주한미군연습-CJ3-RSOI.FE 영문 이시우 2003/01/17 204

http://www.korea.army.mil/org/j3/ed/rsoi/rsoi.html

RSOI/FE Exercise Branch
Reception, Staging, Onward movement, and Integration /Foal Eagle

WORKSHOP SUMMARIES

Exercise Participant Support Workshop Summary.doc

APS Workshop Summary.doc

C2 Workshop Summary.doc

C4 Workshop Summary.doc

C6 Workshop Summary.doc

CJVB Workshop Summary.doc

CPX TPFDD AD Lift and TRANSLOAD Workshop Summary.doc

CUWTF Workshop Summary.doc

EPW Workshop Summary.doc

ACC Workshop Summary.doc

MSEL Sim Workshop Summary.doc

NCC Workshop Summary.doc

NEO Workshop Summary.doc

Personnel Reporting Workshop Summary.doc

Pol Mil Workshop Summary.doc

SC Reception Centers Workshop Summary.doc

Staff Augmentation Workshop Summary.doc

TMO WorkshopSummary.doc

WHNS Workshop Summary.doc

Exercise Participant Support Workshop Summary.doc

Exercise Participant Support: A workshop was held for each service (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine and SOF). Status of the four objectives established for the workshop is provided below.

a. The first objective was to establish a single service POC and supporting structure for exercise participant support. This objective was accomplished for all services.

b. The second objective was to have 80% or more of the forces in each service loaded in the deployment PID for RSOI/FE and CJLOTS ready for validation. Only SOF accomplished this objective. During the MPC, the other four service did obtain information on their forces needed to load the PID and should be able to accomplish this objective shortly after the MPC. It was noted during the MPC Outbrief that the CJLOTS deployment PID for CJLOTS must be completed by 8 Oct 02 and RSOI/FE deployment PID by 1 Nov 02 in order to ensure validation timelines are met.

c. The third objective of identifying reception and onward movement requirements was not accomplished since this information is based on forces loaded in the PID.

d. The fourth objective of identifying life support requirements was not accomplished since this information is also based on forces loaded in the PID.

APS Workshop Summary.doc

A. (U) War Reserve Branch, G4, Eighth United States Army

(1) (U) An APS-4 Workshop was held on 24 Sep 02, 1300-1700 at the Battle Simulation Center. The purpose of the APS-4 Workshop was to finalize the FTX draws of selective equipment from the APS-4 Brigade Set, the Combat Support Hospital (CSH)/Medical Set; APS-4 Operational Project Stocks Korean Service Corps and the APS-4 War Reserve Stocks for Allies-Korea (WRSA-K), scheduled during Reception, Staging, Onward Movement and Integration/Foal Eagle 2003 (RSOI/FE 03). All workshop objectives were discussed. Concepts of operations for each category of APS-4 being exercised were reviewed and finalized. The appendices to the RSOI/FE 03 Exercise Directorate Annex are in draft and are being forwarded to the appropriate organizations for final input for all of the APS-4 draws.

(2) (U) Listed below are the approved exercise draws/FTXs that were finalized during the RSOI/FE 03 Mid Planning Conference for APS-4 FPC Workshop:

(a) (U) Brigade Set Draw: Three proposed Courses of Action (COA) were addressed during and after the APS-4 Workshop that outlined 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division (1/1) equipment to be drawn in support of a battalion-size task force (1-34 BN TF) and an armor battalion (2-34 AR BN):

(i) (U) COA 1: 2-34 AR BN draws and rail loads equipment from Camp Carroll to Pusan for CJLOTS. Equipment is then uploaded on a Large Medium Speed Roll-On/Roll-Off (LMSR) ship, moved to the vicinity of Pyongtaek, down loaded and then moved by rail to Camp Casey for the installation of MILES and then a Force-on-Force (FoF) exercise is conducted at Twin Bridges Training Area (TBTA). At the completion, equipment is returned to Camp Casey for Operations After Maintenance (OAM) i.e. bring back to TM 10/20, cleaned, inspected and rail loaded to Camp Carroll for turn-in. Meanwhile, 1-34 BN TF draws equipment, rail loads to Camp Casey, and then conducts a Tactical Road March (TRM) to Korean Training Area for Live Fire screening/zero/registration of major weapon systems, returns to Camp Casey for OAM and then rail loaded to Camp Carroll for turn-in. COA 1 is most expensive, allows for training of more personnel and time to get back to FT Riley in time for scheduled NTC preparation that starts on 14 Apr 02. COA 1 consists of 1,971 PAX and 988 vehicles (wheel/track).

(ii) (U) COA 2: 1-34 BN TF conducts CJLOTS, Force-on-Force and Live Fire. This COA allows TF to participate in both CJLOTS and RSOI/FE 03 but the unit is on the Korean peninsula for an extended period and these exercises interfere with scheduled NTC training preparation scheduled to start on 14 Apr 02 at FT Riley. COA 2 consists of 1,244 PAX and 607 vehicles (wheel/track).

(iii)(u) COA3: Identical to COA 1 except 2-34 AR BN is not participating in the FoF exercise at TBTA. This COA requires less FSB (-) support and as a result, costs associated with draw are reduced. COA 2 exercises more personnel, bigger footprint but allows soldiers to get back in time for NTC prep and is less expensive to execute than COA 1 but more expensive than COA2. COA 3 consists of 1,715 PAX and 871 vehicles (wheel/track).

(iv) (U) COA 4: Identical to COA 2 except 1-34 BN TF is not participating in the FoF exercise at TBTA. This COA allows TF to participate in both CJLOTS and Live fire (screen/registration/zero) during RSOI/FE 03 but not to participate in the FoF. This allows the unit to redeploy to its home stationin time to prepare for scheduled NTC training scheduled to start on 14 Apr 02 at FT Riley. COA 2 consists TBD PAX and TBD vehicles (wheel/track).

(b) (U) Combat Support Hospital MEDEX 2003: 18th MEDOM, 16th MEDLOG, and a unit to be identified (USAMMA) will draw all medical and non-medical items associated with 84 beds from the 296 bed Combat Support Hospital. The 84 beds were reconfigured during RSOI/FE 02. During RSOI/FE 03, the same 84 beds will be drawn and relocated (may leave Camp Carroll, may not, a final decision has not been made). The 84 bed CSH will be “complexed” or set up into its wartime configuration.

(c) (U) Korean Service Corps Battalion (WRSA-K) FTX: KSC BN will draw OCIE and CDE equipment from the KSC OPROJ at Pusan Storage Facility, conduct joint inventory, issue IAW wartime procedures, load-up equipment via rolling stocks and then move equipment to the front gate of Pusan Storage Facility. This will end the exercise. Equipment will then be moved back into storage.

(d) (U) War Reserve Stocks for Allies-Korea (WRSA-K): ROK Army Logistics Command will draw classes II, VII and IX supplies and equipment from WRSA-K, issue IAW wartime procedures, move the equipment to the railhead, tie it down and then rail load to ROK Army depot located in Youngcheon. Equipment will remain in ROK Army depots overnight and then rail loaded back to Camp Carroll for visual inspection and will then be turned in to storage.

(2) (U) ISSUE 1: APS-4 Brigade Set: Need General Officer decision on which COA for equipment to be drawn from APS-4 Brigade Set.

(a) (U) DISCUSSION. Four COAs are being considered, COA 1: 1-34 Battalion Task Force conducts live fire exercise (screen/registration/zero) and 2-34 Armor Battalion conducting a CJLOTS and FoF exercise at an estimated cost of $13.5M. COA 2: 1-34 Battalion Task Force conducts a CJLOTS and FoF exercise at an estimated cost of $11.2M. COA 3: 1-34 Battalion Task Force conducts live fire exercise (screen/registration/zero) and 1-34 Armor Battalion conducts a CJLOTS at an estimated cost of $10.7M. COA 4: 1-34 Battalion Task Force conducts a CJLOTS and Live Fire exercise (screen/registration/zero) at an estimated cost of TBD.

(b) (U) ACTION/RESOLUTION. Eighth U.S. Army G4 prepared a decision brief for Assistant Chief of Staff, C/J3, CFC/USFK; Deputy Commanding General for Support (Armistice), Eighth U.S. Army; and Chief of Staff, Eighth U.S. Army. This brief consisted of three courses of action and laid out the costs of each component of the exercise, i.e. CJLOTS, FoF, and Live Fire. Each exercise component cost is broken out by OPTEMPO and Deprocessing/COSIS costs. On 28 Sep 02, during GO Decision Brief, a fourth COA was put on the table for consideration as mentioned in paragraph 2 (a).

(c) (U) PRIORITY. High.

(d) (U) SUSPENSE. 28 Sep 02.

(e) (U) IMPACT IF NOT RESOLVED. GO decision on COA will determine what Brigade Set equipment will be exercised. Need enough time to submit requirement to CCK once funds are committed.

(f) (U) OPRS/POCS USFK/CFC CJ3 Plans, LTC Michael Staver, 736-5559,

C2 Workshop Summary.doc
POINT PAPER

RSOI 03 MPC Summary, 24-27 Sep 02

PURPOSE: Provide summary of C/J2 objectives and MPC workshops

DISCUSSION:

- C/J2 Workshop Objectives

— Confirm staff/component participation

— Review exercise planning timeline

— Discuss exercise scenario and scrub events

— Present and scrub C/J2 augmentation requirements

— Ensure compatibility between component and USFK C/J2 intelligence training objectives

— Discuss communications and simulation architectures and table issues from previous AAR

— Explain intelligence scripting process

— Discuss proposed key STARTEX OB and ensure compatibility with player training reqts

- SDM Review

— Good coordination between PACOM, USFJ, USFK for SDM inject integration

— Will forward inputs to PACOM; combine all inputs into master exercise SDM for all components

— USTC, JCS reps not present for input/coordination

- Workshop 1, Exercise Intel Update, PIE Brief, Foreign Disclosure

— Many newcomers since IPC, review beneficial to discuss overall exercise objectives/scenario

— Foreign Disclosure brief (US only) essential for off-pen participants to minimize releaseability problems when drafting MSELs and injecting SDM/Storyline events

— Events in PACOM Storyboard database need downgrade events to SECRET/RELROK

— Drafting MSELs/Storyboard events impacting ROK exercise play have potential to derail exercise flow if not classified RELROK by originators; ROKs will not have event visibility

- Workshop 2, Simulations, Systems, Collection Management, ACC ISR

— New TACSIM version ( T5 ) field-tested this year

— Will handle more robust database, additional fields, and increased throughput

— May have glitches as a newly-fielded system upgrade

— Review of Systems Architectures for RSOI 03

— Highlighted need for additional SIPRNET drops, esp at TANGO and KBSC, configured with IWS for off-pen coordination; very few or no GCCS-K terminals between USFJ, PACOM, JCS, USTC, SPACECOM/NORAD

— ACC ISR reps coordinated with USFK J6 for UAV feeds and CPX/FTX integration

- Attendee Participation

— Multiple messages sent to on and off-peninsula POCs, beginning with C/J3 ED announcement more than one month out; dismal representation by many on-pen directorates
— No reps from CAD, CM, JCS, nor USTC for MPC duration
— 27 participants for SDM review
— Approx 45 for Workshop 1 (Exercise Intel Update, PIE Brief, Foreign Disclosure)
— 25 for Workshop 2 (Simulations, Systems, Collection Management, ACC ISR)
— Collection Management no-show for Workshop 2, brief cnxd
RECOMMENDATION: None. FYI only.

<>
JOHN A. DOWNEYII, MAJ, USAF
C/J2 Plans Officer

C4 Workshop Summary.doc
RSOI/FE MPC WORKSHOP SUMMARY

Time/Location: Wed, 25 Sep, 0800 1200, CBSC, Rm 114A

POC: C4 Operations and Exercises Branch, Plans and Operations Division
Maj Harry Davis, Jr. 725-4408

Administration:

Although I arranged (the day prior) to come in at 0700 on the day of the brief, the facility was still secure and I and others had to wait until CBSC staff to arrive to open up the facility. The location that the workshop was held was barely large enough to hold all the participants. We had 60 personnel attend the workshop. The room was only large enough for 50 (only 45 chairs were available). Thus, there were a number of participants who had to stand or sit on a desk or a hastily prepared seat during the discussion. There were many others who left because there was nowhere else to sit. The room air conditioning system was fine once it was turned on. After careful thought, I believe the logistics workshop should be held in a room large enough to sit at least 75. The time allotted for the workshop was sufficient. The room was used from 0800-1100.

Topics: Overview of the exercises
Startex data requirements (Annex D, LogSitRep, Component Requirements)
MSR/ASR Review, RSOI data flow, TPFDD

A general exercise overview was reviewed to all participants (because of all new participants who had not attended the IPC). Participants were briefed on requirements for the Annex D submission and startex data requirements. There was ample discussion about  drop dead  date requirements for  real time  submission of information. It was understood that all participants would be given the deadline as soon as it is made available. Participants reviewed the requirements for submission of the Logistics Situation Reports and its pending web-based update capability. Participants were also advised to attend other related logistics workshops (i.e., WHNS, TPFDD, and CJLOTS). Participants were provided an update to the new MSR/ASR and their pending approval for the exercise. Participants held a lengthy discussion on the information concerning the theater and strategic sea and air movement schedule. There was a follow-on discussion concerning submission of startex data and an example was mentioned concerning the data submitted for UFL 02 on US Prepo Ships. Because of the lack of timely submission of startex on US Prepos ships, UFL 02 had ships no longer in the inventory as part of the exercise. A brief was given on the proper procedures for submitting timely data prior to the exercise. Finally, participants held a discussion specifically addressing the movement of assets within the theater. A J-4 representative, along with the PACOM representative, were able to provide a clear explanation to all participants on the different movement categories within the theater as it applies to the TPFDD. Participants were given POC lists for all briefers at the workshop. Based upon the attendance roster that all participants signed in on, an accompanying email was sent out to all participants to give them the capability to coordinate with each other on significant logistics issues