RDL Homepage

Document Information

---

Department of the Army
Headquarters, United States Army
Training and Doctrine Command
Fort Monroe, Virginia 23651-5000

1 December 1995

TRADOC Pam 525-66
Military Operations OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS

Summary. Operational Capability Requirements (OCR) articulate specific capabilities required to fulfill Battle Lab Concepts. OCRs are intended to provide a war fighting focus for the Army's Science and Technology (S&T) investment.

Applicability. OCRs are employed to assess war fighting value of S&T endeavors and to translate concepts into discrete, subset statements of need. OCRs are utilized by TRADOC Battle Labs (BLs) and Army materiel developers.

Suggested improvements. The proponent for this pamphlet is the Deputy Chief of Staff for Combat Developments. Send comments and suggested improvements on DA Form 2028 (Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms) through channels to Commander, TRADOC, ATTN: ATCD-B, Fort Monroe, VA 23651-5000. Suggested improvements may also be submitted using DA Form 1045 (Army Ideas for Excellence Program (AIEP) Proposal).

Distribution restriction. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Contents

     References 

     Explanation of abbreviations and terms 

     OCR Process 

Introduction

1-1. Purpose. This pamphlet describes the Operational Capability Requirements generated by the Army's Battle Labs.

1-2. References.

a. TRADOC Pam 525-5, Force XXI Operations.

b. TRADOC Pam 525-200-1, Battle Command Battle Dynamic Concept.

c. TRADOC Pam 525-200-2, Early Entry Lethality and Survivability Battle Dynamic Concept.

d. TRADOC Pam 525-200-3, Dismounted Battle Space Battle Dynamic Concept.

e. TRADOC Pam 525-200-4, Mounted Battle Space Battle Dynamic Concept.

f. TRADOC Pam 525-200-5, Depth and Simultaneous Attack Battle Dynamic Concept.

g. TRADOC Pam 525-200-6, Combat Service Support Battle Dynamic Concept.

1-3. Explanation of abbreviations and terms. Abbreviations and special terms used in this concept are explained in the glossary.

1-4. Operational Capability Requirements (OCR) Process.

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 Commander-In-Chiefs (CINC's) Integrated Priority Lists (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 Science and Technology (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 Science & Technology ( 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 budgeting, planning, and programming reviews by the materiel 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 Research & Development (R&D) community. Army STOs receive senior Army leadership oversight and have priority for resourcing.

h. OCR Reviews:

(1) OCRs may be updated at anytime given identification of new needs or opportunities for new capabilities.

(2) As a minimum, OCRs will be reviewed and updated once a year.

(3) The elements to be reviewed and considered for updating the OCRs include:

(a) Battle Labs Concepts.

(b) Operational Lessons Learned, including Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) documents.

(c) CINC Integrated Priorities Lists.

(d) Opportunities from technology opportunities. Battle Labs will accrue awareness of opportunities from interaction with the S&T community throughout the course of the year. Intent of Battle Lab interaction with technology should focus on understanding the potential battlefield capability. In many cases, it will be the Battle Lab personnel's operational knowledge of warfighting which may see applications otherwise unforeseen by the materiel developers. It is incumbent upon both the Battle Lab and materiel developer personnel to generate ideas of potential capability from the nexus of technology opportunity and warfighting operational vision. A forum from which this awareness will occur is the annual OCR review cycle.

i. Annual OCR Review Cycle. Following cycle is recommended.

(1) Year Round: Accumulate inputs for OCR updates from sources listed above.

(2) Fall/Winter: Conduct internal Battle Lab Concept and OCR review.

(3) May: Battle Labs publish draft update OCRs and disseminate to other Battle Labs, TRADOC Schools, and the materiel developer community to solicit additional information.

(4) June: Battle Labs publish revised update Battle Lab OCRs incorporating appropriate field input.

(5) June: HQ TRADOC, BLITCD conduct OCR integration workshop to exchange information and consolidate similar OCRs as may be appropriate.

(6) July: HQ TRADOC task TRADOC Schools and Battle Labs to review OCRs for Commandant concurrence/comments directly to appropriate Battle Labs.

(7) August: Battle Labs Consolidate inputs and obtain Battle Lab Director approved list.

(8) September: HQ TRADOC submit final draft OCRs to Commanding General TRADOC for approval.

(9) October: Approved OCRs published, distributed, and submitted as input to Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP).

(10) November - May: Application of OCRs to Battle Lab S&T Reviews, Army STO Review Process, ACT II Broad Agency Announcements, and Battle Lab interactions with industry.