Defense DepartmentChapter 5
Defense Department Systems and Processes
a. Introduction. At both national and departmental levels, various processes and systems have been developed to handle the complex problems of setting strategic direction, determining national military policy, requesting resources to execute that policy, and translating the funded military capability into military operations. The joint planning process is one link in a long and complex chain. This chapter describes many of the systems that influence joint staff officers in their role as joint operation planners.
b. Background. Before focusing on the processes or systems used by DOD for joint planning and operations, we need to set the stage. Since our primary goal is to be able to relate the systems to the joint arena, the background of our study is a basic understanding of the joint purpose these systems serve. The purpose of joint operation planning is to use the military element of national power effectively to protect U.S. interests, and U.S. national security strategy is the starting point for joint planning. Joint planning is a process, a systematic series of actions or procedures, used by a commander to determine the best method of accomplishing assigned tasks. The following systems affect joint planning and operations:
501. NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SYSTEM
References: National Security Act of 1947, as amended
NSDD 2, "National Security Council Structure," dated 12
PDD-2/NSC, "National Security Counsel Organization," dated 20 January 1993
Joint Staff Manual 5715.01, National Security Council Affairs,
dated 1 December 1994
a. Function. The National Security Council (NSC) was established by the National Security Act of 1947 as the principal forum to consider national security issues that require Presidential decision. Congress envisioned that the NSC would allow the military and the civilian government departments and agencies to work more effectively together on national security matters. The NSC functions, by statute, are to advise the President with respect to the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to the national security to enable the military and the other departments and agencies of the Government to cooperate more effectively; to assess and appraise the objectives, commitments, and risks of the United States in relation to our actual and potential military power; and to consider policies on matters of common interest to the departments and agencies of the Government concerned with national security for the purpose of making recommendations to the President. Although the statutory functions of the NSC has remained essentially unchanged since the mid-1950s, its composition, influence, and schedule of meetings have varied considerably with each President, the personality of his key advisers, and his view of the organization. Currently, through PDD-2/NSC, the NSC is tasked to give advice on integrating all aspects of national security policy affecting the United States, including domestic, foreign, military and economic policy (in conjunction with the National Economic Council).
(1) In 1949 the NSC was placed in the Executive Office of the President. It includes only four statutory members: the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Director of Central Intelligence are specified as statutory advisers. Additional members, specified in PDD-2/NSC, are the Secretary of the Treasury, the Representative to the United Nations, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (the "National Security Adviser"), the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Chief of Staff to the President, and, when appropriate, the United States Attorney General. The National Security Adviser is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the council and the interagency coordination. Statutory members and advisers, and other members of the NSC specified by PDD-2/NSC attend all meetings of the Council. Other senior officials not included as members may be invited to attend meetings, depending on the topics being discussed. Subordinate elements of the NSC include the following:
(a) The National Security Council Principals Committee (NSC/PC), a cabinet-level senior interagency forum for consideration of national security policy issues and resolution of issues not requiring the President’s participation. The Chairman, or in his absence, the Vice Chairman attends these meetings.
(b) The National Security Council Deputies Committee (NSC/DC), the senior sub-Cabinet level interagency forum for national security policy issues. The NSC/DC reviews and monitors the work of the NSC interagency process (including the Interagency Working Groups (IWGs)), and focuses much of its attention on policy implementation. The Vice Chairman attends these meetings.
(c) The NSC/DC Crisis Management (NSC/DC/CM), responsible for day-to-day crisis management and crisis prevention, including contingency planning for major areas of concern. The Vice Chairman attends these meetings.
(d) The NSC Interagency Working Groups (NSC/IWGs), which convene on a regular basis as determined by the Deputies Committee, review and coordinate implementation of Presidential decisions in their policy areas. The Assistant to the Chairman or the J-directors or their deputies attend these meetings.
(e) The Interagency Working Groups/Subgroups (IWG Subgroups) meet under the sponsorship of the IWG to develop background material, review working papers, and discuss and develop policy options on national security issues, including those arising from the implementation of NSC decisions. The Joint Staff division chief or action officer (AO) with functional responsibility for these issues would represent the Chairman at these meetings.
(2) NSC Documents. NSC documents are established to inform U.S. Government departments and agencies of Presidential actions:
(a) Presidential Decision Directive (PDD/NSC). The PDD series is used to publish Presidential decisions on national security matters. All PDDs in this series are individually identified by number and signed by the President.
(b) Presidential Review Directive (PRD/NSC). This series of directives is the mechanism for directing the reviews and analysis of an assigned topic to be undertaken by the departments and agencies. All PRDs in this series are identified by number and signed by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Upon completion of staffing, a PRD often becomes a PDD.
502. DEFENSE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT--A JOINT PERSPECTIVE
References: CJCSI 3100.01 (Draft), "Joint Strategic Planning System," dated June 1995
(1) The purpose of the Department of Defense (DOD) Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS) is to produce a plan, a program, and a two-year budget for the DOD with the ultimate objective of furnishing the combatant commanders with the best mix of forces, equipment, and support attainable within fiscal constraints. The Joint Strategic Planning System (JSPS) is the formal means by which the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), in consultation with the other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant commanders, discharges his responsibility to give strategic plans and direction to the Armed Forces of the United States and to interact with the other DOD systems. The JSPS establishes the formal process for review of the national security environment and U.S. national security objectives; threat evaluation; assessment of current strategy and existing or proposed programs and budgets; and proposal of military strategy, programs, and forces necessary to achieve national security objectives. See Figure 5-1.
(2) Taken together, the JSPS and the PPBS have the combined purpose of furnishing the best possible mix of missions, forces, equipment, and support to the combatant commanders. The joint perspective requires that the systems be looked at as one system, beginning and ending with the combatant commanders’ warfighting requirements and capabilities. Viewed in this manner (see Figure 5-2), the entire process is interrelated. It is important to note that the planning sequence allows continuous assessment, giving it the flexibility needed to accommodate today’s rapidly changing global environment.
(3) The following paragraphs discuss JSPS and PPBS according to the processes they cover: planning, programming, and budgeting. The documents and subprocesses included in the three processes are discussed, identifying with each document or subprocess the system it supports.
(1) Joint Strategy Review (JSR)--JSPS. The Joint Strategy Review (JSR) assesses the strategic environment for issues and factors that affect the national military strategy in the near and long term. The JSR is the JSPS process for continuously gathering information and examining current, emerging, and future issues, threats, technologies,
organizations, doctrinal concepts, force structures, and military missions. Throughout the process current strategy, forces, and national policy objectives are reviewed and assessed. The JSR facilitates the integration of strategy, operation planning, and program assessment. When significant changes in the strategic environment are identified, JSR Issue Papers are prepared. These papers are initial discussions of proposed changes to the National Military Strategy (NMS), the Joint Planning Document (JPD), and the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP).
(a) JSR Working Groups. JSR working groups, consisting of representatives from the Joint Staff, the Services, and the combatant commands, continuously review the international and domestic environment for trends and changes that should be incorporated into the strategic thinking of the United States in the long, mid, and near term. The intent is to include officers from the Services and combatant commands in the working groups to expand participation in the strategy development process.
(b) JSR Issue Papers. JSR Issue Papers report, and, when appropriate, publish changes in the strategic environment significant enough to warrant senior leadership review. When a significant change in the strategic environment is identified, a JSR Issue Paper is sent to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Service Chiefs, and the combatant commanders. Continual assessment of the strategic environment gathers information needed to determine whether revisions to other JSPS documents are needed.
(c) JSR Annual Report. The JSR Annual Report summarizes issues studied over the previous year and recommends any changes to the National Military Strategy as a result of those issues. The JSR Annual Report is published by 1 August annually.
(d) Long-Range Vision Paper. The Long-Range Vision Paper is published when needed and examines plausible future environments 14 years beyond the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) period. Its purpose is to help determine future national security needs for the long term, offering a means to study the implications of those future environments on the NMS, joint doctrine, force structure and requirements.
(e) JSR Support Responsibilities. The following assigned responsibilities support the Joint Strategy Review Process.
(2) National Military Strategy (NMS)--JSPS. The NMS furnishes to the President, the National Security Council, and the Secretary of Defense the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in consultation with the other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant commanders, as to the recommended national military strategy and fiscally constrained force structure required to support attainment of national security objectives. The NMS assists the Secretary of Defense in preparing the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) and guiding the development of the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP). The NMS is forwarded to the Secretary of Defense for his review and then to the President. It may be used to determine the CJCS position on matters of strategic importance regarding NCA-directed actions. The NMS also furnishes supporting documentation to the Secretary of Defense for consideration during preparation of the DPG, and to the Services for consideration during development of the Program Objective Memorandums (POMs). In 1992 the NMS was published in an unclassified format for the first time. The intent now is to publish the NMS "as needed" based on NSS changes when changes in the strategic environment dictate a need to modify the national strategy. The NMS includes
(3) Joint Planning Document (JPD)--JSPS. The Joint Planning Document (JPD) supports the National Military Strategy by furnishing concise programming priorities, requirements, or advice to the Secretary of Defense for consideration during preparation of the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG). The JPD is a stand-alone document published in a series of volumes covering specific functional areas. The JPD supports the strategy and force structure for the defense planning period and gives concise military tasks, priorities, requirements, or guidance in functional areas. It is intended to furnish insight on CJCS priorities in development of the defense program for the affected FYDP.
(a) Volume 1, Intelligence (J-2 lead), establishes CJCS intelligence policy guidance and associated goals and objectives in support of the NMS and develops prioritized intelligence capabilities required by the CINCs to support the NMS during the FYDP. It also serves as supporting documentation for the core intelligence capabilities identified in the DPG.
(b) Volume 2, Nuclear , Chemical, and Biological(J-5 lead), outlines the capabilities required by the combatant commanders to support the strategy for the planning period. The CINCs’ inputs for this volume constitute their formal input to the Nuclear Weapons Requirements Study (NWRS) process.
(c) Volume 3, C4 Systems (J-6 lead), summarizes major command, control, communications, and computer (C4) systems capability objectives and programming priorities needed to support the NMS and its force structure in addition to future joint military operations.
(d) Volume 4, Future Capabilities (J-8 lead), discusses present and future operational capability deficiencies and potential technology exploitation opportunities that require major science and technology (S&T) or systems acquisition (research and development) efforts in the mid- and long-range timeframes, and establishes a prioritized set of major R&D and S&T objectives to correct those deficiencies.
(e) Volume 5, Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy (MC&G) (NIMA lead), discusses major MC&G resource requirements and shortfalls to support the NMS, states shortfalls and appraises the inherent risks in programmed MC&G resources, and recommends prioritized actions to resolve those shortfalls.
(f) Volume 6, Manpower and Personnel (J-1 lead), identifies and examines broad issues and programs common to all Services that relate to meeting current and programmed forces, and states the CJCS position regarding military and civilian personnel management programs and policies needed to support manpower requirements.
(g) Volume 7, Logistics (J-4 lead), describes the joint logistics policies and programs that affect the capability of programmed forces to meet their present and future requirements, and states joint logistics policy in support of the NMS for use of the Secretary of Defense in developing the DPG.
(4) Defense Planning Guidance (DPG)--PPBS. The DPG issues guidance from the Secretary of Defense to the military departments for development of the military departments’ Program Objective Memorandums (POMs) for the defense planning period. The DPG includes major planning issues and decisions, strategy and policy, strategic elements, the Secretary’s program planning objectives, the Defense Planning Estimate, the Illustrative Planning Scenarios, and a series of studies. The DPG is the major link between the JSPS and the PPBS.
(a) The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)) takes the lead in drafting the DPG, considering the previous year’s DPG, Program Decision Memorandums (PDMs), and the budget, along with the NMS. The DPG Steering Group, chaired by the Deputy USD(P), helps develop and coordinate the DPG. DPG development relies on extensive dialogue between OSD, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the combatant commanders, and the Services.
(b) As chapters of the DPG are drafted, they are circulated to the military departments and others for review and comment. The Services use the draft DPG as guidance to begin development of their programs. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the combatant commanders, and the Defense Resources Board (DRB) review the draft DPG until the final version is issued. The DRB was established as an oversight organization to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the PPBS process. The DRB ensures that fiscal and other guidance are followed at all levels. This powerful group is actively involved in every step of the PPBS process. The board, chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, also serves as the major arbiter of fiscal issues leading to development of the DOD budget.
c. Programming. In January, the President approves Fiscal Forecasts and Guidance (FFG) developed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and sends it to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Services. The FFG furnishes fiscal guidance concerning the value of the dollar and forecast availability that the Services need to develop realistic programs within fiscal constraints.
(1) Program Objective Memorandums (POMs). The military departments and Special Operations Command (SOCOM) send POMs to the Secretary of Defense in the spring of even-numbered years. These identify major issues that must be resolved during the year of submission. Supporting information for the POMs is published per the annual POM preparation instructions.
(a) The combatant commanders submit their requirements to the Services through their components during POM development. The CINCs also send their highest priority needs to the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the CINCs’ Integrated Priority Lists (IPLs). The Services are required to include special annexes that show how their POMs respond to the needs of the CINCs, in particular the CINCs’ individual IPLs, and the CINCs have the opportunity to review all POMs to ensure that the Services have considered their needs.
(b) POMs are based on the strategic concepts and guidance stated in the DPG and include an assessment of the risks associated with current and proposed force and support programs. POMs express total program requirements for the years covered in the DPG. They also describe the rationale for proposed changes to the force approved by the Secretary of Defense as reflected in the Future-Years Defense Program (FYDP).
The FYDP is the official database of all military establishment programs approved by the Secretary of Defense, structured as depicted in Figure 5-3. The FYDP is updated formally three times during the cycle shown in Figure 5-4.
(c) At the behest of Congress, the Secretary of Defense began submitting two-year budgets, starting in FY89 with the FY89-90 budget. Congress, however, has not changed its traditional practice of working out the budget annually. To remain synchronized with Congress, DOD complies with the original annual budget timetables, but, in keeping with the spirit of the two-year budget, doesn’t introduce new items in the "off-year" budget of each cycle. Instead, DOD refines the figures submitted the year before. See Figure 5-5.
(2) Chairman’s Program Assessment (CPA)--JSPS. The Chairman’s Program Assessment (CPA) is the CJCS’s assessment of the composite POM. It summarizes the views of the CJCS on the balance and capabilities of the POM force and support levels required to attain U.S. national security objectives. In addition, the CPA assists the Chairman in fulfilling his statutory duty to do the following:
(a) The CPA assesses how well strategic guidance and the POMs submitted by the military departments, USSOCOM, and defense agencies conform to national military defense priorities and strategic guidance. When appropriate, it may contain alternative recommendations and proposals to improve conformance with strategic guidance or the CINC’s priorities.
(b) CPA development is an iterative process that begins before the POMs are published and ends when critical issues are identified for inclusion in the CPA. Services, CINCs, agencies, and the Joint Staff are involved throughout the process. This coordination is essential to identify and properly develop specific issues appropriate for CJCS to bring before the Secretary of Defense formally. Documents considered in CPA development include POM preparation instructions, OSD Fiscal Guidance, the DPG, the POMs themselves, the NMS, the JPD, the JWCA, the JMRR, the JMNA, the CINCs’ IPLs, the Combat Support Agency Responsiveness and Readiness Report, etc.
(3) Issues--PPBS. The OSD staff prepares a set of potential issues, i.e., alternatives to some of the programs included in the POMs. The CINCs and OMB prepare other potential issues. The Program Review Group (PRG) examines all potential issues, resolving many issues at the PRG level, and agrees on a set of issues to be considered by the Defense Resources Board (DRB). The DRB makes the final selection from the list of candidates; those selected as a formal briefing to the DRB or as issue books, sometimes called program review books, are prepared, staffed through the CINCs and Services for comment, and forwarded to the DRB for a decision. The Services formulate the issue papers, and the Chairman and other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CINCs also supply inputs. Each issue paper consists of a discussion section followed by alternatives. The individual issues are combined into issue books (IBs), sometimes called main issues or program review books. Issue books are circulated to other OSD staff, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CINCs, and the Services for review and comment. The DRB, the DOD’s "board of directors," considers the books, with comments to facilitate the decision process.
(4) Program Decision Memorandums (PDMs)--PPBS. The DRB has many meetings over a two-to-three-week period to consider the Issue Books and resolve the issues. The CINCs are invited to the meetings that consider their issues. The Service Chiefs and Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may attend DRB meetings. Each Issue Book is the subject of one two-to-three-hour meeting, after which the Deputy Secretary of Defense reaches a tentative decision. After all the Issue Books have been individually reviewed, a wrap-up meeting is held to evaluate the total effect of the tentative decisions on the program. Open issues are resolved and final decisions are reached and recorded in PDMs during early August.
(1) Budget Estimates Submission (BES)--PPBS. Each of the military departments and defense agencies forwards its Budget Estimates Submission (BES) to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (ASD(C)). The BES is traditionally due in September. It includes data for the prior year, current year, budget year, and budget year plus one (more for authorized programs) per the Budget Guidance Manual and supplementary memorandums. Budget Estimates are prepared and submitted based on the approved program as well as current economic assumptions contained either in the PDMs or in detailed budget guidance issued each year. On receipt of the submission, the comptroller’s program and budget office begins the joint OSD and OMB hearings to review the submission. Appropriate members of the Joint Staff and OSD staffs attend these hearings, jointly conducted by OSD and OMB representatives. The military departments make presentations concerning their submissions and respond to questions. The DRB meets when appropriate.
(2) Program Budget Decisions (PBDs)--PPBS. Budget submission hearings are held to obtain additional information needed to draft Program Budget Decisions (PBDs). The entire budget is reviewed to ensure that the requests are properly priced, program schedules are appropriate, and estimates are consistent with the objectives of the Secretary of Defense. PBDs document approval of the estimates for inclusion in the President’s Budget. These decisions evaluate, adjust, and approve all resources in the budget request. Although the responsible budget analyst has the lead in developing the
PBD, other OSD staff personnel furnish appropriate recommendations and support. When each individual PBD is written, it is coordinated with OMB and the Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries of Defense. Each PBD consists of a discussion of the area, issues, and a series of alternatives. PBDs are sent with a covering memorandum that identifies any unresolved issues to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, who then chooses one of the alternatives or directs a new one, and the signed PBD goes to the appropriate military department and CINCs.
(a) If a military department appeals a PBD, the reclama is processed through the same channels as was the PBD, and the Deputy Secretary of Defense makes the final decision. The military department secetaries and Service chiefs have an opportunity as near the end of the review cycle as possible to discuss with the Secretary of Defense the major budget issues that merit his personal review. During this phase of PPBS, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and CINCs assess the impact of PBDs on warfighting capabilities of the combatant commands. They present their concerns to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who discusses them with the Secretary of Defense as appropriate. While the formal PPBS process has not changed, the CINCs and the Joint Staff are becoming increasingly influential in the program and budgeting choices.
(b) Since the mid-1980s, the role of the CINCs in resource management has increased significantly, as shown by Figure 5-6. PPBS has become much more responsive to the needs of the CINCs. The Commander in Chief, U.S. Special Operations Command, is the only combatant commander who actually submits a budget.
(3) Defense Budget--PPBS. If, at the end of the PPBS process, OMB or DOD feels that unresolved differences remain, the Secretary of Defense and Director, OMB, raise these issues when they meet with the President. Once the final budget decisions are made, the DOD budget becomes a part of the President’s budget that is submitted to the Congress in January. Once the President signs the Congressional appropriations act into law, OMB can begin apportioning funds to the federal departments. The Services execute the budget and procure new forces and capabilities, and the CINCs develop, maintain, and prepare to execute their contingency plans (See Figure 5-7).
e. Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP)--JSPS. The Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP) contains guidance to the CINCs and Service Chiefs for accomplishing military tasks and missions based on current military capabilities. These assignments take into account the capabilities of available forces, intelligence information, and guidance issued by the Secretary of Defense. The JSCP directs the development of contingency plans to support national security objectives by assigning planning tasks and apportioning major combat forces and strategic lift capability to the combatant commanders. As a capabilities planning document, it represents the last phase of resource management. It apportions the resources provided by the PPBS to develop operation plans.
The JSCP constructs a coherent framework for giving capabilities-based military advice to the NCA.
(1) The JSCP is designed to be a "living document" that is reviewed biennially. As a result of such reviews, the Joint Staff J-5 initiates appropriate changes resulting from force structure modification and changes to the strategic environment, or, if there is no need to revise the JSCP, publishes a directive requiring CINC revalidation of operation plan requirements.
(2) The JSCP is the principal vehicle that assigns tasks to the combatant commanders to develop operation plans, Concept Plans with or without Time-Phased Force and Deployment Data (TPFDD), and functional plans using deliberate planning procedures described in detail in Chapter 6 following. The JSCP gives strategic planning guidance and direction for plans to be developed following its distribution with a time-frame for completion being between 12 and 18 months. It consists of a single volume that covers planning guidance, objectives, tasks, and major force apportionment for planning. Major combat forces expected to be available during the planning period include both
Active and Reserve forces under various conditions of mobilization. The JSCP supplemental guidance, published separately as 14 CJCS Instructions, furnishes planning guidance, capabilities, and amplification of tasks assigned for planning in specified functional areas:
CJCSI 3110.02 Intelligence
CJCSI 3110.03 Logistics
CJCSI 3110.04 Nuclear
CJCSI 3110.05 Psychological Ops
CJCSI 3110.06 Special Ops
CJCSI 3110.07 Chemical Warfare; Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Defense; Riot Control Agents and Herbicides
CJCSI 3110.08 Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy
CJCSI 3110.09 Command and Control Warfare (C2W)
CJCSI 3110.10 Command, Control, Communications, and Computer Systems (C4 Systems)
CJCSI 3110.11 Mobility
CJCSI 3110.12 Civil Affairs
CJCSI 3110.13 Mobilization
CJCSI 3110.14 Military Operations Other Than War
CJCSI 3110.15 Special Technical Operations
f. JSPS-Related Assessments and Other Key Documents. The following assessment list contains critical JSPS-related information.
(1) The Joint Military Net Assessment (JMNA) (J-8) is prepared by the CJCS in consultation with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and CINCs. It is submitted annually to the Secretary of Defense for his approval and submission to Congress with the defense budget. The JMNA fulfills the statutory duty of the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual comprehensive net assessment of the defense capabilities and programs of the Armed Forces of the United States and its allies compared with those of potential adversaries.
(2) The Current Readiness System (CRS) (J-3). The CRS, depicted in Figure 5-8 and detailed in CJCSI 3401.01, looks at current strategy and assesses areas judged important to joint warfare. When deficiencies exist, they are looked at in more detail in concert with the unified commands and Services. Service programs are reviewed for adequacy to satisfy the current warfighting deficiency. This system reviews and assesses current strategy, forces, and critical joint enablers.
(3) The Joint Monthly Readiness Review (JMRR) (J-3). The JMRR, the central component of the CRS, examines both current readiness and readiness to execute the National Military Strategy (NMS). It is a subjective assessment with a macro-level focus by the senior leadership of the Services and combatant commands. The JMRR
contains the CJCS Service assessments of unit readiness by the Service Operations Deputies and CINC assessments of joint readiness and is briefed by the J-3. During the JMRR, the Services report unit readiness, assessing people, equipment, training, and critical enablers. The CINCs report joint readiness, assessing their ability to integrate and synchronize ready forces to execute their assigned missions. A quarterly feedback JMRR, chaired by the CJCS or VCJCS, is conducted to brief the CINCs’ identified deficiencies and courses of action to correct them. The solutions are developed as a collaborative effort between the Joint Staff, the Services, and unified command staffs. The focus is on near-term (within two years) operational, planning, policy, and programmatic corrections for key warfighting deficiencies.
(4) The Joint Warfighting Capability Assessment (JWCA) (J-8). The Joint Warfighting Capability Assessment process is the CJCS vehicle for obtaining a systematic view of future joint warfighting capabilities. Assessments, sponsored by Joint Staff Directorates, are conducted by teams of warfighting and functional area experts from the Joint Staff, unified commands, Services, Office of the Secretary of Defense, federally funded research and development centers, and others as necessary. Assessments examine key relationships and interactions between joint warfighting capabilities, and identify opportunities for improving warfighting effectiveness. The continuous assessment process gives insight into issues involving requirements, readiness, and plans for recapitalizing joint military capabilities. Findings are presented to the CJCS, the JROC, and the CINCs. The final assessment products are used to influence programming and budget guidance and to develop joint requirements resource recommendations. The JWCA is the major source for developing the Chairman’s Program Recommendations (CPR).
(5) Chairman’s Program Recommendations (CPR) (J-8). The CPR contains the CJCS’s recommendations to the Secretary of Defense for future programs. The recommendations represent the Chairman’s view of programs important for creating or enhancing joint warfighting capabilities. The recommendations are intended for consideration while developing the Defense Planning Guidance. Services, unified commands, and the Joint Staff are involved throughout the process. CINC inputs are solicited to make the CPR a better tool during DPG development.
(6) The Defense Planning Guidance (DPG)
(a) The DPG issues policy, articulates strategic objectives, and reflects the national military strategy; it includes the Secretary of Defense’s force and resource POM guidance to the military departments, other combat support agencies, and the unified commands. The DPG is a statutorily required (reference) indispensable source document for both planning and programming. It is essential that CJCS advice be furnished during development of the DPG.
(b) The DPG also includes the Secretary’s program planning objectives, the Defense Planning Estimate, the Illustrative Planning Scenarios, and a series of studies. The DPG is a major link between the JSPS and the PPBS.
(7) Contingency Planning Guidance (CPG) fulfills the statutory duty of the Secretary of Defense to furnish written policy guidance annually to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for contingency planning. The Secretary issues this guidance with the approval of the President after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The CPG focuses the guidance given in the NSS and DPG, and is the principal source document for the JSCP.
503. COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS, AND COMPUTER (C4) SYSTEMS. Historically, great military victories are often attributed to superior mobility, firepower, intelligence, or logistics. Superior command and control (C2) systems have enabled commanders to maintain the unity of effort to apply these capabilities at the critical time and place to win. Today improved technology in mobility, weapons, sensors, and C4 systems, and increased and increasingly sustained operation tempo, generate voluminous amounts of information. Information overload, if not managed, can adversely affect the outcome of a conflict. Properly employed, C4 systems can be the key to successful information management and military operations.
a. Basic Doctrine
(1) An unbroken chain of communications must extend from the NCA, through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to the combatant commanders, component commanders, and commanders of subordinate and supporting commands.
(2) The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, through the combatant commands, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), and the Services, ensures that commanders at each echelon have the communications necessary to accomplish their assigned missions. The required communications capability may come from the Defense Communications System (DCS), the Global Command and Control System (GCCS), other National Communications System (NCS) operating agencies’ systems, organic force communications systems, or commercial communications systems. This multiplicity of C4 systems ensures communications support during all phases of military operations.
(3) Effective C4 systems are critical to planning and executing successful joint or combined operations.
(4) Joint force commanders (JFCs) must develop operational procedures that provide an interoperable, compatible communications network. Annex K to any OPLAN furnishes the plan for employment of communications and C4 systems in that OPLAN.
(1) Command and control denotes the process that commanders use to plan, direct, coordinate, and control forces to ensure mission accomplishment.
(2) C2 Systems, C4 Systems, and C4 are the supporting systems that include both the C2 systems and the communications and computer systems required to implement the C2 process.
c. C4 Systems Principles. Experience has demonstrated that the C4 planner should be brought in at the beginning of the planning process and involved throughout the planning evolution. To achieve operational objectives, C4 principles should be applied during all phases of the operation. Joint Pub 6-0 identifies principles common to Service, joint, and combined C4 activities. Some of the key principles deal with system discipline, interoperability, flexibility, reliability, security, and survivability.
d. Peacetime Systems. Deterrence, the fundamental U.S. military strategy, relies on peacetime readiness of forces. Therefore, peacetime C4 systems support three basic requirements of daily operations, attack warning, and transition to war.
e. Conventional War Systems. Wartime C4 systems support joint force commanders’ requirements for C2, including intelligence, logistics, combat service support, and special operations. Additional communications links are usually brought on line, including targeting and strike mission planning. Essential C4 systems are composed of many systems and nodes connecting the combatant commander with U.S. components, supporting combatant commanders, and any allied or coalition forces. The C4 system of a combatant command includes the C4 systems of subordinate commands and joint task forces (JTFs) when such organizations are established.
f. Communications Support--JTFs. Communications support may be available to a joint force commander from the Joint Communications Support Element (JCSE) or other CJCS-controlled communications resources. CJCSM 6231-series discusses CJCS communications capabilities.
504. NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (NCS). The National Communications System (NCS) is an interagency group that coordinates the telecommunications assets of 23 Federal departments and agencies to ensure compatibility and interoperability during emergencies without compromising day-to-day operations.
a. The purpose of the NCS is to assist the President, National Security Council, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Office of Management and Budget to
b. The Secretary of Defense is the Executive Agent for the NCS. The principal adviser for NCS matters is the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C3I). The Director, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), is the Manager, NCS.
505. DEFENSE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (DCS). The Defense Communications System (DCS) is a composite of certain DOD communications systems and networks under the management control and direction of DISA. It administers the C2 requirements of DOD and civil agencies directly concerned with national security or other critical emergency requirements. The objective is to organize the complex of DOD communications networks, equipment, control centers, and resources to furnish an effective, responsive, survivable worldwide communications system.
506. THE JOINT OPERATION PLANNING AND EXECUTION SYSTEM (JOPES). The system used by the Joint Planning and Execution Community (JPEC) to conduct joint planning during peace and crisis is the Joint Operation Planning and Execution System (JOPES). Joint operation planning is a process coordinated through all levels of the national structure for joint planning and execution, including the NCA and the JPEC. The focus of the joint operation planning process is at the combatant commanders, who use it, assisted by and coordinated through JOPES, to determine the best method of accomplishing assigned tasks and direct the actions necessary to accomplish the mission. In normal peacetime conditions the process--called deliberate planning--produces operation plans, either OPLANs or CONPLANs, and functional plans. In crises the process--called Crisis Action Planning (CAP)--produces operation orders (OPORDs). JOPES is designed to facilitate rapid building and timely maintenance of plans in deliberate planning, rapid development of effective options and OPORDs through adaptation of approved operation plans or in no-plan situations in CAP, and effective management of operations in execution across the spectrum of mobilization, deployment, employment, sustainment, and redeployment when operations are conducted.
a. Overview of JOPES. JOPES is the integrated joint conventional command and control system used to support military operation monitoring, planning, and execution (including theater-level nuclear and chemical plans) activities. JOPES incorporates policies, procedures, personnel, and facilities by interfacing with automated data processing (ADP) systems available on the Global Command and Control System (GCCS), reporting systems, and support to senior-level decision-makers and their staffs at the NCA level and throughout the JPEC.
b. JOPES Procedural Principles. JOPES was developed and continues to evolve based on several principles described below.
(1) JOPES includes administrative policies and procedures that govern all conventional military operation planning and execution. This system standardizes vocabulary, procedures, and joint ADP support (available on GCCS) for all participants in all aspects of joint military planning and execution, and facilitates the transition from training, to planning, to executing effective, successful military operations.
(2) JOPES planning is based on both requirements and capabilities. Military planners use forces and resources identified in the JSCP, CJCS orders, Service documents, and approved operation plans or OPORDs. They identify forces and resources required to accomplish the mission and compare them to actual forces and resources available. Supporting commands and agencies and the Services confirm force and resource availability, including combat, combat service, and combat service support forces, and sustainment and transportation resources. Rapid, accurate exchange of information via GCCS is fundamental to the intense coordination required throughout the JPEC to support timely decisions during planning and adjust operations to the developing situation during execution.
(3) JOPES contains specific procedures for the supported command to identify shortfalls between planned requirements and identified capabilities throughout the planning process. If shortfalls cannot be resolved, planners conduct a risk analysis, and adjust the CINC’s concept of operations if the risk is considered too great.
(4) Within JOPES, completed and approved plans are maintained and updated as changes occur. New plans are required when the threat, tasks, forces assigned, resources available, and/or concept of operations change to the extent that the supported CINC and the CJCS conclude that development of a new plan is necessary. Otherwise, commanders and their staffs concentrate on keeping existing plans and orders up to date and executable through use of all appropriate methods, including plan maintenance conferences and teleconferences.
c. Guidelines. JOPES authoritative documentation is published in the CJCSM 3122 series of manuals as follows:
(1) Joint Pub 5-03.1 (CJCSM 3122.01), Joint Operation Planning and Execution System Volume I (Planning Policies and Procedures), unclassified, describes the policies and procedures governing the joint conventional deliberate and crisis action planning processes under JOPES.
(2) CJCSM 3122.02, Manual for Time-Phased Force and Deployment Data (TPFDD) Development and Deployment Execution, describes building, refining and maintaining force deployment databases for deliberate and crisis action plans.
(3) CJCSM 3122.03, Joint Operation Planning and Execution System Volume II (Planning Formats and Guidance), unclassified, describes operation plan formats and gives guidance for joint conventional planning and execution under JOPES. Specific guidance concerning OPLAN and CONPLAN formats and examples of them are included, along with detailed administrative procedures concerning plan data management, classification, and security guidance.
(4) CJCSM 3122.04, Joint Operation Planning and Execution System Volume II (Planning and Execution Format and Guidance, Secret Supplement) describes formats for classified portions of operation plans.
g. The Scope of JOPES. JOPES is the integrated, conventional command and control system designed to satisfy the information needs of senior decision-makers in conducting joint planning and operations. Figure 5-9 depicts the scope of JOPES, spanning the gamut of deliberate and crisis action planning and execution, integrating all seven JOPES functions in all phases of military operations (mobilization, deployment, employment, and sustainment), from the NCA through all levels of the JPEC.
h. History of JOPES. Development of support for standardized joint operation planning began in the 1960s. Originally, computer types, software programs, planning procedures, and documentation varied between commands, and the support proved ineffective. For instance, planning data stored in one command’s computer system were readily available only to an organization using that system. Information transfer between dissimilar computer systems was mechanically difficult, frustrating, and time consuming. Moreover, the combatant commands had, over time, developed different formats for storing data to support their individual plans. Plans submitted by the combatant commanders were therefore difficult to analyze, review, approve, or relate to each other.
(1) In 1966 the Secretary of Defense, recognizing the seriousness of these problems, directed the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop procedures and a standardized ADP system that could be used with the Worldwide Military Command and Control System (WWMCCS) to support the new Joint Operation Planning System (JOPS). JOPS was to accomplish several things, including the following:
(2) Work began on the development of JOPS in 1967; initial design of JOPS received formal JCS approval in 1970. By 1973 new Honeywell 6000 computers were installed to furnish ADP support for the standardized planning procedures in JOPS. To prevent combatant commands from losing (during transition to the new standardized computer system) the plan development ADP support they were already using, the Joint Chiefs of Staff directed rapid development of interim computer programs until new software could be introduced. The Force Requirements Generator (FRG), Movement Requirements Generator (MRG), Transportation Feasibility Estimator (TFE), and utility programs that allowed them to interact were developed as temporary programs and proved so successful that they were adopted as the standard ADP systems for JOPS.
(3) JOPS procedures were continually updated through the years as the standardized system for developing and documenting operation plans in deliberate planning and operation orders in Crisis Action Procedures (CAP), as Crisis Action Planning was called under JOPS. However, the data generated in JOPS ADP were not readily accessible for rapid adaptation to crisis action situations under CAP, and JOPS ADP gave no capability to monitor execution of an OPORD. To help remedy this condition, the Joint Deployment System (JDS) was developed to furnish the ADP support for increasingly time-constrained crisis action planning. Primarily intended to support crisis action planning, the JDS database included TPFDD and narrative data from all approved plans. JDS bridged the gap between deliberate and crisis planning by making the extensive efforts of deliberate planning resident in the JDS database immediately available for use in crisis action planning.
(4) While JDS was an improvement over JOPS, the disadvantage of having to move back and forth between the two systems hampered its effectiveness. DISA implemented a strategy of bringing improved JOPS and JDS functions together into a single, user-friendly system--JOPES, which resided on WWMCCS.
(5) JOPES procedures continue to be used for deliberate planning and crisis action. JOPES ADP, which supports force planning, support planning, and transportation planning has migrated to the GCCS and is further discussed in Chapters 6 and 7.
507. JOINT CENTER FOR LESSONS LEARNED (JCLL). The Joint Center for Lessons Learned operates a computerized search and retrieval system to extract relevant lessons from a large database of existing knowledge acquired during previous operations and exercises. The database has been built mostly from after-action reports and is continuously updated. The search capabilities are extremely sophisticated and capable of supporting short- or no-notice crisis planning. The JCLL is managed by the Joint Staff J-7 Evaluation and Analysis Division (ESD) and includes three subsystems.
a. Joint Universal Lessons Learned System (JULLS) is a PC-based software package designed to create, modify, and display observations from command post exercises, field training exercises, and actual operations. After-action reports and lessons learned are consolidated and forwarded to the Joint Staff J-7 (ESD). These observations are transcribed into the JULLS database (Secret) and made available to the entire JPEC. MCM 86-90 furnishes details on administration of the system.
b. Joint After-Action Reporting System (JAARS). CJCS MOP 53 requires submission of after-action reports (AARs) following operations and exercises. The AAR is the vehicle by which most lessons learned are generated for the JULLS database. Joint Pub 1-03.30 contains formats and procedures for preparing and submitting AAR documents.
c. Remedial Action Projects (RAP) Program tracks significant shortfalls or deficiencies identified during exercises and operations to favorable resolution. RAP furnishes a written description of deficiencies and shortfalls that must be corrected by specific actions in order to improve joint warfighting capabilities. MCM 234-90 gives guidance concerning compliance with and administration of the RAP program.
508. C4I FOR THE WARRIOR. Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) for the Warrior is a concept that sets forth a roadmap for achieving joint interoperable C4I on a global basis that
a. C4I for the Warrior encompasses the concept of a global C4I system that directly links and supports the combatant commanders who engage in military operations in a rapidly changing world. C4I for the Warrior furnishes accurate and complete pictures of the battlespace, timely and detailed mission objectives, and the clearest view of targeting.
b. A unifying C4I concept is essential to achieving the objectives required to meet the needs of the combatant commanders. Through a revolutionary approach of an open architecture that makes C4I data available as needed by the user, and in an evolutionary manner, C4I for the Warrior attempts to resolve joint force C4I interoperability issues. Its aim is to improve the joint warfighter’s ability to manage and execute crisis and contingency operations and furnish the means for unifying the many Service C4I programs currently being pursued.
c. The C4I for the Warrior concept builds on lessons learned from previous conflicts, operational requirements, the effects and opportunities presented by rapidly changing technologies, and the directions of evolving U.S. national security strategy.
509. GLOBAL COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM (GCCS) is the mid-term phase of the Command, Control, Computers, Communications, and Intelligence for the Warrior (C4IFTW) concept. C4IFTW fulfills the requirement for a capability to move a U.S. fighting force on the globe at any time and to give it the information and direction to complete its mission. The C4I objective is to give the warrior a fused, real-time, accurate picture of the battlespace and the ability to order, respond, and coordinate horizontally and vertically to fulfill a mission in that battlespace (See Figure 5-10). GCCS is the single C4I system that satisfies the C4IFTW concept. It is a user-focused program under the oversight of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff that will furnish C4I systems to support strategic, theater, and tactical requirements and a common thread that extends from the foxhole to the commander in chief. The C4IFTW is indeed a revo-lutionary approach to resolving the joint force interoperability issues and evolving heterogeneous Service C4I programs into a unified system.
a. Overview. GCCS evolved from a baseline legacy of integrated C2 components and serves as the cornerstone for the rapid integration of additional legacy systems until all functional requirements are satisfied. As legacy components are fielded, they will be reengineered or replaced. GCCS common functional, physical, and operational characteristics are based on a Common Operating Environment (COE). All future GCCS development must be compatible with this COE. The result will be a fully integrated GCCS, with a common look and feel and the flexibility to interface with external systems.
b. Initial Capabilities. The initial task of GCCS was to be a functional replacement for the older WWMCCS ADP system. This required movement of JOPES ADP and other mission-essential applications such as SORTS from the WWMCCS mainframe environment into the GCCS distributed architecture network. However, GCCS also offers much more than just a platform for those applications. As the single C4I system to underlie evolution of the C4IFTW concept, GCCS establishes a foundation to support further growth. That foundation comprises a robust network to give global connectivity, a flexible and reliable system architecture, and a comprehensive training system to ensure personnel capable of operating and maintaining the system. This basic infrastructure, enabled by the adaptability of modern computing technology, will permit GCCS to continue to develop in order to support warfighters, however their needs may change. The structure will include the following:
c. GCCS Mission Applications. GCCS performs command and control mission functions better and more reliably than WWMCCS applications, especially in the JOPES functions migrating from WWMCCS to GCCS that are briefly discussed below. JOPES functions that aid in force, support, and transportation planning are discussed in more detail in Chapter 6.
(1) JOPES ADP resident on GCCS includes software used to construct time-phased force deployment data and analysis including the following:
(2) Common Operational Picture is the basic GCCS fused battlespace picture. This capability can display land, sea, and air tracks on a near-real-time basis, overlaid on a chart battleground. To produce the Common Operational Picture, GCCS interfaces with other systems, such as Service battlespace display systems, data link (TADIL) inputs, and other data feeder systems, such as JDISS (discussed later). Through its core software, GCCS produces the geographic display, correlates contacts, and furnishes track database capability.
(3) Global Transportation Network (GTN) is an operational prototype that furnishes the automated command and control support needed for USTRANSCOM to carry out its mission of global transportation management for DOD. GTN also supports USTRANSCOM in accomplishing its task to integrate deployment-related ADP systems and to furnish centralized traffic management in peace and war.
(a) GTN accesses current transportation information from diverse sources, integrates that information, and gives it to users in a useful form. Information is integrated into a central database to cross-reference supply, cargo, forces, passenger, and patient requirements and movements with airlift, air refueling, aeromedical, and sealift schedules and movement. Success will be directly related to the quality of the data, response time to a query, number of users able to access the database at one time, and ability to keep the database operational under all conditions.
(b) DESERT SHIELD/STORM highlighted the need for integrated transportation information. One of the key problems experienced was inaccurate movement requirements. JOPES gave a general forecast of requirements to schedule lift against, but some units took more or less equipment than the JOPES database held for them, or they weren’t ready to embark lift assets at times indicated in the JOPES database. This sometimes resulted in scheduling the wrong lift assets for the wrong loads at the wrong times. Another problem was lack of in-transit visibility; once passengers and cargo were loaded on a lift asset, they could not be tracked until accounted for at the receiving end. The customers in the field did not know where critical items were in the pipeline, so duplicate and triplicate requisitions were sometimes submitted, and lift that could have been used more efficiently for something else was used to move the extra items. Containers remained in ports because nobody knew what they contained or where to send them. In-transit visibility, a primary benefit of GTN, solves or ameliorates such deficiencies.
(c) GTN gives users the ability to do the following things, as depicted in Figure 5-11:
(4) Scheduling and Movement (S&M) is the focus within JOPES for command and control information on deployment activity and status. It functions as a vehicle to report and track movement of TPFDD requirements. S&M allows the user to review, update, schedule, and create manifests of both Transportation Component Command (TCC) carrier and organic movement data, before and during deployment. It offers the capability to review and analyze an extensive variety of sources requirements. TCC air carrier information is supplied by the Global Transportation Network (GTN). Multiple reports concerning transportation analysis are available. Major new functions in S&M include the following:
(5) GCCS Reconnaissance System (GRIS). The Joint Reconnaissance Information System (JRIS), the Pacific Command Reconnaissance Mission Information System (PARMIS), and the European Reconnaissance Information System (ERIS) collectively furnish the functionality required by the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Reconnaissance Center(JCS/JRC) and theater commands. These applications and their databases are cur-
rently migrating to GCCS to form GRIS, which will be made available to the Joint Staff, each theater command, and selected organizations. GRIS produces
(6) Evacuation System (EVAC). The Joint Staff, combat support agencies, and the Services had a requirement for a command and control system to assist in planning for and building evacuation plans. U.S. embassies and consulates throughout the world collect and forward to the Joint Staff detailed information about U.S. citizens in their areas. The EVAC application makes this information readily available to planners and operates on GCCS with a primary and backup database server. EVAC receives formatted "F77" reports from the automated message handlers and automatically updates the primary and backup databases. The principal users of EVAC are the Joint Staff and the CINCs. The EVAC application does the following:
(7) Fuel Resource Accounting System (FRAS) gives fuel planners an automated capability for determining the supportability of a deliberate or crisis action plan and for generating the time-phased bulk petroleum required to support an OPLAN. FRAS facilitates the review of the fuel requirements of a proposed, new, or revised OPLAN and assesses the adequacy of available resources to support crisis action planning. Two or more OPLANs can be combined into a single OPLAN for analysis. The requirements generated can be varied through the use of intensity tables and consumption data extracted from the Logistics Factors File (LFF) or with Service-supplied data. Principal users are the Joint Staff, CINCs, the Services, and the Defense Fuel Supply Center.
(8) Joint Deployable Intelligence Support System (JDISS) furnishes an intelligence window to national, theater, and tactical intelligence sources through the joint architecture for intelligence. It offers connectivity and interoperability with intelligence systems required to support forces in peacetime, crisis, and war. Using an integrated set of commercial off-the-shelf software applications, JDISS supports the following functions:
(9) Theater Analysis and Replanning Graphical Execution Toolkit (TARGET) is a toolkit containing planning tools designed to support the operation planner during crisis action procedures. The tools allow planners and operators to accomplish tasks through rapid access to required documents, information sources, analysis tools, multimedia, and teleconferencing tools.
(10) Global Status of Resources and Training (GSORTS) is an output application furnishing information on the status of units with respect to personnel, equipment, and training. The location of specific units can be plotted on digitized maps produced by the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA). GSORTS uses data entered by the Services, CINCs, and combat support agencies. The GSORTS database includes all defined joint data elements. GSORTS query and display capabilities include the following:
(11) Air Tasking Order (ATO) offers the capability to view and print selected parts of air tasking orders. A query function allows the user to tailor requested information contained in a specific order for viewing. The query function also supports display of color-coded ground tracks for selected parts of the order. ATO interfaces with the Contingency Tactical Air Planning System (CTAPS).
d. Joint Electronic Library (JEL) furnishes a high-speed, full-text search and retrieval capability immediately accessible through desktop computers. Action officers, planners, warfighters, educators, students, and doctrine developers can have immediate access to the most complete and current library of joint doctrine and tactics, techniques, and procedures available through the JEL. It will eventually have several hundred joint, Service, and multinational doctrine publications. JEL is maintained and operated by the Joint Warfighting Center (JWFC), Fort Monroe, Virginia, and has two main parts: (1) JEL CD-ROM version which is distributed worldwide by JWFC and updated periodically as determined by the Joint Staff (J-7) ; and (2) World Wide Web Internet access at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine. Questions about JEL can be directed to JWFC, Doctrine Division.