1. Moving Towards Transformation
Department of Defense and the DoD Chemical Biological Defense Program
Moving Towards Transformation
BG Patricia L. Nilo
Acting Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Chemical and Biological Defense

2. Discussion Outline DoD Transformation Efforts
2001 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Transformation Tenets
Acquisition Decision Support Systems in Transition
Transformation of CBDP Management/Organizations
Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution in Transformation
CB Defense Program Budget Update – FY04 PB
CB Force Protection Initiatives
Summation

3. The Need for Transformation
“The United States will … transform America’s national security institutions to meet the challenges and opportunities of the twenty-first century.”
President George W. Bush,
September 2002
“The Department currently is pursuing transformational business and planning practices such as adaptive planning, a more entrepreneurial, future-oriented capabilities- based resource allocation process, accelerated acquisition cycles built on spiral development, out-put based management, and a reformed analytic support agenda.”
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld,
Transformation Planning Guidance
April 2003 3

4. Quadrennial Defense Review Transformation Tenets
A Capability-Based Approach
Shift basis of defense planning from a “threat-based” model to a “capabilities-based” model for the future:
Capabilities based model:
Focuses more on how an adversary might fight rather than specifically whom the adversary might be or where a war might occur
Identify capabilities required to deter and defeat adversaries who will rely on surprise, deception, and asymmetric warfare to achieve objectives
Maintain our military advantages in key areas while we develop new areas of military advantage and deny asymmetric advantages to adversaries

5. Quadrennial Defense Review 4-2-1 Planning Construct- Paradigm Shift
Need for portfolio of capabilities robust across spectrum of possible force requirements

6. Quadrennial Defense Review Transformation Initiatives
New defense strategy identifies 6 key operational goals for deterring conflict and conducting military operations
DoD investment resources must be focused on these goals
Protect bases of operation at home and abroad and defeat the threat of CBRNE weapons
Assure information systems in the face of attack and conduct effective information operations
Project and sustain U.S. forces in distant anti-access and area-denial environments
Deny enemies sanctuary by providing persistent surveillance, tracking, and rapid engagement
Enhance the capability and survivability of space systems
Leverage information technology and innovative concepts to develop interoperable Joint C4ISR
Goals represent the operational focus for efforts to transform our Forces

7. Acquisition Decision Support Systems In Transformation
Revolutionary
Joint Capabilities
Integration &
Development
System (JCIDS)
CJCS C
24 June 03
VCJCS/Service
Chief Oversight
MID 913 PPBS to PPBE
22 May 03
Evolutionary
Defense
Acquisition
System
Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution Process (PPBE)
Milestone Decision
Authority (MDA)
Oversight
Emerging
DEPSECDEF
Oversight
DoD 5000 Series
12 May 03 Revision

8. Acquisition Decision Support Systems In Transformation
Joint Capabilities
Integration &
Development
System (JCIDS)
CBDP
Requirements and Acquisition Process Transforming
JRO
JPEO
DTRA (S&T)
VCJCS/Service
Chief Oversight
Defense
Acquisition
System
Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution Process (PPBE)
Milestone Decision
Authority (MDA)
Oversight
DEPSECDEF
Oversight

9. DoD Leadership’s Intent
For DoD 5000 Revision
“….create an acquisition policy environment that fosters efficiency, flexibility, creativity, and innovation.”
DEPSECDEF Paul Wolfowitz, 30 Oct 2002
Revised Policy Objectives
Encourage innovation and flexibility
Permit greater judgment in the employment of acquisition principles
Focus on outcomes vice process
Empower PM’s to use the system vice being hampered by over-regulation

10. The Aftermath of 9-11 CBDP TRANSFORMING
The entire spectrum of CB matters has received increased emphasis from the Administration, Congress, News Media, and the Public
CBDP TRANSFORMING
Awareness of Threat Soars
Warfighting spectrum has expanded to homeland security
Emphasizes importance of coordinated USG program to counter WMD proliferation
Asymmetric methods are no longer a threat, but a reality

11. Transformation – CBDP Historical Perspectives
1993 – National Defense Authorization Act of 1994 mandates a Joint CBDP (PL , Section 1703)
July 1994 – Joint Service Agreement (JSA) signed
9 Sep 02 – JROC approves Joint Requirements Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense (JRO-CBRND) under J-8
19 Sep 02 – USD(AT&L) issues Acquisition Decision Memorandum
Directed significant changes to CBDP Management and lays out primary responsibilities of new management structure
22 Apr 03 – USD(AT&L) signs Implementation Plan
Supercedes 1994 JSA
Establishes detailed management duties for requirements, tech base, advanced development, and oversight.
Creates OIPT for issue resolution.

12. CBDP Management & Oversight Structure ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT &
REQUIREMENTS
OVERSIGHT
Formerly JSIG
SCIENCE &
TECHNOLOGY
Formerly JSMG
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT &
ACQUISITION
Based on 22 April 2003 CBDP Implementation Plan

13. New Organization - Requirements Requirements Validation
OSD
Guidance
POM
Recommendation
Army Executive Agent
CJCS
POM
Recommendation
JROC
Joint Requirements
Office - CBRND
Acquisition
Input
Requirements Validation
Requirements
SERVICES
Combatant Commanders

14. New Organization - Acquisition
DAE
CBD OIPT
ATSD(NCB) - Chair
Milestone Decision Authority (Sentinel Systems)
AT&L
Oversight
Services
Joint Staff
OSD Staff
AAE
Day to Day Management (MDA for non-Sentinel Systems)
JPEO
CBD
Coordination
DTRA
Tech Base
Programs
CB PMs
Transition
Requirements Input

15. Acquisition Organizations
USD(AT&L)
Milestone Decision Authority for key selected CBD Sentinel systems
Delegates MDA responsibility for all but Sentinel Systems to Secretary of the Army
Sentinel Systems are those programs, that because of their cost, complexity, and/or criticality, provide a representative picture of the overall health of the CBDP.
Approves recommended POM for submission to SECDEF
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs (ATSD(NCB))
Overall coordination/integration of medical and non-medical CBDP
Chairs permanent CBD OIPT
Oversight of funds allocation for Defense-Wide CBDP accounts
Develop CBDP POM Strategy Guidance
Review SECARMY recommended POM and make recommendations to USD(AT&L)
Conduct program oversight activities
Develop, publish CBDP Annual Report to Congress

16. Acquisition Organization (con’t)
Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO-CBD)
Army TDA organization, reporting to ASA(ALT)
Responsible for all Advanced Development and Procurement
Multi-service Program Managers for capability areas
Delegated MDA responsibility for non-Sentinel Systems
Exercise year of execution re-programming authority for assigned programs
Life cycle oversight
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)
Manage and integrate Science and Technology Programs
Exercise year of execution re-programming authority for S&T programs
Manage and integrate CB ACTDs
Provide funds management functions under the oversight of ATSD(NCB)

17. Program Analysis and Integration
Program Analysis and Integration Office (PAIO)
Executes “Army as Executive Agent” functions, under the operational direction of Army G8
Provide independent analysis functions
Integrate planning, programming, and budgeting functions across funding lines and executing organizations
Support JRO-CBRN POM build
Support SECARMY review and submission of POM
Develop RDA Plan
Lead development of BES/PB efforts and documents
Mid-year execution reviews
Analyze and develop programmatic impacts/options for ATSD(NCB)
Provide primary support to ATSD(NCB) for development of Annual Report to Congress, POM Strategy Guidance and responses to audit reports and Congressional inquiries
Maintain programming, planning, and budgeting database

18. Acquisition Decision Support Systems In Transformation
Joint Capabilities
Integration &
Development
System (JCIDS)
CBDP
Requirements and Acquisition Process Transforming
JRO
JPEO
DTRA (S&T)
VCJCS/Service
Chief Oversight
DoD has three Decision-making Support Systems, all have been updated this year
Defense Acquisition System How we acquire weapon systems, new 5000 series Directive & Instruction signed in May 2003
Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) - total restructuring of “requirements” process. Signed in June Focus on warfighting capabilities and gaps, analysis to determine what capability gaps to fill, and whether a material or non-material solution is appropriate.
Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) – by MID 913 (DATE) replaced former PPBS. Focus on Resource Allocation – providing warfighter with best mix of forces, equipment and support attainable under fiscal constraints. Introduces new emphasis on using performance metrics to focus on output, return on investment
Important Point: JCIDS and DAS are event-driven; PPBE is calendar-driven, and linked to the president’s budget submission
Defense
Acquisition
System
Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution Process (PPBE)
Milestone Decision
Authority (MDA)
Oversight
DEPSECDEF
Oversight

19. FY 2004-2009 Defense Planning Guidance (DPG)
“The Department’s current planning, programming, budgeting and acquisition systems are rigid, unresponsive and ill-suited for a dynamic and uncertain security environment.
DoD needs to streamline and integrate PPBS and the major acquisition and requirements processes with particular attention paid to those areas where technological change occurs most rapidly.”
Tasked the Senior Executive Council to provide a systematic approach for replacing these processes
FY04 DPG (May 04) sought to address these issues, and to better integrate resource allocation with the acquisition and capabilities/requirements processes

20. New Process- Defense Planning Corresponding to Four-Year Presidential Terms
Year 1 (Review and Refinement):
Early National Security Strategy (NSS)
Off-year DPG as required (at discretion of SECDEF)
Limited Changes to Baseline Program
Year 2 (Formalize the Agenda):
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
– Aligned with PB submission in second year of an administration
Fiscal Guidance Issued
On-year DPG (implementing QDR)
POM/BES Submissions
Year 3 (Execution of Guidance):
Year 4 (Ensuring the Legacy):
On-year DPG (refining alignment of strategy and programs)
Program Objective Memorandum (POM)/Budget Estimate Submission (BES) Submissions
Two Year POM/BES Cycle
Administration recognizes that it takes a year to get the people and processes to be able to build an agenda thus they planned for a QDR in year two of the administration’s 4 year term. Once the QDR and resultant direction are implemented in year two, year three will be a year of few changes unless there have been major situational changes in the world requiring revisiting the plan adopted in year two.

21. Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution
Primary Resource Management System for DoD:
Articulates strategy
Identifies size, structure and equipment for military forces
Sets programming priorities
Allocates resources
Evaluates actual output against planned performance and adjusts resources as appropriate
PPBE is the primary resource management system for DoD.
Until now, unchanged since developed by McNamara in 1961
What do we do in PPBE?
Strategy - How are we going to defend the nation? National Goals
Forces - What are we going to use to defend the nation? to execute that Strategy?
Prioritize - Which ones, which programs will be funded now?
Resources - How much will be spent on each program?
Output - Where are we getting our best return?
Trans: What are the phases in PPBE?

22. Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution Phases
Assess capabilities / review threat
Develop resource informed guidance
Programming
Turn guidance into achievable, affordable packages
Six-year program (Future Years Defense Program)
Budgeting
Assess for efficient funds execution
Scrub budget years
Prepare defensible budget
Execution Review (incorporated in program/budget review)
Develop performance metrics
Assess actual output against planned performance
Adjust resources to achieve desired performance goals
Brief Overview of PPBE phases: Still have same three phases: planning, programming and budgeting. The major difference is that we now have a review of program execution/program performance concurrent with the program and budget review (NOT Army’s PPBES)
Planning: QDR 2001 shifted the basis of defense planning from a "threat-based" model that dominated thinking in the past to a "capabilities-based" model
Capabilities-based model:
– Focuses on how an adversary might fight rather than specifically who the adversary might be or where a war might occur.
– Recognizes that it is not enough to plan for large conventional wars in distant theaters. Instead, the United States must identify the capabilities required to deter and defeat adversaries who will rely on surprise, deception, and asymmetric warfare to achieve their objectives.
Defense Planning Guidance (DPG): Marching Orders for next phase
Programming:
Components develop Program based on guidance
OSD & Joint Staff review for priority, affordability
Info captured in the FYDP
Budgeting:
Components develop budget submissions
OSD(C) reviews budget inputs, with emphasis on funds execution
Ultimate aim, to submit a defensible President’s Budget thru OMB to Congress
Execution Review
Overlays both Program Review and Budget Review processes
In past emphasis on input, “how much to spend on each program”; now emphasis is on output, “what are we getting for our money?”
Using performance metrics to examine program execution
TRANSITION: Let’s compare the old PPBS to the new PPBE…

23. CB Defense Program Budget Update

24. RDT&E, and Procurement Funds ONLY
Chemical/Biological Defense Primary Program Focus
Provides Chemical and Biological Defensive Equipment to the WARFIGHTER
RDT&E, and Procurement Funds ONLY

25. DoD CB Defense Program Historical Perspective- Funding – FY04
Total
Dollars in Millions
RDT&E
Procurement
Fiscal Year
First PL Consolidated POM submitted

26. DoD Chemical/Biological Defense Program
FY2004 PB ($M) with Congressional Adjustments
Funding By Budget Activity
Science & Tech Base
(22.3%) $246.0
(29.4%) $363.6
Basic Research
(3.2%) $35.8
(4.2%) $51.9
Procurement (45.8%) $505.7
(44.8%) $555.6
Applied Research
(9.6%) $106.5
(12.4%) $153.5
Adv Tech Dev
(9.4%) $103.7
(12.8%) $158.2
ACD&P
(14.7%) $162.1
(10.7%) $132.8
Operational Sys Dev
(0.3%) $3.4
(0.0%) $0.0
SDD
(13.4%) $148.1
(11.5%) $142.8
Mgmt Support (3.5%) $39.4
(3.6%) $44.8
RDT&E = $ $684.1
Procurement = $ $555.6
Total = $ $1,239.7
Advanced Development
(31.6%) $349.6
(25.8%) $320.4

27. Support to the Warfighter
Making Progress in Research, Development and Acquisition:
However more progress needed:
Organizational/Managerial Transformation
Training Readiness
Joint Concepts/Doctrine
Senior Service/Combatant Commanders Awareness
$$ Dollars Will Not Solve Everything

28. CB Installation Protection Initiative
The CB Installation/Force Protection Program (CBIFPP) provides:
$76.6M for a CBIFPP capability on 15 CONUS installations in FY04
Prioritizes 200 installations for FY04-09 (185 CONUS, 15 OCONUS)
Integrates established AT/FP capabilities through CBRNE CONOPS and Standards
Adds or enhances installation CBRN defense capabilities in
Sense
Shape
Shield
Sustain
Initially leverages off-the-shelf capabilities

29. CBDP- Emerging Directions/Challenges
Threat remains diverse, dispersed, and unpredictable
Capability based approach for CBRND Planning
In lieu of previous validated specific threats
Focuses on CBRN capabilities an adversary might employ
Primary focus must remain support of the warfighter
CBDP CBRND
Use of new CBRND Joint Operational Concept Parlance:
Sense; Shape; Shield; Sustain
Acceleration of CBRND technology
Emphasis on Installation Force Protection; interoperability with emergency responders
Homeland Security- Evolving roles/missions for DoD/CBRNDP
Interagency cooperation on vaccine development and deployment

30. The Chemical & Biological Threat
It’s not a matter of if,
it’s now.