By Order of the Secretary of the Army:

RAYMOND T. ODIERNO

General, United States Army

Chief of Staff

Official:

GERALD B. O’KEEFE

Acting Administrative Assistant to the

Secretary of the Army

1322001

U.S. Army Engineer School

(573) 563-8080/DSN 676-8080

COMMANDANT

BG Anthony C. Funkhouser 

563-6192

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

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT

COL David Theisen

563-6192

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

DEPUTY COMMANDANT

Mr. James R. Rowan

563-8080

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

REGIMENTAL COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR

CSM Butler J. Kendrick, Jr.

563-8060

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

REGIMENTAL CHIEF WARRANT OFFICER

CW5 Scott R. Owens

563-4088

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

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–USAR

COL Ricardo A. Javier 

563-8045

<ricardo.a.javier.mil@mail.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–ARNG

LTC Adam M. Calderon 

563-8046

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

CHIEF OF STAFF

LTC Philip M. Secrist III

563-7116

<philip.m.secrist.mil@mail.mil>

COMMANDER, 1ST ENGINEER BRIGADE

COL Daniel S. Larsen

596-0224, DSN 581-0224

<daniel.s.larsen.mil@mail.mil>

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING AND LEADER DEVELOPMENT

LTC Jason L. Smallfield

563-4093

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

DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRATION

Mr. Robert F. Danner

563-2845

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

COUNTER EXPLOSIVE HAZARDS CENTER

COL Darryl McDowell 

563-8142

<darryl.d.mcdowell.mil@mail.mil>

HUMANITARIAN DEMINING TRAINING CENTER

Mr. Jonathan D. Green

563-6199

<jonathan.d.green.civ@mail.mil>

ENGINEER DOCTRINE, MSCoE CDID, CODDD

LTC John C. Morrow

563-2717

<john.c.morrow2.mil@mail.mil>

MANEUVER SUPPORT ORGANIZATION

Mr. Donald Wenzel

563-7264

<donald.l.wenzel.civ@mail.mil>

MANEUVER SUPPORT MATERIEL

MAJ Richard E. Weixelbaum

563-5055

<richard e.weixelbaum.mil@mail.mil>

Engineer (ISSN 0046-1989) is published three times 

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

Support Center of Excellence G-37 Publications Support, 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Periodicals postage is paid

at Fort Leonard Wood and additional mailing offices.

Articles to be considered for publication are due

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

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

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

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

the manuscript to Engineer Professional Bulletin, 14010 

MSCoE Loop, Building 3201, Suite 2661, Fort Leonard 

Wood, Missouri 65473-8702. Due to the limited space per 

issue, we normally do not print articles that have been 

published elsewhere.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Engineer 

Professional Bulletin, 14010 MSCoE Loop, Building 3201, 

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

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

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

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

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

engrmag/>.

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

informed of current and emerging developments within their 

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

authors and not those of the Department of Defense or its 

elements. The contents do not necessarily reflect official 

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

items constitutes neither affirmation of their accuracy nor 

product endorsement. Engineer reserves the right to edit 

material submitted for publication.

CONTENT is not copyrighted. Material may be reprinted 

if credit is given to Engineer and the author.

OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION is targeted to all engineer 

and engineer-related units.

PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS are available for $24.00 

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

63197-9000.

ADDRESS CHANGES for personal subscriptions should 

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

address.
E R

DEPARTMENTS

02 Clear the Way

By Brigadier General 

Anthony C. Funkhouser

03 Lead the Way

By Command Sergeant Major 

Butler J. Kendrick, Jr.

04 Show the Way

By Chief Warrant Officer Five

Scott R. Owens

26 Engineer Doctrine Update

34 Book Review: The Price of Glory

Reviewed by Colonel Brian E. Bart

36 Book Review: The Echo of 

Battle: The Army’s Way of War

Reviewed by First Lieutenant Kevin

N. Braam

MANAGING EDITOR

Diane E. Eidson

EDITOR

Rick Brunk

GRAPHIC DESIGNER

Jennifer Morgan

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Phyllis E. Grayson

COMMANDANT

Brigadier General Anthony C. Funkhouser

FEATURES

05 The Theater Engineer Command Supporting the Army of 2020

From the Theater Engineer Command Senior Working Group

10 The End of an Era: Lessons Learned From the Last J-7 in Iraq

By Colonel Fabian E. Mendoza, Jr., Lieutenant Colonel Benjamin M.

Wallen, and Major Holli A. Bennett

14 Rehearsals: The Lost Art

By Captain Michael P. Carvelli

17 USACE Supports the Army Family Through School Construction

 By Dr. JoAnne Castagna

18 An Introduction to Aqueduct Warfare

 By First Lieutenant Evan M. Nelson

20 The Double Life of Brigadier General Paschal N. Strong—How

One Engineer Officer Had a Lasting Impact on the Battlefield

and the Home Front

 By Colonel John M. Riley

23 Lessons Learned in Energy Efficiency

By Colonel Stewart R. Fearon

28 Alaska District Takes Prominent Role in New Defense Strategy

 By Colonel Christopher D. Lestochi

30 Study Offers Guidance for Using Indigenous Materials and

Methods to Build Base Camps

By Dr. Ghassan Al-Chaar

Volume 43 PB 5-13-3 Headquarters, Department of the Army September–December 2013

NGINEE

U.S. ARMY

ENGINEER SCHOOL

The Professional Bulletin of Army Engineers

September–December 2013 Engineer 1

Front cover: U.S. Army photos. Clockwise from top: Engineer Soldiers train 

and practice their route clearance skills, 

combat engineers find cover behind a 

“blast blanket” after detonating an entryway with explosives, an engineer Soldier 

competes in the Best Soldier Competition 

at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, 

Alaska.

Back cover: U.S. Army photos.
2 Engineer September–December 2013

 

Clear the Way

Brigadier General Anthony C. Funkhouser 

Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School

I

t is great to return to Fort Leonard 

Wood, the home of our Engineer Regiment! I am truly humbled and honored 

to serve as the 95th commandant of the 

U.S. Army Engineer School. As I write this, 

I have been the commandant for only about 

3 weeks and I can say that there is a lot 

happening. I would like to thank Brigadier 

General Peter A. (Duke) DeLuca, his wife 

Marianne, and the entire U.S. Army Engineer School team for their hospitality and 

assistance in a smooth transition. 

I will be assessing where we are over the 

course of the coming weeks, but you should 

know that our mission remains unchanged: 

to generate the military engineer capabilities that the Army needs to provide 

commanders with the freedom of action to win decisively 

as part of the joint, interagency, intergovernmental, multinational, industry, and academia (JIIM-IA) team. Major 

General Bryan G. Watson and Brigadier General DeLuca 

have brought us to this point over the last 4 years, and the 

Engineer School will continue to focus on leader development 

and brigade engineer battalion (BEB) implementation and 

modernization as we move toward Army 2020 and beyond. 

We also intend to retain our slightly modified box top as the 

framework to illustrate how we assure mobility, enhance 

protection, enable force projection and expeditionary logistics, and build partnership capacity and infrastructure. We 

have the finest Soldiers and equipment in the world; and our 

Army deserves the most agile, adaptive, and dynamic engineer leaders to provide engineering solutions and freedom of 

action across the force. 

Much of our effort will be focused on implementing the 

BEB. The BEB represents the largest change to the Engineer Regiment in more than a decade, and it will be a great 

challenge with many moving parts. The BEB implementation will occur amidst a global environment that continues 

to evolve and expand our mission set. We continue to fight in 

Afghanistan and maintain worldwide engagements. We are 

about to embark on a period of transition that will require 

us to be more expeditionary as we consolidate our military 

forces within the continental United States while operating 

in a continually more constrained fiscal environment. The 

resource-constrained Department of Defense budget will be 

a driver for us to continually reevaluate our way ahead and 

make difficult decisions that will affect our force size and 

level of modernization.

This is not unprecedented. Three years after his inauguration, President Thomas Jefferson reduced the Army from 4,410 

to 2,579 Soldiers and reduced the Army 

budget to less than a third of what it had 

been. Despite those fixed reductions, he, 

along with Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, recognized the need to establish a military school to train and develop engineer and

artillerist competency for the core profession. 

This would start as the U.S. Military Academy and eventually separate its mission as 

the U.S. Army Engineer School. To this day, 

our engineers maintain a high value for our 

Army. While there will be fiscal challenges,

our team will work to retain its quality and

its great leaders to ensure that our stock 

remains high. Our Engineer School was born

in times of fiscal austerity. Through the

years, it has led numerous transitions, each

time posturing us for the future.

The BEB approval has been our focus for more than 

4 years, and we will need to lean forward and move out 

aggressively now that the Army has approved the plan. We 

will share information quickly (up and down the chain) and 

track the efforts, issues, and lessons learned through monthly 

fusion cell and BEB forums. Having been through a similar 

reorganization before modularization, we should all anticipate an accelerated schedule. Unfortunately, if we continue 

to reduce the size of the Army in the future, we can plan for 

cuts to impact all components of our Army. 

Despite the fiscal challenges, we have a large number of 

opportunities over the coming months and years that I plan 

to discuss in this and other forums. I see many of these opportunities in our support to the warfighter—supporting decisive 

actions in the lodgment, training our engineers, implementing the BEB effort, and integrating women into all of our 

military occupational specialties and formations to meet the 

standards of Soldier 2020. We must also increase our focus 

on developing leaders and broadening and managing talent.

 Finally, here are a few closing thoughts. I want to increase 

our collaborative dialogue with the field and the push of 

information to add to your kit bags. We are your reachback 

to help solve problems. We are also your reachback for the 

customs and traditions of the Engineer Regiment. We need 

to preserve our history and share it with young engineers 

since they are now part of that history. It binds us in a special way—past, present, and future. Send us a note, and we’ll 

provide an answer or the information you seek. I look forward 

to serving as the commandant to preserve our past, train 

and educate to fight today, and transform and modernize for

the future.

Essayons!
Engineer 3

 

Lead the Way

Command Sergeant Major Butler J. Kendrick, Jr. 

Regimental Command Sergeant Major

September–December 2013

How time flies! I’m still very excited 

to be part of this superb team; 

and though it seems like I just got 

here, it has been 3 months since Kim and 

I arrived at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

I was fortunate enough to celebrate the 

Army’s 238th anniversary at Fort Leonard 

Wood this year. The Maneuver Support 

Center of Excellence team of Major General Leslie C. Smith and Command Sergeant Major Terrence W. Murphy started 

the morning with a 3.5-mile run. It was a 

great way to begin the morning and watch 

troops get fired up as we began the day’s 

many events. I also celebrated Independence Day here and was entertained by 

the U.S. Army Soldier Show. That event 

was largely made possible by the installation recycling program. It was a great display of the many different talents of 

our Soldiers. After the performance, we enjoyed an electrifying fireworks display to top off the evening. 

I also rekindled a friendship with an engineer Gold Star 

Family. Dennis and Teri Johnson, parents of Specialist 

Joseph D. Johnson, were at Gammon Field to participate 

in the Independence Day celebration. It was bittersweet to 

talk with the family of a fallen comrade who was part of the 

20th Engineer Brigade when I was the brigade command 

sergeant major, but it was very special to see them again.

I remain extremely proud of the Soldiers in the Regiment. I recently observed training and spoke to the Soldiers of the 1438th Engineer Company (Multirole Bridge), 

Missouri Army National Guard, getting ready to deploy to 

support Operation Enduring Freedom. The 50th Multirole 

Bridge Company was also ramping up to provide bridge 

support during the operation. Even as engineers shape 

our world by closing out Operation Enduring Freedom 

and providing route clearance patrols, construction, bridge 

repair, prime power, plumbing, and electrical generation, 

they strive for and achieve excellence. U.S. Army Reserve 

Specialist Fromm Mitchell, a combat engineer representing the 416th Theater Engineer Command, won the 2013 

U.S. Army Reserve Best Warrior Competition and Sergeant Jacob Valderrama, 555th Engineer Brigade, won the 

U.S. Army Forces Command NCO of the Year competition. 

Please congratulate these young engineers as they move 

forward and compete in the Army’s best warrior and leader 

competitions.

I had dinner with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

command sergeant major, engineer graduates from the 

U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy 

Class 63, and a small group of students. 

A spokesman from the Engineer Professional Development Office described 

career opportunities and broadening 

assignments. These have changed over 

time, and NCOs should contact the Engineer School about their career paths and 

opportunities. It was a great evening for 

the students at the dinner and for the 

other “regimental elders,” including me, 

who were able to spend time with our 

future leaders. 

I visited Active Guard Reserve engineers in North Dakota and learned that 

the North Dakota National Guard 164th 

Regional Training Institute provides 

training within assigned career management fields, offers 

excellent training for officers and NCOs, and has some of 

the best trainers in the U.S. Army. Each instructor has at 

least three military occupational specialty (MOS) qualifications and is technically skilled in numerous other skills. 

I watched Soldiers from many different MOSs go through 

intense training that demonstrated the awesome capabilities that the engineer team brings to the fight. 

I look forward to implementing the brigade engineer 

battalion (BEB) and ensuring that maneuver commanders 

understand our newly enhanced engineer capabilities. We 

engineer leaders—officers and NCOs—must know our craft 

and be able to demonstrate our skills to the brigade combat teams across the Army. I will ensure that you have the 

information you need about the BEB. 

I ask regimental leaders to talk to their Soldiers, especially sergeants and staff sergeants, about the Profession of 

Arms campaign. Many young engineer leaders have no clue 

about being members of a profession within a professional 

organization. The Army exists for one reason: to serve the 

Nation by supporting and defending the Constitution.1

We must determine the best strategy for leader development as we approach Army 2020. Engineers must strive 

to refine every area of doctrine, organization, training, 

materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) for our Regiment. Implementing the BEB 

will stretch us in every one of those capabilities, but we are 

up to the task.

Finally, I would like to introduce and welcome the 95th 

engineer commandant to the team. On 30 July 2013, we 

bid a fond farewell to Brigadier General Peter A. (Duke) 

(Continued on page 13)
4 Engineer September–December 2013

Chief Warrant Officer Five Scott R. Owens

Regimental Chief Warrant Officer 

Show the Way 

Last month, I attended the annual 

Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) 

Army Training and Leader Development Conference. The conference 

brought together Army senior leaders from 

Headquarters, Department of the Army; 

U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command; and U.S. Army Forces Command 

to discuss current and future challenges 

and initiatives within the Army. The key 

focus of the conference was Army plans to 

develop leaders and train the force to meet 

these challenges during the fiscally constrained years ahead. CSA General Raymond T. Odierno spoke extensively about 

the budgetary challenges we will face for 

the foreseeable future and his vision for 

moving forward. It was an enlightening and professionally 

rewarding 2 days, and I was encouraged by the direction 

that he outlined for the Army. A few points that General 

Odierno made especially resonated with me because leaders 

of the Engineer Regiment have been turning their attention 

to them more and more recently. Two of these points are: we 

need to develop the expeditionary mind-set, and we must 

increase the focus on training and leader development from 

the platoon level to the most senior levels in the Army.

As the CSA spoke, I thought about the role of engineer 

warrant officers and their responsibility to help as the Army 

transitions into the future. First, I will address the expeditionary mind-set. This isn’t anything new to the Army; the 

Army has always had that focus, except when it has been 

engaged in long periods of conflict such as the past dozen 

years. But with a shrinking force and upcoming regional 

force alignment, it is even more critical that we redevelop 

that mind-set and ingrain it into training and operations. 

For years, we’ve had to focus on Army force generation rotations and deployments into mature theaters, where many 

things have already been set in place. With an Army based 

in the continental United States, we will be required to conduct early-entry operations, most likely into denied areas 

with poor or no infrastructure. This scenario falls squarely 

within the expertise of engineer warrant officer military 

occupational specialties (MOSs):

■ Construction engineering technicians (MOS 120A) will be

critical in establishing, opening, and expanding lodgments in the early stages of the next conflict. They

will establish and build base camps; design, build,

and connect the power grid: improve or fix existing facilities; and manage a host of construction projects. In

short, they will be extremely busy. 

■ Geospatial engineering technicians

(MOS 125D) will be equally busy.

They will be critical early in the planning process, gathering geospatial

data and creating data where it 

doesn’t exist. They will produce terrain analysis and terrain visualization products to help commanders and 

staffs visualize and understand the

terrain and its impacts on friendly

and enemy operations. Once intheater, they will directly support 

current operations and plan for

future operations. 

This leads me to the topic of training 

and leader development. This is where 

we build the foundations to better prepare ourselves and our Soldiers for the future so that they 

will be ready to handle whatever missions they are called 

on to perform. By definition, warrant officers are trainers, 

integrators, and maintainers of Army systems. As such, 

we need to ensure that Soldiers are trained and instilled 

with an expeditionary mind-set. We must get them to think 

about what it would take to prepare and move into a hostile, immature theater; what equipment they would need; 

what types of missions they could be assigned; and how 

they would survive. As we made plans for Operation Iraqi 

Freedom in V Corps, I thought of those things. I knew I was 

going into a hostile environment, but didn’t know how long 

I would be there. I had to ensure that my team brought 

everything we could possibly need for the mission and for 

our personal use, such as music, videos, books, and personal hygiene products. That’s what it will be like when 

we are called upon again. In addition to training Soldiers, 

you should take part in company, battalion, and brigade 

training meetings and provide input and expertise. As 

technical experts, you owe commanders your assessment of 

unit training and readiness. You should help focus training 

where it needs to be. 

The last part of the job is leader development. The CSA 

charged officers to have a leader development strategy for 

their units. What is your leader development strategy? 

Take time to develop commissioned officers, warrant officers, NCOs, and yourself. Read about past conflicts, study 

after action reviews, and put them into the context of the 

world today. You’ll find that there is a wealth of information and brilliant solutions to problems you may face in the 

future in the writings of Soldiers who faced similar situations in the past. 

Until we meet again, stay safe. Essayons!
September–December 2013 Engineer 5

I

n 2013, the 412th and 416th Theater Engineer Commands (TECs) collaborated to examine engineer mission command at echelons above brigade and corps. 

Those discussions led to the Army of 2020 Theater Engineer 

Command campaign plan. What follows is a synopsis of 

their findings and recommendations as they try to answer 

the fundamental question: What is the role of the TECs in 

support of the Army of 2020 and beyond? As the Army faces 

unprecedented resource constraints, there is a tremendous 

opportunity for this unique formation to serve as a unifying 

force for One Regiment. It can do so in a way that plans, 

prepares, and provides cost-effective solutions to the Army 

and serves as one of the critical regimental integrators 

through routinization, integration, and the cultivation of 

relationships. 

Past, Present, and Future 

Operating Environments

Past and Present. The predecessors of the TECs, 

the engineer commands, were the senior engineer headquarters in the operational plans of U.S. 

Central Command, U.S. European Command, and U.S. 

Pacific Command. They served as a deep reservoir of 

technical engineering expertise and enabled direct connectivity and integration with numerous Army service component commands (ASCCs) across the globe. The engineer 

commands became TECs under modularity and shifted their 

focus toward mission command while simultaneously training and providing Title X forces to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility supporting overseas contingency 

operations. One consequence of the transformation was a 

decrease in technical engineering positions in the TEC headquarters. Over more than a decade of persistent conflict, the 

employment of TEC capabilities has ranged from doctrinally defined applications of its formation (such as Operations 

Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers [USACE] Gulf Region District mission command, 

and the joint force engineer command in Afghanistan) to 

joint manning document staff augmentation. Throughout this period, the TECs have met Army requirements as 

needed. It is critical for the TECs to build on the experience 

and success of the past and continue to develop current relationships as they execute the campaign plan. 

Future. The Army of 2020 will be more than 95 percent 

based in the continental United States. It will be regionally aligned and focused on preparing for decisive action in 

support of unified land operations and supporting theater 

From the Theater Engineer Command Senior Working Group
6 Engineer

security cooperation missions to build 

partnership capacity. As a starting point for both missions, it will be 

imperative for the Army to deliver 

engineer capability at the point of 

need; and the TECs are uniquely 

poised to serve as one of the critical 

regimental points of synchronization. 

The next war for engineers will 

be characterized by the need for 

a strategic and operational planning capability for initial-entry and 

forcible-entry operations and the 

need to reacquire and maintain the 

muscle memory to execute those 

operations. The single greatest 

role for the TECs will be to become 

theater enabling commands (using 

the current vernacular) and to set 

conditions for success starting at 

the intermediate staging base 

and beyond. 

The four components of the 

Engineer Regiment—Active 

Army, Army National Guard, 

U.S. Army Reserve, and USACE—have unique capabilities. 

The TECs have the potential to synchronize these capabilities and bring them together to support the warfighter at 

the point of need. This is one of the key tenets of integration.

The era of plentiful resources is coming to an end, thus 

increasing the need for cost-effective, whole-of-EngineerRegiment solutions. With reduced overseas contingency 

operations, theater security cooperation will see renewed 

importance. While the TECs have met a variety of mission 

requirements, they must do more to support ASCCs and 

their vital contributions to Phase 0 theater security cooperation operations. The U.S. Army Reserve established Army 

Reserve engagement cells at numerous ASCCs. The TECs 

serve as the engineer point of synchronization for that organization and for the Army National Guard State Partnership Program, the Partnership for Peace, and USACE liaison officers and contingency response units. 

TECs Today

Understanding the TECs today is necessary to 

inform the discussion about TECs in the Army 

of 2020, using a modified doctrine, organization, 

training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, 

and facilities (DOTMLPF) methodology.

Doctrine. According to current Army doctrine, 

the TECs are designed to provide mission command 

engineer capability for the theater Army. They are 

the only organizations designed to do so without augmentation and can provide the joint force commander 

with an operational engineer headquarters. They can also 

augment joint task force engineer staffs. The TECs provide 

mission command for all assigned or attached engineer

The Army of 2020 will face initial-entry and forcibleentry operations.

The Army of 2020 will focus on preparing for decisive actions such as theater 

security missions.

September–December 2013
September–December 2013 Engineer 7

brigades and other engineer units and 

missions for the joint force land component commander or theater Army 

commander. The TECs also provide 

support for all operational planning 

across all engineer disciplines. They 

synchronize all engineer planning 

and support for the geographic combatant or joint force commander. In 

direct support of this doctrine, the 

U.S. Army Reserve Command has 

regionally aligned TECs to each 

of the geographic combatant commands (GCCs)—

■ 412th TEC to U.S. Pacific 

Command, U.S. European

Command, and U.S. Africa

Command.

■ 416th TEC to U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Southern 

Command, and U.S. Central Command.

With only two TECs in the Army, their commanders 

emphasize mutual support in staff augmentation to provide 

long-term support for each GCC. 

Organization. TEC commanders and staffs have critically examined their organizational structure and are evaluating possible adjustments with no change in required 

strength or grade growth. 

TECs are modular organizations, are tailored to 

meet mission requirements, and can deploy as a whole 

or in part. The TECs have two deployable command 

posts (DCPs) that can deploy separately or together. 

A single, partial DCP may even deploy as a detachment. 

Doctrine allows TEC commanders to tailor the TECs as they 

see fit to meet the supported commander’s mission. 

The deployability and flexibility of these units have led 

some people to believe that TECs have not been employed 

correctly or according to doctrine. Some people think of the 

TECs as administrative commands that 

are capable of deploying ad hoc detachments which only augment joint or ASCC 

staffs. As the TECs 

reengage in reviewing and exercising the 

operations and contingency plans for GCCs 

and ASCCs, the supported commands 

are becoming more 

aware of the advantages of the doctrinal 

flexibility inherent in 

them. This routinization is another one of 

The TECs seek to 

train and work with 

USACE and other 

staffs.

Building partnership capacity will be an important focus for the Army of 2020.
8 Engineer September–December 2013

the major tenets of the TECs. The mission command elements of flexibility, scalability, and employability allow the 

TECs to flex resources against requirements in a time-phased 

fashion for specific plans. The TECs can support changing 

levels of intensity from Phase 0 operations that shape the 

environment through Phase 5 operations that enable civil 

authorities. 

It is the flexibility of the TEC mission command that codifies the doctrine and organization of its role in supporting 

and enabling others. Due to its relatively robust deployable 

staff (up to four times larger than the staff of a deputy chief 

of staff engineer for an ASCC), the TECs can support the 

doctrinal engineer coordinator at the ASCC level and provide the mission command of engineer forces at echelons 

above brigade or corps within a theater. With their planning capability, the TECs can either augment or assume 

engineer planning at those levels, depending on the mission 

requirements. These capabilities enable the ASCC 

engineer staff to set conditions for success at the operational 

and strategic levels. They also allow USACE to gain support in gathering forward assessments or initiating preliminary stabilization work before a permissible environment is 

established. To fulfill the engineer support and mission command requirements, the TECs continually seek opportunities to train and execute tasks alongside the GCC, ASCC, 

corps, and USACE staffs.

Training. The TECs train through active participation 

in a variety of venues by exercising, executing, and learning. Engagement in a wide breadth of exercises is the key 

to training and maintaining the skills of the TEC staffs 

and their brigades, battalions, and detachments. The TECs 

aggressively seek out and participate in a wide array of 

exercises at the strategic, operational, joint, multinational, 

brigade, and battalion levels. The exercises include—

■ Ulchi Freedom Guardian.

■ Key Resolve.

■ Combined Joint Logistics Over the Shore.

■ Austere Challenge.

■ Vibrant Response.

■ Integrated Advance.

■ Ardent Sentry. 

Participating in exercises at all levels enables TEC 

staffs and formations to build relationships, gain experience, and demonstrate their capabilities. It is important 

to note that the TECs are not training commands, but 

operational commands. Even in the current constrained 

fiscal environment, the TECs seek out real-world engineer support missions. Through military-to-military 

engagements, exercise-related construction, humanitarian assistance, defense support of civil authorities, 

and base construction and improvements, the TECs are 

constantly engaged in real-time support. To advance 

our personnel and develop our technical skills, the TECs 

look for other technically demanding opportunities 

to train and learn. It is through this process that the 

final tenet—cultivation of relationships—is realized. 

Materiel. The TEC DCPs and detachments, by modified 

tables of organization and equipment, are fully functional 

and self-sustaining mission command elements. They are 

fielded to deploy with the technical skills, automation, field 

structures, and equipment needed to plug in with a field 

headquarters, thus relieving the stress and burden of support from a joint task force headquarters. The TECs continually evaluate this capability and update equipment 

packages to maintain the ability to interface with supported 

commands.

Leadership and education. Unlike any other formation in the Army, the TECs offer a unique opportunity to 

assemble a variety of technically skilled professionals who 

bring to bear the full weight of their knowledge and experience. In turn, these professionals serve as technical mentors 

An engineer uses a chainsaw to clear downed trees from 

a road during exercise Ardent Sentry. Training from exercises such as this will become increasingly important to 

TECs in the future.
September–December 2013 Engineer 9

for the future of the Army. 

The TECs recognize the 

critical need for, and seek 

to increase the number of, 

technical, degreed, or certified specialists in their 

formations and throughout the Regiment. 

Personnel. A critical role of the TECs is to 

plan, prepare, and provide the right technical 

engineer expertise to 

the supported command 

or agency at the point 

of need. The doctrinal 

flexibility of the TEC 

organization requires 

a mix of highly qualified technical engineers with a broad 

range of skills. They 

must work with and 

support all levels of 

command. The TECs, 

along with the rest of the 

Regiment, mitigate the skills gap through reachback and 

reach-forward teams. The TECs will execute the technical specialist recruitment and sustainment plans to provide a sustainable depth so that supported commands have 

the required technical engineering capability when they 

need it. 

Facilities. The establishment of U.S. Army Installation 

Management Command saw a decrease in engineer unit 

troop construction, which had been a hallmark of engineer 

support. In this era of constrained resources for Army garrisons, the TECs are exploring ways to expand troop construction support to more installations and facilities. The TECs 

intend to forge a strategic relationship with the command to 

unlock that potential. 

Desired End State

The TECs are the senior level engineer headquarters that are an indispensable Army asset. 

They anticipate and provide engineer capability 

and subject matter expertise and execute mission command for echelons above division and corps. They operate 

across the three disciplines—combat, general, and geospatial engineering—and four components of the Engineer Regiment to support decisive action in unified land 

operations. 

Way Forward

The leadership of the Engineer Regiment has discussed the future role of the TECs moving forward 

with the leadership in USACE, the U.S. Army 

Engineer School, the Army National Guard, the U.S. Army 

Reserve, and staff engineers at ASCCs. The discussions 

reveal that there remains much to be done. Synchronization throughout the Engineer Regiment remains the principal goal. The chosen path to address the challenges of

the future operating environment will be cooperation and

partnership, through the tenets of routinization, integration, and the cultivation of relationships. The TECs provide one focus to synchronize the entire Engineer Regiment. They are situated at the nexus where the ASCCs, 

USACE districts and divisions, and Army National Guard 

engineer formations converge in times of peace and conflict. The TECs will build on valuable lessons learned from 

past experiences and move forward in support of the warfighter and the Nation.

Contributors from the Theater Engineer Command Senior 

Working Group include—

■ Brigadier General Douglas R. Satterfield, Deputy Commanding General, 412th Theater Engineer Command.

■ Colonel Eugene J. Leboeuf, Chief of Staff, 416th Theater 

Engineer Command.

■ Colonel Jared W. Olsen, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, 412th Theater Engineer Command.

■ Colonel Richard L. Ott, Chief of Staff, 412th Theater

Engineer Command.

■ Colonel Adam S. Roth, Chief of Staff (Reserve Affairs), 

Office of the Chief of Engineers.

TECs constantly engage in real-world activities such as humanitarian assistance 

missions.
10 Engineer September–December 2013

Engineers have long had a reputation for being first 

into the fight since they have to clear breaches, 

obstacles, and improvised explosive devices. The 

engineers assigned to the engineering staff section (J-7) 

of the Office of Security Cooperation–Iraq (OSC-I) also 

assumed duties as the last out since they have the task of 

site closure. This assignment has reaffirmed the need for 

engineers to be flexible, adaptive, and innovative. Over the 

past year, Operation New Dawn ended and a transition to a 

traditional OSC took place in Iraq. It is essential to understand that no two security cooperation offices are exactly the 

same. For OSC-I, this means that there was a fundamental change from operating at six enduring Department of 

Defense (DOD) sites to operating exclusively from the U.S. 

embassy, while executing foreign military sales (FMS) and 

maintaining relations between the U.S. and Iraqi governments. OSC-I received guidance to accelerate the return of 

all DOD sites to the Iraqis and transition responsibility for 

basic life support and site security to the contractors who 

support the FMS cases at the sites. 

Strategy

From the onset of our deployment, the objective was 

to include input from senior Iraqi engineer leaders 

to help identify gaps within doctrine, organization, 

training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, 

and facilities (DOTMLPF). This would help develop infrastructure master plans for the remote sites, including the 

construction of enhanced force protection systems. The 

objective was to eliminate containerized housing units, spot 

generation, and semiaustere living conditions. 

Adaptation

The lines of effort (LOEs) were set, and the order was 

issued to close all remote sites due to a change in U.S. 

policy. Creative engineers designed systems management tools to get maximum output from limited manpower. 

The J-7 team used professional project management practices to integrate five independent project closure schedules. 

An important J-7 focus was developing contingency plans 

for a possible evacuation of the U.S. mission in Iraq or a 

quick introduction of more forces to support the Iraqi government. The adaptive, agile thinkers of America’s 9/11 generation also managed the following LOEs that were critical 

to base closure and the normalization of the remaining FMS 

real estate enclaves:

■ Construction management.

■ Facilities.

■ Environmental concerns.

■ Plans.

■ Site closure.

■ Strategic Iraqi engagement.

■ FMS infrastructure.

■ Normalization.

By Colonel Fabian E. Mendoza, Jr., Lieutenant Colonel Benjamin M. Wallen, and Major Holli A. Bennett
Engineer 11

Enduring Bases: Planning, Sustainment, 

and Reduced FMS Footprint

The J-7 focus changed from maintaining and sustaining enduring bases to planning for the transition of 

sites back to the Iraqi government. With that planned 

transition and with a portion of each DOD site remaining 

for FMS contractors in their own enclave, it became clear 

that there was no synchronized master plan for each of 

these sites. The infrastructure required for self-sufficiency 

(such as water wells and purification units, power generation, maintenance shops, potable and black-water storage, 

wastewater treatment, and dining facilities) should be centrally located instead of being spread across an entire site. 

For example, the FMS enclave for contractors remaining 

at Tikrit required three T-walled areas to enclose infrastructure and allow the services to be self-sustaining. This 

increased security requirements and associated costs to protect three areas instead of one. 

It was essential early in the planning process to determine which enduring bases would execute long-term FMS 

cases. These bases require a reduced final footprint to support the FMS contractors, and the conditions for that should 

be set early. If a commander’s emergency response funds 

are available, they should be used deliberately to improve 

the infrastructure and capabilities of those sites. In future 

contingency operations, sites should be established with all 

infrastructure centrally located so that the site can grow 

outward as required by force flow and mission and then 

collapse back to a smaller footprint for the enduring use of 

the site. In Iraq, the ability to reduce the footprint and provide an enclave for FMS contractors was only possible with 

signed agreements and support from the prime minister’s 

receivership secretariat. 

September–December 2013

Legacy Projects

OSC-I inherited seven legacy projects from U.S. 

Forces–Iraq worth $60 million, managed by the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). During the 

team’s year of deployment, three projects were completed 

for the Iraqi government. However, the remaining four were 

cancelled, mainly due to the inability of local contractors 

to complete them. USACE tried to reaward contracts, but 

no Iraqi companies could provide the required construction within the allotted time. To ensure transparency, the 

Iraqi government was fully informed about the cancellation. 

Maintaining transparency regarding construction status 

and challenges will help to forge and strengthen the relationship and trust with host nation senior engineers. 

Construction Considerations 

of Site Transition

As closure dates were provided for planning purposes, all existing construction projects were evalu-

.ated .based on a cost-benefit analysis. More than 25 

projects (including overhead cover installations, a wastewater treatment plant, and a power plant) were cancelled 

at a savings or cost avoidance of more than $70 million. The 

cancelled projects resulted in material that was no longer 

required. Some material was included as part of a foreign 

excess personal property packet for return to the Iraqis, 

since that would cost less than returning it to the United 

States. Other material originally destined for the cancelled 

projects was reallocated to other U.S. interests in the region.

It was essential to provide guidance on new construction 

at remaining DOD sites before transition to the Iraqi government. An assessment of the previous 100 operations and 

maintenance projects 

was completed, covering 

life, health, safety, force 

protection, and qualityof-life improvements. 

The average processing 

time—from project initiation by the customer 

(with a letter of justification, receipt of estimate, 

technical evaluation, and 

funding approval) to a 

notice to proceed—was 48 

days. The timeline from 

project initiation through 

project completion averaged 148 days. ThereThorough inventories 

at Camp Taji were part 

of the turnover to the 

Government of Iraq.
12 Engineer September–December 2013

fore, the J-7 director published guidance to all DOD installation teams that no new projects could be submitted within

6 months of site closure. This ensured that time, effort, and

funds were not expended on projects that would not be

completed before site closure. 

Environmental Stewardship

Environmental stewardship is everyone’s responsibility from the moment a site is occupied until it is 

transitioned back to the host country. To ensure this, 

it must be a priority to develop a comprehensive, concise siteclearing checklist that all tenants on the site must follow 

before leaving. More than once during site transition operations, the environmental compliance officer found areas 

with contaminated soil or used petroleum, oil, and lubricant 

products left behind. Compliance should be stressed along 

the way; because when site transition occurs, the reduced 

force will not have the time or capacity to perform cleanup 

that should have already been completed. Sites must conduct an initial, environmental site closure survey 150 days 

before a planned transition date. This helps to identify areas 

of concern that current contractors must address and helps 

to capture problem areas left by a previous occupant. These 

areas are the primary reason for establishing a contract 

for environmental remediation and cleanup. The typical 

contract award timeline is between 60 and 90 days, so this 

effort must be started early. 

Once all environmental corrective action plans are completed, a final environmental site closure survey must be 

completed to capture the initial and final conditions. Fortunately, the Iraqi government accepted most hazardous 

waste storage areas “as is” because the used petroleum, oil, 

and lubricant products, and other products will be reused. 

This saved the cost of removing the hazardous waste from 

the site. The final location and 

appearance of the hazardous 

waste storage areas, wastewater lagoons, reverse osmosis 

water purification units, and 

other areas of environmental 

significance were captured 

as part of the environmental 

record of return. This documentation was presented as 

part of the property and site 

record of return to the Iraqi 

government receivership secretariat. The relationship, 

trust, and confidence between 

OSC-I J-7 and the secretariat 

enabled the site transition to 

go smoothly. 

Target Folders

Contingency plans are

always essential, 

especially when operating in a nonpermissive environment like Iraq. Throughout 

the last 10 years, numerous contingency plans were developed and refined for each site, combat outpost, and forward 

operating base. However, these plans do no good if they 

are not properly archived and turned over to successors. 

Although we knew that contingency plans and tools existed, 

no one knew where to find them. Therefore, we created target folders of important information about each site. They 

included updated listings of all infrastructure and facilities, 

complete with capabilities such as water, fuel, and power 

generation. We included updated airfield surveys, imagery, 

and information for all points of entry and every border 

crossing into the country. This information was especially 

useful when planning a humanitarian aid mission for refugees in the area. These target folders must remain secure 

and available to the organization. 

Site Closure

Units must plan for site closure from the beginning. 

After the large-scale drawdown of U.S. forces in 

2011, six sites were left active. They became dumping grounds for containers and equipment. This became a 

problem when it was time to close those sites because there 

were no Soldiers, haul assets, authorities, or funding to 

retrograde the containers and equipment. While much of the 

remaining materiel will be turned over to the Iraqi government when U.S. forces depart, there were numerous items 

that could not be turned over and had to be retrograded. 

Now that Iraq is a sovereign nation, clearance from the Iraqi 

government to move equipment into, out of, or around Iraq is 

required. This can consume a lot of time and effort and may 

even be disapproved. It is better to know ahead of time what 

equipment cannot be turned over to the host nation and 

to ship it out of the country while resources are available. 

T-walls, Hesco Bastion Concertainers,® and bunkers remain at Camp Taji as reminders 

of the U.S. presence from 2003 to 2013.
September–December 2013 Engineer 13

To prepare for the final closeout of each site, each unit must 

remove its trash, documents, and anything else that cannot 

be left for the host nation before departing. They must also 

paint over memorials, unit markings, and names. In order 

to ensure that this is done, a clearing checklist must be 

published and enforced. Once U.S. forces depart, no troops 

will be available to do these tasks, so further cleanup would 

require bringing troops back or contracting outside labor. 

Forward planning and preparation will reap large dividends 

during the final phases of a drawdown. 

Leadership and Professional 

Military Education

Serving in this complex war termination environment 

required a cumulative set of military and diplomatic 

skills, in addition to the interlocking knowledge of 

engineering disciplines. From a senior engineer perspective, 

the lessons learned from multiple combat tours in building 

partnership capacity served exceptionally well in designing 

a strategy; establishing LOEs for ways, means, and ends; 

understanding the complexity of Iraqi business practices; 

and using best practices for negotiation. Additionally, the 

engagement skills essential to mission success were developed through practice where trustworthy relationships are 

matured through time.

Language is the key to breaking cultural barriers. Future 

engineers from the joint community who will be assigned to 

security assistance teams might not have the required skill 

sets. Therefore, leader preparation for a postwar assignment 

in the FMS program will require changes in the professional 

military education system. The next generation will have to—

■ Understand DOTMLPF in the design of an FMS case.

■ Be familiar with contracting and acquisition phases and

processes.

■ Understand the contracting milestones that are essential

to providing a realistic timeline.

■ Understand the process needed to support host nation

projects. 

Also, the human resource management system must 

be disciplined to assign leaders with the right skill sets. 

FMS programs can have phenomenal effects beyond FMS 

case development and deliveries on strategic partnerships 

between governments. The effort requires displaying cultural astuteness, understanding the impact of DOTMLPF 

on a developing military FMS programs, building sustainable systems, and learning the contracting system and historical background of the region.

Final Engineer Support

With the reduction of the OSC-I, the most significant 

impact on the engineers was the elimination of the 

J-7. While the U.S. Forces–Iraq J-7 strength was 

more than 65 persons, the final engineer support of a nontradtional security cooperation office will be two military

engineer lieutenant colonels and a strategic advisor. It 

is essential to keep the engineers in the infrastructure

or they will become irrelevant. The OSC-I J-7 conducted

two video teleconferences and exchanged numerous documents with the Afghanistan J-7 to share critical information and lessons learned as they began the war termination 

transition from a DOD- to a Department of State-led effort. 

Colonel Mendoza is the command engineer for the Army 

and Air Force Exchange Service. He is a graduate of the Air 

War College, the U.S. Army Command and General Staff 

College, and the Defense Language Institute. He holds a 

bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from Texas A&I University (now Texas A&M University–Kingsville).

Lieutenant Colonel Wallen is working toward a Ph.D in 

environmental engineering at the Colorado School of Mines. 

He is a graduate of Intermediate Level Education, the U.S. 

Army Combined Arms and Services Staff School, and the 

basic and advanced engineer officer courses. He holds a 

bachelor’s degree in environmental engineering from the 

U.S. Military Academy, a master’s degree in environmental 

engineering from the University of Texas at Austin, and a 

master’s degree in geological engineering from the University 

of Missouri–Rolla (now Missouri University of Science and 

Technology). He is a licensed professional engineer and a certified project management professional.

Major Bennett is the executive officer of 1st Battalion, 

345th Engineer Regiment (Training Support). She holds a 

bachelor’s degree in technology from the University of Alaska 

at Fairbanks and a master’s degree in human resource 

administration from the University of Central Michigan. She 

is a certified project management professional.

DeLuca and welcomed Brigadier General Anthony C. Funkhouser. The Regiment remains in great hands.

I want to thank community leaders—here in the Ozarks 

and at every post, camp, and station—who support our Soldiers while we withdraw from a decade of combat operations. Our requirements are many, and our solutions must 

remain optimized to support a wide range of military operations. We must rapidly provide scalable capabilities to 

prevent, shape, and win the wars of our Nation. Further, 

I appreciate the Army spouses who unconditionally hold the 

line on the toughest job in the Army. Thanks for all you 

do. Finally, thanks to the Soldiers of the Regiment for your 

dedicated service. You are our future generation of champions. Engineers always lead the way.

Essayons! 

Reference:

1

Army Doctrine Reference Publication 1, The Army Profession, 14 June 2013.

(“Lead the Way,” continued from page 3)
14 Engineer September–December 2013

Arehearsal is the most effective synchronization tool 

available to commanders. Rehearsals validate sub-

.ordinates’ understanding of an assigned mission 

and the higher commander’s intent. They should consist of 

scheduled blocks of uninterrupted time when a unit can practice a specific event, standing operating procedure (SOP), or 

series of occurrences to ensure that the unit achieves the 

commander’s intent within the stated mission.

An effective rehearsal reveals weaknesses, integrates 

actions, confirms coordination, and improves understanding at all levels. An interactive rehearsal includes a 

variety of roles such as leaders, drivers, gunners, medics, and fire support and logistics personnel. Engaging 

Soldiers at all levels to discuss, act, or explain their part 

confirms their knowledge of assigned tasks. It also identifies unanswered questions and knowledge gaps and 

establishes coordination measures that may not have 

been revealed earlier.

Considerations for conducting a rehearsal include 

time available, space required/available, classes of supply 

(including live ammunition), and levels of leader and Soldier involvement. Units should conduct the most involved 

rehearsals possible. Whatever their level of detail, rehearsals must be well planned and involve up-to-date intelligence.

The types of rehearsals available to commanders are—

■ Confirmation brief.

■ Backbrief.

■ Combined arms.

■ Support.

■ Battle drill or SOP.

Plans are useless, but planning is everything.1

—General Dwight D. Eisenhower

Rehearsals:: The Lost Art

By Captain Michael P. Carvelli
September–December 2013 Engineer 15

These rehearsals must be paired with one of the following 

techniques to achieve the desired end state:

■ Full dress.

■ Reduced force.

■ Terrain model.

■ Sketch map.

■ Map.

The above considerations of time and space available, 

classes of supply, and levels of leader and Soldier involvement must be taken into account to achieve the best result. 

Commanders must also ensure that outside agencies and 

representatives from other units are present during rehearsals. In addition, logistics at any level can cripple an operation if not given proper consideration during a rehearsal. 

The recent deployment of the 84th Engineer Support 

Company (Airborne) as a route clearance company supporting Operation Enduring Freedom taught the following 

worthwhile lessons about the value of rehearsals.

Precombat Checks and Inspections

Although not a part of doctrinal rehearsals, precombat 

checks and inspections are critical to the success of 

.any patrol. They are reviews of individual equipment 

readiness and vehicle load plans. At a minimum, they must 

be held at the team leader level. It is important to tailor 

the checks to the mission and across the company. Checklists are extremely helpful, not as a way to micromanage, 

but to ensure that all relevant items are covered. Items on 

checklists can include, but are not limited to, individual kits, 

weapons, vehicles, enablers, and special items of equipment. 

Checks should not just ensure that equipment is present, 

but that it is clean, serviceable, and properly packed and 

includes the required basic issue items and extra batteries, 

if needed.

Troop-Leading Procedures

Following one of the steps of the military decisionmaking process by conducting course-of-action analysis within platoon level troop-leading procedures 

was helpful. Deciding to use the box, belt, or avenue-indepth method improved the sketch map technique for various courses of action. Gathering squad leaders, the platoon sergeant, and the platoon leader around a whiteboard 

achieved great effects as it fit in the reduced-force, battle 

drill scenario.

Although confirmation briefs are usually given immediately after a platoon level operation order is issued, backbriefs can be more effective. Giving squad leaders a set 

amount of time to develop their own plan was an effective 

teaching tool. Then, they had to tell the platoon leader how 

their plan achieved the commander’s intent and supported 

the platoon mission. This assured that they had received the 

A squad conducts a full-dress, battle drill rehearsal.
16 Engineer September–December 2013

information (similar to the confirmation brief) and that it 

confirmed their understanding of the commander’s intent. 

Through confirmation briefs, the platoon leader synchronized the overall plan to meet the commander’s intent.

Enablers

Within the company, the following enablers were 

assigned across two route clearance platoons and 

a mobility support platoon:

■ Unmanned aerial sensors.

■ Handheld detectors.

■ Interrogation arms. 

■ Biometric identification and enrollment devices.

■ Explosive line charges.

Discussing the event trigger that would force the 

emplacement of an enabler allowed leaders and Soldiers to 

understand what enabler would be chosen, how and why it 

would be employed, and who would employ it. This allowed 

the enabler to be integrated without specific direction from 

the leaders. Rehearsing the employment reduced time, 

increased proficiency, and achieved the desired result.

Scenario-Driven Battle Drill or SOP

After issuing an operation order and before crossing the line of departure, a patrol (or ramp) brief .should .be conducted. Mirroring the five-paragraph 

operation order format helps Soldiers recall the items of 

the operation order. At a minimum, all patrols must conduct rollover and fire drill rehearsals. Some missionspecific rehearsals that proved helpful were conducting verbal rehearsals, including rules of engagement and 

escalation of force. Mounted gunners gathered to answer

scenario-specific questions. Drivers practiced their vehicle 

movements using index cards and conducted full-dress 

rehearsals of catastrophic kills and mobility scenarios with 

tow bars, tow straps, and recovery vehicles. Senior medics 

presented medical scenarios that allowed platoon medics 

and platoon sergeants to react to multiple casualties and 

conduct casualty evacuations. Rehearsals should continue 

until the platoon scenario has completely moved back to the 

tactical assembly area, next objective, or friendly base.

Remember, the process is more important than the end 

product. Rehearsals are the art to the science of planning.

References:

Army Doctrine Reference Publication 7-0, Training Units 

and Developing Leaders, 23 August 2012.

Army Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures 5-0.1, Commander and Staff Officer Guide, 14 September 2011.

Field Manual 3-21.10, The Infantry Rifle Company, 

27 July 2006.

Field Manual 3-34.210, Explosive Hazards Operations, 

27 March 2007.

Endnote:

1

Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957, National Archives and Records 

Service, Government Printing Office, p. 818.

Captain Carvelli is the commander of the 84th Engineer 

Support Company (Airborne), recently deployed to Regional 

Command–South in Afghanistan. He is a graduate of the 

Maneuver Captains Career Course at Fort Benning, Georgia.

Soldiers conduct precombat checks.
September–December 2013 Engineer 17

By Dr. JoAnne Castagna

I

n 1821, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New 

York, established the first school on a military installation to serve the children of Soldiers. Almost two centuries later, the West Point community and Department of 

Defense are still committed to providing these children an 

education to take them into the 21st century, even in the 

current tough fiscal times.

This is demonstrated by the much-needed renovation 

of the historic West Point Middle School by the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE), New York District. The school, 

which educates 300 students in grades five through eight, 

needed major upgrades. 

In 2011, a USACE contractor began the renovations. The 

project includes renovating the existing school that was built 

in 1934 and is designated as an historic landmark, demolishing a wing to the school that was built in 1954, and constructing a new addition of approximately 31,000 square feet. 

The more modern facility will include new, state-of-theart, general-purpose, art, science, and music classrooms 

that will have interactive whiteboards and wireless Internet 

access. The renovation will provide a digital arts lab, a clay 

workroom in the art classrooms, an acoustic band room, and 

a full digital video production studio. The school cafeteria, 

playground, restrooms, library, parking area, and handicapped access will be improved; and new central air conditioning, security, fire protection, and communication intercom systems will be installed.

The new structure will meet the Leadership in Energy 

and Environmental Design requirements to be certified 

with a silver rating by the U.S. Green Buildings Council. 

It will have energy-efficient doors and windows, additional windows to make use of natural light, energyefficient water heating and cooling systems, upgraded 

insulation, water-conserving toilets, and motion detector 

faucets.

The West Point campus is filled with historic buildings, 

including the 80-year-old middle school. The USACE project engineer and contracting office representative said that 

an effort was made to maintain the historic look and feel of 

the campus. 

The school principal said, “The students are going to 

benefit greatly by this renovation. They will have access 

to learning spaces that are safe, modern, and efficient; and 

they will have a setting in which 21st century curricular 

objectives may be pursued. This project is also a testament 

to the military’s commitment to provide world-class educational opportunities for the children of the men and women 

serving in our nation’s military.”

The project is being performed in phases while classes 

are in session, and completion is expected in 2014. 

Dr. Castagna is a public affairs specialist for the USACE, 

New York District. 
18 Engineer September–December 2013

The area of Afghanistan where 3d Platoon, 84th Engineer Support Company (Airborne), has been working 

since March 2013 is scarce on resources, none more 

crucial than water. Most of the people in the Zharay District of Kandahar Province in Regional Command–South 

get their income from agriculture, even though the area 

gets little rainfall during the growing season. The ability to 

move water from its source to the fields is of great concern 

to the Afghan farmers. Over the centuries, they have developed numerous, creative ways to water their crops. The two 

main sources of water are 

the Arghandab River and 

a large aquifer that lies 

beneath the hard clay soil. 

Farmers either tap into the 

river upstream and channel the water down to their 

fields, or they pump the 

water out of the ground. 

Once the water is on the 

surface, it moves through 

a network of large canals 

into smaller channels and 

finally into the ditches that 

parallel the fields. 

Civil infrastructure is 

of no importance to a farmer who wants to saturate 

his fields. If there isn’t a culvert under a road where he needs 

one, he will simply dig a ditch straight across the road. The 

water canals, channels, and ditches that are so vital to the 

Afghan farmer can also become a source of tremendous 

frustration to U.S. military forces when they are intentionally used to stymie U.S. efforts in what has been termed 

“aqueduct warfare.” 

Early in its deployment, the platoon got its first taste 

of aqueduct warfare during Operation Gallant Stroll. The 

purpose of the operation was to clear enemy forces out of 

By First Lieutenant Evan M. Nelson

Engineers lay a large 

culvert near an Afghan 

village.
September–December 2013 Engineer 19

an area while simultaneously cutting and building a new 

road into a Taliban stronghold. The mission was to construct 

1.5 kilometers of improved road within 4 days. The first 

obstacle encountered was a large canal with a small amount 

of flowing water. The villagers had constructed a crude 

footbridge across the canal that served their needs, but the 

bridge certainly would not support an up-armored vehicle. 

The engineers installed and backfilled a 2- by 2-foot box culvert, enabling the main effort to push forward and allowing 

the water to continue flowing. 

The next morning, the work crew was surprised to find 

that the newly cut road had turned into a soupy quagmire 

of mud. The cause was the canal, which had mysteriously 

swelled to a raging torrent of water that breached the banks 

and flooded the entire area, even though there had been no 

rain overnight. The waiting villagers complained that the 

culvert was much too small. The culvert denial system, 

which prevents unauthorized access to the culvert, had also 

been clogged with sticks, leaves, and debris, compounding 

the problem. While bulldozers cut away the top layers of 

saturated soil, Army officials asked local elders to turn off or 

divert the water upstream so that work could continue. The 

elders replied that there was nothing they could do about 

the water, since it was coming from snowmelt in the mountains several hundred miles away. The only solution would 

be to install a larger culvert, they said. The operation lost 

an entire day digging out the old culvert and installing a 

much larger one in its place. The following day, the canal 

had returned to its original flow rate and the villagers were 

content to watch as the road project continued. A similar 

situation occurred one more time during Operation Gallant Stroll, with similar problems and the same solution—

a bigger culvert. 

Due to delays, only about half the road was finished at 

the end of the operation. During a meeting with village 

elders, they explained that they never wanted the road built 

in the first place. Apparently, culvert size correlates to status in this part of Afghanistan. The larger the culvert serving a village, the more prestige it brings to that village. This 

explained why the farmers had pumped so much water into 

the canal and stalled progress until they got the larger culvert they wanted. It was an example of how aqueduct warfare can express displeasure with the presence of military 

forces in an area and delay their progress. This would not be 

the platoon’s last encounter with aqueduct warfare. 

Third Platoon engineers learned that insurgents can 

also use aqueduct warfare to deny International Security 

Assistance Forces access to an area. The platoon supported 

another engineer company effort to clear and raze a village 

used by the Taliban to stage improvised explosive device 

attacks. The only road crossed a large canal with a large 

box culvert before sloping downhill into the village, which 

was approximately 1 kilometer away. After a few days of 

preparation north of the village, the canal that ran under 

the road became flooded, washing out part of the road and 

making both sides of the canal soft and dangerous. We knew 

that the excess water had come from farmers flooding their 

fields. We could see pumps pulling water from underground 

sources and farmers using shovels to direct the flow toward 

the road. 

A bulldozer was used to berm up the canal and divert 

water away from the road. A platoon of U.S. Marine Corps 

engineers brought in to emplace an armored vehiclelaunched bridge across a canal south of the village nearly 

overturned a vehicle after it became stuck in the mud. 

Fortunately, no one was injured, the vehicle was successfully recovered, and the bridge was emplaced. However, the 

water continued to flow and ended up pooling in the staging 

area, creating a muddy parking lot and entrapping several 

vehicles. 

Clearly the insurgents knew that if the road into the village were swamped, vehicles would either roll over or get 

stuck, thus delaying the operation and buying time to withdraw their forces and empty their supply caches. Whether 

the Taliban turned on the water pumps themselves or 

coerced the locals into doing so, the effect was the same. The 

most powerful army in the world was almost defeated by a 

handful of Afghans armed with nothing but shovels and gaspowered water pumps. 

Aqueduct warfare can present problems to all units 

operating on vulnerable battlefields. While leaders may not 

be able to prevent aqueduct warfare, an understanding of 

where it can be used and its potential impacts may mitigate 

some of the problems it can cause. 

First Lieutenant Nelson is a platoon leader for 84th Engineer Support Company (Airborne). He holds a bachelor's 

degree in environmental engineering from the U.S. Military 

Academy.
20 Engineer September–December 2013

While Soldiers may joke about leaders who seem to 

have multiple personalities, one highly respected 

engineer officer who served from the 1920s through 

the 1950s was in fact two different people.

Brigadier General Paschal “Pat” N. Strong was an engineer officer who served with distinction through World War 

II and the Korean War. He wrote regularly for engineering 

and military publications throughout his long and noteworthy career. But he was also “Kennedy Lyons,” the author 

of more than 75 adventure tales for children and young 

adults. Over a 30-year Army career, Brigadier General 

Strong lived a double life, delivering engineering expertise to the Army while exciting young people with tales of 

strange lands and thrilling adventures.

Having failed his flight physical after graduating 

from West Point in 1922, he was assigned to the Corps of 

Engineers and initially trained at Fort Humphreys, Virginia, 

for duties that would take him to the center of a number of 

significant events in U.S. military history. He captured the 

tales of his military career in a memoir called Sabres and 

Safety Pins, which was coauthored by his wife Mary. Written in a clever, give-and-take format, the book covers the 

many moves and experiences of the Strong family from the 

perspective of the officer, with the sometimes contradictory 

vantage point of his spouse. 

Among his career highlights, Captain Strong supervised 

the construction of the Malinta Tunnel complex in the Philippines, which would later serve as the refuge for General 

Douglas A. MacArthur and his besieged forces. Over a 3-year 

period, Captain Strong supervised crews of laborers, mostly 

native Filipinos, as they blasted away at The Rock, as the 

island of Corregidor was known. The Army’s mission was 

By Colonel John M. Riley
September–December 2013 Engineer 21

around the world. General Mills, Incorporated, 

was pleased, since Jack Armstrong, All American Boy

helped sell a variety of popular breakfast cereals, including 

“Wheaties®.”

After moving his battalion multiple times as the Army 

expanded, he trained his engineers at Fort Leonard Wood, 

Missouri, along the banks of the Big Piney River while his 

family lived in Lebanon, Missouri. It was the closest town 

to the fort that was able (barely) to handle the rapid influx 

of military families in the early 1940s. In his memoirs, 

Pat Strong details the 

struggles of battalion 

command at the time. 

The 6th Engineers were 

responsible for constructing the ranges and

many of the support 

facilities of the new fort 

in Missouri. At the same 

time, they were expected 

to begin training alongside the units of the 6th 

Infantry Division in 

preparation for the

Louisiana Maneuvers. 

As if those two competing missions were not 

enough, the recently promoted lieutenant colonel 

to construct one major tunnel for all vehicles and artillery 

pieces on the island and 24 lateral support tunnels to store 

supplies and equipment. The officers on Corregidor knew, 

even in the mid-1930s, that the United States would face 

the armed forces of Japan in the future. They worked diligently in spite of supply shortages to prepare the defenses 

of the Philippines against future attack. Captain Strong was a prolific writer who 

focused on short pieces for Boy’s 

Life and Colliers magazines and 

also penned a series of adventure 

books about West Point life and 

athletics. But the tropical scenery 

and exotic people of the islands gave 

him the inspiration for an adventure 

book entitled Wings Over Wonder 

Island. It was this book that captured 

the attention of executives at General 

Mills, Incorporated, when the script 

writer for their radio show Jack Armstrong, All American Boy suddenly passed 

away and they needed another writer to 

continue the tales. 

After another intermediate assignment with the Corps of Engineers, Major 

Strong was selected to command the 

6th Engineer Battalion in the newly formed 

6th Infantry Division as the nation began 

to mobilize for the coming war. He was 

contacted during this assignment at Fort Riley, Kansas, and 

asked if he would take over writing the scripts for Jack Armstrong, All American Boy. He was signed to a 6-year contract 

and devoted his evening hours to churning out adventure 

stories for America’s youth. Major Strong gave new life to 

Jack Armstrong and his friends Billy and Betty by adding 

a liberal mix of his experiences around the country and 

While commanding the 6th 

Engineer Battalion, Brigadier 

General Strong also wrote 

children’s adventure stories 

for America’s youth.

West entrance of the 

Malinta Tunnel
22 Engineer September–December 2013

also had to contend with a near-constant turnover in his 

unit leadership. The Army pulled senior commissioned and 

noncommissioned officers from the ranks of existing units 

to serve as cadre for newly forming battalions, and Lieutenant Colonel Strong continued to prepare his unit for combat 

by training officers and Soldiers for their mission as combat engineers. He recognized that his first priority was to 

train the men to fight as infantry and then train them in

engineer skills. 

Under protest, Lieutenant Colonel Strong was assigned 

to a new post in Michigan before he could take his unit into 

combat. However, he was somewhat placated with a promotion to colonel and an understanding that the work he 

was doing on lock and port facilities would benefit him in a 

future role.

In the fall of 1943, Colonel Strong was ordered to England 

to oversee the construction of airfields as U.S. and Canadian 

forces poured onto the island nation. By December of the 

same year, he was moved to the position of chief engineer 

of the Southern Base District with a mission to construct 

and maintain every support facility necessary to facilitate 

the invasion of Europe. Colonel Paschal Strong, at the age 

of 42, was placed in charge of the activities of 18 engineer 

regiments and a host of other support units for this monumental task. Although junior to many of the regimental 

commanders, Colonel Strong was posted at the “direction 

of the President,” and all but one of his subordinates gave 

him their respect and best efforts. The lone detractor was 

quickly reassigned to the states. In his memoirs, he recounts 

the daunting task of uncoiling the Allied war machine from 

the dispersed camps to the port facilities to embark on the 

Channel crossing. Colonel Strong and his movement section 

did yeoman’s work while managing changes in troop movements in the final months and weeks before the invasion, 

and he orchestrated the flow of logistics across the water to 

sustain the combat operations as they moved inland from the 

invasion beaches. 

After the Allies secured their foothold and moved toward 

victory in Europe, Colonel Strong moved onto the European 

continent and continued his work as his engineers built up 

the ports and camps in places like Le Havre and Antwerp. 

He also continued to churn out scripts for the heroic adventures of Jack Armstrong in what little time he had to spare, 

admittedly plagiarizing liberally from his previous works to 

save time.

Returning to the United States in 1945, Colonel Strong 

recalled that upon landing in Washington, D.C., he remarked 

to fellow passenger Brigadier General Anthony C. McAuliffe, “I’m going to sit the next war out.” He was wrong, but 

happy to be reunited with his wife and family after 2 years 

at war. Colonel Strong landed his dream assignment and 

was assigned as the commander of the Savannah District of 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers near his childhood home 

in Georgia. He wrapped up his association with Jack Armstrong in 1947 as he focused on Savannah, his family, and 

the future. However, the Jack Armstrong character would 

live on for decades to come on radio and in motion pictures. 

The popular cartoon series Jonny Quest was largely based 

on Jack Armstrong and his travels. 

In 1949, Colonel Strong moved to an assignment as the 

staff engineer for Eighth Army and the Occupation Forces 

in Japan. He then went on to Korea and eventual promotion to brigadier general while tending to the complex engineer tasks—bridging, demolitions, port openings, ice breaking, and railway operations—of the conflict in Korea. He 

returned to Savannah in 1951 as the war in Korea churned 

on. He had done his best to posture American forces for 

success in that conflict and ensured that they had the infrastructure in place to sustain the United Nations forces fighting on the peninsula.

Brigadier General Strong entered the old Army in 1922, 

did his part to solidify a foothold in the Pacific as tensions 

with Japan were on the rise, and participated in the buildup 

for global war. He helped build the infrastructure that would 

deliver the Allies into Europe and sustain them during combat, and he even constructed the camps and ports through 

which they would pass to return home. All the while, he met 

the needs of young people around the country as he wrote 

stories that captivated and inspired readers and radio listeners and told them of adventures beyond American shores. 

Pat Strong epitomized the career Army officer who was able 

to achieve balance in his life. He served his country as an 

accomplished expert in his field, raised four children with 

his wife Mary as they traversed the country and the world, 

and pursued his own passions for writing and adventure. 

In his later life, he continued to serve the Port of Savannah 

as an advisor and operated an oyster supply company while 

pursuing other interests, such as flying, sports, and music. 

He passed away in 1988, but left behind him military and 

literary legacies worthy of great admiration and study. He 

lived the life of the All-American Man. 

References:

Paschal N. Strong, “The Lean Years–2,” Corregidor Historic Society, archived from the original on 23 December 2004, 

<http://corregidor.org/chs_lean_years/leanyear_02.htm>,

accessed on 7 August 2013.

Paschal N. and Mary H. Strong, Sabres and Safety 

Pins, 1954, <http://wnk.hamline.edu/sabresandpins.html>, 

accessed 7 August 2013.

Malou Komornicka (granddaughter of Brigadier General 

Strong), e-mail, July 2013. 

Colonel Riley serves as the Deputy Chief of Staff for 

Operations, Plans, and Training (G-3), Maneuver Support 

Center of Excellence, Fort Leonard Wood. He holds a bachelor’s degree in English from The Citadel, South Carolina; a 

master’s degree in international relations from Troy State 

University (now Troy University), Alabama; and a master’s 

degree in strategic studies from the U.S. Army War College, 

Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania.
September–December 2013 Engineer 23

I

n an effort to improve energy efficiency and reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions, the 63d Regional Support 

Command (RSC) used the U.S. Army Reserve Center 

at Bryan, Texas, as a test bed for a geothermal heat pump, 

solar water heating, and a photovoltaic (PV) solar array. 

Bryan is the home of the 420th Engineer Command. The 

goal was to implement 

Executive Order 134231

to reduce energy intensity by 3 percent annually 

and implement renewable 

energy generation projects on U.S. Army Reserve 

property. 

Comparatively little 

energy is expended on 

heating the building in 

Bryan, so cooling is the 

primary requirement of 

the heating, ventilation, 

and air conditioning system. With 83 wells feeding

37 heat pumps, the geothermal system eliminates the 

chiller unit. Compared to a typical chiller unit, the initial 

costs of the geothermal heat pump are more expensive, but 

the maintenance costs and energy savings over a 25-year 

life cycle make the geothermal system less expensive, while 

complying with the executive order.

By Colonel Stewart R. Fearon

A parking shelter also serves as an energy-producing solar array.

Photo by Jon Fleshman, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
24 Engineer September–December 2013

The geothermal heat pump cools and heats the Bryan 

U.S. Army Reserve Center. The ground temperature 

remains relatively constant year-round and averages about 

68°F. The geothermal heat pump uses 300-foot-deep wells 

to extract heat from the ground in the cooler months and 

distribute it through the conventional duct system to warm 

the center. In the warmer months, the process is reversed; 

heat is extracted from the center and transferred back into 

the wells. Two pumps in the mechanical room circulate a 

glycol solution through a closed system. Eighty of the wells 

support the main training and administration building, 

while the other three wells support the base maintenance 

activity shop.

Geothermal heating and cooling (Figure 

1) is a mature technology that has been 

used for decades. The components are not 

high-tech and do not require extensive

maintenance. With periodic maintenance

of the pumps and heating and cooling coils, 

the expected life span of the Bryan geothermal heat pump is 30 years.

The Bryan U.S. Army Reserve Center 

project also uses solar water heaters. This 

proven technology is used extensively in 

homes and businesses in temperate climates with high levels of sun exposure. 

Instead of heating the water from about 

68°F to 125°F with gas or electricity, the 

solar water heaters use solar panels on the 

roof. On a summer day, the sun will heat 

the water to the point where additional 

heating is not required. Small pumps 

continuously circulate the hot water from 

the collector to storage tanks. When the 

sun goes down or is not shining, the pumps 

stop circulating the water back into the 

collectors, where it would cool the stored 

water. During the winter, when temperatures can drop below freezing, sensors signal the pumps to drain the solar panels to 

prevent them from freezing. 

There are two types of active solar 

water heating systems: direct and indirect. In a direct system, the water runs 

through a collector to be heated. In an 

indirect system, water or another fluid 

runs through a collector and then heats 

the water in a storage tank. The indirect system requires a heat exchanger 

and more extensive piping than a direct 

system. The Bryan U.S. Army Reserve 

Center has two 119-gallon solar water 

heaters for domestic water in the main 

training and administration building and 

one solar water heater for the base maintenance shop, with an electrical backup 

for days when the sun does not shine or 

temperatures are below freezing. 

For an initial cost of $1.48 million, the array of 682 solar 

panels, each 77 by 30 inches, covers 14,220 square feet. Each 

panel can generate 280 watts and has a maximum power of 

190.9 kilowatts, though the inverters can only capture 175 

kilowatts. Part of the negotiation between the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers and Bryan Texas Utilities resulted in 

50 percent of the renewable energy credits going to the utility 

company. 

One of the lessons learned is that each utility company 

manages the renewable energy added to its grid differently. 

Bryan Texas Utilities does not simply give the 63d RSC 

Figure 1. Geothermal cooling and heating

Solar collectors heat water at the Bryan U.S. Army Reserve Center.
September–December 2013 Engineer 25

credit for the energy it produces and deduct it from 

the bill (called net metering). Instead, the 63d RSC 

is required to sell the solar 

power to Bryan Texas Utilities based on the current 

grid pricing schedule. This 

price fluctuates and is tied 

to the seasonal demands 

for the region. Then, the 

63d RSC has to purchase 

the power back from the 

power company at the normal rate. Table 1 shows 

the Bryan U.S. Army 

Reserve Center power consumption and the power 

generated by its PV array. 

Table 1 shows that the power output of the PV 

array predictably declined from a high of 33,067 kilowatt-hours in August 2012 to a low of 18,743 kilowatt-hours in February 2013 as the days grew 

shorter. Table 2 shows that the energy credits the utility company paid showed a surprising drop from 

4.4 cents per kilowatt-hour in July to 2.3 cents in January. At the same time, the price of electricity paid to the 

utility company increased from 6.2 cents per kilowatthour to 7.8 cents.

If the energy credits from the first 6 months are matched 

in the next 6 months, the PV array would pay for itself in 

143 years. Although Bryan is in an excellent location to generate renewable energy, the cost of electricity there is relatively low compared to other states such as California. This 

increases the time for the savings to offset the cost of the PV 

array. However, solar power reduces the 63d RSC reliance 

on petroleum-based energy and reduces its overall energy 

consumption. 

The 63d RSC is working with the Army Reserve Installation Management Directorate to eliminate the requirement 

to sell its unused solar power to Bryan Texas Utilities. One 

idea is to add on-site energy storage for the power generated 

by the PV array. This would allow the 63d RSC to use 100 

percent of the energy generated instead of selling it to Bryan 

Texas Utilities and then purchasing it back at a higher rate. 

The 63d RSC is leading the way in implementing Executive Order 13423. By reducing energy consumption through 

the use of geothermal and solar water heaters and generating energy from renewable sources, the 63d RSC is working 

to meet the goal of reducing energy consumption by 3 percent annually, while creating renewable energy generation 

projects for the U.S. Army Reserve.

Endnote:

1Executive Order 13423, 

Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, Federal 

Register, Volume 72, No. 17, 

26 January 2007, <http://www

.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007

-01-26/pdf/07-374.pdf>.

Colonel Fearon serves as 

the director of public works at 

the 63d RSC. He holds a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the U.S. Military 

Academy and master’s degrees 

in strategic studies from the 

U.S. Army War College and 

business administration from 

National University.

Table 1. Generation and Consumption

Table 2. Credits and Costs
26 Engineer September–December 2013

Publication 

Number

Title Date Description 

(and Current Status)

ATP 3-34.22

(FM 3-34.22)

Feb 09

FM 3-34 Aug 11

ATP 3-37.34 

(FM 5-103)

Survivability Operations Jun 13 This is a multi-Service manual with the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and provides an 

integrated systematic approach to survivability operations. This manual is a compilation of 

tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) found in doctrine, lessons learned, and other 

reference material. This manual falls under the umbrella of the protection warfighting 

function and supersedes FM 5-103, Survivability.

Status: Current

Publication Revisions

Combat Engineering

ATP 3-34.20

(FM 3-34.210)

Explosive Hazard 

Operations

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

Operations, to ATP 3-34.20. 

Status: Staffing of the final draft is complete, and the final approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 14.

Engineer Operations—

Brigade Combat Team and 

Below

Engineer Operations 

This is a revision and conversion of FM 3-34.22, Engineer Operations—Brigade Combat 

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

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

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 2d quarter, FY 14. To be 

published 4th quarter, FY 14.

U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence 

Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate 

Concepts, Organizations, and Doctrine Development Division 

Engineer ngineer Doctrine octrine Update pdate

ATP 3-34.23

(ATTP 3-34.23)

Engineer Operations— 

Echelons Above Brigade 

Combat Team

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

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

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 2d quarter, FY 14. To be 

published 4th quarter, FY 14. 

Brigade Special Troops 

Battalion

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

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 3d quarter, FY 14. To 

be published 1st quarter, FY 15.

ATP 3-90.61

(FM 3-90.61)

This revised version contains the “box top” as our doctrinal framework; integrates 

the three engineer disciplines of combat, general, and geospatial engineering; and 

introduces the four lines of engineer support for decisive actions.

Status: The revised version has been approved by the U.S. Army Engineer School 

(USAES) commandant. Anticipate publication 1st quarter, fiscal year (FY) 2014.

ATP 3-90.4

(ATTP 3-90.4)

Combined Arms Mobility

Operations

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

Mobility Operations, to ATP 3-90.4.

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 2d quarter, FY 14. To 

be published 4th quarter, FY 14.

ATP 3-90.8

(FM 3-90)

(FM 5-102)

(FM 90-7)

Combined Arms 

Countermobility 

Operations

Jul 01 

Mar 85 

Sep 94

This will be a full revision that includes the consolidation of FM 3-90, Tactics; FM 5-102, 

Countermobility; and FM 90-7, Combined Arms Obstacle Integration. This will be a multiService manual that discusses countermobility and combined arms obstacle integration 

and their relationship to the combined arms defense and warfighting functions with 

regard to wide-area security.

Status: The final approved draft has been approved by the USAES commandant and is 

now awaiting USMC approval. To be published 1st quarter, FY 14.
September–December 2013 Engineer 27

Publication 

Number

Title Date Description 

(and Current Status)

U.S. Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence 

Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate 

Concepts, Organizations, and Doctrine Development Division 

Engineer ngineer Doctrine octrine Update

Combat Engineering (Continued)

ATP 3-34.40

(FM 3-34.400)

General Engineering Dec 08 This multi-Service manual is a conversion from FM 3-34.400, General Engineering, to 

ATP 3-34.40. 

Status: Staffing of the final draft is complete, and the final approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 14.

Notes: 

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

discussed in this article are currently under development and/or recently published. Drafts may be obtained during the staffing process by contacting the Engineer Doctrine Branch at commercial (573) 563-0003, DSN 676-0003, or <usarmy.leonardwood.mscoe.mbx.cdidcodddengdoc@mail 

.mil>. The development status of these manuals was current as of 10 September 2013.

2. Items in parentheses are publication numbers of current publications, which will be superseded by the new number at the top of the entry. 

Multiple numbers in parentheses indicate consolidation into one manual.

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

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

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

ATP 3-34.81

(FM 3-34.170)

Engineer 

Reconnaissance

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

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 3d quarter, FY 14. To 

be published 1st quarter, FY 15.

Geospatial Engineering

ATP 3-34.80

(FM 3-34.230)

Geospatial Engineering Mar 08 This is a conversion from FM 3-34.230, Topographic Operations, to ATP 3-34.80. 

Status: Staffing of the final draft is complete, and the final approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 14.

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

Operations, to ATP 3-34.5. 

Status: Staffing of the final draft is complete, and the final approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 14.

ATP 3-34.5

(FM 3-100.4)

Environmental 

Considerations

Feb 10

ATP 3-34.45

(FM 3-34.480)

Power Generation/ 

Distribution

Apr 07 This multi-Service manual is a conversion from FM 3-34.480, Engineer Prime Power 

Operations, to ATP 3-34.45.

Status: Anticipate the final draft to be sent for worldwide staffing 2d quarter, FY 14. To 

be published 4th quarter, FY 14.

ATP 3-90.37

(FM 3-90.119)

Combined Arms 

Improvised Explosive 

Device Defeat 

Operations

Sep 07 This is a conversion from FM 3-90.119, Combined Arms Improvised Explosive Device 

Defeat Operations, to ATP 3-90.37. 

Status: Staffing of the final draft is complete, and the final approved draft is being 

prepared. To be published 2d quarter, FY 14.

General Engineering
28 Engineer September–December 2013

With the nation’s defense strategy focus shifting to 

the Asia-Pacific region, the expanding involvement 

of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District in that part of the world has taken on new and increasing importance. In partnership with agencies such as U.S. 

Pacific Command (USPACOM) and the U.S. State Department, the district has executed more than 200 projects and 

gained broad experience throughout the region. Work that 

started in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam has 

expanded to India, Mongolia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Taiwan.

In fiscal year 2013, the district’s workload under the 

Department of Defense Humanitarian Assistance Program 

and U.S. Agency for International Development consisted 

of 70 projects valued at $31 million, while programs supporting the U.S. State Department for security assistance 

and foreign military sales featured three projects valued at 

$91 million. 

The district began its work for USPACOM through the 

Department of Defense Humanitarian Assistance Program 

in 2009. Despite many obstacles, the district has managed 

140 projects in this program and the workload keeps growing. 

Most of the projects are schools, medical facilities, flood management centers, and cyclone shelters constructed in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, Mongolia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and 

Vietnam. Nepal has four projects that are vital to disaster 

preparedness and response, including a blood center and airport structural upgrades to withstand earthquakes. Mongolia is the latest entry, with the renovation and construction 

of tuberculosis clinics. Although customers have requested 

more complicated projects, such as communications centers 

and helipads, most work continues to focus on medical and 

educational structures, with an emphasis on multiuse facilities. The district is also conducting a Koshi River drainage 

study in Nepal.

Department of Defense humanitarian assistance activities were established by the federal government in 1986 to 

assure support to selected friendly nations and allies and to 

provide basic humanitarian aid and services to populations 

in need. The goals of the Department of Defense and combatant commanders, are to help avoid political and humanitarian crises, promote democratic development and regional 

stability, and enable countries to recover from past conflicts. 

In noncrisis peacetime settings, the program supports combatant commanders by providing access to, and fostering 

goodwill for, the U.S. military.

USPACOM provides humanitarian assistance to

36 countries across the Asia-Pacific region. In protecting 

and defending the nation, the Alaska District plays a leading role in setting the conditions with nations in the Pacific 

and Asia so that the U.S. government has access there in 

By Colonel Christopher D. Lestochi
September–December 2013 Engineer 29

case of a national emergency. The district may seem like an 

unlikely candidate for this role, but the work it is doing in 

the region is similar to what it performs in Alaska. Alaska 

is located in the USPACOM area of responsibility, and 

Alaska District employees have an expeditionary mindset that has always been part of the district’s culture. Its 

employees are accustomed to working in remote locations 

on projects that support communities in rural and coastal 

Alaska and many of the more than 200 federally recognized tribes of Native Americans in the state. The district 

is part of the long history of the Department of Defense 

and Department of State working together to achieve common goals. It is a flexible, adaptable, and high-performing 

organization. As the priorities of the Army and the Nation 

are changing, the district is in a position to take advantage 

of new opportunities in the Asia-Pacific region, including 

humanitarian assistance.

Project managers set their sights on continual improvement by increasing standardization and efficiency, but this 

improvement is complicated for many reasons, including 

cultural and language differences. Project sites in the AsiaPacific region are usually located in rural areas, where the 

help is needed most. Travel from Alaska can take up to

2 days, so visits are normally scheduled several times annually and cover multiple countries to minimize expenses. 

Once they arrive, team members need to work effectively, 

coordinating with foreign dignitaries and U.S. embassy personnel and interacting with host nation businesses that are 

contracted for design, construction, and quality assurance.

The district’s military contingency contracting team 

administers contracts. This reflects an effort across the 

Corps to assign Soldiers to districts in the acquisition career 

field so that they can gain design and construction contracting experience with an emphasis on applying those skills in 

a contingency environment. Humanitarian assistance projects fit the criteria for gaining that kind of exposure, and the 

Alaska District uses military contingency contracting teams 

as they were intended to be employed.

By developing standard designs, the district controls 

costs. Easily adaptable designs also streamline efforts with 

contractors. For instance, school layouts are similar, except 

for the number of rooms and toilets. Typically built for

40 pupils, classrooms have tile floors and ceiling fans. Since 

sanitation is a primary objective of the program, restrooms 

are provided for all facilities. Water is drawn from a well, 

while a rain catchment supplies a backup source. Desks and 

chalkboards are installed to complete the project and make 

it fully operational.

Medical buildings are more complicated because of their 

diverse uses. Most countries have multiple layouts developed by their health ministries, depending on the population to be served. With the aid of local designers, the district 

evaluates which type of facility is appropriate for humanitarian assistance and uses existing layouts to develop standard designs that are right for the program, whether it is a 

clinic or hospital. 

Besides getting the right type of facility, the nations 

receive a high-quality product that is focused heavily on 

structural design. District engineers developed countryspecific structural requirements based on the International 

Building Code®. Designing buildings to handle austere 

conditions and serve local populations is also emphasized. 

Providing elaborate features could result in facilities that 

clash culturally or are difficult to maintain, so designs are 

simplified. Developing nations have little money for maintenance, and schools and hospitals usually have no maintenance staff. To mitigate the difficulties of upkeep, the district requires construction contractors to provide operations 

and maintenance manuals and to train the end users.

USPACOM and host nations have expressed their satisfaction with the finished construction projects, and that

success has led to more customers. The U.S. Agency for 

International Development gave the district more than $40 

million to manage and construct as many as 100 cyclone 

shelters in Bangladesh. The work is planned over 5 years 

and is modeled after the district’s accomplishments for 

USPACOM. The district is coordinating with the Bangladesh Coast Guard to assist with natural disasters and 

build coastal crisis management centers that are full-time 

stations to protect local populations and waterways. These 

buildings will help Bangladesh and the international community respond more effectively during crisis and recovery. 

The district also participates in the Global Peace Operations Initiative sponsored by the Department of State. The 

district manages construction projects in Mongolia and Bangladesh to renovate and expand facilities that train host 

nation peacekeeping forces. Another avenue of support to 

the region is through foreign military sales. The district 

is constructing facilities and infrastructure worth $299.6 

million in India and helping to plan, design, and construct 

infrastructure to support rotary, heavy lift, and fighter aircraft sales throughout the USPACOM area of responsibility.

By containing costs and adding value for customers in 

Asia, the district can help make a difference for the people of 

developing countries and support the U.S. mission abroad. 

Multiple projects and programs in the region allow the district to leverage resources and products to meet customer 

needs. Opportunities to assist the national defense focus 

in the Asia-Pacific region are likely to increase as the war 

in Afghanistan winds down. Resources may concentrate on 

humanitarian assistance, security cooperation assistance, 

foreign military sales, or a new opportunity still to be discovered. As federal budgets decline, programs like the one 

that the Alaska District supports on behalf of USPACOM 

are a cost-effective way to advance U.S. strategic interests 

in the region.

Colonel Lestochi is the commander of the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Alaska District. He holds a bachelor’s 

degree in architectural engineering and a master’s degree in 

civil engineering from Penn State University. He is a licensed 

civil engineer in Alaska.
30 Engineer September–December 2013

Research conducted under the Army Study Program 

assesses the feasibility of using local materials and 

techniques to construct base camp facilities. The 

strategic, informed use of indigenous construction materials (ICM) could reduce the Army’s logistics burden while 

promoting practices that are resource-efficient and reducing 

adverse impacts on the environment, host nation cultural 

resources, and local populations.

The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development 

Center (ERDC) is conducting the study for Headquarters, 

Department of the Army. Using ICM and indigenous methods of construction can cause problems for engineers accustomed to working with U.S. standards and specifications, 

such as the Unified Facilities Criteria. The ERDC goal is to 

propose realistic standards that allow the inclusion of ICM 

building designs into the Joint Construction Management 

System, which supports the Army Facilities Components 

System program. By associating costs with the life cycles 

of some common semipermanent construction, the research 

team is developing matrices that allow decisionmakers 

to compare and contrast ICM with traditional materials 

and methods.

Local Materials Used

I

n recent U.S. contingency operations, the greatest 

vulnerability of a contingency base is its supply line. A 

base depends on liquid fuels and other classes of supply, including construction materials, most of which must 

be brought in by air or by highly vulnerable ground convoys. 

The Army is making great efforts to reduce its resource 

footprint and studying ways to reduce energy demand, 

decrease the use of fossil fuels, and build more efficient 

facilities.

Although guidance exists on specific Army goals related 

to the sustainability of contingency bases, the Army Facilities Components System offers only wood frame construction designs for standard military facilities, whether or not 

that type of construction is appropriate for a particular theater of operation. This study will recommend ICM and indigenous techniques that can be adapted to standard military 

designs and are suitable for several climate zones, including arid and tropical. Evaluation factors for these materials 

and techniques will include the cost of materials, cost and 

risk of transportation of materials, construction labor costs 

and availability, potential energy efficiency improvements, 

durability, and force protection characteristics.

By Dr. Ghassan Al-Chaar

“The Army is making great 

efforts to reduce its resource 

footprint and studying ways to 

reduce energy demand, decrease 

the use of fossil fuels, and build 

more efficient facilities.”
September–December 2013 Engineer 31

In addition to reducing the cost to transport materials, 

it may also be possible to use skilled local labor to reduce 

the number of contractors who must be brought in and supported at a base. This may also result in positive effects for 

local economies. Local construction is often more suitable 

for the regional climate, potentially reducing the energy 

required to heat and cool the structure. At the end of an 

operation, facilities are much more likely to be culturally 

suitable for turnover to the local community. 

ICM Definition Tweaked

Previous experience has shown that traditional definitions of ICM can be limiting and unrealistic for existing conditions in a host country. Table 1 lists definitions revised for the study.

Qualitative and Quantitative 

Features Compared

The ERDC Construction Engineering Research Laboratory developed metrics that allow semipermanent 

structures to be compared qualitatively and quantitatively when constructed with ICM versus traditional materials. The structure types under consideration include—

■ Barracks hut.

■ Adobe.

■ Compressed-earth block.

■ Soil cement.

■ Concrete/brick masonry.

■ Mortarless masonry.

■ K-span.

■ Hesco Bastion Concertainer®.

■ Containerized housing unit.

■ Foam.

Qualitative building features under consideration 

include—

■ Safety (fire rating).

■ Structural integrity.

■ Constructability.

■ Scalability.

■ Force protection rating.

■ Material durability.

■ Compatibility.

■ Environmental suitability.

■ Economic, efficient construction.

■ Quality-of-life rating.

■ Reuse or disposal possibilities.

Qualitative location features under consideration 

include—

■ Climate/weather effects.

■ Quality of transportation available.

■ Hostility.

■ Land acquisition.

■ Earthquake/hurricane potential.

■ Power, water, and sewage available.

■ Labor available.

■ Location of resources and equipment.

For quantitative comparisons, the Construction Engineering Research Laboratory developed a new system called 

Table 1. ICM definitions
32 Engineer September–December 2013

the indigenuity index. This index provides a rating system 

for structural types. Each structure is rated based on the 

following factors:

■ Material factor. Describes how difficult it is to form or

retrieve the material for the structure.

■ Transportation factor. Incorporates the variables 

involved in moving resources.

■ Construction factor. Includes the variables needed to 

construct the structure.

■ Functionality factor. Provides variables for rating the 

structure throughout its U.S. military use.

■ Disposal factor. Describes how the structure will be 

dealt with after U.S. military use. 

Some of the qualitative features under consideration cannot be easily measured, and information on others cannot 

be easily found. Because of this, the variables that make 

up these factors (shown in Figure 1) will be used to compare structural types. The variables are associated with 

quantitative—but not dollar—costs. They are entered into 

Figure 1. Indigenuity index breakdown

Legend:

CEB—compressed-earth block

CHU—containerized housing unit

CMU—concrete masonry unit

an algorithm that accounts for overlaps in costs and interaction between costs. The algorithm produces a single value 

based on how indigenous and sustainable each structural 

type would be in a given location. The smallest value will 

be the best structural solution for a designated region and 

requirements. 

Figure 2 demonstrates how each material is ranked, 

based on the results of the material factor portion of the 

algorithm. The algorithm would similarly rank the other 

four factors for each material. After the factors are determined, they would be combined to produce an indigenuity 

index value for every material being compared. 

An example for how such rankings are determined will 

be provided using the material factor. The material factor 

is made up of the cost of the material or the energy, work, 

and time required to transform it into a useful construction material. This factor includes the steps of manufacture for materials not occurring naturally in the area, such 

as steel or thermoplastic material. In general, the more 

indigenous a material is, the lower its cost will be. The 

equipment and tools required during formation of the 
September–December 2013 Engineer 33

construction material is one variable that is rated. The ratings are based on the amount and complexity of equipment 

required. Simple equipment (such as molds) is scored a value 

of 1, basic equipment (such as a mixer) gets a value of 2, 

highly complex equipment (such as a compression block 

machine) gets a value of 3, and advanced machinery (such 

as factory equipment) gets values of 10 or 15, depending on 

complexity.

The process and the time the process takes are also variables that affect the final value of the material. The more difficult the process is or the more labor required in forming 

the material, the higher the assigned value for that material. Materials that only require mixing and pouring, such 

as adobe, would get a value of 1, while the process of mixing and firing clay bricks would get a value of 2. A more 

difficult process, such as cutting stone, would get a value

of 3. The most intensive formation processes, such as forming thermoplastic material and steel, would get values of

4 and 5 respectively. The time that these processes take 

are rated as quick, average, or slow. For example, forming 

a compressed-earth brick would be rated quick, forming a 

traditional brick would be rated average, and forming steel 

would be rated slow.

The next variable is based on the amount of resources 

needed to produce a useful construction material. Each 

resource is assigned a value based on how easily it can be 

converted into a useful resource to produce the material in 

question. Water, clay, and sand would be readily available 

and require no work, so they would be assigned a value of 1. 

Materials such as cement and steel would be assigned values of 7 and 10, respectively, due to their cost to the environment and the manufacturing processes and amount of 

energy that go into their production.

Dr. Al-Chaar is a senior research structural engineer at 

Materials and Structures Branch, ERDC Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Champaign, Illinois. He holds 

a bachelor’s degree in structural engineering from the University of Illinois at Chicago, master’s degrees in structural 

engineering from the University of Illinois at Chicago and 

geotechnical engineering from the University of Illinois at 

Urbana–Champaign, and a Ph.D. in structural engineering 

from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Figure 2. Material factor scores

Legend:

CEB—compressed-earth block

CHU—containerized housing unit

CMU—concrete masonry unit
34 Engineer September–December 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Price of Glory, by Sir Alistair Horne, Penguin Books, 

1964, ISBN-13: 9780140022155.

Reviewed by Lieutenant Colonel Brian E. Bart

The Price of Glory, by Sir Alistair Horne, provides voluminous details of the Battle of Verdun, the French and German leaders involved in it, and the decisions they made 

before and during the bitter 10-month battle. His descriptions of battlefield conditions, the weaponry used, and their 

effects on troops paint a vivid picture of the hardships faced 

by soldiers on both sides.

The author, a World War II veteran and noted European historian, provides the necessary backstory, with 

an emphasis on the French senior leaders that adequately frames the events leading to Verdun in February 

1916. The book describes the ineptness of the belligerents’ senior military leaders, who seemed perfectly willing to throw endless numbers of soldiers into the fray, 

regardless of the number of casualties sustained. Military leaders were unwilling or unable to grasp the lasting impacts of the battle and their demoralizing effects on 

both armies. The Battle of Verdun nearly rang the death 

knell for the French Army. 

The French Army’s death grip on Verdun can be traced 

back to its stunning loss to Germany in 1870. So humiliated 

was France, her army, and her officer corps that the military 

leaders sought to reinvent the army into a model of its former self from the glory days of Napoleon. The need to hold 

on to every inch of French soil and to immediately counterattack to regain any lost ground—regardless of cost—was 

drummed into every officer’s psyche. 

Before the outbreak of the war, senior French Army 

leaders lacked the vision to recognize the importance of 

changes in technology. Intense study of the 1870 loss to Germany focused on the belief that a lack of offensive spirit—

élan vital—was the main reason for France’s defeat. The 

philosophy of the offense became the mantra of the French 

Army. It was a group-think effect of élan that overrode the 

few remaining rational military thinkers. The generals 

didn’t want heavy artillery because it would slow them down 

and didn’t want machine guns because they were too complicated and cumbersome to maneuver in the field. Politicians focused on cost-saving measures, so not having to pay 

for these new weapons easily drew support. As a result, the 

French Army lacked the offensive punch required to break 

through German defenses.

French engineering would play a pivotal role in the 

defense of Verdun, allowing the French Army to fight tooth 

and nail for key terrain (its forts) long enough to outlast the 

German attackers. With a keen understanding of the topography, a French sapper general by the name of Raymond 

Adolphe Serre de Riviere had properly sighted positions that 

allowed interlocking sectors of fire and provided excellent 

observation points to cover dead space with indirect fire. 

Properly sighted positions allowed defenders to pour murderous enfilading fire on densely packed infantry formations 
September–December 2013 Engineer 35

advancing through restrictive ravines and belts of barbwire 

entanglements.

Germany’s strategy to defeat the Allied coalition focused 

on knocking out France once and for all. With the operational objective of bleeding the French Army dry through 

attrition, the Germans had massed superior firepower and 

troop concentrations focused along a narrow front. Achieving initial surprise 

and harnessing the 

shock effect of the 

opening assault, 

the German Army 

planned to quickly 

overwhelm French 

defenders. At the 

tactical level, the 

German main effort 

focused on dislodging the French Army from the massive field fortifications 

that served as strongpoints. A combination of overwhelming 

firepower, immediately followed by infantry assaults, would 

overrun defensive positions quickly. With the fortifications 

neutralized or in German control, the combination would 

defeat Fort Douaumont, the linchpin in the French defensive 

lines. The so-called Gibraltar of the French defenses, Fort 

Douaumont dominated the terrain and became the focal 

point for both armies. It traded hands more than once, and 

each army became fixated on possessing it. If lost, it would 

deprive the French Army of the advantage in defendable terrain. If the Germans could capture and hold the fort, they 

would break the crust of the French defensive belts, open up 

the vulnerable interior to further penetrations, continue the 

attrition of French reserves, and open avenues of approach 

to Paris itself.

French senior leaders should be considered woefully 

inadequate at best; at worst, they were outright incompetents with delusions of grandeur. French Marshal Joseph 

Joffre seemed completely detached and unimaginative, 

indifferent to the suffering and loss of life that his army was 

enduring at the front. The ranks of his senior staff officers 

were plagued with sycophants focused on advancing their 

own careers at any price. A league of chateau generals managed the war from far behind the lines, giving little thought 

to the soldiers dying in the trenches. 

General Philippe Petain proved to be the exception at a 

critical moment in the battle. He understood the modern 

battlefield and espoused a firm belief in the effectiveness of 

firepower. Gleaning lessons learned from the American Civil 

War, the Boer Wars, and the Russo-Japanese War, General 

Petain understood the proper use and deadly effects of modern weapons, especially the machine gun. He instituted unit 

rotations for the first time, moving battered units out of the 

frontlines and replacing them with new ones. He eventually rotated 70 divisions through Verdun, seasoning his 

force with units that had frontline combat experience. He 

provided a touch of sanity and care for the frontline soldier, 

saving the army from dissolving at the pivotal moment of 

the battle. 

The book details how reverberations from the Battle of 

Verdun were felt through the end of the war and would 

influence decisionmakers in the next war. The battle was a 

watershed moment 

when Germany 

could have won the 

war outright. In 

the end, it would 

cripple France for 

the remainder of the 

war, push Britain 

into the role of lead 

Allied nation, and 

finally draw America

into the conflict. More than 700,000 French and German soldiers were either killed, captured, wounded, or missing.

We have the advantage of time to look back and review 

the battle, the belligerents involved, and the end result. By 

today’s standards, this battle and its cost in human lives 

are unpalatable to modern military professionals or Western society. How both countries absorbed and dealt with this 

level of loss is hard to fathom. I agree with the book’s opening quote from F. Scott Fitzgerald that “This western-front 

business couldn’t be done again, not for a long time. The 

young men think they could do it again but they couldn’t.”1

No one today would have the stomach to willingly sacrifice 

so many for so little. 

The Price of Glory is an excellent read for anyone interested in the history of World War I or looking for insights 

into the decisionmakers of the war and the period. Decisions 

should be analyzed in their historical context. The book 

provides valuable lessons learned for the engineer leader 

today and shows the impact of understanding terrain and 

its impact on a battle.

Endnote:

1

F. Scott Fitzgerald, Tender Is the Night, Scribner, New 

York, reprint edition 1995.

Lieutenant Colonel Bart is the total force integrator at 

the Concept Organization Doctrine Development Division of 

the Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate at 

the Maneuver Support Center of Excellence at Fort Leonard 

Wood, Missouri. He is a graduate of the Joint and Combined 

Warfighting School–Joint Professional Military Education 

II, the Joint Engineer Operations Course, and the Advanced 

Operations Warfighter Course. He holds a bachelor’s degree 

in business administration from College of the Ozarks at 

Point Lookout, Missouri; and a master’s degree in business 

administration from Webster University

“Military leaders were unwilling or unable to 

grasp the lasting impacts of the battle and their 

demoralizing effects on both armies. The Battle 

of Verdun nearly rang the death knell for the 

French Army.”
36 Engineer September–December 2013

The Echo of Battle: The Army’s Way of War, by Brian 

McAllister Linn, Harvard University Press, 2009, ISBN-13: 

9780674034792.

Reviewed by First Lieutenant Kevin N. Braam

Leaders in the U.S. Army learn throughout their careers 

to be adaptable, flexible, and open to new concepts and new 

ways to accomplish a mission. One tool that the Army uses 

to facilitate and encourage this is the after action review, 

which is conducted by the smallest formations immediately 

after training events. A more formal process conducted 

by the Center for Army Lessons Learned features a large 

group of personnel dedicated to collecting and disseminating the latest information. Despite the common goal 

of improving upon past performance and ensuring better preparation for the future, military intellectuals and 

strategic planners often fall into three martial traditions 

that govern their outlook on training for armed conflict. In 

The Echo of Battle: The Army’s Way of War, Brian McAllister Linn provides an insightful discussion of these three 

schools of thought, which he terms Guardians, Heroes, and 

Managers. 

In the prologue, Linn says that an officer or planner may 

occasionally encompass aspects of each, but that the three 

traditions are usually distinct and separate from each other. 

Linn takes the reader on a journey through American military history from the post-Revolutionary War period up to 

the War on Terrorism. His focus is not on tactics, decisive 

leadership, or discussion of a uniquely American way of 

fighting. Instead, he incorporates each tradition into understanding how the Army applied lessons learned from the 

war it just finished as it prepared for the next war. 

Linn shows that advocates of the Guardian tradition 

adapted their strategic planning based on the most dangerous enemy course of action and used data from a previous conflict as justification. Army engineers initially comprised the 

Guardians. During the 1800s, the greatest perceived threat 

was a coastal attack by a European navy and Guardians 

responded by stressing coastal defense. However, the necessary infrastructure and manpower needed to implement the 

plan was never fully realized. As the Industrial Revolution 

produced larger, more capable naval forces in the years leading up to World War I, Guardians continued to validate and 

redefine their strategic plans. Following the war, Guardians 

argued that the number of casualties in future conflicts could 

be reduced by increased emphasis on coastal defense and less 

American involvement in European affairs. 

Decades later, when the Soviet Union became a nuclear 

power, planning for atomic warfare became the new focus 

of the Guardians. The tradition is also linked to the Powell Doctrine of the late 20th century, which stated that if a 

country posed a threat to the United States, then America 

should attack with a preemptive strike. For the time after 

the Civil War and the period of the two world wars, Linn 

illustrates that the elaborate defenses needed to withstand 

an enemy attack on U.S. soil were never realized. Notwithstanding the intellectual insight and lessons learned from 

past conflicts, Guardians substantiated their strategic plans 

with piecemeal evidence. That does not mean that a nuclear 

strike against the United States could not have occurred, but 

that the preparation and planning that went into nuclear 

deterrence kept other forms of warfare from receiving the 

necessary attention. Linn makes it clear that planning for 

unconventional warfare was always an afterthought, despite 

its prevalence on the battlefield. Unconventional warfare, 

with its focus on the individual, was more suited to the 

Hero tradition.

Heroes, like Guardians, used the evidence from past conflicts that best suited their worldview. Heroes emphasized 

the warfighter mentality of every Soldier. They advocated 

values such as personal courage and honor, made clear that 

war is unpredictable, and believed that no rigid formula or 

method could determine its outcome. Linn explains that the 

Hero tradition became well established in the time between 

the Civil War and World War I. Unconventional warfare 

then seemed to be the norm and not simply an anomaly. 

The Army was fighting American Indians on the western 

frontier, confronting guerillas in the Philippines, and had 

troops committed to Reconstruction in the South. Despite 

this, senior U.S. officers and military intellectuals of the 

late 1800s and early 1900s believed that an Army which 

was well prepared to fight a conventional war could be 

easily reorganized to fight an insurgency. Linn also states 

that a Soldier with the Hero mentality could easily adapt 

from conventional to unconventional warfare. Following 
September–December 2013 Engineer 37

World War I, little doctrine was published or written concerning unconventional warfare. Heroes adapted by developing a code of nine principles that are not unlike the seven 

Army values of today. Heroes also continued to embrace the 

human element 

of warfare as the 

most important 

factor. They 

did not accept 

the significance 

of technology, 

specifically the 

development of 

the tank. During and after the 

Vietnam War, 

Heroes saw the 

need to have Soldiers who could adapt to the conditions of the native environment and were capable of training indigenous forces 

on their own land.

Like the Hero tradition, the Manager tradition took 

hold after the Civil War as warfare became more complex, 

technology improved, and greater manpower was needed 

to fight and win wars. Unlike Guardians (who generally 

viewed warfare as an engineering project) or Heroes (who 

saw warfare as a test of honor), Managers looked at war 

as an organizational problem. Managers constantly tried 

to improve administrative systems, incorporate technology, 

and enhance the Army through better business practices. 

Manager concepts of how to improve the Army are still alive 

today and are recited regularly. One of these concepts was 

that every task a Soldier performed could be evaluated, 

graded, and standardized across the military and that corresponding doctrine would provide the necessary framework 

for training. 

The Manager tradition flourished after World War II 

and throughout the Cold War. The Soviet Union and atomic 

warfare were the greatest threats of that time period, and 

doctrine development reflected those threats. This was evident in the hours spent on atomic warfare instruction at the 

U.S. Army Command and General Staff College during the 

1950s. It was also apparent in the focus on conventional war 

with the Soviet Union as the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command developed and the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, began operations in the 1970s. 

Still, unconventional war always seemed to take a backseat. 

As the book progresses, Linn’s tone changes. Early in the 

book, he describes what the Army was doing, while the last 

few chapters are more like a description of what the Army 

was not doing.

The Echo of Battle provides a detailed account of 

how doctrine developed and transformed in the decades 

following the Vietnam War. The doctrine of active defense 

evolved into AirLand Battle; Field Manual 100-5, Operations,

1

 was continually revised in an effort to stay current; 

and institutional training became more standardized. The 

Army appeared prepared for conventional war against 

the Soviet Union. 

What was missing, 

according to Linn, 

was any formal 

training in unconventional warfare. 

The lessons learned 

from fighting guerillas in Vietnam 

and interacting 

with the local populace were lost. The Army had again defined the most dangerous threat as the Soviet Union and concentrated its 

efforts to prepare for war in Europe. Leaders were taught 

that they needed to be more flexible and adaptive, yet were 

evaluated on the rigid system that prepared all regular 

units for combat with the Soviet Union. While trying to 

avoid the negative, Linn’s description of how the Army prepared for war after Vietnam leaves the reader feeling as 

though Army strategic planning was misguided and that 

training only prepared units for the ideal scenario. 

The Echo of Battle presents a unique explanation of 

how the lessons-learned process was applied throughout 

American military history. Linn does not focus on combat action but instead gives attention to the processes 

the Army used and the different martial traditions that 

exist among strategic planners and intellectuals. The 

book is an excellent choice to understand how the United 

States prepared for future conflicts during peacetime 

and what it neglected in the collection and understanding of lessons learned. 

Endnote:

1

Superseded by Field Manual 3-0, Operations, 14 June 

2001, which was superseded by Army Doctrine Publication 

3-0, Unified Land Operations, 10 October 2011.

First Lieutenant Braam is the officer in charge of the company intelligence support team for the 22d Engineer Clearance Company. He has attended the Joint Engineer Operations Course, the Officer Candidate School, the Engineer 

Basic Officer Leader Course, and the U.S. Army Air Assault 

School. He holds a bachelor’s degree in history from Columbia College and a master’s degree in military history from 

Norwich University. 

“The preparation and planning that went into 

nuclear deterrence kept other forms of warfare 

from receiving the necessary attention. Linn 

makes it clear that planning for unconventional warfare was always an afterthought, 

despite its prevalence on the battlefield.”
PIN: 103077