Spells out Headquarters reductions

1. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WASHINGTON, D.C . 20310
MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: 2013 Focus Areas
14 AUG 2013
1. Across the board reductions in Federal spending imposed by the Budget Control Act
of 2011 will significantly decrement the Army's budget in the foreseeable future. Given
these reductions, we must focus on the Army's core missions, sustaining the Army's
ability to provide a smaller, more capable Army able to provide ready land forces to
meet combatant commanders' global requirements; develop leaders for the 21 st
century,
while maintaining the bonds of trust with Soldiers and Families. To ensure Army
readiness at these reduced budget levels, we must make the best and maximum use of
every single dollar provided to the Army.
2. To best allocate Army resources, we direct a 2013 Army Focus Area Review Group
to review specific focus areas and propose executable recommendations to best apply
reductions to Army programs and elements. Army Program Analysis and Evaluation
(PA&E) has already made an initial allocation of reductions across Program Objective
Memorandum (POM) 15-19. The Review Group recommendations will enable us to
make specific decisions concerning the consolidation and reduction of organizations,
programs and functions.
3. Mr. Thomas Hawley and LTG Thomas Spoehr will lead the Review Group. The
group will initially have seven Focus Area teams. The purpose of the Focus Area teams
is to develop bold executable recommendations which will be used to balance the
already directed reductions in POM 15-19. See Appendix 1 (Focus Area Team Leads
and Membership) for more details. Where appropriate, specific targets for each focus
area in dollars and full-time equivalents (FTE) will be provided to team leads as soon as
they are available. Army PA&E will provide support as needed to each team. The
Focus Areas are:
• Institutional Headquarters Reductions
• Operational Headquarters Reductions
• Operational Force Structure and Ramps
• Readiness
• Acquisition Work Force
• Installation Services and Investments
• Army C31 and Cyber
4. The timeline for decision and action is short. Not later than 11 September 2013, the
Focus Area Review Group will provide us with a comprehensive set of
recommendations. Given the difficulty of this task, we fully expect that Review Group

2. SUBJECT: 2013 Focus Areas
recommendations are unlikely to reflect consensus. To the extent possible, each
recommendation will include actionable options, distinguished by their effect on our
Army and the cost savings associated with each. To promote transparency,
recommendations will be staffed with ALL affected Army stakeholders. Comments,
minority views and nonconcurrences will be documented, justified in detail and
submitted to us for consideration. Except in extraordinary circumstances,
recommendations to conduct further studies or assessments are not acceptable. To the
extent practicable, the Review Group will rely on existing data, studies and reviews.
5. The Review Group leads have the authority to adjust the work within each of the
Focus Area teams. They will coordinate with the Director of the Army Staff to obtain
additional staff support as needed to complete this effort in the allocated time. Since
this is a Total Army effort, each focus area will also have a representative from the Army
National Guard and Army Reserve.
6. We expect weekly updates starting in early August 2013. Mr. Hawley and LTG
Spoehr will establish the necessary battle rhythm to develop and review the
recommendations. This effort will take priority over all other activities.
7. Let there be no mistake, aggregate reductions WILL TAKE PLACE. The money is
gone; our mission now is to determine how best to allocate these cuts while maintaining
readiness. We expect Army leaders, military and civilian, to seize this opportunity
to re-shape our Army. This effort will take PRIORITY OVER ALL other Headquarters,
Department of the Army activities.
8. One element of the Focus Area Review is to determine how to reduce Army
Headquarters (both institutional and operational, at the 2-star and above levels) in the
aggregate by 25%. In the next two weeks, Commands (Army Command (ACOM), Army
Service Component Command (ASCC) and Direct Reporting Unit (DRU)) and Army
Headquarters Principal Officials should be prepared to present their individual plans on
what functions they would reduce or eliminate and the corresponding organizational
change that would cause a 25% reduction in Headquarters funding and manning.
9. This effort suspends many of the efforts on Institutional Army Headquarters reform
led by the Institutional Army Transformation Commission (IATC) and Army
Headquarters Transformation (AHT). Selected proposals from both of these efforts will
be reviewed and incorporated within this effort.
2

3. SUBJECT: 2013 Focus Areas
10. If you have any questions, contact Mr. Thomas Hawley, (703) 697-8150,
thomas.e.hawley3.civ@mail.mil and LTG Thomas Spoehr, (703) 614-4682,
thomas.w.spoehr.mil@mail.mil.
6L,6~~()Raymond T. Odierno
General, United States Army
Chief of Staff
DISTRIBUTION:
ohn M. McHugh
ecretary of the Arm
Principal Officials of Headquarters, Department of the Army
Commander
U.S. Army Forces Command
U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command
U.S. Army Materiel Command
U.S. Army Pacific
U.S. Army Europe
U.S. Army Central
U.S. Army North
U.S. Army South
U.S. Army Africa/Southern European Task Force
U.S. Army Special Operations Command
Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command
U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Strategic Command
U.S Army Cyber Command
U.S. Army Network Enterprise Technology Command/9th Signal Command (Army)
U.S. Army Medical Command
U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command
U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Army Military District of Washington
U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command
U.S. Army Installation Management Command
Superintendent, United States Military Academy
Director, U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center
Executive Director, Arlington National Cemetery
Accessions Support Brigade
CF:
Director, Army National Guard
Director of Business Transformation
3

4. Appendix 1: Focus Area Team Leads and Membership
The Focus Groups will develop executable recommendations that can meet established
resource targets and senior leader guidance for the planning period 2015-2019.
1. Focus Area teams should look at developing bold, innovative recommendations
from an Army-wide perspective, focusing on and validating the key core missions
of the Army. Do these recommendations support where we want the Army to
go? Where can we take risk to minimize the risk to the Army core missions?
2. Designated Team leads shall be responsible for meeting or exceeding specified
targets in a manner that best matches resources to missions. The Team leaders
will work with Army Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) to understand
applicable resource constraints. For this effort, assume we are operating under
the POM Budget Control Act (BCA) funding levels and the Office of the Secretary
of Defense (OSD)/Army guidance.
3. The Team leaders have the latitude to select their team members after
conducting mission analysis and providing those names to Mr. Hawley and LTG
Spoehr for their approval. The Director of the Army Staff will arbitrate any
disagreements with the owning organizations. Army Commands and Direct
Reporting Units (DRU) are directed to provide point of contact information to the
appropriate Focus Group leaders and the Review Group.
4. Note that these reductions have already been made to the program, the dollars
and the authorizations have already been taken, thus it will not be acceptable to
present recommendations that fail to meet the established targets.
5. Special care and consideration must be applied to ensure that reductions are
integrated across the focus areas to avoid "double-tapped/double-counting"
savings in the recommendations. To that end, an integration cell will be stood up
to support the Focus Review Group in binning recommendations for dollar and
manpower savings from across all focus groups. The integration cell will also
provide support to focus area teams as required.
6. FOCUS AREA TEAMS
a. Institutional Headquarters Reductions. MG Thomas Horlander (Office of
Business Transformation (OBT)) will lead this team with Mr. Pete Bechtel and
Dr. Leonard Braverman as directed members. The requirement for this team
is to reduce the size of the Total Army Institutional Headquarters by 25%
(HQDA, FOAs, ACOMs and DRUs) in the aggregate, across military, civilian
and contractors (down to every organization authorized a 2-Star General
Officer or Tier 2 SES). A particular emphasis will be placed on ensuring
HQDA reductions are put into place. The Army National Guard and Army
Reserve members will provide necessary information and support for their

5. organizations and commands. The baseline reductions from which the
reductions are to be calculated are the dollars and Table of Distribution
Allowances (TDA) Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) reflected in FY18 of POM 14-
18 for these headquarters. Movement of personnel outside of headquarters
to subordinate units is not a legitimate means of achieving savings. Teams
should consider consolidation, reductions, and closing organizations.
Reductions have already been applied to these accounts in a proportional
manner. This team will assess how these reductions should optimally be
applied. The team should capitalize on work that has already been done by
the Army Headquarters Transformation (AHT) effort and the Institutional Army
Transformation Commission (IATC).
b. Operational Headquarters Reductions. MG Jeffrey Snow will lead this team
with BG Robin Mealer as a directed member. This team will develop courses
of action to transform operational headquarters (2-star and above), based on
strategic priorities and the stated needs of combatant commanders, while
simultaneously achieving a 25% aggregate reduction. The baseline is the
FY18 funding from the President's Budget 2014 and the authorizations in
FMS Web for 2018 for these organizations. Consideration can be given to
both empowering and consolidation of ASCCs, but recommendations should
not drive to a single solution. Additionally consolidation and transfer of
functions between ASCCs, Corps and Divisions should be reviewed. Once
again, these changes will be across the Total Army formations and include all
2-StarfTier 2 SES and above led operational commands.
c. Operational Force Structure and Ramps. BG Roger Cloutier (G-3/5/7
Force Management) will lead this team with Ms. Gwen DeFilippi (ASA(MR&A)
as a directed member. Mr. John McLaurin will temporarily lead this team until
BG Cloutier's arrival. The goal of this team is to determine the appropriate
mix of the formations in our Army and the proper drawdown ramps in order to
achieve that structure by 2019. This is a Total Army effort and will include
members from the Army National Guard and Army Reserve to ensure that
their unique challenges in reorganizing can be included in the decisions.
Include for consideration multi-component organizations, organizational
design, echelon consolidations and schedules. Specific interest areas are
forces that provide support to other Services, task organization of Corps and
Divisions, Logistics, Theater capabilities and other echelon above Brigade
Combat Team (BCT) forces. Review should look broadly across the force; at
rules of allocation and at AC/RC alignment.
d. Readiness. BG Wayne Grigsby (G-3/5/7 Training) will lead this team with
COL John Muller (ASA(MRA)) as a directed member. The goal of this team is
to ensure our limited resources are correctly estimated and applied across
both AC and RC forces to provide necessary force readiness levels to meet
national security objectives, in FY15-19 informed by FY14 planning.
Strategy, model and readiness investments should be reviewed with

6. recommendations focused on training readiness within constrained
resourcing.
e. Acquisition Work Force. Mr. Thomas Mullins (ASA(ALT)) will lead this team
with MG Bo Dyess (G-8 Force Development) as a directed member. The goal
of this team is to reduce the size of the different parts of the acquisition work
force commensurate with the reduction in funding for their functions. This
group will provide the appropriate metrics, but in the aggregate, the
acquisition workforce should be reduced in a manner that optimizes the
resources to support our core missions.
f. Installation Services and Investments. MG AI Aycock (ACSIM) will lead
team with Mr. Paul Cramer (ASA(IE&E) as a directed member. The goal of
this team is to review all installation support and services and programs
across all PEGs and all Components. Recommendations should consider
reductions of workforce and missions and other cost-savings measures while
sustaining quality care of Soldiers and families. The Army National Guard
and Army Reserve members will provide the necessary information to ensure
this is a look across the Total Army. Closely examine and make
recommendations concerning which programs at the installation level can be
eliminated and/or consolidated. Additionally, working with the G-3 FM
recommendations should include options for stationing forces beyond 2015 in
order to reduce costs to installations support and services.
g. Army C31 and Cyber. This team will be led by (TBD) and will include Mr.
Dean Pfoltzer as a directed member. The goal of this team is to reduce the
size of the organizational headquarters within the C31 construct (ARCYBER,
G2, INSCOM, CIO/G6, NETCOM, ITA) by 25% in the aggregate, across
military, civilian, and contractors (down to every organization authorized a 2-
Star General Officer or Tier 2 SES). A particular emphasis will be placed on
consolidations and eliminations. The baseline reductions from which the
reductions are to be calculated are the dollars and TDA FTEs in FY18 of
POM 14-18 for these commands and organizations. Movement of personnel
outside of headquarters to subordinate units is not a legitimate means of
achieving savings. Team should consider consolidation , reductions, and
closing organizations. Reductions have already been applied to these
accounts in a proportional manner; this team's purpose will be to assess how
these reductions should optimally be applied.