United States Army Engineer School

573-563-8080 / DSN 676-8080

COMMANDANT

MG Randal R. Castro

563-6116

<randal.castro@us.army.mil>

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT

BG John E. Sterling Jr.

563-6192

<john.e.sterling@us.army.mil>

REGIMENTAL COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR

CSM Clinton J. Pearson

563-8060

<clinton.pearson@us.army.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT

COL Lou L. Marich

563-8080

<lou.marich@us.army.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–USAR

COL Loretta Deaner

563-8045

<loretta.angela.deaner@us.army.mil>

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT–ARNG

LTC Dennis V. Smith

563-8046

<dennis.v.smith@us.army.mil>

CHIEF OF STAFF

LTC Alfred Pantano

563-7116

<alfred.pantano@us.army.mil>

TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER – ASSURED MOBILITY

COL Robert Nicholson

563-4081

<robert.nicholson@us.army.mil>

TRADOC PROGRAM INTEGRATION OFFICE–TERRAIN DATA

COL Thomas Crabtree

329-1908

<thomas.crabtree@us.army.mil>

COMMANDER, 1st ENGINEER BRIGADE

COL Bjarne Iverson

596-0224, DSN 581-0224

<bjarne.iverson@us.army.mil>

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING AND LEADER DEVELOPMENT

COL Paul W. Kelly

563-4093

<paul.w.kelly@us.army.mil>

DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRATION

Dr. Rebecca Johnson

563-4129

<rebecca.johnson1@us.army.mil>

DIRECTOR OF FUTURES CENTER–ENGINEER

COL Richard M. Hornack

563-7955

<richard.hornack@us.army.mil>

HUMANITARIAN DEMINING TRAINING CENTER

Mr. Rodney A. Robideau

596-3870

<rodney.a.robideau@us.army.mil>

COUNTER EXPLOSIVE HAZARDS CENTER

LTC Kent D. Savre

593-4085

<kent.savre@us.army.mil>

Engineer (ISSN 0046-1989) is prepared quarterly

by the United States Army Engineer School, 320 MANSCEN Loop, Suite 348, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri

65473-8929. Periodicals postage is paid at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to United

States Army Engineer School, ATTN: ATSE-DP (Engineer), 320 MANSCEN Loop, Suite 348, Fort Leonard

Wood, Missouri 65473-8929.

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) 563-4104, DSN 676-4104; e-mail address:

<engineer@wood.army.mil>; Internet home page:

<http://www.wood.army.mil/engrmag/default.htm>.

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 United States Army

positions and do not change or supersede information in other United States Army publications. 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

$19.00 ($26.60 foreign) per year by contacting the

Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15250-7954.

ADDRESS CHANGES for personal subscriptions

should be sent to the Superintendent of Documents, ATTN: Mail List Branch, Mail Stop SSOM,

Washington, D.C. 20402.

By Order of the Secretary of the Army:

PETER J. SCHOOMAKER

General, United States Army

Chief of Staff

Official:

JOYCE E. MORROW

Administrative Assistant to the

Secretary of the Army 0622803
 Engineer 1 July-September 2006

COMMANDANT

Major General

Randal R. Castro

FEATURES

040.130th Engineer Brigade: A Year in Iraq

 By Colonel Thomas W. Kula

08 Honoring Our Fallen Comrades

09 Command Relationships in a Combined Force

 By Major Matthew V. Burton

11 Joint Engineer Culture Clash – Lessons Learned From a Marine

Expeditionary Force

By Major R. Daren Payne and Lieutenant Colonel Carol L. Anderson

14 Battle-Tracking Tips for Junior Leaders

By Captain Jackquline N. Waddell

17 Assured Mobility Through Synchronization: Taking on the Counter-IED

Fight

By Captain Amber N. Schleuning

19 Powering the Forces

By Captain Esther S. Pinchasin and Captain James S. Boyette

21 The Corps Engineer Brigade Construction Mission – A Joint and

Combined Arms Effort

By Major Tyrone Bennett

23 Do You Think or Do You Know?

By Staff Sergeant Travis Y. Johnson

27 Continuous Kinematic Surveying Throughout Iraq

By Second Lieutenant Jonathan Wilson

29 More Than Management

By Major Clarence B. Kemper

32 Military Designs: Design to Time or to Standard?

By Second Lieutenant Carlos Flores

34 Constructing Living Quarters in Iraq

By Second Lieutenant Anne C. Hsieh

36 Resourcing the Master Plan: The 130th Engineer Brigade Class IV Story

By Captain Jeffrey M. Swartzlander

38 Providing Class IV Support to the Iraqi Army

By Captain Jeffrey M. Swartzlander

39 Winning Logistical Battles Together: Civilian and Logistical Support

in Operation Iraqi Freedom

By Captain Caprice Vargas

41 Careful Planning Makes Safe and Rewarding Civil Affairs Missions

By Captain Brian J. Henderson

42 A Day at the Phoenix Academy – The Iraqi Army Engineer School

By Second Lieutenant Raymond Kangas

43 130th Engineer Brigade: HOT and MAD in Iraq

By First Lieutenant Sarah E. McMahon

44 Brigade Special Troops Battalions – Part 1: All the Way In

By Lieutenant Colonel Thomas H. Magness

48 Army Engineer Divers in the Fight

By First Lieutenant Thomas Darrow

51 Explosive Hazards Coordination Cell Mobile Observation Teams

By First Lieutenant Phillip M. Smith

53 Dam Restoration Keeps Military Moving Forward

By Dr. JoAnne Castagna

55 The EOCA Course and the UMBC

By Mr. Michael Dascanio and Sergeant Major Joseph Harris

July-September 2006 Headquarters, Department of the Army Volume 36 PB 5-06-3

Front Cover: Soldiers of HHC,

130th Engineer Brigade, conduct

precombat checks before departing LSA Anaconda, Iraq, in support

of a humanitarian mission. (See

article on page 41.) Photo by Staff

Sergeant James Morris.

Back Cover: Photos courtesy of

the United States Army.

DEPARTMENTS

02 Clear the Way

By Major General

Randal R. Castro

03 Lead the Way

By Command Sergeant Major

Clinton J. Pearson

47 Dedication

56 Book Review - “An Army at

Dawn: The War in North

Africa, 1942-1943”

By Mr. Jeffrey L. Rosemann

Inside back cover:

Subscription Order Form

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Jennifer Morgan

GRAPHIC DESIGNER

Penny Moats

Kathy Webber

MANAGING EDITOR

Shirley Bridges

EDITOR

Cheryl Green

UNITED STATES ARMY

ENGINEER SCHOOL

NGI EThe Professional Bulletin of Army EngineersNEER
2 Engineer July-September 2006

Clear The Way

By Major General Randal R. Castro

Commandant, United States Army Engineer School

Hello everyone and greetings once

again from Fort Leonard Wood.

Judy and I are thankful for the fantastic time we had with the Soldiers, families, and communities here at the home of

the Engineer Regiment. We often talk

about Soldiers needing to be agile and

adaptive, and soon we will get a chance to

see a great agile and adaptive leader in

action. Major General William (Bill) McCoy

and his wife Jill will be returning to Fort

Leonard Wood to take command and lead

our Regiment into the future once he completes his mission as Commander of the

Gulf Region Division in Iraq.

I would like to thank Brigadier General Todd Semonite

and his wife Connie for their inspirational leadership as the

Assistant Commandant of the United States Army Engineer

School (USAES) for the past year and Command Sergeant

Major Clinton (Clint) Pearson and his wife Mollie for tremendous support to our Regiment as well. In July, we welcomed

Brigadier General Jack Sterling and his wife Cathy as our

new Assistant Commandant. Jack is one of our premier

Warfighters who will support our Nation at war and shape

our Regiment for the future.

I am extremely proud and honored to have served our

Regiment and our Soldiers as your Commandant. I am very

impressed with the accomplishments of our sappers, civilians, families, and communities during the past two years as

we supported the Global War on Terrorism. I thank each one

of you and your families for your sacrifices. The past two

years have brought huge positive impacts on our Regiment

in support of our Army’s missions. Our “Engineer Team” has

blended the powerful capabilities of all three components of

our Regiment to provide a very responsive capability and

function for our Nation. We are all connected in our Team of

Teams.

Just to highlight a few of the key successes over the past

two years: We have modified every engineer organization

that supports the Army to ensure that we can properly support expeditionary warfighting. We have developed improved

capabilities inside the Brigade Combat Team (BCT) and are

in the process of standing up and converting new Combat

Effects Battalions and Construction Effects Battalions to meet

the assured mobility function of our ground

maneuver commanders.

Clearly, our Counter Explosive Hazards

Center (CEHC) remains our Regiment’s and

Army’s “Center of Excellence” for countering explosive hazards. The CEHC has trained

both Army and Marine units in improvised

explosive device (IED)-defeat awareness

and route reconnaissance and clearance and

continues to integrate the latest lessons

learned from the United States Army Central

Command AOR and combat training centers

into our unit and institutional training courses.

There have been significant improvements in developing and acquiring new combat vehicles designed to defeat IEDs on the battlefield. Examples of these key

pieces of equipment are the Buffalo, the RG-31, the Assault

Breaching Vehicle (ABV), the Joint Assault Bridge (JAB), and

robot vehicles, all designed to prevent injuries and save lives.

And the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) to modernize

our equipment has increased more than $5 billion.

We have redesigned both the Officer Basic and Advanced

Courses, as well as the Noncommissioned Officer Advanced

Course to better develop the “pentathletes” required by our

Army now and in the future. Our courses now include key tasks

of IED-defeat battle staff planning and considerations for units

preparing for combat.

I’m extremely proud of the significant accomplishments

from our units in the field in Iraq, Afghanistan, and locations

around the world; our Regiment is making a very positive difference, from the Gulf Region Division and Afghanistan Engineer District to the combat units—Active Army, United States

Army Reserve, and Army National Guard—to our civilians serving in harm’s way to defeat terrorism and help rebuild peaceful

nations.

In closing, I say again how thankful I am to have had the

opportunity to serve the Regiment alongside such great Soldiers, leaders, and community families as our Regiment trains,

deploys, transforms, and restations to meet the needs or our

Nation at war. Judy and I wish you all the best. Let’s continue to

improve our Regimental Team of Teams!

Essayons...and Carry On!
Lead The Way

By Command Sergeant Major Clinton J. Pearson

United States Army Engineer School

July-September 2006 Engineer 3

Welcome to another great issue of

Engineer. This quarter has been

absolutely amazing as we engaged in events ranging from changing

major leaders to standing up new units. I

offer my sincerest gratitude and a fond farewell to Brigadier General Todd Semonite and

his wife Connie, Major General Randal Castro

and his wife Judy, and Command Sergeant

Major Bill McDaniel and his wife Samm, for

they will be truly missed. While these farewells are tough, they become a little easier

knowing great people aren’t that far behind.

Among those to whom I wish a warm welcome are the new Assistant Commandant

Brigadier General Jack Sterling and his wife Cathy; the new

MANSCEN Command Sergeant Major Michael Hayes and his

family; and Major General William McCoy, who will return to

Fort Leonard Wood in October as the MANSCEN Commander

and Engineer School Commandant, and his wife Jill.

We continue to work the three Ts (Transform the Regiment, Train Soldiers and Leaders, and Take Care of the

Regiment) here at the Engineer School. As we transform the

Regiment and the Army, we are consolidating MOSs and training them for success. This will help us fight the fight and win

the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). The Fusion Cell continues to gather and present data on the current state of engineer transformation, restationing, and support for the GWOT

as they assist in issue identification, communication facilitation, and issue resolution. Synchronization among global repositioning and the BRAC initiatives; deployment in support

of GWOT; and transformation to the modular Regiment is the

key to success to the Regiment.

To date, the Regiment has activated two engineer battalions from scratch; one brigade, two battalions, one geospatial

planning cell, and three equipment support companies have

converted to the new modular engineer design.Within the

next year, four engineer battalions will be activated and one

brigade, two battalions, and a geospatial planning cell will

convert.

The Regiment continues to ensure that our noncommissioned officers (NCOs) are getting the best institutional training in the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC)

and the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course

(ANCOC). These courses will provide the technical training

to support and win the GWOT and provide the right training

for the Future Engineer Force. Our vision

statement boldly guides the Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES)

transformation process: An Engineer Noncommissioned Officer Education System

grounded in heritage, values, and tradition; embodies the Warrior Ethos and values; and perpetuates learning to develop

NCOs empowered to lead, train, motivate,

and retain Soldiers.

We have recently developed a new course

map for the 21B/21C BNCOC and ANCOC

based on the critical task selection panel that

convened this fiscal year. Many participants

were an integral part of the process, to include representatives from the Army National Guard and United

States Army Reserve. We have conducted course reviews for

our 21H, 21N, 21T, and 62B MOSs in preparation for critical

task selection boards and course redesigns.

Positive enhancements continue here at the Engineer

School. The migration of updated doctrine and functional

courses from the Counter Explosive Hazards Center is an ongoing process. Our BNCOC is leading the way among regiments, introducing search training and forward operating base

training during situational training exercises and migrating skill

level 3 tasks from the Urban Mobility Breaching Course. In

ANCOC, graduates are now certified as train the trainers on the

Improvised Explosive Device Defeat – Train the Trainer (IEDD-T3)

Course; training on infrastructure requirements—sewer, water,

electricity, academics, and trash (SWEAT)—is being conducted;

and linking with the EOD fusion cell is extremely valuable. Our

NCOES continues to be on the leading edge of digital training.

Soldiers attending BNCOC receive 40 hours of FBCB2 training, and ANCOC students receive a 40-hour certification on

MCS 6.4 along with 16 hours of MCS-Engineer training. The

future of the Engineer Regiment looks brighter than ever as

the Army looks to define and implement the pentathlete concept; our outstanding engineer NCOs have always lived and

trained that concept before it was even defined.

In closing, I am very pleased with the way engineers continue to maintain high standards and lead the way during this

GWOT. I am so very proud to be serving in this Regiment. I

ask each of you to remember the Soldiers who are away from

their homes and families. May God bless our fallen comrades

and keep watch over our sons and daughters as we continue

to fight the fight. Essayons!
4 Engineer July-September 2006

S

imply put, it’s about attitude. The 130th Engineer Brigade

and other Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) 05-07 engineers

went into the country determined to continue the success

of previous engineer units and to make a difference. The

following articles (pages 4-43) highlight this determination

and accomplishments in numerous areas of engineer support

to the Multinational Corps–Iraq (MNC–I). It was a team effort

all year long. I would like to thank all the OIF 05-07 engineer

brigade commanders for their unwavering support and

commitment to the fight, the MNC–I command and staff for

their guidance and support, and especially the OIF 04-06 team.

You set us up for success.

Our Challenge

I

.

 n October 2005, the 130th conducted relief in place (RIP)/

transfer of authority (TOA) of the corps engineer brigade

for the MNC–I with the 20th Engineer Brigade. The OIF

05-07 rotation was a turning point for engineers: Their force

structure was reduced by 25 percent because the two engineer brigades serving under the 20th, the 30th, and the

194th Engineer Brigades were not replaced. By early December

2005, the 130th was the only engineer brigade above division

level in the MNC–I. The unit looked at this period “right out of

the starting blocks” as one of its defining moments as the

corps brigade. The 130th commanded all corps engineer units

spread across the entire theater, including the United States

Air Force facility and utility detachments. Truly a joint engineer

force, the brigade’s strength averaged about 3,300 Soldiers,

Sailors, and Airmen—either assigned, attached, or under

tactical control (TACON) or administrative control (ADCON)—

during its year in-theater.

Building the Team

T.

he 130th team was not only joint but also a mix of

active and reserve—one determined “total” Army

engineer force. The 130th was augmented with the

412th Engineer Command Construction Management Section

(CMS) upon arrival in Kuwait to fill the missing part of the

modified table of organization and equipment (MTOE). The

412th’s tasks were numerous, not only filling the traditional

role of a CMS but also serving as the command and control

element for the many facility engineer teams and detachments

attached or TACON to the brigade. The 412th CMS was ready

and trained, and its accomplishments as part of the OIF 05-07

engineer team are a story in itself. As we built the team, the

46th, 54th, 84th, and 110th Engineer Battalions were also

significant in helping piece the engineer team puzzle together

with each of their missions.

 The 130th built its team and staff well before deployment,

ready to link the separate pieces together once in-theater.

Beginning with the first of seven corps training exercises,

started in September 2004, the command and staff prepared a

list of the keys to successful staff operations (Figure 1).

Preparation began a year out from deployment, while the

brigade simultaneously deployed two of its assigned units

from Germany—the 94th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Heavy)

and the 502d Engineer Company—to OIF 3. The 130th staff

had its “head in the fight” by deploying and training its units,

focused on the complex operating environment in Iraq. We

participated in seven command post exercises (CPXs) at the

corps and brigade levels to prepare for our mission.

Before the V Corps mission rehearsal exercise (MRX),

brigade leaders conducted three leader’s recons in-theater so

that we fully understood and exercised our mission during

this critical MRX. By the time the 130th arrived in Kuwait for

reception, staging, onward movement, and integration (RSOI),

all that remained was polishing individual and collective battle

tasks before heading north into Iraq to assume its mission.

A second product developed during these exercises was a

wallet-size leader card to disseminate the command philosophy

(Figures 2 and 3). These basics and fundamentals built the

By Colonel Thomas W. Kula

Figure 1

130th Engineer Brigade:

A Year in Iraq

y Execute the fundamentals

– By staff (expert in your lane)

– By information (what to do with it)

– By key roles and missions of the top 5

y Brigade commander (BC)

y Command sergeant major (CSM)

y Deputy brigade commander (DBC)

y Chief of staff (CoS)

y S-3

y Keep everyone engaged

– Clearly identified duties

– Clearly identified responsibilities

y Maximize use of technology: How can we do it quicker

and more efficiently?

y Promote teamwork among staff sections, higher and

lower

y Plan ahead: Resource subordinate units for success

Basics of Brigade Operations
July-September 2006 Engineer 5

Figure 2

Figure 3

Prep for the Fight

Dec 04

Dec 04
6 Engineer July-September 2006

Figure 4

Figure 5

In the Fight

OIF 05-07

OIF 05-07
 COB and FOB infrastructure repair and expansion –

improved power, water, and sewer systems to Amber or

Green ratings.

 ISF development – constructed ISF contingency outposts

and checkpoints and partnered with the Iraqi Engineer

School.

 Support reconstruction efforts – supported force protection

projects of Iraqi infrastructure.

Joint Team Effort

T.

he success of the brigade was a joint team effort across

all the Armed services. From the Air Force detachments

working construction all over Iraq, to the Navy

electronic warfare officers on brigade and battalion staffs,

to embedded Navy explosive ordnance disposal (EOD)

personnel, to the mix of Active Army, United States Army

Reserve, and Army National Guard service members, the 130th

Engineer Brigade was a multifaceted force that made a

difference in-theater. Each member of the team played an

important role and, by the end, helped the 130th leave its mark

during OIF 05-07.

Conclusion

T.

he 130th Engineer Brigade units completed OIF 05-07

with pride and a true sense that they had made a

difference. It was a long year; we fought through challenges, and some of our Soldiers were wounded and killed

while trying to make a difference. We will never forget our

fallen comrades.

Even though the war continues, we measure our success

by the victories of our units. We gave it our all, and our sense

of accomplishment is best summed up by Coach Vince

Lombardi:

“I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest

fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is the moment when he

has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted

on the field of battle—victorious.”

OIF 05-07 corps engineer units—Soldiers, Sailors, and

Airmen—you made a difference. Thank you for serving your

country!

Colonel Kula is the commander of the 130th Engineer

Brigade. Previous assignments include Joint Readiness

Training Center senior engineer observer-controller; Chief,

Plans, 82d Airborne Division; Commander, 307th Engineer

Battalion, 82d Airborne Division; and plans/operations

officer at the United States Southern Command. He is a

graduate of the United States Military Academy and the

United States Army War College Fellowship Program at the

University of Texas.

foundation for preparing the staff to assume corps engineer

brigade command and control. These principles for staff,

leaders, and Soldiers are just as important today as they were

at the start of the deployment. They were also useful tools to

pass along to our successor.

As the 130th coordinated with the team prior to deployment,

we shared our philosophy for combat operations with our

subordinate units. Figures 4 and 5 show OIF 05-07 cards sent

out to units before deployment. The130th leadership used the

same cards to brief battalion and company leaders as they

flowed through RSOI in Kuwait. There are never enough

opportunities to team-build for OIF, and these products were

useful.

The 130th continued to emphasize security, safety/risk

management, and discipline throughout deployment. We

considered these as three legs of a stool, with leadership

banding together and reinforcing the legs. On the stool rests

mission accomplishment and keeping troops alive. It’s a

platform for success, with each part vital.

Missions and Achievements

With the mission as the MNC–I corps engineer

brigade, the 130th’s primary focuses were assured

mobility (route clearance and bridging) and theater

construction. As a carryover from the 20th Engineer Brigade,

the 130th continued to provide proactive, essential, timely,

and relevant engineer support to the MNC–I. A few of the

many missions and achievements of the 130th Engineer Brigade

units in OIF 05-07 were—

 Route clearance – achieved and consistently sustained

greater than 50 percent of the improvised explosive devices

(IEDs) found on corps routes.

 Route sanitation – cleared 700 kilometers of debris and

trash along main routes.

 IED blasthole and pothole repair – filled more than 600

potholes.

 Construction and facilities design and management –

completed 345 projects across theater.

 Bridging – emplaced three assault float bridges (AFBs)

and one medium Mabey-Johnson bridge (MJB) (Float),

conducted two long-term rafting operations, and maintained eight bridges.

 Topographic/geospatial engineering – completed 1,800

surveying and mapping projects for units in-theater.

 Well drilling – provided wells in Multinational Force–West

(MNF–W) at forward operating bases (FOBs) and Iraqi

security force (ISF) camps to reduce logistics haul

requirements.

 Electrical power repair, generation, and distribution –

provided constant power to 25 contingency operating

bases (COBs) and FOBs and reduced safety hazards.

July-September 2006 Engineer 7
Corporal Andy D. Anderson 46th Engineer Battalion Fort Rucker, Alabama

Sergeant Carlos Eugene Pernell 46th Engineer Battalion Fort Rucker, Alabama

Sergeant Michael David Rowe 46th Engineer Battalion Fort Polk, Louisiana

Staff Sergeant Omar D. Flores 54th Engineer Battalion Bamberg, Germany

Sergeant Alkaila Tonee Floyd 54th Engineer Battalion Bamberg, Germany

Specialist Felipe Jose Garcia Villareal 54th Engineer Battalion Bamberg, Germany

Specialist Troy Carlin Linden 54th Engineer Battalion Bamberg, Germany

Specialist Joseph Paul Micks 54th Engineer Battalion Bamberg, Germany

Private First Class Joseph I. Love 84th Engineer Battalion Schofield Barracks, Hawaii

Staff Sergeant Lewis J. Gentry 94th Engineer Battalion Vilseck, Germany

Private First Class Alva L. Gaylord 110th Engineer Battalion Lexington, Missouri

Specialist Michael Layne Hermanson 164th Engineer Battalion Minot, North Dakota

Sergeant Leroy Segura, Jr. 362d Engineer Company (MRB) Fort Benning, Georgia

Sergeant Dustin Daniel Laird 913th Engineer Company (CSE) Union City, Tennessee

Sergeant Luis Ricardo Reyes 947th Engineer Company (CSE) Colorado Springs, Colorado

The accomplishments of Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07, in support of the Multinational Corps–Iraq, that are described

in the articles on pages 4 to 43, were not achieved without loss. Our stories are dedicated to the memory of the Soldiers

who gave their lives to help us make a difference.

8 Engineer July-September 2006
July-September 2006 Engineer 9

A.

s the world is well aware, fighting the war in Iraq is

a joint fight: U. S. military forces come together to

.conduct joint operations. Communication between

the administrative control (ADCON) and operational control

(OPCON) units is critical. Engineer leaders must doctrinally

understand their ADCON and OPCON role because operations

in a joint environment will only increase in the future.

Responsibilities

When it comes to understanding command and

control relationships, such as ADCON and

OPCON, it is critical for battalion- and brigade-level

leaders and staff planners to know their roles and responsibilities. Leaders and staff officers must understand the

boundaries and limitations to avoid interference with maneuver

or combat missions or administrative roles and responsibilities.

Likewise, subordinate units must know what to expect and

where to go for administrative and logistical support. Not

understanding the command relationship or having unclear

lanes of responsibility and an ambiguous relationship can be

detrimental to an effective and smooth combat operation.

In a joint or multinational force environment, the number of

combat commanders with OPCON of engineer forces assigned

to the engineer brigade is increasing on the battlefield. ADCON

encompasses administrative (legal, personnel, and finance)

and logistical support to the maneuver forces. When designated as an ADCON unit, the engineer brigade enters into

agreements for certain responsibilities.

Authority

ADCON is the control vested (primarily) in the engineer

brigade chain of command and the exercise of authority over

subordinate engineer units in respect to administration and

support. It includes the organization of engineer forces, control

of resources and equipment, personnel management and

administration, unit logistics, training, readiness, deployment,

redeployment, discipline, and other matters not included

in the operational missions of the subordinate or other

organizations.

To accomplish missions, commanders are often provided

different levels of authority. The amount of authority depends

not only on their current position in the chain of command but

also on the type of mission. Additionally, when forces are

assigned or attached resulting from a relief in place (RIP)/

transfer of authority (TOA), the gaining commander assumes

a different authority. It is also important for planners to

understand the chain of command, the authorities and

responsibilities that exist within the chain of command, the

various relationships among the ADCON and OPCON

commanders during the military decision-making process, and

how vital it is to successfully plan any mission with an ADCON

or OPCON command relationship.

Chain of Command

The chain of command is the succession of commanding

officers, from a superior to a subordinate, through which

command is exercised. It is a single chain of command

with two distinct command relationships. One branch—

administrative—extends from the ADCON commander

(engineer brigade) to the engineer battalion commander; the

other branch—operational (where missions are carried out)—

extends from the OPCON commander to the engineer battalion

commander.

OPCON

I

nherent in command authority, OPCON is the authority to perform the functions of command over subordinate forces that involve organizing and employing

commands and forces, assigning tasks, designating objectives,

and giving authoritative direction necessary to accomplish

the mission. OPCON does not, in and of itself, include authoritative direction for logistics or matters of administration,

discipline, internal organization, or unit training.

The employment of engineer forces to attain an operational

objective through the organization, integration, and conduct

of major operations requires services to work with one another.

This requires the joint force commander to task-organize Army

engineers to work with the Marines for tactical operations,

integrating key forces at the level necessary to accomplish

assigned missions. Anything that would affect the OPCON,

maneuver, or unit combat operational readiness would go

through the OPCON unit.

Considerations for the OPCON unit (maneuver) are as

follows:

 Tracking emergency leave.

 Tracking rest and recuperation leave and passes.

 Submitting strength reports.

Command Relationships

in a Combined FoRCe

By Major Matthew V. Burton
 Enforcing internal administration and discipline: evaluations, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

actions, safety reporting, logistical reporting, and casualty

operations (casualty notification and assistance).

One way of avoiding conflict or crossing the ADCON or

OPCON lane is to have or develop something similar to a

memorandum of understanding and agreement that spells out

everything from safety and accident investigations, to

evaluations, to Class II and Class IX supplies.

Conclusion

Establishing the roles and responsibilities of the ADCON

and OPCON units creates a better combat working

environment between the units and gives subordinate

units a better understanding of when, where, and how to report,

as well as what actions to take to be successful on the

battlefield. For more information on command relationships,

see Joint Publication (JP) 0-2, Unified Action Armed Forces.

Major Burton is the S-1 for the 130th Engineer Brigade,

Multinational Corps–Iraq. Previous assignments include combat

engineer platoon leader and company executive officer,

588th Engineer Battalion; company commander, Alpha Company,

5th Engineer Battalion; engineer observer-controller, National

Training Center; and budget officer, Headquarters, United States

Military Entrance Processing Command (USMEPCOM).

10 Engineer July-September 2006

 Maintaining strength accountability.

 Reporting casualties (using the Defense Casualty Information Processing System [DCIPS]).

ADCON

Administration and support includes organization,

control of resources and equipment, personnel

management, unit logistics, individual and unit

training, readiness, discipline, and other matters not included

in operational missions of subordinate or other organizations.

ADCON gives authority over subordinate or other organizations on administration and support.

Considerations for the ADCON unit (engineer brigade) are

as follows:

 Making recommendations to the OPCON commander on

the proper employment of engineer forces.

 Conducting specific engineer-oriented training.

 Informing the OPCON chain of command of changes in

logistics and administrative support and logistics functions

normal to the command.

 Providing supporting operation and exercise plans with

necessary engineer data to support missions assigned by

the OPCON commander.

NCR = Naval Construction Regiment

MNC–I = Multinational Corps–Iraq

MND–W = Multinational Division–West
Photo by Captain Scott Updike

July-September 2006 Engineer 11

T.

he 46th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (under the

administrative control of the 130th Engineer Brigade)

recently served in one of the most unique command

structures and diverse task organizations an engineer unit has

encountered—joint and multicomponent—representing

almost every facet of our nation’s military. During this time,

the Soldiers and leaders of the 46th learned many hard, valuable

lessons and had many “outside the box” construction and

combat engineering experiences. Such diverse units and

organizational structures, with joint and multicomponent

characteristics, are likely to be the rule rather than the exception

in the future. This article shares some of the lessons learned

and experiences from the unit’s year in-theater.

In October 2005, the 46th deployed to Multinational Force–

West (MNF–W) in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The

MNF–W area of operations was under the command of a

Marine expeditionary force (MEF), rather than an Army division

or corps headquarters, so all Army units fell under a Marine

Corps general officer. Since the 46th is combat heavy, the MEF

further assigned the unit to the 30th Naval Construction Regiment (NCR)—an Active Navy headquarters commanded and

staffed by United States Navy Reserve and a few Active Navy

officers. The regiment changed several times during its deployment and sometimes included naval mobile construction

battalions (NMCBs) (commonly known as Seabees), Marine

Corps engineer support battalions, and Army combat engineer

battalions.

Soldiers, Sailors, and Marines engaged in the full spectrum

of construction, combat engineering, and assured mobility

missions—which included wood frame construction, route

repair, bridge repair, route clearance, security escort patrols,

direct support to maneuver units in kinetic operations, and

most important of all, support to Iraqi military and security

forces. There was clearly a lot of learning, synergy, and cultural

sensitivity that took place to keep the engineer missions moving

forward on a daily basis. The 46th learned a great deal during

its deployment to share with fellow engineer units.

Language Barrier

When venturing to a new place, the first thing

Soldiers need to learn is how to speak the local

dialect—something a person traveling to a different

area in the United States might also need to do. Similarly, fellow

military professionals are often separated by a common

language. Marines are part of the naval service and the naval

traditions. Therefore, even in the middle of the desert, nautical

references abound. This became apparent during the construction of an Iraqi security forces (ISF) base camp. The

mission to build infrastructure for ISF troops was a joint

operation with Alpha Company, 46th Engineer Battalion,

attached to NMCB 22, a Reserve Component unit from the

30th NCR. Adapting to nautical dialect was a challenge. Shower

and latrine trailers are “ablution units,” a kitchen is a “galley,”

a “scullery” is a dish-washing facility, and living areas are

“berthing spaces.” Left and right are “port and starboard”

and a wall is a “bulkhead.” “Hooah” is “oorah” and “roger”

becomes “aye–aye.” Of course, this was reversed when Bravo

Company—charged with erecting Southwest Asia (SWA) huts

with climate control, central power grid, and force protection—

was reinforced with a platoon from NMCB 40, an Active Navy

By Major R. Daren Payne and Lieutenant Colonel Carol L. Anderson

Joint Engineer Culture Clash

Lessons Learned From a Marine Expeditionary Force
12 Engineer July-September 2006

unit from the 9th NCR. This time Sailors learned a “head” was

a “latrine” and “cover” was “head gear.” As a result, our

Soldiers and Sailors not only learned new acronyms and

nomenclatures but also how to immerse themselves in a

different culture and succeed—a lesson that will help in

many other situations where adapting to new things and

new ideas is paramount to success.

Organizational Identity Crisis

A.

s Army engineers, our organization identity is one of

“fight-and-build” units, while all Marines take pride

in the credo “every man a rifleman.” The Navy sees

things a bit differently. The NMCBs are organized as

construction and construction management organizations.

Both Active and Reserve Army Soldiers and Active and

Reserve Marines within the NCR spend the majority of their

training time honing combat skills (physical training, live-fire

exercises, demolitions, and mine training), but less time on

practicing core competencies (vertical and horizontal

construction). Navy engineers, on the other hand, obtain

“graduate level” skills (military occupational specialty for the

Army). Among both the Active Navy and the Reserve

Component of the naval engineer community, all personnel

E-6 and above must have a professional license or certification.

There are many licensed electricians, plumbers, master

carpenters, and steel workers or welders. Every officer must

earn a professional engineer certification and maintain a

current license.

This gap in knowledge, skills, and craftsmanship between

Army and Navy engineers is too big to ignore. So don’t ignore

it; use it to your advantage! The major reason for this gap is

that Navy units are construction organizations, as opposed

to Army or Marine engineer units that are combat units. The

NCRs and NMCBs are more organizationally akin to the United

States Army Corps of Engineers® (USACE) than they are to

the Army’s deployable engineer battalions and brigades or

groups. There are two positives to this. First, it offers a unique

opportunity for both combat and combat heavy engineers to

learn while working with a Seabee unit. Many of our young

carpenters, electricians, plumbers, and combat engineers will

find that Seabees are more than willing to share their knowledge.

Army officers can also learn a great deal from their Navy

counterparts. Nowhere outside of USACE can a young officer

learn more about planning, programming, and construction

management than working with NMCB or NCR staff. Secondly,

Seabees operating in a combat zone have a unique opportunity

to learn about weapons employment, small-unit tactics,

immediate action and reaction drills, vehicle identification, and

many other tasks that will help them stay alive on the battlefield.

Thus, there are many opportunities to share knowledge and

help bridge the gap in organizational identity between the

services.

Cultural and Institutional Differences

There are long-standing cultural and institutional

differences between the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps

team that Soldiers of all ranks need to consider in a

Seabees and

Soldiers combine

skills to erect

formwork during a

project.

Photo by Captain Scott Updike
July-September 2006 Engineer 13

joint environment. The Navy rank structure is unique and the

rights and privileges of each rank are very different. Marine

rank structure is similar in insignia and nomenclature, but

different roles and responsibilities are expected of each rank.

Several examples are as follows:

 The Navy is more conscious about separating officers,

chiefs (E-7 and above), and enlisted (E-6 and below). Each

group has separate heads, berthing areas, recreation areas,

and galleys, if possible. The Marines operate in a similar

manner.

 The chief petty officer or gunnery sergeant (E-7 or above)

is equivalent to a command sergeant major or first sergeant

in the Army. If you need to make things happen, make one

of these guys your first stop.

 A Marine corporal or sergeant (E-5) is expected to be a

squad leader capable of leading patrols outside the wire.

In the Army, such responsibility normally rests at the

sergeant first class or lieutenant level. In the Navy, it is

nothing to see a chief petty officer in charge of 50 personnel

and 10 pieces of equipment on a $10 million high-visibility

project. A chief is expected to be professionally licensed in

at least one trade, have a degree, and know project management at a higher level than an Army captain or major.

 Saluting and uniformity is not emphasized. Sailors and

Marines don’t salute, and they have different uniform

policies when not on duty. They work in hard hats and

remove blouses or unblouse boots, while Soldiers work in

helmets and full uniform. Also, Sailors and Marines don’t

have a standard physical training uniform.

These and many other differences exist between the

services. Learning to work with these differences is a challenge

that noncommissioned officers in particular must practice daily

so Army standards and traditions are upheld, yet offenses to

our hosts are avoided.

 Additionally, there are many institutional differences that

units should prepare for:

 The Navy is more meticulous on accounting and its Class

IV supply and construction management; cost and

schedule accountability procedures are more detailed. The

Navy tracks projects by man-hours and uses the number

of man-hours available or expended to determine how much

work can be done. Physical training, meals, training, and

maintenance do not count as man-hours expended toward

a project according to the Navy. This created some problems

in the beginning, because in the Army, it’s part of our

routine. In contrast, many Marine Corps systems are in

some ways less time consuming than Army systems.

 Marine and Navy deployments are shorter than Army

deployments. This led to some friction, especially when a

new MEF or NCR arrived on its first deployment. Often

this forced units task-organized to Navy organizations to

reinvent standing operating procedures and tactics,

techniques, and procedures every few months. Patience

and cooperative attitudes by leaders go a long way toward

establishing relationships that help accomplish the mission.

 Marines, like the Army, fight in small-unit teams that train,

live, play, eat, and fight together as one functioning unit.

Seabees are pooled into companies and pulled out and

sent to detachments to complete a project under a chief or

junior officer. When the project is over, the detachment

separates.

Learning from Reserve Components

M.

any of the lessons learned from working with

Reserve Component Seabees and a United States

Army Reserve combat support equipment (CSE)

company simply reinforced prior experiences with Reserve

units. Among the new lessons learned, however, was that

Reserve Soldiers and Seabees possess skills and abilities that

A Seabee and a Soldier

work side by side hanging

Photo by Captain Scott Updike

trim on a SWA hut.

(Continued on page 16)
14 Engineer July-September 2006

Battle tracking is not limited to battle captains, engineers,

or maneuver units; it is used for every position in every

branch of the U.S. military. When dealing with the

demands from any facet of battle tracking, one thing is certain:

there is no surefire approach to accomplishing it 100 percent

error-free. People are human, and humans make mistakes. In

fact, if a command is demanding, the battle tracker will probably

experience a few growing pains while trying to get a handle on

it. Battle tracking is best learned through experience. And later,

these lessons learned will prove to be invaluable.

During Operation Iraqi Freedom, the 130th Engineer Brigade

provided an opportunity to work in a corps separate engineer

brigade as a battle captain. Entering the Iraqi theater for the

first time as a newly promoted captain is definitely a fly-bythe-seat-of-your-pants type of experience. One useful thought

for junior captains or noncommissioned officers (NCOs)

responsible for battle tracking is that some of the most valuable

learning points come when things are going wrong.

By understanding the intent and concept and implementing

six simple control measures, anyone can tailor a unit battletracking system that could drastically reduce the discomfort

generated from the entire process.

Intent

T.

he intent of battle tracking is to facilitate the higher

and lower and left and right exchange of information.

The intent is simple, but the execution can be quite

difficult depending on your personality, skills, and ability to

establish good working relations.

One solid example of an environment that requires extensive

battle tracking is a tactical operations center (TOC). A TOC is

considered a nerve center or hub for planning, executing,

monitoring, and reporting the status of missions. A TOC or a

modified form of a TOC exists at every level in the military. The

goal of battle tracking in a TOC is to monitor the execution of

all tasks so the information is analyzed properly, ensuring that

the information reported to higher headquarters is timely and

accurate.

Concept

T.

he concept is one that is completely fluid and is missiondependent. It is important to understand that the

concept is only as effective as the person implementing

it and requires tailoring for every position in a unit. It depends

on a unit’s specific mission and changes with every mission.

If someone is not receptive to change, the battle-tracking

process is difficult. Most people do not attend a course or

field training exercise that prepares them for what is required

from a unit with a high operating tempo that demands intense

situational awareness.

Control Measures

T.

he control measures can be categorized into six areas:

proper personnel allocation, preparation and training,

battle rhythm identification, situational awareness,

accurate information reporting, and effective communication.

Proper Personnel Allocation

When a unit is told to deploy, it should not procrastinate.

Leaders must backward plan, obtain critical dates, and allocate

personnel appropriately. Leaders should evaluate deploymentrelated positions and assign Soldiers to those positions

according to the skills and abilities they possess. If not, the

deployment can be quite challenging.

It is not advised to assign Soldiers to slots just to fill them,

because not everyone will perform battle tracking efficiently.

If a Soldier easily understands concepts; pays attention to

detail; and speaks in clear, concise sentences, this Soldier

should be considered for employment in a TOC position.

Preparation and Training

If at all possible, assign demanding positions in advance

and allow Soldiers assigned to the TOC to train, deploy, and

redeploy in those assigned positions. Usually, Soldiers

assigned to battle-tracking positions in a TOC are senior

enlisted or junior officers and are employed as battle NCOs

and captains. Those are also the same Soldiers who are made

responsible for executing or monitoring the unit’s predeployment preparations.

Do not allow the personnel assigned as future battle

trackers to spend all of their training time monitoring container

loading or duffle bag painting. These Soldiers need to train

realistically and often. Do not allow training to be overlooked

or make scenarios easy just to check the block and get

them out of the way. The training needs to set a standard

that conveys a worst-case scenario so all Soldiers get a

good grasp of what may be encountered, how it should be

handled, and what information analysis needs to be

conducted.

By Captain Jackquline N. Waddell
July-September 2006 Engineer 15

Once in-theater, a leader can’t expect a Soldier to effectively

track the battle or perform to standard if a clear standard was

never established. Unless absolutely necessary, leave the

Soldiers in their assigned positions for the entire training,

deployment, and redeployment process. Ensure that every

Soldier is cross-trained to seamlessly cover down in the event

of any loss of personnel. Once the unit is engaged, the time

required to train anyone hinders the entire battle-tracking effort.

Battle Rhythm Identification

Battle tracking is usually defined by a battle rhythm or a

command schedule of events. There will always be implied or

specified suspense dates for products or briefings. As soon

as possible, identify the section’s or unit’s battle rhythm, the

pertinent suspense times, and the information your section is

required to compile. Institute a calendar showing every

suspense date, and use it as a backward-planning tool. By

doing this, it is easy to implement controls or systems, which

in turn aids in the battle-tracking effort.

Systems and tracking devices have proved to be one of the

most critical tools in battle tracking. Establishing solid

guidelines is essential to ensure that operational missions (such

as route clearance, construction, and casualty operations) or

Soldier-related issues (such as Red Cross messages) are not

missed. As a rule, anything that requires an action, a reply, or

a report needs to be tracked.

There should be a system developed for every task required

by your section, and all systems should be documented. This

isn’t something that has to be dramatic or complex: just

something that outlines the basic procedures. Establish a

tracker for every task required so the status can be briefed at

any given time and kept updated and archived. Keeping

archives may seem completely mundane, but—once in place—

it becomes second nature. This will ensure that any question,

even if it was an issue or concern from a previous month, can

be easily referenced and answered. Every unit will lose

personnel for one reason or another, and it is much easier to

cross-train new personnel if tracking procedures are in place.

Situational Awareness

Ensure that Soldiers have situational awareness of everything going on, whether it directly affects them or not. Make a

log, and use it for operational notes; have the Soldiers write as

they go because they will need to refer back to their notes. Do

not leave Soldiers in the dark by hoarding information. Sharing

information with them encourages them to share information

also.

Talk to superiors, Soldiers, and adjacent units, and establish

sound points of contact. Take the time to know what missions

are going on 360 degrees around your section. Do an informal

“what’s hot” session with your immediate personnel, and go

over upcoming, current, and completed missions regularly.

There will be times when Soldiers will be stopped and asked

mission-related questions. The information they know or do

not know is a direct reflection of their battle NCOs or captains.

Accurate Information Reporting

When a section is required to report something, make sure

the information is accurate and on time. Information reporting

Rafting and construction operations are just two of many possible missions a unit would track.
and battle tracking go hand in hand. If the information provided

is inaccurate, the Soldiers look incompetent and—depending

on the mission—Soldiers could get killed. An implied task is

ensuring that every piece of information or report that leaves

your section is right. If it is an electronically generated

document, don’t just hastily put it together; learn how to use

the spell-check function effectively.

Effective Communication

Without effective communication, both verbal and written,

battle tracking is useless. One of the primary goals is to make

it easier to report information on the status of a unit’s missions

to higher headquarters. In any position, the battle NCO or

captain has to be able to communicate the information effectively to Soldiers, superiors, the command, and other units.

Every Soldier communicates, but not every Soldier communicates effectively. Understand that effective communication is achieved only when the information exchanged is

relayed and understood by both parties. Without effective

communication, the mission becomes confusing, and the intent

is lost.

If you are unclear in your intent, or don’t prepare and

rehearse your brief, you won’t be taken seriously, and the

value behind your input is lost. Take the time to think about

what to brief before briefing it. If you sound as if you don’t

know what you’re talking about, then what you’re trying to

convey will be dismissed. If something isn’t known, make sure

it is stated as unknown, then take notes, find the answer, and

report back. When speaking to any command, provide only

the information that is relevant. The command usually wants

to know up front the bottom line, and giving too much

information loses their attention and your intent.

Summary

Battle tracking is not easily mastered, and there are often

situations that Soldiers and leaders are not prepared

for. Taking the initiative to identify and understand

what is expected in battle tracking sets the unit—and the

mission—up for success. Establish a plan for whatever

positions there are, and afford Soldiers time to prepare and

train in their assigned positions. Planning ahead will make the

transition from garrison to deployment easier for all concerned.

Communicating with personnel on current issues—as well as

what is expected and when—and training them how to

communicate effectively will have profound rewards. These

common sense things will ensure that the unit and its Soldiers

are seen as professionals and what they say will be taken

seriously.

Captain Waddell is the S-3 operations battle captain for

Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 130th Engineer

Brigade. Her previous positions include assistant adjutant,

adjutant, executive officer, company rear detachment

commander, and assistant S-3.

16 Engineer July-September 2006

 far exceed their job descriptions due to civilian life experiences.

An example is the vertical construction completed by a CSE

company; they built SWA huts and completed other projects

normally assigned to a general construction platoon. The

Reserve Seabees also displayed a similar diversity of skills.

Perhaps the biggest lesson learned was the different administrative systems.

Working in an environment with so many Reserve Soldiers

and Sailors provided a great opportunity to appreciate the

skills brought to the fight and to learn the logistics and

administrative Reserve systems—knowledge that will benefit

engineers as they deploy more often as multicomponent teams.

Conclusion

The 46th Engineer Battalion learned many lessons,

improved its understanding of joint operations,

honed many skills, and executed many missions. Alpha

and Bravo Companies worked as task force engineers,

providing close combat engineer support to kinetic operations

conducted by maneuver task forces. Simultaneously, the CSE

company built a bottled water plant for the Marine Logistics

Group, while Sailors and Soldiers worked side by side

establishing ISF strongpoints, outposts, and base camp facilities. No matter what the counterinsurgency fight demands,

the 46th is now better prepared to support any campaign plan.

Its experiences provide a road map for fellow units by

demonstrating the language barriers, cultural and institutional

differences, and other challenges that can be expected working

in a joint, multi-component environment during combat operations. They forged a legacy of cooperation across cultural and

operational lines of services that provide a better understanding

of capabilities across the entire joint engineer team.

Major Payne is the S-3 for the 46th Engineer Battalion,

130th Engineer Brigade. Previous assignments include platoon

leader for the 44th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Mechanized);

platoon leader and executive officer for Bravo Company,

46th Engineer Battalion; assistant S-3 and commander for the

Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 11th Engineer

Battalion (Combat) (Mechanized); company commander and

staff officer for the 1-395th Engineer Training Support Battalion;

and Deputy Area Engineer, Tikrit Area Office, USACE Gulf

Region Division–North District at Forward Operating Base

Speicher, Iraq. He holds a bachelor’s from Virginia Military

Institute.

Lieutenant Colonel Anderson is the commander of the

46th Engineer Battalion, 130th Engineer Brigade. Previous

assignments include platoon leader and executive officer,

52d Engineer Battalion (Combat); staff officer and bridge

company commander, 36th Engineer Group (Combat);

battalion S-3 and executive officer, 84th Engineer Battalion

(Combat) (Heavy); and staff officer, Office of the Chief of

Engineers, Headquarters, USACE. She holds a bachelor’s from

the University of Southern Colorado and a master’s from the

University of Georgia.

(“Culture Clash,” continued from page 13)
July-September 2006 Engineer 17

As corps engineers during Operation Iraqi Freedom

(OIF) 05-07, the 130th Engineer Brigade assumed the

responsibility of clearing the Multinational Corps–

Iraq (MNC–I) main supply routes (MSRs) of improvised

explosive devices (IEDs) and other obstacles. Clearing IEDs

proved to be a challenge not only tactically, where the rubber

meets the road (we were reminded every day that the enemy

“has a vote”), but also operationally, at the brigade level of

planning and decision making. The fundamentals of assured

mobility were identified and understood early in the fight. The

challenges were nested in the resources.

Situation and Mission

T.

he mission of clearing the MSRs was given to the

110th Engineer Battalion, which was under the

operational control of the 130th Engineer Brigade in

support of OIF 05-07. Working in teams, the battalion cleared

IEDs, unexploded ordnance (UXO), and other hazards in an

area of operations with more than 300 kilometers of roads, dirt,

overpasses, and canals. The goals were to clear the routes for

coalition forces and deny the anti-Iraqi forces terrain and

freedom of maneuver. Daily clearances required the route

clearance teams to travel diverse terrain and urban environments, in addition to several different operational environments, making seamless movements difficult.

The 110th developed a working relationship with maneuver

elements involved in their current operations. As the route

clearance teams or operational environment owners discovered

IEDs, the site was cordoned off, the incident was reported

among forces, cordons were turned over, and details were

exchanged. With the brigade mission of assuring mobility,

the focus was on long-term operational planning. The counterIED fight was more pervasive than the day-to-day success of

the route clearance team. To achieve absolute success—

allowing the force commander the ability to move and

maneuver where and when he desired without interruption or

delay—the fundamentals of assuring mobility needed to be

properly executed.

The six fundamentals of assured mobility are—

 Predict actions and circumstances that could affect the

ability of the force to maintain momentum.

 Detect early indicators of impediments to the battlefield

mobility using intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets; identify alternatives; and

establish surveillance.

 Prevent potential impediments to maneuverability from

affecting the battlefield mobility of the force by acting early;

monitor and protect cleared routes.

 Avoid detected impediments to the battlefield mobility of

the force; if prevention fails, identify alternatives.

 Neutralize, reduce, or overcome (breach or, in this case,

have explosive ordnance disposal personnel destroy or

remove) impediments.

 Protect against threat force weapons and tactics,

techniques, and procedures through the application of

technology or tactical behavior. This is a continuous

process.

By Captain Amber N. Schleuning
18 Engineer July-September 2006

Brigade Operations in Synchronization

I

.

n order to “hit on all cylinders” in the counter-IED fight,

the 130th Engineer Brigade created an Assured Mobility

Synchronization Cell (AMSC). Field Manual (FM) 3-34,

Engineer Operations, cites assured mobility as the actions

that guarantee commanders the ability to maneuver where

and when they desire without interruption or delay to achieve

the mission. It requires the understanding of the friendly and

enemy actions and the three-dimensional operational environment (subterranean, ground level, and aerial) to permit

commanders to act first within the threat opponent’s decision

cycle. Thus, the cell’s mission housed the six fundamentals

aiming to track and synchronize route clearance teams,

logistical convoy movements, maneuver operations, ISR

assets, and other engineer enablers.

The AMSC’s first priority included determining the steady

state maneuver missions, operational environment owner

clearance efforts, and combat patrol capabilities. A detailed

targeting process allowed the AMSC to position the route

clearance teams so they achieved “time on target” and were

integrated in and around ongoing maneuver combat patrols.

Adding the layer of tracking logistical convoys, the AMSC

needed to ensure that the routes were cleared of IEDs and

UXO to safeguard the timely movement of personnel and

equipment in-theater. Finally, acknowledging that the threat

was thinking and would adapt to our operations, ISR (the

combat multiplier) assets were overlaid and tracked.

Conclusion

The dynamics and resources available in Iraq are

constantly changing. Every rotation is unlike the one

before. This article is offered as after-action review

comments that might possibly be integrated into planning

and considerations for the “next round.” In the end, the

constant that remains is the need for a combined and synchronized force when tasked with the mission of assuring

mobility. Without the synchronization of the force, success in

the fundamental engineer task of assuring mobility will always

be in question.

Captain Schleuning is the 130th Engineer Brigade

Assured Mobility and Synchronization Cell officer in charge,

deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07.

Previous assignments include platoon leader during

Operation Iraqi Freedom, assistant S-3 operations officer,

and brigade maintenance officer. She holds a bachelor’s

in biology from the University of Colorado, Boulder,

Colorado.

 Get the most out of and integrate enablers to

attack the enemy across the spectrum of

countering IEDs from predict to protect—this is

a combined arms fight.

 Set and sustain a team objective to achieve

success in assured mobility.

 Ensure a steady state of give and take between

maneuver and route clearance teams.

 Consistently share analysis with brigade combat

teams (BCTs) and task forces. Everyone adds a

piece to the puzzle to defeat the enemy’s actions.

 Integrate with operational environment owners—

frequent face-to-face coordination and liaison

officers are essential. Constant communication

is essential because the battlefield changes

constantly.

 Synchronize with maneuver combat patrols.

 Coordinate and share information with MSR

users.

 Execute proper tactics, techniques, and procedures. Ensure security always.

 Protect Soldiers and equipment.

 Increase route clearance team time by embedding explosive ordnance disposal (EOD)

assets rather than waiting for EOD personnel.

 Sustain an aggressive route sanitation and crater

repair program.

 Predict and make the right changes. Don’t get

into a rut with route clearance scheduling and

targeting—the enemy is always changing.

 Work hard every day to make a difference.

Assured Mobility Basics

From the Corps Engineer Brigade

Commander’s Perspective

A route clearance team searches for IEDs and UXO.
July-September 2006 Engineer 19

T.

he 249th Engineer Battalion (Prime

Power) trains for worldwide deployment to provide prime power

electrical solutions and electrical-systems

expertise in support of military operations

and the National Response Plan. Operation

Iraqi Freedom continues to present daily

challenges of environmental and logistical

obstacles, which the “Black Lions”

successfully overcome. Gone are the days

of the quick-and-easy Force Provider module

forward operating base (FOB) in a box! Our

restructured footprint requires comprehensive and flexible power planning, and the

prime power production specialists provide

the knowledge necessary to meet the

theater’s increasing power requirements.

The Soldiers of the 249th Engineer Battalion possess a variety of capabilities to

support military operations, such as installing and operating prime power plants,

providing technical power-related guidance,

and serving as technical assistants to the contracting officer’s

representative (COR) for power projects. The Army’s prime

power production specialists assist in the connection of base

camps to local commercial grids (which establishes the

secondary backup system and helps eliminate the dependency

on contracted power generation equipment). This is not

currently being accomplished in Iraq because the national grid

is unreliable and incapable of providing consistent power to

the Iraqi population. The final objective and a measure of

success will be the connection of bases to the commercial

grid, utilizing it as the primary power source.

Military-constructed and leased power plants provide

electricity for all contingency operating bases (COBs) in Iraq.

The smaller FOBs are powered solely by spot generation

(which consists of many low-voltage generators referred to as

tactical generators [TACGENS]). The Soldiers of the 249th

support base commanders and area support groups in their

efforts to maximize the use of the government-purchased and

leased power generation systems, implement load-sharing

programs during peak power demands, and ensure the safe

and efficient operation of the utilities infrastructures sustaining

allied forces.

In 2003, the existing electrical infrastructure at most of the

COBs was cannibalized, destroyed, or severely damaged. The

249th conducted battle damage assessments and repaired

enormous portions of the distribution systems to enable

operations. They put miles of power distribution lines in the

ground and stood up life-support areas all over Iraq. Since

then, power production equipment has been leased and

purchased, and the role of the 249th has changed to one of

assisting the Multinational Corps–Iraq (MNC–I) with the

proper utilization of the newly acquired resources.

Prime power specialists have been conducting electrical

assessments of facilities, compiling required bills of materials,

computing load estimates and projected power requirements,

as well as designing and installing low- and medium-voltage

power distribution systems for base engineers. They have

taken on the critical tasks of overseeing project execution,

ensuring the quality control of the contractors’ work, and

providing technical assistance to both theater and the United

States Army Corps of Engineers® CORs.

At one logistics support area (LSA), the 249th oversaw the

construction and installation of overhead power distribution

lines covering the entire base, to ensure that the Army received

what it paid for with taxpayers’ dollars. The LSA had more

distribution capability than power available, which is rarely

the case; therefore, the plan was to double the size of the

existing plant and provide power to more than 90 percent of

Powering

the Forces

By Captain Esther S. Pinchasin and Captain James S. Boyette

Soliders splice a medium-voltage distribution cable.
20 Engineer July-September 2006

the base, using minimal spot generation. This directly reduced

fuel and maintenance costs and maximized power production

capability on the LSA.

A prime power team at one COB in Iraq worked diligently to

stand up utilities operations. The base is mostly powered by

costly spot generation—which is operated, maintained, and

fueled by contractors. The objective was to reduce our

dependency on the inefficient spot generation and utilize more

of the leased-plant capacity. The prime power team also

assisted in upgrading the electrical infrastructure, provided

quality control for the contracted work, and completed several

technical troop-labor missions. The 249th worked aggressively

to connect to the existing grid the major power users, the

critical facilities, and the facilities that do not require an

extensive bill of materials. Working alongside the MNC–I

C-7 (engineer staff section) Power Cell, they produced a theater

power plan to meet future power demands and assist in the

programming of funds for upcoming power production

requirements. The current plan, to add megawatts to the COB

power plant, will guarantee power support to the base. The

249th engaged in assessing and prioritizing facilities to carry

out this course of action and guarantee the COB’s ability to

handle the summer power surge demand.

Over the last twelve years, the 249th has deployed and

worked with engineers from all over the world. However, in

Iraq, they had the rare opportunity to work directly with United

States Marines at a base that was abandoned by the Iraqi

army and subsequently looted, rendering the main power

bunker inoperable.

Most of the distribution system was in a horrible state of

disrepair, and all the substations were nonmission capable.

They were directed to restore the power distribution

system, which was accomplished successfully with

limited resources and materials. These prime power

production specialists repaired the existing internal

electrical systems and enabled occupancy of the

buildings on the COB.

They also located and disabled high-voltage

feeder cables to the base, arresting the barrier

system without any electrical diagrams, required

tools, or diagnostic equipment. They resourcefully

consolidated all unused transformers, switchgear,

and high-voltage rated cable to quickly determine

the serviceability of each item and set up a cannibalization, testing, and repair shop to repair

complete substations with zero cost to the U.S.

government. The prime power Soldiers conducted

reconnaissance and assessment of more than 200

facilities and collected repair parts and materials to

restore the electrical capability to each facility.

Today, the 249th continues to build on past

successes. It works closely with the area support

group’s electrical team to repair and maintain the

power distribution system and supervise the

operation of the base-leased power plant. The team also

repairs cable strikes, conducts substation maintenance and

repair, and corrects faults in the underground distribution

infrastructure—which was built in the early 1980s. The unit is

also looking ahead and working on the expansion of the power

plant and has already developed the power projections.

The 249th Engineer Battalion, the only prime power unit in

the Army, is comprised of professional Soldiers who are the

theater’s technical experts on commercial-grade mediumvoltage power. They continue to operate out of the major COBs

in Iraq, supporting the entire area of operations, providing the

outlying FOBs with technical expertise, and identifying lifethreatening electrical safety hazards. The Soldiers of the 249th

will continue to rotate in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan,

covering both areas of operations, to support thousands of

U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines.

Captain Pinchasin is attending graduate school for

construction engineering at Stanford University and will

serve with the United States Army Corps of Engineer upon

graduation. Her previous positions include platoon leader,

executive officer, S-3, battalion S-4, company commander,

battalion liaision, and adjutant. She holds a degree from

Boston University and has attended the Aviation Captains

Career Course and Combined Arms and Services Staff

School (CAS3).

Captain Boyette is a small-group instructor for the

Engineer Officer’s Basic Course. His previous positions

include platoon leader, support platoon leader, executive

officer, assistant S-3, and battalion liaison officer. He has a

bachelor’s in management from National American

University.

A Soldier works at troubleshooting an electrical fault.
July-September 2006 Engineer 21

As military engineers continue the transformation

process, the corps engineer brigade is continuing to

.provide senior engineer leadership by focusing on

the corps commander’s priorities within the area of

responsibility (AOR). Will this association become a thing of

the past, or will it remain steadfast in the current command and

support structure? In the meantime, the missions keep coming.

If the corps is serving as the joint task force (JTF) or

Multinational Corps, then the subordinate engineer brigade is

equally postured for command and control of the engineer

structure. The responsibility of providing construction and

master planning during current operations spans all the

services, to include specific Army branches. The corps

engineer brigade has a unique challenge of balancing the

corps’s priority for the construction and master planning effort

with an inherent relationship with the United States Army Corps

of Engineers®—which is the Gulf Region Division. The

invariable requirement for continued infrastructure improvements, to include assured mobility, has prompted other

services and Army branches to become noticeable contributors

in the overall processes.

The joint and combined arms involvement is visible when

other services provide their construction and master planning

unit in lieu of an unavailable Army capability normally under

the corps engineer brigade’s command and control. Some

examples of the in-lieu-of capability are showcased by the

United States Air Force’s facility and utility detachments. The

combined arms effort is not as perceptible and does not fall

under the corps engineer brigade’s direct control, but these

units are equally as important to the construction and master

planning effort. A few of the primary contributors to the

combined arms construction effort to highlight include finance

and contracting, Defense Contracting Management Agency

(DCMA), and almost every aspect of logistics (corps support

command [COSCOM]). All services are transforming, and units

are receiving updated nomenclatures.

The effort provided by the Air Force facility and utility

detachments is clearly defined: They are replacing similar Army

facility engineer teams (FETs) and utility detachments because

these particular standard requirements code (SRC) units are

not available or are just off-cycle for purposes of operational

rotations. It’s very apparent that strict attention should be

given to certain low-density SRC units that have witnessed

the brunt of the engineer’s operational turbulence. The

continuous and sometimes increased need for utility

The Corps Engineer Brigade

Construction Mission—

By Major Tyrone Bennett

A Joint and Combined Arms Effort

The versatile 803d Utility

Detachment executes various

missions: Top left – final grade for

vehicle staging area; Bottom left –

fence improvements for force

protection; Top right – traffic

speed bump emplacement;

Bottom right – final survey shots

for drainage and elevation.
22 Engineer July-September 2006

detachments and FETs are trends that must be addressed

sooner rather than later.

The Army and Air Force utility detachments are valuable

when it comes to making immediate impacts to infrastructure

improvements and the construction of almost any type, not to

exceed certain project scopes. The Army made a doctrinal

decision in the late 1980s to move all utility detachments to

the Reserve Component. This positioning decision may take

another blow if current transformation plans completely

eliminate the SRC. As a result of the increased need and almost

uncontrollable operating tempo (OPTEMPO), the requirement

for utility detachments has spilled over to the other services—

the Air Force being the first formalized contributor. Currently,

the corps engineer brigade is responsible for managing all of

the utility detachments in the present operations within the

corps’s AOR.

The Army FETs are also a much sought after, low-density

engineer unit whose existence became essential dating back

to the Balkans. The turbulence from the current operations

has prompted the Air Force to provide an equivalent capability

in lieu of the stretched Army FETs. The Air Force facility

detachments are assembled individual skill sets based on the

Army FET structure and have successfully delivered the master

planning needed under the corps engineer brigade’s requirement for managing a master plan at the priority base

camps.

There are some unique challenges that accompany every

joint effort, regardless of the familiar skill sets. After working

with sister services in a joint military construction effort,

frequent challenges with processes used for resourcing the

projects have become apparent. Every service has its own

process for requisitioning and funding projects, but in a joint

environment all services must increase the synergy around

the particular service recognized as the executive agent. All

too often, requesting agents or customers focus solely on the

engineering aspects of the construction requirement, and the

material requirements start off behind the timeline—thus

creating a project lag.

Preventing a project lag is where the combined arms concept

becomes apparent and very essential to the timeliness of the

project. The military construction designs can be performed

by Soldiers or civilian engineers, but both options require

assistance from finance and accounting. The DCMA has area

contracting officers who help enforce government contract

standards in support of military bases. Ultimately, DCMA is

responsible for ensuring that federal acquisition programs,

supplies, and services are delivered on time. Normally, the

requisitioning unit relies on the military’s supply system and

transportation units to deliver precious material. This all seems

like a routine process until another service attempts to use an

unfamiliar process like this from beginning to end.

As the number of engineer brigades is reduced, the

versatility of existing brigades operating in support of the

deployed corps headquarters will continue to increase across

service lines. The Army is seeing the Air Force take an active

role in filling requirements in lieu of Army units like the FETs

and the utility detachments. There are several key Army

branches that have some critical, behind-the-scenes roles

regarding successful construction projects within the corps

engineer brigade and throughout the corps’s AOR. As the Air

Force and other services take on additional responsibilities in

the theater of operations, the need for understanding the

Army’s processes will become an overarching task. The utility

detachments are underappreciated and should remain in the

structure as versatile construction units.

Major Bennett is the S-3 construction officer for the

Multinational Corps–Iraq Corps Engineer Brigade. Previous

assignments include Korea, Fort Stewart, Haiti, Fort Bragg,

Fort McPherson, Saudi Arabia, and Germany. Previous duties

include bridge platoon leader, facilities engineer, company

commander, and plans and operations officer.

An example of design work

provided by the 732d Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron, Facility Detachment 15:

Top left – expeditionary

mortuary affairs operation;

Top right – modified Southwest Asia (SWA) hut design to

replace tent; Bottom left – 3-D

view of structure with drainage system; Bottom right –

construction of new mortuary

affairs facility.
K.

.nowing the answer to the question “Do you think or

do you know?” can mean the difference between

success and failure during a deployment. What you

think is something you’ve been told. What you know is what

you have done or seen. For example, surveying in an

underdeveloped nation or nonpermissive environment is not

the same as surveying in a peacetime western environment.

Successful predeployment training and relief in place (RIP)/

transfer of authority (TOA) when arriving in-theater will close

the gap between the two and set the stage for successful

deployments. The missions may vary a great deal, yet it all

comes down to whether or not personnel think they know or

actually know successful deployment procedures. While

supporting the 130th Engineer Brigade in Iraq, Detachment 8,

412th Engineer Command (ENCOM), United States Army

Reserve, was given survey missions that required all of their

combined civilian and military backgrounds. This included

previous continental United States (CONUS), overseas, and

combat experiences molded into a proven procedure: beginning

in predeployment training, continuing through RIP/TOA, and

being continually refined during operations in Iraq. This

successful deployment procedure involves more than the

simple collection of data and can be broken into six steps. The

unit—

 Must have the proper equipment for the job (most

important).

 Should have training beyond the basic “schoolhouse”

understanding of the equipment.

 Must have an understanding of survey principles and be

able to apply them to the mission.

 Must know what data collection standards are required.

 Should be prepared for theater-specific issues.

 Should be prepared for changes.

If not managed correctly, all these things

(individually or collectively) can lead to

mission failure or loss of a Soldier. Incountry survey missions should only be

done once. Sending a team twice due to

mission failure in CONUS just means that

time was wasted, but sending Soldiers

back out in a combat theater can cost

lives.

Tools of the Trade

Total Station

The traditional survey tool is a “total

station,” which is a conventional survey

system with an instrument usually

referred to as a gun, plus required prisms,

poles, tripods, batteries, and tripodmounted levels called tribrachs. Until

recently, the Army version of this set was

the Geodimeter® Automated Integrated

Survey Instrument (AISI) 444. This

instrument is more than 13 years old and

By Staff Sergeant Travis Y. Johnson

July-September 2006 Engineer 23

Two survey Soldiers take field notes and set up the Geodimeter 5600.

Photo by Staff Sergeant Travis Y. Johnson

or Do You Know?

Do You Think
is no longer used professionally in surveying. To meet mission

requirements, Detachment 8 acquired the Geodimeter 5600

Servo Direct Reflex (DR) 200+ with the Trimble® Automated

Control Unit (ACU) Survey Controller as the gun. The gun is

capable of measuring 5,500 meters to a prism with two-second

accuracy over that distance or roughly 5 centimeters. This is a

line-of-sight system and was acquired with global positioning

system (GPS) gear to be used as a stand-alone system or

together. Although not standard military equipment, the United

States Army Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri,

recently adopted the 5600 gun with a slightly different control

module, the Geodimeter Control Unit (CU), which is more

closely related to the AISI 444 operational procedures.

Global Positioning System

The GPS acquired to meet mission requirements is the

Trimble 5800 Real-Time Kinetic (RTK) Rover. The main

component is the Site Positioning System (SPS) 780 Rover

series with base option, which is an antenna that can be used

as either a GPS base station or as a rover. A rover collects RTK

GPS data while moving. The rover vehicle can be any platform,

but is typically an all-terrain vehicle like the Polaris Ranger®

4x4, which needs only minor modifications to mount the survey

rod. This GPS requires an attachable data collector, the Trimble

Survey Controller 2 (TSC2), which can be interchanged with

the base, the rover, or the gun. This system measures at an

unadjusted accuracy of 1 to 3 centimeters.

Software

The Army trains and supplies TerramodelTM civil design

software developed to use with Trimble equipment. Other

software supplied and trained by the Army is AutoCAD 2004,

but AutoCAD 2004 Land Desktop Development (LDD) and

other Autodesk civil design series components are also available. Conversion and data management software packages

are required, such as Geotrans V2, Convert 4.08, Trimble Data

Transfer, and Trimble Geomatics Office. No single software

package could satisfactorily meet all missions; the combination

of all this software was essential to the various missions and

their changes. Nontechnical but important software in creating

a final product is Adobe® Acrobat® Professional, which allows

almost any technical output to be made into a portable

document format (PDF) that any client can view.

Predeployment Training

P.

redeployment training is mandatory for all deploying

Soldiers. There are core, theater-specific tasks, such as

convoy operations, that all services mandate. Military

occupational specialty (MOS) 21T technical engineer

specialists, like all Soldiers, need to train in their job-specific

tasks. However, unlike 21B combat engineers, 21Ts are lowdensity, and not many qualified and experienced trainers are

available. A 21T must be an expert not only in surveying but

also in drafting, computer-aided drafting (CAD), soils analysis,

concrete quality control, and other critical technical engineer

jobs that require considerable training and experience after

the initial schooling (military or civilian). If they only have

schoolhouse or basic MOS training, the odds are that they

only think they know the job.

A train-the-trainer atmosphere is perfectly suited for

correcting this problem. Given sufficient lead time, a 21T trainer

from the Engineer School or from a training brigade may be

available. Local vendors for survey equipment may be able to

provide hands-on training that can be very important. Even a

single experienced noncommissioned officer can successfully

mentor school-trained Soldiers during predeployment training.

It is also important that unit leadership be thoroughly familiar

with all the software, hardware, and applications in order to

set the missions for success in planning, logistics, and

specifications. Finally, advance coordination with the unit being

replaced can ensure that “right-seat/left-seat” training (working

side by side with someone familiar with the job), using actual

ongoing missions, will use the RIP/TOA period to build on

predeployment training and bring the incoming unit up to full

speed.

General Survey Principles

T.

here are a few general survey principles that need to

be reinforced during predeployment training. These

principals are proper point coding, site identification,

and the location or placement of benchmarks. Errors in these

tasks must be caught and corrected on-site, without slowing

the progress, or the entire survey could be wasted. Drilling

the steps for each principle as a battle drill would ensure the

Soldiers’ confidence both in themselves and the equipment.

Point Coding

Proper point coding steps vary with the equipment, but the

principle remains the same. Point coding is how the surveyor

assigns identifiers to points. Often a 21T other than the

surveyor uses the data to develop drawings. There may be

multiple surveys, potentially creating confusion with data sets.

Some coding conventions will not be read in by the software.

You have to know your equipment. Having a key to the codes

as part of the job files eliminates whether people know or only

think they know the data codes.

Site Identification and Benchmarks

Proper site identification and benchmarks are also important

for mission success. Do the surveyors know that they have

enough data at the end of a mission or do they only think they

have enough? Everything should be collected. Experience

shows that projects can expand or become new projects. Intheater, many clients don’t fully understand how to translate

their needs into technical requirements that can also result in

additional work. Extra data can make a new survey unnecessary. Available benchmarks should be located in all

surveys. Benchmarks make project handoff, map location, and

accuracy markedly better. Also, proper field notes streamline

surveying, data use, and the ability to effectively change in

the middle of a mission.

24 Engineer July-September 2006
July-September 2006 Engineer 25

It is better to have the data and not need it than to need it

and not have it. However, time constraints can make it difficult

to get these extra details, particularly if the survey crew has to

take considerable time on-site working out the details of the

survey. A site visit before the survey with all key project

members—to include the client, the designers, and the

construction supervisors—is essential for mission success.

It ensures that the survey leaders can better plan the site work

by seeing it, the client’s needs are worked out on the ground

and understood by all, and data needs are thoroughly

understood.

Collection Standards

Do the survey crews know how to perform the survey

accuracy standards for the mission? The civilian

standard of surveying is much more stringent than

that of an average military surveyor, yet those higher standards

are required for United States Army Corps of Engineers® or

military contract projects that the surveys support. The

difference is in accuracy and legality. Civilian surveyors are

required to know property laws and geospatial information

systems (GISs) and be able to pass licensing exams. In most

states, they must have attained a bachelor of science degree.

Military surveyors are not held to the same standards.

However, in-theater missions can require civilian levels of

expertise, and not being able to execute those missions can

delay large projects until civilian contractors are available and

funded.

Something normally practiced by civilian surveyors, but

not by the military, is the use of an Online Positioning User

Service (OPUS) for GPS coordinate correction. This system

has been recently set up in-theater and is

monitored regularly. The website is

<www.ngs.noaa.gov>. Using this service

ensures that the surveyors and designers

know that benchmark data is correct rather

than only thinking that it is.

Theater-Specific Encounters

Force Protection

Force protection is always an issue intheater. The leader for any mission should

know the potential threat for the site and for

travel to the site. Unexploded ordnance

(UXO) could be found on a base where future

construction is planned. A route survey can

encounter improvised explosive devices

(IEDs) and small arms fires. Even secure bases

can receive mortar or rocket attacks. These

are just some of the challenges survey teams

have experienced. Unit planning must ensure

that all coordination is made, to include

accounting for the amount of equipment

being transported for a mission and ensuring

that the security team understands the needs of the survey

team. Environmental considerations include high heat, wildlife

(such as scorpions and vipers), and cold weather or rain

(depending on the location and the season).

Drainage

Drainage is a significant issue in-theater for surveyors as

well as for designers. The soils in many of Iraq’s populated

areas are alluvial silts that seal against water shortly after being

wetted instead of allowing water to filter into the ground. The

topography of most bases is flat and not conducive to proper

drainage. On many bases, gravel is used to “put boots and

wheels above the water.” This makes the situation worse. Units

are in-theater for a year or less and typically do not see the

long-term effects. For the surveyor, it may mean recording a

point on the top of the gravel and then digging below the

gravel to record a point at ground level, both for drainage and

After using a rover-mounted GPS to survey a 1,000-acre

site in southern Iraq, a comprehensive drainage plan

was developed from the 3-D data using Terramodel.

Photo by Sergeant Adam Russell

A Soldier stakes off a base station setup, which is a temporary benchmark for the survey.
26 Engineer July-September 2006

gravel removal. A site must be designed to drain properly by

not draining into another site, which would cause problems

there. All drainage structures have to be identified and verified

by the surveyor. Whether a site or project will drain properly

is something that one must know and not just think they know.

Aside from making the area a muddy waste, improper drainage

can undermine slabs, roads, and other structures and allow

pooling for insect breeding.

Global Positioning System Capability

Several units in-theater have reported a lack of GPS

capability. This is in direct relation to them thinking they know

the equipment and actually not knowing it. The GPS will likely

encounter problems, and a thorough knowledge of the systems

is required to fix these problems. Another common issue is

GPS elevation variances that do not match the topography

across a project. The fix for this is to place multiple base station

control points on-site and locate them relative to each other,

then use differential leveling within the software package to

eliminate the error. A second fix for this problem is to do a

“cooked point,” which takes at least three hours of data collection in a FastStatic or similar surveying procedure, and send

the data files in a receiver independent exchange (RINEX)

format to OPUS for correction.

Operations

Equipment Assignment

Proper equipment assignment is important to individual and

collective mission success. Does the team leader think he

knows all mission requirements or does he really know? Really

knowing is a significant challenge. The survey team leader is

usually the person who must take the supported unit commander’s intent and translate it into technical requirements.

For example, a mission may seem to be a perfect application of

GPS based on a map reconnaissance; yet once in the field, the

line-of-sight gun may be what is needed. The GPS is best-suited

for large, open, and unobstructed areas. If there are large concrete

buildings or bunkers that block the GPS signal, the gun may be

better. Small projects requiring total accuracy are also best-suited

to gun usage. The concern about this is balancing whether the

unit becomes mission incapable for other missions by sending

all equipment to one area against whether a mission can be

done with only one. Is there another unit nearby that can

help? The United States Army, Air Force, and Navy engineer

units can usually help each other if there is advance coordination. Can measurements be taped off and recorded in

the field notes instead of using a gun? The mission planner

needs to know all resources and methods available to balance

current missions against planned missions, as well as any

high-priority “short-fuse” missions that may occur.

Mission Creep

Mission creep is how a mission can begin small and become

large. Mission creep often occurs when the survey crew thinks

they know the mission instead of actually knowing it. Once

on-site, the customer usually tries to get additional tasks

completed. There is often a mentality of “I have you here now,

and I’m going to keep you,” because demand is high for intheater engineer resources, particularly if the client knows that

21Ts have more skills than just surveying. The team leader

must know the mission’s scope of work, the commander’s

intent, the unit’s full capabilities, the designers and surveyors,

and upcoming missions. Typically, a mission directive will give

the team one goal and a specific timeline. Often it’s good to do

extra work within that timeline, because it provides good will

and takes care of the supported unit’s missions. Other times,

the supported unit’s “nice-to-have” want would be at the

expense of another mission’s “must-have” need. The on-site

team leader and the unit’s operations section must have a firm

grasp of the current and projected workload to balance these

priorities.

Changes in Focus

Focus changes are a normal occurrence in theater

operations. What the unit may think is their mission is

what they were trained on or told prior to deployment. What

the unit will know is that their mission is what they will

encounter in-theater. This happens across all coalition

activities, not just engineering, because coalition governments

shift priorities, military missions change, the anti-Iraqi forces

change tactics, and engineering priorities change. A survey

can be top priority one day, and the next day it can be low

priority or canceled. Units being told they will be doing a lot of

surveys or few surveys based on current or past Operation

Iraqi Freedom cycles may find a different reality on the ground.

The only solution is to be prepared and remain flexible.

Thinking and knowing is measured on a graduated scale, based

on the collection of factual data over time. As such, the facts

in-theater will change regularly, and what you know to be the

mission today may not be the mission tomorrow.

Conclusion

Surveying in a nonpermissive environment is vastly

different than in CONUS. The timelines allowed and the

safety considerations put the two environments on

different ends of the spectrum. The difference between what

you think and what you know of the equipment, personnel,

principles, standards, environment, and operations is vital to

success in-theater. Soldiers of all ranks need to understand

this to ensure that all criteria are met and that all Soldiers

return. An improper survey resulting in an improper design

can mean lives lost. That is a risk that we, as military surveyors,

cannot afford. Ensure that your Soldiers know what is

necessary and are prepared for it.

Staff Sergeant Johnson is the Construction Management Section

NCOIC for Detachment 8, 412th ENCOM, supporting the

130th Engineer Brigade in Iraq. He has been a United States Army

technical engineer for 9 years and a civilian surveyor and civil/

mechanical designer for 12 years. He has led military survey missions

in CONUS, Korea, Germany, Italy, Kosovo, Bosnia, the Marshall

Islands, and Iraq, as well as civilian survey teams in six states.
July-September 2006 Engineer 27

As the military continues to develop its contingency

operating bases (COBs) and create improved facilities

.and living accommodations for its Soldiers, the

demand for military surveyors increases. Surveyors in Iraq

have a vital role, ensuring that both military and civilian engineer

planners have accurate designs and topographic products

necessary for planning construction and improvements. The

increased demand for surveys requires new technology,

equipment, and methods to obtain rapid and accurate results.

One piece of equipment in particular, the Trimble® 5700 Global

Positioning System (GPS), proved invaluable to the Survey

Platoon of the 320th Engineer Company (Topographic),

130th Engineer Brigade, as it conducted numerous missions

across Iraq.

Applications

T.

he Trimble 5700 is a versatile piece of equipment that

can be used under most surveying conditions. Within

Iraq and the scope of military surveying, the most

beneficial use was the continuous kinematic collection of

survey points. This function fulfills the purpose of developing

comprehensive topographic maps at a rate previously

unattainable. Throughout the theater of operations, there are

Continuous Kinematic Surveying

Throughout Iraq

By Second Lieutenant Jonathan Wilson

An Army Soldier uses a Trimble 5700 during a survey mission.
28 Engineer July-September 2006

little or no detailed contour maps. Although the country is

predominately desert, rainfall can average up to 100 centimeters

in some areas during the rainy season. The sudden addition

of water creates massive flooding in regions that were

previously dry. Thus, it has become the focus for many design

management sections (DMSs) to plan and develop drainage

and flood mitigation plans for their forward operating bases

(FOBs) and logistics support areas (LSAs).

In order for a DMS to accomplish the lengthy task of flood

control planning and construction design, it first needs a final

survey product. The survey product includes a thorough

topographic contour map of the surveyed area. The

development of a contour map involves a lengthy process of

surveying a wide area in a specified grid pattern. Typically, a

50-foot interval is used to create a grid of points from which

extrapolations can be made for relief. In the past, this process

required one surveyor with an optical total station (a tool used

to sense position) to take individual shots as a rod man (raises

or lowers the target until the surveyor signals that it is at the

proper height) moved from point to point along the set grid.

But now, with modern technology and the addition of the

Trimble 5700 to the Army surveyors’ basic equipment list, all

of these tasks can easily be accomplished in a fraction of the

time.

Continuous Kinematic Surveying

T.

he Trimble 5700 allows you to select the desired time

interval that you want to use. Then, the instrument

with its built-in satellite receiver measures a point at

that time interval. Essentially, the instrument only needs to be

kept at a steady height—on a Soldier’s back or attached to a

vehicle. The Soldier continually walks or drives the area. If

tasked with a site survey, to include drainage for a motor

pool or other confined areas, only one Soldier is needed to

walk the grid pattern. If the area is larger, a contour map is

developed and the instrument is placed on top of the vehicle

with magnets. The vehicle then drives the pattern. A

15-second interval is optimal when walking, and when

driving, a 5-second interval is optimal as long as the vehicle

remains at a slow speed.

Once the surveyors collect all of the raw field data, it is

processed. Trimble TerramodelTM is one software program that

is compatible with the Trimble 5700. The program takes all of

the points, inputs them, and connects all of the points of equal

elevation and develops a complete contour map for the DMS

to use in its planning and designing.

Put to the Test

All of the beneficial aspects of the Trimble 5700 system

were put to use recently by the Survey Platoon of the

.320th. As the war evolves in Iraq, many of the smaller

FOBs are becoming obsolete, and thus it has become a military

endeavor to consolidate its forces into more centralized hubs.

The 555th Combat Support Brigade (Maneuver Enhancement)

DMS has been charged with the mission of developing all the

plans necessary for future Soldiers into COB Speicher. In order

for the 555th to complete its mission and correctly make all of

the designs for the COB, it first needed to know the existing

conditions of the area.

The Survey Platoon began the process of surveying COB

Speicher, which was flooded throughout the rainy season.

For the 555th personnel to combat and mitigate the flooding,

they needed to know the total volume of runoff entering the

COB and where all of the water was flowing. They created a

detailed contour map of the entire COB, as well as the

surrounding watershed, for drainage assessment and planning.

Over the course of three weeks, the platoon put the Trimble

5700s to the test, collecting more than a quarter million data

points in an elaborate grid spanning the area. They also

extended their survey beyond the perimeter to encompass the

surrounding farmlands. With an elaborate grid of points

collected—each point a precise coordinate and orthometric

(height of a point on the earth’s surface) elevation—the platoon

compiled and processed all of the data. The result was a

comprehensive and thorough topographical contour map of

the entire installation with decimeter interval precision.

Mission Success

T.

he Survey Platoon has made efficient and valuable use

of the Trimble 5700 survey system throughout the

country. With it, the platoon has created comprehensive and thorough maps of several FOBs in less than half

the time it would have taken using older methods. The Trimble

5700 is a reliable and beneficial piece of equipment that was

used in the collection of more than half a million survey points

at a rate previously unmatched by other surveyors.

Second Lieutenant Wilson is the survey platoon leader for

the 320th Engineer Company, 130th Engineer Brigade.

Throughout Iraq, the platoon has performed numerous

surveys to include site, topographic, construction, and

hydrologic surveys.

“Over the course of three weeks, the platoon put the Trimble

5700s to the test, collecting more than a quarter million data

points in an elaborate grid spanning the area.”
July-September 2006 Engineer 29

Whether you call the collection of military occupational specialty (MOS) 21T engineer technicians and 21D facilities/contract and construction management engineer officers a construction

management section (CMS) or a design management section

(DMS), the word “management” seems to be the operative

word. Usually found in engineer groups and brigades, the

CMS and DMS traditionally act as a small engineering firm,

providing surveying, design, soils testing, materials testing,

and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for construction, materials, and drawings to supported units.

When Detachment 8 was formed from the 412th Engineer

Command (ENCOM), United States

Army Reserves, to support the

130th Engineer Brigade as its CMS or

DMS for Operation Iraqi Freedom, it was

known that the mission would be more

than just management.

The commander of the 130th knew

that the brigade would have a wide range

of missions. It would be responsible for

maintaining and improving contingency

operating bases, developing convoy

support centers, and overseeing various

technical units such as facility engineer

teams (FETs), engineer utility detachments, and United States Air Force

(Civil Engineer) detachments. These

responsibilities would be in addition to the traditional brigade

role of providing command and control for combat engineers,

construction units, and bridge units and dealing with Iraqi

infrastructures. The commander also knew that beyond the

traditional role of a CMS or DMS, this kind of organization

(from the Reserve Component) offers experienced individuals

with real-world engineering experience.

Formation of Detachment 8

T.

he 130th Engineer Brigade is based in Hanau, Germany.

The 412th area of responsibility includes the United

States European Command and the United States

Photo by Major Clarence B. Kemper

The photo above shows output from the USACE Automated Recon Recording

Kit, which integrates video capture and voice recordings while storing the

vehicle’s coordinates and gyroscope data as it travels.
30 Engineer July-September 2006

Pacific Command. While many of the Reserve Component

engineer brigades have a CMS or DMS, the Active Army

combat engineer brigades no longer have these assets. When

the 130th requested technical engineering support for various

Iraq-specific missions, the United States Army Forces

Command tasked the 412th to provide a team. The result was

Detachment 8.

The 412th ENCOM provides command and control for

theater engineer operations, with its primary mission being

the Eighth United States Army and the Korean Peninsula.

However, the unit also has a large number of MOS 21T Soldiers

and 21D officers who stay engaged in technical engineering

missions throughout the United States, Europe, and Asia, in

addition to unit participation in annual joint multinational

exercises in Korea. Multiple detachments and individual

augmentees have already been mobilized from the 412th to

support current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, the

Philippines, and the Balkans. Many of these engineers and

technicians have civilian engineering jobs in government or

industry, giving them a depth and range of experience not

typically available within the Active Army.

The 412th staff capitalized on these individuals, forming a

team with a wide range of technical abilities and demonstrated

tactical proficiency. Almost all of the officers have engineering

degrees and have civilian experience in the civil, mechanical,

structural, electrical, environmental, and security engineering

fields. The lead surveyor and designer had civilian survey

and civil and mechanical design experience, the lead QA/QC

individual had many years of commercial materials testing lab

experience, and several of the technicians were construction

contractors with knowledge of construction and drawings.

Several experienced MOS 21H construction engineering

supervisors provided additional depth to the team. The

detachment commander served with the United States Army

Corps of Engineers® (USACE) in the Gulf War as an Active

Army engineer officer. Later joining USACE as a civilian civil

engineer, he was responsible for USACE projects in South

America and has years of engineering experience in areas torn

by decades of guerilla warfare. He was also mobilized as a civil

engineer for Operation Enduring Freedom in a previous

detachment from the 412th and supported operations in

northern Iraq and the Balkans.

However, the detachment commander realized that even

this pool of talent was not going to be enough to be ready for

the missions they would encounter. Many of the Soldiers

identified for mobilization were sent to civilian and military

training classes, ranging from reclassifying some of the enlisted

as 21Ts to add to the technical workforce to training in

improvised explosive device (IED) defeat, security engineering,

safety, and contracting. Mobilization training at Camp Shelby,

Mississippi, included base camp master planning and

infrastructure assessment training from USACE, training on

modern global positioning system (GPS) survey equipment,

and other technical areas including required tactical training.

The 412th Soldiers linked up with the 130th in Kuwait in

early October 2005. A few days later, the first teams were sent

forward to Iraq to start the missions, and they maintained a

rapid pace throughout the entire deployment. The 130th, with

the 412th and other subordinate engineer units, assumed

nationwide responsibility as the only corps-level engineering

brigade.

Command and Control

Command and control was one of the first missions that

the 412th started that was not a traditional CMS or

DMS function. Since the FETs, the utility detachments,

and the Air Force engineers were all working for the 130th, the

A Soldier records

measurements during

a bridge reconnaissance on the Tigris

Photo by Major Clarence B. Kemper

River.
July-September 2006 Engineer 31

130th commander capitalized on the 412th’s leadership and

expertise to make Detachment 8 the central hub for corps-level

technical engineers for the brigade. While Detachment 8 did

not have formal command authority over these units, it took

on many of the operational aspects of coordination, mission

development, and supervision as needed on behalf of the

brigade. The command and control assets were critical,

particularly with units spread out all over Iraq. When working

with these technical units, it was vital to have someone who

both understood their world and was experienced in command

and control. By “leaning forward in the foxhole,” the 412th

kept these assets engaged and plugged into future operations

planning.

Integration

T.

he 412th provided administrative support, crossleveled expertise, and was task-organized for specific

missions, while augmenting these units with design,

engineering, survey, and QA/QC support as needed. The

DMS not only developed its own designs but reviewed those

for supporting units, providing additional design and

engineering upon request. The brigade provided additional

staff and resource support. However, for routine operations

and technical work, the 412th assumed many of the duties

normally falling to the brigade with respect to these units, leaving

the brigade to concentrate on the line units and its missions. At

the same time, the 412th assisted in intelligence analysis,

operations, project tracking, mission development, and other

tasks when additional expertise was needed. The detachment

became fully integrated into brigade operations, while still

maintaining a distinct mission set.

Infrastructure Assessment Missions

Assets were needed for future projects to go

out and do the technical reconnaissance

and then feed the results back for internal

staffing. From that point, the CMS or DMS would

develop a solution internally, reach back to USACE for

additional support, or conclude that a given problem

wasn’t an issue that could be addressed at the corps

engineer level. This was particularly true for

infrastructure assessment missions. Some missions

ranged over an extended distance, such as a

400-kilometer reconnaissance for developing estimates

and scopes of work for road improvements. Other

missions required working with the local Iraqi engineers

for troubleshooting water systems and in building

projects. Since these infrastructure assessment

missions were “outside the wire,” tactical proficiency

was also required. During their deployment, the 412th

found IEDs on job sites, were attacked by anti-Iraqi

forces while on convoys and reconnaissance missions,

and had mortars or rockets land near their work site or

living area. Their ability to respond quickly and go

anywhere at any time was cited as a key factor when

compared to civilian employees and contractors who had

comparable technical skills.

Paving Supply Routes

Some of the missions had been going on for several

Operation Iraqi Freedom cycles, such as paving supply

routes. These missions had technical, operational, and

strategical issues, such as—

 Finding a source for quality paving materials.

 Planning construction around convoy staging

requirements and multiple contractors.

 Shifting the availability of funds.

 Working with various Iraq ministries.

Paving supply routes not only affects coalition convoys but

also civilian commerce, creating long-term impact on the

rebuilding of Iraq.

Water System

The water pipeline from the Tigris River to the Qayyarah

West (Q–West) Airfield provides water for many of the local

communities. Attacks on the pipeline by anti-Iraqi forces not

only interrupted water supplies to Q–West but also to the

villages and towns in the region that had less storage capacity

and were more vulnerable to a water stoppage. The 130th and

the 412th partnered with Q–West units and local leaders to

protect the water system as well as to upgrade pumps, relocate

taps on the pipeline, and increase overall water production.

Periodic technical reconnaissance allows Soldiers to track

wear and tear on highways and helps predict future maintenance needs.

Photo by Major Clarence B. Kemper

(Continued on page 38)
32 Engineer July-September 2006

When providing designs in the Operation Iraqi

Freedom theater of operations, two options must

be considered as the main effort: whether to design

to time or design to standard. Both of these options offer the

constructing agent significant advantages; one or the other

will be chosen, depending on the site and resources available.

With increased military operations in Iraq and the

reconstruction efforts, United States Army and Air Force civil

engineers are faced with incredible logistic and support design

challenges. When choosing which type of design will be

suitable for a project, consider variables like time, funding,

materials available, and human resources, as well as the

experience of the troops executing the project. What exactly

does design to time mean versus design to standard? The

task of designing in a combat zone to support military

operations in an ever-changing war zone requires design

flexibility and improvisation. When combined with military

operational tempo, this duo presents the battlefield designer

with the question at hand: Should I design to time or to

standard?

Design to Time

T.

o put it simply, when a construction team designs to

time, it presents a 90 percent design solution to the

construction unit. The unit must then complete the

design, adapting it to the challenges presented at the

construction site. In past experience, custom designs have

not reached a true sense of professionalism when referring to

the end product given to the customer and the construction

unit. However, this may not be a negative thing. Custom

designs during an operation such as Iraqi Freedom are

solutions to an operational need that is identified by a military

unit or a customer. To understand the shortfalls of a particular

military design, the following must be understood:

 The original intent

 The circumstances surrounding its development

 What the customer actually intends to solve

Designs in Operation Iraqi Freedom are not meant to be

another addition to a residential living area or a commercial

shopping mall; they are solutions to military operational needs.

It is because of the flexibility and competence of American

troops that our civil engineering effort in Iraq has made, and

continues to make, an impact not only on the quality of life

that American troops enjoy during their deployment but also

on support to the development and reconstruction effort of a

war-torn land.

The experience of the 130th Engineer Brigade’s construction

section with custom designs in Operation Iraqi Freedom is

similar to other units. When a customer

identifies a requirement for a project, such

as a Southwest Asia (SWA) hut or a simple

wall renovation, the designing unit provides

guidance to the customer on what can be

built based on the restrictions in the area.

Sometimes, a customer wants special

features in a project that will increase the

difficulty of the construction project;

however, through deliberate yet brief

analysis, the designing unit can help guide

the customer in making a better decision

regarding the recommended design. The

process of making a custom design begins

when a unit is officially tasked to design a

project—the equivalent of a civilian firm

getting a contract. Each construction team

must take into consideration that there

won’t be as many design options, meaning

By Second Lieutenant Carlos Flores

Military Designs:

Design to Time or to Standard?

Army engineers construct a road to facilitate access to a logisitics support

area.
the mission. Standard designs, although a quick way to get a

design out to the customer, present other challenges, to include

preparing the site to accommodate a standard design. While a

design can be called standard, it will never be truly standard

when constructed, because each site is different and presents

challenges of its own. In order for a standard design to work

properly, there must be communication between the design

team and the builder. Additionally, the builder must be able to

see implied tasks that come with the union of a standard design

at a nonstandard site. In fact, many times the design has to

evolve to fit into the site.

A good noncommissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) of

construction is essential for executing a standard design.

Although a standard design means faster design time, it

could involve complications. But Soldiers and Airmen

overcome these complications through communication and

hard work.

Conclusion

G.

iven an expedient design, U.S. Soldiers have had to

improvise as they build. Design is not a simple task

in Operation Iraqi Freedom; it requires a design team

that is flexible, willing to commit, and able to overcome

obstacles. Army units are constantly faced with challenges in

Iraq; however, through the great work of engineering units

and construction elements, they have achieved success in

presenting a design solution that meets the needs of both the

military and the civilians.

Second Lieutenant Flores is the S-3 assistant construction

officer for the Multinational Corps–Iraq, 130th Engineer

Brigade. His previous experience includes project manager

in several engineering firms in the United States, design

manager, chief designer in 52 architectural projects, and

studio design instructor.

July-September 2006 Engineer 33

that there are fewer design teams

deployed than there are civilian firms

to choose from back in the United

States.

One characteristic about custom

designs in the Operation Iraqi Freedom

area of operations is that it will likely

continue to change until the project is

completed. A design team is often

pressed for time when a new design

is started. This time constraint,

although not unusual among military

operations, isn’t common in the

civilian world. In many instances, the

need for expedited results is addressed

because of a serious short-fall that

does not allow a unit to perform tasks

that greatly affect their security or the

well-being of Soldiers. Therefore,

designs in Operation Iraqi Freedom have not evolved into a

consummate set of construction drawings, but into a solution

that, in many cases, results in a 70 percent solution.

Time and money have much to do with the degree of

complexity of a design. For example, between the rainy months

of January and March, flooding is a very serious issue for

many installations and Army units in Iraq. Issues such as

mobility and health are highly important in order to maintain

combat readiness. Can a design team provide a full survey

and go through the never-ending steps of proper design? The

answer is no. A quick solution must be presented to preserve

what little comfort and life support Soldiers have inside their

living areas, since there is no other place for them to go to in

Iraq.

Design teams from the Air Force and the Army have been

challenged to bring these kinds of solutions to the battlefield.

Sometimes personnel and equipment are not available, but

through creative thinking, multiple obstacles are breached

every day by civil engineering design teams in Iraq. Army

engineers from the 84th Engineer Battalion constructed a road

to provide access to a logistics support area so Iraqis could

bring business and materials. The project is a good example of

a quick solution, because it took only two and a half weeks

from the time it was identified as a projected need to the

time it was completed. The design work was much faster

than normal and was complemented by sound engineering

efforts during construction. If time had been a concern, the

construction team would have been better off using a

standard design.

Design to Standard

Standard designs are an effective way to provide

almost instantaneous design solutions. However,

designing to standard is very rare in Operation Iraqi

Freedom because of the constraints and given the nature of

A SWA hut nears completion.
34 Engineer July-September 2006

As the Multinational Corps–Iraq (MNC–I) continues to

turn over military control to the Iraqis, small forward

operating bases (FOBs) and combat outposts all over

the country are shutting down and consolidating at a few

main FOBs, one of which happens to be Al Asad Air Base. As

a result, Al Asad needs to grow and develop to support the

influx of personnel and units on base.

Soldiers from Alpha Company, 84th Engineer Battalion

(Combat), worked on construction projects all over the base.

Most recently, 1st Platoon was assigned to build living facilities

called Southwest Asia (SWA) huts—based on the Southeast

Asia (SEA) huts originally developed in Vietnam—for incoming

personnel. From the start of the project in mid-April, the

platoon met with a variety of challenges characteristic of

any construction project in-theater: poor quality of

materials, resource constraints, equipment breakdowns, and

changes in plans. In addition, other missions sometimes

took priority, pulling all personnel away from the project for

weeks at a time. Nevertheless, the platoon has still managed

to remain flexible and complete the project to standard. The

platoon adapted to new issues as they arose, working late to

compensate.

Prior to this project, 1st Platoon—also known as the “Rough

Riders”—spent three months building the Iraqi army camp at

Combat Outpost Rawah. Working with Navy construction

battalions (Seabees), the platoon finished the project four

weeks ahead of schedule. Upon its return to Al Asad, the

platoon was assigned to various construction missions across

post. The platoon transitioned away from the Navy Seabee

construction system under which it had learned and worked

during the first three months of deployment. Through the Al

Asad project, the platoon discovered and refined the various

strengths of its members and became a more cohesive unit.

More than 25 percent of the platoon is composed of combat

engineers, most of whom never worked on construction

projects before the deployment, much less directed construction crews. Their incorporation into the unit and performance in carpentry and electrical work was phenomenal.

The platoon’s combat engineers were given more construction

responsibility at Al Asad, as opposed to the first project in

Rawah, where they were an asset in tactics and force protection

measures, and carpenters provided the technical skill and

knowledge on the construction site. Combat engineer

sergeants in the platoon even served as construction squad

By Second Lieutenant Anne C. Hsieh
July-September 2006 Engineer 35

leaders for weeks at a time, manning their squads and

leading by example on the jobsite every day. For the

most recent living area construction project, two

combat engineers directed and emplaced the entire

roofing system for several of the large buildings. The

experience of “carpenters and combat engineers

joining forces” has been a challenging and worthwhile

one. They learned to work together as one engineer

unit despite different backgrounds.

They were indeed an incredible team. Even when

there was only a few months left of deployment and

dozens of construction missions looming on the

horizon, the Soldiers of 1st Platoon, Alpha Company,

84th Engineer Battalion, continued to make a

difference at Al Asad and Iraq—one SWA hut at a

time.

Second Lieutenant Hsieh is the vertical construction platoon leader for 1st Platoon, Alpha

Company, 84th Engineer Battalion (Combat). She

is currently stationed at Al Asad Air Base, Iraq. She

graduated from the United States Military Academy

at West Point in 2005 with a double major in

comparative politics and arts, philosophy, and

literature.

Opposite page: The frame of an exterior wall of a SWA hut awaits

completion of the floor.

Top: Soldiers from 1st Platoon work together to sheath the floor

of a SWA hut.

Lower left: The completed SWA huts will provide comfortable

living quarters for personnel at Al Asad Air Base, Iraq.
36 Engineer July-September 2006

Engineers in Iraq have a huge job to do. One of the

primary missions of the 130th Engineer Brigade was to

support enduring base camp development and ensure

that long-term bases grow and expand to accommodate the

closure of dozens of small base camps throughout the country.

As small operating bases close or are transferred to Iraqi army

control, displaced coalition personnel and equipment move

to an enduring base camp. In order to support all the construction driven by the base camp closure process or other

support needs, Multinational Corps–Iraq (MNC–I) directed

the 130th to maintain stocks of Class IV materials to support

internal projects. The yard demands a great deal of effort to

manage and maintain. However, nothing was quite as rewarding

for the 130th S-4 section as running a thriving Class IV yard.

This article outlines many of the tips, tricks, and systems that

helped the yard flourish. Hopefully, some of the ideas presented

will be useful to other engineers in-theater and to engineers

who may have a similar responsibility one day.

The yard was only about seven months old when the

30th Engineer Brigade transferred authority to the 130th. During

that period, the 30th S-4 section had built a very large and

successfully operating Class IV yard. Millions of dollars spent

during those seven months enabled four construction

battalions to continuously build throughout Iraq, as well as

advance unit basic load (UBL) stockage levels for the yard.

When the 130th assumed control, its first priority was to

continue developing internal and external systems and

procedures where its predecessors left off.

Understanding the Process

T.

o run a large Class IV yard, several systems must first

be understood. Using the Joint Acquisition Review

Board (JARB) and Joint Facilities Utilization Board

(JFUB) processes, spend plans, purchase requests, contracting system, and military standard requisitioning and issue

procedures (MILSTRIP) keep the yard stocked despite large

and continuous outputs. An overview of these systems looks

like this:

 JARB: An MNC–I board validates unit funding requirements costing more than $200,000. The 130th had

an approved JARB packet that allowed funding requests

to be forecasted on the spend plan, specifically to

build and maintain a class IV basic load.

 JFUB: An MNC–I board validates and makes an approval

recommendation for construction projects costing more

Resourcing the Master Plan:

The 130th Engineer Brigade Class IV Story

By Captain Jeffrey M. Swartzlander

A pole barn—designed and built by the 130th Engineer Brigade—protects stocks of lumber, plywood,

and cement from the elements.
July-September 2006 Engineer 37

than $200,000. Area support groups or major subordinate

commands must secure the board’s approval prior to securing project funding and commencing work on the

project.

 Spend Plan: Units forecast and request all of their nonstock funding needs on a monthly financial report. Large

requests (more than $200,000) must be previously validated

by the JARB or JFUB.

 Purchase Request: The Department of the Army (DA) Form

3953, Purchase Request and Commitment, moves funding

that was already forecasted and approved on the unit

spend plan from resource management to the local

contracting office.

 Contracting: A contracting officer uses funding committed

on a purchase request to purchase supplies or services

directly from a commercial source. For Class IV, this source

is typically a local Iraqi company. Contracting is currently

the major ordering method for ready-mix concrete and

aggregate; electrical, plumbing, and hardware items; and

any other commercially available products not readily

available through MILSTRIP.

 MILSTRIP: This is the standard Army requisition system—

separate from the above funding and contracting

processes. Units requisition supplies through the Unit

Level Logistics System (ULLS) or the forward distribution

point (FDP) using a national stock number (NSN).

MILSTRIP is the preferred and easiest procurement

method. The 130th used this as the primary source for

lumber and other types of construction materials.

Resourcing

Although the 130th operated and maintained a Class IV

yard in support of brigade construction missions, the

.S-4 section didn’t resource all projects due to limited

personnel and resources. Guidelines were established for

customer units that requested Class IV. Customers were

normally expected to resource their own materials for projects,

or at a minimum, obtain corps approval and funding for

anything but minor projects. When possible, the 130th sourced

the bill of materials (BOM) for projects from on-hand stock

rather than delay a project for two or more months while the

customer ordered the materials. The customer unit then

furnished the 130th with the funded purchase request, and

the 130th used the customer unit’s funding to reorder and

replenish the materials. In short, they sourced standard

projects immediately with on-hand materials and replenished

the depleted materials with future funding.

Obviously, only materials stocked in the yard could be

provided. The customer is expected to source any nonstandard

or accountable items for projects. Our S-4 section was not

intended to be a substitute for other S-4s or relieve them of

the responsibility of resourcing their units’ needs.

When one of the 130th subordinate units was assigned a

construction project, the constructing unit received a BOM

from the design section of the 412th Engineer Command. Our

construction unit completed a Class IV request router and

submited it with the BOM to the brigade S-3 construction

officer. The project was validated and assigned a mission

tracking number. The router and BOM were staffed through

the brigade S-4 delegate, and from there the BOM went to the

Class IV noncommissioned officer in charge to prepare the

materials for pickup. Once the materials were picked up, the

BOM and request router were filed for material accountability.

No materials left the yard without being accounted for.

Improving the Process

I

mproving routine ordering, which resulted in improved

yard maintenance and control, was probably one of the

largest contributions the 130th made to the operation of

the Class IV yard. The brigade property book officer

established a derivative unit identification code (UIC) and

Department of Defense activity address code (DODAAC)

strictly for Class IV yard use. Our ordering sergeant was able

to place MILSTRIP requisitions at the FDP for expendable

Class IV materials. The ordering sergeant also coordinated

with the headquarters company ULLS–Ground clerk to order

construction materials using the Class IX DODAAC. By

continuing to research product NSNs and working the supply

system, the yard was increasingly self-supportive and less

dependent on competitive nonstock funds.

With regard to contracted orders, several hundred line items

are available for order through easy-to-use blanket purchase

agreements (BPAs) at the local contracting office. The BPAs

enabled the S-4 ordering officer to place Class IV orders directly

with vendors and simply maintain the declining funds balance.

Quantities ordered were derived from a UBL shortage report

from a computer database and an analysis of demand history.

Facing Challenges

One continued challenge is long and often unpredictable lead times in ordering supplies, with

delivery of contracted orders arriving anywhere from

one week to two months after the order was submitted. The

same holds true for MILSTRIP orders—delivery from a matter

of days to several months. Another common problem is material

variants delivered by Iraqi vendors. Despite item photographs,

illustrations, and descriptions in the contract, local vendors

all too often provide incompatible, unwanted materials that

must be returned. To mitigate this problem as much as possible,

the S-4 ordering officer must be very clear and coordinate

fully with the contracting officer and the vendor to ensure

that the proper items are ordered and delivered. A final challenge

to highlight is managing customer expectations. The yard

principally exists to source brigade construction projects,

while also serving as a reserve stockage for corps “be prepared”

missions. As a general rule, the 130th did not source self-help

projects on post, which can usually be resourced by the area

support group’s Directorate of Public Works self-help yard.

Or the unit may order materials through the same MILSTRIP

or contracting processes that the 130th used to order materials.

The 130th resourced an outside unit if there was a legitimate

need, if the project was validated and approved by the brigade
Providing Class IV Support Providing Class IV Support

to the Iraqi Army to the Iraqi Army

By Captain Jeffrey M. Swartzlander

Soldiers of the 130th Engineer Brigade contributed to the

construction of a new Iraqi army base camp in Northern

Iraq by issuing critical force protection materials to the Iraqi

1st Motorized Transportation Regiment (MTR). These high-priority

materials were used to supplement force protection measures of the

camp. Though this load-up was small, the brigade looked forward to

future opportunities to assist the increasingly self-reliant Iraqi

security forces.

For the past several months the Iraqi military forces have played

an increasing role in maneuver operations to defeat terrorism.

However, this transport mission executed by the Iraqi 1st MTR

illustrated that the Iraqi army is becoming increasingly proficient at

running its own logistical operations in addition to tactical operations.

Although the convoy commander for this mission was an Army

captain, it is only a matter of time before the Iraqi army is running its

support and sustainment convoys autonomously.

The 130th maintained construction and barrier materials on-hand

in its Class IV yard to supply theater construction projects. From

on-hand materials, the 130th issued required supplies in a short

time, allowing projects and mission construction or force protection

missions to begin without delay.

Even though the convoy arrived a little behind schedule, the longawaited force protection materials needed for the new Iraq forward

operating base (FOB) were ready for issue. The 130th worked hand

in hand with the Iraqi army, which shows a lot of dedication and

enthusiasm as it continually moves closer to full self-reliance.

Captain Swartzlander is the S-4 in the 130th Engineer Brigade.

His past assignments include survey platoon leader for the 320th

Engineer Company (Topographic), executive officer for the 502d

Engineer Company (MRB), and S-4 for the 565th Engineer Battalion.

He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy.

Similar civil-military missions included the evaluation of

water treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, and buildings

for local schools, often with subsequent design or other

engineering support to improve those facilities.

Environmental Surveys

Environmental surveys are requirements for closing down

any U.S. facility in Iraq, but there were no environmental survey

teams available. This became critical to the corps-level mission

of drawing down the coalition basing footprint. Under the

leadership of a lieutenant colonel who is an environmental

engineer with USACE as a civilian, several teams were trained

in environmental standards, sampling equipment, and personal

protective equipment. Through their efforts, a series of bases

and facilities (including the Abu Ghraib prison) were closed or

handed over to the Iraqis in a timely manner.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Alongside all of these other missions was the traditional

CMS or DMS role of providing in-house design and

.managing troop construction. Designs included

multistory, wooden buildings; concrete guard towers; building

renovations; and roads and runways. Structural, civil,

mechanical, electrical, environmental, and security engineering

were integrated to create complete design-build packages for

other units or contractors to execute. The QA/QC section

worked with local concrete batch plants to improve the quality

and consistency of the concrete by sharing expertise and

conducting regular testing to ensure that the specifications

were met. The QA/QC section also worked with units and

contractors to ensure conformity of the plans and

specifications or to work out variances, if required. Survey

teams were sent out all over Iraq on missions that included

performing 1,000-acre surveys and spot surveys to ensuring

that new equipment was properly set and integrated into

existing systems.

Conclusion

T.

he 130th Engineer Brigade could not have accomplished

these missions without Detachment 8, 412th ENCOM.

Through its leadership and technical expertise—

ranging from proactively assessing possible future projects

(on and off post), supervising and assisting the FETs, and

working with engineers of all services—Detachment 8 was a

true force multiplier for the brigade and accomplished much

more than just management.

Major Kemper is the structural, mechanical, and force protection

engineer for Detachment 8. Commissioned in the United States Army

Reserves, he has commanded a combat support equipment company

and a mechanized combat engineer company. Since joining the 412th

ENCOM in 2003, he has served in Germany, Italy, Korea, Vietnam, and

Thailand. He is a registered professional engineer in Louisiana, Texas,

and South Carolina and holds a mechanical engineering degree from

Louisiana State University. In civilian life, he is a consulting engineer.

(“More Than Management,”continued from page 31)

38 Engineer July-September 2006

S-3 construction officer, and if the yard had sufficient materials

on hand.

Conclusion

The Class IV yard came a long way since the

130th Engineer Brigade assumed control. It effectively and efficiently developed, managed, and

improved the yard to proudly hand off to the next engineer

brigade. The 130th Class IV yard truly “made a difference” in

Iraq!

Captain Swartzlander is the S-4 in the 130th Engineer

Brigade. His past assignments include survey platoon leader

for the 320th Engineer Company (Topographic), executive

officer for the 502d Engineer Company (MRB), and S-4 for

the 565th Engineer Battalion. He is a graduate of the United

States Military Academy.
July-September 2006 Engineer 39

T.

hese days, civilians are not just on the battlefield; they

are shaping it and contributing to the fight. In the

maintenance and logistics world, the Army is relying

heavily on contracted civilian support so it can focus more on

the mission. This is great for the Soldier on the ground.

The 130th Engineer Brigade Maintenance Office was

responsible for coordinating and communicating with these

outside civilian agencies. If a unit is deploying to Iraq,

especially as a part of a higher headquarters engineer element,

the unit should prepare and train its Soldiers for the presence

of these civilians on the battlefield. It is a lot like the civilian

business world—the unit will have to make contacts, watch

for upcoming fieldings and projects and, most of all, have a

good rapport with the civilians.

Civilians on the Battlefield

On a daily basis, the 130th worked with civilian

contractors employed by KBR, Inc. (formerly Kellogg,

Brown, & Root); ManTech International Corporation;

Caterpillar®; American Defense Systems, Inc. (ADSI); and

L-3 Communications, as well as Department of the Army (DA)

civilians.

KBR

KBR provides everything from maintenance support to

transportation of parts and equipment. In addition to having

military service units operate maintenance support shops, the

Army hires contractors to enhance the capabilities of the units.

In-theater, KBR contractors perform the

duties of the supply support activity (SSA) and

the direct support shop, under the guidance and direction

of the assigned Army unit. Because they don’t have a rank

structure, there are slight differences in management, but the

equipment is fixed and the parts are supplied nonetheless.

ManTech

ManTech supports many different types of equipment. The

maintenance shop frequently interacts with this agency,

attending meetings with ManTech contractors and project

managers. ManTech works for the Product Manager, Assured

Mobility Systems; together, the Army and ManTech have

improved route clearance equipment. Although the

ManTech shop isn’t run like a military maintenance shop,

similarities do exist, such as using a DA Form 5988-E,

Equipment Maintenance and Inspection Worksheet, to

open a job order.

By Captain Caprice Vargas

A grader receives additional armor.
40 Engineer July-September 2006

Caterpillar

Caterpillar handles many pieces of special engineer

equipment that is not logistically supported by the Army

system. A lot of engineer equipment is difficult to maintain,

and parts are hard to acquire. So the maintenance shop relies

on Caterpillar to provide mechanics for upper-level maintenance and parts. A blanket purchase agreement is used to

buy hard-to-acquire parts for equipment such as dozers,

scrapers, and graders. Once the parts arrive from the Caterpillar

delivery system, their mechanics also install them. This

operation is run similarly to ManTech.

ADSI and L-3 Communications

At Logistics Support Area (LSA) Anaconda, ADSI and L-3

Communications have made a joint effort to support engineers

with special missions and special equipment needs. The

Product Manager, Combat Engineer/Material Handling

Equipment, hired ADSI. Civilians are in charge of the shop,

and it runs well.

Parts Acquisition

T.

he parts acquisition for the brigade was a huge

challenge. Many civilians helped the 130th with parts

acquisition and tracking. The DA civilians at the

United States Army Tank-automotive and Armaments

Command (TACOM) and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)

helped track down parts through the Army system. Parts

managers from Caterpillar and the AutoMAK General Trading

and Contracting Company helped acquire critical parts for

engineer equipment, including older equipment that is relevant

to the mission but being phased out or replaced. These parts

were generally shipped using civilian methods until they arrive

in-theater, and then it became the unit’s responsibility to

transport the part on location.

Conclusion

Civilian and military personnel all have different missions

in the Operation Iraqi Freedom theater. Without these agencies,

vulnerabilities that could injure or kill Soldiers in action would

exist. Our goal is one and the same: Win the war and keep our

Soldiers safe.

Captain Vargas is the brigade maintenance officer for the

130th Engineer Brigade. Previous assignments include

production platoon leader, 320th Engineer Company

(Topographic); executive officer, Headquarters and

Headquarters Detachment, 565th Engineer Battalion; and

executive officer, Headquarters and Headquarters Company,

130th Engineer Brigade. She holds a degree from Illinois

State University.

An up-armored D7

dozer is tested.
July-September 2006 Engineer 41

Any mission outside the confines of a forward operating

base or logistics support area (LSA) has its hazards.

.Humanitarian and civil affairs missions are no

exception. This was experienced when “Pioneer” Soldiers from

Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 130th Engineer

Brigade, had a mission to conduct an inspection of a small

school near LSA Anaconda, Iraq, to determine the feasibility

of making improvements.

The noncommissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) of the

brigade commander’s combat security team coordinated the

mission. He wanted to make sure they planned for every

contingency. He used aerial photography and current

intelligence information to prepare his plan. Considerations

included site security, rally points, partisan linkup, and battle

drills for enemy contact such as improvised explosive devices

(IEDs) or sniper fire.

Meanwhile, the team conducted classes on using the M2

machine gun and rehearsed casualty evacuation (CASEVAC)

procedures. Even though this was a humanitarian and civil

affairs mission, the team needed to be prepared for emergencies.

While the team members were highly trained in their battle

drills, many of them from different military occupational

specialties had not made it “outside the wire” yet. With a

detailed operation order, rock drills, and rehearsals, all of the

Soldiers involved felt confident in their mission.

 When the team members arrived at the school that morning,

they performed their battle drills flawlessly. Once their vehicles

were in the designated sectors of fire to secure the site, the

translator and the company commander linked up with the

school headmaster. At this point, the Soldiers were able to

dismount and greet the gathering crowd of children.

When the team inspected the school building, it discovered

that there was no electricity or water. The headmaster expressed

his interest in expanding the school and getting a reliable

source of electricity. He said that the school’s population would

continue to grow and that the facility was needed for teaching

all of the children.

When the inspection was completed, the Soldiers moved

on to the humanitarian part of the mission. The children were

given school supplies, toys, shoes, and food. Many of the

gifts were collected from packages received by the Soldiers

from friends and families back home. Additional gifts were

provided by the 3d Corps Support Command (COSCOM),

Assistant Chief of Staff, Civil Affairs (G-5) staff. The looks on

the faces of the children made all of the preparation worthwhile.

This mission was one more step toward the rebuilding of Iraq.

Captain Henderson is the commander of Headquarters

and Headquarters Company, 130th Engineer Brigade. His

previous assignments include S-3, 130th Engineer Brigade,

Hanau, Germany. He is a graduate of the Airborne School,

Engineer Captain’s Career Course, Combined Arms Services

and Staff School, Ranger School, and the North Atlantic

Treaty Organization (NATO) Officers Course. He holds a

bachelor’s in environmental engineering from North Carolina State University.

Photo by Staff Sergeant James Morris

By Captain Brian J. Henderson
42 Engineer July-September 2006

O.

ne of the most rewarding experiences for a Soldier

deployed to Iraq is to see the Iraqi people rebuilding

their country and improving their way of life. On

1 April 2006, the Equipment Platoon, Headquarters and Support

Company, 84th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Heavy), had the

unique opportunity to impact both of these goals by instructing Iraqi engineers on the operation of heavy engineer

equipment. At the end of the day, the Americans and the Iraqis

had learned a valuable lesson in engineering and team building.

Engineer forces are critical to the country of Iraq. As the

Iraqi force grows and trains, it will acquire more responsibility

for the reconstruction of its country’s infrastructure and force

protection measures and the basic mobility, countermobility,

and survivability of combat engineer forces. The Iraqi engineers

have built their fleet of equipment from various coalition forces.

Now, the challenge is to train them on this equipment.

The Iraqi army has an excellent engineer training area

located near Baghdad. With plenty of open space, scrap yards,

and abandoned buildings, the Phoenix Academy at Camp Taji

is the perfect setting for heavy engineer equipment training.

The academy—also known as the Iraqi Army Engineer

School—will grow and develop as a site for future Iraqi

engineer soldiers to hone their operating skills. After graduating

from the academy, the Iraqi engineers are assigned to their

units to continue training and integrating with other military

branches, develop their infrastructure, and create viable

engineer units in the field.

The Equipment Platoon Soldiers helped the Iraqi army move

closer to its goal by providing expert instruction on the engineer

equipment. The platoon leader selected five noncommissioned

officers, which included a staff sergeant with years of

experience as a D7 dozer instructor at the United States Army

Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. For the oneday training session, each instructor prepared a 45-minute

block of instruction covering the basic components, operating

procedures, and operator maintenance of the D7 dozer, the

5-yard bucket loader, and the M917 20-ton dump truck.

During the morning session, the instructors watched as

the Phoenix Academy cadre held formation and marched their

soldiers to the training area. The Iraqis rotated to different

pieces of equipment and listened as the instructors taught

them the basics of each engineer asset. Interpreters were onsite to assist with communication. This verbal instruction

period gave the Iraqis a chance to ask questions and receive

an overview of the equipment’s operation and capabilities.

During the afternoon session, the instructors organized

“hands-on” instruction so that each student had an

opportunity to operate the equipment. The instructors rode

alongside the Iraqi soldiers as they operated the equipment

for the first time. This enabled the instructors to point out

techniques and capabilities of the machinery that was hard to

communicate during the morning session. The American and

Iraqi cadre conversed and took notice of the sense of

accomplishment their soldiers displayed. It was evident they

were excited to receive the equipment and instruction and

step closer to their goal of self-sustainability.

The Equipment Platoon not only successfully completed

its mission to train the Iraqi engineers but also walked away

with a better understanding of what a great challenge it is to

rebuild a country. The experience was a cultural exchange

between nations rather than merely a block of instruction. The

Equipment Platoon’s experience and interaction at the Phoenix

Academy created a more solidified engineer team between the

84th Engineer Battalion and the future Iraqi engineer force.

Second Lieutenant Kangas is the heavy equipment platoon

leader for Headquarters and Support Company, 84th

Engineer Battalion. He holds a bachelor’s in business from

Kennesaw State University in Atlanta, Georgia.
July-September 2006 Engineer 43

T.

he 130th Engineer Brigade was HOT (Helping Our

Troops) and MAD (Making a Difference) in Iraq.

During Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) 05-07, members

of the 130th cleared improvised explosive devices (IEDs), filled

potholes, provided electrical power, and built living quarters

across the Iraqi province. As the brigade commander said from

the beginning, “Make the days count, don’t count the days.”

The brigade’s deployment to Iraq has now ended, but everyone

worked hard to make sure that the efforts and time put in

would leave a mark that would last until long after American

forces are home.

Working on the 130th Engineer Brigade staff opened the

eyes of this junior officer. At a platoon, company, or even

battalion level, the big picture can often be overlooked. But

after working on the theater corps engineer brigade staff, a

whole new world was brought to light about all the great things

Soldiers everywhere are doing in Iraq. The main focus of OIF

05-07 was on rebuilding and transitioning power to the Iraqis,

a piece of the puzzle that the 130th played a large part in.

Members of the 46th Engineer Battalion, the 913th Combat

Support Equipment Company, the 412th Engineer Command,

and the 84th Engineer Battalion worked diligently through the

blazing heat to rebuild their areas of operation. Whether it was

repairing roads, opening river crossings, or building living

quarters to improve quality of life, these units were the key to

success for all missions.

Not to be outdone, the 54th Engineer Battalion and the

110th Engineer Battalion spent their days in Iraq making the

roads safe for military convoys and civilians alike by clearing

IEDs—one of the deadliest hazards of the war. Each day, those

Soldiers put their lives on the line for the mission and wouldn’t

quit until their time in country was done. Put in situations that

would make most people shy away, these Soldiers boldly took

on their mission and raised the bar of excellence for future

operations in their field.

OIF 05-07 had its hardships, because many of the battalions

experienced loss. Soldiers were wounded and left the theater

to return home, and others paid the ultimate sacrifice for their

country. It is the memories of those brothers and sisters the

brigade lost that drove the remaining Soldiers to strive harder

for excellence and never let up, honoring the memory of their

fallen comrades. It is never easy to say goodbye, but their

sacrifices will not be in vain.

Overall, the brigade’s time in Iraq was a huge success, and

the Soldiers went home holding their heads high—proud of

what they accomplished. Whether working on a brigade staff

or working as part of a team in a platoon, each Soldier played

an important role in the success of the 130th Engineer Brigade

during OIF 05-07. The articles on the preceding pages (4 – 42)

tell their stories and the part they played in the reconstruction

of Iraq and the Global War on Terrorism.

First Lieutenant McMahon was the Assistant S-1 of the

130th Engineer Brigade. Her previous assignment was as

Headquarters Platoon Leader of the 320th Engineer

Company (Topographic). She holds a degree from the

University of Notre Dame.

By First Lieutenant Sarah E. McMahon Photo by Jimmy Lane Jr.
44 Engineer July-September 2006

Consider the case of the brigade special troops battalion

(BSTB). There is no approved doctrine and no distinct

approach to growing a leader for its ranks. No single

branch currently owns it nor populates its leadership roles.

Across the Army, it is considered a collection of “specialists”

with no clear task and purpose—a battalion in search of a

mission and a meaningful role within the brigade combat team

(BCT). Few understand it. Fewer still have seen what happens

when you unlock the vast potential that resides within the

assemblage of this seemingly unrelated group of maneuver

supporters.

Simply put...you must be “all the way in.” To really “get”

the BSTB, you must fully embrace transformation and the new

paradigms associated with the Army redesign. You cannot

just dip your little toe in the water—you have to take off the

harnesses, shed completely the old way of doing business,

and fully immerse in the transformation “pool.” Doing so

reveals this battalion as a truly powerful enabler of maneuver,

synchronizing and synergizing effects across the brigade’s

area of operations (AO), and delivering for its respective BCT

in ways that are orders of magnitude greater than what was

possible without it. More importantly, the BSTB is a battletested battalion that exists to address some of our most

challenging combat missions, to include execution of

intelligence and communications functions, assured mobility,

reconstruction and essential services project management, and

military police operations. It is a battalion whose success is

directly linked to the success of its supported brigade. It is a

battalion whose every leader and every Soldier had better,

themselves, be all the way in.

 What follows, then, is a collection of findings and

observations that describe what “all the way in” might look

like. It is a combination of lessons learned at the National

Training Center and regular dialogue with BSTB commanders

and leaders in various stages of the deployment cycle. This

article reflects the growing body of knowledge and

understanding about the capability of this powerful organization and the new operational paradigm that must exist to

fully leverage it. Finally, I believe it reflects the vision of our

Army leadership in creating modular, capabilities-based units

that are able to fight and win on a full-spectrum battlefield. But

to understand this vision...you must be all the way in!

Background

T.

he decision to create a new BSTB was made after

several...observations of the newly fielded Stryker

brigade combat team (SBCT) revealed a need to bring

the many separate, enabling combat support units under the

control of one commander. The span of control in the SBCT

organizational design proved to be too extensive for effective

C2 [command and control]of these many enabling eaches.

The BSTB organizational design allows the BCT

commander...to concentrate [his] focus on the battle in all

threat environments, without the added direct responsibilities

that these small units require.1

The Army recognized a challenge in its modular design

with respect to the command and control of small (company

and below) maneuver support units. The brigade commander

needs to focus on fighting his respective battalions. The

brigade staff identifies subordinate unit tasks, the completion

of which will enable the accomplishment of the commander’s

intent, while synchronizing and resourcing subordinate

battalions for success. A brigade commander and his staff

simply are not resourced—and frankly do not have the time or

energy—to command and control, let alone resource, prepare,

train, or provide administrative oversight to these disparate

units, dozens of which may be present within a deployed BCT

formation.

The nearly 40 BSTBs in the Army exist to help solve this

problem. BSTBs command and control attached and organic

units—period. They execute the tasks assigned to them. They

leverage the full “team of teams” to accomplish the mission

according to the BCT commander’s intent. They receive the

tasks assigned to them by the brigade, translate the tasks into

synchronized mission orders, and complete them in a way that

adds value to the brigade.

What kind of missions? Generally the BSTB executes

missions that extend across the BCT AO. These are missions

that exceed the geographic boundaries of a maneuver task

force and for which oversight and command and control

responsibilities reside at the brigade level (i.e., the BSTB).

These missions might include intelligence and communication

operations, route reconnaissance and clearance, civil affairs

missions, or essential services management—the execution

of which generally requires the crossing of task force

By Lieutenant Colonel Thomas H. Magness

Brigade Special Troops Battalions

All the Way In Part I: All the Way In All the Way In
July-September 2006 Engineer 45

with all of its resources, is put on the mission for which we

used to ask a staff section at one or two persons deep? Not

even close. Compared to the synergy possible when a

battalion, all the way in, focuses all of its resources on the

planning, preparation, and execution of tasks to meet the

brigade commander’s intent? It is an order of magnitude

difference.

BSTB Doctrinal Key Tasks

K.

.ey to accepting the premises implicit within the new

paradigm is an understanding of the doctrinal tasks

and functions now provided by the BSTB. These

are the value-added functions that must be routinely provided

to address the problems associated with the command and

control of small units. They are among the limiting factors that

prevent staff officers from being able to do more than assign

tasks, and the type of deliverable for which the BSTB is now

responsible. They are the critical details that are often the

difference between good...and great.

 Exercise command and control over BSTB units during

the preparation and execution of BCT-directed missions.

BSTB commanders are held accountable for both.

 Ensure that BSTB commanders and leaders conduct

precombat inspections and rehearsals focused on the

execution of assigned BCT tasks. Think about this: Who

performed these roles for small units before their assignment

to the BSTB?

 Ensure that BSTB unit assets are positioned to execute

their assigned tasks. For the sake of clarification, this

requirement is neither to determine the tasks nor to

determine the required positioning. Those tasks are

accomplished at the brigade staff level. Consistent with

the new paradigm, the BSTB ensures that the tasks are

accomplished in order to meet the BCT commander’s intent.

 Coordinate to ensure that combat service support, force

health protection, and security are provided for BSTB

organic and attached units positioned throughout the

BCT AO. The BSTB does not have the capability to

resource every one of its subordinate units across the width

and depth of the BCT AO. Its mission is to coordinate

resources and, when required, to provide the resources

themselves.

 Coordinate or provide security for organic and attached

units moving throughout the BCT AO.

2

 Small units cannot

generally secure themselves. The BSTB is responsible for

coordinating security through the supported unit or, if

boundaries and often reaches across the full width and depth

of the BCT AO.

The New Paradigm

T.

here is a new way of doing business, a new paradigm,

consistent with being all the way in. Tasks that were

formerly assigned directly by the BCT to each of its

small maneuver support units are now formally assigned to

the higher headquarters uniquely responsible for the execution

of those tasks—the BSTB. All tasks are assigned by the brigade

commander (through the S-3) to the BSTB. It is the responsibility of the BSTB to determine how best to leverage its

specialized units to accomplish the mission and meet the

commander’s intent.

Implicit within this new paradigm is the understanding that

commanders and specialized unit leaders do not “work for”

staff officers. Gone are the stovepipes and shortcuts whereby

BCT staff officers reach down into these small units and issue

“fire missions.” Staff officers assign tasks to the BSTB. The

BSTB commander and his staff translate these tasks into fully

planned, synchronized, and resourced missions—and are held

accountable for mission accomplishment!

Resistance to this new paradigm (What new organization

or design does not come without its naysayers?) comes in

two forms: The first is the concern that the BSTB introduces

an additional layer of bureaucracy between specialized units

and the brigade staffs assigning them tasks. On the contrary,

the BSTB exists to translate the tasks into simple, executable

mission orders while resourcing subordinates for success.

More importantly, the BSTB implements necessary measures

to prepare units to execute all tasks beyond the traditional

capability of staff elements—and then monitors their

completion. This concern is further alleviated by BSTB

commanders who leverage warning orders, provide dedicated

liaison officers, and encourage cross talk between staff sections

(brigade – battalion) and between brigade staff elements and

the specialized units under their command.

The second resistance to this new approach is from those

who feel that the old way was working fine, negating the need

for change. (They are not all the way in!) What they cannot

possibly know (until they see it in action) is...compared to

what? Compared to the deliverables possible when a battalion,

The BSTB is an integral component of the

modularized BCT. I rely on them every day to lead my

low-density unique units and keep their specialized

equipment operational.

BCT Commander, 3d Infantry Division

Command: The authority and responsibility for

effectively using available resources for planning the

employment of, organizing, directing, coordinating, and

controlling military forces for the accomplishment of

assigned missions.

Control: The regulation of forces and other

battlefield operating systems to accomplish the

mission in accordance with the commander’s intent.

FM 1-02, Operational Terms and Graphics
required, providing the security itself. It’s no

surprise—there are no “security units” within the BSTB.

The combined resources in the team of teams must work

together to provide necessary security assets.

A critical function woven throughout each of these tasks

is the requirement of the BSTB to capably address attachments

and detachments. The capacity of the brigade to receive

modules is directly related to the ability of the BSTB to serve

as the “socket” for the incorporation of any number, form, and

function of modular “plugs.” The BSTB must have adequate

standing operating procedures (SOPs) to address the receipt

of attachments—to include logistical, administrative, and

tactical issues—in order to facilitate their rapid integration

into BCT operations.

The final doctrinal role for the BSTB is perhaps the one

upon which most BCT commanders rely—perform roles as

dictated by the BCT commander. These are generally the

missions that cross task force boundaries and extend across

the full reach of the brigade’s AO. Note the heavy maneuver

support focus in these missions. They include (but are certainly

not limited to) the following:

 Command and control of detainee operations. Current

Army doctrine on detainee operations highlights the

criticality of “green tab” leaders at every echelon of

detention. BCTs often leverage the BSTB as a natural fit

for this role. Who better than the higher headquarters for

military police (detainee proponents) and military

intelligence (interrogation experts) (i.e., the BSTB) to

effectively oversee this vital mission?

 Forward operating base (FOB) defense. BSTBs either

receive augmentation forces or coordinate between tenant

units to provide all elements of base defense, command

and control, and life support. This is a “current fight”

extension of the rear area headquarters mission envisioned

for this battalion during its original design. This critical

mission must be planned, resourced, rehearsed, and

executed incorporating all elements of base defense.

 Route reconnaissance and clearance/assured mobility

command and control. BSTBs leverage the unique

capabilities of subordinate military intelligence, military

police, engineer, and explosive ordnance disposal units to

46 Engineer July-September 2006

address threats to mobility such as improvised explosive

devices (IEDs). This is clearly one of those “crossboundary” issues in which the synergy of putting all

enablers under one common headquarters (assigned the

mission and provided with the resources) can have

powerful results.

 Reconstruction headquarters and essential services

project management. BCTs routinely rely on the BSTB

(reorganized at the staff level for this mission) to provide

oversight for critical infrastructure repairs. Not surprisingly,

this mission often becomes the BSTB main effort and ties

directly to most of the BCT operational priorities.

In-Theater Validation

BCT commanders continue to rely on their BSTB

commanders for some of the brigade’s most critical

functions. In a recent, informal query of fourteen BSTB

commanders, only three responded with battalion missions

(specified or implied) that read anything like “force provider.”

Most common among the respondents was service in the

mission areas of base defense (8/14); detainee operations

(8/14); and reconstruction/essential services (11/14).

Interestingly, rather than force provider, BSTB units are

assuming the form and/or function as “nonlethal effects task

force,” “maneuver support task force,” “combined arms effects

battalion,” and “nonlethal fires battalion.” True combat

multipliers and value added, indeed.

Deployed commanders find that there is simply too much

to do and too many critical functions that cross task force

boundaries without the synchronization of effects made

possible through the BSTB. The stakes are too high to ask

small, over-tasked, brigade-level staff sections to command

and control subordinate units. Successful execution is made

possible by putting a battalion headquarters (a BSTB) on those

things that require battalion-level resources and effort. Mission

accomplishment and the best practices in-theater point to the

value added, many times exponentially, of this approach.

Parting Shots

Some mistakenly view the BSTB as a large headquarters

company, a force provider of trained and resourced

specialized units back to the brigade for tasking and

The BSTB command team not only executed

millions of dollars worth of reconstruction but also

aggressively worked with media to get the message

out. They offered me a headquarters that could focus

on an area that influenced millions of people and

influenced the core of the insurgency. They were an

invaluable asset to this combat brigade. I wouldn’t

leave home without them.

BCT commander, 3d Infantry Division
by BSTBs (reconstruction, assured mobility, detainee

operations) are made possible by units that think outside of

themselves, that knock down old stovepipes, and that work

together for the common good. This is only made possible

through branch-immaterial, selfless, team-centric thought and

action. That is what being “all the way in” is really all about.

Lieutenant Colonel Magness is an Army War College

fellow at the University of Texas. Previously he served as an

observer-controller at the National Training Center (NTC)

at Fort Irwin, California.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author

and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or positions

of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S.

government.

Endnotes

1

 Field Manual Interim (FMI) 3-90.61, Brigade Troops

Battalion Operations. March 2005.

2

 Ibid.

Note: “Brigade Special Troops Battalions, Part II: Synergy”

will be published in the October-December 2006 issue of

Engineer.

July-September 2006 Engineer 47

employment. Listen...the Army does not centrally select

battalion-level commanders and command sergeants major for

those kinds of roles. And with a war going on...it certainly

does not need them. That type of approach is not grounded in

either combat training center or theater lessons learned and

reverts back to the problem that Army leaders felt existed when

they created the BSTB! This is a unit designed to “command

and control attached and organic units” for missions that reach

across the BCT AO.

One word appears repeatedly in any discussion about the

BSTB: execution. The combining of units under a common

headquarters must translate into results. The new paradigm

must, in fact, be better. Separate units that were previously

unfocused, unsynchronized, poorly resourced, and challenged

during execution must now deliver. Simply put, the BSTB—

like any other battalion—must accomplish its assigned

missions.

Successful execution is made possible through leaders who

create synergy. (See note at right.) The combination of

maneuver support units that seemingly have nothing to do

with each other (military intelligence, signal, military police,

engineer, explosive ordnance disposal, civil affairs, chemical)

must produce a total that is greater than the sum of its parts.

Mathematically: 1+1+1>3. The bulk of the missions provided

Dedication

The following members of the Engineer Regiment have been lost in the Global War on Terrorism since the last issue of Engineer.

We dedicate this issue to them.

Sergeant Carlton A. Clark 2d Brigade Troop Battalion, 2d Brigade Combat Team Fort Campbell, Kentucky

Staff Sergeant Stephen A. Seale 2d Brigade Troop Battalion, 2d Brigade Combat Team Fort Campbell, Kentucky

Corporal Jose Zamora 2d Brigade Troop Battalion, 2d Brigade Combat Team Fort Campbell, Kentucky

Sergeant Jason J. Buzzard 8th Infantry Regiment, 2d Brigade Combat Team Fort Hood, Texas

Sergeant Ian T. Sanchez 32d Infantry Regiment, 3d Brigade Combat Team Fort Drum, New York

First Sergeant Christopher C. Rafferty Charlie Company, 37th Engineer Battalion Fort Bragg, North Carolina

Corporal Ryan J. Clark 40th Engineer Battalion, 1st Brigade Combat Team Baumholder, Germany

Specialist Robert L. Jones 40th Engineer Battalion, 1st Brigade Combat Team Baumholder, Germany

Sergeant Reyes Ramirez 40th Engineer Battalion, 1st Brigade Combat Team Baumholder, Germany

Corporal Andy D. Anderson Bravo Company, 46th Engineer Battalion Fort Rucker, Alabama

Sergeant Carlos E. Pernell Bravo Company, 46th Engineer Battalion Fort Rucker, Alabama

Specialist Troy C. Linden 54th Engineer Battalion, 130th Engineer Brigade Bamberg, Germany

Specialist Joseph P. Micks 54th Engineer Battalion, 130th Engineer Brigade Bamberg, Germany

Staff Sergeant Omar D. Flores 54th Engineer Battalion, 130th Engineer Brigade Bamberg, Germany

Sergeant Sirlou C. Cuaresma 62d Engineer Battalion, 13th Containment Command Fort Hood, Texas

Sergeant James P. Muldoon 68th Combined Arms Regiment, 3d Heavy Brigade Combat Team Fort Carson, Colorado

Captain Patrick D. Damon Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 240th Engineer Group Augusta, Maine

Sergeant Leroy Segura, Jr. 362d Engineer Company, 54th Engineer Battalion Fort Benning, Georgia

Sergeant Bryan C. Luckey 562d Engineer Company, 172d Stryker Brigade Combat Team Fort Wainwright, Alaska

Sergeant Dustin D. Laird 913th Engineer Company, 46th Engineer Battalion Union City, Tennessee
48 Engineer July-September 2006

T.

he most common response Army divers hear when

explaining their profession—no matter what they are

doing or where they are in the world—is “I didn’t know

the Army had divers.” Although Army divers have been in the

fight since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, this

response is still heard today in Iraq, Kuwait, and the rest of

the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) area of

responsibility. The 74th Engineer Team (Dive) and the

544th Engineer Team (Dive) were deployed to serve during

the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, and their missions primarily

consisted of conducting river reconnaissance, mine clearance,

bridge demolition, hydrographic surveys, weapons of mass

destruction (WMD) searches, and personnel recovery (see

“Army Diver Missions in Iraq,” Engineer, July-September 2003,

page 28.) After completing five months of service, the

544th was sent home, but in December 2005, was again

deployed to support Operation Iraqi Freedom. The unit

conducted its relief in place (RIP)/transfer of authority (TOA)

with the 511th Engineer Team (Dive). Currently, the 544th falls

under the Coalition Forces Land Component Command

(CFLCC) C-7 (engineer staff section) and Area Support Group–

Kuwait (ASG–KU). Although some missions have changed

over the past few years, many remain the same.

Scope of Work

T.

he presence and usefulness of the Army diver is

historically lost in the constant changing of the guard

within CFLCC and Multinational Corps–Iraq

(MNC–I). It has become customary for the dive team commander to conduct briefings for the combatant commander

and high-ranking officials in Kuwait, Iraq, and Bahrain for

CFLCC, MNC–I, and the United States Naval Forces Central

Command (NAVCENT) on the Army engineer diver mission

and their broad scope of work.

Security Swims

One mission consisted of assisting a Navy explosive

ordnance disposal (EOD) unit with antiterrorism force

protection (ATFP) security swims at shipping ports within the

CENTCOM area of responsibility. To date, the 544th has

conducted more than 30 ATFP security swims. The team works

with local officials to assist in the port security mission, which

usually involves the help of the Navy Criminal Investigation

Service (NCIS) and local medical support. The major customer

of the ATFP security swims is the Army watercraft team. The

watercrafts maneuver throughout the CENTCOM area of

responsibility, providing necessary resupply items.

Army Engineer Divers in the Fight

By First Lieutenant Thomas Darrow
July-September 2006 Engineer 49

Since the watercraft team is well aware of the usefulness of

Army divers, it takes full advantage of the other benefits the

dive team has to offer. In addition to conducting hull surveys

and clearing screw propellers, the 544th has cleaned the bottom

of vessels maintained by the United States Army Materiel

Command (AMC). These vessels are part of the pre-positioned

stock of Army watercraft maintained by AMC. The divers have

also recovered ammunition, weapon parts, and personal

equipment dropped over the side of vessels while in port.

Personnel Recovery

The 544th was also called on for one of the more unfortunate, but honorable, missions an Army diver can

accomplish: the recovery of a fallen service member. While

planning another mission, an inquiry was received about the

usefulness of the Army diver in personnel recovery. Two days

later, the team was sent to assist with the recovery of two

missing Marines. A troop carrier with nine Marines aboard

had flipped over in a river, and two of them had not been

recovered. Over an 8-day period, the team diligently searched

a 20-kilometer stretch of the river extending from the crash site

to the mouth of the Euphrates River. The team located a 50-

caliber machine gun, an M16 rifle, an M9 pistol, and multiple

50-caliber machine gun rounds lost in the accident. In keeping

with the Army diver tradition, the team did not leave the site

until the missing personnel were recovered. Local Iraqi

civilians discovered the Marines 70 kilometers downstream

from the accident site and turned the bodies over to coalition

forces.

Reconnaissance

After returning from that mission, the team was requested

for a reconnaissance mission on a flooded basement that was

scheduled for renovation. The basement had been mysteriously flooded since 2003, and no one knew why. British forces

requested outside diving support for the dive team. Due to

the uncertainty of the building’s condition, the 544th deployed

its remotely operated vehicle and viewed the basement from

the safety of the building’s driest floor.

During the mission, the 544th was needed for the emergency

recovery of a downed Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).

For unknown reasons, the UAV plummeted into a small lake,

and its recovery was necessary to investigate the cause of the

vehicle’s malfunction. A four-man team successfully recovered

all the parts of the UAV. With the deployment of the four-man

team, the detachment spread out and worked on separate tasks.

Army engineer dive teams are designed by their very nature

to be separately employed autonomously of each other, a feat

the 544th has successfully accomplished several times since

being deployed to Iraq.

Opposite page: Members of the 544th Engineer Team (Dive) recover a 50-caliber machine gun that was

found during a search for missing personnel.

Above: A Soldier conducts a welding operation on a metal ramp.
50 Engineer July-September 2006

Salvage

During the recovery mission, a request was received to

conduct a reconnaissance and salvage of an Iraqi float bridge.

The team focused on this task after completing the recovery

mission. Destroyed by coalition forces, the bridge needed to

be removed from the water so locals could cross the river in

small boats as part of their everyday lives. The team decided

to send two separate elements. The first team conducted a

reconnaissance of the project site, and the second team

brought additional equipment and personnel needed to

complete the task. After the first team arrived, it was redirected

to conduct a personnel recovery from a helicopter crash

elsewhere. The team quickly moved to the crash site, deployed

side scan sonar equipment to locate the helicopter, and then

conducted diving operations around the clock until they

recovered the remains of the two helicopter pilots. The other

team members sent additional manpower and equipment to

help recover the helicopter. After the successful completion

of the mission, the team proceeded to work on the reconnaissance and salvage of the Iraqi float bridge.

Other Missions

In addition, the 544th has worked in Kuwait to accomplish

other valuable missions. The team conducted an inspection

and repair mission of a security system on an oil platform.

Future missions at oil platforms have already been developed

for later in the year to increase security and improve the quality

of life for the Sailors stationed there.

Other missions included joint work with and for the Kuwait

navy. The dive team spent 30 days conducting underwater

cutting operations on two old Iraqi tugboats that the Kuwaiti

navy used for target practice. In order to scrap

the tugs, the propulsion system needed to

be cut off the bottom of each of the tugboats.

Once the team cut the propulsion system,

using their underwater cutting equipment, the

tugboats were beached and scrapped. They

also welded a ramp extension together so a

Kuwaiti unit could board its vehicles on

Army watercraft to conduct a mission. The

Kuwaiti vehicles did not have enough

clearance and needed a little lift to prevent

damage.

Diver Qualification Process

I

.

n spite of such a busy schedule, the team

managed to squeeze in a deep diving

exercise the first week in March that

allowed them to qualify some of its newly

dubbed First Class Divers. After promotion

to staff sergeant, a diver attends First Class

Diver School in Panama City Beach, Florida,

at the Naval Diving and Salvage Training

Center (NDSTC). After completing the course,

the First Class Diver undergoes an extremely

intense qualification process to earn the title of being a qualified

diving supervisor and capable of operating on his own. These

qualifications and corresponding acquired skills are the

backbone of the Army diving community. Becoming

qualified allows diving supervisors to be deployed independently to any location in the world to conduct diving

operations. As an example of the skill and competence of

these staff sergeants, the majority of these missions were

completed or supervised by staff sergeants operating

independently.

No Job Too Large

T.

he Army diving community is small, and the current

presence in-theater is even smaller, but as Army

engineer divers of the past have shown, and as the

544th continues to demonstrate during its current deployment,

no job is too large. Eventually, the combatant commander will

no longer be surprised that Army divers exist, but rather be

aware of the benefits they offer and seek out those skills.

First Lieutenant Darrow is assigned to Third Army, Area

Support Group–Kuwait, while deployed in support of

Operation Iraqi Freedom. He was previously assigned to 7th

Transportation Group (Composite), 6th Transportation

Battalion, United States Army Dive Company (Provisional),

Fort Eustis, Virginia. He is a graduate of the Engineer Officer

Basic Course, the Diver Course Phase 1, the Sapper Leader

Course, the Diving Basic Officer Course, and the Salvage

Officer Course. He holds a bachelor’s in business management

from Providence College, Providence, Rhode Island.

A diver prepares to cut a rudder on a tugboat.
July-September 2006 Engineer 51

E.

ngineers are performing a major role in defeating

the increased threat of deadly improvised explosive

devices (IEDs) in Iraq. Their role in the counter-IED

fight is to protect military convoys and the Iraqi population

by searching for and removing IEDs from the roadways. The

engineers work in teams, which are proudly known as IED

Hunters, as they perform their duties with courage and honor

at the risk of losing their own lives. According to statistics

from June 2006, route clearance teams account for a significant

portion of all IED finds in Iraq.

Explosive Hazards Coordination Cell

I

.

n the fall of 2005, officers and Soldiers from the 115th

Engineer Battalion were mobilized as the Explosive

Hazards Coordination Cell (EHCC)—formerly known as

the Mine and Explosive Ordnance Information Coordination

Cell (MEOICC)—to support Operation Iraqi Freedom. One of

the primary missions of the EHCC is engineer route clearance.

Explosive Hazards Coordination Cell

Mobile Observation Teams

By First Lieutenant Phillip M. Smith

Mobile Observation Teams

I

.

n January 2006, the EHCC organized mobile observation

teams (MOTs) to help in the counter-IED fight. The MOTs

monitor the progress of route clearance teams at the corps

level. Their mission is to observe, collect, write, publish, and

distribute route clearance information. One of the ways they

do this is by observing the best tactics, techniques, and

procedures of the route clearance teams and then disseminating this information to the other teams through regularly

scheduled conferences. This process of collecting and

distributing information captures lessons learned and

empowers the teams to be more effective.

The MOTs travel throughout Iraq to meet with and observe

all route clearance teams. These visits can last up to several

days, depending on the number of teams per engineer

company. The MOTs accompany the route clearance teams

on their combat missions as specialized observers. Working

with the team in this manner—and with a similar mission to

These mine-protected vehicles, the Buffalo and the RG-31, are used in the counter-IED fight.
52 Engineer July-September 2006

defeat IEDs—creates a bond between the MOTs and the route

clearance teams that strengthens both groups. The MOTs

learn from each team because of the difference in leadership,

equipment, and geographical areas in which the teams operate.

During the missions, the MOTs ask a variety of questions to

the vehicle crews (driver, vehicle commander, and gunner) while

they are searching for IEDs. This allows the MOTs to analyze

and build on the team’s strengths and correct identified

weaknesses.

The MOTs share the broader perspective of route clearance

operations with route clearance commanders and their teams,

as well as the latest information on new equipment that is

available and how it will be used. They also share their

perspectives on problems pertaining to route clearance operations that are not seen at the corps level. Major issues are

thereby streamlined and fixed on a mass scale to the benefit of

all route clearance teams.

At the conclusion of each visit, the MOTs outbrief the

company commander on his team’s performance. The briefing

generates an official report that is given to his chain of

command. Commanders at all levels have welcomed these visits

and the assessments of their teams. The MOTs’ assessments

then are compiled and distributed through briefings or e-mail

messages to all of the route clearance community.

Route Clearance Handbook

I

.

n April 2006, the MOTs published an unclassified Route

Clearance Handbook that provides guidance to route

clearance teams and captures the continuity of experience

to help train new teams. The handbook is updated monthly

with the latest assessments and then redistributed to the

coalition forces, the combat training centers, and the United

States Army Engineer School. A quote from the handbook

says:

“This handbook is designed for a platoon-level route

clearance team. A new patrol leader to route clearance will

be able to read and understand current tactics, techniques,

and procedures and how to employ route clearance vehicles.”

Upcoming Products

T.

he MOTs are scheduled to publish a Leaders Operational Handbook in the fall. They are also helping

create the doctrine that will be trained to the new Iraqi

army route clearance teams. Engineers continue to battle the

IED fight through route clearance operations, but it has not

been without the loss of great Soldiers. Engineers will continue

to Clear the Way.

First Lieutenant Smith commands the Headquarters

Detachment, 115th Engineer Battalion, and is the leading

officer in charge of the MOTs. A prior enlisted Soldier, he has

served almost 11 years in the Army National Guard. He is a

graduate of the Engineer Officer Basic Course and will soon

attend the Engineer Officer Advanced Course. He also holds

a liberal arts degree from Frostburg State University,

Frostburg, Maryland, with a minor in computer science.

Lieutenant Smith is a New Mexico State Police Officer when

not called to active duty.

The robotic arm

of the Buffalo

searches for

suspected IEDs.
July-September 2006 Engineer 53

Since 1802, the tradition at the United States Military

Academy at West Point, New York, has been to graduate

highly trained military officers. More than 900 cadets

are commissioned annually and serve their country to protect

our American way of life.

The Academy (established primarily to train engineers) and

the United States Army Corps of Engineers® (which began its

roots at West Point) have shared a close relationship and

worked together to ensure that Army officers are prepared for

their missions by providing optimum training and living

facilities.

The Academy sits on the western shore of the Hudson

River, approximately 50 miles north of New York City. This

past winter, the Corps’s New York District began restoring a

historic dam and reservoir, near the shore of the Hudson River,

on the grounds of the sprawling campus.

In the late 1800s, the Academy needed an additional source

of drinking water. So in 1895, the Corps augmented the

Academy’s drinking water system by constructing the Lusk

Dam and Reservoir, now considered significant elements within

the Academy’s National Historic Landmark property.

Dam Restoration Keeps Military

Moving Forward

By Dr. JoAnne Castagna

A Corps engineer stands on the recently

constructed Lusk Reservoir Dam in 1895.

Photo by Milton N. Ricks, Project Engineer, USACE
54 Engineer July-September 2006

The reservoir dam is a large, arched masonry block structure.

The dam—which was constructed under the direction of

Captain James L. Lusk, a West Point graduate—created the

reservoir. To date, water is piped in from area ponds and creeks

to the reservoir.

In 2004, a Corps inspection—conducted by the New York

District—showed that leaks were present behind a buildup of

efflorescence (crystallization that had accumulated on the dam’s

surface), raising concerns that there could be a more serious

problem down the road if the dam was left unmonitored. Since

the dam is located upstream and adjacent to several highoccupancy Academy facilities, any potential structural problem

is unacceptable.

During the winter of 2005, the New York District performed

the dam’s first cleaning in its more than 100 years of service.

The joints on the downstream face of the dam were cleaned of

the efflorescence, and the leaks that were covered by the

crystallization crust were located, cleaned, and sealed. The

cleaning provided the Corps a “fresh face” to observe and

categorize the leaks present in the dam and determine if further

repairs were needed.

Efflorescence is caused by the dissolving calcium carbonate

in the dam’s mortar. The reservoir water is slightly acidic and

chemically reacts with the mortar between the dam’s stones.

When efflorescence builds up over the stones, it becomes

difficult to determine the location of leaks because the water

from a leak moves under the efflorescence crust and away

from the leak source. By cleaning away the efflorescence, the

leak’s actual location is seen.

It took a month to clean the dam. The stones were sandblasted clean with small coarse-grained silica (glass-like

particles) under high water pressure, removing the calcite

buildup along the seams of the dam’s masonry stones. Workers

performed the cleaning by standing on a platform (similar to

those used by high-rise building window washers) that was

lowered over the side of the dam’s stone balustrade and

8-foot-wide brick walkway.

If the dam had not been cleaned, the Corps would not be

aware of the severity of the seepage problem, which could

have resulted in a more significant problem. The leaks are

being monitored, not repaired, at this time.

Engineers who plan to perform similar dam restoration work

should—

 Work closely with environmental and cultural resources

staffs on the project because they can be invaluable in the

selection of the proper cleaning method. Even though the

main focus of the project is dam safety, it’s important to

remain aware of the environmental and cultural resource

impacts of the work being performed.

 Ensure that there is enough time to perform the project.

For example, if the dam is located in a cold-climate region,

avoid the fall timeframe, which could shorten the restoration

time.

In the near future, the Corps plans to inspect the structural

condition of the Lusk Reservoir Dam’s upstream face using a

dive team because this portion of the structure needs to be

visually examined. Corps personnel hope to correlate the leak

locations on the downstream face with the upstream face

cracks, which will allow them to determine what work is needed

in the future.

Dr. Castagna is a technical writer/editor for the United

States Army Corps of Engineers, New York District. She can

be reached at <joanne.castagna@usace.army.mil>.

Project Area

New York

Lusk Reservoir Dam, West Point,

Photo by USACE, New York District

New York
July-September 2006 Engineer 55

The United States Army Engineer School is committed to

providing excellent training opportunities for all units

in support of the Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN)

cycle. We are constantly improving the courses and enrollment

processes for the Explosive Ordnance Clearance Agent

(EOCA) Course and the Urban Mobility Breaching Course

(UMBC). We extend our congratulations to the organizations

that have equipped their units with these valuable capabilities

by sending Soldiers to these courses. We continue to receive

excellent feedback from units in-theater and look forward to

providing these capabilities to the rest of the Regiment.

Descriptions

EOCA Course. This course is designed to train skill levels

10 through 40 (E-4 [P] to E-7) combat engineers (21B)

and select engineer officers (O-1 to O-3) on the basic

skills and knowledge required to perform as EOCAs. These

Soldiers will receive training in the following areas: reacting to

an unexploded ordnance (UXO) hazard; EOCA roles and

responsibilities: ordnance terminology; safety; color codes

and markings; explosives and explosive effects; demolition

operations refresher; EOCA Identification Guide overview and

application; ordnance identification; protective measures;

EOCA reconnaissance; marking; disposal of selected UXO

(in-place only), as identified in the EOCA Identification Guide,

in the conduct of engineer-specific area and route clearance

operations, reporting procedures, and robotics. The course

encompasses an intensive command post exercise (CPX)/

practical exercise (PE) to use newly acquired engineer skills in

a series of explosive ordnance clearing operations.

UMBC. This course provides advanced information on

urban breaching operations. Soldiers will receive training in

the following areas: in-depth explosive theory; detailed planning

that combines operational and training safety issues; urban

reconnaissance; employment of urban breaching assets,

including explosive, manual, and ballistic breaching techniques

for urban operations; and use of Current Force equipment that

supports mobility operations in support of the maneuver force.

Prerequisites

EOCA Course. To be eligible for this course, Soldiers

must—

 Obtain an Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery

(ASVAB) general maintenance (GM) score of 105 prior to

January 2002 and 104 after January 2002.

 Be of the rank of E-4 (P) through E-7 and O-1 thru O-3.

 Have at least an interim secret security clearance.

 Have normal color vision.

 Be qualified in their military occupational specialty (MOS)

21B series.

UMBC. To be eligible for this course, Soldiers must—

 Meet the requirements listed in Department of the Army

Pamphlet 611-21, Military Occupational Classification

and Structure, and Army Regulation 600-9, The Army

Weight Control Program.

 Be a combat engineer in the grade of E-5 (P) through E-7

and a graduate of the Basic Noncommissioned Officer

Course (BNCOC).

 Have no pending Uniform Code of Military Justice

(UCMJ) actions.

 Have no limiting profiles.

We are continuing our efforts to support all units that are

priority on the ARFORGEN cycle. Your support is needed as

we proceed in equipping units with this EOCA/UMBC

capability. Please comply with the enrollment instructions on

page 56. We are currently allocating slots to each unit prior to

deployment in order to support your training needs and increase

your capabilities.

Allocations

ARFORGEN engineer units across the Regiment will

have priority sequentially according to the ARFORGEN cycle to attend these courses. Each unit will be

allocated three slots per class for the EOCA Course and UMBC.

Unit representatives/S-3s must enroll Soldiers in these courses,

using the Army Training Requirements and Resource System

(ATRRS), once the unit receives allocations to attend the

training.

By Mr. Michael Dascanio and Sergeant Major Joseph Harris
56 Engineer July-September 2006

Unit Requirements

S.

oldiers must receive basic familiarization demolition

training from their unit before attending the EOCA

Course. They must submit a memorandum signed

by their unit commander, through the battalion or brigade

commander, to the Directorate of Training and Leader

Development (DOTLD), United States Army Engineer School,

to confirm their name and attendance date. Soldiers must have

at least an interim secret security clearance. Waivers can be

approved for course attendance, with the exception of the

security clearance requirement.

The Engineer School is in the process of recertifying

Soldiers who are EOCA-qualified. To maintain the additional

skill identifier (ASI) (E-8), there will be a certification course

mobile training team (MTT) to train Soldiers.

Points of Contact

T.

he points of contact concerning these courses are Mr.

Michael Dascanio, the DOTLD Technical Director,

United States Army Engineer School, (573) 563-4093;

or Sergeant Major Joseph Harris, the DOTLD Sergeant Major,

United States Army Engineer School, (573) 563-4093.

Book Review

An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942-1943,

by Rick Atkinson, Henry Holt and Company, LLC: New York,

2002, 704 pages, ISBN: 0-8050-6288-2, $30 (hardcover).

An Army at Dawn concerns America’s initial involvement

in World War II. Mr. Atkinson covers the coming of age of

the U.S. armed forces and their leaders, to include many

details—personal and political. No punches are pulled in

the rivalry between British and American forces or their

leadership. Names like Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley,

Montgomery, Rommel, and Clark come to the forefront and

remain there until the defeat of the Axis powers in Europe.

The Tunisian campaign, Atkinson shows, was undertaken

by an American Army lacking in training and experience,

alongside a British army whose primary experience had been

of defeat. Green units panicked, abandoning the wounded

and weapons. The author points out the numerous strategic

and tactical errors made on the various battlefields. Mistakes

were made not only by the generals but also by people in

charge at lower levels. This included very basic errors, such

as not sending out reconnaissance units or initiating tank

attacks without proper artillery or air support. Many brave

men were sent to their deaths in useless and ill-conceived

actions. Sometimes, just the sheer confusion of the battlefield

was responsible or just plain error, such as artillery falling

short or planes bombing their own personnel. So, you see,

this was where the Americans learned to fight the war.

As the first book in a trilogy, I can hardly wait for the next

volume. Don’t let the size of this book intimidate you; it is a

fantastic account of a little-documented phase of America’s

entrance into World War II.

This book review is provided by Mr. Jeffrey L. Rosemann, an

instructional systems specialist with the Officers Education Branch,

Department of Training Development, United States Army Engineer

School. A retired infantry Soldier, Mr. Rosemann also served as

the 2d Infantry Division historian during the beginning of the 50th

Anniversary of the Korean War.

○○○○○○

Fiscal Year 2007 Schedule

Class No. Report Date End Date

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

15 Oct 06

26 Nov 06

21 Jan 07

3 Nov 06

15 Dec 06

9 Feb 07

25 Feb 07 16 Mar 07

15 Apr 07

3 Jun 07

5 Aug 07

22 Jun 07

4 May 07

24 Aug 07

Urban Mobility Breaching Course

Submit an Article

The staff of Engineer welcomes articles

concerning training, current operations and exercises, doctrine, equipment, history, personal

viewpoints, or other areas of general interest to

engineers. Send submissions by e-mail to

<engineer@wood.army.mil>. For more specific

instructions, see the Engineer Writer’s Guide at

<http://www.wood.army.mil/engrmag/writers

guide.htm>.