UNCLASSIFIED AD NUMBER ADB221756 NEW LIMITATION CHANGE TO Approved for public release, distribution unlimited FROM Distribution authorized to DoD and DoD contractors only; Critical Technology; 12 Nov 96. Other requests shall be referred to U.S. Army Engineer School, Directorate of Combat Developments, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473. AUTHORITY USACERL ltr 25 Apr 2001 THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED US Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering USACERL Technical Report 97/38 Research Laboratories January 1997 Revised Class IV Planning Factors by Carol A. Subick The Class IV supply category includes fortification materials, obstacle and barrier materials, and construction materials for base development and general engineering. A quick, valid estimate of the Class IV supply requirements for a given contingency is crucial to high-level military planning and analysis. The Total Army Analysis (TAA) planning scenarios and various Army analysis tools use a single planning factor (consumption rate) to estimate the gross tonnage requirements as a function of the number of soldiers deployed. In previous work the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (USACERL) was tasked to update the Class IV supply planning factor. Subsequently, representatives of the user community requested that the proponent of the study revisit two aspects of the final Class IV computation that could 19u7 overestimate actual Army Class IV requirements under certain scenarios. USACERL, in cooperation with user representatives and the proponent, met in October 1996 to discuss ideas for refining the computation of the overall consumption rate to best fit the requirements of the computer model used for the TAA studies. This report documents the computations made and the final algorithm derived for the Class IV planning factor as a result of the new methods adopted at the October 1996 meeting. Distribution authorized to Department of Defense and DoD contractors only; tImt tczhnr" _týt ,-'.ent n'- .ch.r.L-'o' "-(cid:127)' o Cf :, :tcont "U (cid:127) *ppW. T- his determination was made on 12 November 1996. Other requests shall be referred to: U.S. Army Engineer School, Directorate of Combat Developments, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents. DESTROY THIS REPORT WHEN IT IS NO LONGER NEEDED DO NOT RETURN IT TO THE ORIGINATOR Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final January 1997 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Revised Class IV Planning Factors MIPR 01CER001F, dated 21 October 1996 6. AUTHOR(S) Carol A. Subick 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (USACERL) REPORT NUMBER P.O. Box 9005 TR 97/38 Champaign, IL 61826-9005 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING / MONITORING U.S. Anmy Engineer School AGENCY REPORT NUMBER ATTN: ATSE-CD-SIM Directorate of Combat Developments Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Copies are available from the Defense Technical Information Center, ATTN: DTIC-DDRB, Cameron Station, Alexandria, VA 22304-6145 12a. DISTRIBUTION/ AVAILABILITY STATEMENT IT ,L , , 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Distribution authorized to Department of Defense and DOD contractors only; t ,,(cid:127) L j Iuda tU d0 ," :- t F--:L , :...... . Z ,, . ....... ;., (cid:127) , - This determination was made on 12 November 1996. Other requests shall be referred to: U.S. Army Engineer School, Directorate of Combat Developments, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473. 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) The Class IV supply category includes fortification materials, obstacle and barrier materials, and construction materials for base development and general engineering. A quick, valid estimate of the Class IV supply requirements for a given contingency is crucial to high-level military planning and analysis. The Total Army Analysis (TAA) planning scenarios and various Army analysis tools use a single planning factor (consumption rate) to estimate the gross tonnage requirements as a function of the number of soldiers deployed. In previous work the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (USACERL) was tasked to update the Class IV supply planning factor. Subsequently, representatives of the user community requested that the proponent of the study revisit two aspects of the final Class IV computation that could overestimate actual Army Class IV requirements under certain scenarios. USACERL, in cooperation with user representatives and the proponent, met in October 1996 to discuss ideas for refining the computation of the overall consumption rate to best fit the requirements of the computer model used for the TAA studies. This report documents the computations made and the final algorithm derived for the Class IV planning factor as a result of the new methods adopted at the October 1996 meeting. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES supply management mobilization 26 planning factors 16. PRICE CODE construction materials 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified SAR NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Duo Quumr": Prescribed by ANSI Sid 239-18 298-102 2 USACERL TR 97/38 Foreword This study was conducted for U.S. Army Engineer School under Reimbursable Work Unit G27, "Class IV Study"; Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request (MIPR) 01CER001F, dated 21 October 1996. The technical monitor was David Loental, ATSE-CD-SIM. The work was performed by the Maintenance Management and Preservation Division (FL-P) of the Facilities Technology Laboratory (FL), U.S. Army Construc- tion Engineering Research Laboratories (USACERL). Dr. Simon S. Kim is Chief, CECER-FL-P, and Donald F. Fournier is Operations Chief, CECER-FL. The USACERL technical editor was Gordon L. Cohen, Technical Information Team. COL James T. Scott is Commander of USACERL, and Dr. Michael J. O'Connor is Director. USACERL TR 97/38 3 Contents S F 2 9 8 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. 1 Fo rew o rd ................................................................ 2 1 Introduction ......................................................... 5 Background .......................................................... 5 O bjectives ........................................................... 6 Ap proach ............................................................ 6 Mode of Technology Transfer ............................................ 7 Me tric Conversion Factors ............................................... 7 2 Revised Class IV Computations ......................................... 8 Introd uction .......................................................... 8 O riginal Me thodology ................................................... 8 Revisiting the Issue of Army Support to the Air Force ......................... 11 Re-evaluating The Use of Averaged Consumption Rates ...................... 12 Ot her Re visions ...................................................... 14 Revised Class IV Consumption Rates for the TAA Scenarios ................... 15 Algorithm for Computing a Contingency-Specific Class IV Planning Factor ........ 16 3 Summary and Recommendations ...................................... 19 S um m ary ........................................................... 19 Recom m endations .................................................... 19 Re ferences .............................................................. 21 Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................... 22 Distribution USACERL TR 97/38 5 1 Introduction Background The U.S. Army logistics system divides supplies into ten major classes identified by Roman numeral. The Class IV supply category includes fortification materials, obstacle and barrier materials, and construction materials for base development and general engineering. Having a good, quick estimate of the Class IV supply require- ments for a given contingency is crucial to high-level military planning and analysis, including Army force structure studies conducted under the Total Army Analysis (TAA) program as well as contingency planning using software support tools and published field manuals. These various analysis processes all use a single material consumption rate-or planning factor-to estimate the gross tonnage requirements as a function of the number of soldiers deployed. The Class IV tonnage require- ments in turn affect lift and haul capacities, storage requirements, deployment schedules, etc. In October 1994, the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (USACERL) completed a study for the U.S. Army Engineer School with funding from the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) to update the Class IV supply planning factor. The results of the study were reported in USACERL Technical Report FF-95/01, Class XVSupply PlanningF actors. That report includes a description of the method used to estimate Class IV supply requirements for the two scenarios used for Total Army Analysis 2001 (TAA-01). The report also includes a Class IV supply consumption rate for the Gulf War, calculated from requisition records in the Logistics Intelligence File. Because the consumption rates for these contingencies differed, the final product of the study was not a single Class IV planning factor but a concise algorithm for computing a contingency-specific plan- ning factor. This Class IV algorithm was derived from a spreadsheet model designed to estimate the total daily supply tonnage requirements by summing the estimated requirements for each type of task that uses Class IV materials. The algorithm's input parameters include: 0 the type and number of divisions and separate brigades deployed * the level of the theater's existing infrastructure * the threat's capability for deep strike 6 USACERL TR 97/38 0 a descriptor for the maneuver pattern of the force, the Army population in theater on C-day, and the rate of deployment. Analysts at the Planning Factors Branch of U.S. Army Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM) reviewed the results of the USACERL study and questioned two key areas in the final computation of the consumption rates, both in the TAA-01 scenarios and in the Class IV algorithm. The first area of concern was the inclusion of materials required to support the Army's airfield work for the Air Force. The second area involved the use of an "average" consumption rate over 10-day time periods, which weighted the overall consumption rate toward the higher consump- tion during the first 50 days of a contingency when the population is smaller than average. Personnel from CASCOM, the U.S. Army Engineer School (USAES), and USACERL met in October 1996 to discuss how to improve the computation of the overall consumption rate so that the resulting numbers best fit the requirements of the computer model used for the TAA studies. This report documents the computations made and the final algorithm derived for the Class IV planning factor as a result of the new methods adopted in the October 1996 meeting. Objectives The objectives of this work were to "* improve the accuracy of the computed Class IV supply consumption rates for the TAA-01 scenarios "* compute the Class IV consumption rates for the TAA-03 scenarios constructed after the original USACERL study "* update the Class IV planning factor algorithm based on the computational methods adopted by the joint efforts of USAES, CASCOM, and USACERL in October 1996. Approach Three sets of computations were required to update the work of the original study. First, the Class IV supply consumption rates for the two TAA-01 scenarios were USACERL TR 97/38 7 recomputed using the same method as the original study, but with the following changes to the data: "* removal of the Class IV supplies required to support the Air Force from the calculation "* adjustment of the material requirements for storage of POL (petroleum, oils and lubricants) to correspond with the planning data used for TAA-03, as documented in TAA-03 Engineer Regional ConstructionP lanning Data and Assumptions (U.S. Army Concepts Analysis Agency [CAA] 1995) "* adjustment of the material requirements for non-divisional unit fortification and construction to use the planning data for a well developed theater with minimal threat capability instead of using the data for a developing theater with a highly capable threat. Second, the Class IV consumption rates for the two TAA-03 scenarios were computed using the same method as described above for the TAA-01 scenarios. Third, the spreadsheet model for estimating Class IV requirements was adjusted to (1) omit supplies used in support of the Air Force, (2) update the POL storage requirements, and (3) compute an overall average consumption instead of a time- stepped average. The model was then used to generate the comprehensive set of data points needed to develop a new concise algorithm for calculating a contingency- specific planning factor. Using a more extensive set of data points than was used in the original study allows the revised Class IV algorithm to cover a broader range of scenario possibilities than the original version of the algorithm. Mode of Technology Transfer It is recommended that the results of these latest computations be used to update the Army Force Planning and Data Assumptions (AFPDA) and related documents and software planning tools referencing Class IV supply consumption rates. Metric Conversion Factors U.S. standard units of measure are used throughout this report. A table of metric conversion factors is presented below. 1 in. = 25.4 mm I ft = 0.305 m lsqft = 0.093 m2 1 lb = 0.453 kg I gal = 3.78 L 8 USACERL TR 97/38 2 Revised Class IV Computations Introduction This chapter contains a description of the basic methods used in the original USACERL study to determine a contingency's Class IV requirements and to develop a representative planning factor. It also describes the difficulties of dealing with the two areas of concern addressed in the current work and the solutions proposed through the joint efforts of USAES, CASCOM, and USACERL (see Chapter 1, p 6). Original Methodology Although the Class IV supply planning factor is expressed in terms of a "pounds per soldier per day" rate, Class IV supplies actually do not fit as neatly into this frame- work as other classes of supply. The food supplies of Class I, for exatnple, are closely related to the individual soldier, are consumed on a daily basis, and have a con- sumption rate independent of the size or type of force deployed. The Class I planning factor can be applied as intended: multiply it by the size of the force on the ground to estimate the gross daily requirement for that class. Class IV supply consumption, on the other hand, is not completely related to the requirements of the individual soldier and it varies considerably from day to day-not as a daily con- sumption but as many types of one-time expenditures to meet longer-term require- ments. Also, the Class IV "pounds per soldier per day" rate is very dependent on the size and type of force deployed. Examples: "* An armor division requires less fortification material per soldier than an infantry division. "* The materials required for base development vary considerably from theater to theater; they are not directly related to individual soldier consumption but instead add to the "per soldier" consumption rate in inverse proportion to the size of the population. "* After a maneuver unit has developed a fortified position, its Class IV con- sumption rate is minimal until it moves to a new location, at which time the consumption rate can easily exceed 50 pounds per soldier per day until the new position is complete.