CSIP: AC battalion command from an RC perspective.

On Christmas Eve 1998, I was sitting at my desk at the Department of Interior, US Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Division in Denver, Colorado, when the phone rang. It was my brigade commander calling to tell me that, as an Army National Guard (ARNG) officer, I was going to take command of a unique battalion. That was the beginning of my journey from citizen soldier to active duty battalion commander.

The purpose of this article is to share some experiences along the journey but, more importantly, to examine some of the differences between Active Component (AC) and Reserve Component (RC) battalion command. Hopefully, this article will provide some insights into AC command from an RC perspective.

I was on active duty from 1985 until 1988 when I became a member of the ARNG. Upon my selection for participation in, the Command and Staff Integration Program (CSIP), I assumed command of 1st Battalion, 17th Field Artillery (1-17 FA), a Paladin battalion in the 75th FA Brigade, III Corps Artillery, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on 27 June 2000.

History of CSIP. In 1996, Lieutenant Colonel John R. Hennigan became the first AC officer in recent history to take command of an ARNG artillery battalion, the 1-141 FA in Louisiana. (See his article "First AC Commander of ARNG Battalion," March-April 1998). Subsequently, in September 1998, Colonel Mark A. Graham took command of the 40th Infantry Division (Mechanized) Artillery, California ARNG, as the first AC officer to take command of a brigade-level ARNG command during peacetime. That same year, the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Dennis J. Reimer, created an exchange program between the AC and RC at the battalion command level.

The purpose of the AC/RC CSIP is to foster an exchange of ideas, further integrating the AC and RC into "one Army," and provide each participating officer with unique experiences that will have a positive impact on his future higher-level assignments.

Initially, CSIP began at the battalion level. However, CSIP recently has been expanded to include battery command and key staff positions with future brigade-level commands possible.

Qualified officers from the RC and AC are selected to exchange command tours for a period of two years. That is to say, the RC officer enters active duty and assumes command of an AC battalion. Likewise, the AC officer transitions into the RC, either as a member of the ARNG or the US Army Reserves (USAR). He then assumes command of an RC battalion fulltime. Upon completion of the command tour, both RC and AC officers transition back to their original components.

The "Class of 2000" consisted of eight officers: four from the RC and four from the AC.

Training. Training is always a major concern for both AC and RC commanders. Time is limited and always at a premium, regardless of which component in which one commands.

The typical RC battalion commander has 48 unit training assembly (UTA) periods per year; each monthly drill (typically Saturday and Sunday) equates to 4 UTAs. Additionally, the RC commander has 15 days at annual training (AT). In total, that means the RC commander has approximately 39 days per training year (TY) to train soldiers.

At first glance, the number of days to prepare a unit for combat may seem small. However, when compared to the time the AC commander has to focus on go-to-war tasks in a battalion that operates 365 days per year, the ARNG number of 39 training days per year is not nearly as small as it initially appears.

1-17 FA trains on a 24-week cycle called a Red, Amber, Green, Gold (RAGG) cycle, each divided into six-week blocks. One would assume that this 24-week cycle would yield a lot of time to train on artillery tables and associated tasks. However, if one analyzes the RAGG cycle, it quickly becomes apparent the AC commander faces many of the same challenges the RC commander faces. (See Figures 1 and 2 for the comparison of AC and RC annual training days.)

It is easy to argue the pluses and minuses of the examples in the figures. But the fact remains that all commanders face the challenge of maximizing training. AC and RC commanders must vehemently defend against any incursions into scheduled training.

Training should be driven by the mission training plan (MTP), based on established artillery tables; focused on the unit's mission-essential task list (METL); tough, realistic and challenging; and, most importantly, fun. The commander must achieve excellent training at every opportunity plus all the other requirements of command and maintain a balance between his professional and personal life.

As Figure 1 shows, the AC commander has approximately 90 days per year to train artillery task. For all intents and purpose, the AC unit has just under three times the number of artillery training days the average RC unit has annually.

It is easy to assume that the average AC unit might be more combat ready than the average RC unit. However, that may not be true. The fact is that there are many factors that determine a unit's readiness. Strength, military occupational skill qualification (MOSQ), fielding of new equipment, morale, unit cohesion and leadership all play major roles in the combat readiness of a unit.

The key for the RC commander is to allocate minimum time to administrative tasks and focus on warfighting tasks. The fulltime staff should ensure the commander and soldiers have every opportunity to train without distracters.

Maintenance. Maintenance must be a major priority for all commanders. Every aspect of training pivots on a unit's operational readiness. You cannot train on MTP tasks if your maintenance program is "broken."

The AC commander should dedicate a lot of time to training soldiers and leaders how to ensure proper maintenance. Leaders at all levels, especially at the battery level, must be involved. When the leadership is intimately involved in maintenance, not only is that unit's operational readiness (OR) rate higher, but also its morale is higher and soldiers have confidence in their equipment. DA Form 2406 Materiel Conditions Status Report must reflect the unit's maintenance status accurately.

The primary difference between the AC and RC units is that fulltime maintenance personnel perform the majority of organizational and direct support maintenance on RC vehicles and equipment during the 28-days per month when the commander and his soldiers are not present. This makes it more important for RC commanders and junior leaders to check with the fulltime battery or battalion staff on the status of their equipment and its availability for drill periods. Maintenance issues and the DA Form 2406 must always be part of the unit's monthly training meeting.

The biggest maintenance danger for RC units is that while most equipment can "hobble" through the typical drill weekend, long-term combat sustainability is severely jeopardized if the unit's vehicles and equipment are not well-maintained. Leaders and soldiers must be technically proficient at maintaining both personal and section equipment.

Personnel. Well-trained and well-led soldiers who are motivated and disciplined remain the key to the operational success of every battalion.

When I took command of the 1-17 FA, our unit strength hovered around 68 percent with 308 of the 454 soldiers authorized by the modified table of organization and equipment (MTOE).

Units, either AC or RC, cannot survive without good people, especially with the correct MOS.

While the total number of soldiers assigned to my battalion increased dramatically after I assumed command, we still had personnel shortages in the correct MOS and grades. For example, during my command from June 2000 to June 2002, my battalion never had more than 50 percent strength in MOS 13E Fire Direction Specialists. As a result, I only could man half my six platoon operations centers (POCs). In addition, I had to modify Paladin tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) as outlined in FM 3-09.70, TTP for M109A6 Howitzer (Paladin) Operations to conduct live-fire operations.

One of the most significant AC combat readiness issue is personnel turnover. The continuous influx and exodus of personnel, especially in key leadership positions, significantly affects readiness and cohesion. It takes time for all soldiers, regardless of rank, to become familiar with new surroundings and personalities and overcome the turmoil of a permanent change of station (PCS).

During my command, I worked with 14 different battery commanders, 10 first sergeants, two operations officers (S3s) and two battalion executive officers (XOs). While they all have been superb, this amount of turnover is not conducive to establishing stability and unit cohesion over an extended period of time.

A battery commander in III Corps Artillery typically commands for 18 months; in comparison, it is not uncommon for an RC battery commander to command for three years, sometimes more. AC battery command should be extended to two years.

Another, and perhaps more significant, example, is the time a battalion S3 and XO serve in their positions in AC battalions. Routinely, these officers are in these positions for 12 months. If they are lucky, they will proceed to other branch-qualifying positions.

Twelve months as a battalion S3 or XO is not enough. During that short time, the officer may experience one rotation to the National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, California, and a Battle Command Training Program (BCTP) Warfighter exercise or an annual external evaluation (ABE). While these experiences are excellent, the S3 or XO only gets "one shot" at each experience to learn what and what not to do.

On the other hand, it is rare for RC officers to spend so little time in these two key leadership positions. Usually an RC officer will have a minimum of two years as a battalion S3 and, if he is lucky, two more years as the XO. The result is a field grade officer who is well-versed in battalion-level operations and understands all aspects of the command.

An advantage the RC commander has over his AC counterpart is stability of personnel. It is not uncommon to find soldiers in a section who graduated from high school together, left for basic combat training (BCT) and advanced individual training (AIT) at the same time, and have served in the same section or unit for five, 10 or more years.

Such longevity and stability within the RC unit can be counter-productive at times, especially when it comes to adhering to dogma and resisting change. But it also can result in a unit esprit de corps and unit relationships rarely matched by their AC brethren.

Final Thoughts. The CSIP is in its third year with the second crop of AC and RC battalion commanders finished with their first year in command. It remains a superb forum for the continued integration of the RC and AC into one seamless Army. Historical bias between the AC and the RC must remain just that--history.

With the AC draw down over the last decade and increased reliance on the RC for wartime missions and stability and support operations (SASO), such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo, we can never again function independently from the other.

With 67 percent of the US Army's FA assets in the ARNG, it is imperative that, as a branch, we support not only CSIP, but also the continued integration of the FA AC and RC. AC commanders who participate in this program must be among the best the branch has to offer. They should remain competitive upon their return to active duty and be afforded as good or even a better opportunity for selection to senior staff colleges and positions of higher responsibility. These officers have a wealth of knowledge.

Likewise, RC officers who lead AC soldiers must be exceptional leaders and the best of the best. The RC officer selected for AC command should have experience in line positions, including serving as a platoon leader, battery commander, battalion S3 and battalion XO, if possible. He must have a strong personality and character, be physically and mentally fit, articulate, dynamic and flexible. Prior AC experience is a significant benefit but should not be a prerequisite.

When asked would I participate in the program again--given what I know now--I always answer, "Yes!" The relationships, friendships and the tactical and technical experience I have gained are priceless. My command at Fort Sill is one of the most rewarding of my life.

Figure 1

AC Artillery Training Days by Red, Amber, Green, Gold (RAGG)
Cycle. This chart shows the number of days per 24-week
RAGG available for training on artillery tables and mission
training plan (MTP) tasks. With two RAGG cycles each year,
the AC FA battalion actually trains on artillery tasks
about 90 days per year.


168  Total Days Per RAGG
     (24 Weeks x 7 Days)

-48  Weekends

-30  Red Cycle Garrison Support
     (6 Weeks x 5 Days Per Week)

-10  Federal Holidays
     (10 Per Year Matched by III Corps)

 -5  Gold Cycle Prep for Red Cycle
     (5 Days)

-18  Command Maintenance
     (18 Weeks in Amber, Green and Gold)

 -6  Payday Activities

 -2  Inclement Weather

 -4  Mandatory Classes (Safety Day,
      etc.)

 45  Total

Figure 2

RC Artillery Training Days Annually. This chart shows the number of days
per year available for RC training on artillery tables and MTP tasks,
including weekend drills and annual training (AT).


39  Total Days Per Year
    (12 Months x 2 Plus 15 Days AT)

-2  Annual Christmas Party/
    Administrative Drill

-2  Load Out and Travel to AT

-2  Recovery/Travel to Home Station
    From AT

-1  Army Physical Fitness Testing/
    Weigh In

32  Total

Lieutenant Colonel Kenneth J. Lull, until recently commanded the 1st Battalion, 17th Field Artillery, part of the 75th Field Artillery Brigade in III Corps Artillery, Fort Sill, Oklahoma. He is the first Army National Guard officer in recent history to command an Active Component battalion as part of the Chief of Staff of the Army's Command and Staff Integration Program (CSIP). Currently, he is a student at the Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania. His previous assignments include serving as Executive Officer (XO) of the 169th Field Artillery Brigade and as XO and S3 of the 1st Battalion, 157th Field Artillery, part of the 169th Field Artillery Brigade, all in the Colorado Army National Guard (COARNG). He holds a Master of Science in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado and a Master of Science in Forest Hydrology and Watershed Management from the University of Montana.