Engineer Memoirs _____________________________________________________________________
Basically, the ACE, as I see it today, is much stronger than it was in my day in the ACE.
They're a much more credible player on the Army Staff, I believe, respected by the
operations community, and the Chief of Staff, and the Director of the Army Staff in ways
they weren't back in my day. We seem to always be trying to clamor for recognition and
credibility. I think, over the years, because of the things like I mentioned, of moving housing
and the O&M programmers there, so the ACE had a more complete package. Those
structural things were fixed. So, therefore, they're better.
Q:
Yes.
A:
Second, now, when I was there, it was the last of the Carter years and we were on low
budgets. So, the second factor was that we went through the Reagan years' budgets and all of
a sudden the ACE comes out as a bigger player on a bunch of things because of that.
Now, with the growth in the environment and the Chief of Engineers being given the role as
the Army's chief environmentalist, the guy responsible for the Army's environmental
programs, the ACE's role has grown. Finally, with all the base closures and the realignments
and all those exercises that have to do with installation planning, the Installations Planning
Office, which had all the books back when I was there and did some pretty good stuff, now is
really involved in anything the Army tries to do in figuring out changes in installations.
So, I think the ACE is much stronger than it used to be and a very credible player. I don't see
any problems or tensions in what's happening with respect to them. If there are, it's because
somebody doesn't understand the respective roles.
I think, without doubt, with regard to Military Programs, we've got communications there
better than ever before. I'm sure Bill Ray, having arrived and having come out of Europe as
the DCSENGR and now having been previously in the ACE's shop in programming, that
also will improve--just understanding of the leaders and how things are.
Now, as new people come in as action-oriented folks, they've got to provide their perspective
to their organization, so that they respond and respond that way.
Q:
I would like to ask you about--you said you might want to return to the issue of the process
not working fast enough, since we were just talking about process a few minutes ago. Do you
have more comments on that?
A:
Yes. As a headquarters, we really don't do staff actions in a timely manner. Now, you know,
I just got through saying Al Genetti really cranks these and does them right. What I'm really
coming down to is I think we're so big that we don't have that Pentagon, Department of the
Army sense of timeliness on doing things.
We almost have a MACOM of stovepipes. We're a very professional bunch, so we'll go at it
very deliberately, and sometimes we're not ready with a decision when it needs to be made.
Now, you can say, you know, that maybe they want decisions too early. Well, in this
environment, in this town, to win you have to have anticipated, done your homework, and be
452
Previous Page
