k~.-- - THE MAGAZINE FOR ARMY ENGINEERS Spring 1982 

UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER 

AND FORT BELVOIR. VA 

COMMANDER/COMMANDANT 

Maj. Gen. James N. Ellis 

DEPUTY COMMANDANT 

Col. Alvin G. Rowe 

CHIEF OF STAFFDEPUTY 

INSTALLATION COMMANDER 

Col. David 0.Cooksey 

COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM Marvin L. Knowles 

DIRECTORATES 

DIRECTORATE OF ENGINEER 

FORCE MANAGEMENT 

Lt. Col. Charles S. Nichols 

DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT 


DEVELOPMENTS 


Col. Phillip R. Hoge 


DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING 


DEVELOPMENTS 


Col. John W. Devens 


DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING 


AND DOCTRINE 


Col. Stanley R. Johnson 


UNITS 

ENGINEER CENTER BRIGADE 


Col. Robert A. Dey 


ENGINEER TRAINING BRIGADE 


Col. Peter J. Groh 


PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER 


Maj. James E. Kiley Jr. 


EDITOR 


John Florence 


ASSOCIATE EDITOR 


Sp5 N. P. Lang 


COVER ILLUSTRATION 

designed by 1st Lt. Stephen J. Ressler. 

Ellis Named 

Engineer School Commandant 

M aj. Gen. James N. 

Ellis assumed command in 

March of the U.S. Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir 

from Mai. Gen. Max W. Noah 

who becomes director of Program Analysis and 

Evaluation, Office of the Chief of Staff of the 

Army. 

Ellis comes to Fort Belvoir from Atlanta 

where he served as division engineer of the 

South Atlantic Division, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (COE). 

A U.S. Military Academy graduate, Ellis has 

a master's degree in civil engineering from the 

University of Illinois, is airborne and ranger 

qualified and is a graduate of the Army War 

College. 

He served two tours in Vietnam; commanded 

companies twice in the 82d Airborne Division; 

was commander of the 4th Engineer Battalion, 

4th Infantry Division (Mechanized); and rose to 

the rank of associate professor of earth, space 

and geographic sciences at the U.S. Military 

Academy. 

His COE assignments include district engineer, Louisville District; executive director, Office of the Chief of Engineers; and division engineer, Middle East Division. 

Ellis is a native of Cape Girardeu, Mo; he 

and his wife, Mareth, have three children. 
VOLUME 12 SPRING 1982 NUMBER 1 

FEATURES 

10 Company Commander As Judge and Jury 

by Maj. Raymond F. Powell 

12 Your Unparalleled Heritage 

by Secretary of the Army John 0.Marsh Jr. 

14 BRIGHT STAR 82-The Engineer Perspective 

by Lt. Col. Raymond E. Knell 

19 The Critical Path Method-Is It Time To Change? 

by Capt. Andrew Hamlin, Capt. Robert Huff 

and 1st Lt. Michael J. Harris 

24 Self-Help Programs and Company Maintenance 

by Capt. Merrit P. Drucker 

26 A Different Kind of Training Project 

by Capt. Douglas D. Gransberg 

DEPARTMENTS 

2 CLEAR THE WAY 8 FORUM 

4 NEWS& NOTES 27 ENGINEER PROBLEM 

29 ENGINEER SOLUTION 

ENGINEER is an authorized publication of the U.S. Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir, Va. Unless specifically stated, materiel apoearine herein does not necesssrilv reflect official oolicv. thinkine or endorsement bv anv arenev of the U.S. Armv. All ohotoeraohs 

. -. contained 

hereinare official U.S. Army phoiographs unless ithervise crediied. Use of funds f& pryntkg &is publication was approved by Headquarters 

Department of the Army. July 22, 1981. Material herein may be reprinted if credit is given to ENGINEER and the author.. ENGINEER OB. 

JECTIVES are to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas, to inform and motivate and to promote the professional development of all mem- bers of the Armv . enrineer - familv. .DIRECT CORRESPONDENCE with ENGINEER is authorized and encouraeed. Inauiries. letters to the 

editor, manuscripts, photographs and general correspondence ahould be sent to: Editor, ENGINEER, U.S. Army ~ngineer center; Fort Belvoir, 

Va. 22060. Telephone Autavon 354-3082. If a return of manuscripts or material is desired, a self-addressed envelope is required. .SUBSCRIPTIONS to ENGINEER are available through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washingtan, D.C. 

20402. A check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents must accompany all subscription requests. Rates are $8.00 domestic 

(including APO and FPO addresses) and $10.00 for foreign addresses. Individual copies are available at $2.75 per copy to domestic addresses 

and $3.45 for foreign addresses. .SECOND CLASS postage paid at Fort Belvoir, Va, and Riverdale, Md. ISSN 00461989 
by Maj. Gen. Max W. Noah 

Sharing the responsibility 


for training developments 


We often hear that finding 

answers to the question, "How 

and with what do we fight?" is 

the business of the Engineer 

School's Directorate of Combat 

Developments, and most of us 

tend to leave that issue to the 

designated "thinkers" in our 

ranks. In peacetime, a natural 

and vital additional question is, 

"How and with what do we 

train to fight?" When we look 

for answers to this question, we 

enter the world of training development. This is the milieu of 

the Army Training and Evaluation Program (ARTEP), Soldier's Manual, Trainer's Guide 

(formerly called Commander's 

Manual), Job Book, Skill Qualification Test (SQT), Training 

Extension Course (TEC), etc., 

etc., . . . all of the materials designed to help you and me plan, 

conduct and evaluate the training of the soldiers and units for 

whom we are responsible. Because we all share training responsibility to one degree or another, we need to be familiar 

with this world of training development. Accordingly, I'd like 

to discuss several points regarding some of our common training concerns. 

The ARTEP 

As a unit leader, the ARTEP 

has to be your guide for 

evaluating and training your 

unit on most of the tasks expected of it in combat. There 

may very well be additional 

tasks required of your unit by 

specific operations plans or 

other situations unique to your 

parent command. If your unit 

has specific combat tasks assigned to it which are not in 

your ARTEP, include them in 

your training program by all 

means. If you need our help in 

training these tasks, please let 

us know. 

The ARTEP for most units 

contains a greater number of 

tasks than the unit can realistically train on or maintain proficiency during the course of a 

normal training year. Accordingly, commanders, you are expected to use the ARTEP task 

lists as a menu and to select 

from them training tasks most 

critical to your unit. It is a 

chain-of-command function to 

determine the criticality of 

tasks and training priorities. If 

you have any question about 

which tasks are critical for your 

unit, see your boss. 

We all know that most commands use the external evaluation feature of the ARTEP as a 

test of unit training readiness 

and sometimes this bothers unit 

commanders. It is true that the 

ARTEP itself was designed as a 

diagnostic tool, but commanders 

may want to use selected elements from it for tests. Hopefully, however, such use does not 

inhibit use of the ARTEP for its 

broader, designated purposes. 

Soldier's Manuals 

Documenting the tasks expected of each soldier and the 

conditions and standards by 

which they are to be performed 

is an extremely ambitious undertaking. I recognize that the 

size and number of these manuals are formidable obstacles to 

their intended use. We are looking for your ideas on how manuals can be streamlined and still 

fill their intended purposes. 

The Common Task Soldier's 

Manual was published in June 

1981. Thereafter, new or revised soldier's manuals will not 

duplicate the tasks contained in 

the common task manual. This 

should reduce the size of our 

manuals considerably. 

One of the frustrations frequently expressed by unit trainers is that the soldier coming 

out of the training base isn't 

"MOS qualified." At a minimum, unit trainers need to look 

in the Trainer's Guide to find 

out the tasks in which the soldier should have been trained at 

the training base and the training tasks for which the unit is 

responsible. We know that the 
soldier coming out of the training base isn't "MOS qualified" 

because he has yet to be trained 

in all the tasks of his MOS. He, 

however, should be proficient in 

those tasks indicated as a training base responsibility in the 

Trainer's Guide. Resource constraints preclude training the 

new soldier to a higher level of 

proficiency at the training base. 

As a general rule, you can expect the new soldier arriving in 

your unit from the training base 

to be about 4&50 percent MOS 

qualified. The remaining 5&60 

percent is the training job for 

unit commanders. 

Another frustration of unit 

trainers is that there is no 

ready way to correlate the collective (unit) tasks in the unit's 

ARTEP with the individual 

tasks in the Soldier's Manual. 

If this could be done, it would 

make it simpler for units to concurrently train on specific individual and collective tasks, 

thereby making better use of 

precious training time. These 

needed "crosswalks" between 

collective and individual tasks 

are being developed, and we are 

furnishing them to the units 

concerned as they become available. Some of these crosswalks 

have been provided to us by 

field units, and we appreciate 

them sharing the fruits of their 

efforts. By the way, National 

Guard and Reserve units seem 

to be the leaders in this effort. 

We, as a community, undoubtedly spend more time and 

effort developing and administering SQTs than on anything 

else in our training system. The 

SQT is one of the more controversial features of the system. 

Our common challenge, within 

the constraints of the SQT system, is to make the SQT supportive of the training needs of the 

unit as well as the individual. 

Ideally, I would like to see our 

soldiers-at all skill levels, and 

officers, too-demonstrate battlefield survivability skills, 

with each commander being 

able to select most of the tasks 

to be evaluated based on the situation in his or her particular 

unit. 

Making Things Better 

I'll be the first to admit that 

all of our training development 

products could be improved and 

that some of them, in fact, contain errors. We at the Engineer 

School don't want to be in the 

business of suggesting that you 

do something "dumb" in training your unit or your soldiers. If 

you find something in our products that doesn't make sense, 

then don't do it that way. (Unless, of course, your boss says 

otherwise. In that case, you 

have a problem with your boss, 

not with the product.) Please 

don't keep potential training 

improvements a secret. We're 

never going to get our training 

development products healthy if 

you don't let us know what is 

wrong with them and share 

your suggestions for improvements. We may not be able to 

make all the changes you suggest, but I guarantee that they 

will be given honest consideration. Address your comments to: 

Commandant 

U.S. Army Engineer School 

ATTN: ATZA-TD 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060 

or call us on the Engineer 

Hotline. 

This is my final article as 

com.mandant. My year-and-ahalf at the School has been 

much too short, but we have a 

number of new initiatives 

started in the combat engineering arena which you out there 

in the Army need to push. Doctrine and training is the business of all of us. Mobility and 

countermobility is our game. 

Topographic information is an 

important piece. And all this 

needs to be more up front where 

the shooting is. Fast, 

survivable, deployable-that's 

what we need. Your Army deserves no less. Let's "Clear the 

Way!" 

Noah 

Engineer 

ENGINEER HOTLINE 


Engineer related problems, questions and comments can be addressed telephonically to the U.S. Army Engineer School's "Engineer Hotline." The 

Hotline's auto-answer recorder operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 

Callers should state their name, address and telephone number, followed by a 

concise question or comment. 

The School's Coordination and Review Branch, part of the Training Literature Division, Directorate of Training Developments, has experts analyze your 

problem and reply directly to you within three to 15 days. The Hotline is not 

intended as a receiving agency for formal requests. 

Call commercial (703) 664-3646; WATS 800- 336-3095, extension 3646; or AV 

354-3646. 
I I News & Notes 

NEW BRIDGE INERT ROUND 

REINFORCEMENT DEVELOPEDFORCEV 

SYSTEM MSgt. Boyd Crawford, U.S. 

The U.S. Army Mobility Army Readiness Group, Fort 

Equipment Research and Devel- McCoy, Wis., and the post's 

opment Command (MERAD- Training Aids Services Office 

COM) has awarded $370,050 to (TASO), have developed an inFiber Materials, Inc., to develop ert practice round for the coma bridge reinforcement system bat engineer vehicle (CEV) 

using organic composite materi- main gun. 

als. The contractor will design a The dummy round, made of 

reinforcement system, test the elastomer polyurethane plastic, 

system according to MERAD- costs about $70 and weighs 41 

COM standards, develop a pilot pounds. A live round weighs 

production line and produce 20 65.5 pounds; the weight of the 

composite tensile elements from inert round can be increased if 

the pilot production line. necessary. 

The new reinforcement sys- The Wisconsin Army Nationtem is similar to the one cur- al Guard's 32d Engineer Comrently developed as part of the pany, 32d Infantry Brigade 

Bridging For The 80s program. (Mech), Onalaska, Wis., reports 

Use of graphite epoxy compos- the round shows almost no wear 

ites, however, will reduce the MSgt. Boyd Crauford displays after more than two months 

system's weight from 95 pounds the inert training round he de- testing. 

for the developed steel version veloped with the help of the Fort Contact MSgt. Crawford at 

to 26 pounds for the new design. McCoy, Wis.,Training Aids (608) 388-3991 for more 

Delivery of the reinforcement Services Office. information. 

sets is scheduled for September 

1982. 

ENGINEER WET GAP TRAINING 


RDF TO RECEIVE Selecting a CONUS wet gap training site for 


WATER PURIFIERS engineer units is in its final stages. The leading 

contender seems to be the Arkansas River wet 

A $4.5 million contract for gap training site at Fort Chaffee, Ark. Although 

water purification units for the final selection and site development are several 

Rapid Deployment Joint Task months away, the area is now available for use by 

Force has been awarded to active, Reserve, or National Guard units year 

Cosmodyne, Inc. by the U.S. round. 

Army Mobility Equipment Re- The area has one mile of frontage and 2,500 

search and Development Com- acres of maneuver area, with access routes to the 

mand. Cosmodyne, a division of river but no prepared launch sites yet. Water gap 

Avel Corp., is producing 14 re- width ranges from 750 to 1,000 feet, with an avverse osmosis water purification erage depth of 25 feet. The water runs three-tounits each capable of purifying eight feet per second; the near shore is sandy and 

150,000 gallons of water per the far shore is riprap. 

day. The commercial units will Plans call for construction of three tactical 

be used until larger militarized crossing sites during summer 1982. Road net and 

systems are developed. bivouac areas can be improvedlconstructed as reThe first finished units were quired by training units. Barracks are available 

expected to be delivered in year-round. Contact Lt. Col. Richard L. Brown, 

February. AV 962-2840, for further information. 

1 1 
i 

News & Notes 


ENGINEER DINNER 

DATE IS SET 

Active and retired engineer officers worldwide treated to a performance of "The Student Prince." 

are cordially invited to celebrate the Corps' 207th Following the dinners, at 10 p.m., is the Castle 

anniversary at the 115th Annual Engineer Din- Ball at Mackenzie Hall. 

ner at Fort Belvoir, Va., May 14. Tickets for the engineer dinner are $14 each Highlight of the evening will be the annual and available in advance by sending a check or 

presentation of the Itschner Awards to the year's money order, payable to the 115th ~~~~~l ~ ~ ~ most outstanding engineer company of the active n,,, Dinner, to Post Office Box 552, U.S. Army Reserve and Guard, and the Engineer Center, Fort Belvoir, Va., 22060. Sturgis Award to the Corps' preeminent enlisted 

soldier. Tickets for the counterpart dinner cost $10.50 

each; $5 each for the Castle Ball. For tickets, ~h~ dinner begins at 6:30 at ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ ~ i 

Hall (post officers' club). Spouses of attending of- send check Or money order payable to 

ficers are invited to the 6th Annual Counterpart 'Ounterpart Dinner and'or to Mrs. JohnT.Miller, 9813 Doulton Court, Fairfax, Va., Dinner scheduled concurrentlv at the ~~~t ~~1- 

voir Main Club (NCO club). 22030. 

Theme for the counterpart dinner is "Das Reservations and ticket purchases for all 

Heidleberger Schloss" and attendees will be events must be made by May 7. I 

CORPS TO CONSTRUCT 


SINAI INSTALLATIONS 


The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been designated construction agent for the Multinational Force and Observers 

(MFO), an international peacekeeping force established as a 

result of the 1979 Camp David 

Accords between Israel and 

Egypt. Construction for the MFO includes two base camps, one in GEOTECHNICAL LAB DEDICATED 

northern Sinai at Eitam Air TO CASAGRANDE BY CHIEF 

Base and one in the south near 

Sharm el Sheikh. The base The new $4.6million geotech- The laboratory also includes a 

camps will support a force of nical laboratory at the U.S. center of mobility expertise. 

about 2,500. Army Engineer Waterways ExUnder the terms of the Camp periment Station (WES), Vicks- Casagrande was recognized as 

David Accords, the Sinai is to be burg, Miss., has been dedicated the world's foremost specialist 

demilitarized by April 25, 1982; the Arthur Casagrande Build- in soil mechanics and foundathe peacekeeping force must be ing by Chief of Engineers Lt. tion engineering and their apin place prior to that date. Gen. Joseph K. Bratton. plication to civil engineering 

Col. William E. Lee Jr., the The 82,000 sq. ft. building works. He served as a teacher 

contracting officer, has assumed houses research facilities for and consultant to the Corps of 

command of the Sinai Construc- soil mechanics, geology and Engineers for 46 years and was 

tion Office in Tel Aviv, Israel, rock mechanics, earthquake en- a Gordon McKay Professor in 

with a resident engineer office gineering, pavement systems, soil mechanics and foundation 

established at each of the two and both the soils testing facili- engineering at Harvard Univerconstruction sites. ty and the soils research center. sity until his recent death. 

-
AIRBORNE 

ENGINEERS 

WALK 

ON 

WATER 

(photo by Richard E. Sharp) 

With help from a "no visible er, the men rappelled into an three cables were stretched 

means of support" bridge, sol- area near Fort Bragg's Mc- across a 150 foot wet gap. To 

diers of the 3rd platoon, Compa- Arthur Lake, conducted a mock them was attached a continuous 

ny B, 307th Engineer Battalion, river assault and, after securing ribbon of aluminum mats. The 

82d Airborne Division, walk on both shores, began this unique finished product provided an inwater. bridge construction task. visible bridge for %-ton trucks, 

Responding to a challenge Twelve-foot 'deadmen' on both and supported the weight of a 

from their battalion command- shores served as anchors and Gamma Goat. 

BERRY IS NAMED 1 MISSOURI YOUNG ENGINEER 1


Reserve Capt. Robert T. Berry has been named 

1981 Missouri Young Engineer of the Year by the 

Missouri Society of Professional Engineers. 

Berry, a civil engineer on the Kansas City Survey Team, an element of the 416th Engineer 

Command (USAR), previously served with the 

471st Engineer Company (USAR), Rolla, Mo. 

During four years of active duty, he served in 

Germany with the 317th Engineer Battalion 

(Combat) and with the 1st Engineer Battalion 

(Combat), Fort Riley, Kan. 

He currently works for a Kansas City engineering company as project manager for wastewater 

facilities, design and construction and other public works. 

Berry received a degree in civil engineering 

from the University of Missouri and a master's in 

engineering management from Boston University. Additionally, he has a M.S. in environmental 

health engineering and a doctorate of engineering degree from the University of Kansas. 

I NEW RIFLE RANGE 

FOR RAMSTEIN 

A $400,000 rifle and pistol 

range was constructed by the 

1st platoon, Company C, 79th 

Engineer Battalion (Combat) 

(Heavy), for the 86th Tactical 

Fighter Wing (USAF), at Ramstein, West Germany. 

The facility includes a 

25-meter pistol range, 50 and 

100-meter rifle ranges and a 

50-meter track mounted, moveable targets system range. The 

ranges will be used by the U.S. 

Air Force and Army, the German polizei special weapons 

teams and by enthusiastic 

sportsmen in the Kaiserslautern area. 
I 

News & Notes 


CAPSTONE 


CONFERENCE 


Key participants in a major 

CAPSTONE training conference sponsored recently by the 

264th Engineer Group, Wisconsin Army National Guard, included, from left, in photo below, Col. Richard Polo, commander, 7th Engineer Brigade, 

USAREUR; Maj. Gen. Raymond 

/ TRAPPED! 


Matera, Wisconsin Guard adjutant general; and Col. Jerome 

Berard, commander, 264th 

Engineers. 

The two-day conference 

brought together in Eau Claire, 

Wis., representatives from 23 

active and reserve component 

(RC) units. 

Also present were syndics 

from FORSCOM, the Engineer 

School, two readiness and mobilization regions, two reserve 

maneuver training commands, 

and readiness group personnel 

from four states. 

Unit commanders were 

briefed on relationships and 

training priorities while RC 

staff personnel were able to 

coordinate directly with their 

active Army counterparts. 

The CAPSTONE program 

provides planning and training 

association between active and 

RC units to expedite wartime 

deployment. 

USAR UNITS MAY WEAR 

ACTIVE PATCHES 

Army Reserve units having 

training affiliations with an active Army unit are now authorized to wear the shoulder sleeve 

insignia of the active comuonent-unit. 

DA Uniform Board officials 

have noted that local approval 

to wear the insignia is subject 

to mutual agreement between 

the reserve unit's Major U.S. 

Army Reserve Command and 

the active Army unit commander. 

The new policy is included in 

an interim change to AR 67& 1, 

which was published last fall. 

Previously, only Army National Guard units were authorized to wear the patches of their 

affiliated units. 

I I 1 

ENGINEERS CONSTRUCT 

AIR STRIP AT A.P. HILL 

The 618th Engineer Company 

(LE)(ABN) recently parachuted 

into Fort A.P. Hill, Va., along 

with 29 pallet-loads of equipment to begin a 12-day, aroundthe-clock marathon to construct 

a 5,000-ft. assault air strip. 

Commanded by Capt. George D. 

Mitroka, the unit is attached to 

the 307th Engineer Battalion 

(CBT)(ABN), 82d Airborne 

Division. 

Assisted by the 11th Engineer 

Battalion (CBT)(HVY), Fort 

Belvoir, Va., the strip was completed three days ahead of 

schedule. The strip allows units 

to be airlifted to Fort A.P. Hill, 

avoiding time consuming truck 

convoying. I Air Force pilots will use the 

An antitank ditch constructed by the 15th Engineers, 9th Infan- strip to practice landings and 

try Division, snags a M-60 tank from the division's 2172d Armor takeoffs from unimproved 

during a Fort Lewis, Wash., FTX. facilities. 
For Degrees.9 


by Capt. Robert L. McClure 

With the Reagan administration's increase in defense spending, an interesting poss~hility 

for Engineer officers has appeared. It may now become feasible to pay Army engineers and 

scientists for their talents, 

much the same as is now done 

with military doctors. The reason cited for doing so is to combat the low retention rate for 

such officers in all services. 

While the Air Force and Navy 

may have problems unique to 

them that only money will 

solve, paying Army Engineers 

extra is a mistake. 

To deny that the services 

don't need scientists and "hard 

core" engineers is foolish. The 

Air Force definitely needs aeronautical engineers and scientists for its highly technical 

equipment. With the civil works 

mission in the Army Corps of 

Engineers, those of us with castles on our collars also fully recognize the need for career officers with a formal engineer 

education. Even though it is 

possible to have a successful career in the Engineers without a 

PE or engineering degree, the 

perception still exists that to 

get a battalion command or 

choice district assignment one 

needs to be a certified engineer. 

The perception, especially from 

the company grade officer, is 

that only certified engineers 

(engineering or PE) make it to 

"the top" in the Corps. At the 

least, they believe certain assignments will forever elude 

those officers not "hard core" 

engineers. 

But the Corps of Engineers 

isn't all technical and engineer 

intensive. Anyone who has 
served in a combat engineer 

battalion knows that constructing a tank ditch does not 

require a civil engineering degree from Georgia Tech. This is 

one reason the Army accepts 

into the Corps so many officers 

without engineering degrees. 

Recent Engineer Officer Basic 

Course classes have averaged 

from 40 to 60 percent "hard 

core" engineers in terms of education. The remainder have included officers with a variety of 

degrees ranging from music to 

biology to history. 

While the need for an engineering degree at the junior officer level is not critical, its importance increases above the 

rank of major. This is when the 

percentage of assignments 

requiring an engineer background rises due to the district 

and research missions given the 

Corps. Today a rejuvenated civilian engineer job market hires 

away "hard core" Engineer officers at a high rate, while the 

need for such talent in the 

Army has not decreased. To cover the shortfall, some officers 

from other branches (Infantry, 

Armor, etc.) now have a Skill 

Code (SC) 21 additional specialty. Usually their educational 

background has earned them 

assignments to a variety of civil 

works districts. However, this 

practice of assigning SC 21 as 

an additional specialty still 

fails to address the retention 

problem for engineer skilled 

officers. 

The foregoing begs the obvious question: Why not pay officers with engineering and science degrees a bonus to help 

stem the tide of resignations? 

Combat engineer purists abhor 

the idea. For the past several 

years, we Engineers have tried 

hard to be a combat am and 

have done a fairly good job. In 

war, engineers will be critical 

on the battlefield; the infantry 

and armor will not be able to 

move and to survive without us, 

it's that simple. Army, not Engineer, doctrine has us a member of the combined arms 

team-where we belong. In 

war, we have a battlefield, not a 

technical mission. If for no 

other reason, the teamwork demanded of combined arms operations says no branch is more 

equal than the other. In such a 

situation, why should the engineer be paid more than the 

artilleryman? 

Leaving that argument aside 

for a minute, let's examine this 

"pro-pay." Who should we pay? 

Obviously not all Engineers because not everyone has an engineering degree. Perhaps a performance standard is desired. 

To receive the bonus, an Engineer officer would need a technical degree (of a type to be 

specified) and a professional engineer license. This sounds logical, but what impact would it 

have on promotionlselection 

boards? It would probably exacerbate the already perceived 

split between those with and 

without engineer credentials. 

How about creating a new 

specialty code? This would be an 

additional specialty meant primarily for those interested in 

district engineer assignments, 

facilities engineering, or specialized research connected with 

their degree. To get the bonus, 

an officer must have the required educationlcredentials 

and work in a specified job. A 

new specialty code would also 

address another problem vexing 

personnel managers. Currently 

with SC 21 used as both an initial and additional specialty, it 

is (theoretically) possible for an 

Infantry officer with an SC 21 

additional specialty to command an engineer battalion. A 

new specialty code wouid solve 

this problem by reserving SC 21 

for exclusive use as an initial 

entry specialty. 

With the real problem being 

engineer retention, could we not 

make other incentives available 

rather than money? Instead of 

spending money buying "hard 

core" engineers, let's transfer 

that money into increased educational opportunities for the 

junior officer. More education 

earlier may increase the number of Engineer officers that 

stay beyond their initial term of 

service, thereby slowing the resignation rate. Let's face it, the 

Army needs "hard core" engineers but is not retaining them 

at an acceptable rate. Simply 

throwing money at the problem 

will not solve it. I contend that 

paying bonuses to Engineer officers is inappropriate and would 

be a mistake. 

Capt. Robert L. McClure is a 

qraduate of the U.S. Military 

Academ.~and the Engineer Wf'icer Aduanced Course. He completed airborne and ranger 

training and served in Germany 

with the 12th Engineer Battalion as a platoon leader and campuny commander. Capt. 

McClure is currently assigrted to 

Headquarters, U.S. Army Engineer Center, Fort Beluoir, Va. 
Nonjudicial punishment 


Company Commander 

As Judge and Jury 

When it comes to handling minor military offenses and misconduct, one of the most valuable 

aids to the unit commander is nonjudicial punishment. The president of the United States grants 

commanders the authority to punish in accordance with Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as stated in the Manual for CourtsMartial), however, proper use of the Article 15 is 

the key to a successful command. 

The Article 15 is not always the answer, and 

commanders must know when and whether to use 

it. The following discussion considers proper actions commanders should take, beginning with 

the discovery of an offense through the imposition of punishment, including the effects of punishment on the individual soldier and his unit. 

"Why did this offense take place?" "What could 

have been done to prevent it?' These questions 

continually plague commanders. However, leadership and true concern for the individual soldier 

will normally reduce the number of offenses within a unit. Absent without leave (AWOL), for example, is a specific offense often preventable. Sincere, positive and concerned leadership is the 

most important element in the prevention of 

AWOL.' Good leadership in the military is important, especially at lower command echelons 

where it directly interacts with individual soldiers. A good leader, one who knows and cares for 

his subordinates and keeps them informed, can 

prevent many offenses frequently punished under 

Article 15.But when misconduct does occur, combv" Mai." Ravmond " F. Powell 

manders must carefully consider the evidence before deciding what course of action to take. Evidence must be complete and valid. 

Will the evidence stand up in a court of law? 

Inexperienced leaders often request punishment 

based on evidence that is biased, unfounded or 

where the rights of the individual were violated. 

The severity of the offense and the record of the 

individual must be judiciously considered. 

Punishment must be understood by the commander. Punishment only maintains minimum 

standards by motivating behavior up to a minimally acceptable level. It should be used when an 

individual fails to respond to positive incentives 

or for a lack of motivation, not a lack of ability or 

training. Punishment is not always the solution. 

If an individual has failed, but tried hard, and 

was punished, he will not try again. Lack of ability should be corrected by means such as extra 

training, most probably on the individual's own 

time.2 

Alternatives to punishment have a greater corrective impact than punishment. Extra training, 

reprimands, suspension of privileges and formal 

counseling all have their effect. The main point is 

that the individual is aware of his misconduct. 

He knows his superior is aware, and he knows 

that recurring actions will be dealt with more severely. A basic leadership point is that a minor 

offense does not have to go to the commander, but 

may be corrected with alternatives at the lowest 

level appropriate. 

The commander should decide how to handle 

alleged misconduct after reviewing evidence and 

the recommendations of his subordinates. 

Throughout this detailed process, the individual 

still has the right to a speedy trial and delays 

cannot be tolerated. The commander should re-
view alternatives to punishment, and especially, 

learn what subordinate leaders have previously 

done to prevent the alleged misconduct. 

The commander deciding to use nonjudicial 

punishment (Article 151, must do it properly, as 

in a court of law. Legal advice may be necessary. 

The charges must be prepared explicitly in accordance with the Manual For Courts-Martial. 

Charges must be able to stand in a court-martial; 

if they cannot, punishment under the provisions 

of Article 15 should not he imposed. There are 

specific rules and guidance to follow for the imposition of Article 15 punishment. Further guidance is to use common sense leadership and human relations. 

At Article 15 proceedings, the commander is 

both judge and jury, and his office is the court 

room. Proceedings must be held in a professional 

manner with military bearing and dignity. Distractions such as telephone calls and clutter on a 

desk should be eliminated. The individual's 

chain-of-command should be present not only to 

tell their side but to hear exactly what the commander tells the individual. Every proceeding 

should be considered a counseling session, not 

just as a time set aside for the imposition of punishment. If witnesses or other evidence are required, the proceedings should be recessed and 

properly completed later to ensure the full rights 

of the individual are respected. 

The judgelcommander must communicate in a 

fair and equitable manner without playing favorites. He must listen to the facts and to the individual and must remove any prejudices or preconceived notions he may have. He must prove the 

soldier guilty (if, in fact, he is guilty), not just try 

to see if he is innocent. The most important part 

of the proceeding is that the commander must 

communicate with the individual. Barriers to 

communication will definitely hinder any results. 

As with any good form of leadership activity, 

there is no room for profanity, which is only an 

excuse for poor language and communication 

abilities. The entire process is centered around 

communication and respect. 

"Fourteen days extra duty, reduction to grade 

E- 3.. ." The actual imposition of punishment, no 

matter to what degree, should be completely 

thought out. The purpose of punishment under 

Article 15 should be corrective in nat~re.~ The 

goals of punishment should be to protect society 

against a repetition of the offense, to reform the 

individual so he will be less likely to repeat the 

offense, and to deter others from considering and 

undertaking such an ~ffense.~ The commander 

must make the punishment fit the crime and the 

individual, plus set the example for others. He 

must also evaluate the probable effects of the 

punishment upon the individual and the unit. 

Care should be taken not to compound existing 

problems. Properly used, suspension of punishment provides a behavioral incentive to the offender and an excellent opportunity to evaluate 

the individual during the period of su~pension.~ 

With well considered and explained punishment, 

the individual knows why he is being punished. 

He also perceives that the punishment and his 

hearing were fair and will think twice about 

committing the offense again. 

There are many benefits of properly conducted 

proceedings, including that the individual gains 

respect for the commander and supervisors despite punishment. This infectious respect along 

with the group's knowledge of the commander's 

standard will result in a unit with fewer problems. Individual soldiers should be allowed to 

progress upon completion of punishment, the purpose being to help them improve as soldiers and 

to motivate them to do their jobs without carrying the burden of a previous punishment. Many 

times a good soldier is left improperly punished, 

without a chance to improve and a potential is 

therefore lost by the military. 

The commander's job is vast with administering nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 

only one of his responsibilities. However, the 

number of offenses he must review will be reduced when they are properly and expeditiously 

handled. With fewer offenses, all leaders within 

the chain-of-command will have more positive 

time for the individual soldier, creating a more 

harmonious and stronger Army. 

Maj. Raymond F. Powell is a graduate of the 

Engineer Officer Advanced Course and Command 

and General Staff College. He graduated from 

Rutgers University with a B.S. in engineering and 

the University of Missouri at Rolla with an M.S. 

in engineering management. He served two tours 

in Vietnam, including duty as an aviation platoon 

leader and as the S-3 of Engineer Region III. 

Other duty includes company commands with the 

75th and 5th Engineer Battalions, assistant PMS 

at Princeton University and XO of the 43rd Engineer Battalion. He is currently on the staff of the 

Command and General Staff College. 

FOOTNOTES: 

1.U.S. Army FM 2%100, Military Leadership, page 

163. 

2. U.S. Army FM 22-100, M~lztary Leadership, page 

a5. 

3. Manual for Courts-Martial, 1969, U.S. Government 

Printing Office, page 26 3. 

4. U.S. Army FM 27- 1,Legal Guidefor the Com,nander, page 1. 

5. Manual for Courts-Martial, 1969, U.S. Government 

Printing Office, page 263. 
Last month, the nation marked 

the 200th annivrrsay of the battle 

where our independence was 

won-Yorktown. The freedom and 

incl~pendenredeclared in Philadelphia was won after six and one-half 

years of war on a peninsrlla in 

Virginia. Those great words-lifr, 

liberty and the pursuit of happiness-were givrn real meaning. 

The last line of that <leclarntion 

pledged the livrs. fortunes and sacred honor of th~signers. Washington, our first rommander-in-chief, 

did not sign the Derlaratior~of lndependencp brraose hr hat1 resigned 

from the Continental Congr~sstn tak~ 

command of he Army. If that 1lor.11-

ment carlld haw been submitted to 

him, along with thc surr~nrlrragreement, the same comnwnt hc pla<:e~l 

on thp surretldrr agreement with his 

signature he might have penned on 

thr bottom of the declaration: "Done 

in the trenches before Yorktown, O<.-

tnber 19, 1781". 

Many times the Army has gone 

into the trenches to achieve or prrserve freedom. The final victory in 

the Revolution was the result of a 

great operation by the engineers of 

Washington and Rochambeau, who 

employed in a classir way the techniques of siege engineering. 

The enginrers are a key part of our 

Revolutinnay histo? and go back to 

the founding of the Arm". This Revolution led to the establishment of a 

school of engineering which in 1802 

became the United States Military 

Academ?. The rationale for educating officers focused on training enginpers. The nerd to train engineers 

led to the establishment of the 

Virginia Military Institute and 

Norwich Universitv. 

After the Revolution, two great 

events further emphasized the importance of Army engineers: the 

Louisiana Purchase in 1R03 and the 

Mexican War. With them came vast 

land areas to be explored and surveyed, roads to be opened and canals 

to be built. 

The War Between the States, or 

the Civil War, has been called the 

first of the modern wars. Also, it was 

a war of firsts: 

The first to use the railroads. This 

impacted on logistics and troop 

movements; 

The first to employ the telegraph 

which collapsed time and distance in 

communications; 

The first to employ ironclads: 

The first to use aerial rrronaaissancr: and. 

The first to be rerorded photographicall\- thanks to Mathew Rrad". 

It was thr first war of modern engineering. Legendary feats were 

undertaken b! the engineers in both 

armies. The war saw canstnlcted one 

of the first, and also the longest, 

pontoon bridges ever built. It cn)ssed 

the James River and its span was 

2,200 feet. History records that on 

one occasion Union engineers built a 

2.000 foot pontoon hridge in seven 

hours. This type of bridging over maEurope. Where NATO forces are 

counter-poised to prevent aggression 

by the Warsaw Part: 

Africa. That continent that is the 

scene of great instability and political crosscurrents. hut is so vital to 

the West because of its resources: 

The Middle East. What at times appears to he a tinderbox of conflict: 

Southwest Asia. Where we find Soviet combat forces in Afganistan; 

Northeast Asia. Where U.S. forces, 

along with our Korean alli~s,safeguartl the Korean peninsula: 

Southeast Asia. Which is still 

gripped hy oppression: and, 

Latin America. Where we see instability in parts of our own hemisphere. 

Your 

Unparalleled Heritage 

Secretary of the Army John 0.Marsh Jr. 

speaks to Engineer Oficer Basic Course 7-81. 

jor rivers was commonplace by both 

armies during that struggle. 

Today, tile role of the corps of 

Engineers contin~resto be unique. It 

has a dual mission-one military and 

one civil. The civil rniasinn go~s 

back to the earliest day of the republic when the rount~Innked to 

the Corps for engineering experience 

as America moved west. This took 

the Corps into rivers and harbors, 

flood control, dredging, dams, canals 

and other significant construction 

projects. You have a great heritage of 

building America, and your manuments are to be found in every state. 

This experience in the civilian sector 

makes available a trained force, constantly ready to meet mission requirements of a wartime 

environment. 

We live in a critical time where 

readiness not only of the Corps but 

the Army and of our sister services is 

essential. I will not cite the many 

problem areas that are so prevalent 

around the globe, but let me say 

there are seven major geographical 

areas of concern. These areas are: 

To an audirncr such as this, it is 

not necessary fnr me to dwell on the 

challenges we facr, or the need for a 

strong drfcnse. You are aware of 

this. Wherever U.S. forces may be 

deployed-as the president has 

noted-it is our purpose to prevent 

conflict and deter war through a 

strong strategic and conventional rapahilit?. Fundamental to this 

strength is the Corps of Engine~rs. 

That strength is directly related to 

you and the kind of person you are 

and thf officer you become. 

As you pursue your career, let me 

make several suggestions which I 

hope will stand "orr in good stead. 

Some of these are drawn from an examination of the life of George 

Marshall-chief of staff of the Army, 

secretary of defense, secretary of 

state and Nobel Prize winner. 

Throughout his military career, 

from the time he entered the Virginia 

Military Institote as a cadet, until his 

retirement from active service in 

1945, his life was one of training, 

self-learning and self-discipline. 

The American poet, Longfellow, 

wrote: 

"Lives of great men all re-
mind us 

We can make our lives 

suhlimr. 

And ~leparting, leave behind us 

Footprints on the sands of 

time." 

Marshall had th~ ahility to select 

priorities and pursue them with 

perseverence. Early in his career he 

developerl a sense of cost discipline 

and the carrful management of resources. He developed the ability to 

take a complex matter and rpduce it 

to a simplr. understandable, workahlr plan. The secret to this is thoro~rghrtess which produced understanding and mastery of a subject. 

Marshall was also r~ceptive to new 

idras. He was innovative and creative and was willing to take risks with 

new ideas. Time for Marshall u.as a 

resource. Recaus~ you are young, 

you may not realiz~ that time is a resource. Lonpfrllow, wrote: 

"The heights by great men 

reached and kept, 

Werr not attained by sodden flight, 

But they while their companions slept, 

Were toiling upward in the 

night." 

Because time is a resource, there 

are four areas in which I woulrl like 

to see you devote more of your time. 

They are in the nature of r. Ifimprovemrnl and study. 

First, I urge you to acquire a 

greatt-r knowledge of g~ographg so 

that you have a better understanding 

of place ant1 people, terrain and resnurves. This takes you into demographirs and economic geography. A 

greater understanding by Americans 

of the world's people and where resources are located is important. 

A second area in which I wuuld 

like for you to invest time is developing a la~lguage capability. In a 

world that is not only comp~titive, 

but also one in which there is a great 

need for cooperation, Americans and 

American interests are handicapped 

hy the lack of this ahility. 

I would like for you to place greater emphasis on writing and the ability to present your thoughts cogently, 

with clarity and understanding in 

written form. This is a difficult task. 

However I was once told that hard 

writing makes easy reading. 

Lastly, you should develop a program for maintaining physical fitness. h will require self-discipline. 

Essential to the Corps are the 

young officers who provide leadership. In your ranks have n~arched 

such American military leaders as 

Robert E. Lee and George Meade, 

who commanded opposing armies at 

G~tt~sburg. 

Youhave an unparalleled heritage. It was an Arm" enginerr who, at 

the request of the Russian czar in 

1842, built the first railroad in 

Russia from Saint Petersb~~rp to 

Mosr,,w. 

It was men in the llth Engineer 

Regiment-todav tlir 11th Engineer 

Battalion stationrd at Fort Belvoir-that took thr first casualties in 

World War I as the? 'sought to make 

a passageway across no-man's land 

for an Allied asfiault. 

It was U.S. cornbat engineers that 

landed at Normandy and lltah Beach 

on D-Day an hour before the first 

wave of American infantry. 

lo World War II, the Corps oT Engineers, under the most adverse terrain and climate conditions, built the 

.4lcan Highway which *,as 1,500 

miles in length. It took only eight 

months to complete. 

Army engineers, under Col. 

George Goethals, constructed one of 

the great engineering marvels of the 

world when they built the Panama 

Canal-a task which thr builders of 

the Suez Canal failed to achieve in 

seven years time, and cost the lives 

of 22,000 workers. 

It might surprise you to know after 

the War Between the States, it was 

Army engineers who redesigned and 

completed the construction of the 

Washington Monument. 

If you were to ascend the steps of 

the Washington Monument, you 

woulrl find placed in the sides of the 

monument, stones taken from various 

states, reminders that ours is a union 

of many. At about the 500 foot level, 

you can see a whitt-, polished stone 

taken from the ruins of ancient 

Carthage. 

Other than an identification of the 

donor who gave the stone during the 

last century, there is nothing to indicate why, in a monument that is 

uniquely American, there is displayed a stone taken from a city the 

20th century does not know. Carthage once flourished on thr southern 

shores of the Mediterranean Sea: 

prosprous irr trade and in commerce. and material wealth, it was 

the pride and envy of the ancient 

world. But. Carthage was destrowd 

by Rome. 

Coold it be this stone from that 

great but forgotten city was placed 

there to remind us that material 

wealth and progress are never sr~bstitntions for national will? 

However, this is not the end of the 

story. Remember something ~lse 

when you see that monument. 1 mentioned to you earlirr that thr Arm" 

engineers redesigncrl and finished 

the construction of thr Washington 

Monument. At the peak of the monllmrnt, the capstone. is a small pyramid made of 100 ounces of aluminr~m-the largest piece of aluminum 

that had heen cast up to that time. It 

was plat:~d there on thc 6th da) of 

December 1884. Inscribed on its 

base are these words: 

"Chief Engineer and 

Architect. 

Colonel Thomas Linc:r,ln 

Casey, 

Corps of Engineers." 

Today is a time of farewrlls. ShortI!, you will go your separate ravs. 

Some to thr Regulars. some to the 

Reserves, wrnp to the Guard. Whr.rever duty takes yon. I am prrlod ~OII 

are officers in the Arm". I thank !ou 

for your service to our country. 

Emerson wrote: 

"So nigh is granduer to our 

dust, 

So close is God tn man: 

When dutv whisprrs low 

thou must. 

The youth replies, I c:an." 

And, I know that is the reply of this 

graduating class today. 

Secretary of the Arm! John 0. 

Marsh Jr., an infantry officer tcith 

U.S. occupation forces in Germany 

following World War 11, is a laur 

school graduate of Washington ant1 

LCPUnioersity. He srr~rd in the 11,s. 

House of Represenra~il.~rfom 1963-

71 and was Vice Presidenr Ford's nssistant for narior~al security in 1974. 

As 	a VirginiaArmy National G~cardsman, he completed airborne and 

jumpmaster schools, and retired from 

the Guard as a Lt. Col. in 1976. His 

son, Scot, was a graduate of EOBC 

7-81, 
BRIGHT STAR 


The Engineer Perspective. 


'by Lt. Col. Raymond E. Knell 

Remember those recruiting posters that 

promised to show you the world? Remember 

hoping that your unit would be selected for a special off-post exercise? For the members of Task 

Force Tiger, those dreams came true during Joint 

Training Exercise (JTX) Bright Star 82, the second in a series of deployment and training exercises in Southwest Asia sponsored by the Rapid 

Deployment Joint Task Force (RDJTF). 

JTX Bright Star 82 was conducted in 

November-December, 1981, in Egypt, Sudan, 

Oman and Somalia. While the operations in 

Egypt were widely publicized, the exercise in 

Somalia was particularly important to engineers. 

The RDJTF mission to the 20th Engineer Brigade 

(Combat) (Airborne) of XVIII Airborne Corps at 

Fort Bragg, N.C., was to form a task force of engineers, accompanied by medical teams, military 

police and terminal port personnel, to deploy by 

air and sea to Berbera, a small village on the 

north coast of Somalia. Once deployed, the unit 

would conduct a logistical assessment of the area. 

The 20th Engineer Brigade, in turn, tasked its 

27th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Airborne) to 

organize, train, equip and to deploy a selfcontained joint task force (JTF) by air and sea to 

the vicinity of Berbera; to exist in an unknown, 

harsh desert environment; to be good guests in a 

foreign land; to gather medical and terrain information; to train in a realistic mission environment; to complete quick, visible, high-impact action projects as a token and remembrance of our 

presence; to redeploy, debrief, and disband; and 

to capture and disseminate terrain information 

and lessons learned. 

The mission was historic. This would be the 

first significant U.S. military presence in 

Somalia since the Russians were expelled in 

1977. Somalia is the horn of Africa; to the north 

lies the Gulf of Aden and the narrow straits to 

the Red Sea, to the east the Indian Ocean. 

Berbera is a small village with a deepwater port. 

In the mid-1970's the Soviet Union initiated a 

massive construction program near Berbera 

building a 400 bed hospital, a water distribution 

system, a desalination plant, a causeway and 

pier, a POL tank farm and jetty, a missile support and maintenance area and an airfield capable of handling any aircraft in the world. 

When the Somalis demanded that the Russians 

leave the country, the Soviets left in extreme 

haste, leaving most of the construction program 

unfinished. 

The JTF, dubbed Task Force Tiger for the 

27th'~ nickname, the Tiger Battalion, was a composite, short-term, self-sustaining organization. 

Some 35 different company-sized units were represented. Elements of the 20th Engineer Brigade's 27th and 548th Engineer Battalions provided the general engineer capability of the force. 

Cartographers, terrain analysts, bridge specialists and surveyors represented the remaining 

units of the brigade. The Air Force's Air-Land 

Control Element, Red Horse and Prime Beef 

teams as well as elements of the Army's 7th 

Transportation Group, 16th Military Police Brigade and Fort Bragg medical teams provided 

airhead, port, security and field hospital capability. A Joint Services Communication Element 

(JSCE) satellite communications terminal pro- 
vided Task Force Tiger access to reliable communications by teletype and voice with the RDJTF 

exercise headquarters near Cairo, Egypt. Task 

Force Tiger was capable of sustained independent 

operation, requiring only air resupply of rations 

and local procurement of raw water and fuel. 

JTX Bright Star units in Egypt experienced 

many of the problems of desert warfare, including 

severe sandstorms. This was not the case for Task 

Force Tiger. Although there was heat and sand, 

the climate was not severe. The terrain near 

Berbera is a desert coastal plain; the soil is sandy 

silt with angular rock fragments up to the size of 

a fist. The top 4 to 6 inches of soil is extremely 

dry and appears to be porous, but is not. Below 

the dry surface, the soil is the same composition 

but very densely packed. Significant time and effort are required to dig sumps, latrines, or fighting positions with hand tools; entrenching tools 

are almost useless. Scrub trees up to 20 feet tall 

dot the plain, providing concealment from 

ground-level observation for up to 2%-ton trucks. 

The trees provide no concealment for vehicles 

from aerial observation. The coastal plain ends 

10 to 20 miles inland, becoming a highland plateau. Weather and terrain data vary drastically 

between the coastal plain and the highlands; data 

from one area cannot be used for the other area. 

In the June-August hot season, the temperature in Berbera reaches 115 F in the shade, and a 

stiff wind is routine. The coastal weather during 

the exercise, however, was sunny, with highs in 

the upper 80s, lows in the upper 60s and a light 5 

to 8 knot breeze. 

The exercise provided the engineers unique 

challenges in planning the deployment, coordinating among task force members and with other 

agencies, deploying to a strange area and conducting training and operations with their Somali hosts. 

Planning for the exercise was based on only 

limited knowledge of the exercise area. Although 

a RDJTF and 20th Engineer Brigade survey team 

visited Berbera for a few hours in September, detailed information about the area was scarce. The 

most critical planning task was defining the task 

force organization and mission. Simultaneous 

planning for the Somali portion of JTX Bright 

Star occurred at RDJTF headquarters, at XVIII 

Airborne Corps and at the multiple units represented in Task Force Tiger. Daily, vigorous 

coordination was necessary to keep abreast of 

new initiatives. 

Operational security also influenced planning 

and coordination. The location and dates of the 

exercise were classified until immediately prior 

to deployment. Initially, soldiers knew that they 

were deploying to Southwest Asia. Only key 

leaders, however, knew the country and deployment schedule. Most of the soldiers believed that 

they were going to Egypt. Immediately prior to 

deployment, the task force was assembled and 

Heavy equipment for Task Force TLger arrives in 

Berbera by sea from Savannah, Ga. 

isolated in a secure "lock-in" area, and operational briefings revealed the destination and 

schedule. 

Many of the preparations for the deployment 

were normal procedures for members of the Rapid 

Deployment Force or for other units whose contingencies call for overseas deployment. Medical 

and personnel records review, immunization 

update, equipment preparation and personnel 

roster reconciliation were all normal preparations for overseas exercises. The only special 

training required was for operation of the new 

600-gallon-per-hour reverse osmosis water purification unit (ROWPU) and the water chiller attachment for the 400-gallon water trailer. 

The development of deployment load plans on 

the other hand, posed unique challenges. Limited 

information was available about the area, and 

the absence of previous exercises in Somalia 

meant that no after-action reports were available 

to help determine what to take and how to move 

it. The task force was allocated one C5A and a 

fixed amount of deck space on the roll-on/roll-off 

ship Cygnus for oversized equipment, and nine 

C141 aircraft for troops and the remaining equip- 
TASK FORCE TlGEl 

C 


"C.",, ,.,, VI EQUIP 

COMMUNDER DVISORS

-

1-

TASK 

XVlll UBN CORPS 

1 L 

1301 

IED HORSE 

HQS CMI r f USAF 

PRIME BEEF I 

1 r 

ldalTnk roar ronrmsenr ir.., 4-CHRPL

ment. What should go by ship? How should the 

remainder be distributed among the aircraft? 

Would the first plane to take off be the first to 

land? What prime movers had to be available at 

Berbera to unload non-motorized equipment? Deployment load plans were the greatest challenge 

of the exercise. Four constraints were adopted for 

all load plans. 

(1) Only bulk amounts of petroleum, oils and lubricants (POL) and raw water would be available 

from the Somalis. Everything else had to fit on 

available transportation. 

(2) Food and drinkable water would accompany 

the soldiers on each aircraft to sustain them until 

the ROWPU and the food resupply cycle from 

Egypt were operational. 

(3) The troop and equipment list would be general enough to provide for reasonable changes in 

the mission after arrival in Somalia. 

(4) The loss or delayed arrival of any one piece of 

equipment would not endanger mission accomplishment. 

Equipment for the sea shipment left Fort Bragg 

on October 16 and the Cygnus sailed from Savannah, Ga., on October 19. With one intermediate 

stop at Alexandria, Egypt, and a day-long delay 

through the Suez Canal, the Cygnus arrived at 

Berbera on November 17. The air deployment left 

Pope Air Force Base (adjacent to Fort Bragg) on 

November 14 and 15 and arrived on the 15th and 

16th. Although some aircraft took longer to 

arrive than the planned 18 hours and the sequence of arrival differed from that of departure, 

all sorties arrived at Berbera by the scheduled 

end of the airflow. The planning for out-ofsequence arrival paid off; there was temporary 

inconvenience but no mission or safety reduction. 

Once in country, all elements of Task Force 

Tiger moved quickly to accomplish their mission. 

Teams designed to gather medical and terrain information found many opportunities to improve 

U.S. knowledge of the local facilities and terrain. 

A terrain analysis team from the 283d Engineer 

Detachment at Fort Bragg spent most of its time 

on the road, gathering data for map revisions and 

verifications, such as the new major highway 

linking Berbera and Mogadishu which replaces 

significant portions of the route currently shown 

on 1:250,000 scale maps. Preventive medicine 

teams gathered water samples from each of the 

fresh water sources for Berbera. No harmful bacteria or virus was found in any sample. 
Specific Projects 

Engineer projects were designed to leave behind a lasting reminder of United States assistance. At the water stand for all nearby military 

garrisons, water tankers had made a mudhole of 

the area. Combat engineers placed a concrete pad 

under the spout and ditched a runoff channel. 

Combat heavy engineers repaired water erosion 

on an older portion of the road linking Berbera 

and Mogadishu where over half of the road surface had been eaten away. Engineers replaced 

and recompacted the soil, added a six-inch layer 

of rock from local quarries, and applied an asphalt and rock-chip surface treatment to extend 

the life of the road. 

The Air Force Prime Beef team from WrightPatterson AFB painted the unmarked runway to 

international standards using hundreds of gallons of special paint mixed with over 13,000 

pounds of reflective glass beads. 

All elements of Task Force Tiger participated 

in desert training and in joint training with Somali military forces stationed at Berbera. Somali 

soldiers rigged and detonated American 40-pound 

h.erican Sanners in Somalia 


Objectives for Task Force Tiger in Bright Star 82 

placed heavy emphasis upon survival and security, a 

mission requiring excellent training in tactical wire 

and bunker construction. Soldiers from Charlie Company, 27th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Airborne) 

erected over 900 meters of half-apron and cattle fencing to provide a minimum security boundary for the 

bivouac. Two reinforced bunkers for machine guns 

were also constructed at critical points on the perimeter. During the excavation of the bunkers, the engineers received their first experiences with the "desert 

sand" of Somalia. Along the coastal plain, the soil appeared loose and fine; however, it proved to be mostly 

silt which was compacted to the consistency of concrete 

just a few inches below the surface. All digging was an 

extreme challenge for both hand tools and the light, 

airborne engineer equipment. Addition of water only 

made the soil harder. 

With the establishment of the base camp, the Composite Engineer Company focused upon construction 

and training opportunities. Somali units around 

Berbera were eager to interact with their American 

guests. During the first week, for example, a joint inspection of host-nation Soviet-built vehicles, air defense weapons and communications equipment was 

arranged. The engineers were able to examine the 

equipment, to send messages over the wireless and to 

perform actual crew drill on antiaircraft guns. 

Much of the subsequent training involved teaching 

Somali soldiers American techniques and doctrine. A 

good example was the joint demolitions training which 

began with demonstrations of standard explosives and 

expedient charges. The U.5, engineers went on to conduct hands-on training in the use of det cord, electric 

and nonelectric priming and the use of expedient cratering charges (ammonium nitrate). This was the Somali soldiers first experience with demolitions. The 

Americans learned valuable lessons on the effectiveness of cratering techniques in the desert-subsoil 

hardness resulted in more favorable blast results than 

expected. 

Maintaining physical conditioning was also a key 

hy Capt. Kerry K. Pierce 

march, were accompanied by a platoon of Somali 

marines. 

Just prior to redeployment, a joint weapons exercise 

was organized. The combat engineers first demonstrated basic marksmanship with the .45 caliber pistol, M-16, M-203, and M-60 to Somali marines, then 

coached them in actual firing. The Americans then got 

As part of their physical training regimen, task /orce 

personnel particlpafed in rucksack marches. 

I 

the rare opportunity to engage targets with the AK-47 

assault rifle, which was impressive in its semiautomatic accuracy but proved inferior to the M-16 when 

fired on automatic. 

The training experiences in Somalia left the engineers confident in their basic skills. JTX Bright Star 

82 validated numerous techniques and procedures in 

the different environment of Southwest Asia and revealed other combat engineer training needs to support the RDF mission. 

Capt. Kerry K. Pierce is commander of Co. C, 27th En- I 

gineer Battalion (CBTI (ABN). During Bright Star 82 

he was Composite Company commander. A I974 U.S. 1 

part of the training in Somalia. Twice Charlie Compa- Military Academy graduate, he is a registered profesny conducted rucksack marches and on their second sional engineer in Virginia. I 
- 

shaped charges, and Somali marines learned new 

skills as medical aidmen. Other joint training included firing U.S. and Soviet weapons and operation of other Soviet equipment. The Air Force 

fire truck team from Ramstein AFB, Germany, 

taught the Somalis to fill and to operate two local 

The 244 task force troops were issued desert earnouflaged fatigues and Vietnam style bush hats. 

Fiat fire trucks. The proof of their learning came 

before the task force departure when, according 

to the Somali commander, both trucks were used 

to assist the town of Berbera in extinguishing a 

warehouse fire. 

ROWPU Success 

The two new items of water treatment equipment performed well in Somalia. The ROWPU 

made excellent potable water from both fresh and 

salt water. At the Berbera port, the ROWPU 

processed salt water which was twice as salty as 

the maximum for which the ROWPU was designed to process, yet easily met both water quality and quantity standards. The five-day shakedown and training period at Fort Bragg prior to 

deployment was a key factor in the performance 

of the ROWPU. Although the maximum air temperature of 91 to 93 F did not tax the capability of 

the water chiller to reduce water temperature 

from 120 to 60 F, the unit reliably produced 

pleasantly cool water, even without the special 

water-tank cover. 

Redeployment from Berbera to Fort Bragg was 

far easier than the deployment. Everything had 

already fit together on the way over and it was 

obvious what had to be returned. The Cygnus 

was reloaded on November 24 and airflow commenced from Berbera the same day. All aircraft 

arrived at Pope AFB by November 27, the Cygnus off-loaded at Savannah on December 13 and 

the task force was completely closed at home stations on December 16. 

In assessing lessons from JTX Bright Star 82, 

some caution must be used in extrapolating the 

accomplishments of Task Force Tiger for future 

exercises. The exercise in Somalia was a logistical exercise in the coolest period of the year and 

there was no significant off-road movement. Temperatures were similar to those the units experienced at Fort Bragg. The force remained within a 

25-mile radius of base camp and on level terrain. 

No rain fell; no flash flooding was experienced. 

On the other hand, some of the lessons of the 

exercise in Somalia are applicable to future deployments of composite units to an unfamiliar 

overseas area. The task force demonstrated that a 

small force can enter by air an area where no 

prior basing exists and establish a support base. 

The organization and staffing levels of the task 

force proved to be well founded. Good people from 

many units took less than two days to develop 

~ ~ ~ .-..---*. ,, ,. - --..*,*s * 

14 

Canabal~zed remnants of a Soviet truck serve as a 

rem~nderof an earlier Russian presence. 

SOPS and cohesion. Equipment proved reliable as 

well-the ROWPU and chiller worked extremely 

well. Units encountered no trafficability problems in the area with current equipment. FM radios transmitted clearly at normal operating 

ranges. The 250 cfm air compressor was very valuahle in oreoclrine for redeolovment: it blew off 

dust, lea;& little required'w&hing. One important note for anyone planning a future exercise-B-rations take more cooks and KPs than 

A-rations; more preparation is also required. 

The accomplishments of Task Force Tiger were 

significant and every member of the force has 

great pride in those successes. The task force organized, deployed, lived, learned, trained and redeployed without accident, incident, lost time or 

heat injury. 

Lt. Col. Raymond E. Knell commands the 27th 

Engineer Battalion (CBT) (ABN). A 1964 U.S. 

Military Academy graduate, he has completed 

airborne and ranger training, Command and 

General Staff College, and has a master's degree 

in civil engineering from the University of Illinois. 

He is a registered professional engineer in Illinois 

and has served on the engineering department faculty, U.S. Military Academy. Other assignments 

include the 168th and 23d Engineer Battalions; 

159th Engineer Group; Seattle Engineer District 

and the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. 
The Critical Path Method 


By Capt. Andrew Hamlin, Capt. Robert J. Huff 

and 1st Lt. Michael J. Harris 

The "critical path method" (CPM) is widely recognized as a powerful management tool. 

The CPM allows supervisors to effectively allocate their available resources throughout the 

planning, scheduling and controlling phases of a 

construction project. The Engineer School has 

taught a traditional version of CPM called 

"activity-on-the-arrow (AOA)," for over fifteen 

years. This form of CPM has been a reliable 

workhorse for shaping the thought process of 

young engineer officers and it has helped speed 

countless construction projects through to timely 

completion. 

However, the School is considering a less traditional version of CPM called "precedence diagraming (PD)" or "activity-on-the-node." This article will discuss concepts of network analysis 

systems in general, then address specific advantages and disadvantages of CPM (activity-on-thearrow) versus PD (activity-on-the-node). Reader 

comments or suggestions are welcome and can be 

directed to the address or telephone number at 

the end of this article. 

Although network analysis systems vary in format and usefulness, the general approach to 

solving management problems is the same. The 

initial step involves breaking the project into 

component parts (activities) and developing a 

network model. This network graphically depicts 

the logical interrelationships of activities which 

make up an entire project. In this initial step, the 

manager constructs the network as if he has unlimited resources, and therefore no consideration 

is given to constraining factors such as men and 

equipment. Manpower or equipment conflicts are 

eventually resolved as the construction schedule 

is developed, and this is the real strength of a 

network analysis system. The manager is able to 

proceed in a systematic fashion, developing a feasible construction schedule without becoming 

overwhelmed by a complicated project in the early stages of planning. 

The key to a successful construction schedule is 

the manager's ability to obtain reasonably accurate estimates of material, manpower and equipment requirements for each activity in the network. This analysis will lead to an estimate of 

how long each activity will take to accomplish 

(activity duration). 

At this point the manager begins a time analysis of the network. By knowing the logic relationships and activity durations, the following time 

data can be calculated for each activity: 

Early start and early finish times, 

late start and late finish times 

and total float. 

Critical activities and activities which cannot 

be delayed without extending the overall project 

duration can now be identified. These critical activities form one or more continuous paths 

through the network and dictate the minimum 

project duration. The information acquired up to 

this point is then placed on an early start schedule, so-called because the constraining factors of 

men and equipment have not yet been considered. 

This final, most difficult step to master, is to "resource constrain" the early start schedule and 

original logic diagram. If the resources demanded 

by the early start schedule exceed the resources 

available to the manager, a modification to the 

schedule and network results. The resequencing 

of activities on the schedule and network is accomplished by establishing resource relationships 

between activities. On the network, these new relationships appear as resource arrows. Resource 

arrows can have a profound impact on the time 

analysis and therefore alter the critical path(s). 
when the final construction schedule is 

developed, it should be used throughout the remainder of the construction project. The manager 

is constantly required to provide data on the current project status and often must make decisions 

on how better to employ his resources. If the network analysis system is properly updated and the 

data provided is understood, the manager has an 

invaluable tool to assist him in accomplishing his -

mission. 

The use of a network analysis system should be 

considered for comnlicated nroiects which can be 

broken into well defined actiGities. It should be 

used when resource constraints are expected and 

when the manager is prepared to keep his construction schedule updated and accurate. 

A network analysis system is not a panacea to 

be used in all situations. For example, a network 

should not be used for simple projects of short duration. For these projects, some other management technique, such as a bar chart, would be 

just as effective and less time-consuming. A network analysis system may be inappropriate when 

activities cannot be easily defined or are difficult 

to estimate accurately, or in projects where the 

same cycle of activities is performed daily or periodically. Here, a representative flow diagram 

may be a better management tool. Most importantly, a network analysis system is not useful to 

a manager who does not understand the system 

in sufficient detail or to one who is unwillinglunable to properly update the schedule 

throughout the course of the construction. 

When the manager decides a network analysis 

system is appropriate he must choose which technique to use. Two popular systems of CPM are 

activity-on-the-arrow and activity-on-the-node. 

To explain the differences, a sample project is visualized and plotted using both techniques. 

The Critical Path Method, AOA, was developed 

by the DuPont Corp. in the late 1950s. The network diagram is produced using three graphic 

symbols: "solid" activity narrows, "broken" dummy arrows, and circular event nodes. The familiar representations are shown in Figure 1.Note 

the effect added resource relationships have on 

the critical path. 

The Critical Path Method, activity-on-thenode, which will be referred to for the remainder 

of this article as PD (precedence diagraming), 

was developed by J.W. Fondahl of Stanford University. This modification of the original CPM is 

not a recent development. It is widely used and 

often brought up when the subject of future 

trends in construction management is discussed. 

The precedence diagram is produced using, primarily, two graphic symbols, activity nodes and 

ACTIVIWQN-THE-ARROW 

A &j7, UTE M","US 

FIGURE 1. 

ACTIVITY-ON-THE-NODE 

-

KEY 

r +TO,", nOL1 

t~ tm~rlw 

U1C $,"KT 

FIGURE 2. 

LUG FACTOR MODIFICATIONS 

OF NORMAL ACTlYlN SEQUENCE 

Activities considered: Clearing; Scarifying and Compacting: and Placement of Base Courre, 

Activity.on-the-Arrow 

SCARIFY AN0 

CLtlR 

BASE CQURSt 
relationship arrows. The project now takes on a 

different appearance, as shown in Figure 2. 

Before comparing the merits of each system, 

the reader is encouraged to study Figures 1 and 

2. The glossary of terms on the right should clarify data within each figure. 

The precedence diagram presents a simpler, 

cleaner logic diagram than the AOA diagram. 

There is no need for dummy arrows in the precedence network, eliminating a major source of confusion for the less experienced managers of network analysis systems. The PD is less cluttered 

than the AOA diagram and relationships between activities are more readily apparent. The 

PD is also more goal or "milestone" oriented and 

is therefore easier to learn and understand. 

Information on an activity's early start, late 

finish, early finish, late start and total float is 

easily accessible on the precedence network. The 

information for each activity is consolidated at 

the node representing that activity. In an AOA 

diagram only the early start and late finish times 

are on the diagram. To find these, the user must 

refer to both the head and tail of the activity arrow. The early finish, late start and total float 

are not listed on the AOA diagram. They can, 

however, be quickly calculated and listed on a 

separate tabulation sheet. As the project progresses, it often becomes necessary to update the 

logic diagram. Since the information for an activity is on the node in precedence diagraming, 

blank preprinted or computer printed nodes with 

the updated information can be placed over the 

original node, causing minimal draftsmanship 

problems. 

Resource constraining an AOA diagram often 

requires the use of several new nodes and dummy 

arrows, in addition to the resource arrow. This is 

done to avoid overconstraining other activities in 

the network. In a PD, there is one resource arrow 

for each resource relationship. The diagram remains concise and the resource relationships 

clear. 

Sometimes an activity can begin before a related preceding activity has been completely finished. Therefore, two activities that are related 

can actually overlap each other. These "leads" or 

"lags" can be represented in both systems, as 

seen in Figure 3. One of the real strengths of 

precedence diagraming is its ability to handle 

these lead and lag factors. The graphic representation is less involved and still depicts the main 

activities. The lead or lag factor can be entered 

into a computer with much less difficulty than in 

AOA. 

Precedence diagraming has many avid supporters in the construction arena. However, this system is not seen as being superior to AOA by every management expert. PD can be difficult to 

update manually if lag factors or other "wrinkles" are used by the manager. This can be a seriActi-city arra IW: Eacn aczlvlzy 1s represented by 

one s olid arro, w in a CPM (AOA) diagram. An ac- . I.- tivity ~rray ue referred to by its tail-head node 

numbers. 

Activity node: Each activity is repres ented by 

one node in a Precedence Diag :ram (act .ivity-on- ...r...... J A. L.. - the-node). An activity may be relerreu LU uy a 


single activity number. 


Critical activity: A critical activity ha€ . .
 i no float 

time (see Float). Its accomplishment cannot oe 

delayed without causing an extension in the overall project duration. 

Critical path: Every network has one or more 

continuous critical paths which dictate the minimum project duration. The critical activities in 

the project form the critical path(s). The critical 

path may also contain "critical" resource and 

dummy arrows. The critical pz chlighted 

by using a double line. 

Dummy arrows: Dummy arrc ot represent activities. They are used to transmit logic 

and insure all the relationships between activities are properly depicted by the network. Dummy arrows are not needed for most variations of 

precedence di; sgrams. 

Early event I.ime: Eac h node in an AOA diagram 

has its own early eve:nt time. The eal ,ly event . .I .. IL. time represents me earliest possible Llrxlt, u~e 

event node can occur. 

Early start: This is the earliest time an activity 

mav ----~ begin. In an AOA diagram, the early start is 

founti bv referring to the early event time above 

the t 3f a particular activity. 

y start schedule: This is a preliminary construc:tion schedule which has not been analyzed 

for r esource constraini ems. Eve ry activity is schedul,ed to beg 4 earliest: possible LZ-. Lllllt,. 

Event node: This is one of the graphlc symbols 

used for AOA. It is a control device which reCapt. Robert J. Huff is a construction management instructor at the U.S. Army Engineer 

School. A 1977 graduate of the U.S. Military 

Academy, he has attended airborne and ranger 

training. He last served as executive officer of Co. 

D, 10th Engineer Battalion, Germany. Capt. Andrew T .Hamlin and 1st Lt. Michael J. Harris are 
of Terms 


strains the start of any activity leaving it until 

all the necessary preceding activities have been 

completed. An event node occurs when all preceding activities have been accomplished. The projected occurrence of event nodes is indicated by 

the early and late event times associated with 

each node. 

Float: This is the amount of time an activity can 

be delayed before it begins to impact on the overall project duration (total float). The amount of 

time an activity can be delayed before it impacts 

on the early start of other activities is called free 

float and is a component of total float. The remaining component of total float is called 

interfering float. An activity delayed into this 

time period will interfere with the early start of 

other activities but will not extend the project 

duration. 

Relationship arrow: These arrows are used in 

precedence diagrams and show how the activity 

nodes interact. Relationship arrows do not represent activities. 

Resource arrow: These relationship arrows indicate how the initial logic of the network has 

been modified to insure that the available resources for the project are not exceeded. They are 

used in both AOA and PD. 

Resource constrained schedule: This is the final construction schedule which the manager 

prepares. It is a modified early start schedule and 

insures that the available resources for the project are not exceeded. 

Late event time: This time represents the latest 

time an event node can occur without delaying 

the overall project duration. 

Late finish: This time indicates when an activity 

must be finished in order to keep it from extending the project duration. In an AOA diagram, 

the late finish is found by referring to the late 

event time below the head node of a particular 

activity. 

both instructors of engineer management at the 

Engineer School. Harris is a Cornell University 

graduate who recently served as platoon leader of 

Co. A, 11th Engineer Battalion, Fort Beluoir. 

Capt. Hamlin fornserly serued as a platoon leader 

and company commander with the 9th Engineer 

Battalion, Germany. 

ous drawback. The manager has no simple way to 

check a computer-assisted project. The potential 

for this problem is also present, to some degree, 

when using AOA. 

It is recognized that neither technique is totally superior to the other and that each system has 

its advantages and disadvantages in different situations. If the Engineer School adopts precedence 

diagraming as the primary construction management technique, AOA will have to remain visible, 

as it will be regularly encountered by managers 

for years to come. 

One obvious impact of the transition from AOA 

to PD is that of a break in communication between incoming officers1NCOs who understand 

the PD system and their chain-of-command who 

are more familiar with AOA. This is not as significant a problem as a first impression may indicate. Precedence diagraming is very similar to 

AOA in many areas. Whether using AOA or PD, 

the manager is responsible for providing a certain amount of review and reeducation to his subordinate supervisors to insure the plan and 

schedule are correctly followed. 

How will a change in instruction influence existing Army literature, regulations, ARTEPs, soldier's manuals, TMs and SOPS? Precedence diagraming is still a critical path method. Any 

references to this management technique will remain applicable with little if any modification. 

TM 5333, "Construction Management," provides 

a discussion of both AOA and PD. 

The Engineer School would emphasize PD not 

because it has overwhelming advantages over 

AOA, but because precedence diagraming has 

certain merits over AOA for managing smaller 

projects which are not supported by computers. 

Since the bulk of projects managed by the recently graduated Engineer School students are not 

complex, they normally contain a limited number 

of activities and are managed without the aid of 

computers. As a result, PD is a logical choice. 

Precedence diagraming is preferred for managers 

just learning to use a network analysis system. 

As more experience is gained, the engineer manager becomes familiar with both systems. Since 

both AOA and PD are valid and effective management tools, senior managers can choose the 

technique they feel most comfortable with. 

Comments from the field are encouraged. Managers with experience in one or both of the systems should express their viewpoints to the 

USAES project officer, Capt. A. Hamlin, at the 

following address: 

United States Army Engineer School 

Department of Military Engineering 

ATTN: ATZA-DTE-EM 

Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060 

Phone: AUTOVON 354-3272 
by Capt. Merrit P. Drucker 

Army units occupy a large number 

of facilities of varying ages and conditions and these facilities represent 

an important, extremely valuable asset. Every effort should be made to 

maintain them in the best condition 

possible. 

Current doctrine holds that facilities maintenance begins with and is 

the responsibility of the installation 

commander. This is indeed correct 

since failure to give facility maintenance command attention leads to 

run-down barracks, mess halls and 

motor pools; lowered morale; and ultimately, to decreased combat 

effectiveness. 

Army Regulation 420-22, Prewentive Maintenance and Self-Help Programs, defines preventive maintenance as the systematic care, 

servicing and inspection of equipment utility plants and systems, 

buildings, structures, and grounds 

facilites to detect and correct incipient failures and to accomplish minor 

maintenance. Although most preventive maintenance is handled by the 

post facility engineers, self-help programs allow military personnel and 

occupants of family/traop housing to 

themselves accomplish limited maintenance, repair work and to make minor improvements. This article explains how the company-level 

self-help program fits into the Army 

Real Property Maintence System and 

suggests ways to make self-help programs more effective. 

Effective facilities maintenance is 

difficult to accomplish without the 

support of the installation commander and all subordinate leaders. When 

a company commander inventories 

unit equipment prior to assuming 

command, for example, he should 

also inspect and inventory the buildings, maintenance areas and grounds 

assigned to the company. Commanders sign for their buildings on DA 

Form 2062, Hand Receipthnnez No; 

authorized repairs are made by unit 

personnel or, as required, reported to 

the facility engineer. 

The facilities maintenance plan 

should be an integral part of the total 

leadership plan for the unit. Maintenance of facilities at company level 

is a direct responsibility of the enlisted chain-of-command; first sergeants, platoon sergeants and squad 

leaders should be held accountable 

for the maintenance of their assigned 

facilities. Each soldier, in turn, 

should be respnsible for performing 

minor repairs in his assigned area. 

The commander should hand-receipt 

individual rooms to the soldiers who 

occupy them. All inspections by the 

chain-of-command should also include inspection of buildings and 

grounds. 

Most units find it necessary to appoint one individual to perform authorized minor repairs, to draw supplies and equipment and to serve as 

unit representative to the facility engineer. This soldier, usually known 

as the "self-help NCO," must he chosen carefully. The soldier selected 

should be competent, motivated, capable of working with tools and able 

to work with little or no supervision. 

It may be advantageous to make this 

an additional duty. Many installations conduct a short school which 

self-help NCOs must attend. If the 

training is availahle, commanders 

should consider sending one individual per platoon to the school. This 

will enable the company to distribute 

the maintenance workload and will 

enhance the unit's overall maintenance program. 

Most company-sized units have an 

adequate supply of tools available to 

the self-help NCO; a review of the 

unit Table of Organization and 

Equipment will indicate the location 

and type of tools available. Usually, 

the appropriate tool sets will he lacated in the company headquarters 

section. The engineer squad tool box, 

the general mechanic's tool set or the 

No. 1 common tool set, will contain 

the tools needed to perform building 

maintenance. All tools must be properly hand-receipted and accounted 

for. Items such as paint brushes, 

paint, putty, hardware and glass may 

be obtained from the Self-Service 

Center or through the facility engineer. Expendable supplies must he 

carefully controlled to prevent loss or 

theft. 

It is absolutely critical for the selfhelp NCO to maintain communications with the supporting facility engineer. Problems beyond the 

capabilities of the unit must he reported to the facility engineer promptly. A log should he maintained of 

telephonic service orders and of work 

requests submitted on forms. The 

service order number or document 

number for each job should be readily available to the commander or to 

anyone inspecting the unit. The log 

should be updated and purged regularly so it can he used as an effective 

management tool. 

The commander should instill in 

members of the company a sense of 

responsibility for assigned facilities. 

Almost without exception, soldiers 

can he trained to maintain their facilities in an outstanding manner. If 

troops are provided with materials, 

leadership and strong command emphasis, facilities can be maintained 

in an above average condition. Troop 

involvement promotes an attitude of 

personal responsibility for the 

barracks. 

In any given company, there are 

usually several soldiers who have 

been carpenters, plumbers, painters 

or electricians in civilian life. These 

soldiers are an asset to the unit since 

they can do a significant amount of 

repair and maintenance work. Proj-
ects like regrouting latrines and 

showers or installing tile noon and 

sidewalks can be done quite professionally by unit members if such 

projects are authorized by the facility 

engineer. Authorization for such 

projects is mandatory since they are 

out of the realm of self-help and into 

the area of minor construction. 

There are many things a commander can do to improve facilities. The 

company charge-of-quarters can be 

used to inspect the barracks and orderly room and make a list of problems so the unit self-help personnel 

can start correcting problems without 

having to inspect the entire facility. 

When the mess officer or staff duty 

officer inspects the dining facility, 

the building and installed fixtures 

should be thoroughly inspected, too. 

If problems are identified on a daily 

basis, they can be corrected before 

becoming severe. 

Another opportunity for increased 

building maintenance occurs when 

the company goes off post or to the 

field leaving a detachment behind. 

The rear detachment should be responsible for securing, inspecting, 

cleanine and maintainine " the unit's 

facilities. The detachment should 

have specific, identified missions regarding the facilities. For example, 

this is an ideal time to do painting 

without disrupting the entire unit; 

maintenance involving turning off 

water, gas or electricity is also easier 

to accomplish. Motor pool maintenance, such as repairing pavement, 

painting lines or cleaning, is also 

easier since most of the vehicles may 

be out of the motor pool. 

Building exteriors deserve special 

aitention; many times cracked walls, 

broken electrical outlets or stopped 

up drains are overlooked. The outside of buildings must be maintained 

to prevent the elements from damaging the interior, to conserve energy 

and to present a good appearance. 

The roof of a building should be inspected regularly by facility engineer 

personnel far leaks, water damage, 

cracks and stopped up rain gutters. 

Another often neglected facility is 

a structure located distant from the 

company or in an isolated area. 

These facilities must be checked periodically and repairs made rapidly. 

Buildings in areas where the temperature falls below freezing must be 

winterized when not used, a task noru 

mally accomplished by the facility 

engineer. If buildings are unoccupied for a short period during freezing weather, they sho~~ldbe inspected daily to check for frozen 

pipes. 

Grounds, fences, sidewalks, 

roads, curbs, parking lots, culverts 

and street lights within company 

boundries should be inspected regularly and work orders initiated as required. Many repairs in these areas 

will have to be made by the facility 

engineer. The company can help by 

reporting problems promptly and by 

not allowing practices which damage 

the grounds, such as driving vehicles 

over sidewalks and grounds. Gutters 

and culverts should be kept free of 

debris and consideration should be 

given to erosion control. Maintaining 

adequate ground cover is one method 

of controlling erosion. The drainage 

of water from large paved areas, 

drain pipes and culverts should be 

checked to insure that soil erosion is 

not taking place. 

The battalion 5-4 has staff responsibility for facilities maintenance. 

There are several things the S-4 can 

do to assist the company maintenance program. The 5-4 should 

hand-receipt facilities from the installation and then, in turn, handreceipt the facilities to company 

commanders. The S-4 should supervise the inspection, inventory and 

transfer of buildings to new company 

commanders. The 5-4 self-help NCO 

can draw suoulies .. and eauioment . . for 

the battalion or supervise composite 

details from companies to accomplish 

specific self-help missions. The battalion self-help NCO should conduct 

frequent inspection and assistance 

visits to the companies. These visits 

should stress teaching, coaching and 

helping the company self-help personnel to maintain and repair their 

facilities. If properly selected and 

trained, the battalion self-help NCO 

can handle most of the S-4;s facilities 

management responsibilities. 

Some units operate a consolidated 

battalion self-help program with each 

company designating one soldier to 

work for the battalion self-help NCO. 

Such centralization can greatly increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the self-help program. The 

decision to consolidate depends upon 

the specific unit situation and is 

made by the battalion commander. 

Fire prevention, safety, physical 

security, sanitation and energy conservation are all interrelated areas 

and each is dependent, to some degree, upon well maintained facilities. 

Every effort should be made to integrate these areas with the unit facilities maintenance program. Communication must be maintained between 

those who have responsibilities in 

these areas, and effective ~lanning is 

required to prevent conflicts or duplication of effort. 

Of the five functional logistical 

areas-supply, maintenance, transportation, services and facilitiesfacilities is equal in importance to 

the other four. The type and condition of a unit's facilities have a distinct impact upon the effectiveness 

and morale of the unit. A well maintained, functional, clean barracks or 

vehicle maintenance building is an 

indicator of an organized and disciplined unit. 

Additional information on selfhelp programs can be obtained from 

AR 420-22, Preventive Maintenance 

and Self-Help Programs, and TM 

5-610, Preventive Maintenance, Facilities Engineering-Buildings and 

Structures. 

Capt. Merrit P. Drucker is an infantry officer and instructor in the 

Command and Leadership Branch, 

U.S. Arnry Engineer School, Fort 

Belvoir. Va. A graduate of St. John's 

University, the Infantry Officer Aduanced Course and the Supply Management Offier Course, he has served 

in several command and staff positions with the IR08th Infantry, 82d 

Airborne Division. He has had articles 

published in Army Logistician and 

lnfantry and has been selected for instructor duty at the U.S. Military 

Acadrmy. 
A 

Different 

Kind 

Of 

Training 

Project 

by Capt. Douglas D. Gransberg 

Let's set the scene. The XYZ Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Heavy) is planning a battalion 

field training exercise (FTX). The S-3, Major 

Oakleaf, and his assistant, Second Lieutenant 

Goldbar, are discussing their plans. 

Major 0: "Well, we've got the line company 

construction missions set. Now what are we going 

to do to keep the A Company equipment platoon 

busy?" 

Lieutenant G: "No sweat, sir! They can send 

their dozers to the B Company tank ditch. C Company will probably request all their dump trucks 

and bucket loaders for the haul mission. S-4 always needs a forklift and a light set, and the rest 

of them can pull security around the battalion 

TOC." 

Sound familiar? As those who served in the Alpha Company of a combat heavy battalion know, 

it's often the same old story on FTXs; piecemeal 

employment of the 62E and 62F equipment operators and endless hours of guard duty for the 62H 

asphaltlconcrete specialists and the 62G quarrymen. However, with a little imagination and 

some easily obtainable construction materials, 

the equipment platoon can be assigned a small 

project challenging their construction abilities 

and utilizing every Military Occupational Specialty in the platoon. 

The mission given the equipment platoon, A 

Company, 864th Engineer Battalion, was to construct a field expedient "de-drumming plant." 

When bituminous material is issued, it often 

comes in fifty-five gallon drums. This requires 

the bitumen to be emptied out of the drums 

(hence the name "de-drumming") into a machine 

that heats it to a temperature at which it can be 

pumped. The skid-mounted, 750 gallon-per-hour 

asphalt melter is the ideal machine for this purpose. Furthermore, when the melters are placed 

at a height that permits gravity flow into the distributor trucks, a great deal of minor maintenance hassles are eliminated. 

Constructing a de-drumming plant was the 

idea of the junior NCOs of the equipment platoon 

and consisted of four phases. The first phase was 

site preparation. A trench 2 feet deep was cut and 

lined with polyethylene sheeting. Two inches of 

sand was placed above and below the sheeting to 

protect it from punctures and the trench was 

backfilled with a granular material. This provided a spillage protected lane in which the distributors could be loaded. Additionally, the remainder 

of the area was compacted. Phase two consisted of 

erecting an elevated platform on which to set the 

melters. Six timber piles per melter were driven 

to refusal and cut off 10 feet above the ground. A 

timber framework was then installed on top of 

the piles. A timber headwall was constructed on 

the front side of the structure and backfilled to a 

depth of 3 feet. The third phase involved installing, leveling and plumbing the melters on 

top of the platform; an earthfill ramp was built 

behind the platform as the final phase. Once the 
limbax Framework 

ila Driven taRefural 

lent opportunity to evaluate the platoon's 

capabilities to perform a realistic construction 

mission under tactical conditions. 

The equipmentplatoon, A Company, 864th Engineer Battalion, Fort Lewis, Wash., constructed 

this field expedient "de-drumming" plant during 

two FTXs. The training project provided an excelramp was completed, de-drumming could begin 

utilizing a forklift on the ramp to lift the drums 

to a height at which they could be emptied into 

the melter. 

Half the project was completed during a battalion FTX in late March 1981, and the other half 

was done during the battalion ARTEP in April 

1981. This enabled the unit to be evaluated on 

ARTEP Task 14-1,Conduct Piledriving Operations, for the first time in eight years and allowed 

the equipment platoon to be evaluated on its ability to function as a single unit. The entire project 

was accomplished under tactical conditions with 

much of the work done during the hours of darkness. The total process took approximately three 

days during each week-long exercise. Inexperience at piledriving was the primary factor 

lengthening the time to completion; however, 

simulated enemy threat, NBC play, inclement 

weather and minor maintenance problems took 

their toll as well. 

The following describes which tasks were performed in each MOS: 

*62G, Quarryman: The quarry section was required to open and to operate a borrow pit to provide fill for the ramp. Additionally, they operated 

their 75 ton-per-hour crusher continuously to 
Lifting and loading specialists, MOS 62F, droue 

piles and used cranes and forklifts during the battalion FTX. (Photos by Robert J.Walz.) 

provide granular backfill for the trench as well as 

to stockpile gravel for later use by the battalion. 

*62H, Asphalt Concrete Specialist: The asphalt 

section was required to compact the site using 

their 1CL 14 ton steel wheel roller. They installed 

the plastic sheeting, spread the protective sand 

blanket and installed the melters when the platform was completed. 

*62F, Lifting and Loading Specialist: The primary task given the 62Fs was driving the piles. 

Additionally, they utilized the cranes and forklifts to lift timber framework to the top of the 

piles and to set the melters. 

*62E, Construction Equipment Operator: The 

62Es operated both the bulldozers and bucketloaders at the project site, the borrow pit and the 

quarry. 

*6W, General Construction Machine Operator: 

A 250 cfm air compressor and pneumatic tool set 

were used for several purposes. First, the pneumatic chain saw was used to cut the timbers for 

the framework and the headwall, then it was 

used to cut the piles to the appropriate height. 

Both the jackhammer and the pneumatic drill 

were used to pin the timbers to the piles. The 

6Ws were also given the responsibility to provide 

lighting at the project site, the borrow pit and the 

quarry. 

*64C, Vehicle Operator: The dump truck drivers utilized both the 5-ton and 20-ton dump 

trucks throughout the project. 

*Additionally, both engineer (62B) and ordnance (63B) mechanics were used during the 

project. 

In all, fourteen ARTEP tasks were evaluated as 

a result of the project. The task numbers from 

ARTEP 5-115, dated 1 October 1980, were: 3-4, 

4-4, 4-7, 4-8, 4-13, 11-12, 12-2, 13-2, 13-7, 13-8, 

13-11, 13-20 and 14-1. 

General construction machine operators, MOS 

62J,pinned timbers to piles and provided lighting 

to various project sites. 

The de-drumming plant construction project 

proved a useful training endeavor. Allowing the 

equipment platoon to maintain unit integrity enhanced the morale and efficiency of the unit. It 

also allowed the equipment platoon leadership to 

coordinate the efforts of the platoon in concert. 

Best of all, the project provided a great deal of 

valuable experience in little used construction 

skills. 

Capt. Douglas D. Gransberg is commander of 

Company A, 864th Engineer Battalion (Combat) 

(Heauy), Fort Lewis, Wash. He serued preuiously 

with the 78th Engineer Battalion, and later this 

spring will join the St. Paul District. Capt. 

Gransberg has a master's degree in civil engineering from Oregon State University and is a registered professional engineer in Oregon. 
The ENGINEER 

Solution 

The absolute volume method is used to solve this problem. 


Absolute volume -

- Weight of a material 


(Specific gravity) (62.4 lbslcu ft) 


CEMENT 


Weight of cement = (6.5 sackslcu yd) (94 lbslsack) =611 1bs 


Absolute volume 	 -- 611 lbs =3.1 cu ft 

(3.15) (62.4 lbslcu ft) 

WATER (Unadjusted for aggregate moisture) 

Weight of water =(6.5 sackslcu yd) (5.5 galslsack) (8.33 lbslgal) =298 lbs 

Absolute volume 	 = 298 lbs 

(1)(62.4 lbs/cu ft) 

AIR 


Volume of air =(0.06) (27 cu ftlcu yd) = 1.6 cu ft 


VOLUME SUBTOTAL = 3.1 + 4.8 + 1.6 = 9.5 cu ft 


VOLUME OF AGGREGATES IN 


A 1CUBIC YARD BATCH = (27 cu ft) -(9.5 cu ft) = 17.5 cu ft 


FINE AGGREGATES 


Absolute volume = (0.40) (17.5 cu ft) =7.0 cu ft 


Weight (dry) =(7.0 cu ft) (2.60) (62.4 lbslcu ft) = 1136 lbs 


Weight (wet) =(1136 lbs) (1.06) = 1204 lbs 


COARSE AGGREGATES 

Absolute volume = (0.60) (17.5 cu ft) = 10.5 cu ft 

Weight (dry) =(10.5 cu ft) (2.70) (62.4 lbslcu ft) = 1769 lbs 

WATER ADJUSTMENT: The water added must be adjusted for the free-surface 

moisture and the water absorbed by the aggregates. 

Free-surface moisture 


Fine aggregates =WO- 0.6% = 5.4% 


Coarse aggregates = -0.5% 


Water added 	 = 298 lbs -(1136 lbs(0.054)) -(1769 lbs(-0.005)) 

=298 - 61 + 9 = 246 lbs 

FINAL SOLUTION 


Water added = 246 lbs 


Fine aggregate weight = 1204 lbs (wet) 


Coarse aggregate weight = 1769 lbs (dry) 

(photo by