1. USPACOM READINESS OF JTF CAPABLE HQ
Chet Malins JTF Training and Certification Branch USPACOM J March 2009
1. The notes provided on the first 8 slides of this brief provide additional information and background to the points presented on that slide.
2. They were intended to augment the slide content and not serve as “talking points” for that slide.
This brief is classified:
UNCLASSIFIED 1

2. JTF Capable HQ End State Core USPACOM JTFs USPACOM Program of Record
Outline
JTF Capable HQ End State
Core USPACOM JTFs
USPACOM Program of Record
Observations / Concerns
Recommendations for Training Community
Important to discuss how HQ USPACOM views the end state re: improving and sustaining JTF capability and readiness.
There are unique USPACOM factors that have shaped our view and decisions
There are 4 JTFs of special concern: None of whom are stood up. All are to be JTF Capable. Two (2) are forward deployed.
The USPACOM program of record is based on guidance and requirements in:
USPACOMINST , JTF Certification Feb 2006
Pacific Joint Training Strategy (PJTS) FY09-12 Jun 2006
USPACOMNOTE 0029, JTF Training and Cert Sep 2006
USPACOMINST A, JTF Training and Cert Draft/ in staffing
PJTS FY Draft/ in staffing
Working to implement the program that will enable Service HQ achieve the end state has given rise to several observations and concerns.
Our objective for the WJTSC would be to identify and tee up issues for discussion, and presentation to the training community represented here at the WJTSC

3. JTF Capable HQ End State
USPACOM core “JTF Capable HQ” use DRRS to:
Measure and record readiness to execute assigned missions
Drive JTF efforts to sustain proficiency through training
Corollaries:
DRRS:
Addresses both common and unique JTF requirements
Informs and requires participation by HHQ
Implementation must still work after JTF activation
JTIMS is the environment to schedule, manage, and assess JTF training per the JTS methodology and provide feedback to DRRS
JMD Builder and eJMAPS capture and manage manning requirements and allow feedback of manning status to DRRS
JMEEL captures equipment requirements and allows feedback of equipment status to DRRS.
This vision applies to both USPACOM JTFs a) certified as JTF Capable and b) those identified to progress toward JTF Capable HQ status:
Certified: JTF 519 (2007, 2008) and JTF 507 (2007)
In process: JTF 505 (following TS08 in Jul 2009)
Each JTF Capable HQ:
Definition: Capable of executing a broad range of likely, theater contingency missions
Must follow the methodology in USPACOM JTF directives…to achieve JTF Capable status
After a rigorous certification cycle, CJTF presents self assessment of readiness and capability
CDR USPACOM, upon corroboration by HQ and SC, will certify JTF as JTF Capable HQ
Like it or not, the goal must be to make existing tools work:
Use of DRRS mandated
Use of JTS mandated
Use of JTIMS mandated
Use of eJMAPS mandated
JMD Builder is a government developed application that provides a number of organizational, billet, manning, training, and RSOI tracking functions. Endorsed by USPACOM J1 as the way to get the requisite JMD information required for eJMAPS.
JMEEL – concept introduced in the CONOPS. J361 uses it as a way to get all on same sheet of music regarding the C2/CS capabilities .

4. USPACOM Designated “Core” JTF HQ
JTF 501 (I Corps)
JTF 507 (7th FLT)
Why Define a “Core” JTF:
3 or 4 Star Operational HQ
Assigned missions per USPACOMINST S3020.2L
Most likely HQ to be activated for Theater JTF missions
Capable of a broad spectrum of mission sets
2 of 4 HQ Staffs are Forward Deployed
JTF 519
JTF 505 (III MEF)
Previous graphic took the view from the perspective of the individual JTFHQ.
This graphic explains the situation that underscores the USPACOM view and hence the philosophy and perspective imbedded in our JTF training and certification program structure and implementation. The task is not a SEQUENTIAL, ROTATIONAL, TEMPORAL progression of the JTFs …but a SIMULTANEOUS dynamic juggling of all four.
The USPACOM vision is that all are “capable and available” to respond when directed. All know what to do to sustain that joint capability (readiness) and vigorously do so. However, at any given time, non are fully manned, fully equipped, and fully trained. No two are on the same track.
Because both Service Component and HQ USPACOM monitor, track status (via DRRS and JTIMS), and constantly update what is needed to “fix the shortfall now”…any of these HQ could be called upon should CDR USPACOM require.
Ongoing HQ USPACOM programs recognize that a) each JTF will undergo degradation in readiness and capability over time and b) HQ USPACOM efforts must attempt to continually compensate through enhanced assist visits and training (individual, staff, and collective)
KEY:
J3/J5 determine which of the 2/3/4 star staffs should be named and numbered JTFs via USPACOMINST S3020.2L
The JTF Training and Cert effort determines which JTFs meet the broad spectrum of mission category resident in CDR USPACOM definition of JTF Capable HQ.
Other JTFs, and Service 2 & 3 Star HQ
JTF 510, JTF HD, JIATF-W
5th, 11th, 13th AF
I MEF, MARFORPAC
3rd Fleet
25th ID

5. USPACOM Program of Record
Program emphasis:
Success requires collaborative engagement of the Designated JTF, HQ USPACOM and the applicable Service Component.
Readiness/capabilities are the goal. Certification is a motivating factor.
Clear identification of how DRRS and JTIMS are to be used individually and collectively to enable and support JTF Capable HQ.
Clear and adequate documentation that outlines requirements in concrete detail and shares best practices.
Standardization measures for consistency between core JTF Capable HQ:
Core tasks
Minimum baseline standards
Foundational training courses and materials
Program emphasis has crystallized over the last 3 years based on:
Four certification cycles with the 5th one in progress.
Work with the larger community on addressing some of the larger OSD, SECDEF, and CJCS concerns, specifically the refinement of the JTF HQ CONOPS and other JTF readiness efforts
As such, the task has grown bigger than just a J7 training/certification effort.
DRRS was not designed for the (USPACOM view of a) JTF Capable HQ, that is essentially: a Service HQ, not stood up, with perhaps, at best, a vague statement of mission, with no subordinate forces assigned.
Furthermore, DRRS leads one to believe that it represents an objective score; yet the process is extremely subjective with broad variation not only possible but likely among “similar” activities.
Both DRRS and JTIMS are not user friendly in many functions and can be inscrutable to forward deployed staffs, without resources and overloaded with other commitments.
Over and over again….JTF reps will communicate: “we see the words that you have written as the requirement…but what do you really want us to do in concrete terms.”
Given the USPACOM end state vision…of 4 similarly capable entities available at any given time… USPACOM efforts must work (counter to DRRS philosophy) to the commonality of all and reduce the variation across all four JTF HQ.

6. USPACOM Program of Record
Implementation of an Assist Visit program:
Tools and compliance
Academics (certification / sustainment cycles)
Designation of HQ USPACOM OPR to facilitate the synchronization and integration of stakeholder efforts to improve JTF capability.
Develop each supporting
program
Periodic OPTs
Quarterly readiness review
OPR:
Overall Integrator and synchronizer J1
Manning
J3 Readiness
Reporting
J35/J5 Mission Assignments
J723 Certification
J361/J63
Equipping
J72/SJFHQ
Training
Other SMEs
OPT
Motivation for Assist Visits (Non Academic)
The baseline theater understanding, implementation, execution, and oversight of the use of DRRS and JTIMS need to be improved to support the attainment of the end vision. The JTF needs the help to understand and put these programs in place.
Providing “hands on” to the right JTF counterpart can eliminate many problems and facilitate understanding and interpretation of specific execution directed in USPACOM documents.
Since a JTF Improvement is a “unity of effort” program at HQ USPACOM level, the assist visit allows for subject matter experts to cover down on all aspects of readiness: manning, equipping, training, and readiness reporting.
The Assist Visit team can help the JTF sort through who needs to be involved internal to the JTF staff to achieve the requisite level of integration and synchronization that will lead to sustainment.
Due to limited resources, the focus for J7 funded ACADEMICS remains on the JTF in the certification cycle. J7 recognizes that there must be commitment (at lower priority) for those in sustainment status.
As the understanding has matured of what all is involved in helping the JTF HQ achieve and sustain readiness, so too has the realization that all stakeholders must work together in an integrated and synchronized manner.
The concept of a HQ OPT has been informally in place at HQ USPACOM for over a year. But, what was missing was the formal appointment of the group, the OPR, and the lines of authority. The new revision to the JTF Training and Certification instruction will constitute the group and appoint the J7 to the position of OPR.
Theoretically, this venue and authority vested in the relationship will facilitate a stronger “unity of effort” in defining, coordinating, and achieving the necessary guidance and support products.

7. USPACOM Observations / Concerns
Achieving / sustaining Joint capabilities
Joint requirements are additive, specifically use of joint UIC
Lack of staffing, funding, and continuity at JTF HQ
Using DOD sponsored / directed processes and tools
Suitability for task
Labor intensive
Cross domain, multi-domain challenges
All echelons are interconnected
Can’t enable the JTF HQ in isolation of HQ USPACOM and Service Component
Mastery of basics (DRRS, JTIMS) are pre-conditional
Manning, equipping, training and readiness reporting in parallel
JMETL approach requires upfront mission guidance/ assumptions
Adequate Resources
HQ USPACOM Team (OPT) capable of an integrated approach
Funding/resources available to JTF HQ to address new requirements
Suitable training venues
Use of DRRS, JTS, JTIMS, eJMAPS…all add workload to an already overworked Service HQ. Even a superficial implementation has caused the JTFs to raise deep concerns over cost vs. benefits.
2. Workload:
There are valid arguments for each side of the debate whether the JTF Capable HQ should report readiness under METs listed on its existing service UIC versus a separate joint UIC. HQ USPACOM considers that the joint UIC is both more logical and advantageous. However, the DRRS tool is cumbersome and not supportive of dual reporting (in an easy an straightforward manner).
TPOTPETPA was not invented by a forward deployed marine. The functionality in JTIMS preserved that cumbersomeness.
USPACOM forward deployed Svc HQ/JTFs do significant training with TSCP partners. Having to shift to a different tools (JTIMS) adds another layer of complexity which further acerbates the staff workload.
Suitability. There is a level of concern in USPACOM J7 whether DRRS
Is the best (practical) ruler for measuring what needs to be measured in a JTF Capable HQ. [However, designing something different for JTFs is a non-starter]
Can transition and support readiness reporting for the activated JTF.
Current “culture of DRRS and JTIMS” in the theater is poor, with marginal oversight and accountability. USPACOM J7 is trying to push the JTFs to a more rigorous implementation than HQ USPACOM follows or requires theater-wide. These systems require universal implementation at all echelons.
The cornerstone of the entire JTF Training and Certification program is that HQ USPACOM has identified contingency mission requirements in sufficient detail to allow mission analysis and the identification of required training, equipping, and manning. Also that a JTF will get the call when that mission arises.
6. Last bullet speaks for itself. The standup of the HQ OPT is a new requirement. This program has tasked the JTF with new requirements. Who provides the manpower and monetary resources to accomplish the work that needs to get done? Currently, CDRUSPACOM has directed complex, high end venues.

8. Recommendations for Training Community
Groom existing execution tools to “better fit” the JTF situation
DRRS (JTF Capable and activated JTF)
JTIMS (simplify the process and execution)
Standardize core tasks and training materials for contingency JTFs
JTP&G, Issue #07-016
Field basic joint training materials available to all (JKKDC)
Expand the field of view of individual and joint training to address the augmentee and service HQ staff officer
Identify resources for dedicated effort
Predictable CE2 funding to build up and sustain programs
Flexibility to allocate one JTFS to the JTF HQ challenge
Establish greater participation by readiness community in the emerging JTF HQ community of interest (COI)
Can we improve DRRS to better support the JTF Capable HQ…or can we field an interpretation that will better measure what we need to? DOES DRRS KNOW OF THE SPECIAL JTF REQUIREMENTS?
TOs to TPOs to TPEs to TPAs: This progression looks great in theory and on paper, but fails under the lack of practical workability and an enormous resource cost. CAN ANY LEVEL OF EFFORT BY THE JTIMS COMMUNITY FIX THIS FUNDAMENTAL FRICTION POINT?
There is a level of commonality among all JTF HQ, regardless of combatant commander, that could be the basis of standard training materials…with as many as practical available for self study on-line. Note that ISSUE # identifies that USJFCOM has been tasked by JS to lead just such a collaborative effort. WILL THE EFFORT TASKED IN THE JTP&G BE FIXED BY THE CONOPS?
As important as the staff of the CCDR is (the current focus of the I/ST WG and JKKDC), CAN THAT WG TAKE ON THIS ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE? CAN WE DEFINE WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE?
Discretionary CE2 funding is available to CCDR on an annual, competitive basis. However, having a predictable threshold of resources dedicated to the certification of readiness of JTF HQ would allow for stability and individual/collective program development. Some efforts may span all CCDRs and warrant enterprise level allocation. Current SLT oversight controls this account without a “unified input/recommendation/criteria” from the emerging JTF COI. CAN THE JTF COI PROVIDE PRIORITIES FOR THESE RESOURCES?
CAN THE FOCUS OF THE JOINT TRAINING FACILITATOR SPECIALISTS (JTFS) PROVIDED TO THE CCDR BE EXPANDED TO ADDRESS JTF REQUIREMENTS?

9. BACKUP SLIDES 9

10. Approved JTF Core Tasks
OP 1.2 Conduct Operational Maneuver and Force Positioning
OP 2.1 Direct Operational Intelligence Activities
OP 2.2 Collect and Share Operational Info
OP 3.1 Conduct Joint Force Targeting
OP 4.4 Coordinate Support for Forces in JOA
OP 5.1 Acquire and Communicate Operational Level Information & Maintain Status
OP 5.5 Establish, Organize and Operate a Joint Force HQ
OP 1.1 Conduct Operational Movement
OP 4.5 Manage Logistic Support in the JOA
OP 5.3 Prepare Plans and Orders
OP 5.4 Command Subordinate Operational Forces
OP 5.6 Coordinate Operational Information Operations (IO)
OP 5.7 Coordinate and Integrate Joint/Multinational/Interagency Support
OP 6.2 Provide Protection for Operational Forces, Means, and Noncombatants
OP 7.3 Coordinate Passive CBRNE Defense in JOA

11. JTF Training and Certification - Bottom Line
Since inception, the primary goal of JTF Training and Certification:
To improve the operational capability of designated HQ staffs for execution of JTF contingency missions in USPACOM AOR.
Current USPACOM J7 perspective:
HQ USPACOM, Service Component, and designated HQ staff (JTF) share responsibility to improve and sustain joint manning, equipping, training, and readiness reporting of that JTF HQ.
Certification is the driving force toward capability improvement, not the goal line.
CDRUSPACOM certification of a HQ staff as JTF capable signifies:
HQ staff has achieved and will sustain joint operational capability for assignment for JTF contingency operations.
HQ USPACOM and Service Component have the plans in place to fully man and equip the “JTF” when activated.

12. JTF Training and Certification – Basic Tenets
Establish consistency across core HQ staffs (aspiring to and certified as JTF capable)
Core JMETS and minimum baseline standards
Standard training regimen
SJFHQ-P as joint trainer and enabler
Routine monitoring of JTF readiness and training as documented and reported in DRRS, JTIMS, eJMAPS, etc.
Implement an assist visit program to help HQ staff refine its joint manning, equipping, training and readiness reporting status
Provide culminating event (major exercise) to evaluate JTF proficiency and performance to standards
Complex scenario and C2
Use of Joint Enablers
External observation and evaluation to approved standards

13. JTF Certification Period
Ongoing JTF Proficiency
Focus of JTF Certification Period is Preparing the JTF for Joint Operations
JTF CDR IPR
USPACOM , SC, JTF Staff Preparation 1
JTF Training Regimen
JTF develop training, manning, equipping, and readiness reporting 2
CERT BRIEF TO J00
JTF Develop Certification Package 3
This slide breaks down the “certification period” into 3 main segments. NOTE: the focus of certification is preparing the JTF to be joint mission capable across a spectrum of missions.
The Black arrows both to the right and left indicate that the JTF staff should have an ongoing program to prepare and maintain its joint and multinational proficiency. During the certification period, HQ USPACOM promises the JTF CDR and staff additional resources to train and evaluate staff capability.
The CDR’s IPR establishes the guidance and priorities for that support.
The JTF training regimen is a synthesis of all events undertaken by the JTF HQ to prepare and train for mission accomplishment.
In parallel, the staff and HQ USPACOM assess and refine the manning and equipment the JTF will need to do its real world assigned mission.
The final step is the synthesis of all this information for presentation to CDR USPACOM.
This sequence re-emphasizes that certification of a HQ staff as JTF-capable is the decision of CDR USPACOM after consideration of a wide spectrum of information on JTF capability. Certification is not done by some external agency during the Exercise AAR. 1
Prepare update for and obtain JTF CDR’s Guidance 2
Train and improve JTF capabilities and status 3
Document learning and present case for Certification

14. JTF Certification Recommendation
At the completion of the certification period, JTF CDR will forward his recommendation for certification as a JTF Capable HQ based on attainment of the following criteria:
Proficient in JTF core tasks
Proficient in mission specific JMETs
Has valid and sourced joint manning document (JMD)
Has valid and resourced joint mission essential equipment list (JMEEL)
Has participated in a training regimen addressing joint and multinational operations
Has participated in a measured culminating exercise
Possesses acceptable mission readiness posture, as reported in the Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS)
This slide outlines the criteria or attributes that all JTF-capable HQ staffs should possess. Note: that the JTF CDR makes the assessment as to attainment.
All designated JTFs should commence attainment of these attributes whether or not slated for a near term certification period:
Criteria #1, #2, #3, #4 and #7 are independent of the certification cycle and culminating exercise.
Criteria #5 (a JTF training regimen) should be in place during both the certification period and the JTF self sustainment period. During the certification period, the JTF will get additional resources and the benefit of the SJFHQ standard training package.
Criteria #6 specifies that the JTF HQ staff participate in a culminating exercise and be evaluated by an external team.
As USPACOM has gained experience with JTF certification and recognized that the real bottom line is the training and readiness improvement for the JTF, it became apparent for the JTF and HQ USPACOM to use the certification period to catalog JTF C2 capability relative to promulgated standards. Where they exist, shortfalls will be documented and the potential work-arounds identified so that HQ USPACOM and the Service Component can immediately implement them, upon JTF activation.
Whereas a specific mission or scenario may provide the backdrop and context for the certification process, the designation as “JTF-capable” indicates CDR USPACOM confidence that the JTF CDR and staff could handle a broader range of mission assignments.
JMEEL = systems, applications, hardware, software, and equipment used to provide joint C2 capability
Per USPACOMINST

15. JTF Certification Decision
CDR JTF and DEPCDR USPACOM submit certification recommendation to CDR USPACOM in joint briefing. Briefing will address:
Attainment of JTF Certification criteria
Relevant Lessons Learned and Issues from Culminating Event
POAM to fix issues within JTF capabilities
Recommendations for changes to doctrine, SOPs, organizations, etc
Ongoing plans for sustaining JTF readiness
CDRUSPACOM makes decision to certify HQ Staff as JTF Capable HQ based on:
JTF CDR assessment of HQ staff capability
HQ USPACOM / Service Component confirmation that plan is in place to reconstitute manning and equipping upon activation
Per the USPACOM Certification instruction, this is the generic “post culminating exercise” sequence of events. The actual sequence and method of implementing it will be tailored to the specifics of the individual circumstances.
The first bullet addresses the JTF CDR’s report of attainment of the criteria from the previous page. The JTF HQ has: thought through, identified, trained, and been evaluated in the critical areas related to mission accomplishment. Manning and equipping plans for subsequent activation have been refined, any shortfalls identified, and put on the shelf for immediate use if required..
The final four bullets focus on leveraging JTF CDR and staff insights into how to improve warfighting and JTF operations in the USPACOM theater. In addition to focusing on specific mission (JTF unique) related items, these insights should contribute to the learning that will assist all JTF-capable HQ staffs; e.g. best practices, recurring problems, improvements to standard procedures, etc.
Upon completion of these items, whether done at a brief or in some other forum, CDR USPACOM will formally designate JTF certification via letter or memo.
Per USPACOMINST

16. References and Points of Contact
USPACOMINST , JTF Certification Program, 1 Feb 2006
USPACOMNOTE , JTF Certification Program, 26 Sep 2008
USPACOM Pacific Joint Training Strategy FY09-12, 16 Jun 2008
USPACOMINST A, Joint Exercise Program, 24 Jul 2007
USPACOMINST , Joint Lessons Learned and Issue Resolution Program,
9 Sep 2008
Points of Contact:
LTC Jon Narimatsu, JTF Certification Branch Chief; ;
Chet Malins, JTF Certification analyst; ; ;
John Ellis, JTF Training analyst; ; ;
Thom Acton, USPACOM Lessons Learned, ; ;
Keith Maxfield, Joint Doctrine, ; ;

17. Requirements for an Evaluation Team
Combatant Commander needs an evaluation team that provides measured feedback on the:
Proficiency of the JTF HQ against approved standards
Effectiveness of the cumulative training regimen.
JTF CDR’s Rcmd for Certification as JTF Capable HQ
JMETL
JTF Training Regimen
JTF CDR’s Assessment
Culminating Event
JMETL embodies
JTF CDR Guidance
CCDR core requirements
Mission requirements
Evaluation Team
Knows the approved standards
Evaluates performance in context of theater and cumulative training
Provides objective evaluation to JTF CDR to help shape CDR assessment.
This slide represents the requirement for the Evaluation Team in the framework of the USPACOM JTF Training and Certification program. It is independent of DTT.
Nothing in here speaks negatively of specific DTT practices or products, or requires that DTT commit to performance of specific tasks: e.g. input TPO’s into JTIMS, etc.
Where these requirements appear to be at odds with current DTT methodology:
DTT asserts that they are trainers and that the culminating event is an isolated training laden experience. Because they view themselves as trainers, they consider they can not perform evaluation. Fact is….at this point of the training regimen, it is too late for introduction of new ideas…JTF should be evaluated against its integrated and synchronized battle plan. There is insufficient time in a 5-7 day CPX to overhaul that plan. The good ideas should have been incorporated into the procedures over the course of the month training regimen.
DTT does not invest the upfront time to understand and embrace Theater/CCDR/JTF CDR directed standards or processes and procedures. They import their own concept of what right should be based on Master Training Guide, JFCOM centric-ideas and their broad, across multiple command observations. So JTF trains to one set of standards, but is observed from a different set.
DTT feedback to CDR does not focus on whether JTF did what they were directed to do (from his approved guidance, JMET standards, and JTF procedures) or trained to do during the course of the training regimen. It does not point out whether perfect execution of JTF procedures may have been mismatched in specific instances (or across the board) and why alternative methods should be considered and why those alternatives would have been more effective in that case.
4. The USPACOM issue requests either a re-evaluation of DTT charter to address the articulated requirement or the resources to build the evaluation team in house.
Culminating Event
Not a stand alone training event
Focus is JTF demonstration of proficiency to approved standards and cumulative training
Clearly a “Learning event “ as JTF battle tests its processes and procedures
Not a go /no-go inspection
Training Regimen consists of
All standard academics
All staff and collective training
Applicable Real World Ops
That Trains JTF to standards :
-Tasks, JMET Standards,
Conditions
-JTF Lessons Learned
-SOPs

18. JTF Certification and OCAP Schedule
Schedule for JTF Training and Certifications Cycles
JTF 505 (III MEF) FY 09 (TS09), FY12 (CG12(T))
JTF FY10 (TF10), FY12 (TF 12)
JTF 507 (C7F) FY11 (TS11)
JTF 501 (I CORPS) Being considered for FY13
(Culminating venue)
Schedule for Operational Capability Assessments:
JTF FY 10 (SOCPAC nominate venue)
JTF HD FY 11 (USARPAC nominates TF 11)
CSF TBD