What is the work carried out at Joint Forces Command?

SUFFOLK

The Joint Forces Command opened a small window Wednesday on the work it does, even as it prepares for its own demise.

Two days after Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced plans to close the Norfolk-based command known as JFCOM, the command hosted a previously scheduled media event designed to showcase its operations.

The message of the day was that while JFCOM's central mission - promoting cooperation among the various branches of the armed forces - will remain a key U.S. military objective, JFCOM will no longer be the agent driving the mission.

"If you go back to 1999 when Joint Forces Command was originally formed, its principal charter was to inculcate jointness within the armed forces of the United States," said Craig Quigley, JFCOM's director of communications. "The secretary's view is that while those needs are still very valid, there's a more efficient way to go about that."

Notwithstanding the efforts of Virginia politicians to reverse Gates' decision, Quigley and other JFCOM spokesmen made it clear that they now have a new mission: Shut the command down within the next 12 months.

"The secretary of defense has made a recommendation and a decision, and we're here to support him," said Navy Capt. Mark Boettcher, director of staff operations at NATO's Norfolk headquarters.

Much of the work now done at JFCOM will continue to be done in other venues, Boettcher said. Central to that work, he said, is facilitating cooperation not only among the different U.S. armed services but also among a 43-nation warfighting coalition.

Wednesday's event was part of Empire Challenge 10, an annual three-week, $15 million demonstration of JFCOM's intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance work.

Arrayed behind Boettcher were three large projection screens displaying data collected by unmanned aerial vehicles flying over the exercise's field location at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., and transmitted in real time to JFCOM's sprawling operations center in northern Suffolk.

The set-up is intended to simulate communications between the battlefield and coalition headquarters in Afghanistan. The objective, Boettcher said, is to give commanders the best possible information about the battlefield.

That work will go on even as JFCOM goes about the job of shutting itself down, Quigley said.

"We do have a job to do," he said. "It is to support the joint warfighter. And we have been encouraging our men and women here at Joint Forces Command to carry on" despite the distraction of the impending closure.

Quigley said the command has received clear marching orders from Clifford Stanley, the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness: "Put in place an implementation plan for the disestablishment of Joint Forces Command, and do so as quickly as possible so that our work force can make informed decisions about their futures."

Particularly vulnerable are the 3,200 contract employees who make up more than half of JFCOM's work force. Gates has made clear that he wants to reduce the military's reliance on contractors.

Roughly $500 million of JFCOM's $700 million annual budget is spent on contractors.

The command has current contracts totaling more than $2.1 billion extending into 2014. The largest, for just over $1 billion, is a joint contract for engineering and technical services with General Dynamics Corp., Lockheed Martin Corp., Science Applications International Corp. and Northrop Grumman Corp.

JFCOM officials say it's too early to tell what the future holds for any of those contracts.

Gary Lambert, a military analyst with General Dynamics who worked on Empire Challenge 10, was philosophical about the coming changes.

"I've seen it before," he said. "Companies go up and down, and so does the military. Sometimes you've got to reorganize and figure out how to save money. If that's what we have to do, I'll go with the flow. I'll survive."

Bill Sizemore, (757) 446-2276, bill.sizemore@pilotonline.com