The Exceptional Release
L O G I S T I C S O F F I C E R A S S O C I AT I O N Enhancing the military logistics profession since 1982
EXECUTIVE BOARD President Col Evan Miller president@loanational.org Vice President Lt Col Pat Kumashiro vicepres@loanational.org Treasurer Lt Col Stephen Petters treasurer@loanational.org Information Officer Maj Stephanie Halcrow InfoOfficer@loanational.org Membership Development Maj Jeff Martin membership@loanational.org Chapter Support Lt Col Dennis Dabney chaptersupport@loanational.org Executive Senior Advisor Lt Gen Kevin Sullivan Webmaster/Website Maj JD DuVall webmaster@loanational.org www.loanational.org
Fall 2008 Features AFMC…Leading The MATERIEL WORLD!! By Captain Vaughan Whited and Captain Susan Doyle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Enabling the Mighty Eighth By Col Joseph Codispoti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 AFSO21 Implementation and Results in a Logistics Readiness Squadron By Lt Col Condon, Mr. Carter, Capt Garza, TSgt Nicosia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Re-baselining Air Force Scheduled Maintenance for the C-5 Galaxy By Mr. Peter M. O’Neill and Mr. Scott P. Vandersall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 BRAC 2005 Supply, Storage, and Distribution and SCOR: Transforming Materiel Management for DOD By Ms. Frances Walinsky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Contracting Office By Major Greg Lowe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 Some Observations on Logistics Measurements and Metrics By Brig Gen (ret) Robert E. Mansfield Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Strategic Alternate Sourcing Program Office (SASPO) By Mr. Derrell Dover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Combat Truckers: Shining Bright “Blue” in a Sea of “Green” By Lt Col Derek Oliver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Dover’s Super Port By 2 Lt Marcus McWilliams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68
THE EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
Keys to a Successful Wal-Mart Supply Chain By Mr. Johnnie Dobbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
Editor Col Dennis Daley editor@loanational.org
Remembering the Original Forgotten Mechanic By Col Tracy Smiedendorf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
Assistant Editor Col (ret) Mary H. Parker assteditor@loanational.org Executive Director, Marketing/PR ER Managing Editor/Publisher Marta Hannon marta@loanational.org ER Worldwide Staff Col Cheryl Allen, ICAF Student Lt Col Eugene K. Carter, 15 AMXS/CC Maj Richard L. Fletcher, 305 AMXS/CC Maj Paul L. Pethel, 100 MXS/CC Graphic Design MMagination LLC – Atlanta, GA www.mmagination.com
Get Out of Your Box… Please By Col (ret) Robert D. Dubek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 AF Legislative Liaison and You By Lt Col Dennis Dabney, Lt Col Randy Mauldin and Mr. Rick Ubelhart . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80 Industrial College of the Armed Forces… Over 80 Years of Preparing Senior Leaders By Lt Col Pat Kumashiro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86 Focus on a President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
In Every Issue President’s LOG(istics) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Editor’s Debrief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 From the E-Ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
LOA National PO Box 2264 – Arlington, VA 22202
CGO Corner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92
Issue No. 109 - Fall 2008
Chapter CrossTalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93 Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96
President’s LOG(istics) The only constant is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be. (Isaac Asimov) At our National Conference in Columbus in just a few short weeks, LOA will transition to our new leadership team. As I sat down to pen my last President’s Log, I could not help but reminisce over my past ten years as a member of the Logistics Officer Association. Serving in a number of positions both locally and nationally, I have seen the association grow and expand its influence. I have had the opportunity to learn from some of our original
Col Evan Miller
members and I never fail to marvel at the vision of the handful of officers at the Bolling AFB Officers’ Club who recognized in 1982 that connecting the pieces of the logistics community would create a whole that was infinitely more powerful than the sum of its pieces. Today, I am constantly impressed by the young officers who attend our huge national conferences and who locally support our 73 local chapters around the world. Now, more than ever, I understand the incredible value that
ER: PRESIDENT’S LOG(ISTICS)
LOA brings to our Air Force in the current environment in our current fight. I invite everyone to come to the conference this year (12-15 Oct, Columbus, Ohio). It is shaping up to be our most important ever. While the need for discipline, attention to detail and strict adherence to standards has not changed since our service was formed in 1947, I have to admit that the Air Force I joined as a 2Lt seemed much simpler than the climate we face today. As a 2Lt, I did not have the resources or the knowledge to reach across the world for advice, assistance, or assets that could make my job easier. My mentors were pretty much limited to those I worked with, those I met in AF training opportunities or those I mingled with at the club.
We all recognize that today’s world has become vastly more interconnected. I equate “interconnected” to “inextrica-
bly linked.” To effectively move any linked organization forward, you must operate as a team. Today, we collectively expect officers to use a large network to solve tough problems, pass on lessons for tool control and supply chain management, and exchange lessons learned for deployed operations or other key competencies. We live in a resource constrained environment, and I believe this makes LOA that much more important. LOA is, without a doubt, an organizational force multiplier. Very simply, we cannot survive in today’s environment without a strong, interconnected and interdependent network for support. We must work as a team and we must find better, more effective and less expensive ways to support and accomplish the mission. LOA makes interdependent networks happen. If you have ever been to a national conference or participated in a local chapter meeting, I ask you this simple question: Did you EVER walk away without having met someone new or without learning something about your profession that you did not know before? I bet the answer to that question is “No.” Connections: multiplied across every meeting/conference and across our over 3000 members (Active Duty, Retired, Reserve, National Guard, Civilians, Contractors and Members of the Defense Industry). Connections: multiplied over the 26 years of LOA’s existence. In the past two years, through LOA, I have gotten to talk to Iraqi AF officers, officers from Peru, civilian contractors, and fantastic logisticians across the Air Force from second lieutenants to four-star generals. I promise you that I have learned from each of these experiences and I hope that as a result of them I am a smarter officer. These are the kind of connections that make us stronger. These are the kind of experiences that lead me to believe that LOA is a force multiplier. Looking forward, it is these connections that will help us thrive as we face what is arguably one of the biggest changes in Air Force logistics. The Expeditionary Combat Support System or ECSS will change our operation fundamentally. Our network of members and associates can help ease the multi-year transition plan by formally and informally passing on lessons and helping ease the impact on the mission … because there will be an impact. As many of you remember, we used to practice power outages by using AFTO Forms 349 to manually document maintenance until we had power restored only to look forward to manually entering data we collected “off-line.” ECSS will be much different.
2
FA L L 2008
However, since ECSS is still a theory to me, I have to translate our network into something tangible. From my perspective in the engine sustainment business, I know we have about 128 units across the Air Force operating roughly 179 test cells to support engine maintenance repair and overhaul around the world. That constitutes a huge capacity, a huge capability, as well as a huge logistics infrastructure to maintain. We can do better and we must think our way into new ways of working so that we simplify our operations, increase our effectiveness, agility and flexibility. My goal is to improve our enterprise and support to the mission. I know my mission and I know LOA can help me make it happen. LOA is an opportunity around every corner and on every flight line. I cannot count the new perspectives and ideas that I have gotten as a result of my associate with YOU! I challenge you to look at your position as see where LOA can help you. As my tenure draws to an end, I’d like to thank the folks who really ran LOA.
I truly enjoyed working with so many great Americans
and I marveled at their efforts to make LOA a strong and effective tool for its members. First, I want to say thank you to the National Board including Lt Col Pat Kumashiro, Lt Col Steve Petters and Maj Stephanie Halcrow. They are fantastic officers and were very patient and supportive. I’d also like to thank the rest of the board with special thanks to Col Dennis Daley, Col Doug Cato and Maj JD Duvall whom I relied on heavily. I also want to thank the rest of the board for all their great work to make our association run so smoothly. Finally, I tip my hat to Marta Hannon … the real engine that makes LOA fly.
Marta’s efforts have made our conferences overwhelm-
ingly successful and she does fantastic work handling many of the day-to-day activities. Thank you to the entire board and thank you to the members. Your leadership of Air Force logistics, service to your country, and your key role in shaping the future is the reason that we come together as an Association. Your development is our true purpose. Thank you for letting me serve as your president and until I see you again … stay focused, stay safe and stay ahead of the pack.
––COL EVAN MILLER PRESIDENT, LOGISTICS OFFICER ASSOCIATION
Our technology and expertise played a key role in the transformation of Ogden, ALC at Hill Air Force Base. Enhancing processes and securely locating inventory at point-of-use proved dramatic results. More time available to turn out warfighter assets 11 More jets in the field Stock outs were eliminated by 100% Travel time was reduced by 330% Non-productive time was reduced by $83,000 a month Vending machines paid for themselves in under 6 months
Call us to see how we can help your logistics operation receive similar results or read a complete case study at: www.cribmaster.com/cs.htm
1.888.419.1399 1 2005 USAF-LOA National Conference - www.loanational.org
Editor’s Debrief Hope you like it! To coincide with the 2008 LOA conference in Columbus, we have focused this ER edition on Managing the Materiel Enterprise. Sound less than exhilarating? Don’t believe it…the materiel enterprise is an area with initiatives that are dramatically changing logistics provisioning. I hope you’ll agree after reading this edition and some of the stimulating initiatives underway in our materiel enterprise.
ER: EDITOR’S DEBRIEF
Certainly AFMC illustrates several major accomplishments in managing the materiel enterprise. Capt Whited and Capt Doyle describe leaps in materiel management in their AFMC…Leading the Materiel Col Dennis Daley World. Anytime we have AFMC staffers quote Sun Tzu, we know it’s going to be a good one. Col Codispoti writes again on one of our materiel command founding fathers…Maj General Hugh Knerr in his masterpiece Enabling the Mighty Eight. Please read Col Codispoti’s well-written account of General Knerr’s development of the 8th Air Force Logistics Structure which provided to be the genesis of AFMC’s depot system. Well done Joe! Mr. Scott Vandersall and Col (Ret) Peter O’Neill summarize the proposed new C-5 depot inspection method outlined in Maintenance Steering Group (MSG-3). This article details a major depot initiative that will raise Reliability Centered Maintenance on the C-5 to the next level. Fred will fly forever! Another AFMC initiative stems from the recently created Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC). The GLSC has created the Strategic Alternate Sourcing Program Office (SASPO) to address the persistent Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS) problem. Mr. Derrell Dover outlines SASPO’s exciting approach to the DMS problem. In summary, this edition provides four great articles that connect AFMC to the materiel enterprise…just in time for October in Columbus, Ohio. The materiel enterprise extends to the base level. Please read Lt Col Condon’s article on his McChord Logistics Readiness Squadron’s AFSO21 accomplishments and how they improved the working end of their materiel enterprise. Wow! And wonder why his LRS was selected as the best LRS in the Air Force for 2007. Likewise, 2Lt McWilliams details why 40% of all channel cargo into OIF goes through Dover’s state-of-the-art aerial port. It’s all about moving cargo at Dover’s super port. As a benchmark, Mr. Dobbs describes the world-class warehousing and distribution of Wal-Mart. Of course, the materiel enterprise is expeditionary as well. Read Lt Col Oliver’s Combat Truckers: Shining Bright “Blue” in a Sea of “Green”. It reminds us all what the bottom line of the material enterprise is about…delivering the beans, bullets, and blankets to the warfighter. Similarly, Col Smiedendorf reminds us that the Airmen on the flightline are critical in the materiel enterprise in his In Remembering the Original Forgotten Mechanic. No materiel enterprise discussion would be complete without DLA. In BRAC 2005 Supply, Storage and Distribution and SCOR: Transforming Material Management for DOD, Ms. Walinksy reminds us that BRAC 2005 is more than a reorganization, but also quest for efficiency and enhanced customer satisfaction. To stress this point, the ER team interviewed LTG Robert Dail, the Commanding General of DLA. In this issue of Perspectives, LTG Dail conveys his vision of advancing DLA to new levels of customer satisfaction. To round out our materiel enterprise edition, Brig Gen (Ret) Mansfield provides a lesson on supply metrics and the lost art of using tailored metrics to manage our logistics processes in Some Observation on Logistics Measurement and Metrics. We also dedicated several articles for our CGOs. Especially a must read, is the new section that focuses on a selected superstar CGO in LOA. Our first edition has an excellent review of Capt Jamie Rempel from Luke AFB 56 AMXS. Capt Rempel’s interview responses make us all proud to be in the Air Force. Other features geared for our CGOs are Col Kumashiro’s introduction to ICAF… something all CGOs should have as a career goal. Likewise, Lt Col Dabney writes on the role of an Air Force liaison, a unique assignment that many CGOs are not aware of until they do their first Air Staff assignment. OK…let’s close on an emotional appeal. Our next edition, the winter edition, will investigate all aspects of aircraft availability. Please consider writing an article on how we can improve this persistent and systematic problem. Well that’s all folks… hope you enjoy the fall edition. If you see any of the authors at the conference please thank them for contributing to our ER. See you all in Columbus!
–– COL DENNIS DALEY EDITOR, ER MAGAZINE 4
FA L L 2008
From the E-Ring L O O K H O W FA R W E ’ V E C O M E – I M A G I N E H O W FA R W E C A N G O ! As this article is being published, many of you are headed to the annual LOA national conference
Lt Gen Kevin Sullivan
where this year’s theme is “Managing the Materiel Enterprise”. When I first saw the theme, I was struck by how far we’ve come as logisticians that we can now think in terms of being part of a materiel enterprise. I say this because the notion that I was part of any kind of enterprise would have been inconceivable to me as a young munitions officer over 30 years ago. My field of view, at that time, did not go beyond munitions and I saw little connection between what I did and what we all recognize as a very interconnected materiel community today.
In fact, you would have been hard put to convince me that I was
part of a single logistics team at all. What I saw at the time were aircraft maintainers not getting me aircraft in time to get them loaded; supply folks not getting me the parts I needed when I needed them; transporters not delivering the parts the supply folks
ER: FROM
THE
E-RING
swore were already on base; and Air Logistics Centers that I was convinced were working against me at every turn. In truth, I didn’t think of myself as a logistician.
I was a munitions guy and I only interfaced with the rest of what we now know as our logis-
tics community when I absolutely had to. I know this sounds pretty narrow-minded today, but that was the Air Force of the mid 70s and I was not alone in thinking the way I did. Fast forward to the mid 80s when Maj Sullivan was an Air Staff aircraft maintenance officer. By this time I had grudgingly accepted that being a maintenance officer also meant I was a logistician – but I didn’t like it much and I was convinced that the only reason the “other” logisticians existed was to support maintainers. That’s why I’ll never forget walking down the halls of the Pentagon one day talking to Lt Col Rocky Barnard, a supply officer, and hearing Rocky tell me that maintenance was nothing more than another source of supply. I argued with Rocky, as any self-respecting maintainer would have at the time, but I never forgot that conversation. Because I think I knew that Rocky was onto something, even though I didn’t like it. He didn’t use the term “materiel enterprise” that day, but as I reflect back on the conversation that’s exactly what we were talking about – he was telling me that I was part of something bigger than just maintenance and while I was starting to come to that same conclusion, I was finding it hard to accept. It’s also not a concept that was embraced quickly across our Air Force. Remember LOA didn’t evolve from MOA until 1999 – over a decade after Rocky and I had our hallway talk. Fast forward with me one more time to today. We stood up an Air Force Global Logistics Support Center (AFGLSC) earlier this year, which has taken us from multiple, unit-focused supply organizations to a single, enterprise-focused AFGLSC. Following right behind the AFGLSC is the Air Force Vehicle and Equipment Support Agency (AFVESA), which will manage vehicle and equipment classes of supply with a single enterprise focus. We’re only a couple years away from fielding the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS), which will replace 250 legacy logistics IT systems with a single, integrated Enterprise Resource Planning system. We’ve made good initial progress in centralizing some of our intermediate repair capability under the Repair Enterprise for the 21st Century (RE21) initiative and we’ll make even more progress in integrating and rationalizing our repair network as we roll out our Repair Network Transformation (RNT) initiative. Our Air Logistics Centers have become leaner, more customer facing, more enterprise focused and RNT will tie them closer to our operational missions than ever before. In short, we’ve come to understand that we really are all part of a materiel enterprise and we’re starting to manage our business that way as well. But imagine if you will, how far we can go over the next 30 years. 6
FA L L 2008
Imagine an Air Force where we’ve eliminated large maintenance footprints at our operational bases and we’re able to deploy forward to any expeditionary location with 25% of the logistics footprint of today. Imagine a materiel enterprise where our advanced planning prognostics are so good and our transportation network is so efficient, that we can reduce base-level supply stocks to 10% of what we have on-hand today. Imagine component reliability improvements where engines that once stayed on-wing for 900 hours stay on-wing for 9,000 hrs or 90,000 hours. Imagine an officer professional development process where we’re able to grow young maintenance, fuels, readiness, distribution and materiel management experts into colonel logisticians with complete understanding of the materiel enterprise we ask them to lead. Sound impossible? Maybe…but remember that munitions officer of 30 years ago who couldn’t even think in terms of “materiel enterprise”…he’s come a long way since then and so has Air Force logistics. If history is any indicator, our Air Force logistics community will continue to evolve and improve in the years ahead. That’s been the one constant throughout our history. Regardless of organizational changes; “rightsizing” decisions; AFSC modifications or any other evolutions; there will continue to be opportunities for logistics leaders with the vision to think beyond today, the courage to say what they think and the imagination to dream of how far we can go.
I can’t wait to see what our young leaders do over the next 30 years.
––LT GEN KEVIN J. SULLIVAN, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, LOGISTICS, INSTALLATIONS AND MISSION SUPPORT
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
7
Perspectives IN STEP
WITH
LT G R O B E R T T. D A I L , U S A
LTG Robert T. Dail is the Director of Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), headquartered at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, is responsible for providing the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and other federal agencies with a variety of logistics, acquisition and technical services in peace and war. These services include logistics infor- LtG Robert Dail mation, materiel management, procurement, warehousing and distribution of spare parts, food, clothing, medical supplies and fuel, reutilization of surplus military materiel and document automation and production. This worldwide mission is performed by approximately 21,000 civilian and military personnel.
ER: What do you see as the most significant challenges that DLA is experiencing today?
ER: PERSPECTIVES
LTG DAIL: DLA continues to support mission success with continual performance and process improvements to provide persistent, effective, and efficient combat support. With that in mind, DLA remains focused on four main challenges, which are key to DLA’s long-term success in supporting warfighters worldwide:
Enhanced customer focus through DLA’s strategy of ”Extending its Enterprise” that “links supply and demand”
Cost management—with appropriate risk taking
Institutionalized, disciplined inventory management
Measurable accountability to warfighters
I view enhanced customer focus and support through “Extending the Enterprise” as my core contribution to DLA. The Agency, like most all organizations, has always had a focus on its customers. However, when I arrived at DLA there was a tremendous internal focus on processes, supporting systems…and a predominance of internally facing key performance metrics. Consequently, I’ve actively pursued, as a core DLA strategy, implementing a much stronger, enterprise alignment to our customers and warfighters. The goal is to link DLA’s network of suppliers with the warfighter demand. In DLA, everyone is familiar with our strategy of “Extending the Enterprise.” Under this strategy, we’re looking for as many opportunities as possible to extend the DLA Enterprise forward to our customers through physical relocation of Customer Account Specialists (CASs) and Demand Planners, by having key performance metrics realigned to customers and their outcomes, and through various other DLA strategic thrusts. I will continue to focus my personal time and energy on executing this strategy to ensure DLA remains focused on its core purpose…supporting mission success, supporting our country’s warfighters, and executing my intent and our strategic vision. For example, we’re focused on excellence in cost management…with appropriate risk taking. As with any large business, cost management at DLA is always a challenge. At DLA, we have been exceptional financial stewards in recent times and we continue to lower our Cost Recovery Rate—-the lowest in history. The challenge I’m working in the Agency is to increase the level of appropriate risk taking as it applies to cost management. My view is that there’s some room for DLA to be a little more aggressive in pursuit of providing the full support desired by our military customers, at the most optimum cost. To pursue continuous improvement in this regard, we‘ve established two core strategies at the agency: Minimizing total supply chain costs and demonstrating
8
FA L L
2008
stewardship, and fostering stakeholder trust. As I write this answer, we’re planning our upcoming Senior Strategy Council (SSC) session where cost management with risk taking will be the major topic of discussion. We’re committed to institutionalized, disciplined inventory management. With sales and services provided by DLA doubling during 2001-2007, inventory management takes on an increasingly critical role in addressing how well, in conjunction with—at what cost, we support our customers. We’re addressing this on many fronts, to include improvements to our Demand Planning processes, increased customer and supplier collaborative planning, and innovative contractual relationships with our suppliers. The increased use of Radio Frequency Identification tags lets logisticians and warfighters track materiel in-transit. This provides added confidence in the supply system, thereby reducing unnecessary duplicate orders and maintaining our focus on inventory visibility and control. Looking forward, DLA must continue to work with the Military Services to improve our ability to link customer demand to our supplier base. The ability to jointly improve demand planning accuracy, and optimize the items and quantities we carry in inventory, will maximize the use of our precious financial resources, and is critical to improving support to the warfighter.
ER: DLA plays a significant role in the current Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) implementation. Given that, you’re heavily involved in BRAC transition activities and approaching a year into actual mission ownership for the first activities (Stock, Storage and Distribution at Warner-Robins ALC). Would you provide your assessment on lessons learned?
LTG DAIL: The 2005 BRAC decision called for the transfer of the retail supply mission supporting the depots from the Military Services to DLA, creating opportunities for the Department to improve end-to-end logistics support to the warfighter while rightsizing materiel inventory. As with any change where a dedicated workforce is involved, communication is a key element…to provide, for example: accurate, consistent information on a timely basis to the affected people who work in Air Logistics Centers. That’s been my first priority. Following that, our communications with internal DLA folks and the representatives from HQ Air Force Materiel Command and the Air Logistics Centers have been vital. We must implement the changes as we have communicated them—that’s the cornerstone of trust--and trust is the basis for our successful collaboration and partnership agreements among the Military Services and DLA to accomplish BRAC. Over nine hundred employees have transferred from the Air Force to DLA as part of the Supply, Storage, and Distribution (SS&D) implementation. DLA takes the responsibility for creating an environment for growth and development for these new employees seriously. Moreover, as we work with our new employees, we are seeking their input on how to improve the supply chain to achieve better outcomes for the artisans at the Air Logistics Centers. While each site may be unique due to mission, weapons system focus, or geography, we’re applying many of the lessons learned from our Air Force experience across the Services for subsequent SS&D implementations. In the coming months and years, additional Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marine Corps personnel will join the DLA workforce.
ER: Previously, you briefed this round of BRAC was more than a reorganization of responsibilities between depots and DLA, but also an efficiency initiative to improve customer support. Although you’re only in the initial stages of assuming responsibility for some of these missions, in what direction do you see DLA moving to deliver efficiencies and improvements in customer support?
LTG DAIL: The intent of BRAC is to achieve “better” output and outcomes for the Air Force, the other Services, and for the Department. As I’ve stated, the first objective is to enable our Air Force to achieve improved performance. After that, we can already see where our integration of functions can achieve economies and efficiencies into the end–to-end (E2E) supply chain that will enhance effectiveness with a significant reduction in materiel inventory. BRAC will transform DOD logistics support while saving the Air Force and the taxpayer money. Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
9
BRAC presents us with a unique opportunity. Military Service and DLA employees alike must assess their skills and capabilities to work collaboratively. This enhanced focus on better alignment, as well as more effective and efficient support to the warfighter, will create an integrated E2E DOD logistics infrastructure. DLA is moving to increase performance through enhanced supply chain management. Major keys to this are improvement of DLA and Service demand planning skills, the forward positioning of purchasing capability for emergent requirements, and the accompanying pursuit of inventory reduction. This should result in optimized use of financial resources. This focus will deliver improvements in customer support, as well as, efficiencies by ensuring the right items in sufficient quantities are available to the warfighter on demand. Naturally, processes and norms vary across the Military Services and DLA. This is where using the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) model, championed by the USAF and DLA, is vital. SCOR helps us all think in a process-way that doesn’t let Service or major command-unique language serve as a barrier to common understanding and enterprise E2E processes. Lean-Six Sigma and other continuous process change methodologies are equally vital. Successfully executing BRAC legislation requires a willingness of all components to rise to the challenge of overcoming the status quo. We have to be flexible and agile as we jointly adapt to meet the logistics needs of the DOD and strive to exceed the expectations of those who defend our nation.
ER: PERSPECTIVES
ER: The Air Force is implementing ECSS as a replacement to a large number of legacy IT business systems. Last year, DLA completed a similar transition from its legacy IT business systems to its Enterprise Business System (EBS). As it appears, DLA is about five years ahead of the AF on this transformation journey. What lessons learned would you offer to AF logisticians for their consideration?
LTG DAIL: I’ll offer four areas for consideration. First, implementation will take longer than anticipated. Even with detailed planning, benchmarking, and preparation, this type of initiative will take longer than initial plans. There are many unforeseen challenges that will present themselves in this kind of transformation. Challenges such as refinement of functional requirements, detailed designs, issues related to building the requirements, discipline in seeing adequate testing (and re-testing) through to completion, training, availability, and turnover in key resources, etc., are typical. Throughout the journey, there will be these types of major decision points where senior leadership will need to balance desired requirements and results against the element of time. Secondly, implementation will cost more than anticipated. Because of the above factors--and many others—you should expect some cost growth. The key to minimizing this potential growth is senior leader engagement throughout the effort, with a relentless and personal focus on cost, schedule, and performance. Third, implementation will be harder than anticipated. In addition to the challenges concerning time and cost, this type of transformational change is just simply “hard work.” You must have the fortitude to see this type of monumental change through to the finish. It will seem at times a daunting task to decompose, reengineer, and build a new enterprise business system. However, it can be done. Finally, other lessons for success include ensuring a very senior level team is regularly engaged on the project from the beginning, delivering the required training to employees to make them successful in the new environment, and executing a robust change management plan with frequent communications across the Enterprise. Continued focus on your workforce cannot be overstated. Being careful to have a senior leadership team that largely remains intact is important to best enabling continuity of understanding, decision-making, and progress.
ER: DLA is responsible for eight different supply and demand chains. One of which, the Aviation Supply and Demand Chain, is often regarded as unique due to its fluctuating demand histories, high inventory valuations and protracted production lead time challenges. As a national logistics leader, what are your thoughts on how DLA can respond to the unique challenges posed by aviation customers?
LTG DAIL: The first thing I’d mention is that, although the Aviation Supply and Demand Chain is certainly dominant in its support of the Air Force, DLA provides support to the Air Force and other Services through all of its Supply Chains. For example,
10
FA L L
2008
we provide uniforms (clothing & textiles), rations (subsistence), fuel (Defense energy), and a great deal more. That said, DLA is responding to aviation demand and supply chain challenges through improved demand planning, increased collaboration, and enhanced supplier/industry relations. A further, ongoing focus is on the BRAC Supply, Storage, and Distribution (SS&D) and Depot Level Repairable (DLR) Procurement efforts to further improve overall demand and supply chain support for the Air Force. A critical factor for our success is the level of collaboration and partnership formed between DLA and the Air Force. As the Air Force continues to support multiple missions overseas, constant communication and collaboration with DLA is necessary for optimal support. In my opinion, if we’re able to collectively excel in Demand Planning and Supplier Collaboration, then our historical focus on symptoms such as fluctuating demand history, high inventory cost, and protracted lead times will drastically diminish. Demand Planning is one example of how a team approach can produce improved results in the form of increased readiness, reduced overhead, and cost savings. Another area that benefits is supplier/industry relations. As DLA moves out with supplier relationship management, a joint USAF - DLA approach to the supplier base is critical to leveraging industry support. As we move out with BRAC, our joint ability to maximize our collaborative efforts across the Supply and Demand chain will be paramount to achieving the desired performance results and materiel efficiencies.
ER: How have rising fuel costs impacted aviation POL costs?
LTG DAIL: Rising fuel prices have increased the cost of military operations worldwide. Every dollar increase in the cost of a barrel of oil amounts to approximately $130 million in increased DOD operating costs. The Defense Energy Support Center (DESC), a DLA field activity, purchases fuel for use by the Military Services. DESC sells the fuel at a “standard price” established at the beginning of each fiscal year. The standard price is a tool that was created by DOD fiscal managers to insulate the Military Services from the normal fluctuations of the fuel marketplace. It also provides the Military Services and the DOD with budget stability despite the commodity market swings, with gains or losses absorbed by a revolving fund known as the Defense Working Capital Fund. Increases in purchase costs are passed onto the Military Services through standard price adjustments. Over the past year, rising fuel prices have resulted in several fuel price increases in DOD. The standard price of jet fuel was increased from $2.31 per gallon on October 1, 2007, to $3.04 per gallon by mid-December 2007. Another increase, to $4.07 per gallon, was implemented on July 1, 2008, due to the rising cost of fuel. DLA continues to explore alternative energy sources and innovative contractual support arrangements to provide the best possible service at the lowest possible cost.
ER: Gaps in long-term contract coverage are on our scope as a recurring issue as the AF looks to DLA for support of parts with a relatively consistent demand history. How do you factor in long-term contracts in to your strategic thinking and guidance to DLA?
LTG DAIL: DLA’s ability to leverage industry capabilities through long-term contracts, strategic supplier, and supply chain alliances are a key element of our DLA Strategic Plan—and success in our daily execution. From the top down, DLA measures its performance on a regular basis. Every week I host a Common Operating Picture-Warfighter (COP-W) VTC that has as regular attendees: senior logisticians from CENTCOM, USTRANSCOM and DLA. In addition, all DLA field commanders/directors attend, as well as our DLA presence in CENTCOM, PACOM and EUCOM. We report—measurably—on warfighter support and readiness. In another example, as part of our monthly Corporate Board, the Agency reviews its strategic and operational metrics for key logistics, procurement, and financial areas—and sets guidance for further improvement. Long Term contracts are a key tool in the DLA contracting toolkit. Our intent is to continue placing additional items on longterm contractual arrangements. One of our current challenges is ensuring our Enterprise ability to renew and sustain those items already placed on long-term contracts. To this end, we recently developed new tracking tools to assist purchasing specialists and managers in this area. We have deployed a new strategic sourcing database to assist our buyers in identifying future opportunities Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
11
for long-term support. For the first time in history, this database will contain DLA consumable items and Service DLR items. I review the performance of each Supply Chain in meeting the objectives of long-term contract performance. Commanders are held accountable for performance. I look forward to continued success in new contractual arrangements, delivering improved support, and additional savings to our Military Services.
ER: At the DLA executive level, what metrics do DLA senior leaders review to measure supply and demand chain performance?
LTG DAIL: The Agency’s performance measures framework is based on a commonly adopted process reference model known as the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) model. SCOR-based measures have been adopted by our Service customers to drive process improvement. SCOR integrates the concepts of business process reengineering, benchmarking, and process measurement into one cross-functional framework—a set of common building blocks. This allows for relevant comparisons with other supply chains and eliminates confusion and ambiguity when communicating with our supply chain partners.
This single,
Enterprise-wide view of performance measurement information provides my executives and managers with the capability to filter data by using different views—for example: strategic, operational, and tactical—and different perspectives such as weapon system, customer, customer segment, location, command, supply and demand chain. It also provides the means to quickly drill down into underlying management layers to identify root causes. We use this approach during our monthly Corporate Board, where I and my senior leadership team—my Vice and all field activity and staff Commanders/Directors—assess our performance in support of the
ER: PERSPECTIVES
Services and warfighters worldwide. Recently, we fielded the “DLA Fusion Center” capability for use in our Corporate Board meetings. The fusion center allows all leaders, down to section level, to present and review indicators of performance against goals/objectives using the power of our Enterprise Business System. All of the leaders—from me to the GS-12—use the same data to assess performance and cost reductions. When we meet monthly in our Corporate Board to collectively assess supply and demand chain performance, and manage the Agency’s progress on achieving goals and meeting customer’s expected outcomes, everyone operates with common data. One of my objectives was to “outlaw power point” and use live information that is distributed across the Agency. That way, our junior leaders use it to manage, as well as the Corporate Board, and our people use it daily to solve dilemmas for our customers, as opposed to spending their precious time compiling data and building charts. I led this effort in my previous job at USTRANSCOM and I’ve introduced it here at DLA. The Fusion Center construct ensures that the Agency is transparent to its users—all to the betterment of combat support of warfighters. Eventually, anyone doing business with DLA will have access to Fusion Center data, based on their roles and authority. At the Corporate Board level, we look at supply and demand chain metrics, such as Perfect Order Fulfillment; Order Volume; Unfilled Orders; Demand Planning Accuracy (which can be measured at the individual level at specific support locations); Attainment to Plan; Inventory Turns; Aged Purchase Requests; Delinquent Contracts; and Procurement Productivity. We also look at Strategic Materiel Sourcing metrics such as NSNs on Long-Term Contracts (LTCs), LTC renewals and lapses; Obligation rates; Lead Times; and Financial metrics such as NOR, net outlays. Of course, we also examine financial performance measures such as Defense Working Capital Fund Cash and the Net Operating Results for each of the Supply Chains and Service Centers/Commands. Our people and leaders, empowered with Enterprise processes and systems, our network, and the Fusion Center capabilities assist us in making faster, better decisions and demonstrate tremendous agility around the globe. Our warfighting customers demand this response. That’s the bottom line as far as I’m concerned—”better support to the troops in the field and artisans on the production line.”.
ER: The Air Force material enterprise was recently re-energized with a central Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC) operating AF wide with a central command and control function. How has DLA modified their operations to leverage the change to a GLSC-centric command and control structure?
LTG DAIL: DLA has been engaged with the Air Force in anticipation of Air Force Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC) since 2003 by providing representatives from the Defense Supply Center Richmond (DSCR) to serve as members of the AF APS 12
FA L L
2008
(Advanced Planning System) Pilot, as well as the AF APS F101 (B-1 engine) Pathfinder for Demand Data Exchange/Customer Collaboration. DLA representatives are active participants in the recently formed (March 2008) AFGLSC IPT. The IPT’s mission is to define the specific roles and responsibilities of DLA and AFGLSC necessary to maximize support to the warfighter, establish an enterprise systemic view for both the USAF and DLA, and to identify and provide the scope for each area of GLSC - DLA interaction. The IPT’s implementation plan is scheduled for delivery in December 2008.
ER: Several years ago, the Secretary of Defense identified TRANSCOM as the Distribution Process Owner (DPO). Many logisticians have watched the DPO concept develop thinking that it would lead to an enterprise supply, repair, and distribution network. As a former deputy TRANSCOM commander, could you share your thoughts with regard to the future of the DPO and how DLA might better serve it?
LTG DAIL: The USTRANSCOM/DLA partnership today is stronger than ever. We were partnering on logistics/transportation issues long before the DPO concept was implemented. Both organizations recognized that while individually we provided key capabilities for the Department of Defense, there were areas where we could work much closer to achieve better results for the Services. I think the work in the past four years has demonstrated the power of a “National Enterprise” that the Service components of COCOMs could pull forward into their battle space that delivered better movement and Supply Chain support. We were able to accomplish remarkable success because General Norty Schwartz and I both operated from a key principle: You didn’t have to own a process to improve it. As General Schwartz would say, “you don’t have to own it to control it.” DLA is an active partner with USTRANSCOM, participating along with the Services and other COCOMs in all DPO governance forums. More importantly, DLA continues to be the DPO’s key partner in a host of initiatives including: Joint Regional Inventory Materiel Management (JRIMM); Defense Transportation Coordination Initiative (DTCI); and the Integrated Data Environment-GTN Convergence (IGC). These initiatives leverage organization’s transportation, logistics, and acquisition core competencies. The efforts of the DPO have helped ensure that DLA’s eight supply chains are effectively integrated with the nation’s transportation capabilities. To stay closely connected with the DPO, USTRANSCOM has a full-time, dedicated liaison stationed at HQ DLA to ensure transparency of efforts and a strong relationship between our organizations. In a similar fashion, DLA has a liaison stationed at HQ USTRANSCOM. DLA also supports the DPO via a partnership effort between USTRANSCOM and the General Services Administration. As for the future of DPO and DLA’s support, I see the two organizations continuing their strong partnership—optimizing E2E logistics support for the warfighter. Partnering is an integral part of all we do. Our people recognize that together we are stronger than apart.
ER: A majority of our LOA membership is USAF company grade officers and junior field grade officers. What opportunities exist in DLA for Air Force logistics officers?
LTG DAIL: DLA provides the ideal environment for Air Force logistics officers to work hand-in-hand with logistics officers from all Military Services, and the professional civilian logisticians of the Agency. This is an outstanding opportunity for these officers to gain the foundation towards becoming senior level logistics leaders who have logistics experience across DOD. In addition, DLA provides the opportunity for Air Force officers to gain experience in the full E2E demand and supply chain at a National and global level. As the line between retail and wholesale vanishes in the next few years, DLA is perhaps the only place with this scope of influence for logistics officers to gain National Enterprise experience—especially in supply and contracting. It is an invaluable and a natural step in the career path for all up-and-coming logistics officers. I welcome them all. K
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
13
The Exceptional Release A Professional Military Journal written by logisticians for logisticians The purpose of the Logistics Officer Association (LOA) is to enhance the military logistics profession. LOA provides an open forum to promote quality logistics support and logistic officer professional development. Policy on Written Submissions: The editor invites articles and other contributions on issues that support LOA’s purpose. Direct manuscripts, letters and other communications to: marta@loanational.org and editor@loanational.org. Deadlines: The 15th day of January, April, July, and October. Story Format: Double-spaced, typed and electronically submitted to marta@loanational.org. Photos & Graphics: Send individual electronic files (hi-res JPG, TIFF or EPS with type as outlines) along with stories (as separate text files) and include cutlines/captions. All photos should be at least 300 dpi or greater resolution. Submitter data: Should be typed at the end of the story file. Information included should be: Rank; full name; service; home mailing address; business name and address; business phone (DSN and commercial); email; three to five sentence biographical sketch; and a photo (as a separate file – see photos and graphics above). Editorial Policy: The editors reserve the right to edit all submissions for length, clarity and libel. All submissions become the property of LOA. Advertisement Formats: Each ad must be sent as a composite hi-res (300 dpi or greater) EPS file with fonts saved as outlines. Full-page ads with bleeds should allow at least 3/8” bleeds. Ad rates visit: www.loanational.org/adrates.html Advertising Contact: Ms Marta Hannon, Managing Editor PO Box 2264 – Arlington, VA 22202 – email: marta@loanational.org – Phone 405-701-5457 Subscriptions: The ER is published quarterly and is available via membership in the Logistics Officer Association at the annual rate of $25. Access membership forms on the website at www.loanational.org.
h ot Bo
for
on-time,, on n-targe target g So olution Solutions l ti
08 #5
par t your partner y p rtner
ŹAircraft Ź Aircraftt maintenance and a logistics ŹProgram Ź Program m Managementt ŹSoftware Ź Software Integration ŹModeling Ź Modelin ng & Simulation ŹLong-te ŹLong-term g erm customer relationships re elationships p ŹProcess-based Ź Process-based development development ŹInnovative Ź Innovattive solutions ŹExperienced members Ź Experie enced team mem mbers
www.kelleylog.com 937.879.3483
Don’t Miss the Year’s Largest Gathering of Influential Air & Space Logistics Professionals
2008 LOA National Conference Leading the Materiel Enterprise October 12-15 – Columbus Convention Center Columbus, OH The 2007 LOA Conference in DC drew nearly 1500 logisticians from across the Air Force as well as senior executives from many top defense manufacturing companies. The 2008 LOA Conference will be another great opportunity to share ideas, proven practices, and new technology. Our Columbus venue will draw many senior leaders not only from Wright Patterson AFB - AFMC HQ but across the AF and Department of Defense. Exhibit and Sponsorship Still Available! Register Today! www.LOANATIONAL.org/conference Need more info? Call Marta Hannon: (405) 701-5457
A F M C …Leading … The MATERIEL WORLD!! address how AFMC developed from the merger of Air Force Systems Command (AFSC) and Air Force Logistics Command he Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) bears the profound (AFLC). Formed during the post-Cold War era and on the heels of responsibility to organize and execute the Air Force’s logistics winning Desert Shield - Desert Storm, the One Material Command mission required to defend the greatest country in the world. reflects aspects of the models used in both WWI and WWII. AFMC delivers war-winning technology, acquisition, test, and sus- AFMC traces its heritage to McCook Field, a WWI experimental tainment for expeditionary capabilities to the warfighter. With engineering facility in Dayton, OH. In 1917, when the Army that responsibility, AFMC has a proven track record of success dat- Signal Corps controlled military aviation, the three basic functions ing back to 1917. Today, the Command has four core missions of materiel support were: Research and Development; Procurement within the materiel enterprise: research and development; acquisi- and Production; and Supply and Maintenance. Each was a separate tion; test and evaluation; and sustainment—all integral to and distinct entity, until the Army America’s strength and power in Air Corps consolidated them into every corner of the globe. In light of the Materiel Division. Sound its selection to host the 2008 The great Chinese military strategist, familiar? With the creation of the National LOA Conference in U.S. Air Service in 1918, the Sun Tzu once said, “The line between Columbus, OH, it is fitting to focus organization became known as the on AFMC—the Air Force’s One disorder and order lies in logistics”. Engineering Division and expandMateriel Command! ed to include the Air Corps’ logisAdditionally, President Dwight D. tics system. It was then O N E M AT E R I E L C O M M A N D . Eisenhower remarked, “You will not find re-designated the Air Corps The AFMC Commander, General Materiel Division in 1926. As the it difficult to prove that battles, camBruce Carlson, addresses the One largest branch of the Air Corps, Materiel Command concept as “a paigns, and even wars have been won or the Materiel Division controlled mindset we all must have as we the research, development, prolost primarily because of logistics.” strive to become an integrated team. curement, maintenance, supply One Materiel Command is a way of and flight tests for all aircraft thinking that integrates all and equipment. For most of AFMC mission areas and all WWII, the operational support aspects of life-cycle manageservices fell under the Materiel ment. It’s how we approach our Command (acquisition of jobs each day, looking for ways materiel) or the Air Service to integrate what we do with Command (logistics operaothers inside our individual tions), with responsibilities often overlapping. In 1942, the Air organizations and across AFMC.” For the past 16 years, AFMC has Staff considered recombining logistics, acquisition, and other funcevolved into a world-class, dominant materiel provider and warfighter enabler throughout the world. In this article, we will tions into a more efficient Support Command.
By Captain Vaughan Whited and Captain Susan Doyle
T
16
FA L L
2008
announced that “the functions perConsequently, in the summer of formed by AFSC and AFLC would 1944, with the vision of an be integrated into one new comindependent Air Force in mind, mand – the Air Force Materiel the Materiel Command and the Command – in 1992.” Air Service Command merged into the Air Technical Service To this end, the AFSC and AFLC Command. One year later it commanders agreed “that the conwas re-named the Air Materiel cept called Integrated Weapon Command. Again, sound familSystem Management (IWSM) iar? In the generation after would form the foundation of the WWII, men and women in Air new command.” The merger’s planMateriel Command helped ning and implementation was exetransform the Air Force into a A nearly completed B-17 Flying Fortress at the Boeing aircraft plant in cuted by two groups – a select group separate service; provided Seattle, Washington. of eleven senior staff members from worldwide assets to support the both commands – known as the Korean conflict; and maintained Magnificent 11, and a second team known as the Headquarters the technical fortitude necessary for our superior conventional Integration Team. The Magnificent 11 consisted of four memand strategic nuclear missile deterrence. bers from AFSC, four from AFLC, two from the Air Staff, and H O W A F M C E V O LV E D . In 1961, the Air Materiel one from the Defense Logistics Agency. AFMC was then actiCommand was re-designated Air Force Logistics Command vated on 1 July 1992. (AFLC), while the Air Research and Development Command AFMC has endured many challenges from its inception and unigained the added responsibility for weapon system acquisition fied the acquisition and logistics sustainment communities. and was re-designated Air Force Systems Command (AFSC). These challenges include streamlining multiple acquisiFrom the early 1960s, tion programs (scaled down to AFSC and AFLC flourthree new major advanced airished in their own ways, craft programs – the B-2, the supporting the Air C-17, and the F-22); the Force’s mission to conwatershed acquisition realigntrol the skies around the ment reforms using the Warsaw Pact countries Program Executive Officer and other critical areas model with single managers throughout the world. responsible for life cycle In the late 1980s, howaccountability; the focus on ever, the Department of modernizing and extending Defense (DoD) and the service lives of legacy airCongress compelled the craft; the Research, Air Force to consolidate Development, Test and AFSC and AFLC. DoD Evaluation (RDT&E) efforts released a series of targeted on Unmanned Aerial Defense Management Woman working on an airplane motor at North American Aviation in Long beach, CA. 1942 Vehicles (UAVs); avionics Review Decisions and weapons enhancements; (DMRD), mandating major changes in the support functions of military departments. and the execution of the 1995 BRAC directives to shut down air The most significant of these DMRDs was Number 943 propos- logistics centers in Sacramento, CA and San Antonio, TX and ing to “eliminate duplication and unnecessary management lay- to privatize the logistics mega-centers in place. ers by disestablishing AFSC and combining the remaining essential staff with AFLC.” In January 1991, it was formally
Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
17
E R : A F M C … L E A D I N G … T H E M AT E R I E L W O R L D ! !
A F M C T O D A Y . We are now at an historic time in the history of our Nation and of the Air Force. The Air Force’s ability to execute operations across the domains of air, space, and cyberspace magnifies the military power of the United States and of coalition forces. We continue to pave the way forward and to secure supremacy in these three domains. In line with Air Force priorities, AFMC is helping to win today’s fight; take care of our people; and prepare for tomorrow’s challenges. AFMC recognizes that preparation for future challenges includes dedicating the appropriate resources; investing in development planning across all domains; and extending our understanding of Air Force dominance into future warfare. Ultimately, our decisions today affect tomorrow and enable us to fly, fight and win in the next conflict.
1950’s — The B-47E was an improved version of the -B model and more than 1500 were produced by Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed. (USAF file photo)
AFMC focuses on four core missions in the Integrated Life Cycle Management process:
product center, the Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles AFB, CA, focuses on space assets management and falls under Air Force Space Command.
1. Develop and Transition Technology 2. Professional Acquisition Management 3. Exacting Test and Evaluation 4. World-Class Sustainment of All Air Force Weapons Systems To execute its first mission, AFMC develops and transitions technology at the Air Force Research Laboratory at WrightPatterson AFB. AFRL lays the foundation for tomorrow’s warfighting capabilities through basic research and applied technology and works with other AFMC centers to transition that technology into developmental and legacy systems. To execute its second mission, AFMC conducts Professional Acquisition Management at three centers: the Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC) at Wright-Patterson AFB, the Electronic Systems Center (ESC) at Hanscom AFB, and the Air Armament Center (AAC) at Eglin AFB. The ASC focuses on designing, developing and delivering war-winning capabilities for the Air Force; the ESC focuses on net-centric command and control, communications, ISR and combat support systems; and the AAC is the focal point for all Air Force armament issues. A fourth
18
FA L L
To execute its third mission, AFMC tests and evaluates weapons systems at the Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) at Edwards AFB, the Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC) at Arnold AFB, and the 46th Test Wing (as part of the AAC) at Eglin AFB. These research facilities test and evaluate developing air and space capabilities in both controlled and real-world environments. The AFFTC is the world’s premier flight test facility for both manned and unmanned systems. Since it opened in 1951, nearly every US military aircraft; both military and commercial aircraft engines; and many satellite systems have been tested at AEDC. The 46th Test Wing, is the primary test facility for all Air Force armament, and now includes testing systems against cyber attack. To execute its fourth mission, AFMC performs sustainment at three Air Logistics Centers (ALCs) [Oklahoma City ALC (OCALC) at Tinker AFB, Ogden ALC (OO-ALC) at Hill AFB, and Warner Robins ALC (WR-ALC) at Robins AFB]. All three ALCs provide comprehensive depot-level maintenance and repair for current and future air and space systems. OC-ALC supports large aircraft and all engines, OO-ALC supports attack aircraft, ICBMs, and most fighters, and WR-ALC supports large
2008
transport aircraft, helicopters, and electronic warfare systems. AFMC also has specialized units that include: the Air Force Security Assistance Center controls foreign military sales; the National Museum of the US Air Force is the largest and oldest military aviation museum in the world.; the Global Logistics Support Center serves as the single supply chain owner; and the Nuclear Weapons Center is the Air Force’s Center of Excellence for Nuclear Sustainment. All of these combined capabilities ensure that AFMC delivers war-winning technology, acquisition, test, and sustainment expeditionary capabilities to the warfighter‌on time and on cost. A Peek into the Future. Over the past decade, the Air Force has transformed and will continue to transform as our Nation faces new challenges. Epic gains in information technology for intelligence and surveillance; command and control; and precision kinetic and non-kinetic weapons are dramatically reshaping warfare. It will not be long before Joint Force Air Component Commanders (JFACCs) can visualize the entire battle space; identify key adversary centers of gravity; and rapidly communicate information to employ precision munitions and destroy sensitive targets. This approach requires the deployment of fewer forces; enhances rapid mobility; reduces the length of conflict; and limits collateral damage. There are many initiatives underway within AFMC to adapt to our rapidly changing world. Cyberspace presents a new challenge to the Air Force Enterprise. AFMC is taking the lead, in collaboration with other DoD units, to define and leverage this
domain and better enable Loggies across AFMC to communicate with counterparts from DoD, industry and academia. As logisticians, this increase in communication improves timelines in vital chains of supply and real-time accurate aircraft availability reporting. As Loggies, we are all concerned with efficiently and effectively using people, equipment and money. One of the ways AFMC addresses this issue is through one of the overarching processes for Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century (AFSO21), namely Develop and Sustain Warfighting Systems (D&SWS). D&SWS encompasses the entire enterprise for air, space, and cyberspace fighting systems and optimizes limited resources. Its goal is to provide integrated life-cycle management to operate as one materiel enterprise developing, testing, sustaining, and disposing of critical warfighting capabilities. The metrics, or North Stars, that D&SWS vector from are: increasing human productivity; critical equipment rates; response time and agility; sustaining safe and reliable operations; and improving energy efficiencies. Two other current sustainment initiatives within AFMC embracing integrated life-cycle management are High Velocity Maintenance (HVM) and Repair Network Transformation (RNT). HVM is designed to accelerate the speed and effectiveness of depot maintenance and will launch its pilot project in February 2009. RNT is still in concept development and will be designed to improve the efficiency of the repair network to provide faster more effective support to the warfighter. As AFMC transforms, one of the newest developments is the stand-up of the Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC). The 4,500 person organization focuses on supply chain management challenges. Under the new structure, Loggie networking experts from around the globe can link wholesale and retail logistics for supply chain management. Furthermore, they can integrate logistic processes, technology and resources in order to efficiently deliver end-toend warfighter support at a reduced cost. The Loggie community not only needs the best software integration and supply chain processes, but also a leaner more efficient way to fund warfighter priorities across the Air Force enterprise. Consequently, AFMC established the Centralized Asset Management (CAM) initiative to streamline and simplify the requirements
Maintainers inspect an engine insulation blanket for cracks, holes and deterioration on a C-130 Hercules March 21 at a Southwest Asian air base. (USAF photo/SSgt Patrick Dixon)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
Continued on next page... 19
E R : A F M C … L E A D I N G … T H E M AT E R I E L W O R L D ! !
determination; resource prioritization; budgeting; and the execution process for all sustainment accounts. Implementing CAM centralizes and improves financial processes; helps eliminate numerous non-value added transactions; and enables Air Force supply chains to be more responsive, flexible and affordable. As part of the Expeditionary Logistics for the 21st Century (eLog21), a number of initiatives are on the horizon to better equip the warfighter, including the Expeditionary Combat Support Systems (ECSS). By 2012, the goal is to replace approximately 250 disparate processes with one integrated solution for easier collaboration between organizations. Most importantly, ECSS will help ensure warfighters get the right equipment at the right time. In addition, ECSS will provide necessary resources to modernize aging weapons systems and significantly reduce cost. Peeking over the horizon is a hypersonic UAV on steroids called “Blackswift.” As the AFRL Commander, Major General Curtis M. Bedke, commented during the official ribbon cutting ceremony in June 2008, this national asset-to-be is a “short-term game changer.” Amazingly, Blackswift will take off from a runway; accelerate to Mach 6+; stay aloft longer than any previous UAV; maneuver freely; and land on its own. Furthermore, it uses a turbine-based combined cycle engine instead of rocket power. Traditional aircraft operations and maintenance opportunities for Loggies will increase as technology progresses and the Air Force discovers new ways to defeat the enemy.
BACK
TO THE
F U T U R E ? AFMC transformed dramatically
since its inception at McCook Field in 1917, when the Signal Corps first established the Airplane Engineering Division during WWI. Today, 91 years later, the Materiel Command explores ideas never imagined. The Loggie community will continue to be highly engaged in the success of developing war-winning technology, acquisition, test, and sustainment for expeditionary capabilities for the warfighter on time and on cost!
Guntrucks, manned by some of AFMC’s finest warfighters, are used to protect logisticians and other critical convoys during escort missions in the CENTCOM theater. USAF photo)
the way. Come join us as we write another chapter of LOA history with AFMC and all the friends we proudly call Loggies. We look forward to seeing you there! About the Authors: Captain Vaughan Whited is assigned to the HQ AFMC staff’s Centralized Asset Management (CAM) office. He is a career maintenance officer, with over 21 years of service as a young enlisted maintenance and munitions technician, as a flightline maintenance officer, as a scientific management professional and as a headquarters staffer. As this article is published, he is transitioning from AFMC to the United Arab Emirates as the 380 EAMXS MOO at Al Dhafra AFB. Captain Susan Doyle is assigned to the HQ AFMC Commander’s Action Group, where she is the Speechwriter to the Commander. She is an aircraft maintenance officer with five years of service and earned her Masters Degree in Public Policy from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in 2005.
AFMC is indeed leading the Materiel World. Most Loggies call AFMC home at some point in their careers. Today, AFMC is a world-class, second-to-none warfighting support machine running on all cylinders. What will AFMC look like in five years, ten years or in 2032 – our 50th year as the LOA? Will it experience the transformation that occurs once every generation, with decentralizing and re-integrating major enterprises? If history is our guide, then the AFMC journey will retrace old paths and blaze new ones in the years to come. Take the time to recognize the warfighter support teammates from AFMC at the 26th Annual LOA National Conference in Columbus, OH. This year’s theme is focused on AFMC – “Leading the Materiel Enterprise!! AFMC is proud to be this year’s host, with the Wright Brothers Chapter of LOA leading
20
FA L L
Captain Doyle recently
served in the 31st Aircraft Maintenance Squadron at Aviano AB, Italy as the Aircraft Maintenance Unit Assistant Officer in Charge.
Her previous assignment was as the Maintenance
Operations Officer with the 332 EMXS in Balad, Iraq. Editorial assistance was provided by Mr. Charlie Botello, a retired aircraft maintenance officer presently working with the Air Force Research and Development program office in HQ AFRL/XP. He has been a National MOA/LOA member since 1985 and a pillar of continuity for the Wright Brothers Chapter.
2008
K
LOA CONFERENCE UPDATE
The LOA National Team in Columbus, Ohio! Located at the center of the Universe; in the heartland of America; and deep in Big Ten Buckeye country, this year’s conference will be one of the most memorable events ever. From 12-15 October 1,400+ Loggies from around the globe will converge on the dynamic city of Columbus, Ohio for the 2008 Logistics Officer Association National Conference. This year’s theme, Leading the Materiel Enterprise, focuses on AFMC and plans to feature new topics, ideas, approaches, and speakers that will truly be value-added to you as a leader in the logistics world. Your LOA National Board has gone all out this year developing a full schedule designed to motivate and equip you for future success. Are you interested in Harleys? Then break out your leathers, because if you have what it takes for the elusive hole-in-one, you could win a brand new Harley! But you better bring your “A-game” because this year’s conference starts out with a fun-filled day of golf at one of the best courses in the northeastern region--the Scioto Reserve. After a full day of harassing your teammates about the shot they missed, everyone will muster for the Ice Breaker at The Lodge Bar, for another round of networking and reminiscing. “Roll Call!” is announced, and just as the smooth-tongued, hard-nosed USMC Gunnery Sergeant (Honorary Title), R. Lee Ermey so eloquently broadcasts, we expect to hear the same from the Chapters. This year, there will be no room for passive war cries from the chapters. If you are a logistics leader, you had better know how to motivate your troops. What better way to demonstrate your chapter pride than to dominate the house with fear and intimidation …“AIRPOWER!” To kickoff our conference, Maj Gen Thomas J. Owen, HQ AFMC Director of Logistics and Sustainment, and new advisor for the Wright Brothers Chapter, will provide some sage words. He will be followed by Lt Gen Kevin J. Sullivan, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission Support, who will enlighten us with an overview of the state of logistics. As the tempo increases, Gen Bruce Carlson, Commander of Air Force Materiel Command, and the Honorable Ms. Sue C. Payton, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, will give us their senior-level view of what is happening in the world of Acquisition and Logistics. We are very excited to have Gen Norton A. Schwartz, Chief of Staff of the Air Force provide us the Air Force Perspective. Breakout sessions will include focused panel discussions about supply chain management; depot field teams; repair network transformation; maintenance commander’s crosstalk; and an Iraqi A9 update…plenty to pick from, and all exciting. Day two provides another chance to demonstrate your team’s pride as well as an opportunity to learn more about logistics. The Commander of Air Mobility Command, Gen Arthur J. Lichte will jump-start the day with a focus on the incredible ability to deliver the materiel enterprise to the Warfighter. Then, the strategic to tactical shift in Repair Network Transformation will be presented by Maj Gen Robert H. McMahon, Director of Maintenance, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission Support. Conference attendees will then participate in breakout sessions that focus on topics such as: Depot 50/50; Partnering in Performance Based Logistics; AFSO21 initiatives; and F-15 mishaps and Aging Aircraft. In addition, some real-world valuable advice from a squadron commander’s forum will be available. What better way to conclude a great day than to have the opportunity to learn from the logistics legends themselves: Lt Gen (ret) Leo Marquez, Lt Gen (ret) Donald J. Wetekam, and Lt Gen (ret) Michael E. Zettler. They will offer their perspectives of the past, present, and vision for the future in a Senior Statesman Panel. Day three is the last chance to demonstrate the “Shock and Awe” chapter war cry! Lt Gen Terry L. Gabreski, Vice Commander of Air Force Materiel Command, will launch the day with her perspective on the future of The Materiel Enterprise. Immediately following will be a presentation on Space maintenance. Major General Thomas F. Deppe, Vice Commander of Air Force Space Command, will share with the Loggie community his insight on logistics for supporting space. I am sure you are asking what about the tours, right? Well, we have some great events lined-up that you should not miss. Chartered buses will take folks to the restoration hangar of the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, or Lane Aviation, Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal, the Defense Supply Center, Battelle, and the Air Force Metrology and Calibration program office--all located in or near Columbus. Hey, don’t think we forgot about the spouses. They get to visit the world famous Longaberger Basket Headquarters or shop till they drop at Easton Town
Commander’s Log As members of LOA, we are all part of th e Materiel Enterprise, regardless of whethe r you spend your time on the flightline, in th e warehouse, or in a pr ogram office. Logistic s plays a key role in each of our mission ar eas and the [2008] Materiel Enterprise,” theme, “Leading the will focus on how we integrate our various warfighting capability expertise to deliver to our Air Force. We are excited to ho st the LOA in the gr eat state of Ohio, th Our Wright Brothers e birthplace of Aviat chapter was formed ion. on the foundation of a ric heritage, harkening ba h materiel enterprise ck to the days of the first aviation logistician Wright. In fact, their s, Orville and Wilbur functional check flight s were preformed at Wright-Patterson Air Hu ffm an Prairie, where Force Base now sta nds. This proud his Conference and the tory makes the ‘08 LO great state of Ohio a A perfect marriage, bo ation and logistics ex th as champions of av cellence. i––General Bruce Ca
rlson, AFMC/CC
Center. Hopefully, through all the excitement, you made it a point to visit the exhibit hall. Our partners in industry do some truly amazing things. As always, it will be a great time to see, touch, and hear what is on the horizon for logistics. We are convinced that by the end of the conference, each of you will have added some great gear to your Loggie toolbox. That is the point--isn’t it? We join forces once a year, get charged up, calibrate our networking skills, connect with other like-minded professionals, and go back to the fight ready to conquer the world. Well, we are not going to send you off without proper appreciation for all you do. The grand finale - our Awards Banquet- will be hosted by Gen Carlson, where he will congratulate our 2008 scholarship and award winners, as well as giving us his view of the Materiel world. The Materiel Enterprise needs YOU to join us at this fantastic annual event. So mark your calendar to join forces at the center of the Universe, America’s heartland… come experience Columbus with us. Registration is open at the LOA Website, http://www.loanational.org/. Strength and honor fellow Loggies, see you in O-HI-O, the home of the legendary Wright Brothers!
–– CAPT VAUGHAN WHITED
LOA 2008 National Conference Agenda Sunday 12 October 0730 – Golf buses depart for Scioto Reserve 0900 – Golf Shotgun Start 1800 – Icebreaker – Lodge Bar
Monday 13 October 0700 0700 0800 0815 0900 0900 1030 1030 1145 1145 1300 1345 1500 1600 1800
- 1800 Registration Open – Breakfast – Opening Ceremony & Welcome Remarks – AFMC Logistics – Maj Gen Owen – Exhibits Open - Acquisition & Logistics – Gen Carlson, Ms Payton – Spouse shuttle – Easton Town Center – Breakouts: Taking the Materiel Enterprise to the Fight – Lunch – Exhibit Hall – LOA Past National President’s Luncheon (invite) – AF Perspective- Gen Norton Schwartz, CSAF – State of Logistics - Lt Gen Sullivan – Center Commander’s Forum – Generals Reno, Close, Peyer, Thomas – Exhibits Close – LOA Loggie Reception – Exhibit Hall
Tuesday 14 October 0700 0815 0900 0900 0900 1015 1130 1130 1300 1315 1415 1520 1700
– Breakfast – AMC - Materiel to the Warfighter – Repair Network Transformation: Strategic to Tactical – Maj Gen McMahon – Spouse Tour - Longaberger Headquarters – Exhibits Open – Breakouts: Materiel Enterprise – Exhibits Close for Lunch – Lunch – Keynote: Rob Carter, Executive Vice President, Information Services & CIO FedEx – General Session Ballroom. Open to full conf. all attendees & exhibitors. – Exhibits Reopen – Breakouts: Materiel Enterprise (Repeat) – J-4 Update - LtGen Kathleen Gainey – Senior Statesman Panel – Exhibits Close
Wednesday 15 October 0700 0700 0800 0815 0845 0915 0930 1000 1030 1200 1200 1215 1330 1330 1700 1800 1900 1900
- 1800 Registration Open – Breakfast – Roll Call - Future of the Materiel Enterprise – Lt Gen Gabreski – Space Maintenance - Maj Gen Deppe – DLA – Maj Gen Morrill – Exhibits Open – Bus departs for NMUSAF Prof. Tour – Break Outs – Force Development – Lunch – Exhibit Hall – Stars & Bars Luncheon – Chapter Presidents Meeting/Luncheon - Exhibits temporarily close - Developmental Tours Depart – Senior Officer (06up) Tour Exhibit Hall – Banquet Reception – Exhibit Hall – Annual Awards Banquet – Keynote Speaker – Gen Bruce Carlson – Exhibits Close Permanently
*Schedules May Change.
Thank You LOA 2008Conference Sponsors Platinum Sponsor Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Gold Sponsors Computer Science Corporation GE Aviation IBM Corporation Silver Sponsors Battelle Raytheon Bronze Sponsors AAI Corporation ATTI Internet CafĂŠ Sponsor Standard Aero Key Card Sponsor Battelle
Online Registration Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace
IceBreaker Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace
Golf Tournament Sponsor The Nordam Group
Loggie Reception Sponsor Boeing Company
Conference Guide Sponsor Honeywell Aerospace
2008 LOA National Conference Scholarship Donors ($500 and up) Corporate Contributors ATTI The Boeing Company Booz Allen Hamilton Crestwood Technology Group Honeywell Aerospace Raytheon WBB Consulting Individual Contributors Col (ret) Robert Drewitt Lt Col (ret) Russ Hall The Nowak Family Foundation
Enabling the
Mighty Eighth “…success or failure of an army [was] in direct proportion to the success or failure of its air force. The degree of success or failure of the Air Force in turn was a direct consequence of the functioning of the logistical elements of the air force itself…” –Maj Gen Hugh J. Knerr, USAAF By Col Joseph Codispoti The article in the Spring 2008 edition of Exceptional Release entitled “Maj Gen Hugh J. Knerr: Foundational Leader and Improbable Hero” established Gen Knerr as a distinguished “…operator, theorist, instigator, organizational genius, and visionary logistician” in the formative stages of our United States Air Force. This offering serves to validate the last four of those qualities, with special emphasis on the last two, through the lens of his service as Commanding General (CG), VIII Air Force Service Command (AFSC) and Deputy CG for Administration, United States Strategic Air Forces Europe (USSTAFE). Of particular focus will be Gen Knerr’s invaluable leadership and vision while organizing, training, and equipping the formidable Eighth Air Force logistics machine. With the benefit of hindsight, we understand that the Allies began to halt Axis aggression on all fronts during the latter half of 1942. However, this was not so clear to Allied leadership, who had particular concern with the ability of Soviet forces to contain the Nazi onslaught on the Eastern Front. As a result, AngloAmerican planners formulated strategies with the presumption that Hitler would be able to shift sizable forces from east-to-west to oppose Allied invasion attempts in Western Europe. This presumption led to one obvious conclusion in the minds of Army Air Force (AAF) planners: priority must be given to the only viable Allied mission strategy—an air offensive to wreck Luftwaffe fighter capability and dislocate infrastructure supporting numerically superior Axis ground forces. This conclusion was given life at the Casablanca conference between January and February 1943, which issued priority to a Combined Bomber Offensive (CBO) and specifically tasked the AAF with “…systematic destruction of selected vital elements of the German military and industrial machine through precision bombing in daylight.” The decisions at Casablanca carried a not so subtle message aimed at the Eighth Air Force to improve bombing effectiveness. Readiness figures had been woeful and bombing results up to February 1943were correspondingly weak. As late as June 1943, only 222 of 775 heavy bombers in Eighth Air Force were fully operational. This was a dreadful 28.6% mission capable rate. Not surprisingly, the
not yet “Mighty Eighth” flew missions over Germany just four days during the month and, even then, launched only 10-20% of their B-17 fleet on any mission. There were many reasons for the dismal logistics support in the early days of the Eighth Air Force. First and foremost, the AAF deliberately ramped up aircraft orders in 1939 without funding the requisite spare parts to support them in the field. Similarly, aircraft and crews were rushed to England to present combat capability, but without a comparative increase in the meager logistics infrastructure to support combat operations. Instead, the Eighth Air Force relied on British support until American logistics infrastructure could be established in appropriate numbers. Colonel Myron Wood, Chief of the VIII AFSC Supply Division, stated as late as April 1943 that the Eighth Air Force received greater support from the British than they gave in return.
The “Heaven’s Above” B-17 sits as a static display at the parade grounds at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. (U.S. Air Force photo/Meredith Canales)
The supply situation was further hampered by the priorities given to other theaters. Following the Operation TORCH landings in November 1942, the Eighth Air Force was required to transfer large quantities of equipment, vehicles, and an estimated 75% of available spare parts to Brigadier General Doolittle’s Twelfth Air Force, which was supporting operations in North Africa and the Mediterranean. Eighth Air Force maintainers routinely resorted to cannibalization to compensate for lack of spare parts, driving a fleet of “hangar queens,” some of which were ruined beyond repair in the process. Exacerbating the problem was the shipping priority for the European theater, the lowest of any overseas theater. Not until the TRIDENT conference in April 1943—which set in motion preparations for the invasion of Western Europe—was the European theater granted equal shipping priority. Aside from the diversion of much needed spares and equipment and the low shipping priority, a growing number of aircraft requiring modification prior to delivery to combat units hindered maintenance. Major General Henry Miller, CG, VIII AFSC, related that his depots were “…swamped with modifications upon new aircraft arriving in theater.” Modifications varied from 100 to more than 1,000 man hours, with intense pressure from operational commanders to deliver aircraft “yesterday.” By June 1943, every B-17, B-24, and P-47 delivered to England required 55, 43, and 48 standard modifications, respectively. With such materiel limitations and
increasing demands to support both a CBO and a pending invasion, it is no surprise that General Ira Eaker, CG, Eighth Air Force described the VIII AFSC as “…our weakest single factor in the Eighth Air Force.” Enter Knerr. Following the TRIDENT conference, General Henry “Hap” Arnold, CG, Army Air Force, directed Major General Follett Bradley to assess logistics capabilities and requirements in England and North Africa and make recommendations to improve the organization and function of VIII AFSC to “…sustain the Eighth Air Force at its potential strength…” Then Colonel Knerr accompanied General Bradley. But when Bradley suffered a heart attack while touring North Africa, Knerr was charged with leading the remainder of the tour and drafting the report. Knerr submitted the report on 23 June 1943 and identified many issues noted earlier, e.g., equipment and spares shortages, hefty modification workload, and low shipping priorities. But he also identified several organizational deficiencies, many of which were rooted in his first conclusion,: “A lack of understanding of the necessity of cooperation exists between the combat and service activities.” Specifically, Knerr noted that service groups were disorganized and under very loose controls; not all maintenance and supply personnel were being used in their specialties; equipment was malpositioned and units generally had about 50% of authorized quantities; combat groups controlled and directed service group activity with inadequate coordination between the two; the service group was not Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
27
MIGHTY EIGHTH THE
ER: ENABLING
depot workload, and synchronize logistics with operations.
inspecting or directing technical activities related to maintenance; combat group commanders failed to adequately supervise maintenance and supply activities; there was poor coordination between the echelons of maintenance and confusion as to types of maintenance to be performed at each echelon; and there was much inefficiency at the Burtonwood Depot, the primary facility for fourth echelon maintenance, due to British labor inefficiencies.
Knerr instituted several organizational changes. Perhaps the most important of these, implemented in the latter half of 1943, was expansion of sub-depots on each Eighth Air Force base.. The enhanced sub-depots supported first and second echelon mainteKorean War-era veteran Bob Selden shares the history of the B-17 Flying Fortress with nance, but with one Jason Morris and his son, Brody, during the 2008 McGuire Air Expo May 31 at McGuire Air important difference— Force Base, N.J. Base officials hosted the air expo, which concluded Air Force Week in maintenance and supply Philadelphia. Mr. Selden is a volunteer crew member of the “Memphis Belle.” (U.S. Air personnel, formerly Force photo/Staff Sgt. Bennie J. Davis III) assigned to the base comKnerr’s recommendations mander, were transferred were specific and direct: all third and fourth echelon maintenance should be organized to the VIII AFSC for all but administrative control. This under, and directed and controlled by the VIII AFSC; equipment allowed for the centralized control and decentralized execution and trained personnel should be consolidated at base level for of logistics and appropriately focused operators on the operamaximum effect; the VIII AFSC should be immediately and con- tional mission and logisticians on logistics support—a lesson tinuously expanded to support combat operations at least 30 days “re-learned” on occasion in our Air Force and under consideraprior to expected requirements; replace contracted maintenance tion again today. It also corrected an unbalanced maintenance and repair with organic capability; supply sections in air depots workload by diverting work from overtaxed base maintainers to should be specialized by types of equipment supported; unfilled underutilized depots, an imbalance Knerr attributed to the operrequisitions should be immediately directed to and shipped by ational commander’s tendency to “…keep things under his own the primary source of supply versus an intermediate organization; hand, and not divide responsibilities for airplanes to anyone consumption data should be immediately collected to support a else.” Finally, Knerr established Advanced Air Depot Areas with proactive supply system; and the VIII AFSC should be reorgan- geographic area responsibilities. This arrangement enhanced ized to exercise a “rigid central control and decentralized opera- parts availability by establishing 30 days of supply at the subtion.” The eventual implementation of Knerr’s recommendations depots and drawing from 90 days of supply at nearby Advanced resulted in a coordinated buildup of combat forces with requisite Air Depots. logistics capability, increased materiel flow, expansion of mainteA final and key reorganization espoused by Knerr, rejected by nance and supply facilities and installations, and increases in the Eaker, and finally instituted by Eaker’s successor, General Tooey stateside Air Service Command support infrastructure. Spaatz, was the establishment of the Deputate system to replace Satisfied with the report General Arnold requested Knerr’s pro- the A-staff system. This change established Major General motion to Brigadier General, charged him with implementing Frederick Anderson as the Eighth Air Force Deputy for the plan’s recommendations, and assigned him to the post of Operations and now Major General Knerr as the Deputy for Deputy CG, VIII AFSC and Deputy A-4, Eighth Air Force. He Administration. The move put logistics on par with operations in Eighth Air Force, enabled even greater synchronization would assume the CG and A-4 positions in October 1943. between operations and logistics, and established truly centralized One of Knerr’s first initiatives was the establishment of a control control of logistics through Knerr. The latter enabled Knerr to system and activity, based on the Control Office he led in the Air establish a greater degree of standardization and process control. Service Command. He instituted “statistical reporting and control procedures at all bases,” which included 3-month sortie forecasts. As mentioned earlier, Knerr’s emphasis on capturing supply conCombined with efforts to collect supply consumption data, the sta- sumption data, his establishment of increased stock levels at tistical control system helped forecast spares requirements, manage bases and supporting Advanced Air Depots, and his streamlined
28
FA L L
2008
Airmen from the 394th Bombardment Squadron gather for a group photo during World War II at an unknown location. The 394th BS was the training unit for all incoming B-17 Flying Fortress crews and was stationed throughout the Pacific theater. (Courtesy photo)
requisitioning process all improved the supply situation for Eighth Air Force by bringing the right parts closer and more rapidly to the operating bases. Knerr also oversaw an arrangement with the British in August 1943 to source many more recurring requirements for common supplies on the local economy. This collaboration cut lead times and reduced the burden on allied shipping with its associated risk of losses at sea. Items such as rivets, paints, abrasives, and hand tools were readily available and of high quality in the UK. Knerr also had a solution for parts not readily available in the US or UK—an aggressive local manufacture program, primarily at the depots. In just a few short months, Knerr’s organizational and process initiatives pushed the supply situation to acceptable levels and set it on a course of continuous improvement, in spite of ever expanding mission and numbers of aircraft. In the midst of growing task complexity and a more than five-fold increase in aircraft in preparation for the invasion, Knerr inherited the enormous task to transform a sluggish maintenance capability to meet the challenge. While common wisdom held that poor maintenance was the biggest problem in the European Theater of Operations in 1943, Knerr recognized and attacked the root cause— a dearth of trained maintenance crews. Maintainers were trained in ground schools in the US and sent overseas as integral units. In Knerr’s, mind the lead time required to train, equip and transport these green maintenance units was unacceptable and a primary contributor to the root cause. He petitioned and ultimately convinced General Arnold to send “warm bodies” to train on the line at the Air Depots under experienced mechanics. Knerr later described his training methods, stating “I didn’t care what they were. I got college professors, bartenders. We took ten men, put them on a bench with an experienced man to inspect the ’tear-downs’ as they went through. In that way each of those ten men became an expert in
a simple operation. Then we broke those ten up and put each in charge of another bench.” Knerr trained them in progressively larger jobs, and then systematically transferred some to sub-depots and mobile repair units to perform first, second, and third echelon maintenance. Also, he hotly contested what he termed “artificial limits” on manpower and equipment in Army tables of organization and equipment. Although he wasn’t successful convincing the Army bureaucracy, he mitigated the deficiencies with his training system and organizational initiatives. A rapidly growing mission for the expanding pool of maintainers was aircraft modification. In a constant struggle with Germany for technical supremacy, both the US and UK turned to modification of existing airframes as a means of rapidly fielding capability in lieu of 5 to 8-year acquisition programs for new models. The Lockheed Aircraft Company, based in Ireland, provided early modification capability for the AAF; however, true to his recommendation to replace outsourced workload with organic capability, Knerr established specialized modification capability by aircraft type at his three depots and substantially increased production by concentrating maintenance specialties and equipment. The production increases were absolutely essential to keep pace with escalating demands for modifications by aircrew in response to German innovations in technology and tactics. Deliveries of longer range fighter aircraft requiring modifications ( P-51s and P-38s) drove the requirement still higher. Knerr’s modification scheme increased production from 575 aircraft in September 1943 to nearly 1,400 aircraft by April 1944, ultimately turning out more aircraft than could be used on bombing missions. Knerr improved upon a maintenance concept instituted by the VIII Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
29
MIGHTY EIGHTH THE
ER: ENABLING
AFSC in 1942—mobile repair units—to rescue damaged or otherwise unserviceable aircraft landing away from home station. In contrast to a British policy of dismantling aircraft at the crash site and hauling components to repair facilities, mobile repair units responded to the site with 16-19 specialists, a jeep, and two trailers in addition to field trucks stocked with tools, supplies, and parts,. Their mission was to return the aircraft to a minimum flyable condition and enable it to be flown to its home base or a repair depot for more extensive repairs. Under Knerr’s watch, the mobile repair units rescued 67 aircraft per month—mainly B-17s—reaching a peak of 136 aircraft in October 1943. Mobile repair units were also used to augment overstretched crews at the bases during surges, illustrating the flexibility inherent in Knerr’s inspired organizational schemes. Women workers install fixtures and assemblies to a tail fuselage section of a B-17F Flying Fortress
As prominent a position as aircraft modificabomber at the Long Beach, Calif., plant in October 1942 tions held in the minds of operators and maintainers alike, battle damage repair of heavy mind. He divided battle-damaged aircraft into four categories, bombers had become the most prominent concern in 1943. In based on the extent of the damage, and allocated aircraft to varthe words of General Eaker, “…it is normal for from twenty-five ious echelons of repair. Base-level maintainers teamed with subto fifty per cent of aircraft on a deep penetration mission into depots to fix aircraft assigned to second and third echelon Germany to suffer some form of battle damage. This places a maintenance, assisted by mobile repair units and depot working burden on repair establishments which had certainly not been teams, as necessary. Mobile repair units continued to repair airrecognized in peacetime planning and for which there was not craft damaged away from home station. The responsible Air adequate organization.” This indictment on AAF logistics planDepot Area provided oversight and overall management of the ners seems inexcusable today, but given the prevailing notion enterprise. The results were amazing. Of 8,859 aircraft damaged since the days of Brigadier General Billy Mitchell of the infallifrom 21 January to 30 April 1944 (which included “Big Week”), bility of the armed bomber, such oversight seems plausible, base-level maintainers, sub-depots, mobile repair units, and although regrettable. In fact, the absence of attrition factors in depot work parties collaborated to repair more than 83% within our wartime spares planning today highlights both the difficul5 days and almost half within 24 hours! Knerr’s strategy had litties in determining expected attrition and the unpopularity of erally transformed battle damage repair from a major mainteexpressing it. However, it was common during 1943 for more nance concern to a near routine operation. than 200 bombers to return with battle damage after any given mission and the repair establishment could not keep up with the Improved supply and maintenance operations required an allworkload. As a matter of perspective, of 5,330 aircraft receiving important linkage with a responsive transportation network. battle damage in the last half of 1943, 722 received major dam- Among the items in short supply throughout Knerr’s tenure in the age. More than half receiving major damage returned to com- UK were vehicles—particularly cargo transport vehicles. One bat within 10 days. Although that record of repair may seem special irritation for Knerr was the lack of transport to move the reasonably good, backlogs in battle damage repair lines caused expanding stores of ammunition to the bomber units—although Knerr’s operations counterpart, General Anderson, to express Army ground forces seemed to have a plentiful supply of underconcern that numbers of crews could potentially exceed available utilized trucks. Unable to change the tables of allowance, or otherwise convince the Army to send more trucks to the VIII AFSC, aircraft in short order. Knerr made the best of a less than optimal situation. He pooled Knerr responded with a vigorous training program aimed at engiavailable trucks and other transport vehicles, enabling centralized neering officers and noncommissioned officers involved with control and improved visibility and prioritization with his limitbattle damage repair—primarily sheet metal workers. ed fleet. With centralized control Knerr was able to establish a Characteristically, Knerr also had an organizational solution in responsive ground transport network to move supplies vertically 30
FA L L
2008
from ports to bases, independent of the Army Service of Supply, and horizontally between bases and echelons of repair. In early 1943, the AAF activated two organic air transport units to move troops and supplies within the UK. The 27th and 31st Air Transport Groups almost exclusively to supported logistical requirements of the Eighth and Ninth Air Forces. Despite spirited objections of General Anderson both groups were assigned to the USSTAFE’s 302d Transport Wing. As with his other organizational initiatives, the centralized control of air transport increased the effectiveness of limited resources. During 1943, on average the air transport service moved 300 tons of cargo and 3,000 passengers per month for both Eighth and Ninth Air Forces. Centralized control also saved the day when VIII AFSC’s already undersized truck fleet was tapped to support the loading of troops bound for the beaches of Normandy. Knerr temporarily filled the void with both transports and bombers to keep vital supplies moving. The importance Knerr placed on responsive air transport was highlighted in a letter written to General Arnold in May 1945, in which he wrote, “Supply by air is a permanent adjunct of military operations.” He further related that it should be established “…as an Air Force responsibility before some other agency grabs the ball and runs with it.”
General Knerr. He shaped an Eighth Air Force logistics infrastructure that not only conquered the heavy, day-to-day demands of the CBO and preparations for the invasion of Western Europe, but had the flexibility and capacity to ready and sustain nearly 1,300 heavy bombers for “Big Week” operations in February 1944. While the world focused on such distinguished AAF combat leaders as Generals Spaatz, Eaker, and Doolittle, to name a few, much is owed to the expeditionary logistics genius of Major General Hugh J. Knerr—arguably the great enabler of the Mighty Eighth. About the Author: As Chief of Logistics Readiness for Air Mobility Command (AMC), Col Codispoti oversees operations of over 3,500 personnel at 61 accounts with over $4.6B of supply, equipment, fuels, and vehicle assets. He directs logistics readiness policies, concepts, and procedures in direct support of wartime mission needs and oversees the positioning of spare parts, vehicles and equipment at AMC en route locations around the world. He also manages financial, war reserve, and computer resources to maximize global reach.
Col
Codispoti serves as AMC’s representative to the Logistics Readiness Officer (LRO) Developmental Team, managing assignments and providing professional development counseling to the command’s LROs.
The Casablanca and TRIDENT conferences set in motion expoCol Codispoti is a member of the LOA Gateway Chapter. K nential expansion of air forces in the UK and enormous mission growth for an undersized logistics machine struggling to support just 860 aircraft at the time of the Casablanca conference. Less than one year later the logistics burden would extend to more than 4,500 aircraft—a complicated mix of heavy, medium, and light bombers, fighters, transports, and support aircraft with ever-changing mission configurations. One would have difficulty imagining how the VIII AFSC could have not only met the challenge, but also significantly improved levels of support without the farreaching process improvements and efficiencies, organizational solutions, training regimens, statistical controls, requirements forecasting, robust distribution network, and other brilliant innovaThe vapor trails from two Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress aircraft light up the night sky. The B-17 prototype first flew on July 28, 1935. (U.S. Air Force file photo) tions instituted by Major
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
31
SSgt Jerry Simmons loads personal and mobility bags of deploying personnel. (USAF photo/SrA Marc Lane)
AFSO21 Implementation and Results in a Logistics Readiness Squadron By Lt Col Travis Condon, Mr. Warren R. Carter, Capt Ricardo Garza, TSgt Joseph Nicosia Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century (AFSO21) at the base level yields tremendous returns to customers and those involved in the process. Immediate gains are realized in man-hours and while wasteful processes are eliminated providing greater value to our customers. With a higher operations tempo, less money and an aging fleet that needs to be recapitalized, leaders at base level must advocate AFSO21 initiatives. This article will address some of the reasons the Air Force has implemented AFSO21 along with results, challenges and lessons learned from implementing AFSO21 at a base-level Logistics Readiness Squadron (LRS). The current situation is critical. We’ve been in a combat environment for more than 16 years, have an aging fleet with an average aircraft age over 23 years, manpower costs are rising approximately 6% annually and the impacts of Program Budget Decision (PBD) 32
FA L L
720 have made personnel cuts in various specialties across the Total Force. The Operations Tempo remains high with fewer people to support an increasing number of taskings on our personnel. The Air Expeditionary Force (AEF) structure is severely strained necessitating a new methodology for the Air Force to meet the demands of the combatant commander. In order to meet global requirements while simultaneously providing some predictability and stability for Airmen, the AEF has transitioned about 40-50% of deploying forces into an AEF tempo band rule set. These tempo bands operate outside the normal AEF baseline of five AEF pairs, 4-month rotations, once every 20 months. The new banding concept is broken down into bands from A to E with each progressive letter having an increased amount of deployment time to home time. Band A is essentially the normal AEF construct. Band B starts the 179 day deployment cycle followed by four 179 day periods at home and is demonstrated in Table 1 and Figure 1 (below).
2008
cepts together within the Air Force to continuously improve operations. So, what is AFSO21?
Figure 1. Tempo Band Construct
AFSO21 focuses on generating efficiencies and improving combat capabilities across the Air Force. It applies to all the processes associated with the Air Force mission. Through proven process improvement techniques, AFSO21 provides a structured venue to significantly increase the Air Force’s combat capabilities. AFSO21 is an Air Force unique model using portions of lean, six sigma, theory of constraints and business process engineering. Taiichi Ohno came to the United States and took back techniques from the Ford assembly line, Dr W. Edwards Deming and “pull” systems from supermarkets and then adapted various tools and techniques to meet his needs by developing the Toyota Production System. Recently, Toyota has passed up Chrysler, Ford and GM as the #1 car maker in the United States in terms of output.
Table 1. Tempo Banding w/days deployed/home & ratio
The Air Force is doing much the same with AFOS21….taking the right tools and techniques and applying them within the Air Force to produce greater combat capability. Unlike past change efforts such as Zero Defects, Management By Objectives, and Total Quality Management where changes were looked at in stovepipes and isolation while producing numerous metrics that didn’t really change the way we looked at getting results through continuous process improvement. AFSO21 is about the end-toend process of getting greater combat capability through the elimination of non-value added activities. Quickly defined in Table 2 are some of the key improvement programs used by AFSO21.
Table 2. Process Improvement Programs
A specific example for the LRS is the Logistics Readiness Officer (LRO) Career Field who have gone from an AEF alignment to that of band D. With that, LROs can expect 179-day deployments followed by, at best,1 year at home station before the next deployment. This same construct is applied to numerous specialties across the Air Force. All of these critical factors make it necessary for us (Air Force) to continuously find better ways of doing business. We’re all doing the jobs the way we were trained but it’s time to look at the processes and eliminate non-value added activities. In most cases, 90-99% of any process is waste—non-value added activities from the customer’s perspective. AFSO21 is the improvement model we can use to pull the right tools and con-
In the Air Force today, Airmen are being asked “What have I improved today?” That’s a question the former Secretary of the Air Force, Michael W. Wynne, urged Airmen to ask themselves. By eliminating waste and killing non-value added work, the Air Force can concentrate on increasing operational support and combat power. This cultural transformation revolves around “Clean sheet thinking,” looking at processes from beginning to end and improving them from the ground up by asking “why are we doing it this way?” Value stream mapping of each process allows for a view of the current and future state map as a guide to attack waste. In order to improve the process, establish a vision and goals for improvement, conduct Rapid Improvement Events (RIEs), and then develop an action plan with priorities and responsibilities. In order to ensure continuous process improvement, commanders need to lead and actively participate as change agents then monitor, measure and share results across the organization and up the chain of command.
Continued on next page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
33
R E S U LT S AND
E R : A F S O 2 1 I M P L E M E N TAT I O N
AFSO21 is all about results and providing greater service from the customer’s point of view. Lean is the easiest of the tools to start with to eliminate waste. What is needed from the lean operating style is the ability to deal with declining resources without loss of combat capability or the ability to modernize our force. By identifying and eliminating the waste inherent in our day to day processes we can achieve this goal. An enhanced ability to accomplish our mission will result and afford a greater agility in response to changing demands with any mission and the personnel who perform the mission. With this cultural transformation, AFSO21 will produce people who are conscious of the value they deliver and seek to improve every day; this will result in Airmen who see their role in a fundamentally different way. “We must work from the customer’s rather than the organization’s point of view.” AFSO21 has adopted several desired effects for all AFSO21 activities. First, AFSO21 seeks to increase productivity of our most valued asset – People. This is not just about doing more with less, but doing less with less. By eliminating unnecessary steps (waste) and making our processes more efficient we can improve performance on all “value-added” activities. The foundation for AFSO21 begins with the elimination of waste and “lean thinking”. The majority of all processes contain 90-99 percent waste. Separating the value-added (VA) from the non-value added (NVA) is one of the key components of the AFSO21 philosophy. The term “waste” can be applied to any process – manufacturing, information, or service. Toyota has identified eight major types of non-value added waste inherent to any processes: overproduction, waiting, unnecessary transport, uncecessary movement, overproduction, excess inventory, defects, and unused employee creativity. By concentrating our efforts on the elimination of non-value added waste we can make significant impacts to the overall value stream of a process. Non-value added (waste) processes in figure 2 are colored white. Figure 2. Graph depicting value added and Non-value added in a process
As evidenced in this figure, most of the processing steps are waste. If wasteful steps are eliminated, the process can become much faster and more efficient—see figure 2. Can AFSO21 really provide tangible benefits at the base level and especially in the LRS? Over the last year, the 62d LRS led and participated in many AFSO21 RIEs that have provided tremendous efficiency gains for our internal personnel while providing enormous customer service improvements. The following are just some examples of the great successes that need to be shared.
E P R P R O C E S S . A process that all personnel are subject to is the EPR process. The old process that many organizations follow is very time consuming and frustrating for most that are “pushing” EPRs through the process. The process we used to follow did not utilize any of the “lean” concepts. What we measured was the time an EPR left the flight until it left the squadron. The typical process was from the Flight Commander to the Squadron leadership which included the secretary, Superintendent, First Sergeant and the Commander. After submitting to squadron leadership, the EPR would bounce back and forth to the flight as changes were indicated and then reviewed multiple times by squadron leadership. This required a significant amount of effort to track EPRs and also took a tremendous amount of time in the batch and queue process. The previous process had an approximate time from flight release to squadron release of about 60 days, consumed over 40 hours per week in squadron leadership time, and EPRs were still late. Work in progress (WIP) was very high—there were about 35-40 EPRs in the process at any one time and many were reviewed repeatedly. Now, the current process pulls EPRs through the system and is only reviewed during the week they close out. Under the new process, EPRs that closed out during the last week are reviewed during a group review process. EPRs are turned in at 1200 on Tuesday and then reviewed in order by the superintendent, secretary, 1st Sergeant and then the commander. The same hard copy EPR has all the comments/markings on it all the way through the commander. During the group review on Wednesday, all flight commanders, superintendents and signatories of the EPR are present for the review. The commander and superintendent discuss what needs to be changed and then the flight CC/superintendent along with the signers change it on the spot and then the EPR is signed. There is no more back and forth between the flight and squadron. There are numerous benefits to this process: (For comparison purposes, the 62 LRS has approximately 270 military personnel) 1. Squadron leadership spends 5 hours per week on EPRs vice 40+ hours
34
FA L L
2008
2. WIP reduced from 25-30+ EPRs to 2-7 EPRs weekly 3. Tracking time cut 95% 4. Mentorship time available for each NCO/Officer writing/reviewing EPRs 5. Quality significantly raised which further reduced review time 6. Zero late EPRs for TSgt and below (MSgt and above involves group and wing processes that are not controlled). Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the old and new process.
M O B I L I T Y B A G P R O C E S S . With the Global War on Terrorism approaching its seventh year, the question is no longer if I’ll deploy, but when. As a result, the deployment and redeployment process of Airmen is pivotal. Naturally, there are strains on the LRS mobility bag section personnel associated with supporting the war-fighter as well as a tremendous amount of stress involved in coordinating the myriad of deployment readiness checklist items needed prior to departure. The 62 LRS held a RIE earlier this year to look at the entire MOBAG process from issue to return that included walking the process from the Figure 3. 62 LRS Old EPR Process
Figure 4. 62 LRS New EPR Process
moment the customer comes in the door until the time they left. The average process time (dependent on bag issue type) was between 60-90 minutes while the distance traveled by both customer and LRS personnel averaged almost half a mile! One fault which was repeated throughout the process was a lack of standardized work. The quality and issuance of a bag was a completely subjective process depending on the LRS representative at the counter. Furthermore, personnel were using only one inventory terminal for both issue and receipt. This created tremendous bottle necks and prevented us from efficiently serving our customer. The entire section was reacting to customers, rather than knowing when to expect them. The solution was in the works within 72-hours. First, by separating the NVA from the VA activity we were able to reduce customer wait times by 93%. One of the most important and imaginative solutions came from rethinking the way we shelve and issue like items. Why couldn’t like non-expendable items be kitted together? As an experiment we used food processing vacuum seal bags and placed 9 modified A-bag items in a vacuum machine. We then added bar codes to the clear plastic containers which would allow for quick inventory issue/receipt. The result was a reduction to 2 items and provided a tremendous success and catalyst for other creative and “out-of-the-box” solutions. By the end of the week we were kitting just about everything—a C-Bag was reduced from 26 to 9 items. Furthermore, because items were sealed, clearly visible, reduced baggage space was required and protected items returned unopened could be placed directly in outbound inventory once accounted for. There were numerous other improvements made, such as moving the existing customer service counter and adding 4 additional inventory terminals to creating a wing-wide scheduling program and introducing the “pantry & supermarket” concept. In the old process, the entire warehouse was used to retrieve and return inventory. This made the requirement to monitor the inventory of the entire warehouse for just smaller deployments. This entire warehouse is called the supermarket. The analogy used is that at home, we do not go to the supermarket every time we need an item—we go to the pantry. Only when the pantry needs to be restocked do we go to the supermarket. With that, we developed a lean production cell, now called the pantry that has all items needed, pre-packaged and kitted for deployers. This new lean production cell drastically cut travel distance and customer/worker time involved in building and returning mobility bags. Additionally, this inventory is now easy to see and visual management used to determine when it needs to be restocked. The results of these changes were astonishing—mobility bag processing Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
35
time cut 93%, travel distance cut 98%, inventory items cut 65% and customer wait time reduced from 76 minutes to 5 minutes maximum. The results are highlighted in table 3 and figures 5&6. Priority 03 Parts Delivery to Aircraft. Looking at each and every process from the customer’s perspective is the key to eliminating
R E S U LT S
Table 3. Results of MOBAG RIE
In order for this to become a reality several things needed to happen. First an open communication between our supply and aircraft maintenance units was crucial. The old process (see figure 7) involved tremendous NVA and took on average 78 minutes from the time a part was needed until it was picked up and delivered. The new solution involves the maintainer ordering the part required from the aircraft via radio and having their folks input the order in GO81 (the same system LRS supply
AND
E R : A F S O 2 1 I M P L E M E N TAT I O N
NVA processes. Late last year the 62 LRS took a hard look at how we supported the aircraft maintainer on the flightline. As a result, a decision was made to hold a RIE which would look at our parts store support and how we could provide greater service to our customer. One of the creative non-typical solutions was to try delivering Priority 03 parts to the aircraft maintainers. In the past, the maintainer would have to come off the flightline, look up the part, order it, come to the aircraft parts store to pick it up and then go back to the plane. Now, they order from the plane and the part is delivered to them…they can reach out and the part is there….much a like a surgeon in a surgical suite!
Figure 5. Future State Map for MOBAGs Figure 7. Old Part Order Process between LRS & AMXS
Figure 6. C Bag Kitting Example Figure 8. New Part Order Process between LRS & AMXS
36
FA L L
2008
uses). Once input, the order is immediately received and processed at Materiel Management storage. From there the part is transferred to an Airman from the aircraft parts store who delivers the part directly to the flightline where the request originated. The time taken to complete the entire process is now 24 minutes and the maintainer stays on the flightline! (see figures 8 and 9) Cultural transformation begins with cooperative team collaboration and this solution is evidence of that. Although the solution did involve a little extra time on LRS’s part, the overall gain to the Air Force is noteworthy; AMXS time savings of 81%, while the AF saves 70% per order received and delivered to the aircraft. The new Priority 03 Delivery process has been benchmarked by AMC and will become the standard way we do business. Those were just a small sampling of recent RIEs and now we’ll look at some 6S events. The 6S process involves six areas: sort, straighten, shine, standardize, sustain and safety. During the initial sort stage, brutal assessment is carried out to determine what items are actually used and need to stay—if it doesn’t add value
then it’s gone. 6S events have been carried out throughout the squadron and even in our command section where we cleared 250 square feet of space. As a result, we cleared out over $16,000 worth of unused items—$4,385 equipment was made available to the squadron or wing while $8,635 worth of assets was transferred to recycle center and $4,120 was transferred to the Defense Reutilization Marketing Office (DRMO). Highlighted below are a few of these 6S events:
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 6S
E V E N T.
The highlight of our 6S program has been our vehicle maintenance shop where our multi-purpose shop led 6S for the squadron. The result— over 59 items (130 units) worth $31,632 were red tagged and donated to the base Auto Hobby Shop. In addition, standards of work were created and shared among the multiple shops. For example, Multi-Purpose 1 (MP1), MP2, Customer Service and 463L all share common work standards. A tool is checked out and located in the same position in one shop as it would be in Continued on next page...
Figure 11. More 6S Results in Vehicle Mx
Figure 9. Time differential for LRS & AMXS for Parts Delivery
Figure 10. 6S Results in 62 LRS Vehicle Mx Figure 12. 62 LRS 6S Results on the Shared Drive
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
37
as stated earlier, is nothing short of a complete cultural change and there are eight common errors to organizational change efforts.
Table 4. AFSO21 Phase Implementation Plan
E R : A F S O 2 1 I M P L E M E N TAT I O N
AND
R E S U LT S
C O M P L A C E N C Y.
another. Items are clearly visible and marked for their assigned location (see figures 10 and 11), “a place for everything and everything in its place.” 6S events are not limited to industrial and administrative areas, they are also valuable in the electronic arena. We even conducted a 6S event on our shared “common” drive. How many times do people say it’s on the shared drive and it’s nearly impossible to find? Before it could take a tremendous number of clicks to find a file…now it’s standardized and takes 3 clicks. The results in figure 12 demonstrate some of the success. With such great successes, it would seem like it should be very easy to implement continuous process improvement; however, this is not the case. With so many good reasons to implement AFSO21, why does it seem difficult to get this started and keep it going? There are a number of reasons for this—with an overarching reason that implementing AFSO21 is a culture change. It is a fundamental culture change that will take years to implement in a 3-phased approach. Currently, most organizations at the base-level are still in Phase 1 and may be there for a while. It takes the squadron commander to lead this effort through vision, education, key leader development while simultaneously creating a battle rhythm that maintains AFSO21 at the forefront As you can see in Table 4, it starts with leadership commitment. Leadership throughout the squadron must understand what AFSO21 is along with implementing the vision and providing avenues for quick wins to help everyone understand and “buyin” to AFSO21. People need to see AFSO21 in action and realize it’s all about eliminating waste while simultaneously getting greater impact and customer service. Leadership needs to make AFSO21 a priority. We are constantly bombarded with various deployments, inspections, taskers, exercises, significant events, etc. However, the vision of implementing AFSO21 and changing the culture must continue throughout all of these distracters in order to help everyone become more productive and successful while spending less time on wasteful, non-value added activities. Implementing AFSO21,
38
FA L L
If there is not a high enough sense of urgency among leaders and employees the change efforts will fail. Without a sense of urgency or a burning platform as a reason for change, most personnel will not see the need to go beyond their comfort zone, implement and be part of the change effort. So why the urgency in the United States Air Force? The burning platform for the Air Force is: “Our people and aircraft have been in combat environs for 16 consecutive years, asymmetric threat advantages challenge the cyber-integrity of our national defensive systems and fiscal challenges combines with demographic changes in our nation make the adversary of 2015 a real and present danger.”
G U I D I N G C O A L I T I O N . The leader must be an active supporter along with a significant number of their staff. Without team leadership from the top, change efforts will not get the attention deserved or perceived level of importance. In particular to the Air Force, the squadron commander must understand and lead the change efforts with the support of senior staff, officers and senior NCOs. V I S I O N . The vision is required to “direct, align, and inspire actions on the part of large numbers of people.” “The vision for AFSO21 is to establish a continuous process improvement (CPI) environment whereby all Airmen are actively eliminating waste and continuously improving processes.” Understanding the importance of vision and the Air Force’s vision for AFSO21, it’s critical that each squadron incorporate continuous process improvement into their squadron vision.
U N D E R - C O M M U N I C AT I N G .
The vision must be clear and the benefits of AFSO21 must be understood or people will not be willing to make the short term sacrifices required for the longer term gain. So many are satisfied with the status quo and do not want to expend the effort to implement change….even when it significantly benefits them! People must believe in the change and it must be communicated not only in words, printed form but also in action. Squadron commanders must take the lead and take the first steps in what they will require so many more people to do—make the time and be involved in RIEs. If a squadron sommander can take the time to participate in a week-long event and make long term change, then it’s easier to put the expectation on the rest of the squadron to commit. In addition to leading by example, participation in change efforts
2008
also produces a thorough understanding and belief that change efforts can and do produce enormous benefits to the workforce.
O B S TA C L E S .
There are many obstacles to change efforts. Sometimes the obstacles are organizational structures or guidance, other times they may be the incentive and reward systems. However, many times the worst obstacles are some people who refuse to understand the need for change and continually work to undermine successful continuous process improvement. Failure to deal effectively with these personnel will undermine the change efforts…especially if these personnel are senior leaders in the organization.
S H O R T T E R M W I N S . Leaders must create the envi-
SrA Alfredo Samson, 62nd LRS, left, and Richard Olszewski assure shelves are properly stocked and items are readily available for future deployments. (USAF photo Abner Guzman)
ronment and ensure short term wins occur for as many people in the organization as possible. As the vision is communicated and continuous process improvement implemented, people need to see the benefits quickly in order to sustain the effort needed for long term change and more comprehensive change efforts. Squadron leadership must actively find potential short term wins, engage the personnel and “reward the people involved with recognition, promotions, or money.”
DECLARING VICTORY
T O O S O O N . Until the organization culture is fully changed, victory cannot be declared. For many organizations, this victory cannot be declared for 3-10 years, while the Air Force is looking to become mature in 4-7 years. Toyota on the other hand has had continuous process improvement deeply ingrained in its culture for over 40 years yet claims it still has a long way to go. What all of this should tell you is that we (Air Force) are a long way off from declaring victory in any change efforts.
A N C H O R I N G C H A N G E S . The changes and new culture must become part of the normal way of doing business. Over time, continuous process improvement will become just the normal way of doing business and not something on top of what everyone else is doing. Time must be taken to ensure the results of change efforts are clearly communicated and developing future leadership. Additionally, the right recognition and promotion criteria should be put in place to encourage continuous process improvement. Implementing change is not easy and Kotter’s 8 steps should be followed to help implement and sustain the changes. Five key points from Liker’s “The Toyota Way” are very relevant:
1. Start from the top—this may require an executive leadership shakeup 2. Involve from the bottom up 3. Use middle managers as change agents 4. It takes time to develop people who really understand and live the philosophy 5. On a scale of difficulty, it is “extremely” difficult
G E T T I N G S TA R T E D There will be significant resistance at first and then it will dissipate over time—so, how do you get started? First and foremost the squadron commander must fully understand AFSO21 and especially “Lean” to begin the process. All squadron commanders must educate themselves by reading: a.) “Leading Change” by John L. Kotter; b.) “The Toyota Way” by Jeffrey K. Liker; c.) “Lean Thinking” by James P. Womack and Daniel T. Jones; and d.) the “AFSO21 Playbook” (http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-070205-088.pdf) Additionally, there are a multitude of briefs and papers on AFSO21 and each commander should obtain and understand those as well. Next, each commander should attend the AFSO21 Level 1 Facilitator course and become a certified Level 1 facilitator. Lastly, recommend that each commander attend the Lean Enterprise Systems Design Institute course at the University of Tennessee. This is the best course I’ve seen to help understand and illustrate through practical examples Lean techniques. Second, while the squadron commander is learning, they should also start teaching. Start with basic AFSO21 briefings Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
39
R E S U LT S AND
E R : A F S O 2 1 I M P L E M E N TAT I O N
trained. This will help start the cultural change and illustrate how Lean can help in any process. To help generate enthusiasm for the immediate results, organize 6S events and Rapid Improvement Events. Find a facilitator on base and get started. I’ve found that after each event, enthusiasm grows and spreads to others. Ensure you pick a good cross section of people to be on the RIE—those that fully understand the process, the nay sayers, those that don’t have any idea about the process and those who truly understand Lean. With this mix, you will get great results. I’ve found it Heavy bags weigh SSgt Neil McCarthy down as he gets ready to deploy from Ellsworth AFB. (USAF photo/A1C Nathan more common now for people Riley) to query as to when they get to participate on an RIE or 6S at commander’s calls and also during squadron staff meetings. event rather than asking what it is. Remember, all processes Set the vision and goals for AFSO21 and begin building a plan are about 90-99% waste…so you can start anywhere. of action. Start teaching to all in the squadron and more in depth for senior squadron personnel. I recommend starting Third, show your commitment by participating and leading with “The Toyota Way” as it is the easiest book to understand, AFSO21 RIEs and 6S events. This not only shows your full provides great illustrations and examples, and has fairly short commitment but also demonstrates to all that if you can take a chapters that can be covered in one chapter each week for a week out of your schedule to give so much more back to the total of 30 minutes. Start with the squadron senior staff and squadron and Air Force, then so can everyone else. The addithen add further sessions to get more people involved. The tional benefit is that you can now communicate from experience squadron senior staff will form the guiding coalition that will and by leading from the front. help implement and sustain the change efforts. This becomes a very critical stage. Senior squadron leaders must know that understanding and being positive about continuous process improvement is expected and anything less than that is unacceptable. There will be resistance at first but there are always key senior leaders that understand and help implement while others take a little longer…be patient, but steadfast. Class size should be no more than 10 students and each should express what they learned from the chapter. We don’t do power point slides and we don’t let people read from notes—they just need to talk about the key points they got out of the chapter. Make this 30-minute session mandatory and ensure everyone schedules their appointments around this. Failing to show and participate leads to people really not understanding and makes your efforts much more difficult as many of the concepts are counter-intuitive to the way we’ve all been brought up and 40
FA L L
Fourth, make AFSO21 events part of the formal recognition system. Make it part of feedback sessions, civilian appraisals, EPRs, OPRs…make it something people need to do in order to earn the highest ratings and stratifications. This certainly helps to motivate those who need that “little extra push” in order to really start understanding and becoming an advocate. All National Security Personnel System (NSPS) civilians in our LRS are required to initiate and participate in at least 2 AFSO21 events during each appraisal year. This certainly helps to establish and maintain the culture. Furthermore, the change results and those recognized must be communicated to the entire squadron who must then see the results of RIEs and also see those participating being rewarded. For every RIE and 6S event in the 62 LRS, we always publicly recognize the team and give them 1 day off….military and civilian. Every event thus far has produced
2008
tremendous benefits to our customers and significant manpower savings and efficiency gains for our personnel. This energizes everyone on the team to want to continue these efforts which help accelerate the change efforts and provides even more opportunities for improvements. A significant side benefit is the quantifiable results that make award packages, EPRs, OPRs and decorations very strong. Finally, find opportunities for short term wins. Some examples were given in this article but many more are available through various communities of practice (COPs) or through Powersteering that is accessible by wing AFSO21 leads. Successful short term wins really energizes members of the team and the word begins to spread. Results of many short term wins include increased morale, believability that change will happen and that it actually makes a difference for their work environment. Make AFSO21 part of your normal battle rhythm. Determine a plan of action for implementation, schedule events (RIE and 6S) out into the future and make outbriefs and the future schedule part of a normal weekly meeting with senior staff in the squadron. There is always a reason to put AFSO21 off until next week, next month or next year but it needs to start now—AFOS21 will give back more time than it takes…invest now for a much larger return later. As a good friend once said about someone not willing to take a short term loss for a significant long term gain….”They’re too busy swimming to get in the boat.” This may sound overly simplistic but it is very true…take a short amount of time to climb in the boat to gain the efficiency and speed of riding in the boat…don’t wait, start now. Take it on and start the change efforts…there’s no better day than today! We are all busy enough, but take the time to eliminate most of the waste that makes us so busy. Hunt down waste and kill it! About the Authors: Lt Col Travis Condon is the Commander of the 62d Logistics Readiness Squadron at McChord. The 62d LRS was recently recognized as the Daedalian Major General Warren R. Carter Logistics Effectiveness Award for the best Logistics Readiness Squadron in the Air Force 2007. Travis.Condon02@McChord.af.mil Capt Ricardo Garza is currently the Operations Officer for the 62d Logistics Readiness Squadron. Ricardo.Garza@McChord.af.mil TSgt Joseph Nicosia is the lead AFSO21 Facilitator for the 62d Logistics Readiness Squadron. Joseph.Nicosia1@McChord.af.mil
K
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
41
Re-baselining Air Force Scheduled Maintenance for the C-5 Galaxy Coupled with a hierarchical inspection/check process, higherlevel tasks include or meet the intent of all lower-level requirements.
By Mr. Peter M. O’Neill and Mr. Scott P. Vandersall The C-5 System Program Manager and Air Mobility Command are revamping the scheduled maintenance inspection program on the C-5 Galaxy by instituting the Maintenance Steering Group 3 (MSG-3) concept. This will affect all scheduled maintenance inspections from preflight, thruflight, and basic postflight to minor isochronal, major isochronal and programmed depot maintenance.
W H AT I S M S G - 3 ? MSG-3 is commercial aviation’s decision logic process for determining initial scheduled maintenance inspection requirements for newly acquired aircraft and/or power plants. MSG-1 was originally designed in 1968 by the Air Transport Association (ATA) to build scheduled inspection programs for new commercial aircraft (specifically the Boeing 747). In 1970, MSG-2 removed specific Boeing 747 terminology for use on other aircraft (L-1011 & DC-10). Like MSG-1, MSG-2’s philosophy was parts-driven, bottom-up, and process-oriented. By 1979, aviation experience and events drove significant changes in the methodology resulting in MSG-3. This MSG variant, still exclusively used by commercial aviation today, is system-driven, top-down, and task-oriented. MSG-3 analysis is a rigorous, structured process that determines optimal scheduled inspection tasks and intervals. It employs a LEAN set of building-blocks consisting of zonal/enhanced zonal, general visual, detailed visual and non-destructive inspections. 42
FA L L
WHY
M S G A N A LY S I S S U P E R I O R T O S TA N D A R D R C M P R O G R A M S O N C O M M E R C I A L A N D M I L I TA RY A I R C R A F T ? IS
MSG has evolved over 35 years and was designed specifically for aircraft. MSG concepts incorporate a simple and concise inspection convention with Standard and Enhanced Zonal (e.g. aged wiring) Inspections. MSG-based maintenance programs are compatible with hierarchical maintenance concepts, allowing for a shift in structural inspections to later intervals to capitalize on aircraft downtime (Right Time to Find, Right Time to Fix). This, in turn, allows increased focus on systems degradation checks at earlier intervals for increased reliability. The result is a list of tasks and defined intervals that are fully justifiable and defensible through the analysis process and achieve consistent, standardized results. This ensures only required inspections are performed, eliminating “over-inspecting” the aircraft. MSG and RCM started down the same path in 1968. The RCM experts of the time, Stanley Nolan and Howard Heap, assisted the ATA in developing the MSG inspection convention. The RCM approach to failure analysis worked well for systems analysis, but was deficient in the areas of structures and zonal analysis. The MSG approach diverted from the RCM approach, as the analysis structure was developed for structures and zonal under the governance of the ATA. The extent of RCM devel-
2008
who worked the aircraft opment beyond the A N I N D U S T R Y D C 9 M S G 3 A N A L Y S I S R E S U L T assisted in the analysis, basics of structure analywhich resulted in the sis and the full zonal Interval Check Pre-MSG-3 Post-MSG-3 Savings realization that the concept is dependent Months Flow Man Flow Man Percent MSG-3 process has a upon the involvement of Days Hours Days Hours higher degree of accurathe integrating entity 18 16 12,000 7 5,250 56 36 40 30,000 30 25,000 25 cy on an older aircraft and, to our knowledge, 108 50 37,500 40 30,000 20 because of the wealth of has not fallen under any available empirical and governance, such as the reliability data. ATA, to ensure periodic updates and reviews. The MSG-3 construct of establishing the Implementation of MSG-3 on the DC-9 resulted in a decrease scheduled maintenance inspection program has been used for in flow days and labor-hours expended for each interval check. nearly 29 years, and is employed by every commercial aircraft The departure reliability rate for the DC-9 fleet rose from 96.8 operator in the world, excluding the Eastern Bloc countries. It percent to 98.5 percent, a 53 percent reduction in the remainis a proven and trusted methodology. ing “not mission capable” time.
WILL MSG-3
WORK ON AN AGED AIRCRAFT?
The MSG-3 construct was initially designed to determine the appropriate tasks and intervals of the scheduled maintenance inspection while an aircraft is in design/production. The airline industry applied a refined MSG-3 decision logic to review the maintenance program of an aged aircraft, the DC-9. Technicians
WILL MSG-3 CRAFT?
W O R K O N M I L I TA RY A I R -
The answer is a resounding “Yes!” MSG-3 will be implemented on the C-5 on 1 Oct 2009. The systems, structural, and zonal Continued on next page...
A C-5 Galaxy takes off from an airfield at a forward-deployed location. (USAF photo by TSgt. Justin Pyle)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
43
C-5 GALAXY FOR THE
ER: RE-BASELINING AF SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE
analyses have been completed. The appropriate tasks and their intervals have been determined. All the tasks, including all the technical justification, have been placed in a maintenance program database. This database serves as a dynamic analysis record, including rationale, for the entire aircraft service life. The tasks are sorted by task intervals and are used to author “best practice� commercial- based work cards for technicians to accomplish the various inspections. The tasks are also assigned a task tracking number to allow for tracking the health of the task and refinement of the inspection program.
C - 5 I N T E R VA L A N A LY S I S R E S U LT S Interval Check HSC ISO (Minor) ISO (Major) PDM-A Model PDM-B Model
Current 105 Days 14 Months 28 Months 60 Months 84 Months
Post-MSG-3 120 Days 16 Months 48 Months 96 Months 96 Months
The first improvement was a scheduled maintenance inspection interval extension. Using a prior original equipment manufacturer (OEM) study, the programmed depot maintenance (PDM) interval for the A, B, and C model C-5s were extended to eight years. The following are the resultant interval changes: To determine the cost avoidance associated with the interval extensions, a net present value (NPV) model developed by QuantiTech of Huntsville, Alabama was used. The model, QuantiTech Computer Aided Flow Economics (QT CAFE), has been used on the Patriot Missile System, AF Telephone Switching System, and Computer System Upgrade determination. The model portrays the life cycle of all aircraft passing through the maintenance program. It determines the cost of all aircraft cycling through the current program and through the MSG-3 program, determines the cost difference between both programs, and calculates the NPV of the costs. With the C-5 expected to stay in the inventory until 2040, the 33 year cost avoidance from 2007 is $1.38 billion. The scheduled maintenance inspection interval extension also decreases the number of aircraft that are in scheduled maintenance per day and are now available to the warfighter. Based upon the interval extension alone, this equates to 2.15 aircraft per day no longer undergoing scheduled maintenance inspection activities.
Another improvement was the identification and inclusion of all Force Structural Maintenance Program (FSMP)/Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP) items into the MSG-3 scheduled maintenance inspection program. These items are OEM/System Program Office-identified structural inspection items that should be included in the inspection program to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft. After the initial structural analysis, 68 FSMP/ASIP items were found to be missing or not adequately addressed in the current inspection program. Adding these items into the MSG-3 program ensures Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness (OSS&E) compliance for the C-5. Incorporating a hierarchical maintenance inspection program for the C-5 eliminates the requirement for any field-level inspections immediately following PDM after the aircraft returns to the unit. The intent of all lower level (field) inspections is covered as part of the PDM inspection tasks. The C-5 will no longer require extensive downtime to complete an isochronal inspection shortly after returning from PDM. The PDM inspection will also zero time the lower level inspections such as ISOs (Isochronal) and HSCs (Home Station Checks). MSG-3 will also reduce the unscheduled maintenance requirements of the C-5. As an example, the current scheduled maintenance inspection program does not adequately address the slat system. The slat system is repaired as it fails and has little preventative maintenance inspections or established evaluation criteria. Invariably, as the C-5 progressed through the PDM process, the aircraft would encounter slat problems at the last part of the PDM, the functional test. To address this problem, Intergraph
A C-5 Galaxy from Dover AFB, and another from Travis AFB, stand ready in Southwest Asia. (USAF photo by TSgt James Mossman)
44
FA L L
2008
Maintainers with the 721st Air Mobility Operations Group at Balad Air Base, Iraq, remove the panels on a C-5 Galaxy to perform maintenance. (USAF photo SAirman Terri Barriere)
Corporation performed the MSG-3 analysis on the slat system developing inspection tasks and criteria. This inspection was performed on two “bad-actor” aircraft, which had 10 slat problems between them within the last 12 months prior to PDM input. Both aircraft encountered no slat problems at functional test following PDM and have been monitored since their departure from PDM. Both aircraft have exceeded the number of sorties, cycles, and flight hours of the 12-month period prior to PDM input, and have experienced one slat problem between them since incorporation of the new MSG-3 inspection and evaluation criteria. On the one aircraft that encountered the slat problem, this represented an 80 percent increase in the reliability of that system (one discrepancy versus five previously). The slat system represents one percent of all available systems on the aircraft. While we do not expect to achieve an 80 percent increase in reliability (and resultant decrease in unscheduled maintenance requirements) across the board on all systems once MSG-3 is fully implemented, we believe a very conservative 20 percent increase in overall system reliability is achievable. A 20 percent increase in reliability for a 111-aircraft fleet would result in 4.77 fewer aircraft down for unscheduled maintenance per day.
PERFORMANCE BASED PLANNING AND L O G I S T I C S ( P B P & L ) E S TA B L I S H E S A RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Initial MSG-3 analysis goal is to realize 80 percent of scheduled maintenance improvements. To improve on the remaining 20 percent, a robust reliability program is needed to continually monitor and trend aircraft discrepancies. Monitoring, tracking and correcting system degradation and inspection task effectiveness is crucial to maintaining inherent reliability and to properly adjust a MSG-3-based maintenance program. Intergraph designs reliability programs to improve asset reliability and support dynamic MSG-3-based maintenance programs. PBP&L is Intergraph’s reliability architecture, specifically designed to improve aircraft reliability, availability, and maintainability. Intergraph’s team of PBP&L analysts uses a combination of experience, analytical skills, and software tools to quickly identify negative trends or problem areas across the fleet or down to spe-
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
Continued on next page...
45
C-5 GALAXY FOR THE
ER: RE-BASELINING AF SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE
cific tail numbers. Once system degradation is identified, the nature of the problem is thoroughly researched to isolate root cause(s). All viable solutions or repairs are studied and supported with return on investment type analyses, ensuring the most economical and effective solution is recommended to our customers. There are many avenues to correct reliability issues, depending on problem sources or root causes: MSG-3 task and interval adjustments, process improvements, training, supply improvements, maintenance Reliability Enhancement Visits (REVs), and recommended modifications or redesigns are all possible remedies to correct degradation. REVs are planned maintenance actions or repairs that are accomplished during scheduled inspections or opportune downtime. All resources, labor, and support equipment required is planned in advance so the aircraft can be repaired in a costeffective manner.
After repair or process improvement, Intergraph’s PBP&L process continually monitors and tracks system and inspection task health to verify that implemented solutions restore reliability to inherent design levels. On 1 October 2009, the MSG-3 scheduled maintenance inspection convention will be instituted on the C-5. Coupled with the reliability improvements of the PBP&L program, the warfighter will have seven fewer aircraft per day tied up in scheduled and unscheduled maintenance. The C-5 System Program Manager and C-5 Operations and Maintenance groups will have the confidence that the OSS&E of the C-5 is adequately covered, that documented analysis and task tracking numbers ensure we are not over-inspecting the aircraft, and a mechanism is in place to adjust the scheduled inspection program over time. This hierarchical inspection program eliminates the need for any field-level inspections immediately following PDM. It is estimated that over the remaining life of the C-5 out to 2040, the USAF will achieve a $1.38 billion cost avoidance.
About the Authors: Col Peter M. O’Neill, USAF (ret) is now a Senior Technical Manager with Intergraph Corporation. He served on active duty for forty years in various maintenance and logistics command and staff positions. Prior to his retirement in 2006, he was the Commander, 830th Aircraft Sustainment Group (F-15) at Robins AFB, GA. Scott P. Vandersall, YF-3 (GS-15) is the C-5 Chief
Engineer
in
the
730th
Aircraft
Sustainment Group (C-5) at Robins AFB, GA. He has been intimately involved in the development of the MSG-3 application to the C-5 since 2004. He is scheduled for reassignment to the 580th Aircraft Sustainment Group (SOF) as their Chief Engineer.
46
FA L L
2008
K
Transforming Materiel Management for DOD By Ms. Frances Walinsky
Both Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 Supply and Storage (S&S) and the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) Model are key components of the Department of Defense’s
While BRAC 2005 Supply and Storage is the legislative vehicle used to achieve a single end-to-end supply chain for DOD industrial maintenance activities, SCOR is the tool that enables DOD components – DLA and the military services alike – to conceptualize distinct supply chains in common terms. BRAC S&S and SCOR are like bread and butter, perfectly complementary to one another.
B R A C 2 0 0 5 S U P P LY
AND
STORAGE
Before jumping ahead to how BRAC relates to materiel management, let’s quickly review BRAC 2005 Commission Recommendation 177. The Supply and Storage Joint Cross-Service Group (JCSG) developed three recommendations which were enacted into legislation as part of BRAC 2005. The overarching strategy of these BRAC S&S recommendations was to pursue logis-
(DOD) strategic transformation and are tied directly to the theme of this month’s Exceptional Release: Materiel Management.
Above: Marcel Baril, Defense Logistics Agency supportability specialist, looks over the print stuffer list that was sent from Air Force employees in the F-15 wing shop. The list contains items needed to refurbish a wing. (Defense Logistics Agency photo/Amy Clement)
48
FA L L
2008
tics economies and efficiencies that enhance the effectiveness of logistics support to operational, joint, and expeditionary military forces. One of the three BRAC S&S decisions, Commission Recommendation 177 – Supply, Storage, and Distribution (SS&D) Management Reconfiguration, focused on consolidating supply, storage, and distribution functions and inventories at sites with colocated military service depot maintenance and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) depots. BRAC SS&D directed the military service depot maintenance activities to transfer SS&D functions and inventories to DLA in order to “eliminate unnecessary redundancies and duplication”. BRAC SS&D also directed the reconfiguration of the distribution network for optimum support. Doing both would strengthen the core missions of DLA and each military service component: DLA could focus on its core mission of SS&D while the services could focus on effective maintenance and warfighting. For DLA, the BRAC SS&D decision meshed with an existing strategy to extend employees, inventories, and logistics capabilities forward to the ultimate customer. DLA has worked tirelessly to establish and manage seamless business process links between the services’ materiel requirements and the source of the materiel – the industrial base. Consolidating the supply and distribution functions, people, and inventory under one DOD entity provides complete and timely visibility of, and response to, depot maintenance requirements. While BRAC SS&D is being implemented by all four military services and DLA, this article focuses on implementation at Air Force locations, which were the first to deploy the BRAC SS&D changes. In partnership, DLA and Air Force have been implementing the BRAC SS&D decision, addressing both the reconfiguration of the distribution network and the transfer of SS&D functions and inventories. While working towards increasing the effectiveness of DOD logistics, DLA and the Air Force brought forth leading subject matter experts to ensure the transformation would not disrupt the production line so that warfighter support would continue uninterrupted. The first step in implementing BRAC SS&D was to transfer in place 265 employees at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (ALC) in October 2007, then 365 at Oklahoma City ALC in February 2008, and finally 232 at Ogden ALC in July 2008. All personnel were part of the Chief of Supply operation within their respective ALC. Each of these newly activated DLA supply industrial sites has a commander and is under the command and control of DLA’s Aviation Supply and Demand Chain at Defense Supply Center Richmond.
SCOR SCOR’s roots are in the commercial sector, a result of the neverending search for the best supply chain model. The SCOR Model is a product of the Supply-Chain Council (SCC), an independent, not-for-profit, global corporation with membership open to all companies and organizations interested in applying and advancing the state-of-the-art in supply chain management systems and practices.
What the Supply-Chain Council developed in SCOR was a Rosetta Stone, or as DLA Vice Director Maj Gen Arthur Morrill likens it to, ‘earphones at the United Nations’. SCOR provides a master reference model for materiel management, giving users the lexicon of terminology to easily identify common touch-points among manufacturers, suppliers, and consumers. In fact, the SCOR Model became so fundamental to materiel management that in May 2003 OSD revamped DoD 4140.1-R, the DoD Supply Chain Materiel Management Regulation, or supply “super regulation” to mirror the model. The change aligned the “super reg” with the SCOR Model, which is organized around five primary processes of plan, source, make, deliver, and return of materiel in the supply system. Thus, DOD took a best commercial practice and incorporated it into the heart of materiel management in order to take advantage of world-wide best practices. This is all well and good, but it is ornamentation unless put to practical use. BRAC provides us with a practical application for SCOR. Since DOD’s core competency is warfighting, and depot maintenance keeps the warfighter armed with the best weapon systems possible, effective materiel management support to depot maintenance is paramount. There is a very practical reason to make the logistics flow as streamlined as possible. In SCOR terminology, logistics plans, sources, delivers, and accepts returns for maintenance. Everyone’s goal is to return the weapon system to the end-user, the warfighter, as quickly as possible. In August 2006, LTG C. V. Christianson, while Director for Logistics, J-4, The Joint Staff and Chair of the Supply and Storage JCSG, directed a small group consisting of representatives from all four services and DLA to SCOR BRAC – that is, to apply the SCOR Model to functions impacted by the BRAC Supply and Storage legislation. He directed them to examine which functions would transfer to DLA and which would remain with the services. The team broke down the processes, receiving assistance from Air Force, Marine Corps, and DLA SCOR consultants who guided the participants through the SCOR definitions. The common translation of the “UN earphones” helped identify what everyone could agree would transfer (the deliver and return processes, which DLA calls storage and distribution), what would remain with the services (a sub-element of the plan process called requirements determination), and what was a gray area (a sub-element of the source process, called stock control in an independent BRAC analysis). After that joint effort, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) and DLA sorted through process sub-elements. The two organizations agreed that DLA would perform sourcing along with delivery and return. The agreement supported the Chief of Supply office at each ALC coming over to DLA and bringing with it the responsibility
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
Continued on next page...
49
SCOR AND
DISTRIBUTION AND
E R : B R A C 2 0 0 5 S U P P L Y, S T O R A G E ,
for sourcing, receiving, storing, and issuing materiel to production. Also, the components agreed that DLA would actually own DLA source of supply items until they moved to the production line, while AFMC would still own nonDLA managed items. AFMC retained overarching plan-tosource strategy for all items. AFMC and DLA would each execute the actual consumer level sourcing for items they would respectively own. So where’s the efficiency?
PLAN According to the SCOR Model, under the section “SCOR-Model Structure”:
Figure 2: Using the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) Model to extend DLA’s support forward, closer to the warfighter
A planning element is a process that aligns expected resources to meet expected demand requirements. Planning processes balance aggregated demand across a consistent planning horizon. Planning processes generally occur at regular intervals and can contribute to supply chain response time. What the SCOR Model shows us is how planning occurs across several time horizons. Organizational alignment is not a part of SCOR; however, it is important to understand that more than one organization does planning. Planning can be for demand or supply, and the nature of the planning relates to its place on the time horizon and within the larger organizational structure. The weapon system (WS) program manager plans the bill of materiel and production schedule, looking several years ahead and across all activities needing the items for that WS. This effort constitutes requirements determination by individual WS. The manager produces a work deck, which becomes the basis for supply planning. The AFMC Global Logistics Support Center (GLSC) aggregates requirements at the National Stock Number (NSN) level across its customer base (whereas the WS program manager looks across requirements for the WS). GLSC requirements aggregation looks at a time horizon from several lead times to one lead time away from required date. This activity is also requirements determination and is part of planning. The DLA planners aggregate requirements for demand forecasting units (item, customer, and stock location), which will be used to create a supply plan for those NSNs encompassing global customer demand. The supply plan is used to produce a timephased inventory plan (TPIP), including demand collaboration 50
FA L L
information received from the customer. The planners respond to requirements across a timeline at least one lead time away from actual demand, usually longer. The plan passes to sourcing (acquisition) for purchasing. The production line at the depot adjusts workload on a monthly, weekly, and even daily basis, based on many factors. The timely feedback loop from maintenance to the WS program manager, the GLSC, and DLA demand planning – with information on actual usage and accurate forecast projections – is a critical part of making better demand plans in the future. The DLA retail item managers and supportability specialists respond to the more immediate requirements of the maintainers, which can be more than a lead time away, but also less than a lead time, resulting in expedited supply support. So, if we put all these organizations/functions on the SCOR grid, all have touch-points to planning, which in turn affect sourcing and delivery. The efficiency and effectiveness improvements derive from improved collaboration among program managers, GLSC, and DLA, and an understanding of what is actually occurring on the production lines, with regular feedback to the planners in both the Air Force and DLA. In addition, DLA is enhancing its Enterprise Business System to enable optimized, multi-indenture, multi-echelon (MIME) inventory planning, local purchase support improvements, and more effective demand planning. These tools will allow DLA to reduce buffer (safety) stocks across the entire supply chain, while moving the right amount of materiel at the right time into the protected operating level at the maintenance depots. (Ref: DoD 4140.1-R, C2.6)
2008
SOURCE According to the SCOR Model, under the section “Source Stocked Product”, sourcing is: The procurement, delivery, receipt, and transfer of raw material items, subassemblies, product, and/or services. Since both AFMC and DLA will own materiel before it is delivered to the maintenance production line, both will be procuring inventory in accordance with the demand and supply plans discussed above. DLA’s sourcing strategy ties to its hub and spoke configured distribution network so that replenishment from a Strategic Distribution Platform “hub” (Oklahoma City, San Joaquin, Susquehanna, or Warner Robins) occurs in time to meet planned demand, and buys are made directly to a Forward Distribution Point “spoke” when that makes sense. For efficiency and ease of execution, the Air Force employees who transferred to DLA as a result of BRAC SS&D will process and receipt all materiel and perform physical custody management of that materiel. These changes will also offer opportunities to streamline the distribution network.
the supply system can move it back to global availability for use elsewhere. In summary, BRAC Recommendation 177 – Supply, Storage, and Distribution Management Reconfiguration – is a continuation of efforts to establish an end-to-end supply chain for DOD industrial depot maintenance operations. SS&D supply chain integration improves customer and warfighter support through complete and timely visibility of, and response to, depot maintenance requirements. DLA continues to rely heavily on strong partnerships with the military services to better identify and meet customer requirements and to implement process and system solutions. DLA and the military services embracing and merging each other’s cultures and business practices will make this transformation successful and will benefit DOD as a whole. About the Author: Ms. Frances Walinsky is the lead for the Supply portion of BRAC 2005 Supply, Storage, and Distribution (SS&D) Management Reconfiguration decision at Headquarters, Defense Logistics Agency, Ft. Belvoir, Va. She plans and manages the implementation of Supply-related actions needed to transfer SS&D functions and inventory at maintenance depots from the military services to
MAKE
DLA. She also has responsibility for the Supply areas in the BRAC
Maintenance is a “make” process in the SCOR framework. While crucial to warfighter support, BRAC Recommendation 177 focuses on functions related to plan, source, deliver, and return. Therefore, this article will not cover make.
SS&D business plan. Email: frances.walinsky@dla.mil
K
DELIVER
AND RETURN According to the SCOR Model, under the section “Deliver Stocked Product”, delivery is: The process of delivering product that is maintained in a finished goods state prior to the receipt of a firm customer order. Delivery occurs when the actual order from production is filled. The request comes in and the item is picked, packed, and moved out to the maintenance production line, ready for installation. Again, DLA’s distribution capabilities move forward as DLA adopts the culture of face-to-face, daily encounters with maintainers. DLA has adjusted its materiel return policy to allow maintenance to return unused items back to supply so that they are available for future projects. If no future demand exists at that location,
Air Force sheet metal mechanic Gene Manns works on the top panel of an F-15 Eagle wing in the F-15 wing shop at Robins Air Force Base, Ga. (DLA photos by Amy Clement)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
51
How I Learned to
Stop Worrying and Love the Contracting Office
By Major Greg Lowe Nellis Air Force Base maintainers, who already maintain the Air Force’s most diverse fleet, set about looking for an even bigger challenge in 2007: converting half of its maintenance workforce to contract support. The 57th Maintenance Group embarked on an 18-month long project to find massive cost savings while maintaining the exceptional maintenance support it has come to expect from its mixed blue suit and civil service workforce. Commonly known as an “A-76” (from the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76), the competitive sourcing program has been performed by executive branch agencies since the Eisenhower administration. Over the ensuing years, tens of thousands of positions considered “non-inherently governmental” have been studied for efficiencies. While common in large civil-service organizations such as those in Air Force Materiel Command, the studies have not been regularly performed at base-level aircraft maintenance organizations. The lack of a combat deployment function at Nellis made the 57th MXG suitable for conversion to all-civil service or a contract organization. Air Combat Command directed Nellis to explore manpower savings options as early as 2003. Led by the 99th Air Base Wing’s Manpower and Organization Office, a diverse team of contracting, manpower, personnel, and functional repre-
52
FA L L
2008
sentatives began the preliminary planning stage of an A76.Since a good portion of the flying at Nellis is done in support of the 53rd Test Wing’s OT&E mission, it was determined that flightline maintenance (i.e. AMXS) would continue to be performed by its all-military workforce. The repair shops and maintenance operations functions, however, were the perfect candidate for running an A-76 study.
REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT Like most base-level organizations, the 57th MXG had no experience and little training in running a major services acquisition. The project would have surely failed without three important people. First, Capt Dan Boeh, the procuring contracting officer, was instrumental in ensuring a fair competition between industry and government bidders. He focused on thorough communication with offerors, early and often, which was universally praised by everyone involved in the study.
PERFORMANCE-BASED ACQUISITION Like most recent federal acquisitions, the 57 MXG took a performance-based approach to the PWS. In an effort to allow government and industry offerors every chance to incorporate innovation into their bid, the PWS development team listed the required major services along with major performance-based deliverables. The team minimized the amount of regulations required of the service provider to the minimum necessary to ensure safe, reliable maintenance will be performed on the wing’s aircraft. This allowed bidders to innovate, saving the government money while providing what the government really wants: missioncapable aircraft. One of the difficulties in a backshop-only A-76 was developing performance-based metrics (called Service Summaries in acquisitions lingo). For example, it’s easy to grade a service provider at a pilot training basewhere the contractor has full responsibility and authority for all aircraft maintenance. Metrics like mission capable rate and flying scheduling effectiveness are almost entirely within the contractor’s control.
Second, Katie Weimer, branch chief from ACC’s Acquisition and Management Integration Center (AMIC), acted as Team Nellis’ acquisition advisor. A prior Air Force contracting officer and now civil service employee, Katie advised the program manager (PM) and contracting officer (CO) on a daily basis in navigating the complex rules, regulations, and laws surrounding a major services acquisition. Lastly, a comprehensive statement of requirements, the Performance Work Statement (PWS), was only possible because of the professionals at the Air Force Manpower Agency. Led by Ms. Twyla Vital, their mobile requirements team spent more than 6 weeks on-site at Nellis leading the PWS development team through the process of collecting data, analyzing trends, and turning it into actionable information that potential offerors could use to bid on the project. SrA Michael Blankenship (left) fills out F-16 Fighting Falcon post flight forms while SrA Gabriel Sheppard and Curtis Morgan change an argon bottle on an AIM-9 missile at Nellis AFB. (USAF photo/MSgt Kevin J. Gruenwald)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
53
However, when split down the middle of a maintenance group, how does one evaluate the performance of metals technology or egress shops? With no ACC standards to guide them, the PWS development team had to evaluate current (government) performance standards. In most cases, they came up with very unique requirements that will continue to support the blue-suit flightline workforce while allowing the service provider a great deal of Continued on next page...
room for innovation. For example, the service provider has a standard of zero engine holes and zero aircraft awaiting wheel & tires. The government does not dictate how the service provider will achieve this standard, or that they maintain any spares. Instead the government gives the contractor the flexibility to provide needed services as long as the equipment is maintained according to technical orders.
ER: HOW I LEARNED
TO
STOP WORRYING ...
CRITICAL OVERSIGHT Due to the size and estimated cost of the contract, the Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Combat and Mission Support provided acquisition oversight . While just a drop in the bucket compared to their overall portfolio, the Nellis A-76 received special attention because it was the AF’s first A-76 in several years, after the OMB Circular was revised in 2003. Team Nellis delivered a series of milestone updates, acquisition strategy reviews, and source selection briefs to the PEO, eventually leading to a performance decision. On February 14, 2008, after using almost the entire 18-month allotted timeframe to conduct the study, a contract was awarded to Computer Sciences Corp. (Applied Technology Division), of Fort Worth, Texas.
54
FA L L
The PM and CO braced for protest from an unsuccessful offeror, and debriefed them in a timely manner after the announcement. Despite the high dollar value of the contract, no protest was received. The Nellis team completed a fair and thorough source selection, in accordance with the request for proposal and federal acquisition regulations. Risk of a protest was mitigated by involvement of a strong CO, the quality of those involved in the source selection, and the many levels of oversight provided within the acquisition community.
LESSONS LEARNED For any logistics unit undergoing an A-76 competitive sourcing study, Team Nellis offers the following three lessons learned: 1) Utilize the services offered by the Air Force Manpower Agency. A-76 is a manpower function and no one is more knowledgeable about the entire process than AFMA. They have teams that can assist with the entire process, from developing requirements to aiding the government proposal team. AFMA also has a comprehensive website with training, lessons learned, and links to helpful sources.
2008
2) Communication is key! While true in any acquisition, it is critical in an A-76. Capt Boeh, our CO, was skilled in the art of communicating with industry bidders. Exchanges with potential offerors during the pre-solicitation phase resulted in a better statement of requirements. Additionally, interacting and communicating with the affected workforce, especially civil service employees avoided any major confrontation in what is a significant emotional event, similar to base closure or realignment. 3) As with most programs, selecting the right person for the job is the most important task. The Nellis team was fortunate to be staffed with “A-teamers” from the affected maintenance squadrons, contracting, and manpower. This was evident throughout the entire process and was noted by many senior officials involved in the program. The on-time, under budget, and protest-free study was primarily due to the high quality NCOs assigned to the requirements and source selection teams.
SrA Beau Columbus loosens a bolt attaching the propeller to the shaft of a C130 Hercules engine at a Southwest Asian air base. Members of the Central Intermediate Repair Facility remove and install C-130 engines. (USAF photo/TSgt Michael Boquette)
If your unit is about to undergo an A-76 study or you would like more information regarding competitive sourcing in a logistics environment, please contact the author at gregory.lowe.2@us.af.mil. About the author, Maj Greg Lowe, is a career aircraft maintenance officer who spent 22 months as program manager for ACC’s largest maintenance A-76.
He has since been reassigned as a CSAF
Foreign Policy Advisor (POLAD) Fellow for the 2009 Academic Year. He wishes to thank two contracting officers, Capt Dan Boeh and Ms. Katie Weimer, for mentoring him in the fine art of acquisition.
K
A1C Travis Davis launches an F-15E Strike Eagle in support of Exercise Green Flag at Nellis AFB. (USAF photo/MSgt Kevin J. Gruenwald)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
55
METRICS EASUREMENTS AND
LOGISTICS ON
E R : S O M E O B S E R VAT I O N S
Some Observations on Logistics Measurements and Metrics “Logisticians are awash in a sea of data.” I don’t recall who stated this, or if it’s an accurate quote at all. It has been with me for years, and it is certainly true; particularly as we have moved well into the Information Age. There are likely more data than can be put to beneficial use. Military logistics generates a massive amount of data everyday. These data come from many information systems used to manage the fundamental logistics processes, maintenance, acquisition and inventory systems. The number of these, many times disparate systems, have been the focus of much attention over the last decade, and
Robert E. Mansfield, Jr., Brig Gen, USAF (RET)
has led to the movement to implement Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and other commercial based, enterprise level, integrated management information systems in all the military services and major DoD agencies. One of the intended benefits of the move to ERP is to provide fewer sources of data for logistics managerial control (better stated in a military environment is “command and control”) of the “logistics chain.”
Successful implementation of the integrated enter-
prise information systems should help logisticians swim in the sometimes turbulent sea of data. However, even with the much improved information systems, how they are used becomes the bottom line. Performance measurements of the logistics activities that support military operations are key. The measurements and metrics used are critical to successful logistics operations. Ultimately, the basic purpose of military logistics is to meet service levels and standards to support mission and operational requirements at some budget or cost level. To do this, there must be a specified level of service that is clearly stated and well understood. Performance can then be judged against achieving operational/mission success aligned with the planned resource expenditure. Also critical is a full understanding of the logistics activity and the service delivery processes being measured.
The first observation is
that the links between the logistics activity and the processes used to delivery service must be well understood. Only by a clear understanding of the processes can measurements and metrics be created that will be effective in guiding actions to meet operational/mission outcomes for which the logistician is responsible. The second observation is: one should not get too enamored with the process. While measurements and metrics about the “health” of the process are very important; the mission/service outcome is the final indicator of success. Many times it is easier to create diagnostic metrics that measure the health of the process than the metric that measures the outcome desired by employing the process. In my opinion, one of the major reasons for the drop in mission capable rates in the late 1990s was that many of the leaders throughout the DoD did not fully understand the workings of the logistics processes that supported the military. In the rush for a Cold War “peace dividend,” and seeing that logistics was a major cost of operations, orders were given to cut people and dramatically reduce inventories. The senior civilian leadership took a commercial view of logistics and many of the senior military leaders did not understand the processes and limitations of the data systems that supported them. The civilian leadership was well acquainted with integrated logistics and financial systems for single and multinational companies and assumed that DoD systems should be similarly capable of adjusting to changing “market conditions.” They did not fully appreciate the differences from commercial practices in the operational business of support to military forces. Some of the senior military and civilian service officials did not understand the fundamentals of the logistics processes as well. Many of the logistics processes were people dependent; they were created when information technology and hardware were expensive and people less expensive. Taking people out of the process
56
FA L L
2008
could only have the effect of degrading the process, as they were designed to be people intensive. Couple this with the multiple measurements and metrics that were devised for a Cold War operational style and processes and information systems developed in the 1960s—support levels could do nothing but degrade. A third observation follows from the second: any single logistics process is reliant on other processes for adequate performance. So, performance management systems must include a “closed loop” between measurement and service performance. This means that if expected performance is different from the control level or limits, management decisions need to be made which create corrective action. Any corrective actions should be evaluated in relationship to the overall logistics system. The cumulative corrective actions implemented should influence the review and setting of performance expectations and goals to ensure they continue to be relevant. Changing the expected performance level or looking at modifying the process may be necessary, but only when their impact on the system is known. Point solutions can be more harmful that the conditions they are intended to remedy. But, (observation number four) when expected performance is not being met, the measurements and metrics are not the first area to look to change. Looking at the control system is first; then given that the control system is working fine; determine if the expectations of performance continue to be consistent with mission/operational objectives. Next is the process working as designed? A look needs to be taken at the resources provided to operate the processes. I recall some years ago at several installations where an important weapons system was based—each were trying to get a mission capable rate that was almost 20% higher than what budget and system funding had made available. The logistics processes were working as designed, the measurements and metrics were fine, the control system was working; however the money programmed and budgeted for the weapons system by the headquarters, (approved by the DoD and authorized by Congress) wasn’t what local leadership needed to meet there alternative mission capable rate. The installations didn’t have much of a chance meeting a local performance measure of their choosing where they could not control the performance level set elsewhere in the organization . I haven’t mention IT systems and data (accuracy, quality, etc.) yet. This is observation number five. Check to see if the information management systems are working properly and the procedures for data inputs are being followed when performance goals are not being met.
Military logistics data systems at the local level eventually get into enterprise level data systems that are used to
set budgets and mission capability objectives. Devising local management information systems and data bases are fine, particularly if they give insight into local actions that impact performance. If the “systems of record” are not provided the required data, they are degraded in their usefulness. There certainly are data quality and accuracy issues. But if the data used in these systems of record are good enough for planning, programming and budgeting and setting mission capability targets, they should be good enough for measuring performance. There is peril in using data from a non-standard local IT system to make decisions that have their performance standards based on “systems of record.”
There must be a single version of the truth.
Observation six: when making changes in processes, desired outcomes, or operational style/doctrine, the first question is not, repeat not, “what are the measurements and metrics?” The first issue to address must be a performance outcome—“what is the performance standard or goal?” That’s a good first question, as everything else should align to meet that to the greatest extent possible. Without performance objectives, targets, goals; whatever we want to call the end objective(s), the measurements and metrics chosen will not likely get the desired result. A seventh observation is that logistics processes and coupled with the external processes that influence logistics performance, must all be aligned on the service level outcomes. Sometimes the diagnostic measures and metrics for one process, when acted upon, can cause difficulties in other ones—particularly if changes are made to data systems used by more that one organization or process to facilitate information collection. Multiple processes together make up the logistics system, so they need to work in harmony. Configuration control becomes an important issue.
Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
57
The eight observation is: less is more. When doing work for a logistics balanced scorecard we found that there were over 300 reported significant USAF logistics metrics. Many really had no influence on meeting service or mission outcomes. Some were good individual process diagnostics, but many were measurements because they could be taken. Too many measurements and metrics are not only wasteful, but take away from focusing on the true performance outcome. The ninth observation is as the military relies more and more on commercial providers of logistic services, measurements and metrics are going to change for the military logistician. New terms will be used, and the data collection and analysis will become even more complex. This will mean the operational performance outcomes, rather than product delivery from the commercial supply chain, will need to be factored into the measurement system. Measurement of the performance of many parts of the supply chain not previously done, will be desirable. This will lead to the need for new levels of cooperation, trust and information exchange. I suspect this will lead to new metrics for many organizations, and even the development of supply chain prognostics may happen as a result. The final observation is well understood. “What gets measured gets done.� What is sometime forgotten is that because this is so fundamentally true, that one must look out for the unintended consequence. Measurements and metrics must be very carefully chosen. Measure the wrong things or measure the right things wrong, and trouble is inevitable. About the Author: Brig Gen (ret) Robert E. Mansfield Jr. was Special Assistant for Supply Chain Integration and Logistics Transformation, Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations and Logistics, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. He retired from active duty in June 2003. Currently he is Director of the National Center for Aerospace Leadership at the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc.
K
© 2008 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Lmf]\& L]kl]\& 9f\ j]Y\q lg ^a_`l&
9J?;K& Our newest generation automatic electronic test technology is the first ever to provide a single test station that can serve the Navy and Army equipment. All without reconfiguring hardware, test adaptors, or software. ARGCS — Agile Rapid Global Combat Support — fully integrates diagnostics, directed test, and net-centric capabilities at a lower cost. And it delivers off-the-shelf synthetic plug-and-play instrumentation. ARGCS technology is prepared to pass the ultimate test. www.northropgrumman.com
Strategic Alternate Sourcing Program Office (SASPO)
KC-135 Stratotanker maintainers move the main landing gear strut carefully to ensure all four wheels travel the same distance so when the strut is pushed back into place it will line up exactly. If this process is not done carefully it is difficult to re-secure the gear to the aircraft. (USAF photo/MSgt Ruby Zarzyczny)
By Mr. Derrell Dover It is often said, “You can never expect a different outcome if you continue to do the same thing the same way.” The 448th Supply Chain Management Wing (SCMW), the planning and execution arm of the Air Force Global Logistics Support Center (AFGLSC), took this statement to heart as it set out to transform the way it does business in an effort to provide improved support to the warfighter. The ultimate goal of the transformation is to meet the supply support needs of the warfighter by delivering the right part, at the right place, at the right time, and at the right price. To help achieve this daunting task, the 448th SCMW stood up the Strategic Alternate Sourcing Program Office (SASPO).
THE BEGINNINGS 448th SCMW senior management created the SASPO program after benchmarking a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) pro60
FA L L
gram used in the civilian sector known as Parts Manufacturing Approval (PMA). In this program, FAA certifies companies, other than the original equipment manufacturers (OEM), to manufacture or repair replacement items. By opening the competition beyond the original manufacturer through PMA certification, airlines and repair facilities broaden their vendor base and realize significant savings. Major airlines, such as United and American, established PMA engineering offices to take advantage of these opportunities. To determine the feasibility of implementing a similar program, Air Force senior management authorized a study of the FAA’s PMA program. Air Force representatives interviewed FAA personnel, PMA vendors, civilian airlines individuals and OEM representatives, and reviewed their practices. The results of the study indicated that such a program could be accomplished within the Air Force without compromising configuration control, operational safety, suitability and effectiveness of the weapon systems.
2008
The Air Force PMA initiative began with only two people staffing the program. Yet, successes were realized almost immediately. Of the first 427 candidates reviewed, 362 (85%) were approved with a projected savings of $6.9M. Additional savings were also captured as a result of the increase in competition. When one vendor discovered the Air Force was looking for PMA vendors for certain parts, the OEM reduced the price for 131 parts by 40%, leading to an actual savings of $13.9M for FY07-08. The initiative led to multiple lessons learned such as: 1. The greatest area for savings, in order of precedence, is within the Propulsion Product Group, Aircraft Accessories, Aircraft Structures, Landing Gear, and Secondary Power Systems. 2. Increasing vendors for the same item does not increase savings. The most savings are realized when a second vendor is added, but that number drops for each subsequent vendor until the savings flat line.
3. Having a goal of adding a specific number of vendors does not provide as high of a return on investment as targeting specific parts for additional vendors.
THE SASPO Based on the successes and lessons learned, the Air Force decided to transform the PMA initiative into a program office. Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Material Shortage (DMSMS) and Commercial Derivative Repairs (CDR) were added to the PMA initiative to form the Strategic Alternate Sourcing Program Office (SASPO). Because of the inherent overlap in these three areas, the Air Force hopes to achieve higher levels of efficiency by housing them under a single program. SASPO was assigned to the 429th Supply Chain Management Squadron within the 948th Supply Chain Management Group (Material).
Continued on next page...
SSgt Robert Stewart inspects the convergent seal and liner of the augmenter on an uninstalled Pratt and Whitney jet engine at Seymour Johnson AFB, N.C. Sergeant Stewart is responsible for inspecting the fans inside the augmenter. (USAF photo/A1C Salma Nebot)
posed of in Air Force maintenance practices, that the civilian sector reworks and reuses in a cost effective manner, with no impacts to safety or effectiveness. Independent engineering analysis has shown the repaired unit is stronger than the original part. Using the FAA’s Designated Engineering Representative (DER) approvals for non-OEM repairs and then qualified by the Air Force cognizant engineering authority, we plan to identify and add these procedures to both the organic and contract maintenance repertoire.
E R : S T R AT E G I C A LT E R N AT E S O U R C I N G P R O G R A M O F F I C E
DMSMS A part becomes obsolete when a source of supply is no longer available. This is especially prevalent in the electronics arena. However, it affects all commodities and has a large impact on the warfighter. DMSMS is a growing problem for DoD weapon systems because they command a decreasing market size but have an increasing technological dependence and longer life cycles.
The SASPO’s future endeavors include:
Expanding operations to support the 448th SCMW groups at Hill and Robins AFBs.
Adding to the challenge, is the average Coordinating multi-service age of the USAF airissues working through the craft fleet is two Joint Aeronautical Logistics decades old while the Commander’s group. elder warriors of the Supporting the development fleet, the B-52 and of the Expeditionary Combat C/KC-135, are over 50 Support System. Mike Kraus makes adjustments on a five-axis milling machine prior to working on years old with no an F119 intermediate compressor. Mr. Kraus is a machinist with the 547th retirement in the fore Becoming the single face to, Propulsion Maintenance Squadron. (USAF photo/Ron Mullan) seeable future. The not only the customer, but also activation of the the vendor. AFGLSC and realignment of the command DMSMS program office within the SASPO at Tinker AFB will allow DMSMS to Educating the workforce and vendor base on the mission and capabilities of the SASPO. standardize processes across the command and effectively mitigate and reduce DMSMS impacts through the development of By maximizing the use of commercial capabilities available to an enterprise plan. The SASPO will bring all DMSMS activi- the Air Force, the SASPO intends to be a key player in meetties in the Air Force under one roof to help maximize benefits ing the goals of eLog 21. This is an exciting time for the Air and minimize cost. Centralizing these efforts in coordination Force supply chain. The stand-up of the Strategic Alternate with strategic alternate sourcing will assist in identifying poten- Sourcing Program Office at Tinker AFB puts the USAF on tial component material support issues in a timely manner; opti- course to centralize strategic sourcing and to manage PMA parts; mize the use of resources; and provide knowledge sharing to utilize the Commercial Derivative Repairs (CDR) process; and proactively seek resolution of DMSMS. to reverse engineer unique military parts while providing Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) solutions across AFGLSC.
CDR The Commercial Derivative Repairs program takes advantage of repair practices already in use in the civilian sector. During recent tours of engine overhaul and aircraft program depot maintenance areas, contractors have identified parts which are dis-
62
FA L L
About the Author: Mr. Derrell Dover is a Strategic Alternate Sourcing
Equipment
Specialist
Derrell.Dover@tinker.af.mil
2008
K
at
Tinker
AFB,
OK.
Combat Truckers: Shining Bright “Blue” in a Sea of “Green” CONVOY TRAINING
By Lt Col Derek Oliver As the United States Armed Forces continue to transform to meet the challenges of the Global War on Terror, Airmen find themselves frequently deployed to accomplish a wide variety of missions. One such mission is executed by the 320 “Combat Truckers” of the 70th and the 424th Medium Truck Detachments among nearly 8,000 soldiers in the Persian Gulf region, in the U.S. Central Command Area of Responsibility. The Detachments fall under the tactical control of the U.S. Army, and the administrative /operational control of the U.S. Air Force’s 586th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron. Since September 2005, deployed Airmen have executed the linehaul mission with Soldiers and continue to deliver extraordinary combat success with every subsequent rotation. It is no accident that these little known combat logistics warriors inside our Air Force epitomize “Excellence In All We Do.” Their training, preparation, execution and assessment are beyond compare and allow them to shine bright “Blue” in a Sea of “Green.”
64
FA L L
Training begins with the Basic Combat Convoy Course (BC3) at Camp Bullis, Texas. All Airmen tasked to fill combat convoy duty “in lieu of” soldiers attend this mandatory five-week training course. Many of them, led by a captain and a chief master sergeant, are on their second, third or fourth rotation for the six month line-haul deployment. The unique training environment at BC3 gives Airmen the opportunity to transition through the “FormingStorming-Norming-Performing” phases of group development quickly while they gain critical combat skills and build a solid foundation in convoy fundamentals. Airmen receive a full complement of skills during the physically demanding and academically rigorous five weeks of BC3. First, they learn how to communicate with the lineof-sight U.S. Army Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System used in the M915A3 tractors, and the movement tracking system that provides a text messaging capability, and visible route tracking, between M915A3 tractors and inside tactical operations centers.
2008
Next, they learn navigation and combat medical techniques. Airmen are trained to program and utilize the precision lightweight ground receiver, a handheld global positioning system device that provides accurate navigation to and from various locations, along with basic map reading skills and plotting of grid coordinates. Every Airman completes the U.S. Army’s Combat Life Saver program and is capable of rendering intermediate level medical care in a combat environment. Finally, Airmen complete weapons qualification, learn vehicle roll-over procedures, practice casualty evacuation and spend hours behind the wheel of the M915A3 tractor. All of these skills are brought together, and evaluated, in an end of course student training exercise. Here, at about the four week point, the Airmen replicate combat convoy operations as closely as possible for the final week on the Camp Bullis training grounds before they graduate and head to the USCENTCOM AOR.
C O N V O Y P R E PA R AT I O N Upon arrival in the Persian Gulf Region, the detachment of approximately 160 Airmen will enter into a three week process called Relief-In-Place/Transfer of Authority. This RIP/TOA gives the outgoing unit the time required to prepare the incoming unit for success through a very structured process. At this point, experienced U.S. Army truck companies and/or U.S. Air Force truck detachments will take on the responsibility to orient new “Combat Truckers” to specific tactics, techniques and procedures in theater. A new Air Force detachment, divided into eight, 14-person convoy teams and an S-Staff (for personnel, intelligence, operations, logistics, training and communications) may receive AOR specific training sanctioned by the U.S. Army, or move directly into “Rightseat/Left-seat” training rides on actual combat convoy missions throughout Iraq. After two or three of these training rides, the new convoy team leadership – convoy commander (typically a Technical Sergeant), assistant convoy commander (typically a Staff Sergeant) and the lead vehicle commander (typically a Senior
USAF combat trucker about to enter the cab of an M915A3 tractor.
Airman) are certified by the experienced convoy team and approved to execute missions on their own.
CONVOY EXECUTION At D-2, the convoy team will assemble to conduct preventative maintenance checks and services, or PMCS, to ensure that each M915A3 is mechanically sound and ready to endure the rough roads on the main and alternate supply routes throughout Iraq. At D-1, the convoy commander, called C2, will conduct a briefing that begins with the latest intelligence for the route being traveled, covers new threats and highlights any changes in enemy tactics. The C2 will brief the team, including external security elements (or “gun trucks”) on the rules of engagement, communication frequencies, the route, escalation of force procedures, expectations for the team and other pertinent details of the mission. Next, the assistant convoy commander will take the team through a set of battle drills with miniature wooden M915A3 models (positioned on a mock highway) to reinforce proper actions to be taken in the event of an improved explosive device detonation, insurgent small arms fire or other incident. Finally, the lead vehicle commander will physically walk the team through the route on an over-sized wooden map of Iraq pointing out key locations, bridges, traffic control points and other important elements of the chosen route. On D-day, the C2 assembles the team approximately half an hour before the mission is scheduled to depart and conducts a safety briefing. The C2 will reiterate key aspects of the mission, assign portions of the team to execute different tasks, remind everyone of personal protective equipment requirements, reinforce safety and weapon security, and stress professional behavior at forward operating bases (FOBs). Unit leadership will also take this opportunity to wish their Airmen well, and make mention of any essential points to remember as their Airmen depart. The safety briefing concludes
Continued on next page...
Convoy Commander, TSgt Scott Neu, donning his Individual Body Armor.
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
65
E R : C O M B AT T R U C K E R S : S H I N I N G B R I G H T “ B L U E ”
IN A
SEA
OF
“GREEN”
action report (AAR) and forwards it to the detachment leadership. After review, the detachment sends the AAR through the TACON chain of command for further review and action by the joint logistics task force. The AAR recommendations are taken very seriously and often lead to changes in tactics, techniques and procedures.
CONCLUSION This was just a quick glimpse into the world of the “Combat Trucker.” They are in one of the most frequently deployed, highly-stressed career fields. Before they even reach the USCENTCOM AOR, they are away from home-station for over a month at BC3. They routinely transport mission essential cargo over hostile, unimproved roads brimming with insurgent activity. They overcome that insurgent activity while delivering front haul and returning back haul cargo for units deploying and redeploying in support of the Global War on Terror. Many are on their second, third or forth deployment for this very same mission. For what amounts to nearly eight months, these Airmen are downrange, standing shoulder to shoulder with Soldiers, accomplishing a deadly mission with pride each and every day. Despite the challenges, they do not complain. They have established an impenetrable bond amongst themselves because only they can really understand the shared experiences. They are true combat heroes within the logistics community and the U.S. Air Force. They have answered their nation’s call and they are shining bright “Blue” in a Sea of “Green.”
Army and Air Force combat truckers praying together prior to combat convoy mission execution.
with a prayer by the unit Chaplain for the safety of all Soldiers and Airmen about to embark into ground combat.
CONVOY ASSESSMENT Combat convoy missions move throughout the entirety of Iraq and can be as short as four days, or as long as two weeks. Numerous contributing factors will make a mission longer or add more complexity than normally expected. The C2 is faced with the tremendous responsibility of coordinating all the transportation movement request details with joint logistics task force customers. The C2 must be a master planner and negotiator because the very nature of planning convoy missions in a combat theatre requires flexibility and ingenuity. The C2 is also challenged with overcoming language barriers, dealing with time consuming upload/download issues, and working to identify alternative routes if the environment suddenly changes. The C2 relies heavily on the convoy team to fulfill their various roles while en-route and upon arrival at FOBs. The team must work together to support deploying and redeploying units awaiting multiple cargo containers and rolling stock. Ultimately, the C2 must have the skill to balance information requirements and work issues in an always chaotic, often deadly, combat environment. Upon mission completion, all of the events that took place during a convoy mission are reviewed. The C2 leads this session with the members of the convoy team to critique how well they performed as a unit. The goal is to identify any training shortfalls, capture lessons learned, incorporate new ideas or avoid mistakes on the next mission. The C2 generates an after 66
FA L L
About the Author: Lt Col Derek Oliver is the Commander of the 97th Logistics Readiness Squadron at Altus AFB, OK. He is currently deployed to the Persian Gulf Region as Commander of the 586th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron. He is a graduate of the Basic Combat Convoy Course, a Joint Specialty Officer, and has logistics experience at the tactical, operational and strategic levels.
Derek.oliver@altus.af.mil or Derek.m.oliver@
kuwait.swa.army.mil
2008
K
DOVER’S SUPER PORT By 2 Lt Marcus McWilliams Home to more than 500 Airmen and DoD civilians, the Super Port at Dover AFB has been a fighting force in the world of military cargo and passenger movement since the birth of the Military Air Transport Service in 1952. Originally designated the 1607th Air Terminal Squadron, the Port opened its doors for business on 23 April 1954. With a fleet consisting of C-124 Globemaster IIs, Dover moved more than 220,000 tons of cargo in its first 4 years of operation. Even in those early days Dover was known as the “World’s Largest Air Cargo Terminal.” In 1966 MATS was redesignated the Military Airlift Command, Dover began getting C-133 and C-141 aircraft, and the 1607th Air Terminal Squadron became the 436th Aerial Port Squadron. With the introduction of the first C-5s in 1971, the “Super Port”—a name dubbed by then Operations Officer Major Bob Edwards—was born. The Super Port has played a crucial role in providing support to the Global War on Terrorism. Since 9/11, the Super Port has moved more than 700,000 tons of cargo in direct support of Operations IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) and ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) on over 55,000 missions. More than 300,000 pas-
sengers have been moved as well. The first C-5s to land in Kandahar, Afghanistan in support of OEF, flew out of Dover loaded with Super Port cargo. Dover is the main point of embarkation for cargo shipping to 20 different receiving ports in the OIF and OEF Area of Responsibility (AOR). The Super Port suffered a setback to its operations in February of 2003 when the roof of the Air Freight Terminal collapsed after a heavy snowfall. Fortunately there were no injuries, but the resulting damage put limitations on the Super Port’s ability to move cargo. As a result, some of the channels for the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) cargo were shifted to the Aerial Port at Charleston AFB until construction of Dover’s new Air Freight Terminal was completed. The Super Port moved into its new home in November of 2007 and regained the OIF channels it had temporarily shifted to Charleston AFB and the OEF channels shifted to McGuire AFB. As a result, the workload of channel cargo coming out of Dover is as high now as it has been since the start of the GWOT. The Super Port averaged 10,000 tons of cargo moved per month for the first two quarters of 2008, a 50% increase over 2007. Built to the tune of $72.8M, the Super Port’s new 370,000 square
Above: Inside ICS: Dover’s Inventory Control System spans the length of the Super Port’s Air Freight Terminal and features covered storage for 560 pallets.
TX; Richmond, VA; and foot Air Freight Terminal repSusquehanna, PA. Cargo is resents a leap forward in Aerial shipped from these depots Port technology. At the heart in order to ensure maxiof the new terminal is the mum efficiency in filling Inventory Control System the warfighter’s requests for (ICS), a fully automated syssupplies. In addition, tem that streamlines every Depots send pallets that are aspect of cargo buildup, procompletely packaged for a cessing, and shipping. Larger single destination, such than its sister system at that these pallets can very Ramstein AB, Germany, the The front side of the Air Freight Terminal is dedicated to TMO operations and has 28 shipping and receiving docks. nearly go straight from the Dover ICS has secured covered truck they arrive on out to storage space for 560 standard a waiting aircraft. These military 463L pallets as well as 40 staging docks for cargo on the flightline-side with space for 240 pre-packed pallets, known as Air Lines of Communication, are built pallets. The cargo buildup area inside the facility consists of 10 “pure” by destination, thereby eliminating the need for Dover individual pallet buildup stations with separate handling areas for Airmen to tear down, sort, and re-pack the pieces of cargo contained hazardous and secure material, while the land-side of the facility has on every pallet. The pallets can be shipped directly to the end user. 28 docks for shipping and receiving by truck. Dover AFB’s location on the East Coast makes it ideally suited to The ICS has eliminated or streamlined many of the processes handle cargo heading over the Atlantic. The multitude of combetween the time cargo arrives at the Super Port’s front door and mercial shipping ports within a few hundred miles make diverting when it gets on an aircraft. ICS has the ability to weigh each indi- cargo from air to surface transportation a quick process. With sevvidual pallet and measure its dimensions. It can also tell Load eral DLA depots nearby, cargo spends less time in-transit before it Planners the contoured shape of a pallet (contours are necessary for reaches the warfighter. Transit time is also significantly decreased large pallets moving on KC-135s, KC-10s, and various civilian cargo by not having to travel down to Charleston AFB for airlift. aircraft). However, the biggest benefit is the system’s ability to spin Since the onset of the GWOT, Aerial Port Airmen have dealt with pallets and sequence them automatically for loading on an aircraft. a very high deployment tempo. Since February 2004, the Super Without this automation Super Port Airmen would have to spend Port has deployed 1,504 personnel. In the AOR, these Airmen are extra time using forklifts to orient each pallet in the proper direcpart of the first-line of support when it comes to delivering supplies tion (to fit on that particular type of aircraft) and set them in the to men and women fighting on the front lines of the GWOT. right order. All in all, the automation of ICS has cut the time it takes to pull and stage an aircraft load in half. Super Porters dealt with runway closures at Dover AFB and the The Super Port, like all aerial ports, makes liberal use of the new 60K Tunner and even newer 25K Halverson K-Loaders. The 60Ks in particular, with their 6-pallet capacity and high level of versatility, are a favorite among aerial porters. The newer 25K Halversons mirror most of the 60K’s abilities, incorporating them into a smaller package with a 3-pallet capacity that is ideal for operating in deployed locations.
Incirlik AB, Turkey transship point; years of high deployment tempos and 60-hour work weeks; and changes and restrictions on sizes and types of cargo allowed at various locations. Yet throughout it all, they have remained the largest and most productive Aerial Port in Air Mobility Command. About the Author: 2Lt Marcus McWilliams is an officer in Dover’s 436th Aerial Port Squadron.
He is currently
serving as a Duty Officer in
While some of the cargo the Super Port processes comes direct from vendors and manufacturers, the majority of it comes from the Defense Logistics Agency depots in Tobyhanna, PA; Red River,
the Squadron’s Air Terminal Operation
Center.
Lt
McWilliams is a graduate of the University of Cincinnati and AFROTC Detachment Super Port airmen prepare to set up a load on a 60k Tunner.
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
69
665.
K
KEYS TO A SUCCESSFUL WAL-MART SUPPLY CHAIN
By Mr. Johnnie Dobbs Wal-Mart has a proud history of logistics innovations and a significant part of these innovations have come from involving our supplier partners in our business. During my 18 years working in WalMart and Sam’s Logistics, I have had the opportunity to see first hand the synergies created when our suppliers and our logistics associates work together to create more efficient, profitable and sustainable processes. When we talk with our suppliers, they often ask what else they can do to promote even greater achievements in supply chain integration. One of the most important integrations between the Wal-Mart Logistics Division and our suppliers is in the area of shipping and receiving. There are five (5) areas with particular significance for our suppliers:
Product Packaging & Labeling Pallet Standards
70
FA L L
Distribution Channels Shipping and Routing Wal-Mart’s Integrated Receiving Strategy
Following is a brief summary which outlines some of the specifics within each of these areas that ensure successful shipping and receiving interactions with our suppliers.
P R O D U C T PA C K A G I N G & L A B E L I N G Wal-Mart’s Logistics Network incorporates state-of-the-art technology as part of providing exceptional service to our stores and clubs. We require quality packaging and labeling to ensure efficient distribution center (DC) processing. Suppliers should focus on packaging that is good for both the environment and business. Product and package quality does not need to be compromised to deliver an environmentally sustainable package. Maximizing cube utilization should be a priority.
2008
To achieve consistency for proper delivery, and to aid in purchase order verification, the following information should be included with all shipments to the DCs: Separate Bill of Lading (VICS Standard) Packing Slips Shipping Label Product Identification Information Non-Standard Carton Identification SCC–14 Shipping Container Bar Code All standard pack shipping cartons processed through our Wal-Mart DCs must have a shipping container bar code on each vendor pack case. The 14-digit bar code (interleaved 2 of 5) provides a unique s.k.u. identification number that is cross-referenced at the DC to a specific Wal-Mart item and pack. More detailed packaging and labeling requirements can be found on Wal-Mart’s Retail Link web site or by contacting the packaging merchandise support manager.
PA L L E T S TA N D A R D S Our goal is to maximize delivery capability and minimize transportation costs. Guidelines designed to balance freight costs, trailer utilization and handling costs at origin and destination can also be found on Retail Link. Receiving palletized product from the supplier is preferred; however, trailer cube utilization is also a determining factor of shipment configuration. Wal-Mart supports the use of alternative pallet materials such as plastic, metal, etc. However, all alternative materials must be pre-approved. Suppliers may choose to lease pooled pallets from any number of service providers or purchase one-way “White Wood” pallets. Pallets must meet or exceed the GMA Grade-A specifications.
SHIPPING
AND
ROUTING
The following shipping and routing terms are frequently used in our process:
MUST ARRIVE BY DATE (MABD)
DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS Grocery and high velocity DC channels incorporate palletized inbound and outbound freight strategies. This conventional warehouse format is primarily a staple stock (items are held in inventory) environment. Regional DCs incorporate extensive conveyor and sortation systems to efficiently process merchandise. Conveyable and nonconveyable characteristics can be found in the shipping and routing guide on Retail Link.
Shipment must deliver to the Wal-Mart DC on or before to be considered on-time.
DO NOT SHIP BEFORE DATE (DNSB) Suppliers should not send product prior to the DNSB to avoid overstocking stores.
DO NOT SHIP AFTER DATE (DNSA) Products should be shipped prior to the DNSA date to prevent out-of-stocks. Continued on next page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
71
AVAILABLE TO SHIP DATE (ATSD) OR READY DATE This is specified by the supplier in the request for routing process for when they have the product ready to pickup by the carrier.
EXPECTED DELIVERY DATE (EDD)
Suppliers must request routing by noon (CST), two business days prior to the shipment being ready for pickup. Wal-Mart will schedule a truck or authorized carrier to pick up the merchandise on the ready date. Staple stock and assembly distribution freight must be separated on the trailer, not mixed. Pallets, slips and boxes must be loaded by item and P.O., not mixed on the trailer.
Wal-Mart’s Integrated Receiving Strategy is being developed to provide efficiencies in three work streams. The first of these work streams has been completed and the second and third are currently under development. 1. The planning and management stream includes inbound scheduling through the online scheduler application and several internal yard management and load prioritization tools. This internet-based tool allows suppliers, Carriers, and 3rd party logistics operations (3pls) to request delivery appointment times into the Wal-Mart DC network. 2. The receiving efficiencies and accuracy work stream provides the biggest reduction in supply chain cost. This includes Advance Ship Notice (ASN) EDI 856 receiving as well as a claims reduction program. 3. The third work stream is called inbound visibility. Suppliers who become participants in the integrated receiving program will receive complete visibility to all data points collected from the time the truck leaves the supplier’s warehouse through the unloading process within the Wal-Mart DC. The application, life cycle visibility, will be available through Retail Link and will be updated several times daily, giving suppliers the ability to manage their supply chain in a real-time manner. This tool allows suppliers to customize alerts and reporting, setup exception-based management of data and drill down to any level of detail necessary to drive supply chain efficiencies.
ER: KEYS
TO A
S U C C E S S F U L WA L - M A R T S U P P LY C H A I N
Used for holding transportation and carriers accountable for on-time delivery performance. Primarily for collect loads.
W H AT ’ S N E W !
By leveraging our distribution network, the toolset available through integrated receiving, and the EDI 856 Advanced Ship Notice, Wal-Mart will be able to provide an increased level of service to our stores and clubs while reducing costs across the entire supply chain. Maximizing efficiencies, developing and sharing innovations with our business partners and a continued focus on environmental sustainability are all vital to our mission of saving people money so they can live better. About the Author: Mr. Johnnie Dobbs is the Executive Vice President of Logistics for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
72
FA L L
2008
K
Remembering the Original Forgotten Mechanic By Col Tracy Smiedendorf I enjoy trivia questions, especially historical ones. Each day I start out my production meeting with a Presidential history trivia question. Remembering the past is important to help us preserve our heritage and learn from those who came before us. So here’s a trivia question I’m sure few of you know the answer to. Who was the first aircraft mechanic? If you answered Orville or Wilbur Wright you’d be wrong. The correct answer is Charles E. Taylor. He was the father of aircraft maintenance, who built the first engine for the Wright Flyer which propelled the Wright brothers to flight on 17 December, 1903. He was the original forgotten mechanic. Charles Taylor deserves recognition for his contributions not just to man’s first powered flight, but his establishment of the aviation maintenance profession. Plenty has been written about the Wright Brothers and what they accomplished. Now its time to learn about the man who helped them accomplish their dreams.
Mr Charlie Taylor, the father of aircraft maintenance (Photo courtesy of Mr & Mrs R. Shafer)
He was born May 24th, 1868 on an Illinois farm and raised in Nebraska where he learned to be a printer, binder, and surveyor. By age 24 he opened up his own machine shop and married into a
family that happened to be friends with Bishop Milton Wright, father of Wilbur and Orville Wright. During one of Mr. Taylor’s meetings with Bishop Wright, he was encouraged to move to Dayton, Ohio and use his skills there to find employment in the numerous industries that were thriving in Dayton at that time. Two years later, economic depression in Nebraska prompted Mr. Taylor to heed this advice and move his family to Dayton. The year was 1896. In Dayton, Mr. Taylor worked for a farm machinery company two years before opening up his own machine shop. As the shop owner, he worked on bicycles and obtained parts from the Wright Cycle company which operated out of a building owned by his wife’s uncle. Charlie Taylor’s skill as a machinst was recognized by the Wright Brothers and they began to sub contract manufacturing work to Mr. Taylor. Over the next three years, a professional and personal friendship built up between Charlie and the Wrights. In the summer of 1901, Charlie Taylor was hired by the Wright Brothers to work as a machinist for the Wright Cycle Company. He ran the bicycle shop while the Wrights pursued their aviation glider experiments in North Carolina. By 1902, the Wrights were ready to tackle the problem of the powerplant for their airplane. None of the fledgling automobile manufacturers were interested in building
an engine for the Wright’s airplane, so they turned to Charlie Taylor for help. According to an interview he gave to Colliers Weekly Magazine in December 1948, he had only worked on one engine prior to this and admitted that it didn’t work when he was done with it. Charlie developed the idea of using four cylinders and an aluminium block to house the pistons for the motor. Using aluminum saved on weight, which was critical to the Wrights requirements. With only a lathe, drill press, and hand tools, he designed and built a 12 hp engine to propel the Wright Flyer. He would complete this task in just six weeks! There were no blueprints or other engines to study. Charlie had to be designer, machinist, mechanic, and logistician. He had to be his own supply chain manager and source parts to constuct the engine. Charlie was his own contracting officer when he purchased raw materials and had them cast by local foundries. An exhibit at the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park shows that the drive sprocket and chain to turn the propellers came from bicyle parts at the Wright Cycle Co. Charlie Taylor’s engine would help change the world on December 17th , 1903, when Orville made that first 12-second flight using Charlie’s engine. He built engines for the next three versions of Wright Flyers to inlcude the aircraft developed for the US Army. Also, he would repair and maintain the aircraft keeping them airworthy and ultimately supervise early manufacturing of Wright Flyers as production began. In addition to being the first aircraft mechanic, he was also the first airport manager when the Wright’s began flight testing from Huffman Prarie in Dayton. He helped construct the hangar which housed Wright Flyer II and took care of the launching rail they used. Charlie accompanied the Wrights on many of their public demonstrations of their flying machine to include the first military demonstrations at Ft. Myer, VA. It was during this demonstration when Charlie gave up his seat on a ride with Orville to Lt. Thomas Selfridge. Tragically this flight ended in a crash that killed Lt Selfridge and Charlie became the first aircraft mishap investigator when he examined the wreckage and discovered the propeller had disbonded causing the mishap. When Calbraith Rodgers attempted the first transcontinental flight using a Wright Flyer production airplane, Charlie accompanied him as his chief mechanic and chief logistician. He traveled by private rail car with a rolling work shop and spare parts to repair the aircraft. The trip took 47 days and the airplane was completely rebuilt along the way due to several crash landings because airports were not yet developed. While the Wright’s would receive their recognition as pioneers of aviation, Mr. Taylor’s achievements in man’s first flight and first transcontinental flight were little noticed and his humble personality would Continued on next page...
AVIATION MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN DAY Saturday May 24th in 45 States and several US Territories will be officially known as “Aviation Maintenance Technician (AMT) Day.” Washington is one of the 45 states proclaiming this day of recognition for aviation maintenance professionals. Why was May 24th chosen for AMT Day? It is the birthday of Charles E. Taylor. Who is Charles E. Taylor you might ask? He is the father of aircraft maintenance, who built the first engine for the Wright Flyer which propelled the Wright brothers to flight on 17 December, 1903. He was the first aircraft mechanic and critical to the success of the Wright Brothers aircraft. Aviation Maintenance Technician Day was created to help recognize the achievements of Charles E. Taylor and bring deserved respect and recognition to all aviation maintenance professionals (military and civilian). A bill in the House of Representatives to create a National AMT Day was passed on April 30, 2008 and will be sent to the Senate then to the President. The actual resolution House Resolution #444 is several paragraphs long, but here are three that apply to the men and women that support our Air Force: Whereas aviation maintenance technicians today play an essential role in ensuring the safety and security of civil and military aircraft. Whereas the duties of aviation maintenance technicians are critical to United States homeland Security. Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the House of Representatives recognizes the essential role of aviation maintenance technicians in ensuring the safety and security of civil and military aircraft. Other professions have their day of recognition, now the proud aviation maintainers have theirs and the memory of their founding father is also honored. So on Saturday May 24th when you see an airplane in the air remember… Maintainers put it there!
ORIGINAL FORGOTTEN MECHANIC THE
ER: REMEMBERING
Space Museum Steven not permit him to seek F.Udvar-Hazy Center at Dulles any fame, glory or fortune Airport, Washington, D.C. for his efforts. He would Embry-Riddle Aeronautical go on to dedicate the University has named their next 50 years of his life to Aviation Maintenance Science working as an aircraft Department after Mr. Taylor. maintenance technician Recently, the FAA established in relative obscurity. He the Charles E. Taylor Master was the forgotten Mechanic Award for those who mechanic. However, serve 50 years or more as a upon Orville Wright’s maintenance technician. For death in 1948 Charlie more information on the life Taylor became the last remaining member of the The Wright Flyer is in the air, because Charlie Taylor put it there! (Photo courtesy of and achievements of Charles E. Taylor, I recommend the only first flight team and was National Air & Space Museum) book written about him, sought out by reporters Charles E. Taylor: The Wright for interviews recalling those early days of flight. He was on hand during the 50th Brothers Mechanician written by H.R. DuFour with Peter J. anniversary celebrations of the Wright’s first flight, but in the Unitt, published by Prime Digital Printing. years after that celebration Charlie Taylor faded into obscurity. The Professional Aviation Maintenance Association began a When he died in 1956, at age 88, he was buried at the Portal of concerted effort two years ago to push for legislation to create a the Folded Wings Shrine National Aviation Maintenance to Aviation in Burbank, Technician (AMT) Day. On April CA where numerous avi30, 2008 their efforts were rewardation pioneers are laid to ed when the House of rest. Representatives approved the bill creating a National AMT Day to The ingenuity and be observed every May 24th. The achievements of Charles fogotten mechanic is forgotten no E. Taylor are now being more. recognized and honored thanks to several dedicatThe next time you see a picture of ed maintenance profesthe Wright Flyer in the air, rememsionals and organizations. ber the maintainer Charlie Taylor Charlie Taylor’s birthday, who put it there! May 24th is now Aviation Maintenance About the Author: Col Tracy A. Technician Day in over Smiedendorf is the Commander of 45 states and U.S. territothe 62d Maintenance Group, ries (see accompanying McChord AFB, WA. He was also article on page XX). LOA National Treasurer & Asst This day was picked to honor Charles Taylor and Treasurer 2002-2005 and Fairchild all the millions of techniLOA Chapter President 2000cians who have served in 2001. Tracy.smiedendorf@ the profession since 1903. mcchord.af.mil K In 2006, a bust of Mr. Charlie with a prototype engine (Photo courtesy of the Archives California Institute Taylor was unveiled at of Technology) the National Air and
76
FA L L
2008
Get Out of Your Box… PLEASE By Col (ret) Robert D. Dubek Are you regularly examining your processes for improvement opportunities? Are you looking for better ways of doing business? Are you charging your Airmen with the same and supporting them in these efforts? Are you really brainstorming new ideas and not immediately evaluating them for dismissal? Are you really willing to change? I don’t think we need overly formal “training” for improvement, because whether you’re “formally” implementing the tools of Theory of Constraints, LEAN, Six Sigma or just systematically trying new ideas to improve process efficiency and effectiveness you’re implementing AFSO21. Look up “Kaizen”…it does not have to be a fancy program, “kai” means change and “zen” means good. Don’t get caught up in the bureaucracy, the bottom line is IMPROVE. So, why do I say “Get out of your box”? Well, our routines become routine and even when a new situation presents itself, it is human nature to solve that situation within today’s routine. Our real challenge in making step-function improvements (vice marginal improvements) is to continually identify large and small potential savings and attack them. This DOES NOT mean that there are “problems” in your process that must be resolved. It means looking at the high cost areas (time, material, money) within a process and how to reduce those costs. Sometimes this entails sub-optimizing one area for an overall gain. We MUST make looking for improvement opportunities part of daily ops…whether in the field or on the staff. Do you really know the details of your process? I think formal training in ToC, LEAN, 6 Sigma, and Kaizen is good not because of the
theories themselves (although they are excellent), but good because of the great tools these programs give us. And, I’m a statistical person by nature (don’t get me started on preparing for fantasy baseball draft), so I think it’s very important to collect data and evaluate our processes especially over time. However, I think the most important tool we have is the flowcharting of our processes. This is the key to understanding all of the moving parts, the interactions of those parts, the bottlenecks in our processes, and the high value
Above: A crane hoists a storage container onto the waiting deck of the U.S. Navy dock landing ship USS Harpers Ferry (LSD 49) as it receives vehicles and equipment from elements of the embarking 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit at White Beach, Okinawa, Japan, April 25, 2008. The Harpers Ferry is part of the Essex Expeditionary Strike Group forward deployed to Sasebo Japan. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Michael D. Kennedy) (Released)
78
FA L L
2008
areas to examine for improvement. It’s amazing how many times a solution will jump right out at us when we actually take some time to fully document what we’re doing. So, get out of the routine and take a fresh look at your process(es) by flowcharting. This applies to both existing processes and new programs that are given to you to execute. Easier said than done, so let me give an example. I’m now in the alternative energy business. Most public emphasis in the energy business is placed on exploration or discovery of applicable resources (renewable in our case) and processing (refining) into customer products (like “biofuels”). More recently the emotional debate about food vs. fuel has been in the headlines highlighting the global supply/demand interacLoading a 3,000-pound container onto a flat bed truck at a Southwest Asia air base. (USAF photo/TSgt tions between growing economies, agriculture, Johnny Saldivar) speculation, and energy. Meanwhile, there is an extremely large and important logistics side business from a clean sheet of paper, how about optimizing the locaof the business. And, as we all know moving people, equipment, tions of your operations to minimize or eliminate some of these gas, etc. from one entity or location to another involves two basic logistics costs because we pay them forever. A 3PL (third party functions: transportation/carry and transfers/hand-offs. Both of logistics) support organization can optimize based on whatever evalthese areas must be examined for efficiency based on pre-established uation criteria you provide. Just remember that situations change, evaluation criteria such as delivery time or cost. “flexibility is the key” to logistics efficiency. We’re planning on the movement of liquid products from overseas to the US. Our foreign supplier will transport the product to a major port for steamship line transoceanic transport. But, my ocean options are limited based on the individual quantities I have available. So, we’re planning on using “flexibags” within a bulked up standard container or isotanks as our steamship containers. To reduce in-country transloading, we’re pushing the transoceanic containers to the liquid source location for direct loading and subsequent truck delivery to port vice using bulk load wet vessels. At the US ports we also have final destination delivery options. We will likely optimize our US delivery efficiency based on a couple factors. First we consider distance…the longer we have to haul within the US, the more rail transport makes sense. But, we also have to be sensitive to transport limitations of a flexibag containers and might have to transload contents to a liquid rail car. If we have a short haul to our final customer, trucks are an efficient final transportation solution. Second, we must consider our end customer’s receiving capability and storage capabilities. If they have a rail spur on site, rail cars are very efficient. But if not, we have to weigh the cost of trucking over longer distances. Overall, we have many options and many variables including some interim hand-offs at ports which all have to be considered. We will have an optimum solution for each unique set of circumstances…but without a fully mapped out process, we will have difficulty in identifying that solution. Oh, by the way, if you’re developing an economic model and
Bottom line(s) – breakdown your operations to the fundamentals, flowchart your process to identify potential areas for improvement…and don’t forget the interrelated processes and external forces which not only have an impact on your operation, but when properly integrated (and changed if necessary) can also be an additional source for overall increased efficiency. Remember: it’s not LEAN, it’s not Six Sigma, it’s not ToC, it’s not TPS, it’s not rocket science…it’s you. Back to Kaizen, it is the small daily or weekly improvements that compound into productivity increases and a culture of continuous improvement. Take small steps and don’t be slave to the methods/methodologies, use the tools of these methods and invest time to really know what your operation encompasses, who and what you impact, and then how it can be improved. About the Author: Colonel (ret) Robert D. Dubek was formerly the 305 MSG/CC at McGuire AFB. Whenever I was asked about my formal training in Operations Research at AFIT, I responded, it’s about taking processes apart and putting them back together better. Logistics is a great area in which to apply operations research and now with AFSO21 I believe we have to build grass roots operational support vice top down directed “program” support to make this work. rddubek@msn.com
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
79
K
AF Legislative Liaison and You
By Lt Col Dennis Dabney, Lt Col Randy Mauldin and Mr. Rick Ubelhart It is often said that those of us in the military “don’t do politics”. Well, I would have held that view until about a year ago when I went from being a branch chief in the Directorate of Maintenance to a completely different world. The only exposure I had regarding the legislative process and Capitol Hill was a Schoolhouse Rock cartoon—I never thought I would be called upon to use that childhood knowledge. In my current position, a typical day for me now consists of a 10:00 meeting with the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force and a Senator to discuss alternative energy policy, 14:00 meeting with the AF Depot Caucus, then off to a 15:30 meeting with AF/A4 and a SASC Professional Staff Member followed by a Senate Joint Reception in the Dirksen Senate Office Building. I still have to pack for a Congressional Delegation visit leaving tomorrow morning and I still owe an AF position on proposed National Defense Authorization Act depot legislation. I am known for my civilian business attire, and I am often mistaken for an agent in the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) or a contractor. I find myself watching C-SPAN and using words like STAFDEL, CODEL, SAP, report language and PSM. I work in the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill and on occasion, travel around the world showing the Air Force to Congress. A year or so ago I was asked to trade in my ABUs and combat boots for pinstripes and wingtips and serve as the Chief of Logistics and Readiness Branch in the Directorate of Legislative Liaison, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. It has been a rewarding experience and a rare opportunity to gain an entirely new perspective on military and government relations.
I would like to take this opportunity to share with you a little about my job, the mission of USAF Legislative Liaison, history and current organization structure. I will also explain Congressional engagement and some of the challenges and opportunities on the FY08 political landscape. I will introduce you to some of the key players in the legislative process as well as provide perspective from others and close with information on how you can gain experience within legislative liaison.
THE JOB
AND THE
MISSION
My portfolio includes a wide range of topics from depot maintenance and military working dogs to Common Battlefield Airmen Training (CBAT) and Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT). I suddenly became the “go to” person on issues I knew very, very little about. I’ve prepped AF witnesses for public hearings on Air Force body armor and classified briefings on AF readiness. I’ve become accustomed to venturing out of my swim lane of maintenance and logistics and into the “open ocean” on a myriad of issues. I learned quickly who the subject matter experts were for my portfolio and owe a huge debt of gratitude to action officers at all levels, as well as command action groups and 2-digit “congressional shops” for their support. The information I provide could become talking points for an influential Senator or Representative on the debate floor or could be used to develop legislation governing the Air Force, the other Services or the Department of Defense. One immediate transition I had to make was working in an environment of visible rank, structure and affiliation to one that is driven by local or even national agenda without regard to service and a demo-
Above: Michael B. Donley, center, with Gen. Norton A. Schwartz (left) and Gen. Duncan J. McNabb, testify July 22 before the Senate Armed Services Committee during hearings to examine their nominations for three key posts. (USAF photo /Scott M. Ash)
graphic in which the most influential person in the room could be a civilian staff member half my age. Another paradigm shift was that a simple solution to an issue may become hopelessly complex when local politics come into play. The mission of the Office of Legislative Liaison or “LL” is to “Advocate and promote Aerospace Power through constructive relationships with Congress.” The constructive relationship aspect is critical and one which LL spends a significant amount of time nurturing. LL is sometimes the only face Congress may see on an issue and is usually the 9-1-1 number Congress will call when they need information on Air Force programs. Figure 1 highlights the basic tenets of the legislative liaison relationship with Congress: Image, Access and Influence. Image is based on responsiveness and accuracy of information which leads to credibility and trust. Although I am granted access to Congress by my position, I have to balance and at times leverage personal agendas, party politics, local constituent interests and hot topics of the day to continue to build rapport with Congress to achieve the overall bottom-line: meet the objectives of the President’s Budget (PB) request. Figure 1
HISTORY Air Force Legislative and Liaison Division (LLD) came into its own effective December 27, 1947, from the Department of the Army Legislative and Liaison Division, by Joint Army and Air Force Adjustment Regulation (JAAFAR) 1-11-2, on January 15, 1948. Later that same year LLD was established within the Directorate of Public Relations by Headquarters Office Instruction 20-26, Department of the Air Force, September 23, 1947, and included responsibility for responding to Congressional inquiries and investigations dealing with the Air Force. LLD was then separated from the Directorate of Public Relations and upgraded to a Directorate of Legislation and Liaison by Office Memorandum 20-9, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, August 26, 1948. The directorate was responsible for legislative formulation, processing, and presentation regarding the Air Force and was later designated as the Office of Legislative Liaison on May 1, 1953. Figure 2 is how SAF/LL is organized today.
Figure 2
O R G A N I Z AT I O N I am part of a total force team of 17 personnel from across the Air Force in the Programs and Legislation Division of LL. The division focuses on providing information to Congress on subject matters ranging from medical policy to weapon systems acquisition. The other 70 personnel on the LL team are in divisions just as critical providing invaluable liaison support. The Congressional Action Division advises and prepares the “Top 4” (SECAF, CSAF, VCSAF and Under Secretary of the Air Force) for Congressional engagement. The division also coordinates and escorts 100+ wing commanders on over 500 congressional delegation visits annually. The Congressional Inquiries Division’s primary duty is to receive, track and provide responses to over 6,500 constituent inquiries annually. The Weapon Systems Division oversees and manages congressional interest in over 113 air, space and cyber programs. Air Operations Division plans and coordinate all aspects of world-wide Congressional travel totaling over 650 trips during the past year. The liaison offices, both on the House and Senate side of Capitol Hill, provide highly visible and direct support to Congress and are our first responders when a Senator or Representative has a concern or a desire to travel. Also note we have a sister organization within the Air Force Secretariat providing liaison to the Congress. The Air Force Office of Congressional Budget and Liaison, SAF/FMBL, provides liaison to Congressional members and staff on the budget, defense appropriations, and military construction-VA committees of the House of Representatives and Senate. This function operates under the direction of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Budget (FMB). Public law requires the DoD and the military services to engage Congressional appropriators through their respective budget offices and not under LL due to the singular nature and specialized expertise required of the budget process. In an office of seven portfolio managers within SAF/FMBL, one is an aircraft maintenance officer.
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
Continued on Next Page...
81
YOU AND
E R : A F L E G I S L AT I V E L I A I S O N
Legislative Liaison in action: Senate Legislative Liaison and Maintenance Officer, Maj Rodney Bullock takes notes during a meeting with (right to left) Senator Barack Obama, (D-IL); General Gene Renuart, Commander NORAD/NORTHCOM; LTG Glen Webster, Deputy Commander NORAD/NORTHCOM; and Ms. Ruchi Bhowmik, Military Legislative Assistant for Senator Obama.
T H E K E Y P L AY E R S Understanding the LL mission and how it is organized is a very important part of being a liaison. Knowing your role in the process is critical to the success of the Air Force. It is very important to know and understand the key players in the legislative process to include their experience base, agenda and needs. These factors are taken into account to make the engagements most effective. I would like to introduce you to the major players I work with day to day. At the top tier of the legislative process are the Members of Congress or “Members.” A Senator’s or Representative’s agenda, influence, committee affiliation or districts are all taken into account when planning congressional engagement. Key personal staff are employed by a Senator or Representative and hold titles such as Chief of Staff or Legislative Director. They craft legislation to promote their Member’s agenda and consult with a committee Professional Staff Member (PSM) to gain an understanding of national concerns and impact within a certain piece of legislation. Additional staff in a member’s office may include Military Legislative Assistants (MLA) or Legislative Correspondents. This staff provides constituent services with a casework focus and is within the 24-42 age range. The Air Force affords personal staff
82
FA L L
1-star equivalent rank. PSMs are afforded 2-star equivalent rank while committee staff directors are treated as 3-star equivalents. Professional Staff Members or PSMs are normally employed by a committee and focus on national issues, MILCON, acquisition, personnel, energy/natural resources, veteran affairs or readiness. The PSMs craft legislation based on their committee or subcommittee jurisdictions and external influences. PSMs are usually the point of contact for coordinating and executing congressional hearings. PSM tenures may survive administration change-over, or House/Senate majority swaps, depending on the job.
CONGRESSIONAL ENGAGEMENT A month or two into the job, the novelty of wearing civilian clothes wore off and I was immersed in the very real business of assessing proposed legislation and tracking budget allocations. Currently LL is actively engaged with Congress to further these AF legislative priorities:
2008
Preserve Aerospace Industrial Base Modernize and Protect Air, Space and Cyberspace Capabilities Recruit and Retain Highest Quality Airmen
Figure 3
Figure 5
Retire Aging, Worn-Out Aircraft Assure Sustainable Energy Achieve Total Force Integration
In order for the AF to achieve its goals and priorities, LL assists AF leadership with appealing to Congress for support. Just like any military operation, the AF develops a strategy as well as tools and techniques to achieve a desired outcome. SAF/LL follows a multi-tiered plan to schedule engagements and tends to proactively convey AF goals and priorities within the Congressional calendar and before the budget cycle begins. We reinforce these messages with Congressional visits by the top 4 (CSAF, SECAF, VCSAF and Under SECAF), visits by various Air Staff Directors, and events hosted throughout the year. For example, in CY07, Air Force senior leaders engaged congress over 200 times promoting AF programs and responding to Congress. In order for the AF to achieve favorable budget authorizations and legislative provisions, I quickly learned to develop engageFigure 4
ment strategies and communication plans to convey those goals and priorities to Congress. As figure 4 suggests, examples of congressional engagement include one-on-one office calls with Members of Congress or their staff, briefings or presentations to congressional staff, or preparing AF witnesses to testify in a public hearing convened by a defense committee. Several times during the year AF leaders attend many social events on Capitol Hill. Such venues provide a more relaxed, social atmosphere in which to bend the ear of an influential Member or committee staff. Lower-level engagements include routine information exchange between the AF and congressional staff. On-going discussion between Directorate-level and MAJCOM subject matter experts are also important and frequent engagement methods. All engagements are planned, orchestrated and executed to provide consistent and timely information to Congress.
CONGRESSIONAL CALENDAR Did you ever wonder how the Air Force decides to buy or retire a weapon system or how an Air Force base gains a mission or aircraft? The process that develops and authorizes such policies, programs and missions begins with legislation. Figure 5 depicts major milestone events in the legislative process during the calendar year. The AF has a very short window, Feb – Jun, in which to influence DoD budget authorizations as they flow through House and Senate defense committees. Committees will provide their legislative inputs or “marks” (funding plus-ups or cuts to AF programs, as well as legislative language) to the AF budget based on information provided via various congressional engagements explained earlier. The window of opportunity to engage closes a little more each month until “conference” when the final inputs and appeals from the administration on pending language are considered. Continued on Next Page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
83
YOU AND
E R : A F L E G I S L AT I V E L I A I S O N
AF credibility and trust, built up over the years, mean the most during this time as we seek help and influence from Congress with critical AF programs. To be successful, we engage congressional members and professional/personal staff continually…the process never stops. When one NDAA / Appropriation Bill is passed, we start work on the next.
POLITICAL LANDSCAPE – CHALLENGES OPPORTUNITIES
AND
FY07-08 presented some significant challenges, and the political landscape will continue to change. LL takes several factors into account when planning engagements. Political climate and media attention, for example, can change the focus and message we carry to Congress. There are several factors that LL monitors as we develop engagement strategies. Some include: military service among Members of Congress, defense committee priorities and GAO reports. There continues to be fewer and fewer members with military experience serving in the U.S. Congress. In fact, the number of veterans in the previous Congress (109th Congress) is 13 fewer than that of the 108th Congress, and 14 fewer than the 107th Congress. As you can see in figure 6, the comparison between the 109th and the 110th Congress shows a continued downward trend. This trend creates a challenge, or some might say, an AF engagement opportunity. When we examine the entering freshman class of the 110th Congress, we found only 6 of the 54 House members have some form of military experience. The percentage is lower on the Senate side, with only one of the 10 new members having military experience. The take-away for us is we need to be busy providing AF 101 education to our newest
84
FA L L
members with increased engagements such as Congressional delegation (CODEL) or Staff Delegation (STAFDEL) visits to view the AF mission. Likewise, the current political climate is extremely sympathetic to Army and Marine Corps losses and readiness shortfalls. It is going to be extremely important for AF leadership to tell the Air Force story and explain how 17 plus consecutive years of being at war impacts our readiness capabilities as well. You should also know that in this environment the focus is slanted more towards “getting it right” on the readiness side of the House; without an increase to the Defense top line, there will be a temptation to fund readiness needs at the expense of modernization accounts. That translates to potential cuts to weapon system development programs. It’s important we fight hard to achieve our readiness needs, at the same time keeping key development programs on track. There is not much worse than spending weeks preparing an AF witness to testify at a hearing and learning at the hearing the Government Accountability Office (GAO) just released a report regarding the particular weapon system program your witness is giving testimony on. In such instances, members of Congress have been known to quote liberally from such reports, and to ask very pressing questions about the report’s findings. This is an extremely uncomfortable position for a witness to be in. As you might imagine, we go out of our way to try to avoid such embarrassments by expanding our engagement planning to include the monitoring of key websites, the review of relevant reports by organizations like GAO and the Congressional Research Service, as well as increasing senior leadership situational awareness on what reports the AF will be delivering to the Congress before
2008
any engagement. GAO reports and similar publications could drive discussions during hearings, as well as the tone and tenor of engagements during the budget cycle.
L E G I S L AT I V E P R O C E S S
AND
YOU
What can you do to be a key player in the legislative process? I have a few suggestions. First, in the advent of AFSO21 and enterprise solutions, some “great ideas” may not survive the intense scrutiny of Congress without proper socialization and notification. Any concept that involves or may involve a significant shift in unit manpower or involves Air Reserve Component (ARC) units or personnel could receive a great deal of Congressional interest. Just like any unit commander, Members of Congress do not like surprises and typically want to hear about initiatives before execution and certainly before they are reported in their local district press. Secondly, know your MAJCOM position on issues that affect your base/unit. If a congressional task falls on your desk, realize that this is your “opportunity to excel” by providing timely, thorough responses which in most cases will eventually reach a Member of Congress for review and consideration. Find out who the MAJCOM legislative POCs are and work through your leadership to keep them informed. Topics deemed “below congressional radar” often are not below the radar at all, and congressional staff appreciate a “heads-up” and regular updates. Lastly, CODEL and STAFDEL visits are excellent opportunities to provide Congress with first-hand knowledge and understanding of how the AF operates. Encourage such visits as they are an incredible opportunity to provide feedback on how legislation impacts your operation or mission.
SAF/LL ALUMNI Several notable AF logisticians are SAF/LL alumni. Maj Gen Loren Reno, Commander, Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, served in Legislative Liaison from Jul 81 to Jul 82 followed by a tour at Headquarters Air Mobility Command as Chief of Legislative and Government Affairs. Gen Reno speaks very highly of his experience as a liaison both at the Secretariat and MAJCOM levels. Gen Reno recollected, “Some of my fondest AF memories were during my time in Legislative Liaison. The knowledge I gained through my time on ‘The Hill’ is put to good use years later helping me understand the political environment at one of our nation’s defense industrial bases.” Maj Gen Kathleen Close, Commander, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Hill AFB, was Chief of the Legislative Liaison Logistics Branch from Dec 89 to May 91. She advised, “I would recommend a tour in legislative liaison for any loggie to learn more about how decisions are made through the legislative process that may affect the logistics workforce. It is a perspective that you will carry with
you for the rest of your career.” Brig Gen Judith Fedder, Commander, 76th Maintenance Wing, Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker AFB, served from Feb 97 to May 99 as special assistant for Depot, Readiness and Logistics Programs, Office of Legislative Liaison, and again as the Deputy Director, Legislative Liaison from Sep 05 to Jul 06. Gen Fedder recalls both of her tours as the most rewarding of her career. “I will always consider it an honor to have served with such an outstanding team of professionals as an action officer and again as deputy director. The legislative liaison total force team is on the front line with Congress at a very challenging time in our service’s history. I encourage all officers and loggies in particular to consider a position in legislative liaison or seek an opportunity through the Legislative Fellows programs. The rare perspective I gained continues to serve me today.” Hopefully, you’ve gained a greater understanding of the Legislative Liaison mission and history, and how LL assists AF senior leaders in making a difference with Congress through carefully crafted and consistent engagement on many levels. I’ve shared a few of the challenges of the political landscape and provided a keen perspective of a few LL alumni. If you are interested in learning more about the legislative process and wish to pursue a tour in Legislative Liaison or the Legislative Fellows Intermediate Developmental Education (IDE) program, consult your mentor or senior rater and make your preference known on your AF Form 3849 and Airman Development Plan. Congress keeps a watchful eye on AF programs and budget execution. Calendar Year 07-08 brought a mixture of successes and challenges. Rest assured, there will be a legion of Air Force professionals that will continue to assist in advocating programs and legislation to maintain our status as the best Air, Space and Cyber force in the world. About the Authors: Lt Col Dabney is Chief of Logistics and Readiness Branch in the Directorate of Legislative Liaison, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force.
Prior to his assignment to
SAF/LL, Lt Col Dabney was on the Air Staff as Chief, Force Development Branch Directorate of Maintenance. Lt Col Dabney is also a member of the LOA National Board as the Chapter Support Officer. dennis.dabney@pentagon.af.mil Lt Col Randy A. Mauldin is the Deputy Director, Congressional Appropriations and Budget Liaison. Mr. Rick Ubelhart is a Senior Policy Analyst, Congressional Branch, Directorate of Resource Integration, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission Support.
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
85
K
Industrial College of the Armed Forces… Over 80 Years of Preparing Senior Leaders the execution of that strategy. ICAF educates strategic thinkers versed in national security strategy and its resource foundation, and serves as a center for study and research in the resource component of national security.”
By Lt Col Pat Kumashiro
Where can you go to get a graduate level degree in National Resource Strategy, travel domestically/internationally, and play intramural sports while building joint, interagency, and international relationships with fellow students throughout the year? The ICAF was established in 1924 after one of its founders, Bernard answer is the Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF) at Fort Baruch, identified U.S. mobilization challenges during Word War I. McNair, Washington, D.C. ICAF is a ten-month program that is a As a prominent Wall Street executive and Chairman of the War component of the USAF Senior Developmental Education (SDE) Industries Board, Baruch determined that both military and indusProgram. Professional Military Education (PME) consists of com- try leaders needed to work more closely together to effectively mobipleting Squadron Officer School (SOS) at the Captain timeframe lize the military in times of war. Initially established as the Army in your career, Intermediate Developmental Education (IDE) at the Industrial College, the college was renamed the Industrial College of the Armed Forces in 1946. In 1986, the Major timeframe, and SDE at ICAF curriculum was accredited by the the Lieutenant Colonel/ CJCS to satisfy Joint Specialty officer Colonel timeframe in your “It is my conviction that the educational (JSO) education requirements. This allows career. You can also attend programs conducted by the [Industrial] graduates to be assigned directly into joint SDE in-residence at other senCollege are of the greatest importance in billets without having to complete the tenior service schools such as week Joint PME Phase I & II course at National War College also at developing the kind of enlightened military Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk, VA. Fort McNair, Air War College and civilian leadership our Nation must have In 1994, Congress authorized National (Maxwell AFB, AL), Army if its purposes and security are to endure.” Defense University to award a Master of War College (Carlisle Barracks, Science degree in National Resources PA), Naval War College ––President Dwight D. Eisenhower Strategy and is accredited by the Middle (Newport, RI), and Marine War States association of Colleges and Schools. College (Quantico, VA). ICAF and National War College both belong to National Defense University at Ft McNair. Additionally, there are a number of SDE fellowships available at Harvard, RAND and other locations. Selection for IDE and SDE in-residence programs is accomplished through a competitive selection process managed by AFPC and Air Force functional Developmental Teams. The ICAF mission is “to prepare selected military and civilians for strategic leadership and success in developing our national security strategy and in evaluating, marshalling, and managing resources in
86
FA L L
The ICAF curriculum is unique among the other SDE programs because it focuses on the interdependent relationship between national security strategy and industry while focusing on key issues such as the economy, globalization, and acquisitions. In fact, it is the only senior service school that has its own Economic and Acquisition Departments. In the Fall semester, students study core courses such as national security strategy, military strategy & logistics, strategic leadership, and macroeconomics. In the Spring semester, students will study acquisition, microeconomics, regional
2008
Throughout the year, ICAF students have the security studies, and industry studies. To I want to establish a little opportunity to listen and engage with a number complete each core course, the students school…to preserve experience of distinguished visitors including the President, much apply the tenets of the course in a Supreme Court Justices, Mr. Bob Schieffer from 5-10 page research paper. Grading for and keep in touch with industry. CBS, Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, each core course typically consists of 50 ––Bernard Baruch Chairman Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral percent seminar participation and 50 War Industries Board WWI Mike Mullen, and other senior military, governpercent written assessment. In addition ment civilian and industry leaders. to the core courses, students must also take two elective courses each semester The ICAF class is composed of 320 students from the military servfrom National Defense University, National War College, or ICAF ices, interagency, international allies, and industry. 180 students are to complete their graduate level study. Students may focus their military, 68 are from DoD agencies, 39 are from non-DoD agencies, elective studies in special concentrations studies such as acquisi23 are international fellows, and 10 are industry fellows. Of the 180 tions, supply chain management, information operations, and indemilitary students, 60 officers are from the USAF. The ICAF class pendent research if they desire. is broken up into 20 seminars of approximately 16 students in each The signature highlight of the ICAF academic year is the Industry seminar. The seminar is led by a teaching team composed of a facStudies Program. The objectives of the Industry Studies Program ulty member from each of the four core courses in the Fall, with the include: industry team teaching in the Spring. (1) Develop a capability to analyze industry from a strategic nationThe list of distinguished ICAF alumni is a virtual “Who’s Who” of al security perspective in terms of both the ‘general welfare’ and American military leaders including General Dwight D. the national defense in normal and crisis conditions; Eisenhower, Class of 1933, General Henry “Hap” Arnold, Class of (2) Develop a comparative analyses of U.S. and international par- 1921, General John Vessey, Class of 1966 and General Duncan ticipants in selected industries in both defense and non-defense McNabb, Class of 1993. More recent ICAF “loggie” graduates environments in terms of their contribution to national and includes Lt Gen (ret) Michael Zettler, Class of 1986, Major General Art Morrill III, Class of 1992, Major General David Gillett, Class international economic and defense policies; and of 1994, Major General Polly Peyer, Class of 1994, Brig General Art (3) Develop a capability to analyze the role and effect of public polCameron III, Class of 1999, Mr. Mark Johnson, Class of 1997, and icy on national security as well as economic and industrial criMs. Sue Lumpkins, Class of 2002. sis preparedness. If you should happen to meet an ICAF graduate, they will undoubtIn the spring, students will select from one of twenty industry studedly tell you that it was one of the highlights of their career—proies including Agribusiness, Aircraft, Biotechnology, Education, fessionally and personally rewarding. Furthermore, they will tell you Electronics, Energy, Environment, Financial Services, Health Care, that ICAF prepared them to hold strategic leadership positions Information & Communications Technology, Land Combat within their organizations. Most importantly, they will tell you that Systems, Manufacturing, News Media, Privatized Military the personal relationships they developed with other military, civilOperations, Re-construction & Infrastructure, Shipbuilding, Space, ian, international, and industry colleagues will span a lifetime. Strategic Materials, Transportation, and Weapons. For example, President Eisenhower appropriately stated, at the dedication of the the Financial Services industry study travelled to Chicago, New ICAF building that bears his name in 1960: York City, Hong Kong, and China “Our liberties rest with our people, upon the in 2008. During their travel, stuscope and depth of their understanding of the dents met with senior financial spiritual, political, and economic realities, executives from the Financial which underlie our national purpose and susServices industry including Mr. tain our nation’s security. It is the high mission Frederic Mishkin, Federal Reserve of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces Board Governor, and Mr. John to develop such an understanding among our Bogle, founder and retired CEO of people and their military and civilian leaders.” the Vanguard Group. After completion of their industry study, the Lt Col Pat Kumashiro is a 2008 ICAF graduseminar collaborated on an indusate and is currently an Assistant Professor of try study paper that articulates how their industry study impacts President Bush addresses National Defense University students. Military Strategy & Logistics at ICAF. K national security strategy. (USAF Photo)
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
87
Focus on a President An interview with Jamie A. Rempel
Maintenance Rocks! Name three things that made you decide to commit to join our Air Force: I wanted to make a difference in the world. I wanted to serve through a leadership capacity. I believe passionately in the freedom and liberty which define our nation Name three things that you think can be improved in the Air Force today: 1. Continued emphasis on highlighting Air Force Core Values to the American public; 2. Continued emphasis within the Air Force to internalize our Core Values; 3. Continued emphasis on showcasing the Air Force’s outstanding Airmen to the American public and world at large Have you participated in any AFSO21 projects? If so, describe. My first AFSO21 initiative occurred as a Lean project in the 1 FW’s Maintenance Flight; we tackled the challenge of standardizing and streamlining our phase dock operations. This project preceded formal AFSO21 nomenclature, but certainly was in keeping with the motivating theories of Lean and 6S. My year in Maintenance Flight witnessed our commitment to positive change – our perseverance laid the foundation for better and smarter ways of doing the business of aircraft maintenance. Have you deployed recently? If so, please elaborate. Unfortunately, I have not…but I stand ready to deploy as Air Force needs dictate.
88
FA L L
2008
What is the biggest challenge you encounter as an officer in our Air Force today?
VITAL STATISTICS NAME:
JAMIE A. REMPEL
Hometown:
Auberry, California
College:
United States Air Force Academy, Class of 2001 (Fire it up!) Webster University, 2008
Degree:
Bachelors, Business Management Masters, Business Administration
Balancing life so I can be the best I can be. I enjoy the daily challenge to be smarter at my job while developing a better perspective on the macro and strategic considerations in our Air Force. And the opportunity to pursue a professional career in conjunction with staying physically fit, maintaining important personal relationships, and loving God with all my heart. What do you think are the three most significant logistics challenges in the USAF today?
Professional Military Education: Aerospace Basic Course, 2002 Squadron Officer School, 2006
Sustaining the increasing operational tempo with diminishing personnel and resources
Assignments: USAFA Preparatory School, Colorado Springs CO Head Volleyball Coach and English Instructor 1 FW, Langley AFB, VA Flight Commander – AGE, Maintenance, Fabrication Assistant OIC, 71 AMU 56 FW, Luke AFB, AZ Assistant Maintenance Operations Officer, 56 AMXS OIC, 62 AMU Significant Awards: ACC Female Athlete of the Year 2002 1 MXG CGOY 2004 56 FW CGOQ 2006 Current Duty:
62d Aircraft Maintenance Unit Officer In Charge
Family:
Single
The Colonels in our Air Force need your insight. Airmen?
Maintaining legacy aircraft while sourcing and bringing online fifth generation technology to ensure continued air dominance From the officer viewpoint – the increased expeditionary demand as we combat and win the Global War on Terrorism Please provide a short summary of your leadership philosophy. Fundamentally, I think leadership is about service to one’s fellow man, and genuine respect for the unique individuality which characterizes each human soul and life. I want to make a positive difference in the world, and I hope to do that by serving our beautiful country and her people. What are your long term goals and objectives? I love my job as an aircraft maintenance officer and the opportunity I have to serve in our Air Force. I look forward to continued challenges, professionally and academically, and want to command if given the privilege. Above all, I plan to remain in this profession as long as I’m passionate about what I do, and as long as I have the opportunity to contribute and give back to the Air Force and our country.
What do you think senior leaders can do better for our junior officers and
Senior leaders must continue to invest time and energy in CGOs and Airmen. The outstanding mentorship I’ve received from my O-6 at Luke has been instrumental. His leadership has helped me better define the kind of logistics officer I want to be “when I grow up.” I think the more mentorship Colonels and senior leaders can extend to younger officers, the stronger and better equipped they will be to lead our enlisted force. A role of any officer is to improve the quality of life of our Airman. If you could do one thing to enhance our Airmen’s quality of life what would it be? Despite fiscal constraints, I think the Air Force does an excellent job of providing for our Airmen – facilities, uniforms, morale and welfare, as well as the tools and equipment needed to perform the mission. I think we can always improve communicating to our Airmen what a big difference the Air Force makes on a global scale, and the direct role each of them play in making that happen. Continued on Next Page... EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
89
General Sullivan, THE AF A4, is reading your interview. What do you want to tell him? Sir, your United States Air Force is amazing; thank you for your leadership and service to our country. It’s an honor getting to serve as the Spike AMU OIC- I would humbly submit that I have the best job in the AF. The dedication and talent showcased every day by the Airmen of the 62d AMU epitomize why America is free, and why America is great. Sir, Installing Falcon Engine Covers Reenlisting SSgt Metcalf
PRESIDENT
you have the very best men and women in America making the mission happen here at Luke – and at bases around the world.
ON A
What do you do in your free time? Hobbies?
ER: FOCUS
Reading, running, lifting, swimming, spinning, volleyball, basketball, snowboarding, and attempting to play golf.
K
Getting Briefed by TSgt Greene
90
FA L L
2008
www.defenselog.com
Book now and save up to $400* off your registration! Call 1-888-482-6012 and register with code 10389XZ11PA
Speakers Include: WHEN: December 2-5, 2008
Tuesday, December 2: Synchronized Supply Chain Day Wednesday & Thursday, December 3 & 4: Main Program Friday, December 5: PBL, Maintenance & Sustainment Day
WHERE: The Marriott Crystal Gateway, Arlington, VA Defense Logistics 2008 will bring together cross-service logisticians and industry experts that set and implement strategies to better support the Warfighter.
5 Reasons Defense Logistics 2008 Is A Must Attend: K Speakers: Key defense leaders from across
the Services and Defense Agencies; you’ll gain perspectives and future directions from all aspects of the defense industry.
Location: Located in Arlington, we’ll make it as K
easy as possible for you to make the most out of your time out of the office and keep your travel costs down. Opportunity: Over 60 executive level K
Networking: Our brand new networking K
lunches and extended Q&A’s will give you more opportunities for face time with key decision makers you want to meet. Pricing: In response to your budgetary constraints, K
presenters means you’ll have more opportunities to meet and create partnerships with individuals who lead our most important logistics commands and programs.
Military pricing for 2008 has been reduced.
Our specialized program will deliver you the most relevant content over four full days: •
Tuesday, December 2: The Synchronized Supply Chain Day focuses on the end-to-end integration & synchronization of supply chain processes and systems to enable increased visibility and support to the Warfighter.
•
Wednesday & Thursday, December 3 & 4: The Main Program
•
Friday, December 5: The PBL, Maintenance & Sustainment Day focuses on the challenges of redefining and reshaping the way military-industry partnerships and PBL contracts are structured.
Don’t Miss: The Defense Logistics 2008 Awards Ceremony Recognizing Leaders In Military Logistics Join us on December 3 at 8 PM to recognize, honor and promote individuals who’ve made a significant contribution to military logistics.
DEFENSE LOGISTICS IS THE ONE CONFERENCE YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO MISS!
Register by September 26 and claim up to a $400 discount*. Discounts are available off other packages as well. Be sure to mention your priority code: 10389XZ11PA
Paul A. Brinkley Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Business Transformation US Department Of Defense Lieutenant General Kathleen M. Gainey Director for Logistics, J-4 The Joint Staff Vice Admiral Michael K. Loose Civil Engineer Corps, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Fleet Readiness and Logistics (N4) US Navy Jim Hall Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Logistics Plans and Programs Office Of The Secretary Of Defense Alan Estevez Principal Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Logistics & Materiel Readiness) OSD Major General Daniel Benjamin Commander Canadian Operational Support Command Major General Vincent E. Boles Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, G-4 US Army Major General James E. Chambers Commander, Combined Arms Support Command US Army Major General Michael C. Gould Director of Operations and Plans US Transportation Command Major General Arthur B. Morrill III USAF, Vice Director Defense Logistics Agency
To Register: Call: 888-482-6012 or 646-200-7530 Fax: 646-200-7535 Email: defense@wbresearch.com Web: www.defenselog.com
Sponsored By:
CGO Corner
E R : C G O C O R N E R , C H A P T E R C R O S S TA L K
CROSSING THE LOGISTICS DMZ Chatting over dinner with a fellow career broadening logistics officers, I could not help but chuckle inside. Who would have imagined I would be laughing and sharing insights with “one of those guys.” At first glance, such a statement may seem a bit strange. Captain Phillip Broyles is an Aircraft Maintenance Officer and I’m a Logistics Readiness Officer (LRO). Think about it. Often times, conversations on flight line operations and support become a bit contentious. During my tenure in Capt Ernest Cage the Air Force, I managed supply, aerial port operations, fuels, ground transportation and logistics plans. Each of these logistics disciplines is uniquely different yet inextricably linked to our core Air Force mission of pushing hot iron into the sky. Yet even in the face of such clear evidence there continues to be a line of demarcation between aircraft maintenance and the other logistics disciplines drawn on the tarmac. In our professional magazines and at conferences, we talk about the importance of logistics and the significance of being an Air Force logistician. Yet, back at home station when the bad news hits the “the boss’s” desk it is all about “us versus them.” Without question, the pressures and demands on logisticians are immense and tempers will, and do, become frayed in the heat of sortie generation. Nonetheless, what message do we send to our newest lieutenants and enlisted Airmen when we treat each other with over generalized discourse? I came into the Air Force wide-eyed, enthusiastic, and impressionable. Six years later, my vigor and love for our service is stronger than ever. Fortunately, I have been “schooled” in the traditional ways of the flightline by weathered officers and SNCOs. I have seen LROs belittled during maintenance status briefings because of hopelessly backordered parts. I lived through deployments where everyone had to work five times harder to make the mission happen because of frustrated, haphazardly palletized, maintenance cargo and spotty documentation. I sat in more than my share of staff meetings where all the problems in world were blamed on the “other guys.” Fortunately, I served in an Air Mobility Squadron as an Aerial Port Flight Commander, witnessing first-hand the relationship between aircraft maintenance and the other logistics disciplines. I fully appreciate the art and science necessary to maintain aircraft. Unfortunately, the Air Mobility Squadron model is the exception not the norm. At the company grade officer level, we rarely find ourselves outside of our “tribes.” Pride in one’s profession is a vital contributor to individual self-worth and a key proponent of organizational success – this is healthy. However, as our Air Force continues to evolve from a garrison based predictive force into a dynamic, multi-dimensional force integrator operating across vast strata with discreet resources, traditional mindsets and sacred cows must be sent off to Maxwell for archival investiture. It is not my prerogative to advocate any formalized cross-pollination between LROs and Maintainers. To the contrary, each of us presently has the corrective tools at our disposal — knowledge and mutual respect. If you are an LRO, do you know the maintenance flight commander(s) you support by name? Likewise if you are a maintainer, do you know who your supply, fuels, transportation, and logistics plans company grade leaders are in the Logistics Readiness Squadron? If the answer to these questions is no, I would argue that you are doing your wing and the USAF a disservice. I often hear that fuels Airmen are cut from a different cloth or that crew chiefs are the lifeblood of sortie generation – I do not disagree. The herculean feats these Airmen accomplish day-in and day-out are nothing short of amazing. Truth is, every logistician is a critical link in this great mission we have been tasked to perform. A glance at Air Force history clearly reflects the long and hard traveled road maintainers and LROs have endured to earn the trust and confidence of our “operational” leadership. The key imperative we must address now is within. Do we have the courage to truly become logisticians in fact and not just in name? I am confident that we can rise to the occasion but of course Rome was not built in a day – let’s start by shaking hands on the flightline. The CGO Corner is written by Captain “Nest” Cage – he is currently an Air Force Logistics Career Broadening Officer serving as deputy program manager for the KC-10 at the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. Nest has been a staff writer for the ER since 2006.
92
FA L L
2008
K
Chapter CrossTalk WRIGHT BROTHERS CHAPTER – WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB, OH Submitted by Capt Vaughan Whited Once again, it has been a productive summer for the legendary Wright Brother’s Chapter! We were honored to host AFMC Commander, General Bruce Carlson in May and in July the team rallied to enjoy lunch with Maj Gen Polly Peyer, the new Warner Robins Air Logistic Center Commander. One of the great things about being part of the Wright Patterson team is the opportunity that abounds to gain insight from senior leaders on a face-to-face level.
As you all know, the national conference is right around the corner. Ms. Marta Hannon, Col Jim Hannon, Lt Col Steve Petters and Col Doug Cato from the National Team came to Dayton for a 2-day planning conference with the local planners. The team received a great vector check and plenty of helpful advice. The team is hard at work to ensure this will be a fantastic conference. We look forward to your arrival in Columbus, Ohio this October. As always, great quarter Wright Brothers’ team - strength and honor!
WASATCH WARRIORS – HILL AFB, UT Submitted by: Capt Richard Boatman Our Wasatch Warrior Chapter has been busy over these last few months. Our annual golf tournament was the most successful yet with proceeds over $5500. Our thanks go out to Capt Ron Kolodziejczyk, committee chair, for the world class event. Local chapter elections were announced and the new board presented to the membership at our 13th annual dining. It was an evening where we celebrated the importance of education to the professional logistician with keynote speaker, Mr. Richey, AETC/A4. Our five local scholarship winners recognized during the dining out were: Ms. Linda Hudspeth: $500 SrA Christopher Collins: $750
TSgt Melodie Gonzalez: $1000 MSgt Samantha Stoner: $1500
SSgt Sheila Fish: $750
Continued on Next Page...
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
93
WASATCH WARRIORS [CONTINUED] We wish MSgt Stoner best of luck as our chapter’s nominee to compete for a LOA National Scholarship. We bid farewell to our senior Military advisor for the last three years, Brig Gen Cameron as he PCS’d to Washington DC. Our chapter owes a great many successes to his leadership and support provided during his tenure. We wish Gen Cameron the best of luck in all future endeavors and extend a heartfelt thank-you for all the support. We welcome our Senior Military Advisor, Brig Gen (S) Cooper. See you at LOA National.
AIR COMMANDO CHAPTER – HURLBURT FIELD, FL
E R : C H A P T E R C R O S S TA L K
Submitted by Capt Michael D. Schuyler The last three months have been a whirlwind of activity for the Air Commando Chapter! We started May off with the firstever Hurlburt joint Maintenance/Operations Bash. Lt Gen (Ret) Leo Marquez was the guest speaker and delivered a very memorable speech that provided our Logisticians with many insightful thoughts about how our efforts affect the mission. We expanded our knowledge base later that month as we combined our monthly meeting with a tour of the Edwin Watts Golf Distribution Facility in Fort Walton Beach. Mr. Watts’ son gave us a personal tour addressing how supply chain management affects a business’ daily operations. We brought back numerous ideas that will only go to improve the way we operate! July has us on tap for a tour of the 6th Special Operations Squadron and a Senior Officer Panel in the near future!
Above Right: Col. Socrates Greene, 1 Special Operations Maintenance Group Commander and Col. Dennis Pannell, 1 Special Operations Group Commander present Lt Gen (Ret) Leo Marquez with mirrored Master Maintenance Badge hand made by the 1 Special Operations Equipment Maintenance Squadron.
AIRBRIDGE CHAPTER - DOVER AFB, DE GLOBEMASTER CHAPTER – CHARLESTON AFB, SC Submitted by 1st Lt Matt Ratcliffe and 1st Lt Jeffrey Fry The Airbridge and Globemaster LOA Chapters recently gathered a team of fourteen Airmen from both Dover and Charleston AFBs and embarked on a four-day trip to the greater Cincinnati region. The purpose of the trip was to visit industrial workplaces that have implemented the Lean and Six Sigma processes, and then to bring back innovations and ideas to our bases. We started our tours at the Toyota plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, where they assemble Camry, Avalon, and Solara automobiles. Toyota has long been the forerunner in bringing Lean initiatives to the workplace, and that was more than evident at the Georgetown plant. All supervisors are trained and well-versed in the “Toyota Production System” (TPS), which is their own unique name for their Lean processes, and the floor workers are encouraged to participate in.
94
FA L L
2008
The next day brought us to the General Electric Aircraft Engines plant outside Cincinnati, where they assemble and test many of their aircraft and ship engines. We received a tour through the entire engine assembly process, where each work cell focuses on a particular step in the building of engines. Our final tour brought us to the DHL operation located in Wilmington, Ohio. This facility flies over 115 flights and processes approximately one million packages daily. Lean activities were employed and very much in use at the DHL facilities. To wrap up our trip, we visited Wright Patterson AFB and sat in on a presentation from Lt Gen Jack Hudson, the Commander of Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC). The briefing covered the role of the ASC in supporting our air frames while meeting the logistical challenges of today and the future. He also stressed the importance of abiding by the Air Force Core Values and challenged everyone to know the Air Force mission by heart - “To deliver sovereign options for the defense of the United States of America and its global interests – to fly and fight in Air, Space, and Cyberspace.” The overall trip was a huge success. Every one of us that embarked on this trip returned to our bases with a new perspective on Lean concepts. We had the opportunity to witness the improvements and successes that Lean brings to the private sector, and see— firsthand—the future of Lean and what it can bring to the Air Force.
RAZORBACK CHAPTER – LITTLE ROCK AFB, AR Submitted by Capt. Denny Ray Shofner Eight members from the Little Rock AFB, LOA Razorback Chapter, along with one C1C Air Force Academy Cadet had the opportunity of touring the Remington Manufacturing Plant, located in Little Rock, AR. The Plant consists of over 250,000 square feet and sits on more than 1200 acres. Chapter members were able to view the complete process of forging lead, molding plastic, and prepping primers for installation. The members toured the entire main aisle of the plant along with the shot tower. The Remington Plant is the only commercial plant that makes ammunition in the United States. It was very evident while touring the plant that very little gets wasted. They have incorporated LEAN into many areas of their manufacturing which they have labeled as successes. The success that stood out the most was a key logistical issue with their solution to a warehousing and shipping problem. The available warehouse space at the plant was not sufficient, so they contracted offsite warehousing. However, the company noticed that they could barely fill up a tractor-trailer half way with ammunition without breaking weight restrictions, but they could fill it up entirely with guns and not even come close to the limit. Since guns are manufactured in Kentucky and New York, and all ammunition is manufactured in Arkansas, they decided to make a single warehousing and distribution facility in Memphis, TN. This facility allows Remington to put a combination of high-volume, low-weight guns with high weight, low-volume ammunition into one tractor-trailer and ship customized orders to customers. This means more effective trailer space utilization and more efficient and responsive delivery options. To have had the opportunity to receive such logistical mentoring was a wonderful experience. We would highly recommend to all fellow loggies to get out and touring available industries in your local area. K
EXCEPTIONAL RELEASE
95
Milestones LT COL LAWRENCE HAVIRD
WRITES:
MAJ JONDAVID DUVALL
Transitioned from Little Rock AFB to Travis AFB and loving life in CA!
LT COL MICHAEL CANNON
WRITES:
Hola, I just arrived in sunny Rota, Spain to help stand up the 521st AMOG as the deputy. It is exciting to be involved in the transformation of the AMC en route system. Mike Cannon
LT COL DAVID FOOTE
LT COL RICHARD NELSON
COL (RET) JOHN MILLER
WRITES:
I just completed an outstanding tour as the Deputy MXG at Beale and moved to the A4M staff at HQ AFMC. Looking forward to seeing everyone at the conference in October.
COL JOHN BUKOWINSKI
WRITES:
In June 2008, I moved from Kadena AB and took command of the 402d Aircraft Maintenance Group at Robins AFB. WRITES:
After a year in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Ill be moving back to Oklahoma City. Ill be joining the ARINC Aircraft Integration and Modification Division leadership team. Im looking forward to getting back to the great State of Oklahoma and Team Tinker.
WRITES:
In Jun 08, I moved from HQ AETC/A4M to the 2d Maintenance Group at Barksdale AFB. WRITES:
I retired on 10 July from the Air Force Security Assistance Center at Wright-Patt...what an exciting and rewarding tour it’s been for me and my family serving in our great Air Force! Experiences and friends galore that will always be remembered. God speed to all our great logisticians—I have been honored to work with you along the way.
MAJ MICHAEL MILES MR. BILLY GILILLAND ER: MILESTONES
WRITES:
PCSd to Tinker AFB to assume command of the 558th Aircraft Sustainment Squadron and deploy to Joint Special Operations Task Force - Philippines. Good times.
WRITES:
All, just arrived at Wright-Patterson working on the AFMC staff. All is well!
COL SEAN CASSIDY
Recently PCSd from Air Command and Staff College to Yokota AB, Japan. Took command of the 374th Maintenance Squadron on 25 Jun 08. Happy to be a Samurai Warrior!
I have completed my tour at Osan AB, ROK, as the 7 AF/A4 and 607th Air Support Group Commander, and reported in to Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, where I’m assigned to AFMC/A4 as the Chief, Resource Integration Division (A4P). I’m looking forward to seeing familiar and fresh faces at the 2008 LOA National Conference just down the road in Columbus, OH.
MR KURT CONKLIN
COL ROBERT STINE
MAJ TIMOTHY TRIMMELL
WRITES:
WRITES:
Kurt Conklin has moved from Fort Worth, TX where he was working for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in the F-35 Autonomic Logistics Global Sustainment to Beale AFB, CA to assume the position of Lockheed Site Manager for U-2 Field Service.
LT COL DEBORAH MESERVE
WRITES:
After ending a great two years in command of the 325 AMXS at Tyndall, I left for a 365 tour in the IZ as the American advisor to the Iraqi Air Force A9. In the IqAF, the maintainers have their own directorate. By the end of the year, the Iraqis will double the size of their Air Force. They will triple it by Dec 09. It is quite an amazing mission in CAFTT. If you have FMS experience and want an exciting challenge, look for an opportunity to serve MNSTC-I/CAFTT in your future.
96
FA L L
WRITES:
Departed Kirtland AFB, NM as 58th Special Ops Mx Group CC for CENTCOM J4 Mobility Division Chief, MacDill AFB, Fl
COL HERBERT PHILLIPS
WRITES:
Just took the helm of the 386th Expeditionary Maintenance Group at a base in Southwest Asia. Great job, people, and mission....little hot and very dusty.
LT COL ALLAN DAY
WRITES:
Folks, my Air Staff tour is complete June 08, and I am heading to Air War College. Hope to see some fellow loggies in class and I look forward to discovering what the AF has in store next.
COL CAROL JOHNSON
WRITES:
Just finished an outstanding 10 months at ICAF and am off to Travis AFB CA to take command of the 60 MXG. K
2008
LOGISTICS OFFICER ASSOCIATION Post Office Box 2264 Arlington, VA 22202
Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage
PAID
Permit No. 768 Nashville, Tennessee