By the time you read this, we will be heavily engaged with finalizing our Military Occupational Classification and Structure (MOCS) input for fiscal year 2002 (FY02). Resubmission of the military occupational specialty (MOS) 98Y (Signals Collector/Analyst) proposal is at the top of the list. Warrant Officer (WO) accessions continue to be a priority challenge and we are working hard in this area. Resolution of officer intermediate-level education issues may be at hand, especially where it concerns functional area (FA) qualifications. The Army Staff should make decisions before the end of this year. We will continue our active involvement in this for both the Military Intelligence (Ml) area of concentration (AOC) (35) and FA34 (Strategic Intelligence). This office will monitor these decisions closely. The Director, Office of the Chief, Military Intelligence (OCMI), is Lieutenant Colonel Eric W. Fatzinger.
Military Occupational Classification and Structure (MOCS) Update. One of the most repeated questions we have received lately concerns the status of MOS 98Y merger proposal. In a previous issue of the Military intelligence Professional Bulletin (MIPB), we noted that we had submitted the 98Y proposal in FY01 but that it had been returned for further study because of the anticipated significant impact on the Army's transient, trainee, holdover, and student (TTHS) account. This review continues but we remain on track for FY02 MOCS submission and inclusion of the 98Y proposal.
98Y History. Since the focus of this MIPB issue is on echelons above corps (EAC), and since the two combining MOSs in the 98Y proposal reside predominately at the EAC level, some extended discussion of this topic is appropriate. The two MOSs are 98K, (Signals Collection/Identification Analyst) and 98J (Electronic Intelligence Interceptor/Analyst).
The initial study effort to determine which signals intelligence (SIGINT) MOSs would be good candidates for merger identified three general functional categories for consideration. These were signals analytic, signals externals exploitation, and signals internal exploitation. When the U.S. Army Intelligence Center looked closely at 98J and 98K and the signal characteristics on which they focus, we saw them easily falling into the exploitation category for signals externals. Other SIGINT MOSs such as 98G (Cryptologic Linguist) and 98H (Communications Interceptor! Locator) predominately fell into the internals exploitation realm, and of course 98C (Signals Intelligence Analyst), and parts of 98J and 98K fell into the analytic realm. This commonality of 98J and 98K functions ultimately became the basis for merger discussions. The initial studies, discussions, and decision papers highlighted the fact that the 98Y merger would not be easy to accomplish. Nevertheless, the consensus of all of those studies and paper s was that it could and should be done. Countless discussions later, the concept has now taken the form of a proposal in the MOCS process.
Ultimately, discussions on the 98Y merger lead to the bottom line question of "What does the field get out of this merger?" The answer is clear. The 98Y soldiers will provide greatly increased flexibility in both mission management and dealing with a rapidly changing signals environment. It is our hope that commanders will be better able to react quickly and surge capability as needed when faced with unexpected missions. More importantly, the new multiskilled 98Y soldier will be readily adaptable to technology changes in the collection, analysis, and reporting equipment of our trade.
STAR MOSs. In past issues of the MIPB, the Proponent Office has often highlighted the need to address the STAR MOS issue. In this column, we would like to provide some insight on why we are so concerned about these MOSs.
By definition, a STAR MOS is one that has unfilled noncommissioned officer (NCO) authorizations at the Sergeant and Staff Sergeant levels, while having an inventory of non-boarded Specialists and Sergeants who meet the time-in-service and time-in-grade requirements for a recommendation of promotion. When we identify an MOS as meeting this criteria, we are concerned for three reasons:
* Important NCO positions are remaining unfilled.
* There is a direct, negative imppact on soldier morale and retention when otherwise qualified soldiers are not receiving promotions.
* The ability of the Army to successfully function with these positions unfilled implies to some that the positions may not, in fact, be necessary as NCO positions.
Taken together, the effect on the health of our MOSs is direct and immediate.
The preferred method for filling NCO ranks in any MOS is to gradually "grow" soldiers with the appropriate technical and leadership skills to best serve the Army. When faced with long-term NCO shortages in STAR MOSs, however, the Proponent is forced to look at other potential solutions to filling these NCO positions, primarily the Bonus Extension and Retention (BEAR) program. While this answers the need, and many of our best NCOs certainly come out of the BEAR program, it is not the preferred method. As leaders, we must make certain that all of our fully qualified soldiers go before a promotion board as soon as they are ready and eligible. The point of contact for enlisted actions is Sergeant Major Crossman at E-mail email@example.com.
Warrant Officer Actions
Two studies affecting the Army Warrant Officer (WO) Corps are currently ongoing. Their purpose is to identify changes required to ensure that the WO Corps is well-positioned to support the Army of the 21st century. These are the first in-depth studies to look at the Army WO Corps since the mid-1980s. We are anticipating a number of positive results from these efforts and will keep you informed in this department as the Army approves and implements these recommendations.
ADS XXI. The Army Development System XXI (ADS XXI) began in November 1999. The Warrant Officer Personnel Management Study Group, operating under this program, identified several initiatives subsequently approved by the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA). These initiatives are--
* Tailor technicai training to units and assignments.
* Publish a WO professional development policy and update other WO policies.
* Provide force development specialty training to WOs in those positions.
* Roll back Active Component (AC) WO grade structure.
* Assign AC WOs by grade. El Develop a WO tenure program.
* Expand technical WO accession base.
* Access technical WO at five to eight years of active federal service.
* Educate officers and NCOs on the roles of Warrant Officers.
We have been actively addressing all of these issues with the Army. The Warrant Officer Training Branch, Fort Huachuca, has been conducting a thorough "cradle to grave" (C2G) study for each of our WO MOSs to identify where we can use assignment-oriented training. OCMI is also in the process of evaluating the rollback of the AC warrant officer grade structure. This is a good thing for MI since we have far too many Chief Warrant Officer Four (CW4) slots and not nearly enough CW2/3/5 slots. This restructure will actually improve promotion potential because CW3 will no longer be a bottleneck.
We are expanding the accession base through offering AOC 351E (Human Intelligence Collection Technician) to qualified 98G applicants. Additionally, we will soon offer 350D (Imagery Intelligence Technician) to qualified 96H (CGS Operator) applicants. The Army will modify the 350L (Attache Technician) prerequisites in order to offer the MOS to those soldiers who meet all accession requirements except Defense Attache Service (DAS) experience if they possess appropriate Bachelors degrees.
ATLDP. The Army Training and Leadership Development Panel (ATLDP), Warrant Officer Study, is the third phase of another CSA- directed effort intended to assess the state of training and leader development in the Army. As in the Officer and NCO Studies already completed, and the Army Civilian Study that will follow, we are assessing training and leader development requirements of the Objective Force. The WO portion of this study has been ongoing since October 2001 and will be complete in March 2002. All of our WOs should have had the opportunity to provide input either through study team visits to their organizations and installations or through surveys mailed to each WO. Again, we will be providing additional information as it becomes available during the next several months. The point of contact for Warrant Officer actions is CW5 Castleton at E-mail Ion.firstname.lastname@example.org.
Intermediate-Level Education (ILE). TRADOC continues to work on the revised ILE program. While a number of issues remain to be resolved, a couple of points are becoming clearer. There will be two phases. The first phase will consist of a three- to four-month course that is mandatory for all officers. This will be the part of the course that actually produces the military education level four (MEL-4) and joint professional military education level 1 (JPME-1). Phase I, as it is called, will not necessarily be in residence at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. We anticipate that there will be various options such as correspondence courses, the Total Army School System (TASS) distributed classrooms, and possibly at extended Command and General Staff College (CGSC) campus sites the Army may establish. Phase II will vary depending on the Career Field (CF). Operations CF officers will all most likely attend the resident Advanced Operations Warfighting Course (AOWC) sponsored by CGSC. Officers in other career fields may or ma y not attend AOWC since each FA will develop specific training for its own officers. Today, the plan is for FA 34 (Strategic Intelligence) officers to continue to attend both the Strategic Intelligence Officer Course (SIOC) and the Postgraduate Intelligence Program (PGIP). We are actively engaged in providing input for an Army decision sometime in the near future. The point of contact for Officer actions is Ms. Borghardt at E-mail charlotte. email@example.com.
Upcoming Selection Boards.
The tentative dates for the FY02 selection boards are shown in Figure 1. Remember, it is essential that you have an up-to-date photograph in your files--do not wait until the last minute.
You can access the OCMI website by going to the Intelligence center Homepage at http://usaic.hua.army.mil and then linking to QOMI with the "Training/MI Professionals" button. You will be able to find information on issues ranging from enlisted CF overviews to officer, warrant officer, and civilian updates.
Figure 1 Tentative Dates for FY02 Selection Boards. Major 16 April to 17 May 2002 Career Field Designation (CFD) Year Group 1992 28 May to 7 June 2002 Lieutenant Colonel 26 February to 29 March 2002 Colonel 30 July to 23 August 2002
Lieutenant Colonel Eric Fatzinger is currently the Director, Office of the Chief, Military Intelligence (OCMI). Readers may contact him via E-mail at eric. firstname.lastname@example.org and by telephone at (520) 533-1173 or DSN 821-1173. The Deputy Director is Robert C. White, Jr. You can contact him through E-mail at email@example.com and telephonically at 520-533-1190 or DSN 821-1190.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin|
|Date:||Apr 1, 2002|
|Previous Article:||Force Design Update: Theater Intelligence Brigades/Groups. (Force Design).|
|Next Article:||ASAS Block II fielding update. (TSM Notes).|