Army convoys carrying supplies and equipment in the CENTCOM area of responsibility have been subjected to deadly attacks by insurgents using IEDs and other weapons. In response to these attacks, the Army has undertaken several force protection measures such as adding armor to a number of medium and heavy trucks operating in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other CENTCOM locations. Army convoys operating in the CENTCOM area of responsibility have been subjected to deadly attacks by enemy forces. In particular, attacks in Iraq by insurgents using IEDs have placed trucks and personnel at tremendous risk as they carry supplies and equipment throughout the region. In May 2003, U.S. and coalition forces began stabilization operations in Iraq that continue today. However, since that time, the United States has incurred more casualties than during major combat operations, mostly due to ambushes and IED attacks by insurgents operating in Iraq. The threat from IEDs has grown progressively, from single mortar rounds, to multiple explosives linked together, to suicide car bombs. In the spring of 2004, nearly every attack from an IED resulted in a coalition casualty. In particular, U.S. military convoys have been the targets of these types of attacks. In addition to attacks in Iraq, U.S. forces operating in Afghanistan have been subjected to IED attacks. IEDs take a variety of shapes and sizes and have been employed in a number of different ways. They can contain commercial or military explosives, homemade explosives, or military ordnance and ordnance components. For example, mortar and artillery projectiles have been employed as IEDs in Iraq. In addition, IEDs have been placed in many vehicles—from small sedans to large cargo trucks—and stationed along the roadways. Furthermore, “person-borne” suicide bombs have also been used, with explosives contained in a vest, belt, or clothing that is specifically modified to conceal and carry this material. In light of the threat posed by IEDs and other weapons, such as mortars and rocket launchers, the Army has taken several force protection measures to include adding armor to a number of medium and heavy trucks operating in Iraq, and Afghanistan. The Army’s medium and heavy tactical trucks that are being armored include: M939 5-ton trucks, family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV), heavy expanded mobility tactical trucks (HEMTT), heavy equipment transporters (HET), palletized load systems (PLS), the M915 truck family, and tankers. Appendix II contains a detailed description of each Army vehicle in addition to a discussion of the armor kit availability and the significant factors that affected armor availability for each truck. The Army’s medium tactical trucks include the M939 5-ton and FMTV. The M939 tactical truck is a general-purpose military vehicle, primarily designed for tactical, off-road use. The M-939 is a 5-ton capacity, six-wheel drive cargo truck used for transportation of all types of supplies and comes in various vehicle types, including a cargo truck, dump truck, and wrecker. The Army’s FMTV addresses medium tactical-vehicle requirements for unit mobility and unit resupply, and transportation of equipment and personnel. The FMTV consists of the light medium tactical vehicle, which has a 2.5-ton capacity, and the medium tactical vehicle, which has a 5-ton capacity. The Army’s heavy tactical trucks include the HEMTT, HET, PLS, M915, and tankers. The Army utilizes the HEMTT to provide transport capabilities for the resupply of various combat vehicles and weapons systems. The HET is used to transport, deploy, recover, and evacuate main battle tanks and other heavy tracked and wheeled vehicles to and from the battlefield. The PLS performs long distance and local hauls and unit resupply in the tactical environment to support combat units. The PLS consists of a truck with self-loading capabilities and a trailer. The Army’s family of M915 trucks consists of highway tractors used primarily for the long distance transport of containers, which is similar to commercial tractor-trailer trucks. The Army uses its tankers to haul and dispense bulk fuel. Four models of fuel tankers are involved in the Army’s armoring program: the M967, the M969, the M978, and the M1062. The primary component of the tanker armoring effort is a self-sealing coating material that is sprayed onto the exterior of the fuel tank. When a small arms round penetrates the coating material and the fuel tank, the hole self seals and the fuel leak is stopped within minutes. A secondary component is composed of a set of armor panel kits mounted at select locations on the fuel tanker to protect critical equipment that is not protected by the coating material. The Army identified wartime truck armor requirements and initiated a procurement program to develop an armor solution, which involved seeking funding from a variety of sources, identifying and contracting with suppliers for armor materials and components, designing and testing armor solutions, and installing armor onto trucks in the CENTCOM area of responsibility or other installation sites in the United States and Europe. When a need for new equipment is identified by Army warfighters deployed to Iraq and other CENTCOM locations in support of the global war on terrorism, official requirements for these items are developed through the submission of the Army’s operational needs statement (ONS). Army field commanders prepare an ONS, which documents the urgent need for a materiel solution to correct a deficiency or to improve a capability that impacts mission accomplishment. The ONS is sent forward through the unit’s chain of command to the Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC) for theater-level approval, while an information copy is provided directly to Army headquarters for an initial check to ensure the requested capability and operational concept are clearly stated. Once approved by CFLCC, the ONS is forwarded to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-3 at Army headquarters where it is reviewed and validated by the Army Strategic Planning Board (ASPB). The ASPB is chaired by the G-3, with representatives from other Army headquarters staff offices and major Army commands. In the case of truck armor, once the requirement is validated by the ASPB, it is transmitted to the Program Executive Office-Combat Support and Combat Service Support, which manages the procurement of truck armor through its Project Manager for Tactical Vehicles (Project Manager). Validated requirements are also passed to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-8 and the Army Budget Office to obtain the necessary funding. To address validated requirements for truck armor, the Army initiated a procurement program to develop an armor solution for its deployed trucks. Procurement is funded through congressional appropriations. However, at the time requirements for current operations were identified in November 2003, there were no truck armor kit procurement programs in place. Consequently, funding for armor kits in the current Army procurement budgets did not exist. Because no funding was available at the time the requirements were identified, the Army obtained funding for its program from a variety of sources. While the Army can reprogram a small amount of funds from one program budget to another, the majority of funding had to be approved by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and in some cases, Congress. Specifically, to obtain funding for truck armor, the Army sought approval from the DOD Comptroller and Congress to reprogram funding from other procurement or appropriations accounts, requested funding from the DOD-managed Iraqi Freedom Fund, and requested armor funding through supplemental appropriations. The Army’s approved armor protection for medium and heavy tactical vehicles consisted of add-on armor kits to be installed on vehicles already in use in the theater of operations or prior to deployment. These kits included armor panels and ballistic glass, as well as other components such as air conditioners. For all trucks except the M939 5-ton, the Army awarded contracts to armor companies to produce add-on kits for each type of truck. According to Army officials, as needed production quantities increased, the Army modified these contracts to reflect the additional quantities and revised prices. In the case of the 5-ton truck, the armor kits were produced by the Ground Systems Industrial Enterprise (GSIE), an Army organization of depots and other facilities. Instead of a contract, agreements on quantities and costs for work were provided through Military Inter-departmental Purchase Requests (MIPR), which were issued to GSIE for each new production order. Once armor kits were produced by contractors or Army depots, they were shipped to installation sites in the United States, Middle East, and Europe, where they were installed onto trucks by military or contractor personnel. The Army expects to have met its current requirements for the production and installation of truck armor by the end of January 2006 except for fuel tankers. Completion of armor kit installation for tankers is expected by January 2007. Figure 1 shows the overall production and installation quantities of truck armor as compared to requirements. The Army’s solution to addressing truck armor requirements focused on developing add-on armor kits to be attached to the vehicles. These add-on armor kits included armor panels and ballistic glass, as well as other components such as air conditioners. Although the Army first identified a requirement for 3,780 truck armor kits for five types of trucks in November 2003, it did not produce all of the kits until February 2005 and did not install the kits to fully meet the initial requirement until May 2005, or 18 months later. As shown in table 1, the time to produce and install armor kits to meet initial requirements varied by truck type, and ranged from 15 to 18 months. However, as shown in figure 1, by that time requirements had increased substantially. More detailed information on requirements, production, and installation times for each specific truck is provided in appendix II.