Upload
lucy-fowler
View
239
Download
8
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Joint Exercise Transportation ProgramWorking Group
Lt Col Brian Livergood
Joint Staff / J7
Monday Agenda
TIME TOPIC/SUBJECT BRIEFER
1230 Welcoming Remarks & Introductions Lt Col Livergood
1235—1345 Program Execution Review Lt Col Livergood
•FY09 Execution Review•FY10-11 Budget Projections•Funding Methodology•Exercise Additions / Issues
1345—1400 Break
1400—1630 JETP Business Practices Lt Col Livergood
•CTP issues•Deconfliction Conference Way Ahead•Questions from the Field
Additional Breaks as Required
Tue Morning Agenda
TIME TOPIC/SUBJECT BRIEFER
0800—1200 Exercise Requirements Briefings COCOM Briefers
•AFRICOM•CENTCOM•EUCOM•JFCOM•NORTHCOM
•PACOM•SOCOM•SOUTHCOM•STRATCOM•TRANSCOM
1300 JWFC Workgroup Begins JWFC
FY09 JETP Execution as of 5 Aug 09
$-
$50,000.0
$100,000.0
$150,000.0
$200,000.0
$250,000.0
$300,000.0
$ in
Th
ou
san
ds
Budget $13,154.5 $25,127.8 $25,314.6 $31,300.6 $68,739.8 $92,790.3 $110,812. $117,557. $138,754. $191,100. $231,108. $259,715.
Expenditures $26.1 $53.2 $354.6 $22,388.0 $22,824.1 $31,618.2 $46,610.9 $57,877.2 $57,877.2 $96,185.9
Executed $5,400.5 $5,428.1 $20,713.6 $77,640.0 $165,146. $167,436. $172,780. $220,799. $220,799. $225,190.
Obligations $5,400.5 $5,428.1 $20,713.6 $75,507.6 $163,207. $162,958. $168,109. $215,998. $215,998. $223,808.
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP
FY09 Budget Review as of 18 Aug 09
• Includes July bills, but not Aug• Reflects CTP distributed (based on requests) NOT CTP Authorized• Great progress with MSC and SDDC billing• Only reflects bills received (don’t know what is still “out there”)
COMMAND BUDGET EXECUTION RATEAFRICOM 30,210,000$ 25,944,879$ 85%
CENTCOM 40,500,000$ 33,722,545$ 79%EUCOM 39,440,000$ 15,888,708$ 40%JFCOM 5,150,000$ 2,337,757$ 45%
NORTHCOM 7,310,000$ 1,450,999$ 20%PACOM 72,070,000$ 52,747,661$ 75%SOCOM 1,260,000$ 1,289,265$ 102%
SOUTHCOM 30,710,000$ 14,177,848$ 39%STRATCOM 2,910,000$ 1,469,680$ 51%TRANSCOM 30,150,000$ 19,911,582$ 65%Grand Total 259,710,000$ 168,940,923$ 64%
FY10-11 Target Budget
• FY10 budget still unstable– HASC proposing a $26M cut to CE2T2, SASC will vote on this in Sep– OSD taxes still unknown
• FY11 planning factors– Reflects a $9M fuel cut (RMD 800)– JETP portion of FY11 CE2 mark unknown (fair share ~ $5M)– TALISMAN SABER on year / BRIGHT STAR off year– Strategic priorities re-alignment
COCOM FY09 adjustment 1New Budget Percentage
FY10.2Target
FY10.2 Budget Percentage FY11.1 Target PERCENT
AFRICOM 30.21$ 9.5% 30.512$ 10.97% 35.73$ 11.7%CENTCOM 40.50$ 23.9% 63.850$ 22.97% 43.40$ 14.2%EUCOM 39.44$ 13.2% 35.986$ 12.94% 46.19$ 15.1%JFCOM 5.15$ 1.6% 4.236$ 1.52% 4.91$ 1.6%NORTHCOM 7.31$ 6.0% 21.320$ 7.67% 26.66$ 8.7%PACOM 72.07$ 20.6% 56.168$ 20.20% 74.91$ 24.5%SOCOM 1.26$ 0.5% 0.500$ 0.18% 0.50$ 0.2%SOUTHCOM 30.71$ 12.2% 31.797$ 11.44% 34.31$ 11.2%STRATCOM 2.91$ 1.0% 3.000$ 1.08% 5.50$ 1.8%TRANSCOM 30.15$ 11.6% 30.660$ 11.03% 33.21$ 10.9%Total 259.715$ 100.00% 278.0295$ 100.00% 305.343$ 100.00%
JETP Funding Methodology?
Throw in a few historical numbers for good housekeeping…
Funding Methodology
FY07 & prior FY08 FY09 +Transparency
Operational Art
Consistency
Strategy-Based
Requirements Roulette
Transparency
Operational Art
Consistency
Strategy-Based
Requirements Roulette
Transparency
Operational Art
Consistency
Strategy-Based
Requirements Roulette
closed collaborative
subjective calculated
variable predictable
low high
low high
closed collaborative
subjective calculated
variable predictable
low high
low high
closed collaborative
subjective calculated
variable predictable
low high
low high
red = sub-optimal green = optimal
8
Program Execution Examples
• No single variable is a good indicator to determine future funding
• Many factors influence the COCOMs ability to execute their program
• Current funding methodology seeks to meet future needs without penalizing for effect of external influences
Execution Rate FY07 FY08
EUCOM 66% 114%
STRATCOM 52% 3.5%
SOUTHCOM 102% 100%
Funds removed at start of FY and then returned in 4QTR—could not execute
AFRICOM using EUCOM budget
Country clearances pulled just prior to major deployment
VCJCS cancelled #1 exercise due to world events
No major issues—program executed as expected
9
Assessing Execution
• Current Metrics are ineffective and do not translate to any meaningful assessment or forecasting tool
• Financial Management Regulation (FMR) OP-5, Attch 7 defines metrics for the “JCS Exercise Program”
– Must report Airlift hrs flown (C-17 equivalent), Sealift days steaming, cost of PH/IT
– Broken down by exercise
• Assessment standard outdated– JETP is no longer a line item in the budget—rolled into CE2T2
– Inconsistency across CE2—only program reporting cost elements instead of program performance or effectiveness
– Legacy mindset—assumes cost of 3 modes of stratlift = cost of EX
• Current FMR requirement hinders development of new metrics– Accounting efforts are focused on maintaining legacy reporting
– Release from outdated requirement enables new thinking
10
Adding New Exercises
• Three new exercises added as CE2 JEP Events– Joint Exercise India (PACOM)
– UNITAS RIVERINE (SOUTHCOM)
– EMERALD WARRIOR (SOCOM)
• Exercise process defined in CJCSI 3500.01F (draft), Joint Training Policy
– COCOM coordinates with its components and TRANSCOM during fall conferences
– COCOM nominates exercise at the Jan Deconfliction conference
– JS J7 reviews for consistency with directives and staffs with Service HQs and financial organizations—writes an assessment
– New exercise announced at Spring WJTSC
– Exercise list finalized during the summer for start of next FY
11
FY10 TAC Codes
TAC EXERCISE TAC EXERCISE TAC EXERCISE TAC EXERCISEAFRICOM USEUCOM USNORTHCOM / NORAD USSOUTHCOM
FE AFRICA ENDEAVOR 10 AF ANATOLIAN FALCON 10 AW AMALGAM ARROW 10 HT BEYOND HORIZONS-CARIBBEAN 10AN AFRICAN LION 10 AR ANGORAN RESOLVE 10 FA AMALGAM FABRIC DART 10 HN BEYOND HORIZONS-CENTAM 10FL FLINTLOCK 10 AU ARRCADE FUSION 10 FN AMALGAM FALCON DART 10 SX ELLIPSE ECHO 10JR JUDICIOUS RESPONSE 10 AS AUSTERE CHALLENGE 10 AC AMALGAM FENCING DART 10 HU FUERZAS ALIADAS-HUMAN 10MF MEDFLAG 10 BT BALTOPS 10 ED ARCTIC EDGE 10 FP FUERZAS ALIAD-PANAMAX 10ML MEDLITE 10 BV BOLD AVENGER 10 AY ARDENT SENTRY 10 FC FUERZAS COMMANDO 10NR NATURAL FIRE 10 BX BRILLIANT MARINER 10 EH ELLIPSE ALPHA 10 AV INTEGRATED ADVANCE 10NP NOBLE PIPER 10 BN BRlILLIANT ARDENT 10 DD FALCON DART 10 HZ NEW HORIZ-PARAGUAY 10PE PHOENIX EXPRESS 10 CM COMBINED ENDEAVOR 10 CC VIBRANT RESPONSE 10 PK PKO AMERICAS 10SA SHARED ACCORD 10 CL COOPERATIVE LANCER 10 VG VIGILANT SHIELD 10 XS SOUTHERN EXCHANGE 10SE SILVER EAGLE 10 1-4 CW COOPERATIVE LONGBOW 10 TW TRADEWINDS 10WC WATC 10 FZ FLEXIBLE RESPONSE 10 UA UNITAS ATLANTIC 10
MR IMMEDIATE RESPONSE 10 UP UNITAS PACIFIC 10JA JACKAL STONE 10 RU UNITAS RIVERINE 10
USCENTCOM JC JUNIPER COBRA 10 USPACOMAT ACCURATE TEST 10 JS JUNIPER STALLION 10 AZ ARCTIC SAREX 10BS BRIGHT STAR 09/10 MU MEDCEUR 10 BL BALIKATAN 10 USSTRATCOMEG EAGER LIGHT 10 NH NOBLE SHIRLEY 10-1/2 CG COBRA GOLD 10 GL GLOBAL LIGHTNING 10ET EAGER TIGER 10 NV NORTHERN VIKING 10 CS COMMANDO SLING 10-(1-4) GT GLOBAL THUNDER 10RE EAGLE RESOLVE 10 RT RAPID TRIDENT 10 SC ELLIPSE CHARLIE 10EV EARLY VICTOR 10 RR REGIONAL RESPONSE 10 FB FREEDOM BANNER 10EL EARNEST LEADER 10 SB SEA BREEZE 10 JN JOINT EXERCISE INDIA 10 USTRANSCOMEC EASTERN CASTLE 10 SH SHARED RESPONSE 10 KE KEEN EDGE 10 JL JLOTS 10 EE EASTERN EAGLE 10 ST STEADFAST NOON 10 KR KEY RESOLVE/FOAL EAGLE 10 TB TURBO ACTIVATION 10EX EASTERN FALCON 10 UR TORGAU 10 TE TEMPEST EXPRESS 10 TD TURBO CADS 10RV EASTERN VALOR 10 TR TROJAN FOOTPRINT 10 1-4 TY TERMINAL FURY 10 TT TURBO DISTRIBUTION 10EP EASTERN VIPER 10 UF ULCHI-FREEDOM GUARDIAN 10EF ELLIPSE FOXTROT 10 VS VALIANT SHIELD 10NC INFERNO CREEK 10NY INHERENT FURY 10 USJFCOMLK INITIAL LINK 10 BF BLUE FLAG 10 JEP Exercise TAC Codes
NG INSPIRED GAMBIT 10 UB UNIFIED ENDEAVOR 10-1 USSOCOM 1st Y= JEP ExerciseTV INTERNAL ADVANCE 10 UE UNIFIED ENDEAVOR 09 1-3 AX ABLE WARRIOR 10 2nd = Second Character-denotes serviceTL INTERNAL LOOK 10 UH UNIFIED ENDEAVOR 10-2 EW EMERALD WARRIOR 10 A ArmyNF NATIVE FURY 10 UJ UNIFIED ENDEAVOR 11-1 F Air ForceRC REGIONAL COOPERATION 109 VF VIRTUAL FLAG 10 M Marine CorpsSN STEADFAST INDICATOR 10 N NavySP STEPPE EAGLE 10 3rd&4th See chart
Exercise Issues
• FY10 funding on 1 OCT 09– If budget is passed and waiting for funds: I can only send out
MIPRs (airlift, sealift, SDDC) subject to availability of funds
– If under a CRA: I can send MIPRs and FADs up to JETP’s authorized funding level for the month
– If no CRA and no budget: everything stops
• Funding Options– Units cash flow CTP, PH, IT, SCCP and JETP will reimburse
– Obligate FY09 funds by 30 Sep to fund travel in first few days of FY10
• MPF ship costs increasing
13
Have You considered using more
IT?
Have You considered using more
IT?
Instead of CTP…
Instead of CTP…
CTP Funding Status
$47,099,393
$35,329,826
$27,467,553
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
$50,000,000
TOTAL CTP AUTHORIZATION TOTAL CTP DISTRIBUTION TOTAL CTP OBLIGATIONS
$
CTP Needs an Overhaul
• JS Lines of Accounting and DTS cross-orgs at the JS level will not continue in FY10
– Too many unintended consequences– Services continued to execute “their own
way”
• In FY10 the Joint Staff will return to sub-allocations (FADs through PBAS) for all CTP, PH, IT, and SCCP (if a TAC cannot be used)
• The remaining question is: Which organizations will receive the FAD?
– COCOMs– Services– MAJCOMs/MACOMs/CSAs
JETP Execution by Cost Components
JETP TOTAL COST
AIRLIFT SEALIFT SUB ALLOCATIONS/DFAS DJAL
AMC(MIPR)
MSC(MIPR)
CommercialCharter
MIL AIR
SDDCUSN Fleet
Charter
Port Handling
Container
Port Handling
DFASDJAL
InlandTransport
Port Handling
28%~$63M
17%~$40M
56%~$120M
ChannelCargo
72%
28%
CTP
SCCP
Port Handling
InlandTransport
Services(Sub Allocated)
DFAS MIPR
CTP
7% 21%
PowerTrack
Channel Cargo
3%
<1%
4%
Sub Allocated
TI-97
A process change here will yield the greatest
impact
17
Current Execution Process
Joint Staff/J7
AREUR COCOMFORSCOM JFCOM FFCUSAFE SOCOM USMC
AMC
MSC
$26.3M
$.06M
$.04M$.98M$.19M$.29M $.57M$.07M$.02M$.38M
SDDC
$.88M
LINER
PH/ITRAIL
COCOMs
• JS J7 executes COCOM budget—sends funds to over 40 agencies
• Inherent inefficiencies due to JS acting as arbitrator between COCOM and components
• COCOM has limited visibility into component spending
18
COA1: FAD to COCOMs
Joint Staff/J7
AREUR FORSCOM JFCOM FFCUSAFE SOCOM USMC
AMC MSC SDDC
COCOM
COCOMs
• Maximizes COCOM’s visibility of costs, flexibility to execute their budget, and overall control of costs
• JS J7 continues to directly fund 80% of costs and shifts 20% to the COCOMs
• COCOM best positioned to authorize and distribute to their components
– COCOM validates TPFDD and knows appropriate level of funding– Eliminates JS as middle man adjudicating COCOM vs. component needs
MIPRFAD
19
TAC
COA 2: FAD to Service HQs
• Determining appropriate level of funding by Service is inaccurate—COCOMs plan at the cost component top line
• COCOM loses visibility of funds—current concerns with SIF are propagated
• COCOMs must submit quarterly breakout, by Service, for CTP, PH, IT & SCCP to J7
• J7 sends FAD to Service HQ for further distribution to units
• Service HQ will report status of funds to JS Comptroller & J7
20
Joint Staff/J7
COCOMsARMY
units
FFCUSAF
units
USMC
AMC
MSC
SDDC
COCOMs
units units CSAs
MIPRTAC
FAD
Other Funding Options
• JS suballocates to individual major commands or agencies
– Method used in the past and deemed ineffective– COCOMs had very limited visibility of component spending
and no control to shift funds between exercises– Inefficient reporting process due to disparate agencies,
accounting systems, and organizational layers between JS and organizations
• JS MIPRs funds to COCOMs– Legal constraint prevents redistributing a MIPR
21
Funding Distribution Way Ahead
• Funding is for CTP, PH, IT, SCCP only
– Airlift, sealift, SDDC funding remains direct from JS J7
• JS J7 will continue to perform overall JETP management consistent with CE2 management
• Promote a simplified execution process that empowers the COCOMs
• Goal is to make CTP and other programs more responsive
– Faster funding upfront– More units spending JETP funds
instead of their own– Greater accuracy in accounting
• COCOM & SERVICE POSITIONS…
22
AFRICOM
CENTCOM
EUCOM
JFCOM
NORTHCOM
PACOM
SOCOM
SOUTHCOM
STRATCOM
TRANSCOM
USAF
ARMY
USMC
NAVY
Transportation Alternatives?
The latest hybrid concept car
24
Issue 08-014: Scheduling resources to support combatant command events is challenging given daily operations tempo, personnel, fiscal, and time constraints and multiple events executing during the same period. Need overall deconfliction resolution process for Combatant Command Exercises.
Discussion: Limited Service resources (forces, equipment, exercise support) preclude the ability to support competing combatant command exercises. Without a force management process, Services will be forced to prioritize / reduce support for competing combatant command exercises. Current exercise schedules have major combatant command exercises back-to-back or overlapping, limiting the Services’ ability to support. In the future, exercises must be more evenly distributed across the fiscal year, or Service support must be scaled back or possibly cancelled.
Endstate: Robust resolution process involving all stakeholders to effectively deconflict resources supporting combatant command exercises. Deliverable product from the conference is a deconflicted and validated exercise schedule. Unresolved issues are highlighted for Stakeholder Leadership Team consideration and combatant command leadership awareness.
POA&M: JS J-7 lead a USJFCOM hosted conference to focus on future year planning 2-5 years out, deconflicting three areas: USJFCOM Distributed Training Team support to combatant commands, USTRANSCOM support to combatant commands, and validating supportability of exercise schedules by forces, lift assets, and budgets. Combatant commands, Services, and components identify shortfalls and present courses of action to minimize risk to the exercise community.
OPRs: JS J-7; OCRs: COCOMs, Services
Deconfliction of Combatant Command Exercise Resources
AUG 08
Presented atCE2 SLT for review
DEC 08
USJFCOM update CE2 SLT
On Process
USJFCOM-sponsored Stakeholder Scheduling
Meeting
JAN/FEB 09 MAR 09
WJTSC Scheduling WGCE2 SLT resolve conflicts
AUG 09
JS J7 updates SLT on conference agenda
JS J7 lead/USJFCOM hosted conference
JAN/FEB 09
Briefer: Lt Col Livergood
Deconfliction Conference Basics
• Three main building blocks for the conference
– Deconflict support teams from JWFC, TRANSCOM, STRATCOM
– Identify exercise execution issues using a JTIMS graphic layout
– JTIMS stratlift module updates and modifications
• Conference takeaways:
– Support teams deconflicted
– Identify where there are execution problems in upcoming years
– Services provide an assessment of supportability
– Inform senior leaders and prepare for March WJTSCs
• What it will NOT do…
– Prioritize exercises 1 to N across COCOMs
– Line-by-line scrub of JTIMS for requirements
– Move exercises (unless rep is empowered to do so)
Conference Skeleton
• Location: Hosted at JFCOM• Timing:
– 3 day conference with Mon and Fri as travel days– End of Jan
• Expectation: Open dialogue between COCOMs and Services discussing requirements and supportability
• AgendaMONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY
AMJWFC Support Deconfliction
TRANSCOM, STRATCOM
Support Deconfliction
FY+2 COCOM Exercise Portfolio
Review
JTIMS Stratlift Module business
rules
Travel Day Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch
PMJWFC Support Deconfliction
FY+1 COCOM Exercise Portfolio
Review
FY+3 COCOM Exercise Portfolio
Review Travel Day
Deconfliction Conference Focal Point
Deconfliction Conference Way Ahead
• Open Discussion• COCOM & SERVICE
POSITIONS…– Agree / Disagree
– Alternatives
28
AFRICOM
CENTCOM
EUCOM
JFCOM
NORTHCOM
PACOM
SOCOM
SOUTHCOM
STRATCOM
TRANSCOM
USAF
ARMY
USMC
NAVY
Questions from the Field
Question #1
• Who approves a new joint exercise?
– The ONLY person approving a joint exercise is the combatant commander
– The Joint Staff will provide an assessment of whether it meets the criteria of a CE2 JEP Event identified in CJCSI 3500.01F. If the JS disagrees with the COCOM, funding availability can be adjudicated by OSD (P&R). This process parallels CE2 governance
– Services are given an opportunity to provide a supportability assessment back to the COCOM
Question #2
• Is it possible to deploy foreign military on a commercially chartered or U.S. Military aircraft in support of an exercise?
– CJCSI 3511.01a only addresses foreign nationals flying CTP—they must be permanently assigned to the command to use CTP
– Although not addressed by CJCSI, the practice of using US aircraft or AMC contracted aircraft is not advisable nor supported by AMC.
Question #3
• Who resolves a discrepancy between CTP Message allocated totals based on USTRANSCOM city pair costs versus what the units are submitting based on their Carlton office?
– the COCOM is in the driver seat to determine how much to spend on an exercise
– The TRANSCOM message is used as the baseline for CTP costs because it is based on validated COCOM TPFDD requirements.
– If the supported COCOM agrees to the additional charges/requirements, an email to the JETP manager from the COCOM acknowledging and requesting the higher amount is all that is needed
Question #4
• Can members of CYBER COMMAND use CTP to travel to the annual Star Trek Convention?
– NO! And it doesn’t matter that your Exercise Control Group is located in the transporter chamber near the Klingon display.
Tue Morning Agenda
TIME TOPIC/SUBJECT BRIEFER
0800—1200 Exercise Requirements Briefings COCOM Briefers
•AFRICOM•CENTCOM•EUCOM•JFCOM•NORTHCOM
•PACOM•SOCOM•SOUTHCOM•STRATCOM•TRANSCOM
1300 JWFC Workgroup Begins JWFC
J7 Points of Contact
• Lt Col Brian Livergood, [email protected]
703-695-5745 (DSN 225)
• Mr. Caleb [email protected]
703-693-6700 (DSN 223)
• Ms. Cristina [email protected]
703-695-5546 (DSN 225)