Annex C. Interaction With TRADOC
Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP 1997)


Interaction with Tradoc

A. INTRODUCTION

Battle Labs were created in response to the factors and implications of a changing world, strategy, budgetary reality, and a need for a new way of doing business. Battle Labs have quickly demonstrated their value as places where new concepts and technologies can be investigated for their implications on the battlefield, in the areas where warfighting appears to be changing most dramatically.

Following are overviews of Battle Lab concepts and their corresponding Operational Capabilities Requirements. Purpose of these overviews is provide insights on the battlefield dynamic each Battle Lab is charged to investigate, that Battle Labs' vision of future warfighting, and their perspective on operational capabilities required to fulfill the vision.

The process of developing Operational Capability Requirements (OCRs) is as follows:

a. Operational Capability Requirements are statements of capabilities required for the Army to fulfill the vision articulated within the Army Modernization Objectives. TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5 and the Battle Lab Concepts.

b. One set of OCRs are written for each Battle Lab and encompass the battlefield dynamic for which the Battle Lab is responsible. Scope of the Battle Lab’s OCRs include the horizontal capabilities required of the force as well as relevant branch contributions to these capabilities. OCRs state required and desired capabilities across the full dimension of operations.

c. OCRs are a set of brief statements which break out required capabilities into discrete subsets, the aggregate of which, if fully attained, permits the Army to fulfill the National Military Strategy of winning quickly and decisively, while minimizing casualties.

d. OCRs are derived within the framework of historical lessons learned from operational experiences as well as the opportunities provided from technology exploitation.

e. OCRs are to encompass needs of the force stated within CINC’s Integrated Priority List (IPL); however, given the lack of singular, analytically defined threat, OCRs are to also include a vision of desired capabilities emanating from technology opportunity.

f. Objective of the OCRs are to focus the Army S&T community towards capabilities which will provide technological superiority over any potential adversary. Technological superiority is required despite the potential that adversaries may have access to some state-of-the-art, high technology capabilities available in the world market.

g. Applications:

(1) Operational Capability Requirements are used within the Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP) process to provide a warfighting focus to technology base funding.

(2) OCRs articulate required and desired capabilities to the materiel developer community internal and external to the Army.

(3) OCRs are employed in Battle Lab S&T Reviews as the yardstick for assessing the warfighting merits of individual science and technology efforts and the total Army S&T program in aggregate.

(4) Perceptions of shortfalls derived from Battle Lab S&T Reviews should generate dialogue with the materiel developers to confirm or resolve the perceptions. Confirmed shortfalls should be considered in budgetary, planning, and programming reviews by the material developer. Shortfalls which exceed Army resource capabilities can be identified to industry to permit discretionary industry investments in needed areas.

(5) OCRs are employed in the Army Science and Technology Objectives (STO) process as the yardstick of warfighting merit. Candidate efforts selected as Army STOs within this process are published in the Army Science and Technology Master Plan as the most important S&T objectives for the Army R&D community. Army STOs receive senior Army leadership oversight and have priority for resourcing.