Interview with Janet Garber

Interview with Brig. Gen. Thomas Spoehr

Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion

Next Generation Decontamination

� Jul - Sep �008

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

Decontamination is the process of removing, reducing or neutralizing hazardous levels of contamination.

The inherent challenge for JPM-Decontamination is to find solutions that will not cause harm to the Warfighter applying the decontaminant, nor cause degradation to the material to which it is applied. Chemical warfare was not introduced on a large scale until World War I, but ever since, battlefield decontamination has been a high priority for military services worldwide. Having the capability to rapidly reconstitute forces after a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) attack has always been considered a critical deterrent for those who would attempt a CBRN attack. Whether conducting a conventional warfighting mission or mitigating the aftermath of a terrorist attack, JPM-Decontamination needs to be ready for a

wide range of threats. A close working relationship with our Inter-agency partners is also critical to ensure a coordinated response to homeland attacks. Today’s science and technology provides us with effective and varied options for personnel, equipment and wide-area decontamination following a CBRN attack. From self-decontaminating coatings to highly reactive aerosols, state-of-the-art of decontamination continues to keep pace with the rogue development of new, more lethal chemical and biological agents. The JPM-Decontamination develops, fields, and supports solutions to the Warfighter to enhance force protection and provide the ability for forces to efficiently, quickly and safely reconstitute themselves after a CBRN attack. Our organization provides US forces the capability to sustain operations in a contaminated environment with the least necessary burden and minimum degradation to mission accomplishment. We fully recognize the importance of what we do and look forward to the challenge of fielding products that perform and meet the urgent needs of our Warfighters. In this issue of Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly Magazine, there are articles discussing several phases of JPM Decontamination’s undertakings including a new portfolio initiative that seeks to build a family of decontamination systems. In the Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion (RSDL) article, you will find this recently fielded product has qualities that make it superior to the older M291 Skin Decontamination Kit. RSDL gives the Warfighter an immediate decontamination capability that neutralizes vice removes contamination. We also present an article about the chemistry challenges of solution-based chemical/biological decontamination. Since the discovery of Chlorinating Compounds in the 1930s, our decontamination solutions have had to meet the requirements of superior efficacy, long shelf life and material compatibility. Today, safety and environmental concerns are as important in a decontaminant as its ability to neutralize or remove the threat. As you read the article, you will see that new concepts and approaches to solution-based decontamination are constantly being reviewed for the best balance of Warfighter needs. The next article concerns a new initiative, the Decontamination Family of Systems (DFoS), which is focused on providing a number of benefits to the Warfighter, including the ability to tailor the response to a specific threat scenario and contamination level while decreasing the time-lapse between threat detection and mitigation. The article further details how JPM Decontamination is targeting technology enablers that support desired outcomes. I hope you enjoy this issue of the Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly Magazine and gain further knowledge and understanding of JPM Decontamination’s mission and goals in support of our Warfighters.

Maj. Gen. Stephen V. Reeves

Joint Program Executive Officer

Mr. Douglas Bryce Deputy Joint Program Executive Officer

Mr. Scott Paris Chief of Staff

Col. Jonathan Newmark Assistant JPEO-CBD for Medical Affairs

Ms. Brenda Besore Director, Knowledge Management

Mr. Charlie Cutshall Director, Resource Management

Ms. Susan Hubbard Director, Management Support

Mr. Gary Olejniczak Director, Current Acquisition

Mr. Rich Floyd Acting Director, Future Acquisition

Mr. Darrell McCarthy Director, Human Resources

Mr. Larry Wakefield Special Assistant for External Affairs

Ms. Patricia Estep Webmaster

webmaster@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Editor, Chem-Bio Defense Magazine

Mr. Julius L. Evans Julius.Evans@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Contractor Support Provided by Kalman & Co., Inc. and Camber Corporation

Mr. Stephen Gude Assistant Editor

Stephen.Gude@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Mr. Steven Lusher Senior Graphic Designer

Steve.Lusher@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Ms. Tonya Maust Graphic Designer

Tonya.Maust@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Ms. Ashlee Burns Graphic Designer

Ashlee.Burns@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Ms. Jacqueline Grosser Distribution

Jacqueline.Grosser@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly magazine is published quarterly by the Joint Program Executive

Office for Chemical and Biological Defense. Articles reflect the views of the authors and do

not necessarily represent the views of Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly, the Department of the Army or

the Department of Defense.

To contact the editorial office:

Call: (703) 681-0701 DSN: 588-9600

Fax: (703) 681-3439 Email: editor@jpeocbd.osd.mil

Articles should be submitted to:

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly 5203 Leesburg Pike

Skyline 2, Suite 1609 Falls Church, VA 22041

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

Guest Columnist: Mr. Rudy Olszyk Joint Program Executive Office

Mr. Rudy OlszykJoint Project Manager

Decontamination

16 Jul - Sep �008

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

By Julius L. Evans, Editor, Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly magazine

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

Test and Evaluation has undergone recent changes in its organizational structure. Test and Evaluation Manage-ment Agency (TEMA) is now the Test and Evaluation Office (TEO). You are the first Director of the Test and Evaluation Office. Was that a long-awaited change?

I think you are probably aware that Mr. Hollis retired almost two years ago. We are the result of the reorganization. We had two different offices set up at Army headquarters for Test and Evaluation. There was the Test and Evaluation Executive’s Office and my old office, Test and Evaluation Management Agency (TEMA), and we had two different reporting chains. The T&E Executive reported to the Secretary through the Deputy Under-secretary and TEMA reported to the Chief of Staff of the Army through the Director of the Army Staff. This new organization unifies us into one location, both organizationally and physically, so there is one organization for T&E at the headquarters level. I think it is going to be incredibly more efficient and effective with the single organization structure we have now.

What does that change mean to the Chem-Bio community and how is that going to play a part?

The biggest thing is the mission itself stays the same. I think the way we approach the mission will be different. Being a single organization will increase efficiency and effectiveness, not just for the staff of this organization, but for the people we work with. For the Chem-Bio community, they will find that we can work better in this new organization structure. From our point of view, we want to take a more strategic view of the Chem-Bio Defense mission -- get a more futuristic and long-range view of where we are going with Chem-Bio Defense.

There are many organizations involved including the Joint Requirements Office and the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense. Do you see a change in integration and involving these and other stakeholders with your initiatives?

The best way to describe it, really, is I have a different manage-ment style, which I believe will influence the way we deal with people. There are two things that are key to my management style -- one is transparency. I want everybody to have visibility of what we are doing because I think we can add value to it that way. I think it also sets the stage for greater collaboration and working together within the Chem-Bio community.

Along that same line, I also want to develop us as a greater player in the acquisition community (AC). Testing has always been a part of acquisition. Because of the requirement for independent Test and Evaluation, we are somewhat outside of the AC. I want to build a better relationship with the AC, such that T&E can be regarded as a valued member of that AC and we are embraced as part of that community, such that they are coming to us early and often for testing in the development of the programs. All of that relates back to communication. Coordinating and working with not only with members of the Chem-Bio community, but with all of the members of the AC, not just at our own level, but at the Department of Defense (DoD) level with Director, Operational Test & Evaluation and Director, Test Resource Management Cen-

Ms. Janet Garber became the first Direc-tor, Test and Evaluation Office (TEO) when the office stood up March 11, 2008. She was the Director, Test and

Evaluation Management Agency (TEMA) since 2005 and led the transition and reorganization of TEMA, the Army Test and Evaluation Executive, and the Chemical and Biologi-cal (CB) Test and Evaluation Executive into one organiza-tion, TEO. She is responsible for developing the Army T&E budget, a nearly $1 billion annual program for investments and operations of the Army’s T&E ranges and facilities, as well as the CBDP T&E Infrastructure budget at over $100 million a year. She is the focal point for all Army T&E re-source programming and coordination within Headquarters, Department of the Army. She develops and monitors T&E policy, and coordinates all Army T&E policy actions. She also interfaces with the other Military Departments, Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and Congress on all Army T&E resource and policy issues. Ms. Garber is a 1974 graduate of Michigan State University, with a BS in Multidisciplinary Social Science and an MSBA from Boston University in 1986.

M

18 Jul - Sep �008

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

ter to develop those relationships to work more collaboratively.

The T&E part has always been very important. In looking back, do you feel that T&E has been left out? I ask because you said that you want the acquisition community to em-brace you.

Well, T&E is a required element of the acquisition process in terms of directing the operational testing. However, we want to play a greater part throughout the development of the system; we want to be involved early on and help in establishing the requirements. We want to be there to make sure that system re-quirements are testable and measurable. Therefore, working with the community in this regard is important. At the same time, we must maintain the independence that is required of us. We want to work with the acquisition community early and often, while maintaining and preserving the independent evaluation.

That’s almost like saying, “I want to have a relationship with you, but I do not want to get close.” Like a no-fraternization policy.

Yes. We will want to fraternize; we just do not want them to tell us what to do. We are ultimately the ones that define what those test requirements are and we must ensure that they are robust and realistic enough to give us the information that we need to do an independent evaluation.

As the Director of the Test and Evaluation Office (TEO), what do you want to accomplish most?

I think the biggest thing is working with the acquisition commu-nity and developing that greater relationship as a valued part of

the acquisition process.

Has that really been a problem?

I would not say it has been a problem, per se, but I think we can do our jobs better and we can serve the acquisition community better when we are more involved. When they understand the value that we add, we are included earlier-on in the process. I think the entire acquisition process works better with the value we can add to it. I also want to promote greater collaboration throughout the Chem-Bio community. I would like to work on improving the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) develop-ment and staffing process to ensure that we have robust, realistic plans in those TEMPs. We do have a resource mission here as well – I would like to continue to add rigor to our portion of the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) process, which is for the T&E infrastructure.

Test has been involved in the acquisition process for a long time. Have you seen a great deal of maturity since the programs have evolved and are we truly getting the mission accomplished?

I can address two things here. First off, the Chem-Bio program, with the Army being the T&E Executive is relatively new. We have been the T&E Executive for five years now. In the big scheme of things, that is really very, very young and I think we have made some great progress in terms of testing and evalua-tion. One thing I can point to specifically, is that we have issued the new Test and Evaluation Infrastructure Investment Strategy. This will be the second time this has been done, but quite hon-estly, this version of it is leap years ahead of where we were with the initial investment strategy. It has a lot of discipline in it, it has

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil

JPEO-CBD

1�

some very forward-looking ideas; this is where we want to take the Test and Evaluation Infrastructure in the future. I think that is a great improvement. There are other areas that we have done some strategic planning, both on our own, and we have contrib-uted to strategic planning through the special assistant for the Chem-Bio programs; which I think is definitely an improvement.

Where are we taking this as opposed to just dealing with the daily crisis? I think that is a big change. The second point is, that we are at War. One thing we deal with constantly when at war – more so than in peacetime – is that balance between speed and caution. You want to get the best possible equipment out to the Warfighter as soon as possible so that they are best equipped. At the same time, we have a responsibility to ensure that the equip-ment is effective, suitable, survivable, and safe for Warfight-ers when it gets there. So it has forced us, I think, to pay more attention to that timing aspect – being at War. In fact, TRMC conducted Test Week in June in Huntsville. I was not able to go, but we had several people from this office there. One of the main overarching themes was that we, as the testers and evaluators, need to be more responsive to the community. So the War has forced us to focus on the timing and the rapid-equipping initia-tives. It has provided an opportunity for us to look at ways of doing things faster while still maintaining the integrity of the Test and Evaluation process. We still have that responsibility to make sure we are effective, suitable, and survivable. Nevertheless, we have a greater focus now on the timing aspect than I think we did before. Those are the two major areas where we’ve seen the improvement.

And that’s not to say that previously, we were cutting corners in testing?

No. It is just a matter of I am not one of those people that would say if it is not broke, do not fix it. I think anything can be im-proved. The War has provided an additional incentive for us to look for those improvements. We have really taken a strategic look in the last few years and it has helped focus us so we can improve at a more efficient pace than in the past.

There have been a great number of lessons learned that we can call upon. You mentioned some of those here in coordi-nating the TEMP. Please address that.

Yes. In terms of the lessons learned on our process, I can discuss a few things. Anytime you work in a multi-service environment, which is what Chem-Bio is all about, more players are involved. You have to plan ahead because it is going to take more time to bring the community together and, again, that falls into that whole strategic look we discussed previously. If we have the communications going and we all know the path we are follow-ing, it makes it easier to plan ahead and set the stage for that coordination.

With regard to the transparency that I mentioned – the more we know about what each other is doing, the easier it is to coordinate in that multi-service environment. Nevertheless, we cannot forget the ‘service unique’ requirements, as we are moving forward.

Earlier, I mentioned the POM. It has been a great integrating

factor in terms of forcing us to have the science and technology people work with the acquisition community, the material devel-opers, and the testing community. We need to make sure there is synergy among all three and that we are synchronized, in terms of what is coming down the pipe from S&T and acquisition. That way, we will be ready to test that equipment in a timely fashion, as we move forward.

One of the things that I am very proud of is the early involvement initiatives, which are really just coming into their own in the last year or so. We have a core of people we attempt to keep involved from very early in the process - pre-Milestone A and during the S&T stage - and then throughout planning. We recognize from an information sharing position, that what is coming down the road makes it critical to enable Operational Test Agencies to be involved early. A key benefit of early involvement is to have the operational evaluators understand the developmental test side in order to have integrated testing, which we think will be more efficient for Test and Evaluation for all of the systems. Those are some of the things we have learned and I think we are getting better at it every day.

Have there been many challenges with different test require-ments from the different services?

One of the challenges we are dealing with right now is terminol-ogy. You know, we do not all use the same words to describe the same thing and, coincidentally later this morning we have a meeting to talk about what can we do about defining common language within the Chem-Bio world so when the one service says something, we all have the same common understanding of what is being discussed.

One would imagine that will come into play, as well as the workforce changes. There is a great deal of discussion about baby boomers about to retire and concerns with people mov-ing – will that be an issue? How will that be addressed?

You know, I am glad you asked about that because that is one of my favorite subjects. I think what we are doing in the Chem-Bio world is really, very exciting and we are right on the cutting edge of discovery and technology. A lot of the work that is done in Chem-Bio can only be done in government facilities. So we offer opportunities to these young scientists and engineers to do things that they could not do any place else. I have been out to Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, several times. Not that it is the only place that Chem-Bio testing is done, but it is certainly the center of gravity for Chem-Bio testing. Every time I talk with the workers, their passion and enthusiasm for their jobs is absolutely infec-tious. They are excited about what they do and they are proud of the contributions they make. To those of us who live inside the beltway, it seems like Dugway is in the middle of nowhere. But these folks are immersed in their jobs and do not mind being there to do this kind of work. So I don’t worry about that Tsunami of retirements in Dugway as much as I do in other places.

Additionally, Dugway in particular has done a very good job of recruiting student employees under work-study type programs. I have met people at Dugway that started as part-timers when they were students and are now full-time government employees. One

�0 Jul - Sep �008

Chem-Bio Defense Quarterly

about the time it takes to create the TEMP, both the develop-ment times and the approval times. There are many signatures involved and my office has started a Lean Six Sigma project to look at what we can do in terms of the TEMP process, but we are not the only office involved. There are other people who are also looking at improving the TEMP process. In fact, the Office of the Secretary of Defense has a team looking at the TEMP process. I believe ATEC is also looking at the same thing, but I am definitely concerned about it. That has been one of my focuses from the time I received this responsibility.

When you look at the current acquisition process there seems to be a significant amount of testing for systems under devel-opment, but it seems that we cannot get a handle on identify-ing risks and reducing it, for example, Reliability, Availability, Maintainability (RAM) Performance. What can be done to overcome some of these problems and is testing the answer?

The timing of this question is exceptional. There is a Defense Sci-ence Board report that just came out in May 2008, and if you’ll indulge me – there are a couple of quotes I’d like to read you from the chairman of Defense Science Board’s cover letter that accompanied the report. He says many things, but the two I want to read are, “No amount of testing will compensate for deficien-cies in RAM program formulation.” And the other thing he says is, “RAM shortfalls are frequently identified during DT (Devel-opmental Testing), but program restraints, schedule and funding often preclude incorporating fixes and delaying Initial Operational Test and Evaluation.” So is testing the answer? In and of itself, no. Can testing help in this? Absolutely. The Office of the Secretary of Defense established a reliability improvement working group and we are a member of one of the subgroups of specifically looking at integrated testing. The integrated testing might be part of the answer. What can we do in getting more realism into the develop-mental testing? Where can we do combined DT/OT? Where can we utilize data so that we minimize the amount of testing that has to be done? I have high expectations this working group is going to come out with some suggestions, which are also going to help address these problems.

However, another thing that I mentioned before – the early involvement, is also key. We talked about system requirements and that we do not define those requirements; that is not in the Test and Evaluation community lane. However, if we are involved early on as those requirements are being defined, we can help to ensure that those requirements are testable and measurable – that is very important. We need to be a part of those decisions early on and the requirements need to be mission-realistic as well.

Because of the War and a push to get items to the Warfighter quicker, do you see the T&E process changing to reduce the amount of testing done?

No. I do see pressure to find ways to do testing more efficiently and more effectively, which hopefully will result in less time and expense on testing. But like you said, we are not about to give up our responsibility for ensuring that the equipment is effective, suitable and survivable. We have that responsibility to Warfight-ers, our ultimate customers, and we are not going to drop that responsibility. In terms of the TEMP – we must ensure that we

other point is because of the nature of the work and its remote location, Dugway depends heavily on contractors. More than half of the workforce is contractors, which actually serves as a great resource. There are many instances of contract employees con-verting to full-time government positions. The nature of the work is the real key to getting good employees at Dugway and they are doing a great job of it.

If that is not an overarching issue – what do you view as the critical challenges of Chem-Bio Defense community?

There are a few of them. The first one, I believe, is realism; hav-ing operationally realistic T&E. Just the nature of working with biological and chemical warfare agents – as you know, we cannot go out in the field and release those agents to do operational test-ing, so we have to depend on simulants and we have to do some chamber work. Maintaining that operational realism with those kinds of constraints is difficult, but it is absolutely critical.

The other thing is the unknown. I mentioned that not only is the Chem-Bio mission as new with respect to Army being T&E Executive , but I think the whole emphasis on the chemical and biological defense program is relatively new and there is a lot that we don’t know yet. There are emerging threats we are looking at that change all the time – for instance, toxic industrial chemicals and materials. Some of the things I mentioned are on the cutting edge and who knows what tomorrow will bring. The unknown is one of our greatest challenges. The third challenge, again, is the delicate balance between speed and caution. We need to move quickly to get the best possible equipment to the Warfighters, but we need to ensure we are conducting robust testing to check on the effectiveness and survivability of that equipment before it goes to the Warfighter.

There was a time when Warfighters called for equipment, in some instances it was being sent, and in other instances of the equipment being sent it experienced some difficulties. So the value and importance of that statement is obvious. We certainly want to get it to them and be responsive to them. But it has to work when they receive it.

Absolutely! One area in which Army Test and Evaluation Com-mand (ATEC) has done an exceptional job in terms of getting equipment to the Soldiers early is in the Urgent Operational Needs Statement process for urgent material requests, which is what you are talking about when the Soldier in the field is asking for something. In 2003, ATEC established what they call FOAs – For-ward Operational Assessment Teams – and they have actually put testers and evaluators in theater so they can work alongside Warfighters while collecting data and doing some independent evaluation, as well.

The Test and Evaluation Master Plan is big, cumbersome and has a lots of information. Are there plans to adjust it?

You mentioned the size – information overload is counterproduc-tive. The important thing is that we need to focus on the critical elements in the TEMP, and that includes both format and sub-stance, making sure that critical information is easily accessible and very visible where the format can help. I am concerned

JPEO-CBD

www.jpeocbd.osd.mil �1

have robust, realistic testing planned ahead of time so we are well prepared for the testing when the time comes. Focusing the testing on mission success is what really matters. That, I think, will help us perform more efficient testing. It all falls back to that planning -- that ‘strategic look’ that I discussed earlier. If we are deliberate in working with the community to ensure that we have got the correct requirements to test against and the appropriate testing to collect the information that we need to determine if equipment is effective, suitable and survivable, I think that is where we cut the corners -- using your terminology -- without cutting corners on the evaluation of the equipment.

I believe that in the past there have been challenges with requirements. And you mentioned if T&E or TEO could be in the requirements process earlier that it could actually help to create a baseline that could be met going forward.

Well, not just TEO; it is really the Operational Test Agencies becoming involved because it is all the same community. Like I said, we are not going to define the system requirements, but I think having Operational Test Agencies’ input to ensure that we have something that is testable and measurable is important.

Is there anything else that you would like to say to the T&E community and the people who will be reading this interview?

I want to emphasize a point I made previously about the early involvement – both on our part and the other Operational Test Agencies – is really a key to success. This is going to help us evolve to integrated testing. We need to understand what the technology is in order to test it. We need to have early identification, budgeting, and acquisi-tion of new test capability needs so that we are ready when the program is ready to test. Also, I want to reiterate the idea of operationally realistic testing. We need realistic, robust, early and often testing. We need to evaluate for mission success. I think those are the two big things and I am really excited about it. I am excited about the organizational changes we have made because I think it better posi-tions us to support the community. I am excited about the programs in which we are working. Chem-Bio is really just coming into its own right now and I’m look-ing forward to the challenge and opportunity to support the Warfighter.

Mr. Alan Thomson, Ms. Janet Garber and Ms. Terri Kocher return to the Test and Evaluation Office while discussing a new initiative.