---------------------------------------------------------------- The Navy Public Affairs Library (NAVPALIB) A service of the Navy Office of Information, Washington DC Send feedback/questions to navpalib@opnav-emh.navy.mil ---------------------------------------------------------------- Department of the Navy Policy Paper "...From the Sea" Update THE OPNAV ASSESSMENT PROCESS May 1993 During the Cold War era, naval forces were trained, organized and equipped to counter Soviet hegemony throughout the world. Extensive modernization of the fleet undertaken in the 1980s provided the nation with a highly capable naval force to accomplish this task. In the 1990s, the challenge is to reshape this force for regional contingencies. As described in the new strategic document, "...From the Sea," the naval service is now focusing on joint operations in the littoral areas of the world. In light of this new direction, The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) initiated an assessment process to examine Department of the Navy (DON) programs to ensure they support the new strategy. This new assessment process began in October, 1992, coincident with the reorganization of the Navy staff. The assessment process ensures that the Navy and Marine Corps will retain the flexibility and unique combat capabilities they bring to the nation's armed forces -- sea-based combat forces that can be seamlessly integrated into joint and combined military operations. JOINT MISSION AREAS AND SUPPORT AREAS In addition to the traditional naval capabilities of forward presence operations, crisis response, strategic deterrence, and sealift, "... From the Sea" outlines four key operational capabilities required to successfully execute the new direction: Command, Control, and Surveillance; Battlespace Dominance; Power Projection; and Force Sustainment. To programmatically review these capabilities the new assessment process employs six Joint Mission Areas (JMAs) and two Support Areas (SAs). The JMAs and SAs provide the link between required operational capabilities, spelled out in the new strategy, and the DON program and budget. Resource requirements (systems, technology, and manpower/infrastructure) are scrutinized and evaluated for their specific contributions to the assessment areas. A primary objective of the assessment process is to develop a thorough understanding of how naval forces contribute to the nation's joint force. JMAs and SAs broaden the perspective of the assessment process by examining the DON program in the context of all the services' roles and functions. The JMAs and SAs are an assessment tool, not a foundation for warfare doctrine. Naval forces will continue to conduct fundamental naval warfare tasks such as strike warfare, air warfare, surface warfare, and submarine warfare. However, they will now focus on applying these warfare tasks to the more complex littoral environment. Figure (1) shows the relationship between the key operational capabilities, naval warfare tasks, and the JMAs and SAs. The JMA and SA definitions are being refined as the process yields a better understanding of their relationships and programmatic underpinnings. These are the JMA and SA definitions used in the assessment process: JOINT MISSION AREAS (JMAs) JOINT STRIKE: A joint/allied action by appropriate units which is intended to inflict damage on or destroy by use of force, an objective at sea or ashore. JOINT LITTORAL WARFARE: The use of joint/allied forces, shaped for forward operation in the sea/air/land/space environment, to influence, deter, contain or defeat a regional littoral threat through the projection of maritime power. JOINT SURVEILLANCE: The systematic observation and exploitation of the multi-dimensional theater battlespace by all available sensors. JOINT SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE/INTELLIGENCE: The use of joint/allied forces for the destruction or neutralization of enemy SEW targets. It is also the enhancement of friendly force battle management through the integrated employment and exploitation of the electromagnetic spectra and the medium of space. STRATEGIC DETERRENCE: A state of mind brought about by the existence of a perceived credible threat of unacceptable counter- action. It is the use of a clear, evident and precisely tailored capability to hold a potential opponent's assets at risk such that they will assess the cost of escalation to be unacceptable and conclude that their most favorable option is to remain at or return to peace. Strategic deterrence is applied to the entire spectrum of violence, to include both nuclear and conventional arms. STRATEGIC SEALIFT/PROTECTION: The employment of joint/allied forces to control ocean areas, assure access to littoral regions and deploy and sustain forces over the operational continuum. This area also evaluates the program to provide funding to obtain adequate strategic sealift. SUPPORT AREAS (SAs) READINESS, SUPPORT, AND INFRASTRUCTURE: Provide, man, operate and maintain fleet assets and the supporting facilities. MANPOWER, PERSONNEL, AND SHORE TRAINING: Provide sufficient military (active and reserve) and civilian personnel to maintain fleet readiness and support. Provide facilities, equipment, services, and personnel required to train these personnel to maintain both fleet and shore establishment readiness. THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND THE OPNAV REORGANIZATION Prior to the reorganization of the staff of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV), resource sponsors focused mainly on their role as platform and warfare community advocates. As an example, OP-05, the progenitor of N88, represented the interests of naval aviation. After the reorganization, the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Resources, Warfare Requirements, and Assessments (N8) established the assessment process to encompass expertise from all Navy platforms and warfare disciplines. It is designed to ensure the review of naval capabilities in a joint context. As shown in figure (2), the process is founded on the elimination of barriers -- between individual naval warfare communities, and between the services. Reflecting the new emphasis on joint operations in the littoral, the OPNAV organization now mirrors the structure and functions of the Joint Staff. A new division has also been formed within OPNAV. N85, the Expeditionary Warfare Division, was established to meet requirements set forth in "... From the Sea." It is led by a Marine Corps General Officer and ensures that the DON program addresses the unique aspects of naval expeditionary operations in the world's littoral. The assessment process assigns new roles to many offices within OPNAV and requires them to adopt a broader perspective. Prior to the reorganization, the process was centralized in a few OPNAV offices. The new process established assessment teams in each of the JMAs and SAs listed above. Each JMA and SA develops a "vision" that briefly describes what that area provides to national capabilities and how operations within the JMA or SA will be conducted. "Capability Characterizations" are developed which allow experience-based, operational judgment to determine the value of programs, and their contribution to operations described in the "vision." Other services' efforts are examined for their complementary contributions to each JMA and SA. JMA and SA recommendations include: tradeoffs to maximize capabilities, potential efficiencies and areas where redundant capability may exist, and emerging requirements that may require additional resources or application of science and technology efforts. These assessment teams are chaired by a Navy Flag or Marine General Officer and consist of a "horizontal cut" of senior officers from across OPNAV. At the working level, JMA and SA Core Working Groups (CWGs) include members from across the OPNAV organization, to provide representative warfare and/or programmatic expertise. Also included in the assessments are representatives from Headquarters, Marine Corps (HQMC), and the Fleet Commanders-in-Chief (FLTCINCs). The teams employ seminars and wargames to examine and discuss warfare requirements, emerging issues, and programmatic alternatives. The teams seek the expert opinions of organizations such as the Defense Science Board and Naval Research Advisory Committee. Additionally, the process draws on the analytical capabilities of the naval warfare centers, Center for Naval Analyses, university research laboratories, and, to a lesser extent, contractors. The process emphasizes assessment of the full cost of warfare capabilities. About one third of DON money is spent on programs to develop and acquire new capabilities, or modernize existing capabilities. JMA assessments determine those systems the Navy needs to be effective, and those systems which may represent redundant capability. The JMAs and SAs are also charged with examining the costs of operating and supporting capabilities within their area. The Assessment Division, N81, oversees the assessment process for N8 and provides analytical resources to support the efforts of the JMA and SA assessment teams. The Assessment Division is also charged with integrating the results of the separate assessments into a single investment strategy, the Investment Balance Review (IBR). This assessment process maintains a joint perspective and specifically evaluates the complementary contributions of other services and defense agencies. Considerable effort is invested in ensuring the assessments result in consensus. OPNAV ASSESSMENT: OBJECTIVES AND PROCESS The continuous refinement of DON's program requires the meticulous balancing of a wide variety of resource requirements. As shown in figure (3), the assessment process is the principal OPNAV program planning tool. Assessments provide a continuous review of Navy capabilities and resource requirements in specific joint mission and support areas. The process is iterative, and continuously refined to ensure it addresses emerging operational requirements, evolving naval strategies, and fiscal reality. The objective of the assessment process is an integrated investment strategy. This strategy is continuously refined in step with DON's implementation of the Department of Defense Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS). The CNO's Executive Steering Committee (ESC) and the Resource and Requirements Review Board (R3B) are the principal decision forums in this streamlined program decision process. The R3B is the focal point of the assessment process. Advising the Chief of Naval Operations, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the Secretary of the Navy, the R3B makes programmatic decisions to guide development of the Navy program. The R3B is a senior executive board chaired by N8. In the assessment process, the six JMAs and two SAs brief the R3B. The assessment results are combined into one complete Navy investment strategy, the Investment Balance Review. The R3B then sets direction, provides guidance, and approves or disapproves the recommendations arising out of the assessment process. The CNO ESC, which includes the Navy's highest uniformed leadership, oversees the R3B and provides long range guidance. In such a way, the assessment process ensures the Navy program addresses warfighting requirements, is properly funded, and is balanced. CONCLUSION Assessments are conducted in the context of the vision articulated in "... From the Sea." The assessment process and the R3B are OPNAV's primary program/budget planning initiatives. They capitalize on the elimination of platform parochialism accomplished by the reorganization. Expertise aligned horizontally from across OPNAV, HQMC, and the Fleet, participate in Core Working Groups to assess the Navy's program in each of six Joint Mission Areas and two Support Areas. Flag Officer leadership in the form of Joint Mission Area Teams and Support Areas Teams review and guide the assessment process. The assessment process and the R3B are playing a decisive role as the Department of the Navy works efficiently to provide the nation with "naval expeditionary forces, shaped for joint operations, operating forward from the sea, and tailored for national needs." -USN-