Gulf War Air Power Survey
Security police guards perimeter of air base
Download 5.55 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Contingency contracting officers established Blanket Purchase Agreements for food service.
- Contract Transfers to Saudi Arabia
- Table 5 Contracts Transferred to Saudi Arabia
- Total 141 $20,245,659
- Contracting During the War
- Closing Out the Contracts
- One of the concerns upon arriving in Saudi Arabia was to set up contracts for food service. At the end of the war, new contracts were needed to support redeployment.
- Transitional Rules of Engagement
Security police guards perimeter of air base. 3 Contracting Support Background The CENTAF Contracting Directorate was responsible for contracting support for all CENTAF activities in the Southwest Asia theater of operations. They also provided lateral contracting support to the other CENTCOM Services that participate in activities sponsored by the Joint Chief of Staff. They assisted in contract management for Southwest Asia prepositioning program, including a $51-million Air Force Caretaker Maintenance contract in Oman to support the prepositioning of more than $2-billion in vital war reserve material and equipment.871 Many statutory and regulatory documents have been provided to contracting officers to help guide them in the performance of their duties during contingency operations. Congress enacted some 350 laws which provide for a quick response in times of crisis. Two of them affect contracting in foreign countries during contingency operations: • 50 U.S. Code 1431-1435, The “National Defense Contracts Exempt From Certain Statutory Limitation,” authorizes the Department of Defense to enter into, modify, or make advance payments on contracts in the interest of the national defense without regard to certain statutory limitations. • 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(2) authorizes the Department of Defense to forego formal advertising when its need for property or services “is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the United States would be seriously injured. . . . ” The Defense Resources Act is designed to provide the authority necessary to meet various contingencies. Contingency Contracting Officers cers should ensure that they are aware of exactly what has been authorized before using this authority. Some specific aspects of this Act reveal how far-reaching potential waivers could be. For example, Section 401 provides the President with authority to authorize entering into contracts and into modifications of contracts without regard to the provisions of law whenever he deems such action would facilitate the performance of the national defense; except it does not authorize the use of the cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost system of contracting or any contract provision in violation of law relating to limitation of profits. Section 1214 states that all laws and parts of laws in conflict with the provisions of this Act are hereby suspended to the extent of such conflict for the period during which this Act shall be in force. Even so, contracting officers are still required to adhere to sound contracting principles to the extent possible, and contracting records are subject to audit. Also, the contracting officer must thoroughly document reasons for not following normal procedures.872 Deployment The inability to conduct site surveys in the area of responsibility resulted in paying up to sixty-five percent more for the supplies and services than what would normally be expected. Contingency contracting officers use site surveys to determine requirements, sources of supply, distance to market, contractors' access to base, etc. However, contracting officers had to depend on host nation governments for sources of supply. They also used “jobbers” that were aware of local sources of supply. To make matters worse, some wing commanders and resource managers would not provide the contracting officers with the needed resources to do their job (i.e., locate sources of supply, obtain rental vehicles for use to identify sources, and provide mobile telephones to facilitate their work). As a result, contracting officers found it necessary to rely on vendors who came to the gate, where the contracting officer would provide them a list of requirements which the vendor would buy from the local market, then deliver to the location. This also resulted in much higher prices for the items being procured. As a result, the CENTAF contracting officer discussed this problem with wing commanders and provided justification to support contracting officers. Once wing commanders understood this, they normally supported their contracting officers.873 62
Contingency contracting officers established Blanket Purchase Agreements for food service. 8
With an operational philosophy of getting “the iron on the ramp” for Operation Desert Shield and no predeployment site surveys, contracting support was severely degraded; as a consequence, thousands of military personnel slept on aircraft hanger floors and ate only Meals-Ready-To-Eat for approximately one week after arriving at beddown locations. Air Force units, almost without exception, deployed to Saudi Arabia ahead of logistical support teams even though many bases offered very little in the way of food, billeting, transportation, laundry, bottled water, ground fuel, etc. CENTAF contracting began to deploy contingency contracting officers from their headquarters to the beddown locations one or two days before the arrival of incoming units. These personnel established Blanket Purchase Agreements for hotel and other suitable contract quarters, food service catering, bottled water deliveries, rental cars and buses, and other necessary items on the local economy. Such foresight helped keep airlift assets concentrated on supplying units with warfighting capabilities, such as munitions, fuel equipment, spare parts, etc.874 The CENTAF Contracting Directorate deployed on 7 August 1990 with the advanced party. Initial concerns upon arrival in Saudi Arabia were to set up contracts for quarters, rental vehicles, material handling equipment, heavy equipment, food service, bottled water, and ground fuels. During this phase, the contracting officer was responsible not only for purchasing but the pick-up and delivery of items to customers as well. CENTAF contracting personnel initially provided all contracting support for headquarters at CENTCOM, ARCENT, NAVCENT, CENTAF, and two Air Force operating locations in the Riyadh area along with fourteen attached units. Overall, they supported over 6,000 people in the Riyadh area. More than 13,000 contracting negotiations worth almost $18 million were written between 7 August and 30 September 1990 to support these units. During this time frame, 70 percent of the purchase requests were bought, picked-up, and delivered to the supported customers within a day or two of the order. Early in the deployment, contracting had problems interfacing with finance. Wing commanders and resource managers placed greater emphasis on finance, performing check-cashing and currency exchanges, rather than on their support as paying agents. In many cases, at least initially, contracting personnel performed both contracting and paying agent responsibilities. Finance hours of operation were inflexible and did not coincide with contracting needs. In many cases, contracting required paying agents to accompany them after normal business hours, which resulted in placing contracting officers in an awkward position where there were no checks and balances between buyers and payers. There were no procedures for submitting contractors' invoices to finance for payment, and some invoices had to be hand-carried by contracting offi- cers through the payment process in order to get contractors paid within a reasonable time.875 By the end of August, the number of personnel and unit locations severely strained contracting capabilities to support the units. However, a few support units had arrived in Saudi Arabia with some contracting personnel. Lt. Col. Bradley R. Busch, Director of Contracting, CENTAF, used them to supplement his staff of eight in Riyadh, bringing the total at any given time to between twelve and fifteen contracting personnel. In order to meet the needs of combat forces arriving without support personnel, Busch divided the Riyadh-based contracting officers into small teams that were sent to beddown locations, some of which were “just a patch of runway and some sand and maybe a source of water.”876 Although port-handling and inland transportation fell within the scope of Army responsibilities, CENTAF contracting was tasked on several occasions to contract for offloading ships and arranging for transportation of critical assets to Air Force operating locations. The contractors responded to the challenge: off-loading critically needed munitions, special purpose vehicles, and Harvest Falcon assets from ports at Jeddah, Abu Dhabi, Muscat, and Raysuit to various beddown locations. These contracts were valued at more than $200,000. Unfortunately, Middle East businessman will not conduct business with females. In at least one case, the Tactical Air Command sent a female contracting officer to Saudi Arabia (Tabuk), and she was unable to negotiate contracts. Neither do Arab businessmen like to deal with enlisted men. Once contracting officers were allowed to wear civilian clothing, however, the problem with rank was resolved.877 Contract Transfers to Saudi Arabia In October 1990, HRH Prince Bandar bin Sultan accepted a proposal to send a U.S. team to work out procedures for host nation support. The director of the Joint Staff, Lt. Gen. Michael P. C. Carns, directed Maj. Gen. James W. Ray, U.S. Army, director of Military Programs, Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to travel to Saudi Arabia to put in place an operating process that used Saudi money to pay for fuel, water, transportation, and facilities. It was an excellent selection, since General Ray had spent five years in Saudi Arabia and three in Europe working on projects that involved host nation support agreements and was well qualified for the mission. General Ray and a team of specialists drawn from the Joint Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense arrived in Saudi Arabia on 17 October, where they developed and negotiated a support agreement. General Dan Starling, CENTCOM/J4 (logistics director), and Saudi deputy commander for Saudi Joint Forces, Maj. Gen. Abdul Aziz Al Sheik, signed the agreement. Under the agreement, which became effective 1 November 1990, the Saudi government would provide, at no cost to the United States, fuel, transportation, water, food, and facilities to support U.S. forces from the time of initial deployment. Before General Ray left, the Saudis presented him with a check to the U.S. Treasury for $760 million to cover in-country expenses from 7 August to 1 November. General Ray's team recommended to the CENTCOM commander that he establish a 16- to 17-person cell, headed by a general officer, to monitor and implement host nation support, and CENTCOM approved the recommendation. Brig. Gen. Patrick M. Stevens IV, division engineer from the corps' North Pacific Division, arrived in late November to head this cell and serve as General Starling's deputy.878 As a result, the Air Force transferred to the Saudi government 141 contracts valued in excess of $20 million at seven locations. The categories of the contracts and their dollar values are as indicated in Table 5, opposite page. Table 5 Contracts Transferred to Saudi Arabia
However, the Saudi government did not have the contracting infrastructure to administer the contracts, provide responsive support, or disburse prompt payment to contractors. Because of this, contractors were reluctant to enter into negotiations with the Saudis, with an end result of late delivery or no contract. There was also a tendency of awarding contracts based purely on the “low-bid.” Moreover, the centralized system used by the Saudis for contracting everything in Riyadh did not respond to U.S. Air Force bases scattered throughout the kingdom. Fuel trucks, linehaul trucks, and construction equipment were all examples of inoperative or broken equipment rented for the United States by the Saudis, wasting their money and Air Force contracting officers' time. The CENTCOM components lost faith in the system and contracted for critical operational requirements themselves. For example, the U.S. Army elected to contract for the majority of its requirements and only started to transfer their contracts to the Saudi government in March 1991. The biggest problems arose in trying to switch contract responsibility in mid-deploymentafter the contracts had already been written and the equipment was in use. Colonel Busch said, “You can't just turn it in and have the Saudis write contracts from scratch. You just can't do that when you're in the middle of a deployment.”879 Also, in many instances, our own supply system could have supported requirements, but was not utilized.880 In addition, new bases that came on-line after 1 November were heavily financed through Host Nation Support. For example, Al Kharj used $18.2 million in Saudi contracting support between 1 December 1990 and 31 January 1991. In spite of these successes, there were problems with Host Nation Support. CENTAF contracting devoted one full-time person as liaison with the Ministry of Defense for Aviation (MODA) to ensure that all contracts were successfully transferred and accepted. Sustaining the Bases Between October 1990 and February 1991, the local suppliers learned the law of supply and demand. Rental rates for some logistic items, such as forklifts, tractor trailers, vans, and buses, quickly increased to such a magnitude that the equipment often could be purchased for what had been paid in several months' rental. The immediate need, however, along with the uncertainty, and the lengthy process in obtaining approval often times precluded purchasing as an alternative to leasing.881 Once the initial “combat” contingency mode of contracting transitioned into the sustaining phase, CENTAF established a rear area contracting office at Shaw AFB, South Carolina. This provided for the purchase of medical supplies and equipment, computer and communications equipment, etc., in the United States and transported it to the theater much more effectively. By changing the contracting strategy to “two fronts,” it was estimated that the U.S. government realized a cost savings of up to thirty percent.882 Contracting During the War When Operation Desert Storm began, contracting had to compensate for some adjustments. Contracting officers were restricted to base in most instances which meant that purchases could only be arranged over the phone. Most contractors closed after dark, thereby reducing the buying day by half. Contractors started demanding cash and carry only. Some contractors refused to come to work unless they were provided a gas mask. Some food services contracts were terminated, since protection of food sources from terrorist contamination could not be guaranteed. During Threatcon Charlie883 conditions, contractors were also restricted from entering installations. All such readjustments could result in paralyzing operations. Some D-day requirements for immediate contracting negotiation, included halon for F-16s, fuel trucks, linehaul trucks, concertina wire, sand bags, crash recovery vehicles, high-speed copiers to support Air Tasking Order production, and ¾-inch videotapes for aircraft gun cameras. At the peak of combat operations, the United States had received more than $444 million in assistance from Saudi Arabia, Germany, and Japan. Much of this support was in the form of contracts awarded by the Saudi government to Saudi-owned companies, and by Saudi law any business operating in Saudi Arabia must be at least partly owned by a Saudi citizen. The success of such assistance depended heavily upon the relationship between the U.S. forces and the Saudi government.884 Sustaining this volume of support proved to be exceptionally challenging after 17 January 1991, when the air campaign began. Once the Iraqis began to retaliate by launching Scud missiles at cities in Saudi Arabia, laborers, stevedores, and truck drivers stopped working. (The majority of the Saudi work force is composed of third-country nationals under contract with Saudi companies.)885 Closing Out the Contracts With the cessation of hostilities, Lt. Gen. Charles A. Horner established a policy to cease new contracts except those required to support redeployment. Therefore, most of the contract effort shifted to terminating contracts, paying claims for damaged facilities and rental equipment, canceling contracts, and disbursing final payments to close out contracts. While contracting officers were the first in theater, they were the some of the last to leave. Even though many of the troops were leaving, the base close out teams still needed the same type contracts to support them in tearing down tent cities and reconstituting vehicles, hotel, food service, transportation, and other miscellaneous services. As of 30 June 1992, CENTAF had spent in excess of $244 million on contracts supporting the area of responsibility. 63
One of the concerns upon arriving in Saudi Arabia was to set up contracts for food service. At the end of the war, new contracts were needed to support redeployment. 9
4 Legal Support to Air Operations Operations Law The working relationship developed between CENTAF judge advocates and operations and intelligence personnel during exercises Gallant Knight/Gallant Eagle 88, Internal Look 90, and Bright Star 90 facilitated the early involvement of judge advocates in both the planning and execution of the air campaign. Throughout Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, judge advocates provided legal advice that helped craft operational guidance for defensive air operations, develop wartime rules of engagement, and review master attack plans, target selection, and weaponry decisions for all nominated targets. Transitional Rules of Engagement When the circumstances giving rise to the Persian Gulf War came about, there was no “off-the-shelf” reviewed and CJCS-approved Operations Plan available on which to base combat operations. When the Warning Order was issued, CENTAF lawyers assembled copies of the draft 1002-90 plan and of USCENTCOM Regulation 525-11, the regulation containing the approved peacetime rules of engagement for the USCENTCOM area of responsibility. These rules had a strong maritime orientation consistent with their use during Operation Earnest Will. Although USCENTCOM Regulation 525-11 contained a four- or five-page annex setting out rules for “Air Forces Not Supporting Carrier Operations,” the rules of engagement were not designed to support the operational scenario presented by Operation Desert Shield. The problem posed by the absence of rules of engagement tailored to the defensive air operations conducted during Operation Desert Shield was complicated by the deployment of USAF units that had not supported CENTAF and did not have copies of the governing rules. After ensuring that the F-15 squadrons at Dhahran and the AWACS and Rivet Joint crews at Riyadh had been briefed on the rules of engagement, the Director of Air Defense and the Chief of Operations Law worked together to overcome this by drafting supplemental rules tailored to support Operation Desert Shield air operations. On 16 August 1990, USCENTCOM approved the release of supplementary guidance consistent with 525-11, and CENTAF transmitted its transition to subordinate, Naval, and Marine aviation units. Because the message constituted a “summary” of USCENTCOM Reg. 525011 and supplemental rules of engagement approved by the National Command Authority,886 it also acted as a means of lawfully conveying SECRET NOFORN U.S. rules of engagement to other members of the Coalition involved in air operations. During the initial, defensive phase of air operations, CENTAF's principal focus in the promulgation of the rules was the protection of high value airborne assets and responses to penetration of Saudi airspace. Working with the Royal Saudi Air Force and the Royal Air Forcethe other Coalition partners flying combat air patrolCENTAF developed Operational Guidance, on 2 September 1990, that set out combined rules of engagement and Beyond Visual Range weapons release procedures. These procedures were distilled from the Transition Rules of Engagement transmitted on 16 August 1990 and could only be properly applied within the context of those rules. The Operational Guidance was designed to respond to both potential airborne Iraqi defectors887 and preemptive strikes. [DELETED]888 In mid-October 1990, an Iraqi fighter penetrated the Saudi border and was almost shot down. As a result of this incident, Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf expressed concern about the provocative impact of shooting down an Iraqi aircraft near the border and suggested modification of the Operational Guidance [DELETED]889 On 4 November 1990, CENTAF forwarded the revised Operational Guidance to the CENTCOM Directorate of Operations for coordination. In a 13 November 1990 message, CENTCOM approved the guidance and directed CENTAF to transmit it to the other components. [DELETED] [DELETED] [DELETED] [DELETED]890 [DELETED].891[DELETED]892 Ultimately, six nations agreed to the procedures contained in the operational guidance supplementing Operation Desert Shield transition rules of engagement.893 Directory: sgp -> library sgp -> Sgp country Programme Strategy for op6 sgp -> Itu-d study groups sgp -> Internship with Congressional Campaign Exploratory Committee — Only 4 spots left! sgp -> Using Well Logs in the Petroleum Industry sgp -> Telecommunication development bureau itu-d study groups Download 5.55 Mb. Share with your friends:
|