SHARE
TWEET

Untitled

a guest Aug 30th, 2013 1,055 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
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy. OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
 
Top