Multinational Planning Augmentation Team Course of Action Development

Purpose Discuss techniques and procedures for developing courses of action Part of Commander’s Estimate process Operational level Courses of action must be valid PURPOSE OF THIS BLOCK IS TO DISCUSS WAYS TO DEVELOP COAs - A COA IS A BROAD STATEMENT OF POSSIBLE WAYS (OPERATIONS) AND MEANS (FORCES) BY WHICH THE CTF MIGHT ACHIEVE THE OPERATIONAL END STATE OF THE ASSIGNED MISSION I’LL DISCUSS WHERE COURSE OF ACTION DEVELOPMENT FALLS IN THE CAP AND COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS AND SOME KEY PLANNING CONCEPTS TO KEEP IN MIND AS YOU DEVELOP COAS. THE MAJORITY OF THIS BRIEF WILL COVER THE 8 TASK STEPS TO DEVELOPING VALID, OPERATIONAL-LEVEL COAs.

References CJCSM 3500.05, JTF Headquarters Master Training Guide, 15 April 1997 Joint Pub 5-0, Doctrine for Planning Joint Operations, 13 April 1995 JP 5-00.2, Joint Task Force Planning Guidance and Procedures, 13 January 1999 JP 5-03.1, Joint Operation Planning and Execution System, Volume I, (Planning Policies and Procedures), Annex P, 4 August 1993 CJCSM 3500.5, JTF HQ MASTER TRAINING GUIDE COVERS EACH STEP OF THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS - OUR GUIDE TO TRAINING JP 5-0 IS THE KEYSTONE JOINT PLANNING PUBLICATION JP 5-00.2 IS THE NEW JOINT TASK FORCE DOCUMENT. A MUST READ FOR JTF PLANNING. JP 5-03.1 HAS FORMATS FOR MESSAGES, ORDERS, ETC. USING THESE FORMATS HELPS TO DEVELOP CHECKLISTS. AFSC PUB 1 IS NOT A DOCTRINAL PUBLICATION BUT IT IS A GOOD SOURCE OF INFORMATION. ON PAGES 6-38 THRU 6-40 THERE IS A SECTION TITLED “A PRIMER ON THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE” WHICH HAS SOME REALLY GOOD INFO.

Crisis Action Planning Process III Course of Action Development II Crisis Assessment IV Course of Action Selection V Execution Planning OPORD & Deployment Data Base I Situation Development VI Execution And/or Warning Order Planning Order Alert Order Execute Order I Mission Analysis / Restated Mission THE COURSE OF ACTION (COA) DEVELOPMENT PHASE OF CRISIS ACTION PLANNING (CAP) IMPLEMENTS AN NCA DECISION TO DEVELOP MILITARY OPTIONS IN RESPONSE TO A CRISIS AND WILL USUALLY BEGIN UPON RECEIPT OF A CINC’S WARNING ORDER THIS WARNING ORDER WILL ESTABLISH COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS AND IDENTIFY THE MISSION AND ANY PLANNING CONSTRAINTS THE JTF STAFF MUST CONSIDER. THIS BEGINS THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS, OF WHICH MISSION ANALYSIS IS THE FIRST PHASE. AS SHOWN, MISSION ANALYSIS IS THE FIRST PHASE AND PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS. THIS PHASE IDENTIFIES WHERE WE ARE GOING AND HOW WE WILL GET THERE. IT IS THE BASIS FOR ALL FURTHER PLANNING AND... II Course of Action Development III Analysis of Opposing Courses of Action IV Comparison of Own Courses of Action V Commander’s Decision Commander’s Estimate Process

Key Planning Concepts To the extent possible, plans should incorporate the following concepts of combined operation planning doctrine Strategic Supported Commander’s (HHQ) strategic intent and operational focus Orientation on the strategic and operational centers of gravity of the threat Protection of friendly strategic and operational centers of gravity Phasing of operations to include the commanders intent for each phase THESE CONCEPTS WILL ENHANCE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CINC’S STRATEGIC INTENT THIS SLIDE WAS TAKEN FROM JOINT PUB 5-0. THE CONCEPTS LISTED ARE MEANT TO FACILITATE COORDINATION OF STRATEGIC PRIORITIES DURING PLANNING ON THE THEATER LEVEL. YET, AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE CONCEPTS HAVE APPLICABILITY AT THE OPERATIONAL LEVEL OF WARFARE AS WELL. FOCUSES ON EXPLOITING THE ENEMIES’ COG AND DEFENDING OUR OWN COG PHASING OPERATIONS MAKES THE COA MORE UNDERSTANDABLE AND EASIER TO ANALYZE LATER DURING THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS PHASING THAT IS COMMON TO EACH COA WILL ALSO HELP- IN OTHER WORDS, ALL COAS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF PHASES LISTED BELOW PHASING:DEPLOYMENT, LODGMENT/BUILDUP, DECISIVE ACTION, FOLLOW THROUGH, AND REDEPLOYMENT

Course of Action Development The COA is a broad statement of possible ways the multinational force (MNF) can accomplish its mission WHO will accomplish essential tasks WHAT is the type of mission to be conducted WHEN the operation must begin or must be completed WHERE the combined operation will be executed WHY or the purpose of the operation HOW or the method of conducting the operation using major available resources WHAT WILL THE COURSES OF ACTION CONTAIN? SEE SLIDE ---- DON’T CONFUSE WITH MISSION STATEMENT DEVELOPED DURING MISSION ANALYSIS - COA IS MORE DETAILED END PRODUCT OF TASK IS A SET OF COAS, APPROVED BY THE CCTF, AND AVAILABLE FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON BY THE STAFF COAS NEED NOT BE OVERLY DETAILED, BUT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED IN ENOUGH DETAIL TO ALLOW FOR PROPER ANALYSIS (WARGAMING)

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC AS MENTIONED, COA DEVELOPMENT FOR A CTF WILL USUALLY BEGIN UPON RECEIPT OF A CINC’S WARNING ORDER THE WARNING ORDER WILL ESTABLISH COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS AND IDENTIFY THE MISSION AND ANY PLANNING CONSTRAINTS THE CTF STAFF MUST CONSIDER THE WARNING ORDER MAY IDENTIFY SOME OF THE WHAT, WHEN, AND WHY, BUT WE STILL NEED THE WHO, WHERE, AND HOW. THE FIRST STEP IN COA DEVELOPMENT IS TO DEVELOP INITIAL COAS MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Develop Initial COAs Plan to plan - One or more groups? - One big group? - Big brain technique? - Simultaneous or sequential development? Brainstorm - Be bold in concept - Be general by component - Be open to new ideas - Be unconstrained PLAN TO PLAN SEEMS BASIC BUT SOMEONE NEEDS TO TAKE THE LEAD AND DECIDE HOW THE INITIAL COAs WILL BE DEVELOPED - WILL THERE BE ONE BIG GROUP DEVELOPING COAS OR SEVERAL SMALL GROUPS - OR ONE PERSON COMING UP WITH SEVERAL STRAWMAN COAs? PROs AND CONs TO EACH METHOD SIMULTANEOUS VERSUS SEQUENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - SIMULTANEOUS (SEPARATE GROUPS WORKING ON DIFFERENT COAS) ADVANTAGE IS POTENTIAL TIME SAVINGS DISADVANTAGE IS THAT SYNERGY OF CPG DISRUPTED, MANPOWER INTENSIVE, REQUIRES COMPONENT & DIRECTORATE REP & LIKELIHOOD COAs WILL NOT BE DISTINCTIVE BRAINSTORM- WHAT DO YOU THINK PEOPLE INITIALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THE IDEA OF LOADING A CARRIER WITH ARMY HELOS? OPERATION UPHOLD DEMOCRACY DIRECTED COA FROM ON HIGH (C5) MARINE MSTP - ID ESSENTIAL TASKS BY TIME, EVENT & SPACE. LOOK AT CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE TASKS, CAPABILITIES REQUIRED AND WHAT FORCES CAN PROVIDE THE CAPABILITY (HAVE & HAVE NOT), & MOEs

Develop Initial COAs - More Considerations Review mission analysis/MNF commander (MNFC) planning guidance Develop plans to integrate the joint environment Focus on centers of gravity and decisive points Identify sequencing and phasing for each COA Identify main and supporting efforts Identify component level missions/tasks Develop information operations support items Develop initial COA sketches and statements HANG RESTATED MISSION & GUIDANCE IN CONSPICUOUS PLACE ON WALL ALL PROBABLY EXCELLENT AT PLANNING FOR THE EMPLOYMENT OF A SINGLE SERVICE - IT’S WHERE WE ARE COMFORTABLE DEVELOP PLANS TO INTEGRATE THE JOINT ENVIRONMENTS OF LAND, MARITIME, AIR, SPECIAL OPERATIONS AND SPACE OPERATIONS WITHIN THE OPERATIONAL AREAS OF MANEUVER, FIREPOWER, PROTECTION, SUPPORT, AND COMMAND AND CONTROL ADDRESS ENEMY AND FRIENDLY COGs IDENTIFY THE MAIN AND SUPPORTING EFFORTS BY PHASE, THE PURPOSES OF THOSE EFFORTS, AND KEY SUPPORTING/SUPPORTED RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THAT PHASE IDENTIFY THE COMPONENT LEVEL MISSION AND TASKS (WHO AND WHAT) THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH THE STATED PURPOSES OF THE MAIN AND SUPPORTING EFFORTS - EXAMPLE OF NO TASKS LEADING TO AN INABILITY TO CONDUCT ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON (CAN’T DO ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON IF COMPONENTS AREN’T ASSIGNED MISSIONS AND TASKS SINCE THE RESULTS OF DECEPTION OPERATIONS MAY INFLUENCE THE POSITIONING OF UNITS, PLANNERS SHOULD CONCEIVE MAJOR ELEMENTS OF THE STORY BEFORE DEVELOPING ANY COAS. BRIEFLY ANSWER WHO, WHAT WHEN WHERE HOW AND WHY. NO FANCY GRAPHICS

COA Development Pitfalls - The Intended COA - The Clone of the Intended COA - The Throw Away - Nested COAs IN A LOT OF COMMANDS WE HAVE SEEN THE PLANNING PROCESS RESULT AS DEPICTED ON THIS SLIDE A HIGHER LEVEL PLANNER DECIDES BEFORE ANY ANALYSIS WHAT THE COA WILL BE. THE CPG DEVELOPS A SECOND COA WHICH LOOKS LIKE THE INTENDED, BUT WITH ENOUGH DIFFERENCES TO ENSURE THAT IT WON’T PASS ANY DETAILED ANALYSIS. FINALLY, RIGHT BEFORE THE BRIEFING, A JUNIOR OFFICER IS GIVEN 15 MINUTES TO COME UP WITH A THROWAWAY COA TO ENSURE WE PRESENT THREE COA’S TO THE BOSS THIS IS WRONG. WHAT IT DOES IS TAKE THE COMBINED FORCE COMMANDER OUT OF THE DECISION MAKING BUSINESS. WHAT WE HAVE INSTEAD IS A DECISION MADE BEFORE ALL FACTS WERE GATHERED AND ANALYSIS WAS DONE. IF WE DO THIS WE ARE MISREPRESENTING THE COMMANDER, NOT DOING OUR JOBS AS MEMBERS OF HIS STAFF 3 IS NOT A MAXIMUM - COULD DEVELOP MORE IF TIME PERMITS, DEVELOP SEVERAL FEASIBLE COAS FOR BOTH ENEMY MPCOA AND MDCOANESTED COAs - START LIMITED AND GET PROGRESSIVELY BIGGER OR MORE INVOLVED COA 1 - MILITARY FDO - SAIL CBG TO AOR COA 2 - COA 1 PLUS LIMITED AIRSTRIKE COA 3 - COAs 1 & 2 PLUS AMPHIB/AIRBORNE ASSAULT OTHER EXAMPLE IS 7TH FLT AND STRAITS OF CHINA/TAIWAN MISSILE CRISIS IN 96. COA1 - SAIL CBG NEAR ACTION, COA 2 - PLACE CBG IN HARMS WAY, COA 3 - GET IN STRAITS AND ENGAGE MISSILES COMMANDER MAY MAKE THE DECISION BEFORE ALL THE FACTS ARE GATHERED AND ANALYSIS IS COMPLETE

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Test COA Validity Is the COA suitable? Is the COA feasible? Is the COA acceptable? Is the COA complete? Are the COAs distinguishable? YOU WILL HEAR THESE TERMS FREQUENTLY DURING THE DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF COURSES OF ACTION LET’S EXAMINE THE MEANING OF EACH IN A LITTLE GREATER DETAIL

SUITABLE Will the COA accomplish the mission if carried out successfully. Is it aimed at the right objectives? FIRST CHECK ON THE COA: DOES IT ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE SET OUT TO DO? DOES IT MEET THE CCTF’S INTENT? - DON’T LET HIM BE THE ONE TO TELL YOU DOES IT ACCOMPLISH ALL THE ESSENTIAL TASKS?- REMEMBER MISSION ANALYSIS DOES IT ALLOW THE CTF TO MEET THE CONDITIONS FOR THE END STATE? BLOWN UP DAMS OR POWER PLANTS DO NOT HELP WITH POST-HOSTITLITIES DOES IT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE ENEMY AND FRIENDLY CENTERS OF GRAVITY?

FEASIBLE Do we have the required resources to accomplish the mission and will they be available in the operations area in time? Forces / Capability Transportation Resupply Facilities DO WE HAVE THE FORCE STRUCTURE NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE TASK AND CAN WE GET IT THERE? THE COA IS FEASIBLE IF IT CAN BE CARRIED OUT WITH THE FORCES, SUPPORT AND TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE, WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, AND AGAINST EXPECTED ENEMY OPPOSITION THIS IMPLIES SOME SORT OF TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS PRIOR TO THIS STEP ALTHOUGH THIS PROCESS OCCURS AGAIN DURING COA ANALYSIS, AND THE TEST THIS TIME IS PRELIMINARY, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO DECLARE A COA INFEASIBLE HOWEVER, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO FILL SHORTFALLS BY REQUESTING FILLS TO SHORTFALLS FROM THE CINC

ACCEPTABLE Even though the action will accomplish the mission and we have the necessary resources, is it worth cost in terms of possible losses. Besides just military losses, the MNFC must consider: Loss in Time Loss in Position Political Acceptability Legal / Ethical Acceptability DO WE WIN THE BATTLE BUT LOSE THE WAR? DOES IT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE LIMITATIONS PLACE ON THE CTF (POLITICAL/ROE) (CONSTRAINTS - MUST DO) (RESTRAINTS - MUST DO) AGAIN, WE WILL CONDUCT THIS TEST DURING COA ANALYSIS BUT THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP A COA IF THE RISKS OR POTENTIAL LOSES ARE UNACCEPTABLE TO THE CJTF OR HIGHER AUTHORITY, UNLESS IT CAN BE MODIFIED TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF LOSS

COMPLETE Are the COAs technically complete? Do the COAs adequately answer: WHO will execute it? WHAT type of action is contemplated? WHEN will it begin? WHERE will it take place? HOW will it be accomplished? WHY key actions are required? AN OVERALL PRELIMINARY CHECK FOR COMPLETENESS INCORPORATES MAJOR OPERATIONS AND TASKS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED TO INCLUDE FORCES REQUIRED, LOGISTICS CONCEPT, EMPLOYMENT CONCEPT, TIME ESTIMATES FOR REACHING TERMINATION OBJECTIVES, RESERVE FORCE CONCEPT, AND END STATE

DISTINGUISHABLE Are the COAs significantly different From MNFC’s perspective? From the perspective of HHQ? From the perspective of the coalition NCAs? THE FIRST TWO BULLETS ARE GENERALLY TRUE, BUT THE LAST ONE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ALTHOUGH NOT A NORMAL CHECK, VARIETY IN COAs IS NECESSARY. IF OUR COAs ARE ALIKE, THE CCTF, THE CINC, AND THE NCA HAVE NO DECISION TO MAKE .WHAT MAKES COAs DIFFERENT? 1. FOCUS OR DIRECTION OF THE MAIN EFFORT 2. SCHEME OF MANEUVER (LAND, AIR, MARITIME, SPECIAL OPERATION) 3. PRIMARY MECHANISM FOR MISSION ACCOMPLISHMENT 4. TASK ORGANIZATION 5. USE OF RESERVES VARIETY MAY ALSO COME FROM AN INCREMENTAL APPLICATION OF FORCE AS DISCUSSED IN NESTED COAs EARLIER

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Determine Command & Control Means Determine command relationships Operational Control (OPCON) Tactical Control (TACON) Support (general, direct, close) Organizational options Service components Functional components Subordinate MNF or TF Determine control measures BOUNDARIES, AO’S, ETC. OPCON - ARMY’S TIGER BRIGADE TO CG II MEF DURING D.S. TACON - ARMY APACHE HELOS USED 1ST NIGHT OF AIRWAR WERE TACON TO COMAFFOR FOR THAT MISSION ATTENTION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO “SUPPORT” CATEGORIES TOO. IDENTIFY AND PRIORITIZE FORCES AND RESOURCES ALLOCATED TO SUPPORTING EFFORT LET’S QUICKLY REVISIT THE SECOND BULLET, ORGANIZATIONAL OPTIONS

MNF Composition MNFC MNFC FUNCTIONAL C2 STRUCTURE SERVICE C2 STRUCTURE CFMCC CFACC CFLCC CSOTF CPOTF SERVICE C2 STRUCTURE MNFC DEPICTED HERE ARE EXAMPLE OPTIONS FOR THE COMMAND STRUCTURE FOR A CTF…OTHER OPTIONS MIGHT INCLUDE ANY COMBINATION OF THESE TWO. THE FUNCTIONAL COMPONENT STRUCTURE PROVIDES CENTRALIZED DIRECTION AND CONTROL OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS. SIMILAR CAPABILITIES AND FUNCTIONS OF FORCES FROM MORE THAN ONE SERVICE ARE JOINED UNDER A FUNCTIONAL COMMAND. EXAMPLE: MARINE AND ARMY LAND FORCES FALL UNDER THE COMBINED LAND COMPONENT COMMANDER. NAVAL, MARINE, AND AIR FORCE FIXED WING UNITS FALL UNDER THE COMBINED AIR COMPONENT COMMANDER. FUNCTIONAL COMPONENCY CAN BE APPROPRIATE WHEN FORCES FROM ONE OR MORE SERVICES OF ONE OR MORE NATIONS ARE OPERATING IN THE SAME DIMENSION OR MEDIUM. GENERALLY, THE PREFERRED OPTION IS THE SERVICE COMPONENT STRUCTURE. THIS STRUCTURE FOLLOWS SERVICE LINES AND IS USUALLY EASIER TO FORM. CLEAR AND UNCOMPLICATED COMMAND LINES AND LOGISTICS COORDINATION MAKES THIS OPTION EASIER TO FORM FOR CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS CNAVFOR CAFFOR CARFOR CMARFOR CSOTF CPOTF Historically, have seen more of the service component structure

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Prepare COA Statement, Sketch, & Task Organization COA statement answers WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, HOW, WHY Develop COA sketch Task organize the force Initial organization THE COA STATEMENT ANSWERS SOME OF THE WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW, AND WHY SKETCH SHOULD BE GRAPHIC& EASY TO UNDERSTAND I RECOMMEND THAT THE COAS BE DESCRIBED BY PHASE, AS MENTIONED WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE KEY PLANNING CONCEPTS SLIDE DEVELOPMENT OF COAS BY PHASE MAY ALSO FACILITATE YOUR WARGAMING OR ANALYSIS EFFORTS EXAMPLE: DEPLOYMENT, LODGMENT/BUILDUP DECISIVE ACTION, FOLLOW THROUGH REDEPLOYMENT TASK ORGANIZATION IS LISTING OF FORCES AND HOW THEY ARE ORGANIZED

COA Sketch (example) C+31 to C+60 Country X PHASE THREE: Delivery of Relief Supplies MNF HQ: Maintain C2 in City T. CMARFOR: O/O distribute relief supplies to City G. CARFOR (Main Effort): O/O, distribute relief supplies to City T. CAFFOR: Maintain air bridge from intermediate staging base in Country X to Cities G & T. CNAVFOR: Offload relief supplies at port facilities in Cities G & T. CSOTF: No change. 1. DON’T GET BOGGED IN THE WEEDS. 2. OPERATIONAL VS. TACTICAL X City T X City G ISB Country X THE COA STATEMENT ANSWERS SOME OF THE WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW, AND WHY - IT TELLS WHAT THE FORCE AS A WHOLE IS DOING - WE RECOMMEND DOING THIS FOR EACH PHASE IMPORTANT TO IDENTIFY WHAT ENDS ONE PHASE AND WHAT BEGINS ANOTHER THE SKETCH IS A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY AND HOW C+31 to C+60 This phase begins with the delivery of relief supplies to Cities G & T and ends with distribution of those supplies throughout the cities well established. Operations will be conducted in both cities simultaneously. Phase is complete when distribution facilities are ready for hand over to local authorities.

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

MNFC Approves COAs Review and approve COAs for further analysis Direct revisions to COAs, combinations of COAs, or development of additional COAs WORD OF CAUTION CONTINUE TO WORK ON ALL THE APPROVED COAs, NOT JUST THE ONE THAT THE C3 OR C5 BELIEVES THE CCTF SEEMS TO PREFER COMMANDER’S GUIDANCE IS VITAL DURING THIS PHASE.

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Conduct Initial Staff Estimates Each staff addresses each COA from its own perspective Staff prepares for COA analysis, COA comparison, and COA recommendation and selection NEXT STEP IS DETAILED ANALYSIS - TAKE COAS BACK TO RESPECTIVE STAFF SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AND ALLOW THEM TO GET FAMILIAR WITH THE COAS - OFTENTIMES NOT DONE WELL. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF EACH OF THE COAS CONSIDERED WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE MESSAGE FORWARDED TO THE CINC AND, ULTIMATELY, TO THE NCA INITIAL STEP TO BUILDING YOUR ANNEXES FOR OPORD.

Course of Action Development Task Steps Develop Initial COAs Initial Test for Validity Determine C2 Means COA Statement & Sketch Brief COAs to MNFC MNFC Approves COAs Staff estimates Course of Action Development Vertical & horizontal planning

Continue Concurrent planning Discuss planning status with counterparts, higher and lower Coordinate planning with staff counterparts from other functional areas Permits adjustments in planning COMUNICATE AND COORDINATE ADDITIONAL DETAILS WILL BE LEARNED FROM HIGHER AND ADJACENT ECHELONS PERMITS LOWER ECHELONS TO BEGIN COLLABORATIVE PLANNING EFFORTS AND GENERATE QUESTIONS (REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION/INTELLIGENCE) THAT RESULT USE OF COMPONENT LIASONS IS CRITICAL- THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TP SPEAK FOR THE COMPONENT CC WORD OF CAUTION - THE PROPOSED COAs MUST BE STAFFED THROUGH THE COMPONENT ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL AS THE JTF STAFF EVERYBODY WHO PARTICIPATES IN COA ANALYSIS (THE NEXT STEP) MUST HAVE A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE APPROVED COAs ARE

Crisis Action Planning Process III Course of Action Development II Crisis Assessment IV Course of Action Selection V Execution Planning OPORD & Deployment Data Base I Situation Development VI Execution And/or Warning Order Planning Order Alert Order Execute Order I Mission Analysis / Restated Mission THE COURSE OF ACTION (COA) DEVELOPMENT PHASE OF CRISIS ACTION PLANNING (CAP) IMPLEMENTS AN NCA DECISION TO DEVELOP MILITARY OPTIONS IN RESPONSE TO A CRISIS AND WILL USUALLY BEGIN UPON RECEIPT OF A CINC’S WARNING ORDER THIS WARNING ORDER WILL ESTABLISH COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS AND IDENTIFY THE MISSION AND ANY PLANNING CONSTRAINTS THE JTF STAFF MUST CONSIDER. THIS BEGINS THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS, OF WHICH MISSION ANALYSIS IS THE FIRST PHASE. AS SHOWN, MISSION ANALYSIS IS THE FIRST PHASE AND PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE COMMANDER’S ESTIMATE PROCESS. THIS PHASE IDENTIFIES WHERE WE ARE GOING AND HOW WE WILL GET THERE. IT IS THE BASIS FOR ALL FURTHER PLANNING AND... II Course of Action Development III Analysis of Opposing Courses of Action IV Comparison of Own Courses of Action V Commander’s Decision Commander’s Estimate Process

Questions?