THE below SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 3010 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON.

THE below SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

3010 DEFENSE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-3010

JAN 13 2005

MEMORANDUM FOR CHAIRMAN, DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD

SUBJECT: confines of Reference--Defense Science Board 2005 Summer inquiry on Transformation: A Progress Assessment

Since the period of the Cold War, the Department of Defense has engaged in a wide range of military and humanitarian operations. As President GW Bush stated in the 2002 National Security Strategy, "The major institutions of American national security were designed in a different era to suitable different requirements. All of them must be transformed." In replication to this call to arms, the Department of Defense initiated wide-ranging plans, policies, and programs to transform itself. As described in the Secretary of Defense's 2003 Transformation Planning Guidance (TPG) the margin of the Department's transformation efforts encompassed by what means we fight, how we do business, and in what way we work with others. While the TPG states, "There will be no momentum at which the Department is transformed," the Department must evaluate the couple the effectiveness and the direction of its transformation efforts.

You are solicited to form a Defense Science Board Summer subject of attention to provide an assessment of the Department's continuing transformation proces The assessment should describe the circulating status of the Department's transformation efforts, identify the appropriate transformation objectives, and attract favor to ways and means to fitting the emerging and persistent challenges as identified in the 2004 National Defense Strategy.

The TPG outlined the Department's three-part strategy for transformation: Transformed refinement Transformed processes, and Transformed capabilities. Within the Department's transformation space and strategy, the Study should consider all the following:

1) universals and Experimentation. Post-Cold War operational general [i]or[/i] abstract notions are continuously evolving. In rejoinder to the Secretary's request for joint universals of operations, the concept community evolveed a family of joint universals organized in a hierarchy including the overarching Joint Operations universals (JOpsC), subordinate Joint Operating universals (JOC), supporting Joint Functional universals (JFC), and detailed Joint Integrating universals (JIC). In addition, the Services exhibited supporting service concepts. The Air Force is developing the Air Force universals of Operations (CONOPS); the Navy and Marine Corps are developing the Naval Operating universal for Joint Operations (NOC); and the Army is pursuing the what is yet to be Force concept. These concepts address the exhibition of future joint forces' transformational capabilities and characteristics, on the other hand an assessment is needed of the state of the joint universal development and experimentation process that integrates Service-provided capabilities into effective joint operational capabilities. Further, the assessment should examine to what extent well the Department integrates the security of the U.S. Government (USG) capabilities to provide the capabilities to deal with 21st centenary adversaries. The Study should address alternative operational fabricates and concept development processes, which would enable the Department of Defense to better convenient the challenges of the 21st centenary by applying the entire array of power available to the USG. The reflection must focus on important functional universals and capabilities, such as logistics and battlespace awareness, which provide essential ultimate parts to implementing joint concepts. Finally, experimentation provides an important feedback mechanism into the iterative unfolding of joint concepts. Consequently, the studious mood must assess the state of experimentation, the interrelationships between a series of experiments within an experimental campaign, and, especially, the relationship and involvement of Service and Combatant Command experimentation efforts.

2) International competitors solicit to develop and possess breakthrough technical capabilities intended to supplant U advantages in particular operational domains. Because of this aspect of the security environment, the thought should address disruptive challenges from a variety of sources similar as technology, demographics, and legal. In addition, the investigation should define the scope of the vexed question and capabilities DoD requires to address these challenges.

3) As an proper state of net-centric operations, the Department is developing a broad range of networked plans to generate new capabilities and multiply existing force building effectiveness. The Study should assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the approaches to realize the potential advantages of net-centric operations.

4) The Department's force configuration still is burdened with devoid of warmth [i]or[/i] heat War legacy components. A significant transformation effort endeavor to gains to transform the joint force into smaller, rapid, more agile forces with greater deployability and lethality than a great deal of of the current force. However, strategic guidance and operational experience confirm that any joint force operations will continue to require sustained demeanor and an ability to be opposite to heavy, concentrated firepower to achieve desired imports and mission accomplishment. Since the Department's transformation efforts must reconcile expeditionary agility and responsiveness with persistence and durability, the application of mind should focus on the Department's ne for evolving joint forces to shroud the spectrum of military engagement and accomplish the sated range of missions assigned to DoD.