UFMCS University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies
UIC unit identification code
UJTL universal joint task list
UROC U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Reachback Operations Center
UQ Unified Quest
USAASC U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USACIL U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory
USAES U.S. Army Engineer School
USAFMSA U.S. Army Force Management Support Activity
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
USAPHC U.S. Army Public Health Command
USAR U.S. Army Reserve
USARC U.S. Army Reserve Command
USARSO U.S. Army South
USASAC U.S. Army Security Assistance Command
USD Undersecretary of Defense
USD(AT&L) Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
USF-I U.S. Forces-Iraq
USG U.S. government
USMA U.S. Military Academy
USMC U.S. Marine Corps
USTRANSCOM U.S. Transportation Command
VCSA Vice Chief of Staff of the Army
WRAP warfighter rapid acquisition program
Terms No entries for this section.
1 FM 1-01 was developed by the ARCIC-Forward Directorate; since then, proponency for this doctrinal publication has been passed to the CAC.
2 Commanding General (CG) TRADOC Directive, TRADOC GF Study, 3 November 2008.
3 Primary Title 10 functions include: recruiting; organizing the force; manning; training; equipping and fielding; maintaining; supplying; administration; procurement; construction; and research and development. Title 5, Title 22, and Title 32 also apply to some GF organizations.
4 FM 1-01, pp iii, 1-01.
5 During the course of the Generating Force Study, HQDA realigned MDW as an operational Army organization.
6 Data provided by HQDA G-37. The totals include the combatant command ASCCs, as well as Space and Missile Defense Command and U.S. Army Special Operations Command.
7 HQDA G-37/FMP briefing, "Army Global Force Pool – Army Campaign Plan Decision Point #99," 16 September 2008. This presentation also underscores the state of flux in language and definitions presented in this paragraph.
8 The Army Force Management School (AFMS) now acknowledges the blended organization as a distinct organizational model in operating force/GF analysis. AFMS identifies these organizations as "blended:" Military District of Washington, Intelligence and Security Command, Criminal Investigation Command, Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, Army Materiel Command, Space and Missile Defense Command, and Corps of Engineers.
9 The ongoing Army Institutional Adaptation effort has identified these four Core Enterprises: readiness, materiel, human capital, and services and infrastructure.
10 The operational problem statement was defined during the course of the Unified Quest (UQ) 2008 capstone wargame in May 2008.
11 The ICT did not include representatives from ATEC, MDW, or USMA, based on their nominal involvement in support to operations.
12 GF organizations support ARFORGEN, but they do not participate as units in the ARFORGEN readiness cycle.
13 An additional 256 OFTC entities are Army Prepositioned Stock (APS) materiel, managed by AMC, the Office of the Surgeon General, and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). APS consists of protected go-to-war assets. Therefore, APS materiel can't be accounted for as a unit with personnel, but as equipment sets only. APS is accounted for by AMC, U.S. Army Medical Materiel Agency (USAMMA), and DLA.
14 Due to the high number of its personnel being deployed and redeployed, one major GF organization, USACE, has now established its own deployment center for active Army and RC military, government civilians, and contractors going to Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than sending them through the CONUS Replacement Centers. The USACE Deployment Center is operated by the Middle East District at Winchester, Virginia. See http://www.tam.usace.army.mil/UDC/index.asp and USACE Transatlantic Programs white paper, "Deployment Center opens at TAC for those headed to Iraq and Afghanistan," not dated. USACE had determined that benefit was worth the cost to operate this in-house capability; note that some Deployment Center tasks are contracted out.
15 The information on FEST-A/M is drawn primarily from the executive summary of the USACE concept plan to support USACE FFE.
16 ERDC's Tele-engineering Operations Center (TEOC) and Engineering Infrastructure and Intelligence Reachback Center (EI2RC) were recently merged to become the USACE Reachback Operations Center. The TEOC was one of the earliest formal GF reachback enablers, established in the 1990s to better support deployed forces, notably those operating in the former Yugoslavia.
17 The information in this section is drawn from the USACE executive summary for the CETAD concept plan (2008) and briefing materials associated with it.
18 USACE News Release, 29 September 2009, http://www.tam.usace.army.mil/MED09-11-30-03.asp.
19 Information on the IMCOM BASOPS concept is sourced from Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM)/IMCOM information papers and briefings.
20 RSGs are being formed through conversion of corps support groups and area support groups. As of 25 February 2009, 14 RSGs have deployed as units to fill requirements as corps support groups and rear area operations centers. The first request and sourcing of RSGs to fulfill their normal assigned mission in theaters of operations will occur in FY2010.
21 U.S. Army News Release, Army Public Affairs Office, 22 September 2006.
22 AMC briefing, "The Generating Force Forward," Assistant Chief of Staff, G-5, March 2009.
23 Terminology has been in flux. LSE once was more generic, and applied to the concept of a forward-deployed sustainment asset that integrated logistics efforts for the deployed force; this has since largely evolved into the AFSBn. The term LSE is now reserved for the AMC logistics element that each supports a Corps at their home station (Fort Hood, Fort Lewis, and Fort Bragg). Note, for example, the transition from FM 63-11, Logistics Support Element, to FMI 4-93.41, Army Field Support Brigade Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures.
24 The establishment of forward field maintenance and repair facilities is itself an example of GF organizational adaptation and expeditionary quality. Examples include several service centers in Balad, Iraq operated by Army Field Support Battalion-IZ; the Stryker repair facility in Qatar under AFSB-Southwest Asia; and the small arms and information operations support centers in Bagram, Afghanistan under AFSB-Afghanistan. Backup field maintenance in Afghanistan is also performed at Kandahar, Kabul, and Bagram under AFSB-Afghanistan direction.
25 Army field support battalions and LSEs generally number about 30 personnel and a variable number of augmentees, while BLSTs number between 9 and 14 personnel.
26 LOGCAP is governed by Army Regulation 700-137. "Combat service support" is now an obsolete term, replaced by the term "sustainment," but is still found in documentation published prior to this change.
27 LOGCAP is not just a contingency contracting vehicle; it is also used to exploit corporate commercial capabilities in support of current and future force development.
28 LOGCAP Executive Summary briefing, 25 April 2008.
30 Contingency Contracting Structure and Growth briefing, Mr. Jeffrey P. Parsons, Director of Contracting, ASC, 21 September 2007, with specific numbers updated by HQDA G-3/5/7, as of 27 August 2009, in order to reflect April 2009 Army structure approved totals. In August 2009, the VCSA approved these 256 authorizations in the Contract Administration FDU, which will be reflected in the next MTOE update: 158 active Army/74 ARNG/24 USAR. By this time, the ACC was established and contracting assets were realigned from ASC.
31 The 408th, 409th, 410th, 411th, 412d, and 413th Contracting Support Brigades are aligned to the AORs of Central Command, European Command, Southern Command, the subunified command in Korea, Northern Command, and Pacific Command, respectively.
32 The Army Contracting Agency merged into the ACC as these regional commands were being established.
33 "Army establishes new contracting units," Army Logistician, November-December 2006.
34 The Army established contracting force structure with the approval and resourcing of an FDU package initiated by the commander of the ACC. AMC recommended expansion of this MTOE force structure based upon mission requirements and the recommendations of a task force jointly chaired by AMC and the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology.
35 Report of the Commission on Army Acquisition and Program Management in Expeditionary Operations, 31 October 2007.
36 In the 1990s, the Army had five general officers in key contracting positions, but none by the time that OIF began. The overall number of contracting personnel also dropped considerably in the 1990s as those elements within the institutional Army were taxed as billpayers for the Army reduction in force after Operation Desert Storm.
37 "Panel sets course for Army contracting overhaul," Government Executive.com, Elizabeth Newell, 2 November 2007 (http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1107/110207e1.htm).
38 Prior to this decision, the Army Contracting Agency was a field operating agency reporting to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology.
39 Army Logistician, November-December 2006.
40 Executive Director, ACC.
41 The first transfer of authority of CSBs from ASC to ACC took place just 3 months after the ACC activation, with a change of command ceremony of the 408th CSB in Kuwait.
42 Formation and training of HTTs also take place at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
43 Several factors inhibit recruiting and maintaining HTT personnel, but perhaps the most significant one is simply the dearth of qualified candidates who are interested in or willing to deploy to a theater of conflict to support military operations.
44 2009 Army Posture Statement.
45 Effective 1 October 2009, the U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine and the U.S. Army Veterinary Command were combined to form the U.S. Public Health Command (USAPHC). The purpose of a unified USAPHC is to enhance and protect the health, fitness, and well-being of Soldiers, their families, and the Department of the Army.
46 The discussions in chapter 6 of the rapid equipping force, rapid fielding initiative, and Task Force Odin are relevant examples of improvement in GF expeditionary quality.
47 TRADOC originally described a center of excellence as "a premier organization that creates the highest standards of achievement in an assigned sphere of expertise by generating synergy through effective and efficient combination and integration of functions while reinforcing the unique requirements and capabilities of the branches." On 3 December 2009, CG TRADOC approved this definition for a Center of Excellence: "Designated command or organization within an assigned area of expertise that delivers current warfighting requirements, identifies future capabilities, integrates assigned DOTMLPF dimensions, and presents resource-informed, outcomes-based recommendations to the TRADOC Commanding General." Note that AR 5-22,