Company has heavy equipment that is much larger 

than most of the Army inventory and must be moved by 

trailer. Planning this movement required much coordination and many hours of work. Moving the equipment by air 

was not feasible, limiting the ability to ship needed equipment quickly and forcing the unit to move it by sea. The 

Fort Carson transportation offce worked closely with the 

battalion unit movement offcer and 4th Infantry Division 

transportation offce to coordinate the movement by rail to 

the port on time.

The fnal challenge was the dual reporting requirements 

of the battalion. The 52d Engineer Battalion is located in 

Colorado; but its higher headquarters, the 36th Engineer 

Brigade, is at Fort Hood, Texas. The headquarters brigade 

was deployed for weeks to the National Training Center, 

which limited communications with it. The solution was to 

work closely with the 4th Infantry Division logistics offce 

and have the battalion rear detachment stand up quickly. 

The logistics staff worked tirelessly to guide the battalion as 

it worked through issues. 

I

n a continually evolving world, the military must stand 

ready to deploy and engage on short notice to any 

part of the world. Part of this readiness starts with a 

refnement of many standard operating procedures and 

training priorities. Units must be prepared for quick movement, have updated operation equipment lists, and ensure 

that all Soldiers are trained for the movement portion of 

operations. In this deployment, the battalion had an effcient unit movement offcer who helped the new company 

unit movement offcer. Training for quick-response deployments can be accomplished through random emergency 

deployment response exercises that focus on the documents 

required to accomplish such movement and train leaders, 

unit movement offcers, pallet-building teams, and hazmat 

inspectors on their roles and responsibilities. Units must 

also develop standard operating procedures and checklists 

that are event-driven rather than timeline-driven. Eventdriven deployments will likely become the standard for 

future operations. 

All occupational specialties across the Army must learn 

from the light infantry units that are prepared to respond 

quickly and from the lessons provided by this quick-response 

deployment. 

Despite the obstacles, constraints, and limitations 

encountered, the 52d Engineer Battalion enabled a successful, short-notice deployment with heavy equipment and 

now has a defned process for pushing out forces and equipment for future quick-response deployments. The efforts of 

the 615th Engineer Company will save lives and mitigate 

human suffering. What the 52d Engineer Battalion and 

Fort Carson accomplished to quickly deploy the company 

can serve as an example to highlight the direction the Army 

needs to go as it transitions from the War on Terrorism to a 

Captain Anderson is a graduate of the Engineer Basic 

Offcer Leader and Captains Career Courses. He holds a 

bachelor of science degree 

and degree in -

ster University. He is the 52d Engineer Battalion logistics 

offcer.

“Units must be prepared for quick movement, 

have updated operation equipment lists, and 

ensure that all Soldiers are trained for the 

movement portion of operations.”

In the book’s fnal chapter, Moskos explains the motivation and changes that led to the military we have today. A 

constant theme in the book is that there is a reason behind 

events and that without those events, necessary changes 

cannot occur.

Staff Sergeant Ehrhart is the operations sergeant for the 

at the Directorate of Training and 

Leader at the U.S. Engineer School, Fort 

Leonard Wood, Missouri.

In Chapter 7, the author attempts to portray the emotions 

that enlisted Soldiers felt when dealing with war protesters 

in the United States as the Vietnam unfolded. Adding to their emotional turmoil was resentment of college students who dodged the draft or had parents wealthy enough 

to keep them out of the war. They were also witnessing an 

of Soldiers who actually volunteered for service in 

Vietnam as a way to aid their fellow Soldiers, to gain rank 

faster, or to escape from a unit where they were unhappy. 

The war in Vietnam was always in need of more Soldiers. 
20 Engineer January–April 2015

R

ecently, U.S. Army Africa (USARAF) took part in 

stemming the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. 

The engineering effort fell into three areas: 

■ Operations of the U.S. Agency for International Develop- 

 ment (USAID) disaster assistance response team (DART).

■ Construction of Ebola treatment units (ETUs).

■ Activation of the Monrovia Medical Unit. 

The unity of effort, regional understanding, and understanding of the commander’s intent were doctrinal principles used to highlight the successful operational foundation 

provided by USARAF for follow-on units. 

By December 2014, reported cases of the Ebola virus 

disease in West Africa had reached more than 17,000. The 

outbreak, starting in December 2013, was a small occurrence that became a regional crisis by October 2014. The 

U.S. government response began by sending a team from the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and in September 2014, USAID requested support from the Department 

of Defense.1, 2 The response became Operation United Assistance, which hinged on the construction of multiple ETUs in 

Liberia. The Engineer Regiment response began by tasking 

USARAF to provide a civil engineer planner for the USAID 

team in Monrovia, Liberia. 

DART

A

DART consists of a small group of U.S. Department of State personnel and other government 

.and humanitarian resources. DARTs from USAID 

deploy to “coordinate and manage an optimal U.S. government response, while working closely with local offcials, the 

international community, and relief agencies.”3

 In September, the Ebola DART in Monrovia was one of four deployed 

by USAID, with others in Iraq, Syria, and South Sudan. The 

same month, three military planners were requested for the 

Ebola DART. This was the frst time that a DART would 

include military personnel. 

A U.S. Navy offcer deployed as a logistics planner, and a 

U.S. Air Force offcer served as an air planner. The author, 

an operations offcer for the USARAF Deputy Chief of Staff 

Engineer, provided engineer expertise as the civil engineer 

planner. DART integration began with a safety briefng 

that covered Ebola and other, more standard threats. With 

the health and safety of the team a paramount concern, a 

contract emergency response was on hand for U.S. 

personnel who might contract Ebola. A small clinic at the 

U.S. Embassy in Monrovia, Liberia, treated other, standard maladies. Because compound fractures, amputations, 

or internal bleeding would have been untreatable with the 

available medical infrastructure, car accidents were deemed 

the largest risk to U.S. government workers. Despite world 

perceptions, such standard threats present the largest risk 

to nonmedical personnel during the outbreak. 

The logistics and air planners focused on runway assessment, air bridge development, and other logistic requirements. The civil engineer planner met with personnel from 

nongovernmental organizations in Liberia to develop a unifed approach for the American engineer response. With a 

variety of agencies and personnel operating in theater, it 

became imperative to “achieve and maintain unity of effort . . . 

between the joint force and interorganizational partners”4

 to 

ensure a rapid and synchronized response. The main effort 

was the creation of new treatment facilities. The Liberians 

needed more beds quickly; but since nongovernmental organizations had provided this capacity in the past, nobody in 

the U.S. contingent had a plan for constructing an ETU. 

Doctors Without Borders, the largest and most experienced 

organization, was providing an ETU with 200–300 beds.

By Captain Andrew K. Hill

“By December 2014, reported cases 

of the Ebola virus disease in West 

Africa had reached more than 

17,000. The outbreak, starting in 

December 2013, was a small occurrence that became a regional crisis 

by October 2014.”
January–April 2015 Engineer 21

An Ebola growth model by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would shock the world with the possibility of infections ranging in the millions by January 2015.5

This message created a sense of urgency and brought muchneeded resources to help stem the outbreak. Typically, 

DARTs deploy to areas after a disaster to help coordinate 

recovery efforts. This approach starts small, avoiding massive logistic capability and aid that would overwhelm existing infrastructure, build dependency and, ultimately, 

a self-reliant local recovery. The West Africa Ebola outbreak 

proved different, presenting a disaster more similar to an 

enemy invasion than an earthquake or The response 

was new for the DART, so the U.S. government required 

“innovative and adaptive leaders and cohesive teams that 

thrive in conditions of complexity and uncertainty.”6

ETU

A

n ETU, in the context of this outbreak, is a 100-bed 

facility approximately the size of a soccer feld, sepa-

.rated into two risk level zones where confrmed and 

suspected victims can be isolated and treated. It includes 

ward areas, staff changing and resting areas, various levels 

of chlorinated water distribution, electrical production and 

distribution, a morgue, and other ancillary facilities, such as 

a separate visitor area and a room for religious and social 

workers.

There are four major lines of effort for an ETU:

■ Construction.

■ Nonmedical management, such as electrical and water 

 supply.

■ Medical care and management.

■ Resupply. 

The DART was responsible for synchronizing the nongovernmental organizations and agencies responsible for each 

line of effort. By September, the plan consisted of at least one 

ETU in each of Liberia’s 15 counties, with more in the densely 

populated Montserrado County, which contains the capital 

city of Monrovia. U.S. military support was newly arrived, 

and time was of the essence. Fortunately, the Armed Forces 

of Liberia started initial planning for ETU construction.

A 14 September briefng about the Liberian construction 

plans brought together representatives from the U.S. military, the World Health Organization, Doctors Without Borders, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The U.S. military personnel worked with the Liberians to develop the bills of material, site adaptations, and 

contracting documents needed to start construction. Since 

construction was to start immediately, efforts had to be 

synchronized, not duplicated. The Liberian military would 

supply labor and expertise in local methods, the World 

Health Organization and other organizations would provide conceptual plans and medical expertise, and the U.S. 

military would provide survey and design capability and 

funding for materials and equipment.

The frst product was a conceptual site layout adapted 

from World Health Organization plans featuring standard 

Liberian construction and U.S. Army and commercial tents. 

The concept was e-mailed to USARAF for computer-aided 

design drawings. USARAF later used the drawings to geospatially site-adapt the plan to scouted construction sites.

The initial bill of material required a regional understanding of construction to develop appropriate solutions. 

Designing and building U.S. military standard facilities 

would over-engineer and lengthen times for ETU construction. Every day without plans meant another day that the 

An engineer from the 

Armed Forces of Liberia cuts wood braces 

for the Tubmanburg 

ETU.
22 Engineer January–April 2015

U.S. government was not building ETUs. The bill of material 

went to USARAF, where it was combined with the concept 

layout to develop performance work statements. Contracting 

documents were key to meeting the commander’s intent and 

starting work on the frst joint ETU at Tubmanburg, Liberia. 

Joint Forces Command was established on 17 September 2014, and four more members of USARAF deployed to 

Monrovia to form the Joint Forces Command J-7 Engineer. 

Known as the J-7 (Forward), it had primary responsibility 

for site surveys, forward contract management, and information gathering. The J-7 (Main) in Vicenza, Italy, provided 

engineering solutions through providing reachback and 

focusing effort on contracts and site adaptations. 

A

long with ETUs, USARAF engineers had a large 

part in planning another major element of the U.S. 

.response. A 25-bed, U.S. Air Force expeditionary 

medical support hospital would provide advanced medical 

treatment to any health care workers who contracted Ebola. 

The facility became known as the Monrovia Medical Unit.

As the J-7 (Forward) gained personnel, it also gained 

logistics, air, and engineering planning capabilities that 

rendered the original military DART planners redundant. 

As a result, the frst military members of a DART redeployed to their respective home stations in early October. 

USARAF continued to function as the Joint Forces Command headquarters until the 101st Airborne Division took 

responsibility for Operation United Assistance on 25 October. USARAF engineers weren’t alone; they gained support 

from the 36th Engineer Brigade, the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, and the U.S. Air Force. In Liberia, they worked 

closely with USAID, the Armed Forces of Liberia, and the 

U.S. Marine contingent that mentors them. In 38 days, the 

USARAF engineer team completed 58 designs, 28 performance work statements, and 30 equipment and material 

estimates and saw the groundbreaking of six ETUs and the 

Monrovia Medical Unit.

The unity of effort among various agencies and organizations through sustained communication, regional understanding, and partnership with the Liberian military 

ensured appropriate construction methods and a rapid, synchronized approach that paved a positive way forward for 

the people of Liberia. Foundation-setting work by its engineers show that USARAF is a trusted and respected partner 

that achieved long-term strategic effects in Africa. 

Endnotes:

1Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Update: 

Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic—West Africa, December 2014,” 

19 December 2014, <http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview 

/mmwrhtml/mm6350a4.htm?s_cid=mm6350a4_w>, accessed on 

22 January 2015.

2

International Information Program (U.S. State Department), “U.S. Offers More Aid for Response to Ebola in West 

Africa,” 16 September 2014, <http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov 

/st/english/article/2014/09/20140916308491.html>, accessed on 

 22 January 2015.

3USAID From the American People—Who We Are, “Offce 

of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance,” <http://www.usaid.gov 

-and-humanitarian-assistance/offce-us>, accessed on 6 November 2014.

4Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations, 11 August 2011.

5Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Estimating 

the Future Number of Cases in the Ebola Epidemic—Liberia 

and Sierra Leone, 2014–2015,” 26 September 2014, <http://

www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6303a1.htm>, 

accessed on 6 November 2014. 

6Training and Doctrine Command Pamphlet 525-3-1, The 

 31 October 2014.

Captain Hill is the Intelligence and Susny, Headquarters and Headquarters Battalion, 

USARAF. He holds a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering 

in engineering for sustainable the University 

ridge. and a 

licensed professional engineer in Missouri. 

“The unity of effort among various agencies and organizations 

through sustained communication, regional understanding, 

and partnership with the Liberian military ensured appropriate construction methods and a rapid, synchronized approach 

that paved a positive way forward for the people of Liberia.”
January–April 2015 Engineer 23

T

he engineering effort in Afghanistan in 2014 was 

extensive and impressive, with work that spanned 

nearly the full spectrum of engineering operations. 

The many in-theater headquarters—the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), the ISAF Joint Command 

(IJC), U.S. Forces–Afghanistan, and the six regional commands—support the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of operations. These commands require dedicated engineering to support the ISAF mission of ensuring security, 

reconstruction, development, and governance. To effectively 

support the engineer missions, the engineering directorate 

in Afghanistan includes several divisions:

■ Combined joint engineer theater operations.

■ Counter improvised explosive device (C-IED).

■ Theater basing at the IJC level. 

These organizations work with their counterparts in 

the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) to ensure 

that Afghan engineering capabilities will be ready to support the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 

after 2014.

C-IED Mission

T

he IJC C-IED branch, in conjunction with the NATO 

Training Mission–Afghanistan, synchronizes the 

efforts of the ISAF headquarters, the Combined 

Security Training Command–Afghanistan ministerial advisory group, and the regional command C-IED cells to train, 

advise, and assist ANSF on its ability to man, equip, train, 

and sustain its forces. Doing this, we enable ANSF freedom 

of movement by attacking the network, defeating the device, 

and preparing the force.

The ANSF is composed of the Afghan National Police 

(under the Ministry of Interior) and the Afghan National 

Army (under the Ministry of Defense). The Afghan National 

Police is divided into eight zones, while the Afghan National 

Army is divided into seven corps (each with a prescribed 

number of organic explosive ordnance disposal teams). The 

ANSF has numerous improvised explosive device (IED) disposal operators and even more explosive ordnance disposaltrained operators. To account for injuries and expected 

attrition rates, the IJC C-IED team has trained more than 

By Captain Donald E. Frier

Members of the Base Closure Commission escort fellow 

Afghans around a coalition base due to be transferred.
24 Engineer January–April 2015

100 percent of the number required by the Tashkil, or “modifed table of organization and equipment.” This sets up 

Afghanistan and the ANSF to go after and defeat the threat 

of IEDs.

IJC C-IED has deployed mobile training teams, consisting of more than 185 trainers from more than 27 countries, 

throughout the theater. The teams focus on train-the-trainer 

courses that will let the ANSF provide qualifed trainers for 

their own units. This will ultimately reduce the need for 

coalition mentoring at the unit level, an important step in 

the transition from a coalition-led fght against the insurgency. The IJC C-IED training section is responsible for the 

overall training plan initiated in late 2013, which focused 

on areas that were vital for the 2014 fghting season. As a 

result of the analysis that was conducted, IJC C-IED was 

able to train all of the personnel required to fll positions as 

IED and explosive ordnance disposal operators, explosivehazard reduction teams, and additional C-IED disciplines 

within the current ANSF manning structure.

IJC C-IED and the NATO Training Mission–Afghanistan 

are working to transition training responsibility from the 

coalition to the ANSF. There are 27 courses for the Afghan 

National Army and 11 courses for the Afghan National Police 

that were to be transferred before the end of 2014. As of this 

writing, 10 of the 27 Afghan National Army courses and fve 

of the Afghan National Police courses had been transferred.

The ANSF explosive ordnance disposal capability is at 

an overall rating of 84 percent initial operational capability. 

Currently, they’re doing an excellent job, with a found-andcleared rate of more than 68 percent for fscal year 2014. 

In summary, the ANSF C-IED forces have demonstrated 

the skills necessary to assist during the coalition retrograde, safeguard the population, and defeat the enemies 

of Afghanistan.

A

s ISAF and IJC look toward the mission after 2014, 

only a handful of coalition bases will remain. The 

.rest are set to be closed or transferred to different 

government ministries. Those critical basing decisions are 

made through an appointed team of Afghan ministerial offcials called the Base Closure Commission (BCC). In 2013, 

there were more than 200 bases in the coalition footprint, 

but the count was reduced by more than half by August 

2014. Afghan offcials have indicated that they would 

like to take over everything—to include real and personal 

property—but realize that these items entail infrastructure 

that needs a sustainment plan.

To help resolve these issues, the IJC coalition joint engineer theater-basing team has partnered with the BCC to 

discuss the closure and transfer of ISAF infrastructure 

across Afghanistan. The aim is to provide the Afghans with 

safe, secure, and sustainable basing options. There are several planned monthly events that enable this partnership, 

provide the necessary dialog, and maintain momentum to 

obtain key government basing decisions. 

The joint base closure working group meets weekly for a 

2-hour session to discuss key basing issues, including—

■ Changes in the current base plan.

■ Confrmation of who will sign for, and accept transfer of,

 a base.

■ Property rights and real estate ownership.

■ Infrastructure.

■ Property transfer.

■ Sustainability. 

When necessary, the combined joint engineer theaterbasing team hosts and facilitates a planning session. These 

planning sessions are day-long events that allow for greater 

dialogue and permit the BCC and theater-basing team to 

walk through more complex issues. These meetings have 

also been used to plan visits to the most critical bases 

throughout the theater.

The theater-basing team escorts and facilitates joint visits with the Afghan BCC to the most critical bases in the 

Combined Joint Operations Area–Afghanistan. As the number of bases has dwindled, the requirement for site visits 

has decreased proportionately, except for some of the largest bases. The visits are hosted by the regional command 

responsible for the base and are jointly attended by senior 

members of the BCC. The visits allow the BCC to assess 

how many personnel it will take to maintain security and 

how much money it will cost to sustain the base. These 

Trainers instruct 

Afghan explosive 

ordnance disposal 

technicians on the use 

of military explosives.
January–April 2015 Engineer 25

important visits have led to Afghan decisions for the movement of units, adjustments of perimeters, and descoping of 

unsustainable infrastructure. An example is a February 

2014 visit to the Camp Bastion–Camp Leatherneck operational base in Regional Command (Southwest), where the 

BCC decided that the security perimeter was too large and 

requested that it be reduced in size. 

Through this strategic and operational partnership, the 

combined joint engineer theater-basing team and the BCC 

have had the same goal—to set conditions for a sustainable 

Afghanistan as the government postures its security forces 

to defend the country and its supporting ministries to care 

for their people.

W

ithin the IJC combined joint engineer theater operations branch is a 2-person team focused on ANSF 

development. While similar to the C-IED branch 

adviser team, the focus of this team is distinct. It oversees 

and supports ANSF development for the National Engineer 

Brigade and each ANSF corps engineer kandak (CEK), or 

“battalion.” The National Engineer Brigade is a national 

asset that is held at the Ministry of Defense level. Because of 

this, the brigade capabilities of bridging, well drilling, metal 

working, and general and horizontal construction capabilities support the strategic mission in-theater. The CEKs are 

very different, being operational assets under the control of 

the six corps that are spread across Afghanistan. The CEK 

mission is to provide general and horizontal engineering 

support to its corps, while each corps is also task-organized 

with one engineer company that is capable of providing traditional sapper-related functions. 

Before being assigned and dispersed to the corps areas of 

operations, each CEK went through the consolidated felding center near Kabul. While there, the unit received its 

initial fll of personnel, vehicles, and equipment. It also conducted basic engineering training, largely led by coalition 

forces and adviser teams. It was during this time that some 

CEKs had an opportunity to send a number of students to 

the Afghan National Army engineer school for formal training, similar to training at the U.S. Army Engineer School at 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 

After being felded, each CEK was sent to its geographic 

area of responsibility, and advise and assist teams were 

assigned to support them during their approximately 

10-month training period. These advise and assist teams 

varied in size and capability, depending on the requirements 

of the CEK being trained. The U.S. Theater Engineer Brigade maintains control over most of the teams by providing engineer battalion advise and assist teams to oversee 

training and progress at the CEKs. Security force advise and 

assist teams are typically found at the corps level and above, 

where they advise the corps engineer and staff. A coalition 

element from the regional command headquarters oversees 

the engineer advising role within the corps. 

At the Ground Forces Command level, Afghan National 

Army engineer staffs are supported by advisers and 

partners. While the advisers maintain almost daily contact, the partners meet with the engineer staff weekly and 

serve as the link between the operational and tactical commands by conducting consistent interaction and facilitating the information between the Ground Forces Command engineer staff and the corps security force advise and 

assist teams. At the Ministry of Defense level, the senior 

ANSF engineer (known as the general staff engineer) is also 

advised by a dedicated 2-person team.

Together, advisers and partners at all levels strive to provide functional advice to ANSF engineer leaders from the 

CEK to the Ministry of Defense. As the ANSF become more 

and more capable of performing independent operations 

without advisers, adviser teams are transitioning their mission. The successes that the ANSF continues to show will 

allow the coalition to prepare for its enduring mission of support and mentoring after 2014. 

Working together, advisers and partners at all levels 

are responsible for supporting ANSF engineers across the 

full spectrum of engineer operations. Engineer equipment 

readiness is still an ANSF challenge that impacts the sustainability of the Afghan National Army engineers. By 

overcoming challenges, the engineers are showing that 

they are capable of performing critical engineer missions 

and can be viewed as combat multipliers and experts in 

their feld. With limited assistance from adviser teams, the 

general staff engineer assembled nearly 100 senior Afghan 

leaders in May 2014 to discuss engineer-related challenges 

during a 3-day conference. This was only the second time 

this forum took place, and it included active participation 

and briefngs from coalition advisers and partners. After 

coalition-led staff assistance visits to the 215th and 203d 

Corps in March 2014, ANSF partnered with senior coalition members in a combined staff assistance visit to the 

215th Corps to address challenges faced in the feld. In 

addition, Ground Forces Command engineers conducted 

a 10-day battlefeld circulation of their own, visiting each 

corps to address engineer-specifc concerns with their 

own leaders. 

In a short time, the engineering challenges facing the 

ANSF will be solved with assistance from coalition advisers and partners. With the Afghan National Army engineers 

demonstrating success at the tactical level and preparing 

the coalition for their enduring mission to support Afghanistan, attention will be focused on functionally based tasks, 

with engineer sustainment among the principal challenges. 

However, it should be remembered that the felding of these 

units and the processes used to sustain them are only a little 

more than 2 years old. The coalition will continue to advise 

and assist the ANSF in identifying and solving these challenges and will continue to be a devoted member of the team 

into the future.

Captain Soldier and was 

through the Reserve Offcers Training Corps at 

Stony Brook University in New York in 2008. He holds -
26 Engineer January –April 2015

Publication 

Number

Title Date Description 

(and Current Status)

ATP 3-34.22

(FM 3-34.22)

Dec 14

Publication Revisions

Combat Engineering

ATP 3-34.20

(FM 3-34.210)

Explosive Hazard 

Operations

Mar 07 This is a multi-Service manual and conversion from FM 3-34.210, Explosive Hazards 

Operations, to ATP 3-34.20. 

Status: Additional revisions to the fnal draft are being made and it is being fnalized. To 

be published 3d quarter, FY 15.

Engineer Operations—

Brigade Combat Team and 

Below

This is a revision and conversion of Field Manual (FM) 3-34.22, Engineer Operations—

Brigade Combat Team and Below, to Army Techniques Publication (ATP) 3-34.22. It is 

under development and will include information on the brigade engineer battalion (BEB).

Status: Current.

U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence 

Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate 

Concepts, Organizations, and Doctrine Development Division 

Engineer ngineer Doctrine octrine Update pdate

ATP 3-34.23

(ATTP 3-34.23)

Engineer Operations— 

Echelons Above Brigade 

Combat Team

Jul 10 This is a revision and conversion from Army Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (ATTP) 

3-34.23, Engineer Operations—Echelons Above Brigade Combat Team, to ATP 3-34.23. 

Status: To be published 3d quarter fscal year (FY), 2015.

Brigade Special Troops 

Battalion

Dec 06 This is a revision and conversion from FM 3-90.61, The Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 

to ATP 3-90.61. 

Status: Staffng of the fnal draft is complete, and the fnal approved draft is being

prepared. To be published 4th quarter, FY 15.

ATP 3-90.61

(FM 3-90.61)

ATP 3-90.4

(ATTP 3-90.4)

Combined Arms Mobility 

Operations

Aug 11 This is a multi-Service manual and conversion from ATTP 3-90.4, Combined Arms 

Mobility Operations, to ATP 3-90.4.

Status: Staffng of the fnal draft is complete, and the fnal approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 15.

ATP 3-90.8

(FM 3-90)

(FM 5-102)

(FM 90-7)

Combined Arms 

Countermobility 

Operations

Sep 14 This multi-Service manual is a full revision that consolidates FM 3-90, Tactics; 

FM 5-102, Countermobility; and FM 90-7, Combined Arms Obstacle Integration. It 

discusses countermobility and combined arms obstacle integration and their relationship 

to the combined arms defense and warfghting functions with regard to wide area 

security.

Status: Current.

“Doctrine is indispensable to an army. Doctrine provides a military organization with 

a common philosophy, a common language, a common purpose, and a unity of effort.”
January–April 2015 Engineer 27

Publication 

Number

Title Date Description 

(and Current Status)

U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence 

Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate 

Concepts, Organizations, and Doctrine Development Division 

Engineer ngineer Doctrine octrine Update

ATP 3-34.40

(FM 3-34.400)

General Engineering Dec 08

Notes: 

1. Current engineer publications can be downloaded from the Army Publishing Directorate Web site at <http://www.apd.army.mil>. The manuals 

discussed in this article are currently under development and/or recently published (within 6 months of review date). Drafts may be obtained during the staffng process by contacting the Engineer Doctrine Branch at commercial (573) 563-0003, DSN 676-0003, or <usarmy.leonardwood

.mscoe.mbx.cdidcodddengdoc@mail.mil>. The development status of these manuals was current as of 2 February 2015.

2. Items in parentheses are publication numbers of current publications, which will be (or have been recently) superseded by the new number at 

the top of the entry. Multiple numbers in parentheses indicate consolidation into one manual.

3. Currently, all 30 Army doctrine publications/Army doctrine reference publications have been published. Every Army professional should have a 

basic knowledge of our fundamental principles since they rarely change quickly. They can be downloaded from the Army Publishing Directorate 

Web site at <http://www.apd.army.mil>.

ATP 3-34.81

(FM 3-34.170)

Engineer 

Reconnaissance

Mar 08 This is a conversion from FM 3-34.170, Engineer Reconnaissance, to ATP 3-34.81.

Status: Staffng of the fnal draft is complete and the fnal approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 3d quarter, FY 15.

Geospatial Engineering

ATP 3-34.80

(FM 3-34.230)

Geospatial Engineering Sep 14 This is a conversion from FM 3-34.230, Topographic Operations, to ATP 3-34.80. 

Status: Current.

This is a conversion from FM 3-100.4, Environmental Considerations in Military 

Operations, to ATP 3-34.5. 

Status: Staffng of the fnal draft is complete, and the fnal approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 3d quarter, FY 15.

ATP 3-34.5

(FM 3-100.4)

Environmental 

Considerations

Feb 10

General Engineering

This multi-Service manual is a conversion from FM 3-34.400, General Engineering, to 

ATP 3-34.40. 

Status: Awaiting publication. To be published 2d quarter, FY 15.

Engineer leaders,

One of our key programs for the Engineer Regiment is the Doctrine Sponsorship Program. It was implemented as part of Doctrine 2015, which focused on the improvement and renewal of many of our publications. Commanders were asked to sponsor 

publications, based on resident skill and experience. We received great support, and the program has proven benefcial in the 

doctrine development process.

However, we continue to need sponsors. Please contact the doctrine team if you are interested in sponsoring a publication. 

This will allow engineer doctrine to incorporate essential feedback from the feld.

Thank you for your support.

Major Sally C. Hannan, Telephone: (573) 563-2717; e-mail: <sally.c.hannan.mil@mail.mil>.

Mr. Douglas K. Merrill, Telephone: (573) 563-0003; e-mail: <douglas.k.merrill.civ@mail.mil>.

Engineer Doctrine Team, e-mail: <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx.cdidcodddengdoc@mail.mil>.
28 Engineer January–April 2015

A

t 0700 on 8 September 2014, the leaders of the 

engineer company were notifed that a civilian 

.vehicle .carrying a load of sodium hypochlorite had 

spilled and affected several square miles. The 

accident left 25,000 civilians dealing with contaminated water and seeking 

medical attention.

This was the mission 

scenario briefed to the 

68th Engineer Company 

(Horizontal), 62d Engineer Battalion, Fort Hood, 

Texas, during its quarterly emergency deployment readiness exercise 

(EDRE) in support of the 

current unit mission as 

part of the Defense Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Response 

Force. The EDRE was a 

72-hour training event 

that tested the unit ability to prepare equipment 

and personnel to respond 

to a national emergency. 

If a real-world crisis like 

the mission scenario occurred, the 68th Engineer Company 

would conduct a self-sustaining deployment to assist federal, 

state, and local emergency reaction forces. These agencies 

Soldiers tie down equipment in the belly of the plane.
January–April 2015 Engineer 29

include local police and fre departments, state search and rescue task 

forces, and the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency. 

Since 1 January 2013, the unit 

has been tasked to operate as an 

element of the response forces in 

U.S. Army North. The company 

is required to be mission-capable 

and deployable in a very short 

period of time. The requirement 

includes remaining current on 

training for chemical decontamination, route clearance, and horizontal construction. As a result, 

Soldiers must be prepared to 

operate in chemical, biological, 

radiological, and nuclear environments. They train semiannually in 

controlled toxic environments to

test their mission-oriented protective posture equipment. The

controlled-environment training 

lets Soldiers gain confdence in 

their protective equipment.

In addition to operating in a 

contaminated area, essential tasks 

include debris removal, route clearance, and general engineering construction to allow emergency forces 

to reach vital areas that need assistance. To support these tasks, Soldiers train weekly on heavy engineer equipment, including crane 

systems and bulldozers, to create 

or improve main supply routes and 

construct areas for military intermediate staging bases. These bases 

will provide Federal Emergency Management Agency with 

temporary housing and assist frefghters in search and 

extraction operations.

Upon notifcation, the unit mobilized for an airlift to 

transport heavy engineer equipment and personnel from 

Robert Gray Army Airfeld at Fort Hood to the contaminated 

area as part of Force Package One. Two other line platoons 

were notifed to prepare for a 200-mile ground convoy to 

Camp Bowie in Brownwood, Texas, and the construction of 

a decontamination site to support personnel and equipment 

that redeployed from the contaminated area. Teamwork and 

communication were critical to the success of this exercise 

since multiple moving pieces had to come together. The 

68th Engineer Company commander said that his company 

was the only unit on post that conducted such a complex 

EDRE. It served as a combined exercise that supported air 

load operations training requirements for the unit and for 

the U.S. Air Force. In this scenario, Air Force loadmasters 

needed to train on company engineer equipment, such as 

bulldozers, scrapers, and interim high-mobility engineer 

excavators. This exercise was also the frst chance for the 

68th Engineer Company to test loading operations for its 

new bulldozer and scraper. The experience gained by the 

Army and Air Force will enhance unit readiness for shortnotice deployment, within or outside the continental United 

States. 

During planning, the platoon leaders soon realized that 

the overall weight for each group of Soldiers in the air load 

had to be accurately calculated. The largest pieces of equipment—the bulldozer and scraper—were the most challenging. The dozer required signifcant amounts of shoring materials to load the vehicle onto the aircraft. To prevent damage 

to the concrete surface of the airfeld and the of the 

aircraft by the dozer, a plywood pathway to the plane was 

constructed. The bulldozer had to be secured in a carefully 

designated location in the aircraft to ensure proper weight 

distribution with the other equipment that was loaded at 

the same time. Although the scraper is a wheeled vehicle, 

Ground guides load a backhoe onto a C-5 Galaxy.
30 Engineer January–April 2015

its weight was a critical factor while planning the air load. 

This model is signifcantly heavier than the earlier model 

and must be loaded at the exact center of balance of the 

aircraft. Also, its blade requires shoring to protect the 

of the aircraft.

While executing the air load, operators had to understand the entire load plan and how each vehicle was to be 

loaded. Front and rear ground guides directed the placement of each vehicle. As each piece of equipment was settled in its proper load position, the Air Force loadmaster 

directed the assigned tie-down teams in its unique tiedown requirements. This EDRE was the third exercise that 

the platoon executed within fscal year 2014. Each EDRE 

became more complex, with more components that provided 

realistic training.

The EDRE will provide 

feedback to help the company improve procedures 

and develop a feel for the 

requirements of a real-world 

emergency. By the end of 

the 72-hour exercise, the 

68th Engineer Company had 

successfully deployed three 

deployment packages, consisting of six pieces of heavy 

engineer equipment. The 

unit earned commendable 

ratings during inspections 

by III Corps, 36th Engineer 

Brigade, and 62d Engineer 

Battalion. In addition, the 

company was able to identify 

areas that need improvement. Conducting the exercise gave the 68th Engineer 

Company and the 356th and 

68th Airlift Squadrons a 

great opportunity to train, 

increase readiness, and better understand the Defense 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Response Force mission. The 

68th Engineer Company 

will be capable of executing its duties in the event 

of any national emergency 

and plans to conduct followup exercises in the future to 

maintain mission readiness.

Captain Griffth is the 

of the 68th Engineer 

Fort Hood. He holds

a bachelor’s degree in anageent and engineering -

istration Park University 

and a aster’s degree in engineering anage ent fro Missouri University of Science and Technology at Rolla. 

First Lieutenant is the executive offcer for the 68th 

Engineer She holds a bachelor’s degree in construction anage ent fro Morgan State University, Balti ore, 

Maryland.

C-5 Galaxy loadmasters confrm clearance of the bulldozer.

A member of the 68th Engineers observes as equipment is loaded.
January–April 2015 Engineer 31

S

ome people believe that geospatial engineering is the 

forgotten component of Army engineer disciplines, but 

it remains an important asset in supporting missions 

such as Operation Inherent Resolve. Tactics in the operation 

rely on mapping and imagery to obtain geospatial awareness and achieve a tactical advantage. This article is meant 

to provide insight on what it means to serve as a geospatial 

engineer and on the lessons learned for future success in 

the feld.

Geospatial engineers serve in most brigades and at higher 

echelons, daily providing various products for different staff 

sections. The geospatial engineers of the 17th Field Artillery Brigade, which is forward-deployed across four countries in the U.S. Army Central Command area of responsibility, produce and update the daily common operational 

picture and provide digital and hardcopy products for battle 

update briefngs and targeting working groups. One specialty is the creation of maps that focus on the unit’s artillery capabilities, the enemy’s weapons capabilities, and the 

terrain effects on the employment of a wide array of weapon 

systems. Factors including elevation, slope, obstacles, and 

hydrology impact the brigade’s high-mobility artillery rocket 

system capability. With the assessments complete, it is possible to produce graphic representations of the brigade capability to engage targets. This critical information provided 

for the commander and staff assists support brigade operations and helps senior U.S. Army Central Command offcials 

decide where to emplace assets. 

In the months leading up to the advance into Iraq by the 

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the primary focus of 

the section was providing map products to help maintain 

partner nation improvements within the U.S. Army Central Command area of responsibility. As the situation in 

Iraq worsened, the section’s requirements accelerated from 

a crawl to a sprint. Information provided to strike operations included confrming or disproving the activities and 

disposition of Iraqi Security Forces and their opponents 

around Baghdad. It ranged from imagery analysis to indirect fres analysis accomplished through change detection, 

which compares imagery of features collected on different 

dates. In one instance, after receiving reports of threats to 

aircraft using Baghdad International Airport, geospatial 

engineers fused geospatial intelligence with imagery intelligence to produce a single product that portrayed possible 

locations that posed the greatest threats to aircraft. This 

was achieved by showing elevated areas that provided a 

direct line of sight to the airport, verifying the areas with 

imagery, and then providing that product to Government of 

Iraq forces to exploit. 

As strike operations increased, so did demand for 

imagery-based requests for information. One example was 

locating and manipulating the most up-to-date imagery 

for locations in Iraq and exporting it for use on systems 

that did not possess the same software capabilities. Imagery exploitation software was an extremely useful tool that 

allowed the geospatial engineers to place multiple layers of 

data onto images, allowing a better understanding of the 

terrain and a fuller analysis of the fnal product. Another 

useful product was a SharePoint®

 geospatial folder that 

featured simple base maps that visitors could easily access 

and use for presentations. 

There are many ways for geospatial engineers to present the same product. An important aspect of building 

effective products involves data management and organizational skills. The careful layering of data is important 

in building an effective composite. An overabundance of 

data sometimes detracts from the overall effectiveness of 

a map, so geospatial engineers must assess which layer of 

data is most important to create the clearest understanding for the customer. Creating a map is like painting a picture, and it is subject to different interpretations. Properly 

visualizing and representing the layered data is the most 

important aspect of building an effective map.

He is the offcer in charge of the 17th Field 

Artillery Brigade geospatial intelligence Base 

Lewis-McChord, Washington. 
32 Engineer January–April 2015

By Major Robert T. Moore

Afghan construction workers lay foor tile in the dormitory.

A

s U.S. forces leave Afghanistan, it’s natural to wonder what 12 years of war will lead to in this some- 

.times unstable and often misunderstood country. 

One project the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

built is high atop a hill just north of the city of Herat, overlooking the University of Herat. It is a 370-person dormitory for Afghan women who will come to the university from 

rural areas outside the city. The facility is a $5 million Commander’s Emergency Response Program project designed to 

provide the young women of Afghanistan with comfortable 

and safe living quarters while enrolled in the university.

While Americans may take access to higher education 

and secure living conditions for granted, it is not always that 

way for women in Afghanistan. In southern Afghanistan, a 

stronghold for the Taliban, insurgents discourage women 

from going to school even today. Sharia law, practiced by the 

insurgents, forbids women from getting an education and 

may severely punish them for doing so. Women from areas 

outside the city of Herat either lack the fnancial resources 

or are culturally prevented from going to college. Without 

this newly constructed dormitory, those women would be 

continually barred from educational opportunities. 
January–April 2015 Engineer 33

The project is a three-story building, complete with a 

library, computer laboratory, kitchen, and bedrooms where 

women can feel safe while pursuing higher education. Surrounded by a 15-foot rock wall with security guards at the 

entrance, the dormitory provides a secure refuge for students to pursue advanced learning without fear of reprisal 

or punishment. The construction was scheduled for completion in February 2015, allowing more than 370 students to 

move in and start their new path to equality and enlightenment. The women will have a short walk to their classes at 

the university and then back to their dormitory, which is 

complete with the educational resources needed to complete 

their degree programs. 

Winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people has 

always been a counterinsurgency strategy for the U.S. military. USACE is helping to create an educated population 

that can build better lives for themselves and their children. 

Facilitating unfettered access to universities is the frst step 

in creating generations of educated Afghans who can become 

productive members of society, rather than give in to the lure 

of insurgents. A USACE representative said the only way 

Afghanistan will survive is through education. “We’re making a difference here by ensuring that women of Afghanistan can get an education without worrying about interference from the Taliban,” he said.

The dormitory construction was not without controversy. 

At one point, the local Afghan police arrived to shut down 

the project. Undeterred, the Afghan contractor kept working 

with the intention of fnishing the job on time. In a country 

fraught with corruption, bribes, and cultural gender bias, 

it’s not easy to keep any projects on track, especially those 

delivering new cultural norms. Ahead of schedule, the university held a ribbon-cutting ceremony on 10 December 

2014 that included representatives of the local Afghan government and the U.S. Department of State. Now that construction is complete, books, computers, furniture, and other 

equipment for students will be provided. Afghan women 

will soon enroll and start living in the dormitory. The facility will keep them safe while they get an education, something they would otherwise never obtain.

When it comes to winning the hearts and minds of the 

Afghan people in Herat, USACE seems to have a recipe 

for success. 

Major Moore is a U.S. Reserve offcer in charge of 

the Kandahar Resident Offce for the USACE Transatlantic 

Afghanistan District. He holds a bachelor’s degree the 

U.S. Military He serves with the USACE Contingency Response Unit, 416th Theater Engineer in 

Washington, D.C.

Workers use 

scaffolding 

to paint the 

exterior of the 

dormitory.
34 Engineer January–April 2015

S

erving in a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

district provides an excellent opportunity to grow 

professionally, develop emotional intelligence, and 

sharpen technical skills. While serving as a deputy district 

engineer, I enjoyed learning about the Nation’s civil works 

infrastructure while being involved with strategic-level 

engineering initiatives. The assignment gave me the opportunity to attend conferences, courses, and workshops where 

I networked with a variety of experts and professionals. I 

also enjoyed the organizational climate and the interaction 

with our command, staff, project managers, and the employees who operate the district locks and dams. I learned that 

the Department of the Army civilian workforce is just as 

devoted to duty as the uniformed members. Serving in the 

position reinforced the notion that leadership matters and 

that offcers can never stop growing as leaders if they want 

to achieve mission success within organizations that may 

be very different from previous assignments. I would recommend a USACE assignment to offcers who wish to broaden 

their career, enhance their leadership traits, and develop 

additional engineering skills. This article is primarily aimed 

at offcers selected for a deputy district engineer position, 

but it includes information that may be useful to any offcer 

going to a USACE assignment for the frst time.

New arrivals at a district should schedule an appointment with the district commander to discuss their specifc 

role within the district. Every deputy district engineer position has its nuances, and it is best to understand how the 

commander views the roles and responsibilities of the job. 

Some commanders will view the position as a pure deputy 

commander position, some will view it as a chief of staff or 

executive offcer position, some will carve out a set range 

of priority missions based on a division-of-effort model, 

and others will view it as a hybrid or mix of any of these 

views. The key is to obtain the commander’s guidance and 

trust early in the process. This will also allow newcomers 

to focus their right-seat transition period with their predecessors and devote time to the issues that are important to 

the district commander. This is critical because most district commanders have busy travel schedules, so deputies 

By Lieutenant Colonel Jared L. Ware
January–April 2015 Engineer 35

have to be prepared immediately to lead the district in the 

commander’s absence. It is incumbent upon deputy district 

engineers to understand and be comfortable with their roles 

to effectively manage policies and make decisions on behalf 

of the commander.

The District Offcer Introductory Course or the USACE Commanders Course helps offcers 

gain a better perspective on the 

USACE mission and the most 

recent initiatives. The District 

Offcer Introductory Course 

provides an overview of USACE 

policies, programs, processes, 

and regulations. It also allows 

interaction with instructors who 

are experts in their respective 

topic areas. The senior-level 

USACE Commanders Course 

is aimed at providing division 

and district commanders with 

professional development and 

an update of current USACE 

initiatives. Most of the briefngs 

are provided by senior USACE 

leaders, and participants are 

able to interact with USACE 

policy experts. Either course 

will suffce, but it is important to attend at least one. For 

professional development, I would recommend attending at 

least one course a year, such as one of those listed on the 

USACE Learning Center Website at<http://ulc.usace.army 

.mil/CrsSchedule.aspx>.

An engineer from the USACE Rock Island District provides food-fght training to frst responders 

from communities along the Mississippi River.

An engineering technician from the USACE Los Angeles District ensures that contractors comply with safety procedures.
36 Engineer January–April 2015

USACE offers a variety of courses that contribute to professional knowledge and technical skill sets. Our district 

encourages leader development and training opportunities 

for its employees; and if employees see that leaders make 

self-development a priority, then they will also “sharpen the 

ax” through relevant professional development activities. 

Offcers will be more effective leaders and communicators 

if they have a solid knowledge of an engineering commodity area that is vital to their district mission or that occurs 

within their district geographical area of operation.

Deputy district engineers should invest the effort to 

develop a solid network with other deputy district engineers 

and with their district senior civilians. Fellow deputy district engineers are a source of knowledge, ideas, and support. Our division hosted a deputies’ summit led by the colonel serving as our deputy division engineer so that we could 

meet and discuss common purposes. I discovered that many 

challenges that would have taken me 6 months to research 

and solve on my own had already been addressed in other 

districts. Having that trusted network of fellow leaders 

provided better solutions that could be implemented more 

quickly. Eventually, I made it a priority to visit every district within the division and learn from their best practices 

and to share my district’s successful ideas with my peers.

It is critical to develop a solid working relationship with 

the senior civilian leaders in the district. In my experience, the relationship with the civilian deputy district engineer (the senior civilian leader in the district) is the most 

important one to foster. Most civilian deputies have several 

years of USACE experience, some have had prior military 

leadership experience, and all are respected throughout the 

organization. It is also important to meet with other senior 

leaders of the district, which will probably include the division chiefs of—

■ Engineering.

■ Construction.

■ Operations.

■ Contracting.

■ Resource management.

■ Offce of counsel.

Civilian Employees

F

or most Army engineer offcers, the frst opportunity to work with civilian employees will occur when 

assigned to a district. The workplace rules, the 

Equal Employment Opportunity Program, and the human 

resources activities will be foreign turf for most Army offcers. One book that helped me to better understand the 

rules, regulations, and reward system governing civilian 

employees was How to 

Motivate Your People, Deal with Diffcult Issues, and Achieve 

Tangible Results. During my frst week at the district, I had 

to address a grievance fled by a union employee. Later, 

I was part of a panel that dealt with the conversion to the 

National Security Personnel System and then back to the 

USACE, in partnership with the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation and the National Park Service, 

fnishes work on the Plumb Beach Coastal Storm Risk Reduction Project in Brooklyn, New York.
January–April 2015 Engineer 37

wage grade system. Reading the book and spending time 

with the district human resources chief helped me understand how to serve as a leader in the district.

T

he Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) 

is very popular in most USACE districts and divisions. Most military commanders and civilian deputy 

commanders end up serving as senior offcers in their local 

SAME chapters. It is one of the organizations that professional Army engineer offcers should consider joining.

D

eputy district engineers should meet leaders of the 

key civilian constituencies within their districts, 

including—

■ Congressional staffs.

■ Local offcials such as mayors, city managers, and county

 government representatives.

■ State offcials.

■ Federal offcials.

■ Academic or nonproft organization personnel who work

 inside the district. 

Deputy district engineers should expect to serve on committees and in work groups for issues in which their district 

is involved. The district congressional affairs liaison can 

provide a booklet that lists the background of the relevant 

stakeholders in the district, including local, state, and federal political leaders. An understanding of external politics 

will help establish priorities, add discipline to processes, and 

address important issues concerning the district.

Rookie Mistakes to Avoid

N

ew arrivals should avoid making the following 

mistakes:

■ and manage access to the executive suite. There will be 

 requests by different constituencies to meet with the dis- 

 trict engineer. My rule was that only three people had 

 direct access to the district commander at any point in 

 the day: 

1. The division commander.

2. The Chief of Engineers.

3. The district commander’s spouse. 

At some point, a familiar and respected retired offcer 

who may have served as a division commander or district 

engineer (and now works as a consultant or contractor) will 

probably drop in unexpectedly and want to see the commander. There must be a rule for such occurrences. My standard answer was along the lines of, “Sir or ma’am, thank you 

for stopping by the district; you are always welcome here. 

But as standard military courtesy, we expect all visitors to 

schedule an appointment with the district commander, even 

those with distinguished military service, such as you. We 

can check with the commander’s secretary and see if the 

commander is available sometime today.” The same goes 

for any district employee or local leader who will inevitably attempt to gain access to the commander. If there is no 

rule in place, then deputy district engineers should expect 

the commander to divert all issues from such visitors back 

to them.

I highly recommend pursuing the opportunity to serve 

in a USACE district. I found the experience professionally 

and personally rewarding. I gained leadership and technical skills that would not have been possible to obtain 

serving in a typical Army line organization. I developed 

a trusted network of engineer and business professionals 

who helped me address issues I encountered in subsequent 

Army assignments. I attended conferences, seminars, 

training, and workshops that enriched my understanding 

and appreciation of the Nation’s civil works infrastructure 

and the mission sets of the Corps of Engineers. I learned 

how important Army engineers are to local, state, and federal agencies and that joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multi-national activity is alive and well in most 

USACE districts. The district I served with worked daily 

with the U.S. Coast Guard, the state governments of Illinois and Iowa, and the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. Also, some employees worked engineer programs 

with foreign countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Serving in a USACE district is a rewarding experience that 

is benefcial to the professional growth of an Army engineer leader.

Stewart Liff, ees: How to 

Motivate Your People, Deal with Diffcult Issues, and Achieve 

Tangible Results, AMACON, New York, New York, 26 February 2007.

Lieutenant Colonel Ware serves as the division engineer for 

the 82d Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He previously served in the Rock Island District of USACE as deputy 

district engineer.

■ Showing favoritism. Showing favoritism could end up 

 dividing the team. Deputy district engineers must 

 serve as honest brokers and treat all entities with 

 respect, even those with whom they may vehemently 

 disagree. Some nonproft organizations may be eager

 to support district initiatives, but the door should be 

 open even to those enti ties that oppose the best efforts 

 of the district. The job is to lead all employees and

 deal fairly with every constituency and stakeholder.

■ Speaking out of turn. Deputy district engineers should 

 not speak with authority when they are not the auth- 

 ority. What deputy district engineers say may be inter- 

 preted as policy, so they should know the facts before 

 speaking. If they are not comfortable answering a ques- 

 tion or addressing an issue, they should decline to 

 answer and request time to research an answer or bring 

 along an expert who can address questions that might 

 arise.

■ Failing to manage the calendar. The deputy district 

 engineer should know the district engineer’s calendar 
38 Engineer January–April 2015

W

hether supporting force realignment, reorganization, growth, or drawdown, the cyclic nature of the 

constantly changing U.S. Army guarantees future 

missions to activate, inactivate, and deactivate units. In 

2014, the leaders of the 94th Engineer “Wolverine” Battalion at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, received the dreaded 

mission of inactivating. Complex and multifaceted missions 

are an undeniable fact across the force today. Faced with 

the unenviable mission of inactivating, the 94th Engineers 

implemented the operational process to plan, prepare, and 

execute the assigned mission.

On 8 October 2014, the proud 94th Engineer Battalion 

cased its colors in a ceremony that allowed Wolverine Soldiers, past and present, to honor and preserve the battalion’s rich history and lineage. However, the ceremony itself 

did not translate into the ability to professionally inactivate. 

For the 94th Engineer Battalion, success meant reaching 

the desired end state of having its colors cased, lineage and 

history preserved, Soldiers and Families transitioned to 

follow-on assignments, equipment transferred according to 

disposition instructions, and facilities transferred according 

to directives. 

The military decisionmaking process helped to produce 

an executable plan, which materialized in Operation Wolverine Hibernation. This four-phased operation used fve 

lines of effort to keep battalion objectives synchronized and 

aligned with the Department of the Army-directed mission 

of inactivation. The fve lines of effort were— 

■ Families.

■ Training.

■ Manning.

■ Equipping.

■ Facilities. 

Families

T

he battalion put Families as its frst line of effort and 

top priority. This required accounting for battalion 

Soldier and Family needs while meeting the needs of 

the Army. The plan placed great emphasis on understanding 

the climate and concerns that stem from inactivation and 

personnel relocation. This understanding allowed leaders 

to restore confdence by executing resiliency summits and 

company social events, using Family Readiness Groups, and 

The Soldiers and colors 

of the 94th Engineer 

Battalion render honors at the inactivation 

cermony.
January–April 2015 Engineer 39

participating in battalion town hall meetings. The battalion commander and command sergeant major gave Soldiers 

and Families the opportunity to ask questions at the conclusion of all battalion events. Using the chaplain’s phone to 

receive questions via text messages allowed leaders to reach 

the timid. From the receipt of the mission to its accomplishment, the Wolverines cared for Families, and the effort was 

felt throughout the ranks. The strength of the Army traces 

its roots to Families, where a Soldier’s most valued advisors 

originate.

A

lthough the training focus shifted from collective to 

individual tasks, the operational tempo remained 

.high. The battalion established a goal of dominating basic warrior tasks, military occupational specialty 

profciency, and leader development, while achieving 100 

percent individual readiness. Commanders focused on dominating the basics and mastering the fundamentals across 

fve domains:

■ Physical training.

■ Weapons.

■ Combat lifesaver skills.

■ Combatives.

■ Warrior tasks. 

As the amount of vehicles, equipment, and personnel 

steadily declined, individual and team competitions and 

the use of virtual simulators and obstacle courses received 

increased emphasis. To maintain military occupational specialty profciency, the battalion accepted only minor construction missions that required the minimal use of equipment as its organic equipment was prepared for transfer or 

turn-in. The battalion leader professional development program incorporated events such as— 

■ Building a fghting position to standard specifcations.

■ Visiting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis 

 District.

■ Conducting a virtual staff ride of the 2008 Battle of 

 Wanat.

■ Holding a Spiritual Strength Seminar. 

Further developmental opportunities were presented 

naturally through the reduction in end strength. Within battalion formations, it became normal to see staff sergeants 

serving as platoon sergeants and sergeants frst class serving as frst sergeants. Leaders ensured that all Soldiers left 

the battalion confdent in their ability to shoot, move, communicate, and perform their military occupational specialty 

tasks: They were trained!

Manning

T

he battalion manning goal consisted of stabilizing 

leaders and key low-density personnel throughout 

the inactivation, which proved challenging. Leaders 

spent extensive time and effort projecting personnel losses, 

forecasting unit end strength, rerouting potential gains, 

establishing a realistic timeline for submitting awards and 

evaluations, identifying individuals to stabilize, and maintaining awareness of high-risk personnel. Weekly inactivation, relocation, and restructuring meetings were required 

to synchronize efforts. These meetings allowed leaders to 

analyze, collaborate, and assess progress.

A few keys to success were stabilizing key personnel, 

enforcing adherence to the awards and evaluations submission timeline, and establishing a provisional unit. The 

personnel offce developed Rainbow 1, a spreadsheet that 

depicted the personnel drawdown based on rank, date, and 

type of move, such as permanent change of station, on-post 

transfer, enlisted termination of service, or retirement. 

Rainbow 1 was vital to maintaining battalion systems and 

functions based on projected departures and helped identify 

which individuals to stabilize. Despite being short-staffed, 

the leaders were able to provide coverage while still encouraging Soldiers to take leave. From April to June 2014, subordinate units were required to submit 10 awards per week 

to ensure that Soldiers who deserved awards got them in a 

timely manner and to prevent the human resources section 

Lieutenant Colonel Samuel L. Volkman (left) and Master Sergeant Jonas C. Boggess case 

the battalion colors.
40 Engineer January–April 2015

from being overloaded during the last month of inactivation. 

This policy took advantage of having key leaders available 

to write awards and a full staff to process them. As Soldiers 

came up on orders, the personnel offce sent the completed 

award to the appropriate leader for signature. Sometimes, 

leaders who write awards depart before signing them. 

Ensuring that Soldiers departed with quality awards written by frst-line supervisors explains why such an intense 

timeline was enforced.

To account for remaining personnel and property, the 

battalion established a provisional unit that became effective the day the battalion cased its colors. By that time, the 

only companies that had not reached their Department of 

the Army-directed execution date were the Headquarters 

and Headquarters Company and the Forward Support Company. To maintain continuity, the Headquarters and Headquarters Company command team became the provisional

unit command team. Conducting the inactivation ceremony 

before the battalion’s execution date of 15 January 2015 

was decisive. It allowed us to transfer personnel and equipment to systems (such as the Electronic Military Personnel 

Offce, Property Book Unit Supply Enhanced, and Digital 

Training Management System), ensuring proper transition. 

A deliberate and proactive approach—coupled with exceptional communication, teamwork, and initiative—was a 

recipe for success.

Equipping

The goal of the equipping line of effort was to turn in 

or laterally transfer equipment according to disposition 

instructions. The disposition instructions involved meticulous tracking and a considerable investment of time. Operators conducted technical inspections on 7,717 pieces of equipment from April to September 2014. Starting early reduced 

the need to conduct multiple transactions with units. Turnins and transfers incorporated visits to the Big Red One 

Material Redistribution Team, supply support activities, 

and vehicle processing center at Fort Riley, Kansas. The 

success of these transactions relied heavily on coordination 

among the losing unit, gaining units, and Department of 

the Army civilians. Division support was essential to making the process a straightforward event. The oversight and 

effective tracking mechanisms of the battalion logistics 

section allowed the completion of all transactions ahead 

of schedule.

Facilities

T

he goal was to be good stewards of Army real property, 

which will allow follow-on forces to use battalion facilities. A comprehensive consolidation plan progressively reduced the battalion footprint. On 1 September 2014, 

the logistics section coordinated with installation agencies 

to conduct inspections and environmental assessments of 

battalion buildings and motor pools. This enabled the battalion to correct defciencies and identify possible impediments 

in advance. Facility transfers required subordinate units to 

archive documents, properly dispose of classifed documents, 

and send historical artifacts to the U.S. Army Center of 

Military History or the Institute of Heraldry. By November 

2014, subordinate units moved from their company operating facilities to the battalion headquarters which, along with 

the remaining arms room, was transferred to the provisional 

unit. Historic artifacts not accepted by the U.S. Army Center 

of Military History were presented to the Wolverine Alumni 

Organization, which was founded on 8 October 2014. The 

professional closure of the battalion facilities and the establishment of the alumni group are direct of the 

discipline, pride, and stewardship of the 94th Engineer 

Battalion.

In the end, the 94th Engineer Battalion successfully 

accomplished its assigned mission to inactivate and case its 

colors. The emotions of casing the colors stems from Soldier 

pride in the unit lineage, honor in the history that they are 

a part of, and allegiance to their colors. Due to the nature of 

inactivation, the listed lines of effort provide baseline standard operating procedures for unit inactivations across the 

Engineer Regiment. The 94th Engineer Battalion approach 

was successful as it responsibly and professionally inactivated in support of the Army of 2020. 

To become part of the Wolverine Alumni Organization, 

visit <www.94thenbnalumni.org>. 

Lieutenant Colonel as the of the 

94th Engineer Battalion and is now the executive offcer for the 

Director of Operations, Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation 

the Pentagon. He holds in engineering University of Science and 

Technology at Rolla and a bachelor’s degree in civil engineerprofessional engineer in Missouri and a certifed project 

professional. 

Captain Acojedo served as the 94th Engineer Battalion operations offcer and is scheduled to take of the 50th Multirole Battalion, at Fort Leonard 

Missouri University of Science and Technology at Rolla 

and a bachelor’s degree in engineering 

“. . . the 94th Engineer Battalion 

successfully accomplished its 

assigned mission to inactivate and 

case its colors. . . .[they will] provide 

baseline standard operating procedures for unit inactivations across 

the Engineer Regiment.” 
January–April 2015 Engineer 41

Engineer Writer’s Gui e

E

ngineer is a Department of the Army-authenticated publication that contains instructions, guidance, and other 

materials to continuously improve the professional development of Army engineers. It also provides a forum for exchanging information and ideas within the Army engineer community. 

Engineer includes articles by and about commissioned offcers, 

warrant offcers, enlisted Soldiers, Department of the Army civilians, and others. Writers may discuss training, current operations and exercises, doctrine, equipment, history, personal viewpoints, or other areas of general interest to engineers. Articles 

may share good ideas and lessons learned or explore better ways 

of doing things. Shorter, after action type articles and reviews of 

books on engineer topics are also welcome.

Articles should be concise, straightforward, and in the 

active voice. Avoid using acronyms when possible. When used, 

acronyms must be spelled out and identifed at the frst use. 

Avoid the use of bureaucratic jargon and military buzzwords. 

Text length should not exceed 2,000 words (about eight doublespaced pages). 

Articles submitted to Engineer must be accompanied by a 

written release from the author’s unit or activity security manager before editing can begin. All information contained in an 

article must be unclassifed, nonsensitive, and releasable to the 

public. It is the author’s responsibility to ensure that security 

is not compromised; information appearing in open sources 

does not constitute declassifcation. Engineer is distributed to 

military units worldwide and is also available for sale by the 

Government Printing Offce. As such, it is readily accessible 

to nongovernmental or foreign individuals and organizations. 

For convenience, a user-fllable security release memorandum 

is provided at <http://www.wood.army.mil/engrmag/Security

%20Release%20Form%20cx.docx>. 

Authors are responsible for article accuracy and source 

documentation. Use endnotes (not footnotes) and references to 

document sources of quotations, information, and ideas. Limit 

the number of endnotes to the minimum required for honest 

acknowledgment. Endnotes and references must contain a complete citation of publication data; for Internet citations, include 

the date accessed. 

Include photographs and/or graphics that illustrate information in the article. Graphics must be accompanied by captions 

or descriptions; photographs should also be identifed with the 

date, location, unit/personnel, and activity, as applicable. Do not 

embed photographs in Microsoft®

 PowerPoint or Word or include 

photographs or illustrations in the text; instead, send each of 

them as a separate fle. If illustrations are created in PowerPoint, avoid the excessive use of color and shading. Save digital images at a resolution no lower than 200 dpi. Please see the 

photo guide at <http://www.wood.army.mil/engrmag/Photograph 

%20Illustration%20Guide.htm> for more information.

Copyright concerns and the proliferation of methods used to 

disseminate art, illustrations, and photographs require that the 

origin of any graphics be identifed. If a graphic is copyrighted, 

the author must obtain copyright approval and submit it to 

Engineer with the proposed manuscript. As a general policy, 

Engineer will not use artwork that cannot be attributed. 

Provide a short paragraph that summarizes the content 

of the article. Also include a short biography, including full 

name, rank, current unit, job title, and education; U.S. Postal 

Service mailing address; and a commercial daytime telephone 

number.

When an article has multiple authors, the primary point of 

contact should be clearly designated with the initial submission. The designated author will receive all correspondence 

from Engineer editors and will be responsible for conferring 

with coauthors concerning revisions before responding to the 

editors.

Engineer will notify each author to acknowledge receipt of 

a manuscript. However, we make no fnal commitment to publish an article until it has been thoroughly reviewed and, if 

required, revised to satisfy concerns and conform to publication 

conventions. We make no guarantee to publish all submitted 

articles, photographs, or illustrations. If we plan to publish an 

article, we will notify the author. Therefore, it is important to 

keep us informed of changes in e-mail addresses and telephone 

numbers. 

Manuscripts submitted to Engineer become government 

property upon receipt. All articles accepted for publication are 

subject to grammatical and structural changes as well as editing for length, clarity, and conformity to Engineer style. We will 

send substantive changes to the author for approval. Authors 

will receive a courtesy copy of the edited version for review 

before publication; however, if the author does not respond to 

Engineer with questions or concerns by a specifed suspense 

date (typically fve to seven working days), it will be assumed 

that the author concurs with all edits and the article will run 

as is.

Engineer is published three times a year: April (article deadline is 1 December), August (article deadline is 1 April), and 

December (article deadline is 1 August). Send submissions

by e-mail to <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx.engineer@mail 

.mil> or on a CD in Microsoft Word, along with a double-spaced 

copy of the manuscript, to Managing Editor, Engineer Professional Bulletin, 14010 MSCoE Loop, Building 3201, Suite 2661, 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 65473-8702.

As an offcial U.S. Army publication, Engineer is not copyrighted. Material published in Engineer can be freely reproduced, distributed, displayed, or reprinted; however, appropriate credit should be given to Engineer and its authors.

Note: Please indicate if a manuscript is being considered for 

publication elsewhere. Due to regulatory requirements and the 

limited space per issue, we usually do not print articles that 

have been accepted for publication at other Army venues.
42 Engineer January–April 2015

D

uring the War of Independence, Major General 

Henry Knox, General George Washington’s chief of 

artillery, advocated the creation of “a society to be 

formed by the American offcers and to be called the Cincinnati.” Knox wished to form a fraternal organization to honor 

the service of its members in the fght for independence. 

The name of the new society was taken from the illustrious 

Roman general, Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus, who left his 

farm at the call of his country and led the armies of Rome to 

victory. When that victory had been achieved, he returned 

to his plow and refused the honors offered to him by the 

grateful Senate. The society’s purpose was to perpetuate the 

remembrance of the great struggle and the mutual friendships that had been formed during the war.1

A

t the frst meeting of the society, held at the New 

Windsor Cantonment outside Newburgh, New York, 

.in May 1783, Washington was unanimously chosen 

president-general and held that offce to the end of his life in 

1799. Major General Alexander Hamilton was then elected 

president-general and held the offce until his tragic death 

in 1804. Membership was open to all offcers of the Continental Army who had served for 3 years or to the end of the 

war. Later, offcers of the Navy were likewise admitted. At 

the frst meeting, members of the French army and navy 

who had served in America were granted memberships.2

 On 

18 December 1783, King Louis XVI of France authorized 

qualifed French offcers to accept membership in the society. He consented to be the patron of the society in France 

and often wore its insignia at court. The French Revolution 

later caused the dispersion of the membership, and many of 

the French members perished on the guillotine during the 

Reign of Terror. Consequently, the Society of the Cincinnati 

in France was not offcially revived until 1925.3

All offcers were required to contribute one month’s pay 

upon joining to maintain the society and aid members in 

need. Upon the death of a member, his membership passed 

to his eldest son. In 1854, it was resolved to admit as hereditary members the eldest male representatives of such Continental offcers who did not join the society while still alive. 

Offcers who had died in service were likewise eligible for 

representation by their heirs.4

Additionally, the society provided for the admission of a 

limited number of honorary members, men whose services 

and ideals were similar to those of the Cincinnati. Under 

this provision, some of the most noted men of this and other 

countries have been elected to honorary membership. The 

society was organized into 14 branches, one in each of the 

original 13 states and one in France, which is known as the 

Order of the Cincinnati. Some of the state societies ceased 

to exist for a time, owing to the members having been scattered, but all have been restored and continue to 

today. Triennial general meetings have been held without 

interruption since the formation.5

F

our engineer offcers who served during the Revolution and subsequently became Chief of Engineers 

included—

■ Brigadier General Rufus Putnam of Massachusetts, 

 1776.

■ Major General Louis Le Bègue de Presle Duportail of 

 France, 1777.

■ Lieutenant Colonel Etienne Nicholas Marie Béchet de 

 Rochefontaine of France, 1795.

■ Brigadier General Henry Burbeck of Massachusetts, 

 1814.6

Probably the most interesting connection between Army 

engineers and the society is that of the three companies 

of sappers and miners, formed by Resolve of Congress on 

27 May 1778, and the Corps of Engineers, formed by 

Resolve of Congress on 11 March 1779. Every offcer was an 

By Mr. Gustav Person
January–April 2015 Engineer 43

original member of the Cincinnati, with the exception of 

Colonel Louis Baileul de la Radière, who died 4 years before 

the society was instituted. This list included 17 offcers, 

of whom eight were French. The distinguished list also 

included Colonel Thaddeus Kosciuszko, a Polish offcer who 

later fought for his own country’s independence; and Major 

Pierre Charles L’Enfant, the future designer of the city of 

Washington, D.C. There were no engineering schools in 

America during the 18th century, so trained foreign offcers 

were urgently needed during the War of Independence. The 

majority of these men were seconded from the French army.7

The father of the Corps of Engineers, Louis Le Bègue de 

Presle Duportail, arrived in America in 1777. Commissioned 

a brigadier general on 17 November 1777, he joined Washington on the eve of the Battle of Germantown. His best 

known services were in planning and erecting the defenses 

that kept the Continental Army safe during its darkest 

moment, the terrible winter of 1777–1778 at Valley Forge, 

Pennsylvania. When the Society of the Cincinnati was instituted in May 1783, Duportail was among the frst to sign 

what in the society is known as the Parchment Roll, the frst 

list of members. After the war, he returned to France, where 

the king bestowed on him the coveted Cross of Saint-Louis 

and a generous annuity.8

Society Insignia

T

he design for the society’s insignia was approved at 

the frst meeting; and on 19 June 1783, the offcers 

charged L’Enfant with the duty of having the badges 

made in Paris. The badge consists of a bald eagle, “a bird 

peculiar to the American continent,” grasping golden olive 

branches in its talons. Above its head is an olive wreath from 

which is suspended a ribbon of sky blue and white, “descriptive of the union of France and America.” Pictured on the 

breast of the eagle is a medallion with “the fgure of Cincinnatus being presented a sword by three Senators, and in the 

background his wife standing at the door of their cottage near 

a plough and other instruments of husbandry.” Around the 

whole is the legend: ,“He 

Left All to Serve the Republic.” On the reverse is “a sun rising; a city with open gates, and vessels entering the port; 

Fame crowning Cincinnatus with a wreath inscribed Virtutis “The Reward of Virtue,” and below, hands 

joined, supporting a heart with the motto, Esto Perpetua, “Let 

It Be Forever.” Around the entire whole is the inscription: 

Societas 1783, “Society of Cincinnati Founded A.D. 1783.” Washington ordered one of the 

eagles for himself and six others, which he presented to his 

principal military aides. These eagles were made in Paris in 

1783–1784. On 24 February 1784, the offcers of the French 

navy presented Washington with the eagle of the Cincinnati 

richly set in diamonds and other gems. He wore this eagle 

at offcial gatherings of the Cincinnati; and after his death, 

it was transmitted by his heirs to his successor, Hamilton. 

Since then, it has been worn by each president-general and 

is one of the most prized and valuable relics of the modern 

society. L’Enfant also designed the certifcates of membership, which were printed in France and signed by PresidentGeneral Washington and Secretary-General Knox.9

Washington took the greatest interest in the activities 

of the society and guided them with his counsel. In a letter to Knox on 16 October 1783, he spoke of a gift of $500 

to the society. His personal gift to Liberty Hall Academy in 

The diamond eagle of the Cincinnati

“. . .the offcers of the French navy presented 

Washington with the eagle of the Cincinnati 

richly set in diamonds and other gems.”

Reproduced by permission of the Society of the Cincinnati
44 Engineer January–April 2015

Rockbridge County, Virginia, so inspired the Virginia 

branch of the society that its members voted in 1807 to 

present their entire fund of approximately $25,000 (derived 

from the contribution of a month’s pay by each member) to 

this institution, which by that time was named Washington 

College—now known as Washington and Lee University.

10

By the time the French society was reconstituted, society 

leaders in America were discussing the need to establish 

a permanent headquarters. In 1938, that need was flled 

by an extraordinary gift of the Larz Anderson family of 

the Virginia chapter, who donated their elegant Washington, D.C., mansion as a headquarters and memorial to the 

offcers of the War of Independence. The headquarters currently serves as the fraternal center of the international 

organization and home of the society’s library, museum, and 

educational programs. The establishment of an international headquarters led to a dramatic increase in the membership actively involved in the work of the general society. 

The constituent societies also sponsor a wide range of educational efforts to memorialize the heroes of the Revolution 

and their ideals.11

Endnotes:

1Edgar Erskine Hume, “The Society of the Cincinnati and 

the Corps of Engineers, United States Army,” The Military 

Engineer, Vol. XXV, No. 144, November–December 1933, pp. 

1 and 2. 

2

“The Origins of the Society, 1775–1783,” 2012, <http://www

.societyofthecincinnati.org/about/history/origins>, accessed on

26 September 2014.

3Hume, pp. 4 and 5.

4

Ibid., p. 3.

5

“The Origins of the Society, 1775–1783.” 

6Hume, p. 9.

7

Ibid.

8

Ibid., p. 16.

9

Ibid., pp. 3 and 4.

10Ibid., p. 10.

11“The Origins of the Society, 1775–1783.”

Mr. Person served on active duty in the 3 years and 

in the New York for 26 years. He retired 

in 1999 as a lieutenant colonel. to 2012, he was the 

-

ter’s degree in history College of the City University 

of New York.

Engineer is always looking for good quality, action photographs (no “grip and grins,” please) to use on the outside 

covers. If you have photographs of Soldiers who are in the 

proper, current uniform and are participating in training events 

or operations or photographs of current, branch-related equipment that is being used during training or operations, please 

send them to us at <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx 

.engineer@mail.mil>. Ensure that photographs depict proper 

safety and security procedures, and do not send copyrighted 

photographs. All photographs must be high-resolution; most 

photographs obtained from the Internet, made smaller for 

e-mailing, or saved from an electronic fle such as a Microsoft®

PowerPoint or Word document cannot be used for print. In 

addition, please include a caption that describes the photograph and identifes the subject(s) and photographer (if 

known). Please see our photograph guide at http://www.wood 

.army.mil/engrmag/Photograph%20Illustration%20Guide.htm 

for more detailed information.

We Need Your Photographs!
January–April 2015 Engineer 45

T

here are two notable defciencies in current Army 

counter improvised explosive device (C-IED) and 

explosive-hazard doctrine: Army Techniques Publication 3-90.37, and 

Field Manual 3-34.210, Explosive Hazards Operations.

1, 2

The frst is that the C-IED doctrine is not geared toward 

operations in an immature theater. Most of the doctrine 

refers to using historical improvised explosive device (IED) 

data to determine the most likely type and location of device 

and the most likely enemy course of action. However, in the 

Army’s next historical data may be unavailable and 

units may have to plan clearance operations with inaccurate 

or incomplete information on the IED threat. Consequently, 

leaders must take a more proactive approach to planning 

with greater emphasis on intelligence preparation of the 

battlefeld. The second defciency in our doctrine is that it 

is geared toward the use of the military decisionmaking 

process by battalion and brigade staffs to plan and execute 

C-IED operations. It largely ignores the tactical execution 

of clearance operations at the platoon and company levels. 

There is no basic doctrinal document that gives junior offcers and noncommissioned offcers a starting point for the 

execution of route clearance operations. 

As the Army completes the transition back to unifed land 

operations, the Engineer Regiment needs to address these 

gaps in doctrine before the lessons learned over the past 

12 years of planning and executing clearance operations are 

lost. This article proposes a framework to plan and execute 

effective route clearance operations using existing engineer 

doctrine (which was largely ignored in clearance operations 

during the War on Terrorism). This framework provides a 

starting point and a way to help clearance elements focus 

their assets and be more successful in providing mobility for 

the maneuver commander. 

After receiving a mission to conduct a route clearance, 

leaders are trained to immediately begin troop leading procedures. Offcers coming out of the Engineer Basic Offcer 

Leader Course and the Engineer Captains Career Course 

should be able to issue a warning order, make a tentative 

plan, and begin necessary movement. However, when tasked 

with a route clearance mission, most junior offcers (especially lieutenants) struggle or fail to conduct a proper reconnaissance to complete their plan. This is the single point in 

the route clearance planning process where company level 

leaders can identify potential locations of threats and plan 

to change their clearance posture to focus their assets and 

capabilities to fnd the explosive hazard before it fnds them. 

Anyone can conduct “recon by tire” and drive down a 

road until they hit an explosive hazard. However, engineers 

are unique not only for their specialized equipment but 

also for their ability to understand and dominate terrain to 

maximize the effectiveness of their equipment and personnel. One of the most effective tools for understanding terrain to focus engineer capabilities is the process of engagement area development. It is vital to remember that the 

explosive-hazard/IED fght is a mission conducted by enemy 

engineers (even though they may have little formal training 

“. . . engineers are unique not only 

for their specialized equipment but 

also for their ability to understand 

and dominate terrain to maximize 

the effectiveness of their equipment 

and personnel.” 
46 Engineer January–April 2015

or affliation with military engineers). These enemy engineers are developing engagement areas to attack friendly 

forces and limit their freedom of maneuver. By taking 

the engagement area development tool in the context of a 

route clearance mission, friendly engineers can conduct an 

engagement area development from the enemy’s point of 

view (in other words, a reverse engagement area development) to determine where the enemy engineers are most 

likely to attack patrols. 

Engagement area development consists of the following 

steps: 

Step 1. Identify likely enemy avenues of approach. 

Step 2. Identify likely enemy schemes of maneuver. 

Step 3. Determine where to kill the enemy. 

Step 4. Emplace weapons systems. 

Step 5. Plan and integrate obstacles. 

Step 6. Plan and integrate indirect fres. 

Step 7. Rehearse operations in the engagement area. 

Steps 4–7 can be loosely grouped into a single category: 

determining how to kill the enemy. When conducting a 

reverse engagement area development for a route clearance 

patrol, steps 1 and 2 are already complete since the clearance route (or avenue of approach) has already been designated. Therefore, the focus should be on determining where 

and how the enemy wants to attack friendly forces.

The easiest way to conduct a reverse engagement analysis is to create an engineer modifed combined obstacle 

overlay (MCOO) that is focused on the route to be cleared 

and the obstacles specifc to route clearance operations; 

for example, canalizing terrain and vulnerable points, as 

opposed to the more basic mobility restrictions identifed on 

the standard MCOO. The MCOO is a tool that junior leaders 

in the Engineer Regiment have rarely used over the past 12 

years. Though it is still taught in the Engineer Basic Offcer 

Leader Course and the Engineer Captains Career Course, it 

is not often used in stability operations or applied to route 

clearance patrols due to the perception that it is only applicable in large-scale, decisive-action, unifed land operations. 

As a result, the MCOO has been largely overlooked in the 

route clearance fght even though it can easily be applied to 

route clearance patrols with great effect. 

To build the route clearance MCOO, leaders need to—

■ Identify vulnerable points. Vulnerable points are often 

 discussed when conducting route clearance operations, 

 and many people have different ideas on the defnition of

 a vulnerable point. Vulnerable points are transition

 points on a route or piece of terrain that limit line of sight,

 maneuver, and/or direct fres. 

■ Identify possible fring points for previously identi-

 fed vulnerable points. This is where data on the types

 of IEDs being used by the enemy is most useful. The

 location of usable fring points largely depends on the

 types and capabilities of the explosive device being used. 

 It is also important to remember that the enemy wants 

 to maintain overwatch on their device, regardless of the

 initiation method, to assess its effectiveness and create

 propaganda. The brigade level geospatial cell can be a

 tremendous asset in identifying possible fring points. 

■ Identify ingress and egress routes. The ingress and

 egress routes are tied to the previously identifed fr-

 ing points. When looking at the fring points, leaders

 must determine what the enemy can use to escape from

 the area. By tying together the vulnerable points and fr-

 ing points, leaders can identify possible egress routes and

 focus their assets on the most likely enemy course of 

 action. Furthermore, this feeds into the development of

 the fres plan in which the ingress/egress routes and

 fring points can be targeted with indirect fres and intel-

 ligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets. 

■ Gather information about signifcant activities and

 intelligence about possible IEDs. This historical data

 helps identify trends and enemy tactics, techniques, and

 procedures. However, if this data is unavailable or incom-

 plete in initial-entry operations or immature theaters, 

 this step may be omitted.

When these locations have been identifed and the data 

is overlaid on the map to produce the MCOO, leaders can 

further analyze and identify locations where the enemy may 

want to engage U.S. forces and then identify which devices 

and capabilities would be most effective against the friendly 

patrol. These locations are the enemy’s tentative engagement areas. Identifying the tentative engagement areas 

allows company leaders to make informed decisions about 

the most likely enemy course of action, determine where 

to change their clearance posture from hasty to deliberate, 

f

o

t

i

y

L

i

c

c

A

r

r

■

■

An offcer uses an actions-on terrain model during a briefing for an upcoming route clearance mission.
January–April 2015 Engineer 47

and decide where and how to focus 

available assets. Once this process is 

complete, leaders can assign priority 

information requirements to the tentative engagement areas, at which 

point they will become named areas 

of interest. Leaders can then request 

and use available ISR assets to confrm or deny the priority information 

requirements that will, in turn, lead 

to the refnement of their clearance 

plan. The use of small, unmanned 

aerial systems and other ISR assets 

during the execution phase of the 

operation can provide a tremendous 

advantage to the clearance patrol 

leader. 

When leaders create the terrain

model to issue their operation order, 

they should create actions-on terrain models for the individual engagement areas and named areas of interest. Obviously, the length of the route determines the number of 

engagement areas and it may not be feasible to create a terrain model for each individual engagement area. At a minimum, actions-on terrain models should be built for the most 

likely and most dangerous enemy courses of action. During 

the operation order, leaders should give detailed briefngs of 

the actions-on engagement areas and named areas of interest. It is essential that supporting maneuver elements assist 

in planning and be present during the operation order. All 

elements should conduct a combined arms rehearsal using 

the actions-on terrain models. If time allows, full-dress 

rehearsals should be conducted for clearing engagement 

areas and named areas of interest, for actions on contact, and 

for vehicle recovery operations. This will greatly increase 

the effectiveness and lethality of the clearance patrol. 

Planning for a route clearance mission should not be 

haphazard or neglected. Route clearance is a deliberate 

operation and should not be planned and executed as a 

battle rhythm event. Engineer leaders are responsible for 

ensuring that the maneuver commander understands this. 

There have been instances over the past 12 years when 

route clearance patrols (mostly when conducted in a general 

support role) became a battle rhythm event and were not 

adequately planned and resourced. This approach left engineers conducting clearance missions without proper supporting assets; and they were frequently uninformed about 

the enemy threat, the operational environment owner’s 

operations, and additional friendly assets available to them. 

Resourcing company intelligence support teams within 

engineer companies and implementing combined arms 

route clearance operations are two important steps taken 

to correct this problem. However, engineer leaders need to 

go a step further and use their knowledge, expertise, and 

tools throughout the planning process to ensure that route 

clearance patrols are as effective as possible. They need 

to ensure that maneuver commanders and staffs identify 

priority routes for clearance and create an effective mobility synchronization matrix so that all clearance missions 

are coordinated and in line with the maneuver commander’s 

priorities. These steps will increase success in defeating the 

enemy, lead to better evidence collection, decrease damage 

to equipment, and save lives. 

Increased effectiveness and better results start with better planning and a better understanding of enemy intent. By 

developing a route clearance MCOO, conducting a reverse 

engagement area development, and using actions-on terrain 

models of engagement areas, clearance patrols will be set up 

for success. Understanding how this is done will be essential in the next con ict when the frst engineer elements 

will move into an immature theater with little historical 

data and will be expected to conduct effective clearance 

operations. This should be addressed in our doctrine now to 

ensure that the doctrine supports staff personnel and noncommissioned offcers who will be tasked with developing 

and implementing the tactical solutions to the route clearance problem set. 

Endnotes:

1Army Techniques Publication 3-90.37, Countering 

, 29 July 2014.

2Field Manual 3-34.210, Explosive Hazards Operations, 

27 March 2007. 

He holds a 

bachelor’s degree in civil engine

 in engineering

University of Science and Technology at Rolla.

Engineers conduct route clearance operations during a mission readiness exercise at Fort Riley, Kansas.
48 Engineer January–April 2015

D

uring a transition from high-intensity, large-scale 

offensive operations to a consolidation and a responsible drawdown of forces and equipment, it is necessary to economize combat power in support of decisive 

operations nested with tactical, operational, and strategic 

lines of effort. In Regional Command (West) in Afghanistan, 

multinational-joint combined arms route clearance operations maximized combat power while encompassing the 

warfghting functions and meeting desired end states. There 

are three points necessary for the successful execution of 

multinational-joint operations:

■ Shared intelligence.

■ Established relationships between multinational 

 partners.

■ Strong supply, operations, and maintenance sections 

 within a U.S. engineer company task-organized under 

 a coalition-commanded task force.

Multinational–

M

ultinational collectively describes military actions 

conducted by forces of two or more nations. For the 

576th Engineer Company (Clearance), operational 

and tactical control resided with Italian Army engineer 

Task Force Genio. While subordinate commanders in the 

task force had the opportunity to exercise the art of command, the variables of mission command, command and 

support requirements, equipment differences, and varied 

capabilities hindered the science of control while planning 

for and conducting operations. The mitigation of these issues 

started and ended with subordinate commander and leader 

interaction with their coalition commander, counterpart, 

or enabler.

Joint describes operations supported by elements from 

multiple branches of Service. In the case of combined arms 

route clearance teams operating in Regional Command 

(West), these included enablers from the U.S., Italian, and 

British Air Forces; the U.S. Navy; and the U.S. Marine 

Corps. Complex as it seemed, the integration of joint assets 

into these operations was seamless when proper coordination occurred, starting at the company level. Other than 

increased profciency in tactics, techniques, and procedures 

(TTP), patrol leaders benefted most from learning to understand the accents of different nations and vernaculars of different branches of Service. For example, when spoken over 

the radio, “the Queen’s English” can sound as foreign as 

Italian to the untrained ear of a U.S. Soldier.

–
Engineer 49

T

o maximize the combat power of an economized force, 

the purpose of a multinational-joint combined arms 

route clearance operation is to operate independently 

while internally applying the six warfghting functions:

■ Mission command.

■ Movement and maneuver.

■ Intelligence.

■ Fires.

■ Sustainment.

■ Protection.

There was never a shortage of competent leaders while 

operating in a multinational task force since leadership is 

an element of combat power that helps drive the warfghting functions. Soldiers from Italy and other North Atlantic 

Treaty Organization (NATO) countries may be held to more 

stringent terms of service, including the length of enlistment and rank progression. For example, the average age of 

a member of a U.S. Army engineer company is in the early 

to mid-twenties while in an Italian engineer company, it is 

in the mid-thirties. Its members may have nearly twice the 

time in service and/or grade as their U.S. counterparts. The 

result is an organization with a broader knowledge base 

and a cohesion that results from less turnover than U.S. 

units experience.

Information is the second element of combat power that 

helps drive the warfghting functions. Each coalition nation 

has its own vehicles, equipment, and weapons systems—not 

always compatible with each other—which can frustrate the 

cross-branch understanding of capabilities. This reiterates 

the importance of information between senior and subordinate commanders to allow sound decisions to be made 

and orders to be disseminated through the operations process. Strong, leaders and mission-ready units must 

fll in the gaps and execute the mission when information 

shortfalls occur.

The true test of mission command in a multinationaljoint organization is how well a commander and staff can 

create intelligence-based common situational understanding across the force and then integrate enablers. During 

mission planning, an unhindered information helps to 

paint the situational picture for the operation. The company 

intelligence support team collects, exploits, and disseminates the information that is a critical piece of the framework of a combined arms route clearance operation. Mission 

command resides with the ground force commander, who is 

usually an infantry or armor commander. However, there is 

a risk that these commanders might lack an understanding 

of route clearance equipment or experience in maneuvering 

it. With training and support from enablers such as a mortar platoon leader or joint tactical air controller, an engineer 

commander could serve as the ground force commander. 

Also, an engineer commander would bring knowledge and 

experience of the TTP and equipment necessary for route 

clearance, which is the primary function of a combined arms 

route clearance operation.

The ability to move, maneuver, and protect is important 

to maintain the combat power of a combined arms route 

January–April 2015

A U.S. RCP prepares for a mission in Herat Province.
50 Engineer January–April 2015

clearance operation. That ability is built into the route 

clearance package with only slight variations between coalition partners. With a maneuver force enabler, comes direct 

and indirect fres capability. Transparent to differences in 

coalition vehicles and equipment, the maneuver force gives 

a route clearance patrol (RCP) the protection needed to control the explosive hazard site, establish an outer cordon, and 

close with and destroy external threats.

In a multinational environment, command and support 

relationships are important in planning and executing sustainment beyond individual patrols. In an operational control relationship (or more commonly, tactical control under 

a NATO command), coalition partners in a combined arms 

route clearance operation can support each other. Adding 

a doctor to the task organization of an operation can offset 

shortfalls in the capabilities of combat medics, which is an 

important factor considering the distance of a typical combined arms route clearance operation. Reductions in coalition forces have not always reduced the routes that need to 

be patrolled. In Regional Command (West), patrols could 

cover a round trip of 200 kilometers. Also, integrating a U.S. 

RCP adds recovery assets that generally meet requirements 

for the entire operation in case self-recovery is not feasible 

due to vehicle limitations or extensive battle damage. 

Supply systems, personnel services, and maintenance support can present sustainment challenges for a U.S. unit that 

is subordinate to a coalition command. For the services that 

a coalition partner cannot provide, an administrative control 

support relationship must be established. When the 576th 

Engineer Company (Clearance) was subordinate to an Italian Army engineer task force, the responsibility for administrative control and most services and supplies rested with 

Task Force Bayonet, a U.S. engineer task force in Regional 

Command (South). Due to this separation, the company was 

required to accurately track and manage all classes of supply 

and personnel services (fnancial, legal, religious, and others) to forecast future needs. In such a modular setting, it is 

imperative that a company have strong operations and maintenance sections, supported by a competent and forwardlooking task force staff.

R

oute clearance must be maintained to lower the 

overall threat along a route and to assure mobility. 

A by-product of a retrograde operation is a reduction 

of the forces and equipment that support operational needs. 

Shrinking spheres of ce reduce necessary route security, thus increasing the threat of reseeding once a route has 

been cleared. Additionally, with a reduction of RCPs, framework route clearance is not possible as the required clearance distances for each RCP increases.

Differences in the equipment capabilities of coalition partners result in different TTP. The advanced technology of their equipment and the amount of organic combat 

Engineers conduct medevac training at Shindand Air Base in Herat Province.
January–April 2015 Engineer 51

power in their packages make U.S. RCPs superior to those 

of other nations. This makes them best suited for operations 

along the longer, rural routes that connect widely separated 

bases. Protection measures, sustainment support, and 

redundant assets allow U.S. RCPs to operate farther from 

base support systems, reinforced by combined arms support enablers. However, coalition RCPs are not obsolete in 

the fght to assure mobility. They are best suited to conduct 

route clearance where the start point and release point of 

a patrol is the same location over a single time frame. It 

is important for coalition RCPs to stay within reach of a 

quick reaction force, primarily for recovery support. Their 

less expedient detection capabilities (mainly due to the 

lack of vehicle-mounted, ground-penetrating radar) impose 

time constraints that inhibit clearance of the longer routes 

between bases.

Regardless of the differences in equipment, resources, or 

TTP, members of U.S. RCPs can learn much from coalition 

RCPs. By working and training together, U.S. and coalition 

RCPs can learn, integrate, and execute TTP encouraging 

personnel to think outside the box, ensure that they can 

safely execute route clearance operations, recover lost or 

damaged assets, and ensure mobility.

While there are some difficulties when conducting 

multinational-joint operations, the chance to build mutual 

trust and camaraderie between coalition partners at the 

command and Soldier levels outweighs potential problems. 

Invaluable experiences often occur, broadening views on 

how to execute tactical tasks with different equipment. As 

the cornerstone of a combined arms route clearance operation, RCPs must remain profcient in route clearance and 

unifed action to accomplish the mission. During a retrograde action that will culminate in the closure of most coalition bases, combined arms route clearance operations are 

the way to safely conduct operations while mitigating the 

enemy threat. 

Army Doctrine Publication 5-0, The Operations Process, 

17 May 2012.

Army Doctrine Publication 6-0, Mission , 17 May 

2012.

Army Doctrine Reference Publication 3-0, Unifed Land 

Operations, 16 May 2012. 

Army Techniques Publications 3-90.37, -

vised Explosive Devices, 29 July 2014.

Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations, 11 August 2011.

Captain ns offcer, 4th Infantry Division, 

He 

holds a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering Point 

and degree in civil engineering Missouri University of Science and Technology at Rolla.

A U.S. Army Buffalo conducts route clearance operations in Badghis Province.
52 Engineer January–April 2015

By Colonel Bradley P. Welch

O

f the four symbols on the Essayons (or 

Engineer) Button, one has always 

.been a mystery to me. The rising sun at the lower right of the button, although appropriate in a landscape setting, never had the same 

iconic connection to the Corps of 

Engineers as the other three. 

The eagle is this Nation’s most 

recognizable image, symbolizing its courage and strength. 

The banner inscribed with the 

word Essayons is the motto of 

the Corps, sending the message 

that engineers will try even in 

the face of overwhelming odds. The 

bastion represents the engineer missions of construction and fortifcation. 

But what is unique about the sun, and 

why does it have a face?

I stumbled upon what I believe to be the answer 

some 25 years after I joined the Corps and proudly donned 

its distinctive buttons. My last day of temporary duty at 

Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, was cut short, giving me the opportunity to do some sightseeing as I returned 

to my duty station via Philadelphia 

International Airport. As I made my 

way through Freedom Hall, where 

the Continental Congress formed 

our Constitution, the park ranger 

on duty told the story of Benjamin Franklin’s remark about 

George Washington’s “Rising 

Sun” chair. 

“As the representatives 

signed the Constitution, Franklin 

watched. The president’s chair was 

at the front of the hall, and a sun 

was painted on the back of the chair. 

Franklin told some of the members near 

him that it was always diffcult for painters to show the difference between the rising sun 

and the setting sun. He said that during the convention he had often looked at the painted sun and wondered 

‘. . . whether it was rising or setting. But now at length I have 

the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a 

setting sun.’ ”1

The chair was cordoned off at the far end of the 

room, too far to discern the exact shape and features 

of the ornament the park ranger described. Luckily, 

he had a picture of the chair for everyone to view. 

Immediately, I knew where I had seen that image 

before—on my Essayons Buttons! 

That provided the what of my question, but it did 

not explain the why. A little research revealed that 

one of the persons credited with the creation of the 

Essayons Button was Benjamin Franklin’s grandnephew, Colonel Jonathan Williams. Colonel Williams (1751–1815), who was the frst Superintendent 

at West Point and sixth Chief of Engineers, lived in 

t

s

r

o

h

I

b

n

o

E

n

li

Castle Williams a
Based on his genealogy, fraternity, and the examples of 

symbols described earlier, I believe that Colonel Williams 

chose the sun face for inclusion on the Essayons Button. It 

cannot be conclusively proven, and if documentary proof 

ever existed, it probably was destroyed along with other offcial records of the Corps of Engineers in a West Point building fre in 1838.4

 While its full meaning may never be known 

due to the secrecy of Freemasonry, the mystery of why the 

sun face is part of the heritage of the Corps of Engineers has 

been answered for this writer. Our button is forever linked 

to the belief of the Founding Fathers that, for our Nation, 

the sun is always rising.

Endnotes:

1

“Citizen Ben,” 2002, <http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3

_citizen_founding.html>, accessed on 13 November 2014.

2Edward L. King, “Famous Freemasons,”©

 1998–2014, 

<http://www.masonicinfo.com /famous2.htm>, accessed on 

13 November 2014.

3Alfred Billings Street, The Council of Revision of the State of 

New York, William Gould, Albany, New York, 1859.

4

”The Engineer Button,” <http://www.150th.com/history/

en_butt.htm>, accessed on 26 January 2015.

Colonel Welch serves as the Deputy Chief of Staff, G3/7 

(Exercises) for the -

tucky. His previous was 397th Engineer Battalion, Eau Claire, Wisconsin.

January–April 2015 Engineer 53

France and assisted Franklin from there during 

the Revolutionary War. He later designed and 

supervised the construction of the bastion named 

Castle Williams and supervised the reconstruction of Fort Jay, both on Governors Island, located 

south of Manhattan Island. 

The connection to Benjamin Franklin provided 

the link. Knowing that Franklin, Washington, 

and many other Founding Fathers were Freemasons,1

 I tried to fnd other examples of the sun 

face image connected to their work.2

 What I found 

sent a tingle up my spine. The Trophèe ďArmes 

statue above the sally port at Fort Jay features an 

eagle holding in its talons a shield with the sun 

face emblazoned on it. Franklin’s Fugio cent, possibly the frst coin authorized for the U.S. Mint, bears the 

image on its front side. John Jay, frst Chief Justice of the 

U.S. Supreme Court (and a Freemason for whom the fort is 

named) helped devise the state seal of New York.3

 Approximately 15 states contain a sun image on their seal, but only 

the seal of New York features the sun face. 

Left: George Washington’s “Rising Sun” chair.

Below: Fort Jay sally port statue

Fugio cent Fugio cent
Technical engineers showcase

relevance in JoinT operaTion

54 Engineer January–April 2015

T

he Nation has repeatedly called on the Engineer 

Regiment over the past 13 years to support the War 

on Terrorism. The routine of recovering and reftting following deployments has resulted in a diminished 

focus on the technical profciencies of construction engineers 

while stateside. This has resulted in a misconception of 

construction engineer capabilities. This phenomenon should 

remain at the front of every construction engineer’s mind. 

As the Engineer Regiment undergoes its latest transformation and the pace of deployments slows, construction engineer battalions must remain focused on reestablishing their 

relevance on installations.

The Army has initiated the alignment of engineer forces 

under brigade combat teams. Many installations have witnessed this transformation frsthand with the birth of the 

brigade engineer battalions. This new alignment, combined 

with a diminished engineer requirement to support the 

War on Terrorism, has transformed the focus of construction engineers. The philosophy has evolved from “training 

to deploy” into “training to refne technical skills.” The current military downsizing and budget cuts have put new 

emphasis on developing low-cost training opportunities that 

are essential to the success of construction engineers. At 

Fort Stewart, Georgia, the 92d Engineer “Black Diamond” 

Battalion understands the importance of these efforts and 

continuously pursues new ways to improve the perishable 

skills of its construction engineers. This has frequently led 

to the development of partnerships outside the organization, 

which has let the Black Diamonds capitalize on technical 

training opportunities with customer-funded projects. 

The 36th Engineer Detachment (Survey and Design) is 

crucial to the battalion’s success. The detachment is a distinctive, highly sought-after resource and a key contributor 

to the 92d Engineer effort at Fort Stewart and surrounding 

communities. One of the few remaining survey and design 

By Chief Warrant Offcer Two Matthew T. Lizotte

Technical engineers showcase

relevance in JoinT operaTion

b

w

W

t

t

r

t

w

t

t

Soldiers had to trasverse rugged terrain to collect survey t

data for the design process.
January–April 2015 Engineer 55

detachments on active duty, it provides geodetic survey 

support, detailed building designs, and material testing 

analysis to numerous agencies, including—

■ 3d Infantry Division brigades.

■ Numerous Fort Stewart tenant battalions.

■ The Fort Stewart Directorate of Morale, Welfare, and

 Recreation.

■ The 75th Ranger Regiment at Hunter Army Airfeld.

■ The Fort Stewart Range Control Branch.

■ The Fort Stewart Directorate of Public Works.

■ The Savannah State University Reserve Offcer Training

 Corps program. 

Most recently, the detachment Soldiers had an opportunity to showcase their technical abilities in a joint mission 

with Joint Task Force North, the U.S. Border Patrol, and the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Exactly 1 year after returning from Afghanistan, the detachment traveled to the U.S.-

Mexico border to conduct a geodetic survey. Detachment 

leaders used the mission as the culmination of a collective 

task on the mission-essential task list: Conduct survey and 

design operations. The mission was to collect and process 

data from the geodetic survey and design a road to improve 

the mobility of the U.S. Border Patrol and increase the security of America. 

Determined to showcase their talents, the detachment 

technical engineers surveyed from sunrise to sundown and 

collected more than 20,000 survey data points, working in 

90°F temperatures for 2 weeks. The desert wind and sand 

relentlessly battered them as they scaled 40-foot sand dunes 

to survey the required 5 miles of desert. After completing the 

assigned survey 3 days ahead of schedule, the survey team 

voluntarily went a step further and surveyed an additional 

mile of desert, surveyed an entire mountain, and emplaced 

three survey benchmarks. The benchmarks are semipermanent survey control points that are secured in black concrete 

diamonds and will be used to align the road during construction. Passing up a well-deserved day of rest from surveying, 

the team traveled 3 hours before dawn to participate in an 

8-kilometer charity run to demonstrate support for volunteer organizations dedicated to assisting wounded veterans. 

Since the technical engineers returned from the joint 

mission, they have processed the collected data, researched 

technical manuals, and followed the advice of professional 

engineers to ensure a superior road design. The design team 

members are determined to do their part to reestablish engineer relevance and highlight their capabilities by submitting a product that exceeds the expectations of Joint Task 

Force North. 

Establishing relevance in the Army of 2020 should be a 

priority on every engineer’s agenda. As commanders develop 

views of engineer capabilities and ways to use them properly, it is important that construction engineers be a part of 

the process. If construction engineers fail to validate their 

existence outside a brigade, they will face the monumental 

task of reestablishing their relevance as the brigade engineer

battalions transform the role of engineers in the eyes of brigade combat team commanders. Construction engineers must 

seek out partnerships and take advantage of every engineering opportunity presented, no matter the size, to showcase 

their unique abilities while maximizing training opportun 

ities. With only a handful of survey and design detachments 

remaining on active duty, it is imperative that outside organizations understand the capabilities of the detachments so 

that the assets can be used to their fullest potential. 

Chief Warrant Offcer Two Lizotte is the of the 

36th Engineer (Survey and Design) at Fort Stewart. He holds a bachelor’s degree in and 

A newly constructed “Black Diamond” benchmark 

monument serves as a base station control point during 

surveys.

Technical engineers take ground shots during a joint 

mission on the U.S.–Mexican border.
56 Engineer January–April 2015