slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Overseas Contingency Operations Supplemental Process Brief Professional Development Institute May 2009 Mr. Rick McKutch PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Overseas Contingency Operations Supplemental Process Brief Professional Development Institute May 2009 Mr. Rick McKutch

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

Overseas Contingency Operations Supplemental Process Brief Professional Development Institute May 2009 Mr. Rick McKutch - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 230 Views
  • Uploaded on

Overseas Contingency Operations Supplemental Process Brief Professional Development Institute May 2009 Mr. Rick McKutchin/FMB-11. Overview. Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Estimate cost of continuing Contingency Operations (CONOPS) Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Overseas Contingency Operations Supplemental Process Brief Professional Development Institute May 2009 Mr. Rick McKutch' - hija


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Overseas Contingency OperationsSupplemental Process BriefProfessional Development InstituteMay 2009Mr. Rick McKutchin/FMB-11

overview
Overview
  • Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)
    • Estimate cost of continuingContingency Operations (CONOPS)
      • Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)
      • Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
  • Recapitalization (Reset)
    • Restore equipment returning from OIF/OEF
    • Equipment replacement
    • Sustainment to include munitions and consumables backfill
  • Other
    • Transportation surcharges
    • Equipment to counter emerging threats
    • Over-Strength
  • Current FY 2009 and FY 2010 amounts reflect integrated BSO estimates and current COST model projections as approved by OSD/OMB
each year presents different challenges associated with supplemental funding
Each year presents different challenges associated with Supplemental funding.
  • 2001 / 2002
  • Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) created to respond to 9/11 attack
  • Operation Enduring Freedom
  • “No-year” funds
  • 2004
  • Originally premised on post-war sustainment level of support
  • Situation changed for OIF-2, where Marine Corps and Navy personnel rotated in to replace Army units mid-year
  • Absorbed $1.6B GWOT costs from baseline
  • 2005
  • Funded all OIF/OEF combat ops
  • Restored equip returning from OIF/OEF
  • Funded: higher baseline fuel and WCF cash drawdown; USMC Force Structure Change – 2 add’l rifle BNs
  • Noble Eagle (Homeland Defense) funded in baseline
  • 2003
  • Included all OIF/OEF combat operations
  • All incremental costs funded

$3.8B DON

$3.8B Navy (DERF)

$27M USMC (DERF)

2001

$11.5B DON

Operations - $7.6B USN

Investment - $0.5B USN

Operations- $3.3B USMC

Investment- $0.1B USMC

$6.0B DON

Operations - $2.9B USN

Investment - $0.3B USN

Operations - $2.5B USMC

Investment - $0.3B USMC

$2.8B DON

Operations -$2.0B USN

Investment - $0.5B USN

Operations - $0.3B USMC

Investment – 3.5M USMC

2002

$13.3B DON

Operations - $4.2B USN

Investment - $1.3B USN

Operations - $4.3B USMC

Investment - $3.5B USMC

each year presents different challenges associated with supplemental funding4
Each year presents different challenges associated with Supplemental funding.
  • 2006
  • Request approved by OSD based on similar OPTEMPO as 2005
  • Did not support NECC/ GWOT initiatives
  • Funded: MilPers and O&M full request and higher baseline fuel.
  • Large initial request to fund USMC reset costs (vehicles & weps)
  • 2008
  • Original Request based on similar OPTEMPO as 2007, excluding surge
  • Continues to address DON reset
  • Amended Supp Request addressed accelerated Navy reset and surge extension
  • 2007
  • FY07 included surge force requirement
  • Addresses Navy reset
  • Support for NECC initiatives
  • Includes fuel and utility re-pricing
  • Funded OSD/ Congressional baseline OPTEMPO reductions
  • Requested2009
  • Request based on similar OPTEMPO as 2008, excluding surge
  • Maintains current level of effort
  • Continues to address DON reset
  • Reflects initial shift from Iraq to Afghanistan

$17.0B DON

Operations - $7.4B USN

Investment - $1.4B USN

Operations - $5.6B USMC

Investment - $2.6B USMC

$25.5B DON

Operations - $7.8B USN

Investment - $6.2B USN

Operations - $6.5B USMC

Investment - $5.0B USMC

$24.6B DON

Operations - $7.7B USN

Investment - $4.0B USN

Operations - $5.6B USMC

Investment - $7.4B USMC

$16.8B DON

Operations - $6.2B USN

Investment - $1.0B USN

Operations - $4.8B USMC

Investment - $4.7B USMC

Bridge Received $7.3B

Remaining Request $9.7B

each year presents different challenges associated with supplemental request funding
Each year presents different challenges associated with Supplemental/Request funding.
  • Requested2010
  • Relatively steady-state OPTEMPO
  • Maintains current overall level of effort
  • Continues to address DON reset with limitations
  • Continues assumed Iraq drawdown and increased OPTEMPO in Afghanistan
  • TBD 2011
  • OCO funding expected to continue at a reduced level

$15.3B DON

Operations - $7.4B USN

Investment - $1.6B USN

Operations - $4.5B USMC

Investment - $1.7B USMC

$ TBD DON

Operations - $ TBD USN

Investment - $ TBD USN

Operations - $ TBD USMC

Investment - $ TBD USMC

guidance through fy 2009
Guidance through FY 2009
  • DoD Financial Management Regulations (Vol 12, Chap 23): Supplemental funding may be requested to cover costs resulting from unanticipated events
    • “DoD Components normally do not budget for contingency operations…”
  • Prior Year OUSD(C) Guidance:
    • In FY 2005, “the Department will identify the unfunded incremental requirements in support of OIF, Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), and OEF.” Did not forward ONE request to Congress.
    • In FY 2006, “emergency supplemental request for [CONOPS] address the incremental costs above the baseline funding needed to support specific forces and capabilities required to execute OIF and OEF.” Does not include funding for ONE.
  • OUSD(C) guidance for the FY 2007 through FY 2009 Supplemental submission:
    • “This supplemental will address only those incremental costs which are “emergency” in nature and are specifically required to prosecute mission objectives during FY 2007. Costs that can be deferred without immediate operational impact will not be included.”
    • Supplemental to include:
      • “…incremental costs above the baseline funding needed to support specific forces and capabilities required to execute OIF, OEF, and Operation Jump Start (OJS).”
      • “…requested construction projects must be in Iraq or Afghanistan and be in direct support of OIF/OEF.”
    • The request for supplemental funds will not:
      • “Restore program funding reduced to finance GWOT costs”
      • “Restore Congressional reductions”
guidance for fy 2010 and fy 2011
Guidance for FY 2010 and FY 2011*
  • Guidance for FY 2010
    • Geographic area/Theater of Operatuions = Iraq and Afghanistan
      • Persian Gulf; Gulf Nations, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, the Horn of Africa, Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean
    • Major Equipment: Replacement only for items not programmed for replacement in the FYDP; must be executable within 12-months
    • Aircraft replacement: Combat losses occurring in theater of operations
    • Munitions: Replenishment of munitions expended in combat if existing stock are inadequate
    • Operations: Within theater direct incremental costs
    • Exclusions: Training equipment; SLEPS; Family Support Initiatives; personnel above the level requested in the President’s Budget
  • Guidance for FY 2011
    • PR-11 Guidance: *Move items not directly related to operations in Iraq / Afghanistan / Horn of Africa into the baseline TOA
how estimates are formed o m milpers
How Estimates are Formed (O&M / MILPERS)
  • Budget Submitting Offices Provide estimates via PBIS and OP-5’s
  • FMB-1 Contingency Branch models the annual cost using the Contingency Operations Support Tool (COST) Model
    • Fleet schedule inputs, both afloat and ground based units (ie SEABEE)
    • Estimates for the number of personnel filling IA positions
    • OPTEMPO standardized with OSD guidance
    • Navy requirements are incremental to baseline
  • Comparison made between COST and BSO estimate
  • Changes or overrides to COST made as needed.
contingency operations support tool
Contingency Operations Support Tool
  • Sponsored by OUSD (Comptroller)
  • COST Team
    • Comptroller
    • Joint Staff
    • Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines
    • SOCOM, NORTHCOM
    • Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
cost business rules
COST Business Rules
  • Incremental Costs
  • No Munitions
  • No Procurement
  • Credit Peacetime OPTEMPO
  • Special Pays for Active Duty Personnel
  • Full Pay plus Special Pays for Reserve Personnel
  • Credit Reserve Drill and Training
  • Transportation by Category, Mode and Route
reset recapitalization
Reset/Recapitalization
  • Definition: “Actions taken to restore units to a desired level of combat capability commensurate with the units’ future mission. It encompasses maintenance and supply activities that restore and enhance combat capability to unit and pre-positioned equipment that was destroyed, damaged, stressed, or worn out beyond economic repair due to combat operations by repairing, rebuilding, or procuring replacement equipment. These maintenance and supply activities involve Depot (Sustainment) and Field Level (e.g., Organizational and Intermediate) repairs/overhauls centrally managed to specified standards. Included are Procurement, RDT&E, and Operation and Maintenance funded major repairs/overhauls and recapitalization (Rebuild or Upgrade) that enhances existing equipment through the insertion of new technology or restores selected equipment to a zero-miles/zero-hours condition.”
how estimates are formed investment
How Estimates are Formed (Investment)
  • Budget Submitting Offices provide estimates
    • Input spreadsheet - “Color Top” (i.e. “Green Top”)
    • Narrative Justifications
  • N80 Reset list
  • Naval Expeditionary Command Enterprise input
  • MIP/NIP program manager input
  • Emergent technologies
  • CENTCOM/USMC MILCON requirements
n80 reset list examples
N80 Reset List (Examples)
  • Aviation
    • USN New Aircraft: F/A-18, MH-60R, C-40
    • USN Upgrades: F-18, P-3, EA-6B
    • USMC New Aircraft: V-22, KC-130J, H-1
    • USMC Upgrades: AV-8B, F/A-18, C-130, helos
  • Weapons
    • USN: Tomahawk, MK38 Gun mount mods, JSOW
    • USMC: LAV upgrades, HIMARS launchers and rockets, Javelin, TOW missiles, Hellfire, Pioneer
  • Ammunition
    • USN/USMC: Small Arms/Landing Party ammo, Airborne Rockets
  • Other Equipment
    • USN: Construction Equipment, Tactical Vehicles, Night Vision Equipment
    • USMC: Unit Ops Centers, Radios, Night Vision Equipment, Tactical Vehicles, Littoral Battlespace Sensing, Al Asad Facility Transfers, EOD Systems, Construction Equipment
slide15
NECE
  • Vehicles
    • MRAP
    • HMMWV
    • Passenger Carrying Vehicles
  • Construction Equipment
    • Earth Moving Equipment
    • Cranes
    • Miscellaneous Construction Equipment
  • Standard Boats
    • 7m Rigid Inflatable Boat (RIB)
    • Riverine Multi-mission Craft
    • Riverine Command and Control craft
    • Force Protection (small and large)
emergent technologies
Emergent Technologies
  • Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles
  • CAT I Representatives CAT II Representatives CAT III
  • HMMWV after IED MRAP After IED
milcon examples
MILCON (Examples)
  • Horn of Africa – Infrastructure Camp Lemonier, DJIBOUTI
    • Electrical Power Production
    • Water Production
    • HQ Dining Facility
    • Fuel Farm
    • Full Length Taxiway
  • Grow the Force (FY 09 and prior)
    • Support for Blount Island
    • Intel Battalion
    • JIEDDO Battle Courses
  • Child Development Centers
  • FY 2010 = 0
cost of war reporting
Cost of War Reporting
  • Importance of accurate and timely reporting
  • What is information used for?
  • To monitor current year OCO funding execution
  • Justify future requirements through validation of program execution
  • Who needs it?
  • DON; OSD; DFAS ; OMB and Congress
  • Due to FMB-1 – 8th of each month
  • Due to DFAS – 16th of each month
cost of war improvement project
Cost of War Improvement Project
  • Cost of War Improvement Team established to analyze the OCO CoW estimation and reporting methodologies
  • Implementation Complete
    • Conducted site visits to both Navy Fleets and their subordinate operating units, personnel commands, acquisition commands, and regional commands
    • Also conducted site visits to USMC systems commands and expeditionary units
    • Issued guidance in September 2008 to Department of the Navy activities
      • Summarize best practices and data commonalities
      • Standardize cost reporting and modeled methodologies
      • Ensure reliable, repeatable, and defendable output
  • Compliance Validation / Testing Underway Now
    • Ensure BSO’s have implemented proper procedures to capture CoW accounting data
    • Preliminary Findings will be presented to Senior Navy leadership