ENGIINEEPQ, The Professional Bulletin of Army Engineers -i 

-

U.S. Army Engineer School 

573-xxx-xxxx IDSN 676-xxxx 

COMMANDANT 

MG Anders B. Aadland 

563-6158 

aad/anda@wood.armymil 

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

BG Randal R. Castm 

563-6192 

castror@ wood.armymi1 

REGIMENTALCOMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM Robert R. Robinson 

563-8060 

robinsonr@wood.armymil 

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

COL John (Pat) Leake 

563-8080 

leakej@wood.army mil 

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT - USAR 

COL Jimmy T. Fox 

563-8045 

foxj@wood.armymii 

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT- ARNG 

LTC Robert Hudnall 

563-8046 

hudnailr@wood.army mil 

TRADOC SYSTEMS MANAGER for ENGINEER COMBAT SYSTEMS 

COL John Holler 

563-4081 

hollerj@wood.armymil 

TRADOC PROGRAM INTEGRATION OFFICE - TERRAIN DATA 

COL David Kingston 

563-4086 

kingsfond@wood. army mil 

COMMANDER, 1st ENGINEER BRIGADE 

COL James Rowan 

596-0224 

rowanj@wood.armymil 

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING 

COL Jeffrey LaMoe 

563-4093 

lamoej@wood.army mil 

DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTALINTEGRATION 

COL Robert S. Kirsch 

563-4119 

kirschra wood.army.mil 

DEPARTMENT OF INSTRUCTION 

LTC Jeff Bedey 

563-4129 

bedeyj@wood.armymil 

CHIEFOF DOCTRINE 

LTC William Duddleston 

563-7537 

duddlesfonw@wood.armymii 

HUMANITARIAN DEMlNlNG TRAINING CENTERICOUNTERMINE 

TRAINING SUPPORTCENTER 

Mr. Paul Arcangeli 

596-3869 

arcangelip@wood.armymil 

By Order of the Secretary of ttieArmy 

ERIC K. SHlNSEKl 

General, United States Army 

Chief of Staff 

Official: 

/,&dBJOEL B. HUDSON 

Administrative Assistant to the 

Secretaty of the Army 

01m 


Engineer (ISSN 004619890) is prepared (quarterly by 

L,*.,-n,..., the U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center, 320 ivluna~elu 

Loop, Suite 210, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 6 5473-8929. 

Second Class postage is paid at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, 

and additional mailing offices. 

POSTMASTER: :Send addrt sss changs es to U.S. 

Army Maneuver Supp ort Center, I4TTN: ATZ T-DT-DS-B 

(Engineer). 320 MA NSCEN LI 30p, Suite 210, Fort - - .-- - - - Leonard Wood. MO 654/3-8~~9. 

CORRESPONDENCE, letters to the ed itor, rnanuscripts, photographs, official unit requests to receive ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~..- copies, and unit address changes should oe sen1 ro 

Engineer at the preceding address. Teleph lone: (573) 

563-4104. DSN 676-4104. Engineer's e-m; ail address 

is: bridgess@wood.armvrnil. Our Internet home page 

is located at: http:/ d.army.miliengrmagi 

ernag-hp.htrn. 

DISCLAIMER: Englneer presents professional information designed to keep U.S, military and civilian engineers informed of current and emerging developments within their areas of expertise for the purpose of enhancing their professional development. 

Views expressed are those of the authors and not 

those of the Department of Defense or its elements. 

The contents do not necessarily reflect official U.S. 

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

news items constitutes neither affirmation of their 

accuracy nor product endors ement. En lgineer reserves thf ? right to edit material 

CONTiENT is not copyrightel 3. Material may be re- . ... . . Drlnted lt credit is given to Ena~neer and tne autnor. 

OFFlClAL DlSTRll 3UTION is targeted to all engineer 

and engin' eer-related units. ----, ., , , < 

YtKX)NALSUBSLKI~I ~u~usareava~~ao~erors-!a.u

per year by contacting the Superintendent of Documents, 

PO Box :i71954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Address 

changes for personal subscriptions should also be sent 

to the Supelintendent of Docume 

-

ENGINE- The Professional Bulletin of Army Engineers 

UNnD STATES ARMY FEATURES 

ENGINEERSCHOOL 4 Engineer White Paper- Into the Objective Force 

By Major General Anders B. Aadland and Mr. James L. Allen 

COMMANDANT 

11 Assured Mobility-The Path to the Future 

By Mr. Mike Fowler and Lieutenant Colonel Gary Johnston 

April 2002 Headquarters, Department of the Army R 
 Volume 32 PB 5-02-2 

Major General 


Anders 8.Aadland 


MANAGING EDITOR 

Lynne Sparks 

EDKOR 


Shirley Bridges 


GRAPHIC DESIGNER 

Jennifer Morgan 

I

Front Cover: FullSpectrum EngineersForce for Cmngef 

Back Coven: 


Future Combat Systems 


16 Engineer Digital Command and Control 

By Major Eugene Snyman and Mr. Kenneth Bergman 

21 Countermine Operations in the Contemporary Operational Environmenr 

By Colonel Jeffrey P LaMoe and Captain Ted Read 

24 Engineer Officer Education Transformation 

By L~eutenant Colonel Jeffrey Bedey and Major DaMan Scherer 

27 Developing an Engineer Strategy for Homeland Securlty 

By Lieutenant Colonel Robert Hudnali, Lreutenant Colonel Monroe Nickell, 


and First Lreutenant Rachel Walkenbach 


30 Field-Force Engineering--A Regimental Approach 

By Represenfafrves of the 412th and 416th Engrneer Commands and the 


U S Army Corps of Eng~neers 


34 The Multicomponent Initiative: Lessons Learned and Challenges Ahead 

By Lteutenant Colonel Thomas E O'Donovan 

38 Self-Reliant, Resourceful, and Adaptable: America's Engineers in the 2lst Century 

By Major Erik L. Stor 

41 Operation Enigma Strike: Testing the Deployability of the 130th Engineer 

Brigade FEMs 

By Major George Simon and Captarn Christopher Jeszenszky 

UThe Evolution of the Engineer Force: Part I 

By Dr. Lany Roberis 

DEPARTMENTS 

2 Clear the Way 

By Major General Anders B. Aadland 

3 Lead the Way 

By Command Sergeant Major Robert R. Robinson 

33 Engineer Writer's Guide 

April 2002 

M Officer PERSCOM Notes 

By Major Jeff Freeland, Major Dave Holbrook, 

and Captain Ronnie Griffin 

53 Enlisted PERSCOM Notes 

By Lieutenant Colonel Peter Taylor 

55 Engineer Update 

Engineer I 
2 Engineer April 2002

Clear The Way

By Major General Anders B. Aadland

Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School

F ULL-SPECTRUM ENGINEERS –

 FORCE FOR CHANGE! Excitement is

 in the air as we near ENFORCE 2002.

This will be a tremendous event for our

Regiment’s leaders; we can’t wait to see all

of our Engineer warriors gather here and

engage in camaraderie and healthy exchanges of ideas and resolve tough Regimental issues. We’ll roll up our collective

sleeves to get some important work done as

we continue to transform our Regiment and

Army. Our ENFORCE conference theme, FullSpectrum Engineers—Force for Change,

conveys two vital points about where we are

and where we must be. The events of 9-11

underscored the role of the Engineers across

the spectrum of conflict—from homeland security (HLS) to

global war on terrorists to full-scale, high-intensity warfare.

The vast breadth, diversity, and power of our branch continue

to be demonstrated by you throughout the world. And the

Engineers are at the forefront of the Army’s Transformation,

not just going along with change but driving it. The ENFORCE

2002 theme captures the excitement of our vitality today and

the extraordinary road ahead. The conference agenda is loaded

with activities and sessions that will instill pride, recognize

excellence in our ranks, address key concerns, stimulate new

thought, and break old paradigms. The war stories will abound,

as always, as we reacquaint with our sapper compatriots

returning to the Home of the Engineers from around the world.

We’ll start the week off with our Councils of Engineer

Sergeants Major and Colonels. We will continue to update our

senior leaders on what’s going on at the School, review the

status of current issues, some of which resulted from the

Commandant’s VTC at the end of March, and give a lead-in to

the ENFORCE breakout sessions. We have six challenging

issues set for this year’s breakout sessions: 1) Engineer

Command and Control (C2) Systems; 2) Assured Mobility and

Future Engineer Organizations; 3) Countermine Operations in

the Contemporary Operational Environment (COE); 4)

Homeland Security—Engineer Support Requirements; 5)

Engineer Officer Education Transformation (OES); and 6) Joint

and Field-Force Engineering (FFE). We look forward to your

personal contribution in at least one of these vital issues.

The Engineer C2 Systems breakout will review the

development of such C2 systems as the Maneuver Control

System–Engineer (MCS-E), Force XXI Battle Command Brigade

and Below (FBCB2), CastleNET, and Digital Topographic

Support System (DTSS). The session will provide a detailed

review of existing Engineer C2 systems, their capabilities and

shortcomings, and the planned way ahead to make them more

valuable tools for Engineers and maneuver forces and ensure

full integration of Engineer command,

control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance

(C4ISR) in current and evolving combinedarms operations.

The Objective Force’s mobility is

absolutely critical to ensuring that it maintains force agility, freedom to operate in the

COE, and high-tempo combat operations

over the extent of the battlespace. In the

Assured Mobility breakout session, we will

discuss how we as a Regiment must understand the concept of Assured Mobility and

determine how we can make it a reality for

the Objective Force Unit of Action (UA).

In the COE, we no longer face enemies

who use mines primarily to shape the terrain; turn, fix, block,

and disrupt are no longer the intended payoffs of enemy mine

warfare. These have been replaced by the threat’s use of mines

as a terror and casualty producing system—the perfect

asymmetric weapon of the Third World. Though employment

techniques are different, mines and booby traps are just as

lethal and even harder to detect. This dilemma imposes serious

challenges to our maneuver forces today and assured mobility

for future forces. In the Countermine breakout session, you will

see how your Engineer School is attacking this challenge headon and developing an organization with the expertise to

orchestrate an aggressive, combined-arms, joint effort to provide

solutions across the DTLOMS spectrum.

As I stated in the February 2002 Engineer Bulletin, “Combat

Engineer doctrine, units, systems, training, tactics, techniques

and procedures must address a new threat, a new operational

environment here and abroad, and new roles that must fill voids

in Army planning.” Our Homeland Security breakout session

will go into detail on the missions, responsibilities, and

requirements of Engineers in their critical role in the defense

and preservation of our free and secure homeland.

The OES session will update Engineer leaders on TRADOC’s

Leader Development Campaign Plan and the Engineer School’s

role in transforming the Engineer OES. We will discuss the

timelines for its implementation and its impacts on the field.

In the Field-Force Engineering breakout session, you will

see how FFE is our way of putting General Engineering

requirements into the plans for contingency operations and

ensuring that critical Engineer resources are available at the

time and place necessary to execute each contingency operation.

As we develop FFE as a concept, it’s easy to see the complexities

involved with coordinating the efforts of many diverse

organizations; but it’s also easy to see the power of the combined

efforts of these organizations.
Lead TFe Way


By Command Serge6 ... 3r RL--. t R. Rot . 

-U.S. Army Engineer School I 

0 14th annual ENFC 

conference is fast approaching, 

and I would like to echo MG 

Aadland's remarks regarding the importance of this week to our Regiment. 1 

sincerely hope that you are looking forward 

to spending this week at Fort Leonard 

Wood, renewing friendships and resolving 

issues as we focus on our full-spectrum 

engineering capability in support of our 

Army, now and in the Objective Force. 1 

also want to address some issues that will 

shape the focus of the Council of Command 

Sergeants Major (CSMs) and generate wha! 

I am sure will be lively discussion aniong 

our senior leaders. 

ll 

e the last Lead the Way article, I 

~vetraveled to several installations. I truly 

ljoyed visiting with the soldiers of the 

Regiment and being immersed in the 

uniqueness of the many organizations and 

missions we have in our branch. Say I'm 

biased, but our soldiers are the greatest in 

the Army. We are blessed with talented 

officers and noncommissioned officers who 

competently lead our soldiers through the 

varied and complex missions our Army 

expects US to execute. 

Along with my firsthand obs~r~ations. 

1 routinely receive e-mails and calls on the 

We will kickoffthc week witt~ 2 fLlldaysufCuwlcil ufCSh.ls 

~essions--the agenda is on the ENFORCE Web site. Among 

our usual topics will be acareer-management-tieldbrief hm the 

Engineer Bmch, an update from the Directorate of Combat 

Developnients, an Engineer ANCOClBNCOC course update, a 

review ofourproponent guidance to the DA centralized boards, 

an update fromthehy EngineerAssociation, and a brief from 

former FORSCOM CSM, CSM(R) Jerry Alley, on financial 

planning.Addresses from theChiefofEngineers, LTG Flowers; 

MG Aadland, Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School; and 

BGCastro,AssistantCommdndant,U.S.hy EngineerSchool, 

will complement our agenda. 

We also have SMA Jack Tillcy schoholfuled for a ralk un 

Tuesday. He will spend 2 days at Fort Leonard Wood, anend 

our ice-breaker social, and be a featured guest speaker in 

Lincoln Hall auditorium on Wednesday. This is a great 

opportunity for us to be in the midst of someone who has 

such a great impact on us and our soldiers. SMA Tilley will 

share his thoughts and concerns and, I'msure, will beavailable 

to answer your questions. 

great suppol? and effort our soldiers provide 

to installations and missions all over the world. Several weeks 

ago, a retired CSM, who works at a chernical munitions 

arsenal, called me. He told me that shortly after the events of 

1 1 September, soldiers had been deployed to his arsenal to 

assist in security. He stated that he was so impressed by the 

professional bearing and discipline of the soldiers that he 

approached a few of thein to find out what unit they were 

from. He said he was amazed to learn that they were activeduty engineers assigned to a midwest installation. He called 

me to tell nie what a great job they were doing and that I 

should be proud (as 1always am) of our soldiers. 

I am extremely of all that you and our 5oldiela 

represent. We have a common factor that's evident in all of 

our organizations: we are all extremely busy and feverishly 

working to accomplish the missions of ourAmiy and nation. 

From shaping doctrine and design of our organizational 

mission and structure to supporting the efforts related to 

Operations Noble Eagle and Enduring Freedom, engineers 

are completely integrated and involved. 

o ~ needs ~ ~ us as muchA now as it did. ~ ~ 1frhere is 

ever a doubt as to whether the Regiment will be viable aspart 

The remainder of the ENFORCE schedule mirrors ~c:of the Objective Force, just look to the past and examine how 

past-vendor displays, Regimental review, barbeque social, 

Army Engineer Association luncheon, and unit plaque 

dedications. Culminating the week will be our Regimental nm 

and the dinner, where we will recognize our 2001 ltschner, 

Sturgis, and Grizzly winners, along with our gold de Fluely 

medal recipient. 

Please arrange your itinerary so you can register on 

Sunday, participate in all the Council of CSMs schedule and, 

if desired, stay through Saturday to play in the ENFORCE 

golf tournament. As always, please bring your colors so we 

can display them during our Regimental dinner. 

. . : . '..~ * \ .... ,.. April 2002 : , . . ,, ,. . . ,

... : '. . . .. .., . .. . . . . ;.., * .,.., .~..~.. ., , ;m ,? .,,...:,.?' ..,,., ;:.< ':, . .: '<....3...3. . ... y*:;!.';.:,,;. , 

:.\ <., ,.. ,~.,.,.?.-,=,. ..::: ,,. ..:+: :\; ..,: . .

we have transitioned the Regiment as our Army changed 

over the last 226 years. There is no question that for as long 

as there is an Army, there will be engineers. 

A, move inlo the months year, 1 ,,,,l~ 

,keevery effort to ,,isit with you and your units. Being ,,,it[, 

you and our soldiers gives me an intense sense of pride in all 

we do for this country, and it makes me gratefill for the 

opportunity to serve as your Regimentill CSM. 

ESSA~ONS-E~@~~~~~ ~~~d way! 

. - .. ..., :..I,,.. . ,

:_. I;... I.. I , ' Engineer 3 . . . k ,., . .,: "Ye.' . . '. :, . . .. ... Er.;..:6,;, ., ,:. . . . . . .. y"". . '.. ,., . . . -. ,. . . " ,.' ,.;!&. 
Engineers are a full-spectrum force for changc. During 

the past ycar of so, we have all become familiar 

with the "trident" chart pictured bclo~v. It is Chief of 

SidtTofthe Army General Eric K. Shinseki's vision of how our 

Amy must transform over the next 30 years. En; "lneers are 

fully in\.ol\;ed in all tlvee legs ofthe trident-the Legacy, Intcrim, 

and Objective Forces. Our involvement extends from the very 

tip of the spear all the way back to the sustaining base and 

includes eletllents of the soldiers and civilians working in the 

Active Component, Reserve Component. and Corps of 

Engineers. No other Regiment has that broad a band of 

~rsponsibility. 

In past Mrhite Papers. our priority has been the Legacy and 

lnterim legs of the trident. In this paper. our priority shifts to 

the third leg. the Objective Force. 

The Objective Force 

As a quick review. let us recall that the ObJective Force 

is to have the deployability of the Interim Force with 

the lethality and su~vivability oftoday's Legacy Force. 

Beyond that, it will enable us to fight ina \vhole new way, using 

total situational overmatch and precision engagement. Built 

around the Future Cotnbat System (FCS),the Objective Force 

will also include the Comanche helicopter and the Crusader 

field artillery cannon. Units 

will be structured as "units 

of action" (UA) and "units 

of employment" (UE). The 

TheArmy Transformation I 

I 

I &i;:a;,?,77--'---~ 

II k . -

..! 

,' 

, 

Interim I : 

Force I -~ 

I I 

I Fsrsl I Firrt Unit 

-0 InlCr(m 

BCT 

2002 Lqdwed

objectire 

. . . Responsive, Deployable, Agile, Versatile, 


Lethal, Survivable, Sustainable. 


Arniy is using these new 

designations to get us to 

think about unit organizations other than the 

platoons, companies. battalions, brigades, divisions, 

and corps with which we 

have all grown comfortable. 

UAs-roughly analogous 

to today's battalion and 

brigade combat teams-are 

tomorrow's maneuver units. 

UEs-roughly analogous 

to today's divisions andlor 

corps-are tomorrow's planners, synchronizers, and 

supporters. 

4 Rigii~eer. April 2002 
The force made up of UAs and UEs will be lighter than 

today's force and easily deployed anywhere in the world within 

96 hours. It will have superior firepower, networked together 

and capable of engaging any threat from beyond the threat's 

capability to engage us. Situational awareness and 

understanding of the entire battlefield is an integralpart ofits 

survivability and lethality. With this information, we stop 

reacting to obstacles as we encounter them and start making 

decisions based on the ability, capability, and intent of the 

enemy to emplace an obstacle. In this way, we are reacting to 

information, not just obstacles on the ground. 

Envision a typical heavy armored division on today's 

battlefield, a division equivalent perhaps to one of our divisions 

in Operation Desert Stonn. The commander of that division 

knows where all of his units are located and knows their 

capabilities. He wants to know where we are located as well. 

Now, think of us entering the battlefield in about the same 

strength as today's maneuver brigade. It doesn't seem a very 

fair fight, but in the Objective Force, we will not only know 

where all of our units are located, we will have a complete 

picture of where all of the Republican Guard units are located 

as well. And, with our precision strike and other capabilities, 

we will start blinding the threat before we land, taking down his 

command and co~itrolnodes so he loses touch with his own 

units. Our brigade-sized unit-the UA-will engage each of 

the threat's units in turn from standoff distances. Because the 

threat commander no longer has the ability to keep in touch 

with his own units-let alone target ours--our smaller, lighter 

force will quickly roll up the much largerunit. The Republican 

Guard commander may not even know we have landed until we 

are knocking at the door to his headquarters. That, in a nutshell, 

is the theory of the Objective Force. 

Where does this unparalleled situational understanding 

come from? It comes from sensors and databases, all networked 

together and available to the soldier on the ground or as he 

flies to the battlefield. The Global Information Grid (GIG), an 

element of the Objective Force, is an integrated, interoperable 

digital information infrastructure supporting the strategic, 

operational, and tactical information and intelligence needs for 

our warfighters. Whatever infonnation we need will be available 

to us from the GIG. Future improved versions of our Digital 

Topographic Support System (DTSS) and the Maneuver Control 

System (MCS) will feed information into, and receive information 

from, the GIG. Data from the intelligence community, national 

intelligence assets, and other military and civilian information 

providers will also be fed into the GIG, fused at some point 

and fed back on demand. We may receive digital geospatial 

information and imagery in the middle of an Asian jungle from 

a French, Russian, or even a commercial satellite. 

Organizational structures are still being designed, but 

current UA designs have engineers embedded within the UA 

itself, as iftoday's tank battalion had its own organic engincer 

platoon. Many engineer "capabilities" will be performed by 

nonengineer personnel or organizations and may be built into 

equipment designs (for example, blast mitigating hulls on the 

FCS). There will be extensive use of robotic systems to perform 

the dangerous missions of countermine and reconnaissance, 

to name only two. 

UE organizations are still being designed. It is our intent for 

engineer UE organizations to be modular offspring of today's 

echelon-above-division (EAD) and echelon-above-corps (EAC) 

battalion-sized organizations, existing within the UE to 

support the UA. Some of these modules will be specialized 

teams. These engineers will be supporting not only U.S. forces 

but also coalition forces and other governmental and nongovernmental organizations and will be needed to restore 

facilities to the local population and government. Special "urban 

infrastructure" organizations and technical or specialized 

augmentation support teamslcells are likely to be needed for 

such things as power generation and distribution, sanitary 

sewers, and water- and gas-distribution nets, in addition to 

execution of environmental baseline surveys and integration 

actions. Contractors will most likely provide a good deal of this 

support. 

New Objective Force Tasks 

ur work with the Objective Force has already 

introduced a new concept-assured mobility. Today, 

our forces avoid obstacles when possible and breach 

tlicm \\lien necessary, but tend to react to minefields and other 

obstacles as they approach them. Assured mobility is a 

combined-arms proactive approach to mobility in which we 

use information to maximize avoidance and prevent enemy 

actions that inhibit mobility. Computer algorithms are used along 

with intelligence, geospatial information, and weather data to 

identify numerous routes to the objective and to predict likely 

obstacles along each of those routes. The task force then 

maneuvcrs along multiple, dispersed, parallel routes to the 

objective. In this manner, minefields are no longer as prevalent, 

and we can handle them at standoff without changing our 

momentum. The slow, methodical breaching of minefields that 

we must practice today becomes the exception rather than the 

rule. This is how it works: 

See First-We develop the mobility common operating 

picture (COP)by integrating terrain, imagery, and intelligence 

to determine potential operating areas. 

Understand First-We select, establish, and maintain 

operating areas by identifying or predicting potential 

obstacles and booby traps, enemy staging areas, threat 

avenues of approach and egress, and emplacement 

methods using standoffdetection means. We then "swarm" 

surveillance assets to cover suspected areas. Sensor nets 

allow 11sto detect enemy movements and actions, which 

cues validation sensors to suspected activity. The sensors 

then track the enemy and provide a detailed COP to our 

engagement systems. 

Act First-We swarm surveillance assets to attack the 

enemy's ability to influence our operating areas before 

he has a chance to place mines into or onto the ground, 

April 2002 Engineer 5 
Maint 

and I 

---

;elect, E 

and m 

lity 

Im 

SEE FIRST 

operating areas 

mornentu influence operating ar 

and we neutralize any oveiwatching observation and fires With this shift in emphasis, we have also changed our 

in order to deal with mines or booby traps out of contact. priority for materiel development. Three tailored lists have 

replaced the sing1e"I-n" list you have seen in the past. one for Finish Decisively-The cumulative effect of See First, each of the three forces, Unde,s~andF~rsr.and Act Ftrsr allows us to mass forces 

arrivingonmultipleroutes to Finish Decisively Mobility actions 

such as breaching and bridging are included. 

2. Star 

3. Star 

-

.. 

7. Ral 

8. Terr 

re Force 1 

ility Information Syste 

doff Mine 1 

idoff Mine I 

I-n List 

m 

rilliant Sensor-Munition 

3-Mobility V 

aneuver Support Bridging Suite 

,idly Deployable Conr 

ain Shaping Munition 

3n 

9. Dem, 

10. lnfri n Equipme 

olition Mod 

astructure I 

ernization 

Sonstructio 

The Interim Force 

e are more familiar with the Interim Force. Like the 

Objective Force, the CSA's intent is to puta combat- w capable brigade anywhere in the world within 96

hours. ti full division in 120 hours, and five divisions on the 

ground within 30 days. The Interim Brigade Combat Team 

(IBCT) has a 118-mansapper company that supports 80 percent 

ofthe mobility tasks' required for the IBCT and has specialized 

engineer equipment, including an engineer variant of the 

Stlykerinterim armored vehicle, the Rapidly Emplaced Bridge 

System (REBS), thevolcano scatterable mine system,the small 

emplacement excavator (SEE), (which will be replaced by the 

high-mobility engineer excavator [HMEE]), a downsized version 

of the Mongoose explosive standoff minefield breacher, the 

deployable universal combat earthmover (DEUCE), and access 

to the Digital Topographic Support System (DTSS) which is 

located at the brigade headquarters. The Engineer Regiment in 

the Interim Division (IDIV) provides the maneuver commander 

with engineer command and control, mobility (to include assault 

6 Engineer April 2002 
- --- 

bridging with the REBS), countermobility, survivability, general 

engineering (both vertical and horizontal construction), and 

embedded geospatial engineering support. EAD engineer 

support augments the capabilities of both the IBCT and IDIV 

engineer organizations. 

We have developed a separate I-n list specifically for this 

force. There are a number of differences between this list and 

the one for the Objective Force; these differences reflect the 

differences in the missions of the two forces and the time fl-ame 

of their availablility. The IBCTIIDIV engineer equipment and 

concepts must be pmven out for use in the Objective Force. 

Interim Force I-n 

1. "13 S (five var2 

- 2. 	 Enaineer Souad Vehlcle 

3. 	 Standoff Mine C 

4. 	 Mongoose 

5. 	 HtBS 

6. 	 Countermine Robotics 

7. 	 Raptor1 Advanc ed Hornet 

8. 	 Demolitions Mc ~dernizatiorI 

9. 	 HMEE 

10. 	Light Constructlul~ 3ul~t. 

11. 	Brid!ling Suite 

12. MCS;-E 

,., 	 ,I-,-. ...-I A", A la. 	VUILdllVlhTLfl 

The Legacy Force 

The Legacy Force provides our near-term offensive 

capability. It contains a light "forced-entry" force that 

includes the lOlstAirborneDivision(AirAssa~ilt),82d 

Airborne Division, 10th Mountain Division, 25th Light Infantry 

Division, and the National Guard's 29th Light Infantry Division. 

The Legacy Force includes an "early-entry" force (referred to 

as the containment force in some documents) composed of 

forward-deployed divisions (1st Infantry Division, 2d Infantry 

Division, and 1st Armored Division) and active and Army 

Reserve reinforcing combat units along with seven National 

Guard divisions and eight National Guard enhanced brigades. 

These forces will undergo only modest modernization efforts, 

sustainment, and recapitalized to maintain our offensive power 

until the Objective Force is fielded. They will be among the first 

units to rnove to the Objective Force. The "heavy-punch" 

component of the Legacy Force is the modernized I11 Corps, 

maximized for a counterattack role and composed of 1st Cavalry 

April 2002 


Division, 4th Infantry Division, 3d Infantry Division, and 3d 

Armored Cavalry Regiment. The Counterattack Corps is the 

Army's highest priority for reorganization. With the Amy's 

decision to not procure the Grizzly, our #I priority system last 

year, the Legacy I-n List is changed as follows: 

I rmarlr Force I-n List 

1. 	 vv"l"t.rl 

2. 	 Standon Mlne Uetectlon (HSTAMIDS, GSTAMIDS, 

TAMIDS) 

3 


4. 	 Wlba-C 

5. 	 HornetiRaptor 

6. 	 Bradle)1 Engineer Sauad Veh 

7 	 ,se 

8. 	 Bridging Suite (common bridge transporter [CBT], 

improved ribbon bridge [IRB], dly support bridge, 

and line-of-communication bridge [LOCBI) 

9 	 ?mine Rob otics 

1 	 uction Equ ipment 

Headquarters, Department of the Army has directed only 

modest modernization in this force, accepting risk her-e to enable 

development of the Interim and Objective Forces. 

Near-Term Work Effort 

EAD and EAC Engineer Battalions 

Our quest for change does not ignore the EADIEAC portion 

of our Regiment. Areview of these organizations can streamline 

certain components into the more mobile and deployable units 

we need in the future. This portion of our force structure 

comprises 72 percent of our Regiment and is a major player in 

our plans for the Objective Force. What this force brings to the 

fight is the ability for long-term sustainment of operations. 

However, we must begin to upglade our construction equipment 

fleet, for which we need approximately $150 million per year. 

We have been working with less than that requirement for years. 

We must take a hard look atthe capabilities we need, eliminate 

redundancy, and develop alternatives to provide our construction needs. Key missions into the Objective Force will 

include airfield construction and improvement, lines-ofcommunication (LOC) development and maintenance, 

infrastructure development and sustainment, and mine-clearing 

operations and environmental-integration actions. 

RestrictiveIComplex Terrain 

As the Russians learned in Chechnya, and as we learned in 

Mogadishu, military operations in urban terrain (MOUT) remain 

Engineer 7 

the great equalizer. We must prepare and equip our soldiers 

now for these highly likely future scenarios. We must give our 

platoon and company officers the tools, experience, and tactical 

acumen to fight and win the MOUT battle. The Infantry School 

has the lead in developmet~tof MOUT doctrine and training 

strategy, and we will be in "lockstep" with them as we identify 

the doctrine, training, leader development, organization, 

materiel, and soldier (DTLOMS) requirements for the combinedarms team at brigade level and below. We see our traditional 

engineer MOUT missions of ~ubble,mine, and booby trap 

clearing; demolitions; force protection-to include environmental considerations, survivability, and infrastructure repaircontinuing into the Objective Force. 

Beyond MOUT, engineers will continue to add great value 

to the force when it encounters difficult terrain. Our forcemodernization plan is sharply focused on enabling high mobility 

of the transformed Army and on emplacing dynamic obstacles 

for countermobility operations. Geospatial engineering 

promises detailed terrain-feature information about roads, 

airfields, buildings, bridges, obstacles, subsurface infrastructure 

(for example, stomi sewers and utility conduits), and anything 

that has a symbol on the map. "Point-and-click" technology 

will bring up an infomiation table (attributes) about each symbol 

and provide key information upon which tactical decisions will 

be based. Predictive terrain modeling for both threat analysis 

and friendly course-of-action development is required. Key 

programs in the works areRapid acquisition and application of fully attributed digital terrain data to support three-dimensional terrain 

visualization. 

Decision support tools that provide predictive modeling of 

building composition and strength of materials for precise 

and proportional weapons effects. 

New explosiveand nonexplosi\re technologies for standoffi 

remote reduction of walls and other obstacles. We are 

the obstacle-reduction experts and must he fully knowledgeable of the latest in explosive and nonexplosive 

technologies. To this end, we are establishing a "master 

breacher" progratii similar to the armor and infantry "master 

gunner" programs. 

Modifications to our training methods that ensure we have 

the necessary skills to meet the challenges of fighting and 

winning in complex terrain. 

Employment of robotics to support the full spectrum of 

MOUT-from robotic followers used as "mules" that can 

transport equipment and casualties to robots used in 

reconnaissance and cleariugibreaching operations to 

create lanes through obstacles. 

The need for urban rubble-clearing capabilities to maintain 

maneuver dominance in complex terrain. 

The need to reinforce, rebuild, or reestablish civilian 

infrastructure. 

The need for our sappers to move. shoot, communicate. 

and pave the way for the maneuver force they support. 

Sappers must have the tools, TTP, and training needed 

to accomplish their mission for the combined-arms team. 

Geospatial Engineering. This is the development, dissemination, andanalysis ofterrain information that is accurately 

referenced to precise locations on the earth's surface. Although 

this is new terminology (replacing topography), the emphasis 

is still on engineers bcing the terrain experts for the tnaneuver 

commander.Our leaders must be "masters ofterraiu." Geospatial 

engineering is keeping pace with other Department of Defense 

organizations and services as they move from the old 

topographic line-map mentality into a new geospatial 

information age. The National lmage~yand Mapping Agency 

(NIMA) has developed the foundation-data concept, a 

revolutionary approach to provide geospatial information to 

wartighters. It relies on a readiness and responsiveness strategy 

that moves away from many standard products and toward an 

information-management environment. This strategy calls for 

the establishment of near-global coverage of foundation data, 

including medium-resolutioo geospatial information (for 

example, a joint-operations graphic at 1 :250,000 scale). 

Regardless of location or mission, the foundation data will be 

available and maintained to provide a consistent, worldwide 

level of preparedness or readiness. Enhancements to the 

foundation data will generate mission-specific data sets to 

satisfy specific mission information needs. The mission-specific 

data sets are more detailed than foundation data and contain 

more time-sensitive geospatial content to meet intended uses. 

Engineer leaders must know how toexploit this inform~t' ion. 

Countermine. Currently, at least 72 countries have mines 

already in the ground, impacting all CmC areas of rcsponsihility. 

To most Third World countries, mines are a cheap, nasty, and 

effective means of conducting asymmetric warfare against a 

First World state and protecting national or tribal interests. 

Mines remain the "weapon of choice" for many rogue states. 

The article on page 21 describes how the Engineer School is 

tackling the countermine requirements for the current and the 

future force. 

Dynamic-Obstacle Emplacement. The offensive and 

dynamic nature offuture operations, coupled with the reduced 

number of sappers on the ground, forces us to shift from a 

reliance on conventional obstacles to emplacement of lessmanpower-intensive dynamic obstacles with "turn-unhrn-off' 

and programmable self-destruct capability. 

Fratricide from scatterablemines, time and resources required 

to put up fratricide fences, and implications of short-duration 

scatterable mines--coupled with problems associated with 

long-duration release authority-dictate that we look for a turnonlh~m-offcapability. We must also look at "self-reporting," 

"self-marking," and Force XXI Battle Command-Brigade and 

Below (FBCB2) reporting capabilities to further enhance the 

task force's situational awareness. We are exploring, with other 

proponents, possible solutions to emplacing deep dynamic 

obstacles. 

8 Engineer April 2002 
Munitions such as the Hornet, Advanced Homet, Raptor 

Intelligent Combat Outpost, and mixed (antitank and 

antipersonnel) Antipersonnel Landniine Alternatives (APLAs) 

will pro\,ide us with new capabilities incorporating a high-tech 

ability to seek, identify, and destroy enemy ground vehicular 

systems. The Advanced Hornet will give us tlie first remote 

turn-onlh~rn-off capability and provide technological insights 

to add this capability to our current stock of scatterable mines. 

These intelligent dynamic-obstacle systems seamlessly 

integrate with our overarching engineer geospatial and command, control, conlniunications. computers. intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance (C41SR) MCS. 

Alternatives to current "dumb antipersonnel land mines 

are being developed. Among these alternatives are an artillerydelivered mixed munition; a "self-healing" minefield consisting 

of antitank mines equipped with sensors, intcrnal communication systems, and injectors that relocate and synchronize 

the minefield in near real-time; and non-self-destructing 

alternative (NSDA) munitions that add a soldier to the decision 

loop before munition activation. 

C41SR Systems. As we look at the Army'sTransfom~ation 

Campaign Plan-our path to the future-we see that 

knowledge-based battle com~nand is the key to increased 

lethality and survivability. Comprehensive and reliahle C4ISR 

systems are the cornerstone of the digitized Army. They give 

us the COP and superior situational awareness and understanding to facilitate precision maneuver and engagement. 

One of our niost iinportant ncar-term goals is to define the 

critical information that must be digitized and how it is to he 

managed. It is critical that we work with our field commanders 

to correctly define this requirement. To maintain our relevance 

on the battlefield. we must develop and field a world-class 

engineer MCS. The MCS-E is an automated decision support 

and management element to be embedded in MCSs supporting 

the maneuver commander and providing the engineer 

conlnlandcr rapid answers othenvise requiring time-consuming, 

manual calculations. The MCS-E is tied to the DTSS and the 

rest of the Anny Battle Command System (ABCS) and is fully 

integrated throughout the battlespace. It links the commander 

to Tele-Engineering assets providing access to subject-matter 

experts from around the world. 

Changes in engineer command and control structures in 

EAD are also being defined. Problems dealing with a mix of 

digitized and nondigitized units are prevalent. As LOCs become 

extended and the security of these LOCs decreases, command 

and control becomesmore challenging. Anear-term requirement 

will be defini~lg the roles of engineer brisades and groups and 

their span of control in the hattlespace. 

Training, Leader Development, and Soldiers. Tlie explosion 

of information technology, with its attendant operational and 

personnel irnplicalions, is helping to forge the Engineer 

Regiment of the 21st century. Even with changes to our 

stnlchlre, equipnient, and technologies. our core functions of 

battlefield engineering and infrastructure support remain central 

to our nlission. The Regiment must acquire the finest equipment 

and write the doctrine for using it effectively on the battlefield. 

The Regiment must also develop soldiers and leaders with the 

right skills, knowledge. and experience to meet unforeseen 

challenges ofthe 21st century. In the end, our most important 

mission and future success lies with the soldiers we train, equip, 

and deploy in support of the Army and the nation. Anny training 

is in a period of sisificant transition. What we train, how we 

train, and the methods used to plan and execute training are all 

changing. 

The article on page 24 describes how the legacy Officer 

Education System (OES) will trdnsform to meet the Objective 

Force education needs. These changes are required due to the 

diversity of the Army's missions, the scarcity of resources, 

increased weapon lethality, and an anticipated decrease in 

available training time and space. The purpose ofthe next few 

paragraphs is to provide the direction regimental training will 

take in the near term. 

Digitizatinn is the near-telin technology for storing and 

processing infonnation. In the very near future, there will be 

fewer hard-copy field manuals, soldier training publications. 

mission training plans. and such. Access to these training and 

doctrinal ~natcrials comes through the Anny Doctrine and 

Training Digital Library on the Internet or through thc Standard 

Anny Training System (SATS). Staffing of proposed revisions 

occurs electronically. Training development is also transitioning 

to electronic media. There will no longer be paper-based 

programs of instruction, lessonplans, andjoh and task analyses. 

The training-development process will be accomplished in the 

Automated Systems Approach to Training (ASAT) database. 

Training developers input information into ASAT. the data are 

manipulated. and the output is training products that soldiers1 

unitslactivities obtain via an electronic medium (Internet, SATS, 

or data discs). 

Classroom XXItakes the classroom to the battlefield and 

the battlefield to the classroom. It provides worldwide access 

to digital infonnation. training. and simulation. We currently 

have 13 classroon~s with this capability and will have 27 by 

2009. These classrooli~s provide a multimedia environment with 

worldwide access to ii~stmctionli~ifomiation. The digital fomlat 

oftraining materials/products provides a faster. more econonlic 

means of delivery. In tlie near term, the Engineer School 

conducts sniall-group instruction using expert obser\,ercontrollers from the combat training centers. assesses student 

comprehension and performance, and delivers world-class 

source materials on demand-to include the capability to 

televise live classroom instnlction to students worldwide. 

Distance learning is a concept for delivering training to 

soldiers u,hen and where it is needed without having to brillg 

the soldiers to the schoolhouse. It is the engine making 

Classroo~n XXI achievable: it incorporates a number of 

emerging technologies to acconlplish "distributed learning." 

CD-ROM and computer-based (Web-based) multimedia 

programs are two technologies used by the Engineer School. 

Some training-support packagcs and portions of some courses 

April ZOO2 Diphieer 9 
are available via these media. The Engineer Focused Battle 

CommandIStaff Training (EFBCST) System is an Engineer 

School initiative consisting of three progressive training tools 

for commanders and staffs: the Engineer Battle Staff Training 

System (EBSTS), Engineerstaff-Conduct-of-Fire Trainer 

(ES-COFT), and Engineer Collective Command and Staff Trainer 

(ECCST). The EBSTS is an Internet-based series of courses 

designed to train commanders and staffs on critical individual 

tasks. Eight individual position lessons have been developed 

or are under development. We are continuing to pursue funding 

for the remainingpam ofthis training system. Distance leaming 

will be applied in many ways to achieve TRADOC's goal to 

have soldiersistudents spend less time in resident instluction 

at the school; major portions of courses will be accomplished 

via distance leaming. 

Simulators and simulations (Sim2) are in great demand for 

accomplishing training. Increases in operating tempo and 

ammunition costs are coupled with a decline in maneuver areas 

and ranges. Currently, the Engineer School uses constructive 

simulations (Janus and BrieadeiBattalion - Battle Simulation 

[BBS]) to conduct training exercises for leader courses (officer 

and senior noncommissioned officer). In the next few years, 

Janus and BBS will be replaced with One-Semiautomated Forces 

(One-SAF), providing more realistic training possibilities. The 

training strategy for the Wolverine relies heavily on Sim2 for 

both institutional and collective!sustainment training. We are 

working hard to become an active player in the virtual training 

world. The Engineer School is working with TRADOC on the 

justification and requirements to include engineer equipment 

and systems in the close combat tactical traincrivirtual training 

arena. Our edition ofthis effort is called the Engineer Combined 

Arms Tactical Trainer (ENCATT). Pending funding, we project 

("Clrai- The Cl'ctx " continlied from page 2) 

We have spanned the Army in our search for ENFORCE g 

speakers who are relevant to the Army's change and operatior 

centered to give you the straight facts, insights, and vision 

you need to hear and challenge. These speakers agreed to c' olne 

because they understand the importance of Engineers to our 

Army now and it1 the Objective Force. If you have an imp01 *atit 

message to convey to the conference from your neck of . . woods, let me know and we'll help get your stop out. 

With much help from Engineers in the field and our C 

Infantry, Armor, MI, and Ordnance brothers-in-arms, .... 

Engineer School continues to make progress develog ling 

solutions to counter our current and future mine and boc ,bytrap problems. Since briefing the Vice Chief of Staff of the A rmv 

(VCSA) and the Army Requirements Oversight Council (AR' UL) 

last December, we have continued to move forward in efl brts 

to get our deployed forces in Operation Enduring Free1 lom 

(OEF) what they need now to detect and neutralize mine thrc :ats. 

In conjunction with HQ TRADOC, we established a 

Countennine Integrated Concepts Team (ICT), that launched a 

Countermine Council of Colonels (CoC), which met in March, 

and a Countermine General Officer Stecring Committee (GOSC), 

which met in April. These fora had great participation fi-om the 

10 Engineer 

having this capability for the engineer force by the 2005 time 

frame. Simulations continue to become increasingly realistic 

and eventually will include simulations of individual soldiers 

connected via fiber-opticidistributed interactive simulation 

lines all overthe world. 

Tactics, techniques, and procedures and new doctrine will 

be developed for engineer soldiers and leaders with new 

equipment and concepts to support the Interim and Objective 

Forces. 

Conclusion 

Development of new engineer capabilities is not solely 

the job of the schoolhouse. Good solutions require 

the help ofthe entire Engineer Regiment. I challenge 

tlic combat developments community, school, labs, and 

engineer commanders in the field to focus on the issues 

presented throughout this paper. By focusing our efforts on 

these top issoes, we will be able to achieve our goal-to 

remain the best-trained. -prepared, and -equipped engineer 

force in ihe 11ur.ld. -

W 

Major General Aadlaird is the Commandant of the CIS Al-n~x 

Engineer School and Cornmo,ider of the Monetrver. Support Genre,: 

For1 Leonard Wood. Missouri. 

Mr Allen is the lead ar~aiysi omdscie,rce odi,i.~ocfor the Concepts 

Branch, Engineer Division, MANSCENDCD. He ir reriredfjorn the 

U.S. A,mv Reserve with 34 years of ucrii'e, re.re)ve. and civilian 

militan; dug? 

~ ~ d ~ ~ t ~ : 

'The company's limited countermobility and survivability 

capabilities, a~nd no gr fneral enqineerinq ca~abilitv, make it 

pendent on -

other enc iineer units for thi;support. I I I 
 -

staff. other branch proponents, our sister services. national 

ncies and ". labs. and the intelligence community. This 

lnues a tull-court press effort to solve current and filhlre 

cou ntermine challenges and ensur -e that thc countermine 

priority is not just another "flash in t he pan." We are plannitig 

future CoC and GOSC nil setings, wil 1 seek your panicipation, ..A . "A *I-^ C^", Lu will keep this progran, dL front of Army priorities. 

The pace of change in our Army and our Regiment are un- 

.ecedented. As our CSA, Gen Shinseki, said, "If you dislike 

lange, you're going to dislike irrelevance even more." As a 

bran~ch,we are committed not only to leading change but also 

to nnaking sure these changes strengthen the Army's warfighting capability and increase the vitality of our Regiment as 

~"mbat arm. With your help, the Engineers will continue to be 

a force driving change; be sure to keep your head in that game. 

finjoy this ENFORCE conference and come ready to participate. 

T!hrough it you will gain important insights as to where our 

Regiment can go armed with the commitment, brilliance, and 

innovation of our current leaders and those bright young sapper 

leaders who will follow. These are exciting times and we have 

much work to do! 

ESSAYONS! 

April 2002 

1 
Bv MI:Mike Fowler uizd Liel~leilanrColoi~elGar?; Johit.s/oii 

uring the past dccadc, the U.S. Army has been 

engaged in a deliberate and sweeping effort to adapt 

its organizations, soldiers, equipmcnt, and lnethods 

oioperation to the reqilirements of a rapidly changing strategic 

and technological landscape. The Am~yVision dcscribes the 

characteristics of the Objective Force, and emerging technologies promise a clear path to that futore. The power of 

advanced technologies, especially information technology, 

enables the Army to achieve situational dominance and 

decision-making momentum to create a new construct for the 

application offorce. 

The hallmark oftlie Objective Force described in this article 

is its rcliance on small, lethal. tactical units. At the heart of 

these units are soldiers and leaders-warriors-who know 

and live Artny values; are disciplined, physically tough, and 

mentally conditioned for combat; have perscvcrancc; are 

technically and tactically competent; and possess an unbreakable will to win. These tough, resilient, resourceful, 

versatile professionals-equipped with the best technologies 

our nation can provide and led by the most competent 

leadership we can grow-will remain persuasive in peaceand 

invincible in war, the ultimate guarantors ofAmerica's interests 

around thc world. 

OperationalConcept 

The Objective Forcc is a full-spectrum forceorganized, manned, equipped, and trained to be more 

strategically responsive, deployable, agile, versatile, 

lethal, sun-ivahle, and sustainable across the entircspectnlrn 

ofmilitary operations.ObjectiveForce units contributeto decisive 

joint operations by conducting simultaneous, distributed, 

continuous, combined-arms air-ground operations4ay or 

night-in any terrain throughout the bartlespace. 

Objectivc Force units are designed to operate at a tempo 

that affords the enemy no rest or rclief and no means of 

I-espondingeffectively. These units develop situations out of 

contact, maneuver to positions of advantage, engage enetny 

forces beyond the range of their weapons, and destroy thcm 

with precision fires and, when necessary, by tactical assault at 

times and places of oul-choosiog. Objective Force units will 

employ the full range of national and joint capabilities to see 

first, undsstanc/,fir.~t,ocr.firsI, and Jinisk deci?i~~eI]~ at the 

strategic, operational, and tactical levels. 

See First 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilitiescoupled with other ground, air, and space sensors networked 

into a common integrated operational picturc-enable us to 

see the enemy, both in whole and in part, as a complex, adaptive 

organization. The enablers for seeing first include, as a 

minimumrn Combat identification systems. 

rn Organic sensors that arc robotic, multispectral, and 

disposable. 

rn Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). 

rn Embedded command, control, communications, computers, 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR). 

rn Special-operations forces. 

Long-range surveillance detachments. 

Air and ground reconnaissance operations 

Data-fusion systems, global-informatio~grids, and leader 

training will enable decision makers to have a synthesized, 

common picture of the battlefield-the common operational 

picture (COP). Bli~idingthe enemy through the use of 

obscurants, jamming, signature rcduction, deception. and 

pattern-avoidance techniques will further enhance the 

Objective Force's ability to scc first. 

Understand First 

Objective Force unitsunderstand first through cxploitation 

of a COP of the battlespace that allows soldiers and leaders to 

understand what the enemy is doing and bcttcr anticipate his 

intentions. As leaders at all levels observe this common picture, 

they simultaneously analyzc and share assessments through 

their Web-based command and control systems. Objective 

Force commanders can leverage the intellect, experience, and 

tactical intuition of leaders at multiple levels to identify enemy 

ccntcrs of gravity and co~lceptualizesolutions, thus CI-eatinga 

collective genius through accelerated collaborative planning 

within Objective Force units. As commanders decide on a 

course of action, they instantaneously disseminate their intent 

to all levels, affording lnaximum time for subordinatc levels to 

conduct requisite troop-leading procedures. The time gained 

through effective use of these information technologies enables 

Objective Force units to seize and retain the initiative and build 

momcntum for decisive outcomes. Thc key cnablers for understanding first includeA laiowledge-based battle-command system. 0b.jective Force units see first by detecting, identifying, 

and tracking the individual components of enelny units. rn Mcntally agile, intuitive, and adaptive leaders at all levels. 

Advanced technologies that lead to unprecedented rn An execution-centric command and control system 
T - be First Establish 8 

Maintain 

-	n 

a,

.
 WhMArnth. C

> 	 SURED 0-	 Moncuvcr? 

a 

P 
 How can I ma1 

WllhThsrn? I! 

I "\ 


i 
 ' 	 Sustain Mobility , and U~menlum Wh 1 ~ ~ ~ ct First. . . -. 

Anticipate...Execute...Force the Enemy to React I 	 1 


Leaders must be educated forrapid synthesis of infortnatiotl. 

intuitive assessments of situations, and rapid conceptualization 

of friendly courses of action. They must be able to clearly 

define their information requirements and, most importantly, 

develop and effectively communicate their intent. Units must 

be highly trained and disciplined in the use of these infonnation 

technologies to efficiently managc thc volumes of infonnation 

they will provide. This will rcquire disciplined use of infonnation 

protocols, leader education, and new training and lcaderdevelop~nent concepts in both live and constructive 

environments. 

Act First 

Objective Force units act first by virtue of the superior 

situational awareness that permits them to engage the enemy 

at times and placcs of our choosing. Wide dissemination of the 

comma~~dcr'sintent, coupled with broad access to the COP, 

will provide unprecedented opportunities for subordinate 

initiative to exploit enemy vulnerabilities as opportunities 

prescnt themselves. Furthermore, this information will allow 

our commanders to integrate the elements of combat power 

into a do~ninant whole when applying decisive force, both lethal 

and nonlethal. To act first, Objective Force leaders, platforms, 

and units mustm 	 Have infonnation dominance. 

m 	 Be capable of moving, shooting, and reengaging faster than 

the enemy. 

Target-acquisition systems will see farther than the enemy 

in all conditions and environments. Units will be able to rapidly 

assess options, act first by understanding when and where 

they must transition between actions, and maintain fully 

synchronous fires throughout the violence of execution. The 

design is to deny the enemy any respite or initiative while 

Objective Forces operatc at high operational tempo. Objective 

Force units will bc cnabled by systems that link and clear 

12 Engi~leer 

line-of-sight and beyond-line-of-sight fires through advanced 

weapons control systems and man-in-the-loop decision 

making. 

Finish Decisively 

Objective Force units finish decisively by dcstroying the 

enemy's ability to continue the fight and achieving moral 

dominance over him. The units will do this by building 

momentum and rapidly transitioning to assault and exploitation 

operations without allowing the enemy time or opportunity to 

regroup and continue the fight. Units will maneuver by both 

ground and air to assume tactical and operational positions of 

advantage through which thcy will continue to dominate the 

enemy and pursue subsequelit campaign objectives. Objective 

Force units will continuc toexploit the initiative until they have 

broken the enemy morally andlor physically, thus achieving 

decisive victory. 

Assured Mobility 

The mobility of the Objective Force is critical to 

maintain the high tempo and operate over the 

extended distances dictated by this concept. Assured 

mobility is one of several key maneuver support enablers of 

thc Objective Force and must bedeveloped to its full potential. 

Assured mobility extends the concept of air corridor suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD) to ground nobility 

routes, corridors, or operating areas. Today, troops on thc 

ground must continue to develop the current situation, develop 

the lnobility plan after deployment, and remc~nbcr that 

situational understanding is time-sensitive. 

In the Objective Force, space, air, and ground imaging sensors will maintain current, real-time situational understanding, 

and sensor-effects links will preclude the enemy from modifying 

the current situation. The selcctcd course of action will be 

encompassed by a blanket of sensor coverage allowing assured 

mobility with sensors and effects similar to the SEAD effects 

April 2002 
today. The current operational pictures will be fed continuously 

to commanders, and area-denial systems will prevent enemy 

alteration. Futurc requirements for the intelligence, surveillance, 

and reconnaissance system include sensors that can distinguish among friendly, enemy, and civilian activities; predict 

and verify enemy intent with assured route mobility sensors (a 

mobility decision aid); anddeny enelny forces theopportunity 

to apply counlermobility measures. 

At present, engineers are task-organized to handle a myriad 

of tasks in a worst-case mission scenario. Current doctrine 

requires 150 percent redundancy of engineer systems to ensure 

mission accomplishment. In the Objective Force, engineers will 

task-organize only with nccessary mission-specific equipment. 

Mobility support will be provided by planned/focused engineer 

effort, thereby reducing the necessity of redundancy required 

today, supported by Future Cornbat System (FCS) mobility 

mission modules with prepackaged equip~nent for specific 

missions. Future mine-detection and -neutralization capabilities, 

both standoff and organic, will allow the preparation of the 

battlefield with an assurance and safety factor not imaginable 

today. Future requirements includc thc FCS mobility package, 

robotic standoffmine-detection and breaching capabilities, and 

a standoff marking system. Standoff dctection and breaching 

can be accomplished by systelns such as the conceptual route 

access and proofing system, which will have robotic vehicles 

move down a desired route--identifying and electronically 

marking mines along the way-with standoff mine killers such 

as the UAV or vehicle-mounted rockets homing in on the 

electronic signal to destroy the threat. 

Thcrc are four main tasks for assured mobility. Those tasks 

are not necessarily sequential. 

Develop the Mobiliq COP 

This is the collection and integration ofgeospatial, cultural, 

and enelny information-aided by automated mobility planning 

tools-to establish the mobility COP for the operating area. 

This information allows us to quickly develop our initial 

modified combined-obstacle overlay (MCOO) and enables the 

maneuver commander to select the mobility course of action. 

Knowledge ofthe existing obstacles and monitoringof existing 

traffic pattelns are two examples that allow us to see the 

battlefield in near-real time. This information allows the 

maneuver commander to detennine where he wants to maneuver, 

what resources will be required to get there, and how the enemy 

can attempt to influence this mancuver plan. The mobility COP 

identifies the operating areas and the mobility issues within 

those areas for the maneuver plan. 

Select, Establish, and Maintain Operating Areas 

With the aide of automated tools, critical mobility choke 

points and operating areas will be identified and a shaping 

plan developed. This plan includes prediction of encrny actions 

and intents and required sensor coverage to fill any infotmation 

voids within the operating area. Sensors will bc cmployed, or 

focused from other assets, on the critical areas to fill thc voids 

or improve our sihlatiollal understanding and maintain our 

April 2002 

mobility COP. To solidify the mobility COP, sensor-effects 

packages will be e~nployed at critical areas to protect them from 

enemy influence. In coordination with these sensor-effects 

packages, conducting standoff attacks on selected enemy 

capabilities to perform countemline activities-or deceiving 

the enemy to focus his attention on other areas-will fix the 

current mobility situational understanding. An active protective 

system will be emplaced at choke points, such as bridges, to 

counter enemy attempts to disrupt us at such points. Being 

able to control and monitor critical mobility areas is key to 

coordinating a mobilityplan in conjunction with theschcme of 

maneuver. Simply put, "sensor staring" will enable the 

Objective Force to "own" the operating area. 

Attack the Enemy's Ability to Influence Operating Areas 

Employing standoff-detection and obstacle-neutralization 

systems to maintain mobility within operating areas will ensure 

freedom of rnanetnrer. This will be accomplished with a 

combination of rori/-~fien~p/oymenr(UE) and unit-of-action 

(UA) resources. Battlespace temain reasoning and awareness 

(BTRA) will allow us to template potential obstacles and 

locations of where the enemy might place obstacles. Standoff 

detection of obstacles and standoff neutralization (where 

necessary) or attacking of thesc obstacles in coordination with 

the maneuver plan are critical to reserve UA resources. This is 

a proactive attack of the enemy's ability to employ obstacles. 

Attacking the enemy's ability to shape the battle-space is also 

a key enabler for the UA's mobility. Sensor systems such as 

the Raptor and the antipersonnel land mine alternative (APLA) 

will protect the flanks of our units and deny the enemy the 

freedom of action within our ope~ating area. 

Maintain Mobilily and Momenhun 

This allows the UA the freedom of maneuver to seize his 

objective without delay. Detecting obstacles (including side-attack 

and wide-area mines) and neutralizing their effects without 

affecting the maneuver plan or momentum are critical to accomplish the speed and agility required for the Objective Force. 

As a last resort, an in-shide breaching capability must exist to 

overcome enemy obstacles that may be encountel-cd when it is 

necessary for the force to cross. Marking systems that providc 

visual, virtual, and active identification of obstacles and cleared 

or safe areas arc required. In addition to supporting the assaulting 

force, maintaining mobility and momentum has arnle to ensure 

that the force can be supported. This includes maintaining and 

opening routes for pulse logistics as well as forward landing 

areas for air resupply. We nus st be able to neutralize the effects of 

obstacles without disruption ofour maneuver momentum in one 

of four ways: detect and avoid, detect and destroy from standoff, 

detect and breach, or withstand the effects. 

Organizations 

To implement the Objective Force concepts, all Army 

organizations will be analyzed as to their need and 

relevance. This is especially true for the Engineer 

Reyment with the wide range of capabilities it brings to the 

Army. Most Anny tasks that are conductcd today will remain 

Engineer 13 
valid; however, the method used to accomplish those tasks 

may drastically change. This leads to a complete review of 

how our units are organized. 

There are scveral considerations that must be applied in 

developing the future engineer organization. Basic options 

that must bc reviewed areModularity. 

Tailorabilih/. 

Combined arms to the lowest levels. 

Task organizing on tlic move. 

Force pooling ofengineer capabilities 

The way we equip and deploy. 

Before the engineer units can be developed, the Objective 

FOI-ceorganization concept must first be understood. The 

Objective Force must fulfill a varicty of strategic. operational, 

and tactical purposes, while interacting with various political 

and military actors within the U.S. interagency process and 

the international con~munity.Thus, thc Ar11ry must maintain 

some mix of functional competencies at all levcls. Early analysis 

indicates that eliminating echelons and flattening hierarchies 

will not be as easy as coln~nonlyperceived. Many fact013111ust 

bc addressed, including the challe~igesof span of co~itrol,the 

increasing con~plexityof operations at each level of cffort, thc 

expanding battlespace geometry, the differences in tasks and 

pltlposes that occur at each echelon, and the human capabilities 

(and limitations) offuture lcaders and staffs. Eclielonnient also 

rcconcilcs the inhel-ent organizational tension between sizc 

and agility. Finally, echelonment rcflccts the reality tliat it is 

neither econo~nicalnor efficient to furnish every fi~nctional 

capability to cvcry fo~mation.Rather, the more varied and 

complex ~nilitaryactivities become, the more necessary to 

delegate functional responsibilities among more than one level 

of orgat~ization. 

Generally, when fewer consecutive eclrelons are required, 

translating intention into action is more rapid and less 

vulnerable to tiiction. There arc limits to that equation, howcver 

Beyond a celtairi point, ilattening organizations so enlarges 

Capitalizes onnew information technologies to streamline 

decision making and coordination without overloading 

commanders and staffs. 

Provides for the routine cycling of combat and support 

units into and out of action. 

Reflects an expectation that future tnilitary operations 

typically will require the employment ofjoint enablcrs at 

much lowcr organizational levels than in the past. 

Unitsof Purpose 

In the contcxt of today's echelons, we must account for the 

functions, tasks, and purposes of corps and divisions to 

establish the requirements for Objective Force echelonment. 

Weuse the UE to account for these tasks in our design work. It 

is imperative to place the UE in the contcxt of operations in 

01-der to validate tliis assessment. The UA accounts for the 

functions, tasks, and purposcs ofthe brigade and below. These 

units co~lductcombined-arms operations, employing fire and 

maneuver and tactical assault while maintaining freedom of 

action in tactical engagements. While the ultimate designations 

of Objective Forcc units of purpose retnaitl to be determined, 

for the sake of discussion, today's designations can be used 

to discuss the functions they must be able to perform. 

Echelonment in the Objective Force is a complex question 

tliat demands extensive analysis and expcrimetitation. TRADOC 

has not yet defined all levels of conitnand resident within the 

Objective Force. To discuss eclielonment, Objective Force 

concepts employ a functional fmmework in which UEs perfonn 

tasks assigned today to divisions and higher-service 

headquarters. UEsLink ground and joint forces and orchestrate ground 

operations that decide joint campaigns. 

Have the capacity to assume com~nandofjointtask forccs. 

Providc the basis forcombined-arms atr-ground ta~kforccs. 

Rcsourcc and execute combat operations. 

= Designate objectives 

m Coordi~iatcwith niultise~vice,interagency, multinational, and 

nongovcmtncntal activities. 

their span of control and increases the burdens on subordinate Employ long-range tires, aviation, and sustainment 

units that organizational sluggishness and operational risk 

actually increase. Moreover, tlic way in which successive ' C4'SR and tactical dit-ectionto 

echelons are constituted is as important as their number. 

Formations designed with a high level of organic selfsufficielrcy are-by that very quality-less easy to reconfigure, whereas formations with little organic structure require 

aug~iientationfor robustness and durability but also can be 

retailored more rapidly and easily. 

Objective Force organization retlects thcse considerations 

in rclation to the operational conditions and methods described 

carlier. ItLocates self-sufficiency and tailorability at thc cclielons 

where they are most essential. 

UAs are the tactical warfighting echelons of the Objective 

Force. For analytic purposes, UAs comprise brigade and below 

echelons. Maneuver UAs arc the smallest combined-arms units 

that can be committed indepcndcntly. Their function is to finish 

decisively by closing with and dcstroying enemy forces through 

integrated fire and maneuver and tactical assault. For continued 

developmental purposes, thc corc of the UA brigade is the 

combined-arms combat battali011tliac commands a number of 

organic small tactical units that fight as teams of fighting teams. 

The span of control of the UA brigadc is four to six battalions. 

Maneuver UAs require the qualities of durability, eotlurance, 

and stamina. Brigades are expected to employ most combat 

battalions in dispersed yet integrated cngage~nentswhile 
periodically cycling individual units into and out ofcontact to Force support (provide ~~oncontig~ous route support, area 

sustain operational momentum. Combat battalions must clearance. deceotion. and environlncntal sunoort). 

dominate the unexpected contact and be able to transition 

through several engagements in sequence. 

Engineer Organizations 

Developing organizational designs for engineers has begun 

by defining the capabilities that are requircd and those that can 

be e~nbcddedinto the UA. We will use the term "modules" to 

identify a capability that is required to accomplish a low-level 

Annv task. Each task will be broken down into souad-level detail , 

with mission-essentialequipment.These moduleswill be grouped 

together to fonn units that are co~~sistcntwithtlie Objective Force 

design (such as brigades, baualions, and companies). 

Engineer rnodules arc now being developed; these nodules 

will lcad to grouping capabilities to accomplish vital engineer 

functions in support of Army missions. For example, engineer 

missions are described using FM 7-15, The Armv U!tiwrsal 

TrrskList. Undcr the Battlefield Operating System of mobility1 

countermobility/survivability, tlie coinbined-arms tactical 

rnanuever elcrnent is required to conduct mobility operations. 

A pall of mobility operalions is overconiing barriers. obstacles, 

and mines, which leads to subtasks of conducting breaching 

opcrations. Even under the concepl of assured mobility these 

tasks will have to be perfomied when standoff neutralization or 

avoidance methods have failcd. 

Using the subtask "conduct breaching operations," we 

develop a list of modular capabilities that are required within 

engineer units to support this conibined-arms operation. After 

reviewing all the tasks. we developed 10 groups of module 

tasks: 

Mobility (cnhance mobility options by enabling bypass, 

clearing obstacles [out of contact], and breaching, when 

rcquired). 

Search (detect and neutralize mines, unexploded ordnance, 

improvised explosive devices, and other offensive enemy 

use of obstacles at standoff). 

Reconnaissance (identify mobility oppomnities and assess 

mobility restrictions). 

Shaping (proactively deny the enemy's ability to affect 

fricndly mobility, while positively affecting enemy and 

gray mobility). 

Force protection (enhance friendly and neutral forcc 

survivability through employment of terrain and infrastructure reinforcement). 

Construction (through joint, organic, host-nation, and 

contract assets, provide infrastructure and services to meet 

mission requirements, including airfield1APOD repair: 

emplacenient, LOC const~uctio~ilniaintennacc, etc). 

Geospatial (provide terrain situational awareness to enahlc 

home-field advantage and quickly develop and continuously 

update mission-specific data sets) 

,. , 

Special-purpose (provide unique specialized capabilities in 

support of opcrations). 

Command and control (plan, integrate, and sy~ichronize 

engineer capabilities requiredfor missio~isucccss; com~nand 

and control combined-arms and engineer UAs as assigned; 

control defile operations, which includes tlie ability to reach 

for assistance through information or modular capability 

outside of the organization). 

As the modules are grouped together, nlodularity, 

tailorability, and deployability are key characteristics that are 

considered. Each modular design has three components: 

Personnel with keylunique equipment. 

Army TOE equipment required for major-thcater war 

environment. 

Available cotn~nercialequip~ne~it that could be used in lieu 

of deploying the units' equipment. 

This organizational conccpt opens up new deployment options. 

So~ncunits may rapidly deploy a portion of their unit initially 

without all their fieldcd equip~nentand then lease co~n~nercial 

cquipment at a fonvard location to begin operations while the 

rest of the unit, or other engineer units, deploy by conventional 

means. This gives us options to provide CONUS-based units 

with forward-deployed capabilities. 

Conclusion 

his is just the beginning of the total review that must 

be done to support the Anny's Transformation Plan. 

It will take the i~ivolve~nentofthe entire Engineer Corps 

to ensure thatm The ~naneuverco~nmandereceives assured rnob~lity. 

Current engineer capab~litiesare embedded in the Objective 

Force (may or may not reside in engineer organizations or 

equipment). 

Engineer units are operationally responsive and agile (ready, 

tailorable, and deployable). 

Requisite Objective Force capabilities that the engineers 

nus st provide (e~nbcdded,combined areas, or modular) are 

properly addrcssed and designcd in accordance w~ththe 

concept of assured mobiltiy. 

The Engineer Schooland MANSCEN DCD engineer staff invite 

support and input from each member oftlie Engineer Regiment 

to help addl-ess these complex issues. Y 

Mr Fowler is n prvgram ario/!:,stirr file IMANSCE:~'Directorate of Coi~~hnt Deveiopmenrs. Fort Leonod Ii'ood 

Missouri. 

Lieutenar7t Colonel(Pj Johnston i,s chief ofthe ErigineerDivbion. MAhrSCEN Dirr.c.tor-ate qf Cornhot Develo/~n~ei~ts, 

Fort Leonar-d Wood Mi.s.sour.i. 
By Major Eugene Snyman and MI: Kenneth Bergman 

he Engineer Regiment has been working to develop 

digital command and control (C2) systems that 

facilitate maneuver support to the combined-arms 

commander. This work has been fully integrated with other 

efforts across the Army to automate battlefield functions. 

Although most of the work has focused on legacy systems, 

the intent is to posture C2 systems to support the operational 

concepts being developed for the Interim and Objective Forces. 

The current Army Battle Command System (ABCS) will move 

forward and transform as well. 

This article addresses the chronology of the Engineer 

Regiment's efforts to complement Armywide efforts in 

development and transformation of command, control, 

communications, and computers (C4). The central requirement 

is that the future system will serve the needs of the combinedarms commander. Requirements that are more oriented to the 

engineer staff's needs should be considered as distinct from 

maneuver requirements. Digital C2 systems will enable the future 

vision of support to maneuver forces by defining actions 

necessary to ensure the mobility of the force: see first, 

understand first, act first, andfinish decisively. 

Background 

proliferation, sophistication, and availof digital technology in the late 

came the natural impulse to apply digital 

solutions to battlefield functions. The introduction of systems 

such as the Standard Army Training System, the Unit-Level 

Logistics System, and e-mail facilitated broad steps toward 

unit automation. Engineers sought the same digital efficiency. 

In the early 1990s, USACE sponsored a Science and Technology 

Objective (STO) for the Engineer Obstacle Planning System 

(EOPS), which was a forerunner of the Maneuver Control 

System-Engineer (MCS-E). TerraBase provided staff officers 

the capability to quickly analyze terrain and distribute useful 

16 Engineer 

terrain-visualization products. SapperNET, developed by the 

3d Infantry Division in early 1999, was the first use of the 

Tactical Local Area Network to post engineer reports to a Web 

server to share commonly used data. From this legacy, the 18th 

Airborne Corps developed CastleNET as a Web-based reporting 

system that could be adapted by any engineer unit. The Engineer 

School developed the Digital Topographic Support System 

(DTSS) to provide engineer terrain teams at the brigade, 

division, corps, and echelon-above-corps levels with automated assistance performing terrain analysis and creating 

topographic products. 

Proponents of other Battlefield Operating Systems (BOSS) 

were simultaneously developing automated tools to assist in 

collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information relevant 

to their unique requirements. These included the MCS, 

Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System, and All-Source 

Analysis System. By the late 1980s, this confederation of BOS 

C2 systems became the Army Tactical Command and Control 

System (ATCCS). These systems funneled data directly from 

source to intended recipients, bypassing the wider community 

of staffs working to satisfy battlefield demands. This "stovepiping" of data was not originally a problem since it was 

understood that the staffs would distribute the relevant 

information. ATCCS had five systems. Since then, additional 

systems were added as the need for even greater BOS 

functionality became apparent. The ATCCS evolved into the 

current ABCS, which now has 11 systems. 

The Division Capstone Exercise (DCX), conducted in two 

phases at the National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California 

(DCX I), and at Fort Hood, Texas (DCX 11), better refined command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) requirements (see 

"Assessing Engineer Priorities in the Division Capstone 

Exercise," Engineer, February 2002). Commanders demonstrated how ABCS provided a common operational picture 

April 2002 
(COP) and situational awareness that improved efficiency 

and lethality. While automation has transformed battlefield 

dynamics, the systems themselves have significant 

shortcomings. 

During the DCX I1 after-action review/commandant3s video 

teleconference on 5 November. TRADOC Commander, General 

John N. Abrams, addressed some of the broad issues confronting ABCS viability. Foremost was the observation that all 

systems lacked integration and were too oriented to meeting 

individual BOS requirernents. He directed the Combined Arms 

Center Commander, Lieutenant General James C. Riley, to lead 

an effort to reassess the ABCS and make recomniendatiolis to 

TRADOC on \vhether to continue program funding, modify 

the system requirements, or discontinue the program. The 

following quote from Lieutenant General Riley addressed ABCS 

way-ahead efforts: "...overarching driver for tinal recommendations will be the degree to which each system integrates 

into the combined-anns fight in order to support situational 

understanding and decision making by combined-arms 

commanders." 

Current Situation 

here are distinct aspects of the commander's 

situational awareness that engineers historically 

manage. The Engineer Regiment is always cognizant 

of our fundanlental purpose to support the combined-amis 

commander in the prosecution of the warfight. It is challenging 

to sort through the myriad of tasks and assign priorities from 

the maneuver perspective. In one sense, all our activities are 

oriented to the combined-arms fight, but the question really 

deals with the specific infonnation the commander needs for 

decision making. These include preparation for combat, 

correlation and control of forces, knowledge of the enemy, and 

the effects of combat action. Many of the cun-ent capabilities 

in MCS are designed to meet the requirements of the battle 

captain. The commander probably does not need to see an 

engineer overlay dotted with little green marks; instead, he 

needs a visual analysis ofenemy activity, considering obstacle 

effolt grouped according to probable enemy intent. Sinlilarly, 

the commander may not understand the significance of 

electronically highlighted routes and bridges until he sees how 

they fit with other aspects of terrain and with the scheme of 

maneuver. 

The current thought is that considering the offensive focus 

of current doctrine and the emerging emphasis in the Interim 

and Objective Forces on assured mobility. obstacle situational 

awareness is one of the most impostant command requirements. 

Equally important is the ability of the commander to see the 

terrain and u~ldersta~ld its effects on maneuver. Topographic 

engineers can provide a variety ofdigital tactical decision aids 

and terrain-visualization tools for maneuver support. Other 

important tasks must be automated as well. Legacy Force 

doctrine still accounts for defensive operatioils making 

survivability and countermobility trackilig important in 

automation efforts. At this stage in ABCS development, various 

April 2002 

systems give us only pieces of the data sets required to create 

relevant command decision-making tools. 

Maneuver Control System 

The aptly named MCS does not adequately support 

the engineer's ability to package infortnation for 

the commander. Although the initial requirements 

documents addressed the need to record and report obstacle 

information, de\~elopers focused efforts on other maneuver 

priorities and on system stability. Not until operational testing 

at the DCX did the extent of the deficiencies become clear. 

Currently, the MCS has no means by which engineers can track 

obstacles, much less perform mobility analyses. Very little of 

the obstacle data generated at ground level can be autotnatically 

sent to the MCS and, even then, there are no tools to manage 

and synthesize data into information. 

As this system evolves, it must allow the soldier to 

accurately record friendly and enemy obstacles according to 

doctrine, post these immediately to the COP. and be able to 

update obstacle infolnlation in real time. Staffs must be able to 

receive, store, update, collate, analyze, and disseminate obstacle 

infonnation and graphics up and down the chain in real time. 

Technically, this requires a database-fully compatible with 

other hardware and software--empowered with user-defined 

query capability and "fi~zq-logic" decision aids. 

Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below 

Developnicnt of the Force XXI Battle Command 

Brigade and Below (FBCBZ) System. the fightingplatform-level reporting and situational-awareness 

system: accommodated engineer needs to a much greater extent 

than did the MCS. At the platfonn level, obstacle situational 

awareness is achieved. Obstacles discovered are reported in 

real time and populate the entire lower tactical internet. The 

systems in vehicles that are approaching recorded obstacles 

even give the drivers audible warning. However, during the 

DCX in early 200 1, minefield fratricide became apnmary point 

of command attention. 

I I 


FBCBZ System 


Engineer 17 
"It is envisioned that future versions of the FBCB2 Systein 

will simplify the obstacle reporting into one comprehensive 

report for both enemy and friendly obstacles. 3 7 

The FBCBZ System provides three primary message for~nats 

that engineers typically use: the obstacle report, the minefieldlaying report, and the overlay message. The obstacle report, 

intended originally as a means of reporting enemy obstaclcs, 

auto~natically displays the reported minefield on all FBCB2 

screens. The minefield report and overlay lnessagc arc intended 

for friendly minefields and graphic dissemination of enginccr 

planning. While most ofthe relevant infonnation is captured in 

these three reports, a complex combination of work arounds 

and tactics, techniques, and procedures involving all thrcc 

reports is needed to push information to the intended recipients. 

It does not automatically make information digitally acccssihlc 

to the higher echelons. 

To date, the MCS-E program has suffcred from a lack of 

definition and focus within the ABCS construct. 

Although there has bcen work since the inception of 

the MCS tocreate astand-aloneC2 system, called MCS-E, for 

the mobilitylsurvivability BOS, those efforts have fallen 

significantly short of the mark. There is also valid concern in 

the Regiment that another stovepipc box in ABCS would be a 

mistake.As a result. the Engineer School decided that MCS-E 

should be integtated directly into MCS. MCS-E is an effort to 

assist the TRADOC Systetn Manager-MCS in meeting engineer 

requirements. It will provide engineers with a seatnless, integratcd set of tools in one easy-to-use softwarc package. Capabilities will include counterrnobility, survivabilty, mobility, 

atid sustainnient tools. MCS-E will he integrated into the MCSLight System. It will incorporate all of the fu~ictionality that 

currently exists in CastleNET and will havc the added benefit 

of being totally integrated into thc ABCS architecture. 

It is intended that these tasks identified as most important 

to the combined-arms decision-making process be addressed 

by the MCS, while all additional, tnorc staff-oriented tasks be 

incorporated illto MCS-E. Integration ofthis effort is expected 

to coincide with MCS, Vcrsion 7.0, which is scheduled for 

release in FY04. 

Digital Topographic Support System 

The DTSS software is largely successful at the technical 

levcl and can be enhanced through software upgrades and doctrine, training, leadcr development, 

org;inization, materiel, and soldiers (DTLOMS) adjustments. 

Since it is able to leverage commercial software, the DTSS is a 

fully integrated member of the ABCS family and is a stable, 

reliable system in the ficld. Unique government applications 

18 Er~gineer 

provide added functionality to process digital terrain data. 

System upgrades are delivered to the field as software advances 

are achieved. Many products can be preparedusing the DTSS, 

including tactical decision aids, slope analyses, intervisibility 

plots, and 3-D terrain fly-throughs. Atnap server was added at 

DCX TI to provide a readily accessible archive for larger terraindata files in the tactical operations center. The units performed 

well at the DCX, but lnission performance standards (mission 

training plans [MTPs]) must be identified to better focus the 

soldiers on keeping their technical skills razor-sharp. 

Joint Mapping Toolkit 

The Joint Mapping Toolkit (JMTK) was designed to 

serve as a cornmon system for terrain-data displays 

and some embedded-data analysis tools throughout 

ARCS. Problems with the initial release oftheJMTKled to the 

variety of display software as each system sought its own 

display tool. There are presently seven different terrain-datadisplay software packages in use within the ABCS. This leads 

to a lack of commonality in terrain-data representation and 

fi~nctionality. The current version ofthe JMTK used at DCX I1 

is more stable and capable than previous versions. External 

interfaces with DTSS and other ABCS members will increase 

the effectiveness of planning, execution. and reporting by 

engineer units. 

Near-Term Prognosis 

sing the DCX aftel--action review and consultation 

with the field, MCS deficiencies have been captured. 

articulated, and passed on to the TRADOC System 

blanagel--MCS. The MCS-Ewill giveus an oppotfunity to inserr 

engineer functions into the MCS in its FY04 release and 

subsequent versions. 

Thc FBCB2 System will releaseVersion4.0 in FY04 as well. 

The Maneuver Support Center's (MANSCEN's) Dit-ector of 

Combat Developments is working to refine the message fonnat 

in theFBCB2 System to fix reporting shortconlings and facilitate 

database management of obstacles, but it is not yet clear 

whether these significant message format changes will bc 

reflected in FBCB2, Version 4.0. There are varying degrees of 

difficulty in effecting changes with proponent, contractlcost, 

priority, and time considerations involved. A short-term 

solution involves changes to the existing message fonnats. 

The minefield symbol that autopopulates all other FBCB2 

screens can be changed to capture the obstacle number; the 

drop-down menus in the obstacle report can be changed to 

better reflect obstacle status options; and the ability to edit 

April 2002 
existing obstacles can be added to circumvent the requirement 

to send additional messages about the same obstacle when 

the status changes. The task is further co~nplicatedbecause 

changes to the messages and Military Sra~ldard25258 (Field 

Manual 101-5-1, Ol)r~?rtionalTerms ai~dGropliic.~)must be 

approved by an interservice board. 

CastleNET is essentially two subsystems iCastleNETReports and CastlcNET-Visual) that currently require a manual 

interface.CastleNET-Reports(previously SapperNET) is a Webbased (SIPRNET) system at the task-force level into which 

reports from lower echelons (mobile subscriber equipment, FM 

radios. and e-mail) are entered. Standard reports include enemy 

and friendly obstacles, engineer missions. main supply routes. 

bridges, and logistics. Once entered, the data is saved to a 

relational database that self-replicates the data to databases at 

higher echelons. essentially creati~lgseveral identical sets of 

data available for use at each echelon through corps. 

CastleNET-Visual is an ovcrlay-producing program used to 

create situational awareness and update the various commanders' COPS.As mentioned, the transfer of data from the 

reports database to a current overlay requires a multistep 

transfer ofdata on a Global Co~nlnandand Control System box. 

Once the transfer takes place (one contractor or trained soldier 

is required full-time), several other manual data-transfer steps 

must take place to view the update on the corps COP and 

IvlCS-Light (personal computerIWindows-based).At this point, 

despite the manual processing stcps involued (elapsed time 

5-60 minutes), obstacle situational awareness is available for 

the conm~ander'sdecision-niaking process. 

Cast1eNETn.a~successfully used during the 18thAirborne 

Corps Warfighter Exercise in early February 2002 It lhas 

received developmental Joint Forces Command funding 

through the Joint Area Clearallcc Advanced Concepts 

Technology Dcino~lstrationto determine the military utility of 

the system. With fuither funding. CastleNET could serve as an 

interim solution until MCS, Version 7.0. is released. Incidentally, 

the MCS-E is using much of the.functionality ofCastleNET to 

accelerate its de\~elopmelitalefforts. 

The next software release of DTSS in the fall of 2002 will 

include a capability called battlespace terrain reasoiling and 

a\rpareness(BTRA). This new tool will enhance the capability 

of DTSS users to provide terrain-analysis products that can be 

rapidly modified as the battlefield situation develops. 

Meanwhile, understanding the use of digital topographic 

products will be enhanced through the development of a new 

Training Circular 5-230, Tol,osrophic Sninrt Book This will 

Engineer School is refining concepts with the Intelligence 

School through the Imagery and Geospatial Information 

Integrated Concept Tearn. Conclusions from this analysis will 

llelp I-efinethe synelgistic relationship bctween the topogxaphic 

and intelligence functional areas. 

Visualization of tcrrain data throughout the ABCS will be 

impacted by a congressional mandate forcomnercialization of 

the JMTK. Thc new cotnmercial JMTK (CIJMTK) contract 

award should take place in FY02, with initial sofhvare release in 

FY03. Portions of JMTK software can potentially be incorporated into the C.'JMTK. Thc Engineer School will participate in the development of the CIJMTK to manage capabilities and costs associated with software licenses. since 

thousands of computers will use this system. 

Engineer C2 Roadmap 

The figure on page 20 shows notional timelines for 

combat engineer and geospatial C2 developments and 

a concept for digital systems training at Fott Leonard 

Wood. The figure shows CestleNET providing current 

capabilities to support combat enginccr tasks: CastleNET will 

be retired after the MCS-E is delivered. The DTSS will 

incorporate BTRA in the fall 2002 deliver): with coilrinued 

software upgrades as com~ncrcialindustry and go\;ernment 

labs build added functionality. The Engineer School will 

accommodate digital systems training with the advent ofthese 

automated systems so that engineer students will see digital 

systcms being used effectively before departing Fort Leonard 

Wood. MANSCES assets will be used to sho\v students how 

the MCS-E. DTSS. and other digital systems are employed. 

The Way Ahead 

As pre\,iously mcntioiied. the ABCS way ahead was 

a series of confere~icesto i-eview, update. and determine courses of action oriented to a final decision 

bricl lo General Abrams in early Februaly 2002 to facilitate 

ProgramObiective Memorandum 04-09 input.The action ofiicer 

conference methodoloev -- was used to conduct a mission

analysis to develop a coln~nonunderstanding of ABCS 

capabilities. gain consensus from all stekeholders. ant1present 

the recommended courses of action to the TRADOC commander. All viablecoursesofaction address actions to be taken 

after ABCS. Version 7.0 (MCS 7.0IFBCB2 4.0). to accompany 

the transformation of the Legacy and Interim Forces. Aseparatc 

Future Combat Systcln (FCS) C2 capability will be de\relopcd 

- for the Obiectivc Force.

increase awareness ofpotcntial DTSS products in the field and The Objective Force concept is still in developnhent, at the TRADOC schools for battle staff officers. There has TRADOC isconducting a seriesof selninarwar games to focus 

always been a close relationship between the topographic senior leaders on flcshing out operational and organizational engineer community and the intelligellccco~n~nunity. especially issues, Otllerefforts are ongoing: in the use of imagery products. Engincer units in recent years 

have provided more oversight topograp~licfunct~ons,hi^ .A unit-of-action iUA) task force was stood up at Fort box 

has increased the focus of the topographic units on both the dmingthefa110f200'. . -. friendly and enemy terrain regions, but some units seldom use A full-time working group is exploring the nature and 

imagery products from the intelligence community. The requirelnentsoftl~eFCS. 

,4pri/ 2002 Eiigii~cei.19 
Engineer C2 Roadmap 

( Develop MCSE MCSE Delivery 

Combat Engineer CZ I A F 

(MCS-E Replaces 

CastleNET Use CastleNE 

i DTSS 8.0 

(with BTRA) DTSS Upgrades 

Geospatlal CZ 4 A A A A /L 

Develop 81T MTPs ARTEP ARTEP ARTEP 

-A n e 

TerraBase forGeospatlal Tralntng F 

Training Training Professional Development Leader 

Digital Tralnlng at FLW Material Facilities Training 

halysis Refinement Development Eslablished (TED) 

A 

Fivc concept experimentation programs (CEPs) are underway, all oriented on transformation with full en&' meer 

participation. 

In addition, the Engineer School has done an enonnous alnount 

of work exploring countennine requirements and solutions for 

the Objective Force Assured Mobility Concept. 

Assured mobility involves actions that guarantee the force 

cosnmander the ability to maneuver where and when hedesires 

without interruption or delay to achieve his intent. It presupposes siti~ationalawareness through superior battlefield 

vision and understanding. The commander is able to develop a 

thorough mobility COP with geospatial products to help assess 

the environment and see the enemy's intent. With extensive 

support of sensor webs, hc is able to select, establish, and 

maintain operating areas, from which he sets the conditions to 

fix and destroy enemy forces and move according to operational 

requirements. From an operational position of advantage, he 

can then attack at will, using stand-off detection/neutralization 

of obstacles. Finally, with theaid ofcmbedded systems, he can 

breach residual obstacles and maintain mobility and momentum. 

When the Objective Force operational and organizational 

concepts are approved. the current C4ISR requirements will be 

revisited with the intent of developing an integrated system 

structured around the needs of the commander. Taking 

advantage of current and future techtiologies, the Obiective 

Force commander will have at his disposal tactical 

decision-making aids, collaborative and interactive planning 

tools, real-time access to reach-back expertise and resources, 

and thc ability to conduct mission rehea~salson the movc. It is 

clearly vital that MANSCEN and the Engineer School embrace 

a forward-focused posture to ensure that these systems serve 

the combined-arms comrnanderwith relevant information from 

the maneuver support community. These capabilities will be 

facilitated by enhanced engineer C2 systems which will give 

us information superiority to seefirsf, iindeistanu'first, act 

jrii:rf, andfinish decisively! Y 

Mujor Syvmnn is chicf uf the IIeuvj~Forces Divisioif. 

Maneuver S~~pport Battle Lab, Fort Leonarrl Wood, Mi.ssoiiri. 

Pi,eviort.v assignments inclzrcfe coinn~anrioffhe5351hEngiiieo. 

Compafly (CSE),130th Engineer Brignde, Hcina~i,Ger~itnii.~. 

as ~vellas execritive oficer and platoon leader in the 1st 

Engineer Britrulion, lsr li~fanfiyDivision, Fort Riley. k'ansas. 

MAJSnyinnn is agrarluate of the Engineer Officer Advoilced 

Course and Con7nlond and General StafCoIlege and hold.%a 

bachelor :v degree in E11glis11from the Universih, of'Kat7sn.s 

and a inaster's degree in nti1itai:v sciencefrom tl~eCom~nund 

and General StqflCoIlege. 

Mr Bergman is the Dep~rhiTRADOCPt-ogram Integrariott 

Oflicefor Terrain Darn. Fort Leonard Wood,Missouri, through 

July 2002. Previous e.rpef-ience at the Engineer Reseal-rh 

and Developnlent Center-Topographic Engineei-ing Centec 

includes //reRapid Tewrrin Vi.vitnlizationACTD, Arm). Space 

Technologl~Of5ce. and terrain database gener-ation. MI 

Bergnzun is a gradriare of the Nrrl,nl Acaden~yand holdr a 

master k degree in sjstems engineeringfiom George Mason 

C'niversily. A lietitenant colonel in the Marine Corps 

Reserves, his e,rperience includes deploj~mentsto Beirut and 

GI-enada. 
- - 

1 

Countermine Operations in the 


Contemporary Operational Environment 


By CoiorieiJeffrey P LaMoe and Captain Ted Read 

The events of I1 September initiated Operation 

Enduring Freedom and thrust engineers into a new 

operational environment. Legacy-equipped and -trained 

Forces are currently deployed in Afghanistan as part of 

Operation Enduring Freedom, operating in a nonlegacy 

environment. The challenge in Afghanistan is part legacy 

enviromnent ~4th a conventional force and part asymmetric. 

with the added complexity of terrorist organizations. The 

conte~nporary operational environment (COE) is a complex 

composite of all three of those elements. The Legacy Force in 

the COE causes multiple dilemmas; mines and booby traps are 

perhaps the most vexing. Engineers will spearhead a 

co~nprehensive combined-arms dialogue involving all the 

Battlefield Operating Systems to tackle the mine and boobytrap challenge of the COE. 

The countennine dilemma in Afghanistan is daunting. The 

United Nations estimates that 6-10 nill lion mines have 

accu~nulated since the 1979 Soviet invasion. Additional sources 

estimate up to 30 millionmines (Trdinins andDocmne Command 

[TRADOC] Countermine Task Force Recommendations, 19 

December 2001). Because the contemporary operating environment combines conventional, asymmctric. and terrorist 

environments. Afshanistan is a near-perfect sumgate to test 

systems and develop future solutions on a u,orld scale. 

A chilling aspect of the countennine challenge in the COE 

is that mines, booby traps, and improvised explosive devices 

(IEDs) are pemasive and converge as increasingly sophisticated and individually targeted devices that the enemy uses 

specifically to inflict casualties upon our soldiers. This is vely 

different from our traditional perception of how the enemy uses 

mines to shape the battlefield or for area denial in conventional 

confrontations. Moreover, technology and globalization enable 

terrorist organizations (and unfriendly nations) to share 

successful and ominous tactics, techniques, and procedures 

(TTP) in a quick. efficient manner. This means that U.S. forces 

may well see devices and TTP that terrorists used successfully 

in Indonesia, Chechnya, Lebanon, or any other current conflict 

in the world. The ability to understand our adversaries' options 

and anticipate their actions in the COE is paramount to our 

near-term success and requires additional analysis of the 

enemies and the environmeot in which they operate. 

We have traditionally regarded our enemies in the context 

of a peer competitor that is Cold War-organized to use mines to 

shape the battlefield. However, the COE, is "terror-centric" (see 

Figure I) and uses mines, booby traps, and IEDs primarily as 

offensive weapons or for protection. The contemporary threat 

will most likely progress from a regional conflict to an 

asymmetrical conflict when U.S. forccs arrive in theater. Regional 

Paradigm Shift 

m 	 The operational environment changes how the Army operates. 

m 	 Reconcle and close the gap between the Legacy Force that is trained and equipped to face a doctrine-based, echeloned enemy 

and a force needed to to operate in a contemporary operational environment, faced with mines and technologically sophisticated 

booby-trap threats. -
 - NQW 


Fight not to lose, 


Asylnmetric, "te rror-centric' threat. 


Mini nn to inn?++I .~C,,S,,~Ca,,A torrnr ..,.-......v.----,.,-.,u,,...~..v.. 


Empiace mines for protection and to fortify positions. 


Legacy minefields from previous conflicts. 


Discrete use of sophisticated wmmand-detonated 


mines on individuai targets. 


Find mobility where traffic. people. and anlmais are 

movi"S. 


IPGpredict the enemy's mine-emplacement plan and 


prevent emplacement. 


Sensors, sensor cueing, change detecti on, and 


standoff mine detection and neutralizatic In. -
 .. . . Attack mlning activity and ambush preparation; aeter 


mineemplacement. 


Set conditions to deal with mines and booby traps 


out of contact. 


m Fight to win. 

n Peercornpetition. -	 c..L.-,-.. 

shape the battlefield 

m Soviet "bear claw" c lacles again 

formations. 

m 	 Mine-centric to turn, fix, block. disrupt. 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

Systems 


Operational 


Concept 


rn IPB-confirm or deny templated enemy, adjust plan, attack, 

find mines, conduct deliberate breaching operations. m 

m 	 Mine de'lectors, rolle rs, plows, li~ie charges. and 

scouts. 

-	 . ... . . . m veal wlrn mlnes encounterea; ~n conracr. . Use supress. obscure, secure, reduce (SOSR) 

iundamentals to set conditions and execute. m Task-organize support, breach, and assault. 

m 

m 

Enemy m Mining i: ;low risk and high payoff. m 	 Mining is iow risk and high ~ayoff;we rrlust turn this 

around and mak e enemy mil ling high risl <and low 

-

Risk pay1Jff. 

Figure 1 


April 2002 Engineer 21 

needed to a in a dec~a~ve opcratlon. Thc enemy may attempt to 

erode our nat~onalw~lland resolve by uslng mtncs and booby I / 

warlords know they cannot compete withU.S. forces ina direct 

confrontation, so theencmy's path is towin by not losing. The 

threat's offensive strategy of a "death by a thousand cuts" will 

continue until he can gamer the military support or weaponry 

. 

traps to terrorize field forces, inflict unacceptably high casualty 

ratcs, and degrade soldier confidence and morale-leaving them 

to feel dcfenseless, fri~strated,and unprotected against an 

unseen menace. A full-spectrum analysis, incorporating a 

complex asynimctric and terrorist threat analysis, is needed to 

define the mobility and survivability tasks supporting freed0111 

ofmaneuver in the COE. 

Exploitation Process 

Disseminate 

Threat Cuedr Counters 

Rethinkine the threat requires that we also rethink ourselves. 

While the legacy paradigm assumed our enemies to be conventioiial peer co~npetitorswho fought to win (see Figure 1, 

page 2 I), our current enemy in Operatioti Enduring Freedom is 

Inore asymmetrical. The legacy paradigm also assumed that it 

was not feasible to prevent our enemy from elmplacing a large 

number of mines. Given that prevention was not an option, the 

Engineer Regiment was "mine-centric3'and expected to locate 

the mines, find a bypass, or if necessary reduce the mines 

through redundant means. The changes in the COE, combined 

with increased information dominance, gives us new capabilities 

and options it1 which to develop a countermine tnodel. We can 

focus on deterring mine emplacement instead of reacting to 

miues that are already on or in the ground. The Engineer 

Regiment has a mandate and an opportunity, through a comprehensive conibined-arms dialogue, to redefine how we will 

meet the COE couuterminc challenge and rnakc the threat's 

emplacement ofmines a liigh-risk, low-payoff operation. 

To focus the Army's countennine effort, General John N. 

Abrams, TRADOC Commander, directed the Engineer School 

Commander to convene a combined-anns Counteriilitle Task 

Force to recommend near- and long-tenn doctrine, training. 

leader-development. organization, materiel, and soldier 

(DTLOMS) solutions to enhance ground operations during 

Operation Enduring Freedom and develop an agressive 

countermine operational and organizational plan for the 

Objective Force. The task force used a combined-arms process 

to war-game potential missions in Operation Enduring Freedom 

to identify required countermine and counter-booby-trap 

capabilities. It focused on how to improve friendly countem~ine 

operations in Afghanistan by leveraging technology tom See the battlefield by developing a common operating 

picture (COP). 

Understand the threat and develop a comprehensive 

surveillance plan. 

Maximize sensor arrays to ensure early warning 

Act decisively to neutralize adversaries before mine 

emplacement. 

P .4 '._ 

j 

Develop 

Counters 

Figure 2 

The Counte~mineTask Force's deliberate course of action 

analysis on all the missions yielded core requirements that will 

touch the full spectrum of engineering: 

"See and detect" both the enemy and mines. 

"Neutralize" mines outside their blast radius. 

"Clear" mines to maintain maneuver tempo. 

"Protect the force" from milie hazards. 

In a briefing to the Army Requirements and Oversight 

Council (AROC) on 19 December2001, the CountermineTask 

Force recommended selected near-term, commercial-off-theshelf and government-off-the-shelf solutions for immediate 

acquisition to enhance ground operations in Afghanistan. 

Some ofthe solutions fulfill current operational requirements. 

The recommended solutions included: limited number of 

Minelab FI A4s-l~andlield mine detectors that are effective in 

high-ferrous soil; Antipersonnel Obstacle Breaching Systems 

(AP0BS)-portable, rocket-propelled line charges; Improved 

BodyAnnor Sets, Individual Countermine (IBASIC); miniflails; 

mine-marking foam; small robots: and coalitionlcontract minedetection dogs. These systems will help bridge the gap for 

units in Operation Enduring Freedom until better systems, such 

as the Handheld StandoffMine-Detection System (HSTAMIDS) 

are ready for fielding under an accelerated time line. 

General Abmms is fully com~nittedto solving this combinedarms challenge. His guidance included the following: 

Einploy the best minds available to develop materiel. operational, and training solutions to the countermine problem. 

m Acquire and then reverse engineer the threat mine, boobytrap, and command-detonation architecture. 

Conduct a worldwide assessment to find innovative 

solutions in both training and materiel. 

Develop a CountermineICounter-Booby-Trap Center 

(CCBTC) that will bring synergy to DTLOMS efforts and 

solutions. 

Set the dialogue, report progress, and identify re 

source shortfalls. 

22 Engineer Apvil2002 
"Jn keeping with General Abrams's guidance, the Manel~ver 

Support Center (RIANSCEN) began efforts to establish a 

CCBTC at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, to bring combineclarms, joint, and allied efforts together on one team." 

He made it clear that TRADOC's energy and resources will be 

committed to solving the cou~itermineproblem. 

In keeping with General Abrams's guidance, the Ma~ieuvcr 

Support Center (MANSCEN) began efforts to establish a 

CCBTC at Fort Leonard Wood. Missouri, to bring combinedarms, joint, and allied efforts together on one team. The center 

provides in-depth, worldwide assessments of current and 

emerging mine and booby-trap capabilities in order to actively 

fill illformation gaps and proactively seek out emerging 

capabilities, trends, and employment techniques. The centcr 

will focus and synchronize aggressive technical exploitation 

and science and technology (S&T) efforts, in addition to 

developing integrated DTLOMS solutions to protect forces 

and assure operational momentum against enemy employment 

of mines and booby traps. 

Through a worldwide in-depth assesslneut of current and 

merging technologies and employment TTP, the center 

discovers a "threat cue"-either a new way an enemy employs 

old mines, or the development of new [nines (see Figure 2). The 

threat cue triggers exploitation ofthe threat architech~re using 

our technology to quickly reverse engineer the threat cue and 

develop DTLOMS solutions fsom both internal resources and 

capitalization of worldwide countermine neutralization 

tcchniques andlor equipment (see Figure 2). The CCBTC will 

be a one-stop shopping mall for countcr~nine solutions across 

the DTLOMS spectru~n.We will build it into the world 

benchmal-k in counte~ininc and counter-booby-trap training and 

technology. Our center will be a joint organization that will 

non nit or inine incidents around the world, then tie new mine 

incidents into a collaborative fix between materiel solutions 

provided by tlie S&T from buth the military and industrial 

cornmunitics and training solutions from the mine warfare 

training department. The cellter can be viewed as a hub for a 

continually movi~ig wheel that searches the world for new 

enemy devices and TTP and DTLOMS counter~nine solutions 

and assists in the implementation of matericl and training 

solutions to tlic field. 

Unfortunately, the Army has made little progress in 

developing technology to detect and neutralize ~nincs over the 

past 60 years. Mine detectors (that detect metal), [nine probes 

(to lnanually detennine whether ~nctal in the ground is a mine or 

a scrap), plows and rollers (brute force), and bangalores and 

mine-clearing line cliarges (explosives) are "state of the art" for 

mine detection and neutralization even today. Limited 

investment in standoff detection and neutralization programs 

is attributable partly to the technical co~nplcxity of getting 

beyond manual, brute-force systems that supported a legacy 

paradigm whose counterrnine solutions were limited to 

bypassing or breaching existing minefields. 

This resurgent effon orchestrated by the Amy's new CCBTC 

will lead tlie chargc to reverse this 60-year trend by focusing 

on the COE to synchronize DTLOMS integration and 

concentrate research and development efforts. The effort also 

depends on maintaining a close collaboration with the 

combined-arms team and developing close partnerships with 

intelligence, special operations, infantry, armor, explosive 

ordnance (EOD), and chetnicalproponents to develop collective 

combined-arms training strategies to meet agile and adaptive 

adversaries. 

The Engineer School is leading the TRADOC effon by 

forming a Countermine Integrated Concept Team (ICT) to 

accelerate implementation ofDTLOMS solutions that meet the 

counter~nine challenge in the COE now and ensure mobility of 

the Obiective FOI-ce. This ICT encompasses a Countermine 

Council ofColonels and a Countennine General Ofticcr Steering 

Committee which will ensure that the counter~ninc effort has 

sustained, top priority investment and com~nitment from the 

Army. In short, the countermine challenge is a combined-arms 

challenge that requires a fi~ll-spectrum analysis of the contelnporaly operating cnvironinent to ensure that we maintain 

tlic freedom to maneuver aud increase force protectioti in any 

environment now and in the foreseeable fut~11-C. Y 

Color~el LuMoe i.7 /he Dii.ecior of Paining, US Awn. 

Ellgineer School, Furr Lcorinrd PVood, Missorrr.i. Prci~ioizs 

ii~~igIlIJl~if/.~ irtclude Senior. Conibot Ei~gineer. Trainer -

Sidewiiider 07, Natioilal Troiniilg Center For1 Ir~t,iri, 

CuI;/or-i7ia, aild Depzfty Commander: jjjrh Coil~bat Engi~reer. 

G,ait/~. For1 Leii,is, Wa.~hing/oii. He holds u nntoster of.rcien~,e 

degreefin? Michigan Stole U~~iver.~i/i, urld a r~ia.sier of arls 

degr-eein snolegicplai~ni~~fi.fi-on1 the U.S. Arn~?M'ar College. 

Cnplairi Read is o gcospatial-er7giilef~iiii1gi,~sn.~~cfor iri 

/he Taclics Deparn~roit. US. A~III). 61gineei- School. Fort 

Leo~~ardWood. Misso~rri. He ,<>as prrl~iorrs!~a11 engineer 

oh.serr~er/coiit~oll~~i~at the Con~hot /Muneuvr~, Paining Ceriter. 

iir Hoirenfels. Germonv, urld commiiniic(/ C' Corilpai?)? 9th 

Erigiiteer Ba//alion, 1st l~!/an/ry Divisior7 iiz Scha.eir!/i~rt. 

Gern7ai1j: He hur deplg'ed to oper-a~io~u in Somnlin. Huiti. 

and the Balkuns. 
Engineer Officer Education 

By Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey Bedel; and Major Dallan Schen 

The United States Army Engineer School has been a 

key participant in every facet of transforming the 

officer education system (OES). The latest initiatives 

and changes to thc way we will train our engineer officers in 

the very near future are captured in this article. 

The Chiefof Staff ofthe Army, General Eric K. Shinseki's, 

vision for Army Transfonnation as it applies to TRADOC is 

"...training and developing the force for 'strategic dominance 

across the entire spectrum of operations' ...we will do it better, 

faster, and more affordably."TRADOC is not only the architect 

for change in the design of the Anny's warfighting forces, it 

also has the key role to transform the institutional Army. In 

suppo~tof the Chief's vision, TRADOC Commander, General 

John N. Abrams. developed his vision for the future of 

leadership development for the Army. He has energized the 

force tom Identify the knowledge, skills, and attributes for leaders to 

he able to cope with the task of warfighting and war winning 

across the full spectrum of warfareas it relates to the world 

we live and operate in as reflected by the contemporaly 

operational environment. 

Advance curriculums with experiential leader-development 

experiences relevant to the positions they assume upon 

graduation from TRADOC schools. 

Return to the core foundations of teaching tactics and 

learning tactics at the company-grade level; e~nphasize 

small-unit leadership dcvcloprnent for lieutenants as well 

as tactical and technical competence. 

Advance thc learning for combined-arms training for 

captains, and increase joint and combined operations 

knowledge and skills at the scnior tactical level and 

operational level for military education level (MEL)-4 

experience. 

Rekindlc the passion and competence for training and for 

our training doctrine across the force, and put its application 

in the context of today's readiness equation. 

m Focus on learning the tmditions of Am~yscrvice and its 

heritage. 

Reinvigorate the study of history as a medium for 

scholarship developme~ltas a lifelong enabler for learning 

and growing. 

The end state is to develop competency-based learning 

requirements for officers, noncommissioned officers, warrant 

officers, and civilians a1 each level in support of Army 

Transfonnation. This will be accomplished by designing and 

?? 

executing transformation ofcommand to align withobjective 

Force goals and by implementing institutional transformation 

strategies for training and leader-development systems. 

Tomeet General Shinseki's intent, TRADOC implemented a 

Leader Development Campaign Plan (LDCP) to transform our 

curment resident facility-focused system intoone that is a more 

efficient model, focused on ao officer's next assignment. The 

figure depicts how the Legacy Force OES, by course and 

duration from initial-entry training through the Command and 

General Staff Officer Course (CGSOC), will transform to meet 

the Objective Force education needs. 

Looking at the current OES model, ourjunior-grade officers 

currently spend between 35 and 51 weeks training at Fort 

Leonard Wood, Missouri, or Fort Leavcnworth, Kansas. The 

higher end takes into account the participation in the 

Cooperativc Degree Program (University of Missouri-Rolla I 

University of Missouri-St. LouisIWehster University). As for 

our field grade officers, only 50 percent of a given year group 

are selected to attend CGSOC in residency for 40 weeks at Fort 

Lcavenworth. Those who are not selected must complete their 

training by corrcspondence while still working full time in the 

field Army. 

The Basic OfficerLeader Course (BOLC), which replaces 

the Engineer Officer Basic Conrse, will be conducted in two 

phases: 

BOLC Phase I will be traincd at one or two consolidated 

locations (for example, pilots are currently being conducted 

at Fort Benning, Georgia). This h-week course will develop 

leaders of all Amly branches with character and confidence 

who are self-aware and adaptable and acliie\,e excellence. 

BOLC Phase 11will be trained at the Engineer School. This 

I I-weekcoursc will focus on engineer platoon leading and 

task force engineer skills, with an increase in tactics 

instruction (in particular, training on scatterable mines. 

geospatial engineering, and force-protection constn~ction). 

In March 2002, weconductedour first BOLC Phase I1 pilot. 

Full ROLC implementation is targeted for FY03104. 

Thecombined Arms StaffCourse(CASC) will replace the 

Combined Arms Services StaffSchool (CAS3) (notice that the 

timing has changed to precede advanced officer training). This 

training will also be conducted in two phases: 

CASC Phase Iwill consist of approximately 120 hours of 

distance learning, to he conducted at the unit on both 

common-core and engineer-specific tasks focused on staff 

24 Engineer April 2002 
*: 

(FLW 

OES Transformation 

Resident: 

40 Wks 

i C 

;Resident: 

12 wks128 W s rT1CFIFA 

RaridmiVunlng at FLW 

Rslildentvaining .Isme*.* otMrthan FLW Resident NotatFL rn DiStan.. ,..m,.g 

-

I Wks 

ident 

'IFLV) 

I 

I 

~' 

! 

officer skills and knowledge. The window for accessing 

this distance-learning courseware opens upon successful 

completion of BOLC Phase 11and must be completed before 

attending CASC Phase 11. 

CASC Phase 11is a 2-week resident course at tlie Engineer 

School that lnaxi~nizesconstructive, virtual, andlor live 

training with a focus on staff functions. This training will 

revolve around combined-anns staff officers training with 

engineer-specific training embedded. Portions of this 

training are also envisio~iedto be Web-based combinedanns ~nultiecheloncollaborative si~nulationexercises. The 

first CASC pilot is scheduled for FY03i04. Full itnplementation is targeted for FY04105. 

The Combined Arms Rattle Command Course (CABCC), 

which will replace tlie EngineerCaptain's Career Coutse (ECCC), 

will bevery similar in execution asCASC, but will be conducted 

in three phases: 

CABCC Phase I will consist ofapproximately I60 hours of 

distance learning, which will be conductcd at the unit and 

will include both common-core and engineer-specific tasks 

that are focused on company command skills and 

knowledge. The window for accessing this distance-learning 

courseware opens upon successful co~npletionof CASC 

Phase I1 and must be complcted before attending CABCC 

Phase 11. Officers must be identified for company command 

to attend CABCC Phasc 11. 

CABCC Phase II will be a 4-week resident course at Fort 

Leonard Wood, with tlie focus on maximizing constructive, 

virti~nl,andlor live training will1 a focus on corn~nand 

hnctions. This training will illso re\,olvc around combinedarms training with engineer-specific training embedded. 

Similarly. pol-lionsofthis training arc also envisioned to be 

Web-bascd co~~ibincd-armsniulticchelon collaborative 

si~ilulationcxerciscs. 

CABCC Phasc I11 will be a combat trainingcenter(CTC)-

like expcriencc with officcrs spcnding 3 wceks at tlie CTC 

that is most associatcd with their command. This training 

will rocr~son unit training and thc attes-action review (AAR) 

proccss-thc intcnt bcing to develop "master trainers." The 

tirst CABCC pilot is scheduled for FY03104. Full implementation is targeted for FY04105. 

Intermediate Level Education (ILE), a resident coursc 

conductcd in two pliascs, will replace the CGSOC: 

ILE Phase I will be a 12 weeks long and will focus on 

comnion-corc field grade training. All field grade officers 

will artelid Phase I in residency; however, this training may 

be conductcd at more than one location. Successfi~l 

completion of this training will give an officer his MEL-4 

rating. 

ILE Phase 11 will likely be resident; however, officers will 

attend training at different locations based on their career 

field a~idorfunctiolial area. The first ILE pilot is scheduled 

for FY03. Full i~nplementatio~i is targeted for FY03104. 

Expert-Producing Courses is an Engineer School concept 

whereby an officercan receive highly specialized training. The 
vision is to develop a serics of I- to 3-week resident functional 

courses to produce experts in engineering-related tasks. One 

example is a Countennine Counter-Booby-Trap Course being 

developed now to provide expert training on the latest 

counterminc and counter-hooby-trap technologies and 

techniques to countei- these hazards. 

Notice the significant decrease in institutional resident 

training (from35-5 1 weeks to 17 weeks). To offset this decrease, 

wc must take advantage of existing and emerging technologies 

to create a means to package and export training to the field. 

One initiative of LDCP is to create a database for knowledge 

management and e-learning that can provide the right 

knowledge, training, and education on demand. This systcm, 

termed the "Warrior Knowledge Network (WKN)," will allow 

all Anny personnel to access interactive courseware designed 

to be delivered anywhere, anytime, to meet the educational 

needs ofthe Army viadistance or distributed learning (DL), on 

demand. This courseware will focus on preparing personnel 

for accelerated advanced learning and/or application of skills 

in a resident educational course. 

Some of this training will be directed (CASC Phase I and 

CABCC Phase I) while other training will he self-development. 

Some of the self-development courses, tenned Staff Modules, 

can be taken at any time following BOLC. For example, once an 

officer is identified to serve as a battalion S1, he could access 

the WKN and take the Adjutant Course Module, giving him 

the necessary skills and knowledge to perform in that position. 

The key is that through DL, anyone can learn the fundamentals 

needed to succeed immediately or "jnst-in-time" before 

assuming a new position. Other training that will be offered 

includes the Supply Officer Course (S4) and the Battalion 

Maintenance Officer (BMO) Course. 

The common theme throughout the LDCP is to leverage DL 

to reduce an officer's time away from troops and shift focus 

during the resident training phase from learning skills to 

applying those skills. The benefit is twofold: the officer learns 

a skill when he needs the skill most, and he spends more time 

with troops and less time in the institutional environment. 

You may have heard the terms "gauntlet training" and 

"crucible training." These terms are often used intel-changeably; however, gauntlet training focuses on leadership training 

in a multiechelon, multigrade, syntheticlvirtual-training 

environment, while crucible training refers to the same experience in a field environment. One of the goals of the OES 

transformation is to use this performauce-oriented training to 

the maximum extentpossible. 

We are working to integrate this type of training at the 

Engineer School. The Department of Instruction and 

Department of Common Leader Training, in collaboration with 

the Armor School, are working to pilot a constructive simulation 

exercise via the Web for a gauntlet-type exercise. To further 

enhance this type of training, we are spearheading the 

internation of a snite of Force XXI Battlefield Comand.Bripade 

and Below (FBCB2) Systems into a digital tactical operations 

center These systems will support training rcquirements for 

the entire Maneuver Support Center (MANSCEN). 

MANSCEN and the Engineer School arc leading the 

TRADOC transformation and will vely soon present a concept 

to ensure that the cooperative graduate degree programs arc 

not lost. Wc are exploring multiple courses of action with 

several learning institutions to actually expand the ability for 

all engineers to obtain associate, bachelor's, or graduate 

degrees. The bottom line is that the Engineer School understands the importance oflligher education and is determined 

to continue to provide a means to deliver higher civilian 

education opportunities. 

Today's military missions and operational and strategic 

policies dictate that we produce skilled, self-confident, adaptive 

leaders who can win on any battlefield across the full spectrum 

of conflict. Focused, tallored training is key, whether it is 

preresident, resident, or postresident training. Providing 

expertly packaged, more frequent training for shoner periods 

allows the mind to better absorb and understand concepts 

and-overall-increase retention. This can be accomplished 

best by providing the right combination ofdistributive learning 

~nulti~nediatechnology and capitalizing on combat training 

center and unit training. Our challenge is to wisely use the 

limited resources we have to develop the most effective and 

innovative training feasible. To srlccessfully transform our 

educational system, it is essential that we continue to explore 

the use of existing and emerging technologies to enhance the 

delivery and design of future resident and nonresident training. 

We must ensure that we maintain the most realistic and 

challenging training and education possible. w 

Lieutenant Colonel Bedey is chief of the Directorate of 

Instruction, U.S.Army Engineer School, For1 Leonard Wood. 

Missouri. Previorrs assignments include commander of [he 

299th Engineer Battalion, 1st Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, 

Fort Ifood Teras, and S3 and company commander; 15th 

Engineer Battalion, 9th Infanb:~ Division (Motorized). LTC 

Bedey is a graduale ofthe Command and GeneralStaff'College 

and holds a bachelorb degree in construction engineering 

from Montana State University and a master's degree in 

cot~struction management from Colorado State University. 

Major Scherer is chief of the Tactics Division at the 

Engineer School. A former conlmander oJAI94th Engineer 

Combat Battalion (Heavy) in Germany, he also served as an 

engineer observer/controller at the Combat Maneuver 

Training Center: Major Scherer holds a bachelor h degree in 

automotive technology and managemenl fuom Western 

Michigan UniversiQ 

Comments can sent to the authors at bedeli-

@woodarm?tnrilorscllererd@woodarm~.mil. 
Bj'Lieutenant Coloilel Robei.t H~rdiiall, Lieute12ant Colonel Monroe Nickell, and 

First Lieutenant Rachel Walkenbach 

The threats of the 2 I st century demand a new approach 

to homeland security (HLS). The events of 11 September 

have caused us to focus more clearly on the connection 

between terrorists and other enemies of this country; the 

weapons of mass destruction they seek to use against us; and 

the social, economic, and political tensions across the world. 

President Bush has proposed an HLS budget that increased 

from $19.5billionin the FY02 budget to $37.7 billion forFY03. 

The budget proposal nearly doubles funding for a sustained 

strategy of HLS focused on four key areas: bio-terrorism, 

emergency response, airport and border security, and improved 

intelligence. National sovereignty and HLS are top presidential 

priorities. 

Our coulltry is at war. Security of our homeland is a national 

priority The present terl-orism thrcat toward Americans requires 

a different perspective of what the constitutional requirement 

"to provide for the common defense and general welfare of 

the United States" means. In the near future, the President 

isexpected to sign the Unified Command Plan, creating a 

new Northern Command (USNORTHCOM~responsiblefor HLS. The Itnplementation 

Plan will lay out DoD's requirements and guidelines for 

response planning tasks, command and control architecture, 

and training standards. 

Engineer Roles, Responsibilities, and Missions 

he Eugineer Regiment must adapt its structure for HLS 

missions, roles, and responsibilities. Engineer leaders 

must discuss force structure changes that will be needed 

to prepare fo~; prevent, defend against, and respond to threats 

and aggression directed toward U.S. territory, sovereignty, 

Dl of Defens~ 

"The primary 11r1a31V1tof the U.S. ,,,,,,tany qLraL a,,u 


foremost to fight and win our wars, 


members are trained and ready to defend our nation 


from ourmilitary forceshave previously 


and partnered effectively with civil authorities during 


times of natural disaster and will continue to do so." 


-Secretaty of Defense message 26 23302 Oct 01 

domestic population, and infrastructure. We must look at the 

capabilities the Regiment brings to the table to accomplish 

these missions, roles, and responsibilities. ~ ~an HLS ~ 

strategy should be on every ellgineer commander's agenda. 

Although U.S. Anny engineers have been apart of the HLS 

mission since its inception, it is now formally spelled out by 

the Secretaryof Defense as a priority area, There will 

be primary mission considerations for engineers as the 

Army develops its Objective Force structure capabilitiesfighting and winning our nation's wars and defending the 

homeland. 

Many engineer capabilities required to support civil 

authorities will be the same as those reqnil-ed to support military 

forces and illstallations in the prosecution of the global war on 

The nt of Defenhse on HLS 

HLS is not a new mission for the American milita ry... we 


have been performing the mission for the past 226 


April 2002 Engineer 27 
"Many c)f our comr nanders fe el comforta .ble in their ability to r,sspond to I r civilian ag lencies for support I 

in dealing with natur; 31 or man-I nade disa: jters. Ther~ e is a long I history of Service tc I our natiol n by all , . - -

. . - . .. . ,.- . , , 	 ., , . - comoonenrs or our nealmenr. uur me evenrs or 11 seoremoer nave grearly lncreasea me sraKe we, as tnljineers. 

have acros ;s the soec trum of ou r National I rategy." 

terrorism. There is a need to reassess today's engineer capabilities in order to support the full spectrum of Army 

require~nentsin the 21st century. There is a necessity to rethink 

how we are going to prepare our units to prevent or respond to 

attacks. Most CONUS response plans focus on natural 

disasters or isolated examples of man-made disasters. They are 

not geared toward responding to the asymmetrical terrorist 

threats now facing our nation. Future HLS responses by DoD 

will almost certainly be joint and multicomponent whereas, 

The Way Ahe!ad 

'I rte aetirelary "I (he 1irmy's prim :ipal tasks for HLS: 

II 	ConsolLiate responsibility for HLS--and the myriad 

of issue ,s,functions, and responsibilities that touch 

tho ..., nnr -"3 staff-into a single organization. 

I te a review of the operational r 

ough the Chairman, Joint Staff, 1 

nds. to ensure that arranaemenrs - lor HLS

Denweelivarious L~nified com mands are ! optimal. 

m Ensure interagen iation witt I Governor 

historically, the Army National Guard has been the traditional 

militay component involved in civil-military training exercises 

and milita~y assistance to civil authorities. The Total Army 

Analysis process is now considering the assignment of 

engineer units to this mission exclusively. Estimates are that as 

Inany as a dozen or more engineer units-to include groups, 

battalions, companies, and detachments involving thousands 

ofengineer soldiers, primarily from the Reserve Componentswill be assigned geographical responsibility to support HLS. 

Engineers are a critical and dynamic pa13 of the HLS mission 

area. HLS-by definition-WILL be a mission area for the 

Objective Force. The threat to our homeland will not diminish 

as we move into the future. In fact, it may increase as technology 

and financial capabilities of those hostile to our way of life 

grow. Leaders must think "out of the box" to develop new 

ways that Army engineers can contribute to the HLS mission. 

Engineers must be prepared to respond with well-trained and 

well-equipped units that can operate effectively. 

Basic engineer missions of today have not changed as a 

result of the HLS requirements. But future HLS mission 

requirements may lead to a need for new technology and 

equipment. Terrain visualization, field-force engineering, and cy coordir 

+,.- a,, LllC "-,;,.;+;-- +k"+ b... :. aruvlllra 8s D<A..,.7< "'UYC . ,.'&;- :, ",,,LC integration of environmental impacts associated with events "7 .A .,I all" ,,,a, IlC 

undertaking. 

,,,c YVYU "-..,* :,. ,',- lrrarry bdeh ayrlrrlr. 

working or Iall of the: se issues. The bad nlews is tha t 

there are nianv federa 'I agencies working on all of thew 3 

issues." 

'nator Fred Thompson 

. 	 -


involving weapons of mass destruction or natural disasters 

are areas where the Engineer Regiment has great potential to 

enhance our nation's HLS poshire. 

The HLS Challenge 

A major challenge of the future involves building and 

improving civil-military relationships. Commanders 

can help initiate their piece of the HLS strategy by 

, 

April 2002 

I 
lnsurrecfio 

Civil disturl - .. . 

Fires 

Floods 

-

Meteor imp 

Tornados 

Animal disl 

Mass immi! 

Explosions 

Radiologici 

Droughts 

Oil spills 

Chnm8r.l it 

Epidemics 

Postal wor 

hlilitan, *I,, 

tnemy ant 

¤ ns 

¤ 3ances 

tannauales

.

.

. Isunamlslttdal waves

.

. 

Soace debris imDacts

.

. 

Hurricanesltyphoons 

. 

Biological i

.

. 

m Snowstorms

. 

m

.-.." ...."-... 

m

. 

...,...,.,,,,,. ., ,..,,authorities

.

.

.YY""L"1Y1"y ""rlauv,,

. 

.u"",,$rrLr,

. 

Military su[ 

Military sul 

P,,. ,"tnrrlr. 

Critical infr 

Continuity 

Support M 

IC~S 

ruptions 

nridants ..-. --. .. 

iI incidents 

lpon for civi 

)port for civi 

," ,,nnr-linn 

astructure I: 

of operation 

,",#3,,, 

rals 

I law enfom 

l disturbancm 

This process will help identify missions your unit can or callnot 

accomplish. Local, state, and federal agencies can cousider 

your capabilities in their emergency-response planning process. 

CommunityInvolvement 

Emergency-response community ilivolve~nentmay be 

the most important area for integration, coordination, 

and synchronization of emergency-response tactics, 

teci~niques,and procedures. Engineer units will not be as 

effective initially in a disaster-response call-up if they do not 

communicate, plan, and train with local, state, and federal 

agencies that may request engineer support. The importance 

of getting involved in civil-military training exercises cannot be 

overemphasized. No one knows when the next te~~orist incident 

will be, but we can help protect the future of our nation by 

getting involved now. Guidelines for conducting HLS training 

exercises will change as new doctrine is developed. For now, 

leaders must continue to plan, prepare. and rehearse roles as 

often as possible using culTent doctrine. 

Conclusion 

HLS is not changing basic engineer missions or roles. 

It simply establishes a new emergency-response 

construct to deal with the challenges created hecause 

of terrorist threats and attacks. Engineers have successfully 

responded to disasters througllout our nation's history. 

Engineers of the 21st century will continue to be tasked to 

respond to natural and man-made disasters, except that now 

these missionsmay be in responsc to terrorist threats and 

attacks. Responding to the increased demands of HLS will be a 

completing a unit HLS mission assessment. Leaders must challenge. HLS has been an important part of our Regiment 

consider these types of questions when creating their contribution to the security and prosperity of our nation. From 

assessment: defending-the homeland to winnins our nation's wars, engineers 

Mi! 

-

Homeland 

Security 

(Strategic) I 

I I 

State funel 

. - . 

will continue to move into the future as a full-spectrum force. What kind of mission might your unit be tasked with, and 

what are the I-equirements of agencies your unit may be Y 

wnnnrtino? Lier,leno~rtColonel ih~rl,tollis (he US. Army Engineer School 

Emergency 

Preparedness 

(Operational) 

Homeland 

Defense 

(Operational) 

"-,,y "...~.=. 

Depun3 Assislonr Co~nntandanr,A,mv ,Voinlionnl Guard, Fort Leonard 

m Are local civilian or other military support assets available wood ~i~~~,,,.i, 

(Operational) 

in your area? Lieutenant Colonel Nickell ;s IheDrpuQ Direcror ofrh~~blaneuver 

How does you current warfighting mission differ from an Sup~~orrCenrer Homeland Securir?; Olfice, Fort Leonnrd Wood, 

HLS mission? Mi.vsour.i. 

Are there different materiel or training support Fi,:~iLieutenanfM~/~nbachisaLiS.ArmyEngineerSchooI~~~rion 

requirements? uffi~~er~fo~~ho~neIondsecuriIy, crm.enll,~semig~~:ith the MirsouriArmy 

N(1riono1Guard a1 Fort Leonard Wood, Mircor~n. 

April 2002 Engineer. 29 
Bv Re/)re.~mtcriivesqfthe 412th a17d416tl~Engineer Conv~?a~ld,s 

and the Lr.SArmy Corps ofEn,gineei-s 

The Amy is transforming to improve responsiveness fluctuate quickly as the situation develops but are kept at a 

to operations across the full spectrum of conflict. minimurn end strength (seeFigure 2, page 3 1). 

Anny engineers have been a force multiplier and force 

enabler in evely military operation since the end of thc Cold Regimental Capabilities 

War. This a~ticleoutlines an ongoing initiative by the US. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE), the 412th and 416th Engineer 

Commands (ENCOMs), and the U.S. Anny Engineer School to 

define how the Anny Engineer Regiment must transfomi to 

meet the challenge of providing timely general-engineering 

suppol? throughout the spectrum of conflict. 

Problem 

General-enginecring response during contingency 

operations has been described as "ad hoc" and not 

following Anny doctrine. Commanders typically have 

large ilrisatisfied engineering requirements when they need 

support most-early in the operation and again during 

posthostility operations. The challenge is to satisfy the 

requil-e~nentscurve (see Figure 1 ). 

Solution 

aIIC Engineer Regiment has enormous capabilities to 

apply across the spectrum of conflict. USACE, the 

ENCOMs, the Engineer School, the Directorates of 

Puhlic Works, and contractors work together under FFE to 

provide seamless general-engineering support to the warfighter 

Additionally, USACE, the Facility Engineer Group (FEG),and 

the ENCOMs can task-organize and send modular teams to 

meet diverse general-engineering requirements. 

The ENCOMs have the follo\\:ing capabilities: 

Command and control. 

Augmentation of Army Service Component Command 

(ASCC) engineering. 

Theatcr planning. 

Facilities engineering. 

Troop construction. 

Ficld-force engineering (FFE) links all the components Geospatial engineering. 

of the Anny Engineer Rcgiment into a sealnless field- USACE has following capabilities: force engineer capability to provide timely gcncral Contract construction. cn~ineeringto the warfighter throughout the spectruln of 

co~lflict.FFE specifically targets improving general-engineering .Techllical engineering. 

support to contingency operations where friendly forces .Real estate st~pport. 

Figure 1. Engineer Support Shortfall 
I 

Full-Spectrum Capability 

Operation I& 

-Operating and managlng - Mllnary conntnrdbn -Troop conrtrudion 

Peace War 

Stabhi and Suppo* Small-Scale Lesser Reganal Mlllluy Combat 

operatonr contingmc,cr Confingencin Operatlo"* 

D 

I

Figure 2. Regimental Approach 

FFE Planning Structure Corps of Engineers 

The provides an integrated A~~~~engineer For contingencies, USACE personnel are organized as 

planning capability. Regimental ENCOMIUSACE forward engineer (FESTs). The FEST planning 

teams work for thejoint task force comlnanders and/or cell provides direct augmentation to the CINCIASCC staff 

the .ASCC engineer to provide timely technical assistance. The engineerOr the ENCOM. The FEST execution team provides 

ENCOM~have permanent folward.planning cells with all the command and control for execution of USACE missions: 

ASCCs except U.S. Army South. USACE can deploy planning Forward Engineer Support Team-Main (FEST-M). 

augmentation teams as required to support planning (see Figure A deployable USACE organization that executes USACE 

3 and the table on page 32). missions in the area of operation. It is usually subordinate 

Engineer Commands to the senior engineer commander. 

The ENCOMs support each commander in chief (CINC) .bward Engineer SupportTeam-Augmentation (FESTthrough theASCC.The ENCOMs plan forflexible modularenhy A).Adeployable planning-augmentation cell that augments 

into the theater via early-entry Lmodules,which range from the engineer staff of other organizations (for example, CTNC, 

several soldiers to a functional ENCOM command and control ASCC, and ENCOM). If a FESTM the FESTA 

element. A one-size module does not fit all contingencies, so cOmesunderthecOmJnandOftheFEST-M 

one or two early-entry modules are developed for early insertion Contingency Real Estate Support Team (CREST). A 

into an operation as the situation develops. At some point, the deployable five- to six-person real estate team and a com-

"early operation" ends and further augmentation is the result ponent of a FEST. The team can quickly execute leases 

of deliberate planning and specific capability requests through at forward locations. 

Forces Command. m EnvironmentalSupport Tcam (ENVST).Adeployable fourThe ENCOMs havemultiple capabilities to put their soldiers person environmental team and a component of a FEST. 

in theater within days ofmobilization by utilizing- The team provides baseline and otherenvironmental studies 

at forward locations. Active Component and Title 10 active National Guard1 

Reserve soldiers. m Base Development Team (BDT). Anondeployable team that 

can quickly provide hase-development engineering and Hasty mobilization (a new process endorsed the Chief, planning and facilities design for staging bases, basecamps, Army R~scN~s). forward-operating bases, and displaced-persons camps. 

Tem~oral~ tours of active and active for 'pecial .~nfrastructureAssessment Team (IAT).Anondep]oyable 

work. team that provides engineering infrashucture assessments 

April 2002 Engineer 31 
Peace 

LNO'Planncr 

1 i i 

LNWPlnnnrr 3 

Coordinating, Planning. *"', and Exercises 

Figure 3. Field-Force Engineering Planning Structure 

for military deployments and civil-military operations in 

forward areas. Focus areas for the IATs are the infi-astructures relatcd to USACE ~nissions and aspects of 

the area of operation impacting contract constl-action, such 

as roads, utilities, water resourccs, and host-nation support. 

Facilitv Eneineer Groua d -

Thc FEG is a 405-person table of distribution and 

''lowanccs (TDA) tab'e of orgal'ization and 

group for design 

tcclinical-engineering support as urell as facility and 

environmental managelnelit, base operations, and force 

protection. The 416th ENCOM has peacetime command and 

control of the FEG, hut during wartime, it is split betweell the 

ENCOMs bascd on the mission, enemy. terrain, troops, and 

time available. The FEG is comprised of six 15-person TOE 

facility engineer detachments (FEDs) and thirty 7-person TDA 

facility engineerteams (FETs) that are aligned undcr gcograpl~ic 

Facility Engineer Ccntcrs, which provide command and control 

andadministrative support. Each organizational clcment oftlie 

FEG is assigned a unique unit idcntification code for rapid and 

efficient deployment. 

Facilit?; Engineer Detachments 

Three FEDs are war-traced to each major contingency 

opel,tion ENCOM and aligllcd one area group. 

Duringpeacetime, thedetachnie~itsprovide elivironmental and 

facility assessments. enginecr dcsign. and support to the Army 

engineer percent), in additioll to exercise 

participation, planning, and design rev,ew (50 

per,cnt), 

Facility EngineerTeams 

The FETs deploy during wartime to conduct Directorate of 

P~~blic Works, base operations, and environmental and facility 
assessment missions. The FETs are under the command and 

control of the senior engineer in theatre. During peacetime, 

FETs provide environmental and facility assessments, engineer 

design, and support to the Army Reserve engineer. 

Leveraging Technology 

Reachback and TeleEngineering operations are 

terms used to describe the ability to conduct engineering analysis utilizing expertise that is beyond 

in-theater capabilities. The source ofthe expertise is linked I-eal 

time via information technology to the mission site. The keys 

to this are the professional engineers, scientists, and 

technicians-combined with established procedures in the 

USACE, ENCOMs, and FEG.This allows real-time linkages of 

expertise to the operator via secure voice and video. The results 

are faster response times, a greater level of expertise in 

examining and solving problemslproviding options, reduced 

deployment footprint and support requirements, and reduced 

costs. 

Summary 

This article focuses mainly on the functions, 

responsibilities, and capabilities of the engineer 

operational-level organizations formerly known as 

echelons above corps. It addresses the dynamic nature of the 

The Engineer Writer's Guide 

Engineeris a professional-development bulletin designed 

to provide a forum for exchanging information and ideas 

within the Army engineer community. We include articles 

by and about officers, enlisted soldiers, warrant officers, 

Department of the Army civilian employees, and others. 

Writers may discuss training, current operations and exercises, doctrine, equipment, history, personal viewpo ints, 

or other areas of general interest to engineers. Arti cles 

may share good ideas and lessons learned or explore better ways of doing thingc 

Articles sl hould be c raightfotward, and ir ithe 

active voice. If they con )table infor mation or 1

quo- tations nor rererencea in me rexr, urovlae auurourlare 


' enidnotes. Text length I should n ot exceec I 2,000 w'ords 


theater strategic and operational requirements across the 

spectrum of conflict. Field-force engineering is a means to get 

general engineers involved early in the planning of theater 

operations and to provide tailored support during execution. 

A bl-eakout session at ENFORCE 2002 will provide further 

discussion of FFE. Bd 

The,followingpeople were involved in writing this article: 

412th ENCOM: 

COL Albert J Bush III, Depuq Chief ofstag Ii~telligence 

MAJJohn D. Bacon Jr, Plans Oficer 

CPTE. Scott Loi.vdennilk, Plans OSficer 

416th ENCOM: 

COL Mark E. Eldridge, Chief of StaJf 

COL Neil W Gafney, Chiefofstaft; Faciliy Engineer Group 

USACE: 

COL William H. Fritz, Deputy ChiefofStaJL Operations 

Mr Michael J Shama, ODCSOPNS, Chief; Coilcepts Plaizs 

and Doctrine Branch 

LTC M~chael A. Alexandec Field Force Engineering 

Program Manager 

including your full name, rank, current unit, and job title; a 

list of your past assignments, experience, and education; your mailing address; and a fax number and commercial daytime telephone numbc 

include a statement with your article tt ~cal . .. . , securitv office has determined thar me lnrormarlon con. 

tairled in the article is u nclassifiec1, nonsen:;itive, and releasable to tk ie public. 'We do no1 : require a hard cop! / of 

the clearance?. (Engine,er is availa lble for sal e by the Gov-

.-. .. -... errImenI rrrnrina - unlce .! 

We cannc it guarantc ?e that we will publish all submittedI articles. 1rhey are a iccepted fc ~r publication only after 

,"*,,"h"A\, in ., I ir +h,#8" ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, in\", If .*,A ,, .., nl-n

., your in an up-

(a]bout eight double-SFlaced pagl 2s). Shortt ?r after-ac tion- ' 

CO,ning issue, we will notify you. Therefore it is important to 1 

tYl

le articles and revier NS of book ;son engir leer topic: teep us informed of changes in your e-mail address or 

also wercom 

are tele?phone number. All articles accepted for publication are 

captions) andlor line diagrams . .- illustrate infc wmation ir1 the article. Please do not inc lude Send submissrons by e-mall to pbdt2wood.army.mil 

Include pt lotos (with 

sutlject to grz and struct ural than( l as 

that editing for st! 

nr nhn,nr .h nf illustrations ,, .,,,,, in the text; instead, send eat,,, ,, them as a separate file. embed photos in 

or send a l/2-inch dish in ~~~~~~~f~word, along with a 

PowerPoint. If illustrations are in PowerPoint, avoid excessive use of color and shading. Save digital images at a 

double-spaced copy of the manuscript, to: Editor, Engineer professional Buletin, 320 MANSCEN L ~ ~suite~ 

0, Fort Leonardwood, Missouri 65473.8929. 

resolution no lower than 200 dpi. Images copied frc 

Web site must Note: Ple;5se indica te if your manuscript is being c on- be accompanied by copyright permisr 

Provide a short paragraph that summarizes the 

ered for PL~blicationeIsewhere. Due to the limited sp; 3ce ..--. . - ...- A,. --A,.-:. -- - - -- - - ~ssua,we uu Ijut p~nltarticles that have baa, Iati~apted tent of the article. Also include a short biograpny, forpub~ication by other Army professional bulletins. 

April 2002 Engineer 33 
The Mulleicomponent Initiative: 


Lessons Learned and Challenges Ahead 

By Lie~rleriaritColonel T/zoiiias E. 0'Doilovan 

he multicomponent concept was implemented in the T52d Engineer Battalion, Fort Carson, Colorado, in 

October 1999, and the52d became the first triconiponent 

batt;llion in the Army. Having passed our 2-year anniversary 

as a ~nulticomponent unit, it is importanl that both 011s successes 

and challenges are presented to the engineer communily. 

Because of our sisnificant Reserve Component (RC) responsibilities, and the fact that an increasing number of engineer 

units are becoming multico~nponent, we must ellsure that the 

lessons learned as part of this important effort get to the 

cngineers who need thcm. 

Background 

he multicomponent initiative is an Active Component T(AC)IRC i~ltegration effort that is defined as being 

one or more organizations from different components 

organized in a single authorization document (modified table 

of organization and equipment [MTOE]). More imporlantly, 

the initiative makes one commander directly responsible for 

the readiness of one unit, organized from different components. 

The 52d Engineel- Battalion is an authorized level of 

organiratio~l (ALO) 1 Lricomponent nit with an AC headquarters and support company ([HSC], 220 soldiers authorized), 

one AC line colnpany (A Company, 144authorized), one Army 

National Guard (ARNG) line co~npany (B Company. Albany 

andCan~pRilea.Oregon),andoneU.S.AnnyReserve(USAR) 

line colnpany (C Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico. and Fort 

Carson). This tilakes 44 percent of the battalion RC. Each RC 

co~npany is stationed in two detachments to broaden the 

recruiting avea. Training support for each RC company is 

provided by the geographically supporting Training Support 

Battalion (TSBn) rrom the91st Division. The 11364TSBn, Fort 

Lewis, Washington, supports B Company and 11351 TSBn. 

Denver, Colorado, supports C Company. 

~l~~ ofthe hattalion is that on order it deploys 

to any ,heater of operations, conducts general.engineerillg 

missions in support of U.S.!Joint/Combined forces, and 

provides countermobility and survivability engineer support 

as required. Upon reorganization, the battalion adopted the 

~nultico~nponent mission ofreaching the very highest possible 

readiness of all components, using the individual strengths 

of each. 

Training Events 

Since the 52d's reorganization, three rnaior training 

events have becn cornpleled. In the su~nrner of 2000. 

about 120 soldiers from the AC portion of the battalion 

deployed to Oregon for annual training with B Company. The 

AC element providcd command and control. construction 

support, and limited maintenance support for Opcration Oregon 

Forest, a tactical construction cxcrcise in the Deschutes 

National Forest. Later in the summer, thc battalion went 

\:.A,G 52d Engineer Combat Battalion (Heavy) 

< ALO 1 Current Organization L'-;,..- ).. !*.,\, 
downranze at Fort Carson with C Company for 

an exercise dubbed Coyote Castle, which 

involved tactical construction of projects for Fort 

Carson. 

In 2001. the entire battalion deployed to South 

Dakota to participate inExerciseGoldenThunder. 

This 3,500-soldier exercise included ARNG and 

USAR units from across the United States in a 

Bosnia-based scenario. Again, the battalion 

executed tactical construction. All three of these 

training exercises involved training assessment 

modules (TAMS) of RC elements by our TSBns. 

opposing forces (OPFOR), and deployment 

operations by many different modes. 

Smaller, battalion-supported training events . i 

have included range qualification, field training 

exercises (FTXs), and equipment operator 

training. At weapons ranges, AC soldiers 

supportedqualifyin~RCsoldiers,whichal-lowed AC and ARNG soldiers of the 52d Engineer Battalion complete NBC 

maximum use of critical RC training time. training during ~~~~~i~~ orego"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t 

Integrated FTXs at Fort Carson allowed C 

Company to fall in on a battalion footprint that provided mess thc new B Company, which significantly modernized that unit. 

andmedicalsupport,apartiallyestablishedperimeter,command This could not have happened under Oregon's previous 

and control, and maintenance support. This integrates the RC 

company and maximizes training time. 

Successes 

commanders of^ can 

say with assurance that they understand who 

their commander is. This has significant 

positive impact in terms of stating a unit wartime mission, 

developing a mission-essential task list (MEW. and determini% critical supporting battle tasks. These, in Nm,can 

result in better (for example, more focused) training. 

W companies 

Integration With the Battalion. Through the execution of 

Oregon Forest, Coyote Castle, and Golden Thunder, we have 

made significant in illtegrating the company leadership 

into battalion operations. Coordination such as video 

teleconferences and telephone conference calls, e-mailing 

o~erationsorden(OPORDs) alld fra~entar~ orden (FRAGOs), 

hackbnefs. and rehearsals were completed during the planning 

and preparation phases of the exercises. This allowed company 

and battalion leadership and staff to work together to identify 

and solve problems, coordinate training, and report accurate 

information. In an actual deployment mission, these foundations 

would Prove invaluable to deployment success. Our efforts in 

integatingjuniorleaders included participation ofcompany-level 

leadership of all components for ceremonies of many types, 

quarterly training briefs, participation in company training . . 

meetings, social events,vi;its to Gaining. a METL deveL 

opment and review conference. 

Equipment Turnover. When the 52d became a multicomponent unit, we deactivated the active B Company at Fort 

Carson. We were able to send a large amount of equipment to 

April 2002 

Department ofthe Amy (DA) priority for equipment fielding. 

For an engineer unit, this is particularly notable because it 

allows Oregon to use that equipment in a wide variety ofrolesfrom training to statewide assistance projects to providing 

support for disaster response and humanitarian relief. 

Equipment Fielding. Designating the 52das multicomponent 

brought all three components to one priority for equipment 

fielding,Previously~ Co,,,pany3s was very high due 

to its with ~~111 ~ i corps, ~ while the b AC ~ po*ion ofthe battalion was somewhat lower, and [he ,,"its that 

came to make up B Company were even lower. Therefore, C 

Company had a wide variety of equipment that had not yet 

been fielded the rest the This gave the AC 

an O~~omniv to use such as 'lightvision devices, that had not yet been fieldedto them. 

~lth~~~h there have been challenges with the paint scheme 

(AC is tan and RC is three-pattern, but equipment is fielded in 

only one color), new equipment is now fielded to all three 

components simultaneously. This ensures that both operators 

and maiutainers from all components have the oppomnity to 

wain at the same time or for the AC portion to receive training 

then give the RC portion during drill or annual training. 

That commonality of equipment and training will significantly 

imorove the caoabilities for mission. 

Battalion Support. The stnlcture ofcombat hea~ battalions 

is particularly well suited to company-level multicomponent 

organization because much of the critical support required by 

the companies is organized at the battalion level. For example, 

the battalion aid station; the dump truck section within HSC 

that supports haul missions for the companies; the soils, survey, 

and drafting section within the S3 that provides those services 

Engineer 35 
AC and USAR soldiers ofthe 52d Engineer Battalion build a bridge during Exercise Coyote Castle 

for the companies; the co~nmunications section; and the 

battalion direct-support maintenance shop are all at battalion 

level. Each of these has given support to our RC companies 

that might be difficult under other organizational structures. 

Examples range from weapons ranges to flu shots, to SingleChannel Ground-to-Air Radio System (SMCGARS) training, 

to survey support on projects, to maintenance assistance in 

preparation for annual training or readiness inspections. Further. 

for C Company, the advantages of having its next higher 

headquarters readily available has helped improve administrative processing of personnel actions, particularly for 

those where the AC battalion commander is the approving 

authority. 

Interaction With the TSBn. A significant issue that was 

resolved early was which TSBns would provide coverage for 

our RC companies. The final decision of the 91st Division was 

to use the geographical footprints. This allows the battalion to 

focus on command and control and support of the companies, 

while the TSBns provide the observer-controllers for TAM 

evaluations, lane training exercises. tactical operations center 

exercises. and other training events. This approach is working 

well and continues to improve with time and focus. 

Construction Support. The integration of C Company had 

added impact by allowing the battalion to develop construction 

projects on Fort Carson that supported C Company's training 

and Fort Carson's construction needs. This involved 

construction planning and technical support to C Company 

requisitions, temporary duty, and other important items. 

Additionally. the battalion has undergone an audit by the Amy 

Audit Agency, which was seeking to find instances of mixing 

congressionally titled funds. Since the battalion had been very 

careful to ensure that there was no significant mixing. no 

significant findings resulted. 

Staffing. To ensure better support and integration with the 

RC companies. the battalion sought to captureACiRC expertise 

within the battalion headquarters. Selecting acommand sergeant 

major with ACRC (TSBn) experience proved invaluable. During 

the 3 years ofpreparing for and executing the multicomponent 

concept, the battalion experienced a 50 percent success rate of 

having field grade officers with previous ACIRC experience. 

These leaders' experience was important in coordinating with 

the 96th Regional Support Command and the supporting TSBns 

and in understanding the RC companies' issues. The battalion 

is scheduled to get authorization for a battalion-level administrator in FY03. 

Partnership. The interaction of the 52d and the supporting 

unit for B Company. the OregonNational Guard's (ORNG's) 

1249th Engineer Battalion (Mechanized), has had many positive 

aspects ranging from a better understanding of ARNG issues 

to support for each organization. This has been a real success 

story and an important part of ensuring consistent and effective 

guidance and support for B Company. 

Future Challenges 

construction at a minimal cost to Fort Carson. obilization/Deployment Planning. Without 

Funding. A challenging area, one success has been the getting too specific-due to classification 

transfer of USAR (Title I I) funds to Fort Carson to allow Mu requirements--one of our Warhace deployment 

C Company immediate access to money for Class IX plans for the 52d now includes our RC; the other plan still does 

36 Engineer April 2002 
not. For the first one, our AC and RC units deploy togetlierwith Fort Cars011 as their power projection platform-in a 

timeline that can he met based on current readiness. We have 

not had as much success with the other Wartrace deployment 

plan. Currently, only the AC portion of the battalion is listed, 

and this is counted as fulfilling the regional commander in 

chief's (CINC's) requirement for an entire battalion. Planners 

are aware of this but are having difficulty correcting the 

problem. If they adjust our arrival dates to reflect required 

mining and deployment times that allow the battalion to deploy 

together, they will not have enough combat heavy hattalions 

to meet the CINC's requirements. 

Guidance. The multiconiponent concept is still being 

developed. A27 July 200 1 DApolicy letter improved guidance 

in many areas but did not focus on how to make the concept 

work. The three critical portions of the guidance-that units 

be of like modernization, be geographically proximate, and be 

given funding in all three components-are important guidance 

that is not fi~lly implemented. Further. D4included time-phased 

force-development-list planningguidance that rnulticolnponent 

units deploy togetlier, which is also not fully implemented. 

Forces Command (FORSCOM) Regulation 350-2, Reserve 

Coni/~oneri/ PaOiitig, briefly discusses lnulticomponent units. 

Other forms of policy. regulations, and guidance at all other 

levels arc still under development. Coordinated integration of 

the concept into guidance would impact positively on al~iiost 

every challenge discussed here. 

Impact on Soldiers. There are sig~iificant aspects to the 

multicomponent implementation that impact directly on soldier 

perceptions. Some RC soldiers have concellis that becoming 

part of a multicomponcnt unit increases the likelihood of 

deployment. One young soldier said. "If I had wanted to be 

AC, I would have stayed AC." Other soldiers look for inmediate i~nprovenients in many aspects oftheir unit (such as 

equipment, funding, and training), improvements that in fact 

take time. Some soldiers fear an increase in operating tempo 

(OPTEMPO) that they arenot willing tocommit to. While these 

soldiers are clearly in the minority, each of these perceptions 

has an impact on the most important issue to RC unitspersonnel strength-and so must be addressed by both AC . and KL leaaers. 

Impacts on the Readiness of AC Units. The time and 

resources invested in the niulticomponent concept by the AC 

comes at a cost that includes impacts on the leadership. budget, 

and soldiers of the battalion and overall readiness of tlie AC 

side. Arecent General Accounting Office report briefly referred 

to this impact in terms of OPTEMPO on leadership. This is 

particularly true jn the 52d,\vhere two RC companies withnvo 

detachments each means that aunit is drilling every weekend. 

While that situation is tlie nonn for many RC hattalions, it is 

challenging to sustain focus from the AC side. Also, the 

challenges of learning the procedures in three such disparate 

planning. rcsourcing, and administrative systems takes a 

significant toll on young staffofticers-pa~ticularly, given that 

in AC hattalions today, well over half the staff officers are senior 

first lieutenants waiting to attend the career course. These 

young officers arc still learning the complexities of the AC 

system, not to mention the RC world. 

Memorandum ofAgreement (MOA). DA specified that an 

MOA among FORSCOM, theNational Guard Bureau (NGB), 

and the U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) wouldensure 

effective coordination between the three components for 

running a ~nulticomponent unit. The MOAprocess for the 52d 

began in early 1999with a series of conferences that concluded 

in early 2000.A final version of the MOA began circulation for 

signature at that time and still had not been signed as of this 

writing. 

This is only one of scveral problems with the MOA process. 

Other issues include the difficulties inherent in establishing 

procedures for rumling a battalion at the FORSCOM!NGBI 

USARC levels. For example, the positive impact that completing 

and resourcing the MOA could have is the issue and accountability of items such as sleeping bags, cold-weather boots, 

mittens, and field packs for the Fort Carson detachment of C 

Company. The MOA specifies that Fort Carson will provide 

this support to those soldiers. This would allow the supply 

sergeant of C Company to eliminate all the items he currently 

controls (a significant u,orkload) and the soldiers would draw 

from Fort Carson's Central Issue Facility. Thcn the soldiers 

would have the same equipment as the AC, and the supply 

sergeant would be able to focus on other areas. Funding 

shortages currently prevent resolution. This is just one example 

of the MOA challenge. but it illustrates the issue. 

Conclusion 

his is just a brief review of the actions of the 5?d TEngineer Battalion and a brief introduction to the 

multicomponer~t concept. With many other units already 

mul~icornponent-like the 14tI1, the 46th, and the 249thEn,' -IneelBattalions-we need to deepen tlie discussions to help this 

concept work for every nlulticomponent unit. The successes 

show how powerful the conccpt can be in improving the 

readiness ofthe Amiy The challenges showjust hoiv hard it is. 

Even ifyou aren't in a multiconlponent unit now. you probably 

will he someday. Or perhaps another way to look atit is that 

with 76 percent ofthe Col-ps of Engineers in thc RC. you already 

are in a multico~nponelit unit-the Engineer Regiment! Id 


Lieuretta~it Coloiiel 0 'Donovati ,rlinqtri,shed cotnma~~d of 

the 52d Engi~ieer Batialioti it1 Ju!, 2001 atid is c~rwerit!,; a 

srudenr a! rhe Utiired Stare.7 Arntv Wc~rCollege. Prei'iotu 

assignmetits iticlt~de assisfat~t corps et~gitlee?: V Cor~):33, 

40th Engineer B~rrnlio~z. Germuny; ossi.rro~~rpr-okssor: Li~.',iiiei/

Stares mil it at^. .4codenq,, West Poinl: otid co~nmandet: B 

Corri~~ori?,6Zd E~ipineer Bn/talion, Fort finod Trms. 
Self-Reliant, Resourceful, 


and Adaptable: 


America's Engineers in the 21st Century 

81,Major Erik L. Stov 

T he irlitinl report was wrong. It 

\$.as allvays x'ra~tg. Yet M.P hud 

. to do soinething. We informed the 

huiialion comiiinizder and hri~fid hiin 

oil the situation: a j'ortng bq); nas badh, 

iiljui,ed w,hile plqli~~g i<'it/i une.~ploded 

ortinaiicu rfenr n mbie-i~!/ested n-ench 

o~rt.~i~le the local row:o. He tnuiiaged to 

niiikr 1ii.c itZay back to oJiinii road oild 

then go1 a ride to the ho.~/~itnl. where he 

ivas h~ing ti.eorcd. He tolrl a do~~tor: who 

ii!fort~ierl rhe loco1 l~i~plentenmtioii 

11,iih ~niiic detecrors aiid basir sititr' I 

u.n.7rri ,oltte to /lie tro?ch. The brigade 

co~iiii~aiidevrequested hclicoprer 

sul~l~orf U.riilg u .sl~otlight, n 11eiicol)ter 

,fleiv U/J illid do it:!^ the tv~iich lirie. 

/ookin,q for the ii!j~irr~d ho): The senrcl~ 

eiidrd rarlv in the rnoi-niiig il.hrn thej 

jixtiid the dead hod\: It was /lie sunli~~er 

rflYY6. 

This example, though tragic, 

dctnonstrates a reccnt exatnple of the 

ability of American engineers to respond 

quickly to unknown and unforeseen 

tnissions and threats. This ability to 

adapt, howevcr. is not new. In kt, sevcral 

engineer units during thc 20th century, 

trained in engineer doctrine, have 

executed missions that challenged and 

forced our leaders to look for solutions 

that may or ]nay not hereadily available. 

This article will examine three of them 

during three different operations. 

Force canip cornii?ni~rieu fhrrt I~isfiio~d Battalion. cornrnnlided by Lieutenant 

Iws uncoiiscioiis and still ii~ //IF trench. Colonel David Pergrin, landed on Olnaha 

The tinre was I830 11o1u:r and cllif-kne.rs Beach. just over 2 weeks after the 

1va.s qrricklj, a/~l~ronchi~ig. Uiider. the invasion. Thc engincers' initial task was 

rules of ~~iiga~e,~io~t. m:e \,,ere iioi to provide support directly behind thc 

r,aq~rired to rerrct. But we did. The 9th and 83d Infantry Divisiotis and 

co~nn~or~iiri- qf'BI23d Bigineer Battiilion maintain the quickly deteriorating 1st 

ah-eac!i, had rr plat our^ on alert. IVitliii~ Army tnain supply routc between 

i~~ii~tes, a scrpper squori eq~iil~j~e~I Cat-entan and Ste. Mere-Eglise and south 

World War 11 I 

ore half a centuly ago, 

thousands of . ~ . 

engineer soldiers cntered the 

Europcaii theater of war, traincd on 

assault river crossings, mine cmplacernent, and demolitions. However, when I the engineers hit the bcach, thcy 

cncountcred inissioos that would 

challenge their lncn and test their 

leadership. Not knowing what to expect, 

sappersffrom the 291st Engineer 

\,illages, and buildings throughout their 

zone, as well as numeroils bridges blown 

by rctreatingGemans.' ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ 

There were several areas where engineers adapted to an environment and 

faced missions that looked nothing like 

the missions they encountered at homcstattoll training. Thc first of these was 

the initial advance intoFrance.Ad\#ance- 

~nentwasveryslowthroughtheNonnan 

bocage because of thc tnassivc walls of 

hedgerows. each about 12 feet high and 

8 feetthick. In addition, whenever troops 

smashed through a hedgerow, they 

encountered Gcrrnan minefields hastily 

emplaced as they withdrew across the 

fields and along tlie connecting roads.' 

Along with the hedgerows we]-e 

waterways, trenches, deep valleys, 

orchards. and wooded areas. There was 

no doctrine to bust through. In fact, therc 

was no equipment available. Based on a 

recommendation from one of his lieutenants, Lieutenant Colonel Pergrin 

i 

of Carentan toward Pcriers. The enginecrs would be faccd with heavily 

mined and boohy-trapped fields, 

UnexDloded ordnance such as these 500 ka bombs , orovlded 

. a

challenge to the engineers at the airfield base camp in Afghanistan. 

-

-

38 Engineer April 2002 
ordcred that several of the bulldozer cabs 

be protected "by means of makeshift 

armored driving - c~mnartments."~ ~ ,~ The

first of the "armored" bulldozers began 

crashing through hedgerows followed by 

advancing infantry shortly thereafter. 

Anothcr cxa~nplc of engineer 

adaptability was in employing mine 

detectors. Designed to detect metal in 

antipcrsonnel and antitank mines, mine 

detectors were the primary means to clear 

a mined area. Not anticipated, however, 

was the use of the minc dctcctor to clear 

a path to recover dead paratroopers in 

themine-infestedswarnpsaro'lndOmaha One of the "hulks" in Afghanistan that needed to be moved for C-17 traffic. 

Beach."rained engineers be Soviets left the MIG, stand, and tools right on the spot. counted on to complete this morbid task. 

The 29lst Engineer Battalion con- As engineers discovered during World I numerous airfields1'-again, missions 

structed 67 bridges (I I imder fire), War 11, a special heavy-duty protective that were nothing like the ones they 

cleared 7,000 mines, deactivated 15 cab was needed. In this case, it was encountered a1 home-station training. 

bombs,took8,500prisoners,andrescucd standard issue. The perilous job of 

235 non~ombatants.~ o~eratine the Rome low allnost Bosnia 1 . v 

guaranteed that the engineer would 

Vietnam I.. .. cinch ...a Purple Heart."g Amcrica's engineers. 25 years stat~st~cally later, would again prove to be 

wenly years latcr, America's The significance was the "fact that these self-reliant, resourceful. and 

engineers would again prove to engineer were not adapl:lb[e during operations in Bosnia. 

be self-reliant, resourceful, and trained Or screened for land-c'earing ! Thousands of engineer soldiers entered 

adaptable during the early 1965 troop I the Balkan region trained - on mobility, 

buildup in South Vietnam. Because the Next was the requirement to clear countermobility, and survivability. 

active duty engineers lacked the ' tunnels. Thc 1966 search-and-destroy However, when thc cnginecrs from the 

manpower base at the beginning of the tactics uncovercd a vast network of 23d Engineer Battalion arrived, they 

troop buildup, and because there were tunnels that was as much as 20 years in found that very little-if any-of their 

only twoengineertraining facilities, units the making. "Constructed in impervious home-station training or Combat 

going to South Vietnam were woefully layers of hard clay at varying depths, with Maneuver Training Center rotations had 

short on engineer cxpcricnce and skill small,well-camouflagedentrances,these prepared them for the yearlong deduringthefirstyeat:'Theinitialengineer tunnels defied any simple method of ployment. Tlie initial probleln the 

missions included supporting the tactical destruction."" Engineers put togcthcr a engineers faced was a great deal of tnud 

operations, constructing logistical tunnel-demolition team, known as and mines. With the majority of the 

facilities, and "making the cnvirontnent "tunnel rats," that developed several Posivina Corridor comprised of lowlands 

amenabletothe A~my interests.'"During means of destruction. One way was to in the vicinity of rivers, minefields, 

the initial planning, engineers estimated prepare and place explosive charges deep destroyed towns and factories, occupied 

that there were 170 battalion-months' in the tunnel with sacks of powdered riot- communities, and agricultural fields, 

worthofengineereffortrequiredandonly col~trol agents placed on top of the i engineers would again have to execute 

eight active battalions deployed, leaving charges. The chemical remained effective missions that were not by the book. 

almost 2 years to accomplish the work. from 2 to 6 months. Another method was The first example was the U,S, 

Engineers their adaptability to use acetylene gas, and still another Amy Europe and V Corps initial plan for 

in several ~h~ first of these wv was destluction flooding.Again3 ~ base camp construction. The plan was 

was the requirement to clear areas for the significance was the fact that these 1 for a brigade operating base (BOB), 

camps and helicopter landing pads and engineer "Idiers were not housing 1,800 soldiers and equipment, 

open major transportation routes, The trained or screened to be tunnel rats. and two forward operating bases (FOBs), 

thick jungle vegetation and trees posed Finally, engineers in Vietnam con- housing 1,200 soldiers and equipment 

a significant obstacle to the land-clearing ducted quarry operations, constructed each. When the engineers assessed the 

operations. The fix was the Rome plow- fuel pipelines, cleared miles of jungle, terrain and the mancuver commander's 

a special tree-cutting blade that replaced tnoved tons of eanh, repaired hundreds intent, the BOB and two FOBs would not 

the standard blade on the D7E tractor. ofbridges, and installed steel matting for be feasible. From the perspective of 

April ZOO2 Enxineer 39 








INFANTRY DIVISION K l 


Infantry Division Structure - 1948 

and special engineer forces were operat- many other branches. were generally also forwarded recommendations. Senior 

ingwellfonvardoftheadtllinistrativcand ignored. Consequently, thc corps en- engineer commanders were unanimous 

operational boundaries which defined gineercombat regiments were broken up in recornlnending a return to the twodivision. corps, and army areas. In spite in 1944, and their battalions were given battalion engineer regiment for the 

of this circumstance. there was no sig- separate numerical designations. division. They also recommended the 

nificant change in the structure of divi- i Ultimately. general-service regiments return to the regimental structnre for 

sional engineers. The annored engineer suffered the same fate. Thc War Depart- larger corps alld anny engineer units. 

battalion was reduced latc in the war by ment also began transforming the large Senior colntnanders in the Pacific noted 

thedcletionofthebridgccompany, which separate battalions to one or more stan- I that group comma~lders ended up 

was moved to corps control. I dard engineer combat battalions. devoting Inore time to the incoming or 

There were changes 10 the force A second change for the engineers mOvelnent of separate batstructure for corps and army engineer , invol\.ed a reorientation of engincer I t~i~~~stl~a~lt~~eydidthelnanape~

units. In latc 1942. the War Department general-service regiments. While these "Wort of those under their control. 

started to convert nondivisional reg- organizations performed a variety of Engineel-sin bothEuropeand the pacific 

imentstogroups.Adi~ocatedbyMcNair, functions, the term "construction" Weedthat combat and constructioll 

the argument was that the group was a tended to describe most of them. con- i "nits the principal elements of the 

more flexible command and control seq~ently. engineer colnmandrrs, ~ri. ell~nrerfn.rein ~arandtllats~eciaiized 

headquarters. Regitncntswere limited to marily in the Pacific, began to urgc the unitsps~lch as to~ogra~hic. maintheir authorized battillions. Groups could redesignation of general-sen:ice rcgi- t'nance, water, and depot-ontinued to 

control a varied number of subordinate ments and battalions as collstruction fillaneedcd unique-lnissionrequirelnent 

eletnents. This would allow cops and battalions and groups. In the Pacific. tllc for 

anny comnlanders to shift battalions and need to build most of the logistical and 

companies to areas where they were transportation infrastructure for Am- Engineer Force Structure, 

needed. \vhilemaintaining the continuity , crican forces tended to focus anny and 1946-1950 

of thc group headquarters associated corps engineers on this function. The he Corps was partially successful with a tactical area. Engineer connnanders process of redesignating general-service in convincing senior Army generally considered this to be a bad idea. regiments and similar organizations to leaders that the engineer force of 

First, the regimental structure enhanced construction units had been largely ' field army needed significant esprit and morale. Separate units, with completed by the end of hostilities in the 1 increases, H ~it was not~ succcss~ul ~ little or no history. would be hard-pr-essed Pacific. in reconstituting either the two-battalion 

to establish this pride of unit. Second. AS it had done in 1920. the Army divisional engineer regilllent or thc 

the had to have examined its wartime stnlcture inaneffort regimental organization as a whole. This 

sufficient adlllinistrative and logistica1 to determine the most effective organ- was in spite ofthe fact that the maneuver 

personnel and trallsPort to it to izational structul-e for the postwar force. anns, principally the infantry, retained the 

function indepe11dcntl~. Providing these As has been mentioned. the general regimental system for another 10 years. 

for battalionscreated larger boards were created in Europe for this In 1948, the Department of the Army 

Personnel e'lui~"lcnt than was 1 purpose. Although not forlnalized in reorganized the infantry division. bascd 

required under the rcgilnental organ- boards. other theater commanders and on the experiences of \Irorld War 11. 

iretion. These concerns, shared with their subordinate colntnands and staffs Divisional engineer battalions were 
increased almost 50 percent. This 

was largely through the addition of 

a fourth letter company and the 

addition of a bridge platoon and an 

assault platoon to the headquarters 

and headquarters company. The 

armored divisional engineer 

battalion had a corresponding increase in personnel and equipment. 

With the addition of the fourth 

lettered company, the division 

engineer could allocate onc 

company to each of the division's 

:;mental combat teams and retain 

:fourth company for work within 

:division area. The fourth 

..mpany could also reinforce one .T'Z-?; of the other battalions as needed. -7-7-
 -,,

Doctrine at that time accepted that .\ -,i 

"In a maior attack. the eneineer - -.,.Ipw; ' ~ 

battalion will normally need and 

receive assistance from a corps 

engineer group," This as. A tactical bridge built across the Rhine River by a corps engineer combat battalion. 

sistance could take tliefortii of relieving 

the divisional engineers from other work 

in the division area or direct assistance 

in the attack itself. 

The divisional support role of nondivisional combat battalions was clearly 

evident in their organizational structure. 

Theengineercomhat battalion-army had 

712 officers and men. It was similar to the 

divisional battalion with several 

important exceptions. First, the battalion 

hadonlythreecompaniesandlackedthe 

bridge and assault platoons of the 

divisional battalion. It also had less 

construction equipment-such as road 

graders, cranes, and trucks-than the 

division. Clearly, the battalion's function 

was to reinforce the maneuver units. Tt 

lacked the equipment and personnel to 

perform substantial construction work in 

either the division or corps area. The 

construction-type work in the corps 

area-such as roads and bridges-was 

assigned to separate companies attached 

to the engineer combat group. These 

included dump-euck, light-equipment, 

and bridge companies. 

There were no engineer units 

specifically assigned to the corps. All 

nondivisional organizations were 

assigned to either the army or the communications zone. The existence of 

engineer at the corps that a 


number oforganizations were -attached,, 


' to the corps as needed, ~ ~on
 1 the tactical situation and the units 

required, one or more group headquarters was attached to the corps to 

provide command and control. Existing 

doctrine did accept that on a normal 

basis, there would be two combat groups 

(each with three battalions and associated companies) per corps (of three 

divisions). This would allo\v the 

allocation of a battalion to each of the 

divisions, leaving the other three forwork 

within the corps area. Not all non- 

, divisional combat battalions or groups 

' were to be found in the corps. Doctrine 1 and force structures called for at least 

two combat groups (three battalions and 

supporting companies) per field army. in 

addition to the divisional and corps 

engineer units. 

~h, construct~on battalion and 

groups were considered either army or 

co~nmunications-zone assets. Doctrine 

generally precluded their use in the 

corps and division areas. These units 

were responsible for the more permanent road, bridge, and facility work 

neededintherear areas. The units were 

joined in army and comnunications zone 

areas by technical units such as 

port-construction, depot, and rnaintenance units. 

~ ~ ~ d i At the end of the first half of the 20th 

century. the engineers had developed a 

force structure based on the lessons of 

two world wars. That structure had been 

tested in theaters of operation around the 

globe. The challenge for the second half 

of the centuly was to apply this structure 

and the associated lessons with conflicts 

short ofconventional war. This was made 

additionally difficult as the Army increasingly looked to technology to solve 

battlefield problems. Equipment became 

systems and nioved from being impletnents of war to the cornerstone of 

doctrine and force structure. 

This is thefirst ?fa two-i~ort article. 

Par/ I1hegin.v with Jbrce stmcture during 

the Korean Wf~r and continzres through 

the 20th century, to include Vietnam, 

Desert Storm, and the Engineer Restructure initiative. La 

DI:RoberLv O rhe U.S.Army Engineer 

School historian at Fort Leonard Wood, 

Missouri. 

April 2002 Engineer 49 
I Strategic Communication: every soldier would have an e-mail address through AKO by 

I 

October 2001; however, less than 5 percent of engineer officers Know'edge Management Strategy have an address on record at PERSCOM. You can help the 

n August 2001, Secretary oftlie Army Thomas E. White Engineer Branch achieve this goal by sending us your AKO 

and Chief of Staff of the Anny (CSA) General Eric K, e-mail address today. 

Sliinseki signed a nieniorandum outlining the goals and has other servicesin the works, Soon, all soldierswill 

for Management(AKM),astratcg~ be able to l-eview their Official Military penonnel File (OMpF), 

to transform the into a "network-centric, knowledgebased force." The centcrof this strate= is the Army Knowledge 

Online @KO) portal. AKO is strategically changing the way 

we do business. 

Amain feature ofAKO is the career lifetime c-mail. With an 

AKO account, e-mail can be accessed aliytilne from anywhere 

around the world. The user can forward messapes from ihc 

AKO account to a different e-mail address-a regularly used 

one that is adjusted if the user moves or changes accounts. 

The AKO c-mail address remains the same no matter how Inany 

times the person lnoves or how many tines his other e-mail 

address changes. 

The lifetime e-mail feature is particularly useful for 

online, hrough~~0. currently, majors going before the FY02 

lieutenantcolonel promotionboard can review their files online. 

~~~~~~i~~ files through^^^ will evelltually eliminate the 

process of requesting a microfiche, which can take weeks for a 

response. For more infomiation on AKO capabilities and services. 

go to u,u~~+:army.rni//uko. To apply for your AKO account, go 

to ~~~~~u:u,.or~ny.mii. 

T, the csxsstrategy for~~M, ~~~i~~~~ ~~~~~h 

has upgraded itsholncpage to ilnprove information distribution 

to the Engineer (see Figure I ), We ha\,e added 

assignment infomatioll, the ~~~i~~~~ ~~~~~h ~~,~f, professionaldevelopment guidelines, frequently asked questions, and other 

usefill information.At a minimum, we update monthly. Many of 

PERSCOMbecauseitcatimaintaincontactwithofficersinthe your questions can be answered by simply going to 

field throughout their career. The CSA mandated that ~~~1~:pa~co1~1.army.n1i//ope11g/~iin1ninpg.hIm. Check the Web 

~mf;nrn~l,nrII .i.* .i illv..r in tilelr mrerr iwatnct,#.it:iI )no prcfr,;~,~naidrlalop,i#ant. 

9 Raco?nlfield ::.lrllng d!t *'ig'-Nxb ID 'P)' :lri' la"<: ~pIlfr$ and sediloni. Thsn silnd the :lr **a, !or 4

rarnnlltl llitlnq of lirll and informitior8 arailrtle. 

b Chur* rmkil N.e-J~il*~jirntlfor runtart inf,>r,nrllan on Engineer Brand md l,nkr lu rule; tram each ariirnmenl 

b TOfind lniomatlon on mnert a%$lqnmentrfor your Fads, see tae rnqlnrrr aiilqw?n:i page. * Infonation on :lrlllan ani ml:ltar/ rrhoob, ban& quailflratlon, functloail area derignaflon, raraei Reid 

G~.llpdtl~n, flle mslnreoance. ard more lr ardlCt!e an the Prof$irlrnal :leieiromert~rge 


b EJdrd dates, reiuits. and itiIi%tl~~
 tan 5e feond on the Ymnarloni >nC ;ilectloii pane. * The ~UI~PI~P~RS~O~A~OPICI can De founl at -,I-> I::.

@ ~elpYI pmride the best porrible rsrvice byupdabfi:~aclInformation if you balan.1 a'-eabv, plsare rsg:rter for 

an ~rmyxsar*lsdgo online IAKO~e,nnil address 

[ ~I-L!,>LF~<!. 8ldc!j!!# 'i!:!:,~,,? I [ ~~~j~~.Js~Ar!~,y K, '#d-l"f~f,c fr>?,j:5K3! ] [ O!~J@.~~<>!,?.~~.:~,~~l,:::r~ 1 

Figure 1 

50 Engineer April 2002 

site periodically to stay connccted and informed. If you have Major Assignments 

suggestions for improving the home page, call the Web page Engineer majors are unique in the assign~nentprocess. 

manager at (703) 325-0766. Their time as a major is fast and furious, but if they 

maintain contact wilh lhcir assignment officer and stay Lieutenant Colonel Assignments motivated, they can meet all requirements and re~naincomaieutenant coloncls must know what they want to do petitiveforlieutenant colonel. Departmentofthehny Pamphlet 

and wlicrc they want to go before contacting the 600-3, Chapter 16,paragraph 16-3, d(3) (a) specifies 12 months 

assignment officer. Their long- and short-term goals as the minimum rcquircd for branch qualification. However, 

in those arcas are important factors in determining as- recent board statistics place the average timc for officers 

signments. A realistic assessment of pron~otionand command selected for promotion to lieutenant colo~ielfar greater than the 

potential can save a lot of stress and frustration in the minimum. Our goal is to position engineer majors at locations 

assignment process. The lieutenant-colonel population so they gct 24 months of branch-qualifying time. PERSCOM 

consists of about 420 officel-s who are managed based on docs not pinpoint officers to branch-qualifyingjobs; it assigns 

lieutenant-colonel command potential.Assignllrc~ltsare based officers to a MACOM, which will establish when an officer 

on which trackanofficerfallsunder: co~il~nandornoncommand. goes into a branch-qualifying job and in what unit that officer 

Command Track will scrvc. The key to ensuring that you get enough branchqualifying time to be competitive for lieutenant colonel is to 

Engineer lieutenant colonel commands are 24 months. complete military education level (~6~1 I", eitherresident or 

Officers who are successful in can expect be nonrcsidcnt, no later than 36 months before your lieutenant 

assigned a former command (FBC) position. promotion board, Tllis allows the Engineer Branch 

Conditions and priorities change, but typical FBC assigllments ample tillle to posit,oll you at a location to get branch.qualified, include the Engineer School, Pentagon, PERSCOM, and Joint 

positions. ~b~~~ 90 percent offomer battalion commanders Youare the bestlnanagerofyourcareerThe Engineer Branch 

\,,ill senior college 2 to 3 years after completing is here to assist and plovide guidallce. The PERSCOM and 

command. Engineer Branch home pages contain valuable information to 

assist you in this process. To help manage your career ef- NoncommandTrack fcctively, we must have current contact infortnation, which 

Officersnot on the command track can expect to be assigned includes home and work telephone numbcr, home address, and 

as a professor of militaly science; director of public works; an AKOe-mail address. Maintainiogcu~rentcontactinformation 

deputy district engineer; instructor; staff officer for the Joint will also assist us with the assignment process. Assignments 

staff,Department oftheAmy staff, or installation or MACOM become available on a cyclic basis (see Figure 2, page 52). 

staff;or in multiple positions in the Active ComponenVReserve As the Amy continues to transition,engineer-assignment Component (ACRC). They are still colnpetitive for promotion priorities will change to support this transition, E~~~ officer 

to colonel and should plat1 their career accordingly. Please shollld maintain oftheAnny,s futLlrc, contact the Engineer Branch for a file assessment. The Engineer Branch will assist every ofticer with professionalAssignment Considerations development opportunities to be successful through this 

officers sllould consider the following before talking to an transition. Maintaining contact with us and staying infonned 

assignment officer about their next assignment: of the Amy's future will greatly assist in this process. 

Priority: location or position. POC is Major Da1.e Holl~rook,majorr 'assignment oflcer; 

Engineer Branch. OPMD, PERSCOM. Current time on station. 

Overseas vulnerability (6 to I0 ycars). Captain Assignments 

Preference: short- or long-tour overseas. Fallowing company command, an officer can expect to 

Personal desires and family considerations. be assigned to a develop~nentalposition where there is 

Exceptional Family Member Program. an Army and engineer requirement for a branch-qualified 

captain. These positions range from an observer-controller or 

have priority. the Inore an trainer at one of the combat training centers or in an AC/RC

assignment officer knows about the individual ofticer and his1 ",,it, to a company commander or operations officer in the U,S. her family situation, the better the chances are that the officer's hyRecIuiting~olnmand ~ ~also exist ~ personal and professional needs will he met. to serve in Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) as an 

POC is Major Jeff Freeland, lieurenanl colonels ' assistant professor of military science or operations officer and 

assig~?mentoffice,: Engineer Bratich. OPMD,PERSCOM. in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as a project engineer. 
/ Considerations .............................. 
 Installations 

-EstablishesTarget (ODP) 

.Tracks Qains I Losses 

. . 

System Support Process 

Disbibution Divislon - MACOM Needs 

Assignment Division - lndividud Needs 

(PersonalI Professional) 

Assignments Made 

Figure 2 

Branch-qualified captains are a vital but short resource. 

Requirements for branch-qualified captains usually exceed the 

number ofavailable officers. This shortfall of captains, coupled 

with the critical nature of the requil-ements, creates a level of 

anxiety for the officer being assigned and the assign~nent 

officer during the assignment process. Much of the anxiety is 

based on false perceptions in the field of common branchqualified captain assignments. 

The most cornmon misperception is that a"3R" (ACIRC, 

USAREC, ROTC) assignment hurts an officer's potential for 

promotion, schooling, and battalion cotnmand. Almost 75 

percent of branch-qualified engineer captain assignments are 

in this category, so almost every officer can expect a 3R 

assignment. 

ACIRC and USAREC assignments foster the most concern 

from o+xcers in the field; however, they are critical Amy 

missions to which PERSCOM assigns thc best officers. 

Congress mandates the filling of ACIRC units, and General 

Shinseki made recruiting his number one mission-essential 

task. Accomplishing the ACIRC and USAREC mission is vital 

for ensuring that our Army continues to fight and win the 

nation's wan decisively. 

Three thoughts: First, 3R assignments are developmental 

positions that prepare an officcr for increased responsibilities 

as a field grade. They provide an excellent opportunity to 

positively impact the future of our Army and Corps. Second, 

ccessfil company commanders have proven that they can 

lead, train soldiers, and accomplish the mission. The challenge 

becomes sharing their experience with othcrs so they may 

accomplish future missions for the Army. Third, if an officer is 

at risk for promotion, 99 percent of the time that risk was 

determined before or during company command. Rarely is the 

officer's current command responsible for the ofiicer not getting 

promoted. Successful completion of company command is the 

best indicator of future success. 

A 3R assignment itsclf has no negative bearing on 

promotion, schooling, and battalion command. Consecutive 

nonh.oop assignments, average company command OERs, and/ 

or an overall center of mass perfortnance will adversely affect 

potential. Therefore, it is important for the ofticer to do well in 

every jobfor his and the Army's long-term success. w 


POCis Captain RonnieGvfin, hr,anch-qual$edcaptnins' 

assignnlenr officer; EngineevBranch, OPMD, PERSCOM. 

1 l"s, 'h ,/ J 

1 

?''* as 


F -% # 

+-\ 
Enlisted PERSCOM Notes 


By Lieurennrrr Colorrei Peter Taylor 

Greetings frorn the Engineer Branch. 1 appreciate the MOSs (l2B, IZC, 5 I M, 5 1 R, 5 1T) that are cunently manned at 

opportu~lity to update you on the health of the better than 100 percent. This is nccessary so that other MOSs, 

enlisted enginccr force and trends T'veobsen-ed since mostly nonengineer. can be brought up to strength. For every 

I assumed duties as Branch Chicf this past summer. 	 soldier in excess of authorizations in one CMF. there's a 

corresponding shortfall in another. 

Health of the Regiment 

The Assignment Process Tbe Engineer Regiment, as a wliole. is healthy. Today 

our Regiment is manned with 14 of our 21 military hen I amved, I was amazed to learn of the many 

occupational specialties (MOSS) at I00 percent orbetter lwfactors that impact our ability to select soldiers 

(sec rable 1 ). I'\.e been on thejob now for Inore than 6 months, for assignment-the Anny Chief of Staff's manning 

and I can tell you that no other branch en.10~~ thisle\7el oftill. gu~iiance for units, individual qualifications and preferences. 

the field. most units are filled at close to 100 percent. asoldier's pem~anent-change-of-station(PCS) eligibility (time 

Typically. we see units filled withlnore skill-level-one soldiers on station, stabilization), and many more. I was impressed by 

and fe,\;cr sergeants and staff sergeants than autllorized. ~ 1 ~, the challenye our assignment managers and professional 

shortage of noncommissioned office~s (NCOs). particularly development NCOs (PDNCOs) face as they attempt to cnsure 

sergeants and staff sergeants, is anAmiv\~ide issue caused, in engineer unit readiness while balancing a soldier's (and 

part, by incl-eased requirementsfor drill sergeants and recruiters. family's) preferences. professional development needs, and 

We also have several MOSs (OOB, 51K, 5lM. and 62F) that tour equity concerns. 

need more promotion-eligible specialists and sergeants to be 

boarded. Strer 

Despite our overall good health, wc continue to experience (pert 

shortages in a few of our low-density MOSS-OOB. 52E, and 

airbome62ElJ. To address thcsc shortages. we're bringing 

more soldiers into those MOSs, poshing for incentives to 

help retain more of those currently serving, and closely 

monitoring motrthly promotion allocations. We also continue 

to accept reclassitications into these MOSs. Many of them 

offer attractive reclassification bonuses under the Bonus 

Extension and Retraining (BEAR) Program. Call this office if 

you're interested in reclassifying. 

As a branch. we've accessed and retained well in recent 

years. Our recruiting successes can be attributed to the 

enlistment bonuses offered for some of our MOSS and to the 

fact that we offer challenge and variety for potential recruits. 

At this point in FY02, I'm pleased to report that exceed the 

Army recruiting avcrages in all three of our career managcmcnt 

fields (CMFs+l2,5 1 and 8I. Fortunately, we've been able to 

recoup the 128 accessions we missed earlier this year by adding 

enlistment bonuses and by increasing recruiter emphasis on 

the MOS. We see similar trends with retention. Reenlistment is 

strong in the 8 1 series, but CMFs 12 and 5 1 arc retaining at 

levels slightly below the Army average. Again, we expect 

targeted incentives to help us meet our retention goals for the 

year. 

The long-term projections for the Regiment are good, Table 1. Engineer Regiment MOS Strength 

though we'll see our strength levels decrease slightly in those 

April 2002 	 Engineer 53 
Given these considerations, you may wonder when you 

should speak witli branch about your professional development Board Date Target Release 

needs and careeraspirations. The answer, quite simply, is often CYOl CSM, SGM, and SMC 2 Oct -24 Oct 01 Late Jan 02 

and whenever you're eligible for reassignment. I recommend 

that you periodically call your assignment manager to initiate 

a dialogue and, when appropriate, follow up by submitting 

cyo2 MSG 

cY02 SFC 

5 Feb- 1 Mar 02 

29 May -27 Jun 02 

LateApr02 

LateAug02 

Depannelit of the Army Forn~ 4187, Personnel Action. More CYO2 CSM, SGM, and SMC 1Oct -23 Oct 02 Late Jan 03 

i~nportantly, Iencourege you to use the newly implemented 

Assignment Satisfaction Key (ASK) System which enables Table 2. Selection Boards and Release Dates 

You to input duty preferences and locations directly to our assign~iient eligibility, preferences. and family circumstances. 

database via the Internet. Our assignment Inatlagers now havc when you call, be in your we can ollly 

the software to use your preferellce data whell tile? fill send you to locations where your MOS is authorized, overseas 

requisitions-a great improvement to how we make assignments are a possibility if you haven.t been stationed 

assignments. overseas in several years, and we probably won't send you on 

To better understand when you should speak with ?our back-to-back assign~nelits to TDA units. NCOs, at some point, 

assignent manager, it's important to kllow the tilnelines he you should expect to he asked to serve as a drill sergeant or 

works with and the factors hc considers when making an recluiter or in an Active Component/Resen,e Co~nponcnt (ACI 

assignment. Around mid-January, our assignment team staiied RC) assignment. These are llolninative assignments that our 

wol-king assignments for fall 2002, mol-e than 6 months out, best NCOs arc asked to fill-thcy are challengingassignments 

Our standard is to placc soldiers on assignment instructions and are recognized by selection boards as being career- 

(Al) at least 150 days before the report date at the next duty enhancing. 

location. Assignlnent managers typically begin to wo~k the 

preliminary paperwork several months beforeplacilig a soldier Promotions and Training 

on AI. They need this time to screen records for nomi~iative Rro~notions and training are subjects that intcrest all 

positions (drill sergeants, recruiters, observer-controllers, soldiers. Two related arcas that have recently reROTC, ACIRC), obtain PCSItimc-on-station waivers, research ceived considerable attention are conditional pro- the availability ofrnedical services to meet Exceptional Family motions and NCOES As a reminder, conditionally Member Program needs, and so on. We usually fill drill sergeant promoted soldiersmay their prolllotion if don,t attend 

and rccruiter nomi~lations 8 months bcfore the anticipated tlleappropriateNCOEScourse(PLDC, BNCOC,ANCOC) when 

report date. scheduled, typically within I year of being conditionally 

For senior NCOs (sergeants first class and above), wc work promoted. We can make exceptions for opcrational or hardship 

assignments even further out. Our goal is to placc you on reasons; however, soldiers need to attend NCOES courses as 

assignment instructions 12 months before your report date. soon as possible. Call this office if you have questions about 

This is a rcccnt change on making assignments, so we're NCOES attcndanceorconditional promotions. 

working toward the 12-month standard. Table 2 shows the latest projections for upcoming selectioli 

It's also important to know when your assignment manager boards and release dates. Remember. it's up to you to review your 

will look at you for reassignment. Ifyou'rc returning toCONUS, Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and get a current 

you can rely on the timelines described above to gauge when photograph submined well in advance of your next hoard. Visit 

your next assign~ncnt will he worked-we seldom cultail the PERSCOM Web sitc (n%~~?per.~con~.~r~~~~~.~~~i

for the latest 

soldiers beforc thcir DEROS. For those sewing in CONUS, it's on selection boards and for procedures to request your OMPF. 

not uncolnlnon to PCS with 24 moliths time on station, 

solnetimes lcss. This occurs frequently for NCOs selected for Contacting Us 

drill sergeant and recruiter duty. Senior NCOs should expect The Engineer Branch exists to support commanders and 

that we'll work a follow-on assignment that coincides with soldiers in the field. I encourage you to contact your theil-co~npletionof 24 months in a leadership position (platoon assignmellt managel; PDNCO, Branch SGM. or me with 

jergcant Or first sergeant). This doesn't Inean an! questions you have about your assignment or professional automatically PCS at this point, hut we do consider them PCS- dc,c~oplnent-t~lat+swily here, ~1~~ PERSC-M web site 

eligible once they've filledthe leadership positions necessaty has information on how to contactus, ~ ~tile hest way~ for their professional develo~lne"t. That they'll stay to influence your future assignment is to tell us your preferences competitive for promotion. bcfore we makc your assignment. Y 

Tlre hottoln line concerning the assig~~nent process is that 

we need to colnmunicate with you frequently. Periodically call Lieulcno~?fColonel Tq.10,. ir IIIE bra17cI1 cI?iq/:fur Ei~~;nee). 

your assign~nellt ~nanager or PDNCO to review your EnlisredA.csig~~rne~zts. 

54 Engineer April ZOO2 
I I 

Commercial numbers are (573) 563-xxxx and Defense System 

Network (DSN) numbers are 676-xxxx unless otherwise noted. 

Directorate of Training (DOT) 

Army Development Systenl (ADS) XXI. TMDOC hosted a 

workshop fro~ll 25 to 28 January 2002 to develop draft 

implementation plans for warrant officer and enlisted personnel. 

The workgroups ideutified unfinanccd requirements for 

incorporation into thc Planning, Programming: and Budgeting 

Execution System process forFY02 and the Program Objective 

Memorandum period FY03-08. 

The agendas were as follows: 

n Wan-ant Officer 

Tailor technical training to unit and assignment. 

Educate ofiicers andNCOs on the role of awarrant officer. 

- Expand technical warrant officer accession base 

m 	Enlisted 

-Combining MOSS with similar functions 

- Multiskilled soldiel-s. 

- Structured self-development. 


POC is CIV4 Frederick Kerber, 34088; DSN 1088: ore-mail 


kn.hei:~,a~ood.arn1~:iiii/, 

MOS 51TTechnical Engineer-a Feeder 10sInto the 

21OA\\!arrant Officer Program. See DAPam611-2I.Miliiaql: 

O~.criporioiin/ Classificaiioil uiid Srrucrure, for a duty 

description of this MOS. For info~li~ation on hour to become a 

OLD TITLE MOS 

Officers 

21A I Eng nccrgcneraloff~ccr 

218 1 Cornoat eno~ncerotficer 

21D Facilitiesicantractconst~ction 

managementengineer -

Warrant Officers 

21OA I Ut~i~tlesoperat~onand malntenan I technician 

215D I Terrain analysis technician 

Enlisted 

IGRADE~iE 

I 	 1-6 

I 	 14 

1-6 rlu 

I I 1 	 1-5 1 215D 

Combat Engineer Career Field 

122 1 Combatengineerseniorsergeant I 8.9 1 212 

128 1 Combatengineer 1 1-7 1 218 

12C I Bridge crewmember 1 1-7 1 21C 

General Engineering Career Field 

512 I General enaineersuoewisor - 1 8,9 1 21x

006 I Diver 

warrant officcr, go to htp://lea~-~vi~~~~:ari~~?:mil/~r~occi. 

POC is CW4 Frederick Kerber, 34088: DSN -4088: or e-mail 

kerberf@~~,oo~i.iirn~~.iiiil. 


MOS 81TTopographicAnalyst-Restoring Staff Sergeant 

SquadLeaders in TopographicCompanies at Corps and Echelons 

Above Corps. The consolidation of MOS 81C cartographer and 

MOS XIQ terrain analyst into MOS 81T. along\vith changes in 

NCO strength. led to a 1.eduction of26staffsergeant tenain-analysis 

squad-leader positions in engineer topographic companies (22 

Activc and 4 National Guard) to sergeant. In 2001, topographic 

unit commanders indicated a need to restore these positions to 

staflseargeant due to theco~nplexity of the mission and the degree 

of responsibility required. The request to upgrade these positions 

is currently being handled through the military occupatio~lal 

structure process. 

POC is MSG Arthur Harvey, 34087: DSN -1087; or e-mail 

harve~.a@~~~ood.anil!:i~~il. 

Standardized MOSCodes. On24 January2002. MGAndelsB. 

Aadland approved a revision to the MOS coding of all officers. 

walrant officers. and enlisted soldiers in the Engineer Regiment. 

The codcs were approved, in part, in December 2002 by the Deputy 

Chiefof Staff, Pe~sonnel (DCSPER). The table to the right shows 

62E Heavyconstructionequipment 1-5 21E 

operator 

62F Crane operator 

tionequipml 

Topograph 

I 

81T Topographicanalyst 

82D I Topographicsurveyor 

Note: MOScodes shown in red indicatea change from the 

16 November submission. 
the submissions fro111 24 January 2002, which may change. 

DCSPER may double-code two MOSS and areas of concentration because it is somewhat reluctant to use the 0and I 

alpha characters. A decisionshould he made in 3QFY02. 

POC is SGM Wade Ken; 34087; DSN -4087; or e-mail 

kel-m~@woodarm~~.n~i/. 

FM 3-34.221 (5-2), Engineer Initial Brigade Combat 

Operations. The TRADOC commander has directed an 

accelerationofall Initial Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) doctrine 

manuals. The newly established date for completing the 

coordinating draft of this FM is September 2002. The ~nanual 

will be used to prepare for the IBCT certification exercise in 

early 2003 and then finalized by November 2003. 

POC is LTC William Duddleston, 37537; DSN -7537; oremail di~ddlesto~~w~@l*.o~d.~rrr~~y.~i~il. 

ANIPSS-12 Mine Detector DTLOMS Board. As part of 

the iinplc~nentation of a DTLOMS board decision; portions of 

course and collecting information from the field on humanitarian 

dernining. Please contact the HDTC ifyour unit is scheduled to 

conduct a humanitarian demining-related mission. 

POC is SGM Kevin Fee, 36199; DSN -6199; or e-mail, 

/eek@~voodarntJrrnil. 

Engineer Captain's Career Course Schedule. Below are 

the dates forthe course for the Active and Resenre Components: 

FMs 5-34, EngirzeerFieIc/Da/a, and 20-32, Mir~e/Couritel?~~ir?e 

Operurions,are being revised to reflect approved changes to 

ANIPSS-I2 training techniques. The updated methods, 

developed by Dr.Alan Davison, will he in change I to FM 20- 

32 and include modified sweep techniques, increased 

sensitivity checks, and detection training methods shown to 

raise the ANiPSS- I2 detection rate of low-metal mines from 15 

to over 87 percent. 

POC is LTC William Duddleston. 37537; DSN -7537; or 

e-mail di~~~dlesies,oi~io@~vood.ar~n~y.n~il. 

Countermine and Counter-Booby-Trap Center (CCBTC). 

Following the TRADOC commander's directive, the CCBTC 

was established at Foli Leonard Wood in January 2002 to create 

a dynamic learning center of excellence, able to forecast and 

respond to future developments in minelcountermine warfare 

before they are encountered by friendly forces. The center will 

draw on the resoilrces of the Army, Marines, and intelli, ~ence 

and humanitarian mine-action communities so it can not only 

respond to current threats hut also anticipate and tneet future 

threats. The organizat~on and mission of the center is being 

finalized following the Countennine Council of Colonels and 

General Officer Steering Co~nlnittec in March and April 2002. 

POC is LTC Mark A. Thompson, 37347; DSN -7347; or 

e-mail thompsma@u~oodarmmvVn~il. 

Humanitarian Demining Training Center (HDTC). The 

HDTC continues to serve as the U.S. DoD center for mineaction training. It offers the Humanitarian Demining Basic 

Course to soldiers who are deploying to support humanitarian 

mine-action ouerations. The HDTC also offers training in 

humanitarian mine-action management and new training to 

POC is MA1 Steve Cross, 34128, DSN -4128; or e-mail 

oo,~~.~@i*.ood.arn~~~ii/. 

Requests for Information (RFls). RFI traffic in the division 

remains at an elevated level. Most questions center around 

airfield repairlconstruction and bridging. Division personnel 

instruct a wide range of subjects and have considerable 

experience and expertise. Please contact them with questions 

you may have related to construction engineering. 

MAJ Chris Kramer, OIC and geology, 35372: DSN -5372: or 

e-mail kran~erch@wood.aniiymil. 

MAJ lsidro Roudon-Torres, bridging, 35660; DSN -5660; or 

e-mail rondon-torre.~i@i~:oodarn~ymil. -

SSG David Lawson, bridging, 37552; DSN -7552; ore-mail 

Iciwsonp@~cood.a~mil. 

Kenny Light, civil engineering (roadslairfields). 35655; DSN 

-5655; or e-mail lig/ttk@wood.arm~.r~~il. 

Chad Morris, civilengineering(concretelasphalt), 35653; DSN 

-5653; or e-mail mor~rischa@i~ood.a~n~y.mil. 

CW3 Arthur Flinn, Warrant Officer Advanced Course issues 

and project management, 35537; DSN -5537; or e-mail 

fiinna@~~:ood.army.rnii. 

CW2 Greg Sanden, Wanant Officer Advanced Course issues 

supponsoldiersconductinghumanitariandeminingoversight and project management. 37788; DSN -7788; or e-mail 

with the Stabilization Force. It is co~lstantly updating its HDO sandeng@woodarnt)rntil. 

56 Engineer April 2002 
SFC Franklin Bell, airfield damage repair (RRR), drainage, EnhancementsWithin the EOBC and ECCC. The landmme 

drainage shucmres, and horizontal construction, 35329; DSN - warfare and demolitions and the tactics blocks of instruction 

5329; ore-mail bellj@wood.army.mil. have been updated. With the changes, students will be more 

SFC Thomas Hylsky, soils and site investigations, 35653; ktlowledgeable on thrcat mines, booby traps, and countermine 

DSN -5653: ore-mail hvlslNlicOwooda~~mvmil. measures to defeat them in a contemporary operating , ,.., environment. 

SSG Mark Hackett, vertical constnlction/structures, 35639; 

DSN -5639; or e-mail liackeitnt@wood.a,.mymil. POC for the EOBC isCPT Ken Boggs, 35593; DSN-5593; or 

e-mail hogg,rk@~vood.army.n~ii. SSG Jason Griffin, theater construction management 

systems, qumy operations, and horizontal construction, 35645; ECCC is JOhnClarke*35582; DSN-5582; Or 

DSN -5645; or e-mailgrifii~j@wood.armpmil. e-mail clurkej@wood.army.mil. 

jyew~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t i ~ l PO,-. CPTT~~ ~~d is the new geospatial Mine Cards for Afghanistan. The mine card deck for 

instructor. Hc recently attended the Topographic officers Afghanistan, GTA 5-10-51, Afghanistan and Mine IdenM~~~~~~~~~ courseand geospatial informatioll tification, has been co~npletedand should be available through 

training at Fon Belvoir, Virginia, to further his knowledge in your localTraini% 

terrain analysis. He is an instructor for the Engineer Officer POC is MAJ Mark Griffin, 36199; DSN -6199; e-mail 

Basic Course (EOBC) and Engineer Captain's Career Course grzfinma@wood.arm.y.mil. 

(ECCC). You can contact him at 37060, DSN -7060, or e-mail 

i*ead~@~~ood.armymi/. 

Directorate of Training Development (DOTD) 

Field Manual Update. The following field manuals have Change 1 to FM 5-499, Hydraulics. This is a one-page 

recently been sent to ATSC for print and distribution. Look for change, required because of incorrect information that could 

them in the near future on the Reimer Digital Library at h/lp:// cause a safety concern. 

155.21 7.58.58/atdls.lilm. POC is Sandra Gibson, 37651; DSN -7651; or e-mail 

FM 3-34.343, Military Nonstandard Fixed Bridging. This gibsons@woon'arnzj~.mil. 

is a complete revision of the June 1991 version. 

Directorate of Environmental Integration (DEI) 

Army Proponent for Environmental Integration. Because 

of thc I December 2000 approved Army Environmental 

Campaign Plan and Operational Directive, signed by the 

Undersecretary of the Army and thehy's Vice Chief of Staff, 

the Engincer School was designated the Army's (and branch's) 

proponent for the integration of environmental considerations 

across doctrine, training (military and civilian), leader 

development (military and civilian), organization (design), 

materiel (requirements development), and soldier (and civilian) 

(DTLOMS) support and within military operations. DEI 

represents the Engineer School in the day-to-day execution of 

this mission. In this role, DEI will develop, integrate, evaluate, 

standardize, and synchronize environmental considerations into 

and across DTLOMS to increase awareness and knowledge of 

soldiers and civilians. The objective is to positively affect 

environmental efficiencies and effectiveness in conducting 

military training and operations. This will ensure sustainable 

Army training areas and ranges; environmentally considerate 

leaders, soldiers, and units when operationally deployed; and 

a program synchronized with the Anny's other four areas of 

environmental concentration-research, development, and 

acquisition; installation management; operations; and public 

outreach. Additionally, the Engineer School (DEI) is charged 

with collecting and disseminating environmental lessons 

learned. 

POC is COL Robert Kirsch, 341 19; DSN -41 19; or e-mail 

ki~.rch~wood.ar~ny.mii; or Dr. Rebecca Johnson, 34119;DSN 

-4119;or e-mailjohnson@u.ood.arm,v.mil. 

Visual Archives. The History Office at the Engineer School is developing a visual archives. It currently has more than 

18,000photographs, largely fromWorld War Ii and Korea. Units that would like to contribute photographs (copies)or other visual 

material should contact Dr. Larry D. Roberts. Historian, U.S. Army EngineerSchool, Fort Leonard Wood. Missouri 65473. Where 

possible. caption information should accompany the images. If you have questions, please call Dr. Roberts at (573)563-6109. 

April 2002 Engineer 57