A person recognizable to anyone who has been in military information technology for a few years offered MILCOM 2009 attendees insights into where the Defense Information Systems Agency is headed. Tony Montemarano, component acquisition executive, DISA, revealed that the agency is working on a campaign plan in which the word “convergence” is used time and time again. The plan, which is in the midst of final modifications, comprises three lines of operations: enterprise infrastructure, command and control, and information sharing.

In the area of enterprise infrastructure, Montemarano explained that it is important for companies to know that DISA operates networks, computing environments and entire systems, and each of these has its own set of business processes and different cost-recovery schedules. In this way, the agency is still stovepiped, he allowed.

The focus today is on convergence so that warfighters can plug into the cloud or network to get the information they need. To this end, DISA is trying to drive anonymity out of the network so that troops as well as DOD personnel can access the network from wherever they are and that access is attribute-based. “That’s what we’re focusing on. How do you do that?” Montemarano asked. At DISA, the program is called Enterprise User, he revealed.

Today, DISA is moving toward everything over Internet protocol (EoIP). This approach causes some problems, Montemarano allowed. “In my business, technology doesn’t bother me; technology doesn’t cause me headaches. Culture causes me headaches. Getting people who have always done something one way to adapt to the way other organizations do things is critical to getting them to work together,” he stated.

The danger of EoIP is the same as putting all your eggs in one basket, Montemarano admitted. But it is exactly for this reason that information assurance and security become all that more important. This is particularly true as DISA makes the nonsecure Internet protocol router network (NIPRnet) a true intranet, he said.

Montemarano was honest and upfront about the problems the agency has faced with the Net-Enabled Command Capability. “It didn’t do what we expected it to do. The department is currently rethinking how it wants to go forward. We are going to take this rather significant effort and cut it back. We’re going to go incremental with very small incremental pieces each and every year. The objective and the requirements documents remain in place. We are going to continue to move with a service-oriented architecture, loosely coupled net-centric environment, but we’re going to do it in a more incremental fashion. That tells you something. If you’re going to do it over time, the destination is probably going to change,” he explained.

In the current environment, policy has not kept pace with technology to enable the information sharing that today’s capabilities offer. Combatant commanders still have to look at multiple screens to see all of the data streaming into their operations centers and to obtain total situational awareness.

To solve this problem, Montemarano stated that these capabilities must be brought together as an enterprise service. “We haven’t gotten there yet, but we are honing in on a solution,” he shared. Details of the solution could not be divulged because the competition to provide the capability is still underway.

Richard J. Byrne, vice president, command and control center, The MITRE Corporation, wrapped up the unclassified discussion on the first day of MILCOM 2009 by proposing that today’s acquisition problems should be viewed in a different manner. Rather than thinking about how to improve what the U.S. government is doing, perhaps agencies—the U.S. Defense Department included—need to come at the problems from an entirely new direction—a very complex direction.

Complexity theory can be applied in a number of areas—from acquisition to cyberthreats, Byrne explained. Emergent behavior is one of the unique aspects of complexity theory and refers to what happens when many different yet related individual items are combined. These complex systems adapt by cooperating, repeating and responding, and this results in emergent behavior, which is unpredictable. Referring to Stephen Wolfram from his book A New Kind of Science, Byrne said this means that every major complex system that exists exhibits emergent behavior; consequently, those working on complex problems or with complex networks must start thinking about them in new ways.

In terms of acquisition of new systems, procurement officials must be willing to accept less than 100 percent solutions confident that products will be constantly evolving. “If you look at any of the major programs, many of them come from places such as Skunk Works. In fact, 60 percent or more of what the U.S. Army is using today in the theater of operations is not from programs of record. And yet, the dollars of the programs of record are not going into these projects. Most of the things that we’re fighting the war with today are built with a fraction of the funding spent on programs of record,” he related.

Many contend that while these products—such as the Predator—are good individually, they do not integrate well into the systems of systems the military is trying to create. Byrnes contends, however, that once again this problem must be approached differently. Instead of looking at innovations as different, the integration issue should be looked at as different segments that reach out to each other and bleed into each other to some extent.

The difference between how products from programs of record and how innovative products are built is a matter of different assumptions, Byrne explained. Innovators take into account the environment when in the design phase; if the environment the product will be deployed in is not considered from the beginning, the system will fail, he added.

Lt. Gen. Ted F. Bowlds, USAF, commander, Electronic Systems Center, Hanscom Air Force Base, delivered the luncheon speech at MILCOM 2009. Gen. Bowlds stated that the world is changing so fast that it is impossible to predict what innovations will develop as well as threats the U.S. will face in the next 10 to 15 years. “Five years out is about all we can go,” he said.

Although irregular warfare is the buzzword today, in the spectrum of conflict, it doesn’t represent any more than 10 percent to 15 percent of the threat today, he said. Despite this low percentage, it is consuming a lot of the U.S. military’s time. “I tell people if you get three individuals with an attitude and an explosive, you’ve got a problem on your hands. They can go anywhere they want to and take that problem and make it your problem these days,” he stated.

Adding to the challenges are budget realities. The way the U.S. Defense Department does business with industry is going to start to change very drastically, he said. The top priorities for the fiscal year 2012 budget will be influenced by “a lack of appetite for spending for DOD” and other pressures, such as the economy and health care. As a result, the military budget is going to come down, the general noted. “The spending spree that we all got to enjoy for the past five or six years is going to evaporate away from us. So, we’re going to have to be smarter in doing what we can with what we’ve got, or we’re going to have to be very, very smart in buying what we need,” he added.

At the heart of the next generation in the military is creation of data, systems and ideas, the general noted. Gen. Bowlds noted that if the military is not careful, its acquisition process is going to go the “way of the dinosaur” because technology is moving so quickly. About 90 percent of what is used at ESC rides on commercial technology today. “So over the years, we’ve been trying to figure out how to tighten up our acquisition,” he stated. The goal at ESC is to get solutions into the hands of the warfighter within 12 months.

In terms of fighting threats in the cyberspace, virtualization of networks may hold the key, the general allowed. By creating a number of virtual networks, data can be stored in different locations, so it is a constantly moving target. “It’s like being a chameleon in the cyber domain,” he stated.

BOSTON – October 19, 2009 – MILCOM 2009 opened today with a speech by David Gergen, CNN commentator and editor at-large for US. News and World Report. Gergen, who has worked for four U.S. presidents, pointed out that the relationship between president and military has changed over the past two decades. The differences have evolved as the men who occupied the Oval Office and held the position of commander-in-chief of the military themselves did not have first-hand military experience.

President Barack Obama appears to be at least stemming the tide of this change by putting more four-stars in places of power than any president before him, Gergen pointed out. These include Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, USA (Ret.) as leader of the Department of Veterans Affairs and Adm. Dennis Blair, USN (Ret.) as the Director of National Intelligence.

However, one of the best decisions Obama made after taking office was to ask Robert M. Gates to stay on as secretary of the U.S. Defense Department into the new administration. “Obama looks to him with an honest respect and has given him more and more latitude. I would say that Bob Gates right now is probably the most powerful Secretary of Defense that I can remember,” Gergen said. The president supports Gates’ efforts to do what he needs to do to get things done, and that applies to the weapons systems and will apply to the Quadrennial Defense Review as well, he added.

Gates has taken a strong view on a number of activities since he began working under President Obama, including strategy, Gergen went on. For example, the SECDEF has been focused on the idea that the Defense Department concentrate on waging the current war, not planning for the next one. Evidence of this is the cancellation of the T-SAT program and Gates’ promise to overhaul the military acquisition process, as evidenced by the decision to hold off on the number of F-22s the department will purchase and changes in the Future Combat Systems program.

These types of decisions are likely to continue as the Defense Department feels more of the budget crunch. While concern about the Chinese military is important, a growing concern is whether the Chinese will continue to invest in the United States, Gergen shared. The balance the administration is trying to reach is between how much spending must continue to keep the military strong and how much deficit the nation should continue to take on. “Previous administrations sort of built a wall around the Pentagon and said, ‘Don’t touch these things.’ That is no longer the case,” he added.

Although Gates is being given a lot of leeway on many issues, one issue that the White House will weigh in strongly on will be future operations in Afghanistan. Although the SECDEF will likely have a lot of say in what will occur there, it is Obama who is in the spotlight when it comes to future activity in Afghanistan. The president has demonstrated that he can be tough on many issues; however, the question still remains about how tough he is willing to be in that country. He must begin to move in one direction soon, however, because not to take a stand appears to others—including U.S. allies and the Taliban—that the U.S. is wavering. “To decide not to decide is to invite defeat, in my judgment,” Gergen stated.

This is an era in which the U.S. is being challenged, Gergen concluded. Looking 20 to 30 years in the future, the question is not whether China or India will be “at the table” but rather whether the United States will still be there. “We’re not going to spend our way to being a great power, and we’re certainly not going to borrow our way into being a great power; we’re going to innovate our way there. And innovation remains the greatest single hope for this country in the long term,” he said.

The U.S. Coast Guard is taking steps to enhance its command, control, intelligence and reconnaissance capabilities with new unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and network-centric systems for its ships. At a press briefing late last week, RAdm. Ronald J. Robago, USCG, the service’s new assistant commandant for acquisitions, discussed steps being taken to evaluate and select a new shipboard UAS.

The Coast Guard is interested in the MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned helicopter, which will soon equip the U.S. Navy’s littoral combat ships. Under the Coast Guard’s original Deepwater plan, UASs would increase ships’ operational range ships by providing a search and reconnaissance asset with greater range and endurance than shipboard helicopters. The original UAS platform selected for the Deepwater program, the Bell Helicopter tilt-rotor Eagle Eye UAS, was cancelled due to its technical immaturity, the admiral said.

Adm. Rabago explained that the Coast Guard is considering the Fire Scout because of its maturity, versatility and the advantage of sharing a common platform with the Navy. However, he emphasized that that the service has not yet selected Fire Scout.

Another key issue delaying acquisition is the Fire Scout’s lack of a maritime search radar. The key Coast Guard role for a UAS will be to detect and identify ships and boats for a variety of search and rescue, anti-narcotics, anti-piracy and homeland security missions. Adm. Rabago claims that a search radar is key for accomplishing these missions.

Funding is available in the Coast Guard’s budget to acquire a variety of UAS platforms, the admiral remarked. For example, the service is also conducting tests with land-based Predator B UAV’s for coastal patrol operations. A dry-fit test with a Fire Scout was recently conducted on the Coast Guard’s newest ship, USCGC Bertholf. Adm. Rabago explained that the cutter has sufficient onboard space to house and operate the UAVs. He added that the Coast Guard will conduct tests at the end of this month with a Fire Scout equipped with a prototype maritime search radar.

The search radar is important because the Coast Guard and Navy require different missions from their UAVs. Coast Guard ships often operate alone, while Navy vessels work in battle groups. Navy Fire Scouts will rely on targets being detected by shipboard sensors, while the Coast Guard requires the UAVs to operate as search platforms.

Besides acquiring UAS platforms, the Coast Guard is also taking steps to enhance its interoperability with other U.S. military services. The Coast Guard’s first national security cutter, the USCGC Bertholf will soon be equipped with a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) to handle classified data. It will be the first Coast Guard ship equipped with a SCIF, which will allow the vessel to operate more closely with Navy and coalition ships.

The admiral explained that the SCIF was not installed in the shipyard, although a space with all the required power and data connections was left in place. The facility will be installed with the assistance of the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Center. All of the Coast Guard’s national security cutters will be equipped with SCIFs.

Whether it’s needs versus wants, open conversations versus regulations to protect intellectual property or oversight versus open development, agencies and the commercial sector must find the happy medium for acquisition processes to be truly reformed. These were the tough issues experts discussed at AFCEA International’s SOLUTIONS Series event today. The conference, which took place at the National Conference Center, Lansdowne, Virginia, as well as via the SOLUTIONS the Web site, began with a presentation by John W. Nyce of the U.S. Department of the Interior and ended with a town hall meeting where attendees posed their questions and made their points to Maj. Gen. (Sel.) George J. Allen, USMC, director C4 and CIO of the U.S. Marine Corps; Frank Anderson of the Defense Acquisition University; and Tony Montemarano, DISA’s component acquisition executive. In between, experts on three panels presented their viewpoints on training, requirements and lessons learned.

While some speakers and panelists said they believe the acquisition system could be improved but is generally solid, others pointed out where total reform is needed. Some of the key points shared:

• “We are 20th century managers managing a 21st century work force,” Montemarano said.

• Need to bring the younger generation—the “G Generation,” which stands for Google Generation—to these types of discussions and conferences.

• Top three issues identified by the Town Hall panelists:
Anderson:
*Technology in the work place is moving faster than the acquisition processes that are in place.
*Aging work force.
*Reviewing curriculum to ensure proper training.

Montemarano:
*Processes intended to be flexible; work force culture NOT flexible.
*Acquisition processes need to be embraced NOT avoided.
*DISA move to Fort Meade and agency is losing talent daily.

Gen. Allen:
*Technology is moving faster than we can acquire it.
*Network security needs to be built in upfront.
*“Green” IT.

• The IT procurement paradigm is shifting at least in part because of a shift to cloud computing by DOD. Both the government and industry is driving this change.

• Benefits of cloud computing include cost effectiveness, quickness, increased flexibility and “green.” Challenges include security, vendor management and pricing.

• To move to cloud computing, a team that understands the requirements must be formed; a governance model must be in place; and employee training must improve.

• “I’m not telling you that I have the answers. I don’t think anyone does,” Nyce said about cloud computing challenges.

• “We have not made any kind of strides in putting our acquisition [processes] in electronic form,” Nyce stated.

• The cornerstone to describing requirements well is communications between the government and industry.

• There is a lack of willingness on the part of government agencies to talk to industry. The RFI process is NOT a good way to understand the available solutions.

• Many times, government agencies talk about what they want rather than what they need.

• One-on-one meetings with contractors are better than large forums like Industry Days, BUT government procurement personnel must be sure to share the exact same information with each company.

• Must be communications among the user, contract officer and procurement office. Bring the user in earlier in the procurement process.

• “As a contractor, I am disappointed with the government’s commitment to using small businesses,” Anthony Jimenez said during one of the panel sessions.

• Solutions exist to solve current problems, but they cannot be identified quickly.

• Recommendations: improve communications between government organizations; improve acquisition planning; define requirements better to increase the success rate; and trust the contractors’ judgment.

• The challenge in setting requirements for IT is the balance between just enough definition and not too much definition.

• Oversight of IT projects must be different than it is for other platforms.

• Training at the Defense Acquisition University needs to include courses in purchasing IT, which is different than purchasing platforms.

• Need to have the right people in place, and it’s not just about training—it’s also about experience.

• Need to move away from proprietary solutions.

• Need simpler, smaller, net-enabled solutions, but policy is not flexible enough.

• Opinions vary on the acceptability of teleworking.

Acquisitions experts from the government and private sectors agree that the procurement system is broken, but they do not necessarily agree about how to fix it. Meeting at AFCEA International’s SOLUTIONS Series conference today, a consensus was achieved on contributing factors to the problem. Long acquisition cycles strip the effectiveness of many of the IT systems that are being purchased by the time they hit the field. Time and cost estimates are not realistic from the beginning of the purchasing process. Leadership to bring about true change is lacking. These were just some of the topics brought up during today’s discussion, a discussion that will continue tomorrow on the second day of “IT Acquisition: Shifting to a Modern Paradigm,” taking place at the National Conference Center as well as broadcast via the Web.

Many attendees were interested in a quick way to share some of the highlights of the speeches and panels with their bosses. Among the ideas and information shared during the conference:

•“Shouldn’t we look for leaders who can clear up the complexity? Can we make this any harder?” Sue Payton said.

•The U.S. Army is changing its acquisition strategy to procuring services.

•The Army’s Program Executive Office (PEO), Enterprise Information Systems, is changing the title of deputy PEOs to portfolio information managers.

•The Army’s acquisition IT enterprise will be evaluated and changed in manageable chunks, each with its own schedule, budget and set of requirements. Now, the need exists to work on the seams as well.

•The U.S. Marine Corps needs: energy alternatives for the tactical environment; products that will lighten the load Marines must carry; and forward logistics support ideas.

•Realistic and knowledge-based estimates of time and cost must be at the beginning of the procurement process. Cost estimates are provided with a 50 percent level of confidence; this should be 80 percent.

•The acquisition work force must be trained better and expanded.

•Acquisition requirements must be reformed in terms of margin and realism; the military must accept that programs may go wrong yet take risks.

•Government needs to be more involved with industry. Acquisition rules MUST be modified so that government organizations can have discussions directly with companies.

•Industry needs to help agencies understand their innovations and ideas by describing them in a way that procurement officers can UNDERSTAND what they offer.

•Every service needs cybersecurity built in upfront, not as an add-on.

•Some said warfighters are using all the commercial technology they can get their hands on because official procurement takes too long; others disagreed, saying there is discipline in the services, and warfighters follow the rules when using communications systems.

•Cloud computing is the future for the DOD.

•Standards are good but also can stifle innovation.

•Process for certification and accreditation for commercial products is necessary but takes too long.

•Some said that warfighters’ needs MUST be considered when developing IT systems; others said that warfighters can’t be asked to define requirements because they don’t know about available technologies. For example, how do warfighters ask for iPhone capabilities if they don’t know what those capabilities are?

•“How do you purchase an iPhone in an eight-track acquisition world?” Joe Grace asked. One answer is ID/IQ contracts.

•One problem is the way contracts are designed. For example, contractors are paid to provide help desks, but the goal is to purchase systems that won’t require users to call for help all the time. How can this approach be reversed?

•Commercial companies such as Marriott International face the same types of IT procurement issues. To address them, the company has a strategy to grow, but grow sensibly. The company used to “build to last,” but now “builds to change,” Laura Bouvier said.

What do YOU think is the biggest problem with the government acquisition system? How do YOU think it can be fixed?

The 2010 Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration (CWID) cycle has begun. Organizations interested in participating in the event can go to the Federal Business Opportunity site for details about how to participate.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sponsors the annual event, which supports the U.S. Defense Department and homeland defense and security acquisition decisions. Federal, state and local government organizations identify the technology solutions they are seeking.

For next year’s CWID interoperability trials, decision-makers are interested in solutions in the areas of improved coalition command, control and coordination for conventional and irregular warfare operations as well as leader-centric and net-enabled operations. Other focus areas include enhanced coalition battlespace situational awareness, coalition logistics planning and partnership-building capabilities. Information security also is a key challenge, and CWID organizers would like to see technical solutions in this area as well.

As in 2009, assessment of the interoperability trials will take place in three areas: warfighter/operator utility, technical interoperability and/or information assurance. Warfighters and emergency responder personnel from the U.S. armed services, coalition partners, local and federal agencies and nongovernment organizations will be on hand to examine the technologies.

This year, more than 1,000 senior decision-makers representing the military and other government organizations visited U.S. CWID sites where technologies were put to the test in real-world scenarios. A final report about the event is expected to be released next month and will be posted on the CWID Web site.

LandWarNet closed with a keynote address by Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army’s vice chief of staff. Outlining his views on command and control, the general noted that the Army is in a critical time of transformation and conflict. He added that the service has undergone rapid change during the last eight years.

The general noted that a critical lesson learned from the past several years is that vital technological and operational changes are made on the ground by soldiers at the tip of the spear. More data is now available to warfigthers than ever before, but it must be made available to a variety of personnel across all echelons, he said. (more…)

Top Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) officials met with industry today to share their strategy and plans for the future. Lt. Gen. Carroll F. Pollett, USA, director, DISA told attendees at the Forecast to Industry Day that the agency is looking to the commercial sector to engage with DISA’s leaders and help shape the future. Although he is considering developments in the short term—four to five years—he is especially focused on where the military and the United States will be 10 years from now as he makes plans and fills current requirements.

Technology alone is not DISA’s primary concern, Gen. Pollett said. With a vision of “Leaders Enabling Information Dominance in Defense of our Nation,” the agency’s focus is on how to deliver capabilities to the warfighter more efficiently and effectively. Commanders aren’t concerned with how a capability is delivered, he pointed out, they just want the capability at their disposal when they need it. The difference in bringing command and control, infrastructure and information assurance to the edge in today’s environment is that the edge is everywhere in irregular warfare, he said. The general emphasized that he is not interested in proprietary solutions.

This strategy will require resources—both in funding and personnel, he noted. “You can have dreams and visions, but without resources, all you have are dreams and visions,” the general stated. Some of his concerns include retaining intellectual capital when the agency moves its headquarters from Arlington, Virginia, to Fort Meade, Maryland, as a result of the Base Realignment and Closure decision. To address this issue, DISA’s leaders are reviewing what skill sets are needed, which may result in retraining and shifting personnel, he explained.

The general has spoken with the combatant commanders of nearly all of the combatant commands and the leaders of each of the services to improve his understanding of their requirements. These meetings also contributed to an understanding of how DISA can leverage its relationship with the commercial sector. However, DISA is not making a to-do list as it has in the past. Instead, it is creating a living document that can be changed over time, he added.

“What will we do next?” he asked rhetorically. “That’s where my focus is. What am I doing so international coalitions, national-level leaders and warfighters have capabilities? How do we partner with industry to accomplish this?” He agreed that the partnership announced yesterday between the General Services Administration and DISA will result in greater efficiencies, improved processes, more capabilities to the warfighter, “and if we’re lucky, we’ll save some money in the process,” the general said.

In addition to DISA partnering with industry, Gen. Pollett said the agency also needs companies to partner with each other to develop enterprise solutions.