1. Combat Service Support Division
Welcome
United States Army Human Resources Command
29 Jun 05

2. Briefing Purpose
To provide information to and address key officer personnel issues affecting Combat Service Support officers.
Provide information to assist you in mentoring junior officers and answer your questions.

3. What I Want You to Take Away!
Don’t break contact with us. If we can’t get a hold of you, we can’t communicate with you! The Army Human Resources Command (HRCOM) is changing how it does business, stay current.
Must have an Officer Retention Program. Commanders and HRCOM must shape realistic expectations and preferences.
Priorities are clear:
GWOT
Modularity
“Readiness is Paramount”
Personnel Assignment and Professional Development policies and programs are in a great state of flux.
Importance of mentoring and counseling officers

4. Briefing Outline
Mission
Organization
OPMS III
OER/Rating Philosophy
Career Management
Miscellaneous

5. ASSIGN THE RIGHT OFFICER TO THE RIGHT JOB AT THE RIGHT TIME.
Mission
ASSIGN THE RIGHT OFFICER TO THE RIGHT JOB AT THE RIGHT TIME.
CSSD CREDIBILITY
Reputation
Integrity
Commitment
Fairness
Requires
TASKS
Meet Army Requirements!
Officer Professional Development
Officer Personal Desires
To Accomplish

6. OPERATING DIRECTORATES Information Technology Combat Service Support
Our Organization
ARMY G1
CG HRC
OPERATING DIRECTORATES
DIRECTOR, OPMD
IMB
Ms Brown
BG Hernandez
EPMD
TAGD
Information Technology
OPMD
PERSINSD
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
COL Roncoli
MSB
Ms Hollander
Management Support
LDD
FAD
CAD
CSAD
CSSD
OPS/PLANS
COL Stallings
Mr. Kendall
COL Martin
COL Robertson
COL Curl
COL Fix
Education & Strategic
Change
Functional Area
Assignments
Combat Arms
Assignments
Combat Support
Assignments
Combat Service Support
Assignments
Operations and Plans
(“S3 Shop”)
SMD
COLs DIVISION
HSD
WOD
LTC McGarrity
COL Wilson
COL Allen
CW5 Jenkins
Medical Specialist
Assignments
Warrant Officer
Assignments
8 Assignment Divisions
1 Operations Division
1 Officer Professional Development Division
Special Units
Colonel Assignments
As of 10 DEC 04

7. CSSD Organization Colonel’s Division
COL Curl
Colonel’s Division
Division Chief QM
LTC Hamilton
LTC Kennedy XO TC
LTC Heibel
LTCMorrow
LTC(P) Gardner
LTC(P) O’Connor
LTC Gill
LTC Hagan
COL Yocum
FA 90
Branch Chief
QM Branch Chief
OD Branch Chief
TC Branch Chief
AG Branch Chief
FI Branch Chief OD
LTC Cantolina
Mailing Address:: Telephone: Branch Telephone Numbers:
Commander, HRCOM DSN: / QM (AHRC-OPC-Q): x8119/8123
ATTN: AHRC-OPC COMM: (703) / OD (AHRC-OPC-O): x8122/2623
200 Stovall Street FAX : DSN /8025 TC (AHRC-OPC-T): x5290/5291
Alexandria, VA FAX: COMM (703) AG (AHRC-OPC-A): x5272/8106
FI (AHRC-OPC-F): x5293/0332
FA 90 (AHRC-OPC-L): x5262/7494
As of June 2005

8. OPMS III Briefing Outline Mission / Organization
Officer Evaluation Report
Career Management
Miscellaneous

9. OPMS 2. “Dual-track” system. No career fields OPMS 2 to OPMS XXI/3
Driven by environmental changes
Required Officer Management changes to:
Increase Warfighting readiness
Develop both specialists and operators
Endstate - 4 career field-based officer management system
Must change to better support a Joint and Expeditionary Campaign Quality Army
Let me set the context for our current system.
OPMS 2 was implemented in 1985, the first review since Principle outcome was a “dual-track” system—all officers if not working in their branch could work in their functional area.
1996, Gen Reimer,directed OPMS XXI Review. Several environmental dynamics drove the review--the Cold War drawdown, as well as 3 major legislations (Goldwater-Nichols 1986, Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act 1990, and Title VII and XI legislation for AC/RC ’92/’93).
These acts created serious structure-inventory mismatches. Field Grades were overstructured auths and could meet only 75% of Army reqts.
Skills were not aligned with requirements —MI, SC and Log were significantly understrength. Combat arms filled most branch immaterial positions and 2/3s were working outside their branch.
Readiness suffered. Officers were being pulled to meet other reqts too rapidly.
Majors highlight the challenge--fewer major jobs available, created a queue, and with a higher demand for majors after Bn XO/S3 time to meet legislated requirements, many received only 12 months. Average Bn Cmd selects were only getting 1 yr in key major positions—today we’re almost at 3 yrs.
FA skills produced limited deeply experienced specialists; almost none were promoted (except Army Acquisition Corps). Most stayed on the command track, gained little experience, averaging 8-10 years between FA assignments. Senior Leadership recognized a need to develop increased depth in both warfighters and specialists.
OPMS 21, today’s OPMS 3 is a 4 career field system for FGs where 75% of officers serve in the OP CF, their branch, and the rest in a FA --not both.
While this system is generally working as intended, it’s being impacted by restructuring, rebalancing, and stabilization and needs to adjust to support a Joint and Expeditionary Campaign quality Army.

10. Strategic View Where We Are Today… Where We Are Headed???
IOCF
ISCF
OSCF
OPCF
4 Army Career Fields
Functionally Aligned…Joint Experienced
Professionally Developed Adaptable Leaders
Flexible Career Paths… Increased Stability
Skills Based…Breadth and Depth
Deep Bench…Lifelong Learning
Robust Incentives…Lifetime of Service
This slide highlights where we are and where we believe we’re headed.
Shift from today’s 4 CFs that are aligned principally for promotion management, to functionally aligned CFs with emphasis on increased joint experience to enhance joint warfighting skills. This would require expanding our current joint rules to increase opportunity and to identify and develop depth in special skills that serve repetitively in joint assignments—for example, strategic intell and faos. Additionally, we look to begin joint officer development as early as CPT.
We would shift from a bureaucratic, prescriptive management system to a less prescriptive professionally-tailored system that would provide opportunity to serve in a wide range of assignments all important to a campaign quality army while reducing turbulence with force stabilization as the foundation.
We would shift from preference driven to skills based assignments to meet army requirements while developing breadth, officers able to do many things well, and depth, a pool of specialists—experts developed in their field through repetitive assignments where the army requires these special skills.
This would include shifting to flexible timelines which allow us to grow a deeper bench of strategic leaders through the opportunity for lifelong learning—education opportunities as well as 360 assessments. Additionally, this would explore the merits of moving from our current “up or out” to a ‘perform and stay” system.
Finally, we must continue to recruit and retain the all-volunteer Army. The current capacity to provide officer incentives is greatly limited, and reflects little substantive change over the past three decades. We need to develop a menu of incentives to buy the Future Force now. These incentives need to be targeted to the specific interests for officers in different times in their career.

11. Summary of Recommendations
Develop Skills: Functionally align skills
Career Paths
Adopt a new Officer Development Model
Provide less prescriptive development
Synchronize Professional Military Education with Civilian Education
Modify Career Field Designation (CFD) Process
Recruit and Retain all Volunteer Force: Develop intrinsic and extrinsic incentives
Develop skills. This construct is intended to align Army functions, possibly reduce CFs, to support modularity, and Joint Warfighting in order to increase Joint experience and to ensure we grow leaders skilled and capable of supporting combatant commanders.
Detailed work is required to figure out the best CF structure given where we’re headed with the ACP and the ASPG to ensure we’re developing officers with the skills we need to provide necessary breadth and depth. We intend to synch this effort with TRADOC Futures and JFCOM.
Career Paths. We’re developing 4 major areas tied to career paths.
First, Adopt a new Officer Development Model different than today’s model. Designed around developing a joint and professional officer corps. This model emphasizes the importance of jiim and educational experiences up front. It reinforces our profession by establishing clear certification standards.
It provides less prescriptive development--we’re looking to get beyond today’s direction of attack mentality, where paths are tightly defined, to broad boundaries. We need to highlight that in a campaign quality army, assignments in the operating and generating force are important but the focus for young company grade officers remains unchanged. We need to highlight that promotion opportunity will remain high and it’s ok to go where the army needs your skills and experience.
At the same time, command will remain central to what we do and overall command opportunity will remain high.
We’re conducting a cradle to grave review of education requirements to ensure we’re linking civilian education and military education requirements. We’ll conduct a gap analysis intended to produce a strategy that will synchronize officer skills from pre-commissioning to ACS to ensure we’re investing smartly in developing strategic leaders. This includes future reqts as well as addressing today’s regional/cultural/pol-mil skill requirements. We’re working with the commands, TRADOC and USMA.
Modify Career Field Designation (CFD) Process – instead of the current designation upon selection to major we will start to develop operators and some limited number of specialists earlier in their career to support modularity and develop specialties that require extensive development time. And synchronize CFD with ILE which begins at the 8th year.
Again, we’ll pursue a menu of incentives and work closely with the Competitive Advantage Working Group as they review incentives. We’re looking at programs that include ACS, branch of choice and posting for increased ADSOs for cadets and a different range of options for field grade officers.

12. OPMS TF Structure Director OPMD Log Corps Team NG/RC/WO Team Grad Ed
for Service
Tiger Tm
Career Field
Team
Education
Team
Log Corps
Team
NG/RC/WO
Team
Incentives
Team
600-3
Tiger Tm
WEB
PAGE
LDD - Task
Force HQ
REP
REP
REP
G-1
REP
OPMD
ORSA
ORSA
FA90
WOD
ORSA
Rep
TRADOC
Rep
Rep
Rep
Contract
RAND
RAND
RAND ?
JFCOM
USMA
ARSTAF
NGB
USARC
HRC
St. L
ARSTAF
USMA
Other Agencies
ARSTAF
OEMA
OSD
Joint
Staff
OEMA
CDT
CMD
AMC
ARSTAF
Access
CMD

13. Current DA Pam 600-3 Career Development Model
(left side)
This slide shows the current career path model which reflects a prescriptive career path ‘Yellow Brick Road “
Branch qualification is command time which leads to a rite of passage
Prescriptive path at each grade level
Does not emphasize joint skills and experience
Narrow OES windows of opportunity
We are moving away from this and will include the new model in DA Pam The proponents and TRADOC have heard your guidance and are moving in a direction consistent with the new model.
Prescriptive
Time Line Driven
Command Centric

14. LDR Development Timeline Current OPMS III
FAD
PZ MAJ/CFD
PZ LTC
PZ COL C C F D S C
BDE
CMD BR
QUAL C S
BN XO/S3
BRANCH
QUAL
JOINT/
OFCR
GEN
BN CMD BR
UTIL
JOINT/
OFCR
GEN
Highlights:
2LTs pin 1LT at 18 months and by law, must be a 1LT for 24 months, thus pin on to CPT is 40 months.
We are targeting to send officers to CPTs Logistics Career Course as promotable LTs and graduate as CPTs. CAS3 is now incorporated at CLC3.
Officers will still select a Functional Area at their 5th year of service.
Currently, At tenth year, just after the majors board, officers will select their Career Field. After this point, officers will target for the cmd track in the Opns field and the other CF will become specialized in their new CF. However, under OPMS III Review, Eleminate FAD Process, Create 2 CFD, and Consolidate Career Field into TWO: OPS and ISCF
In the Transporation World however, our functional requirements still outweigh our ability to support filling all the FAD requirements.
OPS O B C BR
TOE
ASGMT/
DETAIL
3Rs/
FUNCT
AREA
TNG&
ASGMT
CMD
NON
OPS C S
S S C
FUNCT
AREA
QUAL
FA/
JOINT/
OFCR
GEN
FA/JOINT/
OFCR
GEN
JOINT/
OFCR
GEN
FUNCT
AREA
DA Pam 600-3

15. Recommended Developmental Model (JIIM-E)
COMPANY GRADE
FIELD GRADE
Joint and Expeditionary Mindset
CCC/WOAC
ILE/WOSC
SSC/WOSSC
Operational
Assignment
OPERATING FORCE
OPS
GENERATING FORCE
Joint, Inter-agency, Inter-governmental, Multi-national and Education (JIIM-E) Developmental Zone
WOBC / BOLC
Joint and Expeditionary Mindset
Generalists Specialists
GENERATING FORCE
CFD
The new Officer Developmental Model is designed to portray a much less prescriptive model designed around developing a Joint and Expeditionary professional officer corps. Inherent in the Army Officer Professional Developmental Model is a campaign quality that clearly indicates the linkage of the generating and operating force. Flexible timelines will enable officers to serve longer in developmental assignments ensuring officers have adequate time to gain skills and experience and also support unit readiness and cohesion.
The centerpiece of the Officer Professional Developmental Model is the Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, Multinational and Educational Developmental (JIIM-E) Zone. The JIIM-E Zone builds multifunctionality in field grade officers and directly supports developing Joint officers. JIIM-E assignments will become even more crucial in developing Joint force Commanders and staff officers.
The focus for young company grade officers remains unchanged: to gain the requisite branch technical and tactical skills, to develop a warrior ethos, and to gain important leadership experience in company grade developmental assignments. Earlier career field designation points will enable the Army to start developing the skills and experience for officers to serve in other than operations career fields.
OPERATING FORCE
JOINT EXPEDITIONARY MINDSET 16 8
Developing Warriors for a Lifetime of Service
Emphasizes “JIIM-E” experience
Less prescriptive
Synchronizes with Army Battle Rhythm
Highlights importance of “Campaign-Quality” Army
Promotes concept of “decathlete”

16. The operational environment is producing, in the near term, greater opportunities, broader assignments and less-prescriptive career paths.
Promotions
Transformation will increase promotion board selection rates for CPT – LTC… record highs for the next several years.
Board guidance has been adjusted and values performance.
Command
Provide career paths to develop officers in branches with fewer company command opportunities.
Overall BN and BDE CMD opportunity decreases slightly.
Assignments
Deployment experience is producing an officer corps capable of serving in positions of greater responsibility than OPMS 3 envisioned.
Assignment priorities remain – Army requirements first, professional development next, and then officer preference … OPMS will reflect and support these priorities.

17. Contact Information

18. Qualification Data by FA
What is the CFD Process?
1 - SMITH
2 - FLANDERS
3 - HRIMPTON
4 - JENKINS
5 - LARSON + +
Major’s
Promotion List
Officer Preference
Commanders Input
Abilities/
Experience
A process that matches officer’s preference and capabilities with Army requirements. +
Preference and requirement driven.
OER- include operational and career field comments. = +
CFD Board Designates
Career Field
Qualification Data by FA
to CFD Board
Army Requirements

19. Career Fields Operations Operational Support (OS)
Goal %
Information Operations (IO)
FA 24 Information Systems
Engineering
FA 30 Information Operations
FA 34 Strategic Intelligence
FA 40 Space Operations
FA 46 Public Affairs
FA 53 Information Systems
Management
FA 57 Simulation Operations
Operations
Basic Branches
FA 39 PSYOP and Civil Affairs
FA 90 Multifunctional Logistician
Operational Support (OS)
FA 48 Foreign Area Officer
FA 51 Army Acquisition Corps
Institutional Support (IS)
FA 43 Human Resource Management
FA 45 Comptroller
FA 47 USMA Permanent Instructor
FA 49 Operations Research/Systems Analysis
FA 50 Force Management
FA 52 Nuclear Research and Operations
FA 59 Strategic Plans and Policy
69% 7% 9%
14 %
These are the Functional areas that are in CF. Note that FA 90 remains part of the Opns CF.
The percentages indicate across the force, what percentage of the Army will be in each CF. You can anticipate that the CSS branch participation in CF other than operations will not be quite as high due to the high demand of log reqts in the Opns CF.
Green - reflects new career fields

20. Early CFD 4 Year CFD to fill MTOE CPTs authorizations
7 Year CFD to fill MAJs authorizations

21. Officer Evaluation Report
Briefing Outline
Mission / Organization
OPMS III
Officer Evaluation Report
Career Management
Miscellaneous

22. Bottom Line Up Front System is working
COM Report is not a killer (COM report vs COM file)
You need to understand “How the system works”
Counseling is the key

23. OERs
Center of Mass Report is different from a Center of Mass File (many ACOM officers have COM reports). However, having all COM reports places an officer at risk..
Most officers have received at least one COM (Over 86% of all CPTs; 93% of all MAJs; 90% of all LTCs, 86% of all COLs).
Most of those who are successful will have a mix of ACOM and COM OERs, but some ACOMs in key jobs (BQ) are a must. Spikes in file are essential.
Board results indicate officers with a mix of ACOMs and COMs are competitive to LTC.
Enthusiastic, but not overexaggerated, narrative often differentiates among COM reports.
As of: Dec 2003

24. “Vast Majority of OERs arriving at DA are Center of Mass” (May 05)
OER Trends (DA Form 67-9)
“Vast Majority of OERs arriving at DA are Center of Mass”
(May 05)

25. Board Feedback Selection boards strongly endorse current OER.
Overwhelming majority believe OER provides necessary information to select future leaders.
Boards can distinguish between a COM report and a COM File.
Over 18,000 Officers selected by all boards with COM OERs

26. OER Enhancements
As of 1 Oct 2004 Senior Raters are no longer required to force distribute their rated company grade officer populations, to include 2LT, 1LT, CPT, WO1 and CW2.
The renaming and expansion of the Developmental Support Form to include the rank of CW2 and CPT compliments this change. These enhancements foster an environment conducive to growth by providing structure to the critical tasks of teaching, coaching, mentoring, and educating.
The enhancements optimize leader’s abilities to maintain esprit and provide flexibility by focusing the Army’s Warrior Force on individual development and progressive expectations is intended to eliminate the current peer to peer competition and distractions caused by our current system and methods.
Ultimately, these changes allow us to better teach, coach, mentor, and educate our officers during a critical developmental period in their careers.
Officers should visit the HRC website for more information on the process for implementing these enhancements:
ie timelines for all officers in these grade plates to receive their first non-block checked OER by 31 Dec 04

27. Career Management Briefing Outline Mission / Organization OPMS III
Officer Evaluation Report
Career Management
Miscellaneous

28. Needs of the Army Priorities Skills and Experience
Skills & Experience
Why Do We Move Officers ?
Needs of the Army
Priorities
Skills and Experience

29. Non-Discretionary Officer Move Criteria “RISK”
Release - Retirement/REFRAD
Imbalance – Skills or grades not aligned with organization requirements or Army manning guidance
e.g. officer “promoted-out” of a location
School – To and from CCC, CSC/ILE, SSC,
ACS, CF training
Known losses
DEROS
Joint tour complete
Sequential assignments
Command selects
Needs of the Army
Priorities
Skills & Experience R
Account manager
input required I S K
# of moves
Before we order a move – do “R.I.S.K” analysis

30. Discretionary Officer Move Criteria “CSI”
Career
Next opportunity only exists elsewhere
Need new skill set (Joint, ARSTAF)
Skills
Skills and/or experience desired/required elsewhere (e.g. BNRs)
CSL prepo
Individual
EFMP
Compassionate
Joint Domicile
Individual preference
HS Stab
Needs of the Army
Priorities
Skills & Experience C S I
# of moves

31. Officer Personnel Dynamic Distribution Model (DDM)
This process may be done daily, weekly, or monthly; it is dynamic
Non-discretionary Moves
Discretionary Moves
Projection
Projection
(Account manager input required)
(Assignment officer input required) R I S K
Grade
Skill
Unit
Unit S C I
Skill
Grade
Approved by Director OPMD
Filled to AUTHs
Filled in excess of AUTHs
Not filled to AUTHs
center of gravity
Validated Requirements - a position opened for fill to achieve manning guidance or another skill/grade demand
Model to achieve manning guidance
Donor Units
Unit
Determine tradeoff between # of moves and achieving manning guidance
Skill
Metrics for success
Manning guidance met
Acceptable skill & grade match in units
Monthly assignment quotas
Recipient Units
Unit
skills and experience
Grade
Some donor units may also be recipient units.
Ideally the donor list is larger than the recipient list to account for uncertainty.
Multiple solutions possible
Skill
Plan
Unit
Grade
Updated regularly based on events
Some units will still be below AUTHs at certain skills/grades
Skill
Assignment division execution backbrief to Director Plan adjustment made as required.
Grade

32. Proposed OPMD Manning Priorities
58% of
authorizations
98-100% fill
(If deployed: 105%)
27% of
authorizations
95% fill
15% of
authorizations
85% fill 1 2 3
80%
MCRUs
EUSA
AAMDCs
ARCENT
DA Special Roster
GWOT DMO
USCENTCOM
MNF-I*
MNC-I*
MNSTC-I*
PCO-I*
CFC-A*
USSOCOM
USASOC
INSCOM(5 Bdes)
CBRN*
JTF-GMO*
Expeditionary Forces
HQDA
OSD
JOINT STAFF
USA Contracting Agcy
Acq Spt Center
USMA
DAIG
TRADOC(-)**
CTC
SGL
IET
Schools
RTB
USAREC
Futures Ctr
CDT CMD PMS
TWA DMO
USNORTHCOM*
Old Guard
By Law/Policy
UNIFIED CMDs (-)
USEUCOM
USJFCOM
USPACOM
USSOUTHCOM
USSTRATCOM
USTRANSCOM
USANATO RRC
NETCOM
HRC
DMO(-)
Staff/FOA
MACOMs
EAD/EAC TROOPS
FORSCOM HQ
USAREUR HQ
USARPAC HQ
COSCOMs
Corps CS & CSS
TRADOC(-)**
ACC
CAC
AWC
CDT CMD(-)
TRAC
TRADOC HQ
SATMO
MEPCOM
Other TRADOC
Staff/FOA
AC/RC
Title X
Non-titled
DOD AGENCIES
USANATO (-)
NGB
IMA
ATEC
OTHER FOAs
Others Not Listed
This is a graphical representation of how Fill Priority 1 and Fill Priority 2 align by the major categories we track in OPMD along with the portion of the authorizations they cover.
Circled units represent the non-negotiable units that must be filled to FP1 standard
MACOMs
INSCOM (-)
CID CMD
USACE
MDW(-)
SDDC
MEDCOM
SMDC
AMC
* - New organization since JUL 2000
** - TRADOC aggregate 97%

33. Stabilizing the Force
The concept of Force Stabilization and the manning strategies involved are primarily designed to improve combat readiness and provide stability and predictability for Soldiers and their families.
The goal of the new manning guidance is to provide fully manned, ready, capable, and deployable units for combatant commanders.
This is a fundamental change to the way the Army assigns it’s officers, warrant officer and enlisted.
Due to ongoing Army initiatives and transformation efforts, there will be a significant amount of Force structure turbulence over the next several years. Some of the changes have been documented while other changes, that are expected to affect units as early as the current fiscal year, are still being developed and are not completely visible. In the near-term this may result in challenges to stability and predictability but in the long term we will experience the benefits of these changes.

34. Modularity: TODAY FY 03 BCT (UA)s 36 Heavy 18 Stryker 3 Light 7
SBCT 1
SBCT 2
SBCT 4
Fort Lewis 1 2 3
Fort Drum 1 3 3 1 2 3 4
Fort Carson
Fort Riley 1 2 3
Fort Campbell
Fort Bragg 3 1 2 1 2 4
Fort Benning 1 2 3 4
Fort Stewart
Fort Bliss
Fort Hood
Fort Polk
ITALY 2 3
173d
SBCT 3
Fort Wainwright
FY 03
BCT (UA)s 36
Heavy 18
Stryker 3
Light 7
Airborne/AASLT 8
Schofield Bks
Fort Richardson

35. BCT Units of Action : Oct 06
SBCT 1
SBCT 2
SBCT 4
Fort Lewis 1 2 3
Fort Drum 2 1 3 6 3 1 2 3 4
Fort Carson
Fort Riley 1 2 3 4
Fort Campbell
Fort Bragg 4 5 1 2 3 4 1 2 4 4
Fort Benning 1 2 3
Fort Stewart
Fort Bliss
Fort Hood
Fort Polk
ITALY 3
173d
SBCT 3
SBCT 5
Fort Wainwright
Schofield Bks 4
Fort Richardson

36. Modularity Status FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 6 4 5 1 1
Annex E (Modularity-UEx & UA) to OPMD WARNO
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
TBD
Corps/
Divisions
(UEx)
SEP04
SEP04
DEC04
APR05
OCT05
JUL04
NOV05
MAR07
JUN06
JUL07
SEP09
PROVISIONAL
New
Brigades
(UAs)
JAN 07 3
SEP09
PROVISIONAL
APR 07 4 4
MAR 07 4
AUG 07
JUL04 4
SEP04 4
SEP04 3
AUG 07 IN UA
DEC04 4 4
JAN05
MAY-NOV05 4
OCT05 4 6
JAN06
MAR06
JUN06
APR06 4 5
SEP06
JUL04 1
DEC04 1
APR05 1
SEP05 2
OCT05 1
NOV05 3
JUN06
JAN06 3
JUN06
JUL06
SEP04 1
MAR07 1
JUL07 1
SEP04 1
Converting
Brigades
(UAs)
JUL04 2
OCT05 2
SEP04 2
DEC04 2
NOV05 2 2
MAR07
JUL07 2
JUN06 2
AUG06
SBCT1
JUL04 3 3
SEP04
DEC04 3
OCT05 3
JUN06
OCT06 1 3
MAR07
SBCT2 1
OCT-DEC05
SBCT5 2
OCT06
SBCT7 3
APR-JUN05
SBCT4
Stryker
SBCT3
As of: 27 Apr 05
Decision to implement final 5 BCTs(UAs) subject to operational necessity and OSD approval
- 5 final UAs

37. The deployment schedule renders the current COA
Problem
Current COA
FY07
FY08
FY09
The deployment schedule renders the current COA
infeasible 12 12 11 2
SBCT3 2 3 4 4 4
SBCT5 2
Three Heavy UA builds in one quarter 1 3 4 2 6 3 2 2 3
SBCT7 2 1
SBCT4 1 1 4 3 3
Five builds in one quarter 3 4 1
SBCT1 4 2 5
Not scheduled 1 2 1
3ACR
Three Infantry UA builds in one quarter 3
Three Infantry UA builds in one quarter
Undue friction is created in the current LM schedule by not considering the number of like UAs being built in the same quarter, total number of UAs being built per quarter and individual installation supportability

38. Recommended COA Based on E-Date
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
1st Q T R
2nd
3rd
4th
Total 3 9 17 27 35 40
SBCT3
SBCT5 2 4
SBCT1
SBCT5 2
3ACR 4
Oct
Nov
Dec 2 3
SBCT3 3 4 4 4
SBCT1 3 6 1 4 3 6
Jan
Feb
Mar 3 2 2 2 2 1
SBCT4 2 3
SBCT7 3 3
SBCT4 2
Apr
May
Jun 4 2 2 4 1 2 4 1 3 3 1
Jul
Aug
Sep 3 1 1 3 4 4 5 4 1 4 1 5
Changes from current COA
Color patches = first lifecycle of a unit
Greyscale patches = subsequent lifecycles
SBCT2 1 1
173rd 4
Non-Lifecycle Manned
Awaiting Decision 3 4 4 IN UA

39. Life Cycle Manning FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 1st QTR 2nd QTR
Appendix 1 (Lifecycle Manning) to Annex D (Modularity) to OPMD OPORD 05-01
Life Cycle Manning
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
(plus FY04 units)
FY08
(plus FY05 units)
FY09
(plus FY06 units)
1st QTR
2nd QTR
3rd QTR
4th QTR 3 4 4
SBCT3 4
SBCT5 2 2 2 2 4 4
SBCT1 1 2 3 3 1 2 6 3 4
SBCT4 4 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 4 3 4 1 4 1
3ACR 5 3 1 2 3
173rd 1 1 2 2
Non-LCM 3
As of: 27 Apr 05
3d Bde 1 Cav no LCM, 4th Bde move life cycle to Jan 06

40. HQs, BCTs and Support Brigades Over Time
Appendix 2 (Total Modularity) to Annex E (Modularity-UEx & UA) to OPMD WARNO
HQs, BCTs and Support Brigades Over Time
* An additional 7 Bdes (total of 35) represent surrogate units for Theater-level requirements

41. Sustainment Brigade Timeline

42. Modularity Status FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 F S S S S S S S S (UEy) Fires
Annex D (Modularity) to OPMD OPORD 05-01
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
(UEy)
Fires
UAs
(6+)
MAR06
75 FA
JUL06
BLISS
214 FA
OCT06
212 FA
MAR07
BRAGG
18 FA
MAY07
17 FA
DEC04
HOOD F
7 TCG
EUSTIS
Sustain
UAs
(16)
JUL04 S
SEP04 S
SEP04 S
DEC04 S
OCT05
BLISS S S
JAN06
JUN06 S S
501CSG
KOREA
RILEY

43. Operational Chart: Jun 05
Annex F (Operational Chart) to OPMD WARNO
Operational Chart: Jun 05
Deployed
Reset
Train
Ready
Pre-Stab
Deployed
Ready
Reman
Post-Stab 3 4 1 1 2
Deployed
Ready
Reman
Stab
E+90
EDATE
MOD - UFS
MOD - IRS
AOE - IRS 3 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 4 4 4 4 5 4 4
UA48 6 5 4 3 3 3 4 4

44. - AC DCP / SUS BDE LOCATIONS - RC CSS DCP LOCATIONS
AC/RC TSC LOCATIONS
- AC DCP / SUS BDE LOCATIONS
- RC CSS DCP LOCATIONS
593 TD
Ft Lewis
Ft Drum 10
518
DCP
466
DCP
Germany
Ft Carson 16
Ft Riley
FT LEE 3
DCP 43 1 7
Ft Knox TO 21
DCP
FL-W
Ft Campbell
Ft Eustis 29
311
DCP TO
101
Ft Irwin
1 TSC TD
507
Ft Bragg
167 TSC 82 TD
Ft Benning
Ft Wainwright 13
DCP 4
135
DCP
184
DCP 64
Ft Bliss
Ft Richardson 15
Ft Hood
Ft Stewart 3
8 TSC 45
377 TSC
Schofield Bks
143
DCP 1 1 1 1
DCP
LEGEND
TSC Deployable CP (Compo Pure)
- Theater Distribution Det
- Theater Opening Det TD
- Sustain BDE (AC)
- TSC Main (Multi-Compo)
TSC TO
- Army Reserve
- Army National Guard
Japan
Korea
501 10
DCP 19
DCP
(Okinawa)

45. MODULAR CSS FORMATION LOCATIONS
ARNG AND USAR
MODULAR CSS FORMATION LOCATIONS
Ft Lewis
TBD
TBD 34
Bloomington
Ft Drum
518
DCP
TBD TD
336 TO
TBD TD 67
Ft Sheridan
300
369
Des Moines
Chicago
Lincoln
Butler
Bronx 33
371
466
DCP
287
274 TD
Germany
350 TD
Kettering
Sacramento 38 55
Ft Riley
Topeka
Indianapolis
Ft Carson
311
DCP
Ft Knox
Ft Belvoir
Witchita
3rd DCP
Ft Campbell
Ft Eustis 21
DCP
230
Columbia
304
Los Angeles
Long Beach
Ft Bragg
164
145 TO
403 TO
1 TSC 40
184
DCP
Mesa
167 TSC
158
Birmingham
Ft Benning
Ft Wainwright
Laurel
375 TD
Ft Bliss
13 DCP
TBD
Abbe
Baton Rouge
Ft Hood
Mobile
Ft Stewart
Ft Richardson
321
Ft Polk
135
DCP
Austin
Schofield Bks 49
TBD TO
Tampa
New Orleans
Orlando
8 TSC
377 TSC 32 TO 1 1
143
DCP
LEGEND
TSC
- TSC Main (Multi-Compo)
- Sustain BDE (AC/AR/NG)
Japan
DCP
TSC Deployable CP (Compo Pure)
DCP
DCP
- Army Reserve
Korea TO
- Theater Opening Det
- Army National Guard 19
DCP 10
DCP TD
- Theater Distribution Det
(Okinawa)

46. Assignment Officers…
Meet validated Army requirements--they do not create them
Adjust to quickly changing Army requirements throughout the world **Readiness Top Priority**
Assist in professionally developing officers to meet future requirements
Assign to MACOMs--normally not to duty positions-- but changing
Consider tour (overseas) equity, but not primary factor
Must adhere to changing policies
Do NOT communicate with promotion or selection boards
Care for each officer, but NOT at the expense of others
Are HUMAN!

47. Logistics Officer Population vs All Requirements
COL
LTC
FY03 01A REQ = 50
OES = 32
FY03 01A REQ = 74
AWC = 33
MAJ
CPT
FY03 01A REQ = 112
FY03 01A REQ = 58
OES = 274
CGSC =125
Includes TTHS, 01A, etc
Source: TAADS 04-11

48. Officers working in Functional Area 90 positions by Branch
Use public query in HAZASE; “FA90 PARTICIPATION”
Total Officers working FA90 positions = 1,328
As of : 4 Apr 2005

49. FA 90 Certification Panel
OPMD convened the FA90 Certification Panel following the release of the FY04 LTC Promotion Board (Next Panel o/a Jul 05)
The intent of the panel is to ensure that only those officers that complete FA90 branch qualification IAW DA PAM retain the FA90 designation.
The panel is conducted annually following the ACC LTC Promotion List release
The certification criteria is the same as the MAJ/O-4 BQ requirements in DA Pam 600-3
The Director, OPMD will approve the results of the panel
Each officer reviewed by the panel will receive written notification of their FA90 status prior to the Battalion Command Board
Officers that do not retain FA90 certification will not be able to compete for command in the multifunctional categories of 6S and 6SM.
Officers that do not retain their FA90 designator will still be eligible to compete in their basic branch functional categories and 6SR/6ST

50. Certification Criteria
The panel used the new draft of DA Pam because it expanded and more clearly defined the requirements for branch qualification as a MAJ.
Excerpt from DA PAM 600-3, chapter 28 (Multifunctional Logistician)
must serve a cumulative of 12 months minimum in one or more of the 04/05, 90A coded BQ positions from the following list:
(a) Executive Officer, S3 or Support Operations Officer of a multifunctional logistics battalion*, squadron, group, DISCOM or equivalent or corps materiel management center. (*) Multifunctional Battalion includes but not limited to FSB, MSB, CSB, BSB, Striker Support Bn, Regimental Support Bn, , or equivalents).
(b) Chief of a division, brigade, or regimental materiel management center
(c) Deputy G4/G4 plans officer
(d) Logistics operations officer of a corps materiel management center or distribution management section
(e) CSS observer controller (major-level) at a combat training center
(f) Major-level multifunctional logistics command position
(g) All TOE Brigade/Group S4, 04 positions
(h) DMMO
(i) FA90 Joint Staff Officer (JSO) or serving in a CSS JSO position different from the officer’s basic branch.
(j) XO or S3 of a CSS functional TOE battalion, group or equivalent different from the officer’s basic branch,
(k) Major-level functional command position different from the officer’s basic branch

51. FA 90 Certification Panel
For questions regarding the FA90 Certification Panel review the MILPER message FA90 Certification Panel dated 5 August and visit the FA90 Website at:
Or contact your assignment officer or the FA90 Branch Chief, LTC Vic Hagan
DSN:
COM:

52. PROMOTION TO CAPTAIN FY04 (NOV) SELECTION RATE ARMY TC QM OD
PZ % 92.7% 93.4% 87.7%
AZ % 40.0% 0.0% 33.3%
Primary Reason for Nonselection:
BCOM reports
NOs on front/GOLOR
“Off Block” checks
Referred Reports
FYI
Upon promotion to Captain, all LT Officer Evaluation Reports are moved to the officer’s restricted fiche
End of Branch Detail
FY04 CPTs board was a Best Qualified Selection Board versus the Fully Qualified Selection Boards of recent years. The change caused the selection rate to be lower than the past few years. The reason the selection process changed from fully qualified to best qualified was because the shortage of CPT problem has stabilized and there is no longer a need to promote as many LTs to CPTs as possible like we had been doing in recent years.
Branch Detail Program:
CSS Branches donate to IN, AR, FA, AD, and CM
Branch detail program is 24 months
Cdrs can help by working with G1s to identify Branch Detail officers and program good CSS positions after BREX detail. Maintain comms with cbt arms cdrs to ensure our branch detail officers are not disadvantaged by participating in the BREX program.
IET XOs Program:
Targets 1LTs with at least 12 months platoon leader time.
Officers serve as basic training and AIT company XOs at TRADOC posts.

53. Keys to preparing for the CPTs Board
The FY04 CPTs board was the first best qualified CPT selection board conducted in the past 7 years; we expect next year’s board will be conducted as fully qualified.
Officer Tips
Prepare your file by submitting a signed ORB and current Photo
Review your OMPF (fiche) to ensure your AERs, OERs and any awards are present
Do this with enough time to get it fixed by your branch or PSB
Talk to your branch if you can not do these checks
Chain of Command Tips
Ensure, if possible, that every LT going before the board has an OER (do a complete the record if necessary)
Know that off block checks will hurt a LT’s chances of getting promoted significantly
Ensure someone in the chain of command reviews a LT’s file in preparation for the board
FY04 CPTs board was a Best Qualified Selection Board versus the Fully Qualified Selection Boards of recent years. The change caused the selection rate to be lower than the past few years. The reason the selection process changed from fully qualified to best qualified was because the shortage of CPT problem has stabilized and there is no longer a need to promote as many LTs to CPTs as possible like we had been doing in recent years.

54. MAJ pin on migrating to 10 year mark.
Promotion to Major
Next MAJ Board
06 September 2005
FY04 SELECTION RATE
Zone ARMY TC QM OD
PZ % 95.7% 91.8% 96.6%
AZ % 21.4% 45.5% 42.1%
BZ % 4.1% 5.2% 2.0%
Primary Reasons for Nonselection:
Straight COM file
Below Center of Mass OERs
No company command time
Referred Reports
MAJ pin on migrating to 10 year mark.
USAREC is a high priority and HRCOM will send even more quality officers to recruiting.
SELCON - recently approved for two time non selects. Non-selects had good quality across the board and most were selected for SELCON. Non-RA officers do not receive sep pay if offered SELCON. SELCON is for 3 years if under 14 years. Possible that it could be offered again to get an officer to retirement.

55. Selective Continuation
Captains:
Has been conducted for the last four years
SELCON for a 3 year period, will be considered by the
following year’s promotion board
Majors:
USC. Title 10 directs that SELCON be conducted for
Majors
Used for the two-time non-select
List will be published with ACC LTC promotion list

56. Intermediate Level Education (ILE)
ILE for Operations CF Officers will be 10 months at Leavenworth
Two courses per year
July start – 2/3 officers
January start – 1/3 officers
Beginning in summer 05 officers in YGs 93 (CGSC selects only), 94 (selected for MAJ), 95 and 96 may attend ILE

57. Promotion to LTC FY04 SELECTION RATE Zone Army TC QM OD
PZ % 84.9% 72.0% 81.7%
AZ % 21.2% 3.4% 10.0%
BZ % 4.3% 8.8% 6.6%
Primary Reasons for Nonselection:
No CGSC (40%)
No branch qualifying job as a MAJ or all COM Reports
Referred reports (poor judgement,
integrity, communication, leadership)
Board results reaffirm that consistent COM files are at risk. *

58. FY 06 LTC Command Selection Rates
FY06 Battalion Command list
96 CSS officers selected
18 officers selected in 2d look or above
9% Non-resident MEL-4 (10% FY05)
25% had BZ promotions (25% FY05)
30% Joint qualified before taking command
Overall CSSD selection rate:
85.5% of eligibles asked to be considered
17.6% Overall selection rate
Females:
81.8% of eligibles asked to be considered
16.7% Selected (15)
Minorities:
88.6% of eligibles asked to be considered
17.3% Selected (31)
ONLY FA90 NOW
COMPETE FOR
6S AND 6SM
FY05 BN CMD List Numbers
Army FY05 Selection Rate 16.1%
Branch # Selected # Considered % Selected
AG %
FI %
OD %
QM %
TC %
Total %
+100 CSS Officers selected; 1 3rd look and 1 4th look
+10% Non-Resident MEL-4 (17% in FY04)
+24% had at least one BZ Promotion (21% in FY04)
+13% will be Joint Qualified at PCOCD (31% in FY04)
+Overall CSSD Selection Rate:
84.3% of eligibles asked to be considered (83.5% in FY04)
18.1% overall selection rate (16.5% in FY04)
+Females:
70.4% of eligibles asked to be considered (80.5% in FY04)
17.3% Selected (14) [12% (11) in FY04]
+Minorities:
81.9% of eligibles asked to be considered
10.7% Selected (16) [12.5% (19) in FY04]

59. Briefing Outline
Mission
Organization
OPMS III
OER/Rating Philosophy
Career Management
Miscellaneous

60. Promotion Board Comments
Digital photo!*
ORB understandable* (Fwd Spt Bn v. FSB)
Manner of performance - OERs *
Weight / Appearance
Branch qualification
Letters to the President
Duty descriptions
Senior Rater promotion potential
Words match profile
(large population)
Will talk more on the photo - but have a color photo!
Don’t allow weight to grow on the OER along with the height - bad perception.
Take time to fix ORBs - spell out units as much as possible, FWD SPT BN vs. FSB.
Ensure sufficient BQ time prior to the board.
MOP will drive the train
Duty descriptions - if you don’t have the people, expound on the geographic region and fiscal responsibility. Have read some where you didn’t realize there were less than 20 soldiers in the Bn.
Review comments for school, command, and promotion.
Avoid an exclusive narrative for a COM report or SR’s vote is discounted.
* Key items in a board file!!

61. Current Environment SL/SM Effects
Must fill MCRU units to 100% aggregate strength
Attrition numbers are increasing
Moving quickly towards Force Stabilization and Unit Life Cycle Management
UA modular organization increases requirements and opportunities

62. Your Career Manager Notes
See
Your Career Manager Notes
See your photo
See your record
See
all jobs!
Allows officers to access their own ORB
Secure via AKO
Can view, print, save and send
Now With Photos on your ORB

63. What I Want You to Take Away!
Don’t break contact with us. If we can’t get a hold of you, we can’t communicate with you! The Army Human Resources Command (HRCOM) is changing how it does business, stay current.
Must have an Officer Retention Program. Commanders and HRCOM must shape realistic expectations and preferences.
Priorities are clear:
GWOT
Modularity
“Readiness is Paramount”
Personnel Assignment and Professional Development policies and programs are in a great state of flux.
Importance of mentoring and counseling officers

64. COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT DIVISION
Questions????