Guest User

Untitled

a guest
Aug 30th, 2013
1,229
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
  1. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
  2. Caveats: NONE
  3.  
  4. Good luck for you, see you soonRegards,
  5. -Gene
  6.  
  7. > -----Original Message-----
  8. > From: AJMacDonald [mailto:ajmacdonald83@yahoo.com]
  9. > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 2:31 PM
  10. > To: Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)
  11. > Subject: Re: Follow-up, 20130820
  12.  
  13. > As you see I'm far from this now, but I know our guys did their best.
  14. > I enjoyed catching-up with you. Hope to see you soon again.
  15.  
  16. > Sincerely,
  17. > Jamie
  18.  
  19. > On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:14 PM, "Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)"
  20. > <eugene.p.furst.civ@mail.mil> wrote:
  21.  
  22.  
  23. >> You're exactly right. We have to work with both theater on the requirement
  24. >> and the organization that owns the contract to ensure we don't have too few
  25. >> or too many contractors.
  26.  
  27. >> CITP - Rock Island Contract
  28. >> CIAT - DIA Contract
  29.  
  30. >> By the way, saw your latest success, my congratulations. Good job.
  31. >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syrian-activists-accuse-government-of-deadly-chemical-attack-near-damascus/2013/08/21/aea157e6-0a50-11e3-89fe-abb4a5067014_story.html
  32.  
  33. >> Regards,
  34. >> -Gene
  35.  
  36. >> -----Original Message-----
  37. >> From: AJMacDonald [mailto:ajmacdonald83@yahoo.com]
  38. >> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 1:00 PM
  39. >> To: Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)
  40. >> Subject: Re: Follow-up, 20130820
  41.  
  42. >> Gene; CIAT and CITP contracts are MIP funded. I recall the issue that often
  43. >> surfaced was how the drawdown affected demand necessitating our assessment
  44. >> of where we had folks, the quantity of analysts, and costs associate with
  45. >> their employment. My recollection of this is correct is it not? Please
  46. >> advise. Thank you. Jamie On Aug 21, 2013, at 4:19 PM, "Furst, Eugene P CIV
  47. >> (US)" <eugene.p.furst.civ@mail.mil> wrote:
  48.  
  49. >>> Jamie,
  50. >>>
  51. >>> Next time you come in, I'll grab Katrina in DAMI-RI to help out if needed.
  52. >>> Your comment below is correct. It's just important to remember that
  53. >>> the POM captures our "request". It isn't approved until Congress puts
  54. >>> its stamp of approval on it. Pretty sure you understood that, we're
  55. >>> just at the point where we're covering minor nuances...
  56. >>>
  57. >>> Regards,
  58. >>> -Gene
  59. >>>
  60. >>> -----Original Message-----
  61. >>> From: AJMacDonald [mailto:ajmacdonald83@yahoo.com]
  62. >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:13 PM
  63. >>> To: Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)
  64. >>> Subject: Re: Follow-up, 20130820
  65. >>>
  66. >>> Thanks, Gene; ROGER all on the OCO piece - at DIA and with the ISR TF
  67. >>> OCO was always stated; the fun was in determining what color OCO we
  68. >>> would be allocated. End use always mattered in these cases. POM lock
  69. >>> precedes the
  70. >>> CJB: In that case the CJB captures how we were allocating MIP dollars
  71. >>> to support activities within the confines of the approved POM. We
  72. >>> might need a coffee! Jamie
  73. >>>
  74. >>>
  75. >>> On Aug 20, 2013, at 4:59 PM, "Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)"
  76. >>> <eugene.p.furst.civ@mail.mil> wrote:
  77. >>>
  78. >>>> Jamie,
  79. >>>>
  80. >>>> One quick caveat... within the MIP and the NIP there is base and OCO.
  81. >>>> Most, if not all JUONS coming out of theater were addressed using OCO
  82. >>> dollars.
  83. >>>> Some of this OCO was MIP and some was NIP. Within DA G-2 almost all
  84. >>>> of our OCO throughout the years was MIP. Not sure how much MIP/NIP
  85. >>>> OCO DIA utilized. Just bringing this up based on your comment "
  86. >>>> albeit the MIP might have more akin to OCO painted the color of MIP".
  87. >>>>
  88. >>>> You're correct regarding not having the linguist contract presented
  89. >>>> during Congressional MIP/NIP Day... this was funded using non-MIP
  90. >>>> Army OCO
  91. >>> dollars.
  92. >>>> Stable Shadow was actually part of MIP/NIP Day... it was just never
  93. >>>> an issue.
  94. >>>>
  95. >>>> Following MIP/NIP day, DAMI-RI would begin to build the Army's MIP
  96. >>>> section of the CJB. The funding and manpower data within the CJB was
  97. >>>> based upon data provided by the dollars requested/approved within the
  98. >>>> POM (once we had a "POM lock", DAMI-RI was able to plug the numbers
  99. >>>> into
  100. >>> the CJB).
  101. >>>>
  102. >>>> Everything else is spot-on.
  103. >>>>
  104. >>>> I can also run this past Katrina in DAMI-RI for review... I'm pretty
  105. >>>> familiar with the processes, but I'm certainly no expert.
  106. >>>>
  107. >>>> Please don't hesitate if there's anything else.
  108. >>>>
  109. >>>> Regards,
  110. >>>> -Gene
  111. >>>>
  112. >>>> -----Original Message-----
  113. >>>> From: AJMacDonald [mailto:ajmacdonald83@yahoo.com]
  114. >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 4:43 PM
  115. >>>> To: Furst, Eugene P CIV (US)
  116. >>>> Cc: genefurst@hotmail.com
  117. >>>> Subject: Follow-up, 20130820
  118. >>>>
  119. >>>> Gene:
  120. >>>>
  121. >>>> Thank you for making time to see me last week; I enjoyed catching-up
  122. >>>> with you. Additionally, I learned a great deal and you enabled me to
  123. >>>> put a few things back into perspective.
  124. >>>>
  125. >>>> When I was the Chief of Staff of the DIOCC at DIA I was appointed to
  126. >>>> lead the Agency's Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)
  127. >>>> Task Force Tiger Team. The purpose of this Tiger Team was to merge
  128. >>>> the ongoing and competing efforts of the agency's five disparate
  129. >>>> directorates to garner funding from the ISR Task Force to resource
  130. >>>> their stove piped support requirements to the fights in Iraq and
  131. >>>> Afghanistan. They were doing this under the auspices of the JUONS
  132. >>>> process. We got our act together and tightened up things within the
  133. >>>> agency. I always believed that although we were working through the
  134. >>>> ISR Task Force we were actually leveraging available MIP and NIP
  135. >>>> dollars - albeit the MIP might have more akin to OCO painted the
  136. >>>> color of MIP. The NIP piece was always something LTG Zahner, and
  137. >>>> later LTG Kozial, would work out with the DNI. Do you believe I have
  138. >> this right?
  139. >>>>
  140. >>>> The NIP MIP day is clear now as well. Essentially OP served as the
  141. >>>> intelligence operations authority and advocate for Army intelligence
  142. >>>> equities (e.g., Prophet, Guardrail, DCGS-A, ARL, EMRS, PTDS and PGSS)
  143. >>>> during the annual meetings with the Congressional Professional Staff
  144. >>> Members (PSM).
  145. >>>> Our endstate was to ensure that all Military Intelligence Program "
  146. >>>> intelligence capability areas" entered into the Congressional
  147. >>>> Justification Book (CJB), specifically any changes in resource
  148. >>>> allocation, were understood by the PSMs prior to final submission of
  149. >>>> the requirements to Congress for approval. I am not certain we had
  150. >>>> our linguist contract or Stable Shadow $s included in this mix.
  151. >>>>
  152. >>>> However, before all of this kicked off we had to meet with the SMEs
  153. >>>> and action officers to review the submissions and provide counsel or
  154. >>>> guidance on the completion of the individual submissions to ensure we
  155. >>>> "dotted all of the i's" and "crossed all of the t's". Once this was
  156. >>>> complete we would review the proposed submissions with the G-2 for
  157. >>>> approval, guidance and or course changes. We'd conduct another
  158. >>>> internal review before providing read-aheads to the PSMs. Once in
  159. >>>> the book and good to go this would be aligned with the POM - right?
  160. >>>>
  161. >>>> Please let me know if I have this right or missed something.
  162. >>>>
  163. >>>> Again, thank you for your time and patience.
  164. >>>>
  165. >>>> Sincerely,
  166. >>>>
  167. >>>> Jamie
  168. >>>>
  169. >>>>
  170. >>>>
  171. >>>>
  172. >>>>
  173. >>>>
  174. >>>>
  175. >>>>
  176. >>>>
  177. >>>>
  178. >>>>
  179. >>>>
  180. >>>>
  181. >>>>
  182. >>>>
  183. >>>>
  184. >>>
  185.  
  186.  
  187. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
  188. Caveats: NONE
RAW Paste Data