What's Brewin: An RFID Game Plan
$744 million: That's what the Defense Department plans to spend
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20080808_9193.php
$744 million: That's what the Defense Department plans to spend on
integrating radio frequency identification into its supply chain
between now and 2013, based an automatic identification technology
deployment plan signed by the head of U.S. Transportation Command, Air
Force Gen. Norton Schwartz, earlier this year, and kindly forwarded to
me by a reader.
The plan (TRANSCOM calls it an "implementation plan," a phrase that
makes me want to rend my garments and bay at the moon) shows planned
funding at about $120 million or more each year for the next five years:
• 2008: $119 million
• 2009: $119 million
• 2010: $123 million
• 2011: $126 million
• 2012: $129 million
• 2013: $128 million
The plan notes that TRANSCOM does not intend to open up its own purse,
but instead wants the military services and Defense agencies to pony
up their own funds.
“Components/agencies must have and will commit necessary resources to
accomplish tasks in this plan at their respective sites,” the plan
stated. “That commitment must be accomplished within current annual
budgets and personnel resources, as outlined in each service’s POM.”
That stands for program objective memorandum, which determines budget
allocations.
One wonders if this is wishful thinking. Even though “joint” has
become a Defense mantra, adherence to the ideal sometimes screeches to
a dead halt when it comes to forking over money.
The budget, as far as I can determine, primarily covers installation
of a passive RFID infrastructure -- which scans tags placed on cases
and pallets -- throughout Defense, and integration of data gathered
from scanning those tags at various points into back-end systems.
Ultimately, RFID data would be integrated into enterprise resource
planning systems in 2013.
Hmm…The Pentagon required suppliers of practically everything it buys
to tag cases and pallets as of January 2007, but Defense won’t
complete its end of the deal until six years after the supplier
tagging mandate went into effect? I wonder what the suppliers -- who
went to considerable expense to buy RFID gadgets and gizmos, as well
as software -- think of this.
Active vs. Passive
Passive RFID has a range of about 30 feet and is used to scan materiel
in distribution centers and warehouses at the case or pallet level.
Defense currently uses active RFID tags -- which, unlike passive tags,
are battery-powered and have a range of about 300 feet -- to track 24-
foot shipping containers transported by ship or truck. Active tags
cost about $100 each; passive tags cost less than a dollar when bought
in bulk.
Active tags have allowed Defense to track practically every container
shipped to Afghanistan and Iraq since the start of operations in both
countries, and also incorporate onboard data storage to identify the
items stuffed into containers. Defense tracks 98 percent of the 20,000
containers inbound every month to Central Command’s area of
responsibility, according to Dave Dias, TRANSCOM’s chief of asset
visibility.
The new TRANSCOM plan calls for replacing these data-rich tags with
license plate-type tags that identify containers only for tracking
purposes. The container ID is then linked to cargo information in a
supply database.
Defense spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin told me the switch to a license plate
approach will save money. But she added that users still will have the
option of using data-rich tags at locations with limited connectivity,
where it’s difficult to match up a tag identifier with information in
a database.
Justin Patton, managing director of the RFID Research Center of the
University of Arkansas, agreed that switching to license plate tags
will cut costs. But he told me that security could be the real reason
behind the switch. Using only a license plate tag means “the bad guys
can’t find out everything that is in a container,” he noted.
The Savi Technology unit of Lockheed Martin Corp. controls the Defense
active RFID market under contracts dating back to 1997. In February
2008, Defense boosted the ceiling of the current Savi contract,
awarded in 2003, by $60 million to $483 million.
Savi now faces competition. In July, the Army put out an RFP for an
active RFID contract vehicle. It will be interesting to watch how the
competition develops -- a business worth almost $500 million over
three years is bound to get some attention.
Navy Big RFID Winner?
TRANSCOM has set up five teams to manage the RFID deployment plan,
with most of it managed by TRANSCOM itself, the Defense Logistics
Agency or Joint Forces Command.
The Navy is the only service with a key role under the plan. It will
manage supply distribution processes at the delivery end of the supply
chain, work with TRANSCOM to evaluate potential cost savings from use
of the active tags and help determine requirements.
Sounds like this means more jobs at Naval Supply Systems Command
headquarters in Mechanicsburg, Pa.
Let’s Hope VA Doesn’t Have Another Financial System Meltdown
Last week, I reported that the Veterans Affairs Department had issued
two requests for proposals to upgrade its financial and asset
management systems under a project known as the Financial and
Logistics Integrated Technology Enterprise program.
A VA reader and correspondent said he hoped the department makes FLITE
fly better than its last attempt to field a financial system, the $472
million Core Financial and Logistics System that burned out in tests
at the Bay Pines, Fla., VA Medical Center.
Yancy Dorn, a union president at Bay Pines, said the system was so bad
that hospital personnel bought their own surgical gloves rather than
run the purchases through the system. “The employees here are sick of
it,” he told the St. Petersburg Times four years ago. We’re trying to
take care of the veterans, and we can’t even get gloves to put on to
draw blood.”
Hey Soldier, That’s $100 Extra for the Duffel Bag
When Army Staff Sgt. Ashley Serrano checked in last month at American
Airlines in El Paso, Texas, with three bags full of the gear he needed
for training prior to deployment to Iraq, he was told he would have to
pay $100 for the third bag, the El Paso Times reported.
Serrano, a member of the Texas National Guard, said he had never been
hit with such a fee while in uniform, and could not quite understand it.
Neither does George Lisicki, commander of the Veterans of Foreign
Wars. He wants all the airlines to waive extra bag fees for uniformed
personnel traveling on orders.
I suggest Lisicki gently remind American and the U.S. airline industry
that they collect about $1 billon a year from Defense on military
charter flights.
http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20080808_9193.php