1. WJTSC 10-1 Master Issue Deck
Post WJTSC 10-1
as of: 2 Apr 10 1 1

2. Note
To streamline review, discussion, and resolution of issues, all open issues have been ‘binned’ to one of five categories:
1. Exercise issues
2. Joint Training Requirements issues
3. Joint Individual and Staff Training issues
4. Joint Training Assessment and Readiness issues
5. Interagency issues
While not all issues are a ‘perfect fit,’ issues were placed in the bin that represented the best fit as of the close of the previous WJTSC. Issues may be ‘re-binned’ by the Council of Colonels as appropriate. 2

3. Exercise Related 10-004 – National Rehearsal Program
Missile Warning / Defense Systems Training Capability 3

4. National Rehearsal Program
Briefer: LTC Fuller
New Issue
Issue : National Exercise Program (NEP) does not adequately exercise real world threat streams and adversaries. Consequently, combatant commands cannot realistically exercise their contingency plans with interagency partners if they link to the NEP.
Discussion: Recent discussions indentified the requirement for a National Level Rehearsal (NLR). Domestic incident management does not incorporate threat streams and disrupt/respond options. Requirement for an exercise construct with senior whole of government integration for maximum collaboration and participation. Requirement for a senior level rehearsal program with flexibility to keep ahead of current threats. Requires exercise integration of real world threat streams on an annual basis (Example: Counterterrorism, Cyber, Weapons of Mass Destruction). Requirement to partner with interagency during development and execution of NLR. COA 1: Propose enhancement / modification of current NEP construct developing an exercise framework addressing actual overseas threats on an annual basis. COA 2: Define existing programs as a new National Rehearsal Program commensurate with NEP.
Endstate: A national rehearsal program that brings together disrupt / respond options to real world threat streams in a whole of government context.
POA&M: 1) Establish whole of government community of interest. 2) Establish series of in process reviews. 3) Establish Able Warrior 11 as a pilot for the NLR. 4) Conduct a senior concept development conference to discuss NLR ) Initiate discussions among senior leaders. 6) Conduct strategic level mission analysis (MA) and course of action (COA) development.
OPRs: OSD(P), JS J7 and USSOCOM OCRs: Combatant Commands and Interagency partners
MAR 10
APR 10
MAY 10
JUN 10
JUL 10
MAR 11
2011
Issue identified
Develop
concept brief
Establish community of interest
AW 11 Senior level CDC
Initial strategic level MA and COA Dev
NLR 11 (AW 11) pilot
COA decision

5. Missile Warning / Defense
Systems Training Capability
Briefer: Mr McVay
Issue : Combatant Commanders require a distributed, integrated, synthetic Missile Warning (MW) and Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) training and exercise modeling and simulation (M&S) capability.
Discussion:
a. Current capability requires duplicative, static, scenario development and does not provide synergistic training capability.
b. There is a requirement for a federated joint missile simulation capability which will stimulate all applicable operational missile awareness systems simultaneously to meet all stakeholders missile warning and integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) simulation requirements.
Endstate: A federated Joint IAMD simulation capability which will stimulate all operational awareness systems to meet all missile warning and integrated air and missile defense simulation requirements.
POA&M:
Short Term: Develop a federated IAMD simulation capability that will stimulate operational missile awareness systems for the entire missile mission set to include missile warning, missile defense, and IAMD. IOC Goal: May 2011 for GLOBAL LIGHTNING (GL) 11, linked w/USEUCOM AUSTERE CHALLENGE (AC) 11.
Long Term: Integrate / federate M&S capabilities from tiers 1-4 into a complete end to end MW / IAMD M&S capability 0-5 years.
OPRs: USSTRATCOM / USNORTHCOM; OCRs: Missile Defense Agency, Combatant Commands and Services
MAR 08
APR 08
DEC 09
MAR 10
APR10
JUN 10
TBD
USSTRATCOM provide
update at WJTSC 08-1
ITWG meets
@CO Springs
Proof-of-Concept
At JWFC
BMDS Warfighter Conf Update
COCOM J3/J7 Con Concurrence on Requirements
GO/FO Proof of Concept Demo
IOC – GL/AC 11? 5

6. Joint Training Requirements
Integration of ACGU Partners into Joint Training Enterprise
Joint Logistics Education and Training
Joint Training Enterprise Training M&S Gaps
Joint Task Force Capable Headquarters Readiness Requirements
Joint Exercise Transportation Program Funding
– Update CTP Business Practices 6

7. Integration of ACGU Partners into the Joint Training Enterprise
Briefer: Col Walrond
ACGU: Australia, Canada, Great Britain, United States
Issue : The enhancement of ACGU Joint, Combined, Multilateral training in order to increase operational capability, preparedness, and improve interoperability.
Discussion:  No formal procedure exists for scheduling and coordinating ACGU Joint Combined and Multilateral training and use of the full range of Live Virtual Constructive (LVC) training capabilities. An ACGU working group (WG), including Combatant Commands and JS J7, needs to be established to draft agreement(s), develop business rules, and identify/develop the appropriate forum for coordination. The WG will use the PACOM-AUS Joint Combined Training Capability (JCTC) work as a starting point. Formal business rules will require a long term effort, but short term efforts will continue to leverage existing multilateral venues.
Endstate: Defense level policy guidance, and agreements. A formal coordination process, business rules and/or other documents as necessary for ACGU partners and combatant commands/Services that outlines the process for scheduling and coordinating bi-lateral and multilateral training and exercises enhanced via LVC enablers using ACGU networks. Short term endstate will address OIF/OEF pre-deployment training. Long term solution expected to take several years.
POA&M: Formalize overarching vision statement and reach agreement in principle (c/w)
- Establish ACGU Working Group membership and chair (Policy/Scheduling and Technical/Systems) (c/w)
- Define ACGU training scope
- Establishment of a scheduling process for the JTEN and Virtual & Constructive assets
- Develop and adopt ACGU country agreements/business rules formalizing this process
OPR: USJFCOM; OCRs: USPACOM, USNORTHCOM, USEUCOM, ADF, PJHQ J7, CFD/CFEC, OSD.
I&SJT WG Comments: Need further analysis of combatant command requirements, JKDDC capabilities and costs from a broader system of systems view (relationships between mutually supporting systems such as command LMSs, JTIMS, DRRS, JKDDC, personnel systems). JKDDC is not covering Combatant Command unique learning requirements. JKDDC will be a complementary capability to any Combatant Command deployed LMS.
JUN 09
OCT 09
DEC 09
SEP 08
MAR 09
JAN 10
MAR 10
Approved POA&M
Initial ACGU WG Agreement in principle
Established
ACGU WG
Determine venue for event coordination
Draft ACGU Charter
Enlist OSD rep as WG member
Objectives/End State Obtained; Action Completed 7 7

8. Joint Logistics Education and Training
Briefer: Mr. Bizub
Issue : Lack of an oversight structure to support the DOD Joint logistics education and training requirements.
Discussion: In the past few years there has been a myriad of initiatives and studies that were consolidated in the Joint Logistics Education, Training, and Exercise Study (JLETES). There is no central authority providing oversight related to Joint Logistics education and training to influence the logistics learning continuum to shape the development of Joint logisticians.  This shortcoming has likely resulted in duplication of efforts, lost opportunities, and reduced support to combatant command Joint logisticians and makes the implementation of the 40+ recommendations made in the JLETES more challenging.
Endstate: A validated set of Joint logistics education and training requirements.
POA&M: Formally staff the JLETES with the Joint logistics community stakeholders and provide the results to the Center for Joint and Strategic Logistics (CJSL) for assessment.
OPRs: JS J7&J4, USJFCOM J7; OCRs: Combatant Commands, Services, DUSD (L&MR), (CJSL)
Briefed JLETES
AUG 09
MAR 10
APR 10
Established
way-ahead
Staff JLETES
Aug 10
MAR 11
Brief Staffing Results
Initial Requirements List

9. Joint Training Enterprise Training Modeling & Simulation Gaps
Briefer: Col Walrond
Issue : Joint Training Enterprise identified key training Modeling & Simulation (M&S) gaps which are currently unfunded.
Discussion: The Joint Training Enterprise executed a M&S Training Gap Analysis Forum (TGAF) on 16 February 2010 in order to re-validate the top training M&S gaps as directed by OSD P&R. The forum was conducted using the established Joint Training Review Group ( JTRG) technical requirement procedures. Re-validation occurred with minimal change to the prioritized issue list.
Endstate: Approval of validated M&S TGAF process and results; funding or mitigation plans to support the development of solutions that close the training M&S gaps identified by the Joint Training Enterprise.
POA&M: Joint Training Enterprise identified the M&S Gaps; USJFCOM to lead the effort of gap analysis to determine detailed estimated costs to close the gaps. Conduct detailed analysis to determine optimal solutions.
OPR: USJFCOM; OCRs: Combatant Commands; Services
NOV 08
MAR 09
JUL 09
AUG 09
FEB 2010
MAR 2010
AUG 2010
M&S TGAF
Briefed top 5
Training M&S
Gaps at
WJTSC 09-1
M&S TGAF
VTC
Brief analysis at
WJTSC 09-2
M&S TGAF
(Solutions Conference)
M&S TGAF
(Solutions Conference)
M&S TGAF
VTC 9 9

10. Joint Task Force-Capable Headquarters (JTF HQ) Readiness Requirements
Briefer: COL Grubich
Issue : Combatant commanders / combatant command Service components require clear certification authorities, requirements, and a defined process to compete for JTF HQ certification funds.
Discussion: Direction for each Combatant Commander to certify the readiness of headquarters staffs to perform as a JTF is found in 2008 UCP. Language focusing on JTF readiness requirements versus JTF certification has been proposed for inclusion in 2010 UCP. The allocation and distribution of the JTF HQ Certification CE2 funds is inconsistent across the combatant commands.
Endstate: Guidance defining combatant command JTF readiness requirements. Governance and enterprise requirements that enable consistent baseline support and the ability for combatant commands to compete for funds to address unique requirements..
POA&M: Seek national guidance defining JTF readiness requirements. Seek alternate funding, determine baseline requirements and fund distribution methodology to enable required readiness.
OPR: JS J-7; OCR: USJFCOM
AUG 09
DEC 09
MAR 10
APR 10
xxx 10
JUN 10
JUL 10
Aug 10
Sep 10
Issue
Identified
Research requirements
Issue reset
Draft COCOM requirements submitted
UCP approved with readiness requirements
JFCOM baseline support brief at SLT.
OCO funding availability.
Draft distribution methodology
Final COCOM requirements submitted
Fund distribution approved by SLT 10 10 10 10

11. Joint Exercise Transportation Program
Funding
Briefer: LtCol Livergood
Issue : The appropriation designating Joint Exercise Transportation Program Funding (JETP) as one-year funds needs to be changed to two year or longer fund similar to a working capital fund.
Discussion: Present funding in one year periods creates problems with 1st Quarter and 4th Quarter exercises. The lack of funds early in the year due to a continuing resolution or process delays in distributing funds and the inherent instabilities at the end of the year (either lack of funds or lack of time to obligate) drives Combatant Commanders to heavily load exercises into the 2nd and 3rd quarters. With an increased number of exercises executing nearly simultaneously, supporting commands are limited in the support they can provide. Additionally, obligation and execution rates are impacted often delaying end of year realignment of funds within Combatant Commander Exercise and Engagement (CE2) as the enterprise waits to pay bills from heavy 3rd quarter and early 4th quarter exercise execution.
Endstate: Make JETP funding multi-year (2 year funds). This would allow units to better execute exercises throughout the fiscal year.
POA&M: Program funding change proposal must be developed and forwarded to the budget authorities for staffing and approval.
OPR: OSD(P&R); OCR: JS J-7
MAY 10
JUN 10
SEP 10
JAN 11
MAR 11
OCT 12
Funding Study completed
Study briefed to SLT
Proposal briefed to WJTSC
Legislative proposal staffed
Funding identified
Funding provided to Combatant
Commanders

12. Update CTP Business Practices
Briefer: LtCol Livergood
New Issue
Issue : Commercial Ticket Program (CTP) business rules and practices need to be updated to reflect the growth in program demand and highly dynamic nature of the program.
Discussion: Due to significant growth in the use of commercial airlines for exercises, accounting and management practices need to be updated to reflect a more dynamic program. What started as a $13M program to supplement military or charter airlift, has grown into a $56M program in FY09 and is now a critical component to exercise movements. The current process to build requirements, validate mode- source, build authorization messages and distribute funding is cumbersome, time consuming and not responsive to force provider needs. Often, units must cash flow tickets from Service Incremental Funding or other Operations & Maintenance funds and seek reimbursement afterward, further delaying accurate accounting of expenses. New business practices are required in order to increase the flexibility, speed, and accounting visibility of CTP funds.
Endstate: New business rules that govern roles and responsibilities for CTP authorization, notification, flow of funds, and account management.
POA&M: Two day work group 3rd week of April to produce proposed business rules and courses of action. Concept will be staffed for combatant command and Service chop. Interim guidance published as addendum to CJCSI A prior to incorporation in CJCSI.
OPR: JS J-7 OCRs: Combatant Command J3/J4/J8, Services
APR 10
JUN 10
JUL 10
AUG 10
SEP 10
OCT 10
2 day workgroup in Norfolk
AO level coordination by DCO
Planner level coordination
Final coordination
Publish guidance
Implement new practices

13. Joint Individual and Staff Training
Joint Staff Officer Proficiency 13

14. Joint Staff Officer Proficiency
Briefer: MAJ Coryell
Issue : The ramp up time to achieve desired proficiency for officers reporting for joint assignment at combatant commands is too long.
Discussion: The results of the Joint Staff Officer (JSO) Study included the desired 15 core competencies for Joint Staff Officers identified by combatant command senior leadership. Lack of competency in identified areas were found to result in extended ramp up time for officers to achieve desired proficiency levels in joint staff officer tasks. Combatant commands expressed interest in the Joint Staff J-7 leading the development of Joint Staff Officer training support resources to close the identified proficiency gap.
Endstate: Establish an individual learning curriculum that leads to the reduction in time for officers to become proficient in joint staff officer duties.
POA&M: Joint Staff J-7 in coordination with the combatant commands develops joint staff officer training support resources. JS J7 leads inventory of existing courseware related to the 15 JSO competencies. Analyzes existing courseware. Designs draft JSO individual learning curriculum leveraging existing resources. Makes curriculum development decision and assigns responsibilities. Develops draft JSO curriculum and conducts Alpha and Beta tests. Integrates final JSO curriculum into combatant command training programs.
OPR: JS J-7 JETD; OCRs: Combatant Commands, National Guard Bureau
Complete formal staffing of the Joint Staff Officer Study. Joint Staff J-7 identify existing resources and content to develop program of instruction addressing the 15 core competencies identified in the Joint Staff Officer Study.
SEP-DEC 09
APR 10
APR 10
JUN 10
SEP 10-JUL 11
AUG 11
Design
JSO Curriculum
Beta Test of Handbook
& Smart Cards at
Combatant Commands
Handbook &
Smart Cards Finalized
Complete Curriculum Development Front-end Analysis
Curriculum Development
Alpha & Beta
Tests
JSO Curriculum Integrated
in Training Programs

15. Joint Training Assessment and Readiness
Joint Assessment – Observations, Best Practices, and Issues
Joint Corrective Action Process
Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS)
JTIMS and JLLIS Integration 15

16. Joint Assessment – Observations, Best Practices, and Issues
Briefer: LCDR Tanner
Issue : Consensus has not been achieved in the joint training community regarding how joint training trends and joint training assessment taskers will be achieved.
Discussion: JS J7 will develop an annual Joint assessment brief at WJTSC. CJCSI E was updated to require monthly Task Proficiency Assessment (TPA) reporting, which will help to support the development of training trend information. CJCSI E states it is critical to have a linkage between Joint readiness and training; DRRS requires assessments every 30 days. Therefore it is necessary for JTIMS training assessments to match DRRS 30-day readiness assessment requirements.
Endstate: Joint Training Assessments are approved in JTIMS on a monthly basis in accordance with CJCSI E and then analyzed and briefed annually. Analysis of assessment data results in the identification of joint training / resource requirements for consideration / validation and advocacy in joint requirement / resource forums; reports to senior leadership; risk mediation forums; policy and doctrinal development; and for potential inclusion in the Chairman's Annual Joint Training Guidance and identification as a Chairman's High Interest Training Issue.
POA&M: Establish a Process Action Team/Working Group to define standardized process and select community-wide system for issue tracking and resolution (review best practices and capabilities currently implemented by commands). Develop DoD/CJCS Notice and update existing Policy, Instructions, and Manuals.
OPR: JS J-7 JETD; OCR’s: Combatant Commands, CSAs, Services
Background: The development of training trends was a USJFCOM J7 tasker IAW Joint Training Policy and Guidance (CJCSI C) which assigned responsibility to USFCOM to collect Training Trends from all sources. JS J7 directed JFCOM J7 to conduct a feasibility study on JTIMS and DRRS to determine their possible utility in trend analysis. Feasibility studies were completed and results forwarded to JS J7 (Capt Miller). Study revealed that JTIMS and DRRS (as they currently exist) did not support this task.
Discussion: Capt Melcher met with Capt Miller in Aug 06 to discuss the results of the feasibility studies. Capt Miller acknowledged the results and indicated that this was an issue for the JS J7 and not JFCOM J7.
Resource implications: None Internal POCs: CDR Bob Clark, Capt Chuck Melcher Recommended positions: Undetermined, awaiting guidance/direction from the JS J7 on future trend analysis and JFCOM J7 requirements to support.
MAR 09
APR – AUG 09
SEP 09
APR 10
SEP 10
Select FY 08 trends binned to Working Groups and addressed during WJTSC 09-1
Trend data collected and analyzed after JTIMS v3.1 release
Trends briefed at WJTSC 09-2; issues linked to JLLIS/CAP/etc
Establish an Assessment PAT/WG
Assessment data briefed at WJTSC 10-2; issues linked to JLLIS 16

17. Joint Issue Resolution Tracking Process
(Joint Corrective Action Process)
Briefer: LCDR Tanner
Issue : Combatant Commands, Services and Combat Support Agencies (CSAs) need a joint issue resolution tracking process, supported by an automated collaboration tool within JLLIS, for tracking resolutions of joint issues generated through the JLLP.
Discussion: In Mar 09 the Joint Lessons Learned Working Group (JLLWG) voted in favor of standing up the sub-working group, the Joint Issue Resolution Working Group (JIRWG) to address this issue.
Combatant Commands, Services and CSAs require a collaborative, transparent process to efficiently resolve issues resultant from exercises and operations.
The Joint Lessons Learned Program (JLLP) defines issues as validated observations that require corrective action but does not provide a process for how joint issues should be resolved in a collaborative environment.
The JLLP, to include the joint issue resolution tracking process, should support the after action processes specified in DODI , DOD Participation in National Exercise Program (NEP).
The proposed joint issue resolution tracking process should capitalize on and use Joint and Interagency established procedures currently in existence.
Endstate: An automated joint issue resolution tracking process integral to the JLLP and JLLIS that provides the ability to collaborate on and resolve joint issues in a transparent and efficient manner with proper authorities identified to approve and execute the recommended corrective action plan.
POA&M: Codify policies and procedures in CJCSM , The Joint Lessons Learned Program.
OPRs: JS/J7, NORAD and USNORTHCOM/J7; OCRs: DUSD(P&R), DOD
WJTSC 09-1,
JLLWG
Charter of JIRWG
MAR 09
APR 09
JIRWG
Teleconference
MAY 09
JIRWG
DCO Session
AUG 09
WJTSC 09-2
JIRWG Outbrief
To WJLLWG
OCT 09
CJCSM
Preliminary
Coordination
MAR 10
WJTSC 10-1
JIRWG
MAY 10
CJCSM
Final
Coordination
AUG 10
CJCSM
Approved
SEP 10
WJTSC 10-2
JIRWG
JAN11
JIRWG 17 17

18. Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS)
Briefer: LCDR Tanner
Issue : The Joint community lacks a single automated support system to discover, apply, share and research joint lessons.
Discussion: The Department of Defense (DOD) Lessons Learned Community lacks a repository capability as well as the input support tools vital to effective knowledge management.
JLLIS is POM’d for FY11-15
JLLIS is being migrated from MCCLL to Fort Huachuca NLT Jul 2010.
The Joint Lessons Learned Working Group uses the Configuration Review Board (CRB) process to identify and prioritize requirements for incorporation into the JLLIS.
The following have JLLIS: Combatant Commands, Services, National Guard, but not the Coast Guard; some Combat Support Agencies (CSA); the Department of State, United States Agency for International Development and the United States Department of Agriculture; others in education community are TBD.
Endstate: Enterprise, web based, Global Information Grid (GIG) compliant JLLIS with input and management tool, with a federated/distributed database for all JLLIS stakeholders.
POA&M: JLLIS capability using an open architecture is being fielded to Combatant Commands, Services, CSAs, Interagency, and other organizations; JLLIS is GIG-compliant, net-centric, web-services enabled and will be linked to other DOD systems like the Joint Doctrine, Education and Training Electronic Information System; Joint Training Information Management System, and the Defense Readiness Reporting System.
OPRs: JS J-7 JETD, OSD Policy; OCRs: DOD components
Discussion:
- JLLIS achieved IOC in Sep 08; FOC projected for Sep 2011.
- The following have the JLLIS: combatant commands; all Services, National Guard, but not the Coast Guard; some Combat Support Agencies; the DOS, USAID and USDA; others like the JPME community are TBD.
ACRONYMS
CJCSI – Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction
CRB – Configuration Review Board
CSAs – Combat Support Agency
DOD – Department of Defense
DOS – Department of State
DRRS – Defense Readiness Reporting System
FY – Fiscal Year
FOC – Full Operating Capability
FOUR-EYES – the nations of Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and United States
GIG – Global Information Grid
IOC – Initial Operating Capability
JDEIS – Joint Doctrine, Education and Training Electronic Information System
JETD – Joint Exercise and Training Division
JLLIS – Joint Lessons Learned Information System
JPME – Joint Professional Military Education
JTIMS – Joint Training Information Management System
NGB – National Guard Bureau
OCR – Office of Collateral Responsibility
OPRs – Office of Primary Responsibility
OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense
POA&M – Plan of Action and Milestones
POM – Program Objective Memorandum
TBD – To Be Determined
UFR - Unfunded Requirements
USAID – United States Agency for International Development
USCG – United States Coast Guard
USDA – United States Department of Agriculture
POM’D FY09
OCT 08
CRB
MAR 09
JLLIS MOA Terminated
JUL 09
CRB
AUG 09
MAR 10
WJTSC
10-1
JLLIS
Migrated to
Ft Huachuca
JUL 10
SEP 10
WJTSC
10-2
WJTSC
11-1
MAR 11
Next
Generation
JLLIS
MAY 11
NOV 09
JTIMS
Hyperlink
Established 18 18

19. JTIMS and JLLIS Integration
Briefer: LCDR Tanner
Issue : No capability exists to automatically transfer data between Joint Training Information Management System (JTIMS) and Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS).
Discussion: JTIMS Task Performance Observations (TPOs) may have joint lessons learned applicability. TPOs may identify an issue requiring joint issue resolution; per definitions of the Joint Lesson Learned Program (JLLP), final resolution of an issue would provide a lesson learned, which should be included in the joint lessons learned data base.
JLLIS observations may provide additional information to better enable the development of a Training Objective, Training Proficiency Evaluation (TPE) or Training Proficiency Assessment (TPA). DoDI states that each combatant command, CSA, and Military Department (Service) shall determine which performance observations should be elevated in status to a lesson learned, and that these lessons learned should be included in the JLLP through JLLIS.
Endstate: Near real-time data integration between JTIMS and JLLIS
POA&M: Nov 23, 2009, JTIMS provides capability to nominate observation & evaluation data and export to JLLIS. JLLIS to determine the requirements and develop capability to import JTIMS data.
OPR: JS J-7 JETD
AUG 09
NOV 09
TBD
Brief phased integration process to JLLIS/JTIMS Working Groups
Deploy JTIMS v4.0 with export capability to JLLIS
Deploy JLLIS import capability of JTIMS Lessons Identified data 19

20. Interagency 07-001 - Integration of Interagency Partners
Training for Integrated Operations 20

21. Integration of Interagency Partners
Briefer: Mr. Quay
Issue : Inadequate partner representation/environmental emulation in Combatant Command and Service training, education, exercises, and experimentation degrades the quality of these events.
Discussion: DOD recognizes the value of non-DOD partner participation in its exercises. Partner participation provides authoritative and realistic input and support to training events; however, satisfying participation requests is hampered by both interagency capacity to support and perceptions of shared objectives and value.
End State: DOD events reflect current policy and the complexity of integrated planning and operations.
POA&M: To enhance partner integration: 1. Identify and analyze participation gaps Develop potential mitigation strategies.
OPRs: OSD/P&R, OSD/HD, JS J-7 JETD; OCRs: Combatant Commands, Services, CSAs, and NGB
1st Quarter FY 10
FY 09
DEC 09
FEB 10
MAR 10
FY 10
FY 11
Implement process for FY 10/11
Year end assessment
Initiate Process for FY 11/12
Publish Draft
FY 10/11 Plan
Update at WJTSC 10-1
Complete
POA&M
Interagency Process Effectively Supports DoD Exercises 21

22. Training for Integrated Operations
Briefer: Mr. Quay
New Issue
Issue : Current integrated operations (defined in DODD ) training and exercise strategy, planning, resourcing and implementation is not adequate to support current and future integrated operations requirements.
Discussion:
USG recognizes that we must train together to effectively conduct integrated operations; however, lack:
- a comprehensive interagency training engagement strategy
- a common integrated operating picture
Inadequate funding exacerbates the challenges of conducting integrated operations training.
End State: Integrated operations training events reflect USG national security objectives.
POA&M: 1. Develop a comprehensive DOD training strategy that includes a funding strategy Press for a USG training strategy. 3. Develop a CJCSI that implements the DOD strategy. 4. Review mission essential tasks and validate with USG interagency partners. 5. Assess readiness impact of interagency participation or lack thereof. 6. Establish an Interagency Training Community of Interest Portal.
OPRs: OSD/P&R, OSD/P, JS J-7; OCRs: Combatant Commands, Services, CSAs, NGB, IA Partners
AD HOC Efforts
JFCOM
IW IA
Requirements Div
Solutions Div
COCOMs
S/CRS
USDA
NTC
10th Mtn Div
CTCs
USMC
OIF
OEF
Camp Atterbury
Muscatatuck
FY10
FY10
FY10/11
FY11
FY11
FY11
FY 12
Assess Readiness Impact
Review METS
Develop TCOI Portal
Complete DOD Strategy
Press for USG
Strategy
Complete CJCSI
USG Training Effectively Supports Integrated Operations 22 22

23. Closed 08-003 - DOD Participation Challenges in the NEP
Supporting Joint Training with the Joint Live Virtual Constructive (JLVC) Federation
Experimentation & Testing (E&T) in Joint Training
Joint Task Force Capable Headquarters Readiness Requirements
DOD National Electromagnetic (EM) Opposing Force (OPFOR)
JC2 Training Management 23

24. DOD Participation Challenges in the National Exercise Program (NEP)
Briefer: LTC Fuller
Closed
Issue : DOD Participation Challenges in the National Exercise Program
Discussion:
a. There is higher-level involvement in the NEP, and the E&E Sub-IPC is considering changing the frequency of National Level Exercises (NLE), Principal Level Exercises, and NEP Tier II exercises.
b. 5-Year scheduling challenges in the NEP: No fidelity in future years for NEP exercises (NLE and planning dates through 2010 and some for 2011 are established). This is discussed in interagency forums, and interagency partners understand the dilemma. However, problem still exists and JS/OSD will continue to press this issue.
Endstate: Improved joint training effectiveness and efficiency as directed by Chairman’s Joint Training Guidance. Supported / supporting roles consistent with Plans / Unified Command Plan. Staffs build relationships, conduct realistic rehearsal with actual counterparts.
POA&M:
Use Worldwide Joint Training and Scheduling Conference, deconfliction and combatant command annual exercise conferences to link multiple exercises, taking advantage of NEP to link exercises / integrate mission areas to ensure regional / mission area coverage.
Still need more fidelity on future years exercises regarding dates/themes.
Support use of the National Exercise Simulation Center (NESC) (located at FEMA HQ) to provide national level interagency exercise support and exercise control capabilities.
Codify Tier III DOD submission process.
OPR: JS J-7 JETD; OCRs: DHS, USNORTHCOM
SEP 08- JUN 09
SEP 08
SEP 08
FEB 09
AUG 09
MAR 10
DOD Process
Completed
NEXS Conf and
5-year schedule to DC
and approved
NEP 5-year
Scheduling Conf
Completed
Combatant commands involved
In 5-yr NEP calendar
Update at
WJTSC 09-2
Update at
WJTSC 10-1 24 3 24 24

25. Supporting Joint Training with the Joint Live Virtual Constructive (JLVC) Federation
Briefer: Col Tom Walrond
Combined with
Issue : Diminishing resources dictate the need for a cost effective solution for delivering Joint training. Currently both the JLVC Federation & Joint Theater Level Simulation (JTLS) support Joint training. A revised strategy for development & sustainment of an enterprise training capability that supports Joint training is required
Discussion: The JLVC Federation is the standard for Joint training & provides the most realistic environment to align joint training with combatant command assigned missions, requirements & constraints. The JLVC federation is comprised of both Joint & Service simulations & tools. JTLS supports the combatant command Joint Exercise Program (JEP), yet, JTLS lacks the capability to model high fidelity strategic to tactical operations. This shortfall was noted in the Joint Staff’s Training Capabilities Analysis of Alternatives Gaps JLVC addresses these gaps. Recent cuts to Training Transformation (T2) Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation funds have driven the need for a revised strategy for development & sustainment of an enterprise training capability that can met future training requirements such as those of United States Korea Command (KORCOM). JTLS sustainment is funded (O&M) for FY10. Sustained maintenance of JTLS is required. The JLVC is funded through the FYDP with combatant command funding for event integration (CE2) & USJFCOM T2 funding for development.
Endstate: A single Joint training federation that is composable, has a low overhead competitive capability, & can meet the training requirements of Tier I – IV training audiences (including those of KORCOM).
POA&M: Develop a JLVC low cost option. Determine capabilities of JTLS needed to be incorporated into the JLVC. Develop a plan for implementing capabilities into the JLVC & conduct a business case analysis to determine cost effectiveness of the plan. Conduct front end analysis of KORCOM training requirements. Obtain needed T2 funding for JLVC development.
OPRs: USJFCOM, JS J-7; OCRs: Combatant Commands
MAY - JUL 09
POM 12
NOV 08
MAR 09
AUG 09
SEP 09
JAN 10
MAR 10
APR 10
FY11
Training Gap
Analysis Forum
Develop JLVC
Low Cost options
Front End Analysis of KORCOM Rqmts
Submit PR11 funding Rqmts
Brief OSD on KORCOM funding strategies
Develop plan to incorporate JTLS Rqmts into the JLVC
Business Case Analysis of JLVC
JTLS / JLVC transition decision
Obtain KORCOM funding
Obtain JTLS funding through FYDP 25

26. Experimentation, Demonstration, and Testing (EDT) in Joint Training
Briefer: OSD
Closed
Issue : Lack of common DOD-wide process for incorporation of EDT into joint training.
Discussion: EDT requirements call for access to joint environments. It is not always clear what training event or venue is best suited for a specific EDT event, either in content or schedule. Short-notice insertions into training events are disruptive to exercise planning. OSD is seeking to more effectively enable EDT scheduling activity within joint context and reduce possible impact to training audience and providers. For example, Joint Test and Evaluations require a joint environment for their demonstrations. Joint context and resource limitations require test and prototyping activity in training. USJFCOM has developed a clearing house function for venue identification, scheduling, and coordination (Joint Experimentation, Test and Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations) under the direction of the T2 I-Plan. This direction will be continued under DoDI 1322.xx Implementing DoD Training as it cancels the T2 I-Plan.
Endstate: Common policy and supporting responsibilities for incorporating EDT activity in training are included in DoDI.
POA&M: OSD(P&R) developing a DoDI to transition policy from the T2 I-Plan to broader DoD-wide application and continue USJFCOM's Joint Experiments, Tests & Evaluations, and Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration role. Final coordination will occur through the formal processing of the DoDI.
OPRs: OSD(P&R) and USJFCOM J-7; OCRs: OSD (DOT&E, AT&L), JS J-7 JETCD, JS J-7 JETD, USJFCOM J-9, Combatant Commands, CSAs, Services
DOT&E forced to engage multiple combatant command’s to search for venues. T&E short-notice insertions disruptive to combatant command exercise planning. OSD Training & Testing Steering Group seeking to embed test activity in training to test with appropriate joint context. USJFCOM also requires training environment to assess capabilities such as DJC2, Blue Force Tracking and SJFHQ. The need for joint context and resource limitations require some test and prototyping activity in training. USJFCOM has developed a manual that outlines process the T&E community will use for integrating into USJFCOM sponsored and supported training.
POA&M: Form PAT (combatant commands, Services, CSAs, OSD) to develop DOD-wide process based on USJFCOM JETA Manual, USPACOM instruction, and other combatant command, Service, CSA, and OSD guidance. Develop requirements for supporting tools including JTIMS and submit through established requirements process.
FY09-FY10
SEP 08
SEP 10
OSD update at
WJTSC 08-2;
Cease efforts on CJCSM
Draft and staff new DODI
New DODI published 26

27. Joint Task Force-Capable Headquarters (JTF HQ)
Certification Criteria and Funding
Updated 29 Jan 10
Briefer: LTC Phlegar
Issue : Combatant commanders / combatant command Service components require clear certification authorities, requirements, and a defined process to compete for JTF HQ certification funds.
Discussion: Direction for each Combatant Commander to certify the readiness of headquarters staffs to perform as a JTF is found in 2008 UCP. Implementation of this guidance inconsistent. Clarification of intent has been proposed for inclusion in 2010 UCP. In the interim, certification requirements are dictated by the forming commander (normally a Combatant Commander). Combatant Commanders will determine what organizations within their command must be certified, and what standards will be applied to certify readiness.
Endstate: Requirements and governance that enables consistent interpretation and application of JTF HQ certification criteria, timeline, scope, and funding stream.
POA&M: Research of original requirements completed. CE2 PAT and SLT will coordinate process development with Combatant Commanders and Services.
OPR: JS J-7; OCR: USJFCOM
AUG 09
DEC 09
MAR 10
MAY 10
JUN 10
JUL 10
Issue
Identified
Research requirements
Proposed process
briefed at WJTSC
Proposed process
approved by SLT
Certification Process Implemented
Combatant Commands
Submit Funding Requirements 27 27 27 27

28. DOD National Electromagnetic (EM) Opposing Force (OPFOR)
Briefer: Mr. Winn
Closed
Issue : Formation of a DOD National EM OPFOR Program (NEOP)
Discussion:
Joint Requirements oversight Council Memorandum (JROCM) authorized USSTRATCOM to provide Joint oversight of electronic warfare (EW) training DOD-wide. JROCM approves the EW Initial Capabilities Document (ICD). JIOWC EW Directorate is directed to implement the JROCMs.
b. JROCM / EW ICD states: “The Joint Force must train, exercise, verify and validate electronic warfare (EW) concepts and capabilities in a congested and/or contested EM environment (EME) … Specifically, DOD should create formal EW certification paths; develop valid test and operational objectives, and create robust EM OPFOR to provide feedback.”
Endstate: Improved joint training effectiveness and efficiency as directed by CJCSI E and JROCMs. Replicate a coherent, realistic EME capable of mirroring adversary and civilian infrastructure in order to train and enhance EM capabilities, processes, and TTP proficiency across DOD and USG.
POA&M:
Establish formal process for DOD submissions to major Joint exercises. Need fidelity on future years exercises regarding EM requirements/assets and funding.
Central “EM OPFOR clearinghouse” to provide Joint exercise integration / coordination for EM assets and exercise control capabilities.
Use WJTSC, USJFCOM JNTC and combatant command annual exercise conferences to link multiple exercises and integrate EM mission areas to ensure regional / mission area coverage.
OPR: TBD; OCRs: Combatant Commands
JUL 09
AUG 09
SEP 09
APR 10
SEP 10
OCT 10
JFCOM JNTC &
Joint IO Range
Summit
WJTSC
Issue Brief
JNTC TM-3 OPFOR Summit
JFCOM JNTC &
JIOWC EW Directorate draft
formal NEOP CONOP
JFCOM JNTC and NEOP COI
Test CONOP at Air Wing Fallon
CONOP Analysis &
Refinement 28 3 28 28

29. Joint Command and Control (JC2)
Training Management
Briefer: Mr. Chiaverotti
Recommend Close
Issue : No joint organization is assigned responsibility for managing JC2 training.
Discussion: Transition from Global Command and Control (GCCS) Family of Systems to future Net- Enabled JC2 systems offers opportunity for effective and efficient training delivery to individual warfighters worldwide based on a joint standards-based foundation. The future JC2 system will provide a single, joint architecture to establish a common environment for warfighters at all levels of JC2. Future JC2 system material developers will provide appropriate, re-usable, tailorable, individual technical and functional training packages for each future C2 system capability produced. The current GCCS-Joint Single Service Training Manager model doesn’t provide authority and resources to ensure future C2 system-related training packages are effective, standardized, entered into extant joint curricula, and distributed to Services and Agencies for re-use and tailoring.
Endstate: A JC2 training management organization with the necessary authority and resources, codified by a CJCSI, in-place and functioning.
POA&M: Continue (1) JSAP-M staffing of draft CJCSI , Command and Control Training Management (revise CJCSI B, GCCS-J Training Management) until CJCSI is signed and (2) engage warfighters at Command and Control (C2) Training Working Group (TWG) quarterly meetings.
OPR: USJFCOM J-8; OCRs: JS J-7, JS J-3
Begin
AO-level Staffing
SEP 09
NOV 09
Brief C2 TWG
Brief C2 TWG
FEB 10
Begin Planner-level staffing
Begin Flag-level staffing
MAR 10
Brief WJTSC
2010-1
MAR/APR 10
MAY 10
CJCSI signed
Brief C2 TWG
JUN 10
TM Org established