1. Expeditionary Training Group (ETG) ETG Maritime Security Operations Ready UNCLASSIFIED Navy Staff Planning EODGRU TWO 25-28 AUG 14

2. Situation

3. OVERVIEW OF THE SITUATION - What’s happening on the ground? ENEMY - Info from HHQ order (FRAGO) - Enemy in the area (size, activity, location, etc.) - What will the enemy do (most likely/dangerous COAs) - Recent enemy activity (along convoy route, etc.) FRIENDLY - HAS (higher, adjacent, supporting) - Consider info you received from RFI responses HN - Consider info you received from RFI responses

4. Logistics

5. MOVEMENT PLAN - Describe plan to get from pt A to pt B - Consider info you received from RFI responses INFRASTRUCTURE AT NAVBASE XXX - Consider info you received from RFI responses HN - What will the HN provide? CONSIDER: “Beans, Bullets, Bandages, Bad Guys” (Food, Fuel, Ammo, People, etc. to sustain the effort)

6. Command and Signal

7. COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS - Supporting/Supported relationships TASK ORGANIZATION - Once we re-deploy, where will the leadership be? C2/COMMUNICATIONS - Relay CO’s emphasis on the importance of C2/comms

8. MissionAnalysis COA Development COAAnalysis COADecision OrdersDevelopment Transition Navy Staff Planning Model  Use mission analysis data and CDR’s guidance to produce multiple courses of action  Examine each course of action for validity  Consider branch plans COA Comparison and Decision

9. Courses of Action A COA is a broadly stated potential solution that results in the accomplishment of the mission developed during mission analysis COA development should consider all force/unit capabilities necessary to achieve the commander’s objectives The planning team should attempt to develop at least two (and often more) valid and distinguishable COAs for the commander

10. Courses of Action Multiple COAs = Distinct options –“Collectively exhaustive/mutually exclusive” – Complete (Who, What, When, Where, Why...and How) – Variety (meaningful difference) between COAs

11. COA Considerations Factors that impact COA development CDR’s planning guidance Scheme of maneuver Sequential and simultaneous operations Sequencing task accomplishment Requirement for supporting effort(s) Employment of forces/units ROE End State

12. ABCs of COA Development A – Focus on “actions on the objective area” - What do I need/how do I allocate forces to accomplish the mission? (ex. NCHB at APOD, NCHB at SPOD, etc.) - Movement between/C2/mutual support between APOD, SPOD, HQ B – How do I accomplish force buildup to support execution at APOD, SPOD, HQ? - immediate buildup - phased buildup

13. ABCs of COA Development C – How do I get my forces there? - Advance Party (tasks) - Initial force buildup - Main Body (increase footprint to intended capacity/capability) D – How do I sustain the effort? - How do I account for “BPT” or emergent tasks? E – Retrograde planning (as required)

14. Phasing Logical, well-defined, sequential events in a complex mission Example:Phase I - Transit to objective area Phase II – Insert of ground forces Phase III – Establish waterborne cordon Phase IV – Extraction of ground forces Phase V – Return to FOB

15. COA Sketch Brief and tentative – Written for each COA; provides the big picture to the CO Essential to each COA Presentation –Forces required (WHO) –Tasks to be accomplished (WHAT) main and supporting efforts –Timeframe (WHEN) Phasing/sequence of events –Area of Effort (WHERE) –Scheme of maneuver (HOW) –Intent (WHY) –Advantages/Disadvantages / Pros and Cons

16. Statement: RR3 conducts a five-phase insert/extract of ground forces to and from the objective area while providing security, water-borne cordon, fire support, CASEVAC, and EOD support to eliminate the MARK threat in the West Point area. II III IV ground force COA Sketch and Statement

17. COA Statement: The airborne forced entry COA is an aggressive offensive operation aimed at neutralizing the Redland 23 Guard divisions in order to attack and destroy the terrorist organization in Redland. COA Sketch and Statement

18. COA Name: PH I: PH II: PH III: PH IV: Pros: Cons: SKETCH COA STATEMENT: COA Template

19. COA Testing Determine validity of the COA Primary test –Suitability (Does it accomplish the tasks & mission and comply with CDR’s guidance?) Secondary tests (preliminary) –Feasibility (Can it be done?) –Acceptability (Justifies risk/cost in resources?) –Variety (Differs from other COAs?) –Completeness (Are all tasks included?)

20. Unresolved Assumptions? Think Branch Plans!

21. Branch Plan An option built into the basic plan or course of action for changing the mission, disposition, orientation, or direction of movement based on anticipated events, opportunities, or disruptions. Example: What if we discover the harbor/river is mined?

22. Deliverable: COA Presentation to planning team - Sketch and Statement - Phases with tasks to be accomplished in each phase and by whom - Pros / Cons - Risk (branch plans) - RFFs (Requests for Forces) Assistance Phase

23. MissionAnalysis COADevelopment COA Analysis COA Comparison and Decision OrdersDevelopment Transition Navy Staff Planning Model  Assess each COA against enemy COAs  Discard or retain COAs

24. Friendly COAs vs Enemy COAs Friendly COAs likelihood of success compared to the Enemy Most Likely and Most Dangerous COAs Retain or Modify Friendly COA COA Analysis

25. General Rules 25 1.Remaining objective and not allowing personality or sense of what the commander wants to influence participants. Avoid defending a COA just because the participant(s) personally developed it. 2.Recording advantages and disadvantages of each COA accurately as they emerge. 3.Continuously assessing feasibility, acceptability, and suitability of each COA. If COA fails any of these tests, reject it. 4.Avoid drawing premature conclusions and gathering facts to support such conclusions. Avoid comparing one COA to another during the analysis. (This occurs during COA comparison.)

26. EC 1 EC 2 Most Likely Most Dangerous COA 1 COA 2 COA 3 Modifications COA Analysis

27. EC 1 EC 2 Most Likely Most Dangerous COA 1 COA 2 COA 3 Modifications None None – acceptable risk Collapse Scheme of Maneuver to allow mutual protection, shift OA’s randomly COA Analysis

28. Simple Wargaming 28 The simplest form of wargaming is the manual tabletop approach. -Members of the planning team use a map or chart of the operational area (OA) and manually war-game events as outlined in the COAs. COA #Critical Event: Sequence # ActionReactionCounter Action AssetsRemarks 1 2 3

29. Wargaming Methods Essential Tasks Method (Critical Events): – War-games critical events (usually those associated with each phase) in sequence Avenue in Depth Method: – Focuses on one approach at a time, beginning with the main effort executing the decisive action – Good for COAs that attempt to “seize the initative” Belts Method – Divide the operating space into areas that span the width of the OA and conduct sequential analysis of events in each belt Box Method – A detailed analysis of a critical area, such as an amphibious objective area 29

30. Sample Wargaming 30 COA #Critical Event: Establish and Maintain Security at the Redland Lake Dam Sequence #ActionReactionCounter Action AssetsRemarks 1 Forces position in the Redland Lake and adjacent waterways, demonstrate show of force and prepares for future operations. Insurgent forces position to JTF positioning to deny JTF forces freedom of action (FOA) and protect waterways for continued use. JTF forces demonstrate FOA through maneuver (SUW, ASW, MIW) and actions within published ROE. CRG MAST, Riverine vessels, Security vessels CRG is the supported component. JFMCC requests supplemental ROE to meet emerging threat actions. CCIR: (PIR) Add indications of offensive mining. 2 JTF forces engage Redland maritime forces in OA Lions, Tigers, and Bears as required to demonstrate FOA and maritime superiority. Insurgents engage JTF forces to deny use of the Redland Lake and adjacent waterways. JTF forces conduct strikes to destroy CDCM sites affecting JTF FOA, employs OCA, defensive counter-air (DCA), ASW, SUW, to destroy insurgent forces. No changeConsider additional strikes on mine storage facilities, identified command and control nodes, and maritime assets not underway in port.

31. Deliverable: COA Analysis Assistance Phase

32. MissionAnalysis COADevelopment COAAnalysis COA Comparison and Decision OrdersDevelopment Transition Navy Staff Planning Model  Retained friendly COAs evaluated against established criteria and each other  Conduct staff supportability estimate  Conduct COA brief  Decision made by the Commander

33. Assists staff in refining COAs Assists staff in providing recommended COA Assists commander in making a sound decision COA Comparison

34. Decision Matrix Advantages/Disadvantages Matrix Staff Estimates of Supportability for each COA COA Comparison

35. Compare COAs Framed by Governing Factors - Received from Commander’s guidance Weighted or Non-Weighted? Decision Matrix

36. Examples of Governing Factors –Least complicated by ROE –Offers the greatest operational flexibility –Offers least operational risk –Easiest to support C2 –Best logistic/sustainability –Offers best use of transportation links –Accomplishes objective in shortest amount of time –Will best facilitate future ops Decision Matrix

37. Governing Factors Weight COA 1COA 2COA 3 C2 2 242412 SIMPLICITY 1 331122 SUSTAINABILITY 2 362424 FLEXIBILITY 1 113322 RISK 1 221133 TOTAL 16 13 Weighted

38. Decision Matrix Governing FactorsCOA 1COA 2COA 3 C2221 SIMPLICITY312 SUSTAINABILITY322 FLEXIBILITY132 RISK213 TOTAL11910 Non-Weighted

39. List advantages and disadvantages for each COA Modify COA if necessary Reevaluate feasibility and acceptability Advantages/Disadvantages

41. Staff Estimates COA 1COA 2COA 3 PREFERRED N2 N3 N4 N6 EOD LNO

42. Staff Estimates COA 1COA 2COA 3 PREFERRED N21 N31 N41 N61 EOD3 LNO2

43. Staff Estimates COA 1COA 2COA 3 PREFERRED N21 N31 N41 N61 EOD3 Det LNO2

44. Deliverable: Decision Matrix Advantages/Disadvantages Matrix √ Staff Estimates of Supportability Refine COA decision brief for CO Assistance Phase

45. Approved Mission Statement Review of Cmdr’s COA Development Guidance Orientation Update of RFIs/RFFs/Intel COA Briefs Sketch/OverviewStatement PhasesPros & Cons Risk Assessment Convoy PlanComm Plan / C2 Arrangements Bug Out PlanMEDEVAC Plan Additional CO Guidance Issues/Concerns (Staff) COA Analysis, Comparison, Estimates… RECOMMENDED COA Sample COA Brief Format

46. QQQ Questions?