CF OPP NOTES

SUB-PROCESS NOTES THE CF OPP - INTRODUCTION The Canadian Forces Operational Planning Process (CF OPP) a coordinated process to determine the best method of accomplishing assigned operational tasks and to plan possible future tasks. Having great similarity to the formal Estimate of the Situation carried out at the tactical level, the CF OPP is intended to be conducted collaboratively and simultaneously by all staff branches within a formation headquarters (HQ) and with significant interaction throughout the process between superior and subordinate formations and units. The CF OPP is a tool or framework to help commanders and staffs solve complex problems in mutually-supporting yet complimentary roles. The staffs are objective and rational. They analyze facts, make logical deductions, draw conclusions, propose solutions and solve problems. Meanwhile, the Commander is more subjective and imaginative, drawing upon his experience and intuition and capitalizes on opportunities to demonstrate the operational art while expressing his intent. To be successful in planning, the Commander must provide guidance to his staff and monitor their progress. The CF OPP is formalized problem-solving incorporated with analytical step-by-step approach to decision-making at the operational level. Like the Estimate of the Situation, it applies the same simple formula of first stating the aim to be achieved, identifying and analyzing the facts, devising courses open and making a plan. It has the following main advantages: a. It allows strategic control to be maintained during the development of a plan; b. It enables the commander and staff to translate strategic or superior objectives into operational-level military objectives; c. It standardizes the planning process within the HQ and across the CF, and indeed also across NATO; d. It enables commanders to guide development of the plan including the synchronization of operational combat functions; and e. It maximizes the commanders and staffs creative thinking and associated thought processes. STAGE 1 - INITIATION Introduction Stage 1 is about the Commanders initial assessment, assisted by a small number of key staff and advisors to understand the problem and tasks received from his Superior. Its important to realize that initiation of planning does not confer the authority to execute an operation. Usually, forces required will have to be identified, requested to higher authority, approved and sourced sometimes from multiple commands or nations. It is quite possible and indeed common - that you are perhaps planning an operation for a Task Force that does not yet exist, except for the HQ or the Commander-designate.

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2013 1/24 OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Input Superior Comds Initiating Directive NOTES Operations planning may be initiated at any level in response to either political or military events. An Initiating Directive is a generic term for the instrument issued by an Initiating Authority (IA) that triggers operations planning and it could take the form of a written directive, an operations plan (OPLAN), planning guidance, warning order, or informal means such as telephone call, email or verbal instruction. The IA can be considered as being one level above the Commander who is in receipt of direction to carry out planning for and execution of an operation. In other words, the IA is the Commanders commander and throughout the CF OPP is referred to as the Superior Commander. The CF OPP might also be initiated by a commander on his own initiative for his staff to carry out planning for contingencies, branches or sequels. In the Canadian context (see CFJP 01 Canadian Military Doctrine), at the strategic level the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) is the principal military advisor to the Government of Canada and responds to government direction for military operations by the CF. It is the Strategic Joint Staff (SJS) who analyze domestic or global situations and translate government direction in order to provide the CDS with decision-making support thus enabling his strategic command. The SJS might take part in the preliminary stages of operational planning with other government departments, CF operational and environmental commands, and the strategic staffs of Canadas allies. The SJS enables the CDS strategic level planning, initiation, direction, synchronization and control of operations whilst also translating the CDS intent into strategic directives. Thus for CDS-directed operations, the CDS would issue an Implementation Order that directs the implementation of a Plan. At the operational level, for example the Commander Canadian Joint Operations Command (CJOC) as the Superior Commander would be the IA that directs a Joint Task Force Commander (JTFC) to plan and execute operations. In the NATO context, at strategic level, SACEUR would issue an Activation Order to initiate the Transfer of Authority for national forces to him and authorizes the deployment of NATO forces as well as the release of NATO common funding. Commanders Initial Assessment - Tasks The Comd needs to assess the tasks he has been assigned by his Superior Comd, the general situation within which he will carry out his operation and the main factors that characterize it. He should ask himself, "What have I been asked to do?" The Comd needs to consider timelines applicable to operational activities and also to planning.

Commanders Initial Assessment Operational Timelines Commanders Initial Assessment - Threats to Planning Commanders Initial Assessment Comd's Initial Assumptions 2/24

The Comd needs to consider any threats that might impact on operational activities or on his planning. He should do so in the grand context of Diplomatic, Informational, Military or Economic (DIME) or Political, Military, Economic, Social, Infrastructure and Informational Systems (PMESII). The Comd may have to make assumptions in order to carry out planning of the operation.

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Commanders Initial Assessment Initial End State Commanders Initial Assessment Required Staff Products Activate Planning Staff Organization NOTES The Comd should have a reasonable idea of a likely desired End State, based on Superior Comd's Initiating Directive, intent or concept of operations. In the Canadian context, it is likely that the Military End State would be determined by the SJS. At this early stage, the Comd may have a reasonable idea of which staff products or critical information requirements will be necessary. There may be an applicable Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in use within the HQ. In the context of a major Joint HQ, the core planning staffs are known as the Joint Operations Planning Group, or JOPG, and they are described in detail in the HQ SOPs and Terms of Reference (TOR). The JOPG could be a permanent branch within the HQ, but most likely is ad hoc and activated when necessary by the COS. The JOPG is a cross-functional working group led by COS and/or the Joint Plans Branch (a.k.a. J5 or Chief JOPG) and is responsible for the process of operational level planning to develop the operational design and associated plans. It includes planners from all staff branches, subject matter experts (SME), and liaisons representing all the required functional areas and disciplines, depending on the type and level of operation being conducted and taking into account political, economic, civil and military instruments. It is responsible for the coordination and production of operational plans, contingency plans, Statement of Requirements (SOR), branch plans and sequel plans. The JOPG will be supplemented by other important Staff Groups and Boards such as the Information Operations Coordination Committee (IOCC), the Joint Targeting Coordination Board (JTCB), the Joint Intelligence Centre (JIC), the Joint Fusion Centre and the Joint Operations Centre (JOC). Further, the JOPG will be supplemented by augmentees, liaison personnel and specialist staff such as legal advisor (LEGAD), political advisor (POLAD) and medical advisor (MEDAD). The key roles in the JOPG are the J5 and the J2. Roles for all JOPG members should be described in HQ SOP or TOR. Broadly, these could be as follows: J1 Personnel, human resources J2 - Adversary strategic, operational factors; environment; geomatics J3 Operational considerations J4 Logistics considerations; Lines of Communication (LOC), deployment; sustainment; Host Nation (HN) support J5 Mission guidance; Alliance strategy, operational factors J6 C2 factors; C2 options for Opposition/Allied/IO/Space J7 Training and exercise considerations J8 Financial considerations J9 HN strategic and operational factors; HN support The nature of recent global challenges has highlighted the importance for military officers to consider the comprehensive aspect of planning to work alongside other players and within not only a joint but interagency, inter-governmental, multinational and public (JIIMP) environment. To achieve interoperability, commanders and staffs will have to be ready to include those other players in the JOPG whenever possible. Activate Planning Staff Establish Liaison 3/24 In Stage 1, the Comd might direct that the staff initiate liaison with higher, lower and flanking formations. OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Activate Planning Staff Battle Rhythm NOTES Most likely, the HQ will have an established and well-described battle rhythm published in their SOPs. Chief JOPG, or COS, is the principal staff officer responsible for the battle rhythm of the JOPG. Among other considerations, the battle rhythm should consider team assignments, working hours and locations, meetings and conferences, briefings, deliverables and staff products. To support the JOPG workspace organization, all necessary planning tools are gathered, such as higher HQ directives, orders, maps, overlays, briefing templates and other information sources such as country studies and strategic assessments. The Comd will issue direction to his staff for the conduct of Stage 2. The format will vary depending on the HQ, but this could likely be drafted by the COS or Chief JOPG who also leads internal staff coordination efforts. The Comd will direct his staff regarding the type of planning they are to conduct, whether deliberate or crisis action and whether they are to abbreviate or modify any aspect of the OPP. For example, the Comd may wish to receive a mission analysis briefing before the staff commences factors analysis or operational design. Types of planning include: a. Deliberate planning. Deliberate planning consists of initiating and developing plans in anticipation of a known or anticipated future event or circumstances that Canada might or could reasonably face. The outputs are Operations Plans (OPLAN) or Contingency Plans (CONPLAN); b. Crisis Action planning. Crisis Action planning consists of initiating and developing plans in response to a current or developing crisis. It requires expeditious coordination and approval. While following the same stages as in deliberate planning, some activities are truncated to meet time constraints. The outputs are the same as for deliberate planning; c. NATO Fast-Track Decision-Making (FTDM). This applies only to NATO, for those situations requiring an urgent response of rapidly-deployable forces (for example the NATO Response Force (NRF)) when an existing relevant and current contingency plan is available. Based on his strategic assessment, SACEUR may recommend to the North Atlantic Council (NAC) that the FTDM process be used. Commander's Direction to Staff - Initial Time Allocation for Planning and for Operations Commander's Direction to Staff - Authorized Movement, Including Initial Recce and Liaison The Comd, COS and Chief JOPG will consider the operational timeline and the time available for planning since this could significantly affect the battle rhythm and the potential to produce various staff products. The Comd will consider issuing direction regarding liaison and authorized movements of forces, personnel or equipment.

Activate Planning Staff Gather Planning Tools

Commander's Direction to Staff - General

Commander's Direction to Staff - Type of Planning

4/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Commander's Direction to Staff - Additional Tasks for Staff Commander's Direction to Staff - Initial Comds Critical Information Requirements (CCIR) As necessary. NOTES

CCIR guide information gathering and dissemination, synchronize joint activities and assist in resource allocation. They concern the operational status and capability of friendly forces, operational status, capabilities and intentions of the adversary and the battle space environment. CCIR derive from analysis of key factors that highlights gaps in information essential to the planning and execution of operations. Staff should include those information requirements identified by the Comd during Stage 1 and those Priority Intelligence Requirements (PIR), Essential Elements of Friendly Information (EEFI) or Friendly Force Information Requirements (FFIR) deemed sufficiently important to the Comd during Stage 2. At this point in Stage 1, based on the Comd's initial assessment, he may have identified initial CCIR that should be relayed to the staff. Further staff consideration of factors during subsequent subprocesses should enhance refinement of CCIR which then can be finalized and approved following operational design. This direction is provided to the staff to initiate their Stage 2 efforts.

OUTPUT: Comd's Stage 2 Direction OUTPUT: Warning Order (WNG O)

If applicable, the Comd might issue a WNG O to subordinate formations and units about the probable operation to come. STAGE 2 - ORIENTATION

Introduction

In Stage 2, through deductive reasoning, the Comd and staff become oriented to the situation, the problem to be solved and the tasks to be accomplished. The Staff will define the situation as it currently exists, determine what needs to happen to change the situation from its current state to the desired end state and define what the situation should look like when the operation is done. In other words, the Comd and staff must determine What is the mission? Among the more significant details to be drawn out during Stage 2 analysis are: a. Operational Military End State. The military situation that needs to exist when an operation has been completed; b. Criteria for Success. Measurable criteria that determine when the End State is achieved; and c. Operational Objectives. These should be assessed within the context of DIME.

5/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Mission Analysis NOTES Mission Analysis (MA) comprises the analysis of the Superior Comds intent, tasks, assumptions and limitations. This sets the scene for operational design. MA usually begins as a brainstorming session involving the Comd, COS, J5, J2 and perhaps key members of the JOPG. MA is a logical process for extracting and deducing from a superiors orders the tasks necessary to fulfill a mission. It places in context what effect is to be achieved in the overall op design and results in the Comd's mission statement. Possibly, the Commander and staff might conclude that the mission cannot be achieved by a single operation and hence a campaign plan consisting of multiple operations may be required. The Comd may prefer that a Mission Analysis Briefing be conducted immediately following this sub-process in order to clearly state for his staff and subordinates with a unified purpose what effect is to be achieved in the overall operational design. Such statement not only triggers, but regulates the remainder of the analysis and planning process. Alternatively, the Comd may prefer that the briefing be conducted later in Stage 2 so as to include the results of factors analysis, operational design and initial risk assessment. Intent Analysis - Superior Comd's Initiating Directive and Op Design Here the staff will consider the Superior Comds initiating directive, op design and if known his concept of ops (CONOPS). A Comd is required to understand the Intent of his Superior Comd two levels up, and the Intent and CONOPS of his Superior Comd one level up. The first issues to be agreed upon are the nature of the problem to be solved and the results to be achieved. The boundaries of the problem need to be established. The guidelines provided by the Superior Comd must be defined and interpreted and any physical, military or political conditions that may affect the mission determined. Examine whatever intelligence is available at this time; this may be little more than a summary of background reports or country studies, or it may be very detailed intelligence products already prepared. Collate the known facts from any and all other sources books, references, staff-officers handbooks, liaison reports. The Superior Comd might have made assumptions contained within his direction. Assigned tasks or Specified Tasks - are explicitly stated in the directives or orders received from the Superior Comd. With respect to the Comd's operational design, they can translate into potential decisive points (DP), objectives or lines of operation (LOO). Implied tasks are other activities that must be carried out in order to achieve the mission, including the requirement to support the Superior Comds Main Effort, but which are not explicitly stated in higher directives. These are derived from a detailed analysis of the Superior Comds directives and orders and also the key factors. For example, we can be tasked to conduct offensive action in a theatre and it is implied that we must enter the theatre to achieve this.

Task Analysis - Assigned Tasks

Task Analysis - Implied Tasks

6/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Task Analysis - Essential Tasks NOTES Once all assigned and implied tasks have been identified, they should be analyzed to determine those that require an allocation of resources and must be executed to accomplish the mission or would result in mission failure if not completed successfully. They have high correlation with objectives and drive the op design. These are known as Essential Tasks. Such a list generally requires approval by the Comd during the MA Briefing. A comparison of all tasks against the Superior Comd's intent should lead to an initial deduction of the critical activity required or the Main Effort. In the absence of positive proof, assumptions may be made to provide necessary information in order to enable commanders and staff to continue the planning process and to ultimately decide upon a course of action. They must however realize that assumptions must later be validated before a plan could be considered reliable. Any assumptions listed in the Superior Comds Initiating Directive should be noted and considered during subsequent planning. Then, the JOPG should identify and highlight any assumptions necessary for continuation of planning. Throughout the OPP, any further assumptions identified should be incorporated into the list. Limitations may be either assigned or implied and may apply to planning or execution of an op, or both. A commander may place some limitations on his subordinate commanders that restrict their freedom of action. Constraints take the form of a requirement to do something (for example, maintain a reserve of one division, maintain a fighter squadron on alert, conduct maritime interdiction operations in a specific area). Restraints are prohibitions on action (for example, no reconnaissance forward of a line before H-hour). Mission Statement At this point, the Commander and staff should be able to derive the mission statement which will underpin all remaining planning and execution of the operation. The mission statement is a clear expression by the Commander that describes: who will execute actions; what type of action will be executed (attack, defend, deter etc); when will the action begin (e.g. on order); where will the action occur and why will this action be carried out (e.g. in order to). In the event the Comd was not intimately involved in the analysis thus far, it may be worthwhile for the staff to formally brief him and seek approval of the proposed mission statement. In some organizations, it has become customary to consider this an initial mission statement at this time, allowing further staff consideration during subsequent sub-processes then to finalize the mission statement as an output of operational design (included within the Mission Analysis Briefing).

Assumptions & Limitations Superior Comd's Assumptions

Assumptions & Limitations Own Assumptions

Assumptions & Limitations Limitations

7/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Evaluate Friendly Forces General NOTES An evaluation of facts should lead to many deductions and conclusions translating into identifiable elements of all aspects of OPP such as operational timeline, operational design, risk management, Commanders Planning Guidance, Courses of Action (COA), OPLAN, supporting plans and annexes (coordinating measures, logistics planning, targeting, intelligence collection to name just a few). Staff should identify the key factors - those that can affect the mission in fundamental ways. During this process, the analyst asks the question So what? in order to make those deductions. Consider and assess all factors concerning all "actors", namely own forces, alliance forces and partners. OPERATIONAL TIMELINE In anticipation of the timeline comparison step at the end of this sub-process, JOPG should now begin development of the own forces operational timeline, enhancing and refining it throughout Stages 2 and 3. TERMINOLOGY Planners should consult the Defence Terminology Bank (DTB) (at DWAN http://terminology.mil.ca/) for operational definitions, such as : D-Day: The day on which an operation, whether hostilities or any other operation, commences or is due to commence; or, the day on which an operation commences or is due to commence. This may be the commencement of hostilities or any other operation. G-Day: The day on which an order is or is due to be given to deploy a unit. Note: Such an order is normally a national one. M-Day: The day on which mobilization commences or is due to commence. Evaluate Friendly Forces Impact of the Operational Environment The operational environment is primarily considered during Step 2 of the Joint Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment (JIPOE) and the information is treated by both the J2 in subsequent JIPOE steps and by the JOPG during OPP Stage 2. Consequently, close cooperation and staff interaction will be essential between the JOPG and J2 Branch. To facilitate this, the JOPG battle rhythm should include periodic J2 JIPOE update briefings. While examining own forces and adversary forces, it is common to consider their strengths and weaknesses. There are various techniques commonly employed, however one of the more useful methods employed is the CC/CR/CV Analysis in which you examine the Centre(s) of Gravity (COG) or End State to determine its Critical Capabilities (CC), Critical Requirements (CR) and Critical Vulnerabilities (CV). NATO AAP-6 defines COG (a noun) as that characteristic, capability or locality from which a military force, nation or alliance derives its freedom of action, physical strength or will to fight. Clausewitz described COG as the "hub of all power and movement, upon which everything depends...and the principal source of strength and power for achieving one's aim." Example, Iraqi Republican Guard during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

Evaluate Friendly Forces Strengths & Weaknesses

Evaluate Friendly Forces Centre of Gravity

8/24

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Evaluate Friendly Forces CC/CR/CV NOTES Ref: US Joint Pub 2-01.3 Joint Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment At this point, staff should examine their own forces with a view toward identifying critical vulnerabilities that should be shielded. The method associated with this is called the Strange Analysis, named for Mr Joseph Strange, an instructor at the US Marine Corps War College. For this analysis, a Centre of Gravity (COG) is assessed for its associated Critical Capabilities (CC), then those capabilities are assessed for their Critical Requirements (CR) and finally those requirements are assessed for their Critical Vulnerabilities (CV). Alternatively, when the COG is not readily apparent the staff may assess an End State for its associated CC, CR and CV. This is known as the Modified Strange Analysis. Critical Capabilities (CC) - (a verb) those means that are considered crucial enablers for a COG to function as such, and are essential to the accomplishment of the specified objective or assumed objective. CC is a strength. Analysts may find it useful to think of CC as an "ability to...". Examples: "ability to dominate sea lanes of communication (SLOC)", "ability to communicate with...", "ability to counter...". Critical Requirements (CR) - (a noun) the conditions, resources and means that enable a CC to become fully operational or to sustain the CC with its strength. In operational context, CR are "high-level" descriptions of capabilities such as "Air Force capable of Close Air Support or Interdiction", "secure environment", "mobile rocket or missile launchers", "advance warning capability", "SAM umbrella". Critical Vulnerabilities (CV) - (a noun with modifiers) those aspects or components of CR that are deficient, or vulnerable to direct or indirect attack in a manner achieving decisive or significant results. CV expose the CC. However, in identifying CV, the J2 or JOPG analysts must also compare their criticality with their accessibility, vulnerability, redundancy, ability to recuperate and impact on the civilian populace. Examples: "vulnerability of ports to attack", "Network of radars". Adversary CV are your potential targets. Own CV should be protected from attack (as in "Shield DP"). High Value Targets (HVT) Among the important staff inputs from the J2 branch following their evaluation of the adversarys critical vulnerabilities (CV) will be a list of the adversarys assets, resources, organizations or persons that J2 assesses the adversary requires for the successful completion of his mission. The loss of any of these assets would be expected to seriously degrade important adversary functions and thus successful targeting against them would be a high value action for our own operation. These HVT should be considered when staff design the operation and prepare courses of action.

9/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Evaluate Friendly Forces Initial Capability Requirements NOTES Deductions and conclusions drawn from the analysis of factors thus far should allow the JOPG to prepare the broad initial list of capabilities the Task Force (TF) would require. This will be further amplified and detailed following the op design and during Stage 3 to become the Joint Statement of Requirements (JSOR). In comparison to those forces presently available a shortfall will be identified and the staff may assess the initial level of operational risks as a result. Staff may also be able to design the initial broad TF C2 structure. For a detailed description of this activity, please refer to JIPOE Step 2. These factors impact on travel, movement, decision-making, reaction time, sustainment, exhaustion of resources, tempo, initiative and so forth. Taking into consideration the available intelligence products from the JIPOE Step 2, the JOPG should assess in greater fidelity the time, space and force relationships applicable to friendly forces. This analysis has four aspects: time vs. force; space vs. time; force vs. space; and time vs. space vs. force. Evaluate Friendly Forces Adversary vs. Blue Timeline Comparison Consider and compare operational timelines of adversary versus own forces. These will need to be synchronized for the purpose of the COA War Game during Stage 3. Determine if there are any windows of vulnerability, i.e. when the adversary actions could not be sufficiently countered due to own forces not being operationally ready. For the adversary, consider the estimate of soonest achievement of capability. For own forces, consider reference from a "G-day" (to be defined by the staff). The CF OPP applies equally to the planning of either operations or campaigns, whilst the product of Stage 2 will be either an operation design or a campaign design. Thus the process is the same but the level at which the activity is planned and led will vary from the operational level to the strategic level. Similarly, the term operational level also applies equally to either operations or campaigns, and is defined by the Defence Terminology Board (DTB) as the level of conflict concerned with producing and sequencing a campaign which synchronizes military and other resources to achieve the desired end state and military strategic objectives. Military actions at the operational level are usually joint and often combined. Likewise, our British allies describe the operational level as the level at which campaigns and major operations are planned, conducted and sustained within theatres or areas of operation, to achieve strategic objectives. Military campaigns are orchestrated in concert with other actors and agencies and are most effective as part of a comprehensive approach to crisis management. A campaign may be characterized as a major operation or a series of operations intended to achieve an end state having national, multinational, strategic or operational objectives. NATO defines a campaign as a set of military operations planned and conducted to achieve a strategic objective within a given time and geographical area, which normally involve maritime, land and air forces. Hence, a campaign plan provides the framework for a series of related plans. As described in UK JDP 01, campaigns and their objectives relate to a single Theatre of Operations and fall under the jurisdiction of a single Joint Force Comd (JFC). Therefore, in a global conflict there may be multiple campaigns to be waged, each with their own JFC and campaign plan. 10/24 OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

Evaluate Friendly Forces Time/ Space / Force Analysis

Operational Design vs. Campaign Design

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS NOTES An operation is a military action or the carrying out of a strategic, tactical, service, training, or administrative military mission, or the process of carrying on combat, including movement, supply, attack, defence and manoeuvres needed to gain the objectives of any battle or campaign. Operational design is the practical expression of operational art and should be driven by the essential tasks while considering the situation and the adversarys capabilities and likely intentions. Knowing these, the JOPG designs an operation to accomplish objectives set by the Superior Commander and by your own commander, while determining objectives for subordinate commands and the end state criteria. Operational Design - End State End State is a descriptive statement of the military or political conditions or situation to be attained at the end of an operation and that indicate that the objectives have been attained or in order to achieve defined policy goals. Defining the End State is the most important concept in operational design. Example - territorial integrity of nation X restored. Because desired End-states are broad in nature a requirement exists to set out measurable criteria which determine that they have actually been achieved. These are called Criteria for Success and are closely linked to objectives. Example - foreign nationals within territory X are safe and secure. NATO AAP-6 describes an objective as a clearly defined and attainable goal for a military operation. Existing on the physical and psychological planes, objectives are desired outcomes essential to a commanders plan and towards which the operation is directed. Objectives can also be considered as the constituent elements, which when combined achieve the End State. They may be described in terms of force applied against the adversary (e.g. expel, defeat, destroy, contain, neutralize, isolate, convince), space (e.g. seize, secure, defend, control, deny) or time (e.g. gain time for build-up of forces). A DP is a point from which a hostile or friendly COG can be threatened, and when acted upon allows a Commander to gain an advantage over an adversary or contributes significantly to achieving success. This could be an event, geographic place, critical factor or function that may exist in time, space or the information environment. If described as an event, the successful outcome would be a precondition to the defeat or neutralization of a COG, achievement of an objective or End State. DPs indicate conditions or effects that must be set in order to achieve the aim of the campaign for example sea lanes of communication opened or attainment of air superiority or commitment of the adversarys reserve. They can also be considered as intermediate operational objectives and can be assigned resources to protect, control or achieve them. They are usually the main focus of a war game. DPs are deduced primarily during mission analysis, factors analysis and JIPOE Step 3 evaluation of the adversary, and they derive from the essential tasks, critical factors, own CVs you want to protect and the adversarys CVs you want to target. The art of identifying DPs and selection of those to be addressed is a highly important part of operational design. In Stage 2, the staff develops initial DPs, describing what effect is to be achieved or what event is to take place and what Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) apply. Then, during Stage 3, the staff refines the operational design to include adding fidelity in close coordination with Component staffs about how the DP is OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

Operational Design - Criteria for Success

Operational Design Objectives

Operational Design - Decisive Points Development

11/24

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS NOTES to be achieved. In other words, during Stage 3, DP development looks at specific tasks and resource allocation necessary. DPs are described by several specific characteristics. Effect to be achieved Measures of Effectiveness (MOE), example build-up to xx% of TF in theatre or Adversary degraded to xx% or Adversary pushed back to within their own territory Date to be completed Tasks Resources required Associated Risks Example DP: APOD X open, SLOC secured To deduce a DP: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Operational Design - Decision Points Development List the essential tasks List CV that you want to target List major deductions from your analysis of the operational environment List major deductions from your analysis of forces List major deductions from your analysis of time List Own CV that you must protect ("Shield" DP)

US Joint Publication 2-01.3 Joint Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment describes a decision point as a point in space and time when the Commander anticipates making a key decision concerning a specific course of action. Some allied nations may also refer to this as a Commanders Decision Point (CDP). In either case, this clearly shows that it is the Commanders decision and nobody elses. A decision point should be located to provide sufficient time for friendly forces to engage the adversary in a specific target area of interest (TAI). The locations of decision points depend both on the availability and response time of friendly forces as well as the anticipated activity, capabilities, and movement rates of adversary forces. If there is a branch in a line of operation (LOO), a Decision Point may be required. This will be depicted on the operational design as a star and it highlights the trigger for the decision. Staffs need to consider the CCIR/PIR associated with the indications & warnings (I&W) required to cue the Commander that the trigger item(s) has occurred. (e.g. a decision point might be based on adversary forces massing of troops, deployment of strategic and major assets such as submarines, etc.). Decision points should be designed to allow as much warning as is necessary to change from one state to another state of operational readiness (e.g. go from deter posture to a defend or offensive posture).

Operational Design - Measures of Effectiveness

Described above

12/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS Operational Design - Lines of Operation NOTES Lines of operation (LOO) establish the relationship between decisive points and produce a critical path in time and space to threaten the adversarys COG. The operational commander uses them to synchronize and integrate capabilities such as firepower, deception, manoeuvre, special operations, etc. as well as ensure that military effort is coordinated with the actions of other elements of national power in the execution of a Whole of Government strategy or campaign plan. LOO can describe the efforts of a functional component, an operational function, an objective, a desired effect, or a family of activities. Usually an op might have several LOOs. Sequencing is the specific ordering and synchronizing of events, in other words DPs, along the line of operations in an order that is most likely to achieve the desired End State. Phasing is a way of organizing the extended and dispersed activities of the campaign or major operation into more manageable parts that allow for flexibility in execution. Often, logistic and strategic lift capabilities will be predominant considerations. Phasing is a method of organizing activities into manageable parts or groupings. They may have overall themes, such as deployment, deterrence, counter-attack etc. and should have specific and identifiable conditions for termination and transition to the next. The op design or OPLAN may have specific C2 relationships (supported/ supporting) to be determined by phase. Operational Design Transition Conditions Transition conditions describe how the JTF will move to from one phase to the next and they describe the end state conditions which should tie directly to the initiation conditions for the subsequent operation. They are the hinge to sequel operations or a state of military readiness and they may define the initiation, expansion, conversion, reduction or exit of military forces. Key considerations include the structures, capabilities and postures required next. An important feature of any plan, no matter how detailed, is its usefulness as a common basis for change under rapidly changing circumstances while preserving freedom of action. Therefore the commander and staff must build flexibility into the operational design, anticipate contingencies and plan for them. Contingency planning requires continual focusing of effort toward attainment of the objectives while envisioning sequential and alternate outcomes to proposed actions. There are two kinds of contingency plans: a. Branch Plans are executed when necessary in response to an anticipated opportunity or reversal, to provide the Commander with the flexibility to retain the initiative while preserving freedom of action and ensuring maintenance of the intended operational design; and b. Sequel Plans are options for subsequent operations within a campaign. They are planned on the basis of the likely outcome of the current operation in order to provide the Commander with the flexibility to retain the initiative and/or enhance operational tempo and to achieve subsequent objectives. Once a sequel is determined, Staff must anticipate that its requirements might influence the planning and execution of the current operation.

Operational Design Sequencing & Phasing

Operational Design - Potential Branch & Sequel Plans

13/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUPUT: Mission Statement NOTES In the event that the mission analysis sub-process produced only an initial mission statement, then it should now be finalized. CCIR should now be finalized. The staff will now have to consult the Commander and assist him in preparation of his written intent for the operation. In accordance with B-GL-300-003/FP-000 Command, Mission Command, the Canadian Forces philosophy of command within the manoeuvre warfare approach to fighting, has three enduring tenets: the importance of understanding a Superior Commanders intent, a clear responsibility to fulfill that intent and timely decision-making. The underlying requirement is the fundamental responsibility to act within the framework of the Commanders intentions. Thus in order to allow subordinates to exercise their initiative but in a way that will satisfy the Commanders mission and operational design, it is paramount that the Commander expresses his intent in terms of what needs to be achieved towards his desired End State and it should be captured within his CONOPS. This intent will drive the development of COA during Stage 3. Considering the broad initial list of capabilities requirements prepared earlier, the staff should then estimate with greater fidelity the actual forces necessary to satisfy the operation designed. This will be further amplified during Stage 3 to become the Joint Statement of Requirements (JSOR). In comparison to those forces presently available a shortfall will be identified and the staff may assess the initial level of operational risks as a result. At this point in the OPP, the Staff will have identified preliminary C2 arrangements necessary for the operation and a probable organizational structure necessary. These should be depicted in a Task Organization Matrix. Ref: B-GJ-005-052/FP-000 Risk Management for CF Operations Risk Management concerns the assessment, controls and mitigation for each threat posed: by the adversary; by the op environment; towards own forces; by time; by civilians; and by national powers or alliances. Risk management is a process that assists decision makers in determining how to reduce or offset risk and to make informed decisions that weigh risks against mission benefits. Risk management assists in the identification of the optimum course of action (COA) and ensures that the implications of the residual risks are understood by the Commander, his staff and subordinate commanders. The failure to manage risk can lead to the loss of resources, lives and ultimately catastrophic mission failure. The level of risk is often related to potential gain, so commanders must be able to weigh the gains versus the costs and the risks.

OUTPUT: CCIR OUTPUT: Comd's Intent

OUTPUT: Initial Force Estimate

OUTPUT: Preliminary C2 Concept and Task Organization Risk Assessment - General

14/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS NOTES The fundamental aim of risk management is to enhance operational capabilities and mission accomplishment, with minimal loss. Risk assessment involves threat identification and assessment. A threat is a source of danger, such as an opposing force, condition or circumstance with the potential to have a negative impact on the accomplishment of the mission or to degrade mission capability. Examples of threats are: actions of the adversary (use of weapons of mass destruction); actions of own forces (early provocation of adversary, complex synchronization requirements); environmental factors (weather); other actors (Host Nation, Other Government Departments, Non-Government Organizations, contractors, refugees); or operational design (threats to achieving DPs, ability to pursue LOO). Assessment of the level of risk considers probability and severity estimates for each threat. For this, the staff questions whether the threat impacts our ability to achieve one or more DP, to pursue a LOO or to achieve operational objectives. Probability is the estimate of the likelihood that a threat will occur. Severity is the expected consequence of a threat on the achievement of the mission. Assessment is done with the following steps: Step 1 Identify threat (example TF Capability Shortfall, ability to detect submarines beyond their torpedo range) Step 2 Assess threats level of Risk IAW matrix (probability versus severity) Step 3 Determine controls to reduce the threat impact Step 4 Determine mitigations for each threat Step 5 Assess the overall residual post-mitigation risk for the op Threat Controls Risk mitigation means development of controls in line with the commander's risk guidance that either eliminate the threat or reduce the risk and consequences associated with it and making appropriate operational decisions. For each threat, determine which controls may be implemented, such as: Engineering (technologies, materiel) Administrative (policies, SOP, personnel management) Education & Trg (individual, collective and joint trg) Physical Controls (barriers, guards, protective equipment, fences) Operational Controls (avoid threat, delay actions, pace or tempo, reassignment of task or resources, boundaries, fire control measures, ROE, airspace control, exercises, rehearsals, rectify training deficiency); or Accept threat and its impact without action Threat Mitigations These are actions or measures taken to reduce the impact of threats. These usually involve avoidance, delay, transfer, reduction or acceptance of Risk. The Comd alone must decide whether the controls are sufficient and to accept the mitigations and residual risks for the operation.

15/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUTPUT: Initial Risk Assessment Matrix NOTES Commanders need to know how likely a risk is to occur, whether it can be avoided or controlled and can we mitigate the consequences. The matrix depicts all identified threats for the operation, their assessed level of risk and an overall level of residual risk with all threats, their controls and mitigations considered. During Stage 3, staff will also prepare a risk assessment matrix for each COA. Staff recommendations should be expressed as: Unacceptable spectrum of risk management actions cannot reduce risk to an acceptable level Conditionally acceptable risk can be reduced to an acceptable level if certain risk management actions are taken Acceptable no risk management actions necessary The matrix may also be used to prioritize resources, to resolve risks, to standardize threat notification or to determine response actions. It will be important to update this matrix during Stages 3, 4 and 5, particularly after the COA War Game, Plan War Game and Stage 5 War Game (or Exercise). As well, risk should be frequently re-assessed during the execution of an operation. Mission Analysis Briefing Although the Commander might have already been consulted in the development of the mission statement, he will need to be appraised of the results of staff efforts for all of Stage 2. The venue for this will be the Mission Analysis Briefing, which highlights mission analysis, evaluation of friendly forces, operational design and risk assessment. It should also include an updated JIPOE briefing by the J2 branch. Following the briefing, the staff seeks the Commanders approval of the (final) mission statement, the operational design and the list of CCIR. The Comds Planning Guidance (CPG) is a formal, written document intended for two audiences, namely: his own staff for further planning; and for the Superior Commander who will be interested to see that the plan being developed meets the higher or even strategic objectives. The CPG includes operational design, mission analysis, mission statement, intent, confirmation of the area of operations or the Joint Operations Area (JOA), Area of Influence, Area of Interest, CCIR, required capabilities and direction on COA development. The Comds Initiating Directive is intended for subordinate commanders and supporting commanders as initiation for their planning. Like the CPG, it should include mission analysis, mission statement, intent, confirmation of the area of operations or JOA, Area of Influence, Area of Interest, CCIR and direction on COA development. STAGE 3 COA DEVELOPMENT COA Development Introduction A COA is a possible option that would accomplish the mission. It is initially stated in broad terms, with further details determined during the COA War Gaming and COA Evaluation. A COA should follow logically from the deductions and conclusions already derived from the Mission Analysis and Factors Analysis. Staff should consider the Comds Planning Guidance whilst developing a range of ideas in COA design. Periodically, the Comd may wish update briefings to allow him to provide OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

OUTPUT: Commander's Planning Guidance

OUTPUT: Commander's Initiating Directive

16/24

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS NOTES further direction, focusing of efforts and possibly to call for modification or elimination of some COA. Requirements for the number of COA will vary from one Comd to another and might be situation-dependent; however the Staff should expect to prepare at least three friendly COA. The chosen COA will form the basis for the Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and supporting Joint Statement of Requirements (JSOR). The J2 Branch should as a minimum develop an Adversary Most Likely COA and an Adversary Most Dangerous COA. COA Development - Develop COA A COA should satisfy the Essential Tasks already identified and is usually comprised of four elements: Intent Scheme of Manoeuvre Main Effort End State A COA should answer the questions: When does the activity begin or end? Consider phasing and sequencing. Who will conduct the activity? Consider capabilities required. What military operations are to happen? Consider offensive and defensive activities. Where will the activity be performed? Why is the activity to be conducted? Consider "in order to..." How will the activity be conducted? Staff should highlight the Advantages and Disadvantages for each COA, prepare an accompanying sketch or graphic portrayal, Task Organization Chart, Synchronization Matrix, Risk Assessment Matrix and Initial Joint Statement of Requirements (JSOR). Staff should also consider the intended effects - that should be developed into Joint Effects Guidance (JEG) - and therefore the resulting targeting needs. Staff may prepare a Joint Troops to Task List (JTTL) for each COA. Given that all COA must satisfy the operational design, which is purpose-built to achieve a mission along LOO in a prescribed sequence, then the COA at the operational level will vary only in time, space or force aspects in other words, Scheme of Manoeuvre and possibly Main Effort. Staff should consider variations in the treatment of key factors analyzed during the mission analysis and factors analysis. Example COAs could be fast and light, slow and heavy, invade by land, invade by sea. For each DP, staff should determine the desired effect, tasks t o be fulfilled, JTF elements that could fulfill those tasks (with supported and supporting Components identified) and MOE. Consider variations in the application of operational functions, component tasks and objectives, main effort, transition conditions, composition and employment of the operational reserve, logistics support concept, C2 relationships etc. COA Development - COA Validity Test Each COA must be tested for validity, namely that it is: 1. Suitable: accomplishes the mission and the essential tasks, meets the Comds Intent, focuses on Objectives and Adversarys COG; 2. Feasible: it is possible to accomplish, you have now or expect to have Force structure and resources to mount and sustain; 17/24 OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS NOTES

3. Acceptable: it is efficient, worth the risk, politically acceptable, manageable within resource limitations, satisfies rules of engagement (ROE) requirements, counters Adversary COAs; 4. Exclusive: is unique, fundamentally distinguishable from other COAs (with respect to scheme of manoeuvre, main effort, task organization, composition or use of the operational Reserve and so forth); and 5. Complete: it has an Intent, Scheme of Manoeuvre, Main Effort, End State. It addresses supported and supporting efforts. It answers the questions who, what, where, when, how. COA Development - Refine Op Design After designing COAs, the staff may have further ideas to enhance the detail within the operational design, particularly with input from component or specialist staff planning processes to date. For example, there may now be available detailed MOE developed for certain DP. The staff should review all aspects of the operational design with a view to updating anything applicable. Regarding DPs for example, as described earlier, during Stage 2, the staff develops initial DP, describing what effect is to be achieved or what event is to take place and what MOE apply. Then, during Stage 3, the staff adds fidelity, in close coordination with Component staffs, about how the DP is to be achieved. In other words, during Stage 3, DP development looks at specific tasks and resource allocations necessary. For those occasions when the Commanders own forces are insufficient to carry out the operation, or in the event the Commanders HQ does not normally have any subordinate forces assigned, a JSOR is developed that lists in broad terms those forces required to carry out such a COA: for example two carrier groups, two armoured divisions, one marine expeditionary force, one bomber wing. The JSOR should build from the Initial Force Estimate developed during Stage 2. Initially during Stage 3, a JSOR is prepared for each COA but later after one COA is chosen, it will be enhanced in greater detail to allow other elements of the CF or nations in the NATO context to realize the type and scale of forces being sought and an opportunity to assess the costs, risks and feasibility of deployment, employment and sustainment of such an operation. In preparing the JSOR, the staff should base it on the requirements of component commands and include preliminary deployment information according to the JFCs required force flow into Theatre. In the Canadian context, the CJSOR might also be accompanied by a provisional Table of Organization & Equipment (TO&E) that prescribes the specific organization, personnel and equipment necessary for the operation.

COA Development - Joint Statement of Requirements (JSOR)

18/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS COA Development Synchronization Matrix NOTES Each COA should be accompanied by a Synchronization Matrix describing the activities and events and the timeframe when they will occur whether by date or by phase. The matrix is oriented towards Joint Effects Guidance and is organized in effects-based language focused on DPs drawn from the Op Design. Staff should identify each DP, when it should be achieved, the effects to be achieved, the measures of effectiveness, the tasks or purpose for each major element of the JTF for example the Air Component the date to be completed and any other key operational aspects necessary to portray the activities of the operation. The matrix associates participating forces with time and space. Time elements of interest are: Critical dates Times affected by Constraints or Restraints Critical distances versus time Time to achieve specific elements or options Time for Adversary to react to Own actions Each COA should be accompanied by a Risk Assessment Matrix.

COA Development Risk Assessment Matrix Information Briefing General

The format for the Info Briefing might vary, depending on the preferences of the Comd, the SOPs for the HQ, the time available or whether the Comd has been involved thus far in the COA Development. The purpose is to update the Comd on the status of planning thus far, to give him an opportunity to acknowledge or concur with certain COA, to narrow the broad range of options or to confirm the Comds preferences for COA comparison criteria. J2 provides a JIPOE update, including a review of the predicted Adversary COA

Information Briefing - J2 JIPOE Information Briefing - Op Design Update Information Briefing - COAs

J5 highlights any updates or fidelity made to the Op Design since the Mission Analysis Briefing J5 or COA Development teams present the details of each Friendly COA (as described above). The J5 might preface with a summary of those aspects common to all COA. The J5 should conclude with presentation of open issues and requests for specific guidance from the Comd. A suggested format to describe a COA is: Overall concept, by phase Timeline comparison of COA vs. Adversary Main tasks for each Component Start/end dates for each phase DPs to be achieved during each phase Transition conditions Task Organization Advantages and disadvantages Risk assessment and management options Plans for COA refinement Identification of necessary supporting plans to be developed

19/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUTPUT: COA Refinement NOTES The Commander should approve the COA or direct a return to initial COA development if required, provide guidance to the staff for refinement of COA and most importantly he should provide guidance to the staff for COA comparison criteria. The J5 should propose to the Commander for his approval a set of COA comparison criteria that will focus the war gaming effort and provide a framework for data collection by the staff. The Comd will use these to select the COA that will be developed into a CONOPS. Consider Commanders intent, CPG, critical characteristics of each LOO, Principles of War, limitations on casualties, exploitations of adversary weaknesses, defeat of the adversarys COG, opportunity for manoeuvre, concentration of combat power, logistics requirements, political considerations, force protection, impact on local populations, collateral damage and so forth. Criteria must be differentiable and measurable. Examples: rapidly enhances deterrence, provides early support to humanitarian assistance, allow maximum operational flexibility, shows minimum risk, ensures long-term sustainability or supports early internal security. War Gaming is an interactive simulation of military operations that is crucial to decision-making and it is just one way to compare COA. It can range from informal discussions around a map to the use of sophisticated computer modeling software. In Stage 3, the purpose of war gaming is to evaluates the COA ability to accomplish the mission and provide the Commander with objective tools to discern one COA from another in order to allow him to decide which COA will be used for the Operation. Potentially, the war game might assist in identifying planning deficiencies, potential risks and opportunities and synchronization of key actions however those are more likely benefits of the Plan War Game in Stage 4. In a war game, a friendly COA is played against an adversary COA in order to test its merits, advantages, disadvantages, effectiveness in accomplishing the mission, risks incurred and so forth. In order to prepare for the war game, staff will have to know which method is to be used and to have prepared a synchronization matrix for each COA and to have compared own operational timelines versus adversary timelines. Ideally, and depending on the time available, each friendly COA will be played against each adversary COA. If the time is short, the Commander or COS might direct that each friendly COA be played against only one adversary COA perhaps the Most Dangerous or the Most Likely.

OUTPUT: COA Comparison Criteria

COA War Game - General

20/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS COA War Game Conduct War Game(s) Generally, there are four Steps: 1. Plan 2. Prepare 3. Conduct 4. Analyze war game products There are many considerations for planning and preparation of a war game. Here are just a few: Step 1 Plan Method (e.g.. belt, phase, focal DPs, LOO, battle space segments) Comparison criteria Which COA Selection of focal DP, associated MOE and key phase transition criteria Forces dispositions at game Start Operational timeline synchronization Determine Participants (Control, Adversary, Blue, White, Green, Referee, Scribes, Analysts, Observers) Requirements for Operational Analysis (OA) Use of simulation Requirements for any initial coordination Boards (e.g.. Joint Targeting Board) Step 2 Prepare Identify and prepare the Control, Referees and Analysis Teams Selection and definition of turns including preparation of a Master Synchronization Matrix describing events to be played during each turn Master Events List (MEL), Joint Effects Guidance (JEG) Gather tools, maps, data (etc.) available Room set-up Briefing for participants, including ground rules and duties Step 3 Conduct Turns Side with initiative for that turn goes first Action Reaction Counter-Action Cognition (assessment) Identify decision points Identify branches and sequels Identify risks and opportunities Step 4 - Analyze Examine and compare results, Adversary COA vs. Own COA; Own COA vs. Own COA COA relative advantages and disadvantages COA Comparison Matrix Identify critical issues COA War Game - COA Refinement or COA Evaluation 21/24 Following the COA War Game(s), the staff should either proceed to the COA Evaluation process or refine the COA and if necessary submit them to War Gaming. OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto NOTES

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUTPUT: Decision Support Template (DST) OUTPUT: High Payoff Target List (HPTL) OUTPUT: Refined Initial JSOR OUTPUT: Operational Analysis Results COA Evaluation - General NOTES Each COA should be accompanied by a DST, updated with War Game results.

Each COA should be accompanied by a HPTL, updated with War Game results.

Each COA should be accompanied by a refined Initial JSOR, updated with War Game results. Each COA should be accompanied by updated Op Analysis results.

Using the results of the war game, the Stage 2 analysis and the JIPOE, the Staff now evaluates and compares COA relative to each other based on the following. This is a comparison of the relative effectiveness of each Own COA to each Adversary COA. This is a comparison of the relative merits of each Own COA versus other Own COA.

COA Evaluation Friendly vs. Adversary COA Evaluation Friendly vs. Friendly COA Evaluation Timeline Comparison COA Evaluation Risk Assessment OUTPUT: COA Comparison Matrix Decision Briefing - General

A COA Comparison Matrix should be prepared for the Decision Briefing.

The purpose of the Decision Briefing is to allow the Commander to decide upon one of the COA that will be used for the Operation. At the same time, the Commander should confirm his Op Design and any C2 relationships that the staff have proposed. Subordinate commanders and liaison officers from other stakeholders might attend in order to glean the thrust of the plan, get a heads-up on any potential issues and to offer direct advice in their areas of expertise or responsibility. This briefing is usually orchestrated by the COS according to the SOP of the HQ. Staff should focus on the results of COA Comparison and recommend one of the COA. The selected COA will be developed into a CONOPS. The Commander should instruct the staff on development of Branches or Sequels and provide additional CCIR, if applicable.

22/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUTPUT: Concept of Operations (CONOPS) NOTES The CONOPS has several purposes: it guides staff during Stage 4; it advises the Superior Commander or Initiating Authority of the Commanders intentions and provides an instrument for concurrence and/or approval; and it informs subordinate commanders and supporting formations of the scope, nature and likely tasking required for their plans, forces and capabilities needed, timelines and supporting plans required. The CONOPS contains an overview of situation, mission statement, Commanders intent, outline concept for execution, outline force capability requirements, outline administrative or logistic support concept, key C2 arrangements, public affairs polices or requirements. It does not include detailed annexes or supporting plans. Once a COA is chosen, its Initial JSOR should be refined. It lists the forces necessary for the operation, is based on requirements of the component commanders, includes preliminary deployment information based on JFCs required force flow into Theatre and might be accompanied by a provisional Table of Organization & Equipment (TO&E) which prescribes the specific organization, personnel and equipment necessary. For specific reference to a Canadian context, refer to CF Force Employment Planning Process. STAGE 4 PLAN DEVELOPMENT Plan Preparation During Stage 4, the approved CONOPS will be amplified into a Plan or Order. Preparation of the Plan will involve the whole Staff due to the complexity, length and detail of such a product. Key activities include: a. Any remaining issues will be identified and resolved by the Staff. This will typically involve detailed Staff Checks and SME advice. b. All annexes and supporting plans (SUPLAN) need to be synchronized with the main Joint Plan and approved by the JFC. Annexes and SUPLANs are integral parts of the plan. An Annex is used to provide details concerning a specific aspect of the plan. The use of Annexes keeps the size of the body of the plan manageable, and allows selected addressees to receive copies of only those annexes that are of direct interest to them. SUPLANs are used when the amount of detail required is too great for the use of an annex. SUPLANs are stand-alone plans that support another plan by providing detailed direction and information on a particular aspect of that plan. c. If necessary, the staff will initiate the OPP for the development of Branch Plans and Sequel Plans that were identified during the planning process. Plan War Game During Stage 4, a War Game of the Plan is employed as a tool for drawing out the details in order to enhance and validate the OPLAN, to highlight any planning deficiencies, to identify any new potential risks or opportunities and to synchronize key actions. It may be planned and conducted in the same manner as the COA War Game during Stage 3.

OUTPUT: JSOR

23/24

OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013)

For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto

CF OPP NOTES
SUB-PROCESS OUTPUT: Operation Order (OP O) or Operation Plan (OPLAN) or Contingency Plan (CONPLAN) NOTES The aim of the OPP to plan an operation and issue a plan. It may need to be submitted to the IA for approval before general distribution. Implementation of the plan may require that the IA issue an Implementation Order (IMPL O) and/or that the JTFC issue an OP O to subordinate formations and units. Consequently, after Stage 4 the Commander will be able to issue one of the following: a. Operation Order (OP O) a directive issued for the purpose of effecting the coordinated execution of an Operation; or b. Operational Plan (OPLAN) used to plan and prepare well in advance for a known upcoming operation for which the Government has specifically tasked the CF to prepare and execute; or c. Contingency Plan (CONPLAN) - prepared for contingencies that can be reasonably anticipated; reflects potential response options but having no specific time set for the Operation. STAGE 5 PLAN REVIEW Plan Review - General A Plan or OP O must be reviewed regularly to evaluate its viability. The evaluation may be conducted through exercises, war gaming or Staff analysis. The options available may be dependent on time available before its anticipated that the operation might be executed, or by the resources available to carry out a review. There are two main applications of a review: 1. Progress Review through the pre-execution and execution phases of an operation , the existing plans, supporting plans, orders and Force Generation must be continually reviewed to ensure that Force Generation and preparation is proceeding as required, and any necessary changes can be incorporated while ensuring the mission remains viable. 2. Periodic Review All plans have a limited period of validity due to the changing circumstances upon which they were based. Plans and associated supporting plans must be reviewed on a periodic basis in light of current or anticipated conditions. An Information Briefing may be conducted to update the Commander on the findings of the review. If it is deemed that the existing plan is no longer viable or not satisfying the mission, then the Commander may likely direct the staff to reinitiate the OPP at an appropriate Stage. If the required changes to the plan are reasonably minor, it may be updated and re-promulgated. War Game and/or Exercise During Stage 5, a War Game of the Plan is employed as a tool for validating, testing or refining it whilst an exercise may be conducted to rehearse the participants in the Operation. Such a war game may be planned and conducted in the same manner as the COA War Game during Stage 3.

OUTPUT: Revised OPLAN or CONPLAN 24/24 OPP NOTES (15 Aug 2013) For Educational Purposes Only Canadian Forces College, Toronto