USJFCOM Issues Update

1
USJFCOMIssues Update
As of 23 Feb 07
2
Joint Event Life Cycle

• Issue 06-025 JELC Revision. Although an
  effective methodology, current JELC is extremely
  resource intensive (e.g. people, travel , time).
  Can we work the JELC more collaboratively and
  save time and resources?
• Discussion
• JELC provides framework for design, planning,
  preparation, execution, analysis of Chairmans
  Exercise Program
• Originally developed in 1995 with only minor
  changes over the years
• Notionally 12-18 months but has inherent
  flexibility 6-9 months JELCs are not uncommon
• JELC conferences typically held at supported
  commands location
• Collaborative communication technologies have
  improved in both capability and reliability
• Combination of collaborative information
  environment and face-to-face conferences may
  reduce resource intensity while maintaining
  effective product oriented JELC process
• Endstate More efficient and effective JELC. No
  prescriptive solution set as this is a continuous
  improvement process
• POAM JWFC chair a Working Group comprised of
  all interested stakeholders that will
• - Explore the efficiencies that may be realized
  in current JELC through the combination of CIE
  technologies and traditional JELC conferences
• - Identify potential modifications (additions
  and/or deletions) to current JELC products and
  process in Joint Training Manual
• - Report back to WJTSC in Mar 07 with
  recommendations
• OPR/OCR JFCOM/J7 JTD JEXD

MAR 07
OCT 06
SEP 07
NOV 06
DEC 06
FEB 07
JELC WG Telecon MeetingD
JWFC CG Email to COCOM J3/7
JELC WG Telecon MeetingD
JELC WG Telecon MeetingD
JELC WG Telecon MeetingD
Report Out to WJTSC
3
Joint Training and Scheduling Conference 07-1
5-8 March 2007 Joint Event Life Cycle

• Rick Martin
• JWFC, USJFCOM

4
Purpose

• Brief out the results of the JELC Working Group
  and get Leadership consensus on way ahead

5
JELC Working Group

• Formed as a result of issue and discussion
  brought to WJTSC 06-2
• Looking for efficiencies to be gained through
  collaborative means and improved process
• Determine if modifications need to be made in the
  JELC process, products and tasks

6
JELC Working Group

• Met over three separate occasions via Telecon
• Reviewed Current JELC Process
• Identified Specific Products and Critical Nodes
• Agreed that the current tasks and products w/in
  JELC are appropriate

7
JELC Working Group

• Agreed that each exercise is unique and some have
  challenges to include relationship building with
  Multinational Partners
• Agreed that owners focus on products and
  timelines - not necessarily events
• Requires Leadership support MG Kamiya email
• Requires common collaborative tools
• Requires working tasks and products throughout
  cycle and not just for conferences

8
Business Rules

• Event Planners must prepare JELC plan prior to
  start of JELC
• ID products and OPRs
• ID critical nodes and timelines
• Agree to meeting/travel points w/in JELC
• ID collaborative comms/devices/processes
• Planners must establish method for delivering
  products

9
Business Rules

• Training Audience get CDRs guidance up front and
  then throughout process
• Only Essential Personnel in Attendance at
  conferences/meeting points
• Products completed and delivered prior to meeting
  or on time as set

10
Recommend Way Ahead

• COCOMs nominate FY 08 events to work
  collaborative process
• Leadership support in getting common
  collaborative tools for all COCOMs
• Leadership support potential efficiencies and new
  ways of doing business
• Develop feedback process to improve collaborative
  JELC methodology

11
Joint Training Coordination

• Issue 06-026 Entry of Accredited Programs into
  the Joint Exercise Program (JEP). JNTC has helped
  identify Service and Service component shortfalls
  in obtaining participation by other services.
  Every Service/Service Component has identified
  other service participation as key to training to
  critical commended joint task training.
• Discussion
• Commander, JFCOM has provided guidance during
  development of JFCOM Joint Training Plan FY
  07-10 that service components will provide an
  assessment of ability to coordinate/synchronize
  their training with other USJFCOM Service
  Components in order to increase service
  interoperability and "jointness".
• Commander USJFCOM directed that J7/CG JWFC
  develop process to facilitate this coordination.
• Emphasis for joint training will be on
  distributing the training using Live, Virtual and
  Constructive technologies where possible,
  optimizing JNTC, and reducing costs whenever
  feasible.
• Interoperability training is constrained by
  lack of coordination inadequate planning
  conflicting schedules, inadequate funding.
• Endstate
• Conduct more effective Joint and Interoperability
  Training in FY 08
• Coordination of service organizations with
  complementary joint training objectives
• Development of long term relationships for more
  persistent approach to joint training
• Use of JNTC JTEN Connectivity to develop training
  opportunities between HQ staffs and critical C2
  nodes
• POAM
• Develop CONOPS for Joint Training Coordination
  of CONUS based forces
• Develop plan to integrate Service Component
  training to meet their joint training
  requirements
• Publish the plan in USJFCOM Joint Training Plan
  for FY 08-10
• Compete in JEP and (potentially) CE2

Apr 07
May 07
MAR 07
OCT 06
SEP 07
NOV 06
JSAP on CONOPS released.
Joint Training Coordination Conference 28-29 Nov
Provide Update to WJTSC
Submit Funding Request for FY 08
Inter-Service Joint and Interoperability Trng
Joint Training Coordination Conference for FY 09
12
UNCLASSIFIED
Joint Training Coordination
Briefing to World Wide Joint Training and
Scheduling Conference 7 March 2007
Kevin Kiernan Plans and Policy JFT- Operations
Sharpening the Joint Edge
13
Issue

• JNTC Accreditation and Service / Service
  Component assessments have identified other
  service participation as key to increase service
  interoperability and jointness
• Interoperability training is constrained by
• Lack of coordination
• Inadequate planning
• Uncoordinated schedules
• Funding

14
Mitigating the Issue

• Commander, USJFCOM directed in his JTP FY 07-10
• Service components provide an assessment of
  ability to coordinate/synchronize their training
  with other USJFCOM Service Components in order to
  increase service interoperability and jointness
• JWFC develop process to facilitate this
  coordination
• Distribute the training using Live, Virtual and
  Constructive technologies where possible,
  optimizing JNTC technologies, and reducing costs

15
Joint Training Coordination - POAM

• Developed CONOPS - 06 level chop complete
• Conducted first Joint Training Coordination
  Meeting 28-29 Nov 06
• Coordinated joint training schedule for FY 08
• Brief results to 2-Star Training Conference in
  Feb 07
• Submit Funding request for FY 08 Inter-Service
  Joint and Interoperability Training nlt May 07
• Publish approved results in USJFCOM FY08-11 JTP
  (Jul 07)

16
Training Coordination Cycle for FY 09 and Beyond
Feb 08 2-Star Coord Conference Brief Plan for
FY 09
Jan 08 JFCOM Deconfliction Conference for FY
09/10
Nov07 Force Coord Conference Confirm Plan for
FY 09
Mar 08 WWJTSC
May 07 Training Coord Conference Develop
Plan for FY 09
FY 08
FY 07
Sep 07 WWJTSC
Jul 07 Publish JFCOM JTP for 08
May 08 Force Coord Conference Develop Plan for
FY 10
FY 08
FY 09
Jul 08 Publish JFCOM JTP for 09
Sep 08 WWJTSC
17
Results

• Developed three types of capabilities
  integration
• Response Cells. Replicate Low Density / High
  Demand critical Service and Joint Command and
  Control Nodes. Allows for the service training
  audience to interface with a critical service or
  joint C2 node that would not otherwise be
  available
• Participation of one or more services in another
  service's program. Enables the training audience
  to experience the complexity of interacting with
  other service forces / systems. Can be done
  Distributedly. Enables the participating
  services to receive valuable training on joint
  tasks
• Synchronization of Service events. This level of
  coordination is optimal for addressing
  significant joint task training, and for enabling
  full interoperability between forces

18
Results- Continued -

• Response Cells
• SOCOM - JSOTF Response Cell.
• - Consists of 5 experienced contract personnel
• - Provides support to 5 additional exercises
  per year.
• - Prioritized support through the Joint Training
  Coordination Process.
• ACC - AOC Response Cell
• - Consists of 10-12 experienced contract
  personnel,
• - Replicate basic AOC functions (ATO
  Development, Current Operations, etc)
• - Provides support to 8 events per year.
• - Prioritized support through the Joint Training
  Coordination Process.
• Other LD / HD capabilities that need to be
  replicated Joint Intelligence, InterAgency

19
Results - Continued -

• Participation in another service's program.
• ACCs BLUE FLAG 08-2 32 AAMDC BCD JFLCC NALE,
  MARLO JPOTF, SOLE Aviation Planners JTF HQ
  Functionality
• FFCs JTFEX 08-4 Division Response Cell 32
  AAMDC Response Cell Longbow Trainer JFCOM Tech
  and Training Spt JSOTF Response Cell PSYOPS
  Cell Division Response Cell JIED Spt AOC
  Response Cell AWACS Joint ISR (Live/Virtual)
• TECOMs MAWTS-1 Patriot Bn AWACS JSTARS F-15
  Det AC-130 (pending)
• National Training Center (NTC) - BCT training -
  Center of Excellence for JCIED EA-6B, EP-3,
  SOF, Interagency

20
Results - Continued -

• Synchronization of Service training events.
• Examples of existing interservice synchronization
  include
• National Training Center / Green Flag West
• Joint Readiness Training Center / Green Flag East
• Virtual Flag / Fleet Synthetic Training- Joint
• To expand and improve joint / interoperability
  training requires
• Identification of complementary training
  objectives
• Development of a common scenario
• Identification of an overarching Exercise
  Director or development of a comprehensive
  Memorandum of Understanding
• JWFC facilitation of collaborative planning
  effort
• JWFC augmentation of Higher Headquarters White
  Cell / JECG

21
Results

• Recommended Way Ahead for Synchronization
• Near Term
• For FY 08, explore the possibility of integrating
  events that have compatible dates and training
  objectives. Focus would be on joint staff
  training events (FST-J, BLUE FLAG, BCTP, MSTP)
• Long Term
• JTC Conference in May addresses FY 09. Recommend
  all services come to the conference ready to
  discuss synchronizing exercises as a first
  alternative for joint and interoperability
  training

22
Results - Continued -

• Patriot Integration
• Option 1 Live Patriot - Full Participation of 2
  Minimum Employment Packages Costs Average
  costs for Option 1 employment is 650K.
• Option 2 Distributed Patriot - Forward
  deployment of Patriot Sensors and C2 nodes for
  MEP, with major element of the MEPs remaining at
  Ft. Bliss.
• Costs Average costs for Option 2 employment
  is 125K.
• Option 3 Virtual Patriot - Utilize other
  sensors to replicate sensor feeds from the event
  locale, and transmit this data via the JTEN to
  the Patriot simulator at Ft Bliss.
• Costs Interative costs associated with event
  technical testing.

Bottom Line Using the Distibuted and Virtual
capabilities will enable us to integrate Ground
and Air Missile Defense into significantly more
training than has been possible in the past.
23

• Questions / Discussion